Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Tires, 877-888 [06-137]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICES
47 CFR Part 73
I
[DA 05–3211; MB Docket No. 04–339, RM–
11060]
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
The Audio Division, at the
request of Cook County Broadcasting of
Minnesota, allots Channel 245C0 at
Grand Portage, Minnesota, as the
community’s first local FM service.
Channel 245C0 can be allotted to Grand
Portage, Minnesota, in compliance with
the Commission’s minimum distance
separation requirements at city
reference coordinates without site
restriction. The coordinates for Channel
245C0 at Grand Portage, Minnesota, are
47–57–50 North Latitude and 89–41–05
West Longitude. The Government of
Canada has concurred in this allotment,
which is located within 320 kilometers
(199 miles) of the U.S.-Canadian border.
DATES: Effective January 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deborah Dupont, Media Bureau, (202)
418–2180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Report
and Order, MB Docket No. 04–339,
adopted December 14, 2005, and
released December 16, 2005. The full
text of this Commission decision is
available for inspection and copying
during normal business hours in the
FCC Information Center, Portals II, 445
12th Street, SW., Room CY–A257,
Washington, DC 20554. The complete
text of this decision also may be
purchased from the Commission’s
duplicating contractor, Best Copy and
Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW.,
Room CY–B402, Washington, DC 0554,
(800) 378–3160, or via the company’s
Web site, www.bcpiweb.com. The
Commission will send a copy of this
Report and Order in a report to be sent
to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A).
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:02 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
[Amended]
2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM
Allotments under Minnesota, is
amended by adding Grand Portage,
Channel 245C0.
I
AGENCY:
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio, Radio broadcasting.
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.
§ 73.202
Radio Broadcasting Services; Grand
Portage, MN
SUMMARY:
1. The authority citation for Part 73
continues to read as follows:
Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 06–111 Filed 1–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–23439]
RIN 2127–AJ65
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Tires
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions
for reconsideration.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In June 2003, NHTSA
published a final rule establishing
upgraded tire performance requirements
for new tires for use on vehicles with a
gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000
pounds or less. This document responds
to petitions for reconsideration of that
final rule. After carefully considering
the petitions, the agency is modifying
certain performance requirements to
better address snow tires and certain
specialty tires. Specifically, we are
amending the performance requirements
for snow tires used on light vehicles.
Further, we decided that the safety
performance of certain other specialty
tires is better addressed through the
requirements of a different Federal
safety standard.
DATES: The amendments in this rule are
effective June 1, 2007, and delay the
effective date of the Final Rule
published on June 26, 2003 (68 FR
38115) from June 1, 2007 until
September 1, 2007. Voluntary
compliance is permitted before that
time. In addition, ‘‘snow tires,’’ as
defined in S3 of 49 CFR 571.139 need
not comply with the requirements of 49
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
877
CFR 571.139 until September 1, 2008, if
they comply with applicable
requirements in effect as of the date of
this Final Rule. The incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed
in the regulations is approved by the
Director of the Federal Register as of
September 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical and policy issues: George
Soodoo, Office of Crash Avoidance
Standards. Telephone: (202) 366–2720.
Fax: (202) 366–4329. E-mail:
George.Soodoo@nhtsa.dot.gov.
For legal issues: George Feygin,
Attorney Advisor, Office of Chief
Counsel. Telephone: (202) 366–2992.
Fax: (202) 366–3820. E-mail:
George.Feygin@nhtsa.dot.gov.
Both persons may be reached at the
following address: NHTSA, 400 7th
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Final Rule
II. Background
III. Petitions for Reconsideration
IV. Discussion and Analysis
A. Endurance Test Failure Due to Tire
Chunking
B. Deep Tread LT Specialty Tires
C. Tire Conditioning Prior to Low-Pressure
Performance Test
D. Test Temperature Tolerance
E. Calculation of Vehicle Normal Load
F. Time Limit for Measuring Post-Test
Inflation Pressure
G. Permissible Level of Tire Pressure Loss
V. Miscellaneous Issues and Technical
Corrections to the Regulatory Text
VI. Effective Date
VII. Rulemaking Notices and Analyses
VIII. Regulatory Text
I. Summary of Final Rule
First, this final rule amends Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 139, ‘‘New pneumatic tires for light
vehicles’’ to reduce the endurance and
low-pressure test speeds from 120 km/
h to 110 km/h for snow tires. Second,
this rule amends the application of
FMVSS No. 139 to exclude light truck
radial tires with a tread depth of 18/32
inches or greater. Instead these tires will
be subject to the requirements of
FMVSS No. 119. Third, this rule makes
several technical corrections and
amendments to the regulatory texts of
FMVSS Nos. 109, 110, 119, 120 and 139.
For example, because a test laboratory
may not be able to maintain a constant
ambient temperature the agency is
specifying a tolerance during certain
tests. Finally, we have delayed the
effective date of the upgraded tire safety
requirements from June 1, 2007 until
September 1, 2007. Voluntary
compliance is permitted before that
date.
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
878
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
below.4 The petitioners were Denman
Tire (Denman), the Rubber
The Transportation Recall
Manufacturers Association (RMA),
Enhancement, Accountability, and
Japan Automobile Tyre Manufacturers
Documentation (TREAD) Act, Section
Association (JATMA), European Tyre
10, ‘‘Endurance and resistance
and Rim Technical Organization
standards for tires,’’ required NHTSA to (ETRTO), Specialty Equipment Market
revise and update Federal Motor
Association (SEMA), Alliance of
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance),
109, New Pneumatic Tires, and FMVSS
Tire and Rim Association (TRA), and
No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for
Strategy Safety. Two commenters, the
1 In
Vehicles Other than Passenger Cars.
Small Business Administration (SBA)
response to this mandate, NHTSA
and the Tire Industry Association (TIA)
published a final rule on June 26, 2003,
submitted letters in support of
establishing a new FMVSS No. 139,
Denman’s petition to exclude its tires
New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light
from FMVSS No. 139. The issues or
Vehicles, which will apply to new tires
subject areas addressed by the
used on light vehicles; i.e., vehicles with petitioners include the following:
a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000
• RMA, ETRTO, and JATMA
pounds or less, except motorcycles and
requested that NHTSA either redefine
low speed vehicles.2
tire chunking or not consider tire
chunking to be an indication of tire
The new standard is scheduled to
failure during endurance testing.
become effective on June 1, 2007. It
• Denman petitioned the agency to
features substantially more stringent
exclude tires manufactured in quantities
high speed and endurance tests, and a
new low-pressure performance test. The of less than 15,000 tires from the
requirements of FMVSS No. 139, and
purpose of the new and more stringent
requirements is to improve the ability of instead subject these tires to the
tires to withstand the effects of tire heat requirements of FMVSS No. 119.
• RMA, ETRTO, and JATMA
build-up and severe under-inflation
petitioned the agency to clarify which
during highway travel in fully loaded
tire safety standard applies to spare
conditions. Unlike the existing tire
tires.
safety standards, which previously
• JATMA petitioned the agency to
differentiated between light trucks and
revise the test conditions and
3 FMVSS No. 139 applies
passenger cars,
procedures specified for the lowto tires used on both.
pressure performance test.
The June 2003 final rule deferred
• JATMA, ETRTO, and RMA
action on proposals to revise the
petitioned the agency to include a
existing strength and bead unseating
temperature tolerance of ±3 °C to the
resistance tests, and to add a new tireambient temperature of 38 °C specified
aging test, because the agency believed
for endurance and low-pressure testing
that additional research should be
of FMVSS No. 139.
undertaken before reaching decision in
• The RMA and ETRTO petitioned
these areas. Finally, the final rule
the agency to amend the method by
changed the applicability of FMVSS No. which vehicle manufacturers calculate
109 and FMVSS No. 119. Beginning
the vehicle normal load on the tire.
June 1, 2007, FMVSS No. 109 would
• Exclude ST, FI, and 8–12 rim
apply only to bias-ply tires and certain
diameter code tires.
other specialty tires used on light
• Definition of passenger car tire.
• RMA petitioned the agency to
vehicles. FMVSS No. 119 would apply
delete CT tires from the requirements of
to tires used on motorcycles, low speed
FMVSS No. 139 and other tire safety
vehicles, and heavy vehicles; i.e.,
standards because CT tires are no longer
vehicles with a gross vehicle weight
being offered for sale in the U.S.
rating of more than 10,000 pounds.
• Alliance petitioned the agency to
III. Petitions for Reconsideration
change the effective date of FMVSS No.
139 from June 1, 2007 to September 1,
NHTSA received petitions for
2007 to coincide with the traditional
reconsideration of the June 2003 final
start of the new model year
rule from eight petitioners who
introduction.
requested that NHTSA reconsider or
• Allow FMVSS No. 139 tires on
otherwise address 18 issues described
vehicles over 10,000 pounds.
• De-rating requirement.
1 Pub. L. 106–414, November 1, 2000, 114 Stat.
• Measuring post-test inflation
1800.
pressure.
2 68 FR 38115; June 26, 2003.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
II. Background
3 Historically, FMVSS No. 109 applied to tires for
use on passenger cars and FMVSS No. 119 applied
to tires for use on all other vehicles, including light
trucks.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
4 To examine the petitions please see Docket No.
NHTSA–03–15400 at https://dms.dot.gov/search/
searchFormSimple.cfm.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• RMA petitioned the agency to
correct the test pressures for LT tires
with a nominal cross section larger than
295 mm.
• JATMA petitioned the agency to
clarify the bead unseating test
conditions for light truck tires.
IV. Discussion and Analysis
A. Endurance Test Failure Due to Tire
Chunking
Under the new requirements of
FMVSS No. 139, tires are subjected to
endurance testing under different
loading conditions at the speed of 120
km/h, for a combined duration of 34
hours. After completing the endurance
test, the same tire is then subjected to
a low-pressure performance test for an
additional 90 minutes. S6.3.2(a) and
S6.4.2(a) of FMVSS No. 139, require that
when the tire is tested for endurance
and low-pressure performance, ‘‘* * *
there shall be no visual evidence of
tread, sidewall, ply, cord, belt or bead
separation, chunking, open splices,
cracking or broken cords.’’ Chunking is
defined as ‘‘* * * breaking away of
pieces of the tread or sidewall.’’ 5
RMA, ETRTO, and JATMA requested
that NHTSA either redefine tire
chunking or not consider tire chunking
to be an indication of tire failure during
endurance testing because petitioners
believe that endurance test failures due
to chunking are not representative of
tire failures occurring in the real world.
RMA recommended that we either
delete ‘‘chunking’’ from Sections
S6.3.2(a) and S6.4.2(a), or modify the
definition of ‘‘chunking’’ as follows:
‘‘Chunking means the breaking away of
pieces of the tread or sidewall rubber
extending to the reinforcement cord or
wire material.’’ That is, chunking would
only be considered to occur if the
breakaway pieces of tread or sidewall
were deep enough to reach
reinforcement cord or wire material.
JATMA also asked the agency to
redefine chunking such that it would be
permitted for deep tread, winter type
snow tires, and on light truck tires so
long as it did not expose reinforcement
cords.
RMA argued that chunking mostly
occurs during endurance testing and is
rarely experienced in the real world.
RMA believes that chunking occurs in
testing because the test road-wheel
artificially overheats the tire by
5 The existing tire safety requirements, FMVSSs
No. 109 and 119, contain the same definition of
‘‘chunking.’’ Additionally, the European Union tire
regulations, Economic Commission for Europe
(ECE) Regulation 30 for light vehicle tires and ECE
Regulation 54 for heavy vehicle tires also contain
a similar definition.
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
879
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
deflecting the tire’s outer edges.6 This
deflection occurs because the tire’s
contact patch flexes when contacting
the curved surface of the test roadwheel, which is typically 67 inches (1.7
meters) in diameter. The difference
between flat and curved surface
performance increases as the tire’s
outside diameter increases, and/or the
tread depth increases. According to
RMA, this results in more energy being
transferred into the tire, resulting in
higher running temperatures.
According to RMA and ETRTO, the
test road-wheel temperature difference
is more pronounced for deep tread snow
tires and certain light truck tires because
deep tread snow tires depend on the
traction characteristics of higher
hysteretic tread compounds, molded in
greater tread depth, and smaller tread
blocks. These tread designs and
compounds are adversely affected by
the greater deflection on the road-wheel
and consequently run at
disproportionately higher temperatures.
Petitioners argue that the resultant tread
chunking is uncharacteristic of realworld tire performance.
RMA states that its members
subjected 352 passenger car tires of
various sizes, service descriptions, load
ranges and types to endurance and lowpressure testing. We note that the
duration of these tests exceeded the
duration of tests specified in FMVSS
No. 139 by six hours.7 Thirteen of the
35 deep tread snow tires failed that
endurance test. All 13 failures were
attributed to tread chunking. Out of 129
light truck (LT) tires of various sizes, 38
tires failed the 40-hour endurance test.
Tread chunking was attributed to 44
percent of failures.
After we issued the June 2003 final
rule, RMA performed additional testing
using the FMVSS No. 139 duration
parameters.8 The data are summarized
below:
Number
tested
Tire type
Number
chunked
Percent
failure
PC tires ....................................................................................................................................................
PC snow tires ..........................................................................................................................................
LT tires .....................................................................................................................................................
LT snow tires ...........................................................................................................................................
157
67
87
2
9
33
6
1
6
49
7
50
Total ..................................................................................................................................................
313
49
16
* PC means passenger car.
RMA believes that the ‘‘no chunking’’
requirement penalizes larger tires
because of material thickness (heavier
lugs, ribs, plies, and deeper tread
depth), especially at higher speed and
reduced inflation pressure. The
petitioners argue that the ‘‘no chunking’’
requirement will force tire
manufacturers to redesign deep tread
winter type snow tires and LT tires and
that these tire design changes will not
improve but will, to the contrary, reduce
snow traction and off-road traction
performance.
As an alternative to redefining
chunking, petitioners suggested that the
agency subject light truck tires and deep
tread snow tires to the performance
requirements of FMVSS No. 119,
instead of FMVSS No. 139.
Agency Testing. Before issuing the
June 2003 final rule, we tested a select
sample of tires to assess their
performance under the more stringent
high-speed and endurance tests, and the
new low-pressure test. Our tire sample
varied not only in size, but also in price.
We found that 19 out of 20 sampled
tires passed all tests being contemplated
by the agency. All five LT tires
subjected to this testing passed.
Fourteen out of 15 passenger car (PC)
tires passed all the tests. One snow tire
failed the endurance testing due to
chunking.9
To address the issues raised in the
petitions for reconsideration, the agency
conducted additional testing on a larger
sample of tires. We focused on the tires
selected by vehicle manufacturers as
original equipment for new light
vehicles, and similar-sized tires readily
available in the replacement market. We
also tested certain specialty tires
discussed in Section IV(B). The test
results are summarized in Table I below.
In addition to FMVSS No. 139 testing,
the agency performed modified testing
to assess the effectiveness of cooling
fans in reducing the incidence of tire
chunking during testing. We used a
circulating fan to simulate the airflow
across the tire that would normally
occur on the roadway. The addition of
fan did not affect tire performance. The
tires that failed FMVSS No. 139
endurance and low-pressure
performance tests did not pass the
modified tests.
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF ENDURANCE/LOW-PRESSURE TIRE TESTING RESULTS
Tire category
Number
tested
Number passed
(%)
Number failed
(%)
Number failed due to
chunking
(%)
Passenger Car Tires (PC)
19
Snow PC .......................
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Regular PC ....................
28
11 (58%) 2 of 2 (Michelin, Yokohama, Uniroyal,
and Cooper). 3 of 4 Kelly-Springfield.
18 (64%) ..............................................................
6 Road-wheel machine is curved test wheel
pressed against the test tire, rotating it to the
specified test speed.
7 RMA tested tires to the proposed requirements
of FMVSS No. 139, which specified testing for a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
8 (42%) 7 of 8 Cokers,
1 Kelly-Springfield.
10 (36%) 2 of 2
Bridgestone Blizzak.
combined duration of 40 hours. As explained
above, the June 2003 final rule specifies endurance
testing for a combined duration of 34 hours.
8 The test data is available at Docket No. NHTSA–
15400–21.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4 (50%) 1 Kelly-Springfield, 3 Coker.
10 (100%).
9 The agency tested Bridgestone Blizzak tire with
a Q speed rating. Bridgestone describes the Blizzak
as a ‘‘dedicated winter tire.’’
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
880
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF ENDURANCE/LOW-PRESSURE TIRE TESTING RESULTS—Continued
Tire category
Number
tested
Number passed
(%)
Number failed
(%)
Number failed due to
chunking
(%)
Light Truck Tires (LT)
Regular LT ....................
12
7 (58%) ................................................................
Snow LT ........................
4
2 (50%) 2 of 2 Dunlop ........................................
16
5 (31%) 1 of 8 Denman & 4 of 4 Goodyear .......
Specialty LT *see Section IV(b).
5 (42%) 1 Michelin, 2
Cooper, & 2 Fisk
(Uniroyal).
2 (50%) 2 of 2 Yokohama.
11 (69%) 7 of 8
Denman & 4 of 4
Speciality Tires of
America.
0 (0%).
2 (100%) Both Yokohama.
3 (27%).
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Observations:
• Chunking: Half of the failures (19/36, 53%) were due to chunking.
• Specialty LT: All four Goodyear 31x10.50R15 passed, while all 4 Denman 31x10.50R15 failed.
• Effectiveness of fan is inconclusive: 1 Kelly-Springfield PC did better with the fan; however 1 Coker PC did better without the fan.
Transport Canada conducted testing
of LT and PC snow tires to FMVSS No.
139 test requirements, except that the
test speed was reduced from 120 km/h
to 110 km/h. The tests were performed
at the Standards Testing Labs (STL) and
Smithers Scientific Services (Smithers).
STL tested 13 tires and Smithers
Scientific Services tested 20 tires,
including six LT snow tires. Of the 13
tires tested by STL, none failed. Of the
20 tires tested by Smithers, two PC
snow tires failed because of chunking.10
The overall tire failure rate was 6%, or
2 out of 33 tires.
Agency Decision. Based on analysis of
agency research and testing, as well as
testing conducted by RMA and
Transport Canada, we decided to amend
certain performance requirements of
FMVSS No. 139 as they apply to PC
snow tires and LT snow tires.
Specifically, we decided to reduce the
endurance and low pressure
performance test speeds in S6.3.1.2.3
and S6.4.2.1 from 120 km/h to 110 km/
h for all PC snow tires and LT snow tires
with load ranges of C, D, and E. All of
the other test parameters in S6.3 and
S6.4 remain unchanged.
The agency decided against
eliminating ‘‘chunking’’ as a test failure
condition because we did not receive
data demonstrating that some fixed
percentage of a tire’s tread could break
away without detrimental effect on safe
vehicle operation.
In real world riving conditions,
operating a vehicle with chunked tires
creates a potential safety hazard due to
wheel imbalance and vehicle vibrations.
Further, allowing tread chunking just
short of exposing the reinforcement
10 The two snow tires that chunked during testing
at Smithers are Kumho Izen Stud (P205/75R15,
97Q) and Bridgestone Dueler DM–Z2 (P235/75R15,
105Q).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
cords would create an unacceptable risk
of imminent tire failure. Finally, we
note that international standards such as
ECE R 30 and ECE R 54 also deem tire
chunking to be an indication of a safety
problem.
The agency believes that because of
the nature of snow tire construction, the
speed specified in certain current tests
of FMVSS No. 139 are impracticable for
special tires. Specifically, snow tires
usually feature higher hysteretic tread
compounds, molded in greater tread
depth, and smaller tread blocks. This
construction is used to provide special
performance in snow conditions. These
tread designs and compounds are
disproportionately affected at high
speeds when tested on the road wheel.
The technical design challenges and the
costs to redesign existing snow tires to
pass the 120 km/h test would far
outweigh the negligible safety benefits
associated with that redesign. By
reducing the endurance and lowpressure test speeds from 120 km/h to
110 km/h for all PC snow tires and LT
snow tires with load ranges of C, D, and
E we can ensure virtually all the safety
benefits from upgrading the test speed
for snow tires and eliminate
practicability and cost concerns.
The agency has decided not to reduce
the test speed for non-snow LT tires.
These tires did not experience chunking
in our tests, and we believe the higher
test speed is practicable for non-snow
LT tires. The test results provided by
RMA also indicate that chunking occurs
infrequently in non-snow LT tires when
tested at speeds and duration specified
in S6.3.1.2.3 and S6.4.1.2.1.
The tire industry classifies tires as
‘‘snow tires’’ if they attain a traction
index equal to or greater than 110,
compared to the ASTM E–1136
Standard Reference Test Tire, when
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
using the snow traction test as described
in ASTM F–1805, Standard Test Method
for Single Wheel Driving Traction in a
Straight Line on Snow- and Ice-Covered
Surfaces. We are incorporating this
voluntary consensus standard by
reference in order to insure that the tires
that do not attain a certain level of
traction are not labeled as snow tires
and subjected to less stringent testing.
In order to enable the agency to
ascertain which tires are to be tested at
110 km/h, the agency is adding a
labeling requirement to all PC snow
tires and LT snow tires with load ranges
of C, D, and E that are certified at this
test speed. The manufacturers must
mark their snow tires with the Alpine
Symbol if they wish to certify their
snow tires to the special requirements
applicable to snow tires. The use of the
Alpine Symbol will have the added
benefit of enabling consumers to
identify snow tires that provide a higher
level of snow traction compared to allseason tires. However, the tire
manufacturers are not obligated to do so
if they wish to certify their snow tires
to the normal requirements of the
Standard. Thus, only the snow tires
certified to the reduced test speed
requirements must display an Alpine
symbol (as shown below), on at least
one sidewall. The symbol is currently
required in Canada as a means of
identifying snow tires.
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
B. Deep Tread LT Specialty Tires
Denman produces Radial Deep Tread
On-road/Off-road LT specialty radial
tires (deep tread tires) used for
significant off-road operations
necessitating extended mobility on
harsh terrain. Denman petitioned the
agency to exclude these deep tread tires
from the requirements of FMVSS 139
because the costs of compliance testing
and certification would, according to
the petitioner, cause it to go out of
business. Instead, Denman asked that
the agency subject their deep tread tires
to the less stringent requirements of
FMVSS No. 109 or FMVSS No. 119. The
agency received letters from the U.S.
Congress, the Small Business
Administration, the Tire Industry
Association and SEMA in support of
Denman’s petition.
Denman stated it has not tested any of
their deep tread tires to the new
requirements of FMVSS No. 139,
because such tests are cost prohibitive.
Denman argued that when issuing the
June 2003 final rule, the agency
excluded bias-ply tires for the reasons of
practicability, and the same rationale
should exclude their deep tread tires
from the requirements of FMVSS No.
139. Denman argued that mandating
more stringent and expensive tire
performance requirements for specialty
deep tread radial tires, but not for bias
ply tires would encourage
manufacturing of bias ply deep tread
tires instead of deep tread radial tires.
Denman recommended that NHTSA
exclude radial tires with a 20⁄32-inch
tread depth or greater and a rubber-tovoid ratio of 2⁄3 or lower.
Agency Testing and Research
Because there is no standard industry
definition of rubber-to-void ratio, the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
agency has decided to consider only the
tread depth, which is an easily
measured parameter, in addressing the
issues raised by the Denman petition.
NHTSA tested sixteen of Denman’s
deep tread tires (≥ 18⁄32 inch tread depth)
to the FMVSS No. 139 performance
parameters. Our test results showed a
higher failure rate for deep tread tires
compared to the failure rates for original
equipment non-deep tread tires. We
believe the deep tread tires experienced
chunking because of their tread depth.
The results are as follows:
providing increased navigational
capabilities for vehicles used off-road.
Agency Decision
that this tolerance is currently specified
in FMVSS No. 109. The RMA also
petitioned the agency to lower the
ambient temperature for the tire
dimensions test since this test is
typically performed in an area with an
ambient of 20 °C–30 °C.
Because a test laboratory may not be
able to maintain a constant ambient
temperature of 38 °C, the agency is
specifying a tolerance of +0 °C, ¥6 °C.
That is, the tires subject to the high
speed, endurance, and low pressure
performance tests of FMVSS No. 139
must meet the applicable requirements
at the full range of temperatures
between 32 °C and 38 °C. For the tire
dimensions test, the agency is
specifying an ambient room temperature
of 20 °C to 30 °C.
C. Tire Conditioning Prior to Low
Pressure Performance Test
JATMA petitioned the agency to
revise the test conditions and
procedures specified for the low
pressure performance test such that at
the completion of the endurance test, all
hot air would be purged from the test
tire and refilled with cold air before
beginning the low-pressure test. JATMA
did not provide a rationale or data
supporting this recommendation, but its
Number and petition suggests that the tire would
Number of
percentage cool down quicker if purged of its hot
Type of test
Denman
of Denman air and refilled with cold air.
tires tested
tires that
The agency believes that complete
passed
deflation and re-inflation of the test tire
is unnecessary. Instead, in order to
FMVSS No. 139
ensure that the tire is sufficiently
endurance
and low-prescooled-off after completion of the
sure tests ......
8
2 (25%) endurance test, we are amending the
FMVSS No. 139
low-pressure test conditions and
high speed
procedures to specify that the tire is
test ................
5
2 (40%)
conditioned for a period of at least 3
FMVSS No. 119
hours prior to beginning the lowendurance
13
test ................
3
3 (100%) pressure test.
D. Test Temperature Tolerance
Our research indicates that, with one
JATMA, ETRTO, and RMA petitioned
exception,11 vehicle manufacturers
the agency to include a temperature
typically do not install tires with tread
tolerance of ± 3 °C to the ambient
depth exceeding 18⁄32 inches on their
temperature of 38 °C specified for
vehicles either as standard or optional
endurance and low-pressure testing of
equipment.
FMVSS No. 139. The petitioners note
Based agency testing and analysis, we
believe that a number of the
requirements in FMVSS No. 139 are
impracticable for deep tread specialty
tires with tread depth of at least 18⁄32
inches. Because the thickness of the
tread rubber of these tires causes higher
tire temperatures, we believe that it is
more appropriate to subject these tires
to the requirements of FMVSS No.
119.12 We note that in a letter to the
agency on October 4, 2004, RMA
provided endurance test results on 16
deep tread tires with tread depths of
18⁄32-inch or greater; 62 percent (10 of
16) failed due to chunking. The agency
believes that any potential
countermeasures could be cost
prohibitive, and could also negatively
impact the utility of deep tread tires,
which serve a special purpose of
11 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon is equipped with 245/
75R16 Goodyear Wrangler MT/R tires with a tread
depth of 19⁄32 inches.
12 FMVSS No. 119 endurance test for load range
E tires is conducted at 40 mph at loading conditions
of 70 percent/88 percent/106 percent for 47 hours
(7/16/24 hours) at an inflation pressure
corresponding to the maximum load rating marked
on the tire sidewall.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E. Calculation of Vehicle Normal Load
RMA and ETRTO petitioned the
agency to amend the method by which
vehicle manufacturers calculate the
vehicle normal load on the tire, as
specified by S4.2.1.2, S4.2.2.2 and
S4.2.2.3 of FMVSS No. 110.
13 The agency has also amended the conditioning
procedure which precedes the endurance testing by
adding a tolerance of ± 5 minutes.
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
ER06JA06.364</GPH>
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
If the manufacturers choose to mark
their snow tires with the Alpine
Symbol, the mountain profile must have
a minimum base of 15 mm and a
minimum height of 15 mm, and must
contain three peaks with the middle
peak being the tallest. Inside the
mountain profile, there must be a sixsided snowflake having a minimum
height of one-half the tallest peak.
881
882
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Specifically, the petitioners suggested
that the vehicle normal load on the tire
should not exceed 88 percent of tire
maximum load.
The agency revised the definition of
vehicle normal load to change the frame
of reference from a percentage of the
tire’s maximum load to the percentage
of the tire’s load at the manufacturer’s
recommended tire pressure.
Specifically, the normal load is defined
as 94 percent of the vehicle
manufacturer’s recommended cold
inflation pressure.
We believe that it is not appropriate
to define normal load as 88% of
maximum load rating because the
manufacturer’s recommended tire
pressure for some vehicles equipped
with, for example, LT load range E tires,
could be far below their maximum
inflation pressure. If we were to require
normal load calculation based on the
maximum inflation pressure, the normal
load calculation would be different.
Accordingly, the agency is denying the
petitioner’s request.
F. Time Limit for Measuring Post-Test
Inflation Pressure
RMA and ETRTO petitioned the
agency to amend the time limit for
checking post-test inflation pressure
from ‘‘at least one hour’’ to ‘‘at least 15
minutes after the end of the test.’’ 14
RMA explained that when post-test time
period exceeds one hour, inflation
pressure in the tires often falls below
pre-test levels. Petitioners argue that the
tire inflation pressure should be
measured when the tire temperature has
stabilized, which occurs within one
hour, but not sooner than 15 minutes.
In the June 2003 final rule, the agency
specified that all post-test pressure
measurements be taken at least one hour
after the test is completed. We indicated
that the one-hour period provides a
sufficient time for tire cooling and
would prevent superficially high tire
temperatures from masking test-induced
pressure losses that would not be
detectable at an earlier time. Further,
this time period reduces the risk of tire
explosion, which RMA stated could
occur if tire pressure measurement was
taken immediately after testing.
The agency is amending the time limit
for post-test pressure measurement from
‘‘at least one hour’’ to ‘‘at any time
between 15 minutes and 25 minutes’’
after the tests are completed. This
change ensures that the pressure
measurement does not occur after 25
minutes have elapsed. For tires known
to retain more heat and therefore, higher
inflation pressure, the change offers
14 See
Docket No. NHTSA–2003–15400–23.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
enough flexibility to allow measurement
after the 15 minute time period, in order
to address technician safety. The agency
believes that if a rapid loss of pressure
to a level below the initial test pressure
is to occur, it is likely to occur during
the test or within the first 15 minutes
after the end of the test. Thus, this
change will not affect the stringency of
the upgraded tire safety performance
requirements.
G. Permissible Level of Tire Pressure
Loss
RMA and ETRTO petitioned the
agency to amend FMVSS No. 139 to
allow for a pressure loss of not greater
than 10 percent below the initial test
pressure. Petitioners noted that small air
losses occur during and after tests as a
result of air diffusion through the tire
casing. Further, some air also escapes
during pressure measurement.
According to the petitioners, additional
variability factors could include tire
pressure gauge accuracy, and the
‘‘initial break-in’’ factor; i.e. testing of
new tires could result in some small
mechanical growth of the tire casing
(increase in pressure vessel volume). As
a result, some post-test tire pressure
measurements will show small pressure
losses below the initial test pressure,
which should not be indicative of tire
failure. RMA suggested that a minimum
permissible tire pressure loss criteria be
specified.
RMA submitted information, data,
and graphs on its testing by RMA
member companies. A total of 313 tires
(224 passenger car and 89 light truck
tires) were tested to the FMVSS No. 139
endurance and low pressure
performance tests. Of the 313 tires
tested, 42 percent (133) experienced
pressure loss per the FMVSS No. 139
conditions and procedures. The loss of
pressure was attributed to the longer
cool-down time periods addressed
above. RMA stated that the 42 percent
estimate could be higher as some tire
manufacturers did not report pressure
loss data to the RMA.
The agency agrees that some small
mechanical growth of the tire casing
could occur during the initial break-in
of new tires, which could result in posttest pressures being slightly lower than
the initial test pressure once the tire has
cooled to ambient temperature.
Although our testing did not show
significant losses in tire pressure at 15
to 25 minutes after the completion of
endurance and low-pressure testing, we
believe that it is reasonable to allow for
a nominal amount of post-test pressure
drop. Accordingly, the agency will
require that the post-test pressure loss
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
be no greater than 5% of the specified
initial inflation pressure.
V. Miscellaneous Issues and Technical
Corrections to the Regulatory Text
1. JATMA, ETRTO, RMA petitioned
the agency to remove references to TType spare tires from S6.1.1.1.2 of
FMVSS No. 139. Petitioners noted that
footnote 38 of the June 2003 final rule
indicated that temporary spare tires
would not be subject to the
requirements of FMVSS No. 139.15
The agency did not intend to subject
T-Type temporary spare tires to the
requirements of FMVSS No. 139.
Therefore, NHTSA is amending the
regulatory text of FMVSS No. 139 to
remove references to T-Type temporary
spare tires.
2. The RMA and ETRTO petitioned
the agency to replace the term ‘‘Pmetric’’ with the term ‘‘passenger car’’
in the regulatory text of FMVSS Nos.
109, 110 and 139. The RMA stated that
using ‘‘P-metric’’ as a generic term for
‘‘passenger car’’ tires is not correct since
the use of this terminology could
exclude ‘‘Hard’’ metric or any other
radial passenger car tire that does not
have ‘‘P-metric’’ size designation.
NHTSA has reviewed the tire industry
Year Books (TRA, JATMA, and ETRTO)
and notes that tires used on passenger
cars are referred to as ‘‘passenger car’’
tires and not ‘‘P-metric’’ tires.16
Therefore, the agency is amending the
regulatory text of the relevant tire safety
standards by removing references to ‘‘Pmetric tires’’ where it is more
appropriate to use the term ‘‘passenger
car.’’ In conjunction with this change,
we are adding a definition of passenger
car tires to FMVSS No. 139.
3. Alliance petitioned the agency to
amend FMVSS No. 120 to allow the use
of tires meeting FMVSS 139 in addition
to those meeting FMVSS No. 119 for
vehicles with a GVWR over 10,000
pounds.
The agency agrees that FMVSS No.
120 should allow the use of tires that
comply with FMVSS No. 139. For
example, LT tires with a load range E
are sometimes used on vehicles with a
GVWR below 10,000 pounds. Since
FMVSS No. 139 applies to LT tires load
range E tires, a reference to this standard
should have been included in S5.1.1 of
FMVSS No. 120. NHTSA believes this
reference was inadvertently omitted
from the June 2003 final rule.
15 See
68 FR 38116 at 38145.
TRA Year Book states that the prefix, ‘‘P’’,
when used in tire size designations identifies a tire
primarily intended for service on passenger cars. In
addition to the P-Type passenger car tires, the Year
Book also includes information on T-Type
passenger car tires and other passenger car tires.
16 The
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Accordingly, the agency is amending
the regulatory text of S5.1.1 of FMVSS
No. 120 to add a reference to FMVSS
No. 139.
4. RMA, TRA, and ETRTO petitioned
the agency to amend the ‘‘application’’
sections of FMVSS No. 119, ‘‘New
pneumatic tires for vehicles other than
passenger cars,’’ to indicate that it
applies to Special Trailer (ST), Farm
Implement (FI), and 8–12 rim diameter
code and below tires. We note that in
the June 2003 final rule, the agency
decided to exclude bias, ST, FI, and 8–
12 rim diameter tires from the
requirements of FMVSS No. 139 and
indicated that they would remain
subject to the requirements of FMVSS
Nos. 109 and 119.17 However, the
petitioners indicate that all such tires
have been, and remain subject to only
FMVSS No. 119 because they are not
used on passenger cars.
The agency is amending the
application sections of FMVSS Nos.
109, 119, and 139 in order to clarify that
ST, FI, and 8–12 rim diameter code and
below tires are subject to the
requirements of FMVSS No. 119.
5. When a passenger car tire is
installed on a traditionally heavier
vehicle such as an MPV, truck, bus, or
trailer, the normal load rating is ‘‘derated’’ by a factor of 1.10. That is, the
normal load rating is reduced by
dividing it by 1.10. The Alliance
petitioned the agency to clarify that the
de-rating requirement in FMVSS No.
120 applies only to passenger car tires,
and not to all tires.
The agency intended to apply the 1.10
de-rating requirement in FMVSS No.
120 only to passenger car tires when
installed on vehicles other than
passenger cars. The agency did not
intend to subject other tires to the same
requirements. Accordingly, the agency
is amending S5.1.2 of FMVSS No. 120
to clarify the application of the de-rating
requirement.
6. Safety Research and Strategies
(SRS) submitted comments urging the
agency to address tire aging.18 In short,
SRS is asking the agency to require that
tires be labeled with an ‘‘expiration
date’’ that would inform consumers that
their tires are no longer safe after an X
number of years have elapsed since
their manufacture.
The agency is currently conducting
research on tire aging. When this
research is complete, the agency will
decide how to proceed.
7. This document amends the titles to
FMVSS No. 109 and FMVSS No. 139 to
17 See
18 See
68 FR 38116 at 38141.
Docket No. NHTSA–2003–15400–12, 31,
32.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
more accurately reflect their
application. The new titles read as
follows: § 571.109—Standard No. 109—
New pneumatic and certain specialty
tires, and § 571.139—Standard No.
139—New pneumatic radial tires for
light vehicles.
8. This document amends the table
located below Figure 1 in FMVSS No.
109 to add a 20 rim diameter code
because the Tire & Rim Association’s
2003 and newer Yearbooks now include
LT tires of that size.
9. ETRTO and RMA petitioned the
agency to remove references to CT Tires
from FMVSS No. 139 because CT tires
are not being manufactured for sale or
distribution in the United States.19 The
petitioners also indicated that this tire
type is being withdrawn as an active
classification in the ETRTO Standards
Manual.
This rule amends FMVSS No. 139 by
removing references to CT tires because
these tires are not being sold in the
United States.
10. RMA and ETRTO petitioned the
agency to amend Tables I and II in
FMVSS No. 119. Specifically, the
petitioners requested that Table I
include the plunger diameter for
motorcycles. The petitioners also
requested that Table II include the
minimum static breaking energies for
load ranges ‘‘A’’ through ‘‘E’’ tires used
on 12 rim diameter code or smaller, and
light truck tires, because FMVSS No.
119 applies to these types of tires.
NHTSA agrees with the petitioners
that Tables I and II of FMVSS No. 119
should be revised to reflect the change
in applicability of FMVSS No. 119. The
agency has retained the current strength
requirements of FMVSS No. 119 but
since LT load range C, D, and E tires are
now subject to the requirements of
FMVSS No. 139, the tables need to
reflect this change.
11. RMA petitioned the agency to
correct the test pressures for LT tires
with a nominal cross section larger than
295 mm. The petitioner indicated that
these tires, as shown in the Tire and
Rim Association Year Book, have a
lower inflation pressure to attain the
load range C, D, or E maximum load
limits and do not follow the normal load
range C, D, and E inflation pressures for
tire maximum load limits. Therefore, to
ensure that all LT tires within a single
load range category are subject to the
same level of performance requirements,
the petitioners recommend that FMVSS
883
No. 139 be amended to specify correct
inflation pressures for these tires.
NHTSA agrees with the petitioner that
LT tires with a nominal cross section
greater than 295 mm have a different
load range for the same maximum
inflation pressure as tires equal to or
less than 295 mm wide and therefore
amend S6.2.1.1.1, S6.3.1.1.1 and
S6.4.1.1.1 accordingly.
12. JATMA petitioned the agency to
clarify the bead unseating test
conditions (inflation pressure and
dimension ‘‘A’’) for light truck tires,
since they were not stipulated in the
June 2003 final rule. The current
requirement in FMVSS No. 139, S6.6,
reference FMVSS No. 109, which does
not include test parameters for LT tires.
We are amending the regulatory text
to specify the test inflation pressure for
the LT tires undergoing resistance to
bead unseating test. The pressure is the
same for the endurance test. The
dimension ‘‘A’’ parameters are the same
as those specified in FMVSS No. 109.
VI. Effective Date
Alliance petitioned the agency to
change the effective date of FMVSS No.
139 from June 1, 2007 to September 1,
2007 to coincide with the traditional
start of the new model year
introduction. Petitioners argue that an
effective date of September 1, 2007
would help in the transition from the
2007 to 2008 model year. RMA
petitioned the agency to extend the
effective date for an additional 2 years
to 2009 arguing that tire manufacturers
are waiting for the agency’s response to
petitions for reconsideration.
In light of potential impact of midmodel year introduction of a new set of
requirements, the agency is delaying the
effective date of FMVSS No. 139 until
September 1, 2007. Furthermore, we are
delaying the effective date of
applicability of FMVSS No. 139 to snow
tires until September 1, 2008 because of
changes to snow tire construction that
may be necessitated by the more
stringent performance requirements.
However, we believe that a two-year
delay in the effective date, as requested
by the RMA is unwarranted. As
indicated in 49 CFR § 553.35(d) a
petition for reconsideration does not
stay the effectiveness of the rule.
Therefore, the manufacturers need to
continue their efforts to comply with the
new requirements while their petitions
are being considered.
VII. Rulemaking Notices and Analyses
19 CT
means a pneumatic tire with an inverted
flange tire and rim system in which the rim is
designed with rim flanges pointed radially inward
and the tire is designed to fit on the underside of
the rim in a manner that encloses the rim flanges
inside the air cavity of the tire.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory
Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735,
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
884
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
October 4, 1993), provides for making
determinations whether a regulatory
action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore
subject to Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) review and to the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
This rulemaking action was not
reviewed under Executive Order 12866.
The rulemaking action is not significant
under Department of Transportation
regulatory policies and procedures. The
agency is modifying certain
performance requirements to better
address snow tires and certain deep
tread specialty tires. The effect of this
change is a decreased regulatory burden
on manufacturers of snow tires and
deep tread specialty tires through more
practicable tire safety performance
requirements. This final rule also makes
a number of technical corrections to the
regulatory text of all Federal tire safety
regulations. This action will not affect
the impacts estimated in the final
regulatory evaluation for the June 2003
final rule.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(5 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.) requires agencies
to evaluate the potential effects of their
proposed and final rules on small
business, small organizations and small
governmental jurisdictions. I hereby
certify that this rulemaking action will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
This document decreases the
regulatory burden on small entities by
subjecting the specially manufactured
deep-tread tires to more practicable tire
safety performance requirements.
According to the petitioners and the
Small Business Administration, this
rulemaking action will result in
substantial cost savings for the one
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
small business that petitioned the
agency to amend our regulations.
C. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this document
for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The agency
has determined that implementation of
this rulemaking action does not have
any significant impact on the quality of
the human environment.
D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
The agency has analyzed this
rulemaking in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in
Executive Order 13132 and has
determined that it does not have
sufficient federal implications to
warrant consultation with State and
local officials or the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement.
The final rule does not have any
substantial impact on the States, or on
the current Federal-State relationship,
or on the current distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various
local officials.
E. Unfunded Mandates 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
($120.7 million as adjusted annually for
inflation with base year of 1995).
The agency previously estimated that
the June 2003 final rule establishing
more stringent tire performance
requirements was likely to result in the
expenditure by automobile
manufacturers and/or tire manufacturers
of more than $109 million annually.20
This document amends certain
performance requirements to better
address snow tires and certain specialty
tires. This final rule also makes a
number of technical corrections to the
regulatory text of all Federal tire safety
regulations. The effect of these changes
is a decreased regulatory burden on
manufacturers of snow tires and certain
other specialty tires. Accordingly, this
rulemaking action will not result in
expenditures by State, local or tribal
governments of more than $120 million
annually. Further this rulemaking action
will not result in private sector
expenditure of more than $120 million
annually.
F. Civil Justice Reform
This final rule does not have any
retroactive effect. Under 49 U.S.C.
21403, whenever a Federal motor
vehicle safety standard is in effect, a
State may not adopt or maintain a safety
standard applicable to the same aspect
of performance which is not identical to
the Federal standard, except to the
extent that the state requirement
imposes a higher level of performance
and applies only to vehicles procured
for the State’s use. 49 U.S.C. 21461 sets
forth a procedure for judicial review of
final rules establishing, amending or
revoking Federal motor vehicle safety
standards. That section does not require
submission of a petition for
reconsideration or other administrative
proceedings before parties may file suit
in court.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et. seq.),
Federal agencies must obtain approval
from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for each ‘‘collection of
information’’ they conduct, sponsor, or
require through regulations. NHTSA has
reviewed this final rule and determined
that it does not contain collection of
information requirements.
In order to enable the agency to
ascertain which tires are to be tested to
less stringent requirements, the agency
is adding a labeling requirement to all
PC snow tires and LT snow tires with
load ranges of C, D, and E that are
certified under the less stringent
requirements. The manufacturers must
mark their snow tires with the Alpine
Symbol described in Section IV(A), if
they wish to certify their snow tires to
the requirements applicable to snow
tires. However, the tire manufacturers
are not obligated to do so if they wish
to certify their snow tires to the normal
requirements of the Standard. Thus,
only the snow tires certified to the
reduced test speed requirements must
display an Alpine symbol (as shown
below), on at least one sidewall. The use
of the Alpine Symbol will have the
added benefit of enabling consumers to
identify snow tires that provide a higher
level of snow traction compared to allseason tires.
Under CFR 1320.3(h)(1),
‘‘information’’ does not generally
include certifications such as that
described in the previous paragraph,
which only identify tires certified to the
less stringent requirements.
H. Privacy Act
20 The
written assessment of costs is available at
Docket No. NHTSA–2003–15400–2 at https://
dms.dot.gov/search/searchResultsSimple.cfm.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
885
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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 https://dms.dot.gov.
VIII. Regulatory Text
§ 571.109 Standard No. 109—New
pneumatic and certain specialty tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, part
571 is amended as follows:
I
*
*
*
*
*
S2. Application. This standard
applies to new pneumatic radial tires for
use on passenger cars manufactured
before 1975, and new pneumatic bias
ply tires for use on passenger cars
manufactured after 1948.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR
VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 571
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at
49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 571.109 is amended by
revising the section heading, S2, and the
Table located below Figure 1:
I
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Tires.
FIGURES FOR FMVSS NO. 109
Dimension ‘‘A’’ for tires with maximum inflation pressure
Wheel size
Other than
60 psi (in)
20 .....................................................................................................................................
19 .....................................................................................................................................
18 .....................................................................................................................................
17 .....................................................................................................................................
16 .....................................................................................................................................
15 .....................................................................................................................................
14 .....................................................................................................................................
13 .....................................................................................................................................
12 .....................................................................................................................................
11 .....................................................................................................................................
10 .....................................................................................................................................
320 ...................................................................................................................................
340 ...................................................................................................................................
345 ...................................................................................................................................
365 ...................................................................................................................................
370 ...................................................................................................................................
390 ...................................................................................................................................
415 ...................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 571.110 is amended by
revising S4.2.2.2 and S4.2.2.3(a), to read
as follows:
§ 571.110 Standard No. 110—Tire selection
and rims for motor vehicles with a GVWR
of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
S4.2.2.2 When passenger car tires
are installed on an MPV, truck, bus, or
trailer, each tire’s load rating is reduced
by dividing it by 1.10 before
determining, under S4.2.2.1, the sum of
the maximum load ratings of the tires
fitted to an axle.
S4.2.2.3(a) For vehicles equipped
with passenger car tires, the vehicle
normal load on the tire shall be no
greater than the value of 94 percent of
the derated load rating at the vehicle
manufacturer’s recommended cold
inflation pressure for that tire.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
13.50
13.00
12.50
12.00
11.50
11.00
10.50
10.00
9.50
9.00
8.50
8.50
9.00
9.25
9.75
10.00
11.00
11.50
4. Section 571.119 is amended by
revising S3, and Tables I and II to read
as follows:
I
I
Jkt 208001
§ 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. Application. This standard
applies to:
(a) New pneumatic tires for use on
motor vehicles with a GVWR of more
than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds)
manufactured after 1948;
(b) New pneumatic light truck tires
with a tread depth of 18/32 inch or
greater, for use on motor vehicles with
a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000
pounds) or less manufactured after
1948;
(c) Tires for use on special-use trailers
(ST, FI and 8–12 rim or lower diameter
code); and
(d) Tires for use on motorcycles
manufactured after 1948.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Other than
420 kPa
345
330
318
305
292
279
267
254
241
229
216
216
229
235
248
254
279
292
60 psi (in)
420 kPa
....................
12.00
11.40
10.60
9.90
9.40
8.90
8.40
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
305
290
269
251
239
226
213
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
TABLE I.—STRENGTH TEST PLUNGER
DIAMETER
Plunger diameter
Tire type
(mm)
Light truck .................
Motorcycle ................
≤ 12 rim diameter
code (except motorcycle) .................
Tubeless:
≤ 17.5 rim diameter code ...
>17.5 rim diameter code, load
range F or less
> 17.5 rim diameter code,
load range
over F .............
Tube-type:
Load range F or
less .................
Load range over
F .....................
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
(inches)
19.05
7.94
5 16
⁄
19.05
34
19.05
34
31.75
11⁄4
38.10
11⁄2
31.75
11⁄4
38.10
11⁄2
34
⁄
⁄
⁄
886
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE II.—MINIMUM STATIC BREAKING ENERGY
[Joules (J) and Inch-Pounds (inch-lbs)]
Tire characteristic
Motorcycle
7.94 J
mm
5/16″
Breaking Energy
J
In-lbs
Load Range:
A .................................
B .................................
C .................................
D .................................
E .................................
F .................................
G ................................
H .................................
J .................................
L .................................
M ................................
N .................................
16
33
45
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
150
300
400
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
Light truck and
17.5 rim diameter code or
smaller rim
Tubeless
19.05 J
mm
34
⁄ ″
19.05J
mm
34
J
Plunger diameter (mm and
inches)
All 12 rim diameter code or
smaller rim size
except motorcycle
In-lbs
J
67
135
203
271
338
406
............
............
............
............
............
............
600
1,200
1,800
2,400
3,000
3,600
............
............
............
............
............
............
225
293
361
514
576
644
711
768
............
............
............
............
*
*
*
*
*
5. Section 571.120 is amended by
revising S5.1.1 and S5.1.2 to read as
follows:
I
§ 571.120—Standard No. 120—Tire selection
and rims for motor vehicles with a GVWR
of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000
pounds).
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
S5.1.1 Except as specified in S5.1.3,
each vehicle equipped with pneumatic
tires for highway service shall be
equipped with tires that meet the
requirements of § 571.109, § 571.119 or
§ 571.139, and rims that are listed by the
manufacturer of the tires as suitable for
use with those tires, in accordance with
S4.4 of § 571.109 or S5.1 of § 571.119, as
applicable, except that vehicles may be
equipped with a non-pneumatic spare
tire assembly that meets the
requirements of § 571.129, New nonpneumatic tires for passenger cars, and
S8 of this standard. Vehicles equipped
with such an assembly shall meet the
requirements of S5.3.3, S7, and S9 of
this standard.
S5.1.2 Except in the case of a vehicle
which has a speed attainable in 3.2
kilometers of 80 kilometers per hour or
less, the sum of the maximum load
ratings of the tires fitted to an axle shall
be not less than the gross axle weight
rating (GAWR) of the axle system as
specified on the vehicle’s certification
label required by 49 CFR part 567.
Except in the case of a vehicle which
has a speed attainable in 2 miles of 50
mph or less, the sum of the maximum
load ratings of the tires fitted to an axle
shall be not less than the gross axle
weight rating (GAWR) of the axle system
as specified on the vehicle’s
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:02 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
⁄ ″
Tires other than Light Motorcycle, 12 rim diameter code or smaller
Tube type
Tubeless greater
than 17.5
rim diameter
code
11⁄4″
31.75
mm
11⁄4″
38.10J
mm
11⁄2″
38.10
mm
11⁄2″
In-lbs
J
In-lbs
J
In-lbs
J
In-lbs
J
In-lbs
2,000
2,600
3,200
4,550
5,100
5,700
6,300
6,800
............
............
............
............
............
............
768
892
1,412
1,785
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
6,800
7,900
12,500
15,800
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
576
734
971
1,412
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
5,100
6,500
8,600
12,500
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
2,282
2,598
2,824
3,050
3,220
3,389
............
............
............
............
............
............
20,200
23,000
25,000
27,000
28,500
30,000
............
............
............
............
............
............
1,694
2,090
2,203
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
............
15,000
18,500
19,500
............
............
............
§ 571.139—Standard No. 139—New
pneumatic radial tires for light vehicles.
*
*
*
*
*
S2 Application and Incorporation by
Reference.
S2.1 Application. This standard
applies to new pneumatic radial tires for
use on motor vehicles that have a gross
Frm 00014
Tubeless Greater than 17.5
rim diameter
code
31.75J
mm
certification label required by 49 CFR
part 567. If the certification label shows
more than one GAWR for the axle
system, the sum shall be not less than
the GAWR corresponding to the size
designation of the tires fitted to the axle.
If the size designation of the tires fitted
to the axle does not appear on the
certification label, the sum shall be not
less than the lowest GAWR appearing
on the label. When a passenger car tire
is installed on a multipurpose passenger
vehicle, truck, bus, or trailer, the tire’s
load rating shall be reduced by dividing
by 1.10 before calculating the sum (i.e.,
the sum of the load ratings of the tires
on each axle, when the tires’ load
carrying capacity at the recommended
tire cold inflation pressure is reduced by
dividing by 1.10, must be appropriate
for the GAWR).
*
*
*
*
*
I 6. Section 571.139 is amended by:
I a. Adding new paragraphs S2.1 and
S2.2 to S2; adding to S3, in alphabetical
order, new definitions of ‘‘Passenger car
tire’’ and ‘‘Snow tire’’ and adding a new
paragraph (i) to S5.5;
I b. Revising S2; the first sentence of
S5.5; S6.1.1.1.2; S6.1.1.1.4; S6.2.1.1.1;
S6.2.1.2.6; S6.2.1.2.8; S6.2.2; S6.3.1.1.1;
S6.3.1.1.2; S6.3.1.2.2; S6.3.1.2.3;
S6.3.1.2.5; S6.3.2; S6.4.1.1.1; S6.4.1.1.2;
S6.4.1.2.1; S6.4.1.2.5; S6.4.1.2.6; S6.4.2;
S6.5.1; and S6.6 as set forth below.
PO 00000
Tube type
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000
pounds or less, and that were
manufactured after 1975. This standard
does not apply to tires for use on new
pneumatic light truck tires with a tread
depth of 18⁄32 inch or greater; ST, FI and
8–12 rim or lower diameter code tires;
tires for use on low speed vehicles; and
tires for use on motorcycles
manufactured after 1948.
S2.2 Incorporation by reference.
ASTM F–1805–00, Standard Test
Method for Single Wheel Driving
Traction in a Straight Line on Snowand Ice-Covered Surfaces is
incorporated by reference in S3 of this
section. The Director of the Federal
Register has approved the incorporation
by reference of this material in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR Part 51. A copy of ASTM F–1805–
00 may be obtained from the ASTM
Web site https://www.astm.org/ or by
contacting ASTM, or by contacting
ASTM, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959. A copy
of ASTM F–1805–00 may be obtained
from the NHTSA docket at Docket No.
2005–23439, or at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call 202–741–
6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
*
*
*
*
*
S3. Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Passenger car tire means a tire
intended for use on passenger cars,
multipurpose passenger vehicles, and
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
887
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
trucks, that have a gross vehicle weight
rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less.
*
*
*
*
*
Snow tire means a tire that attains a
traction index equal to or greater than
110, compared to the ASTM E–1136
Standard Reference Test Tire, when
using the snow traction test as described
in ASTM F–1805–00, Standard Test
Method for Single Wheel Driving
Traction in a Straight Line on Snowand Ice-Covered Surfaces, and which is
marked with an Alpine Symbol
specified in S5.5 (i) on at least one
sidewall.
*
*
*
*
*
S5.5 Tire Markings. Except as
specified in paragraphs (a) through (h)
of S5.5, each tire must be marked on
each sidewall with the information
specified in S5.5 (a) through (d) and on
one sidewall with the information
specified in S5.5 (e) through (h)
according to the phase-in schedule
specified in S7 of this standard. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Alpine Symbol. A tire meeting the
definition of a snow tire as defined in
paragraph S3 may, at the option of the
manufacturer, show the pictograph of a
mountain with a snowflake as shown
below. If the manufacturer chooses to
mark the snow tire with the alpine
symbol, the mountain profile must have
a minimum base of 15 mm and a
minimum height of 15 mm, and must
contain three peaks with the middle
peak being the tallest. Inside the
mountain, there must be a six-sided
snowflake having a minimum height of
one-half the tallest peak.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.1.1.1.2 For passenger car tires,
inflate to the pressure specified in the
following table:
S6.1.1.1.4 Condition the assembly at
an ambient room temperature of 20 °C
to 30 °C for not less than 24 hours.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.2.1.1.1 Mount the tire on a test
rim and inflate it to the pressure
specified for the tire in the following
table:
Test pressure (kPa)
Tire application
Passenger car tires
Standard load ...........................
Extra load .................................
Load Range C ..........................
Load Range D ..........................
Load Range E ..........................
220
260
320
410
500
Light truck tires with a nominal cross
section > 295 mm (11.5 inches)
Load Range C ..........................
Load Range D ..........................
Load Range E ..........................
230
320
410
*
*
*
*
S6.2.1.2.6 During the test, the
ambient temperature, measured at a
distance of not less than 150 mm and
not more than 1 m from the tire, is
maintained at not less than 32 °C or
more than 38 °C.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.2.1.2.8 Allow the tire to cool for
between 15 minutes and 25 minutes.
Measure its inflation pressure. Then,
deflate the tire, remove it from the test
rim, and inspect it for the conditions
specified in S6.2.2(a).
*
*
*
*
*
S6.2.2 Performance requirements.
When the tire is tested in accordance
with S6.2.1:
(a) There shall be no visual evidence
of tread, sidewall, ply, cord, innerliner,
belt or bead separation, chunking, open
splices, cracking, or broken cords.
(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% of the initial
pressure specified in S6.2.1.1.1.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.3.1.1.1 Mount the tire on a test
rim and inflate it to the pressure
specified for the tire in the following
table:
Light truck tires with a nominal cross
section > 295 mm (11.5 inches)
Load Range C ..........................
Load Range D ..........................
Load Range E ..........................
Test pressure (kPa)
190
260
340
S6.3.1.1.2 Condition the assembly at
32 to 38 ° C for not less than 3 hours.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.3.1.2.2 During the test, the
ambient temperature, at a distance of
not less than 150 mm and not more than
1 m from the tire, is maintained at not
less than 32 °C or more than 38 °C.
S6.3.1.2.3 Conduct the test, without
interruptions, at the test speed of not
less than 120 km/h with loads and test
periods not less than those shown in the
following table. For snow tires, conduct
the test at not less than 110 km/h.
*
Tire application
Test pressure (kPa)
Tire application
Test period
Duration
(hours)
1 ........................
2 ........................
3 ........................
4
6
24
Load as a
percentage
of tire maximum load
rating
85
90
100
*
*
*
*
*
S6.3.1.2.5 Allow the tire to cool for
between 15 minutes and 25 minutes
after running the tire for the time
specified in the table in S6.3.1.2.3,
measure its inflation pressure. Inspect
the tire externally on the test rim for the
conditions specified in S6.3.2(a).
*
*
*
*
*
S6.3.2 Performance requirements.
When the tire is tested in accordance
with S6.3.1:
(a) There shall be no visual evidence
of tread, sidewall, ply, cord, belt or bead
separation, chunking, open splices,
cracking or broken cords.
(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% of the initial
pressure specified in S6.3.1.1.1.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.4.1.1.1 This test is conducted
following completion of the tire
endurance test using the same tire and
rim assembly tested in accordance with
S6.3 with the tire deflated to the
following appropriate pressure:
Standard
Reinforced
180 ........................................
*
*
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
220
Standard load ...........................
Extra load .................................
Load Range C ..........................
Load Range D ..........................
Load Range E ..........................
*
15:02 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
180
220
260
340
410
Tire application
Test pressure (kPa)
Passenger car tires
Standard load ...........................
Extra load .................................
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
140
160
ER06JA06.365</GPH>
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Passenger car tires
Inflation pressure (kPa)
888
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Tire application
Test pressure (kPa)
Load Range C ..........................
Load Range D ..........................
Load Range E ..........................
200
260
320
Light truck tires with a nominal cross
section > 295 mm (11.5 inches)
Load Range C ..........................
Load Range D ..........................
Load Range E ..........................
150
200
260
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES
S6.4.1.1.2 Condition the assembly at
32 to 38 °C for not less than 2 hours.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.4.1.2.1 The test is conducted for
ninety minutes at the end of the test
specified in S6.3, continuous and
uninterrupted, at a speed of 120 km/h
(75 mph). For snow tires, conduct the
test at not less than 110 km/h.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Jan 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
S6.4.1.2.5 During the test, the
ambient temperature, at a distance of
not less than 150 mm and not more than
1 m from the tire, is maintained at not
less than 32 °C or more than 38 °C.
S6.4.1.2.6 Allow the tire to cool for
between 15 minutes and 25 minutes.
Measure its inflation pressure. Then,
deflate the tire, remove it from the test
rim, and inspect it for the conditions
specified in S6.4.2(a).
S6.4.2 Performance requirements.
When the tire is tested in accordance
with S6.4.1:
(a) There shall be no visual evidence
of tread, sidewall, ply, cord, innerliner,
belt or bead separation, chunking, open
splices, cracking, or broken cords, and
(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% of the initial
pressure specified in S6.4.1.1.1.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
S6.5.1 Tire strength for passenger
car tires. Each tire shall comply with the
requirements of S5.3 of § 571.109.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.6 Tubeless tire bead unseating
resistance. Each tire shall comply with
the requirements of S5.2 of § 571.109.
For light truck tires, the maximum
permissible inflation pressure to be used
for the bead unseating test is as follows:
Load Range C ..............................
Load Range D ..............................
Load Range E ..............................
*
*
*
*
260 kPa.
340 kPa.
410 kPa.
*
Issued on: December 21, 2005.
Jacqueline Glassman,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 06–137 Filed 1–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
E:\FR\FM\06JAR1.SGM
06JAR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 4 (Friday, January 6, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 877-888]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-137]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2005-23439]
RIN 2127-AJ65
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Tires
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions for reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In June 2003, NHTSA published a final rule establishing
upgraded tire performance requirements for new tires for use on
vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less.
This document responds to petitions for reconsideration of that final
rule. After carefully considering the petitions, the agency is
modifying certain performance requirements to better address snow tires
and certain specialty tires. Specifically, we are amending the
performance requirements for snow tires used on light vehicles.
Further, we decided that the safety performance of certain other
specialty tires is better addressed through the requirements of a
different Federal safety standard.
DATES: The amendments in this rule are effective June 1, 2007, and
delay the effective date of the Final Rule published on June 26, 2003
(68 FR 38115) from June 1, 2007 until September 1, 2007. Voluntary
compliance is permitted before that time. In addition, ``snow tires,''
as defined in S3 of 49 CFR 571.139 need not comply with the
requirements of 49 CFR 571.139 until September 1, 2008, if they comply
with applicable requirements in effect as of the date of this Final
Rule. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical and policy issues:
George Soodoo, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards. Telephone: (202)
366-2720. Fax: (202) 366-4329. E-mail: George.Soodoo@nhtsa.dot.gov.
For legal issues: George Feygin, Attorney Advisor, Office of Chief
Counsel. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. Fax: (202) 366-3820. E-mail:
George.Feygin@nhtsa.dot.gov.
Both persons may be reached at the following address: NHTSA, 400
7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Final Rule
II. Background
III. Petitions for Reconsideration
IV. Discussion and Analysis
A. Endurance Test Failure Due to Tire Chunking
B. Deep Tread LT Specialty Tires
C. Tire Conditioning Prior to Low-Pressure Performance Test
D. Test Temperature Tolerance
E. Calculation of Vehicle Normal Load
F. Time Limit for Measuring Post-Test Inflation Pressure
G. Permissible Level of Tire Pressure Loss
V. Miscellaneous Issues and Technical Corrections to the Regulatory
Text
VI. Effective Date
VII. Rulemaking Notices and Analyses
VIII. Regulatory Text
I. Summary of Final Rule
First, this final rule amends Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 139, ``New pneumatic tires for light vehicles'' to reduce
the endurance and low-pressure test speeds from 120 km/h to 110 km/h
for snow tires. Second, this rule amends the application of FMVSS No.
139 to exclude light truck radial tires with a tread depth of 18/32
inches or greater. Instead these tires will be subject to the
requirements of FMVSS No. 119. Third, this rule makes several technical
corrections and amendments to the regulatory texts of FMVSS Nos. 109,
110, 119, 120 and 139. For example, because a test laboratory may not
be able to maintain a constant ambient temperature the agency is
specifying a tolerance during certain tests. Finally, we have delayed
the effective date of the upgraded tire safety requirements from June
1, 2007 until September 1, 2007. Voluntary compliance is permitted
before that date.
[[Page 878]]
II. Background
The Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and
Documentation (TREAD) Act, Section 10, ``Endurance and resistance
standards for tires,'' required NHTSA to revise and update Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 109, New Pneumatic Tires, and
FMVSS No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other than Passenger
Cars.\1\ In response to this mandate, NHTSA published a final rule on
June 26, 2003, establishing a new FMVSS No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial
Tires for Light Vehicles, which will apply to new tires used on light
vehicles; i.e., vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000
pounds or less, except motorcycles and low speed vehicles.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pub. L. 106-414, November 1, 2000, 114 Stat. 1800.
\2\ 68 FR 38115; June 26, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The new standard is scheduled to become effective on June 1, 2007.
It features substantially more stringent high speed and endurance
tests, and a new low-pressure performance test. The purpose of the new
and more stringent requirements is to improve the ability of tires to
withstand the effects of tire heat build-up and severe under-inflation
during highway travel in fully loaded conditions. Unlike the existing
tire safety standards, which previously differentiated between light
trucks and passenger cars,\3\ FMVSS No. 139 applies to tires used on
both.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Historically, FMVSS No. 109 applied to tires for use on
passenger cars and FMVSS No. 119 applied to tires for use on all
other vehicles, including light trucks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The June 2003 final rule deferred action on proposals to revise the
existing strength and bead unseating resistance tests, and to add a new
tire-aging test, because the agency believed that additional research
should be undertaken before reaching decision in these areas. Finally,
the final rule changed the applicability of FMVSS No. 109 and FMVSS No.
119. Beginning June 1, 2007, FMVSS No. 109 would apply only to bias-ply
tires and certain other specialty tires used on light vehicles. FMVSS
No. 119 would apply to tires used on motorcycles, low speed vehicles,
and heavy vehicles; i.e., vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating
of more than 10,000 pounds.
III. Petitions for Reconsideration
NHTSA received petitions for reconsideration of the June 2003 final
rule from eight petitioners who requested that NHTSA reconsider or
otherwise address 18 issues described below.\4\ The petitioners were
Denman Tire (Denman), the Rubber Manufacturers Association (RMA), Japan
Automobile Tyre Manufacturers Association (JATMA), European Tyre and
Rim Technical Organization (ETRTO), Specialty Equipment Market
Association (SEMA), Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance),
Tire and Rim Association (TRA), and Strategy Safety. Two commenters,
the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Tire Industry
Association (TIA) submitted letters in support of Denman's petition to
exclude its tires from FMVSS No. 139. The issues or subject areas
addressed by the petitioners include the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ To examine the petitions please see Docket No. NHTSA-03-
15400 at https://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RMA, ETRTO, and JATMA requested that NHTSA either redefine
tire chunking or not consider tire chunking to be an indication of tire
failure during endurance testing.
Denman petitioned the agency to exclude tires manufactured
in quantities of less than 15,000 tires from the requirements of FMVSS
No. 139, and instead subject these tires to the requirements of FMVSS
No. 119.
RMA, ETRTO, and JATMA petitioned the agency to clarify
which tire safety standard applies to spare tires.
JATMA petitioned the agency to revise the test conditions
and procedures specified for the low-pressure performance test.
JATMA, ETRTO, and RMA petitioned the agency to include a
temperature tolerance of 3 [deg]C to the ambient
temperature of 38 [deg]C specified for endurance and low-pressure
testing of FMVSS No. 139.
The RMA and ETRTO petitioned the agency to amend the
method by which vehicle manufacturers calculate the vehicle normal load
on the tire.
Exclude ST, FI, and 8-12 rim diameter code tires.
Definition of passenger car tire.
RMA petitioned the agency to delete CT tires from the
requirements of FMVSS No. 139 and other tire safety standards because
CT tires are no longer being offered for sale in the U.S.
Alliance petitioned the agency to change the effective
date of FMVSS No. 139 from June 1, 2007 to September 1, 2007 to
coincide with the traditional start of the new model year introduction.
Allow FMVSS No. 139 tires on vehicles over 10,000 pounds.
De-rating requirement.
Measuring post-test inflation pressure.
RMA petitioned the agency to correct the test pressures
for LT tires with a nominal cross section larger than 295 mm.
JATMA petitioned the agency to clarify the bead unseating
test conditions for light truck tires.
IV. Discussion and Analysis
A. Endurance Test Failure Due to Tire Chunking
Under the new requirements of FMVSS No. 139, tires are subjected to
endurance testing under different loading conditions at the speed of
120 km/h, for a combined duration of 34 hours. After completing the
endurance test, the same tire is then subjected to a low-pressure
performance test for an additional 90 minutes. S6.3.2(a) and S6.4.2(a)
of FMVSS No. 139, require that when the tire is tested for endurance
and low-pressure performance, ``* * * there shall be no visual evidence
of tread, sidewall, ply, cord, belt or bead separation, chunking, open
splices, cracking or broken cords.'' Chunking is defined as ``* * *
breaking away of pieces of the tread or sidewall.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The existing tire safety requirements, FMVSSs No. 109 and
119, contain the same definition of ``chunking.'' Additionally, the
European Union tire regulations, Economic Commission for Europe
(ECE) Regulation 30 for light vehicle tires and ECE Regulation 54
for heavy vehicle tires also contain a similar definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RMA, ETRTO, and JATMA requested that NHTSA either redefine tire
chunking or not consider tire chunking to be an indication of tire
failure during endurance testing because petitioners believe that
endurance test failures due to chunking are not representative of tire
failures occurring in the real world.
RMA recommended that we either delete ``chunking'' from Sections
S6.3.2(a) and S6.4.2(a), or modify the definition of ``chunking'' as
follows: ``Chunking means the breaking away of pieces of the tread or
sidewall rubber extending to the reinforcement cord or wire material.''
That is, chunking would only be considered to occur if the breakaway
pieces of tread or sidewall were deep enough to reach reinforcement
cord or wire material. JATMA also asked the agency to redefine chunking
such that it would be permitted for deep tread, winter type snow tires,
and on light truck tires so long as it did not expose reinforcement
cords.
RMA argued that chunking mostly occurs during endurance testing and
is rarely experienced in the real world. RMA believes that chunking
occurs in testing because the test road-wheel artificially overheats
the tire by
[[Page 879]]
deflecting the tire's outer edges.\6\ This deflection occurs because
the tire's contact patch flexes when contacting the curved surface of
the test road-wheel, which is typically 67 inches (1.7 meters) in
diameter. The difference between flat and curved surface performance
increases as the tire's outside diameter increases, and/or the tread
depth increases. According to RMA, this results in more energy being
transferred into the tire, resulting in higher running temperatures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Road-wheel machine is curved test wheel pressed against the
test tire, rotating it to the specified test speed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to RMA and ETRTO, the test road-wheel temperature
difference is more pronounced for deep tread snow tires and certain
light truck tires because deep tread snow tires depend on the traction
characteristics of higher hysteretic tread compounds, molded in greater
tread depth, and smaller tread blocks. These tread designs and
compounds are adversely affected by the greater deflection on the road-
wheel and consequently run at disproportionately higher temperatures.
Petitioners argue that the resultant tread chunking is uncharacteristic
of real-world tire performance.
RMA states that its members subjected 352 passenger car tires of
various sizes, service descriptions, load ranges and types to endurance
and low-pressure testing. We note that the duration of these tests
exceeded the duration of tests specified in FMVSS No. 139 by six
hours.\7\ Thirteen of the 35 deep tread snow tires failed that
endurance test. All 13 failures were attributed to tread chunking. Out
of 129 light truck (LT) tires of various sizes, 38 tires failed the 40-
hour endurance test. Tread chunking was attributed to 44 percent of
failures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ RMA tested tires to the proposed requirements of FMVSS No.
139, which specified testing for a combined duration of 40 hours. As
explained above, the June 2003 final rule specifies endurance
testing for a combined duration of 34 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After we issued the June 2003 final rule, RMA performed additional
testing using the FMVSS No. 139 duration parameters.\8\ The data are
summarized below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The test data is available at Docket No. NHTSA-15400-21.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number Number Percent
Tire type tested chunked failure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PC tires......................... 157 9 6
PC snow tires.................... 67 33 49
LT tires......................... 87 6 7
LT snow tires.................... 2 1 50
--------------
Total........................ 313 49 16
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* PC means passenger car.
RMA believes that the ``no chunking'' requirement penalizes larger
tires because of material thickness (heavier lugs, ribs, plies, and
deeper tread depth), especially at higher speed and reduced inflation
pressure. The petitioners argue that the ``no chunking'' requirement
will force tire manufacturers to redesign deep tread winter type snow
tires and LT tires and that these tire design changes will not improve
but will, to the contrary, reduce snow traction and off-road traction
performance.
As an alternative to redefining chunking, petitioners suggested
that the agency subject light truck tires and deep tread snow tires to
the performance requirements of FMVSS No. 119, instead of FMVSS No.
139.
Agency Testing. Before issuing the June 2003 final rule, we tested
a select sample of tires to assess their performance under the more
stringent high-speed and endurance tests, and the new low-pressure
test. Our tire sample varied not only in size, but also in price. We
found that 19 out of 20 sampled tires passed all tests being
contemplated by the agency. All five LT tires subjected to this testing
passed. Fourteen out of 15 passenger car (PC) tires passed all the
tests. One snow tire failed the endurance testing due to chunking.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The agency tested Bridgestone Blizzak tire with a Q speed
rating. Bridgestone describes the Blizzak as a ``dedicated winter
tire.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address the issues raised in the petitions for reconsideration,
the agency conducted additional testing on a larger sample of tires. We
focused on the tires selected by vehicle manufacturers as original
equipment for new light vehicles, and similar-sized tires readily
available in the replacement market. We also tested certain specialty
tires discussed in Section IV(B). The test results are summarized in
Table I below.
In addition to FMVSS No. 139 testing, the agency performed modified
testing to assess the effectiveness of cooling fans in reducing the
incidence of tire chunking during testing. We used a circulating fan to
simulate the airflow across the tire that would normally occur on the
roadway. The addition of fan did not affect tire performance. The tires
that failed FMVSS No. 139 endurance and low-pressure performance tests
did not pass the modified tests.
Table 1.--Summary of Endurance/Low-Pressure Tire Testing Results
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number Number failed due to
Tire category tested Number passed (%) Number failed (%) chunking (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passenger Car Tires (PC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regular PC....................... 19 11 (58%) 2 of 2 8 (42%) 7 of 8 4 (50%) 1 Kelly-
(Michelin, Cokers, 1 Kelly- Springfield, 3
Yokohama, Uniroyal, Springfield. Coker.
and Cooper). 3 of 4
Kelly-Springfield.
Snow PC.......................... 28 18 (64%)............ 10 (36%) 2 of 2 10 (100%).
Bridgestone Blizzak.
----------------------------------
[[Page 880]]
Light Truck Tires (LT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regular LT....................... 12 7 (58%)............. 5 (42%) 1 Michelin, 0 (0%).
2 Cooper, & 2 Fisk
(Uniroyal).
Snow LT.......................... 4 2 (50%) 2 of 2 2 (50%) 2 of 2 2 (100%) Both
Dunlop. Yokohama. Yokohama.
Specialty LT *see Section IV(b).. 16 5 (31%) 1 of 8 11 (69%) 7 of 8 3 (27%).
Denman & 4 of 4 Denman & 4 of 4
Goodyear. Speciality Tires of
America.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Observations:
Chunking: Half of the failures (19/36, 53%) were due to chunking.
Specialty LT: All four Goodyear 31x10.50R15 passed, while all 4 Denman 31x10.50R15 failed.
Effectiveness of fan is inconclusive: 1 Kelly-Springfield PC did better with the fan; however 1 Coker
PC did better without the fan.
Transport Canada conducted testing of LT and PC snow tires to FMVSS
No. 139 test requirements, except that the test speed was reduced from
120 km/h to 110 km/h. The tests were performed at the Standards Testing
Labs (STL) and Smithers Scientific Services (Smithers). STL tested 13
tires and Smithers Scientific Services tested 20 tires, including six
LT snow tires. Of the 13 tires tested by STL, none failed. Of the 20
tires tested by Smithers, two PC snow tires failed because of
chunking.\10\ The overall tire failure rate was 6%, or 2 out of 33
tires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The two snow tires that chunked during testing at Smithers
are Kumho Izen Stud (P205/75R15, 97Q) and Bridgestone Dueler DM-Z2
(P235/75R15, 105Q).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Decision. Based on analysis of agency research and testing,
as well as testing conducted by RMA and Transport Canada, we decided to
amend certain performance requirements of FMVSS No. 139 as they apply
to PC snow tires and LT snow tires. Specifically, we decided to reduce
the endurance and low pressure performance test speeds in S6.3.1.2.3
and S6.4.2.1 from 120 km/h to 110 km/h for all PC snow tires and LT
snow tires with load ranges of C, D, and E. All of the other test
parameters in S6.3 and S6.4 remain unchanged.
The agency decided against eliminating ``chunking'' as a test
failure condition because we did not receive data demonstrating that
some fixed percentage of a tire's tread could break away without
detrimental effect on safe vehicle operation.
In real world riving conditions, operating a vehicle with chunked
tires creates a potential safety hazard due to wheel imbalance and
vehicle vibrations. Further, allowing tread chunking just short of
exposing the reinforcement cords would create an unacceptable risk of
imminent tire failure. Finally, we note that international standards
such as ECE R 30 and ECE R 54 also deem tire chunking to be an
indication of a safety problem.
The agency believes that because of the nature of snow tire
construction, the speed specified in certain current tests of FMVSS No.
139 are impracticable for special tires. Specifically, snow tires
usually feature higher hysteretic tread compounds, molded in greater
tread depth, and smaller tread blocks. This construction is used to
provide special performance in snow conditions. These tread designs and
compounds are disproportionately affected at high speeds when tested on
the road wheel. The technical design challenges and the costs to
redesign existing snow tires to pass the 120 km/h test would far
outweigh the negligible safety benefits associated with that redesign.
By reducing the endurance and low-pressure test speeds from 120 km/h to
110 km/h for all PC snow tires and LT snow tires with load ranges of C,
D, and E we can ensure virtually all the safety benefits from upgrading
the test speed for snow tires and eliminate practicability and cost
concerns.
The agency has decided not to reduce the test speed for non-snow LT
tires. These tires did not experience chunking in our tests, and we
believe the higher test speed is practicable for non-snow LT tires. The
test results provided by RMA also indicate that chunking occurs
infrequently in non-snow LT tires when tested at speeds and duration
specified in S6.3.1.2.3 and S6.4.1.2.1.
The tire industry classifies tires as ``snow tires'' if they attain
a traction index equal to or greater than 110, compared to the ASTM E-
1136 Standard Reference Test Tire, when using the snow traction test as
described in ASTM F-1805, Standard Test Method for Single Wheel Driving
Traction in a Straight Line on Snow- and Ice-Covered Surfaces. We are
incorporating this voluntary consensus standard by reference in order
to insure that the tires that do not attain a certain level of traction
are not labeled as snow tires and subjected to less stringent testing.
In order to enable the agency to ascertain which tires are to be
tested at 110 km/h, the agency is adding a labeling requirement to all
PC snow tires and LT snow tires with load ranges of C, D, and E that
are certified at this test speed. The manufacturers must mark their
snow tires with the Alpine Symbol if they wish to certify their snow
tires to the special requirements applicable to snow tires. The use of
the Alpine Symbol will have the added benefit of enabling consumers to
identify snow tires that provide a higher level of snow traction
compared to all-season tires. However, the tire manufacturers are not
obligated to do so if they wish to certify their snow tires to the
normal requirements of the Standard. Thus, only the snow tires
certified to the reduced test speed requirements must display an Alpine
symbol (as shown below), on at least one sidewall. The symbol is
currently required in Canada as a means of identifying snow tires.
[[Page 881]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06JA06.364
If the manufacturers choose to mark their snow tires with the
Alpine Symbol, the mountain profile must have a minimum base of 15 mm
and a minimum height of 15 mm, and must contain three peaks with the
middle peak being the tallest. Inside the mountain profile, there must
be a six-sided snowflake having a minimum height of one-half the
tallest peak.
B. Deep Tread LT Specialty Tires
Denman produces Radial Deep Tread On-road/Off-road LT specialty
radial tires (deep tread tires) used for significant off-road
operations necessitating extended mobility on harsh terrain. Denman
petitioned the agency to exclude these deep tread tires from the
requirements of FMVSS 139 because the costs of compliance testing and
certification would, according to the petitioner, cause it to go out of
business. Instead, Denman asked that the agency subject their deep
tread tires to the less stringent requirements of FMVSS No. 109 or
FMVSS No. 119. The agency received letters from the U.S. Congress, the
Small Business Administration, the Tire Industry Association and SEMA
in support of Denman's petition.
Denman stated it has not tested any of their deep tread tires to
the new requirements of FMVSS No. 139, because such tests are cost
prohibitive. Denman argued that when issuing the June 2003 final rule,
the agency excluded bias-ply tires for the reasons of practicability,
and the same rationale should exclude their deep tread tires from the
requirements of FMVSS No. 139. Denman argued that mandating more
stringent and expensive tire performance requirements for specialty
deep tread radial tires, but not for bias ply tires would encourage
manufacturing of bias ply deep tread tires instead of deep tread radial
tires. Denman recommended that NHTSA exclude radial tires with a \20/
32\-inch tread depth or greater and a rubber-to-void ratio of \2/3\ or
lower.
Agency Testing and Research
Because there is no standard industry definition of rubber-to-void
ratio, the agency has decided to consider only the tread depth, which
is an easily measured parameter, in addressing the issues raised by the
Denman petition.
NHTSA tested sixteen of Denman's deep tread tires (>= \18/32\ inch
tread depth) to the FMVSS No. 139 performance parameters. Our test
results showed a higher failure rate for deep tread tires compared to
the failure rates for original equipment non-deep tread tires. We
believe the deep tread tires experienced chunking because of their
tread depth. The results are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number and
Number of percentage
Type of test Denman of Denman
tires tires that
tested passed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMVSS No. 139 endurance and low-pressure tests 8 2 (25%)
FMVSS No. 139 high speed test................. 5 2 (40%)
FMVSS No. 119 endurance test.................. 3 3 (100%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our research indicates that, with one exception,\11\ vehicle
manufacturers typically do not install tires with tread depth exceeding
\18/32\ inches on their vehicles either as standard or optional
equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Jeep Wrangler Rubicon is equipped with 245/75R16 Goodyear
Wrangler MT/R tires with a tread depth of \19/32\ inches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Decision
Based agency testing and analysis, we believe that a number of the
requirements in FMVSS No. 139 are impracticable for deep tread
specialty tires with tread depth of at least \18/32\ inches. Because
the thickness of the tread rubber of these tires causes higher tire
temperatures, we believe that it is more appropriate to subject these
tires to the requirements of FMVSS No. 119.\12\ We note that in a
letter to the agency on October 4, 2004, RMA provided endurance test
results on 16 deep tread tires with tread depths of \18/32\-inch or
greater; 62 percent (10 of 16) failed due to chunking. The agency
believes that any potential countermeasures could be cost prohibitive,
and could also negatively impact the utility of deep tread tires, which
serve a special purpose of providing increased navigational
capabilities for vehicles used off-road.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ FMVSS No. 119 endurance test for load range E tires is
conducted at 40 mph at loading conditions of 70 percent/88 percent/
106 percent for 47 hours (7/16/24 hours) at an inflation pressure
corresponding to the maximum load rating marked on the tire
sidewall.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Tire Conditioning Prior to Low Pressure Performance Test
JATMA petitioned the agency to revise the test conditions and
procedures specified for the low pressure performance test such that at
the completion of the endurance test, all hot air would be purged from
the test tire and refilled with cold air before beginning the low-
pressure test. JATMA did not provide a rationale or data supporting
this recommendation, but its petition suggests that the tire would cool
down quicker if purged of its hot air and refilled with cold air.
The agency believes that complete deflation and re-inflation of the
test tire is unnecessary. Instead, in order to ensure that the tire is
sufficiently cooled-off after completion of the endurance test, we are
amending the low-pressure test conditions and procedures to specify
that the tire is conditioned for a period of at least 3 hours prior to
beginning the low-pressure test.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The agency has also amended the conditioning procedure
which precedes the endurance testing by adding a tolerance of 5 minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Test Temperature Tolerance
JATMA, ETRTO, and RMA petitioned the agency to include a
temperature tolerance of 3 [deg]C to the ambient
temperature of 38 [deg]C specified for endurance and low-pressure
testing of FMVSS No. 139. The petitioners note that this tolerance is
currently specified in FMVSS No. 109. The RMA also petitioned the
agency to lower the ambient temperature for the tire dimensions test
since this test is typically performed in an area with an ambient of 20
[deg]C-30 [deg]C.
Because a test laboratory may not be able to maintain a constant
ambient temperature of 38 [deg]C, the agency is specifying a tolerance
of +0 [deg]C, -6 [deg]C. That is, the tires subject to the high speed,
endurance, and low pressure performance tests of FMVSS No. 139 must
meet the applicable requirements at the full range of temperatures
between 32 [deg]C and 38 [deg]C. For the tire dimensions test, the
agency is specifying an ambient room temperature of 20 [deg]C to 30
[deg]C.
E. Calculation of Vehicle Normal Load
RMA and ETRTO petitioned the agency to amend the method by which
vehicle manufacturers calculate the vehicle normal load on the tire, as
specified by S4.2.1.2, S4.2.2.2 and S4.2.2.3 of FMVSS No. 110.
[[Page 882]]
Specifically, the petitioners suggested that the vehicle normal load on
the tire should not exceed 88 percent of tire maximum load.
The agency revised the definition of vehicle normal load to change
the frame of reference from a percentage of the tire's maximum load to
the percentage of the tire's load at the manufacturer's recommended
tire pressure. Specifically, the normal load is defined as 94 percent
of the vehicle manufacturer's recommended cold inflation pressure.
We believe that it is not appropriate to define normal load as 88%
of maximum load rating because the manufacturer's recommended tire
pressure for some vehicles equipped with, for example, LT load range E
tires, could be far below their maximum inflation pressure. If we were
to require normal load calculation based on the maximum inflation
pressure, the normal load calculation would be different. Accordingly,
the agency is denying the petitioner's request.
F. Time Limit for Measuring Post-Test Inflation Pressure
RMA and ETRTO petitioned the agency to amend the time limit for
checking post-test inflation pressure from ``at least one hour'' to
``at least 15 minutes after the end of the test.'' \14\ RMA explained
that when post-test time period exceeds one hour, inflation pressure in
the tires often falls below pre-test levels. Petitioners argue that the
tire inflation pressure should be measured when the tire temperature
has stabilized, which occurs within one hour, but not sooner than 15
minutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2003-15400-23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the June 2003 final rule, the agency specified that all post-
test pressure measurements be taken at least one hour after the test is
completed. We indicated that the one-hour period provides a sufficient
time for tire cooling and would prevent superficially high tire
temperatures from masking test-induced pressure losses that would not
be detectable at an earlier time. Further, this time period reduces the
risk of tire explosion, which RMA stated could occur if tire pressure
measurement was taken immediately after testing.
The agency is amending the time limit for post-test pressure
measurement from ``at least one hour'' to ``at any time between 15
minutes and 25 minutes'' after the tests are completed. This change
ensures that the pressure measurement does not occur after 25 minutes
have elapsed. For tires known to retain more heat and therefore, higher
inflation pressure, the change offers enough flexibility to allow
measurement after the 15 minute time period, in order to address
technician safety. The agency believes that if a rapid loss of pressure
to a level below the initial test pressure is to occur, it is likely to
occur during the test or within the first 15 minutes after the end of
the test. Thus, this change will not affect the stringency of the
upgraded tire safety performance requirements.
G. Permissible Level of Tire Pressure Loss
RMA and ETRTO petitioned the agency to amend FMVSS No. 139 to allow
for a pressure loss of not greater than 10 percent below the initial
test pressure. Petitioners noted that small air losses occur during and
after tests as a result of air diffusion through the tire casing.
Further, some air also escapes during pressure measurement. According
to the petitioners, additional variability factors could include tire
pressure gauge accuracy, and the ``initial break-in'' factor; i.e.
testing of new tires could result in some small mechanical growth of
the tire casing (increase in pressure vessel volume). As a result, some
post-test tire pressure measurements will show small pressure losses
below the initial test pressure, which should not be indicative of tire
failure. RMA suggested that a minimum permissible tire pressure loss
criteria be specified.
RMA submitted information, data, and graphs on its testing by RMA
member companies. A total of 313 tires (224 passenger car and 89 light
truck tires) were tested to the FMVSS No. 139 endurance and low
pressure performance tests. Of the 313 tires tested, 42 percent (133)
experienced pressure loss per the FMVSS No. 139 conditions and
procedures. The loss of pressure was attributed to the longer cool-down
time periods addressed above. RMA stated that the 42 percent estimate
could be higher as some tire manufacturers did not report pressure loss
data to the RMA.
The agency agrees that some small mechanical growth of the tire
casing could occur during the initial break-in of new tires, which
could result in post-test pressures being slightly lower than the
initial test pressure once the tire has cooled to ambient temperature.
Although our testing did not show significant losses in tire pressure
at 15 to 25 minutes after the completion of endurance and low-pressure
testing, we believe that it is reasonable to allow for a nominal amount
of post-test pressure drop. Accordingly, the agency will require that
the post-test pressure loss be no greater than 5% of the specified
initial inflation pressure.
V. Miscellaneous Issues and Technical Corrections to the Regulatory
Text
1. JATMA, ETRTO, RMA petitioned the agency to remove references to
T-Type spare tires from S6.1.1.1.2 of FMVSS No. 139. Petitioners noted
that footnote 38 of the June 2003 final rule indicated that temporary
spare tires would not be subject to the requirements of FMVSS No.
139.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See 68 FR 38116 at 38145.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The agency did not intend to subject T-Type temporary spare tires
to the requirements of FMVSS No. 139. Therefore, NHTSA is amending the
regulatory text of FMVSS No. 139 to remove references to T-Type
temporary spare tires.
2. The RMA and ETRTO petitioned the agency to replace the term ``P-
metric'' with the term ``passenger car'' in the regulatory text of
FMVSS Nos. 109, 110 and 139. The RMA stated that using ``P-metric'' as
a generic term for ``passenger car'' tires is not correct since the use
of this terminology could exclude ``Hard'' metric or any other radial
passenger car tire that does not have ``P-metric'' size designation.
NHTSA has reviewed the tire industry Year Books (TRA, JATMA, and
ETRTO) and notes that tires used on passenger cars are referred to as
``passenger car'' tires and not ``P-metric'' tires.\16\ Therefore, the
agency is amending the regulatory text of the relevant tire safety
standards by removing references to ``P-metric tires'' where it is more
appropriate to use the term ``passenger car.'' In conjunction with this
change, we are adding a definition of passenger car tires to FMVSS No.
139.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The TRA Year Book states that the prefix, ``P'', when used
in tire size designations identifies a tire primarily intended for
service on passenger cars. In addition to the P-Type passenger car
tires, the Year Book also includes information on T-Type passenger
car tires and other passenger car tires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Alliance petitioned the agency to amend FMVSS No. 120 to allow
the use of tires meeting FMVSS 139 in addition to those meeting FMVSS
No. 119 for vehicles with a GVWR over 10,000 pounds.
The agency agrees that FMVSS No. 120 should allow the use of tires
that comply with FMVSS No. 139. For example, LT tires with a load range
E are sometimes used on vehicles with a GVWR below 10,000 pounds. Since
FMVSS No. 139 applies to LT tires load range E tires, a reference to
this standard should have been included in S5.1.1 of FMVSS No. 120.
NHTSA believes this reference was inadvertently omitted from the June
2003 final rule.
[[Page 883]]
Accordingly, the agency is amending the regulatory text of S5.1.1 of
FMVSS No. 120 to add a reference to FMVSS No. 139.
4. RMA, TRA, and ETRTO petitioned the agency to amend the
``application'' sections of FMVSS No. 119, ``New pneumatic tires for
vehicles other than passenger cars,'' to indicate that it applies to
Special Trailer (ST), Farm Implement (FI), and 8-12 rim diameter code
and below tires. We note that in the June 2003 final rule, the agency
decided to exclude bias, ST, FI, and 8-12 rim diameter tires from the
requirements of FMVSS No. 139 and indicated that they would remain
subject to the requirements of FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119.\17\ However, the
petitioners indicate that all such tires have been, and remain subject
to only FMVSS No. 119 because they are not used on passenger cars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 68 FR 38116 at 38141.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The agency is amending the application sections of FMVSS Nos. 109,
119, and 139 in order to clarify that ST, FI, and 8-12 rim diameter
code and below tires are subject to the requirements of FMVSS No. 119.
5. When a passenger car tire is installed on a traditionally
heavier vehicle such as an MPV, truck, bus, or trailer, the normal load
rating is ``de-rated'' by a factor of 1.10. That is, the normal load
rating is reduced by dividing it by 1.10. The Alliance petitioned the
agency to clarify that the de-rating requirement in FMVSS No. 120
applies only to passenger car tires, and not to all tires.
The agency intended to apply the 1.10 de-rating requirement in
FMVSS No. 120 only to passenger car tires when installed on vehicles
other than passenger cars. The agency did not intend to subject other
tires to the same requirements. Accordingly, the agency is amending
S5.1.2 of FMVSS No. 120 to clarify the application of the de-rating
requirement.
6. Safety Research and Strategies (SRS) submitted comments urging
the agency to address tire aging.\18\ In short, SRS is asking the
agency to require that tires be labeled with an ``expiration date''
that would inform consumers that their tires are no longer safe after
an X number of years have elapsed since their manufacture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2003-15400-12, 31, 32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The agency is currently conducting research on tire aging. When
this research is complete, the agency will decide how to proceed.
7. This document amends the titles to FMVSS No. 109 and FMVSS No.
139 to more accurately reflect their application. The new titles read
as follows: Sec. 571.109--Standard No. 109--New pneumatic and certain
specialty tires, and Sec. 571.139--Standard No. 139--New pneumatic
radial tires for light vehicles.
8. This document amends the table located below Figure 1 in FMVSS
No. 109 to add a 20 rim diameter code because the Tire & Rim
Association's 2003 and newer Yearbooks now include LT tires of that
size.
9. ETRTO and RMA petitioned the agency to remove references to CT
Tires from FMVSS No. 139 because CT tires are not being manufactured
for sale or distribution in the United States.\19\ The petitioners also
indicated that this tire type is being withdrawn as an active
classification in the ETRTO Standards Manual.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ CT means a pneumatic tire with an inverted flange tire and
rim system in which the rim is designed with rim flanges pointed
radially inward and the tire is designed to fit on the underside of
the rim in a manner that encloses the rim flanges inside the air
cavity of the tire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule amends FMVSS No. 139 by removing references to CT tires
because these tires are not being sold in the United States.
10. RMA and ETRTO petitioned the agency to amend Tables I and II in
FMVSS No. 119. Specifically, the petitioners requested that Table I
include the plunger diameter for motorcycles. The petitioners also
requested that Table II include the minimum static breaking energies
for load ranges ``A'' through ``E'' tires used on 12 rim diameter code
or smaller, and light truck tires, because FMVSS No. 119 applies to
these types of tires.
NHTSA agrees with the petitioners that Tables I and II of FMVSS No.
119 should be revised to reflect the change in applicability of FMVSS
No. 119. The agency has retained the current strength requirements of
FMVSS No. 119 but since LT load range C, D, and E tires are now subject
to the requirements of FMVSS No. 139, the tables need to reflect this
change.
11. RMA petitioned the agency to correct the test pressures for LT
tires with a nominal cross section larger than 295 mm. The petitioner
indicated that these tires, as shown in the Tire and Rim Association
Year Book, have a lower inflation pressure to attain the load range C,
D, or E maximum load limits and do not follow the normal load range C,
D, and E inflation pressures for tire maximum load limits. Therefore,
to ensure that all LT tires within a single load range category are
subject to the same level of performance requirements, the petitioners
recommend that FMVSS No. 139 be amended to specify correct inflation
pressures for these tires.
NHTSA agrees with the petitioner that LT tires with a nominal cross
section greater than 295 mm have a different load range for the same
maximum inflation pressure as tires equal to or less than 295 mm wide
and therefore amend S6.2.1.1.1, S6.3.1.1.1 and S6.4.1.1.1 accordingly.
12. JATMA petitioned the agency to clarify the bead unseating test
conditions (inflation pressure and dimension ``A'') for light truck
tires, since they were not stipulated in the June 2003 final rule. The
current requirement in FMVSS No. 139, S6.6, reference FMVSS No. 109,
which does not include test parameters for LT tires.
We are amending the regulatory text to specify the test inflation
pressure for the LT tires undergoing resistance to bead unseating test.
The pressure is the same for the endurance test. The dimension ``A''
parameters are the same as those specified in FMVSS No. 109.
VI. Effective Date
Alliance petitioned the agency to change the effective date of
FMVSS No. 139 from June 1, 2007 to September 1, 2007 to coincide with
the traditional start of the new model year introduction. Petitioners
argue that an effective date of September 1, 2007 would help in the
transition from the 2007 to 2008 model year. RMA petitioned the agency
to extend the effective date for an additional 2 years to 2009 arguing
that tire manufacturers are waiting for the agency's response to
petitions for reconsideration.
In light of potential impact of mid-model year introduction of a
new set of requirements, the agency is delaying the effective date of
FMVSS No. 139 until September 1, 2007. Furthermore, we are delaying the
effective date of applicability of FMVSS No. 139 to snow tires until
September 1, 2008 because of changes to snow tire construction that may
be necessitated by the more stringent performance requirements.
However, we believe that a two-year delay in the effective date, as
requested by the RMA is unwarranted. As indicated in 49 CFR Sec.
553.35(d) a petition for reconsideration does not stay the
effectiveness of the rule. Therefore, the manufacturers need to
continue their efforts to comply with the new requirements while their
petitions are being considered.
VII. Rulemaking Notices and Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR
51735,
[[Page 884]]
October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action''
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
This rulemaking action was not reviewed under Executive Order
12866. The rulemaking action is not significant under Department of
Transportation regulatory policies and procedures. The agency is
modifying certain performance requirements to better address snow tires
and certain deep tread specialty tires. The effect of this change is a
decreased regulatory burden on manufacturers of snow tires and deep
tread specialty tires through more practicable tire safety performance
requirements. This final rule also makes a number of technical
corrections to the regulatory text of all Federal tire safety
regulations. This action will not affect the impacts estimated in the
final regulatory evaluation for the June 2003 final rule.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. Sec. 601 et seq.)
requires agencies to evaluate the potential effects of their proposed
and final rules on small business, small organizations and small
governmental jurisdictions. I hereby certify that this rulemaking
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
This document decreases the regulatory burden on small entities by
subjecting the specially manufactured deep-tread tires to more
practicable tire safety performance requirements. According to the
petitioners and the Small Business Administration, this rulemaking
action will result in substantial cost savings for the one small
business that petitioned the agency to amend our regulations.
C. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this document for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that implementation
of this rulemaking action does not have any significant impact on the
quality of the human environment.
D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
The agency has analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 and has
determined that it does not have sufficient federal implications to
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation
of a federalism summary impact statement. The final rule does not have
any substantial impact on the States, or on the current Federal-State
relationship, or on the current distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various local officials.
E. Unfunded Mandates 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
($120.7 million as adjusted annually for inflation with base year of
1995).
The agency previously estimated that the June 2003 final rule
establishing more stringent tire performance requirements was likely to
result in the expenditure by automobile manufacturers and/or tire
manufacturers of more than $109 million annually.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The written assessment of costs is available at Docket No.
NHTSA-2003-15400-2 at https://dms.dot.gov/search/
searchResultsSimple.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This document amends certain performance requirements to better
address snow tires and certain specialty tires. This final rule also
makes a number of technical corrections to the regulatory text of all
Federal tire safety regulations. The effect of these changes is a
decreased regulatory burden on manufacturers of snow tires and certain
other specialty tires. Accordingly, this rulemaking action will not
result in expenditures by State, local or tribal governments of more
than $120 million annually. Further this rulemaking action will not
result in private sector expenditure of more than $120 million
annually.
F. Civil Justice Reform
This final rule does not have any retroactive effect. Under 49
U.S.C. 21403, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in
effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable
to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal
standard, except to the extent that the state requirement imposes a
higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for
the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 21461 sets forth a procedure for judicial
review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor
vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before
parties may file suit in court.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501,
et. seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each ``collection of information'' they
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. NHTSA has reviewed
this final rule and determined that it does not contain collection of
information requirements.
In order to enable the agency to ascertain which tires are to be
tested to less stringent requirements, the agency is adding a labeling
requirement to all PC snow tires and LT snow tires with load ranges of
C, D, and E that are certified under the less stringent requirements.
The manufacturers must mark their snow tires with the Alpine Symbol
described in Section IV(A), if they wish to certify their snow tires to
the requirements applicable to snow tires. However, the tire
manufacturers are not obligated to do so if they wish to certify their
snow tires to the normal requirements of the Standard. Thus, only the
snow tires certified to the reduced test speed requirements must
display an Alpine symbol (as shown below), on at least one sidewall.
The use of the Alpine Symbol will have the added benefit of enabling
consumers to identify snow tires that provide a higher level of snow
traction compared to all-season tires.
Under CFR 1320.3(h)(1), ``information'' does not generally include
certifications such as that described in the previous paragraph, which
only identify tires certified to the less stringent requirements.
H. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
[[Page 885]]
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
https://dms.dot.gov.
VIII. Regulatory Text
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Tires.
0
In consideration of the foregoing, part 571 is amended as follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
0
1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
0
2. Section 571.109 is amended by revising the section heading, S2, and
the Table located below Figure 1:
Sec. 571.109 Standard No. 109--New pneumatic and certain specialty
tires.
* * * * *
S2. Application. This standard applies to new pneumatic radial
tires for use on passenger cars manufactured before 1975, and new
pneumatic bias ply tires for use on passenger cars manufactured after
1948.
* * * * *
Figures for FMVSS No. 109
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dimension ``A'' for tires with maximum inflation
pressure
Wheel size ---------------------------------------------------
Other than Other than
60 psi (in) 420 kPa 60 psi (in) 420 kPa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20.......................................................... 13.50 345 ........... ...........
19.......................................................... 13.00 330 12.00 305
18.......................................................... 12.50 318 11.40 290
17.......................................................... 12.00 305 10.60 269
16.......................................................... 11.50 292 9.90 251
15.......................................................... 11.00 279 9.40 239
14.......................................................... 10.50 267 8.90 226
13.......................................................... 10.00 254 8.40 213
12.......................................................... 9.50 241 ........... ...........
11.......................................................... 9.00 229 ........... ...........
10.......................................................... 8.50 216 ...........
320......................................................... 8.50 216 ........... ...........
340......................................................... 9.00 229 ........... ...........
345......................................................... 9.25 235 ........... ...........
365......................................................... 9.75 248 ........... ...........
370......................................................... 10.00 254 ........... ...........
390......................................................... 11.00 279 ........... ...........
415......................................................... 11.50 292 ........... ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
3. Section 571.110 is amended by revising S4.2.2.2 and S4.2.2.3(a), to
read as follows:
Sec. 571.110 Standard No. 110--Tire selection and rims for motor
vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.
* * * * *
S4.2.2.2 When passenger car tires are installed on an MPV, truck,
bus, or trailer, each tire's load rating is reduced by dividing it by
1.10 before determining, under S4.2.2.1, the sum of the maximum load
ratings of the tires fitted to an axle.
S4.2.2.3(a) For vehicles equipped with passenger car tires, the
vehicle normal load on the tire shall be no greater than the value of
94 percent of the derated load rating at the vehicle manufacturer's
recommended cold inflation pressure for that tire.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 571.119 is amended by revising S3, and Tables I and II to
read as follows:
Sec. 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. Application. This standard applies to:
(a) New pneumatic tires for use on motor vehicles with a GVWR of
more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) manufactured after 1948;
(b) New pneumatic light truck tires with a tread depth of 18/32
inch or greater, for use on motor vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less manufactured after 1948;
(c) Tires for use on special-use trailers (ST, FI and 8-12 rim or
lower diameter code); and
(d) Tires for use on motorcycles manufactured after 1948.
* * * * *
Table I.--Strength Test Plunger Diameter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plunger diameter
Tire type ---------------------
(mm) (inches)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Light truck....................................... 19.05 \3/4\
Motorcycle........................................ 7.94 \5/16\
<= 12 rim diameter code (except motorcycle)....... 19.05 \3/4\
Tubeless:
<= 17.5 rim diameter code..................... 19.05 \3/4\
>17.5 rim diameter code, load range F or less. 31.75 1\1/4\
> 17.5 rim diameter code, load range over F... 38.10 1\1/2\
Tube-type:
Load range F or less.......................... 31.75 1\1/4\
Load range over F............................. 38.10 1\1/2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 886]]
Table II.--Minimum Static Breaking Energy
[Joules (J) and Inch-Pounds (inch-lbs)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tire characteristic Motorcycle All 12 rim Light truck and Tires other than Light Motorcycle, 12 rim diameter code or smaller
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- diameter code or 17.5 rim -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Plunger diameter (mm and inches) 7.94 J 5/16'' small
