Standard Reference Test Tire, 42762-42775 [2021-15361]
Download as PDF
42762
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 165.519 Safety Zones; Hampton Roads
Bridge-Tunnel Expansion Project, Hampton/
Norfolk, VA.
(a) Definitions. As used in this
section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, including a Coast Guard
coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer
designated by or assisting the Captain of
the Port Virginia in the enforcement of
the safety zone. The term also includes
an employee or contractor of Hampton
Roads Connector Partners (HRCP) for
the sole purposes of designating and
establishing safe transit corridors, to
permit passage into or through these
safety zones, or to notify vessels and
individuals that they have entered a
safety zone and are required to leave.
(b) Locations and zone-specific
requirements.
(1) Zone 1, Hampton Flats Mooring
Area.
(i) Location: All waters of the
Hampton Flats, from surface to bottom,
encompassed by a line connecting the
following points beginning at
36°59′40.41″ N, 76°22′10.66″ W, thence
to 37°00′01.84″ N, 76°21′01.69″ W,
thence to 36°59′52.62″ N, 76°20′57.23″
W, thence to 36°59′31.19″ N,
76°22′06.20″ W, and back to the
beginning point.
(ii) Requirements: No vessel or person
may enter or remain in the safety zone
without permission of the COTP, HRCP,
or designated representative. Mariners
must observe lighted marker buoys
along the perimeter and at each of the
corners marking the safety zone.
(2) Zone 2, Phoebus Safe Harbor Area.
(i) Location: All waters west of the
Phoebus Channel, from surface to
bottom, encompassed by a line
connecting the following points
beginning at 37°00′34.26″ N,
76°19′10.58″ W, thence to 37°00′23.97″
N, 76°19′06.16″ W, thence to
37°00′22.52″ N, 76°19′11.41″ W, thence
to 37°00′32.81″ N, 76°19′15.81″ W, and
back to the beginning point.
(ii) Requirements: No vessel or person
may enter or remain in the safety zone
during announced enforcement periods
without permission of the COTP, HRCP,
or designated representative. Such
enforcement periods will be announced
by Sector Virginia Broadcast Notice to
Mariners and broadcasts on VHF–FM
radio. During enforcement periods,
mariners shall observe lighted marker
buoys along the perimeter and at each
of the corners marking the safety zone.
(3) Zone 3, Willoughby Bay Mooring
Area.
(i) Location: All waters of Willoughby
Bay, from surface to bottom, in the area
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
encompassed by a line connecting the
following points beginning at
36°57′48.68″ N, 76°17′08.20″ W, thence
to 36°57′44.84″ N, 76°16′44.48″ W,
thence to 36°57′35.31″ N, 76°16′42.80″
W, thence to 36°57′28.78″ N,
76°16′51.75″ W, thence to 36°57′33.17″
N, 76°17′19.43″ W, and back to the
beginning point.
(ii) Requirements: No vessel or person
may enter or remain in the safety zone
without permission of the COTP, HRCP,
or designated representative. Mariners
must observe lighted marker buoys
along the perimeter and at each of the
corners marking the safety zone.
(4) Zone 4, North Highway Bridge
Trestle and North Island.
(i) Location: All waters, from surface
to bottom, located within 300 feet of the
east or west side of the Hampton Roads
Bridge-Tunnel’s north highway bridge
trestle, including North Island, to the
shore of the City of Hampton. No vessel
or person may enter or remain in the
safety zone without permission of the
COTP, HRCP, or designated
representative.
(ii) Requirements: All mariners
attempting to enter or depart the
Hampton Creek Approach Channel or
the Phoebus Channel in the vicinity of
the North Island must proceed with
extreme caution and maintain a safe
distance from construction equipment.
(5) Zone 5, South Highway Bridge
Trestle and South Island.
(i) Location: All waters, from surface
to bottom, located within 300 feet from
the east or west side of the Hampton
Roads Bridge-Tunnel’s south highway
bridge trestle, including South Island, to
the shore of the City of Norfolk.
(ii) Requirements: No vessel or person
may enter or remain in the safety zone
without permission of the COTP, HRCP,
or designated representative. HRCP may
establish and post visual identification
of safe transit corridors that vessels may
use to freely proceed through the safety
zone. All mariners attempting to enter
or depart the Willoughby Bay Approach
Channel in the vicinity of the South
Island shall proceed with extreme
caution and maintain a safe distance
from construction equipment.
(6) Zone 6, Willoughby Bay Bridge.
(i) Location: All waters, from surface
to bottom, located along the Willoughby
Bay Bridge highway trestle and
extending 50 feet to the north side of the
bridge and 300 feet to the south side of
the bridge along the length of the
highway trestle, from shore to shore
within the City of Norfolk.
(ii) Requirements: No vessel or person
may enter or remain in the safety zone
without permission of the COTP, HRCP,
or designated representative, except that
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
vessels are allowed to transit through
marked safe transit corridors that HRCP
shall establish for the purpose of
providing navigation access for
residents located north of the
Willoughby Bay Bridge through the
safety zone. All mariners attempting to
enter or depart residences or
commercial facilities north of the
Willoughby Bay Bridge through the safe
transit corridors or other areas of the
safety zone when granted permission
shall proceed with caution and maintain
a safe distance from construction
equipment.
(c) General requirements. (1) Under
the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, no vessel or
person may enter or remain in any
safety zone described in paragraph (b) of
this section unless authorized by the
COTP, HRCP, or designated
representative. If a vessel or person is
notified by the COTP, HRCP, or
designated representative that they have
entered one of these safety zones
without permission, they are required to
immediately leave in a safe manner
following the directions given.
(2) Mariners requesting to transit any
of these safety zones must first contact
the HRCP designated representative, the
on-site foreman, via VHF–FM channels
13 and 16. If permission is granted,
mariners must proceed at their own risk
and strictly observe any and all
instructions provided by the COTP,
HRCP, or designated representative to
the mariner regarding the conditions of
entry to and exit from any location
within the fixed safety zones.
(d) Enforcement. The Sector Virginia
COTP may enforce this regulation and
may be assisted by any Federal, state,
county, or municipal law enforcement
agency.
Dated: July 15, 2021.
Samson C. Stevens,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Virginia.
[FR Doc. 2021–16198 Filed 8–4–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Parts 571 and 575
[Docket No. NHTSA–2020–0067]
RIN 2127–AL92
Standard Reference Test Tire
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
ACTION:
This document proposes
amendments to several Federal motor
vehicle safety standards and consumer
information regulations to update the
standard reference test tire (SRTT) used
therein. The SRTT is used in those
standards and regulations as a baseline
tire to rate tire treadwear, define snow
tires based on traction performance, and
evaluate pavement surface friction. This
proposed rule is necessary because the
only manufacturer of the currently
referenced SRTT ceased production of
the tire. Referencing a new SRTT
ensures the availability of a test tire for
testing purposes.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
September 7, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
electronically to the docket identified in
the heading of this document by visiting
the following website:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
Alternatively, you can file comments
using the following methods:
• Mail: Docket Management Facility:
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. To be
sure someone is there to help you,
please call (202) 366–9826 before
coming.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
Regardless of how you submit your
comments, you should mention the
docket number identified in the heading
of this document.
Instructions: For detailed instructions
on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the Public Participation heading of
the Supplementary Information section
of this document. Note that all
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please
see the Privacy Act heading below.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5
U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its
rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice, DOT/ALL–
14 FDMS, accessible through
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
www.dot.gov/privacy. In order to
facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to
provide their name, or the name of their
organization; however, submission of
names is completely optional. Whether
or not commenters identify themselves,
all timely comments will be fully
considered. If you wish to provide
comments containing proprietary or
confidential information, please contact
the agency for alternate submission
instructions.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You
may contact Hisham Mohamed, Office
of Crash Avoidance Standards, by
telephone at (202) 366–0307 or David
Jasinski, Office of the Chief Counsel, by
telephone at (202) 366–2992. The
mailing address of both of these officials
is: National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This rulemaking addresses the
standard reference test tire (SRTT)
manufactured according to
specifications set forth in an ASTM
International standard, E1136,
‘‘Standard Specification for P195/75R14
Radial Standard Reference Test Tire’’
(14-inch SRTT). The 14-inch SRTT is a
size P195/75R14 all-season steel-belted
radial tire. The dimensions, weight,
materials, and other physical properties
of the tire are specified in E1136. The
tire is not intended for general use, but
as the name indicates, is used for
testing.
The 14-inch SRTT was first
introduced in the 1980s. The 14-inch
SRTT was manufactured by one
company, Michelin North America, Inc
(Michelin) and was sold under its
Uniroyal brand. NHTSA uses the 14inch SRTT to evaluate tire treadwear
performance 1 by comparing a candidate
tire’s performance to the performance of
the SRTT in a particular performance
test. NHTSA also uses the 14-inch SRTT
to evaluate test surface friction 2 for
safety standards relating to braking
because the narrow specifications for
the tire (size, component materials, etc.)
ensure consistent, repeatable
performance.
NHTSA first incorporated the 14-inch
SRTT into the Federal Motor Vehicle
1 49
CFR 575.104.
CFR 571.105, 571.121, 571.122, 571.126,
571.135, 571.136, 571.139, 571.500.
2 49
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42763
Safety Standards (FMVSSs) in a 1995
rule adopting FMVSS No. 135, the light
vehicle braking standard.3 Previously,
NHTSA had used skid number to define
the road test surface in the light vehicle
braking test. Testing a surface to
determine skid number involved using
a locked wheel. However, modern antilock brake systems (ABS) are designed
to achieve maximum friction prior to a
wheel becoming locked and the tire
skidding. An anti-lock brake system
prevents wheel lockup by modulating a
vehicle’s brakes at a point just before the
wheels would lock up. Consequently, in
the 1995 final rule, NHTSA adopted
ASTM method E1337, ‘‘Standard Test
Method for Determining Longitudinal
Peak Braking Coefficient (PBC) of Paved
Surfaces Using Standard Reference Test
Tire,’’ as the means for evaluating test
surfaces.4 ASTM E1337 measures the
peak braking force prior to wheel
lockup, which corresponds to the
behavior of an anti-lock brake system.
ASTM E1337 specifies the use of the
E1136 SRTT in order to ensure that
variability in tire size, material, or
construction does not affect the
evaluation of test surfaces.
Over time, the evaluation of a test
surface using the ASTM E1337 test
method and the E1136 SRTT was
incorporated into the heavy vehicle
braking standards (FMVSS Nos. 105 and
121), the light and heavy vehicle
electronic stability control standards
(FMVSS Nos. 126 and 136), the
motorcycle braking standard (FMVSS
No. 122), and the low-speed vehicle
standard (FMVSS No. 500).5
The use of the 14-inch SRTT is also
incorporated into the definition of a
‘‘snow tire’’ in FMVSS No. 139.
Specifically, a ‘‘snow tire’’ is defined as
a tire that attains a traction index greater
than or equal to 110 compared to the 14inch SRTT when using the ASTM F1805
snow traction test. The ASTM F1805
snow traction test measures the driving
traction of tires while traveling in a
3 60
FR 6411, 6415–17 (Feb. 2, 1995).
reason for adopting the peak braking
force related to the variability associated with
determining skid number. That matter was
discussed in more detail in NHTSA’s earlier
proposals to require heavy vehicles to be equipped
with anti-lock brake systems. See 49 FR 20465 (May
14, 1984); 49 FR 28962 (July 17, 1984).
5 ASTM E1337 is also incorporated by reference
into 49 CFR 575.106, which are the provisions
related to a new tire consumer information
program. However, the test procedures in 49 CFR
575.106 are not currently used pending publication
of a proposed and final rule establishing the
remaining aspects of the consumer information
program. See 75 FR 15893 (Mar. 30, 2010).
Therefore, this proposal does not address 49 CFR
575.106. In a proposal implementing the remaining
aspects of that tire consumer information program,
NHTSA would address the issues discussed in this
proposal.
4 Another
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
42764
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
straight line on snow- and ice-covered
surfaces. Tires that meet the definition
of ‘‘snow tires’’ are subject to less
stringent performance test requirements
compared to other tires subject to
FMVSS No. 139.6
The SRTT is also used as part of the
Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
(UTQGS), an information program to
assist consumers in making informed
decisions when purchasing tires. The
UTQGS apply to passenger car tires and
require motor vehicle and tire
manufacturers and tire brand name
owners to provide consumers with
information about their tires’ relative
performance regarding treadwear,
traction, and temperature resistance.
The 14-inch SRTT is used as part of
the determination of a tire’s UTQG
treadwear rating. As part of the UTQG
test procedures, treadwear is measured
by running the tires being tested (called
candidate tires) in convoys over a 400mile course of public roads near San
Angelo, Texas. The performance of tires
over this course can change daily due to
variability in the road surface,
temperature, humidity, and
precipitation. To compensate for
changes in condition of the test course,
candidate tires are tested concurrently
with course monitoring tires (CMTs).
NHTSA has used the 14-inch SRTT as
the exclusive CMT since 1991. CMTs
must be not more than one year old at
the time of commencement of the test
and must be used within two months
from being removed from storage in
order to prevent variability resulting
from aging of the CMT. The
performance of the CMT is used to
determine the base course wear rate
(BCWR) by running four-vehicle
convoys equipped with 16 CMTs for
6,400 miles over the test course four
times per year. 7 The wear rate of the
CMT over the prior four quarterly CMT
test runs are averaged to calculate the
BCWR, which is published in Docket
No. NHTSA–2001–9395. The BCWR is
used to determine a course severity
adjustment factor, which is applied to
the comparison between the candidate
tires and CMTs to determine a tire’s
rating.
II. Proposal To Replace 14-Inch SRTT
With 16-Inch SRTT
This proposal would amend NHTSA’s
safety standards and regulations to no
longer reference the 14-inch SRTT.
Because of technological advancements
in the development of tires and the
general trend of increasing rim diameter
sizes since the 1980s, the size and
6 See
7 See
71 FR 877, 880 (Jan. 6, 2006).
65 FR 33481 (May 24, 2000).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
materials of the 14-inch SRTT are no
longer representative of modern tires
sold in the U.S. Further, Michelin has
ceased production of the 14-inch SRTT
because it has become difficult for
Michelin to obtain the materials
necessary to manufacture the SRTT.8
Thus, NHTSA seeks to reference a
different standard reference test tire in
the agency’s safety standards and
regulations and to transition seamlessly
to the new tire in the agency’s
compliance and consumer information
test programs.
ASTM International has developed an
updated specification for an SRTT
designated F2493 (16-inch SRTT). The
16-inch SRTT is size P225/60R16. The
16-inch SRTT is considered to be more
representative of current tires because of
its larger size and new material and
design features that lead to traction that
is more typical of modern passenger car
tires.9 To the best of NHTSA’s
knowledge, the 16-inch SRTT is
manufactured only by Michelin and
sold under its Uniroyal brand.
To reference an SRTT that is more
representative of tires on the road today,
and in consideration of Michelin’s
decision to cease production of the 14inch SRTT, NHTSA has determined that
replacing the 14-inch SRTT in its
regulations is warranted. The only
suitable replacement for the 14-inch
SRTT that has been suggested to
NHTSA is the 16-inch SRTT. However,
because the 16-inch SRTT is a larger
size and uses more modern design and
materials, it is likely that the 16-inch
SRTT will not perform identically to the
14-inch SRTT. Therefore, NHTSA has
been cooperating with Transport
Canada, Natural Resources Canada,
representatives of ASTM International
committees F09 on tires and E17 on
vehicle-pavement systems, the U.S. Tire
Manufacturers Association (including
Michelin, currently the sole
manufacturer of SRTTs), and the Rubber
Association of Canada to conduct
testing to determine the consequences of
replacing the 14-inch SRTT with the 16inch SRTT. The results of the testing by
these entities, in addition to NHTSA’s
own testing, have substantially
contributed to this proposal to replace
8 See ‘‘Discontinued Tire Will Lead to ASTM
Standard Changes’’ (July 30, 2015), available at
https://www.astm.org/cms/drupal-7.51/newsroom/
discontinued-tire-will-lead-astm-standard-changes
(last accessed April 13, 2021).
9 See ‘‘New ASTM Specification Presents
Requirements for Standard Reference Test Tire’’
(April 1, 2007), available at https://www.astm.org/
cms/drupal-7.51/newsroom/new-astmspecification-presents-requirements-standardreference-test-tire (last accessed April 13, 2021).
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the 14-inch SRTT with the 16-inch
SRTT.10
A. Proposed FMVSS Amendments
1. Surface Friction Measurement
As discussed above, other than for
defining a ‘‘snow tire,’’ NHTSA uses the
SRTT in the FMVSSs to define the
surface coefficient of friction for the test
surface for braking and electronic
stability control (ESC) standards. The
friction of the test surface is measured
by the peak braking force prior to wheel
lockup, which is referred to as a peak
friction coefficient (PFC) or peak
braking coefficient (PBC). For the
purpose of this preamble, NHTSA uses
the term peak friction coefficient or
PFC, but the terms are used
interchangeably in the FMVSS.
In the FMVSS, the peak friction
coefficient of a surface is determined
using the 1990 version of ASTM E1337
test method. The ASTM E1337 test
method involves mounting the SRTT to
a test trailer, bringing the trailer to a test
speed of 40 mph (64 km/h), and
applying the brake to produce the
maximum braking force prior to wheel
lockup.
When NHTSA was informed that
production of the 14-inch SRTT was to
be discontinued, NHTSA evaluated the
16-inch SRTT to determine whether it
would be a suitable replacement.
NHTSA carefully considered the effect
of the 16-inch SRTT on the
determination of PFC. NHTSA was
concerned that the use of the 16-inch
SRTT without further changes to the
FMVSSs would increase the stringency
of the braking and ESC FMVSSs. The
reason for this was that the different
materials used in the 16-inch SRTT and
the increased size of the tire would
result in the 16-inch SRTT having better
traction performance than the 14-inch
SRTT. If the 16-inch SRTT has
improved traction performance relative
to the 14-inch SRTT, then the same
surface would have a higher PFC when
tested with the 16-inch SRTT.
Alternatively stated, obtaining an
identical PFC value using the 16-inch
SRTT would require a road surface with
lower friction. Testing braking systems
using stopping distance on road surfaces
with lower friction would require
improved braking performance to stop
in the same distance, which is not an
outcome intended by this rulemaking.
Consequently, NHTSA sought a
conversion factor to evaluate PFC of a
test surface using the 16-inch SRTT
without altering the severity of any
braking or ESC FMVSSs.
10 See
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
Docket No. NHTSA–2020–0067.
05AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
Initial testing confirmed the
assumption that using the 16-inch SRTT
resulted in a test surface having a higher
PFC than when evaluated using the 14inch SRTT. Transportation Research
Center, Inc. (TRC) conducted initial
testing in support of the ASTM
committee evaluating this issue (the
E17.21 committee).11 Testing was
conducted on 15 different surfaces of
varying friction. The evaluation of a dry
test surface (e.g., 0.9 PFC using the 14inch SRTT) using the 16-inch SRTT
resulted in a PFC over 15 percent higher
than the PFC derived using the 14-inch
SRTT. However, testing on a low
friction surface (0.5 PFC using the 14inch SRTT) showed that the PFC
derived using the 16-inch SRTT and the
14-inch SRTT was similar.
Because the difference in performance
between the 16-inch SRTT and the 14inch SRTT was not consistent for all
levels of surface friction, something
more than a simple multiplier is
necessary to correlate performance
between the two tires. ASTM
International has developed such a
formula. That formula is included in the
2019 update to ASTM E1337, which
NHTSA is proposing to incorporate by
reference into the FMVSSs, in place of
the 1990 version of E1337 currently
referenced. NHTSA has used the
formula in the 2019 version of E1337 to
derive PFC value for all of the FMVSSs.
Those values are listed in the table
below.
Each value derived using the formula
was rounded to the hundredths
position, rounding up if necessary. This
ensures that the updated FMVSS test
surface PFC specification will be no
more stringent as a result of this
proposed amendment than it is now,
consistent with NHTSA’s intent in this
rulemaking.
FMVSS section
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
FMVSS
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
PFC value using
14-inch SRTT
PFC value using
16-inch SRTT
0.9
0.5
0.9
0.5
0.9
≤0.45
≥0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.02
0.55
1.02
0.55
1.02
≤0.50
≥0.90
1.02
1.02
1.02
1.02
105 S6.9.2(a) (high friction testing) .............................................................................................
105 S6.9.2(b) (low friction testing) ..............................................................................................
121 S5.3.1.1, S5.7.1, S6.1.7 (high friction testing) 12 .................................................................
121 S5.3.6.1, S6.1.7 (low friction testing) ...................................................................................
122 S6.1.1.1 (high friction testing) ..............................................................................................
122 S6.1.1.2 (low friction testing) ...............................................................................................
122 S6.9.7.1 ................................................................................................................................
126 S6.2.2 ...................................................................................................................................
135 S6.2.1, S7.4.3, S7.5.2, S7.6.2, S7.7.3, S7.8.2, S7.9.2, S7.10.3, S7.11.3 ..........................
136 ...............................................................................................................................................
500 13 ...........................................................................................................................................
NHTSA commissioned confirmatory
testing using the 16-inch SRTT to verify
that the PFC values discussed above are
equivalent to the PFC values in the
FMVSSs derived using the 14-inch
SRTT. NHTSA has contracted with TRC
to conduct this testing on five different
test surfaces (wet ceramic, wet jennite,
wet asphalt, dry asphalt, and dry
broomed concrete). These test surfaces
range from high to low PFC values. For
each test surface, 10 of each of the 14inch SRTT and the 16-inch SRTT were
each tested 3 times with 10 stops per
test, for a total of 300 tests for each size
SRTT on each test surface. A final report
summarizing the results has been placed
in the docket identified at the beginning
of this NPRM.
2. Snow Tire Definition
Presently, for a manufacturer to
designate a tire as a ‘‘snow tire,’’ the tire
must attain a traction index equal to or
greater than 110 compared to the 14inch SRTT when tested using the snow
traction test in the 2000 version of
ASTM F1805. The ASTM F09
committee on tires commissioned a
study to determine the feasibility of
11 See
docket No. NHTSA–2020–0067.
is also proposing to revise Tables I, II,
and IIA in FMVSS No. 121 to eliminate the
redundant references to PFC values in those tables.
In place of PFC values, NHTSA is proposing to
include in Table I (Stopping Sequence) references
12 NHTSA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
42765
replacing the 14-inch SRTT with the 16inch SRTT in the determination of
whether a tire meets the definition of
‘‘snow tire.’’ This study was funded by
the United States Tire Manufacturers
Association (USTMA).
The study consisted of testing of
traction during the winter test seasons
of 2016, 2017, and 2018 to develop a
method to correlate results of tests
conducted using the 16-inch SRTT with
those conducted using the 14-inch
SRTT. ASTM International has
published a technical report
documenting this work.14 ASTM
International determined that a
correlation factor of 0.9876 was
appropriate, meaning that a tire that
attained a rating of 110 when tested
using the 14-inch SRTT correlated to a
rating of 111.4 or 111.5 when tested
using the 16-inch SRTT, depending on
the number of significant digits
considered. Recent guidance issued by
the USTMA, a trade association
consisting of companies that
manufacture tires in the United States,
recommends a minimum traction index
of 112 using the 16-inch SRTT.15
Accordingly, NHTSA is proposing to
amend the definition of ‘‘snow tire’’ in
FMVSS No. 139 to specify that a snow
tire is a tire that attains a traction index
of 112 when tested using the updated
F1895 test method using the 16-inch
SRTT. This proposal is consistent with
the guidance issued by USTMA, which
NHTSA believes reflects a consensus
within the tire industry on the
appropriate traction index for use in
determining what qualifies as a ‘‘snow
tire.’’ NHTSA seeks comment on this
proposal.
Furthermore, after reviewing this
information from the USTMA, NHTSA
determined that additional clarification
was necessary to the definition of a
‘‘snow tire’’ in FMVSS No. 139. The
latest (2020) version of ASTM F1805
defines the standard test procedure for
measuring traction on ‘‘snow’’ and ‘‘ice’’
surfaces. However, there are multiple
surface types in both the ‘‘snow’’ and
‘‘ice’’ categories. They include soft pack
(new) snow, medium pack snow,
medium hard pack snow, hard pack
snow, ice—wet, and ice—dry.16 The
definition of ‘‘snow tire’’ in FMVSS No.
to the sections in which the various procedures are
set forth, which is a more helpful reference.
13 Although FMVSS No. 500 specifies a PFC value
for the test surface, the test surface is only used to
verify the vehicle’s maximum speed.
14 Available at https://www.astm.org/COMMIT/
2019_04_10_E1136%20to%20
F2493%20transition%20for%20ASTMF1805.pdf
(last accessed April 13, 2021).
15 See https://www.ustires.org/sites/default/files/
USTMA_TISB_37_0.pdf (last accessed April 13,
2021).
16 The surface types are defined in the text of
ASTM F1805.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
42766
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
139 does not specify the surface type
specified within ASTM F1805 for
testing.
NHTSA interprets that the ‘‘medium
pack snow’’ condition was intended for
use by manufacturers for marketing tires
as ‘‘snow tires.’’ NHTSA seeks comment
on whether this assumption is correct.
It is the surface type specified for severe
snow tires in UNECE Regulation No.
117 for determining when use of the
Alpine or Three-Peak Mountain
Snowflake marking that indicates that a
tire meets the requirements for use in
severe snow conditions. Based upon the
research on the SRTT, the 2020 revision
of ASTM F1805 contains a revised
tractive coefficient range for ‘‘medium
pack snow’’ using the 14-inch SRTT
from 0.25–0.41 to 0.25–0.38 and adds a
tractive coefficient range for ‘‘medium
pack snow’’ using the 16-inch SRTT of
0.23–0.38.
Based on the research by ASTM
International and USTMA’s recent
guidance, NHTSA is proposing to
update the definition of a ‘‘snow tire’’:
(1) To replace the reference to the 14inch SRTT with the 16-inch SRTT and
to change the minimum traction index
in order to meet the definition of a
‘‘snow tire’’ from 110 to 112 using this
tire; (2) to specify that this traction
index is obtained when tested on the
‘‘medium pack snow’’ surface, and (3) to
update the incorporation by reference of
ASTM F1805 from the 2000 version to
the 2020 version, which is the latest
version. ASTM F1805–20 incorporates
the research discussed above. NHTSA is
not aware of other research on
equivalent performance of the 14-inch
SRTT and 16-inch SRTT on snowcovered surfaces other than the testing
by ASTM International.
B. Proposed UTQGS Amendments
In anticipation of Michelin’s decision
to cease production of the 14-inch
SRTT, NHTSA began including testing
of the 16-inch SRTT as part of its BCWR
determination. Since the second quarter
of 2016, NHTSA has been duplicating
BCWR testing using both the 14-inch
SRTT and the 16-inch SRTT. NHTSA
has shared some data from this testing
with its testing partners (named at the
end of Section I of this preamble) in
order to develop options that could be
implemented once production of the 14inch SRTT has ended. Four options
have been considered:
1. Use the research data to develop a
correlation formula between the 14-inch
SRTT and the 16-inch SRTT. While this
would allow future testing and rating to
be based on either SRTT, it was likely
to be the most resource-intensive to
develop and validate a formula.
2. Establish an effective date for the
16-inch SRTT and begin publishing the
quarterly BCWR after that date using
four quarters of data using that tire.
After two quarters of testing it was
apparent that this was likely to result in
a shift in the BCWR. However, large
shifts in BCWR have occurred in the
past, such as when repaving was done
on portions of the route.
3. Allow a transition period in which
NHTSA would publish BCWR rates for
both SRTTs, allowing manufacturers to
choose when to shift within that period.
4. Establish an effective date to begin
quarterly testing with the 16-inch SRTT,
but continue to calculate the BCWR rate
using the prior quarterly testing results
used to calculate prior BCWR rates. The
first quarter with official testing using
the 16-inch SRTT CMT would result in
a BCWR rate calculated from the average
of those results and the results of the
previous three quarters testing using the
14-inch SRTT CMT, the second quarter
would average two quarters with the 16inch SRTT CMT and 2 quarters with the
14-inch SRTT CMT, and so on.
In 2017, Michelin informed NHTSA
that the test results from the first two
quarters of testing were within the
normal variability seen for BCWR.17
Michelin believed that NHTSA could
develop an entirely new formula for
determining BCWR, but believed that
such a formula may not be able to be
developed prior to the end of
production of 14-inch SRTT. Instead,
Michelin recommended adding a new
conversion factor to the existing formula
derived from the ratio of the BCWR from
the 14-inch SRTT CMT to the BCWR of
the 16-inch SRTT CMT measured over
a specific number of quarters of testing.
Michelin recommended that this factor
be based on at least six quarters of
testing, which was all the testing that
was available at the time of Michelin’s
recommendation.
NHTSA now has 14 consecutive
quarters of testing data. Table 1
summarizes the quarterly BCWR values
determined by NHTSA since the first
quarter of 2017. As shown in Table 1,
NHTSA has determined BCWR
reference values for the 16-inch SRTT.
Table 1 also shows BCWR rates for the
16-inch SRTT beginning in Q2 2017
after four quarters of BCWR values were
obtained. Table 1 also shows a
conversion factor based on the ratio of
the BCWR using the 14-inch SRTT to
the BCWR using the 16-inch SRTT
measured over all available quarters of
testing.
TABLE 1—QUARTERLY BCWR DATA SINCE APRIL 2016
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
14-inch SRTT
BCWR data
January–March 2017 .............................
April–June 2017 .....................................
July–September 2017 ............................
October–December 2017 .......................
January–March 2018 .............................
April–June 2018 .....................................
July–September 2018 ............................
October–December 2018 .......................
January–March 2019 .............................
April–June 2019 .....................................
July–September 2019 ............................
October–December 2019 .......................
January–March 2020 .............................
April–June 2020 .....................................
16-inch SRTT
BCWR data
8.090
7.556
9.640
8.932
7.481
8.253
9.648
8.867
6.555
8.242
7.243
7.237
7.695
6.719
5.349
5.952
6.189
6.578
5.731
6.074
6.467
6.602
5.999
5.506
5.656
6.206
5.259
5.616
Quarterly
published
BCWR rate
9.059
8.573
8.692
8.555
8.402
8.577
8.579
8.562
8.331
8.328
7.727
7.319
7.604
7.224
Theoretical
16-inch
SRTT BCWR rate
Derived
conversion
factor based on
prior six
quarters
..............................
..............................
..............................
6.017
6.113
6.143
6.213
6.219
6.286
6.144
5.941
5.842
5.657
5.684
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
1.392
1.393
1.403
1.328
1.348
1.344
1.312
1.301
1.276
17 Michelin presentation; UTQG Wear Change
from 14″ TO 16″ SRTT First Two Test Quarters. See
docket No. NHTSA–2020–0067.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
42767
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—QUARTERLY BCWR DATA SINCE APRIL 2016—Continued
14-inch SRTT
BCWR data
July–September 2020 ............................
October–December 2020 .......................
January–March 2021 .............................
16-inch SRTT
BCWR data
6.983
8.122
7.228
The conversion factor listed in the last
column of Table 1 is determined by
dividing the average of six quarters of
BCWR testing with the 14-inch SRTT by
the average of the same six quarters of
BCWR with the 16-inch SRTT. The
conversion factor is similar for all
quarters currently available. NHTSA
requests comments on how the new
conversion factor should be selected
from among the available quarters of
Quarterly
published
BCWR rate
6.856
6.886
4.687
Theoretical
16-inch
SRTT BCWR rate
7.159
7.380
7.263
data. For example, NHTSA could use
the last six (or some other number) of
quarters of data, or all data available to
determine the conversion factor.
NHTSA requests comments on which of
these possible conversion factors
NHTSA could use and why.
For this NPRM, NHTSA is basing the
adjustment on the average of all 17
consecutive quarters of available data.
The average BCWR wear rate using the
Derived
conversion
factor based on
prior six
quarters
5.984
6.154
6.011
1.257
1.206
1.239
14-inch SRTT is 7.911. The average
BCWR wear rate using the 16-inch SRTT
is 5.942. Dividing 7.911 by 5.977 results
in a conversion factor of 1.324. Based
upon this new conversion factor, the
new formula for the treadwear grade,
assuming the decision was to use the
most recent quarter’s conversion factor,
would be: 18
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
Projected mileage x base course wear rate 14
P=------------------402
Projected mileage x base course wear rate 16 (base course wear rate 14 )
P=---------------x
402
base course wear rate 16
base course wear rate 14
base course wear rate 16
Conversion Factor = - - - - - - - - - - = 1.324
P
Projected mileage x base course wear rate
=- - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 1.324
402
Projected mileage x base course wear rate
P=------------------304
NHTSA does not believe the
calculation of projected mileage as used
in this formula also requires adjustment,
as the calculation takes into
consideration the actual measurement of
the CMT used during the test of the
candidate tire being evaluated.
NHTSA is also proposing to modify
language in the treadwear test procedure
in § 575.104 to reference the total
distance and schedule of events in terms
of circuits completed rather than
mileage. This proposed change is
intended to allow testing to be more
flexible in the vent of route changes or
other unforeseen circumstances. With
the added flexibility of these changes,
NHTSA believes that it is preferable to
use the actual mileage of the completed
circuit in the calculation of the wear
rate rather than the estimated 400 miles
per circuit. NHTSA believes that this
would ensure that the wear rate reflects
the actual mileage covered if the
completed 16 circuits is not exactly
6,400 miles. NHTSA seeks comment on
these proposed changes and any
potential effects they may have on the
testing process or data integrity.
NHTSA also seeks comment on the
specification in the note to
§ 575.104(e)(2)(ix)(C) that the CMT must
18 The first equation definition P is set forth in 49
CFR 57.104(e)(2)(ix)(F).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
EP05AU21.038
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4910–59–C
42768
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
be no more than one year old at the
commencement of testing and that it
must be used within two months after
removal from storage. NHTSA lacks
facilities to store tires in a climatecontrolled environment at its testing
facility in San Angelo, Texas. Therefore,
because of the time limitations on the
use of the CMT in the BCWR testing,
NHTSA only purchases CMTs on a
quarterly basis depending on funding
availability and conducts BCWR testing
as soon as feasible after receiving a
shipment of CMTs. Lack of funding
sometimes requires NHTSA to delay
CMT purchases, and sometimes when
NHTSA purchases CMTs, supplies may
be limited, meaning that NHTSA is
required to wait weeks or months before
receiving CMTs for testing. To increase
NHTSA’s flexibility in purchasing and
testing CMTs, NHTSA is considering
lengthening the amount of time tires
may be removed from storage to four
months, so that NHTSA can purchase
CMTs in advance and store them in its
San Angelo facility. NHTSA also
requests comment on whether the word
‘‘storage’’ is sufficiently well defined
and, if not, how NHTSA could define
‘‘storage’’ more clearly to ensure tires
are stored in such a way that would
minimize testing variability without
providing inflexible limitations on
NHTSA’s use of the SRTT. NHTSA
requests comment on this proposed
change.
C. Summary
Based on the foregoing, NHTSA has
tentatively concluded that the best
course of action in response to
Michelin’s determination to cease
production of the 14-inch SRTT is to
replace the 14-inch SRTT with the 16inch SRTT for all uses in NHTSA’s
standards and regulations. Because the
16-inch SRTT is a different size and
made of different materials, changes are
necessary to the FMVSS and tire
regulations to ensure that the use of the
16-inch SRTT to evaluate test surface
friction does not alter the stringency of
the standards or the treadwear ratings of
tires in the UTQGS treadwear testing
program. NHTSA tentatively believes
that this proposal accomplishes those
goals. NHTSA requests comment on that
determination, the merits of these goals,
and whether the proposed amendments
would accomplish those goals. NHTSA
also seeks comment on the use and
storage requirements for the CMT tires
used in the BCWR calculation.
III. Effective Date
For the changes to the UTQGS,
NHTSA expects to make these changes
effective at the next BCWR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
determination at least 30 days after the
date of publication of a final rule.
NHTSA does not believe any further
lead time is necessary for the following
reasons. First, because NHTSA is using
a conversion factor to keep the rating
scale used with the 14-inch SRTT and
16-inch SRTT identical, ratings of a
particular line of tires should not be
affected by this proposed rule. Second,
tire lines rated prior to the effective date
of the changes proposed in this rule
would not be required to be rerated.
Third, limited availability of the 14-inch
SRTT could make it difficult for NHTSA
to continue to obtain 14-inch SRTTs in
its BCWR determinations. NHTSA is
currently restricted by its regulations to
using SRTTs that were manufactured
within one year prior to the
commencement of testing and two
months after removal from storage in
order to prevent variability in results
due to tire aging. This provision
prevents NHTSA from stockpiling 14inch SRTTs.
For FMVSS changes, NHTSA is
proposing a lead time of six months.
This will give NHTSA’s compliance test
facilities sufficient time to obtain and
validate test surfaces using the 16-inch
SRTT. Although NHTSA has
determined an equivalent level of
surface friction when evaluating PBC
with the 16-inch SRTT in place of the
14-inch SRTT, NHTSA anticipates
requiring test facilities conducting
NHTSA’s compliance tests to revalidate
test surfaces using the 16-inch SRTT, to
ensure that testing is being done in
accordance with the procedures in the
FMVSS. A six-month lead time is
consistent with the requirements of 49
U.S.C. 30111(d) that standards be
effective between 180 days and 1 year
after they are prescribed. However,
potential unavailability of the 14-inch
SRTT may constitute good cause for
NHTSA to impose a shorter lead time in
a final rule resulting from this proposal.
NHTSA does not believe that
manufacturers require more than six
months of lead time. Because NHTSA
intends the proposed peak braking
coefficient specifications in the FMVSS
using the 16-inch SRTT to be an
equivalent level of friction to existing
peak braking coefficients using the 14inch SRTT, NHTSA does not intend to
affect the FMVSS compliance of any
vehicle and does not believe this
proposal would do so.
NHTSA requests comments on the
proposed lead time for changes to the
UTQGS and FMVSSs.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
IV. Public Participation
How do I prepare and submit
comments?
To ensure that your comments are
correctly filed in the Docket, please
include the docket number of this
document in your comments.
Your comments must not be more
than 15 pages long (49 CFR 553.21).
NHTSA established this limit to
encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion.
However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your
comments. There is no limit on the
length of the attachments.
Please submit your comments
electronically to the docket following
the steps outlined under ADDRESSES.
You may also submit two copies of your
comments, including the attachments,
by mail to Docket Management at the
beginning of this document, under
ADDRESSES.
How can I be sure that my comments
were received?
If you wish to be notified upon receipt
of your mailed comments, enclose a
self-addressed, stamped postcard in the
envelope containing your comments.
Upon receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by
mail.
How do I submit confidential business
information?
If you wish to submit any information
under a claim of confidentiality, you
should submit the following to the
NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590: (1) A complete copy of the
submission; (2) a redacted copy of the
submission with the confidential
information removed; and (3) either a
second complete copy or those portions
of the submission containing the
material for which confidential
treatment is claimed and any additional
information that you deem important to
the Chief Counsel’s consideration of
your confidentiality claim. A request for
confidential treatment that complies
with 49 CFR part 512 must accompany
the complete submission provided to
the Chief Counsel. For further
information, submitters who plan to
request confidential treatment for any
portion of their submissions are advised
to review 49 CFR part 512, particularly
those sections relating to document
submission requirements. Failure to
adhere to the requirements of part 512
may result in the release of confidential
information to the public docket. In
addition, you should submit two copies
from which you have deleted the
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
claimed confidential business
information, to Docket Management at
the address given at the beginning of
this document under ADDRESSES. To
facilitate social distancing during
COVID–19, NHTSA is temporarily
accepting confidential business
information electronically. Please see
https://www.nhtsa.gov/coronavirus/
submission-confidential-businessinformation for details.
Will the agency consider late
comments?
NHTSA will consider all comments
received before the close of business on
the comment closing date indicated at
the beginning of this document under
DATES. In accordance with DOT policies,
to the extent possible, NHTSA will also
consider comments received after the
specified comment closing date. If
NHTSA receives a comment too late to
consider in developing the proposed
rule, NHTSA will consider that
comment as an informal suggestion for
future rulemaking action.
How can I read the comments submitted
by other people?
You may read the comments received
on the internet. To read the comments
on the internet, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions provided.
You may download the comments.
The comments are imaged documents,
in either TIFF or PDF format. Please
note that even after the comment closing
date, NHTSA will continue to file
relevant information in the Docket as it
becomes available. Further, some people
may submit late comments.
Accordingly, NHTSA recommends that
you periodically search the Docket for
new material.
You may also see the comments at the
address and times given near the
beginning of this document under
ADDRESSES.
V. Regulatory Analyses
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
A. Executive Order 12866, Executive
Order 13563, and DOT Rulemaking
Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impact of
this rulemaking action under Executive
Order 12866, Executive Order 13563,
and the Department of Transportation’s
administrative rulemaking procedures.
This rulemaking is not considered
significant and was not reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget under
E.O. 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and
Review.’’
This proposal updates the standard
reference test tire used as a baseline tire
for consumer information testing, in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
determination of what is a snow tire,
and to evaluate testing surface friction
for evaluating braking and electronic
stability control performance. This
proposal will not have a direct effect on
safety because the changes proposed in
this rule are designed to maintain the
present level of stringency of NHTSA’s
braking and electronic stability control
FMVSSs. However, if the 14-inch SRTT
is discontinued without a replacement,
NHTSA would be unable to verify test
surface friction coefficient prior to
compliance testing for braking and
electronic stability control system
FMVSSs. Thus, this rulemaking
indirectly affects safety by ensuring that
NHTSA would be able to perform
compliance tests of those FMVSSs.
Also, if this proposal were not adopted,
it is expected that the 14-inch SRTT
would soon no longer be available for
purchase, rendering it impossible for
NHTSA to continue maintaining the
BCWR for treadwear testing. This
unavailability of an SRTT would lead to
tire manufacturers being unable to rate
their tires for treadwear under the
UTQGS and mold those ratings onto the
side of the tire as required by 49 CFR
part 575.
This proposed rule is expected to
result in additional costs to NHTSA
because the 16-inch SRTT has a retail
price that is $35 per tire more than the
14-inch SRTT ($335 vs. $300).19 NHTSA
purchases 64 SRTTs for its own use
annually in determining BCWR.
Therefore, based on the cost difference
of $35 per tire, NHTSA expects that, if
adopted, this proposal would result in
$2,240 additional annual costs to the
government. However, NHTSA has been
using the 14-inch SRTT and 16-inch
SRTT side-by-side since 2016 for its
quarterly BCWR determination in
anticipation of this rulemaking and
NHTSA plans to continue to do so until
this proposal is finalized. After this
proposal is finalized, NHTSA does not
expect to continue purchasing 14-inch
SRTTs. Therefore, when compared to
years since 2016, NHTSA would likely
purchase fewer SRTTs in subsequent
years after this proposal is finalized.
As to potential costs to the public,
based upon information provided to
NHTSA by Michelin from 2017 and
2018, annual U.S. sales of 14-inch
SRTTs is fewer than 2,000 units.
Assuming that U.S. sales of 16-inch
SRTTs is comparable to sales of 14-inch
SRTTs, the annual cost of this proposal
19 Data on the price of the SRTT was obtained
from instructions on how to purchase SRTTs from
Michelin. See https://www.astm.org/COMMIT/
2011%2011%2008%20E1136
%20F2493%20SRTT%20Purchase%20
Procedure.pdf. (last accessed April 13, 2021).
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42769
would be less than $70,000. However,
NHTSA does not know how many sales
are a consequence of the SRTT being
used as part of NHTSA’s compliance
test procedures, versus those sold for
other purposes (e.g., SRTTs sold to
assess the performance of tires to some
other country’s regulations or to
voluntary industry standards). Any
SRTT sales that are not related to
compliance with NHTSA’s regulations
would not be affected by this proposal
and the existence of such sales would
mean this rule would be less costly than
the maximum estimate of $70,000 per
year. Moreover, NHTSA does not have
any direct knowledge of whether
regulated entities have been conducting
side-by-side testing using both the 14inch SRTT and 16-inch SRTTs like
NHTSA has and whether side-by-side
testing has artificially increased sales in
2017 and 2018.
NHTSA requests comments on the
benefits and costs of this NPRM.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996), whenever an agency is required
to publish a notice of rulemaking for
any proposed or final rule, it must
prepare and make available for public
comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the effect of the
rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions). The
Small Business Administration’s
regulations at 13 CFR part 121 define a
small business, in part, as a business
entity ‘‘which operates primarily within
the United States.’’ (13 CFR 121.105(a)).
However, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required if the head of an
agency certifies the rule would not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the
factual basis for certifying that a rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
NHTSA has considered the effects of
this proposal under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. I certify that this
proposal will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This proposal
would directly impact the government,
as it affects only the test procedures
NHTSA uses in its FMVSSs and
regulations that reference tire
performance. It affects manufacturers of
tires and of motor vehicles only to the
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
42770
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
extent those manufacturers choose to
test their products in the manner
NHTSA would test them. They are not
required to use the test procedures
NHTSA uses.
Although we believe some entities
producing tires or vehicles that would
be tested by NHTSA using procedures
that use the 16-inch SRTT are
considered small businesses, we do not
believe this proposal will have a
significant economic impact on those
manufacturers. First, the small
manufacturers are not required to use
the SRTT in certifying their products.
Second, for manufacturers choosing to
use the 16-inch SRTT to test their
products, this proposal would result in
a cost increase of only $35 per tire to
entities currently purchasing the 14inch SRTT to assess their products. We
do not believe this cost increase is
significant. Finally, for the changes to
the UTQGS, because NHTSA is using a
conversion factor to keep the rating
scale used with the 14-inch SRTT and
16-inch SRTT identical, ratings of a
particular line of tires should not be
affected by this proposed rule. For
FMVSS changes, NHTSA has
determined an equivalent level of
surface friction when evaluating PBC
with the 16-inch SRTT in place of the
14-inch SRTT, so the change to the
standard reference test tire should not
change the performance of current tires
or vehicles.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined this proposal
pursuant to Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and
concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local
governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking
process. The agency has concluded that
the rulemaking would not have
sufficient federalism implications to
warrant consultation with State and
local officials or the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement.
The proposal would not have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’
NHTSA rules can preempt in two
ways. First, the National Traffic and
Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an
express preemption provision: When a
motor vehicle safety standard is in effect
under this chapter, a State or a political
subdivision of a State may prescribe or
continue in effect a standard applicable
to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
equipment only if the standard is
identical to the standard prescribed
under this chapter. 49 U.S.C.
30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command
by Congress that preempts any nonidentical State legislative and
administrative law addressing the same
aspect of performance.
The express preemption provision
described above is subject to a savings
clause under which ‘‘[c]ompliance with
a motor vehicle safety standard
prescribed under this chapter does not
exempt a person from liability at
common law.’’ 49 U.S.C. 30103(e).
Pursuant to this provision, State
common law tort causes of action
against motor vehicle manufacturers
that might otherwise be preempted by
the express preemption provision are
generally preserved. However, the
Supreme Court has recognized the
possibility, in some instances, of
implied preemption of such State
common law tort causes of action by
virtue of NHTSA’s rules, even if not
expressly preempted. This second way
that NHTSA rules can preempt is
dependent upon there being an actual
conflict between an FMVSS and the
higher standard that would effectively
be imposed on motor vehicle
manufacturers if someone obtained a
State common law tort judgment against
the manufacturer, notwithstanding the
manufacturer’s compliance with the
NHTSA standard. Because most NHTSA
standards established by an FMVSS are
minimum standards, a State common
law tort cause of action that seeks to
impose a higher standard on motor
vehicle manufacturers will generally not
be preempted. However, if and when
such a conflict does exist—for example,
when the standard at issue is both a
minimum and a maximum standard—
the State common law tort cause of
action is impliedly preempted. See
Geier v. American Honda Motor Co.,
529 U.S. 861 (2000).
Pursuant to Executive Orders 13132
and 12988, NHTSA has considered
whether this proposed rule could or
should preempt State common law
causes of action. The agency’s ability to
announce its conclusion regarding the
preemptive effect of one of its rules
reduces the likelihood that preemption
will be an issue in any subsequent tort
litigation.
To this end, the agency has examined
the nature (e.g., the language and
structure of the regulatory text) and
objectives of this proposed rule and
finds that this proposal would affect
only minimum safety standards (and
only insofar as how NHTSA would
conduct compliance testing under those
standards). As such, NHTSA does not
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
intend that this proposed rule preempt
State tort law that would effectively
impose a higher standard on motor
vehicle manufacturers than that
established by the affected FMVSSs.
Establishment of a higher standard by
means of State tort law would not
conflict with the minimum standards
affected by this proposal. Without any
conflict, there could not be any implied
preemption of a State common law tort
cause of action. Aspects of this
proposed rule would amend 49 CFR
part 575, which is not a safety standard
but an information program to assist
consumers in making informed
decisions when purchasing tires. The
14-inch SRTT is used as part of the
determination of a tire’s treadwear
rating. This proposed change would not
impose any requirements on anyone.
D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
With respect to the review of the
promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988,
‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ (61 FR 4729; Feb.
7, 1996), requires that Executive
agencies make every reasonable effort to
ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly
specifies the preemptive effect; (2)
clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides
a clear legal standard for affected
conduct, while promoting simplification
and burden reduction; (4) clearly
specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5)
specifies whether administrative
proceedings are to be required before
parties file suit in court; (6) adequately
defines key terms; and (7) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. This document is consistent
with that requirement.
Pursuant to this order, NHTSA notes
as follows. The issue of preemption is
discussed above. NHTSA notes further
that there is no requirement that
individuals submit a petition for
reconsideration or pursue other
administrative proceedings before they
may file suit in court.
E. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19855, April
23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1)
Is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental, health, or safety risk that
the agency has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on
children. If the regulatory action meets
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
both criteria, the agency must evaluate
the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children,
and explain why the planned regulation
is preferable to other potentially
effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the agency.
This proposal is not economically
significant under E.O. 12866. Further, it
is part of a rulemaking that is not
expected to have a disproportionate
health or safety impact on children.
Consequently, no further analysis is
required under Executive Order 13045.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information
by a Federal agency unless the
collection displays a valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number. There is not any information
collection requirement associated with
this proposal.
G. Incorporation by Reference
Under regulations issued by the Office
of the Federal Register (1 CFR 51.5(a)),
an agency, as part of a proposed rule
that includes material incorporated by
reference, must summarize material that
is proposed to be incorporated by
reference and must discuss the ways the
material proposed to be incorporated by
reference is reasonably available to
interested parties or how the agency
worked to make materials available to
interested parties.
This proposed rule would incorporate
by reference ASTM F2493, ‘‘Standard
Specification for P225/60R16 97S Radial
Standard Reference Test Tire,’’ to
replace the existing incorporation by
reference of ASTM E1136, which is a
14-inch standard reference test tire. As
discussed earlier in this document, the
ASTM F2493 is a standard reference test
tire that is not used for general use, but,
as its name suggests, is used for testing.
The ASTM F2493 standard reference
test tire is primarily used for evaluating
surface friction (traction). The standard
reference test tire specifications include,
among other things, size, design,
construction, and materials
requirements.
This proposed rule would also update
an existing incorporation by reference of
ASTM E1337, ‘‘Standard Test Method
for Determining Longitudinal Peak
Braking Coefficient (PBC) of Paved
Surfaces Using Standard Reference Test
Tire.’’ ASTM E1337 is a standard test
method for evaluating peak braking
coefficient of a test surface using a
standard reference test tire using a
trailer towed by a vehicle. NHTSA uses
this method to evaluate test surfaces for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
conducting compliance test procedures
for its braking and electronic stability
control standards. The 2019 version of
ASTM E1337 specifies that the test may
be conducted using the 16-inch SRTT
and includes correlation data for
converting testing using the 14-inch
SRTT to the 16-inch SRTT and vice
versa.
Finally, this proposed rule would
update an existing incorporation by
reference of ASTM F1805, ‘‘Standard
Test Method for Single Wheel Driving
Traction in a Straight Line on Snowand Ice-Covered Surfaces.’’ ASTM
F1805 is a test method for measuring the
traction of tires on snow- or ice-covered
surfaces using an instrumented fourwheel drive vehicle with a single test
wheel capable of measure tire
performance. NHTSA uses ASTM F1805
as part of its criteria for determining
whether a tire may be considered a
‘‘snow tire’’ under its light vehicle tire
standards. The 2020 version of F1805
specifies that the test may be conducted
using the 16-inch SRTT and includes
correlation data for converting testing
using the 14-inch SRTT to the 16-inch
SRTT and vice versa.
The ASTM standards proposed for
incorporation by reference in this NPRM
are available for review at NHTSA’s
headquarters in Washington, DC, and
for purchase from ASTM International.
The ASTM standards that are currently
incorporated by reference (and which
would be replaced under this proposal)
are available for review at NHTSA or at
ASTM International’s online reading
room.20 If this proposal is adopted as a
final rule, NHTSA anticipates that
ASTM International would update its
reading room to include these
standards.
H. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to
evaluate and use existing voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless doing so would be
inconsistent with applicable law (e.g.,
the statutory provisions regarding
NHTSA’s vehicle safety authority) or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies.
Technical standards are defined by the
NTTAA as ‘‘performance-based or
design-specific technical specification
and related management systems
practices.’’ They pertain to ‘‘products
and processes, such as size, strength, or
20 https://www.astm.org/READINGLIBRARY/.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42771
technical performance of a product,
process or material.’’
Examples of organizations generally
regarded as voluntary consensus
standards bodies include ASTM
International, the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE), and the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI). If
NHTSA does not use available and
potentially applicable voluntary
consensus standards, we are required by
the Act to provide Congress, through
OMB, an explanation of the reasons for
not using such standards.
As discussed above, both standard
reference test tires are based on
specifications published by ASTM
International. Thus, this rulemaking
accords with the requirements of the
NTTAA.
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires Federal agencies to prepare a
written assessment of the costs, benefits,
and other effects of proposed or final
rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by
State, local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of
more than $100 million annually
(adjusted for inflation with base year of
1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA
rule for which a written statement is
needed, section 205 of the UMRA
generally requires the agency to identify
and consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective, or least
burdensome alternative that achieves
the objectives of the rule. The
provisions of section 205 do not apply
when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205
allows the agency to adopt an
alternative other than the least costly,
most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if the agency publishes with
the final rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted.
This proposal would not result in any
expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector of
more than $100 million, adjusted for
inflation.
J. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking
action for the purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The agency
has determined that implementation of
this action would not have any
significant impact on the quality of the
human environment.
K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation
assigns a regulation identifier number
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
42772
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in
the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information
Service Center publishes the Unified
Agenda in April and October of each
year. You may use the RIN contained in
the heading at the beginning of this
document to find this action in the
Unified Agenda.
571.121; 571.122; 571.126; 571.135;
571.136; 571.139; 571.500.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 571.105 by removing
paragraphs S6.9.2(a) and S6.9.2(b) and
adding paragraph S6.9.2 to read as
follows:
List of Subjects
*
49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Incorporation by reference,
Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Tires.
49 CFR Part 575
Consumer protection, Incorporation
by reference, Motor vehicle safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing,
NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
parts 571 and 575 as follows:
PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR
VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citation for part 571
of title 49 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at
49 CFR 1.95.
2. Amend § 571.5 by revising
paragraphs (d)(33) through (35) to read
as follows:
■
§ 571.5
Matter incorporated by reference.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(33) ASTM E1337–19, ‘‘Standard Test
Method for Determining Longitudinal
Peak Braking Coefficient (PBC) of Paved
Surfaces Using Standard Reference Test
Tire,’’ approved December 1, 2019, into
§§ 571.105; 571.121; 571.122; 571.126;
571.135; 571.136; 571.500.
(34) ASTM F1805–20, ‘‘Standard Test
Method for Single Wheel Driving
Traction in a Straight Line on Snowand Ice-Covered Surfaces,’’ approved
May 1, 2020, into § 571.139.
(35) ASTM F2493–19, ‘‘Standard
Specification for P225/60R16 97S Radial
Standard Reference Test Tire,’’
approved Oct. 1, 2019, into §§ 571.105;
§ 571.105 Standard No. 105; Hydraulic and
electric brake systems.
*
*
*
*
S6.9.2 (a) For vehicles with a GVWR
greater than 10,000 pounds, road tests
(excluding stability and control during
braking tests) are conducted on a 12foot-wide, level roadway, having a peak
friction coefficient of 1.02 when
measured using an ASTM F2493–19
(incorporated by reference, see § 571.5),
standard reference test tire, in
accordance with ASTM E1337–19
(incorporated by reference, see § 571.5),
at a speed of 40 mph, without water
delivery. Burnish stops are conducted
on any surface. The parking brake test
surface is clean, dry, smooth, Portland
cement concrete.
(b) For vehicles with a GVWR greater
than 10,000 pounds, stability and
control during braking tests are
conducted on a 500-foot-radius curved
roadway with a wet level surface having
a peak friction coefficient of 0.55 when
measured on a straight or curved section
of the curved roadway using an ASTM
F2493–19 standard reference tire, in
accordance with ASTM E1337–19 at a
speed of 40 mph, with water delivery.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Amend § 571.121 by revising
paragraphs S5.3.1.1 introductory text,
S5.3.6.1, S5.7.1, S6.1.7, Table I, Table II,
and Table IIa to read as follows:
§ 571.121
systems.
Standard No. 121; Air brake
*
*
*
*
*
S5.3.1.1 Stop the vehicle from 60
mph on a surface with a peak friction
coefficient of 1.02 with the vehicle
loaded as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
S5.3.6.1 Using a full-treadle brake
application for the duration of the stop,
stop the vehicle from 30 mph or 75
percent of the maximum drive-through
speed, whichever is less, on a 500-foot
radius curved roadway with a wet level
surface having a peak friction coefficient
of 0.55 when measured on a straight or
curved section of the curved roadway
using an ASTM F2493–19 (incorporated
by reference, see § 571.5) standard
reference tire, in accordance with ASTM
E1337–19 (incorporated by reference,
see § 571.5), at a speed of 40 mph, with
water delivery.
*
*
*
*
*
S5.7.1 Emergency brake system
performance. When stopped six times
for each combination of weight and
speed specified in S5.3.1.1, except for a
loaded truck tractor with an unbraked
control trailer, on a road surface having
a PFC of 1.02, with a single failure in
the service brake system of a part
designed to contain compressed air or
brake fluid (except failure of a common
valve, manifold, brake fluid housing, or
brake chamber housing), the vehicle
shall stop at least once in not more than
the distance specified in Column 5 of
Table II, measured from the point at
which movement of the service brake
control begins, except that a trucktractor tested at its unloaded vehicle
weight plus up to 1,500 pounds shall
stop at least once in not more than the
distance specified in Column 6 of Table
II. The stop shall be made without any
part of the vehicle leaving the roadway,
and with unlimited wheel lockup
permitted at any speed.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.1.7 Unless otherwise specified,
stopping tests are conducted on a 12foot wide level, straight roadway having
a peak friction coefficient of 1.02. For
road tests in S5.3, the vehicle is aligned
in the center of the roadway at the
beginning of a stop. Peak friction
coefficient is measured using an ASTM
F2493–19 standard reference test tire
(see ASTM F2493–19 (incorporated by
reference, see § 571.5)) in accordance
with ASTM E1337–19 (incorporated by
reference, see § 571.5), at a speed of 40
mph, without water delivery for the
surface with PFC of 1.02, and with
water delivery for the surface with PFC
of 0.55.
*
*
*
*
*
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE I—STOPPING SEQUENCE
Truck tractors
Burnish (S6.1.8) .......................................................................................................................................................
Stability and Control at GVWR (S5.3.6) ..................................................................................................................
Stability and Control at LLVW (S5.3.6) ...................................................................................................................
Manual Adjustment of Brakes .................................................................................................................................
60 mph Service Brake Stops at GVWR (S5.3.1) ....................................................................................................
60 mph Emergency Service Brake Stops at GVWR (S5.7.1) .................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
Single unit
trucks and
buses
1
N/A
5
N/A
2
3
42773
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
TABLE I—STOPPING SEQUENCE—Continued
Truck tractors
Parking Brake Test at GVWR (S5.6) ......................................................................................................................
Manual Adjustment of Brakes .................................................................................................................................
60 mph Service Brake Stops at LLVW (S5.3.1) .....................................................................................................
60 mph Emergency Service Brake Stops at LLVW (S5.7.1) ..................................................................................
Parking Brake Test at LLVW (S5.6) ........................................................................................................................
Final Inspection ........................................................................................................................................................
Single unit
trucks and
buses
6
7
8
9
10
11
4
6
7
8
9
10
TABLE II—STOPPING DISTANCE IN FEET
Vehicle speed in miles per
hour
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
.....................................
.....................................
.....................................
.....................................
.....................................
.....................................
.....................................
Service brake
(1)
(2)
70
96
125
158
195
236
280
(3)
78
106
138
175
216
261
310
Emergency brake
(4)
65
89
114
144
176
212
250
(5)
78
106
138
175
216
261
310
(6)
84
114
149
189
233
281
335
(7)
61
84
108
136
166
199
235
(8)
170
225
288
358
435
520
613
186
250
325
409
504
608
720
Note:
(1) Loaded and Unloaded Buses.
(2) Loaded Single-Unit Trucks.
(3) Loaded Tractors with Two Axles; or with Three Axles and a GVWR of 70,000 lbs. or less; or with Four or More Axles and a GVWR of
85,000 lbs. or less. Tested with an Unbraked Control Trailer.
(4) Loaded Tractors with Three Axles and a GVWR greater than 70,000 lbs.; or with Four or More Axles and a GVWR greater than 85,000 lbs.
Tested with an Unbraked Control Trailer.
(5) Unloaded Single-Unit Trucks.
(6) Unloaded Tractors (Bobtail).
(7) All Vehicles except Tractors, Loaded and Unloaded.
(8) Unloaded Tractors (Bobtail).
TABLE IIA—STOPPING DISTANCE IN FEET: OPTIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR: (1) THREE-AXLE TRACTORS WITH A FRONT
AXLE THAT HAS A GAWR OF 14,600 POUNDS OR LESS, AND WITH TWO REAR DRIVE AXLES THAT HAVE A COMBINED GAWR OF 45,000 POUNDS OR LESS, MANUFACTURED BEFORE AUGUST 1, 2011; AND (2) ALL OTHER TRACTORS MANUFACTURED BEFORE AUGUST 1, 2013
Service Brake
Emergency Brake
Vehicle speed in miles per hour
(1)
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
(2)
70
96
125
158
195
236
280
(3)
78
106
138
175
216
261
310
(4)
84
114
149
189
233
281
335
(5)
89
121
158
200
247
299
355
(6)
170
225
288
358
435
520
613
186
250
325
409
504
608
720
Note: (1) Loaded and unloaded buses; (2) Loaded single unit trucks; (3) Unloaded truck tractors and single unit trucks; (4) Loaded truck tractors tested with an unbraked control trailer; (5) All vehicles except truck tractors; (6) Unloaded truck tractors.
*
*
*
*
*
5. Amend § 571.122 by revising
paragraphs S6.1.1.1, S6.1.1.2, S6.1.1.3,
and S6.9.7.1(a) to read as follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
■
§ 571.122 Standard No. 122; Motorcycle
brake systems.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.1.1.1 High friction surface. A
high friction surface is used for all
dynamic brake tests excluding the ABS
tests where a low-friction surface is
specified. The high-friction surface test
area is a clean, dry and level surface,
with a gradient of ≤1 percent. The high-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
friction surface has a peak braking
coefficient (PBC) of 1.02.
S6.1.1.2 Low-friction surface. A lowfriction surface is used for ABS tests
where a low-friction surface is specified.
The low-friction surface test area is a
clean and level surface, which may be
wet or dry, with a gradient of ≤1
percent. The low-friction surface has a
PBC of ≤0.50.
S6.1.1.3 Measurement of PBC. The
PBC is measured using the ASTM
F2493–19 standard reference test tire, in
accordance with ASTM E1337–19, at a
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
speed of 64 km/h (both publications
incorporated by reference; see § 571.5).
*
*
*
*
*
S6.9.7.1 * * *
(a) Test surfaces. A low friction
surface immediately followed by a high
friction surface with a PBC ≥0.90.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Amend § 571.126 by revising
paragraph S6.2.2 to read as follows:
§ 571.126 Standard No. 126; Electronic
stability control systems for light vehicles.
*
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
*
*
05AUP1
*
*
42774
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
S6.2.2 The road test surface must
produce a peak friction coefficient (PFC)
of 1.02 when measured using an ASTM
F2493–19 (incorporated by reference,
see § 571.5) standard reference test tire,
in accordance with ASTM E1337–19
(incorporated by reference, see § 571.5)
at a speed of 64.4 km/h (40 mph),
without water delivery.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. Amend § 571.135 by revising
paragraphs S6.2.1, S7.4.3(f), S7.5.2(f),
S7.6.2(f), S7.7.3(f), S7.8.2(f), S7.9.2(f),
S7.10.3(e), and S7.11.3(f) to read as
follows:
§ 571.135 Standard No. 135; Light vehicle
brake systems.
*
*
*
*
S6.2.1 Unless otherwise specified,
the road test surface produces a peak
friction coefficient (PFC) of 1.02 when
measured using an ASTM F2493–19
(incorporated by reference, see § 571.5)
standard reference test tire, in
accordance with ASTM E1337–19
(incorporated by reference, see § 571.5),
at a speed of 64.4 km/h (40 mph),
without water delivery.
*
*
*
*
*
S7.4.3 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of at least 1.02.
*
*
*
*
*
S7.5.2 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
*
*
*
*
*
S7.6.2 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
*
*
*
*
*
S7.7.3 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
*
*
*
*
*
S7.8.2 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
*
*
*
*
*
S7.9.2 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
*
*
*
*
*
S7.10.3 * * *
(e) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
*
*
*
*
*
S7.11.3 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 8. Amend § 571.136 by revising
paragraph S6.2.2 to read as follows:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
*
§ 571.136 Standard No. 136; Electronic
stability control systems for heavy vehicles.
*
*
*
*
*
S6.2.2 The road test surface
produces a peak friction coefficient
(PFC) of 1.02 when measured using an
ASTM F2493–19 standard reference test
tire, in accordance with ASTM E1337–
19, at a speed of 64.4 km/h (40 mph),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
without water delivery (both documents
incorporated by reference, see § 571.5).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. Amend § 571.139 by revising the
definition of ‘‘Snow tire’’ in S3 to read
as follows:
§ 571.139 Standard No. 139; New
pneumatic radial tires for light vehicles.
*
*
*
*
*
S3 * * *
Snow tire means a tire that attains a
traction index equal to or greater than
112, compared to the ASTM F2493–19
(incorporated by reference, see § 571.5)
Standard Reference Test Tire when
using the snow traction test on the
medium pack snow surface as described
in ASTM F1805–20 (incorporated by
reference, see § 571.5), and that is
marked with an Alpine Symbol
specified in S5.5(i) on at least one
sidewall.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. Amend § 571.500 by revising
paragraph S6.2.1 to read as follows:
§ 571.500
vehicles.
Standard No. 500; Low-speed
*
*
*
*
*
S6.2.1 Pavement friction. Unless
otherwise specified, the road test
surface produces a peak friction
coefficient (PFC) of 1.02 when measured
using a standard reference test tire that
meets the specifications of ASTM
F2493–19, in accordance with ASTM
E1337–19, at a speed of 64.4 km/h (40.0
mph), without water delivery (both
incorporated by reference; see § 571.5).
*
*
*
*
*
PART 575—CONSUMER
INFORMATION
11. The authority citation for part 575
of title 49 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32302, 32304A,
30111, 30115, 30117, 30123, 30166, 30181,
30182, 30183, and 32908, Pub. L. 104–414,
114 Stat. 1800, Pub. L. 109–59, 119 Stat.
1144, Pub. L. 110–140, 121 Stat. 1492, 15
U.S.C. 1232(g); delegation of authority at 49
CFR 1.95.
12. Amend § 575.3 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
■
§ 575.3
Matter incorporated by reference.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) ASTM International (ASTM), 100
Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, 610–
832–9500, https://www.astm.org/.
(1) ASTM E 501–08 (‘‘ASTM E 501’’),
‘‘Standard Specification for Standard
Rib Tire for Pavement Skid-Resistance
Tests’’ (June 2008), IBR approved for
§§ 575.104 and 575.106.
(2) ASTM F2493–19 (‘‘ASTM
F2493’’), ‘‘Standard Specification for
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
P225/60R16 97S Radial Standard
Reference Test Tire,’’ (approved Oct. 1,
2019), IBR approved for § 575.104.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 13. Amend § 575.104 by revising
paragraphs (e)(2)(viii) introductory text,
(e)(2)(viii)(A) through (E), and
(e)(2)(ix)(A)(2), the note to paragraph
(e)(2)(ix)(C), and paragraph (e)(2)(ix)(F)
to read as follows:
§ 575.104 Uniform tire quality grading
standards.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(viii) Drive the convoy on the test
roadway for 16 circuits (approximately
6,400 miles).
(A) After every circuit (approximately
400 miles), rotate each vehicle’s tires by
moving each front tire to the same side
of the rear axle and each rear tire to the
opposite side of the front axle. Visually
inspect each tire for treadwear
anomalies.
(B) After every second circuit
(approximately 800 miles), rotate the
vehicles in the convoy by moving the
last vehicle to the lead position. Do not
rotate driver positions within the
convoy. In four-car convoys, vehicle one
shall become vehicle two, vehicle two
shall become vehicle three, vehicle
three shall become vehicle four, and
vehicle four shall become vehicle one.
(C) After every second circuit
(approximately 800 miles), if necessary,
adjust wheel alignment to the midpoint
of the vehicle manufacturer’s
specification, unless adjustment to the
midpoint is not recommended by the
manufacturer; in that case, adjust the
alignment to the manufacturer’s
recommended setting. In all cases, the
setting is within the tolerance specified
by the manufacturer of the alignment
machine.
(D) After every second circuit
(approximately 800 miles), if
determining the projected mileage by
the 9-point method set forth in
paragraph (e)(2)(ix)(A)(1) of this section,
measure the average tread depth of each
tire following the procedure set forth in
paragraph (e)(2)(vi) of this section.
(E) After every fourth circuit
(approximately 1,600 miles), move the
complete set of four tires to the
following vehicle. Move the tires on the
last vehicle to the lead vehicle. In
moving the tires, rotate them as set forth
in paragraph (e)(2)(viii)(A) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(ix) * * *
(A) * * *
(2) Two-point arithmetical method. (i)
For each course monitoring and
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 148 / Thursday, August 5, 2021 / Proposed Rules
candidate tire in the convoy, using the
average tread depth measurements
obtained in accordance with paragraphs
(e)(2)(vi) and (e)(2)(viii)(F) of this
section and the corresponding mileages
as data points, determine the slope (m)
of the tire’s wear in mils of tread depth
per 1,000 miles by the following
formula:
m
= 1000
(Yl -Yo)
(Xl _ Xo)
Where:
Yo = average tread depth after break-in, mils.
p
=
Y1 = average tread depth after 16 circuits
(approximately 6,400 miles), mils.
Xo = 0 miles (after break-in).
X1 = Total mileage of travel after 16 circuits
(approximately 6,400 miles).
(ii) This slope (m) will be negative in
value. The tire’s wear rate is defined as
the slope (m) expressed in mils per
1,000 miles.
*
*
*
*
*
(C) * * *
Note to paragraph (e)(2)(ix)(C): The base
wear rate for the course monitoring tires
(CMTs) will be obtained by the Government
by running the tire specified in ASTM F2493
(incorporated by reference, see § 575.3)
42775
course monitoring tires for 16 circuits over
the San Angelo, Texas, UTQGS test route 4
times per year, then using the average wear
rate from the last 4 quarterly CMT tests for
the base course wear rate calculation. Each
new base course wear rate will be published
in Docket No. NHTSA–2001–9395. The
course monitoring tires used in a test convoy
must be no more than one-year-old at the
commencement of the test and must be used
within four months after removal from
storage.
*
*
*
*
*
(F) Compute the grade (P) of the of the
NHTSA nominal treadwear value for
each candidate tire by using the
following formula:
Projected mileage x base course wear raten
304
Where base course wear raten = new
base course wear rate, i.e., average
treadwear of the last 4 quarterly course
monitoring tire tests conducted by
NHTSA.
Round off the percentage to the
nearest lower 20-point increment.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.
Steven S. Cliff,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021–15361 Filed 8–4–21; 8:45 am]
EP05AU21.040
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Aug 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\05AUP1.SGM
05AUP1
EP05AU21.039
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 148 (Thursday, August 5, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42762-42775]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15361]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 571 and 575
[Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0067]
RIN 2127-AL92
Standard Reference Test Tire
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
[[Page 42763]]
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes amendments to several Federal motor
vehicle safety standards and consumer information regulations to update
the standard reference test tire (SRTT) used therein. The SRTT is used
in those standards and regulations as a baseline tire to rate tire
treadwear, define snow tires based on traction performance, and
evaluate pavement surface friction. This proposed rule is necessary
because the only manufacturer of the currently referenced SRTT ceased
production of the tire. Referencing a new SRTT ensures the availability
of a test tire for testing purposes.
DATES: Submit comments on or before September 7, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments electronically to the docket
identified in the heading of this document by visiting the following
website:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Alternatively, you can file comments using the following methods:
Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is
there to help you, please call (202) 366-9826 before coming.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the
docket number identified in the heading of this document.
Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible
through www.dot.gov/privacy. In order to facilitate comment tracking
and response, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the
name of their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely
comments will be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments
containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact the
agency for alternate submission instructions.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You may contact Hisham Mohamed, Office
of Crash Avoidance Standards, by telephone at (202) 366-0307 or David
Jasinski, Office of the Chief Counsel, by telephone at (202) 366-2992.
The mailing address of both of these officials is: National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This rulemaking addresses the standard reference test tire (SRTT)
manufactured according to specifications set forth in an ASTM
International standard, E1136, ``Standard Specification for P195/75R14
Radial Standard Reference Test Tire'' (14-inch SRTT). The 14-inch SRTT
is a size P195/75R14 all-season steel-belted radial tire. The
dimensions, weight, materials, and other physical properties of the
tire are specified in E1136. The tire is not intended for general use,
but as the name indicates, is used for testing.
The 14-inch SRTT was first introduced in the 1980s. The 14-inch
SRTT was manufactured by one company, Michelin North America, Inc
(Michelin) and was sold under its Uniroyal brand. NHTSA uses the 14-
inch SRTT to evaluate tire treadwear performance \1\ by comparing a
candidate tire's performance to the performance of the SRTT in a
particular performance test. NHTSA also uses the 14-inch SRTT to
evaluate test surface friction \2\ for safety standards relating to
braking because the narrow specifications for the tire (size, component
materials, etc.) ensure consistent, repeatable performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 49 CFR 575.104.
\2\ 49 CFR 571.105, 571.121, 571.122, 571.126, 571.135, 571.136,
571.139, 571.500.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA first incorporated the 14-inch SRTT into the Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) in a 1995 rule adopting FMVSS No.
135, the light vehicle braking standard.\3\ Previously, NHTSA had used
skid number to define the road test surface in the light vehicle
braking test. Testing a surface to determine skid number involved using
a locked wheel. However, modern anti-lock brake systems (ABS) are
designed to achieve maximum friction prior to a wheel becoming locked
and the tire skidding. An anti-lock brake system prevents wheel lockup
by modulating a vehicle's brakes at a point just before the wheels
would lock up. Consequently, in the 1995 final rule, NHTSA adopted ASTM
method E1337, ``Standard Test Method for Determining Longitudinal Peak
Braking Coefficient (PBC) of Paved Surfaces Using Standard Reference
Test Tire,'' as the means for evaluating test surfaces.\4\ ASTM E1337
measures the peak braking force prior to wheel lockup, which
corresponds to the behavior of an anti-lock brake system. ASTM E1337
specifies the use of the E1136 SRTT in order to ensure that variability
in tire size, material, or construction does not affect the evaluation
of test surfaces.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 60 FR 6411, 6415-17 (Feb. 2, 1995).
\4\ Another reason for adopting the peak braking force related
to the variability associated with determining skid number. That
matter was discussed in more detail in NHTSA's earlier proposals to
require heavy vehicles to be equipped with anti-lock brake systems.
See 49 FR 20465 (May 14, 1984); 49 FR 28962 (July 17, 1984).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over time, the evaluation of a test surface using the ASTM E1337
test method and the E1136 SRTT was incorporated into the heavy vehicle
braking standards (FMVSS Nos. 105 and 121), the light and heavy vehicle
electronic stability control standards (FMVSS Nos. 126 and 136), the
motorcycle braking standard (FMVSS No. 122), and the low-speed vehicle
standard (FMVSS No. 500).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ASTM E1337 is also incorporated by reference into 49 CFR
575.106, which are the provisions related to a new tire consumer
information program. However, the test procedures in 49 CFR 575.106
are not currently used pending publication of a proposed and final
rule establishing the remaining aspects of the consumer information
program. See 75 FR 15893 (Mar. 30, 2010). Therefore, this proposal
does not address 49 CFR 575.106. In a proposal implementing the
remaining aspects of that tire consumer information program, NHTSA
would address the issues discussed in this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The use of the 14-inch SRTT is also incorporated into the
definition of a ``snow tire'' in FMVSS No. 139. Specifically, a ``snow
tire'' is defined as a tire that attains a traction index greater than
or equal to 110 compared to the 14-inch SRTT when using the ASTM F1805
snow traction test. The ASTM F1805 snow traction test measures the
driving traction of tires while traveling in a
[[Page 42764]]
straight line on snow- and ice-covered surfaces. Tires that meet the
definition of ``snow tires'' are subject to less stringent performance
test requirements compared to other tires subject to FMVSS No. 139.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 71 FR 877, 880 (Jan. 6, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SRTT is also used as part of the Uniform Tire Quality Grading
Standards (UTQGS), an information program to assist consumers in making
informed decisions when purchasing tires. The UTQGS apply to passenger
car tires and require motor vehicle and tire manufacturers and tire
brand name owners to provide consumers with information about their
tires' relative performance regarding treadwear, traction, and
temperature resistance.
The 14-inch SRTT is used as part of the determination of a tire's
UTQG treadwear rating. As part of the UTQG test procedures, treadwear
is measured by running the tires being tested (called candidate tires)
in convoys over a 400-mile course of public roads near San Angelo,
Texas. The performance of tires over this course can change daily due
to variability in the road surface, temperature, humidity, and
precipitation. To compensate for changes in condition of the test
course, candidate tires are tested concurrently with course monitoring
tires (CMTs).
NHTSA has used the 14-inch SRTT as the exclusive CMT since 1991.
CMTs must be not more than one year old at the time of commencement of
the test and must be used within two months from being removed from
storage in order to prevent variability resulting from aging of the
CMT. The performance of the CMT is used to determine the base course
wear rate (BCWR) by running four-vehicle convoys equipped with 16 CMTs
for 6,400 miles over the test course four times per year. \7\ The wear
rate of the CMT over the prior four quarterly CMT test runs are
averaged to calculate the BCWR, which is published in Docket No. NHTSA-
2001-9395. The BCWR is used to determine a course severity adjustment
factor, which is applied to the comparison between the candidate tires
and CMTs to determine a tire's rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 65 FR 33481 (May 24, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Proposal To Replace 14-Inch SRTT With 16-Inch SRTT
This proposal would amend NHTSA's safety standards and regulations
to no longer reference the 14-inch SRTT. Because of technological
advancements in the development of tires and the general trend of
increasing rim diameter sizes since the 1980s, the size and materials
of the 14-inch SRTT are no longer representative of modern tires sold
in the U.S. Further, Michelin has ceased production of the 14-inch SRTT
because it has become difficult for Michelin to obtain the materials
necessary to manufacture the SRTT.\8\ Thus, NHTSA seeks to reference a
different standard reference test tire in the agency's safety standards
and regulations and to transition seamlessly to the new tire in the
agency's compliance and consumer information test programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See ``Discontinued Tire Will Lead to ASTM Standard Changes''
(July 30, 2015), available at https://www.astm.org/cms/drupal-7.51/newsroom/discontinued-tire-will-lead-astm-standard-changes (last
accessed April 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASTM International has developed an updated specification for an
SRTT designated F2493 (16-inch SRTT). The 16-inch SRTT is size P225/
60R16. The 16-inch SRTT is considered to be more representative of
current tires because of its larger size and new material and design
features that lead to traction that is more typical of modern passenger
car tires.\9\ To the best of NHTSA's knowledge, the 16-inch SRTT is
manufactured only by Michelin and sold under its Uniroyal brand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See ``New ASTM Specification Presents Requirements for
Standard Reference Test Tire'' (April 1, 2007), available at https://www.astm.org/cms/drupal-7.51/newsroom/new-astm-specification-presents-requirements-standard-reference-test-tire (last accessed
April 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To reference an SRTT that is more representative of tires on the
road today, and in consideration of Michelin's decision to cease
production of the 14-inch SRTT, NHTSA has determined that replacing the
14-inch SRTT in its regulations is warranted. The only suitable
replacement for the 14-inch SRTT that has been suggested to NHTSA is
the 16-inch SRTT. However, because the 16-inch SRTT is a larger size
and uses more modern design and materials, it is likely that the 16-
inch SRTT will not perform identically to the 14-inch SRTT. Therefore,
NHTSA has been cooperating with Transport Canada, Natural Resources
Canada, representatives of ASTM International committees F09 on tires
and E17 on vehicle-pavement systems, the U.S. Tire Manufacturers
Association (including Michelin, currently the sole manufacturer of
SRTTs), and the Rubber Association of Canada to conduct testing to
determine the consequences of replacing the 14-inch SRTT with the 16-
inch SRTT. The results of the testing by these entities, in addition to
NHTSA's own testing, have substantially contributed to this proposal to
replace the 14-inch SRTT with the 16-inch SRTT.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2020-0067.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Proposed FMVSS Amendments
1. Surface Friction Measurement
As discussed above, other than for defining a ``snow tire,'' NHTSA
uses the SRTT in the FMVSSs to define the surface coefficient of
friction for the test surface for braking and electronic stability
control (ESC) standards. The friction of the test surface is measured
by the peak braking force prior to wheel lockup, which is referred to
as a peak friction coefficient (PFC) or peak braking coefficient (PBC).
For the purpose of this preamble, NHTSA uses the term peak friction
coefficient or PFC, but the terms are used interchangeably in the
FMVSS.
In the FMVSS, the peak friction coefficient of a surface is
determined using the 1990 version of ASTM E1337 test method. The ASTM
E1337 test method involves mounting the SRTT to a test trailer,
bringing the trailer to a test speed of 40 mph (64 km/h), and applying
the brake to produce the maximum braking force prior to wheel lockup.
When NHTSA was informed that production of the 14-inch SRTT was to
be discontinued, NHTSA evaluated the 16-inch SRTT to determine whether
it would be a suitable replacement. NHTSA carefully considered the
effect of the 16-inch SRTT on the determination of PFC. NHTSA was
concerned that the use of the 16-inch SRTT without further changes to
the FMVSSs would increase the stringency of the braking and ESC FMVSSs.
The reason for this was that the different materials used in the 16-
inch SRTT and the increased size of the tire would result in the 16-
inch SRTT having better traction performance than the 14-inch SRTT. If
the 16-inch SRTT has improved traction performance relative to the 14-
inch SRTT, then the same surface would have a higher PFC when tested
with the 16-inch SRTT. Alternatively stated, obtaining an identical PFC
value using the 16-inch SRTT would require a road surface with lower
friction. Testing braking systems using stopping distance on road
surfaces with lower friction would require improved braking performance
to stop in the same distance, which is not an outcome intended by this
rulemaking. Consequently, NHTSA sought a conversion factor to evaluate
PFC of a test surface using the 16-inch SRTT without altering the
severity of any braking or ESC FMVSSs.
[[Page 42765]]
Initial testing confirmed the assumption that using the 16-inch
SRTT resulted in a test surface having a higher PFC than when evaluated
using the 14-inch SRTT. Transportation Research Center, Inc. (TRC)
conducted initial testing in support of the ASTM committee evaluating
this issue (the E17.21 committee).\11\ Testing was conducted on 15
different surfaces of varying friction. The evaluation of a dry test
surface (e.g., 0.9 PFC using the 14-inch SRTT) using the 16-inch SRTT
resulted in a PFC over 15 percent higher than the PFC derived using the
14-inch SRTT. However, testing on a low friction surface (0.5 PFC using
the 14-inch SRTT) showed that the PFC derived using the 16-inch SRTT
and the 14-inch SRTT was similar.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See docket No. NHTSA-2020-0067.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the difference in performance between the 16-inch SRTT and
the 14-inch SRTT was not consistent for all levels of surface friction,
something more than a simple multiplier is necessary to correlate
performance between the two tires. ASTM International has developed
such a formula. That formula is included in the 2019 update to ASTM
E1337, which NHTSA is proposing to incorporate by reference into the
FMVSSs, in place of the 1990 version of E1337 currently referenced.
NHTSA has used the formula in the 2019 version of E1337 to derive PFC
value for all of the FMVSSs. Those values are listed in the table
below.
Each value derived using the formula was rounded to the hundredths
position, rounding up if necessary. This ensures that the updated FMVSS
test surface PFC specification will be no more stringent as a result of
this proposed amendment than it is now, consistent with NHTSA's intent
in this rulemaking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PFC value using PFC value using
FMVSS section 14-inch SRTT 16-inch SRTT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMVSS No. 105 S6.9.2(a) (high 0.9 1.02
friction testing)..................
FMVSS No. 105 S6.9.2(b) (low 0.5 0.55
friction testing)..................
FMVSS No. 121 S5.3.1.1, S5.7.1, 0.9 1.02
S6.1.7 (high friction testing) \12\
FMVSS No. 121 S5.3.6.1, S6.1.7 (low 0.5 0.55
friction testing)..................
FMVSS No. 122 S6.1.1.1 (high 0.9 1.02
friction testing)..................
FMVSS No. 122 S6.1.1.2 (low friction <=0.45 <=0.50
testing)...........................
FMVSS No. 122 S6.9.7.1.............. >=0.8 >=0.90
FMVSS No. 126 S6.2.2................ 0.9 1.02
FMVSS No. 135 S6.2.1, S7.4.3, 0.9 1.02
S7.5.2, S7.6.2, S7.7.3, S7.8.2,
S7.9.2, S7.10.3, S7.11.3...........
FMVSS No. 136....................... 0.9 1.02
FMVSS No. 500 \13\.................. 0.9 1.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA commissioned confirmatory testing using the 16-inch SRTT to
verify that the PFC values discussed above are equivalent to the PFC
values in the FMVSSs derived using the 14-inch SRTT. NHTSA has
contracted with TRC to conduct this testing on five different test
surfaces (wet ceramic, wet jennite, wet asphalt, dry asphalt, and dry
broomed concrete). These test surfaces range from high to low PFC
values. For each test surface, 10 of each of the 14-inch SRTT and the
16-inch SRTT were each tested 3 times with 10 stops per test, for a
total of 300 tests for each size SRTT on each test surface. A final
report summarizing the results has been placed in the docket identified
at the beginning of this NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ NHTSA is also proposing to revise Tables I, II, and IIA in
FMVSS No. 121 to eliminate the redundant references to PFC values in
those tables. In place of PFC values, NHTSA is proposing to include
in Table I (Stopping Sequence) references to the sections in which
the various procedures are set forth, which is a more helpful
reference.
\13\ Although FMVSS No. 500 specifies a PFC value for the test
surface, the test surface is only used to verify the vehicle's
maximum speed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Snow Tire Definition
Presently, for a manufacturer to designate a tire as a ``snow
tire,'' the tire must attain a traction index equal to or greater than
110 compared to the 14-inch SRTT when tested using the snow traction
test in the 2000 version of ASTM F1805. The ASTM F09 committee on tires
commissioned a study to determine the feasibility of replacing the 14-
inch SRTT with the 16-inch SRTT in the determination of whether a tire
meets the definition of ``snow tire.'' This study was funded by the
United States Tire Manufacturers Association (USTMA).
The study consisted of testing of traction during the winter test
seasons of 2016, 2017, and 2018 to develop a method to correlate
results of tests conducted using the 16-inch SRTT with those conducted
using the 14-inch SRTT. ASTM International has published a technical
report documenting this work.\14\ ASTM International determined that a
correlation factor of 0.9876 was appropriate, meaning that a tire that
attained a rating of 110 when tested using the 14-inch SRTT correlated
to a rating of 111.4 or 111.5 when tested using the 16-inch SRTT,
depending on the number of significant digits considered. Recent
guidance issued by the USTMA, a trade association consisting of
companies that manufacture tires in the United States, recommends a
minimum traction index of 112 using the 16-inch SRTT.\15\ Accordingly,
NHTSA is proposing to amend the definition of ``snow tire'' in FMVSS
No. 139 to specify that a snow tire is a tire that attains a traction
index of 112 when tested using the updated F1895 test method using the
16-inch SRTT. This proposal is consistent with the guidance issued by
USTMA, which NHTSA believes reflects a consensus within the tire
industry on the appropriate traction index for use in determining what
qualifies as a ``snow tire.'' NHTSA seeks comment on this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Available at https://www.astm.org/COMMIT/2019_04_10_E1136%20to%20F2493%20transition%20for%20ASTMF1805.pdf
(last accessed April 13, 2021).
\15\ See https://www.ustires.org/sites/default/files/USTMA_TISB_37_0.pdf (last accessed April 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, after reviewing this information from the USTMA, NHTSA
determined that additional clarification was necessary to the
definition of a ``snow tire'' in FMVSS No. 139. The latest (2020)
version of ASTM F1805 defines the standard test procedure for measuring
traction on ``snow'' and ``ice'' surfaces. However, there are multiple
surface types in both the ``snow'' and ``ice'' categories. They include
soft pack (new) snow, medium pack snow, medium hard pack snow, hard
pack snow, ice--wet, and ice--dry.\16\ The definition of ``snow tire''
in FMVSS No.
[[Page 42766]]
139 does not specify the surface type specified within ASTM F1805 for
testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The surface types are defined in the text of ASTM F1805.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA interprets that the ``medium pack snow'' condition was
intended for use by manufacturers for marketing tires as ``snow
tires.'' NHTSA seeks comment on whether this assumption is correct. It
is the surface type specified for severe snow tires in UNECE Regulation
No. 117 for determining when use of the Alpine or Three-Peak Mountain
Snowflake marking that indicates that a tire meets the requirements for
use in severe snow conditions. Based upon the research on the SRTT, the
2020 revision of ASTM F1805 contains a revised tractive coefficient
range for ``medium pack snow'' using the 14-inch SRTT from 0.25-0.41 to
0.25-0.38 and adds a tractive coefficient range for ``medium pack
snow'' using the 16-inch SRTT of 0.23-0.38.
Based on the research by ASTM International and USTMA's recent
guidance, NHTSA is proposing to update the definition of a ``snow
tire'': (1) To replace the reference to the 14-inch SRTT with the 16-
inch SRTT and to change the minimum traction index in order to meet the
definition of a ``snow tire'' from 110 to 112 using this tire; (2) to
specify that this traction index is obtained when tested on the
``medium pack snow'' surface, and (3) to update the incorporation by
reference of ASTM F1805 from the 2000 version to the 2020 version,
which is the latest version. ASTM F1805-20 incorporates the research
discussed above. NHTSA is not aware of other research on equivalent
performance of the 14-inch SRTT and 16-inch SRTT on snow-covered
surfaces other than the testing by ASTM International.
B. Proposed UTQGS Amendments
In anticipation of Michelin's decision to cease production of the
14-inch SRTT, NHTSA began including testing of the 16-inch SRTT as part
of its BCWR determination. Since the second quarter of 2016, NHTSA has
been duplicating BCWR testing using both the 14-inch SRTT and the 16-
inch SRTT. NHTSA has shared some data from this testing with its
testing partners (named at the end of Section I of this preamble) in
order to develop options that could be implemented once production of
the 14-inch SRTT has ended. Four options have been considered:
1. Use the research data to develop a correlation formula between
the 14-inch SRTT and the 16-inch SRTT. While this would allow future
testing and rating to be based on either SRTT, it was likely to be the
most resource-intensive to develop and validate a formula.
2. Establish an effective date for the 16-inch SRTT and begin
publishing the quarterly BCWR after that date using four quarters of
data using that tire. After two quarters of testing it was apparent
that this was likely to result in a shift in the BCWR. However, large
shifts in BCWR have occurred in the past, such as when repaving was
done on portions of the route.
3. Allow a transition period in which NHTSA would publish BCWR
rates for both SRTTs, allowing manufacturers to choose when to shift
within that period.
4. Establish an effective date to begin quarterly testing with the
16-inch SRTT, but continue to calculate the BCWR rate using the prior
quarterly testing results used to calculate prior BCWR rates. The first
quarter with official testing using the 16-inch SRTT CMT would result
in a BCWR rate calculated from the average of those results and the
results of the previous three quarters testing using the 14-inch SRTT
CMT, the second quarter would average two quarters with the 16-inch
SRTT CMT and 2 quarters with the 14-inch SRTT CMT, and so on.
In 2017, Michelin informed NHTSA that the test results from the
first two quarters of testing were within the normal variability seen
for BCWR.\17\ Michelin believed that NHTSA could develop an entirely
new formula for determining BCWR, but believed that such a formula may
not be able to be developed prior to the end of production of 14-inch
SRTT. Instead, Michelin recommended adding a new conversion factor to
the existing formula derived from the ratio of the BCWR from the 14-
inch SRTT CMT to the BCWR of the 16-inch SRTT CMT measured over a
specific number of quarters of testing. Michelin recommended that this
factor be based on at least six quarters of testing, which was all the
testing that was available at the time of Michelin's recommendation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Michelin presentation; UTQG Wear Change from 14'' TO 16''
SRTT First Two Test Quarters. See docket No. NHTSA-2020-0067.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA now has 14 consecutive quarters of testing data. Table 1
summarizes the quarterly BCWR values determined by NHTSA since the
first quarter of 2017. As shown in Table 1, NHTSA has determined BCWR
reference values for the 16-inch SRTT. Table 1 also shows BCWR rates
for the 16-inch SRTT beginning in Q2 2017 after four quarters of BCWR
values were obtained. Table 1 also shows a conversion factor based on
the ratio of the BCWR using the 14-inch SRTT to the BCWR using the 16-
inch SRTT measured over all available quarters of testing.
Table 1--Quarterly BCWR Data Since April 2016
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Derived
14-inch SRTT BCWR 16-inch SRTT BCWR Quarterly Theoretical 16- conversion factor
data data published BCWR inch SRTT BCWR based on prior
rate rate six quarters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January-March 2017....................................... 8.090 5.349 9.059 ................. .................
April-June 2017.......................................... 7.556 5.952 8.573 ................. .................
July-September 2017...................................... 9.640 6.189 8.692 ................. .................
October-December 2017.................................... 8.932 6.578 8.555 6.017 .................
January-March 2018....................................... 7.481 5.731 8.402 6.113 .................
April-June 2018.......................................... 8.253 6.074 8.577 6.143 1.392
July-September 2018...................................... 9.648 6.467 8.579 6.213 1.393
October-December 2018.................................... 8.867 6.602 8.562 6.219 1.403
January-March 2019....................................... 6.555 5.999 8.331 6.286 1.328
April-June 2019.......................................... 8.242 5.506 8.328 6.144 1.348
July-September 2019...................................... 7.243 5.656 7.727 5.941 1.344
October-December 2019.................................... 7.237 6.206 7.319 5.842 1.312
January-March 2020....................................... 7.695 5.259 7.604 5.657 1.301
April-June 2020.......................................... 6.719 5.616 7.224 5.684 1.276
[[Page 42767]]
July-September 2020...................................... 6.983 6.856 7.159 5.984 1.257
October-December 2020.................................... 8.122 6.886 7.380 6.154 1.206
January-March 2021....................................... 7.228 4.687 7.263 6.011 1.239
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The conversion factor listed in the last column of Table 1 is
determined by dividing the average of six quarters of BCWR testing with
the 14-inch SRTT by the average of the same six quarters of BCWR with
the 16-inch SRTT. The conversion factor is similar for all quarters
currently available. NHTSA requests comments on how the new conversion
factor should be selected from among the available quarters of data.
For example, NHTSA could use the last six (or some other number) of
quarters of data, or all data available to determine the conversion
factor. NHTSA requests comments on which of these possible conversion
factors NHTSA could use and why.
For this NPRM, NHTSA is basing the adjustment on the average of all
17 consecutive quarters of available data. The average BCWR wear rate
using the 14-inch SRTT is 7.911. The average BCWR wear rate using the
16-inch SRTT is 5.942. Dividing 7.911 by 5.977 results in a conversion
factor of 1.324. Based upon this new conversion factor, the new formula
for the treadwear grade, assuming the decision was to use the most
recent quarter's conversion factor, would be: \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The first equation definition P is set forth in 49 CFR
57.104(e)(2)(ix)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP05AU21.038
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
NHTSA does not believe the calculation of projected mileage as used
in this formula also requires adjustment, as the calculation takes into
consideration the actual measurement of the CMT used during the test of
the candidate tire being evaluated.
NHTSA is also proposing to modify language in the treadwear test
procedure in Sec. 575.104 to reference the total distance and schedule
of events in terms of circuits completed rather than mileage. This
proposed change is intended to allow testing to be more flexible in the
vent of route changes or other unforeseen circumstances. With the added
flexibility of these changes, NHTSA believes that it is preferable to
use the actual mileage of the completed circuit in the calculation of
the wear rate rather than the estimated 400 miles per circuit. NHTSA
believes that this would ensure that the wear rate reflects the actual
mileage covered if the completed 16 circuits is not exactly 6,400
miles. NHTSA seeks comment on these proposed changes and any potential
effects they may have on the testing process or data integrity.
NHTSA also seeks comment on the specification in the note to Sec.
575.104(e)(2)(ix)(C) that the CMT must
[[Page 42768]]
be no more than one year old at the commencement of testing and that it
must be used within two months after removal from storage. NHTSA lacks
facilities to store tires in a climate-controlled environment at its
testing facility in San Angelo, Texas. Therefore, because of the time
limitations on the use of the CMT in the BCWR testing, NHTSA only
purchases CMTs on a quarterly basis depending on funding availability
and conducts BCWR testing as soon as feasible after receiving a
shipment of CMTs. Lack of funding sometimes requires NHTSA to delay CMT
purchases, and sometimes when NHTSA purchases CMTs, supplies may be
limited, meaning that NHTSA is required to wait weeks or months before
receiving CMTs for testing. To increase NHTSA's flexibility in
purchasing and testing CMTs, NHTSA is considering lengthening the
amount of time tires may be removed from storage to four months, so
that NHTSA can purchase CMTs in advance and store them in its San
Angelo facility. NHTSA also requests comment on whether the word
``storage'' is sufficiently well defined and, if not, how NHTSA could
define ``storage'' more clearly to ensure tires are stored in such a
way that would minimize testing variability without providing
inflexible limitations on NHTSA's use of the SRTT. NHTSA requests
comment on this proposed change.
C. Summary
Based on the foregoing, NHTSA has tentatively concluded that the
best course of action in response to Michelin's determination to cease
production of the 14-inch SRTT is to replace the 14-inch SRTT with the
16-inch SRTT for all uses in NHTSA's standards and regulations. Because
the 16-inch SRTT is a different size and made of different materials,
changes are necessary to the FMVSS and tire regulations to ensure that
the use of the 16-inch SRTT to evaluate test surface friction does not
alter the stringency of the standards or the treadwear ratings of tires
in the UTQGS treadwear testing program. NHTSA tentatively believes that
this proposal accomplishes those goals. NHTSA requests comment on that
determination, the merits of these goals, and whether the proposed
amendments would accomplish those goals. NHTSA also seeks comment on
the use and storage requirements for the CMT tires used in the BCWR
calculation.
III. Effective Date
For the changes to the UTQGS, NHTSA expects to make these changes
effective at the next BCWR determination at least 30 days after the
date of publication of a final rule. NHTSA does not believe any further
lead time is necessary for the following reasons. First, because NHTSA
is using a conversion factor to keep the rating scale used with the 14-
inch SRTT and 16-inch SRTT identical, ratings of a particular line of
tires should not be affected by this proposed rule. Second, tire lines
rated prior to the effective date of the changes proposed in this rule
would not be required to be rerated. Third, limited availability of the
14-inch SRTT could make it difficult for NHTSA to continue to obtain
14-inch SRTTs in its BCWR determinations. NHTSA is currently restricted
by its regulations to using SRTTs that were manufactured within one
year prior to the commencement of testing and two months after removal
from storage in order to prevent variability in results due to tire
aging. This provision prevents NHTSA from stockpiling 14-inch SRTTs.
For FMVSS changes, NHTSA is proposing a lead time of six months.
This will give NHTSA's compliance test facilities sufficient time to
obtain and validate test surfaces using the 16-inch SRTT. Although
NHTSA has determined an equivalent level of surface friction when
evaluating PBC with the 16-inch SRTT in place of the 14-inch SRTT,
NHTSA anticipates requiring test facilities conducting NHTSA's
compliance tests to revalidate test surfaces using the 16-inch SRTT, to
ensure that testing is being done in accordance with the procedures in
the FMVSS. A six-month lead time is consistent with the requirements of
49 U.S.C. 30111(d) that standards be effective between 180 days and 1
year after they are prescribed. However, potential unavailability of
the 14-inch SRTT may constitute good cause for NHTSA to impose a
shorter lead time in a final rule resulting from this proposal.
NHTSA does not believe that manufacturers require more than six
months of lead time. Because NHTSA intends the proposed peak braking
coefficient specifications in the FMVSS using the 16-inch SRTT to be an
equivalent level of friction to existing peak braking coefficients
using the 14-inch SRTT, NHTSA does not intend to affect the FMVSS
compliance of any vehicle and does not believe this proposal would do
so.
NHTSA requests comments on the proposed lead time for changes to
the UTQGS and FMVSSs.
IV. Public Participation
How do I prepare and submit comments?
To ensure that your comments are correctly filed in the Docket,
please include the docket number of this document in your comments.
Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long (49 CFR 553.21).
NHTSA established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
Please submit your comments electronically to the docket following
the steps outlined under ADDRESSES. You may also submit two copies of
your comments, including the attachments, by mail to Docket Management
at the beginning of this document, under ADDRESSES.
How can I be sure that my comments were received?
If you wish to be notified upon receipt of your mailed comments,
enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope containing
your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket Management will
return the postcard by mail.
How do I submit confidential business information?
If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit the following to the NHTSA Office of
Chief Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590: (1) A
complete copy of the submission; (2) a redacted copy of the submission
with the confidential information removed; and (3) either a second
complete copy or those portions of the submission containing the
material for which confidential treatment is claimed and any additional
information that you deem important to the Chief Counsel's
consideration of your confidentiality claim. A request for confidential
treatment that complies with 49 CFR part 512 must accompany the
complete submission provided to the Chief Counsel. For further
information, submitters who plan to request confidential treatment for
any portion of their submissions are advised to review 49 CFR part 512,
particularly those sections relating to document submission
requirements. Failure to adhere to the requirements of part 512 may
result in the release of confidential information to the public docket.
In addition, you should submit two copies from which you have deleted
the
[[Page 42769]]
claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the
address given at the beginning of this document under ADDRESSES. To
facilitate social distancing during COVID-19, NHTSA is temporarily
accepting confidential business information electronically. Please see
https://www.nhtsa.gov/coronavirus/submission-confidential-business-information for details.
Will the agency consider late comments?
NHTSA will consider all comments received before the close of
business on the comment closing date indicated at the beginning of this
document under DATES. In accordance with DOT policies, to the extent
possible, NHTSA will also consider comments received after the
specified comment closing date. If NHTSA receives a comment too late to
consider in developing the proposed rule, NHTSA will consider that
comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.
How can I read the comments submitted by other people?
You may read the comments received on the internet. To read the
comments on the internet, go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow
the on-line instructions provided.
You may download the comments. The comments are imaged documents,
in either TIFF or PDF format. Please note that even after the comment
closing date, NHTSA will continue to file relevant information in the
Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late
comments. Accordingly, NHTSA recommends that you periodically search
the Docket for new material.
You may also see the comments at the address and times given near
the beginning of this document under ADDRESSES.
V. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and DOT Rulemaking
Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and the Department of
Transportation's administrative rulemaking procedures. This rulemaking
is not considered significant and was not reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review.''
This proposal updates the standard reference test tire used as a
baseline tire for consumer information testing, in the determination of
what is a snow tire, and to evaluate testing surface friction for
evaluating braking and electronic stability control performance. This
proposal will not have a direct effect on safety because the changes
proposed in this rule are designed to maintain the present level of
stringency of NHTSA's braking and electronic stability control FMVSSs.
However, if the 14-inch SRTT is discontinued without a replacement,
NHTSA would be unable to verify test surface friction coefficient prior
to compliance testing for braking and electronic stability control
system FMVSSs. Thus, this rulemaking indirectly affects safety by
ensuring that NHTSA would be able to perform compliance tests of those
FMVSSs. Also, if this proposal were not adopted, it is expected that
the 14-inch SRTT would soon no longer be available for purchase,
rendering it impossible for NHTSA to continue maintaining the BCWR for
treadwear testing. This unavailability of an SRTT would lead to tire
manufacturers being unable to rate their tires for treadwear under the
UTQGS and mold those ratings onto the side of the tire as required by
49 CFR part 575.
This proposed rule is expected to result in additional costs to
NHTSA because the 16-inch SRTT has a retail price that is $35 per tire
more than the 14-inch SRTT ($335 vs. $300).\19\ NHTSA purchases 64
SRTTs for its own use annually in determining BCWR. Therefore, based on
the cost difference of $35 per tire, NHTSA expects that, if adopted,
this proposal would result in $2,240 additional annual costs to the
government. However, NHTSA has been using the 14-inch SRTT and 16-inch
SRTT side-by-side since 2016 for its quarterly BCWR determination in
anticipation of this rulemaking and NHTSA plans to continue to do so
until this proposal is finalized. After this proposal is finalized,
NHTSA does not expect to continue purchasing 14-inch SRTTs. Therefore,
when compared to years since 2016, NHTSA would likely purchase fewer
SRTTs in subsequent years after this proposal is finalized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Data on the price of the SRTT was obtained from
instructions on how to purchase SRTTs from Michelin. See https://www.astm.org/COMMIT/2011%2011%2008%20E1136%20F2493%20SRTT%20Purchase%20Procedure.pdf.
(last accessed April 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to potential costs to the public, based upon information
provided to NHTSA by Michelin from 2017 and 2018, annual U.S. sales of
14-inch SRTTs is fewer than 2,000 units. Assuming that U.S. sales of
16-inch SRTTs is comparable to sales of 14-inch SRTTs, the annual cost
of this proposal would be less than $70,000. However, NHTSA does not
know how many sales are a consequence of the SRTT being used as part of
NHTSA's compliance test procedures, versus those sold for other
purposes (e.g., SRTTs sold to assess the performance of tires to some
other country's regulations or to voluntary industry standards). Any
SRTT sales that are not related to compliance with NHTSA's regulations
would not be affected by this proposal and the existence of such sales
would mean this rule would be less costly than the maximum estimate of
$70,000 per year. Moreover, NHTSA does not have any direct knowledge of
whether regulated entities have been conducting side-by-side testing
using both the 14-inch SRTT and 16-inch SRTTs like NHTSA has and
whether side-by-side testing has artificially increased sales in 2017
and 2018.
NHTSA requests comments on the benefits and costs of this NPRM.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions).
The Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121
define a small business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates
primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)). However, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency
certifies the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a statement of
the factual basis for certifying that a rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
NHTSA has considered the effects of this proposal under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that this proposal will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposal would directly impact the government, as it
affects only the test procedures NHTSA uses in its FMVSSs and
regulations that reference tire performance. It affects manufacturers
of tires and of motor vehicles only to the
[[Page 42770]]
extent those manufacturers choose to test their products in the manner
NHTSA would test them. They are not required to use the test procedures
NHTSA uses.
Although we believe some entities producing tires or vehicles that
would be tested by NHTSA using procedures that use the 16-inch SRTT are
considered small businesses, we do not believe this proposal will have
a significant economic impact on those manufacturers. First, the small
manufacturers are not required to use the SRTT in certifying their
products. Second, for manufacturers choosing to use the 16-inch SRTT to
test their products, this proposal would result in a cost increase of
only $35 per tire to entities currently purchasing the 14-inch SRTT to
assess their products. We do not believe this cost increase is
significant. Finally, for the changes to the UTQGS, because NHTSA is
using a conversion factor to keep the rating scale used with the 14-
inch SRTT and 16-inch SRTT identical, ratings of a particular line of
tires should not be affected by this proposed rule. For FMVSS changes,
NHTSA has determined an equivalent level of surface friction when
evaluating PBC with the 16-inch SRTT in place of the 14-inch SRTT, so
the change to the standard reference test tire should not change the
performance of current tires or vehicles.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined this proposal pursuant to Executive Order 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that
the rulemaking would not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation
of a federalism summary impact statement. The proposal would not have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
NHTSA rules can preempt in two ways. First, the National Traffic
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemption provision:
When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, a
State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue
in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is
identical to the standard prescribed under this chapter. 49 U.S.C.
30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command by Congress that preempts any
non-identical State legislative and administrative law addressing the
same aspect of performance.
The express preemption provision described above is subject to a
savings clause under which ``[c]ompliance with a motor vehicle safety
standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from
liability at common law.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(e). Pursuant to this
provision, State common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle
manufacturers that might otherwise be preempted by the express
preemption provision are generally preserved. However, the Supreme
Court has recognized the possibility, in some instances, of implied
preemption of such State common law tort causes of action by virtue of
NHTSA's rules, even if not expressly preempted. This second way that
NHTSA rules can preempt is dependent upon there being an actual
conflict between an FMVSS and the higher standard that would
effectively be imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers if someone
obtained a State common law tort judgment against the manufacturer,
notwithstanding the manufacturer's compliance with the NHTSA standard.
Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS are minimum
standards, a State common law tort cause of action that seeks to impose
a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers will generally not be
preempted. However, if and when such a conflict does exist--for
example, when the standard at issue is both a minimum and a maximum
standard--the State common law tort cause of action is impliedly
preempted. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
Pursuant to Executive Orders 13132 and 12988, NHTSA has considered
whether this proposed rule could or should preempt State common law
causes of action. The agency's ability to announce its conclusion
regarding the preemptive effect of one of its rules reduces the
likelihood that preemption will be an issue in any subsequent tort
litigation.
To this end, the agency has examined the nature (e.g., the language
and structure of the regulatory text) and objectives of this proposed
rule and finds that this proposal would affect only minimum safety
standards (and only insofar as how NHTSA would conduct compliance
testing under those standards). As such, NHTSA does not intend that
this proposed rule preempt State tort law that would effectively impose
a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers than that established
by the affected FMVSSs. Establishment of a higher standard by means of
State tort law would not conflict with the minimum standards affected
by this proposal. Without any conflict, there could not be any implied
preemption of a State common law tort cause of action. Aspects of this
proposed rule would amend 49 CFR part 575, which is not a safety
standard but an information program to assist consumers in making
informed decisions when purchasing tires. The 14-inch SRTT is used as
part of the determination of a tire's treadwear rating. This proposed
change would not impose any requirements on anyone.
D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729; Feb. 7, 1996), requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) specifies
whether administrative proceedings are to be required before parties
file suit in court; (6) adequately defines key terms; and (7) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship
under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. This document is
consistent with that requirement.
Pursuant to this order, NHTSA notes as follows. The issue of
preemption is discussed above. NHTSA notes further that there is no
requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or
pursue other administrative proceedings before they may file suit in
court.
E. Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19855, April 23, 1997), applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental,
health, or safety risk that the agency has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
[[Page 42771]]
both criteria, the agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the agency.
This proposal is not economically significant under E.O. 12866.
Further, it is part of a rulemaking that is not expected to have a
disproportionate health or safety impact on children. Consequently, no
further analysis is required under Executive Order 13045.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency
unless the collection displays a valid Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) control number. There is not any information collection
requirement associated with this proposal.
G. Incorporation by Reference
Under regulations issued by the Office of the Federal Register (1
CFR 51.5(a)), an agency, as part of a proposed rule that includes
material incorporated by reference, must summarize material that is
proposed to be incorporated by reference and must discuss the ways the
material proposed to be incorporated by reference is reasonably
available to interested parties or how the agency worked to make
materials available to interested parties.
This proposed rule would incorporate by reference ASTM F2493,
``Standard Specification for P225/60R16 97S Radial Standard Reference
Test Tire,'' to replace the existing incorporation by reference of ASTM
E1136, which is a 14-inch standard reference test tire. As discussed
earlier in this document, the ASTM F2493 is a standard reference test
tire that is not used for general use, but, as its name suggests, is
used for testing. The ASTM F2493 standard reference test tire is
primarily used for evaluating surface friction (traction). The standard
reference test tire specifications include, among other things, size,
design, construction, and materials requirements.
This proposed rule would also update an existing incorporation by
reference of ASTM E1337, ``Standard Test Method for Determining
Longitudinal Peak Braking Coefficient (PBC) of Paved Surfaces Using
Standard Reference Test Tire.'' ASTM E1337 is a standard test method
for evaluating peak braking coefficient of a test surface using a
standard reference test tire using a trailer towed by a vehicle. NHTSA
uses this method to evaluate test surfaces for conducting compliance
test procedures for its braking and electronic stability control
standards. The 2019 version of ASTM E1337 specifies that the test may
be conducted using the 16-inch SRTT and includes correlation data for
converting testing using the 14-inch SRTT to the 16-inch SRTT and vice
versa.
Finally, this proposed rule would update an existing incorporation
by reference of ASTM F1805, ``Standard Test Method for Single Wheel
Driving Traction in a Straight Line on Snow- and Ice-Covered
Surfaces.'' ASTM F1805 is a test method for measuring the traction of
tires on snow- or ice-covered surfaces using an instrumented four-wheel
drive vehicle with a single test wheel capable of measure tire
performance. NHTSA uses ASTM F1805 as part of its criteria for
determining whether a tire may be considered a ``snow tire'' under its
light vehicle tire standards. The 2020 version of F1805 specifies that
the test may be conducted using the 16-inch SRTT and includes
correlation data for converting testing using the 14-inch SRTT to the
16-inch SRTT and vice versa.
The ASTM standards proposed for incorporation by reference in this
NPRM are available for review at NHTSA's headquarters in Washington,
DC, and for purchase from ASTM International. The ASTM standards that
are currently incorporated by reference (and which would be replaced
under this proposal) are available for review at NHTSA or at ASTM
International's online reading room.\20\ If this proposal is adopted as
a final rule, NHTSA anticipates that ASTM International would update
its reading room to include these standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ https://www.astm.org/READINGLIBRARY/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to evaluate and use existing voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless doing so would
be inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., the statutory provisions
regarding NHTSA's vehicle safety authority) or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. Technical standards
are defined by the NTTAA as ``performance-based or design-specific
technical specification and related management systems practices.''
They pertain to ``products and processes, such as size, strength, or
technical performance of a product, process or material.''
Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus
standards bodies include ASTM International, the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE), and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
If NHTSA does not use available and potentially applicable voluntary
consensus standards, we are required by the Act to provide Congress,
through OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such
standards.
As discussed above, both standard reference test tires are based on
specifications published by ASTM International. Thus, this rulemaking
accords with the requirements of the NTTAA.
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires Federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs,
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more
than $100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of
1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the agency to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable
law. Moreover, section 205 allows the agency to adopt an alternative
other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if the agency publishes with the final rule an explanation
of why that alternative was not adopted.
This proposal would not result in any expenditure by State, local,
or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million,
adjusted for inflation.
J. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that
implementation of this action would not have any significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.
K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number
[[Page 42772]]
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the
Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may use the RIN
contained in the heading at the beginning of this document to find this
action in the Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tires.
49 CFR Part 575
Consumer protection, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
parts 571 and 575 as follows:
PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
0
1. The authority citation for part 571 of title 49 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.
0
2. Amend Sec. 571.5 by revising paragraphs (d)(33) through (35) to
read as follows:
Sec. 571.5 Matter incorporated by reference.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(33) ASTM E1337-19, ``Standard Test Method for Determining
Longitudinal Peak Braking Coefficient (PBC) of Paved Surfaces Using
Standard Reference Test Tire,'' approved December 1, 2019, into
Sec. Sec. 571.105; 571.121; 571.122; 571.126; 571.135; 571.136;
571.500.
(34) ASTM F1805-20, ``Standard Test Method for Single Wheel Driving
Traction in a Straight Line on Snow- and Ice-Covered Surfaces,''
approved May 1, 2020, into Sec. 571.139.
(35) ASTM F2493-19, ``Standard Specification for P225/60R16 97S
Radial Standard Reference Test Tire,'' approved Oct. 1, 2019, into
Sec. Sec. 571.105; 571.121; 571.122; 571.126; 571.135; 571.136;
571.139; 571.500.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 571.105 by removing paragraphs S6.9.2(a) and S6.9.2(b)
and adding paragraph S6.9.2 to read as follows:
Sec. 571.105 Standard No. 105; Hydraulic and electric brake systems.
* * * * *
S6.9.2 (a) For vehicles with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds,
road tests (excluding stability and control during braking tests) are
conducted on a 12-foot-wide, level roadway, having a peak friction
coefficient of 1.02 when measured using an ASTM F2493-19 (incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 571.5), standard reference test tire, in
accordance with ASTM E1337-19 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
571.5), at a speed of 40 mph, without water delivery. Burnish stops are
conducted on any surface. The parking brake test surface is clean, dry,
smooth, Portland cement concrete.
(b) For vehicles with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds, stability
and control during braking tests are conducted on a 500-foot-radius
curved roadway with a wet level surface having a peak friction
coefficient of 0.55 when measured on a straight or curved section of
the curved roadway using an ASTM F2493-19 standard reference tire, in
accordance with ASTM E1337-19 at a speed of 40 mph, with water
delivery.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 571.121 by revising paragraphs S5.3.1.1 introductory
text, S5.3.6.1, S5.7.1, S6.1.7, Table I, Table II, and Table IIa to
read as follows:
Sec. 571.121 Standard No. 121; Air brake systems.
* * * * *
S5.3.1.1 Stop the vehicle from 60 mph on a surface with a peak
friction coefficient of 1.02 with the vehicle loaded as follows:
* * * * *
S5.3.6.1 Using a full-treadle brake application for the duration of
the stop, stop the vehicle from 30 mph or 75 percent of the maximum
drive-through speed, whichever is less, on a 500-foot radius curved
roadway with a wet level surface having a peak friction coefficient of
0.55 when measured on a straight or curved section of the curved
roadway using an ASTM F2493-19 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
571.5) standard reference tire, in accordance with ASTM E1337-19
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 571.5), at a speed of 40 mph,
with water delivery.
* * * * *
S5.7.1 Emergency brake system performance. When stopped six times
for each combination of weight and speed specified in S5.3.1.1, except
for a loaded truck tractor with an unbraked control trailer, on a road
surface having a PFC of 1.02, with a single failure in the service
brake system of a part designed to contain compressed air or brake
fluid (except failure of a common valve, manifold, brake fluid housing,
or brake chamber housing), the vehicle shall stop at least once in not
more than the distance specified in Column 5 of Table II, measured from
the point at which movement of the service brake control begins, except
that a truck-tractor tested at its unloaded vehicle weight plus up to
1,500 pounds shall stop at least once in not more than the distance
specified in Column 6 of Table II. The stop shall be made without any
part of the vehicle leaving the roadway, and with unlimited wheel
lockup permitted at any speed.
* * * * *
S6.1.7 Unless otherwise specified, stopping tests are conducted on
a 12-foot wide level, straight roadway having a peak friction
coefficient of 1.02. For road tests in S5.3, the vehicle is aligned in
the center of the roadway at the beginning of a stop. Peak friction
coefficient is measured using an ASTM F2493-19 standard reference test
tire (see ASTM F2493-19 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 571.5))
in accordance with ASTM E1337-19 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
571.5), at a speed of 40 mph, without water delivery for the surface
with PFC of 1.02, and with water delivery for the surface with PFC of
0.55.
* * * * *
Table I--Stopping Sequence
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single unit
Truck tractors trucks and
buses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burnish (S6.1.8)........................ 1 1
Stability and Control at GVWR (S5.3.6).. 2 N/A
Stability and Control at LLVW (S5.3.6).. 3 5
Manual Adjustment of Brakes............. 4 N/A
60 mph Service Brake Stops at GVWR 5 2
(S5.3.1)...............................
60 mph Emergency Service Brake Stops at N/A 3
GVWR (S5.7.1)..........................
[[Page 42773]]
Parking Brake Test at GVWR (S5.6)....... 6 4
Manual Adjustment of Brakes............. 7 6
60 mph Service Brake Stops at LLVW 8 7
(S5.3.1)...............................
60 mph Emergency Service Brake Stops at 9 8
LLVW (S5.7.1)..........................
Parking Brake Test at LLVW (S5.6)....... 10 9
Final Inspection........................ 11 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II--Stopping Distance in Feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service brake Emergency brake
Vehicle speed in miles per hour -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30.............................................. 70 78 65 78 84 61 170 186
35.............................................. 96 106 89 106 114 84 225 250
40.............................................. 125 138 114 138 149 108 288 325
45.............................................. 158 175 144 175 189 136 358 409
50.............................................. 195 216 176 216 233 166 435 504
55.............................................. 236 261 212 261 281 199 520 608
60.............................................. 280 310 250 310 335 235 613 720
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
(1) Loaded and Unloaded Buses.
(2) Loaded Single-Unit Trucks.
(3) Loaded Tractors with Two Axles; or with Three Axles and a GVWR of 70,000 lbs. or less; or with Four or More Axles and a GVWR of 85,000 lbs. or less.
Tested with an Unbraked Control Trailer.
(4) Loaded Tractors with Three Axles and a GVWR greater than 70,000 lbs.; or with Four or More Axles and a GVWR greater than 85,000 lbs. Tested with an
Unbraked Control Trailer.
(5) Unloaded Single-Unit Trucks.
(6) Unloaded Tractors (Bobtail).
(7) All Vehicles except Tractors, Loaded and Unloaded.
(8) Unloaded Tractors (Bobtail).
Table IIa--Stopping Distance in Feet: Optional Requirements for: (1) Three-Axle Tractors With a Front Axle That
Has a GAWR of 14,600 Pounds or Less, and With Two Rear Drive Axles That Have a Combined GAWR of 45,000 Pounds or
Less, Manufactured Before August 1, 2011; and (2) All Other Tractors Manufactured Before August 1, 2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service Brake Emergency Brake
Vehicle speed in miles per hour -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30................................ 70 78 84 89 170 186
35................................ 96 106 114 121 225 250
40................................ 125 138 149 158 288 325
45................................ 158 175 189 200 358 409
50................................ 195 216 233 247 435 504
55................................ 236 261 281 299 520 608
60................................ 280 310 335 355 613 720
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: (1) Loaded and unloaded buses; (2) Loaded single unit trucks; (3) Unloaded truck tractors and single unit
trucks; (4) Loaded truck tractors tested with an unbraked control trailer; (5) All vehicles except truck
tractors; (6) Unloaded truck tractors.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 571.122 by revising paragraphs S6.1.1.1, S6.1.1.2,
S6.1.1.3, and S6.9.7.1(a) to read as follows:
Sec. 571.122 Standard No. 122; Motorcycle brake systems.
* * * * *
S6.1.1.1 High friction surface. A high friction surface is used for
all dynamic brake tests excluding the ABS tests where a low-friction
surface is specified. The high-friction surface test area is a clean,
dry and level surface, with a gradient of <=1 percent. The high-
friction surface has a peak braking coefficient (PBC) of 1.02.
S6.1.1.2 Low-friction surface. A low-friction surface is used for
ABS tests where a low-friction surface is specified. The low-friction
surface test area is a clean and level surface, which may be wet or
dry, with a gradient of <=1 percent. The low-friction surface has a PBC
of <=0.50.
S6.1.1.3 Measurement of PBC. The PBC is measured using the ASTM
F2493-19 standard reference test tire, in accordance with ASTM E1337-
19, at a speed of 64 km/h (both publications incorporated by reference;
see Sec. 571.5).
* * * * *
S6.9.7.1 * * *
(a) Test surfaces. A low friction surface immediately followed by a
high friction surface with a PBC >=0.90.
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 571.126 by revising paragraph S6.2.2 to read as follows:
Sec. 571.126 Standard No. 126; Electronic stability control systems
for light vehicles.
* * * * *
[[Page 42774]]
S6.2.2 The road test surface must produce a peak friction
coefficient (PFC) of 1.02 when measured using an ASTM F2493-19
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 571.5) standard reference test
tire, in accordance with ASTM E1337-19 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 571.5) at a speed of 64.4 km/h (40 mph), without water delivery.
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 571.135 by revising paragraphs S6.2.1, S7.4.3(f),
S7.5.2(f), S7.6.2(f), S7.7.3(f), S7.8.2(f), S7.9.2(f), S7.10.3(e), and
S7.11.3(f) to read as follows:
Sec. 571.135 Standard No. 135; Light vehicle brake systems.
* * * * *
S6.2.1 Unless otherwise specified, the road test surface produces a
peak friction coefficient (PFC) of 1.02 when measured using an ASTM
F2493-19 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 571.5) standard
reference test tire, in accordance with ASTM E1337-19 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 571.5), at a speed of 64.4 km/h (40 mph), without
water delivery.
* * * * *
S7.4.3 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of at least 1.02.
* * * * *
S7.5.2 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
* * * * *
S7.6.2 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
* * * * *
S7.7.3 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
* * * * *
S7.8.2 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
* * * * *
S7.9.2 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
* * * * *
S7.10.3 * * *
(e) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
* * * * *
S7.11.3 * * *
(f) Test surface: PFC of 1.02.
* * * * *
0
8. Amend Sec. 571.136 by revising paragraph S6.2.2 to read as follows:
Sec. 571.136 Standard No. 136; Electronic stability control systems
for heavy vehicles.
* * * * *
S6.2.2 The road test surface produces a peak friction coefficient
(PFC) of 1.02 when measured using an ASTM F2493-19 standard reference
test tire, in accordance with ASTM E1337-19, at a speed of 64.4 km/h
(40 mph), without water delivery (both documents incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 571.5).
* * * * *
0
9. Amend Sec. 571.139 by revising the definition of ``Snow tire'' in
S3 to read as follows:
Sec. 571.139 Standard No. 139; New pneumatic radial tires for light
vehicles.
* * * * *
S3 * * *
Snow tire means a tire that attains a traction index equal to or
greater than 112, compared to the ASTM F2493-19 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 571.5) Standard Reference Test Tire when using the
snow traction test on the medium pack snow surface as described in ASTM
F1805-20 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 571.5), and that is
marked with an Alpine Symbol specified in S5.5(i) on at least one
sidewall.
* * * * *
0
10. Amend Sec. 571.500 by revising paragraph S6.2.1 to read as
follows:
Sec. 571.500 Standard No. 500; Low-speed vehicles.
* * * * *
S6.2.1 Pavement friction. Unless otherwise specified, the road test
surface produces a peak friction coefficient (PFC) of 1.02 when
measured using a standard reference test tire that meets the
specifications of ASTM F2493-19, in accordance with ASTM E1337-19, at a
speed of 64.4 km/h (40.0 mph), without water delivery (both
incorporated by reference; see Sec. 571.5).
* * * * *
PART 575--CONSUMER INFORMATION
0
11. The authority citation for part 575 of title 49 continues to read
as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32302, 32304A, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30123,
30166, 30181, 30182, 30183, and 32908, Pub. L. 104-414, 114 Stat.
1800, Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, Pub. L. 110-140, 121 Stat.
1492, 15 U.S.C. 1232(g); delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.
0
12. Amend Sec. 575.3 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 575.3 Matter incorporated by reference.
* * * * *
(c) ASTM International (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box
C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, 610-832-9500, https://www.astm.org/.
(1) ASTM E 501-08 (``ASTM E 501''), ``Standard Specification for
Standard Rib Tire for Pavement Skid-Resistance Tests'' (June 2008), IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 575.104 and 575.106.
(2) ASTM F2493-19 (``ASTM F2493''), ``Standard Specification for
P225/60R16 97S Radial Standard Reference Test Tire,'' (approved Oct. 1,
2019), IBR approved for Sec. 575.104.
* * * * *
0
13. Amend Sec. 575.104 by revising paragraphs (e)(2)(viii)
introductory text, (e)(2)(viii)(A) through (E), and (e)(2)(ix)(A)(2),
the note to paragraph (e)(2)(ix)(C), and paragraph (e)(2)(ix)(F) to
read as follows:
Sec. 575.104 Uniform tire quality grading standards.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(viii) Drive the convoy on the test roadway for 16 circuits
(approximately 6,400 miles).
(A) After every circuit (approximately 400 miles), rotate each
vehicle's tires by moving each front tire to the same side of the rear
axle and each rear tire to the opposite side of the front axle.
Visually inspect each tire for treadwear anomalies.
(B) After every second circuit (approximately 800 miles), rotate
the vehicles in the convoy by moving the last vehicle to the lead
position. Do not rotate driver positions within the convoy. In four-car
convoys, vehicle one shall become vehicle two, vehicle two shall become
vehicle three, vehicle three shall become vehicle four, and vehicle
four shall become vehicle one.
(C) After every second circuit (approximately 800 miles), if
necessary, adjust wheel alignment to the midpoint of the vehicle
manufacturer's specification, unless adjustment to the midpoint is not
recommended by the manufacturer; in that case, adjust the alignment to
the manufacturer's recommended setting. In all cases, the setting is
within the tolerance specified by the manufacturer of the alignment
machine.
(D) After every second circuit (approximately 800 miles), if
determining the projected mileage by the 9-point method set forth in
paragraph (e)(2)(ix)(A)(1) of this section, measure the average tread
depth of each tire following the procedure set forth in paragraph
(e)(2)(vi) of this section.
(E) After every fourth circuit (approximately 1,600 miles), move
the complete set of four tires to the following vehicle. Move the tires
on the last vehicle to the lead vehicle. In moving the tires, rotate
them as set forth in paragraph (e)(2)(viii)(A) of this section.
* * * * *
(ix) * * *
(A) * * *
(2) Two-point arithmetical method. (i) For each course monitoring
and
[[Page 42775]]
candidate tire in the convoy, using the average tread depth
measurements obtained in accordance with paragraphs (e)(2)(vi) and
(e)(2)(viii)(F) of this section and the corresponding mileages as data
points, determine the slope (m) of the tire's wear in mils of tread
depth per 1,000 miles by the following formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP05AU21.039
Where:
Yo = average tread depth after break-in, mils.
Y1 = average tread depth after 16 circuits (approximately 6,400
miles), mils.
Xo = 0 miles (after break-in).
X1 = Total mileage of travel after 16 circuits (approximately 6,400
miles).
(ii) This slope (m) will be negative in value. The tire's wear rate
is defined as the slope (m) expressed in mils per 1,000 miles.
* * * * *
(C) * * *
Note to paragraph (e)(2)(ix)(C): The base wear rate for the
course monitoring tires (CMTs) will be obtained by the Government by
running the tire specified in ASTM F2493 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 575.3) course monitoring tires for 16 circuits over the
San Angelo, Texas, UTQGS test route 4 times per year, then using the
average wear rate from the last 4 quarterly CMT tests for the base
course wear rate calculation. Each new base course wear rate will be
published in Docket No. NHTSA-2001-9395. The course monitoring tires
used in a test convoy must be no more than one-year-old at the
commencement of the test and must be used within four months after
removal from storage.
* * * * *
(F) Compute the grade (P) of the of the NHTSA nominal treadwear
value for each candidate tire by using the following formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP05AU21.040
Where base course wear raten = new base course wear rate,
i.e., average treadwear of the last 4 quarterly course monitoring tire
tests conducted by NHTSA.
Round off the percentage to the nearest lower 20-point increment.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.8.
Steven S. Cliff,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-15361 Filed 8-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P