[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 175 (Monday, September 9, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47437-47446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-22761]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 575
[Docket No. 94-30, Notice 06]
RIN 2127-AF17
Consumer Information Regulations: Uniform Tire Quality Grading
Standards
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Uniform Tire Quality Grading
Standards to: Revise treadwear testing procedures to maintain the base
course wear rate of course monitoring tires at its current value of
1.34. This revision is expected to eliminate treadwear grade inflation,
reduce testing expenses, and reduce the environmental consequences of
operating test convoys for the purpose of calculating the base course
wear rate for each new batch of course monitoring tires; and add a top
end traction grading category of ``AA'' to the current traction grading
categories of A, B, and C. The new AA category will make possible the
differentiation of tires with the very highest traction characteristics
from those with lower traction characteristics.
DATES: This final rule is effective March 9, 1998.
Any petition for reconsideration of this rule must be received by
NHTSA not later than October 24, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket and
notice numbers noted above for this rule and be submitted to the Docket
Section, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street SW, Room 5109, Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-4949.
Docket room hours are from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Mr. Orron Kee,
Chief, Consumer Programs Division, Office of Planning and Consumer
Programs, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street SW, Room 5307, Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-0846;
FAX (202) 493-2739. For legal issues: Mr. Walter K. Myers, Office of
the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400
Seventh Street SW, Room 5219, Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202)
366-2992; FAX (202) 366-3820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Background
(a) Current Provisions
(1) Treadwear
(2) Traction
(b) Request for Comments
(c) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(1) Treadwear
(2) Traction
(3) Fuel Economy
(4) Comments
(d) DOT Appropriations Act of 1996
(e) Public Comments on the NPRM
(1) Treadwear
(2) Traction
III. Agency Decision
(a) Treadwear
(b) Traction
IV. Cost/Benefit Analysis
(a) Treadwear
(b) Traction
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
(a) EO 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(b) Regulatory Flexibility Act
(c) EO 12612--Federalism
(d) National Environmental Policy Act
(e) Paperwork Reduction Act
(f) Civil Justice Reform
I. Introduction
This final rule amends the Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
(49 CFR 575.104) to fix the base course wear rate of course monitoring
tires at a permanent value of 1.34, and establishes an AA traction
grade. A proposal in the agency's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking of May
24, 1995 (60 FR 27472) to rescind the temperature resistance grade and
substitute therefor a fuel economy grade based on low rolling
resistance characteristics of tires is not addressed in this notice
(see the discussion in paragraph II(d) below).
II. Background
(a) Current Provisions. Section 30123(e) of Title 49, United States
Code requires the Secretary of Transportation to prescribe a uniform
system for grading motor vehicle tires to assist consumers in making
informed choices when purchasing tires. Pursuant to that congressional
mandate, NHTSA promulgated the Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
(UTQGS) in 49 CFR 575.104. The UTQGS apply to new pneumatic tires for
use on passenger cars, except deep tread, winter-type snow tires,
space-saver or temporary-use spare tires, tires with nominal rim
diameters of 10 to 12 inches, and limited production tires as defined
in Sec. 575.104(c)(2).
The UTQGS require tire manufacturers and tire brand name owners to
grade their tires with respect to their relative treadwear, traction,
and
[[Page 47438]]
temperature resistance performance. Treadwear grades are shown by
numbers, such as 100, 150, and 200, while traction and temperature
resistance grades are indicated by the letters A, B, and C, with A
representing the best performance and C indicating the minimum level of
performance necessary to comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard No. 109, New pneumatic tires.
(1) Treadwear. Treadwear is graded by first running the tires being
graded, called ``candidate tires,'' over a selected 400-mile segment of
public highway near San Angelo, Texas. After an 800-mile ``break-in''
run, the candidate tires are driven over the test course for a total of
6,400 miles in test convoys composed of 4 passenger cars and/or light
truck vehicles. Each driver remains in the same position within the
convoy. The vehicles are rotated among the 4 positions in the convoy
regularly as are the positions of the tires on the test vehicles so
that the tires get equal time with each driver, each vehicle, and each
wheel position.
``Course monitoring tires'' (CMT) are used as the control standard
in grading candidate tires. CMTs are specially designed and built to
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard E1136 to
have narrow limits of variability. When NHTSA procures a new batch, or
lot, of CMTs, the agency establishes a new base course wear rate (BCWR)
for that lot. The BCWR, measured in miles per thousand miles (MPTM), is
established by running tires from the new lot of CMTs over the 6,400-
mile test course, in the same manner as candidate tires, with tires
from the previous batch of CMTs. A course severity adjustment factor
(CSAF) for the CMTs is determined by dividing the BCWR for the old CMTs
by the average wear rate of the old CMTs in the test. The wear rate of
the new CMTs is then multiplied by the CSAF to determine the adjusted
wear rate (AWR) of the new CMTs, which then becomes the BCWR for the
new CMTs.
Once the BCWR for the new CMTs is established, these CMTs are used
to grade candidate tires. Upon completion of the 6,400-mile test, the
BCWR is divided by the average wear rate of the CMTs to determine the
CSAF for the candidate tires. That factor is then applied to the wear
rates of the candidate tires to obtain the AWR of the candidate tires.
That AWR is then extrapolated to the point of wearout (considered to be
1/16th inch of remaining tread depth), which is then converted to the
treadwear rating of the tire.
The BCWR is intended to provide a common baseline by which to grade
candidate tires by relating all new CMTs to the original lot of CMTs.
However, NHTSA has noted that the BCWRs of successive new lots of CMTs
have been steadily declining over the years. Specifically, the first
lot of CMTs procured from Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (Goodyear)
in 1975 yielded a BCWR of 4.44. The latest batch, procured by the
agency in 1995, produced a BCWR of 1.34.
The significance of the decrease in the BCWR rate is that as the
BCWR decreases, the treadwear grade increases. Consequently, the newer
treadwear grades have increased to the point that they have become a
somewhat misleading indicator of actual tread life when compared to
tires tested with higher BCWRs.
(2) Traction. Traction grades are established by locked-wheel
braking tests of traction on wet asphalt and wet concrete surfaces at
the Uniform Tire Quality Grading Test Facility (UTQGTF), located at
Goodfellow Air Force Base near San Angelo, Texas. A test trailer is
equipped first with two control tires manufactured in accordance with
ASTM standard E501. The trailer is towed over the wet asphalt surface
at a speed of 40 miles per hour (mph) and one wheel equipped with a
control tire is locked. The traction coefficient of that tire is
recorded continuously and averaged for a period of 0.5 to 1.5 seconds
after lockup. The UTQGTF is arranged so that the test trailers traverse
both the asphalt and the concrete test surfaces in a loop. The test is
repeated for a total of 10 times on each surface for each tire and the
measurements taken on a surface are averaged to determine the control
tire's traction coefficient for that surface. The purpose of testing
the control tires is to monitor the friction properties of the asphalt
and concrete surfaces to account for daily fluctuation due to
environmental factors and the polishing effects of sustained use.
The same procedure is used to measure the locked-wheel braking
traction coefficients of candidate tires. The measured traction
coefficients of candidate tires are adjusted by the difference between
the nominal coefficients of the control tires on the test surfaces
(0.50 for the asphalt surface and 0.35 for the concrete surface) and
the actual coefficient of the control tire run simultaneously with the
candidate tire. Using this procedure, the measured coefficients of all
candidate tires are adjusted to a common pavement friction basis for
each of the test surfaces.
The grades of the candidate tires are currently designated as
``A'', ``B'', and ``C''. A tire achieving a high level of traction
performance on both the wet asphalt (above 0.47) and the wet
concrete (above 0.35) surfaces is graded ``A.'' A tire
achieving medium traction performance (above 0.38 on wet
asphalt and above 0.26 on wet concrete) is graded ``B.'' A
tire achieving a traction performance level of 0.38 or less on
the wet asphalt and 0.26 or less on wet concrete is graded
``C.''
(b) Request for Comments. As a result of the White House Conference
on Global Climate Change held on June 10 and 11, 1993, the White House
issued a report announcing nearly 50 initiatives to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions in the United States. The report, entitled ``Climate
Change Action Plan,'' was issued on October 19, 1993 and, among other
things, calls for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels
by the year 2000. One such initiative called for DOT, through NHTSA, to
issue new rules and test procedures requiring tire manufacturers to
test and label tires relative to their fuel economy based on their
rolling resistance. 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Action #22: ``DOT, through the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, will adopt test procedures and new DOT rules
requiring tire manufacturers to test and label (for fuel economy
based on rolling resistance). DOT will also create a consumer-
focused publicity program and a monitoring program in order to
realize maximum benefits. The Administration is proposing to
obligate $0.3 million in FY 1995 for this action and $2 million
through 2000.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the Climate Change Action Plan, NHTSA published a
Request for Comments on April 25, 1994 (59 FR 19686) seeking responses
to a series of questions regarding available data on rolling resistance
and testing procedures. The notice also posed questions concerning
whether and how the treadwear testing procedures should be changed; and
whether a traction grade of ``AA'' should be created to identify those
tires with clearly superior traction characteristics. NHTSA also asked
whether the UTQGS should include peak traction, how it should be
measured and expressed, and the cost of measuring peak traction. 2
NHTSA noted that if peak traction performance of tires differed
substantially from sliding traction, an alternative traction grading
procedure might be necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Peak traction is the primary traction force in anti-lock
braking systems in which maximum braking action is obtained while
the tire is still rolling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. After consideration of the 34
timely comments received in response to the Request for Comments, NHTSA
published a Notice of Proposed
[[Page 47439]]
Rulemaking (NPRM) on May 24, 1995 (60 FR 27472), with a comment closing
date of July 10, 1995.
(1) Treadwear. The agency proposed to freeze the BCWR of the CMTs
used in treadwear grading at its then-current value of 1.47 MPTM in an
attempt to reduce treadwear grade creep.
The agency explained in the NPRM that it had considered many
possible explanations for the consistent decrease in the BCWR of the
CMTs, such as differences in climatic variations, changes in course
severity, non-uniformity of wear rates among tires in the same lot,
effects of aging and storage of CMTs, and errors in the BCWR
calculation. To minimize the aging/storage factor, the agency now wraps
CMTs in polyethylene bags for storage in a facility in which, although
not temperature controlled, the temperature varies only between 50 deg.
and 90 deg. Fahrenheit throughout the year. The agency then proposed
fixing the BCWR at 1.47 MPTM to address the possibility of an error in
the BCWR calculation. The agency believed that in addition to reducing,
if not eliminating, the treadwear grade inflation, fixing the BCWR at a
single figure would eliminate the time and expenditure of scarce
resources required for operating test convoys for each new lot of CMTs,
as well as eliminating the environmental impacts of operating those
convoys.
(2) Traction. The agency further proposed to create a traction
grade of ``AA'' to distinguish those tires with superior traction
characteristics from those with lower traction performance
characteristics.
NHTSA noted in the NPRM that analysis of traction data since 1989
revealed that traction performance has improved to the extent that the
current grading system does not adequately differentiate between tires
with varying levels of traction performance, particularly the tires
showing the highest levels of traction performance. To address that
situation, the agency solicited comments in the Request for Comments on
whether the traction grading rules should be amended to differentiate
more clearly between the highest performing tires. After considering
the responses to the Request for Comments, NHTSA proposed to establish
a new traction grading category of ``AA'' for tires achieving traction
coefficients of more than 0.54 on wet asphalt and more than
0.41 on wet concrete 3. NHTSA stated that since the
``AA'' category would be optional, manufacturers would incur no
additional costs beyond modifying paper labels and sales brochures to
reflect 4 traction grades instead of three. On the other hand, an
``AA'' category might provide an incentive to manufacturers to improve
the traction performance of their tire lines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The preamble in the NPRM erroneously discussed a traction
coefficient value of 0.41 for the wet concrete surface. The
correct value should have been 0.38.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the peak traction data solicited in the Request for
Comments, NHTSA decided, based on the comments received, not to propose
inclusion of peak traction in the traction ratings at this time. NHTSA
noted that the majority of vehicles currently on the road are not
equipped with ABS. The significance of that fact is that those vehicles
continue to depend on sliding traction rather than peak traction for
maximum stopping action. In addition, several tire manufacturers
commented that peak traction performance is highly correlated with
sliding traction performance.
(3) Fuel Economy. The agency proposed in the NPRM to rescind the
temperature resistance grade and substitute therefor a fuel economy
rating based on low rolling resistance characteristics of the tire.
(4) Comments. The NPRM generated 120 comments, all of which
addressed the fuel economy proposal, while 10 commented on the traction
proposal and 12 on the treadwear proposal. Commenters to the fuel
economy proposals included several members of the U.S. Congress; the
Secretary of Energy; tire manufacturers, wholesalers, and retail
dealers, including their foreign plants and subsidiaries;
environmental, safety, and consumer advocates; educators; and members
of the public. Except for a certain few tire manufacturers, the
majority of the tire industry and certain members of Congress strongly
opposed the fuel economy proposal. The Secretary of Energy, on the
other hand, along with most advocacy groups and most members of the
public, supported it.
In response to a number of requests, the agency extended the NPRM
comment period to August 14, 1995 (60 FR 34961, July 5, 1995) and
hosted a public meeting on the UTQGS proposals on July 28, 1995.
Twenty-five representatives of the groups enumerated above made oral
presentations at the meeting while a number of others, including
several members of Congress, filed written submissions. Nearly all the
statements presented at the meeting, whether oral or written, addressed
the fuel economy issue, expressing positions on both sides of the
issue. Thereafter, in response to further requests, the agency again
extended the NPRM comment period to September 1, 1995 to permit
participants at the public meeting an opportunity to file written
responses to matters presented at the public meeting (60 FR 42496,
August 16, 1995).
Although the comment period closed on September 1, 1995, NHTSA
continued to receive correspondence on both sides of the rolling
resistance issue, including letters from various members of the
Congress.
(d) DOT Appropriations Act of 1996. In early November, 1995, while
NHTSA was still evaluating the comments and data from the NPRM and the
public meeting, the Transportation Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year
1996 was enacted. Amendment number 66 to that Act prohibited the
obligation or expenditure of any funds
[T]o plan, finalize, or implement any rulemaking to add to section
575.104 of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations any
requirement pertaining to a grading standard that is different from
the three grading standards (treadwear, traction, and temperature
resistance) already in effect.
NHTSA discontinued rulemaking activity on the fuel economy issue, but
continued to assess the comments on the treadwear and traction
proposals. Accordingly, this final rule addresses only the latter two
proposals.
(e) Public Comments on the NPRM.
(1) Treadwear. Some commenters supported the proposal to fix the
BCWR at the current figure, others supported the proposal as better
than nothing, and still others opposed it. Regardless of their support
for fixing the BCWR at a single figure, all commented that the present
treadwear test procedure is inadequate and a new test procedure should
be devised.
Michelin, The Cooper Tire Company (Cooper), Continental General
Tire, Inc. (CGT), and the Rubber Manufacturers Association (RMA)
supported the proposal to fix the BCWR at its current value so that
further grade inflation will not occur. RMA and CGT agreed that the
BCWR should be fixed immediately at 1.34 to prevent any further
deterioration of the treadwear grades. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. (BF)
supported fixing the BCWR, although it regards the BCWR itself as
invalid in view of the consistency of the quality of modern tires.
Similarly, Hercules Tire and Rubber Company (Hercules) supported
freezing the BCWR at its current value ``or simply scrapping the system
and starting over.'' Goodyear commented that the treadwear grade itself
should be removed from the UTQGS because as manufacturers' treadwear
warranties continue to improve, the treadwear labels under the UTQGS
become less
[[Page 47440]]
significant for tire consumers. If the grade is not eliminated,
however, Goodyear supports freezing the BCWR at its current value.
Nevertheless, the company, like some other commenters, believes the
treadwear test to be unreliable, inaccurate, cumbersome, costly, and
environmentally unfriendly.
The Kelly Springfield Tire Company (Kelly) and Multinational
Business Services, Inc. (MBS) oppose fixing the BCWR at a single
figure. The European Tyre and Rim Technical Organisation (ETRTO) stated
that changing the BCWR would be misleading to consumers because too
many factors have an influence on the test results. Kelly stated that
the treadwear grade should be eliminated and that freezing the BCWR
would not make the treadwear rating any less confusing to consumers.
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates), MTS Systems
Corporation (MTS), and Herzlich Consulting, Inc. (Herzlich) expressed
no opinion on freezing the BCWR, but commented at length on the
inadequacy of the treadwear test. Advocates stated that using CMTs to
determine the treadlife of all candidate tires creates test conditions
that are arguably much less demanding than actual operating conditions
on the road. MTS stated that the treadwear test should be conducted in
an indoor test lab under controlled, repeatable conditions.
(2) Traction. Ten commenters, including 8 tire manufacturers,
submitted comments on the ``AA'' traction proposal. Two supported the
proposal, while the rest opposed it.
In support of the proposal, Michelin stated that creation of an
additional traction grade would provide more differentiation between
tires with superior traction characteristics without having to redefine
the current A, B, and C levels. ETRTO stated that the present traction
grades are generally acceptable and should be maintained, but if NHTSA
wants to add a grade to indicate higher traction characteristics, ETRTO
would prefer to maintain the present grades as they are and add an
``AA'' grade.
In opposing the addition of an ``AA'' grade to the traction
category, Goodyear, Cooper, Dunlop, and CGT all stated that the
traction test procedures were flawed and should be revised to reflect
more accurately the true traction characteristics of tires. Goodyear,
Dunlop and Kelly stated that the test procedure does not allow tires
designed for hydroplane resistance to demonstrate that feature.
Goodyear asserted that the average water depth of 0.02 inches used in
the UTQGS test procedure is less than half the industry standard depth
of 0.05 inches. Thus, the water depth used in traction grading favors
tires with less void area. Dunlop suggested that a hydroplaning test be
conducted in water depths of up to 15 millimeters (0.6 inches).
Finally, Goodyear repeated its assertion made in earlier comments that
the new test pads used at the UTQGTF caused traction grades to go down,
and adding an ``AA'' grade would only accentuate the flaws in the test
procedure.
Cooper asserted that the current test procedure is not repeatable
or sensitive enough to detect the real differences between tires. For
example, the ASTM ``standard'' tire is a straight-ribbed bias tire
designed to be specially sensitive to differences in road surfaces,
while candidate tires are commercial radial tires designed to yield
good traction performance over a wide range of road surfaces and
weather conditions.
Dunlop stated that the traction test is an insufficient basis for a
traction grade because it is only a straight-ahead test on a damp
surface. Dunlop and CGT suggested that, to be more accurate, the test
should include accelerating traction, cornering traction, and traction
testing under varying ambient conditions. Dunlop also suggested that if
the current traction test procedures were not eliminated, a wet lateral
braking test should be conducted over 2 different friction surfaces
where deceleration Gs are measured and stopping distances calculated.
Finally, Dunlop suggested adding the word ``wet'' to traction labels
because the current straight-ahead test renders the traction rating
``inconclusive'' as a benefit to consumers whose vehicles are equipped
with ABS.
MBS stated that the traction rating, based solely on sliding
traction, is not helpful because it indicates nothing about other
traction characteristics. MBS asserted that the traction rating should
include peak traction performance for consumers with vehicles equipped
with ABS. Kelly, however, stated that although there is a correlation
between peak and sliding traction and that both values can be
considered for grading purposes, the results are dependent on the
differences among the various types of ABS systems. Thus, since a
significant majority of vehicles in service are not equipped with ABS,
sliding traction values rather than peak traction values should be
retained for the traction ratings.
MBS and Dunlop argued that adding an AA grade could confuse
consumers and mislead them because straight-ahead, sliding traction may
not be best for ABS-equipped vehicles. Kelly stated that consumers
could be confused by the limited amount of differentiation within the
AA category. MBS and Cooper stated that the traction test should be
redesigned and improved to be repeatable, sensitive, and relevant, and
that research and testing should be conducted to ascertain the
correlations among the different tire traction characteristics.
Advocates strongly opposed adding an AA rating to the UTQGS.
Rather, Advocates favored increasing the minimum requirements for the
existing grades. Advocates argued that adding an AA grade would not be
as much of an incentive for tire manufacturers to improve the traction
characteristics of their tires as would increasing minimum grade
requirements. Advocates further asserted that adding an AA grade would
only give manufacturers an excuse to charge higher prices for more
highly-rated tires, thereby providing them larger profits.
Finally, Kelly stated that although the cost of tire mold reworking
would be minimal, the costs associated with the proposed change would
not be insignificant. Kelly stated that the 6,750 paper labels used in
the Kelly production scheme would have to be changed to reflect the 4-
grade traction rating system when only a very small number of higher
grade changes would occur. Kelly asserted that the cost of changing
those labels would be significant due to the necessity for new artwork,
production of new labels, and subsequent destruction or other disposal
of obsolete labels. CGT estimated that adding an AA grade would incur
costs of $48,000 for new labels and required point-of-sale information.
Like Kelly, Dean Tire & Rubber Company argued that adding an AA rating
to the UTQGS would increase costs with no commensurate benefit.
III. Agency Decision
(a) Treadwear. NHTSA does not disagree that the treadwear grading
procedure could be further improved. NHTSA does disagree, however, with
Goodyear and Kelly that the treadwear grade should be eliminated. As
the agency noted in the NPRM, 74 percent of consumers are familiar with
the treadwear rating and 29 percent consider it in purchasing tires.
Thus, the solution is not to eliminate the treadwear rating, but to
improve the grading procedure to make the rating as meaningful and
helpful as possible to the tire-buying public.
As stated above, when the NPRM was published on May 24, 1995, the
then-current BCWR was 1.47 MPTM. Since that time, a new lot of CMTs was
[[Page 47441]]
procured and calibrated with a BCWR of 1.34. Thus, the BCWR continues
its steady decline. To control that decline, this final rule announces
the freezing of the BCWR at 1.34. Nothing in the comments has dissuaded
NHTSA from believing that freezing the BCWR at 1.34 will significantly
reduce, if not eliminate altogether, any variation in the grading
results between lots. The agency also believes that the use of ASTM-
specification tires with strict quality control will also contribute to
controlling any lot-to-lot variations. NHTSA notes that the changes in
the BCWRs have been consistently in the downward direction. If tire
performance were changing appreciably due to production variables, the
BCWR could be expected to change randomly in either direction.
NHTSA also disagrees with the commenters that stated that
manufacturers' treadwear warranties have progressed to the point that
they can supplant the UTQGS treadwear ratings. One manufacturer
acknowledged that manufacturers' treadwear warranties are not always
based on test results. Further, not all tires carry manufacturers'
warranties and the terms of such warranties are not uniform.
Accordingly, NHTSA believes that the UTQGS treadwear ratings are more
accurate, consistent, and meaningful to consumers than manufacturers'
warranties because the UTQGS ratings are based on uniformly applicable
criteria.
The commenters' suggestions for changing the treadwear grading
procedure fall into 2 basic categories: Revising the road test and
developing a laboratory test. The commenters favoring the revised road
test stated that the San Angelo test course is too mild and that, with
the great improvement in treadwear in recent years, a test of only
6,400 miles does not provide sufficient tread wear on which to base
reliable projections to wearout. The commenters that favored the
laboratory test argued that a lab test would eliminate the need for
CMTs and test convoys and would provide consistent, repeatable test
results. In neither case did commenters suggest any specific test
procedures nor offer any data that could form the basis for development
of revised tests. NHTSA believes that adoption of either of these
alternatives could entail considerable expenditure of funds and
resources. Expansion of the road test to more closely approximate full-
life testing of treadwear would increase the test duration and
significantly increase costs and environmental impact. NHTSA's
experience has shown that laboratory test machines lose repeatability
because the abrasive surfaces of the test wheels tend to fill up with
rubber particles. Accordingly, NHTSA does not believe that either of
these alternatives is practicable at this time. The agency has,
however, requested the assistance of the ASTM F9 committee in devising
a better treadwear test. In addition, the agency intends to request
data on the effects of aging on treadwear performance and storage
procedures to reduce aging in a future Federal Register notice.
NHTSA believes, therefore, that until a better treadwear grading
procedure can be devised, the BCWR should be fixed at its present value
of 1.34 MPTM. The establishment of a BCWR for a new lot of CMTs does
not normally need to be promulgated by rulemaking action published in
the Federal Register. In this case, however, since the agency solicited
public comment on its proposal to change the procedure for calculating
the BCWR by fixing it at a permanent value, the agency deems it
appropriate to announce this decision in the Federal Register.
(b) Traction. As noted above, Goodyear again commented that the new
skid pads at the UTQGTF are more severe than the old pads in traction
rating. NHTSA notes that the skid pads were changed in December 1991,
and acknowledges that there may be a statistical difference in test
results between the new pads and the old pads. Since the old pads no
longer exist, however, the agency is not able to make a comparison for
the purpose of devising a possible correction factor. Nevertheless, the
agency believes that any differences in the test results do not
significantly affect the traction ratings of tire lines and in any
case, new tire lines should by now, after nearly 5 years, have replaced
those tested on the old skid pads. Thus, most tires should by now be
graded on a common basis.
Several commenters proposed other types of traction testing,
including the testing of hydroplaning, cornering, acceleration, and
peak traction characteristics, and testing in various water depths,
ambient conditions, and road surfaces. While the agency regards these
suggestions as worthy of consideration, they go beyond the scope of the
proposals in the NPRM. Those traction factors could, however, be the
subject of future agency research.
While Dunlop's suggestion that the traction grade be labeled ``wet
traction'' on the tire sidewall and on other required labels may be
somewhat more informative to the public, such a change would require
the modification of tire molds, tread labels, and point-of-sale
brochures. NHTSA believes that the costs associated with such a subtle
change could not be justified by any perceived benefit.
NHTSA does not agree with Advocates' suggestion for raising the
cutoff values for the existing traction grades rather than establishing
a new grading category. The agency believes that considerable public
confusion could be generated during the transition to the higher cutoff
values where tires bearing the same grade but with significantly
different traction characteristics are available side-by-side on store
shelves. Such a transition could be lengthy because changing tire molds
could take as long as 2 to 3 years and some tires may remain in
dealers' stocks for a year or more. Further, since the UTQGS are only
consumer information and do not establish minimum traction performance
levels, the agency believes that simply adding an ``AA'' grade to the
UTQGS traction ratings is the simplest, least confusing, least
burdensome, and most cost effective way of differentiating between
those few tire lines with the highest traction performance
characteristics and those tire lines with lower levels of performance.
Advocates expressed concern that manufacturers would increase their
prices for AA rated tires to the detriment of consumers. NHTSA
acknowledges that manufacturers may choose to increase the prices of
their AA traction-rated tires. However, the agency regards that as the
type of marketing decision that manufacturers, distributors, and
dealers are free to make in response to any product rating program.
NHTSA believes that a tire rated AA for traction identifies that tire
as one with superior traction performance and even if it costs slightly
more, the consumer is advised of the specific characteristics of the
tire from which he or she can make an informed purchasing decision.
NHTSA believes that while there may be some costs associated with
the preparation and printing of tread labels and point-of-sale
brochures, such costs can be minimized with adequate lead time.
Manufacturers typically revise their labels and brochures annually,
presumably not printing them in unlimited quantities. Thus, a lead time
of 18 months should permit new labels and brochures to be prepared and
printed in accordance with the normal business cycle, without undue
scrappage of obsolete material. With respect to changing tire molds,
the agency notes that since an AA rating is optional, tire
manufacturers have an unlimited time in which to change molds on
qualifying tire lines, if they decide to rate their tires with a
traction
[[Page 47442]]
grade of AA at all. Accordingly, NHTSA believes that the minor costs
associated with this rulemaking are well justified by the value of this
rulemaking to consumers (see detailed discussion of costs and benefits
in Section IV, below).
The agency proposed the AA rating criteria in the NPRM based on the
statistical distribution of traction test results of 254 tire lines
tested on the new skid pads at the UTQGTF. The distribution of the
traction coefficients of the tested tires showed a mean, or average,
value of 0.516 on wet asphalt and 0.364 on wet concrete, with a
standard deviation of 0.029 on the wet asphalt and 0.017 on the wet
concrete. Since those calculations were made, NHTSA has tested 40
additional tire lines. The mean plus one standard deviation for the
entire population of 294 tires is 0.548 for asphalt and 0.387 for
concrete. This compares to the values of the mean minus one standard
deviation of 0.484 for asphalt and 0.341 for concrete, which are close
to the current threshold values for the A grade. The agency believes
that the proposed AA traction grade threshold is statistically
compatible with the ranges for the A grade and the combined ranges of
the B and C grades since, of the 294 tires tested, only 34 (12 percent)
would qualify for the AA traction grade while 213 (72 percent) would
qualify for the A grade. Thus, there should be approximately the same
number of tire lines graded AA as are graded B and C.
IV. Cost/Benefit Analysis
(a) Treadwear. The fixing of the BCWR at a permanent value of 1.34
MPTM will not cause the Federal government or tire manufacturers to
incur any additional costs. Instead, it will substantially reduce the
cost of CMTs to tire testers and remove the necessity for the
government to contract for one test convoy each year.
Tire manufacturers routinely purchase CMTs from lots procured by
the government for testing of their tire lines. Prior to September 1,
1995, NHTSA charged $304.50 per tire. A DOT Inspector General audit,
however, concluded that NHTSA was not recovering the full cost of
purchasing, storing, and testing the CMTs. By final rule published on
August 2, 1995 (60 FR 39269) NHTSA started charging $379.00 per tire,
effective September 1, 1995. That charge included the government's
purchase price of $250.00, $45.00 in testing costs to establish the
BCWR, $34.00 for storage costs, and $50.00 for general facility costs
and related salaries.
NHTSA estimates that fixing the BCWR at a permanent value will
eliminate the need to calibrate new lots of CMTs, perhaps even
eliminating the need for the government to purchase and store CMTs for
resale. The savings to the government realized by not having to procure
and store CMTs for resale and by not having to operate at least one
test convoy per year is difficult to quantify. However, manufacturers
purchasing CMTs from the government, even though they would no longer
need to, could realize savings of from $45.00 to $95.00 per tire. At
least the $45.00 testing cost could be saved, as well as perhaps some
or all of the storage and/or facility costs.
Although the specific benefits of this change are also difficult to
quantify, it is expected to reduce or eliminate the treadwear grade
inflation experienced in the past, thereby relieving manufacturers of
the possible need to retest certain tire lines and providing consumers
more consistent and reliable treadwear grade information.
(b) Traction. The addition of an AA traction grade will not require
any additional testing by manufacturers. Further, as previously noted,
the assessing of an AA traction grade is optional for manufacturers.
Accordingly, any costs associated with changing tire molds to show an
AA grade can be phased in at the manufacturers' convenience and during
the regular course of reworking the molds for their tire lines. In any
case, only a very few tire lines will be affected. Accordingly, NHTSA
estimates that there should be no additional mold or testing costs to
manufacturers as a result of this change.
The only additional costs required by this change will be to
indicate the existence of a new traction grade on tread labels and
point-of-sale brochures. CGT estimated this cost to be $48,000. Pirelli
estimated the cost of new artwork for labels to be $12,000 and the cost
of brochures and dealer price books at $104,000. Kelly stated that
6,750 label designs would need to be changed, but gave no cost figure.
Goodyear estimated that it would cost $26,000 for new labels and
$120,000 for new point-of-sale brochures. MBS estimated that the costs
of new labels and brochures would be $15 million for the tire industry.
None of the commenters specified whether the costs they quoted were
additional annual costs or whether those were one-time costs associated
with adding a description of the AA grade for the first time. Tire
manufacturers update and reissue their labels and brochures
periodically, normally annually, to account for new tire lines and
improvements or changes in existing tire lines. It follows, therefore,
that once a description of the AA grade is printed on/in the labels and
brochures, that description can be repeated without change on
subsequent labels and brochures without adding any additional costs to
those printings. Accordingly, the agency assumes the figures quoted
above are one-time costs only.
The MBS estimate of $15 million appears to be very high, compared
to the figures estimated by the manufacturers themselves. Even so,
NHTSA regards $15 million as a maximum figure applicable to the entire
tire industry that, as previously pointed out, would be a one-time
expenditure only.
This change will substantially benefit consumers by allowing them
to identify those tire lines with the highest traction performance
characteristics, thereby providing them even greater tire selectivity
and allowing them to make even more-informed choices. In addition,
NHTSA believes that introduction of an AA traction rating will provide
an incentive to tire manufacturers to improve the traction performance
of new tire lines, thereby contributing to motor vehicle safety.
V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
(a) Executive Order No. 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
This document was reviewed under Executive Order No. 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review. NHTSA has analyzed the impact of this
rulemaking action and has determined that it is ``significant'' under
the DOT's regulatory policies and procedures because the proposal which
preceded it contained an issue of substantial public and congressional
interest. That issue, the substitution of a fuel economy grade for the
existing temperature resistance grade, is not addressed in this final
rule.
The Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation prepared by this agency for
the 1995 NPRM remains valid as to the amendments adopted in this final
rule. See section IV, Cost/Benefit Analysis, above for a full
discussion of cost savings, additional costs, and proposed anticipated
benefits of this rulemaking.
(b) Regulatory Flexibility Act
NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that the amendments
promulgated by this final rule will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, a regulatory
flexibility analysis has not been prepared.
The agency believes that few, if any, tire manufacturers qualify as
small
[[Page 47443]]
businesses. Small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental units may be affected by this rulemaking action only to
the extent that they could possibly pay slightly more for tires that
are graded AA for traction performance characteristics.
(c) Executive Order 12612, Federalism
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance with the
principles and criteria of Executive Order 12612 and has determined
that this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
(d) National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act and has determined that
implementation of this rulemaking action will not have any significant
impact on the quality of the human environment.
(e) Paperwork Reduction Act
The provisions of this final rule requiring manufacturers to mold
certain information into or onto the sidewalls of tires and to affix
labels to tires explaining the tire quality grades for the benefit of
consumers are considered to be third-party information collection
requirements as defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in
5 CFR part 1320. The information collection requirements for 49 CFR
575.104 have been submitted to and approved by OMB pursuant to the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Sec. 3501, et seq.
This collection of information authority has been assigned OMB control
number 2127-0519, Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards, 49 CFR Part
575.104, and has been approved for use through September 30, 1998.
(f) Civil Justice Reform
This final rule does not have any retroactive effect. Under 49
U.S.C. 30103(b), whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in
effect, a state or political subdivision thereof may prescribe or
continue in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of
performance of a motor vehicle only if the standard is identical to the
Federal standard. However, a state may prescribe a standard for a motor
vehicle or equipment obtained for its own use that imposes a higher
performance requirement than the Federal standard. 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30161
sets forth a procedure for judicial review of final rules establishing,
amending or revoking Federal motor vehicle safety standards. A petition
for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings is not required
before parties may file suit in court.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 575
Consumer protection, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping, Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 575 is amended as
follows:
PART 575--CONSUMER INFORMATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 575 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. Secs. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
2. Section 575.104 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(1)(i)(B);
(d)(1)(iii); (d)(2)(i); the introductory text of (d)(2)(ii);
(e)(2)(ix)(C); Figure 1; Part I and the introductory text of Part II of
Figure 2; and the paragraph entitled ``Traction'' in Part II of Figure
2; by adding paragaph (d)(2)(ii)(D); and by removing paragraphs (i),
(j), (k), and (1), to read as follows:
Sec. 575.104 Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards.
* * * * *
(d) Requirements--(1) Information.
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(B) Each tire manufactured on and after the effective date of these
amendments, other than a tire sold as original equipment on a new
vehicle, shall have affixed to its tread surface so as not to be easily
removable a label or labels containing its grades and other information
in the form illustrated in Figure 2, Parts I and II. The treadwear
grade attributed to the tire shall be either imprinted or indelibly
stamped on the label containing the material in Part I of Figure 2,
directly to the right of or below the word ``TREADWEAR.'' The traction
grade attributed to the tire shall be indelibly circled in an array of
the potential grade letters AA, A, B, or C, directly to the right of or
below the word ``TRACTION'' in Part I of Figure 2. The temperature
resistance grade attributed to the tire shall be indelibly circled in
an array of the potential grade letters A, B, or C, directly to the
right of or below the word ``TEMPERATURE'' in Part I of Figure 2. The
words ``TREADWEAR,'' ``TRACTION,'' AND ``TEMPERATURE,'' in that order,
may be laid out vertically or horizontally. The text of Part II of
Figure 2 may be printed in capital letters. The text of Part I and the
text of Part II of Figure 2 need not appear on the same label, but the
edges of the two texts must be positioned on the tire tread so as to be
separated by a distance of no more than one inch. If the text of Part I
and the text of Part II of Figure 2 are placed on separate labels, the
notation ``See EXPLANATION OF DOT QUALITY GRADES'' shall be added to
the bottom of the Part I text, and the words ``EXPLANATION OF DOT
QUALITY GRADES'' shall appear at the top of the Part II text. The text
of Figure 2 shall be oriented on the tire tread surface with lines of
type running perpendicular to the tread circumference. If a label
bearing a tire size designation is attached to the tire tread surface
and the tire size designation is oriented with lines type running
perpendicular to the tread circumference, the text of Figure 2 shall
read in the same direction as the tire size designation.
* * * * *
(iii) In the case of information required in accordance with
Sec. 575.6(a) to be furnished to the first purchaser of a new motor
vehicle, each manufacturer of motor vehicles shall, as part of the
required information, list all possible grades for traction and
temperature resistance and restate verbatim the explanation for each
performance area specified in Figure 2. The information need not be in
the format of Figure 2, but it must contain a statement referring the
reader to the tire sidewall for the specific tire grades for the tires
with which the vehicle is equipped.
(2) Performance.--(i) Treadwear. Each tire shall be graded for
treadwear performance with the word ``TREADWEAR'' followed by a number
of two or three digits representing the tire's grade for treadwear,
expressed as a percentage of the NHTSA nominal treadwear value, when
tested in accordance with the conditions and procedures specified in
paragraph (e) of this section. Treadwear grades shall be expressed in
multiples of 20 (for example, 80, 120, 160).
(ii) Traction. Each tire shall be graded for traction performance
with the word ``TRACTION,'' followed by the symbols AA, A, B, or C,
when the tire is tested in accordance with the conditions and
procedures specified in paragraph (f) of this section.
* * * * *
(D) The tire may be graded AA only when its adjusted traction
coefficient is both:
(1) More than 0.54 when tested in accordance with
paragraph (f)(2) of this section on the asphalt surface specified in
paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section; and
(2) More than 0.38 when tested in accordance with
paragraph (f)(2) of this
[[Page 47444]]
section on the concrete surface specified in paragraph (f)(1)(i) of
this section.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(ix) * * *
(C) Determine the course severity adjustment factor by assigning a
base course wear rate of 1.34 to the course monitoring tires and
dividing that rate by the average wear rate for the four course
monitoring tires.
* * * * *
(i) Removed.
(j) Removed.
(k) Removed.
(l) Removed.
* * * * *
BILLING CODE 4910-53-P
[[Page 47445]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR09SE96.023
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
[[Page 47446]]
Figure 2--[Part I]--DOT QUALITY GRADES
TREADWEAR
TRACTION AA A B C
TEMPERATURE A B C
(Part II) All Passenger Car Tires Must Conform to Federal Safety
Requirements In Addition To These Grades
* * * * *
TRACTION
The traction grades, from highest to lowest, are AA, A, B, and
C. Those grades represent the tire's ability to stop on wet pavement
as measured under controlled conditions on specified government test
surfaces of asphalt and concrete. A tire marked C may have poor
traction performance. Warning: The traction grade assigned to this
tire is based on straight-ahead braking traction tests, and does not
include acceleration, cornering, hydroplaning, or peak traction
characteristics.
* * * * *
Issued on August 30, 1996.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-22761 Filed 9-6-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P