[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 80 (Monday, April 27, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20564-20565]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11177]



[[Page 20564]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket NHTSA-98-3398]
RIN 2127-AF05


Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Retreaded/Regrooved for 
New Trailers

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

ACTION: Withdrawal of rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This notice withdraws rulemaking in connection with a petition 
from the Tire Retreading Institute (TRI) requesting that manufacturer-
supplied retreaded tires be permitted for installation on new trailers. 
TRI said in its petition that there was no safety justification for the 
limitations on the use of retreaded tires, and that there would be 
significant environmental benefits from encouraging greater use of 
retreads.
    NHTSA is withdrawing rulemaking because of its concern that safety 
could be degraded, since there is no safety standard establishing 
performance requirements for retreaded tires to be used on new 
trailers. Since there would be no means for the purchaser or this 
agency to assure the quality of retreads installed on new trailers, 
NHTSA is concerned that making the change in the petition could lessen 
safety.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Joseph P. Scott, Office of Crash 
Avoidance Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590 (202) 366-8525.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

a. Tire Retreating Institute (TRI) Petition

    In 1993, the Tire Retreading Institute (TRI) filed a petition 
asking the agency to permit trailer manufacturers and distributors and 
dealers to install retreaded tires on new trailers without any 
limitations. TRI said its petition that there was no safety 
justification for the limitations on the use of retreaded tires, and 
that there would be significant environmental benefits from encouraging 
greater use of retreads. Docket No. 95-43 was initiated in response to 
the Tire Retreading Institute (TRI) petition.
    TRI asserted that the current restriction on the source of 
retreaded tires is not supported by safety considerations, by 
implication, asserting that retreaded tires are safe. TRI stated in its 
comments that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had urged the 
industry to petition NHTSA to revise its regulations in this area.
    TRI proposed new language for S5.1.3 of Sec. 571.120, as follows:

    In place of tires that meet the requirement of Standard No. 119, 
a trailer may be equipped with retreaded tires if the sum of the 
maximum load ratings meets the requirements of S5.1.2 and the 
purchaser is informed in writing that the trailer is equipped with 
such retreaded tires.

b. History of NHTSA Tire Standard

    FMVSS No. 120 requires that vehicles equipped with pneumatic tires 
for highway service be equipped with new tires that meet the 
requirements of either FMVSS No. 109 or FMVSS No. 119. However, in 
place of tires that meet FMVSS No. 119 paragraph S5.1.3 of FMVSS No. 
120 permits a truck, bus, or trailer to--at the request of the vehicle 
purchaser--be equipped at the place of the vehicle's manufacture with 
used or retreaded tires owned or leased by the vehicle purchaser. Only 
the vehicle manufacturer can, per the request of the purchaser, install 
retreaded tires on a new trailer--dealers and distributors are 
prohibited. The sum of the maximum load ratings of the tires must meet 
the requirements paragraph S5.1.2 of the standard, which requires the 
sum of the maximum load ratings of the tires fitted to an axle to be 
equal to the weight rating of the axle system. Also, only tires 
originally manufactured to comply with FMVSS No. 119, as evidenced by a 
DOT symbol marked on the sidewall of tire, can qualify for the S5.1.3 
exception.
    These limitations on the use of retreaded tires were established 
because NHTSA has no safety standard for non-passenger car retreaded 
tires. Absent a safety standard, NHTS decided to establish some 
limitations--to help ensure reasonable safety--on the use of retreaded 
or regrooved tires on new trucks and trailers. With respect to 
retreads, the agency presumed that the trailer purchaser would impose a 
quality control program for the retreads given to the trailer 
manufacturer that would assure the purchaser that its new vehicle had 
appropriate tires.
    FMVSS No. 120 was promulgated in a Federal Register notice dated 
January 23, 1976 (41 FR 3467) and became effective in phases between 
September 1, 1976 and September 1, 1979. Initially, the S5.1.3 
exception applied only to used tires owned or leased by the vehicle 
purchaser, if the maximum load ratings were sufficient to carry the 
loads of the axles on which they were installed. This action was 
intended to accommodate ``mileage contract purchasers,'' a common 
practice in the commercial truck, bus, and trailer industry by which 
the purchaser's vehicles are equipped with tires purchased or leased 
from a supplier on a cost-per-mile basis.
    NHTSA reviewed the standard after its issuance and noticed some 
minor errors and areas that required clarification. NHTSA published the 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on October 30, 1980 (45 FR 71834) 
proposing to amend S5.1.3 to permit the installation of retreaded as 
well as used tires, but limiting the exception to mileage contract 
purchasers only. The agency reasoned that suppliers who provided tires 
on a mileage contract basis had a contractual obligation to ensure that 
the tires were serviceable and safe for use on the vehicles for which 
they were intended. The agency further stated that this safeguard would 
not exist in the case of any other purchaser who was merely trying to 
save the cost of purchasing new tires, since a purchaser could send the 
vehicle manufacturer marginal or unsafe tires for mounting on a new 
vehicle.

c. NPRM (October 30, 1980)

    In response to the NPRM dated October 30, 1980, thirteen comments 
were received by the docket--twelve of which opposed the provision 
limiting the exception to mileage contract purchasers. The commenters 
stated that it is common practice for all vehicle fleets, not just 
mileage contract purchasers, to send tires from their banks to vehicle 
manufacturers for mounting on the new vehicles that they order. Tire 
banks are composed of serviceable tires that have been removed from 
vehicles that are no longer in service. The commenters argued that the 
proposal in the NPRM to limit the used/retreaded tire exception to 
mileage contract purchasers would effectively eliminate the practice of 
maintaining tire banks, thereby increasing the cost for the vehicle 
fleets affected with no safety justification for doing so. Some 
commenters also argued that it made no sense for a purchaser to spend 
$65,000 to $75,000 for a new vehicle, then install unsafe tires on it. 
Finally, one commenter correctly noted that FMVSS No. 120 did not 
require that new vehicles be equipped with tires. Therefore, a 
purchaser could--if they chose to do so--order a new vehicle without 
tires, then install unsafe tires after delivery.
    NHTSA was persuaded by those comments and decided not to limit the

[[Page 20565]]

use of used and retreaded tires only to mileage contract purchasers, 
but to widen the exception to permit all purchasers to provide their 
own tires. In addition, since all commenters who addressed the 
retreaded tire proposal supported it, NHTSA adopted that provision for 
inclusion in S5.1.3. NHTSA published the final rule promulgating the 
current provisions of FMVSS No. 120 on May 17, 1984 (49 FR 20822).

d. Federal Register Notice (June 1, 1995)

    On June 1, 1995, NHTSA's Federal Register Notice solicited comments 
on TRI's petition and whether the standard should be further amended to 
permit manufacturers, distributors, and dealers--in addition to 
purchasers--to install used and/or retreaded tires on new trucks and 
buses. Also in the notice, NHTSA posed fourteen questions in an attempt 
to obtain data ranging from the percentage of purchasers that use tire 
contracts and/or tire banks to the environmental impact of granting the 
petition.

e. Agency's Decision

    NHTSA received 13 comments in response to its notice. Three 
commenters clearly supported the idea of expanding the use of retreads 
on new trailers. TRI, the petitioner, repeated its request for that 
expansion in its comments, noting that NHTSA has no safety data showing 
that retreads are less safe than new tires. Dempster Industries, Inc. 
(a trailer manufacturer) and Becker Tire & Treading, Inc. (a retreader) 
both noted that recycling is important and the requested expansion 
would result in cost savings for all. Two other commenters did not 
oppose the idea of expanding the use of retreads on new trailers. The 
American Trucking Association (ATA) stated that retreads cost about 
half as much as new tires and that its members believe manufacturers 
and dealers are capable of installing suitable retreads on new 
trailers. ATA said that this should not present any serious problems if 
the customer is clearly told what he or she is getting. Fixible, a bus 
manufacturer, indicated that, while it did not oppose the change, that 
company would continue to install only new tires, unless retreads were 
provided by the purchaser.
    Eight commenters opposed the expansion requested in the petition. 
Two tire manufacturers, Dunlop and Continental General Tire, both urged 
the agency to leave the requirements as they are. Dunlop noted that 
there is no Federal standard regulating these retreads and that 
allowing any retread to be used on new trailers would increase the 
number of tire failures experienced by new trailers. Both the 
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and the Advocates for Highway 
and Auto Safety also noted the absence of any Federal standard for 
these retreads and recommended that any expansion in the use of 
retreads on new trailers should be accompanied by a new Federal 
standard for these retreads. The National Automobile Dealers 
Association opposed the expansion, arguing that the price difference 
for new vs. retreaded tires is insignificant when compared to the price 
of a new vehicle. Two trailer manufacturers opposed the proposed 
change. Big Tex Trailers stated that tires are critical to safety and 
the prior history of retreads is not known. In that company's view, the 
change requested would lessen safety. Sooner Trailer Manufacturing Co., 
Inc. commented that the National Association of Trailer Manufacturers, 
which represents manufacturers of trailers with a gross vehicle weight 
rating of less than 26,000 pounds, has adopted a recommendation that 
its members refrain from using retreads as original equipment on new 
trailers. Finally, the American Retreaders Association commented that 
it opposed the change and that its members believe the current 
regulatory provisions work well.
    After considering these comments and reexamining this area, NHTSA 
has decided to terminate rulemaking on this petition. Standard No. 120 
currently requires a quality control check of tires mounted on new 
vehicles other than passenger cars. If those tires are new tires, they 
must be certified as complying with NHTSA's safety standards for new 
tires. If the tires mounted on new vehicles are used or retreaded 
tires, the purchaser has furnished those tires to the vehicle 
manufacturer. Given the substantial investment the purchaser is making 
in a new vehicle, NHTSA has trusted purchasers to take adequate steps 
to assure that the tires given to the manufacturer are safe and 
suitable for use on the new vehicle.
    Under the approach requested in TRI's petition, quality control of 
the tires on new trailers would be left up to vehicle manufacturers and 
dealers. As noted in the comments, there is no Federal safety standard 
for non-passenger car retreads. In addition, NHTSA is unaware of any 
voluntary consensus industry standard for these retreads. Given these 
circumstances, it would be very difficult for vehicle manufacturers and 
dealers to apply any uniform standards for quality control purposes. 
Absent uniform standards, it would be difficult to assure no 
degradation of safety of the tires installed on new trailers and other 
non-passenger cars.
    NHTSA would reexamine this area if information becomes available 
indicating that adequate quality control could be assured, such as an 
industry standard, best practices of major retreaders, or other 
voluntary approaches, as well as, a possible Federal Safety Standard. 
Without assuring quality control of these retreads, NHTSA is concerned 
that the safety of tires on new trailers would be diminished.

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

    Issued on: April 21, 1998.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-11177 Filed 4-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M