[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 22, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14420-14426]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-5580]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2004-17917]


Tire Safety Information

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

ACTION: Final rule; response to petitions for reconsideration; 
technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: In November 2002, NHTSA published a final rule establishing, 
among other things, new tire safety information labeling requirements 
for vehicles. In June 2004, we published a final rule (June 2004 final 
rule) responding to petitions for reconsideration on a variety of 
issues, and made certain amendments to the new vehicle labeling 
requirements. The new tire safety information labeling requirements for 
vehicles become effective September 1, 2005.
    This document responds to petitions for reconsideration of the June 
2004 final rule requesting further changes to the vehicle labeling 
requirements. After carefully considering the petitions, the agency is 
modifying certain aspects of these requirements by allowing the option 
of including selected additional information.

DATES: This rule is effective September 1, 2005, except for the 
amendment to S4.4.2, which is effective June 1, 2007. Voluntary 
compliance is permitted before that time. In addition, vehicle placards 
conforming to the amended requirements of S4.3 of 49 CFR 571.110, as 
published on November 18, 2002 (66 FR 69600) and including any 
correcting amendments, may be used for vehicles manufactured before 
September 1, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical and policy issues: Ms. 
Mary Versailles, Office of International Policy, Fuel Economy and 
Consumer Programs. Telephone: (202) 366-2750. Fax: (202) 493-2290. E-
mail: [email protected].
    For legal issues: George Feygin, Attorney Advisor, Office of the 
Chief Counsel. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. Fax: (202) 366-3820. E-mail: 
[email protected].
    Both persons may be reached at the following address: NHTSA, 400 
7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Summary of Decision
II. Background
III. Petitions for Reconsideration
IV. Discussion and Analysis
    A. Optional load identification for light truck tires
    B. Load index number and speed rating symbol
    C. Supplemental identifier other than VIN or barcode
    D. Placard format subheadings
    E. Effective date
    F. Miscellaneous questions and issues addressed in other 
documents
V. Regulatory Text

I. Summary of Decision

    In November 2002, NHTSA published a final rule establishing, among 
other things, new tire safety information labeling requirements for 
vehicles. In June 2004, we published a final rule responding to 
petitions for reconsideration on a variety of issues, and made certain 
amendments to the new vehicle labeling requirements. In response to the 
June 2004 final rule, NHTSA received several new petitions for 
reconsideration. After considering these petitions, this final rule 
makes a technical amendment to the new vehicle labeling requirements to 
permit certain additional information on the placard and the label at 
the option of the manufacturer. Specifically, the manufacturers may 
show light truck tire load range identification and tire service 
description information on the placard or the label. Further, the 
manufacturers may place an alphanumeric and/or barcode part identifier 
along the bottom or side edges of the placard or the label. This final 
rule also clarifies certain placard and label subheading requirements 
and responds to several requests for legal interpretations. We are 
denying requests to delay the effective date of September 1, 2005 
because we have neither changed nor imposed new mandatory vehicle 
labeling requirements. However, between September 1, 2005 and August 
31, 2006, the manufacturers can use placards and labels that comply 
with the requirements of the November 2002 final rule.

II. Background

    The Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and 
Documentation Act of 2000 (TREAD Act) \1\ required the agency to, among 
other things, improve tire labeling in order to assist consumers in 
identifying tires that may be the subject of a recall.\2\ Additionally, 
the TREAD Act provided that the agency may take whatever additional 
action it deemed appropriate to ensure that the public is aware of the 
importance of observing motor vehicle tire load limits and maintaining 
proper tire inflation levels for safe vehicle operation.\3\ For 
example, such additional action could include a requirement that the 
manufacturers provide the vehicle purchasers with information on 
appropriate tire inflation levels and load limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Pub. L. 106-414, November 1, 2000.
    \2\ See id at Sec. 11(a).
    \3\ See id at Sec. 11(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to this mandate, NHTSA published a final rule (November 
2002 final rule), which among other things, established new tire safety 
information labeling requirements for vehicles.\4\ These requirements 
become effective September 1, 2005, and are specified in S4.3 of 
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

[[Page 14421]]

Standard (FMVSS) No. 110. The final rule requires that each vehicle 
(other than a motorcycle) with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 
10,000 pounds or less contain either a new Vehicle Placard showing 
certain tire and loading information (placard), or a combination of a 
placard currently required by FMVSS No. 110, and a new Tire Inflation 
Pressure Label (label). The final rule specifies the content, format, 
and location for the placard and the label. Subsequent documents 
clarified the applicability of the final rule \5\ and extended the 
compliance date for the vehicle labeling provisions.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 67 FR 69600 (November 18, 2002).
    \5\ See June 26, 2003 correcting amendment at 68 FR 37981.
    \6\ See 68 FR 33655 (June 5, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 3, 2004, NHTSA published a final rule; response to 
petitions for reconsideration of the November 2002 final rule (June 
2004 final rule).\7\ The agency made the following changes to the 
vehicle labeling requirements:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 69 FR 31306.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The placard and label could contain a barcode or vehicle 
identification number (VIN) on the right side of the placard or the 
label.
     The placard and the label could contain tire load 
indications of ``XL'' or ``Reinforced.''
     We clarified the use of red and yellow ink on the placard 
and the label.
     The placard format was revised to match the format of the 
label.
     The effective date for vehicle labeling requirements was 
extended to September 1, 2005.
    Subsequent to issuing the June 2004 final rule, the agency 
published a correction notice and issued several letters of 
interpretation pertaining to questions addressed in this document. We 
will discuss our correction notice and relevant interpretation letters 
in Section IV.

III. Petitions for Reconsideration

    NHTSA received three petitions for reconsideration of the June 2004 
final rule from General Motors (GM), the Rubber Manufacturers 
Association (RMA), and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers 
(Alliance).\8\ Further, the agency received several requests for legal 
interpretations of the new vehicle labeling requirements. We addressed 
some of these requests by issuing letters of interpretations, and 
promised to address other questions when we issued this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ These petitions are available online at http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm (Docket No. NHTSA-2004-17917).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following issues were raised in the petitions:
     GM petitioned the agency to allow optional light truck 
tire load identifications of B, C, D, E, or F on the placard and the 
label.
     Alliance and RMA petitioned the agency to allow optional 
service description (load index number and speed rating symbol) on the 
placard and the label.
     Alliance petitioned the agency to allow the use of a part 
identifier other than the VIN or a bar code on the placard and the 
label, and to delete the location requirements for that identifier.
     Alliance petitioned the agency to limit the spare tire 
information requirement to only compact spare tires, and not full-size 
spare tires or vehicles without spares.
     Alliance petitioned the agency to revise S4.3.3 to show 
tire and rim size information on the certification label only once if 
the same tire and rim combinations can apply to the front and rear 
axle.
     Alliance petitioned the agency to suspend the effective 
date until all issues have been resolved, allowing manufacturers the 
option of complying with: (a) the requirements in effect prior to 
November 2002 final rule; or (b) the requirements of the November 2002 
final rule; or (c) the requirements of the June 2004 final rule.
     GM and Alliance petitioned the agency to correct the 
regulatory text so that it permits the use of subheadings ``size,'' or 
``original tire size,'' or ``original size.''
     GM petitioned the agency to correct S4.3.4(c) and 
S4.3.4(b), which the agency had discussed in the preamble to the 2004 
final rule, but failed to include in the regulatory text.
    The following issues were raised in letters requesting legal 
interpretations and comments to the docket:
     VW asked if manufacturers could use placards and optional 
labels printed prior to the publication of the June 2004 final rule.
     Subaru and Hyundai asked the agency if manufacturers could 
use ``an alpha-numeric identifier'' in place of the VIN or barcode. 
These requests were similar to one of the issues raised by Alliance.
     In a comment to the docket, Ford indicated support for the 
Alliance petition and urged the agency to permit optional service 
description (load index number and speed rating symbol) on the placard 
or optional label.

IV. Discussion and Analysis

A. Optional Load Range Identification for Light Truck Tires

    The current language of the new vehicle labeling requirements only 
lists optional tire load identifications ``XL'' or ``reinforced.'' \9\ 
In its petition and a subsequent October 11, 2004 letter, GM asked the 
agency to amend the vehicle labeling requirements to also allow 
optional light truck tire load range identifications B, C, D, E, or F 
on the placard and label. GM noted that optional light truck load range 
identifications B, C, D, E, or F are used for light truck tires to 
identify load carrying capability in the same way load identification 
XL is used for passenger car tires to identify extra load carrying 
capability. GM reasoned that light truck owners should be made aware of 
tire load carrying capabilities so that they know to replace these 
tires with ones capable of holding similar loads. GM cautioned that the 
same size light truck tires may have different load carrying 
capabilities. Thus, it is not enough for the vehicle placard to specify 
the tire size. Alliance and RMA also urged the agency to allow optional 
light truck tire load range identifications for similar reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See S4.3(i) of FMVSS No. 110, effective September 1, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a letter to GM dated February 18, 2004, NHTSA stated that it was 
not the agency's intent to allow the load rating identification for 
passenger car tires, but prohibit it for light truck tires.\10\ We 
interpreted the language of S4.3(i) of FMVSS No. 110 to permit the use 
of light truck tire load range identifications B, C, D, E, or F. We 
stated that we would amend the regulatory text to make this clear, and 
are doing so in this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/GF007220-2.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Load Index Number and Speed Rating Symbol

    RMA and Alliance petitioned the agency to allow the placard and the 
label to show service description information, consisting of a numeric 
tire load index and a speed rating. Ford also submitted a comment 
indicating support for the Alliance request to show this additional 
information.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2004-17917-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, RMA and Alliance argued that speed rating symbols help 
assure compatibility between the maximum speed capability of the 
vehicle and tires. Alliance indicated that there is an industry 
consensus of opinion regarding service description information and its 
usefulness to consumers. In support of its assertion, Alliance stated 
that www.TireRack.com and the Tire and Rim Association 2004 Year Book 
use the service description information. RMA stated that tires that are 
designed to

[[Page 14422]]

withstand extended travel at high speeds may not have the same handling 
characteristics of other tires. Both RMA and Alliance suggested that 
the speed rating symbol was necessary to ensure that tires originally 
equipped on a given vehicle are replaced with similarly rated tires.
    Second, with respect to tire load index, Alliance and RMA argued 
that the tire load index is necessary to alert consumers to load 
carrying capabilities of their tires. Both parties argued that there is 
enough space to include the speed rating and the load index without 
overcrowding the placard and the label.
    On reconsideration, we have decided to amend the new vehicle 
labeling requirements to allow this information on the placard and the 
label at the option of the manufacturer.
    We believe that the recommended tire inflation pressure, 
replacement tire size, and maximum load carrying capability rating are 
critical components of tire safety information pertinent to consumers. 
We believe that the tire speed rating, which indicates the tire's 
maximum speed capability (usually well in excess of speeds permitted on 
U.S. public roads), and the tire load index, which indicates the 
maximum load a tire can carry at the speed indicated by the speed 
rating symbol are not critical components of tire safety information, 
but may be beneficial to some consumers. We are persuaded by the 
petitioner's request to allow optional tire service description 
information for several reasons.
    First, this optional tire service description information would 
take up minimal additional space on the placard or the label. 
Specifically, the load index is a two or three digit numerical code, 
and the speed rating is a single letter. Thus, the optional information 
amounts to three or four additional alphanumeric characters.
    Second, as indicated by the RMA, vehicle manufacturers select, as 
original equipment, tires that match the maximum speed capability of 
the vehicle to which they are fitted. For some performance vehicles, 
this information may be helpful in enabling the consumer to select 
replacement tires consistent with the vehicle's speed capabilities.
    Finally, we are persuaded by Alliance's argument that to optimize 
performance of certain vehicles, the replacement tires must match not 
only the size but also speed rating capability, which usually impacts 
vehicle performance and handling characteristics.

C. Supplemental Identifier Other Than VIN or Barcode

    The current language of the new vehicle labeling requirements 
allows vehicle manufacturers to place an optional bar code or VIN along 
the right-hand edge of the vehicle placard and label.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See S4.3(h) of FMVSS No. 110, effective September 1, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a letter dated October 7, 2004, Hyundai asked whether it would 
be permissible to use an alphanumeric identifier other than the VIN or 
bar code, in order to ensure that the correct label is placed on each 
specifically configured vehicle.\13\ Hyundai explained that depending 
on trim or performance variations, vehicles on the same assembly line 
may require different labels because they are equipped with different 
tires, or vary in recommended inflation pressures. Hyundai argued that 
an alphanumeric label identifier, other than VIN or barcode, could be 
helpful in ensuring that the correct label is placed on a specifically 
configured vehicle. Subaru made a similar request for a legal 
interpretation, and Alliance petitioned for similar relief. Alliance 
also asked for less restriction on the location of the identifier, 
arguing that the requirement that it be located along the right-hand 
edge of the placard or the label was ``arbitrary and unnecessarily 
restrictive.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2004-17917-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA agrees with the petitioners that an alphanumeric label 
identifier, other than VIN or barcode could be helpful in ensuring that 
different vehicles built on one assembly line are labeled correctly. In 
fact, when we issued the June 2004 final rule, we allowed the use of 
bar codes and VINs for that very purpose; i.e., to help manufacturers 
ensure correct label installation at the factory. Because we agree that 
different types of identifying information could be used for that 
purpose, we are amending S4.3(h) to allow for any form of optional 
alphanumeric identification information and/or barcode that helps the 
manufacturers ensure correct label installation at the factory.
    With respect to the location of the optional alphanumeric 
identifier, we believe a greater degree of flexibility is warranted. As 
indicated in the November 2002 final rule, the purpose of the new 
vehicle labeling requirements is to make them more noticeable and more 
explicit. NHTSA explained that the actual arrangement or the shape of 
labels is less relevant than their content.\14\ Accordingly, we are 
amending the regulatory text to allow the optional alphanumeric 
identifier to be located along either vertical edge or bottom edge of 
the label or the placard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See 67 FR 69600 at 69613.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We continue to believe it is important that this optional 
information is located along the edges of the label or the placard, and 
``away'' from the tire safety information pertinent to consumers. The 
new location and orientation choices for this optional information 
reduce the burden on the manufacturers, yet continues to ensure that a 
consumer would not perceive this information as something relevant to 
tire inflation and loading information.

D. Placard Format Subheadings

    In their petitions, GM and Alliance asked the agency to correct the 
regulatory text so that it permits the use of subheadings ``size,'' or 
``original tire size,'' or ``original size.'' GM noted that the agency 
had indicated it would do so in the preamble to the June 2004 final 
rule; however, the regulatory text did not reflect that change.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 69 FR 31306 at 31315.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When the agency issued the June 2004 final rule, we intended to 
allow the use of the three subheadings interchangeably. However, we 
inadvertently omitted this change from the regulatory text. In a 
document published on August 19, 2004, we corrected the regulatory text 
to permit the use of subheadings ``size,'' or ``original tire size,'' 
or ``original size.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 69 FR 51399.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Alliance petitioned the agency to limit the spare tire information 
requirements to only compact spare tires, and not include full-size 
spare tires. Alliance reasoned that the front and rear tire information 
fields within the placard or the label already provide the pertinent 
information for the full size spare tires. Further, Alliance noted that 
the inflation pressure for the full size spare might be different 
depending on whether the spare tire is installed in the front or rear 
of the vehicle. Alliance stated that, when the full size tire is in 
use, it would be better for consumers to rely on the inflation 
information specific to either front or rear of the vehicle. Thus, 
Alliance suggested that the information field for spare tires is 
unnecessary when a full size spare is provided.
    We agree that the full size spare tire information on the placard 
and label may be redundant in some situations, and that more precise 
tire inflation pressure information may be already available on the 
same placard or the

[[Page 14423]]

label. However, the manufacturers are in the best position to determine 
if additional full size spare tire information is necessary, or if the 
information already provided for the front and rear tires is 
sufficient.
    Accordingly, we are allowing the manufacturers to omit the full 
size spare tire information, if they believe it to be redundant. 
Because the agency continues to believe that consumers would benefit 
from obtaining relevant spare tire information from the label or the 
placard, the label and the placard must nevertheless contain the 
subheading of ``spare.'' However, the manufacturers can use the words 
``see above'' instead of providing the tire size and cold tire 
inflation pressure in the appropriate fields. By contrast, if the 
placard or the label contained no mention of the spare tire, some 
consumers could be deprived of vital tire safety information, including 
whether or not their vehicle is equipped with any spare tire at all. 
Contrary to Alliance's position, we do not believe that the consumers 
would necessarily know to adjust their spare tire pressure according to 
the tire information provided for front or rear tires.
    We are amending the regulatory text to reflect this change.
    In its petition, Alliance asked the agency not to require spare 
tire information subheadings for vehicles not equipped with spare 
tires. The agency believes it is appropriate to continue requiring 
spare tire information subheadings on all placards and labels. If no 
spare tire is provided, the appropriate field must include the word 
``none.'' As discussed above, the agency believes that consumers would 
benefit from knowing that their vehicle is, or is not equipped with a 
spare tire. The placard and the label dedicated to critical tire safety 
information is the best place to alert the consumers that their vehicle 
is not equipped with a spare tire. Omitting the spare tire subheading 
does not convey this pertinent information to consumers. We believe 
that this requirement does not result in additional burden on vehicle 
manufacturers because it allows for a uniform placard and label format 
for all vehicle configurations.

E. Effective Date

    In its petition, Alliance asked the agency to suspend the effective 
date of the June 2004 final rule until NHTSA responds to all petitions 
for reconsideration. Alliance suggested that the agency allow the use 
of vehicle labels that comply with: (1) The requirements in effect 
prior to the November 2002 final rule; (2) the requirements of the 
November 2002 final rule; or (3) the requirements of the June 2004 
final rule.
    The agency carefully considered Alliance's request and believes 
that delaying the effective date is not necessary for the following 
reasons.
    First, this technical amendment does not impose any new mandatory 
vehicle labeling requirements and does not change the format of the 
placard or the label. Instead, in response to petitions for 
reconsideration, the agency is allowing the option of including certain 
additional information on the placard or the label. Thus, labels and 
placards printed before the publication of this document (in 
conformance with the requirements of the June 2004 final rule) are 
unaffected. For example, this document amends the regulatory text to 
allow the option of including an alphanumeric part identifier and load 
range identification on the placard or the label. Because these items 
are optional, the amendments do not result in any additional compliance 
burdens or require new label design efforts.
    Second, as previously stated by this agency on numerous occasions, 
a pending petition for reconsideration does not toll the effective date 
of the subject final rule. NHTSA carefully considers all petitions for 
reconsideration arising from promulgation of new rules. After careful 
review, the agency decides whether to grant the petitions and whether 
to modify the rule. However, NHTSA's response to such petitions is 
prospective, and in the interim, the final rule remains effective as 
originally issued. Because manufacturers cannot assume that the 
requested changes will be made in response to petitions for 
reconsideration, they must take the necessary steps in order to timely 
comply with the original requirements of the subject final rule. In the 
present case, the manufacturers first became aware of the new labeling 
requirements in 2002. After responding to petitions, the agency amended 
the label format in June of 2004. No further required format changes 
are being made in this document. Thus, the manufacturers will have had 
almost 14 months to produce compliant placards and labels. Under these 
circumstances, the agency does not believe that extending the effective 
date is warranted.
    In sum, the agency is denying the request to suspend the effective 
date of vehicle labeling requirements or to allow optional compliance 
with alternative vehicle labeling requirements.
    In an August 25, 2004 e-mail requesting interpretation of the new 
vehicle labeling requirements, VW asked if, after September 1, 2005, it 
would be permissible to use the placards that comply with vehicle 
labeling requirements of the November 2002 final rule, but not the 
amended requirements of the June 2004 final rule, until the current 
stock of labels printed in response to the November 2002 final rule is 
depleted. VW indicated that the printed placards were not being used 
because the agency delayed the effective date of new vehicle labeling 
requirements.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2004-1791-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We note that VW and other manufacturers that printed placards and 
labels prior to issuance of the June 2004 final rule could use these 
placards and labels now, because these placards and labels comply with 
current vehicle labeling requirements in S4.3 of FMVSS No. 110. Thus, 
we do not believe that an excessive quantity of placards and labels 
would have to be discarded as a result of changes made in the June 2004 
final rule.
    However, because the placards and labels that conform to the 
improved labeling requirements of the November 2002 final rule 
(although not the format changes made in the June 2004 final rule), 
would meet the agency's basic goal of ensuring that the public is aware 
of the importance of observing motor vehicle tire load limits and 
maintaining proper tire inflation levels, we will permit the 
manufacturers to use the placards and labels printed to meet the 
November 2002 final rule for a period of 1 additional year. That is, 
between September 1, 2005 and August 31, 2006, the manufacturers can 
use placards and labels that comply with the requirements of the 
November 2002 final rule \18\ or the requirements of the July 2004 
final rule, as amended by this document.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See 67 FR 69600 at 69623.
    \19\ See 69 31306 at 31317.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Miscellaneous Questions and Issues Addressed in Other Documents

    1. On March 21, 2004, GM petitioned the agency to correct the 
regulatory text in S4.3.4(c) of FMVSS No. 110. The agency indicated 
that it would do so in the preamble to the June 2004 final rule, but 
inadvertently omitted relevant regulatory text. Instead, we corrected 
the regulatory text of S4.3.4(c) in a document published on August 19, 
2004.\20\ In the same document, the agency also corrected S4.2.2 of 
FMVSS No. 110.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See 69 FR 51399.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a letter dated September 23, 2004, GM asked whether a technical

[[Page 14424]]

correction to S4.2.2 was necessary. Specifically, GM asked the agency 
to clarify the normal load requirements. In a letter dated January 3, 
2005, we indicated that currently, S4.2.2 specifies normal load limits 
for passenger cars only. Effective June 1, 2007, S4.2.1 will specify 
the normal load limits for passenger cars, and S4.2.2 will specify the 
normal load requirements for multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, 
buses, and trailers with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less. We stated 
that the August 19, 2004 correction did not affect the date on which 
multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, and trailers with a 
GVWR of 10,000 pounds will become subject to the normal load 
requirements.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/rules/interps/files/GF007220.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We reviewed this issue further and concluded that the change to 
S4.2.2 of FMVSS No. 110 was unnecessary. Accordingly, we are amending 
the regulatory language to correct this error.
    2. S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 110 requires that vehicles other than 
passenger cars show certain tire and rim size and recommended inflation 
pressure information on the certification label, in addition to the 
placard and the label discussed elsewhere in this document. Alliance 
petitioned the agency to change this requirement such that the tire and 
rim size information and recommended inflation pressure appear only 
once, if the same information applies to both the front and rear axles. 
The petitioner argues that repeating this information takes up 
unnecessary space when the same tire and rim combination is used on 
both axles.
    The agency believes that the tire and rim size information and 
recommended inflation pressure do not take inordinate amount of space 
on the certification label. Further, we believe that listing this 
information separately for each axle avoids potential confusion and 
specifies the necessary information in a clear format.
    In reviewing the example of the certification label requirements 
provided in S4.3.3 of FMVSS No. 110, we noticed that the example 
contains several metric value conversion errors. This document corrects 
these errors.
    3. S4.4.2 of FMVSS No. 110, as amended on June 26, 2003, contains a 
typographical error.\22\ Specifically, the regulatory text of that 
section incorrectly refers to S4.2.2 instead of referring to S4.4.2. 
This document corrects these errors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See 68 FR 38116 at 38148.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. In the June 2004 final rule, we stated that NHTSA is preparing 
to request OMB for clearance of the collections of information 
associated with that rulemaking.\23\ That request was unnecessary 
because the OMB already approved the collection of information related 
to vehicle and tire labeling (OMB Control No. 2127-0503).\24\ This 
approval expires 12/31/2005. NHTSA will be preparing a new request to 
OMB for information collection clearance in the near future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ SSee 69 FR 31306 at 31317.
    \24\ See http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/library/OMBINV.STATE.DOT.htm#DOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This technical amendment does not contain additional ``collections 
of information,'' as that term is defined at 5 CFR Part 1320 
Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public.
    This technical amendment, made in response to petitions for 
reconsideration, will not impose or relax any substantive requirements 
or burdens on manufacturers. Instead this technical amendment clarifies 
existing requirements and allows certain optional information on the 
placard and the label.

V. Regulatory Text

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Tires.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, part 571 is amended as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 2011, 30115, 30166 and 30177; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.


0
2. Section 571.110 is amended by revising S4.2.2; S4.3(c), (d), (h) and 
(i); the example in the last paragraph of S4.3.3; S4.4.2 introductory 
text; and Figures 1 and 2 at the end of Section 571.110, to read as 
follows:


Sec.  571.110  Standard No. 110--Tire selection and rims for motor 
vehicles with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.

* * * * *
    S4.2.2 The vehicle normal load on the tire shall not be greater 
than the test load used in the high speed performance test specified in 
S5.5 of Sec.  571.109 for that tire.
* * * * *
    S4.3 * * *
    (c) Vehicle manufacturer's recommended cold tire inflation pressure 
for front, rear and spare tires, subject to the limitations of S4.3.4. 
For full size spare tires, the statement ``see above'' may, at the 
manufacturer's option replace manufacturer's recommended cold tire 
inflation pressure. If no spare tire is provided, the word ``none'' 
must replace the manufacturer's recommended cold tire inflation 
pressure.
    (d) Tire size designation, indicated by the headings ``size'' or 
``original tire size'' or ``original size,'' and ``spare tire'' or 
``spare,'' for the tires installed at the time of the first purchase 
for purposes other than resale. For full size spare tires, the 
statement ``see above'' may, at the manufacturer's option replace the 
tire size designation. If no spare tire is provided, the word ``none'' 
must replace the tire size designation;
* * * * *
    (h) At the manufacturer's option, identifying information provided 
in any alphanumeric and or barcode form, located vertically, along the 
right edge or the left edge of the placard or the label, or 
horizontally, along the bottom edge of the placard or the label; and
    (i) At the manufacturer's option, the load range identification 
symbol, load index, and speed rating, located immediately to the right 
of the tire size designation listed in accordance with S4.3(d) above.
* * * * *
    S4.3.3 * * *
Truck Example--Suitable Tire-Rim Choice
    GVWR: 2,441 kilograms (5381 pounds).
    GAWR: Front--1,299 kilograms (2,864 pounds) with P265/70R16 tires, 
16 x 8.0 rims at 248 kPa (36 psi) cold single.
    GAWR: Rear--1,299 kilograms (2,864 pounds) with P265/70R16 tires, 
16 x 8.00 rims, at 248 kPa (36 psi) cold single.
* * * * *
    S4.4.2. Rim markings for vehicles other than passenger cars. Each 
rim or, at the option of the manufacturer in the case of a single-piece 
wheel, each wheel disc shall be marked with the information listed in 
S4.4.2 (a) through (e), in lettering not less than 3 millimeters in 
height, impressed to a depth or, at the option of the manufacturer, 
embossed to a height of not less than 0.125 millimeters. The 
information listed in S4.4.2 (a) through (c) shall appear on the 
outward side. In the case of rims of multi piece construction, the 
information listed in S4.4.2 (a) through (e) shall appear on the rim 
base and the information listed in

[[Page 14425]]

S4.4.2 (b) and (d) shall also appear on each other part of the rim.
* * * * *
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MR05.000


[[Page 14426]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MR05.001


    Issued: March 16, 2005.
Jeffrey W. Runge,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05-5580 Filed 3-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C