Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Technical Corrections and Clarifications Related to Tires and Rims

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Technical Corrections and Clarifications Related to Tires and Rims

Topics: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Technical Corrections and Clarifications Related to Tires and Rims

Heidi Renate King
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
21 August 2019

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 21, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43563-43570]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17813]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0074]
RIN 2127-AL87

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Technical Corrections and
Clarifications Related to Tires and Rims

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes amendments to Federal Motor Vehicle
Standard (FMVSS) No. 109 in response to a petition from the Tire and
Rim Association to clarify the applicability of the FMVSSs to certain
types of tires intended for use on trailers. Based on a review of prior
amendments to FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119, NHTSA concludes that it
inadvertently made these tires subject to both FMVSS Nos. 109 and 119,
when it was the agency's intent to make them subject only to FMVSS No.
119. This document also proposes nonsubstantive technical corrections
to tire and rim regulations.

DATES: Submit comments on or before September 20, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments electronically to the docket
identified in the heading of this document by visiting the following
website:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Alternatively, you can file comments using the following methods:
Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the
docket number identified in the heading of this document.
Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible
through www.dot.gov/privacy. In order to facilitate comment tracking
and response, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the
name of their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely
comments will be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments
containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact the
agency for alternate submission instructions.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Jasinski, Office of the Chief
Counsel, by telephone at (202) 366-2992, and by fax at (202) 366-3820.
You may send mail to this official at the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Tire & Rim Association Petition and Background

On June 26, 2003, the agency published a final rule amending
several Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSSs) related to
tires and rims.\1\ That rulemaking was completed as part of a
comprehensive upgrade of existing safety standards and the
establishment of new safety standards to improve tire safety, as
required by the Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and
Documentation (TREAD) Act of 2000. That final rule included extensive
revisions to the tire standards and to the rim and labeling
requirements for motor vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ 68 FR 38116.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The June 2003 final rule established a new FMVSS No. 139 to provide
upgraded requirements for tires for passenger cars and light trucks. In
addition, the final rule changed the applicability of FMVSS No. 109 and
FMVSS No. 119. Previously, FMVSS No. 109 applied solely to tires for
passenger cars and FMVSS No. 119 applied to tires for all other
vehicles. The June 2003 final rule made FMVSS No. 109 applicable to
bias-ply tires and tires for use on light vehicles (those with a GVWR
of 10,000 lb. or lower) and made FMVSS No. 119 applicable to tires used
on motorcycles and heavy vehicles (those with a GVWR of over 10,000
lb.) The requirements set forth in the June 2003 final rule were set to
become effective on June 1, 2007.
NHTSA received petitions for reconsideration of the June 2003 final
rule from eight petitioners addressing 18 different issues. In a
January 6, 2006 final rule, NHTSA responded to these petitions.\2\
Pertinent to this rulemaking, we received petitions to amend the
applicability section of FMVSS No. 119 to indicate that it applies to
Special Trailer (ST), Farm Implement (FI), and tires with rim diameter
code of 12 and below (hereinafter collectively referred to as
``specialty tires''). In the June 2003 final rule, NHTSA had excluded
specialty tires from FMVSS No. 139 and indicated they would remain
subject to FMVSS No. 109 and FMVSS No. 119. However, the petitioners
indicated that specialty tires have been and should remain subject only
to FMVSS No. 119 because they are not used on passenger cars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ 71 FR 877.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the petitions, NHTSA amended the application
sections of FMVSS Nos. 109, 119, and 139 in order

[[Page 43564]]

to clarify that specialty tires are subject to the requirements of
FMVSS No. 119. The January 2006 final rule also delayed the effective
date for these requirements to September 1, 2007.
NHTSA received a petition for reconsideration of the January 2006
final rule and issued a final rule on August 28, 2007 to respond to
this petition.\3\ Although NHTSA denied the petition, it made a number
of technical corrections. Although the change was not discussed in the
preamble, NHTSA amended the ``Application'' section of FMVSS No. 109 to
add specialty tires. NHTSA made no changes to the applicability of
FMVSS No. 119. Thus, as a result, both FMVSS No. 109 and FMVSS No. 119
applied to specialty tires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ 72 FR 49207.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In June 2013, TRA submitted a petition for rulemaking requesting
that NHTSA clarify specialty tires are subject to the requirements of
FMVSS No. 119 and not those in FMVSS No. 109.\4\ Specifically, TRA
requested three actions:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ See Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Remove from the title and main test of FMVSS No. 109 all
references to specialty tires.
2. Add to the title of FMVSS No. 119 a reference to ``specialty
tires.''
3. Add appropriate values to Table III of FMVSS No. 119 to account
for specialty tires in load ranges A through E.
TRA reasoned that NHTSA had already agreed to the substance of this
petition when it determined in the January 2006 final rule that it
would clarify that specialty tires were subject to the requirements of
FMVSS No. 119. However, TRA stated, in August 2007, NHTSA reinserted
specialty tires into FMVSS No. 109 without explanation while still
keeping them subject to FMVSS No. 119. TRA believes that this change
was inadvertent.
TRA stated that the inclusion of specialty tires in FMVSS No. 109
sets up impossible test conditions. FMVSS No. 109 specifies tire
strength requirements that are tested using a plunger test. The test
conditions are based on the maximum inflation pressure of the tire.
However, the inflation pressure values specified in FMVSS No. 109 do
not cover all of the maximum inflation pressures for specialty tires
that are subject to the standard. In contrast, FMVSS No. 119 previously
specified test conditions according to load range designations. This
covers all variations of specialty tires.

II. NHTSA's Response to the Petition

NHTSA is granting TRA's petition for rulemaking. NHTSA acknowledges
that, in the January 2006 final rule, NHTSA stated its intent for
specialty tires to be subject to FMVSS No. 119, but inadvertently made
specialty tires subject to FMVSS No. 109 in addition to FMVSS No. 119
in August 2007. Further, NHTSA acknowledges that FMVSS No. 109 does not
specify test conditions for specialty tires with maximum inflation
pressures not specified in FMVSS No. 109. Without specified test
pressures, NHTSA cannot test specialty tires for compliance with FMVSS
No. 109. While this issue could be remedied by adding new test
pressures to FMVSS No. 109, we believe that making these tires subject
to FMVSS No. 119 is preferable because it specifies test conditions
based on load range designations. This allows the tire industry
flexibility to change maximum tire inflation pressures for specialty
tires without first requesting regulatory changes from NHTSA.
As for the specific relief requested by TRA, NHTSA is proposing an
amendment to FMVSS No. 109 to remove references to specialty tires from
the title and the ``Application'' section. Second, NHTSA is proposing
to add a reference to specialty tires to the title of FMVSS No. 119. In
addition, though not suggested by TRA, NHTSA is proposing an amendment
to the ``Scope'' section of FMVSS No. 119 to include a reference to
specialty tires to provide added clarity regarding the applicability of
FMVSS No. 119 to specialty tires. Specialty tires are already listed in
the ``Application'' section of FMVSS No. 119.
As for the suggested amendments to Table III, the endurance test
schedule, in FMVSS No. 119, in a September 29, 2010 Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM), NHTSA proposed amendments similar to those suggested
by TRA.\5\ The September 2010 NPRM proposed upgrades to FMVSS No. 119.
In addition, it proposed technical corrections to Table III of FMVSS
No. 119 to include items that have been inadvertently omitted from the
table over the course of years of amendments to the standard, including
in the June 2003 final rule. The NPRM proposed correcting the omission
of load range C, D, M, and N for speed-restricted service tires, load
range A through E and M from the list of ``All other'' tires, and
missing footnotes. TRA's suggested changes included correcting the
omission of load range C and D for speed restricted service tires, load
range A through E from the list of ``All other'' tires, and the missing
footnotes. TRA's suggested changes do not include the omission of load
range M and N tires for speed restricted service or the omission of
load range M for all other tires.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ 75 FR 60036.
\6\ This technical correction is separate from the issue raised
in the September 2010 NPRM whether load range M tires should be
subject to upgraded test requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the September 2010 NPRM, NHTSA received no adverse
comments to the inclusion of load range M and N tires in the tables for
speed restricted service or load range M for all other tires.
Consequently, NHTSA is including the technical corrections to Table III
proposed in the September 2010 NPRM in this proposal, which are
inclusive of the changes to Table III suggested by TRA.
NHTSA is also proposing a corresponding change to FMVSS No. 110. In
a March 13, 2013 NPRM, NHTSA proposed an amendment to FMVSS No. 110 to
clarify that specialty tires could be equipped on new light trailers
(those with GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less). In the proposed regulatory
text, NHTSA stated it would allow light trailers to be equipped with
specialty tires meeting the requirements of FMVSS No. 109. TRA, though
generally supportive of the proposal, submitted a comment suggesting
that specialty tires on light trailers should be required to meet FMVSS
No. 119 rather than FMVSS No. 109. The rationale for this comment
mirrored TRA's rationale in its petition for rulemaking.
In a November 9, 2016 final rule, NHTSA clarified that new light
trailers could be equipped with specialty tires.\7\ In addressing TRA's
comment, NHTSA determined that the matter of how specialty tires could
comply with FMVSS No. 109 was outside the scope of that rulemaking.
NHTSA noted the pendency of this petition for rulemaking and stated
that the matter raised by TRA would be addressed in NHTSA's response to
TRA's petition. As an interim solution until NHTSA could respond to the
petition, NHTSA determined it was sufficient to refer to both FMVSS No.
109 and FMVSS No. 119 as the standards which apply to specialty tires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ 81 FR 78724.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Having proposed that specialty tires should be subject to the
requirements of FMVSS No. 119 and not FMVSS No. 109, this proposal also
removes the reference to FMVSS No. 109 as a standard under which
specialty tires could be certified.

[[Page 43565]]

III. Other Technical Corrections

A. Date of Manufacture of Tires Subject to FMVSS No. 109

In addition to the inclusion of specialty tires in the
``Application'' section of FMVSS No. 109, we have noted another
inadvertent error in that section. When adopting FMVSS No. 139, NHTSA
made all tires for vehicle manufactured after 1975 subject to FMVSS No.
139 and left all tires for vehicles manufactured before 1975 subject to
FMVSS No. 109. NHTSA inadvertently made no standard applicable to tires
for vehicles manufactured in 1975. NHTSA intended for FMVSS No. 109 to
apply to all vehicles manufactured in or before 1975. In addition,
FMVSS No. 109 only applies to vehicles manufactured after 1948. To
clarify the applicability of FMVSS No. 109 and simplify the language,
this proposal changes the application of FMVSS No. 109 to passenger
cars manufactured from 1949 through 1975.

B. Technical Amendments to FMVSS No. 119

This proposal includes several minor amendments to FMVSS No. 119
that were included in a January 10, 2013 Supplemental NRPM.\8\ NHTSA
received no adverse comment to that Supplemental NPRM. Those amendments
were proposed in part after an inquiry from Continental Tire, the
Americas (Continental) regarding the tire strength requirement for
rayon tires. Continental noted that a footnote was missing in Table II
of FMVSS No. 119, which specified a lower minimum breaking energy
requirement for rayon cord tires. After considering Continental's
inquiry, NHTSA determined that two footnotes for Table II of FMVSS No.
119 were inadvertently removed from the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ 78 FR 2236.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The breaking energy requirement for rayon cord tires is less than
other materials to make the severity of the test comparable to tires
made of other cord materials. The breaking energy requirement for rayon
cord tires for light vehicles in FMVSS No. 109 remain less than the
requirement for nylon or polyester cord tires. The agency can determine
whether a tire is composed of rayon cord from information that is
required by S6.5(f) of FMVSS No. 119 to be molded on the tire's
sidewall.
However, only one footnote needs to be reinstated. The other
footnote related to the procedure used for rounding metric conversions,
and it is not necessary to include that information in the text of the
standard.
NHTSA is also including three previously proposed non-substantive
formatting changes to Table II in from the January 2013 SNPRM. First,
some of the headings have been revised to more clearly explain the tire
characteristics. Second, the heading row alignment has been modified.
Third, the order of the columns in the right portion of the table for
tires other than light truck, motorcycle, and 12 rim diameter code or
smaller has been modified to group tube type and tubeless tires
together. The agency believes that these formatting changes will make
Table II easier to read.
NHTSA is also including a previously proposed correction to an
error NHTSA discovered in the formula for computing the breaking energy
of a tire in metric located in S7.3(f) of FMVSS No. 119. In S7.3(f)(1),
the breaking energy (W) is reported in joules (J); however, the
explanation incorrectly states the unit abbreviation for joules as kJ,
which is the abbreviation for kilojoules. In S7.3(f)(2), unit
abbreviations are not included in the explanation and the breaking
energy equation formatting is inconsistent with S7.3(f)(1).
NHTSA has discovered an additional error in Table III of FMVSS No.
119. Table III specifies the schedule for the endurance test, including
the test wheel speed, and the test load over the length of the 47-hour
test (34 hours for tires subject to the high speed performance test).
For reference, Table III lists the total number of revolutions of the
test wheel. However, several of the values for the total number of
revolutions are incorrect in the current Table III and were incorrect
in prior version of Table III. NHTSA has recalculated the number of
total test revolutions for each type of tire listed in the schedule.
For example, the endurance test for non-speed-restricted truck and bus
tires with load range H or above is 48 km/h or 150 rpm for 47 hours.
This computes to 423,000 revolutions (150 x 60 x 47). However, Table
III currently shows the test is 423,500 revolutions. This proposal
corrects this and similar miscalculations in Table III. This change
would not affect how the test is conducted because the test is
conducted at the rpm rate listed in the schedule for the appropriate
amount of time (47 or 34 hours) and not based on the total number of
revolutions.

C. Application of FMVSS No. 139

We have identified an issue similar to the one raised by TRA with
respect to deep tread tires for light trucks. In the January 2006 final
rule responding to petitions for reconsideration of the June 2003 final
rule, NHTSA addressed a petition from Denman requesting that deep tread
light truck tires (those with tread depths of \18/32\ inch or greater)
be excluded from FMVSS No. 139. NHTSA agreed that a number of
requirements in FMVSS No. 139 were impracticable for deep tread tires
and determined it was more appropriate to subject those tires to the
requirements of FMVSS No. 119. Consequently, NHTSA amended the
``Application'' section of FMVSS No. 119 to include light truck tires
with a tread depth of \18/32\ inch or greater for use on light
vehicles. However, NHTSA made no corresponding amendment to FMVSS No.
139 to exclude deep tread light truck tires. Thus, as presently
written, deep tread light truck tires would be subject to both FMVSS
No. 119 and FMVSS No. 139. This was not NHTSA's intention. This
proposal removes deep tread light truck tires from the ``Application''
section of FMVSS No. 139 to be consistent with NHTSA's intent in the
January 2006 final rule and remove any ambiguity in the regulation.
The ``Application'' section of FMVSS No. 139 also presently
excludes specialty tires. However, in addressing tires for smaller
rims, FMVSS No. 139 excludes from its application tires with rim
diameters of 8 inches or below. Specialty tires, as referenced in all
other NHTSA regulations, include tires with rim diameters of 12 inches
or below. This is a typographical error in FMVSS No. 139. This proposal
corrects this typographical error and changes FMVSS No. 139 to exclude
tires with rim diameters of 12 inches or below.

D. Table Headings in FMVSS No. 139

There is a typographical error in the tables setting forth the test
pressure for the high speed performance test, the tire endurance test,
and the low inflation pressure performance test. Each of these tables
provides test pressure for standard load and extra load passenger car
tires and load range C, D, and E light truck tires. Light truck tires
use different test pressures depending on whether the nominal cross
section is greater than 295 millimeters. However, the test pressures
for light truck tires with a nominal cross section of 295 millimeters
or less is listed under the heading ``Passenger car tires.'' There
should be a heading ``Light truck tires with a nominal cross section
<=295 mm (11.5 inches)'' between the extra load tires and load range C
tires. This proposal adds this missing heading in each of the three
tables.

[[Page 43566]]

E. NHTSA Address

In FMVSS No. 110 and FMVSS No. 139, manufacturers of rims and
tires, respectively, may provide certain information to NHTSA by mail.
However, the address for NHTSA's office in these standards is
incorrect. This proposal corrects NHTSA's address in FMVSS No. 110 and
FMVSS No. 139.

F. Typographical Error in Application of FMVSS No. 110

In FMVSS No. 110, the application section contains two minor
typographical errors. First, the abbreviation for GVWR is missing one
parenthesis. Second, the word ``of'' is used in place of the word
``or''. This proposal corrects both of these typographical errors.

IV. Public Participation

How do I prepare and submit comments?

Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long (49 CFR 553.21).
NHTSA established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
Please submit your comments electronically to the docket following
the steps outlined under ADDRESSES. You may also submit two copies of
your comments, including the attachments, by mail to Docket Management
at the beginning of this document, under ADDRESSES.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

If you wish to be notified upon receipt of your mailed comments,
enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope containing
your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket Management will
return the postcard by mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit the following to the NHTSA Office of
Chief Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590: (1) A
complete copy of the submission; (2) a redacted copy of the submission
with the confidential information removed; and (3) either a second
complete copy or those portions of the submission containing the
material for which confidential treatment is claimed and any additional
information that you deem important to the Chief Counsel's
consideration of your confidentiality claim. A request for confidential
treatment that complies with 49 CFR part 512 must accompany the
complete submission provided to the Chief Counsel. For further
information, submitters who plan to request confidential treatment for
any portion of their submissions are advised to review 49 CFR part 512,
particularly those sections relating to document submission
requirements. Failure to adhere to the requirements of Part 512 may
result in the release of confidential information to the public docket.
In addition, you should submit two copies from which you have deleted
the claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at
the address given at the beginning of this document under ADDRESSES.

Will the Agency consider late comments?

NHTSA will consider all comments received before the close of
business on the comment closing date indicated at the beginning of this
notice under DATES. In accordance with DOT policies, to the extent
possible, NHTSA will also consider comments received after the
specified comment closing date. If NHTSA receives a comment too late to
consider in developing the proposed rule, NHTSA will consider that
comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

You may read the comments received on the internet. To read the
comments on the internet, go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow
the on-line instructions provided.
You may download the comments. The comments are imaged documents,
in either TIFF or PDF format. Please note that even after the comment
closing date, NHTSA will continue to file relevant information in the
Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late
comments. Accordingly, NHTSA recommends that you periodically search
the Docket for new material.
You may also see the comments at the address and times given near
the beginning of this document under ADDRESSES.

V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures

NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, and the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. This rulemaking is
not considered significant and was not reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review.'' The rulemaking action has also been determined not to be
significant under the Department's regulatory policies and procedures.
The agency has further determined that the impact of this proposal is
so minimal as to not warrant the preparation of a full regulatory
evaluation.
This proposal clarifies the applicability of the FMVSSs to tires
intended for use on trailers and makes other technical amendments. It
will not result in any costs nor will it have any impact on safety.

B. Executive Order 13771

Executive Order 13771 titled ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs,'' directs that, unless prohibited by law, whenever an
executive department or agency publicly proposes for notice and comment
or otherwise promulgates a new regulation, it shall identify at least
two existing regulations to be repealed. In addition, any new
incremental costs associated with new regulations shall, to the extent
permitted by law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs. Only
those rules deemed significant under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' are subject to these
requirements. As discussed above, this rule is not a significant rule
under Executive Order 12866 and, accordingly, is not subject to the
offset requirements of 13771.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions).
The Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR part 121
define a small business, in part, as a business

[[Page 43567]]

entity ``which operates primarily within the United States.'' (13 CFR
121.105(a)). No regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head
of an agency certifies the rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
NHTSA has considered the effects of this proposal under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I certify that this proposal will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposal would directly impact manufacturers of trailers
with a GVWR of 4,536 kg (10,000 lbs.) or less. Although we believe many
manufacturers affected by this proposal are considered small
businesses, we do not believe this proposal will have a significant
economic impact on those manufacturers. This proposal would not impose
any costs upon manufacturers and relieves any confusion that may have
been generated by the inclusion of specialty tires within the
applicability of FMVSS No. 109 in the August 2007 final rule.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

NHTSA has examined this proposal pursuant to Executive Order 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional
consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that
the rulemaking would not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation
of a federalism summary impact statement. The proposal would not have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
NHTSA rules can preempt in two ways. First, the National Traffic
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemption provision:
When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, a
State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue
in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is
identical to the standard prescribed under this chapter. 49 U.S.C.
30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command by Congress that preempts any
non-identical State legislative and administrative law addressing the
same aspect of performance.
The express preemption provision described above is subject to a
savings clause under which ``[c]ompliance with a motor vehicle safety
standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from
liability at common law.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(e). Pursuant to this
provision, State common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle
manufacturers that might otherwise be preempted by the express
preemption provision are generally preserved. However, the Supreme
Court has recognized the possibility, in some instances, of implied
preemption of such State common law tort causes of action by virtue of
NHTSA's rules, even if not expressly preempted. This second way that
NHTSA rules can preempt is dependent upon there being an actual
conflict between an FMVSS and the higher standard that would
effectively be imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers if someone
obtained a State common law tort judgment against the manufacturer,
notwithstanding the manufacturer's compliance with the NHTSA standard.
Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS are minimum
standards, a State common law tort cause of action that seeks to impose
a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers will generally not be
preempted. However, if and when such a conflict does exist--for
example, when the standard at issue is both a minimum and a maximum
standard--the State common law tort cause of action is impliedly
preempted. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
Pursuant to Executive Order 13132 and 12988, NHTSA has considered
whether this rule could or should preempt State common law causes of
action. The agency's ability to announce its conclusion regarding the
preemptive effect of one of its rules reduces the likelihood that
preemption will be an issue in any subsequent tort litigation.
To this end, the agency has examined the nature (e.g., the language
and structure of the regulatory text) and objectives of today's rule
and finds that this rule, like many NHTSA rules, prescribes only a
minimum safety standard. As such, NHTSA does not intend that this rule
preempt state tort law that would effectively impose a higher standard
on motor vehicle manufacturers than that established by today's rule.
Establishment of a higher standard by means of State tort law would not
conflict with the minimum standard announced here. Without any
conflict, there could not be any implied preemption of a State common
law tort cause of action.

E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729; Feb. 7, 1996), requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) specifies
whether administrative proceedings are to be required before parties
file suit in court; (6) adequately defines key terms; and (7) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship
under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. This document is
consistent with that requirement.
Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows. The issue of
preemption is discussed above. NHTSA notes further that there is no
requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or
pursue other administrative proceedings before they may file suit in
court.

F. Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19855, April 23, 1997), applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental,
health, or safety risk that the agency has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the agency.
This notice is part of a rulemaking that is not expected to have a
disproportionate health or safety impact on children. Consequently, no
further analysis is required under Executive Order 13045.

[[Page 43568]]

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency
unless the collection displays a valid OMB control number. There is not
any information collection requirement associated with this proposal.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to evaluate and use existing voluntary
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless doing so would
be inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., the statutory provisions
regarding NHTSA's vehicle safety authority) or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. Technical standards
are defined by the NTTAA as ``performance-based or design-specific
technical specification and related management systems practices.''
They pertain to ``products and processes, such as size, strength, or
technical performance of a product, process or material.''
Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus
standards bodies include ASTM International, the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE), and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
If NHTSA does not use available and potentially applicable voluntary
consensus standards, we are required by the Act to provide Congress,
through OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such
standards.
There are no voluntary consensus standards developed by voluntary
consensus standards bodies pertaining to this proposal.

I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs,
benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more
than $100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of
1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the agency to
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable
law. Moreover, section 205 allows the agency to adopt an alternative
other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if the agency publishes with the final rule an explanation
of why that alternative was not adopted.
This proposal would not result in any expenditure by State, local,
or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million,
adjusted for inflation.

J. National Environmental Policy Act

NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that
implementation of this action would not have any significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.

K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

L. Privacy Act

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible through
www.dot.gov/privacy. In order to facilitate comment tracking and
response, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of
their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely
comments will be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments
containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact the
agency for alternate submission instructions.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Parts 571

Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Tires.

In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
part 571 as follows:

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 571 of Title 49 continues to read as
follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.95.

0
2. Amend Sec. 571.109 by revising the section heading and paragraph S2
to read as follows:

Sec. 571.109 Standard No. 109; New pneumatic tires for vehicles
manufactured from 1949 to 1975, bias ply tires, and T-type spare tires.

* * * * *
S2. Application. This standard applies to new pneumatic radial
tires for use on passenger cars manufactured from 1949 through 1975,
new pneumatic bias ply tires, and T-type spare tires. However, it does
not apply to any tire that has been so altered so as to render
impossible its use, or its repair for use, as motor vehicle equipment.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 571.110 by
0
a. Revising paragraph S2;
0
b. Revising paragraph S4.1(b)(2); and
0
c. Revising paragraph S4.4.2(e)(1).
The revisions read as follows:

Sec. 571.110 Tire selection and rims and motor home/recreation
vehicle trailer load carrying capacity information for motor vehicles
with a GVWR of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less.

* * * * *
S2. Application. This standard applies to motor vehicles with a
gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds)
or less, except for motorcycles, and to non-pneumatic spare tire
assemblies for those vehicles.
* * * * *
S4.1 General * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Trailers may be equipped with ST tires, FI tires, or tires with
a rim diameter code of 12 or below that meet the requirements of Sec.
571.119.
* * * * *
S4.4.2 Rim markings for vehicles other than passenger cars. * * *
(e) * * *
(1) Any manufacturer that elects to express the date of manufacture
by means of a symbol shall notify NHTSA in writing of the full names
and addresses of all manufacturers and brand name owners utilizing that
symbol and the name and address of the trademark owner of that symbol,
if any. The notification shall describe in narrative form and in detail
how the month, day, and year or the month and

[[Page 43569]]

year are depicted by the symbol. Such description shall include an
actual size graphic depiction of the symbol, showing and/or explaining
the interrelationship of the component parts of the symbol as they will
appear on the rim or single piece wheel disc, including dimensional
specifications, and where the symbol will be located on the rim or
single piece wheel disc. The notification shall be received by NHTSA
not less than 60 calendar days before the first use of the symbol. The
notification shall be mailed to National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, West Building, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC
20590. All information provided to NHTSA under this paragraph will be
placed in the public docket.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 571.119 by:
0
a. Revising the section heading.
0
b. Revising paragraph S1.
0
c. Revising paragraph S7.3(f)(1) and (2).
0
d. Revising Table II-Minimum Static Breaking Energy.
0
e. Revising Table III-Endurance Test Schedule.
The revisions read as follows:

Sec. 571.119 Standard No. 119; New pneumatic tires for motor
vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds),
specialty tires, and tires for motorcycles.

* * * * *
S1. Scope. This standard establishes performance and marking
requirements for tires for use on motor vehicles with a GVWR of more
than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds), specialty tires, and tires for
motorcycles.
* * * * *
S7.3 * * *
(f) * * *

(1) W = [(F x P)/2] x 10-\3\

Where:

W = Breaking energy in joules (J),
F = Force in newtons (N), and
P = Penetration in millimeters (mm), or;

(2) W = (F x P)/2

Where:

W = Breaking energy in inch-pounds (in-lb),
F = Force in pounds (lb), and
P = Penetration in inches (in).
* * * * *
* * * * *

Table II--Minimum Static Breaking Energy
[Joules (J) and inch-pounds (in-lb)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tires other than Light Truck, motorcycle, 12 rim diameter code or smaller
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tire characteristic Motorcycle
All 12 rim
diameter code or
smaller except
motorcycle
Tubeless 17.5 rim
diameter code or
smaller and Light
Truck
Tube type greater than 12 rim diameter
code
Tubeless greater than 17.5 rim diameter
code
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plunger diameter 7.94 mm \5/16\'' 19.05 mm \3/4\'' 19.05 mm \3/4\'' 31.75 mm 1\1/4\'' 38.10 mm 1\1/2\'' 31.75 mm 1\1/4\'' 38.10 mm 1\1/2\''
(mm and inches)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Breaking energy J in-lb J in-lb J in-lb J in-lb J in-lb J in-lb J in-lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Load Range:
A......................................... 16 150 67 600 225 2,000 ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... ........
B......................................... 33 300 135 1,200 293 2,600 ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... ........
C......................................... 45 400 203 1,800 361 3,200 768 6,800 ......... ........ 576 5,100 ......... ........
D......................................... ........ ........ 271 2,400 514 4,550 892 7,900 ......... ........ 734 6,500 ......... ........
E......................................... ........ ........ 338 3,000 576 5,100 1,412 12,500 ......... ........ 971 8,600 ......... ........
F......................................... ........ ........ 406 3,600 644 5,700 1,785 15,800 ......... ........ 1,412 12,500 ......... ........
G......................................... ........ ........ ......... ........ 711 6,300 ......... ........ 2,282 20,200 ......... ........ 1,694 15,000
H......................................... ........ ........ ......... ........ 768 6,800 ......... ........ 2,598 23,000 ......... ........ 2,090 18,500
J......................................... ........ ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ 2,824 25,000 ......... ........ 2,203 19,500
L......................................... ........ ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ 3,050 27,000 ......... ........ ......... ........
M......................................... ........ ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ 3,220 28,500 ......... ........ ......... ........
N......................................... ........ ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ ......... ........ 3,389 30,000 ......... ........ ......... ........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: For rayon cord tires, applicable energy values are 60 percent of those in table.

* * * * *

Table III--Endurance Test Schedule
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test wheel speed Test load: Percent of maximum load
-------------------------- rating Total test
Description Load range --------------------------------------- revolution
km/h r/m Step I (7 Step II (16 Step III (thousands)
hours) hours) (24 hours)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed-restricted service:
90 km/h (55 mph)..................... All......................... 40 125 66 84 101 352.5
80 km/h (50 mph)..................... C, D........................ 48 150 75 97 114 423.0
E, F, G, H, J, L, M, N...... 32 100 66 84 101 282.0
56 km/h (35 mph)................. All......................... 24 75 66 84 101 211.5
Motorcycle............................... All......................... 80 250 \a\ 100 \b\ 108 117 510.0
All other................................ A, B, C, D.................. 80 250 \a\ 75 \b\ 97 114 510.0
E........................... 64 200 70 88 106 564.0
F........................... 64 200 66 84 101 564.0
G........................... 56 175 66 84 101 493.5
H, J, L, M, N............... 48 150 66 84 101 423.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ 4 hours for tire sizes subject to high speed requirements S6.3.
\b\ 6 hours for tire sizes subject to high speed requirements S6.3.

* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 571.139 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph S2;
0
b. Revising paragraph S4.1.1(a);
0
c. Revising paragraph S6.2.1.1.1;
0
d. Revising paragraph S6.3.1.1.1; and
0
e. Revising paragraph S6.4.1.1.1.
The revisions read as follows:

[[Page 43570]]

Sec. 571.139 Standard No. 139; New pneumatic radial tires for light
vehicles.

* * * * *
S2 Application. This standard applies to new pneumatic radial tires
for use on motor vehicles (other than motorcycles and low speed
vehicles) that have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000
pounds or less and that were manufactured after 1975. This standard
does not apply to special tires (ST) for trailers in highway service,
tires for use on farm implements (FI) in agricultural service with
intermittent highway use, tires with rim diameters of 12 inches and
below, T-type temporary use spare tires with radial construction, and
light truck tires with a tread depth of 18/32 inch or greater.
* * * * *
S4.1.1 * * *
(a) Listed by manufacturer name or brand name in a document
furnished to dealers of the manufacturer's tires, to any person upon
request, and in duplicate to the Docket Section (No. NHTSA-2009-0117),
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590; or
* * * * *
S6.2.1.1.1 Mount the tire on a test rim and inflate it to the
pressure specified for the tire in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test
Tire application pressure
(kPa)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passenger car tires:
Standard load............................................ 220
Extra load............................................... 260
Light truck tires with a nominal cross section <=295 mm (11.5
inches):
Load Range C............................................. 320
Load Range D............................................. 410
Load Range E............................................. 500
Light truck tires with a nominal cross section >295 mm (11.5
inches):
Load Range C............................................. 230
Load Range D............................................. 320
Load Range E............................................. 410
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
S6.3.1.1.1 Mount the tire on a test rim and inflate it to the
pressure specified for the tire in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test
Tire application pressure
(kPa)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passenger car tires:
Standard load............................................ 180
Extra load............................................... 220
Light truck tires with a nominal cross section <=295 mm (11.5
inches):
Load Range C............................................. 260
Load Range D............................................. 340
Load Range E............................................. 410
Light truck tires with a nominal cross section >295 mm (11.5
inches):
Load Range C............................................. 190
Load Range D............................................. 260
Load Range E............................................. 340
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
S6.4.1.1.1 This test is conducted following completion of the tire
endurance test using the same tire and rim assembly tested in
accordance with S6.3 with the tire deflated to the following
appropriate pressure:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test
Tire application pressure
(kPa)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passenger car tires:
Standard load............................................ 140
Extra load............................................... 160
Light truck tires with a nominal cross section <=295 mm (11.5
inches):
Load Range C............................................. 200
Load Range D............................................. 260
Load Range E............................................. 320
Light truck tires with a nominal cross section >295 mm (11.5
inches):
Load Range C............................................. 150
Load Range D............................................. 200
Load Range E............................................. 260
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.5.

Heidi Renate King,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-17813 Filed 8-20-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P