Tire Identification and Recordkeeping

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 574

[Docket No. NHTSA-98-4550]

RIN 2127-AH10

Tire Identification and Recordkeeping

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The tire identification and recordkeeping regulation requires

new tire manufacturers and tire retreaders to label on one sidewall of

each tire they produce a tire identification number that includes their

manufacturer's or retreader's identification mark, a tire size symbol,

an optional descriptive code, and the date of manufacture. The date of

manufacture is expressed in the last 3 digits of the tire

identification number.

In response to petitions for rulemaking submitted by the Rubber

Manufacturers Association and the European Tyre and Rim Technical

Organisation, the agency proposes to amend the regulation to require

the date of manufacture to be shown in four digits instead of the

currently-required three, and to reduce the minimum size of the digits

from the current 6 millimeters (mm) (\1/4\ inch) to 4 mm (\5/32\ inch).

The agency believes that the four-symbol date code would, if adopted,

permit better traceability of tires during recalls and would allow

easier identification of older tires. NHTSA also believes that reducing

the size of the date code from 6 mm to 4 mm would not affect the

readability of the date code digits. In addition, adoption of these

proposals would enhance international harmonization by bringing the

U.S. tire date code requirements into harmony with the new United

Nations' Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) regulation and the

International Organization for Standardization (ISO) recommended

practice.

DATES: Comment closing date: Comments on this notice must be received

by NHTSA not later than December 18, 1998.

Proposed effective date: If adopted, the amendments proposed in

this notice would become effective on or about January 1, 2000.

Optional early compliance would be permitted on and after the date of

publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket number for this rule

noted above and be submitted to: Docket Management Room, PL-401, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590. Docket room hours are from 10

a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues: Mr. Joseph

Scott, Safety Standards Engineer, Office of Crash Avoidance Standards,

Vehicle Dynamics Division, National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590; telephone

(202) 366-8525, fax (202) 493-2739. For legal issues: Mr. Walter Myers,

Attorney-Advisor, Office of the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590;

telephone (202) 366-2992, fax (202) 366-3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

Section 574.5 of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Tire

Identification Requirements, sets forth the methods by which new tire

manufacturers and new tire brand name owners identify tires for use on

motor vehicles. The section also sets forth the methods by which tire

retreaders and retreaded tire brand name owners identify tires for use

on motor vehicles. The purpose of these requirements is to facilitate

notification to purchasers of defective or nonconforming tires so that

purchasers can take appropriate action in the interest of motor vehicle

safety.

Specifically, Sec. 574.5 requires each new tire manufacturer and

each tire retreader to mold a tire identification number (TIN) into or

onto the sidewall of each tire produced, in the manner and location

specified in the section and as depicted in Figures 1 and 2. The TIN is

composed of four groups:

a. The first group of two or three symbols, depending on whether

the tire is new or retreaded, represents the manufacturer's

identification mark assigned to such manufacturer by this agency in

accordance with Sec. 574.6;

b. The second group of no more than two symbols represents the tire

size for new tires; for retreaded tires, the second group represents

the retread matrix in which the tire was processed or if no matrix was

used, a tire size code;

c. The third group, consisting of no more than four symbols, may,

at the option of the manufacturer, be used as a descriptive code for

identifying significant characteristics of the tire. If the tire is

produced for a brand name owner, the third grouping must identify such

brand name owner; and

d. The fourth group, composed of three symbols, identifies the week

and year of manufacture. The first two symbols identify the week of the

year, starting with ``01'' to represent the first full week of the

calendar year; the third symbol represents the year. For example,

``218'' represents the 21st week of 1998.

NHTSA originally proposed these requirements in response to the May

22, 1970 amendments to the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety

Act of 1966. 1 Those amendments, among other things,

required manufacturers and brand name owners of new and retreaded motor

vehicle tires to maintain records of the names and addresses of the

first purchasers of tires (other than dealers or distributors) in order

to facilitate notification to such purchasers in the event tires were

found to be defective or not to comply with applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards.

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

\1\ The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966,

Pub. L. 89-563, was originally codified at 15 U.S.C. 1581, et seq.

However, it was recodified in 1995 and is now found at 49 U.S.C.

30101, et seq.

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

The agency believed that an essential element of an effective

defect or noncompliance notification system to vehicle or tire

purchasers was an effective method of tire identification. Accordingly,

on July 23, 1970, NHTSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM) (35 FR 11800) proposing to establish a tire identification

system to provide a means to identify the manufacturer of the tire, the

date of manufacture, the tire size, and at the option of the

manufacturer, additional information to further describe the type or

other significant characteristics of the tire. The agency proposed a

TIN composed of four groups of symbols: the first group would contain

the manufacturer's identification mark which would be assigned by

NHTSA; the second group would identify the tire size by a two symbol

code; the third group of four symbols would identify the date of

manufacture of the tire, the first two

[[Page 55833]]

symbols of which would indicate the week, and the last two the year;

and the fourth group would be the manufacturer's optional description

of the tire. The symbols would be a minimum of 1/4 inch high and would

appear on both sidewalls of the tire.

In a final rule published on November 10, 1970 (35 FR 17257), the

agency revised the requirements proposed in the NPRM in response to the

suggestions of various commenters. Specifically, NHTSA reversed the

order of the manufacturer's optional information and the date of

manufacture, so that the latter would appear in the fourth grouping and

the manufacturer's optional information would appear in the third

grouping. NHTSA also stated that the tire identification number need

only appear on one sidewall, and that the symbols need only be \5/32\

inch high on tires with a bead diameter of less than 13 inches. Many

commenters requested that the date code be expressed in alpha-numeric

form in order to reduce the date symbol to two digits. NHTSA declined

to adopt the alpha-numeric system because it could be confusing to the

public and because retreaders may not be able to easily determine the

age of the casing to be retreaded. In order to shorten the stencil

plate, however, NHTSA dropped one of the two digits representing the

decade of manufacture, thereby reducing the date of manufacture group

from four digits to three.

B. The Petitions

(1) Rubber Manufacturers Association. The Rubber Manufacturers

Association (RMA) is the primary national trade association for the

finished rubber products industry in the U.S. RMA petitioned the agency

to amend 49 CFR 574.5 to permit a 4-digit date code and to reduce the

size of the lettering from \1/4\ inch to \5/32\ inch.

RMA explained that at a recent meeting, the ISO Technical Committee

31 on tires recommended approval of a 4-digit date of manufacture code

beginning in January 2000. RMA stated that ECE has also authorized the

use of a 4-digit date code commencing in January 2000. RMA suggested

that with a 4-digit date code, the first two would represent the week

and the last two the year. For example, 0100 would mean the first week

of January of the year 2000. RMA suggested that an appropriate phase-in

period be allowed during which use of either the 3 or 4 digit code

would be permitted. In order to avoid having to modify existing molds,

RMA suggested that the addition of the fourth digit be offset by

allowing the minimum size of the digits in the date code to be reduced

to 4 millimeters (mm) (\5/32\ inch), regardless of tire size. Finally,

RMA stated that such modification would bring these U.S. requirements

into harmony with the ECE regulation and the ISO recommendation, and

would allow better traceability and identification of older tires.

(2) European Tyre and Rim Technical Organisation (ETRTO). Based in

Brussels, Belgium, the ETRTO is the European standardization authority

for the establishment and promulgation of interchangeability standards

for pneumatic tires, rims, and valves. ETRTO submitted a petition for

rulemaking which cited the ECE regulations and the ISO agreements and

suggested amending Sec. 574.5 to permit a 4-digit date code effective

in January 2000. The first two digits would represent the week and the

latter two would represent the year of manufacture. Again, in order to

avoid modification of existing tire molds, ETRTO requested reduction of

the height of the digits from 6 mm (\1/4\ inch) to 4 mm (\5/32\ inch),

regardless of tire size. ETRTO also sought to justify the requested

amendments by stating that such amendments would bring U.S.

requirements into line with the ECE regulations and ISO

recommendations, and that the amendments would allow better

traceability of tires and identification of old tires.

C. Discussion

As stated in the Background discussion above, the TIN originated

with the May 22, 1970 amendments to the National Traffic and Motor

Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. Prior to that time, there were no tire

labeling requirements in effect, other than standard industry

practices. When considering the TIN in its current form, the agency was

persuaded by the commenters to the NPRM that economizing on limited

space on tire sidewalls justified reducing the decade symbol in the

date code from two digits to one. This presented no problem during the

1970s since the TIN was new, the lifecycle of tires from manufacture to

disposal or recycling was shorter then, and the issue of tires

manufactured in different decades seemed minor at most. The single-

digit year code likewise presented no problem in the 1980s because the

industry was making the transition from bias-ply to radial tires, and

the public could easily distinguish between the bias-ply tires of the

1970s and the new radial tires of the 1980s. No problems appeared in

this respect until the 1990s. At that time, the single-digit year code

became inadequate because longer-lived radial tires became widely used

and there was now no way for the agency or the public to determine for

certain when the tire was manufactured. When the date code requirement

was developed in 1970, it was not envisioned that tires manufactured in

one decade would be taken out of storage and sold ten or more years

later. That, however, has occurred in some cases.

Tire manufacturers recognized this as a concern and, in order to

alleviate that concern without petitioning the government for

additional rulemaking, the industry's voluntary standards organization

issued a new recommended practice that provided that tires built in the

1990s display the symbol ``'' after the TIN to indicate that

the year of manufacture was in the decade of the 1990s. Not all tire

manufacturers followed this recommended procedure, however, thereby

diminishing its meaning and effectiveness. For tires without the mark,

the public was still left with no way of knowing for certain whether

the tire(s) they purchased were manufactured in the 1970s, 1980s, or

1990s.

The agency does not consider the industry voluntary practice to be

a satisfactory solution to this problem. Presumably, different symbols

would be needed to represent different decades. Ultimately, therefore,

a proliferation of such symbols, and the interpretation problems they

would present, would further confuse an already confusing situation.

Rather, NHTSA tentatively concludes that the addition of a fourth digit

to the date code to specifically identify the decade, as requested by

the petitioners, would be a simpler and more practical solution.

NHTSA believes that as run-flat tires and high performance low-

profile tires are developed and become more common, tire diameters will

increase with consequent decrease in sidewall heights. That means that

conservation of ever-more limited space on tire sidewalls will become

even more important than before. The agency's proposal to add a digit

to the date code that would still fit within the current size of the

date code, while more clearly identifying the date of manufacture,

would ensure that the TIN would not take any more space on the tire

sidewall than before.

There was some concern within the agency that reducing the digits

in the date code from 6 mm (\1/4\ inch) to 4 mm (\5/32\ inch) might

make the numbers too small to be seen easily. To determine whether this

would be the case, NHTSA

[[Page 55834]]

requested and received from RMA a sample piece of a tire sidewall with

the numbers 4 mm in height. This sample was examined by various agency

personnel who indicated that the 4 mm digits were clearly readable. The

reduction of the size of the digits is so slight as to be barely

perceptible. Moreover, 4 mm digits are currently permitted with no

reported difficulties for tires with less than 6 inches cross section

or with less than a 13-inch bead diameter. Further, NHTSA permits all

the tire grading information required by the Uniform Tire Quality

Grading Standards, 49 CFR 575.104, to be expressed in 4 mm letters and

numbers, again without reported problems with readability. Accordingly,

NHTSA believes that the tire date code could be reduced from 6 mm to 4

mm with no effect on the readability of the digits.

The tire industry's interest in reducing the size of the digits in

a 4 mm date code is a matter of cost. Based on current requirements,

the industry has developed date ``plugs'' of a standard size and width

and that are changed weekly in the tire molds. To avoid the cost of

modifying current tire molds or constructing new ones to accommodate an

extra digit the same size as now required, the industry requests that

it be permitted to reduce the size of the digits. NHTSA tentatively

concludes that reducing the date code digit size to 4 mm would ensure

that this rulemaking not result in any cost impacts to tire

manufacturers, yet a 4-digit date code symbol would be more effective

in fulfilling the purpose of part 574.

The agency emphasizes that 4 mm is the minimum size for the date

code symbols. No maximum size is specified. Tire manufacturers would be

free to make the digits larger, so long as other required labeling of

the required size continues to appear on the tire sidewall. Where not

otherwise specified, tire manufacturers typically adjust the size of

tire labeling in accordance with trends in the consumer market. NHTSA

has no reason to believe that manufacturers would do otherwise with the

size of the date code symbols.

NHTSA tentatively agrees with the petitioners that the proposed 4-

digit date code would result in better traceability of tires for defect

and compliance purposes and for more accurate identification of older

tires for consumers. NHTSA believes that traceability would be improved

if the year were identified in 2 digits so that the tires produced in

that week in that year can be more quickly and easily traced to a

specific production lot. Moreover, requiring the specific year to

appear in the date code can discourage the unscrupulous practice of

selling old tires to unsuspecting consumers who think that they are

buying recently-produced tires. NHTSA has tentatively concluded that

aging diminishes the wear rates of tires by significant amounts,

depending on the conditions and length of storage of the tires

concerned. See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Uniform Tire Quality

Grading Standards, 63 FR 30695, June 5, 1998. Since old tires will not

provide the wear rates of newer tires, the 4-digit date code will make

it simpler for prospective tire purchasers to know in advance the

status of the tires they are purchasing.

NHTSA is a strong supporter of international harmonization in all

cases where such harmonization is consistent with its statutory mandate

to ensure motor vehicle safety. The adoption of the 4-digit date code

in the TIN is consistent with the agency's harmonization efforts and

would benefit U. S. tire manufacturers and exporters. The international

tire industry has become truly global in manufacturing, marketing, and

sales. In 1995, domestic tire manufacturers exported 22.3 million

passenger car tires and 3.8 million light truck tires to foreign

markets. In the same year, the U. S. imported 45 million passenger car

tires and 5.4 million light truck tires from foreign sources. It is

apparent, therefore, that maximum harmonization of tire requirements

would benefit both U. S. and foreign vehicle and tire manufacturers.

Finally, NHTSA agrees with the petitioners that it would be

advantageous to permit tire manufacturers to phase in the new

requirements between the date of publication of the final rule,

assuming the proposals herein are finally adopted, and the beginning of

the year 2000. In that interim period, tire manufacturers would be

permitted to continue to use the currently-required 3-digit date code

or the new 4-digit date code, at their option. This should give

manufacturers ample time to make the conversion to the new

requirements, yet permit them to utilize the new date code as soon as

they are ready to do so.

Agency Proposal

Based on the considerations discussed above, NHTSA proposes to

amend 49 CFR 574.5 as follows:

a. Change the fourth grouping of the tire identification number,

which shows the date of manufacture of the tire, from 3 to 4 digits.

The first two digits would indicate the week of the year, starting with

the numbers ``01'' to designate the first full week of the year, and

the last two digits would indicate the year. Thus, the date code symbol

``2198'' would indicate the 21st week of 1998;

b. Reduce the minimum size requirement for the digits in the 4-

digit date code, but not the size of the other symbols in the tire

identification number, from 6 mm (\1/4\ inch) to 4 mm (\5/32\ inch).

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

a. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

This document has not been reviewed under Executive Order 12866,

Regulatory Planning and Review.

NHTSA has analyzed the impact of this rulemaking action and has

determined that it is not ``significant'' within the meaning of the

DOT's regulatory policies and procedures. This action proposes to amend

the tire identification number currently required by 49 CFR 574.5 to be

marked on all tires sold in the United States. Specifically, this

proposal would increase the number of digits in the date of manufacture

group of the tire identification number from 3 to 4, and would permit a

reduction in the size of those digits so that the 4 digits would fit

within the same ``plug'' in the tire molds in which the currently-

required 3 digits fit. That would permit tire manufacturers to use the

same molds that they do now, without having to absorb the costs of

constructing new molds. Date codes are changed weekly by manufacturers

and with a sufficient phase-in period, manufacturers would have ample

opportunity to phase into the new 4-digit date code without having to

redesign their tire molds. For these reasons, the agency estimates that

implementation of the proposals herein would not result in any

increased costs to tire manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or

consumers. Accordingly, the agency has concluded that preparation of a

full regulatory evaluation is not warranted.

b. Regulatory Flexibility Act

NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under

the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. I hereby certify

that this notice of proposed rulemaking would not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small entities.

The following is the agency's statement providing the factual basis

for the certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). The amendments proposed herein

would primarily affect manufacturers of motor vehicle tires. The Small

Business Administration (SBA) regulation at 13 CFR part 121 defines a

small business

[[Page 55835]]

as a business entity which operates primarily within the United States

(13 CFR 121.105(a)).

SBA's size standards are organized according to Standard Industrial

Classification (SIC) codes. SIC code No. 3711, Motor Vehicles and

Passenger Car Bodies, prescribes a small business size standard of

1,000 or fewer employees. SIC code No. 3714, Motor Vehicle Part and

Accessories, prescribes a small business size standard of 750 or fewer

employees.

The amendments proposed in this rulemaking action would merely

increase the number of digits in the date of manufacture symbol in the

tire identification number from 3 digits to 4, and permit a reduction

in the size of those digits from 6 mm (\1/4\ inch) to 4mm (\5/32\

inch). The purpose of these changes is to harmonize U.S. requirements

with those of the European community, to make tires more easily

traceable in the event of a defect or noncompliance, and to allow

easier identification of old tires. These proposed amendments were

requested by the trade organizations that represent the major tire

manufacturers in both the U.S. and Europe, in particular the reduction

in size of the digits so that tire manufacturers would be spared the

expense of designing and making new tire molds. The proposed

amendments, if adopted, would not impose any increased costs or other

burdens on tire manufacturers, most if not all of which would not

qualify as small businesses under SBA guidelines. Neither would the

proposed amendments result in any increase in costs for small

businesses or consumers. Accordingly, there would be no significant

impact on small businesses, small organizations, or small governmental

units by these amendments. For those reasons, the agency has not

prepared a preliminary regulatory flexibility analysis.

c. Executive Order No. 12612, Federalism

NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance with the

principles and criteria of E.O. 12612 and has determined that this rule

does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

d. National Environmental Policy Act

NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action for the purposes of the

National Environmental Policy Act and has determined that

implementation of this rulemaking action would not have any significant

impact on the quality of the human environment.

e. Paperwork Reduction Act

The provisions of the proposed amendments herein requiring tire

manufacturers to designate the date of manufacture of their tires in 4

digits instead of the currently-required 3 and to reduce the size of

the digits from 6 mm to 4 mm are considered to be third-party

information collection requirements as defined by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) in 5 CFR part 1320. The proposed amendments

create no additional information collection requirements since the

proposals, if adopted, would merely make a slight change to the format

of existing requirements.

The information collection requirements for 49 CFR part 574 have

been submitted to and approved by OMB pursuant to the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act , 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. This collection of

information authority for tire information and recordkeeping has been

assigned control number 2127-0503, which expires August 31, 2000.

f. Civil Justice Reform

The amendments proposed herein would not have any retroactive

effect. Under 49 U.S.C. 30103(b), whenever a Federal motor vehicle

safety standard is in effect, a state or political subdivision thereof

may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same

aspect of performance of a motor vehicle only if the standard is

identical to the Federal standard.

However, the United States government, a state or political

subdivision of a state may prescribe a standard for a motor vehicle or

motor vehicle equipment obtained for its own use that imposes a higher

performance requirement than that required by the Federal standard.

Section 30161 of Title 49, U.S. Code sets forth a procedure for

judicial review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking

Federal motor vehicle safety standards. A petition for reconsideration

or other administrative proceedings is not required before parties may

file suit in court.

Comments

Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the amendments

proposed herein. It is requested but not required that any such

comments be submitted in duplicate (original and 1 copy).

Comments must not exceed 15 pages in length (49 CFR 553.21). This

limitation is intended to encourage commenters to detail their primary

arguments in concise fashion. Necessary attachments, however, may be

appended to those comments without regard to the 15-page limit.

If a commenter wishes to submit certain information under a claim

of confidentiality, 3 copies of the complete submission, including the

purportedly confidential business information, should be submitted to

the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address noted above, and 1 copy

from which the purportedly confidential information has been deleted

should be submitted to Docket Management. A request for confidentiality

should be accompanied by a cover letter setting forth the information

called for in 49 CFR part 512, Confidential Business Information.

All comments received on or before the close of business on the

comment closing date indicated above for the proposal will be

considered, and will be available to the public for examination in the

docket at the above address both before and after the closing date. To

the extent possible, comments received after the closing date will be

considered. Comments received too late for consideration in regard to

the final rule will be considered as suggestions for further rulemaking

action. Comments on today's proposal will be available for public

inspection in the docket. NHTSA will continue to file relevant

information in the docket after the comment closing date, and it is

recommended that interested persons continue to monitor the docket for

new material.

Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their

comments in the rule docket should enclose a self-addressed stamped

postcard in the envelope with their comments. Upon receiving the

comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 574

Labeling, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Rubber and rubber products, Tires.

In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR part 574 would be amended

as follows:

PART 574--TIRE IDENTIFICATION AND RECORDKEEPING

1. The authority citation for part 574 would continue to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, and 30166;

delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

2. Section 574.5 would be amended by revising paragraph (d) and

Figures 1 and 2 to read as follows:

[[Page 55836]]

Sec. 574.5 Tire identification requirements.

* * * * *

(d) Fourth Grouping. The fourth group, consisting of four

numerical symbols, shall identify the week and year of manufacture.

The first two symbols shall identify the week of the year by using

``01'' for the first full calendar week in each year, ``02'' for the

second full calendar week, and so on. The final week of each year

may include not more than 6 days of the following year. The third

and fourth symbols shall identify the year. Example: 3197 means the

31st week of 1997, or the week of August 3 through 9, 1997; 0198

means the first full calendar week of 1998, or the week of January 4

through 10, 1998. The symbols signifying the date of manufacture

shall be not less than 4 mm (\5/32\ inch) in height and shall

immediately follow the optional descriptive code (paragraph (c) of

this section). If no optional descriptive code is used, the symbols

signifying the date of manufacture shall be placed in the area shown

in Figures 1 and 2 for the optional descriptive code.

* * * * *

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

[[Page 55837]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19OC98.000

[[Page 55838]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19OC98.001

Issued on October 13, 1998.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 98-27917 Filed 10-16-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-C