[Federal Register: November 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 230)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 72358-72369]
[DOCID:fr28no08-19]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 574

[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0187]
RIN 2127-AK11

Tire Registration and Recordkeeping

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this final rule, we are amending our tire identification
and recordkeeping regulation to codify existing interpretations
regarding opportunities for electronic registration of tire sales and
leases and to create new opportunities for the public to use electronic
means to register new tires. This regulation requires manufacturer-
owned tire distributors and dealers to register the names and addresses
of the people to whom they sell or lease new tires, and currently
specifies the use of standardized paper forms for this purpose. It also
requires independent distributors and dealers to provide purchasers
with standardized registration forms, with the tire identification
number filled in, that they can complete and mail to the manufacturer
or its designee. Today's rule accommodates and facilitates Internet and
other electronic registration of tires, including voluntary
registration of tires by independent dealers.

DATES: This final rule takes effect January 27, 2009. Optional
immediate compliance with this final rule is permitted as of November
28, 2008.
    Petitions for reconsideration: Petitions for reconsideration of
this final rule must be received not later than January 12, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must refer
to the docket and notice number set forth above and be submitted to the
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, Mr. Jeff Woods,

Vehicle Dynamics Division, Office of Vehicle Safety Standards
(Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) (Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>). Mr. Woods' mailing
address is National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NVS-122,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    For legal issues, Ms. Dorothy Nakama, Office of the Chief Counsel
(Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) (Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>). Ms. Nakama's mailing
address is National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NCC-112,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Overview
II. Background--Tire Registration Requirements
III. January 2008 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    A. Tires Sold by Independent Tire Dealers--Alternative Means of
Tire Registration
    B. Tires Sold by Dealers Controlled by Tire Manufacturers--
Electronic Tire Registration
IV. Public Comments and NHTSA's Response
V. Final Rule
VI. Statutory Basis for the Final Rule
VII. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
    A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. National Environmental Policy Act
    D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    E. Civil Justice Reform
    F. Paperwork Reduction Act
    G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    I. Plain Language
    J. Regulation Identifier Number
    K. Privacy Act

I. Overview

    In today's final rule, we are amending Part 574, Tire
Identification and Recordkeeping, to codify existing interpretations
regarding opportunities for electronic registration of tire sales and
leases and to create new opportunities for the public to use electronic
means to register new tires. Part 574 requires manufacturer-owned tire
distributors and dealers to register the names and addresses of the
people to whom they sell or lease new tires, and currently specifies
the use of standardized paper forms for this purpose. It also requires
independent distributors and dealers to provide purchasers with
standardized registration forms, with the tire identification filled
in, that purchasers can complete and mail to the manufacturer or its
designee.
    Under the final rule, we make the following changes concerning
registration of tires sold by independent dealers and dealers owned or
controlled by tire manufacturers:

Independent Tire Dealers

     Use of electronic instead of paper registration. Dealers
may, in lieu of providing a paper registration form to the consumer,
voluntarily register a tire by Internet or other electronic means, so
long as such means were authorized by the tire manufacturer.
     Informing consumers of opportunities for electronic
registration. If dealers use standardized paper registration forms,
they may use one that identifies a Web site and/or other means (e.g., a
telephone number) authorized by the tire manufacturer by which the
consumer could register the tires instead of mailing in the form.
     Added flexibility in paper registration. Dealers have the
option of providing to the consumer a mailable standardized paper
registration form that includes the tire identification number (TIN)
and the dealer's name and address (this is the current requirement set
forth in Part 574), or using the same standardized paper registration
form, but voluntarily completing the form and registering the tire by
sending the form to the tire manufacturer or its designee.
     Added flexibility in designing paper registration forms.
The figures showing the standardized paper registration form are
removed from the CFR. Some requirements that were expressed by
referring to the forms in the regulatory text are added to the
regulatory text, but the regulation no longer specifies as many details
concerning the format of the forms.

Dealers Owned or Controlled by Tire Manufacturers

     Added flexibility in designing paper registration forms.
The regulation clarifies that dealers owned or controlled by tire
manufacturers may register tires by electronic means, consistent with a
past agency interpretation. The figure showing the form used for these
tires is also removed from the CFR.
    This final rule does not impose new obligations on tire dealers or
tire manufacturers. Instead, it accommodates and facilitates Internet
and other electronic registration of tires, including voluntary
registration of tires by independent dealers. The rule also clarifies
that tire manufacturers must meet requirements concerning retention of
information for registration information submitted to them by
electronic or other means they authorize, in addition to that submitted
to them on the standardized paper forms.

II. Background--Tire Registration Requirements

    As originally enacted, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle
Safety Act of 1966 (now codified at Title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 Motor
Vehicle Safety) did not include a requirement for tire registration.
However, in May 1970, Congress amended the law to mandate that every
tire manufacturer shall maintain records of the names and addresses of
the first purchaser of tires produced by that manufacturer.\1\ NHTSA
was given the authority to establish procedures to be followed by
manufacturers in establishing and maintaining such records, including
procedures to be followed by distributors and dealers to assist
manufacturers in securing the names and addresses of first purchasers.
The names and addresses of purchasers and lessors are used by a tire or
vehicle manufacturer to contact those people in the event that the tire
manufacturer must conduct a campaign to recall and remedy tires that
either fail to comply with an applicable Federal motor vehicle safety
standard or to have a safety-related defect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 91-265.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to this authority, in a final rule published in the
Federal Register (35 FR 17257) on November 10, 1970, NHTSA established
the initial tire identification and recordkeeping requirements of 49
CFR part 574. The rule required all tire dealers to record the name and
address of the purchaser to whom they sold the tire, along with the
dealer's name and address, and forward that information to the tire
manufacturer.
    However, under the Motor Vehicle Safety and Cost Savings
Authorization Act of 1982 (Pub. L. 97-331), Congress amended the Safety
Act to mandate that the obligations of independent distributors and
dealers be limited to giving ``a registration form (containing the tire
identification number) to the first purchaser.'' The tire purchaser
could then mail the form to the tire manufacturer. Congress also
mandated that NHTSA should prescribe a standardized registration form
and that tire manufacturers had to ensure that they gave sufficient
copies of these forms to their dealers.
    Congress adopted these amendments after the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce found in its report on the 1982 amendments that
tire dealers whose business was owned or controlled by a tire
manufacturer (these

dealers accounted for just under \1/3\ of tire sales) registered
between 80 and 90 percent of the tires they sold.\2\ At that time,
however, independent tire dealers, which accounted for more than \2/3\
of tire sales, registered only 20 percent of the tires they sold.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ H.R. Rep. No. 576, 97th Cong. 2d Sess. 8-9 (1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The changes mandated by the 1982 amendments were established in an
interim final rule published on May 19, 1983 (48 CFR 22572). The
regulation required tire manufacturers to provide both independent and
non-independent distributors and dealers with standardized tire
registration forms. The regulation specified the exact content of the
forms given to independent distributors and dealers, and that no other
information may appear on the forms.\3\ When an independent distributor
or dealer sells or leases a tire to a consumer, the distributor or
dealer must fill in the tire identification number and its name and
address on a registration form and give the form to the consumer. The
consumer may then fill in his or her name and address, add a stamp and
mail the form to the manufacturer or its designee. In a follow-up final
rule published on February 8, 1984 (49 FR 4755), the agency made slight
revisions to the tire registration form to improve its clarity and also
reduced the size of the form so that it could be mailed using post card
postage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ July 18, 2003 letter from Jacqueline Glassman to Ann Wilson
of RMA. Letter is available at: http://isearch.nhtsa.gov/files/
onlinetireregistration.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the agency's implementation of the Transportation Recall
Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act (Pub. L.
106-414) that was enacted on November 1, 2000, the agency increased the
tire registration record retention requirements for tire manufacturers
from three years to five years. The record retention period was
extended in a final rule published in the Federal Register (67 FR
45822) on July 10, 2002.

III. January 2008 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On January 24, 2008 (73 FR 4157), NHTSA published in the Federal
Register, a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend the part 574
tire registration procedures to facilitate Internet and other
electronic registration of tires by independent tire dealers. For a
full explanation of these issues, please refer to the NPRM on pages
4158 through 4161.
    Specifically, under our proposal:
     Independent tire dealers could, in lieu of providing a
paper registration form to the consumer, voluntarily register a tire by
Internet or other electronic means, so long as such means were
authorized by the tire manufacturer. These dealers would also have the
option of providing to the consumer the mailable standardized paper
registration form that includes the tire identification number (TIN)
and the dealer's name and address (this is the current requirement set
forth in part 574), or using the same standardized paper registration
form, but voluntarily completing the form and registering the tire by
sending the form to the tire manufacturer or its designee.
     The standardized paper registration form would be
permitted to identify a Web site authorized by the tire manufacturer at
which the consumer could register the tires instead of mailing in the
form.
     We proposed to remove the figures showing the standardized
paper registration form from the CFR. Some requirements that were
expressed by referring to the forms in the regulatory text would be
added to the regulatory text, but we proposed that the regulation would
no longer specify as many details concerning the format of the forms.
     We also proposed regulatory text that would clarify that
dealers owned or controlled by tire manufacturers may register tires by
electronic means, consistent with a past agency interpretation. The
figure showing the form used for these tires was also proposed to be
removed.
    We stated that our proposal was not intended to impose new
obligations on tire dealers or tire manufacturers. Instead, it would
accommodate and facilitate Internet and other electronic registration
of tires, including voluntary registration of tires by independent
dealers. We noted that we were proposing a provision that would clarify
that tire manufacturers must meet requirements concerning retention of
information for registration information submitted to them by
electronic or other means they authorize, in addition to that submitted
to them on the standardized paper forms.
    The details of our proposal were as follows:

A. Tires Sold by Independent Tire Dealers--Alternative Means of Tire
Registration

    A number of issues concerning electronic registration of tires
arose between 2005 and 2007 in connection with obtaining clearance of
tire registration requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act. In a
March 21, 2007 (722 FR 1334) Federal Register notice, we stated that we
were considering revisions to update 49 CFR part 574 to allow, to the
extent consistent with the agency's authority, for use of electronic
and other possible means of registering new tires at the point of sale.
    The statutory requirements relevant to independent tire dealers are
found at 49 U.S.C. 30117(b)(2)(B), which reads as follows:

    The Secretary shall require each distributor and dealer whose
business is not owned or controlled by a manufacturer of tires to
give a registration form (containing the tire identification number)
to the first purchaser of a tire. The Secretary shall prescribe the
form, which shall be standardized for all tires and designed to
allow the purchaser to complete and return it directly to the
manufacturer of the tire. The manufacturer shall give sufficient
copies of forms to distributors and dealers.

Given the pre-Internet date of enactment of the statute, the statutory
provision appears to contemplate a mail-in paper form (``the
manufacturer shall give sufficient copies of forms to distributors and
dealers''). Also, the legislative history (House report \4\) refers to
forms that are suitable for mailing and addressed to the manufacturer
or its designee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ H.R. Rep. No. 97-576, p. 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One relevant issue is the effect of voluntary tire registration by
independent tire dealers on their obligations under section
30117(b)(2)(B). While the statute provides for a program in which
purchasers of tires from independent tire dealers may register their
tires by returning a form to the tire manufacturer, a 1983 NHTSA letter
to Congressman Timothy Wirth \5\ addressed the situation in which
independent tire dealers may wish to register tires voluntarily for
consumers. Invoking the principles of equitable interpretation, the
agency concluded that voluntary registration would partially relieve
independent dealers of their statutory obligations. Under those
principles, a statutory requirement need not be literally applied in
instances in which the underlying Congressional intent is otherwise
satisfied. More specifically, the agency stated:

    \5\ February 1983 letter from Diane K. Steed to the Honorable
Timothy E. Wirth. Letter is available at: http://isearch.nhtsa.gov/
gm/83/1983-1.12.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the principles of equitable interpretation, we believe
that an independent tire dealer or distributor who (1) registers
tires by computer; (2) attaches a computer-printed invoice
containing all of the information necessary for registration to a
blank standardized registration form; and (3) furnishes the two
documents to the customer when the tires are purchased; fully

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
satisfies the tire registration amendments. * * *

    While, as discussed below, we now believe that this interpretation
goes to some extent beyond what is necessary to satisfy Congressional
intent, we believe the basic principle is correct. In particular, if an
independent tire dealer voluntarily registers tires for the consumer,
it serves no purpose to require the full procedures necessary to enable
consumers to also register those tires.
    Several other issues are whether the statute can be interpreted to
permit the use of electronic forms in lieu of paper forms and, assuming
that the answer to that issue is ``yes,'' the meaning of the statutory
command to ``* * * give a registration form (containing the tire
identification number) to the first purchaser * * *'' in the context of
electronic forms. As to the term ``form,'' it could be interpreted
broadly enough to include electronic as well as paper forms,
notwithstanding the statutory language and legislative history
mentioned above that suggests the forms are to be paper ones.
    As to the term ``give,'' it could readily be interpreted in the
context of the statute to mean physically provide either ``take away''
means of registration (i.e., mailable form) or means of ``on-the-spot''
registration (i.e., an in-store computer terminal accessible to
purchaser). It is not apparent how the term could be further
interpreted to mean simply inform the purchaser about the opportunity
to use means not physically present in the dealer's store (e.g., use of
a computer terminal located at the purchaser's home or elsewhere.) It
is even less apparent how such further interpretation could be given
the term ``give'' given the additional requirement that the form given
the purchaser ``* * * contain the tire identification number * * *''
    A possible scenario that could be viewed as meeting all of the
statutory requirements would be one in which the purchaser was provided
access to a computer at the dealership where the screen showed the form
with the tire identification numbers already filled in, and the
purchaser could register the tires with the manufacturer by entering
his or her name and address and clicking on a button to register the
tires. In preparing the NPRM, we did not know whether manufacturers and
dealerships would be interested in an option along these lines, but
noted that we were requesting comments on this type of approach. We
also noted that a number of approaches for electronic registration by
purchasers would appear not to meet these statutory requirements, but
could be viewed as supplemental means of transmitting tire registration
to manufacturers.
    In the NPRM, after discussing the statutory requirements, we stated
our belief: (1) The regulation must include a basic procedure
consistent with the statutory requirement that enables purchasers of
tires from independent tire dealers to register their tires by
returning a form with the TIN already filled in to the tire
manufacturer; (2) the regulation may provide options under which an
independent tire dealer may voluntarily register tires for consumers,
in which case the dealer need not meet the full procedures necessary to
enable consumers to register those tires; and (3) the regulation may
accommodate means that tire manufacturers may provide for tire
registration (e.g., Internet registration) that consumers may use
instead of mailing in the form.

Voluntary Registration by Independent Dealers

    After reviewing our 1983 interpretation to Congressman Wirth, we
stated our belief that it went to some extent beyond what was necessary
to satisfy Congressional intent. In particular, we stated our belief
that electronic registration of the tires by independent dealers would
satisfy the statutory requirements, without the need to provide an
additional blank form to the purchaser. The purpose of the statutory
requirement is to enable the purchaser to register the tire purchase
with the manufacturer. As such, if the dealer registers the tires
electronically for the purchaser and provides a blank form to the
purchaser, confusion could result, since the purchaser might think
there was a need to submit the paper form to the manufacturer.
    Regarding the statement in the interpretation that the purchaser be
given a computer-printed invoice with the information on the tire
registration paper form, we stated our belief that that statement also
exceeds what is necessary. The tire registration information is kept by
the tire manufacturer (or its designee). There is no need for the
purchaser to separately be given that information. Instead of
duplicating the required information on the invoice given to the
purchaser, we stated our belief that a written statement on the invoice
regarding the registration of the tires by the dealer would be
sufficient to inform the consumer that the tires have been registered.
    We therefore proposed that independent tire dealers have the option
of voluntarily electronically registering tires with the tire
manufacturer. We noted, however, that whether this option can be used
depended on the tire manufacturer's providing a means to receive this
information electronically, or designating an agent to do so for it. We
stated we were not aware of what specific means might be used to
provide electronic registration, such as specific software that
identifies tire sales and then automatically uses the Internet to
transmit the information to the tire manufacturer or its designee.
However, we stated our belief that many company-controlled tire dealers
have autonomous systems in place to register the tires as part of the
sales transaction. Such systems do not require additional or separate
actions by sales personnel to register the tires. The agency welcomed
additional details on the methods that are currently in place and also
other methods that might be used, including how independent tire
dealers may be able to register tires electronically.
    Our proposal also included an option in which independent tire
dealers could use the standardized paper registration form, but
voluntarily complete the form and register the tires by sending the
form to the tire manufacturer or its designee.
    One issue that arises with independent dealers being permitted to
register tires voluntarily for consumers is whether they could charge a
separate registration fee. Tentatively concluding that this should not
be permitted, as it could discourage registration and cause confusion,
we requested comments on this issue.
    Another issue that arises with electronic registration of tires is
the security of the information being transmitted. The proposed
regulatory text would require that electronic registration be by secure
means, e.g., use of https on the Web. We requested comments on the need
for such a provision, and whether it should be more specific. We noted
that in September 2005 we decided not to include an ``encryption''
requirement for electronic registration of child safety seats.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 70 FR 53569, 53572-73, September 9, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We noted that registration by independent tire dealers would be
voluntary. Nothing in the proposed rulemaking would require independent
tire dealers to register tires for the purchaser.
    For the new electronic registration requirements, NHTSA also
proposed to permit the tire manufacturer to designate a third party to
collect or store the tire registration information. Such third party
designation is currently

allowed for the paper registration forms under 574.7, and we stated we
were not aware of any reason not to extend third party designation to
electronic tire registration methods.

Alternative Means of Registration by Tire Purchasers

    Consistent with a 2003 interpretation letter to RMA, we included in
the proposed regulatory text a provision stating that tire
manufacturers may voluntarily provide means for tire registration via
the Internet, by telephone or other electronic means.
    Based in part on comments to NHTSA's requests for comment to extend
OMB approval for the Part 574 collection of information, we tentatively
concluded that including, at the tire manufacturer's option, a Web site
address for purchasers to register tires could facilitate registration
for tire purchasers, and also improve the quality of information
received by the tire manufacturer.
    We checked several tire manufacturers' Web sites, for both widely-
known tire brands and lesser-known tire brands, and found in all but
one case that the tire manufacturers already have Web site-based tire
registration capability. Inclusion of Web site registration information
would be performed at the option of the tire manufacturer. We proposed
simple text to keep information on the form to a minimum: ``Instead of
mailing this form, you can register online at [insert tire
manufacturer's Web site address]''. This proposed language deviated
slightly from the FMVSS No. 213 Child restraint systems, text which
includes references to registering online on both sides of the form,
although the text on the mailing label side of that form is on a part
of the form that is removed prior to mailing. However, the tire
registration form is not of that design, and much of the form space is
needed for recording the tire identification numbers. We sought
comments on the proposed text and location of the optional Web site
registration information.

Other Possible Options for Tire Registration

    We requested comments on whether the regulation should specify
additional options for registering tires sold by independent tire
dealers that would be consistent with our statutory authority. Several
options were discussed in the NPRM at page 4163.

Registration Forms

    As discussed above, for tires sold by independent tire dealers,
NHTSA is required by statute to prescribe a standardized tire
registration form for all tires. Specifically, 49 U.S.C. 30117(b)(2)(B)
provides ``(t)he Secretary shall prescribe the form, which shall be
standardized for all tires * * *.''
    The statute provides that tire manufacturers must give sufficient
copies of the registration forms to distributors and dealers. Also,
Part 574.8 permits distributors and dealers to use registration forms
obtained from other sources.
    Pursuant to the requirement to prescribe a standardized tire
registration form, NHTSA has adopted requirements through rulemaking
and placed them in Part 574. The details of some of the requirements,
including size and data elements, are set in the regulatory text. The
details of certain other requirements are not set out in the regulatory
text. Instead, the regulatory text requires that forms conform in
content and format to the forms depicted in the figures included in
Part 574. See 574.7(a)(2).
    To promote flexibility, in the NPRM, we proposed to remove the
figures showing the forms in Part 574. To ensure that the forms remain
standardized, we proposed to add some requirements to the regulatory
text that are currently expressed by referring to the figures, but with
fewer details concerning format. We also proposed to update the size
standards to reflect the current U.S. Postal Service's ``Domestic Mail
Manual'' (Updated 12-6-07) at Section 6.3 ``Cards Claimed at Card
Rates,'' that specifies physical standards that postcards must meet in
order to be eligible for mailing at card rates.
    Under our proposal, on the address side of the form, the following
would continue to be required to be provided: The name and address of
the manufacturer or its designee, and, in the upper right hand corner,
the statement: ``Affix a postcard stamp.''
    The other side of the form would continue to include the tire
manufacturer's name (unless it already appears on the address side),
and the statement: ``IMPORTANT, In case of a recall, we can reach you
only if we have your name and address.'' There would also continue to
be a statement indicating that sending in the card will add a person to
the manufacturer's recall list. However, we proposed that the
regulation no longer specify that the statement indicate that a person
``must'' send in the card to be on the recall list, since manufacturers
may provide alternative means of registering tires.
    Under our proposal, if a tire manufacturer provides a Web site
where its tires can be registered, it may (but is not required to)
include the following sentences: ``Instead of mailing this form, you
can register online at [insert tire manufacturer's registration Web
site address]''.
    The form would also include the text: ``Do it today.''
    The form would also continue to include space for recording the
tire identification numbers for six tires. There would also continue to
be shading to distinguish between areas of the form to be filled in by
sellers and customers.
    As indicated above, under our proposal, the regulation would no
longer specify as many details concerning the format of the form.
    We requested comments on the removal of these figures and on what
requirements expressed by reference to the figures should be added to
the regulatory text.

Registration Rates

    We sought comments on the current registration rates of tires sold
by independent tire dealers. Commenters were asked to provide
information concerning the total number of such tires that are sold and
the number of those tires that are currently being registered by each
alternative means, e.g., the number of tires registered by returning
the paper form, the number registered using the tire manufacturer's Web
site, etc. We requested that commenters provide the specific basis for
any numbers or rates that are provided. We also requested comments on
how and why these registration rates may change if the agency adopts
the proposed rule.

B. Tires Sold by Dealers Controlled by Tire Manufacturers--Electronic
Tire Registration

    In the NPRM, we noted that the tire registration form in Figure 4
of Part 574 is the form that is to be filled out by company-controlled
tire dealers and returned to the manufacturer upon the sale of new
tires. We noted that we have no data on the continued use of this form,
or what percentage of company-controlled dealers continue to use this
form versus submit the registration information to the tire
manufacturer using electronic means.
    We reiterated that we have previously provided an interpretation
letter to the RMA (July 18, 2003 agency letter) stating that while
company-controlled dealers are permitted to register tires
electronically:

    This interpretation does not relieve non-independent
distributors and dealers from the requirements of section 574.8(b)
that they themselves record the purchaser's name and address, the
tire identification number(s) of

the tire(s) sold, and a suitable identification of themselves as the
selling dealer on a tire registration form and return the completed
forms to the tire manufacturers or their designees. While we would
interpret Part 574 to permit non-independent distributors and
dealers to accomplish these tasks by electronic means, they may not
transfer this responsibility to consumers.

    In the NPRM, we proposed to include a provision expressly
reflecting this existing option in the Part 574 requirements.
Specifically, we proposed that electronic means be permitted as an
alternative to the paper registration forms specified in Sec.
574.7(b).
    In the NPRM, we also noted that as to Part 574's requirements for
these forms, requirements concerning data elements are set forth in the
regulatory text, and the regulatory text also specifies that the forms
must be similar in format and size to that in Figure 4. We noted that
the statutory requirement that NHTSA prescribe a standardized tire
registration form does not apply to ones for tires sold by dealers
controlled by tire manufacturers.
    To promote flexibility, in the NPRM, we proposed to remove Figure 4
showing the registration forms to be used. We proposed to add several
requirements currently expressed by reference to the figure, and leave
all other details to the tire manufacturer. Under our proposal, the
form would continue to be required to include:
     A statement indicating where the form should be returned,
including the name and mailing address of the manufacturer or its
designee.
     The tire manufacturers' logo or other identification, if
the manufacturer is not identified as part of the statement indicating
where the form should be returned.
     The statement: ``IMPORTANT; FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES TIRE
IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS MUST BE REGISTERED.''
    We sought comments on the removal of this figure and on what
requirements expressed by reference to the figure should be added to
the regulatory text.

IV. Public Comments and NHTSA's Response

    In response to the January 2008 NPRM, NHTSA received comments from:
CIMS; Dealer Tire; the National Association of Trailer Manufacturers
(NATM); the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA); the Rubber
Manufacturers Association (RMA); Ms. Barbara Sachau; Safety Research
and Strategies, Inc. (SRS); the Small Business Administration's (SBA)
Office of Advocacy; Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA); TBC
Corporation; and the Tire Industry Association (TIA).
    Commenters generally supported our proposal, with some offering
suggestions they believed would improve the rule. A number of
commenters urged that we issue the final rule as soon as possible.
While some commenters raised other issues about Part 574, none opposed
our proposal.
    RMA stated that it fully supports the proposed changes and urged
the agency to issue the final rule in its entirety, and as
expeditiously as possible. TIA stated that it enthusiastically supports
the proposed changes. SEMA stated that it strongly supports the
proposed rule.
    SBA stated that it ``strongly supports the proposed rule'' and did
not suggest any changes to the proposal. SBA stated that it heard from
``a number of small businesses representing automobile and tire dealers
who have expressed strong support for NHTSA's proposed rule.'' SBA
further stated that the current tire registration program was nominated
``as a regulation in need of review and reform under Advocacy's new
Regulatory Review and Reform (r3) Initiative.'' SBA concluded that
while Part 574 ``was not selected as one of our final `Top 10' r3 rules
for 2008, it likely would have been if not for NHTSA's timely proposed
rule that does exactly what the r3 submitter sought--for NHTSA to
modernize its rule to allow for Internet registration of tires.''
    NADA generally supported the proposed rule. It offered three
suggestions. First, tire manufacturers should be allowed to voluntarily
list on their forms as many electronic filing methods as they choose
(e.g., Web site, phone, fax, etc.). NADA stated that this appears to be
provided for by proposed Sec.  574.7(e), but not by Sec.
574.7(a)(2)(iii)(B)(4), which it said should be revised commensurately.
NADA stated that Sec.  574.8(a)(1)(iii) should be revised to indicate
that independent tire dealers may voluntarily register tires by any
electronic manner listed on the form or by such other means as may be
authorized by a tire manufacturer.
    After considering this comment, NHTSA agrees that tire
manufacturers should be permitted to voluntarily list on their forms as
many electronic filing methods as they choose, and that independent
tire dealers may voluntarily register by any electronic manner listed
on the form or by such other means as may be authorized by a tire
manufacturer. We agree that this will help maximize the rate of
electronic tire registration. We have amended Sec.
574.7(a)(2)(iii)(B)(4) to now read tire manufacturers may voluntarily
provide means for tire registration via the Internet, by telephone, or
other electronic means. If a tire manufacturer voluntarily provides a
Web site or other means by which its tires can be registered, it may
(but is not required to) include a sentence listing one or more such
means, beginning with the phrase ``Instead of mailing this form, you
can * * *'' Example: Instead of mailing this form, you can register
online at [insert tire manufacturer's registration Web site address].
    We are amending Sec.  574.8(a)(1)(iii) to read electronically
transmit the following information on the tire registration form by any
means listed on the form by the tire manufacturer, or by such other
means as may be authorized by the tire manufacturer, to the tire
manufacturer or its designee, using secure means (e.g., https on the
Web), at no charge to the tire purchaser and within 30 days of the date
of sale or lease:
    NADA's second comment was that while NHTSA need not mandate that
independent tire dealers inform purchasers or get their permission
before voluntarily registering on their behalf, nothing in the final
rule should prevent independent tire dealers from doing so. NHTSA notes
that the final rule does not prevent independent tire dealers from
doing this.
    Third, NADA recommended that to more ``appropriately distinguish
between the different registration options, NHTSA should redraft Sec.
574.8(a)(1) to read `independent distributor and each independent
dealer selling or leasing new tires to tire purchasers or lessors
(hereinafter referred to as `tire purchasers') shall comply with
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section. In the alternative, independent
distributors and independent dealers may elect to voluntarily comply
with paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) or (a)(2)(iii) of this section.' ''
    NHTSA has decided not to adopt this recommendation. We believe the
language proposed in the NPRM is clear in this area.
    In the NPRM,\7\ we asked whether, if independent tire dealers
voluntarily registered tires for their customers, they should be able
to charge a separate registration fee. We tentatively concluded that
this should not be permitted, as it could discourage registration and
cause confusion. In response, CIMS and TIA agreed with the agency and
both opposed permitting fees for independent tire dealers to
voluntarily register tires for their

customers. No other comments on this issue were received. Thus, in this
final rule, we will not permit independent tire dealers to impose fees
for voluntarily registering tires for their customers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See page 4163.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Besides its recommendation that NHTSA not permit independent tire
dealers to charge customers to register their tires for them, TIA
opposed mandatory installation of computer terminals in dealer
showrooms for use of consumers to register their tires. TIA, however,
did not object to voluntary installation of such computer terminals. In
this final rule, we do not require independent dealers to provide
computer terminals for use of its customers to register their new
tires. However, nothing in this final rule prohibits independent
dealers from voluntarily providing such computer terminals for their
customers.
    CIMS commented in support of the proposed changes to Part 574. It
further recommended that in order to avoid confusion, NHTSA should
``leave no doubt about the following points'':
     Tire registration is still the law
     Tire dealers must still provide every customer with a tire
registration form or
     Tire dealers must complete the registration process
electronically on behalf of the customer.
    NHTSA notes that independent tire dealers will also have the option
of voluntarily completing the paper form and registering the tire by
sending the form to the tire manufacturer or its designee. The agency
agrees, however, with CIMS that it is important that independent tire
dealers understand their responsibilities. We are currently developing
information specifically for tire dealers similar to what the agency
has now on NHTSA's Web site: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov, for
manufacturers.
    SRS commented that the ``current proposal does not do enough to
close the considerable gaps that remain between tire recordkeeping,
consumer notification in recalls, and the ability of the tire service
professional to capture recalled tires.'' It recommended that NHTSA
initiate rulemaking to promote adoption of Radio Frequency
Identification Tags (RFID). SRS stated that if embedded in tires, RFIDs
could contain all of the information now in TINs. When combined with
scanners at service locations and a recall database, consumers and
technicians can easily determine whether a given tire has been
recalled.
    While identification of recalled tires through RFIDs is an
interesting concept, the agency notes that it could supplement but not
replace tire registration, given the current statutory requirement.
Moreover, we note that there are many issues that would need to be
addressed in order to implement such a program. Some of the issues
include the need to develop the technology and the infrastructure to
ensure RFID tags installed in tires from all manufacturers can be read
with a standard scanner, the availability of standardized software for
the scanner, and the availability of such scanners at tire dealers,
including gas stations and car dealerships that sell new tires. While
we decline to initiate rulemaking in this area, we note that nothing in
the rule prevents tire manufacturers, dealers and parties such as
service centers from creating networks using RFIDs.
    NATM stated that it has no fundamental objection to and supports
what it called the important reform included in our proposal, but
argued that in order to materially improve the effectiveness of future
defective tire safety recall campaigns, the agency ``must totally
revamp Part 574.'' That organization stated that NHTSA's approach
overlooks what it referred to as second-tier recordkeeping
requirements, those impacting the motor vehicle manufacturer, and in
particular, the trailer manufacturer of light- and medium-duty
trailers. NATM stated:

    The absence of coordination between tire and trailer
manufacturers and the lack of clarity in the rules governing their
respective recordkeeping roles are at the heart of the problem of
second-tier tire record keeping. To address this fundamental problem
NHTSA must revise Part 574 top to bottom, redesigning it to
facilitate integrating the tire manufacturers and distributors into
the complete tire recordkeeping chain by requiring and fostering
coordination and cooperation among all tire suppliers and customers
throughout the OEM chain of distribution down to the point of sale
when the retail purchaser takes possession of his or her new motor
vehicle, whether automobile, truck, or trailer.

    NATM raised a variety of issues and made a number of suggestions
related to this general area.
    In the January 2008 NPRM, NHTSA proposed only to change
requirements concerning the means by which information about the retail
customers of new tires is collected, i.e., to facilitate electronic
registration of tires. We did not propose to change the basic nature or
scope of Part 574 or requirements concerning the various
responsibilities of tire manufacturers, dealers, and distributors,
motor vehicle manufacturers, etc.
    Because NATM's comment addresses requirements that NHTSA did not
propose to change, its suggestions are largely outside the scope of
this rulemaking. In its comment, NATM cited a statement in the preamble
that the agency intended the scope of the proposal to be broad.
However, in the sentence immediately preceding that statement, the
agency stated that it was requesting comments on whether the regulation
should specify additional options for registering tires sold by
independent tire dealers that would be consistent with our statutory
authority. Nothing in our proposal indicated that we were considering
totally ``revamping'' Part 574.
    One of NATM's suggestions was that we amend Sec.  574.10 to extend
the electronic communication option to motor vehicle manufacturers.
That section requires motor vehicle manufacturers to maintain records
concerning tires and purchasers. However, it does not specify how these
records must be maintained, and thus does not prevent motor vehicle
manufacturers from using electronic methods.
    While we will consider NATM's comment advocating a significant
revision of Part 574 as a suggestion for future rulemaking, we will not
consider that request as part of this rulemaking.

V. Final Rule

    For the reasons discussed above, we are adopting as a final rule
the requirements we proposed in our January 2008, with minor
adjustments. As explained in our discussion of the comments from NADA,
we have amended Sec.  574(a)(2)(iii)(B)(4) and Sec.  574.8(a)(1)(iii)
in light of its recommendations. In general, the commenters to the NPRM
agreed with the proposal. Thus, no other changes have been made to the
regulatory text proposed in the NPRM.

VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This rulemaking action has been determined not
to be significant under that Executive Order or those policies and
procedures.
    In this document, NHTSA amends Part 574 to permit collection of the
names and addresses of first purchasers of new tires by Internet and
other electronic means. Nothing in this final rule requires any tire
dealer to use these new electronic procedures. All collection of the
names and addresses of first purchasers of new tires may continue to be
collected by the existing means utilizing paper forms. However,

we believe that permitting electronic means of tire registration will
increase the rate of registrations, which will in turn increase the
effectiveness of future tire recalls and thus improve motor vehicle
safety.
    There are some cost impacts associated with increased registrations
of tires by electronic means. Since the new options are voluntary, we
do not know the extent to which they will be utilized by independent
tire dealers and tire manufacturers. However, we are providing the
following analysis to show the cost impacts.

Increased Registrations by Consumers Using the Internet

    Under today's final rule, tire manufacturers can provide, on a
voluntary basis, Internet registration information on the tire
registration form that is given to purchasers by independent tire
dealers. Consumers can then register their tires online instead of
filling out the paper form and mailing it to the tire manufacturer or
its designee. The cost of printing this information on the form is
negligible, and therefore there is no cost increase to tire
manufacturers that are responsible for printing the forms and providing
them to independent tire dealers. However, the tire manufacturers
offering the option of Internet-based tire registration on their Web
sites will incur some cost to include a registration site. The agency
has found that most tire manufacturers already have tire registration
sites included on their Web sites. Web site registration will save
consumers the cost of a postcard postage stamp, and will save costs for
tire manufacturers because they (or their designee) will not have to
transcribe the information on the paper forms into a tire registration
database.
    In the table which follows, we are providing estimates of the
monetized costs associated with various rates of increased tire
registration using the Internet. Under this scenario, paper forms will
continue to be provided to purchasers, but the additional registrations
will occur via the Internet rather than by the forms being mailed in.
Therefore, although tire registrations will increase, mailing and other
costs associated with the paper form will remain the same. We assume,
for purposes of these estimates, that the costs associated with the
current level of tire registration will not change. The additional
costs associated with this scenario will be the time consumers spend
registering tires via the Internet that they otherwise would not
register. We also assume that because the tire registration information
is collected using purely electronic means, there is no additional
labor burden for the tire manufacturer for recordkeeping associated
with these additional registrations. To monetize the costs of consumers
filling out paper forms or using the Internet, a labor rate of $14.61
per hour is used.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The median hourly rate among all occupations, May 2006,
according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics; see http://www.bls.gov/
oes/current/oes_nat.htm#b00-0000.

  Consumer Cost Projections Associated With Increased Tire Registrations With Consumers Registering Tires Using
                                                  the Internet
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Future tire registrations using internet-based
                                                                             registration by consumers
                                                   Current tire  -----------------------------------------------
                                                   registrations    10 Percent      15 Percent      20 Percent
                                                                     increase        increase        increase
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer Hour Burden Estimates:
    Number of Consumers.........................      10,000,000      11,000,000      11,500,000      12,000,000
    Total Tire Registrations....................      54,000,000      59,400,000      62,100,000      64,800,000
    Tire Registration Hours.....................         225,000         247,500         258,750         270,000
    Monetized Costs (Consumer time valued at @        $3,287,250      $3,615,975      $3,780,338      $3,944,700
     $14.61/Hour)...............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Voluntary Registration by Independent Tire Dealers

    Under today's final rule, independent tire dealers may voluntarily
register tires for consumers by electronic means, if this is authorized
by the tire manufacturer. Dealers that do this will incur additional
costs to upgrade their computer systems, with both initial startup
costs and then costs for periodic maintenance of the systems. We assume
that many independent tire dealers, especially the larger ones, already
collect tire purchaser information as part of the sales process. For
these manufacturers, we believe it may be possible to upgrade the sales
system to include automatic electronic registration on behalf of the
purchaser. We do not know the details of how this process may work,
which will be up to the tire manufacturer and the independent tire
dealers. The process might also include companies designated by the
tire manufacturers to provide services in this area. We also do not
know what actual startup and annual costs might be to independent tire
dealers. However, once these systems are installed, tire registration
rates could be 100 percent for tires sold through these large
independent dealers. This compares with overall current registration
rates of 10 percent for tires sold through independent dealers.
    The costs associated with voluntary tire registration by
independent tire dealers will be offset, or partially offset, by the
fact that these dealers will no longer need to provide paper forms to
consumers, or fill out these forms with tire identification numbers.
    The agency has estimated that there are a total of 59,000 tire
dealers in the U.S., including 13,000 that are company-controlled
dealers. The remaining 46,000 tire dealers include 20,000 car and truck
dealers and 26,000 independent tire dealers.
    There are two unknowns for estimating the cost impacts on
independent tire dealers--how many independent dealers will voluntarily
upgrade computer systems to register tires, and what the cost of these
computer systems will be in terms of initial cost and annual
maintenance. Each year, a number of independent dealers will install or
upgrade computer systems, and they continue to maintain their systems
in subsequent years. We assume that an initial installation cost of
providing an upgraded system is $750 and that annual maintenance
thereafter is $200. We do not know whether each tire manufacturer will
work directly with each independent tire dealer, or whether third party
designees will provide an interface service for all tire manufacturers
and independent tire dealers. We note that third party

designees can provide efficiencies of having a single contact company
that can be the interface for an independent tire dealer and multiple
tire manufacturers.
    We are providing cost estimates assuming that 30 percent of
independent tire dealers will participate in such a voluntary program,
with 10 percent beginning the first year (4,600 dealers), an additional
10 percent beginning the second year, and the third 10 percent
beginning the third year. These costs can be summarized as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Startup costs      Annual
                              Year                                 for computer     maintenance     Total cost
                                                                      systems          costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009............................................................         $3.45 M               0         $3.45 M
2010............................................................          3.45 M          0.92 M          4.37 M
2011............................................................          3.45 M          1.84 M          5.29 M
2012 and Beyond.................................................               0          2.76 M          2.76 M
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the final rule establishes collection of information
procedures to be used entirely at the discretion of the tire dealer,
and the estimated paperwork burdens of tire dealers electing to use
these procedures are not expected to exceed $100 million annually, the
agency does not consider this rulemaking to be ``economically
significant,'' as defined by E.O. 12866. Moreover, the impacts are
sufficiently small that the agency has not prepared a full regulatory
evaluation.

B. 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 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 that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    NHTSA has considered the effects of this rulemaking action under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. As explained above, NHTSA amends Part
574 by permitting collection of the names and addresses of first
purchasers of new tires by Internet and other computerized means.
Electronic collection is permitted in place of paper forms. This
regulatory flexibility analysis does not apply to manufacturer-owned
tire dealers, because they are not considered small businesses under
SBA's affiliation rule at 5 CFR 121.103(a)(1) which states in part:
``Concerns and entities are affiliates of each other when one controls
or has the power to control the other * * *'' The tire manufacturer
either ``controls or has the power to control'' dealerships that it
owns.
    Under SBA's size standard regulations (at 5 CFR part 121), ``tire
dealers'' are classified under North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) Code 441320 with a size standard of average yearly sales
of $6 million. ``New car dealers'' are classified under NAICS Code
441110 with a size standard of average yearly sales of $24.5 million.
``Used car dealers'' are classified under NAICS Code 441120 with a size
standard of average yearly sales of $19.5 million.
    In its February 27, 2006 comments to NHTSA, NADA stated that of its
``20,000 franchised automobile and truck dealers who sell new and used
motor vehicles,'' a ``significant number are small businesses as
defined by the SBA.'' At that time, NADA did not specify the number
that would be considered ``small businesses.'' In the Federal Register
of March 21, 2007 (54 FR 133440), we estimated the number of
independent tire dealers to be 26,000. In the January 2008 NPRM to
amend Part 574, we stated our assumption that all NADA members are
small businesses and that therefore, the total number of independent
tire dealers that are small businesses would be 46,000.
    In its comment to the NPRM, NADA provided a clarification, stating
that ``NADA suggests that approximately 40 percent of the 22,000
dealerships nationwide fall within SBA's current small business
definition in annual gross receipts 73 FR 4166.'' NADA was referring to
that part of its membership that is independent motor vehicle dealers.
Forty percent of 22,000 is 8,800 or the number of NADA members that are
small businesses. The previous estimate of 26,000 tire dealers plus
NADA's small business (and therefore independent) motor vehicle dealers
numbering 8,800 equals 34,800 small business independent tire dealers.
34,800 is a smaller figure than the 46,000 small business independent
tire dealers estimated in the NPRM.
    I hereby certify that this final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual
basis for the certification is that this final rule will not
substantively change existing 49 CFR part 574 requirements for small
businesses that are independent tire dealers. Adherence to the
electronic collection of information procedures is voluntary for
independent tire dealers. The statement on the paper form giving Web
site information about online registration of new tires or other
electronic means of registration (and the paper form itself) are to be
provided by the tire manufacturer. If independent dealers choose not to
adopt electronic tire registration procedures, the responsibilities of
the independent dealer remains the same, i.e., to pass out the paper
forms to first purchasers of new tires.

C. 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.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined today's final rule 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
this final rule does not have federalism

implications because the rule will 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.''

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, February 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) 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 Federalism
effect of this final rule is discussed above. NHTSA notes further that
there is no requirement that individuals submit a petition for
reconsideration or pursue other administrative proceeding before they
may file suit in court.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless
the collection displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
control number. These final changes to the tire registration and
recordkeeping rule affect the scope of the rule's ``collection of
information,'' as that term is defined by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320. In
the January 24, 2008 NPRM (see pages 4167-4168), we described how the
proposed rule would affect the scope of the collection of information.
Given that the various proposed options would be voluntary, we stated
we did not know to what extent they would be utilized by independent
tire dealers, tire manufacturers and consumers. Therefore, based on the
available information, we provided the following estimates of burden.
    The same information (name and address of the purchaser) would be
collected regardless of the format, paper form, or typing in
information on a company Web site. Because some people type faster and
some people write faster, we stated our belief that the amount of time
it will take to provide information about the name and address of the
purchaser would be very roughly the same, regardless of the format. To
the extent more consumers registered their tires, actual burdens
realized could thus increase concomitantly with the higher registration
rates. On the other hand, it may be possible for tire manufacturers and
independent tire dealers to develop electronic systems, tied in with
the systems used for monitoring inventory and recording sales
information, that could automatically register the tires with the tire
manufacturer at little additional cost.
    We stated our belief that virtually all recordkeeping by tire
manufacturers is already done electronically. We estimated that it
takes roughly 25,000 hours to transfer handwritten data to an
electronic format for storage. Because, with Web site-based
information, there would be no change in format (i.e., going from
electronic reporting to electronic storage), we stated our belief that
there would be virtually no burden hours imposed in transferring
information provided on a tire manufacturer's Web site to a
recordkeeping site. For these reasons, we stated our belief that the
recordkeeping burden hours would remain at 25,000 hours.
    We solicited comments on the proposed changes in the collection of
information associated with Part 574 and on our analysis of how the
changes will affect the number of burden hours affecting the public. We
provided a 60-day comment period on the proposed collection of
information.
    We received no comments specifically addressing this Paperwork
Reduction Act analysis. Therefore, when this final rule takes effect,
the total annual tire registration and recordkeeping hours associated
with Part 574 (OMB Clearance No. 2127-0050) will remain at 250,000
hours per year.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)
directs NHTSA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs the agency to provide Congress,
through the OMB, explanations when we decide not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    After carefully reviewing the available information, NHTSA has
determined that there are no voluntary consensus standards relevant to
this rulemaking, as the information to be collected and sent to tire
manufacturers is needed only in the event of a tire recall.
Accordingly, this rule is in compliance with Section 12(d) of NTTAA.

H. 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 in any one year (adjusted for inflation with base
year of 1995). Before promulgating a rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires NHTSA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and to
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 NHTSA 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
why that alternative was not adopted.
    This final rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local,
or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of
more than $100 million annually. Accordingly, the agency has not
prepared an Unfunded Mandates assessment.

I. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following questions:

--Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
--Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
--Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?

--Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of
headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
--Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
--Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or diagrams?
--What else could we do to make this rulemaking easier to understand?

    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them
in comments to the docket number cited in the heading of this final
rule.

J. 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.

K. Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-19478) or you may visit http://
docketsinfo.dot.gov/.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 574

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

0
In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 574 as
follows:

PART 574--TIRE IDENTIFICATION AND RECORDKEEPING

0
1. The authority for part 574 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. Section 574.7 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3),
removing figures 3a, 3b, and 4 immediately following paragraph (d), and
adding new paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as follows:

Sec.  574.7  Information requirements--tire manufacturers, new tire
brand name owners.

    (a)(1) * * *
    (2) Each tire registration form provided to independent
distributors and dealers pursuant to paragraph (a)(1) of this section
shall contain space for recording the information specified in
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (a)(4)(iii) of this section. Each form
shall:
    (i) Have the following physical characteristics:
    (A) Be rectangular;
    (B) Be not less than 3\1/2\ inches high, 5 inches long, and 0.007
inches thick;
    (C) Be not more than 4\1/4\ inches high, 6 inches long, and 0.016
inch thick.
    (ii) On the address side of the form, be addressed with the name
and address of the manufacturer or its designee, and include, in the
upper right hand corner, the statement ``Affix a postcard stamp.''
    (iii) On the other side of the form:
    (A) Include the tire manufacturer's name, unless it appears on the
address side of the form;
    (B) Include a statement explaining the purpose of the form and how
a consumer may register tires. The statement shall:
    (1) Include the heading ``IMPORTANT''.
    (2) Include the sentence: ``In case of a recall, we can reach you
only if we have your name and address.''
    (3) Indicate that sending in the card will add a person to the
manufacturer's recall list.
    (4) A tire manufacturer may voluntarily provide means for tire
registration via the Internet, by telephone or other electronic means.
If a tire manufacturer voluntarily provides a Web site or other means
by which its tires can be registered, it may (but is not required to)
include a sentence listing one or more such means, beginning with the
phrase ``Instead of mailing this form, you can * * *.'' Example:
Instead of mailing this form, you can register online at [insert tire
manufacturer's registration Web site address].
    (5) Include the sentence: ``Do it today.''
    (C) Include space for recording tire identification numbers for six
tires.
    (D) Use shading to distinguish between areas of the form to be
filled in by sellers and customers.
    (1) Include the statement: ``Shaded areas must be filled in by
seller.''
    (2) The areas of the form for recording tire identification numbers
and information about the seller of the tires must be shaded.
    (3) The area of the form for recording the customer name and
address must not be shaded.
    (E) Include, in the top right corner, the phrase ``OMB Control No.
2127-0050''.
    (3) Each tire registration form provided to distributors and
dealers that are not independent distributors or dealers pursuant to
paragraph (a)(1) of this section must contain space for recording the
information specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (a)(4)(iii) of
this section. Each form must include:
    (A) A statement indicating where the form should be returned,
including the name and mailing address of the manufacturer or its
designee.
    (B) The tire manufacturers' logo or other identification, if the
manufacturer is not identified as part of the statement indicating
where the form should be returned.
    (C) The statement: ``IMPORTANT: FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES TIRE
IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS MUST BE REGISTERED''.
    (D) In the top right corner, the phrase ``OMB Control No. 2127-
0050''.
* * * * *
    (e) Tire manufacturers may voluntarily provide means for tire
registration via the Internet, by telephone or other electronic means.
    (f) Each tire manufacturer shall meet the requirements of
paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of this section with respect to tire
registration information submitted to it or its designee by any means
authorized by the manufacturer in addition to the use of registration
forms.

0
3. Section 574.8 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  574.8  Information requirements--tire distributors and dealers.

    (a) Independent distributors and dealers.
    (1) Each independent distributor and each independent dealer
selling or leasing new tires to tire purchasers or lessors (hereinafter
referred to in this section as ``tire purchasers'') shall comply with
paragraph (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii) or (a)(1)(iii) of this section:
    (i) At the time of sale or lease of the tire, provide each tire
purchaser with a paper tire registration form on which the distributor
or dealer has recorded the following information:
    (A) The entire tire identification number of the tire(s) sold or
leased to the tire purchaser, and
    (B) The distributor's or dealer's name and street address. In lieu
of the street address, and if one is available, the distributor or
dealer's e-mail address or Web site may be recorded. Other means of
identifying the distributor or dealer known to the manufacturer may
also be used.
    (ii) Record the following information on a paper tire registration
form and return it to the tire manufacturer, or its designee, on behalf
of the tire purchaser, at no charge to the tire purchaser and

within 30 days of the date of sale or lease:
    (A) The purchaser's name and address,
    (B) The entire tire identification number of the tire(s) sold or
leased to the tire purchaser, and
    (C) The distributor's or dealer's name and street address. In lieu
of the street address, and if one is available, the distributor or
dealer's e-mail address or Web site may be recorded. Other means of
identifying the distributor or dealer known to the manufacturer may
also be used.
    (iii) Electronically transmit the following information on the tire
registration form by any means listed on the form by the tire
manufacturer, or by such other means as may be authorized by the tire
manufacturer, to the tire manufacturer or its designee, using secure
means (e.g., https on the Web), at no charge to the tire purchaser and
within 30 days of the date of sale or lease:
    (A) The purchaser's name and address,
    (B) The entire tire identification number of the tire(s) sold or
leased to the tire purchaser, and
    (C) The distributor's or dealer's name and street address. In lieu
of the street address, and if one is available, the distributor or
dealer's e-mail address or Web site may be recorded. Other means of
identifying the distributor or dealer known to the manufacturer may
also be used.
    (2) Each independent distributor or dealer that complies with
paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section shall use either the tire
registration forms provided by the tire manufacturers pursuant to Sec.
574.7(a) or registration forms obtained from another source. Paper
forms obtained from other sources must comply with the requirements
specified in Sec.  574.7(a) for forms provided by tire manufacturers to
independent distributors and dealers.
    (3) Multiple tire sales or leases by the same tire purchaser may be
recorded on a single paper registration form or in a single Web site
transaction.
    (4) Each independent distributor or dealer that is complying with
paragraph (a)(1)(iii) with respect to a sale or lease shall include a
statement to that effect on the invoice for that sale or lease and
provide the invoice to the tire purchaser.
    (b) Other distributors and dealers.
    (1) Each distributor and each dealer, other than an independent
distributor or dealer, selling new tires to tire purchasers:
    (i) shall submit, using paper registration forms or, if authorized
by the tire manufacturer, secure electronic means, the information
specified in Sec.  574.7(a)(4) to the manufacturer of the tires sold,
or to the manufacturer's designee.
    (ii) shall submit the information specified in Sec.  574.7(a)(4) to
the tire manufacturer or the manufacturer's designee, not less often
than every 30 days. A distributor or dealer selling fewer than 40 tires
of all makes, types and sizes during a 30 day period may wait until a
total of 40 new tires is sold. In no event may more than six months
elapse before the Sec.  574.7(a)(4) information is forwarded to the
respective tire manufacturers or their designees.
    (c) Each distributor and each dealer selling new tires to other
tire distributors or dealers shall supply to the distributor or dealer
a means to record the information specified in Sec.  574.7(a)(4),
unless such means has been provided to that distributor or dealer by
another person or by a manufacturer.
    (d) Each distributor and each dealer shall immediately stop selling
any group of tires when so directed by a notification issued pursuant
to 49 U.S.C. 30118, Notification of defects and noncompliance.

    Issued on: November 19, 2008.
David Kelly,
Acting Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E8-28094 Filed 11-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 135 (Friday, July 15, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42318-42320]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15136]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0505; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01289-T;
Amendment 39-22111; AD 2022-14-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus SAS Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes,
and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model
A300-600 series airplanes). This AD was prompted by a determination
that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary.
This AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations, as specified in a European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 19, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 19,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone
+49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR material on the EASA website
at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2022-0505.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0505; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The address for Docket Operations is
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, Large
Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0258, dated November 17, 2021
(EASA AD 2021-0258) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an
unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A300-600 series airplanes.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus SAS Model
A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4-
605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600 series
airplanes). The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2022
(87 FR 27029). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The NPRM
proposed to require revising the existing maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations, as specified in EASA AD 2021-0258.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity
of the airplane. See the MCAI for additional background information.
    EASA previously issued EASA AD 2019-0090, dated April 26, 2019
(EASA AD 2019-0090), requiring the actions described in the Airbus
A300-600 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS), Part 2, ``Damage
Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI),'' Revision 03, dated
December 14, 2018, which also includes the limit of validity (LOV) for
the Model A300-600 airplanes. EASA AD 2019-0090 corresponds to FAA AD
2019-21-01, Amendment 39-19767 (84 FR 56935, October 24, 2019) (AD
2019-21-01). Since that EASA AD was issued, Airbus published the
Variation, as defined in EASA AD 2021-0258, which reduces the LOV for
Model A300-600 airplanes, reflecting the engineering data that supports
the structural maintenance program and that corresponds to the period
of time during which it is demonstrated that Widespread Fatigue Damage
will not occur. EASA AD 2021-0258 does not supersede EASA AD 2019-0090,
but does specify that it invalidates the LOV as specified in the Airbus
A300-600 ALS, Part 2. Therefore, this AD would replace the LOVs
specified in Airbus A300-600 Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS),
Part 2, ``Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI),''
Revision 03, dated December 14, 2018, as required by FAA AD 2019-21-01.
    For the reason described above, this AD requires compliance with
the reduced LOV as specified in the variation.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from the Air Line Pilots Association,
International (ALPA) and FedEx who supported the NPRM without change.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as
proposed. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as
proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the

economic burden on any operator. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0258 describes new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations for airplane LOVs. This material is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 110 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
    The FAA has determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator,
although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator
to operator. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection
program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined
that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane
estimate. Therefore, the agency estimates the average total cost per
operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

2022-14-06 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-22111; Docket No. FAA-2022-0505;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01289-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective August 19, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2019-21-01, Amendment 39-19767 (84 FR 56935,
October 24, 2019) (AD 2019-21-01).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-
620, B4-622 B4-605R, B4-622R, C4-605R Variant F, F4-605R, and F4-
622R airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0258, dated November 17, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0258).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0258

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0258 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2021-0258 specifies ``This AD
invalidates the LOV [limit of validity] as specified in Airbus A300-
600 ALS Part 2 Revision 03 [EASA AD 2019-0090],'' this AD replaces
the LOVs specified in paragraph 3.1 of Airbus A300-600 Airworthiness
Limitations Section (ALS), Part 2, ``Damage Tolerant Airworthiness
Limitation Items (DT-ALI),'' Revision 03, dated December 14, 2018,
as required by FAA AD 2019-21-01.
    (3) Paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2021-0258 specifies revising ``the
approved AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this
AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (4) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0258 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals are allowed unless they are
approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref. Publications''
section of EASA AD 2021-0258.

(j) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this
AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International
Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0258,
dated November 17, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2021-0258, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on June 27, 2022.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-15136 Filed 7-14-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


DRAFT Page 1 12/ 01/ 2004 U. S. EPA BOARD OF SCIENTIFIC COUNSELORS Mercury Subcommittee MEETING AGENDA January 19, 2005 9: 00 am   12: 00 pm EST CONFERENCE CALL ( 202) 275 0166/ 3430#

Wednesday, January 19, 2005 9: 00 am Mechanics of Call/ Roll Call Heather Drumm, DFO, Mercury Subcommittee 9: 15 am Welcome & Introductions Dr. Herb Windom, Chair, Mercury Subcommittee 9: 30 am Overview of Multi Year Plans James Avery, Ph. D., Office of Science Policy, ORD 9: 50 am Overview of the Mercury MYP Bill Stelz, National Center for Environmental Research, ORD 10: 30 am Presentation of the Charge Questions Dr. Herb Windom, Chair 10: 45 am Discussion of the Charge Questions Subcommittee 11: 15 am Brief Overview of Background Documents/ Dr. Herb Windom, Chair Writing Assignments 11: 30 am Administrative Procedures Heather Drumm ( EPA) Logistics for Face to Face Meeting DFO, Mercury Subcommittee 11: 45 am Public Comments 11: 55 am Wrap up Dr. Herb Windom, Chair 12: 00 pm Adjourn