[Federal Register: March 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 60)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 15893-15947]
[DOCID:fr30mr10-18]

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

Part III

Department of Transportation

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

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

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

49 CFR Part 575

Tire Fuel Efficiency Consumer Information Program; Final Rule

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 575

[Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0036]
RIN 2127-AK45

Tire Fuel Efficiency Consumer Information Program

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document establishes the test procedures to be used by
tire manufacturers in a new consumer information program to generate
comparative performance information to inform consumers about the
effect of their choices among replacement passenger car tires on fuel
efficiency, safety, and durability. When this program is fully
established, this information will be provided to consumers at the
point of sale and online. This information will encourage the purchase
of better performing replacement tires.
    In order to provide this agency with time needed to conduct
additional consumer testing and resolve important issues raised by
public comments on the agency's proposal regarding the program, this
rule does not specify how the information will be explained and
provided to consumers. After a public meeting regarding the agency's
draft plan for additional testing, NHTSA will proceed with the testing
and then develop and publish a new proposal for these aspects of the
new program.

DATES: Today's final rule is effective June 1, 2010. The incorporation
by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by
the Director of the Federal Register as of June 1, 2010.
    The various compliance dates for these regulations are set forth,
as applicable, in Sec.  575.106(e)(1)(iii).
    Petitions for reconsideration must be received by May 14, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration must be submitted to:
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT:
    For policy and technical issues: Ms. Mary Versailles, Office of
Rulemaking, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For legal issues: Ms. Sarah Alves, Office of the Chief Counsel,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Executive Overview
    A. Summary
    B. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
    C. Summary of NPRM
    1. Proposed Test Procedures
    2. Proposed Rolling Resistance Rating Metric
    3. Proposed Label
    4. Proposed Information Dissemination and Reporting Requirements
for Tire Manufacturers and Tire Retailers
    5. Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
    6. Proposed Consumer Education Program
    7. Benefits and Costs
    8. Lead Time
    D. Brief Summary of Public Comments on the NPRM
    E. Final Rule
    1. Test Procedures
    2. Rolling Resistance Rating Metric
    3. Label
    4. Information Dissemination and Reporting Requirements for Tire
Manufacturers and Tire Retailers
    5. Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
    6. Consumer Education Program
    7. Benefits and Costs
    8. Lead Time
II. Background
    A. Contribution of Tire Maintenance and Tire Fuel Efficiency to
Addressing Energy Independence and Security
    1. Tire Fuel Efficiency and Rolling Resistance
    2. Relationship Between Tire Maintenance and Tire Fuel
Efficiency and Vehicle Fuel Economy
    3. 2006 National Academy of Sciences Report
    B. Efforts by Other Governments To Establish Consumer
Information Programs To Address These Issues
    1. California
    2. European Union
    3. Japan
    C. Mandates in Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 for
a Consumer Tire Information Program
    1. Tires Subject to the Consumer Information Program
    2. Mandate To Create a National Tire Fuel Efficiency Rating
System
    3. Communicating Information to Consumers
    4. Specification of Test Methods
    5. Creating a National Consumer Education Program on Tire
Maintenance
    6. Consultation in Setting Standards
    7. Application With State and Local Laws and Regulations
    8. Compliance and Enforcement
    9. Reporting to Congress
III. Scope of the Tire Fuel Efficiency Consumer Information Program
    A. Which Tires Must Be Rated?
    1. Passenger Car Tires
    2. Replacement Tires
    3. Tires Excluded
    4. Voluntary Rating of Tires Not Subject to the Program
    5. Each Different Stock Keeping Unit Must Be Rated
    B. Entities Subject to Requirements of the Program
    1. Tire Manufacturers
    2. Tire Retailers
    C. EISA Does Not Give NHTSA Authority To Establish a Rolling
Resistance Performance Standard for Replacement Passenger Car Tires
IV. Rolling Resistance Test Procedure
    A. Test Procedure
    B. Lab Alignment Procedure
V. Rolling Resistance Rating Metric
VI. Rating System
    A. What Information Will the Rating System Convey to Consumers?
    1. Fuel Efficiency
    2. Safety
    i. Potential Safety Consequences
    ii. Test Procedure
    3. Durability
    B. How Will the Rating System Information be Conveyed to
Consumers?
VII. Information Dissemination and Reporting Requirements for Tire
Manufacturers and Retailers
    A. Requirements for Tire Retailers
    1. NHTSA Will Re-Propose Information Dissemination Requirements
for Tire Retailers
    2. NHTSA Will Re-Propose Requirements Regarding the Label
    B. Requirements for Tire Manufacturers
    1. NHTSA Will Re-Propose Requirements Regarding Communication of
Ratings
    2. Data Reporting
    C. Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
    D. Advertising
VIII. NHTSA's Consumer Education Program
IX. Benefits and Costs
    A. Benefits
    B. Costs
X. Lead Time
XI. Enforcement
XII. Regulatory Alternatives
XIII. Conforming Amendments to Part 575
XIV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
    A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
    B National Environmental Policy Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Paperwork Reduction Act
    H. Executive Order 13045
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 13211
    K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
    L. Plain Language
    M. Privacy Act

I. Executive Overview

A. Summary

    This final rule is being issued pursuant to the Energy Independence

and Security Act of 2007 (EISA),\1\ which was enacted in December 2007.
EISA includes a requirement that NHTSA develop a national tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program to educate consumers about the
effect of tires on automobile fuel efficiency, safety, and durability.
Consumers currently have little, if any, convenient way of determining
the effect of tire choices on fuel economy or the potential tradeoffs
between tire fuel efficiency and tire safety and durability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Public Law 110-140, 121 Stat. 1492 (Dec. 18, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The collective effects of the choices consumers make when they buy
tires are matters of public interest and concern. The 240 million
passenger cars and light trucks in the United States consume about 135
billion gallons of motor fuel annually.\2\ Finding ways to reduce this
energy consumption is a national goal for reasons ranging from ensuring
economic and national security to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
improving local air quality. Rolling resistance, or the force required
to make the tires roll, differs from tire to tire and is a
characteristic that indicates a tire's fuel efficiency. Consumers, if
sufficiently informed and interested, could bring about a reduction in
average rolling resistance of replacement tires by adjusting their tire
purchases, and as a consequence, significantly reduce the amount of
fuel consumed annually. While the handling, traction, and other
operating characteristics of tires are of particular interest to people
buying them to place on their own vehicles, they are also matters of
even broader public interest as they may influence the safety
performance of vehicles on the nation's highways.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Transportation Energy Data Book, Edition 27, Tables 4-1 and
4-2, available at http://cta.ornl.gov/data/index.shtml (last
accessed Mar. 5, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Congress required NHTSA to establish a tire fuel efficiency
consumer information program, including a replacement tire fuel
efficiency rating system. To better inform consumers, EISA requires
that NHTSA develop requirements for providing this information to
consumers, and a national tire maintenance consumer education program.
Consumers need to inflate and maintain their tires properly so that
they can achieve their intended levels of efficiency, safety, wear, and
operating performance. NHTSA has previously addressed the importance of
proper tire inflation to safety and fuel efficiency in various public
service campaigns. NHTSA has also mandated that tire pressure
monitoring systems (TPMSs) be installed on new motor vehicles.\3\
However, TPMSs are not a substitute for proper tire maintenance.
Motorists must be reminded of the fact that even small losses in
inflation pressure can reduce tire treadwear life, fuel efficiency, and
operating performance.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Final Rule, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Tire
Pressure Monitoring Systems, Controls and Displays, 70 FR 18136
(April 8, 2005).
    \4\ Transportation Research Board Special Report 286, Tires and
Passenger Vehicle Fuel Economy, National Research Council of the
National Academies, 5 (2006) (hereinafter ``2006 NAS Report'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The tire fuel efficiency consumer information program will require
tire manufacturers to rate their replacement tires for fuel efficiency,
safety, and durability based on test procedures specified in this final
rule. These test procedures address three aspects of tire performance:
rolling resistance, wet traction and treadwear life. As noted above and
described in further detail below, rolling resistance is a measurement
of fuel efficiency. A measurement of wet traction is intended to
indicate a tire's ability to stop on wet pavement. Thus, wet traction
is a metric that measures an aspect of safety. A treadwear rating
measures a tire's wear rate compared with that of control tires.
Treadwear life, therefore, is a measure of durability.
    Comparing the three different ratings for different replacement
tires will enable consumers to see how different replacement tires can
affect the fuel economy they are getting from their vehicles. This will
also enable consumers to see the tradeoffs they may be facing between
fuel efficiency, safety (i.e., wet traction), and durability (i.e.,
treadwear life), and how the balance of these factors may differ from
tire to tire. Providing information regarding all three types of
performance will help to ensure that no single aspect is given
disproportionate attention. NHTSA's research found that while changing
tire construction to improve fuel efficiency need not sacrifice wet
traction or treadwear, maintaining the same wet traction performance
and treadwear while increasing the fuel efficiency of a given tire
often entails higher costs.\5\ Thus, if a manufacturer seeks to improve
the fuel efficiency of a given replacement tire construction while
keeping cost constant, there is a substantial chance that the
construction will be changed in ways that sacrifice other factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NHTSA
Tire Rolling Resistance Rating System Test Development Project:
Phase 2--Effects of Tire Rolling Resistance Levels on Traction,
Treadwear, and Vehicle Fuel Economy (February 2009). Docket No.
NHTSA-2009-0121-0035.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In developing the rule, the agency conducted tire testing research
to determine which test procedure would best standardize a fuel
efficiency rating and provide accurate discrimination among replacement
tires. The agency is specifying the test procedure by which NHTSA will
evaluate the accuracy of the rolling resistance rating assigned by the
tire manufacturer. For the safety and durability rating, this final
rule specifies that the agency will use previously established test
procedures for wet traction and treadwear to evaluate the accuracy of
the safety and durability ratings assigned by the tire manufacturer,
respectively.
    NHTSA is not specifying the content or requirements of the consumer
information and education portions of the program at this time. In
light of the important objectives of this rulemaking, we are continuing
to work to improve the content and format of the consumer information
so that consumers will, in fact, be adequately informed. Specifically,
NHTSA will be conducting additional consumer testing to explore how
consumers will best comprehend information in each of the three
categories discussed above. After additional consumer testing, NHTSA
will publish a new proposal for the consumer information and consumer
education portions of this new program.
    Prompting NHTSA to pursue a deeper examination of consumers'
comprehension of comparative tire information, several comments on the
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) suggested the agency consider
additional indicators for the proposed label that would provide some
understanding of what the ratings meant in terms of the choices
available to a consumer. These suggestions included the use of an icon
or mark on the labels to help consumers at a glance identify the most
fuel efficient tire--an idea NHTSA had sought comment on in the NPRM--
and suggestions that the ratings show high and low demarcations
reflecting the range of ratings within the same size so that consumers
and retailers would not become disenchanted with the system if they
could not purchase or provide any top-rated tires in the size for the
consumer's vehicle. Another commenter expressed concern with the idea
of a mark for the best performers in the fuel efficiency rating
category, as it could imply government endorsement and the commenter
stated such endorsement should not be given unless it was to the safest
tire.

    These comments, as well as comments from other Federal agencies,
have led NHTSA to recognize that a revised consumer research
methodology could provide advanced understanding of how the
presentation of relative rating information affects consumers'
perceptions of the relevance of the information, and what motivates
consumers to act in accordance with the information they have learned.
Through additional consumer research, and a continued open dialog with
interested stakeholders, NHTSA will consider how to best promote
consumer understanding of the real-world benefits and possible
tradeoffs involved in selecting tires at various points along relevant
scales.
    To further the development of the consumer information and consumer
education portions of the tire fuel efficiency consumer information
program, NHTSA recently announced that it will hold a public meeting on
a new draft consumer research plan on Friday March 26, 2010 at the U.S.
Department of Transportation Headquarters building.\6\ The agency has
opened a new docket for the public meeting, Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0018,
and on that docket interested members of the public can access the
draft research plan, early agency consumer research, and any written
comments submitted at the meeting or in response to the meeting notice.
NHTSA will consider the public comments received in developing a
research plan to aid in the development of consumer information
requirements and NHTSA's consumer education plan regarding tire fuel
efficiency. NHTSA will also continue to consider comments received on
the NPRM relating to the consumer information and education portions of
the tire fuel efficiency consumer information program. A continued open
dialog will allow interested stakeholders to further explicate their
ideas of what they believe should be included in a successful tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program, and how this information can
best be communicated. The new consumer research will further inform
these concepts by indicating in what form consumers are most likely to
understand information, and act in accordance with what they have
learned.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Notice of Public Meeting; Tire Fuel Efficiency, 75 FR 11806
(March 12, 2010), Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0018-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In developing this final rule, the agency consulted with the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) on many issues. Since the NPRM, the agency has received nearly
600 pages of comments, which have been carefully reviewed and
considered. When developing the supplemental NPRM for the consumer
information requirements, NHTSA will continue to consider and evaluate
comments received on the NPRM. NHTSA will also continue to consult with
EPA, DOE, and other Federal agencies experienced with energy efficiency
consumer information programs on the development of the tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program.
    NHTSA has also prepared a companion Final Regulatory Impact
Analysis (FRIA) that provides an analysis on the potential economic
impacts of this consumer information program, which is available in the
docket for this final rule.

B. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

    The provision of EISA that mandates the consumer tire information
program built on a legislative proposal originally introduced in 2006
after a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report was issued suggesting
that a tire fuel efficiency consumer information program could increase
vehicle fuel economy by an average of 1 to 2 percent.\7\ Many factors
affect a vehicle's fuel economy, including its tires' rolling
resistance, i.e., the force needed to make the tires roll. The 2006 NAS
report estimated that 4 percent (urban) to 7 percent (highway) of the
energy created by a vehicle's fuel usage is used to overcome the
rolling resistance of the tires. Therefore, reducing rolling resistance
can reduce a vehicle's fuel consumption. As one of many strategies to
meet the Federal corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for
new passenger cars and light trucks, automobile manufacturers often
equip vehicles with low rolling resistance tires. However, consumers
often unknowingly purchase higher rolling resistance tires when
replacing their vehicle tires because information on the comparative
rolling resistance of replacement tires and its impact on vehicle fuel
economy is not readily available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Previous attempts to establish a national tire fuel
efficiency program can be found in proposed amendments to various
energy bills in prior years. See e.g., S. Amdt. 3083, 108th Cong.,
150 Cong. Rec. S4710 (2004) (proposing to amend S. 150); S. Amdt.
1470, 108th Cong., 149 Cong. Rep. S10707 (2003) (proposing to amend
S. 14). These amendments proposed regulating the fuel efficiency of
tires in addition to a tire fuel efficiency grading system and
consumer information program, and were not adopted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One of the most significant of the EISA mandates is the setting of
separate maximum feasible standards for passenger cars and for light
trucks at levels sufficient to ensure that the average fuel economy of
the combined fleet of all passenger cars and light trucks sold by all
manufacturers in the U.S. in model year (MY) 2020 equals or exceeds 35
miles per gallon. Per the President's May 19, 2009 announcement, on
September 28, 2009, NHTSA and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
issued a joint NPRM, with NHTSA proposing CAFE standards under the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended by EISA, and EPA
proposing greenhouse gas emissions standards under the Clean Air
Act.\8\ This joint proposal reflects a carefully coordinated and
harmonized approach to implementing these two statutes. The new
standards propose a significant increase in fuel economy by 2016. This
consumer tire information program is one of the actions that will
contribute towards the larger goals of energy independence and
security. In comparison to CAFE standards, which apply to new vehicle
fuel economy, this rule has goals of improving fuel economy for the
existing fleet of vehicles, as replacement tires are purchased and
installed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Proposed Rulemaking to Establish Light-Duty Vehicle
Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy
Standards, 74 FR 49454 (Sept. 28, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 111 of EISA added section 32304A to Chapter 323 of title
49, United States Code. This chapter codifies consumer information
requirements initially established by the Motor Vehicle Information and
Cost Savings Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-513). The new section 32304A is
titled ``Consumer tire information'' and specifies as follows:
     Within 24 months of the enactment of EISA, NHTSA is to
promulgate rules establishing a national tire fuel efficiency consumer
information program for replacement tires to educate consumers about
the effect of tires on fuel efficiency, safety, and durability.
     The program must include a national tire fuel efficiency
rating system for replacement tires to assist consumers in making more
educated tire purchasing decisions.
     NHTSA must specify requirements for providing information
to consumers, including information at the point of sale and other
potential dissemination methods, including the Internet.
     NHTSA must also specify the test methods that
manufacturers are to use in assessing and rating tires to avoid

variation among test equipment and manufacturers.
     As a part of the consumer information program, NHTSA must
develop a national tire maintenance consumer education program, which
must include information on tire inflation pressure, alignment,
rotation, and treadwear to maximize fuel efficiency, safety and
durability of replacement tires.

C. Summary of NPRM

1. Proposed Test Procedures
    The NPRM proposed to require tire manufacturers to rate the fuel
efficiency of their tires using a measurement obtained with a test
procedure recently finalized by the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO), ISO 28580:2009(E), Passenger car, truck and bus
tyres--Methods of measuring rolling resistance--Single point test and
correlation of measurement results (hereinafter referred to as ISO
28580).\9\ The choice of which test procedure to specify for measuring
rolling resistance is important because measuring rolling resistance
requires precise instrumentation, calibration, test conditions, and
equipment alignment for repeatable results. As explained in detail in
the NPRM, agency research shows that all of the available test
procedures could meet these requirements. However, the ISO 28580 test
method is unique in that it specifies a procedure to correlate results
between laboratories and test equipment, which our research shows is a
significant source of variation. Because other established test methods
lack such a procedure, NHTSA would have to develop a new procedure to
address this variation before any of those test methods could be
considered. Further, the ISO 28580 test procedure is the specified test
method in the proposed European Union Directive, allowing manufacturers
to do one test to determine ratings for both proposed regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Tire Fuel Efficiency
Consumer Information Program, 74 FR 29542 (June 22, 2009); Docket
No. NHTSA-2009-0121-0014 (hereinafter ``Tire Fuel Efficiency
NPRM'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As for the safety and durability ratings, due to the statutory
timeline within which this rulemaking must be completed, NHTSA proposed
to use traction and treadwear test procedures that are already
specified under another tire rating system, the uniform tire quality
grading standards (UTQGS).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 49 CFR 575.104 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Proposed Rolling Resistance Rating Metric
    The NPRM proposed to base a tire's fuel efficiency rating on
rolling resistance force (RRF) as measured by the ISO 28580 test
procedure. This is in contrast to basing a fuel efficiency rating on
rolling resistance coefficient (RRC), or RRF divided by test load. The
proposed European tire fuel efficiency rating system specifies tire
ratings based on RRC. NHTSA proposed to base the rolling resistance
rating on the RRF metric because such a rating translates more directly
to the fuel required to move a tire, and based on the goals of EISA,
appears to be a more appropriate metric.
3. Proposed Label
    To convey information to consumers, the NPRM proposed a label that
contains an individual tire's ratings for fuel efficiency (i.e.,
rolling resistance), safety (i.e., wet traction), and durability (i.e.,
treadwear), and which was similar to a ratings label that tested well
in consumer research conducted by NHTSA. Prior to the NPRM, NHTSA
conducted focus group studies in which it presented several labels
using different graphics and scales to relay the ratings. The proposed
label showed all the ratings on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the
best rating. Consumers expressed an understanding of this 0 to 100
scale, and reacted positively to red and green shading, with red
indicating lower/worse ratings and green indicating higher/better
ratings. Other graphics presented in NHTSA's consumer research were
discussed in the NPRM.
4. Proposed Information Dissemination and Reporting Requirements for
Tire Manufacturers and Tire Retailers
    For tire manufacturers, NHTSA proposed that manufacturers be
required to report various data to the agency. This is necessary both
for enforcement of the rating system, and for development of NHTSA's
tire fuel efficiency Web site, which will contain a database of tire
information with a fuel savings estimator tool that allows easy
comparison of fuel savings between various replacement tires. Regarding
labeling, we proposed to require tire manufacturers to print the tire
fuel efficiency graphic in color along with any other information
manufacturers include on an existing paper label on the tire.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Manufacturers are required to print UTQGS information on a
paper label pursuant to 49 CFR 575.104(d)(1)(B). Many manufacturers
include other information on this paper label as well. Note that
NHTSA uses the term ``paper label'' in the colloquial sense; many
labels on tires are actually made of plastic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As for requirements for tire retailers, we proposed a requirement
that the paper label containing the new rating information must remain
on the tire until the sale of the tire. The label refers consumers to
the agency's Web site for further information about the ratings. We
also proposed a requirement that tire retailers must display a poster
that NHTSA would print and distribute that would explain the rating
system and encourage consumers to compare ratings across tires.
Finally, for tire manufacturers and retailers that maintain a Web site,
the agency proposed to require those Web sites to link to the
comprehensive tire Web site we will be developing as part of the
national tire maintenance consumer education program. The agency also
sought comments on any other information dissemination requirements
that would ensure that easy-to-understand information is conveyed in a
way that is most likely to impact consumers' decisions and, thus,
affect their behavior and save them and our nation fuel and money.
5. Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
    In the NPRM, the agency considered the need and appropriateness of
continuing the current UTQGS requirements. NHTSA explained that if the
agency maintained the current safety and treadwear UTQGS ratings, there
would be concerns about consumer confusion as well as unnecessary
duplication. For this and other reasons explained in the NPRM, the
agency tentatively concluded that the current UTQGS requirements should
either be removed, once tires meet the new EISA requirements, or
amended to conform to the approach in today's rule.
6. Proposed Consumer Education Program
    The NPRM identified and sought comment on various ways that NHTSA
plans to implement a consumer education program to inform consumers
about the effect of tire properties and tire maintenance on vehicle
fuel efficiency, safety, and durability. Some of NHTSA's ideas for
consumer education included informational posters or brochures that
NHTSA would distribute at trade shows and other events, and which tire
retailers could display at the point of sale and a centralized
government Web site on tires containing a database of all tire rating
information. NHTSA also

announced that we are planning to develop a comparative fuel savings
estimator that would show the amount of money a consumer would save
annually or over the estimated lifetime of the tires of varying fuel
efficiency ratings. Using the estimator, a consumer could select tires
to compare, enter the fuel economy of their vehicle (miles per gallon
or mpg) and the average number of miles they drive each year and even
the dollar amount they are paying for fuel and get a calculation of
differences in fuel usage and/or money saved for the tires under
comparison.
    Finally, the NPRM announced plans to develop and form new
partnerships to distribute educational messages about tire fuel
efficiency and tire maintenance. NHTSA explained that we will seek to
partner with any interested tire retailers, and State or local
governments, as well as manufacturers who share NHTSA's goal of
promoting the importance of proper tire maintenance. The NPRM also
stated that we will seek to partner with universities, colleges and
high schools that may wish to educate students regarding tire fuel
efficiency or proper tire maintenance. These various innovative tools
and education measures will assist consumers in making better-informed
tire purchasing and maintenance decisions.
7. Benefits and Costs
    As explained in the NPRM, it is intended that the rule will have
benefits in terms of fuel economy, safety, and durability. At the very
least, the rule should enable consumers to make more informed decisions
about these variables, thus increasing benefits of the factors that
most matter to them. Because the agency could not foresee precisely how
much the proposed consumer information program would affect consumer
tire purchasing behavior and could not foresee the reduction in rolling
resistance among improved tires, the Preliminary Regulatory Impact
Analysis (PRIA) estimated benefits using a range of hypothetical
assumptions regarding the extent to which the tire fuel efficiency
consumer information program affects the replacement tire market.
Specifically, the PRIA developed estimates assuming that between 2
percent and 10 percent of targeted tires are improved and that the
average reduction in rolling resistance among improved tires is between
5 percent and 10 percent. Under these hypothetical assumptions, the
PRIA estimated that the proposal would save 7.9 to 78 million gallons
of fuel and prevent the emission of between 76,000 and 757,000 metric
tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually. The values of the
fuel savings were between $22 and $220 million at a 3 percent discount
rate and between $20 and $203 million at a 7 percent discount rate.
    The PRIA estimated the annual cost of NHTSA's proposal to be
between $18.9 and $52.8 million. This included testing costs of
$22,500, reporting costs of around $113,000, labeling costs of around
$9 million, costs to the Federal Government of $1.28 million, and costs
of between $8.4 and $42 million to improve tires. In addition, NHTSA
anticipated one-time costs of around $4 million, including initial
testing costs of $3.7 million and reporting start-up costs of $280,000.
8. Lead Time
    NHTSA proposed to require tire manufacturers to meet applicable
requirements for all existing replacement tires within 12 months of the
issuance of a final regulation. For new tires introduced after the
effective date of this rule, NHTSA proposed to require reporting of
information at least 30 days prior to introducing the tire for sale, as
is currently required for UTQGS information.
    Regarding the poster, in retailers that have a display room, the
agency proposed to make this poster available within 12 months of the
issuance of a final regulation. At that time NHTSA would publish a
Federal Register notice announcing the availability of the poster. The
agency proposed that a tire retailer must have the poster on display
within 60 days of the issuance of the notice of availability in the
Federal Register. We proposed that a tire retailer would be able to
comply with the requirement of displaying the poster either by
downloading and printing it, in color and with the specifications from
NHTSA's Web site, or by contacting the agency and requesting that we
send the retailer a copy of the poster. For tire retailers and tire
manufacturers with an Internet presence, NHTSA proposed that those Web
sites link to NHTSA's tire Web site within 12 months of the issuance of
a final regulation.

D. Brief Summary of Public Comments on the NPRM

    Scope of the program: Some consumer and safety groups suggested
that NHTSA require that tire manufacturers include the new tire ratings
in advertisements for tires. Further, these groups, a tire
manufacturer, and ExxonMobil Chemical Company (ExxonMobil) urged NHTSA
to contemplate a standard for tire fuel efficiency performance.
ExxonMobil also suggested that NHTSA establish a minimum inflation
pressure retention loss rate for tires to minimize the air loss
characteristics of tires. Various commenters sought confirmation of
which entities would be considered tire manufacturers and tire
retailers under the tire fuel efficiency consumer information program,
as well as confirmation of the different tires types of tires that were
not required to be rated under the program. Multiple commenters also
asked whether tires that were not required to be included under the
program could be voluntarily rated under the program.
    Rolling resistance test procedure: Various commenters urged us to
adopt the full ISO 28580 test procedure. MTS Systems Corp. (MTS), a
test equipment manufacturer, suggested a different test method using a
flat surface test machine rather than a road wheel. Several commenters
also noted the need for NHTSA to specify a reference test machine since
the ISO test procedure needs one for the alignment of results between
different measurement machines, but the ISO has not yet designated one.
    Rolling resistance rating metric: Tire Rack (an online tire
retailer), Consumers Union (non-profit publisher of Consumer Reports
magazine), and ExxonMobil expressed support for using RRF as the metric
on which the agency should base the fuel efficiency rating. The tire
manufacturers, a tire test equipment manufacturer, the European
Commission, Japan Automobile Tyre Manufacturers Association (JATMA),
the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC, an environmental group),
and General Motors (GM) commented that RRC would be a better metric for
a fuel efficiency rating than RRF. These commenters argued that basing
a fuel efficiency rating on RRC would spread out ratings for tires
available to a single consumer so that the consumer would be able to
get a top rated tire.
    Safety: Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) supported
the inclusion of tire safety information in the tire fuel efficiency
consumer information program, and stated that the program should not
promote cost savings at the expense of safety. JATMA supported the use
of the current UTQGS traction grading test method as the basis for a
safety rating for purposes of the tire fuel efficiency consumer
information program. Tire Rack stated that NHTSA should base the safety
rating on an average of the slide and peak coefficients of friction,
the measurements of traction obtained via the traction test procedure.
Consumers Union stated that the safety (wet

traction) rating scale should be revised to define a span that is most
appropriate to the level of performance commonly found in current
replacement tires while still leaving room for future improvement. The
Rubber Manufacturers Association (RMA, a tire industry trade
association) argued that EISA did not give NHTSA the authority to
establish a new rating system for consumer information on tire safety.
RMA contended that the derivation of the safety rating formula from the
wet traction test measurements was not explained well in the NPRM and
that they were unable to comment on it.
    Durability: Michelin North America (Michelin, a tire manufacturer)
commented that NHTSA should specify changes to the UTQGS treadwear
procedure to yield more truly representative wear results. Michelin
also commented that the durability (treadwear) rating scale should be
adjusted because the ratings of some current replacement tires would
far exceed the top rating on the scale. RMA argued that EISA did not
give NHTSA the authority to establish a new rating system for consumer
information on tire durability.
    Overall rating: The tire manufacturers, MTS, Tire Rack, Advocates,
and NRDC did not support an overall rating. Consumers Union, as well as
other consumer and safety groups (Public Citizen et al.) \12\ did
support some form of an overall rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Public Citizen, Center for Auto Safety, Consumer Federation
of America, and Safe Climate Campaign submitted joint comments to
the NPRM. See Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0121-0043.1. Throughout this
notice, we will refer to these as Public Citizen et al. comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Label: NRDC, a private citizen, and Public Citizen et al. suggested
the inclusion of a best-in-class (EnergyStar-type) endorsement for the
most fuel efficient tires. Relatedly, to facilitate comparisons,
Consumers Union and Tire Rack suggested the ratings show high and low
demarcations reflecting the range of ratings for tires of the same
size. Public Citizen et al. supported providing all the ratings on the
same scale. Ford Motor Company (Ford) and Advocates suggested using the
UTQGS scales for the traction and treadwear ratings, as opposed to the
proposed 0-100 scale. Advocates expressed support for the green-red
color coding, while Michelin stated that the transfer of information to
consumers cannot be wholly dependent upon color. Tire manufacturers
supported a five category tire efficiency rating system, as opposed to
the proposed 0-100 rating scale. RMA argued that EISA does not give
NHTSA authority to provide consumer information on a tire's greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions. Numerous commenters submitted suggestions about
terminology on the label, the ordering of the rating scales, the
required size of the tire label, additional disclaimers to place on the
label, and alternate graphic icons for the rating scales. RMA and the
European Commission opposed the inclusion of tire manufacture date on
the tire label, an issue on which NHTSA sought comment in the NPRM, but
did not propose regulatory language. Public Citizen et al. suggested
that the tire identification number (TIN), which NHTSA's safety
standards require be molded onto the tire, be included on the paper
label. Public Citizen et al., as well as the Tire Industry Association
(TIA), expressed concern that the paper label may not provide consumers
with information at a useful time in influencing purchasing decisions.
Information Dissemination and Reporting Requirements
     Tire manufacturer requirements: Tire manufacturers
expressed support of the interpolation of test values for purposes of
data reporting. Other commenters generally opposed the interpolation of
test values. RMA opposed the proposed data reporting requirements. NRDC
supported requiring manufacturers to report rolling resistance data.
The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) agreed with
the proposal that manufacturers should be required to report which
tires are exempted, and the basis for the exemption. Similarly,
Michelin expressed support for requiring tire manufacturers to report
which tires qualify for the low volume exemption and are not labeled.
     Tire retailer requirements: Consumers Union suggested that
NHTSA provide further guidance on how best to ensure that consumers can
see the educational poster at the point of sale. RMA suggested that
instead of requiring the proposed ratings graphic appear on a tire
label, NHTSA should require that the rating information be made
available to consumers at the point of sale. TIA commented that NHTSA
underestimates the importance of dialogue between sales associates and
consumers at the point of sale, and suggested that sales associates
should be trained to communicate the information provided in the new
rating system. Similarly, Public Citizen et al., Ford, the National
Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) and ICCT encouraged the adoption
of additional requirements beyond requiring the retailer keep the label
on the tire until it is sold, reasoning that relatively few consumers
see tires before they buy them as there are limited number of tires on
display in tire retailers.
    Uniform tire quality grading standards: Tire manufacturers, Tire
Rack, and Consumers Union expressed support for the idea of replacing
the UTQGS requirements with the requirements created under the tire
fuel efficiency consumer information program. These commenters cite the
facts that this new rating system will be on a different scale and will
be based on different test measurements than the UTQGS grading system,
which may cause consumer confusion. Public Citizen et al. supported
NHTSA's continuing to provide the temperature resistance rating along
with the other UTQGS ratings, and stated that the temperature
resistance rating should be incorporated into the new tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program rating system.
    Consumer education program: Numerous commenters suggested various
messages that NHTSA should be communicating to promote the success of
the consumer education program. Many commenters stated that much of the
effectiveness of this rating system will depend on the success and
reach of the consumer education program, informing consumers of the
meaning of the new rating system and of the importance of proper tire
inflation and maintenance.
    Benefits and costs: NRDC and ICCT commented that our benefits are
underestimated due to NHTSA's underestimation of the impact of reduced
rolling resistance on fuel economy. RMA predicted higher testing,
labeling, and tire improvement costs than NHTSA. RMA also commented
that NHTSA overestimates benefits.
    Lead time: Tire manufacturers, the European Commission, and JATMA
requested more lead time than the twelve months NHTSA proposed in the
NPRM.
    Enforcement: ICCT and MTS commented that NHTSA should tighten the
compliance tolerance bands that it gave in the NPRM, and emphasized
that compliance tolerances are important because consumers should have
confidence that the tires they are buying are accurately labeled. RMA
expressed support for requiring reported ratings must be less than or
equal to the rating determined by the agency in compliance testing. RMA
opposed the tolerance band concept for compliance. RMA also requested
clarification of how NHTSA intends to apply the new civil penalties
provision.

E. Final Rule

    The final rule adopts the test procedure provisions of the NPRM
summarized above in section I.C, with the changes discussed below made
in response to the public comments on the NPRM. This final rule also
clarifies the scope of the tire fuel efficiency consumer information
program, and responds to numerous comments on related issues.
    As explained above, NHTSA is not specifying the content or
requirements of the consumer information and education portions of the
program at this time, but will be issuing a new proposal on these
portions of the program after engaging in additional consumer research.
NHTSA is also not finalizing information dissemination requirements for
tire manufacturers or tire retailers in this final rule, as further
consumer research may indicate how consumers best comprehend ratings
and other consumer information. However, as discussed further below,
this final rule does specify that NHTSA will require tire manufacturers
to report ratings, but not test data, to the agency as part of the data
reporting requirements of the tire fuel efficiency consumer information
program.
1. Test Procedures
    EISA mandates that this rulemaking include ``specifications for
test methods for manufacturers to use in assessing and rating tires to
avoid variation among test equipment and manufacturers.'' \13\ As
proposed in the NPRM, this final rule requires tire manufacturers to
rate the fuel efficiency of their tires. To test for compliance with
this requirement, NHTSA will use a measurement obtained using the
recently approved test procedure ISO 28580:2009(E), Passenger car,
truck and bus tyres--Methods of measuring rolling resistance--Single
point test and correlation of measurement results.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(2)(C).
    \14\ See http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/
catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=44770 (last accessed Sept. 24, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in detail in the NPRM, the ISO 28580 test method is
unique in that it specifies a procedure to correlate results between
different test equipment (i.e., different rolling resistance test
machines). This is important because our research shows that machine-
to-machine differences are a significant source of variation. As
discussed below, the ISO has not yet completed all aspects of this
procedure. NHTSA is nonetheless specifying the ISO 28580 test procedure
in this final rule because EISA specifically directs the agency to
avoid the type of significant variation that the ISO 28580 lab
alignment procedure takes into account, but other established test
methods do not. Further, the ISO 28580 test procedure is the specified
test method in the European Union Directive and in the staff
recommendations for a California regulation, allowing manufacturers to
do one test to determine ratings for multiple regulations.
    As commenters pointed out, under ISO 28580, use of the lab
alignment procedure depends on the specification of a reference test
machine against which all other labs will align their measurement
results. Because the ISO has not yet specified a reference lab for the
ISO 28580 test procedure, NHTSA must specify this laboratory for the
purposes of implementing this rule so that tire manufacturers know the
identity of the machine against which they may correlate their test
results. In the near future, NHTSA will announce one or more private
laboratories to operate the reference test machine(s) for the tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ It is not the intent of NHTSA to unilaterally establish the
reference machine for ISO or other global regions. Rather, the
agency must define a ``regional'' reference machine for the tire
fuel efficiency consumer information program that is independent of
entities we regulate and is accessible to the agency by standard
contractual mechanisms. This will allow reporting under the program
and agency compliance testing that meet the requirements of EISA. It
is our understanding that the output of a given ``candidate''
machine can be corrected using the appropriate correlation equations
and, therefore, different entities/rating systems could also
designate their own reference machines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the ISO 28580 lab alignment procedure, machine alignment is
conducted using batches of alignment tires of two models with defined
differences in rolling resistance that are certified on the reference
test machine. ISO 28580 specifies requirements for these alignment
tires (``Lab Alignment Tires'' or LATs), but specific sizes or models
of LATs are not specifically identified in ISO 28580. Therefore, NHTSA
must also specify which LATs tire manufacturers should use to align
other rolling resistance machines to the reference lab. Since
specifications and source of supply for these LATs has not yet been
finalized, NHTSA will postpone the specification of LATs to a later
date. NHTSA will address available LAT options in the forthcoming
supplemental NPRM relating to the consumer information requirements and
consumer education portions of the program.
    Because bias ply tires are included in the scope of the tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program, NHTSA is also specifying a
break-in procedure for bias ply tires, in order to warm up these types
of tires up before ISO 28580 testing.\16\ This roadwheel break-in
procedure that will be used for bias ply tires is adopted from already
established Federal motor vehicle safety standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Bias ply tire design is an older internal construction tire
design. Radial ply construction of tires has been the industry
standard for the past 20 years, and the vast majority of passenger
car tires on the market today are of radial construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As for the safety and durability ratings, NHTSA is specifying the
use of the test procedures that are already specified under the UTQGS.
For the traction test, because we are requiring the collection of
slightly different data than under the UTQGS traction test method, a
one-time modification in the software used in the test equipment may be
necessary. The agency will continue to examine other metrics to see if
they could prove more effective in providing consumer information about
safety and durability.
2. Rolling Resistance Rating Metric
    Based on the large number of comments received on this issue, and
to retain flexibility to use what the agency learns about consumer
comprehension from the future consumer research, NHTSA will defer a
decision on which rolling resistance metric should be used for the fuel
efficiency rating and consider that matter further in the future
supplemental NPRM and final rule that will finalize the consumer
information and education portions of the program.
3. Consumer Information Program Requirements
    NHTSA is not specifying the content or requirements of the consumer
information program at this time. In light of the important objectives
of this rulemaking, we are continuing to work to improve the content
and format of the consumer information so that consumers will, in fact,
be adequately informed. After additional consumer testing, NHTSA will
publish a new proposal for the consumer information portion of this new
program in a supplemental NPRM.
4. Information Dissemination and Reporting Requirements for Tire
Manufacturers and Tire Retailers
    NHTSA is requiring that tire manufacturers report the three ratings
for each tire to the agency. Unlike the proposed data reporting
requirements, NHTSA is not requiring manufacturers to report test
measurements. This is due to concerns that this information being
public could cause competitive harm to tire manufacturers. Requiring
the

submission of such data would make public each manufacturer's
statistical approach to risk in terms of how each manufacturer is
rating tires to prevent the possibility of non-compliance.\17\ NHTSA
will also require tire manufacturers to report which tire models and
sizes are excluded from the scope of this program, and thus not rated,
because this information would be useful to consumers who wish to
understand which tires are not rated and why. NHTSA will make this
information available on its tire Web site. For manufacturers that are
otherwise required to report ratings data, this information should be
included with those data submissions. For manufacturers that only
produce limited production tires, or other tires that are excluded from
the applicability of today's program, these manufacturers must provide
a one-time list of each one of its tire models/sizes, and a statement
that every one of its tire models/sizes is excluded from the
applicability of this regulation and, thus, is not rated. NHTSA will
make this information on which tires are excluded from the new rating
system available on its tire Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Although NHTSA neither proposed to publish such data
submitted to the agency, nor to post such data on the comprehensive
tire Web site, such information in the possession of the agency
would be subject to Freedom of Information Act requests and the
agency does not believe it could deny such a request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding labeling, as noted above, NHTSA is not specifying the
content or requirements of the consumer information program at this
time. In light of the important objectives of this rulemaking, we are
continuing to work to improve the content and format of the label so
that consumers will, in fact, be adequately informed. After additional
consumer testing, NHTSA will publish a new proposal for the consumer
information portion of this new program in a supplemental NPRM.
    As for requirements for tire retailers, for similar reasons
discussed above, in order to have the full benefit of any new
understanding of how consumers best comprehend information gained from
the agency's new consumer research, NHTSA will re-propose requirements
for tire retailers in the supplemental NPRM on the consumer information
and education portion of the tire fuel efficiency consumer information
program.
5. Uniform Tire Quality Grading Standards
    NHTSA is retaining the UTQGS requirements at this time, including
the UTQGS treadwear, traction, and temperature resistance ratings.
However, if a future final rule finalizes that ratings under the tire
fuel efficiency consumer information program must be printed on a paper
label on each passenger car replacement tire, NHTSA will consider
removing the UTQGS requirement of molding UTQGS ratings onto tires, and
the UTQGS requirement of printing UTQGS information on the paper tire
label when a tire is labeled in accordance with the tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program requirements. The requirements
to report UTQGS grading information to NHTSA would remain. As such, the
UTQGS ratings would still be available to interested consumers, vehicle
manufacturers, and tire retailers, but a consumer looking at a tire
would not be confronted with different and confusing rating scales.
NHTSA wants to study further the likely consequences of discontinuing
the temperature resistance rating before making a decision about the
future UTQGS requirements. NHTSA is making no changes to UTQGS
requirements in this final rule.
6. Consumer Education Program
    For similar reasons discussed above, in order to have the full
benefit of any new understanding of how consumers best comprehend
information gained from the agency's new consumer research, NHTSA will
re-propose its ideas for the consumer education portion of the program
in the supplemental NPRM on the consumer information and education
portions of the tire fuel efficiency consumer information program. The
supplemental NPRM will newly propose and seek comment on numerous ways
that NHTSA could implement a consumer education program to inform
consumers about the effect of tire properties and tire maintenance on
vehicle fuel efficiency, safety, and durability. The supplemental NPRM
will also discuss some of the messages that NHTSA believes will be key
to a successful tire fuel efficiency consumer information program.
    Within the next year, NHTSA will begin developing a new government
Web site on tires, which will be linked directly from http://
www.safercar.gov/. It will contain all the information on NHTSA's
current tire Web site (also located within http://www.safercar.gov), as
well as links to other useful Web sites that contain educational
information about tire maintenance.\18\ In furtherance of the
objectives of consumer education program, the supplemental NPRM will
seek comment on the structure and content of the tire Web site. NHTSA's
tire Web site will eventually contain a database of all tire rating
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ NHTSA's current online tire information can be found at
http://www.nhtsa.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/
menuitem.c6b5d461a04337a1ba7d9d1046108a0c/and http://
www.safercar.gov/portal/site/safercar/
menuitem.13dd5c887c7e1358fefe0a2f35a67789/
?vgnextoid=0e0aaa8c16e35110VgnVCM1000002fd17898RCRD (last accessed
Sept. 24, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. Benefits and Costs
    It is hoped that the final rule will have benefits in terms of fuel
economy, safety, and durability. At the very least, the final rule
should enable consumers to make more informed decisions about these
variables, thus increasing benefits in ways that most matter to them.
It is possible that the rule will help promote innovation that will
provide benefits to consumers in all three areas of tire performance.
Because the agency cannot foresee precisely how much today's consumer
information program will affect consumer tire purchasing behavior and
cannot foresee the reduction in rolling resistance among improved tires
(we estimate the potential range of rolling resistance improvement to
be between 5 and 10 percent), the FRIA estimates benefits using a range
of hypothetical assumptions regarding the extent to which the tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program affects the replacement tire
market. For example, if we assume that 1 percent of targeted tires (1.4
million tires) are improved and that the average reduction in rolling
resistance is 5 percent, then under these hypothetical assumptions, the
proposal is estimated to save 3 million gallons of fuel and prevent the
emission of 29,000 metric tons of CO2 annually. The value of
these savings is $11.6 million at a 3 percent discount rate.
    If 1 percent of targeted tires are improved at an average cost of
$3 per tire, the annual cost of NHTSA's final rule is estimated to be
$9.4 million. This includes annual testing costs of $3.8 million,
annual reporting costs of around $113,000, annual costs to the Federal
Government of $1.3 million, and annual costs of $4.23 million to
improve tires. This does not include annual costs for labeling. Since
this final rule does not require a label, NHTSA will account for costs
of a label when the requirement is re-proposed in the supplementary
NPRM addressing consumer information requirements. In the first year,
NHTSA anticipates one-time costs of $34.8 million, including the same
costs noted above except changes in initial testing costs of $33.1
million, no one-time costs to improve

tires (NHTSA only assumes this as a subsequent annual cost, not an
initial cost), and reporting start-up costs of almost $400,000.
    Table 1 shows cost and benefit estimates developed to date, which
may change based on further study on the design of the consumer
information requirements. The assumptions are that silica technology is
used at a cost of $3 per tire, that this technology improves rolling
resistance and has no or slightly favorable impacts on wet traction and
treadwear. The estimates below assume that 1 percent of targeted tires
are sold with improved rolling resistance.

                                   Table 1--Total Benefits and Costs Estimates
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      3 Percent discount rate
                                                      7 Percent discount rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuel Efficiency Improvement.....................              5%             10%              5%             10%
Costs (first year)..............................           $34.8           $34.8           $34.8           $34.8
Costs (annual)..................................            $9.4            $9.4            $9.4            $9.4
Benefits \a\....................................           $11.6           $23.2           $10.6           $21.2
Annual Net Benefits (Costs) \b\.................            $2.2           $13.8            $1.2           $11.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Average annual benefit through 2050.
\b\ Counting only annual costs in the future; assuming 1% of replacement tires are sold with improved fuel
  efficiency.

8. Lead Time
    Lead time will be determined based on the timing of the final rules
that will specify the requirements and content of the consumer
information and the specification of a reference laboratory or
laboratories. If the later of the final rules is the one in which NHTSA
announces the selection of a reference laboratory or laboratories with
the capability to test LATs, NHTSA will require tire manufacturers to
meet applicable requirements for replacement tires they manufacture in
stages, by tire size. In that case, tire manufacturers must meet
applicable requirements for 15 and 16-inch tires, the most popular rim
sizes,\19\ first; tire manufacturers must meet applicable requirements
for other passenger car tire sizes at a later date. That phase in would
be tied to the publication of a final rule specifying the availability
of certified LATs from the reference laboratory or laboratories. As
noted above, in the near future NHTSA will announce one or more private
laboratories to operate the reference test machine(s). The agency is
working expeditiously to establish and implement procedures for the
selection of a reference laboratory or laboratories. Soon after, NHTSA
will publish a Federal Register notice of the readiness of the
reference laboratory or laboratories to provide LATs under ISO 28580.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The RMA Preliminary 2010 Factbook estimated that 15 and16-
inch passenger replacement tires constituted about 22% of the
replacement passenger tire sales in the U.S. in 2009. See Rubber
Manufacturers Association, Tire Industry Factbook, available at
http://www.rma.org/rma_resources/market_information/tire_
industry/ (last accessed March 11, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the final rule specifying the requirements and content of the
consumer information portion of the program occurs after the final rule
specifying the reference laboratory or laboratories, NHTSA may
establish a lead time different from the phase in described above since
tire manufacturers will have had since the final rule specifying the
reference laboratory or laboratories to begin testing to the test
procedures specified in this final rule.
    In that case, NHTSA would also announce in the final rule
specifying the requirements and content of the consumer information and
consumer education portion of the program the first date by which tire
manufacturers must submit required data to NHTSA on replacement tires,
and the compliance dates for any other tire manufacturer or tire
retailer requirements established in that rulemaking. For new tires
introduced after those compliance dates, NHTSA is requiring reporting
of information at least 30 days prior to introducing the tire for sale,
as is currently required for UTQGS information.
    The lead time is longer than the 12 months proposed in the NPRM for
several reasons. First, as commenters correctly pointed out, tire
manufacturers will need some additional time to validate correlation
equations between ISO 28580 and other rolling resistance test methods
many manufacturers presently use if they are using laboratories other
than Smithers Scientific Services, Inc. (Smithers) and Standards
Testing Laboratories (STL).
    Second, because the safety rating test requires recording of the
peak coefficients of friction, it is unlikely that manufacturers have
established much (if any) correlation of their peak traction
measurements to the peak values at NHTSA's San Angelo test facility.
Therefore, it will likely take tire manufacturers more than a year to
test enough tires to establish a correlation for all of their tire
sizes to include estimated values in the reporting formula.
    Finally, manufacturers cannot start rating for fuel efficiency
until they can obtain certified reference tires from a reference lab so
that they can use the ISO 28580 lab alignment procedure. NHTSA has
determined that upon the availability of certified LATs, manufacturers
will be able to accurately rate all tires within 24 months. However,
recognizing that the deadlines imposed by EISA indicate a desire to
have information available to consumers as quickly as possible, NHTSA
would phase in the availability of this consumer information. Because
tires with 15 and 16 inch rim sizes make up more than 22 percent of
sales in the replacement passenger car tire market, NHTSA believes
there will be a significant benefit for requiring these most popular
tire sizes to be rated as soon as possible. Recognizing the uncertainty
of the rulemaking timeline for finalizing the requirements and content
of the consumer information and consumer education portions of the tire
fuel efficiency program, NHTSA will tie all compliance dates to the
latter of the consumer information and education final rule, or the
final rule announcing the availability of the reference laboratory or
laboratories to test LATs under ISO 28580.

II. Background \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ This discussion is substantially the same as the Background
discussion in the NPRM, but is repeated here to provide context for
this new regulatory program and for the convenience of the reader.
Comments on EISA section 111's preemption provision are discussed in
this section. Discussions of the European Union's efforts towards
increasing on-road fuel economy by reducing average rolling
resistance is also updated. See Tire Fuel Efficiency NPRM, supra
note 9, at 29547-29552.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Contribution of Tire Maintenance and Tire Fuel Efficiency To
Addressing Energy Independence and Security

1. Tire Fuel Efficiency and Rolling Resistance
    Without the continual addition of energy, a vehicle will slow down.
This effect is due to many forces, including aerodynamic drag,
driveline losses, brake drag, and tire rolling resistance. The first
three of these are vehicle properties; they will not be discussed
further. The fourth, rolling resistance, is the effort required to keep
a given tire rolling. That is, rolling resistance is the energy loss
during the continuation of rotational movement of the tire. As such, it
always opposes the vehicle's longitudinal, or forward/backward,
movement. Since this rolling resistance force (RRF) opposes the
direction of travel of the rotating tire, it directly reduces the
efficiency of a vehicle in converting the chemical energy in the fuel
to motion of the vehicle. Therefore, tire rolling resistance is the
most effective metric for rating the ``fuel efficiency'' of a tire.
    In general, vehicle efficiency affects the conversion of chemical
energy in motor fuel into mechanical energy and the transmission of
energy to the axles to drive the wheels. Figure 1 illustrates the
energy uses and losses for a midsize passenger car. Part of the energy
supplied to the wheels of the vehicle is lost due to energy converted
to heat within the structure of the tire as well as friction between
the tire and the road, which creates resistance, decreasing fuel
efficiency.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30MR10.019

    As noted above, a tire's rolling resistance is the energy consumed
by a rolling tire, or the mechanical energy converted into heat by a
tire, moving a unit distance on the roadway.\22\ The magnitude of
rolling resistance depends on the tire used, the nature of the surface
on which it rolls, and the operating conditions--inflation pressure,
load, and speed.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/atv.shtml (last accessed
Sept. 24, 2009); 2006 NAS Report, supra note 4, at 29.
    \22\ Rolling resistance is, thus, defined as energy per unit
distance, which is the same units as force (Joules/meter = Newtons).
However, unlike force, rolling resistance is a scalar quantity with
no direction associated with it. National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, The Pneumatic Tire, DOT HS 810 561, at 477 (February
2006).
    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Relationship between tire maintenance and tire fuel efficiency and
vehicle fuel economy
    Tires with reduced inflation pressure exhibit more sidewall bending
and tread shearing. This increased deformation causes increased energy
loss by the flexing of the rubber. Further, tires with less than
optimal inflation pressure have a larger footprint of the tire on the
road, creating more contact between the tire and the road, also
increasing rolling resistance. Therefore, properly inflated tires have
less rolling resistance and higher fuel efficiency than under-inflated
tires. Moreover, all tires need proper inflation and proper maintenance
to achieve their intended levels of efficiency, safety, wear, and
operating performance. Thus, a strong message urging vigilant
maintenance of inflation must be a central part of communicating
information on the fuel efficiency performance of tires to
motorists.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 2006 NAS Report, supra note 4, at 5, 97.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to proper tire inflation pressure, combinations of
differences in tire dimensions, design, materials, and construction
features will cause tires to differ in rolling resistance as well as in
many other attributes such as traction, handling, noise, wear
resistance, and appearance.\25\ Thus, when choosing among replacement
tires, consumers choose among tires varying in price, style, and many
aspects of performance, including rolling resistance, treadwear life,
and traction. Every year Americans spend approximately $20 billion
replacing about 200 million passenger

car tires.\26\ Thus, the tires consumers purchase will not only affect
the handling, traction, ride comfort, and appearance of their cars, but
also the fuel economy.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Id. at 1.
    \26\ H.R. Rep. No. 109-537, at 3 (June 28, 2006); 2006 NAS
Report, supra note 4, at 1.
    \27\ Most passenger tires are replaced every 3 to 5 years
because of wear. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fuel economy improvements are a large part of ensuring a more
secure energy future.\28\ EISA will help reduce America's dependence on
oil by reducing U.S. demand for oil by requiring the light duty vehicle
industry to achieve a national average fuel economy of at least 35
miles per gallon by 2020 for passenger cars and light trucks combined.
Achieving this will entail increasing fuel economy standards by 40
percent and resulting in saving billions of gallons of fuel. In
accordance with the President's May 19, 2009 announcement, on September
28, 2009, NHTSA and EPA issued a joint NPRM, with NHTSA proposing CAFE
standards under EPCA, as amended by EISA, and EPA proposing greenhouse
gas emissions standards under the Clean Air Act.\29\ This proposal
would require a fleet-wide fuel economy of 34.1 miles per gallon (mpg)
by 2016, thus nearly reaching the EISA target four years earlier than
the EISA deadline. Today's rule complements that proposal by
establishing a tire fuel efficiency rating system and consumer
education program that will contribute to increases in actual on-road
fuel economy achieved, even for vehicles currently in service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Proposed Rulemaking to Establish Light-Duty Vehicle
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Corporate Average Fuel
Economy Standards, 74 FR 49454, 49631 (Sept. 28, 2009).
    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, improving fuel economy reduces the amount of tailpipe
emissions of CO2. CO2 emissions are directly
linked to fuel consumption because CO2 is an ultimate end
product of burning gasoline. The more fuel a vehicle burns, the more
CO2 it emits. Since the CO2 emissions are
essentially constant per gallon of fuel combusted, the amount of fuel
consumption per mile is directly related to the amount of
CO2 emissions per mile. Thus, improvements in fuel economy
necessarily reduce tailpipe emissions of CO2.\30\ The need
to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, e.g., motor vehicle
tailpipe emissions of CO2, in order to forestall and even
mitigate climate change is well recognized.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Id. at 24356.
    \31\ IPCC (2007): Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate
Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.
Davidson, P. Bosch, R. Dave, and L. Meyer (eds.)]. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. 2006 National Academy of Sciences report
    In the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004,\32\ Congress
provided funding through the USDOT/NHTSA to the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) to develop and perform a national tire fuel efficiency
study and literature review.\33\ The NAS was to assess the feasibility
of reducing rolling resistance in replacement tires and the effects of
doing so on vehicle fuel consumption, tire wear life and scrap tire
generation, and tire operating performance as it relates to motor
vehicle safety. Congress asked that the assessment include estimates of
the effects of reductions in rolling resistance on consumer spending on
fuel and tire replacement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ H.R. Rep. No. 108-401, at 971 (Nov. 25, 2003) (Conf. Rep.).
    \33\ Ultimately the task was given to the Committee for the
National Tire Efficiency Study of the Transportation Research Board,
a division of the National Research Council that is jointly
administered by the National Academy of Sciences, the National
Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In April 2006, the Transportation Research Board and the Board on
Energy and Environmental Systems, part of the National Academies'
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, released Special Report
286, Tires and Passenger Vehicle Fuel Economy: Informing Consumers and
Improving Performance (2006 NAS Report).\34\ The 2006 NAS Report
concluded that reduction of average rolling resistance of replacement
tires by 10 percent was technically and economically feasible, and that
such a reduction would increase the fuel economy of passenger vehicles
by 1 to 2 percent, saving about 1 to 2 billion gallons of fuel per year
nationwide.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Transportation Research Board Special Report 286, Tires and
Passenger Vehicle Fuel Economy, National Research Council of the
National Academies (2006). Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0121-0008.
    \35\ Id. at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A reduction in the average rolling resistance of replacement tires
in the vehicle fleet can occur through various means. Consumers could
purchase more tires that are now available with lower rolling
resistance, tire designs could be modified, and new tire technologies
that offer reduced rolling resistance could be introduced. More
vigilant maintenance of tire inflation pressure may further this
outcome as well.\36\ The 2006 NAS Report concluded that consumers, if
sufficiently informed and interested, could bring about a reduction in
average rolling resistance by adjusting their tire purchases and by
taking proper care of their tires once in service, especially by
maintaining recommended inflation pressure.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Id. at 3.
    \37\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2006 NAS Report observed that consumers currently have little,
if any, practical way of assessing how tire choices can affect vehicle
fuel economy. Recognizing this market failure, the Report recommended
that Congress authorize and make sufficient resources available for
NHTSA to prompt and work with the tire industry in gathering and
reporting information on the influence of passenger tires on vehicle
fuel consumption.\38\ The 2006 NAS Report recognized the challenge of
changing consumer preference and behavior, but recommended
Congressional action nonetheless because of the potential societal
benefits associated with increasing effective on-road fuel economy by
even 1 to 2 percent.\39\ This ambitious undertaking must begin with
information concerning the tire's influence on fuel efficiency being
made widely and readily available to tire buyers and sellers. The
consumer tire information program mandated by EISA and promulgated in
today's notice begins this undertaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ Id. at 2, 4.
    \39\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Efforts by Other Governments To Establish Consumer Information
Programs To Address These Issues

    Other countries have also begun working towards increasing on-road
fuel economy by reducing average rolling resistance. These countries
include those of the European Union and Japan. In addition, the State
of California has also initiated a program to increase vehicle fuel
economy using tire efficiency ratings.
1. California
    In 2001, California Senate Bill 1170 authorized the California
Energy Commission (CEC) to conduct a study to investigate opportunities
for increasing usage of low rolling resistance tires in California.\40\
The study concluded that there was a potential for substantial vehicle
fuel savings from an increase in the use of properly inflated, low
rolling resistance tires. As a result of this study,

in October 2003, the California state legislature adopted Assembly Bill
No. 844 (AB 844),\41\ which required the CEC to develop a comprehensive
fuel efficient tire program.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Cal. Pub. Res. Code Sec. Sec.  25000.5, 25722-25723
(2009); 2001 Cal. Legis. Serv. Ch. 912 (S.B. 1170) (West).
    \41\ See Cal. Pub Res. Code Sec. Sec.  25770-25773; 2003 Cal.
Legis. Serv. Ch. 645 (A.B. 844) (West).
    \42\ Specifically, AB 844 required the State Energy Resources
Conservation Board ``to adopt, on or before July 1, 2007, and
implement, no later than July 1, 2008, a replacement tire fuel
efficiency program of Statewide applicability for replacement tires
for passenger cars and light-duty trucks, that is designed to ensure
that replacement tires sold in the State are at least as energy
efficient, on average, as the tires sold in the State as original
equipment on those vehicles.'' Cal. Pub. Res. Code Sec.  25772.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The program would consist of three phases. In the first phase, the
CEC will develop a database with information on the fuel efficiency of
replacement tires sold in California, develop a rating system for the
energy efficiency of replacement tires, and develop a manufacturer
reporting requirement for the energy efficiency of replacement
tires.\43\ In the second phase, the CEC will consider whether to adopt
standards for replacement tires to ensure that replacement tires sold
in the State are at least as energy efficient, on average, as original
equipment tires.\44\ In deciding whether to adopt standards, the CEC
must ensure that a standard:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See id. at Sec.  25771.
    \44\ See id. at Sec.  25772. By contrast, EISA does not provide
NHTSA with the authority to directly regulate the fuel efficiency of
tires. EISA's mandates to NHTSA regarding replacement tire fuel
efficiency relate only to developing ratings and disseminating
information to consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Is technically feasible and cost effective;
     Does not adversely affect tire safety;
     Does not adversely affect the average life of replacement
tires; and
     Does not adversely affect the State effort to manage scrap
tires.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See id. at Sec.  25773.

If standards are adopted, the CEC will also develop consumer
information requirements for replacement tires for which standards
apply. In the third phase, the CEC must review and revise the program
at least every three years.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 10, 2009, the Transportation Policy Committee of the CEC
conducted a workshop regarding the Energy Commission Fuel Efficient
Tire Program. As part of that workshop, the CEC staff draft regulation
was made public.\47\ The draft regulation would specify testing and
reporting requirements for manufacturers, and describes the database
the CEC will maintain. The draft regulation would define a ``fuel
efficient tire'' as a tire with ``a declared fuel efficiency rating
value no higher than 1.15 times the lowest declared fuel efficiency
rating value for all tires in its combined tire size designation and
load index.'' \48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See http://www.energy.ca.gov/transportation/tire_
efficiency/documents/index.html#061009 (last accessed Sept. 24,
2009).
    \48\ Publication  CEC-600-2009-010-SD (posted May 29,
2009), available at http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CEC-
600-2009-010/CEC-600-2009-010-SD.PDF (last accessed Nov. 12, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. European Union
    Europe is approaching the issue of tire fuel efficiency from two
directions. On July 13, 2009, Regulation (EC) No 661/2009 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union concerning
new type-approval requirements for the general safety of motor vehicles
was adopted.\49\ One of the new requirements in this regulation will
gradually prohibit original equipment and replacement tires with a
rolling resistance coefficient (RRC) above certain levels beginning
November 1, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ Commission Regulation 661/2009, 2009 O.J. (L 200) 1,
available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/
LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:200:0001:0024:EN:PDF (last accessed Nov.
12, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 22, 2009, the European Parliament adopted another
Commission proposal, ``Fuel Efficiency: Labeling of Tyres.'' The new
regulation will require original equipment and replacement tires to be
rated for rolling resistance, wet grip and noise.\50\ The rolling
resistance rating is determined using the same test procedure as in ISO
28580:2009(E), Passenger car, truck and bus tyres--Methods of measuring
rolling resistance--Single point test and correlation of measurement
results. The ratings must be provided to consumers in a label on the
tire, or at the point of sale (e.g., in cases where the tire itself is
not visible at the point of sale), and also in technical promotional
literature, including Web sites. The label design is the same A to G
scale as that used to rate the energy efficiency of household
appliances in Europe.\51\ It will apply to tires fitted to passenger
cars as well as light and heavy duty vehicles. Tire manufacturers are
required to have a link on their Web site to the European Commission
Web page covering the new Regulation. The new regulation will go into
effect on November 1, 2012, but tire manufacturers are encouraged to
comply earlier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/
FindByProcnum.do?lang=2&procnum=COD/2008/0221 (last accessed Nov.
12, 2009). Mandatory requirements are also proposed to begin in
October 2010 for wet grip and external rolling noise.
    \51\ See Council Directive 1992/75/EEC, 1992 O.J. (L 297) 16-19
(on the indication by labeling and standard product information of
the consumption of energy and other resources by household
appliances).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Japan
    In late 2008 the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) and
the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)
announced a decision to establish a fuel efficient tire program.\52\
The stated objectives are to include standards for measuring rolling
resistance, providing information to consumers, and consideration of
ways to ensure proper tire pressure management (either through tire
pressure monitoring systems or consumer education).\53\ Japan has been
participating in the development of ISO 28580.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See http://www.meti.go.jp/english/press/data/20081226_
01.html (last accessed Nov. 12, 2009).
    \53\ Tire manufacturers in Japan have recently proposed a
voluntary rating system that includes rolling resistance and wet
grip. Rolling resistance is divided into five categories labeled
AAA, AA, A, B, and C. Wet grip is divided into four categories
labeled a, b, c, and d. For additional information, see http://
translate.google.com/
translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tftc.gr.jp%2Ftirepark%2Fperformance%2Fla
bel%2Flabel.html&sl=ja&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8 (last accessed March 11,
2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 Mandated Consumer Tire
Information Program

    The legislation that eventually became section 111 of EISA
mandating the tire fuel efficiency consumer education program was
originally introduced by itself in the U.S. House of Representatives as
H.R. 5632 \54\ following the recommendations in the 2006 NAS
Report.\55\ The bill was introduced on June 16, 2006, and on June 28,
2006, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce reported on a slightly
amended version of the bill.\56\ It was never acted upon by the 109th
Congress, but it was inserted into a comprehensive energy bill as the
110th Congress began to develop it in May 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ H.R. 5632, 109th Cong. (2d Sess. 2006).
    \55\ Previous attempts to establish a national tire fuel
efficiency program can be found in proposed amendments to various
energy bills in prior years. See e.g., S. Amdt. 3083, 108th Cong.,
150 Cong. Rec. S4710 (2004) (proposing to amend S. 150); S. Amdt.
1470, 108th Cong., 149 Cong. Rep. S10707 (2003) (proposing to amend
S. 14). These amendments proposed regulating the fuel efficiency of
tires in addition to a tire fuel efficiency grading system and
consumer information program, and were not adopted.
    \56\ See H.R. Rep. No. 109-537 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, which was
enacted in 1972, mandated a Federal program to provide consumers with
accurate information about the comparative safety and damageability of
passenger cars. These requirements were codified in Chapter 323 of
Title 49 of the United

States Code (U.S.C.). EISA added section 32304A to Title 49 U.S.C.,
Chapter 323 which gives authority to the Department of Transportation
(DOT) to establish a new consumer tire information program to educate
consumers about the effect of tires on automobile fuel efficiency,
safety, and durability. The DOT has delegated authority to NHTSA at 49
CFR 1.50. We have summarized below the requirements of title 49 U.S.C.
32304A, the consumer tire information program provision enacted by
EISA.
1. Tires Subject To the Consumer Information Program
    The national tire fuel efficiency consumer information program
mandated by EISA and established in this notice is applicable ``only to
replacement tires covered under section 575.104(c) of title 49, Code of
Federal Regulations'' (CFR), as that regulation existed on the date of
EISA's enactment.\57\ Section 575.104 of title 49 CFR is the Federal
regulation that requires motor vehicle and tire manufacturers and tire
brand name owners to provide information indicating the relative
performance of passenger car tires in the areas of treadwear, traction,
and temperature resistance. This section of NHTSA's regulations
specifies the test procedures to determine uniform tire quality grading
standards (UTQGS), and mandates that these standards be molded onto
tire sidewalls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 575.104 applies only to ``new pneumatic tires for use on
passenger cars * * * [but] * * * does not apply to deep tread, winter-
type snow tires, space-saver or temporary use spare tires, tires with
nominal rim diameters of 12 inches or less, or to limited production
tires as defined in [49 CFR 575.104(c)(2)].'' \58\ Accordingly, the
tire fuel efficiency consumer information program described in today's
notice applies only to replacement passenger car tires with the same
exclusions as the UTQGS regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ 49 CFR 575.104(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Mandate to Create a National Tire Fuel Efficiency Rating System
    EISA requires NHTSA to ``promulgate rules establishing a national
tire fuel efficiency consumer information program for replacement tires
designed for use on motor vehicles to educate consumers about the
effect of tires on automobile fuel efficiency, safety, and
durability.'' \59\ EISA specifies that the regulations establishing the
program are to be issued not later than December 19, 2009.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(1).
    \60\ EISA was signed into law on December 19, 2007. EISA
specifies that ``[n]ot later than 24 months after the date of
enactment * * * [NHTSA] shall, after notice and opportunity for
comment, promulgate rules establishing a national tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program for replacement tires
designed for use on motor vehicles to educate consumers about the
effect of tires on automobile fuel efficiency, safety, and
durability.'' 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 111 of EISA specifically mandates ``a national tire fuel
efficiency rating system for motor vehicle replacement tires to assist
consumers in making more educated tire purchasing decisions.'' \61\
However, NHTSA may ``not require permanent labeling of any kind on a
tire for the purpose of tire fuel efficiency information.'' \62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(2)(A).
    \62\ Id. at Sec.  32304A(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The only Committee Report commenting on the legislation that
eventually became section 111 of EISA explained that the need for this
program was established by the 2006 NAS Report, which concluded that if
consumers were sufficiently informed and interested, they could bring
about a reduction in average rolling resistance (and thus an increase
in average on-road fuel economy) by adjusting their tire purchases and
by taking proper care of their tires once in service.\63\ Thus, NHTSA
reviewed conclusions and recommendations in the 2006 NAS Report
regarding how best to inform consumers using a tire fuel efficiency
rating system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ H.R. Rep. No. 109-537, at 3 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the 2006 NAS Report concluded that rolling resistance
measurement of new tires can be informative to consumers, especially if
they are accompanied by reliable information on other tire
characteristics such as treadwear and traction.\64\ The 2006 NAS Report
further stated that consumers benefit from the ready availability of
easy-to-understand information on all major attributes of their
purchases, and that tires are no exception. A tire's influence on
vehicle fuel economy is an attribute that is likely to be of interest
to many tire buyers.\65\ NHTSA has attempted to keep these key
observations in mind in the development of this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ 2006 NAS Report, supra note 4, at 4. The 2006 NAS Report
specifically noted that ``[i]deally, consumers would have access to
information that reflects a tire's effect on fuel economy averaged
over its anticipated lifetime of use, as opposed to a measurement
taken during a single point in the tire's lifetime, usually when it
is new.'' Id. However, ``[n]o standard measure of lifetime tire
energy consumption is currently available, and the development of
one deserves consideration. Until such a practical measure is
developed, rolling resistance measurements of new tires can be
informative to consumers * * *'' Id.
    \65\ 2006 NAS Report, supra note 4, at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Communicating Information to Consumers
    EISA specifies that this rulemaking to establish a national tire
fuel efficiency consumer information program must include
``requirements for providing information to consumers, including
information at the point of sale and other potential information
dissemination methods, including the Internet.'' \66\ While there is
little to no legislative history of EISA itself, the legislation that
eventually became section 111 of EISA was originally introduced in June
2006 with this identical requirement.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ 49 U.S.C.32304A(a)(2)(B).
    \67\ See H.R. 5632, 109th Cong. (2d Sess. 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, on June 28, 2006, the House Committee on Energy and
Commerce reported on a slightly amended version of the bill and noted
that ``[t]he bill * * * would require tire retailers to provide
consumers with information on the tire fuel efficiency rating of motor
vehicle tires at the point of sale.'' \68\ Thus, NHTSA believes that
the suggestion of point of sale requirements indicates that Congress
intended NHTSA's authority to establish information dissemination
requirements to be broad enough to include requirements for both tire
manufacturers, which by statute includes importers,\69\ and tire
dealers/retailers and distributors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ See H.R. Rep. No. 109-537, at 5 (2006).
    \69\ See 49 U.S.C. 32101(5) (defining manufacturer as ``a person
(A) manufacturing or assembling passenger motor vehicles or
passenger motor vehicle equipment; or (B) importing motor vehicles
or motor vehicle equipment for resale.''). For purposes of the
statute, the importer of any tire is a manufacturer. An importer is
responsible for every tire it imports and is subject to civil
penalties in the event of any violations. The U.S. Customs and
Border Protection may deny entry at the port to items that do not
conform to applicable requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Specification of Test Methods
    Section 111 of EISA also mandates that this rulemaking include
``specifications for test methods for manufacturers to use in assessing
and rating tires to avoid variation among test equipment and
manufacturers.'' \70\ See section IV of this notice for a discussion of
NHTSA's specification of the ISO 28580 test procedure to measure
rolling resistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We note that the 2006 NAS Report, the recommendations from which
formed the basis for the legislation that became section 111 of EISA,
indicated

that ``[a]dvice on specific procedures for measuring and rating the
influence of individual passenger tires on fuel economy and methods of
conveying this information to consumers [was] outside the scope of this
study.'' \71\ Accordingly, after publication of the 2006 NAS Report and
in anticipation of Congressional legislation based off its
recommendations, NHTSA embarked on a large-scale research project in
July 2006 to evaluate existing tire rolling resistance test
methods.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ 2006 NAS Report, supra note 4, at 4.
    \72\ See NHTSA Tire Rolling Resistance Rating System Test
Development Project: Phase 1--Evaluation of Laboratory Test
Protocols (October 2008). Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0121-0019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Creating a National Consumer Education Program on Tire Maintenance
    Section 111 of EISA further directs NHTSA to establish in this
rulemaking ``a national tire maintenance consumer education program
including, information on tire inflation pressure, alignment, rotation,
and treadwear to maximize fuel efficiency, safety, and durability.''
\73\ NHTSA already has some information regarding tire maintenance on
its safercar.gov Web site.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(2)(D).
    \74\ See generally http://www.safercar.gov/portal/site/safercar/
menuitem.13dd5c887c7e1358fefe0a2f35a67789/
?vgnextoid=0e0aaa8c16e35110VgnVCM1000002fd17898RCRD (last accessed
Sept. 24, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2006 NAS Report, the recommendations from which formed the
basis for the legislation that became section 111 of EISA, noted that
consumers benefit from the ready availability of easy-to-understand
information on all major attributes of their purchases, and that
replacement tires' influence on vehicle fuel economy is an attribute
that is likely to be of interest to many tire buyers.\75\ NHTSA has
focused on these principles in determining the best way to make the
information in this program both of interest to consumers and easy to
understand. The 2006 NAS Report further noted that ``industry
cooperation is essential in gathering and conveying tire performance
information that consumers can use in making tire purchases.'' \76\
NHTSA agrees that cooperation with the tire manufacturer and tire
retailer industries, as well as other interested parties will be vital
to the success of this program. The agency has held initial
consultations with various groups of industry and the environmental
community, as well at other Government agencies, to seek their views.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ 2006 NAS Report, supra note 4, at 96.
    \76\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Consultation in Setting Standards
    Section 111 of EISA provides that NHTSA is to consult with the
Department of Energy (DOE) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
``on the means of conveying tire fuel efficiency consumer
information.'' \77\ One of the recommendations of the 2006 NAS Report,
which formed the basis for the legislation that became section 111 of
EISA, stated that NHTSA should consult with the EPA ``on means of
conveying the information and ensure that the information is made
widely available in a timely manner and is easily understood by both
buyers and sellers.'' \78\ NHTSA has fulfilled the statutory
consultation requirement in a way that best serves the goals of EISA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(b). In addition, Executive Order No. 13432
provides that a Federal agency undertaking a regulatory action that
can reasonably be expected to directly regulate emissions, or to
substantially and predictably affect emissions, of greenhouse gasses
from motor vehicles, shall act jointly and consistently with other
agencies to the extent possible and to consider the views of other
agencies regarding such action.
    \78\ 2006 NAS Report, supra note 4, at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA consulted with representatives of DOE, EPA, and the Federal
Trade Commission (FTC) \79\ who work in energy efficiency consumer
information and rating programs. These agencies provided feedback on
NHTSA's draft final rule which included valuable comments and insight
based on their experiences communicating information on the energy
efficiency of consumer products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) developed the
EnergyGuide label to enable consumers to compare the energy use of
different models as consumers shop for an appliance. See http://
www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/homes/rea14.shtm (last accessed
Sept. 24, 2009). Section 321(b) of EISA directs the FTC to consider
the effectiveness of current lamp disclosures and to consider
whether alternative labeling disclosures would be more effective in
helping consumers make purchasing decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. Application With State and Local Laws and Regulations
    Section 111 of EISA contains both an express preemption provision
and a savings provision that address the relationship of the national
tire fuel efficiency consumer information program to be established
under that section with State and local tire fuel efficiency consumer
information programs. Section 111 provides:

    Nothing in this section prohibits a State or political
subdivision thereof from enforcing a law or regulation on tire fuel
efficiency consumer information that was in effect on January 1,
2006. After a requirement promulgated under this section is in
effect, a State or political subdivision thereof may adopt or
enforce a law or regulation on tire fuel efficiency consumer
information enacted or promulgated after January 1, 2006, if the
requirements of that law or regulation are identical to the
requirement promulgated under this section. Nothing in this section
shall be construed to preempt a State or political subdivision
thereof from regulating the fuel efficiency of tires (including
establishing testing methods for determining compliance with such
standards) not otherwise preempted under this chapter.\80\

    \80\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(e).

    In the NPRM, NHTSA sought public comment on the scope of Section
111 generally, and in particular on whether, and to what extent,
Section 111 would or would not preempt tire fuel consumer information
regulations that the administrative agencies of the State of California
may promulgate in the future pursuant to California's Assembly Bill 844
(AB 844).\81\ We discuss these comments in section XIV.D below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \81\ Cal. Pub Res. Code Sec. Sec.  25770-25773; 2003 Cal. Legis.
Serv. Ch. 645 (A.B. 844) (West). This California legislation
mandated that the California Energy Commission (CEC) develop and
implement both a tire efficiency program and a corresponding
consumer information program, and was passed on October 1, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. Compliance and Enforcement
    Section 111 of EISA added a new sub-provision to 49 U.S.C. 32308
(General prohibitions, civil penalty, and enforcement) which reads as
follows:

    Any person who fails to comply with the national tire fuel
efficiency information program under section 32304A is liable to the
United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than
$50,000 for each violation.

    The RMA recommended that NHTSA clarify how it intends to enforce
this provision and subject its interpretation to comment. See section
XI for more detail on RMA's comments on this provision and NHTSA's
response.
9. Reporting to Congress
    EISA also requires that NHTSA conduct periodic assessments of the
rules promulgated under this program ``to determine the utility of such
rules to consumers, the level of cooperation by industry, and the
contribution to national goals pertaining to energy consumption.'' \82\
NHTSA must ``transmit periodic reports detailing the findings of such
assessments to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on Energy and
Commerce.'' \83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(c).
    \83\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Scope of the Tire Fuel Efficiency Consumer Information Program

A. Which tires must be rated?

    As explained above in section II.C.1 of this notice, EISA specifies
that the tire

fuel efficiency requirements are to ``apply only to replacement tires
covered under [49 CFR] section 575.104(c)'' (NHTSA's UTQGS
regulation).\84\ Title 49 CFR, section 575.104 applies only to ``new
pneumatic tires \85\ for use on passenger cars'' with some exclusions
of particular types of tires.\86\ All terms in 49 CFR Part 575 are as
defined by the Safety Act or in 49 CFR Part 571, Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standards (FMVSSs).\87\ Some commenters had questions about
whether or not certain tires were excluded from the program. Others
asked about the voluntary rating of tires not covered under the
program. These comments are addressed in the sections below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \84\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(3).
    \85\ The term pneumatic tires is a broad one that essentially
means air-filled tires. Section 571.139 of title 49 CFR (or FMVSS
No. 109, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles) defines
pneumatic tire broadly as ``a mechanical device made of rubber,
chemicals, fabric and steel or other materials, which, when mounted
on an automotive wheel, provides the traction and contains the gas
or fluid that sustains the load.'' By contrast, a non-pneumatic tire
is a ``mechanical device which transmits * * * the vertical load and
tractive forces from the roadway to the vehicle, generates the
tractive forces that provide the directional control of the vehicle
and does not rely on the containment of any gas or fluid for
providing those functions.'' 49 CFR 571.129, New Non-pneumatic Tires
for Passenger Cars.
    \86\ 49 CFR 575.104(c)(1).
    \87\ 49 CFR 575.2, Definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Passenger Car Tires
    Section 571.139 of title 49 CFR (or FMVSS No. 139, New Pneumatic
Radial Tires for Light Vehicles) defines ``passenger car tire'' as ``a
tire intended for use on passenger cars, multipurpose passenger
vehicles, and trucks, that have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of
10,000 pounds or less.'' Accordingly, as stated in the NPRM, the tire
fuel efficiency consumer information program applies only to
replacement passenger car tires, which are tires intended for use on
passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, and trucks, that have
a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less.\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ This FMVSS No. 139 definition of ``passenger car tires'' is
consistent with past agency interpretations of the scope of 49 CFR
575.104. See April 24, 1980 Letter to Mr. Robert A. Eddy (McCreary
Tire & Rubber Company) (explaining that tires ``which are
manufactured solely for use on a traction test trailer would not
fall within the application of the UTQG Standards''); October 27,
1978 Letter to Mr. Ken Yoneyama (Bridgestone) (explaining that
``UTQGS applies to a tire type whose predominant contemplated use is
on passenger cars, even if the manufacturer knows the tire type is
also used as original equipment on multi-purpose passenger
vehicles'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These tires often have a tire size designation beginning with a
``P,'' indicating that they are for use on passenger cars. However,
they may be designated without the P, sometimes referred to as ``hard
metric'' sizes. Many smaller sport utility vehicles (SUVs), pickup
trucks, and vans are equipped with passenger car tires, even though
these vehicles are classified as light trucks by NHTSA.\89\ Ordinarily,
the kinds of light- and medium-duty trucks used in commercial service,
including full-size pickups and vans, have a GVWR of more than 6,000
pounds. These vehicles are usually equipped with tires having the
letters ``LT'' molded into the sidewall.\90\ EISA excludes replacement
LT tires from the tire fuel efficiency consumer information
program.\91\ JATMA asked for confirmation of their understanding that
LT tires are not included in the scope of the tire fuel efficiency
consumer information program.\92\ As explained in this section, that
understanding is correct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \89\ 2006 NAS Report, supra note 4, at 14.
    \90\ Id.
    \91\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(3).
    \92\ Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0121-0031.1 at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Providing information on LT tires: ICCT asked that NHTSA, since
EISA does not appear to contain any restriction on NHTSA providing
information to consumers, investigate whether our data combined with
California and European Union tire testing data would provide enough
data for NHTSA to provide consumers with information on LT tires on the
agency's online Web site.\93\ ICCT commented that this is especially
important given the high rolling resistances that NHTSA reported for LT
tires.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0121-0042.1 at 2.
    \94\ See Tire Fuel Efficiency NPRM, supra note 9, at 29553.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Agency response: NHTSA agrees that educating consumers about the
general qualities and trends of rolling resistance for tires excluded
under the program, including LT tires, is worthwhile because consumers
currently do not have any information about the relative fuel
efficiency between different types of tires. While section 111 of EISA
is limited to ``only * * * replacement tires covered under [NHTSA's
UTQGS regulation],'' \95\ nothing in EISA appears to restrict NHTSA
from educating the public about motor vehicles and motor vehicle
equipment using information generated by the agency, as it already does
for many different tire characteristics. As noted in the NPRM, the
agency expects test data to be available for many LT tires, as these
tires are covered by the Europe and California programs, in addition to
some LT tires having been included in NHTSA's Phase 1 research for this
rulemaking.\96\ NHTSA tested some LT tires in its Phase 1 research
because that research was initiated in July 2006, subsequent to the
release and based on the recommendations in the 2006 NAS Report, before
the passage of EISA. Moreover, by educating consumers about what type
of comparative fuel efficiency they can expect between replacement
passenger car tires and original equipment (OE) tires or LT tires, the
agency would not be mandating anything of tire manufacturers or tire
retailers, but merely using information that has already been generated
by NHTSA and other government regulatory bodies, and is available under
the Freedom of Information Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \95\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(3).
    \96\ See Tire Fuel Efficiency NPRM, supra note 9, at 29552-
29553.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Passenger car tires used on trailers: The National Association of
Trailer Manufacturers (NATM) commented it did not believe Congress
intended to include replacement tires sold for use on trailers to be
within the scope of the tire fuel efficiency consumer information
program.\97\ NATM explained that some of its trailer manufacturer,
trailer dealer, and trailer-parts distribution members sell ``P'' tires
to consumers for replacement use on light-duty trailers, particularly
small utility trailers. NATM believes that NHTSA's proposed definition
of passenger car tire could be read to include those replacement ``P''
tires sold by NATM members for use on light-duty trailers.
Specifically, NATM stated that the ``intended for use'' language in the
passenger car tire definition could be interpreted to bring under the
jurisdiction of this program ``P'' tires that may have been designed
and manufactured primarily for use on passenger cars but that
ultimately are sold for use on trailers. NATM suggests that NHTSA
modify the definition of passenger car tire to read: ``Passenger car
tire means a tire sold for use on passenger cars, multipurpose
passenger vehicles, and trucks, that have a gross vehicle weight rating
(GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \97\ Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0029.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Agency response: NHTSA disagrees with NATM's suggested definition
for passenger car tires. The statute provides that the tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program is ``for replacement tires
designed for use on motor vehicles.'' \98\ The statute's applicability
section states that this section shall apply ``only to replacement
tires covered under [49 CFR] section 575.104(c)'' as of December 19,
2007, when the Ten-in-

Ten Fuel Economy Act \99\ became law.\100\ For this reason, NHTSA
believes Congress intended the agency look to the UTQGS regulation for
appropriate definitions of different types of tires. Section 575.104(c)
provides that section 575.104, Uniform tire quality grading standards,
apply ``to new pneumatic tires for use on passenger cars,'' subject to
some exclusions, such as for winter-type snow tires, space-saver or
temporary use spare tires, and tires with nominal rim diameters of 12
inches or less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \98\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(1).
    \99\ The ``Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act'' is the short title of
EISA Title I, Energy Security Through Improved Vehicle Fuel Economy.
Public Law 110-140, Sec.  101.
    \100\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The definitions governing 49 CFR Part 575 are contained in 49 CFR
575.2. This section states that all terms in 49 CFR Part 575 are as
defined by the Safety Act or in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards, 49 CFR Part 571. Neither ``passenger car tires'' nor ``tires
for passenger cars'' is defined in the Safety Act.\101\ Therefore,
NHTSA looked to the FMVSSs for definitions. As of December 2007, NHTSA
had regulations on passenger car tires.\102\ Those regulations define
passenger car tire as follows: ``Passenger car tire means a tire
intended for use on passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles,
and trucks, that have a gross vehicle weight rating of (GVWR) of 10,000
pounds or less.'' \103\ In view of the applicability statement in EISA
referring to the UTQGS regulations (Sec.  575.104), the UTQGS
definitional reference to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(Sec.  575.2), and the fact that passenger car tire is defined in a
FMVSS, NHTSA interprets the consumer tire information program in EISA
as applying to passenger car tires as defined in 49 CFR 571.139. For
these reasons, NHTSA's definition of passenger car tires is taken from
FMVSS No. 139. This FMVSS No. 139 definition of ``passenger car tires''
is consistent with past agency interpretations of the scope of the
UTQGS regulations.\104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \101\ See 49 U.S.C. 30102.
    \102\ See FMVSS No. 139, New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light
Vehicles, 49 CFR 571.139.
    \103\ 49 CFR 571.139 S3.
    \104\ See April 24, 1980 Letter to Mr. Robert A. Eddy (McCreary
Tire & Rubber Company) (explaining that tires ``which are
manufactured solely for use on a traction test trailer would not
fall within the application of the UTQG Standards''); October 27,
1978 Letter to Mr. Ken Yoneyama (Bridgestone) (explaining that
``UTQGS applies to a tire type whose predominant contemplated use is
on passenger cars, even if the manufacturer knows the tire type is
also used as original equipment on multi-purpose passenger
vehicles'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, based on EISA's applicability only to replacement
passenger car tires (with some limited exclusions), NHTSA does agree
with NATM that EISA did not contemplate that the tire fuel efficiency
consumer information program would include information to educate
consumers about tires they are purchasing for trailers.\105\
Accordingly, tire retailers that sell only replacement passenger car
tires for use on trailers, and not for use on any other motor vehicles,
would not be considered tire retailers for the purposes of today's
final rule. See section III.B.2 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \105\ See 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Replacement Tires
    In this final rule, NHTSA is retaining the proposed definition of
replacement passenger car tire as ``any passenger car tire other than a
passenger car tire sold as original equipment on a new vehicle.'' \106\
As explained in the NPRM, while most UTQGS requirements apply to all
passenger car tires, whether sold as original equipment with a new
automobile (OE tires) or as a replacement tire, some apply only to
replacement tires. For example, the requirement for a paper label on
the tire tread excludes tires ``sold as original equipment on a new
vehicle.'' \107\ NHTSA is using this language as the basis of a
definition of replacement tires for the purposes of the tire fuel
efficiency consumer information program because EISA specifies that the
tire fuel efficiency consumer information program ``shall only apply to
replacement tires covered under [the UTQGS regulations].'' \108\ For
this reason, NHTSA believes Congress intended the agency look to the
UTQGS regulation for appropriate definitions of different types of
tires.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \106\ Tire Fuel Efficiency NPRM, supra note 9, at 29553, 29584.
    \107\ 49 CFR 575.104(d)(1)(i)(B).
    \108\ 49 U.S.C. 32304A(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency believes the definition of what a replacement tire is
(as distinguished from an OE tire) needs to be in terms of the actual
sale of the tire, not the intention when manufactured.\109\ NHTSA
understands that some tires that are manufactured for the OE tire
market could be sold as replacement tires, either because the vehicle
manufacturer does not purchase all that are manufactured for that
purpose, or because the vehicle manufacturer sells excess stock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \109\ NATM inappropriately cited this statement from the NPRM in
its rationale for its request that NHTSA change the definition of
passenger care tire addressed above in section III.A.1. The agency
used this rationale as a way to ensure that a manufacturer could not
state that it intended a passenger car tire to be original
equipment, but then it just ended up being sold as a replacement car
tire, allowing it to fall outside of the scope of ``replacement
passenger car tire.'' The concern NATM attempted to analogize would
be a manufacturer manufacturing a tire intending its use only on
trailers, but then eventually the tire gets sold for use on a
passenger car. NHTSA does not believe that this is a likely
situation that outweighs the inefficiencies that would be created
using the ``sold for use'' language in the passenger car tire
definition described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Original equipment tires: Michelin commented that it supported the
application of this rulemaking to OE tires. Michelin stated that it is
in the best interest of consumers to have the tire performance grading
information available for OE tires and clearly displayed on a new
vehicle because it will be meaningful for the consumer to have such
tire performance information on the vehicle at the point of sale.\110\
Public Citizen et al. similarly stated that it supports molding \111\
the ratings on all tires, both OE and replacement tires.\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \110\ Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0121-0048.1 at 13.
    \111\ Section 111 of EISA explicitly prohibits NHTSA from
requiring the molding of anything for the purposes of tire fuel
efficiency information onto tire sidewalls. 49 U.S.C. 32204A(d).