ID: nht76-1.21

DATE: 12/14/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Universal Imports

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your November 5, 1976, letter concerning antique tires. You have asked whether it is permissible to import 6.70 x 15 tires, an original equipment size on several classic Mercedes-Benz, that are not marked in accordance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 109, New Pneumatic Tires.

Standard No. 109 applies to "new pneumatic tires for use on passenger cars manufactured after 1948" (S2). The 6.70 x 15 tire size designation appears in Table I-A of Appendix A of the standard. While this tire may have been original equipment on several classic cars, it is also for use on passenger cars manufactured since 1948. As such, it is subject to all the requirements of Standard No. 109. Therefore, a 6.70 x 15 tire that is not marked according to the standard may not be imported into the United States.

SINCERELY,

Universal Imports

Office of Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Safety Association

Attention: Frank Berndt, Acting Chief Counsel

November 5, 1976

LETTER #7998

To date we are still anxiously awaiting reply to our letter No. 7725 dated September 13, regarding the sale of non-D.O.T. marked tires for off-road use. Since that time we have also come across a new problem regarding non-D.O.T. marked tires and this specifically is in regard to antique tires. We have recently had made available to use a line of Dunlop antique tires from their Vintage line. One particular tire, a 670 x 15 is of special interest to us as it is the original equipment size on several classic Mercedes. Regarding this problem, we have the following questions:

1. Can we legally import these tires at all?

2. Is there any provision for bringing in antique tires without D.O.T. marks for use on antique cars that are specifically for show, parades, etc.?

3. If there is no provision regarding the importation and sale of the above tires, what are our requirements as a vendor concerning the sale of these tires from both a retail and wholesale standpoint?

Should you require any additional information or clarification, please contact me at the above address or telephone number. Looking forward to your early reply, we remain

William G. Mathews, III Vice President

ID: nht76-1.22

DATE: 12/29/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Charles E. Duke for John W. Snow; NHTSA

TO: Hon. Albert H. Quie - H.O.R.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

ID: nht76-1.23

DATE: 12/06/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. L. Carter; NHTSA

TO: The Japan Automobile Tire Manufacturers' Association, Inc.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to your April 22, 1976, letter advising the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that the tire standards of the Japan Automobile Tire Manufacturers' Association (JATMA) are being translated into English. You request that consideration be given to referencing JATMA standards in the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that regulate motor vehicle tire manufacture. I regret that we have not responded to your letter sooner.

Standard No. 109, New Pneumatic Tires, and Standard No. 119, New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars, presently reference the Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS). Because the JATMA standards appear to be updated more often than the JIS standards, and because the JATMA standards will be issued in English, the agency intends to substitute a reference to JATMA standards in its regulations for the existing reference to JIS standards.

Thank you for providing us with the English translation of the motorcycle tire standards. We request that you provide us copies of all English translations of the standards for all vehicle types as often as they are updated.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

THE JAPAN AUTOMOBILE TIRE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, INC.

J. B. Gregory -- National

J. B. Gregory -- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation

Dear Sir,

Re: The JATMA Standard.

The Japan Automobile Tire Manufacturers' Association has established the JATMA Standard as an association standard for tires in Japan.

To circulate it widely to the world we are now preparing its English version. Recently the JATMA Standard for motorcycle tires in English has been completed and we are sending you copies of it under the separate cover.

As to the JATMA Standards for other tires (for Truck & Bus, Light Truck and Passenger cars) translation into English is now under way taking this opportunity we would want you to consider to add the JATMA Standard to S 5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 119 and S 4.4(b) of FMVSS No. 109.

Yours faithfully, Keigo Ohgiya, Executive Director

ID: nht76-1.24

DATE: 01/20/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Walt Robbins, Inc.

COPYEE: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your November 7, 1975, request for an interpretation of the labeling requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 109, New Pneumatic Tires -- Passenger Cars, as applied to the tire that you have described as a "Radial, Bias Ply Tire".

On that date, a meeting was held with you, Mr. Al Duduk, and the following NHTSA personnel in attendance: Dr. E. H. Wallace, A. Y. Casanova, and Mark Schwimmer. At the meeting, our letter to you, dated November 3, 1975, was discussed and alternative forms of labeling for this tire were explored. You presented, in substance, the following four examples of sidewall labeling and inquired about their compliance with Standard No. 109:

1. "POLYANGLE" accompanied by "3 PLIES 2 POLYESTER 1 ARAMID"

2. "POLYANGLE" accompanied by "NOT A CONVENTIONAL RADIAL PLY TIRE" and "3 PLIES 2 POLYESTER BIAS PLIES 1 ARAMID RADIAL PLY"

3. "RADIAL/BIAS" accompanied by "NOT A CONVENTIONAL RADIAL PLY TIRE" and "3 PLIES 2 POLYESTER BIAS PLIES 1 ARAMID RADIAL PLY"

4. "RADIAL/BIAS" accompanied by "NOT TO BE USED WITH CONVENTIONAL RADIAL BELTED TIRES" and "3 PLIES 2 POLYESTER BIAS PLIES 1 ARAMID RADIAL PLY"

Tires labeled according to your first example would be in compliance with the requirements of S4.3(g) of Standard No. 109. A strict interpretation of S4.3(g) would rule out the remaining examples because the word "radial" appears in all of them. However, the NHTSA recognizes that, with the development of new tire construction types, this section of the standard may not be adequate to serve its original purpose, to reduce the hazards associated with the mismatching of tires on a single vehicle. Accordingly, we are preparing to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend the standard. For this reason and because the second, third, and fourth examples are in conformity with the spirit of S4.3(g), the NHTSA will, on an interim basis, consider tires so labeled to be in compliance. You may wish to consult with the Federal Trade Commission concerning the advertising of these tires.

I would like to point out that S4.3(d) requires Kevlar, if used as a cord material in a tire, to be identified by its generic name on the tire's sidewall. The generic name of Kevlar, as established by the FTC pursuant to the Textile Fiber Product Identification Act (15 USC 70), is Aramid.

Yours truly,

ATTACH.

ID: nht76-1.25

DATE: 11/04/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Universal Imports;

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your September 13, 1976, letter concerning "a line of racing/rally tires that are not Department of Transportation marked."

I understand from your recent telephone conversation with Mark Schwimmer of my staff that the tires with which you are concerned are of the following size designations: 165/70 HR 10 ; 225/60 HR 14 ; 225/60 HR 13 ; and 195/70 HR 13.

Section S6 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 109, New Pneumatic Tires -- Passenger Cars, reads as follows:

S6. Nonconforming tires. No tire of a type and size designation specified in Table I of Appendix A that is designed for use on passenger cars and manufactured on or after October 1, 1972, but does not conform to all the requirements of this standard, shall be sold, offered for sale, introduced or delivered for introduction in interstate commerce, or imported into the United States, for any purpose. (emphasis added)

because the size designations of the tires in question all appear in Table I of Appendix A, these tires are subject to the prohibitions of S6 unless they were manufactured before October 1, 1972. "All the requirements of the standard" include both performance and labeling requirements.

Sincerely,

ATTACH.

Universal Imports

FRANK BERNDT -- ACTING CHIEF COUNSEL, National Highway Traffic Safety Association

September 13, 1976/Letter #7725

Dear Mr. Berndt:

Universal Tire and it's affiliates are involved in practically every aspect of the tire industry except retreading. The import aspect of our business has just been offered a line of racing/rally tires that are not Department Of Transportation marked.

As you are probably aware there exists today an ever growing extremely viable market for off road racing and rally oriented products.

It is our desire to approach this new market from retail, wholesale and mail order standpoints. We are especially concerned with our responsibilities with regard to selling these race/rally tires since they are not Department Of Transportation marked. Please keep in mind that we wish not only to adhere to the letter of the law but to the spirit of the law as well. Any guidance you can offer us regarding the sale of these tires would be greatly appreciated.

Again, as we see it we have three separate sets of selling circumstances: retail, wholesale and mail order (retail), and would like guidelines from you for all three.

Thanking you in advance for any assistance you might furnish, we remain

Most cordially,

William G. Mathews, III -- Division Manager

ID: nht76-1.26

DATE: 01/28/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Mark I. Schwimmer; NHTSA

TO: File

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: On January 23, 1976, I received a telephone call from Mr. Walt Robbins (750-2600) concerning the interpretation letter mailed from this office to him on January 20, 1976. (The subject of that letter was the application of Standard No. 109's labeling requirements to a "Radial, Bias Ply Tire".) Mr. Robbins asked three questions:

1) Were the four labeling examples set out in the letter intended to be restrictive or merely a model, with respect to the cord materials used in the tires (e.g. would a similar label that specified "3 PLIES 2 POLYESTER BIAS PLIES 1 POLYESTER RADIAL PLY" instead of an aramid radial ply also be permissible)? I explained that, in that respect, the examples were merely a model, so that his suggested alternative would be permissible.

2) When would the rule that was discussed in the letter be issued? I declined to give a prediction, explaining generally the uncertainties in the rulemaking process.

3) What was the real reason for inclusion of the suggestion that he consult the FTC concerning advertising of the tires in question? I explained that he could take the sentence on its face and that the NHTSA was not, in the letter, taking any position on the use of the word "radial" in the advertising of such tires.

ID: nht76-1.27

DATE: 03/08/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Michelin Tire Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your letter of January 27, 1976, concerning the rim listing requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards No. 109 and 110.

You wish to designate the 15x5.5JJ rim as permissible for use with tire sizes 225-15 and 230-15. You have requested confirmation of your interpretation that you need merely list the rim in a document that is furnished to your dealers, to any person on request, and in duplicate to the Tire Division of the NHTSA. Your interpretation is correct. Please note, however, that this listing must include dimensional specifications and a diagram of the rim, unless each of the association publications referred to in S4.4.1(b) of Standard No. 109 in which the rim is listed already contains such specifications and diagram.

We hope that you will also ensure that this tire-rim combination is listed in one of those publications as soon as is possible.

MICHELIN TIRE CORPORATION Technical Group

JANUARY 27, 1976

Office of the Chief Counsel National Highway Traffic Administration Department of Transportation

Re: FMVSS 109 - New Pneumatic Tires for Passenger Cars FMVSS 110 - Tire Selection and Rims

We are writing to confirm our interpretation of paragraph S.4.4.1 of FMVSS 110 and paragraph S.3 and S.4.4.1 of FMVSS 109.

It is our understanding that in order to add an additional permissible rim width for a tire which is already listed in the tables of FMVSS 109, we need merely include it in a document (such as our Data Book or Technical Bulletin) which is furnished to our dealers and to any person upon request, and in duplicate to the Tire Division of NHTSA.

It is our immediate need to add the 15x5.5JJ rim as a permissible fitment for tire sizes 225-15 and 230-15.

Your prompt reply would be appreciated. Thank you.

John B. White Engineering Manager Technical Information Dept.

ID: nht76-1.28

DATE: 08/06/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; R. L. Carter; NHTSA

TO: Hon. John J. LaFalce - H.O.R.

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your correspondence on behalf of Mr. George J. Ciancio, concerning the tires on his 1975 Dodge Van B-100. Prior to responding, this office contacted Mr. Ciancio for additional information.

From the correspondence you submitted to this Administration, Mr. Ciancio did not appear to receive satisfactory responses to the questions he submitted to the Chrysler Corporation concerning the tire problems he was experiencing. We offer the following responses for his consideration:

Question 1 - Stamped on the sidewalls of the original tire the rating is 1400 pounds. Is this maximum load?

Response - Yes. The maximum load rating for an E7815 B passenger car type tire is 1400 pounds. This rating is only applicable when this tire is used for passenger car service. For a van of the type used by Mr. Ciancio, a service factor is applied for "truck service" and the maximum load becomes 1270 pounds.

Question 2 - My registration shows the van weight at 4434 pounds. What is the laden weight of the B-100 van?

Response - Mr. Ciancio was contacted on this point. Our data indicates that the Dodge B-100 van should weigh approximately 3600 pounds depending on the installed equipment. As the Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) is 4600 pounds, the approximate laden weight would be about 1000 pounds as indicated by Chrysler. If in fact, the van does weigh 4434 pounds empty, then the laden weight cannot be over 166 pounds, which of course, cannot be correct.

Question 3 - Do I read correctly that my total tire weight allows 5400 pounds, which includes van and load?

Response - No. From page 3 of your Owners Manual, you will note, "The GVW rating of your truck as manufactured is shown on the Safety Certification Label. The GVW rating is the total permissible weight of your truck including driver, passengers, body, and payload." As the GVWR of the B-100 van is 4600 pounds, 4600 pounds is the maximum load.

Question 4 - The axle capacity in the manual front and rear is shown as 2700 pounds. Does this mean with loaded weight?

Response - No. The axle capacity of 2700 pounds is the rating determined by the vehicle manufacturer as the maximum load that should be applied to that individual axle - it does not mean that both axles can take the design capacity for a total of 5400 pounds. Again, the B-100 van is limited to 4600 pounds GVW. Vehicle load on each axle is further limited by the suspension's spring and wheel ratings which reduce actual load carrying capacity to GAWR valves of 2480 front and 2340 rear. These figures indicate the importance of proper load distribution in the vehicle.

Question 5 - Is it true if I increase my tire size from E78-15B to G78-15B, would it make any difference in the load I could carry without jeopardizing the axle weight capacity?

Response - No. By changing the tires on the van from E ratings to G ratings would not change the GVWR of 4600 pounds. The van is still limited to a GVWR of 4600 pounds.

We hope that the responses to these questions will answer some of the concerns of Mr. Ciancio.

ID: nht76-1.29

DATE: 12/01/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: Pirelli Tire Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in response to your November 1, 1976, letter to Mark Schwimmer of my staff, concerning the marking "V1" on passenger car tires.

The marking "V1" is not required by any Federal statute, motor vehicle safety standard, or other regulation to appear on the sidewall of passenger car tires. Furthermore, Section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 as amended, 15 U.S.C. 1392(d), provides in pertinent part:

Whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard establshed under this title is in effect, no State or political subdivision of a State shall have any authority either to establish, or to continue in effect, with respect to any motor vehicle or item of motor vehicle equipment any safety standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of such vehicle or item of equipment which is not identical to the Federal standard.

This provision, considered with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 109, prohibits any State from imposing any safety labeling requirements for passenger car tires other than those contained in that standard. Any differing safety labeling requirements, including the "V1" that you have mentioned, are thus preempted and void.

SINCERELY,

NOVEMBER 1, 1976

Mark Schwimmer N.H.T.S.A. Office of Chief Counsel

The marking V1 on passenger car tires, as you know, signifies compliance to the "minimum performance requirements and uniform test procedures for new tires for passenger cars and station wagons" issued by the Vehicle Equipment Safety Commission on May 14, 1965 and later revised on October 11, 1965 and September 17, 1966.

To my knowledge no further revisions have been made, because the FMVSS 109 went into effect as of January 1, 1968. I assume, therefore, that the marking V1 should be applied only on the tires listed in the tables 1 - 6 of the regulation as follows: Table 1 - Domestic bias tires of the following series: Low Section (ex. 6.50-14) 4 & 8 P.R.

Super Balloon (ex. 6.70-15) 4 & 8 P.R.

Super Low Section (ex. 6.95-14) 4 & 8 P.R.

Table 2 - 70 Series, alpha numeric bias construction (ex. E 70-14) Table 3 - Domestic radial millimetric series from cross section Table 4 - European bias tires of the following series: Table 5 - European bias tires of the millimetric series (ex.

Table 6 - European radial tires of the millimetric series up to the cross section 155 (ex. 145 R 13) version A (32 psi)

I would like to know if the above is correct and therefore the marking V1 is no longer requested on the tires not included in this list.

If the requirements do not apply to every state in the United States, please notify me.

Thank you in advance for your reply on this matter.

PIRELLI TIRE CORPORATION

Galileo Buzzi-Ferraris Technical Manager

ID: nht76-1.3

DATE: 12/03/76

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; F. Berndt; NHTSA

TO: American Motors Corporation

TITLE: FMVSS INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This responds to American Motors Corporation's (AMC's) September 9, 1976, request for confirmation that Standard No. 101, Control Location, Identification, and Illumination, permits the addition of a "fan" symbol to a control that is identified by the word "fan" in accordance with the requirements of S4.2.1.

The AMC interpretation is incorrect. Section S4.2.1 states in part:

S4.2.1 . . . . A control may, in addition, be identified by a symbol, but only a symbol shown in column 3 or 4 shall be used. However, if the word "None" appears in column 3, no symbol shall be provided. . . .

Table I, whose columns are referred to in S4.2.1, contains an entry for "Heating and Air Conditioning System," and column 3 for that entry contains the word "None". This means that no symbol can be used in addition to the word "fan" on the control for the fan control switch.

The language in the preambles to three proposals to amend Standard No. 101 that you list in your letter does not have the effect of amending the requirements of the standard itself. As you are no doubt aware, a recent proposal would amend Table I to include a symbol for the heating and air conditioning system, but this proposal has not yet been made final. A copy of the proposal is enclosed for your information.

SINCERELY,

American Motors Corporation

September 7, 1976

Robert L. Carter Associate Administrator Motor Vehicle Programs National Highway Traffic Safety Administration U. S. Department Of Transportation

American Motors Corporation (AM) submits this request for an interpretation of the control identification requirements contained in FMVSS 101 as they relate to the fan control switch of the heater and/or air conditioning system.

AM requests this interpretation because of the language contained in Docket 1-18; Notice 7, 10 and 11. Therein, the NHTSA has stated their tentative determination that a fan symbol should be allowed, at the manufacturer's option, to supplement the word "Fan" or "Blower" for purposes of identifying the fan control switch, and has announced its intention to incorporate the internationally accepted ISO fan symbol into Standard 101.

AM is about to release a future heater and air conditioner control assembly which will incorporate the word "Fan" along with the appropriate symbol described in ISO Standard 2575/1 (4.8). AM requests NHTSA's interpretation in order to assure that our incorporation of the ISO fan symbol will not be judged in conflict with the requirements of Standard 101.

A prompt reply to this request would be appreciated in order to facilitate this design decision.

K. W. Schang Director - Vehicle Safety Programs