Interpretation ID: aiam4343
Engineering Manager
Product Engineering
Michelin Americas Research & Development Corp.
P. O. Box 1987
Greenville
SC 29602;
Dear Mr. White: This responds to your letter seeking an interpretation of Standard No 119, *New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles Other Than Passenger Cars (49 CFR S571.119). Specifically, you stated that you currently mark a tire with the size designation 385/65 R 22.5 Load Range J. You also stated that this tire has the same dimensions as a 15 R 22.5 Load Range J tire. You asked whether Standard No. 119 would prohibit the following size designation from being marked on the tire:; >>>385/65R22.5 LRJ<<< >>>(15R22.5)<<< The marking requirements for tires subject to Standard No. 119 are se forth in section S6.5 of the standard. Section S6.5(c) requires that each tire be marked on both sidewalls with 'the tire size designation as listed in the documents and publications designated S5.1.' Section S5.1 of Standard No. 119 requires each tire manufacturer to ensure that a listing of the rims that may be used with each tire the manufacturer produces is available to the public. This may be done either by the individual manufacturer furnishing a document to each of its dealers, to this agency, and to any person upon request, or the manufacturer may rely on the tire and rim matching information published by certain standardization organizations.; With respect to the 385/65 R 22.5 Load Range J tire size, Michelin ha not furnished any individual information for this tire size to the agency. The only standardization organization that has published tires and rim matching information for this tire size is the European Tyre and Rim Technical Organization (ETRTO), which did so in its 1987 yearbook. Accordingly, section S5.2 of Standard No. 119 provides that the information for this tire size in the 1987 ETRTO yearbook is considered to be information for Michelin's tires of that size.; The 1987 ETRTO yearbook shows the tire size only as 385/65 R 22.5. A noted above, section S6.5.(c) requires that the tire size designation on the sidewall be 'as listed in the documents and publications designated in S5.1'. Reading this requirement as narrowly as possible, S6.5(c) prohibits Michelin from marking the tires as both 385/65 R 22.5 and 15 R 22.5, since the size is shown only as 385/65 R 22.5 in the publication designated in S5.1 of Standard No. 119.; In a broader sense, the practice of labeling two tire sizes on on tire, as you requested in your letter, was once a fairly common practice and was referred to as 'dual-size markings.' Dual-size markings were a marketing effort by tire manufacturers to try to persuade consumers to change the size and/or type of tire on their vehicles, by representing that this particular tire size was an appropriate replacement for two different sizes of tires. However, the practice of using dual-size markings confused many consumers about the size of the tire on their vehicle. The only purpose of the Federally required markings on tires is to provide consumers, in a straightforward manner, with technical information necessary for the safe use and operation of the tire. The agency concluded that it was inappropriate to permit a marketing technique that was confusing many consumers to defeat the purpose of the required markings on tires. Accordingly, dual-size markings were expressly prohibited for passenger car tires subject to standard No. 109, 36 FR 1195, January 26, 1971.; While Standard No. 119 does not expressly prohibit dual- size markings section S6.5(c) uses the singular when it refers to the 'tire size designation' to be labeled on the tire. Considering the past history associated with dual-size markings, this agency interprets section S6.5(c) of Standard No. 119 as prohibiting a manufacturer from marking a tire with two different size designations, *even if* a document or publication designated in S5.1 were to show two different size designations for the same tire size.; Sincerely, Erika Z. Jones, Chief Counsel