Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: GF001832

    Mr. E. Paul Daniels
    Pirelli Tire North America
    406 Ridge Road
    Orange, CT 06477


    Dear Mr. Daniels:

    This responds to your letter dated January 26, 2005, asking whether S6.4 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 119 permits a motorcycle tire treadwear indicator height of greater that 0.8 mm.You asked about the possibility of raising it by as much as 0.6 mm, i.e., to 1.4 mm on new molds.

    By way of background, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) does not provide approvals of motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment. Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, manufacturers are required to certify that their vehicles and equipment meet applicable requirements.

    The Federal standard applicable to your question is FMVSS No. 119, New pneumatic tires for vehicles other than passenger cars.The relevant portion of that standard reads as follows:

    "6.4  Treadwear indicators Motorcycle tires shall have at least three such indicators which permit visual determination that the tire has worn to a tread depth of 0.8 mm (1/32 of an inch)."

    The treadwear indicator requirement in S6.4 sets forth a specific standardized treadwear indicator height.A higher treadwear indicator is not permitted.We note that if the treadwear indicator height were raised to 1.4 mm, consumers would not be able to visually determine when the tire wore to a depth of 0.8 mm.

    We further note that in a document published on January 30, 1996, the agency denied a petition for rulemaking from Herzlich Consulting, Inc. to increase the treadwear indicator height requirement for passenger car tires (see 61 FR 2991).The agency explained that the treadwear indicator height limit was based on a long-standing industry practice, and that NHTSA adopted this industry practice.

    I hope you find this information helpful.If you need further assistance, please contact George Feygin of my staff at this address or at (202) 366-2992.

    Sincerely,

    Jacqueline Glassman
    Chief Counsel

    ref:119
    d.3/24/05