Skip to main content
Search Interpretations

Interpretation ID: nht74-4.42

DATE: 01/14/74

FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Richard B. Dyson; NHTSA

TO: Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association

TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION

TEXT: This is in reply to your letter of November 26, 1973, asking whether motor vehicle new or used car dealers are prohibited from selling vehicles mounted on regrooved or recapped tires. You indicated in a phone conversation with Michael Peskoe of this office that your concern is with motor vehicles generally, and not passenger cars alone.

New passenger cars are required to be sold with tires meeting the requirements of Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 109 (49 CFR 571.109; 571.110). New vehicles other than passenger cars are not presently required by NHTSA regulations to be sold with particular tires, but requirements in this regard have been proposed (36 F.R. 14273; August 3, 1971).

This agency has no requirements regarding the sale of used motor vehicles equipped with recapped or retreaded tires. However, buses subject to Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety regulations are prohibited from operating with recapped, retreaded, or regrooved tires on their front wheels (49 CFR @ 393.75(d)).

Trucks and truck tractors subject to Motor Carrier Safety requirements may not be operated with regrooved tires on the front wheels which have a load carrying capacity equal to or greater than that of 8.25-20 8 ply-rating tires (49 CFR 393.75(e)). For more information regarding the applicability of these requirements you should contact, Regulations Division Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety, Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation, Washington, D. C. 20590.

P2

The sale of regrooved tires is subject to regulations issued by this agency (49 CFR Part 569). The recent opinion issued by the United States Court of Appeals (NAMBO v. Brinegar, D.C. Cir., Case No. 71-1268; July 26, 1973) appears to allow the sale of regrooved tires under these regulations in certain circumstances. We believe the opinion is unclear in this regard, and as a result we have determined to seek additional judicial review to further clarify the matter.