August 2009
Tire Aging Standards
In its August 2007 report to Congress, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration vowed to evaluate the feasibility of a regulation related to tire aging. However, recognizing the complexity of tire aging, NHTSA, while continuing to evaluate the issue, has not yet articulated a universal policy or regulation. In fact, NHTSA has recently stated:
While tire life will ultimately depend on the tires’ service conditions and the environment in which they operate, there are some general guidelines. Some vehicle manufacturers recommend that tires be replaced every six years regardless of use. In addition, a number of tire manufacturers cite 10 years as the maximum service life for tires. Check the owner’s manual for specific recommendations for your vehicle. Remember, it is always wise to err on the side of caution if you suspect your vehicle has tires that are over six years of age.
However, without regard for the complexity of the issues, ABC’s 20/20 ran a feature story on tire aging in May, 2008. As with many sensationalized stories regarding consumer products, this story generated a wide-spread public reaction, and legislators throughout the country were quick to jump on the bandwagon without analyzing the underlying scientific and technological aspects of tire aging.
To date, tire aging legislation has been introduced in four states across the country: California, Hawaii, New York and New Jersey. However, there is little uniformity among the various proposed initiatives. For example:
California: AB 496 would require all tire dealers to provide written information on sale documents about the age of each tire sold to customers. AB 323 would require tire dealers to not only disclose the age of each tire sold, but also have warnings posted in their shops regarding the dangers of tire aging. Although AB 496 passed the Assembly Floor by a vote of 49-29, the bill’s sponsors did not have the votes to get it out of the Senate Business, Professions & Economic Development Committee and was pulled from consideration at the request of its sponsors. The bill could be brought up for reconsideration at a later date.
Hawaii: SB 1064 would make it illegal to sell a tire more than six years after its date of manufacture.
New York: A05298 would forbid the sale of any tire that did not have the date of manufacture clearly molded on both sides “in a non-coded fashion.”
New Jersey: New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs issued a notice of pre-proposal, soliciting comments on whether to establish a standard mandating tire age disclosure from tire dealers.
Although these states may have laudable intentions, implementation of non-uniform standards will not only create confusion for consumers, but also will present tremendous hurdles for everyone from tire and vehicle manufactures to mechanics. On the other hand, Congress, through the secretary of the transportation, charged NHTSA with the task of consumer safety with regard to automobile safety. It is only through NHTSA that a standard policy should be implemented regarding tire aging. That approach seems to be the only one with the promise of “aging” limits based on scientific data and not political capriciousness.