Mr. DIXON. That is the one I referred to, the State compact group. Senator HARTKE. That's right. They issued a release under date of May 22. They issued the first regulation covering performance requirements for new tires for passenger cars and station wagons. Have you examined that regulation?

Mr. DIXON. I asked my staff to look at that. The tentative advice I have now is that they see very little difference between the standards that they have adopted and the Rubber Manufacturers Association standards. I don't know whether this is true or not. They say they see very little difference there.

Senator HARTKE. Senator Nelson?

Senator NELSON. The bill that is pending before us is quite general. The essence of it is that the Secretary of Commerce would be authorized to establish grade labeling and safety standards.

Mr. DIXON. Yes, sir.

Senator NELSON. Would I be assuming too much if I suggested that it may very well be practical and quite likely that the manufacturers, the truckers who are big users, the automobile industry, the retail tire dealers, and the Secretary of Commerce representing the public, could, as a practical matter, on a kind of continuous dialog over the years, attempt to come to agreement as to what is practical today, what is sensible, how the tires ought to be tested and what standards ought to be established, and therefore make it a cooperative venture, using all the knowledge of the people who sell the tires and the truckers who use the tires and the manufacturers who equip them, and the automobile manufacturers who equip the automobiles, and the rubber manufacturers, plus the Secretary of Commerce representing the public, as well as independent safety experts.

My question is, wouldn't that be a practical approach to the establishment of standards and enforcement?

Mr. DIXON. I think any time you try to arbitrarily establish a standard without full cooperation at all levels, in the first place, you may never get anything worth while, that is, unless you can get this cooperation.

I think industry, if they feel that they have to do it, will come forward and they will offer their best, and I think something good will come from it..

My problem, one thought I was trying to make here, was to separate the two grade and quality-from safety standards. I would visualize that if your bill was passed just requiring the development and establishment and enforcement of minimum safety standards, and let this be the first piece of legislation, what effect would that have? I would imagine that every tire, no matter what its cost, would disappear, that didn't meet that standard. That would be minimum safety. Nothing on the road, nothing manufactured that didn't meet that.

Now beyond that, I think that industry then would be engaged in competition in selling what you might call supersafety, premium safety. And I know of no one that would not think that is a good idea, although I know today, if you want the safest of all tires, if you will ask any of these tire manufacturers who are going to be here what it will cost you, it will cost you quite a bit of money to get you such a tire, the best tire that Goodyear or Firestone makes, or U.S. Royal, or Goodrich.

54-441-65 - 8

You ask them the question, what is the difference in the price between that super-super-duper-duper-safe tire and that first-line tire, and I will tell you, if you want to find it out, it is money. That is what it is. You get just what you pay for.

[Laughter.]

Senator NELSON. When you say, as the bill does, "minimum safety standards," it was not my intent, and I don't think as a practical matter it would be anybody's intent to interpret that to mean that every tire manufactured for a six-passenger light automobile, say, would be the same as the one manufactured for a heavy six-passenger Cadillac, Buick, or something else. In other words, the minimum safety standard is the minimum safety standard for the purpose for which that tire is intended to be used.

Mr. DIXON. That's right, sir.

Senator NELSON. Therefore I am not suggesting-I certainly wouldn't suggest that you won't have a great variety of tires on the market.

But suppose I go to the retail tire dealer and say I have a second car, and it is a light Ford, Plymouth, Chevrolet, preferably Ambassador, Rambler in my State, and the only intent of the use of this car is for my wife to drive it to the grocery store and drive it around town, it will never go out on the highway any distance at 60 or 70 miles an hour fully loaded. What is an adequate tire, safe tire, for that purpose?

Mr. Dixon. They will tell you an $8.95 tire.

Senator NELSON. It may very well be adequate for that purpose. The consumer ought to be able to be informed. If he goes in and says: "I travel cross country, taking my whole family on camping trips, and intend to travel 2,000, 3,000, or 4,000 miles in the summer at 65 or 70 miles an hour, what tire do I have to have for that?"

You would have a minimum safety tire for that purpose, and a minimum safety tire for in-town driving, and a minimum safety tire to meet the purpose for which the vehicle is intended to be used. Is that not the proper interpretation of minimum safety?

Mr. DIXON. That is one way to approach it, sir. That is one of the problems that seems to permeate this industry. I think that they are making tires just like you are describing today. I think today, if they would describe their tires in great detail, and say we have our cheapest tire, after everyone has one, it is a tire made to serve just the purpose you describe, that second or third car used to go to the grocery store and back, it never gets over 35 or 40 miles an hour, never is it used for any extensive trip where heat would build up. That tire, for that purpose, would be safe.

But if your daughter or your son took that car and told you they were going to the grocery store and got out on the highway and took out somewhere, would it be safe? There is your problem.

Senator HARTKE. We have heard the testimony of the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission. He has completed his testimony and his statement. Senator Bass, do you have any questions?

Senator BASS. I was just trying to briefly go over his statement to see what he said. Being a fellow Tennessean I know that what he said is backed up with a great deal of facts.

Mr. Chairman, I welcome you before the committee again. I don't have any questions right now because I haven't had a chance to absorb his statement.

Senator HARTKE. All people from Tennessee are fine people.

Senator BASS. Yes, sir.

Senator HARTKE. Ás well as from Indiana and Wisconsin.

Mr. DIXON. I appreciate those kind remarks.

Senator HARTKE. Thank you, Mr. Dixon.

Mr. DIXON. Thank you, sir.

Senator HARTKE. The next witness will be the Honorable J. Herbert Hollomon, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology of the Department of Commerce.

Good morning, sir. We are delighted to have you with us.

STATEMENT OF J. HERBERT HOLLOMON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; ACCOMPANIED BY GORDON A. CHRISTENSON, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE; DAVID M. BALDWIN, BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS; AND DR. ROBERT STIEHLER, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Dr. HOLLOMON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce my associates with me this morning. On my right is Dr. Stiehler, of the National Bureau of Standards. On my left, Mr. Gordon Christenson, Assistant General Counsel from the Department of Commerce. And on his left, Mr. Baldwin, from the Bureau of Public Roads.

I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this committee on this bill now under consideration regarding motor vehicle tires.

The bill would require the Secretary of Commerce to prescribe regulations establishing minimum safety and performance standards and a system of grading and labeling for motor vehicle tires, with the objective of providing safe tires for the motoring public. The bill would require regulations to be issued within 1 year after enactment of the bill and enforcement of these regulations to take effect between 180 days and 1 year after their issuance. Any subsequent amendments to the regulations would become effective only after a similar period of notice. The bill would prohibit the manufacture, transportation, or sale in interstate commerce and the importation into the United States of tires that were manufactured after the effective date of the regulations and did not comply with them. Criminal penalties would be imposed on willful violators.

In many respects, the bill is similar to Public Law 87-367 of September 5, 1962, and Public Law 88-201 of December 31, 1963, which direct the Secretary of Commerce to promulgate minimum safety standards for hydraulic brake fluids and for motor vehicle seat belts. Both of these acts require mandatory Federal safety standards to protect the public. Both provide criminal penalties for those who knowingly produce, import, transport, or sell substandard brake fluid or seat belts. These acts have no requirements for grading and labeling, however.

The Department of Commerce strongly favors national tire safety standards and an adequate system for tire grading and labeling. We

believe the Federal Government has a public responsibility not only to provide for the construction of safe Federal highways but also, increasingly, for the safety of vehicles traveling on the highways to reduce the number of tragic deaths and injuries resulting from accidents. Since tires, as well as brakes, seat belts, and other components, play a very important part in safety on the highways, it is essential that we have sound tire safety legislation, both Federal and State.

Through the Vehicle Equipment Safety Commission, established by compact in 1963, at least 37 States are now cooperating to improve highway safety by promoting uniform safety standards for vehicle equipment. Only a few days ago, on May 22, the Commission issued its first regulations. These were performance requirements for new tires for passenger cars and station wagons. The States must now act to adopt the regulations.

But the scope of the Commission's work is limited and does not satisfy the national need. I do not want to criticize what the Commission has done because its new tire standards, for example, are an improvement on existing industry standards. However, I do want to point out some inherent weaknesses in the Commission's jurisdiction and power. Perhaps most important, the Commission cannot undertake laboratory research and testing for vehicle equipment safety. It can recommend research or rely on industry's or Government's. It can let contracts for a Government agency. But it has no authority for its own research program. Nor can it enforce the regulations it issues or require all States to adopt them.

These limitations let us see more clearly that a national need exists for a national tire safety standards program. To meet the need, effective tire safety standards legislation should be enacted, we believe. Before spelling out the possibilities for legislation and giving our recommendations, let me first set the backdrop of the problem of tires and highway safety. Next I shall identify the existing tire standards, how they have been developed and some of the problems in improving them from a safety point of view. Then we can talk about what legislation would be desirable in a more meaningful way. With the steady progress in the completion of the Interstate Highway System and State construction of other highways permitting sustained high speed, the conditions under which the modern tire is used are making it daily a far more critical component of a vehicle than it formerly was. Developments in vehicles also have contributed to the increased performance demands on tires. The technology of the tire industry has made great strides toward meeting these demands. However, an undetermined portion of tires available to the public may not only fail to meet these rigorous demands but may also pose a positive danger under far less stringent conditions than highspeed travel on the highways.

It is very difficult, and I think this constitutes one of our most severe problems, to determine the exact contribution of tires to the highway safety problem. Accident records are not usually sufficient to provide complete and accurate information about the mechanical failures contributing to accidents. In reviewing traffic accidents on turnpikes during 1962 and 1963, we note that tire failure was a contributing factor in 5 percent of all accidents and in 7 percent of fatal accidents. An 18-month study, beginning in the year 1952, of accidents

on the Pennsylvania Turnpike indicated that, of the 3,118 total accidents studied, 13.5 percent or 233 were determined to be the result of vehicle failure. Eighty-five or over one-third of the vehicle failures were attributable to blowouts or soft tires. It is difficult to break these figures down further into failures caused by faulty manufacturing or processing, improper installation, normal wear and tear, owner abuse or neglect, or other factors.

You can see that there is a definite Federal interest in the contribution to traffic accidents by products such as tires moving in interstate commerce, particularly when we have incomplete information and statistics on the relationship between accidents and tire failure.

Perhaps the first specification for tires was the Federal specification issued in January 1930 for procurement purposes. This specification has undergone 10 revisions. The last one dated July 13, 1959. A proposed 11th revision has been developed by the General Services Administration and is now under consideration.

The original Federal specifications for tires and all the revisions have been based primarily on work done at the National Bureau of Standards prior to 1953. Since the Bureau tested only first-line tires in developing the Federal specification, its laboratory experience is incomplete for comprehensive tire standards, including labeling and grading, and is also, obviously, being 10 years old, dated.

Senator HARTKE. Does it serve any useful purpose, then, even for Federal purchases by the General Services Administration, or other agencies of the Government to rely upon these standards at the present time?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Yes, sir. As I understand the situation, the Federal specification requires the purchase of first-line tires. It is these tires to which the Federal specification is directed, and this is, therefore, useful to the Federal Government to do so.

Senator HARTKE. If it is true, as indicated here in the testimony, that first-line may mean different things to different manufacturers, of what value is that?

Dr. HOLLOMON. The tires which are to be tested have to meet certain minimum specifications which are substantially more stringent than, for example, the Rubber Manufacturers Association specifications for tires. And whether these tires are called first-line or otherwise, they are tires which are of superior quality to the tires which would meet the minimum standards of, say, the Rubber Manufacturers Association.

Senator HARTKE. Do you have available with you those general specifications?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Yes, sir; I do.

Senator HARTKE. Can we incorporate those by reference?
Dr. HOLLOMON. Yes, sir.

Senator HARTKE. I don't want them printed, but I would like to have them available for the committee to see.

Dr. HOLLOMON. May I clarify your question? Are you asking for the latest Federal specifications, or also the Rubber Manufacturers Association specification?

Senator HARTKE. GSA is scheduled to testify. Let us put in what you are referring to here regarding the latest Federal specifications, and it will be included by reference.