quirements in order to establish meaningful compliance with standards issued under the bill.

After many consultations with the industry and all of those involved-and there will be many more conferences with the Secretary of Commerce under the bill-the committee is hopeful and I am sure that there will be no particular harassment or undue inspection.

am

I

sure that by 1969 the minimum things necessary to be done can be arrived at, and that most of the regulations to be promulgated by the Secretary will have been complied with.

Sixth. Authorizes the seizure of tires manufactured or sold in violation of any standards issued under the bill, injunctive relief to restrain violations of the bill, and imposes a penalty of $1,000 for failure to permit entry or inspection under the bill and for the sale of regrooved tires.

This is a source of many of the bad tires which get on the road: What they call, in trade terms, "regrooved tires."

Seventh. Directs the Secretary to require permanent safety labeling of tires, and the disclosure of additional safetyrelated information to the tire purchaser at time of sale.

We hope that will be in such languageand in plain enough terms that the public can understand it.

Eighth. Prohibits any State or local authority from enforcing standards differing from those promulgated by the Secretary under this bill.

Ninth. Authorizes appropriations of $2.9 million for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967, $1.45 million for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1968 and 1969, and $1.6 million for each of the fiscal years ending June 30, 1970 through 1974.

After much discussion, the bill received the unanimous approval of the Commerce Committee. In addition to three days of public hearings, we have had scores of conferences with people in the automobile industry, tire and automobile manufacturers, tire dealers and retreaders, and organizations representing the driving public.

It was agreed that the procedure provided in the bill is a good long-time approach to the situation, that it is lon overdue, and that passage of the bill would mean great progress in the field of automobile safety.

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD a communication which is typical of the many communications received from all over the United States with respect to this bill, from the Automobile Club of my own State.

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF WASHINGTON,

SEATTLE, WASH, March 23, 1966.
Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: We have just learned that S. 3005 and 2669 are up for hearings now.

We want to remind you of our support for the Tire Safety Act of 1966, and to express our appreciation to you and your committee for the vigil and pursuit of these important

measures.

Last November we wrote to all of our congressional delegation, expressing our interest in this matter. As a reminder, and for your information, our November 8 letter to Washington's delegation read as follows:

"We have just had an opportunity to review the proposed Federal Tire Safety Act of 1966, introduced as a committee bill under Senator MAGNUSON.

"As a motoring organization in the State of Washington we are keenly interested in S. 2669, and while there may be some suggested changes later when Congress acts on this measure, we wish to express our endorsement of the objectives of the bill.

"We knew that the Vehicle Equipment Safety Commission, on which our State had direct representation, was promulgating tire standards.

"In anticipation of Congress enacting a Federal study program of standards at an early date we encouraged our own State, at its last legislative session, not to act separately.

"Further, we had actively supported our State's inclusion in the Interstate Vehicle Equipment Compact. If Congress adopts the proposed tire standards we shall actively seek our State's ratification if such is desirable or necessary during the appropriate meeting of our legislature."

If there is anything further we may do to be of assistance on this matter, please let us know.

Most cordially.

AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF WASHINGTON,
RUSSELL W. VAN ROOY,

General Manager.

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I rise to support the bill and to urge its approval by the Senate.

As the ranking minority member of the Senate Committee on Commerce which has unanimously recommended the approval of S. 2669, as amended, I want to take a minute to discuss some features of the bill and to try to place it in a somewhat clearer perspective.

Briefly stated, the bill would authorize the Secretary of Commerce to publish safety performance standards for new tires effective sometime next year. After a 2-year program of research and testing he would then issue revised standards for new tires and additional safety standards for newly retreaded tires. The bill contains adequate and effective means for the enforcement of these standards, and makes provisions, too, for the testing and research necessary to develop new tire safety standards.

There is no need for me to go into an elaborate discussion of the need for improved highway safety. The fact that 49.000 Americans were killed last year and another 1.8 million injured speaks so loudly and clearly that no other comment is needed.

The safety of the tire is, obviously. crucial to the safety of the car, its passengers, and others nearby. And tires present special problems, not associated with other elements of the automobile. The principal and most relevant difference arises from the fact that, while tires are manufactured by only 15 companies in the country, they are sold to consumers under nearly a thousand brand and trade names. The fierce competition, especially on the low-priced, private-label tire, has had an inevitable tendency to drive down not only the

price but also the safety standards and the reliability of such tires.

Under such circumstances, it is clear that only the Federal Government. through effective nationwide legislation, can assure the minimum standards of safety for tires that the American public has a right to expect.

At the same time, however, I think it is only fair to note that, in a sense, this bill attacks the problem like a man swatting flies with a sledge hammer.

This legislation is something of a new departure for the Federal Government. It is the first comprehensive Federal action in the field of safety standards for manufactured products. It also gives very broad powers to a single Federal official to set performance standards that could have a major impact on an important industry, and a considerable effect on the pocketbooks of the millions of Americans who buy tires. The Secretary of Commerce, under the bill, can wield a big stick, but I believe he will do so with reason and good judgment, after full and careful consideration of all the factors which may be involved.

Available information on the relationship between tires and automobile accidents is limited and incomplete. But, witnesses for the Department of Commerce told the committee that tire failure was listed as a contributing factor in 5 percent of all accidents on turnpikes in 1962 and 1963. An 18-month study of accidents on the Pennsylvania Turnpike showed that 2.7 percent of the accidents were attributed to blowouts or soft tires.

These accident percentages relate to all tires, new ones or old ones, bald tires In contrast, and heavily treaded tires. the bill deals with only new tires-or in

its later stages with newly retreaded tires. It has no provisions dealing with the safety of old tires, whose tread may be gone. It has no provisions alerting the motorist to the need for a regular check on the inflation pressure, even though the evidence presented to the committee indicated that inflation pressure is a critical factor in the safety and life of automobile tires.

I cite these facts not as criticism of the bill. Problems such as these are outside the scope of this legislation-in fact they are generally outside the scope of effective Federal action. They are mentioned to warn that enactment and full implementation of the bill cannot be taken as a signal for any slackening in the drive for highway safety on the part of the motorist, law enforcement officials, States, and all others concerned.

The bill provides for a solid attack on one of the problems of highway safety, but it is a narrow attack on a single aspect of a broad problem.

As a sledge hammer for swatting flies, it is justified because the "flics"-in this case safety problems of new tires-arc an integral part of the deadly serious problem of highway safety.

Let me repeat. Mr. President. I support the bill. I regard it as an important and necessary piece of legislation and urge the Senate to approve it.

I would also like to pay a tribute to the Senator from Washington. Senator MAGNUSON, the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, for his leadership in the development of this legislation. He, and his staff, have done a fine piece of work.

tem for motor vehicle tires. Such order shall become effective 180 days from the date on which such order was published. The Secretary shall also cooperate with industry and the Federal Trade Commission to the maximum extent practicable in efforts to eliminate deceptive and confusing tire nomenclature and marketing practices."

On page 22, line 6. strike out "or 8" and insert in lieu thereof "8 or 10".

Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. clerk will call the roll.

The

Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I modify my amendment by changing "one year" to "two years" in line 3.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, Without objection, the amendment to the committee amendment is so modified.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, unfortunately I could not be present when the Senator from Wisconsin offered his amendment to the committee amendment. I was attending a meeting in the majority leader's office.

The reason that provision is made in the bill for 3 years is that, to the best of my knowledge, the testimony from the Department of Commerce-which Department will be responsible for the administration of this legislation-is that they will require that much time, and perhaps even more time in some cases. It was felt that they might require 5 years, and the provision for 5 years was incorporated in the original bill.

The Senator from Wisconsin has worked hard on this matter for a long time. He has done yeoman service in pressing for legislation in this very important field of tire safety. The same thing is true of the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. RIBICOFr). I believe that the sooner this is accomplished the better it will be.

I do not wish to push the Secretary of Commerce to the extent that he might 6915 do a haphazard job, in which event there might be confusion at the end of 1 year. I think that perhaps a 2-year term would be sufficient. I see no reason that the job cannot be accomplished in that period of time.

Since the 5-year period was originally proposed, we have had much activity in the field. We have come along the road a long way, and perhaps the necessary period has been reduced a couple of years because of the activity.

So I shall be happy to accept the Senator's amendment, because he is very knowledgeable in the field, but would suggest for the RECORD that if the Department of Commerce feel they need more time, or that they can do it in less time and I wish the RECORD to show we are hopeful that they can do it in less than 2 years, perhaps in 1 year-that they will have ample opportunity to bring the matter to the attention of the other committee in the House.

I repeat, I am happy to accept the Senator's amendment and get the bill on

its way, which we wish to do as soon as possible.

Mr. NELSON. I thank the Senator from Washington. He is correct in his historical statement of how long some were guessing it would take to develop a feasible quality grading system. When I first introduced the resolution in 1964, I had no notion how difficult the problem might be. Since that time, I, as well as many others, have had an opportunity to discuss the matter with experts in the field, who have advised us it would take much less time.

The Automobile Development Association of Princeton, N.J., under the direction of a very distinguished engineer, Mr. Heitzman, formerly a research engineer for General Motors, prepared, at the request of Mr. Ralph Nader, a system of grading for tire safety and quality. It took this engineering group only 30 days to do it.

It depends, of course, on how extensive a grading system is desired, but there is no doubt in my mind that the Secretary of Commerce could come up with a feasible grading system covering the obvious points, at least, without any trouble within a year. I called a distinguished authority in New York about it the day before yesterday, and he agreed that a year was sufficient time.

Mr. RIBICOFF. the Senator yield?

Mr. President, will

Mr. NELSON. I yield.

Mr. RIBICOFF. May I say to the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin and the distinguished chairman of the committee, this is a very important measure. This is the type of bill that, once it becomes law, will actually save lives.

I take this opportunity to give the strongest sort of praise to the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin for pushing this matter and calling to the attention of Congress and the country the importance of safe tires and of this proposal. The distinguished Senator from Washington, as chairman of the committee, was able to see the importance of the measure. He has brought to the floor today a very important bill, and I am wholeheartedly in accord with the measure and with the amendment suggested by the Senator from Wisconsin.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield to me a momentMr. RIBICOFF. I would like to add briefly to what I have said.

Mr. MAGNUSON. Oh, yes; go ahead. Mr. RIBICOFF. I concur with the remarks of the Senator from Wisconsin that the fact is that a bill such as this could have been lying around Congress for half a dozen years and gone nowhere, except for the interest and concern of the chairman of the committee.

Mr. MAGNUSON. I thank the Senator from Connecticut and the Senator from Wisconsin.

I further suggest that we have another important bill in the committee on general automobile safety. I did not have the opportunity to say so when the Senator from Connecticut testified, but I know of no one who contributed more to the work of the committee than he, by his testimony that day. As a matter of fact, we threatened to keep him on, not