A population of over 1.4 billion people catapulting into the world’s third largest automobile market with four million trucks plying across a road network of 6.3 million kilometres supported by a USD 13.4 billion tyre market and a mining sector contributing around 2–2.5 percent of the country’s GDP demonstrate the strength of India’s automobile, freight and tyre sectors.
The story doesn’t end there as the Central Government adopts a strategic approach on reducing carbon emissions across these verticals, especially automobile and tyres, with targets such as the Net Zero Carbon Emissions by 2070, battery electric vehicles target by 2030, zero-emission truck corridors, Extended Producer Responsibility for the tyre sector; the list just goes on.
Amidst all such statistics and targets, a silent spectator remains the old and varied sector of tyre retreading. In a recent news story reported by Tyre Trends, the Indian Tyre Technical Advisory Committee (ITTAC) had made a proposal to Tyre Retreading Education Association (TREA) for mandating certain standards that will improve the quality of retreads. ITTAC has made recommendations to the BIS committee. TREA is part of the same committee. ITTAC and TREA are recommending different standards.
These standards included BIS retread standards, namely IS 15725, IS 15753, IS 15524 and IS 9168. The ITTAC had partially aligned Indian requirements with ECE R109, the European regulatory benchmark.
In a reply to the proposal, which was accessed by Tyre Trends, TREA urged the Indian Tyre Technical Advisory Committee to seek a deferment or non-applicability of BIS standard IS 15704:2018 for retreaded commercial vehicle tyres, warning that mandatory enforcement could cripple the sector.
In the letter, TREA argued that IS 15704:2018 is largely modelled on new tyre manufacturing norms and is technically unsuitable for retreading, which is a restoration and recycling process.
The standard mandates advanced laboratory tests such as spectrometer-based rubber analysis, endurance testing and compound uniformity checks, requirements that most retreading units, particularly small and medium enterprises, are not equipped to meet
The association highlighted that even large retreaders lack the infrastructure and skilled manpower needed for BIS-grade testing, while the sheer number of retreading units would make inspections and certifications operationally unmanageable for regulators.
TREA warned that compliance costs linked to machinery upgrades, audits and quality control could force 70–80 percent of units to shut down, leading to job losses, higher fleet operating costs and adverse environmental outcomes due to reduced recycling
Instead, TREA proposed that BIS prioritise retreading-specific standards such as IS 13531 and IS 15524, which focus on materials, process control, safety and quality consistency.
The body has also called for a phased transition roadmap, MSME support and industry training before any stricter norms are enforced, stressing that abrupt implementation would undermine the sector’s role in India’s circular economy.
The conundrum
India has a total of 36 administrative divisions comprising 28 states and 8 union territories. The tyre retreading sector has been continuously supporting circularity goals since the early 1970s across the world’s largest economy without getting mainstream recognition.
Even after five decades in service, the industry battles different bottlenecks including fragmentation, manpower shortage, tax pressures brought about by the recent GST revisions and now the implementation of such standards, just to name a few.
The sole practice that can simultaneously reduce carbon emissions from tyres and extend tyre life is assumed the nemesis of an ‘infamous and dangerous practice’ in some states of the country.
However, the industry has been drawing its techniques and quality parameters from the world’s oldest retreading economy, Europe.
“Big retreaders in India already have the necessary processes in place that conform to IS 15524 standards. However, as the standard is not yet mandated, we have voiced support for it because it is process-oriented and outlines how retreading should be carried out, including buffing and building procedures,” said TREA Chairman Karun Sanghi.
He added, “This standard focuses on how the work is done rather than imposing product-level testing that cannot be practically implemented. The current debate on IS 15704 stems from it being fundamentally incompatible. The standard includes requirements such as sidewall marking and destructive testing of retreaded tyres, which are impractical in a retreading environment where each tyre differs in brand, size, application and usage history,” he added.
Destructive testing, he argued, assumes uniform batch sizes. In retreading, where every casing is unique, testing even a single tyre would mean destroying finished products without yielding representative results. Applying such a framework would effectively require the destruction of every tyre in a batch, making compliance unviable.
“We have submitted our response to ITTAC and are awaiting feedback from the committee. We remain open to continued dialogue and will engage further once the committee responds to our submission,” said Sanghi.
According to him, a typical retreader processes about 300 tyres a month across multiple brands including MRF, JK Tyre, Apollo and Michelin and applications ranging from buses and trucks to mining vehicles. These casings vary widely in load cycles, operating conditions and duty patterns, often across several models from the same manufacturer.
The committee has cited European standard ECE R109, but Sanghi points to structural differences: “Europe is a global retreading hub where tyre manufacturers such as Michelin and Bridgestone dominate operations, collect their own tyres, retread them and return them to fleets, making batch-based destructive testing relevant. A similar model exists in US, where large tyre companies lead retreading and largely self-regulate without a single overarching standard. The Indian scenario is different, especially with a fragmented market.”
He stressed that the industry is not opposed to standards but to those that cannot be practically applied, warning that adopting European manufacturing-oriented norms without accounting for India’s market structure and operating realities would be counter-productive.
The debate is no longer about whether standards are needed but whether they are fit for purpose. Without accounting for India’s fragmented retreading ecosystem, enforcing impractical norms could dismantle a circular industry in the name of compliance.
Comments (0)
ADD COMMENT