[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 174 (Friday, September 6, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47086-47089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-22762]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. 93-02; Notice 14]
RIN 2127-AF14
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Compressed Natural Gas
Fuel Container Integrity
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule, petitions for reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to petitions for reconsideration, this document
amends certain labeling requirements in Standard No. 304, Compressed
Natural Gas Fuel Container Integrity. Specifically, this document
modifies the labeling requirements with respect to the inspection
interval and deletes reference to certain pamphlets. The amendments
harmonize Standard No. 304 with voluntary industry and international
standards, without any detriment to safety.
DATES: Effective date: The amendment in this document becomes effective
December 2, 1996. Prior to December 2, 1996, a manufacturer is not
required to comply with S7.4(g), which specifies a labeling requirement
regarding container inspections and the appropriate interval between
them.
Petitions for reconsideration: Any petition for reconsideration of
this rule must be received by NHTSA no later than October 21, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration of this rule should refer to
the above mentioned docket number and be submitted to: Administrator,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For non legal issues: Mr. Charles Hott, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590
(Telephone 202-366-0247).
For legal issues: Mr. Marvin L. Shaw, NCC-20, Rulemaking Division,
Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590 (202-366-
2992).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Regulatory Background
On September 26, 1994, NHTSA published a final rule establishing
Standard No. 304, Compressed Natural Gas Fuel Container Integrity. (59
FR 49021) In addition to container performance requirements, the
Standard also specifies labeling requirements. Each CNG container
manufacturer must permanently label each of its containers with the
following information: (1) The statement that ``If there is a question
about the proper use, installation, or maintenance of this container,
contact [CNG fuel container manufacturer's name, address, and telephone
number]''; (2) the month and year in which the container was
manufactured;
[[Page 47087]]
(3) the maximum service pressure; and (4) the symbol ``DOT,'' which
represents the manufacturer's certification that the container complies
with all the standard's requirements. Manufacturers have been required
to label each CNG container manufactured on and after March 26, 1995,
with this information.
On November 24, 1995, NHTSA published a final rule that amended
S7.4 of Standard No. 304 to require CNG containers to be labeled with
the following additional information:
(1) The container designation (Type 1, 2, 3, or 4),
(2) The statement ``CNG ONLY,''
(3) The statement: ``This container should be visually inspected
after a motor vehicle accident or fire and at least every 12 months for
damage and deterioration in accordance with the Compressed Gas
Association (CGA) guidelines C-6 and C-6.1 for Type 1 containers and C-
6.2 for Types 2, 3, and 4 containers.''
(4) The statement: ``Do Not Use After ____________,'' inserting the
year that is the 15th year beginning after the year in which the
container is manufactured.
(60 FR 57943)
In that final rule, NHTSA also amended the bonfire test
requirements that evaluate pressure release and announced its decision
to terminate rulemaking about additional performance requirements for
CNG containers that the agency had proposed.
NHTSA received petitions for reconsideration from the American
Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA), Ford, Consumers Gas,
Powertech (a research and development laboratory), and CNG container
manufacturers, including NGV Systems, Pressed Steel Tank (PST), and
Lincoln Composites (Lincoln).
The petitioners requested changes to the labeling requirements and
the bonfire test requirements in Standard No. 304. In today's final
rule, the agency responds to issues associated with the labeling of CNG
containers. The agency will respond to the petitions addressing the
bonfire test at a later date. The agency believes that it is
appropriate to respond to the petitions in two separate notices, given
the need to provide guidance to manufacturers attempting to comply with
the September 1, 1996 effective date for the labeling of new CNG
containers.
II. Agency Decision on Container Labeling
A. Inspection Interval
NHTSA stated that a one-year interval for visual inspection of a
container's exterior reduces the possibility that damage caused by
external factors would go undetected, a situation that could lead to
container failure. Among the external factors that can damage a
container are scratches and gouges and exposure to caustic substances
and fluids such as acid, road salt, and gasoline. The agency based this
earlier decision on a NGVC document recommending a one year inspection
interval.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NGVC is currently redrafting the voluntary industry
standard to specify a 36 month inspection interval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA received several petitions for reconsideration requesting
that the container inspection interval be every 36 months instead of
every 12 months. Lincoln, Powertech, PST, AAMA, Consumers Gas, and Ford
believed that a 12-month inspection period was inappropriate. Lincoln,
Powertech, PST, and AAMA stated that the soon-to-be-issued updated NGV
standard recommended a 36-month inspection interval. These petitioners
further stated that a 36-month inspection interval is specified in the
Canadian standard and the draft ISO standard.
Consumers Gas stated that it has been operating natural gas powered
vehicles for over ten years and have not had a problem with the
integrity of vehicle containers. It visually inspects its containers
every three years. The company believes that more frequent inspection
would increase the possibility of damaging a container because the
container must be removed from the vehicle for a thorough inspection.
It also believed that an annual inspection would increase the risk of
reducing the environmental coating on the outside of the container.
Consumers Gas was also concerned about the costs associated with
inspecting CNG fuel containers annually.
Powertech stated that all international inspection standards
specify a 36-month interval between inspections. Based on its review of
in-service ruptures of CNG containers since 1974, that company stated
these failures would not have been prevented had a one year visual
inspection been used.
Lincoln stated that its recently completed 12-month inspection
program on 96 CNG vehicles in the Atlanta area showed no indication of
unexpected damage 2 to the CNG fuel containers. Based on this
field experience, Lincoln concluded that a 12-month inspection interval
would provide little safety benefit. Lincoln favored the adoption of a
36-month, 36,000 mile inspection requirement which would harmonize the
U.S. requirement with the requirements of other standard-setting
countries and organizations. Lincoln stated that a 12-month inspection
requirement would not have prevented the two publicized container
failures involving two different GM trucks because, in each case, the
truck's container had sustained damage prior to installation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Lincoln did not explain what it meant by the phrase
``unexpected damage.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AAMA stated that the 12-month interval for visual inspection
requirement is inconsistent with other CNG container inspection
requirements. That organization requested that the interval be revised
to every 36 months or after an accident or fire for external damage and
deterioration.
PST stated that the inspection interval should be 36-months with
the manufacturer having the option of specifying shorter intervals
based on the design and construction of the container.
Based on the available information, NHTSA has decided to amend S7.4
to require that each CNG container be visually inspected for damage or
deterioration after a motor vehicle accident or fire and at least every
36 months or 36,000 miles, whichever comes first. Among the factors
that can damage a container are scratches and gouges and exposure to
caustic substances and fluids such as acid, road salt, and gasoline.
The agency notes that the new inspection schedule is consistent with
international and industry standards. Based on the comments, the agency
believes that a 12-month, 12,000 mile inspection interval would provide
little safety benefit to the vehicle owners. While visual inspection of
a CNG container may detect some conditions that indicate a potential
failure, the agency agrees with the petitioners that a 12 month, 12,000
mile inspection interval would be excessive. The agency notes that a
12-month inspection interval would not have prevented the two
publicized GM container failures because they were caused by stress
corrosion cracking which is internal to the container and therefore
would not have been identifiable during a visual inspection of the
container's exterior.
B. Inspection Pamphlets
In the November 1995 final rule, NHTSA stated that the regulation
must reference inspection information about the in-use safety of CNG
containers. The agency further stated that the current CGA pamphlets
provide valuable inspection information to help assure
[[Page 47088]]
fuel container safety for Type 1, 2, and 3 containers.
PST and AAMA stated that referencing the CNG pamphlets on the
container label is confusing and not beneficial. PST stated that a
container's label should refer only to those CGA pamphlets that are
relevant to that specific container. For example, a reference to
pamphlet C-6.1 on a steel container could be confusing since that
pamphlet is for aluminum containers. AAMA stated that the inspection
procedures referenced in the pamphlets include inspections, such as
interior and hydrostatic testing, that necessitate the removal of the
CNG containers from the vehicle, and the use of specialized test
equipment and personnel. AAMA stated that such testing is not needed to
conduct a visual inspection, like the one specified by the CNG
container label.
After further analyzing the available information, NHTSA has
decided that it is inappropriate at this time to require reference to
any of the CGA pamphlets on the container's label. As AAMA stated, it
would be difficult for users to comply with the requirements in these
pamphlets which direct an inspector to remove a CNG container. The
agency further agrees with AAMA that the inspection procedures
referenced in the CGA pamphlets may be confusing to a mechanic because
it specifies that the CNG container be inspected by a container tester
registered with the U.S. Department of Transportation or Canadian
Transport Commission. NHTSA notes that the CNG container industry is in
the process of revising the inspection pamphlets to clarify the
reinspection interval for CNG containers used as vehicle fuel tanks.
C. Other Issues
PST stated that the minimum character size for the label should be
reduced to \5/32\ inch because the added wording regarding the
recommended periodic inspection of fuel containers would increase the
label's size. PST stated that there is no functional need for the label
to be legible for distances greater than a few feet. PST stated that
larger labels are more costly and more difficult to apply on a CNG
container, and that a smaller label can more easily conform to the
surface for adhesion.
Lincoln does not agree that the cost of this rulemaking is solely
the cost of the label. That manufacturer stated that the rulemaking's
true cost should reflect the costs of implementing the change from a
36-month to 12-month inspection interval and that this would make this
rulemaking significant.
NHTSA notes that the letter height requirements were addressed in
the final rule published July 24, 1995. In that rulemaking, the agency
changed the letter height requirement from 12.7 mm (0.50 inch) to 6.35
mm (0.25 inch) which was consistent with the comments from Chrysler and
Structural Composite Industries. The agency stated in that rulemaking
that it would be inappropriate to reduce the letter height even more
because the lettering would be too small to be visible at various
locations on CNG vehicles. The agency notes that these issues have
already been addressed in both the July 24, 1995 final rule and in the
November 24, 1995 final rule. Since PST did not provide any new
information on label content or the letter height requirement to
justify a change, NHTSA is not making any change.
NHTSA notes that today's amendment of Standard No. 304 with respect
to the labeling requirement render moot Lincoln's concerns about the
added costs associated with an annual inspection interval.
III. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 (Federal Regulation) and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed
under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' Further, this
action has been determined to be ``nonsignificant'' under the
Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. The
agency has not prepared a Final Regulatory Evaluation (FRE) because the
impacts of these amendments are so minimal as not to warrant
preparation of a full regulatory evaluation. The amendments made in
today's final rule are requirements related to the labeling of CNG
vehicles and containers, and as such do not result in significant
increases in cost. In the FRE for Standard No. 304, the agency stated
``The consumer cost for a label on each CNG fuel container certifying
that the container meets the proposed equipment requirements is
estimated to be in the range of $0.06 to $0.11 per label. This includes
the cost of the label plus labor costs for attachment.'' The changes
made by this final rule do not change that estimate.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
NHTSA has also considered the effects of this rulemaking action
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Based upon the agency's
evaluation, I certify that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As noted
above, the amendments will result in only a very nominal cost increase
resulting from adding the additional labeling information. Further,
information available to the agency indicates that businesses
manufacturing CNG fuel containers are not small businesses.
C. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)
NHTSA has analyzed this rulemaking action in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612. NHTSA has
determined that the rule will not have sufficient Federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
D. National Environmental Policy Act
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
NHTSA has considered the environmental impacts of this rule. The agency
has determined that this rule will have no adverse impact on the
quality of the human environment.
E. Civil Justice Reform
This rulemaking does not have any retroactive effect. Under 49
U.S.C. 30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in
effect, a State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable
to the same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal
standard, except to the extent that the State requirement imposes a
higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for
the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial
review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor
vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before
parties may file suit in court.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, Rubber and rubber
products, Tires.
In consideration of the foregoing, the agency is amending Standard
No. 304; Compressed Natural Gas Fuel Container Integrity, part 571 at
Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 571--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 571 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
[[Page 47089]]
2. Section 571.304 is amended by revising S7.4(g) to read as
follows:
Sec. 571.304 Standard No. 304, Compressed Natural Gas Fuel Container
Integrity.
* * * * *
S7.4 * * *
(g) The statement: ``This container should be visually inspected
after a motor vehicle accident or fire and at least every 36 months or
36,000 miles, whichever comes first, for damage and deterioration.
* * * * *
Issued on: August 30, 1996.
Donald C. Bischoff,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 96-22762 Filed 9-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P