[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