Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking |
---|
Topics: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
|
L. Robert Shelton
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
February 6, 1998
[Federal Register: February 6, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 25)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 6144-6145] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06fe98-29] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 571 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 6145]] SUMMARY: This document denies a petition for rulemaking submitted by Mr. Richard J. Shaw to specify the design and method of closure for gas caps on motor vehicles. The petition provided insufficient information to support petitioner's contention that fuel spillage and vapor release represent a safety problem that requires regulation. Available crash data do not demonstrate a safety problem with gas cap closure. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues: Dr. William J.J. Liu, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-4923. Facsimile (202) 366-4329. For legal issues: Nicole Fradette, Office of Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992. Facsimile (202) 366-3820, electronic mail ``nicole.fradette@nhtsa.dot.gov''. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By petition dated May 14, 1997, Mr. Richard J. Shaw petitioned the agency to issue a rule applicable to gas caps. The petitioner stated that the rulemaking was needed to prevent deaths, injuries, and environmental damage caused by improperly secured gas caps. He stated that crash fires and environmental pollution occur when improperly secured gas caps leak gasoline and gasoline vapors. The petitioner requested that NHTSA ``standardize gas caps and eliminate the problem completely.'' To ensure that gas caps are secured properly, the petitioner suggested the use of a robot or an electronic gas cap wrench at filling stations. To promulgate or amend a vehicle safety requirement, NHTSA must decide, on the basis of data and analysis, that a safety problem exists and that the requirement would reduce the problem and thus meet the need for motor vehicle safety. In this instance, NHTSA has found no basis for concluding that there is a safety problem with gas caps. Although the petitioner cited some crash data on post-collision vehicle fires, he did not demonstrate a causal connection between the fires and an improperly sealed gas cap. The petitioner did not provide information showing that improper gas cap use or design contributes to motor vehicle fires, nor is NHTSA aware of any information from other sources demonstrating such a problem. In the research now underway relating to a possible upgrade of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301, ``Fuel System Integrity'' (49 CFR 571.301), the data collected from vehicle crash fires do not show a connection between gas cap performance and vehicle fires. The agency notes that the specific solution suggested by the petitioner, requiring filling stations to install an electronic gas wrench, raises questions about the purview of NHTSA's statutory authority. NHTSA is authorized to regulate motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment. In a September 16, 1994 letter to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, NHTSA determined that gasoline pump nozzle/ hose assemblies (referred to in the letter as ``gas nozzles'') are not ``motor vehicle equipment'' within the meaning of NHTSA's implementing statute, in part because they are not purchased or otherwise acquired by ordinary users of motor vehicles. An electronic gas wrench installed at a filling station is similar to a gas nozzle with regard to the intended purchaser. The petitioner also raised the issue of environmental damage caused by gasoline emissions. This issue is not germane to rulemaking under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, which is limited to matters of motor vehicle safety. Congress has delegated the authority to regulate emissions to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In accordance with 49 CFR part 552, this completes the agency's review of the petition. The agency has concluded that there is no reasonable possibility that the amendment requested by the petitioner would be issued at the conclusion of a rulemaking proceeding. After considering all relevant factors, the agency has decided to deny the petition. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30103, 30162; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8. Issued on February 2, 1998. L. Robert Shelton, Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards. [FR Doc. 98-2998 Filed 2-5-98; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P