Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Fuel System Integrity; Crossover Lines |
---|
Topics: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
|
Barry Felrice
Federal Register
May 17, 1994
[Federal Register: May 17, 1994] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 571 [Docket No. 94-39; Notice 1] RIN 2127-AC62 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Fuel System Integrity; Crossover Lines AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This notice proposes to amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity, to require vehicles equipped with a crossover line connecting dual fuel tanks to comply with requirements that would reduce the likelihood of fuel spillage. The affected vehicles would be almost exclusively heavy trucks. A vehicle equipped with a crossover fuel line would not be permitted to have fuel spillage exceeding 30 grams (1 ounce) (by weight) beginning with the onset of the application of a 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) test force and ending two minutes after the end of the test force application. The agency has tentatively determined that the proposed requirements would eliminate most of the fuel spillage from crossover line breakage and prevent a substantial number of fires and secondary crashes due to fuel spillage. DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before July 18, 1994. Proposed Effective Date. The proposed amendments in this notice would become effective [insert date one year after publication of a final rule in the Federal Register.] ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers above and be submitted to: Docket Section, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Docket hours are 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. William J.J. Liu, Office of Vehicle Safety Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2264. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background A. Current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301 B. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations II. Rulemaking Petition III. Crossover Lines and Frangible Valves IV. NHTSA's Initial Analysis of the California Highway Patrol Petition A. Grant Notice and Initial Study B. NHTSA's Test Program C. Society of Automotive Engineers V. Agency's Decision to Propose Amending Standard No. 301 A. General Considerations B. Requirements and Test Procedures C. Applicability D. Benefits E. Costs F. Leadtime I. Background A. Current Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity, specifies requirements for the integrity of the entire motor vehicle fuel system which includes the fuel tanks, lines and connections and emission controls. The standard's purpose is to reduce the deaths and injuries occurring in fires that result from fuel spillage during and after motor vehicle crashes, and resulting from ingestion of fuels during siphoning. The standard currently applies to passenger cars, and to multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses that have a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less and use fuel with a boiling point above 32 deg. Fahrenheit. The standard also applies to school buses with a GVWR over 10,000 pounds that use fuel with a boiling point above 32 deg. F. Standard No. 301 limits the amount of fuel spillage that can occur from fuel systems of vehicles both during and after various specified barrier impact tests. Fuel spillage as a result of any of the required impact tests cannot exceed one ounce by weight during the time from the start of the impact until motion of the vehicle has stopped, and cannot exceed a total of five ounces by weight in the five-minute period following cessation of motion. For the remaining portion of the test period, fuel spillage cannot exceed one ounce by weight during any one- minute interval. Similar fuel spillage limits are required for the standard's static rollover test. The impact tests specified for all vehicles that have a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less are a 30-mph frontal fixed barrier impact, a 30- mph rear moving barrier impact, and a 20-mph lateral moving flat barrier impact. A static rollover test is conducted following the barrier impacts. Only one impact test is specified for heavy school buses, i.e., those with a GVWR over 10,000 pounds. It is a 30-mph moving contoured barrier crash test at any point and any angle. A static rollover test is not specified for heavy school buses. B. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires commercial motor vehicles engaged in interstate commerce to comply with its Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). Among the FMCSRs' requirements in Subpart E for Fuel Systems are ones addressing fuel lines (Sec. 393.65(f)) and fuel line valves (Sec. 393.65(g)). Section 393.65(f), Fuel Lines, states that a fuel line which is not completely enclosed in a protective housing must not extend more than two inches below the fuel tank or its sump. Diesel fuel crossover, return, and withdrawal lines which extend below the bottom of the tank or sump must be protected against damage from impact.\1\ Under this provision, every fuel line must be (1) long enough and flexible enough to accommodate normal movements of the parts to which it is attached without incurring damage and (2) secured against chafing, kinking, or other causes of mechanical damage. Section 393.65(f), Excess flow valve, states that when pressure devices are used to force fuel from a fuel tank, a device, which prevents the flow of fuel from the fuel tank if the fuel feed line is broken, must be installed in the fuel system. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\A crossover line is a flexible hose connected between two vehicle fuel tanks at or near the bottom of the tanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Rulemaking Petition On May 30, 1986, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) submitted a rulemaking petition to NHTSA to amend Standard No. 301 to apply to medium and heavy trucks and truck tractors, i.e., those that have a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds.\2\ The petition requested NHTSA to add performance requirements to reduce the frequency and magnitude of fuel spills caused when road debris damage the fuel tank, the shut-off valve, or the crossover line on medium and heavy trucks and truck tractors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\These vehicles are referred to as ``heavy trucks'' throughout the remainder of the notice. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The CHP based its petition on data gathered from 142 diesel fuel spills that occurred on Southern California highways during 1984 and 1985. According to the petition, ``one-third of the 142 spills were caused by an object on the road being struck by [a heavy vehicle's] front wheels and thrown against the tank or fuel lines.'' CHP stated that the major consequence of these diesel fuel spills was the cost to the State of cleaning the spill, investigating the leak, and undertaking traffic control. In addition, CHP stated that seven ``secondary'' accidents were caused by vehicles that struck a dropped fuel tank or skidded out-of- control on spilled fuel. Based on the above considerations, CHP requested that NHTSA issue standards that would protect fuel lines, crossover lines and bottom fittings against breakage from road debris. III. Crossover Lines and Frangible Valves By gravitational effect, a crossover line enables both fuel tanks to maintain a constant fuel level and allows the engine to draw fuel from only one tank. On vehicles equipped with dual tanks, the crossover line is typically one of the fuel system components close to the ground. In this location, unprotected crossover lines are susceptible to being struck by road debris, or being snagged in crashes when the truck overrides another vehicle or highway structure. Given this potential danger, vehicle manufacturers may protect crossover lines from contact with road debris by routing the fuel line through a metal sleeve or attaching the fuel line to the rear of an angle iron or beam. Nevertheless, this manner of protection at times is not capable of preventing crossover line failures when a truck overrides another vehicle or highway structure. Another way to protect crossover lines is through the use of breakaway/frangible valves which stop fuel flow if the crossover line fails.\3\ Such devices are installed at the point where the line would otherwise be attached to each tank. They serve as the weakest point in the line, so that they break before any other part of the line fails. When the frangible valve breaks, it seals both sides of the break, thus stopping the fuel flow before fuel can be spilled. To date, relatively few motor vehicles have been equipped with these devices. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\These valves are referred to as frangible valves throughout the remainder of the document. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV. NHTSA's Initial Analysis of the California Highway Patrol Petition A. Grant Notice and Initial Study On May 2, 1988, NHTSA published a notice granting the CHP petition that requested Standard No. 301 be amended to establish minimum positioning, size, and strength requirements to protect fuel lines, crossover lines and bottom fittings against breakage when struck by road debris. (53 FR 15578). In the grant notice, the agency stated that The issues raised by the petitioner warrant further consideration. NHTSA plans to conduct research into the issue of heavy vehicle post-crash fires to determine whether rulemaking is appropriate on this issue. In September 1989, NHTSA published a final report titled, ``Heavy Truck Fuel System Safety Study--Prepared in Response to Senate Report No. 100-198 HR 2890 Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriation Act of 1988,'' based on a research study prepared by the University of Maryland's Fire Protection Engineering Department.\4\ The report analyzed and discussed accident records for truck fuel system fires, diesel fuel system designs, chemistry and physics of truck fires, system safety analyses, and fire mitigation strategies. With respect to the CHP petition, the report found that spilled diesel fuel is difficult to ignite, except during crashes when the fuel may be misted or vaporized. The report concluded that in some instances, fires originate from diesel fuel spilled from breached fuel system components, and improvements to the fuel system to prevent breaching may be possible. In addition, the report indicated that significant benefits could be obtained by improving the protection of crossover lines. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\(DOT HS-807-484, September 1989). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. NHTSA's Test Program NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) prepared a report titled, ``Testing to Develop Fuel System Integrity Standard,'' March 1992, based on a test program evaluating crossover lines. A copy of this report has been placed in the docket. The purpose of the test program was to develop a test procedure that could be used in a performance standard to ensure crossover line integrity. VRTC employed a quasi-static pull test in which force was applied at a constant displacement rate to crossover lines to evaluate crossover line protection. While such a test is not an exact replication of conditions in which road debris strike a crossover line, it provides an acceptable approximation of that situation. Further, it provides an easily duplicated and repeatable method of evaluation. The VRTC study found that a shear force of between 100 and 600 pounds is necessary to sever frangible valves while a shear force between 700 and 1,000 pounds is necessary to sever an unprotected fuel line. The study also found that devices called ``substantial protection devices'' protect crossover fuel lines even when a shear force of 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) is applied. The basis for the 11,000 Newtons (2,500 pounds) is discussed in a subsequent section of the notice titled ``Requirements and Test Procedures.'' ``Substantial protection devices'' are used as a brace loaded in compression to reduce the amount of flexing of the frame and the tank mounting brackets. They are typically metal frames in which the crossover lines are placed. They are typically bolted to the tank mounting brackets, with the brackets providing longitudinal support. In contrast, testing of ``non-substantial protection devices'' indicated that they offer little additional protection for the crossover line. This type of protection device is typically light weight and is bolted to the frame rails. VRTC concluded that a potentially appropriate test procedure would be one specifying the application of a specified force to the crossover line protection device. That procedure could be coupled with a requirement limiting the maximum amount of fuel leakage that would be allowed during the force application and for a period of time thereafter. C. Society of Automotive Engineers. NHTSA notes that the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) is currently drafting a Recommend Practice, J1624, Fuel Crossover Line, to evaluate crossover lines and set minimum strength requirements for these devices. This Recommended Practice would set forth tests procedures and requirements related to crossover lines. The SAE draft Recommended Practice includes a different test procedure than the one being proposed by NHTSA. The Recommended Practice specifies a different and higher load level (22,200 Newtons (5,000 pounds) compared to 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds)), and the load is applied in a different manner. In addition, the Recommended Practice requires the removal of the vehicle's transmission, an action the agency disfavors. NHTSA requests comments on the differences between these procedures and their effect on benefits and costs. V. Agency's Decision to Propose Amending Standard No. 301 A. General Considerations Based on the foregoing and other available information, NHTSA has decided to propose amending Standard No. 301 to limit fuel spillage experienced by vehicles equipped with a crossover fuel line to 30 grams (1 ounce) (by weight) beginning with the onset of the application of a 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) test force and ending two minutes after the end of the test force application. The agency envisions two primary methods by which a vehicle manufacturer could comply with the proposed requirements. One would be the installation of a ``substantial protection device.'' The other would be the installation of a frangible valve. The agency has tentatively determined that the proposed requirements would eliminate most of the fuel spillage from crossover line breakage and annually prevent one fatality and 55 injuries that occur in secondary crashes due to fuel spillage. A detailed analysis of the rulemaking's anticipated benefits is presented in the Preliminary Regulatory Evaluation (PRE), which has been placed in the public docket. NHTSA requests comments on the proposal, including whether there is a safety need for it. Would the installation of a substantial crossover line protection device or frangible valves on a crossover line prevent fuel spillage from damaged crossover lines due to impacts by highway debris or other crashes? To what extent are other components in the fuel system (e.g., supply and return lines, water separators, fuel heaters) vulnerable to damage from road debris? B. Requirements and Test Procedures NHTSA is proposing several details related to the crossover line requirement and test procedures. These include the permissible amount of fuel spillage, the appropriate maximum test load, the time for evaluating fuel spillage, the nature of force application, the point and angle of force application, and the nature of the test apparatus. As explained above, each vehicle that is equipped with a crossover line connecting dual fuel tanks would be permitted to have only a limited amount of fuel spillage after the application of a test force. The proposed requirement would permit fuel spillage of 30 grams (1 ounce) by weight. This amount of fuel spillage is based on the VRTC report of crossover lines that indicated that no frangible valve is capable of stopping the fluid flow instantaneously. It is also based on previous agency rulemakings about fuel system integrity. For instance, the static rollover test in Standard No. 301 permits fuel spillage of 30 grams (1 ounce) per minute after each 90 deg. rotation. (See S6.4) The agency invites comments about whether to permit fuel spillage in addition to 30 grams of fuel. NHTSA is proposing to specify that a test force of 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) be applied to any crossover fuel line connecting dual fuel tanks. This test force is based on the tests run by VRTC. These tests indicated that a force application of 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) would be sufficient to require the installation of devices that would protect the crossover lines while screening out less protective devices. The agency invites comments on whether the proposed test load is appropriate to ensure crossover line integrity. Would the agency's specification of a shear force less than 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) result in a significant increase in the number of severed fuel lines compared to the number that would occur if a shear force of 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) were specified? If so, how much of an increase would be expected? How often do vehicles equipped with a crossover line contact road debris but not leak? Conversely, would it be more appropriate to specify a higher test force? The proposed time period for evaluating the fuel spillage from the crossover line begins with the onset of the application of the test force and ends two minutes after the end of the test force application. The agency tentatively concludes that a two minute period is sufficient to evaluate a crossover fuel line failure. The agency requests comments on whether the proposed two minute period is appropriate to ensure crossover fuel line integrity. NHTSA is proposing to specify that the test force be applied to the full level between 10 and 20 seconds, be maintained between 5 and 10 seconds, and then be released. This time frame is based on the VRTC tests. The agency considered an alternative approach in which the load would have been applied at a rate of 1.9 cm/second. However, the agency has tentatively concluded that the apply-hold-release time provision is consistent with practical laboratory procedures. NHTSA requests comments about how the force application should be specified. NHTSA is proposing to specify that the test force be applied downward in a vertical plane and toward the rear of the vehicle, parallel to the longitudinal axis of the vehicle, and at an angle of 15 deg. with the road surface. This test condition is based on VRTC's recommendation that the pull test be conducted at a 15 deg. angle relative to the road. The agency notes that in real-world situations in which road debris contact the vehicle, the dynamic load would be applied at various angles. Nevertheless, the general direction is toward the rear of the vehicle. The tests at VRTC indicated that the small variations in test angle between 0 deg. and 15 deg. did not significantly affect the test results. The agency believes that this test angle would simplify the test set- up, thereby making it more practicable. NHTSA is also proposing specific provisions related to the test apparatus, a hydraulic device whose characteristics are described in Figures 3 and 4. The test apparatus incorporates a loading application device attached to the end of a hydraulic pulling device which pulls the crossover line structure. The test loading application device has a length of four inches which would be placed around the crossover line or support structure. This would enable testing the exposed ends of a crossover line near the juncture at the fuel tank if the exposed area exceeded four inches in length. An additional allowance of two inches is provided since the test load application device may not fit over curved portions of a crossover support structure at its transition from horizontal to vertical. Exposed portions of crossover lines would have to be tested if the exposed length of crossover line exceeds six inches. NHTSA requests comments about the proposed test conditions as well as alternative procedures such as the SAE Recommended Practice J1624. C. Applicability Standard No. 301 currently applies to vehicles with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less and to heavy school buses. This notice proposes to extend Standard No. 301's applicability to any vehicle that is equipped with a crossover line that connects dual fuel tanks. As a practical matter, the proposed amendment would affect heavy trucks almost exclusively. A majority of these vehicles are equipped with a crossover line that connects dual fuel tanks. In contrast, light vehicles typically are not equipped with dual fuel tanks equipped with a crossover line. Nevertheless, even though the proposal would not affect light vehicles, the agency is proposing to apply the requirements to any vehicle equipped with a crossover line that connects dual tanks in case light vehicles are equipped with such devices in the future. The proposed requirements would affect a vehicle only if it is equipped with a crossover line connecting dual fuel tanks. The proposal would not require a vehicle to be equipped with crossover lines. Further, the proposal would not prevent vehicles equipped with dual fuel tanks from being equipped with devices other than crossover lines for filling up both fuel tanks (e.g., dual fuel supply and returns system). The agency does not wish to hinder the efforts of manufacturers which are developing devices that may eliminate the need for crossover lines. The agency requests comments about the applicability of the proposed crossover line integrity requirements. D. Benefits NHTSA anticipates that, if adopted, the proposed amendment to Standard No. 301 would significantly reduce the potential involvement of heavy truck crossover lines in fatal and injury-producing accidents. As a result of the amendment, there would be fewer breached fuel lines and less fuel spilled by heavy trucks. The PRE estimates that the rulemaking would prevent one fatality and two injuries each year resulting from crossover line breaches in crashes involving truck undercarriages. In addition, the rule would prevent one fatality and 55 injuries that occur in secondary crashes. NHTSA also estimates that about 131,000 gallons of fuel are spilled each year from crossover lines that are breached. The annual direct economic costs associated with this fuel spillage are estimated to be $8,423,000 per year. These costs are broken down as follows: Fuel spill cleanup costs of $2,181,000, traffic delays of 221,000 vehicle-hours costing $2,393,000 in lost productivity, environmental damage of $3,425,000 from unreported fuel spills that are not properly cleaned-up, vehicle property damage of $276,000, and fuel spillage loss of $148,000. While no studies have been conducted to estimate an effectiveness rate for the proposed requirement, i.e., the degree to which it would prevent these losses, the agency expects that a high percentage of the fuel spillage incidents and the associated costs would be prevented, since most of the frangible valves now on the market appear to be able to prevent fuel spillage. NHTSA requests comments about the anticipated benefits of the proposal to reduce fuel spillage in vehicles with crossover lines. Please provide any information on frangible valve performance in over- the-road usage. E. Costs Among the PRE's principal conclusions are that vehicle manufacturers could comply with the proposed performance requirements and thus eliminate crossover fuel line spills by either installing frangible valves, or by providing a crossover line protection device. NHTSA is basing the following estimate on the alternative to install frangible valves since they appear to provide more protection against spills at a lower cost. The vehicle manufacturers' choice of frangible valves would minimize the rulemaking's overall costs. These valves are currently commercially available for a valve manufacturer's estimated retail cost of $25 per valve including installation. However, based on agency discussions with valve manufacturers, the cost could be as low as $15 per valve installed, if sufficient quantities are purchased at a wholesale rate. This would result in a cost of between $30 and $50 per vehicle to equip both sides of the crossover line with frangible valves, since two valves are needed. Given this range of between $30 and $50 per vehicle, the agency has decided to use an average cost of $40 per vehicle in the PRE. The agency requests comments about whether this estimate accurately represents the costs related to preventing fuel spillage caused by severed crossover lines. NHTSA estimates that the costs associated with installing ``more substantial'' crossover protection structures rather than ``less substantial'' structures'' to be $50 to $60 per vehicle. This includes the extra cost of steel structural components and labor to manufacture the structure. In addition, ``more substantial'' structures would result in a weight premium of an estimated 20 pounds. Because of this weight penalty and the higher estimated cost, NHTSA believes that most vehicle manufacturers and operators would use frangible valves. NHTSA notes that eliminating the crossover line by installing dual supply and return lines on trucks is an alternative to increasing the strength of the crossover line structure or installing frangible valves. Although the agency has not determined the precise cost of dual supply and return systems, it believes that their cost would be higher than either frangible valves or substantial crossover support structures. The agency requests data about the number of vehicles using dual supply and return systems versus vehicles using crossover lines. According to the Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association publication, ``1992 Facts & Figures,'' there were 70,831 medium and 171,309 heavy new trucks sold in the United States in 1991. The agency estimates that about 20 percent of medium trucks and 70 percent of heavy trucks are equipped with dual fuel tanks, based on information provided by truck manufacturers. Based on these figures, 14,166 medium and 119,916 heavy new trucks were equipped with crossover lines in 1991. Based on those figures, the annual cost to install frangible valves on these vehicles at a cost of $40 per vehicle would be as follows: Medium Trucks--$567,000 Heavy Trucks--$4,797,000 Total Cost--$5,364,000 NHTSA requests comments about the current production levels of vehicles equipped with crossover lines. What number and percentage of heavy, medium, and light trucks are equipped with dual fuel tanks? By vehicle size, what number and percentage of dual fuel tanks are equipped with a crossover line? For dual fuel tanks that are not equipped with a crossover line, what method of fuel level equalization is used? By vehicle size, what number and percentage of dual fuel tanks are equipped with alternative fuel equalization devices? Is there a trend for vehicles with dual fuel tanks to be equipped with dual feed and return lines for drawing fuel from both fuel tanks? NHTSA also requests comments about the current production levels of vehicles equipped with devices used to prevent or reduce the number of crossover line breaches. What number and percentage of vehicles equipped with crossover lines are equipped with (1) crossover line protection devices that would meet the proposed strength requirements, (2) frangible valves, or (3) any other technologies that would enable a vehicle to comply with the proposed requirements? NHTSA anticipates that the compliance test costs incurred by vehicle manufacturers would not be significant because it believes that most manufacturers would meet the proposed requirements by installing frangible valves instead of providing crossover protection devices. The agency estimates that most of the cost associated with conducting the proposed compliance test would be about $400 to $1000, with the cost range of $400 for a manufacturer with in-house equipment and capability to $1,000 for a manufacturer using an outside laboratory. The agency requests comments about the cost of compliance testing of the proposed requirements. F. Leadtime NHTSA anticipates that truck manufacturers would need to devote relatively minor engineering and development time to incorporate frangible valves or crossover line protection devices in their current vehicle designs. Frangible valves are readily available. The agency expects that valve manufacturers could increase production to meet the additional demand for such valves. Since the agency does not anticipate any significant leadtime problems, it is proposing that the amendment take effect one year after the final rule's publication in the Federal Register. The agency welcomes comments about whether such a leadtime is appropriate. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures This notice was not reviewed under E.O. 12866. NHTSA has analyzed this proposal and determined that it is not ``significant'' within the meaning of the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. A PRE setting forth the agency's detailed analysis of the economic effects of this proposal has been prepared and been placed in the docket. A summary of the anticipated benefits and costs appears above. Regulatory Flexibility Act In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NHTSA has evaluated the effects of this action on small entities. Based upon this evaluation, I certify that the proposed amendments would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action would primarily affect the manufacturers of heavy trucks and frangible valves. The agency is not aware of any manufacturer of heavy vehicles or frangible valves that would be considered a small entity. The agency does expect that the requirements would increase the market for and production of such valves. The added cost of modifying a vehicle to comply with the proposed requirements is very small in comparison to the overall cost of a vehicle. Therefore, these changes would not significantly affect purchase decisions. The industry test cost per vehicle to assure compliance with the proposal would be even smaller in comparison to the vehicle's overall price. For these reasons, vehicle manufacturers, small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental units which purchase motor vehicles would not be significantly affected by the proposed requirements. Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared. Executive Order 12612 (Federalism) This agency has analyzed this action in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in E.O. 12612 and has determined that the proposed rule would not have sufficient Federalism implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment. No State laws would be affected. National Environmental Policy Act The agency has considered the environmental implications of this proposed rule in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and has determined that the proposed rule would improve the human environment by eliminating spillage of approximately 131,000 gallons of fuel each year. Civil Justice Reform This proposed rule would not have any retroactive effect. Under section 103(d) of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act; 15 U.S.C. 1392(d)), 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. Section 105 of the Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1394) 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. Public Comments Interested persons are invited to submit comments on the proposal. It is requested but not required that 10 copies be submitted. All comments must not exceed 15 pages in length. (49 CFR 553.21). Necessary attachments may be appended to these submissions without regard to the 15-page limit. This limitation is intended to encourage commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise fashion. If a commenter wishes to submit certain information under a claim of confidentiality, three copies of the complete submission, including purportedly confidential business information, should be submitted to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the street address given above, and seven copies from which the purportedly confidential information has been deleted should be submitted to the Docket Section. A request for confidentiality should be accompanied by a cover letter setting forth the information specified in the agency's confidential business information regulation. 49 CFR part 512. All comments received before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above for the proposal will be considered, and will be available for examination in the docket at the above address both before and after that date. To the extent possible, comments filed after the closing date will also be considered. Comments received too late for consideration in regard to the final rule will be considered as suggestions for further rulemaking action. The NHTSA will continue to file relevant information as it becomes available in the docket after the closing date, and it is recommended that interested persons continue to examine the docket for new material. Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their comments in the rules docket should enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the envelope with their comments. Upon receiving the comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail. 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 proposes to amend 49 CFR 571.301, Fuel System Integrity, to read as follows: PART 571-- FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS 1. The authority citation for part 571 would continue to read as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1392, 1401, 1403, 1407; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. 2. Section 571.301 would be amended by revising S3, S5, S6 and the introductory text of S7 to read as follows and by adding a definition of ``crossover line'' to S4 to be placed in the proper alphabetical location and by adding S7.6 through S7.6.3 to read as follows: Sec. 571.301 Standard No. 301, Fuel System Integrity. * * * * * S3. Application. This standard applies to passenger cars, and to multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks and buses that have a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less and use fuel with a boiling point above 32 deg. F, and to school buses that have a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds and use fuel with a boiling point above 32 deg. F. In addition, S5.8 applies to each vehicle that is equipped with a crossover line connecting dual fuel tanks and uses fuel with a boiling point above 32 deg. F. S4. Definitions. * * * * * ``Crossover line'' means a flexible hose connected between two fuel tanks at or near the bottom of the fuel tanks. * * * * * S5. General requirements. S5.1 Passenger cars, and multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less. Each passenger car and each multipurpose passenger vehicle, truck, and bus with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less shall meet the requirements of S6.1 through S6.4. Each of these types of vehicles that is manufactured to use alcohol fuels shall also meet the requirements of S6.6. Each vehicle that is equipped with a crossover line connecting dual fuel tanks shall also meet the requirements of S6.7. S5.2 [Reserved] S5.3 Vehicles (Other than Schoolbuses) with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds. Each vehicle (other than a schoolbus) with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds that is equipped with a crossover line connecting dual fuel tanks shall meet the requirements of S6.7. S5.4 Schoolbuses with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds. Each schoolbus with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds shall meet the requirements of S6.5. Each schoolbus with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds that is manufactured to use alcohol fuels shall meet the requirements of S6.6. Each schoolbus with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds that is equipped with a crossover line connecting dual fuel tanks shall meet the requirements of S6.7. S5.5 Fuel spillage: Barrier crash. Fuel spillage for each vehicle in any fixed or moving barrier crash test shall not exceed 1 ounce by weight from impact until motion of the vehicle has ceased, and shall not exceed a total of 5 ounces by weight in the 5-minute period following cessation of motion. For the subsequent 25-minute period, fuel spillage during any 1-minute interval shall not exceed 1 ounce by weight. S5.6 Fuel spillage: Rollover. Fuel spillage for each vehicle in any rollover test, from onset of rotational motion shall not exceed a total of 5 ounces by weight for the first 5 minutes of testing at each successive 90 deg. increment. For the remaining testing period, at each increment of 90 deg., fuel spillage during any 1-minute interval shall not exceed 1 ounce by weight. S5.7 Alcohol fuel vehicles. Each vehicle manufactured to operate on an alcohol fuel (e.g., methanol, ethanol) or a fuel blend containing at least 20 percent alcohol fuel shall meet the requirements of S6.6. S5.8 Fuel spillage: Crossover line. Fuel spillage for each vehicle that is equipped with a crossover line connecting two fuel tanks shall not exceed 30 grams (1 ounce) by weight of fuel in the two-minute period following the end of the test force application. S6. Test Requirements. (a) Each vehicle with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less shall meet the requirements of any applicable barrier crash test followed by a static rollover, without alteration of the vehicle during test sequence. A particular vehicle need not meet further requirements after having been subjected to a single barrier crash test and a static rollover test. In addition, each vehicle that is equipped with a crossover line connecting two fuel tanks shall meet the crossover line test set forth in S6.7. (b) Each vehicle with a GVWR greater than 10,000 pounds that is equipped with a crossover line connecting two fuel tanks shall meet the crossover line test set forth in S6.7. S6.1 Frontal barrier crash. When the vehicle traveling longitudinally forward at any speed up to and including 30 mph impacts a fixed collision barrier that is perpendicular to the line of travel of the vehicle, or at any angle up to 30 deg. in either direction from the perpendicular to the line of travel of the vehicle, with 50th percentile test dummies as specified in part 572 of this chapter at each front outboard designated seating position and at any other position whose protection system is required to be tested by a dummy under the provisions of Standard No. 208, under the applicable conditions of S7., fuel spillage shall not exceed the limits of S5.5. S6.2 Rear moving barrier crash. When the vehicle is impacted from the rear by a barrier moving at 30 mph, with test dummies as specified in part 572 of this chapter at each front outboard designated seating position, under the applicable conditions of S5.7, fuel spillage shall not exceed the limits of S5.5. S6.3 Lateral moving barrier crash. When the vehicle is impacted laterally on either side by a barrier moving at 20 mph with 50th- percentile test dummies as specified in part 572 of this chapter at positions required for testing to Standard No. 208, under the applicable conditions of S5.7, fuel spillage shall not exceed the limits of S5.5. S6.4 Static rollover. When the vehicle is rotated on its longitudinal axis to each successive increment of 90 deg. following an impact crash of S6.1, S6.2, or S6.3, fuel spillage shall not exceed the limits of S5.6. S6.5 Moving contoured barrier crash. When the moving contoured barrier assembly traveling longitudinally forward at any speed up to and including 30 mph impacts the test vehicle (schoolbus with a GVWR exceeding 10,000 pounds) at any point and angle, under the applicable conditions of S7.1 and S7.5, fuel spillage shall not exceed the limits of S5.5. S6.6 Anti-siphoning test for alcohol fuel vehicles. Each vehicle shall have means that prevent a hose made of vinyl plastic or rubber, with a length of not less than 120 centimeters (cm) (47.2 inches) and an outside diameter of not more than 5.2 millimeters (mm) (0.20 inches), from contacting the level surface of the liquid fuel in the vehicle's fuel tank or fuel system, when the hose is inserted into the filler neck attached to the fuel tank with the fuel tank filled to any level from 90 to 95 percent of capacity. S6.7 Crossover fuel lines. When the crossover fuel line test apparatus is applied to the test vehicle at any point along the crossover fuel line (including the contiguous protective structure) with a force of 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds), under the applicable conditions of S7.1 and S7.6, fuel spillage shall not exceed the limits of S5.8. S7 Test conditions. The requirements of S5.1, S5.3, S5.4, S5.5 and S5.6 and S6.1, S6.2., S6.3, S6.4, and S6.5 shall be met under the following conditions. The requirements of S5.8 and S6.7 shall be met under the conditions set forth in S7.1.1, S7.1.2, S7.1.5, and S7.6. Where a range is specified, the vehicle shall be capable of meeting the requirements at all points within the range. * * * * * S7.6 Crossover line test conditions. Compliance with S5.8 and S6.7 shall be demonstrated in accordance with the following: S7.6.1 Place and level the test vehicle on a rigid surface so that it is entirely supported by means of the vehicle frame. Secure the test vehicle so as to prevent any motion of the test load. S7.6.2 Apply the test force specified in S6.7, as shown in Figures 3 and 4, in a downward direction in a vertical plane toward the rear of the vehicle direction, and parallel to the vehicle's longitudinal axis, at an angle of 15 deg. with respect to the road surface. S7.6.3 Load the crossover line to the 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) in not less than 10 seconds or more than 20 seconds and maintain it for not less than 5 or more than 10 seconds. Release the test force in not less than 5 or more than 10 seconds. S7.6.4 Apply the test force until either 11,100 Newtons (2,500 pounds) is reached, or the crossover line is severed, or total separation of any of the crossover line valves occurs. S7.6.5 Ensure that the fuel supply and return lines remain in place for the testing if they are located on the crossover line. Sec. 571.301 [Amended] 3. Section 571.301 would be amended by adding Figure 3 and Figure 4 to read as follows: BILLING CODE 4510-59-P BILLING CODE 4910-59-C Issued on: May 11, 1994. Barry Felrice, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. 94-11920 Filed 5-16-94; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P