[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 34 (Thursday, February 20, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9791-9815]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02957]

Vol. 79

Thursday,

No. 34

February 20, 2014

Part II

Department of Transportation

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

49 CFR Part 575

Alternative Fuel Vehicle Badging, Fuel Compartment Labels and Consumer
Information on Alternative Fuel Usage; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 79 , No. 34 / Thursday, February 20, 2014 /
Proposed Rules

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 575

[NHTSA-2010-0134]
RIN 2127-AK75

Alternative Fuel Vehicle Badging, Fuel Compartment Labels and
Consumer Information on Alternative Fuel Usage

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NHTSA is proposing to require badges, labels and owner's
manual information for new passenger cars, low speed vehicles (LSVs)
and light-duty trucks rated at not more than 8,500 pounds gross vehicle
weight in order to increase consumer awareness regarding the use and
benefits of alternative fuels. In the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 (EISA), Congress directed the Secretary of Transportation
to develop and implement varied and wide-ranging consumer information
and education initiatives related to fuel economy, greenhouse gas,
alternative fuels and thermal management technologies. NHTSA is
implementing these new information and education initiatives through
several different rulemakings.
    This proposed rule would implement specific statutory mandates that
manufacturers be required to: Identify each vehicle capable of running
on an alternative fuel by means of a permanent and prominent display
affixed to the exterior of the vehicle; add proposed text describing
the capabilities and benefits of using alternative fuels to the owners'
manuals provided for alternative fuel vehicles; and identify each
vehicle that is capable of running on an alternative fuel by means of a
label in the fuel filler compartment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 21, 2014. See the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section on ``Public Participation'' for more
information about written comments.

ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No.
NHTSA-2010-0134, by any of the following methods:
    http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
    Fax: NHTSA:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground
Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, Attention Docket ID No.
NHTSA-2010-0134.
    Hand Delivery: Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, Washington, DC 20590,
Attention Docket ID No. NHTSA-2010-0134 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Regardless of how you submit comments, you should
mention Docket ID No. NHTSA-2010-0134 or the Regulatory Identification
Number (RIN) 2127-AK75 for this rulemaking. You may call the Docket
Management Facility at<PHONE_NUMBER>. For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking
process, see the Public Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document. Note that all comments received
will be posted, except as noted below, without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Docket: All documents in the dockets are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the
Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Management Facility is open between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received in any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical issues: Gregory Powell, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For legal issues: Lily Smith, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

AFDC Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center
Alternative Fuel Motor vehicle fuel defined by 49 CFR 32901(a)(1)
B20 Biomass-based diesel blend or biodiesel blend that contains a
mixture of not more than 20% biodiesel in volume and 80% petroleum-
based diesel
B100 100% biodiesel
Biodiesel A fuel comprised of mono-alkyl esters of long chain fatty
acids derived from vegetable oils or animal fats and which meets the
specifications of ASTM D 6751
BEV Battery electric vehicle
CAFE Corporate average fuel economy
CBI Confidential business information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CNG Compressed natural gas
DOE Department of Energy
DOT Department of Transportation
DVD Digital video disc
E85 A mixture of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline
EISA Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
EO Executive order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EREV Extended range electric vehicle
EV Electric vehicle
FCV Fuel cell vehicle
FE Fuel economy
FFV Flexible fuel vehicle
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTC Federal Trade Commission
GHG Greenhouse gas
GVWR Gross vehicle weight rating
HEV Hybrid electric vehicle
ISO International Organization for Standardization
LPG Liquefied petroleum gas
LSV Low speed vehicle
MPG Miles per gallon
MY Model year
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NFPA National Fire Prevention Association
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
OCR Optical character recognition
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PHEV Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary................................................   8
II. What research did the Agency conduct regarding possible options   13
 for this proposal?.................................................
III. What is the Agency proposing?..................................  30
IV. What are the estimated costs and benefits of the proposal?......  60
V. Enforcement and Compliance.......................................  76
VI. Public Participation............................................  78

VII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses................................  82
VIII. Regulatory Text...............................................  92

I. Executive Summary

    In this notice, NHTSA is proposing to require badges, labels and
owner's manual information for new passenger cars, low speed vehicles,
and light-duty trucks rated at not more than 8,500 pounds gross vehicle
weight in order to increase consumer awareness regarding the use and
benefits of alternative fuels, as required by the Energy Independence
and Security Act of 2007 (EISA).\1\ The overarching goal of EISA is to
move the United States toward greater energy independence and security,
given that the United States imports a substantial amount of its
petroleum, two-thirds of which is used to fuel vehicles in the form of
gasoline and diesel, which can be vulnerable to supply disruptions and
price volatility. Renewable alternative fuels produced in the United
States are less vulnerable to the supply disruptions and price
variability associated with imported fuels. Helping the public to
better understand the benefits of these alternative fuels and to better
recognize the vehicles that use them should increase their use, thereby
replacing petroleum use and increasing national and energy security.
Thus, in EISA, Congress directed the Secretary of Transportation, in
consultation with the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to develop and implement
consumer information and education initiatives related to fuel economy,
greenhouse gas (GHG), alternative fuels and thermal management
technologies, all aimed at reducing our nation's dependence on imported
petroleum. This requirement has been codified at 49 U.S.C. 32908(g),
hereafter referred to as simply ``32908(g).'' The Secretary's authority
to develop and implement these programs is delegated to the
Administrator of NHTSA.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 49 U.S.C. 32902(g), Public Law 110-140.
    \2\ 49 CFR 1.95; CFR 501.2(a)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    32908(g) requires the agency to undertake rulemaking to address
consumer information on automobile fuel economy and the use of
alternative fuels in three different ways, which the agency is
implementing in three distinct phases.
    In the recently-completed first phase, NHTSA established
requirements for automobile manufacturers to label new automobiles sold
in the United States with information about their performance in terms
of fuel economy, greenhouse gas emissions, and smog-forming emissions,
with rating systems to help consumers compare automobiles in terms of
this performance at the point of purchase. NHTSA established these
requirements in a joint rulemaking with the EPA,\3\ which also has
authority (under 49 U.S.C. 32908(b)) to regulate new automobile fuel
economy labels. The agencies sought in that joint rulemaking both (1)
to implement NHTSA's 32908(g) authority by providing the new rating
system to help consumers compare vehicles' fuel economy, GHG, and other
emissions performance at the point of sale, and (2) to implement
revisions sought by EPA and NHTSA to update the existing labels and
help them better convey information for advanced technology vehicles
entering the marketplace, such as compressed natural gas vehicles
(CNG), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV), battery electric
vehicles (BEV), and fuel cell vehicles. The final rule establishing the
new labeling requirements was published on July 6, 2011,\4\ and can be
found on NHTSA's Web site at http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 79 FR 39478, July 6, 2011
    \4\ 76 FR 39478. The NPRM for this rulemaking was published at
75 FR 58708 and the rulemaking docket number is NHTSA-2010-0087,
which can be accessed at regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice initiates the second phase of rulemaking to implement
the EISA requirements for consumer information and education about
alternative fuels. 32908(g) requires NHTSA to develop regulations to
require new automobiles to display certain information about their
capability to operate on alternative fuels. First, NHTSA must require
vehicle manufacturers to affix new automobiles sold in the United
States with a ``permanent and prominent display'' that indicates the
vehicle is capable of operating on an alternative fuel; \5\ second,
NHTSA must require manufacturers to attach a label to the fuel tank
filler compartment of vehicles capable of operating on alternative
fuels that indicates the form of alternative fuel that the vehicle is
capable of operating on; and third, NHTSA must require manufacturers to
include in the owner's manual, of vehicles that are capable of
operating on alternative fuels, information which describes that
capability and the benefits of using alternative fuels, including their
renewable nature and environmental benefits.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As defined by 49 U.S.C. 32901(a)(1).
    \6\ 49 U.S.C. 32908(g)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA is therefore proposing the following specific requirements in
this rulemaking, as directed by EISA. To implement the permanent and
prominent display mandate, the rule proposes to require a badge
specifying in natural language which alternative fuel the vehicle is
capable of operating on. The badge would be positioned on the rear of
the vehicle, either directly below or to the right of the vehicle model
name. To implement the fuel compartment label mandate, the rule
proposes to require a label on the exterior of the fuel cap or fuel
compartment access door that clearly states the alternative fuel type,
and depending on the type, the proper/safe capacities for replenishing
the fuel supply. To implement the owner's manual mandate, the rule
proposes to require manufacturers to include standardized text that
describes the capabilities and benefits of using alternative fuels.
Sections II and III of this proposal provide more detailed information
about each of these requirements.
    The agency has estimated the total costs of the proposal in Table
I-1 and Table I-2 below.

  Table I-1--Estimated Industry Costs for Proposal in First Model Year
                                 (2012$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Low                High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permanent and Prominent Display            $6,713,112        $13,292,937
 Badge............................
Tooling (all fuel types)..........             41,064            284,287
Fuel Compartment Label............  .................            827,436
Owner's Information...............  .................            348,352
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total.........................          7,929,963         14,753,011
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values derived from Projected MY2017 Industry Volume of Alternative
  Fuel Vehicles (Including LSVs)

 Table I-2--Estimated Annual Industry Costs for Proposal After the First
                           Model Year (2012$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Low                High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permanent and Prominent Display            $6,713,112        $13,292,937
 Badge............................
Fuel Compartment Label............  .................            827,436
Owner's Information...............  .................            328,081
                                   -------------------------------------
    Total.........................          7,868,629         14,448,453
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values derived from Projected MY2017 Industry Volume of Alternative
  Fuel Vehicles (Including LSVs)

    The agency believes that the benefits of this proposal will be
higher than the costs, as the national and energy security benefits
gained from even a modest increase in consumer purchases of alternative
fueled vehicles would likely outweigh the relatively low anticipated
cost of the proposed requirements. As information on the effects of
these badges on consumer purchases is not available, a quantitative
assessment of the benefits was not possible at this stage. Further
discussion of the anticipated costs and benefits of the proposal can be
found in Section IV.
    In the subsequent third phase of implementing the 32908(g)
requirements, NHTSA will develop a consumer information campaign to
improve understanding of automobile performance in terms of fuel
economy, GHG and other pollutant emissions, as well as to inform
consumers of the benefits of using alternative fuels and where fueling
stations are located. Given the complexity of the consumer research
needed to implement this provision, the agency anticipates that this
rulemaking will be proposed in 2015, after NHTSA completes research
about appropriate and effective consumer messaging.

II. What research did the Agency conduct regarding possible options for
this proposal?

    As part of the development of this NPRM, NHTSA sought and
considered available existing information and research from federal
agencies, automotive manufacturers and suppliers. NHTSA made several
visits to passenger car and light truck retailers and public auto shows
to learn more about how individual manufacturers already use badges and
labels to identify alternative fuel vehicles. In addition, NHTSA
conducted online research of currently available manufacturer
production labels, badges, consumer education materials and information
provided to owners. NHTSA staff also held discussions with
manufacturers, trade groups and suppliers to increase agency awareness
and understanding of existing materials.\7\ Some manufacturers also
directed the agency to industry label and badge suppliers for
additional information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ NHTSA's records of these meeting are available in the docket
for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, in order to benefit from the expertise of other
federal agencies active in alternative fuel vehicle issues, NHTSA
consulted with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal
Trade Commission (FTC), and the Department of Energy (DOE). The agency
discussed potential content of proposed owner's manual information with
the FTC to understand further the requirements and content of the FTC
(until recently) required \8\ alternative fuel point of sale label
found on all new alternative fuel vehicles sold in the U.S. The agency
believes it may be helpful to consumers to provide consistency with
information contained on the FTC Alternative Fuel label. The agency
discussed the required content of the FTC label, including what points
of the label were important for the consumer, with the intent of
including similar information where possible. Consultation with the
FHWA focused on current symbols used for alternative fuels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In April of 2013, the Federal Trade Commission issued final
amendments to the Alternative Fuels Rule, eliminating the point of
sale labels that were previously required by the FTC on alternative
fuel vehicles (AFVs), citing that similar information is
incorporated on recently revised fuel economy and emissions point of
sale labels required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation. (``FTC Amends
Alternative Fuels Rule to Make Compliance Easier'' last accessed:
January 2, 2014)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the agency also consulted with DOE regarding content of
the DOE/EPA fueleconomy.gov \9\ Web site and the DOE alternative fuels
and advanced vehicles data center \10\ Web site. While most of the
experience that these agencies have accumulated does not relate
directly to the issues in this NPRM, NHTSA has done its best to
extrapolate from the experience of these agencies to our current
rulemaking. The interactions with FHWA gave NHTSA an improved
understanding of approved symbols as described in greater detail in
Section II.A. Regarding consultation with DOE, the agency was informed
of many useful tools and information that were determined to be more
applicable to the consumer education campaign, which will constitute
the third phase of implementing the 32908(g) requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ www.fueleconomy.gov (last accessed January 27, 2014).
    \10\ www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/ (last accessed January 27, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency notes that it did not conduct original research on
consumer messaging in developing the proposal for this phase of the
EISA consumer information requirements. The EISA requirements for
badging, fuel tank compartment labeling, and owner's manual information
are fairly straightforward. Unlike the fuel economy labeling
requirements, the requirements being proposed in this rulemaking are
not intended to facilitate direct consumer comparison of multiple
vehicles or pieces of vehicle equipment; instead, they are simply
intended to inform consumers about the alternative fuel capabilities of
the vehicles already in front of them. Because the agency is trying to
provide clear, basic information through this rulemaking and not trying
to aid or influence consumer choice, the agency concluded that original
research would not contribute sufficiently to improving the usefulness
of the required information in order to justify the expenditure of
resources.
    NHTSA has identified several states at the time of this proposal
\11\ that promote the use of alternative fuel vehicles. Some have
implemented programs, such as California's Clean Air Vehicle program,
that provide High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane access for labeled or
specially plated alternative fuel vehicles. These programs often
require the vehicle owner to apply a badge, sticker, or special license
plate that identifies the vehicle as an alternative fuel, low emission,
or ``clean-'' vehicle, but do not regulate the manufacturers of
alternative fuel vehicles or provide consumer information on specific
types

and benefits of alternative fuel vehicles. However, states may have an
interest in this proposal, and we welcome comment from state and local
officials and other interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The states include Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida,
Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina,
Tennessee, Utah and Virginia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, several there are several Federal requirements regarding
the acquisition of alternative fuel vehicles for Federal vehicle
fleets. Specifically, Energy Policy Act (EPAct) 1992 sets statutory
requirements for the acquisition of AFVs by Federal agencies. Executive
Order 13423 directs Federal agencies to use PHEVs when commercially
available at a cost reasonably comparable to non-PHEVs, while Executive
Order 13514 establishes vehicle sustainability goals that encourage the
purchase of AFVs. As with the state programs noted above, these and
similar programs may benefit from vehicle badging, and we welcome
comment from relevant officials and other interested persons.
    The sections below describe in more detail how NHTSA developed this
proposal. The agency seeks comments on the information presented in
this proposal and whether other relevant information should be
considered for the final rule. We encourage the submission of comments
to the docket. For comments that recommend additional information be
considered, it is requested the commenter include an explanation of how
the agency should incorporate that information into the final rule.

A. Alternative Fuel ``Permanent and Prominent Display''

    Based on the information gathered by the agency, manufacturer-
specific alternative fuel vehicle badges vary widely in design from
manufacturer to manufacturer, sometimes as a result of the efforts to
link the badging with overarching corporate goals regarding advanced
technologies and alternative fuel usage.
    After identifying that some manufacturers have already invested
substantially in developing badges to help establish and promote a
positive image for their companies and to promote the use of
alternative fuels, the agency next assessed whether standardization of
existing labels or badging for alternative fuel vehicles would in fact
be beneficial, and if so, what form that standardization should take.
    As one example, Ford uses a ``Road and Leaf'' symbol that depicts,
as the title implies, a road leading to a green leaf. The symbol may
appear on their vehicle's lift-gates, front doors and engine appearance
covers, or on other areas of the vehicle. Ford then incorporates this
symbol into many other badges on vehicles across its model line-up that
are equipped with different ``environmentally-conscious'' technologies.
Some examples of this include: The ``Road and Leaf'' incorporated into
a ``Flex-Fuel'' badge to indicate ethanol-operating capability; a
``B20'' badge to indicate that a diesel vehicle is capable of operating
on a small percentage of biodiesel; and an ``Ecoboost'' badge to
indicate that a vehicle uses direct-injection, turbocharging and
downsizing engine technologies to deliver performance similar to a
larger displacement engine with the higher fuel efficiency of a smaller
displacement engine. In addition, the symbol is applied to its hybrid
and battery electric vehicles. (See Figures II.A-1 through II.A-6 in
``Examples of Existing Alternative Fuel Badges and Symbols,'' in Docket
NHTSA-2010-0134).
    Another example of a corporate-wide program is the ``Flex Fuel''
badge used by GM. In 2006, GM conducted an extensive E85 awareness
campaign promoting the ethanol capabilities of its vehicles under the
banner of ``Live Green, Go Yellow.'' The ``Live Green, Go Yellow''
campaign kicked off during Super Bowl XL in television ads promoting
the use of the clean, alternative fuel in GM's flexible fuel vehicles.
In conjunction with this campaign, GM began applying ``Flex Fuel''
badges to vehicles capable of ethanol operation and using yellow-
colored fuel filler caps for those vehicles as a tie-in to the larger
campaign.\12\ (See Figures II.A-7 through II.A-8 in ``Examples of
Existing Alternative Fuel Badges and Symbols,'' in Docket NHTSA-2010-
0134).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ``GM: ``Live Green Go Yellow''; http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/01/gm_live_green_g.html (last
accessed January 27, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ford and GM explained to NHTSA in meetings with the agency that
they undertake these cross-product campaigns to promote their
investment in environmentally friendly and alternative fuel
technologies, which they believe will help foster consumer enthusiasm
for their vehicles with these technologies. If consumers are more
likely to purchase these vehicles as a result of this marketing
investment, then manufacturers will be more likely to recoup their
investment in technologies that reduce petroleum consumption (and
increase their perception as a socially-responsible corporation),
potentially leading to more investment in technologies that reduce
petroleum consumption and benefiting the U.S. through reduced petroleum
consumption.
    In addition to the examples from Ford and General Motors, the
agency also learned of campaign-derived, exterior badges used by
manufacturers such as Hyundai and Nissan. The ``Blue drive'' exterior
badge was developed in support of Hyundai's corporate branding campaign
to represent ``Hyundai's comprehensive overhaul of thinking green.''
\13\ (See Figure II.A-9 in ``Examples of Existing Alternative Fuel
Badges and Symbols,'' Docket NHTSA-2010-0134). At its April 2011
introduction, the redesigned MY 2012 Versa was ``the first Nissan model
in the U.S. to use the new Nissan ``Puredrive'' designation. The
automaker will put that label onto models that use Nissan's most
advanced technologies to promote eco-friendly driving and to cut CO2
emissions.'' \14\ (See Figure II.A-10 in ``Examples of Existing
Alternative Fuel Badges and Symbols,'' in Docket NHTSA-2010-0134).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Hyundai Bluedrive campaign information http://www.hyundaiusa.com/about-hyundai/environment/ (last accessed January
27, 2014)
    \14\ ''Nissan Versa gets radical new look, better gas mileage''
USA Today.  http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2011/04/nissan-versa-radical-new-style-11000-july-sale-new-platform/1 (last accessed: January 27, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other alternative fuel vehicle manufacturers appear to take a less
comprehensive approach or may do very little in regard to badges. For
example, Honda currently applies labeling in response to the
requirements of some states for manufacturers of gaseous fueled
vehicles, which are based on recommendations developed by the National
Fire Protection Association (NFPA).\15\ (See Figure II.A-11 in
``Examples of Existing Alternative Fuel Badges and Symbols,'' in Docket
NHTSA-2010-0134).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ NFPA 52: Vehicular Gaseous Fuel Systems Code. http://www.nfpa.org/aboutthecodes/AboutTheCodes.asp?DocNum=52 (last
accessed January 27, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Some manufacturers do not produce any alternative fuel vehicles for
sale in the United States. These manufacturers do not have any current
campaigns to promote alternative fuels technologies.
    The agency also conducted additional research regarding vehicle
badge text sizing and coloring. The agency took a closer look at these
two design aspects to obtain a better understanding of how they may
factor into this proposal. The agency surveyed a collection of twenty
vehicles with unique vehicle model and technology-related badges. This
collection included badges dedicated to differing technologies such as
stability control, engine size or type, driveline or

alternative fuel capability. In all, 34 badges were evaluated
representing 19 different vehicle models and nine different vehicle
brands.
    Overall, the agency learned the average size of text found on
vehicle badges across both model and technology specific badges was
approximately 18.4 millimeters. The text sizes ranged from
approximately 4.75 millimeters to 31 millimeters for technology-
specific badges with an average of approximately 16.4 millimeters.
Model name badges were slightly more consistent with a range of 15
millimeters to 42 millimeters and an average of approximately 20.3
millimeters. Please see Table II-1 for badge and measurement details.

                                Table II-1--Vehicle Badge Text Approximate Sizes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Model name     Technology badge
                                                        ------------------------------------
               Make                        Model           High     Low      High     Low          Comment
                                                           (mm)     (mm)     (mm)     (mm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Audi.............................  Q7..................       35       27       23       23  TDI (Diesel) Badge.
BMW..............................  530i................       22       22      (*)      (*)  No Technology
                                                                                Badge.
Chevrolet........................  Malibu..............       17       17       31       17  Hybrid badge.
Chevrolet........................  Express (Van).......       26       26       13       13  Stabilitrak--Foil
                                                                                with Overlay.
Chevrolet........................  Uplander............       20       20       17     4.75  Flex Fuel (yellow).
Chevrolet........................  Express (Van).......    ** 26    ** 26       27       27  Standard CNG
                                                                                Diamond Symbol.
Chevrolet........................  Suburban............       20       20      (*)      (*)  Flex Fuel (green).
Chevrolet........................  Impala..............       20       20    ** 17  ** 4.75  Flex Fuel (yellow)
                                                                                overall badge
                                                                                height is
                                                                                approximately 21
                                                                                mm.
Dodge............................  Caravan.............       20       20       11        5  Flex Fuel with E85
                                                                                Ethanol.
Dodge............................  Avenger.............       15       15    ** 11     ** 5  Flex Fuel--same as
                                                                                Caravan. Badge
                                                                                height is 15 mm.
Ford.............................  Fusion..............       15       15       15       15  Hybrid badge
                                                                                letters. Road and
                                                                                Leaf symbol is
                                                                                approximately 50
                                                                                mm.
Ford.............................  Focus...............       15       15      (*)      (*)  Height is based on
                                                                                sub-model ``SE''
                                                                                designation.
Ford.............................  Explorer............       22       22       14       14  Size is for roll
                                                                                stability control
                                                                                (RSC) designation--
                                                                                Advance Trac text
                                                                                above RSC is 10
                                                                                mm.
Ford.............................  F-150...............       18       18       10       10  Flex Fuel--Two Rows
                                                                                of 10 mm text.
Honda............................  Accord..............       22       15       25       25  V6 Badge.
Honda............................  Insight.............       15       15       14       14  Hybrid badge--
                                                                                overall height is
                                                                                ~20 mm.
Jeep.............................  Liberty.............       42       32       21       21  Height is based on
                                                                                ``3.7L'' engine
                                                                                designation--4x4
                                                                                badge same.
Toyota...........................  Camry Hybrid........       15       15        5        5  Three rows of 5 mm
                                                                                text--Hybrid
                                                                                Synergy Drive.
Toyota...........................  Highlander..........       23       23       20       19  4WD Badge.
Volkswagen.......................  Jetta...............       17       17       17       17  2.5L Engine
                                                                                designation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Indicates no badge.
** Duplicate measurement not included in calculations.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Average Text Height (mm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ranges Model and Technology Badges--High to Low.            21.0            19.7            17.5            15.3
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
Averages Model and Technology Badges............               20.3
                                                               16.4
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
Overall.........................................                               18.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to badge color, the agency found that most badges
surveyed had a chrome or silver finish. Most of the badges surveyed had
letters (particularly the vehicle model names) finished in chrome. The
majority of the technology badges consisted of chrome letters; however,
in some cases the text was displayed in a dark color, usually black,
recessed into a chrome background.
    Based on information obtained from manufacturers and through
research as part of the development of this proposal, NHTSA learned
that some vehicle manufacturers have made significant investments in
promoting alternative fuel and other advanced technologies that reduce
petroleum consumption. These manufacturers view their efforts as
contributing positively to their brand image, through both traditional
campaigns and, in some cases, tying-in those campaigns by applying
badges to their vehicles. The agency believes that, based on
manufacturers' experience with how badging designs deliver alternative
fuel information to consumers, it is important to carefully consider
the views of the manufacturers, as well as their investments developing
and promoting alternative fuel usage.
    NHTSA also conducted research on whether widely-accepted symbols
exist for alternative fuels that the agency might consider for use in
alternative fuel vehicle badging. This included investigation of
symbols used by the FHWA and those defined jointly by the International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE).
    The FHWA currently specifies symbols associated with alternative
fuels as part of their ``General Service Signs'' included in the Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.\16\

These symbols are intended for application to official interstate
signage typically found in advance of interstate highway exit ramps,
and include symbols (and sometimes supporting language) for vehicle
electricity charging stations, and ethanol (E-85 in particular) and
propane fueling stations, among others. However, the FHWA's General
Service Signs symbols do not cover all alternative fuels. (See Figure
II.A-12 in ``Examples of Existing Alternative Fuel Badges and
Symbols,'' in Docket NHTSA-2010-0134).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The National Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD) defines the standards used by road managers nationwide to
install and maintain traffic control devices on all public streets,
highways, bikeways, and private roads open to public traffic. See 23
CFR Part 655, Subpart F. The MUTCD is also available at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/index.htm (last accessed January 27, 2014).
Within the MUTCD, FHWA prescribes a number of standardized symbols
for highway signs referring to alternative fuel availability, as
discussed above. See http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2i.htm (last accessed January 27, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ISO and SAE have developed a fuel symbol for use on vehicle
controls, indicators, and warning lamps in passenger cars, light and
heavy commercial vehicles, and buses, to help standardize fuel
identification and increase consumer understanding. The symbols depict
a typical fuel station pump and guidelines for specifying the fuel type
that should be represented at the base of the symbol. There are SAE/ISO
symbols for multiple fuel types, including some, but not all, of the
alternative fuels covered by this proposal (e.g., liquefied petroleum
gas (LPG), CNG, diesel, hydrogen, etc.).\17\ (See Figure II.A-13 in
``Examples of Existing Alternative Fuel Badges and Symbols,'' in Docket
NHTSA-2010-0134).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See SAE J2402: ``Road Vehicles--Symbols for Controls,
Indicators, and Tell-tales'', published January 2010, symbols
number(s) G.09, Z.03. SAE J2402 is available on file with the agency
and can be purchased at http://standards.sae.org/j2402_201001/
(last accessed January 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA and the EPA jointly required symbols designating vehicle fuel
type on the new fuel economy and environment labels discussed above.
These symbols identify seven different vehicle technologies: gasoline,
diesel, ethanol flexible fuel vehicles, compressed natural gas, battery
electric, fuel cell, and plug-in hybrid vehicles, and theoretically
could be used as a starting point for badging purposes. However, as
with the FHWA symbols, some potential alternative fuels are not
currently addressed.
    The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) currently provides
guidance on labeling of compressed natural gas vehicles that has been
incorporated into some state laws, as noted in the Honda labeling
discussed previously. (See Figure II.A-11 in ``Examples of Existing
Alternative Fuel Badges and Symbols,'' in Docket NHTSA-2010-0134). The
NFPA-recommended label has the letters ``CNG,'' in white or silver,
centered in a diamond shape with blue background. The NFPA label is
intended to inform first responders (and others that may come in
contact with or attempt to repair a damaged vehicle) that a vehicle may
carry different fire risks than that of a conventional-fuel vehicle,
and should be handled with those different risks in mind. Some states
mandate the use of the ``blue diamond,'' presumably to maximize the
safety of crash response by assisting first responders, who have been
trained to recognize the meaning of the symbol. It would presumably
also assist first responders if manufacturers added the label to their
vehicles voluntarily. NHTSA recognizes that there may be safety
benefits associated with standardizing the use of such symbols.
    However, NHTSA believes the purpose of the EISA requirement is to
inform the general public of the type of alternative fuel the vehicle
uses regardless of their level of familiarity with alternative fuels.
While the use of an acronym in the NFPA labels is sufficient for first
responders because they are already familiar with this fuel type and
its shorthand, we are not convinced that it would effectuate EISA's
goal of consumer education better than the natural language ``natural
gas'' badge proposed here. NHTSA therefore believes the ``natural gas''
badge proposed in this rule will provide consumer education benefits
not currently provided by the NFPA label. NHTSA also believes the
standardization provided by the proposed ``natural gas'' badge is an
additional benefit not served by the NFPA label, which is not mandatory
in most states.
    NHTSA seeks comment on any potential overlap or conflicts between
the proposed badge for natural gas and the existing NFPA ``CNG'' label.
Specifically, NHTSA seeks comment on whether the existing NFPA label
already serves the consumer education purpose of this proposal due to a
high level of consumer familiarity with the ``CNG'' acronym. If
commenters support NHTSA considering the existing NFPA label for
consumer education purposes, NHTSA requests that commenters provide
data that shows existing consumer familiarity with the NFPA label and
the CNG acronym.
    In summary, the agency found that, while there appear to be
consensus standards for symbols for some alternative fuels, those
standards do not cover the range of fuels that NHTSA believes it needs
to address in this proposed rulemaking. Moreover, the agency is not
persuaded at this time that the symbols required by those standards,
even if they did cover the full range of alternative fuels, would
necessarily be complementary to the exterior vehicle appearance. The
FHWA General Service Signs symbols are used for fuel and charging
stations and might not integrate well with existing exterior badges if
placed on a vehicle. Further, both the FHWA symbols and the SAE/ISO
fuel symbols may not clearly communicate the differences between
alternative fuels beyond the short and standardized acronyms located on
the fuel pump symbol. As a result, the agency does not believe that the
symbols established by the consensus standards are particularly useful
for adoption as permanently affixed vehicle badges in this proposed
rulemaking, as these symbols were not developed for use on vehicle
exteriors and/or as a component of larger campaigns. After assessing
whether standardization of existing manufacturer labels or badging
would best serve the informative purpose of this proposal, the agency
concluded that the existing market examples do not lead to a clear
conclusion that one approach is superior to another.

B. ``Owner's Manual Information'' for Alternative Fuel Capable Vehicles

    While reviewing information currently provided to owners, the
agency learned that vehicle manufacturers producing vehicles capable of
operating on alternative fuels provide owners with information
regarding the alternative fuel capability, typically in the owner's
manual. Manufacturers generally provide information that they believe
is important for owners to understand regarding safe operation and
maintenance of their alternative fuel vehicles. However, the agency
found that manufacturers currently provide very little to no
substantive information regarding the energy security and environmental
benefits of alternative fuels.
    In looking for information that could be required for inclusion in
owner's manuals, NHTSA also considered alternative fuel information
developed by other federal government agencies. The agency found
various forms and depths of alternative fuel information from federal
agencies. Federally-developed alternative fuel information is
disseminated through agency Web sites and printed materials. This
information can be highly scientific or very cursory depending on the
target audience or the message conveyed.
    The DOE's Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center

(AFDC),\18\ for example, describes itself as ``a comprehensive
clearinghouse of information related to advanced transportation
technologies'' and states that it ``offers transportation decision
makers a collection of unbiased alternative fuel information,
publications, data, and tools.'' NHTSA believes this could be a useful
source for information to describe a vehicle's capability to operate on
alternative fuels and the benefits of using alternative fuels,
including their renewable nature and environmental benefits, given that
agency's expertise in these issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/about.html (last accessed:
January 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Until April 2013, the FTC required vehicle manufacturers to affix a
label to new alternative fuel vehicles offered to consumers for sale or
lease. This label contained a series of key points to inform consumers
about alternative fuels either prior to or at the point of vehicle
purchase or lease. Vehicle dealers were required to keep the label on
the vehicle until it was either sold or leased.
    Some vehicle manufacturers provide training information to dealer
sales personnel regarding alternative fuels. For example, Chrysler
produces information intended as an aid in answering questions
consumers may have regarding alternative fuel vehicles, in order to
ease pre-purchase concerns or correct possible misinformation.

C. Fuel Compartment Label for Alternative Fuel Vehicles

    The agency gathered and identified many examples of fuel
compartment labeling including labels for ethanol, hydrogen, compressed
natural gas and electricity. The labeling ranged from an adhesive label
with text, an adhesive label containing text and a graphic symbol, to a
fuel tank ``cap'' which is labeled with text indicating the appropriate
fuel type, and sometimes combinations of those elements. (See Figures
II.C-1 through II.C-2 in ``Examples of Existing Fuel Compartment
Labels,'' in Docket NHTSA-2010-0134).
    In addition to the adhesive label examples and text on the fuel
cap, the agency found that in some cases, if a vehicle is alternative
fuel capable, a specific, colored fuel tank cap is used. For the most
part, these caps were colored yellow to indicate ethanol
capability.\19\ (See Figures II.C-3 through II.C-4 in ``Examples of
Existing Fuel Compartment Labels,'' in Docket NHTSA-2010-0134).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ While not an alternative fuel, the agency also received
examples showing the color green used to indicate a vehicle operates
on diesel fuel. Fieldwork performed by the agency confirmed
inconsistent use of color for fuel filler caps for diesel fuel
across various vehicle manufacturers. In some cases, the cap was
colored green, but in most cases the cap color was black.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In discussions with manufacturers,\20\ the agency learned that, at
the time this proposal was developed, some do not provide any labeling
information at the fuel compartment filler (i.e., charge port) for
electric vehicles. One manufacturer of electric vehicles indicated
that, while not currently present, labeling at the charge port may be
necessary to assist consumer understanding of connection type and
ratings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ NHTSA's records of these meetings are available in the
docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fuel compartment labels for compressed natural gas and hydrogen
vehicles in production today, or planned for near-term introduction,
were similar in nature to the NFPA-recommended labels found on the
exterior of the vehicles that were described in Section II.A.
Manufacturers using labels for these gaseous fuels derived the labels
from standards to promote safety in fuel handling for owners and,
potentially, emergency responders.
    For more traditional liquid fuel types like gasoline and diesel,
manufacturers provided labels and colored fuel caps, with the intention
to reduce the likelihood of a vehicle being fueled with an incorrect or
incompatible fuel type, which could lead to possible severe damage to a
fuel or exhaust system, or engine.

III. What is the Agency proposing?

A. Who would be affected by this Proposal?

    This proposal would affect companies that manufacture in the U.S.
market automobiles rated at not more than 8,500 pounds gross vehicle
weight \21\ which are capable of operating on the following alternative
fuels: \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 49 U.S.C. 32908 (a)(1).
    \22\ As defined by 49 U.S.C. 32901 (a)(1).

 Methanol \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Note: To be considered an alternative fuel, alcohol derived
fuels need to be blended at levels of at least 85 percent of the
total mixture when blended with gasoline or other fuels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Denatured ethanol \23\
 Other alcohols \23\
 Natural gas
 Liquefied petroleum gas
 Hydrogen
 Coal-derived liquid fuels
 Fuels (except alcohol) derived from biological materials
 Electricity (including electricity from solar energy)

    This proposal would apply to manufacturers of new vehicles
(passenger cars, low speed vehicles, and light-duty trucks). As the
purpose of these provisions arguably is to provide information on all
alternative fuel capable vehicles on the road, regardless of their
origin, NHTSA believes that it may also be appropriate to apply these
requirements to vehicle alterers.\24\ However, the agency has limited
information on the universe of alterers that could be subject to this
rule, including how the inclusion of alterers might affect the cost-
benefit and small business impact analyses. The agency therefore seeks
comment on the all aspects of the appropriateness, potential benefits,
and practicability of extending these requirements to alterers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ An alterer in this context would be someone that converts
for sale or re-sale a conventional-fueled vehicle to one capable of
operating on an alternative fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Alternative Fuel ``Permanent and Prominent Display''

    EISA states that the Department of Transportation (by delegation,
NHTSA) shall develop requirements for vehicle manufacturers to label
vehicles with a ``permanent and prominent display that an automobile is
capable of operating on an alternative fuel.'' To meet this statutory
requirement, NHTSA considered how manufacturers will meet the
requirement that the display be ``permanent and prominent,'' and also
the content of the display. According to Merriam-Webster Online
dictionary,\25\ ``permanent'' means ``continuing or enduring without
fundamental or marked change,'' while ``prominent'' means ``standing
out or projecting beyond a surface or line,'' and ``display'' means
``to put or spread before the view'' or ``to make evident.'' For
purposes of this proposal, the agency is interpreting ``permanent and
prominent display'' as a display that is intended to be affixed to a
vehicle for the vehicle's entire useful life while providing clear,
visible information that the vehicle is capable of operating on an
alternative fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ http://www.merriam-webster.com/ (last accessed January 27,
2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA seeks comment on the assumptions, reasoning, and conclusions
described in this section as underlying this proposal.
    In terms of ``permanence,'' manufacturers currently develop badges
for vehicle model names, manufacturer brand logos and other vehicle
information to specifications intended to allow the badge to remain
attached to the vehicle over its useful life. NHTSA would expect that
any badges developed

for this proposal, or that already meet this proposal, would be of
similar specifications and able to last for the vehicle's useful life
without specifying actual test procedures to measure this requirement.
    In terms of ``prominence,'' NHTSA is proposing to require the
alternative fuel badge to be on the vehicle exterior, at the rear of
the vehicle and in proximity to the vehicle model name or model
designation. In terms of proximity, NHTSA proposes the badge be
positioned either directly below or to the right of the vehicle model
name or model designation found on the rear of the vehicle. In the case
where no model name or designation is intended for the rear of the
vehicle, NHTSA proposes the badge be placed at the lower right corner
of the vertical trunk lid, closeout panel, rear hatch or rear
fender,\26\ depending on the vehicle type and configuration. NHTSA does
not intend to require that the proposed badges take visual or physical
precedence over existing vehicle manufacturer brand logos, model names,
or designations. Vehicle manufacturers have demonstrated expertise in
the design of badges and the placement of badges such that they provide
clear and visible identification of the company logo. NHTSA considered
whether to propose less obtrusive displays, such as clear-background
adhesive window labels, but has tentatively concluded that such
displays would be insufficiently ``prominent'' to fulfill EISA's
intent. If commenters suggest that an approach other than exterior
vehicle badging should be used, NHTSA requests that they provide
specific detail on what their preferred approach would entail and why
exterior vehicle badging would be less permanent than the commenter's
preferred approach, less informative for consumers than the commenter's
preferred approach, or more burdensome for manufacturers than the
commenter's preferred approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Specifically in the case of LSVs where there may be no
trunk, closeout panel or rear hatch as part of the vehicle design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The next question that NHTSA considered was the content of the
display--whether NHTSA should require vehicles to be labeled generally
as simply ``alternative fuel'' or ``alternative fuel capable,'' whether
vehicle labels should reference the specific alternative fuel, and
whether the display should consist of a symbol (or symbols) or in the
form of natural language.\27\ These are not questions answered directly
by Congress in EISA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Webster's Third New International Dictionary: Natural
language: A language that is the native speech of a people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA does not believe that Congress intended for vehicles to be
labeled generally as ``alternative fuel'' or ``alternative fuel
capable.'' 49 U.S.C. 32901(a)(1) has long enumerated specific
alternative fuels, which were already defined when Congress created the
``permanent and prominent display'' requirement. Thus, NHTSA believes
that, rather than repeating the existing enumerated list of alternative
fuels in 32908(g), Congress intended for that list to be referenced by
32908(g). Additionally, if the purpose of EISA is to promote energy
conservation and the use of non-petroleum fuels, NHTSA does not believe
that a generic alternative fuel vehicle label would promote the same
level of consumer understanding about the variety of alternative fuel
options available to consumers. NHTSA believes that more specific
labels would clearly differentiate among technologies and specifically
identify advanced technologies, such as BEVs, PHEVs, and FCVs, for
which manufacturers generally have made significant investments in
research development, capital equipment and facilities. While some
manufacturers do currently incorporate similar label elements in a
variety of alternative fuel or advanced technology vehicles, they also
typically include distinctive elements for each technology to identify
and promote those technologies. Because of these considerations, NHTSA
tentatively concludes that vehicle labels should specify which
alternative fuel a vehicle is capable of, rather than simply
identifying it as ``alternative fuel.''
    The agency has developed a lead proposal and one alternative
proposal that use natural language. The agency considered an
alternative that used symbols, but is not proposing that option. The
agency assessed the natural language approach and approaches using
symbols and recognizes there are advantages to both approaches.
    Existing symbols, for the most part and regardless of source,
having already endured development and approval processes, are
generally accepted in certain contexts to represent alternative fuels.
They are relatively design-neutral, which should help them to harmonize
better with manufacturer-developed designs that manufacturers may wish
to continue applying. They also may help consumers' recognition of
alternative fuel symbols insofar as they may already be used at fueling
stations, in roadside signage, and at other locations on an alternative
fuel capable vehicle.
    Based on the finding that there is not a single source for widely-
recognized alternative fuel symbols for vehicles, NHTSA considered
whether to try to develop a set of symbols for badging purposes. If the
agency attempted to specify a set of symbols for the variety of
alternative fuels, we believe that it would need to be accompanied
either by evidence that the symbols were intuitively comprehended by
most people, or by a significant education effort to inform consumers
of their meaning. The variety of fuels covered by the term
``alternative fuel'' imposes educational challenges, and the agency
believes that the fact that Congress mandated educational efforts in
EISA regarding the use and benefits of alternative fuels points to a
general lack of public knowledge about alternative fuels.
    Even if the symbols were developed and consumer research indicated
there was general comprehension of the symbols, the agency is concerned
that there is a risk that a significant number of consumers will not
interpret the symbols consistently if they were eventually implemented.
At this time, the agency believes a considerable amount of research
would be required to develop symbols representing alternative fuels
that are easily comprehended by most people. The agency believes that
even if considerable research was conducted to develop the symbols,
consumers still would not interpret them consistently, and therefore
the agency does not believe that symbols for alternative fuel vehicle
badging are the best solution for meeting the EISA requirement.
Additionally, as discussed above, many manufacturers have already
invested considerable resources in developing their own symbols, and
the agency does not wish to impact that investment unnecessarily by
requiring manufacturers to replace their symbols with standardized ones
if the agency is not confident that consumers will be able to determine
what standardized symbols mean.
    Natural language, on the other hand, should be more readily
understandable for consumers (even if some of the alternative fuels
remain somewhat limited in vehicle use and not commonly seen on the
roads), and less subject to inaccurate interpretation. Manufacturers
already employ natural language in many cases to identify vehicle model
names, vehicle manufacturer names, and unique vehicle model
designations. In addition, because natural language is straightforward,
research would not be required. Natural language would meet EISA
statutory requirements. However, the agency seeks comment on this

assessment and the proposal to require natural language descriptions.
    With these tentative conclusions in mind, NHTSA's proposal for a
``permanent and prominent display'' is as follows:
1. ``Permanent and Prominent Display'' Content Proposal
    Based on the available badging and consumer information reviewed by
the agency, there appear to be virtually no standardized practices
associated with displaying a vehicle's alternative fuel capability.
Some vehicle manufacturers have developed unique badges, and in some
cases consumer campaigns, to promote alternative fuel capability for
their specific, advanced technologies that decrease petroleum
consumption. Through this proposal NHTSA remains committed to promoting
manufacturer investment in alternative fuel vehicles and to avoid the
redundancy of both manufacturers and NHTSA investing time and effort in
developing alternative fuel-specific symbols for each vehicle. Based on
the agency findings, all fuel types may not be represented in a
symbolic form and, over time, new alternative fuel types may be
introduced to the market. Adding new fuel types may involve revisiting
and republishing standards, a time consuming process. In addition, the
symbols identified while researching this proposal were fundamentally
developed for use on controls, the vehicle instrument cluster, and road
signs, versus the vehicle exterior. The agency believes the symbols may
have taken a different form if designed from the outset as an exterior
badge, where aesthetics and complementing an overall theme may take a
higher priority than they would for controls, warning lamps or road
signs. Overall, this proposal is intended to provide a degree of
standardization across the industry without encroaching on manufacturer
investment, creativity and resources utilization in promoting
alternative fuels.
    In order to accomplish these goals, NHTSA is proposing as follows:
The agency has tentatively concluded that the regulation should specify
that manufacturers must provide a ``permanent and prominent display,''
as discussed above, which includes in some form the alternative fuel
type in natural language. The required natural language terms for
alternative fuels are defined in the following table. NHTSA believes
that this requirement to standardize terminology for alternative fuel
vehicles (and to label all alternative fuel vehicles) could be easily
implemented by manufacturers, and would foster consumer recognition of
alternative fuel vehicles on the roads without encroaching on existing
programs that promote vehicles capable of operating on alternative
fuels or established brand equity, since manufacturers will still be
able to incorporate the natural language into their own preferred
designs/branding. This approach is also consistent with the agency's
interpretation of EISA that, at minimum, the type(s) of alternative
fuel on which a vehicle is capable of operating should be identified.
Table III-1 provides detail of the proposed natural language text
associated with the alternative fuels covered by this proposal.

   Table III-1--Proposed ``Permanent and Prominent Display'' Language
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Proposed badge natural language
         Alternative fuel \28\                 minimum description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methanol \29\..........................  Methanol.
Denatured Ethanol \29\.................  Ethanol.
Other Alcohols \29\....................  Name of other alcohol derived
                                          fuel.
Natural Gas............................  Natural Gas.
Liquefied Petroleum Gas................  Propane.
Coal Derived Liquid Fuels..............  Coal to Liquid.
Hydrogen...............................  Hydrogen.
Fuels (except alcohol) derived from      Biodiesel \30\ or name of other
 biological materials.                    fuel derived from biological
                                          materials.
Electricity (Battery Electric Vehicle).  Electric.
Electricity (Plug-In Hybrid Electric     Plug-In Hybrid Electric.
 Vehicle).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As identified, the proposed badge natural language description is
the minimum language to be included and does not preclude the inclusion
of other information related to the alternative fuel capable vehicle
such as dual-fuel capability or acceptable blend level such as E85, if
applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ As defined by 49 U.S.C. 32901(a)(1).
    \29\ Note: To be considered an alternative fuel, alcohol derived
fuels need to be blended at levels of at least 85 percent of the
total mixture when blended with gasoline or other fuels.
    \30\ The agency notes that it recognizes only `neat' biodiesel
(B100) as an alternative fuel. 63 FR 15322 (Mar. 31, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In surveying current production vehicle badge designs, the agency
does see the need to propose a minimum letter height measurement and to
have the alternative fuel name presented in a manner providing clear
contrast between the letters and their background color in order to
ensure readability.
    Based on the survey of current production vehicle model and
technology badges, the agency proposes a minimum for the defined
``natural language minimum description'' be no less than 15
millimeters. This fundamentally aligns with the minimum average text
size found on technology related badges currently in production and is
intended as a minimum size when the ``natural language minimum
description'' is presented as a standalone badge containing no other
text. In cases where the ``natural language minimum description'' is
accompanied by other language, as one badge, the agency proposes a
minimum text size of 5 millimeters for the ``natural language minimum
description'' and the accompanying text with an overall minimum badge
height of 15 millimeters. The agency proposes these minimum sizes to
help ensure readability, based on the precedents set by the survey of
current production vehicle badges (which are assumed, for the most
part, to include readability from a reasonable distance as design
criteria), while still providing ample latitude in the overall badge
design.
    In addition, the agency proposes the defined ``natural language
minimum description'' is presented with a clear difference, or the use
of differences, between the lightest and the darkest parts of the fuel
name. While conducting research for this proposal, the agency observed
that current production vehicle model names and manufacturer brand
logos are predominantly finished in chrome or, in some cases, shades of
silver; a trend that applies historically as well. The agency presumes
these finishes and colors provide maximum flexibility for application
to the wide array of vehicle

colors available to consumers without hindering readability or
attractiveness. With this in mind and to align with vehicle badging
trends, the agency proposes the letters of the alternative fuel name to
be finished in chrome or a silver color. If the alternative fuel name
in the badge contains a background color independent of the vehicle
color, the agency proposes this background color should provide clear
contrast to the alternative fuel name.
    As proposed, the minimum size and letter finish are applicable to
only the alternative fuel badge ``natural language minimum
description'' and not applicable to any other text that may be included
on the badge.
    As an example of what this might look like, during research for
this proposal, the agency identified a current production flex-fuel
badge at a retailer location where, along with the prominent ``flex-
fuel'' designation, the badge included the word ``ethanol'' in the
overall badge design. The agency would consider that badge to meet the
minimum requirements of the proposed regulation. (See Figure III.B-1 in
``Examples of Existing Alternative Fuel Badges and Symbols,'' in Docket
NHTSA-2010-0134).
    The agency believes that this approach would both permit and
promote manufacturer investment in their own badging and brand equity
for alternative fuel vehicles, and would not interfere with broader
manufacturer campaigns to promote both alternative fuel vehicles and
vehicle petroleum consumption-reducing technologies. Any activity,
whether required by the government or undertaken voluntarily by the
industry, which promotes the benefits and availability of these
vehicles, could help to drive sales and reduce the overall consumption
of petroleum-based fuels.
    However, there is still some risk that despite standardization of
the natural language designation for the alternative fuel type, other
inconsistencies across manufacturers' representations could slow
consumer understanding about different alternative fuel vehicles. In
addition, NHTSA has evaluated all the existing or planned vehicle
manufacturer badges and is aware that some of these badges may still
require some re-tooling to incorporate the specific fuel type in
natural language. Despite these issues, the agency has tentatively
decided that this approach is preferable to a more prescriptive
approach, some of which are discussed below as regulatory alternatives.
2. Alternative Display Content Considered by the Agency
    NHTSA also considered whether to specify a standardized word or
symbol design for each type of alternative fuel and require that the
applicable design be used on all alternative fuel capable vehicles sold
in the United States, supplanting any existing manufacturer-applied
badging for alternative fuel capability. NHTSA considered three
different ways to develop the standard design for each alternative
fuel, as discussed below.
    For the first alternative, NHTSA considered using and/or adapting
the FHWA or SAE/ISO symbols discussed above in a way that could make
them more applicable for automobile badging. These symbols, having
already been through development and approval processes, are generally
accepted in certain contexts to represent alternative fuels. They have
the benefit of being relatively design-neutral, which could help them
harmonize better with manufacturer-developed designs, and they could
also help consumers' recognition of alternative fuel symbols, insofar
as they may already be used at fueling stations, in roadside signage,
and at other locations on an alternative fuel capable vehicle (See
Figures II.A-9 & 10 in ``Examples of Existing Alternative Fuel Badges
and Symbols,'' in Docket NHTSA-2010-0134).
    However, because symbols do not exist for some of the fuel types in
either the FHWA or the SAE/ISO set of symbols, the agency would still
need to develop symbols for those other fuel types, similar to the
other alternatives discussed below. In addition, because the symbols
were developed for use on controls, the vehicle instrument cluster and
road signs, rather than for use as a vehicle badge, the agency remains
concerned that the symbols may have taken a different form if designed
from the outset as an exterior badge, where aesthetics and
complementing an overall vehicle theme may take a higher priority, and
specified guidelines for application to controls, warning lamps and
road signs are not applicable.
    For the second alternative, NHTSA considered developing new symbol
designs to represent each of the alternative fuel vehicle types covered
by this proposal. This approach could be used to fill in the gaps in
the approach above, or to start from scratch developing designs
specific to this application. However, NHTSA is concerned that
significant new research would be necessary for such an approach, which
could lead to additional delay in the development of this regulation.
In addition, the approach would need to be coupled with a customer
education program in order for it to be effective, creating further
delay, and without the guarantee that the symbols developed would ever
be immediately recognizable by consumers.
    For the third alternative, NHTSA considered soliciting proposed
designs for each alternative type from interested parties, and choosing
one of those particular designs as the standard design for each type of
alternative fuel vehicle. This approach could significantly benefit a
manufacturer whose existing design was chosen, as they would have
already invested in tooling and would have significant lead time and
cost advantage over other manufacturers. This approach would also
eliminate the effort, and associated cost, for any other manufacturers
who do not currently have such a program, as they would not have to
invest in development of their own design. However, NHTSA is concerned
that a design-mandated approach may not be compatible with future ideas
that manufacturers may develop regarding exterior design and may limit
creativity in their advertising approaches for alternative designs.
    All of these alternatives could potentially create burden for
manufacturers who have made efforts to develop brand equity for their
own alternative fuel strategies including the use of symbols to provide
a representative meaning or to represent something abstract through
their vehicle badges. In addition, some manufacturers have even
obtained trademark rights to these symbols and names, so selecting a
single manufacturer design as the standard could introduce the need for
potential trademark and copyright arrangements among manufacturers,
which could be exceedingly burdensome for other manufacturers whose
design was not chosen. It may be inappropriate for NHTSA to give
manufacturers the advantage of being ``ahead'' of other manufacturers
if their symbol is the one chosen. NHTSA does not wish to discourage
vehicle manufacturers from investing in promoting alternative fuel
vehicle technologies and other petroleum-fuel consumption reduction
technologies; doing so would not be consistent with the agency's and
EISA's goals.
    The agency seeks comment generally on this aspect of the proposal
and these alternatives, and specifically on the following questions:
     Do commenters believe that the proposed natural language
descriptions for the alternative fuels covered by this

proposal are appropriate and recognizable? If not, what do commenters
suggest, and why?
     Do commenters believe the agency should conduct research
regarding the potential advantages of using symbols instead of natural
language (after finalization of natural language badging in the current
rulemaking) to develop a new series of symbols for alternative fuel
vehicles, that might be included in a later rulemaking? If so, why?
What research should the agency undertake? How far in the future should
the agency be aiming to develop and promulgate such a series of symbols
for this requirement, if the agency chose to pursue this path?
     Do commenters believe the agency should require additional
labels/badges and/or other locations to enhance the information being
presented for the use and safety of first responders. In particular, to
address potential badge illegibility in the event of rear impact crash.

C. ``Owner's Manual Information'' on Alternative Fuel Capability and
Benefits

    EISA requires DOT (by delegation, NHTSA) to develop regulations to
require vehicle manufacturers producing vehicles capable of operating
on alternative fuels to include text in the vehicle owner's manual
information describing the capability and benefits of using alternative
fuels, such as their renewable nature and environmental benefits.
According to Merriam-Webster Online dictionary,\31\ ``capability''
means ``the facility or potential for an indicated use or deployment,''
``benefits'' means ``something that promotes well-being'' and
``renewable nature'' suggests ``capable of being replaced by natural
ecological cycles or sound management practices.'' In the context of
owner's manual information regarding alternative fuel vehicles and
alternative fuels generally, manufacturers currently appear to locate
most of the information that they provide in the owner's manual in text
format, but the information provided on alternative fuels generally
does not address the topics enumerated by EISA. For purposes of this
proposal, the agency is interpreting ``owner's manual . . . information
that describes [the] capability and the benefits of using alternative
fuels, including the renewable nature and environmental benefits of
using alternative fuels,'' as requiring more owner's manual text than
what is currently provided by the majority of manufacturers who produce
alternative fuel vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ http://www.merriam-webster.com/ (last accessed January 2,
2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As for the ``permanent and prominent display'' of alternative fuel
capability, NHTSA considered whether it should simply create general
guidelines for these topics and allow manufacturers to develop their
own text, or whether the agency should specify the text that
manufacturers would be required to use. NHTSA has tentatively concluded
that specifying required text rather than simply providing guidelines
for manufacturers to develop their own text would be the best approach.
Manufacturers would be required to include the NHTSA-specified text
with the owner's manual information of every alternative fuel vehicle
that they produce for sale in the United States, but would also be
permitted to develop additional text to describe their own vehicles if
they choose. NHTSA believes that this approach will help to ensure that
the owner's manual information for all alternative fuel vehicles covers
the required topics as thoroughly and accurately as NHTSA believes is
necessary to implement EISA's intent, and will also avoid the potential
for gaps in information that might occur if the agency simply
prescribed guidelines. NHTSA recognizes that this approach may reduce
some amount of flexibility for manufacturers, but we believe that the
benefits of standardization, in this case, likely outweigh the
drawbacks.
    Thus, assuming that NHTSA will specify required owner's manual
text, the second question that NHTSA considered was whether the
required text should be general enough to cover all alternative fuel
vehicles, or whether it should be specific to each individual type of
alternative fuel vehicle. NHTSA has tentatively concluded that
requiring generic text to cover all alternative fuel vehicles rather
than specifying individualized text for each type of alternative fuel
vehicle would be the best approach. Again, manufacturers would be
permitted to develop additional text to describe their own vehicles if
they choose.
    NHTSA believes that this approach should benefit both consumers and
vehicle manufacturers by maintaining consistent owner's manual
information across all alternative fuel types in print form and
reducing complexities associated with specific text for an individual
fuel type, while still allowing alternative fuel information to evolve
as new fuels become more prominent in the marketplace, production
processes change or alternative fuel generation methods transform
technologically and/or regionally. Using standardized, somewhat generic
text with references to additional, more dynamic sources like internet
Web pages avoids published information becoming obsolete and less
useful to consumers. And again, we anticipate that standardized generic
text describing the benefits of alternative fuels will reduce the
burden on manufacturers, who would not be required to develop, or seek
approval for, their own alternative fuel owner's manual information.
    Additionally, in order to benefit from the expertise of other
federal agencies active in alternative fuel vehicle issues, NHTSA
consulted with the FTC to discuss potential alignment of content for
proposed owner's manual information with the (until-recently) required
\32\ FTC-alternative fuel label found on all new alternative fuel
vehicles sold in the U.S. The agency believes it may be helpful to
consumers to provide information that is consistent with the FTC label
which was in the marketplace between 1995 \33\ and April 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ In April of 2013, the Federal Trade Commission issued final
amendments to the Alternative Fuels Rule, consolidating the point of
sale labels required on alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) with those
required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
eliminating the need for two different labels and reducing the
burden of complying with the Rule. (``FTC Amends Alternative Fuels
Rule to Make Compliance Easier'' last accessed: January 2, 2014).
    \33\ http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/1995/05/alternative-fuels-final-rule-issued (last accessed: January 2,
2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency recognizes that there are many details and unique
characteristics associated with each of the alternative fuels covered
by this proposal, and that some consumers may prefer additional
information specific to their type of alternative fuel vehicle.
However, we believe that requiring all of that information to be
provided in the owner's manual may not be necessary, as the extent and
depth of this information for each of these fuels is vast, and can
change over time. Therefore, the agency believes that giving a
foundation of more generic alternative fuel vehicle information to
consumers, while providing a reference to government-funded and
supported sources of additional information, is a better approach to
implementing this statutory obligation.
    Therefore, the agency is proposing to require the following
standardized text, largely derived from the FTC developed alternative
fuel label,\34\ to be included in the owner's manual information of all
vehicles which are capable of operating

on any of the alternative fuels covered by this proposal:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 16 CFR 309.20.

``{Section Heading:{time}  Capabilities and Benefits of Using
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Fuels

    This vehicle is recognized by the U.S. Department of Transportation
as an alternative fuel vehicle, because it is capable of operating on a
biofuel, electricity, hydrogen, natural gas, propane or other fuel that
is not derived primarily from petroleum. Alternative fuel vehicles may
provide benefits both to their users and to the nation as a whole over
their useful lifetime by operating on non-petroleum-based alternative
fuels. Some of the benefits of alternative fuel usage in this vehicle
may include:
    Energy and National Security: Driving this vehicle on alternative
fuels may help to reduce our country's dependence on foreign oil. The
United States imports a substantial amount of its petroleum, the
majority of which is used to fuel vehicles in the form of gasoline and
diesel. Petroleum imports can be vulnerable to supply disruptions and
price shocks depending on conditions in the countries that supply us
with oil. By using alternative fuels, you may be helping the country be
less vulnerable to the supply disruptions and price variability
associated with imported oil, and supporting U.S. alternative fuel
producers.
    Environmental Benefits--Renewability and Emissions: Many
alternative fuels are renewable, which means that their sources can be
replenished--like plant-based ethanol, or solar-powered electricity.
Renewable fuels may have less environmental impact than conventional
fuels. Additionally, compared with vehicles fueled by conventional,
petroleum-derived diesel and gasoline, many alternative fuel vehicles
are estimated to reduce the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of
carbon dioxide.
    Fuel Type and Availability: Alternative fuels are increasing in
availability. To learn more about the availability of alternative fuel
that can power this vehicle, please visit the Department of Energy's
Alternative Fueling Station Locator at http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/locator/stations/ to determine the location of refueling and/or
recharging facilities that meet your driving needs.
Additional Information Resources
    For more information about alternative fuels and alternative fuel
vehicles, please visit the Department of Energy's Alternative Fuels &
Advanced Vehicles Data Center at http://www.afdc.energy.gov.
    For information about vehicle safety, please visit
www.safercar.gov.
    The agency proposes that this text follow the same font and type
size specification as other standard ``body'' text found throughout the
owner's manual. In addition, the agency proposes that the text be
located inside a text box, bordered with a 1-pt. solid black line, with
no other text in box. We believe that this will help the text stand out
to consumers and encourage them to review it.
    The agency seeks comment on this proposed text with regard to
whether it meets the EISA statutory requirements, whether the depth of
the information is sufficient, whether the fuel type should be
specified, and whether the references to other government Web sites for
the most up-to-date information regarding alternative fuels are
helpful. Should the agency require the inclusion of more or less
information on alternative fuel capability and benefits in the
standardized text? Are there additional benefits that should be added
directly in the text? Should the text vary (in part or in its entirety)
depending on the type of alternative fuel? If so, how should the text
vary? Should the agency include different or additional references to
Web sites or link technology such as the QR\TM\ code found on the
recently revised fuel economy label? If so, what type of technology and
to what Web sites? Commenters should include specific suggested changes
(and their reasons for the suggested changes) for the agency's
consideration.

D. Fuel Compartment Alternative Fuel Identification

    EISA requires DOT (by delegation, NHTSA) to develop regulations to
require a label to be attached to the fuel compartment of vehicles
capable of operating on alternative fuels, with the form of alternative
fuel stated on the label. EISA adds that a label attached in compliance
with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 32905(h) would be deemed to meet the
requirements. According to Merriam-Webster Online dictionary,\35\
``attached'' means ``permanently fixed,'' while ``compartment''
suggests ``a separate division or section.'' In the context of this
requirement, most manufacturers offering alternative fuel vehicles
either already have or intend to have, in the near future, some form of
labeling plan in place for the fuel compartment of those vehicles.
These labeling plans may be driven by one or multiple reasons. In some
cases, vehicle manufacturers are labeling the fuel filler compartment
in order to obtain dual-fuel vehicle credits under 49 U.S.C.
32905(h).\36\ In other cases, the labeling may be to provide key safety
information to consumers or first responders. And in yet other cases,
fuel cap coloring may be employed to indicate the vehicle's fuel-type
compatibility to avoid miss-fueling. However, not all alternative fuel
vehicles currently have such labeling, and not all manufacturers have
plans to add such labeling. Of the manufacturers who do provide labels,
the labeling is not consistent in either content or location. For
purposes of this proposal, the agency is interpreting ``a label . . .
attached to the fuel compartment of vehicles capable of operating on
alternative fuels, with the form of alternative fuel stated on the
label,'' as requiring greater consistency than what the majority of
manufacturers are currently providing for their alternative fuel
vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ http://www.merriam-webster.com/ (last accessed January 2,
2014).
    \36\ We note that because the 32905(h) requirement does not
apply to dedicated alternative fuel vehicles (such as, e.g., pure
NGVs or BEVs), manufacturers have no specific incentive to ensure
fuel compartment labeling for these vehicles under the current
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency considered whether it should develop specific labels for
manufacturers to employ, or simply provide general guidelines like
those of 32905(h) and 32908(g)(3) that direct manufacturers to attach
labels indicating which alternative fuel a vehicle can operate on, but
do not otherwise specify the content or form of the label. NHTSA has
tentatively concluded that the label can take the form of an adhesive-
type label or language ``screen-printed'' directly on the exterior of
the fuel cap or the fuel compartment access door, in a similar style to
those found in production today to meet the 32905(h) requirement, that
is specified and designed to remain affixed to the inside of the fuel
compartment access door or fuel cap over the entire useful life of the
vehicle. NHTSA believes this will best fulfill EISA's intent to provide
consumers with clear, consistent and useful information. The labeling
should clearly state the specific alternative fuel type(s) and, for
gaseous or electrically fueled vehicles, the proper/safe capacities for
replenishing the fuel supply.
    If a manufacturer is already applying labeling pursuant to
32905(h), NHTSA would not require an additional separate label for
compliance, but existing labels may require modification to comply with
the proposed label content.
    The agency is proposing a list of content requirements for the
label. Table

III-2 represents the proposed label content requirements that must be
included for each alternative fuel type:

                 Table III-2--Proposed Fuel Filler Compartment Alternative Fuel Labeling Content
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Charging
        Defined alternative fuel \37\           Alternative fuel name for use    Maximum blend       voltage
                                                         in labeling             level (liquid)      level(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Methanol \38\................................  Methanol.......................               X   ...............
Denatured Ethanol \38\.......................  Ethanol........................               X   ...............
Other Alcohols \38\..........................  [Name of Alcohol Derived Fuel].               X   ...............
Natural Gas..................................  CNG............................  ...............  ...............
Liquefied Petroleum Gas......................  LPG............................  ...............  ...............
Coal Derived Liquid Fuels....................  Coal Derived Liquid Fuels......               X   ...............
Hydrogen.....................................  Hydrogen.......................  ...............  ...............
Fuels (except alcohol) derived from            Biodiesel or [Name of other                   X   ...............
 biological materials.                          Biologically derived fuel].
Electricity (Battery Electric Vehicle).......  Electricity....................  ...............               X
Electricity (Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle)  Electricity/[Other Fuel                      X*                X
                                                Type(s)].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For dual fuel capable non-electric power source.

    The agency is providing the following discussion points regarding
Table III D-1 in an effort to provide clarity of the proposed label
content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 32901(a)(1).
    \38\ Note: To be considered an alternative fuel, alcohol derived
fuels need to be blended at levels of at least 85 percent of the
total mixture when blended with gasoline or other fuels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ``Alternative Fuel Name for Use in Labeling'' is the text that
must appear in the labeling.
    The ``Maximum Blend Level (Liquid)'' is intended to identify the
appropriate maximum acceptable mixture levels of liquid fuels that may
contain a blend of fuel types such as ethanol or biodiesel.
    The ``Charging Voltage Level(s)'' is intended to indicate both the
recommended charging voltage and additional voltage levels that can be
used for recharging an electric vehicle: battery only or plug-in
hybrid.
    The agency developed this table of proposed label content based on
alternative fuel labeling currently being applied pursuant to 32905(h)
and existing requirements for gaseous fuel vehicles. NHTSA believes
that this meets the statutory intent of EISA.
    Like the alternative fuel permanent and prominent display, in order
to ensure readability, the agency is proposing a minimum letter height
measurement and to have the alternative fuel name along with any
supporting information presented in a manner that provides clear
contrast between the letters and their background color.
    Based on the survey of current production fuel filler compartment
adhesive labels and information found on fuel caps, the agency proposes
a minimum for the text height of 5 millimeters and ``bold face'' when
applying language to an adhesive label or a fuel filler cap.
    In addition, the agency proposes that the fuel filler compartment
information is presented with a clear difference between the lightest
and the darkest parts of information. Ideally, this would be black text
on a white background, white text on a black background or a
combination of colors very similar in contrast.
    The agency is not currently proposing, but does seek comment on,
whether we should also, or alternatively, require vehicle manufacturers
to color-code the fuel cap (or charging port, or other equivalent) for
a specific alternative fuel type. If commenters believe that such an
additional or alternative requirement would be beneficial, we ask that
they provide specific rationale for the benefits of adding this
requirement, and quantify the benefits to the extent feasible; we also
ask that commenters provide specific recommendations as to what color
coding for each fuel they believe would be helpful and why.
    We also seek comment on the above proposal for fuel compartment
alternative fuel identification, and whether commenters believe that
there may be more effective or helpful ways to implement this
requirement while still meeting the language and intent of EISA.

E. When does NHTSA propose that the new requirements would be
implemented?

    NHTSA proposes that all components of this NPRM would apply to
vehicles manufactured on or after the first September 1 that is at
least six months after the publication date of a final rule
implementing this proposal. This proposed timing is intended to allow a
minimum of six months lead time for implementation. The agency
anticipates finalizing this proposal in the first quarter of 2015.
Therefore, we expect that the effective date of this proposed rule
would be September 1, 2016, which would provide manufacturers
additional lead time. The agency believes the lead time proposed may be
necessary; however the agency intends to allow optional early
compliance if a manufacturer wishes all vehicles from an affected model
year (MY) to be badged and/or labeled the same because we understand
that manufacturers may produce MY 2017 vehicles as early as January 1,
2016. This proposed timing would allow for these vehicles to be
introduced to the market with the proposed badges in place.
    With regard to badging, the agency learned from one badging
supplier that the lead time associated with the tooling and production
of an externally applied badge is approximately 16 to 18 weeks from
design to vehicle production application.\39\ In addition, the agency
believes that the flexible nature of the proposal for a permanent and
prominent display for alternative fuel capability would require little
design effort even among vehicle manufacturers that do not currently
badge their vehicles. Moreover, since the agency is aware that all
vehicle manufacturers currently have business relationships with badge
suppliers to produce ``permanent and prominent displays'' of
manufacturer names, model lines and other unique model designations,
some of which are related to alternative fuel capabilities, as part of
their regular production and marketing strategies, the agency does not
anticipate that manufacturers will need to develop or seek out new

relationships, which might otherwise create a need for additional lead
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Based on discussion with Douglas Corporation, January 22,
2010. A record of this discussion is available in the docket for
this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to owner's manual information, the Alliance of
Automobile Manufacturers suggested that a two full model year lead time
could be necessary for incorporation of this information.\40\ The
agency believes this amount of lead time is more than should be
necessary in this situation. First, the agency is proposing
standardized language that all vehicle manufacturers producing vehicles
capable of operating on the alternative fuels covered by this proposal
will be required to include. Standardized language should alleviate the
lead time that might be required for ``clean sheet'' development by
each manufacturer of owner's manual information language if the agency
provided only guidelines for what the language should contain rather
than specifying it directly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Alliance letter to NHTSA RE: NHTSA Consumer Information
Rulemaking, June 25, 2010. Available at Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0134.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the agency believes that a somewhat shorter time
frame for incorporation than that suggested by the Alliance can be
achieved. Today, in most cases, owner's manual information is
developed, reviewed and approved in an entirely digital environment,
which significantly reduces lead time. Moreover, the agency is aware
that some manufacturers have moved, or are in the process of moving, to
completely digital delivery of owner's manual information, where
owner's manual information is delivered via a digital video disc (DVD)
or some other digital format.\41\ In some of these cases, official
vehicle manufacturer owner's manual information is available via the
internet.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ ``Chrysler Phases Out Paper Owner's Manual'' http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/chrysler-does-away-with-paper-owners-manual/ (last accessed January 2, 2014).
    \42\ ``Owners Manuals for Ford Vehicles,'' https://owner.ford.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Owner/Page/OwnerGuidePageVehicleLookup&BackToLogin=Owner/Page/OwnerGuidePage⩝=14632762 (last accessed December 9, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For fuel compartment labeling, the agency believes the proposed
time frame to be reasonable for two reasons. First, as discussed above,
in developing this proposal the agency discovered that many
manufacturers producing alternative fuel vehicles already label their
fuel compartments in order to obtain dual-fuel vehicle credits,
pursuant to the requirements in 49 U.S.C. 32905(h). In this NPRM, the
agency is simply proposing to require manufacturers to do what many
manufacturers are already doing--thus, for the manufacturers already
labeling their vehicles, no lead time should theoretically be required.
For the manufacturers not currently labeling their alternative fuel
vehicles, a supply base for meeting the requirements of 49 U.S.C.
32905(h) is already established, so those manufacturers should be able
to leverage this existing supply base and thus mitigate lead time
needs.
    Further, manufacturers not already in compliance with this
component of this proposal are, for the most part, not producing
alternative fuel capable vehicles at the present time. The agency
recognizes, however, that some vehicle manufacturers will begin
production of alternative fueled vehicles during the proposed optional
and required compliance time frame.
    The agency seeks comment on whether the proposed lead time for each
of the requirements is reasonable. If a commenter wishes the agency to
provide additional lead time, the agency requests that the commenter
provide specific explanations for which elements and why more lead time
might be needed. For example, if a commenter sought more lead time for
the owner's manual requirements, the agency would be seeking details of
the owner's manual publication process and associated timing, along
with current and future media that will be used for the owner's manual
information.

IV. What are the estimated costs and benefits of the proposal?

    In determining estimated industry costs associated with this
proposal, the agency first set out to determine a projected MY 2017
volume for vehicles capable of operating on the alternative fuels
covered by this proposal. Next, the agency investigated potential
``ball-park'' piece cost and labor cost for labels and exterior vehicle
badges. And finally, the agency looked at labor rates for personnel
that may be involved with the development of owner's manual
information.
    To develop a projected alternative fuel vehicle volume for the U.S.
market, we used specific data from NHTSA's Corporate Average Fuel
Economy (CAFE) program database, current and historical industry
volumes from Wards Auto (online), sales outlooks from Pike Research for
low speed vehicles (LSVs) and the Energy Information Administration's
2012 Annual Energy Outlook for light duty vehicles. Finally, the agency
considered public announcements from manufacturers regarding
anticipated future volumes of alternative fuel vehicles such as FFVs,
PHEVs, BEVs and FCVs.
    For label and badge piece cost and labor costs, the agency spoke
with suppliers of both badges and labels currently used in vehicle
production. These suppliers have continued and wide-ranging label and
badge supply experience inside and outside the automotive industry. In
some cases, the suppliers currently produce either badges or labels for
multiple vehicle manufacturers.
    The agency seeks comment on all cost estimates developed for this
proposal; specifically, the estimated piece costs for alternative fuel
badges and labels, the estimated costs associated with producing pages
of owner's manual information, and any additional costs which may not
be included in these estimates. Specific citations to sources for
comments on cost estimates would be most helpful to NHTSA.

A. How did NHTSA project alternative fuel vehicle volumes?

    As part of the research conducted for development of this proposal,
the agency attempted to determine a projected volume of MY 2017
alternative fuel vehicles that could be affected by this proposal. The
agency utilized the overall industry sales projections of light duty
cars and trucks developed by the Energy Information Agency (EIA) for
its 2012 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) Early Release reference case.\43\
When needed, the agency evaluated and applied manufacturer or specific
vehicle model market share to further refine MY 2017 projections for
specific alternative fuels; an example being E85 capable or ``flex-
fuel'' vehicles. A summary of the volume projections by alternative
fuel type can be found in Table IV-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ AEO2012 Early Release Overview--http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo12/er/ (last accessed: January 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using the CAFE program database, the agency learned that the vast
majority of FFVs are produced by General Motors, Ford and Chrysler with
very few other manufacturers producing FFVs. The agency used this
finding to develop an estimated volume for MY 2017 ethanol capable
flex-fuel vehicles and based the estimate primarily on announced volume
projections from Ford, General Motors and Chrysler where these
manufacturers indicated 50 percent of their fleet will have E85 flex-
fuel capability by 2012.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ ``Detroit Three's Flex-Fuel Builds Increasing'' Wards Auto,
October 27, 2011 http://wardsauto.com/news-amp-analysis/detroit-three-s-flex-fuel-builds-increasing (last accessed: January 2,
2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To develop projected volume for these manufacturers, the agency
applied market share values of 18 percent for General Motors, 15.5
percent for Ford and 11 percent for Chrysler, taken from

Wards Auto for MY 2011-13, to the total MY 2016-17 industry sales
projected by the 2012 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) Early Release
reference case \45\ yielding a projected MY 2017 market volume for
these manufacturers. The agency then applied the 50 percent FFV fleet
value to each manufacturer's projected market-share based volume to
determine a projected MY 2017 FFV volume. To prevent double-counting,
the agency excluded the volume of other alternative fuel vehicles
covered by this proposal and produced by these manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ DOE Annual Energy Outlook Early 2012 Release--http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/#release=EARLY2012&subject=15-EARLY2012&table=48-EARLY2012®ion=1-0&cases=early2012-d121011b
(last accessed: January 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency also included MY 2017 projections for several current
vehicle models that are E85 capable, that are produced by other vehicle
manufacturers, and that have production volumes greater than 2000
units. For the most part, these vehicles were large pickup truck and
SUV FFV models from Nissan and Toyota. Recognizing that the MYs 2012-
2025 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
Emission standards become progressively more stringent each model year
and that both programs provide incentives for FFVs, it is probable that
manufacturers will increase the number of FFV vehicles that they
produce in MY 2017 compared to MY 2012. To avoid underestimating cost
in this proposal, the agency increased the projected number of vehicles
that might be affected by the proposed rule by the equivalent of 50% of
the projected MY 2017 production volume of Toyota and Nissan large
pickups and SUVs. To estimate the projected MY 2017 production volume
of Toyota and Nissan large pickups and SUVs, the agency applied the MY
2013 market share of these vehicles to the projected MY 2017 total
industry volume projections.\46\ The agency notes that it is not aware
of any announcement by either of those companies to produce this
quantity of FFVs. Nevertheless, the agency believes that adding the
equivalent of 50 percent of Toyota's and Nissan's volume is a
reasonable approach for estimating the additional number of vehicles
that might be affected by this proposal, because other manufacturers
may choose to produce FFVs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Overall, using the market share based methodology brings simplicity
and allows any industry-wide volume increase or decrease to be easily
reflected. Using this projection methodology, the agency predicts
almost 98 percent of the overall projected MY 2017 alternative fuel
vehicle fleet will be E85 capable with an estimated 3,818,555 vehicles
produced that year.
    In addition to ethanol capable vehicles, cost estimates for this
proposal also need to account for the number of vehicles capable of
operating on other alternative fuels covered by this proposal. For the
U.S. market, this primarily includes compressed natural gas, liquefied
petroleum gas, hydrogen and electricity fueled vehicles. Through its
research, the agency is not aware of any manufacturers planning to
produce a significant number of vehicles capable of operating on
alternative fuels such as methanol, coal-derived liquid fuels or fuels
(except alcohol) derived from biological materials.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ The agency notes that it recognizes only `neat' biodiesel
(B100) as an alternative fuel. 63 FR 15322 (Mar. 31, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency did employ a different methodology for developing volume
projections of alternative fuel vehicles covered by this proposal that
use fuels other than ethanol. The agency utilized published sales data
for battery electric vehicles (BEV) and plug-in electric vehicles
(PHEV), as these vehicles have entered commerce and accumulated at
least one year of sales data.\48\ In addition, the agency incorporated
the sales volume of electric low speed vehicles (LSVs) into the volume
projections for BEV as these are covered by this proposed rule.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ For reference, the agency used sales information from Wards
Auto for these vehicle types.
    \49\ For LSVs, the agency utilized sales and project data
available from a report developed by Pike Research titled,
``Neighborhood Electric Vehicles: Low-Speed Electric Vehicle for
Consumers and Fleet Markets: Demand Drivers and Barriers,
Technology, Key Industry Players and Market Forecasts,'' Published
2Q 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency also evaluated and utilized manufacturers' revised or
publicly announced projected vehicle volumes for alternative fuel
vehicles powered by electricity, compressed natural gas, liquefied
petroleum gas and hydrogen. As a result, the agency utilized a
``projected volume'' approach instead of the market share approach that
is used for ethanol vehicle volumes. This projected volume approach is
believed to be more practicable as the market share of current models
are likely to change as other competitive models enter the market, and
because future models currently have no market share. However the
agency did project slight increases for vehicles already entered into
commerce, such as BEVs and PHEVs, based on expanding regional
availability in the United States and increased production volumes.
    Therefore, the cost estimates in this proposal are based on the
alternative fuel vehicle volumes represented by fuel type in the
following table.

                         Table IV-1--MY 2017 Alternative Fuel Vehicle Volume Projection
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Percent
                            Fuel type                                 Volume        Percent alt      industry
                                                                                fuel volume       volume
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethanol.........................................................       3,818,555           97.77          22.428
Natural Gas.....................................................           4,300            0.11           0.025
Electric (BEV) *................................................          32,209            0.82           0.189
Electric (PHEV/EREV)............................................          47,639            1.22           0.280
Hydrogen........................................................             274            0.01           0.002
LPG.............................................................           2,750            0.07           0.016
Biodiesel **....................................................  ..............            0.00           0.000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................       3,905,727          100.00          22.940
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes LSVs.
** DOT only considers B100 to be an Alternative fuel.

    As discussed, these volumes are estimates based on varied sources
of information; some historical and some forward-looking. The agency
acknowledges that actual production volumes in the future are likely to
be different than the projections developed for this proposal, however,
the agency believes the projections have been developed using the best
available information at the time of development of this proposal; for
example AEO vehicles sales projections and Wards Auto data. The agency
notes that the forecast information is from the same sources that have
been used in other agency rulemakings and the sources are recognized
and used by industry in developing future projections.
    The agency also recognizes the many factors that will affect these
volume projections some of which include prices of petroleum and non-
petroleum derived fuels, infrastructure for alternative fueling
accessibility, overall consumer acceptance of alternative fuel vehicle
characteristics and finally, the need for vehicle manufacturers to meet
more stringent CAFE and greenhouse gas emissions standards.
    In light of these many significant variables, the agency seeks
comment on these volume projections, including alternative fuel type
applications, for MY 2017 and any subsequent model years to gain
potentially better information to the overall costs and production-
intent alternative fuel type applicability associated with this
proposal.

B. What total costs does NHTSA estimate for the proposal?

    The agency has estimated the total costs of the proposal in Table
IV-2 and Table IV-3 below.

  Table IV-2--Estimated Industry Costs for Proposal in First Model Year
                                 (2012$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permanent and Prominent Display Badge...      $6,713,112     $13,292,937
Tooling (all fuel types)................          41,064         284,287
Fuel Compartment Label..................  ..............         827,436
Owner's Information.....................  ..............         348,352
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................       7,929,963      14,753,011
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values derived from Projected MY2017 Industry Volume of Alternative
  Fuel Vehicles (Including LSVs).

Table IV-3--Estimated Annual Industry Costs for Proposal After the First
                           Model Year (2012$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permanent and Prominent Display Badge...      $6,713,112     $13,292,937
Fuel Compartment Label..................  ..............         827,436
Owner's Information.....................  ..............         328,081
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................       7,868,629      14,448,453
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values derived from Projected MY2017 Industry Volume of Alternative
  Fuel Vehicles (Including LSVs).

    The estimated costs per requirement are described in detail in the
following discussion.
1. What costs does NHTSA estimate for the proposal for ``Permanent and
Prominent Display'' of Alternative-Fuel capability?
    The agency spoke with a supplier of badges to the automotive
industry to gain a better understanding of badge development and
implementation options, along with potential piece costs for those
options.\50\ During the discussion, the supplier suggested multiple
options that could align with the lead and alternative proposals for
meeting the statutory obligations of a ``permanent and prominent
display'' of a vehicle's capability to operate on an alternative fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ NHTSA's records of these meetings are available in the
docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The first consisted of plastic molded into a specified design. This
molded part would be chrome plated and finished with additional
decorative or colored aspects per the specified design. Some key
aspects of this design are its durability and commonality with model or
brand badges found on vehicles in production today. A key consideration
for this badge technology is the need to ensure that the rear surface
of the badge, the surface that would adhere to a vehicle via an
adhesive, has a contour that would be adaptable to most any vehicle due
to the rigidity of the plastic molded part.
    Another badge technology option is a foil-type material containing
the natural language or design, which is covered in a protective
urethane coating. The urethane coating provides thickness to the badge
and could provide some limited contouring on the surface to add
emphasis to components of the design or language contained on the
urethane encased foil. The urethane-coated design does provide some
cost and tooling advantages over the chrome-plated, ABS plastic molded
part, albeit at the possible expense of attractiveness or readability
as a badge employing these materials typically results in the text
being ``protected'' by a relatively thick layer of material. In either
of the two material approaches, the badge is intended to remain affixed
and readable over the useful life of the vehicle.
    Consistent with the proposal for application of a badge containing
natural language, the agency has developed estimated costs associated
with the projected alternative fuel vehicle volume for MY 2017 as the
basis for annual costs. These costs are considered annual costs with
the potential to increase linearly with an increase of alternative fuel
vehicles in the marketplace.

    The following table contains estimated aggregated labor cost for
affixing badges to vehicles in a production environment. The labor
value was estimated at $0.35 per badge based on a labor rate of
approximately $21 per hour \51\ and allowing for one minute of time to
apply the badge to the vehicle in the production environment,
parameters which the agency considered reasonable for the labor
involved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2012,
Production Occupations, 51-2099 Assemblers and Fabricators, All
Other, hourly mean wage: $21.14 per hour. http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes512099.htm (last accessed January 27, 2014).

          Table IV-4--Potential Badge Labor Cost MY2017 (2012$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Fuel type                     Labor cost  Labor hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethanol.......................................   $1,336,494    63,642.58
Natural Gas...................................        1,505        71.67
Electric (BEV)................................       11,273       536.81
Electric (PHEV/EREV)..........................       16,674       793.98
Hydrogen......................................           96         4.57
LPG...........................................          963        45.83
                                               -------------------------