Optional Certification Streamlining Procedures for Light-Duty
Vehicles, Light-Duty Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Engines for Original
Equipment Manufacturers and for Aftermarket Conversion Manufacturers;
Notice of Proposed Rule
Related Material
[Federal Register: July 20, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 138)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 38767-38774]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20jy98-28]
[[Page 38767]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 86
[AMS-FRL-6124-1]
Optional Certification Streamlining Procedures for Light-Duty
Vehicles, Light-Duty Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Engines for Original
Equipment Manufacturers and for Aftermarket Conversion Manufacturers;
Notice of Proposed Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In today's action, EPA is proposing to amend the current
regulatory provisions regarding the certification of light-duty
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and heavy-duty engines that meet the
Clean-Fuel Vehicle (CFV) requirements. This proposed action would serve
to ease the burden of certification for manufacturers of CFVs. EPA is
also proposing to revise the definition for dedicated fuel systems to
include CFVs with limited ability to operate on a conventional fuel,
and is also proposing to amend current regulations to allow
manufacturers of CFVs to group certain engine families together for
certification purposes. In addition, EPA is proposing an exemption, for
MY 1999, 2000 and 2001, from certification fees for dedicated gaseous-
fueled vehicles and engines that certify to EPA's Tier 1 standards as
well as for all vehicles and engines that certify to EPA's CFV, Low-
Emission Vehicle (LEV), Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV), Inherently
Low Emission Vehicle (ILEV), or Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) emission
standards.
DATES: Any party who wishes to submit comments must do so by August 19,
1998 unless a hearing is requested. Any person can request EPA to hold
a public hearing on this action, but such request must be received by
August 19, 1998. If a hearing is requested, it will take place on
September 18, 1998, and interested parties will have an additional 30
days after the hearing (until October 19, 1998) to submit comments on
any information presented at the hearing. Because no hearing will
occur, absent a request for one, interested parties should contact
Clifford D. Tyree at the number listed below after August 19, 1998 to
determine whether a hearing will take place.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted (in duplicate if
possible) to: Air Docket Section (6102), Attention: Docket No. A-97-27,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington,
D.C. 20460, or hand-delivered to the Air Docket at the above address,
in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall. A copy of written comments should also
be submitted to Clifford D. Tyree at the address below.
Materials relevant to this notice of proposed rule are contained in
Docket No. A-97-27, located at the Air Docket, 401 M Street SW,
Washington, DC 20460, and may be reviewed in Room M-1500 from 8:00 a.m.
until 5:30 p.m. on business days. As provided in 40 CFR Part 2, EPA may
charge a reasonable fee for photocopying docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Clifford Tyree, Project Manager,
U.S. EPA, National Vehicle and Fuel Emission Laboratory, Vehicle
Programs and Compliance Division, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI
48105-2425. Telephone: (734) 214-4310; FAX 734-214-4869. E-Mail,
tyree.clifford@epamail.epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by this notice of proposed
rulemaking are Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) of Light-Duty
Vehicles, Light-Duty Trucks (LDTs), and Heavy-Duty Engine (HDEs)
manufacturers. In addition, aftermarket convertors of LDVs, LDTs, and
HDEs will also be regulated. Entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Auto industry of light-duty vehicles, Original Equipment
light-duty trucks, and heavy-duty engines. Manufacturers (OEMs) and
Aftermarket Converters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
proposed action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by this proposed action. Other
types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. If
you have questions regarding the applicability of this proposed action
to a particular product, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Obtaining Electronic Copies of the Regulatory Documents
The preamble, regulatory and other related documents are also
available electronically from the EPA Internet Web site. This service
is free of charge, except for any cost you already incur for internet
connectivity. An electronic version is made available on the day of
publication on the primary Web site listed below. The EPA Office of
Mobile Sources also publishes Federal Register notices and related
documents on secondary Web site listed below.
1. http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/(either select desired
date or use Search feature.)
2. http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/cff.htm
Please note that due to differences between the software used to
develop the document and the software into which the document may be
downloaded, changes in format, page length, etc. may occur.
I. Background <SUP>1</SUP>
EPA's emissions standards and requirements for clean-fuel vehicles
(CFVs) are contained in 40 CFR Part 88. These regulations include
several sets of exhaust emissions standards for clean-fuel vehicles
(CFVs): Transitional Low-Emission Vehicle (TLEV) standards, Low-
Emission Vehicle (LEV) standards, Inherently Low-Emission Vehicle
(ILEV), Ultra Low-Emission Vehicle (ULEV) standards, and Zero-Emission
Vehicle (ZEV) standards. The regulations also apply all standards and
requirements in 40 CFR Part 86 to CFVs, except the Part 86 exhaust
emissions standards for those pollutants for which Part 88 establishes
standards. The CFV standards apply to all CFVs, including those that
operate on gaseous-fuels like compressed natural gas (CNG) and
liquefied petroleum gas (LPG).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA has included in this notice a brief summary of the
aftermarket conversion requirements and the Clean-Fuel Fleet
program. Readers may consult EPA's current certification regulations
in 40 CFR Parts 86 and EPA's clean fuel vehicle regulations in 40
CFR part 88, as well as the following notices of final rulemaking:
Emissions Standards for Clean Fuel Vehicles and Engines (59 FR
50042, September 30, 1994) and Standards for Emissions from Natural
Gas-fueled and Liquefied Petroleum Gas-fueled Motor Vehicles and
Motor Vehicle Engines, and Certification Procedures for Aftermarket
Conversions (59 FR 48471, September 21, 1994), for additional
background information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 246 of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (``CAA'' or
``the Act''), requires states to adopt in their State Implementation
Plans (SIP) a Clean-fuel Fleet Program (CFFP) for certain ozone and
carbon monoxide nonattainment areas. The states' CFFPs must require
that fleet operators with central fueling capability shall include a
certain percentage of CFVs that meet LEV emissions standards in their
vehicle purchases each year, and shall operate such vehicles on clean
alternative-
[[Page 38768]]
fuels.<SUP>2</SUP> EPA is aware that fleet operators subject to CFFP
requirements are concerned about sufficient availability of CFVs to
meet such requirements. For the 1997 model year, one light-duty
vehicle, two light-duty trucks, and five heavy-duty vehicle engine
families have been certified to federal CFV standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ A clean alternative fuel is defined as a fuel used in a
vehicle that meets the CFV standards when operating on such fuel.
See CAA Section 241(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's Office of Mobile Sources recently adopted a one-year
delay in implementation of state CFFPs, due to concerns about
sufficient CFV availability to meet fleet operator
requirements.<SUP>3</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 40 CFR 88.304-98, Direct Final Rule, 63 FR 20103, April 23,
1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In today's action, EPA is proposing to amend certain provisions
intended to encourage and facilitate the certification of CFVs by
reducing the costs of certifying in three specific areas. These
provisions are described in detail below.
II. Today's Proposal
A. Definition of Dedicated Vehicle
Current EPA regulations define a ``dual-fuel vehicle'' as a motor
vehicle, or engine, engineered and designed to be operated on two
different fuels, but not on a mixture of fuels.<SUP>4</SUP> A
``dedicated vehicle'' is defined as a vehicle or engine engineered and
designed to be operated using a single fuel.<SUP>5</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 40 CFR 88.102-94.
\5\ 40 CFR 86.090-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are specific requirements that apply to dual-fuel light-duty
vehicles (LDVs) <SUP>6</SUP> and light light-duty trucks (LLDT)
<SUP>7</SUP> certifying to the CFV emissions standards. A dual-fuel
vehicle must comply with the applicable set of standards for each fuel
on which it can operate. To qualify as CFVs for purposes of state
CFFPs, dual-fuel vehicles must meet LEV (or more stringent) emissions
standards on the clean alternative fuel and the TLEV non-methane
organic gas (NMOG) emission standard on the conventional
fuel.<SUP>8</SUP> On the conventional fuel, the vehicle must meet Tier
1, NMOG and HCHO emission standards and also comply with all other
motor vehicle emissions control requirements contained in 40 CFR Part
86 (such as the cold temperature carbon monoxide standard (Cold CO),
onboard diagnostic requirement (OBD), and certification short test
(CST) requirements) that apply to comparable conventional gasoline
vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 40 CFR 86.082-2, A light-duty vehicle (LDV) means a
passenger car or passenger car derivative capable of seating 12
passengers or less.
\7\ 40 CFR 86.094-2, A light light-duty ( LLDT) means any light-
duty truck rated through 6,000 lbs. GVWR.
\8\ Formaldehyde (HCHO) exhaust emission standards apply to any
fuel used to meet CFV standards, including gasoline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For vehicles with a dedicated fuel system to be a feasible option
for fleets, many fleet operators will need the flexibility to operate
on conventional fuel in emergency situations, when central fueling is
impossible. If the fleet operator is subject to the CFFP, and is
operating in a nonattainment area covered by the CFFP, he must operate
the vehicle on a fuel on which the vehicle meets the CFV emissions
standards to comply with the CFFP requirements. If the vehicle is
certified to the LEV emissions standards on both fuels, the fleet
operator would have the option of using the conventional fuel in the
covered nonattainment area. However, if the vehicle is certified to the
LEV standards only on CNG or LPG, that option would not be available.
In light of the limited gaseous-fuel fueling stations in the
nonattainment areas covered by a CFFP, fleet operators are concerned
that the safety of vehicle operators and occupants could be at risk
during inclement weather.<SUP>9</SUP> In addition, unforeseen traffic
delays (or other unforeseen delays) may cause fleet vehicles to be
stranded, resulting in higher costs for and reduced efficiency of the
fleet. For these reasons, EPA has determined that it would be
reasonable and appropriate to revise the definition of a dedicated
vehicle to allow operation up to a limited mileage on a conventional
fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The CFFP requires fleet operators to operate their CFVs on
clean alternative fuels only when in the covered nonattainment area.
Therefore, for dual-fuel CFVs, fleet operators may use either the
clean alternative fuel or the conventional fuel outside the covered
nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described above, fleet operators subject to the CFFP must
operate their CFV's on a ``clean alternative fuel,'' as defined in CAA
Section 241(2). To ensure that CFVs that operate on gaseous fuels are a
feasible option for fleet operators covered by the CFFP, EPA would
certify as dedicated CFVs vehicles meeting the CFV dual-fuel standards
with limited ability to operate on a conventional fuel, as described
above. EPA's issuance of such certificates is authorized by the
Agency's authority to adopt de minimis exemptions to statutory
requirements, and is consistent with Congressional intent.
Section 246(b) of the CAA requires state CFFPs to provide that
covered fleet operators must operate their clean-fuel vehicles on clean
alternative fuels when operating in the covered nonattainment area.
Clean alternative fuel, in turn, is defined as a fuel used in a CFV
that meets applicable emissions standards and requirements when
operating on such fuel. See Sec. 241(2). Courts have recognized EPA's
authority to provide exemptions from CAA requirements when the burdens
of regulation yield a gain of trivial or no value. Alabama Power v.
Costle, 636 F.2d.323 (D.C. Cir. 1979). EPA believes that prohibiting
gaseous-fueled vehicles capable of limited operation on gasoline from
qualifying as CFVs would unnecessarily increase the burden of
compliance with state CFFPs, and would not result in any emissions
benefits.
Allowing limited operation of such vehicles on gasoline in
emergency situations would not result in any adverse emissions impacts.
If a gaseous-fueled fleet vehicle is stranded within the nonattainment
area due to lack of fuel, and cannot operate on gasoline, even for a
limited number of miles, without violating the CFFP requirements,
another vehicle would have to be dispatched to ``rescue'' the stranded
vehicle and its occupants. The second vehicle may not be a CFV,
especially if it is not owned by the covered fleet (e.g., if a tow
truck was required to retrieve the stranded vehicle). This ``rescue
operation'' will therefore result in emissions likely to be equivalent
to, and perhaps in excess of, the incremental additional emissions
resulting from the limited operation of the gaseous-fueled CFV on
gasoline.
In general, EPA expects that CFVs meeting the revised definition of
dedicated vehicle would meet the Tier 1 emission standards when
operating on conventional fuel. EPA expects that Original Equipment
Manufacturers (OEMs) will produce vehicles that meet the revised
definition of dedicated vehicle and have limited ability to operate on
a conventional fuel by limiting the conventional fuel use function of
dual-fuel vehicles (or engines) previously certified to Tier 1
emissions standards on conventional fuel. Aftermarket conversion
companies are likely to convert vehicles (or engines) previously
certified to Tier 1 standards on a conventional fuel to operate on a
gaseous fuel at least LEV emissions levels. If these vehicles are
equipped with an emergency reserve tank with limited capacity for the
conventional fuel, EPA expects that the vehicles' emissions on
conventional fuel during emergency operation will be similar to the
emissions of the vehicle prior to conversion (i.e., Tier 1 emissions
levels). Therefore, EPA believes it would be appropriate for state
CFFPs to allow fleet operators to purchase dedicated gaseous-fueled
vehicles that have limited ability to operate on gasoline, and to
operate for
[[Page 38769]]
limited mileage on gasoline in emergency situations in the covered
nonattainment area.
EPA regulations define the term ``centrally fueled'' as meaning a
fleet, or that part of a fleet, consisting of vehicles that are fueled
100 percent of the time at a location that is owned, operated, or
controlled by the covered fleet operator, or is under contract with the
covered fleet operator. See 40 CFR 88.302-94. The proposed de minimis
exemption for limited operation on conventional fuel described above
would not affect this definition of ``centrally fueled'', because the
de minimis exemption would allow only limited operation in emergency
circumstances. A fleet operator would still need to determine whether,
in normal circumstances, its covered fleet vehicles are centrally
fueled 100 percent of the time.
EPA considered two modifications to the definition of dedicated
vehicle to allow limited operation on conventional fuel. EPA considered
proposing to modify the definition of a dedicated fueled vehicle to
allow vehicles to be equipped with a fuel tank that would allow a range
of operation of 50 statute miles. This would require the replacement of
the existing gasoline tank with a tank of approximately two-gallon
capacity. However, the act of removing an existing fuel tank that has
met the crash tests and other testing required by the National Highway
Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) <SUP>10</SUP> could
require another set of vehicle crash tests with any vehicle using a
``new'' fuel tank system, and the cost of conducting another set of
vehicle crash tests may deter manufacturers from modifying vehicles in
this manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Reference NHTSA's rules found at 49 CFR Part 555.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An alternative modification EPA considered proposing is retention
of the existing fuel tank and use of a timer to restrict fuel usage.
The timer could allow a maximum of one hour of operation on gasoline
followed by a period of time the vehicle could not operate on gasoline.
Manufacturers would be required to program these time periods into one
of the vehicle's computers. The choice of one hour of operation is
roughly equivalent to the 50-mile range criterion, based on the
combined fuel economy values and an assumed vehicle average speed of 50
miles-per-hour.
To provide maximum flexibility to manufacturers and fleet
operators, EPA is proposing to amend definition of a dedicated vehicle
to allow both of these approaches: clean fuel vehicles equipped with a
timer that limits operation on gasoline to one hour at a time, and
clean fuel vehicles equipped with a fuel tank with fuel capacity of no
more than 50 miles of operation on gasoline, will be included in the
definition of a dedicated vehicle. Because the use of conventional fuel
is intended for emergency use only, and the operation on conventional
fuel is expected to be an exception, no emission or fuel economy
testing would be required on these vehicles with conventional fuel.
The proposed revision to the definition of dedicated fuel systems
would apply only to light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, because
EPA has not adopted heavy-duty flexible and dual fueled Clean-Fuel
vehicle standards. See 59 FR 50050 (September 30, 1994).
B. Engine Family Criteria and Assigned Deterioration Factors
Manufacturers and aftermarket converters have expressed concerns to
EPA regarding the overall burden of complying with EPA's certification
regulations for vehicles converted to operate on a clean alternative
fuel for the purpose of meeting EPA's CFV emissions standards. The
burdens identified relate to the cost of certifying each engine family
and the narrowness of the criteria under which exhaust emission control
systems are classified into engine families.<SUP>11</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 40 CFR 86.096-24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of the diversity in marketing requirements, a number of
engine families, with limited sales, would be created under current
regulations to meet consumer needs. Currently EPA provides for relief
from full useful life deterioration factor (DF) requirement for engine
families with a combined total sales of no more than 10,000 vehicles or
engines.<SUP>12</SUP> In today's action EPA is proposing to adopt
similar provisions, applicable thru MY 2001, for vehicles and engines
certified to EPA's CFV emissions standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 40 CFR 86.094-24(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The costs identified by the OEM and aftermarket conversion
manufacturers were the actual costs associated with certifying each
engine family. Costs attributed to certifying each engine family are
development costs, testing costs, and certification fees. Various
aftermarket conversion entities have estimated the costs of generating
DFs to be in excess of $1 million for each engine family. While EPA
does not have data to corroborate these cost estimates, the Agency
believes that the cost of generating DFs is significant, but expects it
is well below $1 million per engine family. EPA's current regulations
for small volume engine family certification allow manufacturers to use
assigned DFs generated by EPA. See 40 CFR 86.096-24(e)(2) Manufacturers
may also use Dfs they have generated using good engineering judgment.
See 40 CFR 86.094-14(c)(7)(i)(C)(2)(i). In today's action, EPA is
proposing to amend the regulations that clarify these options are also
available for CFV small-volume engine families. In September, 1995, EPA
issued a guidance letter to manufacturers containing assigned DFs for
gaseous fueled vehicles. In general, EPA expects that manufacturer's
use of these assigned DFs for gaseous fueled CFVs would qualify as DFs
generated using good engineering judgment under the regulatory
provision adopted today.
EPA is proposing to amend the provisions that allow grouping of
certain CFV engine families into an engine family class. The criteria
for such grouping is described below. EPA expects that this proposed
action would serve to encourage production of CFVs for fleet operators
to purchase and use to meet state CFFP purchase requirements by
reducing the amount of testing needed for certification of CFVs. This
would allow manufacturers to introduce a greater number of CFV models
desired by fleet owners without incurring additional testing costs.
Fleet vehicles must be able to perform a wide variety of duties,
such as meter-reading tasks, service repair, making deliveries,
transporting passengers, etc. Therefore, for a manufacturer or
aftermarket converter to be competitive in the clean fuel vehicle fleet
market, multiple engine families need to be certified for different
needs.
Currently, vehicle grouping for the purpose of certification is
accomplished though the application of the ``engine family'' and
``emission control system'' definitions in the regulations. Today's
proposal would establish a new definition for grouping engine families:
engine family class. An engine family class would be defined as engines
sharing the following common characteristics: (1) Meeting LEV, ILEV,
ULEV, or ZEV emission standards in 40 CFR Part 88, (2) same car line
name, (3) all engines have engine displacements within a range of 0.8L
<SUP>13</SUP> less than the displacement of the engine used for
certification testing, (4) same catalyst construction, (5) same type of
precious metals used in the catalyst, and (6) same
[[Page 38770]]
relative engine/catalyst size and loading rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See EPA Advisory Circular 17F, page 9, which can be found
in the docket for this rulemaking action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is proposing to amend the criteria for engine family classes to
reduce the certification burden for CFVs and to combine vehicles which
are likely to exhibit similar exhaust emission deterioration over their
useful lives, based on the characteristics of current-technology
vehicles that most significantly affect the deterioration of emission
control over time. Each engine family class would be certified using
separate emission compliance data and a separate certificate of
conformity would be required for each engine family class.
The engine family concept was originally developed as a way to
combine vehicles of similar emission deterioration rates. At that time
(in the early 1970's), the use of catalytic converters was less
prevalent and most emission reductions occurred though modifications to
the engine operating characteristics. For these vehicles, all emission
deterioration was due to increases in emissions coming directly out of
the engine (called ``engine-out'' emissions). Consequently, the
definition of engine family focused on engine-based parameters. Since
that time, there have been many advances in exhaust emission control
technology which have made the engine family concept less useful for
the purposes of grouping vehicles together on the basis of emission
deterioration.
In today's vehicles, most emission control is accomplished through
catalytic conversion of the exhaust while the engine is controlled to
operate within carefully controlled air/fuel ratios to ensure optimum
catalyst efficiency. While manufacturers have demonstrated that
essentially no engine-out deterioration is experienced in their current
product, the mating of the catalyst with the engine is extremely
important. Appropriate sizing of the catalyst to the engine is critical
to achieve an appropriate catalyst residence time (the time the exhaust
gases remain in the catalyst) so that the catalytic reaction has time
to be completed. Adequate levels of precious metal loading and
appropriate dispersion are necessary to provide the active sites for
conversion and achieve the desired conversion rates. Also, the catalyst
must be placed in a temperature environment that allows it to quickly
come to operating temperature but does not expose it to damaging
amounts of high temperature during in-use driving.
The proposed engine family class definition takes into account the
changes in emission control technology by shifting the focus away from
engine parameters to the ability of the overall engine and emission
control system to meet LEV, or better, standards. This single
requirement of focusing on a more stringent emission standard would
require the matching of the catalyst to the engine. The Agency believes
that the proposed engine family class definition would comprise an
effective emission control program and result in significant
environmental benefits by giving manufacturers additional incentives to
produce and market a broader range of vehicles and engines that meet
the CFV standards.
EPA is proposing to provide this newly created engine family class
criteria through model year 2001, by which time EPA expects that
manufacturers would have had several years to assess the market
requirements and should be able to more accurately predict which
vehicle models, out of approximately 400 engine families currently
certified, fleet owners need and consumers favor. Manufacturers would
then know which engine families to focus certification testing on,
rather than certifying a variety of engine families. EPA currently
intends to propose new certification procedures for all light-duty
vehicles and light-duty trucks for application in model year 2000. If
these expected actions are delayed, the applicability of the definition
proposed in this notice could be extended in a subsequent rule.
EPA notes that the proposed requirement that all engines in an
engine family class have the same type of catalyst precious metal
loading would apply only to OEMs. EPA is aware that catalysts are built
to the OEM's specifications, and that the actual amount and ratio of
precious metals in the catalyst is often considered confidential
business information that cannot be obtained by an aftermarket
converter who purchases a vehicle manufactured by an OEM to convert it
to operate on a clean alternative fuel. EPA believes that the remaining
criteria for grouping engines into an engine family class are
sufficient to ensure that vehicles and engines converted to operate on
a clean alternative fuel have similar emissions characteristics and
that it would be appropriate to group such vehicles and engines
together. Because manufacturers can only group vehicles that are in the
same car line, and have similar engine displacements, catalyst
construction, etc., it is unlikely that vehicles or engines that share
those common characteristics will have different catalyst precious
metal loadings. In the event that EPA has reason to believe that, in
spite of meeting the other criteria, an aftermarket converter is
attempting to group engines with different precious metal loadings, EPA
is proposing to reserve the right to limit engine family groupings by
aftermarket conversion companies if the Agency has reason to believe
that the proposed engine family grouping would result in an engine
family class containing engine families that are so dissimilar that
such grouping is not appropriate. Since the Agency's belief could be
based on information that is protected by confidential business
practices, EPA could not necessarily disclose this information to the
aftermarket conversion company. Based on a review of engine families
from previous model years, the Agency does not believe this scenario is
likely to occur but has decided to propose such a provision due to the
theoretical possibility of the scenario occurring in the future.
C. Fees
Today's action proposes to amend the current fee schedule in 40 CFR
Part 86, Subpart J by proposing exemptions from certification fee
requirements. The exemption (through MY 2001) is proposed for vehicles
and engines using certified to LEV, ULEV, ILEV, or ZEV, emission
standards in 40 CFR Part 88 under the small-volume certification
procedures in 40 CFR 86.094-14. In addition, a fee exemption is
provided through MY 2001 for dedicated gaseous fuel systems meeting
Tier 1 emission standards.
The Act authorizes EPA to promulgate (and from time to time revise)
regulations establishing fees to recover all reasonable costs to the
Agency associated with (1) certification of new vehicles or engines
under section 206(a) or under part C of Title II of the Act, (2)
compliance monitoring and testing under section 206(b) or part C, and
(3) in-use compliance monitoring and testing under section 207(c) of
part C. Section 217 of the Act requires such fees to be consistent with
the Independent Offices Appropriation Act (IOAA), 37 U.S.C. 9701 et
seq., and requires that the Agency's fee schedule be based on such
factors as the Administrator finds appropriate, equitable, and
nondiscriminatory (including the number of vehicles or engines produced
under a certificate).
Pursuant to its authority under section 217, EPA established a fee
schedule to recover costs associated with the activities described
above. This fee schedule currently applies to light-duty vehicles,
light-duty trucks, heavy-duty vehicles, heavy-duty engines, and
motorcycles, regardless of the emissions standards to which such
vehicles are
[[Page 38771]]
certified. Current EPA regulations provide for a partial fee waiver for
certification requests where the full fee exceeds one percent of the
aggregate projected retail sales price of vehicles that the certificate
would cover. If EPA grants a waiver, the applicable fee would be
equivalent to one percent of the aggregate projected retail sales price
of the vehicles or engines covered by the certification request.
The first exemption proposed today is for vehicle technologies
certifying to LEV, ULEV, ILEV, or ZEV emissions standards in 40 CFR
88.104-94 and 88.105-94. This proposed exemption is consistent with
Section 217 of the CAA, and with the IOAA. Section 217 requires EPA's
fee schedule to be based on factors that the Administrator finds are
``appropriate and equitable and nondiscriminatory.'' Section 217 also
requires EPA's fee regulations to be consistent with the IOAA. The IOAA
states that ''* * * [I]t is the sense of Congress that each service or
thing of value provided by an agency * * * is to be self-sustaining to
the extent possible.'' In addition, the IOAA authorizes agency heads to
adopt regulations establishing a fee for such ``services or things of
value'' provided by the agency. Such fees must be fair, and must be
based on the following factors: (1) Cost to the government, (2) value
of the service or thing to the recipient, (3) public policy or interest
serviced, and (4) other relevant facts.
The proposed exemption from certification fees for vehicles and
engines certified as LEVs, ILEVs, ULEVs, and ZEVs emission standards is
consistent with the IOAA. The IOAA does not require agencies to be
completely self-sustaining, but only ``to the extent possible.'' In
establishing fees, it is appropriate for EPA to weigh its broad purpose
under the CAA of protecting the nation's air quality against the sense
of Congress that agencies should be self-sustaining to the extent
possible. See Aeronautical Radio v. Federal Communications Commission,
335 F.2d. 304 (7th Cir., 1964). While EPA recognizes that the Agency
would incur costs in issuing certificates for such vehicles, and in
assuring compliance with the applicable emissions standards, the
proposed fee exemption is consistent with Congressional intent to
encourage the development and production of clean-fuel vehicles for
state clean-fuel fleet programs, and with the broader long-term goal of
encouraging the penetration of clean-fuel vehicles in the national
vehicle market. These are valid public policy interests that may be
considered as a factor in setting fees under the IOAA in a manner that
furthers such interests.
The proposed fee exemption for Tier 1 alternative fuel vehicles is
also consistent with Section 217 of the CAA and with the IOAA. As
described above, the IOAA does not require agencies to be completely
self-sustaining, but only to ``the fullest extent possible,'' and it is
appropriate for EPA to weigh its broad purpose under the CAA of
protecting air quality against the sense of Congress that agencies
should be self-sustaining to the extent possible. While EPA recognizes
that the Agency would incur costs in issuing certificates for such
vehicles and in assuring compliance with the applicable emissions
standards, the proposed fee exemption is consistent with EPA's broad
purpose of protecting air quality. Although these vehicles would be
certified to Tier 1 emissions standards, rather than to the more
stringent CFV emissions standards, all fuel systems for a gaseous-fuel
would have lower evaporative emissions than gasoline fueled vehicles
because these fuel systems are ``closed'' fuel systems under pressure.
These closed fuel systems are the only fuel systems thus far that have
been able to demonstrated compliance with the lower evaporative
emission standards required for ILEV evaporative emission compliance.
Even though the operating fuel system on these vehicles and engines
will have a fuel system that is similar to systems meeting ILEV
evaporative standards, these vehicles could also have an emergency
supply of conventional fuel and still qualify as dedicated vehicles if
EPA finalized the proposed revisions to the definition of dedicated
vehicle discussed in section C. 1. above. Lower evaporative emissions
can still be expected from such vehicles because they will carry lower
volumes of conventional fuel than do dedicated conventional fuel
vehicles. In addition, there will be lower refueling losses because the
conventual fuel is an emergency only fuel supply and will be
replenished infrequently. Therefore, it would be appropriate and
consistent with EPA's broad purpose of reducing emissions that result
in air pollution problems for the Agency to waive certification fees
for gaseous-fueled Tier 1 vehicles as a means to encourage
manufacturers to produce such vehicles. Moreover, EPA expects that some
CFVs purchased by fleet operators towards compliance with requirements
of CFFPs will be gaseous-fueled CFVs, and encouraging production of
gaseous-fueled Tier 1 vehicles would assist those fleet operators that
choose gaseous-fueled CFVs by promoting and supporting the gaseous fuel
fueling infrastructure.
The current fee structure is based on recovering EPA's cost for
each engine family. Current regulations rules do allow for partial
waiver of the full fee. This waiver requires the manufacturer to pay 1
percent of the retail value of the vehicle up to a full fee. The net
result is for any engine family with expected annual sales of
approximately 100 units, the manufacturers would be required to pay the
full certification fee. For aftermarket conversions, however, the one
percent of the retail value criterion is based on the sales price of
the converted vehicle, and does not reflect the cost of procuring the
pre-conversion vehicle or engine. The conversion process may add $5,000
to the vehicle's pre-conversion cost. The retail value of the converted
vehicle may be anywhere from $10,000 for a LDV to $20,000 for a pickup
truck. The fee the aftermarket conversion manufacturer pays is based on
the total retail value of the vehicle, not just the value added.
Therefore, if the retail value of the converted vehicle is $25,000 the
fee under the current waiver provision would be 1 percent of $25,000,
or $250. If the convertor expects to sell at least 100 converted
vehicles, it would have to pay the full certification fee of $23,741.00
.
For the 1997 model year <SUP>14</SUP> EPA certified 12 engine
families to LEV, ILEV, ULEV, and ZEV emission standards; three LDV's,
four LDT's, and five HDE's. The total fees paid to EPA for these 12
engine families amount to less than $250,000. Since few gaseous-fueled
engine families have been certified to Tier 1 emissions standards, EPA
does not expect the cost of the fee waiver proposed for Tier 1 gaseous-
fueled vehicles and engines would be significant. The cost of the
proposed fees exemptions would not be passed on to other manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ As of May 30, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In today's action, EPA is proposing a fee exemption for any engine
family certified to Federal LEV, ILEV, ULEV, or ZEV emissions standards
in 40 CFR Part 88. The proposed fee exemption, applicable through MY
2001, would be expected to result in a greater number of engine
families and vehicles available for fleet operators to purchase and use
to comply with the requirements of Clean-Fuel Fleet Programs. In
addition, today's proposal is intended to reduce the overall burden of
certifying clean-fuel vehicles and to provide additional incentive to
both OEM and aftermarket converters to certify vehicles and engines
that meet the CFV emission standards.
[[Page 38772]]
This proposed exemption would apply through MY 2001 because EPA
expects that such incentive will not be needed after MY 2001 as the
production and sales of CFVs by that time should be at a level such
that the amount of fees paid to EPA can easily be amortized over the
total sales. EPA would apply this exemption in an equitable,
nondiscriminatory manner--any manufacturer of a small volume engine
family certified to LEV, ULEV, ILEV, or ZEV emissions standards under
40 CFR Part 88 would be eligible to receive an exemption.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Administrative Designation
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the
Agency must determine whether this proposed regulatory action is
``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) review and, the requirements of the Executive Order. The
order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect, in a material way, the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, EPA has determined
that this proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action''
within the meaning of the Executive Order, and is therefore not subject
to OMB review. Today's action proposes to amend current regulations to
streamline the certification process for manufacturers of Clean Fuel
vehicles and dual fuel gaseous fueled vehicles and engines.
B. Regulatory Flexibility
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule of any rule
subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency
certifies that the rule will not have significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
business, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This proposed rule would not have significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities because today's proposed action
would not impose any new requirements on small entities. In fact, this
proposal would reduce the costs of certification for all entities,
including small entities, that manufacturers of CFVs, as well as
reducing costs for all entities that convert conventional vehicles to
vehicles that operate on gaseous and other fuels, including small
entities that perform such actions. Therefore, I certify that this
action will not have a significant economic impact on a number of small
entities.
C. Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``UMRA'') signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a
written statement to accompany any rule where the estimated costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the
private sector, will be $100 million or more in any one year. Under
section 205, for any rule subject to section 202, EPA must select the
most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the
objective of the rule and that is consistent with statutory
requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for
informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly
and uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not trigger the
requirements of UMRA. The proposed rule does not include a Federal
mandate that may result in estimated annual costs to State, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more, and it does not propose regulatory requirements that
may significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, this
proposed rule does not trigger the requirements of UMRA.
D. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirement
Today's proposal does not impose any new information collection
burden. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously
approved the information collection requirements under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. And has assigned
OMB control number 2060-0104 (EPA ICR No. 0783).
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instruction; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search for data sources; complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
Copies of the ICR document(s) may be obtained from Sandy Farmer,
OPPE Regulatory Information Division; EPA; 401 M St., SW. (mail code
2137); Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740. Include the
ICR and/or OMB number in any correspondence.
E. Environmental and Economic Impacts
This proposal will have no adverse effects on air quality, since
all current emissions standards and requirements would continue to
apply to vehicles and engines affected by today's action. EPA believes
that this proposed action would encourage manufacturers to develop and
market vehicles and engines with innovative, new emissions control
technology, ultimately resulting in broader market penetration of CFVs
and clean alternative fuels.
By proposing to waive certification fees for qualifying vehicles,
this proposed action would reduce the regulatory burden on industry
without adversely affecting air quality.
F. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks
This proposed rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it does not involve
decisions on environmental health risks or safety risks that
disproportionately affect
G. Public Participation
1. Comments and the Public Docket
EPA welcomes comments on all aspects of this proposed rulemaking.
All comments, with the exception of proprietary information should be
addressed to the EPA Air Docket Section, Docket No. A-97-27 (see
ADDRESSES).
Commenters who wish to submit proprietary information for
[[Page 38773]]
consideration should clearly separate such information from other
comments by (1) labeling proprietary information ``Confidential
business Information'' and (2) sending proprietary information directly
to the contact person listed (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) and
not to the public docket. This would help insure that proprietary
information is not inadvertently placed in the docket. If a commenter
wants EPA to use a submission labeled as confidential business
information as part of the basis for the notice of proposed rulemaking,
then a non-confidential version of the document, which summarizes the
key data or information, should be sent to the docket.
Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed
by EPA only to the extent allowed and by the procedures set forth in 40
CFR Part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the submission
when it is received by EPA, the submission may be made available to the
public without notifying the commenters.
2. Public Hearing
Any person can request EPA to hold a public hearing on this
proposed action, but such request must be received by August 19, 1998.
Because no hearing will occur, absent a request for one, interested
parties should contact Clifford D. Tyree at the number listed below
after August 19, 1998 to determine whether a hearing will take place.
IV. Statutory Authority
Authority for the actions set forth in this notice of proposed
rulemaking is granted to the EPA by sections 202, 203, 206, 207, 217,
241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as
amended (15 U.S.C. 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2013; 42 U.S.C. 7521,
7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 7542, 7549, 7550, and 7601(a)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 8, 1998.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, chapter I, title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 86--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
2. Section 86.090-2 of Subpart A is amended by revising the
definition of ``Dedicated vehicle (or engine)'' to read as follows:
Sec. 86.090-2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Dedicated vehicle (or engine) means, any motor vehicle (or motor
vehicle engine) engineered and designed to be operated using a single
fuel. Flexible fuel vehicles and multi-fuel vehicles are not dedicated
fuel vehicles. Through model year 2001, motor vehicles (or motor
vehicle engines) capable of operating on a second fuel through use of
one of the options listed in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this definition
are dedicated vehicles (or engines):
(1) Vehicles or engines certified to Tier 1, LEV, ULEV, ILEV, or
ZEV that are capable of operation on a conventional fuel for a maximum
of one hour during a three-hour period.
(2) Vehicles or engines certified to Tier 1, LEV, ULEV, ILEV, or
ZEV that are capable of operation on a conventional fuel no more than
50 miles on a conventional fuel limited either by fuel tank capacity or
tamper-proof electronic software.
* * * * *
3. Section 86.096-24 of Subpart A is amended by revising paragraph
(a)(2) introductory text and adding new paragraphs (c)(4), (c)(5),
(e)(1), (i), and (j) to read as follows:
Sec. 86.096-24 Test vehicles and engines.
(a) * * *
(2) To be classed in the same engine family, engines must be
identical in all the respects listed in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through
(x) of this section or, at the manufacturers option, as allowed in
paragraphs (i) and (j) of this section.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) Light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks applying for a
certificate of conformity with Clean-Fuel vehicle emissions standards
in 40 CFR part 88. This paragraph (c)(4) applies to engines, systems,
or components used to establish exhaust emission deterioration factors
for light-duty vehicle and light-duty truck small volume engine
families certified to LEV, ILEV, ULEV, or ZEV emissions standards in 40
CFR part 88.
(i) For light duty vehicles, the Administrator shall select the
vehicles, engines, systems, or components to be used to determine
exhaust emission deterioration factors for each engine family or engine
family class control system combination using the criteria in paragraph
(c)(1) of this section, or, alternatively, by selecting the vehicle
with the largest projected sales volume in the engine family or engine
family class.
(ii) For light duty trucks, the manufacturer shall select the
vehicles, engines, systems, or components to be used to determine
exhaust emission deterioration factors for each engine family or engine
family class control system combination using the criteria in paragraph
(c)(2) of this section, or alternatively, by selecting the vehicle with
the largest projected sales volume in the engine family or engine
family class.
(iii) For light duty vehicles, service accumulation procedures must
comply with one of the following:
(A) 40 CFR 86.094-26 (a); or
(B) 40 CFR 86.094-14 (c)(7)(i)(C).
(iv) For light duty trucks, service accumulation procedures must
comply with one of the following:
(A) 40 CFR 86.094-26 (b) and (d); or
(B) 40 CFR 86.094-14 (c)(7)(i)(C).
(5) Heavy-duty engines applying for a certificate of conformity
with Clean-fuel vehicle emissions standards in 40 CFR part 88. This
paragraph (c)(5) applies to engines, systems, or components used to
establish exhaust emission deterioration factors for small volume
heavy-duty engine families certified to LEV, ILEV, ULEV, or ZEV
emissions standards in 40 CFR part 88.
(i) The manufacturer shall select the vehicles, engines, systems,
or components to be used to determine exhaust emission deterioration
factors for each engine family or engine family class control system
combination using the criteria in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, or
alternatively, by selecting the engine with the largest projected sales
volume in the engine family or engine family class.
(ii) Service accumulation procedures must comply with one of the
following:
(A) 40 CFR 86.094-26(c) and (d);
(B) 40 CFR 86.094-14 (c)(7)(i)(C); or
(C) The engine must be operated at maximum power and maximum fuel
rate for 500 engine hours. Three tests, equally spaced, shall be used
to extrapolate deterioration factors.
* * * * *
(e)(1) Any manufacturer may request to certify engine families,
with combined total U.S. sales of vehicles and engines fewer than
10,000 units, for the model years 1999 through 2001, to the clean-fuel
vehicle standards prescribed in 40 CFR 88.104-94 and
[[Page 38774]]
88.105-94, under the provisions of Sec. 86.094-14, in addition to the
vehicles certified under paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
(i) For light duty vehicles and light duty trucks, small volume
engine families certified to LEV, ULEV, ILEV, or ZEV emissions
standards in 40 CFR part 88 may be grouped into an engine family class,
provided that:
(1) For original equipment manufacturers, the following criteria
are met:
(i) Vehicles are all certified to the same emissions standards
prescribed in 40 CFR 88.104-94.
(ii) The maximum range of engine displacement is less than or equal
to 0.8 liters of the largest displacement in the class.
(iii) Same type of catalyst (e.g., beads or monolith).
(iv) Same precious metal composition of the catalyst by the type of
principle active material(s) used (e.g., platinum based oxidation
catalyst, palladium based oxidation catalyst, platinum and rhodium
three-way catalyst, palladium and rhodium three-way catalyst).
(v) The ratios of [(catalysts volume/displacement) x (catalyst
loading rate)] of all catalysts is within 25 percent or 0.2 g/liter of
each other.
(2) For aftermarket conversions, the following criteria are met:
(i) Vehicles are all certified to the same emissions standards
prescribed in 40 CFR 88.104-94.
(ii) The maximum range of engine displacement is less than or equal
to 0.8 liters of the largest displacement in the class.
(iii) Same type of catalyst (e.g., beads or monolith).
(iv) All carlines or engine models were included on the certificate
for the pre-conversion configuration.
(3) Vehicles certifying to more than one set of emission standards
specified in this paragraph (i) may be grouped into a single engine
family class, as provided in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this
section. For example, a manufacturer may certify a vehicle to both ULEV
and ILEV standards, or to both ZEV and ILEV standards.
(j) For heavy duty engines, small volume engine families certified
to LEV, ULEV, or ZEV emissions standards in 40 CFR 88.105-94 may be
grouped into an engine family class, provided that:
(1) For original equipment manufacturers, the following criteria
are met:
(i) The engines meet the requirements of paragraphs (a)(2)(iv)
through (a)(2)(x) of this section.
(ii) The maximum range of engine displacement is less than or equal
to 0.8 liters of the largest displacement in the class.
(iii) Same type of catalyst (e.g., beads or monolith).
(iv) Same precious metal composition of the catalyst by the type of
principle active material(s) used (e.g., platinum based oxidation
catalyst, palladium based oxidation catalyst, platinum and rhodium
three-way catalyst, palladium and rhodium three-way catalyst).
(v) The ratio of [(catalysts volume/displacement)] x [catalyst
loading rate] of all combinations is within 25% or .2 g/liter.
(2) For aftermarket conversions, the following criteria are met:
(i) The maximum range of engine displacement is less than or equal
to 0.8 liters of the largest displacement in the class.
(ii) Same type of catalyst (e.g., beads or monolith).
(iii) All carlines or engine models were included on the
certificate for the pre-conversion configuration.
4. Section 86.099-2 is added to subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 86.099-2 Definitions.
The definitions of Sec. 86.098-2 continue to apply to 1998 and
later model year vehicles. The definitions listed in this section apply
beginning with the 1999 model year.
Engine Family Class means:
(1) A grouping of vehicles or engine families that meets the
following criteria:
(i) Dedicated vehicles or engines that meet LEV, ILEV, ULEV, or ZEV
emission standards in 40 CFR 88.104-94 or 88.105-94.
(ii) The maximum range of engine displacement is not more than 0.8L
of the largest displacement tested in the class.
(iii) Same type of catalyst.
(iv) Same principle active precious metal.
(v) The ratios of [(catalysts volume/displacement) x (catalyst
loading rate)] of all catalysts is within 25 percent or 0.2 g/liter of
each other.
(vi) For aftermarket conversions, all carlines or engine models
were included on the certificate for the pre-conversion configuration.
(2) This definition is applicable for model years 1999 through
2001.
5. Section 86.908-93 of Subpart J is amended by adding paragraph
(d) to read as follows:
Sec. 86.908-93 Waivers and refunds.
* * * * *
(d)(1) For model years 1999 through 2001, the required fees under
this subpart shall be waived for any light-duty vehicle, light-duty
truck, or heavy-duty engine family that meets the following
requirements:
(i) Is a dedicated vehicle or engine;
(ii) Is seeking certification to LEV, ILEV, ULEV, or ZEV emissions
standards in 40 CFR part 88; and
(iii) Meets the small volume sales requirements of Sec. 86.094-
14(b) or Sec. 86.094-24(e).
(2) If the manufacturer does not receive a certificate of
conformity with the LEV, ILEV, ULEV, or ZEV emissions standards in 40
CFR part 88, the fee requirements of this section will apply. Before
any certificate can be issued, the applicable fee must be paid.
[FR Doc. 98-18860 Filed 7-17-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20081108042609im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}