fuel instead of ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel, consistent with good
engineering judgment. For example, an obvious case where this would be
appropriate (but not the only possible case), would be if a railroad
had emission data showing the locomotive still met the applicable
standards/FELs while operating on the higher sulfur fuel.
    EPA is requesting comment on four additional locomotive provisions.
The first is the allowance in 40 CFR 1033.101(g)(3) for shorter useful
lives for non-locomotive-specific engines--that is, engines not
specifically designed for use in locomotives. For normal locomotive
engines, the minimum useful life is specified in terms of MW-hrs as the
product of the rated horsepower multiplied by 7.50. However, the
regulations allow manufacturers/remanufacturers of locomotives with
non-locomotive-specific engines to ask for a shorter useful life if the
locomotives will rarely operate longer than the shorter useful life.
Second, we request comment regarding the need for additional guidance
on applying this provision. For example, would it be helpful if we
specified that the default alternative minimum useful life under this
provision would be 6.00 (instead of 7.50) times the rated horsepower?
Third, we request comment on whether EPA should consider notch-specific
engine/alternator efficiencies to be confidential business information,
and whether we need to update the URL listed in 40 CFR 1033.150(a)(4).
Fourth, we request comment on extending the provisions of 40 CFR
1033.101(i) to Tier 4 locomotives. This generally involves a less
stringent CO standard in tandem with over-complying with the PM
standard. Specifically, this option, which currently applies for Tier 2
and earlier locomotives, requires PM emissions be at least 50 percent
below the normally applicable PM standard. The existing provisions were
developed to provide a compliance path for natural gas locomotives that
reflected both the technological capabilities of natural gas
locomotives and the relative environmental significance of CO and PM
emissions. This provision was not applied to Tier 4 locomotives,
because the applicable Tier 4 p.m. standard is already very low (0.03
g/hp-hr). If we were to apply a similar provision corresponding to Tier
4 standards, we would need to select PM and CO levels that are properly
paired to manage this tradeoff. We request comment on whether it is
appropriate to pursue such alternate standards, and on the specific
numerical standards for PM and CO that would represent an equivalent
level of stringency relative to the published standards.
    EPA is proposing to make numerous additional changes across 40 CFR
part 1033 to correct errors, to add clarification, and to make
adjustments based on lessons learned from implementing these regulatory
provisions. This includes the following proposed changes:
     Sec. Sec.  1033.30, 1033.730, and 1033.925: Consolidate
information-collection provisions into a single section.
     Sec.  1033.101: Allow manufacturers to certify Tier 4 and
later locomotives using Low Sulfur Diesel fuel instead of Ultra-Low
Sulfur Diesel fuel. Manufacturers may wish to do this to show that
their locomotives do not include sulfur sensitive technology. Sec.
1033.120: Reduce extended-warranty requirements to warranties that are
actually provided to customers, rather than to any published warranties
that are offered. The principle is that the emission-related warranty
should not be less effective for emission-related items than for items
that are not emission-related.

     Sec.  1033.201: Clarify that manufacturers may amend their
application for certification after the end of the model year in
certain circumstances, but they may not produce locomotives for a given
model year after December 31 of the named year.
     Sec.  1033.201: Establish that manufacturers may deliver
to EPA for testing a locomotive/engine that is identical to the test
locomotive/engine used for certification. This may be necessary if the
test locomotive/engine has accumulated too many hours, or if it is
unavailable for any reason.
     Sec.  1033.225: Clarify that manufacturers may amend the
application for certification after the end of the model year only in
certain circumstances, and not to add a new or modified locomotive
configuration.
     Sec.  1033.235: Add an explicit allowance for carryover
engine families to include the same kind of within-family running
changes that are currently allowed over the course of a model year. The
original text may have been understood to require that such running
changes be made separate from certifying the engine family for the new
model year.
     Sec. Sec.  1033.235, 1033.245, and 1033.601: Describe how
to demonstrate compliance with dual-fuel and flexible-fuel locomotives.
This generally involves testing with each separate fuel, or with a
worst-case fuel blend.
     Sec.  1033.245: Add instructions for calculating
deterioration factors for sawtooth deterioration patterns, such as
might be expected for periodic maintenance, such as cleaning or
replacing diesel particulate filters.
     Sec.  1033.250: Remove references to routine and standard
tests, and remove the shorter recordkeeping requirement for routine
data (or data from routine tests). All test records must be kept for
eight years. With electronic recording of test data, there should be no
advantage to keeping the shorter recordkeeping requirement for a subset
of test data. EPA also notes that the eight-year period restarts with
certification for a new model year if the manufacturer uses carryover
data.
     Sec.  1033.255: Clarify that rendering information false
or incomplete after submitting it is the same as submitting false or
incomplete information. For example, if there is a change to any
corporate information or engine parameters described in the
manufacturer's application for certification, the manufacturer must
amend the application to include the new information.
     Sec.  1033.255: Clarify that voiding certificates for a
recordkeeping or reporting violation would be limited to certificates
that relate to the particular recordkeeping or reporting failure.
     Sec.  1033.501: Clarify how testing requirements apply
differently for locomotive engines and for complete locomotives.
     Sec.  1033.501: Add paragraph (a)(4) to remove
proportionality verification for discrete-mode tests if a single batch
fuel measurement is used to determine raw exhaust flow rate. This
verification involves statistical assessment that is not valid for the
single data point. Requiring manufacturers instead to simply ensure
constant sample flow should adequately address the concern,
     Sec. Sec.  1033.515 and 1033.520: Update terminology by
referring to ``test intervals'' instead of ``phases''. This allows us
to be consistent with terminology used in 40 CFR part 1065.
     Sec.  1033.520: Correct the example given to describe the
testing transition after the second test interval.
     Sec. Sec.  1033.701 and 1033.730: Describe the process for
retiring emission credits. This may be referred to as donating credits
to the environment.
     Sec.  1033.710: Clarify that it is not permissible to show
a proper balance of credits for a given model by using emission credits
from a future model year.
     Sec.  1033.730: Clarify terminology for ABT reports.
     Sec.  1033.815: Add consideration of periodic locomotive
inspections in 184-day intervals.
     Sec.  1033.901: Update the contact information for the
Designated Compliance Officer.
     Sec.  1033.915: Migrate provisions related to confidential
information to 40 CFR part 1068.

J. Miscellaneous EPA Amendments

    EPA is proposing to clarify that the cold NMHC standards specified
in 40 CFR 86.1811-17 do not apply at high altitude. We intended in
recent amendments to state that the cold CO standards apply at both low
and high altitude, but inadvertently placed that statement where it
also covered cold NMHC standards, which contradicts existing regulatory
provisions that clearly describe the cold NMHC standards as applying
only for low-altitude testing. The proposed change would simply move
the new clarifying language to apply only to cold CO standards. We are
also proposing to restore the cold NMHC standards in paragraph (g)(2),
which were inadvertently removed as part of the earlier amendments.
    EPA is proposing to revise the specifications for Class 2b and
Class 3 vehicles certifying early to the Tier 3 exhaust emission
standards under 40 CFR 86.1816-18 to clarify that carryover values for
PM and formaldehyde apply. The preamble to the earlier final rule
described these standards properly, but the regulations inadvertently
pointed to the Tier 3 values for PM and formaldehyde for these
vehicles.
    EPA is proposing to make a minor correction to the In-Use
Compliance Program under 40 CFR 86.1846-01. A recent amendment
describing how to use SFTP test results in the compliance determination
inadvertently removed a reference to low-mileage SFTP testing. We are
proposing to restore the removed text.
    EPA is proposing to revise the instruction for creating road-load
coefficients for cold temperature testing in 40 CFR 1066.710 to simply
refer back to 40 CFR 1066.305 where this is described more generally.
The text originally adopted in 40 CFR 1066.710 incorrectly describes
the calculation for determining those coefficients.
    EPA is also proposing two minor amendments related to highway
motorcycles. First, we are proposing to correct an error related to the
small-volume provisions for highway motorcycles. The regulation
includes an inadvertent reference to a small-volume threshold based on
an annual volume of 3,000 motorcycles produced in the United States. As
written, this would not consider any foreign motorcycle production for
importation into the United States. This error is corrected by simply
revising the text to refer to an annual production volume of
motorcycles produced ``for'' the United States. This would properly
reflect small-volume production as it relates to compliance with EPA
standards. Second, we are proposing to clarify the language describing
how to manage the precision of emission results, both for measured
values and for calculating values when applying a deterioration factor.
This involves a new reference to the rounding procedures in 40 CFR part
1065 to replace the references to outdated ASTM procedures. EPA is
proposing in 40 CFR 1037.601(a)(3) to clarify that the Clean Air Act
does not allow any person to disable, remove, or render inoperative
(i.e., tamper with) emission controls on a certified motor vehicle for
purposes of competition. An existing provision in 40 CFR 1068.235
provides an exemption for nonroad engines converted for competition
use. This provision reflects the explicit exclusion of engines used
solely for competition from the CAA definition of

``nonroad engine''. The proposed amendment clarifies that this part
1068 exemption does not apply for motor vehicles.

K. Amending 49 CFR Parts 512 and 537 To Allow Electronic Submissions
and Defining Data Formats for Light-Duty Vehicle Corporate Average Fuel
Economy (CAFE) Reports

    To improve efficiency and reduce the burden to manufacturers and
the agencies, NHTSA is proposing to modify 49 CFR part 537 eliminating
the option for manufacturers to submit pre-model, mid-model and
supplemental reports on CD-ROMS and require only one electronic
submission (for each report) electronically via a method proscribed by
NHTSA. NHTSA is introducing a new electronic format to standardize the
method for collecting manufacturer's information. NHTSA also proposes
to modify 49 CFR part 512 to include and protect submitted CAFE data
elements that need to be treated as confidential business information.
    49 CFR part 537 currently requires manufacturers to provide reports
to NHTSA containing projected estimates of how manufacturers plan to
comply with NHTSA standards. In the CAFE final rule for vehicles
manufactured for model years 2017-2025, NHTSA modified its reporting
requirements at 49 CFR 537.5(c)(4) to eliminate the option for
manufacturers to mail hardcopy submissions of CAFE reports to NHTSA and
required all reports to be submitted electronically by CD-ROM (CBI and
non-CBI versions) or by email (non-CBI version).\881\ Currently, any
data provided in the manufacturer's report is required in MS-Excel
spreadsheet format. Supporting documentation such as cover letters or
requests for confidentiality is required to be provided in a pdf
format.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \881\ 77 FR 62624, October 15, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA is proposing to change the required format for CAFE data
required under 49 CFR 537.7(b) and (c) in order to standardize
submissions and better align with data provided to EPA. For model year
2013 through 2015 most manufacturer reports received by NHTSA lacked
the required format adopted in the 2017-2025 final rule. NHTSA is
therefore adopting a standardized template for manufacturers to report
model type level data. The template organizes the required data in a
consistent manner, adopts formats for values consistent with those
provided to EPA for similar values and calculates manufacturer's target
standard. Calculating target standards is preferred because it reduces
errors in manufacturer's determinations. However, NHTSA's long-term
goal is to standardize the required data for incorporation into an
electronic database system and this first step facilities a structure
for coding the electronic data which will ultimately reduce
manufacturer's and the government's burden for reporting.
    NHTSA rationalizes that establishing a required format is necessary
because manufacturers may not understand how to provide the required
CAFE data. In the 2017 to 2025 final rule, NHTSA modified its base tire
definition to better align with the approach manufacturers use to
determine model type target standards. CAFE standards are attribute
based, and thus each manufacturer has its own ``standard,'' or
compliance obligation, defined by the vehicles it produces for sale in
each fleet in a given model year. A manufacturer calculates its fleet
standard from the attribute based target curve standards derived from
the unique footprint values, which are the products of the average
front and rear vehicle track width and wheelbase dimensions, of the
vehicles in each model type. Vehicle track width dimensions are
determined with a vehicle equipped with ``base tires,'' which NHTSA
currently defines in 49 CFR part 523 as (for passenger automobiles,
light trucks, and medium duty passenger vehicles) the tire size
specified as standard equipment by the manufacturer on each unique
combination of a vehicle's footprint and model type. Standard equipment
is defined in 40 CFR 86.1803-01. NHTSA made these changes to provide a
clear definition for footprint calculations and, thus, fleet compliance
projections, calculations, finalizations and enforcement efforts.
Beginning in model year 2013, as modified in 49 CFR 537.7(b),
manufacturers were to provide attribute characteristics and standards
in consideration of the change in the base tire definition for each
unique model type and footprint combination of the manufacturer's
automobiles. Manufacturers were required to provide the data listed by
model types in order of increasing average inertia weight from top to
bottom down the left side of the table and list the information
categories in the order specified in 49 CFR 537.7(b)(3)(i) and (ii)
from left to right across the top of the table. Manufacturers could
also provide the data using any format required by EPA, which contains
all of the required information in a readily identifiable format.
    In the 2017-2025 final rule, additional changes to NHTSA's
reporting requirements also included a modification to 49 CFR 537.7(b)
to restructure and clarify how manufacturers report information used to
make the determination that an automobile can be classified as a light
truck for CAFE purposes. The agency felt that this proposed change was
necessary because the previous requirements in 49 CFR part 537
specified that manufacturers must provide information on some, but not
all, of the functions and features used to classify an automobile as a
light truck, and it is important for compliance reasons to understand
and be able to readily verify the methods used to ensure manufacturers
are classifying vehicles correctly. Furthermore, the previous
regulation required that the information be distributed in different
locations throughout a manufacturer's report, making it difficult for
the agency to clearly determine exactly what functions or features a
manufacturer is using to classify a vehicle as a light truck.
Therefore, NHTSA streamlined the location of all its provisions for
defining vehicle classifications into one consolidate section. With
these changes, manufacturers can provide the agency with all the
necessary data in a simpler format that allows the agency, and perhaps
also the manufacturer, to understand quickly and easily how light truck
vehicle classification determination decisions are made.
    In reviewing manufacturers current reporting, most manufacturers
are still failing to provide the required information for classifying
light trucks. For the model year 2015 pre-model year reports, only a
few manufacturers provided the required information and many provided
the information incorrectly. Therefore, NHTSA is also proposing to
incorporate an additional template for collecting vehicle configuration
level data which includes vehicle classification information.
Similarly, the template will standardize the format of the data with
values required by EPA and structures the data for future incorporation
into a database system. Finally, the template also simplifies reporting
by not having manufacturers report all vehicle classification
characteristics but only those used by the manufacturer in qualifying a
vehicle as a light truck. NHTSA is adopting this provision to better
align with EPA current database structure which uses a similar approach
in accepting light truck level data.

XV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is an economically significant regulatory action that
was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
Any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been
documented in the docket. The agencies prepared an analysis of the
potential costs and benefits associated with this action. This
analysis, the draft ``Regulatory Impact Analysis--Heavy-Duty GHG and
Fuel Efficiency Standards NPRM,'' is available in the docket. The
analyses contained in this document are also summarized in Sections
VII, VIII, and IX of this preamble.

B. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has initiated the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
process under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C.
4321-4347, and implementing regulations issued by the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ), 40 CFR part 1500, and NHTSA, 49 CFR part
520. On July 9, 2014, NHTSA published a notice of intent to prepare an
EIS for this rulemaking and requested scoping comments (79 FR 38842).
The notice invited Federal, State, and local agencies, Indian tribes,
stakeholders, and the public to participate in the scoping process and
to help identify the environmental issues and reasonable alternatives
to be examined in the EIS.
    Concurrently with this proposed rule, NHTSA is releasing a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). NHTSA prepared the DEIS to
analyze and disclose the potential environmental impacts of the
proposed HD fuel consumption standards and reasonable alternatives.
Environmental impacts analyzed in the DEIS include those related to
fuel and energy use, air quality, and climate change. The DEIS also
describes potential environmental impacts to a variety of resource
areas, including water resources, biological resources, land use and
development, safety, hazardous materials and regulated wastes, noise,
socioeconomics, and environmental justice. These resource areas are
assessed qualitatively in the DEIS.
    The DEIS analyzes five alternative approaches to regulating HD
vehicle fuel consumption, including a ``preferred alternative'' and a
``no action alternative.'' The DEIS evaluates a reasonable range of
alternatives under NEPA, and analyzes the direct, indirect, and
cumulative impacts of those alternatives in proportion to their
significance.
    Because of the link between the transportation sector and GHG
emissions, NHTSA recognizes the need to consider the possible impacts
on climate and global climate change in the analysis of the effects of
these fuel consumption standards. NHTSA also recognizes the
difficulties and uncertainties involved in such an impact analysis.
Accordingly, consistent with CEQ regulations on addressing incomplete
or unavailable information in environmental impact analyses, NHTSA has
reviewed existing credible scientific evidence that is relevant to this
analysis and summarized it in the DEIS. NHTSA has also employed and
summarized the results of research models generally accepted in the
scientific community.
    Although the alternatives have the potential to decrease GHG
emissions substantially, they do not prevent climate change, but only
result in reductions in the anticipated increases in CO2
concentrations, temperature, precipitation, and sea level. They would
also, to a small degree, delay the point at which certain temperature
increases and other physical effects stemming from increased GHG
emissions would occur. As discussed in the EIS, NHTSA presumes that
these reductions in climate effects will be reflected in reduced
impacts on affected resources.
    The DEIS has informed NHTSA decision makers in their preparation of
this proposed rule and in the ongoing rulemaking process. NHTSA invites
comments on the DEIS from Federal, State, and local agencies, Indian
tribes, stakeholders, and the public. Instructions for submission of
such comments are included in the DEIS.
    For additional information on NHTSA's NEPA analysis, please see the
DEIS. The DEIS is available on NHTSA's Web site and on http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0074.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection activities in these proposed rules have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document
that EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 2394.04. You can
find a copy of the ICR in the docket for these proposed rules, and it
is briefly summarized here.
    The agencies propose to collect information to ensure compliance
with the provisions in this proposal. This includes a variety of
testing, reporting and recordkeeping requirements for vehicle and
engine manufacturers. Section 208(a) of the CAA requires that
manufacturers provide information the Administrator may reasonably
require to determine compliance with the regulations; submission of the
information is therefore mandatory. We will consider confidential all
information meeting the requirements of Section 208(c) of the CAA.
    Respondents/affected entities: Respondents are manufacturers of
engines and vehicles within the North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) and use the coding structure as defined by NAICS.
336111, 336112, 333618, 336120, 541514, 811112, 811198, 336111, 336112,
422720, 454312, 541514, 541690, 811198, 333618, 336510, for Motor
Vehicle Manufacturers, Engine and Truck Manufacturers, Truck Trailer
Manufacturers, Commercial Importers of Vehicles and Vehicle Components,
and Alternative Fuel Vehicle Converters and Manufacturers.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: The information that is subject
to this collection is collected whenever a manufacturer applies for a
certificate of conformity. Under section 206 of the CAA (42 U.S.C.
7521), a manufacturer must have a certificate of conformity before a
vehicle or engine can be introduced into commerce.
    Estimated number of respondents: It is estimated that this
collection affects approximately 155 engine and vehicle manufacturers.
    Frequency of response: Annually.
    Total estimated burden: The burden to the manufacturers affected by
these rules has a range based on the number of engines and vehicles a
manufacturer produces. The estimated average annual respondent burden
associated with the first three implementation years of the Phase 2
program is 62,400 hours (see Table XV-1). This estimated burden for
engine and vehicle manufacturers is an average estimate for both new
and existing reporting requirements for calendar years 2017, 2018 and
2019, in which trailer manufacturers will prepare for and begin
certifying for Phase 2 while Phase 1 will continue for the other
affected manufacturers. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 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 instructions; 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 data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.

     Table XV-1--Burden for Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Affected Vehicle Manufacturers.  155.
Annual Labor Hours for Each Manufacturer   Varies.
 to Prepare and Submit Required
 Information.
Total Annual Information Collection        62,400 Hours.
 Burden.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total estimated cost: The estimated average annual cost associated
with the first three implementation years of the Phase 2 program is
approximately $8 million. This includes approximately $3.3 million in
capital and operation & maintenance costs. This estimated cost for
engine and vehicle manufacturers is an average estimate for both new
and existing testing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for
calendar years 2017, 2018 and 2019, in which trailer manufacturers will
prepare for and begin certifying for Phase 2 while Phase 1 will
continue for the other affected manufacturers.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    Submit your comments on the agencies' need for this information,
the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondent burden to EPA and NHTSA using the docket
identified at the beginning of these proposed rules. You may also send
your ICR-related comments to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning
the ICR between 30 and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive comments
no later than August 12, 2015. The agencies will respond to any ICR-
related comments in the final rules.
    NHTSA also separately submitted a request to OMB for approval of a
change to an information collection activity that is proposed in this
rulemaking. The information collection request was previously assigned
ICR No. 2127-0019 for 49 CFR part 537, ``Automotive Fuel Economy
Reports.''
    The existing collection involves vehicle manufacturers submitting
reports to the Secretary of Transportation with preliminary estimates
demonstrating their ability to comply with corporate average fuel
economy standards (CAFE) established by 49 U.S.C. 32902 for each model
year. To improve efficiency and reduce manufacturers' and the
government's burden, NHTSA is proposing to modify 49 CFR part 537 to
require CAFE reports to be submitted electronically via an electronic
database using a standardized data format. The total estimated amount
of paperwork burden resulting from this action that the federal
government is imposing on private businesses and citizens is summarized
below.
    Respondents: Automobile manufacturers.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 30.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 54. Some manufacturers have multiple
fleets (domestic passenger car, import passenger car, light truck) and
49 CFR part 537 requires a separate report for each fleet.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: Thirty automotive manufacturers must
comply with 49 CFR 537. For each current model year, each manufacturer
is required to submit semi-annual reports: A pre-model year report and
a mid-model year report. The pre-model year report must be submitted
during the month of December, and the mid-model year report must be
submitted during the month of July. The total number of responses
submitted by automotive manufacturers is 54. We currently have a
clearance based on reports being received from 22 manufacturers with an
estimated total annual burden of 2,339 hours. Including 8 additional
manufacturers, results in an additional reporting burden of 850 hours.
Adding that burden to the existing burden of 2,339 hours, results in a
total of 3,189 hours.
    Estimated Frequency: A pre-model report and a mid-model report are
required to be submitted by manufacturers once per model year for each
applicable fleet (domestic passenger car, imported passenger car and
light trucks).
    A copy of the 60 day notice for this ICR containing the proposed
changes is included in the docket for this rule. NHTSA seeks public
comments on all aspects of this information collection, including (a)
whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the
Department's performance, (b) the accuracy of the estimated burden, (c)
ways for the Department to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of
the information collection and (d) ways that the burden could be
minimized without reducing the quality of the collected information.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to section 603 of the RFA, the agencies prepared an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) that examines the impact
of the proposed rules on small entities along with regulatory
alternatives that could minimize that impact. The complete IRFA is
available for review in the docket and is summarized here. As required
by section 609(b) of the RFA, EPA convened a Small Business Advocacy
Review (SBAR) Panel to obtain advice and recommendations from small
entity representatives that potentially would be subject to the rule's
requirements. The SBAR Panel evaluated the assembled materials and
small-entity comments on issues related to elements of an IRFA. A copy
of the full SBAR Panel Report is available in the rulemaking docket.
(1) Overview
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rules on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201 (see table below); (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that
is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special
district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    Table XV-2 provides an overview of the primary SBA small business
categories potentially affected by this regulation.

              Table XV-2--Primary Small Business Categories Potentially Affected by This Regulation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Industry                                     Defined as small entity
    Industry expected in rulemaking       NAICS \a\          NAICS description           by SBA if less than or
                                             code                                              equal to:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Fuel Engine Converters.....       333999  Misc. General Purpose Machinery  500 employees.
                                              811198  All Other Automotive Repair &    $7.0 million (annual
                                                       Maintenance.                     receipts).
Voc. Vehicle Chassis Manufacturers.....       336120  Heavy-Duty Truck Manufacturing.  1,000 employees.
HD Trailer Manufacturers...............       336212  Truck Trailer Manufacturing....  500 employees.
                                              333924  Industrial Truck, Trailer &      750 employees.
                                                       Stacker Machinery.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
\a\ North American Industrial Classification System.

(2) Legal Basis for Agency Action
    Heavy-duty vehicles are classified as those with gross vehicle
weight ratings (GVWR) of greater than 8,500 lb. Section 202(a) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) allows EPA to regulate new vehicles and new engines
by prescribing emission standards for pollutants which the
Administrator finds ``may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public
health or welfare.'' In 2009, EPA found that six greenhouse gases
(GHGs) were anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, and new
motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to that
pollution. This finding was upheld by the unanimous court in Coalition
for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, 684 F. 3d 102 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
Acting under the authority of the CAA, EPA set the first phase of
heavy-duty vehicle GHG standards (Phase 1) and specified certification
requirements for emissions of four GHGs emitted by mobile sources:
Carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O),
methane (CH4), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFC).
(3) Summary of Potentially Affected Small Entities
    Table XV-2 above lists industries/sectors potentially affected by
the proposed rules. EPA is not aware of any small businesses who
manufacture complete heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, heavy-duty
engines, or Class 7 and 8 tractors.
    EPA used the criteria for small entities developed by the Small
Business Administration under the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) as a guide. Information about these
entities comes from sources including EPA's certification data, trade
association databases, and previous rulemakings that have affected
these industries. EPA then found employment information for these
companies using the business information database Hoover's Online (a
subsidiary of Dan and Bradstreet). These entities fall under the
categories listed in the table.
(4) Potential Reporting, Recordkeeping and Compliance Burdens
    For any emission control program, EPA must have assurances that the
regulated products will meet the standards. The program that EPA is
considering for manufacturers subject to this proposal will include
testing, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements. Testing
requirements for these manufacturers could include use of EPA's
Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) vehicle simulation tool to obtain
the overall CO2 emissions rate for certification of
vocational chassis and trailers, aerodynamic testing to obtain
aerodynamic inputs to GEM for some trailer manufacturers and engine
dynamometer testing for alternative fuel engine converters to ensure
their conversions meet the proposed CO2, CH4 and
N2O engine standards. Reporting requirements would likely
include emissions test data or model inputs and results, technical data
related to the vehicles, and end-of-year sales information.
Manufacturers would have to keep records of this information.
(5) Related Federal Rules
    The primary federal rule that is related to the proposed Phase 2
rules under consideration is the 2011 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel
Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles
(76 FR 57106). This Phase 1 rulemaking would continue to be in effect
in the absence of these proposed rules. Several Federal rules relate to
heavy-duty vehicles and to the proposed Phase 2 rules under
consideration. The Department of Transportation, through NHTSA, has
several safety requirements for these vehicles. California adopted its
own greenhouse gas initiative, which places aerodynamic requirements on
trailers used in long-haul applications. None of these existing
regulations were found to conflict with the proposed rulemaking.
(6) Summary of SBREFA Panel Process and Panel Outreach
(a) Significant Panel Findings
    The Small Business Advocacy Review Panel (SBAR Panel, or the Panel)
considered regulatory options and flexibilities to help mitigate
potential adverse effects on small businesses as a result of these
rules. During the SBREFA Panel process, the Panel sought out and
received comments on the regulatory options and flexibilities that were
presented to SERs and Panel members. The recommendations of the Panel
are described below and are also located in Section XX of the SBREFA
Final Panel Report, which is available in the public docket.
(b) Panel Process
    As required by Section 609(b) of the RFA, as amended by SBREFA, we
also conducted outreach to small entities and convened an SBAR Panel to
obtain advice and recommendations of representatives of the small
entities that potentially would be subject to the rule's requirements.
On October 22, 2014, EPA's Small Business Advocacy Chairperson convened
a Panel under Section 609(b) of the RFA. In addition to the Chair, the
Panel consisted of the Division Director of the Assessment and
Standards Division of EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration,
and the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget.
    As part of the SBAR Panel process, we conducted outreach with
representatives of small businesses that would potentially be affected
by the proposed rulemaking. We met with these Small Entity
Representatives (SERs) to discuss the potential rulemaking approaches
and potential options to decrease the impact of the rulemaking on their
industries. We distributed outreach materials to the SERs; these
materials included background on the rulemaking, possible

regulatory approaches, and possible rulemaking alternatives. The Panel
met with SERs from the industries that would be directly affected by
the Phase 2 rules on November 5, 2014 (trailer manufacturers) and
November 6, 2014 (engine converters and vocational vehicle chassis
manufacturers) to discuss the outreach materials and receive feedback
on the approaches and alternatives detailed in the outreach packet. The
Panel also met with SERs on July 19, 2014 for an initial, introductory
outreach meeting, and held a supplementary outreach meeting with the
trailer manufacturer SERs on October 28, 2014. The Panel received
written comments from the SERs following each meeting in response to
discussions had at the meeting and the questions posed to the SERs by
the agency. The SERs were specifically asked to provide comment on
regulatory alternatives that could help to minimize the rule's impact
on small businesses.
    The Panel's findings and discussions were based on the information
that was available during the term of the Panel and issues that were
raised by the SERs during the outreach meetings and in their comments.
It was agreed that EPA should consider the issues raised by the SERs
and discussions had by the Panel itself, and that EPA should consider
comments on flexibility alternatives that would help to mitigate
negative impacts on small businesses to the extent legally allowable by
the Clean Air Act.
    Alternatives discussed throughout the Panel process included those
offered in previous or current EPA rulemakings, as well as alternatives
suggested by SERs and Panel members. A summary of these recommendations
is detailed below, and a full discussion of the regulatory alternatives
and hardship provisions discussed and recommended by the Panel can be
found in the SBREFA Final Panel Report. A complete discussion of the
provisions for which we are requesting comment and/or proposing in this
action can be found in Sections IV.E and V.D of this preamble. Also,
the Panel Report includes all comments received from SERs (Appendix B
of the Report) and summaries of the two outreach meetings that were
held with the SERs. In accordance with the RFA/SBREFA requirements, the
Panel evaluated the aforementioned materials and SER comments on issues
related to the IRFA. The Panel's recommendations from the Final Panel
Report are discussed below.
(c) Panel Recommendations
(i) Small Business Trailer Manufacturers
    Comments from trailer manufacturer SERs indicated that these
companies are familiar with most of the technologies described in the
materials, but have no experience with EPA certification and do not
anticipate they could manage the accounting and reporting requirements
without additional staff and extensive training. Performance testing,
which is a common requirement for many of EPA's regulatory programs, is
largely unfamiliar to these small business manufacturers and the SERs
believed the cost of testing would be a significant burden on their
companies. In light of this feedback, the Panel recommended a
combination of streamlined compliance and targeted exemptions for these
small businesses based on the specific trailer types that they
manufacture. The Panel believed these strategies would achieve many of
the benefits for the environment by driving adoption of CO2-
reducing technologies, while significantly reducing the burden that
these new regulations would introduce on small businesses.
(ii) Box Trailer Manufacturers
    Box trailer manufacturers have the benefit of relying on the
aerodynamic technology development initiated through EPA's voluntary
SmartWay program. The Panel was aware that EPA was planning to propose
a simplified compliance program for all manufacturers, in which
aerodynamic device manufacturers have the opportunity to test and
certify their devices with EPA as technologies that can be used by
trailer manufacturers in their trailer certification. This pre-approved
technology strategy was intended to provide all trailer manufactures a
means of complying with the standards without the burden of testing. In
the event that this strategy is limited to the early years of the
trailer program for all manufactures, the Panel recommended that small
manufacturers continue to be given the option to use pre-approved
devices in lieu of testing.
    In the event that small trailer manufacturers adopt pre-approved
aerodynamic technologies and the appropriate tire technologies for
compliance, the Panel recommended an alternative compliance pathway in
which small business trailer manufacturers could simply report to EPA
that all of their trailers include approved technologies in lieu of
collecting all of the required inputs for the GEM vehicle simulation.
(iii) Non-Box Trailer Manufacturers
    The Panel recommended no aerodynamic requirements for non-box
trailers. The non-box trailer SERs indicated that they had no
experience installing aerodynamic devices and had only seen them in
prototype-level demonstrations. In terms of the aerodynamic devices in
use today, most non-box trailer SERs identified unique operations in
which their trailers are used that preclude the use of those
technologies.
    Some non-box trailer manufacturers had experience with LRR tires
and ATI systems. However, the non-box trailer manufacturer SERs
indicated that LRR tires are not currently available for some of their
trailer types. The SERs noted that tire manufacturers are currently
focused on box trailer applications and there are only a few LRR tire
models that meet the needs of their customers. The Panel recommended
EPA ensure appropriate availability of these tires in order for it to
be deemed a feasible means of achieving these standards and recommended
a streamlined compliance process based on the availability of
technologies. The Panel suggested the best compliance option from a
small business perspective would be for EPA to pre-approve tires,
similar to the approach being proposed for aerodynamic technologies,
and to maintain a list that could be used to exempt small businesses
when no suitable tires are available. However, the Panel recognized the
difficulties of maintaining an up-to-date list of certified
technologies. The Panel recommended that, if EPA did not adopt the
list-based approach, the agency consider a simplified letter-based
compliance option that allows manufacturers to petition EPA for an
exemption if they are unable to identify tires that meet the LRR
performance requirements on a trailer family basis.
(iv) Non-Highway Trailer Manufacturers
    The Panel recommended excluding all trailers that spend a
significant amount of time in off-road applications. These trailers may
not spend much time at highway speeds and aerodynamic devices may
interfere with the vehicle's intended purpose. Additionally, tires with
lower rolling resistance may not provide the type of traction needed in
off-road applications.
(v) Compliance Provisions for All Small Trailer Manufacturers
    Due to the potential for reducing a small business's
competitiveness compared to the larger manufacturers, as well as the
ABT record-keeping

burden, the Panel recommended that EPA consider small business
flexibilities to allow small entities to opt out of ABT without placing
themselves at a competitive disadvantage to larger firms that adopt
ABT, such as a low volume exemption or requiring only LRR where
appropriate. EPA was asked to consider flexibilities for small
businesses that would ease and incentivize their participation in ABT,
such as streamlined the tracking requirements for small businesses. In
addition, the Panel recommended that EPA request comment on the
feasibility and consequences of ABT for the trailer program and
additional flexibilities that will promote small business
participation.
(vi) Lead Time Provisions for All Small Trailer Manufacturers
    For all trailer types that will be included in the proposal, the
Panel recommended a 1-year delay in implementation for small trailer
manufacturers at the start of the proposed rulemaking to allow them
additional lead time to make the proper staffing adjustments and
process changes and possibly add new infrastructure to meet these
requirements. In the event that EPA is unable to provide pre-approved
technologies for manufacturers to choose for compliance, the Panel
recommended that EPA provide small business trailer manufacturers an
additional 1-year delay for each subsequent increase in stringency.
This additional lead time will allow these small businesses to research
and market the technologies required by the new standards.
(vii) Small Business Alternative Fuel Engine Converters
    To reduce the compliance burden of small business engine converters
who convert engines in previously-certified complete vehicles, the
Panel recommended allowing engine compliance to be sufficient for
certification. This would mean the converted vehicle would not need to
be recertified as a vehicle. This flexibility would eliminate the need
for these small manufacturers to gather all of the additional
component-level information in addition to the engine CO2
performance necessary to properly certify a vehicle with GEM (e.g.,
transmission data, aerodynamic performance, tire rolling resistance,
etc.). In addition, the Panel recommended that small engine converters
be able to submit an engineering analysis, in lieu of measurement, to
show that their converted engines do not increase N2O
emissions. Many of the small engine converters are converting SI-
engines, and the catalysts in these engines are not expected to
substantially impact N2O production. Small engine converters
that convert CI-engines could likely certify by ensuring that their
controls require changes to the SCR dosing strategies.
    The Panel did not recommend separate standards for small business
natural gas engine manufacturers. The Panel believes this would
discourage entrance for small manufactures into this emerging market by
adding unnecessary costs to a technology that has the potential to
reduce CO2 tailpipe emissions. In addition, the Panel noted
that additional leakage requirements beyond a sealed crankcase for
small business natural gas-fueled CI engines and requirements to follow
industry standards for leakage could be waived for small businesses
with minimal impact on overall GHG emissions.
    Finally, the Panel recommended that small engine converters receive
a one-year delay in implementation for each increase in stringency
throughout the proposed rules. This flexibility will provide small
converters additional lead time to obtain the necessary equipment and
perform calibration testing if needed.
(viii) Emergency Vehicle Chassis Manufacturers
    Fire trucks, and many other emergency vehicles, are built for high
level of performance and reliability in severe-duty applications. Some
of the CO2-reducing technologies listed in the materials
could compromise the fire truck's ability to perform its duties and
many of the other technologies simply provide no benefit in real-world
emergency applications. The Panel recommended proposing less stringent
standards for emergency vehicle chassis manufactured by small
businesses. The Panel suggested that feasible standards could include
adoption of LRR tires at the baseline Phase 2 level and installation of
a Phase 2-compliant engine. In addition, the Panel recommended a
simplified certification approach for small manufacturers who make
chassis for emergency vehicles that reduces the number of inputs these
manufacturers must obtain for GEM.
(ix) Off-Road Vocational Vehicle Chassis Manufacturers
    EPA is planning to propose to continue the exemptions in Phase 1
for off-road and low-speed vocational vehicles (see generally 76 FR
57175). These provisions currently apply for vehicles that are defined
as ``motor vehicles'' per 40 CFR 85.1703, but may conduct most of their
operations off-road. Vehicles qualifying under these provisions must
comply with the applicable engine standard, but need not comply with a
vehicle-level GHG standard. The Panel concluded this exemption is
sufficient to cover the small business chassis manufacturers who design
chassis for off-road vocational vehicles.
(x) Custom Chassis Manufacturers
    The Panel concluded that chassis designed for specialty operations
often have limited ability to adopt CO2- and fuel
consumption-reducing technologies due to their unique use patterns. In
addition, the manufacturers of these chassis have very small annual
sales volumes. The Panel recommended that EPA propose a low volume
exemption for these custom chassis manufacturers. The Panel did not
receive sufficient information to recommend a specific sales volume,
but recommended that EPA request comment on how to design a small
business exemption by means of a volume exemption, and an appropriate
annual sales volume threshold.
(xi) Glider Manufacturers
    The Panel was aware that EPA would like to reduce the use of glider
kits, which have higher emissions of criteria pollutants like
NOX than current engines, and which could have higher GHG
emissions than Phase 2 engines. However, the Panel estimates that the
number of vehicles produced by the small businesses who manufacturer
glider kits is too small to have a substantial impact on the total
heavy-duty inventory and recommended that existing small businesses be
allowed to continue assembling glider vehicles without having to comply
with the GHG requirements. The Panel recommended that EPA establish an
allowance for existing small business glider manufacturers to produce
some number of glider kits for legitimate purposes, such as for newer
vehicles badly damaged in crashes. The Panel recommended that any other
limitations on small business glider production be flexible enough to
allow sales levels as high as the peak levels in the 2010-2012
timeframe.
(7) Summary of Projected Impact on Small Businesses
    EPA has chosen to propose the Panel's recommended regulatory
flexibility provisions for small business alternative fuel converters
and vocational vehicle chassis manufacturers and we believe that all of

the small businesses in these industries will be impacted by less than
one percent of their annual sales. EPA is also proposing many of the
Panel's recommendations for small business trailer manufacturers,
including seeking comment on the possibility of a small volume
exemption. A majority of the small trailer manufacturers produce non-
box trailers, and are not required to adopt aerodynamic devices in this
proposal. Additionally, many of the smallest trailer manufacturers
produce specialty trailers that are candidates for exemption under the
proposed off-highway or heavy-haul provisions described in Section
IVC.(5). At this time, EPA believes the additional flexibilities
offered for small business trailer manufacturers will reduce their
burden below three percent of their annual sales. A more detailed
description of the analysis to quantify the impact on small businesses
in each affected industry sector is included in the IRFA as presented
in Chapter 12 of the draft RIA for this rulemaking. EPA invites comment
on all aspects of the proposal and its impacts on small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains a federal mandate under UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-
1538, that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
state, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Accordingly, the agencies have prepared a
statement required under section 202 of UMRA. The statement is included
in the docket for this action and briefly summarized here.
    The agencies have prepared a statement of the cost-benefit analysis
as required by Section 202 of the UMRA; this discussion can be found in
this preamble, and in the draft RIA. The agencies believe that the
proposal represents the least costly, most cost-effective approach to
achieve the statutory requirements of the rules. Section IX explains
why the agencies believe that the fuel savings that would result from
this proposal would lead to lower prices economy wide, improving U.S.
international competitiveness. The costs and benefits associated with
the proposal are discussed in more detail above in Section IX and in
the Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis, as required by the UMRA.
    This action is not subject to the requirements of Section 203 of
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rules
from State and local officials.
    NHTSA notes that EPCA contains a provision (49 U.S.C. 32919(a))
that expressly preempts any State or local government from adopting or
enforcing a law or regulation related to fuel economy standards or
average fuel economy standards for automobiles covered by an average
fuel economy standard under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 329. However, commercial
medium- and heavy-duty on-highway vehicles and work trucks are not
``automobiles,'' as defined in 49 U.S.C. 32901(a)(3). In Phase 1 NHTSA
concluded that EPCA's express preemption provision would not reach the
fuel efficiency standards to be established in this rulemaking. NHTSA
is reiterating that conclusion here for the proposed Phase 2 standards.
    NHTSA also considered the issue of implied or conflict preemption.
The possibility of such preemption is dependent upon there being an
actual conflict between a standard established by NHTSA in this
rulemaking and a State or local law or regulation. See Spriestma v.
Mercury Marine, 537 U.S. 51, 64-65 (2002). At present, NHTSA has no
knowledge of any State or local law or regulation that would actually
conflict with one of the fuel efficiency standards to be established in
this rulemaking.
    NHTSA seeks public comment on this issue.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This proposal will be implemented at the Federal
level and impose compliance costs only on vehicle and engine
manufacturers. Tribal governments would be affected only to the extent
they purchase and use regulated vehicles. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this action.
    The agencies specifically solicit comment on this proposal from
Tribal officials.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is an
economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive
Order 12866, and the agencies believe that the environmental health or
safety risk addressed by this action may have a disproportionate effect
on children. Accordingly, we have evaluated the environmental health or
safety effects of these risks on children. The results of this
evaluation are discussed below.
    A synthesis of the science and research regarding how climate
change may affect children and other vulnerable subpopulations is
contained in the Technical Support Document for Endangerment or Cause
or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the
Clean Air Act, which can be found in the public docket for this
proposal. In making those findings, EPA Administrator placed weight on
the fact that certain groups, including children, are particularly
vulnerable to climate-related health effects. In those findings, EPA
Administrator also determined that the health effects of climate change
linked to observed and projected elevated concentrations of GHGs
include the increased likelihood of more frequent and intense heat
waves, increases in ozone concentrations over broad areas of the
country, an increase of the severity of extreme weather events such as
hurricanes and floods, and increasing severity of coastal storms due to
rising sea levels. These effects can all increase mortality and
morbidity, especially in vulnerable populations such as children, the
elderly, and the poor. In addition, the occurrence of wildfires in
North America have increased and are likely to intensify in a warmer
future. PM emissions from these wildfires can contribute to acute and
chronic illnesses of the respiratory system, including pneumonia, upper
respiratory diseases, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease, especially in children.
    The agencies have estimated reductions in projected global mean
surface temperature and sea level rise as a result of reductions in GHG
emissions associated with the standards finalized in this action
(Section VII and NHTSA's DEIS). Due to their vulnerability, children
may receive disproportionate benefits from these reductions in
temperature and the subsequent reduction of increased ozone and
severity of weather events.

    As discussed in Section VIII.D.2, based on the magnitude of the
non-GHG co-pollutant emissions changes predicted to result from the
proposed standards, the agencies expect that there will be improvements
in ambient air quality, pending a more comprehensive analysis for the
final rulemaking. Due to their vulnerability, children may receive
disproportionate benefits from these reductions, as well.
    Children are also more susceptible than adults to many air
pollutants because of differences in physiology, higher per body weight
breathing rates and consumption, rapid development of the brain and
bodily systems, and behaviors that increase chances for exposure. Even
before birth, the developing fetus may be exposed to air pollutants
through the mother that affect development and permanently harm the
individual.
    Infants and children breathe at much higher rates per body weight
than adults, with infants under one year of age having a breathing rate
up to five times that of adults.\882\ In addition, children breathe
through their mouths more than adults and their nasal passages are less
effective at removing pollutants, which leads to a higher deposition
fraction in their lungs.\883\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \882\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2009).
Metabolically-derived ventilation rates: a revised approach based
upon oxygen consumption rates. Washington, DC: Office of Research
and Development. EPA/600/R-06/129F. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=202543.
    \883\ Foos, B.; Marty, M.; Schwartz, J.; Bennet, W.; Moya, J.;
Jarabek, A.M.; Salmon, A.G. (2008) Focusing on children's inhalation
dosimetry and health effects for risk assessment: An introduction. J
Toxicol Environ Health 71A: 149-165.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Certain motor vehicle emissions present greater risks to children
as well. Early lifestages (e.g., children) are thought to be more
susceptible to tumor development than adults when exposed to
carcinogenic chemicals that act through a mutagenic mode of
action.\884\ Exposure at a young age to these carcinogens could lead to
a higher risk of developing cancer later in life.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \884\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2005). Supplemental
guidance for assessing susceptibility from early-life exposure to
carcinogens. Washington, DC: Risk Assessment Forum. EPA/630/R-03/
003F. http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/pdfs/childrens_supplement_final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The adverse effects of individual air pollutants may be more severe
for children, particularly the youngest age groups, than adults. The
Integrated Science Assessments and Criteria Documents for a number of
pollutants affected by these rules, including those for NO2,
SO2, PM, ozone and CO, describe children as a group with
greater susceptibility. Section VIII.B.7 discusses a number of
childhood health outcomes associated with proximity to roadways,
including evidence for exacerbation of asthma symptoms and suggestive
evidence for new onset asthma. In general, these studies do not
identify the specific contaminants associated with adverse effects,
instead addressing the near-roadway environment as one containing
numerous exposures potentially associated with adverse health effects.
    There is substantial evidence that people who live or attend school
near major roadways are more likely to be of a minority race, Hispanic
ethnicity, and/or low SES. Within these highly exposed groups,
children's exposure and susceptibility to health effects is greater
than adults due to school-related and seasonal activities, behavior,
and physiological factors.
    Section VIII.D.2 describes the expected ambient air quality changes
for non-GHG co-pollutants resulting from the proposed standards, which
represent levels to which the general population is exposed. Children
are not expected to experience greater ambient concentrations of air
pollutants than the general population. However, because of their
greater susceptibility to air pollution and their increased time spent
outdoors, it is likely that the proposed standards would have
particular benefits for children's health.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution or use of energy. In fact, this proposal has a positive
effect on energy supply and use. Because the combination of the
proposed fuel economy standards and the proposed GHG emission standards
would result in significant fuel savings, this proposal encourages more
efficient use of fuels. Therefore, we have concluded that this proposal
is not likely to have any adverse energy effects. Our energy effects
analysis is described above in Section IX.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act and 1 CFR Part 51

    This action involves technical standards.
    The agencies propose to use the following voluntary consensus
standards from SAE International:
     SAE J1263 (March 2010) and SAE J2263 (December 2008) are
voluntary consensus standards that together establish a test protocol
to determine road-load coefficients for properly testing vehicles on a
chassis dynamometer to simulate in-use operating conditions. Heavy-duty
vehicle testing already relies on these reference standards under 40
CFR part 1066.
     SAE J2343 (July 2008). This voluntary consensus standard
establishes a minimum hold time for LNG-fueled vehicles following a
refueling event before the tank vents to relieve pressure. This is
described further in Section XIII.A.3.
    We are also aware that updated standards are pending for three SAE
standards that are already incorporated by reference in the
regulations--SAE J2263, SAE J1526, and SAE J2071. We will consider
referencing these updated standards if they are adopted before
completion of the final rule. All SAE documents are available from the
publisher's Web site at www.sae.org.
    We are proposing to adopt updated versions of two ASTM standards
that already apply under 40 CFR part 1036. This applies for ASTM D240-
14 and ASTM D4809-13, both of which specify test methods for
determining the heat of combustion of liquid hydrocarbon fuels.
    This action also involves technical standards for which there is no
available voluntary consensus standard. First, the agencies are
proposing greenhouse gas emission standards for heavy-duty vehicles
that depend on computer modeling to predict and emission rate based on
various engine and vehicle characteristics. Such a model is not
available from other sources, so EPA has developed the Greenhouse Gas
Emission Model as a simulation tool for demonstrating compliance with
emission standards. See Section II for a detailed description of the
model. A working version of this software is available for download at
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/gem.htm.
    Second, we need to define a benchmark gear oil for establishing a
reference point for establishing improvements in axle efficiency. There
is no voluntary consensus standard for this purpose. As described in
Section II.C.1.c, we are instead proposing to identify the technical
specifications for a commonly used commercial product from BASF
Corporation. These technical specifications have been placed in the
docket for this rulemaking.
    Third, 40 CFR part 1037 includes several test procedures involving
calculation with numerous physical quantities. We are incorporating by
reference NIST Special Publication 811 to allow for standardization and
consistency of units and nomenclature. This standard, which already
applies for

40 CFR parts 1065 and 1066, is published by the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (Department of Commerce) and is available at
no charge at www.nist.gov.
    Fourth, the amendments for marine diesel engines involve technical
standards related to the requirements that apply internationally. There
are no voluntary consensus documents that address these technical
standards. In earlier rulemakings, EPA has adopted an incorporation by
reference for MARPOL Annex VI and the NOX Technical code in
40 CFR parts 1042 and 1043. The International Maritime Organization
adopted changes to these documents in 2013 and 2014, which need to be
reflected in 40 CFR parts 1042 and 1043. EPA recently adopted the
updated reference documents in 40 CFR part 1043. As noted in Section
XIV.H.4, this proposal includes the remaining step of incorporating the
updated IMO documents by reference in 40 CFR part 1042. All these
documents are available at www.imo.org.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The agencies believe the human health or environmental risk
addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority,
low-income or indigenous populations. The results of this evaluation
are discussed below.
    With respect to GHG emissions, the agencies have determined that
these proposed rules would not have disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or
indigenous populations because they increase the level of environmental
protection for all affected populations without having any
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on any population, including any minority, low-income or
indigenous population. The reductions in CO2 and other GHGs
associated with the standards would affect climate change projections,
and the agencies have estimated reductions in projected global mean
surface temperatures (Section VII). Within communities experiencing
adverse impacts related to climate change, certain parts of the
population may be especially vulnerable; these include the poor, the
elderly, those already in poor health, the disabled, those living
alone, and/or indigenous populations dependent on one or a few
resources.\885\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \885\ EPA 2009. Technical Support Document for Endangerment and
Cause of Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section
202(a) of the Clean Air Act. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/endangerment/Endangerment_TSD.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For non-GHG co-pollutants such as ozone, PM2.5, and
toxics, the agencies have concluded that it is not practicable to
determine whether there would be disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects on minority, low income and/or
indigenous populations from these rules. As discussed in Section
VIII.D.2, however, based on the magnitude of the non-GHG co-pollutant
emissions changes predicted to result from the proposed standards, EPA
and NHTSA expect that there will be improvements in ambient air quality
that would likely help in mitigating the disparity in racial, ethnic,
and economically-based exposures, pending a more comprehensive analysis
for the final rulemaking.

L. Endangered Species Act

    Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires federal agencies, in
consultation with one or both of the Services (depending on the species
at issue), to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, or carry out
are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of federally
listed endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or
adverse modification of designated critical habitat of such species. 16
U.S.C. 1536(a)(2). Under relevant implementing regulations, section
7(a)(2) applies only to actions where there is discretionary federal
involvement or control. 50 CFR 402.03. Further, under the regulations
consultation is required only for actions that ``may affect'' listed
species or designated critical habitat. 50 CFR 402.14. Consultation is
not required where the action has no effect on such species or habitat.
Under this standard, it is the federal agency taking the action that
evaluates the action and determines whether consultation is required.
See 51 FR 19926, 19949 (June 3, 1986). Effects of an action include
both the direct and indirect effects that will be added to the
environmental baseline. 50 CFR 402.02. Indirect effects are those that
are caused by the action, later in time, and that are reasonably
certain to occur. Id. To trigger a consultation requirement, there must
thus be a causal connection between the federal action, the effect in
question, and the listed species, and the effect must be reasonably
certain to occur.
    The agencies note that the projected environmental effects of this
rule are positive. See proposed preamble section VII.C and VIII.
However, the fact that the rule will have overall positive effects on
the environment does not mean that the rule may affect any listed
species or designated critical habitat within the meaning of ESA
section 7(a)(2) or the implementing regulations or require ESA
consultation. We have carefully considered various types of potential
effects in reaching the conclusion that ESA consultation is not
required for this rule.
    With respect to the projected GHG emission reductions, we are
mindful of significant legal and technical analysis undertaken by FWS
and the U.S. Department of the Interior in the context of listing the
polar bear as a threatened species under the ESA. In that context, in
2008, FWS and DOI expressed the view that the best scientific data
available were insufficient to draw a causal connection between GHG
emissions and effects on the species in its habitat.\886\ The DOI
Solicitor concluded that where the effect at issue is climate change,
proposed actions involving GHG emissions cannot pass the ``may affect''
test of the section 7 regulations and thus are not subject to ESA
consultation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \886\ See, e.g., 73 FR 28212, 28300 (May 15, 2008); Memorandum
from David Longly Bernhardt, Solicitor, U.S. Department of the
Interior re: ``Guidance on the Applicability of the Endangered
Species Act's Consultation Requirements to Proposed Actions
Involving the Emission of Greenhouse Gases'' (Oct. 3, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agencies have also previously considered issues relating to GHG
emissions in connection with the requirements of ESA section 7(a)(2).
Although the GHG emission reductions projected for this proposal are
large, EPA evaluated comparable or larger reductions in assessing this
same issue in the context of the light duty vehicle GHG emission
standards for model years 2012-2016 and 2017-2025. There the agency
projected emission reductions comparable to, or greater than those
projected here over the lifetimes of the model years in question \887\
and, based on air quality modeling of potential environmental effects,
concluded that ``EPA knows of no modeling tool which can link these
small, time-attenuated changes in global metrics to particular effects
on listed species in particular areas. Extrapolating from global metric
to local effect with

such small numbers, and accounting for further links in a causative
chain, remain beyond current modeling capabilities.'' EPA, Light Duty
Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy
Standards, Response to Comment Document for Joint Rulemaking at 4-102
(Docket EPA-OAR-HQ-2009-4782). EPA reached this conclusion after
evaluating issues relating to potential improvements relevant to both
temperature and oceanographic pH outputs. EPA's ultimate finding was
that ``any potential for a specific impact on listed species in their
habitats associated with these very small changes in average global
temperature and ocean pH is too remote to trigger the threshold for ESA
section 7(a)(2).''Id. EPA believes that the same conclusion would apply
to the present proposed rule (should it be adopted), given that the
projected CO2 emission reductions are comparable to or less
than those projected for either of the light duty vehicle rules. See
section VII.D.2 and Table VII-41 to the preamble to the proposed rule;
See also, e.g., Ground Zero Center for Non-Violent Action v. U.S. Dept.
of Navy, 383 F. 3d 1082, 1091-92 (9th Cir. 2004) (where the likelihood
of jeopardy to a species from a federal action is extremely remote, ESA
does not require consultation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \887\ See 75 FR at 25347 Table I.C 2-4 (May 7, 2010); 77 FR at
62894 Table III-68 (Oct. 15, 2012); compare with Table VII-41 to the
preamble to the proposed rule here. Projected emission reductions of
criteria pollutants and air toxics are also on the same order as the
two light duty vehicle rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XVI. EPA and NHTSA Statutory Authorities

    As described below, the proposed regulations are authorized
separately for EPA and NHTSA under the agencies' respective statutory
authorities. See Section I for a discussion of these authorities.

A. EPA

    Statutory authority for the vehicle controls proposed today is
found in CAA section 202(a) (which authorizes standards for emissions
of pollutants from new motor vehicles that emissions cause or
contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare), and CAA sections 202(d), 203-209,
216, and 301 (42 U.S.C. 7521(a), 7521(d), 7522-7543, 7550, and 7601).
    Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4365, EPA must make certain proposed rules
available to the Science Advisory Board (SAB) for review. EPA may also
voluntarily choose to make other rules available to the SAB. EPA
notified the SAB of its plans for this rulemaking and on June 11, 2014,
the chartered SAB discussed the recommendations of its work group on
the planned action and agreed that no further SAB consideration of the
supporting science was merited.

B. NHTSA

    Statutory authority for the fuel consumption standards proposed
today is found in section 103 of the Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007, 49 U.S.C. 32902(k). EISA authorizes a fuel efficiency
improvement program, designed to achieve the maximum feasible
improvement to be created for commercial medium- and heavy-duty on-
highway vehicles and work trucks, to implement appropriate test
methods, measurement metrics, fuel economy standards, and compliance
and enforcement protocols that are appropriate, cost-effective and
technologically feasible. To the extent motor vehicle safety is
implicated, NHTSA's authority to regulate it is also derived from the
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 9

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 22

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Penalties, Pesticides and pests,
Poison prevention, Water pollution control.

40 CFR Part 85

    Confidential business information, Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research,
Warranties.

40 CFR Part 86

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Incorporation by reference, Labeling, Motor vehicle
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 600

    Administrative practice and procedure, Electric power, Fuel
economy, Incorporation by reference, Labeling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 1033

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control.

40 CFR Parts 1036 and 1037

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, confidential business information, Incorporation
by reference, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Warranties.

40 CFR Part 1039

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Confidential business information, Imports,
Labeling, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Warranties.

40 CFR Part 1042

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Confidential business information, Imports,
Labeling, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels,
Warranties.

40 CFR Part 1043

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Vessels,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Parts 1065 and 1066

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Research.

40 CFR Part 1068

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle
pollution, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Warranties.

49 CFR Part 512

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Freedom of information, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Parts 523, 534, 535, and 537

    Fuel economy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Part 538

    Administrative practice and procedure, Fuel economy, Motor
vehicles, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as set forth
below.

PART 9--OMB Approvals Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

0
1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 135 et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 2003,
2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 31 U.S.C. 9701; 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1318,

1321, 1326, 1330, 1342, 1344, 1345 (d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38
FR 21243, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp. p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243,
246, 300f, 300g, 300g-1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6,
300j-1, 300j-2, 300j-3, 300j-4, 300j-9, 1857 et seq., 6901-6992k,
7401-7671q, 7542, 9601-9657, 11023, 11048.

0
2. In Sec.  9.1 the table is amended by:
0
a. Adding in numerical order by CFR designation a new undesignated
center heading ``Control of Emissions from New and In-Use Heavy-Duty
Highway Engines'' and its entry in numerical order for ``1036.825''.;
0
b. Adding in numerical order by CFR designation a new undesignated
center heading ``Control of Emissions from New Heavy-Duty Motor
Vehicles'' and its entry in numerical order for ``1037.825''.; and
0
c. Adding in numerical order by CFR designation a new undesignated
center heading ``Control of NOX SOX, and PM
Emissions from Marine Engines and Vessels Subject to the Marpol
Protocol'' and its entryies in numerical order for ``1043.40--through
1043.95''.
    The additions read as follows:

Sec.  9.1  OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                40 CFR citation                      OMB Control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
   Control of Emissions From New and In-Use Heavy-Duty Highway Engines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1036.825.......................................                2060-0678

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Control of Emissions From New Heavy-Duty Motor Vehicles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1037.825.......................................                2060-0678

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Control of NOX SOX, and PM Emissions From Marine Engines and Vessels
                     Subject to the Marpol Protocol
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1043.40-1043.95................................                2060-0641

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

PART 22--CONSOLIDATED RULES OF PRACTICE GOVERNING THE
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES AND THE REVOCATION/
TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF PERMITS

0
3. The authority citation for part 22 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136(l); 15 U.S.C. 2615; 33 U.S.C. 1319,
1342, 1361, 1415 and 1418; 42 U.S.C. 300g-3(g), 6912, 6925, 6928,
6991e and 6992d; 42 U.S.C. 7413(d), 7524(c), 7545(d), 7547, 7601 and
7607(a), 9609, and 11045.

0
4. Section 22.1 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:

Sec.  22.1  Scope of this part.

    (a) * * *
    (2) The assessment of any administrative civil penalty under
sections 113(d), 205(c), 211(d) and 213(d) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7413(d), 7524(c), 7545(d) and 7547(d)), and a
determination of nonconforming engines, vehicles or equipment under
sections 207(c) and 213(d) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7541(c) and 7547(d));
* * * * *
0
5. Section 22.34 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  22.34  Supplemental rules governing the administrative assessment
of civil penalties under the Clean Air Act.

    (a) Scope. This section shall apply, in conjunction with Sec. Sec.
22.1 through 22.32, in administrative proceedings to assess a civil
penalty conducted under sections 113(d), 205(c), 211(d), and 213(d) of
the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7413(d), 7524(c), 7545(d), and
7547(d)), and a determination of nonconforming engines, vehicles or
equipment under sections 207(c) and 213(d) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7541(c) and 7547(d)). Where inconsistencies exist
between this section and Sec. Sec.  22.1 through 22.32, this section
shall apply.
    (b) Issuance of notice. Prior to the issuance of a final order
assessing a civil penalty or a final determination of nonconforming
engines, vehicles or equipment, the person to whom the order or
determination is to be issued shall be given written notice of the
proposed issuance of the order or determination. Service of a complaint
or a consent agreement and final order pursuant to Sec.  22.13
satisfies these notice requirements.

PART 85--CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOBILE SOURCES

0
6. The authority citation for part 85 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart F--Exemption of Clean Alternative Fuel Conversions From
Tampering Prohibition

0
7. Section 85.525 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  85.525  Applicable standards.

    To qualify for an exemption from the tampering prohibition,
vehicles/engines that have been converted to operate on a different
fuel must meet emission standards and related requirements as described
in this section. The modified vehicle/engine must meet the requirements
that applied for the OEM vehicle/engine, or the most stringent OEM
vehicle/engine standards in any allowable grouping. Fleet average
standards do not apply unless clean alternative fuel conversions are
specifically listed as subject to the standards.
    (a) If the vehicle/engine was certified with a Family Emission
Limit for NOX, NOX + HC, NOX + NMOG,
or particulate matter, as noted on the vehicle/engine emission control
information label, the modified vehicle/engine may not exceed this
Family Emission Limit.
    (b) Compliance with greenhouse gas emission standards is
demonstrated as follows:
    (1) Subject to the following exceptions and special provisions,
compliance with light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas

emission standards is demonstrated by complying with the N2O
and CH4 standards and provisions set forth in 40 CFR
86.1818-12(f)(1) and the in-use CO2 exhaust emission
standard set forth in 40 CFR 86.1818-12(d) as determined by the OEM for
the subconfiguration that is identical to the fuel conversion emission
data vehicle (EDV):
    (i) If the OEM complied with the light-duty greenhouse gas
standards using the fleet averaging option for N2O and
CH4, as allowed under 40 CFR 86.1818-12(f)(2), the
calculations of the carbon-related exhaust emissions require the input
of grams/mile values for N2O and CH4, and you are
not required to demonstrate compliance with the standalone
CH4 and N2O standards.
    (ii) If the OEM complied with alternate standards for
N2O and/or CH4, as allowed under 40 CFR 86.1818-
12(f)(3), you may demonstrate compliance with the same alternate
standards.
    (iii) If the OEM complied with the nitrous oxide (N2O)
and methane (CH4) standards and provisions set forth in 40
CFR 86.1818-12(f)(1) or (f)(3), and the fuel conversion CO2
measured value is lower than the in-use CO2 exhaust emission
standard, you also have the option to convert the difference between
the in-use CO2 exhaust emission standard and the fuel
conversion CO2 measured value into GHG equivalents of
CH4 and/or N2O, using 298 g CO2 to
represent 1 g N2O and 25 g CO2 to represent 1 g
CH4. You may then subtract the applicable converted values
from the fuel conversion measured values of CH4 and/or
N2O to demonstrate compliance with the CH4 and/or
N2O standards.
    (iv) Optionally, compliance with greenhouse gas emission
requirements may be demonstrated by comparing emissions from the
vehicle prior to the fuel conversion to the emissions after the fuel
conversion. This comparison must be based on FTP test results from the
emission data vehicle (EDV) representing the pre-conversion test group.
The sum of CO2, CH4, and N2O shall be
calculated for pre- and post-conversion FTP test results, where
CH4 and N2O are weighted by their global warming
potentials of 25 and 298, respectively. The post-conversion sum of
these emissions must be lower than the pre-conversion conversion
greenhouse gas emission results. CO2 emissions are
calculated as specified in 40 CFR 600.113-12. If statements of
compliance are applicable and accepted in lieu of measuring
N2O, as permitted by EPA regulation, the comparison of the
greenhouse gas results also need not measure or include N2O
in the before and after emission comparisons.
    (2) Compliance with heavy-duty engine greenhouse gas emission
standards is demonstrated by complying with the CO2,
N2O, and CH4 standards (or FELs, as applicable)
and provisions set forth in 40 CFR 1036.108 for the engine family that
is represented by the fuel conversion emission data engine (EDE). The
following additional provisions apply:
    (i) If the fuel conversion CO2 measured value is lower
than the CO2 standard (or FEL, as applicable), you have the
option to convert the difference between the CO2 standard
(or FEL, as applicable) and the fuel conversion CO2 measured
value into GHG equivalents of CH4 and/or N2O,
using 298 g/hp-hr CO2 to represent 1 g/hp-hr N2O
and 25 g/hp-hr CO2 to represent 1 g/hp-hr CH4.
You may then subtract the applicable converted values from the fuel
conversion measured values of CH4 and/or N2O to
demonstrate compliance with the CH4 and/or N2O
standards (or FEL, as applicable).
    (ii) Small volume conversion manufacturers may demonstrate
compliance with N2O standards based on an engineering
analysis.
    (iii) For conversions of engines installed in vocational vehicles
subject to Phase 2 standards under 40 CFR 1037.105 or in tractors
subject to Phase 2 standards under 40 CFR 1037.106, conversion
manufacturers may omit a demonstration related to the vehicle-based
standards, as long as they have a reasonable technical basis for
believing that the modified vehicle continues to meet those standards.
    (3) Subject to the following exceptions and special provisions,
compliance with greenhouse gas emission standards for heavy-duty
vehicles subject to 40 CFR 1037.104 is demonstrated by complying with
the N2O and CH4 standards and provisions set
forth in 40 CFR 1037.104 and the in-use CO2 exhaust emission
standard set forth in 40 CFR 1037.104(b) as determined by the OEM for
the subconfiguration that is identical to the fuel conversion emission
data vehicle (EDV):
    (i) If the OEM complied with alternate standards for N2O
and/or CH4, as allowed under 40 CFR 1037.104(c) you may
demonstrate compliance with the same alternate standards.
    (ii) If you are unable to meet either the N2O or
CH4 standards and your fuel conversion CO2
measured value is lower than the in-use CO2 exhaust emission
standard, you may also convert the difference between the in-use
CO2 exhaust emission standard and the fuel conversion
CO2 measured value into GHG equivalents of CH4
and/or N2O, using 298 g CO2 to represent 1 g
N2O, and 25 g CO2 to represent 1 g
CH4. You may then subtract the applicable converted values
from the fuel conversion measured values of CH4 and/or
N2O to demonstrate compliance with the CH4 and/or
N2O standards.
    (iii) You may alternatively comply with the greenhouse gas emission
requirements by comparing emissions from the vehicle before and after
the fuel conversion. This comparison must be based on FTP test result
from the emission data vehicle (EDV) representing the pre-conversion
test group. The sum of CO2, CH4, and
N2O shall be calculated for pre- and post-conversion FTP
test results, where CH4 and N2O are weighted by
their global warming potentials of 25 and 298, respectively. The post-
conversion sum of these emissions must be lower than the pre-conversion
greenhouse gas emission result. Calculate CO2 emissions as
specified in 40 CFR 600.113. If we waive N2O measurement
requirements based on a statement of compliance, disregard
N2O for all measurements and calculations under this
paragraph (b)(3)(iii).
    (c) Conversion systems for engines that would have qualified for
chassis certification at the time of OEM certification may use those
procedures, even if the OEM did not. Conversion manufacturers choosing
this option must designate test groups using the appropriate criteria
as described in this subpart and meet all vehicle chassis certification
requirements set forth in 40 CFR part 86, subpart S.

Subpart O--Urban Bus Rebuild Requirements

0
8. Section 85.1406 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(2) to read as
follows:

Sec.  85.1406  Certification.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) If the equipment certifier disagrees with such determination of
nonconformity and so advises the Agency, the Administrator shall afford
the equipment certifier and other interested persons an opportunity to
present their views and evidence in support thereof at a public hearing
conducted in accordance with procedures found in 40 CFR part 1068,
subpart G.

Subpart P--Importation of Motor Vehicles And Motor Vehicle Engines

0
9. Section 85.1508 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  85.1508  ``In Use'' inspections and recall requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) A certificate holder will be notified whenever the
Administrator has determined that a substantial number of a class or
category of the certificate holder's vehicles or engines, although
properly maintained and used, do not conform to the regulations
prescribed under section 202 when in actual use throughout their useful
lives (as determined under section 202(d)). After such notification,
the Recall Regulations at 40 CFR part 1068, subpart G, shall govern the
certificate holder's responsibilities and references to a manufacturer
in the Recall Regulations shall apply to the certificate holder.
0
10. Section 85.1513 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(4) to read as
follows:

Sec.  85.1513  Prohibited acts; penalties.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (4) Hearings on suspensions and revocations of certificates of
conformity or of eligibility to perform modification/testing under
Sec.  85.1509 shall be held in accordance with 40 CFR part 1068,
subpart G.
* * * * *

Subpart R--Exclusion and Exemption of Motor Vehicles and Motor
Vehicle Engines

0
11. Section 85.1701 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:

Sec.  85.1701  General applicability.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Beginning January 1, 2014, the exemption provisions of 40 CFR
part 1068, subpart C, apply instead of the provisions of this subpart
for heavy-duty motor vehicle engines regulated under 40 CFR part 86,
subpart A, except that the competition exemption of 40 CFR 1068.235 and
the hardship exemption provisions of 40 CFR 1068.245, 1068.250, and
1068.255 do not apply for motor vehicle engines.
* * * * *
0
12. Section 85.1703 is amended by adding paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  85.1703  Definition of motor vehicle.

* * * * *
    (b) Note that, in applying the criterion in paragraph (a)(2) of
this section, vehicles that are clearly intended for operation on
highways are motor vehicles. Absence of a particular safety feature is
relevant only when absence of that feature would prevent operation on
highways.
0
13. Section 85.1706 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  85.1706  Pre-certification exemption.

* * * * *
    (b) Any manufacturer that desires a pre-certification exemption and
is in the business of importing, modifying or testing uncertified
vehicles for resale under the provisions of 40 CFR 85.1501, et seq.,
must send the request to the Designated Compliance Officer as specified
in 40 CFR 1068.30. The Designated Compliance Officer may require such
manufacturers to submit information regarding the general nature of the
fleet activities, the number of vehicles involved, and a demonstration
that adequate record-keeping procedures for control purposes will be
employed.

Sec. Sec.  85.1713 and 85.1714  [Removed]

0
14. Remove Sec. Sec.  85.1713 and 85.1714.

Subpart S--Recall Regulations

0
15. Subpart S is revised to read as follows:

Subpart S--Recall Regulations

Sec.  85.1801  Recall regulations.

    Recall regulations apply for motor vehicles and motor vehicle
engines as specified in 40 CFR part 1068, subpart G.

Subpart T--Emission Defect Reporting Requirements

0
16. Section 85.1901 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  85.1901  Applicability.

    (a) The requirements of this subpart shall be applicable to all
1972 and later model year motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines,
except that the provisions of 40 CFR 1068.501 apply instead for heavy-
duty motor vehicle engines certified under 40 CFR part 86, subpart A,
and for heavy-duty motor vehicles certified under 40 CFR part 1037
starting January 1, 2018.
    (b) The requirement to report emission-related defects affecting a
given class or category of vehicles or engines shall remain applicable
for five years from the end of the model year in which such vehicles or
engines were manufactured.
0
17. Section 85.1902 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  85.1902  Definitions.

    For the purposes of this subpart and unless otherwise noted:
    (a) Act means the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q, as amended.
    (b) Emission-related defect means:
    (1) A defect in design, materials, or workmanship in a device,
system, or assembly described in the approved Application for
Certification that affects any parameter or specification enumerated in
appendix VIII of this part; or
    (2) A defect in the design, materials, or workmanship in one or
more emission-related parts, components, systems, software or elements
of design which must function properly to ensure continued compliance
with emission standards.
    (c) Useful life has the meaning given in section 202(d) of the Act
(42 U.S.C. 7521(d)) and regulations promulgated thereunder.
    (d) Voluntary emissions recall means a repair, adjustment, or
modification program voluntarily initiated and conducted by a
manufacturer to remedy any emission-related defect for which direct
notification of vehicle or engine owners has been provided, including
programs to remedy defects related to emissions standards for
CO2, CH4, N2O, and/or carbon-related
exhaust emissions.
    (e) Ultimate purchaser has the meaning given in section 216 of the
Act (42 U.S.C. 7550).
    (f) Manufacturer has the meaning given in section 216 of the Act
(42 U.S.C. 7550).

PART 86--CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY VEHICLES
AND ENGINES

0
18. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart A--General Provisions for Heavy-Duty Engines and Heavy-Duty
Vehicles

0
19. Revise the heading of subpart A to read as set forth above.

Sec.  86.001-35  [Removed]

0
20. Remove Sec.  86.001-35.
0
21. Section 86.004-2 is amended by revising the definition of
``Emergency vehicle'' to read as follows:

Sec.  86.004-2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Emergency vehicle has the meaning given in 40 CFR 1037.801.
* * * * *
0
22. Section 86.004-25 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4)(i) to
read as follows:

Sec.  86.004-25  Maintenance.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) * * *

    (i) For diesel-cycle heavy-duty engines, the adjustment, cleaning,
repair, or replacement of the following items shall occur at 50,000
miles (or 1,500 hours) of use and at 50,000-mile (or 1,500-hour)
intervals thereafter:
    (A) Exhaust gas recirculation system related filters and coolers.
    (B) Positive crankcase ventilation valve.
    (C) Fuel injector tips (cleaning only).
    (D) DEF filters.
* * * * *
0
23. Section 86.004-28 is amended by revising paragraph (i) introductory
text and adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:

Sec.  86.004-28  Compliance with emission standards.

* * * * *
    (i) This paragraph (i) describes how to adjust emission results
from model year 2020 and earlier heavy-duty engines equipped with
exhaust aftertreatment to account for regeneration events. This
provision only applies for engines equipped with emission controls that
are regenerated on an infrequent basis. For the purpose of this
paragraph (i), the term ``regeneration'' means an event during which
emission levels change while the aftertreatment performance is being
restored by design. Examples of regenerations are increasing exhaust
gas temperature to remove sulfur from an adsorber or increasing exhaust
gas temperature to oxidize PM in a trap. For the purpose of this
paragraph (i), the term ``infrequent'' means having an expected
frequency of less than once per transient test cycle. Calculation and
use of adjustment factors are described in paragraphs (i)(1) through
(5) of this section. If your engine family includes engines with one or
more AECDs for emergency vehicle applications approved under paragraph
(4) of the definition of defeat device in Sec.  86.004-2, do not
consider additional regenerations resulting from those AECDs when
calculating emission factors or frequencies under this paragraph (i).
* * * * *
    (j) For model year 2021 and later engines using aftertreatment
technology with infrequent regeneration events that may occur during
testing, take one of the following approaches to account for the
emission impact of regeneration:
    (1) You may use the calculation methodology described in 40 CFR
1065.680 to adjust measured emission results. Do this by developing an
upward adjustment factor and a downward adjustment factor for each
pollutant based on measured emission data and observed regeneration
frequency as follows:
    (i) Adjustment factors should generally apply to an entire engine
family, but you may develop separate adjustment factors for different
configurations within an engine family. Use the adjustment factors from
this section for all testing for the engine family.
    (ii) You may use carryover or carry-across data to establish
adjustment factors for an engine family as described in Sec.  86.001-
24(f), consistent with good engineering judgment.
    (iii) Identify the value of F in each application for the
certification for which it applies.
    (2) You may ask us to approve an alternate methodology to account
for regeneration events. We will generally limit approval to cases
where your engines use aftertreatment technology with extremely
infrequent regeneration and you are unable to apply the provisions of
this section.
    (3) You may choose to make no adjustments to measured emission
results if you determine that regeneration does not significantly
affect emission levels for an engine family (or configuration) or if it
is not practical to identify when regeneration occurs. If you choose
not to make adjustments under paragraph (j)(1) or (2) of this section,
your engines must meet emission standards for all testing, without
regard to regeneration.

Sec.  86.004-30--[Removed]

0
24. Remove Sec.  86.004-30.
0
25. Section 86.007-11 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(iii),
(c), and (g) to read as follows:

Sec.  86.007-11  Emission standards and supplemental requirements for
2007 and later model year diesel heavy-duty engines and vehicles.

* * * * *
    (a)(1) * * *
    (iii) Carbon monoxide. 15.5 grams per brake horsepower-hour (5.77
grams per megajoule).
* * * * *
    (c) No crankcase emissions shall be discharged directly into the
ambient atmosphere from any new 2007 or later model year diesel-cycle
HDE, with the following exception: Diesel-fueled HDEs equipped with
turbochargers, pumps, blowers, or superchargers for air induction may
discharge crankcase emissions to the ambient atmosphere if the
emissions are added to the exhaust emissions (either physically or
mathematically) during all emission testing. Manufacturers taking
advantage of this exception must manufacture the engines so that all
crankcase emission can be routed into a dilution tunnel (or other
sampling system approved in advance by the Administrator), and must
account for deterioration in crankcase emissions when determining
exhaust deterioration factors. For the purpose of this paragraph (c),
crankcase emissions that are routed to the exhaust upstream of exhaust
aftertreatment during all operation are not considered to be
``discharged directly into the ambient atmosphere.''
* * * * *
    (g) Model year 2018 and later engines at or above 56 kW that will
be installed in specialty vehicles as allowed by 40 CFR 1037.605 may
meet alternate emission standards as follows:
    (1) The engines must be of a configuration that is identical to one
that is certified under 40 CFR part 1039.
    (2) Except as specified in this paragraph (g), engines certified
under this paragraph (g) must meet all the requirements that apply
under 40 CFR part 1039 instead of the comparable provisions in this
subpart A. In your annual production report, count these engines
separately and identify the vehicle manufacturers that will be
installing them. Treat these engines as part of the corresponding
engine family under 40 CFR part 1039 for compliance purposes such as
selective enforcement audits, in-use testing, defect reporting, and
recall.
    (3) The engines must be labeled as described in Sec.  86.095-35.
Engines certified under this paragraph (g) may not have the label
specified for nonroad engines in 40 CFR part 1039.
    (4) In a separate application for a certificate of conformity,
identify the corresponding nonroad engine family, describe the label
required under this paragraph (g), state that you meet applicable
diagnostic requirements under 40 CFR part 1039, and identify your
projected U.S.-directed production volume.
    (5) No additional certification fee applies for engines certified
under this paragraph (g).
    (6) Engines certified under this paragraph (g) may not generate or
use emission credits under this part or under 40 CFR part 1039. The
vehicles in which these engines are installed may generate or use
emission credits as described in 40 CFR part 1037.
* * * * *

Sec.  86.007-30  [Amended]

0
26. Section 86.007-30 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph
(d).

Sec.  86.007-35  [Removed]

0
27. Remove Sec.  86.007-35.

0
28. Section 86.008-10 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1)(iii);
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraph (f); and
0
c. Revising paragraph (g).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  86.008-10  Emission standards for 2008 and later model year Otto-
cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles.

    (a)(1) * * *
    (iii) Carbon monoxide. 14.4 grams per brake horsepower-hour (5.36
grams per megajoule).
* * * * *
    (g) Model year 2018 and later engines that will be installed in
specialty vehicles as allowed by 40 CFR 1037.605 may meet alternate
emission standards as follows:
    (1) The engines must be of a configuration that is identical to one
that is certified under 40 CFR part 1048 to the Blue Sky standards
under 40 CFR 1048.140.
    (2) Except as specified in this paragraph (g), engines certified
under this paragraph (g) must meet all the requirements that apply
under 40 CFR part 1048 instead of the comparable provisions in this
subpart A. In your annual production report, count these engines
separately and identify the vehicle manufacturers that will be
installing them. Treat these engines as part of the corresponding
engine family under 40 CFR part 1048 for compliance purposes such as
production-line testing, in-use testing, defect reporting, and recall.
    (3) The engines must be labeled as described in Sec.  86.095-35.
Engines certified under this paragraph (g) may not have the label
specified for nonroad engines in 40 CFR part 1048.
    (4) In a separate application for a certificate of conformity,
identify the corresponding nonroad engine family, describe the label
required under this paragraph (g), state that you meet applicable
diagnostic requirements under 40 CFR part 1048, and identify your
projected U.S.-directed production volume.
    (5) No additional certification fee applies for engines certified
under this paragraph (g).
    (6) Engines certified under this paragraph (g) may not generate or
use emission credits under this part. The vehicles in which these
engines are installed may generate or use emission credits as described
in 40 CFR part 1037.
0
29. Section 86.078-6 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  86.078-6  Hearings on certification.

    If a manufacturer's request for a hearing is approved, EPA will
follow the hearing procedures specified in 40 CFR part 1068, subpart G.
0
30. Section 86.084-4 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  86.084-4  Section numbering; construction.

    (a) The model year of initial applicability is indicated by the
last two digits of the 5-digit group. A section remains in effect for
subsequent model years until it is superseded. The number following the
hyphen designates what previous section is replaced by a future
regulation. For example, Sec.  86.005-1 applies to model year 2005 and
later vehicles and engines until it is superseded. Section 86.016-1
takes effect with model year 2016 and continues to apply until it is
superseded; Sec.  86.005-1 no longer applies starting with model year
2016, except as specified by Sec.  86.016-1.
    (b) If the regulation references a section that has been superseded
or no longer exists, this should be understood as a reference to the
same section for the appropriate model year. For example, if the
regulation refers to Sec.  86.001-30, it should be taken as a reference
to Sec.  86.007-30 or any later version of that section that applies
for the appropriate model year. However, this does not apply if the
reference to a superseded section specifically states that the older
provision applies instead of any updated provisions from the section in
effect for the current model year; this occurs most often as part of
the transition to new emission standards.
    (c) Except where indicated, the language in this subpart applies to
both vehicles and engines. In many instances, language referring to
engines is enclosed in parentheses and immediately follows the language
discussing vehicles.

Sec.  86.085-37  [Amended]

0
31. Section 86.085-37 is amended by removing paragraph (d).

Sec.  86.094-30  [Removed]

0
32. Remove Sec.  86.094-30.
0
33. Section 86.095-35 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a) introductory text, (a)(3)(iii)(B),
(a)(3)(iii)(H), (I), (J), and (K);
0
b. Adding paragraph (c); and
0
c. Revising paragraph, (i).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  86.095-35  Labeling.

    (a) The manufacturer of any motor vehicle (or motor vehicle engine)
subject to the applicable emission standards (and family emission
limits, as appropriate) of this subpart, shall, at the time of
manufacture, affix a permanent legible label, of the type and in the
manner described below, containing the information hereinafter
provided, to all production models of such vehicles (or engines)
available for sale to the public and covered by a Certificate of
Conformity under Sec.  86.007-30(a).
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (B) The full corporate name and trademark of the manufacturer;
though the label may identify another company and use its trademark
instead of the manufacturer's as long as the manufacturer complies with
the branding provisions of 40 CFR 1068.45.
* * * * *
    (H) The prominent statement: ``This engine conforms to U.S. EPA
regulations applicable to XXXX Model Year New Heavy-Duty Engines.'';
    (I) If the manufacturer has an alternate useful life period under
the provisions of Sec.  86.094-21(f), the prominent statement: ``This
engine has been certified to meet U.S. EPA standards for a useful-life
period of XXX miles or XXX hours of operation, whichever occurs first.
This engine's actual life may vary depending on its service
application.'' The manufacturer may alter this statement only to
express the assigned alternate useful life in terms other than miles or
hours (e.g., years, or hours only);
    (J) For diesel engines, the prominent statement: ``This engine has
a primary intended service application as a XXX heavy-duty engine.''
(The primary intended service applications are light, medium, and
heavy, as defined in Sec.  86.090-2.);
    (K) For engines certified under the alternative standards specified
in Sec.  86.007-11(g) or Sec.  86.008-10(g), the following statement:
``This engine is certified for only in specialty vehicles as specified
in [40 CFR 86.007-11 or 40 CFR 86.008-10]'';
* * * * *
    (c) Vehicles powered by model year 2007 through 2013 diesel-fueled
engines must include permanent, readily visible labels on the dashboard
(or instrument panel) and near all fuel inlets that state ``Use Ultra
Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Only''; or ``Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel
Only''.
* * * * *
    (i) The Administrator may approve in advance other label content
and formats, provided the alternative label contains information
consistent with this section.

Subpart E--Emission Regulations for 1978 and Later New Motorcycles,
General Provisions

0
34. Section 86.402-78 is amended by adding in alphabetical order a
definition for ``Round'' to paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  86.402-78  Definitions.

    (a) * * *
    Round has the meaning given in 40 CFR 1065.1001, unless otherwise
specified.
* * * * *
0
35. Section 86.410-2006 is amended by revising paragraph (e)
introductory text to read as follows:

Sec.  86.410-2006  Emission standards for 2006 and later model year
motorcycles.

* * * * *
    (e) Manufacturers with fewer than 500 employees worldwide and
producing fewer than 3,000 motorcycles per year for the United States
are considered small-volume manufacturers for the purposes of this
section. The following provisions apply for these small-volume
manufacturers:
* * * * *

Sec.  86.419-78  [Removed]

0
36. Section 86.419-78 is removed.
0
37. Section 86.419-2006 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read
as follows:

Sec.  86.419-2006  Engine displacement, motorcycle classes.

    (a)(1) Engine displacement shall be calculated using nominal engine
values and rounded to the nearest whole cubic centimeter.
* * * * *
0
38. Section 86.432-78 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:

Sec.  86.432-78  Deterioration factor.

* * * * *
    (d) An exhaust emission deterioration factor will be calculated by
dividing the predicted emissions at the useful life distance by the
predicted emissions at the total test distance. Predicted emissions are
obtained from the correlation developed in paragraph (c) of this
section. Factor = Predicted total distance emissions / Predicted total
test distance emissions. These interpolated and extrapolated values
shall be carried out to four places to the right of the decimal point
before dividing one by the other to determine the deterioration factor.
The results shall be rounded to three places to the right of the
decimal point.
* * * * *
0
39. Section 86.443-78 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  86.443-78  Request for hearing.

    The manufacturer may request a hearing on the Administrator's
determination as described in 40 CFR part 1068, subpart G.
0
40. Section 86.444-78 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  86.444-78  Hearings on certification.

    If a manufacturer's request for a hearing is approved, EPA will
follow the hearing procedures specified in 40 CFR part 1068, subpart G.

Subpart F--Emission Regulations for 1978 and Later New Motorcycles;
Test Procedures

0
41. Section 86.544-90 is amended by revising the introductory text and
paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  86.544-90  Calculations; exhaust emissions.

    This section describes how to calculate exhaust emissions.
Determine emission results for each pollutant to at least one more
decimal place than the applicable standard. Apply the deterioration
factor, then round the adjusted figure to the same number of decimal
places as the emission standard. Compare the rounded emission levels to
the emission standard for each emission data vehicle. In the case of
NOX + HC standards, apply the deterioration factor to each
pollutant and then add the results before rounding.
    (a) Calculate a composite FTP emission result using the following
equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP13JY15.021

Where:
Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant (i.e.,
CO2, HC, CO, or NOX) in grams per vehicle
kilometer and if appropriate, the weighted carbon mass equivalent of
total hydrocarbon equivalent, in grams per vehicle kilometer.
Yct = Mass emissions as calculated from the transient
phase of the cold-start test, in grams per test phase.
Ys = Mass emissions as calculated from the stabilized
phase of the cold-start test, in grams per test phase.
Dct = The measured driving distance from the transient
phase of the cold-start test, in kilometers.
Ds = The measured driving distance from the stabilized
phase of the cold-start test, in kilometers.
Yht = Mass emissions as calculated from the transient
phase of the hot-start test, in grams per test phase.
Dht = The measured driving distance from the transient
phase of the hot-start test, in kilometers.
* * * * *

Subpart G--Selective Enforcement Auditing of New Light-Duty
Vehicles, Light-Duty Trucks, and Heavy-Duty Vehicles

0
42. Section 86.614-84 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  86.614-84  Hearings on suspension, revocation, and voiding of
certificates of conformity.

    The provisions of 40 CFR part 1068, subpart G, apply if a
manufacturer requests a hearing regarding suspension, revocation or
voiding of certificates of conformity.
0
43. Section 86.615-84 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  86.615-84  Treatment of confidential information.

    The provisions of 40 CFR 1068.10 apply for information you consider
confidential.

Subpart L--Nonconformance Penalties for Gasoline-Fueled and Diesel
Heavy-Duty Engines and Heavy-Duty Vehicles, Including Light-Duty
Trucks

Sec.  86.1103-87  [Removed]

0
44. Section 86.1103-87 is removed.

0
45. Section 86.1103-2016 is added to subpart L to read as follows:

Sec.  86.1103-2016  Criteria for availability of nonconformance
penalties.

    (a) General. This section describes the three criteria EPA will use
to use to evaluate whether NCPs are appropriate under the Clean Air Act
for a given pollutant and a given subclass of heavy-duty engines and
heavy-duty vehicles.

Together, these criteria evaluate the likelihood that a manufacturer
will be technologically unable to meet a standard on time. Note that
since the first two of these criteria are intended to address the
question of whether a given standard creates the possibility for this
to occur, they are evaluated before the third criterion that addresses
the likelihood that the possibility will actually happen.
    (b) Criteria. We will establish NCPs for a given pollutant and
subclass when we find that each of the following criteria is met:
    (1) There is a new or revised emission standard that is more
stringent than the previous standard for the pollutant, or an existing
standard for that pollutant has become more difficult to achieve
because of a new or revised standard. When evaluating this criterion,
EPA will consider a new or revised standard to be ``new'' or
``revised'' until the point at which all manufacturers already
producing U.S.-directed engines or vehicles within the subclass have
achieved full compliance with the standard. For purposes of this
criterion, EPA will generally not consider compliance using banked
emission credits to be ``full compliance''.
    (2) Substantial work is required to meet the standard for which the
NCP is offered, as evaluated from the point at which the standard was
adopted or revised (or the point at which the standard became more
difficult meet because another standard was adopted or revised).
Substantial work, as used in this paragraph (b)(2), means the
application of technology not previously used in an engine or vehicle
class or subclass, or the significant modification of existing
technology or design parameters, needed to bring the vehicle or engine
into compliance with either the more stringent new or revised standard
or an existing standard which becomes more difficult to achieve because
of a new or revised standard. Note that where this criterion is
evaluated after the work has been completed, the criterion would be
interpreted as whether or not substantial work was required to meet the
standard.
    (3) There is or is likely to be a technological laggard for the
subclass. Note that a technological laggard is a manufacturer that is
unable to meet the standard for one or more products within the
subclass for technological reasons.
    (c) Evaluation. (1) We will generally evaluate these criteria in
sequence. Where we find that the first criterion has not been met, we
will not consider the other two criteria. Where we find that the first
criterion has been met but not the second, we will not consider the
third criterion. We may announce our findings separately or
simultaneously.
    (2) We may consider any available information in making our
findings.
    (3) Where we are uncertain whether the first and/or second criteria
have been met, we may presume that they have been met and make our
decision based solely on whether or not the third criterion has been
met.
    (4) Where we find that a manufacturer will fail to meet a standard
but are uncertain whether the failure is a technological failure, we
may presume that the manufacturer is a technological laggard.

Sec.  86.1104-91  [Removed]

0
46. Section 86.1104-91 is removed.

0
47. Section 86.1104-2016 is added to subpart L to read as follows:

Sec.  86.1104-2016  Determination of upper limits.

    EPA shall set a separate upper limit for each phase of NCPs and for
each service class.
    (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of this
section, the upper limit shall be set as follows:
    (1) The upper limit applicable to a pollutant emission standard for
a subclass of heavy-duty engines or heavy-duty vehicles for which an
NCP is established in accordance with Sec.  86.1103-87, shall be the
previous pollutant emission standard for that subclass.
    (2) If a manufacturer participates in any of the emissions
averaging, trading, or banking programs, and carries over certification
of an engine family from the prior model year, the upper limit for that
engine family shall be the family emission limit of the prior model
year, unless the family emission limit is less than the upper limit
determined in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
    (b) If no previous standard existed for the pollutant under
paragraph (a) of this section, the upper limit will be developed by EPA
during rulemaking.
    (c) EPA may set the upper limit during rulemaking at a level below
the level specified in paragraph (a) of this section if we determine
that a lower level is achievable by all engines or vehicles in that
subclass.
    (d) EPA may set the upper limit at a level above the level
specified in paragraph (a) of this section if we determine that such