Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Applications From Hyundai Motor Company and Kia Motors Corporation, 40403-40405 [2019-17473]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2019 / Notices
can be found at: https://www.ferc.gov/
docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For
other information, call (866) 208–3676
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659.
Dated: August 8, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019–17394 Filed 8–13–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–9998–14–OAR]
Alternative Methods for Calculating
Off-Cycle Credits Under the Light-Duty
Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Program: Applications From Hyundai
Motor Company and Kia Motors
Corporation
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
EPA is requesting comment
on applications from Hyundai Motor
Company (‘‘Hyundai’’) and Kia Motors
Corporation (‘‘Kia’’) for off-cycle carbon
dioxide (CO2) credits under EPA’s lightduty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions
standards. ‘‘Off-cycle’’ emission
reductions can be achieved by
employing technologies that result in
real-world benefits, but where that
benefit is not adequately captured on
the test procedures used by
manufacturers to demonstrate
compliance with emission standards.
EPA’s light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas
program acknowledges these benefits by
giving automobile manufacturers several
options for generating ‘‘off-cycle’’ CO2
credits. Under the regulations, a
manufacturer may apply for CO2 credits
for off-cycle technologies that result in
off-cycle benefits. In these cases, a
manufacturer must provide EPA with a
proposed methodology for determining
the real-world off-cycle benefit.
Hyundai and Kia have submitted
applications that describe
methodologies for determining off-cycle
credits from technologies described in
their application. Pursuant to applicable
regulations, EPA is making Hyundai’s
and Kia’s off-cycle credit calculation
methodologies available for public
comment.
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before September 13, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2019–0459, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:56 Aug 13, 2019
Jkt 247001
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or withdrawn. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roberts French, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality,
Compliance Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI
48105. Telephone: (734) 214–4380. Fax:
(734) 214–4869. Email address:
french.roberts@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
EPA’s light-duty vehicle greenhouse
gas (GHG) program provides three
pathways by which a manufacturer may
accrue off-cycle carbon dioxide (CO2)
credits for those technologies that
achieve CO2 reductions in the real
world but where those reductions are
not adequately captured on the test used
to determine compliance with the CO2
standards, and which are not otherwise
reflected in the standards’ stringency.
The first pathway is a predetermined
list of credit values for specific off-cycle
technologies that may be used beginning
in model year 2014.1 This pathway
allows manufacturers to use
conservative credit values established
by EPA for a wide range of technologies,
with minimal data submittal or testing
requirements, if the technologies meet
EPA regulatory definitions. In cases
where the off-cycle technology is not on
the menu but additional laboratory
testing can demonstrate emission
benefits, a second pathway allows
manufacturers to use a broader array of
emission tests (known as ‘‘5-cycle’’
testing because the methodology uses
five different testing procedures) to
demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2
credits.2 The additional emission tests
allow emission benefits to be
demonstrated over some elements of
real-world driving not adequately
captured by the GHG compliance tests,
including high speeds, hard
accelerations, and cold temperatures.
These first two methodologies were
completely defined through notice and
comment rulemaking and therefore no
additional process is necessary for
manufacturers to use these methods.
The third and last pathway allows
manufacturers to seek EPA approval to
use an alternative methodology for
determining the off-cycle CO2 credits.3
This option is only available if the
benefit of the technology cannot be
adequately demonstrated using the 5cycle methodology. Manufacturers may
also use this option for model years
prior to 2014 to demonstrate off-cycle
CO2 reductions for technologies that are
on the predetermined list, or to
demonstrate reductions that exceed
those available via use of the
predetermined list.
Under the regulations, a manufacturer
seeking to demonstrate off-cycle credits
with an alternative methodology (i.e.,
under the third pathway described
above) must describe a methodology
that meets the following criteria:
• Use modeling, on-road testing, onroad data collection, or other approved
analytical or engineering methods;
• Be robust, verifiable, and capable of
demonstrating the real-world emissions
benefit with strong statistical
significance;
• Result in a demonstration of
baseline and controlled emissions over
a wide range of driving conditions and
number of vehicles such that issues of
data uncertainty are minimized;
• Result in data on a model type basis
unless the manufacturer demonstrates
that another basis is appropriate and
adequate.
Further, the regulations specify the
following requirements regarding an
application for off-cycle CO2 credits:
• A manufacturer requesting off-cycle
credits must develop a methodology for
demonstrating and determining the
benefit of the off-cycle technology and
carry out any necessary testing and
analysis required to support that
methodology.
• A manufacturer requesting off-cycle
credits must conduct testing and/or
prepare engineering analyses that
demonstrate the in-use durability of the
2 See
1 See
PO 00000
40 CFR 86.1869–12(b).
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40403
3 See
E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM
40 CFR 86.1869–12(c).
40 CFR 86.1869–12(d).
14AUN1
40404
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2019 / Notices
technology for the full useful life of the
vehicle.
• The application must contain a
detailed description of the off-cycle
technology and how it functions to
reduce CO2 emissions under conditions
not represented on the compliance tests.
• The application must contain a list
of the vehicle model(s) which will be
equipped with the technology.
• The application must contain a
detailed description of the test vehicles
selected and an engineering analysis
that supports the selection of those
vehicles for testing.
• The application must contain all
testing and/or simulation data required
under the regulations, plus any other
data the manufacturer has considered in
the analysis.
Finally, the alternative methodology
must be approved by EPA prior to the
manufacturer using it to generate
credits. As part of the review process
defined by regulation, the alternative
methodology submitted to EPA for
consideration must be made available
for public comment.4 EPA will consider
public comments as part of its final
decision to approve or deny the request
for off-cycle credits.
II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications
A. High-Efficiency Alternators
Using the alternative methodology
approach discussed above, Hyundai and
Kia are applying for credits for model
years 2010 and later for off-cycle credits
using the alternative demonstration
methodology pathway for highefficiency alternators. Automotive
alternators convert mechanical energy
from a combustion engine into electrical
energy that can be used to power a
vehicle’s electrical systems. Alternators
inherently place a load on the engine,
which results in increased fuel
consumption and CO2 emissions. High
efficiency alternators use new
technologies to reduce the overall load
on the engine yet continue to meet the
electrical demands of the vehicle
systems, resulting in lower fuel
consumption and lower CO2 emissions.
Some comments on EPA’s proposed rule
for GHG standards for the 2016–2025
model years suggested that EPA provide
a credit for high-efficiency alternators
on the pre-defined list in the
regulations. While EPA agreed that
high-efficiency alternators can reduce
electrical load and reduce fuel
consumption, and that these impacts are
not seen on the emission test procedures
because accessories that use electricity
are turned off, EPA noted the difficulty
in defining a one-size-fits-all credit due
to lack of data. Since then, however a
methodology has been developed that
scales credits based on the efficiency of
the alternator; alternators with
efficiency (as measured using an
accepted industry standard procedure)
above a baseline value could get credits.
EPA has previously approved credits for
high-efficiency alternators using this
methodology for Ford Motor Company,
General Motors Corporation, Fiat
Chrysler Automobiles, and Toyota
Motor Company. Details of the testing
and analysis can be found in the
manufacturer’s applications.
B. Hyundai and Kia Stop-Start System
Hyundai and Kia applied for engine
idle stop-start credit covering 2012–
2016 model year vehicles with stop-start
technology, including hybrid electric
vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles. Based on the analysis
presented in their application, they are
requesting a credit of 3.7 grams/mile for
vehicles with stop-start technology that
are not hybrids, and 3.8 grams/mile for
hybrid electric and plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles.
The methodology used by Hyundai
and Kia was essentially the same as that
used by Mercedes and approved by EPA
in September of 2014.5 This
methodology is based on the following
analyses:
• Estimate or measure the total idle
fraction as a percentage of all vehicle
operation in the real-world;
• Estimate or measure the percentage
of idle fraction that the stop-start system
is enabled out of all the available idle
time (i.e., eligible stop-start percentage
or stop-start system effectiveness);
• Determine the benefit of the stopstart system in grams per mile based on
A–B emissions testing (i.e., technology
on and off);
• Multiply the eligible real world
stop-start time (relative to the 2-cycle
eligible time) by the stop-start system
benefit to estimate the idle stop-start
credit; and,
• For vehicles that allow the driver to
disable the stop-start system, the
frequency of disablement by the driver
must be determined.
The Mercedes application and EPA’s
Decision Document are both available
on EPA’s website; however, for
convenience the table below shows a
comparison of the key inputs to the
methodologies approved by EPA for
Mercedes and proposed by Hyundai and
Kia.
Mercedes (as
approved by
EPA)
Input
Idle Time Fraction ....................................................................................................................................................
System Effectiveness ..............................................................................................................................................
Driver Disablement ..................................................................................................................................................
Credit (g/mi) .............................................................................................................................................................
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
III. EPA Decision Process
EPA has reviewed the applications for
completeness and is now making the
applications available for public review
and comment as required by the
regulations. The off-cycle credit
applications submitted by the
manufacturer (with confidential
business information redacted) have
been placed in the public docket (see
ADDRESSES section above) and on EPA’s
4 See
40 CFR 86.1869–12(d)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:56 Aug 13, 2019
Jkt 247001
22.7
52%
11%
∼3.5–4.5
Hyundai-Kia
(proposed in
application)
22.7
59.4%
1.6%
3.7–3.8
website at https://www.epa.gov/vehicleand-engine-certification/complianceinformation-light-duty-greenhouse-gasghg-standards.
EPA is providing a 30-day comment
period on the applications for off-cycle
credits described in this notice, as
specified by the regulations. The
manufacturers may submit a written
rebuttal of comments for EPA’s
consideration, or may revise an
application in response to comments.
After reviewing any public comments
and any rebuttal of comments submitted
by manufacturers, EPA will make a final
decision regarding the credit requests.
EPA will make its decision available to
the public by placing a decision
document (or multiple decision
documents) in the docket and on EPA’s
website at the same manufacturerspecific pages shown above. While the
5 ‘‘EPA Decision Document: Mercedes-Benz Offcycle Credits for MYs 2012–2016.’’ U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA–420–R–14–
025, September 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM
14AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 14, 2019 / Notices
broad methodologies used by these
manufacturers could potentially be used
for other vehicles and by other
manufacturers, the vehicle specific data
needed to demonstrate the off-cycle
emissions reductions would likely be
different. In such cases, a new
application would be required,
including an opportunity for public
comment.
Dated: August 5, 2019.
Byron J. Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of
Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air
and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2019–17473 Filed 8–13–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0091; FRL–9996–70]
Product Cancellation Order for Certain
Pesticide Registrations
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice announces EPA’s
order for the cancellations, voluntarily
requested by the registrants and
accepted by the Agency, of the products
listed in Table 1 of Unit II, pursuant to
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). This
cancellation order follows a May 29,
2019 Federal Register Notice of Receipt
of Requests from the registrants listed in
Table 2 of Unit II to voluntarily cancel
SUMMARY:
40405
these product registrations. In the May
29, 2019 notice, EPA indicated that it
would issue an order implementing the
cancellations, unless the Agency
received substantive comments within
the 30-day comment period that would
merit its further review of these
requests, or unless the registrants
withdrew their requests. The Agency
received comments on the notice but
none merited its further review of the
requests. Further, the registrants did not
withdraw their requests. Accordingly,
EPA hereby issues in this notice a
cancellation order granting the
requested cancellations. Any
distribution, sale, or use of the products
subject to this cancellation order is
permitted only in accordance with the
terms of this order, including any
existing stocks provisions.
DATES: The cancellations are applicable
August 14, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Green, Information
Technology and Resources Management
Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 347–0367; email address:
green.christopher@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
agricultural advocates; the chemical
industry; pesticide users; and members
of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since
others also may be interested, the
Agency has not attempted to describe all
the specific entities that may be affected
by this action.
I. General Information
This notice announces the
cancellation, as requested by registrants,
of products registered under FIFRA
section 3 (7 U.S.C. 136a). These
registrations are listed in sequence by
registration number in Table 1 of this
unit.
A. Does this action apply to me?
This action is directed to the public
in general and may be of interest to a
wide range of stakeholders including
environmental, human health, and
B. How can I get copies of this document
and other related information?
The docket for this action, identified
by docket identification (ID) number
EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0091, is available
at https://www.regulations.gov or at the
Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the
Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm., 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. What action is the Agency taking?
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
TABLE 1—PRODUCT CANCELLATIONS
Registration No.
Company No.
100–1222 ..........
279–3555 ..........
279–3559 ..........
279–3561 ..........
279–3562 ..........
279–3573 ..........
279–9633 ..........
538–189 ............
538–214 ............
1015–82 ............
1043–26 ............
100
279
279
279
279
279
279
538
538
1015
1043
Quadris S ....................................................................
Nuance Herbicide .......................................................
Harass Herbicide ........................................................
Chisum Herbicide .......................................................
Report Herbicide .........................................................
Chi-Chlorsul NC–75 Herbicide ...................................
Ciramet Herbicide .......................................................
Turf Builder Plus Halts ................................................
Proturf Fertilizer Plus Preemergent Weed Control .....
Sanafoam Diquat ........................................................
1-Stroke Environ .........................................................
1043–87 ............
1043
Vesphene II SE ...........................................................
1043–91 ............
1043
LPH Master Product ...................................................
1043–92 ............
1043
LPH SE .......................................................................
1043–114 ..........
1043
2749–582 ..........
2749–583 ..........
19713–621 ........
42750–66 ..........
2749
2749
19713
42750
Vesta-Syde Interim Instrument Decontamination Solution.
Novaluron EC Insecticide ...........................................
Novaluron Technical MUP ..........................................
Drexel Aquapen ..........................................................
Gly Star Ready-To-Use Grass and Weed Killer ........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:56 Aug 13, 2019
Product name
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Active ingredients
Sfmt 4703
Azoxystrobin.
Tribenuron-methyl.
Thifensulfuron.
Chlorsulfuron & Metsulfuron.
Chlorsulfuron.
Chlorsulfuron.
Metsulfuron.
Pendimethalin.
Pendimethalin.
Diquat dibromide.
2-Benzyl-4-chlorophenol; 4-tert-Amylphenol & oPhenylphenol (NO INERT USE).
4-tert-Amylphenol & o-Phenylphenol (NO INERT
USE).
4-tert-Amylphenol & o-Phenylphenol (NO INERT
USE).
4-tert-Amylphenol & o-Phenylphenol (NO INERT
USE).
4-tert-Amylphenol & o-Phenylphenol (NO INERT
USE).
Novaluron.
Novaluron.
Pendimethalin.
Glyphosate-isopropylammonium.
E:\FR\FM\14AUN1.SGM
14AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 14, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40403-40405]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17473]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-9998-14-OAR]
Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the
Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Applications From
Hyundai Motor Company and Kia Motors Corporation
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is requesting comment on applications from Hyundai Motor
Company (``Hyundai'') and Kia Motors Corporation (``Kia'') for off-
cycle carbon dioxide (CO2) credits under EPA's light-duty
vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards. ``Off-cycle'' emission
reductions can be achieved by employing technologies that result in
real-world benefits, but where that benefit is not adequately captured
on the test procedures used by manufacturers to demonstrate compliance
with emission standards. EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas
program acknowledges these benefits by giving automobile manufacturers
several options for generating ``off-cycle'' CO2 credits.
Under the regulations, a manufacturer may apply for CO2
credits for off-cycle technologies that result in off-cycle benefits.
In these cases, a manufacturer must provide EPA with a proposed
methodology for determining the real-world off-cycle benefit. Hyundai
and Kia have submitted applications that describe methodologies for
determining off-cycle credits from technologies described in their
application. Pursuant to applicable regulations, EPA is making
Hyundai's and Kia's off-cycle credit calculation methodologies
available for public comment.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 13, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2019-0459, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roberts French, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone: (734) 214-4380. Fax:
(734) 214-4869. Email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) program provides
three pathways by which a manufacturer may accrue off-cycle carbon
dioxide (CO2) credits for those technologies that achieve
CO2 reductions in the real world but where those reductions
are not adequately captured on the test used to determine compliance
with the CO2 standards, and which are not otherwise
reflected in the standards' stringency. The first pathway is a
predetermined list of credit values for specific off-cycle technologies
that may be used beginning in model year 2014.\1\ This pathway allows
manufacturers to use conservative credit values established by EPA for
a wide range of technologies, with minimal data submittal or testing
requirements, if the technologies meet EPA regulatory definitions. In
cases where the off-cycle technology is not on the menu but additional
laboratory testing can demonstrate emission benefits, a second pathway
allows manufacturers to use a broader array of emission tests (known as
``5-cycle'' testing because the methodology uses five different testing
procedures) to demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2
credits.\2\ The additional emission tests allow emission benefits to be
demonstrated over some elements of real-world driving not adequately
captured by the GHG compliance tests, including high speeds, hard
accelerations, and cold temperatures. These first two methodologies
were completely defined through notice and comment rulemaking and
therefore no additional process is necessary for manufacturers to use
these methods. The third and last pathway allows manufacturers to seek
EPA approval to use an alternative methodology for determining the off-
cycle CO2 credits.\3\ This option is only available if the
benefit of the technology cannot be adequately demonstrated using the
5-cycle methodology. Manufacturers may also use this option for model
years prior to 2014 to demonstrate off-cycle CO2 reductions
for technologies that are on the predetermined list, or to demonstrate
reductions that exceed those available via use of the predetermined
list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b).
\2\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c).
\3\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the regulations, a manufacturer seeking to demonstrate off-
cycle credits with an alternative methodology (i.e., under the third
pathway described above) must describe a methodology that meets the
following criteria:
Use modeling, on-road testing, on-road data collection, or
other approved analytical or engineering methods;
Be robust, verifiable, and capable of demonstrating the
real-world emissions benefit with strong statistical significance;
Result in a demonstration of baseline and controlled
emissions over a wide range of driving conditions and number of
vehicles such that issues of data uncertainty are minimized;
Result in data on a model type basis unless the
manufacturer demonstrates that another basis is appropriate and
adequate.
Further, the regulations specify the following requirements
regarding an application for off-cycle CO2 credits:
A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must develop a
methodology for demonstrating and determining the benefit of the off-
cycle technology and carry out any necessary testing and analysis
required to support that methodology.
A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must conduct
testing and/or prepare engineering analyses that demonstrate the in-use
durability of the
[[Page 40404]]
technology for the full useful life of the vehicle.
The application must contain a detailed description of the
off-cycle technology and how it functions to reduce CO2
emissions under conditions not represented on the compliance tests.
The application must contain a list of the vehicle
model(s) which will be equipped with the technology.
The application must contain a detailed description of the
test vehicles selected and an engineering analysis that supports the
selection of those vehicles for testing.
The application must contain all testing and/or simulation
data required under the regulations, plus any other data the
manufacturer has considered in the analysis.
Finally, the alternative methodology must be approved by EPA prior
to the manufacturer using it to generate credits. As part of the review
process defined by regulation, the alternative methodology submitted to
EPA for consideration must be made available for public comment.\4\ EPA
will consider public comments as part of its final decision to approve
or deny the request for off-cycle credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications
A. High-Efficiency Alternators
Using the alternative methodology approach discussed above, Hyundai
and Kia are applying for credits for model years 2010 and later for
off-cycle credits using the alternative demonstration methodology
pathway for high-efficiency alternators. Automotive alternators convert
mechanical energy from a combustion engine into electrical energy that
can be used to power a vehicle's electrical systems. Alternators
inherently place a load on the engine, which results in increased fuel
consumption and CO2 emissions. High efficiency alternators
use new technologies to reduce the overall load on the engine yet
continue to meet the electrical demands of the vehicle systems,
resulting in lower fuel consumption and lower CO2 emissions.
Some comments on EPA's proposed rule for GHG standards for the 2016-
2025 model years suggested that EPA provide a credit for high-
efficiency alternators on the pre-defined list in the regulations.
While EPA agreed that high-efficiency alternators can reduce electrical
load and reduce fuel consumption, and that these impacts are not seen
on the emission test procedures because accessories that use
electricity are turned off, EPA noted the difficulty in defining a one-
size-fits-all credit due to lack of data. Since then, however a
methodology has been developed that scales credits based on the
efficiency of the alternator; alternators with efficiency (as measured
using an accepted industry standard procedure) above a baseline value
could get credits. EPA has previously approved credits for high-
efficiency alternators using this methodology for Ford Motor Company,
General Motors Corporation, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, and Toyota Motor
Company. Details of the testing and analysis can be found in the
manufacturer's applications.
B. Hyundai and Kia Stop-Start System
Hyundai and Kia applied for engine idle stop-start credit covering
2012-2016 model year vehicles with stop-start technology, including
hybrid electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Based on
the analysis presented in their application, they are requesting a
credit of 3.7 grams/mile for vehicles with stop-start technology that
are not hybrids, and 3.8 grams/mile for hybrid electric and plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles.
The methodology used by Hyundai and Kia was essentially the same as
that used by Mercedes and approved by EPA in September of 2014.\5\ This
methodology is based on the following analyses:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``EPA Decision Document: Mercedes-Benz Off-cycle Credits for
MYs 2012-2016.'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-420-R-14-
025, September 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimate or measure the total idle fraction as a
percentage of all vehicle operation in the real-world;
Estimate or measure the percentage of idle fraction that
the stop-start system is enabled out of all the available idle time
(i.e., eligible stop-start percentage or stop-start system
effectiveness);
Determine the benefit of the stop-start system in grams
per mile based on A-B emissions testing (i.e., technology on and off);
Multiply the eligible real world stop-start time (relative
to the 2-cycle eligible time) by the stop-start system benefit to
estimate the idle stop-start credit; and,
For vehicles that allow the driver to disable the stop-
start system, the frequency of disablement by the driver must be
determined.
The Mercedes application and EPA's Decision Document are both
available on EPA's website; however, for convenience the table below
shows a comparison of the key inputs to the methodologies approved by
EPA for Mercedes and proposed by Hyundai and Kia.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mercedes (as Hyundai-Kia
Input approved by (proposed in
EPA) application)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idle Time Fraction...................... 22.7 22.7
System Effectiveness.................... 52% 59.4%
Driver Disablement...................... 11% 1.6%
Credit (g/mi)........................... ~3.5-4.5 3.7-3.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. EPA Decision Process
EPA has reviewed the applications for completeness and is now
making the applications available for public review and comment as
required by the regulations. The off-cycle credit applications
submitted by the manufacturer (with confidential business information
redacted) have been placed in the public docket (see ADDRESSES section
above) and on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/compliance-information-light-duty-greenhouse-gas-ghg-standards.
EPA is providing a 30-day comment period on the applications for
off-cycle credits described in this notice, as specified by the
regulations. The manufacturers may submit a written rebuttal of
comments for EPA's consideration, or may revise an application in
response to comments. After reviewing any public comments and any
rebuttal of comments submitted by manufacturers, EPA will make a final
decision regarding the credit requests. EPA will make its decision
available to the public by placing a decision document (or multiple
decision documents) in the docket and on EPA's website at the same
manufacturer-specific pages shown above. While the
[[Page 40405]]
broad methodologies used by these manufacturers could potentially be
used for other vehicles and by other manufacturers, the vehicle
specific data needed to demonstrate the off-cycle emissions reductions
would likely be different. In such cases, a new application would be
required, including an opportunity for public comment.
Dated: August 5, 2019.
Byron J. Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2019-17473 Filed 8-13-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
