[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 207 (Monday, October 27, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55635-55637]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28368]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-5914-2]
Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Engines; Tampering Enforcement
Policy for Alternative Fuel Aftermarket Conversions; Addendum to Mobile
Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A
September 4, 1997.
A. Purpose. The purpose of this document is to clarify and revise
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) ``tampering''
enforcement policy for motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines
originally designed to operate on gasoline or diesel fuel and
subsequently modified to operate exclusively or in conjunction with
compressed natural gas (CNG) or liquified petroleum gas (LPG or
propane), hereinafter referred to as ``alternative fuels''. The
provisions of this Addendum shall apply to all persons subject to the
tampering prohibition of Section 203(a) of the Act. For the purpose of
this policy Addendum, the term manufacturer will apply to any person
who designs, produces, and/or assembles components for converting
vehicles or engines to operate on alternative fuels and is responsible
for complying with all applicable requirements of this policy Addendum.
B. Background. EPA's policy is and has been that any alteration
from an original configuration of a vehicle or engine as certified
under Title II of the Act may constitute tampering under Section
203(a)(3). Routine maintenance and repair of vehicles and engines
requires the use of replacement parts which may be non-original or
``aftermarket'' parts or systems. EPA's Office of Enforcement and
General Counsel issued Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A (Memo
1A) on June 25, 1974 to provide guidance to covered parties regarding
how the Agency intended to enforce the ``tampering'' prohibition under
Section 203(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act (Act) with respect to
maintenance and the use of aftermarket parts.
Memo 1A provides, in part, that the use of an aftermarket part,
alteration or add-on part will not constitute tampering if the dealer
has a ``reasonable basis'' to believe that such acts will not adversely
affect emissions performance. It also provides specific procedures or
options by which the dealer would have a ``reasonable basis''. One
available procedure is emissions testing performed in accordance with
``40 CFR 85'' (subsequently revised and incorporated under 40 CFR Part
86) demonstrating compliance with emission standards for the useful
life of the vehicle or engine. An alternate option is that ``a Federal,
state or local environmental control agency represents that a
reasonable basis exists' based on testing done in accordance with
procedures specified by that agency. Many vehicles converted from
gasoline fueled to CNG or propane have relied on the second option
utilizing procedures established by California or Colorado for
demonstrating emissions compliance.
EPA has recently become aware of federal emission test data
generated under a program conducted by the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL) which indicate that a significant number of these
vehicles modified to run on alternative fuels may be exceeding one or
more applicable federal emission standards. The installers involved in
the NREL program had attempted to comply with Memo 1A by using
conversion systems certified by the state of California under the
``California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for Systems
Designed to Convert Motor Vehicles Certified for 1993 and Earlier Model
Years to Use Liquefied Petroleum Gas or Natural Gas Fuels'' (pre-1994
California Procedures). EPA has subsequently reviewed emission test
data from other sources which generally substantiate the NREL results.
In response to concerns raised by these data, the Agency conducted
a public stakeholders meeting on February 21, 1997, with
representatives of the affected industries, regulatory agencies and
interested fleet operators. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss
these data and the causes of the emission failures as well as to
explore all available options to identify and remedy the problems. Many
reasons were provided for the emission problems, including inadequate
initial testing, insufficient durability evaluations, overly broad
vehicle application based on limited testing, inadequate systems/parts
specifications, improper installation and fuel variability. The
concerns of the affected industries and fleets subject to several
alternative fuel statutory mandates were also discussed.
The most significant conclusion reached at that meeting, and from
extensive data review and discussions subsequent to that meeting, was
that the pre-1994 California and Colorado procedures as currently
structured do not provide an adequate demonstration or assurance that a
vehicle or engine modified to operate on an alternative fuel using an
aftermarket conversion system will comply with the applicable emission
standards for its useful life. As a result of the above and in light of
the number of vehicles and engines that may be converted to alternative
fuels in the near future, EPA believes it is appropriate to issue this
Addendum to Memo 1A (this Addendum) to provide additional guidance to
the regulated community, including manufacturers and installers of
alternative fuel conversion systems.
C. Revised Policy. Effective immediately, EPA will no longer accept
a representation based on the pre-1994 California Procedures for
alternative fuel conversion systems or on the test procedures under
Colorado Regulation No. 14 in effect prior to the date of this Addendum
as a ``reasonable basis'' under paragraph 3(c) of Memo 1A.
Consequently, any future installation of an alternative fuel conversion
system, or the modification of any motor vehicle or motor vehicle
engine in compliance with Title II of the Clean Air Act to operate
exclusively or in part with an alternative fuel, or the causing
thereof, may constitute tampering under Section 203(a) of the Act,
where the installer or manufacturer has relied exclusively on a
representation by Colorado or California, as described above, that a
reasonable basis exists in accordance with paragraph 3(c) of Memo 1A.
Effective immediately, the ``reasonable basis'' under paragraph 3 of
Memo 1A that EPA agrees may be relied on by any person, including a
manufacturer, installer or operator, when converting, or causing the
conversion of, a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine to operate on an
alternative fuel is limited to one of the three options listed below.
1. A Federal Certificate under 40 CFR Part 86 demonstrating
compliance with the applicable standards or under 40 CFR Part 88
demonstrating compliance with Clean Fuel Fleet standards for each
engine family to be converted in accordance with 40 CFR Part 85,
Subpart F; or
[[Page 55636]]
2. A Retrofit System Certification under the ``California
Certification and Installation Procedures For Alternative Fuel Retrofit
Systems for Motor Vehicles Certified for 1994 and Subsequent Model
Years'' for a conversion system installed and tested under the above
procedures on a vehicle or engine from a ``50-state engine family'' for
use nationwide, or for a conversion system installed and tested under
the above procedures on a vehicle or engine from a ``California engine
family'' for use in California only; or
3. Until December 31, 1998, the use of an alternative fuel
conversion system designed, tested and installed on a single engine
family, or multiple engine families as provided under paragraph b.(4)
below, if testing is completed by March 31, 1998, as follows:
a. With the alternative fuel conversion system installed on the
certified engine family, the manufacturer shall perform, or cause the
performance of, one federal emission test while operating with the
alternative fuel and one test with the original certification fuel, if
dual fuel operation is retained, in accordance with the applicable test
procedures under 40 CFR Part 86 or Part 88 for that class and model
year vehicle or engine. Prior to testing, the vehicle or engine shall
be operated with the conversion system installed for at least the
number of miles or hours equal to the service accumulation period
needed to stabilize the emission control system specified by the
original manufacturer in its certificate application submitted to EPA.
EPA encourages manufacturers to conduct at least one baseline emission
test with the certification fuel prior to conversion to ascertain that
the vehicle or engine meets the applicable standards.
b. (1) With the application of an appropriate deterioration factor
(DF) to the above test results, the vehicle or engine shall meet the
applicable federal exhaust emission standards to which the vehicle or
engine was originally certified. The DF shall be determined either
based on full useful life durability testing, predictions based on
engineering judgement for a similar light duty vehicle or heavy-duty
engine with a similar emission control system using the same
alternative fuel conversion system, or determined in accordance with
the appropriate protocol contained in the ``Dear Manufacturer'' letter
of September 27, 1995--Assigned Deterioration Factors for Gaseous-
Fueled Vehicles and Engines, identified as CD-95-14. For heavy-duty
engines with aftertreatment (such as a catalyst), the deteriorated
emissions are calculated by multiplying the DF with the exhaust
emission results. For heavy-duty engines without aftertreatment, the
deteriorated emissions are calculated by adding the DF with the exhaust
emission results. For a vehicle or engine converted and tested prior to
accumulating 50% of its useful life, the manufacturer shall apply the
full DF. For a vehicle or engine converted and tested subsequent to
accumulating 50% of its full useful life, apply a DF that is the midway
point between no DF and the full DF. For example, an additive DF of 1.0
may become 0.5 and a multiplicative DF of 2.0 may become 1.5. For a
vehicle or engine converted and tested subsequent to accumulating its
full useful life, apply no DF.
(2) For heavy-duty engines used in vehicles with a gross vehicle
weight rating (GVWR) less than or equal to 10,000 lbs, the manufacturer
may demonstrate compliance with the applicable light-duty truck
standards in accordance with the preceding paragraph.
(3) In lieu of engine dynamometer testing for on-highway heavy duty
vehicles with a GVWR less than or equal to 14,000 lbs, the manufacturer
may conduct two or three emission tests as described below in
accordance with the most current amendments to ``California Exhaust
Emissions Standards and Test Procedures for 1988 and Subsequent Model
Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks and Medium-Duty Vehicles''. These
shall consist of one baseline test using the certification fuel prior
to conversion, one test after conversion with the alternative fuel and
one test after conversion with the certification fuel if the vehicle is
intended to be dual fuel. The two tests after conversion shall not
result in any exhaust emissions that exceed 1.10 times any of the
baseline emission levels. In the case of pure CNG operation, the after
conversion NMHC emissions shall not exceed 0.9 times the THC emissions
before conversion. For heavy-duty vehicles operating on a mixture of
CNG and either diesel fuel or gasoline, the conversion system
manufacturer should contact EPA's Mobile Source Enforcement Branch to
determine the appropriate ratio of NMHC emissions after conversion to
THC emissions before conversion.
(4) With respect to light duty vehicles, light duty trucks, or
heavy-duty engines meeting the requirements of paragraph (2) above, the
above demonstration may be applied as a reasonable basis for up to a
maximum of three additional light duty engine families to that tested,
provided:
A. The results from testing done in accordance with the above
procedures demonstrate compliance with low emission vehicle (LEV) or
more stringent emission standards under 40 CFR 88.104,
B. The additional engine families have engine displacements equal
to, or within 0.8 liters (50 CID) less than, the engine tested,
C. The additional engine families comprise vehicles equal to or
less than the gross vehicle weight of the vehicles covered by the
engine family tested, and
D. The additional engine families are equipped with the same
catalytic converter type (i.e. beaded vs monolith, OC vs OC/RC) and the
same primary emission control technology (eg. EGR, Air Injection, EFI
vs carburetor, closed loop vs open loop) as the engine family tested.
(5) Option 3 of this policy is not available for conversion of
California only engine families.
(6) An alternative fuel conversion system that degrades a closed
loop feedback system to a continuous non-feedback open loop system is
not allowed under this option.
(7) Compliance with this policy may be demonstrated based on
existing data provided such data are the result of testing in
accordance with the procedures and protocols specified herein.
(8) Demonstration with the Cold CO requirements under 40 CFR Part
86 Subpart C is not required under Option 3 of this policy.
(9) The Certification Short Test requirements under 40 CFR Part 86,
Subpart O is not required under Option 3 of this policy.
(10) The evaporative emissions requirements under 40 CFR 86.094-
8(b) and 86.094-9(b) are not required under Option 3 of this policy.
c. The manufacturer of the conversion system shall specify all part
numbers/calibrations associated with that conversion system and provide
all such information, specifications and installation requirements,
including a permanent conversion system label which appropriately
identifies the conversion system with reasonable specificity, with each
system that is sold or provided for installation.
d. In order to demonstrate that it has a reasonable basis to
believe that its conversion system will not adversely affect emissions
over the useful life of the vehicle or engine, the conversion system
manufacturer should retain records including but not limited to all
emission test data, including test results, description of vehicles
and/or engines modified, all maintenance and modifications performed,
laboratory data sheets, identification of test
[[Page 55637]]
laboratory, test dates, test personnel and test procedures followed,
engine families tested, data to support additional engine family
coverage, if applicable, VIN's, vehicle and engine mileage and/or age
as applicable, fuel specifications, conversion system part numbers and
calibrations, durability procedures followed including all durability
data and all calculations and engineering analyses performed to
determine compliance with the above requirements.
e. In order to meet the requirements of this policy, any
installation of a conversion system designed and tested in accordance
with the above shall be done in accordance with the applicable part
numbers/calibrations installed on the vehicle or engine that was
tested, completed in accordance with manufacturer's specifications and/
or instructions and the conversion system label affixed to the vehicle
or engine. The system shall only be installed on a vehicle or engine of
the same engine family as that tested or as permitted under paragraph
3.b.(4) above.
f. In support of an appropriate installation, the installer should
retain records of each vehicle or engine converted in accordance with
the above, including the VIN, make and year of each vehicle or engine
so modified, the name of the installer, the date of installation and a
copy of the manufacturer's or marketer's/distributor's representation
that the conversion system has been demonstrated on that engine family
to meet the requirements of this policy.
g. In support of any marketer's or distributor's compliance with
the requirements of this policy, such parties should retain records of
each conversion system sold or distributed, copies of the
representation from the manufacturer that the system meets this policy
and records of sales to others including the name of the purchasers,
part numbers, dates of sales and the numbers of systems sold.
h. Colorado has indicated that it will revise its administrative
procedures under Colorado Regulation No. 14 to require that conversion
system manufacturers conduct testing in accordance with option 3 of
this Addendum in order to receive a Colorado Letter of Certification.
Consequently, until December 31, 1998, EPA will not consider as
tampering the sale and installation of a conversion system in Colorado
pursuant to a Colorado Letter of Certification issued after the above-
referenced administrative procedure revisions have been made by
Colorado, provided testing in support of the Letter of Certification is
done in accordance with option 3 of this Addendum and is completed by
March 31, 1998.
D. Conclusion. EPA believes that the maximum degree of assurance
that vehicles or engines modified to operate on alternative fuels will
meet emissions standards throughout their useful life can only be
achieved through full certification demonstration in accordance with 40
CFR Parts 86 or 88. However, the cost and time associated with such a
demonstration may be prohibitive for some conversion system
manufacturers in the short term and may not provide sufficient
equipment for fleets currently subject to various alternative fuel
mandates to comply with those mandates. In addition, EPA will be
attempting to implement various procedures to streamline federal
certification for alternative fuel vehicles and on-highway engines, but
it is likely that implementation of those procedures will take some
time. In the interim, the procedures and requirements outlined in
option 3 above should allow alternative fuel conversion systems to be
developed and evaluated more quickly and at less cost, while providing
a reasonable assurance that emissions will not be deteriorated. After
December 31, 1998, manufacturers, marketers and installers must utilize
equipment which meets the requirements of option 1 or option 2 above to
be covered by the non-tampering policy of Memo 1A.
EPA will be reviewing Memo 1A more thoroughly in the near future to
determine if additional changes are required for other vehicle or
engine modifications, parts or systems. Any questions regarding this
interim policy should be directed to the Mobile Source Enforcement
Branch at (202) 564-2255.
Bruce C. Buckheit,
Director, Air Enforcement Division, Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance.
[FR Doc. 97-28368 Filed 10-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
