Je veux savoir à propos de…

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 169 / Friday, September 3, 2021 / Proposed Rules discussions, NHTSA identified several issues that may be influencing late submissions. First, non-menu requests are becoming more complex and are requiring unique reviews. Previously approved technologies are also becoming more complex and are requiring either new testing, test procedures or have evolved beyond the definitions which at one time previously qualified them. Next, manufacturers identified the lack of standardized test procedures approved by EPA or certainty from EPA on which model types need to be tested as major sources for delays in submitting their analytical plans. In addition, manufacturers claimed there is significant uncertainty surrounding the necessary data sources to substantiate the benefit of the technology. For example, the data sources necessary to substantiate the usage rates certain technologies in the market. Testing or extrapolating test results for variations in model types can also be difficult and a source of delay. Manufacturers are typically uncertain as to what configurations within a model type must be tested and believe further guidance may be needed by EPA.
Manufacturers further claim that it is challenging to coordinate the required testing identified by EPA for off-cycle in coordination with other required certification and emissions testing.
Several of these issues were addressed in the 2020 final rule. In that rulemaking, the agencies stated that developing a standardized test procedure toolbox may not be possible due to the development of new and emerging technologies, and manufacturers different approaches for evaluating the benefits of the technologies. However, the agencies committed to considering additional guidance, if feasible, as the programs further matures in the review process of technologies and, if possible, identify consistent methodologies that may help manufacturers analyze off-cycle technologies.
Part of the issue is that the review process begins significantly later than the development of technology.
Typically, EPA only learns about a new off-cycle technology during manufacturers precertification meetings, months or even years after manufacturers started to develop the technology. NHTSA seeks comments on whether opportunities exist during the initial development of off-cycle technologies for manufacturers to start discussions with the agencies to identify suitable test procedures or approval of the initial concept of a new technology.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

21:48 Sep 02, 2021

Jkt 253001

After certification meetings, NHTSA
also identified that in many cases, manufacturers do not communicate with EPA seeking approvals for their test procedures, test vehicles or credit calculations until anywhere from 36
months after the initial development of the technology. Delays in approving a suitable test procedure extends the manufacturers ability to perform testing or to submit its formal request for benefits until after the model year has ended. As mentioned, testing can take up to 12 months after a suitable test procedure and identifying which subconfigurations must be tested.
One manufacturer also stated that set submission deadlines are impossible, agency approvals are variable based on OEM need and reply timing is driven by the EPA. When questioned whether any deadlines could be imposed manufacturers responded believing any deadlines would need to be negotiated between the manufacturer and the government. Please comment on any drawbacks associated with negotiating and enforcing off-cycle process deadlines with manufacturers.
NHTSA is proposing to modify the eligibility requirements for non-menu off-cycle technologies in the CAFE
program starting in model year 2024.
Manufacturers will be required to finalize their analytical plans by December before the model years and their final official technology credit requests by September during the model year. Manufacturers will also be required to meet the proposed deadlines or be subject an enforcement action.
Unless an extension is granted by NHTSA for good cause, a manufacturer will be precluded from claiming any offmenu items not timely submitted.
Failure to request extensions or meet negotiated deadlines will be subject to enforcement action in compliance with 49 U.S.C. 32912a.
To further streamline the process of reviews, NHTSA also proposes to work with EPA to create a quicker process for adding off-cycle technologies to the predetermined menu list if widely approved for multiple manufacturers.
For example, the agencies added highefficiency alternators and advanced A/C
compressors to the menu allowing manufacturers to select the menu credit rather than continuing to seek credits through the public approval process.
High-efficiency alternators were added to the off-cycle credits menu, and advanced A/C compressors with a variable crankcase valve were added to the menu for A/C efficiency credits. The credit levels are based on data previously submitted by multiple manufacturers through the off-cycle
PO 00000

Frm 00237

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

49837

credits application process. The high efficiency alternator credit is scalable with efficiency, providing an increasing credit value of 0.16 grams/mile CO2 per percent improvement as the efficiency of the alternator increases above a baseline level of 67 percent efficiency.
The advanced A/C compressor credit value is 1.1 grams/mile for both cars and light trucks.548
ii Safety Assessment In the 2016 heavy-duty fuel economy rule 81 FR 73478, October 25, 2016, NHTSA adopted provisions preventing manufacturers from receiving credits for technology that impair safetywhether due to a defect, negatively affecting a FMVSS, or other safety reasons.549
Additionally, NHTSA clarified that technologies that do not provide fuel savings as intended will also be stripped of credits. To harmonize the light-duty and heavy-duty off-cycle programs, NHTSA is proposing to adopt these provisions for the light-duty CAFE
program. While the agency encourages fuel economy innovations, safety remains NHTSAs primary mission and any technology applied for CAFEpurposes should not impair safety.
Furthermore, adopting these requirements for the light-duty fleet will harmonize it with the heavy-duty regulations.
iii Menu Credit Cap Due to the uncertainties associated with combining menu technologies and the fact that some uncertainty is introduced because off-cycle credits are provided based on a general assessment of off-cycle performance, as opposed to testing on the individual vehicle models, EPA established caps that limit the amount of credits a manufacturer may generate using the EPA menu list.
Off-cycle technology is capped at 10
grams/mile per year on a combined car and truck fleet-wide average basis. In its concurrent proposal for MYs 20232026
GHG standards 86 FR 43726, August 10, 2021, EPA is proposing to increase the off-cycle menu cap from 10 grams CO2/mile to 15 grams CO2/mile beginning with MY 2023. EPA also proposes to revise the definitions for passive cabin ventilation and active engine and transmission warm-up beginning in MY 2023, as discussed in the next following sections.
Furthermore, EPA is proposing, for MYs 548 For additional details regarding the derivation of these credits, see EPAs Memorandum to Docket EPAHQOAR20180283 Potential Off-cycle Menu Credit Levels and Definitions for High Efficiency Alternators and Advanced Air Conditioning Compressors.
549 See 49 CFR 535.7f2iii.

E:FRFM03SEP2.SGM

03SEP2