On January 17, 2006, the US Environmental Protection Agency published in the Federal Register a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) "Component Durability Procedures" [Docket No. FRL-8019-1] to request comments on options for addressing component durability during the vehicle emissions certification process. This rulemaking is also in response to the court decision that ordered EPA to issue new rulemaking covering emissions component durability regulations.
Summary of the Supplemental Notice
This proposed rule is related to an April 2, 2004, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) concerning procedures that manufacturers of light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks and heavy-duty vehicles use to demonstrate, for purposes of emission certification, that new motor vehicles will comply with EPA emissions standards throughout their useful life period. The demonstration of light-duty vehicle emission durability for purposes of certification consists of two elements:
- Emission deterioration and
- Component durability.
The April 2004 NPRM proposed emissions certification durability procedures to be used by manufacturers to demonstrate the expected rate of deterioration of the emission levels of their vehicles. The proposal did not make any changes to component durability procedures. It carried over the component durability requirements from "CAP 2000" (Compliance Assurance Program). EPA received several comments on the NPRM pertaining to component durability, and because of the complex nature of the comments, The EPA determined that the issue of component durability warranted further consideration and discussion.
Key Elements of the Proposed Rule
This SNPRM requests comment on three different options that manufacturers can use to demonstrate component durability.
- Option 1 - Retain the current EPA process of allowing manufacturers to use good engineering judgment, such as computer modeling, test data, or other established methods to demonstrate component durability.
- Option 2 - Allow manufacturers to continue using the current EPA process, but would also require the manufacturers to submit whole vehicle testing data for a worst-case vehicle configuration.
- Option 3 - This option is similar to Option 2 in that it would allow manufacturers to continue using the current EPA process, and would also require the manufacturers to submit whole vehicle testing data for a worst-case vehicle configuration when a new type of component or new technology is being introduced.
Background
Afton Chemical Corporation (formerly known as Ethyl Corporation) had petitioned for review of the CAP 2000 rulemaking, claiming that CAP 2000 durability provisions were unlawful since EPA had not established methods and procedures for making tests by regulation as required by Section 206. EPA denied those petitions.
Afton Chemical Corporation then instituted legal action against the EPA. In an opinion issued on October 22, 2002, the Court found that CAP 2000 regulations were not consistent with Section 206(d) of the Clean Air Act, because they did not "establish methods and procedures for making tests." The Court remanded EPA to revise its CAP 2000 regulations to establish more prescribed test procedures. In this rulemaking, EPA intends to proceed with finalization of the emission deterioration procedures discussed in the NPRM, and is issuing this supplemental notice to address the comments received during the rulemaking process.
Public Participation Opportunities
Comments from interested parties are due to the EPA on or before February 16, 2006.