Heavy Duty Complaint

No.
24-____
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
S TATE OF N EBRASKA , S TATE OF A LABAMA , S TATE OF A LASKA ,

S TATE OF A RKANSAS , S TATE OF F LORIDA , S TATE OF G EORGIA ,
S TATE OF I DAHO , S TATE OF I NDIANA , S TATE OF I OWA , S TATE OF
K ANSAS , C OMMONWEALTH OF K ENTUCKY , S TATE OF L OUISIANA ,
S TATE OF M ISSISSIPPI , S TATE OF M ISSOURI , S TATE OF M ONTANA ,
S TATE OF O KLAH OMA , S TATE OF S OUTH C AROLINA , S TATE OF
S OUTH D AKOTA , S TATE OF T ENNESSEE , S TATE OF T EXAS , S TATE
OF U TAH , C OMMONWEALTH OF V IRGINIA , S TATE OF W EST
V IRGINIA , AND S TATE OF W YOMING ,
Petitioners,
v.
U NITED S TATES E NVIRONMENTAL P ROTECTION A GENCY
AND M ICHAEL S. R EGAN , IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS
A DMINISTRATOR OF THE U NITED S TATES
E NVIRONMENTAL P ROTECTION A GENCY ,
Respondents.
PETITION FOR REVIEW
Under 42 U.S.C. § 7607(b)(1), Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure

15, and D.C. Circuit Rule 15(a), the States of Nebraska, Alabama, Alaska,
Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina,
South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and
Wyoming petition this Court for review of the final agency action taken
by Respondents United States Environmental Protection Agency and
Michael S. Regan, in his official capacity as Administrator of the United
States Environmental Protection Agency, titled “Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles—Phase 3,” published at
89 Fed. Reg. 29,440 (April 22, 2024). A copy of the agency action is
attached to this petition.
Petitioners will show that the final rule exceeds the agency’s
statutory authority and otherwise is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of
discretion, and not in accordance with law. Petitioners thus ask that this
Court declare unlawful and vacate the agency’s final action.
Dated: May 13, 2024 Respectfully submitted.
MICHAEL T. HILGERS
Attorney General of Nebraska
s/ Eric J. Hamilton
ERIC J. HAMILTON
Solicitor General
ZACHARY B. POHLMAN
Assistant Solicitor General
Nebraska Department of Justice
2115 State Capitol
Lincoln, Nebraska 68509
Tel.: (402) 471-2683
Fax: (402) 471-3297
eric.hamilton@nebraska.gov
zachary.pohlman@nebraska.gov
Counsel for State of Nebraska
2
STEVE MARSHALL TREG R. TAYLOR
Attorney General of Alabama Attorney General of Alaska
s/ Edmund G. LaCour Jr. s/ Masha Kazakova

EDMUND G. LACOUR JR. MASHA KAZAKOVA
Solicitor General Assistant Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General Environmental Section
State of Alabama Alaska Department of Law
501 Washington Avenue 1031 West 4th Avenue, Suite 200
P.O. Box 300152 Anchorage, Alaska 99501-1994
Montgomery, Alabama 36130-0152 Tel.: (907) 269-5211
Tel.: (334) 242-7300 masha.kazakova@alaska.gov
Fax: (334) 353-8400
edmund.lacour@alabamaag.gov Counsel for State of Alaska
Counsel for State of Alabama
TIM GRIFFIN ASHLEY MOODY

Attorney General of Arkansas Attorney General of Florida
s/ Nicholas J. Bronni s/ Henry C. Whitaker

NICHOLAS J. BRONNI HENRY C. WHITAKER
Solicitor General Solicitor General
DYLAN L. JACOBS JAMES H. PERCIVAL
Deputy Solicitor General Chief of Staff
Office of the Arkansas Office of the Attorney General
Attorney General The Capitol, Pl-01
323 Center Street, Suite 200 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Tel.: (850) 414-3300
Tel.: (501) 682-2007 Fax: (850) 410-2672
nicholas.bronni@arkansasag.gov henry.whitaker@myfloridalegal.com
dylan.jacobs@arkansasag.gov james.percival@myfloridalegal.com
Counsel for State of Arkansas Counsel for State of Florida
3
CHRISTOPHER M. CARR RAÚL R. LABRADOR
Attorney General of Georgia Attorney General of Idaho
s/ Stephen J. Petrany s/ Joshua N. Turner

STEPHEN J. PETRANY JOSHUA N. TURNER
Solicitor General Chief of Constitutional Litigation
Office of the Attorney General and Policy
40 Capitol Square, SW ALAN M. HURST
Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Solicitor General
Tel.: (404) 458-3408 Office of the Idaho Attorney General
spetrany@law.ga.gov P.O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720
Counsel for State of Georgia Tel.: (208) 334-2400
josh.turner@ag.idaho.gov
alan.hurst@ag.idaho.gov
Counsel for State of Idaho
THEODORE E. ROKITA BRENNA BIRD

Attorney General of Indiana Attorney General of Iowa
s/ James A. Barta s/ Eric H. Wessan

JAMES A. BARTA ERIC H. WESSAN
Indiana Attorney General’s Office 1305 E. Walnut Street
IGCS – 5th Floor Des Moines, Iowa 50319
302 W. Washington St. Tel.: (515) 823-9117
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 Fax: (515) 281-4209
Tel.: (317) 232-0709 eric.wessan@ag.iowa.gov
james.barta@atg.in.gov
Counsel for State of Iowa
Counsel for State of Indiana
4
KRIS W. KOBACH RUSSELL COLEMAN
Attorney General of Kansas Attorney General of Kentucky
s/ Anthony J. Powell s/ Matthew F. Kuhn

ANTHONY J. POWELL Matthew F. Kuhn
Office of the Kansas Jacob M. Abrahamson
Attorney General Assistant Solicitor General
120 SW 10th Avenue, 2nd Floor Office of Kentucky Attorney General
Topeka, Kansas 66612 700 Capital Avenue, Suite 118
Tel.: (785) 368-8539 Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
Fax: (785) 296-3131 Tel.: (502) 696-5300
anthony.powell@ag.ks.gov matt.kuhn@ky.gov
jacob.abrahamson@ky.gov
Counsel for State of Kansas
Counsel for Commonwealth
of Kentucky
ELIZABETH B. MURRILL LYNN FITCH

Attorney General of Louisiana Attorney General of Mississippi
s/ J. Benjamin. Aguiñaga s/ Justin L. Matheny

J. BENJAMIN AGUIÑAGA JUSTIN L. MATHENY
Solicitor General Deputy Solicitor General
Louisiana Department of Justice Office of the Mississippi Attorney
1885 N. Third Street General
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70802 P.O. Box 220
Tel.: (225) 506-3746 Jackson, Mississippi 39205-0220
aguinagab@ag.louisiana.gov Tel.: (601) 359-3825
justin.matheny@ago.ms.gov
Counsel for State of Louisiana
Counsel for State of Mississippi
5
ANDREW BAILEY AUSTIN KNUDSEN
Attorney General of Missouri Attorney General of Montana
s/ Caleb Rutledge s/ Christian B. Corrigan

CALEB RUTLEDGE CHRISTIAN B. CORRIGAN
Assistant Attorney General Solicitor General
Attorney General’s Office of PETER M. TORSTENSEN, JR.
Missouri Deputy Solicitor General
Post Office Box 899 Montana Department of Justice
Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 215 N. Sanders
Tel.: (573) 751-0812 Helena, Montana 59601
Fax: (573) 751-0774 christian.corrigan@mt.gov
caleb.rutledge@ago.mo.gov peter.torstensen@mt.gov
Counsel for State of Missouri Counsel for State of Montana
GENTNER DRUMMOND ALAN WILSON

Attorney General of Oklahoma Attorney General of South Carolina
s/ Garry M. Gaskins, II s/ Joseph D. Spate

GARRY M. GASKINS, II JOSEPH D. SPATE
Solicitor General Assistant Deputy Solicitor General
JENNIFER L. LEWIS 1000 Assembly Street
Deputy Attorney General Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Office of the Attorney General Tel.: (803) 734-3371
of Oklahoma josephspate@scag.gov
313 NE Twenty-First St.
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105 Counsel for State of South Carolina
Tel.: (405) 521-3921
garry.gaskins@oag.ok.gov
jennifer.lewis@oag.ok.gov
Counsel for State of Oklahoma
6
MARTY J. JACKLEY JONATHAN SKRMETTI
Attorney General of South Dakota Attorney General and Reporter
of Tennessee
s/ Steve Blair
STEVE BLAIR s/ J. Matthew Rice
Deputy Attorney General J. MATTHEW RICE
1302 East Highway 14, Suite 1 Solicitor General
Pierre, South Dakota 57501-8501 WHITNEY HERMANDORFER
Tel.: (605) 773-3215 Director of Strategic Litigation
atgservice@state.sd.us Office of the Attorney General and
Reporter of Tennessee
Counsel for State of South Dakota P.O. Box 20207
Nashville, Tennessee 37202-0207
Tel.: (615) 532-6026
matt.rice@ag.tn.gov
Counsel for State of Tennessee
7
KEN PAXTON SEAN REYES
Attorney General of Texas Attorney General of Utah
BRENT WEBSTER s/ Stanford Purser

First Assistant Attorney General STANFORD PURSER
JAMES LLOYD Solicitor General
Deputy Attorney General for Civil Office of the Utah Attorney General
Litigation 160 East 300 South, Fifth Floor
KELLIE E. BILLINGS-RAY Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Chief, Environmental Protection Tel.: (385) 382-4334
Division spurser@agutah.gov
s/ Wesley S. Williams
WESLEY S. WILLIAMS Counsel for State of Utah
Assistant Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General of
Texas
Environmental Protection Division
P.O. Box 12548, MC-066
Austin, Texas 78711-2548
Tel.: (512) 463-2012
Fax: (512) 320-0911
wesley.williams@oag.texas.gov
Counsel for State of Texas
8
JASON MIYARES PATRICK MORRISEY
Attorney General of Virginia Attorney General of West Virginia
s/ Kevin M. Gallagher LINDSAY S. SEE

KEVIN M. GALLAGHER Solicitor General
Principal Deputy Solicitor General s/ Michael R. Williams
BRENDAN T. CHESTNUT MICHAEL R. WILLIAMS
Deputy Solicitor General Principal Deputy Solicitor General
Virginia Attorney General’s Office Office of the Attorney General of
202 North 9th Street West Virginia
Richmond, Virginia 23219 State Capitol Complex
Tel.: (804) 786-2071 Building 1, Room E-26
kgallagher@oag.state.va.us Charleston, West Virginia 25301
bchestnut@oag.state.va.us Tel.: (304) 558-2021
lindsay.s.see@wvago.gov
Counsel for Commonwealth of michael.r.williams@wvago.gov
Virginia
Counsel for State of West Virginia
BRIDGET HILL
Attorney General of Wyoming
s/ Ryan Schelhaas
RYAN SCHELHAAS
Chief Deputy Attorney General
Office of the Wyoming Attorney
General
109 State Capitol
Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002
Tel.: (307) 777-5786
ryan.schelhaas@wyo.gov
Counsel for State of Wyoming
9
C ERTIFICATE OF S ERVICE
I certify that on May 13, 2024, I served a copy of this Petition for
Review by United States first-class mail on the following:
The Honorable Michael S. Regan

Administrator
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code 1101A
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Office of General Counsel

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code 2310A
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland

Attorney General of the United States
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Todd Kim
Assistant Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
s/ Eric J. Hamilton
ERIC J. HAMILTON
10
ATTACHMENT
11
29440 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 78 / Monday, April 22, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION under the HD GHG Phase 2 rule. EPA is services and the current status, please
AGENCY also adding warranty requirements for visit us online at www.epa.gov/dockets.
batteries and other components of zero- Public Participation: Docket: All
40 CFR Parts 86, 1036, 1037, 1039, emission vehicles and requiring documents in the docket are listed on
1054, and 1065 customer-facing battery state-of-health the www.regulations.gov website.
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985; FRL–8952–02– monitors for plug-in hybrid and battery Although listed in the index, some
OAR] electric vehicles. In this action, we are information is not publicly available,
also finalizing additional revisions, e.g., confidential business information
RIN 2060–AV50 (CBI) or other information whose
including clarifying and editorial
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards amendments to certain highway heavy- disclosure is restricted by statute.
for Heavy-Duty Vehicles—Phase 3 duty vehicle provisions and certain test Certain other material, such as
procedures for heavy-duty engines. copyrighted material, is not placed on
AGENCY: Environmental Protection the internet and will be publicly
Agency (EPA). DATES: This final rule is effective on available only in hard copy form
ACTION: Final rule.
June 21, 2024. The incorporation by through the EPA Docket Center at the
reference of certain material listed in location listed in the ADDRESSES section
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection this rule is approved by the Director of of this document.
Agency (EPA) is promulgating new the Federal Register beginning June 21,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 2024. The incorporation by reference of
standards for model year (MY) 2032 and Brian Nelson, Assessment and
certain other material listed in this rule
later heavy-duty highway vehicles that Standards Division, Office of
was previously approved by the Director
phase in starting as early MY 2027 for Transportation and Air Quality,
of the Federal Register as of March 27,
certain vehicle categories. The phase in Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
2023.
revises certain MY 2027 GHG standards Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI
that were established previously under ADDRESSES: 48105; telephone number: (734) 214–
EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Docket: EPA has established a docket 4278; email address: nelson.brian@
Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- for this action under Docket ID No. epa.gov.
and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles— EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. Publicly SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Phase 2 rule (‘‘HD GHG Phase 2’’). This available docket materials are available
document also updates discrete either electronically at Does this action apply to me?
elements of the Averaging Banking and www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at This action relates to companies that
Trading program, including providing Air and Radiation Docket and manufacture, sell, or import into the
additional flexibilities for manufacturers Information Center, EPA Docket Center, United States new heavy-duty highway
to support the implementation of the EPA/DC, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 vehicles and engines. This action also
Phase 3 program balanced by limiting Constitution Ave. NW, Room 3334, relates to state and local governments.
the availability of certain advanced Washington, DC. For further Potentially affected categories and
technology credits initially established information on EPA Docket Center entities include the following:
This table is not intended to be this action to a particular entity, consult 3’’ standards are appropriate and
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide the person listed in the FOR FURTHER feasible considering lead time, costs,
for readers regarding entities potentially INFORMATION CONTACT section. and other factors. EPA also finds that it
affected by this action. This table lists is appropriate (1) to limit the
What action is the agency taking?
the types of entities that EPA is now availability of certain advanced
aware could potentially be affected by The Environmental Protection Agency technology credits initially established
this action. Other types of entities not (EPA) is promulgating new GHG under the HD GHG Phase 2 rule, and (2)
listed in the table could also be affected. standards for model year (MY) 2032 and to include additional flexibilities for
To determine whether your entity is later heavy-duty highway vehicles that manufacturers in applying credits from
regulated by this action, you should phase in starting as early MY 2027 for these incentives in the early model
carefully examine the applicability certain vehicle categories. The phase in years of this Phase 3 program. EPA is
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
criteria found in 40 CFR parts 86, 1036, revises certain MY 2027 GHG standards also adding warranty requirements for
1037, 1039, 1054, and 1065.1 If you have that were established previously under batteries and other components of zero-
questions regarding the applicability of EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions and emission vehicles and requiring
Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- customer-facing battery state-of-health
1 See 40 CFR 1036.1 through 1036.15 and 1037.1 and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles— monitors for plug-in hybrid and battery
ER22AP24.000</GPH>
through 1037.15. Phase 2 rule. We believe these ‘‘Phase electric vehicles. We are also finalizing
VerDate Sep<11>2014 12:03 Apr 20, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00002
12Sfmt 4700
Fmt 4701 E:\FR\FM\22APR2.SGM 22APR2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 78 / Monday, April 22, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 29441
revisions and clarifying and editorial All peer review was in the form of letter VII. Benefits of the Program
amendments to certain highway heavy- reviews conducted by a contractor. The A. Climate Benefits
duty vehicle provisions of 40 CFR part peer review reports for each analysis are B. Non-GHG Health Benefits
1037 and certain test procedures for C. Energy Security
in the docket for this action and at
VIII. Comparison of Benefits and Costs
heavy-duty engines in 40 CFR parts EPA’s Science Inventory (https:// A. Methods
1036 and 1065. We also note that EPA cfpub.epa.gov/si/). B. Results
included in this action’s notice of IX. Analysis of Alternative CO2 Emission
Table of Contents
proposed rulemaking (hereafter referred Standards
to as the ‘‘HD GHG Phase 3 NPRM’’) a Executive Summary A. Comparison of Final Standards and
proposal to revise its regulations A. Purpose of This Regulatory Action Alternative
addressing preemption of state B. The Opportunity for New Standards B. Emission Inventory Comparison of Final
regulation of new locomotives and new Based on Advancements in Heavy-Duty Rule and Slower Phase-In Alternative
Vehicle Technologies Which Prevent or C. Program Costs Comparison of the Final
engines used in locomotives; those Control GHG Emissions
revisions were finalized in a separate Rule and Alternative
C. Overview of the Final Regulatory Action D. Benefits
action on November 8, 2023.2 3 D. Impacts of the Standards E. How do the final standards and
E. Coordination With Federal and State alternative compare in overall benefits
What is the agency’s authority for Partners
taking this action? and costs?
F. Stakeholder Engagement X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Clean Air Act (CAA) section 202(a), I. Statutory Authority for the Final Rule A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
42 U.S.C. 7521(a), requires that EPA A. Summary of Key Clean Air Act Planning and Review and Executive
establish emission standards for air Provisions Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory
B. Authority To Consider Technologies in
pollutants from new motor vehicles or Setting Motor Vehicle GHG Standards
Review
new motor vehicle engines, which, in B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Response to Other Comments Raising
the Administrator’s judgment, cause or C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Legal Issues
contribute to air pollution that may D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
II. Final HD Phase 3 GHG Emission
reasonably be anticipated to endanger Standards (UMRA)
A. Public Health and Welfare Need for E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
public health or welfare. The F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
Administrator has found that GHG GHG Emission Reductions
B. Summary of Comments and the HD GHG and Coordination With Indian Tribal
emissions from highway heavy-duty Governments
Phase 3 Standards and Updates From
vehicles and engines cause or contribute Proposal G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
to air pollution that may endanger C. Background on the CO2 Emission Children From Environmental Health
public health or welfare. Therefore, the Standards in the HD GHG Phase 2 and Safety Risks
Administrator is exercising his authority Program H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
under CAA section 202(a)(1)–(2) to D. Vehicle Technologies and Supporting Concerning Regulations That
establish standards for GHG emissions Infrastructure Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
from highway heavy-duty vehicles. See E. Technology, Charging Infrastructure, Distribution, or Use
and Operating Costs I. National Technology Transfer and
section I.D of this preamble for more Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
F. Final Standards
information on the agency’s authority Part 51
G. EPA’s Basis for Concluding That the
for this action. Final Standards Are Feasible and J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
Did EPA conduct a peer review before Appropriate Under the Clean Air Act To Address Environmental Justice in
H. Alternatives Considered Minority Populations and Low-Income
issuing this action?
I. Small Businesses Populations and Executive Order 14096:
This regulatory action is supported by III. Compliance Provisions, Flexibilities, and Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment
influential scientific information. EPA, Test Procedures to Environmental Justice for All
therefore, conducted peer review in A. Revisions to the ABT Program K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
accordance with the Office of B. Battery Durability Monitoring and L. Judicial Review
Management and Budget’s (OMB) Final Warranty Requirements M. Severability
Information Quality Bulletin for Peer C. Additional Revisions to the Regulations XI. Statutory Authority and Legal Provisions
IV. Program Costs
Review. First, we conducted a peer A. IRA Tax Credits Executive Summary
review of the underlying data and B. Technology Package Costs
algorithms in MOVES4 that served as A. Purpose of This Regulatory Action
C. Manufacturer Costs
the basis for MOVES4.R3 used to D. Purchaser Costs The Environmental Protection Agency
estimate the emissions impacts of the E. Social Costs (EPA) is finalizing this action to further
final standards. In addition, we V. Estimated Emission Impacts From the reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) air
conducted a peer review of the Heavy- Final Standards pollution from highway heavy-duty
Duty Technology Resource Use Case A. Model Inputs (hereafter referred to as ‘‘heavy-duty’’ or
B. Estimated Emission Impacts From the
Scenario (HD TRUCS) tool used to HD) engines and vehicles across the
Final Standards
analyze HD vehicle energy usage and VI. Climate, Health, Air Quality, United States. This final rule establishes
associated component costs. We also Environmental Justice, and Economic new CO2 emission standards for MY
conducted a peer review of a Heavy- Impacts 2032 and later HD vehicles with more
Duty Vehicle Industry Characterization, A. Climate Change Impacts stringent CO2 standards phasing in as
Technology Assessment, and Costing B. Health and Environmental Effects early as MY 2027 for certain vehicle
Report developed by FEV Consulting. Associated With Exposure to Non-GHG categories. We have assessed and
Pollutants demonstrated that these standards are

C. Air Quality Impacts of Non-GHG
2 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Greenhouse
Pollutants
appropriate and feasible considering
Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles— cost, lead time, and other relevant
Phase 3. 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2023. D. Environmental Justice
3 Final Rulemaking for Locomotives and E. Economic Impacts factors, as described throughout this
Locomotive Engines; Preemption of State and Local F. Oil Imports and Electricity and preamble and supporting materials in
Regulations. 88 FR 77004, November 8, 2023. Hydrogen Consumption the docket for this final rule. Under the
13Sfmt 4700
Clean Air Act (CAA) ‘‘the Administrator mandated to issue GHG standards ‘‘to GHG emissions over the long term.
shall by regulation prescribe (and from regulate emissions of the deleterious While standards promulgated pursuant
time to time revise) . . . standards pollutant from new motor vehicles.’’ to CAA section 202(a)(1)–(2) are based
applicable to the emission of any air State of Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. on application of technology, the statute
pollutant from any class or classes of 497, 533 (2007). Therefore, following does not specify a particular technology
new motor vehicles or new motor the 2009 Endangerment Finding, EPA or technologies that must be used to set
vehicle engines, . . . which in his promulgated GHG regulations for heavy- such standards; rather, Congress has
judgment cause, or contribute to, air duty vehicles and engines in 2011 and authorized and directed EPA to adapt its
pollution which may reasonably be 2016.7 We refer to the EPA-specific GHG standards to ‘‘the development and
anticipated to endanger public health or regulations found within the application of the requisite technology’’
welfare.’’ The regulation ‘‘shall take ‘‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel as determined by the Administrator.9
effect after such period as the Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Major trucking fleets, HD vehicle and
Administrator finds necessary to permit Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles— engine manufacturers, and U.S. states
the development and application of the Phase 1’’ and ‘‘Greenhouse Gas have announced plans to increase the
requisite technology, giving appropriate Emissions and Fuel Efficiency use of these technologies in the coming
consideration to the cost of compliance Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty years. Tens of billions of dollars are
within such period.’’ Despite the Engines and Vehicles—Phase 2’’ final being invested not only in these
significant emissions reductions rulemakings as ‘‘HD GHG Phase 1’’ and technologies, but also to increase the
achieved by previous rulemakings, GHG ‘‘HD GHG Phase 2’’ respectively infrastructure necessary for their
emissions from HD vehicles continue to throughout this preamble (i.e., we are successful deployment, including
adversely impact public health and not including any reference to the electric charging and hydrogen refueling
welfare, and there is a critical need for Department of Transportation (DOT) infrastructure, manufacturing and
further GHG reductions. The fuel efficiency standards in those production of batteries, and domestic
transportation sector is the largest U.S. rulemakings in using these terms in this sources of critical minerals and other
source of GHG emissions, representing preamble). In the HD GHG Phase 1 and important elements of the supply chain.
29 percent of total GHG emissions,4 and Phase 2 programs, EPA set GHG The 2021 Infrastructure Investment and
within this, heavy-duty vehicles are the emission standards that the Agency Jobs Act (commonly referred to as the
second largest contributor to GHG found appropriate and feasible at that ‘‘Bipartisan Infrastructure Law’’ or BIL)
emissions and are responsible for 25 time, considering cost, lead time, and and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022
percent of GHG emissions in the sector.5 other relevant factors, in 2011 and 2016, (‘‘Inflation Reduction Act’’ or IRA)
At the same time, there have been respectively.8 Meanwhile, major accelerate these ongoing trends by
significant advances in technologies to scientific assessments continue to be together including many incentives for
prevent and control GHG emissions released that further advance our the development, production, and sale
from heavy-duty vehicles, and we understanding of the climate system and of a wide range of advanced
project there will be more such the impacts that GHGs have on public technologies (including BEVs, plug-in
advances. These final regulations health and welfare both for current and hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs),
appropriately take advantage of those future generations, as discussed in FCEVs, and others), electric charging
projected available and cost-reasonable detail in section II.A. infrastructure, and hydrogen, which are
motor vehicle technologies to set more At the same time, manufacturers have expected to spur significant innovation
stringent GHG standards that will continued to find ways to further reduce in the heavy-duty sector.10 Technical
significantly reduce GHG emissions and eliminate tailpipe emissions from assessments and data provided by
from heavy-duty vehicles. In general, new motor vehicles, resulting in a range commenters during the public comment
the final standards are less stringent of technologies with the potential for period for this action’s notice of
than proposed for the early model years further significant reductions of GHG proposed rulemaking (hereafter referred
of the program and more stringent or emissions from HD motor vehicles. to as the ‘‘HD GHG Phase 3 NPRM’’) as
equivalent to the proposed standards in These include but are not limited to well as comments on related rules,
later model years (expect for heavy-
reductions reflecting increased use of which proposed strengthening existing
heavy vocational vehicles which are less
advanced internal combustion vehicle MY 2027 GHG standards for heavy-duty
stringent in later model years; see
and engine technologies and including vehicles, support that significant
section ES.C.2.ii of this preamble for
increased use of hybrid technologies. adoption of technologies with the
more details).
GHG emissions have significant These also include technologies with greatest potential to reduce GHG
adverse impacts on public health and the greatest potential HD vehicle GHG emissions and associated infrastructure
welfare. In 2009, the Administrator emission reductions, such as battery growth is expected to occur over the
issued an Endangerment Finding under electric vehicle technologies (BEV) and next decade.11 12 13 14 We summarize
CAA section 202(a), concluding that fuel cell electric vehicle technologies
GHG emissions from new motor (FCEV). These technologies—which are 9 CAA section 202(a)(2).
10 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public
vehicles and engines, including heavy- already being adopted by the HD
Law 117–58, 135 Stat. 429 (2021) (‘‘Bipartisan
duty vehicles and engines, cause or industry—present an opportunity for Infrastructure Law’’ or ‘‘BIL’’), available at https://
contribute to air pollution that may significant reductions in heavy-duty www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW-
endanger public health or welfare.6 117publ58.pdf; Inflation Reduction Act of 2022,
7 76 FR 57106, September 15, 2011; 81 FR 73478, Public Law 117–169, 136 Stat. 1818 (2022)
After making such a finding, EPA is October 25, 2016. (‘‘Inflation Reduction Act’’ or ‘‘IRA’’), available at
https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr5376/BILLS-
8 See, e.g., 40 CFR 1036.101(a)(2) (engines,

4 EPA (2023). Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
overview of emission standards); 40 CFR 1036.108 117hr5376enr.pdf.
Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2021 (EPA–430–R–23– (engine GHG standards, exhaust emissions of CO2, 11 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Control of
002, published April 2023). CH4, and N2O); 40 CFR 1037.101(a)(2) (vehicles, Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy-
overview of emission standards); 40 CFR 1037.105 Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards. 87 FR 17414
Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2021 (EPA–430–R–23– and 1037.106 (vehicle GHG standards, exhaust (March 28, 2022).
002, published April 2023). emissions of CO2 for vocational vehicles and 12 U.S. EPA, ‘‘Control of Air Pollution from New
6 74 FR 66496, December 15, 2009. tractors). Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle
14Sfmt 4700
these developments in section B of this more stringent CO2 standards phasing in numerous new vehicle and engine
Executive Summary, and provide as early as MY 2027 for certain vehicle technologies to reduce pollution. For
further detail in section I of the HD GHG categories (i.e., more stringent than what example, the Phase 2 GHG standards for
Phase 3 NPRM, section II of this final was finalized in HD GHG Phase 2). We HD vehicles (81 FR 73478, October 25,
rule, and Regulatory Impact Analysis have assessed and demonstrated that 2016) were projected to reduce CO2
(RIA) Chapters 1 and 2.15 16 these standards are appropriate and emissions by approximately 1.1 billion
In addition, technologies for vehicles feasible considering cost, lead time, and metric tons over the lifetime of the new
with ICE, along with a range of other relevant factors, as described vehicles sold under the program (see,
electrification, exist today and continue throughout this preamble and e.g., 81 FR 73482), and the most recent
to evolve to further reduce and supporting materials in the docket for ‘‘criteria-pollutant’’21 standards are
eliminate exhaust emissions from new this final rule. EPA considers safety, projected to reduce oxides of nitrogen
motor vehicles. For example, some of consistent with CAA section 202(a)(4), (NOX) emissions from the in-use HD
these technologies include and may consider other factors such as fleet by almost 50 percent by 2045
improvements to the efficiency of the the impacts of potential GHG standards (‘‘Control of Air Pollution from New
engine, transmission, drivetrain, on the industry, fuel savings, oil Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and
aerodynamics, and tire rolling resistance conservation, energy security, and other Vehicle Standards’’ (hereafter referred to
in HD vehicles that reduce their GHG relevant considerations. These as ‘‘HD2027 Low NOX final rule,’’ 88 FR
emissions. Another example of a standards build on decades of EPA 4296, January 24, 2023)). This final rule
technology under development by regulation of harmful pollution from HD builds upon EPA’s multi-decadal
manufacturers that reduces vehicle GHG vehicles. Pursuant to our section 202(a) tradition of regulating heavy-duty
emissions is HD vehicles that use authority, EPA first established vehicles and engines, by applying the
hydrogen-fueled internal combustion standards for the heavy-duty sector in Agency’s clear and longstanding
engines (H2–ICE), which have zero the 1970s. Since then, the Agency has statutory authority to consider the
engine-out CO2 emissions. The heavy- revised the standards multiple times feasibility and costs of reducing harmful
duty industry has also been developing based upon updated data and pollution using new real-world data and
hybrid powertrains, which consist of an information, the continued need to information, including the effects of
ICE as well as an electric drivetrain and mitigate air pollution, and congressional recent congressional action in the BIL
some designs also incorporate plug-in enactments directing EPA to regulate and IRA.
capability. Hybrid powered vehicles emissions from the heavy-duty sector We are issuing this HD vehicle GHG
may provide CO2 emission reductions more stringently. Since 1985, HD engine Phase 3 Final Rulemaking (‘‘HD GHG
through the use of downsized engines, and vehicle manufacturers have been Phase 3 final rule’’) which finalizes
recovering energy through regenerative able to comply with standards using certain revised HD vehicle carbon
braking system that is normally lost averaging;17 EPA also introduced dioxide (CO2) standards for MY 2027
while braking, and providing additional banking and trading compliance and certain new HD vehicle CO2
engine-off operation during idling and flexibilities in the HD program in standards for MYs 2028, 2029, 2030,
coasting. Hybrid powertrains are 1990;18 and EPA explained that 2031, and 2032 that will achieve
available today in a number of heavy- manufacturers could use the Averaging, significant GHG reductions for these
duty vocational vehicles including Banking and Trading (ABT) flexibilities and later model years. (Note that the MY
passenger van/shuttle bus, transit bus, to meet more stringent standards at 2032 standards will remain in place for
street sweeper, refuse hauler, and lower cost. EPA’s HD GHG standards MY 2033 and thereafter unless and until
delivery truck applications—and as and regulations have consistently new standards are promulgated.) The
noted in the preceding paragraph, plug- included an ABT program from the final standards we are promulgating
in hybrid technologies are included in start,19 and have relied on averaging as take into account the ongoing
advanced technology incentives under the basis for standards of greater technological innovation in the HD
IRA. We discuss these technology stringency.20 Since the first CAA section vehicle space and reflect CO2 emission
developments further in section II of 202(a) HD standards in 1972, standards that we have assessed and
this final rule, and Regulatory Impact subsequent standards have extended to demonstrated are appropriate and
Analysis (RIA) Chapters 1 and 2. additional pollutants (e.g., particulate feasible considering cost, lead time, and
With respect to the need for GHG matter and GHGs), have increased in other relevant factors, as described
reductions and after consideration of stringency, and have spurred the throughout this preamble and
these and other heavy-duty sector development and deployment of supporting materials in the docket for
developments, EPA is finalizing in this this final rule.22
17 50 FR 10606, March 15, 1985; see also NRDC
action new CO2 emission standards for In this rulemaking, EPA did not
v. Thomas, 805 F.2d 410, 425 (D.C. Cir. 1986)
MY 2032 and later HD vehicles with (upholding emissions averaging in the 1985 HD reopen (1) the other HD GHG standards,
final rule). including nitrous oxide (N2O), methane
Standards—Response to Comments.’’ Section 28. 18 55 FR 30584, July 26, 1990.
Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0055. 19 76 FR 57128, September 15, 2011 (explaining 21 We refer to PM, oxides of nitrogen (NO ),
X
13 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Greenhouse
ABT is a flexibility that provides an opportunity for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), hydrocarbons
Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles— manufacturers to make necessary technological (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2),
Phase 3. 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2023. improvements while reducing the overall cost of the more generally as ‘‘criteria pollutants’’ throughout
14 U.S. EPA. Response to Comments (RTC)—
program); 81 FR 73495, October 25, 2016 this preamble.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy- (explaining that ABT plays an important role in 22 We note that EPA also included in the HD GHG
Duty Vehicles: Phase 3. EPA–420–R–24–007. March providing manufacturers flexibilities, including Phase 3 NPRM a proposal to revise its regulations
2024. helping reduce costs).
addressing preemption of state regulation of new

15 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Greenhouse 20 For example, in promulgating the HD GHG locomotives and new engines used in locomotives;
Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles— Phase 2 standards, we explained that the stringency those revisions were finalized in a separate action
Phase 3. 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2023. of the HD GHG Phase 2 standards were derived on on November 8, 2023, and therefore are not
16 U.S. EPA. Regulatory Impact Analysis— a fleet average technology mix basis and that the discussed further in this final rule. Final
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy- emission averaging provisions of ABT meant that Rulemaking for Locomotives and Locomotive
Duty Vehicles: Phase 3. EPA–420–R–24–006. March the regulations did not require all vehicles to meet Engines; Preemption of State and Local Regulations.
2024. the standards. See, e.g., 81 FR 73715. 88 FR 77004, November 8, 2023.
15Sfmt 4700
(CH4), and CO2 emission standards that (SI) engines are common in the lighter developing, and testing their engines in-
apply to heavy-duty engines and the weight classes, and smaller numbers of house for use in their vehicles). Others
hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) emission alternative fuel engines (e.g., liquified purchase some or all of their engines
standards that apply to heavy-duty petroleum gas, compressed natural gas) from independent engine suppliers. At
vehicles, (2) any portion of our heavy- are found in the heavy-duty fleet. We the time of this rulemaking, only one
duty compliance provisions, refer to the vehicles powered by internal major independent engine manufacturer
flexibilities, and testing procedures, combustion engines as ICE vehicles (or supports the HD industry, though some
including those in 40 CFR parts 1037, ICEV) throughout this preamble. An vehicle manufacturers sell their engines
1036, and 1065, other than those increasing number of HD vehicles are or ‘‘incomplete vehicles’’ (i.e., a chassis
specifically identified in our proposal powered by technologies that do not that includes the engine, the frame, and
(e.g., EPA did not reopen the general have any tailpipe emissions such as a transmission) to body builders who
availability of Averaging, Banking, and battery electric vehicle (BEV) design and assemble the final vehicle.
Trading), and (3) the existing approach technologies and hydrogen fuel cell Each of these subindustries is often
taken in both HD GHG Phase 1 and electric vehicles (FCEVs). These supported by common suppliers for
Phase 2 that compliance with vehicle technologies have seen significant subsystems such as transmissions, axles,
emission standards is based on growth in recent years, for example, engine controls, and emission controls.
emissions from the vehicle, including EPA certified approximately 400 HD In addition to the manufacturers and
that compliance with vehicle exhaust BEVs in MY 2020, 1,200 HD BEVs in suppliers responsible for producing HD
CO2 emission standards is based on CO2 MY 2021, and 3,400 HD BEVs in MY vehicles, an extended network of
emissions from the vehicle. We further 2022 across several vehicle categories. dealerships, repair and service facilities,
note that we did not reopen anything on We use the term zero-emission vehicle and rebuilding facilities contributes to
which we did not propose or solicit (ZEV) technologies throughout the the sale, maintenance, and extended life
comment. preamble to refer to technologies that of these vehicles and engines. HD
result in zero tailpipe emissions, and vehicle dealerships offer customers a
B. The Opportunity for New Standards place to order such vehicles from a
Based on Advancements in Heavy-Duty vehicles that use these ZEV technologies
we refer to collectively as ZEVs in this specific manufacturer and often include
Vehicle Technologies Which Prevent or service facilities for those vehicles and
Control GHG Emissions preamble.24 Hybrid vehicles (including
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles) include their engines. Dealership service
1. Brief Overview of the Heavy-Duty energy storage features such as batteries technicians are generally trained to
Industry and also include an ICE.25 Further perform regular maintenance and make
Heavy-duty highway vehicles range background on the HD industry can be repairs, which generally include repairs
from commercial pickup trucks; to found in section II.D, RIA Chapter 1, under warranty and in response to
vocational vehicles that support local and HD GHG Phase 3 NPRM section manufacturer recalls. Some trucking
and regional transportation, I.A.26 fleets, businesses, and large
construction, refuse collection, and The industry that designs and municipalities hire their own
delivery work; to line-haul tractors manufactures HD vehicles is composed technicians to service their vehicles in
(semi-trucks) that move freight cross- of three primary segments: vehicle their own facilities. Many refueling
country. This diverse array of vehicles manufacturers, engine manufacturers centers along major trucking routes have
is categorized into weight classes based and other major component also expanded their facilities to include
on gross vehicle weight ratings (GVWR). manufacturers, and secondary roadside assistance and service stations
These weight classes span Class 2b manufacturers (i.e., body builders). to diagnose and repair common
pickup trucks and vans from 8,500 to Some vehicle manufacturers are problems.
vertically integrated (designing, The end-users for HD vehicles are as
10,000 pounds GVWR through Class 8
diverse as the applications for which
line-haul tractors and other commercial
these vehicles are purchased. Smaller
vehicles that exceed 33,000 pounds 24 Throughout the preamble, we use the term ZEV
technologies to refer to technologies that result in weight class HD vehicles are commonly
GVWR. While Class 2b and 3 complete
zero tailpipe emissions. Example ZEV technologies purchased by delivery services,
pickups and vans are not included in include battery electric vehicles and fuel cell contractors, and municipalities. The
this rulemaking, Class 2b and 3 vehicles.
middle weight class vehicles tend to be
vocational vehicles are included in this 25 Furthermore, hydrogen-powered internal
used as commercial vehicles for
rulemaking (as discussed further in combustion engines (H2–ICE) fueled with neat
hydrogen emit zero engine-out CO2 emissions (as business purposes and municipal work
section II.C).23
Heavy-duty highway vehicles are well as zero engine-out HC, CH4, CO emissions). We that transport people and goods locally
recognize that there may be negligible, but non- and regionally or provide services such
powered through an array of different zero, CO2 emissions at the tailpipe of H2–ICE that
means. Currently, the HD vehicle fleet is use selective catalytic reduction (SCR)
as utilities. Vehicles in the heaviest
primarily powered by diesel-fueled, aftertreatment systems and are fueled with neat weight classes are generally purchased
compression-ignition (CI) engines. hydrogen due to contributions from the by businesses with high load demands,
aftertreatment system from urea decomposition. As such as construction, towing or refuse
However, gasoline-fueled, spark-ignition further explained in preamble section III, H2–ICE
are considered to emit near zero CO2 emissions
collection, or freight delivery fleets and
23 Class 2b and 3 vehicles with GVWR between under our part 1036 regulations and are deemed owner-operators for regional and long-
8,500 and 14,000 pounds are primarily commercial zero under out part 1037 regulations, consistent haul goods movement. The competitive
pickup trucks and vans and are sometimes referred with our treatment of CO2 emissions that are nature of the businesses and owner-
to as ‘‘medium-duty vehicles’’. The vast majority of attributable to the aftertreatment systems in
compression-ignition ICEs. H2–ICE also emit
operators that purchase and operate HD
Class 2b and 3 vehicles are chassis-certified
certain criteria pollutants. H2–ICE are not included vehicles means that any time at which
vehicles, and we included those vehicles in the

proposed combined light-duty and medium-duty in what we refer to collectively as ZEVs throughout the vehicle is unable to operate due to
rulemaking action, consistent with E.O. 14037, this final rule. Note, NOX and PM emission testing maintenance or repair (i.e., downtime)
section 2a. Heavy-duty engines and vehicles are is required under existing 40 CFR part 1036 for can lead to a loss in income. The
also used in nonroad applications, such as engines fueled with neat hydrogen.
construction equipment; nonroad heavy-duty 26 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Greenhouse customers’ need for reliability drives
engines, equipment, and vehicles are not within the Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles— much of the vehicle manufacturers’
scope of this FRM. Phase 3. 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2023. innovation and research efforts.
16Sfmt 4700
2. History of Greenhouse Gas Emission rulemaking (‘‘HD Technical costs of ZEV technologies have gone
Standards for Heavy-Duty Engines and Amendments’’) that included changes to down and are projected to continue to
Vehicles the test procedures for heavy-duty fall; and manufacturers have announced
EPA has a longstanding practice of engines and vehicles to improve and begun to implement plans to
regulating GHG emissions from the HD accuracy and reduce testing burden.30 rapidly increase their investments in
sector. In 2009, EPA and the U.S. As with the previous HD GHG Phase ZEV technologies over the next decade.
Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s) 1 and Phase 2 rules and light-duty GHG While some HD vehicle manufacturers
National Highway Traffic Safety rules, EPA has coordinated with the and firms that purchase HD fleets
Administration (NHTSA) began working DOT and NHTSA during the cautioned in comments that such
on a coordinated regulatory program to development of this final rule. This announcements may change, several HD
reduce GHG emissions and fuel included coordination prior to and vehicle manufacturers also commented
consumption from HD vehicles and during the interagency review that their MYs 2024–2027 production
engines.27 The first phase of the HD conducted under E.O. 12866. EPA has plans include ZEVs for their planned
GHG and fuel efficiency program was also consulted with the California Air compliance with the previously
finalized in 2011 (76 FR 57106, Resources Board (CARB) during the promulgated Phase 2 standards.32 In
September 15, 2011) (‘‘HD GHG Phase development of this final rule, as EPA 2022 and 2023, there were several
1’’).28 The HD GHG Phase 1 program set also did during the development of the manufacturers producing fully electric
performance-based standards and HD GHG Phase 1 and 2 and light-duty HD vehicles for use in a variety of
largely adopted approaches consistent rules. See section ES.E of this preamble applications, and these volumes are
with recommendations from the for additional detail on EPA’s expected to rise (see RIA Chapter 1.5).
National Academy of Sciences. The HD coordination with DOT/NHTSA, The cost to manufacture lithium-ion
GHG Phase 1 program, which began in additional Federal agencies, and CARB. batteries (the single most expensive
MY 2014 and was phased in through 3. What has changed since EPA component of a BEV) has dropped
MY 2018, included separate standards finalized the HD GHG Phase 2 rule? significantly in the past eight years, and
for HD vehicles and HD engines. The that cost is projected to continue to fall
i. Technology Advancements during this decade, all while the
program offered flexibility allowing
manufacturers to attain these standards When EPA promulgated the HD GHG performance of the batteries (in terms of
through any mix of technologies and the Phase 2 rule in 2016, the agency energy density) improves.33 34 Many of
option to participate in an ABT established the CO2 standards on the the manufacturers that produce HD
program. premise of GHG-reducing technologies vehicles and major firms that purchase
In 2016, EPA and NHTSA finalized for vehicles with ICE including HD vehicles have announced billions of
the HD GHG Phase 2 program.29 The HD technologies such as hybrid dollars’ worth of investments in ZEV
GHG Phase 2 program included more powertrains. However, in 2016 we technologies and significant plans to
stringent, performance-based emission projected that ZEV technologies, such as transition to a zero-carbon fleet over the
standards for HD vehicles and HD BEVs and FCEVs, would become more next ten to fifteen years.35 36 37 See
engines that phase in over the long term, widely available in the heavy-duty section II.D of this preamble, RIA
with initial standards for most vehicles market over time, but would not be Chapter 1, and HD GHG NPRM section
and engines commencing in MY 2021, available and cost-competitive in I.C.1 for further information.38
increasing in stringency in MY 2024, significant volume in the timeframe of Furthermore, we also have seen
and culminating in even more stringent the Phase 2 program. EPA finalized development of technologies such as
MY 2027 standards. HD GHG Phase 2 BEV, PHEV, and FCEV advanced H2–ICE that also will significantly
built upon the Phase 1 program and set technology credit multipliers to reduce CO2 emissions from HD vehicles.
standards based not only on then- encourage the development and Second, in enacting the 2021 BIL and
currently available technologies, but availability of these advanced the 2022 IRA laws, Congress chose to
also on technologies that were either technologies at a faster pace because of provide significant and unprecedented
still under development or not yet their potential for large GHG emissions
widely deployed at the time of the HD reductions. 32 See RTC section 10.3.1.
GHG Phase 2 final rule. To ensure Several significant developments have 33 Mulholland, Eamonn. ‘‘Cost of electric
occurred since 2016 that point to ZEV commercial vans and pickup trucks in the United
adequate time for technology States through 2040.’’ Page 7. January 2022.
development, HD GHG Phase 2 technologies becoming more readily Available at https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/
provided up to 10 years lead time to available much sooner than EPA had 2022/01/cost-ev-vans-pickups-us-2040-jan22.pdf.
allow for the development and phase-in previously projected for the HD sector. 34 Sharpe, Ben and Hussein Basma. ‘‘A meta-
of these control technologies. EPA These developments are summarized study of purchase costs for zero-emission trucks’’.
The International Council on Clean Transportation,
recently finalized technical here, but more detail can be found in Working Paper 2022–09 (February 2022). Available
amendments to the HD GHG Phase 2 the section II and HD GHG NPRM online: https://theicct.org/publication/purchase-
section ES.B or I.C).31 These cost-ze-trucks-feb22.
27 Greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-duty developments support the feasibility of 35 Environmental Defense Fund (2022) September
vehicles are primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), but ZEV technologies and render adoption 2022 Electric Vehicle Market Update: Manufacturer
also include methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), Commitments and Public Policy Initiatives
and hydrofluorocarbons (HFC).
of ZEV technologies to reduce GHG Supporting Electric Mobility in the U.S. and
28 National Research Council; Transportation emissions more cost-competitive than Worldwide, available online at: https://
Research Board. The National Academies’ ever before. First, the HD market has blogs.edf.org/climate411/files/2022/09/ERM-EDF-
Committee to Assess Fuel Economy Technologies evolved such that early ZEV models are Electric-Vehicle-Market-Report_September2022.pdf.
36 EDF Comments to the HD GHG Phase 3 NPRM.
for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles;
in use today for some applications and EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985–1644–A1.

‘‘Technologies and Approaches to Reducing the
Fuel Consumption of Medium- and Heavy-Duty are expected to expand to many more; 37 Heavy Duty Trucking Staff, ‘Autocar, GM to
Vehicles.’’ 2010. Available online: https:// Produce Fuel-Cell Electric Vocational Trucks,’
www.nap.edu/catalog/12845/technologies-and- 30 86FR 34308, June 29, 2021. Trucking Info (December 11, 2023). https://
approaches-to-reducing-the-fuel-consumption-of- 31 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Greenhouse www.truckinginfo.com/10211875/autocar-and-gm-
medium-and-heavy-duty-vehicles. Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles— announce-electric-truck-joint-venture.
29 81 FR 73478, October 25, 2016. Phase 3. 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2023. 38 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2023.
17Sfmt 4700
monetary incentives for the production ‘‘Clean Heavy-Duty Vehicles’’ program, that ‘‘manufacturers who certify Class
and purchase of qualified ZEVs in the which includes $400 million to make 2b–8 chassis or complete vehicles with
HD market, as well as certain key awards to eligible recipients/contractors combustion engines would be required
components. These laws also provide that propose to replace eligible vehicles to sell zero-emission or near-zero
incentives for qualifying electric to serve one or more communities emission such as plug-in hybrid trucks
charging infrastructure and for clean located in an air quality area designated as an increasing percentage of their
hydrogen production and refueling pursuant to CAA section 107 as annual [state] sales from 2024 to
infrastructure, which will further nonattainment for any air pollutant, in 2035.’’44 45 In addition, 17 states plus
support a rapid increase in market fiscal year (FY) 2022 and available the District of Columbia and Quebec (in
penetration of HD ZEVs. As a few through FY 2031. The IRA also includes Canada) have signed a Memorandum of
examples, BIL provisions include $5 the ‘‘Grants to Reduce Air Pollution at Understanding establishing goals to
billion to fund the replacement of Ports’’ program, which appropriates $3 support widespread electrification of
school buses with clean and zero- or billion ($750 million of which is for the HD vehicle market.46 See RIA
low-emission buses (EPA’s ‘‘Clean projects located in areas of Chapter 1 and HD GHG NPRM section
School Bus Program’’) and over $5.5 nonattainment for any air pollutant) in I.C.3 for further information.47 While
billion to support the purchase of zero- FY 2022 and available through FY 2027, independent of EPA’s section 202
or low-emission transit buses and to reduce air pollution at ports. These standards, these efforts nonetheless
associated infrastructure, with up to are only a few examples of a wide array indicate the interest at the state level for
$7.5 billion to help build out a national of incentives in both laws that will help increasing electrification of the HD
network of EV charging and hydrogen to reduce the costs to manufacture, vehicle market.
refueling infrastructure through DOT’s purchase, and operate ZEVs, thereby
ii. Development of a HD GHG Phase 3
Federal Highway Administration bolstering their adoption in the market.
Program
(FHWA), some of which can be used for See section II.E.4 of this preamble, RIA
refueling of heavy-duty vehicles.39 The Chapter 1, and HD GHG NPRM section Recognizing the need for additional
IRA creates a tax credit available from I.C.2 for further information.40 GHG reductions from HD vehicles and
calendar year (CY) 2023 through CY Third, there have been multiple the growth of advanced HD vehicle
2032 of up to $40,000 per vehicle for actions by states to accelerate the technologies, including ZEV
vehicles over 14,000 pounds (and up to adoption of HD ZEV technologies. As of technologies, EPA believes this
$7,500 per vehicle for vehicles under February 15, 2023, the State of increased application of technologies in
14,000 pounds) for the purchase of California and ten other states have the HD sector that prevent and control
qualified commercial clean vehicles; adopted the Advanced Clean Trucks GHG emissions from HD vehicles
provides tax credits available from CY (ACT) program that includes a presents an opportunity to strengthen
2023 through CY 2032 (phasing down manufacturer requirement for zero- GHG standards, which can result in
starting in CY 2030) for the production emission truck sales, and CAA section significant reductions in heavy-duty
and sale of battery cells and modules of 177 empowers additional states to adopt vehicle emissions. Based on an in-depth
up to $45 per kilowatt-hour (kWh); and California’s ACT program if they analysis of the potential for the
also provides tax credits for 10 percent wish.41 42 43 The ACT program requires development and application of such
of the cost of producing applicable technologies in the HD sector, in April
critical minerals (including those found 40 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2023. 2023 we proposed in the HD GHG Phase
41 California Air Resources Board, Final
in batteries and fuel cells, provided that 3 NPRM GHG standards for MYs 2027
Regulation Order—Advanced Clean Trucks
the minerals meet certain Regulation. Filed March 15, 2021. Available at:
through 2032 and later HD vehicles
specifications), when such components https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/ more stringent than the Phase 2 GHG
or minerals are produced in the United regact/2019/act2019/fro2.pdf. standards.48 The proposed Phase 3
States. The IRA also modifies an 42 Oregon, Washington, New York, New Jersey,
existing tax credit that applies to and Massachusetts adopted ACT beginning in MY 059.pdf (Washington); ‘‘More electric, hydrogen,
2025 while Vermont and New Mexico adopted ACT and hybrid passenger and commercial vehicles
alternative fuel refueling property (e.g., beginning in MY 2026, and Colorado, Maryland, coming to New Mexico starting in 2026’’ https://
electric vehicle chargers and hydrogen and Rhode Island in MY 2027. www.env.nm.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/
fueling stations) and extends the tax 43 California Air Resources Board. States that have
2023-11-16-COMMS-More-electric-hydrogen-and-
credit through CY 2032; starting in CY Adopted California’s Vehicle Regulations. Available hybrid-passenger-and-commercial-vehicles-coming-
at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ to-New-Mexico-starting-in-2026-Final.pdf.
2023, this provision provides a tax advanced-clean-cars-program/states-have-adopted- 44 California Air Resources Board, Advanced
credit of up to 30 percent of the cost of californias-vehicle-regulations; See also, e.g., Final Clean Trucks Fact Sheet (August 20, 2021),
the qualified alternative fuel refueling Advanced Clean Truck Amendments, 1461 Mass. available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-
property (e.g., HD BEV charging and Reg. 29 (January 21, 2022) (Massachusetts).; sheets/advanced-clean-trucks-fact-sheet. See also
Medium- and Heavy-Duty (MHD) Zero Emission
hydrogen refueling equipment) and up Truck Annual Sales Requirements and Large Entity
California Air Resources Board, Final Regulation
to $100,000 per item when located in Order—Advanced Clean Trucks Regulation. Filed
Reporting, 44 N.Y. Reg. 8 (January 19, 2022) (New
March 15, 2021. Available at: https://
low-income or non-urban area census York), available at https://dos.ny.gov/system/files/
ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/regact/
tracts and certain other requirements are documents/2022/01/011922.pdf.; Advanced Clean
2019/act2019/fro2.pdf.
Trucks Program and Fleet Reporting Requirements,
met. Further, the IRA includes the 53 N.J.R. 2148(a) (December 20, 2021) (New Jersey),
45 EPA granted the ACT rule waiver requested by
available at https://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/ California under CAA section 209(b) on March 30,

39 While jurisdictions are not required to build adoptions/adopt_20211220a.pdf (pre-publication 2023. 88 FR 20688, April 6, 2023 (signed by the
stations specifically for heavy-duty vehicles, version); Clean Trucks Rule 2021, DEQ–17–2021 Administrator on March 30, 2023).
46 Multi-State MOU (July 2022), available at
FHWA’s guidance encourages states to consider (November 17, 2021), available at http://
station designs and power levels that could support records.sos.state.or.us/ORSOSWebDrawer/ https://www.nescaum.org/documents/multi-state-
medium-and-heavy-duty-zev-action-plan.pdf. States
heavy-duty vehicles. U.S. Department of Recordhtml/8581405 (Oregon); Low emission

Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. vehicles, Wash. Admin. Code 173–423–070 (2021), include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii,
‘‘National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula available at https://app.leg.wa.gov/wac/default. Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New
Program: Bipartisan Infrastructure Law—Program aspx?cite=173-423-070; 2021 Wash. Reg. 587356 Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon,
Guidance (Update)’’. June 2, 2023. Available online: (December 15, 2021); Wash. Reg. 21–24–059 Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/nevi/ (November 29, 2021) (amending Wash. Admin. Washington.
47 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2003.
formula_prog_guid/90d_nevi_formula_program_ Code 173–423 and 173–400), available at https://
guidance.pdf. lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/law/wsrpdf/2021/24/21-24- 48 88 FR 25926, April 27, 2003.
18Sfmt 4700
standards included (1) revised GHG considering the state of the HD market, public docket, of which over 230 had
standards for many MY 2027 HD new incentives, and comments received detailed comments. In addition, 185
vehicles, with a subset of standards that on the HD2027 NPRM regarding people testified over the two-day public
we did not propose to change, and (2) Advanced Technology Credit hearing period and EPA held dozens of
new GHG standards starting in MYs Multipliers (‘‘credit multipliers’’) under follow-up meetings with a broad range
2028 through 2032, of which the MY the HD GHG Phase 2 program, EPA of stakeholders including environmental
2032 standards would remain in place proposed to end credit multipliers for justice (EJ) stakeholders, labor unions,
for MYs 2033 and later. In the HD GHG BEVs and PHEVs one year earlier than manufacturers, fleets, truck dealerships,
Phase 3 NPRM, EPA requested comment provided in the existing HD GHG Phase power sector-related organizations,
on setting more stringent GHG standards 2 program (i.e., no credit multipliers for environmental and public health non-
beyond the MYs proposed for MYs 2033 BEVs and PHEVs in MYs 2027 and governmental organizations (NGOs), and
through 2035. EPA also requested later). states. Memoranda regarding these
comment on an alternative set of GHG The final standards and requirements meetings are in the rulemaking docket.
standards for MYs 2027 through 2032 we are promulgating in this action are We note that very generally, in
that were less stringent than those based on further consideration of the comments on the NPRM stakeholders
proposed yet still more stringent than data and analyses included in the demonstrated strong and opposing
the Phase 2 standards. We also proposed rule, additional supporting views on major issues, including:
requested comment, including data and analyses we conducted in stringency of the standards, the rate of
supporting data and analysis, as to support of this final rule, and increasing stringency of the standards
whether there are certain market consideration of the extensive public year over year from early model years to
segments, such as heavy-haul vocational input EPA received in response to the later model years, availability and
trucks or long-haul tractors which may proposed rule. These considerations and readiness of future ZEV infrastructure,
require significant energy content for analyses are described in detail availability of minerals critical to
their intended use, for which it may be throughout this preamble, the RIA, and battery production and assurance of
appropriate to set standards less the Response to Comments document supply chain readiness for those
stringent than the alternative for the (RTC) accompanying this preamble, materials, impact of the IRA tax credits,
specific corresponding regulatory found in the docket to this rule (EPA– and key elements of EPA’s analysis such
subcategories in order to provide HQ–OAR_2022–0985). In the remainder as technical feasibility, costs of ZEV
additional lead time to develop and of this section, we summarize the final technologies, and other elements. For
introduce ZEV or other low emission program and key changes from the example, many commenters
HD vehicle technologies for those proposal in the section immediately representing environmental NGOs,
specific vehicle applications. In following, followed by a summary of the public health NGOs, environmental
consideration of the environmental impacts of the standards, EPA’s justice organizations, front-line
impacts of HD vehicles and the need for statutory authority, and coordination communities and some state and local
significant emission reductions, we also with partners and stakeholders. governments supported standards that
requested comment on a more stringent C. Overview of the Final Regulatory would be more stringent than our
set of GHG standards starting in MYs Action proposed standards in terms of both
2027 through 2032 whose values would stringency level and year-over-year
EPA carefully considered input from pacing of increased stringency, with
go beyond the proposed standards, such stakeholders, as discussed throughout
as values that would be comparable to many supporting standards comparable
this preamble and in our accompanying with stringency levels used in
the stringency levels in California’s ACT RTC. This preamble section contains an
program, values in between these California’s ACT program, and some
overview of stakeholders’ key concerns, supporting even higher levels (e.g., 100
proposed standards and those that an overview of how EPA has adjusted
would be comparable to stringency percent ZEVs by 2035). A number of
approaches in the final rule after further these commenters provided EPA with
levels in ACT, and values beyond those consideration, and an overview of the
that would be comparable to stringency technical analyses and data to support
final standards. More detailed their view that infrastructure necessary
levels in ACT, such as stringency levels discussion of the final rule and key
comparable to the 50–60 percent ZEV to support ZEVs is projected to be ready
comments and EPA’s consideration of within the rule time frame, and that
adoption range represented by the them is included in the rest of the
publicly stated goals of several major there would be sufficient critical
preamble, and the RTC contains minerals as well, such that standards
original equipment manufacturers detailed comment excerpts, comment
(OEMs) for 2030.49 50 51 52 53 Finally, after more stringent than those EPA proposed
summaries and EPA’s responses. are feasible. Generally, many of these
49 California Air Resources Board, Final 1. Overview of Stakeholder Positions on commenters included various technical
Regulation Order—Advanced Clean Trucks Standards’ Stringency submissions on how EPA purportedly
Regulation. Filed March 15, 2021. Available at: underestimated ZEV feasibility and
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/ EPA’s HD GHG Phase 3 Proposed
regact/2019/act2019/fro2.pdf. adoption, underestimated the impacts of
Rule was signed by Administrator
50 Scania, ‘Scania’s Electrification Roadmap,’ the BIL and IRA in contributing to the
Michael Regan on April 11, 2023, and
Scania Group, November 24, 2021, https:// further development of the ZEV market,
www.scania.com/group/en/home/newsroom/news/ published in the Federal Register on
and overestimated ZEV-related costs—
2021/Scanias-electrification-roadmap.html. April 27, 2023 (88 FR 25926). EPA held
which, they argue when accounted for,
51 AB Volvo, ‘Volvo Trucks Launches Electric two days of public hearings on May 2
Truck with Longer Range,’ Volvo Group, January would have led EPA to consider
and 3, 2023, and the public comment

14, 2022, https://www.volvogroup.com/en/news- standards that are more stringent than
period ended on June 16, 2023. EPA
and-media/news/2022/jan/news-4158927.html. those proposed. Citing the public health
52 Deborah Lockridge, ‘What Does Daimler Truck received over 172,000 comments in the
and environmental needs for pollutant
Spin-off Mean for North America?,’ Trucking Info
(November 11, 2021). https://www.truckinginfo. 53 Navistar presentation at the Advanced Clean reductions that can be achieved with
com/10155922/what-does-daimler-truck-spin-off- Transportation (ACT) Expo, Long Beach, CA (May ZEV technology, especially in places
mean-for-north-america. 9–11, 2022). such as fence-line and overburdened
19Sfmt 4700
communities, many of these (or hydrogen) infrastructure, critical question of whether EPA has authority
commenters also suggested more minerals, and supply chains to increase to issue standards reflecting
stringent or faster pacing of standards the stringency of the MY 2027 performance of different vehicle
for specific subcategories of vehicles standards. Some of these commenters powertrains under the CAA implicates
such as tractors, school/transit buses, further asserted that the CAA mandates the Major Questions Doctrine, and assert
etc. These commenters generally four years of lead time and three years that CAA section 202(a) does not
supported EPA’s proposed elimination of standard stability for revisions of contain the correspondingly requisite
of credit multipliers for BEVs and heavy-duty vehicle and engine clear statement authorizing EPA to do
PHEVs one year earlier than provided in emissions standards for any pollutant, so. These commenters also assert that
the existing HD GHG Phase 2 program including GHGs, citing CAA section EPA predicating the proposed standards
and some asked EPA to finalize even 202(a)(3)(B) and (C). A number of these on averaging under the ABT program,
further limitations of the credit commenters provided EPA with such that vehicles with zero tailpipe
multipliers. EPA requested comment on technical analyses and data to support emissions purportedly must be averaged
what, if any, additional information and their view that ZEV infrastructure with emitting vehicles for
data EPA should consider collecting and would fall far short of what would be manufacturers to be able to meet the
monitoring during the implementation needed to support ZEV adoption levels standards, is beyond EPA’s authority.
of the Phase 3 standards, including with presented in the potential compliance These commenters stated they were
respect to the important issues of pathway on which the proposed asserting this lack of authority both
refueling and charging infrastructure for standards were predicated, and that because, in their view, such averaging
ZEVs; on this topic, this general set of critical minerals would remain a implicates the Major Questions Doctrine
commenters expressed strong limitation to ZEV growth in the HD and EPA lacks a clear statement of
opposition to any action EPA would sector. Generally, many of these authorization from Congress to do so,
take to create a regulatory self-adjusting commenters included various technical and because, in their view, averaging
link between such monitoring and submissions on how EPA purportedly and the ABT program are inconsistent
amending standards to decrease their overestimated ZEV adoption, with CAA statutory provisions for
stringency. overestimated the impacts of the BIL certification, warranty, and civil
In stark contrast, commenters and IRA in contributing to the further penalties, all of which they state
representing many truck manufacturers, development of the ZEV market, and contemplate individualized
owners, fleets, and dealers, along with underestimated ZEV-related costs. determinations, not determinations on
some labor groups and some states, Citing the concerns that unexpectedly average.
voiced support for standards less slow infrastructure development could
EPA heard from some representatives
stringent than even the lowest levels of impact manufacturers’ ability to comply
from the heavy-duty vehicle
stringency on which we requested with Phase 3, a number of these
manufacturing industry both optimism
comment in the proposal, i.e., commenters called for EPA to conduct
regarding the heavy-duty industry’s
considerably less stringent than the extensive monitoring of post-rule
ability to produce ZEV applications in
alternative presented in the HD GHG infrastructure buildout and further
future years at high volume, but also
Phase 3 NPRM. A few commenters suggested that EPA establish
concern that a slow deployment of
representing certain truck mechanisms for the standards to self-
electrification infrastructure (magnitude
manufacturers supported the proposed adjust to become less stringent if the
of potential upgrades to the electrical
MY 2032 standards but were concerned infrastructure deployment was found to
distribution system necessary to support
about the stringency of the early model be insufficient. These commenters
depot charging, and public charging
year standards. Many commenters generally opposed EPA’s proposed
infrastructure) could slow the growth of
representing truck manufacturers, elimination of credit multipliers for
heavy-duty ZEV adoption, and that this
owners, fleets, and dealers opposed any BEVs and PHEVs one year earlier than
may present challenges for vehicle
revision to the model year 2027 provided in the existing HD GHG Phase
manufacturers’ ability to comply with
standards and, even at lower overall 2 program and some asked for an
EPA HD GHG Phase 3 standards.
stringency levels, voiced support for a extension of certain technology credit
Concerns about uncertainties relating to
much more gradual pace of increasing multipliers beyond MY 2027. The
supporting infrastructure included:
stringency of the standards—with some commenters representing certain truck
limited nature of today’s HD charging
suggesting standards not commencing manufacturers who supported the
infrastructure, the magnitude of
until model years 2030 and 2033. Part proposed MY 2032 standards but
buildout of electrical distribution
of their argument is that Phase 2 expressed concern with early model
systems necessary to support (BEVs
established GHG vehicle and engine year standards more specifically cited
especially in the early model years of
standards for MY 2027 which are the early MY standards as being too
the program), the cost and length of time
challenging, and manufacturers have stringent and progressing in stringency
needed for infrastructure buildout, a
made compliance plans to meet those at too steep of an increase given
chicken-egg dynamic whereby
standards. In their view, amending uncertainties associated with
prospective BEV purchasers will not act
those MY 2027 standards cuts against sufficiency of supportive electrical
until assured of adequate supporting
these plans. These commenters also infrastructure in the program’s initial
infrastructure, and utilities will not
state that, although manufacturers years.
build out the infrastructure without
intend to introduce ZEVs in larger Commenters from the petroleum
assurance of demand, and the lack of
numbers over time (and have invested industry and others challenged EPA’s
availability of hydrogen infrastructure.
billions of dollars already to do so),54 authority to issue the proposed

Some commenters further noted that
there is too much uncertainty regarding standards at all.55 Terming the proposal
fleets and owners will be reluctant to
availability of supporting electrification a ‘‘ZEV mandate,’’ they asserted that the
buy, or may cancel orders for, ZEVs, if/
54 See, for example, comments from the Truck 55 See, for example, comments from American when ZEV infrastructure is a barrier.
and Engine Manufactures (EMA), EPA–HQ–OAR– Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce, EPA–HQ– Commenters raised these concerns on
2022–0985–2668–A1. OAR–2022–0985–1660. top of those voiced by some
20Sfmt 4700
manufacturers that more lead time is further notes that we recognize that specifically for charging infrastructure
needed for product development, charging and refueling infrastructure for for medium- and heavy-duty BEVs.60
especially given uncertainty regarding BEVs and FCEVs is necessary for Domestic manufacturing capacity is
purchasers’ decisions, noting customer success in the increasing development also increasing. Department of Energy
reluctance to utilize an unfamiliar and adoption of those vehicle (DOE) estimates over $500 million in
technology, and asserted barriers technologies (further discussed in announced investments have been made
associated with limited range and cargo section II and RIA Chapters 1 and 2). to support the domestic manufacturing
penalty due to need for large batteries. There are significant efforts already of BEV charging equipment, with
These comments are discussed in more companies planning to produce more
underway to develop and expand
detail in section II and in Chapters 6, 7, than one million BEV chargers in the
heavy-duty vehicle electric charging and
and 8 of the RTC. U.S. each year.61 62 Workforce
hydrogen refueling infrastructure. The development is on the rise. For
2. Overview of Consideration of Key U.S. government is making large example, the Siemens Foundation
Concerns From Stakeholders and the investments through the BIL and the announced they will invest $30 million
Final Standards IRA, as discussed in more detail in RIA over ten years focused on the EV
i. Improvements to EPA’s Technical and Chapter 1.3 (e.g., this includes a tax charging sector.63 As of early 2023,
Infrastructure Analyses credit for charging or hydrogen refueling about 20,000 people had been certified
infrastructure as well as billions of through a national Electric Vehicle
EPA considered the wide-ranging additional dollars for programs that Infrastructure Training Program.64 65
perspectives, data and analyses
could help fund charging infrastructure These important early actions and
submitted in support of stakeholder
if purchased alongside an electric market indicators suggest strong growth
positions, as well as new studies and
vehicle).56 57 Private investments will in charging and refueling ZEV
data that became available after the
also play a critical role in meeting future infrastructure in the coming years. See
proposal. As a consequence, EPA
infrastructure needs, as discussed in RIA Chapters 1.3 and 1.6 for more
believes that the technical analyses
more detail in RIA Chapter 1.6. We information on public and private
supporting the final rule are improved
expect many BEV or fleet owners to investments in charging infrastructure.
and more robust. For example, in our
technology analysis tool (HD TRUCS, invest in depot-based charging ii. Summary of Final Standards
see section II of this preamble) we have infrastructure (see RIA Chapter 2.6 for
Our improved analyses for the final
adjusted our battery and other information on our analysis of charging
rule continue to show that it is
component cost assumptions, revised needs and costs). Manufacturers, appropriate and feasible to revise the
vehicle efficiency values, refined the charging network providers, energy MY 2027 standards promulgated under
battery sizing determination, added companies and others are also investing the HD GHG Phase 2 program for most
public charging, increased depot in high-power public or other stations vehicles, and to set new standards for
charging costs and diesel prices, added that will support public charging. For MYs 2028 through 2032 with year-over-
Federal excise tax (FET) and state tax, example, Daimler Truck North America
increased charging equipment is partnering with electric power 60 Lepre, Nicole. ‘‘Estimated $30 Billion
installation costs, included more generation company NextEra Energy Committed to Medium- and Heavy-Duty Charging
charger sharing, and increased hydrogen Resources and BlackRock Renewable Infrastructure in the United States.’’ Atlas Public
Policy. EV Hub. January 26, 2024. Available
fuel costs. Based on consideration of Power to collectively invest $650 online:https://www.atlasevhub.com/data_story/
feedback from commenters, in HD million to create a nationwide U.S. estimated-30-billion-committed-to-medium-and-
TRUCS we also adjusted the technology charging network for commercial heavy-duty-charging-infrastructure-in-the-united-
payback schedule using a publicly- states.
vehicles with a later phase of the project 61 DOE, ‘‘Building America’s Clean Energy
available model. After consideration of also supporting hydrogen fueling Future’’. 2024. Available online: https://
comment (and as EPA signaled at stations.58 Volvo Group and Pilot www.energy.gov/invest.
proposal), we also have adjusted our announced their intent to offer public 62 U.S. Department of Energy, Vehicle
analytical baseline by increasing the charging for medium- and heavy-duty Technologies Office. ‘‘FOTW #1314, October 30,
amount of ZEV adoption in our ‘‘no- 2023: Manufacturers Have Announced Investments
BEVs at priority locations throughout of Over $500 million in More Than 40 American-
action’’ scenario (i.e., without this rule) the network of 750 Pilot and Flying J Made Electric Vehicle Charger Plants’’. October 30,
to reflect ZEV adoption required by North American truck stops and travel 2023. Available online:https://www.energy.gov/
California’s ACT program, as well as eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1314-october-30-2023-
plazas.59 A recent assessment by Atlas manufacturers-have-announced-investments-over-
further ZEV adoption in other states.
Public Policy estimated that $30 billion 500.
These and many more updates
in public and private investments had 63 Lienert, Paul. ‘‘Siemens to invest $30 million
described throughout this preamble and to train U.S. EV charger technicians’’. Reuters.
the RIA strengthen the analyses been committed as of the end of 2023
September 6, 2023. Available online: https://
supporting the final standards. www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/
56 Inflation Reduction Act, Public Law 117–169
We also improved our analysis of siemens-invest-30-million-train-us-ev-charger-
(2022). technicians-2023-09-06.
infrastructure readiness and cost by 57 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Public Law 117– 64 IBEW. ‘‘IBEW Members Answer Call for
including projected needed upgrades to 58, 135 Stat. 429 (2021). National Electric Vehicle Program’’. April 2023.
the electricity distribution system under 58 NextEra Energy. News Release: ‘‘Daimler Truck Available online:https://www.ibew.org/articles/
our potential compliance pathway in North America, NextEra Energy Resources and 23ElectricalWorker/EW2304/Politics.0423.html.
our analysis. As described in section II BlackRock Renewable Power Announce Plans to 65 The White House. ‘‘FACT SHEET: Biden Harris
Accelerate Public Charging Infrastructure for Administration Announces New Standards and
of this preamble, our improved analysis Commercial Vehicles Across The U.S.’’ January 31,
Major Progress for a Made-in-America National

of charging infrastructure needs and 2022. Available online: https://newsroom. Network of EV Chargers.’’ February 15, 2023.
costs supports the feasibility of the nexteraenergy.com/news-releases?item=123840. Available online:https://www.whitehouse.gov/
59 Adler, Alan. ‘‘Pilot and Volvo Group add to briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/15/fact-
future growth of ZEV technology of the
public electric charging projects.’’ FreightWaves. sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-
magnitude EPA is projecting in this November 16, 2022. Available online: https:// standards-and-major-progress-for-a-made-in-
final rule’s potential compliance www.freightwaves.com/news/pilot-and-volvo-group- america-national-network-of-electric-vehicle-
pathway’s technology packages. EPA add-to-public-electric-charging-projects. chargers.
21Sfmt 4700
year increases in stringency. In are finalizing MY 2031 standards that in the stringency of the medium heavy-
consideration of the opposing concerns are on par with the proposal for light duty vocational vehicle standards and a
raised by commenters, EPA believes it is and medium heavy-duty vocational 17 percent increase in the light heavy-
critical to balance the public health and vehicles and day cab tractors. Heavy duty vocational vehicle standards, the
welfare need for GHG emissions heavy-duty vocational vehicle final Phase 3 day cab tractor standards begin
reductions over the long term with the standards are less stringent than in MY 2028 with an 8 percent increase
time needed for product development proposed for all model years, including in stringency over the Phase 2
and manufacturing as well as 2031 and 2032. For MY 2032, we are standards, the heavy heavy-duty
infrastructure development in the near finalizing more stringent standards than vocational standards begin in MY 2029
term. After further consideration of the proposed for light and medium heavy- with a 13 percent increase over Phase 2,
lead times necessary to support both the duty vocational vehicles and day cab and the sleeper cab tractor standards
vehicle technologies’ development and tractors. Our assessment is that setting begin in MY 2030 with a 6 percent
deployment and the infrastructure this level of standards starting in MY increase over Phase 2. Each vehicle
needed, as applicable, under the 2032 achieves meaningful GHG category then increases in stringency
potential compliance pathway’s emission reductions at reasonable cost, each year, through MY 2032, at which
technology packages described in and that heavy-duty vehicle time compared to the Phase 2 program
section ES.C.2.iii, EPA is finalizing GHG technologies, charging and refueling the light heavy-duty vocational
emission standards for heavy-duty infrastructure, and critical minerals and standards are a 60 percent increase in
vehicles that, compared to the proposed related supply chains will be available stringency of the CO2 standard, the
standards, include less stringent to support this level of stringency (as medium heavy-duty vocational vehicle
standards for all vehicle categories in many commenters agreed with and standards are a 40 percent increase, the
MYs 2027, 2028, 2029, and 2030. The provided technical information to day cab standards are a 40 percent
final standards increase in stringency at support). Our assessment of the final increase, the heavy heavy-duty
a slower pace through MYs 2027 to 2030 program as a whole is that it takes a vocational standards are a 30 percent
compared to the proposal, and day cab balanced and measured approach while increase, and the sleeper cab standards
tractor standards start in MY 2028 and still applying meaningful requirements are a 25 percent increase in the
heavy heavy-duty vocational vehicles in MY 2027 and later to reducing GHG stringency of the standards. As
start in MY 2029 (we proposed Phase 3 emissions from the HD sector. described in section II of this preamble,
standards for day cabs and heavy heavy- A summary of the final standards can our analysis shows that the final Phase
duty vocational vehicles starting in MY be found in this Executive Summary, 3 standards, including revisions to HD
2027). As proposed, the final standards with more details on the standards GHG Phase 2 CO2 standards for MY
for sleeper cabs start in MY 2030 but are themselves and our supporting analysis 2027 and the new, progressively more
less stringent than proposed in that year found in section II and Chapter 2 of the stringent numeric values of the CO2
and in MY 2031, and equivalent in RIA. The standards for MY 2027 standards starting in MYs 2028 through
stringency to the proposed standards in through 2032 and later are presented in 2032, are feasible and appropriate
MY 2032. Our updated analyses for the Table ES–1 and Table ES–2 with considering feasibility, lead time, costs,
final rule show that model years 2031 additional tables showing the final and other relevant factors.
and 2032 GHG standards in the range of custom chassis and heavy-haul tractor
those we requested comment on in the standards in section II.F.66 When Table ES–1 MY 2027 through 2032
HD GHG Phase 3 NPRM are feasible and compared to the existing Phase 2 and Later Vocational Vehicle CO2
appropriate considering feasibility, lead standards, the Phase 3 standards begin Emission Standards (grams/ton-mile) by
time, cost, and other relevant factors as in MY 2027 with a 13 percent increase Regulatory Subcategory (with Phase 2
described throughout this preamble and 2024 through 2026 Standards for
particularly section II. Specifically, we 66 See regulations 40 CFR 1037.105 and 1037.106. Reference)
22Sfmt 4700
ER22AP24.002</GPH>
ER22AP24.001</GPH>
23Sfmt 4725
iii. Updated Technology Packages for flexibilities built into the ABT program, ICE (H2–ICE). Except for H2–ICE, these
Example Potential Compliance there are many variations in the exact technologies exist today and continue to
Pathways mix of technologies manufacturers can evolve to improve their CO2 emissions
The standards do not mandate the use use to meet the standards, and this mix reductions. To demonstrate feasibility
of a specific technology, and EPA can include technologies that EPA has and project emissions impacts, costs,
anticipates that a compliant fleet under not envisioned. We have projected a few benefits, etc. in this final rule, we
the standards would include a diverse compliance pathways with technology present a detailed analysis of the
range of HD motor vehicle technologies packages that are purposely different. compliance pathway represented by the
(e.g., transmission technologies, One example potential compliance technology packages shown in Table
aerodynamic improvements, engine pathway’s projected technology package ES–3, which we believe is one
technologies, hybrid technologies, includes a mix of HD motor vehicle reasonable pathway. Details on several
battery electric powertrains, hydrogen technologies that prevent and control additional example potential technology
fuel cell powertrains, etc.). The GHG emissions, including technologies compliance pathways we considered
technologies that have played (and that for vehicles with ICE and ZEV can be found in section II.F.4 and RIA
the Phase 2 rule projected would play) technologies (Table ES–3). In Table ES– Chapter 2.11, and details on our
a fundamental role in meeting the Phase 4, we present another example projected technology mix in a
2 GHG standards will continue to play compliance pathway’s technology ‘‘reference’’ scenario that represents the
an important role going forward, as they package that does not include ZEVs but United States without the final
remain key to reducing the GHG does include a suite of GHG-reducing standards can be found in section V and
emissions of HD vehicles powered by technologies for vehicles with ICE RIA Chapter 4. EPA emphasizes that its
internal combustion engines. In our ranging from: ICE improvements in standards are performance-based, and
assessment that supports the engine, transmission, drivetrain, manufacturers are not required to use
appropriateness and feasibility of these aerodynamics, and tire rolling particular technologies to meet the
final standards, we developed projected resistance; the use of lower carbon fuels standards. Tables ES–3 and ES–4 are
technology packages for potential (Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)/ just two examples of potential
compliance pathways that could be Liquified Natural Gas (LNG)); hybrid technology compliance pathways and
used to meet each of the final powertrains (Hybrid Electric Vehicles do not reflect a requirement of how
standards.67 Because our standards are (HEV) and Plug-in Hybrid Electric manufacturers will ultimately meet the
technology neutral and there are Vehicles (PHEV)); and hydrogen-fueled standards finalized in this rule.
67 As further explained in sections I and II technology packages that manufacturers may, but technology package which could be utilized to meet
(including II.G), EPA is required by law to assess are not required, to utilize). Long-standing case law a standard), indicate potential impediments to that
feasibility and compliance costs of standards issued regarding EPA’s CAA section 202(a) authority technology package’s feasibility, and plausibly
pursuant to CAA section 202(a), and thus supports the necessity of this approach. See NRDC explain how those impediments could be resolved
practically must demonstrate a potential means of v. EPA, 655 F. 2d 321, 332 (D.C. Cir. 1981)
within the lead time afforded).
complying with the standards in order to do so (e.g., (indicating that EPA is to state the engineering basis
ER22AP24.003</GPH>
a potential compliance pathway’s projected underlying a section 202 standard (i.e., the
24Sfmt 4725
iv. Revisions to Advanced Technology earned from advanced technologies. agencies, will issue periodic reports
Vehicle Credit Multipliers However, in recognition that the final reflecting collected information. These
Along with retaining EPA’s historical HD GHG Phase 3 standards will require reports will track HD electric charging
approach to setting performance-based meaningful investments from and hydrogen refueling infrastructure
standards and providing manufacturers manufacturers to reduce GHG emissions buildout throughout Phase 3
flexibility in meeting the standards by from HD vehicles, we requested implementation as well as an evaluation
allowing them to choose their own mix comment on and are finalizing certain of zero and low GHG-emitting HD
of vehicle technologies, we are retaining additional transitional flexibilities to vehicle production and the evolution of
and did not reopen the general structure assist manufacturers in the the HD battery production and material
of the Averaging, Banking and Trading implementation of Phase 3. See section supply, including supply of critical
(ABT) program, which allows III of this preamble for further details. minerals. Based on these reports, as
manufacturers further flexibility in appropriate and consistent with CAA
v. Commitment to Engagement and
meeting standards using averaging section 202(a) authority, EPA may
Monitoring Elements of Phase 3
provisions. In other words, consistent decide to issue guidance documents,
Compliance and Supporting Technology
with EPA’s practice for over fifty years initiate a rulemaking to consider
and Infrastructure Development
of setting emissions standards for HD modifications to the Phase 3 rule, or
As we noted in the HD GHG Phase 3 make no changes to the Phase 3 rule
vehicles, we are retaining the existing
NPRM, EPA has a vested interest in program. We are not finalizing any
regulatory scheme that does not require
monitoring industry’s performance in mechanisms for including a self-
each vehicle to meet the standards
complying with mobile source emission adjusting linkage between the standards’
individually and instead allows
standards, including the highway stringency and ZEV infrastructure as
manufacturers to meet the standards on
heavy-duty industry. In fact, EPA requested by some industry
average within each weight class of their
already monitors and reports out stakeholders. Further details on EPA’s
fleet.68 As described in section III.A of
industry’s performance through a range Phase 3 rule implementation
this preamble, we are finalizing updates
to the advanced technology incentives of approaches, including publishing engagement, data collection and
in the ABT program for HD GHG Phase industry compliance reports (such as monitoring and reporting commitments
2 for PHEVs, BEVs, and FCEVs. As has been done during the heavy-duty can be found in section II.B.2 of this
further explained in section III, after GHG Phase 1 program).69 After preamble.
consideration of comments, we are consideration of the divergent
comments received on the topic of D. Impacts of the Standards
retaining the advanced technology
vehicle credit multipliers for PHEV, collecting and monitoring ZEV Our estimated emission impacts,
BEV, and FCEV technologies through infrastructure during the average per-vehicle costs, monetized
MY 2027, consistent with the previously implementation of the Phase 3 program costs, and monetized benefits
promulgated HD GHG Phase 2 program. standards, as further described in of the final program are summarized in
In order to ensure meaningful vehicle section II, we are committing in this this section and detailed in sections IV
GHG emission reductions under the final rule to actively engage and monitor through VIII of the preamble and
Phase 3 program, we are limiting the both manufacturer compliance and the Chapters 3 through 8 of the RIA. EPA
period over which manufacturers can major elements of heavy-duty notes that, consistent with CAA section
use the multiplier portion of credits technology and supporting 202(a)(1) and (2), in evaluating potential
infrastructure development. EPA, in GHG standards, we carefully weigh the
consultation with other Federal statutory factors, including GHG
68 As further described in section III, as has been
the case since the ABT program was first emissions impacts of the GHG
promulgated, although manufacturers choosing to 69 See EPA Reports EPA–420–R–21–001B
standards, and the feasibility of the
use ABT as a compliance strategy must assure that covering Model Years 2014–2018, and EPA report standards (including cost of compliance
their vehicle families comply with the standard on EPA–420–R–22–028B covering Model Years 2014—
average, each individual vehicle is certified to an 2020, available online at https://www.epa.gov/ and available lead time).
individual limit (called a Family Emission Limit) as compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/epa-heavy- We monetize benefits of the GHG
ER22AP24.004</GPH>
well. duty-vehicle-and-engine-greenhouse-gas-emissions. standards and evaluate costs in part to
25Sfmt 4700
better enable a comparison of costs and under CAA section 177, thus increasing metric tons of CO2-equivalent emissions
benefits pursuant to E.O. 12866, but we the amount of ZEV technology in our from EGUs as a result of the increased
recognize that there are benefits that we projection of the United States without demand for electricity associated with
are currently unable to fully quantify the final standards in place.71 Further, the rule. We also project reductions in
and monetize. EPA’s consistent practice we improved our projections of the rate CO2-equivalent emissions from
has been to set standards to achieve of expected ZEV adoption across vehicle refineries on the order of 0.013 billion
improved air quality consistent with categories for the reference scenario, the metric tons during this time period.
CAA section 202(a), and not to rely on result of which in the modeled Considering both downstream and
cost-benefit calculations, with their compliance pathway was increased upstream cumulative emissions from
uncertainties and limitations, in projected adoption in the light heavy- calendar years 2027 through 2055 (a
identifying the appropriate standards. duty vocational vehicle subcategory and year when most of the regulated fleet
Nonetheless, our conclusion that the decreased adoption in other will consist of HD vehicles subject to
estimated benefits exceed the estimated subcategories compared to the reference the Phase 3 standards due to fleet
costs of the final program reinforces our scenario in the proposal. These updates turnover), the standards will achieve
view that the GHG standards represent to the reference scenario resulted in approximately 1 billion metric tons in
an appropriate weighing of the statutory changes to the estimated numeric values net CO2-equivalant emission reductions
factors and other relevant of emissions and costs as shown but (see section V of this preamble and
considerations. reflect the same general expected Chapter 4 of the RIA for more detail).
Our analysis of emissions impacts impacts of the standards as we projected Following improvements to our
accounts for downstream emissions, i.e., at the time of proposal, i.e., significant technical analysis as described in more
from emission processes such as engine reductions in downstream GHG detail in sections II and V of this
combustion, engine crankcase exhaust, emissions, reductions in GHGs from preamble, we remodeled the GHG
vehicle evaporative emissions, vehicle lower demand for onroad fuels and emission reductions from the proposed
refueling emissions, and brake and tire therefore reduced emissions from fuel standards, and the results show the
wear. Vehicle technologies would also refineries, and increases in GHG reductions from the final rule are close
affect emissions from upstream sources, emissions from EGUs (which we expect to but greater than projected reductions
i.e., emissions that are attributable to a to decline over time as the electricity from the proposed standards (e.g., net
vehicle’s operation but not the vehicle grid becomes cleaner). This same trend reductions are 998 million metric ton
itself, for example, electricity generation is expected for non-GHG pollutants as for the proposed standards). As
and the refining and distribution of fuel. well, which are affected to the extent summarized in section C2.ii of the
Our analyses include emissions impacts that zero- or lower-non-GHG emitting Executive Summary and detailed in
from electrical generating units (EGUs) technologies are used to meet the GHG section II of this preamble, the final
and refinery emission impacts.70 standards, i.e., we project significant standards are less stringent and increase
The estimated impacts summarized in reductions in downstream emissions of in stringency at a slower pace compared
this section are based on our projection non-GHG pollutants, reductions in non- to the proposal in the early model years
of a scenario that represents the United GHG pollutants resulting from lower of the program, but the later model year
States with the final standards in place, demand for onroad fuels and therefore final standards are more stringent than
relative to our projection of a reduced emissions from fuel refineries, proposed for light and medium heavy-
‘‘reference’’ scenario that represents the and increases in non-GHG pollutant duty vocational vehicles and day cab
United States without the final emissions from EGUs (which we expect tractors. This final rule’s GHG emission
standards. For a similar estimate for the to decrease over time as previously reductions will make an important
alternative standards, please see noted). contribution to efforts to limit climate
preamble section IX. As suggested by As seen in Table ES–5, through 2055 change and its anticipated impacts.
many commenters, and as EPA the program will result in significant These GHG reductions will benefit all
suggested at proposal (88 FR 25989), we downstream GHG emission U.S. residents, including populations
updated our reference scenario between reductions—approximately 1.4 billion such as people of color, low-income
the proposal and this final rule to metric tons in reduced CO2-equivalent populations, indigenous peoples, and/or
include California’s ACT program emissions.72 From calendar years 2027 children that may be especially
implementation in California and in the through 2055, we project a cumulative vulnerable to various forms of damages
states that have adopted the ACT rule increase of approximately 0.39 billion associated with climate change.
70 We are continuing and are not reopening the vehicle emission standards are based on vehicle 72 Note that these reductions are lower in the final
existing approach taken in both HD GHG Phase 1 emissions. rule than the proposal primarily due to the
71 EPA granted California’s waiver request on
and Phase 2, that compliance with the vehicle increased number of ZEVs considered in the
exhaust CO2 emission standards is based solely on March 30, 2023, which left EPA insufficient time reference case, see section V of this preamble for
CO2 emissions from the vehicle. Indeed, all of our to develop an alternative reference case for the details.
ER22AP24.005</GPH>
proposal. 88 FR 25989.
26Sfmt 4725
In our modeled potential compliance described in section VI of this preamble, Table ES–6 also shows impacts on
pathway, we project that the GHG there is substantial evidence that people EGU and refinery emissions. Similar to
emission standards will lead to an who live or attend school near major GHG emissions, we project that non-
increase in HD ZEVs relative to our roadways are more likely to be of a non- GHG emissions from EGUs will increase
reference case (i.e., without the rule), White race, Hispanic ethnicity, and/or in the near term as a result of the
which will also result in downstream low socioeconomic status. In addition, increased demand for electricity
reductions of vehicle emissions of non- emissions from HD vehicles and engines associated with the rule, and we expect
GHG pollutants that contribute to can significantly and adversely affect those projected impacts to decrease over
ambient concentrations of ozone, individuals living near truck freight time as the electricity grid becomes
particulate matter (PM2.5), nitrogen routes. Based on a study EPA conducted cleaner. We project reductions in non-
dioxide (NO2), CO, and air toxics. of people living near truck routes, an GHG emissions from refineries.76 We
Exposure to these non-GHG pollutants estimated 72 million people live within project net reductions in NOX, VOC, and
is linked to adverse human health SO2 emissions in 2055. Although there
200 meters of a truck freight route.73
impacts such as premature death as well is a small net increase in direct PM2.5
Relative to the rest of the population,
as other adverse public health and emissions in 2055, ambient PM2.5 is
environmental effects (see section VI). people of color and those with lower formed from emissions of direct PM2.5 as
As shown in Table ES–6, in 2055, we incomes are more likely to live near well as emissions of other precursors
estimate a decrease in emissions from truck routes.74 In addition, children such as NOx and SO2. We project overall
all criteria pollutants modeled (i.e., who attend school near major roads are PM2.5-related benefits based on the
NOX, PM2.5, VOC, and SO2) from disproportionately more highly contribution of emissions from each of
downstream sources. The reductions in represented by children of color and these pollutants (see Table ES–8). See
non-GHG emissions from vehicles will children from low-income section V of this preamble and RIA
reduce air pollution near roads. As households.75 Chapter 4 for more details.
EPA believes the non-GHG emissions EPA has separately proposed new which represents an update from the
reductions of this rule provide source performance standards and 2021 dollars used in the NPRM analysis.
important health benefits to the 72 emission guidelines for greenhouse gas We also note that updates to our
million people living near truck routes emissions from fossil fuel-fired power reference scenario have lowered the
and even more broadly over the longer plants, which would also reduce overall costs and benefits of the final
term. We note that the agency has broad emissions of criteria air pollutants such standards, as described briefly in this
authority to regulate emissions from the as PM2.5 and SO2 (88 FR 33240, May 23, Executive Summary and in more detail
power sector (e.g., the mercury and air 2023).78 in sections IV through VIII of this
toxics standards, and new source In general, the final rule cost analysis preamble. The decrease is attributable to
performance standards), as do the States methodology mirrors the approach we the increase in the number of ZEVs in
and EPA through cooperative federalism took for the proposal, but with a number the reference case.
programs (e.g., in response to PM of important updates to our modeling We estimate that for calendar years
National Ambient Air Quality Standards approach and the data used in our 2027 through 2055 and at an annualized
(NAAQS) implementation requirements, modeling projections. More details on 2 percent discount rate, costs to
interstate transport, emission specific updates after consideration of manufacturers will result in a cost
guidelines, and regional haze),77 and comments and new data can be found savings of $0.19 billion dollars before
that EPA reasonably may address air in sections II and IV of this preamble, considering the IRA battery tax credits.
pollution incrementally across multiple but we note here that our final rule With those battery tax credits, which we
rulemakings, particularly across analysis was conducted using the latest estimate to be $0.063 billion, the cost to
multiple industry sectors. For example, dollar value, 2022 dollars (2022$), manufacturers of compliance with the
73 U.S. EPA (2021). Estimation of Population Size Epidemiol 24, 253–259 (2014). https://doi.org/ 78 New Source Performance Standards for
and Demographic Characteristics among People 10.1038/jes.2014.5. Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New, Modified,
Living Near Truck Routes in the Conterminous 76 We note here that there is uncertainty and Reconstructed Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric
United States. Memorandum to the Docket EPA– surrounding how refinery activity would change in Generating Units; Emission Guidelines for
HQ–OAR–2019–0055. response to lower domestic demand for liquid Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Fossil
74 See section VI.D of this preamble for additional transportation fuels and in response to comments Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; and Repeal of
discussion on our analysis of environmental justice received on the proposal, the estimates in Table ES– the Affordable Clean Energy Rule. 88 FR 33240,
impacts of this final rule. 6 reflect the assumption that half of the projected May 23, 2023. https://www.federalregister.gov/
75 Kingsley, S., Eliot, M., Carlson, L. et al. drop in domestic fuel demand would be offset by documents/2023/05/23/2023-10141/new-source-
Proximity of U.S. schools to major roadways: a an increase in exports. performance-standards-for-greenhouse-gas-
ER22AP24.006</GPH>
nationwide assessment. J Expo Sci Environ 77 See also CAA section 116. emissions-from-new-modified-and-reconstructed.
27Sfmt 4700
program will result in a cost savings of notes the projected fleet-average costs $7,090 (2022$) per vehicle.79 For this
$0.25 billion. The manufacturer cost of per-vehicle for this rule are less than the action, EPA finds that the expected
compliance with the rule on a per- fleet average per-vehicle costs projected additional vehicle costs are reasonable
vehicle basis are shown in Table ES–7. for the HD GHG Phase 2 MY 2027 considering the related GHG emissions
We estimate that the MY 2032 fleet standards which EPA found to be reductions.80 EPA emphasizes again
average per-vehicle cost to reasonable under our statutory that manufacturers will choose their
manufacturers by regulatory group will authority, where the tractor standards pathway for compliance and the
range from a cost savings of between were projected to cost between $12,750 pathway modeled here is just one of
$700 and $3,000 per vehicle for and $17,125 (2022$) per vehicle and the many potential compliance pathways.
vocational vehicles to costs of between vocational vehicle standards were
$3,200 and $10,800 per tractor. EPA projected to cost between $1,860 and
The GHG standards will reduce topic, for this final rule we are using billion through the year 2055, roughly
adverse impacts associated with climate updated SC–GHG values. EPA presented 12 times the cost in vehicle technology
change and exposure to non-GHG these updated values in a sensitivity and associated electric vehicle supply
pollutants and thus will yield analysis in the December 2022 Oil and equipment (EVSE) combined. Regarding
significant benefits, including those we Gas Rule RIA which underwent public social costs, EPA estimates that the cost
can monetize and those we are unable comment on the methodology and use of vehicle technology (not including the
to quantify. Table ES–8 summarizes of these estimates as well as external vehicle or battery tax credits) and EVSE
EPA’s estimates of total monetized peer review.82 After consideration of at depots 84 will be approximately $1.1
discounted costs, operational savings, public comment and peer review, EPA billion. The HD industry will save
and benefits. In our proposal, EPA used issued a technical report signed by the approximately $3.5 billion in operating
interim Social Cost of GHGs (SC–GHG) EPA Administrator on December 2, costs (e.g., savings that come from less
values developed for use in benefit-cost 2023, updating the estimates of SC–GHG liquid fuel used, lower maintenance and
analyses until updated estimates of the in light of recent information and repair costs for ZEV technologies as
impacts of climate change could be advances.83 This is discussed further in compared to ICE technologies, etc.). The
developed based on the best available preamble section VII and RIA Chapter 7. program will result in significant social
science and economics. In response to The results presented in Table ES–8 benefits including $10 billion in climate
recent advances in the scientific project the monetized environmental benefits (with the average SC–GHG at a
literature on climate change and its and economic impacts associated with 2 percent near-term Ramsey discount
economic impacts, incorporating the program during each calendar year rate) and $0.3 billion in estimated
recommendations made by the National through 2055. EPA estimates that the benefits attributable to changes in
Academies of Science, Engineering, and annualized value of monetized net emissions of PM2.5 precursors. Finally,
Medicine 81 (National Academies, 2017), benefits to society at a 2 percent the benefits due to reductions in energy
and to address public comments on this discount rate will be approximately $13 security externalities caused by U.S.
79 The Phase 2 tractor MY 2027 standard cost vehicle fleet and are not meant as an indicator of Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and
increments were projected to be between $10,200 average price increase. Natural Gas Sector Climate Review’’ EPA, 2022.
81 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
and $13,700 per vehicle in 2013$ (81 FR 73621). Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0317.
The Phase 2 vocational vehicle MY 2027 standards and Medicine. 2017. Valuing Climate Damages: Available at: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/
were projected to cost between $1,486 and $5,670 Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon documents/2023-12/eo12866_oil-and-gas-nsps-eg-
per vehicle in 2013$ (81 FR 73718). Dioxide. Washington, DC: The National Academies climate-review-2060-av16-ria-20231130.pdf.
80 For illustrative purposes, these average costs
Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24651. 84 EVSE costs include hardware and installation
82 Standards of Performance for New,

range between an approximate 0.03 percent Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and costs for electric vehicle supply equipment at
decrease for light-heavy vocational vehicles up to Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and depots. Costs for upgrades to the distribution
a 6 percent increase for long-haul tractors based on Natural Gas Sector Climate Review. 87 FR 74702. system are incorporated in the operating costs
a minimum vehicle price of $100,000 for vocational 83 Supplementary Material for the Regulatory (specifically within $/kWh charging costs). We also
vehicles and $190,000 for long-haul tractors (see Impact Analysis for the Supplemental Proposed estimate infrastructure costs for vehicles we project
section II.G.2 of this preamble). We also note that Rulemaking, ‘‘Standards of Performance for New, to use public charging. See RIA 2.4.4 and 2.6 for
ER22AP24.007</GPH>
these average upfront costs are taken across the HD Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and more information.
28Sfmt 4700
petroleum consumption and imports description and breakdown of these the preamble and Chapters 7 and 8 of
will be approximately $0.45 billion benefits can be found in section VIII of the RIA.
under the program. A more detailed
Regarding the costs to purchasers as credits and tax credits applicable to the incremental upfront costs (after the
shown in Table ES–9, for the final EVSE installation and infrastructure, as tax credits) are recovered through
program we estimated the average discussed in section II.E.4 and RIA operational savings such that payback
upfront incremental cost to purchase a Chapter 2. We also estimated the occurs between two and four years on
new MY 2032 HD ZEV relative to a operational savings each year (i.e., average for vocational vehicles, after
comparable ICE vehicle meeting the savings that come from the lower costs two years for short-haul tractors and
Phase 2 MY 2027 standards for a to operate, maintain, and repair ZEV after five years on average for long-haul
vocational ZEV and EVSE, a short-haul technologies) and payback period (i.e., tractors. We discuss this in more detail
tractor ZEV and EVSE, and a long-haul the year the initial cost increase would in sections II and IV of this preamble
tractor ZEV. These incremental costs pay back). Table ES–9 shows that for the and RIA Chapters 2 and 3.
account for the IRA tax credits, vocational vehicle ZEVs, short-haul
specifically battery and vehicle tax tractor ZEVs, and long-haul tractor ZEVs
ER22AP24.008</GPH>
29Sfmt 4700
E. Coordination With Federal and State related comments and identifying security issues. EPA also participated in
Partners updates, for the final rule.86 the Federal Consortium for Advanced
EPA also has consulted with other Batteries led by DOE and the Joint
EPA has coordinated and consulted Federal agencies in developing this rule Office of Energy and Transportation.
with DOT/NHTSA, both on a bilateral and the light-duty vehicles GHG EPA and DOE also have entered into a
level during the development of this rulemaking, including the Federal Joint Memorandum of Understanding to
program as well as through the Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), provide a framework for interagency
interagency review of the action led by the Joint Office for Energy and cooperation and consultation on electric
the Office of Management and Budget. Transportation, the Department of sector resource adequacy and
EPA has set some previous heavy-duty Energy and several National Labs. EPA operational reliability.88 EPA consulted
vehicle GHG emission standards in joint consulted with FERC on this rulemaking with the Department of Labor (DOL) and
rulemakings where NHTSA also regarding potential impacts of these DOE on labor and employment
established heavy-duty fuel efficiency rulemakings on bulk power system initiatives involving the battery and
standards. EPA notes that there is no reliability and related issues.87 EPA vehicle electrification spaces, and DOL
statutory requirement for joint collaborated with DOE and Argonne provided a memorandum to EPA
rulemaking, that the agencies have National Laboratory on battery cost containing an overview of numerous
different statutory mandates and that analyses and critical minerals Federal Government initiatives focused
their respective programs have always forecasting. EPA, National Renewable on these areas.89 EPA also consulted
reflected those differences. As the Energy Laboratory (NREL), and DOE with NHTSA on potential safety issues
Supreme Court has noted, ‘‘EPA has collaborated on forecasting the and NHTSA provided a number of
been charged with protecting the development of a national charging studies to us concerning electric vehicle
infrastructure and projecting regional safety. In addition, EPA consulted with
public’s ‘health’ and ‘welfare,’ a
charging demand for input into EPA’s the Department of State on the Federal
statutory obligation wholly independent
power sector modeling. EPA also Government’s initiatives concerning
of DOT’s mandate to promote energy
coordinated with the Joint Office of supply chains for critical minerals.
efficiency.’’ 85 Although there is no EPA has also engaged with the
statutory requirement for EPA to consult Energy and Transportation on charging
infrastructure. EPA and the Lawrence California Air Resources Board on
with NHTSA, EPA has consulted with technical issues in developing this
Berkeley National Laboratory
NHTSA in the development of this program. EPA has considered certain
collaborated on issues of consumer
program. For example, staff of the two aspects of the CARB ACT rule, as
acceptance of plug-in electric vehicles.
agencies met frequently to discuss
EPA and the Oak Ridge National
various technical issues and to share Laboratory collaborated on energy
88 Joint Memorandum on Interagency
technical information. While assessing Communication and Consultation on Electric

safety implications of this rule for the Reliability, U.S. Department of Energy and U.S.
86 Landgraf, Michael. Memorandum to docket Environmental Protection Agency, March 8, 2023.
NPRM, EPA consulted with NHTSA. EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. Summary of NHTSA 89 See Memorandum from Employment and
EPA further coordinated with NHTSA Safety Communication. February 2024. Training Administration (ETA), Office of Assistant
regarding safety implications of this 87 Although not a Federal agency, EPA also Secretary for Policy (OASP), Office of the Solicitor
rule, including EPA’s response to safety consulted with the North American Electric (SOL) at the U.S. Department of Labor to EPA re
Reliability Corporation (NERC). NERC is the Labor/Employment Initiatives in the Battery/
Electric Reliability Organization for North America, Vehicle Electrification Space (February 2024),
ER22AP24.009</GPH>
85 Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. at 532. subject to oversight by FERC. which is available in the docket for this action.
30Sfmt 4700
discussed elsewhere in this document. section 202 is not limited to any specific as ‘‘any self-propelled vehicle designed
We also have engaged with other states, type of emissions control technology, for transporting persons or property on
including members of the National such as technologies applicable only to a street or highway.’’ 92 Congress has
Association of Clean Air Agencies, the ICE vehicles; rather, the Agency must intentionally and consistently used the
Association of Air Pollution Control consider all technologies that reduce broad term ‘‘any self-propelled vehicle’’
Agencies, the Northeast States for emissions from motor vehicles— since the Motor Vehicle Air Pollution
Coordinated Air Use Management, and including zero-emissions vehicle (ZEV) Control Act of 1965 to include vehicles
the Ozone Transport Commission. technologies that allow for complete propelled by various fuels (e.g.,
prevention of emissions such as battery gasoline, diesel, or hydrogen), or
F. Stakeholder Engagement electric vehicle (BEV) and fuel-cell systems of propulsion, whether they be
EPA conducted extensive engagement electric vehicle (FCEV) technologies—in ICE engine, hybrid, or electric motor
with a diverse range of interested light of the lead time provided and the powertrains.93 The subjects of this
stakeholders in developing this final costs of compliance. Many commenters, rulemaking all fit that definition: they
rule, including labor unions, states, including the main trade group are self-propelled, via a number of
industry, environmental justice representing regulated entities under different powertrains, and they are
organizations and public health experts. this rule, supported EPA’s legal designed for transporting persons or
In addition, we have engaged with authority to consider such technologies. property on a street or highway. The
environmental NGOs, vehicle At the same time, the final standards do Act’s focus is on reducing emissions
manufacturers, technology suppliers, not require the manufacturers to adopt from classes of motor vehicles and the
dealers, utilities, charging providers, any specific technological pathway and ‘‘requisite technologies’’ that could
tribal governments, and other can be achieved through the use of a feasibly reduce those emissions, giving
organizations. For example, in April– variety of technologies, including appropriate consideration to cost of
May 2022, EPA held a series of without producing additional ZEVs to compliance and lead time.
engagement sessions with organizations comply with this rule. Congress delegated to the
representing all of these stakeholder Section I.C summarizes our responses Administrator the authority to identify
groups so that EPA could hear early to certain other comments relating to available control technologies, and it
input in developing its proposal. EPA our legal authority, including whether did not place any restrictions on the
has continued engagement with this rule implicates the major questions types of emission reduction
stakeholders throughout the doctrine, whether EPA has authority for technologies EPA could consider,
development of this rule, throughout the its Averaging, Banking, and Trading including different powertrain
public comment period and into the (ABT) program, whether EPA properly technologies. By contrast, other parts of
development of this final rule.90 considered ZEVs as part of the class of the Act explicitly limit EPA’s authority
vehicles for GHG regulation, and by powertrain type,94 so Congress’s
I. Statutory Authority for the Final Rule whether the 4-year lead time and 3-year conscious decision not to do so when
This section summarizes the statutory stability requirements in CAA section defining ‘‘motor vehicle’’ in section 216
authority for the final rule. Statutory 202(a)(3)(C) apply to this rule. We further highlights the breadth of EPA’s
authority for the GHG standards EPA is discuss our legal authority and rationale standard-setting authority for such
finalizing is found in CAA section for battery durability and warranty vehicles. As we explain further below,
202(a)(1)–(2), 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(1)–(2), separately in section III.B of the Congress did place some limitations on
which requires EPA to establish preamble. Additional discussion of legal
standards applicable to emissions of air authority for the entire rule is found in 92 EPA subsequently interpreted this provision
pollutants from new motor vehicles and Chapters 2 and 10 of the RTC, and through a 1974 rulemaking. 39 FR 32611
engines which in the Administrator’s additional background on authority to (September 10, 1974), codified at 40 CFR 85.1703.
regulate GHGs from heavy-duty motor The regulatory provisions establish more detailed
judgment cause or contribute to air criteria for what qualifies as a motor vehicle,
pollution which may reasonably be vehicles and engines can be found in including criteria related to speed, safety, and
anticipated to endanger public health or the HD GHG Phase 1 final rule.91 EPA’s practicality for use on streets and ways. The
welfare. Additional statutory authority assessment of the statutory and other regulation, however, does not draw any distinctions
factors in selecting the final GHG based on whether the vehicle emits pollutants or its
for the action is found in CAA sections powertrain.
202–209, 216, and 301, 42 U.S.C. 7521– standards is found in section II.G of this 93 The Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Act of 1965
7543, 7550, and 7601. preamble, and further discussion of our defines ‘‘motor vehicle’’ as ‘‘any self-propelled
Section I.A overviews the text of the statutory authority in support of all the vehicle designed for transporting persons or
revised compliance provisions is found property on a street or highway.’’ Public Lae 89–
relevant statutory provisions read in 272, 79 Stat. 992, 995 (October 20, 1965). See also,
their context. We discuss the statutory throughout section III of this preamble. e.g., 116 S. Cong. Rec. at 42382 (December 18, 1970)
definition of ‘‘motor vehicles’’ in section A. Summary of Key Clean Air Act (Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970—Conference
216 of the Act, EPA’s authority to Report) (‘‘The urgency of the problems require that
Provisions the industry consider, not only the improvement of
establish emission standards for such existing technology, but also alternatives to the
motor vehicles in section 202, and Title II of the Clean Air Act provides
internal combustion engine and new forms of
authorities related to compliance and for comprehensive regulation of transportation.’’).
testing in sections 203, 206, and 207. emissions from mobile sources, 94 See CAA section 213 (authorizing EPA to
Section I.B addresses comments authorizing EPA to regulate emissions of regulate ‘‘non-road’’ engines’’), 216(10) (defining
regarding our legal authority to consider air pollutants from all mobile source non-road engine to ‘‘mean[ ] an internal combustion
categories, including motor vehicles engine’’). Elsewhere in the Act, Congress also
a wide range of technologies, including specified specific technological controls, further
under CAA section 202(a). To
electrified technologies that completely suggesting its decision to not to limit the
prevent vehicle tailpipe emissions. understand the scope of permissible technological controls EPA could consider in
EPA’s standard-setting authority under regulation, we first must understand the section 202(a)(1)–(2) was intentional. See, e.g., CAA
scope of the regulated sources. CAA section 407(d) (‘‘Units subject to subsection (b)(1)
for which an alternative emission limitation is
90 Miller, Neil. Memorandum to docket EPA–HQ– section 216(2) defines ‘‘motor vehicle’’ established shall not be required to install any
OAR–2022–0985. Summary of Stakeholder additional control technology beyond low NOX
Meetings. March 2024. 91 76 FR 57129–57130, September 15, 2011. burners.’’).
31Sfmt 4700
EPA’s standard-setting under CAA CAA section 202(b)(3)(C) (defining that consumers can continue to access a
section 202(a),95 but these limitations ‘‘heavy-duty vehicle’’ with reference to wide variety of vehicles to meet their
generally did not restrict EPA’s function and weight), 202(a)(3)(A)(ii) mobility needs, while enabling
authority to broadly regulate motor (‘‘the Administrator may base such continued emissions reductions for all
vehicles to any particular vehicle type classes or categories on gross vehicle vehicle types, including to the point of
or emissions control technology. weight, horsepower, type of fuel used, completely preventing emissions where
We turn now to section 202(a)(1)–(2), or other appropriate factors.’’).98 appropriate.
which provides the statutory authority In 2009, EPA made an endangerment In setting standards, CAA section
for the final GHG standards in this finding for GHG and explicitly stated 202(a)(1) requires that any standards
action. Section 202(a)(1) directs the that ‘‘[t]he new motor vehicles and new promulgated thereunder ‘‘shall be
Administrator to set ‘‘standards motor vehicle engines . . . addressed applicable to such vehicles and engines
applicable to the emission of any air are: Passenger cars, light-duty trucks, for their useful life (as determined
pollutant from any class or classes of motorcycles, buses, and medium and under [CAA section 202(d)], relating to
new motor vehicles or new motor heavy-duty trucks.’’ 74 FR 66496, 66537 useful life of vehicles for purposes of
vehicle engines, which in his judgment (December 15 2009).99 100 Then EPA certification), whether such vehicle and
cause, or contribute to, air pollution reviewed the GHG emissions data from engines are designed as complete
which may reasonably be anticipated to ‘‘new motor vehicles’’ and determined systems or incorporate devices to
endanger public health or welfare.’’ This that these classes of vehicles do prevent or control such pollution.’’ 102
core directive has remained the same, contribute to air pollution that may In other words, Congress specifically
with only minor edits, since Congress reasonably be anticipated to endanger determined that EPA’s standards could
first enacted it in the Motor Vehicle public health and welfare. The be based on a wide array of
Pollution Control Act of 1965.96 Thus endangerment finding was made with technologies, including technologies for
the first step when EPA regulates regard to pollutants—in this case, the engine and for the other (non-
emissions from motor vehicles is a GHGs—emitted from ‘‘any class or engine) parts of the vehicle,
finding (the ‘‘endangerment finding’’), classes of new motor vehicles or new technologies that ‘‘incorporate devices’’
either as part of the initial standard motor vehicle engines.’’ This on top of an existing motor vehicle
setting or prior to it, that the emission approach—of identifying a class or system as well as technologies that are
of an air pollutant from a class or classes classes of vehicles that contribute to ‘‘complete systems’’ and that may
of new motor vehicles or new motor endangerment—is how EPA has always involve a complete redesign of the
engines causes or contributes to air implemented the statute. vehicle. Congress also determined that
pollution which may reasonably be For purposes of establishing GHG EPA could base its standards on both
anticipated to endanger public health or emissions standards, EPA has regarded technologies that ‘‘prevent’’ the
welfare. new heavy-duty trucks (also known as
pollution from occurring in the first
The statute directs EPA to define the heavy-duty vehicles) as its own class
place—such as the zero emissions
class or classes of new motor vehicles and has then made further sub-
technologies considered in this rule—as
for which the Administrator is making categorizations based on weight and
well as technologies that ‘‘control’’ or
the endangerment finding.97 EPA for functionality in promulgating standards
reduce the pollution once produced.103
decades has defined ‘‘classes’’ subject to for the air pollutant, as further
While emission standards set by the
regulation according to their weight and elaborated in section II of this
EPA under CAA section 202(a)(1)
function. This is consistent with both preamble.101 EPA’s class and
generally do not mandate use of
Congress’s functional definition of a categorization framework allows the
particular technologies, they are
‘‘motor vehicle,’’ as discussed Agency to recognize real-world
variations in the lead time and costs of technology-based, as the levels chosen
previously in this section, and
emissions control technology for must be premised on a finding of
Congress’s explicit contemplation of
different vehicle types. It also ensures technological feasibility. EPA must
functional classes or categories. See
therefore necessarily identify potential
95 See, e.g., CAA section 202(a)(4)(A) (‘‘no 98 Section 202(a)(3)(A)(ii) applies to standards control technologies, evaluate the rate
emission control device, system, or element of established under section 202(a)(3), not to standards each technology could be introduced,
design shall be used in a new motor vehicle or new otherwise established under section 202(a)(1).
motor vehicle engine for purposes of complying However, we think it nonetheless provides 102 See also Engine Mfrs. Ass’n v. S. Coast Air
with requirements prescribed under this subchapter guidance on what kinds of classifications and Quality Mgmt. Dist., 541 U.S. 246, 252–53 (2004)
if such device, system, or element of design will categorizations Congress generally thought were (As stated by the Supreme Court, a standard is
cause or contribute to an unreasonable risk to appropriate. defined as that which ‘‘is established by authority,
public health, welfare, or safety in its operation or 99 EPA considered this list to be a comprehensive
custom, or general consent, as a model or example;
function’’). In addition, Congress established list of the new motor vehicle classes. See id. (‘‘This criterion; test . . . . This interpretation is
particular limitations for discrete exercises of CAA contribution finding is for all of the CAA section consistent with the use of ‘standard’ throughout
section 202(a)(1) authority which are not at issue in 202(a) source categories.’’); id. at 66544 (‘‘the Title II of the CAA . . . . to denote requirements
this rulemaking. See, e.g., CAA section Administrator is making this finding for all classes such as numerical emission levels with which
202(a)(3)(A)(i) (articulating specific parameters for of new motor vehicles under CAA section 202(a)’’). vehicles or engines must comply . . . , or
standards for heavy-duty vehicles applicable to By contrast, in making an endangerment finding for emission-control technology with which they must
emissions of certain criteria pollutants). GHG emissions from aircraft, EPA limited the be equipped.’’).
96 Public Law 89–272. endangerment finding to engines used in specific 103 Pollution prevention is a cornerstone of the
97 See CAA section 202(a)(1) (‘‘The Administrator classes of aircraft (such as civilian subsonic jet Clean Air Act. The title of 42 U.S.C. Chapter 85 is
shall by regulation prescribe . . . standards aircraft with maximum take off mass greater than ‘‘Air Pollution Prevention and Control’’; see also
applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from 5,700 kilograms). 81 FR 54421, August 15, 2016. CAA section 101(a)(3), (c). One of the very earliest
100 EPA is not reopening the 2009 or any other
any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new vehicle pollution control technologies (one which
prior endangerment finding in this action. Rather,
motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment is still in use by some vehicles) was exhaust gas
cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may we are discussing the 2009 endangerment finding recirculation, which reduces in-cylinder
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health to provide the reader with helpful background temperature and oxygen concentration, and, as a
or welfare.’’ (emphasis added)), 202(a)(3)(A)(ii) information relating to this action. result, engine-out NOX emissions from the vehicles.
(‘‘the Administrator may base such classes or 101 See NRDC v. EPA, 655 F.2d 318, 338 (D.C. Cir. More recent examples of pollution prevention
categories on gross vehicle weight, horsepower, 1981) (the Court held that ‘‘the adoption of a single technologies include cylinder deactivation, and
type of fuel used, or other appropriate factors’’ particulate standard for light-duty diesel vehicles electrification technologies such as idle start-stop or
(emphasis added)). was within EPA’s regulatory discretion.’’). ZEVs.
32Sfmt 4700
and its cost. Standards promulgated impacts of standards on fuel savings by We now turn from section 202(a) to
under CAA section 202(a) are to take vehicle operators; the impacts of overview several other sections of the
effect only ‘‘after such period as the standards on the heavy-duty vehicle Act relevant to this action. CAA section
Administrator finds necessary to permit industry; as well as other relevant 202(d) directs EPA to prescribe
the development and application of the factors such as impacts on safety.108 regulations under which the ‘‘useful
requisite technology, giving appropriate EPA has considered these factors in this life’’ of vehicles and engines shall be
consideration to the cost of compliance rulemaking as well. determined for the purpose of setting
within such period.’’ 104 This reference Rather than specifying levels of standards under CAA section 202(a)(1).
to ‘‘cost of compliance’’ means that EPA stringency in section 202(a)(1)–(2), For HD highway vehicles and engines,
must consider costs to those entities Congress directed EPA to determine the CAA section 202(d) establishes ‘‘useful
which are directly subject to the appropriate level of stringency for the life’’ minimum values of 10 years or
standards,105 but ‘‘does not mandate standards taking into consideration the 100,000 miles, whichever occurs first,
consideration of costs to other entities statutory factors therein. EPA has clear unless EPA determines that greater
not directly subject to the authority to set standards under CAA values are appropriate.113
standards.’’ 106 Given the prospective section 202(a)(1)–(2) that are technology Additional sections of the Act provide
nature of standard-setting and the forcing when EPA considers that to be authorities relating to compliance,
inherent uncertainties in predicting the appropriate,109 but is not required to do including certification, testing, and
future development of technology, so. Section 202(a)(2) requires the warranty. Under section 203 of the
Congress entrusted to EPA the authority Agency to give appropriate CAA, sales of vehicles are prohibited
to assess issues of technical feasibility consideration to cost and lead time unless the vehicle is covered by a
and availability of lead time to necessary to allow for the development certificate of conformity, and EPA issues
implement new technology. Such and application of such technology. The certificates of conformity pursuant to
determinations are ‘‘subject to the breadth of this delegated authority is section 206 of the CAA. Compliance
restraints of reasonableness’’ but ‘‘EPA particularly clear when contrasted with with standards is required not only at
is not obliged to provide detailed section 202(b), (g), (h), which identifies certification but throughout a vehicle’s
solutions to every engineering problem specific levels of emissions reductions useful life, so that testing requirements
posed in the perfection of [a particular on specific timetables for past model may continue post-certification. To
device]. In the absence of theoretical years.110 In determining the level of the assure each engine and vehicle complies
objections to the technology, the agency standards, CAA section 202(a) does not during its useful life, EPA may apply an
need only identify the major steps specify the degree of weight to apply to adjustment factor to account for vehicle
necessary for development of the each factor such that the Agency has emission control deterioration or
device, and give plausible reasons for its authority to choose an appropriate variability in use. EPA also establishes
belief that the industry will be able to balance among factors and may decide the test procedures through which
solve those problems in the time how to balance stringency and compliance with the CAA emissions
remaining. The EPA is not required to technology considerations with cost and standards is measured. The regulatory
rebut all speculation that unspecified lead time.111 112 provisions for demonstrating
factors may hinder ‘real world’ emission compliance with emissions standards
control.’’ 107 108 81 FR 73512, October 25, 2016; 76 FR 57129– have been successfully implemented for
Although standards under CAA 30, September 15, 2011. decades, including through our
109 Indeed, the D.C. Circuit has repeatedly cited
section 202(a)(1) are technology-based, Averaging, Banking, and Trading (ABT)
NRDC v. EPA, which construes section 202(a)(1), as
they are not based exclusively on support for EPA’s actions when EPA acted pursuant program.114
technological capability. Pursuant to the to other provisions of section 202 or Title II that are
broad grant of authority in section 202, explicitly technology forcing. See, e.g., NRDC v. for Responsible Regulation, 684 F.3d at 127 (noting
when setting GHG emission standards Thomas, 805 F. 2d 410, 431–34 (D.C. Cir. 1986) that the section 202(a) standards provide ‘‘benefits
(section 202 (a)(3)(B), 202 (a)(3)(A)); Husqvarna AB above and beyond those resulting from NHTSA’s
for HD vehicles, EPA must consider v. EPA, 254 F. 3d 195, 201 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (section fuel-economy standards’’).
certain factors and may also consider 213(a)(3)); Nat’l Petroleum and Refiners Ass’n v. 113 In 1983, EPA adopted useful life periods to
other relevant factors and has done so EPA, 287 F. 3d 1130, 1136 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (section apply for HD engines criteria pollutant standards
202(a)(3)).
previously when setting such standards. 110 See also CAA 202(a)(3)(A).
(48 FR 52170, November 16, 1983). The useful life
For instance, in HD GHG Phase 1 and mileage for heavy HD engines criteria pollutant
111 See Sierra Club v. EPA, 325 F.3d 374, 378 standards was subsequently increased for 2004 and
Phase 2, EPA explained that when (D.C. Cir. 2003) (even where a provision is later model years (62 FR 54694, October 21, 1997).
acting under this authority EPA has technology-forcing, the provision ‘‘does not resolve In the GHG Phase 2 rule (81 FR 73496, October 25,
considered such issues as technology how the Administrator should weigh all [the 2016), EPA set the same useful life periods to apply
effectiveness, ability of the vehicle to statutory] factors’’); Nat’l Petrochemical and for HD engines and vehicles greenhouse gas
Refiners Ass’n v. EPA, 287 F.3d 1130, 1135 (D.C. emission standards, except that the spark-ignition
perform its work for vehicle purchasers, Cir. 2002) (EPA decisions, under CAA provision HD engine standards and the standards for model
its cost (including for manufacturers authorizing technology-forcing standards, based on year 2021 and later light HD engines apply over a
and for purchasers), the lead time complex scientific or technical analysis are useful life of 15 years or 150,000 miles, whichever
necessary to implement the technology, accorded particularly great deference); see also comes first. In the Heavy Duty (HD) 2027 Low NOX
Husqvarna AB v. EPA, 254 F. 3d 195, 200 (D.C. Cir. final rule (HD2027 rule) (88 FR 4359, January 24,
and, based on this, the feasibility of 2001) (great discretion to balance statutory factors 2023), EPA lengthened useful life periods for all
potential standards; the impacts of in considering level of technology-based standard, 2027 and later model year HD engines criteria
potential standards on emissions and statutory requirement ‘‘to [give appropriate] pollutant standards. See also 40 CFR 1036.104(e),
reductions; the impacts of standards on consideration to the cost of applying . . . 1036.108(d), 1037.105(e), and 1037.106(e).
technology’’ does not mandate a specific method of 114 EPA’s consideration of averaging in standard-
oil conservation and energy security; the cost analysis); Hercules Inc. v. EPA, 598 F. 2d 91, setting dates back to 1985. 50 FR 1060, March 15,
106 (D.C. Cir. 1978) (‘‘In reviewing a numerical
1985 (‘‘Emissions averaging, of both particulate and

104 CAA section 202(a)(2); see also NRDC v. EPA,
standard we must ask whether the agency’s oxides of nitrogen emissions from heavy-duty
655 F. 2d 318, 322 (D.C. Cir. 1981). numbers are within a zone of reasonableness, not engines, is allowed beginning with the 1991 model
105 Motor & Equipment Mfrs. Ass’n Inc. v. EPA, whether its numbers are precisely right.’’). year. Averaging of NO, emissions from light-duty
627 F. 2d 1095, 1118 (D.C. Cir. 1979). 112 Additionally, with respect to regulation of trucks is allowed beginning in 1988.’’). The
106 Coal. for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, 684
vehicular GHG emissions, EPA is not ‘‘required to availability of averaging as a compliance flexibility
F.3d 120, 128 (D.C. Cir. 2012). treat NHTSA’s . . . regulations as establishing the has an even earlier pedigree. See 48 FR 33456, July
107 NRDC, 655 F. 2d at 328, 333–34. baseline for the [section 202(a) standards].’’ Coal. Continued
33Sfmt 4700
Under CAA section 207, model year.116 In this rulemaking, EPA with how the agency has applied the
manufacturers are required to provide has accounted for a wide range of statute in numerous rulemakings over
emission-related warranties. The emissions control technologies, five decades. The following discussion
emission-related warranty period for HD including advanced ICE engine and elaborates our position on this issue;
engines and vehicles under CAA section vehicle technologies (e.g., engine, further discussion is found in Chapter
207(i) is ‘‘the period established by the transmission, drivetrain, aerodynamics, 2.1 of the RTC.
Administrator by regulation tire rolling resistance improvements, the The text of the Act directly addresses
(promulgated prior to November 15, use of low carbon fuels like CNG and this issue and provides unambiguous
1990) for such purposes unless the LNG, and H2–ICE), hybrid technologies authority for EPA to consider all motor
Administrator subsequently modifies (e.g., HEV and PHEV), and ZEV vehicle technologies, including a range
such regulation.’’ For HD vehicles, part technologies (e.g., BEV and FCEV).117 of electrified technologies such as fully-
1037 currently specifies that the These include technologies applied to electrified vehicle technologies without
emission-related warranty for Light HD motor vehicles with ICE (including an ICE that achieve zero vehicle tailpipe
vehicles is 5 years or 50,000 miles and hybrid powertrains) and without ICE, emissions (e.g., BEVs), fuel cell electric
for Medium HD and Heavy HD vehicles and a range of electrification across the vehicle technologies that run on
is 5 years or 100,000 miles, and technologies. hydrogen and achieve zero tailpipe
specifies the components covered for In response to the proposed emissions (e.g., FCEVs), plug-in hybrid
such vehicles.115 Section 207 of the rulemaking, the agency received partially electrified technologies, and
CAA also grants EPA broad authority to numerous comments on this issue, other ICE vehicles across a range of
require manufacturers to remedy specifically on our consideration of BEV electrification. As described earlier in
nonconformity if EPA determines there and FCEV technologies. Regulated this section, the Act directs EPA to
are a substantial number of entities generally offered support for the prescribe emission standards for ‘‘motor
noncomplying vehicles. These warranty agency’s legal authority to consider such vehicles,’’ which are defined broadly in
and remedy provisions have also been technologies, noting that they CAA section 216(2) and do not exclude
applied for decades under our themselves were also considering any forms of vehicle propulsion. The
regulations, including where varying levels of these technologies in Act then directs EPA to promulgate
compliance occurs through use of ABT their own product plans. Their emission standards for such vehicles,
provisions. Further discussion of these comments relating to these technologies, ‘‘whether such vehicles and engines are
sections of the Act, including as they and those of most stakeholders, were designed as complete systems or
relate to the compliance provisions we more technical and policy in nature, for incorporate devices to prevent or
are finalizing, is found in section III of example, relating to the pace at which control such pollution,’’ based on the
the preamble. manufacturers could adopt and deploy ‘‘development and application of the
such technologies in the real world or requisite technology.’’ There is no
B. Authority To Consider Technologies the pace at which enabling question that electrified technologies,
in Setting Motor Vehicle GHG Standards infrastructure could be deployed. We including various ICE, hybrid, BEV, and
Having provided an overview of the address these comments in detail in FCEV technologies, meet all of these
key statutory authorities for this action, section II of this preamble and have specific statutory criteria. They apply to
we now elaborate on the specific issue revised the standards from those ‘‘motor vehicles’’, are systems and
of the types of control technology that proposed after consideration of incorporate devices that ‘‘prevent’’ and
are to be considered in setting standards comments. ‘‘control’’ emissions,118 and qualify as
under section 202(a)(1)–(2). EPA’s A few commenters, however, alleged ‘‘technology.’’
position on this issue is consistent with that the agency lacked statutory
authority altogether to consider BEV 118 The statute emphasizes that the agency must
our position in the HD Phase 1 and
and FCEV technologies because they consider emission reductions technologies
Phase 2 GHG rules, and with the regardless of ‘‘whether such vehicles and engines
believed the Act limited EPA to
historical exercise of the Agency’s are designed as complete systems or incorporate
considering only technologies
section 202(a)(1)–(2) authority over the devices to prevent or control such pollution.’’ CAA
applicable to ICE vehicles or to section 202(a)(1); see also CAA section 202(a)(4)(B)
last five decades. That is, EPA’s
technologies that reduce, rather than (describing conditions for ‘‘any device, system, or
standard-setting authority under section element of design’’ used for compliance with the
altogether prevent, pollution. EPA
202(a)(1)–(2) is not a priori limited to standards); Truck Trailer Manufacturers Ass’n, Inc
disagrees. The constraints they would
consideration of specific types of v. EPA, 17 F.4th 1198, 1202 (D.C. Cir. 2021) (the
impose have no foundation in the statute ‘‘created two categories of complete motor
emissions control technology; rather, in
statutory text, are contrary to the vehicles. Category one: motor vehicles with built-
determining the level of the standards, statutory purpose, are undermined by a in pollution control. Category two: motor vehicles
the agency must account for emissions substantial body of statutory and with add-in devices for pollution control.’’). While
control technologies that are available or legislative history, and are inconsistent
the statute does not define ‘‘system,’’ section 202
will become available for the relevant does use the word expansively, to include ‘‘vapor
recovery system[s]’’ (CAA section 202(a)(5)(A)),
116 For example, in 1998, EPA published ‘‘new power sources or propulsion systems’’ (CAA
21, 1983 (EPA’s first averaging program for mobile regulations for the voluntary National Low section 202(e)), and onboard diagnostics systems
sources); 45 FR 79382, November 28, 1980 (advance Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program that allowed LD (CAA section 202(m)(1)(D)). In any event, the
notice of proposed rulemaking investigating motor vehicle manufacturers to comply with intentional use of the phrase ‘‘complete systems’’
averaging for mobile sources). We have included tailpipe standards for cars and light-duty trucks shows that Congress expressly contemplated as
banking and trading in our rules dating back to more stringent than that required by EPA in methods of pollution control not only add-on
1990. 55 FR 30584, July 26, 1990 (‘‘This final rule exchange for credits for such low emission and zero devices (like catalysts that control emissions after
announces new programs for banking and trading emission vehicles. 63 FR 926, January 7, 1998. In they are produced by the engine), but wholesale
of particulate matter and oxides of nitrogen
2000, EPA promulgated LD Tier 2 emission redesigns of the motor vehicle and the motor
emission credits for gasoline-, diesel- and methanol- standards which built upon ‘‘the recent technology vehicle engine to prevent and reduce pollution.
powered heavy-duty engines.’’). See section III.A of improvements resulting from the successful [NLEV] Many technologies that reduce vehicle GHG
this preamble and RTC 10.2 for further background program.’’ 65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000. emissions today can be characterized as systems
on the structure and history of our ABT program’s 117 ZEV technologies include BEV and FCEV. that reduce or prevent GHG emissions, including
regulations, including consistency with CAA Both rely on an electric powertrain to achieve zero advanced engine designs in ICE and hybrid
section 206. tailpipe emissions. FCEVs run on hydrogen fuel, vehicles; integration of electric drive units in
115 See 40 CFR 1037.120. while BEVs are plugged in for charging. hybrids, PHEVs, BEV and FCEV designs; high
34Sfmt 4700
While the statute also imposes certain vehicles represent a difference in kind technologies related to vehicle
specific limitations on EPA’s from all other emissions control electricity production, such as high
consideration of technology, none of technologies, that is simply untrue. As efficiency alternators; and engine
these statutory limitations preclude the we explain in section II and RIA accessory technologies that increase the
consideration of electrified Chapter 1, electrified technologies efficiency of the vehicle, such as electric
technologies, a subset of electrified comprise a large range of motor vehicle coolant pumps, electric steering pumps,
technologies, or any other technologies technologies. In fact, all new motor and electric air conditioning
that achieve zero vehicle tailpipe vehicles manufactured in the United compressors. Because electrified
emissions. Specifically, the statute States today have some degree of technologies reduce emissions, EPA has
states that the following technologies electrification and rely on electrified long considered them relevant for
cannot serve as the basis for the technology to control emissions. regulatory purposes under Title II. For
standards: first, technologies which ICE vehicles are equipped with
example, EPA has relied on various
cannot be developed and applied within alternators that generate electricity and
batteries that store such electricity. The such technologies to justify the
the relevant time period, giving
electricity in turn is used for numerous feasibility of the standards promulgated
appropriate consideration to the cost of
compliance; and second, technologies purposes, such as starting the ICE and under section 202(a),121 promulgated
that ‘‘cause or contribute to an powering various vehicle electronics requirements and guidance related to
unreasonable risk to public health, and accessories. More specifically, testing involving such technologies
welfare, or safety in its operation or electrified technology is a vital part of under section 206,122 required
function.’’ CAA section 202(a)(2), (4).119 controlling emissions on all new motor manufacturers to provide warranties for
The statute does not contain any other vehicles produced today: motor vehicles them under section 207,123 and
exclusions or limitations relevant to the rely on electronic control modules prohibited their tampering under
Phase 3 model years. EPA has (ECM) for controlling and monitoring section 203.124
undertaken a comprehensive assessment their operation, including the fuel Certain vehicles rely to a greater
of the statutory factors, further mixture (whether gasoline fuel, diesel extent on electrification as an emissions
discussed in section II of the preamble fuel, natural gas fuel, etc.), ignition control strategy. These include (1)
and throughout the RIA and the RTC, timing, transmission, and emissions hybrid vehicles, which rely principally
and has found that the CAA plainly control system. In enacting the Clean on an ICE to power the wheels, but also
authorizes the consideration of these Air Act Amendments of 1990, Congress derive propulsion from an on-board
technologies, including BEV and FCEV itself recognized the great importance of electric motor, which can charge
technologies, at the levels that support this particular electrified technology for batteries through regenerative braking,
the modeled potential compliance emissions control in certain vehicles.120
and feature a range of larger batteries
pathway to achieve the final standards. It would be impossible to drive any ICE
Having discussed what the statutory than non-hybrid ICE vehicles;125 (2)
vehicle produced today or to control the
text does say, we note what the statutory plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV), which
emissions of such a vehicle without
text does not say. Nothing in section have an even larger battery that can also
such electrified technology.
202(a)(1)–(2) distinguishes technologies Indeed, many of the extensive suite of be charged by plugging it into an outlet
that prevent vehicle tailpipe emissions technologies that manufacturers have and can rely principally on electricity
from other technologies as being devised for controlling emissions rely for propulsion, along with an ICE; (3)
suitable for consideration in on electrified technology and do so in hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (FCEV),
establishing the standards. Moreover, a host of different ways. These include which are fueled by hydrogen to
nothing in the statute suggests that technologies that improve the efficiency produce electricity to power the wheels
certain kinds of electrified technologies of the engine and system of propulsion, and have a range of larger battery
are appropriate for consideration while such as the ECMs, electronically- sizes; 126 and (4) battery electric vehicles
other kinds of electrified technologies controlled fuel injection (for all manners (BEV), which rely entirely on plug-in
are not. While some commenters suggest of fuel, including but not limited to charging and the battery to provide the
that battery electric vehicles or fuel cell gasoline, diesel, natural gas, propane, energy for propulsion. Manufacturers
and hydrogen), and automatic may also choose to sell different models
voltage batteries and controls; redesigned climate transmission; technologies that reduce of the same vehicle with different levels
control systems improvements, and more.
119 In addition, under section 202(a)(3)(A), EPA
the amount of ICE engine use such as of electrification. In many but not all
must promulgate under section 202(a)(1) certain engine stop-start technology and other
criteria pollutant standards for ‘‘classes or idle reduction technologies; add-on 121 See, e.g., LD 2010 rule, 88 FR 25324, May 7,
categories’’ of heavy-duty vehicles that ‘‘reflect the technologies to control pollution after it 2010; HD GHG Phase 2 rule, 81 FR 73478, October
greatest degree of emission reduction achievable 25, 2016.
through the application of technology which the has been generated by the engine, such 122 See, e.g., HD GHG Phase 1 rule, 76 FR 57106,
Administrator determines will be available . . . as gasoline three-way catalysts, and September 15, 2011.
giving appropriate consideration to cost, energy, diesel selective catalytic reduction and 123 See, e.g., HD GHG Phase 1 rule, 76 FR 57106,
and safety factors associated with the application of particulate filters that rely on electrified September 15, 2011.
such technology.’’ EPA thus lacks discretion to base
such standards on a technological pathway that technology to control and monitor their 124 See, e.g., HD GHG Phase 1 rule, 76 FR 57106,
reflects less than the greatest degree of emission performance; non-engine technologies September 15, 2011.
125 Hybrid vehicles include both mild hybrids,
reduction achievable for the class (giving that that rely on electrified systems to which have a relatively smaller battery and can use
consideration to cost, energy, and safety). In other
words, where EPA has identified available control
improve vehicle aerodynamics; the electric motor to supplement the propulsion
technologies that can completely prevent pollution provided by the ICE, as well as strong hybrids,
which have a relatively larger battery and can drive
120 See CAA 207(i)(2) (for light-duty vehicles,

and otherwise comport with the statute, the agency
lacks the discretion to rely on less effective control statutorily designating ‘‘specified major emission for limited distances entirely on battery power.
technologies to set weaker standards that achieve control components’’ subject to extended warranty 126 As explained in section II.D.3.ii, the
fewer emissions reductions. And while section provisions as including ‘‘an electronic emissions instantaneous power required to move a FCEV can
202(a)(3)(A) does not govern any GHG standards, control unit’’). Congress also designated by statute come from either the fuel cell, the battery, or a
which are established only under section 202(a)(1)– ‘‘onboard emissions diagnostic devices’’ as combination of both. Interactions between the fuel
(2), we think it is also informative as to the breadth ‘‘specified major emission control components’’; cells and batteries of a FCEV can be complex and
of EPA’s authority under those provisions. OBD devices also rely on electrified technology. may vary based on application.
35Sfmt 4700
cases,127 electrified technologies are technologies capable of completely Agency has developed considerable
systems which ‘‘prevent’’ (partially or preventing vehicle tailpipe emissions. expertise over the last five decades.
completely) the emission of pollution The surrounding statutory context Such a program is necessarily
from the motor vehicle engine.128 further highlights that Congress predicated on the continuous
Nothing in the statute indicates that intended section 202 to lead to development of increasingly effective
EPA is limited from considering any of reductions to the point of complete emissions control technologies. In
these technologies. For instance, pollution prevention. Consistent with determining the standards, EPA
nothing in the statute says that EPA may section 202(a)(1), section 101(c), of the appropriately considers updated data
only consider emissions control Act states), ‘‘A primary goal of this and analysis on pollution control
technologies with a certain kind or level chapter is to encourage or otherwise technologies, without a priori limiting
of electrification, e.g., where the battery promote reasonable Federal, State, and its consideration to a particular set of
is smaller than a certain size, where the local governmental actions, consistent technologies. Given the continuous
energy derived from the battery is less with the provisions of this chapter, for development of pollution control
than a certain percentage of total vehicle pollution prevention.’’ 131 Section technologies since the early days of the
energy, where certain energy can be 101(a)(3) further explains the term ‘‘air CAA, this approach means that EPA has
recharged by plugging the vehicle into pollution prevention’’ (as contrasted routinely considered new and projected
an outlet as opposed to running the with ‘‘air pollution control’’) to mean technologies developed or refined since
internal combustion engine, etc. The ‘‘the reduction or elimination, through the time of the CAA’s enactment,
statute does not differentiate in terms of any measures, of the amount of including for instance, electrification
such details, but simply commands EPA pollutants produced or created at the technologies.136 The innumerable
to adopt emissions standards based on source.’’ That is to say, EPA is not technologies on which EPA’s standards
the ‘‘development and application of the limited to requiring small reductions, have been premised, or which EPA has
requisite technology, giving appropriate but instead has authority to consider otherwise incentivized, are presented in
consideration to the cost of compliance technologies that may entirely prevent summary form later in this section and
within such period.’’ the pollution from occurring in the first then in full in section 2 of the RTC. This
EPA’s interpretation also accords the place. Congress also repeatedly approach is inherent in the statutory
primary purpose and operation of amended the Act to itself impose text of section 202(a)(2): in requiring
section 202(a), which is to reduce extremely large reductions in motor EPA to consider lead time for the
emissions of air pollutants from motor vehicle pollution.132 Similarly, Congress development and application of
vehicles that are anticipated to endanger prescribed EPA to set standards technology before standards may take
public health or welfare.129 This achieving specific, numeric levels of effect, Congress directed EPA to
statutory purpose compels EPA to emissions reductions (which in many consider future technological
consider available technologies that instances cumulatively amount to advancements and innovation rather
reduce emissions of air pollutants most multiple orders of magnitude),133 while than limiting the Agency to only those
effectively, including vehicle explicitly stating that EPA’s 202(a) technologies in place at the time the
technologies that result in no vehicle authority allowed the agency to go still statute was enacted. In the report
tailpipe emissions of GHGs and further.134 Consistent with these accompanying the Senate bill for the
completely ‘‘prevent’’ such statutory authorities, prior rulemakings 1965 legislation establishing section
emissions.130 And, given Congress’s have also required very large emissions 202(a), the Senate Committee wrote that
directive to reduce air pollution, it reductions, including to the point of it ‘‘believes that exact standards need
would make little sense for Congress to completely preventing certain types of not be written legislatively but that the
have authorized EPA to consider emissions.135 Secretary should adjust to changing
technologies that achieve 99 percent This reading of the statute accords technology.’’ 137 This forward-looking
pollution reduction (for example, as with the practical reality of regulatory approach keeps pace with
some PM filter technologies do to administering an effective emissions real-world technological developments
control criteria pollutants), but not 100 control program, a matter in which the that have the potential to reduce
percent pollution reduction. At emissions and comports with
minimum, the statute allows EPA to 131 Clean Air Act Amendments, 104 Stat. 2399, congressional intent and precedent.138
consider such technologies. Today, 2468, November 15, 1990; see also 42 U.S.C.
many of the available technologies that chapter 85 (‘‘AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND 136 For example, when EPA issued its Tier 2
can achieve the greatest emissions CONTROL’’). standards for light-duty and medium-duty vehicles
132 See, e.g., CAA section 202(a)(3)(A)(i) (directed
control are those that rely on greater in 2000, the Agency established ‘‘bins’’ of standards
EPA to promulgate standards that ‘‘reflect the in addition to a fleet average requirement. 65 FR
levels of electrification, with ZEV greatest decree of emission reduction achievable’’ 6698, 6734–6735, February 10, 2000. One ‘‘bin’’ was
for certain pollutants). used to certify electric vehicles that have zero
127 For example, some vehicles also use 133 CAA section 202(a), (g)–(h), (j). criteria pollutant emissions. Id. Under the Tier 2
electrified technology to preheat the catalyst and 134 See, e.g., CAA section 202(b)(1)(C) (‘‘The program, a manufacturer could designate which
improve catalyst efficiency especially when starting Administrator may promulgate regulations under bins their different models fit into, and the
in cold temperatures. subsection (a)(1) revising any standard prescribed weighted average across bins was required to meet
128 CAA section 202(a)(1).
or previously revised under this subsection . . . . the fleet average standard. Id. at 6746.
129 See also Coal. for Responsible Regulation, Inc. Any revised standard shall require a reduction of 137 S. Rep. No. 89–192, at 4 (1965). Likewise, the
v. EPA, 684 F.3d 102, 122 (D.C. Cir. 2012), aff’d in emissions from the standard that was previously report accompanying the House bill stated that ‘‘the
part, rev’d in part sub nom. Util. Air Regulation. applicable.’’), (i)(3)(B)(iii) (‘‘Nothing in this objective of achieving fully effective control of
Grp. v. EPA, 573 U.S. 302 (2014), and amended sub paragraph shall prohibit the Administrator from motor vehicle pollution will not be accomplished
nom. Coal. for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, exercising the Administrator’s authority under overnight. [T]he techniques now available provide
606 F. App’x 6 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (the purpose of subsection (a) to promulgate more stringent only a partial reduction in motor vehicle emissions.
section 202(a) is ‘‘utilizing emission standards to standards for light-duty vehicles and light-duty . . . For the future, better methods of control will clearly
prevent reasonably anticipated endangerment from at any other time thereafter in accordance with be needed; the committee expects that [the agency]
maturing into concrete harm’’). subsection (a).’’). will accelerate its efforts in this area.’’ H.R. Rep. No.
130 CAA section 202(a)(1); see also CAA section 135 See, e.g., 31 FR 5171, March 30, 1966 (‘‘No 89–899, at 4 (1965).
202(a)(4)(B) directing EPA to consider whether a crankcase emissions shall be discharged into the 138 See also NRDC, 655 F.2d at 328 (EPA is ‘‘to
technology ‘‘eliminates the emission of unregulated ambient atmosphere from any new motor vehicle or project future advances in pollution control
pollutants’’ in assessing its safety. new motor vehicle engine subject to this subpart.’’). capability. It was ‘expected to press for the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 12:03 Apr 20, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701
36Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22APR2.SGM 22APR2
For all these reasons, EPA’s areas will begin outrunning the to say, power sources and propulsion
consideration of electrified technologies technological limits of our capacity to systems beyond the existing internal
and technologies that prevent vehicle reduce pollution from the internal combustion engine and fuels available
tailpipe emissions in establishing the combustion engine.’’ 140 at the time of the statute’s enactment. As
standards is unambiguously permitted Since the earliest days of the CAA, the D.C. Circuit stated in 1975, ‘‘We may
by the Act; indeed, given the Act’s Congress has also emphasized that the also note that it is the belief of many
purpose to use technology to prevent air goal of section 202 is to address air experts—both in and out of the
pollution from motor vehicles, and the quality hazards from motor vehicles, not automobile industry—that air pollution
agency’s factual finding based on to simply reduce emissions from cannot be effectively checked until the
voluminous record evidence that BEV internal combustion engines to the industry finds a substitute for the
and FCEV technologies are the most extent feasible. In the Senate Report conventional automotive power plant—
effective and available technologies for accompanying the 1970 CAA the reciprocating internal combustion
doing so, the Agency’s consideration of Amendments, Congress made clear the (i.e., ‘piston’) engine. . . . It is clear
such technologies is compelled by the EPA ‘‘is expected to press for the from the legislative history that
statute. Because the statutory text in its development and application of Congress expected the Clean Air
context is plain, we could end our improved technology rather than be Amendments to force the industry to
interpretive inquiry here. However, we limited by that which exists’’ and broaden the scope of its research—to
have taken the additional step of identified several ‘‘unconventional’’ study new types of engines and new
reviewing the extensive statutory and technologies that could successfully control systems.’’ 144
legislative history regarding the kinds of meet air quality-based emissions targets Moreover, Congress believed that the
technology, including electric vehicle for motor vehicles.141 In the 1970 motor vehicle emissions program could
technology, that Congress expected EPA amendments, Congress further achieve enormous emissions reductions,
to consider in exercising its section demonstrated its recognition that not merely modest ones, through the
202(a) authority. Over six decades of developing new technology to ensure application and development of ever-
congressional enactments and that pollution control keeps pace with improving emissions control
statements provide overwhelming economic development is not merely a technologies. For example, the Clean
support for EPA’s consideration of matter of refining the ICE, but requires Air Act of 1970 required a 90 percent
electrified technologies and considering new types of motor vehicle reduction in emissions, which was to be
technologies that prevent vehicle propulsion.142 Congress provided EPA achieved with less lead time than this
tailpipe emissions in establishing the with authority to fund the development rule provides for its final standards.145
final standards. of ‘‘low emission alternatives to the Ultimately, although the industry was
As explained, section 202 does not present internal combustion engine’’ as able to meet the standard using ICE
specify or expect any particular type of well as a program to encourage Federal technologies, the standard drove
motor vehicle propulsion system to purchases of ‘‘low-emission vehicles.’’ development of entirely new engine and
remain prevalent, and it was clear to See CAA section 104(a)(2) (previously emission control technologies such as
Congress as early as the 1960s that ICE codified as CAA section 212).143 exhaust gas recirculation and catalytic
vehicles might be inadequate to achieve Congress also adopted section 202(e) converters, which in turn required a
the country’s air quality goals. In 1967, expressly to grant the Administrator switch to unleaded fuel and the
the Senate Committees on Commerce discretion under certain conditions development of massive new
and Public Works held five days of regarding the certification of vehicles infrastructure (not present at the time
hearings on ‘‘electric vehicles and other and engines based on ‘‘new power the standard was finalized) to support
alternatives to the internal combustion sources or propulsion system[s],’’ that is the distribution of this fuel.146
engine,’’ which Chairman Magnuson
opened by saying ‘‘The electric [car] 140 Richard Nixon, Special Message to the 144 Int’l Harvester Co. v. Ruckelshaus, 478 F.2d
will help alleviate air pollution and Congress on Environmental Quality (February 10, 615, 634–35 (D.C. Cir. 1975).
1970), https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ 145 See Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970,
urban congestion. The consumer will documents/special-message-the-congress- Public Law 91–604, at sec. 6, 84 Stat. 1676, 1690,
benefit from instant starting, reduced environmental-quality. December 31, 1970 (amending section 202 of the
maintenance, long life, and the economy 141 S. Rep. No. 91–1196, at 24–27 (1970).
CAA and directing EPA to issue regulations to
of electricity as a fuel. . . . The electric 142 In the lead up to enactment of the CAA of reduce carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons from LD
car does not mean a new way of life, but 1970, Senator Edmund Muskie, Chair of the vehicles and engines by 90 percent in MY 1975
Subcommittee on Environmental Pollution of the compared to MY 1970 and directing EPA to issue
rather it is a new technology to help Committee on Public Works (now the Committee on regulations to reduce NOX emissions from LD
solve the new problems of our age.’’ 139 Environment and Public Works), stated that ‘‘[t]he vehicles and engines by 90 percent in MY 1976
In a 1970 message to Congress seeking urgency of the problems required that the industry when compared with MY 1971).
a stronger CAA, President Nixon stated consider, not only the improvement of existing 146 Since the new vehicle technology required on
technology, but also alternatives to the internal all model year 1975–76 vehicles would be poisoned
he was initiating a program to develop combustion engine and new forms of by the lead in the existing gasoline, it required the
‘‘an unconventionally powered, transportation.’’ 116 Cong. Rec. 42382, December rollout of an entirely new fuel to the marketplace
virtually pollution free automobile’’ 18, 1970. with new refining technology needed to produce it.
because of the possibility that ‘‘the sheer 143 A Senate report on the Federal Low-Emission It was not possible for refiners to make the change
Vehicle Procurement Act of 1970, the standalone that quickly to all of the nation’s gasoline
number of cars in densely populated legislation that ultimately became the low-emission production, so this in turn required installation of
vehicle procurement provisions of the 1970 CAA, a new parallel fuel distribution infrastructure to
development and application of improved stated that the purpose of the bill was to direct distribute and new retail infrastructure to dispense
technology rather than be limited by that which Federal procurement to ‘‘stimulate the unleaded gasoline to the customers with MY1975
exists today.’ ;’’ To do otherwise would thwart development, production and distribution of motor and later vehicles while still supplying leaded
congressional intent and leave EPA ‘‘unable to set vehicle propulsion systems which emit few or no gasoline to the existing fleet. In order to ensure
pollutant levels until the necessary technology is pollutants’’ and explained that ‘‘the best long range availability of unleaded gasoline across the nation,
already available.’’). method of solving the vehicular air pollution all refueling stations with sales greater than 200,000
139 Electric Vehicles and Other Alternatives to the problem is to substitute for present propulsion gallons per year were required to dispense the new
Internal Combustion Engine: Joint Hearings before systems a new system which, during its life, unleaded gasoline. In 1974, less than 10 percent of
the Comm. On Commerce and the Subcomm. On produces few pollutants and performs as well or all gasoline sold was unleaded gasoline, but by
Air and Water Pollution of the Comm. On Pub. better than the present powerplant.’’ S. Rep. No. 1980 nearly 50 percent was unleaded. See generally
Works, 90th Cong. (1967). 91–745, at 1, 4 (March 20, 1970). Continued
37Sfmt 4700
Since that time, Congress has Congress recognized that certain on such ‘‘low greenhouse gas emitting
continued to emphasize the importance technologies, while extremely potent at vehicles,’’ but explicitly prohibited
of technology development to achieving achieving lower emissions, would be vehicles from so qualifying ‘‘if the
the goals of the CAA.147 In the 1990 difficult for the entire industry to adopt vehicle emits greenhouse gases at a
amendments, Congress determined that all at once. Rather, it would be more higher rate than such standards allow
evolving technologies could support appropriate for the industry to gradually for the manufacturer’s fleet average
further order of magnitude reductions in implement the standards over a longer grams per mile of carbon dioxide-
emissions. For example, the statutory period of time. This is directly equivalent emissions for that class of
Tier I light-duty standards required (on analogous to EPA’s assessment in this vehicle, taking into account any
top of the existing standards) a further final rule, which finds that industry will emissions allowances and adjustment
30 percent reduction in nonmethane gradually shift to more effective factors such standards provide.’’ 152
hydrocarbons, 60 percent reduction in emissions control technologies over a Congress thus explicitly contemplated
NOX, and 80 percent reduction in PM period of time. Generally speaking, the possibility of motor vehicle GHG
for diesel vehicles. The Tier 2 light-duty phase-ins, fleet averages, and ABT all standards with a fleet average form.153
standards in turn required passenger are means of addressing the question, The recently-enacted IRA154
vehicles to be 77 to 95 percent recognized by Congress in section 202, demonstrates Congress’s continued
cleaner.148 Congress instituted a clean of how to achieve emissions reductions resolve to drive down emissions from
fuel vehicles program to promote further to protect public health when it may be motor vehicles through the application
progress in emissions reductions, which difficult (or less preferable for of the entire range of available
also applied to motor vehicles as manufacturers) to implement a technologies, and specifically highlights
defined under section 216, see CAA stringency increase across the entire the importance of ZEV technologies.
section 241(1), and explicitly defined fleet simultaneously. The IRA ‘‘reinforces the longstanding
motor vehicles qualifying under the Similar to EPA’s ABT program, these authority and responsibility of [EPA] to
program as including vehicles running statutory phase-in provisions also regulate GHGs as air pollutants under
on an alternative fuel or ‘‘power source evaluated compliance with respect to a the Clean Air Act,’’ 155 and ‘‘the IRA
(including electricity),’’ CAA section manufacturers’ fleet of vehicles over the clearly and deliberately instructs EPA to
241(2).149 model year. More specifically, CAA use’’ this authority by ‘‘combin[ing]
Congress also directed EPA to phase- section 202(g)–(j) each required a economic incentives to reduce climate
in certain section 202(a) standards in specified percentage of a manufacturer’s pollution with regulatory drivers to spur
CAA section 202(g)–(j).150 In doing so, fleet to meet a specified standard for greater reductions under EPA’s CAA
each model year (e.g., 40 percent of a authorities.’’ 156 To assist with this, as
Richard G. Newell and Kristian Rogers, The U.S. manufacturer’s sales volume must meet described in section II and RIA Chapter
Experience with the Phasedown of Lead in certain standards by MY 1994). This 1, the IRA provides a number of
Gasoline, Resources for the Future (June 2003), made the level of a manufacturer’s
available at https://web.mit.edu/ckolstad/www/ economic incentives for HD ZEVs and
Newell.pdf.
production over a model year a core the infrastructure necessary to support
147 For example, in the lead up to the CAA element of the standard. In other words, them, and specifically affirms
Amendments of 1990, the House Committee on the form of the standard mandated by Congress’s previously articulated
Energy and Commerce reported that ‘‘[t]he Congress in these sections recognized statements that non-ICE technologies
Committee wants to encourage a broad range of that pre-production certification would
vehicles using electricity, improved gasoline,
natural gas, alcohols, clean diesel fuel, propane, be based on a projection of production 152 42 U.S.C. 13212(f)(3)(C) (emphasis added).
and other fuels.’’ H. Rep. No. 101–490, at 283 (May for the upcoming model year, with 153 42 U.S.C. 13212 does not specifically refer
17, 1990). actual compliance with the required back to CAA section 202(a). However, we think it
148 See 65 FR 28, February 10, 2000).
percentages not demonstrated until after is plain that Congress intended for EPA in
149 See also CAA section 246(f)(4) (under the implementing section 13212 to consider relevant
the end of the model year. Compliance CAA section 202(a) standards as well as standards
clean fuels program, directing the Administrator to
issue standards ‘‘for Ultra-Low Emission Vehicles was evaluated not only with respect to issued by the State of California. See 42 U.S.C.
(ULEV’s) and Zero Emissions Vehicles (ZEV’s)’’ and individual vehicles, but with respect to 13212(f)(3)(B) (‘‘In identifying vehicles under
to conform certain such standards ‘‘as closely as the fleet as a whole. EPA’s ABT subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall take into
possible to standards which are established by the account the most stringent standards for vehicle
provisions use this same approach, greenhouse gas emissions applicable to and
State of California for ULEV and ZEV vehicles in
the same class.’’). adopting a similar, flexible form, that enforceable against motor vehicle manufacturers for
150 CAA section 202(g) required a phase in for LD also makes the level of a manufacturer’s vehicles sold anywhere in the United States.’’). As
trucks up to 6,000 lbs GVWR and LD vehicles production a core element of the explained in the text, EPA has historically set fleet
beginning with MY 1994 for emissions of average standards under CAA section 202(a) for
standard and evaluates compliance at certain emissions from motor vehicles. Under
nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC), carbon
monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and
the fleet level, in addition to at the section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act, EPA may also
particular matter (PM). These standards phased in individual vehicle level. authorize the State of California to adopt and
over several years. Similarly, CAA section 202(h) In enacting the Energy Independence enforce its own motor vehicle emissions standards
required standards to be phased in beginning with subject the statutory criteria. California has also
and Security Act of 2007, Congress also adopted certain fleet average motor vehicle
MY 1995 for LD trucks of more than 6,000 lbs
GVWR for the same pollutants. CAA section 202(i)
recognized the possibility that fleet- emissions standards. No other Federal agency or
required EPA to study whether further emission average standards also recognized the State government has authority to establish
reductions should be required with respect to MYs possibility of fleet-average standards. emissions standards for new motor vehicles,
after January 1, 2003 for certain vehicles. CAA although certain States may choose to adopt
The statute barred Federal agencies from standards identical to California’s pursuant to CAA
section 202(j) required EPA to promulgate
regulations applicable to CO emissions from LD
acquiring ‘‘a light duty motor vehicle or section 177.
vehicles and LD trucks when operated under ‘‘cold medium duty passenger vehicle that is 154 Inflation Reduction Act, Public Law 117–169,
not a low greenhouse gas emitting 136 Stat. 1818, (2022), available at https://
start’’ conditions i.e., when the vehicle is operated

at 20 degrees Fahrenheit. Congress directed EPA to www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr5376/BILLS-
vehicle.’’ 151 It directed the 117hr5376enr.pdf.
phase in these regulations beginning with MY 1994
under Phase I, and to study the need for further
Administrator to promulgate guidance 155 168 Cong. Rec. E868–02 (daily ed. August 12,
reductions of CO and the maximum reductions 2022) (statement of Rep. Pallone, Chairman of the
achievable for MY 2001 and later LD vehicles and under this subchapter may provide for a phase-in House Energy and Commerce Committee).
LD trucks when operated in cold start conditions. of the standard.’’ CAA 202(b)(1)(C). 156 168 Cong. Rec. E879–02, at 880 (daily ed.
In addition, Congress specified that any ‘‘revision 151 42 U.S.C. 13212(f)(2)(A). August 26, 2022) (statement of Rep. Pallone).
38Sfmt 4700
will be a key component of achieving As previously discussed, beginning in credits for producing such vehicles. In
emissions reductions from the mobile 2011, EPA has set HD vehicle and this rule, EPA continues to consider
source sector, including the HD engine standards under section these technologies, and based on the
sector.157 The legislative history reflects 202(a)(1)–(2) for GHGs.159 updated record, finds that such
that ‘‘Congress recognizes EPA’s Manufacturers have responded to these technologies will be available at a
longstanding authority under CAA standards over the past decade by reasonable cost during the timeframe for
section 202 to adopt standards that rely continuing to develop and deploy a this rule, and therefore has included
on zero emission technologies, and wide range of technologies, including them in the technology packages to
Congress expects that future EPA more efficient engine designs, support the level of the standards under
regulations will increasingly rely on and transmissions, aerodynamics, tires, and the modeled potential compliance
incentivize zero-emission vehicles as air conditioning systems that contribute pathway.
appropriate.’’ 158 These developments to lower GHG emissions, as well as The analysis of the statutory text,
further confirm that the focus of CAA vehicles based on methods of purpose and history, as well as EPA’s
section 202 is on application of propulsion beyond diesel- and gasoline- history of implementing the statute,
innovative technologies to reduce fueled ICE vehicles, including ICE demonstrate that the agency must, or at
vehicular emissions, and not on the running on alternative fuels, as well as a minimum may, appropriately consider
means by which vehicles are powered. various levels of electrified vehicle available electrified technologies that
This statutory and legislative history, technologies from mild hybrids, to completely prevent emissions in
beginning with the 1960s and through strong hybrids, and up through battery determining the final standards. In this
electric vehicles and fuel-cell vehicles. rulemaking, EPA has done so. The
the recently enacted IRA, demonstrate
EPA has long established agency has made the necessary
Congress’s historical and contemporary
performance-based emission standards predictive judgments as to potential
commitment to reducing motor vehicle
that anticipate the use of new and technological developments that can
emissions through the application of
emerging technologies.160 In both the support the feasibility of the final
increasingly advanced technologies.
HD Phase 1161 and Phase 2 standards,162 standards and also as to the availability
Consistent with Congress’s intent and of supporting charging and refueling
as in this rule, EPA specifically
this legislative history, EPA’s infrastructure and critical minerals
considered the availability of electrified
rulemakings have taken the same necessary to support those technological
technologies, including ZEV
approach, basing standards on ever- developments, as applicable. In making
technologies. At the time of the HD
evolving technologies that have allowed these judgments, EPA has adhered to
Phase 1 and 2 rules, EPA determined
for enormous emissions reductions. As the long-standing approach established
based on the record before it that certain
required by the Act, EPA has by the D.C. Circuit, identifying a
technologies, namely more electrified
consistently considered the lead time technologies like PHEV and BEV as well reasonable sequence of future
and costs of control technologies in as FCEV, should not be part of the developments, noting potential
determining whether and how they technology packages to support the difficulties, and explaining how they
should be included in the technological feasibility of the standards given that may be obviated within the lead time
packages for the standards, along with they were not expected to be sufficiently afforded for compliance. EPA has also
other factors that affect the real-world available during the model years for consulted with other organizations with
adoption or impacts of the technologies those rules, giving consideration to lead relevant expertise such as the
as appropriate. Over time, EPA’s motor time and costs of compliance. Instead, Departments of Energy and
vehicle emission standards have been recognizing the possible future use of Transportation, including through
based on and stimulated the those technologies and their potential to careful consideration of their reports
development of a broad set of advanced achieve very large emissions reductions, and related analytic work reflected in
technologies—such as electronic fuel EPA incentivized their development the administrative record for this
injection systems, gasoline catalytic and deployment through advanced rulemaking.
convertors, diesel particulate filters, technology credit multipliers, which Although the standards are supported
diesel NOX reduction catalysts, gasoline give manufacturers additional ABT by the Administrator’s predictive
direct injection fuel systems, and judgments regarding pollution control
advanced transmission technologies— 159 76 FR 57106, September 15, 2011 (establishing technologies and the modeled potential
which have been the building blocks of first ever GHG standards for heavy-duty vehicles). compliance pathway, we emphasize that
heavy-duty vehicle designs and have 160 For example, in EPA’s 2016 HD Phase 2 the final standards are not a mandate for
yielded not only lower pollutant regulations, the Agency explained that the emission a specific type of technology. They do
standards were ‘‘predicated on use of both off-the- not legally or de facto require a
emissions, but improved vehicle shelf technologies and emerging technologies that
performance, reliability, and durability. are not yet in widespread use’’ and which we manufacturer to follow a specific
Many of these technologies did not exist projected would ‘‘require manufacturers to make technological pathway to comply.
when Congress first granted EPA’s extensive use of these technologies.’’ 81 FR 73478, Consistent with our historical practice,
October 25, 2016. See also, e.g., NRDC v. Thomas, EPA is finalizing performance-based
section 202(a) authority in 1965, but 805 F. 2d 410, 431 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (upholding EPA
these technologies nonetheless have rule where EPA identified trap oxidizers technology standards that provide compliance
been successfully adopted and reduced as the basis for compliance with numerical PM flexibility to manufacturers. While EPA
emissions by multiple orders of standard); Nat’l Petroleum and Refiners Ass’n v. projects that manufacturers may comply
EPA, 287 F. 3d 1130, 1136 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (NOX with the standards through the use of
magnitude. absorbers and catalyzed particulate filters as basis
for complying with numerical NOs and PM certain technologies, including a mix of
157 See Inflation Reduction Act, Public Law 117– standards.). advanced ICE vehicles, BEVs, and
169, at §§ 13204, 13403, 13404, 13501, 13502, 161 The Phase 1 GHG program set standards for FCEVs, manufacturers may select any
50142–50145, 50151–50153, 60101–60104, 70002 MY 2014 through 2018 and later. See 76 FR 57106 technology or mix of technologies that
136 Stat. 1818, (2022), available at https:// (September 15, 2011).
www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr5376/BILLS- 162 The Phase 2 GHG program set standards for
would enable them to meet the final
117hr5376enr.pdf. MY 2021 through 2027 and later for combination standards.
158 168 Cong. Rec. E879–02, at 880 (daily ed. tractors, vocational vehicles, HD pickup trucks and These choices are real and valuable to
August 26, 2022) (statement of Rep. Pallone). vans, and engines. manufacturers, as attested to by the
39Sfmt 4700
historical record. The real-world results these differences between EPA’s class as other heavy-duty vehicles for
of our prior rulemakings make clear that projections and actual manufacturer GHG regulation. These comments were
industry sometimes chooses to comply decisions, the industry as a whole was raised only by entities not regulated by
with our standards in ways that the not only able to comply with the this rule. This section also addresses a
Agency did not anticipate, presumably standards during the period of those comment regarding whether the 4-year
because it is more cost-effective for standards (2012–2016), but to generate lead time and 3-year stability
them to do so. In other words, while substantial additional credits for requirements in CAA section
EPA sets standards that are feasible overcompliance.166 202(a)(3)(C) apply to this rule. We
based on our modeling of potential In support of the final standards, EPA separately discuss our legal authority
compliance pathways, manufacturers has also performed additional modeling and rationale for battery durability and
may find what they consider to be better demonstrating that the standards can be warranty in section III.B of the
pathways to meet the standards and met in multiple ways. As discussed in preamble.
may opt to follow those pathways section II.F.4 of the final rule preamble, Major questions doctrine. While many
instead. while our modeled potential commenters recognized EPA’s legal
For example, in promulgating the compliance pathway includes a mix of authority to adopt the final GHG
2010 LD GHG rule, EPA modeled a ICE vehicles, BEV, and FCEV standards, certain commenters claimed
technology pathway for compliance technologies, we also evaluated that this rule asserts a novel and
with the MY 2016 standards. In additional examples of potential transformative exercise of regulatory
actuality, manufacturers diverged from technology packages and potential power that implicates the major
EPA’s projections across a wide range of compliance pathways that include only questions doctrine and exceeds EPA’s
technologies, instead choosing their additional vehicles with ICE across a legal authority. These arguments were
own technology pathways best suited range of electrification. These additional intertwined with arguments challenging
for their fleets.163 164 For example, EPA examples of technology pathways also EPA’s consideration of electrified
projected greater penetration of dual- support the feasibility of the final technologies. Some commenters
clutch transmissions than ultimately standards and show that the final claimed that the agency’s decision to do
occurred in the MY 2016 fleet; by standards may be met without so and the resulting GHG standards
contrast, use of 6-speed automatic producing additional ZEVs to comply would mandate a large increase in
transmissions was twice what EPA had with this rule.167 electric vehicles. According to these
predicted. Both transmission commenters, this in turn would cause
technologies represented substantial C. Response to Other Comments Raising indirect impacts, including relating to
improvements over the existing Legal Issues issues allegedly outside EPA’s
transmission technologies, with the In this section, EPA summarizes our traditional areas of expertise, such as to
manufacturers choosing which specific responses to certain other comments the petroleum refining industry,
technology was best suited for their relating to our legal authority. These electricity transmission and distribution
products and customers. Looking include three comments relating to our infrastructure, grid reliability, and US
specifically at electrification legal authority to consider certain national security.
technologies, start-stop systems were technologies discussed in section I.B: EPA does not agree that this rule
projected at 45 percent and were used whether this rule implicates the major implicates the major questions doctrine
in 10 percent of vehicles, while strong questions doctrine, whether EPA has as that doctrine has been elucidated by
hybrids were projected to be 6.5 percent authority for its Averaging, Banking, the Supreme Court in West Virginia v.
of the MY 2016 fleet and were actually and Trading (ABT) program, and EPA and related cases.168 The Court has
only 2 percent.165 Notwithstanding whether EPA erred in considering made clear that the doctrine is reserved
heavy-duty ZEVs as part of the same for extraordinary cases involving
163 See EPA Memorandum to the docket for this
assertions of highly consequential
rulemaking, ‘‘Comparison of EPA CO2 Reducing power beyond what Congress could
Technology Projections between 2010 Light-duty 2021, while actual sales exceeded 4 percent.
Vehicle Rulemaking and Actual Technology Compare 2012 Rule RIA, Table 3.5–22 with 2022 reasonably be understood to have
Production for Model Year 2016’’. Automotive Trends Report, Table 4.1. granted. This is not such an
166 See 2022 Automotive Trends Report, Fig. ES–
164 Similarly, in our 2001 final rule promulgating extraordinary case in which
heavy-duty nitrogen oxide (NOX) and particulate 8 (industry generated credits each year from 2012–
2015 and generated net credits for the years 2012–
congressional intent is unclear. Here,
matter (PM) standards, for example, we predicted
that manufacturers would comply with the new 2016). EPA is acting within the heartland of its
nitrogen oxide (NOX) standards through the 167 We stress, however, that these additional statutory authority and faithfully
addition of NOX absorbers or ‘‘traps.’’ 66 FR 5002, pathways are not necessary to justify this implementing Congress’s precise
5036 (January 18, 2001) (‘‘[T]he new NOX standard rulemaking; the statute requires EPA to demonstrate direction and intent.
is projected to require the addition of a highly that the standards can be met by the development
efficient NOX emission control system to diesel and application of technology, but it does not First, as we explain in section I.A–B
engines.’’). We stated that we were not basing the require the agency to identify multiple of the preamble, the statute provides
feasibility of the standards on selective catalytic technological solutions to the pollution control clear congressional authorization for
reduction (SCR) noting that SCR ‘‘was first problem before mandating more stringent EPA to consider updated data on
developed for stationary applications and is standards. That EPA has done so in this
currently being refined for the transient operation rulemaking, identifying a wide array of technologies pollution control technologies—
found in mobile applications.’’ Id. at 5053. capable of further reducing emissions, only including BEV and FCEV technologies—
However, industry’s approach to complying with highlights the feasibility of the standards and the and to determine the emission standards
the 2001 standards ultimately included the use of significant practical flexibilities manufacturers have accordingly. In section 202(a), Congress
SCR for diesel engines. We also projected that to attain compliance. We observe that some past
manufacturers would comply with the final PM standards have been premised on the application of made the major policy decision to
regulate air pollution from motor
standards through the addition of PM traps to diesel a single known technology at the time, such as the
engines; however, industry was able to meet the PM catalytic converter. See Int’l Harvester v. vehicles. Congress also prescribed that
standards without the use of PM traps or any other Ruckelshaus, 478 F.2d 615, 625 (D.C. Cir. 1973) (in EPA should accomplish this mandate
PM aftertreatment systems. setting standards for light duty vehicles, the Court
165 Although in 2010, EPA overestimated upheld EPA’s reliance on a single kind of through a technology-based approach,
technology penetrations for strong hybrids, in 2012, technology); see also 36 FR 12657 (1971)
we underestimated technology penetrations for (promulgating regulations for light duty vehicles 168 W. Virginia v. EPA, 142 S. Ct. 2587, 2605,
PEVs, projecting on 1 percent penetration by MY based on the catalytic converter). 2610 (2022).
40Sfmt 4700
and it plainly entrusted to the comprehensive analyses present in the based on the increasing availability of
Administrator’s judgment the evaluation administrative record. The courts have ZEV technologies. Looking to the future
of pollution control technologies that recognized the agency’s authority in this under the No Action scenario, as shown
are or will become available given the area.169 The agency’s analysis includes in RIA Table 4–8, we project that by
available lead-time and the consequent our assessment of available pollution 2032 ZEVs will account for between 4.7
determination of the emission control technologies; the design and percent (long-haul tractors) and 30.1
standards. In the final rule, the application of a quantitative model (HD percent (LHD vocational) of new HD
Administrator determined that a wide TRUCS) for assessing feasible rates of vehicles, depending on regulatory
variety of technologies exist to further technology adoption; the economic group. The final rule builds on these
control GHGs from HD vehicles— costs of developing, applying, and using industry trends. It will likely cause
including various ICE, hybrid, and ZEV pollution control technologies; the some heavy-duty manufacturers to
technologies such as BEVs and FCEVs— context for deploying such technologies adopt control technologies more rapidly
and that such technologies could be (e.g., the supply of raw materials and than they otherwise would, and this
applied at a reasonable cost to achieve components, and the availability of will result in significant pollution
significant reductions of GHG emissions supporting charging and refueling reductions and large public health and
that contribute to the ongoing climate infrastructure); the impacts of using welfare benefits. However, that is the
crisis. These subsidiary technical and pollution control technologies on entire point of section 202(a); that EPA
policy judgments were clearly within emissions, and consequent impacts on and the regulated industry may be
the Administrator’s delegated authority. public health, welfare, and the successful in achieving Congress’s
Second, the agency is not invoking a economy. While each rule necessarily purposes does not mean the agency has
novel authority. As described deals with different facts, such as exceeded its delegated authority.
previously in this section, EPA has been advances in new pollution control The regulatory burdens of this rule are
regulating emissions from motor technologies at the time of that rule, the also reasonable and not different in kind
vehicles based upon the availability of above factors are among the kinds of from prior exercises of EPA’s authority
feasible technologies to reduce vehicle considerations that EPA regularly under section 202. The regulated
emissions for over five decades. EPA evaluates in its motor vehicle rules, community of heavy-duty vehicle
has specifically regulated GHG including all our prior GHG rules. manufacturers in this rule was also
emissions from heavy-duty vehicles Third, this rule does not involve regulated by the earlier Phase 1 and
since 2011. Our rules, including this decisions of vast economic and political Phase 2 rules. In terms of costs of
rule and the HD Phase 1 and HD Phase importance exceeding EPA’s delegated compliance for regulated entities, EPA
2 rules, have consistently considered authority. To begin with, commenters anticipates that the rule will result in
available technology to reduce or err in characterizing this rule as an ‘‘EV aggregate cost savings for
prevent emissions of the relevant mandate.’’ That is false as a legal matter manufacturers, both in light of
pollutant, including technologies to and a practical matter. As a legal matter, technological advances in ZEV
reduce or completely prevent GHGs. this rule does not mandate that any technologies and the significant
Our consideration of ZEV technologies manufacturer use any specific incentives provided by the IRA. When
specifically has a long pedigree, technology to meet the standards in this we assess the fleet average costs of
beginning with the 1998 National Low rule. And as a practical matter, as compliance per HD vehicle during the
Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program. explained in section II.F.3 of the year in which the program is fully
Further, the administrative record here preamble and Chapter 1.4 of the RIA,
phased-in, we also find relatively lower
indicates the industry will likely choose manufacturers can adopt a wide array of
costs compared to Phase 2.170 These
to deploy an increasing number of technologies, including various ICE,
costs, moreover, are a small fraction of
vehicles with emissions control hybrid, electric, and fuel-cell
the costs of new HD vehicles and small
technologies such as BEV and FCEV, in technologies, to comply with this rule.
relative to what Congress itself accepted
light of new technological advances, the Specifically, EPA has identified several
in enacting section 202.171 The rule also
IRA and other government programs, as additional potential compliance
does not create any other excessive
well as this rule. That the industry will pathways, including pathways without
regulatory burdens on regulated entities;
continue to apply the latest technologies producing additional ZEVs to comply
for example, the rule does not require
to reduce pollution is no different than with this rule, that can be achieved in
how the industry has responded to the lead-time provided and at a any manufacturer to shut down, or to
EPA’s rules for half a century. The reasonable cost. Moreover, the adoption curtail or delay production.
agency’s factual findings and resulting of additional control technologies, While section 202 does not require
determination of the degree of including ZEVs, are complementary to EPA to consider consumer costs, the
stringency do not represent the exercise what the manufacturers are already agency recognizes that such costs, and
of a newfound power. Iterative increases doing regardless of this rule. As major consumer acceptance of new pollution
to the stringency of an existing program HD vehicle manufacturers told EPA in control technologies more broadly, can
based on new factual developments their comments, they have already made affect the application of such
hardly reflect an unprecedented considerable investments and shifted technologies. As such, EPA carefully
expansion of agency authority. future product plans to focus on ZEV evaluated these issues. For purchasers
Not only does this rule not invoke any technologies, including in response to of HD vehicles, we project a range of
new authority, it also falls well within the significant incentives for ZEVs that 170 We further discuss costs in preamble sections
EPA’s traditionally delegated powers. Congress provided in the IRA, and they IV and II.G, and we provide numerical comparisons
Through five decades of regulating support EPA establishing the standards of costs to the Phase 1 and 2 rules in section 2 of
vehicle emissions under the CAA, EPA the RTC.

has developed great expertise in the 169 See, e.g., Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497, 171 See Motor & Equip. Mfrs. Ass’n, Inc. v. EPA,
regulation of motor vehicle emissions, 532 (2007) (‘‘Because greenhouse gases fit well 627 F.2d 1095, 1118 (DC Cir. 1979) (‘‘Congress
within the Clean Air Act’s capacious definition of wanted to avoid undue economic disruption in the
including specifically GHG emissions ‘‘air pollutant,’’ we hold that EPA has the statutory automotive manufacturing industry and also sought
(see RIA Chapter 2.1). The agency’s authority to regulate the emission of such gases to avoid doubling or tripling the cost of motor
expertise is reflected in the from new motor vehicles.’’). vehicles to purchasers.’’).
41Sfmt 4700
upfront costs, including savings for evaluating the broader social impacts of tiny fraction of the size of the US
certain vehicle types. For all vehicle the agency’s regulations, for example on economy.176
types, we expect that the final standards public health and welfare, safety, EPA also carefully evaluated many
will be economically beneficial for energy, employment, and national indirect impacts outside of the net
purchasers because the lower operating security. Congress has recognized the benefits assessment, and we identified
costs during the operational life of the agency’s expertise in many of these no significant indirect harms and the
vehicle will offset the increase in areas,173 and EPA has regularly potential for indirect benefits. Based on
upfront vehicle technology costs within considered such indirect impacts in our our analysis, EPA projects that this
the usual period of first ownership of rulemaking will not cause significant
prior rules.
the vehicle. Furthermore, purchasers adverse impacts on electric grid
will benefit from annual operating cost EPA carefully analyzed indirect reliability or resource adequacy, that
savings for each year after the payback impacts and coordinated with numerous there will be sufficient battery
occurs. EPA also carefully designed the Federal and other partners with relevant production and critical minerals
final rule to avoid any other kinds of expertise, as described in sections ES.E available to support increasing ZEV
disruptions to purchasers. For example, and II of the preamble.174 The production including due to large
we recognize that HD vehicles represent consideration of many indirect impacts anticipated increases in domestic
a diverse array of vehicles and use is included in our assessment of the battery and critical mineral production,
cases, and we carefully tailored the rule’s costs and-benefits. We estimate that there will be sufficient lead-time to
standards for each regulatory annualized net benefits of $13 billion develop charging and hydrogen
subcategory to ensure that purchasers through the year 2055 when assessed at refueling infrastructure, and that the
could obtain the kinds of HD vehicles a 2 percent discount rate (2022$). This rule will have significant positive
they need. We also recognized that HD number is actually smaller than the net national security benefits. We also
vehicles require supporting benefits of the Phase 2 rule; it is also a identified significant initiatives by the
infrastructure (e.g., fueling and charging Federal government (such as the BIL
small fraction when compared to the
stations) to operate, and we accounted and IRA), State and local government,
size of the heavy-duty industry itself,
for sufficient lead-time for the and private firms, that complement
which is rapidly expanding.175 and a EPA’s final rule, including initiatives to
development of that infrastructure,
including private depot charging, public reduce the costs to purchase ZEVs;
173 See, e.g., CAA section 202(a)(1) (requiring EPA
charging, and hydrogen refueling support the development of domestic
Administrator to promulgate standards for
infrastructure. We also identified emissions from motor vehicles ‘‘which in his critical mineral, battery, and ZEV
numerous industry standards and safety judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution production; improve the electric grid;
protocols to ensure the safety of HD which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger and accelerate the establishment of
vehicles, including BEVs and FCEVs. public health or welfare’’), 202(a)(3)(A) (requiring charging and hydrogen refueling
the agency to promulgate certain motor vehicle
We acknowledge the rule may have emission standards ‘‘giving appropriate
infrastructure.
other impacts beyond those on regulated consideration to cost, energy, and safety factors These and other kinds of indirect
entities and their customers (for associated with the application of such impacts, moreover, are similar in kind
purposes of discussion here, referred to technology’’), 203(b)(1) (authorizing the to the impacts of past EPA motor
as ‘‘indirect impacts’’). But indirect Administrator to ‘‘exempt any new motor vehicle or vehicle rules. For example, this rule
new motor vehicle engine’’ from certain statutory
impacts are inherent in section 202 requirements ‘‘upon such terms and conditions as
may reduce the demand for gasoline and
rulemakings, including past he may find necessary . . . for reasons of national diesel for HD vehicles domestically and
rulemakings going back half a century. security’’), 312(a) (directing EPA to conduct a affect the petroleum refining industry,
As the DC Circuit has observed, in the ‘‘comprehensive analysis of the impact of this but that has been the case for all of
chapter on the public health, economy, and
specific context of EPA’s Clean Air Act EPA’s past GHG vehicle rules, which
environment of the United States’’).
Title II authority to regulate motor 174 For example, we consulted with the following also reduced demand for liquid fuels
vehicles, ‘‘[e]very effort at pollution Federal agencies and workgroups on their relevant through advances in ICE engine and
control exacts social costs. Congress areas of expertise: National Highway Traffic Safety vehicle technologies and corresponding
. . . made the decision to accept those Administration (NHTSA) at the Department of fuel efficiency. And while production of
Transportation (DOT), Department of Energy (DOE)
costs.’’ 172 In EPA’s long experience of including several national laboratories (Argonne
ZEVs does rely on a global supply
promulgating environmental National Laboratory (ANL), National Renewable chain, that is true for all motor vehicles,
regulations, the presence of indirect Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Oak Ridge National which rely extensively on imports, from
impacts does not reflect the Laboratory (ORNL)), United States Geological raw materials like aluminum to
extraordinary nature of agency action, Survey (USGS) at the Department of Interior (DOI), components like semiconductors;
Joint Office of Energy and Transportation (JOET),
but rather the ordinary state of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), addressing supply chain vulnerabilities
highly interconnected and global supply Department of Commerce (DOC), Department of is a key component of managing any
chain for motor vehicles. In any event, Defense (DOD), Department of State, Federal significant manufacturing operation in
EPA has considerable expertise in Consortium for Advanced Batteries (FCAB), and today’s global world. Further, while
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). We also
consulted with State and regional agencies, and we ZEVs may require supporting
172 Motor & Equip. Mfrs. Ass’n, Inc. v. EPA, 627
engaged extensively with a diverse set of infrastructure to operate, the same is
F.2d 1095, 1118 (DC Cir. 1979); see also id. (‘‘There
is no indication that Congress intended section
stakeholders, including vehicle manufacturers, true for ICE vehicles; indeed, supporting
labor unions, technology suppliers, dealers, infrastructure for ICE vehicles has
202’s cost of compliance consideration to embody
utilities, charging providers, environmental justice
social costs of the type petitioners advance,’’ and
organizations, environmental organizations, public
changed considerably over time in
holding that the statute does not require EPA to response to environmental regulation,
consider antitrust concerns); Coal. for Responsible health experts, tribal governments, and other
organizations.
Regul. Inc. v. EPA, 684 F.3d 102, 128 (DC Cir. 2012)
175 See Precedence Research, Heavy Duty Trucks 176 US GDP reached $25.46 trillion dollars in
(holding that the statute ‘‘does not mandate
consideration of costs to other entities not directly Market, https://www.precedenceresearch.com/ 2022. See Bureau of Economic Analysis, Gross
subject to the proposed standards’’); Massachusetts heavy-duty-trucks-market (‘‘The U.S. heavy duty Domestic Product, Fourth Quarter and Year 2022
v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497, 534 (2007) (impacts on trucks market size was valued at USD 52.23 billion (Second Estimate) (February 23, 2023), available at
‘‘foreign affairs’’ are not sufficient reason for EPA in 2023 and is expected to reach USD 105.29 billion https://www.bea.gov/news/2023/gross-domestic-
to decline making the endangerment finding under by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 8.10% from 2023 product-fourth-quarter-and-year-2022-third-
section 202(a)(1)). to 2032.’’). estimate-gdp-industry-and.
42Sfmt 4700
for example, with the elimination of Congress nonetheless enacted statutory establish fleet average standards.183
lead from gasoline, the provisioning of standards premised on this technology. Since then, the agency has routinely
diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) at truck stops Similarly, Congress recognized and used ABT in its motor vehicle programs,
to support selective catalytic reduction accepted the potential for employment including in all of our motor vehicle
(SCR) technologies, and the impacts caused by the Clean Air Act; it GHG rules, and repeatedly considered
introduction of low sulfur diesel fuel to then chose to address such impacts not the availability of ABT in determining
support diesel particulate filter (DPF) by limiting EPA’s authority to the level of stringency of fleet average
technologies. promulgate motor vehicle rules, but by standards. Manufacturers have come to
As with prior GHG vehicle rules, other measures, such as funding training rely on ABT in developing their
many indirect impacts are positive: 177 and employment services for affected compliance plans. The agency did not
foremost, the significant benefits of workers.180 reopen the ABT regulations in this
mitigating climate change, which poses In sum, the final rule is a continuation rulemaking, except to make certain
catastrophic risks for human health and of what the Administrator has been discrete changes discussed in section
the environment, water supply and doing for over fifty years: evaluate III.A of the preamble. Comments
quality, storm surge and flooding, updated data on pollution control challenging the agency’s authority for
electricity infrastructure, agricultural technologies and set emissions ABT regulations and use of fleet
disruptions and crop failures, human standards accordingly. The rule averaging are therefore beyond the
rights, international trade, and national maintains the fundamental regulatory scope of the rulemaking.
security. Other positive indirect impacts structure of the existing program and In any event, the CAA authorizes EPA
include reduced dependence on foreign iteratively strengthens the GHG to establish an ABT program and fleet
oil and increased energy security and standards from its predecessor Phase 2 average standards.184 Section 202(a)(1)
independence; increased regulatory rule. The consequences of the rule are directs EPA to set standards ‘‘applicable
certainty for domestic production of not different in kind, and in many key to the emission of any air pollutant from
pollution control technologies and their aspects, are smaller than those of Phase any class or classes of new motor
components (including ZEVs, batteries, 2. And while the rule is associated with vehicles’’ that cause or contribute to
fuels cells, battery components, and indirect impacts, EPA comprehensively harmful air pollution. The term ‘‘class
critical minerals) and for the assessed such impacts and found that or classes’’ refers expressly to groups of
development of electric charging and the final rule does not cause significant vehicles, indicating that EPA may set
hydrogen refueling infrastructure, with indirect harms as alleged by standards based on the emissions
attendant benefits for employment and commenters and on balance creates net performance of the class as a whole,
US global competitiveness in these benefits for society. We further discuss which is precisely what ABT enables.
sectors; and increased use of electric our response to the major questions Moreover, as we detail in section II.G.2
charging and potential for vehicle-to- doctrine comments in section 2.1 of the of the preamble, consideration of ABT
grid technologies that can benefit RTC. in standard setting relates directly to
electric grid reliability. ABT. Some commenters claim that the considerations of technical feasibility,
Moreover, many of the indirect ABT program, or fleetwide averaging, or cost, and lead time, the factors EPA is
impacts find close analogs in the both, exceed EPA’s statutory authority. required to consider under CAA section
impacts Congress itself recognized and As further explained in section III.A of 202(a)(2) in setting standards. For
accepted. For instance, in 1970 Congress the preamble, EPA has long employed decades, EPA has found that
debated whether to adopt standards that fleetwide averaging and ABT considering ABT, particularly the
would depend heavily on platinum- compliance provisions. In upholding averaging provisions, is consistent with
based catalysts in light of a world-wide the first HD final rule that included an the statute and affords regulated entities
shortage of platinum,178 and in the averaging provision, the D.C. Circuit more flexibility in phasing in
leadup to the 1977 and 1990 rejected a petitioner’s challenge to technologies in a way that is
Amendments, Congress recognized that EPA’s statutory authority for averaging. economically efficient, promotes the
increasing use of three-way catalysts to NRDC v. Thomas, 805 F.2d 410, 425 goals of the Act, supports vehicle
control motor vehicle pollution risked (D.C. Cir. 1986).181 In the subsequent redesign cycles, and responds to market
relying on foreign sources of the critical 1990 amendments, Congress, noting fluctuations, allowing for successful
mineral rhodium.179 In each case, NRDC v. Thomas and EPA’s ABT deployment of new technologies and
program, ‘‘chose not to amend the Clean achieving emissions reductions at lower
177 As noted, our use of ‘‘indirect impacts’’ in this
Air Act to specifically prohibit cost and with less lead time.185
section refers to impacts beyond those on regulated ABT and fleet average standards are
entities. averaging, banking and trading
178 See, e.g., Environmental Policy Division of the authority.’’ 182 ‘‘The intention was to also consistent with other provisions in
Congressional Research Service Volume 1, 93d retain the status quo,’’ i.e., EPA’s Title II, including those related to
Cong., 2d Sess., A Legislative History of the Clean existing authority to allow ABT and compliance and enforcement in CAA
Air Amendments of 1970 at 307 (Comm. Print 1974)
(Senator Griffin opposed the vehicle emissions 183 136 Cong. Rec. 35,367, 1990 WL 1222469, at
standards because the vehicle that had been shown R–98–008, July 1998, p. E–13 (describing concerns *1; see also 136 Cong. Rec. 36,713, 1990 WL
capable of meeting the standards used platinum- about potential shortages in palladium that could 1222468 at *1.
based catalytic converters and ‘‘[a]side from the result from the Tier 2 standards). 184 As we explain in section II.G of this preamble,
180 Public Law 101–549, at sec. 1101, amending
very high cost of the platinum in the exhaust EPA relied on averaging, but not banking or trading,
system, the fact is that there is now a worldwide the Job Training Partnership Act, 29 U.S.C. 1501 et in supporting the feasibility of the standards.
shortage of platinum and it is totally impractical to seq. (since repealed). 185 Beyond the statute’s general provisions
contemplate use in production line cars of large 181 The court explained that ‘‘[l]acking any clear
regarding cost and lead time, Congress has also
quantities of this precious material. . . .’’). congressional prohibition of averaging, the EPA’s
repeatedly endorsed the specific concept of phase-

179 See, e.g., 136 Cong. Rec. 5102–04 (1990) and argument that averaging will allow manufacturers in of advanced emissions control technologies
123 Cong. Rec. 18173–74 (1977) (In debate over more flexibility in cost allocation while ensuring throughout section 202, which is analogous to ABT
both the 1977 and 1990 amendments to the Clean that a manufacturer’s overall fleet still meets the in that it considers a manufacturer’s production
Air Act, some members of Congress supported emissions reduction standards makes sense.’’ NRDC volume and the performance of vehicles across the
relaxing NOX controls from motor vehicles due to v. Thomas, 805 F.2d at 425. fleet in determining compliance. See discussion in
concerns over foreign control of rhodium supplies); 182 136 Cong. Rec. 35,367, 1990 WL 1222469, at section I.A of this preamble citing provisions
see also EPA, Tier 2 Report to Congress, EPA420– *1. including section 202(g)–(j), 202(b)(1)(C).
43Sfmt 4700
sections 203, 206, and 207. Commenters classes, Congress explicitly the standards to vehicles whether they
who alleged inconsistency with the contemplated functional categories: ‘‘the are designed as complete systems or
compliance and enforcement provisions Administrator may base such classes or incorporate devices to prevent or
fundamentally misapprehend the nature categories on gross vehicle weight, control pollution. Thus, Congress
of EPA’s HD GHG program and its ABT horsepower, type of fuel used, or other understood that the standards may be
regulations, where compliance and appropriate factors.’’ 188 It is premised on and lead to technologies
enforcement do in fact apply to indisputable that ZEVs are ‘‘new motor that prevent pollution in the first place.
individual vehicles consistent with the vehicles’’ as defined by the statute and It would be perverse to conclude that in
statute. It is true that ABT allows that they fall into the weight-based a scheme intended to control the
manufacturers to meet emissions ‘‘classes’’ that EPA established with emissions of dangerous pollution,
standards by offsetting emissions credits Congress’s explicit support. Congress would have prohibited EPA
and debits for individual vehicles. In making the GHG Endangerment from premising its standards on controls
However, individual vehicles must also Finding in 2009, EPA defined the that completely prevent pollution, while
continue to themselves comply with ‘‘classes’’ of motor vehicles and engines also permitting the agency to premise
their own emissions limit, known as the as ‘‘Passenger cars, light-duty trucks, them on a technology that reduces 99
Family Emission Limit (FEL).186 Both motorcycles, buses, and medium and percent of pollution. Such a nonsensical
the emission standard and FEL are heavy-duty trucks.’’ 189 Heavy-duty reading of the statute would mean that
specified in each vehicle’s individual ZEVs fall within the class of heavy-duty the availability of technology that can
certificate of conformity, and apply both trucks. EPA did not reopen the 2009 reduce 99 percent of pollution could
at certification and throughout that GHG Endangerment Finding in this serve as the basis for highly protective
vehicle’s useful life. As appropriate, rulemaking, and therefore comments on standards, while the availability of a
EPA can suspend, revoke, or void whether ZEVs are part of the ‘‘class’’ technology that completely prevents the
certificates for individual vehicles. subject to GHG regulation are beyond pollution could not be relied on to set
Manufacturers’ warranties apply to the scope of this rulemaking. emission standards at all. Such a
individual vehicles. EPA and Some commenters contend that ZEVs reading would also create a perverse
manufacturers perform testing on fall outside of EPA’s regulatory reach safe harbor allowing polluting vehicles
individual vehicles, and recalls can be under this provision because they do to be perpetually produced, resulting in
implemented based on evidence of non- not cause, or contribute to, air pollution harmful emissions and adverse impacts
conformance by a substantial number of which endangers human health and on public health, even where available
individual vehicles within the class. We welfare. That misreads the statutory technology permits the complete
further discuss our response to this text. As we explained previously in prevention of such emissions and
comment, including detailed exposition regard to ABT, section 202(a)(1)’s focus adverse impacts at a reasonable cost.
of each of the relevant statutory on regulating emissions from ‘‘class or That result cannot be squared with
provisions, in RTC 10.2. classes’’ indicates that Congress was section 202(a)(1)’s purpose to reduce
ZEVs as part of the regulated class. concerned with the air pollution emissions that ‘‘cause or contribute to
We now address related comments that generated by a class of vehicles, as air pollution which may reasonably be
EPA cannot consider averaging, opposed to from individual vehicles. anticipated to endanger public health or
especially of ZEVs, in supporting the Accordingly, Congress authorized EPA welfare,’’ 190 or with the statutory
feasibility of the standards. Some to regulate classes of vehicles, and EPA directive to not only ‘‘control’’ but also
commenters allege that because ZEVs, has concluded that the class of heavy- ‘‘prevent’’ pollution.
in theory, do not emit GHGs, they duty vehicles, as a whole causes or Commenters’ suggestion that EPA
cannot be part of the ‘‘class’’ of vehicles contributes to dangerous pollution. As define the class to exclude ZEVs would
regulated by EPA under section noted, the class of heavy-duty vehicles also be unreasonable and unworkable.
202(a)(1), and therefore EPA should not includes ZEVs, along with ICE and Ex ante, EPA does not know which
establish standards that consider hybrid vehicles. EPA has consistently vehicles a manufacturer may produce
manufacturers’ ability to produce them. viewed heavy-duty motor vehicles as a and, without technological controls
We disagree with these commenters’ class of motor vehicles for regulatory including add-on devices and complete
reading of the statute, and moreover, as purposes, including in the HD GHG systems, all of the vehicles have the
we explain further below, their Phase 1 and Phase 2 rules. As discussed potential to emit dangerous
underlying factual premise—that ZEVs in section I.A of the preamble, EPA has pollution.191 Therefore, EPA establishes
do not emit GHGs—is incorrect. reasonably further subcategorized standards for the entire class of vehicles,
As discussed in section I.A of the vehicles within the class based on based upon its consideration of all
preamble, Congress required EPA to weight and functionality to recognize available technologies. It is only after
prescribe standards applicable to the real-world variations in emission the manufacturers have applied those
emission of any air pollutant from any control technology, ensure consumer technologies to vehicles in actual
class or classes of new motor vehicles, access to a wide variety of vehicles to production that the pollution is
which in his judgment cause, or meet their mobility needs, and secure prevented or controlled. To put it
contribute to, air pollution which continued emissions reductions for all differently, even hypothetically
endangers public health and welfare. vehicle types. assuming EPA could not set standards
Congress defined ‘‘motor vehicles’’ by These commenters also
their function: ‘‘any self-propelled misunderstand the broader statutory 190 See also Coal. for Responsible Regul., 684 F.
scheme. Congress directed EPA to apply 3d at 122 (explaining that the statutory purpose is
vehicle designed for transporting to ‘‘prevent reasonably anticipated endangerment
persons or property on a street or 188 CAA section 202(a)(3)(A)(ii). This section

from maturing into concrete harm’’).
191 As noted, manufacturers in some cases choose
highway.’’ 187 Likewise, with regard to applies to standards established under section to offer different models of the same vehicle with
202(a)(3), not to standards otherwise established different levels of electrification. And it is the
186 See 40 CFR 1037.801 (adoption of FEL); under section 202(a)(1). But it nonetheless provides manufacturer who decides whether a given vehicle
1037.105, 1037.106 (FEL appears on certificate of guidance on what kinds of classifications and will be manufactured to produce no emissions, low
compliance). See generally RTC 10.2.1.d. categorizations Congress thought were appropriate. emissions, or higher aggregate emissions controlled
187 CAA section 216(2). 189 74 FR 66496, 66537, December 15, 2009. by add-on technology.
44Sfmt 4700
for vehicles that manufacturers intend standards for heavy-duty vehicles for included additional example potential
to build as electric vehicles—a the listed pollutants in section compliance pathways that meet and
proposition which we do not agree 202(a)(3)(A) or to revisions of such support the feasibility of the final
with—EPA could still regulate vehicles standards under 202(a)(3)(B). Section standards including without producing
manufacturers intend not to build as 202(a)(3) applies only to standards for additional ZEVs to comply with this
electric vehicles and that would emit enumerated pollutants, none of which rule. In developing the modeled
dangerous pollution in the absence of are GHGs, namely, ‘‘hydrocarbons, potential compliance pathway on which
EPA regulation.192 When regulating carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, the feasibility of the final standards is
those vehicles, Congress explicitly and particulate matter.’’ Because this supported, EPA has considered the key
authorized EPA to premise its standards rule does not establish standards for any issues associated with growth in
for those vehicles on a ‘‘complete pollutant listed in section 202(a)(3)(A), penetration of zero-emission vehicles,
system’’ technology that prevents that section clearly does not apply. including charging and refueling
pollution entirely, like ZEV Neither does section 202(a)(3)(B), which infrastructure and critical mineral
technologies. is limited to revisions of heavy-duty availability. In this section, we describe
Finally, the commenters’ argument is standards ‘‘promulgated under, or our assessment of the appropriateness
factually flawed. All vehicles, including before the date of, the enactment of the and feasibility of these final standards
ZEVs,193 do in fact produce vehicle Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.’’ and support that assessment with a
emissions. For example, all ZEVs EPA’s heavy-duty GHG standards, potential technology pathway for
produce emissions from brake and tire however, have consistently been achieving each of those standards
wear, as discussed in RIA Chapter 4. promulgated under sections 202(a)(1)– through increased utilization of ZEV
Furthermore, ZEVs have air (2), statutory provisions which were not and vehicles with ICE technologies, as
conditioning units, which may produce enacted or revised by the 1990 well as additional technology pathways
GHG emissions from leakages, and these amendments. Nor does the final rule to meet the final standards using
emissions are subject to regulation revise any standard promulgated technologies for vehicles with ICE. In
under the Act. Thus, even under the ‘‘before’’ the enactment of the 1990 this section, we also present an
commenter’s reading of the statute, amendments. Consequently, the four alternative set of standards (‘‘the
ZEVs would be part of the class for GHG year lead time and three year stability alternative’’) that we additionally
regulation.194 We further address this requirements of section 202(a)(3)(C) are developed and analyzed but are not
issue in RTC 10.2.1.f, where we also inapplicable. We further address this adopting, that reflects an even more
discuss the related contention that ZEVs issue in RTC 2.3.3 and 2.11. gradual phase-in and lower final
cannot be part of the same class because II. Final HD Phase 3 GHG Emission stringency level than the final
electric and ICE powertrains are Standards standards. Furthermore, we also
fundamentally different. developed but did not analyze
Under our CAA section 202(a)(1) and
202(a)(3)(B) and 202(a)(3)(C) lead alternative standards reflecting levels of
(2) authority, we are finalizing new
time and stability. Finally, we address stringency more stringent than the final
Phase 3 GHG standards for MYs 2027
the comments regarding the standards that would be achieved from
through 2032 and later HD vehicles. In
applicability of the 4-year lead time and extrapolating the California ACT rule to
this section II, we describe our
3-year stability provisions in CAA the national level, that we are also not
assessment that the new Phase 3 GHG
section 202(a)(3)(C). As we noted in the standards are appropriate and feasible adopting.
HD Phase 1 final rule, the provision is considering lead time, costs, and other In the beginning of this section, we
not applicable here.195 Section relevant factors. These final Phase 3 first describe the public health and
202(a)(3)(C) only applies to emission standards include (1) revised GHG welfare need for GHG emission
standards for many MY 2027 HD reductions (section II.A). In section II.B,
192 In other words, the additional ZEVs EPA
vehicles, and (2) new GHG standards we provide an overview of the
projects in the modeled potential compliance
pathway exist in the baseline case as pollutant- starting in MYs 2028 through 2032. Our comments the Agency received on the
emitting vehicles with ICE. We further note that it development of the final standards NPRM regarding the proposed Phase 3
would be odd for EPA to have authority to regulate considered all of the substantive GHG emission standards, an overview of
a given class of motor vehicles—in this case heavy- the final standards, and updates to the
duty motor vehicles—so long as those vehicles emit comments received, including those that
air pollution at the tailpipe, but to lose its authority advocated stringency levels ranging analyses that support these standards. In
to regulate those very same vehicles should they from less stringent than the lower section II.C, we provide a brief overview
install emission control devices to limit such stringency alternative presented in the of the existing CO2 emission standards
pollution or be designed to prevent the endangering that we promulgated in HD GHG Phase
pollution in the first place.
NPRM to values that would be
193 As discussed in the Executive Summary, we comparable with stringency levels in the 2. Section II.D contains our technology
use the term ZEVs to refer to vehicles that result California Advanced Clean Truck (ACT) assessment for the projected potential
in zero tailpipe emissions, such as battery electric rule such as stringency levels compliance pathway that supports the
vehicles and fuel cell electric vehicles. While comparable to 50- to 60-percent feasibility of the standards and section
vehicles equipped with H2–ICE engines emit zero
engine-out CO2 emissions, H2–ICE vehicles emit utilization of ZEV technologies range II.E includes our assessment of
criteria pollutants and are therefore not included in and beyond. technology costs, EVSE costs, operating
our references to ZEVs. The final standards’ feasibility is costs, and payback for that modeled
194 Moreover, as already explained, manufacturers
supported through our analysis potential compliance pathway. Section
do not have to produce ZEVs to comply with the reflecting one modeled potential II.F sets out the final standards and the
final standards. EPA’s modeling of the alternate
compliance pathway in section II.F.3 demonstrates compliance pathway, but the final analysis demonstrating their feasibility,
that manufacturers could meet the standard using standards do not mandate the use of any including additional example potential
solely advanced technologies with ICEs. specific technology. EPA anticipates compliance pathways that meet and
195 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel
that a compliant fleet under the final support the feasibility of the final
Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty
Engines and Vehicles EPA Response to Comments
standards will include a diverse range of including without producing additional
Document for Joint Rulemaking, at 5–19 (‘‘Phase 1 technologies, including ZEV and ICE ZEVs to comply with this rule. Section
RTC’’). vehicle technologies, and we have also II.G discusses the appropriateness of the
45Sfmt 4700
final emission standards under the A. Public Health and Welfare Need for and future generations’’ (74 FR 66523).
Clean Air Act. Section II.H presents the GHG Emission Reductions The 2009 Endangerment Finding,
alternative set of standards to the final The transportation sector is the largest together with the extensive scientific
standards that we considered but are not U.S. source of GHG emissions, and technical evidence in the
adopting. Finally, section II.I representing 29 percent of total GHG supporting record, documented that
summarizes our consideration of small emissions and, within the transportation climate change caused by human
businesses. sector, heavy-duty vehicles are the emissions of GHGs (including HFCs)
second largest contributor at 25 threatens the public health of the U.S.
The HD Phase 3 GHG standards are population. It explained that by raising
CO2 vehicle exhaust standards; other percent.197 GHG emissions have
significant impacts on public health and average temperatures, climate change
GHG standards under the existing increases the likelihood of heat waves,
welfare as set forth in EPA’s 2009
regulations for HD engines and vehicles which are associated with increased
Endangerment and Cause or Contribute
remain applicable. As we explained in deaths and illnesses (74 FR 66497).
Findings under CAA section 202(a) and
the proposal, we did not reopen and are as evidenced by the well-documented While climate change also increases the
not amending the other GHG standards, scientific record.198 likelihood of reductions in cold-related
including nitrous oxide (N2O), methane Elevated concentrations of GHGs have mortality, evidence indicates that the
(CH4), and CO2 emission standards that been warming the planet, leading to increases in heat mortality will be larger
apply to heavy-duty engines and the changes in the Earth’s climate including than the decreases in cold mortality in
HFC emission standards that apply to changes in the frequency and intensity the United States (74 FR 66525). The
heavy-duty vehicles, or the general of heat waves, precipitation, and 2009 Endangerment Finding further
compliance structure of existing 40 CFR extreme weather events; rising seas; and explained that compared with a future
part 1037 except for some revisions retreating snow and ice. The changes without climate change, climate change
described in sections II and III.196 As taking place in the atmosphere as a is expected to increase tropospheric
also explained in the proposal, we did result of the well-documented buildup ozone pollution over broad areas of the
not reopen and are continuing the of GHGs due to human activities are United States., including in the largest
altering the climate at a pace and in a metropolitan areas with the worst
existing approach taken in both HD
way that threatens human health, tropospheric ozone problems, and
GHG Phase 1 and Phase 2, that
society, and the natural environment. thereby increase the risk of adverse
compliance with the vehicle exhaust effects on public health (74 FR 66525).
CO2 emission standards is based on CO2 While EPA is not making any new
scientific or factual findings with regard Climate change is also expected to cause
emissions from the vehicle. Indeed, all more intense hurricanes and more
of our vehicle emission standards are to the well-documented impact of GHG
emissions on public health and welfare frequent and intense storms of other
based on vehicle emissions. See 76 FR types and heavy precipitation, with
in support of this rule, EPA is providing
57123 (September 15, 2011); see also 77 impacts on other areas of public health,
some scientific background on climate
FR 51705 (August 24, 2012), 77 FR such as the potential for increased
change to offer additional context for
51500 (August 27, 2012), and 81 FR this rulemaking and to increase the deaths, injuries, infectious and
75300 (October 25, 2016). We respond public’s understanding of the waterborne diseases, and stress-related
to the comments we received on life environmental impacts of GHGs. disorders (74 FR 66525). Children, the
cycle emissions in relation to standard Extensive additional information on elderly, and the poor are among the
setting in RTC section 17.1. climate change is available in the most vulnerable to these climate-related
Additionally, as proposed in the scientific assessments and the EPA health effects (74 FR 66498).
combined light-duty and medium-duty documents that are briefly described in The 2009 Endangerment Finding also
rulemaking, in a separate rulemaking we this section, as well as in the technical documented, together with the
intend to finalize more stringent and scientific information supporting extensive scientific and technical
evidence in the supporting record, that
standards for complete and incomplete them. One of those documents is EPA’s
climate change touches nearly every
vehicles at or below 14,000 pounds 2009 Endangerment and Cause or
aspect of public welfare 199 in the
GVWR that are certified under 40 CFR Contribute Findings for Greenhouse
United States., including the following:
part 86, subpart S. This Phase 3 final Gases Under section 202(a) of the CAA
changes in water supply and quality due
rule does not alter manufacturers of (74 FR 66496, December 15, 2009). In
to changes in drought and extreme
incomplete vehicles at or below 14,000 the 2009 Endangerment Finding, the
rainfall events; increased risk of storm
pounds GVWR continuing to have the Administrator found under section
surge and flooding in coastal areas and
option of either meeting the greenhouse 202(a) of the CAA that elevated
land loss due to inundation; increases in
gas standards under 40 CFR parts 1036 atmospheric concentrations of six key
peak electricity demand and risks to
and 1037, or instead meeting the well-mixed GHGs—CO2, methane (CH4), electricity infrastructure; and the
greenhouse gas standards with chassis- nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons potential for significant agricultural
based measurement procedures under (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and disruptions and crop failures (though
40 CFR part 86, subpart S. sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)—‘‘may offset to a lesser extent by carbon
reasonably be anticipated to endanger fertilization). These impacts are also
196 See the HD GHG Phase 2 rule (81 FR 73478,
the public health and welfare of current
October 25, 2016), the Heavy-Duty Engine and 199 The CAA states in section 302(h) that ‘‘[a]ll
Vehicle Technical Amendment rule (86 FR 34308, language referring to effects on welfare includes,
June 29, 2021), and the HD2027 rule (88 FR 4296, Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2021 (EPA–430–R–23– but is not limited to, effects on soils, water, crops,
002, published April 2023).
January 24, 2023). In this rulemaking, EPA did not vegetation, manmade materials, animals, wildlife,
reopen any portion of our heavy-duty compliance 198 See 74 FR 66496, December 15, 2009; see also
weather, visibility, and climate, damage to and
provisions, flexibilities, and testing procedures, EPA’s Denial of Petitions Relating to the deterioration of property, and hazards to
including those in 40 CFR parts 1037, 1036, and Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for transportation, as well as effects on economic
1065, other than those specifically identified in our Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the values and on personal comfort and well-being,
proposal. For example, while EPA is revising Clean Air Act, available at https://www.epa.gov/ whether caused by transformation, conversion, or
discrete elements of the HD ABT program, EPA did system/files/documents/2022-04/decision_ combination with other air pollutants.’’ 42 U.S.C.
not reopen the general availability of ABT. document.pdf. 7602(h).
46Sfmt 4700
global and may exacerbate problems Climate Assessment (NCA4) found that section 202(a) requires EPA to issue
outside the United States that raise it is very likely (greater than 90 percent standards applicable to emissions of
humanitarian, trade, and national likelihood) that by mid-century, the those pollutants from new motor
security issues for the U.S. (74 FR Arctic Ocean will be almost entirely free vehicles. See Coalition for Responsible
66530). of sea ice by late summer for the first Regulation, 684 F.3d at 116–125, 126–
The most recent information time in about 2 million years.203 Coral 27; Massachusetts, 549 U.S. at 533. See
demonstrates that the climate is reefs will be at risk for almost complete also Coalition for Responsible
continuing to change in response to the (99 percent) losses with 1 °C (1.8 °F) of Regulation, 684 F.3d at 127–29
human-induced buildup of GHGs in the additional warming from today (2 °C or (upholding EPA’s light-duty GHG
atmosphere. Recent scientific 3.6 °F since preindustrial). At this emission standards for MYs 2012–2016
assessments show that atmospheric temperature, between 8 and 18 percent in their entirety).206 Since the 2016
concentrations of GHGs have risen to a of animal, plant, and insect species Endangerment Finding, the climate has
level that has no precedent in human could lose over half of the geographic continued to change, with new
history and that they continue to climb, area with suitable climate for their observational records being set for
primarily because of both historic and survival, and 7 to 10 percent of several climate indicators such as global
current anthropogenic emissions, and rangeland livestock would be projected average surface temperatures, GHG
that these elevated concentrations to be lost. The IPCC similarly found that concentrations, and sea level rise.
endanger our health by affecting our climate change has caused substantial Additionally, major scientific
food and water sources, the air we damages and increasingly irreversible assessments continue to be released that
breathe, the weather we experience, and losses in terrestrial, freshwater, and further advance our understanding of
our interactions with the natural and coastal and open ocean marine the climate system and the impacts that
built environments. ecosystems.204 GHGs have on public health and welfare
Global average temperature has In 2016, the Administrator issued a both for current and future generations.
increased by about 1.1 degrees Celsius similar finding for GHG emissions from These updated observations and
(°C) (2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (°F)) in the aircraft under section 231(a)(2)(A) of the projections document the rapid rate of
2011–2020 decade relative to 1850– CAA.205 In the 2016 Endangerment current and future climate change both
1900. The IPCC determined with Finding, the Administrator found that globally and in the United
medium confidence that this past the body of scientific evidence amassed States.207 208 209 210
decade was warmer than any multi- in the record for the 2009 Endangerment
century period in at least the past Finding compellingly supported a B. Summary of Comments and the HD
100,000 years. Global average sea level similar endangerment finding under GHG Phase 3 Standards and Updates
has risen by about 8 inches (about 21 CAA section 231(a)(2)(A), and also From Proposal
centimeters (cm)) from 1901 to 2018, found that the science assessments EPA proposed this third phase of
with the rate from 2006 to 2018 (0.15 released between the 2009 and 2016 GHG standards for heavy-duty vehicles
inches/year or 3.7 millimeters (mm)/ Findings ‘‘strengthen and further
year) almost twice the rate over the 1971 support the judgment that GHGs in the 206 See also EPA’s Denial of Petitions Relating to
to 2006 period, and three times the rate the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute
atmosphere may reasonably be Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section
of the 1901 to 2018 period. The rate of anticipated to endanger the public 202(a) of the Clean Air Act (April 2022), available
sea level rise during the 20th Century health and welfare of current and future at https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/
was higher than in any other century in generations’’ (81 FR 54424). Pursuant to 2022-04/decision_document.pdf.
207 USGCRP, 2018: Impacts, Risks, and
at least the last 2,800 years. The CO2 the 2009 Endangerment Finding, CAA
Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National
being absorbed by the ocean has Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R.,
resulted in changes in ocean chemistry Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M.
due to acidification of a magnitude not on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S.
A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Pe´an, S. Berger, N. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC,
seen in 65 million years 200 putting Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, USA, 1515 pp. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018. https://
many marine species—particularly K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. nca2018.globalchange.gov.
calcifying species—at risk. Human- Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu and B. 208 Roy, J., P. Tschakert, H. Waisman, S. Abdul
induced climate change has led to Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. Halim, P. Antwi-Agyei, P. Dasgupta, B. Hayward,
203 USGCRP (2018): Impacts, Risks, and
heatwaves and heavy precipitation M. Kanninen, D. Liverman, C. Okereke, P.F. Pinho,
Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National K. Riahi, and A.G. Suarez Rodriguez, 2018:
becoming more frequent and more Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., Sustainable Development, Poverty Eradication and
intense, along with increases in C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. Reducing Inequalities. In: Global Warming of 1.5 °C.
agricultural and ecological droughts 201 Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global
in many regions.202 The 4th National Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and
USA, 1515 pp. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018. related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in
204 IPCC (2022): Summary for Policymakers [H.-O. the context of strengthening the global response to
200 IPCC (2018): Global Warming of 1.5 °C. An
Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, E.S. Poloczanska, K. the threat of climate change, sustainable
IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global Mintenbeck, M. Tignor, A. Alegrı́a, M. Craig, S. development, and efforts to eradicate poverty
warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem (eds.)]. [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D.
related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in In: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W.
the context of strengthening the global response to Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors,
the threat of climate change, sustainable the Sixth Assessment Report of the J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E.
development, and efforts to eradicate poverty Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield
[Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Portner, D. Pörtner, DC Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, (eds.)]. In Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/Chapter/
Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegrı́a, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, Chapter-5.
Moufouma-Okia, C. Pe´an, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. 209 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and
and Medicine. 2019. Climate Change and

Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield New York, NY, USA, pp. 3–33, doi:10.1017/ Ecosystems. Washington, DC: The National
(eds.)]. 9781009325844.001. Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25504.
201 These are drought measures based on soil 205 ‘‘Finding that Greenhouse Gas Emissions from 210 NOAA National Centers for Environmental
moisture. Aircraft Cause or Contribute to Air Pollution That Information, State of the Climate: Global Climate
202 IPCC (2021): Summary for Policymakers. In: May Reasonably Be Anticipated To Endanger Public Report for Annual 2020, published online January
Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Health and Welfare.’’ 81 FR 54422, August 15, 2016. 2021, retrieved on February 10, 2021, from https://
Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth (‘‘2016 Endangerment Finding’’). www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/202013.
47Sfmt 4700
and supported the feasibility of those insufficiently stringent. Many of these level of ZEV acceptance can be
proposed standards based on our commenters centered their arguments replicated on a national basis.
assessment of a projected compliance on general legal and policy grounds, • Massive Federal, state and local
pathway using ZEV technologies and maintaining that the overriding public financial incentives in the BIL, IRA and
ICE vehicle technologies. As described health and welfare protection goals of elsewhere. See also RTC section 2.7.
further in the NPRM, the proposed the Act and of section 202(a)(1) should • Federal standards themselves will
standards commenced in MY 2027 for be reflected in standard stringency. provide needed certainty for investment
most of the HDV subcategories, and in They pointed to the on-going climate in both ZEVs, including metals and
MY 2030 for sleeper cab (long-haul) crisis and indicated that emission minerals critical to battery production,
tractors. The proposed standards would reduction levels should be and charging infrastructure.
increase in stringency through MY 2032, commensurate with the degree of harm • Tens of billions of dollars of
after which they would remain in place posed by that endangerment. A number announced investments from the private
unless and until EPA set new standards of these commenters also stressed the sector and utilities into charging
(e.g., Phase 4 standards). need for reductions in criteria pollutant infrastructure for heavy-duty ZEVs, as
The proposed vehicle standards were emissions including via further well as supporting state and local
performance-based standards and did improvements to ICE vehicles (both actions designed to ensure that the rate,
not specify or require use of any through vehicle and engine standards), scale, and distribution of infrastructure
particular technology. The technology stressing especially the benefits to buildout supports rapid and diverse
packages developed to support the disadvantaged communities that would adoption of heavy-duty ZEVs.
feasibility of the proposed HD GHG be afforded by more stringent standards. Another commenter (to which we
Phase 3 vehicle standards included This group of commenters respond in RTC section 2.4) asserted a
those improvements to ICE vehicle recommended standards at least as number of points, for which they
performance reflected in the HD GHG stringent as those in the California ACT provided empirical support, related to
Phase 2 standards’ technology packages. rules. Other commenters suggested cost of BEVs in relation to comparable
EPA did not reopen and did not propose standards stricter still, including a ICE-powered HDVs:
any revisions to the HD Phase 2 engine standard of zero emission by MY 2035, • Powertrain costs of most BEVs will
GHG standards. basing the standard on the combined be at par or cheaper than diesel ICE
stringencies of the California ACT and vehicles due to the battery tax credits
1. Summary of Comments under the IRA.
Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) programs
There were many comments on EPA’s (citing the record developed by • The Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
proposal. Certain commenters California in support of each of these of BEVs is significantly lower than
supported the proposed stringency programs), and including the ACT sales diesel ICE vehicles across all segments.
levels and the proposed MY mandates as part of a Federal standard. The payback period is less than three
implementation schedule. Regarding the One commenter indicated that the years for all vehicles.
proposed implementation schedule, for baseline should account for both • The cargo capacity of most BEVs
example, one commenter supported California programs, these programs’ will be at par with ICEVs due to a
EPA’s proposal to amend many of the adoption by the CAA section 177 states, posited increase in battery energy
MY 2027 Phase 2 vehicle standards on their presumed adoption by the density.
the grounds advanced by EPA at NESCAUM MOU states, effects of the • 15 minutes of enroute charging
proposal: facts have changed from 2016 IRA and BIL, state and local initiatives, from a megawatt charging system can
when the agency promulgated its Phase and manufacturer and fleet add more than 80 percent of the full
2 rule. Specifically, ZEVs are being commitments. range of battery electric tractors,
actively deployed, there are plans to As further support for more stringent enabling them to meet the requirements
increase their adoption rate, and standards, commenters cited a number of more demanding use cases.
massive Federal and state efforts are of factors, including asserting the • BEVs have a lower TCO per mile,
underway to provide financial following, which we summarize and even assuming significant public
incentives and otherwise encourage respond to in RTC section 2.4 or charging. With 30 percent of all
heavy-duty ZEV implementation. The elsewhere as noted: charging required conducted en route
bulk of comments, however, supported • Introduction into the market of HD (recharging 20–80 percent of a full
standards of either greater or lesser ZEVs, numerous both in volume and charge on half of the operating days),
stringency than proposed. types of applications. More specifically, the payback period of all HDVs is still
This preamble section summarizes CARB staff found (in the administrative less than five years.
these comments at a high level and record for the California ACF program) A number of commenters urged
highlights certain changes we have that ZEVs are available in every weight adoption of more stringent standards
made in the final standards from those class of trucks, and each weight class predicated on further improvements to
proposed after consideration of these includes a wide range of vehicle engine and vehicle GHG performance of
comments. Detailed summaries and applications and configurations. CARB ICE vehicles. The thrust of these
responses are found in section 2 of the staff also found that there are currently comments is that there are various
RTC.211 148 models in North American where available technologies which either
manufacturers are accepting orders or have not been utilized, or are
i. Comments Urging Standards More
pre-orders, and there are 135 models underutilized, in the HDV fleet, and that
Stringent Than Proposed
that are actively being supported and significant incremental improvements
A number of commenters maintained delivered. These commenters pointed to in GHG performance are therefore
that the proposed standards were manufacturer sales announcements and available, and at reasonable cost.
publicly announced production plans as According to these commenters, these
211 For the complete set of comments, please see
corroboration. technologies include lightweighting,
U.S. EPA, ‘‘Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards
for Heavy-Duty Vehicles—Phase 3– Response to
• Adoption of ACT by other states, advanced aerodynamics, tire
Comments.’’ RTC sections 2 and 3. Docket EPA– plus commitments of other states to do improvements, idle reduction including
HQ–OAR–2022–0985. so, indicates standards reflecting that stop-start systems, hybrid technologies
48Sfmt 4700
of all types, and predictive cruise supported the MY 2032 standards but support BEVs. Commenters cited the
control. Commenters stated that some of found the early model year standards chicken-egg dynamic of ZEV purchasers
these technologies would even improve inappropriate, citing among other things needing assurance of supporting
ZEV performance by increasing vehicle the large increase in stringency between infrastructure before committing to
efficiency thereby enabling longer range MYs 2026 and 2027 and the purchases, but electric utilities needing
for a given battery size. We summarize uncertainties associated with (and, in many cases, legally requiring)
and address comments relating to sufficiency of supportive recharging assurance of demand before building
vehicles with ICE technologies in infrastructure in the program’s initial out. These difficulties are compounded
section 9 of the RTC to this rule. years. by issues of timing: it can take 40 weeks
With regard to specific applications, A number of commenters opposed to for utilities to acquire transformer parts,
proponents of more stringent standards the proposed standards offered and 70 to acquire switchgear parts.
stated that: alternative perspectives to some of the Installation delays can be 1–3 years for
• Tesla alone intends to produce points made by commenters supporting smaller installations (cable, conductor
50,000 BEV Class 8 day cabs for MY more stringent standards. With regard to systems), 3–5 years for medium (feeders
2024, which on its own would exceed a nationalized version of the California and substation capacity), and 4–6 for
the percentage of ZEVs in the ACT standards, these commenters large installations (subtransmission
technology package on which EPA asserted that certain assumptions and requiring licensing). Moreover,
supported the proposed MY 2027 circumstances reflected in the ACT infrastructure buildout schedules rarely
standard; program would not be replicated correlate with purchasers’ resale
• The proposed standard for tractors nationally, including assumptions of schedules, or with BIL/IRA subsidy
could be at ACT levels if predicated on high diesel prices, high ACT vehicle timings. These comments are
reduced battery size and opportunity availability, and high demand from summarized in more detail and
(public) charging; California’s ACF program, plus local addressed in section II.D.2.iii of this
• There are many programs that climate conditions which did not preamble and in RTC section 7
support zero emission urban and school require BEVs designed for more extreme (Distribution).
buses, which should be reflected in the weather conditions. A commenter • Uncertainty regarding availability of
standards; further asserted that not all states that critical minerals and associated supply
• Drayage trucks should be subject to have adopted California’s ACT chain issues. These comments are
a more stringent standard, given their provisions have the same supporting summarized in more detail and
suitability for ZEV technologies (limited regulations and therefore it is not clear addressed in section II.D.2.ii and in RTC
range, overnight charging in depots) how many ZEVs will be sold as a result section 17.2.
plus the environmental benefits of of ACT. Others stated that
• Uncertainty regarding purchasers’
reducing emissions given their use in manufacturers’ aspirational goals did
decisions, noting customer reluctance to
heavily polluted areas like ports and not translate to actual production,
utilize an unfamiliar technology and
railway yards. especially given uncertainties regarding
We respond to these comments unsuitability given limited range and
supporting electric charging
throughout section II of this preamble cargo penalty due to need for large
infrastructure, customer reactions to a
and in sections 2 and 3 of the RTC. batteries. These comments are
new, unfamiliar product, and potential
summarized in more detail and
ii. Comments Urging Standards Less critical material shortages.
With respect to further improvements addressed in section II.F.1 of this
Stringent Than Proposed preamble and in RTC sections 4.2 and
to ICE vehicles and engines suggested
Many commenters opposed the by commenters supporting more 19.5.
proposed standards as being too stringent standards, some manufacturer • Assertions that estimating
stringent. Some urged the agency to commenters asserted that some of the availability of hydrogen infrastructure is
simply leave the MY 2027 Phase 2 technologies on which the Phase 2 rule nearly futile at present because this
standards in place, maintaining on was predicated had proved technology is barely commercialized;
general grounds that further unmarketable, others (like the Rankine commenters suggested that EPA has also
technological improvements are too engine and certain advanced mistakenly assumed availability of clean
nascent to form the basis for more aerodynamic features) had never been hydrogen, failed to consider costs of
stringent standards. Other comments commercialized, and some had proved hydrogen infrastructure, ignored
were more specific on the subject of less efficient than projected, and as a potential issues of permitting and
implausibility. One commenter stated result, some manufacturers had interfaces with electric utilities with
that the number of BEV buses would included ZEVs within their production regard to hydrogen infrastructure, and
need to increase by a factor of 12, and plans as a Phase 2 compliance strategy. failed to discuss physical requirements
that thousands of BEV drayage, day-cab These commenters stated that non- of hydrogen charging stations; and that
tractors, sleeper tractors, and step vans utilization of various engine and vehicle EPA also did not consider issues
would need to be sold to achieve the technologies thus should not be viewed relating to hydrogen handling or high
proposed standards. Another as either showing opportunity for initial costs of hydrogen infrastructure.
commenter asserted that the proposal further ICEV improvements, or as These comments are summarized in
was predicated on a ZEV sale growth demand for BEV vehicles. more detail and addressed in section
rate of 63,000 percent from 2021–2032. Uncertainties relating to key elements II.D.3.v and RTC section 8.
One commenter stated that a predicated of the program which commenters Regarding availability of Federal and
introduction of more than two orders of stated are out of the control of the state funding, these commenters made
magnitude for some subcategories (0.2 regulated entities formed the basis of the following points:
percent to approximately 40 percent) in many of the comments questioning the • These subsidies may not be
a few model years was inherently feasibility of the proposed program. available in many instances, due to
implausible. These include: insufficient taxable revenue to qualify,
Two vehicle manufacturer • The availability of distribution or lack of domestic production required
commenters, on the other hand, electrical infrastructure necessary to to be eligible for the tax subsidy;
49Sfmt 4700
• Purchase incentives for tractors are With regard to standard stringency, states which have not done so.212 These
being offset, almost to the dollar, by one commenter submitted detailed comments are summarized in more
Federal excise taxes; comments urging that EPA adopt detail and addressed in section II.B.2.iii
• States are using National Electric standards roughly 50 percent less and RTC section 2.
Vehicle Infrastructure Formula program stringent than proposed for each Several commenters opposed
funds almost exclusively for light duty subcategory, commencing in MY 2030, amendment of the Phase 2 MY 2027
infrastructure, which will not be with standards for HHD vocational GHG vehicle standards. Some
suitable for HDVs; vehicle and sleeper cab tractor commenters alleged equitability
Given all of these uncertainties and applications commencing in MY 2033. arguments opposing amending the
issues, this group of commenters Their recommended standards would Phase 2 standards. They noted that the
questioned the disproportionate weight also include three initial years of Phase 2 standards exhibited a rare
EPA gave to payback in developing a stability. This commenter derived these consensus, reflecting a common
ZEV-based compliance pathway. One standards using EPA’s HD TRUCS tool understanding that the standard would
commenter indicated that EPA should with different inputs. Reasons supplied remain unaltered through its final
accord equal analytical weight to by the commenter for the different model year of phase-in (MY 2027).
purchase price, limited range, excess inputs included omitted costs, Some commenters stated that
weight, lack of electrification underestimated costs, certain errors manufacturers have relied on those
infrastructure, durability concerns, and regarding various of the 101 models standards in devising compliance
unpromising state support. Commenters included in HD TRUCS, misapplication strategies. Moreover, some commenters
also noted the reality of the energy of the ACT Research payback algorithm, stated that early adoption of ZEVs is
efficiency gap noted by EPA, whereby and the following purportedly part of the manufacturers’ Phase 2
purchasers refrain from making unrealistic assumptions: compliance strategies and is not a valid
seemingly economically rational • Timing of infrastructure availability harbinger for a Phase 3 rule. That is,
decisions for various reasons. (including issues associated with supply rather than adopt a number of
EPA’s proposed approach to chains for distribution infrastructure technologies on which the Phase 2 rule
quantifying when payback periods of equipment, especially in light of was predicated (such as high adoption
given duration would support overlapping demands from the LDV rates for advanced aerodynamics, stop
utilization of ZEV technologies as a sector); start, electric steering accessories and
potential compliance option was • Need to get pro-active involvement
others), these commenters stated that
criticized by these commenters (and of electric utilities, and EPA’s seeming
some companies instead have
also by commenters urging standards of lack of effort in encouraging such
introduced ZEVs. These commenters
greater stringency). With regard to the actions;
stated that if the MY 2027 standards are
payback metric generally, a number of • Fuel cell efficiency;
• Lack of consideration of resale amended, these companies are
commenters maintained that payback is effectively punished for their adoption
not a guarantee of technology adoption, value;
• Assumption of domestic battery of an innovative technology, because
pointing to various technologies with they will need to seek unanticipated
production, given the absence of any
rapid payback (like drive wheel fairings) reductions from other vehicles. Some
domestic lithium mining;
which nonetheless proved • The sheer magnitude of manufacturer commenters stated that if
unmarketable. These commenters also infrastructure buildout needed to EPA is considering changed
maintain that TCO is the proper, or support the levels of BEVs on which the circumstances as a basis for amending
superior, metric, better reflecting how proposal was predicated (estimated as a MY 2027 standards, there are changed
purchase decisions are actually made. In need for 15,000 new chargers each week circumstances that cut in the other
any case, these commenters said that a for the next 8 years); direction: under-utilization of GHG-
2-year payback period is more • Unrealistic estimates of cost of reducing technologies in ICE vehicles,
appropriate for HDVs, since initial hydrogen infrastructure; pandemic altered supply chains,
purchasers typically have a 3- to 5-year • Lack of accounting for land inflationary prices, fewer qualified
resale schedule. availability; and technicians, and parts shortages.
One commenter noted that the • A cargo penalty of 30 percent is a
projected results based on the modified iii. Other Comments Related to the
significant deterrent.
equation were highly conservative, and This commenter further maintained Standards
inconsistent with the technical that its suggested standards be adjusted A final group of commenters urged
literature. Other commenters suggested automatically downwards if any of the EPA to predicate standards based on use
EPA utilize instead other of the assumptions on which a standard is of biofuels or other alternative fuels.
methodologies discussed in the Draft predicated prove unfounded. They They noted that such fuels, including
Regulatory Impact Analysis (DRIA) that specifically suggest that these triggers varying degrees of biodiesel, not only
were not based on a proprietary include a linkage to infrastructure provide emission reduction benefits, but
equation, notably the TEMPO equation availability, with the standard being can do so immediately, can do so at less
and methodology. automatically reduced based on the cost, and are the subject of various
One commenter submitted an percentage of infrastructure less than Federal incentive programs, including
attachment from ACT Research (who predicted. This commenter further those administered by the Department
developed the proprietary payback suggested this linkage trigger could be of Agriculture. These comments are
equation EPA had modified in the based on infrastructure buildout in summarized in more detail and
proposed approach) maintaining that counties known to be freight corridors. addressed in section II.D.1 and in RTC
EPA had misapplied the equation. EPA In subsequent meetings with the agency, section 9.1.
addresses this issue and summarizes in this commenter suggested a further
more detail and addresses these trigger based on monitoring ZEV sales 212 Miller, Neil. Memorandum to Docket EPA–
comments in section II.F.1 and RTC both within states which have adopted HQ–OAR–2022–0985. Summary of Stakeholder
section 2.4. the California ACT program, and within Meetings. March 2024.
50Sfmt 4700
2. Summary of the Final Rule Standards MY 2028 and heavy heavy-duty fuels like CNG and LNG, and H2–ICE),
and Updates From Proposal vocational vehicles start in MY 2029 hybrid technologies (e.g., HEV and
(we proposed Phase 3 standards for day PHEV), and ZEV technologies (e.g., BEV
This section briefly summarizes the cabs and heavy-heavy vocational and FCEV). These include technologies
Phase 3 final rule standards and vehicles starting in MY 2027). As
includes discussion of key changes and applied to motor vehicles with ICE
proposed, the final standards for sleeper (including hybrid powertrains) and
updates from the proposed standards. cabs start in MY 2030 but are less
This final rule updates the proposal in without ICE. Electrification across the
stringent than proposed in that year and technologies ranges from fully
a number of ways, reflecting in MY 2031, and equivalent to the
consideration of additional data electrified vehicle technologies without
proposed standards in MY 2032. Our an ICE that achieve zero vehicle tailpipe
received in comments, other new updated analyses for the final rule show
research that became available since the emissions (e.g., BEVs), fuel cell electric
that model years 2031 and 2032 GHG vehicle technologies that run on
proposal, and considerations voiced in standards in the range of those we
the public comments. This preamble hydrogen and achieve zero tailpipe
requested comment on in the HD GHG emissions (e.g., FCEVs), as well as plug-
subsection highlights many of these Phase 3 NPRM are feasible and
changes, while the following in hybrid partially electrified
appropriate considering feasibility, lead technologies and ICEs with electrified
subsections provide additional detail of time, cost, and other relevant factors as
the changes. accessories. There are many potential
described throughout this section. pathways to compliance with the final
i. Final Standards Specifically, we are finalizing MY 2031 standards manufacturers may choose
standards that are on par with the that involve different mixtures of HD
As further described in the following proposal for light- and medium-duty
subsections, the final Phase 3 GHG vehicle technologies. Our potential
vocational vehicles and day cab tractors.
standards include new CO2 emission compliance pathway that includes a
Heavy heavy-duty vocational vehicle
standards for MY 2032 and later HD projected mix across the range of HD
final standards are less stringent than
vehicles with more stringent CO2 vehicle technologies, including certain
proposed for all model years, including
standards phasing in as early as MY vehicle with ICE, BEV, and FCEV
2031 and 2032. For MY 2032, we are
2027 for certain vehicle categories. The finalizing more stringent standards than technologies, supports the feasibility of
final standards for the vocational proposed for light and medium heavy- the final standards and was used in our
vehicles are shown in Table II–1 and for duty vocational vehicles and day cab modeling for rulemaking purposes
tractors in Table II–2. The final tractors. EPA also revised various of the (‘‘modeled potential compliance
standards are discussed in detail in optional custom chassis standards from pathway’’). In addition, for the final
section II.F. Compared to the proposed those proposed. Our assessment of the rule, to further assess the feasibility of
Phase 3 standards, in general, after final program as a whole is that it takes the standards under different potential
further consideration of the lead times a balanced and measured approach scenarios and to further illustrate that
necessary for the standards (including while still applying meaningful there are many potential pathways to
both the vehicle development and the requirements in MY 2027 and later to compliance with the final standards that
projected infrastructure needed to reducing GHG emissions from the HD include a wide range of potential
support the modeled potential sector. technology mixes, we evaluated
compliance pathway that demonstrates EPA emphasizes that its standards are additional examples of other potential
the feasibility of the standards), we are performance-based, such that compliance pathway’s technology
finalizing CO2 emission standards for manufacturers are not required to use packages that also support the feasibility
heavy-duty vehicles that, compared to particular technologies to meet the of the final standards (‘‘additional
the proposed standards, include less standards. In this rulemaking, EPA has example potential compliance
stringent standards for all vehicle accounted for a wide range of emissions pathways’’). These additional example
categories in MYs 2027, 2028, 2029 and control technologies, including potential compliance pathways only
2030. The final standards increase in advanced ICE vehicle technologies (e.g., include vehicles with ICE technologies
stringency at a slower pace through MYs engine, transmission, drivetrain, and include examples without
2027 to 2030 compared to the proposal, aerodynamics, tire rolling resistance producing additional ZEVs to comply
and day cab tractor standards start in improvements, the use of low carbon with this rule.
51Sfmt 4700
We also are finalizing updates to and and requests for comment in the NPRM. iii. Commitment to Post-Rule
new flexibilities that support these final Some of the key updates in our analyses Engagement and Monitoring
standards, as discussed in section III; include updates to our assessment of
however, we did not rely on those other BEV and FCEV component costs, Some representatives from the heavy-
aspects in justifying the feasibility of the efficiencies, and sizing; consideration of duty vehicle manufacturing industry
final standards. certain additional costs to purchasers, have expressed not only optimism
including taxes and insurance; refined regarding the heavy-duty industry’s
ii. Updates to Analyses ability to produce ZEV technologies in
dwell times for charging infrastructure
future years at high volume, but also
We have made a number of updates sizing; EVSE costs; consideration of

ER22AP24.011</GPH>
public charging (and associated costs) concern that a slow growth in ZEV
to our analyses from proposal,
for certain BEVs; and a more detailed charging and refueling infrastructure
especially related to inputs to HD
evaluation of the impact of HD charging could slow the growth of heavy-duty
TRUCS, as detailed in section II.D.5,
after consideration of comments on the U.S. electricity system.
ER22AP24.010</GPH>
submitted in response to our proposal
52Sfmt 4700
ZEV adoption.213 On the other hand, with the Phase 3 standards in the national ultra-low diesel fuel sulfur
some representatives from state and NPRM. 88 FR 25934. In comments, standards, with implementation
local air pollution control agencies manufacturers suggest that we establish beginning in 2006 (for the fuel) and
point to ongoing and planned activities mechanisms for the CO2 standards to 2007 for the heavy-duty engines. These
as evidence that infrastructure for self-adjust (become less stringent) if standards were premised on significant
heavy-duty ZEVs can and will be built infrastructure deployment falls short of investments in both diesel fuel sulfur
out at the pace, scale, and locations the amount necessary to support the removal technology and heavy-duty
needed to support such technologies rule. We heard similar comments from engine and vehicle emission control
used to meet strong EPA GHG standards some Senators suggesting that the technologies. Because of the significant
for heavy-duty vehicles.214 Comments compliance deadline be delayed if the
scope of the regulations and the
from advocacy organizations point to infrastructure is not there by a certain
importance to public health and
analyses from the International Council date. However, many other stakeholders
on Clean Transportation,215 as well as opposed EPA including in the final rule welfare, EPA published two major
announced investments in charging a self-adjusting linkage between the progress reports prior to the
infrastructure from truck manufacturers, standards and ZEV infrastructure. Many implementation dates of the standards,
fleet owners, retailers, other private stakeholders also argued that heavy- with one report published in 2002, and
companies, and utilities as additional duty ZEV infrastructure will be a second report in 2004.218 219 These
evidence to support this point.216 Lack sufficient during the regulatory public reports allowed EPA to
of such infrastructure may present timeframe to support stronger GHG communicate what challenges and
challenges for vehicle manufacturers’ standards than those proposed by EPA progress was being made by the
ability to comply with future EPA GHG in the NPRM. regulated industry and other
standards for manufacturers who We have carefully assessed stakeholders in achieving the goals of
pursues a ZEV-focused compliance infrastructure needed for the modeled the 2000 final rule. EPA believes this
pathway similar to the example potential compliance pathway as previous process for highway heavy-
projected potential compliance pathway described in section II.F that supports duty emission standards and ultra-low
EPA analyzed in this final rule, while the feasibility of the final standards, and fuel sulfur standards can serve as a
good availability of such infrastructure as described in section II.G we conclude broad template for ensuring on-going
would support the sale of HD ZEVs and that the Phase 3 standards are feasible engagement and monitoring of the
support such a manufacturer’s and appropriate within the meaning of Heavy-Duty Phase 3 GHG final
compliance strategy. section 202(a) of the Act. However, EPA
standards (though we note for the 2000
EPA has a vested interest in also commits in this final rule to
rule, EPA established standards for the
monitoring industry’s performance in actively engage with stakeholders and
monitor both OEM compliance and the engine emission requirements and the
complying with mobile source emission
major elements relating to heavy-duty highway diesel fuel sulfur levels,
standards, including the highway
heavy-duty industry. EPA currently ZEV infrastructure. EPA, in consultation whereas in this rule EPA is establishing
monitors industry’s performance with other agencies, will issue periodic emission standard for heavy-duty
through a range of approaches, reports reflecting this collected vehicles).
including regular meetings with information throughout the lead up to As part of the Agency’s on-going
individual companies, regulatory the Phase 3 standards in MYs 2027 certification and compliance program,
requirements for data submission as part through 2032. These periodic status EPA receives data from every OEM to
of the annual certification process, and reports would begin as early as calendar ensure compliance with heavy-duty
performance under various EPA grant year 2026 with a review of MY 2024 HD emission standards, including the
and rebate programs. EPA also provides vehicle certification data and HD existing Phase 2 GHG standards (and, in
transparency to the public through infrastructure growth that occurs over the future, Phase 3 GHG standards as
actions such as publishing industry the next two years. As discussed below,
well). EPA will monitor the on-going
compliance reports (such as has been these reports will be informed by
implementation of the Phase 2 program
done during the HD GHG Phase 1 comprehensive information collected by
EPA as part of its certification and as well as the Phase 3 program, to
program 217). understand how each OEM’s
We requested comment on the pace of compliance programs. The Phase 3
standards are performance-based compliance with the GHG standards is
ZEV infrastructure development, and
standards and the projected potential occurring, including by vehicle class,
potential implications for compliance
compliance pathway is not the only way and to understand the use of the CO2
213 See, e.g., Comments of the Truck and Engine that manufacturers may comply with emissions averaging, banking, and
Manufacturers Association. Docket EPA–HQ–OAR– the standards, and thus these reports trading program. This will include
2022–0985–2668. will include but not be limited to evaluating manufacturers’ use of Phase
214 See, e.g., Comment submitted by the National
assessing HD ZEV infrastructure. Based 2 advanced technology multipliers,
Association of Clean Air Agencies. Docket EPA–
HQ–OAR–2022–0985–1499. on these reports, as appropriate and quantifying any banked credits
215 Ragon, P.-L., et al. (2023). Near-term consistent with CAA section 202(a) generated from the use of multipliers,
infrastructure deployment to support zero-emission authority, EPA may decide to issue and considering the potential for those
medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the United guidance documents, initiate a future credits to undermine the overall goals of
States. International Council on Clean rulemaking to consider modifications to
Transportation. the Phase 3 program in the MY 2027
216 See, e.g., Comment submitted by International the Phase 3 rule (including giving and later time frame.
Council on Clean Transportation. Docket EPA–HQ– appropriate consideration to lead time
OAR–2022–0985–1423. as required by section 202(a)), or make

218 ‘‘Highway Diesel Progress Review’’ EPA
217 See EPA Reports EPA–420–R–21–001B
no changes to the Phase 3 rule program.
covering Model Years 2014–2018, and EPA report EPA has taken similar actions in past Report 420–R–02–016, June 2002. See Docket Entry
EPA–420–R–22–028B covering Model Years 2014– EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985.
2020, available online at https://www.epa.gov/
rulemakings. For example, in 2000, EPA 219 ‘‘Highway Diesel Progress Review Report 2,’’
compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/epa-heavy- finalized stringent highway heavy-duty
EPA–420–R–04–004. March 2004. See Docket Entry
duty-vehicle-and-engine-greenhouse-gas-emissions. engine emission standards as well as EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985–77806.
53Sfmt 4700
This includes GHG-reducing from them. The stakeholders would urban delivery trucks, refuse haulers,
technologies on HD ICEVs, BEVs, likely include at a minimum trucking utility service trucks, dump trucks,
FCEVs, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles fleets and trucking trade associations; concrete mixers, transit buses, shuttle
(PHEVs), hybrid electric vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicle owner-operators; HD buses, school buses, emergency
vehicles with H2–ICE. Also consistent vehicle manufacturers; utilities vehicles, motor homes, and tow trucks.
with commenters’ suggestions, EPA including investor owned, publicly The HD GHG Phase 2 vocational vehicle
intends to monitor data on HDV sales in owned, and cooperatives; infrastructure program also includes a special
California and other states that have providers and installers; state & local regulatory subcategory called vocational
adopted ACT. Such sales provide an governments, EJ communities; and tractors, which covers vehicles that are
early indication of ZEV technology NGOs. As noted, we will also be in technically tractors but generally
adoption. regular contact with DOE and DOT. operate more like vocational vehicles
EPA agrees with commenters that than line-haul tractors. These vocational
C. Background on the CO2 Emission
information on battery production, and tractors include those designed to
Standards in the HD GHG Phase 2
the related issue of availability of operate off-road and in certain intra-city
Program
materials critical to that production delivery routes.
(including viability of supply chains), is In the HD GHG Phase 2 rule, we The existing HD GHG Phase 2 CO2
important to gauging pace and success finalized GHG emission standards standards for vocational vehicles are
of implementation of the Phase 3 tailored to three regulatory categories of based on the performance of a wide
standards. EPA intends to discuss any HD vehicles—heavy-duty pickups and array of control technologies. In
issues with HD vehicle manufacturers vans, vocational vehicles, and particular, the HD GHG Phase 2
and consult other sources of information combination tractors.220 In addition, we vocational vehicle standards recognize
regarding these issues, including the set separate standards for the engines detailed characteristics of vehicle
United States Geological Survey (USGS) that power combination tractors and for powertrains and drivelines. Driveline
and DOE’s tracking of critical minerals. the engines that power vocational improvements present a significant
EPA will monitor the deployment of vehicles. The heavy-duty vehicle CO2 opportunity for reducing fuel
heavy-duty vehicle charging and emission standards are in grams per ton- consumption and CO2 emissions from
hydrogen refueling infrastructure. EPA mile, which represents the grams of CO2 vocational vehicles. However, there is
will begin to collect data in CY 2025 in emitted to move one ton of payload a no single package of driveline
coordination with DOE and DOT, to distance of one mile. In addition, the technologies that will be equally
monitor the implementation of electric Phase 2 program established certain suitable for all vocational vehicles,
vehicle charging infrastructure designed subcategories of vehicles (i.e., custom because there is an extremely broad
to serve HD vehicles potentially chassis vocational vehicles and heavy- range of driveline configurations
including but not limited to the haul tractors) that were specifically available in the market. This is due in
following: designed to recognize the limitations of part to the variety of final vehicle build
certain vehicle applications to adopt configurations, ranging from a purpose-
• Depot charging infrastructure— some technologies due to specialized built custom chassis to a commercial
number of EVSE ports, size, location, operating characteristics or generally chassis that may be intended as a multi-
growth rate low sales volumes with prohibitively purpose stock vehicle. Furthermore, the
• Public charging infrastructure— wide range of applications and driving
long payback periods. The vehicles
number of EVSE ports, size, location, patterns of these vocational vehicles
certified to the custom chassis
growth rate leads manufacturers to offer a variety of
vocational vehicle standards are not
• EVSE sales—number, size, location, drivelines, as each performs differently
permitted to bank or trade credits and
growth rate in use.
some have limited averaging provisions
• A sample of charging station In the final HD GHG Phase 2 rule, we
under the HD GHG Phase 2 ABT
installation timelines and distribution recognized the diversity of vocational
program.221
system upgrades (e.g., covering small, vehicle applications by setting unique
mid-size, and large depots and public 1. Vocational Vehicles vehicle CO2 emission standards
stations.) Samples could be selected to Vocational vehicles include a wide evaluated over composite drive cycles
reflect different regions and utility variety of vehicle types, spanning Class for 23 different regulatory subcategories.
types, among other factors. 2b–8, and serve a wide range of The program includes vocational
Additionally, relevant data from each functions. The regulations define vehicle standards that allow the
organization’s relevant infrastructure vocational vehicles as all heavy-duty technologies that perform best at
funding programs will be assessed. vehicles greater than 8,500 pounds highway speeds and those that perform
EPA will also collect data, in GVWR that are not certified under 40 best in urban driving to each be
coordination with DOE and DOT, on the CFR part 86, subpart S, or a combination properly recognized over appropriate
implementation of hydrogen fueling tractor under 40 CFR 1037.106.222 Some drive cycles, while avoiding potential
infrastructure, including data such as examples of vocational vehicles include unintended results of forcing vocational
the number, capacity, location, and type vehicles that are designed to serve in
of hydrogen production plants and 220 We also set standards for certain types of different applications to be measured
hydrogen refueling stations available for trailers used in combination with tractors (see 81 against a single drive cycle. The vehicle
HD vehicles. FR 73639, October 25, 2016). As described in CO2 emissions are evaluated using
section III of this preamble, in this final rule we
During the development of the reports removed the regulatory provisions related to trailers EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Model
reflecting this information, EPA will in 40 CFR part 1037 to carry out the mandate of the (GEM) over three drive cycles, where
consult with a wide range of U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which the composite weightings vary by
stakeholders regarding the vacated the portions of the HD GHG Phase 2 final subcategory, with the intent of
rule that apply to trailers. Truck Trailer
implementation of HD vehicle Manufacturers Association v. EPA, 17 F.4th 1198
balancing the competing pressures to
infrastructure on an on-going basis, to (D.C. Cir. 2021). recognize the varying performance of
learn from their experiences and to 221 See 40 CFR 1037.105(h)(2). technologies, serve the wide range of
gather relevant information and data 222 See 40 CFR 1037.105(a). customer needs, and maintain a
54Sfmt 4700
workable regulatory program.223 The HD standards’ feasibility are demonstrated set CO2 emission standards for 10
GHG Phase 2 primary vocational through a potential technology path that tractor subcategories.
standards, therefore, contain is based on the performance of more Similar to the vocational program,
subcategories for Regional, Multi- efficient engines, workday idle implementation of the HD GHG Phase 2
purpose, and Urban drive cycles in each reduction technologies, improved tractor standards began in MY 2021 and
of the three weight classes (Light Heavy- transmissions including mild hybrid will be fully phased in for MY 2027. In
Duty (Class 2b–5), Medium Heavy-Duty powertrains, axle technologies, weight the HD GHG Phase 2 final rule, EPA
(Class 6–7) and Heavy Heavy-Duty reduction, electrified accessories, tire analyzed the feasibility of achieving the
(Class 8)), for a total of nine unique pressure systems, and tire rolling CO2 standards and identified technology
subcategories.224 These nine resistance improvements. We developed pathways for achieving the standards.
subcategories apply for compression- the Phase 2 vocational vehicle standards The existing HD GHG Phase 2 CO2
ignition (CI) vehicles. We separately, but using the methodology where we emission standards for combination
similarly, established six subcategories applied fleet average technology mixes tractors reflect reductions that can be
of spark-ignition (SI) vehicles. In other to fleet average baseline vehicle achieved through improvements in the
words, there are 15 separate numerical configurations, and each average tractor’s powertrain, aerodynamics,
performance-based emission standards baseline and technology mix was tires, idle reduction, and other vehicle
for each model year. unique for each vehicle subcategory.226 systems as demonstrated using GEM. As
EPA also established optional custom When the HD GHG Phase 2 final rule we did for vocational vehicles, we
chassis categories in the Phase 2 rule in was promulgated in 2016, we developed a potential technology
recognition of the unique technical established CO2 standards on the package for each of the tractor
characteristics of these applications. premise that electrification of the heavy- subcategories that represented a fleet
These categories also recognize that duty market would occur in the future average application of a mix of
many manufacturers of these custom but was unlikely to occur at significant technologies to demonstrate the
chassis are not full-line heavy-duty sales volumes of electric vehicles in the feasibility of the standard for each
vehicle companies and thus do not have timeframe of the program. As a result, MY.229 EPA did not premise the HD
the same flexibilities as other firms in the Phase 2 vocational vehicle CO2 GHG Phase 2 CO2 tractor emission
the use of the Phase 2 program standards were not premised on the
standards on application of hybrid
emissions averaging program which application of ZEV technologies, though
powertrains or ZEV technologies.
could lead to challenges in meeting the such technologies could be used by
However, we predicted some limited
standards EPA established for the manufacturers to comply with the
use of these technologies in MY 2021
overall vocational vehicle and standards. We finalized BEV, PHEV, and
and beyond and we finalized BEV,
combination tractor program. We FCEV advanced technology credit
PHEV, and FCEV advanced technology
therefore established optional custom multipliers within the HD GHG ABT
credit multipliers within the HD GHG
chassis CO2 emission standards for program to incentivize increased
ABT program to incentivize a transition
Motorhomes, Refuse Haulers, Coach application of these technologies that
to these technologies (see section III of
Buses, School Buses, Transit Buses, had the potential for large GHG
this preamble for further discussion on
Concrete Mixers, Mixed Use Vehicles, emission reductions (see section III of
this program and the targeted ways we
and Emergency Vehicles.225 In total, this preamble for further discussion on
are amending it). More details can be
EPA set CO2 emission standards for 15 this program and the targeted ways we
found in the HD GHG Phase 2 final rule
subcategories of vocational vehicles and are amending it). Details regarding the
preamble, and the HD GHG Phase 2
eight subcategories of specialty vehicle HD GHG Phase 2 standards can be
tractor standards are codified at 40 CFR
types for a total of 23 vocational vehicle found in the HD GHG Phase 2 final rule
part 1037.230
subcategories. preamble and record, and the HD GHG
The HD GHG Phase 2 standards phase Phase 2 vocational vehicle standards are 3. Heavy-Duty Engines
in over a period of seven years, codified at 40 CFR part 1037.227
In HD GHG Phase 1, we developed a
beginning with MY 2021. The HD GHG 2. Combination Tractors regulatory structure for CO2, nitrous
Phase 2 program progresses in three-
The tractor regulatory structure is oxide (N2O), and methane (CH4)
year stages with an intermediate set of
attribute-based in terms of dividing the emission standards that apply to the
standards in MY 2024 and final
tractor category into ten subcategories engine, separate from the HD vocational
standards in MY 2027 and later. In the
based on the tractor’s weight rating, cab vehicle and tractor. The regulatory
HD GHG Phase 2 final rule, we
configuration, and roof height. The structure includes separate standards for
identified a potential technology path
tractors are subdivided into three weight spark-ignition engines (such as gasoline
for complying with each of the three
ratings—Class 7 with a gross vehicle engines) and compression-ignition
increasingly stringent stages of the HD
weight rating (GVWR) of 26,001 to engines (such as diesel engines), and for
GHG Phase 2 program standards. These
35,000 pounds; Class 8 with a GVWR heavy heavy-duty (HHD), medium
223 GEM is an EPA vehicle simulation tool used over 33,000 pounds; and Heavy-haul heavy-duty (MHD) and light heavy-duty
to certify HD vehicles. A detailed description of with a gross combined weight rating of (LHD) engines, that also apply to
GEM can be found in the Phase 2 Regulatory greater than or equal to 120,000 alternative fuel engines. We also used
Impacts Analysis or at https://www.epa.gov/ pounds.228 The Class 7 and 8 tractor cab this regulatory structure for HD engines
regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/ in HD GHG Phase 2. More details can be
greenhouse-gas-emissions-model-gem-medium-and- configurations are either day cab or
heavy-duty. sleeper cab. Day cab tractors are found in the HD GHG Phase 2 final rule
224 See 40 CFR 1037.140(g) and (h). typically used for shorter haul preamble, and the HD GHG Phase 2
225 The numeric values of the optional custom

operations, whereas sleeper cabs are engine standards are codified at 40 CFR
chassis standards are not directly comparable to the often used in long haul operations. EPA part 1036.231
primary vocational vehicle standards. As explained
in the HD GHG Phase 2 rule, there are
226 81 FR 73715, October 25, 2016. 229 81 FR 73602–73611, October 25, 2016.
simplifications in GEM that produce higher or
227 81 FR 73677–73725, October 25, 2016. 230 81 FR 73571, October 25, 2016.
lower CO2 emissions. 81 FR 73686–73688, October
25, 2016. 228 See 40 CFR 1037.801. 231 81 FR 73553–73571, October 25, 2016.
55Sfmt 4700
4. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Averaging, more stringent CO2 emissions standards More specifically, as explained in
Banking, and Trading Program for many of the regulatory subcategories section II.B.2, this final rule establishes
Beginning with the HD GHG Phase 1 and demonstrating the feasibility of new CO2 emission standards for MY
for HD GHG standards, EPA adopted an those final standards based on the 2032 and later HD vehicles with more
ABT program for CO2 emission credits performance of a potential compliance stringent CO2 emission standards
that allows ABT within a vehicle weight pathway comprising of a package of phasing in as early as MY 2027 for
class, meaning that the regulations did technologies that reduce CO2 emissions. certain vehicle categories. We found
not require all vehicles to meet the And in this rule, we developed that these final Phase 3 vehicle
standard.232 In promulgating the Phase technology packages that include both standards are appropriate and feasible,
2 standards, we explained that the vehicles with ICE and ZEV technologies. including consideration of cost of
stringency of the Phase 2 standards was In determining which technologies to compliance and other factors, for their
derived on a fleet average technology model, EPA initially considered the respective MYs and vehicle
mix basis. For example, we projected entire suite of technologies that we subcategories through technology
that diversified manufacturers would expected would be technologically improvements in several areas. To
continue to use the averaging provisions feasible and commercially available to support the feasibility and
in the ABT program to meet the achieve significant emissions appropriateness of the final standards,
standards on average for each of their reductions, including the GHG-reducing we evaluated each technology and
vehicle families. For the HD GHG Phase technologies considered in the Phase 2 estimated potential technology adoption
2 ABT program, we created three weight standards—including BEVs, FCEVs, H2– rates of a mix of projected available
class-based credit averaging sets for HD ICE vehicles, hybrid powertrains, plug- technologies in each vehicle
vehicles: LHD Vehicles, MHD Vehicles, in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs), and subcategory per MY (our technology
and HHD Vehicles. This approach alternative fueled-ICEVs. Because the packages) that EPA projects are
allowed ABT between all vehicles in the statute requires EPA to consider lead achievable based on nationwide
same weight class, including CI- time and costs in establishing standards, production volumes, considering lead
powered vehicles, SI-powered vehicles, and because manufacturers (and time, technical feasibility, cost, and
BEVs, FCEVs, and hybrid vehicles, purchasers) of HD vehicles are profit- other factors. At the same time, the final
which have the same regulatory useful generating enterprises that are seeking standards are performance-based and do
life. Although the vocational vehicle not mandate any specific technology for
to reduce costs, EPA then identified the
emission standards are subdivided by any manufacturer or any vehicle
technologies that the record showed
Urban, Multi-purpose, and Regional subcategory. In identifying the CO2
would be most effective at reducing CO2
regulatory subcategories, credit standards and demonstrating the
exchanges are currently allowed emissions and are cost-effective at doing
so in the MYs 2027–2032 time frame, as technological feasibility of such
between them within the same weight standards, we considered the statutory
class. However, these averaging sets discussed in this section II.D. As a
purpose of reducing emissions and the
currently exclude vehicles certified to result, EPA chose to model certain ICE
need for such emissions reductions,
the separate optional custom chassis vehicle technologies, BEV technologies,
technological feasibility, costs, lead time
standards. Finally, the ABT program and FCEV technologies to support the
and related factors (including safety). To
currently allows credits to exchange feasibility of the final standards and for
evaluate and balance these statutory
between vocational vehicles and tractors analyses for regulatory purposes, not
factors and other relevant
within a weight class. because we have an a priori interest in considerations, EPA must necessarily
ABT is commonly used by vehicle promoting certain HD vehicle estimate a means of compliance: what
manufacturers to comply with the technologies over other technologies, technologies can be used, what do they
standards of the HD GHG Phase 2 but rather because our analysis of lead cost, what is appropriate lead time for
program. In MY 2022, 93 percent of the time and costs showed these are their deployment, and the like. Thus, to
certified vehicle families (256 out of 276 effective technologies at reducing CO2 support the feasibility of the final
families) used ABT.233 Similarly, 29 out emissions and are cost-effective. The standards, EPA identified a modeled
of 40 manufacturers in MY 2022 used record also shows that the modeled potential compliance pathway. Having
ABT to certify some or all of their potential compliance pathway is the identified one means of compliance,
vehicle families. Most of the lowest cost one that we assessed for EPA’s task is to ‘‘answe[r] any
manufacturers that did not use ABT manufacturers overall and would be theoretical objections’’ to that means of
produced vehicles that were certified to beneficial for purchasers because the compliance, ‘‘identif[y] the major steps
the optional custom chassis standards lower operating costs during the necessary,’’ and to ‘‘offe[r] plausible
where the banking and trading operational life of the vehicle will offset reasons for believing that each of those
components of ABT are not allowed, the increase in vehicle technology costs steps can be completed in the time
and averaging is limited.234 within the usual period of first available.’’ NRDC v. EPA, 655 F. 2d at
D. Vehicle Technologies and Supporting ownership of the vehicle. At the same 332. That is what EPA has done here in
Infrastructure time, EPA modeled other technologies this final rule, and indeed what it has
(examples of other potential compliance done in all the motor vehicle emission
For this final rule, as we did for HD
pathways with different mixes of standard rules implementing section
Phase 1 and Phase 2, we are finalizing
technologies, as discussed in section 202(a) of the Act. As we stated earlier
232 40
II.F.6) recognizing that manufacturers in this preamble, manufacturers remain
CFR 1037.701 through 1037.750.
233 U.S. EPA Heavy-Duty Vehicle Certification
can choose many different ways to free to comply by any means they
Data. Last accessed on January 25, 2023, at https:// achieve CO2 emissions reductions to choose, including through strategies that
www.epa.gov/compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/ comply with the final performance- may resemble the additional example
annual-certification-data-vehicles-engines-and- based standards. These additional potential compliance pathways. Based
equipment.
234 See 40 CFR 1037.105(h)(2) for details. See also
example potential compliance pathways on our experience to date, it is the norm
40 CFR 1037.241(a) providing for individual also support the feasibility of the final that manufacturers devise means other
certification of heavy-duty vehicles. standards. than those projected by EPA as a
56Sfmt 4700
potential technology path in support of As previously noted, we did not transmissions, drivetrains, and
the feasibility of the standards to propose and are not adopting changes to accessories; and extended idle reduction
achieve compliance. the existing Phase 2 GHG emission for sleeper cabs. We analyzed the
For each regulatory subcategory, we standards for HD engines. As noted in overall effectiveness of the technology
the following section and RIA Chapter packages using EPA’s Greenhouse Gas
modeled various ICE vehicles with CO2-
1.4, there are technologies available that Emissions Model (GEM), which was
reducing technologies to represent the
can reduce GHG emissions from HD used for analyzing the technology
average MY 2027 vehicle that meets the engines, and we anticipate that many of
MY 2027 Phase 2 standards. These packages that support the Phase 2
them will be used to meet the MY 2024 vehicle CO2 emission standards and is
vehicles are used as baselines from and MY 2027 and later Phase 2 CO2 used by manufacturers to demonstrate
which to evaluate costs and engine emission standards, while compliance with the Phase 2 standards.
effectiveness of additional technologies developments are underway to meet the EPA’s GEM model simulates road load
for each of these vehicle types and new low NOX standards for MY 2027.235 power requirements over various duty
ultimately for each regulatory This final rule remains focused on GHG cycles to estimate the energy required
subcategory. The following subsections reductions through more stringent per mile for HD vehicles. The inputs for
describe the GHG emission-reducing vehicle-level CO2 emission standards, the individual technologies that make
technologies for HD vehicles which EPA which will continue to account for up the fleet average technology package
considered in this final rulemaking, engine CO2 emissions, instead of also that meets the Phase 2 MY 2027 CO2
including those for HD vehicles with finalizing new CO2 emission standards tractor emission standards are shown in
ICE (section II.D.1), HD BEVs (section that apply to heavy-duty engines. Table II–3.236 The comparable table for
II.D.2), and HD FCEVs (section II.D.3), 1. Technologies To Reduce GHG vocational vehicles is shown in Table
as well as a summary of the technology Emissions From HD ICE Vehicles II–4.237 The technology package for
assessment that supports the feasibility vocational vehicles include technologies
of the final Phase 3 standards (section The CO2 emissions of HD vehicles
vary depending on the configuration of such as low rolling resistance tires; tire
II.D.4) and the primary inputs we used inflation systems; efficient engines,
in our technology assessment tool, the vehicle. Many aspects of the vehicle
impact its emissions performance, transmissions, and drivetrains; weight
Heavy-Duty Technology Resource Use reduction; and idle reduction
including the engine, transmission,
Case Scenario (HD TRUCS), that we technologies. Note that the HD GHG
drive axle, aerodynamics, and rolling
developed to evaluate the design resistance. Phase 2 standards (like the Phase 1 and
features needed to meet the power and The technologies we considered for 3 standards) are performance-based;
energy demands of various HD vehicles tractors include technologies that we EPA does not require this specific
when using ZEV technologies, as well as analyzed in Phase 2 such as improved technology mix, rather the technologies
costs related to manufacturing, aerodynamics; low rolling resistance shown in Table II–3 and Table II–4 are
purchasing and operating ICE vehicle tires; tire inflation systems; efficient potential pathways for compliance.
and ZEV technologies used under the engines, engines fueled with natural gas,
modeled potential compliance pathway 236 81 FR 73616, October 25, 2016.
(section II.D.5). 235 40 CFR 1036.104. 237 81 FR 73714, October 25, 2016.
57Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22APR2.SGM 22APR2
ER22AP24.012</GPH>
58Sfmt 4725
Technologies exist today and i. Aerodynamics bumper, headlights, windshield, hood,

continue to evolve to improve the For example, we evaluated the cab, mirrors) or integrating the
efficiency of the engine, transmission, potential for additional GHG components at key interfaces (e.g.,
drivetrain, aerodynamics, and tire performance gains from aerodynamic windshield/glass to sheet metal) to
rolling resistance in HD vehicles and improvements. Up to 25 percent of the alleviate fore vehicle drag. Finally,
therefore reduce their CO2 emissions. As fuel consumed by a sleeper cab tractor improvements may include redirecting
discussed in the preamble to the HD traveling at highway speeds is used to the air to prevent areas of low pressure
GHG Phase 2 program and shown here overcome aerodynamic drag forces, and slow-moving air (thus, eliminating
in Table II–3 and Table II–4, there are making aerodynamic drag a significant areas where air builds creating turbulent
a variety of such technologies. In contributor to a Class 7 or 8 tractor’s vortices and increasing drag).
developing the Phase 2 CO2 emission GHG emissions and fuel Techniques such as blocking gaps in the
standards, we developed technology consumption.238 Because aerodynamic sheet metal, ducting of components,
drag varies by the square of the vehicle shaping or extending sheet metal to
packages that were premised on a mix
speed, small changes in the tractor reduce flow separation and turbulence
of projected technologies and potential
aerodynamics can have a large impact are methods being considered by
technology adoption rates of less than manufacturers to direct air from areas of
100 percent. As discussed in section on the GHG emissions of a tractor. With
much of their driving at highway speed, high drag (e.g., underbody and tractor-
II.F.4 under the additional example trailer gap).
potential compliance pathways, there is the GHG emission reductions of reduced
aerodynamic drag for Class 7 or 8 As discussed in the Phase 2 RIA, the
an opportunity for further National Research Council of Canada
improvements and increased adoption tractors can be significant.239
Improving the vehicle shape may performed an assessment of the
through MY 2032 for many of these aerodynamic drag effect of various
technologies. Furthermore, as discussed include revising the fore components of
the vehicle such as rearward canting/ tractor components.240 Based on the
in section II.F.4 under the additional results, there is the potential to improve
raking or smoothing/rounding the edges
example potential compliance tractor aerodynamics by 0.206 wind
of the front-end components (e.g.,
pathways, we also considered averaged coefficient of drag area (CdA)
additional technologies than those in 238 Assumes travel on level road at 65 miles per with the addition of wheel covers, drive
the Phase 2 MY 2027 technology hour. (21st Century Truck Partnership Roadmap
packages such as H2–ICE, hybrids, and and Technical White Papers, December 2006. U.S. 240 Jason Leuschen and Kevin R. Cooper (National
natural gas engines. Each of these Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Research Council of Canada), Society of Automotive
Renewable Energy Program. 21CTP–003. p.36. Engineer. (SAE) Paper #2006–01–3456: ‘‘Full-Scale
technologies is discussed in this section 239 Reducing Heavy-Duty Long Haul Combination Wind Tunnel Tests of Production and Prototype,
and RIA Chapter 1.4. Truck Fuel Consumption and CO2 Emissions, ICCT, Second-Generation Aerodynamic Drag-Reducing
ER22AP24.013</GPH>
October 2009. Devices for Tractor-Trailers.’’ November 2, 2006.
59Sfmt 4700
axle wrap around splash guards, and In our Phase 2 analysis, considering the results measured during aerodynamic
roof fairing rear edge filler. Up to 0.460 wind average drag performance of testing as prescribed in 40 CFR
CdA improvement is possible if the side heavy-duty tractors at the time, this 1037.525. The results of the
and fender mirrors are replaced with a study demonstrated the possibility to aerodynamic testing are used to
camera system, as suggested by the improve tractors an additional ∼1 determine the aerodynamic bin and
study, and combined with the wheel percent with some simple changes. CdA input value for GEM, as prescribed
covers, drive axle wrap around splash In Phase 2, the tractor aerodynamic in 40 CFR 1037.520 and shown in Table
guards, and roof fairing rear edge filler. performance was evaluated using the II–5.
wind averaged coefficient of drag area
EPA conducted aerodynamic testing aerodynamic bin of low and mid roof lower rolling resistance lose less energy,
for the Phase 2 final rule.241 As shown tractors from the equivalent high roof and use less fuel, producing less CO2
in Phase 2 RIA Chapter 3.2.1.2, the most tractor, this assessment also applies to emissions in operation.
aerodynamic high roof sleeper cabs low and mid roof tractors. A tire’s rolling resistance is a factor
tested had a CdA of approximately 5.4 For our modeled potential compliance considered in the design of the tire and
m2, which is a Bin IV tractor. Therefore, pathway in Phase 3 tractors’ technology is affected by the tread and casing
we concluded that prior to 2016 packages, the vehicles with ICE portion compound materials, the architecture of
manufacturers were producing high roof of the technology package for the MY the casing, tread design, and the tire
sleeper cabs that range in aerodynamic 2027 high roof sleeper cab tractor manufacturing process. It is estimated
performance between Bins I and IV. Bin includes 20 percent Bin III, 30 percent that 35 to 50 percent of a tire’s rolling
V is achievable through the addition of Bin IV, and 50 percent Bin V reflecting resistance is from the tread and the
aerodynamic features that improve the our assessment of the fraction of high other 50 to 65 percent is from the
aerodynamics on the best pre-2016 roof sleeper cab tractors. We continue to casing.242 Tire inflation can also impact
sleeper cabs tested by at least 0.3 m2 project, as we projected in the Phase 2 rolling resistance in that under-inflated
CdA. The features that could be added rulemaking, that manufacturers could tires can result in increased deformation
include technologies such as wheel successfully apply these aerodynamic and contact with the road surface.
covers, drive axle wrap around splash packages by MY 2027. The weighted In Phase 2, we developed four levels
guards, and roof fairing rear edge filler, average for tractors of this set of of tire rolling resistance, as shown in
and active grill shutters. In addition, adoption rates is equivalent to a tractor Table II–6. The levels included the
manufacturers continue to improve the aerodynamic performance near the baseline (average) from 2010, Level I
aerodynamic designs of the front border between Bin IV and Bin V. and Level 2 from Phase 1, and Level 3
bumper, grill, hood, and windshield. that achieves an additional 25 percent
The Phase 2 standards for vocational improvement over Level 2. The Level 2
Our analysis of high roof day cabs is vehicles were not projected to be met
similar to our assessment of high roof threshold represents an incremental
with the use of aerodynamic step for improvements beyond today’s
sleeper cabs. Also, as shown in Phase 2 improvements.
RIA Chapter 3.2.1.2, the most SmartWay level and represents the best
aerodynamic high roof day cab tested by ii. Tire Rolling Resistance in class rolling resistance of the tires we
EPA achieved Bin IV. Our assessment is tested for Phase 1.243 The Level 3 values
Energy loss associated with tires is represented the long-term rolling
that the same types of additional mainly due to deformation of the tires
technologies that could be applied to resistance value that EPA projected
under the load of the vehicle, known as could be achieved in the MY 2025
high roof sleeper cabs could also be hysteresis, but smaller losses result from
applied to high roof day cabs to achieve timeframe. Given the multiple year
aerodynamic drag, and other friction phase-in of the Phase 2 standards, EPA
Bin V aerodynamic performance. forces between the tire and road surface
Finally, because the manufacturers have and the tire and wheel rim. Collectively 242 ‘‘Tires & Truck Fuel Economy,’’ A New
the ability to determine the the forces that result in energy loss from Perspective. Bridgestone Firestone, North American
the tires are referred to as rolling Tire, LLC, Special Edition Four, 2008. EPA–HQ–
241 U.S. EPA. Regulatory Impact Analysis
resistance. Tires with higher rolling OAR–2010–0162–0373.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency 243 U.S. EPA. SmartWay Verified Low Rolling
Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines

resistance lose more energy, thus using Resistance Tires Performance Requirements.
and Vehicles—Phase 2. Chapter 3. EPA–420–R–16– more fuel and producing more CO2 Available online: https://www.epa.gov/sites/
ER22AP24.014</GPH>
900. August 2016. emissions in operation, while tires with default/files/2016-02/documents/420f12024.pdf.
60Sfmt 4700
expected that tire manufacturers will numbers of tire models with rolling than the typical low rolling resistance
continue to respond to demand for more resistance values significantly better tires offered in 2016.
efficient tires and will offer increasing
In the modeled compliance pathway ratio engine design. The engine operates today in the fleet. EIA estimates that
for the Phase 3 tractors’ technology lean of stoichiometric operation, which approximately 4,400 CNG and LNG
packages, the vehicles with ICE portion leads to engine-out emissions that heavy-duty vehicles were sold in 2022
of the technology package for the MY require aftertreatment systems similar to and approximately 50,000 CNG and
2027 included steer and drive tires that diesel ICEs, such as diesel oxidation LNG vehicles are in the U.S. heavy-duty
on average performed at a Level 2 catalysts, selective catalytic reduction fleet.244 Manufacturers are producing
rolling resistance. We continue to systems, and diesel particulate filters. CNG and LNG vehicles in all of the
project, as we projected in the Phase 2 The CNG CI engine is more costly than vocational and tractor categories,
rulemaking, that manufacturers could a diesel CI engine because of the special especially buses, refuse hauler, street
successfully apply tires that on average natural gas/diesel fuel injection system. sweeper, and tractor applications, as
perform at this level by MY 2027. The NG SI engine and aftertreatment discussed further in RIA Chapter
system is less costly than a NG CI 1.4.1.2.245
iii. Natural Gas Engines
engine and aftertreatment system but is iv. Hydrogen-Fueled Internal
Natural-gas powered heavy-duty less fuel efficient than a NG CI engine Combustion Engines
vehicles are very similar to gasoline and because of the lower compression ratio.
diesel fueled ICE-powered vehicles. The Currently, hydrogen fueled internal
In addition to differences in engine
engine functions the same as a gasoline combustion engines (H2–ICE) are in the
architecture, the natural gas fuel can be
or diesel fueled ICE. Two key demonstration stage. H2–ICE is a
stored two ways—compressed (CNG) or
differences are the fuel storage and technology that provides nearly zero
liquified (LNG). A CNG tank stores
tailpipe emissions for hydrocarbons,
delivery systems. The fuel delivery pressurized gaseous natural gas and the
carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide.
system delivers high-pressure natural system includes a pressure regulator. An
H2–ICE require less exhaust
gas from the fuel tank to the fuel LNG tank stores liquified natural gas
aftertreatment. These systems may not
injectors located on the engine. Similar that is cryogenically cooled but stored at
require the diesel particulate filter
to gasoline or diesel fuel, natural gas is a lower pressure than CNG. The LNG (DPF). However, NOX emissions are still
stored in a fuel tank, or cylinder, but tanks often are double walled to help formed during the H2–ICE combustion
requires the ability to store the fuel maintain the temperature of the fuel, process and therefore a selective
under high pressure. and include a gasification system to turn catalytic reduction (SCR) system would
There are different ways that heavy- the fuel from a liquid to a gas before be required, as well a diesel oxidation
duty engines can be configured to use injecting the fuel into the engine. An catalyst, though it may be smaller in
natural gas as a fuel. The first is a spark- important advantage of LNG is the size than that used in a comparable
ignition natural gas engine. An Otto increased energy density compared to diesel-fueled ICE. The use of lean air-
cycle SI heavy-duty engine uses a spark CNG. Because of its higher energy
plug for ignition and burns the fuel density, LNG can be more suitable for 244 EIA. Annual Energy Outlook 2023. Table 49.
stoichiometrically. Due to this, the applications such as long-haul Available Online: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/
engine-out emissions require use of a applications. aeo/data/browser/#/?id=58-AEO2023&cases=
ref2023&sourcekey=0.
three-way catalyst to control criteria Natural gas engines are a mature
245 Department of Energy Alternative Fuels Data

pollutant emissions. The second is a technology. Cummins manufactures Center. Available Online: https://afdc.energy.gov/
direct injection natural gas that utilizes natural gas engines that cover the vehicles/search/results?manufacturer_
a compression-ignition (CI) cycle. The complete range of heavy-duty vehicle id=67,205,117,394,415,201,113,5,408,481,9,13,
11,458,81,435,474,57,416,141,197,417,
CI engine uses a small quantity of diesel applications, with engine displacements 121,475,53,397,418,85,414,17,21,143,476,
fuel (pilot injection) as an ignition ranging from 6.7L to 12L. Heavy-duty 492,23,484,398,27,477,399,31,207,396,489,107,
ER22AP24.015</GPH>
source along with a high compression CNG and LNG vehicles are available 465,487,193,460,35,459,115,37,147,480,199.
61Sfmt 4700
fuel ratios, and not exhaust gas default CO2 emission value (3 g/hp-hr) Hybrid powered vehicles can provide
recirculation (EGR), is the most effective option (though manufacturers may CO2 emission reductions from splitting
way to control NOX in a H2–ICE, as EGR instead conduct testing to demonstrate or blending of ICE and electric
is less effective with H2 due to the that the CO2 emissions for their engine operation. Hybrid vehicles reduce CO2
absence of CO2 in the exhaust gas. is below 3 g/hp-hr). Under our existing emissions through four primary
H2–ICE can be developed using an fuel-mapping test procedures that may mechanisms:
OEM’s existing tooling, manufacturing be used as part of demonstrating • In a series hybrid powertrain, the
processes, and engine design expertise. compliance with vehicle CO2 exhaust ICE operates as a generator to create
H2–ICE engines are very similar to emission standards, the results are fuel electricity for the battery. Series hybrids
existing ICEs and can leverage the consumption values and therefore the can be optimized through downsizing,
extensive technical expertise CO2 emissions from urea decomposition modifying the operating cycle, or other
manufacturers have developed with are not included in the results.247 248 control techniques to operate at or near
existing products. Similarly, H2–ICE Under this final rule, consistent with its most efficient engine speed-load
products can be built on the same existing treatment of such contributions conditions more often than is possible
assembly lines as other ICE vehicles, by from the aftertreatment system from with a conventional engine-
the same workers and with many of the urea decomposition (e.g., for diesel ICE transmission driveline. Power loss due
same component suppliers. vehicles) for compliance with vehicle to engine downsizing can be mitigated
H2–ICE incorporate several CO2 exhaust emission standards, we are by employing power assist from the
differences from their diesel baseline. not including such contributions in secondary, electric driveline.
Components such as the cylinder head, determining compliance with vehicle • Hybrid vehicles typically include
valves, seals, piston, and piston rings CO2 exhaust emission standards for H2– regenerative braking systems that
would be unique to the H2–ICE to ICE vehicles. Thus, H2–ICE technologies capture some of the energy normally
control H2 leakage during engine that run on neat hydrogen, as defined in lost while braking and store it in the
operation. Another difference between a 40 CFR 1037.150(f) and discussed in traction battery for later use. That stored
diesel-fueled ICE and a H2–ICE is the section III.C.3.ii of the preamble, have energy is typically used to provide
fuel storage tanks. The hydrogen storage HD vehicle CO2 emissions that are additional torque upon initial
tanks are more expensive than today’s deemed to be zero for purposes of acceleration from stop or additional
diesel fuel tanks. The fuel tanks likely compliance with vehicle emission power for moving the vehicle up a steep
to be used by H2–ICE are identical to standards under 40 CFR part 1037. incline.
those used by a fuel cell electric vehicle • Hybrid powertrains allow the
Therefore, the technology effectiveness
(FCEV) and they may utilize either engine to be turned off when it is not
(in other words CO2 emission reduction)
compressed storage (350 or 700 Bar needed, such as when the vehicle is
for the vehicles that are powered by this
pressure) or cryogenic storage coasting or when the vehicle is stopped.
technology is 100 percent for
(temperatures as low as ¥253 Celsius). Furthermore, some vehicle systems such
compliance with vehicle CO2 exhaust
Please refer to Chapter 1.7.2 of this as cabin comfort and power steering can
emission standards.
document for the discussion regarding be electrified if a 48V or higher battery
H2 fuel storage tanks. v. Hybrid and Plug-In Hybrid system is incorporated into the vehicle.
H2–ICE may hasten the development Powertrains The electrical systems are more efficient
of hydrogen infrastructure because they The heavy-duty industry has also than their conventional counterparts
do not require as pure of hydrogen as been developing hybrid powertrains, as which utilize an accessory drive belt on
FCEVs. Hydrogen infrastructure exists described in RIA Chapter 1.4.1.1. a running engine. When the engine is
in limited quantities in some parts of Hybrid powertrains consist of an ICE as stopped these accessory loads are
the country for applications such as well as an electric drivetrain. The ICE supported by the traction battery.
forklifts, buses, and LDVs and HDVs at uses a consumable fuel (e.g., diesel) to • Plug-in hybrid vehicles can further
ports. Federal funds are being used to produce power which can either propel reduce CO2 emissions by increasing the
support the development of additional the vehicle directly or charge the battery storage capacity and adding the
hubs and other hydrogen related traction battery from which the electric ability to connect to the electrical power
infrastructure items through the BIL and motor draws its energy. These two grid to fully charge the battery when the
IRA, as described in more detail in sources of power can be used in vehicle is not in service, which can
Chapter 1.8. combination to do work and move the significantly expand the amount of all-
Since neat hydrogen fuel does not vehicle, or they may operate electric operation.
contain any carbon, H2–ICE fueled with Hybrid vehicles can utilize a
individually, switching between the two
neat hydrogen produce zero HC, CH4, combination of some or all of these
sources. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles
CO, and CO2 engine-out emissions.246 mechanisms to reduce fuel consumption
(PHEVs) are a combination of ICE and
However, as explained in section and CO2 emissions. The magnitude of
electric vehicles, so they have an ICE
III.C.2.xviii, we recognize that, like CI the CO2 reduction achieved depends on
and a battery, an electric motor, and a
ICE, there may be negligible, but non- the utilization/optimization of the
fuel tank, and plug-in to the electric grid
zero, CO2 exhaust emissions of H2–ICE previously listed mechanisms and the
to recharge the battery. PHEVs use both
that use SCR and are fueled with neat powertrain design decisions made by
gasoline or diesel and electricity as fuel
hydrogen due to contributions from the the manufacturer.
sources.
Hybrid technology is well established
aftertreatment system from urea
in the U.S. light-duty market, where
decomposition. Thus, for purposes of 247 See 81 FR 73552 (October 25, 2016), for the
explanation on why CO2 from urea decomposition some manufacturers have been
compliance with engine CO2 exhaust

is included when showing compliance with the producing light-duty hybrid models for
emission standards under 40 CFR part engine standards and it is not included when several decades and others are looking
1036, we are finalizing an engine testing showing compliance with the vehicle CO2 to develop hybrid models in the future.
standards.
246 Note, NO and PM emission testing is 248 See, e.g., 40 CFR 1037.501 (including Hybrid powertrains are available today
X
required under existing 40 CFR part 1036 for reference to 40 CFR 1036.535, 1036.540, and in a number of heavy-duty vocational
engines fueled with neat hydrogen. 1036.545). vehicles including passenger van/
62Sfmt 4700
shuttle bus, transit bus, street sweeper, are considered. Another commenter compliance pathway we projected in
refuse hauler, and delivery truck echoed those comments, urging that the Phase 2 and currently project.
applications. Hybrid transit buses have standards reflect further improvements For the ICE vehicle technologies part
been purchased for use in cities for ICE vehicles. Acknowledging that of the analysis that supports the
including Philadelphia, PA, and these improvements could be viewed as feasibility of the Phase 3 standards, our
Toronto, Canada. Heavy-duty hybrid a different compliance pathway to meet assessment is that technology packages
vehicles may include a power takeoff the proposed standards (which is developed for the Phase 2 rule are still
(PTO) system that is used to operate consistent with the proposal and final appropriate for use in this final rule and
auxiliary equipment, such as the boom/ rule explaining the Phase 3 standards thus the technology packages for the
bucket on a utility truck or the water are performance-based standards), the potential compliance pathway include a
pump on a fire truck. Utility trucks with commenter urged that these mix of ICE vehicle technologies and
electric PTOs where the electricity to improvements be incremental to any adoption rates of those technologies at
power the auxiliary equipment can be improvements predicated on a ZEV the levels included in the Phase 2 MY
provided by the battery have been sold. technology package. A third commenter 2027 technology packages. We also
Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles run also supported the first commenter’s developed other additional potential
on both electricity and fuel. Many PHEV assessment of engine and vehicle compliance pathways, with different
models are available today in the light- technologies and further cited a separate technology packages, to support the
duty market.249 Today there is a limited comment submitted to EPA that feasibility of the Phase 3 final standards
number of PHEV heavy-duty models. cylinder deactivation used as active that are based on vehicles with ICE
Light-duty manufacturers that also thermal management also improves technologies. See section II.F.4 of this
produce heavy-duty vehicle could bring efficiency. preamble. These example compliance
PHEVs to market in the LHD and MHD On the other hand, several HD vehicle pathways include consideration of
segments in less time than for the HHD manufacturers noted that some ICE potential different pathways to
and tractor segments. The utility factor vehicle technologies have lagged behind compliance through the use of such ICE
is the fraction of miles the vehicle projections made by EPA to support the vehicle technologies beyond those
travels in electric mode relative to the Phase 2 rule. These technologies included in the Phase 2 MY 2027
total miles traveled. The percent CO2 include automatic tire inflation systems, technology packages, plus technologies
emission reduction is directly related to electric accessories, and tamper proof such as H2–ICE, plug-in hybrids, and
the utility factor. The greater the utility idle reduction for vocational vehicles, natural gas engines. Additional
factor, the lower the tailpipe CO2 discussion can be found in section 9.2
stop-start technologies, and advanced
emissions from the vehicle. The utility of the RTC.
transmission shifting strategies. Some of
factor depends on the size of the battery
the reasons include lack of technology 2. HD Battery Electric Vehicle
and the operator’s driving habits.
availability (e.g., engine stop-start), Technology and Infrastructure
vi. ICE Vehicle Technologies in the technology costs (e.g., auto tire inflation,
Modeled Potential Compliance Pathway electric accessories), customer adoption In addition to assessing ICE
We received a number of comments willingness (e.g., one-minute idle technologies, EPA also assessed BEV
on technologies to reduce CO2 shutdown timers), and high compliance technologies, which we anticipate will
emissions from ICE vehicles. One costs (e.g., powertrain testing). be widely available for many HD vehicle
commenter indicated that vehicle For the final rule analysis, we applications during the timeframe for
improvements to ICE vehicles would be evaluated the manufacturers’ this rule and which have the potential
cost-effective and could lead to compliance with the MY 2021 standards to achieve very large CO2 emissions
appreciable further reductions from ICE (the first year of Phase 2). While the reductions. Our assessment of feasibility
vehicles. Specifically, the commenter manufacturers note in comments that of the Phase 3 standards includes not
pointed to improvements of nearly 7 they are not seeing the adoption of only an assessment of the performance
percent for vehicle improvements to certain engine and vehicle technologies of projected potential emissions control
high-roof sleeper cabs (aerodynamic at the rates shown in EPA’s technology technologies, but also the availability of
improvements, tires, intelligent package to support the Phase 2 rule, this this technology within the rule’s
controls, weight reduction, axle does not mean that the technologies timeframe. Our assessment of
efficiency, reduced accessory load); EPA expected are not available; it just technology availability includes
nearly 10 percent for vehicle means manufacturers have found evaluating the availability of critical
improvements for multi-purpose different ways to comply. In addition, minerals for such technologies
vocational vehicles (stop-start, weight we are still several years away from the (including issues associated with supply
reduction, tires, axle efficiency, MY 2027 vehicle production so there chain readiness) and the readiness of
aerodynamic improvements, reduced continues to be time for increased sufficient supporting electrical
accessory load); improvements from 6– adoption of these technologies. infrastructure. The following
12 percent from vehicle improvements Furthermore, EPA’s emission standards subsections address each of these
to Class 7 and 8 tractors; and from 15– are performance-based and elements.
20 percent for vehicle improvements for manufacturers will use a number of The HD BEV market has been growing
vocational vehicles (all percentages different technologies to comply. These significantly since MY 2018. RIA
reflecting incremental improvements include all those listed in the Phase 2 Chapter 1.5 includes BEV vehicle
beyond the MY 2027 Phase 2 standard). package for MY 2027 because they are information on over 160 models
Further improvements are posited by being installed on vehicles today, produced by over 60 manufacturers that
the commenter if engine improvements hybrids including PHEVs, and cover a broad range of applications,
alternative fueled vehicles such as including school buses, transit buses,
249 US Department of Energy. Fueleconomy.gov.
natural gas, as suggested by straight trucks, refuse haulers, vans,
Available online: https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/ commenters. We are thus not convinced tractors, utility trucks, and others,
PowerSearch.do?action=alts&path=3&year=
2024&vtype=Plug-in+Hybrid&srchtyp that these technologies are not available available to the public through MY
=yearAfv&rowLimit=50&pageno=1. for Phase 3 consistent with the potential 2024. Others project significant growth
63Sfmt 4700
of ZEV sales to continue into the future, Nickel-based chemistries typically have provides a regulatory structure for
achieving 50 percent by 2035.250 higher gravimetric and volumetric contracting parties to set standards for
energy densities than iron phosphate- battery durability in light-duty BEVs
i. Batteries Design Parameters
based chemistries. Since energy or and PHEVs. Likewise, although not
The battery electric propulsion system power is only housed at the chemistry finalized, the UN ECE GTR working
includes a battery pack that provides the level, any additional mass such as the group began drafting language for HD
energy to the motor that moves the cell, module, and pack casings will only BEVs and hybrid electric vehicles. Loss
vehicle. In this section, and in RIA add to the weight of the battery without of electric range can lead to a loss of
Chapter 1.5.1 and 2.4, we discuss increasing the energy of the overall utility, meaning electric vehicles can be
battery technology that can be found in system. Therefore, some pack producers driven less and therefore displace less
both BEVs and FCEVs. have eliminated the module in favor of distance travelled than might otherwise
Battery design involves a ‘‘cell-to-pack’’ design in recent be driven in ICE vehicles. Furthermore,
considerations related to cost 251 and years.254 a loss in utility can dampen purchaser
performance including specific External factors, especially sentiment.
energy252 and energy density,253 temperature, can have a strong influence For batteries that are used in HD
temperature impact, durability, and on the performance of the battery. Like BEVs, the state of health (SOH) is an
safety. These parameters typically vary all BEVs, heavy-duty BEVs today important design factor. The
based on the cathode and anode include thermal management systems to performance of electrified vehicles may
materials, and on the conductive keep the battery operating within a be affected by excess degradation of the
electrolyte medium at the cell level. desired temperature range, which is battery system over time, thus reducing
Different battery chemistries have commonly referred to as conditioning of the range of the vehicle. However, the
different intrinsic values. Here we the battery. Therefore, while operating a durability of a battery is not limited to
provide a brief overview of the different vehicle in cold temperatures, some of the cycling of a battery; there are many
energy and power parameters of the battery energy is used to heat both phenomena that can impact the
batteries and battery chemistries. the battery packs and the vehicle duration of usability of a battery. As a
interior.255 Cold temperatures, in battery goes through charge and
a. Battery Energy and Power Parameters particular, can result in reduced discharge cycles, the SOH of the battery
Specific energy and power and energy mobility of the lithium ions in the decreases. Capacity fade, increase in
density are a function of how much liquid electrolyte inside the battery; for internal resistance, and voltage loss, for
energy or power can be stored per unit the driver, this may mean lower range. example, are other common metrics to
mass (in Watt-hour per kilogram (Wh/ Battery thermal management is also measure the SOH of a battery. These
kg) or Watt per kilogram (W/kg)) or used during hot ambient temperatures parameters together help better
volume (in Watt-hour per liter (Wh/L)). to keep the battery from overheating. We understand and define the longevity or
Therefore, for a given battery weight or consider and account for the energy durability of the battery. The SOH and,
mass, the energy (in kilowatt-hour or required for battery thermal in turn, the cycle life of the battery are
kWh) can be calculated. For example, a management in our analysis, as determined by both the chemistry of the
battery with high specific energy and a discussed in section II.D.5.ii.b. battery and external factors including
lower weight may yield the same temperature. The rate at which the
b. Battery Durability battery is discharged as well as the rate
amount of energy as a chemistry with a
lower specific energy and more weight. Another important battery design at which it is charged will also impact
Battery packs have a ‘‘nested’’ design consideration is the durability of the the SOH of the battery. Lastly, calendar
where a group of cells are combined to battery. Durability is frequently aging, or degradation of the battery
make a battery module and a group of associated with cycle life, where cycle while not in use, can also contribute to
modules are combined to make a battery life is the number of times a battery can the deterioration of the battery.
pack. Therefore, the battery systems can fully charge and discharge before the There are several ways to improve
be described on the pack, module, and battery capacity falls below the and prolong the battery life in a vehicle.
cell levels. Common battery chemistries minimum design capacity.256 In 2015 In our assessment, we account for
today include lithium-ion based cathode the United Nations Economic maintaining the battery temperature
chemistries, such as nickel-manganese- Commission for Europe (UN ECE) began while driving by applying additional
cobalt (NMC), nickel-cobalt-aluminum studying the need for a Global Technical energy required for conditioning the
(NCA), and iron-phosphate (LFP). Regulation (GTR) governing battery battery. See section II.D.5 of this
durability in light-duty vehicles. In 2021 preamble.
250 Truckinginfo.com ‘‘ACT: Half of Class 4–8 it finalized United Nations Global
c. HD BEV Safety Assessment
Sales to be BEV by 2035.’’ February 2022. Available Technical Regulation No. 22, ‘‘In-
online: https://www.truckinginfo.com/10161524/ Vehicle Battery Durability for Electrified HD BEV systems must be designed to
act-half-of-class-4-8-sales-to-be-bev-by-2035.
251 Cost here is associated with cost of the battery Vehicles,’’ 257 or GTR No. 22, which always maintain safe operation. As with
design. This cost may be associated with using any on-road vehicle, BEVs must be
more expensive minerals (e.g., nickel and cobalt 254 BYD ‘‘blade’’ cells are an example of cell-to- robust while operating in temperature
instead of iron phosphate). Alternatively, some pack technology. extremes as well as in rain and snow.
battery cell components may be more expensive for 255 https://www.aaa.com/AAA/common/AAR/
The BEV systems must be designed for
the same chemistry. For example, power battery files/AAA-Electric-Vehicle-Range-Testing-
cells are more expensive to manufacture than Report.pdf. reasonable levels of immersion,
energy battery cells because these cells require 256 The minimum design capacity is typically including immersion in salt water or
thinner electrodes which are more complex to defined as the point where the usable battery energy brackish water. BEV systems must also
produce. (UBE) is less than 70 or 80 percent of the UBE of be designed to be crashworthy and limit
252 Battery specific energy (also referred to as a new battery.
gravimetric energy density) is a measure of battery 257 United Nations Economic Commission for
damage that compromises safety. If the
energy per unit of mass. Europe, Addendum 22: United Nations Global structure is compromised by a severe
253 Volumetric energy density (also called energy Technical Regulation No. 22, United Nations Global
density) is a measure of battery energy per unit of Technical Regulation on In-vehicle Battery Available at: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/
volume. Durability for Electrified Vehicles, April 14, 2022. 202204/ECE_TRANS_180a22e.pdf.
64Sfmt 4700
impact, the systems must provide first for a longer period), shows that BEVs not treat safety as a constraining factor
responders with a way to safely conduct ‘‘are at least as safe’’ as combustion in this rulemaking.
their work at an accident scene. The HD vehicles in terms of crashworthiness test
ii. Assessment of Battery Materials and
BEV systems must be designed to ensure performance, and ‘‘injury claims are
Production
the safety of users, occupants, and the substantially less frequent’’ for BEVs
general public in their vicinity. than for combustion vehicles.259 A DOE ICE vehicles and BEVs both require
In RIA Chapter 1.5.2, we discuss the study found that on some safety metrics, manufacturing inputs in the form of
industry codes and standards used by BEVs perform substantially better than materials such as structural metals,
manufacturers that guide safe design ICE vehicles. Due to their battery plastics, electrical conductors,
and development of heavy-duty BEVs, architecture, for example, BEVs electronics and computer chips, and
including those for developing battery typically have a lower center of gravity many other materials, minerals, and
systems and charging systems that than combustion vehicles, which components that are produced both
protect people and the equipment. increases stability and reduces the risk domestically and globally. These inputs
These standards have already been of rollovers (the cause of up to 35 rely to varying degrees on a highly
developed by the industry and are in percent of accident deaths).260 Most interconnected global supply chain that
place for manufacturers to use to vehicle weight classes do not change. includes mining and recycling
develop current and future products. The distribution of HD vehicle weights operations, processing of mined or
The standards guide the design of BEV may shift higher with BEV adoption but reclaimed materials into pure metals or
batteries to allow them to safely accept the maximum allowed weight for a chemical products, manufacture of
and deliver power for the life of the given weight class does not change. The vehicle components, and final assembly
vehicle. The standards provide guidance one exception is for BEV Class 8 that are of vehicles.
to design batteries that also handle allowed to increase their GCWR from Compared to ICE vehicles, the
vibration, temperature extremes, 80,000 lbs to 82,000, a 2.5 percent electrified powertrain of BEVs
temperature cycling, water, and increase.261 We coordinated with commonly contains a greater proportion
mechanical impact from items such as NHTSA to assess the safety concerns of conductive metals such as copper as
road debris. For HD BEVs to uphold due to vehicle weight. NHTSA is not well as specialized minerals and
battery/electrical safety during and after aware of differences in crash outcomes mineral products that are used in the
a crash, they are designed to maintain between electric and non-electric high-voltage battery. Accordingly, many
high voltage isolation, prevent leakage vehicles. See RTC section 4.8. NHTSA of the public comments we received
of electrolyte and volatile gases, is monitoring this topic closely and is were related to the need to secure
maintain internal battery integrity, and conducting extensive research on the sources of these inputs to support
withstand external fire that can come potential differences between ICE and increased manufacture of BEVs for the
from the BEV or other vehicle(s) electric vehicles. U.S. market.262
involved in a crash. NHTSA continues First, it is important to view this issue
work on battery safety requirements in Fire risk, emergency response, and
from a perspective that includes the
FMVSS No. 305 to extend its maintenance can also be managed
inputs currently required by ICE
applicability to HD vehicles, aligning it effectively. There is evidence (discussed
vehicles, where comparable issues have
with the existing Global Technical more fully in RTC section 4.8) that BEVs
arisen and have been successfully
Regulation (GTR) No. 20, and including are less likely to catch fire than internal
surmounted. Compared to BEVs, ICE
safety requirements during normal combustion engine vehicles. Although
vehicles rely to a greater degree on
operation, charging, and post-crash. BEVs can behave differently in fires
certain inputs, most notably refined
We requested comment on our from ICE vehicles, emergency
crude oil products such as gasoline or
assessment at proposal that HD BEV responders have been gaining
diesel, and critical minerals (for
systems must be, and are, designed ‘‘to experience in BEV fire response as the
example, platinum group metals) used
always maintain safe operation.’’ 88 FR number of BEVs on the road has grown,
in emission control catalysts.
25962. Some commenters supported our and there are protocols and guidance at
Historically, supply and price
assessment that there are industry codes the Federal and private levels in support
fluctuations of crude oil products have
and standards for the safe design and of first responders. Similar protocols
periodically created significant risks,
operation of HD BEVs. In addition, some and guidance exist to mitigate shock
costs, and uncertainties for the U.S.
commenters highlighted that HD BEVs risk to mechanics during maintenance
economy and for national security, and
are subject to, and necessarily comply and repair.
continue to pose them today. The
with, the same Federal safety standards In sum, the public and private sectors critical minerals used in emission
and the same safety testing as ICE have been working diligently to address control catalysts of ICE products, such
heavy-duty vehicles. Commenters BEV safety considerations. While as cerium, palladium, platinum, and
challenging the safety of HD BEVs failed current standards are appropriate, rhodium, historically have posed
to address the existence of these optimization efforts will continue as the particular uncertainty and risk regarding
protocols and Federal standards. While HD BEV industry matures. Heavy-duty their reliable supply. Although
considering safety for the NPRM, EPA BEVs can be and are designed and manufacturers have engineered
obtained NHTSA input. EPA obtained operated safely, and EPA therefore did emission control systems to reduce the
additional NHTSA safety input amount of these minerals that are
regarding comments and updates for the 259 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, ‘‘With
needed, they continue to be scarce and
final rulemaking.258 More Electric Vehicles Comes More Proof of Safety’’ costly today, and continue to be largely
(April 22, 2021), https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/
Moreover, empirical evidence from sourced from other countries. For

with-more-electric-vehicles-comes-more-proof-of-
the light-duty sector (where BEVs have safety. example, South Africa and Russia
been on the road in greater numbers and 260 U.S. Department of Energy, ‘‘Maintenance and
Safety of Electric Vehicles’’, https:// 262 FCEVs use smaller batteries than BEVs, but
258 Landgraf,
Michael. Memorandum to docket afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_maintenance.html those batteries would require use of the same
EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. Summary of NHTSA (October 23, 2023). minerals. The text in this section is written in terms
Safety Communication. February 2024. 261 23 U.S.C. 127(s). of BEVs but is relevant to FCEV batteries as well.
65Sfmt 4700
continue to be dominant suppliers of produced in the U.S., but because other new materials from either domestic or
these metals as they were in the 1970s, countries have already invested in foreign sources over the long term. In
and U.S. relations with both countries developing this supply chain, while the this updated analysis for the final rule,
have periodically been strained. In this U.S. largely has begun developing a we examine these themes again in light
sense, the need for a secure supply domestic battery supply chain more of the public comments and additional
chain for the inputs required for BEV recently. The rapid growth in domestic data that has become available since the
production is not unlike that which demand for automotive lithium-ion proposal.
continues to be important for ICE batteries that is already taking place is We received many comments on our
vehicle production. driving the development of a supply analysis of critical minerals, battery and
The BEV supply chain is chain for these products that includes mineral production capacity, and
characterized as consisting of several development of domestic sources, as critical mineral security. Some common
activity stages including upstream, well as rapid buildout of production themes were: that the proposal did not
midstream, and downstream, which capacity in countries with which the adequately address critical minerals or
includes end-of-life. Upstream refers to U.S. has friendly relations, including battery manufacturing; that the proposal
extraction of raw materials from mining countries with free trade agreements did not adequately address the risk
activities. Midstream refers to additional (FTAs) and long-established trade allies. associated with uncertain availability of
processing of raw materials into battery- For example (as described later in this critical minerals in the future; and that
grade materials, production of electrode section), U.S. manufacturers are the timeline and/or degree of BEV
active materials (EAM), production of increasingly seeking out secure, reliable penetration anticipated by the proposal
other battery components (i.e., and geographically proximate supplies cannot be supported by available
electrolyte, foils, and separators), and of batteries, cells, components, and the minerals and/or growth in domestic
electrode and cell manufacturing. minerals and materials needed to build supplies or battery manufacturing.
Downstream refers to production of them; this is also necessary to remain Many of the concerns stated by
battery modules and packs from battery competitive in the global automotive commenters about the supply chain,
cells, and end-of-life refers to recovery market where electrification is critical minerals, and mineral security
and processing of used batteries for proceeding rapidly. As a result, a large were stated as part of a broader
reuse or recycling. Global demand for number of new domestic battery, cell, argument that the proposed standards
zero-emission vehicles has already led and component manufacturing facilities were too stringent; that is, that the
to rapidly growing demand for capacity have recently been announced or are commenter believed that the standards
in each of these areas and subsequent already under construction.263 Many should be weakened (or withdrawn
buildout of this capacity across the automakers, suppliers, startups, and entirely) because the supply chain or
world. We discuss each of these activity related industries have already the availability of critical minerals
stages in the following sections of this recognized the need for increased could not support the amount of vehicle
preamble. domestic and ‘‘friendshored’’ electrification that would result from
The value of developing a robust and production capacity as a business the standards, or it would create a
secure supply chain that includes these opportunity and are investing in reliance on imported products that
activities and the products they create building out various aspects of the would threaten national security.
has accordingly received broad attention supply chain domestically. For this final rule we considered the
in the industry and is a key theme of Second, we noted that Congress and public comments carefully. We have
comments we have received. The the Administration have taken provided detailed responses to
primary considerations here are (a) the significant steps to accelerate this comments relating to critical minerals,
capability of global and domestic supply activity by funding, facilitating, and the supply chain, and mineral security
chains to support U.S. manufacturing of otherwise promoting the rapid growth of in this preamble and in section 17.2 of
batteries and other ZEV components, (b) U.S. and allied supply chains for these the Response to Comments. We also
the availability of critical minerals as products through the Inflation continued our ongoing consultation
manufacturing inputs, and (c) the Reduction Act (IRA), the Bipartisan with industry and government agency
possibility that sourcing of these items Infrastructure Law (BIL), the National sources (including the Department of
from other countries, to the extent it Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), and Energy (DOE) and National Labs, the
occurs, might pose a threat to national numerous Executive Branch initiatives. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and
security. In addition, there is the further Recent and ongoing announcements of several analysis firms) to collect
question of the adequacy of the battery investment and construction activity information on production capacity
supply chain to meet potential demand stimulated by these measures indicate forecasts, price forecasts, global mineral
resulting from a Phase 3 rule. In this that they are having a strong impact on markets, and related topics. We also
section, EPA considers how these development of the domestic supply coordinated with DOE in their
factors relate to the feasibility of chain, as illustrated by recent analysis assessment of the outlook for supply
producing the BEVs that manufacturers from Argonne National Lab and U.S. chain development and critical mineral
may choose to produce to comply with DOE.264 Finally, while minerals may be availability. DOE is well qualified for
the standards. imported to the U.S. for domestic such research, as it routinely studies
In the proposal, we highlighted vehicle or battery production in the issues related to electric vehicles,
several key reasons that led us to U.S., minerals, in contrast to liquid development of the supply chain, and
conclude that the proposed standards fuels, have the potential to be reclaimed broad-scale issues relating to energy use
were appropriate with respect to through recycling, reducing the need for and infrastructure, through its network
minerals availability, the battery supply of National Laboratories. DOE worked
chain, and minerals security as it relates 263 See section II.D.2.c..ii.b of this preamble for together with Argonne National
to national security. 88 FR 28962–969. further discussion. Laboratory (ANL) beginning in 2022 to
264 Argonne National Laboratories,
First we noted that minerals, battery assess global critical minerals
‘‘Quantification of Commercially Planned Battery
components, and batteries themselves Component Supply in North America through
availability and North American battery
are largely sourced from outside of the 2035’’ (ANL–24/14) (March 2024) (‘‘Planned Battery components manufacturing, and
U.S., not because the products cannot be Supply’’). coordinated with EPA to share the
66Sfmt 4700
results of these analyses during much of for lithium through 2035. We note that a. Battery Critical Minerals Availability
2023 and early 2024. In this subsection an accounting of known mineral The Energy Act of 2020 defines a
we review the main findings of this reserves in democratic countries across ‘‘critical mineral’’ as a non-fuel mineral
work, along with the additional the world indicates that the reserves or mineral material essential to the
information we have collected since the surpass projected global needs through economic or national security of the
proposal. As in the proposal, we have 2030 for the five minerals assessed by United States and which has a supply
considered the totality of information in ANL, under a demand scenario that chain vulnerable to disruption.267 The
the public record in reaching our limits global temperature rise to 1.5 U.S. Geological Survey lists 50 minerals
conclusions regarding the influence of °C.265 ‘Reserves’ here refers to as ‘‘critical to the U.S. economy and
future manufacturing capacity, critical ‘‘measured and indicated deposits that national security.’’ 268 269 Risks to
minerals and related supply chain have been deemed economically mineral availability may stem from
availability, and mineral security on the viable’’ 266 and so is not measuring mere geological scarcity, geopolitics, trade
feasibility of the final standards. presence of a resource. While this policy, or similar factors.270 Critical
As will be discussed in the following statistic does not demonstrate that these minerals range from relatively plentiful
sections, our updated assessment reserves will be extracted in any specific materials that are constrained primarily
supports our conclusion that the time frame, it demonstrates their by production capacity and refining,
standards are technically feasible taking presence and potential availability. As such as aluminum, to those that are both
into consideration issues of critical demand increases, particularly for relatively difficult to source and costly
mineral and supply chain availability, secure supplies, further exploration and to process, such as the rare-earth metals
adequacy of battery production, and development of existing resources in that are used in magnets for permanent-
critical mineral security. Our these countries is likely to further magnet synchronous motors, which are
assessment of the evidence likewise increase these reserves. used as the electric motors to power
continues to support the conclusion that EPA notes that no analysis of future heavy-duty ZEVs and some
the likely rate of development of the outcomes with regard to supply chain semiconductor products. Extraction,
domestic and global supply chain and viability, critical minerals availability, processing, and recycling of minerals
forecast availability of critical minerals or mineral security can be absolutely are key parts of the supply chain that
or materials on the global market are certain. The presence of uncertainty is affect the availability minerals. For the
consistent with the final standards being inherent in any forward-looking purposes of this rule, we focus on a key
met at a reasonable cost (assuming analysis and is typically approached as set of minerals (lithium, cobalt, nickel,
compliance in the same or similar a matter of risk assessment, including manganese, and graphite) commonly
manner set out in the technology sensitivity analysis conducted around used in BEVs; their general availability
packages in the modeled potential costs, compliance paths, or other key impacts the production of battery cells
compliance pathway). Further, based on factors. We also again note that and battery components.
DOE and ANL’s analyses which analyze compliance with the final standards is Demand for these minerals is
the current and future state of the global possible under a broad range of increasing, largely driven by the
and domestic supply chains, along with reasonable scenarios, including a transportation and energy storage
other sources as described in this pathway without additional production sectors, as the world seeks to reduce
preamble, we find no evidence that of ZEVs to comply with the final carbon emissions and as the electrified
compliance with the standards will standards. Demand for battery vehicles and renewable energy markets
adversely impact national security by production and critical minerals would grow. As with any emerging technology,
creating a long-term dependence on be significantly reduced under such a transition period must take place in
imports of critical minerals or potential alternative pathways to which robust supply chains develop to
components from adversarial countries compliance. support production and distribution. At
or associated suppliers. Moreover, we Section II.D.2.c. ii.a of this preamble
present, minerals used in BEV batteries
expect that the standards will provide examines the issues surrounding
are commonly sourced from global
increased regulatory certainty for availability of critical mineral inputs.
suppliers and do not rely on a fully
domestic production of batteries and Section II.D.2.ii.b examines issues
critical minerals, and for creating relating to adequacy of battery 267 See 2021 Draft List of Critical Minerals (86 FR
domestic supply chains, which in turn production. Section II.D.2.c.ii.c 62199–62203).
has the potential to strengthen the U.S.’s discusses the security implications of 268 U.S. Geological Survey, ‘‘U.S. Geological
global competitiveness in these areas. increased demand for critical minerals Survey Releases 2022 List of Critical Minerals,’’
As explained in the following and other materials used to manufacture February 22, 2022. Available at: https://
sections, these results indicate that in electrified vehicles. Additional details www.usgs.gov/news/national-news-release/us-
geological-survey-releases-2022-list-critical-
the near- and medium-term, the on these aspects of the analysis may be minerals.
currently identified capacity for lithium, found in RIA Chapter 1.5.1. 269 The full list includes: Aluminum, antimony,
cobalt, and nickel in the U.S. and Free arsenic, barite, beryllium, bismuth, cerium, cesium,
Trade Agreement and Mineral Security 265 Allan, B. et al., ‘‘Friendshoring Critical chromium, cobalt, dysprosium, erbium, europium,
Minerals: What Could the U.S. and Its Partners fluorspar, gadolinium, gallium, germanium,
Partnership countries is significantly graphite, hafnium, holmium, indium, iridium,
Produce?’’, Carnegie Endowment for International
greater than U.S. demand under Peace, May 3, 2023. At https://carnegieendowment. lanthanum, lithium, lutetium, magnesium,
representative domestic demand org/2023/05/03/friendshoring-critical-minerals- manganese, neodymium, nickel, niobium,
scenarios. Sufficient supply of graphite what-could-u.s.-and-its-partners-produce-pub- palladium, platinum, praseodymium, rhodium,
89659. rubidium, ruthenium, samarium, scandium,
is likewise available considering secure 266 Similarly, the USGS defines reserves as ‘‘that tantalum, tellurium, terbium, thulium, tin,
international trade partnerships, and titanium, tungsten, vanadium, ytterbium, yttrium,
part of the reserve base which could be

taking into account supply of synthetic economically extracted or produced at the time of zinc, and zirconium. Note that the Department of
and recycled graphite if needed. In determination. The term reserves need not signify Energy (DOE) does not classify manganese as a
particular, the U.S. is poised to become that extraction facilities are in place and operative.’’ critical mineral.
U.S. Bureau of Mines and the U.S. Geological 270 International Energy Agency, ‘‘The Role of
a key global producer of lithium, and, Survey, ‘‘Principles of a Resource/Reserve Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions,’’
along with supply from Free Trade Classification For Minerals,’’ Geological Survey World Energy Outlook Special Report, Revised
Agreement partners, is positioned well Circular 831, 1980. version. March 2022.
67Sfmt 4700
developed domestic supply chain.271 As nickel sourcing. LFP batteries may also there cited. At proposal, we concluded
demand for these materials increases be better suited for vehicles without that the scale and pace of demand
due to projected increasing production extended ranges, as they are less energy growth and investment in lithium
of BEVs, production of critical minerals dense. Put more broadly, cathode supply means that it is well positioned
is expected to grow. As noted chemistry varies, and as such can adjust to meet anticipated demand as demand
previously in this section, the need for the demand for certain minerals, or can increases and supply grows. See RIA
a secure supply chain for the inputs eliminate the demand for certain Chapter 1.5.1.3 for further explanation
required for BEV production is not minerals entirely. of focus on lithium as the most
unlike that which continues to be Anode chemistry can also important of the critical minerals as a
important for ICE vehicle production, accommodate alternative chemistries. potential constraint.
given the presence of minerals in ICE Most commonly, BEVs use a graphite More recent information is
vehicles, and given difficulties and anode, supply constraints for which are corroborative and expands the scope of
challenges posed by sourcing liquid described further below; however, analysis to include the five minerals
fuels for ICE vehicles described silicon can replace graphite in an anode, listed previously in this section. ANL
throughout this document. The focus on and graphite anodes containing a has performed a review of international
lithium, cobalt, nickel, manganese, and portion of silicon now make up around and domestic critical minerals
graphite, stems from the fact that their 30 percent of anodes according to the availability as of February 2024, which
increased use is unique to BEVs IEA as of 2023.272 It is also possible to EPA considers to be both thorough and
compared with ICE vehicles. Electrified use alternative forms of carbon in the up to date.273 The analysis finds that
vehicles at present utilize lithium-ion anode, and unlike other minerals used while the U.S. will need imports to
batteries, though alternative battery for BEVs, graphite can be produced bolster supply for most key minerals,
types are in development or are already synthetically. these imports can come from friendly
being deployed in some limited Given the possibilities for substitution nations, and be bolstered by growing
applications. In the near-term, there is for other minerals, EPA focused its own domestic supply, especially for lithium.
not a viable alternative to lithium in analysis on lithium availability as a The analysis also finds that, with the
BEV batteries. As noted previously, potential limiting factor on the rate of
common cathode chemistries today for appropriate policies and enabling
growth of ZEV production, and thus the approaches in place, the U.S. can secure
lithium-ion batteries include nickel- most appropriate basis for establishing a
manganese-cobalt (NMC), nickel-cobalt- the minerals it needs by relying on
modeling constraint on the rate of ZEV domestic production as well as on trade
aluminum (NCA), and iron-phosphate penetration into the fleet over the time
(LFP). While lithium is used in all relationships with allies and partners
frame of this rule. At proposal, EPA (Figure II–1). USGS is engaged in
lithium-ion batteries, cathode chemistry found that the lithium market was
is somewhat flexible, which can help activities that, while not yet
responding robustly to demand, and quantifiable, are enabling the U.S. to
adapt to both supply-based factors and that global supply would be adequate at
end-use needs. For example, LFP expand a secure supply chain for
least through 2035. 88 FR 25965 and critical minerals among U.S. allies and
batteries have been increasing in use sources there cited. We further found
given the constraints of cobalt and partner nations. There are substantial
that notwithstanding short-term price efforts to scale mining supply
271 As mentioned in preamble section I.C.2.i and
fluctuations in price, the price of domestically and in partner countries
in RIA 1.3.2.2, there are tax credit incentives in the lithium ‘‘is expected to stabilize at or underway, further described in this
IRA for the production and sale of battery cells and near its historical levels by the mid- to section II.D.2.c.ii.c.
modules of up to $45 per kWh, which includes up late-2020s.’’ 88 FR 25966 and sources
to 10 percent of the cost of producing applicable
critical minerals that meet certain specifications 273 Argonne National Laboratory, ‘‘Securing
when such components or minerals are produced 272 https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook- Critical Materials for the U.S. Electric Vehicle
in the United States. 2023/trends-in-batteries. Industry ’’ (March, 2024) (ANL–24/06) (‘‘ANL’’).
68Sfmt 4700
The updated ANL critical minerals with whom the United States has free The ANL study continues to confirm
study finds that the U.S. is poised to trade agreements (FTA).274 As detailed a trend of rapidly growing identification
become a key global producer of lithium in the ANL study, numerous lithium of U.S. lithium resources and extraction
by 2030, and could become one of the extraction projects are in various stages development. The identification of these
world’s largest producers of lithium by of development many of which were resources, some of which were publicly
2035. In the near term (the next few also cited in public comments, announced within the last year,
years), manufacturers will need to including Fort Cady, Thacker Pass, exemplifies the dynamic nature of the
import lithium, and ample capacity Rhyolite Ridge, and Kings Mountain.275 industry and the likely conservative
exists to source lithium from countries aspect of existing assessments.
274 ANL at 36, 38 (Australia and Chile), 53. The economies. As of September 16, 2023, the MSP was Norway, the United Kingdom, the United States,
Minerals Security Partnership (MSP) is a composed of: Australia, Canada, Finland, France, and the European Union.
transnational association whose members seek to Germany, India, Japan, South Korea, Sweden, 275 ANL at 34.
ER22AP24.016</GPH>
secure a stable supply of raw materials for their
69Sfmt 4700
This update to DOE’s lithium resource domestic lithium extraction projects to included in the updated analysis
compilation continues to confirm the project domestic lithium supply through represent a significant increase over the
trend of growing U.S. mineral 2035, along with domestic lithium domestic lithium supply considered for
development. As depicted in Figure II– recycling potential, and compared these the proposal, exemplifying the dynamic
2, DOE and ANL assessed announced to estimated demand. The projects nature of the industry.
ER22AP24.018</GPH>
Regarding global lithium production, analysis from the proposal with newly outlook for lithium production has
we have also supplemented our lithium available research and information. The evolved rapidly, with new projects
ER22AP24.017</GPH>
70Sfmt 4700
regularly identified and contributing to segment of each bar represents BMI’s represent a potential range for future
higher projections of resource estimate of added U.S. demand under global supply bounded by a standard
availability and production. Benchmark the proposed light and medium duty weighted scenario and a maximum
Minerals Intelligence (BMI) conducted a vehicle rule, and the proposed HD scenario applied to U.S. production
comprehensive analysis of global and Phase 3 rule. The lower line represents only. In both cases, projected global
domestic lithium supply and demand in BMI’s projection of global lithium lithium supply meets or surpasses
June 2023 that indicates that lithium supply (including U.S.) in GWh projected global demand through 2029.
supply is likely to keep pace with equivalent, weighted by current Past 2029, global demand is either
growing demand during the time frame development status of each project. The generally met or within 10 percent of
of the rule.276 In the Figure II–3 below, next line represents global supply where projected demand through 2032. For
the vertical bars (at full height) the U.S. portion is unweighted (i.e., all reference, the top line is a high supply
represent estimated global demand, included projects reach full expected scenario in which global supply is also
including U.S. demand. The top production). These two lines together unweighted.
EPA notes that BMI based its estimate December 2022 (more than one year this time of rising mineral demand
of U.S. demand on electrified vehicle ago). Excluded from both the weighted coupled with active private investment
penetrations under the proposed and unweighted supply projections are and U.S. government activities to
standards, which projected higher 177 projects for which no information promote mineral resource development,
electrified vehicle penetrations than in on likely production level was available. exclusion of potential production from
the final standards. This means that the It is standard practice to weight projects these resources is not likely to reflect
top segment of each bar would be that have production estimates their future contribution to U.S. supply.
shorter under the final standards, according to their stage of development, In mid-2023, some analysts began
making the depicted results more and BMI has followed this practice with speaking of the possibility of a future
conservative. the 153 projects. However, complete tightness in global lithium supply.277
EPA also notes that although BMI exclusion of the potential production of Opinions varied, however, about its
states that it is aware of 330 lithium 177 projects (more than half of the total) potential development and timing, with
mining projects ranging from suggests that the projections shown may the most bearish opinions suggesting as
announced projects to fully operating be extremely conservative. If even a very early as 2025 with others suggesting
projects and stages in between, the conservative estimate of ultimate 2028 or 2030. However, the projections
supply projections shown here are production from these 177 projects by from BMI and ANL discussed
limited to only 153 projects that are 2030 were to be added to the chart, previously in this section suggest only
already in production or have publicly projected supply would increase and a mild gap developing in global supply
identified production estimates as of perhaps meet or surpass demand. At and demand in 2030 and only if the 177
276 Benchmark Mineral Intelligence (BMI), re BMI Analysis from Natural Resources Defense 2023) at www.cnbc.com/2023/08/29/a-worldwide-
‘‘Lithium Mining Projects—Supply Projections Council (January 2024). lithium-shortage-could-come-as-soon-as-2025.html.
277 Shan, Lee Ying, ‘‘A worldwide lithium
(June 2023). See also Supplemental Comment Letter
ER22AP24.019</GPH>
shortage could come as soon as 2025’’ (August
71Sfmt 4700
projects that were not quantified do not the BNEF’s newly released 2023 Battery secondary sources, plus some domestic
contribute (BMI), or no significant gap Price Survey which shows that pack production from the six 285 prospective
in U.S. lithium supply and demand prices have resumed their downward cobalt projects that have potential to
during the time frame of the rule (ANL). trend, and predicts that average pack come online before 2035.286 This supply
Further, the analysts quoted as prices across all automotive and is projected to be sufficient to meet
predicting a future tightness stop well stationary uses will fall to $113 per kWh demand. BloombergNEF now similarly
short of identifying an unavoidable hard in 2025 and $80 per kWh in 2030.283 projects that cobalt and nickel reserves
constraint on lithium availability that In addition to lithium, EPA carefully ‘‘are now enough to supply both our
would reasonably lead EPA to conclude considered the availability of nickel, Economic Transition and Net Zero
that the standards cannot be met. cobalt, manganese, and graphite at scenarios,’’ the latter of which is an
Forecasts of potential supply and proposal and for this final rule. At aggressive global decarbonization
demand, including those that purport to proposal, we noted the global sources of scenario.287 It is also significant that the
identify a supply shortfall, typically are these materials, and global refining U.S. cobalt spot price dropped by nearly
also accompanied by descriptions of sources. We further explained how 42 percent in the past year (2023–2024),
burgeoning activity and investment United States domestic production of indicating ample current supply.288 U.S.
oriented toward supplying demand, these materials lagged global production efforts to secure the global cobalt supply
rather than a paucity of activity and notwithstanding domestic reserves of chain are discussed further in section
investment that would be more nickel, cobalt, and lithium; however, the II.D.2.ii.c of this preamble.
indicative of a critical shortage. EPA developing supply chain domestically Manganese is not considered to be a
also notes that since the time of the and abroad can meet domestic demand ‘‘critical’’ mineral as defined by USGS
referenced article, demand for lithium over the next decade. 88 FR 25963. or by DOE; however, it is an important
has increasingly been depicted as More recent information from ANL mineral for BEV batteries.289 Capacity
having underperformed peak confirms these initial findings and from FTA and MSP partners is projected
expectations. The final standards also supports that supply and supply chains to be sufficient to meet domestic
project a lower ZEV penetration than in for these minerals will be adequate to demand in both the near and medium
the proposal, which would lead to lower meet domestic demand in the Phase 3 term, as significant reserves are located
demand from the standards than the rule’s timeframe. Below are summaries in Australia, Canada, and India.290 In
proposal would have suggested. of the ANL report’s findings. addition, recycling may prove to be a
Regarding concerns about lithium While the U.S. nickel production growing source of supply starting in the
price fluctuations addressed by industry is expanding, in the near- and early 2030s.291
commenters, recent unexpected drops medium-term, there is sufficient In the near-term, graphite demand is
in lithium prices beginning in early capacity in countries with which the unlikely to be met through domestic
2023 278 and persisting to the present are U.S. has long-standing or emerging trade sources or through trade with FTA
believed to have been the result of partnerships to meet demand for nickel. countries or directly from MSP
robust growth in lithium supply from Some nickel will come from countries countries.292 However, scaling domestic
developments similar to these. This with free trade agreements (FTA) and in synthetic graphite production and
supports EPA’s expectation that mineral the Minerals Security Partnership continued innovation can mitigate this
prices will not continually rise as some (MSP), a multilateral effort to risk. In the medium term, supply
commenters have suggested but will responsibly secure critical mineral sources of natural graphite are expected
find an equilibrium within a reasonable supply chains (Canada, Australia, to become more diverse with new
range of prices as the rapidly growing Finland, Norway), though likely much planned capacity in both FTA (Canada
supply chain continues to mature. of it will come from other trade partners and Australia) and other economic
Despite recent short-term fluctuations in (Indonesia, Philippines and others).284 partners (Tanzania and Mozambique)
price, the price of lithium is expected to The U.S. is engaged in several initiatives and others supported by the MSP.
stabilize at or near its historical levels with these countries to expand and Although the U.S. has significant
by the mid-2020s, according to outside diversify nickel supply (detailed further deposits of natural graphite, graphite
analysis.279 280 This perspective is also in section II.D.2.ii.c of this preamble), has not been produced in the U.S. since
supported by proprietary battery price and some domestic nickel production is the 1950s and significant known
forecasts by Wood Mackenzie that also in development. resources remain largely
include the predicted effect of There are initial efforts to scale up undeveloped.293 ANL notes that China
temporarily elevated mineral prices and cobalt production in FTA countries, but dominates natural graphite production
show battery costs falling again past the bulk of supply will continue to and has been a major source of U.S
2024.281 282 This is also consistent with come from the Democratic Republic of
285 ANL at 48.
Congo, with Australia (which has an 286 We
278 New York Times, ‘‘Falling Lithium Prices Are discuss availability of cobalt refining
FTA with the U.S. and is a member of capacity below in our discussion of issues relating
Making Electric Cars More Affordable,’’ March 20,
2023. Accessed on March 23, 2023 at https://
the MSP) and Indonesia being to mineral security.
287 BloombergNEF, ‘‘Electric Vehicle Outlook
www.nytimes.com/2023/03/20/business/lithium-
prices-falling-electric-vehicles.html. See also The 2022 (filename: brms-q3–2022-iho.pdf). Available to 2023,’’ Executive Summary, p. 5.
Economist, January 6, 2024 at 54: ‘‘[m]ined supply subscribers. 288 https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_cobalt_
of lithium and nickel is also booming; that of cobalt, 282 Wood Mackenzie, ‘‘Battery & raw materials— spot_price#:∼:text=US%20Cobalt%20
a by-product of copper and nickel production, Investment horizon outlook to 2032,’’accompanying Spot%20Price%20is,22.79%25%2
remains robust, dampening green-metal prices.’’ data set, September 2022 (filename: brms-data-q3– 0from%20one%20year%20ago (last accessed
279 Sun et al., ‘‘Surging lithium price will not 2022.xlsx). Available to subscribers. March 19, 2024).
289 DOE Critical Materials Report—2023
impede the electric vehicle boom,’’ https:// 283 BloombergNEF, ‘‘Lithium-Ion Battery Pack
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ Prices Hit Record Low of $139/kWh,’’ November 27, (www.energy.gov).

290 ANL at 63.
S2542435122003026. 2023. Accessed on December 6, 2023 at https://
280 Green Car Congress, ‘‘Tsinghua researchers 291 ANL at 62–63.
about.bnef.com/blog/lithium-ion-battery-pack-
conclude surging lithium price will not impede EV prices-hit-record-low-of-139-kwh. 292 ANL at 52, 57
boom,’’ July 29, 2022. 284 ANL at 44. We discuss availability of nickel 293 U.S. Geological Survey, ‘‘USGS Updates
281 Wood Mackenzie, ‘‘Battery & raw materials— refining capacity below in considering mineral Mineral Database with Graphite Deposits in the
Investment horizon outlook to 2032,’’September security. United States,’’ February 28, 2022.
72Sfmt 4700
imports; however, China has recently The national security implications for billion of investment in domestic
moved to curb exports of graphite, all the mineral supply chains discussed battery production has been announced
imposing an export permit requirement previously in this section are examined in the past two years.304
on graphite in 2023, which will further in section II.D.2.c.ii.c of this Robust growth in the domestic battery
temporarily reduce graphite exports due preamble. EPA posits that, if critical supply chain, including mineral
to a 45-day application period for material availability were the type of
production, is spurred growth is
permits. This suggests that graphite profound constraint voiced by some
furthered by the BIL and IRA. The IRA
exports from China may be controlled in commenters, one would expect there
the future. However, at this time it is not would be signs of trepidation in the offers sizeable incentives and other
clear that this requirement will amount of invested capital. However, support for further development of
meaningfully impact exports over the we see the opposite, as demonstrated by domestic and North American
long term, as similar permit ANL and outside analysis. At proposal, manufacture of electrified vehicles and
requirements have existed on other we cited one analysis indicating that 37 components, and the BIL provides
exports, including those necessary in of the world’s automakers are planning direct funding to achieve this same end.
ICE vehicle production.294 Wood to invest a total of almost $1.2 trillion These two policies have already been
Mackenzie reports that a change to by 2030 toward electrification, a large transformative for the North American
material flows is unlikely, and that a portion of which will be used for battery supply chain, as evidenced in
graphite supply chain outside of China construction of manufacturing facilities Figure II–4: More recent information
is rapidly developing.295 In fact, this for vehicles, battery cells and packs, and indicates that approximately 67 percent
export restriction is expected to be a materials, supporting up to 5.8 terawatt- of private investments in North
catalyst for swiftly expanding the hours of battery production and 54 American battery manufacturing—
domestic graphite supply from million electric vehicles per year including extraction of raw materials
conventional and non-conventional globally.300 Similarly, an analysis by the necessary for battery production,
sources.296 ANL also indicates that Center for Automotive Research showed processing of these ores into battery-
synthetic graphite scaling has potential that a significant shift in North grade materials, manufacturing of
to mitigate graphite risk in the medium American investment is occurring midstream battery precursors, and
term.297 Already, about 58 percent of toward electrification technologies, with production of battery cells and packs—
the world’s graphite is synthetic.298 $36 billion of about $38 billion in total has occurred in the past two years: as
Innovation can also help curb pressure automaker manufacturing facility just noted, approximately $100 billion
on the graphite supply chain, with investments announced in 2021 being of the $150 billion invested since
silicon’s use in battery anodes expected slated for electrification-related 2000.305 Furthermore, there is a sizeable
to expand tenfold by 2035 according to manufacturing in North America, with a
amount of funding from both BIL and
SNE research, displacing the need for similar proportion and amount on track
IRA that still has not been allocated,
some graphite.299 for 2022.301 The State of California, in
its public comments, documented that with the expectation that the domestic
292 ANL as of March 2023, ‘‘at least $45 billion battery supply chain will continue to
at 52, 57
293 U.S. Geological Survey, ‘‘USGS Updates in private-sector investment has been grow as those funds are rolled out.
Mineral Database with Graphite Deposits in the announced across the U.S. clean vehicle Additional investments are likely upon
United States,’’ February 28, 2022. and battery supply chain.’’ 302 the finalization of policies pertaining to
294 Rare earths, necessary for catalytic converters
Companies have announced over 1,300 the battery supply chain at the
and magnet motors are presently subject to Chinese Department of Energy and the
export license restrictions for example. https:// GWh/year in battery production in
www.fastmarkets.com/insights/chinas-commerce- North America by 2030.303 Over $100 Department of the Treasury.
ministry-to-add-rare-earths-to-export-report- Specifically, the BIL and IRA have
directory. 298 ANL at 52. introduced several incentives to scale
295 Wood Mackenzie, ‘‘How will China’s graphite
299 EV battery makers’ silicon anode demand set domestic processing and recycling of
export controls impact electric vehicle supply for take-off—KED Global https://
chain?’’ subscriber material presentation, November critical minerals including the $3 billion
www.kedglobal.com/batteries/newsView/
2, 2023. ked202402230020. Battery Manufacturing and Recycling
296 See China’s Graphite Curbs Will Accelerate 300 Reuters, ‘‘A Reuters analysis of 37 global Grant Program, and tax credits
Plans Around Alternatives (usnews.com). automakers found that they plan to invest nearly including 45X and 48C.
297 ANL at 56; see also Reuters, ‘‘China’s graphite
$1.2 trillion in electric vehicles and batteries
curbs will accelerate plans around alternatives,’’ through 2030,’’ October 21, 2022. Accessed on 302 Comments of State of California at 30, citing
October 23, 2023. Accessed on December 16, 2023 November 4, 2022, at https://graphics.reuters.com/
U.S. Department of the Treasury, Treasury Releases
at https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- AUTOS-INVESTMENT/ELECTRIC/akpeqgzqypr.
transportation/chinas-graphite-curbs-will- 301 Center for Automotive Research, ‘‘Automakers
Proposed Guidance on New Clean Vehicle Credit to
accelerate-plans-around-alternatives-2023-10-20, Lower Costs for Consumers, Build U.S. Industrial
Invest Billions in North American EV and Battery
and Korea Economic Daily, ‘‘EV battery makers’ Manufacturing Facilities,’’ July 21, 2022. Retrieved Base, Strengthen Supply Chains (March 31, 2023),
silicon anode demand set for take-off’’ (February on November 10, 2022 at https://www.cargroup.org/ https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/
2024) at https://www.kedglobal.com/batteries/ automakers-invest-billions-in-north-american-ev- jy1379.
newsView/ked202402230020. and-battery-manufacturing-facilities. 303 Planned Battery Supply Fig. 10.
73Sfmt 4700
Beyond BIL and IRA, a number of to the long lifespan of EV batteries, we system for used batteries. In addition,
actions underscore the extent of U.S. consider the ongoing development of a the Electric Drive Vehicle Battery
efforts to grow the domestic minerals battery recycling supply chain during Recycling and Second-Life Application
supply chain, including extraction, the time frame of the rule and beyond. Program will provide $200 million in
processing, and recycling (detailed more Battery recycling is an active area of funds for research, development, and
extensively in the ANL critical minerals research. The Department of Energy demonstration of battery recycling and
study). For example, critical minerals coordinates much research in this area second-life applications.308 The DOE
projects were recently made eligible for through the ReCell Center, described as has announced the availability of $37
a streamlined permitting process under ‘‘a national collaboration of industry, million in funding to improve the
the Federal Permitting Improvement academia and national laboratories economics and industrial ecosystem for
Steering Council (FAST–41) EXIM is working together to advance recycling battery recycling, and another $30
supporting critical minerals projects in technologies along the entire battery million to enable a circular economy for
the U.S. and abroad through various lifecycle for current and future battery EV batteries, to be awarded in 2024.309
financing products. The USGS Earth chemistries.’’ 306 The ReCell Center is Battery recycling is also a focus of
Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth developing alternative, more efficient private investment as a growing number
MRI) is improving mapping and recycling methods that, if realized and of private companies are entering the
exploration of domestic resources across scaled, can more efficiently expand battery recycling market. For example,
the country. USGS, DOD, and DOE are recycled materials availability. These Panasonic has contracted with Redwood
collaborating on a series of methods include direct recycling, in Materials Inc. to supply domestically
‘‘hackathons’’ to leverage AI and which materials can be recycled for processed cathode material, much of
machine learning to domestic critical direct use in cell production without which will be sourced from recycled
minerals resource assessment. Efforts to destroying their chemical structure, and batteries.310 Ford and Volvo have also
secure global critical minerals supply advanced resource recovery, which uses partnered with Redwood to collect end-
chains are detailed further in section chemical conversion to recover raw of-life batteries for recycling and
II.D.2.ii.c of this preamble. In addition minerals for processing into new promote a circular, closed-loop supply
to the efforts described previously in constituents.307 Battery recycling is the chain utilizing recycled materials.311
this section, the U.S. can increase subject of several provisions of the BIL. Redwood has also announced a battery
minerals availability and minerals It includes a Battery Processing and active materials plant in South Carolina
security by increasing domestic Manufacturing program, which grants with capacity to supply materials for
recycling and pursuing materials significant funds to promote U.S.
innovation and substitution. processing and manufacturing of 307 Department of Energy, ‘‘The ReCell Center for
Substantial funding to scale and Advanced Battery Recycling FY22 Q4 Report,’’

batteries for electric vehicle and electric October 20, 2022. Available at: https://
improve recycling, as well as to develop grid use, by awarding grants for recellcenter.org/2022/12/15/recell-advanced-
advanced batteries using less or more demonstration projects, new battery-recycling-center-fourth-quarter-progress-
readily abundant materials, is ongoing construction, retooling and retrofitting, report-2022.
308 Environmental Defense Fund and ERM,
and will continue given the high and facility expansion. It will provide a
‘‘Electric Vehicle Market Update: Manufacturer
importance of securing the minerals in total of $3 billion for battery material Commitments and Public Policy Initiatives
question. Recycling is an important part processing, $3 billion for battery Supporting Electric Mobility in the U.S. and
of the solution to issues of mineral manufacturing and recycling, $10 Worldwide,’’ September 2022.
security and critical mineral million for a lithium-ion battery 309 Department of Energy, Grants Notice:
availability. 88 FR 25969 and RTC Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) FY23 BIL
recycling prize competition, $60 million Electric Drive Vehicle Battery Recycling and
section 4.7. Over the long term, battery for research and development activities Second Life Applications. Available online:
recycling can effectively serve as a in battery recycling, an additional $50 grants.gov/search-results-detail/351544; See also:
domestically produced mineral source million for state and local programs, and https://arpa-e.energy.gov/news-and-media/press-
that reduces overall reliance on foreign- releases/us-department-energy-announces-30-
$15 million to develop a collection million-develop-technologies-enable.
sourced products. While growth in the 310 Randall, T., ‘‘The Battery Supply Chain Is
return of end-of-life ZEV batteries will 304 Planned Battery Supply at 4. Finally Coming to America,’’ Bloomberg, November
ER22AP24.020</GPH>
lag the market penetration of ZEVs due 305 Planned Battery Supply at 4. ANL has 15, 2022.
74Sfmt 4700
100 GWh per year of battery production, several distinct stages. This section indicated that the industry was already
and is likely to provide these materials examines the outlook for the showing a rapidly growing and robust
to many of the ‘‘battery belt’’ factories ‘‘midstream’’ of the lithium-ion battery response to meet current and
that are developing in a corridor supply chain, which includes materials anticipated demand, that this activity
between Michigan and Georgia.312 processing, component manufacturing, was widely expected to continue, and
General Motors and LG Energy Solution and cell fabrication, in light of that the level of U.S. manufacturing
have partnered with Li-Cycle to recycle anticipated demand as a result of the capacity that had been announced to
GM’s Ultium cells.313 314 Aqua Metals final standards. While other battery date was largely sufficient to meet the
has developed a hydrometallurgical chemistries exist or are under demand projected under the proposed
closed loop process capable of development, this section focuses on
standards by 2030. 88 FR 25968. We
recovering all critical minerals with supply chains for lithium-ion batteries
assessed that battery manufacturing
fewer associated emissions than given their wide use and lack of near-
pyrometallurgical processes.315 term alternatives. capacity was not likely to pose a
Estimates vary for projections of In the proposal, we examined the limitation on the ability of
recycling’s ability to meet demand for outlook for U.S. and global battery manufacturers to meet the standards as
minerals. According to one estimate, by manufacturing capacity for vehicle proposed.
2050, battery recycling could be capable lithium-ion batteries and compared it to EPA has carefully considered the
of meeting 25 to 50 percent of total our projection of U.S. battery demand substantive and detailed comments
lithium demand for battery under the proposed standards, offered by the various commenters. In
production.316 317 considering demand of both the light of additional information that EPA
proposed HDV and LMDV proposed has collected through continued
b. Production Capacity for Batteries and
rules. 88 FR 25967. We collected and research and the public comments, the
Battery Components
reviewed a number of independent evidence continues to support our
As described in the previous section, studies and forecasts,318 including
battery manufacturing consists of previous assessment that domestic and
numerous studies by analyst firms and
global battery manufacturing is well
various stakeholders, as well as a study
310 Randall, T., ‘‘The Battery Supply Chain Is positioned to deliver sufficient battery
of announced North American cell and
Finally Coming to America,’’ Bloomberg, November production to allow manufacturers to
15, 2022. battery manufacturing facilities
311 Automotive News Europe, ‘‘Ford, Volvo join compiled by Argonne National meet the standards.
Redwood in EV battery recycling push in Laboratory (ANL) and assessments by The additional information EPA has
California,’’ February 17, 2022. https:// the Department of Energy. Our review of collected addresses many of the points
europe.autonews.com/automakers/ford-volvo-join-
redwood-ev-battery-recycling-push-california. these studies included consideration of raised by the commenters. In particular,
312 Wards Auto, ‘‘Battery Recycler Redwood Plans uncertainties of the sort that are ANL has performed an updated
$3.5 Billion South Carolina Plant,’’ December 27, common to any forward-looking assessment of North American battery
2022. https://www.wardsauto.com/print/388968. analysis but did not identify any
313 General Motors, ‘‘Ultium Cells LLC and Li-
components and cell manufacturing
Cycle Collaborate to Expand Recycling in North
constraint that indicated that global or capacity that further reinforces our
America,’’ Press Release, May 11, 2021. https:// domestic battery manufacturing assessment that capacity is rapidly
news.gm.com/newsroom.detail.html/Pages/news/ capacity would be insufficient to growing. EPA considers ANL’s
us/en/2021/may/0511-ultium.html. support battery demand under the
314 Other companies engaged in recycling of assessment through December 2023 to
lithium ion batteries and other critical minerals
proposed standards. The review be thorough and up to date.
include (and are not limited to) Umicore, Battery
Solutions, RecycLi Battery Materials, American 315 Aqua Metals. Available online: https://
Battery Technology, and Glencore International. aquametals.com.

75Sfmt 4700
Based on announced investments in vehicles (and some for stationary projected to become operational in the
battery cell production, companies have sources),319 EPA finds that there is four years from proposal, 88 FR 25986,
announced over 1,300 GWh/year in sufficient North American battery the new work performed by ANL
battery production in North America by production capacity for HDVs within indicates that even more battery
2030 (Figure II–5). This is already a the rule’s timeframe, and ANL projects production capacity has been
significant increase over the estimates at least 45 GWh of announced cell announced since the release of those
discussed in the proposal of 1,000 GWh/ production will be dedicated to HDV previous reports (Figure II–7). In
year commencing in 2030. 88 FR 25967. BEVs by 2030 (Figure II–6). Moreover, addition, capacity from trade allies is
EPA estimates that 11 GWh will be end use for some battery cell another source of supply: the sum of
required for HDV BEVs in 2027 and 58 manufacturing facilities has not been announced battery cell production
GWh in 2032 under the modeled announced, and it is likely that North capacity in MSP countries (outside
potential compliance pathway. See RIA American capacity can service HDV North America) exceeds the sum in
Chapter 2.10.2. Consequently, although applications in greater than announced North America, with both reaching
most of this announced capacity is amounts. Importantly, in addition to the 1,300 GWh/year by 2030.320 See Figure
currently intended for light duty 13 new domestic battery plants we II–9 below.
316 Sun et al., ‘‘Surging lithium price will not lithium demand: a dynamic MFA approach,’’ files/2023-12/EDF%20Analysis%20on%20
impede the electric vehicle boom,’’ Joule, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 133, pp. 76–85. https:// US%20Battery%20Capacity%2012.13.23%20
doi:10.1016/j.joule. 2022.06.028 (https://dx.doi.org/ doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec. 2018.01.031. final%20v3.pdf.
10.1016/j.joule.2022.06.028). 318 U.S. Electric Vehicle Battery Manufacturing on
319 Planned Battery Supply at 22, 23.
317 Ziemann et al., ‘‘Modeling the potential Track to Meet Demand. EDF. December 2023.
ER22AP24.021</GPH>
impact of lithium recycling from EV batteries on Available Online: https://www.edf.org/sites/default/
76Sfmt 4700
A number of comments expressed could reach nominal capacity more likely to keep pace with increasing
concerns regarding ramp-up time. The quickly or more slowly. This estimate is global demand. In the proposal we
latest ANL projections estimate the consistent with the projections of noted a 2021 report from Argonne
period from announcement to beginning significant increases in domestic National Laboratory (ANL)323 that
of production for each individual plant production by the commencement of the examined the state of the global supply
based on numerous factors, and uses a Phase 3 program shown in the chain for electrified vehicles and
baseline estimate of 3 years from immediately preceding figures. included a comparison of recent
beginning of production to full scale projections of future global battery
We also continue to see evidence that

operation, based on historical cell
ER22AP24.023</GPH>
global lithium-ion battery cell

manufacturing data.321 ANL describes production is growing rapidly322 and is
www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/lithium-ion-
this as ‘‘a modestly conservative battery-manufacturing-capacity-2022-2030.
323 Argonne National Laboratory, ‘‘Lithium-Ion
estimate,’’ acknowledging that plants 322 ‘‘Lithium-ion battery manufacturing capacity, Battery Supply Chain for E-Drive Vehicles in the
2022–2030’’. International Energy Agency. Last United States: 2010–2020,’’ ANL/ESD–21/3, March
ER22AP24.022</GPH>
320 Planned Battery Supply Appendix D. updated May 22, 2023. Available Online: https:// 2021.
77Sfmt 4700
manufacturing capacity and projections the corresponding projections of shows projected battery cell production
of future global battery demand from demand by a significant margin in every in MSP countries through 2035: as
various analysis firms out to 2030, as year for which they were projected, noted previously in this section, the
seen in Figure II–8.324,325 The three suggesting that global battery sum of announced battery cell
most recent projections of capacity manufacturing capacity is responding production capacity in MSP countries
(from BNEF, Roland Berger, and S&P strongly to increasing demand. (outside North America) exceeds the
Global in 2020–2021) that were The updated ANL supports the sum in North America, with both
collected by ANL at that time exceeded continuation of this trend. Figure II–9 reaching 1,300 GWh/year by 2030.
324 Argonne National Laboratory, ‘‘Lithium-Ion 325 Federal Consortium for Advanced Batteries, FCAB%20National%20Blueprint
Battery Supply Chain for E-Drive Vehicles in the ‘‘National Blueprint for Lithium Batteries 2021– %20Lithium%20Batteries%200621_0.pdf.
United States: 2010–2020,’’ ANL/ESD–21/3, March 2030,’’ June 2021 (Figure 2). Available at https://
ER22AP24.024</GPH>
2021. www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021-06/
78Sfmt 4725
In addition to battery cell material CAM and anode active material demand, prepared by Li-Bridge for
manufacturing, we also consider AAM), electrolyte, foils, separators, and DOE,326 and presented to the Federal
manufacturing of battery components. precursor materials, which include Consortium for Advanced Batteries
In order to meet their projected lithium carbonate, lithium hydroxide, (FCAB) 327 in November 2022. These
operating capacities, the North nickel sulfate, cobalt sulfate, and projections were largely derived by DOE
American battery plants will need to manganese sulfate. from projections by BMI and indicate
manufacture or purchase these Figure II–10 repeats the chart that was that global supplies of cathode active
materials. Battery components include shown in the proposal, showing material (CAM) are expected to be
electrode active material (cathode active preliminary projections of global sufficient through 2035.
cathode supply versus global cathode
326 Slides 6 and 7 of presentation by Li-Bridge to 327 https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/federal-
Federal Consortium for Advanced Batteries (FCAB), consortium-advanced-batteries-fcab.

ER22AP24.025</GPH>
November 17, 2022.
79Sfmt 4700
Following the proposal, ANL the analysis does not include plant these efforts to build out a U.S. supply
analyzed North American production announcements not formally chain for batteries, and, as demonstrated
capacity for battery components and announced, and because cell production in section II.D.2.c.ii.a of this preamble,
precursor materials. ANL does project or other facilities may be vertically uptake from industry has been
that some domestic demand will need to integrated without this fact being considerable. As described in some
be satisfied through imports. Allies and disclosed.331 In fact, planned or detail earlier, the IRA offers sizeable
partners outside of North America are considered but not formally announced incentives and other support for further
likely to be integral in meeting U.S. plants for AAM would add enough development of domestic and North
battery component demand, though this capacity to meet projected cell American manufacture of electrified
does not indicate a deterrence to production.332 Another reason any vehicles and components, and BIL offers
securing adequate battery components projected shortfall can be remedied is significant grant funding for batter
and precursor materials to meet that CAM and AAM production have a component and cell manufacturing. The
domestic demand. Allies Japan and the one- to- three year timeframe from 45X tax credit offers up to $35/kWh for
Republic of Korea, for example, are the initial announcement and opening, battery cell production, up to $10/kWh
world’s second and third largest faster than cell production plants. Thus, for battery pack production, and up to
producers of CAM and AAM.328 ‘‘[b]ecause of their shorter construction 10 percent of incurred costs for battery
Specifically, based on assessed and permitting time, most battery component production through 2032.
announcements, ANL projects North components can be responsive to the The 48C tax credit offers up to $10
American CAM production will reach demand arising from battery cell plants’’ billion in products that could include
570 GWh by 2032, and that this will fall and can delay announcement building battery component and cell
short of North American cell production commitment while waiting for certainty manufacturing and recycling. The DOE
by 2028.329 Anode active material in cell production.333 Gaps in supply Loan Programs Office (LPO) is
(AAM) is likewise projected to be may also be satisfied by imports.334 supported battery component and cell
primarily import dependent, with North This outlook is informed by efforts to manufacturing projects through the
American production capacity reaching build a secure, and largely domestic, Advanced Technologies Vehicle
585 GWh in 2032; this would satisfy supply chain for battery components Manufacturing (ATVM) and Title 17
approximately 43 percent of forecast and batteries by the U.S. government programs.335 (Some examples of recent
end demand in 2030 and remaining and industry. The IRA and BIL have projects are outlined in RIA Chapter
steady thereafter, with the remainder already provided and continue to 1.5.1.3.) Together, these provisions are
supplied from elsewhere.330 provide significant support to accelerate continuing to motivate manufacturers to
ANL emphasizes that its production invest in the continued development of
projections are conservative and may 331 Planned Battery Supply at 6 n.3, 31, 34. a North American supply chain, and
understate domestic capacity, because 332 The report identifies an additional 590 GWh/ already appear to have proven
year in nominal anode active material North influential on the plans of
328 https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/ American production capacity by the end of this
4eb8c252-76b1-4710-8f5e-867e751c8dda/ decade which is planned or considered, but not manufacturers to procure domestic or
GlobalSupplyChainsofEVBatteries.pdf. formally announced. Planned Battery Supply at 31. North American mineral and
329 Planned Battery Supply at 33–34. 333 Planned Battery Supply at 34, 31.
ER22AP24.026</GPH>
330 Planned Battery Supply at 30–31. 334 Planned Battery Supply at 31, 34. 335 Planned Battery Supply at 8.
80Sfmt 4700
component sources and to construct Ford, Volkswagen, GM, Stellantis, battery supply chain are well
domestic manufacturing facilities to Honda, and Hyundai have all documented throughout this preamble,
claim the benefits of the act. announced battery supply chain funds from these laws are still being
Manufacturers are investing in lithium- investments in North America.336 See disbursed, with billions of dollars
ion battery cell production, both also preamble section II.E.4 for further available for the battery supply chain
independently and through joint discussion and examples. Importantly, remaining (see Table II–8).
ventures with battery companies. Tesla, while the effects of BIL and IRA on the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C supply of battery cells and battery by the discussion in this preamble and
In consideration of this updated components to support the feasibility of in RIA 1.5.1.2.
information on battery component and the final standards under the modeled Mineral security refers to potential
cell manufacturing, it continues to be potential compliance pathway. national security risks posed by
our assessment that the industry is well vulnerabilities in the mineral supply
positioned to support the battery c. Critical Mineral Security chain, and in particular reliance on
demand that is projected under the As stated at the beginning of this sourcing of critical minerals from
Phase 3 standards including taking into section II.D, it is our assessment that countries with which the U.S. has
consideration uncertainties that increased deployment of BEVs that fragile trade relations or significant
generally accompany forward-looking could result from this final rule does not policy differences. This section
projections, and therefore EPA constitute a vulnerability to national examines the outlook for mineral
concludes that there will be adequate security, for several reasons supported security as it relates to demand for
ER22AP24.027</GPH>
336 Planned Battery Supply at 23.
81Sfmt 4700
critical minerals resulting from presented in the proposal about the pace expands opportunities to develop a
increased BEV production under the of activity and overall outlook for secure supply chain that reaches well
final standards. We note that this buildout of the critical mineral supply beyond the borders of U.S.
section focuses on mineral security, and chain. While contributing to the record, As discussed previously in this
not on energy security, which relates to the information provided by the section in connection with critical
security of energy consumed by commenters largely serves to support mineral availability, since the proposal,
transportation and other needs. Energy the trends that were already identified Argonne National Laboratory has
security is discussed separately in and considered by EPA in the proposal, conducted additional analysis on the
section VII.C of this preamble. and do not identify new, specific outlook for U.S. production of nickel,
Concern for U.S. mineral security aspects of mineral security that were not cobalt, graphite, manganese and lithium
relates to the global distribution of already acknowledged. Taken together, and we have updated our analysis to
established supply chains for critical the totality of information in the public reflect this work. For the minerals
minerals and the fact that, at present, record continues to indicate that examined, there are prospects for
not all domestic demand can be development of the critical mineral growth among secure sources of supply,
supplied by domestic production. supply chains is proceeding both and the report details ongoing efforts to
Currently, despite a wide distribution of domestically and globally in a manner build and strengthen partnerships with
mineral resources globally, mineral that supports the industry’s compliance friendly countries to fill any supply
production is not evenly distributed with the final standards under the gaps that cannot be met domestically.
across the world. At present, production modeled potential compliance pathway. The United States is actively pursuing
is concentrated in a few countries due In light of this information provided in a whole-of-government strategy to
to several factors, including where the the public comments and additional secure materials that cannot be
resources are found in nature, the level information that EPA has collected sufficiently produced domestically. This
of investment that has occurred to through continued research, it continues involves diversifying sourcing strategies
develop the resources, economic factors to be our assessment that the increase in through strengthening current trade
such as infrastructure, and the presence ZEV production projected under the agreements and actively building new
or absence of government policy relating modeled potential compliance pathway economic, technology, and regional
to their exploitation. While the U.S. is for the standards is not expected to security alliances. The United States has
not a leading producer of minerals used adversely impact national security, and international initiatives in place to
in BEV batteries at present, substantial in fact may result in national security secure nickel, cobalt, and graphite, the
investment has already gone towards benefits by reducing the need for critical battery minerals for which
expanding domestic mineral supply, imported petroleum (as discussed imports from non-FTA, non-MSP
largely due to funding and incentives separately in section VII.C of this countries are projected in the short,
from BIL and IRA. This is described in preamble) and providing regulatory and medium, and/or long term. These
greater detail in section II.D.2.ii.a of this market certainty for the continued initiatives and agreements serve to
preamble. development of a domestic supply chain secure supply chains, and to balance
In the proposal, EPA analyzed the and counteract influence of potential
for critical minerals.
primary issues surrounding mineral threats to those supply chains,
security as it relates to critical mineral Regarding the adequacy of the supply
including potential threats posed by
needs for BEV production. 88 FR 25968. chain in supporting the standards, EPA
Foreign Entities of Concern, such as the
We collected and reviewed information notes that it is a misconception to
concentration of mineral processing in
relating to the present geographical assume that the U.S. must establish a
China. We discuss below some specific
distribution of developed and known fully independent domestic supply
examples of bilateral and multilateral
critical mineral resources and products, chain for critical minerals or other
efforts to secure minerals supply from
including information from the U.S. inputs to BEV production in order to
non-U.S. sources.
Geological Survey, analyst firms and contemplate standards that may result Indonesia, for example, is a major
various stakeholders. In considering in increased manufacture of BEVs. The source of nickel supply and refining
these sources we highlighted and supply chain that supports production capacity, and also has significant
examined the potential for the U.S. of consumer products, including ICE reserves of cobalt. The U.S. has been
supply chain to reduce dependence on vehicles, is highly interconnected across making concerted efforts to forge a
critical minerals that at present are the world, and it has long been the norm strong partnership with Indonesia,
largely sourced from other countries. that global supply chains are involved culminating in the U.S. entering into a
Our assessment of the available in providing many of the products that Comprehensive Strategic Partnership
evidence indicated that the increase in are commonly available in the U.S. with Indonesia in 2023, with the
BEV production projected to result from market and that are used on a daily intention of creating a clean nickel
the proposed standards could be basis. As with almost any other product, supply chain. Another avenue for
accommodated without causing harm to the relevant standard is not complete building partnership with Indonesia is
national security. domestic self-sufficiency, but rather a through the Indo-Pacific Framework for
EPA has carefully considered the diversified supply chain that includes Prosperity (IPEF), an agreement between
substantive and detailed comments not only domestic production where the U.S. and countries across the Indo-
offered by the various commenters. possible and appropriate but also Pacific region to advance resilience,
Much of the information provided by includes trade with allies and partners sustainability, inclusiveness, economic
adverse commenters builds upon the with whom the U.S. has good trade growth, fairness, and competitiveness
evidence that EPA already presented in relations. As discussed below, bilateral for our economies.337 IPEF recently
the proposal concerning the risks and and multilateral trade agreements and
announced a critical minerals dialogue,
uncertainties associated with the future other arrangements (such as defense
and the IPEF Supply Chain Agreement
impact of mineral demand on mineral agreements and various development
security. Much of the information and investment partnerships), either 337 https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/agreements-
provided by supportive commenters long-standing or more recently under-negotiation/indo-pacific-economic-
also builds on the evidence EPA established, already exist which greatly framework-prosperity-ipef.
82Sfmt 4700
entered into force in February 2024.338 DRC to secure cobalt supply to close the Congo’s Cobalt Industry (COTECCO)
Another avenue is through DOI’s gap between projected domestic project.343
International Technical Assistance demand and projected domestic supply. Elsewhere in Africa, the United States
Program (DOI-ITAP), which builds Through PGI, the United States is International Development Finance
capacity in other countries by drawing supporting the development of the Corporation (DFC) has invested to
from the diverse expertise of DOI Lobito Corridor, which connects the expand graphite mining and processing
employees, lending assistance and Democratic Republic of the Congo and in Mozambique.344 The United States is
expertise to projects, including Zambia with global markets through working closely with its FTA partner
mining.339 DOI and USAID partnered to Angola, with an initial investment of Australia to develop graphite mining
advise Indonesia’s Ministry of Mines on $250 million in a rail expansion that projects in Tanzania and other
mining governance. The State countries.345
intends to reduce transport time and
Department also entered a
lower costs for metals exports from the Notably, the U.S. is a member of the
memorandum of understanding with
Indonesia’s Ministry of Energy and region.342 Child and forced labor has Minerals Security Partnership, which a
Mineral Resources to cooperate on been a particular concern for DRC, given collaboration of 13 countries and the EU
responsible mining and minerals the known presence of child workers at to invest in a responsible, secure critical
processing.340 The U.S. also supports artisanal mines across the region, minerals supply chains globally.346
the Just Energy Transition Partnership, despite these mines making up a The selected examples explore U.S.
which supports clean electricity minority of cobalt mining operations. engagements with some of the most
development in Indonesia. The U.S. and allies are partnering with important international players in
The Democratic Republic of Congo the DRC to combat child and forced critical mineral supply chains, but they
(DRC) is the world’s largest source of labor in the cobalt supply chain. A are by no means exhaustive. Below is a
cobalt, with 70 percent of current world notable example is the Department of graphic overview of U.S. initiatives to
production and 48 percent of Labor (DOL)-funded Combatting Child secure electric vehicle battery minerals
reserves.341 The U.S. is partnering with Labor in the Democratic Republic of the across the world (Figure II–11).
In addition, as we noted at proposal, utilization of foreign oil, in that oil is vehicles. 88 FR 25968. That is, mineral
it merits mention that utilization of consumed as a fuel while minerals security is not a perfect analogy to
critical minerals is different from the become a constituent of manufactured energy security. Supply disruptions and
338 https://www.commerce.gov/news/press- 342 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/ cobalt-industry-cotecco. See also the further

releases/2024/01/us-department-commerce- statements-releases/2023/05/20/fact-sheet- discussion in RTC section 17.2.
announces-upcoming-entry-force-ipef-supply-chain. partnership-for-global-infrastructure-and- 344 ANL at 57.
339 https://www.doi.gov/intl/itap. investment-at-the-g7-summit. 345 ANL at 58.
343 https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/comply-
340 ANL at 45. 346 https://www.state.gov/minerals-security-
chain; https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/
ER22AP24.028</GPH>
341 ANL at 46. partnership.

combatting-child-labor-democratic-republic-congos-
83Sfmt 4700
fluctuating prices are relevant to critical iii. Assessment of Heavy-Duty BEV public infrastructure deployment.
minerals as well, but the impacts of Charging Infrastructure Finally, commenters noted that EPA
such disruptions are felt differently and As BEV adoption grows, more finalizing stringent standards would
by different parties. Disruptions in oil charging infrastructure will be needed provide certainty to OEMs, EVSE
supply or gasoline price have an to support the HD BEV fleet.348 We providers and utilities and spur further
immediate impact on consumers received many comments on this topic. investments in charging infrastructure.
through higher fuel prices and thus Vehicle manufacturers, dealers, fleet One point on which we received
constrains the ability to travel. In owners, and representatives of the fuels
contrast, supply disruptions or price many comments was that there would
industry among others raised concerns need to be public charging to support
fluctuations of minerals affect only the that charging and supporting
production and price of new vehicles. In the Phase 3 standards under the
infrastructure, both front-of-the-meter modeled potential compliance pathway.
practice, short-term price fluctuations (electricity generation, distribution, and
do not always translate to higher In this regard, the first group of
transmission) and back-of-the-meter commenters raised issues about the
production cost as most manufacturers (such as EVSE installations), is
purchase minerals via long-term adequacy and availability of public
inadequate today and that the pace of
contracts that insulate them to a degree charging networks. They noted that HD
deployment is not on track to meet
from changes in spot prices. Moreover, levels projected if the proposed BEVs have different charging needs
critical minerals are not a single standards are finalized. Commenters from LD vehicles, and that the power
commodity but a number of distinct noted that fleets will not buy, or may levels and site designs of public
commodities, each having its own cancel orders, if charging infrastructure charging stations available today may
supply and demand dynamics, with is a barrier. A particular concern raised not be able to serve HD vehicles. While
many being capable of substitution by by commenters is that although back-of- some of these commenters noted the
other minerals.347 Importantly, while oil the-meter issues (e.g., how many EVSE importance of public investments in
is consumed as a fuel and thus requires ports to purchase, where to install charging infrastructure, they expressed
continuous supply, minerals become EVSE, etc.) are largely in the control of concern that programs such as the $5
part of the vehicle and have the the vehicle purchaser, front-of-the-meter billion National Electric Vehicle
potential to be recovered and recycled. issues are not. Commenters noted that if Infrastructure (NEVI) program
Thus, even when minerals are imported infrastructure is needed to support the established under the BIL will primarily
from other countries, their acquisition EVSE hardware—generally termed support infrastructure designed for LD
adds to the domestic mineral stock that distribution grid buildout—liaison with vehicles. The second group of
is available for domestic recycling in the a utility is necessary. In this regard, commenters were optimistic that a
future. many commenters spoke of a sufficient public charging network was
We thus reiterate our conclusion from
conundrum whereby owners will not feasible within the 2027–2032 time
proposal that there are short-term,
purchase a BEV without assurance of frame, and some of these commenters
medium-term, and long-term means of
adequate supporting infrastructure, but provided quantified information as to
successfully dealing with issues of
utilities will not build out without potential network extent and cost in
mineral security—both mineral
advance assurance of demand. support.
availability and supply chains for the We also received comments from non-
acquisition of minerals. Lithium supply governmental organizations, We note at the outset that we agree
in the mid- and long-term will largely be electrification groups, electric vehicle with the commenters regarding the need
satisfied domestically, with supply gaps manufacturers, and utilities indicating to assess and cost public charging
being filled by countries with which the that there could be adequate supporting corresponding to the modeled potential
U.S. has strong relations. Although we infrastructure, including distribution compliance pathway supporting
do not anticipate domestic supply to grid buildout, within the proposed feasibility of the final standards. EPA’s
meet a large share of demand for cobalt, Phase 3 rule’s timeframe. They pointed potential compliance pathway at
nickel, and graphite, we have indicated out that buildout need not occur proposal posited that all HDV charging
pathways by which a diversified and nationwide, nor all at once. Rather, they needs could be met with depot charging,
secure global supply chain for each may noted that initial buildout could be and EPA’s cost estimates consequently
be achieved, describing a portfolio of concentrated in a relatively few high- reflected depot charging only. DRIA at
bilateral and multilateral development volume freight corridors. They also 195. EPA acknowledged at proposal that
efforts underway as of February 2024 to highlighted the many public and private public charging would ultimately be
secure critical minerals from friendly investments in charging infrastructure necessary, DRIA at 195–96, and now
countries, as described in the DOE that have been announced or are agrees with commenters that the need is
Argonne Laboratory report on critical underway. Commenters flagged nearer-term and that analysis of public
minerals availability. We anticipate innovative charging solutions such as charging should be included as part of
these minerals security efforts to charging-as-a-service and mobile the modeled potential compliance
continue to expand subsequent to this charging that can help meet the needs pathway that supports the feasibility of
final rulemaking. We consequently of fleets that experience delays the final standards. Accordingly, the
regard the Phase 3 standards as feasible installing EVSE or for which there are analysis for the final rule reflects
in light of concerns regarding mineral other barriers to depot charging. Some incorporation of public charging for
security. noted that public charging needs will be certain HDV subcategories starting in
geographically concentrated in early MY 2030. We have made the
347 For example, manganese can be subsituted by
aluminum in the case of nickel-manganese-cobalt years, allowing a phased approach for appropriate modifications to our cost
(NMC) and nickel-cobalt- aluminum (NCA) estimates, and to HD TRUCS, to reflect
batteries. Likewise, an LFP battery uses iron 348 Infrastructure includes both charging
public charging needs in the modeled
phosphate chemistry without nickel, manganese, infrastructure, which includes the EVSE on the potential compliance pathway. Further
cobalt or aluminum. Research has also been customer side of the meter, and grid infrastructure,
conducted to study the replacement of lithium with that is the power generation, transmission, and details are in sections II.D.5.iv, II.E.2,
sodium ions. distribution on the utility side of the meter. and II.E.5.ii.
84Sfmt 4700
a. Depot Charging variety of fleets, including van, truck, under section 30C of title 26 of the
and bus fleets.355 Internal Revenue Code (‘‘30C’’) that
(1) Behind-the-Meter Infrastructure Some companies are starting with could cover up to 30 percent of the costs
In both the NPRM and here in the mobile charging units while they test or for procuring and installing charging
final rule, we expect that much of the pilot vehicles.356 For example, PACCAR infrastructure (subject to a $100,000 per
infrastructure development may be has partnered with Heliox to offer 40 item cap) in eligible census tracts
kW and 50 kW mobile charging units to through 2032. Based on its assessment
purchased by individual BEV or fleet
its dealers and customers of the of the share of heavy-duty charging
owners for depot charging or be subject
Kenworth and Peterbilt brands,357 and stations that may be located in
to third-party contracts to provide Sysco, which plans to deploy 800 Class qualifying areas (and other 30C
charging as a service.349 Manufacturers 8 BEV tractors in the next few years, provisions), DOE projects an average
are working closely with their plans to use mobile charging units to value of this tax credit of 18 percent of
customers to support this type of EVSE begin their truck deployments while 14 the installed EVSE costs at depots and
infrastructure, many making recent charging stations are being installed.358 up to 27 percent362 at public charging
announcements since the NPRM was While we agree with commenters that stations.363 364 In addition, there are
issued. dedicated HD charging infrastructure billions of dollars in funding programs
For example, PACCAR sells a range of may be limited today, we expect both that could support HD charging
EVSEs to customers directly.350 Mack depot and public charging to expand infrastructure either on its own or
Trucks partnered with two charging significantly over the next decade. The alongside the purchase of a HD BEV. As
solution companies so that they can U.S. government is making large detailed in the following sections,
investments in charging infrastructure private investments will also play an
offer customers the ability to acquire
through the BIL359 and the IRA,360 as important role in meeting future
EVSE solutions directly from their
discussed in RIA Chapter 1.3.2. For infrastructure needs. We also agree with
dealers.351 DTNA also announced a example, the Charging and Fueling
partnership to provide their customers commenters that the existence of the
Infrastructure Discretionary Grant final standards themselves provides
with EVSE solutions.352 Similarly, Program (CFI Program) recently regulatory certainty that will spur
Navistar partnered with Quanta announced the first-year grant recipients further infrastructure investments—both
Services, Inc. to provide BEV under the program.361 In total, over by HD vehicle purchasers installing
infrastructure solutions, that include $600 million in grants will support the EVSE at depots and by manufacturers,
support in the design, construction, and deployment of charging and alternative utilities, EVSE providers, and others
maintenance of EVSE at depots.353 fueling infrastructure in communities installing public charging stations.
Nikola has partnered with ChargePoint and along corridors in 22 states (see EVSE for HD BEVs is available today
to provide fleet customers with a suite RTC 6.1 for a summary of grants that for purchase. However, EPA recognizes
of options for charging infrastructure will specifically support HD charging that it takes time for individual or fleet
and software (e.g., for charge infrastructure). The IRA extends and owners to develop charging site plans
management).354 AMPLY Power, which modifies the ‘‘Alternative Fuel for their facility, obtain permits,
was acquired by BP in 2021, provides Refueling Property Credit’’ tax credit purchase the EVSE, and have it
charging equipment and services for a installed. For the depots that may be
355 BP. Press Release: ‘‘bp takes first major step
charging a greater number of vehicles or
349 ‘‘EV charging as a service’’. IRENA—
into electrification in the US by acquiring EV fleet with high-power DCFC ports, an
charging provider AMPLY Power’’. December 7,
International Renewable Energy Agency. Accessed 2021. Available online: https://www.bp.com/en/ upgrade to the electricity distribution
February 23, 2024. Available online: https:// global/corporate/news-and-insights/press-releases/ system may be required adding to the
www.irena.org/Innovation-landscape-for-smart- bp-takes-first-major-step-into-electrification-in-us-
electrification/Power-to-mobility/31-EV-charging-
installation timeline. As described in
by-acquiring-ev-fleet-charging-provider-amply-
as-a-service. power.html.
RIA Chapter 2.10.3, we estimated the
350 PACCAR. ‘‘Electric Vehicle Chargers.’’ 356 Mobile charging units are EVSE that can move total number of EVSE ports that will be
Accessed on November 1, 2023. Available online: to different locations to charge vehicles. Depending required to support the depot-charged
https://www.paccarparts.com/technology/ev- on the unit’s specifications and site, mobile BEVs in the potential compliance
chargers. charging units may be able to utilize a facility’s
351 Volvo Group Press Release. ‘‘Mack Trucks
pathway’s technology packages
existing infrastructure (e.g., 240 V wall outlets) to
Enters Partnerships with Heliox, Gilbarco to recharge. Mobile charging units may have wheels developed to support the MYs 2027–
Increase Charging Accessibility.’’ February 14, for easy transport. 2032 standards. We estimated about
2023. Available online: https:// 357 Hampel, Carrie. ‘‘Heliox to be global charging 520,000 EVSE ports will be needed
www.volvogroup.com/en/news-and-media/news/ partner for Paccar’’. Electrive.com. September 24, across all six model years, but only
2023/feb/mack-trucks-enters-partnerships-with- 2022. Available online: https://www.electrive.com/
heliox-gilbarco-to-increase-charging- 2022/09/24/heliox-to-be-global-charging-partner-
about half of those will be required to
accessibility.html. for-paccar/. support the MY 2027 through MY 2030
352 Daimler Trucks North America Press Release. 358 Morgan, Jason. ‘‘How Sysco Corp. plans to vehicles. The majority (88 percent) of
‘‘Electrada, Daimler partner for electric charging.’’ deploy 800 battery electric Class 8 trucks (and that’s EVSE ports (for MY2027–2032) are
October 3, 2023. Available online: https:// just the beginning)’’. Fleet Equipment. November
www.truckpartsandservice.com/alternative-power/
Level 2 ports, which are less likely to
14, 2022. Available online: https://
battery-electric/article/15635568/electrada-daimler- www.fleetequipmentmag.com/sysco-battery- require lengthy upgrades to the
partner-for-chargers. electric-trucks. distribution system as described in
353 Navistar Press Release. ‘‘Navistar Partners 359 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public
With Infrastructure Solutions Provider Quanta Law 117–58, 135 Stat. 429 (2021). Available online: 362 The average value of 27 percent for public
Services.’’ May 3, 2023. Available online: https:// https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/ charging infrastructure is for EVSE under 1 MW; for
news.navistar.com/2023-05-03-Navistar-Partners- PLAW-117publ58.pdf. 1 MW and higher, DOE estimates an average tax
With-Infrastructure-Solutions-Provider-Quanta-
360 Inflation Reduction Act, Public Law 117–169, credit value of 19 percent.
Services. 136 Stat. 1818 (2022). Available online: https:// 363 U.S. DOE, ‘‘Estimating Federal Tax Incentives
354 Nikola. ‘‘Nikola and ChargePoint Partner to www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ169/PLAW- for Heavy Duty Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and
Accelerate Charging Infrastructure Solutions.’’ 117publ169.pdf. for Acquiring Electric Vehicles Weighing Less than
November 8, 2022. Available online: https:// 361 JOET, ‘‘Biden-Harris Administration Bolsters 14,000 Pounds.’’ Memorandum, March 2024.
nikolamotor.com/press_releases/nikola-and- Electric Vehicle Future with More than $600 364 See preamble section II.E.2 and RIA Chapter
chargepoint-partner-to-accelerate-charging- Million in New Funding,’’ January 11, 2024, https:// 2.6.2.1 for a discussion of how we accounted for
infrastructure-solutions-212. driveelectric.gov/news/new-cfi-funding. this tax credit in our analysis of depot EVSE costs.
85Sfmt 4700
section II.E.2. See also RTC section 7 grid buildout.365 This issue relates to distribution grid infrastructure, the
(Distribution). In conclusion, there is the infrastructure linking transmission substation is by far the costliest and
time to install EVSE at depots to support lines to an electricity user. A typical most time-intensive to construct (though
projected utilization of BEV grid infrastructure diagram shows a less so to upgrade an existing
technologies beginning in MY 2027. transmission line feeding into a substation), feeders are the next most
distribution substation which serves resource intensive, and service
(2) Front-of-the-Meter Infrastructure/ several feeders to distribute power.
Distribution Grid Buildout transformers the least. Table II–9, based
From the feeders that serve thousands of on information in RIA Chapter 1.6.5,
EPA has carefully considered the customers, the service transformers step shows timing estimates for each of these
many comments concerning the need down the voltage to customer utilization
elements.366 367
for, timing of, and cost for distribution levels. Of these three elements of
New substation costs can vary, could potentially otherwise be charging infrastructure needed to meet
depending on location (urban/suburban/ constraining. this demand in the time frame of the
rural) and Megavolts ampere with In 2027, the Phase 3 rule is projected rule is likely to be centered in a sub-set
estimates showing $4 to $35 million.368 to increase transportation sector of states and counties where freight
Feeders can cost from $100 to electricity demand by a modest 0.67 activity is concentrated and supportive
approximately $872 per foot, variables percent; that is, of the national demand ZEV polices exist. ICCT found that
being above or below ground for electricity posed by the likely areas of high concentration
installation, and voltage (typically $1 transportation sector, less than 1 percent include Texas (Harris, Dallas, and Bexar
million for 0 kV–25 kV and $1.5 million is attributable to the Phase 3 rule in counties); southern California (Los
for 26kV–35kV)).369 The estimated cost 2027. In 2032, this rule is projected to Angeles, San Bernadino, San Diego and
of a non-DCFC service transformer is increase transportation sector electricity Riverside counties); New York State
$20,000.370 demand to 9.27 percent.373 We note that (Bronx, New York, Queens, Kings, and
the modeling associated with these Richmond counties); Massachusetts
EPA has assessed the question of how estimates uses the final rule adoption (Suffolk county); Pennsylvania
much buildout might be needed (under rate scenario, which corresponds to the (Philadelphia county); New Jersey
the modeled potential compliance modeled potential compliance pathway (Hudson county); and Florida (Miami-
pathway supporting the feasibility of the for the final rule. Dade county).375 These areas are
standards) at the national level, at the Furthermore, since this demand is projected to experience either higher
regional level, and at the parcel level.371 only that attributable to the aggregate demand or higher energy
Assessment was conducted with EPA transportation sector, the demand as a demand per unit area attributable to HD
internal tools372 as well as with a first percentage of total demand on a utility BEV adoption. In the critical initial year
of its kind ground up analysis from would be less, since it would be a of the Phase 3 standards, when there is
DOE. We find that electricity demand fraction of all other sources of demand. the least lead time, EPA’s projected
attributable to the Phase 3 standards Thus, in 2030 and 2035 (the years we increases in electricity demand are very
under the modeled potential modeled for this analysis), increases in modest, ranging from 0.002 percent (Los
compliance pathway is minimal for any the demand for the modeled compliance Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim) to 0.88
and all of these perspectives, and pathway are only 0.41 percent and 2.59 percent (Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale).376
especially so in the initial years of the percent.374 These estimates are conservative. The
program when the lead time needed for Moreover, as commenters noted (see projected increases represent increased
distribution grid buildout installation RTC sections 6.1 and 7 (Distribution)), electricity demand attributable to both
365 See, RTC section 7 (Distribution) for a full https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-021-00855- 372 See discussion of IPM modeling for the
discussion of the issues discussed in this preamble 0. interim control case described in RIA Chapter 4.2.4.
section; see also RIA Chapter 1.6. 369 National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 373 Murray, Evan ‘‘Calculations of the Impacts of
366 Borlaug, B., Muratori, M., Gilleran, M. et al. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Kevala the Final Standards at Various Geographic Scales’’
‘‘Heavy-duty truck electrification and the impacts of Inc., and U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Multi-State
(February 29, 2024). (National Demand tab).
depot charging on electricity distribution systems’’. Transportation Electrification Impact Study:
374 Murray, Evan ‘‘Calculations of the Impacts of
Nat Energy 6, 673–682 (2021). Available online: Preparing the Grid for Light-, Medium-, and Heavy-
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-021-00855- Duty Electric Vehicles’’. DOE/EE–2818. U.S. the Final Standards at Various Geographic Scales’’
0. Department of Energy. March 2024. At 64–65 (February 29, 2024). (Generation National Demand
(‘‘TEIS’’).
367 EPRI. ‘‘EVs2Scale2030TM Grid Primer’’. tab).

August 29, 2023. Available online: https:// 370 TEIS at 96. Median cost of DCFC service 375 Comments of ICCT, July 2023 at 11. These
www.epri.com/research/products/00000000300 transformers in the Study was $50,000. Id. comments reflect Ragon, Kelly, et al., 2023 (‘‘ICCT
2028010. 371 A ‘‘parcel’’, as used in the TEIS, means ‘‘a real
368 Borlaug, B., Muratori, M., Gilleran, M. et al.
May 2023 White Paper’’).
estate property or land and any associated 376 Murray, Evan ‘‘Calculations of the Impacts of
‘‘Heavy-duty truck electrification and the impacts of structures that are the property of a person with
depot charging on electricity distribution systems’’. identification for taxation purposes.’’ TEIS at 2 n. the Final Standards at Various Geographic Scales’’
ER22AP24.029</GPH>
Nat Energy 6, 673–682 (2021). Available online: 15. (February 29, 2024). (MSA Demand tab).
86Sfmt 4700
the heavy-duty Phase 3 rule and and under a no action case. The in this section 385—not only do these
demand from the light-duty sector research team also assessed the z2estimates of energy consumption and
absent the final rule. The portion of potential impact of managed EV peak demand impacts decrease, but in
electricity demand attributable to the charging at homes and depots to reduce some instances, peak demand is
Phase 3 rule would be less. the peak power needs and associated projected to decrease in absolute terms,
We estimate that electricity demand cost and timing of distribution that is, to be less than in the no action
in these high traffic freight corridors upgrades. In the unmanaged case, the unmanaged case. Thus, for 2027,
attributable to the transportation sector study assumes that EVs are charged incremental peak demand decreases in
would increase in 2032, corresponding immediately when the vehicle returns to four of the five states, and remains
to need under the modeled potential a charger. In contrast, the managed identical in the fifth.386 For 2032,
compliance pathway to meet increased charging case has vehicles arriving at incremental peak demand is positive in
standard stringency (including charging locations and intentionally two of the states but the increase is only
standards for sleeper cab tractors and minimizing charging power such that 0.1 percent and 0.5 percent, and
heavy heavy-duty vocational vehicles the session is completed just prior to the reduced in the other states by 0.5–1.8
which commence after MY 2027, vehicle’s departure from that location380 percent potentially obviating the need
ranging from 0.014 percent (San Diego- The study also incorporates public for any buildout at all.387
Carlsbad) to 12.58 percent (San charging such that the corresponding These minor increases reflect low
Antonio-New Braunfels).377 EPA regards high power needs are reflected. numbers of transformers, feeders, and
these projected increases as modest. The The study estimates overload at the substations estimated to be needed
projected increases in 2027, when there substation level (100 percent criteria), (again, for the five states at issue, and
is the shortest lead time for buildout, are feeder level (100 percent criteria), and at for both LMDV and HD Phase 3 rules
small. As expected, demand is projected the residential service transformer per together). In 2027, only 1 additional
to increase in 2032 but there is feeder level (125 percent) criteria.381 substation is projected to be needed,
considerably more available lead time in Scenarios examined are for 2027 ‘‘no and none in the managed case.388 In
which buildout can be accommodated. action’’ (i.e., baseline without the LMDV 2032, the TEIS projects that only 8
Moreover, these increases are modest or HD Phase 3 emission standards under substations would be needed in the
compared to total electricity demand on the two rulemakings) with and without unmanaged case, 4 if conservative
utilities within the states in these freight mitigation (i.e., the EV charging mitigative measures are utilized.389
corridors. See RTC section 7 management just described), and the Projections for feeders are 9 in 2027 (5
(Distribution). action case with EPA’s LMDV and HD in the managed case), and 125 in 2032
The Department of Energy study, Phase 3 rules, again both with and (75 if managed). In 2027, the TEIS
‘‘Multi-State Transportation without mitigation. The action case uses projects 2,800 transformers (2,400 if
Electrification Impact Study’’ (‘‘TEIS’’)
the same case EPA used for its national managed), and 30,000 in 2032 (21,000 in
supports this conclusion at a more
and regional estimates presented the managed case).390
granular level.378 This is the first study
previously in this section, which Although new substations are a
of this scale to be bottom up, comparing
include higher electricity demand than significant undertaking that can take
parcel level light, medium, and heavy-
corresponds to the HD Phase 3 final multiple years as shown in Table II–9,
duty vehicle demand to parcel supply
standards under the modeled potential as noted, the TEIS finds that only a
by PV (photovoltaic) and grid capacity
compliance pathway. The study small number are projected to be
at each examined parcel. The study
examines the same scenarios for needed. We note further that the
focuses on 5 states (California, New
2032.382 estimates in the TEIS Study of the
York, Illinois, Oklahoma, and
Pennsylvania) selected to capture Consistent with the national demand amount of distribution buildout needed
diversity in population density (urban and high freight corridor regional are conservative with respect to the HD
and rural areas), freight demand, BEV demand estimates, the TEIS projects Phase 3 rule. First, the TEIS Study
demand, state EV policies, utility type minimal demand (energy consumption) considered both the light/medium duty
(i.e., investor owned, municipality, or and minimal peak demand for both standards and the HD Phase 3 emission
cooperative) and distribution grid 2027 and 2032, even without standards together and did not
composition. The TEIS used these states considering any mitigation. In 2032, that disaggregate the results. Second, as just
to extrapolate a national demand for incremental increase ranged from 1.6 noted, the action scenario considered
where and when upgrades will be percent to 2.7 percent.383 Incremental included higher electricity demand than
needed to the electricity distribution impact on peak demand, again from the corresponds to the Phase 3 final
system—including substations, feeders, unmanaged case, was 0.1–0.2 percent in standards under the modeled potential
and service transformers—due to BEV 2027 and 0.6–3.0 percent in 2032.384 compliance pathway. Third, the
load under the approximated If BEV users engage in simple ‘‘unmanaged’’ scenario presented
combination of the EPA’s combined management strategies—shifting considers no mitigation efforts at all. If
light-duty and medium-duty rulemaking charging times as described previously minimal mitigation efforts,
action (LMDV)379 and HD Phase 3 rules characterized in the TEIS as ‘‘a
Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later Light- conservative estimate of the benefits of
377 Murray, Evan ‘‘Calculations of the Impacts of Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles’’ Docket ID: EPA– managed charging’’,391 are considered
the Final Standards at Various Geographic Scales’’ HQ–OAR–2022–0829. We refer to this action both
(February 29, 2024). (MSA Demand tab). as the Light- and Medium-Duty (LMDV) rule and/
385 TEIS at 4.
378 National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
or LD rule for short in this preamble.
380 TEIS at 4. 386 TEIS at 62.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Kevala
381 TEIS at 47 (substation), 47 (feeder), and 49 387 TEIS at 62.

Inc., and U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Multi-State
Transportation Electrification Impact Study: (transformer). 388 TEIS at Table ES–2.
382 TEIS at 2–3. The No Action case includes 389 TEIS at Table ES–2.
Preparing the Grid for Light-, Medium-, and Heavy-
Duty Electric Vehicles’’. DOE/EE–2818. U.S. current state and Federal policies and regulations 390 TEIS at Table ES–2. Compare this with the
Department of Energy. March 2024. (‘‘TEIS’’). as of April 2023. Id. at 3. estimated 50 million transformers in use presently.
379 EPA’s combined light-duty and medium-duty 383 TEIS at 56. See RTC section 7 (Distribution).
rulemaking action ‘‘Multi-Pollutant Emissions 384 TEIS at 62. 391 TEIS at 4.
87Sfmt 4700
estimated impacts decrease sharply. The would be light and medium heavy Some commenters were concerned that
action managed case is projected to vocational vehicles which utilize EVSE interactions with utilities and their
reduce peak loads in all 5 States in types least likely to occasion demand regulatory commissions vary state-by-
2027, and to reduce peak loads in 3 of triggering need for buildout. RIA state, and that this regime adds to grid
the 5 States in 2032. Chapter 4.2.2. For example, the TEIS buildout deployment timing
We further have modeled a potential projects no need for new and upgraded difficulties.401 Other commenters,
compliance pathway whereby almost all substations in 2027 nationally, and need however, persuasively maintained that
of the HD BEVs utilize Level 2 or DC– for only approximately 24–48 (managed this localized system is actually a plus,
50 kW chargers for depot EVSE, rather and unmanaged cases) nationally in because each potential buildout is a
than higher rated chargers.392 These 2032.396 localized decision, best handled by the
lower rated chargers will not pose the Most of the demand comes from the local utility and grid operator.402 As
types of electricity demand potentially states which have adopted ACT.397 EPA discussed further below, there are also
requiring distribution buildout upgrades notes that these states that have adopted many mitigative measures which BEV
as the higher-rated chargers posited by the program have undertaken and have users can utilize to reduce demand, and
some of the commenters.393 on-going efforts to achieve it. See RTC the localized process could provide a
EPA recognizes that from the section 7 (Distribution) describing such means of developing local site
standpoint of timing, it is important to on-going efforts. optimized mitigative measures.
consider not only incremental increases With respect to non-ACT states, most Finally, we expect that the HD Phase
in demand attributable to the HD Phase of the demand in these states is 3 rule itself will serve as a strong signal
3 emission standards but also other attributable to the HD Phase 3 rule itself. to the utility industry to make proactive
demand from the light-duty, medium- See RIA Chapter 4.2.2. As discussed in investments and otherwise proactively
duty, and heavy-duty transportation RTC section 7 (Distribution) with analyze and plan for potential buildout
sector that might occasion the need for respect to high freight corridors in non- needs.403
distribution grid buildout. For example, ACT states (including Pennsylvania, Commenters pointed out that ‘‘at the
buildout potentially could be needed Texas, Arizona, and Illinois), that distribution system level it is not
with respect to HD BEVs in the EPA incremental demand is low, especially sufficient to simply compare potential
reference case. We continue to find that in the initial year of the program. State- charging station demand growth to
this overall demand can be by state results show similar small system capacities.’’ 404 Numerous
accommodated within the timeframe of percentages of increased demand.398 commenters also pointed to a chicken-
the rule, for the following reasons. EPA agrees with this assessment from egg conundrum, whereby potential fleet
As discussed previously in this the Energy Strategy Coalition (speaking purchasers contemplating BEVs will not
section, buildout need not occur for some of the nation’s largest investor- purchase without an assurance of
everywhere and all at once. In the rule’s owned electric and gas utilities, public adequate electrical supply, but utilities
time frame, as shown in particular in power authorities and generators of cannot build out without having
the ICCT 2023 White Paper, it can be electricity): ‘‘[d]emand for electricity assurance of demand.
centered in a discrete number of high will increase under both the HDV
Proposal and recently-proposed multi- EPA believes that there are potential
freight corridors.
pollutant standards for light-duty and solutions to these issues. First, as
In the early model years of the
medium-duty vehicles . . . . but the demonstrated previously in this section,
program, when lead time is the shortest,
electricity grid is capable of planning for we have projected a potential
projected demand remains low.394
and accommodating such demand compliance pathway to meet the final
When accounting for the increase from
growth and has previously experienced standards whereby there will be limited
all vehicles (light-duty and heavy-duty),
periods of significant and sustained need for grid distribution buildouts.
we find the portion of demand
growth.’’ 399 We further note the Those buildouts that we project largely
attributable to the entire heavy-duty
comments of the Edison Electric involve transformers or feeders, and (in
vehicle sector (including ACT) increases
Institute (trade association of the 2032) a handful of expanded
by only 2.6 percent between 2024 and
nation’s investor-owned utilities) substations. We emphasize again that
2027.395 That is, the increase in demand
(‘‘EEI’’) that the degree of anticipated this analysis is conservative in that we
attributable specifically to electric
buildout is similar to increases did not include ameliorative measures
heavy-duty vehicles (including ACT),
experienced historically by the utility available to utilities to apportion
and therefore the infrastructure buildout
industry, and can be accommodated demand (discussed below).
necessary to support those vehicles, is
small compared to other factors. within the HD Phase 3 rule’s timeframe.
EEI Comments at 7, 8. The Analysis commissions, or electric companies, and there are
We further project that a substantial long-standing policies and practices in place to
majority of these ACT-compliant ZEVs Group reached a similar conclusion.400 ensure timely planning for and development of the
infrastructure needed to endure system, reliability.
392 RIA chapter 2 at Table 2–73. The only 396 TEIS at 65 and using the TEIS analysis And for most states and electric companies in the
exceptions are for four tractors projected to utilize showing that the 5 states analyzed account for country. The magnitude and pace of system
DC–150kW chargers (HD TRUCS vehicles 30, 31, approximately one third of national costs (TEIS at demand growth associated with the rollout of the
83, and 101), and one additional tractor and one 66). EPA’s proposed phase 3 rule neither different from
transit bus projected to utilize DC–350kW chargers 397 Murray, Evan ‘‘Calculations of the Impacts of past periods of economically-driven demand
(HD TRUCS vehicles 80 and 87). the Final Standards at Various Geographic Scales’’ growth, nor unusual with respect of the processes
393 The ICCT White Paper likewise finds that (February 29, 2024). (Demand by State tab). of forecasting, planning and development
‘‘trucks with smaller batteries can charge overnight 398 Murray, Evan ‘‘Calculations of the Impacts of required.’’).
401 Comments of DTNA at 47; see also Comments
with 50 kW CCS chargers or 19 kW Level 2 chargers the Final Standards at Various Geographic Scales’’
in some cases.’’ ICCT White Paper at p. 6. (February 29, 2024) (Demand by State tab). of Environmental Defense Fund at 67.
394 TEIS at 75 showing national distribution costs 399 Comments of Energy Strategy Coalition, at pp. 402 Comments of State of California at 29.
in 2027 (reflecting both light- and heavy-duty 1–2. 403 See Comments of CATF at 48; Comments of
sectors). 400 Hibbard et al., ‘‘Heavy Duty Vehicle EDF at 75; Comments of ICCT at 10; Comments of
395 Murray, Evan, ‘‘Calculations of the Impacts of Electrification’’ (June 2023) at 27 (‘‘Adding Moving Forward Network at 114.
the Final Standards at Various Geographic Scales’’ significant new distribution system infrastructure is 404 Analysis Group Heavy Duty Vehicle
(February 29, 2024). not a new experience for states, public utility Electrification at 10.
88Sfmt 4700
Second, utilities can and are acting in constrained sections of the grid will can be readily connected without
proactively to provide added capacity be bolstered by standards for load triggering a need for significant grid
when needed. As stated by EEI, ‘‘EPA’s control technologies. UL, an upgrades. Specifically, hosting capacity
assessment that ‘there is sufficient time organization that develops standards for maps identify where power exists and at
for the infrastructure, especially for the electronics industry, drafted the UL what level, where distributed energy
depot charging, to gradually increase 3141 Outline of Investigation (OOI) for resources (DERs) can alleviate grid
over the remainder of this decade to Power Control Systems (PCS). constraints, or where an upgrade may be
levels that support the stringency of the Manufacturers can use this standard for required. For example, EV companies
proposed standards for the timeframe developing devices that utilities can use can use the maps to identify new areas
they would apply’ is accurate. . . . . As to limit the energy consumption of to expand their charging station
described previously in this section, EEI BEVs. With this standard in place and networks more quickly and cost-
members actively are planning for and manufacturer completion of conforming effectively. While the information in
deploying infrastructure today’’. EEI products, utilities will have a clear
hosting capacity maps does not address
Comments at 14. EEI documents that a technological framework available to
all the interconnection questions for
number of large utilities are finding use in load control programs that
accelerate charging infrastructure individual sites, they can indicate
ways to move away from a business
deployment for their customers.407 relative levels of investment needed.
model requiring demonstration of
concrete demand so as to provide Third, there are means for utilities to Fourth, there are many mitigative
infrastructure readiness in advance of ameliorate demand which do not measures open to fleet owners utilizing
individual applications. EEI comments require regulatory approval. Utilities depots. Readily available practices
at 12–14 (actions of California and New can engage in short-term load include use of managed charging
York State investor-owned utilities, and rebalancing by optimizing use of software, energy efficiency measures,
their respective regulatory bodies); see existing distribution infrastructure. This and onsite battery storage and solar
RTC section 7 (Distribution) for can accommodate new HDV demand generation.412 Hardware solutions
additional examples. And as noted by while maintaining overall system include bi-directional charging and V2G
the Energy Strategy Coalition (speaking reliability.408 In addition, because depot (vehicle to grid) whereby vehicles can
for some of the nation’s largest investor- charging often occurs over nighttime return electricity to the grid during peak
owned electric and gas utilities, public hours corresponding to reduced system hours while drawing at low demand
power authorities and generators of demand, utilities have the flexibility to times.413 Solar DER allows on site
electricity): ‘‘[d]emand for electricity use otherwise extra grid capacity for
electricity generation that reduces the
will increase under both the HDV those hours (excess capacity being
energy demand on the grid. Battery-
Proposal and recently-proposed multi- inherent in constructing to nameplate
capacity).409 Utilities also can reduce integrated charging can simplify and
pollutant standards for light-duty and accelerate EVSE deployment and
medium-duty vehicles . . . . but the needed demand by incorporating so-
called smart charging into feeder ratings potentially lower costs by avoiding the
electricity grid is capable of planning for need for grid upgrades and reducing
and accommodating such demand and load forecasting whereby the utility
need not provide capacity based on demand charges. These charging
growth and has previously experienced stations are easier for electric utilities to
periods of significant and sustained annual peak load, but can differentiate
by daily and seasonal times.410 An serve on relatively constrained portions
growth.’’ 405
Utilities, of course, are motivated to available variant of this practice is use of the distribution system. These
continue investment in the distribution of flexible interconnections, whereby charging stations use integrated batteries
system for reasons other than demand customers agree to limit their peak load to provide high-powered charging to
from the transportation sector, and so to a specified level below the customers and recharge by drawing
could be building out in some cases for cumulative nameplate capacity of their power from the grid at much lower rates
their own purposes.406 In addition, equipment (in this case, their EVSEs) throughout the day. ANL’s study on
utilities themselves are pursuing until associated grid upgrades can be battery-integrated charging shows that
innovative solutions to address the issue completed, in order to begin operating these systems can be deployed cost
of needed buildout. One approach is for any new needed charging infrastructure effectively for Class 1–3 BEV needs.414
utilities to make non-firm capacity more quickly.411 The use for LD BEV will at times
available immediately as they construct Many utilities also provide hosting eliminate the need for grid buildout,
distribution system upgrades. See RTC 7 capacity maps. Utilities, developers, and making that hardware available for HD
(Distribution) discussing Southern other stakeholders can use these maps BEV or other users that must have grid
California Edison’s two-year Automated to better plan and site energy upgrades. While not a HD BEV analysis,
Load Control Management Systems pilot infrastructure. Hosting capacity maps the process can be applied to HD BEV
program which would limit new provide greater transparency about to determine when this architecture
customers’ consumption during periods where new loads such as EV chargers, provides value. Battery-integrated
when the system is constrained while 407 UL LLC. January 11, 2024. ‘‘UL 3141: Outline
charging is commercially available and,
the utility completes needed upgrades for Investigation of Power Control Systems.’’ for example, is being deployed across
providing those customers access to the Available online: https://www.shopulstandards.
distribution system sooner than would com/ProductDetail.aspx?productId=UL3141_1_O_ 412 Comments of EDF at 69.
otherwise be possible. 20240111. 413 Comments of Advanced Energy United, EPA–
408 ICCT White Paper at 18–19.
Plans like Southern California HQ–OAR–2022–0985–1652–A2 at 4; Comments of
409 ICCT White Paper at 19.
Clean Air Task Force, EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985–
Edison’s to use load management 410 ICCT Comment at 12. 1640–A1 at 54; Analysis Group Heavy Duty Vehicle
systems to connect new EV loads faster 411 Comments of EDF at 69; Electric Power Electrification at 33–4.
Research Institute (EPRI), ‘‘Understanding Flexible 414 Poudel, Sajag, Jeffrey Wang, Krishna Reddi,
405 Comments of Energy Strategy Coalition, at pp. Interconnection’’ (September 2018) (describing Amgad Elgowainy, Joann Zhou. 2024. Innovative
1–2. flexible interconnection generally, and detailing its Charging Solutions for Deploying the National
406 TEIS at 99–100, noting the need to replace possibilities for reducing demands on time—and Charging Network: Technoeconomic Analysis.
aging assets, and for scheduled maintenance. location-dependent hosting capacity). Argonne National Laboratory.
89Sfmt 4700
multiple states.415 416 All of these can for, a HD electric truck.418 The first agrees provides further support for our
reduce demand below what would station under construction in finding. Comments of Edison Electric
otherwise be nameplate capacity. See Bakersfield, CA,419 is planned to have Institute at 14. See also preamble
the comment summaries in RTC section integrated solar and eventually be section II.E.5.ii.
7 discussion of distribution costs. Other capable of charging 200 trucks each day;
additional stations are under b. Public Charging
innovative charging solutions can also
accelerate EV charging deployment. development in San Bernardino and As noted earlier in this section, EPA
Mobile chargers can be deployed near the Port of Long Beach. Zeem has revised its projected potential
immediately because they do not Solutions also offers charging to fleets compliance pathway from proposal
require an on-site grid connection. They along with a lease for one of its such that sleeper cab tractors and
can be used as a temporary solution to medium- or heavy-duty BEVs (via its certain day cab tractors are projected to
bring additional charging infrastructure ‘‘Transportation-as-a-Service’’ model). utilize public charging networks 423
to locations before a stationary, grid- Zeem’s first depot station opened last rather than depot charging. See
connected charger can be deployed. year in the Los Angeles area and will generally, preamble section II.D.5. We
Additional innovative charging support the charging of vans, trucks, find here that there will be adequate
solutions can further accelerate charging airport shuttles, and tour buses (among lead time for development of supporting
deployment by optimizing the use of other vehicles) with its 77 DCFC ports public charging infrastructure for these
chargers that have already been and 53 L2 ports.420 As many tractors under the modeled potential
installed. One company, EVMatch, commenters noted, the question of compliance pathway for the final
developed a software platform for availability of supporting electrification standards.
sharing, reserving, and renting EV infrastructure is not fully in the control First, as documented in the ICCT 2023
charging stations, which can allow of the regulated entity (here, the White Paper, there is no need to build
owners of charging stations to earn manufacturer), nor is it fully in the out all at once.424 It is reasonable to
additional revenue while making their direct control of prospective vehicle project that activity will center on the
chargers available to more EV drivers to purchasers. As all agree, this busiest long-haul freight routes and
maximize the benefit of each deployed necessitates some measure of corridors. The White Paper further finds
charger.417 This scenario could allow coordination between a range of that in 2030, up to 85 percent of
HD BEV depots to earn revenue off of stakeholders and utilities. Utilities have charging infrastructure needs for long-
their chargers while the HD BEV are on a strong business incentive to haul trucks could be met by building
the road doing work. Innovative coordinate to meet increased demand stations on discrete corridors of the
charging models like these can be and many such means of coordination National Highway Freight Network
efficient ways to increase charging are described in the comments by utility where energy demand is concentrated.
access for EVs with a smaller amount of associations like EEI,421 and the ICCT White Paper at 14. Assuming an
physical infrastructure. We note that transportation industry coalition average of 50 miles between stops, this
EPA’s cost estimates do not include ZETA.422 would mean a need for 844 public
consideration of these mitigative In sum, we believe that distribution charging stations. Id. In a supplemental
measures, since we project a compliance systems to meet the potential increase in analysis assuming 100-mile intervals
pathway without needing them. charging station demand associated between stations, ICCT refined that
However, these are all available with depot charging under the HD Phase estimate to needing between 100–210
3 rule will be available in the rule’s electrified truck stops, assuming a given
measures to reduce demand and need
timeframe. Quantified demand level of BEV long-haul tractors.425 We
for distribution buildout, and
attributable to the rule is relatively note that the ICCT estimates in both the
consequently form part of our basis for
modest, and, where buildout might be White Paper and the Supplemental
determining that there are reasonable
needed, can be met for the most part comment assume more long-haul BEV
means of providing needed distribution
with the least time-intensive adoption than in EPA’s projected
buildout in the rule’s timeframe when
infrastructure buildout. We have also compliance pathway for 2030, and so,
there is a need to do so.
considered further potential issues, from that standpoint, can be considered
A variety of solutions are being
including the chicken-egg paradigm, to be conservative bounding estimates.
offered for, or explored by, fleets. For
and described means that are reasonably In March 2024, the U.S. released a
example, WattEV is planning a network available to resolve them in the lead
of public charging depots connecting National Zero-Emission Freight Corridor
time provided by the rule. Utilities and Strategy 426 that, ‘‘sets an actionable
ports to warehouses and distribution fleets are already engaging in these
centers as part of its ‘‘Truck-as-a- practices. That the trade association of 423 En-route charging could occur at public or
Service’’ model, in which customers pay the investor-owned utility industry private charging stations though, for simplicity, we
a per mile rate for use of, and charging often refer to en-route charging as occurring at
418 WattEV. ‘‘WattEV Orders 50 Volvo VNR public stations.
415 Blink. ‘‘Blink Charging Commissions First 424 Ragon, et. al. ‘‘White Paper: Near-Term
Electric Trucks’’. May 23, 2022. Available online:
Battery Storage Energized DC Fast Charger in https://www.wattev.com/post/wattev-orders-50- Infrastructure Deployment to Support Zero-
Pennsylvania Providing Off-Grid Charging volvo-vnr-electric-trucks. Emission Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles in the
Capabilities’’. May 16, 2023. Available online: 419 WattEV. ‘‘WattEV Breaks Ground on 21st United States’’. The International Council on Clean
https://blinkcharging.com/news/blink-charging- Century Truck Stop’’. December 16, 2021. Available Transportation. May 2023. Available online: https://
commissions-first-battery-storage-energized-dc-fast- online: https://www.wattev.com/post/wattev- theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/
charger-in-pennsylvania-providing-off-grid- breaks-ground-on-21st-century-truck-stop. infrastructure-deployment-mhdv-may23.pdf.
charging-capabilities. 420 Business Wire. ‘‘Zeem Solutions Launches 425 ICCT. ‘‘Supplemental comments of the
416 Lewis, Michelle. ‘‘Texas trailblazes with DC International Council on Clean Transportation on
First Electric Vehicle Transportation-As-A-Service

fast chargers with integrated battery storage’’. Depot.’’ March 30, 2022. Available online: https:// the EPA Phase 3 GHG proposal’’. January 3, 2024.
Electrek. February 12, 2024. Available online: www.businesswire.com/news/home/ Docket ID EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985–.
https://electrek.co/2024/02/12/texas-dc-fast- 20220330005269/en/Zeem-Solutions-Launches- 426 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation.
chargers-integrated-battery-storage-xcharge-north- First-Electric-Vehicle-Transportation-As-A-Service- ‘‘National Zero-Emission Freight Corridor Strategy’’
ameri. Depot. DOE/EE–2816 2024. March 2024. Available at
417 EVmatch. Available online: https:// 421 Comments of EEI pp. 10–16.
https://driveelectric.gov/files/zef-corridor-
evmatch.com/. 422 Comments of ZETA pp. 32–46. strategy.pdf.
90Sfmt 4700
vision and comprehensive approach to RTC section 6.1.) As described in RIA supply chain corporation NFI Industries
accelerating the deployment of a world- Chapter 1.6, heavy-duty vehicle is partnering with Electrify America to
class, zero-emission freight network manufacturers, charging network install 34 DCFC ports (150 kW and
across the United States by 2040. The providers, energy companies and others 350kW) to support their BEV drayage 437
strategy focuses on advancing the are also investing in public or other fleet that will service the ports of LA
deployment of zero-emission medium- stations that could support public and Long Beach.438 With funding from
and heavy-duty vehicle (ZE–MHDV) charging. For example, Daimler Truck California, Volvo is partnering with
fueling infrastructure by targeting public North America is involved in an Shell Recharge Solutions and others to
investment to amplify private sector initiative in the U.S. with electric power deploy five publicly accessible charging
momentum, focus utility and regulatory generation company NextEra Energy stations by 2023 that will serve
energy planning, align industry activity, Resources and BlackRock Renewable medium- and heavy-duty BEVs in
and mobilize communities for clean Power to collectively invest $650 southern California between ports and
transportation.’’ 427 The strategy has four million create a nationwide charging industrial centers.439
phases. The first phase, from 2024– network for commercial electric States and utilities are also engaged.
2027, focuses on establishing freight vehicles.431 They plan to start network Seventeen states plus the District of
hubs defined ‘‘as a 100-mile to a 150- construction in 2023 and by 2026 cover Columbia (and the Canadian province
mile radius zone or geographic area key routes on the East and West Coast Quebec) developed a ‘‘Multi-State
centered around a point with a and in Texas with a later stage of the Medium- and Heavy-Duty Zero-
significant concentration of freight project also supporting hydrogen fueling Emission Vehicle Action Plan,’’ which
volume (e.g., ports, intermodal facilities, stations. DTNA is also working with the includes recommendations for planning
and truck parking), that supports a State of Michigan and DTE to develop for, and deploying, charging
broader ecosystem of freight activity a prototype truck stop charging station infrastructure.440 California is investing
throughout that zone.’’ 428 The second in Michigan that could serve as a model $1.9 billion in state funding through
phase, from 2027–2030, will connect for broader truck stop deployment.432 2027 in BEV charging and hydrogen
key ZEV hubs, building out Volvo Group and Pilot recently fueling infrastructure (and related
infrastructure along several major announced their intent to offer public projects), including about one billion
highways. The third phase, from 2030– charging for medium- and heavy-duty specific to infrastructure for trucks and
2045, will expand the corridors, BEVs at priority locations throughout buses.441 The Edison Electric Institute
‘‘including access to charging and the network of 750 Pilot and Flying J estimates that electric companies are
fueling to all coastal ports and their North American truck stops and travel investing about $4 billion to advance
surrounding freight ecosystems for plazas.433 Tesla is developing charging charging infrastructure and fleets.442
short-haul and regional operations.’’ 429 equipment for their semi-trucks that The National Electric Highway
The fourth phase, from 2035–2040, will will recharge up to 70 percent of the Coalition, a group that includes more
complete the freight corridor network. Tesla semi-truck’s 500-mile range in 30 than 60 electric companies and
This corridor strategy provides support minutes.434 cooperatives that serve customers in 48
for the development of HD ZEV Other investments will support states and DC,443 aims to provide fast
infrastructure that corresponds to the regional or local travel needs. For
modeled potential compliance pathway example, Forum Mobility announced a Accelerating Buildout of EV Charging Networks.’’
for meeting the final standards. $400 million investment for 1,000 or February 15, 2023. Available online: https://
This level of public charging is more DCFCs for BEV trucks that are driveelectric.gov/news/private-innvestment.
achievable. As described in RIA Chapter planned for operation at the San Pedro 437 Drayage trucks typically transport containers
and Oakland ports.435 436 Logistics and or goods a short distance from ports to distribution
1.3, the U.S. government is making large centers, rail facilities, or other nearby locations.
investments in charging infrastructure 438 Electrify America. ‘‘Electrify America and NFI
2022–FY 2023 Grant Selections’’. Available online:
through the BIL and the IRA. For https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/
Industries Collaborate on Nation’s Largest Heavy-
example, in the past year, over $160 Duty Electric Truck Charging Infrastructure
CFI%20Grant%20Awards%20Project%20 Project.’’ August 31, 2021. Available online: https://
million in grants under the Charging Descriptions%20FY22-23.pdf. media.electrifyamerica.com/en-us/releases/156.
431 NextEra Energy. News Release: ‘‘Daimler
and Fuel Infrastructure program were 439 Borras, Jo. ‘‘Volvo Trucks Building an Electric
Truck North America, NextEra Energy Resources
announced in the States of California, and BlackRock Renewable Power Announce Plans
Semi Charging Corridor’’. CleanTechnica. July 16,
New Mexico, New York, and 2022. Available online: https://cleantechnica.com/
to Accelerate Public Charging Infrastructure for
2022/07/16/volvo-trucks-building-an-electric-semi-
Washington for projects that will Commercial Vehicles Across The U.S.’’ January 31,
charging-corridor/.
explicitly support HD charging.430 (See 2022. Accessible online: https://
440 ZEV Task Force. ‘‘Multi-State Medium- and
newsroom.nexteraenergy.com/news-releases?item=
123840. Heavy-Duty Zero-Emission Vehicle Action Plan: A
427 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation. Policy Framework to Eliminate Harmful Truck and
432 Daimler Trucks North America Press Release.
‘‘Biden-Harris Administration, Joint Office of ‘‘State of Michigan partners with Daimler Truck Bus Emissions’’. July 2022. Available online:
Energy and Transportation Release Strategy to North America and DTE Energy to build Michigan’s https://www.nescaum.org/documents/multi-state-
Accelerate Zero-Emission Freight Infrastructure ‘truck stop of the future.’ ’’ June 29, 2023. Available medium-and-heavy-duty-zev-action-plan-dual-
Deployment.’’ March 12, 2024. Available online: online: https://northamerica.daimlertruck.com/ page.pdf.
https://driveelectric.gov/news/decarbonize-freight. pressdetail/state-of-michigan-partners-with- 441 California Energy Commission. ‘‘CEC
428 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation. Approves $1.9 Billion Plan to Expand Zero-
daimler-2023-06-29.
‘‘National Zero-Emission Freight Corridor Strategy’’ 433 Adler, Alan. ‘‘Pilot and Volvo Group add to Emission Transportation Infrastructure’’. February
DOE/EE–2816 2024. March 2024. Available at public electric charging projects’’. FreightWaves. 14, 2024. Available online: https://
https://driveelectric.gov/files/zef-corridor- November 16, 2022. Available online: https:// www.energy.ca.gov/news/2024-02/cec-approves-19-
strategy.pdf. See page 3. www.freightwaves.com/news/pilot-and-volvo-group- billion-plan-expand-zero-emission-transportation-
429 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation. add-to-public-electric-charging-projects. infrastructure.
‘‘National Zero-Emission Freight Corridor Strategy’’ 442 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation.
434 Tesla. ‘‘Semi: The Future of Trucking is
DOE/EE–2816 2024. March 2024. Available at Electric.’’ Available online: https://www.tesla.com/ ‘‘Private Sector Continues to Play Key Part in
https://driveelectric.gov/files/zef-corridor- semi. Accelerating Buildout of EV Charging Networks.’’
strategy.pdf. See page 8. 435 As noted by the Joint Office of Energy and February 15, 2023. Available online: https://
430 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transportation in a summary of recent private driveelectric.gov/news/private-innvestment.
Highway Administration. ‘‘Federal Highway sector investments in charging infrastructure. 443 Edison Electric Institute. Issues & Policy:
Administrations’ Charging and Fueling 436 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation. National Electric Highway Coalition. Available
Infrastructure Discretionary Grants Program: FY ‘‘Private Sector Continues to Play Key Part in Continued
91Sfmt 4700
charging along major highways in their utilized in practice.449 Incremental economic benefits of managed charging,
service areas. Other utilities, like the distribution grid investment to enable particularly in light of the increased
Jacksonville Electric Authority (JEA), plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) charging PEV adoption associated with the
are supporting infrastructure through ($2.3 billion across five states over 6 modeled potential compliance pathway
commercial electrification rebates. JEA years assuming unmanaged charging) of the final rule, there is an extremely
is offering rebates of up to $30,000 for was found to be approximately 3 strong economic incentive for market
DCFC stations and up to $5,200 for percent of existing utility distribution actors to adopt managed charging
Level 2 stations.444 In the west, Nevada system investments (2027–2032).450 practices. Our analysis projects that
Energy was supporting fleets by offering We think this increase in distribution there is no difference in retail electricity
rebates for up to 75 percent of the investment is modest and reasonable. prices in 2030 and the difference in
project costs for Level 2 ports and up to Moreover, this value is conservative as 2055 is only 2.5 percent.454 We estimate
50 percent of the project costs for DCFC it is inclusive of effects for both the that the 2.5 percent difference is
stations (subject to caps and light- and medium-duty vehicle primarily due to distribution-level costs.
restrictions).445 446 See generally RIA standards and the heavy-duty Phase 3 Note also that this is comparable to the
Chapter 1.6.2. rule and so overstates the amount of 3 percent increase in distribution-level
In sum, given the relatively low grid investment associated with the investments estimated for the 5 states
demand, ability to prioritize initial final rule, and as it does not reflect within the TEIS.455
public charging deployment in discrete managed charging. The study finds that A -3 percent increase in distribution
freight corridors, the extra lead time ‘‘[m]anaged charging techniques can system build out correlates to a small
afforded for HDV applications projected decrease incremental distribution grid increase in manufacturing output so
to utilize public charging under the investment needs by 30 percent, concerns regarding supply chain timing
modeled potential compliance pathway, illustrating the potential for significant and cost are minimal. The total costs are
and the amount of public and private cost savings by optimizing PEV charging modest both in and of themselves, as a
investment, EPA projects that the and other loads at the local level.’’ 451 percentage of grid investment even
necessary public charging The managed charging practices without considering mitigation
corresponding to the potential analyzed in the TEIS are minimal and strategies, and in terms of effect on
compliance pathway will be available are characterized in the TEIS as ‘‘a electricity rates for users. EPA thus
within the lead time afforded by the HD conservative estimate of the benefits of believes that the costs associated with
Phase 3 final standards. We note further managed charging.’’ 452 Given the very distribution grid buildout attributable to
that we will continue to monitor the significant economic benefits of the Phase 3 rule are reasonable. See
development of the HDV public managed charging, we expect the market further discussion in preamble section
charging infrastructure, as discussed in to adopt managed charging particularly II.E.5.ii as to how we account for these
preamble section II.B.2.iii. under the influence of additional ZEV costs in our analysis, and note further
adoption associated with the modeled that the TEIS cost estimates are reflected
c. Associated Costs potential compliance pathway of the in that analysis. See RIA Chapter
The TEIS documents low overall final rule. 2.4.4.2. For a discussion of how we
We also estimated the impact on retail accounted for distribution upgrade costs
financial impact associated with grid
electricity prices based on the TEIS. The in our final rule analysis, see preamble
buildout. For 2027, the TEIS shows
TEIS results were extrapolated to all section II.E.5.ii and RIA Chapter 2.4.4.2.
incremental distribution grid capital
IPM regions in order to estimate impacts
investment of $195 million for the d. Electricity Generation and,
on electricity rates using the Retail Price
unmanaged action scenario. When Transmission Reliability
Model (see RIA Chapter 2.4.4.2). We
managed, that $195 million drops to $82 As vehicle electrification load
modeled retail electricity rates in the no
million.447 For 2032, the TEIS shows increases, alongside other new loads
action case with unmanaged charging
incremental distribution grid capital from data centers, industry, and
compared to the action case with
investment of $2.3 billion for the building electrification, the grid will
managed charging. We think this is a
unmanaged action scenario. When need to accommodate higher loads on
reasonable approach for the reason just
managed, the $2.3 billion drops to $1.6 generation and transmission (in
noted: 453 given the considerable
billion.448 The savings is driven by the addition to distribution buildout, which
reduction in peak incremental load 449 As noted in the previous section, the 5 state is already discussed). Our examination
achieved by the basic load management peak incremental load is increased 0.6% to 3.0% of the record, informed by our
applied in this study. More effective (Oklahoma and Illinois respectively) when consultations with DOE, FERC, and
load management is expected to be unmanaged while the same increase is only 0.4%
to 1.4% (same states) when managed. The total load other power sector stakeholders, is that
is consistent across unmanaged and managed as the the final standards of this rule, whether
online: https://www.eei.org/en/issues-and-policy/ managed simply adjusts when the load is applied. considered separately or in combination
national-electric-highway-coalition. The total incremental load is increased 1.6% to
444 U.S. Department of Energy. Alternative Fuels
with the light and medium duty vehicle
2.7% (Oklahoma and California) as a result of the
Data Center. ‘‘Florida Laws and Incentives.’’ See action case. standards and upcoming power sector
Docket ID EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985–0290. 450 TEIS at 74. rules, are unlikely to adversely affect the
445 Level 2 rebates are applicable to fleets with 451 TEIS at 76. PEV refers to Plug-in electric
between 2 and 10 ports, and subject to a $5,000/ vehicles. Since the TEIS is considering effects of TRUCS, as described in RIA Chapter 2.4.4.2. The no
port cap. DCFC rebates are limited to 5 stations and both rules, it includes plug-in hybrid vehicles as action case described here is presented for
are capped to the lesser of $400/kW or $40,000 per part of its analysis. comparative purposes, but was not utilized in our
station. 452 TEIS at 4. HD TRUCS modeling.
446 U.S. Department of Energy. Alternative Fuels 454 We note that had we compared an unmanaged
453 Electricity demand in the action case was

Data Center. ‘‘Commercial Electric Vehicle (EV) based on the interim control case described in RIA action scenario with an unmanaged no-action
Charging Station Rebates—Nevada Energy (NV Chapter 4.2.4 for heavy-duty ZEVs and on scenario, or a managed action scenario with a
Energy).’’ (Note: the program ended in June 2023.) Alternative 3 from the proposed ‘‘Multipollutant managed no-action scenario, we would expect only
Available online: https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/ Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and marginally different electricity rates, given that
12118. Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles’’ for distribution costs are a very small part of total
447 TEIS at Table ES–2. electricity costs.
light- and medium-duty vehicles. This scenario was
448 TEIS at Table ES–2. used in our modeling of charging costs in HD 455 TEIS at 74.
92Sfmt 4700
reliability of the electric grid, and that cross-state air pollution rule, the climate change are excluded from
widespread adoption of HD BEVs could proposed rule for discharge to navigable reliability statistics. When extreme
have significant benefits for the electric waters for steam electric units (under weather events associated with climate
power system. the Clean Water Act), and the proposed change are not excluded from reliability
In the balance of this section, we first rule to control leakage and other statistics, the national average length of
provide an overview of the electric releases from of historic surface annual electric power interruptions
power system and grid reliability. We impoundments used to manage waste increased to about seven hours.459
then discuss the impacts of this rule on from coal combustion (under the Around 93 percent of all power
generation. We find that the final rule, Resource Conservation and Recovery interruptions in the U.S. occur at the
together with the light and medium Act). Other commenters agreed that the distribution-level, with the remaining
duty rule, are associated with modest anticipated power needed for the HD fraction of interruptions occurring at the
increases in electricity demand. We also Phase 3 rule is a relatively small share transmission- and generation-
conducted an analysis of resource of the national electricity demand and levels.460 461As new light-duty PEV
adequacy, which is an important metric that power generating capacity will not models continue to enter the U.S.
in North American Electric Reliability be a constraint. These comments came market, they are demonstrating
Corporation’s (NERC) long-term from the electric utility sector, from increasing capability for use as
reliability assessments. We find that the regulated entities themselves, from distributed grid energy resources. As of
final rule, together with the light and NGOs, and from affected states. January 2024, manufacturers have
medium duty rule as well as other EPA The electric power system in the U.S. introduced, or plan to introduce, 24
rules that regulate the EGU sector, are has historically been a very reliable MYs 2024–2025 PEVs with bidirectional
unlikely to adversely affect resource system,456 with utilities, system charging capable of supporting two to
adequacy. We then discuss transmission planners, and reliability coordinators three days of residential electricity
and find that the need for new working together to ensure an efficient consumption. These PEVs have
transmission lines associated with this and reliable grid with adequate capability to discharge power on the
rule and the light and medium duty rule resources for supply to meet demand at order of 10 kW to residential loads or
between now and 2050 is projected to all times, and we anticipate that this limited commercial loads. As more HD
be very small, approximately one will continue in the future under these BEVs enter the market, BEVs with larger
percent or less of transmission, and that standards. batteries and more power available will
nearly all of the additional buildout Power interruptions caused by be available for bidirectional charging.
overlaps with existing transmission line extreme weather are the most- Such a capability could be used to
right of ways. We find that this increase commonly reported, naturally-occurring provide limited backup power to service
can reasonably be managed by the factors affecting grid reliability, with the stations providing petroleum fuels to
utility sector and project that frequency of these severe weather emergency vehicles in response to a
transmission capacity will not constrain events increasing significantly over the local disruption in electrical service.462
the increased demand for electricity past twenty years due to climate We now turn to the impacts of this
associated with the final rule. change.457 Conversely, decreasing rule on generation and resource
Our electric power system can be emissions of greenhouse gases can be adequacy. As discussed in Chapter 4 of
broken down into three subsystems: the expected to help reduce future extreme the RIA and as part of our upstream
electricity power generation, the weather events, which would serve to analysis, we used MOVES to model
electricity transmission network, and reduce the risks for electric power sector changes to power generation due to the
the electricity distribution grid. This reliability. Extreme weather events increased electricity demand
review covers each of these subsystems include snowstorms, hurricanes, and anticipated under the final standards.
in turn, beginning with generation. wildfires. These power interruptions Bulk generation and transmission
Electricity generation is currently have significant impact on economic system impacts are felt on a larger scale,
reliable, with ample resource adequacy, activity, with associated costs in the and thus tend to reflect smoother load
and the power sector analysis U.S. estimated to be $44 billion growth and be more predictable in
conducted in support of this rule annually.458 By requiring significant nature. For a no action case, we project
indicates that resource adequacy will reductions in GHGs from new motor that generation will increase by 4.2
continue to remain unaffected. In the vehicles, this rule mitigates the harmful percent between 2028 and 2030 and by
NPRM, we modeled changes to power impacts of climate change, including the 36 percent between 2030 and 2050.
generation due to the increased increased incidence of extreme weather Further, we project the additional
electricity demand anticipated in the events that affect grid reliability. generation needed to meet the projected
proposal as part of our upstream The average duration of annual demand of HD ZEVs from the final rule
analysis. In the proposal, we concluded electric power interruptions in the U.S., combined with our estimate of the light-
that grid reliability is not expected to be approximately two hours, decreased
adversely affected by the modest slightly from 2013 to 2021, when 459 EIA, U.S. electricity customers averaged seven
increase in electricity demand hours of power interruptions in 2021, 2022, https://

extreme weather events associated with www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=54639#.
associated with projected HD ZEV. 88 460 Eto, Joseph H, Kristina Hamachi LaCommare,
FR 25983. Several commenters stated 456 NREL, ‘‘Explained: Reliability of the Current
Heidemarie C Caswell, and David Till.
that EPA had failed to account for the Power Grid’’, NREL/FS–6A40–87297, January 2024 ‘‘Distribution system versus bulk power system:
combined impact of various EPA rules (https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/87297.pdf). identifying the source of electric service
457 DOE, Electric Disturbance Events (OE–417) interruptions in the US.’’ IET Generation,
when assessing the issue of grid Annual Summaries for 2000 to 2023, https:// Transmission & Distribution 13.5 (2019) 717–723.
reliability. These rules cited by www.oe.netl.doe.gov/OE417_annual_
461 Larsen, P.H., LaCommare, K.H., Eto, J.H., &

commenters (many of which were summary.aspx. Sweeney, J.L. (2015). Assessing changes in the
proposed rules) include not only the 458 LaCommare, K.H., Eto, J.H., & Caswell, H.C. reliability of the US electric power system.
proposed rule concerning emission (2018, June). Distinguishing Among the Sources of 462 Mulfati, Justin. dcBel, ‘‘New year, new
Electric Service Interruptions. In 2018 IEEE bidirectional cars: 2024 edition’’ January 15, 2024.
standards for LDVs and MDVs, but also International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Accessed March 10, 2024. Available at: https://
the proposed rule for CO2 emissions Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS) (pp. 1–6). www.dcbel.energy/blog/2024/01/15/new-year-new-
from electricity generating units, the IEEE. bidirectional-cars-2024-edition/.
93Sfmt 4700
and medium-duty PEVs under the light compare with projected baseline demonstrate that the effects of EPA’s
and medium duty multipollutant rule, outcomes in the presence of the IRA. vehicle and power sector rules do not
to be relatively modest compared to a no Because we recognize that this rule is preclude the industry from meeting
action case, ranging from 0.93 percent in being developed contemporaneously NERC resource adequacy criteria or
2030 to approximately 12 percent in with the multipollutant emissions otherwise adversely affect resource
2050 for both actions combined. Of that standards for light-duty passenger cars adequacy. This demonstration includes
increased generation, approximately 16 and light trucks and for Class 2b and 3 explicit modeling of the impacts of the
percent in 2030 and approximately 34 vehicles, which also is anticipated to Vehicle Rules, an additional
percent in 2050 is due to heavy-duty increase demand for electricity, we quantitative analysis of the cumulative
ZEVs. Electric vehicle charging analyzed the impacts of these two rules impacts of the Vehicles Rules and the
associated with the Action case (light- (the ‘‘Vehicle Rules’’) on the grid Power Sector Rules, as well as a review
and medium-duty combined with together. EPA also considered several of the existing institutions that maintain
heavy-duty) is expected to require 4 recently proposed rules related to the grid reliability and resource adequacy in
percent of the total electricity generated grid that may directly impact the EGU the United States. We conclude that the
in 2030, which is slightly more than the sector (which we refer to as ‘‘Power Vehicles Rules, whether alone or
increase in total U.S. electricity end-use Sector Rules’’ 468). combined with the Power Sector Rules,
consumption between 2021 and Specifically, we considered whether satisfy these criteria and are unlikely to
2022.463 This is also roughly equal to the Vehicles Rules alone and combined adversely affect the power sector’s
the combined latest U.S. annual with the Power Sector Rules would ability to maintain resource adequacy or
electricity consumption estimates for result in anticipated power grid changes grid reliability.
data centers 464 and cryptocurrency such that they (1) respect and remain Beginning with EPA’s modeling of the
mining operations,465 both industries within the confines of key National Vehicle Rules, we used EPA’s Integrated
which have grown significantly in Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) Planning Model (IPM), a model with
recent years and whose electricity assumptions,469 (2) are consistent with built-in NERC resource adequacy
demand the utility sector has capably historical trends and empirical data, and constraints, to explicitly model the
managed.466 EPA’s assessment is that (3) are consistent with goals, planning expected electric power sector impacts
national power generation will continue efforts and Integrated Resource Plans associated with the two vehicle rules.
to be sufficient as demand increases (IRPs) of industry itself.470 We IPM is a state-of-the-art, peer-reviewed,
from electric vehicles associated with multi-regional, dynamic, deterministic
both the HD Phase 3 Rule and the light 468 The recently proposed rules that we
linear programming model of the
and medium duty rule. considered because they may impact the EGU sector
(which we refer to as ‘‘Power Sector Rules’’) contiguous U.S. electric power sector. It
Given the additional electricity include: the proposed Existing and Proposed provides forecasts of least cost capacity
demand associated with increasing Supplemental Effluent Limitations Guidelines and expansion, electricity dispatch, and
adoption of electric vehicles, some Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generation emissions control strategies while
commenters raised concerns that the Point Source Category (88 FR 18824) (‘‘ELG Rule’’),
New Source Performance Standards for GHG meeting energy demand and
additional demand associated with the Emissions from New, Modified, and Reconstructed environmental, transmission, dispatch,
rule could impact the reliability of the Fossil Fuel-Fired EGUs; Emission Guidelines for and resource adequacy constraints. IPM
power grid.467 To further assess the GHG emissions from Existing Fossil Fuel-Fired modeling we conducted for the Vehicle
impacts of this rule on grid reliability EGUs (88 FR 33240) (‘‘111 EGU Rule’’); and
National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Rules includes in the baseline all final
and resource adequacy, we conducted Pollutants: Coal-and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam rules that may directly impact the
an additional grid reliability assessment Generating units Review of the Residual Risk and power sector, including the final Good
of the impacts of the rule and how Technology Review (88 FR 24854) (‘‘MATS RTR Neighbor Plan for the 2015 Ozone
projected outcomes under the rule Rule’’); EPA also considered all final rules affecting
the EGU sector in the modeling for the Vehicle National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Rules. EPA also considered the impact of the (NAAQS), 88 FR 36654.
463 U.S. Energy Information Agency, Use of
proposed rule Hazardous and Solid Waste EPA has used IPM for over two
Electricity, December 18, 2023. https:// Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion
www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/use-of- decades, including for prior successfully
Residuals From Electric Utilities (88 FR 31982 (May
electricity.php. 18, 2023)). See RTC 7.1. implemented rulemakings, to better
464 U.S. DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and 469 NERC was designated by FERC as the Electric understand power sector behavior under
Renewable Energy, Data Centers and Servers Reliability Organization (ERO) in 2005 and, future business-as-usual conditions and
(https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/data- therefore, is responsible for establishing and
centers-and-servers).
to evaluate the economic and emissions
enforcing mandatory reliability standards for the
465 U.S. Energy Information Agency, Tracking
North American bulk power system. Resource
impacts of prospective environmental
Electricity Consumption From U.S. Cryptocurrency Adequacy Primer for State Regulators, 2021, policies. The model is designed to
Mining Operations, February 1, 2024, (https:// National Association of Regulatory Utility reflect electricity markets as accurately
www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61364). Commissioners (https://pubs.naruc.org/pub/ as possible. EPA uses the best available
466 As we noted at proposal, and as several 752088A2-1866-DAAC-99FB-6EB5FEA73042).
commenters agreed, U.S. electric power utilities 470 Although this final rule was developed
information from utilities, industry
routinely upgrade the nation’s electric power generally contemporaneously with the LMDV rule, experts, gas and coal market experts,
system to improve grid reliability and to meet new the two rulemakings are separate and distinct. Since financial institutions, and government
electric power demands. For example, when the LMDV rule was not complete as of the date of statistics as the basis for the detailed
confronted with rapid adoption of air conditioners our analysis, we have been required to make certain
in the 1960s and 1970s, U.S. electric power utilities
power sector modeling in IPM. The
assumptions for the purposes of this analysis to
maintained reliability and met the new demand for represent the results of that rule. Our analysis of the model documentation provides
electricity by planning and building upgrades to the proposed Power Sector Rules is based on the additional information on the
electric power distribution system. modeling conducted for proposals. We believe this assumptions discussed here as well as
467 EPA notes that manufacturers have a wide analysis is a reasonable way of accounting for the all other model assumptions and inputs.
array of compliance options, as discussed in section cumulative impacts of our rules affecting the EGU
II.F.4 of the preamble. For example, manufacturers sector, including the proposed Power Sector Rules, EPA relied on the same model platform
could produce significantly fewer ZEVs than in the at this time. Our cumulative analysis of the
central case, or even no ZEVs beyond the no action Vehicles and Power Sector Rules supports this final subsequent rules are finalized, EPA will perform
baseline. Were manufacturers to choose these rule, and it does not reopen any of the Power Sector additional power sector modeling that accounts for
compliance pathways, the increasing in electricity Rules, which are the subject of separate agency the cumulative impacts of the rule being finalized
demand associated with the rule would be smaller. proceedings. Consistent with past practice, as together with existing final rules at that time.
94Sfmt 4700
at final as it did at proposal, but made resource adequacy, as projected by EPA has studied the issue of grid
substantial updates to reflect public multiple, highly respected peer- reliability carefully and consulted with
comments. Of particular relevance, the reviewed models. In other words, taking staff of DOE, FERC and the Electric
model framework relies on resource into consideration a wide range of Power Research Institute (EPRI) in
adequacy-related constraints that come potential impacts on the power sector as reaching conclusions regarding bulk
directly from NERC. This includes a result of the IRA and Power Sector power system reliability and related
NERC target reserve margins for each Rules (including the potential for much issues. EPA’s assessment is that national
region, NERC Electricity Supply & higher variable renewable generation), power generation will continue to be
Demand load factors, and the as well the potential for increased sufficient as demand increases from HD
availability of each generator to serve demand for electricity from both this ZEVs as well as LD PEVs to the levels
load across a given year as reported by rule and the light and medium duty projected in the potential compliance
the NERC Generating Availability Data rule, EPA found that the Vehicle Rules pathways that support the feasibility of
System. Note that unit-level availability and proposed Power Sector Rules are both final rules’ standards while
constraints in IPM are informed by the not expected to adversely affect resource considering relevant electricity
average planned/unplanned outage adequacy and that EPA’s rules will not generation policy. EPA’s assessment is
hours for NERC Generating Availability inhibit the industry from its supported by the quantified estimates
Data System. responsibility to maintain a grid capable from the utility industry, regulated
Therefore, the model projections for of meeting demand without disruption. entities, NGOs, and expert commenters,
the Vehicle Rules are showing Finally, we note the numerous all of which corroborate EPA’s
compliance pathways respecting these existing and well-established conclusion and provide quantified
NERC resource adequacy criteria. These institutional guardrails at the Federal- estimates of minimal demand, which
NERC resource adequacy criteria are and state-level, as well as non- are quite similar to EPA’s.473
standards by which FERC, NERC and governmental organizations, which we
the power sector industry judge that the A smaller number of commenters
expect to continue to maintain resource
grid is capable of meeting demand. maintained that there could be shortages
adequacy and grid reliability. These
Thus, we find that modeling results well-established institutions—including of electricity transmission capacity. We
demonstrating that the grid will the Federal Energy Regulatory disagree. See RTC section 7.1. As
continue to operate within those Commission (FERC), state Public described in that response, with respect
resource adequacy criteria supports the Service Commissions (PSC), Public to new transmission, the need for new
conclusion that the rules will not have Utility Commissions (PUC), and state transmission lines associated with the
an adverse impact on resource energy offices, as well as NERC and LMDV and HDP3 rules between now
adequacy, which is an essential element Regional Transmission Organization and 2050 is projected to be very small,
of grid reliability. (RTO) and Independent System approximately one percent or less of
EPA also considered the cumulative transmission. Nearly all of the projected
Operator (ISO)—have been in place for
impacts of the Vehicle Rules together new transmission builds appear to
decades, during which time they have
with the Power Sector Rules, which, as overlap with pre-existing transmission
ensured the resource adequacy and
noted, are several recent proposed rules line right of ways (ROW), which makes
reliability of the electric power sector.
regulating the EGU sector. In a given the permitting process simpler.
As such, we expect these institutions
rulemaking, EPA does not generally Approximately 41-percent of the
will continue to ensure that the electric
analyze the impacts of other proposed potential new transmission line builds
power sector is safe and reliable, and
rulemakings, because those rules are, by projected by IPM have already been
that utilities will proactively plan for
definition, not final and do not bind any independently publicly proposed by
regulated entities, and because the electric load growth associated with all
future electricity demand, including developers. The approximate regional
agency does not want to prejudge distribution of the potential new
separate and ongoing rulemaking those increases due to our final rule. We
also expect that utilities will continue to transmission line builds are:
processes. However, some commenters
on this rule expressed concern regarding collaborate with EGU owners to ensure • 24 percent in the West (excluding
the cumulative impacts of these rules that any EGU retirements will occur in Southern California), which are largely
when finalized, claiming that the an orderly and coordinated manner. We Federal lands, that are more-easily
agency’s failure to analyze the also note that EPA’s proposed Power permittable for new transmission builds;
cumulative impacts of the Vehicle Rules Sector rules include built-in flexibilities • 21 percent in the desert Southwest,
and its EGU-sector related rules that accommodate a variety of which are largely Federal lands, that are
rendered this rule arbitrary and compliance pathways and timing more-easily permittable for new
capricious. In particular, commenters pathways, all of which helps to ensure transmission builds;
argued that renewable energy could not the resource adequacy and grid
reliability of the electric power • 14 percent in the Midwest;
come online quickly enough to make up
for generation lost due to fossil sources system.471 In sum, the power sector • 9 percent for each of the Northeast,
that may retire, and that this together analysis conducted in support of this Mid-Atlantic, and Southeast and Mid-
the increasing demand associated with rule indicates that the Vehicle Rules, Atlantic regions; and
the Vehicle Rules would adversely whether alone or combined with the
affect resource adequacy and grid Power Sector Rules, are unlikely to Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles, and
reliability. EPA conducted additional affect the power sector’s ability to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-
maintain resource adequacy and grid Duty Vehicles—Phase 3,’’ available in the docket for
analysis of these cumulative impacts in this rulemaking.
response to these comments. Our reliability.472 473 Hibbard, Paul. ‘‘Heavy Duty Vehicle
analysis finds that the cumulative Electrification Planning for and Development of
471 As noted, EPA is not prejudging the outcome
impacts of the Vehicle Rules and Power Needed Power System Infrastructure’’. Analysis
of any of the Power Sector Rules. Group for EDF. June 2023. Available Online:
Sector Rules is associated with changes 472 See ‘‘Resource Adequacy Analysis Final Rule https://blogs.edf.org/climate411/wp-content/
to the electric grid that are well within Technical Memorandum for Multi-Pollutant blogs.dir/7/files/Analysis-Group-HDV-Charging-
the range of fleet conditions that respect Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Impacts-Report.pdf.
95Sfmt 4700
• 5 percent for each for Southern Energy storage projects can also be the distribution system to develop in a
California and New York State/City used to help to reduce transmission line timely and cost effective manner and
regions.474 congestion and are seen as alternatives support what may be required for the
Other commenters pointed to recent to transmission line construction in HD Phase 3 and LMDV rules, is covered
regulatory actions approving several some cases.484 485 These projects, known in section II.D.2.iii.a and iii.b of this
large-scale regional transmission as Storage As Transmission Asset preamble. Here, the issue of grid
expansions, plus actions by this (SATA),486 can help to reduce reliability and resilience assumes the
Administration to expedite such transmission line congestion, have required hardware is in place and
expansions. DOE recently announced smaller footprints, have shorter assesses if that hardware will continue
several programs and projects aimed at development, permitting, and to deliver electricity with a high
helping to alleviate the interconnection construction times, and can be added probability of success. Comments
queue backlog,475 476 including the Grid incrementally, as required. Examples of showed concern that the grid may not
Resilience and Innovation Partnerships SATA projects include the ERCOT have adequate reliability due to severe
(GRIP) program, with $10.5 billion in Presidio Project,487 a 4 MW battery storms, wildfires, and similar
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding to system that improves power quality and challenges. Commenters emphasized
develop and deploy Grid Enhancing reducing momentary outages due to that without electricity supply, many
Technologies (GET).477 478 479 FERC has voltage fluctuations, the APS Punkin HD BEV would not be able to deliver the
issued various orders to address Center,488 a 2 MW, 8 MWh battery work required.
interconnection queue backlogs, system deployed in place of upgrading We first note that most of these
improve certainty, and prevent undue 20 miles of transmission and comments were general, posing
discrimination for new distribution lines, the National Grid potential issues of grid reliability
technologies.480 481 482 FERC Order 2023, Nantucket Project,489 a 6 MW, 48 MWh unrelated to potential demand resulting
for example, requires grid operators to battery system installed on Nantucket from the HD Phase 3 standards. As
adopt certain interconnection practices Island, MA, as a contingency to noted, that demand is low and
with the goal of reducing undersea electric supply cables, and the encompassable within the HD Phase 3
interconnection delays. These practices Oakland Clean Energy Initiative rule’s time frame. In response to these
include a first-ready, first-served Projects,490 a 43.25 MW, 173 MWh general comments, we note that the U.S.
interconnection process that requires energy storage project to replace fossil electricity grid continues to be very
new generators to demonstrate generation in the Bay area. Through reliable. Power interruptions caused by
commercial readiness to proceed, and a such efforts, the interconnection queues extreme weather are the most-
cluster study interconnection process can be reduced in length, transmission commonly reported, naturally-
that studies many new generators capacity on existing transmission lines occurring factors affecting grid
together.483 can be increased, additional generation reliability,491 with the frequency of
assets can be brought online, and these severe weather events increasing
474 See Multi-Pollutant Emission Standards for
electricity generated by existing assets significantly over the past twenty years
Model Years 2027 and Later Light-Duty and will be curtailed less often. These due to climate change.492 Conversely,
Medium-Duty Regulatory Impact Analysis at 5–22
(2024). factors help to improve overall grid decreasing emissions of greenhouse
475 DOE Interconnection Innovation e-Xchange reliability. gases can be expected to avoid future
(i2X), https://www.energy.gov/eere/i2x/ The previous sections cover grid extreme weather events, which would
interconnection-innovation-e-xchange. reliability in the sense of adequacy and serve to increase electric power sector
476 Abboud, A.W., Gentle, J.P., Bukowski, E.E.,
primarily address if the electricity reliability. Extreme weather events
Culler, M.J., Meng, J.P., & Morash, S. (2022). A
Guide to Case Studies of Grid Enhancing
generation and transmission subsystems include snowstorms, hurricanes, and
Technologies (No. INL/MIS–22–69711–Rev000). can deliver the required power to the wildfires. These power interruptions
Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Idaho Falls, ID distribution subsystem. The ability of have significant impact on economic
(United States). activity, with associated costs in the
477 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
484 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
U.S. estimated to be $44 billion
Implementation of Dynamic Line Ratings, Docket Managing Transmission Line Ratings, Docket No.
No. AD22–5–000 (87 FR 10349, February 24, 2022), annually.493
RM20–16–000; Order No. 881 (December 16, 2021),
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/ https://www.ferc.gov/media/e-1-rm20-16-000.
The average duration of annual
02/24/2022-03911/implementation-of-dynamic- 485 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Staff electric power interruptions in the U.S.,
line-ratings. Presentation Final Order Regarding Managing approximately two hours, decreased
478 DOE, Dynamic Line Rating, 2019, https://
Transmission Line Ratings FERC Order 881 slightly from 2013 to 2021, when
www.energy.gov/oe/articles/dynamic-line-rating- (December 16, 2021), https://www.ferc.gov/news-
report-congress-june-2019. events/news/staff-presentation-final-order-
extreme weather events associated with
479 DOE, Advanced Transmission Technologies,
regarding-managing-transmission-line-ratings. climate change are excluded from
2020, https://www.energy.gov/oe/articles/advanced- 486 Nguyen, T.A., & Byrne, R.H. (2020). Evaluation reliability statistics. When extreme
transmission-technologies-report. of Energy Storage As A Transmission Asset (No. weather events associated with climate
480 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, SAND2020–9928C). Sandia National Lab. (SNL–
Improvements to Generator Interconnection
change are not excluded from reliability
NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States).
Procedures and Agreements, Docket No. RM22–14– 487 http://www.ettexas.com/Content/documents/ statistics, the national average length of
000; Order No. 2023 (July 28, 2023), https:// NaSBatteryOverview.pdf.
www.ferc.gov/media/e-1-order-2023-rm22-14-000. 488 Arizona Public Service Company, 2023 491 DOE, Electric Disturbance Events (OE–417)
481 https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/staff- Annual Summaries 2023, https://www.oe.netl.
Integrated Resource Plan, https://www.aps.com/-/
presentation-improvements-generator- media/APS/APSCOM-PDFs/About/Our-Company/ doe.gov/OE417_annual_summary.aspx.
interconnection-procedures-and. Doing-business-with-us/Resource-Planning-and- 492 DOE, Electric Disturbance Events (OE–417)
482 FERC regulates interstate regional Management/APS_IRP_2023_PUBLIC.ashx. Annual Summaries for 2000 to 2023, https://
transmission planning and is currently finalizing a www.oe.netl.doe.gov/OE417_annual_
489 Balducci, P.J., et al. (2019). Nantucket island
major rule to improve transmission planning. The energy storage system assessment (No. PNNL– summary.aspx.
rule would require that transmission operators do 28941). Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), 493 LaCommare, K.H., Eto, J.H., & Caswell, H.C.
long term planning and would require transmission Richland, WA (United States), https:// (2018, June). Distinguishing Among the Sources of
providers to work with states to develop a cost energystorage.pnnl.gov/pdf/PNNL-28941.pdf. Electric Service Interruptions. In 2018 IEEE
allocation formula, among other changes. 490 https://www.pgecurrents.com/articles/2799- International Conference on Probabilistic Methods
483 See generally FERC Order 1023, 184 FERC pg-e-proposes-two-energy-storage-projects-oakland- Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS) (pp. 1–6).
61,054 (July 28, 2023) (Docket No. RM22–14–000). clean-energy-initiative-cpuc. IEEE.
96Sfmt 4700
annual electric power interruptions In the following sections, and in RIA that circulates cooling fluid through the
increased to about seven hours.494 Chapter 1.7, we discuss key technology stack.503 As the fuel cell ages and
Around 93 percent of all power components unique to HD FCEVs. becomes less efficient, more waste heat
interruptions in the U.S. occur at the will be generated that requires removal.
i. Fuel Cell System
distribution-level, with the remaining A cooling system may be designed to
fraction of interruptions occurring at the A fuel cell stack is a module that may accommodate end-of-life needs, which
generation- and transmission- contain hundreds of fuel cell units that can be up to two times greater than they
levels.495 496 We do not project the HD generate electricity, typically combined are at the beginning of life.504 Waste
Phase 3 rule as having a significant in series.500 A heavy-duty FCEV may heat recovery solutions are emerging.505
effect on any of these trends given the have several fuel cell stacks to meet the The excess heat also can in turn be used
low demand on the grid posed by the power needs of a comparable ICE to heat the cabin, similar to ICE
rule. vehicle. A fuel cell system includes the vehicles. Power consumed to operate
fuel cell stacks and ‘‘balance of plant’’ BOP components can also impact the
3. HD Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle
(BOP) components (e.g., pumps, fuel cell system’s overall
Technology and Supporting
sensors, compressors, humidifiers) that efficiency.506 507
Infrastructure To improve fuel cell performance, the
support fuel cell operations.
Fuel cell technologies that run on Though there are many types of fuel air and hydrogen fuel that enter the
hydrogen have been in existence for cell technologies, polymer electrolyte system may be compressed, humidified,
decades, though they are just starting to membrane (PEM) fuel cells are typically and/or filtered.508 A fuel cell operates
enter the heavy-duty transportation used in transportation applications best when the air and the hydrogen are
market. Hydrogen FCEVs are similar to because they offer high power density free of contaminants, since
BEVs in that they have batteries and use and therefore have low weight and contaminants can poison and damage
an electric motor instead of an internal volume. They can operate at relatively the catalyst. PEM fuel cells require
combustion engine to power the wheels. low temperatures, which allows them to hydrogen that is over 99 percent pure,
Unlike BEVs that need to be plugged in start quickly.501 PEM fuel cells are built which can add to the fuel production
to recharge, FCEVs have fuel cell stacks using membrane electrode assemblies cost.509 510 Hydrogen produced from
that use a chemical reaction involving (MEA) and supportive hardware. The natural gas tends to have more
hydrogen to generate electricity. Fuel MEA includes the PEM electrolyte impurities initially (e.g., carbon
cells with electric motors are more material, catalyst layers (anode and monoxide and ammonia, associated
efficient than ICEs that run on gasoline cathode), and gas diffusion layers.502 with the reforming of hydrocarbons)
or diesel, requiring less energy to Hydrogen fuel and oxygen enter the than hydrogen produced from water
fuel.497 MEA and chemically react to generate through electrolysis.511 There are
Heavy-duty FCEVs are considered in electricity, which is either used to
the modeled potential compliance propel the vehicle or stored in a battery 503 Hyfindr. ‘‘Fuel Cell Stack’’. Available online:
pathway due to several considerations. to meet future power needs. The process
https://hyfindr.com/fuel-cell-stack/.
504 Pardhi, Shantanu, et. al. ‘‘A Review of Fuel
They do not emit air pollution at the creates excess water vapor and heat. Cell Powertrains for Long-Haul Heavy-Duty
tailpipe—only heat and pure water.498 Key BOP components include the air Vehicles: Technology, Hydrogen, Energy and
With current and near-future supply system that provides oxygen, the Thermal Management Systems’’. Energies 15(24).
technologies, energy can be stored more hydrogen supply system, and the December 2022. Available online: https://
densely onboard a vehicle as gaseous or www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/24/9557.
thermal management system. With the 505 Baroutaji, Ahmad, et. al. ‘‘Advancements and
liquid hydrogen than it can as electrons help of compressors and sensors, these prospects of thermal management and waste heat
in a battery, which enables longer components monitor and regulate the recovery of PEMFC’’. Interational Journal of
ranges. HD FCEVs can package more pressure and flow of the gases supplied Thermofluids: Volume 9. February 2021. Available
energy onboard with less weight than online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
to the fuel cell along with relative article/pii/S2666202721000021.
batteries in today’s BEVs, which allows humidity and temperature. Similar to 506 Hoeflinger, Johannes and Peter Hofmann. ‘‘Air
for their potential use in heavy-duty ICEs and batteries, PEM fuel cells mass flow and pressure optimization of a PEM fuel
sectors that are difficult for BEV require thermal management systems to cell range extender system’’. International Journal
technologies due to payload impacts. of Hydrogen Energy. Volume 45:53. October 30,
control the operating temperatures. It is 2020. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.
HD FCEVs also have rapid refueling
necessary to control operating com/science/article/pii/S0360319920327841.
times.499
temperatures to maintain stack voltage 507 Pardhi, Shantanu, et. al. ‘‘A Review of Fuel
and the efficiency and performance of Cell Powertrains for Long-Haul Heavy-Duty
494 EIA, U.S. electricity customers averaged seven Vehicles: Technology, Hydrogen, Energy and
hours of power interruptions in 2021, 2022, https:// the system. There are different strategies Thermal Management Systems’’. Energies 15(24).
www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=54639#. to mitigate excess heat that comes from December 2022. Available online: https://
495 Eto, Joseph H, Kristina Hamachi LaCommare,
operating a fuel cell. For example, a HD www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/24/9557.
Heidemarie C Caswell, and David Till. vehicle may include a cooling system
508 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
‘‘Distribution system versus bulk power system: ‘‘Assessment of Fuel Cell Technologies at Ports’’.
identifying the source of electric service Prepared for EPA by Eastern Research Group, Inc.
interruptions in the US.’’ IET Generation, Heavy-Duty Vehicle Decarbonization’’. September EPA–420–R–22–013. July 2022. Available online:
Transmission & Distribution 13.5 (2019) 717–723. 21, 2023. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/ https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?
496 Larsen, P.H., LaCommare, K.H., Eto, J.H., & sites/default/files/2023-10/h2iqhour-09212023.pdf. Dockey=P1015AQX.pdf.
Sweeney, J.L. (2015). Assessing changes in the 500 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and 509 Hyfindr. ‘‘Hydrogen PEM Fuel Cell’’.
reliability of the U.S. electric power system. Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘Fuel Cell Systems’’. Available online: https://hyfindr.com/pem-fuel-cell/
497 U.S. Department of Energy, Alternative Fuels Available online: https://www.energy.gov/eere/ .
Data Center. ‘‘Hydrogen Basics’’. Available online: fuelcells/fuel-cell-systems. 510 U.S. DRIVE Partnership. ‘‘Hydrogen
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrogen_basics.html. 501 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and
Production Tech Team Roadmap’’. U.S. Department

498 U.S. Department of Energy, Fuel Cell Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘Types of Fuel of Energy. November 2017. Available online:
Technologies Office. ‘‘Fuel Cells’’. November 2015. Cells’’. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/ https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/us-
Available online: https://www.energy.gov/sites/ eere/fuelcells/types-fuel-cells. drive-hydrogen-production-technical-team-
prod/files/2015/11/f27/fcto_fuel_cells_fact_ 502 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and roadmap.
sheet.pdf. Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘Parts of a Fuel 511 Nhuyen, Huu Linh, et. al. ‘‘Review of the
499 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and Cell’’. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/ Durability of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel
Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘The #H2IQ Hour: eere/fuelcells/parts-fuel-cell. Continued
97Sfmt 4700
standards such as ISO 14687 that costs.517 Larger production volumes are Opportunity Announcement (FOA) in
include hydrogen fuel quality anticipated as global demand increases 2023 in anticipation of growth in
specifications for use in vehicles to for fuel cell systems for HD vehicles, hydrogen and fuel cell technologies and
minimize impurities.512 which could improve economies of systems. A portion of the FOA is
Fuel cell durability is important in scale.518 Durability improvements are designed to enable improvements in
heavy-duty applications, given that anticipated to also result in decreased recovery and recycling, and applicants
vehicle owners and operators often have operating costs, as they could extend the are encouraged to find ways to reduce
high expectations for drivetrain life of fuel cells and reduce the need for or eliminate PGMs from catalysts in
lifetimes in terms of years, hours, and parts replacement.519 Fuel cells contain both PEM fuel cells and electrolyzers to
miles. Fuel cells can be designed to PEM catalysts that typically are made reduce reliance on virgin feedstocks.523
meet durability needs (i.e., the ability of using precious metals from the platinum
group, which are expensive but efficient ii. Fuel Cell and Battery Interaction
the stack to maintain its performance
over time). Considerations must be and can withstand conditions in a cell. The instantaneous power required to
The U.S. Geological Survey’s 2022 list move a FCEV can come from either the
included in the design to accommodate
of critical minerals includes platinum fuel cell, the battery, or a combination
operations in less-than-optimized
(as one of several platinum group of both. Interactions between the fuel
conditions. For example, prolonged
metals, or PGMs), as used in catalytic cells and batteries of a FCEV can be
operation at high voltage (low power) or
converters. Critical minerals are defined complex and may vary based on
when there are multiple transitions
in the Energy Act of 2020 as being application. Each manufacturer likely
between high and low voltage can stress essential to the economic or national
the system. As a fuel cell system ages, will employ a unique strategy to
security of the U.S. and vulnerable to optimize the durability of these
a fuel cell’s MEA materials can degrade, supply chain disruption.520 DOE’s 2023
and performance and maximum power components and manage costs. The
Critical Materials Assessment, strategy selected will impact the size of
output can decline. The fuel cell can performed independently from a global
become less efficient, which can cause the fuel cell and the size of the battery.
perspective and focused on the
it to generate more excess heat and The fuel cell can be used to charge the
importance of materials to clean energy
consume more fuel.513 DOE’s ultimate battery that in turn powers the wheels
technologies in future years, identifies
long-term technology target for Class 8 (i.e., series hybrid or range-extending),
PGMs used in hydrogen electrolyzers
HD trucks is a fuel cell lifetime of or it can work with the battery to
such as platinum and iridium as critical.
30,000 hours, corresponding to an They screened out PGMs used in provide power (i.e., parallel hybrid or
expected vehicle lifetime of 1.2 million catalytic converters, such as rhodium primary power) to the wheels. In the
miles.514 A voltage degradation of 10 and palladium. This distinction was emerging HD FCEV market, when used
percent at rated power (i.e., the power made due to the increased focus on to extend range, the fuel cell tends to
level the cell is designed for) by end-of- hydrogen technologies, including long- have a lower peak power potential and
life is considered by DOE when distance HD trucks, to achieve carbon may be sized to match the average
evaluating targets.515 emissions reductions, and an power needed during a typical use
Currently, the fuel cell stack is the anticipated decrease in the importance cycle, including steady highway
most expensive component of a fuel cell of catalytic converters in the medium driving. At idle, the fuel cell may run at
system,516 which is the most expensive term (i.e., the 2025 to 2035 minimal power or turn off based on
part of a heavy-duty FCEV, primarily timeframe).521 state of charge of the battery. The battery
due to the technological requirements of Efforts are underway to minimize or is used during prolonged high-power
manufacturing rather than raw material eliminate the use of platinum in operations such as grade climbing and
catalysts.522 DOE issued a Funding is typically in charge-sustaining mode,
which means the average state of charge
Cell in Long-Term Operation: Main Influencing
Parameters and Testing Protocols’’. Energies 14(13).
517 Deloitte China and Ballard. ‘‘Fueling the is maintained above a certain level
July 2021. Available online: https:// Future of Mobility: Hydrogen and fuel cell solutions while driving. When providing primary
www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/13/4048. for transportation, Volume 1’’. 2020. Available power, the fuel cell tends to have a
512 International Organization for online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/
Deloitte/cn/Documents/finance/deloitte-cn-fueling- larger peak power potential, sized to
Standardization. ‘‘ISO 14687: 2019, Hydrogen fuel
quality—Product specification’’. November 2019.
the-future-of-mobility-en-200101.pdf. match all power needs of a typical duty
Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/
518 Deloitte China and Ballard. ‘‘Fueling the
cycle and to meet instantaneous power
69539.html. Future of Mobility: Hydrogen and fuel cell solutions needs. The battery is mainly used to
for transportation, Volume 1’’. 2020. Available
513 Nhuyen, Huu Linh, et. al. ‘‘Review of the
online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/ capture energy from regenerative
Durability of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Deloitte/cn/Documents/finance/deloitte-cn-fueling- braking and to help with acceleration
Cell in Long-Term Operation: Main Influencing the-future-of-mobility-en-200101.pdf.
Parameters and Testing Protocols’’. Energies 14(13). and other transient power demands.524
July 2021. Available online: https:// Future of Mobility: Hydrogen and fuel cell solutions
www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/13/4048. for transportation, Volume 1’’. 2020. Available 523 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and
514 Marcinkoski, Jason et. al. ‘‘Hydrogen Class 8
online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/ Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘Bipartisan
Long Haul Truck Targets’’. U.S. Department of Deloitte/cn/Documents/finance/deloitte-cn-fueling- Infrastructure Law: Clean Hydrogen Electrolysis,
Energy. October 31, 2019. Available online: https:// the-future-of-mobility-en-200101.pdf. Manufacturing, and Recycling: Funding
www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/19006_hydrogen_ 520 87 FR 10381. ‘‘2022 Final List of Critical Opportunity Announcement Number DE–FOA–
class8_long_haul_truck_targets.pdf. Minerals’’. U.S. Geological Survey. February 24, 0002922’’. March 15, 2023 (Last Updated: March 31,
515 Marcinkoski, Jason et. al. ‘‘Hydrogen Class 8 2023). Available online: https://eere-
2022. Available online: https://
Long Haul Truck Targets’’. U.S. Department of www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/02/24/ exchange.energy.gov/Default.aspx#FoaIda9a89bda-
Energy. October 31, 2019. Available online: https:// 2022-04027/2022-final-list-of-critical-minerals. 618a-4f13-83f4-9b9b418c04dc.
www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/19006_hydrogen_
521 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Critical Materials 524 Islam, Ehsan Sabri, Ram Vijayagopal, Aymeric
class8_long_haul_truck_targets.pdf. Assessment’’. July 2023. Available online: https:// Rousseau. ‘‘A Comprehensive Simulation Study to
516 Papageorgopoulos, Dimitrios. ‘‘Fuel Cell www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/doe- Evaluate Future Vehicle Energy and Cost Reduction
Technologies Overview’’. U.S. Department of critical-material-assessment_07312023.pdf. Potential’’, Report to the U.S. Department of Energy,
Energy. June 6, 2023. Available online: https:// 522 Berkeley Lab. ‘‘Strategies for Reducing Contract ANL/ESD–22/6. October 2022. See Full
www.hydrogen.energy.gov/docs/hydrogenprogram Platinum Waste in Fuel Cells. November 2021. report. Available online: https://anl.app.box.com/s/
libraries/pdfs/review23/fc000_papageorgopoulos_ Available online: https://als.lbl.gov/strategies-for- an4nx0v2xpudxtpsnkhd5peimzu4j1hk/file/
2023_o.pdf. reducing-platinum-waste-in-fuel-cells/. 1406494585829.
98Sfmt 4700
Based on how the fuel cells and hardware components globally that availability associated with FCEVs and
batteries are managed, manufacturers meet fueling speed requirements (i.e., so projections for the development and
may use different types of batteries in that fill times are similar to comparable application of liquid hydrogen in the
HD FCEVs. Energy battery cells are HD ICE vehicles, as identified in DOE HD transportation sector over the next
typically used to store energy for technical targets for Class 8 long-haul decade. 88 FR 25972. Only one
applications with distance needs. Power tractor-trailers).531 High-flow refueling comment was received on this issue,
battery cells are typically used to rates for heavy-duty vehicles of 60 to 80 from a vehicle manufacturer, who stated
provide additional high power for kg hydrogen in under 10 minutes were that they believe liquid hydrogen is
applications with high power needs.525 recently demonstrated in a DOE lab required to meet the packaging
setting.532 533 534 requirement for vehicles with a 500-
iii. Onboard Hydrogen Storage Tanks As we stated in the NPRM, geometry mile range, consistent with our
Fuel cell vehicles carry hydrogen fuel and packaging challenges may constrain assessment at the proposal. The same
onboard using multiple large tanks. the amount of gaseous hydrogen that commenter also included 90th
Hydrogen has high gravimetric density can be stored onboard and, thus, the percentile daily VMT estimates of 484
(amount of energy stored per unit of maximum range of trucks that travel miles for Class 8 day cabs and 724 miles
mass) but extremely low volumetric longer distances without a stop for for sleeper cab tractors, based on an 18-
density (amount of energy stored per fuel.535 Liquid hydrogen is emerging as day snapshot of telematics data, because
volume), so it must be compressed or a cost-effective onboard storage option they said they believe EPA is
liquified for use. There are various for long-haul operations; however, the overestimating ZEV application
techniques for storing hydrogen onboard technology readiness of liquid storage suitability.
a vehicle, depending on how much fuel and refueling technologies is relatively For the final rule, we contracted FEV
is needed to meet range requirements. low compared to compressed gas Group to independently conduct a
Most transportation applications today technologies.536 537 Therefore, given our packaging analysis for Class 8 long-haul
use Type IV tanks,526 which typically assessment of technology readiness, FCEVs that store 700-bar gaseous
include a plastic liner wrapped with a liquid storage tanks were not included hydrogen onboard to see if space would
composite material such as carbon fiber in the potential compliance pathway be sufficient to accommodate hydrogen
that can withstand high pressures with that supports the feasibility and fuel for longer-range travel.538 EPA
minimal weight.527 528 High-strength appropriateness of our standards. conducted an external peer review of
carbon fiber accounts for over 50 In the NPRM, we requested comment the final FEV report. FEV found ways to
percent of the cost of a Type IV onboard and data related to packaging space package six hydrogen tanks to deliver
storage system at production volumes of up to a 500-mile range with a sleeper
531 NextEnergy. ‘‘Hydrogen Heavy Duty Vehicle
over 100,000 systems per year.529 cab using a 265-inch wheelbase. All
Industry Group to Standardize Hydrogen Refueling,
Some existing fuel cell buses use Bringing Hydrogen Closer to Wide Scale Adoption’’. tanks could be at the back of the cab in
compressed hydrogen gas at 350 bar October 8, 2021. Available online: https:// a zig-zag arrangement and the batteries
(∼5,000 pounds per square inch, or psi) nextenergy.org/hydrogen-heavy-duty-vehicle- mounted inside of the frame rails, or
of pressure, but other applications are industry-group-partners-to-standardize-hydrogen-
refueling/.
four of the tanks could be behind the
using tanks with increased compressed 532 DOE suggests that 60 kg of H2 will be required cab with two tanks mounted to the
hydrogen gas pressure at 700 bar to achieve a 750-mile range in a Class 8 tractor- outside of the frame rails under the cab
(∼10,000 psi) for extended driving trailer truck, assuming a fuel economy of 12.4 miles and the batteries inside of the frame
range.530 A Heavy-Duty Vehicle per kilogram. In the DOE lab, one fill (61.5 kg) was rails. This would allow a long-haul
Industry Group was formed in 2019 to demonstrated from the fueling station into seven
type-IV tanks of a HD vehicle simulator, and the tractor to meet a daily operational VMT
standardize 700 bar high-flow fueling second fill (75.9 kg) was demonstrated from the requirement of 420 miles. If a HD FCEV
station into nine tanks. refuels once en route, then it could
525 Sharpe, Ben and Hussein Basma. ‘‘A Meta- 533 Marcinkoski, Jason et. al. ‘‘Hydrogen Class 8
cover a 90th percentile VMT
Study of Purchase Costs for Zero-Emission Trucks’’. Long Haul Truck Targets’’. U.S. Department of
International Council on Clean Transportation. Energy. October 31, 2019. Available online: https://
requirement of as far as 724 miles in a
February 2022. Available online: https://theicct.org/ www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/19006_hydrogen_ day (essentially matching the 90th
publication/purchase-cost-ze-trucks-feb22/. class8_long_haul_truck_targets.pdf. percentile VMT noted by the
526 Type I–III tanks are not typically used in 534 Martineau, Rebecca. ‘‘Fast Flow Future for
commenter). A refueling event during
transportation for reasons related to low hydrogen Heavy-Duty Hydrogen Trucks: Expanded
density, metal embrittlement, weight, or cost.
the day should not be an unreasonable
Capabilities at NREL Demonstration High-Flow-
527 Langmi, Henrietta et. al. ‘‘Hydrogen storage’’. Rate Hydrogen Fueling for Heavy-Duty burden, given that refueling times are as
Electrochemical Power Sources: Fundamentals, Applications’’. National Renewable Energy Lab. short as 20 minutes or less (comparable
Systems, and Applications. 2022. Portion available June 2022. Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/ to a diesel) and so are considered a key
online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/ news/program/2022/fast-flow-future-heavy-duty- benefit of HD FCEVs.539 See RTC
engineering/compressed-hydrogen-storage. hydrogen-trucks.html.
528 U.S. Department of Energy, Fuel Cell 535 Basma, Hussein and Felipe Rodriquez. ‘‘Fuel section 5.3 for additional discussion.
Technologies Office. ‘‘Hydrogen Storage’’. March cell electric tractor-trailers: Technology overview Based on our review of the literature
2017. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/ and fuel economy’’. Working Paper 2022–23. The for the NPRM and after consideration of
sites/prod/files/2017/03/f34/fcto-h2-storage-fact- International Council on Clean Transportation. July the comments received and additional
sheet.pdf. 2022. Available online: https://theicct.org/wp-
529 Houchins, Cassidy and Brian D. James. ‘‘2019 content/uploads/2022/07/fuel-cell-tractor-trailer-
information, our assessment is that most
DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Program Review: tech-fuel-jul22.pdf. HD vehicles have sufficient physical
Hydrogen Storage Cost Analysis’’. Strategic 536 Basma, Hussein and Felipe Rodriquez. ‘‘Fuel
Analysis. May 2019. Available online: https:// cell electric tractor-trailers: Technology overview 538 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial
www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/review19/st100_ and fuel economy’’. Working Paper 2022–23. Vehicles Class 4 to 8: Technology and Cost
james_2019_o.pdf. International Council on Clean Transportation. July Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final
530 Basma, Hussein and Felipe Rodriquez. ‘‘Fuel 2022. Available online: https://theicct.org/wp- Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024.
cell electric tractor-trailers: Technology overview content/uploads/2022/07/fuel-cell-tractor-trailer- 539 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and
and fuel economy’’. Working Paper 2022–23. tech-fuel-jul22.pdf. Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘The #H2IQ Hour.
International Council on Clean Transportation. July 537 Gomez, Julian A. and Diogo M.F. Santos. ‘‘The Today’s Topic: Heavy-Duty Vehicle
2022. Available online: https://theicct.org/wp- Status of On-Board Hydrogen Storage in Fuel Cell Decarbonization’’. September 21, 2023. Available
content/uploads/2022/07/fuel-cell-tractor-trailer- Electric Vehicles’’. Designs 2023: 7(4). Available online: https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/
tech-fuel-jul22.pdf. online: https://www.mdpi.com/2411-9660/7/4/97. 2023-10/h2iqhour-09212023.pdf.
99Sfmt 4700
space to package gaseous hydrogen extend to service as well as emergency private, planned, and temporarily
storage tanks onboard.540 This remains response. In addition, HD FCEVs are unavailable stations in a search, there
the case for long-haul sleeper cabs if subject to, and necessarily comply with, are 99 refueling station locations
they refuel en route. the same Federal safety standards and nationwide.545 546 547 There are also
the same safety testing as ICE heavy- several nationally designated corridor-
iv. HD FCEV Safety Assessment
duty vehicles. Commenters challenging ready or corridor-pending Alternative
FCEVs have two potential risk factors the safety of HD FCEVs failed to address Fueling Corridors for hydrogen.548
that can be mitigated through proper the existence of these protocols and Corridor-ready designations have a
design, process, and training: hydrogen Federal standards. EPA considers the sufficient number of fueling stations to
and electricity. Electricity risks are multiple binding Federal safety allow for corridor travel. The
identical to those of BEVs and, thus, are standards and industry protocols to be designation requires that public
discussed in section II.D.2 and RIA effective and supports the conclusion hydrogen stations be no greater than 150
Chapter 1.5.2. Hydrogen risks can occur that HD FCEV can be utilized safely. miles apart and no greater than five
throughout the process of fueling a While considering safety for the NPRM, miles off the highway.549 Corridor-
vehicle. FCEVs must be designed so that EPA coordinated with NHTSA. EPA pending designations may have public
hydrogen can be safely delivered to a additionally coordinated with NHTSA stations separated by more than 150
vehicle and then transferred into a on safety regarding comments and miles, but stations cannot be greater
vehicle’s onboard storage tanks and fuel updates for the final rulemaking.543 than five miles off the highway.550 The
cell stacks. Hydrogen has been handled, Most if not all fuels, due to their purpose of the Alternative Fuel
used, stored, and moved in industrial nature of transporting energy, can do Corridors program is to support the
settings for more than 50 years, and harm or be unsafe if not handled needed changes in the transportation
there are many established methods for properly. Although hydrogen incidents sector that assists in reducing
doing so safely.541 There is also Federal (not with FCEVs) were provided in the greenhouse gas emissions and improves
oversight and regulation throughout the comments, it is important to note that the mobility of vehicles that employ
hydrogen supply chain system.542 there has not been a FCEV accident due alternative fuel technologies across the
Safety training and education are key for to leaking hydrogen. When compared to U.S.551
maintaining reasonable risk while other fuels, hydrogen is nontoxic and Though few hydrogen refueling
handling and using hydrogen. For lighter than air, so it quickly disperses stations exist for HD FCEVs today, EPA
example, hydrogen-related fuel cell upwards unlike gas vapors that stay at has seen progress on the
vehicle risks can be mitigated by ground level and has a lower radiant implementation of BIL and IRA funding
following various SAE and OSHA heat so surrounding material is less and other provisions to incentivize the
standards, as discussed in RIA Chapter likely to ignite. One commenter establishment of clean hydrogen supply
1.7.4. questioned FCEV safety in tunnels chain infrastructure. In June 2021, DOE
We requested comment on our based on a modeling study. DOE is
assessment that HD FCEVs can be working with other authorities to 545 U.S. Department of Energy, Alternative Fuels
designed to maintain safety. Two evaluate safety in tunnels as discussed Data Center. See Advanced Filters, Station, all
comments were received that in RIA chapter 1.7.4. Additionally, ‘‘Access’’ and ‘‘Status’’ options checked. Accessed
questioned the safety of FCEV. One February 15, 2024. Available online: https://
FCEVs including their storage systems, afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrogen_locations.html#/
vehicle manufacturer commenter agreed like ICE vehicles, are required to meet analyze?fuel=HY.
that FCEVs will be designed to maintain the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety 546 When including non-retail stations, there are
safety. EPA’s assessment at proposal Standards (FMVSS) for crash safety so 132. Non-retail stations involve special permissions
was that HD FCEV systems must be, and that the systems will maintain their from the original equipment manufacturers to fuel
are, designed to always maintain safe along with pre-authorization from the station
integrity after the specified crash provider.
operation. EPA reiterates that conditions. Additional FCEV safety 547 U.S. Department of Transportation, Hydrogen
conclusion here. As EPA explained at information is available in RIA Chapter and Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘Fact of the
proposal, and as noted by the vehicle 1.7.4 and RTC section 4.9. Month #18–01, January 29’’. 2018. Available online:
manufacturer commenter, there are https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/fact-month-
industry codes and standards for the v. Assessment of Heavy-Duty Hydrogen 18-01-january-29-there-are-39-publicly-available-
Refueling Infrastructure hydrogen-fueling.
safe design and operation of HD FCEVs. 548 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
The Hydrogen Industry Panel on Codes, As FCEV adoption grows, more Highway Administration. HEPGIS. ‘‘Hydrogen (AFC
International Code Council, and hydrogen refueling infrastructure will Rounds 1–7)’’. Accessed January 2024. Available
National Fire Protection Association be needed to support the HD FCEV fleet. online: https://hepgis-usdot.hub.arcgis.com/apps/
work together to develop stringent Infrastructure is required during the e1552ac704284d30ba8e504e3649699a/explore.
549 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
standards for hydrogen systems and fuel production, distribution, storage, and Highway Administration. ‘‘Memorandum,
cells. The FCEV codes and standards dispensing of hydrogen fuel. INFORMATION: Request for Nominations—
Currently, DOE’s Alternative Fuels Alternative Fuel Corridor (Round 7/2023)’’. May 18,
540 Kast, James et. al. ‘‘Designing hydrogen fuel Data Center (AFDC) lists 65 public retail 2023. Available online: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
cell electric trucks in a diverse medium and heavy hydrogen fueling stations in the United environment/alternative_fuel_corridors/
duty market’’. Research in Transportation nominations/2023_request_for_nominations_r7.pdf.
Economics: Volume 70. October 2018. Available
States, primarily for light-duty vehicles 550 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ in California.544 When including Highway Administration. ‘‘Alternative Fuel

article/pii/S0739885916301639. Corridors: Frequently Asked Questions FAST Act
541 Hydrogen Tools. ‘‘Best Practices Overview’’. 543 Landgraf, Michael. Memorandum to Docket Section 1413—Alternative Fuel Corridor
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Accessed on EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. Summary of NHTSA Designations Updated December 2020 to Support
Round 5’’. Available online: https://
February 2, 2023. Available online: https:// Safety Communication. February 2024.

h2tools.org/bestpractices/best-practices-overview. 544 U.S. Department of Energy, Alternative Fuels www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/alternative_fuel_
542 Baird, Austin R. et. al. ‘‘Federal Oversight of Data Center. ‘‘Hydrogen Fueling Station Locations’’. corridors/resources/faq/.
Hydrogen Systems’’. Sandia National Laboratories. 551 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
See Advanced Filters, Fuel, ‘‘Hydrogen’’ checked
SAND2021–2955. March 2021. Available online: (not ‘‘include non-retail stations’’). Accessed Highway Administration. ‘‘Alternative Fuel
https://energy.sandia.gov/wp-content/uploads/ February 15, 2024. Available online: https:// Corridors’’. Available online: https://
2021/03/H2-Regulatory-Map-Report_SAND2021- afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrogen_locations.html#/ www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/alternative_fuel_
2955.pdf. analyze?fuel=HY. corridors/.
100
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22APR2.SGM 22APR2
launched a Hydrogen Shot goal to Several programs initiated by BIL and two commenters recognized that Federal
reduce the cost of clean hydrogen IRA are under ongoing development. In investment is expected to heavily
production by 80 percent to $1 per March 2023, DOE announced $750 influence the market. One commenter
kilogram in one decade.552 In March million for research, development, and highlighted BIL and IRA incentives in
2023, DOE released a Pathways to demonstration efforts to reduce the cost addition to those referenced that will
Commercial Liftoff Report on ‘‘Clean of clean hydrogen. This is the first phase hasten buildout of HD FCEV refueling
Hydrogen’’ to catalyze more rapid and of $1.5 billion in BIL funding dedicated infrastructure, including $2.3 billion for
coordinated action across the full to advancing electrolysis technologies a Port Infrastructure Development
technology value chain. Since the and improving manufacturing and Program over five years (2022 to
NPRM, the Federal Government has recycling capabilities. In July 2023, DOE 2026).560 The IRA also provided EPA
continued to implement BIL and IRA released a Notice of Intent to invest up with $3 billion to fund zero-emission
commitments. In June 2023, the U.S. to $1 billion in a demand-side initiative port equipment and infrastructure and
National Clean Hydrogen Strategy and (to offer ‘‘demand pull’’) to support the $1 billion to fund clean heavy-duty
Roadmap was finalized, informed by H2Hubs.556 In January 2024, they vehicles and supportive infrastructure,
extensive industry and stakeholder selected a consortium to design and including hydrogen refueling
feedback, setting forth an all-of- implement the program.557 In December infrastructure.561 562 One commenter
government approach for achieving 2023, the Treasury Department and said they expect to see synergies
large-scale production and use of Internal Revenue Service proposed between H2Hubs and FCEVs that can
hydrogen. It includes an assessment of regulations to offer income tax credit of launch the market even before 2030.
the opportunity for hydrogen to up to $3 per kg for the production of Others suggested that infrastructure may
contribute to national decarbonization qualified clean hydrogen at a qualified be more of a near-term challenge, or that
goals across sectors over the next 30 clean hydrogen facility (often referred to uncertainty could diminish over time as
years.553 Also in June 2023, DOE as the production tax credit, PTC, or ZEV technologies become increasingly
updated Clean Hydrogen Production 45V), as established in the IRA.558 Final affordable and ubiquitous.
Standard (CHPS) guidance that program designs are expected after this At least two commenters agreed there
establishes a target for lifecycle (defined rule is finalized. See section 8.1 of the is sufficient lead time. California, a state
as ‘‘well-to-gate’’) GHG emissions RTC and Chapter 1.8 of the RIA for experienced in hydrogen refueling
associated with hydrogen production, additional detail. infrastructure, shared that LD stations
accounting for multiple requirements We received several comments on the take around two years to build on
within the BIL provisions.554 In October topic of hydrogen infrastructure. Some average. They expect similar
2023, DOE announced the selection of commenters were optimistic and construction times for HD stations,
seven Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs provided support for their view. One given that a hydrogen station for HD
(H2Hubs) in different regions of the commenter acknowledged that vehicles near the Port of Oakland is
country that will receive a total of $7 producing HD FCEV trucks would expected to move from approval to
billion to kickstart a national network of incentivize the building of fueling commissioning in just over two years,
hydrogen producers, consumers, and stations. Another noted that DOE despite permitting challenges. They
connective infrastructure while programs such as the 21st Century cited numerous entities developing
supporting the production, storage, Truck Partnership are engaged in fuel mobile refueling solutions that could
delivery, and end-use of hydrogen. The cell and hydrogen work to reduce provide a fueling option ‘‘bridge’’
emissions from HD trucks.559 At least during the construction of permanent
investment will be matched by
stations.
recipients to leverage a total of nearly
Available online: https://www.energy.gov/articles/ Other commenters were more
$50 billion for the hubs, which are biden-harris-administration-announces-7-billion- cautious about the readiness and
expected to reduce 25 million metric americas-first-clean-hydrogen-hubs-driving.
availability of hydrogen infrastructure.
tons of carbon dioxide emissions each 556 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Biden-Harris
Several indicated there are few existing
year from end uses ranging from Administration to Jumpstart Clean Hydrogen
Economy with New Initiative to Provide Market hydrogen refueling stations for HD
industrial steel to HD transportation.555 Certainty and Unlock Private Investment’’. July 5, FCEVs—mostly in California—and
2023. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/ stated that it is overly optimistic and a
552 Satyapal, Sunita. ‘‘2022 AMR Plenary articles/biden-harris-administration-jumpstart-
Session’’. U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and clean-hydrogen-economy-new-initiative-provide- massive undertaking to expect buildout
Fuel Cell Technologies Office. June 6, 2022. market. of a national network by 2030. One
Available online: https://www.energy.gov/sites/ 557 U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Clean commenter noted that hydrogen fueling
default/files/2022-06/hfto-amr-plenary-satyapal- Energy Demonstrations. ‘‘DOE Selects Consortium infrastructure is still nascent compared
2022-1.pdf. to Bridge Early Demand for Clean Hydrogen,
553 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘U.S. National
to BEV charging infrastructure, and
Providing Market Certainty and Unlocking Private
Clean Hydrogen Strategy and Roadmap’’. June 2023. Sector Investment’’. January 14, 2024. Available several identified challenges that still
Available online: https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/ online: https://www.energy.gov/oced/articles/doe- need to be addressed. Challenges raised
library/roadmaps-vision/clean-hydrogen-strategy- selects-consortium-bridge-early-demand-clean- by the commenter ranged from upstream
roadmap, https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/docs/ hydrogen-providing-market-certainty. emissions and energy required to
hydrogenprogramlibraries/pdfs/us-national-clean- 558 88 FR 89220. Section 45V Credit for
hydrogen-strategy-roadmap.pdf. Production of Clean Hydrogen; Section 48(a)(15)
produce hydrogen, to the cost-
554 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen Election To Treat Clean Hydrogen Production effectiveness of distributing and
Program. ‘‘Clean Hydrogen Production Standard Facilities as Energy Property. December 26, 2023.
Guidance’’. June 2023. Available online: https:// Available online: https://www.federalregister.gov/ 560 U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime
www.hydrogen.energy.gov/library/policies-acts/ documents/2023/12/26/2023-28359/section-45v- Administration. ‘‘Port Infrastructure Development
clean-hydrogen-production-standard, https:// credit-for-production-of-clean-hydrogen-section- Program’’. Available online: https://
www.hydrogen.energy.gov/docs/hydrogenprogram 48a15-election-to-treat-clean-hydrogen.
www.maritime.dot.gov/PIDPgrants.
libraries/pdfs/clean-hydrogen-production-standard- 559 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘U.S. National 561 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ‘‘Clean
guidance.pdf. Clean Hydrogen Strategy and Roadmap’’. June 2023. Ports Program’’. Available online: https://
555 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Biden-Harris Available online: https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/ www.epa.gov/ports-initiative/cleanports.
Administration Announces $7 Billion For library/roadmaps-vision/clean-hydrogen-strategy- 562 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ‘‘Clean
America’s First Clean Hydrogen Hubs, Driving roadmap, https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/docs/ Heavy-Duty Program’’. Available online: https://
Clean Manufacturing and Delivering New Economic hydrogenprogramlibraries/pdfs/us-national-clean- www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/clean-heavy-
Opportunities Nationwide’’. October 13, 2023. hydrogen-strategy-roadmap.pdf. duty-vehicle-program.
101
Fmt 4701
delivering hydrogen (e.g., using gaseous States,563 with 1 percent in projects that centered in a discrete sub-set of states
or liquid technologies), to the inherent are in operation (close to $500,000), 7 and counties where freight activity is
uncertainties associated with projecting percent ($3.2 million) under concentrated. Thus, the select vehicle
emerging station needs in step with HD construction, and a majority still applications for which we project FCEV
FCEV adoption timelines. At least one classified as announced.564 DOE is adoption could start traveling within or
commenter suggested that we did not tracking private sector announcements between regional hubs in this timeframe
identify current private investment of domestic electrolyzers and fuel cell where hydrogen development is
plans in the NPRM. In general, there manufacturing facilities. So far, over prioritized initially.
was a sentiment from these commenters $1.8 billion in new investments has
Along these lines, in March 2024, the
that more support for commercial been announced for over 10 new or
U.S. released a National Zero-Emission
facilities is necessary, and commenters expanded facilities with the capacity to
Freight Corridor Strategy566 that ‘‘sets
urged Federal agencies to align manufacture approximately 10 GW of
an actionable vision and comprehensive
resources and goals to ensure that electrolyzers per year.565 BIL and IRA
programs are under ongoing approach to accelerating the
buildout happens in a coordinated deployment of a world-class, zero-
fashion and at a necessary pace. development, but we anticipate that
investment strategies (e.g., that connect emission freight network across the
Industry commenters anticipated lead producers of hydrogen with end users of United States by 2040. The strategy
time issues beyond their control. fuel) will amplify and become clearer in focuses on advancing the deployment of
Several manufacturers suggested the near term. We also expect this rule zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty
adjusting the standards in the case of will provide greater certainty to the vehicle (ZE–MHDV) fueling
unexpectedly slow infrastructure market to support timely development infrastructure by targeting public
development, and there were calls to of hydrogen refueling stations. investment to amplify private sector
regularly evaluate infrastructure Given that hydrogen refueling momentum, focus utility and regulatory
deployment and establish annual infrastructure for HD FCEVs is energy planning, align industry activity,
benchmarks for assessing progress. developing, we also reviewed literature and mobilize communities for clean
that assesses hydrogen infrastructure transportation.’’ 567 The strategy has four
In response to comments, we re-
needs for the HD transportation sector, phases. The first phase, from 2024–
evaluated our assumptions about the
as discussed further in RIA Chapter 2027, focuses on establishing freight
retail price of hydrogen, in consultation
1.8.3.5. The authors used differing hubs defined ‘‘as a 100-mile to a 150-
with DOE, along with FCEV technology-
analytical approaches and a large range mile radius zone or geographic area
related costs (see RIA Chapter 2.5). Our
of assumptions about the production, centered around a point with a
revised projections for HD FCEV distribution and storage, and dispensing significant concentration of freight
adoption are based on relatively low of hydrogen fuel to estimate hydrogen volume (e.g., ports, intermodal facilities,
production volumes in the MY 2030 to demand for HD FCEVs and the number and truck parking), that supports a
2032 timeframe, indicative of an early of refueling stations required to meet broader ecosystem of freight activity
market technology rollout. As a result, that demand. Several papers examined throughout that zone.’’ 568 The second
our hydrogen consumption estimates in infrastructure costs in the 2030 phase, from 2027–2030, will connect
the NPRM of about 830,000 metric tons timeframe, as discussed further in key ZEV hubs, building out
of hydrogen per year in 2032 dropped Chapter 2.5.3.1. In general, the authors infrastructure along several major
in the final rule to about 130,000 metric concluded that economies of scale are highways. The third phase, from 2030–
tons of hydrogen per year by 2032, or important to reduce costs throughout 2045, will expand the corridors,
1.3 percent of current production. Our the supply chain. Most researchers of ‘‘including access to charging and
assessment is that early market buildout papers that we reviewed agree that it is fueling to all coastal ports and their
of a hydrogen refueling station network not necessary to build a national surrounding freight ecosystems for
to support modest FCEV adoption levels infrastructure network for HD FCEVs all short-haul and regional operations.’’ 569
in the modeled potential compliance at once. Station financial prospects can The fourth phase, from 2035–2040, will
pathway is feasible in the 2030 to 2032 vary by region and tend to be more complete the freight corridor network.
timeframe. We are not suggesting that a favorable in areas with higher demand This corridor strategy provides further
full national hydrogen infrastructure (i.e., high energy needs from HD traffic support for the development of HD ZEV
network needs to be in place by 2030 or flows), while station costs are infrastructure that corresponds to the
2032, as implied by a few commenters, anticipated to drop with growth in
and specifically note that a full national demand and related economies of scale. 566 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation.
hydrogen infrastructure network is not Similar to BEVs, as explained in RTC ‘‘National Zero-Emission Freight Corridor Strategy’’
necessary to accommodate the demand section 7.1, the infrastructure needed to DOE/EE–2816 2024. March 2024. Available at
that we posit for HD FCEVs in our meet this initial demand may be https://driveelectric.gov/files/zef-corridor-
strategy.pdf.
modeled potential compliance pathway. 567 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation.
563 According to the Clean Technology Tracker,
This is further explained in RTC section ‘‘Biden-Harris Administration, Joint Office of
clean hydrogen production refers to the production
8.1. of hydrogen fuel with proton exchange membrane Energy and Transportation Release Strategy to
(PEM) electrolyzers and solid oxide electrolyzer Accelerate Zero-Emission Freight Infrastructure
In addition to the billions of dollars Deployment.’’ March 12, 2024. Available online:
cells (SOEC) or through other methods such as
in Federal investment already methane pyrolysis and natural gas with carbon https://driveelectric.gov/news/decarbonize-freight.
referenced, RIA Chapter 1.7.5 includes capture. 568 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation.
information about known private 564 Cipher News. ‘‘Tracking a new era of climate ‘‘National Zero-Emission Freight Corridor Strategy’’
DOE/EE–2816 2024. March 2024. Available at
investments in HD FCEVs and hydrogen solutions: Cleantech growth across the U.S.’’
Accessed February 2024. Available online: https:// https://driveelectric.gov/files/zef-corridor-
infrastructure. According to Cipher’s ciphernews.com/cleantech-tracker/#definitions. strategy.pdf. See page 3.
Clean Technology Tracker, as of 565 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Building 569 Joint Office of Energy and Transportation.
September 2023, there is $45.752 billion America’s Clean Energy Future—Hydrogen: ‘‘National Zero-Emission Freight Corridor Strategy’’
Electrolyzers and Fuel Cells’’. Accessed February DOE/EE–2816 2024. March 2024. Available at
in total clean hydrogen production 2024. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/ https://driveelectric.gov/files/zef-corridor-
project investment in the United invest. strategy.pdf. See page 8.
102
Fmt 4701
modeled potential compliance pathway are many complex factors at play, and today and seem unlikely to grow
for meeting the final standards. we have taken a close look at how the significantly within the next decade
The literature also further supports ramp-up period over the next decade is without additional incentives.’’ 576
that there is sufficient lead time. Fulton critical. In our modeled potential Thus, at that time, instead of including
et. al. noted that heavy-duty refueling compliance pathway, we evaluated the ZEV technologies in the technology
station funding, design, and planning existing and projected future hydrogen packages for setting the Phase 2
should start one to two years before refueling infrastructure and considered standards, we provided advanced
deployment.570 The Coordinating FCEVs only in the MY 2030 and later technology credit multipliers to help
Research Council noted that full station timeframe to better ensure that our incentivize the development of such
development (i.e., design, permitting, compliance pathway provides adequate technologies, as well as PHEVs, because
construction, and commissioning) takes time for early market infrastructure they had the potential for very large
about two years, assuming no major development. We conclude that a GHG emission reductions.
hurdles.571 The California Energy phased and targeted approach can offer Since the 2016 promulgation of the
Commission has evaluated hydrogen sufficient lead time to meet the HD GHG Phase 2 final rule, as discussed
refueling station development in projected refueling needs that in section I.C of this preamble, several
California since 2010. Their planned correspond to the technology packages important factors have contributed to
network of 200 stations is mainly for for the final rule’s modeled potential changes in the HD landscape. Therefore,
light-duty vehicles but has at least 13 compliance pathway, as further as detailed in this section II and RIA
stations with the capability to serve HD discussed in RIA Chapter 2.1. Chapter 2, our assessment concludes
FCEVs.572 Station development times Additionally, EPA is committed to that ICE technologies, BEV technologies
have generally decreased over time, ensuring the Phase 3 program is and FCEV technologies will be
from a median or typical time spent of successfully implemented, and as technically feasible for HD motor
around 1,500 days in 2010 to about 500 described in preamble section II.B.2.iii, vehicles, as assessed by vehicle type
days in 2019 (i.e., about two years if in consideration of concerns raised and each Phase 3 MY. Similar to Phase
considering business days) for projects regarding inherent uncertainties about 1 and Phase 2, the technology packages
that have completed all phases of the future, we are including a used to support the feasibility of the
development.573 They expect some commitment to monitor progress on standards in this final rule include a
increase in median development times hydrogen refueling infrastructure mix of technologies applied to HD
as projects delayed by the COVID–19 development in the final rule. motor vehicles, and development of
pandemic are completed but regularly those technology packages included an
monitor progress and work to improve 4. Summary of Technology Assessment assessment of the projected feasibility of
the deployment process.574 In prior HD GHG rulemakings, EPA the development and application of
We recognize that these plans will promulgated standards that could BEV, FCEV, and other technologies that
require sustained support to come to feasibly be met through technological reduce GHG emissions from HD ICE
fruition, and our assessment, in improvements in many areas of the vehicles. While our analysis in this
consultation with relevant Federal vehicle. For example, as discussed in section II.D focuses on certain
agencies, is that our projections are section II.C, the HD GHG Phase 2 CO2 technologies in the technology packages
supported and correspond to our emission standards were premised on as a potential compliance pathway to
measured approach in our modeled technologies such as engine support the feasibility of the final HD
compliance pathway for FCEVs. There improvements, advanced transmissions, vehicle GHG emission standards, there
advanced aerodynamics and, in some are other technologies that can reduce
570 Fulton, et. al. ‘‘California Hydrogen Analysis cases, hybrid powertrains. We evaluated CO2 emissions and other example
Project: The Future Role of Hydrogen in a Carbon- each technology’s effectiveness as potential compliance pathways to meet
Neutral California—Final Synthesis Modeling
Report’’. UC Davis Institute of Transportation
demonstrated over the regulatory duty the standards as discussed in RIA
Studies. April 19, 2023. Available online: https:// cycles using EPA’s GEM and estimated Chapters 1 and 2.11 and section II.F.4.
escholarship.org/uc/item/27m7g841. the appropriate projected adoption rate Under the final rule, manufacturers may
571 Coordinating Research Council, Inc. ‘‘Assess
of each technology.575 We then choose to utilize the technologies that
the Battery-Recharging and Hydrogen-Refueling developed a technology package for
Infrastructure Needs, Costs, and Timelines Required
work best for their business case and for
to Support Regulatory Requirements for Light-, each of the regulatory subcategories, the operator’s needs in meeting the final
Medium-, and Heavy-Duty Zero-Emission Vehicles: which represented a potential standards. We reiterate that the
Final Report’’. Prepared by ICF. CRC Report No. compliance pathway to support the standards are performance-based and do
SM–CR–9. September 2023. Available online: feasibility of the Phase 2 standards. We not mandate any specific technology for
https://crcao.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/
CRC_Infrastructure_Assessment_Report_ICF_
are following a similar approach in this any manufacturer or any vehicle
09282023_Final-Report.pdf. Phase 3 final rule. subcategory.
572 The CEC has invested nearly $40 million in In the HD GHG Phase 2 final rule, we The range of GHG emission-reducing
medium- and heavy-duty hydrogen infrastructure. included ZEV technologies in our technologies for HD vehicles considered
573 Berner, et al. ‘‘Joint Agency Staff Report on
assessment of the suite of technologies in this final rulemaking include those
Assembly Bill 8: 2022 Annual Assessment of Time
and Cost Needed to Attain 100 Hydrogen Refueling
for HD vocational vehicles and tractors. for HD vehicles with ICE (section II.D.1),
Stations in California’’. California Energy However, in 2016, when the HD GHG HD BEVs (section II.D.2), and HD FCEVs
Commission & California Air Resources Board. Phase 2 rule was being developed, we (section II.D.3). For evaluating the BEV
December 2022. Available online: https:// stated that ‘‘adoption rates for these and FCEV technologies portion of the
www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/CEC-
600-2022-064.pdf.
advanced technologies in heavy-duty range for this analysis, for this
vehicles are essentially non-existent rulemaking EPA developed a bottom-up
574 Berner, et al. ‘‘Joint Agency Staff Report on
Assembly Bill 8: 2022 Annual Assessment of Time approach to estimate the operational
and Cost Needed to Attain 100 Hydrogen Refueling 575 GEM is an EPA vehicle simulation tool used
characteristics and costs of such
Stations in California’’. California Energy to certify HD vehicles. A detailed description of technologies. As explained in the
Commission & California Air Resources Board. GEM can be found in the RIA for the HD GHG Phase
December 2022. Available online: https:// 2 rulemaking, available at https://nepis.epa.gov/ NPRM, we developed a new technology
www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/CEC- Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100P7NS.PDF?
600-2022-064.pdf. Dockey=P100P7NS.PDF. 576 81 FR 73498 (October 25, 2016).
103
Fmt 4701
assessment tool, Heavy-Duty that application in our technology more BEV models available today
Technology Resource Use Case Scenario package because of, for example, the compared to FCEV models (see, e.g.,
(HD TRUCS), to evaluate the design impact on payload and, thus, potential RIA Chapters 1.7.5 and 1.7.6), we
features needed to meet the energy and work accomplished relative to a project in our technology packages that
power demands of HD vehicle types comparable ICE vehicle.579 BEV technology adoption is likely to
when using different technologies, and To evaluate costs for these happen sooner than the adoption of
comparing resulting manufacturing, technologies, including costs of FCEV technology. Also, as discussed in
operating and purchasing costs. In this compliance for manufacturers using this RIA Chapter 1.6, we project that depot
rulemaking, we used HD TRUCS to compliance pathway as well as user charging will occur at a faster rate than
assess the design features to meet the costs related to purchasing and the development of a HD public
power and energy demands of various operating ZEVs, we sized vehicle charging network. Therefore, the
HD vehicles when using ZEV components that are unique to ZEVs to modeled potential compliance pathway
technologies, as well as costs related to meet the work demands of each focuses on these types of BEVs in the
manufacturing, purchasing and representative vehicle. We applied cost initial Phase 3 MYs.
operating ICE vehicle and ZEV estimates to each vehicle component
technologies. We chose to analyze the Starting in MY 2030, we also
based on sizing to assess the difference
comparison with ZEV technologies for considered FCEV technology using
in total powertrain costs between the
the modeled potential compliance public refueling infrastructure and BEVs
ICE and ZEV powertrains. We
pathway as the technology capable of using public charging for select
accounted for the IRA battery tax credit
achieving the greatest vehicle GHG applications in our modeled compliance
and vehicle tax credit, as discussed in
emission reductions. Furthermore, we pathway and H2-ICE using public
section II.E.4. We also compared
made a number of updates to HD refueling infrastructure in our
operating costs due to fuel
TRUCS for the final rulemaking to additional example potential
consumption, vehicle maintenance and
reflect consideration of new compliance pathways. BEV technology
repair, and insurance. We also included
information, including that received in is more energy efficient than FCEV
the upfront cost to procure and install
comments. HD TRUCS is described in technology but may not be suitable for
depot charging infrastructure for certain
more detail in section II.D.5 and RIA all applications during the model years
BEVs. Costs of the needed distribution
Chapter 2, but we briefly summarize the at issue in this rulemaking, such as
grid buildout infrastructure are reflected
approach here. when the performance needs result in
in the per kilowatt hour price of
To use HD TRUCS as part of building additional battery mass that
electricity used for both depot and
the technology packages to support the prohibitively affects payload. In cases
public charging. For the BEVs where we
feasibility of the standards, we created like this, the pathway considered either
project their charging needs will be met
101 representative HD vehicles that BEVs with smaller batteries, that may
by public charging, instead of including
cover the full range of weight classes require enroute charging and the
the charging infrastructure costs
within the scope of this rulemaking consequent use of public charging away
upfront, we included these amortized
(Class 2b through 8 vocational vehicles from the depot, or FCEVs, which may
costs in the charging cost in addition to
and tractors). The representative have shorter refueling times than BEVs
the cost of electricity, demand charges,
vehicles cover many aspects of work with large batteries.583 584 We considered
and EVSE maintenance costs. We took
performed by HDVs. This work was FCEVs and BEVs using public charging
a similar approach for FCEVs, where we
translated into energy and power in the technology packages for
embedded the hydrogen infrastructure
demands per vehicle type based on applications that travel longer distances
costs into the cost of hydrogen fuel. This
everyday use of HD vehicles, ranging and/or carry heavier loads (i.e., for those
approach is consistent with our
from moving goods and people to that may be sensitive to refueling times
assessment of fueling costs associated
mixing cement. We then identified the
with ICE vehicles where the fuel station
technical properties required for a BEV Vehicles Cost Analysis’’. U.S. Department of
infrastructure costs are included in the
or FCEV to meet the operational needs Energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
per gallon price of fuel. March 2022. Available online: https://
of a comparable ICE vehicle.577
Since batteries can add weight and We relied on research and findings www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/82081.pdf.
volume to a vehicle,578 we evaluated discussed in RIA Chapters 1 and 2 to 581 Hall, Dale and Nic Lutsey. ‘‘Estimating the
conduct this analysis. For MYs 2027 Infrastructure Needs and Costs for the Launch of
battery mass and physical volume Zero-Emission Trucks’’. White Paper: The
required to package a battery pack. If the through 2029, for the BEV and FCEV International Council on Clean Transportation.
performance needs of a BEV resulted in technologies portions of the analysis, we August 2019. Available online: https://theicct.org/
a battery that was too large or heavy, focused primarily on BEV technology wp-content/uploads/2021/06/ICCT_EV_HDVs_
using depot charging. Consistent with Infrastructure_20190809.pdf.
then we did not consider the BEV for 582 Robo, Ellen and Dave Seamonds. Technical
our analysis, research shows that some Memo to Environmental Defense Fund: Investment
577 Heavy-duty vehicles are typically powered by BEV technologies can become cost- Reduction Act Supplemental Assessment: Analysis
a diesel-fueled compression-ignition (CI) engine, competitive in terms of total cost of of Alternative Medium- and Heavy-Duty Zero-
though the heavy-duty market includes vehicles ownership for many HD vehicles by the Emission Vehicle Business-As-Usual Scenarios.
powered by gasoline-fueled spark-ignition (SI) ERM. August 19, 2022. Available online: https://
late 2020s, but it will take longer for www.erm.com/contentassets/
engines and alternative-fueled ICEs. We selected
diesel-powered ICE vehicles as the baseline vehicle FCEVs.580 581 582 Given that there are 154d08e0d0674752925cd82c66b3e2b1/edf-zev-
for the assessment in HD TRUCS in our analysis baseline-technical-memo-addendum.pdf.
because a diesel-fueled CI engine is broadly 579 This does not necessarily mean that a BEV 583 A technology is more energy efficient if it uses
available for all of the 101 vehicle types. with a large battery weight and volume would not less energy to do the same amount of work. Energy
be technically feasible for a given HD vehicle use, can be lost as it moves through the vehicle’s
578 Smith, David et. al. ‘‘Medium- and Heavy-
Duty Vehicle Electrification: An Assessment of but rather this is an acknowledgement that we components due to heat and friction.
Technology and Knowledge Gaps’’. U.S. considered impacts of increased battery size on 584 Cunanan, Carlo et. al. ‘‘A Review of Heavy-
Department of Energy: Oak Ridge National feasibility considerations like payload capacity as Duty Vehicle Powertrain Technologies: Diesel
Laboratory and National Renewable Energy well as cost and payback within the selection of HD Engine Vehicles, Battery Electric Vehicles, and
Laboratory. December 2019. Available online: vehicle technologies for the technology packages. Hydrogen Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles’’. Clean
https://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/Files/ 580 Ledna et. al. ‘‘Decarbonizing Medium- & Technol. Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/
Pub136575.pdf. Heavy-Duty On-Road Vehicles: Zero-Emission 2571-8797/3/2/28.
104
Fmt 4701
or payload impacts). These included BEV and FCEV components such that in RIA Chapter 2.8.3.1. As explained at
some coach buses and tractors. they could meet the driving demands proposal, 88 FR 25974, the initial list of
After considering operational based (in most instances) on the 90th HD TRUCS vehicles contained 87
characteristics and costs in 2022$, for percentile daily VMT for each vehicle types and was based on work
the BEV and FCEV technologies application, while also accounting for the Truck and Engine Manufacturers
portions of the analysis, we determined the heating, ventilation, and air Association (EMA) and CARB
the payback period, which is the conditioning (HVAC) and battery conducted for CARB’s ACT rule.585 For
number of years it would take to offset thermal conditioning load requirements the NPRM, we consolidated the list;
any incremental cost increase of a ZEV in hot and cold weather and any PTO eliminated some of the more unique
over a comparable ICE vehicle. Next, the demands for the vehicle. Furthermore, vehicles with small populations like
inclusion of BEV and FCEV we accounted for the fact that the usable mobile laboratories; and assigned
technologies in the technology packages battery capacity is less than 100 percent operational characteristics for
as a potential compliance pathway that and that batteries deteriorate over time. vocational vehicles that correspond to
support the feasibility of the final We also sized the ZEV powertrains to the Urban, Multi-Purpose, and Regional
standards was determined after ensure that the vehicles would meet an duty cycles used in GEM. We also
considering the payback period for acceptable level of acceleration from a added additional vehicle types to reflect
BEVs or FCEVs. stop and be able to maintain a cruise vehicle applications that were
Lastly, the modeled potential speed while going up a hill at six- represented in EPA’s certification data.
compliance pathway that supports the percent grade. In this subsection, we
Chapter 2.1 of the RIA summarizes the
final standards is a combination of the discuss the primary inputs used in HD
ICE vehicle technologies described in 101 unique vehicle types represented in
TRUCS along with the revisions made
section II.D.1 along with BEV and FCEV HD TRUCS and each with a vehicle
for the tool used in this final
technologies. As stated in section II.D.1 identifier, along with their
rulemaking. Additional details on HD
of this preamble, for the ICE vehicle TRUCS can be found in RIA Chapter 2. corresponding regulatory subcategory,
technologies part of the analysis that We received numerous comments on vehicle application, vehicle weight
supports the feasibility of the Phase 3 our approach to HD TRUCS; some key class, MOVES SourceTypeID and
standards, our assessment is that the topic themes include, but are not RegClassID,586 and GEM duty cycle
technology packages for the modeled limited to, vehicle sales distribution, category. After considering comments,
potential compliance pathway include a battery sizing method, component we revised several HD vehicles to
mix of ICE vehicle technologies and efficiencies and costs, additional increase the number of day cab vehicle
adoption rates of those technologies at operating costs, EVSE costs and dwell types and sleeper cab vehicle types
the levels included in the Phase 2 MY time, payback curve, alternative sources within the final rule version of HD
2027 technology packages. Additionally, for inputs and the feasibility of ZEVs. TRUCS to include four day cabs vehicle
for the additional example potential We also addressed the minor errors in types and three sleeper cabs vehicle
compliance pathways that support the inputs for a few of the 101 vehicles types that are modeled in our analysis
feasibility of the Phase 3 standards, our noted by one commenter. to use public charging, starting in MY
assessment is that those technology 2030. In addition, of the tractors vehicle
i. Vehicles Analyzed types that were designed for public
packages include a mix of vehicles with
ICE technologies described in section The version of HD TRUCS supporting charging one day cab and one sleeper
II.D.1 and further discussed in section this final rule continues to analyze 101 cab were updated to reflect a more
II.F.4 and adoption rates of those vehicle types. However, we refined aerodynamic tractor design than the
technologies at the levels described in certain inputs based on consideration of average tractor aerodynamics used in
section II.F.4. comments received. The 101 vehicle the technology assessment to support
types encompass 22 different the Phase 2 standards. See RIA 2.2.2.1
5. EPA’s HD TRUCS Analysis Tool applications in the HD vehicle market, for additional details.
For the final rule, EPA further refined as shown in Table II–10. These vehicles
HD TRUCS, which (as just noted) was applications are further differentiated by 585 California Air Resources Board, Appendix E:
developed by EPA to evaluate the weight class, duty cycle, and daily VMT Zero Emission Truck Market Assessment (2019),
design features needed to meet the for each of these vehicle applications available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/
files/barcu/regact/2019/act2019/appe.pdf (last
energy and power demands of various into 101 vehicle types. These 101 accessed on September 26, 2022).
HD vehicle types when using ZEV vehicle types cover all 33 of the heavy- 586 MOVES homepage: https://www.epa.gov/
technologies. We did this by sizing the duty regulatory subcategories, as shown moves (last accessed October 2022).
105
Fmt 4701
Heavy-duty vehicles are typically Phase 2 standards. This was done to vehicles, a utility truck, also known as
powered by a diesel-fueled CI engine, reflect the reality that a newly designed a bucket truck, may only drive a few
though the heavy-duty market also HD BEV that is currently available on miles to a worksite while idling for the
includes vehicles powered by gasoline- the market has a more aerodynamic majority of the day and using energy to
fueled SI engines and alternative-fueled design than tractors used in setting the move the bucket up and down. The
ICE. We selected diesel-powered ICE Phase 2 standards. For more discussion power to run the separate equipment on
vehicles as the baseline vehicle for the on the specifics of the aerodynamic ICE vehicles is typically provided by a
assessment in HD TRUCS in our tractors, see RIA Chapter 2.2.2.1. PTO from the main engine.
analysis because a diesel-fueled CI In HD TRUCS, we determined the
engine is broadly available for all of the ii. Vehicle Energy Demand
daily energy demand for each of the 101
101 vehicle types and is more efficient Energy is necessary to perform the vehicle types by estimating both the
than an SI engine. Chapter 2.2 of the work required of the vehicle. This work baseline energy demands that are
RIA includes the details we developed includes driving, idling, and providing similar regardless of the powertrain
for each of the baseline vehicles, heating and cooling; in addition, some configuration and the energy demands
including the size of the engine and the vehicles require energy to operate that vary by powertrain. The baseline
transmission type. This information was equipment. Vehicles with regenerative energy includes energy at the axle to
used to determine the weight and the braking systems have the opportunity to move the vehicle, energy recovered from
cost of the ICE powertrains. recover some of the kinetic energy that regenerative braking energy, and PTO
As noted, in the ZEV technologies would otherwise be lost during braking. energy. Powertrain-specific energy
portion of our analysis for our projected There are a wide variety of energy includes energy required to condition
technology packages, for MYs 2027 demands across the heavy-duty sector, the battery and heat or cool the cabin
through 2029, we primarily considered depending on the vehicle’s application. using HVAC system. We discuss each of
BEV technologies using depot charging. For example, some vehicles, such as these in the following subsections.
Starting in MY 2030, we also considered long-haul tractors, spend the vast a. Baseline Energy
FCEV technologies for select majority of the time driving, a fraction
applications that travel longer distances of the time idling, and require heating For each HD TRUCS vehicle type, we
and/or carry heavier loads. This and cooling of the cabin, but do not determined the baseline energy
included coach buses, sleeper cab require operation of additional consumption requirement that is needed
tractors, and day cab tractors that are equipment. A transit bus typically for each of the HD TRUCS applications
designed to travel longer distances. For operates at low speeds, so it requires for ZEVs. The amount of energy needed
the final rule, we agree with less energy for driving than a long-haul at the axle to move the vehicle down the
commenters who maintained that public tractor, but requires more energy for road is determined by a combination of
charging would be needed for certain heating or cooling due to its large the type of drive cycle (such as urban
BEV applications with high VMT. In our amount of interior cabin volume. Unlike or freeway driving) and the number of
analysis, we are now projecting (and ICE vehicles where the cabin heating is miles traveled over a period of time. To
including costs for) these applications to often provided by excess heat from the do this, we used the drive cycles and
utilize public charging, starting in MY main ICE, BEVs do not have excess heat cycle weightings adopted for HD GHG
2030. We also updated one day cab from an ICE to utilize in this manner Phase 2 for our assessment of the energy
tractor and one sleeper cab tractor that and thus require more energy than ICE required per mile for each vehicle type.
utilize public charging to reflect a more vehicles to heat the cabin and additional EPA’s GEM model simulates road load
aerodynamic design than the average energy to manage the temperature of the power requirements for various duty
tractor aerodynamics used in the batteries. As another example of the cycles to estimate the energy required
ER22AP24.030</GPH>
technology assessment to support the wide variety of energy demands for HD per mile for HD vehicles. To understand
106
Fmt 4701
the existing heavy-duty industry, we Nontaxable Uses of Diesel Fuel in a on vehicle age to the 50th percentile
performed an analysis on current heavy- Motor Vehicle,’’ 589 that covers a wider VMT. The cost of fuel consumption for
duty vehicles in the market in order to range of vehicles beyond the electric a particular calendar year is determined
determine typical power requirements utility vehicles in the referenced NREL by the VMT traveled for that year and
and rates of energy consumption at the studies. This table contains ‘‘safe- the fuel price in that year.
axle. These values represent the energy harbor’’ percentages that are presumed For the proposal, we also developed
required to propel a vehicle of a given amounts of diesel fuel used for a 90th percentile daily VMT (‘‘sizing
weight, frontal area, and tire rolling ‘‘auxiliary equipment’’ operated from VMT’’) and used it in HD TRUCS to size
resistance to complete the specified the same fuel tank as the motor vehicle. ZEV components such as batteries and
duty cycle on a per-mile basis, We used this source to estimate PTO to estimate the size requirements for
independent of the powertrain. In RIA energy use as a function of total fuel EVSE. We selected the 90th percentile
Chapter 2.2.2, we describe the GEM consumed by vehicle type, as discussed daily VMT data because we project that
inputs and results used to estimate the in RIA Chapter 2.2.2.1.4. We requested manufacturers will design their BEVs to
propulsion energy and power data for PTO loads in the NPRM and meet most daily VMT needs, but not to
requirements at the axle for ICE vehicles received some comments on our meet the most extreme operations. BEVs
on a per-mile basis. We also used these approach for analyzing PTO demands. designed to meet the longest daily VMT
inputs, along with some simple electric Specifically, we received data for of all operators would be unnecessarily
vehicle assumptions, to develop a cement mixers and cement pumpers heavy and expensive for most
model to calculate weighted percent of suggesting that our PTO loads used for operations, which would limit their
energy recovery due to regenerative these vehicles in the NPRM were too appeal.
braking. Additional detail can be found low. After investigation, we agree, and Commenters challenged EPA’s
in RIA Chapter 2.2.2.1.3. have increased the PTO demand for choices for both sizing and operational
We requested data on our propulsion cement mixers and pumpers. VMT, as well as the combination of 90th
and regenerative braking energy Within HD TRUCS, we calculated the percentile sizing VMT with 50th
assessment in the proposal. We received total energy needed daily based on a percentile operational VMT. The first
comment that dump trucks, for daily VMT for each vehicle type. We question is the mileage to which a
example, haul loads greater than the used multiple sources to develop the percentile is applied. EPA based its
payload evaluated in GEM to determine VMT for each vehicle including the mileage estimate on the NREL’s
the propulsion power. It is worth noting NREL FleetDNA database, a University FleetDNA and the UC Riverside’s
that the payload used in GEM to of California-Riverside (UCR) database, databases, which provide nationwide
determine power requirements the 2002 Vehicle Inventory and Use estimates covering the widest range of
represents an average payload with the Survey (VIUS), the CARB Large Entity HDVs.592 Two commenters
expectation that vocational vehicles, Report, or an independent source recommended lower VMT using
like dump trucks, would deliver a load specific to an application, as discussed different sources of telematics data
and then return with an empty vehicle. in RIA Chapter 2.2.1.2.590 EPA assigned (including 2002 VIUS data, and data
Therefore, the payload evaluated for each vehicle type a 50th percentile used by CARB in support of its ACT
Class 8 dump trucks is essentially average daily VMT591 (‘‘operational rule). Another commenter, on the other
30,000 pounds on one leg of the trip and VMT’’) that was used to estimate hand, claimed that EPA’s estimate was
zero pounds for the other leg of the trip. operational costs, such as average low and supported its claim with recent
Furthermore, as discussed in section annual fuel, hydrogen, or electricity (May 2023) telematics data from its own
II.F, we reduced the stringency of the costs, and maintenance and repair costs fleet operations which had a 90th
final standards for heavy heavy-duty (see RIA Chapters 2.3.4, 2.4.4, and percentile VMT considerably higher
vocational vehicles from the values 2.5.3). We also account for the change than that in the NREL FleetDNA data
proposed to reflect challenging in use of the vehicle over the course of base. See RIA Chapter 2.2.1.2.2 for
applications, such as this one. its ownership and operation in HD additional discussion.
As noted, some vocational vehicles TRUCS by applying a VMT ratio based Irrespective of mileage, one
have attachments that perform work, commenter maintained that the
typically by powering a hydraulic 589 See 18 CCR section 1432, ‘‘Other Nontaxable combination of a 90th percentile sizing
pump, which are powered by PTOs. Uses of Diesel Fuel in a Motor Vehicle,’’ available VMT and 50th percentile operational
at https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/lawguides/vol3/dftr/ VMT was inherently overconservative.
Information on in-use PTO energy dftr-reg1432.html.
demand cycles is limited. NREL 590 NREL and EPA. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Activity Sizing a battery at the 90th percentile,
published two papers describing for EPA MOVES. Available at https://data.nrel.gov/ in their view, is the equivalent of
investigative work into PTO usage and submissions/168, last accessed on October 15, 2022, foisting unneeded capacity on a
which includes an assessment of both the NREL purchaser when operational VMT is at
fuel consumption.587 thnsp;588 These and UC-Riverside databases; U.S. Census Bureau.
studies, however, were limited to 2002 Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey. https://
the 50th percentile. There is no reason,
electric utility vehicles, such as bucket www.census.gov/library/publications/2002/econ/ in that commenter’s view, for the
trucks and material handlers. To census/vehicle-inventory-and-use-survey.html, last analysis to posit purchasers buying
accessed on October 15, 2022. CARB. Large Entity more battery capacity than they need,
account for PTO usage in HD TRUCS, Reporting. Available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-
we chose to rely on a table described in work/programs/advanced-clean-trucks/large-entity-
and for the analysis to assume that extra
California’s Diesel Tax Fuel Regulations, reporting. battery cost. In addition, the commenter
specifically in Regulation 1432, ‘‘Other
591 We used the 50th percentile as a proxy for asserted that 50th percentile VMT skews
average VMT from the NREL FleetDNA database EPA’s payback analysis toward longer
and the UC-Riverside database. The NREL and UC- payback periods, since it results in
587 NREL, Characterization of PTO and Idle
Riverside databases each contained a selection of

Behavior for Utility Vehicles, Sept 2017. Available vehicles that we used to calculate 50th and 90th longer time in the analysis for
online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/ percentile daily VMT. When each database had a
66747.pdf. VMT value, the values were averaged to get VMT 592 NREL and EPA. Heavy-Duty Vehicle Activity
588 NREL, Fuel and Emissions Reduction in for a specific market segment. See RIA Chapter for EPA MOVES. Available at https://data.nrel.gov/
Electric Power Take-Off Equipped Utility Vehicles, 2.2.1.2 for further details. See text addressing submissions/168, last accessed on October 15, 2022,
June 2016. Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/ comments that these mileage estimates are not which includes an assessment of both the NREL
docs/fy17osti/66737.pdf. representative. and UC-Riverside databases.
107
Fmt 4701
operational and maintenance savings to unnecessarily large for most of depending on only charging at their
be realized. In addition, some applications. For vehicles using depot depot. In the applications where enroute
commenters were skeptical that a 90th charging, one of the base assumptions charging is utilized, manufacturers
percentile sizing VMT properly reflects for the battery sizing analysis was to would not need to assume the extra
the existing market where vehicles complete one day’s worth of work on a battery capacity required to meet the
typically select different sized batteries single charge. Therefore, our basic longest VMT days, and therefore will
for different range requirements. premise was to size ZEVs and ZEV instead match the battery size to the
Other commenters challenged the batteries so that they could perform the typical operational needs. To determine
sizing VMT as too low. They question majority of work that ICE vehicles are the appropriate size of the battery for
whether purchasers would buy a vehicle capable of and to analyze the payback these vehicles, we concluded that the
unsuitable for a portion of their based on the average fleet daily VMT. vehicles would not require the same
operations (at least 10 percent, This ensures that the vehicles specified battery sizing approach we used in the
accepting EPA’s mileage estimate). In in HD TRUCS are capable of doing the NPRM for depot-charged vehicles.
their view, fleets would only purchase work performed by ICE vehicles. At the Instead, we sized the batteries for
90th percentile trucks if they had same time, an operational VMT at the enroute-charged BEVs to meet the 50th
exceptionally high confidence that their 50th percentile is a conservative but percentile daily VMT needs. For the
vehicle will see predictable routes and reasonable means of evaluating payback. longest range day cabs and sleeper cabs,
weights that fall within that 90th By using the 50th percentile, we are on days when these vehicles are
percentile operating window. As noted, saying there will be days where the required to travel longer distances, we
one commenter also submitted data vehicle is used less and days when it’s find that less than 30 minutes of mid-
challenging the mileage estimate itself. used more, but on average this value day charging at 1 MW is sufficient to
Other comments were less specific, would be representative of the typical meet the HD TRUCS 90th percentile
alleging more generally that heavy-duty day. Consequently, we do not agree with VMT assuming vehicles start the day
vehicles travel more miles than reflected the commenters’ assertion that the with a full battery. Details regarding
in EPA’s analysis. These comments combination of sizing and operational enroute charging can be found in RIA
expressed concerns about the range of VMTs in HD TRUCS is arbitrary. Chapters 2.2.1.2 and 2.6.3. Please see
current BEVs and how the range of For the final rule, we are continuing RIA Chapter 2.2.1.2 Table 2–3 for the
current BEV applications fail to match to size our vehicles batteries for depot complete list of VMT for each of the 101
the range of corresponding ICE vehicles. charging BEVs to the 90th percentile as vehicle types.
For example, one commenter raised a this percentile would cover the majority We continue to base the majority of
concern that range for one EV was of fleet operations. Sizing vehicle our sizing VMT on the same sources we
reported at 150 miles when compared to batteries to the 50th percentile, as used in the NPRM. We understand that
a comparable diesel vehicle with a range suggested by some commenters, would there are many different datasets
of 1,000 miles. Another commenter decrease the number of years it would available and that the 90th percentile
questioned the purchasers’ willingness take for the BEV technology to pay back, VMT will be different in each dataset.
to accept vehicles with low range, such but it would also mean that these ZEVs However, the NREL FleetDNA and
as the vehicles EPA included in the would be unavailable for major market MOVES databases use data from many
NPRM which had ranges with less than segments in our analysis. EPA disagrees different sources across the country
100 miles. Another commenter was that such an analytic approach would be giving a homogenized representation of
concerned about the availability of a reasoned one, given that ZEV the HD fleet nationwide rather than data
different models with 200 miles of from a single source, even if that data
applications are suitable (and in some
range. Two other commenters were was collected on a nationwide basis.
instances, available now) for these
concerned about additional trips or Thus, after consideration of comments,
broader market segments. Disallowing
more work required due to limited our assessment is that the sources we
them analytically, i.e., a priori via a 50th
battery range and long charging times use are better suited for the purposes of
percentile battery sizing assumption,
which can be affected by ambient this final rule and that our use of them
consequently, is not reasonable. We take
temperature and road grade, among is reasonable.
these commenters’ point, however, that
other factors. They also stated that these
some HD vehicles—even tractors—do b. Powertrain-Specific Energy
factors contribute to reduced efficiency
not need batteries sized as large as in HVAC requirements vary by vehicle
in the trucking industry requiring
additional trucks, drivers, and trips to the proposal’s approach due to lower type, location, and duty cycle. The
deliver the same amount of freight. daily VMT. We have accordingly HVAC energy required to heat and cool
EPA appreciates the comments that revised the sleeper cab and day cab interior cabins is considered separately
raised concern about the range of BEVs. tractors in HD TRUCS to account for a from the baseline energy in HD TRUCS,
We used 101 vehicles to represent the wide variety of operations including since these energy loads are not
HD industry and our list of vehicles short- and long-range tractors. The sales required year-round or in all regions of
covers the vast majority of vehicle distribution of these vehicles was the country. Nearly all commercial
applications, but we recognize it is not informed by California’s Large Entity vehicles are equipped with heat and
all-encompassing. Our technology Survey, which we also used in the basic ventilation and most vehicles are
packages project that significant NPRM and includes the percentage of equipped with air conditioning (A/C). In
volumes of ICE vehicles will be sold in trips by mileage for day cabs and for ICE vehicles, traditional cabin heating
the timeframe of this rule and that those sleeper cabs.593 uses excess thermal energy produced by
vehicles will be used in applications In the final rule, our modeled the main ICE. This is the only source of
that see extremes, whether they be compliance pathway includes BEVs that cabin heating for many vehicle types.
extreme daily VMT or extreme ambient would utilize enroute charging, instead Additionally, on ICE vehicles, cabin A/
temperatures, or niche applications. 593 California Air Resources Board. ‘‘Large Entity
C uses a mechanical refrigerant
Hence the assumption of 90th percentile Reporting.’’ Available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ compressor that is engine belt-driven.
sizing VMT because battery sizes to our-work/programs/advanced-clean-trucks/large- For BEVs, the energy required for
meet longer daily VMTs would be entity-reporting. thermal management is different than
108
Fmt 4701
for ICE vehicles. First, the loads for HVAC modeling-based approach temperatures.595 However, for the final
HVAC are different because the vehicle described in Basma et. al.594 This rule analysis, we made an adjustment to
is not able to be heated from excess heat physics-based cabin thermal model HD TRUCS to reflect a wider range of
from the engine. In this analysis, we considers four vehicle characteristics: cooling temperatures (as compared to
considered that HD BEVs may be the cabin interior, walls, materials, and the proposed greater than 80 °F). In the
equipped with either a positive number of passengers. The authors final rule analysis, we created three
temperature coefficient (PTC) electric modeled a Class 8 electric transit bus separate ambient temperature bins: one
resistance heater with traditional A/C, with an HVAC system consisting of two for heating (less than 55 °F), one for
or a full heat pump system, as described 20-kW reversible heat pumps, an air cooling (greater than 75 °F), and one for
in RIA Chapter 1. The vehicle’s battery circulation system, and a battery
a temperature range that requires only
is used to power either system, but heat thermal management system. We used
ventilation (55–75 °F). In HD TRUCS,
pumps are many times more efficient their estimated HVAC power demand
than PTC heaters. Given the success and values as a function of temperature, we already accounted for the energy
increasing adoption of heat pumps in resembling a parabolic curve, where loads due to ventilation in the baseline
light-duty EVs, we believe that heat hotter and colder temperatures require energy demand, so no additional energy
pumps will be the more commonly used more power with the lowest power consumption is applied here for the
technology and thus project the use of demand between 59 to 77 °F, as shown ventilation-only operation. We then
heat pumps in our HD TRUCS analysis. in RIA Chapter 2.4.1.1.1. weighted the power demands by the
To estimate HVAC energy As explained in the NPRM, the power percent HD VMT traveled at a specific
consumption of BEVs in HD TRUCS, we required for HVAC in HD TRUCS is temperature range. The results of the
performed a literature and market based on a Basma et. al study that VMT-weighted HVAC power demand
review. Even though there are limited determined the HVAC power demand for a Class 8 Transit Bus are shown in
real-world studies, we agreed with the across a range of ambient Table II–11.
Lastly, HVAC load is dependent on data to be corroborative with our HVAC approximately 68 to 95 degrees
cabin size—the larger the size of the loads and the sleeper cab scaling factor; Fahrenheit (F).598 In HD TRUCS, we
cabin, the greater the HVAC demand. therefore, we did not adjust our HVAC accounted for the battery thermal
The values for HVAC power demand loads from proposal in HD TRUCS. management energy demands as a
shown in Table II–11 represent the Fuel cell stacks produce excess heat function of ambient temperature based
power demand to heat or cool the during the conversion of hydrogen to on a Basma et. al study.599 As described
interior of a Class 8 Transit bus. electricity, similar to an ICE during in RIA Chapter 2.4.1.1.3, we determined
However, HD vehicles have a range of combustion. This excess heat can be the amount of energy consumed to heat
cabin sizes; therefore, we developed used to heat the interior cabin of the the battery with cabin air when it is cold
scaling ratios relative to the cabin size vehicle. In HD TRUCS, we already outside (less than 55 °F) and energy
of a Class 8 bus. Each vehicle’s scaling accounted for the energy loads due to consumed to cool the battery when it is
factor is based on the surface area of the ventilation in the axle loads, so no hot outside (greater than 75 °F) with
vehicle compared to the surface area of additional energy consumption is refrigerant cooling. Note, as similarly
the Class 8 bus. Cabin sizes for most HD applied to FCEV for heating operation. described in the HVAC discussion in
vehicle types have a similar cabin to a Therefore, for FCEV energy this subsection and as discussed in RIA
mid-size light-duty vehicle and consumption in HD TRUCS, we only Chapter 2.4.1.1, we extended the
therefore, an average scaling factor of include additional energy requirements temperature range for cooling from
0.2 was applied to all of those vehicle for air conditioning (i.e., not for greater than 80 °F to greater than 75 °F
types.596 The buses and sleeper cab heating).597 As described in RIA Chapter for the final rule. For the ambient
tractors have cabin sizes similar to the 2.4.1.1.1, we assigned a power demand temperatures between these two
transit bus or scaled down to reflect its of 2.01 kW for powering the air regimes, we agreed with Basma, et. al
relative cabin size. For example, a Class conditioner on a Class 8 bus. The A/C that only ambient air cooling is required
4–5 shuttle bus has a cabin size ratio of loads are then scaled by the cabin for the batteries, which requires no
0.6. For additional information see RIA volume for other vehicle applications in additional load. We first determined a
Chapter 2.4.1.1.1. In response to our HD TRUCS and applied to the VMT single VMT-weighted power
request for data on HVAC loads for fraction that requires cooling, just as we consumption value for battery heating
BEVs, we did receive additional did for BEVs. and a value for battery cooling based on
modeling data from one commenter that BEVs have thermal management the MOVES HD VMT distribution and
included HVAC loads for European systems to maintain battery core based on the same method used for
long-haul tractors. We found the new temperatures within an optimal range of HVAC. Then, we determined the energy
594 Basma, Hussein, Charbel Mansour, Marc curve and converted into Fahrenheit to best fit the battery electric buses’’. Energy: Volume 207, 15
Haddad, Maroun Nemer, Pascal Stabat. VMT distribution that is available in MOVES. September 2020, 118241. Available online: https://
‘‘Comprehensive energy modeling methodology for 596 The interior cabin where the driver and www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
battery electric buses’’. Energy: Volume 207, 15 passengers sit are heated while where the cargo is S0360544220313487.
September 2020, 118241. Available online: https:// stored is not heated. 599 Basma, Hussein, Charbel Mansour, Marc
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ 597 FCEVs use waste heat from the fuel cell for Haddad, Maroun Nemer, Pascal Stabat.
S0360544220313487. heating, and that ventilation operates the same as ‘‘Comprehensive energy modeling methodology for
595 It should be noted that Basma model has it does for an ICE vehicle. battery electric buses’’. Energy: Volume 207, 15
discrete values in Celsius and MOVES data has 598 Basma, Hussein, Charbel Mansour, Marc September 2020, 118241. Available online: https://
discrete values in Fahrenheit. The Basma discrete Haddad, Maroun Nemer, Pascal Stabat. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
ER22AP24.031</GPH>
values in the Basma model is fitted to a parabolic ‘‘Comprehensive energy modeling methodology for S0360544220313487.
109
Fmt 4701
required for battery conditioning battery conditioning for both hot and updated value for the final rule that
required for eight hours of daily cold ambient temperatures, expressed as includes the battery cooling loads down
operation and expressed it in terms of a percentage of battery capacity, used in to 75 °F.
percent of total battery size. Table II–12 HD TRUCS. The battery cooling energy
shows the energy consumption for consumption percentage reflects an
iii. BEV Component Sizing and Weight duty battery depth of discharge and citing a demonstration by Yang et al.
We used HD TRUCS to determine the deterioration. 88 FR 25977. and Dunn et al. Another commenter
size of two of the major components in We received numerous comments stated that oversizing the battery biases
a BEV: the battery and the motor. The about limiting depth of discharge to 80 downward the projected rate of BEV
size of these components is determined percent as well as 20 percent extra adoption due to increased costs
by the energy needs of the specific battery capacity to account for battery attributable to the extra battery capacity.
vehicle to meet its daily operating deterioration over time. Some of these Relatedly, a few commenters raised
requirements. In this subsection, we commenters said we should reduce or concerns about the cost of replacing a
also discuss our method to evaluate the remove the additional 20 percent of vehicle battery. They stated that is a
payload and packaging impact of the extra battery capacity for degradation very large cost that should be accounted
battery. and the 80 percent depth of discharge. for.
Others pointed out that batteries After considering these comments,
a. Battery degrade over time and will reduce in and further supported by the state of
First, in HD TRUCS, we based the size capacity, up to 3 percent annual charge window value used in the 2022
of the battery on the daily demands on capacity loss. Autonomie tool from Argonne National
the vehicle to perform a day’s work, as One commenter cited a February 2022 Laboratory, we revised the battery depth
explained in section II.D.5.ii.a. As Roush report on the electrification of of discharge window to 90 percent in
described in the Vehicle Energy tractors where Roush had set the depth HD TRUCS.600 This is further discussed
Demand subsection, section II.D.5.ii, of discharge to 90 percent and a 10 in RIA Chapter 2.4.1.1.
this daily energy consumption is a percent battery degradation value and EPA also re-evaluated the blanket
function of miles the vehicle is driven suggested using those values. They also application of 20 percent deterioration
and the energy it consumes because of: pointed out that the decrease in VMT value used for all vehicles in the
(1) moving the vehicle per unit mile, over time used in the proposal’s version proposal based on consideration of
including the impact of regenerative of HD TRUCS for calculating operating comments received. We agreed with
braking and PTO energy requirements, costs meets or exceeds the 20 percent certain commenters regarding existing
and (2) battery conditioning and HVAC reduction in battery capacity over that data supports that HD VMT decreases as
energy requirements. Then we also same time. They argued that the vehicles get older, and thus an older HD
accounted for the battery efficiency, decrease in VMT already accounts for BEV would not need to have as much
depth of discharge, and deterioration in 20 percent battery deterioration and that range as it needed when it was new to
sizing of the batteries for BEVs. it should not be included, or that EPA be comparable to a comparable ICE
The daily energy consumption of each should adopt the 10 percent value that vehicle. Consequently, in the final rule,
BEV in HD TRUCS is determined by Roush used in their report. Another we determined the battery deterioration
applying efficiency losses to energy commenter questioned the source for a factor for each of the 101 vehicle
consumption at the axle. These losses 20 percent battery capacity fade. They applications based on the number of
for the inverter, gearbox, and e-motor agreed that batteries will degrade over charging cycles the battery would
are calculated using loss maps of each time but stated that data is scarce for HD require during its first ten years of
component of production components applications and that recent operation. See RIA Chapter 2.4.1.1.3.
for a Class 5 and a Class 8 vehicle, as developments in battery technology In the final rule, we are considering
described in RIA Chapter 2.4.1.1. Next, have resulted in prolonged battery life the costs of battery replacement and ICE
we oversized the battery to account with long-distance BEVs reaching over rebuilds in our analysis of the costs to
separately for the typical usable amount 900,000 miles. Another commenter purchasers, as discussed in section IV.
of battery and, if necessary, for battery stated that the additional 20 percent We are not considering battery
deterioration over time. For the NPRM, battery sizing for deterioration was an replacement cost in our 10-year
we sized the battery by limiting it to a overly conservative estimate and that ownership calculation costs in HD
maximum depth of discharge of 80 fleets would adjust the mileage and TRUCS. Similarly, we do not consider
percent, recognizing that manufacturers routes used for a vehicle over time as engine rebuilding costs for ICE vehicles
and users likely would not allow the they currently do with ICE vehicles in our parallel 10-year ownership
battery capacity to be depleted beyond from the secondary market. They stated calculation of costs. The reason is the
80 percent of original capacity. We also that fleets would not pay for the same in both instances: we do not
accounted for deterioration of the additional unused battery capacity. This

battery capacity over time by oversizing commenter also raised concerns about 600 Argonne National Laboratory. VTO HFTO
the battery by 20 percent, assuming only using an 80 percent depth of discharge Analysis Reports—2022. ‘‘ANL—ESD–2206
Report—MD HD Truck—Autonomie
80 percent of the battery storage is value, saying that it would be more Assumptions.xlsx’’. Available online: https://
available throughout its life. We appropriate to model battery usage and anl.app.box.com/s/an4nx0v2xpudxtpsnkhd
ER22AP24.032</GPH>
requested comment and data on heavy- mileage based on capacity fade and 5peimzu4j1hk/folder/242640145714.
110
Fmt 4701
expect failure of either the battery pack shown to retain 80 percent state of For heavy haul tractors, the BEV motor
or the engine during the vehicles’ first charge after 2,000 cycles under some power is set at 450 kW to reflect the
ten years of ownership, which is the test conditions.601 Our use of a 2,000- maximum engine power of heavy heavy-
period we focused on in our HD TRUCS cycle limitation is consequently duty engines.603 As described in RIA
analysis. conservative. We increased the battery Chapter 2.4.1.2, we estimated a BEV
We have made certain conforming size as necessary for vehicles such that motor’s peak power needs to size the e-
adjustments within HD TRUCS the battery would not exceed 2,000 motor, after considering the peak power
reflecting these considerations. In the cycles at the end of the 10-year period— required during the ARB transient
final rule, instead of applying a constant the number of cycles reflecting 10-year cycle604 and performance targets
deterioration factor, we determined the VMT, as just noted. We note that only included in ANL’s Autonomie model 605
battery deterioration factor for each of eight vehicles in HD TRUCS require a and in Islam et al.,606 as indicated in
the 101 vehicle applications based on 15 percent increase in battery size and Table II–13. We assigned the target
the number of charging cycles the meet the 2,000 cycle limit over a ten maximum time to accelerate a vehicle
battery would require during its first ten year period. Most of the 101 vehicle from stop to 30 mph and 60 mph based
years of operation. The ten years types would experience less than 1,500 on weight class of each vehicle. We also
represents the longest payback period cycles over the ten-year period. The used the criteria that the vehicle must
we consider for the technologies in our battery sizing is described in greater
technology package. A cycle is defined be able to maintain a specified cruise
detail in RIA Chapters 2.4.1.1 and
as a single full charge and discharge speed while traveling up a road with a
2.8.5.3.
cycle. The number of cycles is 6 percent grade, as shown in Table II–
determined based on the annual b. Motor 13. In the case of cruising at 6 percent
operating VMT of the vehicle over the We determined the size of the motor grade, the road load calculation is set at
10-year timeframe. for each vocational and day cab tractor a constant speed for each weight class
We selected 2,000 cycles as our BEV based on the maximum power bin on a hill with a 6 percent incline.
number of cycles target at 10 years of demand of the transient cycle and We determined the required power
age while recognizing this value highway cruise cycles, the vehicle’s rating of the motor as the greatest power
depends on a number of internal and ability to meet minimum performance required to drive the vehicle over the
external parameters including battery targets in terms of acceleration rate of ARB transient test cycle, at 55 mph and
chemistry, the discharge window while the vehicle, and the ability of the 65 mph constant cruise speeds, or at
cycling, power output of the battery, vehicle to maintain speed going up a constant speed at 6 percent grade, and
and how the battery is managed while hill. For sleeper cabs, the motor size was then applied losses from the e-motor.
in and not in use. A study shows LFP determined to be 400 KW based on the We requested comment on our approach
batteries can maintain 80 to 95 percent comparable ICE sleeper cab tractor using these performance targets in the
state of charge after 3,000 cycles and engine power and the continuous motor NPRM but did not receive any
nickel-based lithium-ion batteries are power of existing HD BEV tractors.602 comments on this issue.
c. Battery Weight and Volume application in HD TRUCS using the for the battery pack that ranged between
Performance needs of a BEV could specific energy and energy density of 199 Wh/kg in MY 2027 and 233 Wh/kg
result in a battery that is so large or the battery for each battery capacity. in MY 2032. 88 FR 25978. We received
heavy that it impacts payload and, thus, As described in RIA Chapter 2.4.2, to comments from two commenters on
potential work accomplished relative to determine the weight impact, we used improvements in battery specific energy
a comparable ICE vehicle. We battery specific energy, which measures higher than the values used in the
determined the battery weight and battery energy per unit of mass. In the proposal. EPA recognizes there have
physical volume for each vehicle NPRM, we used specific energy values been significant development in the
601 Preger, Yuliya, et. al. ‘‘Degradation of cycle was developed by the California Air Advanced Vehicle Technologies Through 2050,’’
Commercial Lithium-Ion Cells as a Function of Resources Board (CARB) and includes no grade— Report to the U.S. Department of Energy, Contract
Chemistry and Cycling Conditions.’’ Journal of the just stops and starts. The highway cruise duty ANL/ESD–21/10, October 2021. See previous
Electrochemical Society. September 2020. Available cycles represent 55-mph and 65-mph vehicle reports and analysis: 2021. Available online:
at: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1149/1945- speeds on a representative highway. They use the https://vms.taps.anl.gov/research-highlights/u-s-
7111/abae37. same road load profile but at different vehicle doe-vto-hfto-r-d-benefits/.
602 Peterbilt. 579EV. Available online: https:// speeds, along with a percent grade ranging from -5 606 Islam, Ehsan Sabri, Ram Vijayagopal, Aymeric
www.peterbilt.com/trucks/electric/579EV. percent to 5 percent. Rousseau. ‘‘A Comprehensive Simulation Study to
603 Detroit Diesel Engines. Available online: 605 Islam, Ehsan Sabri. Ram Vijayagopal, Ayman Evaluate Future Vehicle Energy and Cost Reduction
https://www.demanddetroit.com/engines/dd16/. Moawad, Namdoo Kim, Benjamin Dupont, Daniela Potential’’, Report to the U.S. Department of Energy,
604 EPA uses three representative duty cycles for Nieto Prada, Aymeric Rousseau, ‘‘A Detailed Contract ANL/ESD–22/6, October 2022. Available
calculating CO2 emissions in GEM: a transient cycle Vehicle Modeling & Simulation Study Quantifying online: https://vms.taps.anl.gov/research-
ER22AP24.033</GPH>
and two highway cruise cycles. The transient duty Energy Consumption and Cost Reduction of highlights/u-s-doe-vto-hfto-r-d-benefits/.
111
Fmt 4701
areas of battery chemistry, battery cell of NiMn and LFP batteries to determine applications. Specifically, EPA did not
and battery pack design. These the average specific energy for batteries. include BEVs in a projected technology
commenters provided examples and The NiMn batteries have a specific package if this payload capacity was
values for battery specific energy as well energy of 226 Wh/kg and LFP at 170 reduced by over 30 percent. 88 FR
as energy density. However, as Wh/kg, the resulting value, used in our 25978. We note that the payload used to
explained in RIA Chapter 2.4.2, there is analysis, is 198 Wh/kg. For further demonstrate compliance in GEM is less
a difference between battery cell details on battery specific energy see than the full payload capability of the
properties and battery pack RIA Chapter 2.4.2.1. vehicle. For vehicles like dump trucks
properties.607 For a complete discussion We recognize that although there and tractors, that are seen as fully
of information provided by commenters likely will be improvements made loaded during delivery and empty upon
on battery specific energy, see RTC between 2027 and 2032, it is difficult to return, the maximum payload was much
section 3.2.3. determine if the degree of improvements greater than the GEM payload.
For HD TRUCS, one metric for during that time frame, especially Therefore, the 30 percent threshold used
feasibility is to determine the weight of considering that manufacturers will in the NPRM analysis did not represent
the BEV powertrain system which have to balance the cost of additional a 30 percent loss in total payload and its
includes the battery pack weight as well weight reduction and overall costs of impact on total payload is less than 30
as the motor weight (and gear box when the BEV. Therefore, for the final rule we percent. For the proposal, EPA also
required). Since battery packs consist of reasonably, and conservatively, held the evaluated payload volume by
a group of cells (or modules), additional battery specific energy constant for MYs calculating the width of the physical
mass from packaging, cooling system 2027 through 2032. battery using the volume, wheelbase,
and battery management system (BMS) To evaluate battery volume and and 110 percent of the frame rail height.
add additional mass without providing determine the packaging space required If the battery width was less than 8.5
additional energy. For the final rule, for each HD vehicle type, we used feet, we determined the battery would
instead of solely relying on the 2021 battery energy density. Battery energy package on the specific vehicle.
version of Autonomie as we did at density (also referred to as volumetric Many commenters raised concerns
proposal, we also analyzed the battery energy density) measures battery energy about the reduction in payload due to
specific energy values provided in the per unit of volume. To calculate battery increased curb weight of ZEVs. The
comments received on the proposal, energy density, we multiplied the principal concern raised is that battery
ANL BEAN values, values from DOE as battery specific energy by a factor. For size and weight constrain payload so
provided by a 2024 ANL study,608 and the NPRM, we used pack level energy much as to render BEVs uneconomic.
values in the FEV study.609 For our densities that ranged from 496 Wh/L in With respect to our analysis of battery
weight assessment in the final rule, we MY 2027 to 557 Wh/L in MY 2032. width, commenters asserted that EPA
utilized the battery pack specific energy These values corresponded to had failed to consider a number of
values from the 2024 ANL study multiplying the battery pack specific consequential things, including space
because it contains the most energy by 2.5. We requested comment for tires and the width of each frame
comprehensive and most recent and data in the NPRM to inform these rail. There were also several comments
assessment of the battery industry. As values for the final rule. 88 FR 25978. on the specific value of payload loss of
with battery cost, we used a 50/50 mix In response to our request for data in 30 percent used in HD TRUCS for the
the NPRM, one commenter provided NPRM. Three commenters believed the
607 Energy within the battery is stored in the data from a study that included battery payload penalty limit for BEVs is too
battery cell, or more specifically in the active anode properties of specific energy and energy high; for some, even a 5 to 10 percent
and the active cathode, or more simply referred to density. For more details on the
as the active materials (for example nickel loss is too much to perform their
manganese cobalt). The specific energy is a measure comment and our response, see RTC mission. One of these commenters
of how much energy can be stored per unit weight. section 3.2.3. The average energy claimed that approximately 20 percent
For a given amount (weight) of active materials, it density calculated from the data of intermodal loads already max out due
has the ability to store some amount of energy. provided was 2.2. For the final rule, we
However, active material weight within the battery to weight under the current diesel truck
is very low; instead most of the battery cell weight used a ratio of 2.0 as a conservative equipment configuration. Neither of the
is comprised of housing. Since batteries typically estimate because the properties cited by other two commenters provided any
do not exist as just active material, the specific the initial commenter discussed on a
energy is reported in terms of amount of energy (in additional information on any
Wh) stored in the active material and the weight of
cell level, not a pack level. Based on our acceptable payload capacity loss. One
all the components that go into the battery cell. update to battery pack specific energy, commenter recommended adjustment to
Furthermore, for transportation batteries, a battery we used an energy density value of 396 the payload cut off, particularly for
pack consists of many (hundreds or thousands) Wh/L for MYs 2027 through 2032 in HD
cells, the weight of the battery is further increased vocational vehicles such as concrete
from the additional mass that is added to make the
TRUCS. mixers, dump trucks, and tanker trucks.
pack level structure. This therefore lowers the Heavy-duty vehicles are used to At proposal, EPA justified the cargo
specific energy of the battery pack (Wh remains perform work, such as moving cargo or penalty metric based on a report of the
constant since the energy is stored in the active carrying passengers. Consequently,
materials and weight increases from more mass North American Council for Freight
added from the pack). There is frequent reporting
heavy-duty vehicles are sensitive to Efficiency (NACFE) which the agency
that conflates cell level specific energy with pack increases in vehicle weight and carrying characterized as stating that vehicles
level specific energy, or the values are unspecified. volume. To take this into account, we weigh out before cubing out.610 DRIA p.
608 Kevin Knehr, Joseph Kubal, Shabbir Ahmed,
also evaluated BEVs in terms of the 234. Two commenters stated that EPA
‘‘Cost Analysis and Projections for U.S.- overall impact on payload-carrying
Manufactured Automotive Lithium-ion Batteries’’, misunderstood the NACFE report. One
ability and battery packaging space. The
Argonne National Laboratory report ANL/CSE–24/ commenter maintained that the NACFE
1 for US Department of Energy. January 2024. results of this analysis can be found in report references a ‘‘per run’’ load
Available online: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/ RIA Chapters 2.4.2 and 2.9.
2280913. instead of a ‘‘per truck’’ vehicle load. As
609 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial
At proposal, EPA included a 30
Vehicles Class 4 to 8: Technology and Cost
percent reduction in the payload used to 610 EPA ‘‘Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis:
Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final evaluate compliance in GEM as a metric Heavy-Duty Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Phase 3.’’
Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024. to determine specific vehicle April 2023. Page 234.
112
Fmt 4701
load of the truck is unpredictable, any to preclude utilization of BEV assess how FCEVs can store and
additional reduction in payload technology at the rates projected in package hydrogen. The FEV study
capacity reduces the flexibility and use EPA’s modeled compliance pathway. shows that six tanks could fit on a
of the vehicle. Another commenter not See RIA Chapter 2.9.1.1 for detailed sleeper cab tractor with a wheelbase of
only concurred but also stated that the weight comparisons by vehicle, and 265’’.614 A vehicle class where we
NACFE report only refers to regional more detailed discussion of specific determined that battery size, or fuel cell
trucks which makes it inappropriate to applications. On the other hand, for and hydrogen tank size, would reduce
apply to all 101 vehicles in HD TRUCS. concrete mixers and pumpers, EPA storage volume for some applications
Lastly, one commenter asserted that determined that battery size, energy was coach buses, and therefore we did
since the NACFE report is from 2010 demand, and corresponding costs were not finalize more stringent optional
and the industry has gone through all significantly higher than EPA had custom chassis standards for coach
significant changes since then as a result projected at proposal and accordingly buses, as discussed in section II.F.1.615
of e-commerce as well as shipping determined that EPA’s optional custom Our individualized determinations for
practices, the assumed 30 percent chassis standards for Concrete Mixers/ all of these vehicles are found in RIA
weight penalty used at proposal should Pumpers and Mixed-Use Vehicles will 2.9.1.2.
be included in the cost of the vehicle as remain unchanged from the Phase 2 MY
fleets would account for the additional iv. Charging Infrastructure for BEVs
2027+ CO2 emission standards.612
cost of making up for the lost payload For tractors, EPA did the same type of Charging infrastructure represents a
through additional trips or vehicles. weight comparison, and found the key element required for HD BEV
After considering these comments, we weight increase to be reasonable for operation. More charging infrastructure
are not using a 30 percent payload most of the tractors in HD TRUCS. See will be needed to support the projected
reduction as a metric for determining RIA 2.9.1.1 for vehicle by vehicle growing fleet of HD BEVs. This will
BEV suitability and are no longer difference in weight and a more detail likely consist of a combination of (1)
estimating battery width based on frame discussion of specific applications. EPA depot charging—with infrastructure
rail height and wheelbase. Instead, for further examined when tractors are installed in parking depots, warehouses,
the final rule we conducted a more utilized at maximum load 613 and found and other private locations where
robust analysis where we assessed each that many commodities do not require vehicles are parked off-shift (when not
vehicle in HD TRUCS on an individual transport at maximum load, for further in use), and (2) public charging,616
basis and determine the suitability of discussion on our analysis of tractor which provides additional electricity for
each application, as described in this loading based on commodities, see vehicles during their operating hours.
section and in RIA 2.9.1. EPA Chapter 2.9.1 of the RIA. Our ultimate In RIA Chapters 2.6 and 2.8.7 we
conducted two separate individualized conclusion is that our modeled describe how we accounted for charging
types of determinations: one for battery compliance pathway projects a majority infrastructure in our analysis of HD BEV
payload weight, the other for battery of these vehicles remain ICE vehicles, technologies for our technology
volume. See RIA Chapter 2.9.1.1 and that ICE vehicles therefore would be packages to support the feasibility of the
2.9.1.2. We note further that this available to accommodate those standards and extent of use of HD BEV
delineation responds to those comments commodities for which maximum loads technologies in the potential
relating to weighing out and cubing out, are needed, and that BEVs remain viable compliance pathway for MYs 2027–
since we are conducting separate for those other commodities that do not 2032. We explain there in detail the
analyses for each of these situations. updates made after consideration of
require transport at maximum load.
Furthermore, after consideration of comments and newly available
Our analysis respecting volume is
comments, we are no longer using the supporting data from NREL. For the
somewhat different. We make the
NACFE report in this analysis to inform NPRM analysis, we estimated
reasonable assumption that if a current
a single weight penalty cutoff for all infrastructure costs exclusively
BEV (either tractor or vocational
types of vehicles. associated with depot charging to fulfill
With respect to weight, we compared vehicle) exists, its volumetric capacity is
suitable. Thus, if the HD TRUCS version each BEV’s daily charging needs off-
the respective weights of the BEV
of that BEV has the same or similar shift with the appropriately sized
powertrain with the comparable ICE
battery size as an existing BEV, we did electrical vehicle supply equipment.
powertrain. We determined the
not constrain the adoption of that BEV This approach reflected our expectation
percentage difference in weight using
type due to volume loss. In some that many heavy-duty BEV owners
the maximum payload available to each
instances, we examined further whether would opt to purchase and install EVSE
vehicle type, not the default GEM
payload. For example, for the Class 8 wheelbase adjustments could at depots, and accordingly, we
dump trucks, the payload difference accommodate larger battery sizes so as accounted for all of these costs upfront.
(loss) was modest: 2.6 percent; with the not to constrain available volume. See We received many comments on this
NiMn battery chemistry specific energy RIA 2.9.1.2 for a vehicle-by-vehicle approach. While multiple commenters
(226 Wh/kg) 611 the payload loss is 1.3 discussion and more detail on specific agreed that depot charging would be the
percent. The tanker payload loss was 2 vehicle applications. primary source of charging across many
percent of maximum payload. EPA does In assessing the packaging of a FCEV vehicle applications, especially in the
not view these differences as sufficient powertrain, we contracted with FEV to early years of the Phase 3 program, some
612 See also section II.F.1 discussing optional 614 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial
611 Battery chemistry impacts the battery pack
custom chassis standards, including those for Vehicles Class 4 to 8: Technology and Cost
specific energy and battery technology continues to
concrete mixers. Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final
evolve suggesting that battery pack weight may

decrease and payload increase. To assess the 613 DOE. Vehicle Technologies Office. Fact of the Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024.
615 See also II.F.1 discussing optional custom
sensitivity of payload to higher specific energy, EPA Week #1293. ‘‘In 2019, More Heavy Trucks
reviewed two additional scenarios (1) use of NiMn Operated at 34,000 to 36,000 Pounds than Any chassis standards, including those for coach buses.
batteries (HD TRUCS uses a value that represents Other Weight Category’’. Available online: https:// 616 En-route charging could occur at public or
a 50/50 mix of NiMn and LFP to align with battery www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1293- private charging stations though, for simplicity, we
cost assumptions) and (2) possible NiMn battery june-5-2023-2019-more-heavy-trucks-operated- often refer to en-route charging as occurring at
pack specific energy improvements through 2030. 34000-36000-pounds-any. public stations in the preamble.
113
Fmt 4701
commenters noted the importance of (DCFC)—though we have made updates to capture energy from regenerative
also accounting for public charging in to cost assumptions and other key braking. This is the type of HD FCEV
our analysis. Commenters asserted that inputs that impact our depot charging that we modeled in HD TRUCS for the
long-haul vehicles and other fleet analysis, as described in section II.E.2 of MY 2030 to 2032 timeframe in order to
vehicles that either do not regularly this document. meet the longer distance requirements
return to a depot, or for which installing We acknowledge that even vehicles of select vehicle applications.618 619 620
depot charging would be difficult, may which predominantly rely on depot While much of FCEV design is
utilize public charging including during charging may utilize some public dependent on the use case of the
the initial model years (through 2032) charging, for example on high travel vehicle, manufacturers also balance the
covered by the Phase 3 program. days. In addition, some fleet owners cost of components such as the fuel cell,
For our final rule analysis, after may opt not to install depot charging, the battery, and the hydrogen fuel
consideration of these comments, we and instead either rely on public storage tanks. For the purposes of this
have updated our HD TRUCS model to charging or make alternative HD TRUCS analysis, we focused on
incorporate costs associated with public arrangements such as using charging-as- PEM fuel cells that use energy battery
charging for certain vehicle types a-service or other business arrangements cells, where the fuel cell and the battery
starting with MY 2030, the year when to meet charging needs. See RIA Chapter were sized based on the demands of the
we project there will be sufficient public 2.6 for a more complete description of vehicle. In HD TRUCS, the fuel cell
charging infrastructure for HD vehicles this topic. system (i.e., the fuel cell stacks plus
for the projected utilization of such balance of plant, or BOP) was sized at
v. FCEV Component Sizing
technologies. See RIA Chapter 1.6. either the 90th percentile of power
Specifically, in HD TRUCS we assume To compare HD FCEV technology required for driving the ARB transient
that all BEV sleeper cab tractors and costs and performance to a comparable cycle or to maintain a constant highway
coach buses will use public charging ICE vehicle in HD TRUCS, this section speed of 75 mph with 80,000-pound
rather than depot charging, as will four explains how we define HD FCEVs gross combined vehicle weight (GCVW).
of the ten day cab tractors—those with based on the performance and use The 90th percentile power requirement
longer ranges—that we model. In HD criteria in RIA Chapter 2.2 (that we also was used to size the fuel cells of
TRUCS we assume public charging used for HD BEVs, as explained in vocational vehicles and day cab tractors,
needs will be met with a mix of section II.D.5.ii). We determined the e- and the 75-mph power requirement was
megawatt-level EVSE and 150 kW EVSE, motor, fuel cell system, and battery pack used to size the fuel cells of sleeper cab
consistent with a recent ICCT sizes to meet the power requirements for tractors.621
analysis.617 In our analysis for the final each of the FCEVs represented in HD We received comments suggesting
rule, capital costs associated with public TRUCS. We also estimated the size of that the NPRM did not accurately reflect
charging equipment are passed through the onboard fuel tank needed to store how a fuel cell operates because we
to BEV owners through a higher the energy, in the form of gaseous relied on peak fuel cell efficiency rather
charging cost. See RIA Chapter 2.4.4.2. hydrogen, required to meet typical range than average operating efficiency. One
For other day cab tractors and and duty cycle needs. See RIA Chapter commenter noted that FCEVs would
vocational vehicles, in HD TRUCS we 2.5 for further details. benefit from BEV component efficiency
continue to assume that daily charging
a. E-Motor gains and observed that we did not
needs can be met with appropriately
sized depot EVSE. A range of depot As discussed in RIA Chapter 2.4.1.2, 618 Islam, Ehsan Sabri, Ram Vijayagopal, Aymeric
charging equipment is available the e-motor is part of the electric drive Rousseau. ‘‘A Comprehensive Simulation Study to
including AC or DC charging, different system that converts the electric power Evaluate Future Vehicle Energy and Cost Reduction
power levels, as well as options for from the battery and/or fuel cell into Potential’’, Report to the U.S. Department of Energy,
mechanical power to move the wheels Contract ANL/ESD–22.6. October 2022. See Full
different number of ports and report. Available online: https://anl.app.box.com/s/
connectors per charging unit, connector of the vehicle. In HD TRUCS, the e- an4nx0v2xpudxtpsnkhd5peimzu4j1hk/file/
type(s), communications protocols, and motor was sized for a FCEV like it was 1406494585829.
additional features such as vehicle-to- sized for a BEV—to meet peak power 619 Note that ANL’s analysis defines a fuel cell
grid capability (which allows the needs of a vehicle, which is the hybrid EV (FCHEV) as a battery-dominant vehicle
with a large energy battery pack and a small fuel
vehicle to supply energy back to the maximum power to drive the ARB cell, and a fuel cell EV (FCEV) as a fuel cell-
grid). Many of these selections will transient cycle, meet the maximum time dominant vehicle with a large fuel cell and a
impact EVSE hardware and installation to accelerate from 0 to 30 mph, meet the smaller power battery. Ours is a slightly different
costs, with power level as one of the maximum time to accelerate from 0 to approach because we consider a fuel cell-dominant
vehicle with a battery with energy cells. The
most significant drivers of cost. While 60 mph, and maintain a set speed up a approach we took is intended to cover a wide range
specific cost estimates vary across the six-percent grade. of vehicle application however it results in a
literature, higher-power charging b. Fuel Cell System
conservative design, as it relies on a large fuel cell
equipment is typically more expensive and a larger energy battery. As manufacturers
Vehicle power in a FCEV comes from design FCEV for specific HD applications, they will
than lower-power units. For this reason, likely end up with a more optimized lower cost
in HD TRUCS for the final rule we a combination of the fuel cell (FC) stack designs. Battery-dominant FCHEVs and fuel cell-
continued our proposed approach to and the battery pack. The fuel cell dominant technologies with power batteries may
consider four different charging types— behaves like the internal combustion also be feasible in this timeframe but were not
engine of a hybrid vehicle, converting evaluated for the FRM.
AC Level 2 (19.2 kW) and 50 kW, 150 620 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial
kW, and 350 kW DC fast charging chemical energy stored in the hydrogen
fuel into electrical energy. The battery is Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final
617 Hussein Basma, Claire Buysee, Yuanrong charged by power derived from Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024.
Zhou, and Felipe Rodriguez, ‘‘Total Cost of regenerative braking, as well as excess 621 In the NPRM version of HD TRUCS, we
Ownership of Alternative Powertrain Technologies power from the fuel cell. Some HD inadvertently used the 90th percentile of the ARB
for Class 8 Long-haul Trucks in the United States,’’ transient cycle to size the sleeper and day cab
April 2023. Available at: https://theicct.org/wp-
FCEVs are designed to rely on the fuel tractors and the power required to drive at 75 mph
content/uploads/2023/04/tco-alt-powertrain-long- cell stack to produce the necessary to size the vocational vehicles. This error is
haul-trucks-us-apr23.pdf. power, with the battery primarily used corrected in the final version of HD TRUCS.
114
Fmt 4701
utilize the DOE targets for peak fuel cell system are at the appropriate based on peak performance at low
efficiency in HD TRUCS, implying that temperature, pressure, and humidity power, since fuel cells typically do not
fuel cells could be more efficient than and remove heat generated by the stack. operate for long in that range. We
we assumed in the NPRM because a This is the fuel cell stack gross power. therefore reduced them by eight percent
more efficient stack would require less The larger fuel cell can allow the to reflect an average operating efficiency
cooling, which could lead to system to operate more efficiently based instead of peak efficiency (see RIA
compounded gains over time. Three on its daily needs, which results in less Chapter 2.5.1.2.1). This was based on a
commenters suggested that the fuel cell wasted energy and lower fuel review of DOE’s 2019 Class 8 Fuel Cell
efficiency values used in the NPRM consumption. This additional size also
Targets. DOE has an ultimate target for
were too high. One commenter pointed adds durability, which is important for
peak efficiency of 72 percent, which
out that we considered peak efficiency commercial vehicles, by allowing for
some degradation over time. We corresponds to an ultimate fuel cell
estimates rather than average operating
efficiencies. The same commenter and determined that with this upsizing, drive cycle efficiency of 66 percent.
another offered ranges for operating there is no need for a fuel cell system This equates to an 8 percent difference
efficiency at power levels typical for replacement within the 10-year period between peak efficiency and drive cycle
commercial vehicles and suggested that at issue in the HD TRUCS analysis. efficiency at a more typical operating
we revise our fuel cell efficiency power. Therefore, to reflect system
c. Battery Pack efficiency more accurately at a typical
estimates. One of the same commenters
noted that fuel cell performance As described in RIA Chapter 2.5.1.1.3, operating power, we applied the 8
degrades over time, generally due to in HD TRUCS, the battery power percent difference to the peak efficiency
impurities in hydrogen fuel that cause accounts for the difference between the estimate in the NPRM. For the final rule,
efficiencies to drop significantly from peak power of the e-motor and the the operational efficiency of the fuel cell
beginning of life to end of life. We continuous power output of the fuel cell system (i.e., represented by drive cycle
evaluated these comments and find system. We sized the battery to meet efficiency) is about 61 percent.
them persuasive. Accordingly, we have these power needs in excess of the fuel
cell’s capability only when the fuel cell For the final rule, we combined the
revised our sizing methodology for the
cannot provide sufficient power. In our revised fuel cell system efficiency with
fuel cell system (to meet power
demands of a vehicle) and onboard analysis, the remaining power needs are the BEV powertrain efficiency (i.e., the
hydrogen storage tanks (to meet energy sustained for a duration of 10 minutes combined inverter, gearbox, and e-motor
demands of a vehicle, as described in (e.g., to assist with a climb up a steep efficiencies) as a total FCEV efficiency
section II.D.5.d) in the final rule version hill). to account for losses that take place
of HD TRUCS. Since a FCEV operates like a hybrid before the remaining energy arrives at
RIA Chapter 2.5.1.1.2 explains that to vehicle, where power comes from a the axle. The final FCEV powertrain
avoid undersizing the fuel cell system, combination of the fuel cell stack and efficiencies, ranging from 51 percent to
we oversized the fuel cell stack by an the battery, the battery is sized smaller 57 percent, were used to size the
additional 25 percent to allow for than a battery in a BEV, which can hydrogen storage tanks and to determine
occasional scenarios where the vehicle result in more cycling of the FCEV the hydrogen usage and related costs.
requires more power (e.g., to accelerate battery. Thus, we reduced the FCEV
As described in RIA Chapter 2.5.1.2.2,
when the battery state of charge is low, battery’s depth of discharge from 80
we included additional energy
to meet unusually long grade percent in the NPRM to 60 percent in
the final rule version of HD TRUCS to requirements for air conditioning.624 For
requirements, or to meet other
infrequent extended high loads like a reflect the usage of a hybrid battery battery conditioning, since the batteries
strong headwind) and so the fuel cell more accurately. This means the battery in FCEVs have the same characteristics
can operate within an efficient region. is oversized in HD TRUCS to account as batteries for BEVs, we employed the
This size increase we included in the for potential battery degradation over same methodology used for BEVs.
final rule version of HD TRUCS can also time. As described in RIA Chapter 2.5.1.2.1,
improve fuel cell stack durability and we converted FCEV energy
d. Onboard Hydrogen Storage Tank
ensure the fuel cell stack can meet the consumption (kWh) into hydrogen
power needs throughout the useful life. A FCEV is re-fueled like a gasoline or weight using an energy content of 33.33
This is the systems’ net peak power, or diesel-fueled ICE vehicle. We kWh per kg of hydrogen. In our analysis,
the amount available to power the determined the capacity of the onboard 95 percent of the hydrogen in the tank
wheels.622 The fuel cell stack generates hydrogen energy storage system using
(‘‘usable H2’’) can be accessed. This is
power, but some power is consumed to an approach like the BEV methodology
based on targets for light-duty vehicles,
operate the fuel cell system before it gets for battery pack sizing in RIA Chapter
2.4.1.1, but we based the amount of where a 700-bar hydrogen fuel tank with
to the e-motor. Therefore, we increased
hydrogen needed on the daily energy a capacity of 5.9 kg has 5.6 kg of usable
the size of the system by an additional
20 percent 623 to account for operation consumption needs of a FCEV. hydrogen.625 Furthermore, we added 10
of balance of plant (BOP) components Hydrogen fuel in the tank enters the percent to the tank size in HD TRUCS
that ensure that gases entering the fuel cell stack, where an electrochemical to avoid complete depletion of hydrogen
reaction converts hydrogen to from the tank.
622 Net system power is the gross stack power electricity. During the conversion
minus balance of plant losses. This value can be process, some energy from the hydrogen 624 FCEVs use waste heat from the fuel cell for
called the rated power. fuel is lost as heat or otherwise does not heating, and that ventilation operates the same as
623 Huya-Kouadio, Jennie and Brian D. James.

go towards producing electricity. The it does for an ICE vehicle.
‘‘Fuel Cell Cost and Performance Analysis: 625 U.S. DRIVE Partnership. ‘‘Target Explanation
Presentation for the DOE Hydrogen Program; 2023 remaining energy is used to operate the
Document: Onboard Hydrogen Storage for Light-
Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation fuel cell system. Based on consideration Duty Fuel Cell Vehicles’’. U.S. Department of
Meeting’’. Strategic Analysis. June 6, 2023. of comments, we agree the fuel cell
Available online: https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/ Energy. 2017. Available online: https://
docs/hydrogenprogramlibraries/pdfs/review23/ system efficiency values used in the www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/05/f34/fcto_
fc353_james_2023_o-pdf.pdf. NPRM were too high and should not be targets_onboard_hydro_storage_explanation.pdf.
115
Fmt 4701
E. Technology, Charging Infrastructure, costs consist of the battery, electric packs, and with low and high lithium
and Operating Costs motor, inverter, converter, onboard raw material costs. Another commenter
As discussed in section II.D.1, we charger, power electronics controller, questioned EPA’s reliance on the ICCT
considered ICE vehicles with GHG- transmission or gearbox, final drive, and value for battery pack cost given ICCT’s
reducing technologies. For the modeled electrical accessories. RIA Chapter 2.4.3 caution about uncertainty within the
potential compliance pathway, we did contains additional detail on our cost market for this sector. The commenter
not include additional technologies on projections for each of these further maintained that the ICCT White
ICE vehicles beyond those technologies components. Paper did not adequately explain or cite
Battery costs are widely discussed in empirical support for averaging of the
we analyzed to support the Phase 2 MY
the literature because they are a key values, and that upper and lower
2027 standards. Therefore, there are not
driver of the cost of a HD electric bounds should be adopted instead for
any incremental cost increases for the
vehicle. The per unit cost of the battery, HD TRUCS battery cost inputs.
Phase 3 standards associated with the in terms of $/kWh, is the most common Although some commenters believe
ICE vehicles in this potential metric in determining the cost of the the battery costs used for the NPRM are
compliance pathway. Thus, this battery as the final size of the battery too low, others believe the battery costs
subsection focuses on the costs may vary significantly between different used were too high. One commenter
associated with BEV and FCEV applications. The total battery pack cost referenced a Roush report of HDV
technologies and infrastructure. In the is a function of the per unit kWh cost battery costs of $98/kWh in MY 2030
following subsections, we first discuss and the size (in terms of kWh) of the and $88/kWh in MY 2032 without an
BEV technology (section II.E.1) and pack. IRA adjustment. Another commenter
associated EVSE technology costs There are numerous projections for believes the battery used for HDVs will
(section II.E.2) and FCEV technology battery costs and battery pricing in the be less conservative than the one
costs (section II.E.3). RIA Chapter 2.4.3 literature that cover a range of estimates. modeled by EPA in terms of both
(for BEVs) and RIA Chapter 2.5.2 (for Sources do not always clearly define specific energy and energy density, and
FCEVs) includes the cost estimates for what is included in their cost or price that this conservativeness is then
each of the 101 applications. We then projections, nor whether the projections reflected in EPA’s estimates of battery
discuss the IRA tax credits we reflect direct manufacturing costs costs. This commenter’s cited
quantified in our analysis for BEV and incurred by the manufacturer or the BloombergNEF, where battery costs are
FCEV technologies in section II.E.4. Our prices seen by the end-consumer. projected to decline to $100/kWh by
assessment of operating costs for ICE Except as noted in the NPRM, the values 2026 as a result of mineral price
vehicle, BEV and FCEV technologies in the literature we used to develop the stabilization. Another commenter
including the fuel or electricity costs, battery pack costs used in the NPRM referenced an ICCT report where
along with the maintenance and repair were developed prior to enactment of batteries would reach a cost of $120/
costs, insurance, and taxes are presented the Inflation Reduction Act. In the kWh at the pack level by 2030 but did
in section II.E.5. This subsection NPRM, we requested battery cost data not put forward a battery pack cost
concludes with the overall payback for heavy-duty vehicles. 88 FR 25981. estimate of their own.
analysis for BEV and FCEV technologies We received a significant number of Another point of disagreement from
in section II.E.6. RIA Chapter 2.8.2 comments regarding the values we used commenters is the methodology used for
includes the vehicle technologies costs, for the battery costs, as well as assessing the effects of learning by
EVSE costs, operating costs, and comments regarding application of a doing626 on battery pack costs between
payback results for each of the 101 HD learning curve to battery costs. 2027 and 2032. One commenter suggests
applications for BEV and FCEV Commenters suggested values both that faster learning curves may be
technologies. The technology costs for higher and lower than the values used appropriate for BEVs due to novel
BEV and FCEV technologies aggregated in the proposal. Justifications from battery chemistries that can disrupt
into MOVES categories are also commenters for higher than proposal markets and increase competition;
described in detail in RIA Chapter 3.1. values included volatility in the faster-than-expected moderation of
As we have noted several times minerals market, adjustment to rate of pandemic-induced supply chain
throughout this preamble, there are learning, inability to capture some or all disruption; battery pack economies of
other examples of possible compliance of BIL and IRA incentives, as well as scale; and the tendency of battery
pathways for meeting the final general uncertainty within the sector. outlooks to underestimate future
standards that do not involve the Justifications from commenters for learning curves. Another commenter
widespread adoption of BEV and FCEV lower than proposal values included believes learning for BEVs should start
technologies. In section II.F.4, we incentives from BIL and IRA, rapid in 2022 rather than in 2027 which was
provide examples of additional development in the EV sector including used in the NPRM analysis, the logic
potential compliance pathways, the light-duty market, cheaper being that learning commences as
including the associated technology and chemistries including LFP and sodium production commences. Applying EPA’s
operating costs of those technologies. ion batteries, and (more) recent learning curve starting in 2022 would
stabilization within the lithium market. have the effect of reducing cost
1. BEV Technology Costs One commenter recommended that reductions attributable to learning in the
The incremental cost of a BEV EPA use a figure roughly 26 percent years of the Phase 3 rule. Another
powertrain system is calculated as the greater than estimated at proposal; for commenter agrees with this commenter
cost difference from the comparable example, they believe the MY 2027 as to when learning commences, but
vehicle powertrain with an ICE, where battery pack costs should be $183/kWh.
the ICE vehicle powertrain cost is a sum Two other commenters echoed that 626 Manufacturing learning is the process by
of the costs of the engine (including the commenter’s recommended battery which costs for items are reduced as manufacturing
projected cost of the HD2027 standards), costs. Another commenter shared four practices become more efficient through
improvements in manufacturing methods. This is
alternator, gearbox (transmission), CBI battery pack costs for MY 2029 represented as a factor applied to a base year and
starter, torque converter, and final drive under four scenarios. These scenarios applied year over year to reflect a drop in cost for
system. Heavy-duty BEV powertrain included smaller and larger battery year over year manufacturing improvements.
116
Fmt 4701
maintained that the learning curve for studies provided by the FEV and the applied to a given cost estimate as a
ZEVs should be less sharp than for ICE Department of Energy BatPaC means of reflecting learning-by-doing
because ZEVs have fewer moving parts. model.627 thnsp;628 We considered a effects on future costs. 630 We are
The commenter also believes some wide range of MY 2027 battery pack continuing to do so in this rulemaking.
components have not achieved the costs ranging from the $183/kWh cited We agree with some parts of the
economies of scale that is required for by manufacturers in comments to $101/ comments regarding the NPRM’s
the cost inputs used in HD TRUCS. kWh projected by ANL that reflects an assessment of learning for ZEV
Lastly, this commenter stated that the average of the nickel-manganese components. In the final rule, we
learning curve for LD was inapplicable containing layered oxides (Ni/Mn) and adjusted the learning to reflect a less
to HD vehicles given the difference in the lithium iron phosphate (LFP) HD steep portion of the learning curve in
duty cycles, durability, and the resulting battery costs.629 ANL conducted this
MY 2027 and beyond compared to the
difference in battery sizes. Another study to estimate the cost of U.S-
commenter took a different view on produced battery packs for light and learning we used in the NPRM analysis.
learning from the LD market, stating that heavy-duty vehicles using their BatPaC The learning curve we used for the final
learning should have already started in tool. We also contracted FEV to conduct rule aligns closely with the learning
the light-duty industry and this means a cost analysis to inform the final rule applied by ANL in their BatPac
any further learning in HD will be analysis. The FEV study projected costs modeling to develop battery costs for
smaller than what EPA estimated in the for HD battery packs in MY 2027 to heavy-duty BEVs in MYs 2027 through
proposed rule. More detailed discussion range from $128 to $143/kWh. As 2032.631 We calculated the MYs 2028–
of learning used for ZEVs can be found described in RIA Chapter 2.4.3, for MY 2032 battery costs using learning scalars
RIA Chapter 3.2.1 and the comments 2027, we project a battery cost value of as shown in RIA Chapter 3.2.1, resulting
received on learning and responses can $120/kWh (2022$) based on a weighted in the values shown in Table II–14
be found in RTC section 12.3. average of the battery cost values from represent the direct manufacturing
For the final rule, we re-evaluated our DOE’s study, values received from pack-level battery costs in HD TRUCS
values used for battery cost in MY 2027 commenters, and the FEV cost study. using 2022$. These values are used for
based on comments provided by We have traditionally applied battery costs in both BEVs and FCEVs.
stakeholders, as well as on additional learning impacts using learning factors
As noted, batteries are the most inverter, a converter, and optionally, a proposal. One commenter references
significant cost component for BEVs, transmission system or gearbox. The Roush reports of $8/kW for 2030 and
and the IRA section 13502, ‘‘Advanced electric energy in the form of direct 2032, much lower than EPA’s value.
Manufacturing Production Credit,’’ has current (DC) is provided from the Another commenter provided CBI
the potential to significantly reduce the battery; an inverter is used to change the values of e-axle costs. Another
cost of BEVs whose batteries are DC into alternating current (AC) for use commenter cited an ICCT report that
produced in the United States. As by the motor. The motor then converts projected cost reductions of 60 percent
discussed in section II.E.4, the IRA the electric power into mechanical or by 2030 and that further projected that
Advanced Manufacturing Production motive power to move the vehicle. the price of electric powertrain systems,
Credit provides up to $45 per kWh tax Conversely, the motor also receives AC including the transmission, motor, and
credits (with specified phase-out in CYs from the regenerative braking, whereby inverter, would reach $23/kW. Another
2030–2033) for the production and sale the inverter changes it to DC to be stored commenter is concerned that the market
of battery cells and modules, and in the battery. The transmission reduces will demand different ZEV architectures
additional tax credits for producing the speed of the motor through a set of depending on the application (direct
critical minerals such as those found in gears to an appropriate speed at the drive, e-axle, and portal axle) and that
batteries, when such components or axle. An emerging trend is to replace the each of these technologies will have a
minerals are produced in the United transmission and driveline with an e- different $/kW value due to differences
States and other criteria are met. Our axle, which is an electric motor in component costs and their respective
approach to accounting for the IRA integrated into the axle, e-axles are not manufacturing process.
Advanced Manufacturing Production explicitly covered in our cost For the final rule, we continue to
Credit in our analysis is explained in analysis.632 include the direct manufacturing cost
section II.E.4. A few commenters disagreed with the for e-drive in HD TRUCS. Similar to the
An electric drive (e-drive)—another cost used by EPA at proposal for the battery cost, there is a range of electric
major component of an electric electric motor, providing values that drive cost projections available in the
vehicle—includes the electric motor, an were lower and higher than the literature and per stakeholder
627 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial greenhouse gas rule (77 FR 62624, October 15, Lithium-ion Batteries.’’ Figure 4, page 16. February
Vehicles Class 4 to 8: Technology and Cost 2012); the 2011 heavy-duty greenhouse gas rule (76 2024.
Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final
FR 57106, September 15, 2011); the 2016 heavy- 632 E-axles are an emerging technology that have
Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024. duty greenhouse gas rule (81 FR 73478, October 25,
628 DOE BatPac Study.
potential to realize efficiency gains because they
2016); the 2014 light-duty Tier 3 rule (79 FR 23414, have fewer moving parts. Though we did not
629 Argonne National Laboratory. ‘‘Cost Analysis
April 28, 2014); the heavy-duty NOx rule (88 FR quantify their impact explicitly due to a lack of data
and Projections for U.S.-Manufactured Automotive
4296, January 24, 2023). and information at the time of our analysis and to
Lithium-ion Batteries.’’ February 2024.
631 Argonne National Laboratory. ‘‘Cost Analysis remain technology-neutral, the technology can be
630 See the 2010 light-duty greenhouse gas rule
and Projections for U.S.-Manufactured Automotive used to comply with this regulation.
ER22AP24.034</GPH>
(75 FR 25324, May 7, 2010); the 2012 light-duty
117
Fmt 4701
comments. One reason for the disparity the commenters: the demand for e-drive and 2030, adjusted to 2022$.633 We then
across the literature is what is included will be different for different calculated MY 2028–2032 per-unit cost
in each for the ‘‘electric drive’’; some applications. As described in detail in from the power of the motor (RIA
cost estimates include only the electric RIA Chapter 2.4.3.2.1, EPA’s MY 2027 e- Chapter 2.4.1.2) and $/kW of the e-
motor and others present a more motor cost, shown in Table II–15, comes motor shown in Table II–15, and using
integrated model of e-motor/inverter/ from ANL’s 2022 BEAN too and is a an EPA estimate of market learning
gearbox combination. Another reason linear interpolation of the average of the shown in RIA Chapter 3.2.1.
for the disparity is described by one of high- and low-tech scenarios for 2025
Gearbox and final drive units are used lower-voltage systems, such as from a The total direct manufacturing
to reduce the speed of the motor and high-voltage battery to a common 12V technology costs for BEVs for each of
transmit torque to the axle of the level for auxiliary uses.639 We identified the 101 vehicle types in HD TRUCS can
vehicle. In HD TRUCS for the proposal, an additional cost in BEAN that we be found in RIA Chapter 2.4.3.5 for MY
we set the MY 2027 final drive DMC at added as Auxiliary Converter.640 We 2027, MY 2030, and MY 2032.
$1,500/unit, based on ANL’s 2022 also revised the Electric Accessories 2. EVSE Costs
BEAN model for vocational vehicles.634 costs to include both the electric As described section II.D.5.iv, we
For tractors, the final drive cost is accessories costs ($4500 in 2020$) and used a mix of depot and public charging
doubled the cost of vocational vehicles the vehicle propulsion architecture in our final rule analysis of HD BEV
because in general they have additional (VPA) costs ($186 in 2020$) from ANL’s technologies for our technology
drive axles. We did not receive any data 2022 BEAN. These values were packages to support the feasibility of the
to support different values, therefore, converted to 2022$ and include the BEV standards. In that analysis, most
we adjusted the values used in the learning effects included in RIA Chapter vocational vehicles and some lower
proposal to 2022$ and applied the ICE 3.2 and are shown in RIA Chapter travel, return-to-base day cab tractors
learning effects shown in RIA Chapter 2.4.3.2. rely on depot charging while long-haul
3.2.1 for MY 2028 through MY 2032.635 When using a Level 2 charging plug, vehicles (sleeper cab and longer-range
Final drive costs for BEVs are shown in an on-board charger converts AC power day cab tractors) and coach buses utilize
RIA Chapter 2.4.3.2. from the grid to usable DC power via an public charging starting with MY 2030.
The cost of the gearbox varies AC–DC converter. When using a D fast In HD TRUCS we evaluated BEVs for 97
depends on the vehicle weight class and charger (DCFC), any AC–DC converter is of the 101 vehicle types. Of those, we
duty cycle. In our assessment, all light bypassed, and the high-voltage battery is assign depot charging costs to 89 vehicle
heavy-duty BEVs are direct drive and charged directly. The costs we used in types starting in MY 2027 and public
have no transmission and no cost, the NPRM were based on ANL’s BEAN charging costs to eight vehicle types
consistent with ANL’s 2022 BEAN model, which was $38 in MY 2027.641 starting in MY 2030.
model. We determined the gearbox costs In the peer review of HD TRUCS, one In our analysis of depot charging
for medium heavy-duty and heavy reviewer noted that the value used in infrastructure costs, we account for the
heavy-duty BEVs in HD TRUCS from the NPRM was unrepresentative of the cost to purchasers to procure both EVSE
ANL’s BEAN tool.636 BEV Gearbox costs actual costs and suggested a cost of (which we refer to as the hardware
are shown are in RIA Chapter 2.4.3.2. $600.642 In light of this critique, EPA costs) as well as costs to install the
The costs of a power converter and has increased the on-board charger costs equipment. These installation costs
electric accessories in HD TRUCS for to $600 in MY 2027, as further typically include labor and supplies,
both the proposal and final rule came discussed in RIA Chapter 2.4.3.3. We permitting, taxes, and any upgrades or
from ANL’s 2022 BEAN tool.637 For the then calculated the MY 2028–2032 costs modifications to the on-site electrical
final rulemaking version of HD TRUCS, using the learning curve shown in RIA service. We developed our EVSE cost
we updated the term Power Electronics Chapter 3.2.1. estimates for the NPRM from available
to Power Converter, which represents The total upfront BEV direct literature, looking at a range of costs
the cost of a DC–DC converter ($1500 in manufacturing cost is the summation of (low to high) for each of the four EVSE
2020$).638 DC–DC converters transfer the per-unit cost of the battery, motor, types. As discussed in RIA Chapter
energy (i.e., they ‘‘step up’’ or ‘‘step power electronics, on-board charger, 1.3.2, the IRA extends and modifies a
down’’ voltage) between higher- and gearbox, final drive, and accessories. Federal tax credit under section 30C of
633 Argonne National Laboratory. VTO HFTO basing final drive costs on a component that is 638 In the 2022 version of BEAN, the ‘‘BEAN
Analysis Reports—2022. ‘‘ANL—ESD–2206 similar to an ICE vehicle final drive. results’’ tab, this is also represented as ‘‘pc2 DC/DC
Report—BEAN Tool—MD HD Vehicle Techno- 636 Argonne National Laboratory. VTO HFTO booster’’.
Economic Analysis.xlsm’’. Available online: https:// Analysis Reports—2022. ‘‘ANL—ESD–2206
639 https://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/Files/
anl.app.box.com/s/an4nx0v2xpudxtpsnkhd Report—BEAN Tool—MD HD Vehicle Techno- Pub136575.pdf.

5peimzu4j1hk/folder/242640145714. 640 In the 2022 version of BEAN, the ‘‘Cost &
634 Argonne National Laboratory. VTO HFTO
Economic Analysis.xlsm’’. Available online: https://
anl.app.box.com/s/an4nx0v2xpudxtpsnkhd LCOD & CCM’’ tab, this is called a ‘‘pc1 DC/DC
Analysis Reports—2022. ‘‘ANL—ESD–2206 ESS’’. In the ‘‘Autonomie Out’’ tab, this is linked
5peimzu4j1hk/folder/242640145714.
Report—BEAN Tool—MD HD Vehicle Techno- to a DC/DC buck converter cost.
637 Argonne National Laboratory. VTO HFTO
Economic Analysis.xlsm’’. Available online: https:// 641 Argonne National Lab, Vehicle & Mobility
anl.app.box.com/s/an4nx0v2xpudxtpsnk Analysis Reports—2022. ‘‘ANL—ESD–2206 Systems Group, TechScape, found at: https://
hd5peimzu4j1hk/folder/242640145714. Report—BEAN Tool—MD HD Vehicle Techno- vms.taps.anl.gov/tools/techscape/ (accessed
635 For the final rule, we updated the learning Economic Analysis.xlsm’’. Available online: https:// December 2023).
curve for BEV (and FCEV) final drive costs to be anl.app.box.com/s/an4nx0v2xpudxtpsnkhd 642 U.S. EPA. EPA Responses to HD TRUCS Peer
ER22AP24.035</GPH>
consistent with the ICE learning curve since we are 5peimzu4j1hk/folder/242640145714. Review Comments. February 2024.
118
Fmt 4701
the Internal Revenue Code that could that this tax credit—as well as grants, infrastructure cost analysis. These
cover up to 30 percent of the costs for rebates, or other funding available values are summarized in Table II–16.
businesses to procure and install EVSE through the IRA—could significantly We requested comment, including data,
on properties located in low-income or reduce the overall infrastructure costs on our approach and assessment of
non-urban census tracts if prevailing paid by BEV and fleet owners for depot current and future costs for charging
wage and apprenticeship requirements charging, we used the low end of our equipment and installation. 88 FR
are met.643 To reflect our expectation EVSE cost ranges in the NPRM 25982.
We received multiple comments based on a new NREL study issued in the share of the population living in
about these costs. One industry 2023 to reflect the most up-to-date eligible census tracts.648 Taken together,
commenter suggested that EPA should information available.644 After further DOE estimates an average value of this
use the midpoint rather than the low consideration, including consideration tax credit of 18 percent of the installed
end of our EVSE cost ranges. While one of comments on this issue and EVSE costs at depots. We apply this 18
manufacturer commenter suggested our availability of a new DOE analysis 645 of percent average reduction to the EVSE
assumed EVSE installation costs were the average value of the 30C tax credit costs used in HD TRUCS for the final
too high, other manufacturer for HD charging infrastructure, we have rulemaking (FRM).
commenters said that we updated the depot EVSE costs in our As noted, for the NPRM, we had used
underestimated costs for high-power final rule analysis to reflect a the low end of our EVSE cost ranges to
EVSE. Another commenter suggested we quantitative assessment of average reflect our expectation that the tax
should directly account for the savings savings from the tax credit. credit would significantly reduce EVSE
from the 30C tax credit. As noted, the 30C tax credit could costs to purchasers (i.e., we used the
As described in RIA Chapter 2.6.2.1, cover up to 30 percent of the costs for low end to reflect typical EVSE
we made several changes in how we fleets or other businesses to procure and hardware and installation costs less
estimate the EVSE costs incurred for install EVSE on properties located in savings from the tax credit). Since we
depot charging in the final rule analysis. low-income or non-urban census tracts explicitly model the tax credit
For the NPRM analysis, we developed if prevailing wage and apprenticeship reductions for the FRM analysis, we
the DCFC costs from a 2021 study requirements are met. DOE projects that determined it was appropriate to switch
(Borlaug et al. 2021) specific to heavy- businesses will meet prevailing wage from using the low to the midpoint of
duty electrification at charging depots. and apprenticeship requirements in EVSE cost ranges for all EVSE types to
After reviewing new information on order to qualify for the full 30 percent better reflect typical hardware and
EVSE costs provided in comments as tax credit,646 and estimates that 60 installation costs before accounting for
well as literature released since the percent 647 of depots will be located in the tax credit savings. The resulting
publication of the NPRM, we qualifying census tracts based on its hardware and installation costs for
determined it was appropriate to assessment of where HD vehicles are EVSE are shown in Table II–17 before
increase the underlying hardware and currently registered, the location of and after applying the tax credit. We use
installation cost ranges we considered warehouses and other transportation values in the right column in our depot
for DCFC–150 kW and DCFC–350 kW facilities that may serve as depots, and charging analysis.
643 IRA section 13404, ‘‘Alternative Fuel for Acquiring Electric Vehicles Weighting Less eligible census tracts to take further advantage of
Refueling Property Credit’’ under section 26 U.S.C. Than 14,000 Pounds.’’ Memorandum, March 2024. the tax credit. In addition, we note that DOE
30C, referred to as 30C in this document A $100,000 646 As noted in DOE’s assessment, the ‘‘good faith
estimated 68 percent of heavy-duty vehicles are
per item cap applies.
effort’’ clause applicable to the apprenticeship registered in qualifying census tracts suggesting the
644 Wood, Eric et al. ‘‘The 2030 National Charging requirement suggests that it is unlikely that share of EVSE installations at depots that are
Network: Estimating U.S. Light-Duty Demand for businesses will not be able to meet it and take eligible for the 30C tax credit could be higher.
Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure,’’ 2023. advantage of the full 30 percent tax credit (if
648 U.S. DOE. ‘‘Estimating Federal Tax Incentives
Available at: https://driveelectric.gov/files/2030- otherwise eligible).
charging-network.pdf. 647 This estimate may be conservative as DOE for Heavy Duty Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and
645 U.S. DOE. ‘‘Estimating Federal Tax Incentives notes that its analysis did not factor in that fleets for Acquiring Electric Vehicles Weighting Less
ER22AP24.036</GPH>
for Heavy Duty Electric Vehicle Infrastructure and may choose to site depots at charging facilities in Than 14,000 Pounds.’’ Memorandum, March 2024.
119
Fmt 4701
Both hardware and installation costs future, installation costs could rise, and telematics data from Geotab’s Altitude
could vary over time. For example, therefore they supported our approach platform covering about 13,600
hardware costs could decrease due to to keep combined hardware and medium- and heavy-duty trucks in
manufacturing learning and economies installation costs constant. For the final seven geographic zones655 selected to be
of scale. Recent studies by ICCT rule analysis we continued our nationally representative.656 The truck
assumed a 3 percent reduction in proposed approach of not varying costs dataset includes a variety of classes and
hardware costs for EVSE per year to over time on the same bases included in vocations. As described in Bruchon et
2030.649 thnsp;650 By contrast, the NPRM and it retains a conservative al. 2024,657 NREL separately analyzed
installation costs could increase due to approach to EVSE costs. data for four class combinations (2b–3,
growth in labor or material costs. How long a vehicle is off-shift and 4–5, 6–7, and 8) and four vocations
Installation costs are also highly parked at a depot, warehouse, or other defined by vehicles’ travel patterns
dependent on the specifics of the site home base each day is a key factor in (door to door, hub and spoke, local, and
including whether sufficient electric determining what type of charging regional). This results in sixteen unique
capacity exists to add charging infrastructure could meet its needs. We freight vehicle categories.658
infrastructure and how much trenching refer to this as depot dwell time. This Across all vehicle categories, NREL
or other construction is required. If fleet depot dwell time depends on a vehicle’s provided national dwell time
owners choose to install charging duty cycle. For example, a school bus or distributions that describe the number
stations at easier, and therefore, lower refuse truck may be parked at a depot of hours vehicles spend at their primary
cost sites first, then installation costs in the afternoon or early evening and domicile (or depot). For each of the
could rise over time as stations are remain there until the following sixteen freight categories as well as for
developed at more challenging sites. morning whereas a transit bus may school buses, these dwell durations
One of the ICCT studies found that these continue to operate throughout the reflect the total daily hours vehicles
and other countervailing factors could evening. Even for a specific vehicle, off- spent at their depots on operational
result in the average cost of a 150 kW shift depot dwell times may vary weekday or weekend days regardless of
EVSE port in 2030 being similar (∼3 between weekends and weekdays, by whether the vehicles were parked for
percent lower) to that in 2021.651 season, or due to other factors that one continuous period or across
After considering the uncertainty on impact its operation. multiple stops throughout the day. For
how costs may change over time, we The vehicles in our depot charging transit buses, NREL estimated the
kept the combined hardware and analysis span a wide range of vehicle typical time buses spent when parked at
installation costs per EVSE port types and duty cycles, and we expect their depot overnight, i.e., the time
constant for the NPRM analysis. We their dwell times to vary accordingly. In between the end of the last shift of the
received only a few comments on this the NPRM, we used a dwell time of 12 day and the first shift the following
topic. Several commenters noted that hours for every type of HD vehicle
EVSE equipment costs would likely informed by our examination of start 655 The seven zones are: San Jose-Sunnyvale-
decrease over time and one suggested and idle activity data652 for 564 Santa Clara, CA; Pittsburgh, PA; Evansville, IN–KY;
we incorporate reductions to account for commercial vehicles.653 In order to Lafayette, LA; Janesville-Beloit, WI; Southern ID
better understand how depot dwell non-Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA); Eastern
learning rates. However, the other GA non-MSAs. Data used was collected between
commenters agreed with us that while times might vary by vehicle application September 7 and September 30, 2022. See Bruchon
hardware costs may decline in the and class for our final rule analysis, we et al. 2024 for details on variables used to select the
worked with NREL through an seven representative zones.
656 Bruchon, Matthew, Brennan Borlaug, Bo Liu,
649 Minjares, Ray, Felipe Rodriguez, Arijit Sen, interagency agreement between EPA
and Caleb Braun. ‘‘Infrastructure to support a 100% Tim Jonas, Jiayun Sun, Nhat Le, Eric Wood. ‘‘Depot-
and the U.S. Department of Energy. Based Vehicle Data for National Analysis of
zero-emission tractor-trailer fleet in the United
States by 2040’’. Working Paper 2021–33. The
NREL analyzed several data sets for this Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicle
International Council on Clean Transportation. effort: General Transit Feed Charging’’. National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
September 2021. Available online: https:// Specification (GTFS) data for about NREL/TP–5400–88241. February 2024. Available
theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ze- 21,700 transit buses,654 operating data online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/
tractor-trailer-fleet-us-hdvs-sept21.pdf. 88241.pdf.
650 Bauer, Gordon, Chih-Wei Hsu, Mike Nicholas,
for nearly 300 school buses from NREL’s 657 Bruchon, Matthew, Brennan Borlaug, Bo Liu,
and Nic Lutsey. ‘‘Charging Up America: Assessing FleetDNA database, and a set of fleet Tim Jonas, Jiayun Sun, Nhat Le, Eric Wood. ‘‘Depot-
the Growing Need for U.S. Charging Infrastructure Based Vehicle Data for National Analysis of
Through 2030’’. The International Council on Clean 652 Zhang, Chen; Kotz, Andrew; Kelly, Kenneth Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicle
Transportation, July 2021. Available online: https:// ‘‘Heavy-Duty Vehicle Activity for EPA MOVES.’’ Charging’’. National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/charging- National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 2021. NREL/TP–5400–88241. February 2024. Available
online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/
up-america-jul2021.pdf. Available online: https://data.nrel.gov/submissions/

651 Bauer, Gordon, Chih-Wei Hsu, Mike Nicholas, 168. 88241.pdf.
and Nic Lutsey. ‘‘Charging Up America: Assessing 653 The dataset had been analyzed as a joint effort 658 NREL’s report also includes information on a
the Growing Need for U.S. Charging Infrastructure between EPA and NREL to inform EPA’s MOVES long-distance vocation. However, we have excluded
Through 2030’’. The International Council on Clean model. these from our depot charging analysis because, as
Transportation, July 2021. Available online: https:// 654 Both GTFS schedule and real-time data were noted in Bruchon et al. 2024, the long-distance
theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/charging- utilized along with information from the National trucks in the sample are less likely to meet the
ER22AP24.037</GPH>
up-america-jul2021.pdf. Transit Database. criteria for depot-based travel.
120
Fmt 4701
service day with separate estimates for processes exist to handle the rule’s part of a heavy-duty FCEV, primarily
weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays. impact on power generation and due to the technological requirements of
Days on which vehicles were not transmission, including when manufacturing rather than material
operated were excluded from the considered in combination with costs.662 Fuel cells for the heavy-duty
samples.659 projections of other impacts on power sector are expected to be more
As described in RIA Chapter 2.6.2.1.4, generation and transmission based on expensive than fuel cells for the light-
we mapped the depot dwell durations our assessments at the time of this final duty sector because they operate at
from the 18 unique combinations of rule. See RTC section 7.1; see also RIA higher average continuous power over
vocations and class types (i.e., the 16 Chapter 1.6. We also considered their lifespan, which requires a larger
freight vehicle categories plus transit comments and took a close look at fuel cell stack size, and because they
and school buses) in NREL’s analysis to electrical grid distribution systems. A have more stringent durability
the applicable vehicle types in our HD first of its kind Multi-State requirements (i.e., to travel more hours
TRUCS model. As shown in Table 2–78 Transportation Electrification Impact and go longer distances).663
of the RIA, dwell times in HD TRUCS Study (TEIS) was conducted by DOE to Projected costs vary widely in the
range from 7.4 hours to 14.5 hours, evaluate the potential that some literature. They are expected to decrease
reflecting the wide range of vehicle geographic areas and some users will as manufacturing matures. Larger
types considered in our analysis. (See require grid distribution buildout production volumes are anticipated as
RIA Chapter 2.6.2.1.4 for a more updates, and to assess associated time global demand increases for fuel cell
detailed discussion of this analysis.) and cost in recognition that, depending systems for HD vehicles, which could
For the NPRM, we assumed that each on the type of buildout needed, improve economies of scale.664 Costs are
vehicle using Level 2 charging would significant implementation time and also anticipated to decline as durability
have its own EVSE port, while up to two cost could exist.660 In the NPRM, we improves.665
vehicles could share DCFC if charging assumed that utilities would cover the For the NPRM, we relied on an
needs could be met within the assumed electrical power, transmission, and average of costs from an ICCT meta-
dwell time. While one commenter distribution upgrade costs. DRIA 2.6.5.1. study that found a wide variation in fuel
asserted that it is unreasonable to For our final rule analysis, we identify cell costs in the literature.666 The costs
assume two vehicles could share a distribution buildout costs with the we used in the NPRM ranged from $200
DCFC port, and another supported our TEIS, power generation and per kW in MY 2030 to $185 per kW in
NPRM approach, we received several transmission costs with the Integrated MY 2032. We requested comment on
other comments that the constraints on Planning Model (IPM) and Retail Price our cost data projections in the
EVSE sharing in our NPRM analysis Model (RPM) run by ICF and account proposal.
were too limiting. In our final rule Several commenters addressed EPA’s
for these costs within the charging costs,
analysis, we updated our approach and estimates for fuel cell costs. CARB
as discussed in section II.E.5.ii. See
project that up to two vocational agreed with EPA’s estimates, noting
generally section II.D.2.iii.c and RTC
vehicles can share one EVSE port. For they used similar estimated values in
section 7 (Distribution). their Advanced Clean Fleets rule
tractors, which tend to be part of larger
3. FCEV Technology Costs proceeding. One commenter thought the
fleets, we project that up to four
NPRM fuel cell cost estimates were too
vehicles can share one EVSE port. FCEVs and BEVs include many of the
high, particularly if they represent the
However, in both cases, we only model same components such as a battery
fuel cell stack alone, based on targets
vehicles as sharing EVSE ports if there pack, e-motor, power electronics,
published by the European Joint
is sufficient dwell time for each vehicle gearbox unit, final drive, and electrical
to meet its charging needs. We note that accessories. Therefore, we used the Energy. June 6, 2023. Available online: https://
for some of the vehicle types we same costs for these components across www.hydrogen.energy.gov/docs/
evaluated, higher numbers of vehicles vehicles for the same applications; for hydrogenprogramlibraries/pdfs/review23/fc000_
could share EVSE ports and still meet detailed descriptions of these papageorgopoulos_2023_o.pdf.
their daily electricity consumption components, see RIA Chapter 2.4.3. In
Future of Mobility: Hydrogen and fuel cell solutions
needs. However, in our final rule HD this subsection and RIA Chapter 2.5.2, for transportation, Volume 1’’. 2020. Available
TRUCS analysis we limit sharing to two we present the costs for components for online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/
vocational vehicles and four tractors per FCEVs that are different from a BEV. Deloitte/cn/Documents/finance/deloitte-cn-fueling-
the-future-of-mobility-en-200101.pdf.
port as a conservative approach for These components include the fuel cell 663 Marcinkoski, Jason et. al. ‘‘Hydrogen Class 8
calculating EVSE costs per vehicle. system and onboard hydrogen fuel tank. Long Haul Truck Targets’’. U.S. Department of
As discussed in section II.D.2.iii.c, The same energy cell battery $/kWh Energy. October 31, 2019. Available online: https://
EPA acknowledged at proposal that costs used for BEVs are used for fuel cell www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/19006_hydrogen_
there could be additional infrastructure vehicles, but the battery size of a class8_long_haul_truck_targets.pdf.
needs beyond those associated with the comparable FCEV is smaller. Future of Mobility: Hydrogen and fuel cell solutions
charging equipment itself. 88 FR 25982. for transportation, Volume 1’’. 2020. Available
Commenters emphatically agreed and i. Fuel Cell System Costs
online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/
focused on three areas of concern, The fuel cell stack is the most Deloitte/cn/Documents/finance/deloitte-cn-fueling-
the-future-of-mobility-en-200101.pdf.
electrical power generation, expensive component of a fuel cell 665 Deloitte China and Ballard. ‘‘Fueling the
transmission, and distribution. Our system,661 which is the most expensive Future of Mobility: Hydrogen and fuel cell solutions
consideration of comments and final for transportation, Volume 1’’. 2020. Available
660 National Renewable Energy Laboratory, online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/
rule analysis took a close look at power
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Kevala Deloitte/cn/Documents/finance/deloitte-cn-fueling-
generation and transmission. Our Inc., and U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Multi-State the-future-of-mobility-en-200101.pdf.
analysis shows that systems and Transportation Electrification Impact Study: 666 Sharpe, Ben and Hussein Basma. ‘‘A meta-
Preparing the Grid for Light-, Medium-, and Heavy- study of purchase costs for zero-emission trucks’’.
659 In addition, total dwell durations for school Duty Electric Vehicles’’. DOE/EE–2818. U.S. International Council on Clean Transportation,
buses were only considered during the school year Department of Energy. March 2024. Working Paper 2022–09. February 2022. Available
and stops at the depot less than one hour were 661 Papageorgopoulos, Dimitrios. ‘‘Fuel Cell online: https://theicct.org/publication/purchase-
excluded. Technologies Overview’’. U.S. Department of cost-ze-trucks-feb22/.
121
Fmt 4701
Undertaking. Another commenter stated external peer review of the final FEV that this method of weighting primary
that fuel stack technology is too nascent report.670 In the report, FEV estimated research more heavily than secondary
to make any type of realistic cost costs associated with a Class 8 FCEV- research is generally appropriate for
estimate. They noted that existing dominated long-haul tractor with assessing predictive studies of this
component technologies still need to be graphite fuel cell stacks, which are more nature; indeed, it is consistent with
adapted for the HD market and that fuel durable than stainless steel stacks what ICCT itself did. For FEV’s work,
cell stacks are not being produced at typically used in light-duty vehicle we selected costs that align with the HD
scale now, and they stated that they do applications. FEV leveraged a FCEV production volume that we
not believe accurate HD FCEV benchmark study of a commercial project in our modeled potential
technology costs can be predicted now. vehicle fuel cell stack from a supplier compliance pathway’s technology
Several commenters said that EPA’s that serves the Class 8 market. They also packages developed for this final rule,
estimates were too low and referred to built prototype vehicles in-house and which is roughly 10,000 units per year
fuel cell costs from a more recent (2023) relied on existing expertise to validate
in MY 2032, for a DMC of $89 per kW.
ICCT White Paper667 that updated the their sizing of tanks and stacks.671
For ICCT’s work, we used the 2030
ICCT meta-study referenced in the Please see RTC Chapter 3.4.3 for
NPRM.668 See RTC section 3.4.3 for additional detail. value of $301 per kW for MY 2032,
additional details. For the final rule, as described in RIA since 2030 was the latest year of values
We reviewed the ICCT paper that Chapter 2.5.2.1, we established MY referenced by ICCT from literature. Our
several commenters referenced. Also, 2032 fuel cell system DMCs using cost weighted average yielded a MY 2032
due to the wide range of projected costs projections from FEV and ICCT. We fuel cell system DMC of $160 per kW.
in the literature, EPA contracted with weighted FEV’s work twice as much as In order to project DMCs for earlier MYs
FEV669 to independently evaluate direct ICCT’s because it was primary research from MY 2032, we used our learning
manufacturing costs of heavy-duty and because some of the volumes rates shown in RIA Chapter 3.2.1. This
vehicles with alternative powertrain associated with the costs in ICCT’s yielded the MYs 2030 and 2031 DMCs
technologies and EPA conducted an analysis were not transparent. We note shown in Table II–18.
ii. Onboard Hydrogen Fuel Tank Costs Given our assessment of technology weighted FEV’s work twice as much as
readiness for the NPRM, onboard liquid ICCT’s because it was primary research
Onboard hydrogen storage cost hydrogen storage tanks were not and because some of the volumes
projections also vary widely in the included in the potential compliance associated with the costs in ICCT’s
literature. For the NPRM, we relied on pathway that supports the feasibility analysis were not transparent. We note
an average of costs from the same ICCT and appropriateness of the standards. that this method of weighting primary
meta-study that we used for fuel cell Like fuel cell costs, onboard gaseous research more heavily than secondary
costs.672 The values we used in the hydrogen tank costs are dependent on research is generally appropriate for
NPRM analysis ranged between $660/kg manufacturing volume. We reviewed assessing predictive studies of this
in MY 2030 and $612/kg in MY 2032. the ICCT paper that several commenters nature; indeed, it is consistent with
We requested cost data projections in referenced and contracted FEV 674 to what ICCT itself did. For FEV’s work,
the proposal. independently evaluate onboard we selected costs for roughly 10,000
hydrogen storage tank costs for MY 2027 units per year in MY 2032, for a DMC
There were few comments on
(2022$) based on manufacturing of $504 per kg. For ICCT’s work, we
hydrogen fuel tank costs. Two used the 2030 value of $844 per kW for
volume, and EPA conducted an external
commenters referred to ICCT’s revised peer review of the final FEV report.675 MY 2032, since 2030 was the latest year
meta-study.673 One commenter Please see RTC Chapter 3.4.3 for of values referenced by ICCT from
suggested that onboard liquid hydrogen additional detail. literature. Our weighted average yielded
will be required for long-distance ranges Using the same approach taken for a MY 2032 fuel cell system DMC of $617
of over 500 miles in the longer-term and fuel cell system costs, as described in per kW. In order to project DMCs from
suggested that it is too soon to offer cost RIA Chapter 2.5.2.2, we established MY MY 2032 for earlier MYs, we used our
estimates for liquid tanks. See RTC 2032 onboard storage tank DMCs using learning rates shown in shown in RIA
section 3.4.3 for details. cost projections from FEV and ICCT. We Chapter 3.2.1. This yielded the MYs
667 Xie, et. al. ‘‘Purchase costs of zero-emission Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final 673 Xie, et. al. ‘‘Purchase costs of zero-emission
trucks in the United States to meet future Phase 3 Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024. trucks in the United States to meet future Phase 3
GHG standards’’. International Council of Clean 670 ICF. ‘‘Peer Review of HD Vehicles, Industry GHG standards’’. International Council of Clean
Transportation, Working Paper 2023–10. March Characterization, Technology Assessment and Transportation, Working Paper 2023–10. March
2023. Available online: https://theicct.org/wp- Costing Report’’. September 15, 2023. 2023. Available online: https://theicct.org/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/cost-zero-emission- 671 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial
content/uploads/2023/03/cost-zero-emission-
trucks-us-phase-3-mar23.pdf. Vehicles Class 4 to 8: Technology and Cost
668 Sharpe, Ben and Hussein Basma. ‘‘A meta-
trucks-us-phase-3-mar23.pdf.
Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final 674 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial
study of purchase costs for zero-emission trucks’’. Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024.
International Council on Clean Transportation, 672 Sharpe, Ben and Hussein Basma. ‘‘A meta-
Working Paper 2022–09. February 2022. Available Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final
study of purchase costs for zero-emission trucks’’.
online: https://theicct.org/publication/purchase- International Council on Clean Transportation, Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024.
cost-ze-trucks-feb22/. Working Paper 2022–09. February 2022. Available 675 ICF. ‘‘Peer Review of HD Vehicles, Industry
669 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial online: https://theicct.org/publication/purchase- Characterization, Technology Assessment and
ER22AP24.038</GPH>
Vehicles Class 4 to 8: Technology and Cost cost-ze-trucks-feb22/. Costing Report’’. September 15, 2023.
122
Fmt 4701
2030 and 2031 DMCs shown in Table II–

19.
4. Inflation Reduction Act Tax Credits modules or packs678 (up to $10 per the DOE has conducted an analysis of
for HD Battery Electric Vehicles kWh) and 10 percent of the cost of public announcements that shows that
The IRA,676 which was signed into producing critical minerals such as in 2027–2032, there will be sufficient
law on August 16, 2022, includes a those found in batteries, when such domestic battery manufacturing
number of provisions relevant to vehicle components or minerals are produced in capacity for the HD industry to produce
electrification. There are three the United States and other cells and modules that meet the
provisions of the IRA we included qualifications are met as described in requirements of the 45X tax credit and
within our quantitative analysis in HD RIA Chapter 1.3.2.2. These credits begin to supply the volumes we project in this
TRUCS related to the manufacturing in CY 2023 and phase down starting in final rulemaking.682 Furthermore, DOE
and purchase of HD BEVs and FCEVs. CY 2030, ending after CY 2032. As is funding through the BIL battery
First, section 13502, ‘‘Advanced further discussed in RIA Chapter materials processing and manufacturing
Manufacturing Production Credit,’’ 2.4.3.1, we recognize that there are projects to ‘‘support new and expanded
provides up to $45 per kWh tax credits currently few manufacturing plants commercial-scale domestic facilities to
under section 45X of the Internal specifically for HD vehicle batteries in process lithium, graphite and other
Revenue Code (‘‘45X’’) for the the United States. We expect that the battery materials, manufacture
production and sale of battery cells and industry will respond to this tax credit components, and demonstrate new
modules when the cells and modules incentive by building more domestic approaches, including manufacturing
are produced in the United States and battery manufacturing capacity in the components from recycled
other qualifications are met. Second, coming years, in part due to the BIL and materials.’’ 683
section 13403, ‘‘Qualified Commercial IRA. For example, Daimler Trucks, In the NPRM, we projected that the
Clean Vehicles,’’ provides for a vehicle Cummins, and PACCAR recently tax credit earned by battery cell and
tax credit under section 45W applicable announced a new joint venture for a 21 module manufacturers is passed
to HD vehicles if certain qualifications GWh factory to be built in the U.S. to through to the purchaser because market
are met. Third, after further manufacture cells and packs initially competition would drive manufacturers
consideration, including consideration focusing on LFP batteries for heavy-duty to minimize their prices. We received
of comments on this issue, we have and industrial applications.679 Tesla is comment on this projection from three
quantitatively analyzed section 13404, expanding its facilities in Nevada to commenters, questioning how much of
‘‘Alternative Fuel Refueling Property produce its Semi BEV tractor and the credit will be passed down from
Credit,’’ tax credit under 30C for EVSE battery cells680 and Cummins has battery cell and module manufacturers
costs for the final rule. See section II.E.2 entered into an agreement with Arizona- through the supply chain to the ultimate
of this preamble, and IRA sections based Sion Power to design and supply purchaser because of the large upfront
13403, 13502, and 13404. Beyond these battery cells for commercial electric investments required to build
three tax credits, there are numerous vehicle applications.681 See the manufacturing plants. In an interview
provisions in the IRA and the BIL 677 additional discussion in section II.D.2.ii with Axios following Daimler Trucks,
that may impact HD vehicles and of this preamble, and RTC section 17.2 Cummins, and PACCAR’s recently
increase adoption of HD ZEV (battery production) for further announced battery factory,684 Cummins
technologies. These range from tax discussion and examples. Additionally, noted that the 45X tax credit ‘‘is
credits across the supply chain, to expected to benefit customers by
678 Packs would be eligible for the credit under
grants which may help direct ZEVs to the proposed interpretation. See 88 FR 86851. 682 Kevin Knehr, Joseph Kubal, Shabbir Ahmed,
communities most burdened by air 679 Daimler Trucks North America. ‘‘Accelera by ‘‘Cost Analysis and Projections for U.S.-
pollution, to funding for programs to Cummins, Daimler Truck and PACCAR form a joint Manufactured Automotive Lithium-ion Batteries’’,
build out electric vehicle charging venture to advance battery cell production in the Argonne National Laboratory report ANL/CSE–24/
infrastructure, as described in section I United States.’’ September 6, 2023. Available 1 for US Department of Energy. January 2024.
online: https://media.daimlertruck.com/ Available online: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/
of this preamble and RIA Chapter 1.3.2. marsMediaSite/en/instance/ko/Accelera-by- 2280913.
Regarding the first of the provisions, Cummins-Daimler-Truck-and-PACCAR-form-a- 683 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Bipartisan
IRA section 13502, ‘‘Advanced joint-venture-to-advance-battery-cell-production-in- Infrastructure Law: Battery Materials Processing
Manufacturing Production Credit,’’ the-United-States.xhtml?oid=52385590 (last and Battery Manufacturing & Recycling Funding
accessed October 23, 2023). Opportunity Announcement—Factsheets’’. October
provides up to $45 per kWh tax credits 680 Sriram, Akash, Aditya Soni, and Hyunjoo Jin. 19, 2022. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/
under 45X for the production and sale ‘‘Tesla plans $3.6 bln Nevada expansion to make sites/default/files/2022-10/DOE%20
of battery cells (up to $35 per kWh) and Semi truck, battery cells.’’ Reuters. January 25, BIL%20Battery%20FOA-2678%20
2023. Last accessed on March 31, 2023 at https:// Selectee%20Fact%20Sheets%20-%201_2.pdf.
676 Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Pub. L. 117– www.reuters.com/markets/deals/tesla-invest-over- 684 Daimler Trucks North America. ‘‘Accelera by
169, 136 Stat. 1818 (2022) (‘‘Inflation Reduction 36-bln-nevada-build-two-new-factories-2023-01-24/. Cummins, Daimler Truck and PACCAR form a joint
Act’’ or ‘‘IRA’’), available at https:// 681 Sion Power. ‘‘Cummins Invests in Sion Power venture to advance battery cell production in the
www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr5376/BILLS- to Develop Licerion® Lithium Metal Battery United States.’’ September 6, 2023. Available
117hr5376enr.pdf. Technology for Commercial Electric Vehicle online: https://media.daimlertruck.com/
677 United States, Congress. Public Law 117–58. Applications’’. November 30, 2021. Available marsMediaSite/en/instance/ko/Accelera-by-
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021. online: https://sionpower.com/2021/cummins- Cummins-Daimler-Truck-and-PACCAR-form-a-
Congress.gov, www.congress.gov/bill/117th- invests-in-sion-power-to-develop-licerion-lithium- joint-venture-to-advance-battery-cell-production-in-
congress/house-bill/3684/text. 117th Congress, metal-battery-technology-for-commercial-electric- the-United-States.xhtml?oid=52385590 (last
ER22AP24.039</GPH>
House Resolution 3684, passed 15 November 2021. vehicle-applications/. accessed October 23, 2023).
123
Fmt 4701
lowering the price of batteries.’’ 685 After this tax credit in HD TRUCS such that and module tax credits. The battery
consideration of these comments and HD BEV and FCEV manufacturers fully pack costs and battery tax credits used
the literature and announcements utilize the battery module tax credit and in our analysis are shown in Table II–
described in the previous paragraph, we gradually increase their utilization of 20. Further discussion of these
are continuing to include the tax credits the cell tax credit for MYs 2027–2029 assumptions can be found in RTC
in our assessment of purchaser costs. until MY 2030 and beyond, when they section 2.7.
We maintain our modeling approach for earn 100 percent of the available cell
Similar to our approach in using our calculations for each of those years Regarding this last concern that
indirect cost multipliers to calculate in HD TRUCS. limited tax liabilities would reduce
retail price equivalents, in which we do For BEVs and FCEVs, the tax credit is purchaser’s ability to leverage the tax
not attempt to mirror, predict, or equal to the lesser of: (A) 30 percent of credit, we note that the Internal
otherwise approximate individual the BEV or FCEV cost, or (B) the Revenue Service (IRS) has stated that a
companies’ marketing strategies in incremental cost of a BEV or FCEV 45W credit can be carried over as a
estimating costs for the modeled when compared to a comparable ICE general business credit and that unused
potential compliance pathway (see vehicle. The limit of this tax credit is general business credits may be carried
section IV of this preamble), we do not $40,000 for Class 4–8 commercial back one year and carried forward to
attempt to predict specifically how vehicles and $7,500 for commercial each of the 20 tax years after the year
manufacturers will use the 45X tax vehicles Class 3 and below. For of the credit to help offset prior and
credit to alter their products’ prices. example, if a BEV costs $350,000 and a future tax liabilities.687 688 Additionally,
Instead, we estimate the costs we expect comparable ICE vehicle costs for applicable entities who can use
to be incurred by manufacturers for the $150,000,686 the tax credit would be the elective pay, including tax-exempt
modeled potential compliance lesser of: (A) 0.30 × $350,000 = $105,000 organizations, States, and political
pathway—including direct or (B) $350,000—$150,000 = $200,000. subdivisions such as local governments,
In this example, (A) is less than (B), but Indian tribal governments, Alaska
manufacturing costs, indirect costs, and
(A) exceeds the limit of $40,000, so the Native Corporations, the Tennessee
tax credits—and calculate the resulting
tax credit would be $40,000. Valley Authority, rural electric co-
retail price equivalents that would allow We received numerous comments on operatives, U.S. territories and their
manufacturers to fully recover their this 45W tax credit. Many commenters political subdivisions, and agencies and
costs of compliance. Regarding the noted the potential for this tax credit to instrumentalities of state, local, tribal,
second of the provisions, IRA section help reduce costs of ZEVs for the and U.S. territorial governments, the
13403 creates a tax credit under 45W of purchaser, with commenters differing in value of the credit can be paid by the
the Internal Revenue Code applicable to their assessment of how competitive the IRS to the applicable entity.689 690 Our
each purchase of a qualified commercial costs of ZEVs would be compared to inclusion of the Federal excise tax
clean vehicle. These vehicles must be prices of ICE vehicles after earning the (which imposes a Federal tax liability
on-road vehicles (or mobile machinery) tax credit. For example, one commenter associated with the purchase of a ZEV),
that are propelled to a significant extent stated that IRA incentives, including the the long credit life as a general business
by a battery-powered electric motor. The 45W tax credit, would bring total cost of credit, and the elective pay provisions
battery must have a capacity of at least ownership of electric trucks lower than support our application of the credit to
15 kWh (or 7 kWh if it is Class 3 or diesel trucks approximately five years all eligible vehicle sales in our analysis.
below) and must be rechargeable from sooner than without the law. In contrast, We maintain our NPRM approach to
an external source of electricity. This other commenters asserted that the tax modeling this tax credit. We included
limits the qualified vehicles to BEVs credit could easily be offset by Federal this tax credit in HD TRUCS by
and PHEVs. Additionally, FCEVs are excise and state taxes, let alone the decreasing the incremental upfront cost
eligible. The credit is available from CY increased cost of the ZEV without a vehicle purchaser must pay for a ZEV
2023 through 2032, which overlaps with considering taxes. Additionally, one compared to a comparable ICE vehicle
the model years for which we are commenter questioned whether following the process explained in the
finalizing standards (MYs 2027 through purchasers with limited tax liabilities previous two paragraphs. The
2032), so we included the tax credit in would be able to leverage the tax credit. calculation for this tax credit was done
685 Geman, Ben. ‘‘How Biden’s climate law is 687 Internal Revenue Service. ‘‘Commercial Clean 689 Internal Revenue Service. ‘‘Elective pay and
fueling the U.S. battery boom.’’ Axios. September 7, Vehicle Credit.’’ February 16, 2024. Last accessed transferability.’’ March 5, 2024. Last accessed on
2023. Last accessed on November 2, 2023 at: on March 18, 2024. Available at: https:// March 18, 2024. Available at: https://www.irs.gov/
https://www.axios.com/2023/09/07/battery-boom- www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/commercial-clean- credits-deductions/elective-pay-and-transferability.

daimler-blackrock.
686 Sharpe, B., Basma, H. ‘‘A meta-study of
vehicle-credit. 690 Internal Revenue Service. ‘‘Elective Pay and
purchase costs for zero-emission trucks’’.

688 Internal Revenue Service. ‘‘Instructions for Transferability Frequently Asked Questions:
International Council on Clean Transportation. Form 3800 (2022).’’ February 8, 2024. Last accessed Elective Pay.’’ March 11, 2024. Last accessed on
February 17, 2022. Available online: https:// on March 18, 2024. Available at: https:// March 18, 2024. Available at: https://www.irs.gov/
theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/purchase- www.irs.gov/instructions/i3800. credits-deductions/elective-pay-and-transferability-
ER22AP24.040</GPH>
cost-ze-trucks-feb22-1.pdf. frequently-asked-questions-elective-pay#eligibility.
124
Fmt 4701
after applying a retail price equivalent differences are used to calculate an maintenance and repair savings vis-a-vis
to our direct manufacturing costs. We estimated payback period in HD their ICE counterparts. This finding was
did not calculate the full cost of vehicles TRUCS. We expect fueling costs and based on these vehicles’ simpler design,
in our analysis; instead, we determined M&R costs to be different for ZEVs than notably absence of pistons and valves,
that all Class 4–8 ZEVs could be eligible for comparable diesel-fueled ICE and fewer moving parts in general.697
for the full $40,000 (or $7,500 for ZEVs vehicles and included these costs in our Multiple commenters agreed that ZEV
Class 3 and below) if the incremental analysis to support the NPRM. Some purchasers would experience cost
cost calculated compared to a commenters pointed out that we should savings due to lower maintenance and
comparable ICE vehicle was greater than also include insurance cost. For the repair costs. Other commenters
that amount. In order for this final rule HD TRUCS analysis, operating questioned EPA’s finding. These
determination to be true, all Class 4–8 costs are calculated each year as a commenters maintained that it would
ZEVs must cost more than $133,333 summation of the annual fuel cost, take two technicians rather than one to
such that 30 percent of the cost is at maintenance and repair costs, insurance service an HD BEV. In addition, they
least $40,000 (or $25,000 and $7,500, cost, and additional ZEV registration stated that mechanics will require safety
respectively, for ZEVs Class 3 and fee. In addition, for the final rule we training for ZEV maintenance and
below), which seems reasonable based considered the cost impact of the repair, and that EPA had failed to
on our assessment of the literature.691 692 Federal excise tax and state sales tax to account for the associated costs.
As in the calculation described in the the operator at the time of purchase after Another question raised in these
previous paragraph, both (A) and (B) are consideration of the comments we comments is whether there are
greater than the tax credit limit and the received. Each of the following sufficient technicians qualified to
vehicle purchaser may receive the full subsections include the costs for ICE service HD ZEVs. Other commenters
tax credit. The incremental cost of a vehicles, BEVs, and FCEVs. said that maintenance facility upgrades
ZEV taking into account the tax credits will be needed in order to service ZEVs
i. Maintenance and Repair (M&R) Costs
for each vehicle segment in MY 2027 and that such upgrades are a cost of the
and MY 2032 are included in RIA M&R costs contribute to the overall rule.
Chapter 2.9.2. operating costs for HD vehicles. Data on
Several of these commenters went on
real-world M&R costs for HD ZEVs is
5. Purchaser Costs to challenge the empirical basis for
limited due to limited HD ZEV
Operating costs for HD vehicles EPA’s estimates. In HD TRUCS, ZEV
technology adoption today. We expect
encompass a variety of costs, such as maintenance and repair costs are
the overall maintenance costs to be
labor, insurance, registration fees, estimated by first calculating the
lower for ZEVs compared to a
fueling, maintenance and repair (M&R), baseline diesel maintenance and repair
comparable ICE vehicle for several
and other costs. For this HD TRUCS costs and then by applying BEV and
reasons. First, an electric powertrain has
analysis, we are primarily interested in FCEV downward scaling factors based
fewer moving parts that accrue wear or
costs that are different for a comparable on Wang, et al.698 so that cost savings
need regular adjustments. Second, ZEVs
diesel-powered ICE vehicle and for a are the product of the diesel
do not require fluids such as engine oil
ZEV.693 These operational cost maintenance and repair costs times the
or diesel exhaust fluid (DEF), nor do
scaling factor. Several commenters
they require exhaust filters to reduce
691 Burnham, A., Gohlke, D., Rush, L., Stephens, criticized EPA for (purportedly) relying
particulate matter or other pollutants.
T., Zhou, Y., Delucchi, M. A., Birky, A., Hunter, C., on a single source for the ZEV scaling
Lin, Z., Ou, S., Xie, F., Proctor, C., Wiryadinata, S.,
Third, the per-mile rate of brake wear is
factors, and further, that the source itself
Liu, N., Boloor, M. ‘‘Comprehensive Total Cost of expected to be lower for ZEVs due to
quotes a large range of potential values
Ownership Quantification for Vehicles with regenerative braking systems. Several
Different Size Classes and Powertrains’’. Argonne for those factors. One commenter also
literature sources propose applying a
National Laboratory. April 1, 2021. Available at noted a multi-year study of light-duty
https://publications.anl.gov/anlpubs/2021/05/
scaling factor to diesel vehicle
electric vehicles which showed
167399.pdf. maintenance costs to estimate ZEV
maintenance costs averaging 2.3 times
692 The Department of Energy published an maintenance costs.694 695 696
‘‘Incremental Purchase Cost Methodology and EPA indicated at proposal that HD that of ICE vehicles due to the longer
Results for Clean Vehicles’’ that estimates ZEVs would experience significant maintenance time and lack of qualified
representative vehicle costs for broad vehicle types technicians.
relevant to this rulemaking: Class 4–6, Class 7, and
Class 8 ICE vehicles, BEVs, PHEVs, and FCEVs. The required for the selective catalytic reduction ZEV vehicles have fewer moving parts
report indicates that Class 7 and 8 ZEVs cost more aftertreatment system. See RIA Chapter 2.3.4.1 for than their ICEV counterparts, which is
than $133,333, while Class 4–6 ZEVs cost less than DEF costs. typically indicative of fewer serviceable
694 Burnham, A., Gohlke, D., Rush, L., Stephens,
$133,333. While this assessment conflicts with our parts and fewer potential failures. EPA
simplifying assumption for Class 4–6 ZEVs, we note T., Zhou, Y., Delucchi, M. A., Birky, A., Hunter, C.,
that our Class 4–6 ZEVs’ 45W tax credits, as shown Lin, Z., Ou, S., Xie, F., Proctor, C., Wiryadinata, S., reiterates that this will result in reduced
in RIA Chapter 2.9.2, are mostly projected to be Liu, N., Boloor, M. ‘‘Comprehensive Total Cost of costs for maintenance and repair for
limited by a wide margin by the incremental costs Ownership Quantification for Vehicles with their users. This conclusion has ample
and not the $40,000 limit affected by this Different Size Classes and Powertrains’’. Argonne support. Multiple cost assessment
assumption. The exceptions to this are the National Laboratory. April 1, 2021. Available
recreational vehicles, which we do not project as online: https://publications.anl.gov/anlpubs/2021/ papers and the California Advanced
having significant ZEV adoption due to their 05/167399.pdf. Clean Fleets Regulation Appendix G:
lengthy payback periods, even with the full $40,000 695 Hunter, Chad, Michael Penev, Evan Reznicek, Total Cost of Ownership 699 use cost
tax credit. Department of Energy, ‘‘Incremental Jason Lustbader, Alicia Birkby, and Chen Zhang. reduction factors for ZEV maintenance
Purchase Cost Methodology and Results for Clean ‘‘Spatial and Temporal Analysis of the Total Cost
Vehicles’’. December 2023. Available online: of Ownership for Class 8 Tractors and Class 4 Parcel
697 88 FR 25986–87.
https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/ Delivery Trucks’’. National Renewable Energy Lab.
2023.12.18%20Incremental%20 September 2021. Available online: https:// 698 Wang, Guihua et al. ‘‘Estimating Maintenance
Purchase%20Cost%20Methodology%20and www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/71796.pdf. and Repair Costs for Battery Electric and Fuel Cell
%20Results%20for%20Clean%20Vehicles% 696 Burke, Andrew, Marshall Miller, Anish Sinha, Heavy Duty Trucks’’. Available online: https://
20pub%2012–2022%20amd%2012–2023%20Final_ et. al. ‘‘Evaluation of the Economics of Battery- escholarship.org/uc/item/36c08395.
2.pdf. Electric and Fuel Cell Trucks and Buses: Methods, 699 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/
693 For diesel-fueled ICE vehicles, we also Issues, and Results’’. August 1, 2022. Available barcu/regact/2022/acf22/appg.pdf. See section 4,
estimated the cost of the diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) online: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1g89p8dn. pages G–21—G–23.
125
Fmt 4701Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22APR2.SGM 22APR2
compared to internal combustion engine factors.700 We selected the values in the a substantial reduction in estimated
maintenance. Wang et al. paper because its ZEV maintenance and repair savings in
However, there are considerations of methodology was supported by a the final rule compared to the NPRM.
when those savings will accrue. EPA ground-up assessment of the differences The article cited by one commenter
agrees with commenters that there is in BEV, FCEV and diesel components, from Kelly Blue Book701 refers to an
some uncertainty in predicting cost and the cost reduction (scaling factor) analysis of light-duty, not heavy-duty,
reductions for maintenance and repair values in the paper fall within the range vehicles.702 While this article says that
of ZEV heavy-duty vehicles before of other suggested scaling factor values a predictive analytics firm, We Predict,
production and usage become more in the literature. found that EVs ‘‘cost more to repair than
common. A further uncertainty involves their gasoline engine counterparts’’, that
a potential need to retrain technicians to In this final rule HD TRUCS analysis,
EPA has made a further change article also states that that ‘‘EVs cost less
work on ZEVs. in maintenance because they have fewer
EPA has adjusted its cost estimates to involving cost estimates for ICE vehicle
maintenance and repair costs—the regular maintenance procedures.’’ The
reflect consideration of these
baseline to which the scaling factors are reason it finds that EVs are more
uncertainties. We agree that there may
applied for cost estimation purposes—a expensive is because technicians are
be a transition period during which
change not requested in comments but spending more time working on EVs
costs for maintaining and repairing
one we think is warranted. In the NPRM than they are on gasoline cars, and that
ZEVs will not be at their full savings
analysis, we developed the ICE vehicle those technicians cost more per hour.
potential due to the need to train more
M&R costs based on two different As noted, EPA understands that costs
of the workforce to maintain and repair
ZEVs. To account for this period, in this equations—one for sleeper cab tractors for servicing ZEVs may be more
final rule HD TRUCS analysis EPA has which travel longer distances and one expensive in the very near term than
phased in the ZEV scaling factors for for vocational vehicles and day cab they will be once technicians are
maintenance and repair. Specifically, tractors. The value used for vocational retrained and have gained some
instead of applying a single scaling vehicles in the NPRM includes a higher experience; EPA expects the service
factor for every year commencing in cents per mile value than the one used technician workforce to transition to a
2027 (for BEVs) or 2030 (for FCEVs) as for sleeper cab tractors. For the final workforce that has the skills and
at proposal, EPA is starting with a rule analysis, we used the lower cents experience needed to service ZEVs. The
higher scaling factor and gradually per mile M&R value for sleeper cabs for Kelly Blue Book article supports EPA’s
decreasing it (i.e., gradually increasing all HD vehicles. This change reduced expectation: the article states that We
the projected cost savings) over a 5-year the overall maintenance cost estimates Predict ‘‘believes that EVs may prove
period. The initial higher scaling factor for diesel vehicles, which in turn less expensive in the long run.’’ The
comes from Wang et al. and reflects reduces the overall estimated savings article goes on to quote the We Predict
estimates for 2022. EPA’s approach of from ZEV M&R for users under the CEO, James Davies, ‘‘The cost of keeping
applying this factor commencing in potential compliance pathway that the vehicle in service for the EV, even
2027 or 2030 is consequently supports the feasibility of the final as the EV gets older, becomes smaller
conservative given that technicians in standards, since the savings values are and smaller and actually less than
those later years will be more estimated as a cost reduction from the keeping an ICE [internal combustion
experienced than they were in 2022. diesel maintenance and repair values. engine] vehicle on the road. . .That’s
The criticism that EPA used a single An explanation for the basis for this not just maintenance costs, but all
source to derive the scaling factors does change is set out in RTC section 3.6. service costs.’’ 703
not paint a full picture of EPA’s Lowering the diesel maintenance and The M&R BEV scaling factors used to
selection of these values. EPA examined repair costs, along with phasing in the support the final rule analysis are
multiple papers with proposed scaling ZEV scaling factors, together resulted in shown in Table II–21.
EPA agrees that when new products Dealer new vehicle selling costs. See of diesel fuel. The yearly fuel
are introduced dealers may encounter section IV.B.2 of this preamble for consumption is described in RIA
new costs, such as technician training to further discussion. Chapter 2.3.4.3. As we did in the NPRM,
repair ZEVs. EPA therefore accounts for we used the DOE Energy Information
ii. Fuel, Charging, and Hydrogen Costs
these costs in the RPE multipliers. Administration’s (EIA) Annual Energy
EPA’s heavy-duty retail price equivalent The annual fuel cost for operating a Outlook (AEO) transportation sector
(RPE) mark-up includes a 6 percent diesel-fueled ICE vehicle is a function of reference case projection for diesel fuel
markup over manufacturing cost for its yearly fuel consumption and the cost for on-road use for diesel prices.704 For
700 See EPA’s Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis: 702 Heavy-duty ICE vehicle maintenance and 703 https://www.kbb.com/car-news/study-evs-cost-
Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Heavy-Duty repair may have some correlation with light-duty more-to-repair-less-to-maintain/.
Vehicles: Phase 3. EPA–420–D–23–004. April 2023. maintenance and repair, but the comparison does 704 U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Page 265 and sources cited in endnotes 93, 94, and not consider the maintenance and repair costs of Annual Energy Outlook 2023. Table 57 Components
95. diesel engine and exhaust aftertreatment systems of Selected Petroleum Product Prices. Diesel Fuel
701 https://www.kbb.com/car-news/study-evs-cost- which are greater than the costs associated with End User Price. Last accessed on 12/2/2023 at
light-duty vehicles. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/
more-to-repair-less-to-maintain/.
ER22AP24.041</GPH>
?id=70-AEO2023&cases=ref2023&sourcekey=0.
126
Fmt 4701
the final rule analysis, we updated to cost, when spread over the appropriate and public charging when assigning
the latest version of AEO 2023. These timeframe and user base, is modest.708 charging costs. As explained, we have
fuel prices include Federal and State Utilities will have various mechanisms also expanded the scope of what is
taxes but exclude county and local to recoup their expenditures on grid covered in these costs to better reflect
taxes. distribution infrastructure. The process the cost of charging. The charging costs
We note at the outset HD BEV related chosen by any given utility may depend we use for both charging types include
power generation and transmission on the size and financial resources of the cost of electricity as charged by the
actions and their costs are insignificant the utility or it may be driven by utility ($/kWh) as well as additional
when compared to historical levels of regulatory rules and direction. For the costs for EVSE maintenance and
total power generation. See section analysis in this final rule, we are distribution upgrades (expressed in $/
II.D.2.iii of this preamble and RTC including grid infrastructure as kWh) when those upgrades are needed.
section 7 (Distribution). Some recouped through charging costs. Details Our public charging price additionally
commenters agreed that the projected on electricity distribution system costs includes amortized cost of public
power and transmission needs for HD and resulting charging costs are charging equipment and land costs for
BEVs is achievable, especially when the provided in this section and in RIA the station;710 and we project that third
gradual increase is recognized. Some Chapter 2.4.4.2. parties may install and operate these
other commenters applied different The annual charging cost for stations and pass costs onto BEV owners
analysis to generate significant power operating a HD electric vehicle is a via charging costs.
level increases. As discussed in section function of the electricity price, daily To estimate charging costs, we start by
V, we model changes to power energy consumption of the vehicle, and modeling future electricity prices, as
generation due to the increased number of operating days in a year. For charged by utilities, that account for the
electricity demand anticipated under the NPRM we used the DOE EIA AEO costs of BEV charging demand and the
the potential compliance pathway in the 2022 reference case commercial associated distribution system upgrade
final rule as part of our upstream electricity end-use rate projection for costs. We do this in three steps: (1) we
analysis. We project the additional our electricity price.709 We received model future power generation using
generation needed to meet the demand comments that this approach may the Integrated Planning Model (IPM), (2)
of the heavy-duty BEVs in the final rule underestimate charging costs we estimate the cost of distribution
to be relatively modest (as shown in RIA experienced by BEV owners. One system upgrades associated with
Chapter 6.5); the final rule is estimated commenter noted that we should charging demand through the DOE
to increase electric power end use by account for the impact of increased BEV Multi-State Transportation
heavy-duty electric vehicles by 0.1 demand on future electricity prices. Electrification Impact Study (TEIS),711
percent in 2027 and increasing to 2.8 Several commenters discussed the and (3) we use the Retail Price Model to
percent in 2055. This is consistent with impact of high demand charges on project electricity prices accounting for
estimates from the utility industry electricity price. Other commenters both (1) and (2).
itself,705 and from manufacturers.706 As noted that there are additional costs that As described in RIA Chapter 4.2, IPM
a comparison, the U.S. electricity end could increase the effective cost to models the power sector, including
use between the years 1992 and 2021, a charge including EVSE maintenance changes to power generation based on
similar number of years included in our costs. Some commenters noted that future demand scenarios. In order to
analysis, increased by around 25 vehicles using public charging could capture the potential future impacts on
percent 707 without any adverse effects likely incur higher costs to charge than the power sector from zero-emission
on electric grid reliability or electricity those at depots. vehicles, we ran IPM for a scenario that
generation capacity shortages. See also EPA agrees that our approach in the combined electricity demand from an
RTC section 7.1. NPRM underestimated charging costs interim version of the final standards
We do agree that there can be costs and we have increased the electricity case and EPA’s proposed rulemaking
associated with distribution grid prices used in HD TRUCS for the final ‘‘Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards
buildout, and with public charging rule analysis. We also agree with for Model Years 2027 and Later Light-
networks associated with BEV HDV commenters that EVSE maintenance Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles.’’ 712
charging. EPA agrees with commenters costs and distribution upgrade costs due The same demand scenario was used as
that these costs should be included in to increased BEV demand should be the action case for the TEIS.713 The TEIS
our analysis and we have done so in the taken into account, and that 710 As discussed in section II.E.2, capital costs for
final rule analysis. We agree with incorporating these into the charging EVSE used in depot charging are accounted for
commenters that suggested these costs costs is a reasonable approach; we have separately. We make the simplifying assumption
could be reflected in the cost of fuel i.e., done so in HD TRUCS for the final rule that fleets will utilize existing parking depots when
in the charging cost—rather than as analysis. installing EVSE and therefore will not incur
additional costs for purchasing or leasing land.
capital (upfront) costs. Although there is For the final rule, in HD TRUCS we 711 See preamble section II.D.2.c.iii and RTC
considerable uncertainty associated differentiate between depot charging section 7 (Distribution) for a fuller description of
with future distribution system the TEIS.
upgrades and costs, our final 708 National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 712 Electricity demand for heavy-duty ZEVs was
rulemaking analysis, which incorporates Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Kevala based on the interim control case described in RIA
Inc., and U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Multi-State Chapter 4.2.4 and for light- and medium-duty
findings from TEIS, suggests that the Transportation Electrification Impact Study: vehicles was based on Alternative 3 from EPA’s
Preparing the Grid for Light-, Medium-, and Heavy- proposed ‘‘Multipollutant Emissions Standards for
705 Comments of Edison Electric Institute,
Duty Electric Vehicles’’. DOE/EE–2818. U.S. Model Years 2027 and Later Light-Duty and
additionally summarized and discussed in RTC Department of Energy. March 2024. Medium-Duty Vehicles’’ (88 FR 29184 et seq.). See
section 7 (Distribution) and 7.1. 709 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy the TEIS report for more information on the
706 See, e.g., Comments of DTNA, EPA–HQ–OAR– modeled (‘Action’) scenario with managed charging,
Information Administration. Annual Energy
2022–0985, pp. 52–53. Outlook 2023, Table 8: Electricity Supply, and how demand was allocated by region and time
707 Annual Energy Outlook 2022, U.S. Energy Disposition, Prices, and Emissions. Last accessed on of day.
Information Administration, March 3, 2022 (https:// 10/30/2023. Available online: https://www.eia.gov/ 713 National Renewable Energy Laboratory,
www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/narrative/introduction/ outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/?id=8-AEO20 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Kevala

sub-topic-01.php.) 23&cases=ref2023&sourcekey=0. Continued
127
Fmt 4701
research team modeled how many new Model (RPM).714 The RPM developed by Stations are assumed to have seventeen
or upgraded substations, feeders, and ICF generates estimates for average 1 MW EVSE ports and twenty 150 kW
transformers would be needed to meet electricity prices across consumer EVSE ports for a total peak power
projected electricity demand, including classes accounting for the regional capacity of 20 MW. The 19.6 cent/kWh
demand from residential workplace, distribution of electricity demand. The price includes the amortized cost of this
depot, and public charging to support resulting national average retail prices, charging equipment, land costs, both
projected light-, medium-, and heavy- which include distribution upgrade electricity prices (cents/kWh) and
duty plug-in electric vehicles. For all costs, were used as a basis for the demand charges (cents/kW) associated
public and workplace charging, vehicles charging costs in HD TRUCS.715 with high peak power, distribution
were assumed to charge upon arrival at For depot charging, we add 0.52
upgrade costs for substations, feeders,
full power. At homes and depot cents/kWh to the RPM results to
account for EVSE maintenance costs. and transformers associated with these
charging stations—where vehicles have
longer dwell times—a managed charging These values are from a recent ICCT public charging stations, and EVSE
scenario was developed to spread out study,716 which was suggested in public maintenance costs. We apply public
charging and reduce peak power. (See comments (see RTC Chapter 6).717 For electricity prices to long-haul vehicles,
RIA Chapter 1.6.5 and RTC section 7 public charging, we project an some longer-range day cab tractors and
(Distribution) for a discussion of the electricity price of 19.6 cents/kWh for coach buses (see section II.D.5.i of this
potential benefits of managed charging 2027 and adjust it for future years preamble). Overall, our charging costs
to fleet owners.) according to the results of the IPM used in the final rule analysis are higher
The changes to power generation in Retail Price Model discussed. The initial than those used in the NPRM analysis,
our modeled IPM scenario and the value from the same ICCT study 718 particularly since those costs now
distribution cost estimates from TEIS reflects costs for public charging at reflect maintenance, grid distribution
were then input to the Retail Price stations designed for long-haul vehicles. upgrades, and public charging costs.
For the HD TRUCS analysis, rather dispensing at a fueling station. This charging, as explained previously in this
than focusing on depot hydrogen fueling price per kilogram of hydrogen includes section.
infrastructure costs that would be the amortization of the station capital We acknowledge that this market is
incurred upfront, we included costs. This approach is consistent with still emerging and that hydrogen fuel
infrastructure costs in our per-kilogram the method we use in HD TRUCS for providers will likely pursue a diverse
retail price of hydrogen. The retail price ICE vehicles, where the equivalent range of business models. For example,
of hydrogen is the total price of diesel fuel costs are included in the some businesses may sell hydrogen to
hydrogen when it becomes available to diesel fuel price instead of accounting fleets through a negotiated contract
the end user, including the costs of for the costs of fuel stations separately, rather than at a flat market rate on a
production, distribution, storage, and as well as for BEVS with public given day. Others may offer to absorb
Inc., and U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Multi-State between model run years from 2028–2050. We kept 717 See Comments of EMA at 28.
Transportation Electrification Impact Study: electricity prices constant for 2050+ and assumed 718 Hussein Basma, Claire Buysee, Yuanrong
Preparing the Grid for Light-, Medium-, and Heavy- the 2027 price was the same as 2028. Zhou, and Felipe Rodriguez. ‘‘Total Cost of
Duty Electric Vehicles’’. DOE/EE–2818. U.S.
716 Hussein Basma, Claire Buysee, Yuanrong

Ownership of Alternative Powertrain Technologies
Department of Energy. March 2024. Zhou, and Felipe Rodriguez. ‘‘Total Cost of
714 ICF. ‘‘Documentation of the Retail Price for Class 8 Long-haul Trucks in the United States.’’
Ownership of Alternative Powertrain Technologies
Model. Draft.’’ 2019. Available online: https:// International Council on Clean Transportation.
for Class 8 Long-haul Trucks in the United States.’’
www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019–06/ International Council on Clean Transportation. April 2023. Available at: https://theicct.org/wp-
documents/rpm_documentation_june2019.pdf. April 2023. Available at: https://theicct.org/wp- content/uploads/2023/04/tco-alt-powertrain-long-
715 IPM and the RPM were run for select years. content/uploads/2023/04/tco-alt-powertrain-long- haul-trucks-us-apr23.pdf.
ER22AP24.042</GPH>
We used linear interpolation for electricity prices haul-trucks-us-apr23.pdf.
128
Fmt 4701
the infrastructure development risk for Pathways to Commercial Liftoff supply chain from hydrogen production
the consumer, in exchange for the report 720 that are in line with estimates to dispensing, including station costs by
ability to sell excess hydrogen to other from a previous DOE analysis of market technology component and delivery
customers and more quickly amortize uptake of FCEVs.721 Several cost costs by distance delivered. The authors
the cost of building a fueling station. trajectories in the report identified paths vary hydrogen delivery distances,
FCEV manufacturers may offer a for around $6 per kg in 2030, depending station sizes, station utilization rates,
‘‘turnkey’’ solution to fleets, where they on the method of hydrogen production and economies of scale. They assume
provide a vehicle with fuel as a package and cost of the station. For 2030, we that hydrogen is dispensed in
deal. This level of granularity is not looked at the average of the sums of low pressurized gaseous form at 700 bars of
reflected in our hydrogen price and high pathway estimates for pressure and is either delivered via
estimates presented in the RIA. hydrogen produced using steam liquid tanker trucks or produced onsite
As discussed in section II.D.3.iv, large methane reforming (SMR) with carbon in gaseous form. The assumed
Federal incentives are in place that capture and sequestration (CCS) and production cost of $1.50 per kg is based
could impact the price of hydrogen. In water electrolysis is just under $6 per kg on costs of production today using
June 2021, DOE launched a Hydrogen in 2030, considering varying incentives steam methane reforming (SMR), though
Shot goal to reduce the cost of clean from the IRA hydrogen production tax the paper acknowledges that many
hydrogen production by 80 percent to credit (PTC). Distribution, storage, and factors are at play that could impact the
$1 per kilogram in one decade.719 The dispensing costs are based on DOE cost and method of hydrogen
BIL and IRA included funding for estimates if advances in distribution and production in 2030 such as the rate of
several hydrogen programs to accelerate storage technology are commercialized economies of scale; the impacts of
progress towards the Hydrogen Shot and and at scale. Our scenario selections policy incentives (e.g., the 45V tax
jumpstart the hydrogen market in the presume that in the near-term, delivery credit); 726 and the success of research,
U.S. of hydrogen in liquid form is likely, due development, and deployment efforts.
For the NPRM analysis, we included to the limited capacity of gaseous Most capital and operating costs are
a hydrogen price based on analysis from trailers and limited availability of derived from Argonne National
ANL using BEAN. 88 FR 25988. One pipelines.722 Cost reductions to $4 per Laboratory’s Hydrogen Delivery
commenter highlighted several reports kg are considered feasible by 2035 with Scenario Analysis Model (HDSAM)
that indicate large potential for the next generation fuel dispensing Version 4.5.727
hydrogen price to rapidly drop, technologies, reductions in the cost of
particularly on the production side. hydrogen production due to IRA The authors conclude that the overall
Several commenters expressed concern incentives, and possibly the use of system LCOH in 2030 is estimated to
about the hydrogen price assumption in pipelines for hydrogen delivery.723 range from about $3.80 per kg-H2 to
the NPRM or said that prices cannot be To evaluate these estimates further, $12.60 per kg-H2, depending on the size
predicted at this time and urged that and in response to comments, the of stations and method of hydrogen
EPA’s projection be regularly evaluated National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) supply.728 This cost range is not the
as the market develops. Some conducted a bottom-up analysis that same as a retail price, but we assume
commenters referred to an ICCT analysis explores the potential range of levelized that any retail markup at the station is
of hydrogen pricing that indicated a lack costs of dispensed hydrogen (LCOH) 724 minimal.729 730 Importantly, it does not
of cost-competitiveness for hydrogen- from hydrogen refueling stations for HD consider any tax incentives or other
fueled trucks before 2035. Another FCEVs in 2030. Bracci et. al 725 state or Federal incentive policies that
commenter noted that the price of $4 to evaluates breakeven costs along the full may further reduce the retail price that
$5 per kg (that EPA referenced) is consumers see at a fueling station in
described by DOE as a ‘‘willingness to 720 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Pathways to
pay’’ that reflects the total price at Commercial Liftoff: Clean Hydrogen’’. March 2023. 726 The authors indicate that relevant incentives
Available online: https://liftoff.energy.gov/wp- include but are not limited to the Alternative Fuel
which hydrogen must be available to the content/uploads/2023/05/20230523-Pathways-to- Refueling Property Credit (30C), the Credit of
HD vehicle end user for uptake to occur, Commercial-Liftoff-Clean-Hydrogen.pdf. See Figure Production of Clean Hydrogen (45V), the Qualified
or the point at which FCEVs could reach 10. Advanced Energy Project Credit (48C), and the
cost parity with diesel vehicles. They 721 Ledna, et. al. ‘‘Decarbonizing Medium- & Credit for Qualified Commercial Clean Vehicles
stated that it cannot represent the real Heavy-Duty On-Road Vehicles: Zero-Emission (45W).
Vehicles Cost Analysis’’. National Renewable 727 Bracci, Justin, Mariya Koleva, and Mark
market and offered a bottom-up analysis Energy Laboratory. March 2022. Available online: Chung. ‘‘Levelized Cost of Dispensed Hydrogen for
to understand what fleet owners would https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/82081.pdf. Heavy-Duty Vehicles’’. National Renewable Energy
pay at the hydrogen refueling stations. 722 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Pathways to Laboratory. NREL/TP–5400–88818. March 2024.
See RTC section 8.2 for the comments Commercial Liftoff: Clean Hydrogen’’. March 2023. Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/
Available online: https://liftoff.energy.gov/wp- fy24osti/88818.pdf.
submitted on this issue and RIA Chapter content/uploads/2023/05/20230523-Pathways-to- 728 Bracci, Justin, Mariya Koleva, and Mark
2.5.3.1 for a detailed response and Commercial-Liftoff-Clean-Hydrogen.pdf. See Figure Chung. ‘‘Levelized Cost of Dispensed Hydrogen for
additional discussion about hydrogen 10. Heavy-Duty Vehicles’’. National Renewable Energy
price. 723 Ledna, et. al. ‘‘Decarbonizing Medium- & Laboratory. NREL/TP–5400–88818. March 2024.
For the final rule HD TRUCS analysis, Heavy-Duty On-Road Vehicles: Zero-Emission Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/
Vehicles Cost Analysis’’. National Renewable fy24osti/88818.pdf.
in consideration of the comments, we Energy Laboratory. March 2022. Available online: 729 West Virginia Oil Marketers and Grocers
re-evaluated our assumption about the https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/82081.pdf. Association. ‘‘How Much Money Do Businesses
retail price of hydrogen, in consultation 724 LCOH is described as the total annualized Make on Fuel Purchases?’’ Available online: https://
with DOE. We determined the hydrogen capital costs plus annual feedstock, variable, and www.omegawv.com/faq/140-how-much-money-do-
fixed operating costs, divided by the annual businesses-make-on-fuel-purchases.html.
price based on several 2030 cost hydrogen flow through the supply chain. 730 Kinnier, Alex. ‘‘I’ve analyzed the profit
scenarios for hydrogen from the 725 Bracci, Justin, Mariya Koleva, and Mark margins of 30,000 gas stations. Here’s the proof fuel
Chung. ‘‘Levelized Cost of Dispensed Hydrogen for retailers are not to blame for high gas prices’’.
719 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and Heavy-Duty Vehicles’’. National Renewable Energy Fortune. August 9, 2022. Available online: https://
Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘Hydrogen Shot’’. Laboratory. NREL/TP–5400–88818. March 2024. fortune.com/2022/08/09/energy-profit-margins-gas-
Available online: https://www.energy.gov/eere/ Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/ stations-proof-fuel-retailers-high-gas-prices-alex-
fuelcells/hydrogen-shot. fy24osti/88818.pdf. kinnier/.
129
Fmt 4701
2030.731 732 Therefore, we conclude that is within a reasonable range of assessment, we project the retail price of
our retail price of hydrogen of $6 per kg anticipated values. hydrogen in 2030 will be $6 per kg and
in 2030, dropping to $4 per kg by 2035, See RIA Chapter 2.5.3.1 for additional fall to $4 per kg in 2035 and beyond, as
detail about our assessment. After shown in Table II–23.
consideration of comments and this
iii. Insurance v. ZEV Registration Fee direct and indirect manufacturing costs,
In the NPRM analysis, we did not as discussed further in RIA Chapter 3.
In the NPRM analysis, we did not take The operating costs include the diesel,
into account the cost of insurance on the account for ZEV registration fees paid
by the purchaser. Commenters have hydrogen or electricity costs, DEF costs,
ZEV purchaser. A few commenters the maintenance and repair costs,
pointed out that some states have
suggested we should consider the insurance costs, and ZEV registration
adopted state ZEV registration fees.
addition of insurance cost because the fee. The payback results for BEVs and
Though 18 states do not have an
incremental cost of insurance for the FCEVs are shown in RIA Chapter 2.9.2.
additional registration fee for ZEVS, for
ZEVs will be higher than for ICE In our payback analysis in HD
those that do, the registration fees are
vehicles. We agree that insurance costs TRUCS, we did not account for
generally between $50 and $225 per
may differ between these vehicle types potential diesel engine rebuild costs for
year. While EPA cannot predict whether
and that this is a cost that will be seen ICE vehicles, potential replacement
and to what extent other states will
by the operator. Therefore, for the final battery costs for BEVs or EVSE
enact ZEV registration fees, we have
rule analysis in HD TRUCS, we replacement costs for depot-charged
nonetheless conservatively added an
included the incremental insurance BEVs, or potential replacement fuel cell
annual registration fee of $100 to all
costs of a ZEV relative to an ICEV by stack costs for FCEVs because our
ZEV vehicles in our final HD TRUCS
incorporating an annual insurance cost payback analysis covers a shorter period
analysis (see RIA Chapter 2.4.4).
equal to 3 percent of initial upfront of time than the expected life of these
vehicle technology RPE cost.733 This 6. Payback components. However, we did account
annual cost was applied for each After assessing the suitability of the for these costs in our program costs, as
operating year of the vehicle. For further technology and costs associated with discussed in RIA Chapter 3.4, because
discussion on insurance cost see RIA ZEVs, EPA performed a payback they will occur over the lifetime of the
Chapter 2.5.3.3. calculation on each of the 101 HD vehicles.
iv. Taxes TRUCS vehicles for the BEV technology According to a 2013 study conducted
and FCEV technology that we by McKay and Co. the average out frame
In the NPRM analysis, we did not considered for the technology packages rebuilds for internal combustion engines
account for the upfront taxes paid by the to support the feasibility of the final in Class 4 through 8 vehicles range from
purchaser of the vehicle. Commenters standards in the MY 2027–2032 10 to 16 years.734 In addition, in the
pointed out the additional costs from timeframe. The payback period was HD2027 low NOx rule, EPA increased
the Federal excise tax and state sales tax calculated by determining the number emissions warranties for MY 2027 and
which should be included. For the final of years that it would take for the annual later HD engines beyond what is
rule, we added FET and state sales tax operational savings of a ZEV to offset required today.735
as a part of the upfront cost calculation the incremental upfront purchase price Typical battery warranties being
for purchaser in HD TRUCS. A FET of of a BEV or FCEV (after accounting for offered by HD BEV manufacturers range
12 percent was applied to the upfront the IRA section 13502 battery tax credit between 8 and 15 years today and we
powertrain technology retail price and IRA section 13403 vehicle tax credit are finalizing an emissions warranty
equivalent of Class 8 heavy-duty as described in RIA Chapters 2.4.3.1 and requirement for HD BEV (see preamble
vehicles and all tractors in HD TRUCS 2.4.3.5, respectively, Federal excise and section III.B).736 A BEV battery
(i.e., where the FET is applicable). state sales taxes and charging replacement may be practically
Similarly, our analysis in HD TRUCS infrastructure costs (for BEVs, after necessary over the operational life of a
now includes a state sales tax of 5.02 accounting for the IRA section 13404 vehicle if the battery deteriorates to a
percent, the average sales tax in the U.S. Alternative Fuel Refueling Property point where the vehicle range no longer
for heavy-duty vehicles. We applied this Credit) when compared to purchasing a meets the vehicle’s operational needs.
increase to the upfront powertrain comparable ICE vehicle. The ICE vehicle As explained in section II.D.5, we sized
technology retail price equivalent for all and ZEV costs calculated include the the battery in BEVs in HD TRUCS to
vehicles in HD TRUCS. RPE multiplier of 1.42 to include both meet a 10 year and 2,000 cycle
731 The authors indicate that relevant incentives fuelcells/financial-incentives-hydrogen-and-fuel- Rebuilds’’, September 2013. EPA Contract No. EP–
include but are not limited to the Alternative Fuel cell-projects. C–12–011 Work Assignment No. 1–06.
Refueling Property Credit (30C), the Credit of 733 Hussein Basma, Claire Buysee, Yuanrong 735 HD2027 rule (88 FR 4296, January 24, 2023).
Production of Clean Hydrogen (45V), the Qualified Zhou, and Felipe Rodriguez, ‘‘Total Cost of 736 Type C BEV school bus battery warranty range
Advanced Energy Project Credit (48C), and the Ownership of Alternative Powertrain Technologies five to fifteen years according to https://
Credit for Qualified Commercial Clean Vehicles for Class 8 Long-haul Trucks in the United States,’’ www.nyapt.org/resources/Documents/WRI_ESB-
(45W). April 2023. Page 17. Available at: https:// Buyers-Guide_US-Market_2022.pdf. The
732 U.S. Department of Energy, Hydrogen and theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/tco-alt- Freightliner electric walk-in van includes an eight-
Fuel Cell Technologies Office. ‘‘Financial powertrain-long-haul-trucks-us-apr23.pdf. year battery warranty according to https://
Incentives for Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Projects’’. 734 MacKay & Company ‘‘Industry www.electricwalkinvan.com/wp-content/uploads/
ER22AP24.043</GPH>
Available online: https://www.energy.gov/eere/ Characterization of Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine 2022/05/MT50e-specifications-2022.pdf.
130
Fmt 4701
threshold to better ensure a battery durability of the system, as discussed in the lead time necessary to implement
replacement would not be needed section II.D.5.v. the technologies; costs to manufacturers;
during the payback period assessed in costs to purchasers including operating
F. Final Standards
HD TRUCS. Furthermore, we believe savings; the impacts of standards on oil
that proper vehicle and battery The final standards are shown in conservation and energy security;
maintenance and management can Table II–24 and Table II–25 for impacts of standards on the truck
extend battery life. For example, vocational vehicles and in Table II–26 industry; other energy impacts; as well
manufacturers will utilize battery and Table II–27 for tractors. We are as other relevant factors such as impacts
management system to maintain the finalizing CO2 emission standards for on safety.741 In this rulemaking, EPA
temperature of the battery 737 as well heavy-duty vehicles that, compared to has accounted for a wide range of
the proposed standards, include less emissions control technologies,
active battery balancing to extend the
stringent standards for all vehicle including advanced ICE engine and
life of the battery.738 739 Likewise, pre-
categories in MYs 2027, 2028, 2029 and vehicle technologies (e.g., engine,
conditioning has also shown to extend
2030. The final standards increase in transmission, drivetrain, aerodynamics,
the life of the battery.740 In addition, stringency at a slower pace through MYs
research suggests that battery life is tire rolling resistance improvements, the
2027 to 2030 compared to the proposal, use of low carbon fuels like CNG and
expected to improve with new batteries and day cab tractor standards start in
over time as battery chemistry and LNG, and H2–ICE), hybrid technologies
MY 2028 and heavy heavy-duty (e.g., HEV and PHEV), and ZEV
battery charging strategies improve, vocational vehicles start in MY 2029
such that newer MY BEVs will have technologies (e.g., BEV and FCEV).
(we proposed Phase 3 standards for day These include technologies applied to
longer battery life. cabs and heavy-heavy vocational motor vehicles with ICE (including
Similar to the approach we took for vehicles starting in MY 2027). As hybrid powertrains) and without ICE,
sizing the battery in BEVs, we oversized proposed, the final standards for sleeper and a range of electrification across the
the fuel stack system to extend the cabs start in MY 2030 but are less technologies (from fully-electrified
stringent than proposed in that year and vehicle technologies without an ICE that
736 Type C BEV school bus battery warranty range in MY 2031, and equivalent to the achieve zero vehicle tailpipe emissions
five to fifteen years according to https:// proposed standards in MY 2032. We are (e.g., BEVs), fuel cell electric vehicle
www.nyapt.org/resources/Documents/WRI_ESB- finalizing MY 2031 standards that are technologies that run on hydrogen and
Buyers-Guide_US-Market_2022.pdf. The on par with the proposal for light- and
Freightliner electric walk-in van includes an eight- achieve zero tailpipe emissions (e.g.,
year battery warranty according to https:// medium-duty vocational vehicles and
FCEVs), as well as plug-in hybrid
www.electricwalkinvan.com/wp-content/uploads/ day cab tractors. Heavy heavy-duty
partially electrified technologies and
2022/05/MT50e-specifications-2022.pdf. vocational vehicle final standards are
737 Basma, Hussein, Charbel Mansour, Marc ICEs with electrified accessories). As
less stringent than proposed for all
Haddad, Maroun Nemer, Pascal Stabat. noted, under these performance-based
model years, including 2031 and 2032.
‘‘Comprehensive energy modeling methodology for emissions standards, manufacturers
battery electric buses’’. Energy: Volume 207, 15 For MY 2032, we are finalizing more
remain free to utilize any compliance
September 2020, 118241. Available online: https:// stringent standards than proposed for
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ choices they wish so long as they meet
light and medium heavy-duty
S0360544220313487. the CO2 emissions standards. See
vocational vehicles and day cab tractors.
738 Bae, SH., Park, J.W., Lee, S.H. ‘‘Optimal SOC
As further explained in section II.G, section II.G.5 of this preamble for
Reference Based Active Cell Balancing on a further discussion of how we balanced
Common Energy Bus of Battery’’ Available online: and consistent with our HD GHG Phase
http://koreascience.or.kr/article/ 1 and Phase 2 rulemakings, in this the factors we considered for the final
JAKO201709641401357.pdf. Phase 3 final rule we considered the Phase 3 standards.
739 Azad, F.S., Ahasan Habib, A.K.M., Rahman,
following factors: the impacts of
A., Ahmed I. ‘‘Active cell balancing of Li-Ion 740 ‘‘How to Improve EV Battery Performance in
batteries using single capacitor and single LC series

potential standards on emissions Cold Weather’’ Accessed on March 31, 2023.
resonant circuit.’’ https://beei.org/index.php/EEI/ reductions of GHG emissions; technical https://www.worktruckonline.com/10176367/how-
article/viewFile/1944/1491. feasibility and technology effectiveness; to-improve-ev-battery-performance-in-cold-weather.
131
Fmt 4701
ER22AP24.045</GPH>
ER22AP24.044</GPH>
132
Fmt 4701
Similar to the approach we used to ABT program,742 and our projected manufacturers could use to comply with
support the feasibility of previous HD potential compliance pathway includes the standards. EPA’s analysis projects
rulemakings, including both of the HD manufacturers producing a mix of HD that both within the product lines of
GHG rules, to support the feasibility of vehicles that utilize ICE-powered individual manufacturers and for
the final Phase 3 standards we vehicle technologies and ZEV different manufacturers across the
developed projected technology technologies, with specific adoption industry, manufacturers will make use
packages for a potential compliance rates for each regulatory subcategory of of a diverse range of technologies,
pathway that, on average, will meet vocational vehicles and tractors for each including a projected mix of ICE
each of the final Phase 3 standards for MY based on the analyses described in vehicle, BEV, and FCEV technologies.
this section II and RIA Chapter 2. Note EPA recognizes that, although it has
each regulatory subcategory of
that we have analyzed a modeled modeled this potential compliance
vocational vehicles and tractors after
potential technology compliance pathway to support the feasibility of the
considering the various factors pathway to support the feasibility and final rule and as part of the rulemaking
described in this section, including appropriateness of the level of process, manufacturers will make their
technology costs for manufacturers and stringency for each of the final own assessment of the vehicle market
costs to purchasers and operators. The standards and as part of the rulemaking and their own decisions about which
final Phase 3 GHG vehicle standards process. EPA’s analysis and modeling technologies to apply to which vehicles
apply to nationwide production provides information about one for any given model year to comply. The
volumes, which we took into account in potential compliance pathway standards are performance-based and
these technology packages and the while EPA finds modeling useful in
potential compliance pathway to 742 Note that our modeled potential compliance evaluating the feasibility of the
support the feasibility of the final Phase pathway does not include direct consideration of standards, it is manufacturers who will
certain additional flexibilities afforded within the
3 GHG vehicle standards. Consistent decide the ultimate mix of vehicle
ABT program generally or certain flexibilities

with EPA’s prior approach for HD GHG specifically updated in this final rule, including technologies to offer. Although EPA
ER22AP24.047</GPH>
vehicle emission standards, the carryover of credits generated through Phase 2 cannot analyze every possible
multipliers for advanced technologies (see section compliance scenario, for the analysis for
technology packages utilize the III.A.2 of this preamble) and an interim transitional
averaging portion of the longstanding effective expansion of averaging sets for credits
the final standards, we also have
generated as specified in section III.A.3 of this evaluated additional example
ER22AP24.046</GPH>
preamble. compliance scenarios (i.e., additional
133
Fmt 4701
example potential compliance provide manufacturers with additional that support the feasibility of the final
pathways) with only ICE and ICE lead time to design, develop, and rule standards—i.e., our modeled
vehicle technologies, as described in manufacture FCEV models, but that it is potential compliance pathway—include
section II.F.3. For example, EPA finds feasible to do so by MY 2030, as a projected mix of ICE vehicle, BEV, and
that it would be technologically feasible discussed in section II.D.3. With FCEV technologies that are discussed in
in the lead time provided and taking substantial Federal investment in low- section II.F.1. Sections II.F.2 and II.F.3
into consideration costs to GHG hydrogen production (see RIA include the costs and lead times
manufacturers and purchasers to meet Chapter 1.8.2), we anticipate that associated with these technologies that
these final standards without producing hydrogen supply will be sufficient and we considered. In addition, for the final
additional ZEVs to comply with this the price of hydrogen fuel will fall in rule, to further illustrate that there are
rule. The fact that such a fleet is the 2030 to 2035 timeframe to make HD many potential pathways to compliance
possible underscores both the feasibility FCEVs cost-competitive with for the final standards with a wide range
and the flexibility of the performance- comparable ICE vehicles for some duty of potential technology mixes, we
based standards, and confirms that cycles, as discussed in section II.E.5.ii. evaluated additional examples of other
manufacturers are likely to continue to We also note that the hydrogen potential compliance pathway’s
offer vehicles with a diverse range of infrastructure is expected to need technology packages that also support
technologies, including advanced additional time to further develop the feasibility of the final standards, and
vehicle with ICE technologies as well as compared to BEV depot charging which only include vehicles with ICE
ZEVs for the duration of these standards infrastructure, as discussed in greater technologies (‘‘additional example
and beyond. All of these compliance detail in RIA Chapter 1.8, but our potential compliance pathways’’) in
pathways are technically feasible, but in assessment is that refueling needs can section II.F.4.
our analysis, the modeled potential be met by MY 2030. We also recognize We intend for the standards for each
compliance pathway is the lowest cost the positive impact regulations can have individual year are severable from
one overall and is the one modeled on technology and recharging/refueling standards for each of the other years,
because EPA assumes that infrastructure development and including that the earlier MYs (MY 2027
manufacturers are commercial entities deployment. through MY 2029) are severable from
that seek to minimize costs and EPA granted the California ACT the later MYs (MYs 2030 and later).
maximize profits. waiver request on March 30, 2023. The More specifically, our analysis supports
We phased in the final standards approach we used to support the that the standards for each of the later
gradually between MYs 2027 and 2032 feasibility of the final standards, years are feasible and appropriate even
to address potential lead time concerns described in this section II, was to absent standards for each of the earlier
associated with feasibility for develop technology packages on a years, and vice versa. For example,
manufacturers to deploy technologies, nationwide basis and including EPA’s revisions to certain MY 2027
including ZEV technologies, to meet the nationwide production volumes, standards are severable from the new
standards. Concerns include including vehicles sold to meet the ACT MY 2028 and later standards because
consideration of time necessary to ramp requirement in California and other our analysis supports that the standards
up battery production, increase the states that have adopted or may adopt for each of the later years are feasible
availability of critical raw minerals and it under CAA section 177. With the and appropriate even absent the revised
assure sufficiently resilient supply granting of the California ACT waiver, MY 2027 standards. Additionally, we
chains, as discussed in section we also considered how vehicles sold to intend that the standards for each
II.D.2.c.ii. The concerns also include meet the ACT requirement in California category of vocational vehicles and
recognition that it will take time for and other states that have adopted or tractors for each individual model year
installation of EVSE and necessary may adopt it under CAA section 177 are severable, including from the
supporting electrical infrastructure by would impact our reference case (that is, standards for all other categories for that
the BEV purchasers and associated the baseline from which we model model year, and from the standards for
electrical utility, as discussed in RTC projected effects of the final rule). For different model years. Thus, we intend
section 7 (Distribution). They also the final rule, to reflect the ZEV levels each of the Phase 3 emission standards
include consideration of time to design, projected from ACT in California and finalized in this rule to be entirely
develop, and manufacture FCEV models other states, we included these separate from each of the other Phase 3
and hydrogen infrastructure as projected ZEV sales volumes in the emission standards and other varied
discussed in RTC section 8.1, and reference case.743 components of this rule, and severable
willingness to purchase a relatively new We have finalized the new Phase 3 from each other. EPA has considered
technology. We project BEV technology CO2 emission standards using the and adopted the Phase 3 emission
adoption in the potential compliance regulatory subcategories we adopted in standards and the remaining portions of
pathway as early as MY 2027 for certain HD GHG Phase 2, as discussed in the final rule independently, and each
applications where we focused on depot section II.C. As we discuss later in this is severable should there be judicial
charging, and we project adoption of subsection, the technology packages review. For example, EPA notes that our
BEV technology in applications that will vary across the 101 HD TRUCS vehicle judgments regarding feasibility of the
depend on public charging and FCEV types and thus across the regulatory Phase 3 standards for earlier years
technology in the technology packages subcategories. Our technology packages largely reflect anticipated changes in the
for the potential compliance pathway 743 Because it would have been improper to
heavy-duty vehicle market (which are
starting in MY 2030 for select driven by other factors, such as the IRA
prejudge the outcome of EPA’s disposition of

applications that travel longer distances California’s request for a preemption waiver for its and manufacturers’ plans), while our
(i.e., coach buses, sleeper cab tractors ACT program, EPA did not include the full effects judgment regarding feasibility of the
and day cab tractors). There has been of that program as an enforceable program in the standards in later years reflects those
reference case (baseline) used at proposal, although
only limited development of FCEVs for we did make certain estimates of ZEV sales in
trends plus the additional lead time for
the HD market to date; therefore, our California and other states that had adopted ACT further adoption of control technologies.
assessment is that it is appropriate to under CAA section 177. 88 FR 25989. Thus, the standards for the later years
134
Fmt 4701
are feasible even absent standards for 1. Technology Packages To Support the methods in the literature to estimate the
the earlier years, and vice versa. Feasibility of the Final Standards relationship between payback period
Additionally, our judgments regarding We support the feasibility of the final and technology adoption in the HD
the standards for each separate vehicle standards through technology packages vehicle market. We noted at proposal
category are likewise independent and that we had explored the following
that include both ICE vehicle and ZEV
do not rely on one another. For another methods: (1) the methods described in
technologies. In our analysis, the ICE
example, EPA notes that our judgments ACT Research’s ChargeForward
vehicles include a suite of technologies
regarding feasibility of the standards for report,745 (2) NREL’s Transportation
that represent a vehicle that meets the
vocational vehicles reflects our Technology Total Cost of Ownership
existing MY 2027 Phase 2 CO2 emission
judgment regarding the general (T3CO) tool,746 (3) Oak Ridge National
standards. These technologies exist
availability of depot-charging Laboratory’s Market Acceptance of
today and continue to evolve to improve
infrastructure in MY 2027 and for each Advanced Automotive Technologies
the efficiency of the engine,
later model year under the modeled (MA3T) model,747 (4) Pacific Northwest
transmission, drivetrain, aerodynamics,
potential compliance pathway, and that National Laboratory’s Global Change
judgment is independent of our and tire rolling resistance in HD
vehicles and therefore reduce their CO2 Analysis Model (GCAM),748 (5) ERM’s
judgment regarding standards for market growth analysis done on behalf
tractors that reflects our judgment emissions. Further adoption of these
Phase 2 ICE technologies beyond the of EDF,749 (6) Energy Innovation’s
regarding more reliance on publicly United States Energy Policy Simulator
available charging infrastructure and adoption rates used in the HD GHG
Phase 2 rule may be utilized as part of used in a January 2023 analysis by ICCT
hydrogen refueling infrastructure in the and Energy Innovation,750 and (7)
MY 2030 and for each later model year other example potential compliance
pathways to meet the final standards, as CALSTART’s Drive to Zero Market
under the modeled potential Projection Model.751 DRIA at 231. Of
compliance pathway. Similarly, within discussed in section II.F.4. In addition,
the heavy-duty industry continues to these methods explored for the
the standards for vocational vehicles, proposal, only ACT Research’s work
our judgments regarding the feasibility develop CO2-reducing technologies such
as hybrid powertrains and H2–ICE directly related payback period to
of each model year of the standards for technology adoption rates. We stated in
each category of vocational vehicles powered vehicles, also discussed in
section II.F.4 as part of other example the proposal that, based on our
(LHD, MHD, and HHD) and for tractors experience, payback is the most relevant
(day cab and sleeper cab) reflects our potential compliance pathways to meet
the final standards. These further metric to the HD vehicle industry. Thus,
judgments regarding the design for the proposal, we considered the ACT
requirements and payback analysis for technology improvements are not part of
the technology packages for the Research method most relevant to assess
each of the individual 101 vehicle types willingness to purchase and modified
analyzed in HD TRUCS and then modeled potential compliance pathway
supporting the feasibility of the final their method, including to account for
aggregated to the individual vehicle the effects of our proposed regulation, as
category, independent of those same standards but are included as specified
in section II.F.4 in the additional described in DRIA Chapter 2.7.9.
kinds of judgments for the other vehicle There were many comments regarding
categories and independent from prior example potential compliance pathways
EPA’s use of a payback metric at
MYs standards, under the modeled supporting the feasibility of the final
potential compliance pathway. See standards. They are available to any 745 Mitchell, George. Memorandum to docket
further discussion in RTC Chapter 2.10, manufacturer determining its own EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. ACT Research Co. LLC.
regarding how EPA’s analysis for the compliance pathway, and further ‘‘Charging Forward’’ 2020–2040 BEV & FCEV
modeled potential compliance pathway support that the final Phase 3 standards Forecast & Analysis, updated December 2021.
746 National Renewable Energy Laboratory. T3CO:
supports the feasibility for each MY of are feasible and appropriate
Transportation Technology Total Cost of
the Phase 3 final standards for each performance-based standards. Ownership. Available at: https://www.nrel.gov/
vehicle category, including phase-in In the transportation sector, new transportation/t3co.html.
factors up to MY 2032 and later that technology adoption rates often follow 747 Oak Ridge National Laboratory. ‘‘MA3T-
EPA used for a given Phase 3 MY and an S-shape. As discussed in the TruckChoice.’’ June 2021. Available at: https://
preamble to the HD GHG Phase 2 final www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021-07/
are independent of the prior Phase 3 van021_lin_2021_o_5-28_1126pm_LR_FINAL_
MY(s) standards. rule, the adoption rates for a specific ML.pdf.
If a court were to invalidate any one technology are initially slow, followed 748 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. GCAM:
of these elements of the final rule, we by a rapid adoption period, then Global Change Analysis Model. https://
intend the remainder of this action to leveling off as the market saturates, and gcims.pnnl.gov/modeling/gcam-global-change-
analysis-model.
remain effective. Importantly, we have not always at 100 percent.744 Two 749 Robo, Ellen and Dave Seamonds. Technical
designed these different elements of the commenters agreed that technology Memo to Environmental Defense Fund: Analysis of
program to function sensibly and adoption follows an S-shape, as we Alternative Medium- and Heavy-Duty Zero-
independently, the supporting basis for stated in the proposal. Emission Vehicle Business-As-Usual Scenarios.
each of these elements of the final rule In the proposal, we developed a ERM. August 19, 2022. Available online: https://
www.erm.com/contentassets/
reflects that they are independently method to project utilization of BEV and 154d08e0d0674752925cd82c66b3e2b1/edf-zev-
justified and appropriate, and find each FCEV technologies in the HD vehicle baseline-technical-memo-16may2022.pdf.
portion appropriate even if one or more technology packages after considering 750 ICCT and Energy Innovation. ‘‘Analyzing the
other parts of the rule has been set methods in the literature. There is Impact of the Inflation Reduction Act on Electric
Vehicle Uptake in the United States’’. January 2023.
aside. For example, if a reviewing court limited existing data to support Available online: https://theicct.org/wp-content/
were to invalidate the MY 2027 estimations of adoption rates of HD ZEV uploads/2023/01/ira-impact-evs-us-jan23-2.pdf.
standards for LHD vocational vehicles, technologies. The methods considered 751 Al-Alawi, Baha M., Owen MacDonnell,
the other components of the rule, and explored in the formulation of the Cristiano Facanha. ‘‘Global Sales Targets for Zero-
including the other Phase 3 GHG method used in the proposal was Emission Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles—
Methods and Application’’. February 2022.
standards, remain fully operable as the developed by EPA after considering Available online: https://globaldrivetozero.org/site/
remaining components for the rule wp-content/uploads/2022/02/CALSTART_Global-
would remain appropriate and feasible. 744 81 FR 73558, Oct 25, 2016. Sales_White-Paper.pdf.
135
Fmt 4701
proposal as a means of developing a did not appear in the DRIA making evaluated the work conducted by one
potential compliance pathway that comment difficult without getting commenter in development of their
included the use of ZEVs. Two access—and one commenter obtained suggested alternative curve, which was
commenters said, considered alone, the equation and asserted that they derived from the TEMPO outputs. Our
payback is an incomplete metric. Other found no substantive basis for it. As just purpose was to assess the
factors to consider are reluctance to noted, in one commenter’s submitted reasonableness of utilizing the TEMPO
utilize a new technology, effects of comment, ACT Research itself reviewed results for adoption rates and payback
inflation, vehicle suitability, resale the NPRM and stated that EPA had period relationships. We found the
value, end of the IRA and other price misapplied the equation by leaving out approach to be robust, and we were able
incentives, critical mineral availability, various factors, including a to reproduce similar adoption rates for
and availability of supportive charging consideration of total cost of ownership each payback period bin relative to
infrastructure. One of these commenters in addition to payback period. Some those provided by the commenter.
cited ACT Research’s own evaluation commenters believed the total cost of Therefore, based on our assessment that
that EPA should not have increased the ownership approach used in NREL’s NREL’s TEMPO model is robust and the
adoption rates for payback periods Transportation Energy & Mobility adoption rates to payback period
greater than four years for MY 2032 and Pathway Options (TEMPO) Model relationship is reproducible, for the
that our analysis should not have (Muratori et al., 2021) was a better way final rule, we are continuing to use the
included payback-based adoption rates to assess the shape of the payback curve. same payback period method we used
for payback periods beyond ten years, One of these commenters stated that the in the proposal, but have revised the
because this is beyond the payback NREL model ‘‘overcomes key adoption rates that correspond to the
period that would be acceptable. In deficiencies of the ACT Research-based payback period bins based on data from
addition, ACT Research did not agree curve by being based on validated NREL’s TEMPO model instead of the
with EPA using two different adoption empirical data, subject to peer-review, use of the ACT Research-based model.
schedules corresponding to MY 2027 and freely available to the public.’’ 752 See RIA Chapter 2.7 for additional
and MY 2032. Another commenter One commenter also provided an details.
stated that our use of the payback period alternate distribution of adoption rate In the proposal, we applied an
table showing fleets purchasing BEVs based on payback period developed additional constraint (which at times we
and FCEVs at payback periods of up to from their assessment of the inputs from refer to as a ‘‘cap’’) within HD TRUCS
15 years in MY 2027, and beyond 15 a NREL study using the TEMPO that limited the maximum penetration
years in MY 2032 are ‘‘unrealistic’’ Model.753 This commenter also (i.e., adoption percentage) of the BEV
because fleet owners look for payback suggested standards of significantly and FCEV technologies to 80 percent for
periods of two years or less. Another increased stringency using the data from any given vehicle type. This limit was
commenter stated that EPA should the TEMPO model. The other developed after consideration of the
adopt a more conservative payback commenter provided an alternate curve actual needs of the purchasers related to
schedule and suggested one in their based on payback period developed two primary areas of our analysis. Our
comments. from their assessment of the inputs and first consideration was that this volume
Some commenters advocated for more results from a NREL study using the limit takes into account that we sized
stringent standards (see section II.B.1.i TEMPO Model. Another commenter the batteries, power electronics, e-
of this preamble). One of these preferred an alternative method for motors, and infrastructure for each
commenters spoke to the length of a assessing a ZEV-based acceptance. Their vehicle type based on the 90th
payback period, noting that payback model uses a logit function less percentile of the average VMT. As
periods well within a vehicle’s lifetime sensitive to price, developed by the explained in section II.D.5, we utilized
should be sufficient, noting especially Pacific Northwest Laboratory, and also this technical assessment approach
that vocational vehicles have long uses a 15 percent discount rate. because we do not expect heavy-duty
ownership periods. They also We agree with the assessment asserted OEMs to design ZEV models for the
questioned the purportedly relatively in comment that the approach 100th percentile VMT daily use case for
low percentages of projected ZEVs developed by NREL for use in the vehicle applications, as this could
where EPA had estimated payback TEMPO model is more transparent.754 significantly increase the ZEV
periods of 1–2 years. Another Furthermore, for the final rule, we powertrain size, weight, and costs for a
commenter noted that EPA’s projected further evaluated and found NREL’s ZEV application for all users, when only
compliance path showed less ZEV TEMPO model and approach to be a relatively small part of the market will
utilization than many estimates in the robust. The NREL TEMPO model is need such specifications. Therefore, the
literature, citing BloombergNEF, as well peer-reviewed and applicable to our use ZEVs we analyzed and have included in
as various of the ICCT White Papers and because it specifically evaluated HD ICE the technology packages and cost
the levels required in California’s vehicles, BEVs, and FCEVs. We projections for the proposal and this
Advanced Clean Fleet program. Another evaluated NREL’s approach to
commenter noted generally that total determining technology choices
Furthermore, they express ‘‘TEMPO finds pathways
cost of ownership of BEVs would to achieve energy/emissions goals and estimates
modeled in TEMPO using a discrete implications of different scenarios and decisions.’’
necessarily be less than for ICE vehicles choice logit formulation.755 We also A part of this decision process includes inputs such
due to their simpler drivetrains, which as vehicle cost and performance, fuel costs,
would occasion less maintenance costs. 752 ICCT Comments to the HD GHG Phase 3 charging and refueling availability, and travel
As further detailed in RTC sections behavior. The model receives this information and
NPRM. EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985–1553–A1, p. 2.
applies a technology adoption to various inputs and
2.4 and 3.12.2, some of these 753 EDF Comments to Docket. EPA–HQ–OAR–
provides technology based on market segment as a

commenters criticized EPA’s use at 2022–0985–1644–A1, p. 58–59. part of the outputs for TEMPO. The method they
proposal of the data from ACT 754 See also RIA Chapter 2.7 and RTC section
used is based on a logit formulation to describe a
Research’s payback equation. The 3.11.2 for additional discussion on the comments relationship between consumer adoption and
received. aforementioned inputs, cost coefficients and
critique from these commenters was 755 NREL describes ‘‘TEMPO is a transportation financial horizon. One commenter worked with
both for lack of transparency—stating demand model that covers the entire U.S. NREL to provide the relationship between adoption
that the equation was proprietary and so transportation sector’’ including the HD market. rate and payback period.
136
Fmt 4701
final rule in the timeframe at issue are restrictive, than the applicable levels will have more limitations in MY 2027
likely not appropriate for 100 percent of considered in ACT. Another commenter (and thus taking a conservative
the vehicle applications in the real- stated that the results from EPA’s HD approach to the levels of the caps in
world. Our second consideration for TRUCS would need to be further those earlier model years) but will be
including a limit for BEVs and FCEVs is discounted to reflect that the charging further developed by MY 2032, while
that we recognize there is a wide variety and H2 fueling infrastructure would not also capping each vehicle type in HD
of real-world operation even for the be in place to meet the proposed MY TRUCS below the proposed value of 80
same type of vehicle. For example, some 2027 through 2032 standards. percent utilization of ZEV technologies
owners may not have the ability to After consideration of comments, including in MY 2032.
install charging infrastructure at their including concerns raised by Put another way, depending on the
facility, or some vehicles may need to be manufacturers, we re-evaluated the MY, these caps in HD TRUCS reflect a
operational 24 hours a day. Under the maximum penetration constraints and balanced and measured approach to
technology pathway projected to ‘‘caps’’ in HD TRUCS for the final rule. consideration of a combination of
support the feasibility for these final The constraints discussed in the extreme use situations (including
standards, ICE vehicle technologies proposal, such as the methodology to extremes of daily VMT), extreme usages
continue to be included and available in size the batteries and the recognition of such as continuous operation, and
volumes to address these specific the variety of real-world applications of ensuring adequate lead time for the
vehicle applications. heavy-duty trucks, still apply to the various considerations just explained.
The TEMPO model, as shown in RIA final rule analysis. Furthermore, we are These real world constraints are not
Chapter 2.7.1, would attribute 100 taking a phased-in approach to the reflected in the TEMPO model used to
percent adoption to vehicles that have constraints to recognize that the develop payback; rather, the caps are
an immediate payback (payback less development of the ZEV market will part of EPA’s appropriate consideration
than or equal to 0 year). A number of take time to develop. We broadly of these issues. Regarding additional
commenters questioned the 80 percent considered the lead time necessary to responses to comments summarized
limit in the HD TRUCS analysis. Two increase heavy-duty battery production here, please see RTC sections 2.4, 3.3.1
commenters found some merit to EPA’s (as discussed in preamble section and 3.11.2, and see also RIA Chapter
premise that a cap reflected that ZEVs II.D.2.ii), including growth in the 2.7.
would not be suitable for all planned battery production capacity The payback schedule used in HD
applications, but both of these from now through 2032 and other issues TRUCS for the final rule is shown in
commenters maintained that this would including availability of critical Table II–28. The schedule utilizes lower
be less and less over time. minerals and related supply chains, and rates of technology acceptance than
Consequently, these commenters time for manufacturers to design, those used in the proposal for payback
thought EPA’s methodology should at develop, and manufacture ZEVs (as periods greater than four years. The
the least increase the cap in the discussed in preamble section II.F.3). schedule shows that when the payback
standards’ out years. One of these We also have generally accounted for is immediate, we project that up to 20
commenters also submitted an analysis the time required to deploy percent of that type of vehicle could use
without a cap (i.e., with a 100 percent infrastructure (as discussed in preamble BEV technology in MY 2027 for the
cap) where their model showed section II.F.3), including the potential reasons just discussed, with
immediate payback. Under this need for distribution grid buildout diminishing adoption as the payback
alternative methodology, the commenter through 2032 as informed by our
period increases to more than 4 years.756
projected higher ZEV penetration for analysis and by the DOE’s TEIS (as
After consideration of comments from
many of the vehicle Class 2–4 and 6–7 discussed in preamble section II.D.2.iii).
stakeholders, we also set the adoption
trucks, refuse trucks, and almost all bus We see a similar trend in the growth of
rates to zero for payback bins that were
segments. This commenter also noted the infrastructure to support H2
greater than 10 years. The length of
these estimates did not consider the refueling for FCEVs (as discussed in
ownership of new tractors varies. One
effects of the IRA. Both of these preamble section II.D.3.v).
In recognition of these considerations, study found that first ownership is
commenters also maintained that 80
for the final rule we applied more customarily four to seven years for For-
percent was too conservative even for
conservative maximum penetration Hire companies and seven to 12 years
MY 2027, especially when coupled with
the 90th percentile sizing VMT for the constraints within HD TRUCS than were for private fleets.757 Another survey
battery. Another commenter supported a used in the proposal and which are found that the average trade-in cycle for
cap of 90 percent. consistent with a balanced and tractors was 8.7 years.758 Whereas, EMA
Another commenter challenged the 80 measured approach generally, which in and NADA stated that tractors typically
percent cap as inconsistent with that our assessment are appropriate and also have three to five year trade cycles.759
commenter’s purportedly extensive address concerns raised by
756 See RIA Chapter 2.7.9 for additional
telematics data that showed the 90th manufacturers. We limited the
information on the development of the adoption
percentile VMTs we used in the NPRM maximum penetration of the ZEV rate schedule for HD TRUCS for the final rule.
for day cab and sleeper cab tractors were technologies in HD TRUCS to 20 757 Roeth, Mike, et al. ‘‘Barriers to Increased
too low, and suggested that Class 4–7 percent in MY 2027, 37 percent in MY Adoption of Fuel Efficiency Technologies in Freight
ZEVs with payback rates of <0 years 2030 and 70 percent in MY 2032 for any Trucking,’’ Page 24. July 2013. International
would have an adoption rate of 73 given vehicle type. These caps are based Council for Clean Transportation. Available at
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/
percent, and Class 8 ZEVs with payback upon an exercise of technical judgment ICCT-NACFE-CSS_Barriers_Report_Final_
rates of <0 years would have an after reviewing the entire record and 20130722.pdf.
adoption rate of 36 percent, noting that reflect consideration of and address 758 American Transportation Research Institute.
these rates are consistent with CARB’s concerns about infrastructure readiness, ‘‘An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking:
2019 initial market assessment for the willingness to purchase, and critical 2021 Update.’’ November 2021. Page 14.
759 See NADA’s comments at Docket # EPA–HQ–
ACT rule. This commenter also mineral and supply chain availability, OAR–20220–0985–1592–A1 at pp. 7–8 and EMA’s
questioned why EPA’s cap for those reflecting that infrastructure, technology comments at Docket # EPA–HQ–OAR–20220–0985–
categories can be higher, that is, less familiarity, and material availability 2668–A1 at p.48.
137
Fmt 4701
As we discussed in the HD GHG Phase typically have trade cycles of seven to adoption and payback period that was
2 rulemaking, vocational vehicles ten years for most operations.761 created from TEMPO outputs differ from
generally accumulate far fewer annual The issues raised by commenters were the ACT payback schedule used in the
miles than tractors and will lead owners thus considered, and issues raised by proposal and is reflective of a more
of these vehicles to keep them for longer manufacturers were thus addressed, in typical S-curve, where adoption starts
periods of time.760 To the extent our final rule’s approach to HD TRUCS slow and then speeds up. Note, the 70
vocational vehicle owners may be and the projected technology packages: percent constraint we imposed and
similar to owners of tractors in terms of by applying the MY 2027, MY 2030 and explained in this subsection limits the
MY 2032 caps, as discussed, and
business profiles, they are more likely to adoption of the shortest payback bins
through lower ZEV adoption in the
resemble private fleets or owner- for MY 2032.
technology packages for payback
operators than for-hire fleets. See 81 FR periods that are longer than 4 years The schedule shown in Table II–28
73719 (‘‘the usual period of ownership (including setting adoption to zero for was used in HD TRUCS to evaluate the
for a vocational vehicle reflects a payback bins greater than ten years) and use of BEV or FCEV technologies for
lengthy trade cycle that may often higher (than longer payback periods) each of the 101 HD TRUCS vehicle
exceed seven years’’). In addition, EMA ZEV adoption when payback is 4 years types based on its payback period for
and NADA stated that heavy-duty trucks or sooner. The relationship between MYs 2027, 2030, and 2032.
After the technology assessment, as We first determined the ZEVs that are as described in RIA Chapter 2.10.1. The
described in section II.D and RIA appropriate based on their payback for resulting projected ZEVs (shown in
Chapter 2, and technology cost and each of the 101 vehicle types for MYs Table II–29) and projected ICE vehicles
payback analysis, as described in 2027, 2030, and 2032, which can be that achieve a level of CO2 emissions
section II.E and RIA Chapter 2.7.2, EPA found in RIA Chapter 2.8.3.1. We then performance equal to the existing MY
determined the technology mix of ICE aggregated the projected ZEVs for the 2027 emission standards (shown in
vehicle and ZEV for each regulatory specific vehicle types into their Table II–30) were built into our
subcategory in the technology packages respective regulatory subcategories technology packages for the potential
for the potential compliance pathway. relative to the vehicle’s sales weighting, compliance pathway.
760 81 FR 73678 and 73719, October 25, 2016. 761 See NADA’s comments at Docket # EPA–HQ– comments at Docket # EPA–HQ–OAR–20220–0985–
ER22AP24.048</GPH>
OAR–20220–0985–1592–A1 at pp. 7–8 and EMA’s 2668–A1 at p.48.
138
Fmt 4701
As shown in Table II–30, under the the reference case as described in II–31. Similarly, in the MY 2032
modeled potential compliance pathway section V.A. The portion of the overall reference case, 20 percent of the HD
the majority of sales of new HD vehicles HD sales in MY 2027 that are ZEVs sales are projected to be ZEVs, versus 45
in MYs 2027 through 2032 are projected included in the reference case is 7 percent ZEVs in the HD national fleet
to be ICE vehicles with GHG-reducing percent, compared to 11 percent of sales
with the potential compliance pathway

technologies. These values represent the being ZEVs across the nation due to the
ER22AP24.050</GPH>
modeled for the final rule, respectively.

total national HD ZEV and ICE vehicle final rule under our modeled potential
sales, including those accounted for in compliance pathway, as shown in Table
ER22AP24.049</GPH>
139
Fmt 4701
The composition of the overall HD on- uncertainties, including those standards for the other bus optional
road fleet in future years with the final associated with utilizing such custom chassis subcategory.762
rule under our modeled potential technologies in the nearest term for We are finalizing the approach we
compliance pathway and accounting for HHD vocational vehicles, the potential proposed for several other optional
ZEVs in the reference case, is projected disparities between manufacturers in custom chassis categories. We are
to include the following: the need for lead time and their finalizing our proposed approach to not
• In 2027: 1 percent of the on-road corresponding compliance strategies, set Phase 3 standards for motor homes
fleet are ZEVs. and the overall strengthening of the certified to the optional custom chassis
• In 2032: 7 percent of the on-road program in MY 2027 under Phase 3, we regulatory subcategory after
fleet are ZEVs. think it is reasonable to not revise the consideration of projected technologies
• In 2040: 22 percent of the on-road for motor homes, including the
HHD vocational vehicle emission
fleet are ZEVs. projected impact of the weight of
For the final standards, EPA did not standards for MY 2027 or 2028. In
addition, we are not revising the day cab batteries in BEVs in the MYs 2027–
revise (i.e., is not finalizing the 2032, as described in RIA Chapter 2.8.1.
proposed revision to) the MY 2027 or tractor emission standards for MY 2027
for similar reasons. This approach was supported by two
2028 CO2 emission standards for the commenters. The existing Phase 2
HHD vocational vehicles but have set The HD GHG Phase 2 program optional custom chassis standards for
new CO2 emission standards for HHD includes optional custom chassis this subcategory will continue to apply.
vocational vehicles beginning in MYs emission standards for eight specific Furthermore, we also are not finalizing
2029 through 2032. Similarly, we are vehicle types. Those vehicle types may Phase 3 standards for emergency
not revising the MY 2027 day cab tractor either meet the primary vocational vehicles certified to the optional custom
standards, but have set new standards vehicle program standards or, at the chassis regulatory subcategory due to
beginning in MY 2028. Our reference vehicle manufacturer’s option, may our assessment that these vehicles have
case modeling does include some HHD comply with these optional standards. unpredictable operational requirements
vocational and day cab tractor ZEVs in The existing optional custom chassis and after considering suitability of
MY 2027 and HHD vocational ZEVs in standards are numerically less stringent projected technologies, including that
MY 2028. This is our best estimate of than the primary HD GHG Phase 2 emergency vehicles may have limited
ZEV technology penetration for the vocational vehicle standards, but the access to recharging facilities while
reference case. Nonetheless, we ABT program is more restrictive for handling emergency situations in the
recognize the significant uncertainties vehicles certified to these optional MYs 2027–2032 timeframe. Finally, we
associated with the commercializing of standards. Banking and trading of are not adopting new standards for
these technologies in the HHD space, credits is not permitted, with the mixed-use vehicle optional custom
which are still in their infancy today. exception that small businesses may use chassis regulatory subcategory because
We also recognize that vehicle traded credits to comply with the of our assessment that these vehicles
manufacturers may have different optional custom-chassis standards. (such as hazardous material equipment
technology pathway plans to Averaging is only allowed within each or off-road drill equipment) are
demonstrate compliance with ACT, and specific custom chassis regulatory designed to work inherently in an off-
we acknowledge that certain vehicle subcategory for vehicles certified to road environment or are designed to
manufacturer comments stated that they these optional standards. If a operate at low speeds such as to be
do not expect to produce a significant manufacturer wishes to make use of the unsuitable for normal highway
number of HHD ZEVs by MY 2028 full ABT program, from the production operation and, after consideration of
because the HHD vocational vehicles of some or all of their custom-chassis suitability of projected technologies,
will be one of the most challenging vehicles in a given model year, they including that they therefore may have
groups in which to utilize such may certify them to the primary limited access to on-site depot or public
technologies. Our revised analysis for vocational vehicle standards. charging facilities in the MYs 2027–
the final rule projects lower levels of 2032 timeframe.763 The existing Phase 2
HHD ZEVs in the compliance pathways In this final action, as presented
previously in this section, we are optional custom chassis standards for
for MYs 2027–2032 than the proposal. It this subcategory will continue to apply.
also delays the start of the Phase 3 adopting more stringent standards for
some, but not all, of these optional We also are not finalizing Phase 3
standards for day cabs by one year, standards for two other optional custom
beginning in MY 2028. We recognize custom chassis subcategories. We are
revising MY 2027 emission standards chassis categories. Several stakeholders
that the manufacturers’ resources will raised significant concerns related to the
require them to make practical business and establishing new MY 2028 through
MY 2032 and later emission standards ability of coach buses to perform their
decisions to first develop products that
will have a better business case. Our for the school bus optional custom 762 See 40 CFR 1037.105(h)(1) for the final
assessment of the final program as a chassis regulatory subcategory. We are standards that apply for custom chassis vehicles.
whole is that it takes a balanced also establishing new MY 2028 through See existing 40 CFR 1037.105(h)(2) for restrictions
approach while still applying MY 2032 and later emission standards on averaging, banking, and trading for vehicles
for refuse hauler optional custom optionally certified to the custom chassis standards.
meaningful requirements in MY 2027 to 763 Mixed-use vehicles must meet the criteria as
reducing GHG emissions from the HD chassis subcategory and new MY 2029 described in 40 CFR 1037.105(h)(1), 1037.631(a)(1),
through MY 2032 and later emission
ER22AP24.051</GPH>
sector. In light of these challenges and and 1037.631(a)(2).
140
Fmt 4701
mission (transporting people and their the ability of concrete mixers and 2. Summary of Costs Assessment To
cargo) using battery electric technology. pumpers to electrify. They point to Meet the Final Emission Standards
Furthermore, commenters raised issues related to higher PTO usage, We supported the feasibility of the
concerns regarding the infrastructure traveling at loads higher than those used final standards through a potential
needs for electrified motorcoaches in EPA’s HD TRUCS analysis, and compliance pathway’s projected
because these vehicles would need to weight sensitivity. One commenter technology packages that include both
rely on public enroute charging. As maintains that energy used by concrete ICE vehicle and ZEV technologies. To
noted in RIA Chapter 1.5.5, there are mixers is significantly higher than what assess the projected costs of the final
currently two manufacturers of coach is represented in GEM and suggests the Phase 3 emission standards, we thus
buses that produce BEV versions of the underestimated load requirements (and assess the costs of the potential
vehicles. We note that there are a variety compliance pathway’s projected
therefore energy requirements) result in
of different applications of a coach bus. technology packages. In our analysis,
smaller battery sizes and lower costs in
In some instances, it may be used for a the ICE vehicles include a suite of
day trip or for commuting and require HD TRUCS than what that commenter
expects. The commenter states that, as technologies that represent a vehicle
minimal underfloor luggage space and that meets the existing MY 2027 Phase
may not require a restroom. Another a result, concrete mixers should have
unique standards from other vocational 2 CO2 emission standards and HD 2027
common use is for trips with longer NOx emission standards. We accounted
distances such that passengers travel vehicles based on lower adoption rates.
for these technology costs as part of the
with luggage or sports equipment that On the other hand, another commenter
HD GHG Phase 2 final rule and the HD
requires underfloor storage. EPA provided links to several electrified 2027 NOx rule. Therefore, our
contracted FEV to conduct analysis of concrete mixer and pumpers where technology costs for the ICE vehicles in
the packaging feasibility of a FCEV prototypes have been supplied to our analysis are considered to be $0
powertrain on a coach bus to inform the customers in Europe. Additionally, because we did not add additional CO2-
final rule. FEV found that a FCEV another commenter stated that EPA reducing technologies to the ICE
powertrain would require the loss of 2– should set more stringent standards for vehicles in the technology packages for
4 seats and 30 percent of the luggage concrete mixers based on their this final rule beyond those already
volume.764 The capacity loss was driven emissions impact on overburdened required under the existing regulations.
by the space needed for the hydrogen communities. For the final rule, EPA The incremental cost of a heavy-duty
tanks, fuel cell with BOP, and/or increased the PTO loads required for ZEV in our analysis is the marginal cost
batteries. Our assessment is that the concrete mixers and pumpers in our HD of ZEV powertrain components
weight and volume required for TRUCS analysis based on consideration compared to ICE powertrain
packaging a BEV powertrain would be of information provided by another components on a comparable ICE
greater than the requirements for a commenter, and therefore these vehicles vehicle. This includes the removal of
FCEV powertrain, and therefore result have larger power demands and battery the associated costs of ICE-specific
in even greater capacity losses. After sizes in the final rule HD TRUCS components from the baseline vehicle
further consideration of suitability of analysis than the vehicles had in the and the addition of the ZEV components
projected technologies, including EPA and associated costs. RIA Chapter 2.3.2
NPRM analysis. In recognition of the
re-analyzing the packaging space and 2.4.3 includes the ICE powertrain
uncertainty related to the payload
available for battery electric and fuel and BEV powertrain cost estimates for
cell powertrains on coach buses, EPA weight and PTO demands of these each of the 101 HD vehicle types that
now agrees with the commenters that vehicles, EPA determined that the are included in our technology packages
feasibility demonstrations for new Phase optional custom chassis standards for to support the compliance pathway. RIA
3 optional custom chassis standards for Concrete Mixers/Pumpers and Mixed- Chapter 2.5.2 includes the FCEV
coach buses during the timeframe of the Use Vehicles will remain unchanged powertrain cost projections for the
final rule should not include from the existing Phase 2 custom applicable vehicles.
application of BEV or FCEV technology chassis emission standards. See RIA
Chapter 2.9.1.1. However, because there i. Manufacturer Costs
due to the packaging space required to
meet commercial range requirements are prototypes for some electrified Table II–32 and Table II–33 show the
while also having adequate luggage concrete mixers and pumpers, we ZEV technology costs for manufacturers
space. Therefore, EPA’s optional custom continued to include several of these relative to the reference case described
chassis standards for Coach Buses will vehicle types within HD TRUCS where in section V.A.1, including the direct
remain unchanged from the existing they are modeled as part of the manufacturing costs that reflect learning
Phase 2 MY 2027+ CO2 emission compliance pathway for HHD effects, the indirect costs, and the IRA
standards. However, as discussed in RIA vocational vehicles. See RIA Chapter section 13502 Advanced Manufacturing
Chapter 2.9.1.2, we project that there Production Credit, on average
2.9.1.1.
will be some applications of coach aggregated by regulatory group for MYs
We note that we do not have concerns 2027 and 2032, respectively.765 The
buses that will be appropriate as ZEVs
that manufacturers of any of the custom incremental ZEV adoption rate in our
and we therefore have considered these
types of vehicles in the technology chassis types of vehicles could modeled potential compliance pathway
package that supports the modeled inappropriately circumvent the final technology package reflects the
potential compliance pathway for the vocational vehicle standards or the final difference between the ZEV adoption
primary vocational vehicle standards. optional custom chassis standards. This rates in the technology packages that
support the feasibility of our final
Several manufacturers and is because vocational vehicles are built

associations raised concerns regarding to serve a purpose which is readily standards and the reference case. As
identifiable. For example, a shown in Table II–32 through Table II–
764 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial manufacturer cannot certify a box truck 34, we project that some vocational
Vehicles Class 4 to 8: Technology and Cost to the emergency vehicle custom chassis
Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final 765 Indirect costs are described in detail in section
Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024. standards. IV.B.2.
141
Fmt 4701
BEVs will cost less to produce than than a comparable ICE vehicle.766 ICCT increasing diesel truck costs due to
comparable ICE vehicle types by MY similarly found that ‘‘although zero- emission standards compliance.’’ 767
2032 or earlier. Our analysis is emission trucks are more expensive in These studies were developed prior to
consistent with other studies. For the near-term than their diesel passage of the IRA, and therefore we
example, an EDF/Roush study found equivalents, electric trucks will be less would expect the cost comparisons to be
that by MY 2027, BEV transit buses, expensive than diesel in the 2025–2030 even more favorable after considering
school buses, delivery vans, and refuse time frame, due to declining costs of the IRA provisions.
haulers would each cost less upfront batteries and electric motors as well as BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ER22AP24.053</GPH>
766 Nair, Vishnu; Sawyer Stone; Gary Rogers; Sajit blogs.edf.org/climate411/files/2022/02/EDF-MDHD- Zero-Emission Trucks.’’ February 2019. Page 4. Last
Pillai; Roush Industries, Inc. ‘‘Technical Review: Electrification-v1.6_20220209.pd. accessed on February 9, 2023 at https://theicct.org/
Medium and Heavy Duty Electrification Costs for 767 Hall, Dale and Nic Lutsey. ‘‘Estimating the wp-content/uploads/2021/06/ICCT_EV_HDVs_
MY 2027–2030.’’ February 2022. Page 18. Last Infrastructure_20190809.pdf.
Infrastructure Needs and Costs for the Launch of
ER22AP24.052</GPH>
accessed on February 9, 2023 at https://
142
Fmt 4701
ii. Purchaser Costs Credit,’’ and IRA section 13403, costs, and insurance costs. The
We also evaluated the costs of the ‘‘Qualified Commercial Clean operating costs for BEVs include
final standards for purchasers on Vehicles’’) including the applicable FET charging costs that reflect either depot
average by regulatory group, as shown and sales tax, and the associated EVSE charging or public charging, depending
in Table II–35 through Table II–37. Our costs (including IRA section 13404, on the vehicle type. The payback
assessment of the upfront purchaser ‘‘Alternative Fuel Refueling Property periods shown reflect the number of
costs includes the incremental cost of a Credit’’), if applicable. We also assessed years it is projected to take for the
ZEV relative to a comparable ICE the incremental annual operating costs annual operating savings to offset the
vehicle after accounting for the two IRA of a ZEV relative to a comparable ICE increase in total upfront costs for the
tax credits (IRA section 13502, vehicle, which include the refueling/ purchaser for the sales-weighted average
‘‘Advanced Manufacturing Production charging costs, maintenance and repair within a regulatory group.
ER22AP24.055</GPH>
ER22AP24.054</GPH>
143
Fmt 4701
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C tractors, and five years on average for explained in the previous subsection.
As shown in Table II–37, we estimate sleeper cab tractors. We discuss this in Also of note, our MY 2027 technology
that the average upfront cost per vehicle more detail and provide the payback package for this final rule has a
to purchase a new MY 2032 vocational period for each of the HD TRUCS significantly lower adoption rate for
ZEV and associated EVSE compared to vehicle types in RIA Chapter 2.7. these MHD vocational vehicles in MY
a comparable ICE vehicle (after The average per-vehicle purchaser 2027 than in MY 2032, reflecting the
accounting for two IRA tax credits, IRA costs shown in Table II–35 for MY 2027 higher cost in MY 2027 than in MY
section 13502, ‘‘Advanced are higher than the MY 2032 per-vehicle 2032. Purchasers considering a ZEV also
Manufacturing Production Credit,’’ and costs. The reduction in costs over time will have the option to consider
IRA section 13403, ‘‘Qualified are reflective of technology learning, as alternatives to purchasing an EVSE at
Commercial Clean Vehicles’’), will be discussed in section IV.B. It is worth the time of purchasing a vehicle. For
offset by operational costs (i.e., savings noting that though the upfront costs of example, depending on the location of
that come from the lower costs to a BEV MHD vocational vehicle, for the vehicle, heavy-duty public charging
operate, maintain, and repair ZEV example, are higher when one considers may be a better solution than depot
ER22AP24.057</GPH>
technologies), such that we expect the both the vehicle and the EVSE, charging. Instead of spending upfront
upfront cost increase will be recouped purchasers will still recoup these for EVSE, the purchaser could instead
due to operating savings in two to four upfront costs within three years of spread the cost over time through public
years on average for vocational vehicles, ownership on average. This is within charging where the EVSE costs would
ER22AP24.056</GPH>
two years on average for day cab the period of first ownership, as be built into the electricity cost or
144
Fmt 4701
through the use of Charging as a Service. The final Phase 3 standards phase in development and deployment of these
Purchasers of course could choose an over time from MY 2027 through MY technologies. Our current assessment is
ICE vehicle as well if that best suits their 2032. For HD BEVs in the potential that these ICE vehicle technologies
needs. compliance pathway, we considered continue to have adequate lead time and
that BEV technology has been be feasible in the MY 2027 and later
3. Lead Time Assessment
demonstrated to be technically feasible timeframe, as discussed in section
Two of the significant aspects of the in heavy-duty transportation and that II.D.1.
IRA are the tax credit available for the manufacturers will learn from the As a new vehicle is being designed
manufacturing of batteries and the tax research and development work that has and developed, our projected
credit available for the purchase of HD gone into developing the significant technology packages include
ZEVs, where the IRA provisions’ number of LD and HD electric vehicle consideration that manufacturers will
qualifications are met. The tax credits models that are on the road today, as also need time to significantly increase
significantly reduce, and in many cases noted in section II.D.2 and RIA Chapter HD ZEV production volumes from
erase, the incremental cost of 1.5.5. The feasibility of our final today’s volumes. In particular, our
purchasing a HD ZEV when compared standards is supported by technology analysis for the potential compliance
to the cost of purchasing a comparable packages with increasing BEV adoption pathway considers that manufacturers
ICE vehicle. Therefore, as explained in rates beginning in MY 2027 (see also our will need to build new powertrains or
our payback analysis, we expect the IRA discussion in this section II.D.2.iii to modify existing manufacturing
will incentivize the demand and regarding our consideration of adequate production lines to assemble the new
willingness to purchase for HD ZEVs. time for infrastructure development for products that include ZEV powertrains.
However, demand and willingness to HD BEVs). For HD FCEVS, as discussed Our analysis for our potential
purchase are only two of the factors we in section II.D.3 and II.D.4, along with compliance pathway also considered
considered when evaluating the RIA Chapter 1.7.5, fuel cell technology that manufacturers will require time to
feasibility and suitability of HD ZEV in other sectors has been in existence for source new components, such as heavy-
technologies in the MY 2027 through decades, it has been demonstrated to be duty battery packs, motors, fuel cell
MY 2032 timeframe, for inclusion in the technically feasible in heavy-duty
stacks, and other ZEV components,
potential compliance pathway’s transportation, and there are a number including the sourcing of the critical
technology packages to support the of HD FCEV models that are minerals, as discussed in section
feasibility of the Phase 3 standards in commercially available today with more
that timeframe. We also considered the II.D.2.ii. As described in section II.D.5,
expected to become available by 2024. our potential compliance pathway’s
lead time required for manufacturers to
However, we included this technology technology packages project that
design, develop, and produce the ZEV
as part of potential compliance manufacturers will not develop vehicles
and ICE vehicle technologies in the
pathway’s technology packages utilizing ZEV technologies to cover all
projected technology packages, in
supporting the feasibility of our final types of HD vehicles at once but will
addition to lead time considerations
standards starting in MY 2030 in part to focus on those with the most favorable
relating to availability of charging and
take into consideration lead time to business case first, increase the
hydrogen refueling infrastructure, and
allow manufacturers to design, develop, adoption of those vehicles over time,
availability of critical minerals and
and manufacture HD FCEV models (see and then develop other applications. We
resiliency of related supply chains.
As noted in the proposal for this rule, also our discussion in this subsection also note that we have added temporary
heavy-duty manufacturers have regarding our consideration of adequate compliance flexibilities to the rule,
indicated it could take two to four or time for infrastructure development for including the ability to average, bank,
more years to design, develop, and HD FCEVs). and trade credits across averaging sets
prove the safety and reliability of a new We discuss in sections II.D.1 and for certain HD vehicles as described in
HD vehicle. 88 FR 25998. A typical II.F.1 the need for ICE vehicles to section III.A, and have done so to
design process includes the design and continue to install CO2-reducing facilitate compliance flexibility
building of prototype or demonstration technologies, such as advanced (although, as noted in section II.G.2,
vehicles that are evaluated over several aerodynamics, advanced transmissions, these flexibilities are not necessary to
months or years in real world operation. efficient powertrains, and lower rolling EPA’s determination that the final
The manufacturers need to accumulate resistance tires to meet the previously standards are feasible, provide sufficient
miles and experience a wide variety of promulgated MY 2027 Phase 2 lead time, and are appropriate within
environmental conditions on these standards. In our technology assessment the meaning of CAA section 202(a)(1)).
prototype vehicles to demonstrate the for this final rule and the potential Several of the Phase 3 standards
product’s durability and reliability. compliance pathway’s technology commence in MY 2027, but certain
Then manufacturers would work to packages to support the feasibility of the standards do not; namely, the Phase 3
commercialize the vehicle and in turn Phase 3 standards, we included ICE standards for HHD vocational vehicles
build it in mass production. We also vehicle technologies for a portion of commence in MY 2029, the day cab
considered that manufacturers are likely each of the technology packages, and tractors commence in MY 2028, and the
limited in terms of the financial those ICE vehicle technologies mirrored standards for sleeper cab tractors
resources, human resources, and testing the technology packages we considered commence in MY 2030. We believe our
facilities to redesign all of their vehicles in setting the previously promulgated approach described in section II.D.5
at the same time and, instead, focus on Phase 2 MY 2027 CO2 emission demonstrates the feasibility of the final
the applications with the best business standards. Each of these technologies standards through our potential
case because these would be where the exists today and continues to be compliance pathway’s technology
customers would be most willing to developed by manufacturers. As noted packages, including through the
purchase. Manufacturers reiterated the in 2016 when we issued the HD GHG technology packages reflecting the ZEV
need for lead time in their comments on Phase 2 final rule, at that time we adoption rates for the applications we
the proposed rule. See RTC section provided over ten years of lead time to have determined are achievable in the
2.3.3. the manufacturers to continue the MY 2027 and later timeframe.
145
Fmt 4701
Purchasers of BEVs will also need to Plans like SCE’s to use LCMS to discussions with, the Department of
consider how they will charge their connect new EV loads faster in Energy.
vehicles. Our assessment of EVSE constrained sections of the grid will be We have also carefully considered the
technology and costs associated with bolstered by standards for load control adequacy of lead time to procure
charging is included in sections II.E.2, technologies. UL, an organization that minerals critical to battery production,
II.E.5, and II.F.4 of this preamble, RIA develops standards for the electronics for supply chains respecting those
Chapter 1, and RIA Chapter 2. We industry, drafted the UL 3141 Outline of minerals to be resilient enough to
anticipate that many first-time BEV Investigation (OOI) for Power Control support battery production, and for
owners may opt to purchase and install Systems (PCS). Once finalized, sufficiency of battery production. We
EVSE at or near the time of vehicle manufacturers will be able to use this have found that there is sufficient lead
purchase for charging at their depot, and standard for developing devices that time within the rule’s timeframe
we therefore account for these capital utilities can use to limit the energy respecting all of these. See section
costs upfront. As noted in RIA Chapter consumption of BEVs. The OOI II.D.2.c.ii of this preamble, and RTC
1, we expect significant increases in HD identifies five potential functions for section 17.2. Our findings here are
charging infrastructure due to a PCS. One of these functions is to serve likewise supported by DOE studies, and
combination of public and private as a Power Import Limit (PIL) or Power by our consultation with the DOE.
investments. This includes Federal Export Limit (PEL). In these use cases, Purchasers of FCEVs will need to
funding available through the BIL 768 the PCS controls the flow of power consider how they will obtain hydrogen
and the IRA.769 As discussed in section between a local electric power system to refuel the vehicles. Our assessment of
II.D.2.iii and RTC section 7 (local EPS, most often the building hydrogen infrastructure and costs
(Distribution), OEMs, utilities, EVSE wiring on a single premises) and a associated with refueling are in sections
providers and others are also investing broader area electric power system (area II.D.3.v, II.E.5.ii, and II.F.4 of this
in and supporting the deployment of EPS, most often the utility’s system). preamble, RIA Chapter 1, and RIA
charging infrastructure. We also there Critically, the standardized PIL function Chapter 2. We expect significant private
discuss demand on the grid posed by will enable the interconnection of new investment as a result of public
the transportation sector (both light- BEV charging stations faster by investment through BIL and IRA in the
duty and heavy-duty) on a national leveraging the flexibility of BEVs to coming years. In the final rule, we
level, both in the areas of the high- charge in coordination with other loads project that hydrogen consumption from
volume freight corridors that are the at the premise. With this standard in FCEVs would be a small proportion
most likely targets for deployment of place and manufacturer completion of (less than 1 percent) of total hydrogen
heavy-duty BEVs during the rule’s time conforming products, utilities will have expected to be produced through 2030
frame and on a parcel level in particular a clear technological framework in the United States, as discussed in RIA
states and nationally. Our conclusions, Chapter 1.8.3.4. After evaluating the
available to use in load control
as there discussed, are that there is existing and projected future hydrogen
programs that accelerate charging
adequate lead time for deployment of refueling infrastructure,772 we
infrastructure deployment for their
distribution grid buildout for both depot considered FCEV technologies only in
customers.771
and public charging, and we include the MY 2030 and later timeframe to
EPA notes that it regards our analysis
consideration of costs in our analysis. better ensure we have provided
of adequacy and timeliness of
In addition to the anticipated build adequate time for early market
distribution grid buildout as
out of charging infrastructure and infrastructure development and because
conservative, since it (intentionally)
electric distribution grids which we we expect that projected refueling needs
does not account for these innovative
analyzed, innovative charging solutions in the technology packages can be met
measures undertaken by some utilities; by MY 2030, as discussed also in RIA
can further reduce lead times to nor does it consider other than basic
deploying HD BEVs. As discussed in Chapter 2.1.
mitigative measures that BEV Giving consideration to these factors,
section II.D.2.iii of this preamble, one purchasers can undertake to reduce
approach is for utilities to make non- our analysis for the potential
demand. Even with this conservative compliance pathway supports that there
firm capacity available immediately as approach, we found that the rule affords
they construct distribution system is sufficient lead time to meet the final
adequate lead time for such buildout. standards, which manufacturers may
upgrades. In California, Southern We note that our analysis was informed
California Edison (SCE) proposed a two- comply with through application of BEV
significantly by studies from, and technologies, FCEV technologies, or
year Automated Load Control
Management Systems (LCMS) Pilot.770 further improvements to ICE vehicles
evaluate the extent to which LCMS can be used to (which can include additional
‘‘support distribution reliability and safety, reduce
768 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Pub. L. grid upgrade costs, and reduce delays to customers
technologies like PHEV technologies or
No. 117–58. 135 Stat. 429 (2021), available at obtaining interconnection and utility power other potential advanced technologies
https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/ service.’’ SCE states that prior CPUC decisions have like H2–ICE powered vehicles) to their
PLAW-117publ58.pdf. expressed clear support for this technology and SCE fleets. As just discussed, we also believe
769 Inflation Reduction Act, Pub. L. 117–169, 136 is commencing the LCMS Pilot immediately that there will be sufficient
Stat. 1818 (2022). Southern California Edison. ‘‘Establishment of
770 The program would use third-party owned Southern California Edison Company’s Customer- corresponding infrastructure to support
LCMS equipment approved by SCE to accelerate the Side, Third Party Owned, Automated Load Control technologies under our modeled
connection of new loads, including new EVSE, Management Systems Pilot’’. November 2023. potential compliance pathway, and that
while ‘‘SCE completes necessary upgrades in areas Available online: https://edisonintl.sharepoint.com/ availability of critical minerals and
with capacity constraints.’’ SCE would use the teams/Public/TM2/Shared%20Documents/Public/
Regulatory/Filings-Advice%20Letters/Pending/ supply chains will not be a constraining
LCMS to require new customers to limit

consumption during periods when the system is Electric/ELECTRIC_5138-E.pdf?CT= factor. To further demonstrate the
more constrained, while providing those customers 1704322883028&OR=ItemsView.
access to the distribution system sooner than would 771 UL LLC. January 11, 2024. ‘‘UL 3141: Outline 772 U.S. Department of Energy. ‘‘Pathways to
otherwise be possible. Once SCE completes for Investigation of Power Control Systems.’’ Commercial Liftoff: Clean Hydrogen’’. March 2023.
required grid upgrades, the LCMS limits will be Available online: https:// Available online: https://liftoff.energy.gov/wp-
removed, and participating customers will gain www.shopulstandards.com/ProductDetail. content/uploads/2023/03/20230320-Liftoff-Clean-
unrestricted distribution service. SCE hopes to aspx?productId=UL3141_1_O_20240111. H2-vPUB.pdf.
146
Fmt 4701
performance-based nature of the final pathways that are based on nationwide manufacturers may choose to offer
Phase 3 standards, we also included production volumes, including technologies (such as PHEVs) that have
additional examples of compliance compliance pathways that involve only a higher projected upfront cost but also
pathway’s technology packages in technologies for vehicles with ICE have a shorter payback period, we
section II.F.4 that support the feasibility across a range of electrification (i.e., estimated higher costs of compliance
of the final standards. In this final rule, without producing additional ZEVs to (e.g., approximately 18 percent of the
we also considered but did not adopt comply with this rule). price of a new tractor for MY 2032) and
alternative standards that would have In this section, we discuss our conclude these costs are also reasonable
been supported by technology packages analysis for the technologies included in here given consideration of the
with a slower phase-in of CO2 emission- the additional example compliance corresponding business case for
reducing technologies, including a pathways of the impacts on reductions manufacturers to successfully deploy
slower phase in of HD ZEV technologies of GHG emissions; the technical these technologies when considering
in the projected technology packages, as feasibility and technology effectiveness; willingness to purchase, including the
described and for the reasons discussed the lead time necessary to implement payback period of these technologies
in section II.H. the technologies; costs to manufacturers; and the IRA purchaser tax credits for
Additionally, while we believe there and willingness to purchase (including PHEVs. Regarding our assessment of
is sufficient time for the charging and purchaser costs and payback). In short, impacts on purchasers and willingness
refueling infrastructure to develop for EPA finds that, even without to purchase, the technologies we
the reasons explained in this section, manufacturers producing additional assessed generally pay back within 10
EPA recognizes that under the potential years or less. As we explain elsewhere
ZEVs to comply with this rule, it would
compliance pathway in this final rule in this preamble section II, businesses
be technologically feasible to meet the
such infrastructure for BEVs and FCEVs that operate HD vehicles are under
final standards in the lead time
is important for the success of the competitive pressure to reduce
provided and taking into consideration
increasing development and adoption of operating costs, which should
compliance costs. Regarding reductions
these technologies. EPA carefully encourage purchasers to identify and
of GHG emissions, these additional
considered that there are significant adopt vehicle technologies that provide
example potential compliance pathways
efforts already underway to develop and a reasonable payback period. For H2–
meet the final Phase 3 MY 2027 through
expand heavy-duty electric charging ICE tractors, our assessment is that the
MY 2032 and later CO2 emission
and hydrogen refueling infrastructure operating costs exceed the operating
both at the local, state and Federal standards, and therefore achieve the
costs of ICE tractors, but there may be
government level as well as from private same level of vehicle CO2 emission
other reasons that purchasers would
industry, as discussed in RIA Chapters reductions and downstream CO2
consider this technology such as that
1 and 2 and this section II. Those are emission reductions as presented in
the vehicles emit nearly zero CO2
important early actions that will support preamble section V and RIA Chapter 4.
emissions at the tailpipe, the low
the increase in ZEV charging and Regarding technical feasibility and lead
engine-out exhaust emissions from H2–
refueling infrastructure needed for the time, depending on the technology, we
ICE vehicles provide the opportunity for
future growth of ZEV technology of the determined that either no further efficient and durable after-treatment
magnitude EPA is projecting in this development of the technology is systems, and the efficiency of H2–ICE
rule’s technology packages. As required (only further application) or vehicles may continue to improve with
discussed in section II.B.2.iii, EPA has that the technology is technically time. Overall, the fact that such a fleet
a vested interest in monitoring feasible and being actively developed by as the examples assessed in this section
industry’s performance in complying manufacturers to be commercially are possible underscores both the
with mobile source emission standards, available for MY 2027 and later, and feasibility and the flexibility of the
including the highway heavy-duty that there is sufficient lead time to performance-based standards, and
industry, and is committing to do so for deploy it. Similar to the approach we confirms that manufacturers are likely
Phase 3. Monitoring the availability of considered for BEVs and FCEVs in this to continue to offer vehicles with a
supporting infrastructure is a critical preamble section II, for relevant diverse range of technologies, including
element of that post-promulgation effort technologies we also included a phased advanced vehicle with ICE technologies
by EPA. approach to provide lead time to meet as well as ZEVs for the duration of these
the corresponding charging and standards and beyond.
4. Additional Example Compliance refueling infrastructure needs under the The vehicles considered in these
Pathway Technology Packages To final rule’s additional example potential additional pathways include a suite of
Support the Final Standards compliance pathways. Regarding costs technologies ranging from
While the potential compliance of compliance, consistent with our improvements in aerodynamics and tire
pathway’s technology packages that Phase 2 assessment, we conclude that rolling resistance in ICE tractors, to the
include both vehicles with ICE and ZEV the estimated costs for all model years use of lower carbon fuels like CNG and
technologies discussed in section II.F.1 are reasonable for one of the additional LNG, to hybrid powertrains (HEV and
and RIA Chapter 2.10 support the example potential compliance PHEV) and H2–ICE. As described in this
feasibility of the final standards and was pathways, for example based on our section, these technologies either exist
modeled for rulemaking purposes, there estimate that the MY 2032 fleet average today or are actively being developed by
are many other examples of possible per-vehicle cost to manufacturers by manufacturers to be commercially
compliance pathways for meeting the regulatory group will be $3,800 for LHD; available for MY 2027 and later.
final standards that do not involve the $7,600 for MHD vocational vehicles; This section presents our analysis of
widespread adoption of BEV and FCEV and $7,700 for HHD vocational vehicles, the effectiveness of reducing CO2
technologies. In this section, and RIA and range between $10,300 for day cab emissions, the associated lead time, and
Chapter 2.11, we provide further tractors and $10,400 for sleeper cab the technology package costs for the
support for the feasibility of the final tractors. For another additional example technologies considered in these
standards by describing examples of potential compliance pathway, which additional possible pathways in
additional potential compliance we developed and assessed because preamble sections II.F.4.i and II.F.4.ii
147
Fmt 4701
(we discuss the technologies themselves aerodynamic and tire improvements in Table II–38.774 Manufacturers used a
in preamble section II.D.1). We then addition to the technology package that wide variety of technologies to meet the
created technology packages based on supported the Phase 2 MY 2027 CO2 standards. The manufacturer names
adoption rates of aggregated individual tractor emission standards (shown in with ‘*’ indicate that they have EPA
technologies into three scenarios for Table II–3 in preamble section II.D.1, certifications for vehicles that use
MYs 2027, 2030, and 2032 that and that include technologies such as natural gas. The manufacturer names
represent additional example potential improved aerodynamics; low rolling with ‘¥’ indicate they have EPA
compliance pathways that further resistance tires; tire inflation systems; certifications for vehicles with hybrid
support the feasibility of the final efficient engines, transmissions, powertrains. Since the public
standards in preamble section II.F.4.iii. drivetrains, and accessories; and certification data for these MYs doesn’t
The technology packages and adoption extended idle reduction for sleeper identify which vehicles are certified
rates include a mix of vehicles with ICE cabs) as well as additional natural gas with hybrid powertrains, we relied on
technologies. For example, the engine, H2–ICE vehicle, hybrid information identified in Chapter 1.4 of
additional example potential powertrain, and PHEV technologies for the RIA. As for hydrogen-fueled internal
compliance pathways include some tractors. The technology packages also combustion engines, no manufacturers
vocational vehicles with the technology include our projected reference case (see have certified to EPA standards for MY
package that supported the Phase 2 MY RIA Chapter 4) ZEV adoption rates. 2022 with the technology, however a
2027 CO2 vocational vehicle emission Scenario 1 meets the MY 2032 standards number of manufacturers have indicated
standards (shown in Table II–4 in with higher adoption of vehicles with that they are developing an engine that
preamble section II.D.1, and that H2–ICE technology. Scenario 2 meets can run on hydrogen.775 Finally, there
include technologies such as low rolling the MY 2032 standards with higher are a number of manufacturers that have
resistance tires; tire inflation systems; adoption of PHEV technology. Finally, certified ICE vehicles that have
efficient engines, transmissions, and we assessed the manufacturer costs projected CO2 FEL that are lower than
drivetrains; weight reduction; and idle under these additional example the Phase 2 MY 2027 standards. The
reduction technologies) as well as potential compliance pathways, in manufacturer names with ‘#’ indicate
additional natural gas engine, H2–ICE preamble section II.F.4.iv, and that they have one or more vehicles
vehicle, hybrid powertrain, and PHEV purchaser costs and payback in families that currently meet the Phase 2
technologies for vocational vehicles. For preamble section II.F.4.v.773 MY 2027 standards, and which we thus
another example, the additional The vehicle manufacturers that project will have CO2 FEL that are lower
example potential compliance pathways certified to EPA standards for MY 2022 than the Phase 2 MY 2027 standards in
include tractors with further and/or MY 2023 are those listed in MY 2027.
773 We also developed another set of technology 774 U.S. EPA. ‘‘Heavy-Duty Highway Gasoline and 775 Cummins. ‘‘Cummins to Reveal Zero-Carbon
packages that do not include our projected Diesel Certification Data (Model Years: 2015— H2–ICE Concept Truck at IAA Expo Powered by the
reference case ZEV adoption rates (i.e., they are Present’’ February 2024. Available online: B6.7H Hydrogen Engine’’. September 13, 2022.
potential compliance pathways that support the www.epa.gov/compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/ Available Online: https://www.cummins.com/news/
feasibility of the standards with only technologies
annual-certification-data-vehicles-engines-and- releases/2022/09/13/cummins-reveal-zero-carbon-
for vehicles with ICE, with zero nationwide
adoption of ZEV technologies) which is presented equipment. h2-ice-concept-truck-iaa-expo-powered-b67h.
ER22AP24.058</GPH>
in RIA Chapter 2.11.
148
Fmt 4701
i. Technology Effectiveness and Lead determined through aerodynamic 2, and 3 are lower rolling resistance
Time testing. The results of the test determine tires, with each level representing
We evaluated the potential for lower the aerodynamic bin (Bin I through VII) approximately 15 percent lower rolling
CO2 emissions from further and therefore input to GEM that is used resistance than the previous level. In the
aerodynamic and tire improvements to to determine a vehicle’s CO2 emissions. MY 2021 certification data, we found
ICE tractors as well as natural gas The aerodynamic Bin I level represents that the average rolling resistance of the
engine, H2–ICE vehicle, hybrid tractor bodies which prioritize steer tires installed on the day cab and
powertrain, and PHEV technologies for appearance or special duty capabilities sleeper cab tractors was approximately
both vocational vehicles and tractors, as over aerodynamics. These Bin I tractors Level 2. The average rolling resistance
discussed in section II.D.1 of this incorporate few, if any, aerodynamic of the drive tires installed on day cab
preamble. See section II.D.1 for further features and may have several features and sleeper cab tractors was between
discussion of EPA’s assessment that which detract from aerodynamics, such Level 1 and Level 2 performance. The
these technologies are technically as bug deflectors, custom sunshades, B- exception was for high roof sleeper cabs
feasible. pillar exhaust stacks, and others. Bin V where the average drive tire rolling
represents the most aerodynamic MY resistance was at Level 2. The lowest
a. Aerodynamic and Tire Improvements 2022 tractors. rolling resistance tires used on each of
for Tractors The aerodynamic technology already the day cab and sleeper cab
In these additional technology existed for the tractors to achieve Bin IV configurations was 4.7 N/kN and 4.8 N/
pathways, for further aerodynamic and and Bin V performance in MY 2021, kN ton rolling resistance of the steer and
tire improvements to the technology therefore, our assessment is that there is drive tires, respectively, which is better
packages that supported the Phase 2 MY sufficient lead time for tractor than the Level 3 performance. Our
2027 CO2 emission standards we manufacturers to increase application of assessment for the additional example
evaluated technologies to reduce CO2 these aerodynamic designs by MY 2027 potential compliance pathways is that
emissions from ICE tractors. Tractors and to produce more low and mid roof tractor tire rolling resistance can shift to
with ICEs have the potential to have tractors at a Bin IV level of performance a 50/50 split of Level 2 and Level 3 tire
lower CO2 emissions than required by and more high roof tractors at a Bin V rolling resistance for both the steer and
the Phase 2 MY 2027 CO2 emission performance. Because no further drive tires in MY 2027
standards by further reducing the development of aerodynamic We used the technology effectiveness
aerodynamic drag of the tractor and by technology is required, only further inputs and technology adoption rates
reducing the tire rolling resistance. application of the technologies, under discussed in this section of the
These technologies are already being the additional example potential preamble for aerodynamics and tire
used by manufacturers to certify their compliance pathways our assessment is rolling resistance, along with the other
tractors to the Phase 2 standards. that there is sufficient lead time to vehicle technologies used in the Phase
Therefore, EPA assessed this potential include in those technology packages 2 MY 2027 technology package to
technology package applicable to the entire tractor aerodynamic demonstrate compliance with the Phase
tractors through a combination of performance to these levels. 2 MY 2027 tractor standards to develop
aerodynamic improvements and lower For this Phase 3 analysis, we also the GEM inputs for each subcategory of
rolling resistant tires. evaluated technologies to reduce tire Class 7 and 8 tractors. The set of GEM
For this Phase 3 analysis, consistent rolling resistance on tractors, as inputs are shown in Table II–39. Note
with our approach in Phase 2 for discussed in section II.D.1.ii of this that we have analyzed one technology
evaluating technology effectiveness, we preamble. In Phase 2, we developed four pathway for each level of stringency, but
evaluated the technologies to reduce levels of tire rolling resistance. The tractor manufacturers are free to use any
aerodynamic drag, as discussed in baseline tire rolling resistance level combination of technologies that meet
preamble section II.D.1.i. The represents the average tire rolling the standards on average.
aerodynamic drag performance is resistance on tractors in 2010. Levels 1, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
149
Fmt 4701
The results from GEM for this package within the additional example 4 percent lower CO2 emissions than the
technology package are shown in Table potential compliance pathway achieves Phase 2 MY 2027 tractor standards.
II–40. As shown, this technology
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C

available for manufacturers to use for compliance pathway, the ICE vocational
In conclusion, under the additional tractors and estimate use of those vehicles portion of the pathway emit at
ER22AP24.060</GPH>
example compliance pathways we improvements would result in an the Phase 2 MY 2027 level. Therefore,
project that improvements in ICE additional emissions reduction of 4 we did not add any additional
vehicle technologies above and beyond percent. technologies or costs associated with the
the improvements needed to meet the We note that in these additional vocational ICE vehicles with Phase 2
ER22AP24.059</GPH>
Phase 2 MY 2027 standards will be pathways, like in our modeled MY 2027 technologies. We also note
150
Fmt 4701
that the Phase 2 standards for vocational b. Natural Gas Fueled Internal intended model application fueled on
vehicles did not include the use of Combustion Engines CNG and conventional diesel. Family
aerodynamic technologies and were Certification CO2 Levels for the transient
projected to be met with the use of To estimate the technology Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and
improvements in tire rolling resistance effectiveness of natural gas-fueled Supplemental Emission Test (SET) duty
and other technologies. Thus, the engines compared to diesel fueled cycles were compared to determine the
corresponding ICE vehicle technology engines in the Phase 3 additional CO2 reductions possible by applying
package used within the additional example potential compliance natural gas engine technology, as shown
example compliance pathway analysis pathways, we used the publicly in Table II–41. The comparison shows
for a portion of the vocational vehicles available MY 2023 heavy-duty engine that natural gas engine technology could
encompasses the same set of certification data for CO2 emissions.776 achieve CO2 reductions up to 7 percent
technologies used to demonstrate We compared GHG certification data for vocational vehicles and 6 percent for
compliance with the Phase 2 MY 2027 between three engines of similar tractors compared to a similar diesel
standards, as described in section II.D.1. displacement, power ratings, and fueled ICE.
We also considered the availability of c. Hydrogen-Fueled Internal (in other words CO2 emission reduction)
the natural gas fueling stations. Combustion Engines for the vehicles that are powered by this
According to the U.S. Department of technology is 100 percent.
Since neat hydrogen fuel does not
Energy there are 1,464 compressed contain any carbon, H2–ICE fueled with The lead time consideration for H2–
natural gas and liquified natural gas neat hydrogen produce zero HC, CH4, ICE vehicles consists of two parts. The
filling stations in the United States.777 CO, and CO2 engine-out emissions.778 first part is the engine technology design
Of these stations, approximately 90 However, as explained in section and development, along with the
percent of them are CNG stations and 10 III.C.2.xviii, we recognize that, like CI integration of the engine, aftertreatment,
percent are LNG stations. These stations ICE, there may be negligible, but non- and fuel storage integration into the
are a combination of publicly accessible zero, CO2 emissions at the tailpipe of vehicle. The second part is the hydrogen
(783) and privately operated (681). Of H2–ICE that use SCR and are fueled refueling infrastructure availability.
the publicly accessible fueling stations, with neat hydrogen due to contributions An H2–ICE is very similar to existing
all will accommodate Class 3 through 5 from the aftertreatment system from ICEs and engine manufacturers can
HD vehicles and 1,246 will urea decomposition; thus, for purposes leverage the extensive technical
accommodate HD Class 5 through 8 of 40 CFR part 1036 we are finalizing an expertise they have developed with
vehicles. After evaluating the existing, engine testing default CO2 emission existing products. Many H2–ICE engine
and taking into account potential future, value (3 g/hp-hr) option (though components can be produced using an
natural gas refueling infrastructure, manufacturers may instead conduct engine manufacturer’s existing tooling
similar to the approach we considered testing to demonstrate that the CO2 and manufacturing processes. Similarly,
for BEVs and FCEVs in this preamble emissions for their engine is below 3 g/ H2–ICE vehicles can be built on the
section II to ensure adequate lead time hp-hr). Under this final rule, consistent same assembly lines as other ICE
for corresponding infrastructure,, we with treatments of such contributions vehicles, by the same workers and with
determined that there was adequate lead from the aftertreatment system from many of the same component suppliers.
time for 5 percent adoption of natural urea decomposition for diesel ICE For example, Cummins has announced
vehicles, we are not including such the launch of a fuel-agnostic combustion
gas vehicles in the additional example
contributions as vehicle emissions for engine X10 for MY 2026 that can run on
potential compliance pathways based
H2–ICE vehicles.779 Thus, H2–ICE hydrogen fuel.780 Many design aspects
on our balancing that these technologies technologies that run on neat hydrogen, of the integration of a H2–ICE into a
are currently available and used as well as defined in 40 CFR 1037.150(f) and vehicle can be done in parallel with the
as the additional consideration of the discussed in section III.C.3.ii of the H2–ICE ramp up to the production
corresponding infrastructure needed for preamble, have HD vehicle CO2 launch of an engine. However, there
the level of adoption under these emissions that are deemed to be zero for may be final validation vehicle
pathways by MY 2027. purposes of 40 CFR part 1037. development steps that will require the
Therefore, the technology effectiveness final H2–ICE and therefore may take an
776 U.S. EPA. ‘‘Annual Certification Data for Available online: https://afdc.energy.gov/stations/#/ from urea decomposition is not included in the
results.
Heavy-Duty Vehicles’’. January 2023. Available find/nearest?fuel=CNG&country=US.

Online: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/ 778 Note, NOx and PM emission testing is 780 Cummins. ‘‘Cummins Announces New X10
documents/2023-01/heavy-duty-gas-and-diesel- required under existing 40 CFR part 1036 for Engine, Next in The Fuel-Agnostic Series,
engines-2015-present.xlsx. engines fueled with neat hydrogen. Launching in North America in 2026.’’ February
777 Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and 779 The results from the fuel mapping test
2023. Available Online: https://www.cummins.com/
news/releases/2023/02/13/cummins-announces-
Renewable Energy, Alternative Fuels Data Center, procedures prescribed in 40 CFR 1036.535 are fuel new-x10-engine-next-fuel-agnostic-series-
Alternative Fuel Station Locator. February 2024.
ER22AP24.061</GPH>
consumption values, therefore the CO2 emissions launching-north.
151
Fmt 4701
additional year after the launch of an leads to an overall CO2 emission with a Pierce Manufacturing hybrid fire
H2–ICE. Therefore, from the technology reduction of 15 percent for vocational truck showed 1,500 gallons of diesel
development perspective, we project vehicle hybrids and 10 percent for saved in one month which also leads to
H2–ICE technology will be available in tractor hybrids. a reduction in CO2 emissions.785
MYs 2027 and later. For hybrid electric vehicles, the
Hybrid technology is currently being
The discussion in RIA Chapter 1.8.3 projected effectiveness is further
used on heavy-duty vehicles. RIA
details our assessment of hydrogen supported by powertrain testing that
Chapter 1.4.5 details the HD truck and
refueling infrastructure. After evaluating was conducted by Eaton at Argonne
bus models that are currently offered as
the existing and projected future National Laboratory. The testing was
hybrid vehicles. As shown, both Allison
hydrogen refueling infrastructure and performed with a Cummins X15 engine
and BAE offer heavy-duty hybrid
similar to the approach we considered and three transmissions. The
systems for use in vehicles. Our
for publicly-charged BEVs and FCEVs in transmissions were an Eaton P2/P3
assessment, based on currently available
this preamble section II, we considered hybrid, Eaton Endurant, and an Allison
H2–ICE vehicle technology only in the 4500 RDS. For each of the three hybrid technology that is being
MY 2030 and later timeframe for the powertrain configurations, the test produced in vehicles today, is that there
additional example potential procedures prescribed in 40 CFR is adequate lead time for manufacturers
compliance pathways, to better ensure 1036.545 were followed to generate to increase the adoption of the
that our additional example potential powertrain fuel maps. Each of these fuel technology for LHD and MHD
compliance pathways provide adequate maps were input into GEM Version vocational vehicles in MY 2027 and for
time for early hydrogen market 3.5.1 to determined gCO2/ton-mile HHD vocational vehicles and tractors in
infrastructure development. We emissions from a number of MY 2030 to the adoption levels
included the H2–ICE technology in the representative vehicle configurations. included in the additional pathways.
additional compliance pathway relative For the heavy heavy-duty vocational Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles run
to the reference case in MY 2031 and vehicles, the average CO2 emission on both electricity and fuel. The utility
later, which provides nearly seven years reductions were 22, 8, and 25 percent factor is the fraction of miles the vehicle
of lead time for the H2 refueling for multi-purpose, regional, and urban travels in electric mode relative to the
infrastructure buildout to phase in. regulatory subcategories respectively. total miles traveled. The percent CO2
The average CO2 reductions for day cab emission reduction is directly related to
d. Hybrid and Plug-in Hybrid
and sleeper cab tractors was 9 percent. the utility factor. The greater the utility
Powertrains
The data from the powertrain tests factor, the lower the tailpipe CO2
As discussed in section II.D.1.v, supports the estimated CO2 emission emissions from the vehicle. The utility
hybrid powertrains have lower CO2 reduction of 15 percent for vocational factor depends on the size of the battery
emissions than ICE powertrains due to vehicle hybrids, as it is expected that and the operator’s driving habits. For
a combination of regenerative braking vocational vehicle hybrids will be PHEVs, we project that for MY 2027 and
and the ability to optimize the ICE certified as multi-purpose or urban. The MY 2032 tractors, a CO2 emission
operation within the hybrid powertrain data from the powertrain tests also reduction (effectiveness) of 30 percent is
system. For this Phase 3 analysis we supports the estimated CO2 emission achievable by adding a high-voltage
used the approach described in Chapter reduction of 10 percent for tractor battery that could achieve a utility factor
2.2.2.1.3 of the RIA to determine the hybrids, since many of the individual of 22 percent. For MY 2027 vocational
effectiveness of hybrids based on the tractors had greater than 10 percent CO2 vehicles, we project an effectiveness of
amount of braking energy recovered emission reduction, with the average at 30 percent could be achieved by adding
from regenerative braking. In summary, 9 percent. a high-voltage battery with a utility
to calculate percent energy recovery In addition, other studies have also factor of 18 percent. For MY 2030
available, we estimated the braking shown CO2 emission reductions from vocational vehicles, we project an
energy and divided by the total tractive heavy-duty hybrid vehicles. For effectiveness of 50 percent could be
energy (i.e., the energy required to move example, a New Flyer hybrid transit bus achieved by adding a high-voltage
the vehicle) for each drive cycle and achieves 10–29 percent reduction, battery with a utility factor of 41
then weighted the results using the depending on route.781 Similarly, a percent. With utility factors between 18
respective GEM test cycle weighting NovaBus hybrid transit bus found up to to 41 percent, a significantly smaller
factors. We then multiplied these values 30 percent reduction in CO2 emissions battery would be needed for a PHEV in
by the weighted energy consumption at speeds ranging between 9–18 mph.782 comparison to the battery needed for a
per mile to get energy recovered per A NREL report of a reduction of 75 corresponding battery electric vehicle.
mile from regenerative braking. The percent CO2 in idle emissions during
average regeneration energy as a For heavy-duty PHEVs, the projected
PTO use 783 where idle operation is over effectiveness is further supported by
percentage of total tractive energy was 30 percent of vehicle operating time and
10 percent and 5 percent, for vocational powertrain testing that was conducted
uses 10 percent of the fuel.784 A study by Eaton at Argonne National
vehicles and tractors, respectively. For
both tractors and vocational vehicles, 781 New Flyer. ‘‘Hybrid-electric mobility.’’
Laboratory. To evaluate the emissions
we project that hybrid technology can Available online: https://www.newflyer.com/bus/ reductions of a plug-in hybrid
achieve an additional 5 percent of xcelsior-hybrid/. powertrain, Eaton used a combination of
effectiveness by optimizing how the 782 NovaBus. ‘‘Nova LFS HEV’’. Available online: GEM simulations and powertrain test
https://novabus.com/blog/bus/lfs_hev/. results. The results of the analysis
engine is operated. For example, the 783 Ragatz, Adam, Jonathan Burton, Eric Miller,
engine could be operated in the showed that a vocational vehicle with a
and Matthew Thornton. ‘‘Investigation of Emissions
minimum brake-specific fuel Impacts from Hybrid Powertrains’’ National

consumption region of the engine more Renewable Energy Lab. January 2020. Available National Renewable Energy Lab. Available online:
often in a hybrid powertrain. In online: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/ https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/66747.pdf.
75782.pdf. 785 Pierce. ‘‘Pierce Volterra Platform of Electric
addition, the electric motor could be 784 Konan, Arnaud, Adam Duran, Kenneth Kelly, Vehicles’’. Available online: https://
used to limit engine transient operation, Eric Miller, and Robert Prohaska. ‘‘Characterization www.piercemfg.com/electric-fire-trucks/pierce-
or the engine could be downsized. This of PTO and Idle Behavior for Utility Vehicles’’. volterra.
152
Fmt 4701
plug-in hybrid powertrain could reduce a comparable BEV. Therefore, most recharging demand for PHEVs will be
CO2 emission by 52 percent.786 heavy-duty PHEVs could use Level 1 lower than the levels for BEVs in our
In our lead time assessment for charging by plugging it into a standard modeled potential compliance pathway,
PHEVs, we believe it will take longer for 240 V outlet. Truck operators would the demand on the grid would be less
vehicle manufacturers to integrate this have access to these outlets at depots than assessed with our modeled
technology into vehicles than it will for and other businesses without having to potential compliance pathway
hybrid technologies. We determined require special installation of EVSE discussed in preamble section II.D.2.iii.
that approximately 3–4 years would be equipment. Operators would need to
necessary to develop this technology. e. Summary of the Technology
create access to such an outlet, but this Effectiveness
Therefore, we conservatively included
would not be a constraining factor for
PHEVs in limited applications (HHD
vocational vehicle and day cab tractors) lead time and such costs would be low Table II–42 shows the summary of the
beginning in MY 2030 and included a for purchasers. Similar to the approach technology effectiveness (percent CO2
scenario in MY 2032 with and without we considered for BEVs and FCEVs in emission reduction) of each of the
PHEVs in the technology packages that this preamble section II, we determined technologies discussed in this
also include our projected reference there is adequate lead time to meet the subsection relative to the Phase 2 MY
case ZEV adoption rates. PHEVs, like projected charging infrastructure needs 2027 standards.
BEVs, require an external charging that correspond to the technology Table II–42 Effectiveness of
source to provide electricity to the packages for the final rule’s additional Technologies of Vehicles with ICE
vehicle. However, the recharging example potential compliance Relative to the MY 2027 Phase 2
demand for a PHEV is much lower than pathways. Furthermore, because the Standards
ii. Technology Package Costs tires is $1,978 for sleeper cab tractors where the technologies are mature,
and $1,715 for day cab tractors. which is appropriate because natural
In this section, we present the gas technologies have been used in the
incremental technology package costs b. Natural Gas Fueled Internal
heavy-duty marketplace for decades.
for each technology relative to the Combustion Engines
The costs represent the incremental
comparable baseline vehicles that meet EPA contracted FEV to conduct a costs of a spark-ignited (SI) CNG engine
the Phase 2 MY 2027 emission technology and cost study for a variety because that is the predominant
standards.787 of powertrains applicable to Class 4, 5, technology being offered today in the
7, and 8 heavy-duty vehicles.789 FEV heavy-duty market.790
a. ICE Vehicle Improvements
also costed three (15L for Class 8, 10L One difference in costs between a
The costs for the additional for Class 7, and 6.6L for Class 4⁄5) diesel CNG powertrain and the baseline diesel
aerodynamic and low rolling resistance ICE powertrains that would meet the powertrain is the fuel ‘tank.’ A CNG
tire technologies were developed based emission standards as required by the vehicle requires pressurized fuel tanks
on the cost assessment in the Phase 2 Low NOx Rule and the Phase 2 CO2 typically made with carbon fiber in
final rule.788 These technology costs emission standards in MY 2027. These order to hold the fuel at required
developed for the Phase 2 analysis were used to calculate the incremental pressures of 250 bar. These tank types
remain appropriate because the cost of the alternative powertrain to the are much higher in cost than a tank to
technologies are the same and the costs comparable diesel ICE powertrain hold diesel fuel which does not require
baseline, as described in RIA Chapter the capability to store fuel under
including learning through MY 2027. As
2.11.2.2. pressure. The larger the vehicle and/or
discussed in RIA Chapter 2.11.2.1, the
incremental technology package cost of The costs presented in Table II–43 the longer the distance traveled per day
increased application of aerodynamic include both the direct and indirect dictates the number and size of the
costs of compliance for manufacturers tanks required. Cost of tanks for the
technologies and low rolling resistance
and represent a market stable scenario CNG Class 8 day cab and sleeper cab
786 Sanchez, James. Memorandum to Docket EPA– included learning (i.e., are conservative in the 789 FEV Consulting. ‘‘Heavy Duty Commercial
HQ–OAR–2022–0985. ‘‘Eaton Hybrid Powertrain overestimating sense). Vehicles Class 4 to 8: Technology and Cost
Results’’ February 2024. 788 U.S. EPA. Regulatory Impact Analysis Evaluation for Electrified Powertrains—Final
787 The costs presented in this section do not Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Report’’. Prepared for EPA. March 2024.
include the learning effects after MY 2027, and Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines 790 Cummins. Natural Gas Engine Portfolio.
and Vehicles—Phase 2. Chapter 2. EPA–420–R–16– Available online: https://mart.cummins.com/

therefore are higher than they would be if they
ER22AP24.062</GPH>
900. August 2016. imagelibrary/data/assetfiles/0063969.pdf.
153
Fmt 4701
tractor powertrains were estimated to be three-way catalyst to reduce HC, CO and baseline is realized. Another cost
$10,000-$16,500.791 NOx, similar to gasoline-fueled ICE reduction comes from the fuel injection
Another area of difference is in the vehicles. Engine-out PM from SI–CNG system. The diesel system has a fuel
aftertreatment required on CNG fueled vehicles meet the exhaust injection system used to atomize the
powertrains compared to a diesel. The emission standards without additional diesel fuel as it goes into the
current diesel powertrain contains a aftertreatment. Therefore, spark-ignited combustion chamber. These
DOC, DPF, SCR and associated urea CNG vehicles do not require a DPF, components are not needed on a
injection/mixing system. Spark-ignited DOC, SCR or the DEF and urea mixing gaseous fuel as it is already in
CNG engines run stoichiometric system and a significant cost reduction combustible form.
combustion and therefore only require a compared to the diesel powertrain
c. Hydrogen-Fueled Internal higher in cost than a tank to hold diesel respectively. Only SCR and DOC
Combustion Engines fuel because the fuel is pressurized. The aftertreatment is required on a H2–ICE
cost of the tanks on the Class 8 sleeper fueled with neat H2 in order to reduce
We used the same FEV cost study to cab tractors can add on $30,000 in low NOx. In developing the aftertreatment
develop the incremental technology volumes to the H2–ICE powertrain
costs for H2–ICE vehicles, as shown in cost for the H2–ICE, an exhaust gas
costs. heater was also included in order to
Table II–44.792 Also similar to CNG, a significant cost reduce NOx at idle and during low
As with CNG, a major difference decrease compared to the baseline power operation. Another cost decrease
between H2–ICE powertrains and the powertrain is due to the difference in
compared to the baseline powertrain
baseline diesel powertrain is the fuel the aftertreatment required on H2–ICE
‘tank.’ The H2–ICE requires pressurized comes from the fuel injection system.
fueled powertrains compared to the
fuel tanks typically made with carbon baseline diesel powertrain. The baseline The baseline diesel system has a
fiber and many other considerations in diesel powertrain contains a DOC, DPF, number of components to atomize the
order to hold the fuel at required SCR and an associated urea mixing/ diesel fuel as it goes into the
pressures. The H2 tanks used in the FEV dosing system. These aftertreatment combustion chamber. These
cost study are designed to store H2 at components work to reduce components are not needed on a H2–ICE
700 bar so that they can hold sufficient hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, because the H2 is a gaseous fuel in
hydrogen. These tank types are much particulate matter and NOx, combustible form.
d. Hybrids and Plug-In Hybrid VTO/HFTO Transportation RIA Chapter 2.11.2.4 describes the
Powertrains Decarbonization Analysis.793 The process for determining the incremental
To determine the hybrid powertrain results include vehicle costs for powertrain costs for each hybrid
costs, we relied on the Autonomie study conventional vehicles and parallel powertrain. The summary of the hybrid
results published with the 2023 DOE hybrid vehicles for each vehicle class. vehicle costs are in Table II–45.
ER22AP24.064</GPH>
791 Caffrey, Cheryl. Memorandum to the docket 792 Caffrey, Cheryl. Memorandum to the docket 793 US Department of Energy. Available online:
EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. ‘‘Alternative EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. ‘‘Alternative https://anl.box.com/s/hv4kufocq3leoijt

Powertrain Costs’’ February 2024. Powertrain Costs’’ February 2024. 6v0wht2uddjuiff4and https://anl.box.com/s/
ER22AP24.063</GPH>
oy04bje3ltc21rz5py4bq1ed4s4bn0vo.
154
Fmt 4701
The PHEV technology combines an the electric motor, onboard charger, and each of the HD TRUCS 101 vehicle
ICE powertrain with a BEV powertrain. power converter costs for a similar BEV. types are shown in RIA Chapter
Therefore, we calculated the The key difference between the BEV and 2.11.2.4, including direct manufacturing
incremental costs of the PHEV PHEV powertrain costs is due to the size costs and the battery tax credit as
technology using a similar approach as of the battery. We reduced the size of applicable.
we did for BEVs and ICEVs in HD the battery for the PHEV relative to a The individual vehicles were
TRUCS for each of the 101 vehicle BEV to reflect a utility factor of 41 aggregated into the corresponding
types, as detailed in RIA Chapter 2.3.2 percent for vocational vehicles and 22 regulatory class.794 We then included
and 2.4.3. We used the same component percent for tractors and we the indirect manufacturing costs as well;
costs for the ICE powertrain, except conservatively estimated that the depth the incremental additional retail price
replaced the ICE accessory costs with of discharge of a PHEV battery would be equivalent (RPE) for PHEVs by
the electrified accessory component only 60 percent compared to the BEV regulatory group using the 1.42
costs used in BEVs. For the electrified battery depth of discharge of 90 percent. multiplier for MY 2030 are shown in
portion of the PHEV, we also included The incremental component costs for Table II–46.
the technologies is shown in Table II–

47.
e. Summary of Technology Costs
A summary of the per vehicle
incremental technology costs for each of
iii. Technology Adoption Rates in the vehicles, H2–ICE vehicles, and sales that are projected to be ZEVs in the
Additional Potential Compliance aerodynamic and tire rolling resistant reference case are the same portion
Pathways improvements for tractors for MYs 2027, projected to be ZEVs under the final
2030 and 2032, and including those rule (i.e., no additional ZEVs are
As we did for the modeled potential ZEVs from our projected reference case included to meet the final Phase 3
compliance pathway, for this additional
ZEV adoption rates as described in RIA
ER22AP24.067</GPH>
standards). Thus, this additional

example potential compliance pathway
Chapter 4. These values represent the example compliance pathway supports
we determined the technology mix of
total national HD vehicle sales, the feasibility of the Phase 3 standards
technologies for vehicles with ICE
across a range of electrification, which including those accounted for in the relative to the ‘‘no action’’ projection of
for this additional pathway consists of reference case. However, for this ZEV adoption nationwide. We
ER22AP24.066</GPH>
a mix of adoption of natural gas additional example compliance considered two scenarios for the
vehicles, hybrid vehicles, plug-in hybrid pathway, the portion of the overall HD adoption rates in MY 2032. The
794 The sleeper cab tractor costs were calculated
using Vehicles 32, 78, and 79.

ER22AP24.065</GPH>
155
Fmt 4701
adoption rates for this pathway are shown in Table II–48 through Table II–
50.
ER22AP24.070</GPH>
iv. Additional Example Potential example potential compliance pathway are shown in Table II–51 for MYs 2027,
Compliance Pathways—Manufacturer relative to the reference case (that 2030 and 2032.
Costs To Meet the Final Standards includes ZEV adoption in the reference
The fleet average per-vehicle case, at the adoption rates of our ‘‘no
action’’ reference case in RIA Chapter 4)

ER22AP24.069</GPH>
technology costs of the additional

ER22AP24.068</GPH>
156
Fmt 4701
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C $190,000 for sleeper cab tractors in lead to reduction in operating costs. Our
We developed two scenarios for MY 2023).797 We believe this is reasonable technology packages that include
2032. Scenario 1 includes H2–ICE here for all model years given additional improvements to ICE
vehicles without any PHEVs. Scenario 2 consideration of the corresponding vehicles reduced the CO2 emissions,
predominately includes PHEVs with business case for manufacturers to and therefore energy consumption, by 4
only limited adoption of H2–ICE successfully deploy these technologies percent. The cost savings related to the
technology in day cab tractor when considering the payback period of reduction in fuel and DEF consumed
applications. We estimate in Scenario 1 these technologies, including the IRA depends on the number of miles driven,
that the MY 2032 fleet average per- purchaser tax credits for PHEVs. among other factors. The average DEF
vehicle cost to manufacturers by
v. Additional Example Potential and diesel fuel costs for each of the
regulatory group will be $3,800 for LHD;
Compliance Pathways—Purchaser Cost baseline diesel-fueled ICE vehicle
$7,600 for MHD vocational vehicles;
Considerations applications in HD TRUCS were
and $7,700 for HHD vocational vehicles.
developed as discussed in RIA Chapter
The MY 2032 fleet average per-vehicle In this section, we discuss items 2.3.4. As shown in RIA Chapter 2.11.5.1,
costs to manufacturers in Scenario 1 associated with the purchaser costs for the average operating cost savings varies
will range between $10,300 for day cab each of the technologies considered. depending on the vehicle ID, ranging
tractors and $10,400 per sleeper cab Under this approach for vehicles with from approximately $280 to $1,800 per
tractors. The Phase 2 MY 2027 tractor ICE technologies, our evaluation of year. The average annual operating
standard incremental fleet average per- payback focuses on whether the
vehicle costs were projected to be savings for a day cab tractor is $700 and
technology pays back within the period is $1,600 for a sleeper cab tractor. Based
between $12,750 and $17,125 (2022$) of first ownership. Consistent with our
per vehicle and the vocational vehicle on the technology package costs shown
Phase 2 approach to vehicles with ICE in section II.F.4.ii.a for additional ICE
standards were projected to cost technologies, if the vehicle with ICE
between up $7,090 (2022$) per vehicle improvements, the payback
technology pays back within this period for the technology improvements
vehicle.795 EPA notes the projected period, then we consider that
costs per vehicle for this final rule would be less than three years for day
technology within the additional cab tractors and less than two years for
under Scenario 1 are similar to the fleet example potential compliance
average per-vehicle costs projected for sleeper cab tractors.
pathways. We also evaluate payback
the HD Phase 2 rule that we considered period, consistent with our approach to b. Natural Gas Fueled Vehicles
to be reasonable.796 EPA’s assessment consideration of payback in Phase 2 for
here is similarly that these estimated The operating savings of NG vehicles
vehicles with ICE technologies.798 See come from both the elimination of the
costs are reasonable for all model years. also our discussion of first ownership in
The projected manufacturer fleet DEF costs because these vehicles use
section II.F.1 of this preamble. We also three-way catalysts and from the
average per-vehicle technology costs in evaluated and included vehicle with
Scenario 2 for MY 2032 are higher than reduced fueling costs. When comparing
ICE technologies if we assessed there fuel efficiency between diesel and SI
Scenario 1. We developed this scenario may be other reasons that purchasers
because manufacturers may choose to natural gas powered HD vehicles,
would consider such technologies, such dependent on vehicle and duty cycle,
offer technologies, such as PHEVs, that as that the vehicles emit nearly zero CO2
have a higher projected upfront cost, but natural gas returns 7 percent to 12
emissions at the tailpipe, low engine-out percent less fuel economy.799 Therefore,
also have a shorter payback period and exhaust emissions provide the
therefore potentially a better business we calculated the natural gas
opportunity for efficient and durable
case and purchasers may demonstrate consumption using a conversion factor
after-treatment systems, and the
more willingness to buy. The costs to of 139.3 standard cubic feet (scf) to
potential for future efficiency
tractor manufacturers in the PHEV- diesel gallon equivalent and applying a
improvements within the lead time
focused scenario represent 10 percent fuel economy penalty to the
provided.
approximately 18 percent of the price of diesel fuel consumption.800 The average
a new tractor (conservatively estimated a. ICE Vehicles diesel fuel consumption, diesel fuel
to be $140,000 for day cab tractors and Reducing the energy required to move costs, and DEF costs for each of the
a tractor down the road through
799 Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and
795 The Phase 2 tractor MY 2027 standard cost

aerodynamic improvements and
increments were projected to be between $10,200 Renewable Energy, Alternative Fuel Data Center,
and $13,700 per vehicle in 2013$ (81 FR 73621).
reductions in tire rolling resistance will Vehicle and Infrastructure Cash-Flow Evaluation
The Phase 2 vocational vehicle MY 2027 standards Tool (VICE), https://afdc.energy.gov/vice_model/,
were projected to cost between $1,486 and $5,670 797 Memo to Docket. ‘‘Sample Heavy-Duty Truck accessed February 17, 2024.
per vehicle in 2013$ (81 FR 73718). Prices in 2023.’’ Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0945. 800 U.S. DOE. Available online: https://
796 81 FR 73621–622 (tractors) and 73718–19 798 See 81 FR 73621–622 (tractors) and 73718–19 afdc.energy.gov/fuels/equivalency_
ER22AP24.071</GPH>
(vocational vehicles). (vocational vehicles). methodology.html.
157
Fmt 4701
baseline diesel-fueled ICE vehicle diesel ICE vehicle.803 The average DEF operating savings were then compared
applications in HD TRUCS were costs for each of the baseline diesel- to the upfront technology costs, as
developed as discussed in RIA Chapter fueled ICE vehicle applications in HD shown in section II.F.4.ii.d. The hybrid
2.3.4. We then calculated the average TRUCS were developed as discussed in powertrain technology will pay back in
annual natural gas fuel costs for each of RIA Chapter 2.3.4. The net annual 10–11 years for vocational vehicles, but
the HD TRUCS applications by vehicle operating savings for each of the HD in a shorter period of time for some
ID using $18.23/thousand cubic feet TRUCS vehicle applications by vehicle applications such as refuse haulers, step
price, as shown in RIA Chapter ID is shown in RIA Chapter 2.11.5.3. vans, and transit buses. The average
2.11.5.2.801 The natural gas powered The upfront H2–ICE powertrain payback period for this technology in
vehicles have immediate paybacks for technology costs, as shown in section day cab tractors is 7.5 years and 4 years
some vehicle categories and payback II.F.4.ii.c, on average would pay back in in sleeper cab tractors.
periods of less than one year for all 2 years for LHD vocational vehicles, 6 Similar to our discussion for ZEVs
applications when the operating savings years for MHD vocational vehicles, 9 under the modeled potential
are compared to the upfront incremental years for HHD vocational vehicles. The compliance pathways, the IRA provides
costs of the NG vehicles, as shown in operating costs for H2–ICE tractors powerful incentives in reducing the cost
section II.F.4.ii.b. exceed the operating costs of ICE to manufacture and purchase PHEVs, as
tractors, but there may be other reasons well as reducing the cost of charging
c. H2–ICE Vehicles that purchasers would consider this infrastructure as applicable (see further
The operating costs of H2–ICE technology such as the vehicles emit discussion in this section), that
vehicles include H2 consumption to nearly zero CO2 emissions at the facilitates market penetration of PHEV
power the engine and DEF consumption tailpipe, the low engine-out exhaust
technology in the time frame considered
to control the NOx emissions. These emissions from H2–ICE vehicles provide
in this rulemaking. The upfront costs to
costs are compared to the operating DEF the opportunity for efficient and durable
purchasers of PHEVs would be less than
and diesel fuel costs for each of the after-treatment systems, and the
the cost to manufacturers due to the IRA
baseline diesel-fueled ICE vehicle efficiency of H2–ICE vehicles may
purchaser tax credit. IRA section 13403,
applications in HD TRUCS, as discussed continue to improve with time.804
‘‘Qualified Commercial Clean Vehicles,’’
in RIA Chapter 2.3.4. d. Hybrid and Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles creates a tax credit of up to $40,000 per
H2–ICE vehicles operate on H2 gas Class 4 through 8 HD vehicle (up to
instead of diesel fuel. We calculated the Hybrid vehicles, similar to other ICE
vehicle improvements, will have lower $7,500 per Class 2b or 3 vehicle) for the
H2–ICE hydrogen fuel costs relative to purchase or lease of a qualified
our assessment of the hydrogen costs for operating costs than a comparable ICE
vehicle due to reduced diesel fuel commercial clean vehicle. This tax
FCEVs for each of the vehicle credit is available from CY 2023 through
applications in HD TRUCS, as discussed consumption and DEF consumption.
These HEV costs are compared to the CY 2032 and is based on the lesser of
in RIA Chapter 2.5.3.1.When comparing the incremental cost of the clean vehicle
efficiencies between FCEV and H2–ICE operating DEF and diesel fuel costs for
each of the baseline diesel-fueled ICE over a comparable ICE vehicle or the
vehicles, the FCEVs have an average specified percentage of the basis of the
efficiency of 53 percent, as discussed in vehicle applications in HD TRUCS, as
discussed in RIA Chapter 2.3.4. As clean vehicle, up to the maximum
RIA Chapter 2.5.1.2.1, while H2–ICEV $40,000 limitation. Among other
has an efficiency of 42 percent.802 discussed, we used an effectiveness
level for vocational vehicle hybrid specifications, these vehicles must be
Therefore, we calculated the H2 fueling on-road vehicles (or mobile machinery)
costs for H2–ICE relative to the FCEV powertrains of 15 percent and for tractor
hybrid powertrains of 10 percent. that are propelled to a significant extent
fueling costs by applying a ratio of 0.53/ by a battery-powered electric motor or
0.42. The annual operating savings for
HEVs was calculated for each of the HD are qualified fuel cell motor vehicles.
The H2–ICE vehicles also require a For the former, the battery must have a
SCR system to control NOx, but the TRUCS vehicle applications, as shown
in RIA Chapter 2.11.5.4 by reducing the capacity of at least 15 kWh (or 7 kWh
system will be smaller than a if it has a gross vehicle weight rating of
comparable diesel ICE vehicle because diesel ICE DEF and fuel costs by 15
percent for vocational vehicles and 10 less than 14,000 pounds (Class 3 or
the engine-out NOx emissions are lower. below)) and must be rechargeable from
We calculated the annual DEF costs for percent for tractors. The annual
an external source of electricity. For
H2–ICE vehicles as 10 percent of the 801 U.S. DOE/Energy Information Administration. PHEVs, the per-vehicle tax credit cap
DEF costs for a comparable baseline Annual Energy Outlook 2023. Reference Case. Table limitation is 15 percent of the vehicle
13. Transportation Natural Gas Spot Price for 2022. cost, which is the limiting factor for
799 Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Available online: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/
Renewable Energy, Alternative Fuel Data Center, aeo/data/browser/#/?id=13-AEO2023&cases= many of the applications. Since this tax
Vehicle and Infrastructure Cash-Flow Evaluation ref2023&sourcekey=0. credit overlaps with the model years for
Tool (VICE), https://afdc.energy.gov/vice_model/, 802 FEV, ‘‘Hydrogen ICE’’, The Aachen which we are finalizing standards (MYs
accessed February 17, 2024. Colloquium Sustainable Mobility, October 5th–7th, 2027 through 2032), we included it in
800 U.S. DOE. Available online: https:// 2020.
afdc.energy.gov/fuels/equivalency_ 803 Srna, Ales. Sandia National Laboratory. ‘‘The
our calculations for each of those years
methodology.html. in our analysis, as shown in Table II–52.
158
Fmt 4701
The purchaser of a HD PHEV would PHEV powertrain technology after To this end, as in the HD GHG Phase
need to consider the recharging needs of accounting for the IRA tax credit as 1 and Phase 2 rulemakings, in this
the vehicle. Because the battery sizes in shown in Table II–52 for vocational Phase 3 final rule we considered the
HD PHEVs are significantly smaller than vehicles will be offset by the operating following factors in setting final Phase
a comparable BEV and only discharge savings with a payback period of 3 3 GHG standards: the impacts of
60 percent of their battery in-use, the years. The day cab and sleeper cab potential standards on reductions of
recharging demand is also lower than a tractor upfront costs would be offset GHG emissions; technical feasibility and
comparable BEV. Therefore, for this with operational savings over an 8-and technology effectiveness; the lead time
analysis, the vehicles use depot 9-year period, respectively. necessary to implement the
charging and recharge with a 240 V/50 technologies; costs to manufacturers;
G. EPA’s Basis for Concluding That the
amp outlet that we project are available costs to purchasers including operating
Final Standards Are Feasible and
at no additional upfront infrastructure savings; reduction of non-GHG
Appropriate Under the Clean Air Act
cost. There may be situations where the emissions; the impacts of standards on
operator would need to create access to 1. Overview oil conservation and energy security; the
such an outlet, but those costs would be Section 202(a)(1) directs the impacts of standards on the truck
low. Furthermore, as discussed in RIA Administrator to promulgate ‘‘standards industry; other energy impacts; as well
Chapter 1.3.2, the IRA can also help applicable to the emission of any air as other relevant factors such as impacts
reduce the costs for deploying EVSE pollutant from any class or classes of on safety.805 To evaluate and balance
infrastructure if the operator desires new motor vehicles or new motor these statutory factors and other
faster recharging times. The IRA extends vehicle engines, which in his judgment relevant considerations, EPA must
the Alternative Fuel Refueling Property cause, or contribute to, air pollution necessarily estimate a means of
Tax Credit (section 13404) through which may reasonably be anticipated to compliance: what technologies are
2032, with modifications. Under the endanger public health or welfare.’’ See projected to be available to be used,
new provisions, businesses would be also Coalition for Responsible what do they cost, and what is
eligible for up to 30 percent of the costs Regulation v. EPA, 684 F. 3d at 122 appropriate lead time for their
associated with purchasing and (‘‘the job Congress gave [EPA] in deployment. Thus, to support the
installing charging equipment in these § 202(a)’’ is ‘‘utilizing emission feasibility of the final standards, EPA
areas (subject to a $100,000 cap per standards to prevent reasonably identified a potential compliance
item) if prevailing wage and anticipated endangerment from pathway. Having identified one means
apprenticeship requirements are met. maturing into concrete harm’’). As of compliance, EPA’s task is to
Plug-in hybrid vehicle operating costs discussed in section II.A of this ‘‘answe[r] any theoretical objections’’ to
consist of a combination of ICE preamble, there is a critical need for that means of compliance, ‘‘identif[y]
operation and battery electric operation. further GHG reductions to address the the major steps necessary,’’ and to
These PHEV costs are calculated relative adverse impacts of air pollution from ‘‘offe[r] plausible reasons for believing
to the operating costs for each of the HD motor vehicles on public health and that each of those steps can be
baseline diesel-fueled ICE vehicle welfare. Heavy-duty vehicles are completed in the time available.’’ NRDC
applications in HD TRUCS, as discussed significant contributors to the U.S. GHG 804 As we explain in RTC 2.1, the statute does not
in RIA Chapter 2.3.4 and the emissions inventories, and additional require that pollution control technologies pay back
comparable BEV operating costs, as reductions in GHGs from vehicles are in the form of operational savings, or even require
discussed in RIA Chapter 2.4.4. As needed to avoid the worst consequences EPA to consider costs to consumers. While payback
is relevant to ascertaining willingness to purchase,
discussed, we used a utility factor for of climate change as discussed in EPA notes that many pollution control technologies
vocational vehicle PHEV powertrains of section II.A. With continued advances do not pay back. Notwithstanding the lack of
41 percent and for tractor PHEV in internal combustion engine and payback, such technologies have played a critical
powertrains of 22 percent in MY 2030 vehicle emissions controls and ZEV role in achieving the public health and welfare
goals of section 202(a) and have been widely

and later. The annual operating savings technologies coming into the adopted by manufacturers and purchasers. These
was evaluated for each of the HD mainstream as key vehicle emissions include technologies Congress itself contemplated
TRUCS vehicle applications compared controls, EPA’s assessment is that in enacting the Clean Air Act section 202(a), such
as catalytic converters, as well as other technologies
to the comparable baseline diesel ICE substantial further GHG emissions that are the foundation for modern pollution control
vehicle, as shown in RIA Chapter reductions are feasible and appropriate on HD motor vehicles, such as particulate matter
ER22AP24.072</GPH>
2.11.5.4. The incremental cost of the under Clean Air Act section 202(a)(1). filters.
159
Fmt 4701
v. EPA, 655 F. 2d at 332. That is what that we anticipate will be available in evaluates other relevant factors that are
EPA has done here in this final rule, and the MY 2027–32 timeframe, including important to evaluating the real-world
indeed what it has done in all of the numerous advanced vehicles with ICE feasibility of the standards as well as
motor vehicle emission standard rules (e.g., hybrid), BEV, and FCEV their impact, including impacts on
implementing section 202(a) of the Act technologies which include a range of purchasers, non-GHG emissions, energy,
for half a century. electrification (including within ICE safety, and other factors. It concludes
In assessing the means of compliance, engine and vehicle technologies). that the final standards will result in
EPA considers updated data available at Another part of EPA’s consideration considerable benefits for purchasers and
the time of this rulemaking, including of updated data is to evaluate changes operators of HD vehicles, result in
real-world technological and in government and regulatory public health and welfare benefits from
corresponding cost developments incentives, which can have real and non-GHGs, create positive energy
related to emissions-reducing significant impacts on the development security benefits for the United States,
technologies for HD vehicles. The and application of vehicle technologies. and not create an unreasonable risk to
statute directs EPA to assess the Accordingly, an important element of safety. Section II.G.5 explains how the
‘‘development and application of the this rule’s assessment is consideration Administrator exercised the authority
requisite technology, giving appropriate of the large potential impact that recent Congress provided to the agency in
consideration to the cost of compliance congressional action, including the BIL balancing the various factors we
within’’ the relevant timeframe, and and the IRA, will have on the cost and considered. It articulates the key factors
feasibility of HD motor vehicle CO2 that were dispositive to the
specifically compels EPA to consider
emission-reducing technologies, Administrator’s decision in selecting the
relevant emissions-reduction
including facilitating production and final standards, including feasibility,
technologies on vehicles and engines
adoption of ZEV technologies for HD compliance costs, lead time, GHG
regardless of ‘‘whether such vehicles
motor vehicles. EPA’s consideration of emissions reductions, and cost to
and engines are designed as complete
all these factors demonstrates that very purchasers; as well as other factors,
systems or incorporate devices to
large GHG emissions reductions are such as non-GHG emissions, energy,
prevent or control such pollution.’’ CAA
feasible for HD vehicles in the MY and safety, that were not used to select
section 202(a)(1), (2). The statute does
2027–32 timeframe and that such the standards but that nonetheless
not prescribe particular technologies,
reductions can be achieved using a provide further support for the
but rather entrusts to the EPA
combination of advanced ICE vehicle, Administrator’s decision. On balance,
Administrator the authority and BEV, and FCEV technologies at this section II.G, together with the rest
obligation to identify a range of reasonable cost. As noted, of the administrative record,
available technologies that have the manufacturers remain free to choose demonstrates that the final standards are
potential to significantly control or how to comply with the final standards supported by voluminous evidence, the
prevent emissions of the relevant (and, indeed, manufacturers have at product of the agency’s well-considered
pollutant, here GHGs, and to establish times chosen different means from those technical judgment and the
standards based on his consideration of projected as a potential compliance Administrator’s careful weighing of the
the lead-time and costs for such pathway in previous rulemakings to relevant factors, and that these
technologies, along with other factors. comply with the respective standards). standards faithfully implement the
At the same time, the statute does EPA’s analysis in preamble section important directive contained in section
specifically identify criteria for II.F.4 further supports the feasibility of 202(a)(1)–(2) of the Clean Air Act to
technologies that cannot serve as the the final standards by showing that such reduce emissions of air pollutants from
basis for the standards: first, GHG emission reductions can be motor vehicles which cause or
technologies which cannot be achieved using different mixes of contribute to air pollution that may
developed and applied within the vehicles with ICE technologies, reasonably be anticipated to endanger
relevant time period, giving appropriate including without producing additional public health or welfare.
consideration to the cost of compliance; ZEVs to comply with this rule as
and second, technologies that ‘‘cause or described in the additional example 2. Consideration of Technological
contribute to an unreasonable risk to potential compliance pathway. Feasibility, Compliance Costs and Lead
public health, welfare, or safety in its The balance of this section Time
operation or function.’’ CAA section summarizes the key factors found in the The technological readiness of the
202(a)(2), (4). The statute does not administrative record (including the heavy-duty industry to meet the final
contain or imply any other exclusions. entire preamble, RIA, and RTC) that standards for model years 2027–2032
Given the statute’s primary purpose and form the basis for the Administrator’s and beyond is best understood in the
function to reduce emissions of air determination that the final standards context of over a decade of heavy-duty
pollutants which are contributing to are feasible and appropriate under our vehicle emissions reduction programs in
endangering air pollution, the statute Clean Air Act section 202(a)(1)–(2) which the HD industry has introduced
therefore compels EPA to consider authority. Section II.G.2 discusses the emissions reducing technologies in a
technologies that reduce emissions of statutory factors of technological wide lineup of ever more efficient and
air pollutants most effectively, feasibility, compliance costs, and lead cost-competitive vehicle applications.
including vehicle technologies that time, and it explains that the final Electrification technologies beyond the
result in no vehicle tailpipe emissions standards are predicated upon range included in vehicles with ICE
and completely ‘‘prevent’’ GHG technologies that are feasible and of have seen particularly rapid
emissions. CAA section 202(a)(1). At reasonable cost during the timeframe for development and an expansion in the
minimum, the statute allows EPA to this rule. Section II.G.3 evaluates range of electrification over the last
consider such technologies. Pursuant to emissions of GHGs, and it finds that the several years, such that early HD ZEV
the statutory mandate and as explained final standards would achieve models are in use today for some
throughout this preamble, EPA has significant GHG reductions that make an applications and are expected to expand
considered the full range of vehicle important contribution to climate to many more applications, as discussed
technologies that meet these criteria and change mitigation. Section II.G.4 in RIA Chapters 1.5 and 2. The IRA
160
Fmt 4701
provides powerful incentives in successful at reducing GHG emissions. HD vehicle types when using BEV,
reducing the cost to manufacture and The modeled potential compliance FCEV, and PHEV technologies. The
purchase ZEVs, as well as promoting the pathway is not a command, but one overarching design and functionality of
build-out and reducing the cost of demonstration of a means of meeting the HD TRUCS is premised on assessing
charging infrastructure, that EPA standards, not foreclosing other means. whether, for each of the 101 vehicle
projects will facilitate increased market EPA’s analysis of additional vehicles types analyzed, BEV, FCEV, and PHEV
penetration of ZEV technology in the with ICE technology packages and the technologies could perform the same
time frame considered in this technical feasibility, technical work as a comparable ICE vehicle
rulemaking. As a result, the number of effectiveness, lead time, and cost of counterpart. Within the HD TRUCS
ZEVs projected in the potential compliance of corresponding additional modeling that EPA conducted to
compliance pathway’s technology example potential compliance pathways support this final rule, we have imposed
packages we modeled to support the in preamble section II.F.4 further constraints to reflect the rate at which
feasibility of the final standards is supports the feasibility of the final a manufacturer can deploy BEV
higher than in the technology packages standards by showing that such GHG technologies that include consideration
on which the Phase 1 and 2 HD GHG emission reductions can be achieved of time necessary to ramp up battery
standards are predicated. using different mixes of vehicles with production, including the need to
As discussed in RIA Chapter 1.5.5 and ICE technologies, including without increase the availability of critical raw
section II.D, the modeled example producing additional ZEVs to comply minerals and develop more robust
potential compliance pathway to with this rule. supply chains, and expand battery
support the feasibility of the final In setting GHG standards for a future production facilities, as discussed in
standards includes only technologies model year, EPA considers the extent section II.D.2.c.ii. Furthermore, we have
that have already been developed and deployment of advanced existing and also imposed constraints to reflect the
deployed. Additionally, manufacturers future technologies, including the development and deployment of FCEVs,
have announced plans to rapidly technologies most effective at reducing as discussed in section II.D.3.
increase their investments in ZEV Constraints on the technology
GHG emissions, would be available and
technologies over the next decade, and adoption limits in HD TRUCS and
warranted in light of the benefits to
have already expended billions of correspondingly our modeled potential
public health and welfare in GHG
dollars to do so. In addition, as noted, compliance pathway, as well as other
emission reductions, and potential aspects of our lead time assessment, are
the IRA and the BIL provide many constraints, such as cost of compliance,
monetary incentives for the production described in section II.F. Overall, given
lead time, raw material availability and the measured approach we have taken
and purchase of ZEVs in the heavy-duty component supplies (including
market, as well as incentives for electric to phase in the rate of deployment for
availability of minerals critical to new HD vehicles, our assessment shows
vehicle charging infrastructure. battery manufacture and resiliency of
Furthermore, there have been multiple that there is sufficient lead time for the
associated supply chains), redesign industry to more broadly deploy
actions by states to accelerate the cycles, charging and refueling
adoption of heavy-duty ZEV existing technologies and successfully
infrastructure availability and cost, and comply with the final standards should
technologies, such as (1) a multi-state purchasers’ willingness to purchase
Memorandum of Understanding for the they pursue this or similar compliance
(including payback). In the modeled pathways. Should manufacturers pursue
support of heavy-duty ZEV adoption 806 potential compliance pathway other compliance pathways like the
and (2) the State of California’s ACT supporting the feasibility of the final examples outlined in section II.F.4,
program, which has also been adopted standards, EPA assessed these there also is sufficient lead time given
by other states under CAA section 177 considerations. The extent of these that the technologies have already been
and includes a manufacturer potential constraints for the potential developed, most of the technologies
requirement for zero-emission truck compliance pathway has diminished have already been deployed and some
sales.807 Together with the range of ICE significantly in light of increased and are already in widespread use, and there
technologies that have been already further projected investment by are generally fewer concerns regarding
demonstrated over the past decade, manufacturers, increased and further availability of supporting infrastructure
BEVs and FCEVs with no tailpipe projected acceptance by purchasers, and and critical minerals availability.
emissions (and 0 g CO2/ton-mile significant support from Congress to Our modeled potential compliance
certification values) are capable of address such areas as upfront purchase pathway’s technology packages to
supporting rates of annual stringency price, charging infrastructure, critical support feasibility of the final standards
increases that are much greater than mineral supplies, and domestic supply project that, for the industry overall,
were available in earlier GHG chain manufacturing. In response to the nearly 50 percent of new vocational
rulemakings. Hence, EPA supports the increased stringency of the final vehicle sales and 25 to 40 percent of
feasibility of the final standards through standards, in the potential compliance new tractor sales in MY 2032 will be
a modeled potential compliance pathway we project that manufacturers ZEVs. As noted in section II.F.1, this
pathway reflecting the utilization of a will adopt advanced technologies, such represents approximately 1 percent of
mix of HD vehicle technologies, as increased electrification, at an the HD on-road fleet in 2027 growing to
including the technologies most increasing pace across more of their 7 percent of the on-road fleet in 2032.
vehicles. To evaluate the feasibility of EPA believes that this is an achievable
806 NESCAUM MOU, available at https://
BEVs and FCEVs in our modeled level based on our technical assessment
www.nescaum.org/documents/mhdv-zev-mou-
20220329.pdf. potential compliance pathway’s for this final rule that includes
807 EPA granted the ACT rule waiver requested by technology packages that support the consideration of the feasibility and lead
California under CAA section 209(b) on March 30, feasibility of the final standards, EPA time required for ZEVs and appropriate
2023. The ACT had been adopted by seven states developed, and for the final rule refined, consideration of the cost of compliance
under CAA section 177: Oregon, Washington, New
York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts adopted ACT
a tool called HD TRUCS, to evaluate the for manufacturers. Our assessment of
beginning in MY 2025 while Vermont adopted ACT design features needed to meet the the appropriateness of the level of ZEVs
beginning in MY 2026 and Colorado in MY2027. energy and power demands of various in our analysis is also informed by
161
Fmt 4701
consideration of comments as well as by specific vehicles and their fleet to their respective CO2 emission
substantial investments by offerings, while allowing industry standards in that model year, while
manufacturers, as described in RIA overall to meet the standards and thus other vehicles will be ‘‘debit generators’’
Chapter 1. More detail about our achieve the health and environmental and under-performing against their
technical assessment, and our benefits projected for this rulemaking at standards. As the final standards reach
assessment of the production feasibility a lower cost. EPA has considered ABT increasingly lower numerical levels,
of ZEVs is provided in section II.D and in the feasibility assessments for many some vehicle designs that had generated
II.E of this preamble and Chapters 1 and previous rulemakings since EPA first credits against their CO2 emission
2 of the RIA. began incorporating ABT credits standard in earlier model years may
At the same time, we again note that provisions in mobile source instead generate debits in later model
the final standards are performance- rulemakings in the 1980s. In particular, years. In MY 2032 when the final
based and do not mandate any specific consistent with our approach in Phase standards reach the lowest level, it is
technology for any manufacturer or any 2, EPA considered averaging in the possible that only BEVs, FCEVs, PHEVs,
vehicles. The modeled potential standard setting process of the Phase 3 and H2–ICE vehicles are generating
compliance pathway is one of many GHG standards, and our assessment is positive credits, and other ICE vehicles
possible compliance pathways that premised upon the availability of generate varying levels of deficits. A
manufacturers could choose to take to averaging in supporting the feasibility of greater application of ICE vehicle
meet the performance-based standards. the final standards. While we also technologies (e.g., hybrids) can enable
That is, we do not expect, and the considered the existence of other compliance with fewer ZEVs than if less
standards do not require, that all aspects of the ABT program as ICE technology was adopted, including
manufacturers follow a similar pathway. supportive of the feasibility of the Phase a compliance strategy that does not
Instead, individual manufacturers can 3 GHG standards, we did not rely on include ZEVs, and therefore enable the
choose to apply a mix of technologies those other aspects in justifying the tailoring of a compliance strategy to the
that best suits the company’s particular feasibility of the standards. In other manufacturer’s specific market and
product mix and market position as well words, the existing ABT program will product offerings. Together, a
as its strategies for investment and continue to help provide additional manufacturer’s mix of credit-generating
technology development. For example, flexibility in compliance for and debit-generating vehicles contribute
manufacturers that choose to increase manufacturers to make necessary to its sales-weighted average
their sales of hybrid vehicle technological improvements and reduce performance, compared to its standard,
technologies or apply more or increase the overall cost of the program, without for that year.
sales of advanced technologies for non- compromising overall environmental Just as the averaging approach in the
hybrid ICE vehicles would require a objectives; however, the other aspects of HD vehicle GHG program allows
smaller number of ZEVs (including no the ABT program that are not the manufacturers to design a compliance
ZEVs relative to the reference case) than availability of averaging, including strategy relying on the sale of both
we have projected in our assessment to credit carryover, deficits, banking, and credit-generating vehicles and debit-
support the feasibility of the final trading, were not considered in setting generating vehicles in a single year, the
standards, as described in section II.F. the numeric levels of the Phase 3 credit banking and trading provisions of
In addition, while EPA has identified standards. Likewise, the final the program allow manufacturers to
numerous technologies, available today, transitional ABT provisions in this rule design a compliance strategy relying on
for meeting the standards, overcompliance and undercompliance
for credits from multipliers and credit
manufacturers and their suppliers are in different years, or even by different
transfers across averaging sets,
highly innovative and may develop manufacturers. Credit banking allows
described in preamble section III.A, that
novel technologies for achieving the credits to carry-over for up to five years
allow flexibility in compliance options
requisite emissions reductions. For and allows manufacturers up to three
for manufacturers were not considered
example, when EPA implemented years to address any credit deficits.
in setting the numeric levels of the
certain statutory standards following the Credit trading is a compliance flexibility
Phase 3 standards and we did not rely
1970 Clean Air Act Amendments, provision that allows one vehicle
on those flexibilities in justifying the
manufacturers met those standards manufacturer to purchase credits from
feasibility of the standards.
through three-way catalysts, a another.
theretofore unproven technology. More Manufacturers widely utilize ABT, The final performance-based
recently, manufacturers responded to which provide a variety of flexible paths standards with ABT provisions give
EPA’s 2001 heavy-duty rule by applying to plan compliance. We have discussed manufacturers a degree of flexibility in
selective catalytic reduction this dynamic in past rules, and we the design of specific vehicles and their
technologies, even though EPA had not anticipate that this same dynamic will fleet offerings, while allowing industry
anticipated such technology would be support compliance with this overall to meet the standards and thus
utilized for compliance.808 rulemaking in the lead time afforded. achieve the health and environmental
In considering the feasibility of the The GHG credit program was designed benefits projected for this rulemaking.
final standards, EPA also considers the to recognize that manufacturers EPA has considered the averaging
available compliance flexibilities on typically have a multi-year redesign portion of the ABT program in the
manufacturers’ compliance options and cycle and not every vehicle will be feasibility assessments for previous
the approach EPA takes in setting HD redesigned every year to add emissions- rulemakings and continues that practice
GHG vehicle standards that consider the reducing technology. Moreover, when here.
averaging provisions within the technology is added, it will generally We also note the other provisions in
program’s established ABT provisions. not achieve emissions reductions ABT that provide manufacturers
The final performance-based standards corresponding exactly to a single year- additional flexibility in complying with
with ABT provisions give manufacturers over-year change in stringency of the the standards.809 By averaging across
a degree of flexibility in the design of standards. Instead, in any given model
year, some vehicles will be ‘‘credit 809 As noted, these additional flexibilities (other
808 66 FR 5002, 5036 (January 18, 2001). generators,’’ over-performing compared than averaging under the existing ABT program) are
162
Fmt 4701
vehicles in the vehicle averaging sets 2 MY 2027 tractor standard cost those we are unable to fully monetize
and by allowing for credit banking increments were projected to be due to data and modeling limitations.
across years, manufacturers have the between $12,750 and $17,125 (2022$) The GHG emission reductions resulting
flexibility to adopt emissions-reducing per vehicle and the vocational vehicle from compliance with this final rule
technologies in the manner that best standards were projected to cost will significantly reduce the volume of
suits their particular market and between $1,860 and $7,090 (2022$) per GHG emissions from this sector. Section
business circumstances. We note further vehicle.811 Furthermore, the estimated VI.D.2 of this preamble discusses
that we have added additional MY 2032 costs to tractor manufacturers impacts of GHG emissions on
flexibilities to the ABT program as part represent less than about six percent of individuals living in socially and
of the Phase 3 final rule, which are the average price of a new heavy-duty economically vulnerable communities.
aimed at providing flexibilities in the tractor today (conservatively estimated The program will result in significant
transitional MYs of the final Phase 3 to be $140,000 for day cab tractors and social benefits including $10 billion in
standards as detailed in section III. $190,000 for sleeper cab tractors in climate benefits (with the average SC–
EPA’s annual Heavy-Duty Vehicle and 2023).812 This is likewise within the GHGs under a 2 percent near-term
Engine Greenhouse Gas Emissions margin that EPA considered reasonable Ramsey discount rate). These estimates
Compliance Report illustrates how in Phase 2.813 are a partial accounting of climate
different manufacturers have chosen to change impacts and will therefore tend
3. Consideration of Emissions of GHGs to be underestimates of the marginal
make use of the GHG program’s various
credit features.810 It is clear that An essential factor that EPA benefits of abatement. A more detailed
manufacturers are widely utilizing considered in determining the description and breakdown of these
several of the credit programs available, appropriate level of the final standards benefits can be found in section VII of
and we expect that manufacturers will is the projected reductions in GHG the preamble and Chapter 7 of the RIA.
continue to take advantage of the emissions and associated public health As discussed in section VII, we
compliance flexibilities and crediting and welfare impacts.814 monetize benefits of the final CO2
programs to their fullest extent, thereby The final GHG standards are projected standards and evaluate other costs in
providing them with additional tools in to achieve significant reductions in GHG part to better enable a comparison of
finding the lowest cost compliance emissions. The final standards will costs and benefits pursuant to E.O.
solutions. achieve nearly 1 billion metric tons in 12866, but we recognize that there are
In addition to technological feasibility net CO2 cumulative emission reductions benefits we are unable to fully quantify.
and lead time, EPA has considered the from calendar years 2027 through 2055 EPA’s consistent practice has been to set
cost for heavy-duty manufacturers to (see section V of this preamble and standards to achieve improved air
comply with the final standards. See Chapter 4 of the RIA). As discussed in quality consistent with CAA section 202
section II.F.2 of this preamble and section VI of this preamble, these GHG and not to rely on cost-benefit
Chapter 2 of the RIA for our analysis of emission reductions will make an calculations, with their uncertainties
compliance costs for manufacturers. For important contribution to efforts to limit and limitations, in identifying the
some regulatory groups, we estimate climate change and its anticipated appropriate standards. Nonetheless, our
that the rule will result in incremental impacts. See Coal. For Resp. Reg., 684 estimated benefits, which exceed the
cost savings for some vehicle types and F. 3d at 128 (removal of 960 million estimated costs of the final program,
fleet average per-vehicle costs for others. metric tons of CO2e over the life of the reinforce our view that the final
We estimate that the MY 2032 fleet GHG vehicle emission standards rule standards represent an appropriate
average per-vehicle cost savings to was found by EPA to be ‘‘meaningful weighing of the statutory factors and
manufacturers are $2,900 for LHD mitigation’’ of GHG emissions). other relevant considerations. More
vocational vehicles, $1,000 for MHD The final CO2 emission standards will specifically, for this rule our assessment
vocational vehicles and $700 for HHD reduce adverse impacts associated with that the rule has positive net monetized
vocational vehicles. The MY 2032 fleet climate change discussed in section II.A benefits, regardless of the magnitude of
average per-vehicle costs to tractor and will yield significant benefits, those positive net benefits, supports our
including those we can monetize and view that the final standards represent
manufacturers will range between
an appropriate weighing of the statutory
$3,200 for day cab tractors and $10,800
811 The Phase 2 tractor MY 2027 standard cost factors and other relevant
per sleeper cab tractor. EPA notes the
increments were projected to be between $10,200 considerations. Thus, regardless of the
projected costs per vehicle for this final and $13,700 per vehicle in 2013$ (81 FR 73621). method used in quantifying the
rule are lower than the fleet average per- The Phase 2 vocational vehicle MY 2027 standards
monetized benefits of GHG reductions
vehicle costs projected for the HD GHG were projected to cost between $1,486 and $5,670
per vehicle in 2013$ (81 FR 73718). for purposes of this rulemaking, EPA
Phase 2 rule that we considered to be 812 Memo to Docket. ‘‘Sample Heavy-Duty Truck would still find the emissions
reasonable. 81 FR 73621 (tractors) and Prices in 2023.’’ Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0945. reductions, in light of the cost of
73718 (vocational vehicles). The Phase 813 81 FR 73621 and 73719.
compliance, available lead time and
814 As further explained in section II.G.4, we note
other relevant factors EPA considered,
not necessary to EPA’s determination that the final that our modeled potential compliance pathway
standards are feasible and appropriate. These supporting the feasibility of the final standards
would justify adoption of these
additional flexibilities, however, do provide further projects increased use of ZEV technologies in the standards.
support for the reasonableness of the final standards HD vehicle fleet, which would reduce not just GHG
as they allow manufacturers to comply with the emissions but also result in reductions of vehicle 4. Consideration of Impacts on
final standards using a greater variety of compliance emissions of non-GHG pollutants that contribute to Purchasers, Non-GHG Emissions,
pathways, including beyond those examples ambient concentrations of ozone, particulate matter Energy, Safety, and Other Factors
modeled or identified by EPA, and at lower costs,
(PM2.5), NO2, CO, and air toxics. EPA did not select
including below the costs set forth in the the final GHG emission standards based on non- As noted in section II.G.2, the IRA
administrative record. GHG reductions of vehicle emissions; nonetheless, provides powerful incentives in
810 U.S. EPA. ‘‘EPA Heavy-Duty Vehicle and the projected GHG and non-GHG reductions of reducing the cost to manufacture and
Engine Greenhouse Gas Emissions Compliance vehicle emissions of the final program reinforce our
Report.’’ Available online: https://www.epa.gov/ view that the final standards represent an
purchase ZEVs, as well as reducing the
compliance-and-fuel-economy-data/epa-heavy- appropriate weighing of the statutory factors and cost of charging infrastructure, that we
duty-vehicle-and-engine-greenhouse-gas-emissions. other relevant considerations. project will facilitate increased market
163
Fmt 4701
penetration of ZEV technology in the first two years for day cabs and first five previously explained. We likewise find
time frame considered in this years for sleeper cabs. Furthermore, the that there is adequate lead time for the
rulemaking. Businesses that operate HD purchasers will benefit from annual infrastructure to support depot and
vehicles are under competitive pressure operating cost savings for each year after public charging for the use of BEVs we
to reduce operating costs, which should the payback occurs. EPA finds that these project could be used to comply with
encourage purchasers to identify and projected average costs to purchasers are the final standards, and included such
rapidly adopt vehicle technologies that reasonable considering the operating costs in our manufacturer or purchaser
provide a reasonable payback period. savings which more than offsets these cost analyses as appropriate. Section
Outlays for labor and fuel generally costs, as was also the case with the HD II.D.2.iii. With respect to hydrogen
constitute the two largest shares of HD GHG Phase 2 rule. See 81 FR 73482, infrastructure, as further explained in
vehicle operating costs, depending on 73621(tractors), 73719 (vocational RIA Chapter 1.8 and section II.F.3, we
the price of fuel, distance traveled, type vehicles). Regarding practicability, as recognize that this may take longer to
of HD vehicle, and commodity discussed in detail in this section II, develop, and therefore we included a
transported (if any), so businesses that within HD TRUCS we also considered constraint for FCEVs such that we did
operate HDVs face strong incentives to the impact on purchasers through our not incorporate FCEVs into technology
reduce these costs.815 816 However, as evaluation of the practicability and packages to support new standards for
noted in RIA Chapter 6.2, there are a suitability. For example, we applied an long-haul vehicles until MY 2030, when
number of other considerations that may additional constraint within HD TRUCS we expect refueling needs can be met
impact a purchaser’s willingness to that limited the maximum ZEV for the volume of FCEVs we project
adopt new technologies. Regarding adoption rate to 70 percent for any given could be used to comply with the final
payback, within HD TRUCS we vehicle type in MY 2032, 37 percent in standards. We discuss issues relating to
considered the impact on purchasers MY 2030, and 20 percent in MY 2027. availability of critical minerals,
through our evaluation of payback This conservative limit was developed resiliency of associated supply chains,
periods. The payback period is the after consideration of the needs of the and critical mineral security in section
number of years that it will take for the purchasers, as discussed in section II.D.2.ii and in RTC section 17.2. As
annual operational savings of a ZEV to II.F.1. there discussed, we do not consider
offset the incremental upfront purchase For the final rule, we also conducted these to be insurmountable, including
price of a BEV or FCEV (after accounting a complementary assessment of total for the projections to comply with the
for the IRA section 13502 battery tax cost of ownership (TCO) of BEVs and final Phase 3 standards, and we thus do
credit and IRA section 13403 vehicle tax FCEVs from a purchaser’s perspective, not consider them to be a constraining
credit) and upfront charging as discussed in RIA Chapter 2.12. In consideration.
infrastructure costs for depot-charged addition to the cost elements considered We also assessed the impact of future
BEVs (including IRA section 13404, in our payback analysis, our TCO HD BEVs on the grid, as discussed in
‘‘Alternative Fuel Refueling Property analysis also includes the costs of section II.D.2.iii. Our analysis for the
Credit’’) when compared to purchasing financing the vehicles and the impact of final rule shows that systems and
a comparable ICE vehicle. The modeled residual value. As the results show in processes exist to handle the impact on
compliance pathway’s average per- RIA Chapter 2.12, we find that the costs the power generation and transmission
vehicle costs to a purchaser by for owning and operating a ZEV will be of this final rule, including when
lower than a comparable ICE vehicle for considered in combination with
regulatory group for a MY 2032 heavy-
all MY 2032 BEVs and FCEVs in our projections of other impacts on power
duty vehicle, including associated EVSE
technology packages to support the generation and transmission based on
and after considering the IRA battery-
modeled compliance pathway when our assessments at the time of this final
manufacturer and vehicle-purchaser tax
evaluated over a five-year time horizon. rule. See RTC section 7.1; see also RIA
credits, are projected to range between
In fact, all vehicles show several Chapter 1.6. Therefore, we found that
$1,500 and $34,000 for vocational
thousands of dollars in net TCO savings grid reliability is not expected to be
vehicles and $4,300 and $22,000 for
at the five-year point. We find that this adversely affected by the modest
tractors. As explained in section
TCO analysis further supports our increase in electricity demand
II.F.2.ii, EPA concludes that the final
assessment. associated with HD BEV charging and
standards will be beneficial for Within our analysis, to support the thus was not considered to be a
purchasers because the lower operating final standards we also considered the constraining consideration.
costs during the operational life of the lead time necessary for the development EPA considers our analysis of the
vehicle will offset the increase in of infrastructure associated with impact of the final CO2 emission
vehicle technology costs within the operating the vehicles, including standards on vehicle and upstream
usual period of first ownership of the consideration of the projected lead time emissions for non-GHG pollutants as
vehicle, which can be 7 years or longer. necessary under the potential supportive of the final standards. The
For example, purchasers of MY 2032 compliance pathway to install depot final standards will decrease vehicle
vocational vehicles on average by charging and supporting electrification emissions of non-GHG pollutants, and
regulatory group will recoup the upfront infrastructure and to develop hydrogen we expect those decreased emissions
costs through operating savings within infrastructure that will be required for will contribute to reductions in ambient
the first two to four years of ownership. the projected use of these technologies. concentrations of ozone, particulate
Purchasers of MY 2032 tractors on As further explained in RIA Chapter 1.6 matter (PM2.5), NO2, CO, and air toxics.
average will recoup the upfront costs and sections II.E.2 and II.F.3, and RTC Similarly, we also project reductions in
through operating savings within the section 6, our assessment indicates that emissions of non-GHG pollutants from
depot charging can be installed in time refineries (i.e., NOX, PM2.5, VOC, and
815 American Transportation Research Institute,
for the purchase and use of the volume SO2). We project that non-GHG
An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking, of MY 2027 and later BEVs we project emissions from EGUs will increase as a
September 2013. Docket ID: EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–
0827–0512. could be used to comply with the final result of the increased demand for
816 Transport Canada, Operating Cost of Trucks, standards, and we considered such electricity associated with the rule, but
2005. Docket ID: EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0827–0070. purchaser costs in our analysis as the magnitude of emissions increases
164
Fmt 4701
diminishes over time due to EGU terms of oil conservation and energy society at a 2 percent discount rate will
regulations and changes in the future security through reductions in fuel be approximately $13 billion through
power generation mix, including consumption. This final rule is the year 2055, roughly 12 times the
impacts of the IRA. By 2055 there are projected to reduce U.S. oil imports by projected cost in vehicle technology and
net decreases in emissions from all 3 billion barrels through 2055 (see RIA associated electric vehicle supply
pollutants except PM2.5; when the net Chapter 6.5). EPA considered the equipment (EVSE) combined under the
changes in emissions of PM2.5 and PM2.5 impacts of this projected reduction in potential compliance pathway.
precursors (e.g., VOC, NOX, SO2) are fuel consumption on energy security, Regarding social costs, EPA estimates
considered together, there are positive specifically the avoided costs of that the projected cost of vehicle
PM2.5 health benefits beginning in 2040 macroeconomic disruption. Promoting technology (not including the vehicle or
and, overall, a positive present value energy independence and security battery tax credits) and EVSE under the
and annualized value of PM2.5 health through reducing demand for refined potential compliance pathway will be
benefits when using a 2 percent and 3 petroleum use by motor vehicles has approximately $1.1 billion, and that the
percent discount rate. (See sections V long been a goal of both Congress and HD industry will save approximately
and VII of this preamble and Chapters the Executive Branch because of both $3.5 billion in operating costs (e.g.,
4 and 7 of the RIA for more detail). EPA the economic and national security savings that come from less liquid fuel
believes the non-GHG emissions benefits of reduced dependence on used, lower maintenance and repair
reductions of this rule provide imported oil, and was an important costs for ZEV technologies as compared
important health benefits to the 72 reason for amendments to the Clean Air to ICE technologies, etc.). In other
million people living near truck routes Act in 1990, 2005, and 2007.819 A words, the social costs of the rule result
and even more broadly over the longer reduction of U.S. net petroleum imports in net savings to society due largely to
term. We note that the agency has broad reduces both financial and strategic the operating savings expected from
authority to regulate emissions from the risks caused by potential sudden electrification technologies. The
power sector (e.g., the mercury and air disruptions in the supply of petroleum program will result in significant social
toxics standards, and new source to the U.S., thus increasing U.S. energy benefits including $10 billion in climate
performance standards), as do the States security. EPA finds this rule to have benefits (with the average SC–GHGs
and EPA through cooperative federalism significant benefits from an energy under a 2 percent near-term Ramsey
programs (e.g., in response to PM security perspective. We estimate the discount rate) and $0.3 billion of the
NAAQS implementation requirements, benefits due to reductions in energy estimated total benefits through 2055
interstate transport, emission security externalities caused by U.S. are attributable to reduced emissions of
guidelines, and regional haze),817 and petroleum consumption and imports non-GHG pollutants. Finally, the
that EPA reasonably may address air will be approximately $0.45 billion benefits due to reductions in energy
pollution incrementally across multiple under the final program. EPA considers security externalities caused by U.S.
rulemakings, particularly across this final rule to be beneficial from an petroleum consumption and imports
multiple industry sectors. For example, energy security perspective and thus will be approximately $0.45 billion
EPA has separately proposed new this factor was considered to be a under the final program. A more
source performance standards and supportive and not constraining detailed description and breakdown of
emission guidelines for greenhouse gas consideration. these benefits can be found in section
emissions from fossil fuel-fired power EPA estimates that the annualized VIII of the preamble and Chapter 7 of
plants, which would also reduce value of monetized net benefits to the RIA.
emissions of criteria air pollutants such As explained in preamble sections I
as PM2.5 and SO2 (88 FR 33240, May 23, 819 See e.g., 136 Cong. Rec. 11989 (May 23, 1990)
and II, when section 202(a) requires
2023).818 (Rep. Waxman stating that clean fuel vehicles
program is ‘‘tremendously significant as well for EPA to consider costs, it is referring to
As also explained in section II.G.3, our national security. We are overly dependent on costs to manufacturers, not total social
and as discussed in section VII, we oil as a monopoly; we need to run our cars on costs. The Administrator identified the
monetize benefits of the final standards alternative fuels.’’); Remarks by President George
standards that he finds appropriate
and evaluate other costs in part to better W. Bush upon signing Energy Policy Act of 2005,
2005 U.S.C.C.A.N. S19, 2005 WL 3693179 (‘‘It’s an taking into account emissions
enable a comparison of costs and economic bill, but as [Sen. Pete Domenici] reductions, costs to manufacturers,
benefits pursuant to E.O. 12866, but we mentioned, it’s also a national security bill.–. . . feasibility and other required and
recognize that there are benefits we are Energy conservation is more than a private virtue;
discretionary factors. As discussed in
unable to fully quantify. As noted, it’s a public virtue’’); Energy Independence and
Security Act, Public Law 110–140, section 806 section VII, we monetize benefits of the
EPA’s consistent practice has been to set (finding ‘‘the production of transportation fuels final CO2 emission standards and
standards to achieve improved air from renewable energy would help the United evaluate other costs in part to better
quality consistent with CAA section States meet rapidly growing domestic and global
enable a comparison of costs and
202(a), and not to rely on cost-benefit energy demands, reduce the dependence of the
United States on energy imported from volatile benefits pursuant to E.O. 12866, but we
calculations, with their uncertainties regions of the world that are politically unstable, recognize that there are benefits we are
and limitations, in identifying the stabilize the cost and availability of energy, and unable to fully quantify. EPA’s
appropriate standards. Such analysis, safeguard the economy and security of the United
consistent practice has been to set
however, can be corroborative of a States’’); Statement by George W. Bush upon
signing, 2007 U.S.C.C.A.N. S25, 2007 WL 4984165 standards to achieve improved air
standard’s reasonableness, as is the case (‘‘One of the most serious long-term challenges quality consistent with CAA section 202
here and as is explained further in this facing our country is dependence on oil—especially and not to rely on cost-benefit
section. oil from foreign lands. It’s a serious challenge. . . .
calculations, with their uncertainties
EPA also evaluated the impacts of the Because this dependence harms us economically
through high and volatile prices at the gas pump; and limitations, in identifying the
final HD GHG standards on energy, in dependence creates pollution and contributes to appropriate standards. Nonetheless, our
greenhouse gas admissions [sic]. It threatens our estimated benefits, which exceed the
817 See also CAA 116. national security by making us vulnerable to hostile
818 https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air- regimes in unstable regions of the world. It makes
estimated costs of the final program,
pollution/nsps-ghg-emissions-new-modified-and- us vulnerable to terrorists who might attack oil reinforce our view that the final
reconstructed-electric-utility. infrastructure.’’). standards represent an appropriate
165
Fmt 4701
weighing of the statutory factors and light of the benefits to public health and standards. The final emission standards
other relevant considerations. More welfare in GHG emission reductions, are based on one potential compliance
specifically, for this rule our assessment and potential constraints, such as cost of pathway (represented in multiple
that the rule has positive net monetized compliance, lead time, raw material projected technology packages for the
benefits supports our view that the final availability and component supplies various HD vehicle regulatory
standards represent an appropriate (including availability of minerals subcategories per MY) that includes
weighing of the statutory factors and critical to lithium-ion battery adoption rates for both certain vehicles
other relevant considerations. Positive manufacture and resiliency of with ICE technologies and zero-
monetized net benefits do not depend associated supply chains), redesign emission vehicle technologies that EPA
on which of the final rule’s discounted cycles, charging and refueling regards as feasible and appropriate
stream of PM2.5 health benefits is used, infrastructure availability and cost, and under CAA section 202(a) for the
or as explained in this preamble section purchasers’ willingness to purchase reasons given in this section II.G, and as
II.G whether the final rule’s SC–GHG (including payback). The extent of these further discussed throughout section II
estimates or the IWG SC–GHG estimates potential constraints for the potential and RIA Chapter 2. For the reasons
are used (see the Appendix to Chapter compliance pathway demonstrating the described in that analysis, EPA believes
8 of the RIA for the latter in the final feasibility of the final standards has these technologies can be developed
rule); EPA finds the emissions diminished significantly in light of and applied in HD vehicles and adopted
reductions, in light of the cost of increased and further projected at the projected rates for these final
compliance, available lead time and investment by manufacturers, increased standards within the lead time
other factors, justify adoption of these and further projected acceptance by provided, as discussed in section II.F
standards. Section 202(a)(4)(A) of the purchasers, and significant support from and in RIA Chapter 2. EPA’s analysis in
CAA specifically prohibits the use of an Congress to address such areas as preamble section II.F.4 further supports
emission control device, system or upfront purchase price, charging the feasibility of the final standards by
element of design that will cause or infrastructure, critical mineral supplies, showing that such GHG emission
contribute to an unreasonable risk to and domestic supply chain reductions can be achieved using
public health, welfare, or safety. EPA manufacturing. However, as discussed different mixes of vehicles with ICE
has a long history of considering the through this preamble section II and technologies, including without
safety implications of its emission RIA Chapter 2, EPA has also given producing additional ZEVs to comply
standards, from 1980 regulations consideration to expressed concerns and with this rule as described in the
establishing criteria pollutant uncertainties regarding several aspects additional example potential
standards 820 up to and including the of our analysis and undertaken a compliance pathway.
HD Phase 1 and Phase 2 rules. We conservative approach in several of EPA also gave appropriate
highlight the numerous industry those specific instances, leading to a consideration of cost of compliance in
standards and safety protocols that exist moderate, balanced approach overall. the selection of the final standards as
today for heavy-duty BEVs and FCEVs Examples include analyzing availability described in this section II.G, and as
that provide guidance on the safe design and timing of distribution grid buildout further discussed in section II.F and RIA
of these vehicles in section II.D and RIA without considering measures by which Chapter 2. The final MY 2027 through
Chapter 1 and thus this factor was users can mitigate the need for MY 2031 emission standards are less
considered to be a supportive and not electrification support (see RTC section stringent than those proposed for those
constraining consideration. 7 (Distribution)), selecting 2,000 cycles MYs and the final MY 2032 standards;
as our maximum number of cycles for correspondingly, the modeled potential
5. Selection of Final Standards Under compliance pathway supporting the
10 years of battery age (see RIA Chapter
CAA 202(a)(1)–(2) feasibility of these final standards
2.4.1.1.3), and use of maintenance and
Under section 202(a)(1)–(2), EPA has repair scaling factors commencing in includes less aggressive application
a statutory obligation to set standards to MY 2027 and MY 2030 (see preamble rates and, therefore, is projected to have
reduce emissions of air pollutants from section II.E.5). The final standards will lower technology package costs than the
classes of motor vehicles that the achieve significant and important proposed MY 2027 through MY 2031
Administrator has found contribute to reductions in GHG emissions that emissions standards and the final MY
air pollution that may be expected to endanger public health and welfare. 2032 standards. Additionally, as
endanger public health and welfare. In Furthermore, as discussed throughout described in this section II.G and as
setting such standards, the this preamble, the emission reduction further discussed in section II.F and RIA
Administrator must provide adequate technologies needed to meet the final Chapter 2, we considered impacts on
lead time for the development and standards have already been developed vehicle purchasers and willingness to
application of technology to meet the and are feasible and available for purchase (including payback and costs
standards, taking into consideration the manufacturers to utilize in their fleets at to vehicle purchasers) in applying
cost of compliance. EPA’s final reasonable cost in the timeframe of constraints in our analysis and selecting
standards properly implement this these final standards, even after the final standards.821 For example, in
statutory provision, as discussed in this considering key elements including 821 EPA has considered purchaser response in
section II.G. In setting standards for a battery manufacturing capacity, critical appropriately exercising our authority under the
future model year, EPA considers the minerals availability, and timely statute, and based on the record before us, the
extent deployment of advanced availability of supporting infrastructure agency views purchaser response as a material
technologies, including those with the for charging and refueling. aspect of the real-world feasibility of the final
largest potential emission reductions, standards. EPA has a vested interest in real-world
As discussed throughout this feasibility of the final standards as, for example, if
would be available and warranted in preamble, the emission reduction the vehicles with advanced technologies are not
technologies needed to meet the final purchased, the projected emission benefits of the
820 See, e.g., 45 FR 14503 (March 5, 1980) (‘‘EPA final standards may not occur. Although certain
would not require a particulate control technology
standards are feasible and available for commenters chastised EPA for considering
that was known to involve serious safety manufacturers to utilize in HD vehicles purchaser response, noting that it is not explicitly
problems.’’). in the timeframe of these final enumerated in the statute, EPA believes it is
166
Fmt 4701
MY 2032, we estimated that the technological feasibility and accounting potential constraints, as we have
incremental cost to purchase a ZEV will for cost of compliance, lead time, and assessed are appropriate.
be recovered in the form of operational purchaser costs and willingness to As discussed in section II.G.4, there
savings during the first one to four years purchase, and the constraining are additional considerations that
of ownership, on average by regulatory uncertainties related to each of these support, but were not used to select, the
group, for the vocational vehicles; elements. final standards. These include the non-
approximately two years, on average by There have been very significant GHG emission and energy impacts,
regulatory group, for short-haul tractors; developments in the utilization of ZEV energy security, safety, and net benefits.
and four years, on average by regulatory technologies since EPA promulgated the EPA estimates that the annualized value
group, for long-haul tractors, as shown HD GHG Phase 2 rule. One of the most of monetized net benefits to society at
in the payback analysis included in significant developments for U.S. heavy- a 2 percent discount rate will be
section II.F.1. We find the technologies duty manufacturers and purchasers is approximately $13 billion through the
will pay for themselves on average by the adoption of the IRA, which takes a year 2055, more than 11 times the cost
regulatory group within the ownership comprehensive approach to addressing in vehicle technology and associated
timeframe for both tractors and many of the potential barriers to wider electric vehicle supply equipment
vocational vehicles, as described in adoption of heavy-duty ZEVs in the (EVSE) combined (see preamble section
section II.F.1. United States. As noted in RIA Chapter VII and Chapter 8 of the RIA). We
Moreover, averaging and the 2, the IRA provides tens of billions of recognize these estimates do not reflect
additional flexibilities beyond averaging dollars in tax credits and direct Federal unquantified benefits, which would be
already available under EPA’s existing funding to reduce the upfront cost of greater still, and the Administrator has
regulations, including banking and purchasing ZEVs, to increase the not relied on these estimates in
trading provisions in the ABT number of charging stations across the identifying the appropriate standards
program—which, for example, in effect country, to reduce the cost of under CAA section 202(a)(1)–(2).
enable manufacturers to spread the manufacturing batteries, and to promote Nonetheless, our conclusion that the
compliance requirement for any domestic source of critical minerals and estimated benefits exceed the estimated
particular model year across multiple other important elements of the ZEV costs of the final program reinforces our
model years—further support EPA’s supply chain. By addressing all of these view that the final standards represent
conclusion that the final standards potential obstacles to wider ZEV an appropriate weighing of the statutory
provide sufficient time for the adoption in a coordinated, well- factors and other relevant
development and application of financed, strategy, Congress considerations.
technology, giving appropriate significantly advanced the potential for As we explained in the HD Phase 3
consideration to cost. ZEV adoption in the near term, thus NPRM, we also considered, but did not
Congress directed the Administrator supporting standards supported by a analyze, and requested comment on a
to weigh various factors under CAA potential compliance pathway which more stringent alternative with emission
section 202, and, as with the HD GHG includes ZEV technologies. standards similar to those required by
Phase 1 and Phase 2 rules, the In developing the modeled potential the CA ACT program. We received a
Administrator notes that the primary compliance pathway, EPA considered a number of comments supporting more
purpose of adopting standards under variety of constraints which have to date stringent standards, as discussed in
that provision of the Clean Air Act is to limited utilization of ZEV technologies section II.B. We are not adopting such
address air pollution that may and/or could limit it in the future, standards. First, at this time and for
reasonably be anticipated to endanger including the following: cost to similar reasons to those explained in
public health and welfare and that manufacturers and purchasers; this section II regarding changes made
reducing air pollution has traditionally availability of critical minerals; in the final standards from the proposed
been the focus of such standards. Taking adequacy of battery production and standards’ level of stringency, we
into consideration the importance of necessary supply chain elements; consider the final standards’ stringency
reducing GHG emissions and the adequate electricity supply and as the appropriate balancing of the
primary purpose of CAA section 202 to distribution infrastructure in support of factors. Second, the Phase 3 standards
reduce the threat posed to human health depot and public charging; and demonstrably achieve reductions of
and the environment by air pollution availability of hydrogen and supporting GHG emissions beyond those
which endangers, the Administrator infrastructure for its deployment in attributable to a ‘‘no action’’ scenario
finds it is appropriate to finalize FCEVs. While EPA acknowledges that (including the ACT standards), and
standards that, when implemented, will there are some factual uncertainties include significant reductions in non-
result in meaningful reductions of HD regarding future projections on these ACT states. See preamble section V and
vehicle GHG emissions both near term constraints, as detailed through the RTC section 2.4 and sources there cited.
and over the longer term, and to select preamble and the accompanying RIA, We thus do not accept the comment that
such standards taking into consideration our analysis recognizes these standards more stringent than those
the enumerated statutory factors of uncertainties and identifies the proposed are necessary to achieve
technological feasibility and cost of considerations the agency found reductions beyond those which would
compliance within the available lead persuasive. Our analysis was informed occur in the absence of Federal
time, as well as the relevant by extensive consultation with analysts standards. Third, our modeled potential
discretionary factor of impacts on from other agencies, including the compliance pathway supporting
purchasers and willingness to purchase. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, feasibility of the final standards
DOE, DOT, and the Joint Office of appropriately reflects that ICE vehicles
In identifying the final standards, EPA’s

goal was to balance the emissions Energy and Transportation. We have will continue to be needed for certain
reductions given our assessment of extensively reviewed published applications, and for certain usage and
literature and other data. As discussed weather conditions. The caps on ZEV
properly considered in this rulemaking as an aspect
in this preamble and the accompanying adoption in our HD TRUCS analysis for
of both cost (including costs to manufacturers of RIA, we have incorporated limitations the modeled potential compliance
having stranded assets) and feasibility. into our modeling to address these pathway properly reflect these
167
Fmt 4701
considerations. We do not agree with variables; and reach very different financial incentives for ZEV adoption,
commenters advocating for more conclusions. We have carefully and constraints which could shape
stringent standards reflecting further reviewed all these studies and further technology adoption in the future,
improvements to ICE vehicles and discuss them in the RIA and the RTC. including: cost to manufacturers and
engines beyond the Phase 2 MY 2027 The agency’s final standards are purchasers; lead time for manufacturers
improvements in our modeled premised upon our own extensive to develop new products to meet a
compliance pathway, as our assessment technical assessment, which in turn is diverse set of HD applications;
is that manufacturers do not have the based on a wide review of the literature availability of raw materials, batteries,
resources to use all the different and test data, extensive expertise with and other necessary supply chain
technology improvement strategies the industry and with implementation elements; and adequate charging and
together within the lead time provided of past standards, peer review, and our refueling infrastructure, electricity
by the Phase 3 program (e.g., the modeling analyses. The data and supply and distribution. As a result of
modeled potential compliance pathway resulting modeling demonstrate a re-evaluating data and analyses in light
technologies plus technologies in an balanced and measured rate of adoption of public comments, we have revised
additional example potential of emission reduction technologies, at both our cost estimates and our
compliance pathway discussed in rates bounded between the higher and assessment of the feasibility of more
preamble section II.F.4). See RTC lower rates in studies provided by stringent standards, particularly for the
section 2.4. commenters. early years of the program. For the years
Fourth, consideration of availability On balance, we think the various the agency is setting standards, we find
and timing of distribution grid buildout comments and studies pressing for it is important for the standards to
infrastructure, availability of critical faster or slower increases in stringency provide a degree of certainty and send
minerals and associated issues, and than the final rule each have their appropriate market signals to facilitate
willingness to purchase all warrant a strengths and weaknesses, and we the anticipated investments, not only in
balanced and measured approach in recognize the inherent uncertainties technology adoption but also in
determining the stringency of these associated with predicting the future of complementary areas such as supply
standards. Thus, the standards are the highly dynamic vehicle and related chains and charging and refueling
carefully phased in so that the standards industries up to eight years from today infrastructure. The Administrator
for the initial years of the Phase 3 through MY 2032. This uncertainty concludes that this balanced and
standards are less stringent, Phase 3 pervades both scenarios with lesser and measured approach is within the
standards for certain vocational vehicles greater increases in stringency than the authority Congress provided under and
and tractors commence in post-2027 final standards. For example, slower is consistent with the text and purpose
model years, and the standards provide increases in stringency would be more of CAA section 202(a)(1)–(2).
longer lead time where public charging certainly feasible and less costly for In summary, after consideration of the
is part of the modeled potential manufacturers, but they would also risk very significant reductions in GHG
compliance pathway. We believe that giving up emissions reductions and emissions, given the technical feasibility
these decisions reflect reasoned consequent benefits to public health and of the final standards and the moderate
consideration of feasibility and lead welfare that are actually achievable. By costs per vehicle in the available lead
time, appropriately giving these contrast, faster increases in stringency time, and taking into account a number
considerations more weight than these would aim to achieve greater emissions of other factors such as the savings to
commenters would. See RTC section 2.4 reductions and consequent benefits for purchasers in operating costs over the
for additional responses. In addition to public health and welfare, but they lifetime of the vehicle, safety, the
our final standards, we also considered would also run the risk of incurring benefits for energy security, and the
an alternative less stringent than our greater costs of compliance and significantly greater quantified benefits
final standards, as specified and potentially being infeasible in light of compared to quantified costs, EPA
discussed in sections II.H and IX. We the lead time provided. The final believes that the final standards are
considered an alternative with a slower standards reflect our technical expertise appropriate under EPA’s section
phase-in and with less stringent CO2 in discerning a reasoned path among the 202(a)(1)–(2) authority.
emission standards; however, we did varying sources of data, analyses, and
H. Alternatives Considered
not select this level for the final other evidence we have considered, as
standards because our assessment in well as the Administrator’s policy Our analysis for the final rule of
this final rule is that feasible and judgment as to the appropriate level of relevant existing information, public
appropriate standards are available that emissions reductions that can be comments, and new information that
provide for greater GHG emission achieved at a reasonable cost in the became available between the proposal
reductions than would be provided by available lead time. and final rule supports a slower
this slower phase-in alternative. While the final standards are more implementation than included in the
We acknowledge that both those stringent than the Phase 2 standards, proposed standards; our assessment in
stakeholders pressing for more and less EPA applied numerous conservative this final rule, as described in this
rapid increases in stringency have approaches throughout our analysis (as section II, is that the final standards
submitted considerable technical identified throughout this section II and provide the appropriate speed of
studies in support of their positions, in RIA Chapter 2) and the final implementation, including adequate
including analyses purportedly standards additionally are less stringent lead time. In developing this final rule,
demonstrating that a more or less rapid than those proposed for the first several we also developed and considered an
adoption of emissions reduction years of implementation leading to MY alternative set of less stringent standards
technologies, including zero-emissions 2032. As explained throughout this and a more gradual phase-in than the
technologies, is feasible. These studies document, EPA has assessed the final standards in section II.F. The
account for the vast range of economic, appropriateness and feasibility of these results of the analysis of this alternative
technology, regulatory, and other factors standards taking into consideration the are included in section IX of the
described throughout this preamble; potential benefits to public health and preamble. In addition, we considered a
draw different assumptions about key welfare, existing market trends and set of more stringent standards
168
Fmt 4701
reflecting levels of stringency that set of applications. They will also need developed and considered an alternative
would be achieved from extrapolating time to conduct durability assessments that reflects a more gradual phase-in of
the California ACT rule to the national because downtime is very critical in the utilization of such technologies to
level. heavy-duty market. Furthermore, provide even longer lead time to address
As discussed in section II.F, we manufacturers will require time to make such considerations. The alternative
considered while developing the final new capital investments for the CO2 emission standards shown in Table
standards that manufacturers choosing a manufacturing of heavy-duty battery II–53 and Table II–54. We are not
compliance strategy that utilizes ZEV cells and packs, motors, and other EV adopting this alternative set of standards
technologies will need time to ramp up
components, along with changing over in this final rule because, as already
ZEV production from the numbers of
the vehicle assembly lines to described, our assessment is that
ZEVs produced today to the higher
adoption rates we project may be used incorporate an electrified powertrain. In feasible and appropriate standards are
to comply with the final standards that addition, the purchasers of HD BEVs available that provide for greater
begin between three and eight model will need time to design and install emission reductions than provided
years from now. Manufacturers will charging infrastructure at their facilities under this alternative, do so at
need to conduct research and develop or determine their hydrogen refueling reasonable cost, and provide sufficient
electrified configurations for a diverse logistics for FCEVs. Therefore, we lead time.
ER22AP24.073</GPH>
169
Fmt 4701
In the final rule analysis, we also more stringent alternative standards consider the final standards’ stringency
considered standards consistent with considered are shown in Table II–55 as the appropriate balancing of the
levels of stringency that would be and Table II–56. We are not adopting factors, as discussed in section II.G.
achieved from the California ACT rule standards consistent with this more
extrapolated to the national level. The stringent alternative because we
ER22AP24.075</GPH>
ER22AP24.074</GPH>
170
Fmt 4701
I. Small Businesses companies at this time would have a While the new Phase 3 standards do
As proposed, qualifying small negligible impact on the overall GHG not apply for vehicles produced by
manufacturers will remain subject to the emission reductions that the program qualifying small manufacturers, we
previously promulgated Phase 2 MY would otherwise achieve. We received proposed and are finalizing that small
no comments on our proposal to retain manufacturers that are certifying BEVs
2027 and later GHG vehicle emission
the MY 2027 and later standards for or FCEVs would be subject to the battery
standards, and are not subject to the
qualifying manufacturers or revise the durability monitor and warranty
Phase 3 standards unless they
definition of small manufacturer. The provisions described in section III.B.
voluntarily decide to opt into the Phase
3 program, as discussed in this section Phase 2 standards will continue to III. Compliance Provisions,
(see 40 CFR 1037.105(b) and (h) and apply and any applicable small Flexibilities, and Test Procedures
1037.106(b)).822 We note that this manufacturer flexibilities established In this rule, we are retaining the
approach avoids any potential undue under the Phase 2 program will general compliance structure of existing
burden on these small entities. See 88 continue to be available to small 40 CFR part 1037 with some revisions
FR 26008. EPA may consider new GHG manufacturers for MY 2027 and later. described in this section. Vehicle
emission standards to apply for vehicles Since the Phase 2 standards are also manufacturers will continue to
produced by small business vehicle based on a fleet average, small demonstrate that they meet emission
manufacturers as part of a future manufacturers can continue to average standards using emission modeling and
regulatory action. within their averaging sets to achieve EPA’s Greenhouse gas Emissions Model
As described in RIA Chapter 9, we the applicable standards. However, we (GEM) and will use fuel-mapping or
have identified a small number of powertrain test information from
proposed to restrict banking, trading,
heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers that procedures established and revised in
and the use of advanced technology
would qualify as small manufacturers previous rulemakings.824
credit multipliers for credits generated
under the heavy-duty vehicle In section III.A, we describe the
against the Phase 2 standards for
manufacturer category. Most of these general ABT program, discrete revisions
small businesses currently only produce qualifying manufacturers that utilize
to it which we are finalizing, and how
ZEVs, while one company currently this small business interim provision.
we expect manufacturers to utilize ABT
produces ICE vehicles.823 We thus Under this final rule, and as explained
to meet the final standards. In section
estimate that there would only be a in the proposal, qualifying small III.A.1, we describe a revision to the
small emissions benefit from applying manufacturers may voluntarily certify
the final standards to the relatively low their vehicles to the Phase 3 standards 824 See the HD GHG Phase 2 rule (81 FR 73478,
production volume of ICE vehicles without ABT participation restrictions if October 25, 2016), the Heavy-Duty Engine and
they certify all their vehicle families Vehicle Technical Amendment rule (86 FR 34308,
produced by small businesses and June 29, 2021), and the HD2027 rule (88 FR 4296,
maintaining the previously promulgated within a given averaging set to the Phase January 24, 2023). As also explained in the proposal
HD vehicle CO2 standards for these 3 standards for the given MY. In other for this rulemaking, in this rulemaking EPA did not
words, small manufacturers that opt reopen any portion of our heavy-duty compliance
provisions, flexibilities, and testing procedures,

822 See section III.C of this preamble for a into the Phase 3 program for a given MY including those in 40 CFR parts 1037, 1036, and
description of the final revisions to the provisions for all their vehicle families within a 1065, other than those specifically identified in the
for small manufacturers in 40 CFR 1037.105(b) and given averaging set would be eligible for proposal as the subject of our proposal or a
(h), 1037.106(b), and 1037.150(c) and (w). solicitation for comment. For example, while EPA
823 See section XI.C of this preamble for our
the full ABT program, including the
is finalizing revisions to discrete elements of the HD
regulatory flexibility assessment of the potential expanded flexibilities finalized in this ABT program, EPA did not reopen the general
ER22AP24.076</GPH>
burden on small businesses. rule as described in section III.A. availability of ABT.
171
Fmt 4701
definition of ‘‘U.S.-directed production methanol-powered heavy-duty specified in existing 40 CFR

volume’’ that clarifies consideration in engines.’’). See section I of this 1037.740(a). We provide the following
this rulemaking of nationwide preamble for a summary of EPA’s description of the existing ABT program
production volumes, including those authority and implementation of ABT in for background and informational
that may be certified to different state previous rulemakings, and a more purposes only.828 In brief, under the
emission standards.825 This revised detailed description in response to existing program, manufacturers may
definition addresses the interaction that comments on our authority in RTC choose to demonstrate compliance with
would otherwise result between the section 10.2.1. the applicable emission standard by
previous definition of U.S.-directed EPA considered averaging and the using the regulatory provisions for
production volume and the California existence of the general ABT program as averaging, banking, and trading.829 They
Advanced Clean Truck (ACT) regulation part of the Phase 2 standard setting do so by dividing their vehicles into
for HD vehicles.826 Section III.A.2 process (see, e.g., 81 FR 73495 (October ‘‘families’’ or ‘‘subfamilies’’. For each
includes updates to advanced 25, 2016)). As explained in section II, family or subfamily, the manufacturer
technology credit provisions after we likewise considered averaging in the must designate a ‘‘Family Emission
considering comments received on the standard setting process of the Phase 3 Limit’’, which is an ‘‘emission level . . .
HD2027 NPRM (87 FR 17592, March 28, GHG standards, and our assessment is to serve in place of the otherwise
2022) and the proposal for this premised upon the availability of applicable emission standard’’ for each
rulemaking (88 FR 25926, April 27, averaging in supporting the feasibility of family or subfamily.830 The designated
2023). In section III.A.3, we describe the final standards. While we also FEL applies to every vehicle within a
other revised flexibilities available to considered the existence of other family or sub-family and must be
heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers, aspects of the ABT program as complied with throughout the vehicle’s
including an interim transitional supportive of the feasibility of the Phase useful life. Manufacturers choosing to
flexibility regarding how credits could 3 GHG standards, we did not rely on demonstrate compliance with the
be used across averaging sets. In section those other aspects in justifying the applicable emission standards using the
III.B, we describe new durability feasibility of the standards. In other ABT program must show compliance
monitoring requirements for BEVs and words, the existing ABT program will based on (among other things)
PHEVs, clarify existing warranty continue to help provide additional production levels and emissions level of
requirements for PHEVs, and describe flexibility in compliance for FELs. See 40 CFR 1037.705(b). Each
new warranty requirements for BEVs manufacturers to make necessary family or subfamily has a designated
and FCEVs. Finally, section III.C technological improvements and reduce FEL, and credits are generated if the FEL
includes additional clarifying and the overall cost of the program, without is lower than the applicable standard,
editorial amendments we are finalizing compromising overall environmental and debits are generated if the FEL is
related to the HD highway engine objectives; however, the other aspects of higher than the applicable standard.831
provisions of 40 CFR part 1036, the HD the ABT program that are not the The manufacturer can use those credits
vehicle provisions of 40 CFR part 1037, availability of averaging, including to offset higher emission levels from
the test procedures for HD engines in 40 credit carryover, deficits, banking, and vehicles in the same averaging set such
CFR part 1065, and provisions that span trading, were not considered in setting that the averaging set meets the
multiple sectors. the numeric levels of the Phase 3 standards on ‘‘average’’, ‘‘bank’’ the
standards. Accordingly, these other credits for later use, or ‘‘trade’’ the
A. Revisions to the ABT Program aspects of ABT are severable from the credits to another manufacturer. In other
The existing HD GHG Phase 2 Phase 3 standards. words, under the existing ABT program,
program provides flexibilities, primarily The current HD GHG Phase 2 program a manufacturer has two obligations—(1)
through the HD GHG ABT program, that also includes specific credit provisions all vehicles are certified to and must
facilitate compliance with the emission for ‘‘advanced technologies’’ as comply throughout their useful life with
standards. In the HD space, our use of identified in the Phase 2 rule (i.e., the FEL applicable to that vehicle’s
averaging dates back to our 1985 PHEVs, BEVs, and FCEVs) and separate family or subfamily, and (2) the
emissions standards for highway HD provisions for other innovative manufacturer’s vehicles must comply
engines. 50 FR 10606 (March 15, 1985) technologies that are not reflected in with the applicable emission standard
(‘‘Emissions averaging, of both GEM. As described in section II of this as a group, e.g., using a production-
particulate and oxides of nitrogen preamble, the revisions to the existing weighted average of the various FELs
emissions from heavy-duty engines, is MY 2027 Phase 2 GHG emission across the applicable averaging set. All
allowed beginning with the 1991 model standards and new standards for MYs vehicle families across an averaging set
year. Averaging of NO, emissions from 2028 through 2032 are supported by a must show a net zero or positive credit
light-duty trucks is allowed beginning modeled potential compliance pathway balance as detailed in the existing
in 1988.’’). Similarly, we have included premised on utilization of a variety of regulation.832 To incentivize the
banking and trading for highway HD technologies, including technologies
engines in our rules dating back to 1990. that are considered advanced 828 See also an expanded description of EPA’s
55 FR 30584 (July 26, 1990) (‘‘This final technologies in the existing HD GHG ABT program provided as background in the HD
rule announces new programs for Phase 2 ABT program.827 GHG Phase 1 rule (76 FR 57238–57243).
banking and trading of particulate We are generally retaining and did not 829 40 CFR 1037.241(a)(2).
830 40 CFR 1037.801 (definition of ‘‘Family
matter and oxides of nitrogen emission reopen the existing HD GHG Phase 2
emission limit’’).
credits for gasoline-, diesel- and ABT program that allows for emission 831 ‘‘[F]or each family or subfamily . . . positive
credits to be averaged, banked, or traded credits [are generated] for a family or subfamily that
825 The definition update includes conforming within each of the averaging sets has an FEL below the standard.’’ 40 CFR
amendments throughout the HD engine and vehicle 1037.705(b).
regulations of 40 CFR parts 1036 and 1037, 827 As stated in the proposal, we are retaining and 832 Manufacturers must show ‘‘that [the
respectively. did not reopen the existing off-cycle provisions of manufacturer’s] net balance of emission credits
826 EPA granted the ACT rule waiver requested by 40 CFR 1037.610 that allow manufacturers to from all [the manufacturer’s] participating vehicle
California under CAA section 209(b) on March 30, request approval for other ‘‘innovative’’ families in each averaging set is not negative’’. 40
2023. technologies. 88 FR 26013. CFR 1037.730(c)(1), and 40 CFR 1037.241(a)(2)
172
Fmt 4701
research and development of new to the allowance that provides The term U.S.-directed production
technologies with great emission manufacturers three years to resolve volume is key in how the regulations
reduction potential, the existing HD credit deficits, as detailed in 40 CFR direct manufacturers to calculate credits
vehicle ABT program also includes 1037.745. We did not reopen and are in the HD vehicle ABT GHG program in
credit multipliers for certain advanced generally retaining the existing credit 40 CFR part 1037, subpart H. As noted,
technologies, which we discuss further life of five years, as described in 40 CFR prior to this final rule, the existing
in III.A.2. 1037.740(c), with discrete revisions definition of ‘‘U.S.-directed production
In this section III.A, we describe beginning in MY 2027 to the availability volume’’ for HD vehicles explicitly
changes we are finalizing for three of credits earned from advanced excludes vehicles certified to state
aspects of the ABT program: the technology multipliers as described in emission standards that differed from
applicable production volume for use in section III.A.2. Similarly, we are Federal standards.833 Consequently,
calculating ABT credits, how retaining the existing ABT restrictions vehicle production volumes excluded
manufacturers can use credit multipliers for vehicles certified to the custom from that term’s definition could not
for advanced technologies, and credit chassis standards in 40 CFR generate credits or deficits for purposes
transfers across averaging sets. We 1037.105(h)(2). Manufacturers of custom of the Federal program. As described in
intend for the limitations placed on chassis vehicles that wish to make use the proposal (88 FR 26009), the previous
credits generated from Phase 2 of the expanded flexibilities we are exclusion of engines and vehicles
advanced technology credit multipliers finalizing in this rule and describing in certified to different state standards did
and the transitional allowance of credit this section III.A, must certify the not impact the HD GHG program under
transfers across averaging sets that are vehicles under the main program in the parts 1036 and 1037 to-date because
finalized in this rule to be entirely applicable regulatory subcategory. California adopted GHG emission
separate from the Phase 3 emissions standards for HD engines and vehicles
standards and other varied components 1. U.S.-Directed Production Volume
that aligned with the Federal HD GHG
of this rule, and severable from each Phase 1 and Phase 2 standards.834 835 As
As described in section II.D and II.F,
other. Each of these two issues has been also noted in the proposal, the revised
the Phase 3 GHG vehicle standards
considered and adopted independently definition would align with the
include consideration of nationwide
of the level of the standards, and indeed approach in the LD GHG program (88
production volumes. Correspondingly,
of each other. EPA’s overall vehicle FR 26010).
we proposed and are finalizing that the
program continues to be fully As discussed in Chapter 1 of the RIA,
implementable even in the absence of GHG ABT program for compliance with
those standards be applicable to the the ACT regulation requires
any one or both of these elements. All manufacturers to produce and sell
the emissions standards in the rule are same production volumes considered in
setting the standards. 88 FR 26009. The increasing numbers of zero-emission
feasible even without these specific medium- and heavy-duty highway
flexibilities. While credits from existing HD GHG Phase 2 vehicle
program has certain provisions (based vehicles. Given the distinct difference
multipliers and credit transfers across between what would be required under
averaging sets allow flexibility in off the regulatory definition of ‘‘U.S.-
directed production volume’’) that the ACT regulation compared to the
compliance options for manufacturers, existing Phase 2 and proposed Phase 3
they are not necessary for manufacturers would exclude production volumes that
are certified to different state emission vehicle standards, we proposed that the
to meet the emissions standards and we new definition would start with MY
did not rely on them in justifying the standards, including exclusion from
participation in ABT. To address the 2024 to provide consistent treatment of
feasibility of the standards. See any production volumes certified to
preamble sections II.F and II.G and RIA interaction between the existing
definition of U.S.-directed production ACT. We requested comment on
Chapter 2. EPA has also considered and whether we should consider other
adopted these transitional ABT volume and the California Advanced
Clean Truck (ACT) regulation for HD options to transition to the new
flexibilities and requirements and the definition.
remaining portions of the final rule vehicles, we proposed and are finalizing
a revision to the definition of ‘‘U.S.- In comments, vehicle manufacturers
independently, and each is severable generally supported the proposed
should there be judicial review. If a directed production volume’’ in 40 CFR
court were to invalidate any one of these 1037.801. The revision removes the 833 Previously, 40 CFR 1037.801 defined U.S.-
elements of the final rule, we intend the final sentence of that definition, which directed production volume as meaning ‘‘the
remainder of this action to remain presently states that the definition ‘‘does number of vehicle units, subject to the requirements
effective, as we have designed the not include vehicles certified to state of this part, produced by a manufacturer for which
emission standards that are different the manufacturer has a reasonable assurance that
program to function even if one part of sale was or will be made to ultimate purchasers in
the rule is set aside. For example, if a than the emissions standards in this the United States. This does not include vehicles
reviewing court were to invalidate the part’’, and thereby amends it to remove certified to state emission standards that are
transitional allowance of credit transfers any exclusions from the definition. In different than the emission standards in this part.’’
this section III.A.1, we summarize the An equivalent definition of U.S-directed production
across averaging sets, the other volume previously applied for HD engines under 40
components of the rule, including the approach used to setting the Phase 3 CFR 1036.801.
Phase 3 GHG standards (which are not standards and the uncertainties that led 834 California Air Resources Board. ‘‘Final
predicated on these transitional us to revise the definition such that, Regulation Order for Phase 1 Greenhouse Gas
flexibilities), remain fully operable. We within the Phase 3 standards and within Regulations.’’ December 5, 2014, available at
the ABT GHG vehicle program, we https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/
did not propose or otherwise reopen, regact/2013/hdghg2013/hdghgfrot13.pdf.
and we are not adopting any revisions consider nationwide production
835 California Air Resources Board. ‘‘Final

volumes that include vehicles that may Regulation Order for Phase 2 Greenhouse Gas
(‘‘vehicle families within an averaging set are be certified to state emission standards Regulations and Tractor-Trailer GHG Regulations.’’
considered in compliance with the CO2 emissions that are different than the emission April 1, 2019, available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/
standards, if the sum of positive and negative sites/default/files/barcu/regact/2018/phase2/
credits for all vehicle configurations in those
standards in 40 CFR part 1037, finalatta.pdf?_
vehicles lead to a zero balance or a positive balance including vehicles subject to the ACT ga=2.122416523.1825165293.1663635303-
of credits’’). standards. 1124543041.1635770745.
173
Fmt 4701
revision to the definition and the preamble, for the modeled potential but with consequential differences as
effective date of MY 2024, with some compliance pathway supporting the well, including weighted amounts of
indicating that manufacturers would feasibility of the final standards, HD credits per vehicle class, banking and
need to include vehicles intended for TRUCS uses nationwide production trading across all vehicle classes, the
ACT states in order to meet the Phase volumes to project the utilization of the ability to generate partial credits for
3 standards and that some ZEV technologies portion of the certain vehicles, and the potential for
manufacturers have adopted ZEV technology packages.837 So commenters carrying deficits into future model
technologies as a Phase 2 compliance were mistaken in maintaining that the years. See RIA Chapter 1.3.3 for further
strategy. Environmental and health change in the definition would detail on the California ACT regulation.
NGOs generally opposed the proposed necessarily dilute the Phase 3 standard Thus, there would be meaningful
revision noting that, combined with the stringency, as the final Phase 3 uncertainties related to segregating
multipliers available for advanced standards’ stringency are premised upon manufacturers’ production volumes and
technology credits in that period, the nationwide production volumes, credit balances to comply with the ACT
new definition would erode the Phase 3 consistent with the amended definition. regulation. While we project a reference
standard stringency and result in no In response to commenters suggesting case (as explained in section V of this
improvements beyond what would EPA adjust the stringency of Phase 3 to preamble and RIA chapter 4.3.1) that
occur in the absence of the rule. Some include nationwide adoption rates includes an increase in the production
of the commenters further suggested similar to ACT, we note that we of ZEVs in part reflecting compliance
that these credits could even dilute the developed the final rule stringency with ACT in states where applicable,
stringency of the Phase 2 standards, through a balanced and measured given the flexibilities in ACT, the
without justification, by making the approach, based on consideration and production volumes projected in the
revised definition effective in MY 2024. balancing of the statutory and other reference case may not match what
Consequently, the commenters urged relevant factors, including technical manufacturers actually do. It is also
that if EPA amends the definition as feasibility, costs, and lead time, as unclear how EPA could appropriately
proposed, it either commence the described in section II.G of this distinguish which credits should be
change in MY 2027 rather than MY 2024 preamble and RTC section 2.4. treated as excess and part of compliance
or that EPA make a corresponding We note an additional concern with with the Phase 3 program, and the
adjustment in stringency of the Phase 3 EPA adopting suggestions from complexity involved in such a scheme
national standard to include nationwide commenters asking EPA to take a raises verification concerns.
adoption rates similar to ACT. different Phase 3 standard setting
We are adopting an amended Finally, we do not think it would be
approach and implement the Federal appropriate under CAA section
definition of the term U.S.-directed program with the previous definition.
production volume. We disagree with 202(a)(1) to support the standards
Even under the previous definition, through a feasibility demonstration
commenters maintaining that EPA manufacturers should be eligible to
should not change the definition under the modeled potential
generate credits under the Federal compliance pathway projecting that
because any credits generated by program for production and sales in
vehicles in ACT states would be manufacturers will sell volumes of ZEVs
excess of those required by ACT in nationally (including in ACT states), but
windfalls for the Phase 3 program. First, states where ACT is applicable, as
it is not clear that ZEV sales in ACT then prohibit manufacturers from
otherwise our Federal program could generating and using credits based on
states are automatically attributable to unintentionally create a disincentive for
the ACT requirements. Manufacturers such sales for compliance purposes.
such excess production and sales in This would result in a disconnect
have already introduced ZEVs into the states where ACT applies.838 839 If the
market and, given that EPA granted the between how EPA developed and
ACT program simply mandated ‘‘each implemented the standards, as the
waiver for ACT earlier this year, some manufacturer shall produce x number of
may have done so as a Phase 2 standard stringency reflects nationwide
vehicles of each type’’, it would be production volumes but implementation
compliance strategy.836 Additionally, it straightforward to segregate production
is currently unclear if manufacturers’ would exclude portions of nationwide
volumes and sales destined for ACT sales. In addition, we want to minimize
existing compliance plans to meet the states and exclude such volumes from
Phase 2 standards in a given model year the impact of the uncertainty
standard setting and compliance. But surrounding the number of states that
include use of all or a portion of their the ACT program is not structured that
advanced technology credits (and may adopt the ACT program on
simply and also provides various manufacturer compliance planning both
associated credit multipliers) generated compliance flexibilities for
from nationwide production volumes. in the years leading up to MY 2027 and
manufacturers. For example, it uses a during the years of the Phase 3 program.
Credits generated as a result of credit generating approach with
legitimate Phase 2 compliance strategies That is, we think it is important to
similarities to the Federal ABT program, provide manufacturers with regulatory
are not windfalls and we do not have a
way to accurately project or account for 837 Specifically, the projected ZEV adoption rates
certainty on the impact of their products
the balance of credits that may be in our modeled potential compliance pathway are
on their compliance with the Phase 3
available for use in MYs 2027 and later. sales-weighted by subcategory. See RIA Chapter 2 program, and believe that it would be
Furthermore, the final standards for a more detailed description of HD TRUCS and inappropriate for such impacts to
its use of MOVES 4.0 data, as well as the potential change significantly every time a new
reflect nationwide production volumes. compliance pathway’s technology packages.
As explained in section II.F of this 838 See comments from Navistar, Inc. (EPA–HQ–
State decided to adopt (or withdraw
OAR–2019–0055–1318, p. 6) submitted to EPA for from) the ACT program. Furthermore,
836 See, e.g., comments of DTNA (EPA–HQ–OAR– the HD2027 NPRM (87 FR 17592). manufacturers may be motivated to
2022–0985–1555) and Volvo (EPA–HQ–OAR–0985– 839 We also considered that exclusion of produce vehicles with advanced CO2
1606) asserting that OEMs have not been adopting production volumes and sales of states that adopted control or prevention technologies by
certain technologies on which EPA predicated the ACT from the Federal ABT program could
Phase 2 rule and consequently have looked to other unintentionally complicate or even disincentivize
Phase 3 and in response to other
means of compliance, including utilizing ZEV other state’s decision making in whether to adopt initiatives, and we want to support any
technologies. ACT under CAA section 177. U.S. adoption of these technologies by
174
Fmt 4701
allowing manufacturers to account for necessary for developing and producing all-electric vehicles into the market’’ for
their nationwide production volumes to vehicles, would not likely cause MYs 2021 through 2027.842 At low
comply with the standards of this rule. manufacturers to significantly change adoption levels, the benefits of
For these reasons, EPA believes the their product line in MY 2024. encouraging additional utilization of
change to the definition is warranted. Thus, we are finalizing a revision to these technologies outweighed negative
In response to commenters urging that the definition of ‘‘U.S.-directed emissions impacts of multipliers.
any change not occur until MY 2027, we production volume’’ in 40 CFR 1037.801 However, as discussed in section II,
disagree that this new definition would such that it represents the total manufacturers are now actively
dilute the Phase 2 program. The Phase nationwide production volumes, and we increasing their use of PHEV, BEV, and
2 standards were promulgated as a are making that change effective in MY FCEV HD technologies with further
national program and we expect 2024 to minimize the uncertainties support through the IRA and other
manufacturers developed their Phase 2 related to how ACT will be actions, and we expect this growth to
compliance strategies relying on the implemented. We explain in the continue through the remaining
availability of credits, and in some case following section III.A.2 that the final timeframe for the HD GHG Phase 2
credit multipliers, from nationwide rule includes provisions aimed at program and into the timeframe for this
production. As noted, there are minimizing emissions impacts of credits Phase 3 program.
comments to this effect from from PHEV, BEV, and FCEV production While we did anticipate that some
manufacturers. While there are now volumes. growth in development of these
new state standards and the previous Finally, we note that in addition to technologies would occur due to the
definition would exclude production this revision to the definition of ‘‘U.S.- credit incentives in the HD GHG Phase
intended for sale in states adopting directed production volume’’, we are 2 final rule, we did not expect the level
those standards, the timing of the ACT finalizing additional conforming of innovation observed since we
waiver approval relative to the amendments throughout 40 CFR part finalized the rule, the IRA or BIL
manufacturer compliance plans would 1037 to streamline references to the incentives, or that California would
cause timing concerns in the near term revised definition; see section III.C.3 of adopt the ACT rule at the same time
if those production volumes were this preamble for further discussion on these advanced technology multipliers
excluded from Phase 2 compliance. one of those revisions.841 were in effect. We therefore proposed
Also, as just noted, uncertainties phasing out multipliers for PHEV and
relating to other states adopting the ACT 2. Advanced Technology Credit BEV technologies one year earlier than
regulation and the timing of such Multipliers for CO2 Emissions provided in the Phase 2 rule. After
adoption can cut across manufacturers’ For the HD GHG Phase 2 rule, EPA considering comments and the potential
compliance plans, and this concern is adopted credit multipliers through MY disruption to manufacturers’
especially sensitive in the near term, 2027 for vehicles that qualified as compliance plans for Phase 2, we are
when manufacturers are least able to ‘‘advanced technology’’ based on the retaining the existing Phase 2 flexibility
alter compliance strategies. For administrative record at that time (i.e., that allows manufacturers to continue to
example, with respect to MY 2024, EPA PHEV, BEV, and FCEV). In the proposal earn advanced technology credit
expects that manufacturers have been for this rule (88 FR 26010), we described multipliers for PHEV and BEV
planning and developing a compliant the HD GHG Phase 2 advanced technologies through model year 2027.
fleet for years based on the nationwide technology credit multipliers as To address the concern of reduced
applicability of the Phase 2 program, representing a tradeoff between Phase 3 stringency raised in comments,
including ABT provisions, and the lead incentivizing new advanced we are finalizing a provision that places
time necessary to develop and produce technologies that could have significant certain restrictions on and specifies the
heavy-duty vehicles. EPA granted the emissions benefits and providing credits circumstances when credits from
CAA section 209 waiver of preemption that could allow higher emissions from multipliers may be used in model years
for the California ACT program on credit-using engines and vehicles. At 2027 through 2029 and eliminates the
March 30, 2023, which is during MY the time we finalized the HD GHG Phase availability of credit multipliers for use
2024, and which under the prior 2 program in 2016, we estimated that in model years 2030 and later. In this
definition of U.S.-Directed Production there would be very little market section III.A.2, we present background
Volume would have caused penetration of PHEV, BEV, and FCEV in on advanced technologies, summarize
manufacturers to not be able to generate the heavy-duty market in the MY 2021 the comments that informed our final
credits for vehicles sold in states that to MY 2027 timeframe when the approach for credit multipliers, and
had adopted ACT.840 To suddenly advanced technology credit multipliers describe the revisions we are finalizing
deprive manufacturers of the ability to would be in effect. Additionally, the related to advanced technology credits.
generate credits for vehicles sold in ACT technology packages in our technical i. Background on Phase 1 and Phase 2
states for MY 2024 during that model basis of the feasibility of the HD GHG GHG Advanced Technology Credits
year would likely undermine Phase 2 standards did not include any
manufacturers’ long-extant compliance of these advanced technologies. In the prior HD GHG Phase 1 and
strategies, and given the lead time In our assessment conducted during Phase 2 rules, EPA adopted advanced
the development of HD GHG Phase 2, technology credits to incentivize the
840 We note again that prior to the adoption of
we found only one manufacturer had long-term development of technologies
ACT and EPA granting the waiver for ACT, the EPA certified HD BEVs through MY 2016, that had the potential to achieve very
and California programs were aligned. Thus, as a large GHG reductions. Specifically, in
practical matter, manufacturers could generate and we projected ‘‘limited adoption of
HD GHG Phase 1, we provided
credits based on nationwide production volumes,

notwithstanding the then-existing definition of 841 As discussed in section III.C.3, we are also advanced technology credits for hybrid
‘‘U.S.-directed production volume.’’ From this finalizing a similar update to the heavy-duty powertrains, Rankine cycle waste heat
perspective, EPA’s amendment of the definition highway engine definition of ‘‘U.S.-directed recovery systems on engines, all-electric
appropriately preserves the status quo whereby production volume’’ in 40 CFR 1036.801, with
credits may be generated nationwide for additional updates where it is necessary to continue vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles
compliance through the EPA ABT program. See to exclude production volumes intended for sale in
Response to Comments section 10.2. states with different emission standards. 842 81 FR 73818 (October 25, 2016).
175
Fmt 4701
to promote the implementation of recovery systems in a subset of the the HD GHG Phase 2 standards were
advanced technologies that were not engines and tractors, and we removed based on projected utilization of the
included in our technical basis of the mild hybrid powertrains and waste heat other, even more-advanced Phase 1
feasibility of the Phase 1 emission recovery systems as options for advanced credit technologies (e.g., plug-
standards (see 40 CFR 86.1819–14(k)(7), advanced technology credits. At the in hybrid electric vehicles, all-electric
1036.150(h), and 1037.150(p)). The HD time of the HD GHG Phase 2 final rule vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles).
GHG Phase 2 CO2 emission standards in 2016, we believed the HD GHG Phase For HD GHG Phase 2, EPA promulgated
that followed Phase 1 were premised on 2 standards themselves provided advanced technology credit multipliers
the use of mild hybrid powertrains in sufficient incentive to develop those through MY 2027, as shown in Table
vocational vehicles and waste heat specific technologies. However, none of III–1 (see also 40 CFR 1037.150(p)).
As stated in the HD GHG Phase 2 factors, combined with virtually non- Therefore, each BEV or FCEV produced
rulemaking, our intention with these existent adoption of the aforementioned receives base emission credits
multipliers was to create a meaningful advanced technologies in HD vehicles equivalent to the level of the standard,
incentive for those manufacturers as of 2016, we concluded that it was even before considering the effect of a
considering developing and applying unlikely that market adoption of these multiplier. The second share of credits
these qualifying advanced technologies low GHG advanced technologies would does not represent CO2 emission
into their vehicles. The multipliers grow significantly within the next reductions realized in the real world but
under the existing program are decade without additional incentives. rather, as just explained, was
consistent with values recommended by As we stated in the HD GHG Phase 2 established by EPA to help incentivize
CARB in their HD GHG Phase 2 final rule preamble, our determination a nascent market: in this example, the
comments.843 CARB’s values were based that it was appropriate to provide large emission credits for BEVs built between
on a cost analysis that compared the multipliers for these advanced MY 2021 and 2027 receive an advanced
costs of these advanced technologies to technologies, at least in the short term, technology credit multiplier of 4.5, i.e.,
costs of other GHG-reducing was because these advanced an additional 3.5 multiple of the
technologies. CARB’s cost analysis technologies have the potential to lead standard.
showed that multipliers in the range we to very large reductions in GHG
ii. Revisions to the Advanced
ultimately promulgated as part of the emissions and fuel consumption and
Technology Credit Multipliers
HD GHG Phase 2 final rule would make promote technology development
these advanced technologies more substantially in the long term. 81 FR We proposed to amend the existing
competitive with the other GHG- 73818. However, because the credit Phase 2 rule to provide for an earlier
reducing technologies and could allow multipliers are so large, we also stated phase out of multipliers for PHEVs and
manufacturers to more easily generate a that they should not necessarily be BEVs. In general, commenters’ support
viable business case to develop these made available indefinitely. Therefore, for the proposed approach for phasing
advanced technologies for HD vehicles they were included in the HD GHG out advanced technology credit
and bring them to market at a Phase 2 final rule as an interim program multipliers varied (see section 10.3.1 of
competitive price. continuing only through MY 2027. 40 the RTC document for this rulemaking).
In establishing the multipliers in the CFR 1037.615(a). Some commenters supported the
HD GHG Phase 2 final rule, we also The HD GHG Phase 2 CO2 emission proposal. Others commented that EPA
considered the tendency of the HD credits for HD vehicles are calculated should retain the multipliers through
sector to lag behind the light-duty sector according to the existing regulations at MY 2027 as finalized in the Phase 2
in the adoption of several advanced 40 CFR 1037.705(b). For BEVs and program, noting that manufacturers are
technologies. There are many possible FCEVs, the family emission level (FEL) relying on the availability of the
reasons for this, such as: value for CO2 emissions is deemed to be multipliers for their compliance plans
• HD vehicles are more expensive 0 grams per ton-mile.844 Under those and so would need more lead time to
than light-duty vehicles, which makes it existing regulations, the CO2 emission revise their plans. Some commenters
a greater monetary risk for purchasers to credits for HD BEVs built between MY suggested that our statements in the
invest in new technologies. 2021 and MY 2027 would be multiplied proposal that there is sufficient
• These vehicles are primarily work by 4.5 (or the values shown in Table III– incentive available for advanced
vehicles, which makes predictable 1 for the other technologies) and, for technologies indicated that EPA should
functionality and versatility important. discussion purposes, can be visualized eliminate some or all multipliers before
• Sales volumes are much lower for as split into two shares.845 The first MY 2026. Others noted the need for
HD vehicles, especially for specialized share of credits would come from the continued support for manufacturers to
vehicles. reduction in CO2 emissions realized by develop these technologies, and
At the time of the HD GHG Phase 2 recommended EPA extend the

the environment from a BEV that is not
rulemaking, after considering these availability of some or all multipliers
emitting from the tailpipe, represented
843 Letter from Michael Carter, CARB, to Gina
by the first 1.0 portion of the multiplier. beyond MY 2027.
McCarthy, Administrator, EPA and Mark Rosekind,
At proposal (88 FR 26010), we noted
Administrator, NHTSA, June 16, 2016. EPA Docket 844 40 CFR 1037.150(f). that revisions to credit multipliers
ER22AP24.077</GPH>
ID EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0827_attachment 2. 845 See 40 CFR 1037.150(p) and 1037.705(b). should carefully balance several
176
considerations. In terms of potential necessarily comply with the Phase 3 compliance strategies with both the
emissions impact, we acknowledged standards by virtue of complying with Federal performance-based Phase 2 and
that a portion of the credits that result ACT. In contrast, several manufacturers 3 standards and the California ACT
from an advanced technology multiplier commented that both their near-term program. Our final rule reference case
do not represent CO2 emission Phase 2 and long-term compliance plans modeling is our best estimate of ZEV
reductions realized in the real world relied on the availability of credit technology production volumes in the
and those excess credits could allow for multipliers (including use of credits absence of the Phase 3 rulemaking, as
backsliding of emission reductions generated from credit multipliers for supported by our analysis in preamble
expected from ICE vehicles. Relating to Phase 2 compliance) and some even section V. Sales volumes could prove to
the need for continued incentives, we requested EPA extend the availability be lower, however.847 We also recognize
noted that increasing manufacturer through MY 2030 to continue to that manufacturers may have different
production levels, the availability of incentivize the technologies. One approaches and technology pathway
IRA or BIL incentives, and targets set as manufacturer indicated that California’s plans to demonstrate compliance with
part of California’s ACT rule all indicate ACT program targets manufacturer Phase 2 as well as with ACT, as asserted
PHEV and BEV HD vehicles will be sales, but that those sales only occur if by certain commenters and summarized
utilized increasingly in the near-term, customers purchase the products. This previously in this section, and thus
reducing the need for the extra commenter noted that, while supporting manufacturers may undertake different
incentives provided by the advanced regulations exist in some states, there approaches than those asserted as the
technology multipliers. are no nationwide initiatives to ensure basis of commenters’ concerns with
In the proposal, we also recognized, sales, so it is unclear how many ZEVs multiplier credit volumes. EPA
however, that some manufacturers’ will be sold as a result of ACT. considered all of these comments in
long-term product plans for PHEV or After considering the comments weighing potential limitations on ABT
BEV technologies may have extended to received on the proposal for this rule, flexibilities for credits generated by the
model years closer to MY 2027, and we we are not taking final action on the existing Phase 2 credit multipliers.
did not propose to immediately proposal to revise the Phase 2 rule to After balancing consideration of the
eliminate PHEV and BEV credit provide for an earlier phase out (one concerns of disrupting on-going Phase 2
multipliers. 88 FR 26012. Instead, we year early) of multipliers for PHEVs and compliance strategies and the potential
proposed a MY 2026 phase-out for BEVs. As such, manufacturers may for multiplier credits to erode the
PHEV and BEV credit multipliers, one continue to generate credits that include emission benefits of the Phase 3
year earlier than adopted in Phase 2, in credit multipliers for PHEV, BEV, and program, we are placing restrictions on
part, to limit the impact on current FCEV technologies through MY 2027 as how credits from multipliers can be
manufacturer product plans for the HD was adopted in Phase 2.846 We note that used to meet the Phase 3 standards, and
GHG Phase 2 standards and to provide our analysis of the feasibility of the are additionally limiting their use to the
some flexibility as manufacturers plan Phase 3 standards did not rely on the initial model years of the Phase 3
for the more stringent Phase 3 availability of carried over credits from program. As described in the remainder
standards. We did not propose any Phase 2 or Phase 2 credit multipliers; of this section III.A.2.ii, we are
changes to the advanced technology our assessment is that such credits will finalizing provisions that will limit
multiplier for fuel cell electric vehicles, provide appropriate flexibilities for when manufacturers can use credits
which applies through MY 2027, noting manufacturers in the transition into the generated from credit multipliers in MY
that it was still appropriate to early years of the Phase 3 program, as 2027 through 2029 and eliminate the
incentivize the development of fuel cell manufacturers make practical business availability of those credits for use in
technology, because it has been slower decisions on where to apply their MY 2030 and later.
to develop in the HD market, as resources to first develop products. We As noted previously, advanced
discussed in section II (88 FR 26012). also note that retaining the existing technology credits can be thought of as
We note that the proposal regarding Phase 2 ABT provisions on credit two portions: a base credit calculated
Phase 2’s credit multipliers was limited multipliers should address potential using the equation in 40 CFR
to evaluating approaches to phase out concerns or uncertainties raised by 1037.705(b) and a multiplier portion
their availability for use and we did not manufacturers regarding their calculated using multipliers specified in
propose or request comment on compliance plans relying on the credits 40 CFR 1037.150(p) for a given
extending credit multipliers to apply for generated under the existing Phase 2
advanced technology. Our final
other technologies. credit multiplier provisions. However,
provisions will continue to allow
In this final rule, commenters as explained in the remainder of this
expanded on the proposed manufacturers to apply the base credits
preamble section, we are finalizing
considerations. Some commenters noted from advanced technologies through the
provisions to limit the potential use of
that we are amending the definition of 5-year credit life; however, to ensure
credits generated from this flexibility.
U.S. Directed Production Volume, as We disagree with those commenters meaningful vehicle GHG emission
discussed in the section III.A.1, such that assert manufacturers will reductions under the Phase 3 program,
that vehicle production volumes sold in necessarily comply with the Phase 3 we are finalizing restrictions for how
California or section 177 states that standards by virtue of complying with manufacturers can use the multiplier
adopt ACT would be included in the ACT. These comments assume a given portion of advanced technology credits
ABT credit calculations. These volume of Phase 2 credits will be toward Phase 3 compliance.
commenters indicated that continuing generated and carried over into Phase 3, In MYs 2027 through 2029,
to allow multipliers for PHEVs and and thus presuppose manufacturers’ manufacturers can continue to use
BEVs could expand banks of credits multiplier credits to meet the Phase 3
well past the point EPA contemplated 846 We are revising 40 CFR 1037.150(p) to clarify standards; however, multiplier credits
when adopting the Phase 2 rule. Some the applicable standards for calculating credits. We
are finalizing parallel edits to existing 40 CFR 847 We also note that, in RIA Chapter 4.10, we
of these commenters asserted that, given 1037.615(a) and 1037.740(b) to clarify when the conducted a reference case sensitivity analysis with
the Phase 2 flexibilities and the ACT advanced technology credit calculations would lower ZEV adoption than we project will occur
requirements, manufacturers will apply. through compliance with CARB’s ACT.
177
Fmt 4701
can only be applied toward Phase 3 are reducing the potential for multiplier note that in section II.B of this preamble
compliance after available base credits credits to erode the emission benefits of we describe part of EPA’s commitment
are used. In a given model year within the Phase 3 program, in particular in to monitor the on-going implementation
the timeframe this limitation applies, MYs beyond 2029. of the HD vehicle GHG programs as
manufacturers quantify the credits We emphasize that this limitation to assessing manufacturers’ use of the CO2
available from advanced technologies, using credits from multipliers for MYs emissions ABT program. This will
including from credits that were banked 2027 through 2029 is intended to apply include evaluating manufacturers’ use
in previous years, and account for the for Phase 3 compliance. We want to of advanced technology multipliers,
base and multiplier portions of the preserve manufacturers’ ability to quantifying any banked credits
credits. Then, for each family, they implement their existing plans for generated from the use of multipliers,
would calculate credits without complying with the Phase 2 program. and considering the potential for those
consideration of credit multipliers (i.e., Some manufacturers stated in their credits to undermine the overall goals of
credits and deficits from ICE vehicles, comments that they have included the Phase 3 program in the MY 2027
and base credits from vehicles with PHEV and BEV technologies in their and later time frame. If we identify a
advanced technologies) and sum the plans to comply with Phase 2 standards significant volume of banked credits
credit quantities over all vehicle and that those plans also rely on the from credit multipliers that we
families in the averaging set.848 If the credit multipliers for the remaining determine is undermining the goals of
credit quantity is positive, any surplus model years of the Phase 2 program. the Phase 3 program, we may consider
credits, including the multiplier credits, Others have indicated that credit further restrictions in a future action.
can be banked for future use. If the multipliers are a critical incentive for
FCEV development in the near term. To 3. Transitional Flexibility Allowing
credit quantity for the given averaging Credit Exchange Across Averaging Sets
set is negative, manufacturers must use minimize the impact on manufacturers’
available base credits before applying Phase 2 compliance plans, we continue In recognition that the final HD GHG
multiplier credits. Specifically, a to allow full advanced technology Phase 3 standards will require
manufacturer would apply credits in the credits, including any multiplier credits, meaningful investments from
following order of priority, while the to be used for Phase 2 compliance as manufacturers to reduce GHG emissions
credit quantity for the averaging set is currently allowed in the Phase 2 ABT from HD vehicles, we are finalizing
negative: program. That is, in MYs 2026 and additional flexibilities to assist
1. Base credits banked or traded earlier, averaged, banked, and traded manufacturers in the implementation of
within the same averaging set. Phase 2 advanced technology credits, Phase 3. Specifically, we requested
2. Base credits earned in the same including applicable multipliers, can be comment on and are finalizing an
model year from other averaging sets used to comply with the CO2 standards interim (i.e., temporary) flexibility for
(see section III.A.3 of this preamble). in those years. In MY 2027, manufacturers to use certain credits
3. Base credits banked or traded in manufacturers will continue to have the across averaging sets, with limitations
other averaging sets and used across option to earn advanced technology outlined in this section. We are
averaging sets as described in section credits with multipliers relative to the retaining our current averaging set
III.A.3. Phase 3 standards. All multiplier credits definitions and our approach that limits
4. Multiplier credits within the same can be used in full toward any Phase 2 averaging, banking, or trading within an
averaging set for the same model year. deficits through MY 2029 (i.e., the end averaging set for credits or deficits
of the 3-year window when generated from heavy-duty vehicles
5. Multiplier credits banked or traded
manufacturers must remedy any MY outside the range of model years over
within the same averaging set.
2026 Phase 2 deficits). which this transitional allowance
6. Multiplier credits earned in the In MY 2030, we are phasing out the
same model year from other averaging applies.850
multiplier portion of any remaining In HD GHG Phase 1, we adopted an
sets. advanced technology credits. Credits approach to allow advanced technology
7. Multiplier credits banked or traded from Phase 2 advanced technologies credits to earn a multiplier of 1.5 and be
in other averaging sets. will continue to be available, including applied to any heavy-duty engine or
This limitation to using credits from those credits generated from their vehicle averaging set, subject to a
multipliers for MYs 2027 through 2029 applicable multiplier, through MY 2029 cap.851 In HD GHG Phase 2, we
is intended to balance the competing as described previously in this section. discontinued the allowance to reduce
concerns discussed in this section. In MY 2030 and later, manufacturers the risk of market distortions if we
Manufacturers would continue to have would retain any base credits previously allowed the use of the credits across
access to the full amount of credits from earned from PHEV, BEV, or FCEV averaging sets combined with the larger
multipliers if needed in the early years advanced technologies that are still credit multipliers.852 As discussed in
of the Phase 3 program.849 By within their credit life of 5 years, but section III.A.2, manufacturers will
prioritizing the use of base credits, we manufacturers could no longer use continue to have the flexibility to
848 This first step is generally consistent with our
multiplier credits for certifying model generate advanced technology credit
historical approach to credits, which allows use of
year 2030 and later vehicles. Any multipliers through model year 2027 but
credits generated within the same model year but unused multiplier credits would expire those credits generated from multipliers
also first applies all such available credits through in MY 2030. would only be available for use through
averaging to resolve credit balances for that model Since some portion of the advanced model year 2029.
year before applying banked or traded credits. This technology credits have restricted or
approach prevents potential gaming of credit life We requested comment on the
and trading limitations. To further clarify this in the expiring use, we expect to track base flexibility for credits generated from
regulations, we are also adding an amendment in credits separate from multiplier credits PHEV, BEV, and FCEV to be used across
40 CFR 1037.701(f) consistent with this description. in evaluating compliance and will work certain averaging sets, including for HD
849 See Brakora, Jessica. Memorandum to docket
with manufacturers to prioritize which
EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. ‘‘Additional
Considerations of ABT Provisions for HD GHG
credits are applied for a given model 850 40 CFR 1037.140(g) and 1037.740(a).
Phase 3 Final Rule’’. March 2024 for examples of year consistent with the final 851 40 CFR 1036.740(c) and 1037.740(b).
how these provisions could apply. restrictions and provisions. Finally, we 852 81 FR 73498, October 25, 2016.
178
Fmt 4701
vehicles subject to 40 CFR part 1037, certified under 40 CFR part 86, subpart 3 pickup trucks and vans 854 (see 88 FR
HD engines subject to 40 CFR part 1036, S, being allowed to be used within the 26013). One manufacturer of medium-
or heavy-duty vehicles subject to 40 HD vehicle ABT program and credits duty vehicles commented in support of
CFR part 86, subpart S, and any from HD vehicles being allowed to be that potential allowance, indicating that
limitations we should consider. 88 FR used within the HD engine ABT there is a two-year delay in adapting
26013. In comments, many vehicle program. Id. light-duty vehicle technology for the
manufacturers expressed concern over The provision that limits credit heavy-duty vehicle market. No other
the level of the proposed standards and, exchanges to within averaging sets is affected manufacturers commented on
for those considering a compliance unique to the heavy-duty rules—on the the issue. After considering comments,
pathway similar to the potential light-duty vehicle side, credits can flow we are finalizing provisions allowing
pathway EPA modeled, the freely among all vehicle types. EPA manufacturers to access credits
uncertainties in their ability to produce implemented the limitation because generated by model year 2027 through
enough BEV or FCEV or otherwise to heavy-duty vehicles comprise so many 2032 medium-duty vehicles to certify
meet the standards. Commenters applications that calculations across heavy-duty vehicles, with some
expressing support for using credits averaging sets of, for example, operating limitations as described in the following
across averaging sets generally noted life and load cycles could prove section III.A.3.ii. Specifically, we are
that the flexibility would help problematic. 76 FR 57240 (September finalizing an interim allowance for one-
manufacturers implement advanced 11, 2011). EPA has also noted way credit transfers from averaging sets
technologies in the vehicle segments manufacturer equity concerns (see, e.g., for medium-duty vehicles certified to 40
with the greatest demand or cost 55 FR 30586 (July 26, 1990)), whereby CFR part 86, subpart S, to averaging sets
effectiveness. Some of these supportive manufacturers with broader product for heavy-duty vehicles certified to 40
commenters suggested EPA expand the lines might have an unfair advantage CFR part 1037.855
flexibility beyond the examples because of greater opportunities to As previously explained, Phase 2
provided in the requests for comment. average. EPA further indicated, credits may be banked for use in the
Commenters opposed to allowing credit however, that we could reassess these Phase 3 program and manufacturers can
transfers across averaging sets generally limitations after gaining experience continue to apply all available Phase 2
expressed concern over market administering the program. 76 FR credits within the applicable averaging
distortions and reduced effectiveness of 57240. In this rulemaking, commenters sets consistent with the existing ABT
the rule. did not voice these concerns, and HD program. In section III.A.3.ii, we
After considering comments and describe some limitations on the use of
manufacturers commented that
further evaluation of the example banked credits under this transitional
averaging across the HDV averaging sets
flexibilities included as requests for flexibility.
would no longer afford competitors an We have calculated the range of
comment in the proposal, the final
unfair advantage.853 credits that would be eligible for
provision, available as an interim,
transitional flexibility during model After considering comments, we are transfer across averaging sets and
years 2027 through 2032, will allow finalizing an interim provision allowing estimated the relative impact of these
manufacturers some flexibility to use credits to be used across HD vehicle newly available credits, and project that
credits generated from heavy-duty averaging sets during the MY 2027 use of this flexibility will have a limited
vehicles across averaging sets. In this through MY 2032 period. More impact on the stringency of the Phase 3
section III.A.3, we describe how the specifically, during model years 2027 standards.856 While we anticipate no
allowance applies for heavy-duty through 2032, manufacturers can significant negative emissions impact,
vehicles under 40 CFR part 1037 and transfer credits generated from heavy- we are finalizing the transitional
heavy-duty vehicles under 40 CFR part duty vehicles in MYs 2027–2032 flexibility as an interim provision,
86, subpart S. We also explain our between all heavy-duty vehicle available until model year 2032, because
decision not to extend this flexibility to averaging sets in 40 CFR part 1037. we do not expect a continued need for
allow heavy-duty vehicle credits for use Thus, credits can transfer from Light such a flexibility once the Phase 3
in the heavy-duty engine averaging sets HDV to Medium HDV or Heavy HDV, program is fully implemented. We may
under 40 CFR part 1036. See also from Medium HDV to Light HDV or consider extending the flexibility in a
section 10.3.2 of the response to Heavy HDV, and from Heavy HDV to future rule.
comments document for this rule. Light HDV or Medium HDV. We note
that we are finalizing this interim ii. Limitations of the Transitional
i. Applicability of the Transitional provision to include credits generated Flexibility Allowing Credit Exchange
Flexibility Allowing Credit Exchange by all heavy-duty vehicles, including Across Averaging Sets
Across Averaging Sets those using ICE-based vehicle As noted in section III.A.2, we have
The current rules provide three technologies and not limited to Phase 2 taken steps to reduce the potential for
averaging sets for HD vehicles: Light advanced technologies. The broad
HDV, Medium HDV, and Heavy HDV applicability of this interim provision 854 The recent Light- and Medium-duty final rule
(see 40 CFR 1037.740(a)). Credits ensures that we continue to incentivize now classifies these vehicles as ‘‘Medium Duty
Vehicles’’. See Final Rule: Multi-Pollutant
generated by vehicles may only be future vehicle technology that may Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and
averaged, banked, or traded within each generate credits against the Phase 3 Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles.
averaging set. Id. EPA sought comment standards by including it within this Docket number EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0829.
Available online: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-
on revising this limitation during the interim flexibility. emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-multi-
initial phase-in years of the Phase 3 We also requested comment on the pollutant-emissions-standards-model.
program for credits generated from possibility of allowing manufacturers 855 See 40 CFR 86.1819–14 and 40 CFR
Phase 2’s designated advanced certifying under 40 CFR part 1037 to 1037.150(z).
856 See Brakora, Jessica. Memorandum to docket
technologies. 88 FR 26013. EPA’s access credits generated by Class 2b and
EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985. ‘‘Additional
request for comment also included the Considerations of ABT Provisions for HD GHG
possibility of credits generated by 853 See, for example, comments from Volvo Group Phase 3 Final Rule’’. March 2024 for illustrations
chassis-certified Class 2b/3 vehicles (EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985–1606, p 20–21). of how these provisions could operate in tandem.
179
Fmt 4701
Phase 2 advance technology multiplier Light HDV or Medium HDV averaging are able to offset a significant number of
credits to dilute the effective stringency sets; this is consistent with the request vehicles in any given averaging set
of the Phase 3 standards by restricting for comment in the proposed rule. under this flexibility. Our assessment of
the use of credits generated from Regarding credits from vehicles the effect of those vehicles does not
multipliers to MYs 2027 through 2029 certified to 40 CFR part 86, subpart S, indicate a such an offset. Furthermore,
and phasing out their availability in MY we make two additional clarifications. we do not want manufacturers to limit
2030. These multiplier credit First, any credits transferred under this production of technologies with the
restrictions also limit potential impacts flexibility would no longer be available potential for very large GHG emission
from allowing credits to exchange across for the part 86 ABT program to aid in reductions in order to be within a cap;
averaging sets as the restrictions apply manufacturers meeting the requirements in particular we do not want to
within the range of model years over for medium-duty vehicles. Second, disincentivize manufacturers from
which this transitional flexibility vehicles defined as Medium-duty producing additional vehicles with
applies. In this section III.A.3.ii, we Passenger Vehicles in 40 CFR part 86, technologies that can achieve very large
describe other specific limitations we subpart S, are over 8,500 pounds GVWR GHG emissions reductions.
are adopting for heavy-duty vehicles but are subject to the standards that
apply for light trucks and are therefore B. Battery Durability Monitoring and
under 40 CFR part 1037 and heavy-duty
not eligible to generate credits for this Warranty Requirements
vehicles under 40 CFR part 86, subpart
S, to further reduce potential impacts of transitional flexibility. This section describes the battery
credit exchanges across the applicable Some commenters expressed concern durability monitoring requirements that
averaging sets. with the Phase 2 ABT provisions we are finalizing for BEVs and PHEVs
As noted previously, manufacturers allowing credits from vocational and how warranty applies for several
may bank credits generated before MY vehicles to be used for tractors in the advanced technologies. As we explained
2027 for use in Phase 3. However, for same weight class. They argued that a in the proposal, BEVs, PHEVs, and
this transitional flexibility allowing manufacturer may use vocational FCEVs are playing an increasing role in
credits to exchange across averaging vehicle ZEV credits to offset tractors, vehicle manufacturers’ compliance
sets, a manufacturer may only use thereby limiting adoption of ZEV strategies to control GHG emissions
credits from MY 2026 and earlier technology in tractors. Were from HD vehicles. The battery durability
vehicles if the credits were generated manufacturers to do so, this would be and warranty requirements support
from vehicles certified as advanced consistent with the original intent of the BEV, PHEV, and FCEV battery
technologies under 40 CFR part 1037.857 ABT program, which is to provide durability and thus support achieving
We are extending the interim cross- manufacturers the flexibility to identify the GHG emissions reductions projected
averaging set flexibility to include these which vehicle categories to apply new by this program. Further, these
credits given that increased utilization technologies for their specific product requirements support the integrity of the
of advanced technologies prior to the line to meet the standards, generally GHG emissions credit calculations
commencement of the Phase 3 program allowing them to meet standards at under the ABT program as these
has the potential to lead to very large lower cost. As we describe later in this calculations are based on mileage over
reductions in GHG emissions (as we response, we project a limited impact on a vehicle’s full useful life.858
recognized in the Phase 2 rulemaking). emissions from this new (and At the outset we note that, in
The final rule includes several temporary) flexibility. comments, the Engine Manufacturers
limitations on the flexibility to use We also requested comment on the Association (EMA) challenged EPA’s
credits to demonstrate compliance with possibility of allowing a one-way authority to adopt durability and
Phase 3 standards. First, we are not transfer of CO2 credits from heavy-duty warranty requirements for these
extending the interim flexibility to vehicle averaging sets to heavy-duty powertrains and their components.
include credits generated from MY 2026 engine averaging sets (see 88 FR 26013 Before describing the final rule
and earlier vehicles certified to 40 CFR seeking comment on this potential provisions relating to durability and
part 86, subpart S. Those earlier flexibility). While some commenters warranty, we first address this threshold
vehicles are subject to less stringent expressed general support for this issue. EMA agrees that EPA has
standards, which also include the allowance, we expect we would need to authority ‘‘to set lower emission
allowance to generate multiplier credits apply restrictions on the engine standards as advancements in
for advanced technologies. Allowing averaging sets where vehicle credits can technology allow, even down to zero,’’
heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers to be applied to limit potential but maintains that authority to establish
access credits from these earlier disproportionate adverse emission useful life, durability, and warranty
medium-duty vehicles would risk impact on certain engine categories and requirements related to such standards
substantially delaying the benefits of the FEL caps to avoid backsliding on the differs because these provisions are
Phase 3 standards. Second, we are engine standards. At this time, we are applicable only to ‘‘emission related’’
limiting the use of credits from 40 CFR not finalizing such a flexibility as we components, and BEV and FCEV
part 86, subpart S, to a one-way transfer believe the complexity would limit the powertrain components do not emit:
to 40 CFR part 1037 in recognition that use of this flexibility relative to the ‘‘EPA’s authority to prescribe useful life
there is greater availability of advanced other flexibilities we are finalizing in requirements under CAA section 202(d)
technologies in pickup trucks and vans this rule. is directly tied to the purpose of
and less need to offer a flexibility for Finally, we requested comment on extending the time span of emission
vehicles in that market relative to the capping the volume of credits that can standards that limit the rate, quantity or
be transferred across the HD vehicle concentration of emissions of air
larger vehicle classes. Third, medium-

duty credits may be used for averaging sets. 88 FR 26013. We are not pollutants from new motor vehicles
demonstrating compliance only for including a cap on credits transferred . . . . Since ZEV powertrains, including
between averaging sets in the final ZEV batteries, do not and cannot emit
857 This allowance includes any credits generated interim flexibility. A cap would be
from multipliers under 40 CFR part 1037 that are justified in cases where vehicles with 858 These two rationales are separate and
available for use in MYs 2027–2029. zero or near-zero tailpipe CO2 emissions independent justifications for the requirements.
180
Fmt 4701
any air pollutants in any quantity into sale and in use. Previously, EPA has continues to support) and which most
the ambient air . . ., EPA does not have already set warranty requirements for manufacturers choose for demonstrating
the authority to set emissions-related batteries in hybrids and PHEVs. See 88 compliance. Given the fleet average
useful life requirements for BEV and FR 4363 (discussing 40 CFR 1036.120). nature of the standards, the Agency
FCEV powertrains or their various non- EPA has also previously provided needs to have confidence that the
emitting components.’’ With regard to warranties for other electrified emissions reductions—and thus credits
warranty and durability, EMA further technologies, such as ECMs. Indeed, generated—by each BEV, FCEV, and
states that ‘‘CAA section 207(a)(1) Congress explicitly provided that ECMs PHEV introduced into the fleet are
makes it clear that the scope of are ‘‘specified major emissions control reflective of the real world. This is
authorized warranties is to ensure that component[s]’’ for warranty purposes particularly important because one of
vehicles and engines ‘are designed, built per section 207(i)(2). the elements of the credit generating
and equipped so as to conform at the In general, ZEV batteries, just like formula is useful life of the vehicle in
time of sale with the applicable batteries in PHEVs and other hybrid miles travelled, see 40 CFR 1037.705(a).
regulations [i.e., emission standards] vehicles, are emission-related
Ensuring that ZEVs and PHEVs
established under section . . . [section components for two reasons, thus
contain durable batteries is thus
202(a)(1)].’ ’’ 859 providing EPA authority to set
essential to assuring the integrity of the
EPA’s authority to set and enforce durability and warranty requirements
averaging process: assuring that vehicles
durability requirements for emission- applicable to them. First, they are
will need to perform in fact for the
related components like batteries is an emission-related by their nature.
useful life mileage reflected in any
integral part of its title II authority. Durability and warranty requirements
credits they may generate. Put another
Durability requirements ensure that for batteries are not like requiring
way, durable batteries are a significant
vehicle manufacturers and the vehicles durability and warranty for a vehicle
factor in vindicating the averaging form
they produce will continue to comply component like a vehicle’s
‘‘windshield’’ or ‘‘brake pedals’’ that of the standard: that the standard is met
with emissions standards set under per vehicle, and on average per fleet,
202(a) over the course of those vehicles’ have no relevance to a vehicle’s
emissions. Integrity of a battery in a throughout the vehicles’ useful life. The
useful lives. Such authority arises both battery durability and warranty
out of section 202(a)(1) and 202(d) vehicle with these powertrains is vital
to the vehicle’s emission performance; provisions finalized in this rulemaking
(relating to a vehicle’s useful life) and allow for greater confidence that the
section 206(a)(1) and 206(b)(1) (relating integrity of its ‘‘brake pedals’’ ’’ is not.
It is wrong to say that a component that batteries installed by vehicle
to certification requirements for manufacturers are durable and thus
compliance). allows a vehicle to operate entirely
without emissions is not emission- support the standards. Specifically, the
EPA accounts for durability at
related. See 40 CFR 1037.120(c) (‘‘The durability regulatory provisions for
certification by requiring, as part of the
emission-related warranty also covers batteries work to assure the integrity of
compliance demonstration for meeting
other added emission-related the standards throughout a vehicle’s
GHG emission standards, a
components to the extent they are useful life, precisely in accord with the
demonstration that emission controls
included in your application for requirements of section 202(a)(1) and
will not deteriorate during useful life,
certification, and any other components 202(d), and batteries are clearly
such as for a battery in a hybrid or plug-
whose failure would increase a vehicle’s emissions-related components for which
in hybrid electric vehicle. 40 CFR
CO2 emissions.’’).860 warranty requirements may be set under
1036.241(c) and 1037.241(c). Durability
Second, for warranty and durability 207(a)(1). EPA therefore disagrees with
of a ZEV battery is covered by this same
purposes, EPA has consistently EMA that it lacks authority to adopt
provision and principle. EPA has
considered a component to be such standards. EMA’s assertion that
exercised its authority to set emission
‘‘emission related’’ if it relates to a these provisions are unrelated to the
durability requirements across a variety
manufacturer’s ability to comply with emission standards is consequently
of emission-related components for
emissions standards, regardless of the completely misplaced.
decades, including electrified
technology like electronic control form of those standards.861 For In addition to EPA’s general authority
modules (ECM). See, e.g., 40 CFR standards to be meaningfully applicable to promulgate durability requirements
1065.915(d) (permitting ECM signals in across a vehicle’s useful life, EPA’s under sections 202 and 206, EPA has
place of Portable Emissions assessment of compliance with such additional separate and specific
Measurement System (PEMS) standards necessarily includes an authority to require on-board
instrument measurements); 40 CFR evaluation of the performance of the monitoring systems capable of
1037.605 (requiring ECM programming emissions control systems, which for ‘‘accurately identifying for the vehicle’s
where vehicle is speed limited to 45 BEVs, FCEVs, and PHEVs includes the useful life as established under [section
mph as part of alternate standards battery system both when the vehicle is 202], emission-related systems
certification). new and across its useful life. This is deterioration or malfunction.’’ Section
EPA has separate authority to set particularly true given the averaging 202(m)(1)(A).862 As we discuss at length
warranty requirements for batteries in form of standards that EPA uses for in this section, EV batteries are
ZEVs and PHEVs. CAA section GHG emissions (and which EMA ‘‘emission-related systems,’’ and thus
207(a)(1). Providing a warranty for EPA has the authority to set durability
860 The listed components in 40 CFR
emission-related components like monitoring requirements for such
1037.120(c)—’’ tires, automatic tire inflation
batteries precisely accomplishes the systems, tire pressure monitoring systems, vehicle
congressional purpose of assuring speed limiters, idle reduction systems, devices 862 Section 202(m)(1)(A) specifically applies to
purchasers that vehicles will conform to added to improve aerodynamic performance (not light duty vehicles and light duty trucks, but
including standard components such as hoods or section 202(m)(1) allows EPA to ‘‘promulgate
applicable emission standards at time of mirrors), fuel cell stacks, and RESS with hybrid regulations requiring manufacturers to install such
systems, battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell onboard diagnostic systems on heavy-duty vehicles
859 The comment did not address durability electric vehicles ‘‘—are evidently all related to and engines,’’ which provides concurrent authority
requirements related to PHEV components (see RTC vehicular emissions. for the battery monitoring requirements discussed
section 11.1). 861 See 88 FR 4296, January 24, 2023. in this section.
181
Fmt 4701
systems over the course of a vehicle’s comply with all applicable emission competitive nature of the ZEV and
useful life. standards and will be free from defects PHEV market, we anticipate that
EMA suggests that EPA does not have that may cause noncompliance. They do manufacturers will continue to do so,
authority to set durability or warranty so with respect to all emission-related regardless of EPA’s final rule.
requirements because ZEV batteries are components in the manufacturer’s Moreover generally, the battery
not emission-related for several reasons. application for certification, as noted, durability and warranty requirements
First, EMA argues that because ZEVs do and which explicitly include batteries resemble many other compliance
not themselves emit, they and their (also known as Rechargeable Energy provisions that facilitate manufacturers’
powertrain components are ‘‘not within Storage System (RESS)). See 40 CFR ability to comply with the standards, as
the scope of any specific emission 1037.120(c). These provisions are well as EPA’s ability to assure and
standards,’’ and therefore they cannot be readily implementable at time of sale enforce that compliance. Were a
subject to ‘‘emissions-related’’ durability and thereafter by reference to the reviewing court to invalidate any
and warranty requirements. But EPA applicable certified FEL and comport compliance provision, that would
does have the authority to set standards entirely with section 207 of the Act. preclude the agency from applying that
for ZEVs as they are part of the ‘‘class’’ We intend for the battery durability particular provision to assure
of regulated vehicles. In addition, all and warranty requirements finalized in compliance, but it would not mean that
vehicles, including ZEVs, are subject to this rule to be entirely separate and the entire regulatory framework should
an applicable Family Emission Limit severable from the revised emissions fall with it. Specifically, were a
(FEL) throughout their useful life to standards and other varied components reviewing court to invalidate the final
demonstrate compliance with EPA’s of this rule, and also severable from durability and warranty requirements,
GHG emissions standards.863 each other. EPA has considered and EPA would continue to have numerous
EMA argues secondly that a adopted battery durability requirements, tools at its disposal to assure and
component only counts as emission- battery warranty requirements, and the enforce compliance of the final
related if its failure would allow the remaining portions of the final rule standards, including the entire panoply
vehicle to continue operating, but with independently, and each is severable of certification requirements, in-use
higher emissions. But nothing in the should there be judicial review. If a testing requirements, administrative and
statute imposes such a limitation. court were to invalidate any one of these judicial enforcement, and so forth, so as
Moreover, while it is true that the elements of the final rule, we intend the to achieve significant emissions
failure of a battery would cause the remainder of this action to remain reductions. Therefore, EPA is adopting
vehicle to stop operating, the same is effective, as we have designed the and is capable of implementing final
true for some other vehicle components program to function even if one part of standards entirely separate from the
that have also historically been subject the rule is set aside. For example, if a battery durability and warranty
to durability requirements. For instance, reviewing court were to invalidate the requirements. The contrapositive is also
EPA has set durability requirements for battery durability requirements, we true: EPA is adopting and capable of
diesel engines (see 40 CFR 86.1823– intend the other components of the rule, implementing the battery durability and
08(c)), failure of which could cause the including the GHG standards, to remain warranty requirements entirely separate
vehicle to stop operating. Similarly, effective. from the standards. For example, even
Congress explicitly provided that As we explain previously in this without the final standards, we believe
electronic control modules (ECMs) section, for manufacturers who choose the enhanced battery durability and
(described in the statute as ‘‘electronic to produce BEVs, FCEVs, or PHEVs, warranty requirements would serve to
emissions control units’’) are ‘‘specified durable batteries are important to facilitate compliance with the existing
major emissions control component[s]’’ ensuring that the manufacturer’s overall GHG standards.
for warranty purposes per section compliance with fleet emissions
207(i)(2); failure of ECMs can also cause standards would continue throughout 1. BEV and PHEV Durability Monitoring
the vehicle to stop operating, and not the useful life of the vehicle. The battery Requirements
necessarily increase the emissions of the durability and warranty provisions EPA EPA’s HD vehicle GHG emission
vehicle. is finalizing help assure this outcome. standards apply for the regulatory useful
EMA is also mistaken in suggesting At the same time, we expect that, even life of the HD vehicle, consistent with
that there is no way to warrant at time if not strictly required, the majority of CAA section 202(a)(1) (‘‘Such standards
of sale that a vehicle that lacks tailpipe vehicle manufacturers would still shall be applicable to such vehicles and
emissions is ‘‘designed, built, and produce vehicles containing durable engines for their useful life’’). Section
equipped so as to conform, at time of batteries given their effect on vehicle
sale with applicable regulations under performance and the competitive nature 25, 2023. Available at https://wiki.unece.org/
[section 202(a)(1). . . . and . . . for its of the industry. Available data indicates download/attachments/192840855/EVE-61-
useful life, as determined by [section 08e%20-%20UK%
that manufacturers are already 20warranty%20analysis.pdf?api=v2.
202(d)].’’ Section 207(a)(1). In fact, providing warranty coverage similar to 866 CarEdge.com, ‘‘The Best Electric Vehicle
automakers warrant at the time of sale what is required by the final durability Battery Warranties in 2024,’’ January 9, 2024.
that each new vehicle is designed to and warranty requirements for ZEVs Accessed on February 16, 2024 at https://
caredge.com/guides/ev-battery-warranties.
863 See preamble section I.C and Response to
and PHEVs of various 867 California Air Resources Board, ‘‘Cars and
Comments section 10.2.1 for further description of

sizes.864 865 866 867 868 Given the Light-Trucks are Going Zero—Frequently Asked
EPA’s authority to set standards under section Questions.’’ Accessed on February 16, 2024 at
864 United Nations Economic Commission for https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/cars-
202(a) using an averaging form, and to include
Europe Informal Working Group on Electric and-light-trucks-are-going-zero-frequently-asked-
ZEVs and PHEVs within a fleet average-based

standard. For a more detailed description of the Vehicles and the Environment (UN ECE EVE), questions.
ABT process for HDVs, see section III.A of this ‘‘Battery Durability: Review of EVE 34 discussion,’’ 868 Forbes, ‘‘By The Numbers: Comparing Electric
preamble and section 10.2.1.d of the RTC May 19, 2020, p. 12. Available at https:// Car Warranties,’’ October 31, 2022. Accessed on
document. EPA replies to the commenter’s wiki.unece.org/download/attachments/101555222/ February 16, 2024 at https://www.forbes.com/sites/
assertions regarding authority to establish standards EVE-35-03e.pdf?api=v2. jimgorzelany/2022/10/31/by-the-numbers-
for a vehicle’s useful life as part of that same 865 UK Department of Transport, ‘‘Commercial comparing-electric-car-warranties/
response to comments. electric vehicle battery warranty analysis,’’ April ?sh=2ed7a5243fd7.
182
Fmt 4701
202(d) commands EPA to prescribe to comply with EPA standards, we and increased criteria pollutant tailpipe
regulations establishing useful life for proposed and are finalizing emissions, while a degraded battery in
purposes of section 202(a)(1) standards. requirements to ensure that such a BEV could impact its ability to deliver
Accordingly, EPA has historically vehicles certifying to EPA standards are the lifetime mileage expected. This
required manufacturers to demonstrate durable and capable of providing the effectively becomes an issue of
the durability of their emission control anticipated emissions reductions to durability if it reduces the utility of the
systems on vehicles, implementing which they are certified. Specifically, vehicle or its useful life, and EPA will
these authorities as well as EPA’s we are finalizing a requirement that closely track developments in this area
authority to prescribe ‘‘appropriate manufacturers provide a customer- and propose modifications as they
testing’’ for purposes of vehicle facing battery state-of-health (SOH) become necessary.
certification under section 206(a). See, monitor for all heavy-duty BEVs and Vehicle and engine manufacturers are
e.g., 40 CFR 1037.205(l) (requiring PHEVs. The new 40 CFR 1037.115(f) currently required to account for
applicants for certification to identify requires manufacturers to install a potential battery degradation that could
the vehicle family’s deterioration factors customer-accessible SOH monitor result in an increase in CO2 and criteria
and how the manufacturer derived those which estimates, monitors, and pollutant emissions when certifying
factors) and 1037.241(b) 869 (EPA may communicates the vehicle’s state of hybrid or plug-in hybrid vehicles (see,
require engineering analysis showing certified energy (SOCE) as it is defined e.g., existing 40 CFR 1037.241(b) and
that performance of emission controls in 40 CFR 1037.115(f). Specifically, 1036.241(c)).872 In addition, engine
will not deteriorate in use as part of manufacturers would implement manufacturers are required to
certification process). Without onboard algorithms to estimate the demonstrate compliance with criteria
durability demonstration requirements, current state of health of the battery, in pollutant standards using fully aged
EPA would not be able to assess terms of the state of its usable battery emission control components that
whether vehicles originally energy (UBE) expressed as a percentage represent expected degradation during
manufactured in compliance with of the original UBE when the vehicle useful life (see, e.g., 40 CFR
relevant emissions standards (including was new. 1036.235(a)(2) and 1036.240). We
the subfamily specific Family Emission EPA may perform in-use testing ‘‘of considered these well-established
Limit (FEL) to which each vehicle is any vehicle subject to the standards.’’ 40 approaches, as well as comments
certified, for manufacturers complying CFR 1037.401(a). This in-use testing is received, for the final battery durability
using the ABT compliance alternative; compared to the FEL to which the monitoring requirements for HD BEVs
see section III.A of this preamble and vehicle is certified. See 40 CFR and PHEVs.
RTC chapter 10.2.1, section d) would 1037.241(a)(2) (‘‘Note that the FEL is The importance of battery durability
remain compliant over the course of considered to be the applicable in the context of zero- and near-zero
emissions standard for an individual emission vehicles, such as BEVs and
their useful life. Recognizing that BEV,
configuration’’). If manufacturers are PHEVs, has been cited by several
PHEV, and FCEV are playing an
complying with the standard by authorities in recent years. In their 2021
increasing role in manufacturers’
averaging credits, emission credits Phase 3 report,873 the National
compliance strategies, and that emission
would be calculated assuming the Academies of Science (NAS) identified
credit calculations are based in part on
battery sufficiently maintains its battery durability as an important issue
mileage over a vehicle’s useful life, the
performance for the full useful life of with the rise of electrification.874
same logic applies to BEV, PHEV, and
the vehicle. Without battery-specific Several rulemaking bodies have also
FCEV battery and powertrain durability.
durability requirements applicable to recognized the importance of battery
Under 40 CFR part 1037, subpart H,
such vehicles, we are mindful that there durability in a world with rapidly
credits are calculated by determining increasing numbers of zero-emission
would not be a guarantee that a
the FEL each vehicle subfamily achieves vehicles. In 2015 the United Nations
manufacturer’s overall compliance with
beyond the standard and multiplying Economic Commission for Europe (UN
emission standards would continue
that by the production volume and a ECE) began studying the need for a
throughout that useful life. We are
useful life mileage attributed to each Global Technical Regulation (GTR)
finalizing new battery durability
vehicle subfamily.870 Having a useful governing battery durability. In April
monitoring to apply for MY 2030 and
life mileage value for each vehicle 2022 it published United Nations Global
later HD BEVs and PHEVs as a key step
subfamily is integral to calculating the Technical Regulation No. 22, ‘‘In-
in assuring the emission reductions
credits attributable to that vehicle,
projected for this program will be
whether those credits are used for 872 We are removing current 40 CFR 1037.241(b)
achieved in use.
calculating compliance through As implemented by light-duty vehicle and redesignating 40 CFR 1037.241(c) to 40 CFR
averaging, or for banking or trading. manufacturers in current BEVs and
1037.241(b).
Because vehicle manufacturers can PHEVs, lithium-ion battery technology and Medicine 2021. ‘‘Assessment of Technologies
use such emissions control technologies has been shown to be effective and for Improving Light-Duty Vehicle Fuel Economy
durable for use and we expect that this 2025–2035’’. Washington, DC: The National
869 In this final action we are moving 40 CFR
Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26092.
1037.241(c) to 40 CFR 1037.241(b). will also be the case for heavy-duty 874 Among the findings outlined in that report,
870 More specifically, vehicle families and vehicles.871 We recognize that the NAS noted that: ‘‘battery capacity degradation is
subfamilies are certified to the applicable standard energy capacity of a battery will considered a barrier for market penetration of
and FEL. Conditions are placed on the certificates naturally degrade to some degree with BEVs,’’ (p. 5–114), and that ‘‘[knowledge of] real-
to ensure compliance with the fleet average after the world battery lifetime could have implications on
year’s production is completed. The production- time and usage, which can result in a R&D priorities, warranty provision, consumer
reduction in driving range as the vehicle
weighted sum of the families and their FELs within confidence and acceptance, and role of
each averaging set must be equal to or less than the ages. See RIA Chapter 2.4.1.1.3. electrification in fuel economy policy.’’ (p. 5–115).
applicable emission standard. The useful life values Excessive battery degradation in a PHEV NAS also noted that ‘‘life prediction guides battery
for the HD vehicle standards are located in 40 CFR sizing, warranty, and resale value [and repurposing
1037.105(e) and 1037.106(e). 40 CFR 1037.705(b) could lead to higher fuel consumption and recycling]’’ (p. 5–115), and discussed at length
specifies that useful life of the vehicle, in miles, is the complexities of SOH estimation, life-cycle
part of the formula used to determine credit 871 See RIA Chapter 2.4.1.1.4, for how we prediction, and testing for battery degradation (p. 5–
generation. accounted for battery deterioration in our analysis. 113 to 5–115).
183
Vehicle Battery Durability for Electrified requirements, the associated statistical Along with these provisions allowing
Vehicles,’’ 875 or GTR No. 22, which methods and metrics that apply to manufacturers to develop their own test
provides a regulatory structure for determination of compliance, and procedure for determining UBE for BEV
contracting parties to set standards for criteria for establishing battery or for PHEV, we are finalizing specific
battery durability in BEVs and durability and monitor families. criteria for such a test procedure to
PHEVs.876 The European Commission For BEV, we requested comment as to ensure it produces accurate results that
and other contracting parties have also the desirability of EPA defining a are representative of in-use operation.
recognized the importance of durability standard procedure for determining These provisions bound the parameters
provisions and are working to adopt the UBE. 88 FR 26015. We received of each manufacturer-specific test
GTR standards in their local regulatory comments both supporting and procedure. The first requirement is that
structures. objecting to EPA defining such a the test procedure must measure UBE by
EPA concurs with the emerging standard test procedure. We are not discharging the battery at a constant
consensus that battery durability is an finalizing a specific procedure at this power that is representative of the
important issue. The ability of a zero- time due to the range of HD BEV vehicle cruising on the highway. For
emission vehicle to achieve the architectures and the limited test many HD vehicles the power to cruise
expected emission reductions during its facilities for conducting powertrain on the highway would result in a C-rate
lifetime depends in part on the ability testing of BEV with e-axles. In addition, between C/6 and C/2.879 The second
of the battery to maintain sufficient we are not requiring pack level testing requirement is that the test is complete
driving range, capacity, power, and for the determination of UBE, as when the battery is not able to maintain
general operability for a period of use the target power. The third requirement
allowing for vehicle level testing would
comparable to that expected of a is that the battery energy measurements
enable easier verification of UBE with
conventional vehicle. Durable and must meet the requirements defined in
in-use vehicles. The final rule instead
reliable electrified vehicles are therefore 40 CFR 1036.545(a)(10). The final
requires manufacturers to develop and
critical to ensuring that projected requirement is that the SOH monitor
get EPA approval of their own test
emissions reductions are achieved by must be able to determine the UBE
procedure for determining UBE that
this program. The durability monitoring within +/¥ 5 percent of the result of the
meets the criteria that is described in
regulations will require manufacturers test procedure. The finalized accuracy
this section. With the SOCE being a
of BEVs and PHEVs to develop and requirement for the SOH monitor is
relative measure of battery health and
implement an on-board state-of- supported by GTR No. 22 and by
certified-energy (SOCE) monitor that not absolute UBE, we believe that
comments to the proposal.
can be read by the vehicle user. These leaving the test procedure up to the We requested comment on finalizing
requirements are similar to the battery manufacturer will still provide a a state-of-certified-range (SOCR)
durability monitor regulation framework meaningful measure of the health of the monitor. 88 FR 26015. In response, we
developed by the UN ECE and adopted battery. We also believe that requiring received one comment supporting EPA
in 2022 as GTR No. 22. We did not the SOH to be customer-accessible will finalizing an SOCR monitor and many
propose and are not finalizing durability provide assurance that the SOH monitor comments in opposition. As stated by
monitoring requirements for FCEV is relatively accurate. some commenters, the range of a HD
manufacturers at this time because the For PHEV, manufacturers will use the BEV is highly dependent on the duty
technology is currently still emerging in existing powertrain test procedures cycle and payload of the vehicle. Since
heavy-duty vehicle applications, and we defined in 40 CFR 1036.545 to an SOCR monitor is not likely to
are still learning what the appropriate determine UBE, or a manufacturer- provide useful information to the driver,
metric might be for quantifying FCEV specific alternative test procedure.877 we are not finalizing a requirement for
performance. The regulatory powertrain test an SOCR monitor at this time. A
The Administrator has determined procedures require that PHEVs be tested complete list of the comments and our
that GTR No. 22, which was developed in charge depleting and charge response can be found in section 11 of
with extensive input from EPA, sustaining modes using a range of the response to comments document.
provides an appropriate framework and vehicle configurations. Under the final We believe that the new requirement
set of requirements for ensuring battery procedure, PHEV manufacturers would to have an SOH monitor, buttressed by
durability and should be integrated into select the most representative vehicle the manufacturer-specific test for
the context of this rulemaking for this configuration to determine UBE for the determining UBE, will assure that these
purpose. The requirements and general powertrain family. In addition to this vehicles meet standards throughout
framework of the battery durability test procedure, the final rule allows their useful life, per sections 202(a)(1)
program under this rule are therefore manufacturers to develop and get EPA and 202(d) of the CAA. In addition, the
largely identical to those outlined in approval of their own test procedures SOH monitor should provide consumers
GTR No. 22 and broadly parallel the for determining UBE for PHEV. We are with assurance of durability, and an
GTR in terms of the hardware, finalizing this option since some ability to monitor it.
monitoring and compliance manufacturers may use the same battery In addition, under the EPA GHG
pack for their BEV and PHEV products, program, BEV and PHEV generate
875 United Nations Economic Commission for and using the same procedure will credits that can be traded among
Europe, Addendum 22: United Nations Global reduce testing burden and variability in manufacturers and used to offset deficits
Technical Regulation No. 22, United Nations Global the determination of UBE.878 generated by vehicles using other
Technical Regulation on In-vehicle Battery technologies that do not themselves
Durability for Electrified Vehicles, April 14, 2022.
Available at: https://unece.org/sites/default/files/ 877 We are moving the existing powertrain meet the standards, as well as used to
2022-04/ECE_TRANS_180a22e.pdf. procedure from its current location in 40 CFR offset debits generated by the
876 EPA representatives chaired the informal 1037.550 to the heavy-duty highway engine
working group that developed this GTR and worked provisions as a new 40 CFR 1036.545. See section 879 C-rate is a measure of the rate at which a
closely with global regulatory agencies and industry III.C.3 of this preamble for more information. battery is discharged or charged relative to its
partners to complete its development in a form that 878 This flexibility is in response to a comment maximum capacity and has units of inverse hours.
could be adopted in various regions of the world, that we received from Cummins, that is At a 2C discharge rate, it would take 0.5 hours to
including potentially the United States. summarized in RTC section 11. fully discharge a battery.
184
Fmt 4701
manufacturer’s own fleet (i.e., vehicle later BEV and FCEV batteries and emission reductions achieved over the
families across each averaging set). Part associated emission-related electric life of the vehicle.
of the credit-generating calculation is powertrain components (e.g., fuel-cell We did not propose new battery
the useful life of the vehicle, as stack, electric motors, and inverters) warranty requirements for PHEVs. As
specified in 40 CFR 1037.105(e) and under the authority of CAA section ‘‘hybrid system components’’ they
1037.106(e). See 40 CFR 1037.705(b) 207(a)(1) and clarifying how existing already have warranty requirements
(formula). If credits generated by warranty requirements apply for under the existing regulations in 40 CFR
vehicles using these powertrains are PHEVs.880 The battery warranty parts 1036 and 1037. In the HD2027 low
used to offset debits created by other requirements we describe in this section NOX rule, we finalized a provision
vehicles on an equivalent basis, it is build on existing emissions warranty stating that when a manufacturer’s
important that the vehicles achieve this provisions for other emission-related certified configuration includes hybrid
specified useful life mileage—mileage components by establishing specific system components (e.g., batteries,
equivalent to what is expected for an new requirements tailored to the electric motors, and inverters), those
ICE vehicle. For BEV and PHEV, this emission control-related role of the components are considered emission-
depends, in substantial part, on the life high-voltage battery and fuel-cell stack related components, which would be
of the battery. The durability provisions in durability and performance of BEVs covered under the warranty
in this final rule, plus the warranty and FCEV. requirements (see, e.g., 88 FR 4363,
provisions described in the following EPA believes that this practice of January 24, 2023, and 40 CFR 1036.120).
preamble section, provide additional ensuring a minimum level of warranty We are revising 40 CFR 1036.120(c) to
assurance that the battery will perform protection for emissions-related clarify that the warranty requirements of
over this useful life mileage. Again, the components on ICE vehicles, including 40 CFR part 1036 apply to hybrid
durability provisions in this rule help hybrid vehicles, should be extended to system components for any hybrid
provide a safeguard. the high-voltage battery and other manufacturers certifying to the part
electric powertrain components of BEVs 1036 engine standards. In 40 CFR
2. Battery and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle and FCEVs for multiple reasons. 1037.120(c), we are also finalizing our
Component Warranty Recognizing that BEVs and FCEVs are proposal to remove the sentence stating
Recognizing that BEV, PHEV, and playing an increasing role in that the emission-related warranty does
FCEV are playing an increasing role in manufacturers’ compliance strategies, not need to cover components whose
manufacturers’ compliance strategies we the high-voltage battery and the failure would not increase a vehicle’s
proposed new warranty requirements powertrain components that depend on emissions of any regulated pollutant,
for BEV and FCEV batteries and it are emission control devices critical to and replacing this sentence with ‘‘and
associated emission-related components the operation and emission performance any other components whose failure
(e.g., fuel-cell stack, electric motors, and of BEVs and FCEVs, as they play a would increase a vehicle’s CO2
inverters) and proposed to clarify how critical role in allowing BEVs and emissions’’ to the existing sentence that
existing warranty requirements apply FCEVs to operate with zero tailpipe states the emission-related warranty
for PHEVs. In response to this proposal, emissions. Further, EPA anticipates that covers components included in the
we received many comments supporting compliance with the program is likely to application for certification.
the proposed warranty requirements. be achieved with larger penetrations of In response to the comments stating
We also received comments encouraging BEVs and FCEVs than under the that EPA should define which
EPA to define which components are previous program. Although the components are covered and what
covered and what failures are covered projected emissions reductions are failures are covered under the emissions
under the warranty. A complete list of based on a spectrum of control warranty, we have made the following
the comments and our responses is technologies, in light of the cost- changes. First, we are clarifying that the
included in section 11.2 of the response effective reductions achieved, especially RESS (also known as the high-voltage
to comments document. by BEV and FCEVs s, EPA anticipates battery) and associated electric
In consideration of the comments and most if not all manufacturers will powertrain components in the vehicle’s
that BEV, PHEV, and FCEV are playing include credits generated by BEVs and application for certification are covered
an increasing role in manufacturers’ FCEVs as part of their compliance under the emission-related warranty.
compliance strategies, we are strategies, even if those credits are Second, we are finalizing text in 40 CFR
identifying the high-voltage battery, and obtained from other manufacturers; thus 1037.205(b) stating that ‘‘For any
the powertrain components that depend this is a particular concern given that vehicle using RESS (such as hybrid
on it (including fuel-cell stack, electric the calculation of credits for averaging vehicles, FCEV, and BEV), describe in
motors, and inverters), as ‘‘emission- (as well as banking and trading) depend detail all components needed to charge
related components’’ in HD vehicles on the battery and emission the system, store energy, and transmit
under 40 CFR 1037.120(c) (components performance being maintained for the power to move the vehicle.’’ 881 By
covered by warranty), as they play a full useful life of the vehicle. making these two changes we believe
critical role in reducing the vehicles’ Additionally, warranty provisions are a that we have defined which components
emissions and allowing BEV and FCEV strong complement to the battery are covered, while leaving the
to have zero tailpipe emissions in-use, durability requirements described in the requirements general enough to cover
see section I.B of this preamble. As EMA previous section. We believe that a technologies that are not currently in
notes in its comments, ‘‘[t]raditional component under warranty is more the market. As for the comments on
emission-related warranty requirements likely to be properly maintained and defining what failures are covered under
serve the useful purpose of motivating the emissions warranty, we are not
repaired or replaced if it fails, which

a trucking company to keep the would help ensure that credits granted
emissions control systems functioning for BEV and FCEVs sales represent real
881 Rechargeable Energy Storage System (RESS)
properly throughout each vehicle’s means engine or equipment components that store
recovered energy for later use to propel the vehicle
useful life.’’ 880 See section I.D. of this preamble and in this or accomplish a different primary function.
As such, we are finalizing new section III.B for further discussion of EPA’s Examples of RESS include the battery system or a
warranty requirements for MY 2027 and authority under CAA section 207(a)(1). hydraulic accumulator in a hybrid vehicle.
185
Fmt 4701
finalizing any changes, as the current C. Additional Revisions to the contribution of curb idle transmission
warranty requirements already provide Regulations torque (CITT), while 40 CFR
the framework for manufacturers to In this subsection, we discuss 1065.610(d)(3)(v) through (viii) requires
define the specific failures that are revisions to 40 CFR parts 1036, 1037, smoothing based on CITT and says
covered under warranty, as they have and 1065. After consideration of nothing about how to address idle
done for many years. We also received comments,883 many of the updates accessory torque. This could create
comment that only the high-voltage described in this section I.C.5 we are confusion and difficulties for common
battery and fuel cell should be covered finalizing as proposed, however in some cases where CITT is required in
by the emissions warranty. Although we cases we have updated the final addition to the 40 CFR 1036.514 idle
agree that the high-voltage battery and revisions from those proposed and are accessory torques. 40 CFR
fuel cell should be covered, these are finalizing additional clarifications and 1036.514(c)(3), as currently written,
not the only components that enable editorial corrections. We intend for the would only apply if the transmission
ZEV to have a zero CO2 grams per mile changes to testing and other certification was in neutral, because it only allows
from the tailpipe. These reductions are procedures finalized in this rule to be you to account for the accessory load
also dependent on the components that entirely separate from the Phase 3 and not CITT, which was not EPA’s
allow charging the system, storing emissions standards and other varied intent. To illustrate the concern, for
energy, and transmitting power to move components of this rule, and severable example, a MHD engine could have an
the vehicle, and as such we are from each other. These are changes EPA LLC idle accessory load of 23.5 foot-
requiring manufacturers to include is making related to implementation of pounds, which is 19 percent of a typical
these components in the vehicle’s standards generally (i.e., independent of automatic transmission CITT of 124
application for certification and cover the numeric stringency of the standards foot-pounds. To resolve this potential
them with the emissions warranty. We set in this final rule). EPA has issue, we are removing the smoothing
are finalizing as proposed that those considered and adopted changes to instructions in 40 CFR 1036.514 and
components be covered by the existing testing and other certification incorporating them into 40 CFR
regulations’ emissions warranty periods procedures and the remaining portions 1065.610.
of 5 years or 50,000 miles for Light HDV of the final rule independently, and The original intent of the 40 CFR
and 5 years or 100,000 miles for each is severable should there be 1065.610 duty-cycle generation
Medium HDV and Heavy HDV (see judicial review. If a court were to procedure was to avoid discontinuities
revisions to 40 CFR 1037.120). invalidate any one of these elements of in the reference torque values. It was
The warranty provisions are a strong the final rule, the remainder of this written with the assumption that idle
complement to the proposed battery action remains fully operable, as we load in neutral was zero, meaning the
durability monitoring requirements. As have designed the program to function vehicle or machine idle accessory load
explained, EPA anticipates that most if even if one part of the rule is set aside. was zero. When we introduced the
not all manufacturers would include the required LLC idle accessory load in 40
averaging of credits generated by BEVs 1. Updates for Cross-Sector Issues CFR 1036.514, we failed to realize that
and FCEVs as part of their compliance This section includes updates that amendments would be needed to 40
strategies for the final standards. Thus, make the same or similar changes in CFR 1065.610(d)(3) to clarify how to
as noted in the previous section on related portions of the CFR or across handle the accessory load in the
durability, emission credits would be multiple standard-setting parts for denormalization process. The engine
calculated assuming the battery individual industry sectors. mapping section 40 CFR 1065.510 is
sufficiently maintains its performance another area of concern as it does not
i. LLC Cycle Smoothing and Accessory address the possibility of droop in the
for the full useful life of the vehicle. 40 Load
CFR 1037.705(b) (formula). We believe a idle governor, which would result in
component under warranty is more We finalized a new LLC duty-cycle in different idle speeds when the
likely to be properly maintained and the HD2027 rule that included a test transmission is in drive versus neutral.
repaired or replaced if it fails, which procedure for smoothing the nonidle This results in an additional
could help ensure that credits granted nonmotoring points immediately before complication as the required idle
for BEV and FCEV production volumes and after idle segments within the duty- accessory torque will be different in
represent real emission reductions cycle.884 It was brought to our attention drive versus neutral to keep the
that the smoothing procedure in 40 CFR accessory power at the level specified in
achieved over the life of the vehicle.
1036.514(c)(3) allows smoothing based table 1 to 40 CFR 1036.514(c)(4).
Finally, we expect many manufacturers
on the idle accessory torque but says Paragraph (d)(4) of 40 CFR 1065.610
will provide warranties beyond the is a related paragraph that allows a
existing 40 CFR 1037.120 levels for the nothing about how to address the
different deviation for an optional
BEV and FCEV they produce, and the declared minimum torque that applies
fifteen years according to https://www.nyapt.org/
new requirements to require those resources/Documents/WRI_ESB-Buyers-Guide_US- to variable- and constant-speed engines
warranty periods and document them in Market_2022.pdf. Lastly, the Freightliner electric and both idle and nonidle nonmotoring
the owner’s manual would provide walk-in van includes an eight-year battery warranty
points in the duty-cycle. Its scope of
additional assurance for owners that all according to https://www.electricwalkinvan.com/
wp-content/uploads/2022/05/MT50e-specifications- application is wider than 40 CFR
BEV and FCEV have the same minimum 2022.pdf. 1065.610(d)(3). Paragraph (d)(4) of 40
warranty period.882 883 EPA participates in on-going Emissions
CFR 1065.610 applies to all nonidle
Measurement & Testing Committee meetings and
882 For example, the Freightliner eCascadia notes that certain clarifying and editorial revisions
nonmotoring points in the duty-cycle,
included in the final rule described in this section not just the ones immediately preceding
includes a powertrain warranty of 5 year/150,000 or

300,000 miles (depending on battery pack size). III.C were supported by the engine and vehicle or following an idle segment and using
Available at: https://dtnacontent- manufacturers and other industry stakeholders it instead of paragraph (d)(3) would not
dtna.prd.freightliner.com/content/dam/enterprise/ participating in those meetings. See memo to docket
EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985: Laroo, Christopher.
get the intended constant idle accessory
documents/DDCTEC%2016046%20-
%20eCascadia%20Spec%20Sheet_6.0.pdf (last ‘‘Test Procedure Meetings with the Engine power loads or the intended smoothing.
accessed October 30, 2023). In addition, Type C Manufacturers Association’’. There is also an existing historical
BEV school bus battery warranty range five to 884 88 FR 4296 (January 24, 2023). conflict between 40 CFR 1065.510(f)(4)
186
Fmt 4701
and 1065.610(d)(4). Paragraph (f)(4) of transmission where optional declared segments for LLC engine and hybrid
40 CFR 1065.510 requires that idle torque and the optional declared powertrain testing. Shifting the
manufacturers declare non-zero idle, or power are not declared (idle torque is transmission to neutral during very long
minimum torques, but 40 CFR zero). This provides labs that have not idle segments is more representative of
1065.610(d)(4), permissible deviations, yet implemented these required in-use operation than leaving it in drive,
make their use within the duty-cycle deviations the option to not implement so we proposed and are finalizing more
generation optional. This results in an them if they only need to run tests with specific shift points instead of a range
inconsistency between the two sections manual transmissions with zero idle to reduce lab-to-lab variability. The new
as 40 CFR 1065.510(f)(4) requires these torque. We also add manual shift points include setting the reference
parameters to be declared, but 40 CFR transmissions to 40 CFR 1065.512(b)(2) speed and torque values to the warm-
1065.610(d)(4) does not require them to where these required deviations in 40 idle-in-drive values for the first three
be used. CFR 1065.610 are cited. seconds and the last three seconds of
Additionally, there is a historical We are also revising 40 CFR the idle segment for an engine test,
conflict in 40 CFR 1065.610(d)(3)(v). 1065.510(b) and (f) to address the effect keeping the transmission in drive for the
This paragraph, as written, includes of droop in the idle governor and how first 3 seconds of the idle segment,
zero percent speed and, if the paragraph to determine idle speed when idle shifting the transmission from drive to
is executed in the order listed, it would torque is a function of idle speed (where park or neutral immediately after the
include idle points that were changed to a component is specified as power or third second in the idle segment, and
neutral in the previous step for neutral CITT is specified as a function of speed shifting the transmission into drive
while stationary transmissions. This and the idle speeds need to be again three seconds before the end of
conflict would change the torque values determined for each setpoint of the idle the idle segment.
of those idle-in-neutral points back to governor). We are also adding an option
the warm-idle-in-drive torque and the to declare the warm idle speed(s) equal ii. Calculating Greenhouse Gas Emission
speed would be left unaltered at the to the idle speed setpoint for Rates
idle-in-neutral speed. This was clearly electronically governed variable-speed We are revising 40 CFR 1036.550(b)(2)
not the intent of this paragraph, yet we engines with an isochronous low-speed and 1054.501(b)(7) to clarify that when
note that this conflict existed already for governor. Recent updates to the determining the test fuel’s carbon mass
regulations that applied to model year mapping test procedure in 40 CFR fraction, WC, the fuel properties that
1990 engines. 1065.510 assumed that one could must be measured areE T=’8153’≤a/E≤
The smoothing of idle points also declare the warm idle speed(s) equal to (hydrogen) and β (oxygen). These
raises the need for smoothing of the few the idle speed setpoint for electronically paragraphs, as currently written, imply
occurances of non-idle points in the governed variable-speed engines when that you cannot use the default fuel
duty cycle where the vehicle may be running the map at the minimum user- properties in 40 CFR 1065.655 for α, β,
moving, the torque converter may not be adjustable idle speed setpoint and using γ (sulfur), and δ (nitrogen). The fuel
stalled, and the warm-idle-in-drive the map for any test.885 We are property determination in 40 CFR
torque may not be appropriate. This finalizing the proposed changes to make 1065.655(e) makes it clear that if
would result in the smoothing of it clear that this option is allowed, manufacturers measure fuel properties
consecutive points around nonidle which would help simplify the mapping and the default γ and δ values for their
nonmotoring points with normalized process. fuel type are zero in Table 2 to 40 CFR
speed at or below zero percent and To resolve the conflict between 40 1065.655, manufacturers do not need to
reference torque from zero to the warm- CFR 1065.510(f)(4) and 1065.610(d)(4), measure those properties. The sulfur (γ)
idle-in-drive torque value where the we are moving the requirement to and nitrogen (δ) content of these highly
reference torque is set to the warm-idle- declare torques to 40 CFR refined gasoline and diesel fuels are not
in-drive torque value. 1065.510(f)(5), which would clarify it is enough to affect the WC determination
To address these concerns, we are optional and consistent with 40 CFR and the original intent was to not
revising 40 CFR 1065.510, 1065.512, 1065.610(d)(4). require their measurement. We expect
and 1065.610. Note, other changes to To resolve the conflict in 40 CFR the revisions to reduce confusion on the
these subsections not specifically 1065.610(c)(3)(v), which we are fuel properties requirement. We are also
mentioned here are edits to fix citations redesignating as 40 CFR adding a reference to 40 CFR
to relocated or new paragraphs and to 1065.610(c)(3)(vii), we are revising the 1065.655(e) in 40 CFR 1036.550(b)(2)
improve the clarity of the test applicability of the paragraph from ‘‘all and 1054.501(b)(7) so that they point to
procedures. The changes to 40 CFR points’’ to limit it to apply to ‘‘all the default fuel property table whose
1065.610 include basing the smoothing nonidle nonmotoring points.’’ To number had been previously changed
of points preceding an idle segment and address the smoothing of consecutive and we did not make the corresponding
following an idle segment on the warm- nonidle nonmotoring points that update in 40 CFR 1036.550(b)(2) and
idle-in-drive torque value (sum of CITT immediately follow and precede any 1054.501(b)(7).
and idle accessory torque). Exceptions smoothed idle points we are changing
to this are for manual transmissions and iii. ABT Reporting
the reference torques to the warm-idle-
for the first 24 seconds of initial idle in-drive torque value by adding a new We are finalizing a proposed
segments for automatic transmissions. 40 CFR 1065.610(c)(3)(xi). allowance for manufacturers to correct
Here the warm-idle-in-neutral torque We are also reorganizing 40 CFR previously submitted vehicle and
value (idle accessory torque) is used. We 1036.514 and revising the section to engine GHG ABT reports, where a
are including manual transmissions in clarify the process for cycle mathematical or other error in the GEM-
the required deviations for reference denormalization of speed and torque based or fleet calculations used for
torque determination for variable-speed where accessory load is included and to compliance was discovered after the
engines in 40 CFR 1065.610(d)(3) for add more specific transmission shift September 30 deadline for submitting
completeness. The amendments to 40 points for greater than 200 seconds idle the final report. In the Phase 1 program,
CFR 1065.610(d)(3) include the option EPA chose the deadline for submitting
to skip these deviations for a manual 885 88 FR 4296 (January 24, 2023). a final GHG ABT report to coincide with
187
Fmt 4701
existing criteria pollutant report GEM-based errors after a manufacturer measured torque and validate that the
requirements that manufacturers follow submits the 270-day final report (see speed control meets the requirements
for heavy-duty engines.886 The deadline revisions in 40 CFR 1037.730) is defined in 40 CFR 1036.545(m). Positive
was based on our interest in intended to address the cycle work, W[cycle], would then be
manufacturers maintaining good quality disproportionate and adverse financial determined by integrating the sum of
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) impact of an unintentional error in the the power measured at each location in
processes in generating ABT reports. We complex modeling and accounting 40 CFR 1036.545(o)(7).
continue to believe that aligning the processes that manufacturers use to We are also clarifying that
ABT report deadlines for criteria and determine compliance and credit manufacturers may test the powertrain
GHG pollutants can provide consistency balances for a given model year. We with a chassis dynamometer as long as
within a manufacturer’s certification proposed and are finalizing a 10 percent they measure speed and torque at the
and compliance processes, but further discount to these credit corrections to powertrain’s output shaft or wheel hubs.
consideration of the inherent differences the final report, which will reduce the We are replacing all references to 40
and complexities in how credits are value of the credits that are restored CFR 1037.550 throughout 40 CFR parts
calculated and accounted for in the two upon approval of the request. The 10 1036 and 1037 with new references to
programs led us to consider a time percent discount is intended to balance 40 CFR 1036.545. We are clarifying that
window beyond 270 days for allowing the goal of encouraging accuracy in ABT when creating GEM inputs, if speed and
corrections to the GHG report. Certifying reports and use of robust QA/QC torque are measured at more than one
an engine or vehicle fleet with attribute- processes against the considerations for location, determine W[cycle] by
based features (Phase 1) or GEM (Phase allowing manufacturers the ability to integrating the sum of the power
2) involves a greater risk of error correct unforeseen errors. calculated from speed and torque
compared to EPA’s engine or vehicle measurements at each location.
iv. Migration of 40 CFR 1037.550 to 40
test-based programs for criteria Finally, we received comment from
CFR 1036.545
pollutants, where direct measurement of multiple stakeholders that
criteria pollutant emissions at time of We are migrating the powertrain test improvements are needed to reduce the
certification is well established. procedure from the heavy-duty motor test burden of the hybrid powertrain test
Whether an indirect, physics-based vehicle regulations in 40 CFR part 1037 procedure. As discussed in RTC section
model for quantifying GHG emissions to the heavy-duty highway engine 24.1.4, many of these suggested changes
such as GEM, or a unique technology- regulations in 40 CFR part 1036.
are out of scope for this rule. However,
, attribute-, or engine production Specifically, we are migrating the
EPA is constantly reviewing its test
volume-based credit accounting system, procedure from 40 CFR 1037.550 to 40
procedures and in the future EPA
unintentional errors, if not detected CFR 1036.545. Over the course of the
intends to work with manufacturers and
prior to submitting the final GHG ABT development of this test procedure, its
stakeholders to further streamline
report and not realized until the use expanded to include certification of
hybrid certification.
accounting process for the following engines to the criteria pollutant
model year was initiated, could standards in 40 CFR part 1036 v. Median Calculation for Test Fuel
negatively affect a manufacturer’s credit (including test procedures in 40 CFR Properties in 40 CFR 1036.550
balance. For example, the loss of these 1036.510, 1036.512, and 1036.514) and The regulation at 40 CFR 1036.550
credits could result in a manufacturer the procedure can be used in place of currently requires the use of the median
purchasing credits or making unplanned the engine GHG testing procedures (40 value of measurements from multiple
investments in additional technologies CFR 1036.535 and 1036.540) for hybrid labs for the emission test fuel’s carbon-
to make up for the credits lost due to the engines and hybrid powertrains. We are mass-specific net energy content and
report error. migrating the test procedure to 40 CFR carbon mass fraction for manufacturers
Under the revisions to 40 CFR 1036.545 as-is, with the following to determine the corrected CO2 emission
1036.730(f) and 1037.730(f), EPA would exceptions: rate using equation 1036.550–1 in 40
consider requests to correct previously We are adding a new figure that
CFR 1036.550. The current procedure
submitted MY 2021 or later ABT reports provides an overview of the steps
does not provide a method for
only when notified of the error within involved in carrying out testing under
determining the median value. We
24 months from the September 30 final this section.
proposed to add a new calculation for
report deadline. For requests to correct We are clarifying the use of the GEM
the median value in the statistics
reports for MY 2020 or earlier, we have HIL model contained within GEM Phase
calculation procedures of 40 CFR
set an interim deadline of October 1, 2, Version 4.0 if it is used to simulate
1065.602 as a new paragraph (m) to
2024 (see new 40 CFR 1036.150(aa) and a vehicle’s automatic transmission. If
ensure that labs are using the same
1037.150(y)). We believe that the engine is intended for vehicles with
method to calculate the median value.
corrections to ABT reports, where automatic transmissions, the
We also proposed to reference the new
justified, will have no impact on manufacturer must use the cycle
paragraph (m) in 40 CFR
emissions compliance as the actual configuration file in GEM to change the
1036.550(a)(1)(i) and (a)(2)(i) for carbon-
performance of a manufacturer’s fleet transmission state (either in-gear or idle)
mass-specific net energy content and
was better than what was reported in as a function of time as defined by the
carbon mass fraction, respectively. We
error, and correcting the report simply duty cycles in 40 CFR part 1036.
We are clarifying the recommended are finalizing the new median
adjusts the credit balance for the model calculation procedure as proposed.
year in question to the appropriate means to control and apply the
value, such that those credits can then electrical accessory loads for 2. Updates to 40 CFR Part 1036 Heavy-
be used in future model years. powertrains tested over the LLC duty Duty Highway Engine Provisions
This narrowly focused allowance for cycle.
We are clarifying that if the test setup i. Manufacturer Run Heavy-Duty In-Use
correcting accounting, typographical, or Testing
has multiple locations where torque is
886 See the HD GHG Phase 1 rule (76 FR 57284, measured and speed is controlled, the We are adding a clarification to 40
September 15, 2011). manufacturer is required to sum the CFR 1036.405(d) regarding the starting
188
Fmt 4701
point for the 18-month window during the LLC because the allowance to v. U.S.-Directed Production Volume
manufacturers have to complete an indo this is convered in 40 CFR In the recent HD2027 rule, we
use test order. Under the current 1065.140(b)(2). The LLC consists of a amended the heavy-duty highway
provision, the clock for the 18-month very long test interval and the intent of engine provision in 40 CFR 1036.205
window starts after EPA has received the provision was to address emission and several other sections to replace
the manufacturer’s proposed plan for bag sampling systems that do not have ‘‘U.S.-directed production volume’’ with
recruiting, screening, and selecting enough dynamic range to sample the more general term ‘‘nationwide’’
vehicles. There is concern that background constantly over the entire where we intended manufacturers
manufacturers could delay testing by duration of the LLC. Paragraph (b)(2) of report total nationwide production
unnecessarily prolonging the selection 40 CFR 1065.140 affords many volumes, including production volumes
process. To alleviate this concern and flexibilities regarding the measurement that meet different state standards.
keep the testing timeline within the of background concentrations, including In this rule, for the reasons explained
originally intended 18-month window, in section I.A.1, we are finalizing a
sampling over multiple test intervals as
we are revising the 18-month window to broader change to the definition in 40
long as it does not affect manufacturers’
start when EPA issues the order for the CFR 1037.801 such that the phrase
manufacturer to test a particular engine ability to demonstrate compliance with
the applicable emission standards. The ‘‘U.S.-directed production volume’’ no
family. longer excludes production volumes for
In the HD2027 final rule, we adopted final revisions to 40 CFR 1036.514(d)
include additional edits for clarification vehicles certified to different state
a new 40 CFR 1036.420 that includes standards. We are similarly updating the
the pass criteria for individual engines and consistency with other final
definition of ‘‘U.S.-directed production
tested under the manufacturer run in- revisions.
volume’’ for engines in 40 CFR 1036.801
use testing program. Table 1 to 40 CFR iv. Determining Vehicle C Speed Values to maintain consistency between the
1036.420 contains the accuracy margins engine and vehicle regulatory
for Powertrain Testing
for each criteria pollutant. We are definitions. We are also reinstating, as
correcting an inadvertent error in the We are finalizing changes to 40 CFR proposed, the term ‘‘U.S.-directed
final rule’s amendatory text for the 1036.520 to make the procedure more production volume’’ where we
regulations that effects the accuracy robust at determining a representative previously used ‘‘nationwide’’ in 40
margin for carbon monoxide (CO), vehicle C speed. For powertrains where CFR part 1036 to avoid having two
which is listed in Table 1 as 0.025 g/hp- there is no power interrupt as the terms with the same meaning.888
hr. The HD2027 preamble is clear that transmission shifts through gears, the As noted in the proposal, the NOX
the CO accuracy margin that we test procedure can result in an ABT program for HD engines in part
finalized was intended to be 0.25 g/hp- unrepresentatively high vehicle C 1036 excludes production volumes
hr and we are correcting Table 1 to certified to different state standards in
speed. This is because the test
reflect the value in that rule’s its credit calculations, and we proposed
procedure assumes maximum
preamble.887 clarifying updates throughout 40 CFR
powertrain power as a function of speed
ii. Low Load Cycle (LLC)—Cycle for each gear will start low, and then part 1036 to ensure no change to those
Statistics reach the peak power before dropping existing exclusions in tandem with the
proposed change to the definition of the
We are updating 40 CFR 1036.514 to again. If the powertrain does not have
term ‘‘U.S.-directed production
address the ability of gaseous fueled multiple speeds where the power is
volume.’’ Most notably, we proposed a
non-hybrid engines with single point equal to 98 percent of peak power, the
new 40 CFR 1036.705(c)(4) as the
fuel injection to pass cycle statistics to vehicle C speed is the highest speed in location where we exclude engines
validate the LLC duty cycle. In 40 CFR top gear. The finalized changes to the certified to different state emission
1036.514(e), we referenced, in error, the procedure in 40 CFR 1036.520(j)(1) standards from being used to calculate
alternate cycle statistics for gaseous address this by using the lowest vehicle emission credits in the HD engine
fueled engines with single point fuel speed in top gear in place of the program.889 Two commenters suggested
injection in the cycle average fuel map minimum vehicle speed where power is revisions to the proposed 40 CFR
section in 40 CFR 1036.540(d)(3) instead greater than 98 percent of peak power. 1036.705(c)(4), indicating manufacturers
of adding LLC specific cycle statistics in We are also adding a new 40 CFR may certify their engines to both
40 CFR 1036.514(e). We are adding a 1036.520(j)(3) to allow manufacturers to California and Federal standards to
new table 2 in 40 CFR 1036.514(b) to use a declared vehicle C speed instead ensure that engines can be sold
provide cycle statistics that are identical of the measured value if the declared nationwide. Under the proposed
to those used by the California Air value is within (97.5 to 102.5) percent definition, manufacturers would not be
Resources Board for the LLC and to of the corresponding measured value. allowed to include engines certified to
remove the reference to 40 CFR the California standards in their credit
For series hybrids the powertrain may
1036.540(d)(3) in 40 CFR 1036.514(e). calculations, even if the engine was
have only one, two or three gears in the
iii. Low Load Cycle (LLC)—Background transmission or e-axle so the average of never sold in California (or in a state
Sampling the minimum and maximum speeds that adopted California standards). After
where power is greater than 98 percent considering these comments and noting
We are removing the provision in 40 that we never intended to discourage
CFR 1036.514(d) that allows periodic of peak power in top gear, may result in
an unrepresentatively low vehicle C manufacturers from certifying a
background sampling into the bag over
the course of multiple test intervals speed. To address this issue, we are
888 We proposed and are finalizing revisions in 40

finalizing a new 40 CFR 1036.520(j)(4), CFR 1036.205(v), 1036.250(a), 1036.405(a),
887 See HD2027 final rule preamble (88 FR 4353, which directs a manufacturer to request 1036.605(e), 1036.725(b), and 1036.730(b).
January 24, 2023) (‘‘PEMS measurement allowance EPA approval for a representative 889 We are finalizing as proposed the revision to
values in 40 CFR 86.1912 are 0.01 g/hp-hr for HC, vehicle C speed if the procedure results move the statement to keep records relating to those
0.25 g/hp-hr for CO, 0.15 g/hp-hr for NOX, and production volumes from its current location in 40
0.006 g/hp-hr for PM. We are maintaining the same in a vehicle C speed that is lower than CFR 1036.705(c) to 40 CFR 1036.735 with the other
values for HC, CO, and PM in this rulemaking.’’). the cruise speed of the powertrain. ABT recordkeeping requirements.
189
Fmt 4701
complete engine family to California- also finalizing the correction of a ix. Determining Power and Vehicle
level standards, we are further revising paragraph reference error in 40 CFR Speed Values for Powertrain Testing
the proposed provision to exclude 1036.520(h). The paragraph references We are finalizing revisions to 40 CFR
engines if they are certified to different the data collected in paragraph (f)(2) of 1036.520(d)(2) to address the possibility
state standards and intended for sale in the section. The data collection takes of clutch slip when performing the full
a state that adopted those different place in paragraph (d)(2) of the section. load acceleration with maximum driver
emission standards.890
viii. Selection of Drive Axle Ratio and demand at 6.0 percent road grade where
vi. Correction to NOX ABT FEL Cap Tire Radius for Hybrid Engine and the initial vehicle speed is 0 mi/hr. The
We are finalizing an amendment to 40 revision allows hybrid engines and
Hybrid Powertrain Testing
CFR 1036.104 to remove paragraph hybrid powertrains to increase the
(c)(2)(iii) which corresponds to a FEL We are finalizing changes to the drive initial speed from 0 miles per hour to
cap of 70 mg/hp-hr for MY 2031 and axle ratio and tire radius selection 5 miles per hour to mitigate clutch slip.
later Heavy HDE that we proposed in paragraphs in 40 CFR 1036.510(b)(2)(vii) This change in initial speed will reduce
HD2027 but did not intend to include in and (viii), that includes combining the the extreme force on the clutch when
the final amendatory text. In the final selection process into a single paragraph accelerating at 6.0 percent grade. We are
rule for the HD2027 rule, we did not (b)(2)(vii). When testing hybrid engines not finalizing the second option
intend to include in the final and hybrid powertrains a series of proposed that allowed modification of
amendatory text paragraph (c)(2)(iii) the road grade during the first 30
vehicle parameters must be selected.
alongside the final FEL cap of 50 mg/hp- seconds of the full load acceleration, as
The paragraphs for selecting drive axle
hr for MY 2031 and later which applies the option to start at a higher initial
ratio and tire radius are separate from
to all HD engine service classes speed will do a better job at reducing
each other, however the selection of the the effects of the low-end torque, which
including Heavy HDE in paragraph drive axle ratio must be done in
(c)(2)(ii) described by EPA in the is the cause of clutch slip.
conjunction with the tire radius as not We are finalizing a revision to 40 CFR
preamble and supporting rule record. all tire sizes are offered with a given
We are finalizing the correction of this 1036.520(d)(3) to address situations
drive axle ratio. We are finalizing the where the powertrain does not reach
error and removing paragraph (c)(2)(iii). combination of these paragraphs into
This correction will not impact the maximum power in the highest gear 30
one to eliminate any possible confusion seconds after the grade setpoint has
stringency of the final NOX standards
on the selection of these two reached 0.0 percent. To address this we
because even without correction
parameters. are replacing the 30 second time limit
paragraph (c)(2)(ii) controls.891
The maximum vehicle speed for SET with a speed change stability limit of
vii. Rated Power and Continuous Rated testing of hybrid engines and 0.02 m/s2 which will trigger the end of
Power Coefficient of Variance in 40 CFR the test.
powertrains is determined based on the
1036.520
vehicle parameters and maximum x. Determining Vehicle Mass in 40 CFR
We are finalizing the correction of an achievable speed for the configuration 1036.510
error and a revision to a provision we in 40 CFR 1036.510. This is not the case
intended to include in HD2027, We requested comment on updating
for the FTP vehicle speed which reaches equation 1036.510–1 of 40 CFR
regarding determining power and a maximum of 60 miles per hour. It has
vehicle speed values for powertrain 1036.510 to better reflect the
been brought to our attention that there relationship of vehicle mass and rated
testing. In 40 CFR 1036.520, paragraphs are some vehicle configurations that
(h) and (i) describe how to determine power. It was brought to EPA’s attention
cannot achieve the FTP maximum speed that with the increase in rated power of
rated power and continuous rated
of 60 mile per hour. To resolve this, we heavy-duty engines, equation 1036.510–
power, respectively, from the 5 Hz data
are finalizing changes to 40 CFR 1 of 40 CFR 1036.510 might need
in paragraph (g) averaged from the 100
Hz data collected during the test. We 1036.510(b)(2)(vii) that instruct the updating to better reflect the
inadvertently left out the coefficient of manufacturer to select a representative relationship of vehicle mass and rated
variance (COV) limits of 2 percent that combination of drive axle ratio and tire power. We are not making any changes
are needed for making the rated and size that ensure a vehicle speed of no to equation 1036.510–1 of 40 CFR
continuous rated power determinations less than 60 miles per hour. We are also 1036.510 at this time because we still
in the HD2027 final 40 CFR 1036.520(h) finalizing the inclusion, as a reminder, consider it to be representative. Further,
and (i), which were intended to be that manufacturers may request we requested comment on this issue and
based on the COVs calculated in 40 CFR approval for selected drive axle ratio received no comments suggesting
1036.520(g) and we correctly included and tire radius consistent with the changes.
in the HD2027 final 40 CFR 1036.520(g). provisions of 40 CFR 1036.210. We are xi. Test Procedure for Engines
We are adding the 2 percent COV limit also finalizing the addition of a Recovering Kinetic Energy for Electric
in 40 CFR 1036.520(h) and (i). We are provision for manufacturers to follow 40 Heaters
CFR 1066.425(b)(5) if the hybrid
890 We are finalizing as proposed revisions that We are finalizing a clarification in the
powertrain or hybrid engine is used
replace several instances of ‘‘U.S.-directed existing definition for hybrid in 40 CFR
exclusively in vehicles which are not
production volume’’ with a more general 1036.801 to add a sentence stating that
‘‘production volume’’ where the text clearly is capable of reaching 60 mi/hr. This
systems recovering kinetic energy to
connected to ABT or add a more specific reference allows the manufacturer to seek power an electric heater for the
to the production volume specified in 40 CFR
approval of an alternate test cycle and aftertreatment do not qualify as a hybrid

1036.705(c). See revisions in 40 CFR 1036.150(d)
and (k), 1036.725(b), and 1036.730(b). cycle-validation criteria for powertrains engine or hybrid powertrain. Under the
891 As EPA explained in the NPRM and elsewhere where the representative tire radius and existing hybrid definition, systems that
in this final rule, EPA did not reopen the final axle ratio do not allow the vehicle to
HD2027 standards, or any other portion of that rule
recover kinetic energy, such as
besides those specifically identified in the NPRM as
achieve the maximum speeds of the regenerative braking, are be considered
subject to new revisions. specified test cycle. ‘‘hybrid components’’ and
190
Fmt 4701
manufacturers were required to use the for each of the applicable duty cycles in the totals from all affiliated companies
powertrain test procedures to account 40 CFR part 1036. For example, you and added a reference to the definition
for the electric heater or use the engine cannot run the powertrain test of affiliated companies in 40 CFR
test procedures and forfeit the emission procedure for the FTP and run the 1068.30.
reductions from heating the engine test procedure for the SET. In
xiii. Miscellaneous Corrections and
aftertreatment system. With this addition, the same test procedure must
Clarifications in 40 CFR Part 1036
clarification to the hybrid definition, be used for all pollutants. For example,
engines that use regenerative braking you may not run the powertrain test We are finalizing as proposed an
only to power an electric heater for procedure for CO2 and the engine test update to 40 CFR 1036.150(j) to clarify
aftertreatment devices are not procedure for NOX. that the alternate standards apply for
considered hybrid engines and, model year 2023 and earlier loose
xii. Updates to 40 CFR Part 1036 engines, which is consistent with
therefore, are not required to use the Definitions
powertrain test procedures; instead, existing 40 CFR 86.1819–14(k)(8).
those engines can use the test We are finalizing new and updated We are finalizing an update to the
procedures for engines without hybrid definitions in 40 CFR 1036.801 in provision describing how to determine
components. support of several requirements we are deterioration factors for exhaust
We are finalizing a supplement to the finalizing in section II or this section III. emission standards in 40 CFR 1036.245
new definitions with direction for We added a reference to two new to clarify that it also applies for hybrid
testing these systems in 40 CFR definitions we are finalizing in 40 CFR powertrains.
1036.501. In the new 40 CFR part 1065: ‘‘Carbon-containing fuel’’ and xiv. Off-Cycle Test Procedure for
1036.501(g), we are clarifying that an ‘‘neat’’. The definition of carbon- Engines That Use Fuels Other Than
electric heater for aftertreatment can be containing fuel will help identify the Carbon-Containing Fuel
installed and functioning when creating applicable test procedures for engines
using fuels that do not contain carbon We are finalizing a new 40 CFR
fuel maps using 40 CFR 1036.505(b) and 1036.530(j) for engines that use fuels
measuring emissions over the duty and would not produce CO2. The
definition of ‘‘neat’’ indicates that a fuel other than carbon-containing fuel. The
cycles specified in 40 CFR 1036.510(b), off-cycle test procedures in 40 CFR
1036.512(b), and 1036.514(b). This is not mixed or diluted with other fuels,
which helps distinguish between fuels 1036.530 use CO2 as a surrogate for
allowance is limited to hybrid engines engine power. This approach works for
where the system recovers less than 10 that contain no carbon, such as
hydrogen, and fuels that contain carbon engines that are fueled with carbon-
percent of the total positive work over containing fuel, since power correlates
each applicable transient cycle and the through mixing, such as hydrogen
where a diesel pilot is used for to fuel mass rate and for carbon-
recovered energy is exclusively used to containing fuels, fuel mass rate is
power an electric heater in the combustion. We are also updating the
definition for ‘‘U.S.-directed production proportional to the CO2 mass rate of the
aftertreatment. Since the small amount exhaust. For fuels other than carbon-
of recovered energy is stored thermally volume’’ of engines to be equivalent to
nationwide production, consistent with containing fuels, the fuel mass rate is
and can’t be used to move the vehicle, not proportional to the CO2 mass rate of
we believe that the engine test the updated definition for vehicles in
part 1037. the exhaust. To address this issue, we
procedures are just as representative of are finalizing that for fuels other than
We are consolidating the definitions
real-world operation as the powertrain carbon-containing fuels, to use engine
of hybrid, hybrid engine, and hybrid
test procedures. The limit of 10 percent powertrain into a single definition of power directly instead of relying on CO2
is based on the amount of negative work ‘‘hybrid’’ with subparagraphs mass rate to determine engine power.
versus positive work typical of distinguishing hybrid engines and For field testing where engine torque
conventional engines over the transient powertrains. The definition of hybrid and speed are not directly measured,
cycle. After evaluating a range of HDE, retains most of the existing definition, engine broadcasted speed and torque
we have observed that the negative work except that we have removed the can be used as described in 40 CFR
from the transient FTP cycle during unnecessary ‘‘electrical’’ qualifier from 1065.915(d)(5).
engine motoring is less than 10 percent batteries and added a statement relating
of the positive work of the transient FTP xv. Onboard Diagnostic and Inducement
to recovering energy to power an
cycle.892 In the same paragraph (g), we Amendments
electric heater in the aftertreatment (see
are finalizing an option for section I.C.2.xi of this preamble). The EPA is amending specific aspects of
manufacturers to use the powertrain test revised definitions for hybrid engines 40 CFR 1036.110 and 1036.111 to add
procedures for these systems, which and powertrains, which are being clarifications and correct minor errors in
does not have the same restrictions we finalized as subparagraphs under the OBD and inducement provisions
are finalizing for the amount of ‘‘hybrid’’, are more complementary of adopted in the HD2027 final rule.893
recovered energy. each other with less redundancy. As Specifically, EPA is adopting the
We are finalizing changes to the noted in section I.C.2.xi, we are following amendments, without change
proposed 40 CFR 1036.501(g), to clarify finalizing updated definitions of hybrid from the proposed rule except as noted.
that for these hybrid engines, the choice engine and hybrid powertrain to • 40 CFR 1036.110(b)(6): Correcting a
to run the powertrain test procedure or exclude systems recovering kinetic reference to the CARB regulation to be
the engine test procedure can be made energy for electric heaters. consistent with our intent as described
separately for measuring emissions and We are finalizing several editorial in the preamble of the final rule (see 88
fuel mapping. The allowance to choose revisions to definitions as well. We are FR 4372) to not require under our
which test procedure to use doesn’t updating the definition of mild hybrid regulations manufacturer self-testing
allow for a unique decision to be made such that it is relating to a hybrid engine
893 As EPA explained in the NPRM and elsewhere
892 Memorandum
or hybrid powertrain. We are revising
to Docket EPA–HQ–OAR– in this final rule, EPA did not reopen any aspect
2022–0985: ‘‘Analysis of Motoring and Positive
the existing definition of small of our OBD and inducement provisions other than
Cycle Work for Current Heavy-Duty Engines’’. manufacturer to clarify that the those clarifications and corrections specifically
James Sanchez. April 4, 2023. employee and revenue limits include identified in the NPRM for this section.
191
Fmt 4701
and reporting requirements as accumulated several hours of very low- ignition standards. This change to 40
referenced in 13 CCR 1971.1(l)(4). speed operation before being placed into CFR 1036.505, is intended to clarify
• 40 CFR 1036.110(b)(9): Clarifying service. We are therefore amending the what was originally intended for fuels
that the list of data parameters readable regulation to specify that engines should that are not specified in table 1 to
by a generic scan tool is limited to not be designed to assess the speed paragraph (b)(4) of 40 CFR 1036.550.
components that are subject to existing category for inducement triggering This clarification addresses the
OBD monitoring requirements (e.g., conditions until the vehicle has potential situation where, if a fuel is
through comprehensive component accumulated 30 hours of non-idle input into GEM other than the fuel types
requirements in 13 CCR 1971.1(g)(3)). operation. Manufacturers should instead identified in table 1 to paragraph (b)(4)
For example, if parking brake status was program engines with a setting of 40 CFR 1036.550, GEM will output an
not included in an engine’s OBD categorizing them as high-speed error.
certificate, it would not be a required vehicles until they accumulate 30 hours
data parameter. The RTC describes a of non-idle operation to avoid applying xvii. Charge-Depleting Criteria Pollutant
minor change from the proposed rule to an inappropriate speed schedule. Test Sequence—40 CFR 1065.510 Figure
clarify that OBD monitoring is relevant • 40 CFR 1036.111(d)(1), table 2: 1 and 40 CFR 1065.512 Figure 1
both for monitoring specific Correcting a typographical error for the We are finalizing updates to the
components, and for monitoring middle set of columns to read charge-depleting criteria pollutant test
parameters related to those components. ‘‘Medium-speed’’ instead of repeating sequence figures in 40 CFR 1065.510 for
• 40 CFR 1036.110(b)(11): Adding a ‘‘Low-speed.’’ The table was correctly the SET duty-cycle and 40 CFR
reference to 13 CCR 1971.5. The final published in the preamble to the final 1065.512 for the FTP duty-cycle. These
rule referenced 13 CCR 1971.1 to point rule but was incorrectly transcribed in updates are not substantive and are
to OBD testing deadlines; however, the Code of Federal Regulations (see 88 intended to provide better visualization
there are additional OBD testing FR 4378). We are also adding an of the charge-depleting and charge-
deadlines specified in 1971.5. inadvertently omitted notation in the sustaining portions of the test sequences
• 40 CFR 1036.110(c)(1) and table to identify the placement of a as well as which test intervals are
1036.125(h)(8)(iii): Correcting footnote to the table. relevant for criteria pollutant
terminology within these provisions by • 40 CFR 1036.111(a)(1): After determination.
referring to inducements related to consideration of a comment received,
‘‘DEF level’’ instead of ‘‘DEF quantity,’’ we are correcting the omission of an xviii. Testing Exemption for Engines
to make the intent clearer that the alternative DEF level triggering Fueled With Hydrogen
system must use the level of DEF in the condition. More specifically, this final As discussed in section II.D.1,
DEF tank for purposes of evaluating the rule includes a provision allowing for hydrogen-fueled internal combustion
specified inducement triggering DEF supply falling to 2.5 percent of DEF engines (ICE) are a newer technology
condition. We separately refer to the tank capacity as an acceptable triggering under development, and since neat
quantity of DEF injection for managing condition for a DEF level inducement. hydrogen fuel does not contain any
the functioning of the SCR catalyst, EPA SCR certification guidance carbon, H2 ICE fueled with neat
which is unrelated to the level of DEF documents included a DEF level hydrogen produce zero HC, CH4, CO,
in the DEF tank. triggering condition of 2.5 percent DEF and CO2 engine-out emissions. We
• 40 CFR 1036.111: Editing for clarity tank capacity in 2009, and recognize that there may be negligible,
to eliminate confusion with onboard manufacturers have used this strategy but non-zero, CO2 emissions at the
diagnostic terminology. More since that time.894 In the HD2027 NPRM tailpipe of H2 ICE that use SCR and are
specifically, the final rule includes edits and final rule, we described our fueled with neat hydrogen due to
to adjust inducement-related intention to finalize an inducement contributions from the aftertreatment
terminology to refer to ‘‘inducement program similar to the approach system from urea decomposition.
triggering conditions’’ instead of ‘‘fault described in our existing guidance. Similarly, CO2 emissions are
conditions.’’ Inducement algorithms are Some manufacturers may prefer to rely attributable to the aftertreatment
executed through OBD algorithms, but on percent of DEF tank capacity instead systems in compression-ignition ICEs.
the inducement triggers are separate of estimating a fill level that However, the contribution of CO2
from OBD fault conditions related to the corresponds to the time remaining emission due to decomposition of the
malfunction indicator light. before the tank is empty because there
• 40 CFR 1036.111(a)(2): Clarifying urea portion of DEF used in the
is less need to make assumptions about aftertreatment system of diesel fueled
how to determine the inducement speed the vehicle’s operating characteristics.
category when the vehicle has less than ICE is less than 1 percent of the total.895
30 hours of accumulated data. The xvi. Engine Data and Information To Since hydrogen-fueled internal
regulation as adopted sets the Support Vehicle Certification combustion engines must meet the same
inducement schedule based on average We are finalizing an update 40 CFR tailpipe NOX standards in 40 CFR
vehicle speed over the preceding 30 1036.505 to clarify that when certifying 1036.104 as diesel fueled engines, we
hours of non-idle operation. That vehicles with GEM, for any fuel type not expect that engine out NOX will be at
instruction will cover most identified in table 1 to paragraph (b)(4) the same level or lower than diesel
circumstances; however, there is no of 40 CFR 1036.550, the manufacturer fueled engines, which would result in
specific instruction for an inducement identifies the fuel type as diesel fuel for the same or lower DEF usage and
triggering condition that occurs before engines subject to compression-ignition tailpipe CO2 emissions. We are therefore
the vehicle accumulates 30 hours of standards, and identifies the fuel type as finalizing that tailpipe CO2 emissions
non-idle operation. As described in the gasoline for engines subject to spark- from engines fueled with neat hydrogen
final rule, we depend on 30 hours of are deemed to be 3 g/hp-hr, and tailpipe
894 ‘‘Inducement-Related Guidance Documents,
non-idle operation to establish which
and Workshop Presentation,’’ EPA docket memo 895 See 81 FR 73553. ‘‘. . . urea typically
inducement schedule is appropriate for number EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0055–0778, October contributes 0.2 to 0.5 percent of the total CO2
a vehicle. We are also aware that a 2021. See Docket Entry EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985– emissions measured from the engine, and up to 1
newly purchased vehicle would have 78383.’’ percent at certain map points.’’.
192
Fmt 4701
CH4, HC, and CO emissions are deemed 3. Updates to 40 CFR Part 1037 Heavy- from the fuel maps developed to
to comply with the applicable Duty Motor Vehicle Provisions demonstrate compliance with the
standards.896 We are finalizing 3 g/hp- i. Standards for Qualifying Small vehicle CO2 emission standards in 40
hr as the default CO2 emission value, Businesses CFR part 1037. We are finalizing an
since 0.5 percent of the CO2 emissions approach to maintain common
As noted in section II.I, we are measurement of emissions from ICE
of a Phase 2 compliant compression-
finalizing that qualifying small regardless of the fuel used to power
ignition engine is less than 3 g/hp-hr. manufacturers will continue to be
The use of the default CO2 emission them. Therefore, we are finalizing as
subject to the existing MY 2027 and proposed to include vehicles using
value of 3 g/hp-hr is optional and later standards. We proposed revisions
manufacturers may instead conduct engines fueled with neat hydrogen in 40
to 40 CFR 1037.150(c) that clarified the CFR 1037.150(f) so that their CO2
testing to demonstrate that the CO2 standards and proposed restrictions on
emissions for their engine is below 3 g/ tailpipe emissions are deemed to be zero
participation in the ABT program for and manufacturers are not required to
hp-hr. Note, NOx and PM emission MYs 2027 and later for qualifying small perform any engine testing for
testing is required under existing 40 manufacturers that utilize the interim demonstrating compliance with the
CFR part 1036 for engines fueled with provision. In the final rule, we have vehicle CO2 emission standards. This
neat hydrogen. revised 40 CFR 1037.105(b) and (h) and final revision does not change the
1037.106(b) to include the MY 2027 and requirements for H2 ICE engines,
xix. Emergency Vehicle Provisions later standards that apply for small including those fueled with neat
We are adding several provisions to manufacturers. The interim provisions hydrogen, to meet the N2O GHG
40 CFR part 1036 to restore what was of 40 CFR 1037.150(c) and (w) specify
standards and the criteria pollutant
originally adopted in 40 CFR part 86. the flexibilities that continue to be
emission standards in 40 CFR part 1036.
available for small manufacturers. We
The effort to migrate emission standards Additionally, we are revising as
are also finalizing as proposed the
and certification requirements proposed 40 CFR 1037.150(f) to replace
revised definition for ‘‘small
improperly omitted several provisions ‘‘electric vehicles’’ with ‘‘battery electric
manufacturer’’ in 40 CFR 1037.801.897
related to the allowance for vehicles’’, and ‘‘hydrogen fuel cell
manufacturers to design their engines ii. Vehicles With Engines Using Fuels vehicles’’ with ‘‘fuel cell electric
with AECDs that override a derate Other Than Carbon-Containing Fuels vehicles’’, consistent with final
condition for qualifying emergency In the HD2027 final rule, we adopted revisions to those definitions (see
vehicles. Specifically, we are revising 40 revisions to 40 CFR 1037.150(f) to section I.C.3.xiii of this preamble).
CFR 1036.115(h)(4) to clarify that include fuel cell electric vehicles, in iii. ABT Calculations
emissions standards do not apply when addition to battery electric vehicles, in
AECDs for emergency vehicles are the provision that deems tailpipe We proposed revisions to the
active. We are adding text to 40 CFR emissions of regulated GHG pollutants definitions of two variables of the
1036.501(e) to allow manufacturers to as zero and as such does not require emission credit calculation for ABT in
disable such approved AECDs for CO2-related emission testing. As 40 CFR 1037.705. As noted in section
discussed in section II.D.1, hydrogen- II.C, we are not finalizing the proposed
emergency vehicles during testing. We
fueled internal combustion engines are update to the emission standard variable
are also adding text to 40 CFR
a newer technology under development, (variable ‘‘Std’’) to establish a common
1036.580(d) to instruct manufacturers to reference emission standard when
and since hydrogen has no carbon, H2
disregard approved AECDs for calculating ABT emission credits for
ICEs fueled with neat hydrogen produce
emergency vehicles when they vocational vehicles with tailpipe CO2
zero HC, CH4, CO, and CO2 engine-out
determine Infrequent Regeneration emissions deemed to be. However, we
emissions. We recognize that there may
Adjustment Factors. Finally, we are be negligible, but non-zero, CO2 are finalizing as proposed a revision to
revising the definition of ‘‘emergency emissions at the tailpipe of H2 ICE the ‘‘Volume’’ variable. With the final
vehicle’’ in 40 CFR 1036.801 to allow vehicles fueled with neat hydrogen that revision to paragraph (c), we intend for
for qualifying as an emergency vehicle utilize SCR due to the aftertreatment 40 CFR 1037.705(c) to replace ‘‘U.S.-
if it has characteristics that support an system contribution from urea directed production volume’’ as the
expectation that it will be used in decomposition. Similarly, CO2 primary reference for the appropriate
emergency situations such that emissions are attributable to the production volume to apply with
malfunctions would cause a significant aftertreatment systems in ICE. These respect to the ABT program and propose
risk to human life. aftertreatment-based CO2 emissions to generally replace throughout part
We are also amending 40 CFR from HD CI engines today are treated 1037.
1036.601 to clarify that engines for differently in the engine and vehicle iv. U.S.-Directed Production Volume
emergency vehicles may need to include compliance programs. In the engine
design features that don’t full comply program, the CO2 emissions from the The existing 40 CFR 1037.205, which
with the OBD requirements in 40 CFR aftertreatment are included in the describes requirements for the
measurements to demonstrate application for certification, uses the
1036.110. For example, the regulation
compliance with the engine CO2 term U.S.-directed production volume.
requires in-cab displays with derate
standards in 40 CFR part 1036. In the As described in section I.A.1, we are
information for the driver, but the cab finalizing a change to the definition of
vehicle program, the CO2 emissions
display should not include information ‘‘U.S.-directed production volume’’,
from the aftertreatment are excluded
about the schedule for pending derates such that the term equates to
an approved AECD will prevent that 897 The revision removes criteria for trailers and nationwide production volumes that
derate from occurring. revenue that do not apply for the heavy-duty truck include any production volumes
manufacturing category covered by this rule and
adds a clarifying reference to what qualifies as an
certified to different state standards. The
affiliated company for applying the specified revised definition does not require a
896 See 40 CFR 1036.150(f). number of employee limits. change to 40 CFR 1037.205 to ensure
193
Fmt 4701
manufacturers report nationwide are finalizing new regulatory text for an creating the cycle average fuel map for
production volumes. existing test procedure that currently input into GEM. Note that
We are finalizing as proposed refers to a trailer test procedure. The manufacturers may continue to test
revisions to the introductory paragraph existing 40 CFR 1037.527 describes a vehicles on a chassis dynamometer to
of 40 CFR 1037.705(c), consistent with procedure for manufacturers to measure quantify off-cycle credits under 40 CFR
the final revisions to the corresponding aerodynamic performance of their 1037.610.
HD engine provisions, to establish this vocational vehicles by referring to the A We are also correcting paragraph
paragraph as the reference for which to B testing methodology for trailers in reference errors in 40 CFR
engines are excluded from the 40 CFR 1037.525. We have removed the 1037.510(a)(2)(iii) and (iv). These
production volume used to calculate regulatory text describing A to B testing paragraphs reference the warmup
emission credits for HD highway (see from the trailer procedure and moved it procedure in 40 CFR 1036.520(c)(1). The
section I.C.2.v of this preamble). into 40 CFR 1037.527 (such that it warmup procedure is located in 40 CFR
Similarly, final revisions include replaces the cross-referencing regulatory 1036.520(d).
replacing several instances of ‘‘U.S.- text). x. Utility Factor Clarification for Testing
directed production volume’’ with a Engines With a Hybrid Power Takeoff
vii. Removal of 40 CFR 1037.205(q)
more general ‘‘production volume’’ Shaft
where the text clearly is connected to We have corrected an inadvertent
ABT or a more specific reference to the error and have removed the existing 40 We are clarifying the variable
production volume specified in 40 CFR CFR 1037.205(q). This paragraph description for the utility factor fraction
1037.705(c).898 contained requirements we proposed in UFRCD in 40 CFR 1037.540(f)(3)(ii). The
HD2027 but did not finalize and thus current description references the use of
v. Revisions to Hybrid Powertrain did not intend to include in the final an ‘‘approved utility factor curve’’. The
Testing and Axle Efficiency Testing rule’s amendatory instructions, original intent was to use the power take
We are finalizing the addition of a regarding information for battery off utility factors that reside in
new figure to 40 CFR 1036.545 to give electric vehicles and fuel cell electric Appendix E to 40 CFR part 1036 to
an overview on how to carry out hybrid vehicles to show they meet the generate a utility factor curve to
powertrain testing in that section. We standards of 40 CFR part 1037. determine UFRCD. We are clarifying this
are finalizing in the axle efficiency test by replacing ‘‘approved utility factor
viii. Adding Full Cylinder Deactivation curve’’ with a reference to the utility
in 40 CFR 1037.560(e)(2) the use of an
to 40 CFR 1037.520(j)(1) factors in Appendix E.
alternate lower gear oil temperature
range on a test point by test point basis We are finalizing as proposed to xi. Heavy-Duty Vehicles at or Below
in addition to the current alternate that credit vehicles with engines that 14,000 Pounds GVWR
requires the use of the same lower include full cylinder deactivation
temperature range for all test points during coasting at 1.5 percent. We The final standards in this rule apply
within the test matrix. This provides believe this is appropriate since the for all heavy-duty vehicles above 14,000
more representative test results as not same 1.5 percent credit is currently pounds GVWR, except as noted in
all test points within a matrix for a provided for tractors and vocational existing 40 CFR 1037.150(l). We are not
given axle test will result in gear oil vehicles with neutral coasting, and both changing the option for manufacturers
temperatures within the same range. We technologies reduce CO2 emissions by to voluntarily certify incomplete
are also finalizing a change to 40 CFR reducing the engine braking during vehicles at or below 14,000 pounds
1037.560(h)(1) to require that testing vehicle coasting.900 Cylinder GVWR to 40 CFR part 1037 instead of
must be done using the same deactivation can reduce engine braking certifying under 40 CFR part 86, subpart
temperature range for each setpoint for by closing both the intake and exhaust S; the final standards in this rule would
all axle assemblies when developing valves when there is no operator also apply for those incomplete heavy-
analytically derive axle power loss maps demand to reduce the pumping losses of duty vehicles. We are removing 40 CFR
for untested configurations within an the engine when motoring. Because of 1037.104 as proposed and refer
axle family. this, only vehicles with engines where manufacturers to 40 CFR 1037.5 for
both exhaust and intake valves are excluded vehicles.901
vi. Removal of Trailer Provisions closed when the vehicle is coasting In a parallel rulemaking to set new
As part of the HD GHG Phase 2 qualify for the 1.5 percent credit. emission standards for light-duty and
rulemaking, we set standards for certain medium-duty vehicles under 40 CFR
ix. Removal of Chassis Testing Option part 86, subpart S, we proposed a
types of trailers used in combination
Under 40 CFR 1037.510 and Reference requirement for complete and
with tractors (see 81 FR 73639, October
Update incomplete vehicles at or below 14,000
25, 2016). We are finalizing the removal
of the regulatory provisions related to We are removing the chassis pounds GVWR with Gross Combined
trailers in 40 CFR part 1037 to carry out dynamometer testing option for testing Weight Rating above 22,000 pounds to
a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals over the duty cycles as described in 40 have installed engines that have been
for the D.C. Circuit, which vacated the CFR 1037.510(a). The chassis certified to the engine-based criteria
portions of the HD GHG Phase 2 final dynamometer test was available as an emission standards in 40 CFR part 1036.
rule that apply to trailers.899 These option for Phase 1 testing in 40 CFR Those vehicles would continue to meet
revisions include removal of specific 1037.615. We are removing it to avoid GHG standards under 40 CFR 86.1819
sections and paragraphs describing confusion as the chassis dynamometer instead of meeting the engine-based
GHG standards in 40 CFR part 1036 and
trailer provisions and related references testing option is only allowed when
throughout the part. Additionally, we performing off-cycle testing following the vehicle-based GHG standards in 40
40 CFR 1037.610 and is not allowed for CFR part 1037, with one exception. The
898 See revisions in 40 CFR 1037.150(c) and exception would be to allow an option
1037.730(b). 900 See the HD GHG Phase 2 rule (81 FR 73598,
899 Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association v. October 25, 2016), for more information on how 1.5 901 This change includes removing the reference
EPA, 17 F.4th 1198 (D.C. Cir. 2021). percent was determined for neutral coasting. to 40 CFR 1037.104 in 40 CFR 1037.1.
194
Fmt 4701
for manufacturers of such incomplete manufacturer, standard payload, tire standards from their current locations
vehicles to meet the greenhouse gas rolling resistance, trailer, and vehicle. and moving it to 40 CFR
standards under 40 CFR parts 1036 and We are finalizing new and updated 1037.101(a)(2)(i) where we currently
1037 instead of meeting the chassis- definitions in support of several describe the standards that apply in part
based greenhouse gas standards under requirements in section II or this section 1037. We are also updating 40 CFR
40 CFR part 86, subpart S. In that III. We are finalizing replacement of the 1037.101(a)(2)(i) to more accurately
parallel rulemaking, the final rule existing definition of ‘‘electric vehicle’’ state that only CO2 standards are
allows manufacturers the option to with more specific definitions for the described in 40 CFR 1037.105 and
certify those engines to the engine-based different vehicle technologies and 1037.106, by removing reference to CH4
criteria emission standards under 40 energy sources that could be used to and N2O in that sentence. We are
CFR part 1036 instead of certifying to power these vehicles. Specifically, we updating the section title for 40 CFR
chassis-based standards under 40 CFR are finalizing new definitions for battery 1037.102 to include the term ‘‘Criteria’’
part 86, subpart S. For manufacturers electric vehicle, fuel cell electric and the list of components (i.e., NOX,
that select that option, the greenhouse vehicle, and plug-in hybrid electric HC, PM, and CO) covered by the section
gas standards apply as we just described vehicle. We are also finalizing the to be consistent with the naming
for the proposed rule. replacement of the existing definition of convention used in 40 CFR part 1036.
‘‘hybrid engine or hybrid powertrain’’
xii. Updates to Optional Standards for xv. Finalized Changes for In-Use Tractor
with a definition of ‘‘hybrid’’ that refers
Tractors at or Above 120,000 Pounds Testing in 40 CFR 1037.665
to a revised definition in 40 CFR part
In HD GHG Phase 2 and in a 1036.904 We are also updating the The in-use tractor testing
subsequent rulemaking, we adopted definition of U.S.-directed production requirements were adopted to apply
optional heavy Class 8 tractor CO2 volume to be equivalent to nationwide only to Phase 1 and Phase 2 tractors. We
emission standards for tractors with a production as described section III.A.1. proposed to extend that to Phase 3
GCWR above 120,000 pounds (see 40 We are finalizing several editorial tractors as well, but received comments
CFR 1037.670).902 We did this because revisions to definitions as well. We are describing the significant test burden
most manufacturers tend to rely on U.S. finalizing a revision to the definition of and limited value in performing this
certificates as their evidence of vehicle to remove the text of existing testing. Based on those comments and
conformity for products sold into paragraph (2)(iii) and move the main our own evaluation of the merits of
Canada to reduce compliance burden. phrase of that removed paragraph (i.e., further testing, we are not taking final
Therefore, in Phase 2 we adopted ‘‘when it is first sold as a vehicle’’) to action on the proposed change to extend
provisions that allow the manufacturers the description of ‘‘complete vehicle’’ to testing requirements to Phase 3 tractors.
the option to meet standards that reflect further clarify that aspect of the existing
the appropriate technology xvi. Finalized Changes to Constraints for
definition. We are finalizing as
improvements, along with the Vocational Regulatory Subcategories in
proposed a revision to the existing
powertrain requirements that go along 40 CFR 1037.150(v)
definition of small manufacturer, in
with higher GCWR. While these heavy addition to the revisions removing In this action we are finalizing
Class 8 tractor standards are optional for reference to trailers, to clarify that the clarifications to 40 CFR 1037.150(z).905
tractors sold into the U.S. market, employee and revenue limits include As pointed out in comments to this rule,
Canada adopted these as mandatory the totals from all affiliated companies 40 CFR 1037.150(z) included provisions
requirements as part of their regulatory and added a reference to the definition that were duplicative, potentially
development and consultation process. of affiliated companies in 40 CFR confusing, or not needed. To address
As proposed, we are adopting 1068.30. these concerns, we are deleting the
provisions to sunset the optional We are finalizing revisions to the former paragraph (z)(1), which contains
standards after MY 2026.903 definitions of ‘‘light-duty truck’’ and a requirement to select the Regional
‘‘light-duty vehicle’’, by having the regulatory subcategory if the engine is
xiii. Updates to 40 CFR Part 1037 only tested with the Supplemental
definitions reference the definitions in
Definitions Emission Test. This scenario, however,
40 CFR 86.1803–1.
We are finalizing several updates to is not allowed, as 40 CFR 1036.108(a)(1)
the definitions in 40 CFR 1037.801. As xiv. Miscellaneous Corrections and requires that vocational engines
noted in section I.C.3.vi, we are Clarifications in 40 CFR Part 1037 measure CO2 emissions over the FTP
removing the trailer provisions, which We are finalizing revisions to several duty cycle. We are also deleting the
include removing the following references to 40 CFR part 86 revisions. reference to former paragraphs (z)(1)
definitions: Box van, container chassis, Throughout 40 CFR part 1037, we are and (3) in the former paragraph (z)(5), as
flatbed trailer, standard tractor, and tank replacing references to 40 CFR 86.1816 we are removing paragraphs (z)(1) and
trailer. We also are revising several or 86.1819 with a more general the former paragraph (z)(3) provides
definitions to remove references to reference to the standards of part 86, restrictions for defining vehicles as
trailers or trailer-specific sections, subpart S. These revisions reduce the Urban and is not applicable to defining
including definitions for: Class, heavy- need to update references to specific vehicles to the Multi-purpose regulatory
duty vehicle, low rolling resistance tire, part 86 sections if new standards are subcategory. Finally, we are deleting
manufacturer, model year, Phase 1, added to a different section in a future former paragraph (z)(6), as it is identical
Phase 2, preliminary approval, small rule. We are not revising any references to former paragraph (z)(5).
to specific part 86 paragraphs (e.g., 40
902 81 FR 73582 (October 25, 2016) and 86 FR CFR 86.1819–14(j)). 4. Updates to 40 CFR Part 1039 Nonroad
34338 (June 29, 2021). We are removing the duplicative Compression-Ignition Engines
903 We removed the standards listed in the
statements in 40 CFR 1037.105(c) and The final rule includes an amendment
rightmost column of existing table 1 of paragraph
(a) of § 1037.670; we note that the column was 1037.106(c) regarding CH4 and N2O to 40 CFR 1039.705(b) to correct a
intended for model years 2027 and later standards
but was mistakenly labeled ‘‘Model years 2026 and 904 See section I.C.2.xiii of this preamble for a 905 Note that 40 CFR 1037.150(z) is being moved
later’’. description of the updated definition of hybrid. to 40 CFR 1037.150(v).
195
publishing error in the equation to updated with the addition of a new verification requirement for the
calculate emission credits for nonroad paragraph (c)(9)(v) to add a requirement humidity generator is once a year to an
compression-ignition engines. to in the section that describes the uncertainty of ±3 percent; 908 however,
emission calculations used, including we are not requiring that the calibration
5. Updates to 40 CFR Part 1065 Engine
listing the chemical balance method of the humidity generator be NIST
Testing Procedures
used. traceable. We are finalizing a leak check
i. Engine Testing and Certification With The addition of the certification requirement after the humidity
Fuels Other Than Carbon-Containing option for fuels other than carbon- generator is assembled, as these devices
Fuels containing fuels relies on inputs are typically disassembled and stored
Alternative fuels and fuels other than requiring hydrogen, ammonia, and when not in use and subsequent
carbon-containing fuels are part of the water concentration measurement from assembly prior to use could lead to leaks
fuel pathway for sustainable biofuel, e- the exhaust. We are finalizing the in the system. We are including
fuel, and clean hydrogen development addition of new sections in 40 CFR part calculations to determine the
under the U.S. National Blueprint for 1065 and revisions to some existing uncertainty of the humidity generator
Transportation Decarbonization.906 This sections to support the procedure in 40 from measurements of dewpoint and
blueprint anticipates a mix of battery CFR 1065.656. We are finalizing a new absolute pressure. We are finalizing a
electric, sustainable fuel, and hydrogen 40 CFR 1065.255 to provide new definition for ‘‘carbon-containing
use to achieve a net zero carbon specifications for hydrogen fuel’’ and ‘‘lean-burn’’ in 40 CFR
emissions level by 2050 for the heavy- measurement devices, a new 40 CFR 1065.1001 to further support the
duty sector. EPA is updating 40 CFR 1065.257 to provide specifications for addition of the certification option for
part 1065 to facilitate certification of water measurement using a Fourier engines using fuels other than carbon-
engines using fuels other than carbon- Transform Infrared (FTIR) analyzer, and containing fuels.
containing fuels for all sectors that use We are not adding any specifications
a new 40 CFR 1065.277 to provide
engine testing to show compliance with for alternative test fuels, like methanol,
specifications for ammonia
the standards. This includes a new and fuels other than carbon-containing
measurement devices. These additions
definition of ‘‘carbon-containing fuel’’ fuels like hydrogen and ammonia, to 40
also require a new 40 CFR 1065.357 to
in 40 CFR 1065.1001, the addition of a CFR part 1065, subpart H.
address CO2 interference when
new paragraph (f) in 40 CFR 1065.520 Manufacturers certifying engines with
measuring water using an FTIR alternative test fuels must use the
that requires the selection of the analyzer, a new 40 CFR 1065.377 to
chemical balance method prior to provision in 40 CFR 1065.701(c) which
address H2O interference and any other allows the use of test fuels that we do
emission testing, and the addition of a interference species as deemed by the
new chemical balance procedure in not specify in 40 CFR part 1065, subpart
instrument manufacturer or using good H, with our approval.
section 40 CFR 1065.656 that is used in engineering judgment when measuring
place of the carbon-based chemical NH3 using an FTIR or laser infrared ii. Engine Speed Derate for Exhaust
balance procedure in 40 CFR 1065.655 analyzers, and the addition of Flow Limitation
when an engine is certified for operation calibration gases for these new analyzer We are finalizing a change to 40 CFR
using fuels other than carbon-containing types to 40 CFR 1065.750. We are also 1065.512(b)(1) to address the
fuels (e.g., hydrogen or ammonia).907 adding drift check requirements to 40 appearance of three options for
Since these fuels do not contain carbon, CFR 1065.550(b) to address drift generating new reference duty-cycle
the current carbon-based chemical correction of the H2, O2, H2O, and NH3 points for the engine to follow. The
balance cannot be used as it is designed measurements needed in the 40 CFR option in the existing 40 CFR
based on comparisons of the amount of 1065.656 procedure. We are not 1065.512(b)(1)(i) is not an actual option;
carbon in the fuel to the amount finalizing the addition of drift check instead, it gives direction on how to
measured post combustion in the requirements for H2, O2, H2O, and NH3 operate the dynamometer (torque
exhaust. The chemical balance for fuels measurements in 40 CFR control mode). This sentence has been
other than carbon-containing fuels looks 1065.935(g)(5)(ii) for testing with PEMS. moved into 40 CFR 1065.512(b)(1). The
at the amount of hydrogen in the fuel These exhaust gas constituents are not two remaining options in the current 40
versus what is measured in the exhaust. regulated and are used in the chemical CFR 1065.512(b)(1)(ii) and (iii) have
The amendments also facilitate balance to facilitate dilution ratio been redesignated as 40 CFR
certification of an engine on a mix of determination for background correction 1065.512(b)(1)(i) and (ii).
carbon-containing fuels and fuels other and dry to wet correction. If there is any We are not finalizing the change we
than carbon-containing fuels. The significant drift with these species, the proposed to 40 CFR 1065.512(b)(1) to
update to 40 CFR 1065.520(f) also impact will be included in the drift address cycle validation issues where an
requires the decision on which chemical check verification of the regulated engine with power derate intended to
balance to use to be based on the pollutants. We are also adding a new 40 limit exhaust mass flowrate might
hydrogen-to-carbon ratio of the fuel CFR 1065.750(a)(6) to address the include controls that reduce engine
mixture. If it is less or equal to 6, the uncertainty of the water concentrations speed under cold-start conditions,
chemical balance in 40 CFR 1065.655 generated to perform the linearity resulting in reduced exhaust flow that
must be used. The regulation at 40 CFR verification of the water FTIR analyzer assists other aftertreatment thermal
1065.695, Data Requirements, was also in 40 CFR 1065.257. We are finalizing management technologies (e.g., electric
906 The U.S. National Blueprint for Transportation
two options to generate a humid gas heater). Upon further investigation of
Decarbonization: A Joint Strategy to Transform stream. The first is via a heated bubbler the test procedure, we determined that
Transportation. DOE/EE–2674. January 2023. where dry gas is passed through the 40 CFR part 1065 already contains
Available at: https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/ bubbler at a controlled water
files/2023-01/the-us-national-blueprint-for- temperature to generate a gas with the 908 The verification schedule in 40 CFR
transportation-decarbonization.pdf. 1065.750(a)(6) says: ‘‘Calibrate the humidity
907 We are also finalizing a definition for ‘‘carbon- desired water content. The second is a generator upon initial installation, within 370 days
containing fuel’’ in 40 CFR 1036.801 that references device that injects heated liquid water before verifying the H2O measurement of the FTIR,
the proposed new 40 CFR part 1065 definition. into a gas stream. The linearity and after major maintenance.’’.
196
Fmt 4701
options to address this. If the engine has through 1065.1145. We requested resolution. We are updating the key
the power derate feature described comment on the need for potential aging metric to Brunauer–Emmett–
previously in this section, when this changes to the procedure based on Teller (BET) theory for determination of
feature is active, the following scenarios experience that manufacturers and test surface area. We are also allowing the
would be applicable to enable engine labs have gained since the procedure use of total ammonia storage capacity as
testing: was finalized. a surrogate for BET measurements of
1. For idle points: We are finalizing changes to 40 CFR surface area as the key aging metric,
a. For engines with an idle governor, 1065.1135, 1065.1137, 1065.1139, using a single storage site model.
have the dynamometer control torque 1065.1141, and 1065.1145. These • We are finalizing the addition of a
and set the operator demand to changes are based on EPA’s new 40 CFR 1065.1137(b)(4) to add total
minimum (same as what is currently consideration of comments submitted to ammonia storage capacity as a
done for most engine tests). EMA’s Emission Measurement and recommended key aging metric for
b. For engines without an idle Testing Committee (EMTC). The zone-coated copper- and iron-based
governor (i.e., no possibility of and comments consisted of a series of zeolite SCR, similar to paragraphs (b)(1)
enhanced or decreased idle governor updates to the affected sections listed. and (2) of the section. There was no
speed), the test lab can decide whether These updates were based on additional option given previously for determining
to control speed or torque with the dyno testing and accelerated aging model the key aging metric for this technology
and operator demand. validation performed by Southwest and the new addition remedies this.
2. For non-idle-non-motoring points, Research Institute as part of the Diesel • We are finalizing a change to the
have the dynamometer control torque Aftertreatment Accelerated Aging Cycle redesignated 40 CFR 1065.1137(b)(5) to
and the operator demand control speed. (DAAAC) Validation Steering the key aging metric NO to NO2
3. For motoring points, have the Committee that consists of government conversion rate and HC reduction
dynamometer control speed and set (EPA) and industry (EMA) efficiency temperatures to a value less
operator demand to minimum (same as representatives who were part of the than or equal to 200 °C determined
what is currently done for most engine original DAAAC validation study that using good engineering judgement. This
tests). procedures in 40 CFR 1065.1131 change resolves the inconsistencies
If a test lab tested an engine with through 1065.1145 were based on. throughout 40 CFR part 1037 regarding
power derate and took this approach Explanation of the changes to the the temperature rate at which the
and the power derate feature activates, sections listed are as follows: conversion rate should be determined.
we would expect the following to occur: • We are finalizing an editorial • We are finalizing an update to 40
• For idle points under option 1a of change to 40 CFR 1065.1135 that is the CFR 1065.1137(c)(1) to change the
the list, this feature could lower the idle simple insertion of a comma. recommended maximum time to
governor setpoint and the dynamometer • We are finalizing non-substantive observe changes in the aging metric
would continue to apply the reference wording changes to 40 CFR 1065.1137. from 50 hours to 64 hours as 64 hours
idle torque. Presumably, any fueling • We are finalizing a change to 40 is more in line with the pattern of
limit at idle would be sufficient to keep CFR 1065.1137(b)(1) where we are increasing evenly spaced time intervals
the engine from stalling in-use and it adding ‘‘storage capacity of the more (2, 4, 8, 16, and 32 hours) given in 40
would not stall in the test cell under active site’’ as an additional CFR 1065.1137(c)(2).
this idle condition. recommended metric for determining • We are finalizing the addition of
• For idle points under option 1b of the thermal reactivity coefficient for use new paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) to 40
the list, on engines without and idle in the Arrhenius rate law function to CFR 1065.1137 to add processes for
governor (if this case is even practical model cumulative thermal degradation determining ammonia storage capacity
for this technology), the fueling limit due to catalyst heat exposure for copper- for SCR catalysts as well as for
still cannot be set so low as to cause the based zeolite SCR catalysts. This metric determining oxidation conversion
engine to stall under idle load has been shown to be an effective metric efficiency of NO to NO2 for diesel
conditions. for tracking thermal aging in addition to oxidation catalysts (DOC) to assess the
• For non-idle-non-motoring points the already allowed ratio between the aging metric. These are the standard
(option 2 of the list), the throttle is storage capacity of the two different methodologies for assessing the aging
expected to saturate at maximum and storage sites. metric and will provide a level playing
the dynamometer will continue to try to • We are finalizing a change to 40 field for test facilities carrying out
apply the reference torque. This CFR 1065.1137(b)(2) where we are accelerated aging testing.
operation has the possibility of stalling removing the 250 °C temperature target • We are finalizing updates to 40 CFR
the engine if the fueling limit is for the single storage site thermal aging 1065.1137, specifically new paragraphs
insufficient to produce the reference metric for iron-based zeolite SCR (d)(1) through (4) to replace the use of
torque at a reduced speed and might catalysts. Advancements in this catalyst a generalized deactivation equation for
require a stall countermeasure in the technology have led to the need for a determination of catalyst deactivation
test cell controls. technology formulation specific rate constant, kD, and thermal reactivity
• For motoring points (option 3 of the temperature as opposed to the use of a coefficient, Ea,D. The generalized
list), it is assumed the engine is already prescribed default temperature, which equation was replaced with more
at minimum fueling (because the we are adding as part of this change. specific processes for copper-based
operator demand is at minimum) and • We are finalizing a change to 40 zeolite SCR (40 CFR 1065.1137(d)(1)),
power derate feature will have no CFR 1065.1137(b)(3) where we are iron-based zeolite and vanadium SCR
impact on these points. removing the use of NOX conversion at (40 CFR 1065.1137(d)(2)), zone-coated
250 °C temperature target for the single zeolite SCR (40 CFR 1065.1137(d)(3)),
iii. Accelerated Aftertreatment Aging storage site thermal aging metric for and diesel oxidation catalysts (40 CFR
We recently finalized a new vanadium SCR catalysts. Advancements 1065.1137(d)(4)). These updates stem
accelerated aftertreatment aging in this catalyst technology have led to from the need for more detail and
procedure for use in deterioration factor the need for a different approach for specificity on how to model the thermal
determination in 40 CFR 1065.1131 tracking aging to achieve sufficient reactivity coefficient to provide
197
Fmt 4701
consistency and a level playing field. good engineering judgement and this is if the aging cycle is paused for any
For example, it provides a means to use used to calculate the aging metric. This reason, you resume testing at the same
the temperature programmed desorption temperature limit change resolves the point in the cycle where it stopped to
(TPD) data used to generate the inconsistencies throughout 40 CFR part ensure consistent thermal and chemical
ammonia storage capacity values to 1037 regarding the temperature rate at exposure of the aftertreatment system.
model catalyst deactivation. which the conversion rate should be • We are finalizing an update to 40
• 40 CFR 1065.1137(d)(1) for copper- determined. GPLE is used to fit the NO CFR 1065.1145(e)(2)(i) to remove the
based zeolite SCR requires the to NO2 conversion data at each aging requirement to operate the engine for at
processing of all ammonia TPD data for temperature. Global fitting is used to least 4 hours after an oil change with the
each aging condition using an algorithm solve for Ea,D and the pre-exponential exhaust bypassing the aftertreatment
to fit the ammonia desorption data. We factor, AD, by applying a generalized system to stabilize the new oil. The
recommend using a Temkin adsorption reduced gradient (GRG) nonlinear Southwest Research Institute Diesel
model to quantify the ammonia TPD at minimization algorithm. These updates Aftertreatment Accelerated Aging Cycle
each site to determine the desorption stem from the need for more detail and (DAAAC) Validation test program did
peaks of individual storage sites. We specificity on how to model the thermal not stabilize new oil after an oil change
allow either the general power law reactivity coefficient to provide and the validation program results to
expression (GPLE) or Arrhenius consistency and a level playing field. date indicate that there is no adverse
modeling approaches to derive the • We are finalizing the addition of effect on accelerated aging. Therefore
thermal reactivity coefficient, Ea,D. We new paragraphs 40 CFR we are removing the break in
recommend that both models are used 1065.1139(e)(6)(v) for heat load requirement to reduce test burden.
to fit the data and that the resulting Ea,D calculation and tuning for systems that
iv. Nonmethane Cutter Water
values for the two methods are within have regeneration events and 40 CFR
Interference Correction
3 percent of each other as a quality 1065.1139(f)(3) for heat load calculation
assurance check. These updates stem and tuning for systems that do not have We recently finalized options and
from the need for more detail and regeneration events. These additions requirements for gaseous fueled engines
specificity on how to model the thermal allows a reduction in the acceleration to allow a correction for the effect of
reactivity coefficient to provide factor from 10 to a lower number if the water on the nonmethane cutter (NMC)
consistency and a level playing field. target cumulative deactivation for the performance, as gaseous fueled engines
• 40 CFR 1065.1137(d)(2) for iron- field data, Dt,field, is not achievable produce much higher water content in
based zeolite of vanadium SCR requires without exceeding the catalyst the exhaust than gasoline or diesel fuels,
the processing of all ammonia TPD data temperature limits. This would be impacting the final measured emission
(or BET surface area data) for each aging applicable, for example, for a vanadium result.909 The correction is done by
condition using GLPE to fit the catalyst where you might not be able to adjusting the methane and ethane
ammonia desorption data. Global fitting age at the target temperature because it response factors used for the Total
is used to solve for Ea,D and the pre- might cause vanadium sublimation, Hydrocarbon (THC) Flame Ionization
exponential factor, AD, by applying a thus you would use a lower target Detector (FID) and the combine methane
generalized reduced gradient (GRG) temperature and then increase the test response factor and penetration fraction
nonlinear minimization algorithm. time to arrive at equivalent aging. The and combined ethane response factor
These updates stem from the need for same lower acceleration factor for and penetration fraction of the NMC
more detail and specificity on how to thermal aging must also then be used in FID. These response factors and
model the thermal reactivity coefficient the chemical exposure calculations, penetration fractions are then used to
to provide consistency and a level instead of 10. determine NMHC and methane
playing field. • We are finalizing the addition of a concentrations based on the molar water
• 40 CFR 1065.1137(d)(3) for zone- new 40 CFR 1065.1141(b)(2) to add an concentration in the raw or diluted
coated zeolite SCR requires derivation additional method recommendation on exhaust. EPA is aware that test labs that
of the thermal reactivity coefficient, modification of the engine to increase have attempted to implement this
Ea,D, for each zone of the SCR, based on oil consumption to levels required for correction have reported that this new
40 CFR 1065.1137(d)(1) and (2). The accelerated aging in a manner such that option is lacking clarity with respect to
zone that yields the lowest Ea,D is used the oil consumption is still generally the implementation of these corrections
for calculating the target cumulative representative of oil passing the piston from both a procedural and emission
thermal load, as outlined in 40 CFR rings into the cylinder. This method calculation perspective. Test labs and
1065.1139. These updates stem from the uses iterative modification of the oil manufacturers have also requested the
need for more detail and specificity on control rings in one or more cylinders option to use the water correction for all
how to model the thermal reactivity to reduce the spring tension on the oil fuels, not just gaseous fuels. Test labs
coefficient to provide consistency and a control ring and provides a robust and manufacturers have also stated that
level playing field. means to increase engine oil in their view, as written, 40 CFR
• 40 CFR 1065.1137(d)(4) for diesel consumption. 1065.360(d)(12) indicates that the water
oxidation catalysts models the catalyst • We are finalizing an update to 40 correction for the methane response
monolith as a plug flow reactor with CFR 1065.1141(f) to recommend factor on the THC FID is required; we
first order reaction rate. The pre- incorporation of a method of continuous note that was not our intent and are
exponential term, A, in the Arrhenius oil consumption monitoring during finalizing updates to this section to
rate law function is proportional to the accelerated aging, including validation clarify that provision.
number of active sites and is the desired of the monitoring method with periodic In addition to general edits that
aging metric. The NO to NO2 oxidation draining and weighing of the engine oil. improve the consistency of terminology
reverse light off data for each aging This is to ensure that oil consumption and the rearrangement of some
condition is processed by determining rates are representative over the course paragraphs to improve the flow of the
the average oxidation conversion of the accelerated aging test. procedure, we are making the following
efficiency at a temperature of less than • We are finalizing an update to 40
or equal to 200 °C determined using CFR 1065.1145(d) to recommended that 909 86 FR 34543, June 29, 2021.
198
Fmt 4701
changes to 40 CFR 1065.360, 1065.365, also removing the exception for the use where a high NO2 spike might occur.
and 1065.660 to address the concerns of the particulate correction factor for Ozonators in chemiluminescent
raised regarding implementation and humidity in ISO 8178–1 Section 15.1 analyzers are generally not designed to
use of the NMC performance because this correction factor no longer generate that high of an NO2
corrections. In 40 CFR 1065.360 and exists in ISO 8178. concentration during the NOX efficiency
1065.365, we are allowing the optional test (the step in § 1065.378(d)(3)(iv)).
vi. Work System Boundary in 40 CFR
use of the water correction for the The update to 40 CFR part 1065 to allow
1065.210
applicable response factors and the use of a high concentration NO2 gas
penetration fractions for engines Figure 1 to paragraph (a) of 40 CFR will alleviate these concerns.
operated on any fuel, as the use of the 1065.210 provides diagrams for the
work inputs, outputs, and system ix. Formaldehyde Gas Blend Accuracy
correction improves the quality of the
boundaries for engines. We are updating in 40 CFR 1065.750
emission measurement even though the
effect is less pronounced for liquid the diagram for liquid cooled engines in We are finalizing the removal of
fuels. In 40 CFR 1065.360, we are figure 1 to paragraph (a) of 40 CFR formaldehyde from the gas mixture in
finalizing revisions to clarify that 1065.210 to include electric heaters that 40 CFR 1065.750(a)(3)(xiii). There is no
determination of the FID methane use work from an external power standard for formaldehyde from NIST
response factor as a function of molar source. We are also updating 40 CFR and the preference is to gravimetrically
water concentration is optional for all 1065.210(a) to include an example of an blend it under the ‘‘other similar
fuels. In 40 CFR 1065.365, we are engine exhaust electrical heater and standards’’ provision in 40 CFR
removing the recommendation of a direction on how to simulate the 1065.750(a)(4). Removing formaldehyde
methane penetration fraction of greater efficiency of the electrical generator, to here increases the allowable blend
than 0.85 for the NMC FID because the account for the work of the electrical tolerance from ±1 percent to ±3 percent
procedure will account for the effect of heater. We are finalizing an efficiency of of the NIST accepted value in addition
the penetration fraction regardless of the 67 percent, as this is the value used in to allowing the use of ‘‘other similar
level of NMC methane penetration. We 40 CFR 86.1869–12(b)(4)(xiii) as the standards’’, as this gas standard now
are also finalizing a corresponding baseline alternator efficiency when must meet the requirements of 40 CFR
change in relation to another change in determining off-cycle improvements of 1065.750(a)(4). Formaldehyde did not
this rule, such that the requirements for high efficiency alternators. appear on its own in 40 CFR
linearity performance of the humidity 1065.750(a)(3), but rather as part of a gas
vii. Fuel and Diesel Exhaust Fluid mixture of 11 gasses in 40 CFR
generator must meet the uncertainty Composition in 40 CFR 1065.655
requirements in 40 CFR 1065.750(a)(6) 1065.750(a)(3)(xiii). The gas blend in 40
that we have added to address the We are finalizing updates to the CFR 1065.750(a)(3)(xiii) is for
accuracy of humidity generators used in elemental mass fraction variables in 40 calibration of an FTIR when the FTIR
the calibration of the FTIRs used for CFR 1065.655(e) to clarify that these are additive method is used for
water measurement. In 40 CFR measured values that are used to determination of NMHC from gaseous
1065.660, we are modifying equations calculate the elemental ratios in the fuel fueled engines. Formaldehyde in an
1065.660–2 and 1065.660–9 by adding mixture. Not the default values from individual gas blend is already covered
the variable for the methane response table 2 of 40 CFR 1065.655. We are also by 40 CFR 1065.750(a)(4). The removal
factor and penetration fraction for the finalizing updates to the variable of formaldehyde from the gas blend in
NMC FID back into the equations, description for carbon mass fraction for 40 CFR 1065.750(a)(3)(xiii) now allows
which we previously removed for equation 1065.655–25 in 40 CFR it to be blended based on the provisions
simplification because the value was set 1065.655(f)(3). This update clarifies that in 40 CFR 1065.750(a)(4) and it can still
to a constant of one. This modification the carbon mass fraction used in the be included in the gas mixture in 40
has no effect on the outcome of the equation is the one determined in 40 CFR 1065.750(a)(3)(xiii) for calibration
calculations if the effect of water on the CFR 1065.655(d). of the FTIR.
NMC performance is not being viii. NO2-to-NO Converter Conversion x. Drift Validation of Emissions in 40
accounted for because the procedure Verification in 40 CFR 1065.378 CFR 1065.672
directs that the methane response factor
and penetration fraction for the NMC We are finalizing an update to the We are finalizing an update to 40 CFR
FID are set to one. If the effect of water NOX converter efficiency check in 40 1065.672(c) to delete occurances of
is being accounted for, these modified CFR 1065.378, adding an exception as a ‘‘brake-specific’’ as it relates to emission
equations make it easier to understand new paragraph (e)(3) to address calculations for drift validation.
the requirements of the procedure. instances where the peak total NO2 Paragraph (c) currently references brake-
concentration expected during the specific emission calculations in 40 CFR
v. ISO 8178 Exceptions in 40 CFR emission test will be high and the 1065.650. 40 CFR 1065.650 includes
1065.601 ozonator used in the converter calculations of mass emissions in
Paragraph (c)(1) of 40 CFR 1065.601 efficiency check cannot generate enough addition to brake-specific emissions.
allows the use of ISO 8178 mass-based NO2 to approximate this level. With this Off-cycle emission testing requires
emission calculations instead of the change, a lab may request EPA approval calculation Bin 1 emissions rates that
calculations specified in 40 CFR part to use an NO2 gas in lieu of generating are in mass per unit time. This change
1065, subpart G, with two exceptions. NO2 from NO gas using an ozonator. will make the use of 40 CFR 1065.672
We are updating the section reference to High peak total NO2 emission more universal and apply to mass
the exception in 40 CFR concentrations could occur when emission rates and not just brake-
1065.601(c)(1)(i) for NOX humidity and performing OBD system certification specific emission rates.
temperature correction from ISO 8178– where, for example, a manufacturer
1 Section 14.4 to ISO 8178–4 Section could be testing failed components that IV. Program Costs
9.1.6 to address updates made to ISO result in high NO2 to NOX ratio with In this section, we present the costs
8178 over the last 20 years that changed high total NOX (around 2000 ppm) or we estimate will be incurred by
the location of this correction. We are when measuring NOX from raw exhaust manufacturers and purchasers of HD
199
Fmt 4701
vehicles impacted by the final 2. Manufacturer Costs, or g. Operating costs, which include fuel
standards. We also present the social ‘‘manufacturer RPE,’’ which is the costs (including costs for diesel,
costs of the final standards. Our package RPE less any applicable battery gasoline, CNG, electricity [which varies
analyses characterize the costs of the tax credits. This includes: depending on whether the vehicle is
potential compliance pathway’s a. Package RPE. Traditionally, the charged at a depot or at a public
technology packages described in package RPE is the manufacturer RPE in charging facility], and hydrogen), costs
section II.F of the preamble; however, as EPA cost analyses for HD standards. for diesel exhaust fluid (DEF),
we note there, manufacturers may elect b. Battery tax credit from IRA section maintenance and repair costs,
to comply using a different combination 13502, ‘‘Advanced Manufacturing insurance, battery replacement costs,
of HD vehicle and engine technologies Production Credit,’’ which serves to ICE vehicle engine rebuild costs, and
than what we have modeled. We present reduce manufacturer costs. The battery EVSE replacement costs.
these costs not only in terms of the tax credit is described further in 4. Social Costs, which are the sum of
upfront incremental technology cost sections ES and II of this preamble and package RPE, EVSE RPE, and operating
differences between an HD BEV or Chapters 1 and 2 of the RIA. costs and computed on at a fleet level
FCEV powertrain and a comparable HD 3. Purchaser Costs, which are the sum on an annual basis. Note that fuel taxes,
ICE powertrain,910 but also how those of purchaser (1) upfront costs (which Federal excise tax, state sales tax and
costs will change in years following include the upfront vehicle costs battery, vehicle and EVSE tax credits are
implementation due to learning-by- (manufacturer (also referred to as not included in the social costs. Taxes,
doing effects. These technology costs are purchaser) RPE plus applicable Federal registration fees, and tax credits are
presented in terms of direct excise and state sales taxes less any transfers as opposed to social costs.
manufacturing costs (DMC) and applicable vehicle tax credit) plus Social costs includes:
associated indirect costs. These direct applicable EVSE costs), and (2) a. Package RPE (which excludes
and indirect costs when summed and operating costs. This includes: applicable tax credits).
multiplied by vehicle sales are referred a. Manufacturer RPE. In other words, b. EVSE RPE (which excludes
to as ‘‘technology package costs’’ in this the purchaser incurs the manufacturer’s applicable tax credits).
section, and when estimated relative to package costs less any applicable battery c. Operating costs which include pre-
the reference case 911 represent the tax credits. We refer to this as the tax fuel costs, electricity costs
estimated costs incurred by ‘‘manufacturer RPE’’ in relation to the (including those associated with
manufacturers (i.e., regulated entities) to manufacturer and, at times, the electrification infrastructure and a
comply with the final standards should ‘‘purchaser RPE’’ in relation to the public charging network), DEF costs,
a manufacturer choose to comply using purchaser. These two terms are insurance, maintenance and repair
the compliance pathway EPA modeled equivalent in this analysis. costs, battery replacement costs, ICE
as one means of showing the standards’ b. Vehicle tax credit from IRA section vehicle engine rebuild costs, and EVSE
feasibility. 13403, ‘‘Qualified Commercial Clean replacement costs.
More specifically, we break the costs Vehicles,’’ which serve to reduce We describe these costs and present
into the following categories and purchaser costs. The vehicle tax credit our cost estimates in the text that
subcategories: is described further in sections I and II follows, after we discuss the relevant
1. Technology Package Costs, which of this preamble and Chapters 1 and 2 IRA tax credits and how we have
are the sum of DMC and indirect costs. of the RIA. considered them in our estimates. All
This may also be called the package c. Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment costs are presented in 2022 dollars
retail price equivalent (package RPE). (EVSE) costs, which are the costs (2022$), unless noted otherwise. For
This includes: associated with charging equipment both the reference and final standards
a. DMC, which include the costs of installed at depots. Our EVSE cost scenarios, we used the MOVES outputs
materials and labor to produce a estimates include indirect costs so are discussed in RIA Chapter 4 913 to
product or piece of technology. sometimes referred to as ‘‘EVSE RPE.’’ compute technology costs and operating
b. Indirect costs, which include d. EVSE tax credit from IRA section costs as well as social costs on an
research and development (R&D), 13404, ‘‘Alternative Fuel Refueling annual basis. The costs and tax credits
warranty, corporate operations (such as Property Credit,’’ which serve to reduce are estimated on a per vehicle basis and
salaries, pensions, health care costs, purchaser costs. The EVSE tax credit is do not change between the reference
dealer support, and marketing), and described further in sections I and II of and final standards cases, but the
profits.912 We estimate indirect costs this preamble and Chapters 1 and 2 of estimated vehicle populations of the ICE
using RPE markups. the RIA. vehicles, BEVs or FCEVs do change
e. Federal excise tax and state sales between the reference and final
910 Baseline vehicles are ICE vehicles meeting the
tax, which are upfront costs incurred for standards cases. The modeled potential
previous MY 2027 Phase 2 standards discussed in compliance pathway’s technology
RIA Chapter 2.2.2 and the HD2027 Low NOX select vehicles for excise tax and for all
standards discussed in RIA Chapter 2.3.2. heavy-duty vehicles for sales tax. packages project an increase in BEV and
911 As discussed in RIA Chapter 4.2.2, the
f. Purchaser upfront vehicle costs, FCEV sales and a decrease in ICE
reference case or scenario is a no-action scenario
which include the manufacturer (also vehicle sales in the final standards case
that represents emissions in the U.S. without the compared to the reference case and
final rulemaking. Note, reference case cost estimates referred to as purchaser) RPE plus EVSE
also include costs associated with replacing a costs plus applicable Federal excise and these changes in vehicle populations are
comparable ICE powertrain baseline vehicle with a state sales taxes less any applicable the determining factor for total cost
BEV or FCEV powertrain for ZEV adoption rates in
vehicle tax credits. differences between the reference and
the reference case.
final standards cases.

912 Technology costs represent costs that
In general, the final rule cost analysis
manufacturers are expected to attempt to recapture manufacturers in the heavy-duty industry, a
via new vehicle sales. As such, profits are included competitive for-profit industry, to sustain their methodology mirrors the approach we
in the indirect cost calculation. Clearly, profits are operations. As such, manufacturers are expected to
not a ‘‘cost’’ of compliance—EPA is not imposing make a profit on the compliant vehicles they sell, 913 As discussed in RIA Chapter 4.2.2, the final
new regulations to force manufacturers to make a and we therefore include those profits in estimating standards scenario or case represents emissions in
profit. However, profits are necessary for technology costs. the U.S. with the final HD GHG Phase 3 standards.
200
Fmt 4701
took for the proposal, with some (reflecting manufacturers’ compliance We received various costs-related
updates to our modeling. Our final rule with the ACT program in California and comments for vehicle costs, EVSE costs,
analysis was conducted using the latest in the seven other states and a lower, state sales tax, Federal excise tax,
dollar value, 2022$, which represents an non-zero level of ZEV adoption in the maintenance and repair, insurance, fuel
update from the 2021$ used in the other 42 states as discussed in preamble and charging costs, as well as comments
NPRM analysis. Many of our direct section V.A) and a slower phase in of regarding the implications of the IRA
manufacturing costs of technologies final standards. and BIL. Many of these comments are
have been revised based on Note that the analysis that follows summarized and responded to in
consideration of comments and data sometimes presents undiscounted costs preamble section II, and the detailed
received, as discussed in more detail in and sometimes presents discounted comments and our responses are in RTC
preamble section II. Similarly, the costs. We discount future costs and sections 2 and 3. Any applicable
operating costs including fuel prices, benefits to properly characterize their changes to costs discussed in those
electricity prices (now for both depot value in the present or, as directed by sections and RIA Chapter 2 are reflected
and public charging), and hydrogen the Office of Management and Budget in in the rest of this preamble section and
prices have been updated, including to the currently applicable Circular A–4 in RIA Chapter 3.
reflect the latest projections, as (2003), in the year costs and benefits
described in RIA Chapter 2. The begin. Also, in that same guidance, In addition, we received comments on
purchaser costs for the final rule reflect OMB directs use of both 3 and 7 percent learning and RPE, and those comments
the Move to first inclusion of insurance discount rates as we have done with are addressed in this section and in RTC
costs, sales tax, and the Federal excise some exceptions.915 While we were section 12. Briefly, for RPE, commenters
tax as applicable, also described in that conducting the analysis for this rule, argued that EPA used too low of a factor
Chapter 2. The maintenance and repair OMB finalized an update to Circular A– and based the RPE on dated
costs for vocational ICE vehicles have 4 (2023),916 in which it recommended information, but commenters did not
been reduced, after consideration of the general application of a 2-percent provide better, more recent, or
comments. This change led to a discount rate to costs and benefits. The additional data. We therefore continue
decrease in the M&R costs of the BEVs January 1, 2025, effective date of the to consider our NPRM approach to be
and FCEVs accordingly,914 but in updated Circular A–4 means that the appropriate and provide more recent
addition we applied higher M&R costs updated Circular A–4 does not apply to supporting data in section 14.2 of the
for BEVs and FCEVs in the early years this rulemaking, we have also included RTC. For the learning curve used in the
of the Phase 3 program. These changes 2 percent discount rates in our analysis. NPRM, there was generally agreement
are explained in more detail in RIA Present and annualized values are across commenters on this issue that
Chapter 2. Finally, battery replacement, abbreviated as PV and AV throughout some accounting for savings reflecting
ICE vehicle engine rebuilds, and EVSE the document tables in this section. learning was appropriate. However,
replacements are additional operating some commenters acknowledged
costs in the final rule that were not 915 See Advisory Circular A–4, Office of savings over time attributed to learning
included in the NPRM. It is worth Management and Budget, September 17, 2003. by doing but maintained that the
916 See updated Advisory Circular A–4, Office of
noting that, as described in preamble learning process has commenced
Management and Budget, November 9, 2023. The
section V, the overall cost savings of the effective date of the updated Circular is March 1, already since heavy-duty BEVs are
final program are lower than the 2024, for regulatory analyses received by OMB in already being produced and sold. After
proposal due to the increased number of support of proposed rules, interim final rules, and consideration of comments that BEV
direct final rules, and January 1, 2025, for learning has begun, for the final rule, we
ZEVs considered in the reference case regulatory analyses received by OMB in support of
other final rules. In other words, the updated shifted the battery learning onto the
914 As described in the NPRM and in this section Circular applies to the regulatory analyses for draft flatter portion of the learning curve used
IV, our methodology to estimate BEV and FCEV proposed rules that are formally submitted to OIRA in the proposal as shown in Figure IV–
maintenance costs involves multiplying diesel after February 29, 2024, and for draft final rules that
vehicle maintenance costs by a factor based on cited are formally submitted to OIRA after December 31,
1. Details of this adjustment are in
research. 2024. Chapter 2.4 of the RIA.
201
Fmt 4701
We also received comment about with compliance with the final MY 2027 year-by-year by a learning factor
inclusion of dealer costs and we and later CO2 emission standards (see provides a year-over-year cost for each
estimate them as a portion of RPE in the Chapter 3 of the RIA) based on the technology as applied to new vehicle
indirect manufacturing costs of projected technology packages modeled production, which EPA then used to
technology package costs in the final for the potential compliance pathway. calculate total technology package costs
rule, as discussed in section IV.B.2 and Individual technology piece costs are of the final standards.
in Chapter 3 of the RIA. presented in Chapters 2 of the RIA. In This technology package cost
A. IRA Tax Credits general, for the first MY of each final calculation approach presumes that the
emission standard, the per vehicle projected technologies (i.e., those in the
Our cost analysis quantitatively individual technology piece costs
includes consideration of three IRA tax particular technology package
consist of the DMC estimated for each developed by EPA as a potential
credits, specifically the ‘‘Advanced vehicle in the model year of the final
Manufacturing Production Credit,’’, compliance pathway to support the
standards and are used as a starting feasibility of the final standards) will be
‘‘Qualified Commercial Clean point in estimating both the technology
Vehicles,’’, and ‘‘Alternative Fuel purchased by the vehicle original
package costs and the total incremental equipment manufacturers (OEMs) from
Refueling Property Credit’’ applied to costs. Following each year of when costs
battery cost, vehicle purchase cost, and their suppliers. So, while the DMC
are first incurred, we have applied a estimates for the OEM in section IV.B.1
EVSE purchase cost respectively learning effect to represent the cost
(sections II.E.1, II.E.2, II.E.3, and II.E.4 include the indirect costs and profits
reductions expected to occur via the incurred by the supplier, the indirect
of the preamble and Chapters 1.3.2 and ‘‘learning by doing’’ phenomenon.917
2.4.3 of the RIA). We note that a detailed cost markups we apply in section IV.B.2
However, for the final rule, we started cover the indirect costs incurred by
discussion of how these tax credits were the BEV learning scale in MY 2026,
considered in our analysis of costs in OEMs to incorporate the new
rather than MY 2027 after consideration technologies into their vehicles and the
our technology packages may be found of comments received that BEV learning
in section II.E of the preamble and profit margins for the OEM typical of
may begin before MY 2027. This was the heavy-duty vehicle industry. To
Chapter 2.4.3 of the RIA. The battery tax implemented by recalculating the BEV
credit is expected to reduce address these OEM indirect costs, we
learning scalars, such that MY 2027 is then applied industry standard RPE
manufacturer costs, and in turn equal to a learning value of 1 but
purchaser costs, as discussed in section markup factors to the DMC to estimate
retaining the growth rate as if the scalar indirect costs associated with the new
IV.C. The vehicle tax credit and EVSE
started in MY 2026. See RIA Chapter technology. These factors represent an
tax credit are also expected to reduce
3.2.1 for a more detailed description of average price, or RPE, for products
purchaser costs, as discussed in section
how this was implemented. The assuming all products recapture costs in
IV.D.2. For the cost analysis discussed
‘‘learning by doing’’ phenomenon is the the same way. We recognize that this is
in this section IV, the battery tax credit,
process by which doing something over rarely the actual case since
vehicle tax credit and EVSE tax credit
and over results in learning how to do manufacturers typically have different
were estimated for MYs 2027 through
that thing more efficiently which, in pricing strategies for different products.
2032 and then aggregated for each
turn, leads to reduced resource usage, For that reason, the RPE should not be
MOVES source type and regulatory
i.e., cost savings. The DMC as modified considered the price for each individual
class.
technology package but instead should
B. Technology Package Costs 917 ‘‘Cost Reduction through Learning in
be considered more like the average
Manufacturing Industries and in the Manufacture of
Technology package costs include Mobile Sources, Final Report and Peer Review price needed to recapture both costs and
ER22AP24.078</GPH>
estimated technology costs associated Report,’’ EPA–420–R–16–018, November 2016. profits to support ongoing business
202
Fmt 4701
operations. Both the learning effects the technology piece costs of replacing vehicle and how those costs decrease
applied to direct costs and the a comparable ICE powertrain baseline over time on a fleet level are presented
application of markup factors to vehicle with a BEV or FCEV powertrain. in section IV.E.1 of this preamble.
estimate indirect costs are consistent Note, reference case costs estimates also
2. Indirect Manufacturing Costs
with the cost estimation approaches include costs associated with replacing
used in EPA’s past HD GHG regulatory a comparable ICE powertrain baseline Indirect manufacturing costs are all
programs.918 The sum of the DMC and vehicle with a BEV or FCEV powertrain the costs associated with producing the
indirect costs represents our estimate of for ZEV adoption rates in the reference unit of output that are not direct
technology ‘‘package costs’’ or ‘‘package case. manufacturing costs—for example, they
RPE’’ per vehicle year-over-year. These We have estimated the DMC by may be related to research and
per vehicle technology package costs are estimating the cost of removing the cost development (R&D), warranty, corporate
multiplied by estimated sales for the of the ICE powertrain, and adding the operations (such as salaries, pensions,
final standards and reference scenarios. cost of a BEV or FCEV powertrain, as health care costs, dealer support, and
Then the total technology package- presented in Chapter 2 and 3 of the RIA. marketing) and profits. An example of a
related costs for manufacturers (total In other words, net incremental costs R&D cost for these final standards
package costs or total package RPE) reflect adding the total costs of includes the engineering resources
associated with the final HD GHG Phase components added to the powertrain to required to develop a battery state of
3 standards is the difference between make it a BEV or FCEV, as well as health monitor as described in preamble
the final standards and reference removing the total costs of components section III.B.1. An example of a
scenarios. removed from a comparable ICE warranty cost is the future cost covered
baseline vehicle to make it a BEV or by the manufacturer to repair defective
1. Direct Manufacturing Costs
FCEV. BEV or FCEV components and meet the
To produce a unit of output, Chapter 4 of the RIA contains a warranty requirements discussed in
manufacturers incur direct and indirect description of the MOVES vehicle section III.B.2. Indirect costs are
manufacturing costs. DMC include cost source types and regulatory classes. In generally recovered by allocating a share
of materials and labor costs. Indirect short, we estimate costs in MOVES for of the indirect costs to each unit of
manufacturing costs are discussed in the vehicle source types that have both goods sold. Although direct costs can be
following section, IV.B.2. The DMCs regulatory class populations and allocated to each unit of goods sold, it
presented here include the incremental associated emission inventories. Also, is more challenging to account for
technology piece costs associated with throughout this section, LHD refers to indirect costs allocated to a unit of
compliance with the final standards as light heavy-duty vehicles, MHD refers to goods sold. To ensure that regulatory
compared to the technology piece costs medium heavy-duty vehicles, and HHD analyses capture the changes in indirect
associated with the comparable baseline refers to heavy heavy-duty vehicles.920 costs, markup factors (which relate total
vehicle.919 Our modeled potential The direct costs are then adjusted to indirect costs to total direct costs) have
compliance pathway to meet the final account for learning effects on BEV, been developed and used by EPA and
standards are technology packages that FCEV and ICE vehicle powertrains on other stakeholders. These factors are
include both ICE vehicle and ZEV an annual basis going forward beginning often referred to as RPE multipliers and
technologies. In our analysis, the ICE with the first year of the analysis, e.g., are typically applied to direct costs to
vehicles include a suite of technologies MY 2027, for the final standards and estimate indirect costs. RPE multipliers
that represent a vehicle that meets the reference scenarios. Overall, under the provide, at an aggregate level, the
previous MY 2027 Phase 2 CO2 modeled potential compliance pathway proportionate share of revenues relative
emission standards. Therefore, our we anticipate the number of ICE shares of revenue where:
direct manufacturing costs for the ICE powertrains (including engines and Revenue = Direct Costs + Indirect Costs
vehicles are considered to be $0 because transmissions) manufactured each year Revenue/Direct Costs = 1 + Indirect
our projected technology package did will decrease as more ZEVs enter the Costs/Direct Costs = RPE multiplier
not add additional CO2-reducing market. Due to decreasing production of Resulting in:
technologies to the ICE vehicles beyond ICE powertrains, this scenario may lead
those in the baseline vehicle (we note Indirect Costs = Direct Costs × (RPE¥1)
to slower cost reductions going forward If the relationship between revenues
that even though such improvements than would typically occur from
were not included in the modeled and direct costs (i.e., RPE multiplier)
learning-by-doing in the context of can be shown to equal an average value
potential compliance pathway, component costs for ICE powertrains.
additional improvements and over time, then an estimate of direct
On the other hand, with the inclusion costs can be multiplied by that average
technologies for vehicles with ICE are of new hardware costs projected in our
feasible and manufacturers could utilize value to estimate revenues, or total
HD2027 final rule’s modeled potential costs. Further, that difference between
such technologies to meet the final compliance pathway to meet the
standards; see preamble section II.F for estimated revenues, or total costs, and
HD2027 emission standards, we expect estimated direct costs can be taken as
examples of additional potential learning effects will reduce the
compliance pathways that include the indirect costs. Cost analysts and
incremental cost of these technologies. regulatory agencies have frequently
technologies for vehicles with ICE with Chapter 2 and 3 of the RIA includes a
such improvements). The DMC of the used these multipliers to predict the
detailed description of the approach resultant impact on costs associated
BEVs or FCEVs could be thought of as used to apply learning effects in this with manufacturers’ responses to
analysis and reflects consideration of regulatory requirements and we are
918 See the Phase 1 heavy-duty greenhouse gas
rule (76 FR beginning at 57319, September 15,

the comments received on our approach using that approach in this analysis.
2011); the Phase 2 heavy-duty greenhouse gas rule to learning. The resultant DMC per The final cost analysis estimates
(81 FR 73863, October 25, 2016). indirect costs by applying the RPE
919 Baseline vehicles are ICE vehicles meeting the 920 As explained in preamble section V, MOVES
previous MY 2027 Phase 2 standards discussed in vehicle definitions encompass the regulatory
markup factor used in past EPA
RIA Chapter 2.2.2 and the HD2027 Low NOX subcategories of the final standards but are not rulemakings (such as those setting GHG
standards discussed in RIA Chapter 2.3.2. identical to them. standards for heavy-duty vehicles and
203
Fmt 4701
engines).921 The markup factors are manufacturers in the heavy-duty 1 are the RPE factors for light-duty
based on company filings with the industry.922 The RPE factors for the HD vehicle manufacturers.923
Securities and Exchange Commission vehicle industry as a whole are shown
for several engine and engine/vehicle in Table IV–1. Also shown in Table IV–
For this analysis, EPA based indirect level. For that reason, we believe the consideration of comment, EPA is
cost estimates for diesel and compressed two respective vehicle industry RPE clarifying that we accounted for these
natural gas (CNG) regulatory classes on values represent the most appropriate costs in the RPE multipliers.924 The
the HD Truck Industry RPE value shown factors for this analysis. EPA received heavy-duty RPE in Table IV–1 is based
in Table IV–1. We are using an RPE of comments on RPE and commenters on values from the report, ‘‘Heavy Duty
1.42 to compute the indirect costs argued that EPA used too low of a factor Truck Retail Price Equivalent and
associated with the replacement of a and based the RPE on dated Indirect Cost Multipliers,’’ 925 which
diesel-fueled or CNG-fueled powertrain information. After consideration of the contains detailed cost contributor
with a BEV or FCEV powertrain. For comment, EPA has clarified that the subcategories, including costs
this analysis, EPA based indirect cost RPE accounts for dealer costs, as associated with dealer support. Within
estimates for gasoline regulatory classes described in this section. Including this the dealer support costs, the
on the LD Vehicle RPE value shown in clarification, EPA finds that the contribution of new dealer selling costs
Table IV–1 because the engines and multiplier we used is appropriate and in the RPE mark-up includes a 6 percent
vehicles more closely match those built based on robust data and analysis. markup over manufacturing cost for
by LD vehicle manufacturers. We are Moreover, commenters did not provide dealer new vehicle selling costs, from
using an RPE of 1.5 to compute the better, more recent, or additional data to the ‘‘Other’’ cost contributor shown in
indirect costs associated with the update values for RPE, and EPA is not Table IV–1.
replacement of a gasoline-fueled aware of any such data. Therefore, we Dealer new vehicle selling costs for
powertrain with a BEV or FCEV continue with the approach used in the CY 2027 through 2032 are shown in
powertrain. The heavy-duty vehicle NPRM. Table IV–2. We calculated the dealer
industry is becoming more vertically EPA received comment that dealers new vehicle selling costs as 6 percent of
integrated and the direct and indirect may encounter new costs when new the total direct cost calculated for the
manufacturing costs we are analyzing products are introduced (which we refer final standards. Table IV–2 also shows
are those that reflect the technology to in this rulemaking as ‘‘dealer new the undiscounted sum of dealer new
packages costs OEMs would try to vehicle selling costs’’), such as vehicle selling costs from CY 2027 to
recover at the end purchaser, or retail, technician training to repair ZEVs. After 2032.
ER22AP24.080</GPH>
921 76 FR 57322; 81 FR 73863. technology in the automobile industry. repair reflect a later start date for BEVs and FCEVs
922 Heavy Duty Truck Retail Price Equivalent and International Journal of Production Economics to account for the need for initial technician
Indirect Cost Multipliers, Draft Report, July 2010. (2009), doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.11.031. training.
923 Rogozhin,A., et al., Using indirect cost 924 See also preamble section II.E.5 explaining 925 Heavy Duty Truck Retail Price Equivalent and
ER22AP24.079</GPH>
multipliers to estimate the total cost of adding new that our cost savings estimates for maintenance and Indirect Cost Multipliers, Draft Report, July 2010.
204
Fmt 4701
3. Vehicle Technology Package RPE package for the final standards as a comparable ICE vehicle. However,
compared to the baseline vehicle. manufacturers may also price products
Table IV–3 presents the total fleet- It is important to note that these are higher or lower than what would be
wide incremental technology costs costs and not prices. As we explained necessary to account for the incremental
estimated for the final standards relative previously in this section, we do not cost difference. EPA is not attempting to
to the reference case for the projected attempt to estimate how manufacturers mirror, predict, or otherwise
adoption of ZEVs in our technology will price their products in the approximate individual companies’
package on an annual basis. As technology package costs. marketing strategies in estimating costs
previously explained in this section, the Manufacturers may pass costs along to
for the modeled potential compliance
costs shown in Table IV–3 reflect purchasers via price increases that
pathway.926
marginal direct and indirect reflect actual incremental costs to
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
manufacturing costs of the technology manufacture a ZEV when compared to
926 We have likewise noted that our modeled
potential compliance pathway is just one potential

means manufacturers may use to meet the final
standards. By law, EPA must consider the
compliance costs of standards, and to do so, must
develop a potential compliance pathway for such
standards in order to estimate those costs.
205
Fmt 4701
C. Manufacturer Costs this section as manufacturer’s RPE), as reference case in 2022$ under the
we expect the battery tax credit to potential compliance pathway. These
1. Relationship to Technology Package
reduce manufacturer costs, and in turn estimates were based on the detailed
RPE
purchaser costs. The DMCs without the discussion in RIA Chapter 2 of how we
The manufacturer costs in EPA’s past battery tax credit are included in section considered battery tax credits. Both
HD GHG rulemaking cost analyses on an IV.E.1. BEVs and FCEVs include a battery in
average-per-vehicle basis was only the the powertrain system that may meet
average-per-vehicle technology package 2. Battery Tax Credit
the IRA battery tax credit requirements
RPE described in section II.F. However, Table IV–4 shows the annual
if the applicable criteria are met. The
in the cost analysis for this final rule, estimated fleet-wide battery tax credits
we are also taking into account the IRA from IRA section 13502, ‘‘Advanced battery tax credits begin to phase down
battery tax credit in our estimates of Manufacturing Production Credit,’’ for starting in CY 2030 and expire after CY
manufacturer costs (also referred to in the final standards relative to the 2032.
ER22AP24.081</GPH>
206
Fmt 4701
3. Manufacturer RPE manufacturer RPE is shown in Table IV– shown in the manufacturer RPE column.
The manufacturer RPE for BEVs is 5. Table IV–5 reflects learning effects on The difference in manufacturer RPE
calculated by subtracting the battery tax vehicle package RPE and battery tax under the potential compliance pathway
credit in Table IV–4 from the credits from CY 2027 through 2055. The between the final standards and
corresponding technology package RPE sum of the vehicle package RPE and reference case is presented in Table IV–
from Table IV–3 and the resultant battery tax credits for each year is 5.
ER22AP24.082</GPH>
207
Fmt 4701
D. Purchaser Costs battery tax credit from the manufacturer for the final standards relative to the
to the purchaser. In other words, in this reference case, in 2022$ under the
1. Purchaser RPE
analysis, the manufacturer RPE and potential compliance pathway. These
The purchaser RPE is the estimated purchaser RPE are equivalent terms. The estimates were based on the detailed
upfront vehicle cost paid by the purchaser RPEs reflect the same values discussion in RIA Chapter 2 of how we
purchaser prior to considering the IRA as the corresponding manufacturer RPEs considered vehicle tax credits. The
vehicle tax credits. Note, as explained in presented in section IV.C.3. vehicle tax credits carry through to MY
section IV.C, we do consider the IRA
2. Vehicle Purchase Tax Credit 2032 with the value diminishing over
battery tax credit in estimating the
time as vehicle costs decrease due to the
manufacturer RPE, which in this Table IV–6 shows the annual
learning effect as shown in RIA Chapter
analysis we then consider to be estimated vehicle tax credit for BEVs

equivalent to the purchaser RPE because and FCEVs from IRA section 13403, 2. Beginning in CY 2033, the tax credit
we assume full pass-through of the IRA ‘‘Qualified Commercial Clean Vehicles,’’ program expires.
ER22AP24.083</GPH>
208
Fmt 4701
3. Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment operating costs. These end user costs that up to two vehicles can share one
Costs include the production, distribution, DCFC port if there is sufficient dwell
As we included in the analysis for the storage, and dispensing at a public time for both vehicles to meet their
NPRM, we accounted for the EVSE charging or fueling station. This daily charging needs for vocational
hardware and associated installation approach is consistent with the method vehicles and up to four for tractors.927
costs for equipment installed at depots, we use in HD TRUCS for comparable While fleet owners may also choose to
as described in Chapter 2.6 of the RIA. ICE vehicles, where the equivalent share Level 2 chargers across vehicles,
For the final rule, we have also included diesel fuel costs are included in the we are conservatively assigning one
BEVs that would solely depend on diesel fuel price instead of accounting Level 2 charger per vehicle. As
public charging in the technology for the costs of fuel stations separately. discussed in the RIA, we assume that
package to support the final standards. The depot EVSE cost estimates EVSE costs are incurred by purchasers,
The purchasers of these vehicles would include both direct and indirect costs i.e., heavy-duty vehicle purchasers/
not incur an upfront cost to purchase and are sometimes referred to in these owners. We analyzed EVSE costs in
and install EVSE. As discussed in RIA final standards as EVSE RPE costs. As 2022$ on a fleet-wide basis under the
Chapter 2.4.4.2 for public charging and discussed in RIA Chapter 2.6.2, we potential compliance pathway for this
in Chapter 2.5.3 for FCEVs, we included increased the depot EVSE costs for the analysis. The annual costs associated
the respective infrastructure cost in our final rule to reflect consideration of the with EVSE in the final standards
retail electricity prices per kwh and cost data we received in comments. For relative to the reference case are shown
retail prices per kg of hydrogen in our these EVSE cost estimates, we project in Table IV–7.
927 We note that for some of the vehicle types we DCFC port and still meet their daily electricity
ER22AP24.084</GPH>
evaluated, more than two vehicles could share a consumption needs.
209
Fmt 4701
4. EVSE Tax Credit Refueling Property Credit,’’ for the final RIA Chapter 2 of how we considered
standards relative to the reference case, EVSE tax credits. The EVSE tax credits
Table IV–8 shows the annual in 2022$ under the potential carry through to MY 2032. Beginning in
estimated EVSE tax credit from IRA compliance pathway. These estimates CY 2033, the tax credit program expires.
section 13404, ‘‘Alternative Fuel were based on the detailed discussion in
ER22AP24.085</GPH>
210
Fmt 4701
5. Federal Excise Tax, State Sales Tax tax because of higher BEV and FCEV vehicles and all tractors, as discussed in
upfront vehicle cost under the potential RIA Chapter 2.4.3.2. Similarly, a state
As discussed in preamble section compliance pathway. We agree with the tax of 5.02 percent, the average sales tax
II.E.5, in the NPRM we did not account commenters that the cost analysis in the U.S. for heavy-duty vehicles
for the upfront taxes paid by the should include the impact of the FET discussed in RIA Chapter 2.4.3.1, was
purchaser of the vehicle. Several and State Sales Tax on purchasers. For applied to the upfront powertrain
commenters raised concerns about the final rule, we added FET and state technology retail price equivalent and
additional costs that were not included sale tax as a part of the purchaser was added to all vehicles for the final
in HD TRUCS for the proposal. The upfront vehicle cost calculation. A FET rule analysis. Table IV–9 shows the
concern raised by the greatest number of of 12 percent was applied to the upfront estimated state sales tax and Federal
commenters was the additional cost powertrain technology retail price excise tax by calendar year for the final
from Federal excise tax and state sales equivalent for Class 8 heavy-duty standards relative to the reference case.
ER22AP24.086</GPH>
211
Fmt 4701
6. Purchaser Upfront Costs upfront incremental costs include the calendar year for the final standards
purchaser RPE discussed in section relative to the reference case. Note that
The expected upfront incremental IV.D.1 less the vehicle tax credit EVSE costs are associated only with
costs to the purchaser include the discussed in section IV.D.2 plus the BEVs using depot charging; FCEVs and
purchaser upfront vehicle costs plus the EVSE RPE in IV.D.3 less the EVSE tax BEVs solely using public charging do
purchaser upfront EVSE costs as credit in section IV.D.4 and plus the not have any associated upfront EVSE
applicable, after tax credits and Federal excise tax and state sales tax in costs because those costs are reflected in
including FET and sales state tax, under section IV.D.5. Table IV–10 shows the the public hydrogen refueling and
the potential compliance pathway. In estimated incremental upfront charging electricity costs.
other words, the estimated purchaser purchaser costs for BEVs and FCEVs by
ER22AP24.087</GPH>
212
Fmt 4701
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C comparable ICE vehicles, changes to

powertrains. These six types of
7. Operating Costs operating costs include changes in fuel insurance costs of BEVs and FCEVs as
costs of BEVs and FCEVs compared to compared to comparable ICE vehicles,
We have estimated six types of comparable ICE vehicles, avoided diesel battery replacement and ICE engine
operating costs associated with the final exhaust fluid (DEF) consumption by rebuild costs and EVSE replacement
HD GHG Phase 3 emission standards BEVs and FCEVs compared to costs. To estimate fuel, DEF and
and our potential compliance pathway’s comparable diesel-fueled ICE vehicles, maintenance and repair costs of ICE
projected technology packages that reduced maintenance and repair costs of vehicles, EPA used the results of
ER22AP24.088</GPH>
includes ICE, BEV and FCEV BEVs and FCEVs as compared to MOVES runs, as discussed in RIA
213
Fmt 4701
Chapter 4, to estimate costs associated i. Costs Associated With Fuel Usage each source type at those respective
with fuel consumption, DEF Costs associated with fuel usage are charge points. The development of the
consumption, and VMT. Similarly, the presented in two ways: on an annual costs per kWh is presented in RIA
electricity, hydrogen fuel, and basis for aggregate costs of all vehicles Chapter 2.4.4.2 and the values used to
maintenance and repair costs of BEVs and on a per mile basis for a specific estimate program costs are shown in
and FCEVs were calculated based on the model year in each MOVES source type Table IV–11. For hydrogen vehicle fuel
MOVES outputs for fuel/electricity and regulatory class. The annual costs costs, we used the hydrogen prices
consumption and VMT. EPA added are presented in section IV.E.3 to show presented in RIA Chapter 2.5.3.1 and
insurance costs for all vehicle types for the overall fuel costs of the policy case presented in RIA Chapter 3 and shown
the final rule analysis based on the compared to the reference case for pre- in Table IV–12. To calculate the average
incremental upfront cost (purchaser tax fuel. The costs on a per mile basis cost per mile of fuel usage for each
RPE) of the vehicle and calculated for are given as an example what a specific scenario, MOVES source type and
MY vehicle in a given MOVES source regulatory class, EPA divided the fuel
each year a vehicle is operating. For the
type and regulatory class could estimate cost by the VMT for each of the MY
final rule cost analysis in this section of
to pay on a per mile basis based on the 2032 vehicles starting in CY 2032 until
the preamble, we also accounted for the CY 2055. The estimates of fuel cost per
costs to rebuild diesel engines and VMT and total cost of all fuel at retail
prices used from the first year the mile for MY 2032 vehicles under the
battery replacement costs and EVSE final rule are shown in Table IV–13,
replacement costs. We have estimated vehicle is in operation until CY 2055.
To determine the total costs Table IV–14, and Table IV–15 for 2
the net effect on fuel costs, DEF costs, percent, 3 percent and 7 percent
maintenance and repair costs, associated with fuel usage for MY 2032
vehicles, the fuel usage for each MOVES discounting, respectively. Values shown
insurance, battery replacements, engine as a dash (‘‘-’’) in Table IV–13, Table IV–
rebuilds, and EVSE replacements. We source type and regulatory class was
multiplied by the fuel price from the 14, and Table IV–15 represent cases
describe our approach in this section where a given MOVES source type and
AEO 2023 reference case for diesel,
(IV.D.7). regulatory class did not use a specific
gasoline, and CNG prices over from CY
Additional details on our 2032 to CY 2055.928 Fuel costs per fuel type for MY 2032 vehicles.929
methodology and estimates of operating gallon and kWh are discussed in RIA The number of ICE vehicles decrease
costs per mile impacts are included in Chapter 2. We used retail fuel prices and ZEV increase in the final standards
RIA Chapter 3.4 as well as insurance, since we expect that retail fuel prices case compared to the reference case
ICE engine rebuilds, BEV battery are the prices paid by owners of these therefore the fuel costs for all vehicles
ICE vehicles. For electric vehicle costs, are less in final standards case when
replacement, and EVSE replacement
the electricity prices used estimates of computed on an annual basis as shown
costs. Chapter 4 of the RIA contains a
the cost per kWh of charging at depot in section IV.E.3 for pre-tax fuel.
description of the MOVES vehicle
source types and regulatory classes. In and public charge points along with
short, we estimate costs based on estimates of the share of charging by 929 For example, there were no vehicles in our
MOVES vehicle source types that have MOVES runs for the transit bus source type in the
928 Reference Case Projection Tables, U.S. Energy LHD45 regulatory class that were diesel-fueled, so
both regulatory class populations and
Information Administration. Annual Energy the value in the table is represented as a dash (‘‘-
associated emission inventories. Outlook 2023. ’’).
214
Fmt 4701
ER22AP24.090</GPH>
ER22AP24.089</GPH>
215
Fmt 4701
ER22AP24.092</GPH>
ER22AP24.091</GPH>
216
Fmt 4701
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C until CY 2055. Note that the DEF class of MY 2032 vehicles from CY 2032
ii. Costs Associated With Diesel Exhaust consumption rates do not change to CY 2055. The DEF cost was computed
Fluid between the policy and reference for the final standards case under the
scenarios, but the total number of miles potential compliance pathway for each
DEF consumption costs in heavy-duty traveled by vehicles consuming DEF fuel type. Several source types and
vehicles were estimated in the HD2027 does change between scenarios. regulatory classes contain no diesel-
final rule.930 We are applying the same Therefore, the DEF costs per mile are fueled ICE vehicles and therefore no
methodology in this analysis to estimate intended to allow a vehicle user an DEF consumption costs. Values shown
the total costs of DEF under the final HD estimate typical costs related to DEF as a dash ‘‘-’’ in Table IV–16, Table IV–
GHG Phase 3 standards. Costs usage and the aggregate annual costs 17, and Table IV–18 represent cases
associated with DEF are presented in show the impacts of the final standards where a given MOVES source type and
two ways in a similar manner for fuel compared and reference case. regulatory class did not use a specific
costs: on an annual basis for aggregate An example of cost estimates of DEF fuel type. Table IV–16, Table IV–17, and
costs of all vehicles and on a per mile on a per mile basis for MY 2032 vehicles Table IV–18 have values of 0 for
basis for a specific model year in each is provided in Table IV–16, Table IV–17, gasoline, electricity, CNG and hydrogen
MOVES source type and regulatory and Table IV–18 for 2 percent, 3
as those vehicles do not consume any
class. The annual costs are presented in percent, and 7 percent discounting,
DEF and therefore do not incur any cost
section IV.E.3 to show the overall DEF respectively. DEF costs per mile were
per mile.
costs of the policy case compared to the estimated by first the totaling DEF costs
reference case. The costs on a per mile for MY 2032 vehicles by taking the DEF The number of diesel vehicles
basis presented here are given as an usage for each MOVES source type and decrease in the final standards case
example what a specific MY vehicle in regulatory class and multiplying by the compared to the reference case therefore
a given MOVES source type and DEF price from CY 2032 to CY 2055.931 the total DEF costs for all vehicles are
regulatory class could estimate to pay Then to calculate the average cost of less in final standards case when
on a per mile basis based on the VMT DEF per mile, the total DEF cost was computed on an annual basis as shown
and total cost of all DEF used from the divided by the total VMT for each in section IV.E.3.
first year the vehicle is in operation MOVES Source Type and regulatory BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
930 88
FR 4296, January 24, 2023. ‘‘Nonconformance Penalties for On-highway Heavy- beyond 2042 projected at the same 1.3 percent rate
931 This
analysis uses the DEF prices presented in duty Diesel Engines: Technical Support as noted in the NCP TSD. Note that the DEF prices
ER22AP24.093</GPH>
the NCP Technical Support Document (see Document,’’ EPA–420–R–12–014) with growth used update the NCP TSD’s 2011 prices to 2022$.
217
Fmt 4701
ER22AP24.094</GPH>
218
Fmt 4701
ER22AP24.096</GPH>
ER22AP24.095</GPH>
219
Fmt 4701
iii. Costs Associated With Maintenance that the M&R savings do not accrue as mile for MY 2032 vehicles in each
and Repair quickly as they did in our NPRM MOVES source type and regulatory class
analysis. The results of our analysis by fuel type for the final standards are
We assessed the estimated show that maintenance and repair costs shown in Table IV–19, Table IV–20, and
maintenance and repair costs of HD ICE associated with HD BEVs and FCEVs are Table IV–21 for 2-percent, 3-percent and
vehicles, BEVs and FCEVs for the estimated to be lower than maintenance 7-percent discount rates, respectively.
reference case and the final standards and repair costs associated with Table IV–19, Table IV–20, and Table IV–
case under the potential compliance comparable ICE vehicles. The 21 demonstrate higher costs per mile of
pathway. After consideration of methodology for how we calculated ICE vehicles compared to ZEV. The
comments, we have reduced the maintenance and repair costs were
maintenance and repair costs for number of ICE vehicles decrease and
estimated is discussed in RIA Chapter
vocational ICE vehicles in the final rule. ZEV increase in the final standards case
2.3.4.2, 2.4.4.1, 2.5.3.2 and Chapter 3 of
This change led to a decrease in the compared to the reference case therefore
the RIA.
M&R costs of the BEVs and FCEVs Maintenance and repair cost in cents the total maintenance and repair costs
accordingly. We made further changes per mile were computed in a similar for all vehicles are less in final
to M&R costs for BEVs and FCEVs in the manner as fuel and DEF costs. The cost standards case when computed on an
early years of the Phase 3 program such of maintenance and repairs in cents per annual basis as shown in section IV.E.3.
ER22AP24.097</GPH>
220
Fmt 4701
ER22AP24.098</GPH>
221
Fmt 4701
iv. Costs Associated With Insurance seen by the operator. Therefore, for the To calculate the year over year
As discussed in preamble section final rule analysis, we included the insurance costs, 3 percent of the initial
II.E.5, we did not take into account the incremental insurance costs of a ZEV vehicle technology package RPE was
cost of insurance on the user in the relative to a comparable ICE vehicle multiplied by estimated sales for the
NPRM. A few commenters suggested we under the potential compliance pathway final standards and reference case and
should consider the addition of by incorporating an annual insurance were computed each year a vehicle was
insurance cost because the incremental cost equal to 3 percent of initial upfront operational. Then the difference
cost of insurance for the ZEVs will be vehicle technology RPE cost, as between the final standards case and
higher than for ICE vehicles. We agree described in section II.E.5 of the reference case insurance costs are
that insurance costs may differ between preamble. This annual cost was applied shown on an annual basis in Table IV–
vehicles, and this is a cost that will be for each operating year of the vehicle. 22.
ER22AP24.099</GPH>
222
Fmt 4701
v. Costs Associated With State registration fees in some cases to replace annual additional registration fee to all
Registration Fees on ZEVs gasoline and diesel road tax revenue. ZEV vehicles of $100 in our cost
Currently, many states do not have any analysis. This annual cost was applied
As discussed in preamble section additional registration fee for EVs. For for each operating year of the vehicle.
II.E.5, we did not take into account the the states that do, the registration fees Then the difference between the final
cost of state registration fees on ZEVs in are generally between $50 and $225 per standards case and reference case for
the NPRM. Commenters suggested we year. While EPA cannot predict whether state registration fees on BEVs costs are
should consider the addition of state and to what extent other states will shown on an annual basis in Table IV–
registration fees on ZEVs because some enact EV registration fees, we have 23.
states have adopted state ZEV nonetheless conservatively added an
ER22AP24.100</GPH>
223
Fmt 4701
vi. Costs Associated With Battery final rule, after consideration of pathway. Battery replacement and
Replacement and Engine Rebuild comment, we added battery replacement engine rebuild frequency and costs
and engine rebuild costs. Table IV–24 depend on MOVES vehicle source type
As discussed in preamble section shows the annual estimated battery and regulatory class. Details about the
II.E.6, we did not take into account the replacement and engine rebuild costs on year of replacement or rebuild and
cost of battery replacement and engine an annual basis relative to the reference associated costs are discussed in RIA
rebuild on the user in the NPRM. In the case under the potential compliance 3.932
932 Sanchez, James. Memorandum to docket EPA– Replacement and Engine Rebuild Costs’’. February
HQ–OAR–2022–0985. ‘‘Estimating Battery 23, 2023.
ER22AP24.101</GPH>
224
Fmt 4701
vii. Costs Associated With EVSE on the expected lifespan of charging a full replacement. Some installation
Replacement infrastructure. We make the simplifying costs such as trenching or electrical
assumption that all depot EVSE ports upgrades may also not be needed for the
As discussed in preamble section have a 15-year equipment lifetime.933 replacement. Table IV–25 shows the
II.E.6, we did not take into account the After that, we assume they must be annual estimated EVSE replacement
cost of EVSE replacement on the user in replaced at full cost. This assumption costs on annual basis relative to the
the NPRM. In the final rule, after likely overestimates costs as some EVSE reference case under the potential
consideration of comment, we added providers may opt to upgrade existing compliance pathway.
EVSE replacement. There is limited data equipment rather than incur the cost of
933 Borlaug, B., Salisbury, S., Gerdes, M., and Vehicles in the United States,’’ 2020. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
ER22AP24.102</GPH>
Muratori, M. ‘‘Levelized Cost of Charging Electric article/pii/S2542435120302312?via%3Dihub.
225
Fmt 4701
E. Social Costs price). All of the costs are computed for 1. Total Vehicle Technology Package
To compute the social costs of the the MOVES reference and final RPE
final rulemaking, we added the standards cases and cost impacts are Table IV–26 reflects learning effects
estimated total vehicle technology presented as the difference between the on DMC and indirect costs from 2027
package RPE from section IV.B.3, total final standards and reference case. through 2055. The sum of the DMC and
operating costs from section IV.D.7, and Additionally, the battery tax credit, indirect manufacturing cost for each
total EVSE RPE from section IV.D.3. We vehicle tax credit, EVSE tax credit, year is shown in the ‘‘Total Technology
note that the fuel costs in this excise taxes, sales taxes, and state Package Costs’’ column and reflects the
subsection’s social cost analysis are registration fees on ZEVs are not difference in total cost between the final
estimated pre-tax rather than what the included in the social costs analysis standards and reference case in the
purchaser will pay (i.e., the retail fuel discussed in this subsection. specific calendar year.
ER22AP24.103</GPH>
226
Fmt 4701
2. Total EVSE RPE basis by the modeled number of BEV case. This is due to the expected
sales in MOVES. Table IV–27 shows the increase in BEVs requiring EVSE in our
Building on the analysis presented in undiscounted annual EVSE RPE cost for modeled potential compliance
section IV.D.3 that discusses EVSE RPE the final standards relative to the pathway’s technology packages. Thus,
cost per vehicle for depot charging, the reference case. The number of EVSE are our modeled compliance pathway for
annual EVSE RPE was estimated by expected to increase over time for the the final standards shows increased
multiplying EVSE RPE on a per vehicle final standards relative to the reference EVSE cost over time.
ER22AP24.104</GPH>
227
Fmt 4701
3. Total Operating Costs the final standards relative to the shown on an annual basis in Table IV–
reference case for each fuel type. Using 28. This is due to the expected increase
EPA computed annual fuel costs projected fuel prices from AEO 2023 in BEVs and FCEVs in our modeled
across the national fleet for each fuel and the estimated electricity and potential compliance pathway resulting
type for the final standards and hydrogen prices as discussed in section in fewer diesel, gasoline, and CNG
reference cases by multiplying the IV.D.7.i, the total, national fleet-wide vehicles in the final standards case
amount of fuel consumed for each costs of electricity and hydrogen compared to the reference case. The net
vehicle modeled in MOVES by the cost consumption increase over time while effect of the final standards shows
of each fuel type. Table IV–28 shows the the costs for diesel, gasoline, and CNG increased operating cost savings over
undiscounted annual fuel savings for consumption decrease over time, as time.
ER22AP24.105</GPH>
228
Fmt 4701
Annual DEF costs for diesel vehicles the cost DEF. Table IV–29 shows the non-diesel vehicles are shown for
were computed for the final standards annual savings associated with less DEF completeness with no savings since
and reference cases by multiplying the consumption in the final standards those vehicles do not consume DEF.
modeled amount of DEF consumed by relative to the reference case; note that
ER22AP24.106</GPH>
229
Fmt 4701
EPA computed annual maintenance attributable to changes in new BEV, repair costs for the fleet of those
and repair costs on an annual basis for FCEV, and ICE vehicle sales and vehicles correspondingly increases. The
all vehicles modeled in MOVES based populations. EPA has not projected any opposite is true for diesel, gasoline, and
on the total annual VMT, vehicle type changes to the maintenance and repair CNG vehicles in that potential
and vehicle age as discussed in costs on a per mile basis for each compliance pathway as there become
preamble section V and RIA Chapters 2 vehicle powertrain type between the fewer of these vehicles in the fleet, such
and 3. Table IV–30 presents the final standards and reference case, but that their total maintenance and repair
maintenance and repair costs associated as more HD ZEVs enter the HD fleet in costs decrease.
with the final rulemaking. The our modeled potential compliance
maintenance and repair costs are pathway, the total maintenance and
ER22AP24.107</GPH>
230
Fmt 4701
Annual insurance costs were FCEV, and ICE vehicle sales and costs for the fleet of those vehicles
computed by EPA on an annual basis for populations in our modeled potential correspondingly increases. The opposite
all vehicles modeled in MOVES based compliance pathway. EPA has not is true for diesel, gasoline, and CNG
on the purchaser RPE, as discussed RIA projected any changes to the insurance vehicles in our modeled potential
Chapter 2 and 3. Table IV–31 presents for each vehicle powertrain type compliance pathway as there become
the insurance costs associated with the between the final standards and fewer of these vehicles in the fleet, such
final rulemaking. The insurance costs reference case, but as more HD ZEVs that the total insurance costs for the
are attributable to changes in new BEV, enter the HD fleet, the total insurance fleet of those vehicles decreases.
ER22AP24.108</GPH>
231
Fmt 4701
Battery replacement and engine populations under the modeled fleet of those vehicles correspondingly
rebuild costs were computed on an potential compliance pathway. EPA has increases. Similarly, ICE engine rebuild
annual basis for select BEV vehicles not projected any changes to the battery costs are applied to ICE vehicles once
modeled in MOVES in the year a BEV/ replacement costs for each vehicle the vehicle reaches its replacement age.
FCEV reaches its replacement age, as powertrain type between the final Table IV–32 presents the battery
discussed in RIA Chapter 2 and 3. The standards and reference case, but as replacement and engine rebuild costs
battery replacement costs are more HD ZEVs enter the HD fleet, the associated with the final rulemaking.
attributable to changes in BEV age and total battery replacement costs for the
ER22AP24.109</GPH>
232
Fmt 4701
EVSE replacement costs were the modeled potential compliance will be more EVSE to replace in the
computed on an annual basis for all pathway. EPA has not projected any final standards compared to the
BEV modeled in MOVES in the year an changes to a single EVSE replacement reference case. Table IV–33 presents the
EVSE reaches its replacement age, as cost between the final standards and EVSE replacement costs associated with
discussed in RIA Chapter 2 and 3. The reference case, but as more HD ZEVs the final rulemaking.
EVSE replacement costs are attributable enter the HD fleet, the total number of
to changes in BEV populations under EVSE increases. For this reason, there
ER22AP24.110</GPH>
233
Fmt 4701
4. Total Social Costs case are shown in Table IV–34. Table not included in the social costs analysis
IV–34 presents costs in 2022$ in discussed in this subsection because
Adding together the cost elements undiscounted annual values along with taxes, registration fees, and tax credits
outlined in sections IV.E.1, IV.E.2, and net present values at 2-percent, 3- are transfers and not social costs.
IV.E.3, we estimated the total social percent and 7-percent discount rates As shown in Table IV–34, starting in
costs associated with the final CO2 with values discounted to the 2027 2035, our analysis demonstrates that
standards which reflect our modeled calendar year. In addition, the battery total program costs under the final
potential compliance pathway; these tax credit, vehicle tax credit, EVSE tax standards scenario are lower than the
total social costs associated with the credit, sales taxes, Federal excise tax total program costs under the reference
final standards relative to the reference and state registration fees for ZEVs are case.
ER22AP24.111</GPH>
234
Fmt 4701
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C address criteria pollutants or air toxics, technology packages described in
V. Estimated Emission Impacts From we project that they will also result in section II. As we note there,
the Final Standards reductions of downstream emissions of manufacturers may elect to comply
both criteria pollutants and air toxics. using a different combination of HD
We project that the final CO2 We project that these anticipated vehicle and engine technologies than we
standards will result in downstream emission reductions will be achieved modeled. In fact, we developed
emission reductions of GHGs934 from through increased adoption of HD additional example potential
heavy-duty vehicles. Downstream vehicle and engine technologies to compliance pathways that meet the final
emission processes are those that come reduce GHG emissions. Examples of Phase 3 MY 2027 through MY 2032 and
directly from a vehicle, such as tailpipe these GHG-reducing technologies that later CO2 emission standards (see
exhaust, crankcase exhaust, evaporative manufacturers may choose to adopt preamble section II.F.3). These
emissions, and refueling emissions. include ICE vehicle technologies, heavy- pathways would achieve the same level
While the final standards do not directly duty battery electric vehicle (BEV) of vehicle CO2 emission reductions and
technologies and fuel cell vehicle downstream CO2 emission reductions
934 Although the final standards do not directly
(FCEV) technologies. We projected the discussed in this section.
address non-CO2 GHGs, we anticipate that the final
standards will result in reductions of downstream emission reductions from the modeled With the modeled increase in
ER22AP24.112</GPH>
emissions of non-CO2 GHGs. potential compliance pathway’s adoption of GHG reducing technologies,
235
Fmt 4701
including heavy-duty BEVs and FCEVs reports that are available online and in considered and estimated by EPA. The
(together referred to as ZEVs), the final the docket for this rulemaking.937 938 modeling for the final rule includes the
standards will also impact upstream To estimate upstream EGU emission three most significant sectors in terms of
emissions of GHGs and other pollutants. impacts from the final standards, we understanding the impact of the
Upstream emissions sources are those used the 2022 post-IRA version of the standards on overall emissions
that do not come from the vehicle itself Integrated Planning Model (IPM), which (downstream, EGUs and refineries). We
but are attributable to a vehicle, such as is a linear programming model that did not estimate impacts on emissions
from electricity generation for charging forecasts EGU operation and emissions from other sectors with comparatively
BEVs, the production of hydrogen used by calculating the most cost-effective smaller potential impacts, like those
to fuel FCEVs, and emissions generated way for the electricity generation and related to the extraction or
during petroleum-based fuel production transmission system to meet its total transportation of fuels for either EGUs
and distribution. We estimated the demand. IPM accounts for many or refineries.940 Detailed discussion of
impacts of the final standards on variables that impact the operation and the comments we received on upstream
emissions from electricity generation emissions of EGUs, including total modeling and our responses can be
units (EGUs) and on emissions from fuel energy demand (including reserve found in Chapter 13 of the RTC.
refineries. requirements and peak load demand),
planned EGU retirements, final rules A. Model Inputs
In general, the final rule emissions
inventory analysis methodology mirrors that impact EGU operation, fuel prices, 1. MOVES Inputs
the approach we took for the proposal, and infrastructure buildout costs, and
with some updates to our modeling and congressional action like the Inflation We used MOVES to evaluate the
assumptions. First, we utilized the most Reduction Act. More details on IPM and downstream emissions impact of the
recent version of EPA’s Motor Vehicle the inputs and post-processing used to final standards relative to a reference
Emission Simulator (MOVES) model. evaluate the impact of the final case. MOVES defines vehicles using a
Second, we updated the reference standards on EGU emissions can be combination of source type and
case935 in several ways, including found in the Chapter 4.2.4 of the RIA. regulatory class, where source type
accounting for EPA granting California To estimate upstream refinery impacts roughly defines a vehicle’s vocation or
the preemption waiver for its ACT rule from the final standards, we adjusted an usage pattern, and regulatory class
under CAA section 209(b).936 Third, we existing refinery inventory from the roughly defines a vehicle’s gross vehicle
performed new Integrated Planning emissions modeling platform939 to weight rating (GVWR) or weight class.
Model (IPM) runs to evaluate power reflect updated onroad fuel demand Table V–1 defines MOVES heavy-duty
sector emission impacts. Fourth, we from heavy-duty vehicles. The refinery source types and Table V–2 defines
changed our assumptions about refinery inventory adjustments were developed MOVES heavy-duty regulatory
using MOVES projections of liquid fuel classes.941 942 943
throughput to better account for U.S.
demand for both the reference case and
exports of gasoline and diesel. These
the final standards. More details on the 940 We included upstream emissions from FCEVs
changes are explained in more detail in
refinery impacts methodology can be in our EGU emissions modeling, as is discussed in
section V.A and RIA Chapter 4. Chapter 4 of the RIA and later in section V.A.2.
found in Chapter 4.2.5 of the RIA.
To estimate the downstream emission We received several comments on the
941 MOVES vehicle definitions encompass the
reductions from the final standards, we scope of upstream emissions to be

regulatory subcategories of the final standards but
used MOVES4.R3, which was created are not identical to them. The technology
evaluation in HD TRUCS uses 101 vehicle types
based on the latest major public version 937 See https://www.epa.gov/moves/moves- which can be mapped to MOVES source types and
of MOVES, MOVES4.0.0, and contains onroad-technical-reports#moves4. regulatory classes, but no single vehicle type in HD
various updates including updates to 938 Murray, Evan. Memorandum to Docket EPA– TRUCS corresponds to any single source type or
the adoption rate and energy HQ–OAR–2022–0985. ‘‘MOVES4.0.0 Technical regulatory class. In relation to the final standards,
Reports’’. February 2024. we synonymize combination short-haul tractors
consumption of heavy-duty electric 939 The emissions modeling platform is a product (MOVES source type 61) with day cabs and
vehicles. These model updates are of the National Emissions Inventory Collaborative combination long-haul tractors (MOVES source type
summarized in Chapter 4.2 of the RIA, consistent of more than 245 employees of state and 62) with sleeper cabs.
and MOVES4.0.0 data and algorithms regional air agencies, EPA, and Federal Land 942 40 CFR 86.091–2. Available online: https://
are described in detail in the technical Management agencies. It includes a full suite of www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-1998-title40-
base year (2016) and projection year (2023 and vol12/pdf/CFR-1998-title40-vol12-sec86-091-2.pdf.
2028) emission inventories modeled using EPA’s 943 U.S. EPA. ‘‘Frequently Asked Questions about
935 The reference case is a baseline scenario that
full suite of emissions modeling tools, including Heavy-Duty ‘Glider Vehicles’ and ‘Glider Kits’. July
represents the U.S. without the final rule. MOVES, SMOKE, and CMAQ. https://www.epa.gov/ 2015. Available online: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/
936 88 FR 20688, April 6, 2023. air-emissions-modeling/2016v3-platform. ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100MUVI.PDF.
236
Fmt 4701
In modeling heavy-duty ZEV over the next decade. Second, the IRA Our reference case for this final
populations in the reference case, a and the BIL provide many monetary rulemaking shows increased ZEV
scenario that represents the United incentives for the production and adoption for all heavy-duty vehicle
States without the final standards, we purchase of ZEVs in the heavy-duty types compared to our reference case for
considered several different factors market, as well as incentives for electric the NPRM. First, the reference case
related to purchaser acceptance of new vehicle charging infrastructure. Third, includes the ACT program, as suggested
technologies as discussed in RIA there have been actions by states to by many commenters and as EPA
Chapter 2, along with three factors accelerate the adoption of heavy-duty indicated would be likely at
described in this section and in greater ZEVs. Notably, absent the final proposal.945 The reference case for this
detail in RIA Chapter 1. standards, the State of California’s final rule thus reflects manufacturers’
First, the market has evolved such Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) program compliance with the ACT program in
that early HD ZEV models are in use imposes minimum ZEV sales California and in the seven other states
today for some applications and HD requirements beginning in model year that have finalized adoption of ACT.946
ZEVs are expected to expand to many 2024 in California and states that have As explained further in this section, it
more applications, as discussed in RIA adopted the program under CAA section also includes a lower, non-zero level of
Chapters 1.1, 1.5, and 1.7. Additionally, 177. EPA granted the waiver of ZEV adoption in the other 42 states. The
manufacturers have already made preemption for California’s ACT rule national reference case HD ZEV
substantial investments in ZEV adoption rates, based on a sales-
waiver under CAA section 209(b) on
technologies and have announced plans weighting of state-specific adoption
March 30, 2023.944
to rapidly increase those investments rates, are presented in Table V–3.
944 88 FR 20688, April 6, 2023.
945 EPA granted California’s waiver request on
March 30, 2023, which left EPA insufficient time
to develop an updated reference case for inclusion
in the proposal. See 88 FR 25989.
946 At the time we performed the inventory
modeling analysis, seven states had adopted ACT

in addition to California. Oregon, Washington, New
York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts adopted ACT
beginning in MY 2025 while Vermont adopted ACT
beginning in MY 2026 and Colorado in MY 2027.
Three other states, New Mexico, Maryland, and

ER22AP24.114</GPH>
Rhode Island adopted ACT (beginning in MY 2027)

in November and December of 2023, but there was
not sufficient time for us to incorporate them as
ACT states in our modeling.
ER22AP24.113</GPH>
237
Fmt 4701
Further discussion of the reference case breakdowns of ZEV adoption rates by class, and location can be found in RIA
ZEV adoption we modeled in MOVES model year, source type, regulatory Appendix B.
can be found in RIA Chapter 4.2.21 and
Several commenters noted that our absence of a Phase 3 regulation. We scenarios.951 952 Specifically, they
reference case should quantitatively found that the literature had varied projected that in 2030, HD ZEV sales
reflect not only the anticipated ZEV projections. For instance, the National would reach 10 to 51 percent for Class
sales from the ACT rule in California Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 4–8 trucks, 2 to 34 percent for buses, 16
and other states which have adopted it, conducted an analysis in early 2022, to 44 percent for short-haul tractors, and
but also ZEV adoption resulting from prior to the IRA, that projected 42 0 to 16 percent for long-haul tractors,
numerous other factors. The percent HD ZEV sales by 2030 and 98 with adoption rates generally increasing
commenters specifically suggested to percent sales by 2040, along with 100 in future years. The range in their values
include (1) state policies such as percent of bus sales being ZEVs by results from two scenarios. The lower
California’s Advanced Clean Fleets947 adoption rates represent inclusion of
2030.949 This analysis assumed
and Innovative Clean Transit rules and only the regulatory baseline, including
economics alone drive adoption (i.e.,
the NESCAUM MHD ZEV MOU;948 (2) the ACT rule and Innovative Clean
manufacturer, fleet, and government total cost of ownership), and therefore Transit rule. The higher adoption rates
commitments for producing and they did not consider non-financial represent their aforementioned
procuring ZEVs; (3) adoption for factors such ZEV product research and regulatory baseline as well as additional
vehicles that reach cost parity with development timelines, ZEV market growth driven primarily by the
conventional vehicles; and (4) the manufacturing timelines, the market’s response to incentives in the
billions of dollars of programs to availability of ZEV models, IRA. EDF and ERM conducted a follow-
support HD ZEV deployment in the BIL manufacturing or infrastructure up analysis of their HD ZEV sales
and the IRA. Our revised reference case constraints, driver preferences, and projections after the IRA passed in
for this final rulemaking includes other factors. ACT Research also 2022.953 They project several scenarios
greater HD ZEV adoption than the conducted an analysis prior to IRA and
reference case in the NPRM for the projected HD ZEV sales of 24 percent in 951 Ragon, Pierre-Louis, Buysse, Claire, Sen,
reasons cited in the preceding Arijit, Meyer, Michelle, Benoit, Jonathan, Miller,
2024, 26 percent in 2030, and 34 Josh, Rodriguez, Felipe. ‘‘Potential Benefits of the
paragraphs. percent in 2031.950 The International U.S. Phase 3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Regulation
We reviewed the literature to evaluate Council for Clean Transportation (ICCT) for Heavy-Duty Vehicles.’’ International Council on
future HD ZEV projections in the published a pair of analyses in early Clean Transportation. April 2023. Available online:
https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/
947 EPA received a waiver request under CAA
2023 and projected a variety of hdv-phase3-ghg-standards-benefits-apr23.pdf.
952 Slowik, Peter et al. ‘‘Analyzing the Impact of
section 209(b) and 209(e) from California for the
ACF rule on November 15, 2023 (see https:// 949 Ledna, Catherine, et.al. ‘‘Decarbonizing the Inflation Reduction Act on Electric Vehicle
www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation/ Medium- & Heavy-Duty On-Road Vehicles: Zero- Uptake in the United States.’’ International Council
vehicle-emissions-california-waivers-and- Emission Vehicles Cost Analysis.’’ March 2022. on Clean Transportation and Energy Innovation
Policy & Technology LLC. January 2023. Available
authorizations#current). EPA is currently reviewing Slide 25. Available online: https://www.nrel.gov/

the waiver request for the CA ACF rule. Because online: https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/
docs/fy22osti/82081.pdf.
EPA action on California’s waiver request is 2023/01/ira-impact-evs-us-jan23.pdf.
950 Lockridge, Deborah. ‘‘ACT: Third of Class 4–
pending, we did not include the full effects of ACF 953 Robo, Ellen and Dave Seamonds. Technical
in the reference case. 8 Vehicles to be Battery-Electric in 10 Years.’’ June Memo to Environmental Defense Fund: Investment
948 NESCAUM MOU, available at https:// 2021. Available online: https:// Reduction Act Supplemental Assessment: Analysis
www.nescaum.org/documents/mhdv-zev-mou- www.truckinginfo.com/10144947/act-third-of-class- of Alternative Medium- and Heavy-Duty Zero-
ER22AP24.115</GPH>
20220329.pdf. 4-8-vehicles-to-be-battery-electric-in-10-years. Emission Vehicle Business-As-Usual Scenarios.
238
Fmt 4701
which range between 11 and 42 percent projecting emission reductions due to FCEVs discussed in section II of this
HD ZEV sales in 2029 when including the final standards that are greater than preamble and in RIA Chapter 2. We
long-haul tractors. The EDF/ERM could be expected using a reference case calculated ZEV adoption by assuming
analysis found that IRA will help that reflects higher levels of ZEV that a) in no combination of MY, source
accelerate ZEV adoption due to the adoption in the HD market absent our type, regulatory class, and location (i.e.,
purchasing incentives, which drives HD rule. At the same time, our use of this states that have or have not adopted
ZEVs to reach upfront vehicle cost reference case would also overestimate ACT) would ZEV adoption in the
parity at least five years sooner than the costs of compliance of this final rule control case be lower than in the
without the IRA incentives. The ACT if the market would achieve higher reference case, and b) HD ZEV sales
Research, ICCT, and EDF/ERM levels of ZEV adoption than we project would first meet the requirements of the
projections, similar to the 2022 NREL in the absence of our final standards.954 ACT rule in California and the states
study, also did not consider several In modeling the control case (i.e., the which have adopted the ACT rule under
important real-world factors noted, effect of the final standards), we analyze CAA section 177, and then sales would
which would in general be expected to the impact of the final CO2 emission increase further in all other states
slow down or reduce ZEV sales. standards on a heavy-duty fleet that is consistent with our projections of
We note that our reference case projected in our potential compliance national ZEV adoption in our principal
projection of ZEV adoption in this final pathway to include both ICE vehicles modelled compliance pathway
rulemaking includes less aggressive ZEV and an increase in ZEV adoption (described in section II and RIA Chapter
adoption than urged by a number of consistent with our technology packages 2).
commenters or when compared to the described in preamble section II. Our Table V–4 shows the ZEV adoption
studies from NREL, ACT Research, modeling of the ICE vehicle portions of rates used in modeling the final
ICCT, and EDF/ERM because we the technology packages reflect CO2 standards in MOVES from 2027 through
consider real-world factors submitted to emission improvements projected in 2032. We calculated ZEV adoption rates
the record by other commenters, such as previously promulgated standards, for the alternative using a similar
the considerations we described that notably HD GHG Phase 2; thus, we do methodology and those rates are
NREL did not consider in their not model an increase in ICE vehicle discussed in section IX. Further
projections. Therefore, while we think efficiency resulting from the final discussion of the ZEV adoption rates we
our reference case projection standards. Future HD ZEV populations modeled can be found in RIA Chapter
appropriately weighs the relevant real- in MOVES for the final standards 4.2.3 and breakdowns of ZEV adoption
world factors compared to the more scenario were estimated at the national rates by technology, model year, source
limited set of factors considered in these level using HD TRUCS based on the type, regulatory class, and location can
studies and comments, we may be technology assessment for BEVs and be found in RIA Appendix B.
2. Upstream Modeling reference and control cases that all correspond to the ZEV adoption rates
account for the IRA. Because of the lead and energy demand for the reference
We used the 2022 post-IRA version of
IPM to estimate the EGU emissions times necessary to complete our IPM and control cases described in section
associated with the additional energy modeling for the final rulemaking V.A.1.
demand from increased HD ZEV analysis, we developed IPM inputs for The differences between the draft
adoption. Relative to the NPRM, we draft interim reference and control interim and final scenarios are small
performed new IPM runs for updated scenarios which do not directly compared to the difference between IPM
ERM. August 19, 2022. Page 9. Available online: ACT (see RTC section 2.4). Given the comments on a scenario may result in a greater magnitude of
https://www.erm.com/contentassets/ variability in HD ZEV adoption projections absent costs. We present this sensitivity analysis in RIA
154d08e0d0674752925cd82c66b3e2b1/edf-zev- the final standards, and the corresponding potential Chapter 4.10, where we demonstrate that program
baseline-technical-memo-addendum.pdf. uncertainty in the reference case, we also performed costs are reasonable when compared to a reference
a sensitivity analysis using a reference case that has
954 We also received comment questioning how case that has lower HD ZEV adoption than
lower HD ZEV adoption compared to the final rule
many ZEVs will be sold nationwide as a result of presented here.
ER22AP24.116</GPH>
reference case presented here, as we expected such
239
Fmt 4701
defaults and the final scenarios. produced via SMR, are documented in includes both ICE vehicles and an
Therefore, we evaluated that we could Chapter 4.2.4 of the RIA. increase in ZEV adoption consistent
use the draft interim IPM results to The emission impacts presented in with our technology packages described
calculate adjusted inventories that this section are based on the electrolysis in preamble section II. Because ZEVs do
provide a good approximation of the scenario, but emission comparisons not produce any tailpipe emissions, we
EGU emissions impact of the final between the electrolysis and SMR expect reductions in downstream GHG
standards. The details of this scenarios can be found in Chapter 4.8 of emissions as well as reductions in
methodology can be found in Chapter the RIA. The comparative analysis downstream emissions of criteria
4.2.4 of the RIA. shows that the relative emissions of pollutants and air toxics. In our
To account for upstream emissions producing hydrogen via SMR versus analysis, operation of HD ZEVs
from the production of hydrogen used to electrolysis change over time. Compared increases emissions from EGUs but
fuel FCEVs, we made a simplifying to grid-based electrolysis, we estimate leads to reduced emissions from
assumption in modeling the final SMR to have lower emissions in earlier refineries.
standards that all hydrogen used for years and higher emissions in later We present downstream emission
FCEVs would be produced via years. reductions in section V.B.1 and
electrolysis of water using electricity To estimate refinery emission impacts upstream emission impacts in section
from the grid and can therefore be from the final standards, we adjusted an V.B.2. Section V.B.3 presents the net
entirely represented as additional existing refinery inventory from the emission impacts of the final standards.
demand to EGUs and modeled using emissions modeling platform to reflect The impact of the final standards on
IPM. We developed a scaling factor to updated onroad fuel demand from cumulative GHG emissions are
account for the mass of hydrogen that heavy-duty vehicles. The refinery presented in section V.B.4. The
would need to be produced to meet the inventory adjustments were developed downstream and upstream impacts of
FCEV energy demand calculated by using MOVES projections of liquid fuel the alternative are discussed in section
MOVES. demand for both the reference case and IX.
We received comments noting that the final standards. Our refinery Because all our modeling is done for
hydrogen in the U.S. today is primarily emission methodology is discussed in a full national domain, emissions
produced via steam methane reforming detail in Chapter 4.2.5 of the RIA. impacts cover the full national
(SMR), largely as part of petroleum In the NPRM analysis we assumed inventory. Emissions impacts in other
refining and ammonia production. that 93 percent of the drop in domestic domains, such as particular regions or
Given the BIL and IRA provisions that demand would be reflected in reduced localities in the United States, are likely
meaningfully incentivize reducing the refinery activity. We received several to differ from the impacts presented
emissions and carbon intensity of comments noting that, in response to here.
hydrogen production, as well as new lower domestic demand, U.S. refineries
transportation and other demand drivers would increase exports and continue 1. Estimated Impacts on Downstream
and potential future regulation, we refining similar volumes of liquid fuels. Emissions
anticipate more hydrogen will be After consideration of these comments, Our estimates of the downstream
produced by electrolysis in the future. for the final rule, we projected that 50 emission reductions of GHGs that will
However, to evaluate the upstream percent of the drop in domestic demand result from the final standards relative
impacts of FCEVs more fully under would be reflected in reduced refinery to the reference case are presented in
different scenarios, for the final rule activity. There remains large uncertainty Table V–5 for calendar years 2035, 2045,
analysis, we also performed a about how the U.S. refining sector will and 2055. Total GHG emissions, or CO2
comparative analysis of upstream respond to greater electrification in the equivalent (CO2e), are calculated by
emissions under different hydrogen onroad sector, and Chapter 4.9 of the summing all GHG emissions multiplied
production pathways. The comparative RIA includes a sensitivity analysis that by their 100-year global warming
analysis offers a qualitative range for the assumes that 20 percent of the drop in potentials (GWP). The GWP values used
upstream emissions that are projected domestic demand would be reflected in in Table V–5 are consistent with the
from increased FCEV adoption in the reduced refinery activity. 2014 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
potential compliance pathway’s (AR5).955
technology package demonstrating the B. Estimated Emission Impacts From the
feasibility of the final standards. More Final Standards 955 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis
details on our upstream analysis of This final rule includes CO2 emission Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III
emissions from FCEVs, including the standards for MYs 2027 through 2032 to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core
derivation of the scaling factors for and beyond. Our modeled potential Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)].
hydrogen produced by electrolysis and compliance pathway to demonstrate the Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/
the emission factors for hydrogen feasibility of these final standards uploads/2018/02/SYRlAR5lFINALlfull.pdf.
240
Fmt 4701
In 2055, we estimate that the final We note that these reductions are meaningfully less stringent than the
standards will reduce downstream lower in the final rule than the proposal. proposed standards.
emissions of CO2 from heavy-duty We modeled the proposed standards We expect the final CO2 emission
vehicles by 20 percent, methane by 12 with our updated FRM methodologies standards will also result in reductions
percent, and nitrous oxide by 20 and reference case. The results are of non-GHG pollutants. Table V–6
percent, resulting in a reduction of 20 presented in RIA Chapter 4.11 and presents our estimates of the
percent for total CO2 equivalent demonstrate that the emission impact
emissions from heavy-duty vehicles. downstream emission reductions of
differences are primarily due to the criteria pollutants and air toxics from
Table V–5 also shows that most of the increased number of ZEVs considered in
GHG emission reductions are from CO2, heavy-duty vehicles that will result
the reference case (as discussed earlier from the final standards in calendar
which represents approximately 96
in this preamble section V.A) and do not years 2035, 2045, and 2055 relative to
percent of all heavy-duty GHG emission
indicate that the final standards are the reference case.
reductions from the final standards.
In 2055, we estimate the final which means LHD and MHD gasoline over-year impacts from 2027 through
standards will reduce heavy-duty vehicles make up a much smaller 2055.
vehicle emissions of NOX by 20 portion of the HD fleet in the final
reference case than in our NPRM 2. Estimated Impacts on Upstream
percent,956 PM2.5 by 5 percent, VOC by
reference case. Therefore, emissions Emissions
20 percent, and SO2 by 20 percent.
Reductions in air toxics in 2055 range reductions for pollutants which are The final standards are projected to
from 15 percent for formaldehyde to 27 driven by emissions from gasoline
increase emissions from EGUs. Our
percent for 1,3-butadiene. Again, it is vehicles, most notably PM2.5 and VOCs,
estimates of the additional GHG
worth noting that these reductions are are much smaller in our final analysis
than our NPRM analysis. This is emissions from EGUs due to the final
similarly lower in the final rule than the standards, relative to the reference case,
discussed in more detail in RIA Chapter
proposal primarily due to the increased are presented in Table V–7 for calendar
4.
number of ZEVs considered in the Chapter 4.3 of the RIA contains more years 2035, 2045, and 2055, in million
reference case. Our increased reference details on downstream emission metric tons (MMT). Our estimates for
ER22AP24.118</GPH>
case ZEV adoption is greatest for light reductions by vehicle type, fuel type, additional criteria pollutant emissions
and medium heavy-duty vehicles, and emission process, as well as year- are presented in Table V–8.
956 The version of MOVES used to model the final (88 FR 4296, March 27, 2023), so it is accounted for here are incremental to the impacts from that final
ER22AP24.117</GPH>
standards includes the HD2027 Low NOX standards in the reference case. NOX reductions presented rule.
241
Fmt 4701
In 2055, we estimate the final electricity generation uses less fossil Table V–9 presents the estimated impact
standards will increase EGU emissions fuels. Chapter 4.4 of the RIA contains of the final standards on GHG emissions
of CO2 by 12.9 million metric tons, more details and discussion of the from refineries (in metric tons) and
compared to 29.3 million metric tons in impacts of the final CO2 emission Table V–10 presents the estimated
2035. There are similar trends for all standards on EGU emissions, including impact on criteria pollutant emissions
other pollutants. EGU impacts decrease year-over-year impacts from 2027 (in U.S. tons) from refineries, both
over time because of changes in the through 2055. relative to the reference case.
projected power generation mix as We expect the final standards to lead
to a decrease in refinery emissions.
ER22AP24.122</GPH>
Like downstream emissions, we 3. Estimated Impacts on Combined standards relative to the reference case
expect refinery emission reductions to Downstream and Upstream Emissions (i.e., the emissions inventory in the
ER22AP24.121</GPH>
increase over time as HD ZEV adoption While we present a net emissions absence of the final standards), in
increases, thus reducing demand for impact of the final CO2 emission million metric tons, for calendar years
refined fossil fuels and the crude oil standards, it is important to note that 2035, 2045, and 2055. Table V–
from which they are produced. For some upstream emission sources are not 12contains a summary of the modeled
example, we expect refinery emissions included in the estimates. This is net impacts of the final standards on
ER22AP24.120</GPH>
of carbon dioxide to decrease by 331 discussed in detail in Chapter 4 of the criteria pollutant emissions. As
thousand metric tons in 2035 and 690 RIA. discussed in section II.G, EPA’s
thousand metric tons in 2055. Table V–11 shows a summary of our assessment is that these net impacts are
modeled downstream, upstream, and supportive of the final standards.
net GHG emission impacts of the final
ER22AP24.119</GPH>
242
Fmt 4701
In 2055, we estimate the final changes, in part driven by the IRA. which is why we estimate a net increase
standards will result in a net decrease These effects can balance differently for in PM2.5 in all years. However,
of 61 million metric tons of GHG different pollutants. consistent with the trends for other
emissions. We also estimate net Downstream emissions are a more pollutants, the magnitude of the PM2.5
decreases in emissions of NOx, VOC, significant source of GHG, NOX, and emission increases diminish over time.
and SO2 in 2055. However, we estimate VOC emissions, so net reductions grow
4. Cumulative GHG Emission Impacts
a net increase in PM2.5 emissions. over time. However, EGUs are a more
In general, net emission impacts are significant source of SO2 emissions The warming impacts of GHGs are
determined by the interaction of two (largely driven by coal combustion) and cumulative. Table V–13, Table V–14,
effects. First, HD ZEV adoption PM2.5 emissions (largely driven by coal and Table V–15 present the cumulative
increases over time, thus reducing and natural gas combustion). We GHG impacts that we model will result
downstream and refinery emissions. estimate a net increase in SO2 emissions from the final standards between 2027
Second, the increase in EGU emissions in 2035 and 2045 but a net decrease in through 2055 for downstream
declines over time as the electricity grid 2055 as coal is phased out of the emissions, EGU emissions, and refinery
becomes cleaner due to EGU regulations electricity sector. Natural gas remains an emissions, respectively, relative to the
and the future power generation mix important fuel for electricity generation, reference case.
ER22AP24.124</GPH>
ER22AP24.123</GPH>
243
Fmt 4701
Overall, we estimate the final emissions by just over 1 billion metric the reference case, as is presented in
standards will reduce net GHG tons between 2027 and 2055, relative to Table V–16.
VI. Climate, Health, Air Quality, in this section a brief scientific anticipated to endanger the public
Environmental Justice, and Economic background on climate change to offer health and welfare of current and future
Impacts additional context for this rulemaking generations’’ (74 FR 66523). The 2009
In this section, we discuss the impacts and to help the public understand the Endangerment Finding, together with
of the final rule on climate change, environmental impacts of GHGs. the extensive scientific and technical
health and environmental effects, Extensive information on climate evidence in the supporting record,
environmental justice, and oil and change is available in the scientific documented that climate change caused
electricity and hydrogen consumption. assessments and the EPA documents by human emissions of GHGs threatens
We also discuss our approaches to that are briefly described in this section, the public health of the U.S. population.
analyzing the impact of this rule on the as well as in the technical and scientific It explained that by raising average
heavy-duty vehicle market and information supporting them. One of temperatures, climate change increases ER22AP24.128</GPH>
employment. those documents is EPA’s 2009 the likelihood of heat waves, which are
Endangerment and Cause or Contribute associated with increased deaths and
A. Climate Change Impacts Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under illnesses (74 FR 66497). While climate
Elevated concentrations of greenhouse section 202(a) of the CAA (74 FR 66496, change also increases the likelihood of
ER22AP24.127</GPH>
gases (GHGs) have been warming the December 15, 2009) (‘‘2009 reductions in cold-related mortality,
planet, leading to changes in the Earth’s Endangerment Finding’’). In the 2009 evidence indicates that the increases in
climate that are occurring at a pace and Endangerment Finding, the heat mortality will be larger than the
in a way that threatens human health, Administrator found under section decreases in cold mortality in the U.S.
society, and the natural environment. 202(a) of the CAA that elevated (74 FR 66525). The 2009 Endangerment
ER22AP24.126</GPH>
While EPA is not making any new atmospheric concentrations of six key Finding further explained that
scientific or factual findings with regard well-mixed GHGs—CO2, methane (CH4), compared with a future without climate
to the well-documented impact of GHG nitrous oxide (N2O), HFCs, change, climate change is expected to
emissions on public health and welfare perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur increase tropospheric ozone pollution
ER22AP24.125</GPH>
in support of this rule, EPA is providing hexafluoride (SF6)—‘‘may reasonably be over broad areas of the U.S., including
244
Fmt 4701
in the largest metropolitan areas with health and welfare of current and future health and welfare both for current and
the worst tropospheric ozone problems, generations’’ (81 FR 54424). future generations. These updated
and thereby increase the risk of adverse Since the 2016 Endangerment observations and projections document
effects on public health (74 FR 66525). Finding, the climate has continued to the rapid rate of current and future
Climate change is also expected to cause change, with new observational records climate change both globally and in the
more intense hurricanes and more being set for several climate indicators U.S.959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968
frequent and intense storms of other such as global average surface 969 970 971
types and heavy precipitation, with temperatures, GHG concentrations, and The most recent information
impacts on other areas of public health, sea level rise. Additionally, major demonstrates that the climate is
such as the potential for increased scientific assessments continue to be continuing to change in response to the
deaths, injuries, infectious and released that further advance our human-induced buildup of GHGs in the
waterborne diseases, and stress-related understanding of the climate system and atmosphere. These recent assessments
disorders (74 FR 66525). Children, the the impacts that GHGs have on public show that atmospheric concentrations of
elderly, and the poor are among the GHGs have risen to a level that has no
most vulnerable to these climate-related 959 USGCRP, 2017: Climate Science Special
precedent in human history and that
Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, they continue to climb, primarily
health effects (74 FR 66498). Volume I [Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A.
The 2009 Endangerment Finding also Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. because of both historical and current
documented, together with the Maycock (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research anthropogenic emissions, and that these
extensive scientific and technical Program, Washington, DC, USA, 470 pp, doi: elevated concentrations endanger our
10.7930/J0J964J6.
evidence in the supporting record, that 960 USGCRP, 2016: The Impacts of Climate
health by affecting our food and water
climate change touches nearly every Change on Human Health in the United States: A sources, the air we breathe, the weather
aspect of public welfare 957 in the U.S., Scientific Assessment. Crimmins, A., J. Balbus, J.L. we experience, and our interactions
including: Changes in water supply and Gamble, C.B. Beard, J.E. Bell, D. Dodgen, R.J. Eisen, with the natural and built
N. Fann, M.D. Hawkins, S.C. Herring, L. environments. For example,
quality due to changes in drought and Jantarasami, D.M. Mills, S. Saha, M.C.
extreme rainfall events; increased risk of 961 USGCRP, 2018: Impacts, Risks, and atmospheric concentrations of one of
storm surge and flooding in coastal Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National these GHGs, CO2, measured at Mauna
areas and land loss due to inundation; Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., Loa in Hawaii and at other sites around
C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. the world reached 419 parts per million
increases in peak electricity demand Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S.
and risks to electricity infrastructure; Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, (ppm) in 2022 (nearly 50 percent higher
and the potential for significant USA, 1515 pp. doi:10.7930/NCA4.2018. than preindustrial levels) 972 and have
agricultural disruptions and crop 962 IPCC, 2018: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC continued to rise at a rapid rate. Global
failures (though offset to some extent by Special Report on the impacts of global warming of average temperature has increased by
1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global
carbon fertilization). These impacts are greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context
about 1.1 °C (2.0 °F) in the 2011–2020
also global and may exacerbate of strengthening the global response to the threat of decade relative to 1850–1900.973 The
problems outside the U.S. that raise climate change, sustainable development, and years 2015–2022 were the warmest 8
humanitarian, trade, and national efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. years in the 1880–2022 record.974 The
Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla,
security issues for the U.S. (74 FR A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock,
IPCC determined (with medium
66530). S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I.
In 2016, the Administrator issued a Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T.
Waterfield (eds.)]. and Medicine. 2019. Climate Change and
similar finding for GHG emissions from 963 IPCC, 2019: Climate Change and Land: an Ecosystems. Washington, DC: The National
aircraft under section 231(a)(2)(A) of the IPCC special report on climate change, Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25504.
CAA.958 In the 2016 Endangerment desertification, land degradation, sustainable land 969 Blunden, J., T. Boyer, and E. Bartow-Gillies,
Finding, the Administrator found that management, food security, and greenhouse gas Eds., 2023: ‘‘State of the Climate in 2022’’. Bull.
the body of scientific evidence amassed fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 104 (9), Si–S501 https://
E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.-O. doi.org/10.1175/2023BAMSStateoftheClimate.
in the record for the 2009 Endangerment Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, P. Zhai, R. Slade, S. Connors, 970 EPA. 2021. Climate Change and Social
Finding compellingly supported a R. van Diemen, M. Ferrat, E. Haughey, S. Luz, S. Vulnerability in the United States: A Focus on Six
similar endangerment finding under Neogi, M. Pathak, J. Petzold, J. Portugal Pereira, P. Impacts. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
CAA section 231(a)(2)(A), and also Vyas, E. Huntley, K. Kissick, M. Belkacemi, J. EPA 430–R–21–003.
Malley, (eds.)]. 971 Jay, A.K., A.R. Crimmins, C.W. Avery, T.A.
found that the science assessments 964 IPCC, 2019: IPCC Special Report on the Ocean Dahl, R.S. Dodder, B.D. Hamlington, A. Lustig, K.
released between the 2009 and the 2016 and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate [H.-O. Marvel, P.A. Méndez-Lazaro, M.S. Osler, A.
Findings ‘‘strengthen and further Pörtner, DC Roberts, V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, Terando, E.S. Weeks, and A. Zycherman, 2023: Ch.
support the judgment that GHGs in the M. Tignor, E. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. 1. Overview: Understanding risks, impacts, and
atmosphere may reasonably be Alegria, M. Nicolai, A. Okem, J. Petzold, B. Rama, responses. In: Fifth National Climate Assessment.
N.M. Weyer (eds.)]. Crimmins, A.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E.
anticipated to endanger the public 965 IPCC, 2023: Summary for Policymakers. In: Kunkel, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock, Eds. U.S.
Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC,
957 The CAA states in section 302(h) that ‘‘[a]ll Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the USA. https://doi.org/10.7930/NCA5.2023.CH1.
language referring to effects on welfare includes, Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental 972 https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/
but is not limited to, effects on soils, water, crops, Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. co2/co2_annmean_mlo.txt.
vegetation, manmade materials, animals, wildlife, Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, 973 IPCC, 2021: Summary for Policymakers. In:
weather, visibility, and climate, damage to and Switzerland, pp. 1–34, doi:10.59327/IPCC/AR6– Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis.
deterioration of property, and hazards to 9789291691647.001. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth
transportation, as well as effects on economic 966 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
values and on personal comfort and well-being, and Medicine. 2016. Attribution of Extreme on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai,
whether caused by transformation, conversion, or Weather Events in the Context of Climate Change. A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud,
combination with other air pollutants.’’ 42 U.S.C. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K.
7602(h). https://dio.org/10.17226/21852. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock,
958 ‘‘Finding that Greenhouse Gas Emissions From 967 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou
Aircraft Cause or Contribute to Air Pollution That and Medicine. 2017. Valuing Climate Damages: (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
May Reasonably Be Anticipated To Endanger Public Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 3–
Health and Welfare.’’ 81 FR 54422, August 15, 2016. Dioxide. Washington, DC: The National Academies 32, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.001.
(‘‘2016 Endangerment Finding’’). Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24651. 974 Blunden, et al. 2023.
245
confidence) that this past decade was forests, while 23 million years ago (the ‘‘exceptional’’). It would increase the
warmer than any multi-century period last time concentrations were above 450 frequency of sea-ice-free Arctic
in at least the past 100,000 years.975 ppm) the West Antarctic ice sheet was summers from once in 100 years to once
Global average sea level has risen by not yet developed, indicating the in a decade. It could lead to 4 inches of
about 8 inches (about 21 centimeters possibility that high GHG additional sea level rise by the end of
(cm)) from 1901 to 2018, with the rate concentrations could lead to a world the century, exposing an additional 10
from 2006 to 2018 (0.15 inches/year or that looks very different from today and million people to risks of inundation as
3.7 millimeters (mm)/year) almost twice from the conditions in which human well as increasing the probability of
the rate over the 1971 to 2006 period, civilization has developed. If the triggering instabilities in either the
and three times the rate of the 1901 to Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets were Greenland or Antarctic ice sheets.
2018 period.976 The rate of sea level rise to melt substantially, sea levels would Between half a million and a million
over the 20th century was higher than rise dramatically—the IPCC estimated additional square miles of permafrost
in any other century in at least the last that over the next 2,000 years, sea level would thaw over several centuries.
2,800 years.977 Higher CO2 will rise by 7 to 10 feet even if warming Risks to food security would increase
concentrations have led to acidification is limited to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F), from 7 to 20 from medium to high for several lower-
of the surface ocean in recent decades feet if limited to 2 °C (3.6 °F), and by 60 income regions in the Sahel, southern
to an extent unusual in the past 65 to 70 feet if warming is allowed to reach Africa, the Mediterranean, central
million years, with negative impacts on 5 °C (9 °F) above preindustrial levels.984 Europe, and the Amazon. In addition to
marine organisms that use calcium For context, almost all of the city of food security issues, this temperature
carbonate to build shells or skeletons.978 Miami is less than 25 feet above sea increase would have implications for
Arctic sea ice extent continues to level, and the 4th National Climate human health in terms of increasing
decline in all months of the year; the Assessment (NCA4) stated that 13 ozone concentrations, heatwaves, and
most rapid reductions occur in million Americans would be at risk of vector-borne diseases (for example,
September (very likely almost a 13 migration due to 6 feet of sea level rise. expanding the range of the mosquitoes
percent decrease per decade between The NCA4 found that it is very likely which carry dengue fever, chikungunya,
1979 and 2018) and are unprecedented (greater than 90 percent likelihood) that yellow fever, and the Zika virus, or the
in at least 1,000 years.979 Human- by mid-century, the Arctic Ocean will ticks which carry Lyme, babesiosis, or
induced climate change has led to be almost entirely free of sea ice by late Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever).987
heatwaves and heavy precipitation summer for the first time in about 2 Moreover, every additional increment in
becoming more frequent and more million years.985 Coral reefs will be at warming leads to larger changes in
intense, along with increases in risk for almost complete (99 percent) extremes, including the potential for
agricultural and ecological droughts 980 losses with 1 °C (1.8 °F) of additional events unprecedented in the
in many regions.981 warming from today (2 °C or 3.6 °F since observational record. Every additional
The assessment literature preindustrial). At this temperature, degree will intensify extreme
demonstrates that modest additional between 8 and 18 percent of animal, precipitation events by about 7 percent.
amounts of warming may lead to a plant, and insect species could lose over The peak winds of the most intense
climate different from anything humans half of the geographic area with suitable tropical cyclones (hurricanes) are
have ever experienced. The 2022 CO2 climate for their survival, and 7 to 10 projected to increase with warming. In
concentration of 419 ppm is already percent of rangeland livestock would be addition to a higher intensity, the IPCC
higher than at any time in the last 2 projected to be lost.986 The IPCC found that precipitation and frequency
million years.982 If concentrations similarly found that climate change has of rapid intensification of these storms
exceed 450 ppm, they would likely be caused substantial damages and has already increased, the movement
higher than any time in the past 23 increasingly irreversible losses in speed has decreased, and elevated sea
million years: 983 at the current rate of terrestrial, freshwater, and coastal and levels have increased coastal flooding,
increase of more than 2 ppm a year, this open ocean marine ecosystems. all of which make these tropical
would occur in about 15 years. While Every additional increment of cyclones more damaging.988
GHGs are not the only factor that temperature comes with consequences. The NCA4 also evaluated a number of
controls climate, it is illustrative that 3 For example, the half degree of warming impacts specific to the U.S. Severe
million years ago (the last time CO2 from 1.5 to 2 °C (0.9 °F of warming from drought and outbreaks of insects like the
concentrations were above 400 ppm) 2.7 °F to 3.6 °F) above preindustrial mountain pine beetle have killed
Greenland was not yet completely temperatures is projected on a global hundreds of millions of trees in the
covered by ice and still supported scale to expose 420 million more people western U.S. Wildfires have burned
to extreme heatwaves at least once every more than 3.7 million acres in 14 of the
975 IPCC, 2021. five years, and 62 million more people 17 years between 2000 and 2016, and
976 IPCC, 2021. to exceptional heatwaves at least once Federal wildfire suppression costs were
977 USGCRP, 2018: Impacts, Risks, and
every five years (where heatwaves are about a billion dollars annually.989 The
Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National
Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., defined based on a heat wave magnitude National Interagency Fire Center has
C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. index which takes into account duration documented U.S. wildfires since 1983,
Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. and intensity—using this index, the and the 10 years with the largest acreage
Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, burned have all occurred since 2004.990
USA, 1515 pp. doi:10.7930/NCA4.2018. 2003 French heat wave that led to
978 IPCC, 2018. almost 15,000 deaths would be Wildfire smoke degrades air quality,
979 IPCC, 2021. classified as an ‘‘extreme heatwave’’ and increasing health risks, and more
980 These are drought measures based on soil the 2010 Russian heatwave which led to
moisture. thousands of deaths and extensive 987 IPCC, 2018.

981 IPCC, 2021. 988 IPCC, 2021.
982 Annual Mauna Loa CO concentration data
wildfires would be classified as 989 USGCRP, 2018.
2
from https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/ 990 NIFC (National Interagency Fire Center). 2021.
984 IPCC, 2021.
co2/co2_annmean_mlo.txt, accessed September 9, Total wildland fires and acres (1983–2020).
2023. 985 USGCRP, 2018. Accessed August 2021. www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/
983 IPCC, 2013. 986 IPCC, 2018. fireInfo_stats_totalFires.html.
246
Fmt 4701
frequent and severe wildfires due to this framework, the EPA estimates that levels of protective stratospheric
climate change would further diminish global emission projections, with no ozone.996
air quality, increase incidences of additional mitigation, will result in Transportation is the largest U.S.
respiratory illness, impair visibility, and significant climate-related damages to source of GHG emissions, representing
disrupt outdoor activities, sometimes the U.S.994 These damages to the U.S. 29 percent of total GHG emissions.997
thousands of miles from the location of would mainly be from increases in lives Within the transportation sector, heavy-
the fire. Meanwhile, sea level rise has lost due to increases in temperatures, as duty vehicles are the second largest
amplified coastal flooding and erosion well as impacts to human health from contributor to GHG emissions and are
impacts, requiring the installation of increases in climate-driven changes in responsible for 25 percent of GHG
costly pump stations, flooding streets, air quality, dust and wildfire smoke emissions in the sector.998 The GHG
and increasing storm surge damages. exposure, and incidence of suicide. emission reductions resulting from
Tens of billions of dollars of U.S. real Additional major climate-related compliance with this final rule will
estate could be below sea level by 2050 damages would occur to U.S. significantly reduce the volume of GHG
under some scenarios. Increased infrastructure such as roads and rail, as emissions from this sector. Section
frequency and duration of drought will well as transportation impacts and VI.D.2 of this preamble discusses
reduce agricultural productivity in some coastal flooding from sea level rise, impacts of GHG emissions on
regions, accelerate depletion of water increases in property damage from individuals living in socially and
supplies for irrigation, and expand the tropical cyclones, and reductions in economically vulnerable communities.
distribution and incidence of pests and labor hours worked in outdoor settings While EPA did not conduct modeling to
diseases for crops and livestock. The and buildings without air conditioning. specifically quantify changes in climate
NCA4 also recognized that climate These impacts are also projected to vary impacts resulting from this rule in terms
change can increase risks to national from region to region with the of avoided temperature change or sea-
security, both through direct impacts on Southeast, for example, projected to see level rise, we did quantify climate
military infrastructure and by affecting some of the largest damages from sea benefits by monetizing the emission
factors such as food and water level rise, the West Coast projected to reductions through the application of
availability that can exacerbate conflict experience damages from wildfire estimates of the social cost of
outside U.S. borders. Droughts, floods, smoke more than other parts of the greenhouse gases (SC–GHGs), as
storm surges, wildfires, and other country, and the Northern Plains states described in section VII.A of this
extreme events stress nations and projected to see a higher proportion of preamble.
people through loss of life, damages to rail and road infrastructure. These scientific assessments, the EPA
displacement of populations, and While information on the distribution of analyses, and documented observed
impacts on livelihoods.991 climate impacts helps to better changes in the climate of the planet and
EPA modeling efforts can further understand the ways in which climate of the U.S. present clear support
illustrate how these impacts from change may impact the U.S., recent regarding the current and future dangers
climate change may be experienced analyses are still only a partial of climate change and the importance of
across the U.S. EPA’s Framework for assessment of climate impacts relevant GHG emissions mitigation.
Evaluating Damages and Impacts to U.S. interests and do not reflect B. Health and Environmental Effects
(FrEDI) 992 uses information from over increased damages that occur due to Associated With Exposure to Non-GHG
30 peer-reviewed climate change impact interactions between different sectors Pollutants
studies to project the physical and impacted by climate change or all the
economic impacts of climate change to ways in which physical impacts of The non-GHG emissions that will be
the U.S. resulting from future climate change occurring abroad have impacted by this rule contribute,
temperature changes. These impacts are spillover effects in different regions of directly or via secondary formation, to
projected for specific regions within the the U.S. concentrations of pollutants in the air
U.S. and for more than 20 impact Some GHGs also have impacts beyond which affect human and environmental
categories, which span a large number those mediated through climate change. health. These pollutants include
of sectors of the U.S. economy.993 Using For example, elevated concentrations of particulate matter, ozone,, sulfur oxides,
CO2 stimulate plant growth (which can carbon monoxide and air toxics.
991 USGCRP, 2018. be positive in the case of beneficial 1. Background on Criteria and Air
992 (1)Hartin, C., et al. (2023). Advancing the species, but negative in terms of weeds Toxics Pollutants Impacted by This Rule
estimation of future climate impacts within the
United States. Earth Syst. Dynam., 14, 1015–1037, and invasive species, and can also lead
i. Particulate Matter
https://dio.org/10.5194/esd-14-1015-2023. (2) to a reduction in plant
Supplementary Material for the Regulatory Impact micronutrients 995) and cause ocean Particulate matter (PM) is a complex
Analysis for the Supplemental Proposed acidification. Nitrous oxide depletes the mixture of solid particles and liquid
Rulemaking, ‘‘Standards of Performance for New,
Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and
droplets distributed among numerous
Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and www.epa.gov/cira/fredi. Documentation has been atmospheric gases which interact with
Natural Gas Sector Climate Review,’’ Docket ID No. subject to both a public review comment period and solid and liquid phases. Particles in the
EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0317, September 2022, (3) an independent expert peer review, following EPA atmosphere range in size from less than
The Long-Term Strategy of the United States: peer-review guidelines.
Pathways to Net-Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 994 Compared to a world with no additional
0.01 to more than 10 micrometers (mm)
2050. Published by the U.S. Department of State warming after the model baseline (1986–2005).
996 WMO (World Meteorological Organization),
and the U.S. Executive Office of the President, 995 Ziska, L., A. Crimmins, A. Auclair, S.
Washington, DC. November 2021, (4) Climate Risk DeGrasse, J.F. Garofalo, A.S. Khan, I. Loladze, A.A. Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2018,
Exposure: An Assessment of the Federal Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project—
Pérez de León, A. Showler, J. Thurston, and I.

Government’s Financial Risks to Climate Change, Walls, 2016: Ch. 7: Food Safety, Nutrition, and Report No. 58, 588 pp., Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.
White Paper, Office of Management and Budget, 997 EPA (2023). Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Distribution. The Impacts of Climate Change on
April 2022. Human Health in the United States: A Scientific Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2021 (EPA–430–R–23–
993 EPA (2021). Technical Documentation on the Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, 002, published April 2023).
Framework for Evaluating Damages and Impacts Washington, DC, 189–216. https:// 998 EPA (2023). Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
(FrEDI). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, health2016.globalchange.gov/low/ Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2021 (EPA–430–R–23–
EPA 430–R–21–004, available at https:// ClimateHealth2016_07_Food_small.pdf. 002, published April 2023).
247
Fmt 4701
in diameter.999 Atmospheric particles Particulate matter consists of both conditions), VOC reductions are
can be grouped into several classes primary and secondary particles. effective in reducing ozone, and NOX
according to their aerodynamic diameter Primary particles are emitted directly can react directly with ozone, resulting
and physical sizes. Generally, the three from sources, such as combustion- in suppressed ozone concentrations
broad classes of particles include related activities (e.g., industrial near NOX emission sources. Under these
ultrafine particles (UFPs, generally activities, motor vehicle operation, NOX-saturated conditions, NOX
considered as particles with a diameter biomass burning), while secondary reductions can increase local ozone
less than or equal to 0.1 mm [typically particles are formed through under certain circumstances, but overall
based on physical size, thermal atmospheric chemical reactions of ozone production (considering
diffusivity, or electrical mobility]), gaseous precursors (e.g., sulfur oxides downwind formation) decreases and,
‘‘fine’’ particles (PM2.5; particles with a (SOX), oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and even in VOC-limited areas, NOX
nominal mean aerodynamic diameter volatile organic compounds (VOCs)). reductions are not expected to increase
less than or equal to 2.5 mm), and ozone levels if the NOX reductions are
ii. Ozone
‘‘thoracic’’ particles (PM10; particles sufficiently large—large enough for
with a nominal mean aerodynamic Ground-level ozone pollution forms photochemistry to become NOX-limited.
diameter less than or equal to 10 mm). in areas with high concentrations of
Particles that fall within the size range ambient NOX and VOCs when solar iii.
between PM2.5 and PM10, are referred to radiation is strong. Major U.S. sources of Oxides of nitrogen (NOX) refers to
as ‘‘thoracic coarse particles’’ (PM10¥2.5, NOX are highway and nonroad motor nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide
particles with a nominal mean vehicles, engines, power plants and (NO2). Most NO2 is formed in the air
aerodynamic diameter greater than 2.5 other industrial sources; natural through the oxidation of NO emitted
mm and less than or equal to 10 mm). sources, such as soil, vegetation, and when fuel is burned at a high
EPA currently has NAAQS for PM2.5 and lightning, are smaller sources. temperature. NO2 is a criteria pollutant,
PM10.1000 Vegetation is the dominant source of regulated for its adverse effects on
Most particles are found in the lower VOCs in the United States. Volatile public health and the environment, and
troposphere, where they can have consumer and commercial products, highway vehicles are an important
residence times ranging from a few such as propellants and solvents, contributor to NO2 emissions. NOX,
hours to weeks. Particles are removed highway and nonroad vehicles, engines, along with VOCs, are the two major
from the atmosphere by wet deposition, fires, and industrial sources also precursors of ozone, and NOX is also a
such as when they are carried by rain or contribute to the atmospheric burden of major contributor to secondary PM2.5
snow, or by dry deposition, when VOCs at ground-level. formation.
particles settle out of suspension due to The processes underlying ozone
gravity. Atmospheric lifetimes are formation, transport, and accumulation iv. Sulfur Oxides
generally longest for PM2.5, which often are complex. Ground-level ozone is Sulfur dioxide (SO2), a member of the
remains in the atmosphere for days to produced and destroyed by an sulfur oxide (SOX) family of gases, is
weeks before being removed by wet or interwoven network of free radical formed from burning fuels containing
dry deposition.1001 In contrast, reactions involving the hydroxyl radical sulfur (e.g., coal or oil), extracting
atmospheric lifetimes for UFP and (OH), NO, NO2, and complex reaction gasoline from oil, or extracting metals
PM10–2.5 are shorter. Within hours, UFP intermediates derived from VOCs. Many from ore. SO2 and its gas phase
can undergo coagulation and of these reactions are sensitive to oxidation products can dissolve in
condensation that lead to formation of temperature and available sunlight. water droplets and further oxidize to
larger particles in the accumulation High ozone events most often occur form sulfuric acid which reacts with
mode or can be removed from the when ambient temperatures and ammonia to form sulfates, which are
atmosphere by evaporation, deposition, sunlight intensities remain high for important components of ambient PM.
or reactions with other atmospheric several days under stagnant conditions.
Ozone and its precursors can also be v. Carbon Monoxide
components. PM10–2.5 are also generally
removed from the atmosphere within transported hundreds of miles Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless,
hours through wet or dry deposition.1002 downwind, which can lead to elevated odorless gas formed by incomplete
ozone levels in areas with otherwise low combustion of carbon-containing fuels
999 U.S. EPA. Policy Assessment (PA) for the VOC or NOX emissions. As an air mass and by photochemical reactions in the
Review of the National Ambient Air Quality moves and is exposed to changing atmosphere. Nationally, particularly in
Standards for Particulate Matter (Final Report, ambient concentrations of NOX and urban areas, the majority of CO
2020). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, EPA/452/R–20/002, 2020.
VOCs, the ozone photochemical regime emissions to ambient air come from
1000 Regulatory definitions of PM size fractions, (relative sensitivity of ozone formation mobile sources.1003
and information on reference and equivalent to NOX and VOC emissions) can change.
methods for measuring PM in ambient air, are When ambient VOC concentrations vi. Diesel Exhaust
provided in 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. With are high, comparatively small amounts Diesel exhaust is a complex mixture
regard to NAAQS which provide protection against
health and welfare effects, the 24-hour PM10
of NOX catalyze rapid ozone formation. composed of particulate matter, carbon
standard provides protection against effects Without available NOX, ground-level dioxide, oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor,
associated with short-term exposure to thoracic ozone production is severely limited, carbon monoxide, nitrogen compounds,
coarse particles (i.e., PM10–2.5). and VOC reductions would have little sulfur compounds and numerous low-
1001 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment
impact on ozone concentrations. molecular-weight hydrocarbons. A
(ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Photochemistry under these conditions number of these gaseous hydrocarbon
Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019. Table is said to be ‘‘NOX-limited.’’ When NOX

2–1. levels are sufficiently high, faster NO2 1003 U.S. EPA, (2010). Integrated Science
oxidation consumes more radicals, Assessment for Carbon Monoxide (Final Report).
(ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
dampening ozone production. Under Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–09/019F, 2010.
Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019. Table these ‘‘VOC-limited’’ conditions (also http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/
2–1. referred to as ‘‘NOX-saturated’’ recordisplay.cfm?deid=218686. See section 2.1.
248
Fmt 4701
components are individually known to Assessment (AirToxScreen) for Furthermore, air pollutants may pose
be toxic, including aldehydes, benzene 2019.1007 1008 Mobile sources are also health risks specific to children because
and 1,3-butadiene. The diesel significant contributors to precursor children’s bodies are still
particulate matter present in diesel emissions which react to form air developing.1013 For example, during
exhaust consists mostly of fine particles toxics.1009 Formaldehyde is the largest periods of rapid growth such as fetal
(less than 2.5 mm), of which a significant contributor to cancer risk of all 72 development, infancy and puberty, their
fraction is ultrafine particles (less than pollutants quantitatively assessed in the developing systems and organs may be
0.1 mm). These particles have a large 2019 AirToxScreen. Mobile sources more easily harmed.1014 1015 See EPA’s
surface area which makes them an were responsible for 26 percent of Report ‘‘America’s Children and the
excellent medium for adsorbing primary anthropogenic emissions of this Environment,’’ which presents national
organics, and their small size makes pollutant in the 2017 NEI and are trends on air pollution and other
them highly respirable. Many of the significant contributors to formaldehyde contaminants and environmental health
organic compounds present in the gases precursor emissions. Benzene is also a of children.1016
and on the particles, such as polycyclic large contributor to cancer risk, and
i. Particulate Matter
organic matter, are individually known mobile sources account for about 60
to have mutagenic and carcinogenic percent of average exposure to ambient Scientific evidence spanning animal
properties. concentrations. toxicological, controlled human
Diesel exhaust varies significantly in exposure, and epidemiologic studies
2. Health Effects Associated With shows that exposure to ambient PM is
chemical composition and particle sizes Exposure to Non-GHG Pollutants
between different engine types (heavy- associated with a broad range of health
duty, light-duty), engine operating Heavy-duty vehicles emit non-GHG effects. These health effects are
conditions (idle, acceleration, pollutants that contribute to ambient discussed in detail in the Integrated
deceleration), and fuel formulations concentrations of ozone, PM, NO2, SO2, Science Assessment for Particulate
(high/low sulfur fuel). Also, there are CO, and air toxics. This section of the Matter, which was finalized in
emissions differences between on-road preamble discusses the health effects December 2019 (2019 p.m. ISA), with a
and nonroad engines because the associated with exposure to these more targeted evaluation of studies
nonroad engines are generally of older pollutants. Although the discussion published since the literature cutoff date
technology. After being emitted in the which follows largely deals with the of the 2019 p.m. ISA in the Supplement
engine exhaust, diesel exhaust effects of these pollutants on the general to the Integrated Science Assessment for
population, we note at the outset that PM (Supplement).1017 1018 The PM ISA
undergoes dilution as well as chemical
certain populations are especially characterizes the causal nature of
and physical changes in the atmosphere.
vulnerable and susceptible to effects relationships between PM exposure and
The lifetimes of the components present
from exposure to these pollutants. broad health categories (e.g.,
in diesel exhaust range from seconds to
Children are one such population, and cardiovascular effects, respiratory
months.
they are especially vulnerable because effects, etc.) using a weight-of-evidence
vii. Air Toxics they generally breathe more relative to approach.1019 Within this
The most recent available data their size than adults; consequently,
indicate that millions of Americans live they may be exposed to relatively higher 1012 Foos, B.; Marty, M.; Schwartz, J.; Bennet, W.;
amounts of air pollution.1010 Children Moya, J.; Jarabek, A.M.; Salmon, A.G. (2008)
in areas where air toxics pose potential Focusing on children’s inhalation dosimetry and
also tend to breathe through their
health concerns.1004 1005 The levels of air health effects for risk assessment: An introduction.
mouths more than adults, and their J Toxicol Environ Health 71A: 149–165.
toxics to which people are exposed vary
nasal passages are less effective at 1013 Children’s environmental health includes
depending on where people live and
removing pollutants, which leads to conception, infancy, early childhood and through
work and the kinds of activities in adolescence until 21 years of age as described in the
greater lung deposition of some
which they engage, as discussed in EPA Memorandum: Issuance of EPA’s 2021 Policy
pollutants such as PM.1011 1012 on Children’s Health. October 5, 2021. Available at
detail in EPA’s 2007 Mobile Source Air
https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-
Toxics Rule.1006 According to EPA’s 1007 U.S. EPA. (2022) 2019 AirToxScreen: 10/2021-policy-on-childrens-health.pdf.
2017 National Emissions Inventory Assessment Results. https://www.epa.gov/AirTox 1014 EPA (2006) A Framework for Assessing
(NEI), mobile sources were responsible Screen/2019-airtoxscreen-assessment-results. Health Risks of Environmental Exposures to
for 39 percent of outdoor anthropogenic 1008 AirToxScreen also includes estimates of risk Children. EPA, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–05/
attributable to background concentrations, which 093F, 2006.
toxic emissions. Further, mobile sources 1015 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
includes contributions from long-range transport,
were the largest contributor to national persistent air toxics, and natural sources; as well as (2005). Supplemental guidance for assessing
average risk of cancer and secondary concentrations, where toxics are formed susceptibility from early-life exposure to
immunological and respiratory health via secondary formation. Mobile sources carcinogens. Washington, DC: Risk Assessment
substantially contribute to long-range transport and Forum. EPA/630/R–03/003F. https://
effects from directly emitted pollutants, secondarily formed air toxics. www3.epa.gov/airtoxics/childrens_supplement_
according to EPA’s Air Toxics Screening 1009 Rich Cook, Sharon Phillips, Madeleine final.pdf.
Strum, Alison Eyth & James Thurman (2020): 1016 U.S. EPA. America’s Children and the
1004 Air toxics are pollutants known to cause or Contribution of mobile sources to secondary Environment. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/
suspected of causing cancer or other serious health formation of carbonyl compounds, Journal of the americaschildrenenvironment.
effects. Air toxics are also known as toxic air Air & Waste Management Association, DOI: 1017 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment
pollutants or hazardous air pollutants. https:// 10.1080/10962247.2020.1813839. (ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019).
www.epa.gov/AirToxScreen/airtoxscreen-glossary- 1010 EPA (2009) Metabolically-derived ventilation U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
terms#air-toxics. rates: A revised approach based upon oxygen Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019.
1005 U.S. EPA (2022) Technical Support consumption rates. Washington, DC: Office of 1018 U.S. EPA. Supplement to the 2019 Integrated
Document EPA Air Toxics Screening Assessment. Research and Development. EPA/600/R–06/129F.
Science Assessment for Particulate Matter (Final

2018 AirToxScreen TSD. https://www.epa.gov/ http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recor Report, 2022). U.S. Environmental Protection
system/files/documents/2023-02/AirToxScreen_ display.cfm?deid=202543. Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/635/R–22/028, 2022.
2018%20TSD.pdf. 1011 U.S. EPA Integrated Science Assessment for 1019 The causal framework draws upon the
1006 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019). U.S. assessment and integration of evidence from across
(2007). Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, scientific disciplines, spanning atmospheric
Mobile Sources; Final Rule. 72 FR 8434, February EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019. Chapter 4 ‘‘Overall chemistry, exposure, dosimetry and health effects
26, 2007. Conclusions’’ p. 4–1. Continued
249
Fmt 4701
characterization, the PM ISA metabolic effects, and short-term Supplement, as well as epidemiologic
summarizes the health effects evidence exposure and nervous system effects. studies that conducted accountability
for short-term (i.e., hours up to one As discussed extensively in the 2019 analyses or employed alternative
month) and long-term (i.e., one month to p.m. ISA and the Supplement, recent methods for confounder controls,
years) exposures to PM2.5, PM10–2.5, and studies continue to support a ‘‘causal support and extend the evidence base
ultrafine particles and concludes that relationship’’ between short- and long- that contributed to the 2019 p.m. ISA
exposures to ambient PM2.5 are term PM2.5 exposures and conclusion for long-term PM2.5 exposure
associated with a number of adverse mortality.1022 1023 For short-term PM2.5 and mortality.
health effects. The discussion in this exposure, multi-city studies, in A large body of studies examining
section VI.B.2.i highlights the PM ISA’s combination with single- and multi-city both short- and long-term PM2.5
conclusions and summarizes additional studies evaluated in the 2009 p.m. ISA, exposure and cardiovascular effects
information from the Supplement where provide evidence of consistent, positive supports and extends the evidence base
appropriate, pertaining to the health associations across studies conducted in evaluated in the 2009 p.m. ISA. The
effects evidence for both short- and different geographic locations, strongest evidence for cardiovascular
long-term PM exposures. Further populations with different demographic effects in response to short-term PM2.5
discussion of PM-related health effects characteristics, and studies using exposures is for ischemic heart disease
can also be found in the 2022 Policy different exposure assignment and heart failure. The evidence for
Assessment for the review of the PM techniques. Additionally, the consistent short-term PM2.5 exposure and
NAAQS.1020 and coherent evidence across scientific cardiovascular effects is coherent across
disciplines for cardiovascular scientific disciplines and supports a
EPA has concluded that recent morbidity, including exacerbations of continuum of effects ranging from subtle
evidence in combination with evidence chronic obstructive pulmonary disease changes in indicators of cardiovascular
evaluated in the 2009 p.m. ISA supports (COPD) and asthma, provide biological health to serious clinical events, such as
a ‘‘causal relationship’’ between both plausibility for cause-specific mortality increased emergency department visits
long- and short-term exposures to PM2.5 and ultimately total mortality. Recent and hospital admissions due to
and premature mortality and epidemiologic studies evaluated in the cardiovascular disease and
cardiovascular effects and a ‘‘likely to be Supplement, including studies that cardiovascular mortality. For long-term
causal relationship’’ between long- and employed alternative methods for PM2.5 exposure, there is strong and
short-term PM2.5 exposures and confounder control, provide additional consistent epidemiologic evidence of a
respiratory effects.1021 Additionally, support to the evidence base that relationship with cardiovascular
recent experimental and epidemiologic contributed to the 2019 p.m. ISA mortality. This evidence is supported by
studies provide evidence supporting a conclusion for short-term PM2.5 epidemiologic and animal toxicological
‘‘likely to be causal relationship’’ exposure and mortality. studies demonstrating a range of
between long-term PM2.5 exposure and The 2019 p.m. ISA concluded a cardiovascular effects including
nervous system effects and between ‘‘causal relationship’’ between long-term coronary heart disease, stroke, impaired
long-term PM2.5 exposure and cancer. PM2.5 exposure and mortality. In heart function, and subclinical markers
Because of remaining uncertainties and addition to reanalyzes and extensions of (e.g., coronary artery calcification,
limitations in the evidence base, EPA the American Cancer Society (ACS) and atherosclerotic plaque progression),
determined a ‘‘suggestive of, but not Harvard Six Cities (HSC) cohorts, which collectively provide coherence
sufficient to infer, a causal relationship’’ multiple new cohort studies conducted and biological plausibility. Recent
for long-term PM2.5 exposure and in the United States and Canada epidemiologic studies evaluated in the
reproductive and developmental effects consisting of people employed in a Supplement, as well as studies that
(i.e., male/female reproduction and specific job (e.g., teacher, nurse), and conducted accountability analyses or
fertility; pregnancy and birth outcomes), that apply different exposure employed alternative methods for
long- and short-term exposures and assignment techniques, provide confounder control, support and extend
evidence of positive associations the evidence base that contributed to the
studies (i.e., epidemiologic, controlled human between long-term PM2.5 exposure and 2019 p.m. ISA conclusion for both
exposure, and animal toxicological studies), and short- and long-term PM2.5 exposure and
assess the related uncertainties and limitations that
mortality. Biological plausibility for
ultimately influence our understanding of the mortality due to long-term PM2.5 cardiovascular effects.
evidence. This framework employs a five-level exposure is provided by the coherence Studies evaluated in the 2019 PM ISA
hierarchy that classifies the overall weight-of- of effects across scientific disciplines for continue to provide evidence of a
evidence with respect to the causal nature of ‘‘likely to be causal relationship’’
relationships between criteria pollutant exposures
cardiovascular morbidity, particularly
for coronary heart disease, stroke, and between both short- and long-term PM2.5
and health and welfare effects using the following
categorizations: causal relationship; likely to be atherosclerosis, and for respiratory exposure and respiratory effects.
causal relationship; suggestive of, but not sufficient morbidity, particularly for the Epidemiologic studies provide
to infer, a causal relationship; inadequate to infer
development of COPD. Additionally, consistent evidence of a relationship
the presence or absence of a causal relationship; between short-term PM2.5 exposure and
and not likely to be a causal relationship (U.S. EPA) recent studies provide evidence
(2019). Integrated Science Assessment for indicating that as long-term PM2.5 asthma exacerbation in children and
Particulate Matter (Final Report). U.S. concentrations decrease there is an COPD exacerbation in adults as
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC,
increase in life expectancy. Recent indicated by increases in emergency
EPA/600/R–19/188, Section P. 3.2.3). department visits and hospital
1020 U.S. EPA. Policy Assessment (PA) for the cohort studies evaluated in the
Reconsideration of the National Ambient Air
admissions, which is supported by
Quality Standards for Particulate Matter (Final 1022 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment animal toxicological studies indicating
Report, 2022). U.S. Environmental Protection (ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019). worsening allergic airways disease and
Agency, Washington, DC, EPA–452/R–22–004, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, subclinical effects related to COPD.
2022. Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019. Epidemiologic studies also provide
1021 U.S. EPA (2009). Integrated Science 1023 U.S. EPA. Supplement to the 2019 Integrated
Assessment for Particulate Matter (Final Report). Science Assessment for Particulate Matter (Final
evidence of a relationship between
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Report, 2022). U.S. Environmental Protection short-term PM2.5 exposure and
Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–08/139F. Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/635/R–22/028, 2022. respiratory mortality. However, there is
250
Fmt 4701
inconsistent evidence of respiratory PM2.5 exposure and cancer. uncertainty identified in the 2009 PM
effects, specifically lung function Epidemiologic studies examining long- ISA with respect to the method used to
declines and pulmonary inflammation, term PM2.5 exposure and lung cancer estimate PM10–2.5 concentrations in
in controlled human exposure studies. incidence and mortality provide epidemiologic studies persists.
With respect to long term PM2.5 evidence of generally positive Specifically, across epidemiologic
exposure, epidemiologic studies associations in cohort studies spanning studies, different approaches are used to
conducted in the United States and different populations, locations, and estimate PM10–2.5 concentrations (e.g.,
abroad provide evidence of a exposure assignment techniques. direct measurement of PM10–2.5,
relationship with respiratory effects, Additionally, there is evidence of difference between PM10 and PM2.5
including consistent changes in lung positive associations with lung cancer concentrations), and it remains unclear
function and lung function growth rate, incidence and mortality in analyses how well correlated PM10–2.5
increased asthma incidence, asthma limited to never smokers. The concentrations are both spatially and
prevalence, and wheeze in children; epidemiologic evidence is supported by temporally across the different methods
acceleration of lung function decline in both experimental and epidemiologic used.
adults; and respiratory mortality. The evidence of genotoxicity, epigenetic For UFPs, which have often been
epidemiologic evidence is supported by effects, carcinogenic potential, and that defined as particles less than 0.1 mm, the
animal toxicological studies, which PM2.5 exhibits several characteristics of uncertainty in the evidence for the
provide coherence and biological carcinogens, which collectively health effect categories evaluated across
plausibility for a range of effects provides biological plausibility for experimental and epidemiologic studies
including impaired lung development, cancer development and resulted in the reflects the inconsistency in the
decrements in lung function growth, conclusion of a ‘‘likely to be causal exposure metric used (i.e., particle
and asthma development. relationship.’’ number concentration, surface area
Since the 2009 PM ISA, a growing For the additional health effects concentration, mass concentration) as
body of scientific evidence examined categories evaluated for PM2.5 in the well as the size fractions examined. In
the relationship between long-term 2019 PM ISA, experimental and epidemiologic studies the size fraction
PM2.5 exposure and nervous system epidemiologic studies provide limited examined can vary depending on the
effects, resulting for the first time in a and/or inconsistent evidence of a monitor used and exposure metric, with
causality determination for this health relationship with PM2.5 exposure. As a some studies examining number count
effects category of a ‘‘likely to be causal result, the 2019 PM ISA concluded that over the entire particle size range, while
relationship.’’ The strongest evidence the evidence is ‘‘suggestive of, but not experimental studies that use a particle
for effects on the nervous system comes sufficient to infer a causal relationship’’ concentrator often examine particles up
from epidemiologic studies that for short-term PM2.5 exposure and to 0.3 mm. Additionally, due to the lack
consistently report cognitive decrements metabolic effects and nervous system of a monitoring network, there is limited
and reductions in brain volume in effects and for long-term PM2.5 information on the spatial and temporal
adults. The effects observed in exposures and metabolic effects as well variability of UFPs within the U.S., as
epidemiologic studies in adults are as reproductive and developmental well as population exposures to UFPs,
supported by animal toxicological effects. which adds uncertainty to
studies demonstrating effects on the In addition to evaluating the health epidemiologic study results.
brain of adult animals including effects attributed to short- and long-term The 2019 PM ISA cites extensive
inflammation, morphologic changes, exposure to PM2.5, the 2019 PM ISA also evidence indicating that ‘‘both the
and neurodegeneration of specific conducted an extensive evaluation as to general population as well as specific
regions of the brain. There is more whether specific components or sources populations and life stages are at risk for
limited evidence for of PM2.5 are more strongly related with PM2.5-related health effects.’’ 1025 For
neurodevelopmental effects in children, health effects than PM2.5 mass. An example, in support of its ‘‘causal’’ and
with some studies reporting positive evaluation of those studies resulted in ‘‘likely to be causal’’ determinations, the
associations with autism spectrum the 2019 PM ISA concluding that ‘‘many ISA cites substantial evidence for (1)
disorder and others providing limited PM2.5 components and sources are PM-related mortality and cardiovascular
evidence of an association with associated with many health effects, and effects in older adults; (2) PM-related
cognitive function. While there is some the evidence does not indicate that any cardiovascular effects in people with
evidence from animal toxicological pre-existing cardiovascular disease; (3)
one source or component is consistently
studies indicating effects on the brain PM-related respiratory effects in people
more strongly related to health effects
(i.e., inflammatory and morphological with pre-existing respiratory disease,
than PM2.5 mass.’’ 1024
changes) to support a biologically For both PM10–2.5 and UFPs, for all particularly asthma exacerbations in
plausible pathway for health effects categories evaluated, the children; and (4) PM-related
neurodevelopmental effects,
2019 PM ISA concluded that the impairments in lung function growth
epidemiologic studies are limited due to
evidence was ‘‘suggestive of, but not and asthma development in children.
their lack of control for potential
sufficient to infer, a causal relationship’’ The ISA additionally notes that
confounding by copollutants, the small
or ‘‘inadequate to determine the stratified analyses (i.e., analyses that
number of studies conducted, and
presence or absence of a causal directly compare PM-related health
uncertainty regarding critical exposure
relationship.’’ For PM10–2.5, although a effects across groups) provide strong
windows.
Building off the decades of research Federal Reference Method was evidence for racial and ethnic
demonstrating mutagenicity, DNA instituted in 2011 to measure PM10–2.5 differences in PM2.5 exposures and in
damage, and other endpoints related to concentrations nationally, the causality the risk of PM2.5-related health effects,
genotoxicity due to whole PM determinations reflect that the same specifically within Hispanic and non-
exposures, recent experimental and 1024 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment 1025 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment
epidemiologic studies focusing (ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019). (ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019).
specifically on PM2.5 provide evidence U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
of a relationship between long-term Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019. Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019.
251
Fmt 4701
Hispanic Black populations, with some for these health effects.1030 The during childhood can have lasting
evidence of increased risk for discussion in this section VI.B.2.ii effects through adulthood. Such effects
populations of low socioeconomic highlights the Ozone ISA’s conclusions include altered function of the
status. Recent studies evaluated in the pertaining to health effects associated respiratory and immune systems.
Supplement support the conclusion of with both short-term and long-term Children absorb higher doses
the 2019 PM ISA with respect to periods of exposure to ozone. (normalized to lung surface area) of
disparities in both PM2.5 exposure and For short-term exposure to ozone, the ambient ozone, compared to adults, due
health risk by race and ethnicity and Ozone ISA concludes that respiratory to their increased time spent outdoors,
provide additional support for effects, including lung function higher ventilation rates relative to body
disparities for populations of lower decrements, pulmonary inflammation, size, and a tendency to breathe a greater
socioeconomic status.1026 Additionally, exacerbation of asthma, respiratory- fraction of air through the mouth.1031
evidence spanning epidemiologic related hospital admissions, and Children also have a higher asthma
studies that conducted stratified mortality, are causally associated with prevalence compared to adults. Recent
ozone exposure. It also concludes that epidemiologic studies provide generally
analyses, experimental studies focusing
metabolic effects, including metabolic consistent evidence that long-term
on animal models of disease or
syndrome (i.e., changes in insulin or ozone exposure is associated with the
individuals with pre-existing disease,
glucose levels, cholesterol levels, development of asthma in children.
dosimetry studies, as well as studies obesity, and blood pressure) and Studies comparing age groups reported
focusing on differential exposure complications due to diabetes are likely higher magnitude associations for short-
suggest that populations with pre- to be causally associated with short- term ozone exposure and respiratory
existing cardiovascular or respiratory term exposure to ozone and that hospital admissions and emergency
disease, populations that are overweight evidence is suggestive of a causal room visits among children than among
or obese, populations that have relationship between cardiovascular adults. Panel studies also provide
particular genetic variants, and current/ effects, central nervous system effects support for experimental studies with
former smokers could be at increased and total mortality and short-term consistent associations between short-
risk for adverse PM2.5-related health exposure to ozone. term ozone exposure and lung function
effects. The 2022 Policy Assessment for For long-term exposure to ozone, the and pulmonary inflammation in healthy
the review of the PM NAAQS also Ozone ISA concludes that respiratory children. Additional children’s
highlights that factors that may effects, including new onset asthma, vulnerability and susceptibility factors
contribute to increased risk of PM2.5- pulmonary inflammation, and injury, are listed in section XI.B.2 of the
related health effects include life stage are likely to be causally related with preamble.
(children and older adults), pre-existing ozone exposure. The Ozone ISA
diseases (cardiovascular disease and characterizes the evidence as suggestive iii.
respiratory disease), race/ethnicity, and of a causal relationship for associations The most recent review of the health
socioeconomic status.1027 between long-term ozone exposure and effects of oxides of nitrogen completed
cardiovascular effects, metabolic effects, by EPA can be found in the 2016
ii. Ozone reproductive and developmental effects, Integrated Science Assessment for
This section provides a summary of central nervous system effects and total Oxides of Nitrogen—Health Criteria
mortality. The evidence is inadequate to (Oxides of Nitrogen ISA).1032 The
the health effects associated with
infer a causal relationship between primary source of NO2 is motor vehicle
exposure to ambient concentrations of
chronic ozone exposure and increased emissions, and ambient NO2
ozone.1028 The information in this
risk of cancer. concentrations tend to be highly
section is based on the information and Finally, interindividual variation in correlated with other traffic-related
conclusions in the April 2020 Integrated human responses to ozone exposure can pollutants. Thus, a key issue in
Science Assessment for Ozone (Ozone result in some groups being at increased characterizing the causality of NO2-
ISA).1029 The Ozone ISA concludes that risk for detrimental effects in response health effect relationships was
human exposures to ambient to exposure. In addition, some groups evaluating the extent to which studies
concentrations of ozone are associated are at increased risk of exposure due to supported an effect of NO2 that is
with a number of adverse health effects their activities, such as outdoor workers independent of other traffic-related
and characterizes the weight of evidence and children. The Ozone ISA identified pollutants. EPA concluded that the
several groups that are at increased risk findings for asthma exacerbation
1026 U.S. EPA. Supplement to the 2019 Integrated
for ozone-related health effects. These integrated from epidemiologic and
Science Assessment for Particulate Matter (Final
Report, 2022). U.S. Environmental Protection
groups are people with asthma, children
Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/635/R–22/028, 2022. and older adults, individuals with 1031 Children are more susceptible than adults to
1027 U.S. EPA. Policy Assessment (PA) for the reduced intake of certain nutrients (i.e., many air pollutants because of differences in
physiology, higher per body weight breathing rates
Reconsideration of the National Ambient Air Vitamins C and E), outdoor workers, and consumption, rapid development of the brain
Quality Standards for Particulate Matter (Final and individuals having certain genetic and bodily systems, and behaviors that increase
Report, 2022). U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, DC, EPA–452/R–22–004, variants related to oxidative metabolism chances for exposure. Even before birth, the
or inflammation. Ozone exposure developing fetus may be exposed to air pollutants
2022, p. 3–53. through the mother that affect development and
1028 Human exposure to ozone varies over time
permanently harm the individual. Infants and
due to changes in ambient ozone concentration and 1030 The ISA evaluates evidence and draws
children breathe at much higher rates per body
because people move between locations which have conclusions on the causal relationship between weight than adults, with infants under one year of
notably different ozone concentrations. Also, the relevant pollutant exposures and health effects, age having a breathing rate up to five times that of
amount of ozone delivered to the lung is influenced
assigning one of five ‘‘weight of evidence’’ adults. In addition, children breathe through their
not only by the ambient concentrations but also by determinations: causal relationship, likely to be a mouths more than adults and their nasal passages
the breathing route and rate. causal relationship, suggestive of a causal are less effective at removing pollutants, which
1029 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment relationship, inadequate to infer a causal leads to a higher deposition fraction in their lungs.
(ISA) for Ozone and Related Photochemical relationship, and not likely to be a causal 1032 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment for
Oxidants (Final Report). U.S. Environmental relationship. For more information on these levels Oxides of Nitrogen—Health Criteria (2016 Final
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R– of evidence, please refer to Table II in the Preamble Report). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
20/012, 2020. of the ISA. Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–15/068, 2016.
252
Fmt 4701
controlled human exposure studies iv. Sulfur Oxides the development of asthma. However,
provided evidence that is sufficient to This section provides an overview of uncertainty remains regarding the
infer a causal relationship between the health effects associated with SO2. influence of other pollutants on the
respiratory effects and short-term NO2 Additional information on the health observed associations with SO2 because
exposure. The strongest evidence effects of SO2 can be found in the 2017 these epidemiologic studies have not
supporting an independent effect of NO2 Integrated Science Assessment for examined the potential for co-pollutant
exposure comes from controlled human Sulfur Oxides—Health Criteria (SOX confounding.
exposure studies demonstrating ISA).1033 Following an extensive Consistent associations between
increased airway responsiveness in evaluation of health evidence from short-term exposure to SO2 and
individuals with asthma following animal toxicological, controlled human mortality have been observed in
ambient-relevant NO2 exposures. The exposure, and epidemiologic studies, epidemiologic studies with larger effect
coherence of this evidence with the EPA has concluded that there is a estimates reported for respiratory
epidemiologic findings for asthma causal relationship between respiratory mortality than for cardiovascular
hospital admissions and emergency health effects and short-term exposure mortality. While this finding is
department visits as well as lung to SO2. The immediate effect of SO2 on consistent with the demonstrated effects
function decrements and increased the respiratory system in humans is of SO2 on respiratory morbidity,
pulmonary inflammation in children bronchoconstriction. People with uncertainty remains with respect to the
with asthma describe a plausible asthma are more sensitive to the effects interpretation of these observed
pathway by which NO2 exposure can of SO2, likely resulting from preexisting mortality associations due to potential
cause an asthma exacerbation. The 2016 inflammation associated with this confounding by various copollutants.
ISA for Oxides of Nitrogen also disease. In addition to those with Therefore, the EPA has concluded that
concluded that there is likely to be a asthma (both children and adults), there the overall evidence is suggestive of a
causal relationship between long-term is suggestive evidence that all children causal relationship between short-term
NO2 exposure and respiratory effects. and older adults may be at increased exposure to SO2 and mortality.
This conclusion is based on new risk of SO2-related health effects. In free- v. Carbon Monoxide
epidemiologic evidence for associations breathing laboratory studies involving
of NO2 with asthma development in controlled human exposures to SO2, Information on the health effects of
children combined with biological respiratory effects have consistently carbon monoxide (CO) can be found in
plausibility from experimental studies. been observed following 5–10 min the January 2010 Integrated Science
In evaluating a broader range of health exposures at SO2 concentrations ≥400 Assessment for Carbon Monoxide (CO
effects, the 2016 ISA for Oxides of ppb in people with asthma engaged in ISA).1034 The CO ISA presents
Nitrogen concluded that evidence is moderate to heavy levels of exercise, conclusions regarding the presence of
‘‘suggestive of, but not sufficient to with respiratory effects occurring at causal relationships between CO
infer, a causal relationship’’ between concentrations as low as 200 ppb in exposure and categories of adverse
short-term NO2 exposure and some individuals with asthma. A clear health effects.1035 This section provides
cardiovascular effects and mortality and concentration-response relationship has a summary of the health effects
between long-term NO2 exposure and been demonstrated in these studies associated with exposure to ambient
cardiovascular effects and diabetes, following exposures to SO2 at concentrations of CO, along with the CO
birth outcomes, and cancer. In addition, concentrations between 200 and 1000 ISA conclusions.1036
the scientific evidence is inadequate ppb, both in terms of increasing severity Controlled human exposure studies of
(insufficient consistency of of respiratory symptoms and subjects with coronary artery disease
epidemiologic and toxicological decrements in lung function, as well as show a decrease in the time to onset of
evidence) to infer a causal relationship the percentage of individuals with exercise-induced angina (chest pain)
for long-term NO2 exposure with asthma adversely affected. and electrocardiogram changes
Epidemiologic studies have reported following CO exposure. In addition,
fertility, reproduction, and pregnancy,
positive associations between short-term epidemiologic studies presented in the
as well as with postnatal development.
ambient SO2 concentrations and CO ISA observed associations between
A key uncertainty in understanding the
hospital admissions and emergency short-term CO exposure and
relationship between these non-
department visits for asthma and for all cardiovascular morbidity, particularly
respiratory health effects and short- or
respiratory causes, particularly among increased emergency room visits and
long-term exposure to NO2 is co-
children and older adults (≥65 years). hospital admissions for coronary heart
pollutant confounding, particularly by
The studies provide supportive disease (including ischemic heart
other roadway pollutants. The available
evidence for non-respiratory health evidence for the causal relationship.
1034 U.S. EPA (2010). Integrated Science
effects does not adequately address For long-term SO2 exposure and
Assessment for Carbon Monoxide (Final Report).
whether NO2 has an independent effect respiratory effects, the EPA has U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
or whether it primarily represents concluded that the evidence is Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–09/019F, 2010.
effects related to other or a mixture of suggestive of a causal relationship. This 1035 The ISA evaluates the health evidence
conclusion is based on new associated with different health effects, assigning

traffic-related pollutants. one of five ‘‘weight of evidence’’ determinations:
The 2016 ISA for Oxides of Nitrogen epidemiologic evidence for positive causal relationship, likely to be a causal
concluded that people with asthma, associations between long-term SO2 relationship, suggestive of a causal relationship,
children, and older adults are at exposure and increases in asthma inadequate to infer a causal relationship, and not
incidence among children, together with likely to be a causal relationship. For definitions of
increased risk for NO2-related health these levels of evidence, please refer to section 1.6
effects. In these groups and lifestages, animal toxicological evidence that of the ISA.
NO2 is consistently related to larger provides a pathophysiologic basis for 1036 Personal exposure includes contributions
effects on outcomes related to asthma from many sources, and in many different
1033 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment environments. Total personal exposure to CO
exacerbation, for which there is (ISA) for Sulfur Oxides—Health Criteria (Final includes both ambient and non-ambient
confidence in the relationship with NO2 Report, Dec 2017). U.S. Environmental Protection components; and both components may contribute
exposure. Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–17/451, 2017. to adverse health effects.
253
Fmt 4701
disease, myocardial infarction, and exists between long-term exposure and uncertainties, the analysis
angina). Some epidemiologic evidence respiratory morbidity. acknowledged that the risks could be
is also available for increased hospital Finally, the CO ISA concludes that lower than 10¥5, and a zero risk from
admissions and emergency room visits the epidemiologic evidence is diesel exhaust exposure could not be
for congestive heart failure and suggestive of a causal relationship ruled out.
cardiovascular diseases as a whole. The between short-term concentrations of Noncancer health effects of acute and
CO ISA concludes that a causal CO and mortality. Epidemiologic chronic exposure to diesel exhaust
relationship is likely to exist between evidence suggests an association exists emissions are also of concern to EPA.
short-term exposures to CO and between short-term exposure to CO and EPA derived a diesel exhaust reference
cardiovascular morbidity. It also mortality, but limited evidence is concentration (RfC) from consideration
concludes that available data are available to evaluate cause-specific of four well-conducted chronic rat
inadequate to conclude that a causal mortality outcomes associated with CO inhalation studies showing adverse
relationship exists between long-term exposure. In addition, the attenuation of pulmonary effects. The RfC is 5 mg/m3
exposures to CO and cardiovascular CO risk estimates which was often for diesel exhaust measured as diesel
morbidity. observed in co-pollutant models particulate matter. This RfC does not
Animal studies show various contributes to the uncertainty as to consider allergenic effects such as those
neurological effects with in-utero CO whether CO is acting alone or as an associated with asthma or immunologic
exposure. Controlled human exposure indicator for other combustion-related or the potential for cardiac effects. There
studies report central nervous system pollutants. The CO ISA also concludes was emerging evidence in 2002,
and behavioral effects following low- that there is not likely to be a causal discussed in the Diesel HAD, that
level CO exposures, although the relationship between relevant long-term exposure to diesel exhaust can
findings have not been consistent across exposures to CO and mortality. exacerbate these effects, but the
all studies. The CO ISA concludes that exposure-response data were lacking at
vi. Diesel Exhaust
the evidence is suggestive of a causal that time to derive an RfC based on
relationship with both short- and long- In EPA’s 2002 Diesel Health these then-emerging considerations. The
term exposure to CO and central Assessment Document (Diesel HAD), Diesel HAD states, ‘‘With [diesel
nervous system effects. exposure to diesel exhaust was particulate matter] being a ubiquitous
A number of studies cited in the CO classified as likely to be carcinogenic to component of ambient PM, there is an
ISA have evaluated the role of CO humans by inhalation from uncertainty about the adequacy of the
exposure in birth outcomes such as environmental exposures, in accordance existing [diesel exhaust] noncancer
preterm birth or cardiac birth defects. with the revised draft 1996/1999 EPA database to identify all of the pertinent
There is limited epidemiologic evidence cancer guidelines.1037 1038 A number of [diesel exhaust]-caused noncancer
of a CO-induced effect on preterm births other agencies (National Institute for health hazards.’’ The Diesel HAD also
and birth defects, with weak evidence Occupational Safety and Health, the notes ‘‘that acute exposure to [diesel
for a decrease in birth weight. Animal International Agency for Research on exhaust] has been associated with
toxicological studies have found Cancer, the World Health Organization, irritation of the eye, nose, and throat,
perinatal CO exposure to affect birth California EPA, and the U.S. respiratory symptoms (cough and
weight, as well as other developmental Department of Health and Human phlegm), and neurophysiological
outcomes. The CO ISA concludes that Services) made similar hazard symptoms such as headache,
the evidence is suggestive of a causal classifications prior to 2002. EPA also lightheadedness, nausea, vomiting, and
relationship between long-term concluded in the 2002 Diesel HAD that numbness or tingling of the
exposures to CO and developmental it was not possible to calculate a cancer extremities.’’ The Diesel HAD notes that
effects and birth outcomes. unit risk for diesel exhaust due to the cancer and noncancer hazard
Epidemiologic studies provide limitations in the exposure data for the conclusions applied to the general use
evidence of associations between short- occupational groups or the absence of a of diesel engines then on the market and
term CO concentrations and respiratory dose-response relationship. as cleaner engines replace a substantial
morbidity such as changes in In the absence of a cancer unit risk, number of existing ones, the
pulmonary function, respiratory the Diesel HAD sought to provide applicability of the conclusions would
symptoms, and hospital admissions. A additional insight into the significance need to be reevaluated.
limited number of epidemiologic of the diesel exhaust cancer hazard by It is important to note that the Diesel
studies considered copollutants such as estimating possible ranges of risk that HAD also briefly summarizes health
ozone, SO2, and PM in two-pollutant might be present in the population. An effects associated with ambient PM and
models and found that CO risk estimates exploratory analysis was used to discusses EPA’s then-annual PM2.5
were generally robust, although this characterize a range of possible lung NAAQS of 15 mg/m3. In 2012, EPA
limited evidence makes it difficult to cancer risk. The outcome was that revised the level of the annual PM2.5
disentangle effects attributed to CO environmental risks of cancer from long- NAAQS to 12 mg/m3 and in 2024 EPA
itself from those of the larger complex term diesel exhaust exposures could revised the level of the annual PM2.5
air pollution mixture. Controlled human plausibly range from as low as 10¥5 to NAAQS to 9.0 mg/m3.1039 There is a
exposure studies have not extensively as high as 10¥3. Because of large and extensive body of human data
evaluated the effect of CO on respiratory showing a wide spectrum of adverse
morbidity. Animal studies at levels of 1037 U.S. EPA. (1999). Guidelines for Carcinogen
health effects associated with exposure
50–100 ppm CO show preliminary Risk Assessment. Review Draft. NCEA–F–0644,
July. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA. Retrieved on to ambient PM, of which diesel exhaust
evidence of altered pulmonary vascular March 19, 2009 from http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/ is an important component. The PM2.5
remodeling and oxidative injury. The cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=54932. NAAQS provides protection from the
CO ISA concludes that the evidence is 1038 U.S. EPA (2002). Health Assessment
health effects attributed to exposure to
suggestive of a causal relationship Document for Diesel Engine Exhaust. EPA/600/8–
90/057F Office of research and Development, PM2.5. The contribution of diesel PM to
between short-term CO exposure and Washington DC. Retrieved on March 17, 2009, from
respiratory morbidity, and inadequate to http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/ 1039 https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/national-
conclude that a causal relationship recordisplay.cfm?deid=29060. pp. 1–1 1–2. ambient-air-quality-standards-naaqs-pm.
254
Fmt 4701
total ambient PM varies in different update from its 1988 evaluation that various concentration levels of
regions of the country and also within considered the evidence to be indicative acetaldehyde exposure.1051 Data from
a region from one area to another. The of a ‘‘probable human carcinogen.’’ these studies were used by EPA to
contribution can be high in near- develop an inhalation reference
vii. Air Toxics
roadway environments, for example, or concentration of 9 mg/m3. Some
in other locations where diesel engine Heavy-duty engine emissions asthmatics have been shown to be a
use is concentrated. contribute to ambient levels of air toxics sensitive subpopulation to decrements
Since 2002, several new studies have that are known or suspected human or in functional expiratory volume (FEV1
been published which continue to animal carcinogens or that have test) and bronchoconstriction upon
report increased lung cancer risk noncancer health effects. These acetaldehyde inhalation.1052 Children,
associated with occupational exposure compounds include, but are not limited especially those with diagnosed asthma,
to diesel exhaust from older engines. Of to, acetaldehyde, benzene, 1,3- may be more likely to show impaired
particular note since 2011 are three new butadiene, formaldehyde, and pulmonary function and symptoms of
epidemiology studies which have naphthalene. These compounds were all asthma than are adults following
examined lung cancer in occupational identified as national cancer risk drivers exposure to acetaldehyde.1053
populations, including truck drivers, or contributors in the 2019 Air Toxics
underground nonmetal miners, and Screening Assessment b. Benzene
other diesel motor-related occupations. (AirToxScreen).1044 1045 EPA’s Integrated Risk Information
These studies reported increased risk of a. Acetaldehyde System (IRIS) database lists benzene as
lung cancer related to exposure to diesel a known human carcinogen (causing
exhaust, with evidence of positive Acetaldehyde is classified in EPA’s leukemia) by all routes of exposure and
exposure-response relationships to IRIS database as a probable human concludes that exposure is associated
varying degrees.1040 1041 1042 These newer carcinogen, based on nasal tumors in with additional health effects, including
studies (along with others that have rats, and is considered toxic by the genetic changes in both humans and
appeared in the scientific literature) add inhalation, oral, and intravenous animals and increased proliferation of
to the evidence EPA evaluated in the routes.1046 The inhalation unit risk bone marrow cells in mice.1054 1055 1056
2002 Diesel HAD and further reinforce estimate (URE) in IRIS for acetaldehyde EPA states in its IRIS database that data
the concern that diesel exhaust is 2.2 × 10¥6 per mg/m3.1047 indicate a causal relationship between
exposure likely poses a lung cancer Acetaldehyde is reasonably anticipated benzene exposure and acute
hazard. The findings from these newer to be a human carcinogen by the NTP lymphocytic leukemia and suggest a
studies do not necessarily apply to in the 14th Report on Carcinogens and relationship between benzene exposure
newer technology diesel engines (i.e., is classified as possibly carcinogenic to and chronic non-lymphocytic leukemia
heavy-duty highway engines from 2007 humans (Group 2B) by the IARC.1048 1049 and chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
and later model years) since the newer The primary noncancer effects of EPA’s IRIS documentation for benzene
engines have large reductions in the exposure to acetaldehyde vapors also lists a range of 2.2 × 10¥6 to 7.8 ×
emission constituents compared to older include irritation of the eyes, skin, and 10¥6 per mg/m3 as the unit risk estimate
technology diesel engines. respiratory tract.1050 In short-term (4 (URE) for benzene.1057 1058 The
In light of the growing body of week) rat studies, degeneration of
scientific literature evaluating the health olfactory epithelium was observed at 1051 Appleman, L.M., R.A. Woutersen, and V.J.
effects of exposure to diesel exhaust, in Feron. (1982). Inhalation toxicity of acetaldehyde in

1044 U.S. EPA (2022) Technical Support rats. I. Acute and subacute studies. Toxicology. 23:
June 2012 the World Health Document EPA’s Air Toxics Screening Assessment. 293–297.
Organization’s International Agency for 2018 AirToxScreen TSD. https://www.epa.gov/ 1052 Myou, S.; Fujimura, M.; Nishi K.; Ohka, T.;
Research on Cancer (IARC), a system/files/documents/2023-02/AirToxScreen_ and Matsuda, T. (1993). Aerosolized acetaldehyde

recognized international authority on 2018%20TSD.pdf. induces histamine-mediated bronchoconstriction in
1045 U.S. EPA (2023) 2019 AirToxScreen Risk asthmatics. Am. Rev. Respir.Dis.148(4 Pt 1): 940–
the carcinogenic potential of chemicals 943.
Drivers. https://www.epa.gov/AirToxScreen/
and other agents, evaluated the full airtoxscreen-risk-drivers. 1053 California OEHHA, 2014. TSD for Noncancer
range of cancer-related health effects 1046 U.S. EPA (1991). Integrated Risk Information RELs: Appendix D. Individual, Acute, 8-Hour, and
data for diesel engine exhaust. IARC System File of Acetaldehyde. Research and Chronic Reference Exposure Level Summaries.
concluded that diesel exhaust should be Development, National Center for Environmental December 2008 (updated July 2014). https://
Assessment, Washington, DC. This material is oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/
regarded as ‘‘carcinogenic to available electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ appendixd1final.pdf.
humans.’’ 1043 This designation was an ncea/iris2/chemicalLanding.cfm?substance_ 1054 U.S. EPA. (2000). Integrated Risk Information
nmbr=290. System File for Benzene. This material is available

1040 Garshick, Eric, Francine Laden, Jaime E. Hart, 1047 U.S. EPA (1991). Integrated Risk Information electronically at: https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris2/
Mary E. Davis, Ellen A. Eisen, and Thomas J. Smith. System File of Acetaldehyde. This material is chemicalLanding.cfm?substancelnmbr=276.
2012. Lung cancer and elemental carbon exposure available electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ 1055 International Agency for Research on Cancer.
in trucking industry workers. Environmental Health ncea/iris2/chemicalLanding.cfm?substance_ (1982). IARC monographs on the evaluation of
Perspectives 120(9): 1301–1306. nmbr=290. carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans, Volume
1041 Silverman, D.T., Samanic, C.M., Lubin, J.H., 1048 NTP (National Toxicology Program). 2016. 29, Some industrial chemicals and dyestuffs,
Blair, A.E., Stewart, P.A., Vermeulen, R., & Attfield, Report on Carcinogens, Fourteenth Edition.; International Agency for Research on Cancer, World
M.D. (2012). The diesel exhaust in miners study: a Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of Health Organization, Lyon, France 1982.
nested case-control study of lung cancer and diesel Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. 1056 Irons, R.D.; Stillman, W.S.; Colagiovanni,
exhaust. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc14. D.B.; Henry, V.A. (1992). Synergistic action of the
1042 Olsson, Ann C., et al. ‘‘Exposure to diesel 1049 International Agency for Research on Cancer benzene metabolite hydroquinone on myelopoietic
motor exhaust and lung cancer risk in a pooled (IARC). (1999). Re-evaluation of some organic stimulating activity of granulocyte/macrophage
analysis from case-control studies in Europe and chemicals, hydrazine, and hydrogen peroxide. IARC colony-stimulating factor in vitro, Proc. Natl. Acad.
Canada.’’ American journal of respiratory and Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk Sci. 89:3691–3695.
critical care medicine 183.7 (2011): 941–948. of Chemical to Humans, Vol 71. Lyon, France. 1057 A unit risk estimate is defined as the increase
1043 IARC [International Agency for Research on 1050 U.S. EPA (1991). Integrated Risk Information in the lifetime risk of cancer of an individual who
Cancer]. (2013). Diesel and gasoline engine exhausts System File of Acetaldehyde. This material is is exposed for a lifetime to 1 mg/m3 benzene in air.
and some nitroarenes. IARC Monographs Volume available electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ 1058 U.S. EPA. (2000). Integrated Risk Information
105. Online at http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/ ncea/iris2/chemicalLanding.cfm?substance_ System File for Benzene. This material is available
Monographs/vol105/index.php. nmbr=290. Continued
255
Fmt 4701
International Agency for Research on program has not yet evaluated these inhalation.1078 1079 The IARC has
Cancer (IARC) has determined that new data. EPA does not currently have determined that 1,3-butadiene is a
benzene is a human carcinogen, and the an acute reference concentration for human carcinogen, and the U.S. DHHS
U.S. Department of Health and Human benzene. The Agency for Toxic has characterized 1,3-butadiene as a
Services (DHHS) has characterized Substances and Disease Registry known human
benzene as a known human (ATSDR) Minimal Risk Level (MRL) for carcinogen.1080 1081 1082 1083 There are
carcinogen.1059 1060 acute inhalation exposure to benzene is numerous studies consistently
A number of adverse noncancer 29 mg/m3 for 1–14 days exposure.1069 1070 demonstrating that 1,3-butadiene is
health effects, including blood disorders There is limited information from two metabolized into genotoxic metabolites
such as preleukemia and aplastic studies regarding an increased risk of by experimental animals and humans.
anemia, have also been associated with adverse effects to children whose The specific mechanisms of 1,3-
long-term exposure to benzene.1061 1062 parents have been occupationally more butadiene-induced carcinogenesis are
The most sensitive noncancer effect e to benzene.1071 1072 Data from animal unknown; however, the scientific
observed in humans, based on current studies have shown benzene exposures evidence strongly suggests that the
data, is the depression of the absolute result in damage to the hematopoietic carcinogenic effects are mediated by
lymphocyte count in blood.1063 1064 (blood cell formation) system during genotoxic metabolites. Animal data
EPA’s inhalation reference development.1073 1074 1075 Also, key suggest that females may be more
concentration (RfC) for benzene is 30 changes related to the development of sensitive than males for cancer effects
mg/m3. The RfC is based on suppressed childhood leukemia occur in the associated with 1,3-butadiene exposure;
absolute lymphocyte counts seen in developing fetus.1076 Several studies there are insufficient data in humans
humans under occupational exposure have reported that genetic changes from which to draw conclusions about
conditions. In addition, studies related to eventual leukemia sensitive subpopulations. The URE for
sponsored by the Health Effects Institute development occur before birth. For 1,3-butadiene is 3 × 10¥5 per mg/m3.1084
(HEI) provide evidence that biochemical example, there is one study of genetic 1,3-butadiene also causes a variety of
responses occur at lower levels of changes in twins who developed T cell reproductive and developmental effects
benzene exposure than previously leukemia at nine years of age.1077 in mice; no human data on these effects
known.1065 1066 1067 1068 EPA’s IRIS are available. The most sensitive effect
c. 1,3-Butadiene was ovarian atrophy observed in a
electronically at: https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris2/
EPA has characterized 1,3-butadiene lifetime bioassay of female mice.1085
chemicalLanding.cfm?substance_nmbr=276.
1059 International Agency for Research on Cancer as carcinogenic to humans by
1078 U.S. EPA. (2002). Health Assessment of 1,3-
(IARC, 2018. Monographs on the evaluation of
Butadiene. Office of Research and Development,
carcinogenic risks to humans, volume 120. World human exposure from Urban Air. Research Reports National Center for Environmental Assessment,
Health Organization—Lyon, France. http:// Health Effect Inst. Report No.113. Washington Office, Washington, DC. Report No.
publications.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Iarc- 1069 U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and EPA600–P–98–001F. This document is available
Monographs-On-The-Identification-Of-
Disease Registry (ATSDR). (2007). Toxicological electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris_
Carcinogenic-Hazards-To-Humans/Benzene-2018.
1060 NTP (National Toxicology Program). 2016.
profile for benzene. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department drafts/recordisplay.cfm?deid=54499.
of Health and Human Services, Public Health 1079 U.S. EPA. (2002) ‘‘Full IRIS Summary for 1,3-
Report on Carcinogens, Fourteenth Edition.;
Service. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/ butadiene (CASRN 106–99–0)’’ Environmental
Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of
tp3.pdf. Protection Agency, Integrated Risk Information
Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. 1070 A minimal risk level (MRL) is defined as an System (IRIS), Research and Development, National
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc14.
1061 Aksoy, M. (1989). Hematotoxicity and estimate of the daily human exposure to a Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington,
hazardous substance that is likely to be without DC https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris2/
carcinogenicity of benzene. Environ. Health chemicalLanding.cfm?substance_nmbr=139.
Perspect. 82: 193–197. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0135. appreciable risk of adverse noncancer health effects
1080 International Agency for Research on Cancer
1062 Goldstein, B.D. (1988). Benzene toxicity.
over a specified duration of exposure.
1071 Corti, M; Snyder, CA. (1996) Influences of (IARC). (1999). Monographs on the evaluation of
Occupational medicine. State of the Art Reviews. 3: carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans, Volume
541–554. gender, development, pregnancy and ethanol
consumption on the hematotoxicity of inhaled 10 71, Re-evaluation of some organic chemicals,
1063 Rothman, N., G.L. Li, M. Dosemeci, W.E.
ppm benzene. Arch Toxicol 70:209–217. hydrazine and hydrogen peroxide, World Health
Bechtold, G.E. Marti, Y.Z. Wang, M. Linet, L.Q. Xi, 1072 McKinney P.A.; Alexander, F.E.; Cartwright,
Organization, Lyon, France.
W. Lu, M.T. Smith, N. Titenko-Holland, L.P. Zhang, 1081 International Agency for Research on Cancer
W. Blot, S.N. Yin, and R.B. Hayes. (1996). R.A.; et al. (1991) Parental occupations of children
(IARC). (2008). Monographs on the evaluation of
Hematotoxicity among Chinese workers heavily with leukemia in west Cumbria, north Humberside,
carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans, 1,3-
exposed to benzene. Am. J. Ind. Med. 29: 236–246. and Gateshead, Br Med J 302:681–686.
1073 Keller, KA; Snyder, CA. (1986) Mice exposed
Butadiene, Ethylene Oxide and Vinyl Halides
1064 U.S. EPA (2002). Toxicological Review of
(Vinyl Fluoride, Vinyl Chloride and Vinyl Bromide)
Benzene (Noncancer Effects). Environmental in utero to low concentrations of benzene exhibit Volume 97, World Health Organization, Lyon,
Protection Agency, Integrated Risk Information enduring changes in their colony forming France.
System (IRIS), Research and Development, National hematopoietic cells. Toxicology 42:171–181. 1082 NTP (National Toxicology Program). 2016.
1074 Keller, KA; Snyder, CA. (1988) Mice exposed
Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington Report on Carcinogens, Fourteenth Edition.;
DC. This material is available electronically at in utero to 20 ppm benzene exhibit altered numbers Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of
https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris/iris_documents/ of recognizable hematopoietic cells up to seven Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.
documents/toxreviews/0276tr.pdf. weeks after exposure. Fundam Appl Toxicol https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc14.
1065 Qu, O.; Shore, R.; Li, G.; Jin, X.; Chen, C.L.; 10:224–232. 1083 International Agency for Research on Cancer
Cohen, B.; Melikian, A.; Eastmond, D.; Rappaport, 1075 Corti, M; Snyder, CA. (1996) Influences of
(IARC). (2012). Monographs on the evaluation of
S.; Li, H.; Rupa, D.; Suramaya, R.; Songnian, W.; gender, development, pregnancy and ethanol carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans, Volume
Huifant, Y.; Meng, M.; Winnik, M.; Kwok, E.; Li, Y.; consumption on the hematotoxicity of inhaled 10 100F chemical agents and related occupations,
Mu, R.; Xu, B.; Zhang, X.; Li, K. (2003). HEI Report ppm benzene. Arch Toxicol 70:209–217. World Health Organization, Lyon, France.
115, Validation & Evaluation of Biomarkers in 1076 U. S. EPA. (2002). Toxicological Review of 1084 U.S. EPA. (2002). ‘‘Full IRIS Summary for
Workers Exposed to Benzene in China. Benzene (Noncancer Effects). National Center for 1,3-butadiene (CASRN 106–99–0)’’ Environmental
1066 Qu, Q., R. Shore, G. Li, X. Jin, L.C. Chen, B. Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC. Protection Agency, Integrated Risk Information
Cohen, et al. (2002). Hematological changes among Report No. EPA/635/R–02/001F. https://
System (IRIS), Research and Development, National

Chinese workers with a broad range of benzene cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris/iris_documents/ Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington,
exposures. Am. J. Industr. Med. 42: 275–285. documents/toxreviews/0276tr.pdf. DC https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris2/
1067 Lan, Qing, Zhang, L., Li, G., Vermeulen, R., 1077 Ford, AM; Pombo-de-Oliveira, MS; McCarthy, chemicalLanding.cfm?substance_nmbr=139.
et al. (2004). Hematotoxically in Workers Exposed KP; MacLean, JM; Carrico, KC; Vincent, RF; 1085 Bevan, C.; Stadler, J.C.; Elliot, G.S.; et al.
to Low Levels of Benzene. Science 306: 1774–1776. Greaves, M. (1997) Monoclonal origin of concordant (1996). Subchronic toxicity of 4-vinylcyclohexene
1068 Turtletaub, K.W. and Mani, C. (2003). T-cell malignancy in identical twins. Blood 89:281– in rats and mice by inhalation. Fundam. Appl.
Benzene metabolism in rodents at doses relevant to 285. Toxicol. 32:1–10.
256
Fmt 4701
Based on this critical effect and the continuing statistically significant the NRC (2011) recommendations and
benchmark concentration methodology, excess in lung cancers was reported.1094 applied systematic review methods to
an RfC for chronic health effects was Finally, a study of embalmers reported the evaluation of the available
calculated at 0.9 ppb (approximately 2 formaldehyde exposures to be noncancer and cancer health effects
mg/m3). associated with an increased risk of evidence and released a new draft IRIS
myeloid leukemia but not brain Toxicological Review of
d. Formaldehyde
cancer.1095 Formaldehyde—Inhalation in April
In 1991, EPA concluded that Health effects of formaldehyde in 2022.1101 In this draft, updates to the
formaldehyde is a Class B1 probable addition to cancer were reviewed by the 1991 IRIS finding include a stronger
human carcinogen based on limited Agency for Toxics Substances and determination of the carcinogenicity of
evidence in humans and sufficient Disease Registry in 1999, supplemented formaldehyde inhalation to humans, as
evidence in animals.1086 An inhalation in 2010, and by the World Health well as characterization of its noncancer
URE for cancer and a reference dose for Organization.1096 1097 1098 These effects to propose an overall reference
oral noncancer effects were developed organizations reviewed the scientific concentration for inhalation exposure.
by EPA and posted on the IRIS database. literature concerning health effects The National Academies of Sciences,
Since that time, the NTP and IARC have linked to formaldehyde exposure to Engineering, and Medicine released
concluded that formaldehyde is a evaluate hazards and dose response their review of EPA’s 2022 Draft
known human carcinogen.1087 1088 1089 relationships and defined exposure Formaldehyde Assessment in August
The conclusions by IARC and NTP concentrations for minimal risk levels 2023, concluding that EPA’s ‘‘findings
reflect the results of epidemiologic (MRLs). The health endpoints reviewed on formaldehyde hazard and
research published since 1991 in included sensory irritation of eyes and quantitative risk are supported by the
combination with previous and more respiratory tract, reduced pulmonary evidence identified.’’ 1102 EPA is
recent animal, human and mechanistic function, nasal histopathology, and currently revising the draft IRIS
evidence. Research conducted by the immune system effects. In addition, assessment in response to comments
National Cancer Institute reported an research on reproductive and received.1103
increased risk of nasopharyngeal cancer developmental effects and neurological
and specific lymphohematopoietic e. Naphthalene
effects was discussed along with several
malignancies among workers exposed to studies that suggest that formaldehyde Naphthalene is found in small
formaldehyde.1090 1091 1092 A National may increase the risk of asthma— quantities in gasoline and diesel fuels.
Institute of Occupational Safety and particularly in the young. Naphthalene emissions have been
Health study of garment workers also In June 2010, EPA released a draft measured in larger quantities in both
reported increased risk of death due to Toxicological Review of gasoline and diesel exhaust compared
leukemia among workers exposed to Formaldehyde—Inhalation Assessment with evaporative emissions from mobile
formaldehyde.1093 Extended follow-up through the IRIS program for peer sources, indicating it is primarily a
of a cohort of British chemical workers review by the National Research product of combustion.
did not report evidence of an increase Acute (short-term) exposure of
Council (NRC) and public comment.1099
in nasopharyngeal or humans to naphthalene by inhalation,
That draft assessment reviewed more
lymphohematopoietic cancers, but a ingestion, or dermal contact is
recent research from animal and human
associated with hemolytic anemia and
studies on cancer and other health
1086 EPA. Integrated Risk Information System. damage to the liver and the nervous
effects. The NRC released their review
Formaldehyde (CASRN 50–00–0) https:// system.1104 Chronic (long term)
cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris2/ report in April 2011.1100 EPA addressed
exposure of workers and rodents to
chemicalLanding.cfm?substance_nmbr=419.
1087 NTP (National Toxicology Program). 2016. 1094 Coggon, D, EC Harris, J Poole, KT Palmer. naphthalene has been reported to cause
Report on Carcinogens, Fourteenth Edition.; 2003. Extended follow-up of a cohort of British cataracts and retinal damage.1105
Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of chemical workers exposed to formaldehyde. J
Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. National Cancer Inst. 95:1608–1615. Draft IRIS Assessment of Formaldehyde.
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc14. 1095 Hauptmann, M.; Stewart P.A.; Lubin J.H.; Washington DC: National Academies Press. http://
1088 IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Beane Freeman, L.E.; Hornung, R.W.; Herrick, R.F.; books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13142.
Carcinogenic Risks to Humans Volume 88 (2006): Hoover, R.N.; Fraumeni, J.F.; Hayes, R.B. 2009. 1101 U.S. EPA. 2022. IRIS Toxicological Review of
Formaldehyde, 2-Butoxyethanol and 1-tert- Mortality from lymphohematopoietic malignancies Formaldehyde-Inhalation (External Review Draft,
Butoxypropan-2-ol. and brain cancer among embalmers exposed to 2022). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1089 IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of formaldehyde. Journal of the National Cancer Washington, DC, EPA/635/R–22/039.
Carcinogenic Risks to Humans Volume 100F (2012): Institute 101:1696–1708. 1102 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
Formaldehyde. 1096 ATSDR. 1999. Toxicological Profile for
and Medicine. 2023. Review of EPA’s 2022 Draft
1090 Hauptmann, M.; Lubin, J.H.; Stewart, P.A.; Formaldehyde, U.S. Department of Health and Formaldehyde Assessment. Washington, DC: The
Hayes, R.B.; Blair, A. 2003. Mortality from Human Services (HHS), July 1999. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/
lymphohematopoetic malignancies among workers 1097 ATSDR. 2010. Addendum to the 10.17226/27153.
in formaldehyde industries. Journal of the National Toxicological Profile for Formaldehyde. U.S. 1103 For more information, see https://
Cancer Institute 95: 1615–1623. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris_drafts/
1091 Hauptmann, M.; Lubin, J.H.; Stewart, P.A.; October 2010. recordisplay.cfm?deid=248150#.
Hayes, R.B.; Blair, A. 2004. Mortality from solid 1098 IPCS. 2002. Concise International Chemical 1104 U.S. EPA. 1998. Toxicological Review of
cancers among workers in formaldehyde industries. Assessment Document 40. Formaldehyde. World Naphthalene (Reassessment of the Inhalation
American Journal of Epidemiology 159: 1117–1130. Health Organization. Cancer Risk), Environmental Protection Agency,
1092 Beane Freeman, L.E.; Blair, A.; Lubin, J.H.; 1099 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Integrated Risk Information System, Research and
Stewart, P.A.; Hayes, R.B.; Hoover, R.N.; 2010. Toxicological Review of Formaldehyde (CAS Development, National Center for Environmental
Hauptmann, M. 2009. Mortality from No. 50–00–0)—Inhalation Assessment: In Support Assessment, Washington, DC. This material is
lymphohematopoietic malignancies among workers of Summary Information on the Integrated Risk available electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/
in formaldehyde industries: The National Cancer Information System (IRIS). External Review Draft. ncea/iris_drafts/recordisplay.cfm?deid=56434.
Institute cohort. J. National Cancer Inst. 101: 751– EPA/635/R–10/002A. U.S. Environmental 1105 U.S. EPA. 1998. Toxicological Review of
761. Protection Agency, Washington DC [online]. Naphthalene (Reassessment of the Inhalation
1093 Pinkerton, L.E. 2004. Mortality among a Available: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris_drafts/ Cancer Risk), Environmental Protection Agency,
cohort of garment workers exposed to recordisplay.cfm?deid=223614. Integrated Risk Information System, Research and
formaldehyde: an update. Occup. Environ. Med. 61: 1100 NRC (National Research Council). 2011. Development, National Center for Environmental
193–200. Review of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Continued
257
Fmt 4701
Children, especially neonates, appear to growth in respiratory and nasal 1,000–2,000 feet) of major roadways.
be more susceptible to acute tissues.1112 The current EPA IRIS The highest concentrations of most
naphthalene poisoning based on the assessment includes noncancer data on pollutants emitted directly by motor
number of reports of lethal cases in hyperplasia and metaplasia in nasal vehicles are found within 50 meters
children and infants (hypothesized to be tissue that form the basis of the (about 165 feet) of the edge of a
due to immature naphthalene inhalation RfC of 3 mg/m3.1113 The roadway’s traffic lanes.
detoxification pathways).1106 EPA ATSDR MRL for acute and intermediate A large-scale review of air quality
released an external review draft of a duration oral exposure to naphthalene is measurements in the vicinity of major
reassessment of the inhalation 0.6 mg/kg/day based on maternal roadways between 1978 and 2008
carcinogenicity of naphthalene based on toxicity in a developmental toxicology concluded that the pollutants with the
a number of recent animal study in rats.1114 ATSDR also derived steepest concentration gradients in
carcinogenicity studies.1107 The draft an ad hoc reference value of 6 × 10¥2 vicinities of roadways were CO,
reassessment completed external peer mg/m3 for acute (≤24-hour) inhalation ultrafine particles, metals, elemental
review.1108 Based on external peer exposure to naphthalene in a Letter carbon (EC), NO, NOX, and several
review comments received, EPA is Health Consultation dated March 24, VOCs.1117 These pollutants showed a
developing a revised draft assessment 2014 to address a potential exposure large reduction in concentrations within
that considers inhalation and oral routes concern in Illinois.1115 The ATSDR 100 meters downwind of the roadway.
of exposure, as well as cancer and acute inhalation reference value was Pollutants that showed more gradual
noncancer effects.1109 The external based on a qualitative identification of reductions with distance from roadways
review draft does not represent official an exposure level interpreted not to included benzene, NO2, PM2.5, and
agency opinion and was released solely cause pulmonary lesions in mice. More PM10. In reviewing the literature, Karner
for the purposes of external peer review recently, EPA developed acute RfCs for et al. (2010) reported that results varied
and public comment. The NTP listed 1-, 8-, and 24-hour exposure scenarios; based on the method of statistical
naphthalene as ‘‘reasonably anticipated the ≤24-hour reference value is 2 × 10¥2 analysis used to determine the gradient
to be a human carcinogen’’ in 2004 on mg/m3.1116 EPA’s acute RfCs are based in pollutant concentration. More recent
the basis of bioassays reporting clear on a systematic review of the literature, studies of traffic-related air pollutants
evidence of carcinogenicity in rats and benchmark dose modeling of continue to report sharp gradients
some evidence of carcinogenicity in naphthalene-induced nasal lesions in around roadways, particularly within
mice.1110 California EPA has released a rats, and application of a PBPK
new risk assessment for naphthalene, (physiologically based pharmacokinetic) 1117 Karner, A.A.; Eisinger, D.S.; Niemeier, D.A.
and the IARC has reevaluated model. (2010). Near-roadway air quality: synthesizing the
findings from real-world data. Environ Sci Technol
naphthalene and re-classified it as viii. Exposure and Health Effects 44: 5334–5344.
Group 2B: possibly carcinogenic to Associated With Traffic
1118 McDonald, B.C.; McBride, Z.C.; Martin, E.W.;
humans.1111 Harley, R.A. (2014) High-resolution mapping of

Naphthalene also causes a number of Locations near major roadways motor vehicle carbon dioxide emissions. J.
generally have elevated concentrations Geophys. Res.Atmos.,119, 5283–5298, doi:10.1002/
non-cancer effects in animals following 2013JD021219.
chronic and less-than-chronic exposure, of many air pollutants emitted from 1119 Kimbrough, S.; Baldauf, R.W.; Hagler, G.S.W.;
including abnormal cell changes and motor vehicles. Hundreds of studies Shores, R.C.; Mitchell, W.; Whitaker, D.A.; Croghan,
have been published in peer-reviewed C.W.; Vallero, D.A. (2013) Long-term continuous
Assessment, Washington, DC. This material is journals, concluding that concentrations measurement of near-road air pollution in Las
Vegas: seasonal variability in traffic emissions
available electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ of CO, CO2, NO, NO2, benzene, impact on air quality. Air Qual Atmos Health 6:
ncea/iris_drafts/recordisplay.cfm?deid=56434. aldehydes, particulate matter, black
1106 U.S. EPA. (1998). Toxicological Review of
295–305. DOI 10.1007/s11869–012–0171–x.
carbon, and many other compounds are 1120 Kimbrough, S.; Palma, T.; Baldauf, R.W.
Naphthalene (Reassessment of the Inhalation
Cancer Risk), Environmental Protection Agency, elevated in ambient air within (2014) Analysis of mobile source air toxics
approximately 300–600 meters (about (MSATs)—Near-road VOC and carbonyl
Integrated Risk Information System, Research and
concentrations. Journal of the Air &Waste
Development, National Center for Environmental
Management Association, 64:3, 349–359, DOI:
Assessment, Washington, DC. This material is 1112 U. S. EPA. (1998). Toxicological Review of
10.1080/10962247.2013.863814.
available electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ Naphthalene, Environmental Protection Agency, 1121 Kimbrough, S.; Owen, R.C.; Snyder, M.;
ncea/iris_drafts/recordisplay.cfm?deid=56434. Integrated Risk Information System, Research and
1107 U.S. EPA. (1998). Toxicological Review of
Richmond-Bryant, J. (2017) NO to NO2 Conversion
Development, National Center for Environmental Rate Analysis and Implications for Dispersion
Naphthalene (Reassessment of the Inhalation Assessment, Washington, DC. This material is Model Chemistry Methods using Las Vegas, Nevada
Cancer Risk), Environmental Protection Agency, available electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ Near-Road Field Measurements. Atmos Environ
Integrated Risk Information System, Research and ncea/iris_drafts/recordisplay.cfm?deid=56434. 165: 23–24.
Development, National Center for Environmental 1113 U.S. EPA. (1998). Toxicological Review of
1122 Apte, J.S.; Messier, K.P.; Gani, S.; Brauer, M.;
Assessment, Washington, DC. This material is Naphthalene. Environmental Protection Agency, Kirchstetter, T.W.; Lunden, M.M.; Marshall, J.D.;
available electronically at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), Research Portier, C.J.; Vermeulen, R.C.H.; Hamburg, S.P.
ncea/iris_drafts/recordisplay.cfm?deid=56434. and Development, National Center for
1108 Oak Ridge Institute for Science and
(2017) High-Resolution Air Pollution Mapping with
Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC Google Street View Cars: Exploiting Big Data.
Education. (2004). External Peer Review for the IRIS https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris_drafts/ Environ Sci Technol 51: 6999–7008. https://doi.org/
Reassessment of the Inhalation Carcinogenicity of recordisplay.cfm?deid=56434. 10.1021/acs.est.7b00891.
Naphthalene. August 2004. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ 1114 ATSDR. Toxicological Profile for
1123 Gu, P.; Li, H.Z.; Ye, Q.; et al. (2018) Intercity
ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=84403. Naphthalene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, and 2- variability of particulate matter is driven by
1109 U.S. EPA. (2018) See: https://cfpub.epa.gov/ Methylnaphthalene (2005). https:// carbonaceous sources and correlated with land-use
ncea/iris2/chemicalLanding.cfm?substance_ www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp67-p.pdf. variables. Environ Sci Technol 52: 52: 11545–
nmbr=436. 1115 ATSDR. Letter Health Consultation, Radiac
11554. [Online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/
1110 NTP (National Toxicology Program). 2016. Abrasives, Inc., Chicago, Illinois (2014). https:// acs.est.8b03833].
Report on Carcinogens, Fourteenth Edition.; www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/pha/RadiacAbrasives/
1124 Hilker, N.; Wang, J.W.; Jong, C–H.; Healy,

Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of Radiac%20Abrasives,%20Inc.%20_%20LHC R.M.; Sofowote, U.; Debosz, J.; Su, Y.; Noble, M.;
Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. %20(Final)%20_%2003-24-2014%20(2)_508.pdf. Munoz, A.; Doerkson, G.; White, L.; Audette, C.;
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/roc14. 1116 U. S. EPA. Derivation of an acute reference Herod, D.; Brook, J.R.; Evans, G.J. (2019) Traffic-
1111 International Agency for Research on Cancer concentration for inhalation exposure to related air pollution near roadways: discerning
(IARC). (2002). Monographs on the Evaluation of naphthalene. Report No. EPA/600/R–21/292. local impacts from background. Atmos. Meas.
the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals for Humans. https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay. Tech., 12, 5247–5261. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-
Vol. 82. Lyon, France. cfm?deid=355035. 12-5247-2019.
258
Fmt 4701
several hundred meters. 1118 1119 1120 major roads.1131 In addition, numerous outcomes (term birth weight and
1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 There is evidence studies have found adverse health preterm birth). This report follows on an
that EPA’s regulations for vehicles have effects associated with spending time in earlier expert review published by HEI
lowered the near-road concentrations traffic, such as commuting or walking in 2010, where it found strongest
and gradients.1126 Starting in 2010, EPA along high-traffic roadways, including evidence for asthma-related traffic
required through the NAAQS process studies among children.1132 1133 1134 1135 impacts. Other literature reviews have
that air quality monitors be placed near Numerous reviews of this body of been published with conclusions
high-traffic roadways for determining health literature have been published. In generally similar to the HEI
concentrations of CO, NO2, and PM2.5. a 2022 final report, an expert panel of panels’.1138 1139 1140 1141 Additionally, in
The monitoring data for NO2 and CO the Health Effects Institute (HEI) 2014, researchers from the U.S. Centers
indicate that in urban areas, monitors employed a systematic review focusing for Disease Control and Prevention
near roadways often report the highest on selected health endpoints related to (CDC) published a systematic review
concentrations.1127 1128 exposure to traffic-related air and meta-analysis of studies evaluating
pollution.1136 The HEI panel concluded the risk of childhood leukemia
For pollutants with relatively high that there was a high level of confidence associated with traffic exposure and
background concentrations relative to in evidence between long-term exposure reported positive associations between
near-road concentrations, detecting to traffic-related air pollution and health postnatal proximity to traffic and
concentration gradients can be difficult. effects in adults, including all-cause, leukemia risks, but no such association
For example, many carbonyls have high circulatory, and ischemic heart disease for prenatal exposures.1142 The U.S.
background concentrations because of mortality.1137 The panel also found that Department of Health and Human
photochemical breakdown of precursors there is a moderate-to-high level of Services’ National Toxicology Program
from many different organic confidence in evidence of associations published a monograph including a
compounds. However, several studies with asthma onset and acute respiratory systematic review of traffic-related air
have measured carbonyls in multiple infections in children and lung cancer pollution and its impacts on
weather conditions and found higher and asthma onset in adults. The panel hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.
concentrations of many carbonyls concluded that there was a moderate The National Toxicology Program
downwind of roadways.1129 1130 These level of evidence of associations with concluded that exposure to traffic-
findings suggest a substantial roadway small for gestational age births, but low- related air pollution is ‘‘presumed to be
source of these carbonyls. to-moderate confidence for other birth a hazard to pregnant women’’ for
In the past 30 years, many studies developing hypertensive disorders of
1131 In the widely used PubMed database of
have been published with results pregnancy.1143
health publications, between January 1, 1990 and
reporting that populations who live, December 31, 2021, 1,979 publications contained For several other health outcomes
work, or go to school near high-traffic the keywords ‘‘traffic, pollution, epidemiology,’’ there are publications to suggest the
roadways experience higher rates of with approximately half the studies published after possibility of an association with traffic-
numerous adverse health effects, 2015.
1132 Laden, F.; Hart, J.E.; Smith, T.J.; Davis, M.E.; related air pollution, but insufficient
compared to populations far away from evidence to draw definitive conclusions.
Garshick, E. (2007) Cause-specific mortality in the
unionized U.S. trucking industry. Environmental Among these outcomes are neurological
1125 Dabek-Zlotorzynska, E., V. Celo, L. Ding, D. Health Perspect 115:1192–1196. and cognitive impacts (e.g., autism and
Herod, C–H. Jeong, G. Evans, and N. Hilker. 2019. 1133 Peters, A.; von Klot, S.; Heier, M.;
‘‘Characteristics and sources of PM2.5 and reactive
reduced cognitive function, academic
Trentinaglia, I.; Hörmann, A.; Wichmann, H.E.;
gases near roadways in two metropolitan areas in Löwel, H. (2004) Exposure to traffic and the onset performance, and executive function)
Canada.’’ Atmos Environ 218: 116980. of myocardial infarction. New England J Med 351: and reproductive outcomes (e.g.,
1126 Sarnat, J.A.; Russell, A.; Liang, D.; Moutinho, 1721–1730. preterm birth, low birth
J.L; Golan, R.; Weber, R.; Gao, D.; Sarnat, S.; Chang, 1134 Zanobetti, A.; Stone, P.H.; Spelzer, F.E.;
weight).1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149
H.H.; Greenwald, R.; Yu, T. (2018) Developing Schwartz, J.D.; Coull, B.A.; Suh, H.H.; Nearling,
Multipollutant Exposure Indicators of Traffic B.D.; Mittleman, M.A.; Verrier, R.L.; Gold, D.R. 1138 Boothe, V.L.; Shendell, D.G. (2008). Potential
Pollution: The Dorm Room Inhalation to Vehicle (2009) T-wave alternans, air pollution and traffic in
Emissions (DRIVE) Study. Health Effects Institute high-risk subjects. Am J Cardiol 104: 665–670. health effects associated with residential proximity
Research Report Number 196. [Online at: https:// 1135 Adar, S.; Adamkiewicz, G.; Gold, D.R.; to freeways and primary roads: review of scientific
www.healtheffects.org/publication/developing- literature, 1999–2006. J Environ Health 70: 33–41.
Schwartz, J.; Coull, B.A.; Suh, H. (2007) Ambient 1139 Salam, M.T.; Islam, T.; Gilliland, F.D. (2008).
multipollutant-exposure-indicators-traffic- and microenvironmental particles and exhaled
pollution-dorm-room-inhalation]. nitric oxide before and after a group bus trip. Recent evidence for adverse effects of residential
1127 Gantt, B; Owen, R.C.; Watkins, N. (2021)
Environ Health Perspect 115: 507–512. proximity to traffic sources on asthma. Curr Opin
Characterizing nitrogen oxides and fine particulate 1136 HEI Panel on the Health Effects of Long-Term Pulm Med 14: 3–8.
1140 Sun, X.; Zhang, S.; Ma, X. (2014) No
matter near major highways in the United States Exposure to Traffic-Related Air Pollution (2022)
using the National Near-road Monitoring Network. Systematic review and meta-analysis of selected association between traffic density and risk of
Environ Sci Technol 55: 2831–2838. [Online at health effects of long-term exposure to traffic- childhood leukemia: a meta-analysis. Asia Pac J
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c05851]. related air pollution. Health Effects Institute Special Cancer Prev 15: 5229–5232.
1128 Lal, R.M.; Ramaswani, A.; Russell, A.G. 1141 Raaschou-Nielsen, O.; Reynolds, P. (2006).
Report 23. [Online at https://www.healtheffects.org/
(2020) Assessment of the near-road (monitoring) publication/systematic-review-and-meta-analysis- Air pollution and childhood cancer: a review of the
network including comparison with nearby selected-health-effects-long-term-exposure-traffic] epidemiological literature. Int J Cancer 118: 2920–
monitors within U.S. cities. Environ Res Letters 15: This more recent review focused on health 9.
114026. [Online at https://doi.org/10.1088/1748- outcomes related to birth effects, respiratory effects, 1142 Boothe, VL.; Boehmer, T.K.; Wendel, A.M.;
9326/ab8156]. cardiometabolic effects, and mortality. Yip, F.Y. (2014) Residential traffic exposure and
1129 Liu, W.; Zhang, J.; Kwon, J.l; et l. (2006). 1137 Boogaard, H.; Patton, A.P.; Atkinson, R.W.; childhood leukemia: a systematic review and meta-
Concentrations and source characteristics of Brook, J.R.; Chang, H.H.; Crouse, D.L.; Fussell, J.C.; analysis. Am J Prev Med 46: 413–422.
airborne carbonyl compounds measured outside Hoek, G.; Hoffmann, B.; Kappeler, R.; Kutlar Joss, 1143 National Toxicology Program (2019) NTP
urban residences. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 56: Monograph on the Systematic Review of Traffic-
M.; Ondras, M.; Sagiv, S.K.; Samoli, E.; Shaikh, R.;

1196–1204. Smargiassi, A.; Szpiro, A.A.; Van Vliet, E.D.S.; related Air Pollution and Hypertensive Disorders of
1130 Cahill, T.M.; Charles, M.J.; Seaman, V.Y. Vienneau, D.; Weuve, J.; Lurmann, F.W.; Forastiere, Pregnancy. NTP Monograph 7. https://
(2010). Development and application of a sensitive F. (2022) Long-term exposure to traffic-related air ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/ohat/trap/mgraph/trap_final_
method to determine concentrations of acrolein and pollution and selected health outcomes: A 508.pdf.
other carbonyls in ambient air. Health Effects systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ 1144 Volk, H.E.; Hertz-Picciotto, I.; Delwiche, L.; et
Institute Research Report 149. Available at https:// Internatl 164: 107262. [Online at https://doi.org/ al. (2011). Residential proximity to freeways and
www.healtheffects.org/system/files/Cahill149.pdf. 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107262]. Continued
259
Numerous studies have also of color and/or have a low SES. whether housing units are within 300
investigated potential mechanisms by Additionally, people with low SES often feet of an ‘‘airport, railroad, or highway
which traffic-related air pollution affects live in neighborhoods with multiple with four or more lanes.’’ 1165 The 2013
health, particularly for cardiopulmonary stressors and health risk factors, AHS reports that 17.3 million housing
outcomes. For example, some research including reduced health insurance units, or 13 percent of all housing units
indicates that near-roadway exposures coverage rates, higher smoking and drug in the United States, were in such areas.
may increase systemic inflammation, use rates, limited access to fresh food, Assuming that populations and housing
affecting organ systems, including blood visible neighborhood violence, and units are in the same locations, this
vessels and lungs.1150 1151 1152 1153 elevated rates of obesity and some corresponds to a population of more
Additionally, long-term exposures in diseases such as asthma, diabetes, and than 41 million U.S. residents near
near-road environments have been ischemic heart disease. Although high-traffic roadways or other
associated with inflammation-associated questions remain, several studies find transportation sources. 1166 According
conditions, such as atherosclerosis and stronger associations between air to the Central Intelligence Agency’s
asthma.1154 1155 1156 pollution and health in locations with World Factbook, based on data collected
As described in section VI.D.3, people such chronic neighborhood stress, between 2012–2022, the United States
who live or attend school near major suggesting that populations in these had 6,586,610 km of roadways, 293,564
roadways are more likely to be people areas may be more susceptible to the km of railways, and 13,513 airports.1167
effects of air As such, highways represent the
autism in the CHARGE study. Environ Health pollution.1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 overwhelming majority of transportation
Perspect 119: 873–877. The risks associated with residence,
1145 Franco-Suglia, S.; Gryparis, A.; Wright, R.O.;
facilities described by this factor in the
workplace, or school near major roads AHS.
et al. (2007). Association of black carbon with
cognition among children in a prospective birth are of potentially high public health In examining schools near major
cohort study. Am J Epidemiol. doi: 10.1093/aje/ significance due to the large population roadways, we used the Common Core of
kwm308. [Online at http://dx.doi.org]. in such locations. We analyzed several Data from the U.S. Department of
1146 Power, M.C.; Weisskopf, M.G.; Alexeef, SE; et
data sets to estimate the size of Education, which includes information
al. (2011). Traffic-related air pollution and cognitive
function in a cohort of older men. Environ Health populations living or attending school on all public elementary and secondary
Perspect 2011: 682–687. near major roads. Our evaluation of schools and school districts
1147 Wu, J.; Wilhelm, M.; Chung, J.; Ritz, B. environmental justice concerns in these nationwide.1168 To determine school
(2011). Comparing exposure assessment methods studies is presented in section VI.D.3 of proximities to major roadways, we used
for traffic-related air pollution in an adverse
pregnancy outcome study. Environ Res 111: 685–
this preamble. a geographic information system (GIS)
692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2011.03.008. Every two years from 1997 to 2009 to map each school and roadway based
1148 Stenson, C.; Wheeler, A.J.; Carver, A.; et al. and in 2011 and 2013, the U.S. Census on the U.S. Census’s TIGER roadway
(2021) The impact of traffic-related air pollution on Bureau’s American Housing Survey file.1169 We estimated that about 10
child and adolescent academic performance: a (AHS) conducted a survey that includes
systematic review. Environ Intl 155: 106696 [Online million students attend public schools
at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106696]. within 200 meters of major roads, about
1157 Islam, T.; Urban, R.; Gauderman, W.J.; et al.
1149 Gartland, N.; Aljofi, H.E.; Dienes, K.; et al. 20 percent of the total number of public
(2022) The effects of traffic air pollution in and (2011). Parental stress increases the detrimental
effect of traffic exposure on children’s lung school students in the U.S.1170 1171 1172
around schools on executive function and academic
performance in children: a rapid review. Int J function. Am J Respir Crit Care Med.
1158 Clougherty, J.E.; Kubzansky, L.D. (2009) A 1165 The variable was known as ‘‘ETRANS’’ in the
Environ Res Public Health 19: 749. https://doi.org/
10.3390/ijerph19020749. framework for examining social stress and questions about the neighborhood.
1150 Riediker, M. (2007). Cardiovascular effects of susceptibility to air pollution in respiratory health. 1166 The analysis of population living near major
fine particulate matter components in highway Environ Health Perspect 117: 1351–1358. roads based on the Freight Analysis Framework,
patrol officers. Inhal Toxicol 19: 99–105. doi: Doi:10.1289/ehp.0900612. version 4 is intended to provide comparable
10.1080/08958370701495238. 1159 Clougherty, J.E.; Levy, J.I.; Kubzansky, L.D.; estimates as the AHS analyses for the conterminous
1151 Alexeef, SE; Coull, B.A.; Gryparis, A.; et al. Ryan, P.B.; Franco Suglia, S.; Jacobson Canner, M.; United States (i.e., ‘‘the lower 48’’). Population
(2011). Medium-term exposure to traffic-related air Wright, R.J. (2007) Synergistic effects of traffic- estimates for the two methods result in very good
pollution and markers of inflammation and related air pollution and exposure to violence on agreement—41 million people living within 300
endothelial function. Environ Health Perspect 119: urban asthma etiology. Environ Health Perspect feet/100 meters using the AHS 2009 dataset, and 41
481–486. doi:10.1289/ehp.1002560. 115: 1140–1146. doi:10.1289/ehp.9863. million people living within 100 meters of a road
1152 Eckel. S.P.; Berhane, K.; Salam, M.T.; et al. 1160 Finkelstein, M.M.; Jerrett, M.; DeLuca, P.; in the FAF4 network using the data in that analysis.
1167 Central Intelligence Agenda. World Factbook:
(2011). Residential Traffic-related pollution Finkelstein, N.; Verma, D.K.; Chapman, K.; Sears,
exposure and exhaled nitric oxide in the Children’s M.R. (2003) Relation between income, air pollution United States. [Online at https://www.cia.gov/the-
Health Study. Environ Health Perspect. and mortality: a cohort study. Canadian Med Assn world-factbook/countries/united-states/
doi:10.1289/ehp.1103516. J 169: 397–402. #transportation].
1153 Zhang, J.; McCreanor, J.E.; Cullinan, P.; et al. 1161 Shankardass, K.; McConnell, R.; Jerrett, M.; 1168 http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/.
(2009). Health effects of real-world exposure diesel Milam, J.; Richardson, J.; Berhane, K. (2009) 1169 Pedde, M.; Bailey, C. (2011) Identification of
exhaust in persons with asthma. Res Rep Health Parental stress increases the effect of traffic-related Schools within 200 Meters of U.S. Primary and
Effects Inst 138. [Online at http:// air pollution on childhood asthma incidence. Proc Secondary Roads. Memorandum to the docket.
www.healtheffects.org]. Natl Acad Sci 106: 12406–12411. doi:10.1073/ 1170 Pedde, M.; Bailey, C. (2011) Identification of
1154 Adar, S.D.; Klein, R.; Klein, E.K.; et al. (2010). pnas.0812910106. Schools within 200 Meters of U.S. Primary and
1162 Chen, E.; Schrier, H.M.; Strunk, R.C.; et al. Secondary Roads. Memorandum to the docket.
Air pollution and the microvasculature: a cross-
sectional assessment of in vivo retinal images in the (2008). Chronic traffic-related air pollution and 1171 Here, ‘‘major roads’’ refer to those TIGER
population-based Multi-Ethnic Study of stress interact to predict biologic and clinical classifies as either ‘‘Primary’’ or ‘‘Secondary’’. The
Atherosclerosis. PLoS Med 7(11): E1000372. outcomes in asthma. Environ Health Perspect 116: Census Bureau describes primary roads as
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000372. 970–5. ‘‘generally divided limited-access highways within
1155 Kan, H.; Heiss, G.; Rose, K.M.; et al. (2008). 1163 Currie, J. and R. Walker (2011) Traffic the Federal interstate system or under state
Prospective analysis of traffic exposure as a risk Congestion and Infant Health: Evidence from E– management’’. Secondary roads are ‘‘main arteries,
factor for incident coronary heart disease: The ZPass. American Economic Journal: Applied usually in the U.S. highway, state highway, or
Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Economics, 3 (1): 65–90. https://doi.org/10.1257/ county highway system’’.
Environ Health Perspect 116: 1463–1468. app.3.1.65. 1172 For this analysis we analyzed a 200-meter
doi:10.1289/ehp.11290. 1164 Knittel, C.R.; Miller, D.L.; Sanders N.J. (2016) distance based on the understanding that roadways
1156 McConnell, R.; Islam, T.; Shankardass, K.; et Caution, Drivers! Children Present: Traffic, generally influence air quality within a few
al. (2010). Childhood incident asthma and traffic- Pollution, and Infant Health. The Review of hundred meters from the vicinity of heavily
related air pollution at home and school. Environ Economics and Statistics, 98 (2): 350–366. https:// traveled roadways or along corridors with
Health Perspect 1021–1026. doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00548. significant trucking traffic. See U.S. EPA, 2014.
260
About 800,000 students attend public time spent in transit have found areas, such as national parks and
schools within 200 meters of primary evidence of elevated risk of cardiac wilderness areas, and special emphasis
roads, or about 2 percent of the total. impacts.1178 1179 1180 Studies have also is given to protecting visibility in these
EPA also conducted a study to found that school bus emissions can areas. For more information on visibility
estimate the number of people living increase student exposures to diesel- see the final 2019 PM ISA.1186
near truck freight routes in the United related air pollutants, and that programs EPA is working to address visibility
States, which includes many large that reduce school bus emissions may impairment. Reductions in air pollution
highways and other routes where light- improve health and reduce school from implementation of various
and medium-duty vehicles operate.1173 absenteeism.1181 1182 1183 1184 programs associated with the Clean Air
Based on a population analysis using Act Amendments of 1990 provisions
3. Welfare Effects Associated With
the U.S. Department of Transportation’s have resulted in substantial
Exposure to Non-GHG Pollutants
(USDOT) Freight Analysis Framework 4 improvements in visibility and will
(FAF4) and population data from the This section discusses the continue to do so in the future.
2010 decennial census, an estimated 72 environmental effects associated with Nationally, because trends in haze are
million people live within 200 meters of non-GHG pollutants affected by this closely associated with trends in
these FAF4 roads, which are used by all rule, specifically particulate matter, particulate sulfate and nitrate due to the
types of vehicles.1174 The FAF4 analysis ozone, NOX, SOX, and air toxics. relationship between their
includes the population living within i. Visibility concentration and light extinction,
200 meters of major roads, while the visibility trends have improved as
Visibility can be defined as the degree emissions of SO2 and NOX have
AHS uses a 100-meter distance; the
to which the atmosphere is transparent decreased over time due to air pollution
larger distance and other
to visible light.1185 Visibility
methodological differences explain the regulations such as the Acid Rain
impairment is caused by light scattering
difference in the two estimates for Program.1187 However, in the western
and absorption by suspended particles
populations living near major roads.1175 part of the country, changes in total
and gases. It is dominated by
The EPA’s Exposure Factor Handbook light extinction were smaller, and the
contributions from suspended particles
also indicates that, on average, contribution of particulate organic
except under pristine conditions.
Americans spend more than an hour matter to atmospheric light extinction
Visibility is important because it has
traveling each day, bringing nearly all was increasing due to increasing
direct significance to people’s
residents into a high-exposure wildfire emissions.1188
enjoyment of daily activities in all parts
microenvironment for part of the In the Clean Air Act Amendments of
of the country. Individuals value good
day.1176 1177 While near-roadway studies 1977, Congress recognized visibility’s
visibility for the well-being it provides
focus on residents near roads or others value to society by establishing a
them directly, where they live and
spending considerable time near major national goal to protect national parks
work, and in places where they enjoy
roads, the duration of commuting and wilderness areas from visibility
recreational opportunities. Visibility is
results in another important contributor impairment caused by manmade
also highly valued in significant natural
to overall exposure to traffic-related air pollution.1189 In 1999, EPA finalized the
pollution. Studies of health that address 1178 Riediker, M.; Cascio, W.E.; Griggs, T.R.; et al.
regional haze program to protect the
(2004) Particulate matter exposure in cars is visibility in Mandatory Class I Federal
Near Roadway Air Pollution and Health: Frequently associated with cardiovascular effects in healthy areas.1190 There are 156 national parks,
Asked Questions. EPA–420–F–14–044. young men. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 169. [Online forests and wilderness areas categorized
1173 U.S. EPA (2021). Estimation of Population at https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200310–1463OC].
1179 Peters, A.; von Klot, S.; Heier, M.; et al. (2004)
as Mandatory Class I Federal areas.1191
Size and Demographic Characteristics among
People Living Near Truck Routes in the Exposure to traffic and the onset of myocardial These areas are defined in CAA section
Conterminous United States. Memorandum to the infarction. New Engl J Med 1721–1730. [Online 162 as those national parks exceeding
Docket. athttps://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa040203]. 6,000 acres, wilderness areas and
1180 Adar, S.D.; Gold, D.R.; Coull, B.A.; (2007)
1174 FAF4 is a model from the USDOT’s Bureau
memorial parks exceeding 5,000 acres,
of Transportation Statistics (BTS) and Federal Focused exposure to airborne traffic particles and
heart rate variability in the elderly. Epidemiology and all international parks which were
Highway Administration (FHWA), which provides
data associated with freight movement in the U.S. 18: 95–103 [Online at 351: https://doi.org/10.1097/ in existence on August 7, 1977.
It includes data from the 2012 Commodity Flow 01.ede.0000249409.81050.46]. EPA has also concluded that PM2.5
Survey (CFS), the Census Bureau on international 1181 Sabin, L.; Behrentz, E.; Winer, A.M.; et al.
causes adverse effects on visibility in
trade, as well as data associated with construction, Characterizing the range of children’s air pollutant other areas that are not targeted by the
agriculture, utilities, warehouses, and other exposure during school bus commutes. J Expo Anal
industries. FAF4 estimates the modal choices for Environ Epidemiol 15: 377–387. [Online at https:// Regional Haze Rule, such as urban
moving goods by trucks, trains, boats, and other doi.org/10.1038/sj.jea.7500414]. areas, depending on PM2.5
types of freight modes. It includes traffic 1182 Li, C.; N, Q.; Ryan, P.H.; School bus pollution
concentrations and other factors such as
assignments, including truck flows on a network of and changes in the air quality at schools: a case dry chemical composition and relative
truck routes. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/ study. J Environ Monit 11: 1037–1042. [https://
freight_analysis/faf/. doi.org/10.1039/b819458k].
1175 The same analysis estimated the population 1183 Austin, W.; Heutel, G.; Kreisman, D. (2019)
living within 100 meters of a FAF4 truck route is School bus emissions, student health and academic (ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019).
41 million. performance. Econ Edu Rev 70: 108–12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1176 EPA. (2011) Exposure Factors Handbook: 1184 Adar, S.D.; D.Souza, J.; Sheppard, L.; et al. Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019.
2011 Edition. Chapter 16. Online at https:// (2015) Adopting clean fuels and technologies on
www.epa.gov/expobox/about-exposure-factors- school buses. Pollution and health impacts in (ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019).
handbook. children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 191. [Online U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1177 It is not yet possible to estimate the long-term at http://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201410-1924OC]. Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019.
1188 Hand, JL; Prenni, AJ; Copeland, S; Schichtel,
impact of growth in telework associated with the 1185 National Research Council, (1993). Protecting
COVID–19 pandemic on travel behavior. There Visibility in National Parks and Wilderness Areas. BA; Malm, WC. (2020). Thirty years of the Clean Air
were notable changes during the pandemic. For National Academy of Sciences Committee on Haze Act Amendments: Impacts on haze in remote
example, according to the 2021 American Time Use in National Parks and Wilderness Areas. National regions of the United States (1990–2018). Atmos
Survey, a greater fraction of workers did at least Academy Press, Washington, DC. This book can be Environ 243: 117865.
1189 See CAA section 169(a).
part of their work at home (38%) as compared with viewed on the National Academy Press website at
1190 64 FR 35714, July 1, 1999.
the 2019 survey (24%). [Online at https:// https://www.nap.edu/catalog/2097/protecting-
www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.nr0.htm]. visibility-in-national-parks-and-wilderness-areas. 1191 62 FR 38680–38681, July 18, 1997.
261
humidity (i.e., an indicator of the water ecosystems impacts.1196 These latter are likely to be causally associated with
composition of the particles). The impacts include increased susceptibility exposure to ozone.
secondary (welfare-based) PM NAAQS of plants to insect attack, disease, harsh iii. Deposition
provide protection against visibility weather, interspecies competition and
effects. In recent PM NAAQS reviews, overall decreased plant vigor. The The Integrated Science Assessment
EPA evaluated a target level of adverse effects of ozone on areas with for Oxides of Nitrogen, Oxides of Sulfur,
protection for visibility impairment that sensitive species could potentially lead and Particulate Matter—Ecological
is expected to be met through to species shifts and loss from the Criteria documents the ecological effects
attainment of the existing secondary PM affected ecosystems,1197 resulting in a of the deposition of these criteria air
standards. loss or reduction in associated pollutants.1201 It is clear from the body
ecosystem goods and services. of evidence that oxides of nitrogen,
ii. Ozone Effects on Ecosystems oxides of sulfur, and particulate matter
Additionally, visible ozone injury to
The welfare effects of ozone include leaves can result in a loss of aesthetic contribute to total nitrogen (N) and
effects on ecosystems, which can be value in areas of special scenic sulfur (S) deposition. In turn, N and S
observed across a variety of scales, i.e., significance like national parks and deposition cause either nutrient
subcellular, cellular, leaf, whole plant, enrichment or acidification depending
wilderness areas and reduced use of
population and ecosystem. Ozone on the sensitivity of the landscape or the
sensitive ornamentals in
effects that begin at small spatial scales, species in question. Both enrichment
landscaping.1198 In addition to ozone
such as the leaf of an individual plant, and acidification are characterized by an
effects on vegetation, newer evidence
when they occur at sufficient alteration of the biogeochemistry and
suggests that ozone affects interactions
magnitudes (or to a sufficient degree) the physiology of organisms, resulting
can result in effects being propagated to between plants and insects by altering in ecologically harmful declines in
higher and higher levels of biological chemical signals (e.g., floral scents) that biodiversity in terrestrial, freshwater,
organization. For example, effects at the plants use to communicate to other wetland, and estuarine ecosystems in
individual plant level, such as altered community members, such as attraction the U.S. Decreases in biodiversity mean
rates of leaf gas exchange, growth and of pollinators. that some species become relatively less
reproduction, can, when widespread, The Ozone ISA presents more abundant and may be locally extirpated.
result in broad changes in ecosystems, detailed information on how ozone In addition to the potential loss of
such as productivity, carbon storage, affects vegetation and ecosystems.1199 unique living species, the decline in
water cycling, nutrient cycling, and The Ozone ISA reports causal and likely total biodiversity can be harmful
community composition. causal relationships between ozone because biodiversity is an important
Ozone can produce both acute and exposure and a number of welfare determinant of the stability of
chronic injury in sensitive plant species effects and characterizes the weight of ecosystems and their ability to provide
depending on the concentration level evidence for different effects associated socially valuable ecosystem services.
and the duration of the exposure.1192 In with ozone.1200 The Ozone ISA Terrestrial, wetland, freshwater, and
those sensitive species,1193 effects from concludes that visible foliar injury estuarine ecosystems in the U.S. are
repeated exposure to ozone throughout effects on vegetation, reduced vegetation affected by nitrogen enrichment/
the growing season of the plant can tend growth, reduced plant reproduction, eutrophication caused by nitrogen
to accumulate, so even relatively low reduced productivity in terrestrial deposition. These effects, though
concentrations experienced for a longer ecosystems, reduced yield and quality improving recently as emissions and
duration have the potential to create of agricultural crops, alteration of deposition decline, have been
chronic stress on vegetation.1194 1195 below-ground biogeochemical cycles, consistently documented across the
Ozone damage to sensitive plant species and altered terrestrial community United States for hundreds of species
includes impaired photosynthesis and composition are causally associated and have likely been occurring for
visible injury to leaves. The impairment with exposure to ozone. It also decades. In terrestrial systems nitrogen
of photosynthesis, the process by which concludes that increased tree mortality, loading can lead to loss of nitrogen-
the plant makes carbohydrates (its altered herbivore growth and sensitive plant and lichen species,
source of energy and food), can lead to reproduction, altered plant-insect decreased biodiversity of grasslands,
reduced crop yields, timber production, signaling, reduced carbon sequestration meadows and other sensitive habitats,
and plant productivity and growth. in terrestrial ecosystems, and alteration and increased potential for invasive
Impaired photosynthesis can also lead of terrestrial ecosystem water cycling species and potentially for wildfire. In
to a reduction in root growth and aquatic systems nitrogen loading can
carbohydrate storage below ground, 1196 73 FR 16492, March 27, 2008.
alter species assemblages and cause
resulting in other, more subtle plant and 1197 73 FR 16493–16494, March 27, 2008. Ozone eutrophication.
impacts could be occurring in areas where plant The sensitivity of terrestrial and
1192 73 FR 16486, March 27, 2008. species sensitive to ozone have not yet been studied aquatic ecosystems to acidification from
1193 Only a small percentage of all the plant or identified. nitrogen and sulfur deposition is
1198 73 FR 16490–16497, March 27, 2008.
species growing within the U.S. (over 43,000 predominantly governed by the
species have been catalogued in the USDA PLANTS 1199 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment
database) have been studied with respect to ozone (ISA) for Ozone and Related Photochemical
intersection of geology and deposition.
sensitivity. Oxidants (Final Report). U.S. Environmental Prolonged exposure to excess nitrogen
1194 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R– and sulfur deposition in sensitive areas
(ISA) for Ozone and Related Photochemical 20/012, 2020. acidifies lakes, rivers, and soils.
Oxidants (Final Report). U.S. Environmental 1200 The Ozone ISA evaluates the evidence
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–
Increased acidity in surface waters
associated with different ozone related health and

20/012, 2020. welfare effects, assigning one of five ‘‘weight of creates inhospitable conditions for biota
1195 The concentration at which ozone levels evidence’’ determinations: causal relationship,
overwhelm a plant’s ability to detoxify or likely to be a causal relationship, suggestive of a 1201 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment
compensate for oxidant exposure varies. Thus, causal relationship, inadequate to infer a causal (ISA) for Oxides of Nitrogen, Oxides of Sulfur and
whether a plant is classified as sensitive or tolerant relationship, and not likely to be a causal Particulate Matter Ecological Criteria (Final Report).
depends in part on the exposure levels being relationship. For more information on these levels U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
considered. of evidence, please refer to Table II of the ISA. Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–20/278, 2020.
262
Fmt 4701
and affects the abundance and compounds (VOCs), some of which are the atmospheric chemistry related to
biodiversity of fishes, zooplankton and considered air toxics, have long been ambient concentrations of PM2.5, ozone
macroinvertebrates and ecosystem suspected to play a role in vegetation and air toxics is very complex, and the
function. Over time, acidifying damage.1204 In laboratory experiments, a emissions changes are spatially variable.
deposition also removes essential wide range of tolerance to VOCs has Nevertheless, we do expect that in areas
nutrients from forest soils, depleting the been observed.1205 Decreases in in close proximity to roadways (i.e.,
capacity of soils to neutralize future harvested seed pod weight have been within 300–600 meters of the roadway),
acid loadings and negatively affecting reported for the more sensitive plants, the reductions in vehicle emissions will
forest sustainability. Major effects in and some studies have reported effects decrease ambient levels of PM2.5, NO2,
forests include a decline in sensitive on seed germination, flowering, and and other traffic-related pollutants
tree species, such as red spruce (Picea fruit ripening. Effects of individual described in section VI.B. Across
rubens) and sugar maple (Acer VOCs or their role in conjunction with broader geographic areas, we also expect
saccharum). other stressors (e.g., acidification, the decrease in vehicle emissions to
Building materials including metals, drought, temperature extremes) have not contribute to lower ambient
stones, cements, and paints undergo been well studied. In a recent study of concentrations of ozone and PM2.5,
natural weathering processes from a mixture of VOCs including ethanol which are secondarily formed in the
exposure to environmental elements and toluene on herbaceous plants, atmosphere. Section V of this preamble
(e.g., wind, moisture, temperature significant effects on seed production, also describes projected potential
fluctuations, sunlight, etc.). Pollution leaf water content, and photosynthetic emission reductions downwind from
can worsen and accelerate these effects. efficiency were reported for some plant refineries, which would improve air
Deposition of PM is associated with species.1206 quality in those locations. Increased
both physical damage (materials damage Research suggests an adverse impact emissions from EGUs may increase
effects) and impaired aesthetic qualities of vehicle exhaust on plants, which has ambient concentrations of some
(soiling effects). Wet and dry deposition in some cases been attributed to pollutants in downwind areas, although
of PM can physically affect materials, aromatic compounds and in other cases those impacts will lessen over time as
adding to the effects of natural to.1207 1208 1209 The impacts of VOCs on the power sector becomes cleaner.
weathering processes, by potentially plant reproduction may have long-term
D. Environmental Justice
promoting or accelerating the corrosion implications for biodiversity and
of metals, by degrading paints and by survival of native species near major 1. Overview
deteriorating building materials such as roadways. Most of the studies of the Communities with environmental
stone, concrete and marble.1202 The impacts of VOCs on vegetation have justice concerns, which can include a
effects of PM are exacerbated by the focused on short-term exposure, and range of communities and populations,
presence of acidic gases and can be few studies have focused on long-term face relatively greater cumulative
additive or synergistic due to the effects of VOCs on vegetation and the impacts associated with environmental
complex mixture of pollutants in the air potential for metabolites of these exposures of multiple types, as well as
and surface characteristics of the compounds to affect herbivores or impacts from non-chemical
material. Acidic deposition has been insects. stressors.1210 1211 1212 1213 As described in
shown to have an effect on materials C. Air Quality Impacts of Non-GHG section VI.B.2, there is some literature to
including zinc/galvanized steel and Pollutants suggest that different sociodemographic
other metal, carbonate stone (as factors may increase susceptibility to
monuments and building facings), and Section V of this preamble presents the effects of traffic-associated air
surface coatings (paints).1203 The effects projections of the changes in criteria pollution. In addition, compared to non-
on historic buildings and outdoor works pollutant and air toxics emissions due Hispanic Whites, some other racial
of art are of particular concern because to the final rule. We did not conduct air groups experience greater levels of
of the uniqueness and irreplaceability of quality modeling for this rule, and health problems during some life stages.
many of these objects. In addition to making predictions based solely on For example, in 2018–2020, about 12
aesthetic and functional effects on emissions changes is extremely difficult; percent of non-Hispanic Black; 9
metals, stone and glass, altered energy percent of non-Hispanic American
1204 U.S. EPA. (1991). Effects of organic chemicals
efficiency of photovoltaic panels by PM Indian/Alaska Native; and 7 percent of
in the atmosphere on terrestrial plants. EPA/600/3–
deposition is also an emerging 91/001. Hispanic children were estimated to
consideration for impacts of air 1205 Cape JN, ID Leith, J Binnie, J Content, M currently have asthma, compared with 6
pollutants on materials. Donkin, M Skewes, DN Price AR Brown, AD percent of non-Hispanic White
Sharpe. (2003). Effects of VOCs on herbaceous
iv. Welfare Effects Associated With Air plants in an open-top chamber experiment. 1210 Rowangould, G.M. (2013) A census of the
Toxics Environ. Pollut. 124:341–343. near-roadway population: public health and
1206 Cape JN, ID Leith, J Binnie, J Content, M
environmental justice considerations. Trans Res D
Emissions from producing, Donkin, M Skewes, DN Price AR Brown, AD 25: 59–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
transporting, and combusting fuel Sharpe. (2003). Effects of VOCs on herbaceous j.trd.2013.08.003.
contribute to ambient levels of plants in an open-top chamber experiment. 1211 Marshall, J.D. (2000) Environmental
Environ. Pollut. 124:341–343. inequality: Air pollution exposures in California’s
pollutants that contribute to adverse 1207 Viskari E–L. (2000). Epicuticular wax of
South Coast Air Basin. Atmos Environ 21: 5499–
effects on vegetation. Volatile organic Norway spruce needles as indicator of traffic 5503. https://doi.org/10.1016/
pollutant deposition. Water, Air, and Soil Pollut. j.atmosenv.2008.02.005.
1202 U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment 121:327–337. 1212 Marshall, J.D. (2008) Environmental
(ISA) for Particulate Matter (Final Report, 2019). 1208 Ugrekhelidze D, F Korte, G Kvesitadze.
inequality: air pollution exposures in California’s

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (1997). Uptake and transformation of benzene and South Coast Air Basin. Atmos Environ 21: 5499–
Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–19/188, 2019. toluene by plant leaves. Ecotox. Environ. Safety 5503. https://doi.org/10.1016/
1203 Irving, P.M., e.d. 1991. Acid Deposition: State 37:24–29. j.atmosenv.2008.02.005.
of Science and Technology, Volume III, Terrestrial, 1209 Kammerbauer H, H Selinger, R Rommelt, A 1213 Mohai, P.; Pellow, D.; Roberts Timmons, J.
Materials, Health, and Visibility Effects, The U.S. Ziegler-Jons, D Knoppik, B Hock. (1987). Toxic (2009) Environmental justice. Annual Reviews 34:
National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, components of motor vehicle emissions for the 405–430. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-
Chapter 24, page 24–76. spruce Picea abies. Environ. Pollut. 48:235–243. environ082508-094348.
263
Fmt 4701
children.1214 Nationally, on average, the EJ analysis: (1) Is there evidence of but not limited to geography, access,
non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic potential EJ concerns in the baseline and mobility.
American Indian or Alaska Native (the state of the world absent the Scientific assessment reports
people also have lower than average life regulatory action)? Assessing the produced over the past decade by the
expectancy based on 2019 data.1215 baseline will allow EPA to determine USGCRP,1218,1219 the
EPA’s 2016 ‘‘Technical Guidance for whether pre-existing disparities are
IPCC,1220 1221 1222 1223 the National
Assessing Environmental Justice in associated with the pollutant(s) under
Academies of Science, Engineering, and
Regulatory Analysis’’ provides consideration (e.g., if the effects of the
recommendations on conducting the pollutant(s) are more concentrated in 1218 USGCRP, 2018: Impacts, Risks, and
highest quality analysis feasible of some population groups); (2) Is there Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National
environmental justice (EJ) issues evidence of potential EJ concerns for the Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R.,
associated with a given regulatory regulatory option(s) under C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M.
decision, though it is not prescriptive, consideration? Specifically, how are the Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S.
recognizing that data limitations, time pollutant(s) and its effects distributed Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC,
USA, 1515 pp. doi:10.7930/NCA4.2018.
and resource constraints, and analytic for the regulatory options under 1219 USGCRP, 2016: The Impacts of Climate
challenges will vary by media and consideration?; and (3) Do the Change on Human Health in the United States: A
regulatory context.1216 Where applicable regulatory option(s) under consideration Scientific Assessment. Crimmins, A., J. Balbus, J.L.
and practicable, the Agency endeavors exacerbate or mitigate EJ concerns Gamble, C.B. Beard, J.E. Bell, D. Dodgen, R.J. Eisen,
N. Fann, M.D. Hawkins, S.C. Herring, L.
to conduct such an EJ analysis. There is relative to the baseline? It is not always Jantarasami, D.M. Mills, S. Saha, M.C. Sarofim, J.
evidence that communities with EJ possible to provide quantitative answers Trtanj, and L. Ziska, Eds. U.S. Global Change
concerns are disproportionately and to these questions. Research Program, Washington, DC, 312 pp. https://
adversely impacted by heavy-duty EPA received several comments health2016.globalchange.gov/.
1220 Oppenheimer, M., M. Campos, R. Warren, J.
vehicle emissions.1217 related to the environmental justice Birkmann, G. Luber, B. O’Neill, and K. Takahashi,
In section VI.D.2, we discuss the EJ impacts of heavy-duty vehicles in 2014: Emergent risks and key vulnerabilities. In:
impacts of this final rule’s GHG general and the impacts of the proposal Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and
emission standards from the anticipated specifically. We summarize and respond Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects.
reduction of GHGs. We also discuss in to those comments in section 18 of the Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
section VI.D.3 the potential additional Response to Comments document that on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J.
EJ impacts from the non-GHG (criteria accompanies this rulemaking. After Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M.
pollutant and air toxic) emissions consideration of comments, EPA Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B.
changes we estimate would result from updated our review of the literature, Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R.
compliance with the CO2 emission Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge
while maintaining our general approach University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and
standards, including impacts near to the environmental justice analysis. New York, NY, USA, pp. 1039–1099.
roadways and from upstream sources. We note that analyses in this section are 1221 Porter, J.R., L. Xie, A.J. Challinor, K.
EPA did not consider potential adverse based on data that was the most Cochrane, S.M. Howden, M.M. Iqbal, D.B. Lobell,
disproportionate impacts of vehicle appropriate recent data at the time we and M.I. Travasso, 2014: Food security and food
production systems. In: Climate Change 2014:
emissions in selecting the CO2 emission undertook the analyses. We intend to Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A:
standards, but we provide information continue analyzing data concerning Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of
about adverse impacts of vehicle disproportionate impacts of pollution in Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of
emissions for the public’s the future, using the latest available the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
understanding of this rulemaking, [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach,
data. M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L.
which addresses the need to protect Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S.
public health consistent with CAA 2. GHG Impacts on Environmental
Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea,
section 202(a)(1)–(2). When assessing Justice and Vulnerable or Overburdened and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press,
the potential for disproportionate and Populations Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,
USA, pp. 485–533.
adverse health or environmental In the 2009 Endangerment Finding, 1222 Smith, K.R., A. Woodward, D. Campbell-
impacts of regulatory actions on the Administrator considered how Lendrum, D.D. Chadee, Y. Honda, Q. Liu, J.M.
populations with potential EJ concerns, climate change threatens the health and Olwoch, B. Revich, and R. Sauerborn, 2014: Human
EPA strives to answer the following welfare of the U.S. population. As part health: impacts, adaptation, and co-benefits. In:
three broad questions, for purposes of Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and
of that consideration, she also Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects.
considered risks to people of color and Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth
1214 Current Asthma Prevalence by Race and
low-income individuals and Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel
Ethnicity (2018–2020). [Online at https:// on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J.
www.cdc.gov/asthma/most_recent_national_ communities, finding that certain parts
Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M.
asthma_data.htm]. of the U.S. population may be especially Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B.
1215 Arias, E. Xu, J. (2022) United States Life vulnerable based on their characteristics Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R.
Tables, 2019. National Vital Statistics Report, or circumstances. These groups include Mastrandrea, and L.L. White (eds.)]. Cambridge
Volume 70, Number 19. [Online at https:// University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and
www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-
economically and socially
New York, NY, USA, pp. 709–754.
19.pdf]. disadvantaged communities; 1223 IPCC, 2018: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An
1216 USGCRP, 2018: Impacts, Risks, and individuals at vulnerable life stages, IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global
Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National such as the elderly, the very young, and warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and
Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., pregnant or nursing women; those related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in
C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. the context of strengthening the global response to
Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. already in poor health or with
the threat of climate change, sustainable

Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, comorbidities; the disabled; those development, and efforts to eradicate poverty
USA, 1515 pp. doi:10.7930/NCA4.2018. experiencing homelessness, mental [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D.
1217 Demetillo, M.A.; Harkins, C.; McDonald, B.C.; Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W.
illness, or substance abuse; and
et al. (2021) Space-based observational constraints Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors,
on NO2 air pollution inequality from diesel traffic
Indigenous or other populations J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E.
in major US cities. Geophys Res Lett 48, dependent on one or limited resources Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield
e2021GL094333. for subsistence due to factors including (eds.)]. In Press.
264
Fmt 4701
Medicine,1224 1225 and the EPA 1226 add such as cardiopulmonary or respiratory conclusions by providing more detailed
more evidence that the impacts of illness and other health impacts are findings regarding related
climate change raise potential EJ associated with and exacerbated by an vulnerabilities and the projected
concerns. These reports conclude that increase in GHGs and climate change impacts youth may experience. These
less-affluent, traditionally marginalized outcomes, which is problematic as these assessments—including the NCA4 and
and predominantly non-White diseases occur at higher rates within The Impacts of Climate Change on
communities can be especially vulnerable communities. Importantly, Human Health in the United States
vulnerable to climate change impacts negative public health outcomes include (2016)—describe how children’s unique
because they tend to have limited those that are physical in nature, as well physiological and developmental factors
resources for adaptation, are more as mental, emotional, social, and contribute to making them particularly
dependent on climate-sensitive economic. vulnerable to climate change. Impacts to
resources such as local water and food The scientific assessment literature,
children are expected from heat waves,
supplies or have less access to social including the aforementioned reports,
and information resources. Some demonstrates that there are myriad ways air pollution, infectious and waterborne
communities of color, specifically in which particular communities and illnesses, and mental health effects
populations defined jointly by ethnic/ populations may be affected at the resulting from extreme weather events.
racial characteristics and geographic individual and community levels. In addition, children are among those
location (e.g., African-American, Black, Individuals face differential exposure to especially susceptible to allergens, as
and Hispanic/Latino communities; criteria pollutants, in part due to the well as health effects associated with
Native Americans, particularly those proximities of highways, trains, heat waves, storms, and floods.
living on tribal lands and Alaska factories, and other major sources of Additional health concerns may arise in
Natives), may be uniquely vulnerable to pollutant-emitting sources to less- low-income households, especially
climate change health impacts in the affluent residential areas. Outdoor those with children, if climate change
U.S., as discussed in this section. In workers, such as construction or utility reduces food availability and increases
particular, the 2016 scientific crews and agricultural laborers, who prices, leading to food insecurity within
assessment on the Impacts of Climate frequently are comprised of already at- households. More generally, these
Change on Human Health 1227 found risk groups, are exposed to poor air reports note that extreme weather and
with high confidence that quality and extreme temperatures flooding can cause or exacerbate poor
vulnerabilities are place- and time- without relief. Furthermore, people in health outcomes by affecting mental
specific, lifestages and ages are linked to communities with EJ concerns face health because of stress; contributing to
immediate and future health impacts, greater housing, clean water, and food or worsening existing conditions, again
and social determinants of health are insecurity and bear disproportionate due to stress or also as a consequence
linked to greater extent and severity of and adverse economic impacts and of exposures to water and air pollutants;
climate change-related health impacts. health burdens associated with climate or by impacting hospital and emergency
The GHG emission reductions from this change effects. They have less or limited services operations.1231 Further, in
final rule would contribute to efforts to access to healthcare and affordable, urban areas in particular, flooding can
reduce the probability of severe impacts adequate health or homeowner have significant economic consequences
related to climate change. insurance.1229 Finally, resiliency and due to effects on infrastructure,
adaptation are more difficult for pollutant exposures, and drowning
i. Effects on Specific Communities and
economically vulnerable communities;
Populations dangers. The ability to withstand and
these communities have less liquidity,
Per the Fourth National Climate recover from flooding is dependent in
individually and collectively, to move
Assessment (NCA4), ‘‘Climate change part on the social vulnerability of the
or to make the types of infrastructure or
affects human health by altering affected population and individuals
policy changes to limit or reduce the
exposures to heat waves, floods, hazards they face. They frequently are experiencing an event.1232 In addition,
droughts, and other extreme events; less able to self-advocate for resources children are among those especially
vector-, food- and waterborne infectious that would otherwise aid in building susceptible to allergens, as well as
diseases; changes in the quality and resilience and hazard reduction and health effects associated with heat
safety of air, food, and water; and mitigation. waves, storms, and floods. Additional
stresses to mental health and well- The assessment literature cited in health concerns may arise in low-
being.’’ 1228 Many health conditions EPA’s 2009 and 2016 Endangerment and income households, especially those
Cause or Contribute Findings, as well as with children, if climate change reduces
1224 National Research Council. 2011. America’s
Impacts of Climate Change on Human food availability and increases prices,
Climate Choices. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12781. Health, also concluded that certain leading to food insecurity within
1225 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, populations and life stages, including households.
and Medicine. 2017. Communities in Action: children, are most vulnerable to climate-
Pathways to Health Equity. Washington, DC: The related health effects.1230 The 1231 Ebi, K.L., J.M. Balbus, G. Luber, A. Bole, A.
National Academies Press. https://doi.org/ Crimmins, G. Glass, S. Saha, M.M. Shimamoto, J.
10.17226/24624.
assessment literature produced from
Trtanj, and J.L. White-Newsome, 2018: Human
1226 EPA. 2021. Climate Change and Social 2016 to the present strengthens these Health. In Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the
Vulnerability in the United States: A Focus on Six United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment,
Impacts. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R.
EPA 430–R–21–003. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. Lewis, T.K. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. Lewis, T.K.
1227 USGCRP, 2016: The Impacts of Climate Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. Global Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. Global
Change on Human Health in the United States: A Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA,
Scientific Assessment. pp. 539–571. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018.CH14. pp. 539–571. doi:10.7930/NCA4.2018.CH14.
1228 Ebi, K.L., J.M. Balbus, G. Luber, A. Bole, A. 1229 USGCRP, 2016: The Impacts of Climate 1232 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
Crimmins, G. Glass, S. Saha, M.M. Shimamoto, J. Change on Human Health in the United States: A and Medicine 2019. Framing the Challenge of
Trtanj, and J.L. White-Newsome, 2018: Human Scientific Assessment. Urban Flooding in the United States. Washington,
Health. In Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the 1230 74 FR 66496, December 15, 2009; 81 FR DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/
United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, 54422, August 15, 2016. 10.17226/25381.
265
Fmt 4701
The Impacts of Climate Change on projected increases in childhood asthma by approximately 3,000–23,000 per year
Human Health 1233 also found that some diagnoses due to climate-driven changes compared to current levels. Overall, the
communities of color, low-income in particulate air pollution. The report report confirmed findings of broader
groups, people with limited English found that Hispanic and Latino climate science assessments that
proficiency, and certain immigrant individuals are 43 percent more likely children are uniquely vulnerable to
groups (especially those who are to live in areas with the highest climate-related impacts and that in
undocumented) are subject to many projected labor hour losses in weather- many situations, children in the U.S.
factors that contribute to vulnerability to exposed industries due to climate- who identify as Black, Indigenous, and
the health impacts of climate change. driven warming, and 50 percent more People of Color, are limited English-
While difficult to isolate from related likely to live in coastal areas with the speaking, do not have health insurance,
socioeconomic factors, race appears to highest projected increases in traffic or live in low-income communities may
be an important factor in vulnerability delays due to increases in high-tide be disproportionately more exposed to
to climate-related stress, with elevated flooding. The report found that the most severe adverse impacts of
risks for mortality from high American Indian and Alaska Native climate change.
temperatures reported for Black or individuals are 48 percent more likely Tribes and Indigenous communities
African American individuals compared to live in areas where the highest face disproportionate and adverse risks
to White individuals after controlling percentage of land is projected to be from the impacts of climate change,
for factors such as air conditioning use. inundated due to sea level rise, and 37 particularly those communities
Moreover, people of color are percent more likely to live in areas with impacted by degradation of natural and
disproportionately more exposed to air high projected labor hour losses. Asian cultural resources within established
pollution based on where they live, and individuals were found to be 23 percent reservation boundaries and threats to
disproportionately vulnerable due to more likely to live in coastal areas with traditional subsistence lifestyles.
higher baseline prevalence of projected increases in traffic delays from Indigenous communities whose health,
underlying diseases such as asthma. As high-tide flooding. Persons with low economic well-being, and cultural
explained earlier, climate change can income or no high school diploma are traditions depend upon the natural
exacerbate local air pollution conditions about 25 percent more likely to live in environment will likely be affected by
so this increase in air pollution is areas with high projected losses of labor the degradation of ecosystem goods and
expected to have disproportionate and hours, and 15 percent more likely to live services associated with climate change.
adverse effects on these communities. in areas with the highest projected The IPCC indicates that losses of
Locations with greater health threats increases in asthma due to climate- customs and historical knowledge may
include urban areas (due to, among driven increases in particulate air cause communities to be less resilient or
other factors, the ‘‘heat island’’ effect pollution, and in areas with high adaptable.1236 The NCA4 noted that
where built infrastructure and lack of projected inundation due to sea level while Tribes and Indigenous Peoples are
green spaces increases local rise. diverse and will be impacted by the
temperatures), areas where airborne In a more recent 2023 report, Climate climate changes universal to all
allergens and other air pollutants Change Impacts on Children’s Health Americans, there are several ways in
already occur at higher levels, and and Well-Being in the U.S., the EPA which climate change uniquely
communities experienced depleted considered the degree to which threatens Tribes and Indigenous
water supplies or vulnerable energy and children’s health and well-being may be Peoples’ livelihoods and economies.1237
transportation infrastructure. impacted by five climate-related In addition, as noted in the following
The recent EPA report on climate environmental hazards—extreme heat, paragraph, there can be institutional
change and social vulnerability 1234 poor air quality, changes in seasonality, barriers (including policy-based
examined four socially vulnerable flooding, and different types of limitations and restrictions) to their
groups (individuals who are low infectious diseases.1235 The report management of water, land, and other
income, minority, without high school found that children’s academic natural resources that could impede
diplomas, and/or 65 years and older) achievement is projected to be reduced adaptive measures.
and their exposure to several different by 4–7 percent per child, as a result of For example, Indigenous agriculture
climate impacts (air quality, coastal moderate and higher levels of warming, in the Southwest is already being
flooding, extreme temperatures, and impacting future income levels. The adversely affected by changing patterns
inland flooding). This report found that report also projects increases in the of flooding, drought, dust storms, and
Black and African-American individuals numbers of annual emergency rising temperatures leading to increased
were 40 percent more likely to currently department visits associated with soil erosion, irrigation water demand,
live in areas with the highest projected asthma, and that the number of new and decreased crop quality and herd
increases in mortality rates due to asthma diagnoses increases by 4–11 sizes. The Confederated Tribes of the
climate-driven changes in extreme percent due to climate-driven increases Umatilla Indian Reservation in the
temperatures, and 34 percent more in air pollution relative to current Northwest have identified climate risks
likely to live in areas with the highest levels. In addition, more than 1 million to salmon, elk, deer, roots, and
children in coastal regions are projected
1233 USGCRP, 2016: The Impacts of Climate 1236 Porter, et al., 2014: Food security and food
to be temporarily displaced from their
Change on Human Health in the United States: A production systems.
Scientific Assessment. Crimmins, A., J. Balbus, J.L.
homes annually due to climate-driven 1237 Jantarasami, L.C., R. Novak, R. Delgado, E.
Gamble, C.B. Beard, J.E. Bell, D. Dodgen, R.J. Eisen, flooding, and infectious disease rates are Marino, S. McNeeley, C. Narducci, J. Raymond-
N. Fann, M.D. Hawkins, S.C. Herring, L. similarly anticipated to rise, with the Yakoubian, L. Singletary, and K. Powys Whyte,
Jantarasami, D.M. Mills, S. Saha, M.C. Sarofim, J.
number of new Lyme disease cases in 2018: Tribes and Indigenous Peoples. In Impacts,
Trtanj, and L. Ziska, Eds. U.S. Global Change Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth
Research Program, Washington, DC, 312 pp. http://
children living in 22 states in the
National Climate Assessment, Volume II
dx.doi.org/10.7930/J0R49NQX. eastern and midwestern U.S. increasing [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E.
1234 EPA. 2021. Climate Change and Social Kunkel, K.L.M. Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C.
Vulnerability in the United States: A Focus on Six 1235 EPA. 2023. Climate Change Impacts on Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research
Impacts. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Children’s Health and Well-Being in the U.S., EPA– Program, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 572–603.
EPA 430–R–21–003. 430–R–23–001. doi:10.7930/NCA4. 2018. CH15.
266
Fmt 4701
huckleberry habitat. Housing and ecosystem services that threaten these 70,000 housing units across the nation
sanitary water supply infrastructure are individuals’ health and well-being. and asked about transportation
vulnerable to disruption from extreme infrastructure near respondents’ homes
3. Non-GHG Impacts
precipitation events. Additionally, every two years.1241 1242 We also
NCA4 noted that Tribes and Indigenous In section V.B., in addition to GHG analyzed the U.S. Department of
Peoples generally experience poor emissions impacts, we also discuss Education’s Common Core of Data,
infrastructure, diminished access to potential additional emission changes of which includes enrollment and location
quality healthcare, and greater risk of non-GHGs (i.e., criteria and air toxic information for schools across the
exposure to pollutants. Consequently, pollutants) that we project from United States.1243
Native Americans often have compliance with the final GHG
In analyzing the 2009 AHS, we
disproportionately higher rates of emission standards. This section VI.D.3
focused on whether a housing unit was
asthma, cardiovascular disease, describes evidence that communities
located within 300 feet of a ‘‘4-or-more
Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, and with EJ concerns are disproportionately
lane highway, railroad, or airport’’ (this
obesity. These health conditions and and adversely impacted by relevant
distance was used in the AHS
related effects (disorientation, non-GHG emissions. We discuss the
analysis).1244 We analyzed whether
heightened exposure to PM2.5, etc.) can potential impact of non-GHG emissions
there were differences between
all contribute to increased vulnerability for two specific contexts: near-roadway
households in such locations compared
to climate-driven extreme heat and air (section VI.D.3.i) and upstream sources
(section VI.D.3.ii). with those in locations farther from
pollution events, which also may be these transportation facilities.1245 We
exacerbated by stressful situations, such i. Near-Roadway Analysis included other variables, such as land
as extreme weather events, wildfires, use category, region of country, and
and other circumstances. As described in section VI.B.2.viii of
this preamble, concentrations of many housing type. We found that homes
NCA4 and IPCC’s Fifth Assessment
air pollutants are elevated near high- with a non-White householder were 22–
Report1238 also highlighted several
traffic roadways. We recently conducted 34 percent more likely to be located
impacts specific to Alaskan Indigenous
an analysis of the populations within within 300 feet of these large
Peoples. Coastal erosion and permafrost
the CONUS living in close proximity to transportation facilities than homes
thaw will lead to more coastal erosion,
truck freight routes as identified in with White householders. Homes with a
rendering winter travel riskier and
USDOT’s FAF4.1239 FAF4 is a model Hispanic householder were 17–33
exacerbating damage to buildings, roads,
and other infrastructure—impacts on from the USDOT’s Bureau of percent more likely to be located within
archaeological sites, structures, and Transportation Statistics and Federal 300 feet of these large transportation
objects that will lead to a loss of cultural Highway Administration, which facilities than homes with non-Hispanic
heritage for Alaska’s Indigenous people. provides data associated with freight householders. Households near large
In terms of food security, the NCA4 movement in the United States.1240 transportation facilities were, on
discussed reductions in suitable ice Relative to the rest of the population, average, lower in income and
conditions for hunting, warmer people living near FAF4 truck routes are educational attainment and more likely
temperatures impairing the use of more likely to be people of color and to be a rental property and located in an
traditional ice cellars for food storage, have lower incomes than the general urban area compared with households
and declining shellfish populations due population. People living near FAF4 more distant from transportation
to warming and acidification. While the truck routes are also more likely to live facilities.
NCA4 also noted that climate change in metropolitan areas. Even controlling In examining schools near major
provided more opportunity to hunt from for region of the country, county roadways, we used the Common Core of
boats later in the fall season or earlier characteristics, population density, and Data from the U.S. Department of
in the spring, the assessment found that household structure, race, ethnicity, and Education, which includes information
the net impact was an overall decrease income are significant determinants of on all public elementary and secondary
in food security. In addition, the U.S. whether someone lives near a FAF4 schools and school districts
Pacific Islands and the Indigenous truck route. nationwide.1246 To determine school
communities that live there are also We additionally analyzed other
uniquely vulnerable to the effects of national databases that allowed us to 1241 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
climate change due to their remote evaluate whether homes and schools Development, & U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). Age of
location and geographic isolation. They were located near a major road and other residential buildings within 300 feet. In
whether disparities in exposure may be American Housing Survey for the United States:
rely on the land, ocean, and natural 2009 (pp. A–1). Retrieved from https://
resources for their livelihoods, but they occurring in these environments. Until www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ahs/data/2009/
face challenges in obtaining energy and 2009, the U.S. Census Bureau’s ahs-2009-summary-tables0/h150-09.html.
food supplies that need to be shipped in American Housing Survey (AHS) 1242 The 2013 AHS again included the ‘‘etrans’’
at high costs. As a result, they face included descriptive statistics of over question about highways, airports, and railroads
within half a block of the housing unit but has not
higher energy costs than the rest of the 1239 U.S. EPA (2021). Estimation of Population maintained the question since then.
nation and depend on imported fossil Size and Demographic Characteristics among
1243 http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/.
fuels for electricity generation and People Living Near Truck Routes in the
1244 This variable primarily represents roadway
diesel. These challenges exacerbate the Conterminous United States. Memorandum to the proximity. According to the Central Intelligence
Docket. Agency’s World Factbook, in 2010, the United
climate impacts that the Pacific Islands 1240 FAF4 includes data from the 2012 States had 6,506,204 km of roadways, 224,792 km
are experiencing. NCA4 notes that Commodity Flow Survey (CFS), the Census Bureau of railways, and 15,079 airports. Highways thus
Tribes and Indigenous Peoples of the represent the overwhelming majority of
on international trade, as well as data associated

Pacific are threatened by rising sea with construction, agriculture, utilities, transportation facilities described by this factor in
warehouses, and other industries. FAF4 estimates the AHS.
levels, diminishing freshwater 1245 Bailey, C. (2011) Demographic and Social
the modal choices for moving goods by trucks,
availability, and negative effects to trains, boats, and other types of freight modes. It Patterns in Housing Units Near Large Highways and
includes traffic assignments, including truck flows other Transportation Sources. Memorandum to
1238 Porter, et al., 2014: Food security and food on a network of truck routes. https:// docket.
production systems. ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/faf/. 1246 http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/.
267
Fmt 4701
proximities to major roadways, we used these pollutants among people of color factors, such as historic segregation,
a geographic information system to map and people with low socioeconomic redlining, residential mobility, and
each school and roadways based on the status (SES). Numerous studies daily mobility.1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267
U.S. Census’s TIGER roadway file.1247 evaluating the demographics and Several publications report
We estimated that about 10 million socioeconomic status of populations or nationwide analyses that compare the
students attend schools within 200 schools near roadways have found that demographic patterns of people who do
meters of major roads, about 20 percent they include a greater percentage of or do not live near major roadways.1268
1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 Three of these
of the total number of public school residents of color, as well as lower SES
students in the United States.1248 About populations (as indicated by variables studies found that people living near
800,000 students attend public schools such as median household income). major roadways are more likely to be
within 200 meters of primary roads, or Locations in these studies include Los people of color or of low SES.1274 1275 1276
about 2 percent of the total. We found Angeles, CA; Seattle, WA; Wayne They also found that the outcomes of
that students of color were County, MI; Orange County, FL; Tampa, their analyses varied between regions
overrepresented at schools within 200 FL; the State of California; the State of within the United States. However, only
meters of primary roadways, and Texas; and nationally. 1250 1251 1252 1253 one such study looked at whether such
schools within 200 meters of primary 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261. Such conclusions were confounded by living
roadways had a disproportionately disparities may be due to multiple in a location with higher population
greater population of students eligible density and looked at how
for free or reduced-price lunches.1249 1256 Jones, M.R.; Diez-Roux, A.; Hajat, A.; et al. demographics differ between locations
Black students represent 22 percent of (2014) Race/ethnicity, residential segregation, and nationwide.1277 That study generally
exposure to ambient air pollution: The Multi-Ethnic
students at schools located within 200 Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Am J Public
found that higher density areas have
meters of a primary road, compared to Health 104: 2130–2137. [Online at: https://doi.org/ higher proportions of low-income
17 percent of students in all U.S. 10.2105/AJPH.2014.302135.]. residents and people of color. In other
schools. Hispanic students represent 30 1257 Stuart A.L., Zeager M. (2011) An inequality
publications assessing a city, county, or
percent of students at schools located study of ambient nitrogen dioxide and traffic levels state, the results are similar.1278 1279 1280
near elementary schools in the Tampa area. Journal
within 200 meters of a primary road, of Environmental Management. 92(8): 1923–1930.
compared to 22 percent of students in https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.03.003. 1268 Rowangould, G.M. (2013) A census of the
all U.S. schools. 1258 Stuart A.L., Mudhasakul S., Sriwatanapongse U.S. near-roadway population: public health and
W. (2009) The Social Distribution of Neighborhood- environmental justice considerations.
We also reviewed existing scholarly Transportation Research Part D; 59–67.
Scale Air Pollution and Monitoring Protection.
literature examining the potential for Journal of the Air & Waste Management 1269 Tian, N.; Xue, J.; Barzyk. T.M. (2013)
disproportionately high exposure to Association. 59(5): 591–602. https://doi.org/ Evaluating socioeconomic and racial differences in
10.3155/1047–3289.59.5.591. traffic-related metrics in the United States using a
1247 Pedde, M.; Bailey, C. (2011) Identification of 1259 Willis M.D., Hill E.L., Kile M.L., Carozza S., GIS approach. J Exposure Sci Environ Epidemiol
Schools within 200 Meters of U.S. Primary and Hystad P. (2020) Assessing the effectiveness of 23: 215–222.
1270 CDC (2013) Residential proximity to major
Secondary Roads. Memorandum to the docket. vehicle emission regulations on improving perinatal
1248 Here, ‘‘major roads’’ refer to those TIGER health: a population-based accountability study. highways—United States, 2010. Morbidity and
classifies as either ‘‘Primary’’ or ‘‘Secondary’’. The International Journal of Epidemiology. 49(6): 1781– Mortality Weekly Report 62(3): 46–50.
1271 Clark, L.P.; Millet, D.B., Marshall, J.D. (2017)
Census Bureau describes primary roads as 1791. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyaa137.
‘‘generally divided limited-access highways within 1260 Collins, T.W., Grineski, SE, Nadybal, S. Changes in transportation-related air pollution
the Federal interstate system or under state (2019) Social disparities in exposure to noise at exposures by race-ethnicity and socioeconomic
management’’. Secondary roads are ‘‘main arteries, public schools in the contiguous United States. status: outdoor nitrogen dioxide in the United
usually in the U.S. highway, state highway, or Environ. Res. 175, 257–265. https://doi.org/ States in 2000 and 2010. Environ Health Perspect
county highway system’’. 10.1016/j.envres.2019.05.024. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP959.
1249 For this analysis we analyzed a 200-meter 1261 Kingsley S., Eliot M., Carlson L., Finn J., 1272 Mikati, I.; Benson, A.F.; Luben, T.J.; Sacks,
distance based on the understanding that roadways MacIntosh D.L., Suh H.H., Wellenius G.A. (2014) J.D.; Richmond-Bryant, J. (2018) Disparities in
generally influence air quality within a few Proximity of US schools to major roadways: a distribution of particulate matter emission sources
hundred meters from the vicinity of heavily nationwide assessment. J Expo Sci Environ by race and poverty status. Am J Pub Health https://
traveled roadways or along corridors with Epidemiol. 24: 253–259. https://doi.org/10.1038/ ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.
significant trucking traffic. See U.S. EPA, 2014. jes.2014.5. 2017.304297?journalCode=ajph.
1273 Alotaibi, R.; Bechle, M.; Marshall, J.D.;
Near Roadway Air Pollution and Health: Frequently 1262 Depro, B.; Timmins, C. (2008) Mobility and
Asked Questions. EPA–420–F–14–044. environmental equity: do housing choices Ramani, T.; Zietsman, J.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J.;
1250 Marshall, J.D. (2008) Environmental determine exposure to air pollution? Duke Khreis, H. (2019) Traffic related air pollution and
inequality: air pollution exposures in California’s University Working Paper. the burden of childhood asthma in the continuous
South Coast Air Basin. Atmos Environ 42: 5499– 1263 Rothstein, R. The Color of Law: A Forgotten United States in 2000 and 2010. Environ
5503. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.02.00. History of How Our Government Segregated International 127: 858–867. https://
1251 Su, J.G.; Larson, T.; Gould, T.; Cohen, M.; America. New York: Liveright, 2018. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
Buzzelli, M. (2010) Transboundary air pollution 1264 Lane, H.J.; Morello-Frosch, R.; Marshall, J.D.; S0160412018325388.
1274 Tian, N.; Xue, J.; Barzyk. T.M. (2013)
and environmental justice: Vancouver and Seattle Apte, J.S. (2022) Historical redlining is associated
compared. GeoJournal 57: 595–608. doi:10.1007/ with present-day air pollution disparities in US Evaluating socioeconomic and racial differences in
s10708–009–9269–6. Cities. Environ Sci & Technol Letters 9: 345–350. traffic-related metrics in the United States using a
1252 Chakraborty, J.; Zandbergen, P.A. (2007) DOI: [Online at: https://doi.org/10.1021/ GIS approach. J Exposure Sci Environ Epidemiol
Children at risk: measuring racial/ethnic disparities acs.estlett.1c01012]. 23: 215–222.
1275 Rowangould, G.M. (2013) A census of the
in potential exposure to air pollution at school and 1265 Ware, L. (2021) Plessy’s legacy: the
home. J Epidemiol Community Health 61: 1074– government’s role in the development and U.S. near-roadway population: public health and
1079. doi:10.1136/jech.2006.054130. perpetuation of segregated neighborhoods. RSF: The environmental justice considerations.
1253 Green, R.S.; Smorodinsky, S.; Kim, J.J.; Russel Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Transportation Research Part D; 59–67.
McLaughlin, R.; Ostro, B. (2004) Proximity of Sciences, 7:92–109. DOI: 10.7758/RSF.2021.7.1.06. 1276 CDC (2013) Residential proximity to major
California public schools to busy roads. Environ 1266 Archer, D.N. (2020) ‘‘White Men’s Roads highways—United States, 2010. Morbidity and
Health Perspect 112: 61–66. doi:10.1289/ehp.6566. through Black Men’s Homes’’: advancing racial Mortality Weekly Report 62(3): 46–50.
equity through highway reconstruction. Vanderbilt 1277 Rowangould, G.M. (2013) A census of the
1254 Wu, Y; Batterman, S.A. (2006) Proximity of
schools in Detroit, Michigan to automobile and Law Rev 73: 1259. U.S. near-roadway population: public health and
truck traffic. J Exposure Sci & Environ Epidemiol. 1267 Park, Y.M.; Kwan, M.P. (2020) Understanding environmental justice considerations.
doi:10.1038/sj.jes.7500484. Racial Disparities in Exposure to Traffic-Related Air Transportation Research Part D; 59–67.
1255 Su, J.G.; Jerrett, M.; de Nazelle, A.; Wolch, J. Pollution: Considering the Spatiotemporal 1278 Pratt, G.C.; Vadali, M.L.; Kvale, D.L.;
(2011) Does exposure to air pollution in urban parks Dynamics of Population Distribution. Int. J. Ellickson, K.M. (2015) Traffic, air pollution,
have socioeconomic, racial, or ethnic gradients? Environ. Res. Public Health. 17 (3): 908. https:// minority, and socio-economic status: addressing
Environ Res 111: 319–328. doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17030908. inequities in exposure and risk. Int J Environ Res
268
Furthermore, students of lower-income weekday-weekend differences and country on average.1287 According to

families and students with disabilities bottom-up emission estimates to 2020 Census data, on average, the U.S.
are more likely to travel to school by bus estimate that diesel traffic is the population is comprised of 40 percent
or public transit than are other dominant source of NO2 disparities in people of color and 30 percent low-
students.1281 1282 1283 the studied cities. income individuals. In contrast, the
Two recent studies provide strong Overall, there is substantial evidence population living near fossil fuel-fired
evidence that reducing emissions from that people who live or attend school power plants is comprised of 53 percent
heavy-duty vehicles is likely to reduce near major roadways are more likely to people of color and 34 percent low-
the disparity in exposures to traffic- be of a non-White race, Hispanic, and/ income individuals.1288 Historically
related air pollutants. Both use NO2 or have a low SES. As described in redlined neighborhoods are more likely
observations from the recently launched section VI.B.2.viii, traffic-related air to be downwind of fossil fuel power
TROPospheric Ozone Monitoring pollution may have disproportionate plants and to experience higher levels of
Instrument satellite sensor as a measure and adverse impacts on health across exposure to relevant emissions than
of air quality, which provides high- racial and sociodemographic groups. We non-redlined neighborhoods.1289
resolution observations that heretofore expect communities near roads will Analysis of populations near refineries
were unavailable from any satellite.1284 benefit from the reduced vehicle and oil and gas wells indicates there
One study evaluated NO2 emissions of PM, NOX, SO2, VOC, CO, may be potential disparities in
concentrations during the COVID–19 and mobile source air toxics projected to pollution-related health risk from these
lockdowns in 2020 and compared them sources.1290 1291 1292 1293 See also section
result from this final rule. Although we
to NO2 concentrations from the same V.B of this preamble, discussing issues
were not able to conduct air quality
dates in 2019.1285 That study found that pertaining to lifecycle emissions more
modeling of the estimated emission
average NO2 concentrations were generally.
reductions, we believe it a fair inference
highest in areas with the lowest
that because vehicular emissions affect E. Economic Impacts
percentage of White populations, and
communities with environmental justice
that the areas with the greatest 1. Impacts on Vehicle Sales, Fleet
concerns disproportionately and
percentages of non-White or Hispanic Turnover, Mode Shift, Class Shift and
adversely due to roadway proximity,
populations experienced the greatest Domestic Production
and because we project this rule will
declines in NO2 concentrations during
result in significant reductions in In this section, we discuss the impacts
the lockdown. These NO2 reductions
vehicular emissions, these communities’ this regulation may have on HD vehicle
were associated with the density of
exposures to non-GHG air pollutants sales, including the potential for pre-
highways in the local area.
will be reduced. EPA is considering buy and low-buy decisions, decisions
In the second study, NO2 measured
how to better estimate the near-roadway regarding the mode of transportation
from 2018–2020 was averaged by racial
air quality impacts of its regulatory used to move goods, shifting of
groups and income levels in 52 large
actions and how those impacts are purchases between HD vehicle classes,
U.S. cities. Using census tract-level NO2,
distributed across populations. and effects on domestic production of
the study reported average population-
HD vehicles, under the modeled
weighted NO2 levels to be 28 percent ii. Upstream Source Impacts potential compliance pathway. Pre-buy
higher for low-income non-White
As described in Chapter 4.5, we occurs when a purchaser pulls ahead a
people compared with high-income
expect some non-GHG emissions planned future purchase to make the
White people. The study also used
reductions from sources related to purchase before implementation of an
Public Health 12: 5355–5372. http://dx.doi.org/ refining petroleum fuels and increases EPA regulation in anticipation that a
10.3390/ijerph120505355. in emissions from EGUs, both of which
1287 U.S. EPA (2023) 2021 Power Sector
1279 Sohrabi, S.; Zietsman, J.; Khreis, H. (2020)
would lead to changes in exposure for
Burden of disease assessment of ambient air Programs—Progress Report. https://www3.epa.gov/
pollution and premature mortality in urban areas:
people living in communities near these airmarkets/progress/reports/.
the role of socioeconomic status and transportation. facilities. The EGU emissions increases 1288 U.S. EPA (2023) 2021 Power Sector
Int J Env Res Public Health doi:10.3390/ijerph1 become smaller over time because of Programs—Progress Report. https://www3.epa.gov/
7041166. changes in the projected power airmarkets/progress/reports/.
1280 Aizer A., Currie J. (2019) Lead and Juvenile 1289 Cushing L.J., Li S., Steiger B.B., Casey J.A.
generation mix as electricity generation (2023) Historical red-lining is associated with fossil
Delinquency: New Evidence from Linked Birth,
School, and Juvenile Detention Records. The uses less fossil fuels. fuel power plant siting and present-day inequalities
Review of Economics and Statistics. 101 (4): 575– Analyses of communities in close in air pollutant emissions. Nature Energy. 8: 52–61.
587. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00814. proximity to EGUs have found that a https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560–022–01162-y.
1281 Bureau of Transportation Statistics (2021) 1290 U.S. EPA (2014). Risk and Technology
The Longer Route to School. [Online at https://

higher percentage of communities of Review—Analysis of Socio-Economic Factors for
www.bts.gov/topics/passenger-travel/back-school- color and low-income communities live Populations Living Near Petroleum Refineries.
2019]. near these sources when compared to Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
1282 Wheeler, K.; Yang, Y.; Xiang, H. (2009)
national averages.1286 EPA compared Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. January.
Transportation use patterns of U.S. children and the percentages of people of color and
1291 Carpenter, A., and M. Wagner. Environmental
teenagers with disabilities. Disability and Health J justice in the oil refinery industry: A panel analysis
2: 158–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo. low-income populations living within across United States counties. J. Ecol. Econ. V. 159
2009.03.003. three miles of fossil fuel-fired power (2019).
1283 Park, K.; Esfahani, H.N.; Novack, V.L.; et al.
plants regulated under EPA’s Acid Rain 1292 Gonzalez, J.X., et al. Historic redlining and
(2022) Impacts of disability on daily travel Program and/or EPA’s Cross-State Air the siting of oil and gas wells in the United States.
behaviour: A systematic review. Transport Reviews J. Exp. Sci. & Env. Epi. V. 33. (2023). p. 76–83.
43: 178–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/ Pollution Rule to the national average 1293 In comparison to the national population, the
01441647.2022.2060371. and found that there is a greater
EPA publication reports higher proportions of the

1284 TROPospheric Ozone Monitoring Instrument percentage of people of color and low- following population groups in block groups with
(TROPOMI) is part of the Copernicus Sentinel-5 income individuals living near these higher cancer risk associated with emissions from
Precursor satellite. refineries: ‘‘minority’’, ‘‘African American’’, ‘‘Other
1285 Kerr, G.H.; Goldberg, D.L.; Anenberg, S.C.
power plants than in the rest of the
and Multiracial’’, ‘‘Hispanic or Latino’’, ‘‘Ages 0–
(2021) COVID–19 pandemic reveals persistent 17’’, ‘‘Ages 18–64’’, ‘‘Below the Poverty Level’’,
disparities in nitrogen dioxide pollution. PNAS 1286 See 80 FR 64662, 64915–64916 (October 23, ‘‘Over 25 years old without a HS diploma’’, and
118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2022409118. 2015). ‘‘Linguistic isolations’’.
269
future vehicle may have a higher regulations or in the light-duty (LD) D of the Executive Summary, the
upfront or operational cost, or have sector—EPA finds that such analyses are estimated fleet-average costs to
reduced reliability. Low-buy occurs not directly relevant to this regulation manufacturers per-vehicle for this rule
when a vehicle that would have been given relevant differences between the are less than those estimated for the HD
purchased after the implementation of a economic impacts of HD GHG and GHG Phase 2 rule, which EPA found to
regulation is either not purchased at all, earlier HD criteria pollutant regulation, be reasonable, and we do not have data
or the purchase is delayed. Low-buy HD ICE and HD ZEV vehicles, and the (and no commenter presented data)
may occur directly as a function of pre- HD and LD sectors. As such, showing a significant level of pre-buy in
buy (where a vehicle was instead extrapolation of these studies to this HD anticipation of Phase 2. As also noted in
purchased prior to implementation of GHG regulation would not be section D of the Executive Summary,
the new regulation), or due to a vehicle technically sound. Moreover, as we HD ZEV purchasers’ incremental
purchaser delaying the purchase of a explain in this section, salient features upfront costs (after the tax credits) are
vehicle due to cost or uncertainty. Pre- of our analysis of the modeled potential recovered through operational savings
and low-buy are short-term effects, with compliance pathway for this such that payback occurs between two
research indicating that effects are seen regulation—including the significant and four years on average for vocational
for one year or less before and after a expected operating savings as well as vehicles, after two years for short-haul
regulation is implemented.1294 Pre-buy the continuing availability of ICE tractors, and after five years on average
and low-buy impact fleet turnover, vehicles in all HD vehicle segments— for long-haul tractors. These operational
which can result in a level of emission provide strong, qualitative evidence that cost savings, and therefore the payback
reduction attributable to the new these impacts are unlikely to be of the higher upfront costs, will also
emission standards that is different from significant as a result of the final mitigate pre-buy to the extent they are
the level of emission reduction EPA standards. considered in the purchase decision.
estimated. Mode shift occurs if goods With respect to possible purchaser
i. Vehicle Sales and Fleet Turnover
that would normally be shipped by HD anxiety over being unable to purchase
vehicle are instead shipped by another The final emission standards may an ICE vehicle after promulgation of the
method (e.g., rail, boat, air) as a result lead to a change in the timing of regulation, we note that these final
of this action. Class shift occurs when planned vehicle purchases, phenomena standards do not mandate the
a vehicle purchaser decides to purchase known as ‘‘pre-buy’’ and ‘‘low-buy.’’ production or purchase of any particular
a different class of vehicle than Pre-buy occurs when purchasers of HD vehicle, or the use of any particular
originally intended due to the new vehicles pull their planned future
technology in such vehicles. As
regulation. For example, a purchaser vehicle purchase forward to the months
described in section C of the Executive
may buy a Class 8 vehicle instead of the before a regulation is implemented
Summary and preamble section II, we
Class 7 vehicle they may have compared to when they otherwise
model a potential compliance pathway
purchased in the absence of a would have purchased a new vehicle in
to meet the standards with a diverse mix
regulation. Domestic production could the absence of the regulation. Pre-buy
of ICE vehicle and ZEV technologies, as
be affected if the regulation creates may occur due to expected cost
well as additional example potential
incentives for manufacturers to shift increases of post-regulation vehicles, or
compliance pathways to meet the
between domestic and foreign in order to avoid perceived cost, quality,
standards that do not include increasing
production. or other changes associated with new
emission standards. Another reason pre- utilization of ZEV technologies. In
Based on our analysis of the
buy might occur is due to purchaser addition, the phasing-in of the standards
comments and available data, as well as
beliefs about the availability of their will allow ample time for purchasers to
our technical expertise in implementing
vehicle type of choice in the post- make decisions about their vehicle of
the HD GHG and other vehicle
regulation market. For example, if choice, and the potential compliance
emissions programs, EPA finds that the
purchasers think that they might not be pathway modeled for this rule reflects
above-described impacts are unlikely to
able to get the HD ICE vehicle they want that the majority of vehicles will remain
occur in a significant manner.
after the regulation is promulgated, they ICE vehicles, even in MY 2032.
Specifically, we expect that they will
may pre-buy an ICE vehicle.1295 While uncertainty about a new
either not occur at all, or if they do,
Our assessment, with respect to ZEV technology may trigger pre-buy as well,
occur in a limited way that will not
significantly affect the GHG emissions technologies included in our potential this could be mitigated by purchasers
reductions projected by this rule or that compliance pathway, is that the Federal being educated on the new technology
would unduly disrupt the HD vehicle vehicle and battery tax credits, and or increasing exposure to the new
market. Notably, while some EVSE tax credits for those purchasers technology. For example, education on
commenters speculated about the eligible for them, will mitigate possible the benefits of ZEV ownership and
possibility of these impacts, no pre-buy by reducing the perceived operational characteristics (for example,
commenter presented, and EPA is not purchase price or lifetime operational reduced operational costs, decreased
aware of, actual data and analysis cost difference of a new, post-rule ZEV exposure to exhaust emissions and
demonstrating that these impacts would compared to a new pre- or post-rule engine noise and smoother acceleration)
occur in a significant way in response comparable ICE vehicle. We also expect and on charging and hydrogen refueling
to this regulation. While there is some that the final rule’s more gradual phase- infrastructure technology and
analysis on these phenomena more in of more stringent standards compared availability may lead to less uncertainty
generally—for example on low-buy and to the proposal will mitigate possible about each of these technologies.1296
pre-buy in response to earlier HD pre-buy. In addition, as noted in section Our final standards may increase
purchaser exposure to ZEV

1294 See the EPA report ‘‘Analysis of Heavy-Duty 1295 We note that the HD TRUCS model used in
Vehicle Sales Impacts Due to New Regulation’’ at this rulemaking to analyze ZEV technologies 1296 For more information on purchaser
https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_pra_ matched performance capabilities of ZEVs to an acceptance of HD ZEVs, see RIA Chapter 6.2. For
view.cfm?dirEntryID=349838&Lab=OTAQ for a existing ICE vehicle for each use case where the more information on the charging and hydrogen
literature review and EPA analysis of pre-buy and ZEV vehicle technologies are technologically refueling infrastructure analysis in this rule, see
low-buy due to HD regulations. feasible. RIA Chapter 2.6.
270
Fmt 4701
technologies, as well as incentivize an increase in the cost of that earlier HD2027 rule. Thus, we would expect
manufacturers and dealers to educate model year. Some commenters also sales effects of this rule to be
HD vehicle purchasers on ZEVs, stated that EPA’s approach of not significantly different from those
including the benefits of ZEVs, thus estimating sales effects is inconsistent associated with the HD2027 rule or
accelerating the reduction of purchaser with both EPA’s light-duty rules, and other rules establishing standards to
risk aversion. We also expect recent the recently finalized HD2027 rule. reduce criteria pollutants.
congressional actions to support ZEV In response to the comment regarding At proposal, we discussed the
infrastructure and supply chain, more incremental measures than those analysis of EPA regulations on four
including the CHIPS Act, BIL and IRA, proposed, we point to preamble section recent HD regulations, which suggested
will reduce uncertainty surrounding II.F, where we explain that the that the range of possible pre-buy and
ZEV ownership.1297 We note again that standards for MYs 2027–2031 in the low-buy due to those rules includes no
the standards do not mandate the use of final rule are not as stringent as those pre-buy or low-buy due to EPA
a specific technology. proposed as they include a slower rules.1300 We also made it clear that,
In addition to pre-buy, there is the phase-in. While we made this change while it is instructive that the ERG
possibility of ‘‘low-buy’’ occurring in for the reasons stated in section II of the report found little to no pre-buy or low-
response to new regulation.1298 In a preamble and not due to any concerns buy effects due to our HD rules, the
low-buy scenario, sales of HD vehicles with pre-buy or low-buy, this approach to estimate a change in the
decrease in the months after a regulation nonetheless is responsive to the sales of HD vehicles before and after the
becomes effective, compared to what commenters’ request for a slower phase- promulgation of a rule due to the cost
would have happened in the absence of in. In addition, in response to this of that rule (as was done in the ERG
a regulation, due to purchasers either commenter and the commenter on costs, report) should not be used to estimate
pre-buying or delaying a planned the costs of complying with the rule are sales effects from this final rule because:
purchase. Low-buy may be directly lower on average than those estimated (1) most of the statistically significant
attributable to pre-buy, where purchases in the proposed rule. Also, the sales effects in the report were estimated
originally planned for the months estimated pathways of compliance with using data from criteria pollutant rules,
following the effective date of new the rule are associated with reduced which are not appropriate for use in
emission standards are instead fueling costs for both the vehicles with estimating effects from HD GHG rules
purchased in the months preceding the ICE technologies, and with ZEVs. ZEVs because differences in how costs are
effective date of the new emission are also expected to have lower incurred and benefits are accrued as a
standards. Low-buy may also be maintenance and repair costs than result of HD vehicle criteria pollutant
attributable to purchasers delaying the comparable ICE vehicles. These cost regulations versus HD GHG regulations
planned purchase of a new vehicle due savings will reduce the payback period may lead to differences in how HD
to the new emission standards, and may of such technologies that may be used vehicle buyers react to a particular
occur for reasons such as increased by manufacturers to comply with the regulation; 1301 (2) there was relatively
costs or uncertainty about the new rule. We expect that these cost savings more uncertainty in the net estimated
vehicles. We expect low-buy, to the will work toward mitigating possible price change from the 2014 GHG rule
extent that it might occur, to be pre-buy and increased demand for than in the criteria pollutant rules
mitigated under the same circumstances previous model year vehicles. because the performance-based GHG
described in this section for pre-buy. In response to commenters stating standards had many different
As noted in section 19.4 of the RTC that the qualitative discussion in the compliance pathways which led to both
for this rule, some commenters on the proposed rule is inconsistent with our capital cost increases as well as
proposed rule highlight the potential for approach to sales effects in light-duty reductions in operating costs through
this rule to lead to pre-buy, with one rules, as well as with the recently fuel savings. As such, the cost of the
commenter asserting that EPA should finalized HD2027 Low NOx final regulation could vary greatly across
finalize more incremental measures rule 1299 (HD2027 rule), we believe this firms and may have led to net cost
than those proposed in order to avoid rule is significantly different from those savings. This likely variation in net
dramatic increases in up-front vehicle rules such that we cannot apply the costs of the rule led to greater
costs and associated pre-buy. Another same kinds of quantitative analyses. uncertainty in the results of the report;
commenter stated that the cost of First, with respect to light-duty, the (3) the approach outlined in the report
complying with the proposal will lead light-duty market is a very different was estimated only using HD ICE
to a pre-buy, and an increase in demand market than the HD vehicle market, and vehicle data (e.g., cost of compliance
for the previous model year, leading to purchase decisions are made differently. due to adding HD ICE engine
LD consumer behavior includes technologies to a HD ICE engine)
1297 The CHIPS Act is the Creating Helpful different considerations than a HD because that was all that was available
Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science vehicle owner who purchases a vehicle
Act and was signed into law on August 9, 2022. It at the time of promulgation of the rules.
is designed to strengthen supply chains, domestic
to perform work (such as transport
manufacturing and national security. More passengers, deliver concrete, or move 1300 ‘‘Analysis of Heavy-Duty Vehicle Sales
information on how all of these Acts are expected freight). Therefore, the method of Impacts Due to New Regulation.’’ At https://
to support opportunities for growth along the analyses for estimating sales effects in cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_pra_
supply chain can be found in the January 2023 view.cfm?dirEntryID=349838&Lab=OTAQ.
White House publication ‘‘Building a Clean Energy
the LD market are not the same as those 1301 For example, the 2014 rule (‘Final Rule for
Economy: A Guidebook to the Inflation Reduction that should be used for effects in the HD Phase 1 Greenhouse House Emissions Standards
Act’s Investments in Clean Energy and Climate market. Second, the costs of GHG- and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and
Action.’’ found online at https://
reducing technologies are more than Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles’ found at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/ www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-
Inflation-Reduction-Act-Guidebook.pdf.
offset through operating savings, unlike
engines/final-rule-phase-1-greenhouse-gas-
1298 In comments, commenters referred to ‘‘no- the technologies associated with the emissions-standards) led to reductions in GHG
buy’’ as opposed to low-buy, however the concept emissions and had lower associated technology
is the same: the potential that vehicles that would 1299 ‘‘Control of Air Pollution from New Motor costs compared to the criteria pollutant rules, and
have been purchased after the new rule becomes Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle compliance with the GHG regulation was associated
effective will not be purchased for a length of time. Standards’’ 88 FR 4296, January 24, 2023. with fuel savings.
271
Fmt 4701
The modeled potential compliance the final emission standards. Under a only about 13 percent lower than in
pathway for this rule includes ZEV situation where low-buy matches pre- September of the previous year.1305
technologies, which associated EVSE buy, we would also expect lower
ii. Mode Shift
infrastructure, and the possible impacts emission reductions than estimated, and
of such are not represented in the emission reductions would likely be Mode shift would occur if goods
results of the report. For these reasons, somewhere between the two relative normally shipped by HD vehicle are
we are not using the method in the ERG pre-buy/low-buy scenarios discussed in instead shipped by another method
report to estimate sales effects due to this paragraph. For more information on (e.g., rail, boat, air) as a result of this
this rule. For more discussion on sales impacts, see Chapter 6.1.1 of the action. Whether shippers switch to a
comments, and our response to RIA. different mode of transportation for
comments, related to sales effect of this freight depends not only on the cost per
rule, see RTC section 19.4. Although, as commenters mentioned, mile of the shipment (i.e., freight rate),
This rulemaking is expected to lead to the increased purchase price due to this but also the value of the shipment, the
reductions in emissions across the HD rule could potentially lead to pre-buy speed of transport needed for shipment
vehicle fleet (see section V of this and/or low-buy, pre- or low-buy is (for example, for non-durable goods),
preamble), though such reductions are unlikely to occur in a significant and the availability of supporting
expected to happen gradually as the HD manner. Specifically, we expect that infrastructure (e.g., rail lines, highways,
fleet turns over. This is because the they will either not occur at all, or if waterways). Shifting from HD vehicles
fraction of the total HD vehicle fleet that they do, occur in a limited way that will to other modes of transportation may
are new, compliant vehicles will not significantly affect the GHG occur if the cost of shipping goods by
initially be a small portion of the entire emissions reductions projected by this HD vehicles increases relative to other
HD market. As more vehicles compliant rule or that would unduly disrupt the modes of transport in cases where there
with this rule are sold, and as older HD HD vehicle market. This is due, in part, is another mode of transport available
vehicles are retired, greater emission to the operating cost savings we that can meet the required timing.
reductions are expected to accumulate. estimate will be achieved in complying Though we are unable to estimate what
The emission reductions attributable to with this rule. For the modeled effect this rule might have on shipping
each HD segment that will be affected compliance pathway for this rule, that costs, in part because we are not able to
by this rule will depend on many cost savings are expected to wholly estimate how a change in upfront
factors, including the rate of purchase of offset the increased upfront purchase vehicle costs affects shipping rates, or
compliant vehicles in each market cost for ZEVs, which leads to payback how much of a change in operational
segment over time and the proportion of periods of between two and five years. costs is passed through to the shipping
those vehicles that utilize each of the This is also supported by the analyses rates, we do estimate that, under the
mix of technologies under the of previously promulgated EPA HD potential compliance pathway projected
compliance pathways manufacturers emission standards, which indicate that for this rule, average net upfront costs
choose. In addition, if pre-buy or low- where pre-buy or low-buy has been are paid back in five years or less for the
buy occurs as a result of this seen, the magnitude of these vehicle groups affected by this rule, and
rulemaking, emission reductions will be phenomena has been small.1303 Lastly, these vehicles are expected to
smaller than anticipated. Under pre-buy it should be noted that many studies experience reduced operational costs.
conditions, fleets would, on average, be estimating how large or expensive Chapter 3.3 of the RIA and section IV.D
comprised of newer model year purchases are made, including that of of this preamble discuss the estimated
vehicles. Though these new vehicles are HD vehicles, indicate purchase decrease in operational costs of this
expected to have lower emissions than decisions are heavily influenced by rule, mainly due to the increase in the
the vehicles they are replacing, emission macroeconomic factors unrelated to share of ZEVs in the on-road HD fleet
reductions could still be lower than we regulations, such as interest rates, under the modeled potential
estimate will be achieved as a result of economic activity, and the general state compliance pathway. But the same is
the final emission standards. Under of the economy.1304 For example, true for ICE vehicles that meet the Phase
low-buy, we expect older, more 3 emission standards, using other
according to the Economic Research
polluting, HD vehicles to remain in use potential compliance pathways. The
Division of the Federal Reserve, retail
longer than they otherwise would in the vehicles that comply with this rule are
sales of heavy weight trucks sales fell
absence of new regulation. If pre-buy is
dramatically between September of expected to have positive total costs of
smaller than low-buy, to the extent both
2019 and May of 2020 (about 46 percent ownership over both five- and ten-year
might occur, this would lead to a slower
fewer sales), likely in great part due to time horizons and thus we do not
fleet turnover, at least in the short
the COVID–19 pandemic, and they expect a significant increase in shipping
term.1302 Conversely, if pre-buy is larger
rebounded through May of 2021 to be rates and therefore we do not project
than low-buy, short-term fleet turnover
mode shifts as a likely outcome of this
would increase and fleets would, on
1303 For example, Lam and Bausell (2007), regulation.1306 Furthermore, no
average, be comprised of newer model
Rittenhouse and Zaragoza-Watkins (2018), and an commenter suggested that mode shift
year vehicles, and though emission unpublished report by Harrison and LeBel (2008). was a reasonable outcome of our
reductions would be expected to be For EPA’s summary on these studies, see the EPA
larger than under a scenario where low- peer review report ‘‘Analysis of Heavy-Duty Vehicle
proposed standards.1307 For more
buy exceeds pre-buy, emission Sales Impacts Due to New Regulation.’’ at https://
1305 The graph of monthly, seasonally adjusted
cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_pra_
reductions would still be lower than we view.cfm?dirEntryID=349838&Lab=OTAQ, in the heavy weight truck sales from the Bureau of
estimate will be achieved as a result of docket for this rule. Economic Analysis can be found at: https://
1304 See the literature review found in the ERG fred.stlouisfed.org/series/HTRUCKSSAAR.

1306 If manufacturers comply by adding
1302 Fleet turnover refers to the pace at which new report mentioned earlier in this section, ‘‘Analysis
vehicles are purchased and older vehicles are of Heavy-Duty Vehicle Sales Impacts Due to New technology to ICE vehicles, we also expect to see
retired. A slower fleet turnover means older Regulation.’’ Found at https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_ reduced operational costs through reduced fuel
vehicles are kept on the road longer, and the fleet public_pra_ consumption.
is older on average. A faster fleet turnover means view.cfm?dirEntryID=349838&Lab=OTAQ for more 1307 We note that a study published by Argonne
that the fleet is younger, on average. information. National Laboratory in 2017 indicates that if mode
272
Fmt 4701
information on mode shift, see Chapter consistent payload under increased purchasers in the modeled compliance
6.1.2 of the RIA. vehicle weight due to the weight of a pathway for this final rule do not lead
battery. EMA commented that this may to situations where the cost to purchase
iii. Class Shift
lead to driver shortages if vehicles a heavier class of vehicle becomes lower
Class shift would occur if purchasers shifted from Class 6 to Class 7, for than the cost to purchase a lighter
shift their vehicle purchase from one example due to increased driver class.1308 In addition, the average
class of vehicle to another class of requirements, and will lead to increased payback period for the technologies in
vehicle due to impacts of the rule on costs, for example due to increased the modeled potential compliance
vehicle attributes, including driver pay or the need to pay excise pathway for all of the classes of vehicles
performance and relative costs, among taxes if a vehicle shifts from Class 7 to are within the first ownership period,
vehicle types that could practically be Class 8. and our analysis shows a positive total
switched. Heavy-duty vehicles are As described in section II.D.3 of the cost of ownership over a five year time
typically configured and purchased to preamble, we account for differences in horizon.
perform a function. For example, a vehicle uses and payload capacity in HD In summary, we expect very little
concrete mixer truck is purchased to TRUCS, a tool we developed to for this class shifting, if any, to occur. However,
transport concrete, a combination rule to evaluate ZEV technologies. Our if a limited amount of shifting were to
tractor is purchased to move freight HD TRUCS analysis was then occur, we expect negligible emission
with the use of a trailer, and a Class 4 incorporated in in our consideration of impacts (compared to those emission
box truck could be purchased to make possible compliance pathways to reductions estimated to occur as a result
deliveries. The purchaser makes support the feasibility of the final of the emission standards).
decisions based on many attributes of standards. In the modeled potential
the vehicle, including the gross vehicle compliance pathway, we estimate the iv. Domestic Production
weight rating, which in part determines new vehicles produced and sold These emission standards are not
the amount of freight or equipment that compliant with the rule, including expected to provide incentives for
can be carried. If the Phase 3 standards ZEVs, are able to perform the same manufacturers to shift between domestic
impact either the performance or cost of function as vehicles produced without and foreign production. This is because
a vehicle relative to the other vehicle the rule in place. For example, BEV the emission standards apply to vehicles
classes, then purchasers may choose to technologies were not included within sold in the United States regardless of
purchase a different vehicle, resulting in the potential compliance pathway in where such vehicles are produced. If
the unintended consequence of situations where the performance needs foreign manufacturers already have
increased fuel consumption or GHG of a BEV would result in a battery that increased expertise in satisfying the
emissions in-use. was too large or heavy due to the impact requirements of the emission standards,
A purchaser in need of a specific on payload and potential work there may be some initial incentive for
vocational vehicle, such as a bus, box accomplished relative to a comparable foreign production. However, given
truck or street sweeper, would not be ICE vehicle. We assess the incremental increasing global interest in reducing
able to shift the purchase to a vehicle weight increase or decrease of ZEVs vehicle emissions, specifically through
with a less stringent emission standard compared to ICE vehicles in RIA the use of ZEV technologies, as
(such as the optional custom chassis Chapter 2.9.1. Also, it should be noted domestic manufacturers produce
standards for emergency vehicles, that for this final rule, we projected vehicles with reduced emissions,
recreational vehicles, or mixed use multiple pathways to compliance, including ZEVs, the opportunity for
(nonroad) type vehicles) and still meet including pathways that did not project domestic manufacturers to sell in other
their needs. The purchaser makes an increase in ZEV penetration. markets might increase. To the extent
decisions based on many attributes of Furthermore, although there are that the emission standards might lead
the vehicle, including the gross vehicle possible pathways that include reduced to application and use of technologies
weight rating or gross combined weight ZEV penetration compared to the that other countries may seek now or in
rating of the vehicle, which in part modeled potential compliance pathway the future, developing this capacity for
determines the amount of freight or estimated in the analysis for this rule, domestic producers now may provide
equipment that can be carried. Due to there may also be greater ZEV some additional ability to serve those
penetration in one or more vehicle markets. In addition, this rule and
this, it is not likely feasible for
classes than we estimate in the modeled Federal actions including the IRA and
purchasers to switch to other vehicle
potential compliance pathway. BIL support the U.S. in our efforts to
classes simply due to the emission Class shift could also occur if one
standards. remain competitive on a global scale by
class of vehicle becomes significantly
In the proposed rule, we requested encouraging and supporting the
more expensive relative to another class
comment on data or methods to estimate expansion of and investment in
of vehicle due to the technology and
the effect the emission standards might domestic manufacturing of ZEV
operating costs associated with the new
have on class shifting. Though we did technologies, supply chains, charging
emission standards. We expect class
not receive comment on data or infrastructure and other industries
shifting, if it does occur, to be very
methods, we did receive comment on limited because this rule applies new related to green transportation
possible class shifting, due to the emission standards to all HD vehicle technology.
differences between an ICE vehicle and As discussed in section B of the
classes, as described in preamble
its corresponding ZEV counterpart. section II. Furthermore, typically the Executive Summary and RIA Chapter 1,
EMA commented that ZEVs will require purchase cost of heavy-duty vehicles the IRA contains tax credit incentives.
increased axle-capacity directly due to increases with the class of the vehicle. The tax credit for the production and
increased vehicle weight, or to ensure In other words, a light heavy-duty box sale of battery cells and modules 1309 is
truck typically costs less to purchase 1308 See
shift were to occur as a result of this rule, it would preamble section II.F.2.ii.
likely result in further decreasing transportation
and operate than a heavy heavy-duty 1309 Thetax credit (45X) is for up to $45 per
GHG emissions and upstream energy usage. https:// box truck. The projected incremental kilowatt-hour (kWh), and for 10 percent of the cost
publications.anl.gov/anlpubs/2017/08/137467.pdf. upfront and operating costs to Continued
273
Fmt 4701
conditioned on such components or for which we project ZEV adoption for exists, causing split incentives.1315 In
minerals being produced in the United MY 2032 have an average payback this section we discuss these potential
States and, thus, is designed to period of between two and five years, issues that may impact the adoption of
encourage such domestic depending on the regulatory group, technologies like HD ZEVs, as well as
production.1310 Our cost analysis when compared to a comparable ICE factors (like this final rule) that may
reflects that in our modeled potential vehicle, even after considering the mitigate them. We expect these final
compliance pathway we project an upfront purchaser and operating costs of Phase 3 standards as well as other
increasing percentage of the batteries the associated EVSE. See sections II and factors we discuss will help overcome
used in HD BEVs will be eligible for the IV of this preamble and Chapters 2 and such barriers by incentivizing the
up to $45/kwh tax credit beginning in 3 of the RIA for more information on the development of technologies and
MY 2027 through MY 2032, in addition estimated costs of this rule. supporting infrastructure that reduce
to consideration of the other tax Businesses that operate HD vehicles operating costs and total cost of
incentives that apply to vehicle and are under competitive pressure to ownership, like ZEV technologies, and
EVSE purchasers, as described in reduce operating costs, which should reduce uncertainties for HD vehicle
section IV and RIA Chapter 3. For more encourage purchasers to identify and purchasers on such technologies’
information on comments received on rapidly adopt new vehicle technologies benefits and other potential concerns.
possible impacts to domestic production that reduce operating costs. As outlays Additionally, the final rule also sends a
of HD vehicles or components, and our for labor and fuel generally constitute signal to electric utilities of demand
responses, see the RTC section 19. the two largest shares of HD vehicle under the potential compliance
operating costs, depending on the price pathway, and thus provides support
2. Purchaser Acceptance of fuel, distance traveled, type of HD justifying buildout of electrification
In the modeled potential compliance vehicle, and commodity transported (if infrastructure.
pathway for the final rule, we project an any), businesses that operate HD The availability of existing incentives,
increase in the adoption of HD BEVs vehicles face strong incentives to reduce including the Federal purchaser (vehicle
and FCEVs for most of the HD vehicle these costs.1313 1314 Potential savings in and EVSE) and battery manufacturing
types for MYs 2027 and beyond (see operating costs appear to offer strong tax credits in the IRA, is expected to
preamble section II or the RIA Chapter incentives for HD vehicle buyers to pay lead to lower upfront costs for
2 for details).1311 As explained in higher upfront costs for vehicles that purchasers of HD ZEVs than would
section IV and Chapter 3 of the RIA, reduce operating costs, such as HD otherwise occur.1316 We expect this will
though we estimate this rule will be ZEVs. Economic theory suggests that a impact ZEV adoption rates by
associated with higher upfront vehicle normally functioning competitive purchasers taking advantage of existing
costs for some vehicles, these costs are market would lead HD vehicle buyers to incentives to lower the upfront costs of
expected to be mitigated by operating want to purchase, and HD vehicle purchasing HD ZEVs (including depot
costs savings. As explained in preamble manufacturers to incorporate, EVSE), which would result in higher
section II and RIA Chapter 2, under the technologies that contribute to lower net ZEV adoption rates than would
modeled potential compliance pathway, costs. otherwise exist absent such incentives,
although some HD ZEVs produced and In RIA Chapter 6.2, we discuss the and so counteract the energy efficiency
sold in response to this rule have higher possibility that an ‘‘energy efficiency gap for purchasers under the modeled
incremental upfront purchaser vehicle gap’’ or ‘‘energy paradox’’ has existed, potential compliance pathway for
cost difference between a ZEV and a where available technologies that would manufacturers.
comparable ICE vehicle (or higher reduce the total cost of ownership for In addition, as purchasers consider
incremental upfront purchaser cost the vehicle (when evaluated over their more of the operational cost savings of,
difference when including expected lifetimes using conventional for example, a ZEV over a comparable
consideration of EVSE, as applicable), discount rates) have not been widely ICE vehicle in their purchase decision,
our cost analysis shows that this adopted, or the adoption is relatively the smaller the impact the higher
incremental upfront purchaser cost slow, despite their potential to repay upfront costs for purchasers have on
difference will be partially or fully offset buyers’ initial investments rapidly. The that decision, and purchasers are more
by a combination of the Federal vehicle energy efficiency gap may exist due to likely to purchase (in this example, a
tax credit and battery tax credit (and constraints on access to capital for ZEV). However, for this example,
EVSE tax credit, as applicable) for HD investment, imperfect or asymmetrical uncertainty about ZEV technology,
ZEVs that are available through MY information about the new technology, charging infrastructure technology and
2032, and further offset over time uncertainty about supporting availability for BEVs, hydrogen
through operational savings.1312 Our infrastructure, uncertainty about the refueling infrastructure for FCEVs, or
analysis shows that, in our modeled resale market, and first-mover uncertainty about future fuel and
compliance pathway, the vehicle types disadvantages for manufacturers. For electricity prices may affect purchaser
example, purchasers may not consider consideration of operational cost
of producing applicable critical minerals (including
the full, or even a portion of, the value savings of ZEVs.1317 Other areas of
those found in batteries and fuel cells, provided of operational cost savings, due to
that the minerals meet certain specifications). uncertainty, such as uncertainty about 1315 A principal-agent problem happens when
1310 Note that the 30C charger credit has a
future fuel prices, or purchaser there is a conflict in priorities (split incentives)
requirement that eligible chargers must be installed uncertainty about the technology itself. between a ‘‘principal,’’ or the owner of an asset, and
in certain census tracts. an ‘‘agent,’’ or the person to whom control of the
1311 We again note that manufacturers may choose
Another example of when this may asset has been delegated, such as a manager or HD
any compliance pathway that meets the final occur is if a principal-agent problem vehicle operator.
standards, including pathways that do not use ZEV 1316 Note that the incentives exist in the reference
technologies, and thus we note that ZEVs may not 1313 American Transportation Research Institute, scenario and under the scenario analyzed with our
be purchased at the rates estimated in the modeled An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking, final standards.
potential compliance pathway analyzed for this September 2013. Docket ID: EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 1317 We provide an assessment of charging
rule. 0827–0512. infrastructure and the electric generation,
1312 For more information on the Federal tax 1314 Transport Canada, Operating Cost of Trucks, transmission and distribution in preamble section
credits, see section ES.B of this preamble. 2005. Docket ID: EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0827–0070. II.
274
Fmt 4701
uncertainty include purchasers’ weigh characteristics more associated In our modeled potential compliance
impressions of BEV charging and FCEV with ICE vehicles greater than those pathway that supports the feasibility of
fueling infrastructure support and associated with ZEV vehicles in a the standards, we account for and
availability, perceptions of the manner different than represented in the consider willingness to purchase
comparisons of quality and durability of analysis of the modeled compliance considerations in several ways (and,
different BEV powertrains, and resale pathway for this rule. The possibility of correspondingly, impacts on HD ZEV
value of the vehicle. We acknowledge a principal-agent problem could be adoption included in the modeled
that uncertainties, including those mitigated through measures that cause potential compliance pathway). This
regarding infrastructure, could affect an alignment of interests between the includes considering uncertainty about
manufacturer compliance strategies, and principal and the agent, for example, vehicle weight, component (e.g., battery)
could lead to compliance strategy measures that lead to sharing of the sizing, infrastructure availability,
decisions involving fewer ZEVs than we benefits and/or costs that may cause the upfront purchaser costs, and payback
project in our modeled potential issue. While this is a theoretical issue, for purchasers, as well as including
compliance pathway. EPA is not aware of any data or analysis limitations in our analysis to phase in
As discussed in detail in RIA Chapter persuasively demonstrating if the the final standards to provide additional
2.6 and 2.10.3, EPA has carefully principal-agent problem significantly time and a slower pace of adjustment in
analyzed the infrastructure needs and affects HD vehicle purchases generally, early model years. For example, our HD
costs to support the modeled potential or specifically with respect to HD ZEV TRUCS analysis applies oversize factors
compliance pathway’s technology purchases. However, we note that, given for batteries to account for temperature
packages that support the MY 2027– the commercial nature of how HD effects, potential battery degradation
2032 standards. Additionally, as vehicles are used and the need to and more; we sized most batteries for
purchasers learn more about ZEV minimize costs in competitive business the 90th percentile of estimated
technologies, and as the penetration of environments, we think it is reasonable, VMT; 1318 and we sized EVSE such that
the technologies and supporting absent empirical evidence to the vehicles’ batteries could be fully
infrastructure in the market increases, contrary, to conclude that truck recharged during the dwell time
the exposure to ZEV technologies in the purchasers are very unlikely to ignore available to specific vehicle
real world will reduce uncertainty the significant operational cost savings applications. In addition, in our HD
related to viability or durability of the associated with HD ZEVs. TRUCS analysis we cap the ZEV
vehicles and the availability of EPA recognizes that there is adoption rate for each vehicle type to be
supporting infrastructure. And though uncertainty related to technologies that no more than 70 percent for MY 2032
increasing penetration of HD ZEVs is manufacturers may adopt in their and no more than 20 percent in MY
projected to continue to happen compliance strategies for this final rule, 2027. For more detail on the constraints
regardless of the standards, as explained like ZEVs, that may impact the adoption we considered and included, see
in our reference case, these standards of new technology even though it preamble sections II.D, II.E, and II.F. In
are expected to help accelerate the reduces operating costs. Markets for the HD TRUCS analysis, we developed
process, incentivizing manufacturers to both new and used HD vehicles may a method to include consideration of
educate purchasers on the benefits of face these problems, although it is payback in assessing adoption rates of
their compliance strategy technologies, difficult to assess empirically the degree BEVs and FCEVs for the modeled
like HD ZEVs. We note that, as to which they do. We expect these final potential compliance pathway after
explained in preamble section II.B.2.iii, Phase 3 standards will help overcome considering methods in the
EPA, in consultation with other such barriers by incentivizing the literature.1319 Our payback curve, and
agencies, has committed to engage with development and deployment of methods considered and explored in the
stakeholders to monitor compliance and technologies that reduced HD vehicle formulation of the method used in this
major elements related to HD ZEV emissions, including ZEV technologies, rule, are described in RIA Chapter 2.7.
infrastructure, and to issue periodic and the development of supporting As stated there, given information
reports reflecting this collected infrastructure, as well as the education currently available, and our experience
information in the lead up to these of HD vehicle purchasers on the benefits with the HD vehicle industry, payback
standards. These actions will also of reduced emission technology and period is the most relevant metric to the
increase purchaser awareness and about ZEV infrastructure. HD vehicle industry.1320 The payback
reduce uncertainty. In the proposed rule, we requested schedule caps used in our model are
A principal-agent problem could exist comment and data on acceptance of HD lower in MY 2027 compared to MY
if truck operators (agents) and truck ZEVs. Though we did not receive any 2032 to recognize additional time for the
purchasers who are not also operators data, we did receive many comments on
(principals) value characteristics of the ZEV acceptance and adoption, 1318 For the final rule, we sized batteries in BEVs
trucks under purchase consideration including assertions that the proposed that we expect to be charged en-route using public
differently (split incentives) which rule would lead to reduced choice at the charging starting in MY 2030 at the 50th percentile
could lead to differences in purchase dealership because there will be fewer daily VMT. For the longest range day cabs and
sleeper cabs, on days when these vehicles are
decisions between truck operators and ICE vehicle models available to choose required to travel longer distances, we find that less
truck purchasers. Characteristics may from, and that total ownership cost and than 30 minutes of mid-day charging at 1 MW is
include physical characteristics (for return on investment for HD ZEVs is sufficient to meet the HD TRUCS 90th percentile
example noise, vibration or difficult to predict, in part because ZEVs VMT assuming vehicles start the day with a full
battery.
acceleration), cost characteristics (for are so new. Other commenters were in 1319 Adoption rates estimated in HD TRUCS are
example operational costs, purchase support of greater ZEV adoption, stating one of several factors considered in determining the
prices, or cost of EVSE installation), or that the benefits of ZEVs, including appropriate level of the standards. These estimated
other characteristics (for example their overall cost, driver appreciation, adoption rates in HD TRUCS demonstrate that the
availability of EVSE infrastructure). and sustainability, are drivers for adoption rates in our modeled potential compliance
pathway are all feasible.
Such potential split incentives, or adoption. Further detail regarding these 1320 Our assessment of total cost of ownership,
market failures, could, for example, comments and our responses is in RTC shown in RIA Chapter 2.12, further supports our
impact HD ZEV adoption rates if agents section 19.5. assessment of payback periods.
275
Fmt 4701
ZEV technology and infrastructure to and even under the modeled potential rebound has increased over time.1323
mature. Fleet owners and drivers will compliance pathway the majority of This is slightly smaller than the value
have had more exposure to ZEV new vehicles are projected to be ICE found by Leard et al. (2015) for the
technology in 2032 compared to 2027, vehicles, we expect that fleets and similar sector of tractors.
which may work to alleviate concerns purchasers will be able to purchase the With respect to ZEVs specifically, we
related to ZEVs (for example, concerns vehicle that works best for them given do not have data that operational cost
of reliability) and result in a lower their circumstances. For fleets and savings of switching from an ICE vehicle
impression of risk of these newer purchasers, purchase decisions may to a ZEV will affect the VMT driven of
technologies. In addition, infrastructure include choosing a vehicle to comply that vehicle, nor do we have data on
to support ZEV technologies will have with state or local policies as well as how changing fuel prices might affect
had more time to expand and mature, this rule, or choosing a vehicle that VMT of ZEVs over time. Given the
further supporting increased HD ZEV improves driver retention due to its increasing penetration of ZEVs in the
adoption rates. characteristics. As noted, the final rule HD fleet even in the reference case, as
In summary, EPA recognizes that also sends a signal to electric utilities of explained in preamble section V, as well
businesses that operate HD vehicles are demand under the modeled potential as the wide range of effects discussed in
under competitive pressure to reduce compliance pathway, and thus provides the literature, we do not believe the
operating costs, which should support justifying buildout of rebound estimates in literature cited
encourage HD vehicle buyers to identify electrification infrastructure. As here are appropriate for use in our
and rapidly adopt cost-effective explained in section VI.E.1, the ability analysis. In addition, the majority of
technologies that reduce operating costs for manufacturers to comply through research on VMT rebound has been
and the total cost of ownership. Outlays various compliance pathways is also performed in the light-duty vehicle
for labor and fuel generally constitute expected to reduce the likelihood of pre- context. The factors influencing light-
the two largest shares of HD vehicle or low-buy that could potentially be duty and heavy-duty VMT are generally
operating costs, depending on the price associated with this rule. different. For example, light-duty VMT
of fuel, distance traveled, type of HD is generally related to personal
vehicle, and commodity transported (if 3. VMT Rebound
considerations, including costs and
any), so businesses that operate HD Historically, the ‘‘rebound effect’’ has benefits associated with driving, while
vehicles face strong incentives to reduce been interpreted as more intensive HD VMT is more a function of profits
these costs. However, EPA also vehicle use, resulting in an increase in or impacts on labor. It is also important
recognizes that there is uncertainty liquid fuel in response to increased ICE to note that even if there is an increase
related to technologies that vehicle fuel efficiency. Although much in VMT in new vehicles, this may be
manufacturers may adopt in their of this possible vehicle use increase is offset by a decrease in VMT on older
compliance strategies for this final rule, likely to take the form of an increase in vehicles. This may occur if operational
like ZEVs, that may impact the adoption the number of miles vehicles are driven, cost savings on newer vehicles due to
of these technologies even though they it can also take the form of an increase this rule lead operators to shift VMT to
reduce operating costs. Markets for both in the loaded operating weight of a these newer, more efficient vehicles.
new and used HD vehicles may face vehicle or altering routes and schedules If rebound rates are positive, we
these problems, although it is difficult in response to improved fuel efficiency. would assume that higher rebound rates
to assess empirically the degree to More intensive use of those HD ICE are associated with larger responses to
which they do. As explained in this vehicles consumes fuel and generates a change in the cost per mile of travel,
section and RIA Chapter 6.2, we expect emissions, which reduces the fuel which could result in some increase in
these final Phase 3 standards as well as savings and avoided emissions that non-GHG emissions and in brake and
other factors we discussed will help would otherwise be expected to result tire wear, but also an increase in
overcome such barriers by incentivizing from increasing fuel efficiency of HD benefits associated with increased
the development of technologies and ICE vehicles. vehicle use (for example, increased
supporting infrastructure that reduce Unlike the LD vehicle rebound effect, economic activity associated with the
operating costs and total cost of there is little published literature on the services provided by those vehicles), as
ownership, like ZEV technologies, and HD vehicle rebound effect, and all of it well as positive impacts on
reduce uncertainties for HD vehicle focuses on the rebound effect due to employment. However, lower rebound
purchasers on such technologies’ increased ICE fuel efficiency. Winebrake rates may happen if owner/operators
benefits and other potential concerns. et al. (2012) suggest that vocational use those cost savings in other ways, for
As explained in section II of the trucks and tractor trailers have a example, to reduce their payback
preamble, under the modeled potential rebound effect of essentially zero.1321 period. Also, as noted in the Winebrake
compliance pathway the majority of Leard et al. (2015) estimate that tractor at al. (2012) study, possible rebound
new vehicles are projected to be ICE trailers have a rebound effect of 30 impacts are likely reduced by
vehicles. Additionally, in this final rule, percent, while vocational vehicles have adjustments in other operational costs
we emphasize that manufacturers have a 10 percent rebound rate.1322 Patwary
flexibility to choose among various such as labor, and the nature of the
et al. (2021) estimated that the average freight industry as an input to a larger
compliance pathways to meet the rebound effect of the U.S. road freight
standards that can include a mix of HD supply chain system. As in the
sector is between about 7 to 9 percent, proposal, we are not estimating any
vehicle technologies; we analyzed a although their study indicated that
modeled potential compliance pathway VMT rebound due to this rule (88 FR
to support the feasibility of the final 26072). Comments received on this
1321 Winebrake, J.J., Green, E.H., Comer, B.,
standards, and we also provided Corbett, J.J., Froman, S., 2012. Estimating the direct
issue, and our response to them, can be
additional example potential rebound effect for on-road freight transportation. found in RTC section 19.2.
compliance pathways that utilizes only Energy Policy 48, 252–259.
1322 Leard, B., Linn, J., McConnell, V., and Raich, 1323 Patwary, A.L., Yu, T.E., English, B.C.,
vehicles with ICE technologies relative W. (2015). Fuel Costs, Economic Activity, and the Hughes, D.W., and Cho, S.H. (2021). Estimating the
to the reference case. Because there are Rebound Effect for Heavy-Duty Trucks. Resources rebound effect of the US road freight transport.
multiple ways to comply with this rule, For the Future Discussion Paper, 14–43. Transportation Research Record, 2675(6), 165–174.
276
Fmt 4701
4. Employment Impacts manufacturing employed about 4.8 charging infrastructure, and vehicle
Economic theories of labor demand employees per million dollars in sales, manufacturing, both in the LD and HD
indicate that employers affected by falling to just under 3.7 employees per markets.1329 This investment includes
environmental regulation may change million dollars in sales in 2022. In the the BIL, the CHIPS Act,1330 and the IRA,
their demand for different types of labor electrical equipment manufacturing which are expected to create domestic
in different ways, increasing demand for sector, which is involved in the employment opportunities along the full
some types, decreasing demand for production of components that go in to automotive sector supply chain, from
other types, or not changing it at all for BEVs and the battery electric portion of components and equipment
still other types. A variety of conditions PHEVS, employment has increased over manufacturing and processing to final
can affect employment impacts of the last fifteen years, rising from about assembly, as well as incentivize the
environmental regulation, including 3.3 employees per million dollars in development of reliable EV battery
baseline labor market conditions and sales in 2007 to about 4.1 employees per supply chains, both for BEVs and
employer and worker characteristics million dollars in sales in 2022. PHEVs.1331 For example, the IRA is
such as industry and region. A growing The International Union, United expected to impact domestic
body of literature has examined Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural employment through conditions on
employment effects of environmental Implement Workers of America (UAW) eligibility for purchase incentives and
regulation. Morgenstern et al. has stated that re-training programs will battery manufacturing incentives. These
decompose the labor consequences in a be needed to support auto workers in a conditions include contingencies for
regulated industry facing increased market with an increasing share of domestic assembly, domestic critical
abatement costs.1324 This study electric vehicles in order to prepare minerals production, and domestic
identifies three separate components of workers that might be displaced by the battery manufacturing. As an example, a
labor demand effects. First, there is a shift to the new technology.1326 In new joint venture between Daimler
demand effect caused by higher comments on the proposed rule, the Trucks, Cummins, and PACCAR
production costs, which in turn, results UAW stated support for emission recently announced a new battery
in increased market prices. Increased reductions, though they also indicated a factory to be built in the U.S. to
market prices reduce consumption (and slower phase in of ZEVs into the market manufacture cells and packs initially
production), thereby reducing demand than that projected in the proposal focusing on heavy-duty and industrial
for labor within the regulated industry. would better support employees in auto applications was announced in
Second, there is a cost effect. As manufacturing and supporting September 2023.1332 The BlueGreen
production costs increase, industries. Volkswagen has stated that Alliance and the Political Economy
manufacturing plants use more of all labor requirements for ICE vehicles are Research Institute estimate that IRA will
inputs, including labor, to produce the about 70 percent higher than their create over 9 million jobs over the next
same level of output. Third, there is a electric counterpart, but these changes decade, with about 400,000 of those jobs
factor-shift effect, which occurs when in employment intensities in the being attributed directly to the battery
post-regulation production technologies manufacturing of the vehicles can be and fuel cell vehicle provisions in the
may have different labor intensities than offset by shifting to the production of act.1333 As discussed in RTC section
new components, for example batteries
pre-regulation production
or battery cells.1327 Climate Nexus has 1329 See preamble section I for information on the
technologies.1325 BIL and IRA provisions relevant to vehicle
Due to a lack of data, we are not able indicated that increasing penetrations of
electrification, and the associated infrastructure.
to estimate employment effects from electric vehicles will lead to a net 1330 The CHIPS Act is the Creating Helpful
this rule. The overall effect of the rule increase in jobs, a claim that is partially Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science
on employment in the heavy-duty supported by the rising investment in Act and was signed into lay on August 9, 2022. It
vehicle manufacturing sector depends batteries, vehicle manufacturing and is designed to strengthen supply chains, domestic
charging stations.1328 Though most of manufacturing and national security. More
on the relative magnitude of factor-shift, information can be found at https://
cost, and demand effects, as well as these statements are specifically www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-
possible differences in employment referring to light-duty vehicles, they releases/2022/08/09/fact-sheet-chips-and-science-
related to HD ICE and ZEV hold true for the HD market as well. act-will-lower-costs-create-jobs-strengthen-supply-
The expected investment mentioned chains-and-counter-china/.
manufacturing under the potential 1331 More information on how these acts are
by Climate Nexus is also supported by
compliance pathway. A market shift to expected to aid employment growth and create
recent Federal investment which will opportunities for growth along the supply chain can
HD ZEVs will lead to a shift in
allow for increased investment along the be found in the January, 2023 White House
employment needs as well. In Chapter publication ‘‘Building a Clean Energy Economy: A
vehicle supply chain, including
6.4.2 of the RIA, we show that the Guidebook to the Inflation Reduction Act’s
domestic battery manufacturing,
amount of labor per million dollars in Investments in Clean Energy and Climate Action.’’
found online at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
sales in motor vehicle manufacturing 1326 More information on UAW’s comments can content/uploads/2022/12/Inflation-Reduction-Act-
sectors has generally declined over the be found in the white paper ‘‘Making EVs work for Guidebook.pdf.
last fifteen years, indicating that fewer American workers’’ found at https://uaw.org/wp- 1332 Daimler Trucks North America. ‘‘Accelera by
people have been needed to produce the content/uploads/2019/07/190416-EV-White-Paper- Cummins, Daimler Truck and PACCAR form a joint
REVISED-January-2020-Final.pdf. venture to advance battery cell production in the
same value of goods. For example, in 1327 Herrmann, F., Beinhauer, W., Borrmann, D., United States.’’ September 6, 2023. Available
2008, motor vehicle body and trailer Hertwig, M., Mack, J., Potinecke, T., Praeg, C., Rally, online: https://media.daimlertruck.com/
P. 2020. Effects of Electric Mobility and marsMediaSite/en/instance/ko/Accelera-by-
1324 Morgenstern, R.D.; Pizer, W.A.; and Shih, J.- Digitalisation on the Quality and Quantity of Cummins-Daimler-Truck-and-PACCAR-form-a-
S. ‘‘Jobs Versus the Environment: An Industry-Level Employment at Volkswagen. Fraunhofer Institute joint-venture-to-advance-battery-cell-production-in-
Perspective.’’ Journal of Environmental Economics for Industrial Engineering IAO. Study on behalf of the-United-States.xhtml?oid=52385590 (last
and Management 43: 412–436. 2002. the Sustainability Council of the Volkswagen accessed October 23, 2023).
1325 Additional literature using similar Group. https://www.volkswagenag.com/presence/ 1333 Note that these are not all net new
frameworks include Berman and Bui (2001) and stories/2020/12/frauenhofer-studie/6095_EMDI_ employment and reflects where workers may be
Deschênes (2018). For more information on this VW_Summary_um.pdf. hired away from other jobs. As the labor market gets
literature, see the Chapter 10 of the RIA for the 1328 See the report from Climate Nexus at https:// tighter and the economy is closer to full
HD2027 rule, found at Docket ID EPA–HQ–OAR– climatenexus.org/climate-issues/energy/ev-job- employment, there will be a greater number of
2019–0055. impacts/. Continued
277
Fmt 4701
19.6, there are many existing and counterpart (Volkswagen Tiguan).1336 PHEVs might have a higher labor
planned projects focused on training Included in this study are estimates of intensity of production compared to
new and existing employees in fields labor intensity needed to produce each both BEV and ICE vehicles. We do not
related to green jobs, and specifically vehicle under three different have data on employment differences in
green jobs associated with electric assumptions of vertical integration of traditional ICE vehicle manufacturing
vehicle production, maintenance and manufacturing scenarios ranging from a sectors and ZEV manufacturing sectors,
repair and the associated charging scenario where most of the assemblies especially for expected effects in the
infrastructure. This includes work by and components are sourced from future, nor do we have data on the
the Joint Office of Energy and outside suppliers to a scenario where employment needed for the level of
Transportation, created by the BIL, most of the assemblies and components battery production we anticipate will be
which supports efforts related to are assembled in house. Under the low required to meet future HD ZEV demand
deploying infrastructure, chargers and and moderate levels of vertical projected in our potential compliance
zero emission transit and school buses. integration, results indicate that pathway.
In addition, the IRA is expected to lead assembly of the BEV at the plant is The demand effect reflects potential
to increased demand in ZEVs through reduced compared to assembly of the employment changes due to changes in
tax credits for purchasers of ZEVs. ICE vehicle. Under a scenario of high new HD vehicle sales. If HD ICE vehicle
vertical integration, which includes the sales decrease, fewer people would be
The factor-shift effect on employment BEV battery assembly, results show an needed to assemble trucks and the
reflects potential employment changes increase in time needed to assemble the components used to manufacture them.
due to changes in labor intensity of BEV. When powertrain systems are On the other hand, if HD ZEV sales
production resulting from compliance ignored (battery, drive units, increase, more people would be needed
activities. The final standards do not transmission and engine assembly), the to assemble HD ZEVs and their
mandate the use of a specific BEV requires more time to assemble components, including batteries. If HD
technology, and EPA anticipates that a under all three vertical integration ICE vehicle sales decrease while HD
compliant fleet under the standards will scenarios. The results indicate that the ZEV sales increase, the net change in
include a diverse range of technologies largest difference in assembly comes employment will depend on the relative
including ICE vehicle and ZEV from the building of the battery pack employment needs for each vehicle
technologies. ZEVs and ICE vehicles assembly. When the battery cells are type. Additional, short-term, effects
require different inputs and have built in-house, the BEV will require might be seen if pre-buy or low-buy
different costs of powertrain production, more hours to build. What is not were to occur. If pre-buy occurs, HD
though there are many common parts as discussed in this research is that battery vehicle sales may increase temporarily,
well. There is little research on the cells must be built, regardless of where leading to temporary increases in
relative labor intensity needs of that occurs. Battery plants are being employment in the related
producing a HD ICE vehicle versus built and announced in the US, with manufacturing sectors. If low-buy
producing a comparable HD ZEV. support from the IRA, BIL and CHIPs, as occurs, there may be temporary
Though there are some news articles discussed in section II.D. decreases in employment in the
and research from the light-duty motor Though we have more information manufacturing sectors related to HD
vehicle market, they do not provide a today on differences in the time it takes vehicles. However, as noted, EPA does
clear indication of the relationship to build an ICE vehicle and a not expect significant pre-buy or low-
between employment needs for ZEVs comparable BEV or PHEV, we do not buy resulting from this rule. In addition,
and ICE vehicles. Some studies find that have enough information to estimate an as noted in preamble section E.1, we do
LD BEVs are less complex, requiring effect of our rule based on this not anticipate much mode or class shift
fewer person-hours to assemble than a information. We do not know how in HD market affected by this rule,
comparable ICE vehicle.1334 Others find OEMs will be (and are) manufacturing which also supports a minimal demand
that there is not a significant difference their vehicles, nor do we know what effect on employment.
in the employment needed to produce this will look like in several years as the The cost effect reflects the potential
MY 2027 and later standards become impact on employment due to increased
ICE vehicles when compared to
effective and there is projected to be an costs from adopting technologies
ZEVs.1335
increase in the share of BEVs being needed for vehicles to meet the new
EPA worked with a research group to produced and sold. We can say,
produce a peer-reviewed tear-down emission standards. In the HD ICE
generally, that this study indicates that vehicle manufacturing sector, if firms
study of a light-duty BEV (Volkswagen if production of EVs and their power invest in lower emitting HD ICE
ID.4) to its comparable ICE vehicle supplies are done in the US at the same vehicles, we would expect labor to be
rates as ICE vehicles, we do not expect used to implement those technologies.
employees shifting from one job to another. More employment to fall, and it may likely
information can be found in: Political Economy For firms producing ZEVs, we do not
increase. In addition, data on the labor
Research Institute. (2022). Job Creation Estimates expect the rule to require additional
intensity of PHEV production compared
Through Proposed Inflation Reduction Act. compliance activities, as ZEVs, by
University of Massachusetts Amherst. Retrieved to ICE vehicle production is also very
definition, emit zero tailpipe
from https://www.bluegreenalliance.org/site/9- sparse. PHEVs share features with both
million-good-jobs-from-climate-action-the-inflation- emissions.1337 In addition, the standards
ICE vehicles (including engines and
reduction-act. do not mandate the use of a specific
exhaust assemblies) and BEVs
1334 Barret, J. and Bivens, J. (2021). The stakes for technology, and EPA anticipates that a
workers in how policymakers manage the coming
(including motors and batteries). If labor
compliant fleet under the standards will
shift to all-electric vehicles. Economic Policy is a factor of the number of components,
Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/ev-
include a diverse range of technologies
policy-workers. 1336 FEV Consulting Inc., ‘‘Cost and Technology including ICE and ZEV technologies.
1335 Kupper, D., Kuhlmann, K., Tominaga, K., Evaluation, Conventional Powertrain Vehicle
Arora, A., Schlageter, J. (2020). Shifting Gears in Compared to an Electrified Powertrain Vehicle, 1337 We note that there may be indirect impacts,
Auto Manufacturing. https://www.bcg.com/ Same Vehicle Class and OEM,’’ prepared for for example through battery durability monitoring
publications/2020/transformative-impact-of- Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Contract or warranty requirements. See preamble section
electric-vehicles-on-auto-manufacturing. No. 68HERC19D00008, February 2023. III.B for more information on these requirements.
278
Under the additional compliance hydrogen refueling infrastructure increasing high quality employment
pathways projected for this final rule industries. These impacts may occur in related to green energy.
that include only technology adoption several ways, including through greater Because of the diversity of the HD
in ICE vehicles, we expect there could demand for batteries and therefore vehicle market, we expect that entities
be some increase in employment related increased employment needs. In from a wide range of transportation
to implementing these ICE technologies. addition, increased demand for charging sectors will purchase vehicles subject to
However, the level of employment due and hydrogen fueling infrastructure to the emission standards. HD vehicles are
to implementing new ICE technology as support more ZEVs may lead to more typically commercial in nature, and
result of this rule will depend on the private and public charging and fueling typically provide an ‘‘intermediate
relative rate of the adoption of the facilities being constructed, or to greater good,’’ meaning that such vehicles are
technology. use of existing facilities, which can lead used to provide a commercial service
In the proposed rule, we requested to increased maintenance needs for (transporting goods, municipal service
comment on data and methods that those facilities. For example, as vehicles, etc.), rather than serving as
could be used to estimate the potential described in RIA Chapter 2.10.3, we final consumer goods themselves (as
effects of this action on employment in estimated the total number of EVSE most light-duty vehicles do). As a result,
HD vehicle manufacturing sectors, and ports that will be required to support the purchase price of a new HD vehicle
on how increasing electrification in the the depot-charged BEVs in the likely impacts the price of the services
HD market in general might impact technology packages developed to provided by that vehicle. Operating
employment in HD manufacturing support the MY 2027–2032 standards. costs and purchase incentives may also
sectors, both for ICE powertrains as well We find just under 500,000 EVSE ports impact the price of services provided. If
as electrified powertrains. We also will be needed across all six model a change in upfront cost and/or
requested comment on data and years. This increased demand in EVSE operating costs, including purchase
methods to estimate possible effects of will increase employment in this sector. incentives (as might be available for a
the emission standards on employment In the proposed rule, we requested new ZEV), results in higher prices for
in the HD ICE and ZEVs manufacturing comment on data and methods that the services provided by these vehicles
markets.1338 Comments received mainly could be used to estimate the effect of compared to the same services provided
stated that the regulation might this action on the HD BEV vehicle by a pre-regulation vehicle, it may
negatively impact job quality, as well as charging infrastructure industry. We reduce demand for the services such
that there will be geographically received comments stating that there vehicles provide. In turn, there may be
localized effects, even if national level will be shortage of qualified BEV less employment in the sectors
net impacts are minimal. We technicians, as well as technicians providing such services. On the other
acknowledge the possibility of qualified to repair and maintain hand, if there are savings that are passed
geographically localized effects, and infrastructure. We also received on to consumers through lower prices
that there may be job quality impacts comments stating that there has already for services provided, it may lead to an
associated with this rule, especially in been significant job creation in response increase in demand for those services,
the short term. We do not, however, to demand for battery production, with and therefore may lead to an increase in
have data to estimate current or future the expectation that battery and employment in those sectors providing
job quality. As described throughout charging infrastructure will create many those services. We estimate that there
section 19.6 of the RTC, we note that more jobs. We note first that the vehicle are savings over the life of operating a
there are ongoing actions by the market is moving toward increasing ZEV relative to an ICE vehicle that may
Departments of Energy (DOE) and Labor ZEV market share, with or without this decrease downstream prices. We expect
(DOL), as well as others, supporting rule. We also note that there are many that the actual effects on demand for the
green jobs, including the Office of potential pathways to comply with this services provided by these vehicles and
Energy Jobs, which is particularly rule, and regardless of the outcome, we related employment will depend on cost
focused on jobs with high standards and project that ICE vehicles will remain a pass-through, as well as responsiveness
the right to collective bargaining. In significant share of new vehicle sales of demand to changes in transportation
addition, we are unable to determine the through MY 2032, as well as remain the cost, should such changes occur.1340
future location of vehicle manufacturing This action may also produce
majority share of the fleet for many
and supporting industries beyond the employment effects in other sectors, for
years after. The pace of ZEV uptake
public announcements made as of the example, in firms providing liquid fuel.
should provide ample opportunity for
publication of this rule. Also, we point While reduced liquid fuel consumption
training programs to be implemented,
out that even though vehicle represents cost savings for purchasers of
especially if there is demand, or lack of
manufacturing and battery liquid fuel, it could also represent a loss
supply, for qualified technicians. In
manufacturing may create more in value of output for the petroleum
addition, there are many labor and
localized employment effects, refining industry, which could result in
employment initiatives happening
infrastructure work is, and will continue reduced employment in that sector.
related to electric vehicles, including
to be, a nation-wide effort. For more on These impacts may also pass up the
those related to battery production and supply chain to, for example, pipeline
the comments we received on the labor
supply chain, vehicle manufacturing construction, operation and
impacts of the proposed rule, and our
and deployment, refueling maintenance, and domestic oil
responses, see section 19.6 of the RTC
infrastructure, maintenance and repair production. In this final rule, we
document.
As the share of ZEVs in the HD of electric vehicles and more.1339 These estimate that the reduction in fuel
market increases, there may also be programs include initiatives to promote consumption will be met by increasing
effects on employment in associated production and availability and also to net exports by half of the amount of
ZEV industries, including battery train, and retrain, workers in support of
1340 Cost pass-through refers to the amount of
production and BEV charging 1339 See the memo from the U.S. Department of increase in up-front cost incurred by the HD vehicle
infrastructure industries as well as Labor to Elizabeth Miller on Labor/Employment owner that is then passed on to their customers in
Initiatives in the Battery/Vehicle Electrification the form of higher prices for services provided by
1338 88 FR 26074. Space, located in the docket. the HD vehicle owner.
279
Fmt 4701
reduced domestic demand for refined vehicles on the road will still continue are currently unable to fully quantify.
product, with the other half being met to be dominated by HD ICE vehicles, EPA’s consistent practice has been to set
by reductions in U.S. refinery output. and many HD ICE vehicles will standards to achieve improved air
Though the reduced domestic output continue to be sold. This gradual shift quality consistent with Clean Air Act
may lead to future closures or avoids abrupt changes and will reduce (CAA) section 202 and not to rely on
conversions of individual refineries, we impacts in acceptance, infrastructure cost-benefit calculations, with their
are unable to estimate the future availability, employment, supply chain, uncertainties and limitations, in
decisions of refineries to keep operating, and more. identifying the appropriate standards.
shut down or convert away from fossil Nonetheless, as explained in section
F. Oil Imports and Electricity and
fuels because they depend on the VIII of this preamble, our conclusion
Hydrogen Consumption
economics of individual refineries, that the estimated benefits exceed the
economic conditions of parent We project that the final standards estimated costs of the program
companies, long-term strategies for each will reduce not only GHG emissions but reinforces our view that the final
company, and on the larger macro- also liquid fuel consumption (i.e., oil standards represent an appropriate
economic conditions of both the U.S. consumption) while simultaneously weighing of the statutory factors and
and the global refinery market, and increasing electricity and hydrogen other relevant considerations.
therefore we are unable to estimate the consumption. Reducing liquid fuel
consumption is a significant means of A. Climate Benefits
possible effect this rule will have on
employment in the petroleum refining reducing GHG emissions from the EPA estimates the climate benefits of
sector. However, because the petroleum transportation sector. As discussed in GHG emissions reductions expected
refining industry is material-intensive section V and RIA Chapter 4, we used from the final rule using estimates of the
and not labor intensive, and we estimate an updated version of EPA’s MOVES social cost of greenhouse gases (SC–
that only part of the reduction in liquid model to estimate the impact of the final GHG) that reflect recent advances in the
fuel consumption will be met by standards on heavy-duty vehicle scientific literature on climate change
reduced refinery production in the U.S., emissions, fuel consumption, electricity and its economic impacts and
see RIA Chapter 6.5, we expect that any consumption, and hydrogen incorporate recommendations made by
employment effect due to reduced consumption. In Chapter 6.5 of the RIA, the National Academies of Science,
petroleum demand will be small. we present fossil fuel—diesel, gasoline, Engineering, and Medicine.1342 EPA
Commenters stated concerns that CNG—consumption impacts. Table 6–1 published and used these estimates in
employment in the petroleum refining in Chapter 6 of the RIA shows the the RIA for Final Oil and Gas NSPS/EG
industry will fall because plants will estimated reduction in U.S. oil imports Rulemaking, ‘‘Standards of Performance
close, while others more generally under the final standards relative to the for New, Reconstructed, and Modified
stated that oil worker jobs will be reference case scenario. This final rule Sources and Emissions Guidelines for
devastated. For our response to these is projected to reduce U.S. oil imports Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas
comments, see section 19.6 of the RTC by 3 billion barrels through 2055 (see Sector Climate Review’’, which was
document. Table 6–2 of the RIA). The oil import signed by the EPA Administrator on
This action could also provide some reductions are the result of reduced December 2, 2023.1343 EPA solicited
positive impacts on driver employment consumption (i.e., reduced liquid fuel public comment on the methodology
in the heavy-duty trucking industry. As demand) of both diesel fuel and gasoline and use of these estimates in the RIA for
discussed in section IV of this preamble, and our estimate that 94.8 percent of the agency’s December 2022 Oil and Gas
the reduction in fuel costs from reduced liquid fuel demand results in NSPS/EG Supplemental Proposal and
purchasing a ZEV instead of an ICE reduced imports.1341 RIA Table 6–2 also has conducted an external peer review
vehicle will be expected to not only includes the projected increase in of these estimates, as described further
reduce operational costs for ZEV owners electricity and hydrogen consumption in this section. Section 7.1 of the RIA
and operators compared to an ICE due to the final rule. lays out the details of the updated SC–
vehicle, but may also provide additional VII. Benefits of the Program GHG used within this final rule.
incentives to purchase a HD ZEV over The SC–GHG is the monetary value of
a HD ICE vehicle. For example, the In this section, we describe three sets the net harm to society associated with
Clean Air Task Force and ZETA of monetized benefits for the program a marginal increase in GHG emissions in
submitted comments stating the HD and the methodology we use to a given year, or the net benefit of
ZEVs are associated with increased calculate those benefits: climate benefits avoiding that increase. In principle, SC–
driver satisfaction due to quieter related to GHG emissions reductions GHG includes the value of all climate
operations, better visibility, a smoother calculated using the social cost of GHGs, change impacts (both negative and
ride, faster acceleration, less odor, and the health benefits related to reductions positive), including (but not limited to)
a smoother and safer experience when in non-GHG pollutant emissions, and changes in net agricultural productivity,
driving in high traffic or urban energy security benefits. human health effects, property damage
environments. The commenters state EPA monetizes the benefits of the
from increased flood risk and natural
that these positive attributes have the standards in part to better enable a
possibility of decreasing truck driver comparison of costs and benefits 1342 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
shortages and increasing driver pursuant to E.O. 12866, but we and Medicine (National Academies). 2017. Valuing
retention. recognize that there are benefits that we Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social
Cost of Carbon Dioxide. National Academies Press.
An additional factor to consider for 1343 U.S. EPA. (2023f). Supplementary Material
1341 The 94.8 percent import reduction factor is
employment impacts across all
based upon revised throughput assumptions for for the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final
industries that might be affected by this U.S. refineries in response to a decline in product Rulemaking, ‘‘Standards of Performance for New,
rule under the potential compliance demand as a result of this final rule. See Chapter Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and
pathway, or by the increase in the share 7.3.4 of the RIA for how the 94.8 percent is Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and
calculated assuming the refiners maintain refinery Natural Gas Sector Climate Review’’: EPA Report on
of HD ZEVs in the market, is that though throughput at 50 percent of the decline in product the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates
more ZEVs are being introduced to the demand as a result of this rule by exporting refined Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances.
market regardless of this rule, the products. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA.
280
Fmt 4701
disasters, disruption of energy systems, improve SC–GHG estimation.1345 In the it a much-needed improvement in
risk of conflict, environmental December 2022 Oil and Gas estimating the SC–GHG and a
migration, and the value of ecosystem Supplemental Proposal RIA,1346 the significant step towards addressing the
services. The SC–GHG, therefore, Agency included a sensitivity analysis National Academies’ recommendations
reflects the societal value of reducing of the climate benefits of that rule using with defensible modeling choices based
emissions of the gas in question by one a new set of SC–GHG estimates that on current science. The peer reviewers
metric ton and is the theoretically incorporates recent research addressing provided numerous recommendations
appropriate value to use in conducting recommendations of the National for refining the presentation and for
benefit-cost analyses of policies that Academies 1347 in addition to using the future modeling improvements,
affect GHG emissions. In practice, data interim SC–GHG estimates presented in especially with respect to climate
and modeling limitations restrain the the Technical Support Document: change impacts and associated damages
ability of SC–GHG estimates to include Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and that are not currently included in the
all physical, ecological, and economic Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under analysis. Additional discussion of
impacts of climate change, implicitly Executive Order 13990 1348 that the IWG omitted impacts and other updates were
assigning a value of zero to the omitted recommended for use until updated incorporated in the technical report to
climate damages. The estimates are, estimates that address the National address peer reviewer
therefore, a partial accounting of climate Academies’ recommendations are recommendations. Complete
change impacts and likely available. The EPA solicited public information about the external peer
underestimate the marginal benefits of comment on the sensitivity analysis and review, including the peer reviewer
abatement. the accompanying draft technical report, selection process, the final report with
Since 2008, the EPA has used External Review Draft of Report on the individual recommendations from peer
estimates of the social cost of various Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: reviewers, and the EPA’s response to
greenhouse gases (i.e., SC–CO2, SC–CH4, Estimates Incorporating Recent each recommendation is available on
and SC–N2O), collectively referred to as Scientific Advances, which explains the EPA’s website.1351
the ‘‘social cost of greenhouse gases’’ methodology underlying the new set of Section 7.1 within the RIA provides
(SC–GHG), in analyses of actions that estimates and was included as an overview of the methodological
affect GHG emissions. The values used supplementary material to the RIA for updates incorporated into the SC–GHG
by the EPA from 2009 to 2016, and since the December 2022 Supplemental Oil estimates used in this final rule. A more
2021—including in the proposal for this and Gas Proposal.1349 The response to detailed explanation of each input and
rulemaking—have been consistent with comments document can be found in the modeling process is provided in the
those developed and recommended by the docket for that action.1350 final technical report, EPA Report on
the IWG on the SC–GHG; and the values To ensure that the methodological the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases:
used from 2017 to 2020 were consistent updates adopted in the technical report Estimates Incorporating Recent
with those required by Executive Order are consistent with economic theory and Scientific Advances.1352
(E.O.) 13783, which disbanded the IWG. reflect the latest science, the EPA also Commenters on our HD GHG Phase 3
During 2015–2017, the National initiated an external peer review panel NPRM brought up issues regarding
Academies conducted a comprehensive to conduct a high-quality review of the baseline scenarios, climate modeling
review of the SC–CO2 and issued a final technical report (see 88 FR 29372 noting (e.g., equilibrium climate sensitivity)
report in 2017 recommending specific this peer review process was ongoing at and IAMS, claiming that they all used
criteria for future updates to the SC–CO2 the time of our proposal), completed in outdated assumptions. Other
estimates, a modeling framework to May 2023. The peer reviewers commenters suggested that EPA use
satisfy the specified criteria, and both commended the agency on its lower discount rates as well as utilize
near-term updates and longer-term development of the draft update, calling the latest research and values from the
research needs pertaining to various December 2022 Supplemental Oil and
components of the estimation 1345 EPA strives to base its analyses on the best Gas Proposal. EPA’s decision to use the
process.1344 The IWG was reconstituted available science and economics, consistent with its updated SC–GHG values from U.S. EPA
responsibilities, for example, under the Information (2023f) 1353 addresses several of the
in 2021 and E.O. 13990 directed it to Quality Act.
develop a comprehensive update of its 1346 U.S. EPA. (2023). Supplementary Material for concerns voiced within the comments.
SC–GHG estimates, recommendations the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final See RTC section 20 for further detail on
regarding areas of decision-making to Rulemaking, ‘‘Standards of Performance for New, the comments received and EPA’s
which SC–GHG should be applied, and Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and responses. For a detailed description of
Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and
a standardized review and updating Natural Gas Sector Climate Review’’: EPA Report on
process to ensure that the recommended the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates
1351 https://www.epa.gov/environmental-
estimates continue to be based on the Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances. economics/scghg-tsd-peer-review.

1352 Supplementary Material for the Regulatory
best available economics and science Washington, DC: U.S. EPA.
1347 U.S. EPA. (2023). Impact Analysis for the Final Rulemaking,
going forward. 1348 Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of
‘‘Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed,
EPA is a member of the IWG and is and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for
Carbon (IWG). 2021 (February). Technical Support Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector
participating in the IWG’s work under Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Climate Review’’, EPA Report on the Social Cost of
E.O. 13990. As noted in previous EPA Nitrous Oxide: Interim Estimates under Executive Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent
RIAs—including in the proposal RIA for Order 13990. United States Government. Scientific Advances, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
1349 https://www.epa.gov/environmental-
this rulemaking, while that process 2021–0317, November 2023.
economics/scghg-tsd-peer-review. 1353 EPA. 2023f. ‘‘Supplementary Material for the
continues, the EPA is continuously 1350 Supplementary Material for the Regulatory
Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final
reviewing developments in the
Impact Analysis for the Final Rulemaking, Rulemaking: Standards of Performance for New,
scientific literature on the SC–GHG, ‘‘Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and
including more robust methodologies and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and
for estimating damages from emissions, Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Natural Gas Sector Climate Review.’’ EPA Report on
Climate Review’’, EPA Report on the Social Cost of the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates
and looking for opportunities to further Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances,
Scientific Advances, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– Washington, DC. doi: Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
1344 U.S. EPA. (2023f). 2021–0317, November 2023. OAR–2021–0317.
281
Fmt 4701
the updated modeling, please see RIA reductions (comprised of GHG implementation, 2027, through 2055.
section 7 for our final rule as well as the emissions reductions from vehicles and Also shown are the present values (PV)
U.S. EPA (2023f). An appendix to refineries, and increased GHG emissions and equivalent annualized values (AV)
Chapter 7 provides the climate benefits from EGUs; see preamble section V) associated with each of the three SC–
of the rule using the interim SC–GHG associated with the final rule using the GHG values. For a thorough discussion
estimates. SC–GHG estimates presented in EPA of the SC–GHG methodology,
Table VII–1 presents the annual, (2023f) for the stream of years beginning limitations and uncertainties, see
undiscounted monetized climate with the first year of rule Chapter 7 of the RIA.
benefits of the net GHG emissions
B. Non-GHG Health Benefits fossil fuel combustion processes that projected emission reductions,
also produce criteria and hazardous air monetized here, reflect the projected
This section discusses the economic
benefits from reductions in adverse pollutant emissions. The heavy-duty potential compliance pathway
health impacts resulting from non-GHG vehicles that are subject to the final CO2 presented in preamble section II.
emission reductions that can be emission standards are also significant However, as noted elsewhere, there are
expected to occur as a result of the final sources of mobile source air pollution other means of achieving the standards,
CO2 emission standards. GHG emissions such as directly-emitted PM, NOX, including pathways not utilizing ZEV
VOCs, CO, SO2 and air toxics. Our technologies. Resulting emission
ER22AP24.129</GPH>
are predominantly the byproduct of
282
Fmt 4701
reductions would differ from those BPT approach estimates monetized associated with reductions in direct
presented here in such cases (EPA health benefits of avoiding one ton of exposure to NO2 and mobile source air
expects that different manufacturers PM2.5-related emissions from a toxics, nor do they account for
will choose different compliance particular source sector. The value of improved ecosystem effects or visibility.
pathways). Under the modeled potential health benefits from reductions or The estimated benefits of this final rule
compliance pathway, zero-emission increases in PM2.5 emissions associated would be larger if we were able to
technologies will also affect emissions with this final rule was estimated by monetize these unquantified benefits at
from upstream sources that occur multiplying PM2.5-related BPT values by this time.
during, for example, electricity the corresponding annual reduction in Table VII–2 presents the annual,
generation and from the refining and tons of directly-emitted PM2.5 and PM2.5 undiscounted PM2.5-related health
distribution of liquid fuel (see section V precursor emissions (NOX and SO2). As benefits estimated for the stream of
of this preamble). This final rule’s explained in Chapter 7.2 in the RIA, the years beginning with the first year of
benefits analysis includes added PM2.5 BPT values represent the rule implementation, 2027, through
emissions due to increased electricity monetized value of human health calendar year 2055 for the final
generation and emissions reductions benefits, including reductions in both standards. Benefits are presented by
from reduced petroleum refining. premature mortality and nonfatal source: Onroad heavy-duty vehicles and
Changes in ambient concentrations of illnesses. upstream sources (EGUs and refineries
ozone, PM2.5, and air toxics that will The mobile sector BPT estimates used combined). Because premature mortality
result from the final CO2 emission in this final rule were published in 2019
standards under the modeled pathway typically constitutes the vast majority of
but have been updated to be consistent monetized benefits in a PM2.5 benefits
are expected to affect human health by with the health benefits Technical
reducing premature deaths and other assessment, we present benefits based
Support Document (Benefits TSD) that on risk estimates reported from two
serious human health effects, and they accompanied the 2023 p.m. NAAQS
are also expected to result in other different long-term exposure studies
Proposal.1354 1355 1356 1357 The Benefits using different cohorts to account for
important improvements in public TSD details the approach used to
health and welfare (see section VI of this uncertainty in the benefits associated
estimate the PM2.5-related benefits with avoiding PM-related premature
preamble). Children, especially, benefit reflected in these BPTs. The EGU and
from reduced exposures to criteria and deaths.1359 1360 Although annual benefits
Refinery BPT estimates used in this presented in the table are not
toxic pollutants because they tend to be final rule were also recently updated to
more sensitive to the effects of these discounted for the purposes of present
be consistent with the Benefits TSD.1358 value or annualized value calculations,
respiratory pollutants. Ozone and For more detailed information about the
particulate matter have been associated annual benefits do reflect the use of 3-
benefits analysis conducted for this final percent and 7-percent discount rates to
with increased incidence of asthma and rule, including the BPT unit values used
other respiratory effects in children, and account for avoided health outcomes
in this analysis, please refer to Chapter that are expected to accrue over more
particulate matter has been associated 7 of the RIA.
with a decrease in lung maturation. than a single year (the ‘‘cessation lag’’
A chief limitation to using PM2.5- between the change in PM exposures
When feasible, EPA conducts full- related BPT values is that they do not
scale photochemical air quality and the total realization of changes in
reflect the health benefits associated health effects). Table VII–2 also displays
modeling to demonstrate how its with reducing ambient concentrations of
national mobile source regulatory the present and annualized values of
ozone. The PM2.5-related BPT values estimated benefits that occur from 2027
actions affect ambient concentrations of also do not capture the health benefits
regional pollutants throughout the to 2055, discounted using both 3-
United States. The estimation of the 1354 Wolfe, P.; Davidson, K.; Fulcher, C.; Fann, N.;
percent and 7-percent discount rates
human health impacts of a regulatory Zawacki, M.; Baker, K. R. 2019. Monetized Health
and reported in 2022$. We estimate that
action requires national-scale Benefits Attributable to Mobile Source Emission the annualized value of the benefits of
photochemical air quality modeling to Reductions across the United States in 2025. Sci. the final program is $120 to $220
Total Environ. 650, 2490–2498. Available at: million at a 3-percent discount rate and
conduct a full-scale assessment of PM2.5- https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2018.09.273.
and ozone-related health benefits. Air 1355 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.
¥$9.1 to ¥$32 million at a 7-percent
quality modeling and associated EPA). 2023. PM NAAQS Reconsideration Proposal discount rate (2022$). Depending on the
analyses are not available for this rule. RIA. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0587. discount rate used, the annualized value
For the analysis of the final CO2 1356 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. of the stream of PM2.5 health benefits
EPA). 2023. Estimating PM2.5- and Ozone- may either be positive or negative.
emission standards (and the analysis of Attributable Health Benefits. Technical Support
the alternative in section IX), we instead Document (TSD) for the PM NAAQS
use a reduced-form ‘‘benefit-per-ton’’ Reconsideration Proposal RIA. EPA–HQ–OAR–
(BPT) approach to estimate the 2019–0587. 1359 Wu, X, Braun, D, Schwartz, J,
1357 Note that the Final PM NAAQS Kioumourtzoglou, M and Dominici, F (2020).
monetized PM2.5-related health benefits
Reconsideration RIA, released in February 2024, Evaluating the impact of long-term exposure to fine
of this final rule. The BPT approach based its benefits analysis on the same Benefits TSD particulate matter on mortality among the elderly.
estimates the monetized economic value that accompanied the PM NAAQS Reconsideration Science advances 6(29): eaba5692.
of PM2.5-related emission impacts (such proposal. 1360 Pope III, CA, Lefler, JS, Ezzati, M, Higbee, JD,
1358 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. Marshall, JD, Kim, S–Y, Bechle, M, Gilliat, KS,
as direct PM, NOX, and SO2) due to
EPA). 2023. Technical Support Document: Vernon, SE and Robinson, AL (2019). Mortality risk
implementation of the final program. Estimating the Benefit per Ton of Reducing and fine particulate air pollution in a large,
Similar to the SC–GHG approach for Directly-Emitted PM2.5, PM2.5 Precursors and Ozone representative cohort of US adults. Environmental
monetizing reductions in GHGs, the Precursors from 21 Sectors. health perspectives 127(7): 077007.
283
Fmt 4701
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C VII–2, consistent with current presenting total net benefits (see
We use a constant 3-percent and 7- applicable OMB Circular No. A–4 preamble section VIII), we also use a
percent discount rate to calculate guidance. For the purposes of constant 2-percent discount rate to
ER22AP24.130</GPH>
present and annualized values in Table
284
Fmt 4701
calculate present and annualized values. Chapter 7 of the RIA for a more detailed use of natural gas in the U.S. electricity
We note that we do not currently have assessment of energy security and sector stemming from the wider use of
BPT estimates that use a 2-percent energy independence impacts of this electric HD vehicles as a result of this
discount rate to account for cessation final rule and section II.D.2 for a rule. We do not agree that this final rule
lag. If we apply a constant 2-percent discussion on battery critical minerals will result in energy security issues
discount rate to the stream of annual and supply. stemming from the wider use of natural
benefits based on the 3-percent In order to understand the energy gas. We respond to this comment in
cessation lag BPT, the annualized value security implications of reducing U.S. section 22 of the RTC document.
of total PM2.5-related benefits would be net oil imports, EPA has worked with One commenter suggested that the
$160 to $300 million. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), energy security methodology developed
We believe the non-GHG pollutant which has developed approaches for by ORNL used in the proposed rule is
benefits presented here are our best evaluating the social costs and energy outdated and no longer applicable to the
estimate of benefits absent air quality security implications of oil use. When current structure of global oil markets.
modeling, and we have confidence that conducting this analysis, ORNL EPA and ORNL have worked together to
the BPT approach provides a reasonable estimates the risk of reductions in U.S. revise the macroeconomic oil security
estimate of the monetized PM2.5-related economic output and disruption to the premiums based upon the recent energy
health benefits associated with this U.S. economy caused by sudden security literature. Also, for this final
rulemaking. Please refer to RIA Chapter disruptions in world oil supply and rule, EPA is using macroeconomic oil
7 for more information on the associated price shocks (i.e., labeled the security premiums estimated using
uncertainty associated with the benefits avoided macroeconomic disruption/ ORNL’s methodology which
presented here. adjustment costs). These risks are incorporates updated oil price
quantified as ‘‘macroeconomic oil projections and energy market and
C. Energy Security
security premiums,’’ i.e., the extra costs economic trends from the U.S.
The final CO2 emission standards are of oil use besides its market price. Department of Energy’s Energy
designed to require reductions in GHG Two commenters claimed that the Information Administration’s (EIA) most
emissions from HD vehicles in the MYs proposed rule would improve the U.S.’s recent Annual Energy Outlook (AEO)
2027–2032 and beyond timeframe and, energy security position by increasing 2023. Therefore, EPA believes that the
thereby, are expected to reduce oil the wider use of electric HD vehicles. macroeconomic oil security premiums
consumption. Our modeled potential We agree with these commenters that used in this final rulemaking are
compliance pathway projects a mix of the final rule will lower the risks to the reasonable. See section 22 of the RTC
ZEV technologies and ICE vehicle U.S. economy of oil supply disruptions; document for more discussion on this
technologies in compliant fleets. Our our projected potential compliance topic. We do not consider military cost
analysis is based on this modeled pathway for the final standards supports impacts as a result of reductions in U.S.
potential compliance pathway but, as that U.S. oil consumption and U.S. oil oil imports from this final rule due to
noted, many other potential pathways to imports are reduced (e.g., with the methodological issues in quantifying
compliance exist, and analytic results utilization of HD vehicle technologies these impacts.
would differ from those presented here including ZEV technologies) as a result To calculate the oil security benefits
in such cases. Under our modeled of this final rule. On the other hand, of this final rule, EPA is using the ORNL
compliance pathway, the standards will several commenters suggested that EPA macroeconomic oil security premium
be met through a combination of zero- is undermining U.S. energy security by methodology with (1) estimated oil
emission and ICE vehicle technologies, promoting electric HD vehicles in this savings calculated by EPA, and (2) an
which will, in turn, reduce the demand proposed rule. Mandating a specific oil import reduction factor of 94.8
for oil and enable the U.S. to reduce its technology such as electric vehicles percent, which estimates how much
petroleum imports. A reduction of U.S. stifles innovation and progress, U.S. oil net imports are reduced from
petroleum imports reduces both according to these commenters. We projected changes in U.S. oil
financial and strategic risks caused by respond to these comments in detail in consumption. Estimated oil savings are
potential sudden disruptions in the section 22 of the RTC but note here that discussed in detail in RIA Chapter 6.5.
supply of imported petroleum to the the commenters’ characterization of the The oil import reduction factor is based
United States, thus increasing U.S. rule as mandating ZEV technology is not on AEO data and is discussed in detail
energy security. correct. While the potential compliance in RIA Chapter 7.3. Based upon
Energy security is broadly defined as pathway that supports the feasibility of consideration of comments EPA
the uninterrupted availability of energy the final standards includes ZEV received on the proposal, EPA is
sources at affordable prices.1361 Energy technologies in its mix of HD vehicle updating the oil import reduction factor
independence and energy security are technologies, manufacturers can choose to be consistent with revised estimates
distinct but related concepts. The goal any compliance pathway most suitable that U.S. refineries will operate at
of U.S. energy independence is the to them and alternative compliance higher production levels than EPA
elimination of all U.S. imports of pathways exist, including those not estimated in the proposed rule. See
petroleum and other foreign sources of involving ZEV technologies (see section Chapter 4 of the RIA and section 13 of
energy, but more broadly, it is the II.F.6 of this preamble for one example). the RTC document for more discussion
elimination of the U.S.’s sensitivity to EPA thus believes that the final rule of how EPA is updating its refinery
variations in the price and supply of maintains the flexible structure created throughput assumptions and, in turn,
foreign sources of energy.1362 See and followed in the previous HD vehicle air quality impacts from refinery
GHG emission standards rules, which is emissions, as a result of this rule. See
1361 International Energy Agency. ‘‘Energy effectively designed to reflect the Chapter 7 of the RIA and section 22 of
security: Ensuring the uninterrupted availability of diverse nature of the heavy-duty vehicle the RTC document for EPA’s discussion
energy sources at an affordable price’’. Last updated of how EPA is updating the oil import
December 2, 2019.
industry.
1362 Greene, D. 2010. Measuring energy security: One commenter asserted that the reduction factor to be consistent with
Can the United States achieve oil independence? proposed rule does not address the U.S. new estimates of refinery throughput for
Energy Policy 38, pp. 1614–1621. energy security impacts of the greater this final rule. In Table VII–3, EPA
285
Fmt 4701
presents the macroeconomic oil security vehicle standards for the years from
premiums and the energy security 2027–2055.
benefits for the final HD GHG Phase 3
Two commenters claimed that since Standard (RFS) program. EPA agrees establish renewable fuel volume
the proposed rule promotes the wider with the commenters that the increased requirements and associated percentage
use of electric vehicles, it limits the use of renewable fuels in the U.S. standards for cellulosic biofuel,
potential for renewable fuels (i.e., transportation sector will improve the biomass-based diesel, advanced
biofuels) to create energy security U.S.’s energy security and energy biofuels, and total renewable fuel for the
benefits. One commenter suggested that independence position but disagrees
proposed rule would make it more that this rule is at odds with the RFS
difficult to meet the renewable fuel program. On June 21st, 2023, EPA
ER22AP24.131</GPH>
mandates of EPA’s Renewable Fuel announced a final rule (RFS Set Rule) to
286
Fmt 4701
2023–2025 timeframe.1363 The recently of this preamble. Those costs include year costs are presented in preamble
finalized RFS Set Rule and this final costs for both the new technology in our section IV and year-over-year benefits
rule are complementary in achieving modeled potential compliance may be found in preamble section VII.
GHG reductions in the U.S. pathway’s technology packages and the 3. The equivalent annualized value
transportation sector. We respond to operating costs associated with that new (AV) of benefits, costs, and net benefits
these comments in more detail in technology. Importantly, as detailed in representing a flow of constant annual
section 22 of the RTC document. section IV of this preamble, the vehicle values that, had they occurred in each
Numerous commenters suggested that costs presented here exclude the IRA year from 2027 through 2055, will yield
EPA ignored the impacts on U.S.’s battery tax credit, the vehicle tax credit an equivalent present value to those
energy and national security in the and the EVSE tax credit while the fuel estimated in method 2 (using a 2-
proposed rule of an unfavorable savings exclude fuel taxes. As such, as percent, 3-percent or 7-percent discount
transition from reliable, abundant, presented in this section, these costs, rate). Each AV represents a typical
domestically-sourced fuels to a complex along with other operating costs, benefit, cost, or net benefit for each year
supply chain reliant on foreign-sourced represent the social costs and/or savings of the analysis and is presented in year
critical minerals. For this final rule, EPA associated with the final standards. 2022 dollars.
distinguishes between energy security, Benefits from the reduction of GHG
emissions and criteria pollutant B. Results
mineral/metal security and security
issues associated with the importation emissions, and energy security benefits Table VIII–1 shows the undiscounted
of critical minerals, ZEV batteries and associated with reductions of imported annual monetized vehicle-related
component parts (i.e., ZEV supply chain oil, are presented in section VII. projected technology packages RPE
issues). We address energy security A. Methods costs of the final rule and the alternative
issues involving U.S. oil consumption in calendar year 2055. The table also
and oil imports associated with this EPA presents three different benefit- shows the PV and AV of those costs for
final rule in Chapter 7 of the RIA and cost comparisons for the final rule and the calendar years 2027 through 2055
section 22 of the RTC. Comments for the alternative: using 2-percent, 3-percent and 7-percent
1. A future-year snapshot comparison discount rates. The table includes an
associated with projected wider use of
of annual benefits and costs in the year estimate of the projected vehicle
HD ZEV technologies’ impacts on the
2055, chosen to approximate the annual technology packages RPE costs and
U.S.’s mineral/metal security and
costs and benefits that will occur in a
security issues associated with the corresponding costs associated with
year when most of the regulated fleet
importation of HD ZEV batteries and EVSE.
will consist of HD vehicles subject to
their component parts (i.e., ZEV Note that all costs, savings, and
the HD GHG Phase 3 standards due to
technologies supply chain issues) are benefits estimates presented in the
fleet turnover. Benefits, costs, and net
addressed in section II.D.2 of this tables that follow are rounded to two
benefits are presented in year 2022
preamble and in section 17 of the RTC significant figures; numbers may not
dollars and are not discounted.
document. 2. The present value (PV) of the sum due to independent rounding.
VIII. Comparison of Benefits and Costs stream of benefits, costs, and net
benefits calculated for the analytical long recognized that climate effects should be
This section compares the estimated time horizon of 2027 through 2055,
discounted only at appropriate consumption-based
range of benefits associated with discount rates. While we were conducting the
discounted back to the first year of analysis for this rule, OMB finalized an update to
reductions of GHGs, monetized health implementation of the final rule (2027) Circular A–4, in which it recommended the general
benefits from reductions in PM2.5, using 2-percent, 3-percent and 7-percent application of a 2 percent discount rate to costs and
energy security benefits, fuel savings, discount rates, and presented in year benefits (subject to regular updates), as well as the
and vehicle-related operating savings to consideration of the shadow price of capital when
2022 dollars.1364 Note that year-over- costs or benefits are likely to accrue to capital (OMB
total costs associated with the modeled 2023). Because the SC–GHG estimates reflect net
compliance pathway for the final rule 1364 Monetized climate benefits are presented climate change damages in terms of reduced
and for the alternative. Estimated costs under a 2 percent near-term Ramsey discount rate, consumption (or monetary consumption
are detailed and presented in section IV consistent with EPA’s updated estimates of the SC– equivalents), the use of the social rate of return on
GHG. The 2003 version of OMB’s Circular A–4 had capital (7 percent under OMB Circular A–4 (2003))
generally recommended 3 percent and 7 percent as to discount damages estimated in terms of reduced
1363 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program: default discount rates for costs and benefits, though consumption would inappropriately underestimate
Standards for 2023–2025 and Other Changes. 88 FR as part of the Interagency Working Group on the the impacts of climate change for the purposes of
44468, July 12, 2023. Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, OMB had also estimating the SC–GHG.
287
Fmt 4701
Table VIII–2 and Table VIII–3 show diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) consumption modeled potential compliance pathway;
the undiscounted annual monetized arise in the modeled potential BEVs and FCEVs are projected to
vehicle-related operating savings of the compliance pathway’s technology ultimately require 71 percent and 75
final rule and the alternative, packages from the decrease in diesel percent, respectively, of the
respectively, in calendar year 2055. The engine-equipped vehicles which require maintenance and repair costs required
table also shows the PV and AV of those DEF to maintain compliance with NOx of HD vehicles equipped with internal
savings for calendar years 2027 through emission standards. The maintenance combustion engines, as discussed in
2055 using 2-percent, 3-percent and 7- and repair savings are due again to the section II.
percent discount rates. The savings in HD vehicle technologies utilized in the
ER22AP24.133</GPH>
ER22AP24.132</GPH>
288
Fmt 4701
Table VIII–4 shows the undiscounted alternative in calendar year 2055. The 2055 using 2-percent, 3-percent and 7-
annual monetized energy security table also shows the PV and AV of those percent discount rates.
benefits of the final rule and the benefits for calendar years 2027 through
Table VIII–5 shows the climate Table VIII–6 shows the undiscounted Monetized upstream health impacts
benefits of reduced GHG emissions, annual monetized PM2.5-related health associated with the standards also
using the SC–GHG estimates presented benefits of the final rule and the include benefits associated with
in the EPA Report on the Social Cost of alternative in calendar year 2055. The reduced PM2.5-related emissions from
Greenhouse Gases: Estimates table also shows the PV and AV of those refineries and health disbenefits
Incorporating Recent Scientific benefits for calendar years 2027 through associated with increased PM2.5-related
Advances (EPA 2023).1365 The details 2055 using a 2-percent, 3-percent and 7- emissions from EGUs. Negative
are discussed in RIA Chapter 7. These percent discount rate. The benefits in monetized values are associated with
climate benefits include benefits Table VIII–6 reflect the two premature health disbenefits related to increases in
associated with changes to HD vehicle mortality estimates derived from the estimated emissions from EGUs.
GHGs and both EGU and refinery GHG Medicare study (Wu et al., 2020) and the Depending on the discount rate used,
emissions, but do not include any NHIS study (Pope et al., 2019).1366 1367 the present and annualized value of the
impacts associated with the extraction The monetized criteria pollutant health
stream of PM2.5-related benefits may
or transportation of fuels for either benefits include reductions in PM2.5-
either be positive or negative.
EGUs or refineries. related emissions from HD vehicles.
ER22AP24.135</GPH>
1365 For more information about the development Evaluating the impact of long-term exposure to fine Vernon, SE and Robinson, AL (2019). Mortality risk
of these estimates, see www.epa.gov/environmental- particulate matter on mortality among the elderly. and fine particulate air pollution in a large,
economics/scghg. Science advances 6(29): eaba5692. representative cohort of US adults. Environmental
1366 Wu, X, Braun, D, Schwartz, J, 1367 Pope III, CA, Lefler, JS, Ezzati, M, Higbee, JD,
health perspectives 127(7): 077007.
ER22AP24.134</GPH>
Kioumourtzoglou, M and Dominici, F (2020). Marshall, JD, Kim, S–Y, Bechle, M, Gilliat, KS,
289
Table VIII–7 shows the undiscounted percent constant discount rate (see term Ramsey discount rate for the total
annual total benefits of the final rule Table VIII–4 and Table VIII–6, benefits calculation. The benefits
and the alternative in calendar year respectively). Climate benefits are based include those associated with changes
2055, as well as the PV and AV of the on reductions in GHG emissions and are to HD vehicle GHGs and both EGU and
total benefits for calendar years 2027 calculated using three different SC–GHG refinery GHG emissions, but do not
through 2055. Total benefits are the sum estimates that assume either a 1.5- include any impacts associated with the
of climate benefits, criteria pollutant percent, 2.0-percent, or 2.5-percent extraction or transportation of fuels for
benefits and energy security benefits. near-term Ramsey discount rate (see either EGUs or refineries. This likely
The present and annualized values of Table VIII–5). For presentational underestimates the refinery-related
energy security benefits and PM2.5 purposes in Table VIII–7, we use the emission reductions projected in the
health impacts are discounted using climate benefits associated with the SC– rule but likely also underestimates EGU-
ER22AP24.137</GPH>
either a 2-percent, 3-percent, or 7- GHG estimates at the 2-percent near- related emission increases in the rule.
ER22AP24.136</GPH>
290
Fmt 4701
We summarize the vehicle costs, benefits presented in Tables VIII–4 final rule we are using the updated SC–
operational savings, and benefits of the through VIII–6) in a single table. We GHG values (see section VII.A of this
final rule, as shown in Table VIII–8. summarize the vehicle costs, preamble and Chapter 7.1 of the final
Table VIII–8 presents the final rule’s operational savings, and benefits of the RIA). We include the 2 percent discount
costs from Table VIII–1, operating alternative in Table VIII–9. We remind rate here for consistency with the 2
savings from Table VIII–2, and total readers that, in the NPRM, we used the percent near-term Ramsey discount rate
benefits from Table VIII–7 (comprised of interim SC–GHG values, while in this used in the updated SC–GHG values.
ER22AP24.138</GPH>
291
Fmt 4701
ER22AP24.139</GPH>
292
Fmt 4701
We have also estimated the total EVSE tax credit, fuel taxes, Federal comparison of benefits and costs. Note
transfers associated with the final excise taxes and state sales taxes, and that the transfers are presented from the
standards and the alternative, as shown annual vehicle registration fees on all perspective of purchasers, so positive
in Table VIII–10 and Table VIII–11, ZEVs. None of these are included in the values represent transfers to purchasers.
respectively. The transfers consist of the prior tables (i.e., Table VIII–1 through
IRA battery tax credit, vehicle tax credit, Table VIII–9) in this section’s
ER22AP24.140</GPH>
293
Fmt 4701
IX. Analysis of Alternative CO2 implementation, which represents presented in Table IX–1 and Table IX–
Emission Standards differences in timing, costs, and benefits 2, are calculated using the same method
As discussed throughout this of a HD vehicle CO2 emissions program. as the final standards, as described in
preamble, in developing this final rule, Specifically, the alternative has both a preamble section II.F. The ZEV
EPA considered a regulatory alternative less aggressive phase-in of CO2 technologies adoption rates in the
that would establish less stringent CO2 emissions standards from MYs 2027 potential technology packages that
emission standards and, thus, would through 2031 and a less stringent would comply with these levels of
result in fewer GHG emission standard for MYs 2032 and beyond. The stringency for MYs 2027 through 2032
reductions than the CO2 emission alternative was modeled using the same under the slower phase-in alternative
standards we are finalizing. This section methodologies used to model the final are shown in Table IX–1. The ZEV
presents estimates of technology costs, rule, as described in Chapters 2 and 4 technologies adoption rates in the
CO2 emission reductions, fuel savings, of the RIA. potential technology packages that
and other impacts associated with the EPA developed and considered an
would comply with the slower phase-in
alternative. alternative with a more gradual phase-
alternative standards by regulatory
in of CO2 emission standards for MYs
A. Comparison of Final Standards and subcategory and by MY are shown in
2027 through MY 2031 and a less
Alternative stringent final standard in MY 2032, as RIA Chapter 2.9.5.
The alternative represents a slower discussed in section II.H. The slower
phase-in option for program phase-in alternative standards,
ER22AP24.142</GPH>
ER22AP24.141</GPH>
294
Fmt 4701
Based on our current analysis for each are available that provide for greater MOVES4.R3 by increasing ZEV
of the vocational vehicle and tractor emission reductions than provided adoption in HD vehicles, which means
subcategories, our assessment is that under this alternative, do so at we model the alternative’s possible
feasible and appropriate emission reasonable cost, and provide sufficient compliance pathway as utilizing more
standards that provide for greater CO2 lead time. HD ICE vehicles 1368 than those modeled
emission reductions than through the for the final standards’ potential
B. Emission Inventory Comparison of compliance pathway. In general, this
slower phase-in alternative and at Final Rule and Slower Phase-In
reasonable cost are available. As means the alternative has both lower
Alternative
ER22AP24.144</GPH>
explained in preamble section II.H, we downstream emission reductions, lower

are not adopting this alternative set of Both the final standards and the
1368 In this scenario, HD ICE emission rates reflect
standards in this final rule because, as alternative were modeled by EPA in an CO2 emission improvements projected in
already described, our assessment is updated version of EPA’s Motor Vehicle previously promulgated standards, notably HD GHG
ER22AP24.143</GPH>
that feasible and appropriate standards Emission Simulator (MOVES) model, Phase 2.
295
Fmt 4701
refinery emissions reductions, and 1. Downstream Emission Comparison IX–3 for calendar years 2035, 2045, and
lower upstream EGU emission increases 2055. Total GHG emissions, or CO2
when compared to the final standards. Our estimates of the downstream equivalent (CO2e), are calculated by
Chapter 4.7 of the RIA contains more emission reductions of GHGs that would summing all GHG emissions multiplied
discussion on the emission impacts of result from the alternative relative to the by their 100-year Global Warming
the alternative. reference case are presented in Table Potentials (GWP).1369
Our estimated GHG emission standards estimate is 12 percent), and compliance pathways based on an
reductions for the alternative are lower N2O by 6 percent (the final standards increase in the use of zero-emission
than for the final standards (see section estimate is 20 percent). The resulting vehicle technologies. Therefore, we also
V of this preamble). In 2055, we total GHG reduction, in CO2e, is 6 project that downstream emission
estimate that the alternative would percent for the alternative versus 20 reductions of criteria pollutants and air
reduce emissions of CO2 by 6 percent percent for the final standards. toxics would result from the alternative,
(the final standards estimate is 20 For both the final standards and the relative to the reference case, as
percent), methane by 3 percent (the final alternative, we modeled potential presented in Table IX–4.
Once again, the emission reductions reductions of NOX by 20 percent, PM2.5 2. Upstream Emission Comparison
in criteria pollutants and air toxics that by 5 percent, and VOC by 20 percent for Our estimates of the additional GHG
would result from the alternative are the final standards. Reductions in emissions from EGUs due to the
smaller than those estimated to result emissions for air toxics from the alternative, relative to the reference
from the final standards. For example, alternative range from 1 percent for case, are presented in Table IX–5 for
in 2055, we estimate the alternative benzene (the final standards estimate is calendar years 2035, 2045, and 2055, in
would reduce NOX emissions by 7 25 percent) to 3 percent for million metric tons (MMT). Our
percent, PM2.5 emissions by 1 percent, formaldehyde (the final standards estimates for additional criteria
and VOC emissions by 4 percent. This estimate is 15 percent). pollutant emissions are presented in
is compared to the final standards Table IX–6.

ER22AP24.146</GPH>
1369 IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/
Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. uploads/2018/02/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full.pdf.
ER22AP24.145</GPH>
to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
296
Fmt 4701
Because the potential compliance million metric tons (compared to 12.9 Table IX–7 presents the estimated
pathway for the alternative assumes million metric tons from the final impact of the alternative on GHG
lower ZEV adoption rates, we project standards), with similar trends for all emissions from refineries and Table IX–
smaller increases in emissions from other pollutants. The EGU impacts for 8 presents the estimated impact of the
EGUs than the final standards. In 2055, all pollutants decrease over time alternative on criteria pollutant
we estimate the alternative would because of projected changes in the emissions from refineries, both relative
increase EGU emissions of CO2 by 4.4 power generation mix. to the reference case.
ER22AP24.150</GPH>
We project smaller reductions in alternative versus 690,477 metric tons (i.e., the emissions inventory without
refinery emissions for the alternative for the final standards. the final standards), in million metric
than for the final standards (see section tons, for calendar years 2035, 2045, and
ER22AP24.149</GPH>
3. Comparison of Net Emissions Impacts

V of this preamble), consistent with our 2055. Table IX–10 contains a summary
projected impacts for downstream Table IX–9 shows a summary of our of the modeled net impacts of the
emissions. We project a reduction of modeled downstream, upstream, and alternative on criteria pollutant
net GHG emission impacts of the
147,787 metric tons of CO2 for the emissions.

alternative relative to the reference case
ER22AP24.148</GPH>
ER22AP24.147</GPH>
297
Fmt 4701
In 2055, we estimate the alternative emissions impacts trends discussed for and Table V–15 present the cumulative
would result in a net decrease of 17 the alternative, the magnitude of these GHG impacts that we model would
million metric tons of GHG emissions, net impacts is smaller for the alternative result from both the final standards and
compared to 61 million metric tons for than for the final standards. the alternative from 2027 through 2055
the final standards. Like the final for downstream emissions, EGU
4. Comparison of Cumulative GHG
standards, we project net decreases in emissions, and refinery emissions,
Impacts
emissions of NOx, VOC, and SO2 in respectively, relative to the reference
2055 but a net increase in PM2.5 The warming impacts of GHGs are case.
emissions. Consistent with other cumulative. Table V–13, Table V–14,
ER22AP24.153</GPH>
ER22AP24.152</GPH>
ER22AP24.151</GPH>
298
Fmt 4701
Overall, we estimate the alternative and 2055, relative to the reference case, from the final standards, which is more
would reduce net GHG emissions by as is presented in Table V–16. This is than 1 billion metric tons.
321 million metric tons between 2027 less than one third the total reduction
C. Program Costs Comparison of the Costs are presented in more detail in As shown in Table IX–15, our
Final Rule and Alternative Chapter 3 of the RIA. As noted earlier, analysis demonstrates that the final
costs are presented in 2022$ in standards will have the lowest cost
Using the cost elements outlined in undiscounted annual values along with compared to the alternative and
sections IV.B, IV.C, and IV.D, we have net present values and annualized reference cases for all net present and
estimated the costs associated with the values at 2, 3, and 7 percent discount annualized values at all three discount
final rule and alternative relative to the rates with values discounted to the 2027 rates.
reference case, as shown in Table IX–15. calendar year.
ER22AP24.156</GPH>
ER22AP24.155</GPH>
ER22AP24.154</GPH>
299
Fmt 4701
D. Benefits Table IX–16 presents the annual, Scientific Advances 1370 for the years
1. Climate Benefits undiscounted monetized climate beginning with the first year of rule
benefits of reduced GHG emissions implementation, 2027, through 2055 for
Our estimates of the climate benefits using social cost of GHG (SC–GHG) the alternative and final standards. Also
from the GHG emissions reductions values presented in the EPA Report on shown are the present values and
associated with the alternative are the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: equivalent annualized values associated
similar to those discussed for the final Estimates Incorporating Recent with each of the SC–GHG values. For
rule in section VII of this preamble.
ER22AP24.157</GPH>
1370 EPA Report on the Social Cost of Greenhouse
Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Scientific

Advances.
300
Fmt 4701
more detailed information about the please refer to section 7.1 of the RIA. impacts of the final standards and
climate benefits analysis conducted for See sections V and IX.B of this preamble alternative, respectively.
the final standards and alternative, for our analysis of GHG emission
2. Criteria Pollutant Reductions related premature deaths.1371 1372 single year (the ‘‘cessation lag’’ between
Although annual benefits presented in the change in PM exposures and the
Table IX–17 presents the total annual, the table are not discounted for the total realization of changes in health
undiscounted PM2.5-related health purposes of present value or annualized effects). The table also displays the
benefits estimated for the stream of value calculations, annual benefits do present and annualized value of
years beginning with the first year of reflect the use of 3 percent and 7 estimated benefits that occur from 2027
rule implementation, 2027, through percent discount rates to account for to 2055, discounted using both 3
calendar year 2055 for the final CO2 avoided health outcomes that are percent and 7 percent discount rates
emission standards and alternative. The expected to accrue over more than a and reported in 2022$.
range of benefits in Table IX–17 reflects
1371 Wu, X, Braun, D, Schwartz, J, The PM2.5-related health benefits of a
the range of premature mortality
Kioumourtzoglou, M and Dominici, F (2020). less stringent alternative program are
estimates based on risk estimates Evaluating the impact of long-term exposure to fine ¥$3.0 to $2.1 million assuming a 3
reported from two different long-term
particulate matter on mortality among the elderly.

Science advances 6(29): eaba5692. percent discount rate and ¥$77 to
exposure studies using different cohorts 1372 Pope III, CA, Lefler, JS, Ezzati, M, Higbee, JD, ¥$36 million assuming a 7 percent
to account for uncertainty in the Marshall, JD, Kim, S–Y, Bechle, M, Gilliat, KS, discount rate (2022$). We use a constant
benefits associated with avoiding PM- Vernon, SE and Robinson, AL (2019). Mortality risk 3 percent and 7-pecent discount rate to
and fine particulate air pollution in a large,
representative cohort of US adults. Environmental calculate present and annualized values
ER22AP24.158</GPH>
health perspectives 127(7): 077007. in Table IX–17, consistent with current
301
Fmt 4701
applicable OMB Circular No. A–4 discount rate to account for cessation PM2.5 health benefits may either be
guidance (2003). For the purposes of lag. If we apply a constant 2 percent positive or negative.
presenting total net benefits (see discount rate to the stream of annual For more detailed information about
preamble section VIII), we also use a benefits based on the 3 percent the benefits analysis conducted for the
constant 2 percent discount rate to cessation lag BPT, annualized benefits
final standards and alternative, please
calculate present and annualized values. would be $15 to $22 million. Depending
refer to Chapter 7 of the RIA.
We note that we do not currently have on the discount rate used, the present
BPT estimates that use a 2-percent and annualized value of the stream of
302
Fmt 4701
3. Energy Security and the energy security benefits for the security benefits for the final CO2
final standards and alternative for the emission standards are further
In Table IX–18, EPA presents the years 2027 through 2055. The oil discussed in section VII.
macroeconomic oil security premiums security premiums and the energy
ER22AP24.159</GPH>
303
Fmt 4701
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C detailed results. These estimated net identifying the appropriate standards.
E. How do the final standards and benefits are the sum of benefits and Nonetheless, the significantly greater
alternative compare in overall benefits operating savings minus vehicle costs. benefits for the final standards relative
and costs? As noted in preamble section VIII’s to the alternative provide reinforcing
discussion of costs and benefits for the support for EPA’s decision to adopt the
Table IX–19 shows the estimated net final standards, EPA’s consistent final standards in lieu of the alternative.
benefits for the final standards and practice has been to set standards to For example, in 2055, the final rule
alternative relative to the reference case, achieve improved air quality consistent would result in net benefits of $32
at 2, 3 and 7 percent discount rates, with CAA section 202 and not to rely on billion dollars (2022$), which is
respectively. Preamble section VIII and cost-benefit calculations, with their significantly greater than the
Chapter 8 of the RIA presents more uncertainties and limitations, in alternative’s net benefits of $8.3 billion.
ER22AP24.160</GPH>
304
Fmt 4701
X. Statutory and Executive Order that EPA prepared has been assigned products in the United States, as
Reviews EPA ICR Number 2734.02. You can find prescribed by CAA section 203(a).
Additional information about these a copy of the Supporting Statement in Participation in some programs is
statutes and Executive orders can be the docket for this rule, and it is briefly voluntary; but once a manufacturer has
found at https://www.epa.gov/laws- summarized here. The information elected to participate, it must submit the
regulations/laws-and-executive-orders. collection requirements are not required information.
enforceable until OMB approves them. • Estimated number of respondents:
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory This rulemaking consists of targeted Approximately 77 heavy-duty vehicle
Planning and Review and Executive updates and new GHG emission manufacturers.
Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory standards for heavy-duty vehicles • Frequency of response: One-time
Review beginning with MY 2027. While there burden associated with reviewing the
This action is a ‘‘significant regulatory will be changes to the EV–CIS data new requirements for all manufacturers;
action,’’ as defined under section 3(f)(1) system to reflect new standards, this for EV manufacturers, one-time burden
of Executive Order 12866, as amended will not affect manufacturer reporting. associated with new battery health
by Executive Order 14094. Accordingly, In addition, While EPA has committed monitor provisions, warranty reporting
EPA submitted this action to the Office to post-rule monitoring of the requirements, and associated revisions
of Management and Budget (OMB) for implementation of the heavy-duty to owners’ manuals.
Executive Order 12866 review. vehicle GHG programs, that monitoring • Total estimated burden: 7,411
Documentation of any changes made in is expected to rely on manufacturer- hours. Burden is defined at 5 CFR
response to the Executive Order 12866 submitted certification data and will not 1320.03(b).
review is available in the docket. The • Total estimated cost: $1.622
impose additional reporting
EPA prepared an analysis of the million; includes an estimated $936,500
requirements. As part of this monitoring
in maintenance and operational costs.
potential costs and benefits associated program, EPA will continue to evaluate An agency may not conduct or
with this action. This analysis, the the data collection needs and will create sponsor, and a person is not required to
‘‘Regulatory Impact Analysis— a new ICR if we determine additional respond to, a collection of information
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards data is needed. Finally, the information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
for Heavy-Duty Vehicles: Phase 3—Final collection activities for EPA’s Phase 2 control number. The OMB control
Rulemaking,’’ is available in the GHG program do not change as a result numbers for EPA’s regulations in Title
docket.1373 The analyses contained in of this rule. While manufacturers are 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
the RIA document are also summarized expected to experience a cost associated are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB
in sections II, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX with reviewing the new requirements, approves this ICR, the Agency will
of this preamble. they already submit the data that would announce that approval in the Federal
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) be required for certification to the Register and publish a technical
standards to EPA’s certification system amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display
The information collection activities (under programmatic ICRs). There the OMB control number for the
in this rule have been submitted for would be a change only to the specific approved information collection
approval to the Office of Management data reported, not its reporting. activities contained in this final rule.
and Budget (OMB) under the PRA. The • Respondents/affected entities:

Information Collection Request (ICR) Manufacturers of heavy-duty onroad C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
1373 U.S. EPA. Regulatory Impact Analysis—
vehicles. I certify that this action will not have
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-
• Respondent’s obligation to respond: a significant economic impact on a
Duty Vehicles: Phase 3. EPA–420–R–24–006. March Regulated entities must respond to this substantial number of small entities
ER22AP24.161</GPH>
2024. collection if they wish to sell their under the RFA. As explained in this
305
Fmt 4701
preamble, EPA is exempting small This action does not have substantial mental health effects resulting from
entities from the revisions to EPA’s direct effects on one or more Indian extreme weather events. In addition,
Phase 2 GHG standards for MY 2027 tribes, on the relationship between the children are among those especially
and the new GHG standards for MYs Federal Government and Indian tribes, susceptible to most allergic diseases, as
2028 through 2032 and later. Small EV or on the distribution of power and well as health effects associated with
manufacturers are subject to new battery responsibilities between the Federal heat waves, storms, and floods.
health monitor provisions and warranty Government and Indian tribes. Additional health concerns may arise in
provisions, which include making However, EPA has engaged with Tribal low-income households, especially
associated revisions to owners’ manuals. stakeholders in the development of this those with children, if climate change
There are 10 small companies that are rulemaking by holding a Tribal reduces food availability and increases
affected by the requirements. The workshop, offering information sessions prices, leading to food insecurity within
estimated burden is not expected to to Tribal organizations, and offering households. More detailed information
exceed 3 percent of annual revenue for government-to-government consultation on the impacts of climate change to
any small entity, and is expected to be upon request. human health and welfare is provided
between 1 and 3 percent of annual in section VI.A of this preamble.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children make up a substantial
revenue for only one company. We
Children From Environmental Health fraction of the U.S. population, and
therefore conclude that this action will and Safety Risks
not have a significant economic impact often have unique factors that contribute
on a substantial number of small entities This action is subject to Executive to their increased risk of experiencing a
within the regulated industries. More Order 13045 because it is a significant health effect from exposures to ambient
information concerning the small regulatory action under section 3(f)(1) of air pollutants because of their
entities and our conclusion is presented Executive Order 12866, and EPA continuous growth and development.
in Chapter 9 of the RIA. believes that the environmental health Children are more susceptible than
risks or safety risks of the pollutants adults to many air pollutants because
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act addressed by this action may have a they have (1) a developing respiratory
(UMRA) disproportionate effect on children. The system, (2) increased ventilation rates
This action contains no unfunded 2021 Policy on Children’s Health also relative to body mass compared with
Federal mandate for State, local, or applies to this action.1374 Accordingly, adults, (3) an increased proportion of
Tribal governments as described in we have evaluated the environmental oral breathing, particularly in boys,
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does health or safety effects of air pollutants relative to adults, and (4) behaviors that
not significantly or uniquely affect small affected by the final rule on children. increase chances for exposure. Even
governments. This action imposes no The results of this evaluation are before birth, the developing fetus may
enforceable duty on any State, local, or described in section VI of the preamble be exposed to air pollutants through the
Tribal government. This action contains and Chapter 5 of the RIA. The mother that affect development and
Federal mandates under UMRA that protection offered by these standards permanently harm the individual when
may result in annual expenditures of may be especially important for the mother is exposed.
$100 million or more for the private children because childhood represents a In addition to reducing GHGs, this
sector. Accordingly, the costs and life stage associated with increased final rule will also reduce onroad
benefits associated with this action are susceptibility to air pollutant-related emissions of criteria pollutants and air
discussed in sections IV, VII, and VIII of health effects. toxics. Section V of this preamble
this preamble and in the RIA, which is GHG emissions contribute to climate presents the estimated onroad emissions
in the docket for this rule. change and the GHG emissions reductions from the rule. Certain motor
This action is not subject to the reductions described in section V of this vehicle emissions present greater risks
requirements of UMRA section 203 preamble resulting from this rule will to children. Early lifestages (e.g.,
because it contains no regulatory contribute to mitigation of climate children) are thought to be more
requirements that might significantly or change. The assessment literature cited susceptible to tumor development than
uniquely affect small governments. in EPA’s 2009 and 2016 Endangerment adults when exposed to carcinogenic
Findings concluded that certain chemicals that act through a mutagenic
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism populations and life stages, including mode of action.1375 Exposure at a young
The action we are finalizing for HD children, the elderly, and the poor, are age to these carcinogens could lead to a
Phase 3 CO2 emission standards and most vulnerable to climate-related higher risk of developing cancer later in
related regulations does not have health effects. The assessment literature life. Chapter 5.2.8 of the RIA describes
federalism implications. The final HD since 2016 strengthens these a systematic review and meta-analysis
Phase 3 CO2 emission standards and conclusions by providing more detailed conducted by the U.S. Centers for
related regulations will not have findings regarding these groups’ Disease Control and Prevention that
substantial direct effects on the states, vulnerabilities and the projected reported a positive association between
on the relationship between the impacts they may experience. These proximity to traffic and the risk of
National Government and the states, or assessments describe how children’s leukemia in children. Also, section VI.B
on the distribution of power and unique physiological and of this preamble and Chapter 5 of the
responsibilities among the various developmental factors contribute to RIA discuss a number of childhood
levels of government. making them particularly vulnerable to health outcomes associated with
climate change. Impacts to children are proximity to roadways, including
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation expected from heat waves, air pollution,
and Coordination With Indian Tribal infectious and waterborne illnesses, and 1375 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Governments (2005). Supplemental guidance for assessing
This action does not have Tribal 1374 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency susceptibility from early-life exposure to
(2021). 2021 Policy on Children’s Health. carcinogens. Washington, DC: Risk Assessment
implications as specified in Executive Washington, DC. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/ Forum. EPA/630/R–03/003F. https://
Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order documents/2021-10/2021-policy-on-childrens- www3.epa.gov/airtoxics/childrens_supplement_
13175 does not apply to this action. health.pdf. final.pdf.
306
Fmt 4701
evidence for exacerbation of asthma Children are not expected to adverse energy effects. As shown in
symptoms and suggestive evidence for experience greater ambient Table 6–1 in the RIA, EPA projects that
new onset asthma. concentrations of air pollutants through 2055 these standards will result
In addition to reduced onroad compared to the general population. in a reduction of 135 billion gallons of
emissions of criteria pollutants and air However, because of their greater diesel and gasoline consumption and an
toxics, we expect the rule will also lead susceptibility to air pollution, including increase of 2,300 TWh of electricity
to reductions in refinery emissions and the impacts of a changing climate, and consumption (RIA 6.5). As discussed in
increases in pollutant emissions from their increased time spent outdoors, it is preamble section II.D.2.iii.d, we do not
EGUs (see preamble section V). As likely that the GHG emissions expect the increased electricity
described in section VI.B of this reductions associated with the consumption under this rule to have
preamble and Chapter 5 of the RIA, the standards will have particular benefits significant adverse impacts on the
Integrated Science Assessments for a for children’s health. electric grid.
number of pollutants affected by this H. Executive Order 13211: Actions I. National Technology Transfer and
rule, including those for SO2, NO2, PM, Concerning Regulations That Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
ozone, and CO, describe children as a Significantly Affect Energy Supply, part 51
group with greater susceptibility. Distribution, or Use
There is substantial evidence that This action involves technical
This action is not a ‘‘significant
people who live or attend school near energy action’’ because it is not likely to standards. Except for the standards
major roadways are more likely to be have a significant adverse effect on the discussed in this section, the standards
people of color, Hispanic ethnicity, and/ supply, distribution, or use of energy. included in the regulatory text as
or low socioeconomic status. Analyses EPA has outlined the energy effects in incorporated by reference were all
of communities in close proximity to section VI of this preamble and Chapter previously approved for IBR and no
sources such as EGUs and refineries 5 of the RIA, which is available in the change is included in this action.
have also found that a higher percentage docket for this action and is briefly In accordance with the requirements
of communities of color and low-income summarized here. of 1 CFR 51.5, we are incorporating by
communities live near these sources This action will reduce CO2 emissions reference the use of test methods and
when compared to national averages. from heavy-duty vehicles under revised standards from ASTM International
Within these highly exposed groups, GHG standards, which will result in (ASTM). The referenced standards and
children’s exposure and susceptibility significant reductions in the test methods may be obtained through
to health effects is greater than adults consumption of petroleum, increase the ASTM website (www.astm.org) or by
due to school-related and seasonal electricity consumption, achieve energy calling (610) 832–9585. We are
activities, behavior, and physiological security benefits (described in section incorporating by reference the following
factors. VII.C of this preamble), and have no ASTM standards:
In accordance with the requirements Standards and Technology (NIST). The (301) 975–6478. We are incorporating by
of 1 CFR 51.5, we are incorporating by referenced standards and test methods reference the following NIST standards:
reference the use of test methods and may be obtained through the NIST
standards from National Institute of website (www.nist.gov) or by calling
In accordance with the requirements be obtained through the EPA website provisions of 40 CFR 1037.550 to 40
ER22AP24.163</GPH>
of 1 CFR 51.5, we are incorporating by (www.epa.gov) or by emailing CFR 1036.545, including references to
reference the use of EPA’s Greenhouse complianceinfo@epa.gov. As described U.S. EPA’s Greenhouse gas Emissions
gas Emissions Model (GEM) Phase 2, in section III.C.1.iv of this preamble, we Model (GEM). We are therefore
Version 4.0. The referenced model may are moving the powertrain testing removing GEM references in 40 CFR
ER22AP24.162</GPH>
307
Fmt 4701
1037.550, with the change noted in 40 incorporating by reference GEM as

CFR 1037.810(d)(4). We are accordingly follows:
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal exposure to these pollutants for people M. Severability
Actions to Address Environmental living in the communities near these This final rule includes new and
Justice in Minority Populations and facilities. Analyses of communities in revised requirements for numerous
Low-Income Populations and Executive close proximity to these sources (such provisions under various aspects of the
Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation’s as EGUs and refineries) have found that highway on-road emission control
Commitment to Environmental Justice a higher percentage of communities of program, including certain revised GHG
for All color and low-income communities live standards for MY 2027 and new GHG
EPA believes that the human health or near these sources when compared to standards for MYs 2028 through 2032
environmental conditions that exist national averages. and later for HD vehicles, updates to
prior to this action result in or have the EPA is additionally identifying and discrete elements of the ABT program,
potential to result in disproportionate addressing environmental justice emission-related warranty, and other
and adverse human health or requirements. Therefore, this final rule
concerns by providing just treatment
environmental effects on communities is a multifaceted rule that addresses
with environmental justice concerns. and meaningful involvement with many separate things for independent
EPA provides a summary of the environment justice groups in soliciting reasons, as detailed in each respective
evidence for potentially input, considering comments, and portion of this preamble. We intend
disproportionate and adverse effects developing this final rulemaking. each portion of this rule to be severable
among people of color and low-income The information supporting this from each other, though we took the
populations in section VI.D of the impacts review is contained in section approach of including all the parts in
preamble for this rule. VI.D of the preamble for this rule, and one rulemaking rather than
EPA believes that this action is likely all supporting documents have been promulgating multiple rules to ensure
to reduce existing disproportionate and placed in the public docket for this the changes are consistently
adverse effects on many communities action. implemented, even though the changes
with environmental justice concerns. are not inter-dependent. We have noted
Section VI.D.1 discusses the K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) the independence of various pieces of
environmental justice issues associated this package both in the proposal and in
with climate change. People of color, This action is subject to the CRA, and earlier sections of the preamble but we
low-income populations and/or the EPA will submit a rule report to reiterate it here for clarity.
indigenous peoples may be especially each House of the Congress and to the For example, EPA notes that our
vulnerable to the impacts of climate Comptroller General of the United judgments regarding feasibility of the
change. The GHG emission reductions States. This action meets the criteria set Phase 3 standards for earlier years
from this action will contribute to forth in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). largely reflect anticipated changes in the
efforts to reduce the probability of heavy-duty vehicle market (which are
severe impacts related to climate L. Judicial Review driven by other factors, such as the IRA
change. This final action is ‘‘nationally and manufacturers’ plans), while our
In addition to reducing GHGs, we applicable’’ within the meaning of CAA judgments regarding feasibility of the
project that this action will also reduce standards in later years reflect those
section 307(b)(1) because it is expressly
onroad emissions of criteria pollutants trends plus the additional lead time for
listed in the section (i.e., ‘‘any standard
and air toxics. Section V of this further adoption of control technologies.
preamble presents the estimated under section [202] of this title’’). Under
Thus, the standards for the later years
impacts from this action on onroad, section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions
are feasible and appropriate even absent
refinery and EGU emissions. These non- for judicial review of this action must be standards for the earlier years, and vice
GHG emission reductions from vehicles filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the versa. Accordingly, EPA finds that the
will improve air quality for the people District of Columbia Circuit within 60 standards for each individual year are
who reside in close proximity to major days from the date this final action is severable from standards for each of the
roadways and who are published in the Federal Register. other years, and that at minimum the
disproportionately represented by Filing a petition for reconsideration by earlier MYs (MY 2027 through MY
people of color and people with low the Administrator of this final action 2029) are severable from the later MYs
income, as described in section VI.D.3 does not affect the finality of the action (MYs 2030 and later). Furthermore,
of this preamble. We expect that for the purposes of judicial review, nor EPA’s revisions to certain MY 2027
localized increases in criteria and toxic does it extend the time within which a standards are severable from the new
pollutant emissions from EGUs and petition for judicial review must be filed MY 2028 and later standards because
reductions in petroleum-sector and shall not postpone the effectiveness our analysis supports that the standards
ER22AP24.164</GPH>
emissions could lead to changes in of such rule or action. for each of the later years are feasible
308
Fmt 4701
and appropriate even absent the revised elements. For instance, while the battery public health or welfare. The statutory
MY 2027 standards. durability and warranty provisions authorities for specific elements of this
Additionally, our judgments regarding support the implementation of the action are further described in the
the standards for each separate vehicle standards, EPA adopted the standards corresponding preamble sections.
category are likewise independent and independent of those provisions, and
do not rely on one another. For the standards can function absent them. List of Subjects
example, EPA notes that our judgments Likewise, while credits from multipliers 40 CFR Part 86
regarding feasibility of the standards for and credit transfers across averaging sets
vocational vehicles reflect our judgment allow flexibility in compliance options Environmental protection,
regarding the general availability of for manufacturers, they are not Administrative practice and procedure,
depot-charging infrastructure in MY necessary for manufacturers to meet the Confidential business information,
2027 and for each later model year emissions standards and we did not rely Greenhouse gases, Labeling, Motor
under the modeled potential on them in justifying the feasibility of vehicle pollution, Reporting and
compliance pathway, and that judgment the standards. recordkeeping requirements,
is independent of our judgment Thus, EPA has independently
Warranties.
regarding standards for tractors that considered and adopted each of these
reflects our judgment regarding more portions of the final rule (including but 40 CFR Part 1036
reliance on publicly available charging not limited to the Phase 3 GHG
infrastructure and hydrogen refueling standards for HD vehicles; updates to Environmental protection,
infrastructure in MY 2030 and for each discrete elements of the ABT program, Administrative practice and procedure,
later model year under the modeled including temporary transitional Air pollution control, Confidential
potential compliance pathway. flexibilities; compliance testing and business information, Greenhouse gases,
Similarly, within the standards for certification procedures; battery Incorporation by reference, Labeling,
vocational vehicles, our judgments durability monitoring; and battery Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and
regarding the feasibility of each model warranty) and each is severable should recordkeeping requirements,
year of the standards for each category there be judicial review. If a court were Warranties.
of vocational vehicles (LHD, MHD, and to invalidate any one of these elements
HHD) and for tractors (day cab and of the final rule, we intend the 40 CFR Part 1037
sleeper cab) reflect our judgments remainder of this action to remain
Environmental protection,
regarding the design requirements and effective. Importantly, we have designed
Administrative practice and procedure,
payback analysis for each of the these different elements of the program
Air pollution control, Confidential
individual 101 vehicle types analyzed to function sensibly and independently,
in HD TRUCS and then aggregated to the supporting basis for each of these business information, Incorporation by
the individual vehicle category, elements of the final rule reflects that reference, Labeling, Motor vehicle
independent of those same kinds of they are independently justified and pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping
judgments for the other vehicle appropriate, and find each portion requirements, Warranties.
categories and independent from prior appropriate even if one or more other 40 CFR Part 1039
MYs standards, under the modeled parts of the rule has been set aside. For
potential compliance pathway. example, if a reviewing court were to Environmental protection,
Accordingly, EPA finds that the invalidate any of the Phase 3 GHG Administrative practice and procedure,
standards for each category of standards, the other regulatory Air pollution control, Confidential
vocational vehicles and tractors for each amendments, including not only the business information, Labeling, Motor
individual model year are severable, other Phase 3 GHG standards but also vehicle pollution, Reporting and
including from the standards for all the changes to discrete elements of the recordkeeping requirements,
other categories for that model year, and ABT program, certification procedures, Warranties.
from the standards for different model and battery durability and warranty,
years. remain fully operable. Moreover, this 40 CFR Part 1054
Finally, EPA notes that there are list is not intended to be exhaustive, and
changes EPA is making related to should not be viewed as an intention by Environmental protection,
implementation of standards generally EPA to consider other parts of the rule Administrative practice and procedure,
(i.e., independent of the numeric not explicitly listed here as not Air pollution control, Confidential
stringency of the standards set in this severable from other parts of the rule. business information, Imports, Labeling,
final rule). For example, EPA is making Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
changes to testing and other certification XI. Statutory Authority and Legal requirements, Warranties.
procedures, as well as establishing Provisions
Statutory authority for this action is 40 CFR Part 1065
battery durability and battery warranty
provisions. For another example, EPA is found in the Clean Air Act at 42 U.S.C. Environmental protection,
making changes to discrete elements of 7401–7675, including Clean Air Act Administrative practice and procedure,
the existing ABT program, including to sections 202–208, 213, 216, and 301 (42 Air pollution control, Incorporation by
use of credits generated from Phase 2 U.S.C. 7521–7542, 7547, 7550, and reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
credit multipliers for advanced 7601). Statutory authority for the GHG requirements, Research.
technologies and credit transfers across standards is found in CAA section
averaging sets. Each of these issues has 202(a)(1)–(2) (42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(1)–(2)), Michael S. Regan,
been considered and adopted which requires EPA to establish Administrator.

independently of the level of the standards applicable to emissions of air
standards, and indeed of each other. pollutants from new motor vehicles and For the reasons set out in the
EPA’s overall vehicle program continues new motor vehicle engines which cause preamble, we are amending title 40,
to be fully implementable even in the or contribute to air pollution which may chapter I of the Code of Federal
absence of any one or more of these reasonably be anticipated to endanger Regulations as set forth below.
309
Fmt 4701
PART 86—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS § 1036.101 Overview of exhaust emission Heavy HDE certified as tractor engines,
FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY standards. measure CO2 emissions using the SET
VEHICLES AND ENGINES (a) You must show that engines meet steady-state duty cycle specified in
the following exhaust emission § 1036.510. This testing with the SET
■ 1. The authority citation for part 86 standards: duty cycle is intended for engines
continues to read as follows: (1) Criteria pollutant standards for designed to be used primarily in tractors
NOX, HC, PM, and CO apply as and other line-haul applications. Note
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. described in § 1036.104. These that the use of some SET-certified
pollutants are sometimes described tractor engines in vocational
■ 2. Amend § 86.1819–14 by revising
collectively as ‘‘criteria pollutants’’ applications does not affect your
paragraph (d)(2)(i) and adding
because they are either criteria certification obligation under this
paragraph (d)(2)(iv) to read as follows: pollutants under the Clean Air Act or paragraph (a)(1); see other provisions of
§ 86.1819–14 Greenhouse gas emission precursors to the criteria pollutants this part and 40 CFR part 1037 for limits
standards for heavy-duty vehicles. ozone and PM. on using engines certified to only one
(2) This part contains standards and cycle. For Medium HDE and Heavy HDE
* * * * *
other regulations applicable to the certified as both tractor and vocational
(d) * * * emission of the air pollutant defined as engines, measure CO2 emissions using
(2) * * * the aggregate group of six greenhouse the SET duty cycle specified in
gases: carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, § 1036.510 and the FTP transient duty
(i) Except as specified in paragraph
methane, hydrofluorocarbons, cycle specified in § 1036.512. Testing
(d)(2)(iv) of this section, credits you
perfluorocarbons, and sulfur with both SET and FTP duty cycles is
generate under this section may be used
hexafluoride. Greenhouse gas (GHG) intended for engines that are designed
only to offset credit deficits under this
standards for CO2, CH4, and N2O apply for use in both tractor and vocational
section. You may bank credits for use in
as described in § 1036.108. applications. For all other engines
a future model year in which your (b) You may optionally demonstrate
average CO2 level exceeds the standard. (including Spark-ignition HDE),
compliance with the emission standards
You may trade credits to another measure CO2 emissions using the FTP
of this part by testing hybrid
manufacturer according to § 86.1865– transient duty cycle specified in
powertrains, rather than testing the
12(k)(8). Before you bank or trade § 1036.512.
engine alone. Except as specified,
credits, you must apply any available (i) Spark-ignition standards. The CO2
provisions of this part that reference
credits to offset a deficit if the deadline standard for all spark-ignition engines is
engines apply equally to hybrid
to offset that credit deficit has not yet 627 g/hp·hr for model years 2016
powertrains.
passed. through 2020.This standard continues to
* * * * * § 1036.104 [Amended] apply in later model years for all spark-
■ 5. Amend § 1036.104 by removing ignition engines that are not Heavy
(iv) Credits generated under this HDE. Spark-ignition engines that qualify
section may be used to demonstrate to paragraph (c)(2)(iii).
as Heavy HDE under § 1036.140(b)(2) for
compliance with the CO2 emission ■ 6. Amend § 1036.108 by revising
model years 2021 and later are subject
standards for vehicles certified under 40 paragraphs (a)(1) and (e) to read as
to the compression-ignition engine
CFR part 1037 as described in 40 CFR follows:
standards for Heavy HDE-Vocational or
1037.150(z). § 1036.108 Greenhouse gas emission Heavy HDE-Tractor, as applicable. You
* * * * * standards—CO2, CH4, and N2O. may certify spark-ignition engines to the
* * * * * compression-ignition standards for the
PART 1036—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS (a) * * * appropriate model year under this
FROM NEW AND IN-USE HEAVY-DUTY (1) CO2 emission standards in this paragraph (a). If you do this, those
HIGHWAY ENGINES paragraph (a)(1) apply based on testing engines are treated as compression-
as specified in subpart F of this part. ignition engines for all provisions of this
■ 3. The authority citation for part 1036 The applicable test cycle for measuring part.
continues to read as follows: CO2 emissions differs depending on the (ii) Compression-ignition standards.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. engine family’s primary intended The following CO2 standards apply for
service class and the extent to which the compression-ignition engines and
■ 4. Revise § 1036.101 to read as engines will be (or were designed to be) model year 2021 and later spark-ignition
follows: used in tractors. For Medium HDE and engines that qualify as Heavy HDE:
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)(ii) OF § 1036.108—COMPRESSION-IGNITION CO2 STANDARDS

[g/hp·hr]
Medium HDE- Heavy HDE- Medium HDE- Heavy HDE-

Phase Model years Light HDE vocational vocational tractor tractor
1 ..................... 2014–2016 ...................................................... 600 600 567 502 475

2017–2020 ...................................................... 576 576 555 487 460
2 ..................... 2021–2023 ...................................................... 563 545 513 473 447
2024–2026 ...................................................... 555 538 506 461 436
2027 and later ................................................. 552 535 503 457 432
* * * * * (e) Applicability for testing. The as specified in this paragraph (e) to all
emission standards in this subpart apply duty-cycle testing (according to the
310
Fmt 4701
applicable test cycles) of testable relevant components and OBD (incorporated by reference, see
configurations, including certification, monitoring is required for those § 1036.810).
selective enforcement audits, and in-use components (or modeling is required for (2) The provisions of this section
testing. The CO2 FCLs serve as the CO2 some parameter related to those apply differently based on an individual
emission standards for the engine family components): vehicle’s speed history. A vehicle’s
with respect to certification and * * * * * speed category is based on the OBD
confirmatory testing instead of the (11) * * * system’s recorded value for average
standards specified in paragraph (a)(1) (ii) Send us results from any testing speed for the preceding 30 hours of non-
of this section. The FELs serve as the you performed for certifying engine idle engine operation. The vehicle speed
emission standards for the engine family families (including equivalent engine category applies at the point that the
with respect to all other duty-cycle families) with the California Air engine first detects an inducement
testing. See §§ 1036.235 and 1036.241 to Resources Board, including the results triggering condition identified under
determine which engine configurations of any testing performed under 13 CCR paragraph (b) of this section and
within the engine family are subject to 1971.1(l) for verification of in-use continues to apply until the inducement
testing. Note that engine fuel maps and compliance and 13 CCR 1971.5(c) for triggering condition is fully resolved as
powertrain test results also serve as manufacturer self-testing within the specified in paragraph (e) of this
standards as described in §§ 1036.535, deadlines set out in 13 CCR 1971.1 and section. Non-idle engine operation
1036.540, 1036.545, and 1036.630. 1971.5. includes all operating conditions except
■ 7. Amend § 1036.110 by revising * * * * * those that qualify as idle based on OBD
paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(6), (c) * * * system controls as specified in 13 CCR
(b)(9) introductory text, (b)(11)(ii), and (1) For inducements specified in 1971.1(h)(5.4.10). Apply speed derates
(c)(1) to read as follows: § 1036.111 and any other AECD that based on the following categories:
derates engine output related to SCR or
§ 1036.110 Diagnostic controls. TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(2) OF
DPF systems, indicate the fault code for
* * * * * the detected problem, a description of § 1036.111—VEHICLE CATEGORIES
(b) Engines must comply with the the fault code, and the current speed
2019 heavy-duty OBD requirements restriction. For inducement faults under Vehicle category a Average speed
adopted for California as described in (mi/hr)
§ 1036.111, identify whether the fault
this paragraph (b). California’s 2019 condition is for DEF level, DEF quality, Low-speed ................. speed <15.
heavy-duty OBD requirements are part or tampering; for other faults, identify Medium-speed .......... 15 ≤ speed <25.
of 13 CCR 1968.2, 1968.5, 1971.1, and whether the fault condition is related to High-speed ................ speed ≥25.
1971.5 (incorporated by reference, see SCR or DPF systems. If there are a A vehicle is presumed to be a high-speed
§ 1036.810). We may approve your additional derate stages, also indicate
request to certify an OBD system vehicle if it has not yet logged 30 hours of
the next speed restriction and the time non-idle operation.
meeting alternative specifications if you remaining until starting the next
submit information as needed to (3) Where engines derate power
restriction. If the derate involves
demonstrate that it meets the intent of output as specified in this section, the
something other than restricting vehicle
this section. For example, we may derate must decrease vehicle speed by 1
speed, such as a torque derate, adjust
approve your request for a system that mi/hr for every five minutes of engine
the information to correctly identify any
meets a later version of California’s OBD operation until reaching the specified
current and pending restrictions.
requirements if you demonstrate that it derate speed. This paragraph (a)(3)
* * * * * applies at the onset of an inducement,
meets the intent of this section; the
demonstration must include ■ 8. Revise and republish § 1036.111 to at any transition to a different step of
identification of any approved read as follows: inducement, and for any derate that
deficiencies and your plans to resolve recurs under paragraph (e)(3) of this
§ 1036.111 Inducements related to SCR.
such deficiencies. To demonstrate that section.
Engines using SCR to control (b) Inducement triggering conditions.
your engine meets the intent of this emissions depend on a constant supply
section, the OBD system meeting Create derate strategies that monitor for
of diesel exhaust fluid (DEF). This and trigger an inducement based on the
alternative specifications must address section describes how manufacturers
all the provisions described in this following conditions:
must design their engines to derate (1) DEF supply falling to 2.5 percent
paragraph (b) and in paragraph (c) of power output to induce operators to
this section. The following clarifications of DEF tank capacity or a level
take appropriate actions to ensure the corresponding to three hours of engine
and exceptions apply for engines SCR system is working properly. The
certified under this part: operation, based on available
requirements of this section apply information on DEF consumption rates.
* * * * * equally for engines installed in heavy- (2) DEF quality failing to meet your
(6) The provisions related to duty vehicles at or below 14,000 lbs concentration specifications.
verification of in-use compliance in 13 GVWR. The requirements of this section (3) Any signal indicating that a
CCR 1971.1(l)(4) do not apply. The apply starting in model year 2027, catalyst is missing.
provisions related to manufacturer self- though you may comply with the (4) Open circuit faults related to the
testing in 13 CCR 1971.5(c) also do not requirements of this section in earlier following: DEF tank level sensor, DEF
apply. model years. pump, DEF quality sensor, SCR wiring
* * * * * (a) General provisions. The following harness, NOX sensors, DEF dosing valve,
(9) Design compression-ignition terms and general provisions apply DEF tank heater, DEF tank temperature
engines to make the following under this section: sensor, and aftertreatment control
additional data-stream signals available (1) As described in § 1036.110, this module.
on demand with a generic scan tool section relies on terms and requirements (c) [Reserved]
according to 13 CCR 1971.1(h)(4.2), if specified for OBD systems by California (d) Derate schedule. Engines must
the engine is so equipped with the ARB in 13 CCR 1968.2 and 1971.1 follow the derate schedule described in
311
Fmt 4701
this paragraph (d) if the engine detects maximum drive speed for the vehicle. engine operation without regard to
an inducement triggering condition This maximum drive speed decreases engine starting.
identified in paragraph (b) of this over time based on hours of non-idle (1) Apply speed-limiting derates
section. The derate takes the form of a according to the following schedule:
TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (d)(1) OF § 1036.111—DERATE SCHEDULE FOR DETECTED INDUCEMENT TRIGGERING
CONDITIONS a
High-speed vehicles Medium-speed vehicles Low-speed vehicles
Hours of Hours of Hours of

Maximum speed Maximum speed Maximum speed
non-idle engine non-idle engine non-idle engine
(mi/hr) (mi/hr) (mi/hr)
operation operation operation
0 65 0 55 0 45
6 60 6 50 5 40
12 55 12 45 10 35
20 50 45 40 30 25
86 45 70 35 ................................... ...................................
119 40 90 25 ................................... ...................................
144 35 ................................... ................................... ................................... ...................................
164 25 ................................... ................................... ................................... ...................................
a Hours start counting when the engine detects an inducement triggering condition specified in paragraph (b) of this section. For DEF supply,
you may program the engine to reset the timer to three hours when the engine detects an empty DEF tank.
(2) You may design and produce abnormal conditions may include (e.g., trouble codes) is available using
engines that will be installed in excessive exhaust backpressure from an the OBD system.
motorcoaches with an alternative derate overloaded particulate trap, and running * * * * *
schedule that starts with a 65 mi/hr out of diesel exhaust fluid for engines ■ 12. Amend § 1036.150 by:
derate when an inducement triggering that rely on urea-based selective ■ a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) and
condition is first detected, steps down catalytic reduction. The emission (d);
to 50 mi/hr after 80 hours, and standards do not apply when any ■ b. Adding paragraph (f);
concludes with a final derate speed of AECDs approved under this paragraph ■ c. Revising paragraphs (j), (k)
25 mi/hr after 180 hours of non-idle (h)(4) are active. introductory text, (q), and (v); and
operation. * * * * * ■ d. Adding paragraph (aa).
(e) Deactivating derates. Program the The additions and revisions read as
engine to deactivate derates as follows: ■ 10. Amend § 1036.120 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows: follows:
(1) Evaluate whether the detected
inducement triggering condition § 1036.120 Emission-related warranty § 1036.150 Interim provisions.
continues to apply. Deactivate derates if requirements. * * * * *
the engine confirms that the detected (a) * * *
inducement triggering condition is * * * * *
(c) Components covered. The (2) * * *
resolved. (ii) Engines must meet a NOX
(2) Allow a generic scan tool to emission-related warranty covers all
components listed in 40 CFR part 1068, standard when tested over the Low Load
deactivate inducement triggering codes Cycle as described in § 1036.514.
while the vehicle is not in motion. appendix A, and components from any
other system you develop to control Engines must also meet an off-cycle
(3) Treat any detected inducement
emissions. Note that this includes NOX standard as specified in
triggering condition that recurs within
hybrid system components that you § 1036.104(a)(3). Calculate the NOX
40 hours of engine operation as the
specify in a certified configuration. The family emission limits for the Low Load
same detected inducement triggering
emission-related warranty covers any Cycle and for off-cycle testing as
condition, which would restart the
components, regardless of the company described in § 1036.104(c)(3) with
derate at the same point in the derate
that produced them, that are the original StdFTPNOx set to 35 mg/hp·hr and
schedule that the system last
components or the same design as Std[cycle]NOx set to the values specified in
deactivated the derate.
components from the certified § 1036.104(a)(1) or (3), respectively. No
■ 9. Amend § 1036.115 by revising
configuration. standard applies for HC, PM, and CO
paragraph (h)(4) to read as follows: emissions for the Low Load Cycle or for
* * * * * off-cycle testing, but you must record
§ 1036.115 Other requirements.
* * * * * ■ 11. Amend § 1036.125 by revising measured values for those pollutants
(h) * * * paragraph (h)(8)(iii) to read as follows: and include those measured values
(4) The AECD applies only for engines where you report NOX emission results.
§ 1036.125 Maintenance instructions and
that will be installed in emergency allowable maintenance. * * * * *
vehicles, and the need is justified in (d) Small manufacturers. The
* * * * *
terms of preventing the engine from greenhouse gas standards of this part
losing speed, torque, or power due (h) * * * apply on a delayed schedule for
abnormal conditions of the emission (8) * * * manufacturers meeting the small
control system, or in terms of preventing (iii) A description of the three types business criteria specified in 13 CFR
such abnormal conditions from of SCR-related derates (DEF level, DEF 121.201. Apply the small business
occurring, during operation related to quality and tampering) and that further criteria for NAICS code 336310 for
emergency response. Examples of such information on the inducement cause engine manufacturers with respect to
312
gasoline-fueled engines and 333618 for certification under this paragraph (k) is ■ 15. Amend § 1036.240 by revising
engine manufacturers with respect to subject to the following conditions and paragraph (c)(3) to read as follows:
other engines; the employee limits requirements:
apply to the total number employees § 1036.240 Demonstrating compliance with
* * * * * criteria pollutant emission standards.
together for affiliated companies. (q) Confirmatory and in-use testing of
Qualifying small manufacturers are not fuel maps defined in § 1036.505(b). For * * * * *
subject to the greenhouse gas emission model years 2021 and later, where the (c) * * *
standards in § 1036.108 for engines with results from Eq. 1036.235–1 for a (3) Sawtooth and other nonlinear
a date of manufacture on or after confirmatory or in-use test are at or deterioration patterns. The deterioration
November 14, 2011, but before January below 2.0%, we will not replace the factors described in paragraphs (c)(1)
1, 2022. In addition, qualifying small manufacturer’s fuel maps. and (2) of this section assume that the
manufacturers producing engines that highest useful life emissions occur
* * * * *
run on any fuel other than gasoline, E85, (v) OBD communication protocol. We either at the end of useful life or at the
or diesel fuel may delay complying with may approve the alternative low-hour test point. The provisions of
every later greenhouse gas standard communication protocol specified in this paragraph (c)(3) apply where good
under this part by one model year; SAE J1979–2 (incorporated by reference, engineering judgment indicates that the
however, small manufacturers may see § 1036.810) if the protocol is highest useful life emissions will occur
generate emission credits only by approved by the California Air between these two points. For example,
certifying all their engine families Resources Board. The alternative emissions may increase with service
within a given averaging set to protocol would apply instead of SAE accumulation until a certain
standards that apply for the current J1939 and SAE J1979 as specified in 40 maintenance step is performed, then
model year. Note that engines not yet CFR 86.010–18(k)(1). Engines designed return to the low-hour emission levels
subject to standards must nevertheless to comply with SAE J1979–2 must meet and begin increasing again. Such a
supply fuel maps to vehicle the freeze-frame requirements in pattern may occur with battery-based
manufacturers as described in paragraph § 1036.110(b)(8) and in 13 CCR hybrid powertrains. Base deterioration
(n) of this section. Note also that engines 1971.1(h)(4.3.2) (incorporated by factors for engines with such emission
produced by small manufacturers are reference, see § 1036.810). This patterns on the difference between (or
subject to criteria pollutant standards. paragraph (v) also applies for model ratio of) the point at which the highest
* * * * * year 2026 and earlier engines. emissions occur and the low-hour test
(f) Testing exemption for hydrogen point. Note that this paragraph (c)(3)
* * * * * applies for maintenance-related
engines. Tailpipe CO2 emissions from (aa) Correcting credit calculations. If
engines fueled with neat hydrogen are deterioration only where we allow such
you notify us by October 1, 2024, that
deemed to be 3 g/hp·hr and tailpipe critical emission-related maintenance.
errors mistakenly decreased your
CH4, HC, and CO emissions are deemed balance of GHG emission credits for * * * * *
to comply with the applicable standard. 2020 or any earlier model years, you ■ 16. Amend § 1036.241 by revising
Fuel mapping and testing for CO2, CH4, may correct the errors and recalculate paragraph (c)(3) to read as follows:
HC, or CO is optional under this part for the balance of emission credits after
these engines. § 1036.241 Demonstrating compliance with
applying a 10 percent discount to the greenhouse gas emission standards.
* * * * * credit correction.
(j) Alternate standards under 40 CFR * * * * *
part 86. This paragraph (j) describes (c) * * *
paragraph (v) to read as follows:
alternate emission standards that apply (3) Sawtooth and other nonlinear
for model year 2023 and earlier loose § 1036.205 Requirements for an deterioration patterns. The deterioration
engines certified under 40 CFR 86.1819– application for certification. factors described in paragraphs (c)(1)
14(k)(8). The standards of § 1036.108 do * * * * * and (2) of this section assume that the
not apply for these engines. The (v) Include good-faith estimates of highest useful life emissions occur
standards in this paragraph (j) apply for U.S.-directed production volumes. either at the end of useful life or at the
emissions measured with the engine Include a justification for the estimated low-hour test point. The provisions of
installed in a complete vehicle production volumes if they are this paragraph (c)(3) apply where good
consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR substantially different than actual engineering judgment indicates that the
86.1819–14(k)(8)(vi). The only production volumes in earlier years for highest useful life emissions will occur
requirements of this part that apply to similar models. between these two points. For example,
these engines are those in this paragraph * * * * * emissions may increase with service
(j) and §§ 1036.115 through 1036.135, ■ 14. Amend § 1036.230 by revising accumulation until a certain
1036.535, and 1036.540. paragraph (e) to read as follows: maintenance step is performed, then
(k) Limited production volume return to the low-hour emission levels
allowance under ABT. You may § 1036.230 Selecting engine families. and begin increasing again. Such a
produce a limited number of Heavy * * * * * pattern may occur with battery-based
HDE that continue to meet the standards (e) Engine configurations certified as hybrid powertrains. Base deterioration
that applied under 40 CFR 86.007–11 in hybrid powertrains may not be included factors for engines with such emission
model years 2027 through 2029. The in an engine family with engines that patterns on the difference between (or
maximum number of engines you may have nonhybrid powertrains. Note that ratio of) the point at which the highest
produce under this limited production this does not prevent you from emissions occur and the low-hour test
allowance is 5 percent of the annual including engines in a nonhybrid family point. Note that this paragraph (c)(3)
average of your actual production if they are used in hybrid vehicles, as applies for maintenance-related
volume of Heavy HDE in model years long as you certify them based on deterioration only where we allow such
2023–2025 for calculating emission engine testing. critical emission-related maintenance.
credits under § 1036.705. Engine * * * * * * * * * *
313
Fmt 4701
■ 17. Amend § 1036.245 by revising (c) If your certification includes (d) You must complete all the
paragraphs (c)(3) introductory text and powertrain testing as specified in required testing and reporting under
(c)(3)(ii) introductory text to read as § 1036.630, these selective enforcement this subpart (for all ten test engines, if
follows: audit provisions apply with respect to applicable), within 18 months after we
powertrain test results as specified in direct you to test a particular engine
§ 1036.245 Deterioration factors for § 1036.545 and 40 CFR part 1037, family. We will typically select engine
exhaust emission standards.
subpart D. We may allow manufacturers families for testing and notify you in
* * * * * to instead perform the engine-based writing by June 30 of the applicable
(c) * * * testing to simulate the powertrain test as calendar year. If you request it, we may
(3) Perform service accumulation in specified in 40 CFR 1037.551. allow additional time to send us this
the laboratory by operating the engine or * * * * * information.
hybrid powertrain repeatedly over one ■ 20. Amend § 1036.405 by revising * * * * *
of the following test sequences, or a paragraphs (a) and (d) to read as follows:
different test sequence that we approve ■ 21. Amend § 1036.415 by revising
in advance: § 1036.405 Overview of the manufacturer- paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
* * * * * run field-testing program.
(a) You must test in-use engines from § 1036.415 Preparing and testing engines.
(ii) Duty-cycle sequence 2 is based on
operating over the LLC and the vehicle- the families we select. We may select * * * * *
based duty cycles from 40 CFR part the following number of engine families (c) * * *
1037. Select the vehicle subcategory and for testing, except as specified in
paragraph (b) of this section: (1) You may use any diesel fuel that
vehicle configuration from § 1036.540 or meets the specifications for S15 in
§ 1036.545 with the highest reference (1) We may select up to 25 percent of
your engine families in any calendar ASTM D975 (incorporated by reference,
cycle work for each vehicle-based duty see § 1036.810). You may use any
cycle. Operate the engine as follows for year, calculated by dividing the number
of engine families you certified in the commercially available biodiesel fuel
duty-cycle sequence 2: blend that meets the specifications for
model year corresponding to the
* * * * * calendar year by four and rounding to ASTM D975 or ASTM D7467
■ 18. Amend § 1036.250 by revising the nearest whole number. We will (incorporated by reference, see
paragraph (a) to read as follows: consider only engine families with § 1036.810) that is either expressly
annual U.S.-directed production allowed or not otherwise indicated as an
§ 1036.250 Reporting and recordkeeping unacceptable fuel in the vehicle’s owner
volumes above 1,500 units in
for certification.
calculating the number of engine or operator manual or in the engine
(a) By September 30 following the end families subject to testing each calendar manufacturer’s published fuel
of the model year, send the Designated year under the annual 25 percent engine recommendations. You may use any
Compliance Officer a report including family limit. If you have only three or gasoline fuel that meets the
the total U.S.-directed production fewer families that each exceed an specifications in ASTM D4814
volume of engines you produced in each annual U.S.-directed production volume (incorporated by reference, see
engine family during the model year of 1,500 units, we may select one engine § 1036.810). For other fuel types, you
(based on information available at the family per calendar year for testing. may use any commercially available
time of the report). Report the (2) Over any four-year period, we will fuel.
production by serial number and engine not select more than the average number * * * * *
configuration. You may combine this of engine families that you have
report with reports required under certified over that four-year period (the ■ 22. Amend § 1036.420 by revising
subpart H of this part. We may waive model year when the selection is made paragraph (a) to read as follows:
the reporting requirements of this and the preceding three model years),
paragraph (a) for small manufacturers. based on rounding the average value to § 1036.420 Pass criteria for individual
engines.
* * * * * the nearest whole number.
(3) We will not select engine families * * * * *
for testing under this subpart from a (a) Determine the emission standard
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
given model year if your total U.S.- for each regulated pollutant for each bin
§ 1036.301 Measurements related to GEM directed production volume was less by adding the following accuracy
inputs in a selective enforcement audit. than 100 engines. margins for PEMS to the off-cycle
* * * * * * * * * * standards in § 1036.104(a)(3):
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a) OF § 1036.420—ACCURACY MARGINS FOR IN-USE TESTING

NOX HC PM CO
Bin 1 ....................................... 0.4 g/hr.

Bin 2 ....................................... 5 mg/hp·hr ............................. 10 mg/hp·hr ........................... 6 mg/hp·hr ............................. 0.25 g/hp·hr.
* * * * * (e) You may disable any AECDs that (f) You may use special or alternate
■ 23. Amend § 1036.501 by revising have been approved solely for procedures to the extent we allow them
paragraphs (e) and (f) and adding emergency equipment applications under 40 CFR 1065.10.
paragraphs (g) and (h) to read as follows: under § 1036.115(h)(4). Note that the (g) This subpart is addressed to you as
emission standards do not apply when a manufacturer, but it applies equally to
§ 1036.501 General testing provisions. any of these AECDs are active. anyone who does testing for you, and to
* * * * * us when we perform testing to
314
determine if your engines meet emission cycle-average engine fuel maps as § 1036.540(c)(2), substituting ‘‘engine’’
standards. described in § 1036.540, including for ‘‘vehicle’’ and ‘‘highway cruise
(h) For testing engines that use cycle-average engine fuel maps for cycle’’ for ‘‘SET’’. Disregard duty cycles
regenerative braking through the highway cruise cycles. We may do in § 1036.545(j). For cycles that begin
crankshaft only to power an electric confirmatory testing by creating cycle- with idle, leave the transmission in
heater for aftertreatment devices, you average fuel maps from steady-state fuel neutral or park for the full initial idle
may use the nonhybrid engine testing maps created in paragraph (b)(1) of this segment. Place the transmission into
procedures in §§ 1036.510, 1036.512, section for highway cruise cycles. In drive no earlier than 5 seconds before
and 1036.514 and you may also or § 1036.540 we define the vehicle the first nonzero vehicle speed setpoint.
instead use the fuel mapping procedure configurations for testing; we may add For SET testing only, place the
in § 1036.505(b)(1) or (2). You may use more vehicle configurations to better transmission into park or neutral when
this allowance only if the recovered represent your engine’s operation for the the cycle reaches the final idle segment.
energy is less than 10 percent of the range of vehicles in which your engines Use the following vehicle parameters
total positive work for each applicable will be installed (see 40 CFR instead of those in § 1036.545 to define
test interval. Otherwise, use powertrain 1065.10(c)(1)). the vehicle model in § 1036.545(a)(3):
testing procedures specified for hybrid (3) Determine fuel consumption at * * * * *
powertrains to measure emissions and idle as described in § 1036.535(c) and
create fuel maps. For engines that power (d) and determine cycle-average engine (vii) Select a combination of drive
an electric heater with a battery, you fuel maps as described in § 1036.545, axle ratio, ka, and a tire radius, r, that
must meet the requirements related to including cycle-average engine fuel represents the worst-case combination
charge-sustaining operation as described maps for highway cruise cycles. Set up of top gear ratio, drive axle ratio, and
in 40 CFR 1066.501(a)(3). the test to apply accessory load for all tire size for CO2 expected for vehicles in
■ 24. Amend § 1036.505 by revising operation by primary intended service which the hybrid engine or hybrid
paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows: class as described in the following table: powertrain will be installed. This is
typically the highest axle ratio and
§ 1036.505 Engine data and information to smallest tire radius. Disregard
support vehicle certification. TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(3) OF
configurations or settings corresponding
* * * * *
§ 1036.505—ACCESSORY LOAD to a maximum vehicle speed below 60
(a) Identify engine make, model, fuel mi/hr in selecting a drive axle ratio and
Power representing
type, combustion type, engine family Primary intended tire radius, unless you can demonstrate
accessory load
name, calibration identification, and service class (kW) that in-use vehicles will not exceed that
engine displacement. Also identify speed. You may request preliminary
whether the engines meet CO2 standards Light HDV ................. 1.5 approval for selected drive axle ratio
for tractors, vocational vehicles, or both. Medium HDV ............ 2.5 and tire radius consistent with the
When certifying vehicles with GEM, for Heavy HDV ............... 3.5
provisions of § 1036.210. If the hybrid
any fuel type not identified in table 1 to engine or hybrid powertrain is used
paragraph (b)(4) of § 1036.550, identify (4) Generate powertrain fuel maps as
described in § 1036.545 instead of fuel exclusively in vehicles not capable of
the fuel type as diesel fuel for engines reaching 60 mi/hr, you may request that
subject to compression-ignition mapping under § 1036.535 or
§ 1036.540. Note that the option in we approve an alternate test cycle and
standards, and as gasoline for engines cycle-validation criteria as described in
subject to spark-ignition standards. § 1036.545(b)(2) is allowed only for
(b) This paragraph (b) describes four hybrid engine testing. Disable stop-start 40 CFR 1066.425(b)(5). Note that hybrid
different methods to generate engine systems and automatic engine shutdown engines rely on a specified transmission
systems when conducting powertrain that is different for each duty cycle; the
fuel maps. For engines without hybrid transmission’s top gear ratio therefore
components and for mild hybrid fuel map testing using § 1036.545.
depends on the duty cycle, which will
engines where you do not include * * * * * in turn change the selection of the drive
hybrid components in the test, generate ■ 25. Amend § 1036.510 by: axle ratio and tire size. For example,
fuel maps using either paragraph (b)(1) ■ a. Revising paragraphs (b) § 1036.520 prescribes a different top
or (2) of this section. For other hybrid introductory text, (b)(2) introductory gear ratio than this paragraph (b)(2).
engines, generate fuel maps using text, and (b)(2)(vii) and (viii);
■ b. Removing paragraph (b)(2)(ix); and
(viii) If you are certifying a hybrid
paragraph (b)(3) of this section. For
■ c. Revising paragraphs (c)(2)
engine, use a default transmission
hybrid powertrains and nonhybrid
introductory text, (c)(2)(i) introductory efficiency of 0.95 and create the vehicle
powertrains and for vehicles where the
text, and (d) through (g). model along with its default
transmission is not automatic,
The revisions read as follows: transmission shift strategy as described
automated manual, manual, or dual-
in § 1036.545(a)(3)(ii). Use the
clutch, generate fuel maps using
§ 1036.510 Supplemental Emission Test. transmission parameters defined in
paragraph (b)(4) of this section.
(1) Determine steady-state engine fuel * * * * * § 1036.540(c)(2) to determine
maps as described in § 1036.535(b). (b) Procedures apply differently for transmission type and gear ratio. For
Determine fuel consumption at idle as testing certain kinds of engines and Light HDV and Medium HDV, use the
described in § 1036.535(c). Determine powertrains as follows: Light HDV and Medium HDV
cycle-average engine fuel maps as * * * * * parameters for FTP, LLC, and SET duty
described in § 1036.540, excluding (2) Test hybrid powertrains as cycles. For Tractors and Heavy HDVs,
cycle-average fuel maps for highway described in § 1036.545, except as use the Tractor and Heavy HDV
cruise cycles. specified in this paragraph (b)(2). Do not transient cycle parameters for the FTP
(2) Determine steady-state fuel maps compensate the duty cycle for the and LLC duty cycles and the Tractor
as described in either § 1036.535(b) or distance driven as described in and Heavy HDV highway cruise cycle
(d). Determine fuel consumption at idle § 1036.545(g)(4). For hybrid engines, parameters for the SET duty cycle.
as described in § 1036.535(c). Determine select the transmission from (c) * * *
315
Fmt 4701
(2) The duty cycle for testing hybrid (1) Carry out a charge-sustaining test an example of a charge-depleting test
powertrains involves a schedule of as described in paragraph (b)(2) of this sequence where there are two test
vehicle speeds and road grade as section. intervals that contain engine operation.
follows: (2) Carry out a charge-depleting test as (3) Report the highest emission result
(i) Determine road grade at each point described in paragraph (b)(2) of this
based on the continuous rated power of for each criteria pollutant from all tests
section, except as follows:
the hybrid powertrain, Pcontrated, in kW in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this
(i) Fully charge the RESS after
determined in § 1036.520, the vehicle preconditioning. section, even if those individual results
speed (A, B, or C) in mi/hr for a given (ii) Operate the engine or powertrain come from different test intervals.
SET mode, vref[speed], and the specified continuously over repeated SET duty (4) The following figure illustrates an
road-grade coefficients using the cycles until you reach the end-of-test example of an SET charge-depleting test
following equation: criterion defined in 40 CFR sequence:
* * * * * 1066.501(a)(3).
(d) Determine criteria pollutant (iii) Calculate emission results for Figure 1 to Paragraph (d)(4) of
emissions for plug-in hybrid each SET duty cycle. Figure 1 to § 1036.510—SET Charge-Depleting
powertrains as follows: paragraph (d)(4) of this section provides Criteria Pollutant Test Sequence.
(e) Determine greenhouse gas charge-depleting and charge-sustaining from the charge-depleting and charge-
pollutant emissions for plug-in hybrid operation from paragraph (d)(2) of this sustaining test results, eUF[emission]comp,
powertrains using the emissions results section. Calculate the utility factor- using the following equation:
for all the SET test intervals for both weighted composite mass of emissions
Eq. 1036.510–10 interval, i, starting from i = 1. Let UFDCD0

= 0.
Where:
j = an indexing variable that represents one
i = an indexing variable that represents one test interval.
test interval.
M = total number of charge-sustaining test
ER22AP24.167</GPH>
N = total number of charge-depleting test

intervals. Eq. 1036.510–11
intervals.
e[emission][int]CSj = total mass of emissions in the Where:
e[emission][int]CDi = total mass of emissions in
the charge-depleting portion of the test charge-sustaining portion of the test for
k = an indexing variable that represents one
each test interval, j, starting from j = 1.
for each test interval, i, starting from i = recorded velocity value.

UFRCD = utility factor fraction at the full
ER22AP24.166</GPH>
1, including the test interval(s) from the Q = total number of measurements over the
transition phase. charge-depleting distance, RCD, as test interval.
UFDCDi = utility factor fraction at distance determined by interpolating the v = vehicle velocity at each time step, k,
DCDi from Eq. 1036.510–11, as approved utility factor curve. RCD is the starting from k = 1. For tests completed
determined by interpolating the cumulative distance driven over N under this section, v is the vehicle
ER22AP24.165</GPH>
approved utility factor curve for each test charge-depleting test intervals. velocity from the vehicle model in
316
Fmt 4701
§ 1036.545. Note that this should include Example using the charge-depletion ω1 = 0 mi/hr
charge-depleting test intervals that start test in figure 1 to paragraph (d)(4) of ω2 = 0.8 mi/hr
when the engine is not yet operating. this section for the SET for CO2 emission ω3 = 1.1 mi/hr
Dt = 1/frecord determination: frecord = 10 Hz
frecord = the record rate. Q = 24000 Dt = 1/10 Hz = 0.1 s
DCD1 = 30.1 mi UFDCD2 = 0.23 eCO2SETCD4 = 0 g/hp·hr

DCD2 = 30.0 mi UFDCD3 = 0.34 eCO2SETCD5 = 174.4 g/hp·hr
DCD3 = 30.1 mi UFDCD4 = 0.45
DCD4 = 30.2 mi UFDCD5 = 0.53 M=1
DCD5 = 30.1 mi eCO2SETCD1 = 0 g/hp·hr eCO2SETCS = 428.1 g/hp·hr
N=5 eCO2SETCD2 = 0 g/hp·hr
UFDCD1 = 0.11 eCO2SETCD3 = 0 g/hp·hr UFRCD = 0.53
(f) Calculate and evaluate cycle- (2) For engines subject to operation for both criteria and
validation criteria as specified in 40 compression-ignition standards, use the greenhouse gas pollutant determination.
CFR 1065.514 for nonhybrid engines transient test interval described in (c) Except as specified in paragraph
and § 1036.545 for hybrid powertrains. paragraph (c) of appendix B to this part. (d) of this section for plug-in hybrid
(g) Calculate the total emission mass (b) Procedures apply differently for powertrains, the FTP duty cycle consists
of each constituent, m, over the test testing certain kinds of engines and of an initial run through the test interval
powertrains as follows: from a cold start as described in 40 CFR
interval as described in 40 CFR
(1) The transient test intervals for
1065.650. Calculate the total work, W, part 1065, subpart F, followed by a (20
nonhybrid engine testing are based on
over the test interval as described in 40 ±1) minute hot soak with no engine
normalized speed and torque values.
CFR 1065.650(d). For hybrid operation, and then a final hot start run
Denormalize speed as described in 40
powertrains, calculate W using system through the same transient test interval.
CFR 1065.512. Denormalize torque as
power, Psys as described in § 1036.520(f). described in 40 CFR 1065.610(d). Engine starting is part of both the cold-
(2) Test hybrid powertrains as start and hot-start test intervals.
■ 26. Revise and republish § 1036.512 to
described in § 1036.510(b)(2), with the Calculate the total emission mass of
read as follows:
following exceptions: each constituent, m, over each test
§ 1036.512 Federal Test Procedure. (i) Replace Pcontrated with Prated, which interval as described in 40 CFR
is the peak rated power determined in 1065.650. Calculate the total work, W,
(a) Measure emissions using the over the test interval as described in 40
transient Federal Test Procedure (FTP) § 1036.520.
(ii) Keep the transmission in drive for CFR 1065.650(d). For hybrid
as described in this section to determine powertrains, calculate W using system
all idle segments after the initial idle
whether engines meet the emission power, Psys as described in § 1036.520(f).
segment.
standards in subpart B of this part. (iii) For hybrid engines, you may Determine Psys using § 1036.520(f). For
Operate the engine or hybrid powertrain request to change the engine- powertrains with automatic
over one of the following transient duty commanded torque at idle to better transmissions, account for and include
cycles: represent curb idle transmission torque the work produced by the engine from
(1) For engines subject to spark- (CITT). the CITT load. Calculate the official
ignition standards, use the transient test (iv) For plug-in hybrid powertrains, transient emission result from the cold-
interval described in paragraph (b) of test over the FTP in both charge- start and hot-start test intervals using
appendix B to this part. sustaining and charge-depleting the following equation:
ER22AP24.170</GPH>
ER22AP24.169</GPH>
Eq. 1036.512–1 (1) Carry out a charge-sustaining test (2) Carry out a charge-depleting test as
(d) Determine criteria pollutant as described in paragraph (b)(2) of this described in paragraph (b)(2) of this
emissions for plug-in hybrid section. section, except as follows:
ER22AP24.168</GPH>
powertrains as follows:
317
Fmt 4701
(i) Fully charge the battery after Calculate the emission result by treating in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this
preconditioning. the first of the two test intervals as a section, even if those individual results
(ii) Operate the engine or powertrain cold-start test. Figure 1 to paragraph come from different test intervals.
over one FTP duty cycle followed by (d)(4) of this section provides an (4) The following figure illustrates an
alternating repeats of a 20-minute soak example of a charge-depleting test example of an FTP charge-depleting test
and a hot start test interval until you sequence where there are three test sequence:
reach the end-of-test criteria defined in intervals with engine operation for two
40 CFR 1066.501(a)(3). overlapping FTP duty cycles. Figure 1 to Paragraph (d)(4) of
(iii) Calculate emission results for (3) Report the highest emission result § 1036.512—FTP Charge-Depleting
each successive pair of test intervals. for each criteria pollutant from all tests Criteria Pollutant Test Sequence
(e) Determine greenhouse gas engines meet the LLC emission of the idle segment. For the points in
pollutant emissions for plug-in hybrid standards in § 1036.104. The LLC duty between, set the reference speed and
engines and powertrains using the cycle is described in paragraph (d) of torque values to the warm-idle-in-
emissions results for all the transient appendix B to this part. Procedures neutral values to represent the
duty cycle test intervals described in apply differently for testing certain transmission being manually shifted
either paragraph (b) or (c) of appendix kinds of engines and powertrains as from drive to neutral shortly after the
B to this part for both charge-depleting follows: extended idle starts and back to drive
and charge-sustaining operation from (a) Test nonhybrid engines using the shortly before it ends.
paragraph (d)(2) of this section. following procedures: (2) Calculate and evaluate cycle-
Calculate the utility factor weighted (1) Use the normalized speed and validation criteria as described in 40
composite mass of emissions from the torque values for engine testing in the CFR 1065.514, except as specified in
charge-depleting and charge-sustaining LLC duty cycle. Denormalize speed and paragraph (e) of this section.
test results, eUF[emission]comp, as described torque values as described in 40 CFR (b) Test hybrid powertrains as
in § 1036.510(e), replacing occurances of 1065.512 and 1065.610 with the described in § 1036.510(b)(2), with the
‘‘SET’’ with ‘‘transient test interval’’. following additional requirements for following exceptions:
Note this results in composite FTP GHG testing at idle: (1) Replace Pcontrated with Prated, which
emission results for plug-in hybrid (i) Apply the accessory load at idle in is the peak rated power determined in
engines and powertrains without the paragraph (c) of this section using § 1036.520.
use of the cold-start and hot-start test declared idle power as described in 40 (2) Keep the transmission in drive for
interval weighting factors in Eq. CFR 1065.510(f)(6). Declared idle torque all idle segments 200 seconds or less.
1036.512–1. must be zero. For idle segments more than 200
(f) Calculate and evaluate cycle- (ii) Apply CITT in addition to seconds, leave the transmission in drive
validation criteria as specified in 40 accessory load as described in this for the first 3 seconds of the idle
CFR 1065.514 for nonhybrid engines paragraph (a)(1)(ii). Set reference speed segment, then immediately place the
and § 1036.545 for hybrid powertrains. and torque values as described in 40 transmission in park or neutral, and
■ 27. Revise § 1036.514 to read as CFR 1065.610(d)(3)(vi) for all idle shift the transmission into drive again 3
follows: segments that are 200 s or shorter to seconds before the end of the idle
represent the transmission operating in segment. The end of the idle segment
§ 1036.514 Low Load Cycle. drive. For longer idle segments, set the occurs at the first nonzero vehicle speed
Measure emissions using the transient reference speed and torque values to the setpoint.
Low Load Cycle (LLC) as described in warm-idle-in-drive values for the first (3) For hybrid engines, you may
ER22AP24.171</GPH>
this section to determine whether three seconds and the last three seconds request to change the GEM-generated
318
Fmt 4701
engine reference torque at idle to better (2) For nonhybrid engine testing, 1065.530 for a test interval that includes
represent curb idle transmission torque apply vehicle accessory loads in engine starting. Calculate the total
(CITT). addition to any applicable CITT. emission mass of each constituent, m,
(4) Adjust procedures in this section (3) Additional provisions related to over the test interval as described in 40
as described in § 1036.510(d) and (e) for vehicle accessory load apply for engines CFR 1065.650. For nonhybrid engines,
plug-in hybrid powertrains to determine with stop-start technology and hybrid calculate the total work, W, over the test
criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas powertrains where the accessory load is interval as described in 40 CFR
emissions, replacing ‘‘SET’’ with ‘‘LLC’’. applied to the engine shaft. Account for 1065.650(d). For hybrid powertrains,
Note that the LLC is therefore the the loss of mechanical work due to the calculate total positive work over the
preconditioning duty cycle for plug-in lack of any idle accessory load during test interval using system power, Psys.
hybrid powertrains. engine-off conditions by determining
(5) Calculate and evaluate cycle- Determine Psys using § 1036.520(f). For
the total loss of mechanical work from powertrains with automatic
validation criteria as specified in idle accessory load during all engine-off
§ 1036.545. transmissions, account for and include
intervals over the entire test interval and the work produced by the engine from
(c) Include vehicle accessory loading
distributing that work over the engine- the CITT load.
as follows:
on portion of the entire test interval
(1) Apply a vehicle accessory load for (e) For testing spark-ignition gaseous-
based on a calculated average power.
each idle point in the cycle using the fueled engines with fuel delivery at a
You may determine the engine-off time
power values in the following table: single point in the intake manifold, you
by running practice cycles or through
engineering analysis. may apply the alternative cycle-
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(1) OF validation criteria for the LLC in the
§ 1036.514—ACCESSORY LOAD AT (d) Except as specified in paragraph
(b)(4) of this section for plug-in hybrid following table:
IDLE
powertrains, the test sequence consists
Power representing of preconditioning the engine by
Primary intended running one or two FTPs with each FTP
accessory load
service class (kW) followed by (20 ± 1) minutes with no
engine operation and a hot start run
Light HDE ................. 1.5 through the LLC. You may start any
Medium HDE ............ 2.5
Heavy HDE ............... 3.5
preconditioning FTP with a hot engine.
Perform testing as described in 40 CFR
TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (e) OF § 1036.514—ALTERNATIVE LLC CYCLE VALIDATION CRITERIA FOR SPARK-IGNITION
GASEOUS-FUELED ENGINES a
Parameter Speed Torque Power
Slope, a1 ........................................................... ................................................. 0.800 ≤ a1 ≤ 1.030 ................. 0.800 ≤ a1 ≤ 1.030.

Absolute value of intercept, |a0|.
Standard error of the estimate, SEE ................ ................................................. ................................................. ≤15% of maximum mapped
power.
Coefficient of determination, r 2 ........................ ................................................. ≥0.650 ..................................... ≥0.650.
a Cycle-validation criteria apply as specified in 40 CFR 1065.514 unless otherwise specified.
■ 28. Amend § 1036.520 by revising the achieves approximately 75% of its the test after the acceleration is less than
introductory text and paragraphs (b) expected maximum power. Continue 0.02 m/s2.
introductory text, (d), and (h) through (j) the warm-up until the engine coolant, * * * * *
to read as follows: block, lubricating oil, or head absolute (h) Determine rated power, Prated, as
§ 1036.520 Determining power and vehicle
temperature is within ±2% of its mean the maximum measured power from the
speed values for powertrain testing. value for at least 2 min or until the data collected in paragraph (d)(2) of this
engine thermostat controls engine section where the COV determined in
This section describes how to temperature. Within 90 seconds after paragraph (g) of this section is less than
determine the system peak power and 2%.
concluding the warm-up, operate the
continuous rated power of hybrid and
powertrain over a continuous trace (i) Determine continuous rated power,
nonhybrid powertrain systems and the
meeting the following specifications: Pcontrated, as follows:
vehicle speed for carrying out duty-
(1) Bring the vehicle speed to 0 mi/hr (1) For nonhybrid powertrains,
cycle testing under this part and
and let the powertrain idle at 0 mi/hr for Pcontrated equals Prated.
§ 1036.545.
50 seconds. (2) For hybrid powertrains, Pcontrated is
* * * * * the maximum measured power from the
(b) Set up the powertrain test (2) Set maximum driver demand for a data collected in paragraph (d)(3) of this
according to § 1036.545, with the full load acceleration at 6.0% road grade section where the COV determined in
following exceptions: with an initial vehicle speed of 0 mi/hr, paragraph (g) of this section is less than
* * * * * continuing for 268 seconds. You may 2%.

(d) Carry out the test as described in increase initial vehicle speed up to 5 (j) Determine vehicle C speed, vrefC, as
this paragraph (d). Warm up the mi/hr to minimize clutch slip. follows:
powertrain by operating it. We (3) Linearly ramp the grade from 6.0% (1) If the maximum Psys(t) in the
recommend operating the powertrain at down to 0.0% over 300 seconds. Stop highest gear during the maneuver in
any vehicle speed and road grade that paragraph (d)(3) of this section is greater
319
than 0.98·Pcontrated, vrefC is the average of (4) Manufacturers may request plug-in hybrid powertrains, perform the
the minimum and maximum vehicle approval to use an alternative vehicle C test with the hybrid function disabled.
speeds where Psys(t) is equal to speed in place of the measured vehicle * * * * *
0.98·Pcontrated during the maneuver in C speed determined in this paragraph (j)
paragraph (d)(3) where the transmission ■ 30. Amend § 1036.530 by revising
for series hybrid applications. Approval paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2)(ii) and
is in the highest gear, using linear will be contingent upon justification
interpolation, as appropriate. If Psys(t) at adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:
that the measured vehicle C speed is not
the lowest vehicle speed where the representative of the expected real- § 1036.530 Test procedures for off-cycle
transmission is in the highest gear is world cruise speed. testing.
greater than 0.98·Pcontrated, use the lowest * * * * *
vehicle speed where the transmission is * * * * *
in the highest gear as the minimum (g) * * *
■ 29. Amend § 1036.525 by revising the
vehicle speed input for calculating vrefC. (1) Spark-ignition. For engines subject
introductory text to read as follows:
(2) Otherwise, vrefC is the maximum to spark-ignition standards, the off-cycle
vehicle speed during the maneuver in § 1036.525 Clean Idle test. emission quantity, e[emission],offcycle, is the
paragraph (d)(3) of this section where value for CO2-specific emission mass for
the transmission is in the highest gear. Measure emissions using the a given pollutant over the test interval
(3) You may use a declared vrefC procedures described in this section to representing the shift-day converted to a
instead of measured vrefC if the declared determine whether engines and hybrid brake-specific value, as calculated for
vrefC is within (97.5 to 102.5)% of the powertrains meet the clean idle each measured pollutant using the
corresponding measured value. emission standards in § 1036.104(b). For following equation:
Eq. 1036.530–3 determined in paragraph (d)(2) of this eCO2FTPFCL = the engine’s FCL for CO2 over
section. the FTP duty cycle.
Where: mCO2 = total CO2 emission mass over the test
m[emission] = total emission mass for a given interval as determined in paragraph Example:
pollutant over the test interval as (d)(2) of this section.
(2) * * * for CO2-specific emission mass for a converted to a brake-specific value, as

(ii) Off-cycle emissions quantity for given pollutant of all the 300 second test calculated for each measured pollutant
bin 2. The off-cycle emission quantity intervals in bin 2 combined and using the following equation:
for bin 2, e[emission],offcycle,bin2, is the value
Eq. 1036.530–5 in bin 2 as determined in paragraph N = 15439 ER22AP24.175</GPH>
(d)(2) of this section. mNOx1 = 0.546 g

Where: mCO2,testinterval,i = total CO2 emission mass over
i = an indexing variable that represents one
mNOx2 = 0.549 g
the test interval i in bin 2 as determined mNOx3 = 0.556 g
300 second test interval. in paragraph (d)(2) of this section.
N = total number of 300 second test intervals eCO2,FTP,FCL = the engine’s FCL for CO2 over
mCO2,1 = 10950.2 g
ER22AP24.174</GPH>
in bin 2. the FTP duty cycle. mCO2,2 = 10961.3 g

m[emission],testinterval,i = total emission mass for mCO2,3 = 10965.3 g
a given pollutant over the test interval i Example: eCO2,FTP,FCL = 428.1 g/hp·hr
ER22AP24.173</GPH>
ER22AP24.172</GPH>
320
* * * * * testing engines using at least one fuel CO2 emission mass over each 300
(j) Fuel other than carbon-containing. that is not a carbon-containing fuel: second test interval instead of Eq.
(1) Use the following equation to 1036.530–2:
The following procedures apply for
determine the normalized equivalent
Eq. 1036.530–6 Pmax = the highest value of rated power for Wtestinterval = 8.95 hp·hr
all the configurations included in the
Where:
engine family. Pmax = 406.5 hp
Wtestinterval = total positive work over the test ttestinterval = duration of the test interval. Note ttestinterval = 300.01 s = 0.08 hr
interval from both the engine and hybrid that the nominal value is 300 seconds.
components, if applicable, as determined
in 40 CFR 1065.650. Example:
(2) Determine off-cycle emissions (i) For engines subject to spark- emission quantity instead of Eq.
quantities as follows: ignition standards, use the following 1036.530–3:
equation to determine the off-cycle
Eq. 1036.530–7 m[emission] = total emission mass for a given Wtestinterval = total positive work over the
pollutant over the test interval as determined test interval as determined in 40 CFR
Where: 1065.650.
in paragraph (d)(2) of this section.
Example:
(ii) For engines subject to 1036.530–4 to determine the off-cycle following equation to determine the off-
ER22AP24.180</GPH>
compression-ignition standards, use Eq. emission quantity for bin 1. cycle emission quantity for bin 2 instead
(iii) For engines subject to of Eq. 1036.530–5:
compression-ignition standards, use the
ER22AP24.179</GPH>
ER22AP24.178</GPH>
Eq. 1036.530–8 m[emission],testinterval,i = total emission mass for N = 15439

a given pollutant over the test interval i mNOx1 = 0.546 g
Where: in bin 2 as determined in paragraph
i = an indexing variable that represents one (d)(2) of this section. mNOx2 = 0.549 g
300 second test interval. Wtestinterval,i = total positive work over the test mNOx3 = 0.556 g
ER22AP24.177</GPH>
N = total number of 300 second test intervals interval i in bin 2 as determined in 40 Wtestinterval1 = 8.91 hp·hr
in bin 2. CFR 1065.650. Wtestinterval2 = 8.94 hp·hr
Example: Wtestinterval3 = 8.89 hp·hr
ER22AP24.176</GPH>
321
Fmt 4701
■ 31. Amend § 1036.535 by revising the required torque setpoints above the additional speed setpoint must be no
paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (iii), (b)(8) and value determined in paragraph more than one-ninth of Tmax,mapped. Note
(10), and (e) to read as follows: (b)(1)(ii)(A) of this section. All the other that if the test points were added for the
default torque setpoints less than Tmax at child rating, they should still be
§ 1036.535 Determining steady-state
engine fuel maps and fuel consumption at
a given speed setpoint are required reported in the parent fuel map. We will
idle. torque setpoints. test with at least as many points as you.
(iii) You may select any additional If you add test points to meet testing
* * * * *
(b) * * * speed and torque setpoints consistent requirements for child ratings, include
(1) * * * with good engineering judgment. For those same test points as reported
(ii) Select the following required example, you may need to select values for the parent fuel map. For our
torque setpoints at each of the selected additional points if the engine’s fuel testing, we will use the same
speed setpoints: zero (T = 0), maximum consumption is nonlinear across the normalized speed and torque test points
mapped torque, Tmax mapped, and eight (or torque map. Avoid creating a problem you use, and we may select additional
more) equally spaced points between T with interpolation between narrowly test points.
= 0 and Tmax mapped. Select the maximum spaced speed and torque setpoints near
Tmax. For each additional speed setpoint, * * * * *
torque setpoint at each speed to conform
to the torque map as follows: we recommend including a torque (8) If you determine fuel-consumption
(A) Calculate 5 percent of Tmax mapped. setpoint of Tmax; however, you may rates using emission measurements from
Subtract this result from the mapped select torque setpoints that properly the raw or diluted exhaust, calculate the
mean fuel mass flow rate, m Ô , for each
torque at each speed setpoint, Tmax. represent in-use operation. Increments fuel
(B) Select Tmax at each speed setpoint for torque setpoints between these point in the fuel map using the
as a single torque value to represent all minimum and maximum values at an following equation:
Ô
n = the mean exhaust molar flow rate from use diesel exhaust fluid, or if you choose not
Eq. 1036.535–1
which you measured emissions according to to perform this correction, set equal to 0.
Where:
Ô = mean fuel mass flow rate for a given 40 CFR 1065.655. MCO2 = molar mass of carbon dioxide.
m ⊕
χCcombdry = the mean concentration of
fuel map setpoint, expressed to at least the Example:
carbon from fuel and any injected fluids in
nearest 0.001 g/s.
MC = molar mass of carbon. the exhaust per mole of dry exhaust as MC = 12.0107 g/mol
determined in 40 CFR 1065.655(c).
WCmeas = carbon mass fraction of fuel (or ⊕ wCmeas = 0.869
mixture of test fuels) as determined in 40 χOexhdry = the mean concentration of H2O in Ô
exhaust per mole of dry exhaust as n = 25.534 mol/s
CFR 1065.655(d), except that you may not ⊕
use the default properties in 40 CFR determined in 40 CFR 1065.655(c). χCcombdry = 0.002805 mol/mol
Ô
m ⊕
1065.655(e)(5) to determine a, b, and wC. You CO2DEF = the mean CO2 mass emission
χH2Oexhdry = 0.0353 mol/mol
may not account for the contribution to a, b, rate resulting from diesel exhaust fluid Ô
m
g, and d of diesel exhaust fluid or other non- decomposition as determined in paragraph CO2DEF = 0.0726 g/s
fuel fluids injected into the exhaust. (b)(9) of this section. If your engine does not MCO2 = 44.0095 g/mol
ER22AP24.184</GPH>
* * * * * energy content of a reference fuel using equates to a carbon-specific net energy

(10) Correct the measured or the following equation: content having the same units as EmfuelCref.
EmfuelCref = the reference value of carbon-
ER22AP24.183</GPH>
calculated mean fuel mass flow rate, at

each of the operating points to account mass-specific net energy content for the
for mass-specific net energy content as appropriate fuel. Use the values shown in
described in paragraph (e) of this table 1 to paragraph (b)(4) of § 1036.550 for
the designated fuel types, or values we
section. Eq. 1036.535–4

ER22AP24.182</GPH>
approve for other fuel types.

* * * * * Where: WCref = the reference value of carbon mass
(e) Correction for net energy content. Emfuelmeas = the mass-specific net energy fraction for the test fuel as shown in table 1
Correct the measured or calculated content of the test fuel as determined in to paragraph (b)(4) of § 1036.550 for the
mean fuel mass flow rate, mÔ , for each
fuel § 1036.550(b)(1). Note that dividing this designated fuels. For any fuel not identified
ER22AP24.181</GPH>
test interval to a mass-specific net value by wCref (as is done in this equation) in the table, use the reference carbon mass
322
Fmt 4701
fraction of diesel fuel for engines subject to text, (d)(3), and (d)(12)(i)(A) to read as this a valid test and omit the NOX
compression-ignition standards, and use the follows: emission measurements; however, we
reference carbon mass fraction of gasoline for may require you to repeat the test if we
engines subject to spark-ignition standards. § 1036.540 Determining cycle-average determine that you inappropriately
engine fuel maps.
Example: voided the test with respect to NOX
* * * * * emission measurement.
= 0.933 g/s (b) General test provisions. The (2) The provisions related to carbon
following provisions apply for testing balance error verification in § 1036.543
under this section: apply for all testing in this section.
(1) Measure NOX emissions for each These procedures are optional, but we
specified sampling period in grams. You will perform carbon balance error
may perform these measurements using verification for all testing under this
a NOX emission-measurement system section.
that meets the requirements of 40 CFR (3) Correct fuel mass to a mass-
part 1065, subpart J. Include these specific net energy content of a
measured NOX values any time you reference fuel as described in paragraph
report to us your fuel-consumption (d)(13) of this section.
values from testing under this section. If (4) This section uses engine
* * * * *
a system malfunction prevents you from parameters and variables that are
■ 32. Amend § 1036.540 by revising measuring NOX emissions during a test consistent with 40 CFR part 1065.
paragraph (b), table 1 to paragraph under this section but the test otherwise (c) * * *
(c)(2), and paragraphs (d) introductory gives valid results, you may consider (2) * * *
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(2) OF § 1036.540—GEM INPUT FOR GEAR RATIO

Spark-ignition HDE, light Heavy HDE— Heavy HDE—
HDE, and medium
Gear No. transient and ftp duty cy- cruise and set duty cy-
HDE— cles cles
all duty cycles
1 ................................................................................................... 3.10 3.51 12.8

2 ................................................................................................... 1.81 1.91 9.25
3 ................................................................................................... 1.41 1.43 6.76
4 ................................................................................................... 1.00 1.00 4.90
5 ................................................................................................... 0.71 0.74 3.58
6 ................................................................................................... 0.61 0.64 2.61
7 ................................................................................................... — — 1.89
8 ................................................................................................... — — 1.38
9 ................................................................................................... — — 1.00
10 ................................................................................................. — — 0.73
Lockup Gear ................................................................................ 3 3 —
* * * * * 1065.514 for each interval, except that intake manifold, you may apply the
(d) Test the engine with GEM cycles. the standard error of the estimate in 40 alternative cycle-validation criteria in
Test the engine over each of the engine CFR 1065.514(f)(3) is the only speed table 5 to this paragraph (c)(3) for
duty cycles generated in paragraph (c) of criterion that applies if the range of transient testing. Note that 40 CFR part
this section as follows: reference speeds is less than 10 percent 1065 does not allow reducing cycle
* * * * * of the mean reference speed. For spark- precision to a lower frequency than the
(3) Control speed and torque to meet ignition gaseous-fueled engines with 10 Hz reference cycle generated by
the cycle validation criteria in 40 CFR fuel delivery at a single point in the GEM.
TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3) OF § 1036.540— ALTERNATIVE FUEL-MAPPING CYCLE-VALIDATION CRITERIA FOR SPARK-
IGNITION GASEOUS-FUELED ENGINES A
Parameter Speed Torque Power
Slope, a1
Absolute value of intercept, ⎢a0⎢ .... ....................................................... ≤3% of maximum mapped torque
Standard error of the estimate, ....................................................... ≤15% of maximum mapped ≤15% of maximum mapped
SEE. torque. power.
Coefficient of determination, r2 ...... ....................................................... ≥0.700 ........................................... ≥0.750.
a Cycle-validation criteria apply as specified in 40 CFR 1065.514 unless otherwise specified.
* * * * * (A) For calculations that use and continuous CO2 from urea, calculate
(12) * * * continuous measurement of emissions mfuel[cycle] using the following equation:
(i) * * *
ER22AP24.185</GPH>
323
Eq. 1036.540–3 xCcombdryi = amount of carbon from fuel and wCmeas = 0.867
any injected fluids in the exhaust per
Where: mole of dry exhaust as determined in 40 N = 6680
MC = molar mass of carbon. CFR 1065.655(c). ṅ1 = 2.876 mol/s
wCmeas = carbon mass fraction of fuel (or xH2Oexhdryi = amount of H2O in exhaust per
mixture of fuels) as determined in 40 mole of exhaust as determined in 40 CFR ṅ2 = 2.224 mol/s
CFR 1065.655(d), except that you may 1065.655(c). xCcombdryi1 = 2.61·10¥3 mol/mol
not use the default properties in 40 CFR Dt = 1/frecord
1065.655(e)(5) to determine a, b, and wC. MCO2 = molar mass of carbon dioxide. xCcombdryi2 = 1.91·10¥3 mol/mol
You may not account for the ṁCO2DEFi = mass emission rate of CO2 xH2Oexh1 = 3.53·10¥2 mol/mol
contribution to a, b, g, and d of diesel resulting from diesel exhaust fluid
exhaust fluid or other non-fuel fluids decomposition over the duty cycle as xH2Oexh2 = 3.13·10¥2 mol/mol
injected into the exhaust. determined from § 1036.535(b)(9). If your frecord = 10 Hz
i = an indexing variable that represents one engine does not utilize diesel exhaust
recorded emission value. fluid for emission control, or if you Dt = 1/10 = 0.1 s
N = total number of measurements over the choose not to perform this correction, set MCO2 = 44.0095 g/mol
duty cycle. ṁCO2DEFi equal to 0.
ṅ1 = exhaust molar flow rate from which you ṁCO2DEF1 = 0.0726 g/s
measured emissions according to 40 CFR Example:
ṁCO2DEF2= 0.0751 g/s
1065.655. MC = 12.0107 g/mol
* * * * * procedure in this section is one option (incorporated by reference, see

■ 33. Revise § 1036.543 to read as for generating this fuel-mapping § 1036.810) to simulate vehicle
follows: information as described in § 1036.505. hardware elements as follows:
Additionally, this powertrain test (i) Create driveline and vehicle
§ 1036.543 Carbon balance error procedure is one option for certifying
verification. models that calculate the angular speed
hybrid powertrains to the engine setpoint for the test cell dynamometer,
The optional carbon balance error standards in §§ 1036.104 and 1036.108. fnref,dyno, based on the torque
verification in 40 CFR 1065.543 (a) General test provisions. The measurement location. Use the detailed
compares independent assessments of following provisions apply broadly for equations in paragraph (f) of this
the flow of carbon through the system testing under this section:
section, the GEM HIL model’s driveline
(engine plus aftertreatment). This (1) Measure NOX emissions as and vehicle submodels, or a
procedure applies for each individual described in paragraph (k) of this
combination of the equations and the
interval in §§ 1036.535(b), (c), and (d), section. Include these measured NOX
submodels. You may use the GEM HIL
1036.540, and 1036.545. values any time you report to us your
model’s transmission submodel in
■ 34. Add § 1036.545 to read as follows: greenhouse gas emissions or fuel
paragraph (f) to simulate a transmission
consumption values from testing under
§ 1036.545 Powertrain testing. only if testing hybrid engines. If the
this section.
engine is intended for vehicles with
This section describes the procedure (2) The procedures of 40 CFR part
1065 apply for testing in this section automatic transmissions, use the cycle
to measure fuel consumption and create
engine fuel maps by testing a powertrain except as specified. This section uses configuration file in GEM to change the
that includes an engine coupled with a engine parameters and variables that are transmission state (in-gear or idle) as a
transmission, drive axle, and hybrid consistent with 40 CFR part 1065. function of time as defined by the duty
components or any assembly with one (3) Powertrain testing depends on cycles in this part.
ER22AP24.187</GPH>
or more of those hardware elements. models to calculate certain parameters. (ii) Create a driver model or use the
Engine fuel maps are part of You can use the detailed equations in GEM HIL model’s driver submodel to
demonstrating compliance with Phase 2 this section to create your own models, simulate a human driver modulating the
and Phase 3 vehicle standards under 40 or use the GEM HIL model contained throttle and brake pedals to follow the
ER22AP24.186</GPH>
CFR part 1037; the powertrain test within GEM Phase 2, Version 4.0 test cycle as closely as possible.
324
Fmt 4701
(iii) Create a cycle-interpolation approve it if you can show that you the mechanical energy to electrical
model or use the GEM HIL model’s created it, using good engineering energy.
cycle submodel to interpolate the duty- judgment, from sufficient in-use data of (10) The following instruments are
cycles and feed the driver model the vehicles in the same application as the required with plug-in hybrid systems to
duty-cycle reference vehicle speed for vehicles in which the plug-in hybrid determine required voltages and
each point in the duty-cycle. electric powertrain will be installed. currents during testing and must be
(4) The powertrain test procedure in You may use methodologies described installed on the powertrain to measure
this section is designed to simulate in SAE J2841 to develop the utility these values during testing:
operation of different vehicle factor curve. (i) Measure the voltage and current of
configurations over specific duty cycles. (7) The provisions related to carbon the battery pack directly with a DC
See paragraphs (h) and (j) of this balance error verification in § 1036.543 wideband power analyzer to determine
section. apply for all testing in this section. power. Measure all current entering and
(5) For each test run, record engine These procedures are optional if you are leaving the battery pack. Do not measure
speed and torque as defined in 40 CFR only performing direct or indirect fuel- voltage upstream of this measurement
1065.915(d)(5) with a minimum point. The maximum integration period
flow measurement, but we will perform
sampling frequency of 1 Hz. These for determining amp-hours is 0.05
carbon balance error verification for all
engine speed and torque values seconds. The power analyzer must have
testing under this section.
represent a duty cycle that can be used an accuracy for measuring current and
for separate testing with an engine (8) Do not apply accessory loads when
conducting a powertrain test to generate voltage of 1% of point or 0.3% of
mounted on an engine dynamometer maximum, whichever is greater. The
under 40 CFR 1037.551, such as for a inputs to GEM if torque is measured at
the axle input shaft or wheel hubs. power analyzer must not be susceptible
selective enforcement audit as described to offset errors while measuring current.
in 40 CFR 1037.301. (9) If you test a powertrain over the
(ii) If safety considerations do not
(6) For hybrid powertrains with no Low Load Cycle specified in § 1036.514,
allow for measuring voltage, you may
plug-in capability, correct for the net control and apply the electrical
determine the voltage directly from the
energy change of the energy storage accessory loads. We recommend using a
powertrain ECM.
device as described in 40 CFR load bank connected directly to the
(11) The following figure provides an
1066.501(a)(3). For plug-in hybrid powertrain’s electrical system. You may
overview of testing under this section:
electric powertrains, follow 40 CFR instead use an alternator with dynamic
1066.501(a)(3) to determine End-of-Test electrical load control. Use good
for charge-depleting operation. You engineering judgment to account for the Figure 1 to Paragraph (a)(11) of
must get our approval in advance for efficiency of the alternator or the § 1036.545—Overview of Powertrain
your utility factor curve; we will efficiency of the powertrain to convert Testing.
325
Fmt 4701
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C applicable. Set up the engine according the engine’s idle speed to idle speed
(b) Test configuration. Select a to 40 CFR 1065.110 and 1065.405(b). Set defined in 40 CFR 1037.520(h)(1).
powertrain for testing as described in
ER22AP24.188</GPH>
§ 1036.235 or 40 CFR 1037.235 as
326
Fmt 4701
(1) The default test configuration the dynamometer speed at a minimum measurement at the engine’s crankshaft,
consists of a powertrain with all of 5 Hz, or 10 Hz for testing hybrid fnref,dyno is the dynamometer target speed
components upstream of the axle. This engines. Run the vehicle model to from the GEM HIL model’s transmission
involves connecting the powertrain’s calculate the dynamometer setpoints at submodel. You may request our
output shaft directly to the a rate of at least 100 Hz. If the approval to change the transmission
dynamometer or to a gear box with a dynamometer’s command frequency is submodel, as long as the changes do not
fixed gear ratio and measuring torque at less than the vehicle model affect the gear selection logic. Before
the axle input shaft. You may instead dynamometer setpoint frequency, testing, initialize the transmission
set up the dynamometer to connect at subsample the calculated setpoints for model with the engine’s measured
the wheel hubs and measure torque at commanding the dynamometer torque curve and the applicable steady-
that location. The preceding sentence setpoints. state fuel map from the GEM HIL model.
may apply if your powertrain (f) Driveline and vehicle model. Use You may request our approval to input
configuration requires it, such as for the GEM HIL model’s driveline and your own steady-state fuel map. For
hybrid powertrains or if you want to vehicle submodels or the equations in example, this request for approval could
represent the axle performance with this paragraph (f) to calculate the include using a fuel map that represents
powertrain test results. You may dynamometer speed setpoint, fnref,dyno, the combined performance of the engine
alternatively test the powertrain with a based on the torque measurement and hybrid components. Configure the
chassis dynamometer if you measure location. For all powertrains, configure torque converter to simulate neutral idle
speed and torque at the powertrain’s GEM with the accessory load set to zero. when using this procedure to generate
output shaft or wheel hubs. For hybrid engines, configure GEM with engine fuel maps in § 1036.505 or to
(2) For testing hybrid engines, connect the applicable accessory load as perform the Supplemental Emission
the engine’s crankshaft directly to the specified in §§ 1036.505, 1036.514, and Test (SET) testing under § 1036.510.
dynamometer and measure torque at 1036.525. For all powertrains and You may change engine commanded
that location. hybrid engines, configure GEM with the torque at idle to better represent CITT
(c) Powertrain temperatures during tire slip model disabled. for transient testing under § 1036.512.
testing. Cool the powertrain during (1) Driveline model with a You may change the simulated engine
testing so temperatures for oil, coolant, transmission in hardware. For testing inertia to match the inertia of the engine
block, head, transmission, battery, and with torque measurement at the axle under test. We will evaluate your
power electronics are within the input shaft or wheel hubs, calculate, requests under this paragraph (f)(2)
manufacturer’s expected ranges for fnref,dyno, using the GEM HIL model’s based on your demonstration that the
normal operation. You may use driveline submodel or the following adjusted testing better represents in-use
electronic control module outputs to equation: operation.
comply with this paragraph (c). You (i) The transmission submodel needs
may use auxiliary coolers and fans. the following model inputs:
(d) Engine break in. Break in the
(A) Torque measured at the engine’s
engine according to 40 CFR 1065.405(c),
crankshaft.
the axle assembly according to 40 CFR Eq. 1036.545–1
1037.560, and the transmission (B) Engine estimated torque
Where: determined from the electronic control
according to 40 CFR 1037.565. You may
instead break in the powertrain as a
ka[speed] = drive axle ratio as determined in module or by converting the
paragraph (h) of this section. Set ka[speed] instantaneous operator demand to an
complete system using the engine break equal to 1.0 if torque is measured at the
in procedure in 40 CFR 1065.405(c). instantaneous torque in N·m.
wheel hubs.
(e) Dynamometer setup. Set the vrefi = simulated vehicle reference speed as (C) Dynamometer mode when idling
dynamometer to operate in speed- calculated in paragraph (f)(3) of this (speed-control or torque-control).
control mode (or torque-control mode section. (D) Measured engine speed when
for hybrid engine testing at idle, r[speed] = tire radius as determined in idling.
including idle portions of transient duty paragraph (h) of this section. (E) Transmission output angular
cycles). Record data as described in 40 (2) Driveline model with a simulated speed, fni,transmission, calculated as
CFR 1065.202. Command and control transmission. For testing with the torque follows:
Eq. 1036.545–2 (C) Transmission engine load limit. Let vref1 = 0; start calculations at i = 2. A 10-
(D) Engine speed target. minute sampling period will generally
Where:
involve 60,000 measurements.
ka[speed] = drive axle ratio as determined in (3) Vehicle model. Calculate the T = instantaneous measured torque at the
paragraph (h) of this section. simulated vehicle reference speed, nrefi, axle input, measured at the wheel hubs,
vrefi = simulated vehicle reference speed as using the GEM HIL model’s vehicle or simulated by the GEM HIL model’s
calculated in paragraph (f)(3) of this
submodel or the equations in this transmission submodel. For
section.
paragraph (f)(3): configurations with multiple torque

r[speed] = tire radius as determined in
ER22AP24.190</GPH>
measurements, such as when measuring

paragraph (h) of this section. Eq. 1036.545–3 torque at the wheel hubs, T is the sum
(ii) The transmission submodel Where: of all torque measurements.
generates the following model outputs: i = a time-based counter corresponding to Effaxle = axle efficiency. Use Effaxle = 0.955 for
(A) Dynamometer target speed. each measurement during the sampling T ≥ 0, and use Effaxle = 1/0.955 for T <
ER22AP24.189</GPH>
(B) Dynamometer idle load. period. 0.
327
Fmt 4701
Use Effaxle = 1.0 if torque is measured at the Eq. 1036.545–4 (4) Example. The following example
wheel hubs. r = air density at reference conditions. Use illustrates a calculation of fnref,dyno using
M = vehicle mass for a vehicle class as r = 1.1845 kg/m3. paragraph (f)(1) of this section where
determined in paragraph (h) of this CdA = drag area for a vehicle class as
determined in paragraph (h) of this
torque is measured at the axle input
section.
section. shaft. This example is for a vocational
g = gravitational constant = 9.80665 m/s2.
Crr = coefficient of rolling resistance for a Fbrake,i-1 = instantaneous braking force applied Light HDV or vocational Medium HDV
vehicle class as determined in paragraph by the driver model. with 6 speed automatic transmission at
(h) of this section. Fgrade,i-1=M · g · sin(atan(Gi-1)) B speed (test 4 in table 1 to paragraph
Gi-1 = the percent grade interpolated at Eq. 1036.545–5 (h)(2)(ii) of this section).
Dt = the time interval between measurements.
distance, Di-1, from the duty cycle in 40 kaB = 4.0
CFR part 1037, appendix D, For example, at 100 Hz, Dt = 0.0100
seconds. rB = 0.399 m
corresponding to measurement (i–1).
Mrotating = inertial mass of rotating T999 = 500.0 N·m
components. Let Mrotating = 340 kg for Crr = 7.7 N/kN = 7.7·10¥3 N/N
vocational Light HDV or vocational
Medium HDV. See paragraph (h) of this
M = 11408 kg
section for tractors and for vocational CdA = 5.4 m2
Heavy HDV. G999 = 0.39% = 0.0039
Fbrake,999 = 0 N Fgrade,999 = 11408 · 9.81 · Mrotating = 340 kg

vref,999 = 20.0 m/s sin(atan(0.0039)) = 436.5 N vref1000 =
Dt = 0.0100 s
(g) Driver model. Use the GEM HIL CFR part 1037, appendix A, the SET as (2) Send a brake signal when operator
model’s driver submodel or design a defined § 1036.510, the Federal Test demand is zero and vehicle speed is
driver model to simulate a human driver Procedure (FTP) as defined in greater than the reference vehicle speed
modulating the throttle and brake § 1036.512, and the Low Load Cycle from the test cycle. Include a delay
pedals. In either case, tune the model to (LLC) as defined in § 1036.514, the before changing the brake signal to
follow the test cycle as closely as speed requirements described in 40 CFR prevent dithering, consistent with good
possible meeting the following 1066.425(b) and (c). engineering judgment.
specifications: (iii) The exceptions in 40 CFR (3) Allow braking only if operator
(1) The driver model must meet the
1066.425(b)(4) apply to the highway demand is zero.
following speed requirements:
cruise cycles, the Heavy-Duty Transient
ER22AP24.194</GPH>
(i) For operation over the highway (4) Compensate for the distance
cruise cycles, the speed Test Cycle specified in 40 CFR part driven over the duty cycle over the
requirements described in 40 CFR 1037, appendix A, SET, FTP, and LLC. course of the test. Use the following
1066.425(b) and (c). (iv) If the speeds do not conform to equation to perform the compensation
(ii) For operation over the Heavy-Duty these criteria, the test is not valid and in real time to determine your time in
ER22AP24.193</GPH>
Transient Test Cycle specified in 40 must be repeated. the cycle:

ER22AP24.192</GPH>
328
Fmt 4701
Eq. 1036.545–6 (eight configurations). Select axle ratios as described in § 1036.540(c)(3) with the
Where: to represent the full range of expected following exceptions:
ω vehicle installations. Select axle ratios (i) In the equations of
vehicle = measured vehicle speed.
ω
cycle = reference speed from the test cycle.
and tire sizes such that the ratio of § 1036.540(c)(3)(i), ktopgear is the actual
If ωcycle,i-1 < 1.0 m/s, set ωcycle,i-1 = engine speed to vehicle speed covers the top gear ratio of the powertrain instead
ω range of ratios of minimum and
vehicle,i-1. of the transmission gear ratio in the
(h) Vehicle configurations to evaluate maximum engine speed to vehicle speed highest available gear given in table 1 to
for generating fuel maps as defined in when the transmission is in top gear for paragraph (c)(2) of § 1036.540.
§ 1036.505. Configure the driveline and the vehicles in which the powertrain
will be installed. Note that you do not (ii) Test at least eight different vehicle
vehicle models from paragraph (f) of configurations for powertrains that will
this section in the test cell to test the have to use the same axle ratios and tire
sizes for each GEM regulatory be installed in Spark-ignition HDE,
powertrain. Simulate multiple vehicle vocational Light HDV, and vocational
configurations that represent the range subcategory. You may determine
appropriate Crr, CdA, and mass values to Medium HDV using the following table
of intended vehicle applications using instead of table 2 to paragraph (c)(3)(ii)
one of the following options: cover the range of intended vehicle
applications or you may use the Crr, CdA, of § 1036.540:
(1) For known vehicle configurations,
use at least three equally spaced axle and mass values specified in paragraph TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (h)(2)(ii) OF
ratios or tire sizes and three different (h)(2) of this section. § 1036.545—VEHICLE
road loads (nine configurations), or at (2) If vehicle configurations are not CONFIGURATIONS FOR TESTING
least four equally spaced axle ratios or known, determine the vehicle model SPARK-IGNITION HDE, AND MEDIUM
tire sizes and two different road loads inputs for a set of vehicle configurations HDE
(iii) Select and test vehicle tables instead of tables 3 and 4 to TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (h)(2)(iii)
configurations as described in paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of § 1036.540: OF § 1036.545—VEHICLE
§ 1036.540(c)(3)(iii) for powertrains that CONFIGURATIONS FOR TESTING
will be installed in vocational Heavy GENERAL PURPOSE TRACTORS AND
HDV and tractors using the following VOCATIONAL HEAVY HDV
ER22AP24.196</GPH>
ER22AP24.195</GPH>
329
Fmt 4701
TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (h)(2)(iii) of

§ 1036.545—VEHICLE
CONFIGURATIONS FOR TESTING
HEAVY HDE INSTALLED IN HEAVY-
HAUL TRACTORS
(3) For hybrid powertrain systems (i) [Reserved] (2) Warm up the powertrain as
where the transmission will be (j) Duty cycles to evaluate. Operate the described in § 1036.520(d).
simulated, use the transmission powertrain over each of the duty cycles (3) Within 90 seconds after
parameters defined in § 1036.540(c)(2) specified in 40 CFR 1037.510(a)(2), and concluding the warm-up, start the
to determine transmission type and gear for each applicable vehicle transition to the preconditioning cycle
ratio. Use a fixed transmission configuration from paragraph (h) of this as described in paragraph (j)(5) of this
efficiency of 0.95. The GEM HIL section. Determine cycle-average section.
transmission model uses a transmission powertrain fuel maps by testing the (4) For plug-in hybrid engines,
ER22AP24.198</GPH>
parameter file for each test that includes powertrain using the procedures in precondition the battery and then
the transmission type, gear ratios, § 1036.540(d) with the following complete all back-to-back tests for each
lockup gear, torque limit per gear from exceptions: vehicle configuration according to 40
§ 1036.540(c)(2), and the values from (1) Understand ‘‘engine’’ to mean CFR 1066.501(a)(3) before moving to the
§ 1036.505(b)(4) and (c).
ER22AP24.197</GPH>
‘‘powertrain’’. next vehicle configuration. The
330
Fmt 4701
following figure illustrates a charge- are used for criteria pollutant Figure 2 to Paragraph (j)(4) of
depleting test sequence with engine determination: § 1036.545—Generic Charge-Depleting
operation during two duty cycles, which Test Sequence
(5) If the preceding duty cycle does (7) Calculate cycle work using GEM or voided the test with respect to NOX
not end at 0 mi/hr, transition between the speed and torque from the driveline emission measurement.
duty cycles by decelerating at a rate of and vehicle models from paragraph (f) (l) [Reserved]
2 mi/hr/s at 0% grade until the vehicle of this section to determine the
reaches zero speed. Shut off the sequence of duty cycles. (m) Measured output speed
powertrain. Prepare the powertrain and (8) Calculate the mass of fuel validation. For each test point, validate
test cell for the next duty-cycle. consumed for idle duty cycles as the measured output speed with the
described in paragraph (n) of this corresponding reference values. If speed
(6) Start the next duty-cycle within 60 is measured at more than one location,
to 180 seconds after shutting off the section.
(k) Measuring NOX emissions. the measurements at each location must
powertrain. meet validation requirements. If the
Measure NOX emissions for each
(i) To start the next duty-cycle, for sampling period in grams. You may range of reference speed is less than 10
hybrid powertrains, key on the vehicle perform these measurements using a percent of the mean reference speed,
and then start the duty-cycle. For NOX emission-measurement system that you need to meet only the standard
conventional powertrains key on the meets the requirements of 40 CFR part error of the estimate in table 4 to this
vehicle, start the engine, wait for the 1065, subpart J. If a system malfunction paragraph (m). You may delete points
engine to stabilize at idle speed, and prevents you from measuring NOX when the vehicle is stopped. If your
then start the duty-cycle. emissions during a test under this speed measurement is not at the
(ii) If the duty-cycle does not start at section but the test otherwise gives valid location of ƒnref, correct your measured
0 mi/hr, transition to the next duty cycle results, you may consider this a valid speed using the constant speed ratio
by accelerating at a target rate of 1 mi/ test and omit the NOX emission between the two locations. Apply cycle-
hr/s at 0% grade. Stabilize for 10 measurements; however, we may validation criteria for each separate
seconds at the initial duty cycle require you to repeat the test if we transient or highway cruise cycle based
conditions and start the duty-cycle. determine that you inappropriately on the following parameters:
TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (m) OF § 1036.545—CYCLE-VALIDATION CRITERIA

Parameter a Speed control
Slope, a1 ................................................................................................... 0.990 ≤ a1 ≤ 1.010.

Absolute value of intercept, |a0| ................................................................ ≤2.0% of maximum ƒnref speed.
Standard error of the estimate, SEE ........................................................ ≤2.0% of maximum ƒnref speed.
Coefficient of determination, r2 ................................................................. ≥0.990.
a Determine values for specified parameters as described in 40 CFR 1065.514(e) by comparing measured and reference values for ƒnref,dyno.
(n) Fuel consumption at idle. Record (1) Direct fuel flow measurement. (2) Indirect fuel flow measurement.
measurements using direct and/or Determine the corresponding mean Record speed and torque and measure
indirect measurement of fuel flow. values for mean idle fuel mass flow rate, emissions and other inputs needed to
Ô
Determine the fuel-consumption rates at m fuelidle, for each duty cycle, as run the chemical balance in 40 CFR
idle for the applicable duty cycles applicable. Use of redundant direct fuel- 1065.655(c). Determine the
described in 40 CFR 1037.510(a)(2) as flow measurements require our advance corresponding mean values for each
follows: approval. duty cycle. Use of redundant indirect
ER22AP24.199</GPH>
fuel-flow measurements require our
331
advance approval. Measure background without introducing errors related to 2:1 in the primary dilution stage.
concentration as described in insufficient mixing or other operational Calculate the idle fuel mass flow rate for
§ 1036.535(b)(4)(ii). We recommend considerations. Note that for this testing each duty cycle, mÔ
fuelidle, for each set of
setting the CVS flow rate as low as 40 CFR 1065.140(e) does not apply, vehicle settings, as follows:
possible to minimize background, but including the minimum dilution ratio of
Eq. 1036.545–7 c≈Ccombdry = the mean concentration of carbon MCO2 = molar mass of carbon dioxide.
from fuel and any injected fluids in the
Where: Example:
exhaust per mole of dry exhaust.
MC = molar mass of carbon. c≈H2Oexhdry = the mean concentration of H2O in
wCmeas = carbon mass fraction of fuel (or MC = 12.0107 g/mol
exhaust per mole of dry exhaust.
mixture of test fuels) as determined in 40 Ô
m
wCmeas = 0.867
CO2DEF = the mean CO2 mass emission rate
CFR 1065.655(d), except that you may Ô
nexh = 25.534 mol/s
not use the default properties in 40 CFR resulting from diesel exhaust fluid
1065.655(e)(5) to determine a, b, and wC decomposition over the duty cycle as c≈Ccombdry = 2.805·10¥3 mol/mol
for liquid fuels. determined in § 1036.535(b)(9). If your c≈H2Oexhdry = 3.53·10¥2 mol/mol
Ô engine does not use diesel exhaust fluid,
nexh = the mean raw exhaust molar flow rate ÔCO2DEF = 0.0726 g/s
m
from which you measured emissions or if you choose not to perform this
according to 40 CFR 1065.655. correction, set equal to 0. MCO2 = 44.0095
(o) Create GEM inputs. Use the results (2) Declare fuel masses, mfuel[cycle] and and (3). These declared values, which
of powertrain testing to determine GEM Ô
m fuelidle. Determine mfuel[cycle] using the serve as emission standards, collectively
inputs for the different simulated calculated fuel mass consumption represent the powertrain fuel map for
vehicle configurations as follows: values described in § 1036.540(d)(12). In certification.
(1) Correct the measured or calculated addition, declare mean fuel mass flow (3) For engines designed for plug-in
fuel masses, mfuel[cycle], and mean idle rate for each applicable idle duty cycle, hybrid electric vehicles, the mass of fuel
fuel mass flow rates, m Ô Ô
fuelidle, if m fuelidle. These declared values may not for each cycle, mfuel[cycle], is the utility
applicable, for each test result to a mass- be lower than any corresponding factor-weighted fuel mass, mfuelUF[cycle].
specific net energy content of a measured values determined in this This is determined by calculating mfuel
reference fuel as described in section. If you use both direct and for the full charge-depleting and charge-
§ 1036.535(e), replacing m Ô with indirect measurement of fuel flow, sustaining portions of the test and
fuel
mfuel[cycle] where applicable in Eq. determine the corresponding declared weighting the results, using the
1036.535–4. values as described in § 1036.535(g)(2) following equation:
Eq. 1036.545–8 j = an indexing variable that represents one

test interval.
Where:
ER22AP24.203</GPH>
M = total number of charge-sustaining test

i = an indexing variable that represents one intervals.
test interval.
mfuel[cycle]CSj = total mass of fuel over the
N = total number of charge-depleting test
charge-sustaining portion of the test for Eq. 1036.545–9
intervals.
each test interval, j, starting from j = 1.
ER22AP24.202</GPH>
mfuel[cycle]CDi = total mass of fuel in the Where:

charge-depleting portion of the test for UFRCD = utility factor fraction at the full
k = an indexing variable that represents one
each test interval, i, starting from i = 1, charge-depleting distance, RCD, as
recorded velocity value.
including the test interval(s) from the determined by interpolating the
Q = total number of measurements over the
approved utility factor curve. RCD is the
transition phase. test interval.

ER22AP24.201</GPH>
UFDCDi = utility factor fraction at distance cumulative distance driven over N

v = vehicle velocity at each time step, k,
DCDi from Eq. 1036.510–11 as charge-depleting test intervals.
starting from k = 1. For tests completed
determined by interpolating the
approved utility factor curve for each test under this section, v is the vehicle
interval, i, starting from i = 1. Let UFDCD0 velocity as determined by Eq. 1036.545–
1. Note that this should include charge-
ER22AP24.200</GPH>
=0
332
Fmt 4701
depleting test intervals that start when Example for the 55 mi/hr cruise cycle: υ3 = 55.1 mi/hr
the engine is not yet operating. Q = 8790 ƒrecord = 10 Hz
Dt = 1/ƒrecord υ1 = 55.0 mi/hr
ƒrecord = the record rate. υ2 = 55.0 mi/hr Dt = 1/10 Hz = 0.1 s
(4) For the transient cycle specified in (i) For testing with torque Eq. 1036.545–10
40 CFR 1037.510(a)(2)(i), calculate measurement at the axle input shaft:
powertrain output speed per unit of Example:
vehicle speed using one of the following
methods:
⊕
(ii) For testing with torque ƒnengine = average engine speed when vehicle
ER22AP24.207</GPH>
measurement at the wheel hubs, use Eq. speed is at or above 0.100 m/s.
⊕
1036.545–8 setting ka equal to 1. υref = average simulated vehicle speed at or
above 0.100 m/s.
(iii) For testing with torque
Eq. 1036.545–11
measurement at the engine’s crankshaft: Example:
ER22AP24.206</GPH>
Where:
ER22AP24.205</GPH>
ER22AP24.204</GPH>
333
Fmt 4701
(5) Calculate engine idle speed, by sustaining and charge-depleting⊕ test location, determine W[cycle] by
taking the average engine speed intervals when determining ƒnpowertrain integrating the sum of the power
measured during the transient cycle test and T̄powertrain for plug-in hybrid calculated from measured speed and
while the vehicle speed is below 0.100 powertrains.) torque measurements at each location.
m/s. (Note: Use all the charge-sustaining (7) Calculate positive work, W[cycle], as
the work over the duty cycle at the axle (8) The following tables illustrate the
test intervals when determining engine
input shaft, wheel hubs, or the engine’s GEM data inputs corresponding to the
idle speed for plug-in hybrid
powertrains.) crankshaft, as applicable, when vehicle different vehicle configurations for a
(6) For the cruise cycles specified in speed is at or above 0.100 m/s. For plug- given duty cycle:
40 CFR 1037.510(a)(2)(ii), calculate the in hybrid powertrains, calculate W[cycle] (i) For the transient cycle:
average powertrain output speed,
⊕ by calculating the positive work over
ƒnpowertrain, and the average powertrain each of the charge-sustaining and Table 5 to Paragraph (o)(8)(i) of
output torque (positive torque only), charge-depleting test intervals and then § 1036.545—Example of Output Matrix
T̄powertrain, at vehicle speed at or above averaging them together. If speed and for Transient Cycle Vehicle
0.100 m/s. (Note: Use all the charge- torque are measured at more than one Configurations
(ii) For the cruise cycles: Table 6 to Paragraph ((o)(8)(ii) of

§ 1036.545—Generic Example of Output
Matrix for Cruise Cycle Vehicle
Configurations
ER22AP24.804</GPH>
(p) Determine usable battery energy. the current flowing into and out of the equivalent to those from the power
Determine usable battery energy (UBE) battery pack during the charge-depleting analyzer.
for plug-in hybrid powertrains using test intervals, including current
ER22AP24.210</GPH>
one of the following procedures: associated with regenerative braking.

(1) Select a representative vehicle Eq. 1036.545–12 shows how to calculate
configuration from paragraph (h) of this EDCD, but the power analyzer specified
section. Measure DC discharge energy, in paragraph (a)(10)(i) of this section
EDCD, in DC watt-hours and measure DC will typically perform this calculation Eq. 1036.545–12
ER22AP24.209</GPH>
discharge current per hour, CD, for the internally. Battery voltage Where:
charge-depleting test intervals of the measurements made by the powertrain’s i = an indexing variable that represents one
Heavy-Duty Transient Test Cycle in 40 on-board sensors (such as those individual measurement.
CFR part 1037, appendix A. The available with a diagnostic port) may be N = total number of measurements.
ER22AP24.208</GPH>
measurement period must include all used for calculating EDCD if they are V = battery DC bus voltage.
334
Fmt 4701
I = battery current. N = 13360 I2 = 0

Dt = 1/ƒrecord V1 = 454.0
ƒrecord = the data recording frequency. ƒrecord = 20 Hz
V2 = 454.0
Example: I1 = 0 Dt = 1/20 = 0.05 s
(2) Determine a declared UBE that is (i) For liquid fuels, have the sample the cab display required under
at or below the corresponding value analyzed by at least three different labs, § 1036.110(c)(1) identifying a fault
determined in paragraph (p)(1) of this determine wC for each result as condition may omit information about
section, including those from redundant described in 40 CFR 1065.655(d), and the timing or extent of a pending derate
measurements. This declared UBE determine the final value of your test if an AECD will override the derate.
serves as UBEcertified determined under fuel’s wC as the median (as described in * * * * *
40 CFR 1037.115(f). 40 CFR 1065.602(m)) of all the wC
■ 35. Amend § 1036.550 by: values. If you have results from three ■ 38. Amend § 1036.605 by revising
■ a. Revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (2); different labs, we recommend you paragraph (e) to read as follows:
and screen them to determine if additional
§ 1036.605 Alternate emission standards
■ b. Revising the entry for wCmeas in observations are needed. To perform for engines used in specialty vehicles.
paragraph (b)(4) after the ‘‘Example’’. this screening, determine the absolute
The revisions read as follows: value of the difference between each wC * * * * *
value and the average of the other two (e) In a separate application for a
§ 1036.550 Calculating greenhouse gas wC values. If the largest of these three certificate of conformity, identify the
emission rates.
resulting absolute value differences is corresponding nonroad engine family,
* * * * * greater than 1.56 percent carbon, we describe the label required under
(b) * * * recommend you obtain additional section, state that you meet applicable
(1) Determine your test fuel’s mass- results prior to determining the final diagnostic requirements under 40 CFR
specific net energy content, Emfuelmeas, value of wC. part 1039 or 1048, and identify your
also known as lower heating value, in (ii) For gaseous fuels, have the sample projected U.S.-directed production
MJ/kg, expressed to at least three analyzed by a single lab and use that volume.
decimal places. Determine Emfuelmeas as result as your test fuel’s wC.
follows: * * * * *
* * * * *
(i) For liquid fuels, determine (4) * * * ■ 39. Amend § 1036.615 by revising
Emfuelmeas according to ASTM D4809 wCmeas = 0.870 kgC/kg paragraph (a) to read as follows:
(incorporated by reference, see
* * * * * § 1036.615 Engines with Rankine cycle
§ 1036.810). Have the sample analyzed
■ 36. Amend § 1036.580 by adding waste heat recovery and hybrid
by at least three different labs and
determine the final value of your test paragraph (d) to read as follows: powertrains.
fuel’s Emfuelmeas as the median of all the § 1036.580 Infrequently regenerating * * * * *
lab test results as described in 40 CFR aftertreatment devices. (a) Pre-transmission hybrid
1065.602(m). If you have results from * * * * * powertrains. Test pre-transmission
three different labs, we recommend you (d) If your engine family includes hybrid powertrains with the hybrid
screen them to determine if additional engines with one or more emergency engine procedures of 40 CFR part 1065
observations are needed. To perform AECDs approved under or with the post-transmission
this screening, determine the absolute § 1036.115(h)(4), do not consider procedures in § 1036.545. Pre-
value of the difference between each lab additional regenerations resulting from transmission hybrid powertrains are
result and the average of the other two those AECDs when developing those engine systems that include
lab results. If the largest of these three adjustments to measured values under features to recover and store energy
resulting absolute value differences is paragraph (a) or (b) of this section. during engine motoring operation but
greater than 0.297 MJ/kg, we ■ 37. Amend § 1036.601 by revising not from the vehicle’s wheels. Engines
recommend you obtain additional paragraph (c) to read as follows: certified with pre-transmission hybrid
results prior to determining the final powertrains must be certified to meet
value of Emfuelmeas. § 1036.601 Overview of compliance the diagnostic requirements as specified
(ii) For gaseous fuels, determine provisions. in § 1036.110 with respect to powertrain
Emfuelmeas according to ASTM D3588 * * * * * components and systems; if different
(incorporated by reference, see (c) The emergency vehicle field manufacturers produce the engine and
§ 1036.810). modification provisions of 40 CFR the hybrid powertrain, the hybrid
(2) Determine your test fuel’s carbon 85.1716 apply with respect to the powertrain manufacturer may separately
mass fraction, wC, as described in 40 standards of this part. Emergency certify its powertrain relative to
CFR 1065.655(d), expressed to at least vehicle field modifications under 40 diagnostic requirements.
three decimal places; however, you CFR 85.1716 may include
* * * * *
must measure fuel properties for a and corresponding changes to diagnostic
b rather than using the default values systems relative to the requirements in ■ 40. Amend § 1036.630 by revising
ER22AP24.211</GPH>
specified in 40 CFR 1065.655(e). §§ 1036.110 and 1036.111. For example, paragraph (b) to read as follows:
335
Fmt 4701
§ 1036.630 Certification of engine project negative emission credits for a ■ b. Removing the definition of ‘‘Criteria
greenhouse gas emissions for powertrain family, state the source of positive pollutants’’;
testing. emission credits you expect to use to ■ c. Revising the definition of
* * * * * offset the negative emission credits. ‘‘Emergency vehicle’’;
(b) If you choose to certify only fuel ■ 43. Amend § 1036.730 by revising ■ d. Removing the definition of
map emissions for an engine family and paragraphs (b)(4) and (f)(1) to read as ‘‘Greenhouse gas’’;
to not certify emissions over powertrain follows: ■ e. Revising the definition of ‘‘Hybrid’’;
cycles under § 1036.545, we will not ■ f. Removing the definitions of ‘‘Hybrid
presume you are responsible for § 1036.730 ABT reports. engine’’ and ‘‘Hybrid powertrain’’;
emissions over the powertrain cycles. * * * * * ■ g. Revising the definition of ‘‘Mild
However, where we determine that you (b) * * * hybrid’’;
are responsible in whole or in part for (4) The projected and actual ■ h. Adding a definition of ‘‘Neat’’ in
the emission exceedance in such cases, production volumes for calculating alphabetical order;
we may require that you participate in emission credits for the model year. If ■ i. Revising the definition of ‘‘Small
any recall of the affected vehicles (Note: you changed an FEL/FCL during the manufacturer’’;
this does not apply if you also hold the model year, identify the actual ■ j. Adding a definition of ‘‘State of
certificate of conformity for the vehicle). production volume associated with each certified energy (SOCE)’’ in alphabetical
* * * * * FEL/FCL. order; and
* * * * * ■ k. Revising the definition of ‘‘U.S.-
paragraph (c) to read as follows: (f) * * * directed production volume’’.
(1) If you notify us by the deadline for The additions and revisions read as
§ 1036.705 Generating and calculating submitting the final report that errors follows:
emission credits. mistakenly decreased your balance of § 1036.801 Definitions.
* * * * * emission credits, you may correct the
(c) Compliance with the requirements errors and recalculate the balance of * * * * *
of this subpart is determined at the end emission credits. If you notify us that Carbon-containing fuel has the
of the model year by calculating errors mistakenly decreased your meaning given in 40 CFR 1065.1001.
emission credits based on actual balance of GHG emission credits after * * * * *
production volumes, excluding the the deadline for submitting the final Emergency vehicle means a vehicle
following engines: report, you may correct the errors and that meets one of the following criteria:
(1) Engines that you do not certify to recalculate the balance of emission (1) It is an ambulance or a fire truck.
the CO2 standards of this part because credits after applying a 10 percent (2) It is a vehicle that we have
they are permanently exempted under discount to the credit correction, but determined will likely be used in
subpart G of this part or under 40 CFR only if you notify us within 24 months emergency situations where emission
part 1068. after the deadline for submitting the control function or malfunction may
(2) Exported engines. final report. If you report a negative cause a significant risk to human life.
(3) Engines not subject to the balance of emission credits, we may For example, we would consider a truck
requirements of this part, such as those disallow corrections under this that is certain to be retrofitted with a
excluded under § 1036.5. For example, paragraph (f)(1). slip-on firefighting module to become
do not include engines used in vehicles * * * * * an emergency vehicle, even though it
certified to the greenhouse gas standards was not initially designed to be a fire
of 40 CFR 86.1819. ■ 44. Amend § 1036.735 by revising truck. Also, a mobile command center
(4) Engines certified to state emission paragraph (d) to read as follows: that is unable to manually regenerate its
standards that are different than the § 1036.735 Recordkeeping.
DPF while on duty could be an
emission standards referenced in this emergency vehicle. In making this
section, and intended for sale in a state * * * * * determination, we may consider any
that has adopted those emission (d) Keep appropriate records to factor that has an effect on the totality
standards. document production volumes of of the actual risk to human life. For
(5) Any other engines if we indicate engines that generate or use emission example, we may consider how
elsewhere in this part that they are not credits under the ABT program. For frequently a vehicle will be used in
to be included in the calculations of this example, keep available records of the emergency situations or how likely it is
subpart. engine identification number (usually that the emission controls will cause a
the serial number) for each engine you significant risk to human life when the
* * * * * produce that generates or uses emission vehicle is used in emergency situations.
■ 42. Amend § 1036.725 by revising credits. You may identify these numbers We would not consider the truck in the
paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows: as a range. If you change the FEL/FCL example above to be an emergency
after the start of production, identify the vehicle if there is merely a possibility
§ 1036.725 Required information for
certification.
date you started using each FEL/FCL (rather than a certainty) that it will be
and the range of engine identification retrofitted with a slip-on firefighting
* * * * * numbers associated with each FEL/FCL.
(b) * * * module.
You must also identify the purchaser
(2) Calculations of projected emission and destination for each engine you * * * * *
credits (positive or negative) based on produce to the extent this information is Hybrid means relating to an engine or
projected production volumes as available. powertrain that includes a Rechargeable

described in § 1036.705(c). We may Energy Storage System. Hybrid engines
require you to include similar * * * * * store and recover energy in a way that
calculations from your other engine ■ 45. Amend § 1036.801 by: is integral to the engine or otherwise
families to project your net credit ■ a. Adding a definition of ‘‘Carbon- upstream of the vehicle’s transmission.
balances for the model year. If you containing fuel’’ in alphabetical order; Examples of hybrid engines include
336
Fmt 4701
engines with hybrid components order to table 5 to paragraph (e) to read PART 1037—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS
connected to the front end of the engine as follows: FROM NEW HEAVY-DUTY MOTOR
(P0), connected to the crankshaft before VEHICLES
the clutch (P1), or connected between § 1036.805 Symbols, abbreviations, and
acronyms. ■ 49. The authority citation for part
the clutch and the transmission where
the clutch upstream of the hybrid The procedures in this part generally 1037 continues to read as follows:
feature is in addition to the transmission follow either the International System of Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
clutch or clutches (P2). Engine-based Units (SI) or the United States ■ 50. Amend § 1037.1 by revising
systems that recover kinetic energy to customary units, as detailed in NIST paragraph (a) to read as follows:
power an electric heater in the Special Publication 811 (incorporated
aftertreatment are themselves not by reference, see § 1036.810). See 40 § 1037.1 Applicability.
sufficient to qualify as a hybrid engine. CFR 1065.20 for specific provisions (a) The regulations in this part apply
The provisions in this part that apply related to these conventions. This for all new heavy-duty vehicles, except
for hybrid powertrains apply equally for section summarizes the way we use as provided in § 1037.5. This includes
hybrid engines, except as specified. symbols, units of measure, and other battery electric vehicles, fuel cell
Note that certain provisions in this part abbreviations. electric vehicles, and vehicles fueled by
treat hybrid powertrains intended for * * * * * conventional and alternative fuels.
vehicles that include regenerative * * * * *
braking different than those intended for (e) * * *
vehicles that do not include ■ 51. Amend § 1037.5 by:
regenerative braking. The definition of TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (e) OF ■ a. Revising paragraph (e);
§ 1036.805—OTHER ACRONYMS ■ b. Removing paragraphs (g) and (h);
hybrid includes plug-in hybrid electric
powertrains. AND ABBREVIATIONS and
■ c. Redesignating paragraph (i) as
* * * * * paragraph (g).
Acronym Meaning
Mild hybrid means relating to a hybrid The revision reads as follows:
engine or hybrid powertrain with
regenerative braking capability where * * * * * § 1037.5 Excluded vehicles.
the system recovers less than 20 percent DPF ............ diesel particulate filter. * * * * *
of the total braking energy over the (e) Vehicles subject to emission
transient cycle defined in 40 CFR part * * * * * standards under 40 CFR part 86, subpart
1037, appendix A. GCWR ........ gross combined weight rating. S.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Neat has the meaning given in 40 CFR ■ 52. Revise and republish § 1037.101 to
1065.1001. * * * * * read as follows:
* * * * *
■ 47. Amend § 1036.810 by adding § 1037.101 Overview of emission
Small manufacturer means a standards.
manufacturer meeting the criteria paragraph (e) to read as follows:
(a) You must show that vehicles meet
specified in 13 CFR 121.201. The § 1036.810 Incorporation by reference. the following emission standards:
employee and revenue limits apply to * * * * * (1) Exhaust emissions of criteria
the total number of employees and total
(e) U.S. EPA, Office of Air and pollutants. Criteria pollutant standards
revenue together for all affiliated
Radiation, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann for NOX, HC, PM, and CO apply as
companies (as defined in 40 CFR
Arbor, MI 48105; www.epa.gov; described in § 1037.102. These
1068.30). Note that manufacturers with
complianceinfo@epa.gov. pollutants are sometimes described
low production volumes may or may
collectively as ‘‘criteria pollutants’’
not be ‘‘small manufacturers’’. (1) Greenhouse gas Emissions Model because they are either criteria
* * * * * (GEM) Phase 2, Version 4.0, April 2022 pollutants under the Clean Air Act or
State of certified energy (SOCE) (‘‘GEM Phase 2, Version 4.0’’); IBR precursors to the criteria pollutants
means a value representing the amount approved for § 1036.545(a). ozone and PM.
of usable battery energy available at a (2) [Reserved] (2) Exhaust emissions of greenhouse
specific point in time relative to the gases. This part contains standards and
certified value for a new battery, ■ 48. Amend § 1036.815 by revising other regulations applicable to the
expressed as a percentage of the paragraph (b) to read as follows: emission of the air pollutant defined as
certified usable battery energy. § 1036.815 Confidential information. the aggregate group of six greenhouse
* * * * * gases: carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide,
* * * * *
U.S.-directed production volume methane, hydrofluorocarbons,
means the number of engines, subject to (b) Emission data or information that perfluorocarbons, and sulfur
the requirements of this part, produced is publicly available cannot be treated as hexafluoride. Emission standards apply
by a manufacturer for which the confidential business information as as follows for greenhouse gas emissions:
manufacturer has a reasonable described in 40 CFR 1068.11. Data that (i) CO2 emission standards apply as
assurance that sale was or will be made vehicle manufacturers need for described in §§ 1037.105 and 1037.106.
to ultimate purchasers in the United demonstrating compliance with No CH4 or N2O standards apply under
States. greenhouse gas emission standards, this part. See 40 CFR part 1036 for CH4
including fuel-consumption data as or N2O standards that apply to engines
* * * * *
described in §§ 1036.535 and 1036.545, used in these vehicles.
■ 46. Amend § 1036.805 by revising the also qualify as emission data for (ii) Hydrofluorocarbon standards
introductory text and adding entries for purposes of confidentiality apply as described in § 1037.115(e).
‘‘DPF’’ and ‘‘GCWR’’ in alphabetical determinations. These pollutants are also ‘‘greenhouse
337
Fmt 4701
gas pollutants’’ but are treated such as battery electric vehicles, are paragraph (e) are optional for vehicles
separately from exhaust greenhouse gas subject to compression-ignition produced before January 1, 2020. The
pollutants listed in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of emission standards under §§ 1037.105 hold-time requirements of SAE J2343
this section. and 1037.106 for the purpose of apply, with the following clarifications
(3) Fuel evaporative and refueling calculating emission credits. and additions:
emissions. Requirements related to fuel (3) For evaporative and refueling * * * * *
evaporative and refueling emissions are emissions, vehicles are regulated based
described in § 1037.103. on the type of fuel they use. Vehicles § 1037.104 [Removed]
(b) The regulated heavy-duty vehicles fueled with volatile liquid fuels or
are addressed in different groups as ■ 55. Remove § 1037.104.
gaseous fuels are subject to evaporative
follows: and refueling emission standards. ■ 56. Revise and republish § 1037.105 to
(1) For criteria pollutants, vehicles are read as follows:
regulated based on gross vehicle weight ■ 53. Amend § 1037.102 by revising the
rating (GVWR), whether they are section heading and paragraph (b) § 1037.105 CO2 emission standards for
considered ‘‘spark-ignition’’ or introductory text to read as follows: vocational vehicles.
‘‘compression-ignition,’’ and whether § 1037.102 Criteria exhaust emission (a) The standards of this section apply
they are first sold as complete or standards—NOX, HC, PM, and CO. for the following vehicles:
incomplete vehicles. * * * * * (1) Heavy-duty vehicles at or below
(2) Greenhouse gas standards apply 14,000 pounds GVWR that are not
(b) Heavy-duty vehicles with no
differently for vocational vehicles and subject to the greenhouse gas standards
installed propulsion engine, such as
tractors. Greenhouse gas standards also in 40 CFR part 86, subpart S, or that use
battery electric vehicles, are subject to
apply differently depending on the engines certified under § 1037.150(m).
vehicle service class as described in criteria pollutant standards under this
part. The emission standards that apply (2) Vehicles above 14,000 pounds
§ 1037.140. In addition, standards apply GVWR and at or below 26,000 pounds
differently for vehicles with spark- are the same as the standards that apply
for compression-ignition engines under GVWR, but not certified to the vehicle
ignition and compression-ignition greenhouse gas standards in 40 CFR part
engines. References in this part to 40 CFR 86.007–11 or 1036.104 for a
given model year. 86, subpart S.
‘‘spark-ignition’’ or ‘‘compression-
ignition’’ generally relate to the * * * * * (3) Vehicles above 26,000 pounds
application of standards under 40 CFR GVWR that are not tractors.
1036.140. For example, a vehicle with (4) Vocational tractors.
paragraph (e) introductory text to read
an engine certified to spark-ignition as follows: (b) CO2 standards in this paragraph (b)
standards under 40 CFR part 1036 is apply based on modeling and testing as
generally subject to requirements under § 1037.103 Evaporative and refueling specified in subpart F of this part. The
this part that apply for spark-ignition emission standards. provisions of § 1037.241 specify how to
vehicles. However, note that emission * * * * * comply with the standards in this
standards for Heavy HDE are considered (e) LNG refueling requirement. Fuel paragraph (b). Standards differ based on
to be compression-ignition standards for tanks for liquefied natural gas vehicles engine cycle, vehicle size, and intended
purposes of applying vehicle emission must meet the hold-time requirements vehicle duty cycle. See § 1037.510(c) to
standards under this part. Also, for in Section 4.2 of SAE J2343 determine which duty cycle applies.
spark-ignition engines voluntarily (incorporated by reference, see Note that § 1037.230 describes how to
certified as compression-ignition § 1037.810), as modified by this divide vehicles into subcategories.
engines under 40 CFR part 1036, you paragraph (e). All pressures noted are (1) Except as specified in paragraph
must choose at certification whether gauge pressure. Vehicles with tanks (b)(2) of this section, model year 2027
your vehicles are subject to spark- meeting the requirements in this and later vehicles are subject to Phase
ignition standards or compression- paragraph (e) are deemed to comply 3 CO2 standards corresponding to the
ignition standards. Heavy-duty vehicles with evaporative and refueling emission selected subcategories as shown in the
with no installed propulsion engine, standards. The provisions of this following table:
TABLE 1 OF PARAGRAPH (b)(1) OF § 1037.105—PHASE 3 CO2 STANDARDS FOR MODEL YEAR 2027 AND LATER
VOCATIONAL VEHICLES
CO2 standard by regulatory subcategory
(g/ton·mile)
Model year Roof height
Class 7 Class 8 Class 8 Heavy-haul
all cab styles day cab sleeper cab
2027 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 96.2 73.4 64.1 48.3

Mid Roof ........................................... 103.4 78.0 69.6
High Roof ......................................... 100.0 75.7 64.3
2028 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 88.5 67.5 64.1 48.3
Mid Roof ........................................... 95.1 71.8 69.6
High Roof ......................................... 92.0 69.6 64.3
2029 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 84.7 64.6 64.1 47.8

Mid Roof ........................................... 91.0 68.6 69.6
High Roof ......................................... 88.0 66.6 64.3
2030 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 80.8 61.7 60.3 47.8
Mid Roof ........................................... 86.9 65.5 65.4
High Roof ......................................... 84.0 63.6 60.4
2031 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 69.3 52.8 56.4 46.9
338
Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22APR2.SGM 22APR2
VOCATIONAL VEHICLES—Continued
(g/ton·mile)
Mid Roof ........................................... 74.4 56.2 61.2

High Roof ......................................... 72.0 54.5 56.6
2032 and Later .................................. Low Roof .......................................... 57.7 44.0 48.1 45.9
Mid Roof ........................................... 62.0 46.8 52.2
High Roof ......................................... 60.0 45.4 48.2
(2) Qualifying small manufacturers of of this section. If you certify to these part only by certifying all vehicle
model year 2027 and later vehicles may Phase 2 CO2 standards, you may use the families within a given averaging set to
continue to meet Phase 2 CO2 standards averaging provisions of subpart H of this the Phase 3 standards that apply in that
in this paragraph (b)(2) instead of the part to demonstrate compliance. You model year.
standards specified in paragraph (b)(1) may use other credit provisions of this
TABLE 2 OF PARAGRAPH (b)(2) OF § 1037.105—SMALL MANUFACTURER PHASE 2 CO2 STANDARDS FOR MODEL YEAR
2027 AND LATER VOCATIONAL VEHICLES
(g/ton·mile)
Engine cycle Vehicle service class
Multi-purpose Regional Urban
Compression-ignition ...................................... Light HDV ....................................................... 330 291 367

Compression-ignition ...................................... Medium HDV .................................................. 235 218 258
Compression-ignition ...................................... Heavy HDV .................................................... 230 189 269
Spark-ignition .................................................. Light HDV ....................................................... 372 319 413
Spark-ignition .................................................. Medium HDV .................................................. 268 247 297
(3) Model year 2024 through 2026 subcategories as shown in the following
vehicles are subject to Phase 2 CO2 table:
standards corresponding to the selected
TABLE 3 OF PARAGRAPH (b)(3) OF § 1037.105—PHASE 2 CO2 STANDARDS FOR MODEL YEAR 2024 THROUGH 2026
VOCATIONAL VEHICLES
(g/ton·mile)

(4) Model year 2021 through 2023 subcategories as shown in the following
standards corresponding to the selected
VOCATIONAL VEHICLES
(g/ton·mile)

339
VOCATIONAL VEHICLES—Continued
(g/ton·mile)
(5) Model year 2014 through 2020 standards as shown in the following
VOCATIONAL VEHICLES
[g/ton-mile]
CO2 standard for CO2 standard for

Vehicle size
model years 2014–2016 model year 2017–2020
Light HDV ............................................................................................................................ 388 373

Medium HDV ....................................................................................................................... 234 225
Heavy HDV .......................................................................................................................... 226 222
(c) [Reserved] vehicle service class (such as Medium apply the provisions in this paragraph
(d) You may generate or use emission HDV instead of Light HDV). Provisions (h) to any qualifying vehicles even
credits for averaging, banking, and related to generating emission credits though these standards were established
trading to demonstrate compliance with apply as follows: for custom-chassis vehicles. For
the standards in paragraph (b) of this (1) If you certify all your vehicles example, large, diversified vehicle
section as described in subpart H of this from a given vehicle service class in a manufacturers may certify vehicles to
part. This requires that you specify a given model year to the standards and the refuse hauler standards of this
Family Emission Limit (FEL) for CO2 for useful life that applies for a heavier section as long as the manufacturer
each vehicle subfamily. The FEL may vehicle service class, you may generate ensures that those vehicles qualify as
not be less than the result of emission credits as appropriate for the heavier refuse haulers when placed into service.
modeling from § 1037.520. These FELs service class. GEM simulates vehicle operation for
serve as the emission standards for the (2) Class 8 hybrid vehicles with Light each type of vehicle based on an
vehicle subfamily instead of the HDE or Medium HDE may be certified assigned vehicle service class,
standards specified in paragraph (b) of to compression-ignition standards for independent of the vehicle’s actual
this section. the Heavy HDV service class. You may characteristics, as specified in
(e) The exhaust emission standards of generate and use credits as allowed for § 1037.140(g)(7); however, standards
this section apply for the full useful life, the Heavy HDV service class. apply for the vehicle’s useful life based
expressed in service miles or calendar (3) Except as specified in paragraphs on its actual characteristics as specified
years, whichever comes first. The (g)(1) and (2) of this section, you may in paragraph (e) of this section. Vehicles
following useful life values apply for the not generate credits with the vehicle. If certified to the standards in this
standards of this section: you include lighter vehicles in a paragraph (h) must include the
(1) 150,000 miles or 15 years, subfamily of heavier vehicles with an following statement on the emission
whichever comes first, for Light HDV. FEL below the standard, exclude the control label: ‘‘THIS VEHICLE WAS
(2) 185,000 miles or 10 years, production volume of lighter vehicles CERTIFIED AS A [identify vehicle type
whichever comes first, for Medium from the credit calculation. Conversely, as identified in this section] UNDER 40
HDV. if you include lighter vehicles in a CFR 1037.105(h)].’’ These custom-
(3) 435,000 miles or 10 years, subfamily with an FEL above the chassis provisions apply as follows:
whichever comes first, for Heavy HDV. standard, you must include the (1) The following alternative emission
(f) See § 1037.631 for provisions that production volume of lighter vehicles in standards apply by vehicle type and
exempt certain vehicles used in off-road the credit calculation. model year as follows:
operation from the standards of this (h) You may optionally certify certain (i) Except as specified in paragraph
section. vocational vehicles to alternative (h)(1)(ii) of this section, CO2 standards
(g) You may optionally certify a standards as specified in this paragraph apply for model year 2021 and later
vocational vehicle to the standards and (h) instead of the standards specified in custom-chassis vehicles as shown in the
useful life applicable to a heavier paragraph (b) of this section. You may following tables:
340
TABLE 6 OF PARAGRAPH (h)(1)(i) OF § 1037.105—CUSTOM-CHASSIS STANDARDS SCHOOL BUSES, OTHER BUSES, AND
REFUSE HAULERS
CO2 standard by custom-chassis vehicle type
(g/ton·mile)
Phase Model year
School bus Other bus Refuse hauler
2 ...................................................................... 2021–2026 ..................................................... 291 300 313

3 ...................................................................... 2027 ............................................................... 236 286 298
2028 ............................................................... 228 286 283
2029 ............................................................... 220 249 268
2030 ............................................................... 211 243 253
2031 ............................................................... 187 220 250
2032 and later ................................................ 163 200 250
TABLE 7 OF PARAGRAPH (h)(1)(i) OF § 1037.105—CUSTOM-CHASSIS STANDARDS FOR MOTOR HOMES, COACH BUSES,
CONCRETE MIXERS, MIXED-USE VEHICLES, AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES
CO2 standard by custom-chassis vehicle type
(g/ton·mile)
Phase Model year
Motor Coach Concrete Mixed-use Emergency
home bus mixer vehicle vehicle
2 .......................................... 2021–2026 ......................... 228 210 319 319 324

3 .......................................... 2027 and later .................... 226 205 316 316 319
(ii) For qualifying small apply for model year 2027 and later standards specified in paragraph
manufacturers, Phase 2 CO2 standards custom-chassis vehicles instead of the (h)(1)(i) of this section.
TABLE 8 OF PARAGRAPH (h)(1)(ii) OF § 1037.105— SMALL MANUFACTURER PHASE 2 CO2 STANDARDS FOR MODEL YEAR
2027 AND LATER CUSTOM-CHASSIS VOCATIONAL VEHICLES
[g/ton-mile]
Vehicle type CO2 standard
School bus ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 271

Motor home .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 226
Coach bus ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 205
Other bus ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 286
Refuse hauler ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 298
Concrete mixer .................................................................................................................................................................................... 316
Mixed-use vehicle ................................................................................................................................................................................ 316
Emergency vehicle .............................................................................................................................................................................. 319
(iii) Vehicle types identified in this for the assigned vehicle service class paragraph (h) if they use tires with
paragraph (h)(1) are generally defined in and the useful life identified in TRRL at or below 8.4 N/kN (8.7 N/kN
§ 1037.801. ‘‘Other bus’’ includes any paragraph (e) of this section. Each for model years 2021 through 2026).
bus that is not a school bus or a coach separate vehicle type identified in (6) Concrete mixers and mixed-use
bus. A ‘‘mixed-use vehicle’’ is one that paragraph (h)(1) of this section (or group vehicles are deemed to comply with the
meets at least one of the criteria of vehicle types identified in a single standards of this paragraph (h) if they
specified in § 1037.631(a)(1) or (2). row) represents a separate averaging set. use tires with TRRL at or below 7.1 N/
(2) You may generate or use emission You may not use averaging for vehicles kN (7.6 N/kN for model years 2021
credits for averaging to demonstrate meeting standards under paragraphs through 2026).
compliance with the alternative (h)(5) through (7) of this section, and (7) Motor homes are deemed to
standards as described in subpart H of you may not bank or trade emission comply with the standards of this
this part. This requires that you specify credits from any vehicles certified under paragraph (h) if they have tires with
this paragraph (h). TRRL at or below 6.0 N/kN (6.7 N/kN
a Family Emission Limit (FEL) for CO2
for each vehicle subfamily. The FEL (3) [Reserved] for model years 2021 through 2026) and
may not be less than the result of (4) For purposes of emission modeling automatic tire inflation systems or tire
emission modeling as described in under § 1037.520, consider motor homes pressure monitoring systems with
§ 1037.520. These FELs serve as the and coach buses to be subject to the wheels on all axles.
emission standards for the vehicle Regional duty cycle, and consider all (8) Vehicles certified to standards
subfamily instead of the standards other vehicles to be subject to the Urban under this paragraph (h) must use
specified in this paragraph (h). Calculate duty cycle. engines certified under 40 CFR part
credits using the equation in (5) Emergency vehicles are deemed to 1036 for the appropriate model year,
§ 1037.705(b) with the standard payload comply with the standards of this except that motor homes and emergency
341
vehicles may use engines certified with ■ b. Removing and reserving paragraph provisions of § 1037.241 specify how to
the loose-engine provisions of (c); and comply with the standards in this
§ 1037.150(m). This paragraph (h)(8) ■ c. Revising paragraph (f)(2). paragraph (b). Note that § 1037.230
also applies for vehicles meeting The revisions read as follows: describes how to divide vehicles into
standards under paragraphs (h)(5) subcategories.
§ 1037.106 CO2 emission standards for (1) Except as specified in paragraph
through (7) of this section.
tractors above 26,000 pounds GVWR. (b)(2) of this section, model year 2027
■ 57. Amend § 1037.106 by: * * * * * and later tractors are subject to Phase 3
■ a. Revising the section heading and (b) CO2 standards in this paragraph (b) CO2 standards corresponding to the
paragraph (b); apply based on modeling and testing as selected subcategories as shown in the
described in subpart F of this part. The following table:
TRACTORS
(g/ton·mile)
2027 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 96.2 73.4 64.1 48.3

Mid Roof ........................................... 103.4 78.0 69.6
High Roof ......................................... 100.0 75.7 64.3
2028 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 88.5 67.5 64.1 48.3
Mid Roof ........................................... 95.1 71.8 69.6
High Roof ......................................... 92.0 69.6 64.3
2029 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 84.7 64.6 64.1 47.8
Mid Roof ........................................... 91.0 68.6 69.6
High Roof ......................................... 88.0 66.6 64.3
2030 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 80.8 61.7 60.3 47.8
Mid Roof ........................................... 86.9 65.5 65.4
High Roof ......................................... 84.0 63.6 60.4
2031 .................................................. Low Roof .......................................... 69.3 52.8 56.4 46.9
Mid Roof ........................................... 74.4 56.2 61.2
High Roof ......................................... 72.0 54.5 56.6
2032 and Later .................................. Low Roof .......................................... 57.7 44.0 48.1 45.9
Mid Roof ........................................... 62.0 46.8 52.2
High Roof ......................................... 60.0 45.4 48.2
(2) Qualifying small manufacturers of of this section. If you certify to these part only by certifying all vehicle
model year 2027 and later vehicles may Phase 2 CO2 standards, you may use the families within a given averaging set to
continue to meet Phase 2 CO2 standards averaging provisions of subpart H of this the Phase 3 standards that apply in that
in this paragraph (b)(2) instead of the part to demonstrate compliance. You model year.
standards specified in paragraph (b)(1) may use other credit provisions of this
TABLE 2 OF PARAGRAPH (b)(2) OF § 1037.106—SMALL MANUFACTURER CO2 STANDARDS FOR MODEL YEAR 2027 AND
LATER TRACTORS
Phase 2 CO2
Subcategory standards
(g/ton·mile)
Class 7 Low-Roof (all cab styles) .................................................................................................................................................... 96.2

Class 7 Mid-Roof (all cab styles) .................................................................................................................................................... 103.4
Class 7 High-Roof (all cab styles) ................................................................................................................................................... 100.0
Class 8 Low-Roof Day Cab ............................................................................................................................................................. 73.4
Class 8 Low-Roof Sleeper Cab ....................................................................................................................................................... 64.1
Class 8 Mid-Roof Day Cab .............................................................................................................................................................. 78.0
Class 8 Mid-Roof Sleeper Cab ........................................................................................................................................................ 69.6
Class 8 High-Roof Day Cab ............................................................................................................................................................ 75.7
Class 8 High-Roof Sleeper Cab ...................................................................................................................................................... 64.3
Heavy-Haul Tractors ........................................................................................................................................................................ 48.3
(3) Model year 2026 and earlier subcategory as shown in the following
tractors are subject to CO2 standards table:
corresponding to the selected
342
TABLE 3 OF PARAGRAPH (b)(3) OF § 1037.106—CO2 STANDARDS FOR MODEL YEAR 2026 AND EARLIER TRACTORS
[g/ton-mile]
Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 2

standards for standards for standards for standards for
Subcategory model years model years model years model years
2014–2016 2017–2020 2021–2023 2024–2026
Class 7 Low-Roof (all cab styles) ............................................................ 107 104 105.5 99.8
Class 7 Mid-Roof (all cab styles) ............................................................ 119 115 113.2 107.1
Class 7 High-Roof (all cab styles) ........................................................... 124 120 113.5 106.6
Class 8 Low-Roof Day Cab ..................................................................... 81 80 80.5 76.2
Class 8 Low-Roof Sleeper Cab ............................................................... 68 66 72.3 68.0
Class 8 Mid-Roof Day Cab ...................................................................... 88 86 85.4 80.9
Class 8 Mid-Roof Sleeper Cab ................................................................ 76 73 78.0 73.5
Class 8 High-Roof Day Cab .................................................................... 92 89 85.6 80.4
Class 8 High-Roof Sleeper Cab .............................................................. 75 72 75.7 70.7
Heavy-Haul Tractors ................................................................................ .......................... .......................... 52.4 50.2
* * * * * ■ 59. Amend § 1037.115 by revising apply for self-contained air conditioning

(f) * * * paragraphs (a) and (e)(1) and adding used to cool passengers or refrigeration
(2) You may optionally certify Class 7 paragraph (f) to read as follows: units used to cool cargo on vocational
tractors not covered by paragraph (f)(1) vehicles. For purposes of this paragraph
of this section to the standards and § 1037.115 Other requirements.
(e), a self-contained system is an
useful life for Class 8 tractors. This * * * * *
enclosed unit with its own evaporator
paragraph (f)(2) applies equally for (a) Adjustable parameters. Vehicles
that have adjustable parameters must and condenser even if it draws power
hybrid vehicles, battery electric
meet all the requirements of this part for from the engine.
vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles.
Credit provisions apply as follows: any adjustment in the practically * * * * *
(i) If you certify all your Class 7 adjustable range. We may require that (f) Battery durability monitor. Model
tractors to Class 8 standards, you may you set adjustable parameters to any year 2030 and later battery electric
use these Heavy HDV credits without specification within the practically vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric
restriction. adjustable range during any testing. See vehicles must meet the following
(ii) This paragraph (f)(2)(ii) applies if 40 CFR 1068.50 for general provisions requirements to estimate and monitor
you certify some Class 7 tractors to Class related to adjustable parameters. You
usable battery energy for batteries
8 standards under this paragraph (f)(2) must ensure safe vehicle operation
but not all of them. If you include Class serving as Rechargeable Energy Storage
throughout the practically adjustable
7 tractors in a subfamily of Class 8 range of each adjustable parameter, Systems:
tractors with an FEL below the standard, including consideration of production (1) Create a customer-accessible
exclude the production volume of Class tolerances. Note that adjustable roof system that monitors and displays the
7 tractors from the credit calculation. fairings are deemed not to be adjustable vehicle’s State of Certified Energy
Conversely, if you include Class 7 parameters. (SOCE) with an accuracy of ±5%.
tractors in a subfamily of Class 8 tractors * * * * * Display the SOCE from paragraph (f)(2)
with an FEL above the standard, you (e) * * * of this section as a percentage expressed
must include the production volume of (1) This paragraph (e) is intended to to the nearest whole number. Update
Class 7 tractors in the credit calculation. address air conditioning systems for the display as needed to reflect the
* * * * * which the primary purpose is to cool current value of SOCE.
the driver compartment. This would
§ 1037.107 [Removed] (2) Determine SOCE using the
generally include all cab-complete
following equation:
■ 58. Remove § 1037.107. pickups and vans. Similarly, it does not
Eq. 1037.115–1 t = the time for the test, running from time representative of the vehicle cruising on
zero to the end point when the battery the highway. For many HDV, the power
Where: is not able to maintain the target power. to cruise on the highway would result
I = battery current.
UBE = usable battery energy as determined in in a C-rate between 1⁄6 C and 1⁄2 C.
paragraph (f)(3) or (4) of this section, (3) For battery electric vehicles, ask us Where C-rate is a measure of the rate at
where certified refers to the value to approve a procedure you develop to which a battery is discharged or charged
established for certification and aged determine UBE that meets the following relative to its maximum capacity and
refers to the current value as the battery requirements: has units of inverse hours. For example,
ages. (i) Measure UBE by discharging the at a 2 C discharge rate, it would take 0.5
V = battery voltage.
ER22AP24.212</GPH>
battery at a constant power that is hours to fully discharge a battery. For
343
test procedures that involve driving a emission-related components to the considered ‘‘Heavy HDV’’. This
vehicle, you may discharge the battery extent they are included in your paragraph (g)(1) applies for hybrid and
at variable rates until the last portion of application for certification, and any non-hybrid vehicles.
the test, consistent with good other components whose failure would (2) Phase 1 vocational vehicles are
engineering judgment. increase a vehicle’s CO2 emissions. The divided based on GVWR. ‘‘Light HDV’’
(ii) The test is complete when the emission-related warranty covers all includes Class 2b through Class 5
battery is not able to maintain the target components whose failure would vehicles; ‘‘Medium HDV’’ includes
power. increase a vehicle’s emissions of air Class 6 and Class 7 vehicles; and
(iii) Use the same procedure for conditioning refrigerants (for vehicles ‘‘Heavy HDV’’ includes Class 8 vehicles.
measuring certified and aged UBE. subject to air conditioning leakage (3) Phase 2 and later vocational
(iv) Measurements to determine standards), and it covers all components vehicles propelled by engines subject to
power must meet the requirements in 40 whose failure would increase a vehicle’s the spark-ignition standards of 40 CFR
CFR 1036.545(a)(10). evaporative and refueling emissions (for part 1036 are divided as follows:
(4) For plug-hybrid electric vehicles, vehicles subject to evaporative and (i) Class 2b through Class 5 vehicles
determine UBE as described in 40 CFR refueling emission standards). The are considered ‘‘Light HDV’’.
1036.545(p), or you may use a emission-related warranty covers (ii) Class 6 through Class 8 vehicles
procedure that meets the requirements components that are part of your are considered ‘‘Medium HDV’’.
of paragraph (f)(3) of this section. certified configuration even if another (4) Phase 2 and later vocational
■ 60. Amend § 1037.120 by revising company produces the component. vehicles propelled by engines subject to
paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as follows: the compression-ignition standards in
* * * * *
40 CFR part 1036 are divided as follows:
§ 1037.120 Emission-related warranty ■ 61. Amend § 1037.130 by revising (i) Class 2b through Class 5 vehicles
requirements. paragraph (a) to read as follows: are considered ‘‘Light HDV’’.
* * * * * § 1037.130 Assembly instructions for (ii) Class 6 through 8 vehicles are
(b) Warranty period. (1) Your secondary vehicle manufacturers. considered ‘‘Heavy HDV’’ if the
emission-related warranty must be valid installed engine’s primary intended
(a) If you sell a certified incomplete
for at least: service class is Heavy HDE (see 40 CFR
(i) 5 years or 50,000 miles for Light vehicle to a secondary vehicle
manufacturer, give the secondary 1036.140), except that Class 8 hybrid
HDV (except tires). vehicles are considered ‘‘Heavy HDV’’
(ii) 5 years or 100,000 miles for vehicle manufacturer instructions for
completing vehicle assembly consistent regardless of the engine’s primary
Medium HDV and Heavy HDV (except intended service class.
tires). with the requirements of this part.
(iii) All other Class 6 through Class 8
(iii) 2 years or 24,000 miles for tires. Include all information necessary to
vehicles are considered ‘‘Medium
(2) You may offer an emission-related ensure that the final vehicle assembly
HDV’’.
warranty more generous than we (including the engine) will be in its
(5) Heavy-duty vehicles with no
require. The emission-related warranty certified configuration.
installed propulsion engine, such as
for the vehicle may not be shorter than * * * * * battery electric vehicles, are divided as
any basic mechanical warranty you ■ 62. Amend § 1037.135 by revising follows:
provide to that owner without charge for paragraph (c)(6) to read as follows: (i) Class 2b through Class 5 vehicles
the vehicle. Similarly, the emission- are considered ‘‘Light HDV’’.
related warranty for any component § 1037.135 Labeling. (ii) Class 6 and 7 vehicles are
may not be shorter than any warranty * * * * * considered ‘‘Medium HDV’’.
you provide to that owner without (c) * * * (iii) Class 8 vehicles are considered
charge for that component. This means (6) For Phase 1 vehicles, identify the ‘‘Heavy HDV’’.
that your warranty for a given vehicle emission control system. Use terms and (6) In certain circumstances, you may
may not treat emission-related and abbreviations as described in appendix certify vehicles to standards that apply
nonemission-related defects differently C to this part or other applicable for a different vehicle service class. For
for any component. The warranty period conventions. example, see §§ 1037.105(g) and
begins when the vehicle is placed into * * * * * 1037.106(f). If you optionally certify
service. ■ 63. Amend § 1037.140 by revising vehicles to different standards, those
(c) Components covered. The paragraphs (c) and (g) to read as follows: vehicles are subject to all the regulatory
emission-related warranty covers tires, requirements as if the standards were
automatic tire inflation systems, tire § 1037.140 Classifying vehicles and mandatory.
pressure monitoring systems, vehicle determining vehicle parameters. (7) Vehicles meeting the custom-
speed limiters, idle-reduction systems, * * * * * chassis standards of § 1037.105(h)(1) are
devices added to the vehicle to improve (c) Base a standard trailer’s length on subject to the following vehicle service
aerodynamic performance (not the outer dimensions of the load- classes instead of the other provisions in
including standard components such as carrying structure. Do not include this section:
hoods or mirrors even if they have been aerodynamic devices or HVAC units. (i) School buses and motor homes are
optimized for aerodynamics) to the * * * * * considered ‘‘Medium HDV’’.
extent such emission-related (g) The standards and other (ii) All other custom-chassis are
components are included in your provisions of this part apply to specific considered ‘‘Heavy HDV’’.
application for certification. The vehicle service classes as follows: * * * * *
emission-related warranty similarly (1) Tractors are divided based on ■ 64. Revise and republish § 1037.150 to
covers fuel cell stacks, RESS, and other GVWR into Class 7 tractors and Class 8 read as follows:
components used with hybrid systems, tractors. Where provisions of this part
battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell apply to both tractors and vocational § 1037.150 Interim provisions.
electric vehicles. The emission-related vehicles, Class 7 tractors are considered The provisions in this section apply
warranty also covers other added ‘‘Medium HDV’’ and Class 8 tractors are instead of other provisions in this part.
344
Fmt 4701
(a) Incentives for early introduction. Your 2012 and 2013 model years must year 2020 and earlier vocational
The provisions of this paragraph (a) be equivalent in length. vehicles.
apply with respect to vehicles produced (4) This paragraph (a)(4) applies (e) Delegated assembly. The
in model years before 2014. where you do not receive your final delegated-assembly provisions of
Manufacturers may voluntarily certify certificate in a regulatory subcategory § 1037.621 do not apply before January
in model year 2013 (or earlier model within 30 days of submitting your final 1, 2018.
years for electric vehicles) to the application for that subcategory. (f) Testing exemption for qualifying
greenhouse gas standards of this part. Calculate your credits for all production vehicles. Tailpipe CO2 emissions from
(1) This paragraph (a)(1) applies for that occurs 30 days or more after you battery electric vehicles, fuel cell
regulatory subcategories subject to the submit your final application for the electric vehicles, and vehicles with
standards of § 1037.105 or § 1037.106. subcategory. engines fueled with neat hydrogen are
Except as specified in paragraph (a)(3) (b) Phase 1 coastdown procedures. deemed to be zero. No CO2-related
of this section, to generate early credits For tractors subject to Phase 1 standards testing is required under this part for
under this paragraph (a)(1) for any under § 1037.106, the default method these vehicles.
vehicles other than electric vehicles, for measuring drag area (CdA) is the (g) Compliance date. Compliance with
you must certify your entire U.S.- coastdown procedure specified in 40 the standards of this part was optional
directed production volume within the CFR part 1066, subpart D. This includes prior to January 1, 2014. This means
regulatory subcategory to the standards preparing the tractor and the standard that if your 2014 model year begins
of § 1037.105 or § 1037.106. Except as trailer with wheels meeting before January 1, 2014, you may certify
specified in paragraph (a)(4) of this specifications of § 1037.528(b) and for a partial model year that begins on
section, if some vehicle families within submitting information related to your January 1, 2014, and ends on the day
a regulatory subcategory are certified coastdown testing under § 1037.528(h). your model year would normally end.
after the start of the model year, you (c) Small manufacturers. The You must label model year 2014
may generate credits only for following provisions apply for vehicles excluded under this paragraph
production that occurs after all families qualifying small manufacturers: (g) with the following statement: ‘‘THIS
are certified. For example, if you (1) The greenhouse gas standards of VEHICLE IS EXCLUDED UNDER 40
produce three vehicle families in an §§ 1037.105 and 1037.106 are optional CFR 1037.150(g).’’
averaging set and you receive your for small manufacturers producing (h) Off-road vehicle exemption. (1)
certificates for those families on January vehicles with a date of manufacture Vocational vehicles with a date of
4, 2013, March 15, 2013, and April 24, before January 1, 2022. In addition, manufacture before January 1, 2021,
2013, you may not generate credits for small manufacturers producing vehicles automatically qualify for an exemption
model year 2013 production in any of that run on any fuel other than gasoline, under § 1037.631 if the tires installed on
the families that occurs before April 24, E85, or diesel fuel may delay complying the vehicle have a maximum speed
2013. Calculate credits relative to the with every later standard under this part rating at or below 55 miles per hour.
standard that would apply in model by one model year. (2) In unusual circumstances, vehicle
year 2014 using the equations in subpart (2) Qualifying manufacturers must manufacturers may ask us to exempt
H of this part. You may bank credits notify the Designated Compliance vehicles under § 1037.631 based on
equal to the surplus credits you generate Officer each model year before other criteria that are equivalent to those
under this paragraph (a) multiplied by introducing excluded vehicles into U.S. specified in § 1037.631(a); however, we
1.50. For example, if you have 1.0 Mg commerce. This notification must will normally not grant relief in cases
of surplus credits for model year 2013, include a description of the where the vehicle manufacturer has
you may bank 1.5 Mg of credits. Credit manufacturer’s qualification as a small credits or can otherwise comply with
deficits for an averaging set prior to business under 13 CFR 121.201. applicable standards. Request approval
model year 2014 do not carry over to Manufacturers must label excluded for an exemption under this paragraph
model year 2014. These credits may be vehicles with the following statement: (h) before you produce the subject
used to show compliance with the ‘‘THIS VEHICLE IS EXCLUDED UNDER vehicles. Send your request with
standards of this part for 2014 and later 40 CFR 1037.150(c).’’ supporting information to the
model years. We recommend that you (3) Small manufacturers may meet Designated Compliance Officer; we will
notify EPA of your intent to use this Phase 1 standards instead of Phase 2 coordinate with NHTSA in making a
paragraph (a)(1) before submitting your standards in the first year Phase 2 determination under § 1037.210. If you
applications. standards apply to them if they introduce into U.S. commerce vehicles
(2) [Reserved] voluntarily comply with the Phase 1 that depend on our approval under this
(3) You may generate emission credits standards for the full preceding year. paragraph (h) before we inform you of
for the number of additional SmartWay Specifically, small manufacturers may our approval, those vehicles violate 40
designated tractors (relative to your certify their model year 2022 vehicles to CFR 1068.101(a)(1).
2012 production), provided you do not the Phase 1 greenhouse gas standards of (i) Limited carryover from Phase 1 to
generate credits for those vehicles under §§ 1037.105 and 1037.106 if they certify Phase 2. The provisions for carryover
paragraph (a)(1) of this section. all the vehicles from their annual data in § 1037.235(d) do not allow you
Calculate credits for each regulatory production volume included in to use aerodynamic test results from
subcategory relative to the standard that emission credit calculations for the Phase 1 to support a compliance
would apply in model year 2014 using Phase 1 standards starting on or before demonstration for Phase 2 certification.
the equations in subpart H of this part. January 1, 2021. (j) Limited prohibition related to early
Use a production volume equal to the (4) See paragraphs (r), (t), (u), and (w) model year engines. The provisions of
number of designated model year 2013 of this section for additional allowances this paragraph (j) apply only for vehicles
SmartWay tractors minus the number of for small manufacturers. that have a date of manufacture before
designated model year 2012 SmartWay (d) Air conditioning leakage for January 1, 2018. See § 1037.635 for
tractors. You may bank credits equal to vocational vehicles. The air related provisions that apply in later
the surplus credits you generate under conditioning leakage standard of model years. The prohibition in
this paragraph (a)(3) multiplied by 1.50. § 1037.115 does not apply for model § 1037.601 against introducing into U.S.
345
Fmt 4701
commerce a vehicle containing an (2) If you install model year 2020 (A) Base credits banked or traded
engine not certified to the standards engines in your vehicles in calendar within the same averaging set.
applicable for the calendar year of year 2021, submit production and ABT (B) Base credits earned in the same
installation does not apply for vehicles reports for those Phase 1 vehicles model year from other averaging sets as
using model year 2014 or 2015 spark- separate from the reports you submit for specified in paragraph (z) of this
ignition engines, or any model year Phase 2 vehicles with model year 2021 section.
2013 or earlier engines. engines. (C) Base credits from other averaging
(k) Verifying drag areas from in-use (o) Interim useful life for light heavy- sets as specified in paragraph (z) of this
tractors. This paragraph (k) applies for duty vocational vehicles. Class 2b section that are banked or traded.
tractors instead of § 1037.401(b) through through Class 5 vocational vehicles (D) Multiplier credits within the same
model year 2020. We may measure the certified to Phase 1 standards are subject averaging set for the same model year.
drag area of your vehicles after they to a useful life of 110,000 miles or 10 (E) Multiplier credits banked or
have been placed into service. To years, whichever comes first, instead of traded within the same averaging set.
account for measurement variability, the useful life specified in § 1037.105. (F) Multiplier credits earned in the
your vehicle is deemed to conform to For emission credits generated from same model year from other averaging
the regulations of this part with respect these Phase 1 vehicles, multiply any sets as specified in paragraph (z) of this
to aerodynamic performance if we banked credits that you carry forward to section.
measure its drag area to be at or below demonstrate compliance with Phase 2 (G) Multiplier credits from other
the maximum drag area allowed for the standards by 1.36. averaging sets as specified in paragraph
bin above the bin to which you certified (p) Credit multiplier for advanced (z) of this section that are banked or
(for example, Bin II if you certified the technology. The following provisions traded.
vehicle to Bin III), unless we determine describe how you may generate and use (iv) You may no longer use multiplier
that you knowingly produced the credits from vehicles certified with credits for certifying model year 2030
vehicle to have a higher drag area than advanced technology: and later vehicles.
is allowed for the bin to which it was (1) You may calculate credits you (v) Credit provisions not addressed in
certified. generate from vehicles certified with this paragraph (p)(2), such as limitations
(l) Optional certification to GHG advanced technology as follows: on credit life and credit trading,
standards under 40 CFR part 86. The (i) For Phase 1 vehicles, multiply the
continue to apply as specified. Note the
greenhouse gas standards in 40 CFR part credits by 1.50, except that you may not
following:
86, subpart S, may apply instead of the apply this multiplier in addition to the
(A) Unlike multiplier credits, the life
standards of § 1037.105 as follows: early-credit multiplier of paragraph (a)
of base credits is not limited under this
(1) Complete or cab-complete vehicles of this section.
(ii) For model year 2026 and earlier paragraph (p)(2).
may optionally meet alternative (B) You may apply multiplier credits
Phase 2 vehicles, apply multipliers of
standards as described in 40 CFR without the restrictions described in
3.5 for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles,
86.1819–14(j). this paragraph (p)(2) to resolve a deficit
4.5 for battery electric vehicles, and 5.5
(2) Complete high-GCWR vehicles that remains from complying with Phase
for fuel cell electric vehicles. Calculate
must meet the greenhouse gas standards 2 standards in model years 2026 and
credits relative to the Phase 2 standard.
of 40 CFR part 86, subpart S, as (iii) For Phase 3 vehicles, the earlier.
described in 40 CFR 1036.635. advanced-technology multipliers (q) Vehicle families for advanced and
(3) Incomplete high-GCWR vehicles described in paragraph (p)(1)(ii) of this off-cycle technologies. Apply the
may meet the greenhouse gas standards section apply only in model year 2027. following provisions for grouping
of 40 CFR part 86, subpart S, as Calculate credits relative to the Phase 3 vehicles into families if you use off-
described in 40 CFR 1036.635. standard. cycle technologies under § 1037.610 or
(m) Loose engine sales. Manufacturers (2) You may use credit quantities advanced technologies under
may certify certain spark-ignition described in paragraphs (p)(1)(i) and (ii) § 1037.615:
engines along with chassis-certified of this section through model year 2026. (1) For Phase 1 vehicles, create
heavy-duty vehicles where they are The following provisions apply for separate vehicle families for vehicles
identical to engines used in those advanced technology credits starting in that contain advanced or off-cycle
vehicles as described in 40 CFR model year 2027: technologies; group those vehicles
86.1819–14(k)(8). Vehicles in which (i) Quantify accumulated credit together in a vehicle family if they use
those engines are installed are subject to balances in each model year that result the same advanced or off-cycle
standards under this part as specified in from multiplier credit values. For technologies.
§ 1037.105. example, if BEV earns 100 Mg of CO2 (2) For Phase 2 and Phase 3 vehicles,
(n) Transition to engine-based model credits that become 450 Mg of credits create separate vehicle subfamilies for
years. The following provisions apply when multiplied, the base credit value vehicles that contain advanced or off-
for production and ABT reports during is 100 Mg and the multiplier credit cycle technologies; group those vehicles
the transition to engine-based model value is 350 Mg. Provide a detailed together in a vehicle subfamily if they
year determinations for vehicles in 2020 accounting of base and multiplier use the same advanced or off-cycle
and 2021: credits in your annual ABT reports for technologies.
(1) If you install model year 2020 or the relevant model years. (r) Conversion to mid- roof and high-
earlier engines in your vehicles in (ii) For each vehicle family, calculate roof configurations. Secondary vehicle
calendar year 2020, include all those a credit quantity with no consideration manufacturers that qualify as small
Phase 1 vehicles in your production and of credit multipliers. Sum these credit manufacturers may convert low- and
ABT reports related to model year 2020 quantities for every family within a mid-roof tractors to mid- and high-roof
compliance, although we may require given averaging set. configurations without recertification
you identify these separately from (iii) Apply available credits in the for the purpose of building a custom
vehicles produced in calendar year following priority order as long as the sleeper tractor or converting it to run on
2019. summed credit quantity is negative. natural gas, as follows:
346
Fmt 4701
(1) The original low- or mid-roof use. You must notify us of your plans (2) Glider vehicles produced using
tractor must be covered by a valid to use this exemption before you engines certified to model year 2010 or
certificate of conformity. introduce exempt vehicles into U.S. later standards for all pollutants are
(2) The modifications may not commerce. In your notification, you subject to the same provisions that
increase the frontal area of the tractor must identify your annual U.S.-directed apply to vehicles using engines within
beyond the frontal area of the equivalent production volume (and sales, if their useful life in § 1037.635.
mid- or high-roof tractor with the different) of such vehicles for calendar (3) For calendar year 2017, you may
corresponding standard trailer. Note years 2010 through 2014. Vehicles you produce a limited number of glider kits
that these dimensions have a tolerance produce before notifying us are not and/or glider vehicles subject to the
of ±2 inches. Use good engineering exempt under this section. requirements applicable to model year
judgment to achieve aerodynamic (ii) In a given calendar year, you may 2016 glider vehicles, instead of the
performance similar to or better than the produce up to 300 exempt vehicles requirements of § 1037.635. The limit
certifying manufacturer’s corresponding under this section, or up to the highest applies to your combined 2017
mid- or high-roof tractor. annual production volume you identify production of glider kits and glider
(3) Add a permanent supplemental in this paragraph (t)(1), whichever is vehicles and is equal to your highest
label to the vehicle near the original less. annual production of glider kits and
manufacturer’s emission control (iii) Identify the number of exempt glider vehicles for any year from 2010
information label. On the label identify vehicles you produced under this to 2014. Any glider kits or glider
your full corporate name and include exemption for the preceding calendar vehicles produced beyond this cap are
the following statement: ‘‘THIS year in your annual report under subject to the provisions of § 1037.635.
VEHICLE WAS MODIFIED AS § 1037.250. Count any glider kits and glider vehicles
ALLOWED UNDER 40 CFR 1037.150.’’ (iv) Include the appropriate statement you produce under paragraph (t)(1) of
(4) We may require that you submit on the label required under § 1037.135, this section as part of your production
annual production reports as described as follows: with respect to this paragraph (t)(3).
in § 1037.250. (A) For Phase 1 vehicles, ‘‘THIS
(5) Modifications made under this (u) Transition to Phase 2 standards.
VEHICLE AND ITS ENGINE ARE The following provisions allow for
paragraph (r) do not violate 40 CFR EXEMPT UNDER 40 CFR
1068.101(b)(1). enhanced generation and use of
1037.150(t)(1).’’ emission credits from Phase 1 vehicles
(s) Confirmatory testing for Falt-aero. If (B) For Phase 2 vehicles, ‘‘THE
we conduct coastdown testing to verify for meeting the Phase 2 standards:
ENGINE IN THIS VEHICLE IS EXEMPT
your Falt-aero value for Phase 2 and later (1) For vocational Light HDV and
UNDER 40 CFR 1037.150(t)(1).’’
tractors, we will make our (v) If you produce your glider vehicle vocational Medium HDV, emission
determination using the principles of by installing remanufactured or credits you generate in model years
SEA testing in § 1037.305. We will not previously used components in a glider 2018 through 2021 may be used through
replace your Falt-aero value if the tractor kit produced by another manufacturer, model year 2027, instead of being
passes. If your tractor fails, we will you must provide the following to the limited to a five-year credit life as
generate a replacement value of Falt-aero glider kit manufacturer prior to specified in § 1037.740(c). For Class 8
based on at least one CdA value and obtaining the glider kit: vocational vehicles with Medium HDE,
corresponding effective yaw angle, yeff, (A) Your name, the name of your we will approve your request to
from a minimum of 100 valid runs using company, and contact information. generate these credits in and use these
the procedures of § 1037.528(h). Note (B) A signed statement that you are a credits for the Medium HDV averaging
that we intend to minimize the qualifying small manufacturer and that set if you show that these vehicles
differences between our test conditions your production will not exceed the would qualify as Medium HDV under
and those of the manufacturer by testing production limits of this paragraph the Phase 2 program as described in
at similar times of the year where (t)(1). This statement is deemed to be a § 1037.140(g)(4).
possible and the same location where submission to EPA, and we may require (2) You may use the off-cycle
possible and when appropriate. the glider kit manufacturer to provide a provisions of § 1037.610 to apply
(t) Glider kits and glider vehicles. (1) copy to us at any time. technologies to Phase 1 vehicles as
Glider vehicles conforming to the (vi) The exemption in this paragraph follows:
requirements in this paragraph (t)(1) are (t)(1) is valid for a given vehicle and (i) You may apply an improvement
exempt from the Phase 1 emission engine only if you meet all the factor of 0.988 for vehicles with
standards of this part 1037 prior to requirements and conditions of this automatic tire inflation systems on all
January 1, 2021. Engines in such paragraph (t)(1) that apply with respect axles.
vehicles (including vehicles produced to that vehicle and engine. Introducing (ii) For vocational vehicles with
after January 1, 2021) remain subject to such a vehicle into U.S. commerce automatic engine shutdown systems
the requirements of 40 CFR part 86 without meeting all applicable that conform with § 1037.660, you may
applicable for the engines’ original requirements and conditions violates 40 apply an improvement factor of 0.95.
model year, but not subject to the Phase CFR 1068.101(a)(1). (iii) For vocational vehicles with stop-
1 or Phase 2 standards of 40 CFR part (vii) Companies that are not small start systems that conform with
1036 unless they were originally manufacturers may sell uncertified § 1037.660, you may apply an
manufactured in model year 2014 or incomplete vehicles without engines to improvement factor of 0.92.
later. small manufacturers for the purpose of (iv) For vocational vehicles with
(i) You are eligible for the exemption producing exempt vehicles under this neutral-idle systems conforming with
in this paragraph (t)(1) if you are a small paragraph (t)(1), subject to the § 1037.660, you may apply an
manufacturer and you sold one or more provisions of § 1037.622. However, such improvement factor of 0.98. You may
glider vehicles in 2014 under the companies must take reasonable steps to adjust this improvement factor if we
provisions of paragraph (c) of this ensure that their incomplete vehicles approve a partial reduction under
section. You do not qualify if you only will be used in conformance with the § 1037.660(a)(2); for example, if your
produced glider vehicles for your own requirements of this part. design reduces fuel consumption by half
347
Fmt 4701
as much as shifting to neutral, you may § 1037.105(h) for ‘‘other buses’’. The apply for credits generated from model
apply an improvement factor of 0.99. limit in this paragraph (w)(2) applies year 2027 through 2032 vehicles, as
(3) Small manufacturers may generate with respect to vehicles produced by follows:
emission credits for natural gas-fueled you and your affiliated companies. Treat (1) Credits generated under this part
vocational vehicles as follows: these drayage tractors as being in their may be used through model year 2032
(i) Small manufacturers may certify own averaging set. for any of the averaging sets identified
their vehicles instead of relying on the (x) Transition to updated GEM. (1) in § 1037.740(a).
exemption of paragraph (c) of this Vehicle manufacturers may demonstrate (2) Credits generated from vehicles
section. The provisions of this part compliance with Phase 2 greenhouse certified to the standards in 40 CFR
apply for such vehicles, except as gas standards in model years 2021 86.1819–14 may be used through model
specified in this paragraph (u)(3). through 2023 using GEM Phase 2, year 2032 to demonstrate compliance
(ii) Use GEM version 2.0.1 to Version 3.0, Version 3.5.1, or Version with the CO2 emission standards for
determine a CO2 emission level for your 4.0 (all incorporated by reference, see Light HDV or Medium HDV in this part.
vehicle, then multiply this value by the § 1037.810). Manufacturers may change (3) The following provisions apply for
engine’s Family Certification Level for to a different version of GEM for model redesignating credits for use in different
CO2 and divide by the engine’s years 2022 and 2023 for a given vehicle averaging sets:
applicable CO2 emission standard. family after initially submitting an (i) The restrictions that apply for
(4) Phase 1 vocational vehicle credits application for certification; such a trading credits under § 1037.720 also
that small manufacturers generate may change must be documented as an apply for redesignating credits.
be used through model year 2027. amendment under § 1037.225. (ii) Send us a report by June 30 after
(v) Constraints for vocational Manufacturers may submit an end-of- model year to describe how you are
regulatory subcategories. The following year report for model year 2021 using redesignating credits. Identify the
provisions apply to determinations of any of the three regulatory versions of averaging set and number of credits
vocational regulatory subcategories as GEM, but only for demonstrating generated from each vehicle family.
described in § 1037.140: compliance with the custom-chassis Also identify the number of
(1) Select the Regional regulatory standards in § 1037.105(h); such a redesignated emission credits you
subcategory for coach buses and motor change must be documented in the intend to apply for each averaging set.
homes you certify under § 1037.105(b). report submitted under § 1037.730. (4) You may trade redesignated
(2) You may not select the Urban Once a manufacturer certifies a vehicle credits as allowed under the standard
regulatory subcategory for any vehicle family based on GEM Version 4.0, it setting part. Credit provisions not
with a manual or single-clutch may not revert back to using GEM Phase addressed in this paragraph (z), such as
automated manual transmission. 2, Version 3.0 or Version 3.5.1 for that limitations on credit life and credit
(3) Starting in model year 2024, you vehicle family in any model year. multipliers for advanced technology,
must select the Regional regulatory (2) Vehicle manufacturers may certify continue to apply as specified.
subcategory for any vehicle with a for model years 2021 through 2023 (aa) Warranty for advanced
manual transmission. based on fuel maps from engines or technologies. The emission-related
(4) You may select the Multi-purpose powertrains that were created using warranty requirements in § 1037.120 are
regulatory subcategory for any GEM Phase 2, Version 3.0, Version optional for fuel cell stacks, RESS, and
vocational vehicle, except as specified 3.5.1, or Version 4.0 (all incorporated by other components used with battery
in paragraph (v)(1) of this section. reference, see § 1037.810). Vehicle electric vehicles and fuel cell electric
(5) You may select the Urban manufacturers may alternatively certify vehicles before model year 2027.
regulatory subcategory for a hybrid in those years based on fuel maps from ■ 65. Amend § 1037.205 by revising the
vehicle equipped with regenerative powertrains that were created using introductory text and paragraphs (a), (b)
braking, unless it is equipped with a GEM Phase 2, Version 3.0, GEM HIL introductory text, (b)(6), (e), (o), and (q)
manual transmission. model 3.8, or GEM Phase 2, Version 4.0 to read as follows:
(6) You may select the Urban (all incorporated by reference, see
regulatory subcategory for any vehicle § 1037.810). Vehicle manufacturers may § 1037.205 What must I include in my
with a hydrokinetic torque converter continue to certify vehicles in later application?
paired with an automatic transmission, model years using fuel maps generated This section specifies the information
or a continuously variable automatic with earlier versions of GEM for model that must be in your application, unless
transmission, or a dual-clutch year 2024 and later vehicle families that we ask you to include less information
transmission with no more than two qualify for using carryover provisions in under § 1037.201(c). We may require
consecutive forward gears between § 1037.235(d). you to provide additional information to
which it is normal for both clutches to (y) Correcting credit calculations. If evaluate your application. References to
be momentarily disengaged. you notify us by October 1, 2024, that testing and emission-data vehicles refer
(w) Custom-chassis standards for errors mistakenly decreased your to testing vehicles or components to
small manufacturers. The following balance of emission credits for 2020 or measure any quantity that serves as an
provisions apply uniquely to qualifying any earlier model years, you may correct input value for modeling emission rates
small manufacturers under the custom- the errors and recalculate the balance of under § 1037.520.
chassis standards of § 1037.105(h): emission credits after applying a 10 (a) Describe the vehicle family’s
(1) You may use emission credits percent discount to the credit specifications and other basic
generated under § 1037.105(d), correction. parameters of the vehicle’s design and
including banked or traded credits from (z) Credit exchanges across averaging emission controls. List the fuel type on
any averaging set. Such credits remain sets for certain vehicles. The provisions which your vehicles are designed to
subject to other limitations that apply of this paragraph (z) apply for credits operate (for example, ultra-low-sulfur
under subpart H of this part. generated from model year 2026 and diesel fuel).
(2) You may produce up to 200 earlier vehicles certified with advanced (b) Explain how the emission control
drayage tractors in a given model year technology under this part. The system operates. As applicable, describe
to the standards described in provisions of this paragraph (z) also in detail all system components for
348
Fmt 4701
controlling greenhouse gas emissions, § 1037.230 Vehicle families, sub-families, compliance with respect to the
including all auxiliary emission control and configurations. greenhouse gas standards in subpart B
devices (AECDs) and all fuel-system (a) * * * of this part, and to determine any input
components you will install on any (1) Apply subcategories for vocational values from § 1037.520 that involve
production vehicle. For any vehicle vehicles and vocational tractors as measured quantities.
using RESS (such as hybrid vehicles, shown in table 1 of this section. This (a) Select emission-data vehicles that
fuel cell electric vehicles, and battery involves 15 separate subcategories for represent production vehicles and
electric vehicles), describe in detail all Phase 2 and later vehicles to account for components for the vehicle family
components needed to charge the engine characteristics, GVWR, and the consistent with the specifications in
system, store energy, and transmit selection of duty cycle for vocational §§ 1037.205(o) and 1037.520. Where the
power to move the vehicle. Identify the vehicles as specified in § 1037.510; test results will represent multiple
part number of each component you vehicles may additionally fall into one vehicles or components with different
describe. For this paragraph (b), treat as of the subcategories defined by the emission performance, use good
separate AECDs any devices that custom-chassis standards in engineering judgment to select worst-
modulate or activate differently from § 1037.105(h). Divide Phase 1 vehicles case emission data vehicles or
each other. Also describe your modeling into three GVWR-based vehicle service components. In the case of powertrain
inputs as described in § 1037.520, with classes as shown in table 1 of this testing under 40 CFR 1036.545, select a
the following additional information if section, disregarding additional test engine, test hybrid components, test
it applies for your vehicles: specified characteristics. Table 1 axle and test transmission as applicable,
* * * * * follows: by considering the whole range of
(6) If you perform powertrain testing * * * * * vehicle models covered by the
under 40 CFR 1036.545, report both CO2 (d) * * * powertrain family and the mix of duty
and NOX emission levels corresponding (2) For a Phase 2 or later vehicle cycles specified in § 1037.510. If the
to each test run. model that includes a range of GVWR powertrain has more than one
values that straddle weight classes, you transmission calibration, for example
* * * * *
may include all the vehicles in the same economy vs. performance, you may
(e) Describe any test equipment and weight the results from the powertrain
vehicle family if you certify the vehicle
procedures that you used, including any testing in 40 CFR 1036.545 by the
family to the numerically lower CO2
special or alternate test procedures you percentage of vehicles in the family by
emission standard from the affected
used (see § 1037.501). Include prior model year for each configuration.
service classes. Vehicles that are
information describing the procedures This can be done, for example, through
optionally certified to a more stringent
you used to determine CdA values as the use of survey data or based on the
standard under this paragraph (d)(2) are
specified in §§ 1037.525 and 1037.527. previous model year’s sales volume.
subject to useful-life and all other
Describe which type of data you are Weight the results of Mfuel[cycle],
provisions corresponding to the weight
using for engine fuel maps (see 40 CFR fnpowertrain/vpowertrain, and W[cycle] from
class with the numerically lower CO2
1036.505). table 5 to paragraph (o)(8)(i) of 40 CFR
emission standard. For a Phase 2 or later
* * * * * tractor model that includes a range of 1036.545 according to the percentage of
(o) Report calculated and modeled roof heights that straddle subcategories, vehicles in the family that use each
emission results for ten configurations. you may include all the vehicles in the transmission calibration.
Include modeling inputs and detailed same vehicle family if you certify the * * * * *
descriptions of how they were derived. vehicle family to the appropriate (c) * * *
Unless we specify otherwise, include subcategory as follows: (3) Before we test one of your vehicles
the configuration with the highest * * * * * or components, we may set its
modeling result, the lowest modeling adjustable parameters to any point
result, and the configurations with the within the practically adjustable ranges,
highest projected sales. paragraph (a) to read as follows:
if applicable.
* * * * * § 1037.231 Powertrain families. * * * * *
(q) For battery electric vehicles and (a) If you choose to perform ■ 70. Revise § 1037.241 to read as
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, powertrain testing as specified in 40 follows:
describe the recharging procedures and CFR 1036.545, use good engineering
methods for determining battery judgment to divide your product line § 1037.241 Demonstrating compliance with
performance, such as state of charge and into powertrain families that are exhaust emission standards for greenhouse
charging capacity. Also include the expected to have similar fuel gas pollutants.
certified usable battery energy for each consumptions and CO2 emission (a) Compliance determinations for
battery durability subfamily. characteristics throughout the useful purposes of certification depend on
* * * * * life. Your powertrain family is limited whether or not you participate in the
to a single model year. ABT program in subpart H of this part.
§ 1037.211 [Removed] (1) If none of your vehicle families
* * * * *
■ 66. Remove § 1037.211. ■ 69. Amend § 1037.235 by:
generate or use emission credits in a
■ a. Revising the introductory text and
given model year, each of your vehicle
■ 67. Amend § 1037.230 by:
paragraphs (a) and (c)(3); and families is considered in compliance
■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(1)
■ b. Removing paragraph (g)(3). with the CO2 emission standards in
introductory text; §§ 1037.105 and 1037.106 if all vehicle

■ b. Removing paragraph (a)(3);
The revisions read as follows:
configurations in the family have
■ c. Revising paragraph (d)(2) § 1037.235 Testing requirements for modeled CO2 emission rates from
introductory text; and certification. § 1037.520 that are at or below the
■ d. Removing paragraph (d)(3). This section describes the emission applicable standards. A vehicle family
The revisions read as follows: testing you must perform to show is deemed not to comply if any vehicle
349
Fmt 4701
configuration in the family has a the procedures as specified in § 1037.510 Duty-cycle exhaust testing.
modeled CO2 emission rate that is above §§ 1037.525 and 1037.527 for measuring This section applies for powertrain
the applicable standard. drag area. Your vehicle conforms to the testing, cycle-average engine fuel
(2) If you generate or use emission regulations of this part with respect to mapping, certain off-cycle testing under
credits with one or more vehicle aerodynamic performance if we measure § 1037.610, and the advanced-
families in a given model year, your its drag area to be at or below the technology provisions of § 1037.615.
vehicle families within an averaging set maximum drag area allowed for the bin (a) Measure emissions by testing the
are considered in compliance with the to which that configuration was powertrain on a powertrain
CO2 emission standards in §§ 1037.105 certified. dynamometer with the applicable duty
and 1037.106 if the sum of positive and ■ 74. Amend § 1037.501 by: cycles. Each duty cycle consists of a
negative credits for all vehicle ■ a. Revising paragraphs (a), (g)(1)(v), series of speed commands over time—
configurations in those vehicle families and (h); and variable speeds for the transient test and
lead to a zero balance or a positive ■ b. Removing paragraph (i). constant speeds for the highway cruise
balance of credits, except as allowed by The revisions read as follows: tests. None of these cycles include
§ 1037.745. Note that the FEL is vehicle starting or warmup.
considered to be the applicable § 1037.501 General testing and modeling (1) Perform testing for Phase 1
emission standard for an individual provisions. vehicles as follows to generate credits or
configuration. * * * * * adjustment factors for off-cycle or
(b) We may require you to provide an (a) Except as specified in subpart B of advanced technologies:
engineering analysis showing that the this part, you must demonstrate that you (i) Transient cycle. The transient cycle
performance of your emission controls meet emission standards using emission is specified in appendix A to this part.
will not deteriorate during the useful modeling as described in § 1037.520. Warm up the vehicle. Start the duty
life with proper maintenance. If we This modeling depends on several cycle within 30 seconds after
determine that your emission controls measured values as described in this concluding the preconditioning
are likely to deteriorate during the subpart. You may use fuel-mapping procedure. Start sampling emissions at
useful life, we may require you to information from the engine the start of the duty cycle.
develop and apply deterioration factors manufacturer as described in 40 CFR (ii) Cruise cycle. For the 55 mi/hr and
consistent with good engineering 1036.535 and 1036.540, or you may use 65 mi/hr highway cruise cycles, warm
judgment. For example, you may need powertrain testing as described in 40 up the vehicle at the test speed, then
to apply a deterioration factor to address CFR 1036.545. sample emissions for 300 seconds while
deterioration of battery performance for * * * * * maintaining vehicle speed within ±1.0
a hybrid vehicle. Where the highest (g) * * * mi/hr of the speed setpoint; this speed
useful life emissions occur between the (1) * * * tolerance applies instead of the
end of useful life and at the low-hour (v) For the Phase 2 or later standards, approach specified in 40 CFR
test point, base deterioration factors for include side skirts meeting the 1066.425(b)(1) and (2).
the vehicles on the difference between specifications of this paragraph (g)(1)(v). (2) Perform cycle-average engine fuel
(or ratio of) the point at which the The side skirts must be mounted flush mapping for Phase 2 and later vehicles
highest emissions occur and the low- with both sides of the trailer. The skirts as described in 40 CFR 1036.540. For
hour test point. must be an isosceles trapezoidal shape. powertrain testing under 40 CFR
Each skirt must have a height of 36±2 1036.545 or § 1037.555, perform testing
§ 1037.310 [Removed] as described in this paragraph (a)(2) to
inches. The top edge of the skirt must
■ 71. Remove § 1037.310. be straight with a length of 341±2 generate GEM inputs for each simulated
■ 72. Amend § 1037.315 by revising inches. The bottom edge of the skirt vehicle configuration, and test runs
paragraph (a) to read as follows: must be straight with a length of 268±2 representing different idle conditions.
inches and have a ground clearance of Perform testing as follows:
§ 1037.315 Audit procedures related to (i) Transient cycle. The transient cycle
powertrain testing. 8±2 inches through that full length. The
is specified in appendix A to this part.
(a) For vehicles certified based on sides of the skirts must be straight. The (ii) Highway cruise cycles. The grade
powertrain testing as specified in 40 rearmost point of the skirts must be portion of the route corresponding to
CFR 1036.545, we may apply the mounted 32±2 inches in front of the the 55 mi/hr and 65 mi/hr highway
selective enforcement audit centerline of the trailer tandem axle cruise cycles is specified in appendix D
requirements to the powertrain. If assembly. We may approve your request to this part. Maintain vehicle speed
engine manufacturers perform the to use a skirt with different dimensions between –1.0 mi/hr and 3.0 mi/hr of the
powertrain testing and include those if these specified values are impractical speed setpoint; this speed tolerance
results in their certification under 40 or inappropriate for your test trailer, and applies instead of the approach
CFR part 1036, they are responsible for you propose alternative dimensions that specified in 40 CFR 1066.425(b)(1) and
selective enforcement audits related to provide an equivalent or comparable (2).
those results. Otherwise, the certificate degree of aerodynamic drag for your test (iii) Drive idle. Perform testing at a
holder for the vehicle is responsible for configuration. loaded idle condition for Phase 2
the selective enforcement audit. * * * * * vocational vehicles. For engines with an
* * * * * (h) Note that declared GEM inputs for adjustable warm idle speed setpoint,
fuel maps and aerodynamic drag area test at the minimum warm idle speed
typically includes compliance margins and the maximum warm idle speed;
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
to account for testing variability; for otherwise simply test at the engine’s
§ 1037.401 General provisions. other measured GEM inputs, the warm idle speed. Warm up the
* * * * * declared values are typically the powertrain as described in 40 CFR
(b) We may measure the drag area of measured values without adjustment. 1036.520(d). Within 60 seconds after
a vehicle you produced after it has been ■ 75. Revise and republish § 1037.510 to concluding the warm-up, linearly ramp
placed into service. We may use any of read as follows: the powertrain down to zero vehicle
350
Fmt 4701
speed over 20 seconds. Apply the brake the powertrain down to zero vehicle (ii) Highway cruise cycle. The grade
and keep the transmission in drive (or speed in 20 seconds. Put the portion of the route corresponding to
clutch depressed for manual transmission in park (or neutral for the 55 mi/hr and 65 mi/hr highway
transmission). Stabilize the powertrain manual transmissions and apply the cruise cycles is specified in appendix D
for (60±1) seconds and then sample parking brake if applicable). Stabilize to this part. Warm up the vehicle by
emissions for (30±1) seconds. the powertrain for (180±1) seconds and operating it at the appropriate speed
(iv) Parked idle. Perform testing at a then sample emissions for (600±1) setpoint over the duty cycle. Within 60
no-load idle condition for Phase 2 seconds. seconds after concluding the
vocational vehicles. For engines with an (3) Where applicable, perform testing preconditioning cycle, start emission
adjustable warm idle speed setpoint, on a chassis dynamometer as follows: sampling and operate the vehicle over
test at the minimum warm idle speed (i) Transient cycle. The transient cycle the duty cycle, maintaining vehicle
and the maximum warm idle speed; is specified in appendix A to this part. speed within ±1.0 mi/hr of the speed
otherwise simply test at the engine’s Warm up the vehicle by operating over setpoint; this speed tolerance applies
warm idle speed. Warm up the one transient cycle. Within 60 seconds instead of the approach specified in 40
powertrain as described in 40 CFR after concluding the warm up cycle, CFR 1066.425(b)(1) and (2).
1036.520(d). Within 60 seconds after start emission sampling and operate the (b) Calculate the official emission
concluding the warm-up, linearly ramp vehicle over the duty cycle. result from the following equation:
Eq. 1037.510–1 w[cycle] = weighting factor for the appropriate wtransient = 20% = 0.20
test cycle, as shown in table 1 to wdrive-idle = 0% = 0
Where: paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
m[cycle] = CO2 mass emissions over each test wparked-idle = 25% = 0.25
eCO2comp = total composite mass of CO2
emissions in g/ton-mile, rounded to the cycle (other than idle). w55 = 24% = 0.24
nearest whole number for vocational D[cycle] = the total driving distance for the w65 = 56% = 0.56
vehicles and to the first decimal place for indicated duty cycle. Use 2.842 miles for mtransient = 4083 g
tractors. the transient cycle, and use 13.429 miles
for both of the highway cruise cycles. m55 = 13834 g
PL = the standard payload, in tons, as Ô
specified in § 1037.705. m[cycle]-idle = CO2 emission rate at idle. m65 = 17018 g
v̄moving = mean composite weighted driven Example: Class 7 vocational vehicle Dtransient = 2.8449 miles
vehicle speed, excluding idle operation, D55 = 13.429 miles
as shown in table 1 to paragraph (c)(3)
meeting the Phase 2 standards based on
the Regional duty cycle. D65 = 13.429 miles
of this section for Phase 2 vocational Ô
m
vehicles. For other vehicles, let v̄moving = PL = 5.6 tons drive-idle = 4188 g/hr
1. v̄moving = 38.41 mi/hr Ô
mparked-idle = 3709 g/hr
(c) Weighting factors apply for each (2) GEM applies weighting factors for values. Select either Urban, Regional, or
type of vehicle and for each duty cycle vocational vehicles as shown in table 1 Multi-Purpose as the most appropriate
as follows: to paragraph (c)(3) of this section. duty cycle for modeling emission results
(1) GEM applies weighting factors for Modeling for Phase 2 vocational with each vehicle configuration, as
specific types of tractors as shown in vehicles depends on characterizing specified in §§ 1037.140 and 1037.150.
table 1 to paragraph (c)(3) of this vehicles by duty cycle to apply proper (3) Table 1 to this paragraph (c)(3)
section. weighting factors and average speed follows:

ER22AP24.214</GPH>
ER22AP24.213</GPH>
351
Fmt 4701
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3) OF § 1037.510—WEIGHTING FACTORS FOR DUTY CYCLES

Distance-weighted Time-weighted a Average speed
during non-idle
55 mi/hr 65 mi/hr
Transient Drive idle Parked idle Non-idle cycles
cruise cruise (mi/hr) b
(%) (%) (%) (%)
(%) (%)
Day Cabs ....................................................... 19 17 64

Sleeper Cabs ................................................. 5 9 86
Heavy-haul Tractors ....................................... 19 17 64
Vocational—Regional ..................................... 20 24 56 0 25 75 38.41
Vocational—Multi-Purpose (2b–7) ................. 54 29 17 17 25 58 23.18
Vocational—Multi-Purpose (8) ....................... 54 23 23 17 25 58 23.27
Vocational—Urban (2b–7) ............................. 92 8 0 15 25 60 16.25
Vocational—Urban (8) ................................... 90 10 0 15 25 60 16.51
Vocational with conventional powertrain
(Phase 1 only) ............................................ 42 21 37
Vocational Hybrid Vehicles (Phase 1 only) ... 75 9 16
a Note that these drive idle and non-idle weighting factors do not reflect additional drive idle that occurs during the transient cycle. The tran-
sient cycle does not include any parked idle.
b These values apply even for vehicles not following the specified speed traces.
(d) For highway cruise and transient device as described in 40 CFR (a) * * *
testing, compare actual second-by- 1066.501(a)(3). (2) For Phase 2 and later vehicles, the
second vehicle speed with the speed GEM inputs described in paragraphs
specified in the test cycle and ensure § 1037.515 [Removed]
(a)(1)(i) through (v) of this section
any differences are consistent with the ■ 76. Remove § 1037.515.
continue to apply. Note that the
criteria as specified in 40 CFR ■ 77. Amend § 1037.520 by revising the provisions in this part related to vehicle
1036.545(g)(1). If the speeds are not section heading, introductory text, and speed limiters and automatic engine
consistent with the criteria as specified paragraphs (a)(2) introductory text, shutdown systems are available for
in 40 CFR 1036.545(g)(1), the test is not (b)(3), (c)(1) and (2), (e)(1) and (3), (g)(4), Phase 2 and later vocational vehicles.
valid and must be repeated. (j)(1), and (j)(2)(iii) to read as follows: The rest of this section describes
(e) Run test cycles as specified in 40
§ 1037.520 Modeling CO2 emissions to additional GEM inputs for
CFR part 1066. For testing vehicles
show that vehicles comply with standards. demonstrating compliance with Phase 2
equipped with cruise control over the
highway cruise cycles, you may use the This section describes how to use the and later standards. Simplified versions
vehicle’s cruise control to control the Greenhouse gas Emissions Model (GEM) of GEM apply for limited circumstances
vehicle speed. For vehicles equipped to show compliance with the CO2 as follows:
with adjustable vehicle speed limiters, standards of §§ 1037.105 and 1037.106. * * * * *
test the vehicle with the vehicle speed Use GEM version 2.0.1 to demonstrate (b) * * *
limiter at its highest setting. compliance with Phase 1 standards; use
(f) For Phase 1, test the vehicle using GEM Phase 2, Version 4.0 to (3) For Phase 2 and later tractors other
its adjusted loaded vehicle weight, demonstrate compliance with Phase 2 than heavy-haul tractors, determine bin
unless we determine this would be and Phase 3 standards (both levels and CdA inputs as follows:
unrepresentative of in-use operation as incorporated by reference, see (i) Determine bin levels for high-roof
specified in 40 CFR 1065.10(c)(1). § 1037.810). Use good engineering tractors based on aerodynamic test
(g) For hybrid vehicles, correct for the judgment when demonstrating results as specified in § 1037.525 and
net energy change of the energy storage compliance using GEM. summarized in the following table:
TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(3)(i) OF § 1037.520—BIN DETERMINATIONS FOR PHASE 2 AND LATER HIGH-ROOF TRACTORS
BASED ON AERODYNAMIC TEST RESULTS
[CdA in m2]
Tractor type Bin I Bin II Bin III Bin IV Bin V Bin VI Bin VII
Day Cabs ............................................................... ≥7.2 6.6–7.1 6.0–6.5 5.5–5.9 5.0–5.4 4.5–4.9 ≤4.4
Sleeper Cabs ......................................................... ≥6.9 6.3–6.8 5.7–6.2 5.2–5.6 4.7–5.1 4.2–4.6 ≤4.1
(ii) For low- and mid-roof tractors, tractor as shown in table 3 to paragraph aerodynamic test results as described in
you may either use the same bin level (b)(3)(i) of this section, or you may table 4 to this paragraph (b)(3)(ii).
that applies for an equivalent high-roof determine your bin level based on
352
Fmt 4701
TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(3)(ii) OF § 1037.520—BIN DETERMINATIONS FOR PHASE 2 AND LATER LOW-ROOF AND MID-
ROOF TRACTORS BASED ON AERODYNAMIC TEST RESULTS
[CdA in m2]
Low-Roof Cabs ...................................................... ≥5.4 4.9–5.3 4.5–4.8 4.1–4.4 3.8–4.0 3.5–3.7 ≤3.4
Mid-Roof Cabs ....................................................... ≥5.9 5.5–5.8 5.1–5.4 4.7–5.0 4.4–4.6 4.1–4.3 ≤4.0
(iii) Determine the CdA input

according to the tractor’s bin level as
described in the following table:
TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (b)(3)(iii) OF § 1037.520—PHASE 2 AND LATER CdA TRACTOR INPUTS BASED ON BIN LEVEL
High-Roof Day Cabs .............................................. 7.45 6.85 6.25 5.70 5.20 4.70 4.20
High-Roof Sleeper Cabs ........................................ 7.15 6.55 5.95 5.40 4.90 4.40 3.90
Low-Roof Cabs ...................................................... 6.00 5.60 5.15 4.75 4.40 4.10 3.80
Mid-Roof Cabs ....................................................... 7.00 6.65 6.25 5.85 5.50 5.20 4.90
* * * * * ISO 28580 (incorporated by reference, (1) Vehicle weight reduction inputs

(c) * * * see § 1037.810), except as specified in for wheels are specified relative to dual-
(1) Use good engineering judgment to this paragraph (c). Use good engineering wide tires with conventional steel
determine a tire’s revolutions per mile judgment to ensure that your test results wheels. For purposes of this paragraph
to the nearest whole number as are not biased low. You may ask us to (e)(1), an aluminum alloy qualifies as
specified in SAE J1025 (incorporated by identify a reference test laboratory to light-weight if a dual-wide drive wheel
reference, see § 1037.810). Note that for which you may correlate your test made from this material weighs at least
tire sizes that you do not test, we will results. Prior to beginning the test 21 pounds less than a comparable
treat your analytically derived procedure in Section 7 of ISO 28580 for
revolutions per mile the same as test conventional steel wheel. The inputs are
a new bias-ply tire, perform a break-in listed in table 6 to this paragraph (e)(1).
results, and we may perform our own procedure by running the tire at the
testing to verify your values. We may For example, a tractor or vocational
specified test speed, load, and pressure vehicle with aluminum steer wheels
require you to test a sample of for (60±2) minutes.
additional tire sizes that we select. and eight (4×2) dual-wide aluminum
(2) Measure tire rolling resistance in * * * * * drive wheels would have an input of
newton per kilonewton as specified in (e) * * * 210 pounds (2×21 + 8×21).
TABLE 6 TO PARAGRAPH (e)(1) OF § 1037.520—WHEEL-RELATED WEIGHT REDUCTIONS

Weight Weight
reduction— reduction—
Tire type Material Phase 1 Phase 2 and later
(pounds (pounds
per wheel) per wheel)
Wide-Base Single Drive Tire with . . .a ................. Steel Wheel ............................................................ 84 84

Aluminum Wheel .................................................... 139 147
Light-Weight Aluminum Alloy Wheel ...................... 147 147
Steer Tire or Dual-wide Drive Tire with . . . .......... High-Strength Steel Wheel .................................... 8 8
Aluminum Wheel .................................................... 21 25
Light-Weight Aluminum Alloy Wheel ...................... 30 25
a The weight reduction for wide-base tires accounts for reduced tire weight relative to dual-wide tires.
* * * * * than wheels are specified in the

(3) Weight-reduction inputs for following table:
vocational-vehicle components other
TABLE 8 TO PARAGRAPH (e)(3) OF § 1037.520—NONWHEEL-RELATED WEIGHT REDUCTIONS FROM ALTERNATIVE

MATERIALS FOR PHASE 2 AND LATER VOCATIONAL VEHICLES
[Pounds] a
Vehicle type
Component Material
Light HDV Medium HDV b Heavy HDV
Axle Hubs—Non-Drive .................................... Aluminum ....................................................... 40 40
353
TABLE 8 TO PARAGRAPH (e)(3) OF § 1037.520—NONWHEEL-RELATED WEIGHT REDUCTIONS FROM ALTERNATIVE

MATERIALS FOR PHASE 2 AND LATER VOCATIONAL VEHICLES—Continued
[Pounds] a
Vehicle type
Component Material
Light HDV Medium HDV b Heavy HDV
Axle Hubs—Non-Drive .................................... High Strength Steel ........................................ 5 5

Axle—Non-Drive ............................................. Aluminum ....................................................... 60 60
Axle—Non-Drive ............................................. High Strength Steel ........................................ 15 15
Brake Drums—Non-Drive ............................... Aluminum ....................................................... 60 60
Brake Drums—Non-Drive ............................... High Strength Steel ........................................ 42 42
Axle Hubs—Drive ............................................ Aluminum ....................................................... 40 80
Axle Hubs—Drive ............................................ High Strength Steel ........................................ 10 20
Brake Drums—Drive ....................................... Aluminum ....................................................... 70 140
Brake Drums—Drive ....................................... High Strength Steel ........................................ 37 74
Suspension Brackets, Hangers ...................... Aluminum ....................................................... 67 100
Suspension Brackets, Hangers ...................... High Strength Steel ........................................ 20 30
Crossmember—Cab ....................................... Aluminum ....................................................... 10 15 15

Crossmember—Cab ....................................... High Strength Steel ........................................ 2 5 5
Crossmember—Non-Suspension ................... Aluminum ....................................................... 15 15 15
Crossmember—Non-Suspension ................... High Strength Steel ........................................ 5 5 5
Crossmember—Suspension ........................... Aluminum ....................................................... 15 25 25
Crossmember—Suspension ........................... High Strength Steel ........................................ 6 6 6
Driveshaft ........................................................ Aluminum ....................................................... 12 40 50
Driveshaft ........................................................ High Strength Steel ........................................ 5 10 12
Frame Rails ..................................................... Aluminum ....................................................... 120 300 440
Frame Rails ..................................................... High Strength Steel ........................................ 40 40 87
a Weight-reductionvalues apply per vehicle unless otherwise noted.
b For Medium HDV with 6×4 or 6×2 axle configurations, use the values for Heavy HDV.
* * * * * powered compressors. It also include this functional relationship as Falt-aero for

(g) * * * mechanically powered compressors if a given alternate drag measurement
(4) GEM inputs associated with the coefficient of performance improves method. The effective yaw angle, Ψeff, is
powertrain testing include powertrain by 10 percent or greater over the assumed to be zero degrees for Phase 1.
family, transmission calibration baseline design, consistent with the For Phase 2 and later, determine Ψeff
identifier, test data from 40 CFR provisions for improved evaporators from coastdown test results using the
1036.545, and the powertrain test and condensers in 40 CFR 86.1868– following equation:
configuration (dynamometer connected 12(h)(5).
to transmission output or wheel hub). * * * * *
You do not need to identify or provide ■ 78. Amend § 1037.525 by revising
inputs for transmission gear ratios, fuel paragraphs (a) introductory text, (b),
map data, or engine torque curves, (c)(1) introductory text, (c)(2) Eq. 1037.525–1
which would otherwise be required introductory text, and (c)(3)(v) to read as Where:
under paragraph (f) of this section. follows: CdAcoastdown(Ψeff) = the average drag area
* * * * * measured during coastdown at an
(j) * * * § 1037.525 Aerodynamic measurements effective yaw angle, Ψeff.
(1) Intelligent controls. Enter 2 for for tractors. CdAalt(Ψeff) = the average drag area calculated
tractors with predictive cruise control. * * * * * from an alternate drag measurement
This includes any cruise control system (a) General provisions. The GEM method at an effective yaw angle, Ψeff.
that incorporates satellite-based global- input for a tractor’s aerodynamic (2) Unless good engineering judgment
positioning data for controlling operator performance is a Cd value for Phase 1 dictates otherwise, assume that
demand. For tractors without predictive and a CdA value for Phase 2 and later. coastdown drag is proportional to drag
cruise control and for all vocational The input value is measured or measured using alternate methods and
vehicles, enter 1.5 if they have neutral calculated for a tractor in a specific test apply a constant adjustment factor,
coasting or the installed engine configuration with a trailer, such as a Falt-aero, for a given alternate drag
deactivates all cylinders closing all high-roof tractor with a box van meeting measurement method of similar
intake and exhaust valves when the requirements for the standard trailer. vehicles.
operator demand is zero while the * * * * * (3) Determine Falt-aero by performing
vehicle is in motion, unless good (b) Adjustments to correlate with coastdown testing and applying your
engineering judgment indicates that a coastdown testing. Adjust aerodynamic alternate method on the same vehicles.
lower percentage should apply. drag values from alternate methods to be Consider all applicable test data
(2) * * * equivalent to the corresponding values including data collected during

(iii) If vehicles have a high-efficiency from coastdown measurements as selective enforcement audits. Unless we
air conditioning compressor, enter 0.5 follows: approve another vehicle, one vehicle
for tractors, 0.5 for vocational Heavy (1) Determine the functional must be a Class 8 high-roof sleeper cab
HDV, and 1 for other vocational relationship between your alternate with a full aerodynamics package
ER22AP24.215</GPH>
vehicles. This includes all electrically method and coastdown testing. Specify pulling a standard trailer. Where you
354
have more than one tractor model would be 1.037 (or a higher value you improvement. Repeat this testing and
meeting these criteria, use the tractor declare). measure CdA for a vehicle with the
model with the highest projected sales. (7) If a tractor and trailer cannot be improved aerodynamic design.
If you do not have such a tractor model, configured to meet the gap requirements (c) Use good engineering judgment to
you may use your most comparable specified in § 1037.501(g)(1)(ii), test perform paired tests that accurately
tractor model with our prior approval. with the trailer positioned as close as demonstrate the reduction in
In the case of alternate methods other possible to the specified gap dimension aerodynamic drag associated with the
than those specified in this subpart, and use good engineering judgment to improved design.
good engineering judgment may require correct the results to be equivalent to a (d) Measure CdA in m2 to two decimal
you to determine your adjustment factor test configuration meeting the specified places. Calculate ΔdA by subtracting the
based on results from more than the gap dimension. For example, we may drag area for the test vehicle from the
specified minimum number of vehicles. allow you to correct your test output drag area for the baseline vehicle.
(4) Measure the drag area using your using an approved alternate method or ■ 81. Amend § 1037.528 by:
alternate method for a Phase 2 and later substitute a test vehicle that is capable ■ a. Revising the introductory text and
tractor used to determine Falt-aero with of meeting the required specifications paragraphs (b) introductory text, (h)(5)
testing at yaw angles of 0°, ±1°, ±3°, and is otherwise aerodynamically introductory text, (h)(5)(iv), and (h)(6)
±4.5°, ±6°, and ±9° (you may include equivalent. The allowance in this introductory text;
additional angles), using direction paragraph (b)(7) applies for certification, ■ b. Removing paragraph (h)(7);
conventions described in Figure 2 of confirmatory testing, SEA, and all other ■ c. Redesignating paragraphs (h)(8)
SAE J1252 (incorporated by reference, testing to demonstrate compliance with through (12) as paragraphs (h)(7)
see § 1037.810). Also, determine the standards. through (11), respectively; and
drag area at the coastdown effective yaw (8) You may ask us for preliminary ■ d. Revising newly redesignated
angle, CdAalt(Ψeff), by taking the average approval of your coastdown testing paragraph (h)(10).
drag area at Ψeff and¥Ψeff for your under § 1037.210. We may witness the
The revisions read as follows:
vehicle using the same alternate testing.
method. (c) * * * § 1037.528 Coastdown procedures for
(5) For Phase 2 and later testing, (1) Apply the following method for all calculating drag area (CdA).
determine separate values of Falt-aero for Phase 2 and later testing with an This section describes the reference
at least one high-roof day cab and one alternate method: method for calculating drag area, CdA,
high-roof sleeper cab for model year * * * * * for tractors using coastdown testing.
2021, at least two high-roof day cabs (2) Apply the following method for Follow the provisions of Sections 1
and two high-roof sleeper cabs for Phase 2 and later coastdown testing through 9 of SAE J2263 (incorporated by
model year 2024, and at least three high- other than coastdown testing used to reference, see § 1037.810), with the
roof day cabs and three high-roof establish Falt-aero: clarifications and exceptions described
sleeper cabs for model year 2027. These * * * * * in this section. Several of the exceptions
test requirements are cumulative; for (3) * * * in this section are from SAE J1263
example, you may meet these (v) As an alternative, you may (incorporated by reference, see
requirements by testing two vehicles to calculate the wind-averaged drag area § 1037.810). The coastdown procedures
support model year 2021 certification according to SAE J1252 (incorporated by in 40 CFR 1066.310 apply instead of the
and four additional vehicles to support reference, see § 1037.810) and substitute provisions of this section for Phase 1
model year 2023 certification. For any this value into Eq. 1037.525–4 for the tractors.
untested tractor models, apply the value ±6° drag area. * * * * *
of Falt-aero from the tested tractor model * * * * * (b) To determine CdA values for a,
that best represents the aerodynamic perform coastdown testing with a
characteristics of the untested tractor § 1037.526 [Removed] tractor-trailer combination using the
model, consistent with good engineering ■ 79. Remove § 1037.526. manufacturer’s tractor and a standard
judgment. Testing under this paragraph ■ 80. Revise § 1037.527 to read as trailer. Prepare the tractor-trailer
(b)(5) continues to be valid for later follows: combination for testing as follows:
model years until you change the tractor * * * * *
model in a way that causes the test § 1037.527 Aerodynamic measurements (h) * * *
results to no longer represent for vocational vehicles.
(5) Calculate the drive-axle spin loss
production vehicles. You must also This section describes an optional force at high and low speeds, Fspin[speed],
determine unique values of Falt-aero for methodology for determining improved and determine ΔFspin as follows:
low-roof and mid-roof tractors if you aerodynamic drag area, CdA, for
determine CdA values based on low or * * * * *
vocational vehicles, as described in
mid-roof tractor testing as shown in § 1037.520(m), rather than using the (iv) Calculate ΔFspin using the
§ 1037.520(b)(3)(ii). For Phase 1 testing, assigned values. A vocational vehicle’s following equation:
if good engineering judgment allows it, aerodynamic performance is based on a ΔFspin = Fspinhi¥Fspinlo
you may calculate a single, constant ΔCdA value relative to a baseline Eq. 1037.528–10
value of Falt-aero for your whole product vehicle. Determine a ΔdA value by
line by dividing the coastdown drag performing A to B testing as follows: Example:
area, CdAcoastdown, by drag area from your (a) Use any of the procedures ΔFspin = 129.7¥52.7
alternate method, CdAalt. described in this subpart, with ΔFspin = 77.0 N

(6) Determine Falt-aero to at least three appropriate adjustments, for calculating (6) Calculate the tire rolling resistance
decimal places. For example, if your drag area. force at high and low speeds for steer,
coastdown testing results in a drag area (b) Determine a baseline CdA value for drive, and trailer axle positions,
of 6.430, but your wind tunnel method a vehicle representing a production FTRR[speed,axle], and determine ΔFTRR, the
results in a drag area of 6.200, Falt-aero configuration without the aerodynamic rolling resistance difference between 65
355
Fmt 4701
mi/hr and 15 mi/hr, for each tire as (10) Calculate drag area, CdA, in m2 following equation, expressed to at least
follows: for each high-speed segment using the three decimal places:
* * * * *
Eq. 1037.528–16 ΔFTRR = the difference in tire rolling P̄act = mean absolute air pressure expressed
resistance force between high-speed and to at least one decimal place.
Where:
low-speed coastdown segments as Example:
Fhi = road load force at high speed described in paragraph (h)(6) of this
determined from Eq. 1037.528–7. Fhi = 4645.5 N
section. Flo,pair = 1005.0 N
Flo,pair = the average of Flo values for a pair v̄2air,lo,pair = the average of v̄2air,lo values for a
of opposite direction runs calculated as DFspin = 77.0 N
pair of opposite direction runs calculated
described in paragraph (h)(8) of this DFTRR = 187.4 N
as described in paragraph (h)(8) of this
section. v̄2air,hi = 933.4 m2/s2
section.
ΔFspin = the difference in drive-axle spin loss v̄2air,lo,pair = 43.12 m2/s2
R = specific gas constant = 287.058 J/(kg·K).
force between high-speed and low-speed R = 287.058 J/(kg·K)
T̄ = mean air temperature expressed to at
coastdown segments as described in T̄ = 285.97 K
⊕
least one decimal Place.
paragraph (h)(5) of this section. Ρact = 101.727 kPa = 101727 Pa
* * * * * standard 53 foot box van, it may be how your method nevertheless qualifies
■ 82. Revise and republish § 1037.530 to appropriate to use a shorter box van. In as an alternate method under
read as follows: such a case, the correlation developed § 1037.525(d) and include all the
using the shorter trailer would only be following information:
§ 1037.530 Wind tunnel procedures for valid for testing with the shorter trailer. (1) Identify the name and location of
calculating drag area (CdA). (3) For reduced-scale wind tunnel the test facility for your wind tunnel
This section describes an alternate testing, use a one-eighth or larger scale method.
method for calculating drag area, CdA, model of a tractor and trailer that is (2) Background and history of the
for tractors using wind tunnel testing. sufficient to simulate airflow through wind tunnel.
(a) You may measure drag areas the radiator inlet grill and across an (3) The wind tunnel’s layout (with
consistent with published SAE engine geometry that represents engines diagram), type, and construction
procedures as described in this section commonly used in your test vehicle. (structural and material).
using any wind tunnel recognized by (b) Open-throat wind tunnels must (4) The wind tunnel’s design details:
the Subsonic Aerodynamic Testing also meet the specifications of SAE the type and material for corner turning
Association, subject to the provisions of J2071 (incorporated by reference, see vanes, air settling specification, mesh
§ 1037.525. If your wind tunnel does not § 1037.810). screen specification, air straightening
meet the specifications described in this (c) To determine CdA values, perform method, tunnel volume, surface area,
section, you may ask us to approve it as wind tunnel testing with a tractor-trailer average duct area, and circuit length.
an alternate method under combination using the manufacturer’s (5) Specifications related to the wind
§ 1037.525(d). All wind tunnels and tractor and a standard trailer. Use a tunnel’s flow quality: temperature
wind tunnel tests must meet the moving/rolling floor if the facility has control and uniformity, airflow quality,
specifications described in SAE J1252 one. For Phase 1 tractors, conduct the minimum airflow velocity, flow
(incorporated by reference, see wind tunnel tests at a zero yaw angle. uniformity, angularity and stability,
§ 1037.810), with the following For Phase 2 and later vehicles, conduct static pressure variation, turbulence
exceptions and additional provisions: the wind tunnel tests by measuring the intensity, airflow acceleration and
(1) The Overall Vehicle Reynolds drag area at yaw angles of +4.5° and deceleration times, test duration flow
number, Re#w, must be at least 1.0·106. ¥4.5° and calculating the average of quality, and overall airflow quality
Tests for Reynolds effects described in those two values. achievement.
Section 7.1 of SAE J1252 are not (d) In your request to use wind tunnel (6) Test/working section information:
required. testing, describe how you meet all the test section type (e.g., open, closed,
(2) For full-scale wind tunnel testing, specifications that apply under this adaptive wall) and shape (e.g., circular,
use good engineering judgment to select section, using terminology consistent square, oval), length, contraction ratio,
ER22AP24.217</GPH>
a trailer that is a reasonable with SAE J1594 (incorporated by maximum air velocity, maximum
representation of the trailer used for reference, see § 1037.810). If you request dynamic pressure, nozzle width and
reference coastdown testing. For our approval to use wind tunnel testing height, plenum dimensions and net
example, where your wind tunnel is not even though you do not meet all the volume, maximum allowed model scale,
ER22AP24.216</GPH>
long enough to test the tractor with a specifications of this section, describe maximum model height above road,
356
Fmt 4701
strut movement rate (if applicable), for tractors using constant-speed technology other than batteries for
model support, primary boundary layer aerodynamic drag testing. storing energy).
slot, boundary layer elimination * * * * * (i) For plug-in hybrid electric
method, and photos and diagrams of the (c) Vehicle preparation. Perform vehicles, we recommend charging the
test section. testing with a tractor-trailer combination battery with an external electrical
(7) Fan section description: fan type, using the manufacturer’s tractor and a source.
diameter, power, maximum angular standard trailer. Prepare the tractor- (ii) For other vehicles, we recommend
speed, maximum speed, support type, trailer combination for testing as running back-to-back PTO tests until
mechanical drive, and sectional total described in § 1037.528(b). Install engine operation is initiated to charge
weight. measurement instruments meeting the the RESS. The RESS should be fully
(8) Data acquisition and control requirements of 40 CFR part 1065, charged once engine operation stops.
(where applicable): acquisition type, subpart C, that have been calibrated as The ignition should remain in the ‘‘on’’
motor control, tunnel control, model described in 40 CFR part 1065, subpart position.
balance, model pressure measurement, D, as follows: (3) Turn the vehicle and PTO system
wheel drag balances, wing/body panel * * * * * off while the sampling system is being
balances, and model exhaust ■ 85. Amend § 1037.540 by revising the prepared.
simulation. introductory text and paragraphs (c), (4) Turn the vehicle and PTO system
(9) Moving ground plane or rolling
(d)(4), and (f) to read as follows: on such that the PTO system is
road (if applicable): construction and
functional, whether it draws power from
material, yaw table and range, moving § 1037.540 Special procedures for testing
the engine or a battery.
ground length and width, belt type, vehicles with hybrid power take-off.
maximum belt speed, belt suction (5) Operate the vehicle over one or
This section describes optional
mechanism, platen instrumentation, both of the denormalized PTO duty
procedures for quantifying the reduction
temperature control, and steering. cycles without turning the vehicle off,
in greenhouse gas emissions for vehicles
(10) Facility correction factors and until the engine starts and then shuts
as a result of running power take-off
purpose. down. This may require running
(PTO) devices with a hybrid energy
multiple repeats of the PTO duty cycles.
■ 83. Amend § 1037.532 by revising the delivery system. See 40 CFR 1036.545
For non-PHEV systems that are not
section heading, introductory text, and for powertrain testing requirements that
plug-in hybrid systems, the test cycle is
paragraphs (a) introductory text, (b), and apply for drivetrain hybrid systems. The
completed once the engine shuts down.
(c) introductory text to read as follows: procedures are written to test the PTO
For plug-in hybrid systems, continue
by ensuring that the engine produces all
§ 1037.532 Using computational fluid running until the PTO hybrid is running
of the energy with no net change in
dynamics for calculating drag area (CdA). in a charge-sustaining mode such that
stored energy (charge-sustaining), and
This section describes an alternate the ‘‘End of Test’’ requirements defined
for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, also
method for calculating drag area, CdA, in 40 CFR 1066.501(a)(3) are met.
allowing for drawing down the stored
for tractors using commercially Measure emissions as described in
energy (charge-depleting). The full
available computational fluid dynamics paragraph (b)(7) of this section. Use
charge-sustaining test for the hybrid
(CFD) software. good engineering judgment to minimize
vehicle is from a fully charged
(a) For Phase 2 and later vehicles, use the variability in testing between the
rechargeable energy storage system
SAE J2966 (incorporated by reference, two types of vehicles.
(RESS) to a depleted RESS and then
see § 1037.810), with the following back to a fully charged RESS. You must (6) For plug-in hybrid electric
clarifications and exceptions: include all hardware for the PTO vehicles, follow 40 CFR 1066.501(a)(3)
* * * * * system. You may ask us to modify the to divide the test into charge-depleting
(b) For Phase 1 tractors, apply the provisions of this section to allow and charge-sustaining operation.
procedures as specified in paragraphs testing hybrid vehicles that use a (7) Apply cycle-validation criteria as
(c) through (f) of this section. Paragraphs technology other than batteries for described in paragraph (b)(8) of this
(c) through (f) apply for Phase 2 and storing energy, consistent with good section to both charge-sustaining and
later vehicles only as specified in engineering judgment. For plug-in charge-depleting operation.
paragraph (a) of this section. hybrid electric vehicles, use a utility (d) * * *
(c) To determine CdA values, perform factor to properly weight charge- (4) Divide the total PTO operating
CFD modeling based on a tractor-trailer sustaining and charge-depleting time from paragraph (d)(3) of this
combination using the manufacturer’s operation as described in paragraph section by a conversion factor of 0.0144
tractor and a standard trailer. Perform (f)(3) of this section. hr/mi for Phase 1 and 0.0217 hr/mi for
all CFD modeling as follows: * * * * * Phase 2 and later to determine the
* * * * * (c) Measure PTO emissions from the equivalent distance driven. The
■ 84. Amend § 1037.534 by revising the fully warmed-up hybrid vehicle as conversion factors are based on
introductory text and paragraph (c) follows: estimates of average vehicle speed and
introductory text to read as follows: (1) Perform the steps in paragraphs PTO operating time as a percentage of
(b)(1) through (5) of this section. total engine operating time; the Phase 2
§ 1037.534 Constant-speed procedure for (2) Prepare the vehicle for testing by and later conversion factor is calculated
calculating drag area (CdA). operating it as needed to stabilize the from an average speed of 27.1 mi/hr and
This section describes an alternate RESS at a full state of charge (or PTO operation 37% of engine operating
method for calculating drag area, CdA, equivalent for vehicles that use a time, as follows:
ER22AP24.218</GPH>
357
Fmt 4701
Eq. 1037.540–2a portions of the test for the hybrid (i) Determine the utility factor fraction
* * * * * vehicle as applicable. for the PTO system from the table in
(2) Divide the fuel mass by the appendix E of this part using
(f) For Phase 2 and later, calculate the interpolation based on the total time of
delta PTO fuel results for input into applicable distance determined in
paragraph (d)(4) of this section and the the charge-depleting portion of the test
GEM during vehicle certification as as determined in paragraphs (c)(6) and
follows: appropriate standard payload as defined
(d)(3) of this section.
in § 1037.801 to determine the fuel-
(1) Determine fuel consumption by (ii) Weight the emissions from the
calculating the mass of fuel for each test consumption rate in g/ton-mile. charge-sustaining and charge-depleting
in grams, mfuelPTO, without rounding, as (3) For plug-in hybrid electric portions of the test to determine the
described in 40 CFR 1036.540(d)(12) for vehicles calculate the utility factor utility factor-weighted fuel mass,
both the conventional vehicle and the weighted fuel-consumption rate in g/ mfuelUF[cycle]plug-in, using the following
charge-sustaining and charge-depleting ton-mile, as follows: equation:
Eq. 1037.540–3 engine testing to simulate the vehicle simulations described in 40 CFR
Where: powertrain test. These engine-based 1036.545(j). Warm up the engine to
measurements may be used for selective prepare for the transient test or one of
i = an indexing variable that represents one
test interval. enforcement audits as described in the highway cruise cycles by operating
N = total number of charge-depleting test § 1037.301, as long as the test engine’s it one time over one of the simulations
intervals. operation represents the engine of the corresponding duty cycle. Warm
mfuelPTOCD = total mass of fuel per ton-mile operation observed in the powertrain up the engine to prepare for the idle test
in the charge-depleting portion of the test. If we use this approach for by operating it over a simulation of the
test for each test interval, i, starting from confirmatory testing, when making 65-mi/hr highway cruise cycle for 600
i = 1. compliance determinations, we will seconds. Within 60 seconds after
UFDCDi = utility factor fraction at time tCDi as consider the uncertainty associated with concluding the warm up cycle, start
determined in paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this
section for each test interval, i, starting this approach relative to full powertrain emission sampling while the engine
from i = 1. testing. Use of this approach for engine operates over the duty cycle. You may
j = an indexing variable that represents one SEAs is optional for engine perform any number of test runs directly
test interval. manufacturers. in succession once the engine is
M = total number of charge-sustaining test (a) Use the procedures of 40 CFR part warmed up. Perform cycle validation as
intervals. 1065 to set up the engine, measure described in 40 CFR 1065.514 for engine
mfuelPTOCS = total mass of fuel per ton-mile in emissions, and record data. Measure speed, torque, and power.
the charge-sustaining portion of the test individual parameters and emission (c) Calculate the mass of fuel
for each test interval, j, starting from j =
1.
constituents as described in this section. consumed as described in 40 CFR
UFRCD = utility factor fraction at the full Measure NOX emissions for each 1036.545(n) and (o). Correct each
charge-depleting time, tCD, as determined sampling period in grams. You may measured value for the test fuel’s mass-
by interpolating the utility factor curve perform these measurements using a specific net energy content as described
in appendix E to this part. tCD is the sum NOX emission-measurement system that in 40 CFR 1036.550. Use these corrected
of the time over N charge-depleting test meets the requirements of 40 CFR part values to determine whether the
intervals. 1065, subpart J. Include these measured engine’s emission levels conform to the
(4) Calculate the difference between NOX values any time you report to us declared fuel-consumption rates from
the conventional PTO emissions result your greenhouse gas emissions or fuel the powertrain test.
and the hybrid PTO emissions result for consumption values from testing under ■ 88. Amend § 1037.555 by revising the
input into GEM. this section. If a system malfunction introductory text and paragraph (h) to
* * * * * prevents you from measuring NOX read as follows:
emissions during a test under this
§ 1037.550 [Removed] section but the test otherwise gives valid § 1037.555 Special procedures for testing
Phase 1 hybrid systems.
■ 86. Remove § 1037.550. results, you may consider this a valid
test and omit the NOX emission This section describes a powertrain
■ 87. Revise § 1037.551 to read as testing procedure for simulating a
follows: measurements; however, we may
require you to repeat the test if we chassis test with a pre-transmission or
§ 1037.551 Engine-based simulation of determine that you inappropriately post-transmission hybrid system to
powertrain testing. voided the test with respect to NOX perform A to B testing of Phase 1
The regulations in 40 CFR 1036.545 emission measurement. For hybrid vehicles. These procedures may also be
describe how to measure fuel powertrains, correct for the net energy used to perform A to B testing with non-
consumption over specific duty cycles change of the energy storage device as hybrid systems. See 40 CFR 1036.545
with an engine coupled to a described in 40 CFR 1066.501(a)(3). for Phase 2 and later hybrid systems.
transmission; 40 CFR 1036.545(a)(5) (b) Operate the engine over the * * * * *
describes how to create equivalent duty applicable engine duty cycles (h) Correct for the net energy change
cycles for repeating those same corresponding to the vehicle cycles of the energy storage device as described
measurements with just the engine. This specified in § 1037.510(a)(2) for in 40 CFR 1066.501(a)(3).
ER22AP24.219</GPH>
section describes how to perform this powertrain testing over the applicable * * * * *
358
Fmt 4701
■ 89. Amend § 1037.560 by revising ■ 92. Revise and republish § 1037.615 to emission rate resulting from emission
paragraphs (e)(2) and (h)(1) to read as read as follows: modeling of the advanced vehicle as
follows: specified in § 1037.520.
§ 1037.615 Advanced technologies. (3) If you apply an improvement
§ 1037.560 Axle efficiency test. (a) This section describes how to factor to multiple vehicle configurations
* * * * * calculate emission credits for advanced using the same advanced technology,
(e) * * * technologies. You may calculate Phase 1 use the vehicle configuration with the
(2) Maintain gear oil temperature at advanced technology credits through smallest potential reduction in
(81 to 83) °C. You may alternatively model year 2020 for hybrid vehicles greenhouse gas emissions resulting from
specify a lower range by shifting both with regenerative braking, vehicles the hybrid capability.
temperatures down by the same amount equipped with Rankine-cycle engines, (4) Use the equation in § 1037.705 to
for any or all test points. We will test battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell convert the g/ton-mile benefit to
your axle assembly using the same electric vehicles. You may calculate emission credits (in Mg). Use the g/ton-
temperature range(s) you specify for Phase 2 advanced technology credits mile benefit in place of the (Std¥FEL)
your testing. If you use interpolation for through model year 2026 for plug-in term.
mapping, use the same temperature hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric (c) See § 1037.540 for special testing
range for all test points used in the vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles. provisions related to Phase 1 vehicles
interpolation. You may use an external You may calculate Phase 3 advanced equipped with hybrid power take-off
gear oil conditioning system, as long as technology credits for model year 2027 units.
it does not affect measured values. for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, (d) For Phase 2 and Phase 3 plug-in
* * * * * battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell hybrid electric vehicles and for fuel
(h) * * * electric vehicles. You may not generate cells powered by any fuel other than
(1) Test at least three axle assemblies credits for Phase 1 engine technologies hydrogen, calculate CO2 credits using an
within the same family representing at for which the engines generate CO2 FEL based on emission measurements
least the smallest axle ratio, the largest credits under 40 CFR part 1036. from powertrain testing. Phase 2 and
axle ratio, and an axle ratio closest to (b) Generate Phase 1 advanced- Phase 3 advanced technology credits do
the arithmetic mean from the two other technology credits for vehicles other not apply for hybrid vehicles that have
tested axle assemblies. Test each axle than battery electric vehicles as follows: no plug-in capability.
assembly as described in this section at (1) Measure the effectiveness of the (e) [Reserved]
the same speed and torque setpoints. advanced system by chassis-testing a (f) For battery electric vehicles and for
Test all axle assemblies using the same vehicle equipped with the advanced fuel cell electric vehicles, calculate CO2
gear oil temperature range for each system and an equivalent conventional credits using an FEL of 0 g/ton-mile.
setpoint as described in paragraph (e)(2) vehicle, or by testing the hybrid systems Note that these vehicles are subject to
of this section. and the equivalent non-hybrid systems compression-ignition standards for CO2.
* * * * * as described in § 1037.555. Test the (g) As specified in subpart H of this
■ 90. Amend § 1037.601 by revising vehicles as specified in subpart F of this part, advanced-technology credits
paragraph (b) to read as follows: part. For purposes of this paragraph (b), generated from Phase 1 vehicles under
a conventional vehicle is considered to this section may be used under this part
§ 1037.601 General compliance provisions. be equivalent if it has the same footprint outside of the averaging set in which
* * * * * (as defined in 40 CFR 86.1803), vehicle they were generated, or they may be
(b) Vehicles exempted from the service class, aerodynamic drag, and used under 40 CFR part 86, subpart S,
applicable standards of 40 CFR part 86 other relevant factors not directly or 40 CFR part 1036. Advanced-
or 1036 other than glider vehicles are related to the hybrid powertrain. If you technology credits generated from Phase
exempt from the standards of this part use § 1037.540 to quantify the benefits 2 and later vehicles are subject to the
without request. Similarly, vehicles of a hybrid system for PTO operation, averaging-set restrictions that apply to
other than glider vehicles are exempt the conventional vehicle must have the other emission credits.
without request if the installed engine is same number of PTO circuits and have (h) You may certify using both
exempted from the applicable standards equivalent PTO power. If you do not provisions of this section and the off-
in 40 CFR part 86 or 1036. produce an equivalent vehicle, you may cycle technology provisions of
* * * * * create and test a prototype equivalent § 1037.610, provided you do not double
■ 91. Amend § 1037.610 by revising vehicle. The conventional vehicle is count emission benefits.
paragraph (f)(2) to read as follows: considered Vehicle A and the advanced
vehicle is considered Vehicle B. We § 1037.620 [Amended]
§ 1037.610 Vehicles with off-cycle may specify an alternate cycle if your ■ 93. Amend § 1037.620 by removing
technologies.
vehicle includes a power take-off. paragraph (c) and redesignating
* * * * * (2) Calculate an improvement factor paragraphs (d) through (f) as paragraphs
(f) * * * and g/ton-mile benefit using the (c) through (e), respectively.
(2) For model years 2021 and later, following equations and parameters: ■ 94. Amend § 1037.622 by revising the
you may not rely on an approval for (i) Improvement Factor = [(Emission
model years before 2021. You must introductory text and paragraph (d)(5) to
Rate A)¥(Emission Rate B)]/(Emission read as follows:
separately request our approval before Rate A).
applying an improvement factor or (ii) g/ton-mile benefit = Improvement § 1037.622 Shipment of partially complete
credit under this section for Phase 2 and Factor × (GEM Result B). vehicles to secondary vehicle
later vehicles, even if we approved an (iii) Emission Rates A and B are the manufacturers.
improvement factor or credit for similar g/ton-mile CO2 emission rates of the This section specifies how
vehicle models before model year 2021. conventional and advanced vehicles, manufacturers may introduce partially
Note that Phase 2 and later approval respectively, as measured under the test complete vehicles into U.S. commerce
may carry over for multiple years. procedures specified in this section. (or in the case of certain custom
* * * * * GEM Result B is the g/ton-mile CO2 vehicles, introduce complete vehicles
359
Fmt 4701
into U.S. commerce for modification by standards that apply for vehicles (iv) For Phase 2 and later tractors, you
a small manufacturer). The provisions of meeting only one of these sets of may identify AES systems as
this section are intended to criteria. ‘‘adjustable’’ if, before delivering to the
accommodate normal business practices * * * * * ultimate purchaser, you enable
without compromising the effectiveness ■ 97. Amend § 1037.635 by revising
authorized dealers to modify the vehicle
of certified emission controls. You may paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows: in a way that disables the AES system
not use the provisions of this section to or makes the threshold inactivity period
circumvent the intent of this part. For § 1037.635 Glider kits and glider vehicles. longer than 300 seconds. However, the
vehicles subject to both exhaust * * * * * vehicle may not be delivered to the
greenhouse gas and evaporative (b) * * * ultimate purchaser with the AES system
standards, the provisions of this part (1) The engine must meet the disabled or the threshold inactivity
apply separately for each certificate. greenhouse gas standards of 40 CFR part period set longer than 300 seconds. You
* * * * * 1036 that apply for the engine model may allow dealers or repair facilities to
(d) * * * year corresponding to the vehicle’s date make such modifications; this might
(5) The provisions of this paragraph of manufacture. For example, for a involve password protection for
(d) may apply separately for vehicle vehicle with a 2024 date of electronic controls, or special tools that
greenhouse gas, evaporative, and manufacture, the engine must meet the only you provide. Any dealers making
refueling emission standards. greenhouse gas standards that apply for any modifications before delivery to the
* * * * * model year 2024. ultimate purchaser must notify you, and
■ 95. Amend § 1037.630 by revising * * * * * you must account for such
paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (c) to read as ■ 98. Amend § 1037.640 by revising the
modifications in your production and
follows: introductory text to read as follows: ABT reports after the end of the model
year. Dealers failing to provide prompt
§ 1037.630 Special purpose tractors. § 1037.640 Variable vehicle speed limiters. notification are in violation of the
(a) * * * This section specifies provisions that tampering prohibition of 40 CFR
(1) * * * apply for vehicle speed limiters (VSLs) 1068.101(b)(1). Dealer notifications are
(iii) Model year 2020 and earlier that you model under § 1037.520. This deemed to be submissions to EPA. Note
tractors with a gross combination weight section is written to apply for tractors; that these adjustments may not be made
rating (GCWR) at or above 120,000 however, you may use good engineering if the AES system was not ‘‘adjustable’’
pounds. Note that Phase 2 and later judgment to apply equivalent when first delivered to the ultimate
tractors meeting the definition of heavy- adjustments for Phase 2 and later purchaser.
haul tractor in § 1037.801 must be vocational vehicles with vehicle speed (v) For vocational vehicles, you may
certified to the heavy-haul standards in limiters. use the provisions of § 1037.610 to
§ 1037.106 or § 1037.670. apply for an appropriate partial
* * * * *
* * * * * emission reduction for AES systems you
(c) Production limit. No manufacturer identify as ‘‘adjustable.’’
paragraph (a) to read as follows: (2) Neutral idle. Phase 2 and later
may produce more than 21,000 Phase 1
vehicles under this section in any § 1037.660 Idle-reduction technologies. vehicles with hydrokinetic torque
consecutive three model year period. converters paired with automatic
* * * * *
This means you may not exceed 6,000 (a) Minimum requirements. Idle- transmissions qualify for neutral-idle
in a given model year if the combined reduction technologies must meet all credit in GEM modeling if the
total for the previous two years was the following requirements to be transmission reduces torque equivalent
15,000. The production limit applies modeled under § 1037.520 except as to shifting into neutral throughout the
with respect to all Class 7 and Class 8 specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of interval during which the vehicle’s
Phase 1 tractors certified or exempted as this section: brake pedal is depressed and the vehicle
vocational tractors. No production limit (1) Automatic engine shutdown (AES) is at a zero-speed condition (beginning
applies for tractors subject to Phase 2 systems. The system must shut down within five seconds of the vehicle
and later standards. the engine within a threshold inactivity reaching zero speed with the brake
period of 60 seconds or less for depressed). If a vehicle reduces torque
* * * * *
vocational vehicles and 300 seconds or partially but not enough to be
■ 96. Amend § 1037.631 by revising equivalent to shifting to neutral, you
paragraph (a) introductory text to read less for tractors when all the following
conditions are met: may use the provisions of § 1037.610(g)
as follows: to apply for an appropriate partial
(i) The transmission is set to park, or
§ 1037.631 Exemption for vocational the transmission is in neutral with the emission reduction; this may involve A
vehicles intended for off-road use. parking brake engaged. This is ‘‘parked to B testing with the powertrain test
* * * * * idle.’’ procedure in 40 CFR 1036.545 or the
(a) Qualifying criteria. Vocational (ii) The operator has not reset the spin-loss portion of the transmission
vehicles intended for off-road use are system timer within the specified efficiency test in § 1037.565.
exempt without request, subject to the threshold inactivity period by changing (3) Stop-start. Phase 2 and later
provisions of this section, if they are the position of the accelerator, brake, or vocational vehicles qualify for stop-start
primarily designed to perform work off- clutch pedal; or by resetting the system reduction in GEM modeling if the
road (such as in oil fields, mining, timer with some other mechanism we engine shuts down no more than 5
forests, or construction sites), and they approve. seconds after the vehicle’s brake pedal
meet at least one of the criteria of (iii) You may identify systems as is depressed when the vehicle is at a
paragraph (a)(1) of this section and at ‘‘tamper-resistant’’ if you make no zero-speed condition.
least one of the criteria of paragraph provision for vehicle owners, dealers, or * * * * *
(a)(2) of this section. See § 1037.105(h) other service outlets to adjust the ■ 100. Revise and republish § 1037.665
for alternate Phase 2 and Phase 3 threshold inactivity period. to read as follows:
360
Fmt 4701
§ 1037.665 Production and in-use tractor specifications of 40 CFR part 1065, long as it allows for reasonable year-to-
testing. subpart J. Calculate coefficients for the year comparisons and includes testing
We may require manufacturers with road-load force equation as described in from production vehicles. We may also
annual U.S.-directed production Section 10 of SAE J1263 or Section 11 direct you to do less testing than we
volumes of greater than 20,000 tractors of SAE J2263 (both incorporated by specify in this section.
to perform testing as described in this reference, see § 1037.810). Use standard (d) Greenhouse gas standards do not
section. Tractors may be new or used. payload. Measure emissions of NOX, apply with respect to testing under this
(a) Test model year 2021 and later PM, CO, NMHC, CO2, CH4, and N2O. section. Note however that NTE
tractors as follows: Determine emission levels in g/ton-mile. standards apply for any qualifying
(1) Each calendar year, we may (b) Send us an annual report with operation that occurs during the testing
require you to select for testing three your test results for each duty cycle and in the same way that it would during
sleeper cabs and two day cabs certified the corresponding GEM results. Send any other in-use testing.
to Phase 1 or Phase 2 standards. If we the report by the next October 1 after the ■ 101. Amend § 1037.670 by revising
do not identify certain vehicle year we select the vehicles for testing, paragraph (a) to read as follows:
configurations for your testing, select or a later date that we approve. We may
models that you project to be among make your test data publicly available. § 1037.670 Optional CO2 emission
your 12 highest-selling vehicle (c) We may approve your request to standards for tractors at or above 120,000
configurations for the given year. perform alternative testing that will pounds GCWR.
(2) Set up the tractors on a chassis provide equivalent or better information (a) You may certify model year 2026
dynamometer and operate them over all compared to the specified testing. For and earlier tractors at or above 120,000
applicable duty cycles from example, we may allow you to provide pounds GCWR to the following CO2
§ 1037.510(a)(3). You may use emission- CO2 data from in-use operation or from standards instead of the Phase 2 CO2
measurement systems meeting the manufacturer-run on-road testing as standards of § 1037.106:
TABLE 1 OF PARAGRAPH (a) OF § 1037.670—OPTIONAL CO2 STANDARDS FOR TRACTORS ABOVE 120,000 POUNDS
GCWR
[g/ton-mile] a
Model years Model years

Subcategory 2021–2023 2024–2026
Heavy Class 8 Low-Roof Day Cab ......................................................................................................................... 53.5 50.8

Heavy Class 8 Low-Roof Sleeper Cab ................................................................................................................... 47.1 44.5
Heavy Class 8 Mid-Roof Day Cab .......................................................................................................................... 55.6 52.8
Heavy Class 8 Mid-Roof Sleeper Cab .................................................................................................................... 49.6 46.9
Heavy Class 8 High-Roof Day Cab ......................................................................................................................... 54.5 51.4
Heavy Class 8 High-Roof Sleeper Cab ................................................................................................................... 47.1 44.2
a Note that these standards are not directly comparable to the standards for Heavy-Haul Tractors in § 1037.106 because GEM handles aero-
dynamic performance differently for the two sets of standards.
* * * * * resolve credit balances for that model emission credits to the nearest
year. megagram (Mg), using consistent units
* * * * * with the following equation:
paragraphs (a), (f), and (h) to read as
follows: (h) See § 1037.740 for special credit Emission credits (Mg) = (Std¥FEL) · PL
provisions that apply for credits · Volume · UL · 10¥6
§ 1037.701 General provisions. generated under 40 CFR 86.1819–
14(k)(7) or 1036.615 or § 1037.615. Eq. 1037.705–1
(a) You may average, bank, and trade
emission credits for purposes of * * * * * Where:
certification as described in this subpart ■ 103. Revise and republish § 1037.705 Std = the emission standard associated with
and in subpart B of this part to show to read as follows: the specific regulatory subcategory (g/
compliance with the standards of ton-mile).
§ 1037.705 Generating and calculating CO2 FEL = the family emission limit for the
§§ 1037.105 and 1037.106. Note that emission credits.
§ 1037.105(h) specifies standards vehicle subfamily (g/ton-mile).
involving limited or no use of emission (a) The provisions of this section PL = standard payload, in tons.
credits under this subpart. Participation apply separately for calculating CO2 Volume = U.S.-directed production volume
emission credits for each pollutant. of the vehicle subfamily, subject to the
in this program is voluntary. exclusions described in paragraph (c) of
(b) For each participating family or
* * * * * subfamily, calculate positive or negative this section. For example, if you produce
(f) Emission credits may be used in emission credits relative to the three configurations with the same FEL,
the model year they are generated. otherwise applicable emission standard. the subfamily production volume would
be the sum of the production volumes for
Where we allow it, surplus emission Calculate positive emission credits for a these three configurations.
credits may be banked for future model family or subfamily that has an FEL UL = useful life of the vehicle, in miles, as
years. Surplus emission credits may below the standard. Calculate negative described in §§ 1037.105 and 1037.106.
sometimes be used for past model years, emission credits for a family or
as described in § 1037.745. You may not subfamily that has an FEL above the (c) Compliance with the requirements
apply banked or traded credits in a standard. Sum your positive and of this subpart is determined at the end
given model year until you have used negative credits for the model year of the model year by calculating
all available credits through averaging to before rounding. Round the sum of emission credits based on actual
361
production volumes, excluding any of (b) * * * under 40 CFR 86.1819–14(k)(7) or

the following vehicles: (4) The projected and actual 1036.615 to demonstrate compliance
(1) Vehicles that you do not certify to production volumes for the model year with the CO2 standards in this part. The
the CO2 standards of this part because for calculating emission credits. If you maximum amount of advanced-
they are permanently exempted under changed an FEL during the model year, technology credits generated from Phase
subpart G of this part or under 40 CFR identify the actual production volume 1 vehicles that you may bring into each
part 1068. associated with each FEL. of the following service class groups is
(2) Exported vehicles even if they are * * * * * 60,000 Mg per model year:
certified under this part and labeled (f) * * * * * * * *
accordingly. (1) If you notify us by the deadline for (2) Credits generated from Phase 2
(3) Vehicles not subject to the
submitting the final report that errors and later vehicles are subject to the
requirements of this part, such as those
mistakenly decreased your balance of averaging-set restrictions that apply to
excluded under § 1037.5.
(4) Any other vehicles, where we emission credits, you may correct the other emission credits.
indicate elsewhere in this part that they errors and recalculate the balance of * * * * *
are not to be included in the emission credits. If you notify us that ■ 109. Amend § 1037.745 by revising
calculations of this subpart. errors mistakenly decreased your paragraph (a) to read as follows:
balance of emission credits after the
deadline for submitting the final report, § 1037.745 End-of-year CO2 credit deficits.
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
you may correct the errors and * * * * *
§ 1037.710 Averaging. recalculate the balance of emission (a) Your certificate for a vehicle
* * * * * credits after applying a 10 percent family for which you do not have
(c) If you certify a vehicle family to an discount to the credit correction, but sufficient CO2 credits will not be void
FEL that exceeds the otherwise only if you notify us within 24 months if you remedy the deficit with surplus
applicable standard, you must obtain after the deadline for submitting the credits within three model years. For
enough emission credits to offset the final report. If you report a negative example, if you have a credit deficit of
vehicle family’s deficit by the due date balance of emission credits, we may 500 Mg for a vehicle family at the end
for the final report required in disallow corrections under this of model year 2015, you must generate
§ 1037.730. The emission credits used to paragraph (f)(1). (or otherwise obtain) a surplus of at
address the deficit may come from your * * * * * least 500 Mg in that same averaging set
other vehicle families that generate ■ 108. Amend § 1037.740 by revising by the end of model year 2018.
emission credits in the same model year paragraphs (a), (b)(1) introductory text, * * * * *
(or from later model years as specified and (b)(2) to read as follows: ■ 110. Amend § 1037.801 by:
in § 1037.745), from emission credits ■ a. Adding a definition of ‘‘Battery
you have banked from previous model § 1037.740 Restrictions for using emission
electric vehicle’’ in alphabetical order;
years, or from emission credits credits.
■ b. Removing the definition of ‘‘Box
generated in the same or previous model * * * * * van’’;
years that you obtained through trading. (a) Averaging sets. Except as specified ■ c. Revising the definition of ‘‘Class’’;
■ 105. Amend § 1037.715 by revising in § 1037.105(h) and paragraph (b) of ■ d. Removing the definitions of
paragraph (a) to read as follows: this section, emission credits may be ‘‘Container chassis’’, ‘‘Electric vehicle’’,
exchanged only within an averaging set. and ‘‘Flatbed trailer’’;
§ 1037.715 Banking. The following principal averaging sets ■ e. Adding a definition of ‘‘Fuel cell
(a) Banking is the retention of surplus apply for vehicles certified to the electric vehicle’’ in alphabetical order;
emission credits by the manufacturer standards of this part involving ■ f. Revising the definitions of
generating the emission credits for use emission credits as described in this ‘‘Greenhouse gas Emissions Model
in future model years for averaging or subpart: (GEM)’’, ‘‘Heavy-duty vehicle’’, and
trading. (1) Light HDV. ‘‘Heavy-haul tractor’’;
* * * * * (2) Medium HDV. ■ g. Adding a definition of ‘‘Hybrid’’ in
■ 106. Amend § 1037.720 by revising (3) Heavy HDV. alphabetical order;
paragraph (a) to read as follows: (4) Note that other separate averaging ■ h. Removing the definitions of
sets also apply for emission credits not ‘‘Hybrid engine or hybrid powertrain’’
§ 1037.720 Trading. related to this part. For example, and ‘‘Hybrid vehicle’’;
(a) Trading is the exchange of vehicles certified to the greenhouse gas ■ i. Revising the definitions of ‘‘Light-
emission credits between standards of 40 CFR part 86, subpart S, duty truck’’, ‘‘Light-duty vehicle’’, ‘‘Low
manufacturers, or the transfer of credits comprise a single averaging set. rolling resistance tire’’, ‘‘Manufacturer’’,
to another party to retire them. You may Separate averaging sets also apply for and ‘‘Model year’’;
use traded emission credits for engines under 40 CFR part 1036, ■ j. Adding a definition of ‘‘Neat’’ in
averaging, banking, or further trading including engines used in vehicles alphabetical order;
transactions. Traded emission credits subject to this subpart. ■ k. Revising the definitions of ‘‘Neutral
remain subject to the averaging-set (b) * * * coasting’’, ‘‘Phase 1’’, and ‘‘Phase 2’’;
restrictions based on the averaging set in (1) Credits generated from Phase 1 ■ l. Adding definitions of ‘‘Phase 3’’ and
which they were generated. vehicles may be used for any of the ‘‘Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle’’ in
* * * * * averaging sets identified in paragraph alphabetical order;
■ 107. Amend § 1037.730 by revising (a) of this section; you may also use ■ m. Revising the definitions of
paragraphs (b)(4) and (f)(1) to read as those credits to demonstrate compliance ‘‘Preliminary approval’’, ‘‘Small
follows: with the CO2 emission standards in 40 manufacturer’’, and ‘‘Standard
CFR part 86, subpart S, and 40 CFR part payload’’;
§ 1037.730 ABT reports. 1036. Similarly, you may use Phase 1 ■ n. Removing the definition of
* * * * * advanced-technology credits generated ‘‘Standard tractor’’;
362
Fmt 4701
■ o. Adding a definition of ‘‘State of described in § 1037.520 (incorporated may ask us to extend your prior model
certified energy (SOCE)’’ in alphabetical by reference, see § 1037.810). year certificate to include such vehicles.
order; * * * * * Note that § 1037.601(a)(2) limits the
■ p. Removing the definitions of ‘‘Tank Heavy-duty vehicle means any motor extent to which vehicle manufacturers
trailer’’ and ‘‘Tonne’’; vehicle that has a GVWR above 8,500 may install engines built in earlier
■ q. Adding a definition of ‘‘Ton’’ in pounds. An incomplete vehicle is also calendar years.
alphabetical order; a heavy-duty vehicle if it has a curb (ii) The vehicle’s model year may be
■ r. Revising the definitions of ‘‘Trailer’’ weight above 6,000 pounds or a basic designated as the year after the calendar
and ‘‘U.S.-directed production volume’’; vehicle frontal area greater than 45 year corresponding to the vehicle’s date
■ s. Adding a definition of ‘‘Usable square feet. of manufacture. For example, a
battery energy (UBE)’’ in alphabetical Heavy-haul tractor means a tractor manufacturer may produce a new
order; and with GCWR greater than or equal to vehicle by installing the engine in
■ t. Revising the definition of ‘‘Vehicle’’. 120,000 pounds. A heavy-haul tractor is December 2023 and designating it as a
The additions and revisions read as not a vocational tractor in Phase 2 and model year 2024 vehicle.
follows: later. (2) For Phase 1 vehicles with a date
of manufacture before January 1, 2021,
* * * * *
§ 1037.801 Definitions. model year means the manufacturer’s
Hybrid has the meaning given in 40
* * * * * annual new model production period,
CFR 1036.801. Note that a hybrid
Battery electric vehicle means a motor except as restricted under this definition
vehicle is a vehicle with a hybrid engine
vehicle powered solely by an electric and 40 CFR part 85, subpart X. It must
or other hybrid powertrain. This
motor where energy for the motor is include January 1 of the calendar year
includes plug-in hybrid electric
supplied by one or more batteries that for which the model year is named, may
vehicles.
receive power from an external source not begin before January 2 of the
* * * * * previous calendar year, and it must end
of electricity. Note that this definition Light-duty truck has the meaning
does not include hybrid vehicles or by December 31 of the named calendar
given in 40 CFR 86.1803–01. year. The model year may be set to
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Light-duty vehicle has the meaning
* * * * * match the calendar year corresponding
given in 40 CFR 86.1803–01. to the date of manufacture.
Class means relating to GVWR * * * * * (i) The manufacturer who holds the
classes, as follows: Low rolling resistance tire means a tire certificate of conformity for the vehicle
(1) Class 2b means relating to heavy- on a vocational vehicle with a TRRL at must assign the model year based on the
duty motor vehicles at or below 10,000 or below of 7.7 N/kN, a steer tire on a date when its manufacturing operations
pounds GVWR. tractor with a TRRL at or below 7.7 N/ are completed relative to its annual
(2) Class 3 means relating to heavy- kN, a drive tire on a tractor with a TRRL model year period. In unusual
duty motor vehicles above 10,000 at or below 8.1 N/kN. circumstances where completion of
pounds GVWR but at or below 14,000 your assembly is delayed, we may allow
* * * * *
pounds GVWR. you to assign a model year one year
Manufacturer has the meaning given
(3) Class 4 means relating to heavy- in section 216(1) of the Act. In general, earlier, provided it does not affect
duty motor vehicles above 14,000 this term includes any person who which regulatory requirements will
pounds GVWR but at or below 16,000 manufactures or assembles a vehicle apply.
pounds GVWR. (including an incomplete vehicle) for (ii) Unless a vehicle is being shipped
(4) Class 5 means relating to heavy- sale in the United States or otherwise to a secondary vehicle manufacturer
duty motor vehicles above 16,000 introduces a new motor vehicle into that will hold the certificate of
pounds GVWR but at or below 19,500 commerce in the United States. This conformity, the model year must be
pounds GVWR. includes importers who import vehicles assigned prior to introduction of the
(5) Class 6 means relating to heavy- for resale, entities that manufacture vehicle into U.S. commerce. The
duty motor vehicles above 19,500 glider kits, and entities that assemble certifying manufacturer must
pounds GVWR but at or below 26,000 glider vehicles. redesignate the model year if it does not
pounds GVWR. complete its manufacturing operations
* * * * *
(6) Class 7 means relating to heavy- within the originally identified model
Model year means one of the
duty motor vehicles above 26,000 year. A vehicle introduced into U.S.
following for compliance with this part.
pounds GVWR but at or below 33,000 commerce without a model year is
Note that manufacturers may have other
pounds GVWR. deemed to have a model year equal to
model year designations for the same
(7) Class 8 means relating to heavy- the calendar year of its introduction into
vehicle for compliance with other
duty motor vehicles above 33,000 U.S. commerce unless the certifying
requirements or for other purposes:
pounds GVWR. manufacturer assigns a later date.
(1) For vehicles with a date of
* * * * * manufacture on or after January 1, 2021, * * * * *
Fuel cell electric vehicle means a model year means the manufacturer’s Neat has the meaning given in 40 CFR
motor vehicle powered solely by an annual new model production period 1065.1001.
electric motor where energy for the based on the vehicle’s date of Neutral coasting means a vehicle
motor is supplied by hydrogen fuel manufacture, where the model year is technology that automatically puts the
cells. Fuel cell electric vehicles may the calendar year corresponding to the transmission in neutral when the when
include energy storage from the fuel date of manufacture, except as follows: operator demand is zero while the
cells or from regenerative braking in a (i) The vehicle’s model year may be vehicle is in motion, such as driving
battery. designated as the year before the downhill.
* * * * * calendar year corresponding to the date * * * * *
Greenhouse gas Emissions Model of manufacture if the engine’s model Phase 1 means relating to the Phase
(GEM) means the GEM simulation tool year is also from an earlier year. You 1 standards specified in §§ 1037.105 and
363
Fmt 4701
1037.106. For example, a vehicle subject Usable battery energy (UBE) means Special Publication 811 (incorporated
to the Phase 1 standards is a Phase 1 the energy the battery supplies from the by reference, see § 1037.810). See 40
vehicle. start of the certification test procedure CFR 1065.20 for specific provisions
Phase 2 means relating to the Phase until the applicable break-off criterion. related to these conventions. This
2 standards specified in §§ 1037.105 and This part depends on certified and aged section summarizes the way we use
1037.106. values of UBE to set battery monitoring symbols, units of measure, and other
Phase 3 means relating to the Phase requirements as described in abbreviations.
3 standards specified in §§ 1037.105 and § 1037.115(f). * * * * *
1037.106. * * * * * ■ 112. Amend § 1037.810 by:
* * * * * Vehicle means equipment intended ■ a. Revising paragraph (c)(2);
Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle means for use on highways that meets at least ■ b. Removing paragraph (c)(9);
a hybrid vehicle that has the capability one of the criteria of paragraph (1) of ■ c. Redesignating paragraph (c)(10) as
to charge one or more batteries from an this definition, as follows: paragraph (c)(9); and
external source of electricity while the (1) The following equipment are ■ d. Revising paragraph (d).
vehicle is parked. vehicles: The revisions read as follows:
* * * * * (i) A piece of equipment that is
Preliminary approval means approval intended for self-propelled use on § 1037.810 Incorporation by reference.
granted by an authorized EPA highways becomes a vehicle when it * * * * *
representative prior to submission of an includes at least an engine, a (c) * * *
application for certification, consistent transmission, and a frame. (Note: For (2) SAE J1252 JUL2012, SAE Wind
with the provisions of § 1037.210. purposes of this definition, any Tunnel Test Procedure for Trucks and
* * * * * electrical, mechanical, and/or hydraulic Buses, Revised July 2012, (‘‘SAE
Small manufacturer means a devices attached to engines for the J1252’’); IBR approved for
manufacturer meeting the small purpose of powering wheels are §§ 1037.525(b) and (c); 1037.530(a).
business criteria specified in 13 CFR considered to be transmissions.) * * * * *
121.201 for heavy-duty truck (ii) A piece of equipment that is (d) U.S. EPA, Office of Air and
manufacturing (NAICS code 336120). intended for self-propelled use on Radiation, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann
The employee limit applies to the total highways becomes a vehicle when it Arbor, MI 48105; www.epa.gov;
number employees for all affiliated includes a passenger compartment complianceinfo@epa.gov.
companies (as defined in 40 CFR attached to a frame with one or more
(1) Greenhouse gas Emissions Model
1068.30). axles.
(GEM), Version 2.0.1, September 2012
* * * * * (2) Vehicles may be complete or
(‘‘GEM version 2.0.1’’); IBR approved for
Standard payload means the payload incomplete vehicles as follows:
§ 1037.520.
assumed for each vehicle, in tons, for (i) A complete vehicle is a functioning
(2) Greenhouse gas Emissions Model
modeling and calculating emission vehicle that has the primary load
(GEM) Phase 2, Version 3.0, July 2016
credits, as follows: carrying device or container (or
(‘‘GEM Phase 2, Version 3.0’’); IBR
(1) For vocational vehicles: equivalent equipment) attached when it
approved for § 1037.150(x).
(i) 2.85 tons for Light HDV. is first sold as a vehicle. Examples of
(ii) 5.6 tons for Medium HDV. (3) Greenhouse gas Emissions Model
equivalent equipment would include
(iii) 7.5 tons for Heavy HDV. (GEM) Phase 2, Version 3.5.1, November
fifth wheel trailer hitches, firefighting
(2) For tractors: 2020 (‘‘GEM Phase 2, Version 3.5.1’’);
equipment, and utility booms.
(i) 12.5 tons for Class 7. IBR approved for § 1037.150(x).
(ii) An incomplete vehicle is a vehicle
(ii) 19 tons for Class 8, other than (4) Greenhouse gas Emissions Model
that is not a complete vehicle.
heavy-haul tractors. (GEM) Phase 2, Version 4.0, April 2022
Incomplete vehicles may also be cab-
(iii) 43 tons for heavy-haul tractors. (‘‘GEM Phase 2, Version 4.0’’); IBR
complete vehicles. This may include
* * * * * approved for §§ 1037.150(x); 1037.520.
vehicles sold to secondary vehicle
State of certified energy (SOCE) manufacturers. (5) GEM’s MATLAB/Simulink
means the measured or onboard UBE (iii) You may ask us to allow you to Hardware-in-Loop model, Version 3.8,
performance at a specific point in its certify a vehicle as incomplete if you December 2020 (‘‘GEM HIL model 3.8’’);
lifetime, expressed as a percentage of manufacture the engines and sell the IBR approved for § 1037.150(x).
the certified usable battery energy. unassembled chassis components, as ■ 113. Revise appendix C to part 1037
* * * * * long as you do not produce and sell the to read as follows:
Ton means a short ton, which is body components necessary to complete Appendix C to Part 1037—Emission
exactly 2000 pounds. the vehicle. Control Identifiers
* * * * * * * * * *
Trailer means a piece of equipment This appendix identifies abbreviations for
■ 111. Amend § 1037.805 by: emission control information labels, as
designed for carrying cargo and for ■ a. Revising the introductory text; and required under § 1037.135.
being drawn by a tractor when coupled ■ b. In table 5 to paragraph (e), removing
to the tractor’s fifth wheel. the entries for ‘‘ECM’’, ‘‘FE’’, ‘‘FTP’’,
Vehicle Speed Limiters
* * * * * ‘‘LLC’’, ‘‘PHEV’’, and ‘‘SET’’. —VSL—Vehicle speed limiter
U.S.-directed production volume The revision reads as follows: —VSLS—‘‘Soft-top’’ vehicle speed limiter
means the number of vehicle units, —VSLE—Expiring vehicle speed limiter
subject to the requirements of this part, § 1037.805 Symbols, abbreviations, and —VSLD—Vehicle speed limiter with both
produced by a manufacturer for which acronyms. ‘‘soft-top’’ and expiration
the manufacturer has a reasonable The procedures in this part generally Idle Reduction Technology
assurance that sale was or will be made follow either the International System of —IRT5—Engine shutoff after 5 minutes or
to ultimate purchasers in the United Units (SI) or the United States less of idling
States. customary units, as detailed in NIST —IRTE—Expiring engine shutoff
364
Fmt 4701
Tires Distance Grade Distance Grade

—LRRA—Low rolling resistance tires (all) (m) (%) (m) (%)
—LRRD—Low rolling resistance tires (drive)
—LRRS—Low rolling resistance tires (steer) 3742 ...................................... 0.35 10900 .................................... ¥0.37
3818 ...................................... 0.90 10954 .................................... ¥0.7
Aerodynamic Components 3904 ...................................... 1.59 11098 .................................... ¥1.85
—ATS—Aerodynamic side skirt and/or fuel 3990 ...................................... 0.90 11242 .................................... ¥0.70
tank fairing 4066 ...................................... 0.35 11296 .................................... ¥0.37
—ARF—Aerodynamic roof fairing 4142 ...................................... 0 11384 .................................... 0
—ARFR—Adjustable height aerodynamic 4158 ...................................... 0 11394 .................................... 0
roof fairing 4224 ...................................... ¥0.10 11462 .................................... 0.34
—TGR—Gap reducing tractor fairing (tractor 4496 ...................................... ¥0.69 11588 .................................... 1.33
to trailer gap) 4578 ...................................... ¥0.97 11714 .................................... 0.34
4664 ...................................... ¥1.36 11782 .................................... 0
Other Components 4732 ...................................... ¥1.78 11792 .................................... 0
—ADVH—Vehicle includes advanced hybrid 4916 ...................................... ¥3.23 11840 .................................... ¥0.26
technology components 5100 ...................................... ¥1.78 11894 .................................... ¥0.70
—ADVO—Vehicle includes other advanced- 5168 ...................................... ¥1.36 11948 .................................... ¥0.26
technology components (i.e., non-hybrid 5254 ...................................... ¥0.97 11996 .................................... 0
system) 5336 ...................................... ¥0.69 12008 .................................... 0
—INV—Vehicle includes innovative (off- 5608 ...................................... ¥0.10 12114 .................................... 0.38
cycle) technology components 5674 ...................................... 0 12174 .................................... 0.69
—ATI—Automatic tire inflation system 5724 ...................................... 0 12358 .................................... 2.13
—TPMS—Tire pressure monitoring system 5808 ...................................... 0.10 12542 .................................... 0.69
■ 114. Revise appendix D to part 1037 5900 ...................................... 0.17 12602 .................................... 0.38
6122 ...................................... 0.38 12708 .................................... 0
to read as follows:
6314 ...................................... 0.58 12752 .................................... 0
Appendix D to Part 1037—Heavy-Duty 6454 ...................................... 0.77 12836 .................................... ¥0.10
Grade Profile for Steady-State Test 6628 ...................................... 1.09 12928 .................................... ¥0.17
Cycles 6714 ...................................... 1.29 13150 .................................... ¥0.38
6838 ...................................... 1.66 13342 .................................... ¥0.58
The following table identifies a grade 6964 ...................................... 2.14 13482 .................................... ¥0.77
profile for operating vehicles over the 7040 ...................................... 2.57 13656 .................................... ¥1.09
highway cruise cycles specified in subpart F 7112 ...................................... 3.00 13742 .................................... ¥1.29
of this part. Determine intermediate values 7164 ...................................... 3.27 13866 .................................... ¥1.66
by linear interpolation. 7202 ...................................... 3.69 13992 .................................... ¥2.14
7292 ...................................... 5.01 14068 .................................... ¥2.57
Distance Grade 7382 ...................................... 3.69 14140 .................................... ¥3.00
(m) (%) 7420 ...................................... 3.27 14192 .................................... ¥3.27
7472 ...................................... 3.00 14230 .................................... ¥3.69
0 ............................................ 0 7544 ...................................... 2.57 14320 .................................... ¥5.01
402 ........................................ 0 7620 ...................................... 2.14 14410 .................................... ¥3.69
804 ........................................ 0.5 7746 ...................................... 1.66 14448 .................................... ¥3.27
1206 ...................................... 0 7870 ...................................... 1.29 14500 .................................... ¥3.00
1210 ...................................... 0 7956 ...................................... 1.09 14572 .................................... ¥2.57
1222 ...................................... ¥0.10 8130 ...................................... 0.77 14648 .................................... ¥2.14
1234 ...................................... 0 8270 ...................................... 0.58 14774 .................................... ¥1.66
1244 ...................................... 0 8462 ...................................... 0.38 14898 .................................... ¥1.29
1294 ...................................... 0.36 8684 ...................................... 0.17 14984 .................................... ¥1.09
1344 ...................................... 0 8776 ...................................... 0.10 15158 .................................... ¥0.77
1354 ...................................... 0 8860 ...................................... 0 15298 .................................... ¥0.58
1408 ...................................... ¥0.28 8904 ...................................... 0 15490 .................................... ¥0.38
1504 ...................................... ¥1.04 9010 ...................................... ¥0.38 15712 .................................... ¥0.17
1600 ...................................... ¥0.28 9070 ...................................... ¥0.69 15804 .................................... ¥0.10
1654 ...................................... 0 9254 ...................................... ¥2.13 15888 .................................... 0
1666 ...................................... 0 9438 ...................................... ¥0.69 15938 .................................... 0
1792 ...................................... 0.39 9498 ...................................... ¥0.38 16004 .................................... 0.10
1860 ...................................... 0.66 9604 ...................................... 0 16276 .................................... 0.69
1936 ...................................... 1.15 9616 ...................................... 0 16358 .................................... 0.97
2098 ...................................... 2.44 9664 ...................................... 0.26 16444 .................................... 1.36
2260 ...................................... 1.15 9718 ...................................... 0.70 16512 .................................... 1.78
2336 ...................................... 0.66 9772 ...................................... 0.26 16696 .................................... 3.23
2404 ...................................... 0.39 9820 ...................................... 0 16880 .................................... 1.78
2530 ...................................... 0 9830 ...................................... 0 16948 .................................... 1.36
2548 ...................................... 0 9898 ...................................... ¥0.34 17034 .................................... 0.97
2732 ...................................... ¥0.46 10024 .................................... ¥1.33 17116 .................................... 0.69
2800 ...................................... ¥0.69 10150 .................................... ¥0.34 17388 .................................... 0.10
2880 ...................................... ¥1.08 10218 .................................... 0 17454 .................................... 0
2948 ...................................... ¥1.53 10228 .................................... 0 17470 .................................... 0
3100 ...................................... ¥2.75 10316 .................................... 0.37 17546 .................................... ¥0.35

3252 ...................................... ¥1.53 10370 .................................... 0.70 17622 .................................... ¥0.90
3320 ...................................... ¥1.08 10514 .................................... 1.85 17708 .................................... ¥1.59
3400 ...................................... ¥0.69 10658 .................................... 0.70 17794 .................................... ¥0.90
3468 ...................................... ¥0.46 10712 .................................... 0.37 17870 .................................... ¥0.35
3652 ...................................... 0 10800 .................................... 0 17946 .................................... 0
3666 ...................................... 0 10812 .................................... 0 17960 .................................... 0
365
Distance Grade B of this part for engines not relate the alternate detection principle
(m) (%) participating in the ABT program of this to the specified detection principle over
subpart (the ‘‘otherwise applicable the expected concentration ranges for
18144 .................................... 0.46 standard’’).
NO, NO2, and interference species. For
18212 .................................... 0.69 FEL = the family emission limit for the
engine family, in grams per kilowatt- a request to use a different PM
18292 .................................... 1.08
18360 .................................... 1.53 hour. measurement procedure, you should
18512 .................................... 2.75 Volume = the number of engines eligible to explain the principles by which the
18664 .................................... 1.53 participate in the averaging, banking, alternate procedure quantifies
18732 .................................... 1.08 and trading program within the given particulate mass similarly to the
18812 .................................... 0.69 engine family during the model year, as specified procedures.
18880 .................................... 0.46 described in paragraph (c) of this section.
19064 .................................... 0
* * * * *
AvgPR = the average value of maximum
19082 .................................... 0 engine power values for the engine ■ 121. Amend § 1065.170 by revising
19208 .................................... ¥0.39 configurations within an engine family, paragraph (c)(1)(i) to read as follows:
19276 .................................... ¥0.66 calculated on a sales-weighted basis, in
19352 .................................... ¥1.15 kilowatts. § 1065.170 Batch sampling for gaseous
19514 .................................... ¥2.44 UL = the useful life for the given engine and PM constituents.
19676 .................................... ¥1.15 family, in hours. * * * * *
19752 .................................... ¥0.66 (c) * * *
19820 .................................... ¥0.39 * * * * *
(1) * * *
19946 .................................... 0
PART 1054—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS (i) If you expect that a filter’s total
19958 .................................... 0
20012 .................................... 0.28 FROM NEW, SMALL NONROAD surface concentration of PM will exceed
20108 .................................... 1.04 SPARK-IGNITION ENGINES AND 400 mg, assuming a 38 mm diameter
20204 .................................... 0.28 EQUIPMENT filter stain area, for a given test interval,
20258 .................................... 0 you may use filter media with a
20268 .................................... 0 ■ 117. The authority citation for part minimum initial collection efficiency of
20318 .................................... ¥0.36 1054 continues to read as follows: 98%; otherwise you must use a filter
20368 .................................... 0 media with a minimum initial
20378 .................................... 0 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
collection efficiency of 99.7%.
20390 .................................... 0.10 ■ 118. Amend § 1054.501 by revising
20402 .................................... 0 Collection efficiency must be measured
paragraph (b)(7) to read as follows: as described in ASTM D2986
20406 .................................... 0
20808 .................................... ¥0.50 § 1054.501 How do I run a valid emission (incorporated by reference, see
21210 .................................... 0 test? § 1065.1010), though you may rely on
21612 .................................... 0 * * * * * the sample-media manufacturer’s
(b) * * * measurements reflected in their product
PART 1039—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS (7) Determine your test fuel’s carbon ratings to show that you meet the
FROM NEW AND IN-USE NONROAD mass fraction, wc, using a calculation requirement in this paragraph (c)(1)(i).
COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES based on fuel properties as described in * * * * *
40 CFR 1065.655(d); however, you must ■ 122. Amend § 1065.190 by revising
■ 115. The authority citation for part measure fuel properties for a and b paragraph (b) to read as follows:
1039 continues to read as follows: rather than using the default values
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. specified in 40 CFR 1065.655(e). § 1065.190 PM-stabilization and weighing
environments for gravimetric analysis.
■ 116. Amend § 1039.705 by revising * * * * *
* * * * *
PART 1065—ENGINE-TESTING (b) We recommend that you keep both
§ 1039.705 How do I generate and PROCEDURES the stabilization and the weighing
calculate emission credits? environments free of ambient
* * * * * ■ 119. The authority citation for part contaminants, such as dust, aerosols, or
(b) For each participating family, 1065 continues to read as follows: semi-volatile material that could
calculate positive or negative emission Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. contaminate PM samples. We
credits relative to the otherwise recommend that these environments
applicable emission standard. Calculate conform with an ‘‘as-built’’ Class Six
paragraph (d)(1) to read as follows:
positive emission credits for a family clean room specification according to
that has an FEL below the standard. § 1065.12 Approval of alternate ISO 14644–1 (incorporated by reference,
Calculate negative emission credits for a procedures. see § 1065.1010); however, we also
family that has an FEL above the * * * * * recommend that you deviate from ISO
standard. Sum your positive and (d) * * * 14644–1 as necessary to minimize air
negative credits for the model year (1) Theoretical basis. Give a brief motion that might affect weighing. We
before rounding. Round the sum of technical description explaining why recommend maximum air-supply and
emission credits to the nearest kilogram you believe the proposed alternate air-return velocities of 0.05 m/s in the
(kg), using consistent units throughout procedure should result in emission weighing environment.
the following equation: measurements equivalent to those using * * * * *
Emission credits (kg) = (Std¥FEL) · the specified procedure. You may ■ 123. Amend § 1065.210 by revising
Volume · AvgPR · UL · 10¥3 include equations, figures, and paragraph (a) to read as follows:
references. You should consider the full
Eq. 1039.705–1 range of parameters that may affect § 1065.210 Work input and output sensors.
Where: equivalence. For example, for a request (a) Application. Use instruments as
Std = the emission standard, in grams per to use a different NOX measurement specified in this section to measure
kilowatt-hour, that applies under subpart procedure, you should theoretically work inputs and outputs during engine
366
Fmt 4701
operation. We recommend that you use judgment to estimate any work- power as the brake power in emission
sensors, transducers, and meters that conversion losses in a way that avoids calculations.
meet the specifications in § 1065.205. overestimation of total work. For (3) If your engine includes an
Note that your overall systems for example, if it is impractical to externally powered electrical heater to
measuring work inputs and outputs instrument the shaft of an exhaust heat engine exhaust, assume an
must meet the linearity verifications in turbine generating electrical work, you electrical generator efficiency of 0.67
§ 1065.307. In all cases, ensure that you may decide to measure its converted (h =0.67) to account for the work needed
are able to accurately demonstrate electrical work. As another example, to run the heater.
compliance with the applicable you may decide to measure the tractive (4) Do not underestimate any work
standards in this chapter. The following (i.e., electrical output) power of a conversion efficiencies for any
additional provisions apply related to locomotive, rather than the brake power components outside the system
work inputs and outputs: of the locomotive engine. For measuring boundary that do not return work into
(1) We recommend that you measure the system boundary. And do not
tractive power based on electrical
work inputs and outputs where they overestimate any work conversion
output, divide the electrical work by
cross the system boundary as shown in efficiencies for components outside the
accurate values of electrical generator system boundary that return work into
figure 1 to paragraph (a)(5) of this efficiency (h <1), or assume an
section. The system boundary is the system boundary.
efficiency of 1 (h =1), which would over- (5) Figure 1 to this paragraph (a)(5)
different for air-cooled engines than for estimate brake-specific emissions. For
liquid-cooled engines. follows:
the example of using locomotive tractive
(2) For measurements involving work power with a generator efficiency of 1 Figure 1 to paragraph (A)(5) of
conversion relative to a system (h =1), this means using the tractive § 1065.210: Work Inputs, Outputs, and
boundary use good engineering System Boundaries
* * * * * § 1065.255 H2 measurement devices. (2) Raman spectrometer.

(a) Component requirements. We (c) Interference verification. Certain
■ 124. Revise the undesignated center
recommend that you use an analyzer compounds can positively interfere with
heading preceding § 1065.250 to read as magnetic sector mass spectroscopy and
that meets the specifications in
follows: raman spectroscopy by causing a
§ 1065.205. Note that your system must
Hydrocarbon, H2, and H2O meet the linearity verification in response similar to H2. Use good
Measurements § 1065.307. engineering judgment to determine

ER22AP24.221</GPH>
(b) Instrument types. You may use any interference species when performing
■ 125. Add §§ 1065.255 and 1065.257
of the following analyzers to measure interference verification. In the case of
under newly revised undesignated
H2: raman spectroscopy, determine
center heading ‘‘Hydrocarbon, H2, and (1) Magnetic sector mass interference species that are appropriate
H2O Measurements’’ to read as follows:
ER22AP24.220</GPH>
spectrometer. for each H2 infrared absorption band, or
367
Fmt 4701
you may identify the interference instrument manufacturer. For each with FTIR analyzers by causing a
species based on the instrument analyzer determine the H2O infrared response similar to the hydrocarbon
manufacturer’s recommendations. absorption band. Determine interference species of interest. When running the
species under this paragraph (d)(2) that interference verification for these
§ 1065.257 H2O measurement devices. are appropriate for each H2O infrared analyzers, use interference species as
(a) Component requirements. We absorption band, or you may identify follows:
recommend that you use an analyzer the interference species based on the (1) The interference species for CH4
that meets the specifications in instrument manufacturer’s are CO2, H2O, and C2H6.
§ 1065.205. Note that your system must recommendations. (2) The interference species for C2H6
meet the linearity verification in ■ 126. Revise § 1065.266 to read as are CO2, H2O, and CH4.
§ 1065.307 with a humidity generator follows: (3) The interference species for other
meeting the requirements of measured hydrocarbon species are CO2,
§ 1065.750(a)(6). § 1065.266 Fourier transform infrared H2O, CH4, and C2H6.
(b) Measurement principles. Use analyzer.
appropriate analytical procedures for (a) Application. For engines that run paragraph (b) to read as follows:
interpretation of infrared spectra. For only on natural gas, you may use a
example, EPA Test Method 320 (see Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) § 1065.267 Gas chromatograph with a
§ 1065.266(b)) and ASTM D6348 analyzer to measure nonmethane flame ionization detector.
(incorporated by reference, see hydrocarbon (NMHC) and nonmethane * * * * *
§ 1065.1010) are considered valid nonethane hydrocarbon (NMNEHC) for (b) Component requirements. We
methods for spectral interpretation. You continuous sampling. You may use an recommend that you use a GC–FID that
must use heated analyzers that maintain FTIR analyzer with any gaseous-fueled meets the specifications in § 1065.205
all surfaces that are exposed to engine, including dual-fuel and flexible- and that the measurement be done
emissions at a temperature of (110 to fuel engines, to measure CH4 and C2H6, according to SAE J1151 (incorporated by
202) °C. for either batch or continuous sampling reference, see § 1065.1010). The GC–FID
(c) Instrument types. You may use any (for subtraction from THC). must meet the linearity verification in
of the following analyzers to measure (b) Component requirements. We § 1065.307.
H2O: recommend that you use an FTIR ■ 128. Revise the undesignated center
(1) Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) analyzer that meets the specifications in heading preceding § 1065.270 to read as
analyzer. § 1065.205. follows:
(2) Laser infrared analyzer. Examples (c) Measurement principles. Note that
of laser infrared analyzers are pulsed- your FTIR-based system must meet the NOX, N2O, and NH3 Measurements
mode high-resolution narrow band mid- linearity verification in § 1065.307. Use ■ 129. Amend § 1065.270 by revising
infrared analyzers and modulated appropriate analytical procedures for the section heading to read as follows:
continuous wave high-resolution interpretation of infrared spectra. For
narrow band near or mid-infrared example, EPA Test Method 320 in 40 § 1065.270 Chemiluminescent NOX
analyzers. CFR part 63, appendix A, and ASTM analyzer.
(d) Interference verification. Certain D6348 (incorporated by reference, see * * * * *
compounds can interfere with FTIR and § 1065.1010) are considered valid ■ 130. Amend § 1065.272 by revising
laser infrared analyzers by causing a methods for spectral interpretation. You the section heading to read as follows:
response similar to water. Perform must use heated FTIR analyzers that
interference verification for the maintain all surfaces that are exposed to § 1065.272 Nondispersive ultraviolet NOX
following interference species: emissions at a temperature of (110 to analyzer.
(1) Perform CO2 interference 202) °C. * * * * *
verification for FTIR analyzers using the (d) Hydrocarbon species for NMHC ■ 131. Amend § 1065.275 by revising
procedures of § 1065.357. Use good and NMNEHC additive determination. paragraphs (b)(2) and (c) to read as
engineering judgment to determine To determine NMNEHC, measure follows:
other interference species for FTIR ethene, ethyne, propane, propene,
analyzers when performing interference butane, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, § 1065.275 N2O measurement devices.
verification. Consider at least CO, NO, formic acid, and methanol. To * * * * *
C2H4, and C7H8. Perform interference determine NMHC, measure ethane in (b) * * *
verifications using the procedures of addition to those same hydrocarbon (2) Fourier transform infrared (FTIR)
§ 1065.357, replacing occurances of CO2 species. Determine NMHC and analyzer. Use appropriate analytical
with each targeted interference species. NMNEHC as described in procedures for interpretation of infrared
Determine interference species under § 1065.660(b)(4) and (c)(3). spectra. For example, EPA Test Method
this paragraph (d)(1) that are (e) NMHC and NMNEHC 320 in 40 CFR part 63, appendix A, and
appropriate for each H2O infrared determination from subtraction of CH4 ASTM D6348 (incorporated by
absorption band, or you may identify and C2H6 from THC. Determine NMHC reference, see § 1065.1010) are
the interference species based on the from subtraction of CH4 from THC as considered valid methods for spectral
instrument manufacturer’s described in § 1065.660(b)(3) and interpretation.
recommendations. NMNEHC from subtraction of CH4 and * * * * *
(2) Perform interference verification C2H6 as described § 1065.660(c)(2). (c) Interference verification. Certain
for laser infrared analyzers using the Determine CH4 as described in compounds can positively interfere with
procedures of § 1065.375. Use good § 1065.660(d)(2) and C2H6 as described NDIR, FTIR, laser infrared analyzers,
engineering judgment to determine § 1065.660(e). and photoacoustic analyzers by causing
interference species for laser infrared (f) Interference verification. Perform a response similar to N2O. Perform
analyzers. Note that interference species interference verification for FTIR interference verification for NDIR, FTIR,
are dependent on the H2O infrared analyzers using the procedures of laser infrared analyzers, and
absorption band chosen by the § 1065.366. Certain species can interfere photoacoustic analyzers using the
368
Fmt 4701
procedures of § 1065.375. Interference mid-infrared region where NH3 and (b) Component requirements. We
verification is not required for GC–ECD. other nitrogen compounds can recommend that you use a ZrO2
Perform interference verification for the effectively absorb the laser’s energy. analyzer that meets the specifications in
following interference species: (c) Sampling system. Minimize NH3 § 1065.205. Note that your ZrO2-based
(1) The interference species for NDIR losses and sampling artifacts related to system must meet the linearity
analyzers are CO, CO2, H2O, CH4, and NH3 adsorbing to surfaces by using verification in § 1065.307.
SO2. Note that interference species, with sampling system components (sample ■ 137. Amend § 1065.315 by revising
the exception of H2O, are dependent on lines, prefilters and valves) made of paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) to read as
the N2O infrared absorption band stainless steel or PTFE heated to (110 to follows:
chosen by the instrument manufacturer. 202) °C. If surface temperatures exceed
For each analyzer determine the N2O ≥130 °C, take steps to prevent any DEF § 1065.315 Pressure, temperature, and
infrared absorption band. For each N2O in the sample gas from thermally dewpoint calibration.
infrared absorption band, use good decomposing and hydrolyzing to form (a) * * *
engineering judgment to determine NH3. Use a sample line that is as short (2) Temperature. We recommend
which interference species to evaluate as practical. digital dry-block or stirred-liquid
for interference verification. (d) Interference verification. Certain temperature calibrators, with data
(2) Use good engineering judgment to species can positively interfere with logging capabilities to minimize
determine interference species for FTIR NDUV, FTIR, and laser infrared transcription errors. We recommend
and laser infrared analyzers. Note that analyzers by causing a response similar using calibration reference quantities for
interference species, with the exception to NH3. Perform interference verification absolute temperature that are NIST-
of H2O, are dependent on the N2O as follows: traceable within ±0.5% uncertainty. You
infrared absorption band chosen by the (1) Perform SO2 and H2O interference may perform linearity verification for
instrument manufacturer. For each verification for NDUV analyzers using temperature measurement systems with
analyzer determine the N2O infrared the procedures of § 1065.372, replacing thermocouples, RTDs, and thermistors
absorption band. Determine interference occurances of NOX with NH3. NDUV by removing the sensor from the system
species under this paragraph (c)(2) that analyzers must have combined and using a simulator in its place. Use
are appropriate for each N2O infrared interference that is within (0.0 ±2.0) a NIST-traceable simulator that is
absorption band, or you may identify mmol/mol. independently calibrated and, as
the interference species based on the (2) Perform interference verification appropriate, cold-junction compensated.
instrument manufacturer’s for FTIR and laser infrared analyzers The simulator uncertainty scaled to
recommendations. using the procedures of § 1065.377. Use absolute temperature must be less than
(3) The interference species for good engineering judgment to determine 0.5% of Tmax. If you use this option, you
photoacoustic analyzers are CO, CO2, interference species. Note that must use sensors that the supplier states
and H2O. interference species, with the exception are accurate to better than 0.5% of Tmax
■ 132. Add § 1065.277 under newly of H2O, are dependent on the NH3 compared with their standard
revised undesignated center heading infrared absorption band chosen by the calibration curve.
‘‘NOX, N2O, AND NH3 instrument manufacturer. Determine (3) Dewpoint. We recommend a
MEASUREMENTS’’ to read as follows: interference species under this minimum of three different
paragraph (d)(2) that are appropriate for temperature-equilibrated and
§ 1065.277 NH3 measurement devices. each NH3 infrared absorption band, or temperature-monitored calibration salt
(a) General component requirements. you may identify the interference solutions in containers that seal
We recommend that you use an analyzer species based on the instrument completely around the dewpoint sensor.
that meets the specifications in manufacturer’s recommendations. We recommend using calibration
§ 1065.205. Note that your system must ■ 133. Revise the undesignated center reference quantities for absolute
meet the linearity verification in heading preceding § 1065.280 to read as dewpoint temperature that are NIST-
§ 1065.307. follows: traceable within ±0.5% uncertainty.
(b) Instrument types. You may use any
of the following analyzers to measure O2 And Air–to–Fuel Ratio * * * * *
NH3: Measurements ■ 138. Amend § 1065.341 by revising
(1) Nondispersive ultraviolet (NDUV) paragraph (c) introductory text to read
analyzer. as follows:
(2) Fourier transform infrared (FTIR)
§ 1065.341 CVS and PFD flow verification
analyzer. Use appropriate analytical § 1065.280 Paramagnetic and (propane check).
procedures for interpretation of infrared magnetopneumatic O2 detection analyzers.
spectra. For example, EPA Test Method * * * * *
* * * * *
320 (see § 1065.266(c)) and ASTM (b) Component requirements. We (c) If you performed the vacuum-side
D6348 (incorporated by reference, see recommend that you use a PMD or MPD leak verification of the HC sampling
§ 1065.1010) are considered valid analyzer that meets the specifications in system as described in paragraph (b)(8)
methods for spectral interpretation. § 1065.205. Note that it must meet the of this section, you may use the HC
(3) Laser infrared analyzer. Examples linearity verification in § 1065.307. contamination procedure in
of laser infrared analyzers are pulsed- § 1065.520(g) to verify HC
■ 135. Remove the undesignated center
mode high-resolution narrow-band mid- contamination. Otherwise, zero, span,
heading ‘‘Air-to-Fuel Ratio and verify contamination of the HC
infrared analyzers, modulated Measurements’’ preceding § 1065.284.
continuous wave high-resolution sampling system, as follows:

narrow band near and mid-infrared * * * * *
analyzers, and modulated continuous- ■ 139. Amend § 1065.350 by:
wave high-resolution near-infrared § 1065.284 Zirconium dioxide (ZrO2) air- ■ a. Revising paragraph (b);
analyzers. A quantum cascade laser, for fuel ratio and O2 analyzer. ■ b. Removing the undesignated
example, can emit coherent light in the * * * * * paragraph following paragraph (b);
369
Fmt 4701
■ c. Revising paragraph (d)(7); and (b) Measurement principles. CO2 can ■ 142. Amend § 1065.360 by revising
■ d. Adding paragraph (d)(8). interfere with an FTIR analyzer’s paragraphs (a)(4), (b), (c), (d)
The revisions and addition read as response to H2O. If the FTIR analyzer introductory text, and (d)(12) to read as
follows: uses compensation algorithms that follows:
utilize measurements of other gases to
§ 1065.350 H2O interference verification for § 1065.360 FID optimization and
CO2 NDIR analyzers.
meet this interference verification, a verification.
correct result depends on
* * * * * simultaneously conducting these other (a) * * *
(b) Measurement principles. H2O can (4) You may determine the methane
measurements to test the compensation
interfere with an NDIR analyzer’s (CH4) and ethane (C2H6) response factors
algorithms during the analyzer
response to CO2. If the NDIR analyzer as a function of the molar water
interference verification.
uses compensation algorithms that concentration in the raw or diluted
(c) System requirements. An H2O exhaust. If you choose the option in this
utilize measurements of other gases to
FTIR analyzer must have a CO2 paragraph (a)(4), generate and verify the
meet this interference verification, a
interference that is within (0.0 ± 0.4) humidity level (or fraction) as described
correct result depends on
mmol/mol, though we strongly in § 1065.365(g).
simultaneously conducting these other
recommend a lower interference that is (b) Calibration. Use good engineering
measurements to test the compensation
within (0.0 ± 0.2) mmol/mol. judgment to develop a calibration
algorithms during the analyzer
(d) Procedure. Perform the procedure, such as one based on the
interference verification as follows: FID-analyzer manufacturer’s
* * * * * (1) Start, operate, zero, and span the
(d) * * * instructions and recommended
H2O FTIR analyzer as you would before frequency for calibrating the FID.
(7) Operate the analyzer to get a an emission test.
reading for CO2 concentration and Alternately, you may remove system
(2) Use a CO2 span gas that meets the components for off-site calibration. For
record results for 30 seconds. Calculate specifications of § 1065.750 and a
the arithmetic mean of this data. a FID that measures THC, calibrate
concentration that is approximately the using C3H8 calibration gases that meet
(8) The analyzer meets the
maximum CO2 concentration expected the specifications of § 1065.750. For a
interference verification if the result of
during emission testing. FID that measures CH4, calibrate using
paragraph (d)(7) of this section meets
(3) Introduce the CO2 test gas into the CH4 calibration gases that meet the
the tolerance in paragraph (c) of this
sample system. specifications of § 1065.750. We
section.
(4) Allow time for the analyzer recommend FID analyzer zero and span
* * * * * response to stabilize. Stabilization time gases that contain approximately the
■ 140. Amend § 1065.355 by revising may include time to purge the transfer flow-weighted mean concentration of O2
paragraphs (b) and (d)(7) to read as line and to account for analyzer expected during testing. If you use a FID
follows: response. to measure CH4 downstream of a
§ 1065.355 H2O and CO2 interference
(5) Operate the analyzer to get a nonmethane cutter (NMC), you may
verification for CO NDIR analyzers. reading for H2O concentration and calibrate that FID using CH4 calibration
record results for 30 seconds. Calculate gases with the NMC. Regardless of the
* * * * *
the arithmetic mean of these data. calibration gas composition, calibrate on
(b) Measurement principles. H2O and
CO2 can positively interfere with an (6) The analyzer meets the a carbon number basis of one (C1). For
NDIR analyzer by causing a response interference verification if the result of example, if you use a C3H8 span gas of
similar to CO. If the NDIR analyzer uses paragraph (d)(5) of this section meets concentration 200 mmol/mol, span the
compensation algorithms that utilize the tolerance in paragraph (c) of this FID to respond with a value of 600
measurements of other gases to meet section. mmol/mol. As another example, if you
this interference verification, a correct (e) Exceptions. The following use a CH4 span gas with a concentration
result depends on simultaneously exceptions apply: of 200 mmol/mol, span the FID to
conducting these other measurements to (1) You may omit this verification for respond with a value of 200 mmol/mol.
test the compensation algorithms during CO2 for engines operating on fuels other (c) THC FID response optimization.
the analyzer interference verification. than carbon-containing fuels. This procedure is only for FID analyzers
(2) You may omit this verification if that measure THC. Use good
* * * * * you can show by engineering analysis engineering judgment for initial
(d) * * * that for your H2O sampling system and instrument start-up and basic operating
(7) Operate the analyzer to get a
your emission-calculation procedures, adjustment using FID fuel and zero air.
reading for CO concentration and record
the CO2 interference for your H2O FTIR Heated FIDs must be within their
results for 30 seconds. Calculate the
analyzer always affects your brake- required operating temperature ranges.
arithmetic mean of this data.
specific emission results within ±0.5% Optimize FID response at the most
* * * * * of each of the applicable standards in common analyzer range expected during
■ 141. Add an undesignated center this chapter. This specification also emission testing. Optimization involves
heading and § 1065.357 after § 1065.355 applies for vehicle testing, except that it adjusting flows and pressures of FID
to read as follows: relates to emission results in g/mile or fuel, burner air, and sample to minimize
H2O Measurements g/kilometer. response variations to various
(3) You may use an H2O FTIR hydrocarbon species in the exhaust. Use
§ 1065.357 CO2 interference verification for analyzer that you determine does not good engineering judgment to trade off
H2O FTIR analyzers. meet this verification, as long as you try peak FID response to propane
(a) Scope and frequency. If you to correct the problem and the calibration gases to achieve minimal
measure H2O using an FTIR analyzer, measurement deficiency does not response variations to different
verify the amount of CO2 interference adversely affect your ability to show hydrocarbon species. For an example of
after initial analyzer installation and that engines comply with all applicable trading off response to propane for
after major maintenance. emission standards. relative responses to other hydrocarbon
370
Fmt 4701
species, see SAE 770141 (incorporated of paragraph (d), (e), or (f) of this this procedure on the highest range used
by reference, see § 1065.1010). section. As detailed in this section, for emission testing.
Determine the optimum flow rates and/ these penetration fractions may be (2) Start, operate, and optimize the
or pressures for FID fuel, burner air, and determined as a combination of NMC NMC according to the manufacturer’s
sample and record them for future penetration fractions and FID analyzer instructions, including any temperature
reference. response factors, depending on your optimization.
(d) THC FID CH4 response factor particular NMC and FID analyzer (3) Confirm that the FID analyzer
determination. This procedure is only configuration. Perform this verification meets all the specifications of
for FID analyzers that measure THC. after installing the NMC and repeat this § 1065.360.
Since FID analyzers generally have a verification within 185 days of testing. (4) Start and operate the FID analyzer
different response to CH4 versus C3H8, Note that because NMCs can deteriorate according to the manufacturer’s
determine the THC–FID analyzer’s CH4 rapidly and without warning if they are instructions.
response factor, RFCH4[THC–FID], after FID operated outside of certain ranges of gas (5) Zero and span the FID with the
optimization. Use the most recent concentrations and outside of certain NMC as you would during emission
RFCH4[THC–FID] measured according to temperature ranges, good engineering testing. Span the FID through the NMC
this section in the calculations for HC judgment may dictate that you by using CH4 span gas.
determine an NMC’s penetration (6) Introduce the C2H6 analytical gas
determination described in § 1065.660
fractions more frequently. Use the most mixture upstream of the NMC. Use good
to compensate for CH4 response.
recently determined penetration fraction engineering judgment to address the
Determine RFCH4[THC–FID] as follows,
from this section to calculate HC effect of hydrocarbon contamination if
noting that you do not determine
emissions according to § 1065.660 as your point of introduction is vastly
RFCH4[THC–FID] for FIDs that are
applicable. different from the point of zero/span gas
calibrated and spanned using CH4 with
(b) Measurement principles. An NMC introduction.
an NMC:
is a heated catalyst that removes (7) Allow time for the analyzer
* * * * * response to stabilize. Stabilization time
nonmethane hydrocarbons from an
(12) You may determine the response may include time to purge the NMC and
exhaust sample stream before the FID
factor as a function of molar water to account for the analyzer’s response.
analyzer measures the remaining
concentration using the following (8) While the analyzer measures a
hydrocarbon concentration. An ideal
procedures and use this response factor stable concentration, record 30 seconds
NMC would have a CH4 penetration
to account for the CH4 response for of sampled data. Calculate the
fraction, PFCH4, of 1.000, and the
NMHC determination described in arithmetic mean of the analytical gas
penetration fraction for all other
§ 1065.660(b)(2)(iii): mixture.
nonmethane hydrocarbons would be
(i) Humidify the CH4 span gas as (9) Calculate a reference concentration
0.000, as represented by PFC2H6. The
described in § 1065.365(g) and repeat of C2H6, by converting C2H6 to a C1 basis
emission calculations in § 1065.660 use
the steps in paragraphs (d)(7) through the measured values from this and adjusted for water content, if
(9) of this section until measurements verification to account for less than necessary. Calculate the combined C2H6
are complete for each setpoint in the ideal NMC performance. response factor and penetration fraction,
selected range. (c) System requirements. We do not RFPFC2H6[NMC-FID], by dividing the mean
(ii) Divide each mean measured CH4 require that you limit NMC penetration C2H6 concentration from paragraph
concentration by the recorded span fractions to a certain range. However, (d)(8) of this section by the reference
concentration of the CH4 calibration gas, we recommend that you optimize an concentration of C2H6. For any gaseous-
adjusted for water content, to determine NMC by adjusting its temperature to fueled engine, including dual-fuel and
the FID analyzer’s CH4 response factor, achieve a PFC2H6 <0.02, as determined flexible-fuel engines, you must
RFCH4[THC–FID]. by paragraph (d), (e), or (f) of this determine RFPFC2H6[NMC-FID] as a
(iii) Use the CH4 response factors at section, as applicable, using dry gases. function of the molar water
the different setpoints to create a If adjusting NMC temperature does not concentration in the raw or diluted
functional relationship between result in achieving the recommended exhaust using paragraph (g) of this
response factor and molar water PFC2H6 level, we recommend that you section. Use RFPFC2H6[NMC-FID] at the
concentration, downstream of the last replace the catalyst material. Note that, different setpoints to create a functional
sample dryer if any sample dryers are if we use an NMC for testing, we will relationship between RFPFC2H6[NMC-FID]
present. optimize it to achieve a PFC2H6 <0.02. and molar water concentration,
(iv) Use this functional relationship to (d) Procedure for a FID calibrated downstream of the last sample dryer if
determine the response factor during an with the NMC. The following procedure any sample dryers are present. Use this
emission test. describes the recommended method for functional relationship to determine the
* * * * * verifying NMC performance and the combined response factor and
■ 143. Revise § 1065.365 to read as required method for any gaseous-fueled penetration fraction during the emission
follows: engine, including dual-fuel and flexible- test. For any other engine you may use
fuel engines. the same procedure or you may
§ 1065.365 Nonmethane cutter penetration (1) Select CH4 and C2H6 analytical gas determine RFPFC2H6[NMC-FID] at zero
fractions and NMC FID response factors. mixtures and ensure that both mixtures molar water concentration.
(a) Scope and frequency. If you use a meet the specifications of § 1065.750. (10) For any gaseous-fueled engine,
FID analyzer and an NMC to measure Select a CH4 concentration that you including dual-fuel and flexible-fuel
methane (CH4), verify that the catalytic would use for spanning the FID during engines, repeat the steps in paragraphs
activity of the NMC has not deteriorated emission testing and select a C2H6 (d)(6) through (9) of this section, but
as described in this section. Determine concentration that is typical of the peak with the CH4 analytical gas mixture
the NMC’s penetration fractions (PF) of NMHC concentration expected at the instead of C2H6 and determine
CH4 and ethane (C2H6) and, if hydrocarbon standard or equal to the RFPFCH4[NMC-FID] as a function of the
applicable, the FID analyzer response THC analyzer’s span value. For CH4 molar water concentration in the raw or
factors using the appropriate procedures analyzers with multiple ranges, perform diluted exhaust using paragraph (g) of
371
Fmt 4701
this section. Note that RFPFCH4[NMC-FID] arithmetic mean of the analytical gas (8) While the analyzer measures a
is set equal to 1.0 only for zero molar mixture. stable concentration, record 30 seconds
water concentration. For any other (9) Reroute the flow path to bypass of sampled data. Calculate the
engine you may use the same procedure, the NMC, introduce the C2H6 analytical arithmetic mean of the analytical gas
or you may set RFPFCH4[NMC-FID] equal to gas mixture, and repeat the steps in mixture.
1.0. paragraphs (e)(7) and (8) of this section. (9) Divide the mean C2H6
(11) Use RFPFC2H6[NMC-FID] and (10) Divide the mean C2H6 concentration by the reference
RFPFCH4[NMC-FID] in emission concentration measured through the concentration of C2H6, converted to a C1
calculations according to NMC by the mean C2H6 concentration basis. The result is the combined C2H6
§ 1065.660(b)(2)(i) and (d)(1)(i). measured after bypassing the NMC. The response factor and C2H6 penetration
(e) Procedure for a FID calibrated with result is the C2H6 penetration fraction, fraction, RFPFC2H6[NMC-FID]. Use this
propane, bypassing the NMC. If you use PFC2H6[NMC-FID]. Use this penetration combined C2H6 response factor and
a single FID for THC and CH4 fraction according to § 1065.660(b)(2)(ii) penetration fraction according to
determination with an NMC that is and (d)(1)(ii). § 1065.660(b)(2)(iii) and (d)(1)(iii).
calibrated with propane, C3H8, by (11) Repeat the steps in paragraphs (10) Introduce the CH4 analytical gas
bypassing the NMC, determine its (e)(6) through (10) of this section, but mixture upstream of the NMC. Use good
penetration fractions, PFC2H6[NMC-FID] with the CH4 analytical gas mixture engineering judgment to address the
and PFCH4[NMC-FID], as follows: instead of C2H6. The result will be the effect of hydrocarbon contamination if
(1) Select CH4 and C2H6 analytical gas CH4 penetration fraction, PFCH4[NMC-FID]. your point of introduction is vastly
mixtures and ensure that both mixtures Use this penetration fraction according different from the point of zero/span gas
meet the specifications of § 1065.750. to § 1065.660(b)(2)(ii) or § 1065.665, as introduction.
(11) Allow time for the analyzer
Select a CH4 concentration that you applicable.
response to stabilize. Stabilization time
would use for spanning the FID during (f) Procedure for a FID calibrated with
may include time to purge the NMC and
emission testing and select a C2H6 CH4, bypassing the NMC. If you use a
to account for the analyzer’s response.
concentration that is typical of the peak FID with an NMC that is calibrated with (12) While the analyzer measures a
NMHC concentration expected at the CH4 by bypassing the NMC, determine stable concentration, record 30 seconds
hydrocarbon standard and the C2H6 its combined C2H6 response factor and of sampled data. Calculate the
concentration typical of the peak total penetration fraction, RFPFC2H6[NMC-FID], arithmetic mean of these data points.
hydrocarbon (THC) concentration as well as its CH4 penetration fraction, (13) Reroute the flow path to bypass
expected at the hydrocarbon standard or PFCH4[NMC-FID], as follows: the NMC, introduce the CH4 analytical
equal to the THC analyzer’s span value. (1) Select CH4 and C2H6 analytical gas gas mixture, and repeat the steps in
For CH4 analyzers with multiple ranges, mixtures and ensure that both mixtures paragraphs (e)(11) and (12) of this
perform this procedure on the highest meet the specifications of § 1065.750. section.
range used for emission testing. Select a CH4 concentration that you (14) Divide the mean CH4
(2) Start and operate the NMC would use for spanning the FID during concentration measured through the
according to the manufacturer’s emission testing and select a C2H6 NMC by the mean CH4 concentration
instructions, including any temperature concentration that is typical of the peak measured after bypassing the NMC. The
optimization. NMHC concentration expected at the result is the CH4 penetration fraction,
(3) Confirm that the FID analyzer hydrocarbon standard or equal to the PFCH4[NMC-FID]. Use this CH4 penetration
meets all the specifications of THC analyzer’s span value. For CH4 fraction according to
§ 1065.360. analyzers with multiple ranges, perform § 1065.660(b)(2)(iii) and (d)(1)(iii).
(4) Start and operate the FID analyzer this procedure on the highest range used (g) Test gas humidification. If you are
according to the manufacturer’s for emission testing. generating gas mixtures as a function of
instructions. (2) Start and operate the NMC the molar water concentration in the
(5) Zero and span the FID as you according to the manufacturer’s raw or diluted exhaust according to
would during emission testing. Span the instructions, including any temperature paragraph (d) of this section, create a
FID by bypassing the NMC and by using optimization. humidified test gas by bubbling the
C3H8 span gas. Note that you must span (3) Confirm that the FID analyzer analytical gas mixture that meets the
the FID on a C1 basis. For example, if meets all the specifications of specifications in § 1065.750 through
your span gas has a propane reference § 1065.360. distilled H2O in a sealed vessel or use
value of 100 mmol/mol, the correct FID (4) Start and operate the FID analyzer a device that introduces distilled H2O as
response to that span gas is 300 mmol/ according to the manufacturer’s vapor into a controlled gas flow.
mol because there are three carbon instructions. Determine the mole fraction of H2O in
atoms per C3H8 molecule. (5) Zero and span the FID as you the humidified calibration gas, cH2Oref,
(6) Introduce the C2H6 analytical gas would during emission testing. Span the as an average value over intervals of at
mixture upstream of the NMC. Use good FID by bypassing the NMC and by using least 30 seconds. We recommend that
engineering judgment to address the CH4 span gas. you design your system to maintain
effect of hydrocarbon contamination if (6) Introduce the C2H6 analytical gas temperatures at least 5 °C above the
your point of introduction is vastly mixture upstream of the NMC. Use good local calibration gas dewpoint in any
different from the point of zero/span gas engineering judgment to address the transfer lines, fittings, and valves
introduction. effect of hydrocarbon contamination if between the point at which you
(7) Allow time for the analyzer your point of introduction is vastly determine cH2Oref and the analyzer.
response to stabilize. Stabilization time different from the point of zero/span gas Verify the humidity generator’s
may include time to purge the NMC and introduction. uncertainty upon initial installation,
to account for the analyzer’s response. (7) Allow time for the analyzer within 370 days before verifying
(8) While the analyzer measures a response to stabilize. Stabilization time response factors and penetration
stable concentration, record 30 seconds may include time to purge the NMC and fractions, and after major maintenance.
of sampled data. Calculate the to account for the analyzer’s response. Use the uncertainties from the
372
Fmt 4701
calibration of the humidity generator’s paragraphs (d)(8) and (e)(2) to read as sample dryer, if one is used during
measurements and follow NIST follows: testing.
Technical Note 1297 (incorporated by * * * * *
reference, see § 1065.1010) to verify that § 1065.372 NDUV analyzer HC and H2O
(9) You may also run interference
the amount of H2O in xH2Oref is procedures separately for individual
determined within ±3% uncertainty, * * * * * interference species. If the
UxH2O, for one of the options described (b) Measurement principles. concentrations of the interference
in § 1065.750(a)(6). If the humidity Hydrocarbons and H2O can positively species used are higher than the
generator requires assembly before use, interfere with an NDUV analyzer by maximum levels expected during
after assembly follow the instrument causing a response similar to NOX. If the testing, you may scale down each
manufacturer’s instructions to check for NDUV analyzer uses compensation observed interference value (the
leaks. algorithms that utilize measurements of arithmetic mean of 30 second data
(1) If the sample does not pass other gases to meet this interference described in paragraph (d)(7) of this
through a dryer during emission testing, verification, a correct result depends on section) by multiplying the observed
generate at least five different H2O simultaneously conducting such interference by the ratio of the
concentrations that cover the range from measurements to test the algorithms maximum expected concentration value
less than the minimum expected to during the analyzer interference to the actual value used during this
greater than the maximum expected verification. procedure. You may run separate
water concentration during testing. Use * * * * * interference concentrations of H2O
good engineering judgment to determine (d) * * * (down to 0.025 mol/mol H2O content)
the target concentrations. (7) Multiply this difference by the that are lower than the maximum levels
(2) If the sample passes through a ratio of the flow-weighted mean HC expected during testing, but you must
dryer during emission testing, humidify concentration expected at the standard scale up the observed H2O interference
your test gas to an H2O level at or above to the HC concentration measured by multiplying the observed
the level determined in § 1065.145(e)(2) during the verification. interference by the ratio of the
for that dryer and determine a single (8) The analyzer meets the maximum expected H2O concentration
wet analyzer response to the interference verification of this section value to the actual value used during
dehumidified sample. if the result of paragraph (d)(7) of this this procedure. The sum of the scaled
■ 144. Amend § 1065.366 by revising section meets the tolerance in paragraph interference values must meet the
paragraph (b) to read as follows: (c) of this section. tolerance for combined interference as
(e) * * * specified in paragraph (c) of this
§ 1065.366 Interference verification for (2) You may use a NOX NDUV section.
FTIR analyzers. analyzer that you determine does not ■ 148. Add § 1065.377 to read as
* * * * * meet this verification, as long as you try follows:
(b) Measurement principles. Certain to correct the problem and the
species can interfere with analyzers by § 1065.377 Interference verification for NH3
measurement deficiency does not analyzers.
causing a response similar to the target adversely affect your ability to show
analyte. If the analyzer uses (a) Scope and frequency. This section
that engines comply with all applicable
compensation algorithms that utilize describes how to perform interference
emission standards.
measurements of other gases to meet verification for certain analyzers as
■ 147. Amend § 1065.375 by revising described in § 1065.277. Perform
this interference verification, a correct paragraphs (a), (b), and (d)(3) and (9) to
result depends on simultaneously interference verification after initial
read as follows: analyzer installation and after major
conducting these other measurements to
test the compensation algorithms during § 1065.375 Interference verification for maintenance.
the analyzer interference verification. N2O analyzers. (b) Measurement principles. Certain
compounds can positively interfere with
* * * * * (a) Scope and frequency. This section
analyzers by causing a response similar
■ 145. Amend § 1065.369 by revising describes how to perform interference
to NH3. If the analyzer uses
paragraph (b) to read as follows: verification for certain analyzers as
compensation algorithms that utilize
described in § 1065.275. Perform
§ 1065.369 H2O, CO, and CO2 interference measurements of other gases to meet
interference verification after initial
verification for photoacoustic alcohol this interference verification, a correct
analyzer installation and after major
analyzers. result depends on simultaneously
maintenance.
* * * * * conducting these other measurements to
(b) Measurement principles. Certain
(b) Measurement principles. H2O, CO, test the compensation algorithms during
species can positively interfere with
and CO2 can positively interfere with a the analyzer interference verification.
analyzers by causing a response similar (c) System requirements. Analyzers
photoacoustic analyzer by causing a to N2O. If the analyzer uses must have combined interference that is
response similar to ethanol or methanol. compensation algorithms that utilize within (0.0 ±2.0) mmol/mol.
If the photoacoustic analyzer uses measurements of other gases to meet (d) Procedure. Perform the
compensation algorithms that utilize this interference verification, a correct interference verification as follows:
measurements of other gases to meet result depends on simultaneously (1) Start, operate, zero, and span the
this interference verification, a correct conducting these other measurements to NH3 analyzer as you would before an
result depends on simultaneously test the compensation algorithms during emission test. If the sample is passed
conducting these other measurements to the analyzer interference verification. through a dryer during emission testing,
test the compensation algorithms during * * * * * you may run this verification test with
the analyzer interference verification. (d) * * * the dryer if it meets the requirements of
* * * * * (3) Introduce the humidified § 1065.342. Operate the dryer at the
■ 146. Amend § 1065.372 by revising interference test gas into the sample same conditions as you will for an
paragraphs (b) and (d)(7) and adding system upstream or downstream of any emission test. You may also run this
373
Fmt 4701
verification test without the sample species simultaneously, this is the points that represent the maximum
dryer. combined interference. brake torque versus engine speed,
(2) Except as specified in paragraph (8) The analyzer meets the measured at the engine’s primary output
(d)(9) of this section, select a multi- interference verification if the result of shaft. Map your engine if the standard-
component span gas meeting the paragraph (d)(7) of this section meets setting part requires engine mapping to
specification of § 1065.750 that the tolerance in paragraph (c) of this generate a duty cycle for your engine
incorporates the all the appropriate section. configuration. Map your engine while it
interference species. Use a humidity (9) You may instead perform is connected to a dynamometer or other
generator that meets the requirements in interference verification procedures device that can absorb work output from
§ 1065.750(a)(6) to humidify the span separately for individual interference the engine’s primary output shaft
gas. If the sample does not pass through species. The interference verification according to § 1065.110. Configure any
a dryer during emission testing, specified in paragraph (c) of this section auxiliary work inputs and outputs such
humidify your test gas to an H2O level applies based on the sum of the as hybrid, turbo-compounding, or
at or above the maximum expected interference values from separate thermoelectric systems to represent
during emission testing. If the sample interference species. If the concentration their in-use configurations and use the
passes through a dryer during emission of any interference species used is same configuration for emission testing.
testing, humidify your test gas to an H2O higher than the maximum levels See figure 1 to paragraph (a)(5) of
level at or above the level determined in expected during testing, you may scale § 1065.210. This may involve
§ 1065.145(e)(2) for that dryer. Use down each observed interference value configuring initial states of charge and
interference span gas concentrations by multiplying the observed rates and times of auxiliary-work inputs
that are at least as high as the maximum interference value by the ratio of the and outputs. We recommend that you
expected during testing. maximum expected concentration value contact the EPA Program Officer before
(3) Introduce the humidified to the concentration in the span gas. testing to determine how you should
interference test gas into the sample You may run separate H2O interference configure any auxiliary-work inputs and
system upstream or downstream of any concentrations (down to 0.025 mol/mol outputs. If your engine has an auxiliary
sample dryer, if one is used during H2O content) that are lower than the emission control device to reduce
testing. maximum levels expected during torque output that may activate during
(4) If the sample does not pass testing, but you must scale up the engine mapping, turn it off before
through a dryer during this verification observed H2O interference value by mapping. Use the most recent engine
test, measure the H2O mole fraction, multiplying the observed interference map to transform a normalized duty
cH2O, of the humidified interference test value by the ratio of the maximum cycle from the standard-setting part to a
gas as close as possible to the analyzer expected H2O concentration value to the reference duty cycle specific to your
inlet. You may measure dewpoint, Tdew, concentration in the span gas. The sum engine. Normalized duty cycles are
and absolute pressure, ptotal, to calculate of the scaled interference values must specified in the standard-setting part.
cH2O. Verify that the H2O content meets meet the tolerance for combined
the requirement in paragraph (d)(2) of You may update an engine map at any
interference as specified in paragraph time by repeating the engine-mapping
this section. If the sample passes (c) of this section.
through a dryer during this verification procedure. You must map or re-map an
■ 149. Amend § 1065.378 by adding engine before a test if any of the
test, either measure dewpoint, Tdew, and
paragraphs (e)(2) and (3) to read as following apply:
absolute pressure, ptotal, to calculate cH2O
follows: * * * * *
or use good engineering judgment to
estimate the value of cH2O based on the § 1065.378 NO2-to-NO converter (b) Mapping variable-speed engines.
vessel pressure and temperature. For conversion verification. Map variable-speed engines using the
example, you may use previous direct * * * * * procedure in this paragraph (b). Note
measurements of H2O content at certain (e) * * * that under § 1065.10(c) we may allow or
vessel pressures and temperatures to (2) You may use a converter that you require you to use ‘‘other procedures’’ if
estimate cH2O. determine does not meet this the specified procedure results in
(5) If the verification procedure does verification, as long as you try to correct unrepresentative testing or if your
not include a sample dryer, use good the problem and the measurement engine cannot be tested using the
engineering judgment to prevent deficiency does not adversely affect specified procedure. If the engine has a
condensation in the transfer lines, your ability to show that engines user-adjustable idle speed setpoint, you
fittings, or valves between the point of comply with all applicable emission may set it to its minimum adjustable
cH2O measurement and the analyzer. We standards. value for this mapping procedure and
recommend that you design your system (3) You may request to verify the resulting map may be used for any
so that the wall temperatures in those converter conversion efficiency using an test, regardless of where it is set for
transfer lines, fittings, and valves are at NO2 concentration whose value is running each test except that the warm
least 5 °C above the local sample gas representative of the peak total NO2 idle speed(s) must be determined based
dewpoint. concentration expected during testing, on where it is set for running each test.
(6) Allow time for the analyzer in place of the procedure in paragraph (1) Record the atmospheric pressure.
response to stabilize. Stabilization time (d) of this section, with our approval. (2) Warm up the engine by operating
may include time to purge the transfer ■ 150. Amend § 1065.510 by revising it. We recommend operating the engine
line and to account for analyzer paragraphs (a) introductory text, (b), at any speed and at approximately 75%
response. (d)(5)(i) and (iii), and (f) to read as of its expected maximum power.
(7) Operate the analyzer to measures follows: Continue the warm-up until the engine
the sample’s NH3 concentration and coolant, block, lubricating oil, or head
record results for 30 seconds. Calculate § 1065.510 Engine mapping. absolute temperature is within ±2% of
the arithmetic mean of these data to (a) Applicability, scope, and its mean value for at least 2 min or until
determine the interference value. When frequency. An engine map is a data set the engine thermostat controls engine
performed with all the interference that consists of a series of paired data temperature.
374
Fmt 4701
(3) Operate the engine at its warm idle either of these maps to generate the at two manufacturer-specified speeds,
speed as follows: power map as described in paragraph (e) declare the middle of this specified
(i) For engines with a low-speed of this section. speed range as the warm high-idle
governor, set the operator demand to (i) For continuous engine mapping, speed. You may alternatively measure
minimum, use the dynamometer or begin recording mean feedback speed warm high-idle speed using the
other loading device to target a torque and torque at 1 Hz or more frequently following procedure:
of zero or the lowest idle load that you and increase speed at a constant rate (i) Run an operating point targeting
will use for cycle generation on the such that it takes (4 to 6) min to sweep zero torque.
engine’s primary output shaft, and allow from the minimum mapped speed (A) Set operator demand to maximum
the engine to govern the speed. If the described in paragraph (b)(4) of this and use the dynamometer to target zero
idle load is a function of engine speeds section to the check point speed torque on the engine’s primary output
(e.g., the optional declared power from described in paragraph (b)(5)(iii) of this shaft.
paragraph (f)(6) of this section), section. Use good engineering judgment (B) Wait for the engine governor and
calculate the target torque in real time. to determine when to stop recording dynamometer to stabilize. We
Measure this warm idle speed; we data to ensure that the sweep is recommend that you stabilize for at least
recommend recording at least 30 values complete. In most cases, this means that 15 seconds.
of speed and using the mean of those you can stop the sweep at any point (C) Record 1 Hz means of the feedback
values. If you identify multiple warm after the power falls to 50% of the speed and torque for at least 30 seconds.
idle loads under paragraph (f)(4), maximum value. You may record means at a higher
(f)(5)(iii), or (f)(6) of this section, (ii) For discrete engine mapping, frequency as long as there are no gaps
measure the warm idle speed at the select at least 20 evenly spaced in the recorded data. For engines with
lowest torque level for this paragraph setpoints from the minimum mapped a high-speed governor that regulates
(b)(3). Measure the other warm idle speed described in paragraph (b)(4) of
speed by disabling and enabling fuel or
speeds as described in paragraph (b)(7) this section to the check point speed
ignition, you may need to extend this
of this section. described in paragraph (b)(5)(iii) of this
stabilization period to include at least
(ii) For engines without a low-speed section. At each setpoint, stabilize speed
one disabling event at the higher speed
governor, operate the engine at warm and allow torque to stabilize. We
and one enabling event at the lower
idle speed from paragraph (f)(2) of this recommend that you stabilize an engine
speed.
section and zero torque or the lowest for at least 15 seconds at each setpoint
(D) Determine if the feedback speed is
warm idle torque that you will use for and record the mean feedback speed
cycle generation on the engine’s primary and torque of the last (4 to 6) seconds. stable over the recording period. The
output shaft. You may use the Record the mean speed and torque at feedback speed is considered stable if
dynamometer to control either torque or each setpoint. all the recorded 1 Hz means are within
speed and manipulate the operator (iii) The check point speed of the map ±2% of the mean feedback speed over
demand to control the other parameter. is the highest speed above maximum the recording period. If the feedback
(4) Operate the engine at the power at which 50% of maximum speed is not stable because of the
minimum mapped speed. A minimum power occurs. If this speed is unsafe or dynamometer, void the results and
mapped speed equal to (95 ± 1)% of its unachievable (e.g., for ungoverned repeat measurements after making any
warm idle speed determined in engines or engines that do not operate necessary corrections. You may void
paragraph (b)(3) of this section may be at that point), use good engineering and repeat the entire map sequence, or
used for any engine or test. A higher judgment to map up to the maximum you may void and replace only the
minimum mapped speed may be used if safe speed or maximum achievable results for establishing warm high-idle
all the duty cycles that the engine is speed. For discrete mapping, if the speed; use good engineering judgment
subject to have a minimum reference engine cannot be mapped to the check to warm-up the engine before repeating
speed higher than the warm idle speed point speed, make sure the map measurements.
determined in paragraph (b)(3) of this includes at least 20 points from 95% of (E) If the feedback speed is stable, use
section. In this case you may use a warm idle to the maximum mapped the mean feedback speed over the
minimum mapped speed equal to (95 ± speed. For continuous mapping, if the recording period as the measured speed
1)% of the lowest minimum reference engine cannot be mapped to the check for this operating point.
speed in all the duty cycles the engine point speed, verify that the sweep time (F) If the feedback speed is not stable
is subject to. Set operator demand to from 95% of warm idle to the maximum because of the engine, determine the
maximum and control engine speed at mapped speed is (4 to 6) min. mean as the value representing the
this minimum mapped speed for at least (iv) Note that under § 1065.10(c)(1) we midpoint between the observed
15 seconds. Set operator demand to may allow you to disregard portions of maximum and minimum recorded
maximum and control engine speed at the map when selecting maximum test feedback speed.
(95 ± 1)% of its warm idle speed speed if the specified procedure would (G) If the mean feedback torque over
determined in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this result in a duty cycle that does not the recording period is within (0 ± 1)%
section for at least 15 seconds. represent in-use operation. of Tmaxmapped, use the measured speed for
(5) Perform a continuous or discrete (6) Determine warm high-idle speed this operating point as the warm high-
engine map as described in paragraph for engines with a high-speed governor. idle speed. Otherwise, continue testing
(b)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section. A You may skip this if the engine is not as described in paragraph (b)(6)(ii) of
continuous engine map may be used for subject to transient testing with a duty this section.
any engine. A discrete engine map may cycle that includes reference speed (ii) Run a second operating point
be used for engines subject only to values above 100%. You may use a targeting a positive torque. Follow the
steady-state duty cycles. Use linear manufacturer-declared warm high-idle same procedure in paragraphs
interpolation between the series of speed if the engine is electronically (b)(6)(i)(A) through (F) of this section,
points generated by either of these maps governed. For engines with a high-speed except that the dynamometer is set to
to determine intermediate torque values. governor that regulates speed by target a torque equal to the mean
Use the series of points generated by disabling and enabling fuel or ignition feedback torque over the recording
375
Fmt 4701
period from the previous operating continue to iterate until the value is control the dynamometer to target a
point plus 20% of Tmax mapped. within ±0.0001% of the previous value. speed of 99.5% of the recorded mean
(iii) Use the mean feedback speed and (8) This paragraph (b)(8) describes no-load governed speed. Allow speed
torque values from paragraphs (b)(6)(i) how to collect additional data to and torque to stabilize. Record the mean
and (ii) of this section to determine the determine warm idle speed(s) for cycle feedback speed and torque. Record the
warm high-idle speed. If the two generation if your engine has a low- target speed. The absolute value of the
recorded speed values are the same, use speed governor and a user-adjustable speed error (the mean feedback speed
that value as the warm high-idle-speed. idle speed setpoint and you need to minus the target speed) must be no
Otherwise, use a linear equation passing generate cycles for tests with a different greater than 0.1% of the recorded mean
through these two speed-torque points setpoint from the setpoint used in this no-load governed speed. From this
and extrapolate to solve for the speed at mapping procedure. You may omit this series of two mean feedback speed and
zero torque and use this speed intercept paragraph (b)(8) if you use the option to torque values, use linear interpolation to
value as the warm high-idle speed. declare a warm idle speed in paragraph determine intermediate values. Use this
(iv) You may use a manufacturer- (f)(3)(iv) of this section. Collect series of two mean feedback speeds and
declared Tmax instead of the measured additional data using paragraph (b)(7) of torques to generate a power map as
Tmax mapped. If you do this, you may also this section to determine the warm idle described in paragraph (e) of this
measure the warm high-idle speed as speed for each setpoint for use in section. Note that the measured
described in this paragraph (b)(6) before generating cycles. Record the warm idle maximum test torque as determined in
running the operating point and speed speed and torque for each setpoint. § 1065.610(b)(1) will be the mean
sweeps specified in paragraphs (b)(4) * * * * * feedback torque recorded on the second
and (5) of this section. (d) * * * point.
(7) This paragraph (b)(7) describes (5) * * * * * * * *
how to collect additional data to (i) For constant-speed engines subject (f) Measured and declared speeds,
determine warm idle speed(s) for cycle only to steady-state testing, you may torques, and power. You must select
generation if your engine has a low- perform an engine map by using a series speeds, torques, and power for engine
speed governor. You may omit this of discrete torques. Select at least five mapping and for cycle generation as
paragraph (b)(7) if you use the option to evenly spaced torque setpoints from no- required in this paragraph (f).
declare a warm idle speed in paragraph load to 80% of the manufacturer- ‘‘Measured’’ values are either directly
(f)(3)(iv) of this section, or if you declared test torque or to a torque measured during the engine mapping
identify only one idle load and one derived from your published maximum process or they are determined from the
user-adjustable idle speed setpoint power level if the declared test torque engine map. ‘‘Declared’’ values are
under paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section. is unavailable. Starting at the 80% specified by the manufacturer. When
Collect additional data to determine torque point, select setpoints in 2.5% or both measured and declared values are
warm idle speed(s) using one of the smaller intervals, stopping at the available, you may use declared test
following options: endpoint torque. The endpoint torque is speeds and torques instead of measured
(i) For each idle load (e.g., idle with defined as the first discrete mapped speeds and torques if they meet the
the transmission in neutral and drive) torque value greater than the torque at criteria in this paragraph (f). Otherwise,
you identify under paragraph (f)(4), maximum observed power where the you must use measured speeds and
(f)(5)(iii), or (f)(6) of this section, operate engine outputs 90% of the maximum torques derived from the engine map.
the engine at each idle load and observed power; or the torque when (1) Measured speeds and torques.
measure the warm idle speed at each engine stall has been determined using Determine the applicable speeds and
idle load as described in paragraph good engineering judgment (i.e., sudden torques for the duty cycles you will run:
(b)(3)(i) of this section. The warm idle deceleration of engine speed while (i) Measured maximum test speed for
operating point run in paragraph adding torque). You may continue variable-speed engines according to
(b)(3)(i) of this section may be skipped mapping at higher torque setpoints. At § 1065.610.
and the measured warm idle speed from each setpoint, allow torque and speed to (ii) Measured maximum test torque
paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section may be stabilize. Record the mean feedback for constant-speed engines according to
used for cycle generation for cycles speed and torque at each setpoint. From § 1065.610.
where the user-adjustable idle speed this series of mean feedback speed and (iii) Measured ‘‘A’’, ‘‘B’’, and ‘‘C’’
setpoint is the same. Note that this torque values, use linear interpolation to speeds for variable-speed engines
option requires you to know all the idle determine intermediate values. Use this according to § 1065.610.
loads in all the cycles that will be series of mean feedback speeds and (iv) Measured intermediate speed for
generated with this map at the time the torques to generate the power map as variable-speed engines according to
map is run. described in paragraph (e) of this § 1065.610.
(ii) You may map the idle governor at section. (v) For variable-speed engines with a
multiple torque levels and use this map * * * * * low-speed governor, measure warm idle
to determine the warm idle speed(s) at (iii) For any isochronous governed (no speed(s) according to paragraph (b) of
any idle load within the range of this speed droop) constant-speed engine, this section and use this (these) speed(s)
map. For cases where the idle torque is you may map the engine with two for cycle generation in § 1065.512. For
a function of engine speeds (e.g., if CITT points as described in this paragraph engines with no low-speed governor,
is specified as a function of speed or if (d)(5)(iii). After stabilizing at the no- instead use the manufacturer-declared
the optional declared power in load, or minimum achievable load, warm idle speed from paragraph (f)(2) of
paragraph (f)(6) of this section applies) governed speed in paragraph (d)(4) of this section.
we recommend that the warm idle this section, record the mean feedback (2) Required declared speeds. You
speed be determined using a closed speed and torque. Continue to operate must declare the lowest engine speed
form solution assuming speed and the engine with the governor or possible with minimum load (i.e.,
torque vary linearly between points in simulated governor controlling engine manufacturer-declared warm idle
this map. If an iterative method is used, speed using operator demand and speed). This is applicable only to
376
Fmt 4701
variable-speed engines with no low- declare a Curb-Idle Transmission torque as the declared value and use it
speed governor. For engines with no Torque (CITT). We recommend that you for cycle generation.
low-speed governor, the declared warm specify CITT as a function of idle speed (6) Optional declared power. For
idle speed is used for cycle generation for engines with adjustable warm idle or variable-speed engines, you may declare
in § 1065.512. Declare this speed in a enhanced-idle. You may specify a CITT a nonzero power for idle operation that
way that is representative of in-use based on typical applications at the represents in-use operation. If you
operation. For example, if your engine mean of the range of idle speeds you specify a torque in paragraph (f)(5)(iii)
is typically connected to an automatic specify at stabilized temperature of this section and a power in this
transmission or a hydrostatic conditions. See the required deviations paragraph (f)(6), the combination of
transmission, declare this speed at the for cycle generation in § 1065.610(d)(3) declared values must represent in-use
idle speed at which your engine for how the required declared CITT and operation and you must use the
operates when the transmission is the optional declared torque in combination for cycle generation. Use
engaged. paragraph (f)(5)(iii) of this section and the combination of declared values
(3) Optional declared speeds. You the optional declared power in when the idle loads (i.e., vehicle
may use declared speed instead of paragraph (f)(6) of this section are used accessory loads) are best represented as
measured speed as follows: in cycle generation. a constant power.
(i) You may use a declared value for (5) Optional declared torques. You * * * * *
maximum test speed for variable-speed may use declared torque instead of
engines if it is within (97.5 to 102.5)% measured torque as follows: ■ 151. Amend § 1065.512 by revising
of the corresponding measured value. (i) For variable-speed engines you paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) to read as
You may use a higher declared speed if may declare a maximum torque over the follows:
the length of the ‘‘vector’’ at the engine operating range. You may use the § 1065.512 Duty cycle generation.
declared speed is within 2% of the declared value for measuring warm
length of the ‘‘vector’’ at the measured high-idle speed as specified in this * * * * *
value. The term vector refers to the section. (b) * * *
square root of the sum of normalized (ii) For constant-speed engines you (1) Engine speed for variable-speed
engine speed squared and the may declare a maximum test torque. engines. For variable-speed engines,
normalized full-load power (at that You may use the declared value for normalized speed may be expressed as
speed) squared, consistent with the cycle generation if it is within (95 to a percentage between warm idle speed,
calculations in § 1065.610. 100)% of the measured value. (iii) For ƒnidle, and maximum test speed, ƒntest, or
(ii) You may use a declared value for variable-speed engines, you may declare speed may be expressed by referring to
intermediate, ‘‘A’’, ‘‘B’’, or ‘‘C’’ speeds a nonzero torque for idle operation that a defined speed by name, such as
for steady-state tests if the declared represents in-use operation. For ‘‘warm idle,’’ ‘‘intermediate speed,’’ or
value is within (97.5 to 102.5)% of the example, if your engine is connected to ‘‘A,’’ ‘‘B,’’ or ‘‘C’’ speed. Section
corresponding measured value. a hydrostatic transmission with a 1065.610 describes how to transform
(iii) For electronically governed minimum torque even when all the these normalized values into a sequence
variable-speed engines, you may use a driven hydraulic actuators and motors of reference speeds, ƒnref. Running duty
declared warm high-idle speed for are stationary and the engine is at idle, cycles with negative or small
calculating the alternate maximum test you may use this minimum torque as normalized speed values near warm idle
speed as specified in § 1065.610. the declared value. As another example, speed may cause low-speed idle
(iv) For electronically governed if your engine is connected to a vehicle governors to activate and the engine
variable-speed engines with an or machine with accessories, you may torque to exceed the reference torque
isochronous low-speed governor (i.e., no use a declared torque corresponding to even though the operator demand is at
speed droop), you may declare that the operation with those accessories. You a minimum. In such cases, we
warm idle speed is equal to the idle may specify a combination of torque recommend controlling the
speed setpoint and use it for cycle and power as described in paragraph dynamometer so it gives priority to
generation instead of warm idle speed(s) (f)(6) of this section. Use this option follow the reference torque instead of
determined from the data collected when the idle loads (e.g., vehicle the reference speed and let the engine
during the engine mapping procedure in accessory loads) are best represented as govern the speed. Note that the cycle-
paragraph (b) of this section. When a constant torque on the primary output validation criteria in § 1065.514 allow
generating cycles with multiple idle shaft. You may use multiple warm idle an engine to govern itself. This
torque values, you may use this idle loads and associated idle speeds in allowance permits you to test engines
speed setpoint for all idle points. If the cycle generation for representative with enhanced-idle devices and to
idle torque is a function of speed (e.g., testing. As an example, see the required simulate the effects of transmissions
CITT is specified as a function of speed deviations for cycle generation in such as automatic transmissions. For
or if the optional declared power in § 1065.610(d)(3) for improved example, an enhanced-idle device might
paragraph (f)(6) of this section applies) simulation of idle points for engines be an idle speed value that is normally
use the setpoint to calculate the idle intended primarily for propulsion of a commanded only under cold-start
torque(s) for cycle generation. If the vehicle with an automatic or manual conditions to quickly warm up the
engine has a user-adjustable idle speed transmission where that engine is engine and aftertreatment devices. In
setpoint, generate the cycle using the subject to a transient duty cycle with this case, negative and very low
idle speed setpoint that will be set when idle operation. normalized speeds will generate
the engine is run for that cycle. (iv) For constant-speed engines, you reference speeds below this higher
(4) Required declared torque. For may declare a warm minimum torque enhanced-idle speed. You may do any
variable-speed engines intended that represents in-use operation. For of the following when using enhanced-
primarily for propulsion of a vehicle example, if your engine is typically idle devices:
with an automatic transmission where connected to a machine that does not (i) While running an engine where the
that engine is subject to a transient duty operate below a certain minimum ECM broadcasts an enhanced-idle speed
cycle with idle operation, you must torque, you may use this minimum that is above the denormalized speed,
377
Fmt 4701
use the broadcast speed as the reference (f) If your testing requires a chemical § 1065.660(b)(2). Perform this
speed. Use these new reference points balance, then before the start of verification as follows:
for duty-cycle validation. This does not emissions testing select the chemical * * * * *
affect how you determine denormalized balance method and the gaseous (7) * * *
reference torque in paragraph (b)(2) of emission measurement equipment (iii) Use mean analyzer values from
this section. required for testing. Select the chemical paragraphs (g)(2) and (3) and (g)(7)(i)
(ii) If an ECM broadcast signal is not balance method depending on the fuels and (ii) of this section to correct the
available, perform one or more practice used during testing: initial THC concentration recorded in
cycles to determine the enhanced-idle (1) When using only carbon- paragraph (g)(6) of this section for drift,
speed as a function of cycle time. containing fuels, use the carbon-based as described in § 1065.550.
Generate the reference cycle as you chemical balance procedure in
normally would but replace any * * * * *
§ 1065.655.
reference speed that is lower than the ■ 153. Amend § 1065.530 by revising
(2) When using only fuels other than paragraphs (a)(2)(ii), (a)(2)(iii)(A), and
enhanced-idle speed with the enhanced-
idle speed. This does not affect how you carbon-containing fuels, use the (b)(4), (9), and (11) to read as follows:
determine denormalized reference hydrogen-based chemical balance
procedure in § 1065.656. § 1065.530 Emission test sequence.
torque in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section. (3) When using constant mixtures of (a) * * *
(2) Engine torque for variable-speed carbon-containing fuels and fuels other (2) * * *
engines. For variable-speed engines, than carbon- containing fuels, use the (ii) For hot-start duty cycles, first
normalized torque is expressed as a following chemical balance methods operate the engine at any speed above
percentage of the mapped torque at the and gaseous emission measurement peak-torque speed and at (65 to 85)% of
corresponding reference speed. Section equipment: maximum mapped power until either
1065.610 describes how to transform (i) If the hydrogen-to-carbon ratio, α, the engine coolant, block, lubricating
normalized torques into a sequence of of the fuel mixture is less than or equal oil, or head absolute temperature is
reference torques, Τref. Section 1065.610 to 6, then use the carbon-based chemical within ±2% of its mean value for at least
also describes special requirements for balance procedure in § 1065.655. 2 min or until the engine thermostat
modifying transient duty cycles for (ii) Otherwise, use the hydrogen- controls engine temperature. Shut down
variable-speed engines intended based chemical balance procedure in the engine. Start the duty cycle within
primarily for propulsion of a vehicle § 1065.656. 20 min of engine shutdown.
with an automatic or manual (iii) * * *
(4) When using variable mixtures of
transmission. Section 1065.610 also (A) Engine coolant, block, lubricating
carbon-containing fuels and fuels other
describes under what conditions you oil, or head absolute temperatures for
than carbon-containing fuels, if the
may command Τref greater than the water-cooled engines.
mean hydrogen-to-carbon ratio of the
reference torque you calculated from a * * * * *
fuel mixture, α, is expected to be greater
normalized duty cycle, which permits (b) * * *
than 6 for a test interval, you must use
you to command Τref values that are (4) Pre-heat or pre-cool heat
the hydrogen-based chemical balance
limited by a declared minimum torque. exchangers in the sampling system to
procedure in § 1065.656 for that test
For any negative torque commands, within their operating temperature
interval. Otherwise, you may use the
command minimum operator demand tolerances for a test interval.
carbon-based chemical balance
and use the dynamometer to control * * * * *
procedure in § 1065.655.
engine speed to the reference speed, but (9) Select gas analyzer ranges. You
if reference speed is so low that the idle (g) If your testing requires measuring
hydrocarbon emissions, verify the may automatically or manually switch
governor activates, we recommend gas analyzer ranges during a test interval
using the dynamometer to control amount of nonmethane hydrocarbon
contamination in the exhaust and only if switching is performed by
torque to zero, CITT, or a declared changing the span over which the
minimum torque as appropriate. Note background HC sampling systems
within 8 hours before the start of the digital resolution of the instrument is
that you may omit power and torque applied. During a test interval you may
points during motoring from the cycle- first test interval of each duty-cycle
sequence for laboratory tests. You may not switch the gains of an analyzer’s
validation criteria in § 1065.514. Also, analog operational amplifier(s).
use the maximum mapped torque at the verify the contamination of a
background HC sampling system by * * * * *
minimum mapped speed as the
reading the last bag fill and purge using (11) We recommend that you verify
maximum torque for any reference
zero gas. For any NMHC measurement gas analyzer responses after zeroing and
speed at or below the minimum mapped
system that involves separately spanning by sampling a calibration gas
speed.
measuring CH4 and subtracting it from that has a concentration near one-half of
* * * * * the span gas concentration. Based on the
a THC measurement or for any CH4
■ 152. Amend § 1065.520 by: measurement system that uses an NMC, results and good engineering judgment,
■ a. Redesignating paragraph (f) as you may decide whether or not to re-
verify the amount of THC contamination
paragraph (g); using only the THC analyzer response. zero, re-span, or re-calibrate a gas
■ b. Adding new paragraph (f); and
There is no need to operate any separate analyzer before starting a test interval.
■ c. Revising newly redesignated
paragraphs (g) introductory text and CH4 analyzer for this verification; * * * * *
(g)(7)(iii). however, you may measure and correct ■ 154. Amend § 1065.550 by revising
The addition and revisions read as for THC contamination in the CH4 paragraphs (b) introductory text and
follows: sample path for the cases where NMHC (b)(3)(ii) to read as follows:
is determined by subtracting CH4 from
§ 1065.520 Pre-test verification procedures THC or, where CH4 is determined, using § 1065.550 Gas analyzer range verification
and pre-test data collection. an NMC as configured in § 1065.365(d), and drift verification.
* * * * * (e), and (f); and using the calculations in * * * * *
378
Fmt 4701
(b) Drift verification. Gas analyzer Eq. 1065.602–18 propulsion of a vehicle with an
drift verification is required for all Where: automatic or manual transmission
gaseous exhaust constituents for which i = an indexing variable that represents the
where that engine is subject to a
an emission standard applies. It is also rank of the data point whose value is transient duty cycle that specifies points
required for CO2, H2, O2, H2O, and NH3, used to determine the median. with normalized reference speed of 0%
if required by the applicable chemical N = the number of data points in the set. and normalized reference torque of 0%
balance, even if there are no emission (i.e., idle points). These deviations are
Example:
standards. It is not required for other intended to produce a more
gaseous exhaust constituents for which N=4 representative transient duty cycle for
only a reporting requirement applies y1 = 41.515 these applications. For steady-state duty
y2 = 41.780 cycles or transient duty cycles with no
(such as CH4 and N2O).
y3 = 41.861 idle operation, the requirements in this
* * * * * y4 = 41.902
(3) * * * paragraph (d)(3) do not apply. Idle
i=2 points for steady-state duty cycles of
(ii) Where no emission standard i=2
applies for CO2, H2, O2, H2O, and NH3, such engines are to be run at conditions
(ii) Determine the median as the
you must satisfy one of the following: simulating neutral or park on the
average of the data point i and the data
(A) For each test interval of the duty transmission. For manual transmissions,
point i + 1 as follows:
cycle, the difference between the set CITT to zero, which results in warm-
uncorrected and the corrected brake- idle-in-drive speed and torque values
specific CO2, H2, O2, H2O, or NH3 values being the same as warm-idle-in-neutral
must be within ±4% of the uncorrected values. For the case of a manual
value; or the difference between the transmission where the optional
uncorrected and the corrected CO2, H2, declared idle torque in
O2, H2O, or NH3 mass (or mass rate) § 1065.510(f)(5)(iii) and the optional
values must be within ±4% of the declared power in § 1065.510(f)(6) are
uncorrected value. not declared (i.e., idle torque is zero),
(B) For the entire duty cycle, the the required deviations in this
difference between the uncorrected and paragraph (d)(3) have no impact and
the corrected composite brake-specific may be skipped.
CO2, H2, O2, H2O, or NH3 values must (i) Determine the warm-idle-in-drive
be within ±4% of the uncorrected value. speed and torque values with the
transmission in drive from the data
* * * * *
collected during the engine mapping
■ 155. Amend § 1065.601 by revising procedure in § 1065.510. The warm-
paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows: Eq. 1065.602–19
idle-in-drive torque is the sum of CITT
(2) For odd numbers of data points,
§ 1065.601 Overview. and the torques representing loads from
determine the rank of the data point
vehicle accessories. For example, the
* * * * * whose value is the median and the
(c) * * * sum of the required declared CITT in
corresponding median value as follows:
(1) Mass-based emission calculations § 1065.510(f)(4), any optional declared
prescribed by the International torque in § 1065.510(f)(5)(iii), and the
Organization for Standardization (ISO), torque on the primary output shaft from
according to ISO 8178, except the any optional declared power in
following: Eq. 1065.602–20 § 1065.510(f)(6).
(i) ISO 8178–4 Section 9.1.6, NOX (ii) Determine the warm-idle-in-
Where: neutral speed and torque values with
Correction for Humidity and i = an indexing variable that represents the
Temperature. See § 1065.670 for the transmission in neutral from the
rank of the data point whose value is the data collected during the engine
approved methods for humidity median.
corrections. N = the number of data points in the set.
mapping procedure in § 1065.510. The
(ii) [Reserved] warm-idle-in-neutral torque is the sum
Example: of any optional declared torque in
* * * * * N=3 § 1065.510(f)(5)(iii) and the torque on
■ 156. Amend § 1065.602 by adding y1 = 41.515 the primary output shaft from any
paragraph (m) to read as follows: y2 = 41.780 optional declared power in
§ 1065.602 Statistics.
y3 = 41.861 § 1065.510(f)(6) (i.e., the sum of the ER22AP24.226</GPH>
torques representing loads from vehicle
* * * * *
(m) Median. Determine median, M, as accessories).
(iii) Zero-percent speed for
described in this paragraph (m). Arrange
denormalization of non-idle points is
the data points in the data set in
the warm-idle-in-drive speed.
increasing order where the smallest
ER22AP24.225</GPH>
(iv) For motoring points, make no

value is ranked 1, the second-smallest changes.
value is ranked 2, etc. ■ 157. Amend § 1065.610 by revising
paragraph (d)(3) to read as follows: (v) If the cycle begins with an idle
(1) For even numbers of data points: segment (i.e., a set of one or more
(i) Determine the rank of the data § 1065.610 Duty cycle generation. contiguous idle points), set the reference
ER22AP24.224</GPH>
point whose value is used to determine

* * * * * speed and torque values to the warm-
the median as follows:
(d) * * * idle-in-neutral values for this initial
(3) Required deviations. We require segment. This is to represent idle
the following deviations for variable- operation with the transmission in
ER22AP24.222</GPH>
speed engines intended primarily for neutral or park at the start of the
379
Fmt 4701
transient duty cycle, after the engine is the warm-idle-in-drive torque value.
started. If the initial idle segment is This is to represent the transmission
longer than 24 seconds, change the operating in drive.
reference speed and torque values for (ix) For consecutive nonidle
the remaining idle points in the initial nonmotoring points that immediately
Eq. 1065.644–1
idle segment to the warm-idle-in-drive follow and precede idle segments, with
values (i.e., change idle points reference torque values from zero to the Where:
corresponding to 25 seconds to the end warm-idle-in-drive torque value, change Vvac = geometric volume of the vacuum-side
of the initial idle segment to warm-idle- their reference torques to the warm-idle- of the sampling system.
in-drive). This is to represent manually in-drive torque value. This is to R = molar gas constant.
represent the transmission operating in p2 = vacuum-side absolute pressure at time
shifting the transmission to drive.
t2.
(vi) For all other idle segments, set the drive.
T2 = vacuum-side absolute temperature at
reference speed and torque values to the (x) For consecutive nonidle
time t2.
warm-idle-in-drive values. This is to nonmotoring points that immediately p1 = vacuum-side absolute pressure at time
represent the transmission operating in follow and precede any point(s) that t1.
drive. were modified in paragraph (d)(3)(viii) T1 = vacuum-side absolute temperature at
(vii) If the engine is intended of this section, with reference torque time t1.
primarily for automatic transmissions values from zero to the warm-idle-in- t2 = time at completion of vacuum-decay leak
with a Neutral-When-Stationary feature drive torque value, change their verification test.
that automatically shifts the reference torques to the warm-idle-in- t1 = time at start of vacuum-decay leak
transmission to neutral after the vehicle drive torque value. This is to provide verification test.
is stopped for a designated time and smooth torque transition around these Example:
automatically shifts back to drive when points.
the operator increases demand (i.e., * * * * * Vvac = 2.0000 L = 0.00200 m3
pushes the accelerator pedal), reprocess ■ 158. Revise § 1065.644 to read as
R = 8.314472 J/(mol·K) = 8.314472
all idle segments. Change reference follows: (m2·kg)/(s2·mol·K)
speed and torque values from the warm- p2 = 50.600 kPa = 50600 Pa = 50600 kg/
idle-in-drive values to the warm-idle-in- § 1065.644 Vacuum-decay leak rate. (m·s2)
neutral values for idle points in drive This section describes how to T2 = 293.15 K
after the designated time. calculate the leak rate of a vacuum-
p1 = 25.300 kPa = 25300 Pa = 25300 kg/
(viii) For all nonidle nonmotoring decay leak verification, which is
(m·s2)
points with normalized speed at or described in § 1065.345(e). Use the
below zero percent and reference torque following equation to calculate the leak T1 = 293.15 K
from zero to the warm-idle-in-drive rate, , and compare it to the criterion t2 = 10:57:35 a.m.
torque value, set the reference torque to specified in § 1065.345(e): t1 = 10:56:25 a.m.
■ 159. Amend § 1065.650 by revising use as-measured values in the initial set constituents in their flows. See
paragraph (c)(1)(ii) to read as follows: of calculations and corrected values in § 1065.520(f) for information about
the drift-corrected set of calculations as when to use this carbon-based chemical
§ 1065.650 Emission calculations. described in § 1065.520(g)(7). balance procedure. With one flow rate
* * * * * * * * * * of either fuel, intake air, or exhaust, you
(c) * * * may use chemical balances to determine
■ 160. Amend § 1065.655 by:
(1) * * * the flows of the other two. For example,
■ a. Revising the section heading and
(ii) Correct all gaseous emission you may use chemical balances along
analyzer concentration readings, paragraphs (a), (b)(4), and (e)(1) and (4);
■ b. Removing the first paragraph (f)(3);
with either intake air or fuel flow to
including continuous readings, sample determine raw exhaust flow. Note that
and
bag readings, and dilution air chemical balance calculations allow
■ c. Revising the second paragraph
background readings, for drift as measured values for the flow rate of
(f)(3).
described in § 1065.672. Note that you The revisions read as follows: diesel exhaust fluid for engines with
must omit this step where brake-specific urea-based selective catalytic reduction.
emissions are calculated without the § 1065.655 Carbon-based chemical (b) * * *
drift correction for performing the drift balances of fuel, DEF, intake air, and (4) The amount of water in a raw or
ER22AP24.228</GPH>
validation according to § 1065.550(b). exhaust. diluted exhaust flow, xH2Oexh, when you
When applying the initial THC and CH4 (a) General. Chemical balances of fuel, do not measure the amount of water to
contamination readings according to intake air, and exhaust may be used to correct for the amount of water removed
§ 1065.520(g), use the same values for calculate flows, the amount of water in by a sampling system. Note that you
ER22AP24.227</GPH>
both sets of calculations. You may also their flows, and the wet concentration of may not use the water measurement
380
Fmt 4701
methods in § 1065.257 to determine (iv) Determine the sulfur mass wOmeasj = oxygen mass fraction of fuel or any
xH2Oexh. Correct for removed water fraction according to subpart H of this injected fluid j.
according to § 1065.659. part. wSmeasj = sulfur mass fraction of fuel or any
injected fluid j.
* * * * * * * * * * wNmeasj = nitrogen mass fraction of fuel or any
(e) * * * (4) Calculate a, b, g, and d as injected fluid j.
(1) For liquid fuels, use the default described in this paragraph (e)(4). If
values for a, b, g, and d in table 2 of this your fuel mixture contains fuels other Example:
section or determine mass fractions of than carbon-containing fuels, then N=1
liquid fuels for calculation of a, b, g, and calculate those fuels’ mass fractions wC, j=1
d as follows: wH, wO , wS, and wN as described in ṁ1 = 1
(i) Determine the carbon and § 1065.656(d). Calculate a, b, g, and d wHmeas1 = 0.1239
hydrogen mass fractions according to using the following equations: wCmeas1 = 0.8206
ASTM D5291 (incorporated by wOmeas1 = 0.0547
reference, see § 1065.1010). When using wSmeas1 = 0.00066
ASTM D5291 to determine carbon and wNmeas1 = 0.000095
hydrogen mass fractions of gasoline
MC = 12.0107 g/mol
(with or without blended ethanol), use
Eq. 1065.655–20 MH = 1.00794 g/mol
good engineering judgment to adapt the
MO = 15.9994 g/mol
method as appropriate. This may
include consulting with the instrument MS = 32.065 g/mol
manufacturer on how to test high- MN = 14.0067
volatility fuels. Allow the weight of
volatile fuel samples to stabilize for 20 Eq. 1065.655–21
minutes before starting the analysis; if
the weight still drifts after 20 minutes,
prepare a new sample). Retest the
sample if the carbon, hydrogen, oxygen,
sulfur, and nitrogen mass fractions do
not add up to a total mass of 100 ±0.5%; Eq. 1065.655–22
you may assume oxygen has a zero mass
contribution for this specification for
diesel fuel and neat (E0) gasoline. You
may also assume that sulfur and
nitrogen have a zero mass contribution Eq. 1065.655–23
for this specification for all fuels except Where:
residual fuel blends. N = total number of fuels and injected fluids
(ii) Determine oxygen mass fraction of over the duty cycle.
gasoline (with or without blended j = an indexing variable that represents one
ethanol) according to ASTM D5599 fuel or injected fluid, starting with j = 1. * * * * *
(incorporated by reference, see ṁj = the mass flow rate of the fuel or any (f) * * *
§ 1065.1010). For all other liquid fuels, injected fluid j. For applications using a (3) Fluid mass flow rate calculation.
determine the oxygen mass fraction single fuel and no DEF fluid, set this This calculation may be used only for
using good engineering judgment. value to 1. For batch measurements, steady-state laboratory testing. You may
(iii) Determine the nitrogen mass divide the total mass of fuel over the test not use this calculation if the standard-
interval duration to determine a mass
fraction according to ASTM D4629 or rate.
setting part requires carbon balance
ER22AP24.234</GPH>
ASTM D5762 (incorporated by wHmeasj = hydrogen mass fraction of fuel or error verification as described in
reference, see § 1065.1010) for all liquid any injected fluid j. § 1065.543. See § 1065.915(d)(5)(iv) for
fuels. Select the correct method based wCmeasj = carbon mass fraction of fuel or any application to field testing. Calculate
on the expected nitrogen content. injected fluid j. based on using the following equation:
ER22AP24.233</GPH>
ER22AP24.232</GPH>
Eq. 1065.655–25 ṁj = the mass flow rate of the fuel or any ṁ1 = 7.559 g/s
injected fluid j.
Where: wC1 = 0.869 g/g
wCj = carbon mass fraction of the fuel and
ER22AP24.231</GPH>
ṅexh = raw exhaust molar flow rate from any injected fluid j, as determined in MC = 12.0107 g/mol
which you measured emissions. paragraph (d) of this section. xCcombdry1 = 99.87 mmol/mol = 0.09987
fuel or injected fluid, starting with j = 1. Example: mol/mol
N = total number of fuels and injected fluids N=1 xH20exhdry1 = 107.64 mmol/mol = 0.10764
ER22AP24.230</GPH>
over the duty cycle. j=1 mol/mol

ER22AP24.229</GPH>
381
Fmt 4701
* * * * * air flow to correct for background during their respective measurements;

■ 161. Add § 1065.656 to read as emissions as described in § 1065.667(c) for example: xH2Omeas, xH2OxO2meas,
follows: and (d). xH2OxNOmeas, and xH2Oint. If the amount of
(c) Chemical balance procedure. The water present during a ‘‘wet’’
§ 1065.656 Hydrogen-based chemical calculations for a chemical balance measurement is the same as an
balances of fuel, DEF, intake air, and involve a system of equations that
exhaust.
unknown amount of water in the
require iteration. We recommend using exhaust flow, xH2Oexh, iteratively solve
(a) General. Chemical balances of fuel, a computer to solve this system of for that value in the system of equations.
DEF, intake air, and exhaust may be equations. You must guess the initial If you measure only total NOX and not
used to calculate flows, the amount of values of two of the following NO and NO2 separately, use good
water in their flows, and the wet quantities: the amount of hydrogen in engineering judgment to estimate a split
concentration of constituents in their the measured flow, xH2exhdry, the fraction
flows. See § 1065.520(f) for information in your total NOX concentration
of dilution air in diluted exhaust, between NO and NO2 for the chemical
about when to use this hydrogen-based xdil/exhdry, and the amount of intake air
chemical balance procedure. With one balances. For example, if you measure
required to produce actual combustion emissions from a stoichiometric
flow rate of either fuel, intake air, or products per mole of dry exhaust,
exhaust, you may use chemical balances combustion engine, you may assume all
xint/exhdry. You may use time-weighted NOX is NO. For a lean-burn combustion
to determine the flows of the other two.
mean values of intake air humidity and engine, you may assume that your molar
For example, you may use chemical
dilution air humidity in the chemical concentration of NOX, xNOx, is 75% NO
balances along with either intake air or
balance; as long as your intake air and and 25% NO2. For NO2 storage
fuel flow to determine raw exhaust flow.
dilution air humidities remain within aftertreatment systems, you may assume
Note that chemical balance calculations
tolerances of ±0.0025 mol/mol of their xNOx is 25% NO and 75% NO2. Note that
allow measured values for the flow rate
respective mean values over the test for calculating the mass of NOX
of diesel exhaust fluid for engines with
interval. For each emission emissions, you must use the molar mass
urea-based selective catalytic reduction.
(b) Procedures that require chemical concentration, x, and amount of water, of NO2 for the effective molar mass of
balances. We require chemical balances xH2Oexh, you must determine their all NOX species, regardless of the actual
when you determine the following: completely dry concentrations, xdry and NO2 fraction of NOX.
(1) A value proportional to total work, xH2Oexhdry. You must also use your fuel
mixture’s carbon mass fraction, wC, (2) Enter the equations in paragraph
when you choose to determine brake- (c)(5) of this section into a computer
specific emissions as described in hydrogen mass fraction, wH, oxygen
mass fraction, wO, sulfur mass fraction, program to iteratively solve for xH2exhdry,
§ 1065.650(f). xdil/exhdry, and xint/exhdry. Use good
(2) Raw exhaust molar flow rate either wS, and nitrogen mass fraction, wN; you
may optionally account for diesel engineering judgment to guess initial
from measured intake air molar flow values for xH2exhdry, xdil/exhdry, and
rate or from fuel mass flow rate as exhaust fluid (or other fluids injected
into the exhaust), if applicable. xint/exhdry. We recommend guessing an
described in paragraph (f) of this initial amount of hydrogen of 0 mol/
section. Calculate wC, wH, wO, wS, and wN as
described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of mol. We recommend guessing an initial
(3) Raw exhaust molar flow rate from
this section. You may alternatively use xint/exhdry of 1 mol/mol. We also
measured intake air molar flow rate and
any combination of default values and recommend guessing an initial xdil/exhdry
dilute exhaust molar flow rate as
measured values as described in of 0.8 mol/mol. Iterate values in the
described in paragraph (g) of this
paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section. system of equations until the most
section.
(4) The amount of water in a raw or Use the following steps to complete a recently updated guesses are all within
diluted exhaust flow, xH2Oexh, when you chemical balance: ±1% or ±1 mmol/mol, whichever is
do not measure the amount of water to (1) Convert your measured larger, of their respective most recently
correct for the amount of water removed concentrations such as xH2meas, xNH3meas, calculated values.
by a sampling system. Correct for xCO2meas, xCOmeas, xTHCmeas, xO2meas, (3) Use the following symbols and
removed water according to § 1065.659. xH2meas, xNOmeas, xNO2meas, and xH2Oint, to subscripts in the equations for
(5) The calculated total dilution air dry concentrations by dividing them by performing the chemical balance
flow when you do not measure dilution one minus the amount of water present calculations in this paragraph (c):
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3) OF § 1065.656—SYMBOLS AND SUBSCRIPTS FOR CHEMICAL BALANCE EQUATIONS
x[emission]meas Amount of measured emission in the sample at the respective gas analyzer.
x[emission]exh ................................................ Amount of emission per dry mole of exhaust.

x[emission]exhdry ............................................ Amount of emission per dry mole of dry exhaust.
xH2O[emission]meas ........................................ Amount of H2O in sample at emission-detection location; measure or estimate these values accord-
ing to § 1065.145(e)(2).
xCcombdry .................................................... Amount of carbon from fuel and any injected fluids in the exhaust per mole of dry exhaust.
xHcombdry .................................................... Amount of hydrogen from fuel and any injected fluids in the exhaust per mole of dry exhaust.
xdil/exh ......................................................... Amount of dilution gas or excess air per mole of exhaust.
xdil/exhdry ..................................................... amount of dilution gas and/or excess air per mole of dry exhaust.
xHcombdry .................................................... Amount of hydrogen from fuel and any injected fluids in the exhaust per mole of dry exhaust.
ER22AP24.235</GPH>
382
Fmt 4701
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(3) OF § 1065.656—SYMBOLS AND SUBSCRIPTS FOR CHEMICAL BALANCE EQUATIONS—
Continued
x[emission]meas Amount of measured emission in the sample at the respective gas analyzer.
xint/exhdry ..................................................... Amount of intake air required to produce actual combustion products per mole of dry (raw or diluted)
exhaust.
xraw/exhdry .................................................... Amount of undiluted exhaust, without excess air, per mole of dry (raw or diluted) exhaust.
xCO2int ......................................................... Amount of intake air CO2 per mole of intake air.
xCO2intdry ..................................................... amount of intake air CO2 per mole of dry intake air; you may use xCO2intdry = 375 μmol/mol, but we
recommend measuring the actual concentration in the intake air.
xH2Oint ......................................................... Amount of H2O in the intake air, based on a humidity measurement of intake air.
xH2Ointdry ..................................................... Amount of intake air H2O per mole of dry intake air.
xO2int ........................................................... Amount of intake air O2 per mole of intake air.
xCO2dil ......................................................... Amount of dilution gas CO2 per mole of dilution gas.
xCO2dildry ..................................................... Amount of dilution gas CO2 per mole of dry dilution gas; if you use air as diluent, you may use
xCO2dildry = 375 μmol/mol, but we recommend measuring the actual concentration in the dilution
gas.
xH2Odil ......................................................... Amount of dilution gas H2O per mole of dilution gas.
xH2Odildry ..................................................... Amount of dilution gas H2O per mole of dry dilution gas.
t ................................................................. Effective carbon content of the fuel and any injected fluids.
c ................................................................. Effective hydrogen content of the fuel and any injected fluids.
f ................................................................. Effective oxygen content of the fuel and any injected fluids.
x ................................................................. Effective sulfur content of the fuel and any injected fluids.
w ................................................................. Effective nitrogen content of the fuel and any injected fluids.
wC .............................................................. Carbon mass fraction of the fuel (or mixture of test fuels) and any injected fluids.
wH .............................................................. Hydrogen mass fraction of the fuel (or mixture of test fuels) and any injected fluids.
wO .............................................................. Oxygen mass fraction of the fuel (or mixture of test fuels) and any injected fluids.
wS ............................................................... Sulfur mass fraction of the fuel (or mixture of test fuels) and any injected fluids.
wN .............................................................. Nitrogen mass fraction of the fuel (or mixture of test fuels) and any injected fluids.
(4) Use the equations specified in this standard setting part, for all other measurement under the standard setting
section to iteratively solve for xint/exhdry, engines xNH3exhdry may be set to zero. part, for all other engines xCOexhdry and
xdil/exhdry, and xH2exhdry. The following (iv) The calculation of xCO2exhdry is xTHCexhdry may be set to zero. (vi) The
exceptions apply: only required for engines that use calculation of xN2Oexhdry is only required
(i) For xH2exhdry multiple equations are carbon-containing fuels or fluids, either for engines that are subject to N2O
provided, see table 2 to paragraph (c)(6) as single fuel or as part of the fuel measurement under the standard setting
of this section to determine for which mixture, and for engines that are subject part, for all other engines xN2Oexhdry may
cases the equations apply. to CO2 measurement under the standard be set to zero.
setting part, for all other engines (5) The chemical balance equations
(ii) The calculation of xO2exhdry is only xCO2exhdry may be set to a value that
required when xO2meas is measured. are as follows:
yields for xCcombdry a value of zero. (v)
(iii) The calculation of xNH3exhdry is The calculation of xCOexhdry and xCcombdry = xco2exhdry + xcoexhdry +
only required for engines that use xTHCexhdry is only required for engines xTHCexhdry ¥ xco2dil · xdil/exhdry ¥
ammonia as fuel and engines that are that use carbon-containing fuels and for xco2int · xint/exhdry
subject to NH3 measurement under the engines that are subject to CO and THC Eq. 1065.656–1
ER22AP24.241</GPH>
ER22AP24.240</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–2 Eq. 1065.656–4 Eq. 1065.656–6 (see table 2 of this
section)
ER22AP24.239</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–3 Eq. 1065.656–5

Eq. 1065.656–7 (see table 2 of this
ER22AP24.238</GPH>
section)
ER22AP24.237</GPH>
ER22AP24.236</GPH>
383
Fmt 4701
ER22AP24.256</GPH>
ER22AP24.255</GPH>
ER22AP24.254</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–8 Eq. 1065.656–9 Eq. 1065.656–10
ER22AP24.253</GPH>
ER22AP24.252</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–11
ER22AP24.251</GPH>
ER22AP24.250</GPH>
ER22AP24.249</GPH>
ER22AP24.248</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–12 Eq. 1065.656–15
Eq. 1065.656–14
ER22AP24.247</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–13 Eq. 1065.656–16 (see table 2 of this
section)
ER22AP24.246</GPH>
ER22AP24.245</GPH>
ER22AP24.244</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–17
Eq. 1065.656–19
ER22AP24.243</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–21
Eq. 1065.656–18
ER22AP24.242</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–20
384
Fmt 4701
Eq. 1065.656–22 Eq. 1065.656–23 quantities specified in the following

(6) Depending on your measurements, table:
use the equations and guess the
TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (c)(6) OF § 1065.656—CHEMICAL BALANCE EQUATIONS FOR DIFFERENT MEASUREMENTS

When measuring Guess . . . Calculate . . .
(i) xO2meas ................................... xint/exhdry and xH2exhdry ..................................... (A) xH2exhdry using Eq. 1065.656–7.
(B) xO2exhdry using Eq. 1065.656–16.
(ii) xH2meas ................................. xint/exhdry and xdil/exhdry ..................................... (A) xH2exhdry using Eq. 1065.656–6.
(B) [Reserved].
(7) The following example is a χ

HOexhdry using the equations in
solution for χint/exhdry, χdil/exhdry, and paragraph (c)(5) of this section:
ER22AP24.257</GPH>
385
ER22AP24.259</GPH>
386
Fmt 4701
(d) Mass fractions of fuel. (1) For fuels WH, WO, WS, and WN, based on the fuel WO, WS, and WN using the following
other than carbon-containing fuels properties as determined in paragraph equations:
determine the mass fractions of fuel WC, (e) of this section. Calculate WC, WH,
Eq. 1065.656–24
ER22AP24.265</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–25
ER22AP24.264</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–26
ER22AP24.263</GPH>
ER22AP24.262</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–27
ER22AP24.261</GPH>
ER22AP24.260</GPH>
387
Fmt 4701
Eq. 1065.656–28 t = effective carbon content of the fuel and MN = molar mass of nitrogen.
any injected fluids. Example for NH3 fuel:
Where: MC = molar mass of carbon.
wC = carbon mass fraction of the fuel and any c = effective hydrogen content of the fuel and t=0
injected fluids. any injected fluids. c=3
wH = hydrogen mass fraction of the fuel and MH = molar mass of hydrogen. f=0
any injected fluids. f = effective oxygen content of the fuel and x=0
any injected fluids. w=1
wO = oxygen mass fraction of the fuel and any
MO = molar mass of oxygen.
injected fluids. MC = 12.0107 g/mol
x = effective sulfur content of the fuel and
wS = sulfur mass fraction of the fuel and any any injected fluids. MH = 1.00794 g/mol
injected fluids. MS = molar mass of nitrogen. MO = 15.9994 g/mol
wN = nitrogen mass fraction of the fuel and w = effective nitrogen content of the fuel and MS = 32.065 g/mol
any injected fluids. any injected fluids. MN = 14.0067 g/mol
wC = 0 g/g wN = 0.8224470 g/g WN, based on properties determined

wH = 0.1775530 g/g (2) For carbon-containing fuels and according to § 1065.655(d). Calculate
wO = 0 g/g diesel exhaust fluid determine the mass WC, WH, WO, WS, and WN using the
wS = 0 g/g fractions of fuel, WC, WH, WO, WS, and following equations:
Eq. 1065.656–29
ER22AP24.270</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–30
ER22AP24.269</GPH>
ER22AP24.268</GPH>
Eq. 1065.656–31
ER22AP24.267</GPH>
ER22AP24.266</GPH>
388
Fmt 4701
Eq. 1065.656–32
Eq. 1065.656–33 MC = molar mass of carbon. MN = molar mass of nitrogen.

a = atomic hydrogen-to-carbon ratio of the
Where: Example:
fuel and any injected fluids.
wC = carbon mass fraction of the fuel and any MH = molar mass of hydrogen.
a = 1.8
injected fluids.
b = atomic oxygen-to-carbon ratio of the fuel b = 0.05
wH = hydrogen mass fraction of the fuel and g = 0.0003
any injected fluids. and any injected fluids.
MO = molar mass of oxygen. d = 0.0001
wO = oxygen mass fraction of the fuel and any
injected fluids. g = atomic sulfur-to-carbon ratio of the fuel MC = 12.0107
wS = sulfur mass fraction of the fuel and any and any injected fluids. MH = 1.00794
injected fluids. MS = molar mass of sulfur. MO = 15.9994
wN = nitrogen mass fraction of the fuel and d = atomic nitrogen-to-carbon ratio of the fuel MS = 32.065
any injected fluids. and any injected fluids. MN = 14.0067
ER22AP24.277</GPH>
ER22AP24.276</GPH>
(3) For nonconstant fuel mixtures, you judgment. Calculate WC, WH, WO, WS,
ER22AP24.275</GPH>
must account for the varying and WN of the fuel mixture using the
proportions of the different fuels. This following equations:
paragraph (d)(3) generally applies for
dual-fuel and flexible-fuel engines, but Eq. 1065.656–37
optionally it may also be applied if
ER22AP24.274</GPH>
diesel exhaust fluid or other fluids

injected into the exhaust are injected in
a way that is not strictly proportional to Eq. 1065.656–34
fuel flow. Account for these varying
ER22AP24.273</GPH>
concentrations either with a batch Eq. 1065.656–38

measurement that provides averaged Where:
values to represent the test interval, or wC = carbon mass fraction of the mixture of
by analyzing data from continuous mass Eq. 1065.656–35 test fuels and any injected fluids.
rate measurements. Application of wH = hydrogen mass fraction of the mixture

ER22AP24.272</GPH>
average values from a batch of test fuels and any injected fluids.
measurement generally applies to wO = oxygen mass fraction of the mixture of
situations where one fluid is a minor test fuels and any injected fluids.
component of the total fuel mixture; wS = sulfur mass fraction of the mixture of
ER22AP24.271</GPH>
consistent with good engineering Eq. 1065.656–36 test fuels and any injected fluids.
389
Fmt 4701
wN = nitrogen mass fraction of the mixture of wHmeasj = hydrogen mass fraction of fuel or ṁ1= 0.5352 g/s
test fuels and any injected fluids. any injected fluid j. ṁ2= 7.024 g/s
N = total number of fuels and injected fluids wOmeasj = oxygen mass fraction of fuel or any wCmeas1 = 0.820628 g/g
over the duty cycle. injected fluid j. wHmeas1 = 0.123961 g/g
j = an indexing variable that represents one wSmeasj = sulfur mass fraction of fuel or any
injected fluid j.
wOmeas1 = 0.0546578 g/g
fuel or injected fluid, starting with j = 1.
wNmeasj = nitrogen mass fraction of fuel or any wSmeas1 = 0.00065725 g/g
ṁj = the mass flow rate of the fuel or any
injected fluid j. For batch measurements, injected fluid j. wNmeas1 = 0.0000957004 g/g
divide the total mass of fuel over the test wCmeas2 = 0 g/g
Example for a mixture of diesel and wHmeas2 = 0.177553 g/g
interval duration to determine a mass
NH3 fuel where diesel represents 15% of wOmeas2 = 0 g/g
rate.
wCmeasj = carbon mass fraction of fuel or any energy: wSmeas2 = 0 g/g
injected fluid j. N=2 wNmeas2 = 0.822447 g/g
wC = 0.0581014 g/g (2) For fuels other than carbon- x, and w (along with c) based on
wH = 0.1737586 g/g containing fuels use the default values measured values.
wO = 0.00386983 g/g for t, c, f, x, and w in table 3 to this (3) If your fuel mixture contains
wS = 0.0000465341 g/g section, or use good engineering carbon-containing fuels and your testing
wN = 0.76422359 g/g judgment to determine those values requires fuel composition values
(e) Fuel and diesel exhaust fluid based on measurement. If you determine referencing carbon, calculate a, b, g, and
composition. (1) For carbon-containing compositions based on measured values d for the fuel mixture as described in
fuels and diesel exhaust fluid determine and the default value listed in table 3 to § 1065.655(e)(4).
the composition represented by a, b, g, this section is zero, you may set t, f, x, (4) Table 3 to this paragraph (e)(4)
and d, as described in § 1065.655(e). and w to zero; otherwise determine t, f, follows:
TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (e)(4) OF § 1065.656—DEFAULT VALUES OF t, c, f, x, AND w

Atomic carbon, oxygen, and nitrogen-to-hydrogen ratios
Fuel Ct H≤c Of Sx Nw
Hydrogen ......................................... C0H2O0S0N0.

Ammonia ......................................... C0H3O0S0N1.
(f) Calculated raw exhaust molar flow (c) of this section at the same frequency (i) You may measure flow rate
rate from measured intake air molar that you update and record or . For through the crankcase vent and subtract
flow rate or fuel mass flow rate. You laboratory tests, calculating raw exhaust it from the calculated exhaust flow.
may calculate the raw exhaust molar molar flow rate using measured fuel (ii) You may estimate flow rate
flow rate from which you sampled mass flow rate is valid only for steady- through the crankcase vent by
emissions, , based on the measured state testing. See § 1065.915(d)(5)(iv) for engineering analysis as long as the
intake air molar flow rate, , or the application to field testing. uncertainty in your calculation does not
measured fuel mass flow rate, , and the (1) Crankcase flow rate. If engines are adversely affect your ability to show
ER22AP24.279</GPH>
values calculated using the chemical not subject to crankcase controls under that your engines comply with
balance in paragraph (c) of this section. the standard-setting part, you may applicable emission standards.
The chemical balance must be based on calculate raw exhaust flow based on or
raw exhaust gas concentrations. Solve (iii) You may assume your crankcase
using one of the following: vent flow rate is zero.
ER22AP24.278</GPH>
for the chemical balance in paragraph
390
Fmt 4701
(2) Intake air molar flow rate Eq. 1065.656–39 ṅint = 3.780 mol/s
calculation. Calculate ṅ based on using Where: xint/exhdry = 0.69021 mol/mol
the following equation: ṅexh = raw exhaust molar flow rate from xraw/exhdry = 1.10764 mol/mol
which you measured emissions.
ṅint = intake air molar flow rate including xH20exhdry = 107.64 mmol/mol = 0.10764
humidity in intake air. mol/mol
Example:
(3) Fluid mass flow rate calculation. steady-state laboratory testing. See field testing. Calculate based on using
This calculation may be used only for § 1065.915(d)(5)(iv) for application to the following equation:
Eq. 1065.656–40 wCj = carbon mass fraction of the fuel (or xCcombdry1 = 6.45541 mmol/mol =
mixture of test fuels) and any injected 0.00645541 mol/mol
Where: fluid j. xHcombdry1 = 641.384 mmol/mol =
ṅexh = raw exhaust molar flow rate from wHj = hydrogen mass fraction of the fuel (or 0.641384 mol/mol
which you measured emissions. mixture of test fuels) and any injected
fluid j.
ṁ1 = 0.167974 g/s
ṁ2 = 7.39103 g/s
fuel or injected fluid, starting with j = 1. Example: wC1 = 0.820628 g/g
N = total number of fuels and injected fluids
xH20exhdry1 = 312.013 mmol/mol = wC2 = 0 g/g
over the duty cycle.
ṁj = the mass flow rate of the fuel or any
0.10764 mol/mol wH1 = 0.123961 g/g
injected fluid j.
MC = 12.0107 g/mol wH2 = 0.177553 g/g
MH = 1.00794 g/mol N=2
(g) Calculated raw exhaust molar flow correction in § 1065.667; and the ṅdexh = 49.02 mol/s
rate from measured intake air molar calculation of mass of emissions in ṅexh = (0.1544 ¥ 0.1451) · (1 ¥ 0.03246)
flow rate, dilute exhaust molar flow § 1065.650(c) for species that are · 49.02 + 7.930 = 0.4411 + 7.930 =
rate, and dilute chemical balance. You measured in the raw exhaust. 8.371 mol/s
may calculate the raw exhaust molar (1) Crankcase flow rate. If engines are ■ 162. Revise and republish § 1065.660
flow rate, ṅexh, based on the measured not subject to crankcase controls under to read as follows:
intake air molar flow rate, ṅint, the the standard-setting part, calculate raw ER22AP24.284</GPH>
exhaust flow as described in paragraph § 1065.660 THC, NMHC, NMNEHC, CH4,

measured dilute exhaust molar flow and C2H6 determination.
rate, ṅdexh, and the values calculated (f)(1) of this section.
(2) Dilute exhaust and intake air (a) THC determination and initial
using the chemical balance in paragraph
molar flow rate calculation. Calculate as THC/CH4 contamination corrections. (1)
(c) of this section. Note that the
follows: If we require you to determine THC
ER22AP24.283</GPH>
chemical balance must be based on

ṅexh = (xraw/exhdry ¥ xint/exhdry) · (1 ¥ emissions, calculate χTHC[THC–FID]cor
dilute exhaust gas concentrations. For
xH20exh) · ṅdexh + ṅint using the initial THC contamination
continuous-flow calculations, solve for
concentration χTHC[THC–FID]init from
the chemical balance in paragraph (c) of Eq. 1065.656–41
§ 1065.520 as follows:
this section at the same frequency that Example:

ER22AP24.282</GPH>
χ χ
THC[THC–FID]cor = THC[THC–FID]uncor ¥
you update and record ṅint and ṅdexh. ṅint = 7.930 mol/s χ
THC[THC–FID]init
This calculated ṅdexh may be used for xraw/exhdry = 0.1544 mol/mol
the PM dilution ratio verification in xint/exhdry = 0.1451 mol/mol Eq. 1065.660–1
§ 1065.546; the calculation of dilution xH20exhdry = 32.46 mmol/mol = 0.03246 Example:
χTHCuncor = 150.3 mmol/mol
ER22AP24.281</GPH>
air molar flow rate in the background mol/mol
391
Fmt 4701
χTHCinit = 1.1 mmol/mol sample train using Eq. 1065.660–1, concentrations and calculate the mass of
χTHCcor = 150.3—1.1 substituting in CH4 concentrations for NMHC as described in § 1065.650(c)(5).
χTHCcor = 149.2 mmol/mol THC. (2) For an NMC, calculate χNMHC
(2) For the NMHC determination (5) You may calculate THC as the sum
using the NMC’s penetration fractions,
described in paragraph (b) of this of NMHC and CH4 if you determine CH4
response factors, and/or combined
section, correct χTHC[THC–FID] for initial with an FTIR as described in paragraph
(d)(2) of this section and NMHC with an penetration fractions and response
THC contamination using Eq. 1065.660–
1. You may correct χTHC[NMC–FID] for FTIR using the additive method from factors as described in § 1065.365, the
initial contamination of the CH4 sample paragraph (b)(4) of this section. THC FID’s CH4 response factor,
train using Eq. 1065.660–1, substituting (6) You may calculate THC as the sum RFCH4[THC–FID], from § 1065.360, the
in CH4 concentrations for THC. of NMNEHC, C2H6, and CH4 if you initial THC contamination and dry-to-
(3) For the NMNEHC determination determine CH4 with an FTIR as wet corrected THC concentration,
described in paragraph (c) of this described in paragraph (d)(2) of this χTHC[THC–FID]cor, as determined in
section, correct χTHC[THC–FID] for initial section, C2H6 with an FTIR as described paragraph (a) of this section, and the
THC contamination using Eq. 1065.660– in paragraph (e) of this section, and dry-to-wet corrected CH4 concentration,
1. You may correct χTHC[NMC–FID] for NMNEHC with an FTIR using the χTHC[NMC–FID]cor, optionally corrected for
initial contamination of the CH4 sample additive method from paragraph (c)(3) initial THC contamination as
train using Eq. 1065.660–1, substituting of this section. determined in paragraph (a) of this
in CH4 concentrations for THC. (b) NMHC determination. Use one of section.
(4) For the CH4 determination the following to determine NMHC
(i) Use the following equation for an
described in paragraph (d) of this concentration, χNMHC:
section, you may correct χTHC[NMC–FID] (1) If you do not measure CH4, you NMC configured as described in
for initial THC contamination of the CH4 may omit the calculation of NMHC § 1065.365(d):
Eq. 1065.660–2 RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC FID RFPFCH4[NMC–FID] = 1.000

to CH4, according to § 1065.360(d).
Where:
RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = NMC combined C2H6 RFCH4[THC–FID] = 1.05
χNMHC = concentration of NMHC. response factor and penetration fraction,
χTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, according to § 1065.365(d).
initial THC contamination and dry-to- RFPFCH4[NMC–FID] = NMC combined CH4
wet corrected, as measured by the THC response factor and penetration fraction,
FID during sampling while bypassing the according to § 1065.365(d).
NMC.
χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, Example: (ii) Use the following equation for
initial THC contamination (optional) and
χTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 mmol/mol penetration fractions determined using
dry-to-wet corrected, as measured by the an NMC configuration as outlined in
NMC FID during sampling through the χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 20.5 mmol/mol
§ 1065.365(e):
NMC. RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.019
Eq. 1065.660–3 χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 20.5 mmol/mol
ER22AP24.289</GPH>
initial THC contamination (optional) and PFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.020
Where: dry-to-wet corrected, as measured by the
χNMHC = concentration of NMHC. THC FID during sampling through the
χTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, NMC.
initial THC contamination and dry-to- PFC2H6[NMC–FID] = NMC C2H6 penetration
wet corrected, as measured by the THC
ER22AP24.288</GPH>
fraction, according to § 1065.365(e).
FID during sampling while bypassing the
NMC. Example: (iii) Use the following equation for an
PFCH4[NMC–FID] = NMC CH4 penetration χTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 mmol/mol NMC configured as described in
fraction, according to § 1065.365(e). PFCH4[NMC–FID] = 0.990 § 1065.365(f):
ER22AP24.287</GPH>
ER22AP24.286</GPH>
Eq. 1065.660–4 χTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, FID during sampling while bypassing the
initial THC contamination and dry-to- NMC.
Where: PFCH4[NMC–FID] = NMC CH4 penetration
wet corrected, as measured by the THC
χNMHC = concentration of NMHC.
ER22AP24.285</GPH>
fraction, according to § 1065.365(f).
392
Fmt 4701
χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = NMC combined C2H6 χTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 mmol/mol
initial THC contamination (optional) and response factor and penetration fraction,
PFCH4[NMC–FID] = 0.990
dry-to-wet corrected, as measured by the according to § 1065.365(f).
RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC FID χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 20.5 mmol/mol
THC FID during sampling through the
NMC. to CH4, according to § 1065.360(d). RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.019
Example: RFCH4[THC–FID] = 0.980
(3) For a GC–FID or FTIR, calculate χCH2O = 0.8 mmol/mol χC2H6 = the C1-equivalent concentration of
χNMHC using the THC analyzer’s CH4 χC2H4O = 0.3 mmol/mol C2H6, dry-to-wet corrected, as measured
response factor, RFCH4[THC–FID], from χCH2O2 = 0.1 mmol/mol by the GC–FID or FTIR.
§ 1065.360, and the initial THC χCH4O = 0.1 mmol/mol Example:
contamination and dry-to-wet corrected χNMHC = 4.9 + 0.9 + 0.8 + 0.4 + 0.5 +
0.3 + 0.8 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 0.1 χTHC[THC–FID]cor = 145.6 mmol/mol
THC concentration, χTHC[THC–FID]cor, as RFCH4[THC–FID] = 0.970
χNMHC = 9.1 mmol/mol
determined in paragraph (a) of this χCH4 = 18.9 mmol/mol
section as follows: (c) NMNEHC determination. Use one RFC2H6[THC–FID] = 1.02
cNMHC = cTHC[THC-FID]cor ¥ RFCH4[THC-FID] of the following methods to determine χC2H6 = 10.6 mmol/mol
· cCH4 NMNEHC concentration, χNMNEHC: χNMNEHC = 145.6 ¥ 0.970 · 18.9 ¥ 1.02
(1) Calculate χNMNEHC based on the · 10.6
Eq. 1065.660–5
test fuel’s ethane content as follows: χNMNEHC = 116.5 mmol/mol
Where: (i) If the content of your test fuel
χNMHC = concentration of NMHC. contains less than 0.010 mol/mol of (3) For an FTIR, calculate xNMNEHC by
χTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, ethane, you may omit the calculation of summing the hydrocarbon species listed
initial THC contamination and dry-to- NMNEHC concentration and calculate in § 1065.266(c) as follows:
wet corrected, as measured by the THC the mass of NMNEHC as described in
FID. § 1065.650(c)(6)(i).
RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC–FID (ii) If the content of your fuel test
to CH4.
χCH4 = concentration of CH4, dry-to-wet
contains at least 0.010 mol/mol of C2H6,
corrected, as measured by the GC–FID or you may omit the calculation of
FTIR. NMNEHC concentration and calculate Eq. 1065.660–8
the mass of NMNEHC as described in
Example: § 1065.650(c)(6)(ii). Where:
χTHC[THC–FID]cor = 145.6 mmol/mol (2) For a GC–FID, NMC FID, or FTIR, χNMNEHC = concentration of NMNEHC.
χHCi = the C1-equivalent concentration of
RFCH4[THC–FID] = 0.970 calculate χNMNEHC using the THC hydrocarbon species i as measured by
χCH4 = 18.9 mmol/mol analyzer’s CH4 response factor, the FTIR, not corrected for initial
χNMHC = 145.6—0.970 · 18.9 RFCH4[THC–FID], and C2H6 response factor, contamination.
χNMHC = 127.3 mmol/mol RFC2H6[THC–FID], from § 1065.360, the χHCi-init = the C1-equivalent concentration of
(4) For an FTIR, calculate χNMHC by initial contamination and dry-to-wet the initial system contamination
summing the hydrocarbon species listed corrected THC concentration, (optional) of hydrocarbon species i, dry-
in § 1065.266(c) as follows: χTHC[THC–FID]cor, as determined in to-wet corrected, as measured by the
paragraph (a) of this section, the dry-to- FTIR.
wet corrected CH4 concentration, χCH4, Example:
as determined in paragraph (d) of this χC2H4 = 0.9 mmol/mol
section, and the dry-to-wet corrected χC2H2 = 0.8 mmol/mol
C2H6 concentration, χC2H6, as χC3H8 = 0.4 mmol/mol
Eq. 1065.660–6 determined in paragraph (e) of this χC3H6 = 0.5 mmol/mol
section as follows: χC4H10 = 0.3 mmol/mol
Where:
χNMNEHC = χTHC[THC–FID}cor ¥ χCH2O = 0.8 mmol/mol
χNMHC = concentration of NMHC.
RFCH4{THC–FID}. χCH4 ¥ χC2H4O = 0.3 mmol/mol
χHCi = the C1-equivalent concentration of χCH2O2 = 0.1 mmol/mol
RFC2H6{THC–FID] . χC2H6
hydrocarbon species i as measured by χCH4O = 0.1 mmol/mol
the FTIR, not corrected for initial Eq. 1065.660–7 χNMNEHC = 0.9 + 0.8 + 0.4 + 0.5 + 0.3
contamination. + 0.8 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 0.1
χHCi-init = the C1-equivalent concentration of Where:
xNMNEHC = 4.2 mmol/mol
the initial system contamination χNMNEHC = concentration of NMNEHC.
ER22AP24.292</GPH>
(optional) of hydrocarbon species i, dry- χTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, (d) CH4 determination. Use one of the
to-wet corrected, as measured by the initial THC contamination and dry-to- following methods to determine
FTIR. wet corrected, as measured by the THC methane (CH4) concentration, χCH4:
Example: FID. (1) For an NMC, calculate xCH4 using
RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC–FID

χC2H6 = 4.9 mmol/mol the NMC’s penetration fractions,
ER22AP24.291</GPH>
to CH4.
χC2H4 = 0.9 mmol/mol χCH4 = concentration of CH4, dry-to-wet
response factors, and/or combined
χC2H2 = 0.8 mmol/mol corrected, as measured by the GC–FID, penetration fractions and response
χC3H8 = 0.4 mmol/mol NMC FID, or FTIR. factors as described in § 1065.365, the
χC3H6 = 0.5 mmol/mol RFC2H6[THC–FID] = response factor of THC–FID THC FID’s CH4 response factor,
χC4H10 = 0.3 mmol/mol
ER22AP24.290</GPH>
to C2H6. RFCH4[THC–FID], from § 1065.360, the
393
Fmt 4701
initial THC contamination and dry-to- χTHC[NMC–FID]cor, optionally corrected for (i) Use the following equation for an
wet corrected THC concentration, initial THC contamination as NMC configured as described in
χTHC[THC–FID]cor, as determined in determined in paragraph (a) of this § 1065.365(d):
paragraph (a) of this section, and the section.
dry-to-wet corrected CH4 concentration,
Eq. 1065.660–9 χTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, RFPFCH4[NMC–FID] = NMC combined CH4

initial THC contamination and dry-to- response factor and penetration fraction,
Where: wet corrected, as measured by the THC according to § 1065.365(d).
χCH4 = concentration of CH4. FID during sampling while bypassing the Example:
χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, NMC.
initial THC contamination (optional) and RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = NMC combined C2H6 χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 10.4 mmol/mol
dry-to-wet corrected, as measured by the response factor and penetration fraction, χTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 mmol/mol
NMC FID during sampling through the according to § 1065.365(d). RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.019
NMC. RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC FID RFPFCH4[NMC–FID] = 1.000
to CH4, according to § 1065.360(d). RFCH4[THC–FID] = 1.05
(ii) Use the following equation for an

NMC configured as described in
§ 1065.365(e):
Eq. 1065.660–10 FID during sampling while bypassing the PFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.020
NMC. RFCH4[THC–FID] = 1.05
Where: PFC2H6[NMC–FID] = NMC C2H6 penetration PFCH4[NMC–FID] = 0.990
xCH4 = concentration of CH4. fraction, according to § 1065.365(e).
χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC FID
initial THC contamination (optional) and to CH4, according to § 1065.360(d).
dry-to-wet corrected, as measured by the PFCH4[NMC–FID] = NMC CH4 penetration
ER22AP24.298</GPH>
NMC FID during sampling through the fraction, according to § 1065.365(e).
NMC.
Example: (iii) Use the following equation for an
χTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC,
initial THC contamination and dry-to- χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 10.4 mmol/mol NMC configured as described in
wet corrected, as measured by the THC χTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 mmol/mol § 1065.365(f):
ER22AP24.297</GPH>
ER22AP24.296</GPH>
Eq. 1065.660–11 RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = the combined C2H6

response factor and penetration fraction
Where: of the NMC, according to § 1065.365(f).
ER22AP24.295</GPH>
χCH4 = concentration of CH4. PFCH4[NMC–FID] = NMC CH4 penetration

χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, fraction, according to § 1065.365(f).
initial THC contamination (optional) and RFCH4[THC–FID] = response factor of THC FID (2) For a GC–FID or FTIR, xCH4 is the
dry-to-wet corrected, as measured by the to CH4, according to § 1065.360(d). actual dry-to-wet corrected CH4
NMC FID during sampling through the concentration as measured by the

Example:
ER22AP24.294</GPH>
NMC. analyzer.
χTHC[THC–FID]cor = concentration of THC, χTHC[NMC–FID]cor = 10.4 mmol/mol
initial THC contamination and dry-to- χTHC[THC–FID]cor = 150.3 mmol/mol (e) C2H6 determination. For a GC–FID
wet corrected, as measured by the THC RFPFC2H6[NMC–FID] = 0.019 or FTIR, χC2H6 is the C1-equivalent, dry-
FID during sampling while bypassing the PFCH4[NMC–FID] = 0.990 to-wet corrected C2H6 concentration as
ER22AP24.293</GPH>
NMC. RFCH4[THC–FID] = 1.05 measured by the analyzer.
394
Fmt 4701
■ 163. Amend § 1065.670 by revising ■ 165. Amend § 1065.695 by: 8217 (incorporated by reference, see
paragraphs (a) introductory text and (b) ■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(9)(v) § 1065.1010).
introductory text to read as follows: through (vii) as paragraphs (c)(9)(vi) * * * * *
through (viii); and
§ 1065.670 NOX intake-air humidity and ■ b. Adding new paragraph (c)(9)(v).
■ 167. Amend § 1065.715 in paragraph
temperature corrections. (a), table 1, by revising footnote ‘‘a’’ to
The addition reads as follows:
* * * * * read as follows:
(a) For compression-ignition engines § 1065.695 Data requirements.
operating on carbon-containing fuels § 1065.715 Natural gas.
* * * * *
and lean-burn combustion engines (c) * * * (a) * * *
operating on fuels other than carbon- (9) * * *
containing fuels, correct for intake-air (v) Chemical balance method— TABLE 1 OF § 1065.715—TEST FUEL
humidity using the following equation: carbon-based or hydrogen-based SPECIFICATIONS FOR NATURAL GAS
* * * * * chemical balance method.
(b) For spark-ignition engines * * * * * Property Value a
operating on carbon-containing fuels ■ 166. Amend § 1065.705 by revising
and stoichiometric combustion engines paragraph (b) to read as follows: * * *
operating on fuels other than carbon-
* *
containing fuels, correct for intake-air § 1065.705 Residual and intermediate * *
humidity using the following equation: residual fuel.
a Demonstrate compliance with fuel speci-
* * * * * * * * * *
fications based on the reference procedures in
■ 164. Amend § 1065.672 by revising (b) The fuel must be free of used ASTM D1945 (incorporated by reference, see
paragraph (c) to read as follows: lubricating oil. Demonstrate this by § 1065.1010), or on other measurement proce-
showing that the fuel meets at least one dures using good engineering judgment.
§ 1065.672 Drift correction. of the following specifications. * * * * *
* * * * * (1) Zinc is at or below 15 mg per kg
(c) Drift validation. After applying all of fuel based on the procedures ■ 168. Amend § 1065.750 by revising
the other corrections—except drift specified in IP—470, IP—501, or ISO paragraphs (a)(1)(ii), (a)(2)(i), (a)(3)
correction—to all the gas analyzer 8217 (incorporated by reference, see introductory text, and (a)(3)(xiii) and
signals, calculate emissions according to § 1065.1010). adding paragraph (a)(6) to read as
§ 1065.650. Then correct all gas analyzer (2) Phosphorus is at or below 15 mg follows:
signals for drift according to this per kg of fuel based on the procedures § 1065.750 Analytical gases.
section. Recalculate emissions using all specified in IP—500, IP—501, or ISO
of the drift-corrected gas analyzer * * * * *
8217 (incorporated by reference, see
signals. Validate and report the § 1065.1010). (a) * * *
emission results before and after drift (3) Calcium is at or below 30 mg per (1) * * *
correction according to § 1065.550. kg of fuel based on the procedures (ii) Contamination as specified in the
* * * * * specified in IP—470, IP—501, or ISO following table:
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)(ii) OF § 1065.750–GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR PURIFIED GASES A

Constituent Purified Air Purified N2
THC (C1-equivalent) .............................................................. ≤ 0.05 μmol/mol ................................................................... ≤ 0.05 μmol/mol

CO ......................................................................................... ≤ 1 μmol/mol ........................................................................ ≤ 1 μmol/mol
CO2 ........................................................................................ ≤ 10 μmol/mol ...................................................................... ≤ 10 μmol/mol
O2 .......................................................................................... 0.205 to 0.215 mol/mol ........................................................ ≤ 2 μmol/mol
NOX ....................................................................................... ≤ 0.02 μmol/mol ................................................................... ≤ 0.02 μmol/mol
N2O b ..................................................................................... ≤ 0.02 μmol/mol ................................................................... ≤ 0.02 μmol/mol
H2 c ........................................................................................ ≤ 1 μmol/mol ........................................................................ ≤ 1 μmol/mol
NH3 d ...................................................................................... ≤ 1 μmol/mol ........................................................................ ≤ 1 μmol/mol
H2O e ..................................................................................... ≤ 5 μmol/mol ........................................................................ ≤ 5 μmol/mol
a We do not require these levels of purity to be NIST-traceable.
b The N2O limit applies only if the standard-setting part requires you to report N2O or certify to an N2O standard.
c The H2 limit only applies for testing with H2 fuel.
d The NH limit only applies for testing with NH fuel.
3 3
e The H O limit only applies for water measurement according to § 1065.257.
2
(2) * * * (incorporated by reference, see from this gas mixture. If your gas
(i) FID fuel. Use FID fuel with a stated § 1065.1010). mixture contains oxygenated
H2 concentration of (0.39 to 0.41) mol/ * * * * * hydrocarbons, your gas mixture must be
mol, balance He or N2, and a stated total (3) Use the following gas mixtures, in balance purified N2, otherwise you
hydrocarbon concentration of 0.05 with gases traceable within ±1% of the may use balance purified air.
mmol/mol or less. For GC–FIDs that NIST-accepted gas standard value or * * * * *

measure methane (CH4) using a FID fuel other gas standards we approve: (6) If you measure H2O using an FTIR
that is balance N2, perform the CH4 * * * * * analyzer, generate H2O calibration gases
measurement as described in SAE J1151 (xiii) CH4, CH2O2, C2H2, C2H4, C2H4O, with a humidity generator using one of
C2H6, C3H8, C3H6, CH4O, and C4H10. You the options in this paragraph (a)(6). Use
may omit individual gas constituents good engineering judgment to prevent
395
condensation in the transfer lines, generator’s measurements and follow vessel. Adjust the amount of H2O in the
fittings, or valves from the humidity NIST Technical Note 1297 (incorporated calibration gas by changing the
generator to the FTIR analyzer. Design by reference, see § 1065.1010) to verify temperature of the H2O in the sealed
your system so the wall temperatures in that the amount of H2O in the vessel. Determine absolute pressure,
the transfer lines, fittings, and valves calibration gas, xH2Oref, is determined pabs, and dewpoint, Tdew, of the
from the point where the mole fraction within ±3% uncertainty, UxH2O. If the humidified gas leaving the sealed
of H2O in the humidified calibration humidity generator requires assembly vessel. Calculate the amount of H2O in
gas, xH2Oref, is measured to the analyzer before use, after assembly follow the the calibration gas as described in
are at a temperature of (110 to 202) °C. instrument manufacturer’s instructions § 1065.645(a) and (b). Calculate the
Calibrate the humidity generator upon to check for leaks. You may generate the uncertainty of the amount of H2O in the
initial installation, within 370 days H2O calibration gas using one of the
calibration gas, UxH2O, using the
before verifying the H2O measurement following options:
of the FTIR, and after major (i) Bubble gas that meets the following equations:
maintenance. Use the uncertainties from requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this
the calibration of the humidity section through distilled H2O in a sealed
Eq. 1065.750–1 Eq. 1065.750–2
Eq. 1065.750–3 UTdew = expanded uncertainty (k = 2) of the UPabs = expanded uncertainty (k = 2) of the
measured saturation temperature of wet static absolute pressure at the
Where: water at measured conditions. location of the dewpoint measurement.
Tdew = saturation temperature of water at pabs = wet static absolute pressure at the
measured conditions. location of the dewpoint measurement.
ER22AP24.302</GPH>
ER22AP24.301</GPH>
Example: UTdew = 0.390292 K Using Eq. 1065.645–1,

pabs = 99.980 kPa
Tdew = 39.5 °C = 312.65 K UPabs = 1.15340 kPa xH2O = 0.0718436 mol/mol
ER22AP24.300</GPH>
ER22AP24.299</GPH>
396
Fmt 4701
(ii) Use a device that introduces a
ER22AP24.310</GPH>
measured flow of distilled H2O as vapor
into a measured flow of gas that meets
the requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of
Eq. 1065.750–4 Eq. 1065.750–5
this section. Determine the molar flows
ER22AP24.309</GPH>
of gas and H2O that are mixed to (B) Calculate the uncertainty of the
generate the calibration gas. amount of H2O in the generated
(A) Calculate the amount of H2O in calibration gas, UxH2O, using the
the calibration gas as follows: following equations:
ER22AP24.308</GPH>
Eq. 1065.750–6
ER22AP24.307</GPH>
ER22AP24.306</GPH>
Eq. 1065.750–7 Uṅgas = expanded uncertainty (k=2) of the UṅH2O = expanded uncertainty (k=2) of the
molar flow of gas entering the humidity molar flow of H2O entering the humidity
Where: generator. generator.
ṅgas = molar flow of gas entering the humidity ṅH2O = molar flow of H2O entering the
generator. humidity generator, mol/s.
ER22AP24.305</GPH>
ER22AP24.304</GPH>
ER22AP24.303</GPH>
397
Fmt 4701
xH2O = amount of H2O in the calibration gas. (C) The following example is a Uṅgas = 0.000226137 mol/s
UxH2O = expanded uncertainty (k=2) of the solution for using the equations in ṅgas = 0.0148680 mol/s
amount of H2O in the generated paragraph (a)(6)(ii)(B) of this section:
calibration gas. UṅH2O = 0.0000207436 mol/s
ṅH2O = 0.00138771 mol/s
* * * * * ■ a. Adding a definition of ‘‘Carbon- example, hydrogen or natural gas fuel

■ 169. Amend § 1065.805 by revising containing fuel’’ in alphabetical order; used without diesel pilot fuel are neat.
paragraph (f) to read as follows: ■ b. Revising the definition for ‘‘HEPA * * * * *
filter’’; NIST-traceable means relating to a
§ 1065.805 Sampling system. standard value that can be related to
■ c. Adding definitions of ‘‘Lean-burn
* * * * * engine’’ and ‘‘Neat’’ in alphabetical NIST-stated references through an
(f) You may sample alcohols or order; and unbroken chain of comparisons, all
carbonyls using ‘‘California Non- ■ b. Revising the definitions of ‘‘NIST-
having stated uncertainties, as specified
Methane Organic Gas Test Procedures’’ traceable’’ and ‘‘Rechargeable Energy in NIST Technical Note 1297
(incorporated by reference, see Storage System (RESS)’’. (incorporated by reference, see
§ 1065.1010). If you use this method, § 1065.1010). Allowable uncertainty
follow its calculations to determine the The additions and revisions read as
limits specified for NIST-traceability
mass of the alcohol/carbonyl in the follows:
refer to the propagated uncertainty
exhaust sample, but follow subpart G of § 1065.1001 Definitions. specified by NIST.
this part for all other calculations (40 * * * * * * * * * *
CFR part 1066, subpart G, for vehicle Rechargeable Energy Storage System
testing). Carbon-containing fuel means an
engine fuel that is characterized by (RESS) means engine or equipment
* * * * * compounds containing carbon. For components that store recovered energy
■ 170. Amend § 1065.935 by revising example, gasoline, diesel, alcohol, for later use to propel the vehicle or
paragraph (g)(5)(ii) to read as follows: liquefied petroleum gas, and natural gas accomplish a different primary function.
are carbon-containing fuels. Examples of RESS include the battery
§ 1065.935 Emission test sequence for system or a hydraulic accumulator in a
field testing. * * * * *
hybrid vehicle.
* * * * * HEPA filter means high-efficiency
* * * * *
(g) * * * particulate air filters that are rated to
achieve a minimum initial particle- ■ 172. Amend § 1065.1010 by revising
(5) * * *
removal efficiency of 99.97% using paragraphs (a)(40) and (e)(2) to read as
(ii) Invalidate any data for periods in follows:
which the CO and CO2 gas analyzers do ASTM F1471 (incorporated by
not meet the drift criterion in reference, see § 1065.1010). § 1065.1010 Incorporation by reference.
§ 1065.550. For HC, invalidate data if * * * * * * * * * *
the difference between the uncorrected Lean-burn engine means an engine (a) * * *
and the corrected brake-specific HC with a nominal air fuel ratio (40) ASTM D6348–12 epsiv;1,
emission values are not within ±10% of substantially leaner than stoichiometric. Standard Test Method for Determination
the uncorrected results or the applicable For example, diesel-fueled engines are of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive
standard, whichever is greater. For data typically lean-burn engines, and Direct Interface Fourier Transform
that do meet the drift criterion, correct gasoline-fueled engines are lean-burn Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy, approved
ER22AP24.310</GPH>
the data for drift according to § 1065.672 engines if they have an air-to-fuel mass February 1, 2012 (‘‘ASTM D6348’’), IBR
and use the drift-corrected results in ratio above 14.7:1. approved for §§ 1065.257(b),
emissions calculations. * * * * * 1065.266(c), 1065.275(b), and
* * * * * Neat means fuel that is free from 1065.277(b).
ER22AP24.311</GPH>
■ 171. Amend § 1065.1001 by: mixture or dilution with other fuels. For * * * * *
398
Fmt 4701
(e) * * * single storage site is the recommended (2) For each aging temperature
(2) NIST Technical Note 1297, 1994 metric for tracking thermal aging. selected, perform testing to assess the
Edition, Guidelines for Evaluating and (3) Vanadium SCR. Brunauer– aging metric at different times. These
Expressing the Uncertainty of NIST Emmett–Teller (BET) theory for time intervals do not need to be evenly
Measurement Results, IBR approved for determination of surface area is a key spaced and it is typical to complete
§§ 1065.365(g), 1065.750(a), and aging metric for vanadium-based SCR these experiments using increasing time
1065.1001. catalysts. Total NH3 storage capacity intervals (e.g., after 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32
* * * * * may also be used as a surrogate to probe hours). Use good engineering judgment
■ 173. Revise § 1065.1137 to read as the surface area. If you use NH3 storage to stop each temperature experiment
follows: to probe surface area, using a single after sufficient data has been generated
storage site is the recommended metric to characterize the shape of the
§ 1065.1137 Determination of thermal for tracking thermal aging. You may also deactivation behavior at a given
reactivity coefficient. use low temperature NOX conversion as temperature.
This section describes the method for a metric. If you choose this option, you (i) For SCR-based NH3 storage
determining the thermal reactivity may be limited in your choice of capacity testing, perform a Temperature
coefficient(s) used for thermal heat load temperatures for the experiment Programmed Desorption (TPD)
calculation in the accelerated aging described in paragraph (c)(1) of this following NH3 saturation of the catalyst
protocol. section due to vanadium volatility. In (i.e., ramping gas temperature from 200
(a) The calculations for thermal that case, it is possible that you may to 550 °C) to quantify total NH3 released
degradation are based on the use of an need to run a longer experimental during the TPD.
Arrhenius rate law function to model duration than the recommended 64 (ii) For DOC formulations, conduct an
cumulative thermal degradation due to hours to reach reliably measurable NO Reverse Light Off (RLO) to quantify
heat exposure. Under this model, the changes in NOX conversion. oxidation conversion efficiency of NO to
thermal aging rate constant, k, is an (4) Zone-coated zeolite SCR. This type NO2 (i.e., ramping gas temperature from
exponential function of temperature of catalyst is zone coated with both 500 to 150 °C).
which takes the form shown in the copper- and iron-based zeolite. As noted (d) Generate a fit of the deactivation
following equation: in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this data generated in paragraph (b) of this
section, total NH3 storage capacity is a section at each temperature.
key aging metric, and each zone must be
(1) Copper-based zeolite SCR. Process
evaluated separately.
all NH3 TPD data from each aging
Eq. 1065.1137–1 (5) Diesel oxidation catalysts. The key
condition using an algorithm to fit the
Where: aging metric for tracking thermal aging
NH3 desorption data.
A = frequency factor or pre-exponential for DOCs which are used to optimize
exhaust characteristics for a (i) We recommend that you use the
factor. Temkin adsorption model to quantify
Ea = thermal reactivity coefficient. downstream SCR system is the
R = molar gas constant. conversion rate of NO to NO2. Select a the NH3 TPD at each site to determine
T = catalyst temperature. conversion rate temperature less than or the desorption peaks of individual
equal to 200 °C using good engineering storage sites. The adsorption model is
(b) The process of determining Ea adapted from ‘‘Adsorption of Nitrogen
begins with determining what catalyst judgement. The key aging metric for
DOCs, which are part of a system that and the Mechanism of Ammonia
characteristic will be tracked as the Decomposition Over Iron Catalysts’’
basis for measuring thermal does not contain an SCR catalyst for
NOX reduction, is the HC reduction (Brunauer, S. et al, Journal of the
deactivation. This metric varies for each American Chemical Society, 1942, 64
type of catalyst and may be determined efficiency (as measured using ethylene).
Select a conversion rate temperature (4), 751–758) and ‘‘On Kinetic Modeling
from the experimental data using good of Change in Active Sites upon
engineering judgment. We recommend less than or equal to 200 °C using good
engineering judgement. This same Hydrothermal Aging of Cu–SSZ–13’’
the following metrics; however, you (Daya, R. et al, Applied Catalysis B:
may also use a different metric based on guidance applies to an oxidation
catalyst coated onto the surface of a Environmental, 2020, 263, 118368–
good engineering judgment: 118380). It is generalized using the
(1) Copper-based zeolite SCR. Total DPF, if there is no other DOC in the
system. following equation (assuming a two-site
ammonia (NH3) storage capacity is a key model):
aging metric for copper-zeolite SCR (c)(1) Use good engineering judgment
catalysts, and they typically contain to select at least three different
multiple types of storage sites. It is temperatures to complete the
typical to model these catalysts using degradation experiments. We
two different storage sites, one of which recommend selecting these
temperatures to accelerate thermal Eq. 1065.1137–2
is more active for NOX reduction, as this
has been shown to be an effective metric deactivation such that measurable Where:
for tracking thermal aging. In this case, changes in the aging metric can be k = e¥Ea(1¥aq)/RT
there are two recommended aging observed at multiple time points over Ea = thermal reactivity coefficient of
metrics: the course of no more than 64 hours. ammonia desorption.
(i) The ratio between the storage Avoid temperatures that are too high to a = Temkin constant.
capacity of the two sites, with more prevent rapid catalyst failure by a q = fraction of adsorption sites currently
mechanism that does not represent occupied (initial q is assumed to be 1).

active site being in the denominator.
ER22AP24.314</GPH>
normal aging. An example of R = molar gas constant.

(ii) Storage capacity of the more active T = aging temperature.
site. temperatures to run the degradation
(2) Iron-based zeolite SCR. Total NH3 experiment at for a small-pore copper (A) Use Eq. 1065.1137–2 to express
storage capacity is a key aging metric for zeolite SCR catalyst is 600 °C, 650 °C, the NH3 storage site desorption peaks as
iron-zeolite SCR catalysts. Using a and 725 °C. follows:
ER22AP24.313</GPH>
399
Fmt 4701
Eq. 1065.1137–3 Eq. 1065.1137–6

Where: Where:
N1 = moles of NH3 desorbed from Site 1. W0 = 1 (assumes that N2/N1 or = N2 values
A1 = pre-exponential factor associated with were normalized to the degreened value Eq. 1065.1137–9
Site 1. for each aging temperature). Where:
Ea,T1 = thermal reactivity coefficient of A = pre-exponential factor. W = N2/N1 or = N2 (W is to be normalized to
ammonia desorption for Site 1. Ea,D = thermal reactivity coefficient. the degreened W value for each new
N2 = moles of NH3 desorbed from Site 2. R = molar gas constant. catalyst component prior to aging, i.e., W
A2 = pre-exponential factor associated with T = aging temperature. = 1 at t = 0 for each aging temperature).
Site 2. t = aging time.
Ea,T2 = thermal reactivity coefficient of
ammonia desorption for Site 2. (2) Use a global fitting approach to
solve for Ea,D and AD by applying a
(B) Optimize Ea,T1, a1, A1, Ea,T2, a2, generalized reduced gradient (GRG) (Eq. 1065.1137–5)
and A2 to fit each NH3 TPD peak to give nonlinear minimization algorithm, or
the best fit. The moles of NH3 (N1 and A = pre-exponential factor.
equivalent. For the global fitting Ea,D = thermal reactivity coefficient.
N2) may vary for each individual TPD approach, optimize the model by R = molar gas constant.
data set. minimizing the Global Sum of Square T = aging temperature.
(ii) Use one of the following modeling Errors (SSEGlobal) between the
approaches to derive the thermal experimental W and model W while only (2) Generate a plot of 1/W versus t for
reactivity coefficient, Ea,D. We allowing Ea,D and AD to vary. Global SSE each aging temperature evaluated in
recommend that you use both models to is defined as the summed total SSE for paragraph (c)(1) in this section. The
fit the data and check that the resulting all aging temperatures evaluated. slope of each line is equal to the thermal
Ea,D values for the two methods are aging rate, kD, at a given aging
within 3% of each other. temperature. Using the data pairs of
ER22AP24.323</GPH>
aging temperature and thermal aging
(A) General Power Law Expression
rate constant, kD, determine the thermal
(GPLE). Generate a fit of the deactivation
reactivity coefficient, Ea, by performing
data from paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this
a regression analysis of the natural log
section for each aging temperature using Eq. 1065.1137–7
ER22AP24.322</GPH>
of kD versus the inverse of temperature,
the following expression:
Where: T, in Kelvin. Determine Ea,D from the
n = total number of aging temperatures. slope of the resulting regression line,
i = an indexing variable that represents one mdeactivation, using the following equation:
aging temperature. Ea,D = ¥mdeactivation · R
ER22AP24.321</GPH>
SEET = sum of square errors (SSE) for a single
Eq. 1065.1137–4 aging temperature, T, (see Eq. Eq. 1065.1137–10
Where: 1065.1137–8).
Where:
kD = the thermal aging rate constant. mdeactivation = the slope of the regression line
ER22AP24.320</GPH>
of ln(kD) versus 1/T.
R = molar gas constant.
(2) Iron-based zeolite or vanadium

Eq. 1065.1137–5 SCR. Process all NH3 TPD data from
Eq. 1065.1137–8
ER22AP24.319</GPH>
A = pre-exponential factor. each aging condition using a GPLE to fit
Ea,D = thermal reactivity coefficient. Where:
the NH3 desorption data (or BTE surface
R = molar gas constant. n = total number of aging intervals for a area data for vanadium SCR). Note that
T = aging temperature. single aging temperature. this expression is different from the one
W = N2/N1 or = N2 (normalizing W to the i = an indexing variable that represents one
used in paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(A) of this ER22AP24.318</GPH>
degreened W value for each new catalyst aging interval for a single aging
component prior to aging is temperature.
section because the model order m is
recommended (i.e., W = 1 at t = 0 for each WExp = experimentally derived aging metric allowed to vary. This general expression
aging temperature). for aging temperature, T. takes the following form:
Weq = aging metric at equilibrium (set = 0 Wmodel = aging metric calculated from Eq.
ER22AP24.317</GPH>
unless there is a known activity 1065.1137–6 for aging temperature, T.

minimum).
m = model order (assumed to be 2 for copper- (B) Arrhenius approach. In the
based zeolite SCR). Arrhenius approach, the deactivation Eq. 1065.1137–11
rate constant, kD, of the aging metric, W,

(1) Solve Eq. 1065.1137–4 for W to
ER22AP24.316</GPH>
is calculated at each aging temperature. Where:

yield the following expression: W = total NH3 (or BET surface area)
(1) Generate a fit of the deactivation normalized to the degreened value for
data in paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section each new catalyst component prior to
at each aging temperature using the aging (i.e., W = 1 at t = 0 for each aging
ER22AP24.315</GPH>
following linear expression: temperature).
400
Fmt 4701
R = molar gas constant. m = model order.

T = aging temperature.
t = time. (i) Solve Eq. 1065.1137–10 for W to
(Eq. 1065.1137–5) Weq = aging metric at equilibrium (set to 0 yield the following expression:
A = pre-exponential factor. unless there is a known activity
Ea,D = thermal reactivity coefficient. minimum).
Eq. 1065.1137–12 conversion efficiency, X, at the

Where: temperature determined in paragraph
W0 = 1 (assumes total NH3 storage, or BET
(b)(5) of this section. We recommend
surface area, was normalized to the Eq. 1065.1137–13 maintaining the target oxidation
degreened value for each aging conversion temperature to ±5 °C. For
temperature). Where: each aging condition (aging
A = pre-exponential factor. v = velocity. temperature, T and aging time, t),
Ea,D = thermal reactivity coefficient. X = conversion (NO to NO2) in %/100. calculate the aging metric, W, by
R = molar gas constant. V = volume of reactor.
normalizing AD to the degreened AD
value for each new catalyst component
t = aging time.
m = model order (to be varied from 1 to 8 prior to aging (i.e., W = 1 at t = 0 for each
using whole numbers). aging temperature).
Eq. 1065.1137–14 (A) Use the GPLE to fit the NO to NO2
(ii) Global fitting is to be used to solve
for Ea,D and AD by applying a GRG AD = pre-exponential factor. conversion data, X, at each aging
nonlinear minimization algorithm, as Ea,D = thermal reactivity coefficient. temperature. The GPLE takes the
described in paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(A) of R = molar gas constant. following form:
this section. Minimize the SSEGlobal for
each model order, m, while only (ii) For a diesel oxidation catalyst, the
allowing Ea,D and AD to vary. The preexponential term AD is proportional
optimal solution is determined by to the number of active sites and is the
selecting the model order, m, that yields desired aging metric. Solving Eq. Eq. 1065.1137–16
the lowest global fit SSE. If you have a 1065.1137–13 for kD, substituting it for Where:
range of model order solutions where kD in Eq. 1065.1137–5, and then solving
ER22AP24.331</GPH>
the SSEGlobal does not vary substantially, for AD yields Eq. 1065.1137–15: W = aging metric for diesel oxidation
use good engineering judgement to catalysts.
choose the lowest m for this range.
(3) Zone-coated zeolite SCR. Derive
the thermal reactivity coefficient, Ea,D,
ER22AP24.330</GPH>
for each zone of the SCR, based on the Eq. 1065.1137–15 (Eq. 1065.1137–14)
guidance provided in paragraphs (d)(1) R = molar gas constant.
and (2) of this section. The zone that Where:
yields the lowest Ea,D shall be used for SV = space velocity used during RLO testing.
t = aging time.
ER22AP24.329</GPH>
calculating the target cumulative X= conversion (NO to NO2).
Weq = aging metric at equilibrium (set to 0
thermal load, as outlined in Ea,D = thermal reactivity coefficient.
T = temperature where X was measured. unless there is a known activity
§ 1065.1139. minimum).
R = molar gas constant.
(4) Diesel oxidation catalyst. (i) The m = model order.
catalyst monolith is modeled as a plug (iii) Process all NO to NO2 oxidation
ER22AP24.328</GPH>
flow reactor with first order reaction RLO data for each aging condition by (B) Solve Eq. 1065.1137–12 for to
rate: determining the average oxidation yield the following expression:
ER22AP24.327</GPH>
ER22AP24.326</GPH>
Eq. 1065.1137–17 m = model order (to be varied from 1 to 8 order, m, that yields the lowest global fit
using whole numbers) SSE. If you have a range of model order
Where:
(iv) Use global fitting to solve for Ea,D solutions where the SSEGlobal does not
Weq = 1 (assumes the oxidation efficiency, X,
and A by applying a GRG nonlinear vary substantially, use good engineering
was normalized to the degreened value
minimization algorithm, as described in judgement to choose the lowest m for

for each aging temperature).
ER22AP24.325</GPH>
A = pre-exponential factor. paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(A) of this section. this range.

Ea,D = thermal reactivity coefficient. Minimize the SSEGlobal for each model ■ 174. Amend § 1065.1139 by adding
R = molar gas constant. order, m, while only allowing Ea,D and paragraphs (e)(6)(v) and (f)(3) and
T = aging temperature. A to vary. The optimal solution is revising paragraphs (g)(1) introductory
ER22AP24.324</GPH>
t = aging time. determined by selecting the model text and (h) to read as follows:
401
Fmt 4701
§ 1065.1139 Aging cycle generation. that if you reduce the acceleration factor operating modes that will achieve this
* * * * * you must use the same lower cycle average target. For engine-based
(e) * * * acceleration factor in the chemical aging stands you will likely have
(6) * * * exposure calculations in paragraph (h) different oil consumption rates for
(v) If you are not able to achieve the of this section, instead of 10. different modes depending on the speed
target Dt,field using the steps in (g) * * * and load conditions you set. For burner-
paragraphs (e)(6)(i) through (iv) of this (1) Cycle assembly with infrequent based aging stands, you may find that
section without exceeding catalyst regenerations. For systems that use you have to limit oil exposure rates at
temperature limits, use good infrequent regenerations, the number of low exhaust flow or low temperature
engineering judgement to reduce the cycle repeats is equal to the number of modes to ensure good atomization of
acceleration factor from 10 to a lower regeneration events that happen over injected oil. On a cycle average basis,
number. If you reduce the acceleration full useful life. The total cycle duration the portion of oil exposure from the
factor you must re-calculate the number of the aging cycle is calculated as the volatile introduction pathway (i.e., oil
of hours determine in paragraph (a) of total aging duration in hours divided by doped in the burner or engine fuel) must
this section and re-run the process in the number of infrequent regeneration be between (10 to 30) % of the total. The
this paragraph (e). Note that if you events. In the case of systems with remainder of oil exposure must be
reduce the acceleration factor you must multiple types of infrequent introduced through bulk pathway.
use the same lower acceleration factor regenerations, use the regeneration with (2) Fuel sulfur exposure targets. The
in the chemical exposure calculations in the lowest frequency to calculate the target sulfur exposure rate for fuel-
paragraph (h) of this section, instead of cycle duration. related sulfur is determined by utilizing
10. * * * * * the field mean fuel rate data for the
(f) * * * (h) Chemical exposure targets. engine determined in § 1065.1133(a)(3).
(3) If you are not able to achieve the Determine targets for accelerated oil and Calculate the total sulfur exposure mass
target Dt,field using the steps in fuel sulfur exposure as follows: using this mean fuel rate, the total
paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section (1) Oil exposure targets. The target oil number of non-accelerated hours to
without exceeding catalyst temperature exposure rate during accelerated aging reach full useful life, and a fuel sulfur
limits, use good engineering judgement is 10 times the field average oil level of 10 ppmw.
to reduce the acceleration factor from 10 consumption rate determined in (i) For an engine-based aging stand, if
to a lower number. If you reduce the § 1065.1133(a)(2). You must achieve this you perform accelerated sulfur exposure
acceleration factor you must re-calculate target exposure rate on a cycle average by additizing engine fuel to a higher
the number of hours determine in basis during aging. Use good sulfur level, determine the accelerated
paragraph (a) of this section and re-run engineering judgment to determine the aging target additized fuel sulfur mass
the process in this paragraph (f). Note oil exposure rates for individual fraction, wS, as follows:
Eq. 1065.1139–9 Ô
m fuel,field= 54.3 kg/hr (ii) If you use gaseous SO2 to perform
Ô
m accelerated sulfur exposure, such as on
Where: fuel,cycle = 34.1 kg/hr
Ô
m mSfuel,ref = 0.00001 kg/kg. a burner-based stand, calculate the
fuel,field = field mean fuel flow rate.
Ô
m Sacc,rate = 10 target SO2 concentration to be
fuel,cycle = accelerated aging cylce mean fuel
low rate. introduced, xSO2,target, as follows:
mSfuel,ref = reference mass of sulfur per mass
of fuel = 0.00001 kg/kg.
Sacc,rate = sulfur acceleration rate = 10.
Example:
Eq. 1065.1139–10 xSfuel,ref = reference mol fraction of sulfur in Ô

m fuel,field= 54.3 kg/hr
fuel = 10 mmol/mol. Ô
m
Where: exhaust,cycle= 1000.8 kg/hr
Sacc,rate = sulfur acceleration rate = 10.
ER22AP24.334</GPH>
Ô
m Mexh = molar mass of exhaust = molar mass xSfuel,ref = 10 mmol/mol
fuel,field = field mean fuel flow rate.
Ô
m of air. Sacc,rate = 10
exhaust,cycle = mean exhaust flow rate during
the burner aging cycle. MS = molar mass of sulfur. Mexh = 28.96559 g/mol
Example: MS = 32.065 g/mol
ER22AP24.333</GPH>
ER22AP24.332</GPH>
402
Fmt 4701
(iii) You may choose to turn off an iterative process until the correct dynamometer aging, perform
gaseous sulfur injection during modification has been determined. accelerated aging using the cycle
infrequent regeneration modes, but if (3) If the approach in paragraph (b)(2) validated in either paragraph (a)(1) or
you do you must increase the target SO2 of this section is insufficient to reach (2) of this section. Repeat the cycle the
concentration by the ratio of total aging the targets, modify the oil control rings number of times required to reach full
time to total normal (non-regeneration) in one or more cylinders to create small useful life equivalent aging. Interrupt
aging time. notches or gaps (usually no more than the aging cycle as needed to conduct
■ 175. Amend § 1065.1141 by revising 2 per cylinder) in the top portion of the any scheduled intermediate emission
paragraphs (b) and (f) to read as follows: oil control rings that contact the tests, clean the DPF of accumulated ash,
cylinder liner (care must be taken to and for any facility-related reasons. We
§ 1065.1141 Facility requirements for avoid compromising the structural
engine-based aging stands.
recommended you interrupt aging at the
integrity of the ring itself). end of a given aging cycle, following the
* * * * * * * * * * completion of any scheduled infrequent
(b) Use good engineering judgment to (f) Use good engineering judgment to regeneration event. If an aging cycle is
modify the engine to increase oil incorporate a means of monitoring oil paused for any reason, we
consumption rates to levels required for consumption on a periodic basis. You recommended that you resume the aging
accelerated aging. These increased oil may use a periodic drain and weigh cycle at the same point in the cycle
consumption levels must be sufficient to approach to quantify oil consumption. where it stopped to ensure consistent
reach the bulk pathway exposure targets We recommend that you incorporate a thermal and chemical exposure of the
determined in § 1065.1139(h). A method of continuous oil consumption aftertreatment system.
combination of engine modifications monitoring, but you must validate that
and careful operating mode selection method with periodic draining and (e) * * *
will be used to reach the final bulk weighing of the engine oil. You must (2) * * *
pathway oil exposure target on a cycle validate that the aging stand reaches oil (i) Changing engine oil. For an engine-
average. You must modify the engine in consumption targets prior to the start of based platform, periodically change
a fashion that will increase oil aging. You must verify oil consumption engine oil to maintain stable oil
consumption in a manner such that the during aging prior to each emission consumption rates and maintain the
oil consumption is still generally testing point, and at each oil change health of the aging engine. Interrupt
representative of oil passing the piston interval. Validate or verify oil aging as needed to perform oil changes.
rings into the cylinder. Use good consumption over a running period of at Perform a drain-and-weigh
engineering judgment to break in the least 72 hours to obtain a valid measurement. If you see a sudden
modified engine to stabilize oil measurement. If you do not include the change in oil consumption it may be
consumption rates. We recommend the constant volume oil system necessary to stop aging and either
following methods of modification (in recommended in paragraph (c) of this change oil or correct an issue with the
order of preference): section, you must account for all oil
(1) Install the second compression accelerated oil consumption. If the aging
additions. engine requires repairs to correct an oil
ring inverted (upside down) on one or * * * * *
more of the cylinders of the bench aging consumption issue in the middle of
■ 176. Amend § 1065.1145 by revising aging, you must re-validate the oil
engine. This is most effective on rings
paragraphs (d) and (e)(2)(i) to read as consumption rate for 72 hours before
that feature a sloped design to promote
follows: you continue aging. The engine exhaust
oil control when normally installed.
(2) If the approach in paragraph (b)(1) should be left bypassing the
§ 1065.1145 Execution of accelerated
of this section is insufficient to reach aging, cycle tracking, and cycle validation aftertreatment system until the repaired
the targets, modify the oil control rings criteria. engine has been validated.
in one or more cylinders to reduce the * * * * * * * * * *
spring tension on the oil control ring. It (d) Accelerated aging. Following zero- [FR Doc. 2024–06809 Filed 4–19–24; 8:45 am]
should be noted that this is likely to be hour emission testing and any engine BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ER22AP24.335</GPH>
403
Fmt 4701

Heavy Duty Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heavy Duty Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

No.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

S TATE OF N EBRASKA , S TATE OF A LABAMA , S TATE OF A LASKA ,

PETITION FOR REVIEW

Under 42 U.S.C. § 7607(b)(1), Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure

Dated: May 13, 2024 Respectfully submitted.

Counsel for State of Nebraska

s/ Edmund G. LaCour Jr. s/ Masha Kazakova

Counsel for State of Alabama

TIM GRIFFIN ASHLEY MOODY

s/ Nicholas J. Bronni s/ Henry C. Whitaker

Counsel for State of Arkansas Counsel for State of Florida

s/ Stephen J. Petrany s/ Joshua N. Turner

Counsel for State of Idaho

THEODORE E. ROKITA BRENNA BIRD

s/ James A. Barta s/ Eric H. Wessan

s/ Anthony J. Powell s/ Matthew F. Kuhn

ELIZABETH B. MURRILL LYNN FITCH

s/ J. Benjamin. Aguiñaga s/ Justin L. Matheny

s/ Caleb Rutledge s/ Christian B. Corrigan

Counsel for State of Missouri Counsel for State of Montana

GENTNER DRUMMOND ALAN WILSON

s/ Garry M. Gaskins, II s/ Joseph D. Spate

Counsel for State of Oklahoma

Counsel for State of Tennessee

BRENT WEBSTER s/ Stanford Purser

Counsel for State of Texas

s/ Kevin M. Gallagher LINDSAY S. SEE

Counsel for State of Wyoming

Review by United States first-class mail on the following:

The Honorable Michael S. Regan

Office of General Counsel

The Honorable Merrick B. Garland

Pollutants demonstrated that these standards are

8 See, e.g., 40 CFR 1036.101(a)(2) (engines,

addressing preemption of state regulation of new

vehicles, and we included those vehicles in the

in use today for some applications and EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0985–1644–A1.

available at https://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/ California under CAA section 209(b) on March 30,

heavy-duty vehicles. U.S. Department of Recordhtml/8581405 (Oregon); Low emission

and 3, 2023, and the public comment

billions of dollars already to do so),54 authority to issue the proposed

Major Progress for a Made-in-America National

68 As further described in section III, as has been

well. duty-vehicle-and-engine-greenhouse-gas-emissions. standards and evaluate costs in part to

82 Standards of Performance for New,

technical information. While assessing Communication and Consultation on Electric

1985 (‘‘Emissions averaging, of both particulate and

120 See CAA 207(i)(2) (for light-duty vehicles,

start’’ conditions i.e., when the vehicle is operated

vehicle emissions under the CAA, EPA the RTC.

repeatedly endorsed the specific concept of phase-

persons or property on a street or 188 CAA section 202(a)(3)(A)(ii). This section

and Medicine. 2019. Climate Change and

We have made a number of updates sizing; EVSE costs; consideration of

submitted in response to our proposal

OAR–2022–0985–1423. as required by section 202(a)), or make

225 The numeric values of the optional custom

Technologies exist today and i. Aerodynamics bumper, headlights, windshield, hood,

October 2009. Devices for Tractor-Trailers.’’ November 2, 2006.

Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines

900. August 2016. emissions in operation, while tires with default/files/2016-02/documents/420f12024.pdf.

245 Department of Energy Alternative Fuels Data

compliance with engine CO2 exhaust