Alternative Method for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Application From Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCA)

Alternative Method for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Application From Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCA)

Topics: Fiat Chrysler Automobiles

Alternative Method for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Application From Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCA)

Byron Bunker
Environmental Protection Agency
5 April 2021

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 63 (Monday, April 5, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17594-17595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06919]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0076; FRL-10020-64-OAR]

Alternative Method for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the
Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Application From
Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCA)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is requesting
comment on an application from Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV (FCA) for
off-cycle carbon dioxide (CO2) credits under EPA's light-
duty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions standards. ``Off-cycle'' emission
reductions can be achieved by employing technologies that result in
real-world benefits, but where that benefit is not adequately captured
on the test procedures used by manufacturers to demonstrate compliance
with emission standards. EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas
program acknowledges these benefits by giving automobile manufacturers
several options for generating ``off-cycle'' CO2 credits.
Under the regulations, a manufacturer may apply for CO2
credits for off-cycle technologies that result in off-cycle benefits.
In these cases, a manufacturer must provide EPA with a proposed
methodology for determining the real-world off-cycle benefit. FCA has
submitted an application that describes a methodology for determining
off-cycle credits from technologies described in their application.
Pursuant to applicable regulations, EPA is making this off-cycle credit
calculation methodology available for public comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 5, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2021-0076 to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linc Wehrly, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone: (734)
214-4286. Fax: (734) 214-4869. Email address: wehrly.linc@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) program provides
three pathways by which a manufacturer may accrue off-cycle carbon
dioxide (CO2) credits for those technologies that achieve
CO2 reductions in the real world but where those reductions
are not adequately captured on the test used to determine compliance
with the CO2 standards, and which are not otherwise
reflected in the standards' stringency. The first pathway is a
predetermined list of credit values for specific off-cycle technologies
that may be used beginning in model year 2014.\1\ This pathway allows
manufacturers to use conservative credit values established by EPA for
a wide range of technologies, with minimal data submittal or testing
requirements, if the technologies meet EPA regulatory definitions. In
cases where the off-cycle technology is not on the menu but additional
laboratory testing can demonstrate emission benefits, a second pathway
allows manufacturers to use a broader array of emission tests (known as
``5-cycle'' testing because the methodology uses five different testing
procedures) to demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2
credits.\2\ The additional emission tests allow emission benefits to be
demonstrated over some elements of real-world driving not adequately
captured by the GHG compliance tests, including high speeds, hard
accelerations, and cold temperatures. These first two methodologies
were completely defined through notice and comment rulemaking and
therefore no additional process is necessary for manufacturers to use
these methods. The third and last pathway allows manufacturers to seek
EPA approval to use an alternative methodology for determining the off-
cycle CO2 credits.\3\ This option is only available if the
benefit of the technology cannot be adequately demonstrated using the
5-cycle methodology. Manufacturers may also use this option to
demonstrate reductions that exceed those available via use of the
predetermined list. Under the regulations, a manufacturer seeking to
demonstrate off-cycle credits with an alternative methodology (i.e.,
under the third pathway described above) must describe a methodology
that meets the following criteria:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b).
\2\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c).
\3\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use modeling, on-road testing, on-road data collection, or
other approved analytical or engineering methods;
Be robust, verifiable, and capable of demonstrating the
real-world emissions benefit with strong statistical significance;
Result in a demonstration of baseline and controlled
emissions over a wide range of driving conditions and number of
vehicles such that issues of data uncertainty are minimized;
Result in data on a model type basis unless the
manufacturer demonstrates that another basis is appropriate and
adequate.
In addition, the regulations specify the following requirements
regarding an application for off-cycle CO2 credits:
A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must develop a
methodology for demonstrating and determining the benefit of the off-
cycle technology and carry out any necessary testing and analysis
required to support that methodology.
A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must conduct
testing and/or prepare engineering analyses that demonstrate the in-use
durability of the

[[Page 17595]]

technology for the full useful life of the vehicle.
The application must contain a detailed description of the
off-cycle technology and how it functions to reduce CO2
emissions under conditions not represented on the FTP and HFET
compliance tests.
The application must contain a list of the vehicle
model(s) which will be equipped with the technology.
The application must contain a detailed description of the
test vehicles selected and an engineering analysis that supports the
selection of those vehicles for testing.
The application must contain all testing and/or simulation
data required under the regulations, plus any other data the
manufacturer has considered in the analysis.
Finally, the alternative methodology must be approved by EPA prior
to the manufacturer using it to generate credits. As part of the review
process defined by regulation, an application for credits using an
alternative methodology submitted to EPA for consideration must be made
available for public comment, unless EPA has previously approved the
alternative methodology for determining credits and has chosen to waive
the notice and comment period for an application that meets the
regulatory requirements for such a waiver. Further, EPA retains the
option to require a notice and opportunity for public comment in cases
where a new application deviates in significant respects from a
previously approved methodology or raises novel substantive issues.\4\
EPA will consider public comments as part of its final decision to
approve or deny the request for off-cycle credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Off-Cycle Credit Application

Active Climate Control Seat Technology

Using the alternative methodology approach discussed above, FCA is
requesting off-cycle greenhouse gas (``GHG'') credits for the use of a
Gentherm active climate control seating (``ACCS'') technologies. The
company's analysis in their application yields a GHG credit equal to
2.3 grams CO2 per mile for passenger cars and 2.9 grams
CO2 per mile for trucks on vehicles equipped with this
technology in the front seating locations.
Active seat ventilation credits were defined in the 2017-2025 light
duty greenhouse gas and CAFE rulemaking and were added to the
predefined list of credits that could be claimed at 1.0 grams
CO2 per mile and 1.3 grams CO2 per mile for
trucks. The credits and their values were determined in a 2005 study
performed by researchers from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory
(``NREL'') in which they evaluated a seat ventilation system that used
two small fans to pull air through the seat. When occupant comfort is
achieved the air conditioning system no longer needs to work as hard to
cool down the cabin. This translates to lowered air conditioning
consumption and lower GHG emissions due to lowered air conditioning
consumption while improving occupant comfort.
The NREL study was published as an SAE technical paper in 2007
available at https://www.sae.org/publications/technicalpapers/content/2007-01-1194/. More recent advances in ventilated seat technology offer
higher levels of performance in current vehicles over the simpler
ventilated seat system that was the subject of the 2005 NREL study. The
active climate-controlled seat technology developed by Gentherm and
used in FCA premium products was subsequently evaluated by Gentherm in
cooperation with NREL using comparable methodologies to those employed
by NREL in 2005. The more advanced Gentherm ACCS system provides a
greater level of comfort resulting in lower air conditioning
consumption and air conditioning related emissions through the use of
its active cooling technology. Details are provided in the application
by FCA.
FCA's request is for approval of similar methodology and for the
same amount of credits per vehicle granted in the General Motors
request to EPA for off-cycle.
Credit dated September 29, 2017 and subsequently granted in EPA
decision document EPA-420-R-18-014. Details of FCA's analysis and the
approved request by General Motors can be found in the corresponding
the manufacturer's applications.

III. EPA Decision Process

EPA has reviewed the application for completeness and is now making
the application available for public review and comment as required by
the regulations. The off-cycle credit application submitted by the
manufacturer (with confidential business information redacted) has been
placed in the public docket (see ADDRESSES section above) and on EPA's
website at https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/compliance-information-light-duty-greenhouse-gas-ghg-standards.
EPA is providing a 30-day comment period on the application for
off-cycle credits described in this notice, as specified by the
regulations. The manufacturer may submit a written rebuttal of comments
for EPA's consideration, or may revise an application in response to
comments. After reviewing any public comments and any rebuttal of
comments submitted by the manufacturer, EPA will make a final decision
regarding the credit request. EPA will make its decision available to
the public by placing a decision document on EPA's website at the same
manufacturer-specific page described above.

Byron Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2021-06919 Filed 4-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P