Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Proposed Rules 26805

and the environment. Subsequently,

EPA is proposing the deletion of this

Site from the NPL.

State Concurrence

The Florida Department of

Environmental Protection concurs with

the proposed deletion of the Chemform,

Inc. Superfund Site from the NPL. FDEP

submitted a ‘‘Letter of Concurrence’’ to

EPA on November 22, 1999. EPA also

worked closely with FDEP in

establishing a five year review period in

the ESD.

Reports that contain extensive Site

characterization information are

available for review, along with the

RODs and ESD, in the Administrative

Record. A Deletion Docket, which

contains all pertinent information

supporting the deletion

recommendation, is also available to the

public at the EPA Regional office and

the local Site repository.

Dated: April 6, 2000.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IV.

[FR Doc. 00–11569 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 538

[Docket No.: NHTSA–2000–7087]

Automotive Fuel Economy

Manufacturing Incentives for

Alternative Fuel Vehicles

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Request for comments.

SUMMARY: This document seeks

comments to assist the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA) in the study of the success of

the policy of providing corporate

average fuel economy (CAFE) incentives

for ‘‘dual-fuel’’ alternative fuel and

gaseous dual-fuel vehicles and whether

the agency should extend the incentive

program for four years beyond MY 2004.

Comments received in response to this

document will be used to assist NHTSA

in completing a study and issuing a

report to Congress on or before

September 30, 2000.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 8, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments to this document

must refer to the docket number and

notice number set forth above and be

submitted (preferably two copies) to:

U.S. Department of Transportation,

Docket Management, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.

20590. Docket hours are 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Monday through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The

following persons at the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration,

400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington,

D.C. 20590: For non-legal issues: Mr.

Lawrence Fleming, Consumer Programs

Division, Office of Planning and

Consumer Programs, NPS–32, Room

5320, telephone (202) 366–4936,

facsimile (202) 493-2290. For legal

issues: Otto Matheke, Office of the Chief

Counsel, NCC–20, Room 5219,

telephone (202) 366–5263, facsimile

(202) 366–3820.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Corporate

average fuel economy (CAFE) is the fuel

economy, expressed in miles per gallon,

of a manufacturer’s fleet of: (1)

Passenger cars, or (2) light trucks under

8,500 lbs. gross vehicle weight rating.

Each manufacturer’s average fuel

economy is determined by the

Environmental Protection Agency in

accordance with procedures set forth in

49 U.S.C. 32904 and is calculated by

computing the weighted fuel economy

average of various model types of a

manufacturer in a particular model year.

The MY 2000 CAFE standard is 27.5

mpg for passenger cars and 20.7 mpg for

light trucks. Failure to comply with the

standard for either passenger car or light

truck fleets in any given model year

results in civil penalties of $5.50 for

each tenth of a mile per gallon per

vehicle. (49 U.S.C. 32912(b)).

Manufacturers can earn ‘‘credits’’ to

offset deficiencies in their CAFE

performance. Specifically, when the

average fuel economy of the vehicles

manufactured by a manufacturer in a

particular model year exceeds the

average fuel economy standard, the

manufacturer earns credits. The number

of credits a manufacturer earns is

determined by multiplying the number

of tenths of a mile per gallon by which

the manufacturer exceeded the fuel

economy standard in that model year

times the number of vehicles they

manufactured in that model year. These

credits can be applied to any of the

three consecutive model years

immediately after, or if a carry-back

plan is approved under 32903(b), before

the model year for which the credits are

earned. For a variety of reasons, credits

are highly valued by manufacturers and

provide a significant incentive to exceed

the applicable standards for a given

model year.

The Alternative Motor Fuels Act of

1988 (‘‘AMFA’; Pub. L. 100–94, October

14, 1988) was enacted with the primary

purpose of encouraging the

development and use of methanol,

ethanol and natural gas as

transportation fuels and to promote the

production of alternate fuel vehicles

(AFVs) by auto manufacturers. To this

end, AMFA contains provisions that

allow for special treatment of vehicle

fuel economy calculations for dedicated

alternative fuel vehicles and dual-fuel

vehicles that meet specified

requirements. Passenger automobiles

and light trucks that are eligible for

special fuel economy calculations are

‘‘dedicated’’ and designed to operate

exclusively on methanol or ethanol in

composition of 70 percent or more or on

natural gas; or ‘‘flexible fuel’’ vehicles

that have the capability to operate on

either conventional petroleum or a

blend of alcohols in conjunction with

either gasoline or diesel; or on natural

gas. These vehicles also must meet

energy efficiency and minimum driving

range requirements. A manufacturer

producing alternative fuel vehicles that

meet energy efficiency and minimum

driving range requirements may be able

to raise their overall fleet fuel economy

performance by manufacturing these

vehicles.

AMFA directs the Secretary of

Transportation to conduct a study and

issue a report on the success of the

policy of providing CAFE incentives for

alternative dual-fuel vehicles by

assessing alternative fuel use; cost and

availability; the availability and

affordability of vehicles capable of

operating on either alternative or

conventional fuel; the effect these

vehicles have on the environment;

energy conservation; and other relevant

factors. This document seeks

information and data that will assist the

agency in conducting its assessment.

1. Statutory Background

Section 6 of AMFA amended the fuel

economy provisions of Title V of the

Motor Vehicle Information and Cost

Savings Act by adding a new section

513 that contains incentives for the

manufacture of vehicles designed to

operate on alternative fuels, including

dual-fuel vehicles. Dual-fuel vehicles

are generally defined as one of two

classes that operate on either alternative

fuel and gasoline or diesel fuel, or those

capable of operating on natural gas or

either gasoline or diesel fuel. Section

513(h) specifically defined a ‘‘dual

energy@ automobile as one that meets a

minimum driving range and:

26806 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Proposed Rules

(i) Which is capable of operating on

alcohol and on gasoline or diesel fuel;

(ii) Which provides equal or superior

energy efficiency, as calculated for the

applicable model year during fuel economy

testing for the Federal Government, while

operating on alcohol as it does while

operating on gasoline or diesel fuel; [and]

(iii) Which* * * provides equal or

superior energy efficiency, as calculated for

the applicable model year during fuel

economy testing for the Federal Government,

while operating on a mixture of alcohol and

gasoline or diesel fuel containing exactly 50

percent gasoline or diesel fuel as it does

while operating on gasoline or diesel fuel as

those vehicles capable of operating on

alcohol and on either gasoline or diesel fuel,

or those capable of operating on natural gas

and on either gasoline or diesel fuel [.].

A ‘‘natural gas dual energy’’ automobile

was defined as a vehicle that met

specified minimum driving range, and:

(i) Which is capable of operating on natural

gas and on gasoline or diesel fuel; [and]

(ii) Which provides equal or superior

energy efficiency, as calculated for the

applicable model year during fuel economy

testing for the Federal Government, while

operating on natural gas as it does while

operating on gasoline or diesel fuel [.].

The Energy and Policy Act of 1992

added new provisions of Section 513 of

the Motor Vehicle Information and Cost

Savings Act. In addition, the definition

of alternative fuel was expanded to

include liquefied petroleum gas,

hydrogen, liquid fuels derived from coal

and biological materials, electricity and

any other fuel that the Secretary of

Transportation determines to be

substantially non-petroleum based and

have environmental and energy security

benefits. The law also revised

terminology by replacing ‘‘dual energy’’

and ‘‘natural gas dual energy’’ with

‘‘alternative fueled vehicles’’ in order to

more appropriately reflect the expanded

list of fuels.

Beginning in MY 1993, manufacturers

of AFVs that met the minimum driving

range and energy efficiency criteria

could qualify for special treatment in

the calculation of their CAFE by

computing the weighted average of fuel

economy while operating on gasoline or

diesel fuel and when operating on the

alcohol after dividing the alcohol fuel

economy by a factor of 0.15. For

instance, a dedicated AFV that would

achieve 15 mpg fuel economy while

operating on alcohol would have a

CAFE calculated as follows:

FE=(1/0.15)(15)=100 miles per gallon

For alternative dual-fuel vehicles, an

assumption is made that the vehicles

would operate 50% of the time on the

alternative fuel and 50% of the time

operating on conventional fuel,

resulting in a fuel economy that is based

on a harmonic average of alternative and

conventional fuel. The fuel economy for

an alternative dual-fuel model is

calculated by dividing 1.0 by the sum of

0.5 divided by the fuel economy as

measured on the conventional fuel and

0.5 divided by the fuel economy as

measured on the alternative fuel, using

the 0.15 volumetric conversion factor.

For example, for an alternative dualfueled model that achieves 15 miles per

gallon operating on an alcohol fuel and

25 mpg on the conventional fuel, the

resulting CAFE value would be:

1/((0.5/ 25)+(0.5/100))=40 miles per

gallon

The CAFE calculated values for a

natural gas alternative fuel vehicle are

arrived at in similar fashion. For the

purposes of this calculation, the fuel

economy is equal to the weighted

average of the vehicle fuel economy

while operating on natural gas and

while operated on either gasoline or

diesel fuel. Section 32905(c) specifies

the energy equivalency of 100 cubic feet

of natural gas to be equal to 0.823

gallons of gasoline, with the gallon

equivalent of natural gas to be

considered to have a fuel content equal

to 0.15 gallons of fuel. The applicability

of these special mileage calculation

procedures is for vehicles manufactured

for sale in MY 1993 through MY 2004,

and the maximum allowable increase in

a manufacturer’s fleet average fuel

economy attributed to these dual-fuel

vehicles is 1.2 miles per gallon.

Section 32905(g) stipulates that the

Secretary of Transportation (the

Secretary), in consultation with the

Secretary of Energy and the

Administrator of the Environmental

Protection Agency, shall submit a report

to the Committee on Commerce, Science

and Transportation and Governmental

Affairs of the Senate, and the Committee

on Energy and Commerce of the House

of Representatives, a report containing

the results of the study of the success of

this alternative fuel vehicle mileage

credit incentive policy and make

recommendations whether to extend the

program for up to an additional four (4)

model years, with a maximum allowable

increase in average fuel economy for a

manufacturer attributed to dual-fuel

vehicles of 0.9 miles per gallon. In

preparation of this study and report, the

Secretary is to consider the following

factors:

(i) [T]he availability to the public of

alternative fueled automobiles, and

alternative fuels;

(ii) energy conservation and energy

security;

(iii) environmental considerations; and

(iv) other relevant factors.

Upon completion of the study and

report, the Secretary shall either

promulgate a final rule that extends the

incentive program for up to four

additional model years, or issue public

notice of the decision to terminate the

incentive program with appropriate

justification. The final rule or regulatory

decision must be issued no later than

December 31, 2001.

2. The Intent of the Alternative Motor

Fuels Act of 1988 and the Basis for

Evaluation of the Study and Report

It is clear that in creating special

CAFE incentives for alternative fuel

vehicles in AMFA and EPACT

amendments, Congress intended to

foster the commercialization of

alternative fuels used for transportation

and to further the development of the

alternative fuel production, supply and

distribution infrastructure. While

AMFA has provisions for special CAFE

calculations for both dedicated and

dual-fuel vehicles, the statutory

language directs that the study and

report to Congress only assess the policy

of providing CAFE incentives for dualfuel vehicles and not dedicated AFVs.

Accordingly, information on dedicated

AFVs will be included in the study only

as it pertains to evaluating the policy of

providing CAFE mileage credits for

dual-fuel vehicles.

It should be noted that while the

Energy Policy Act of 1992 expanded the

definition of alternative fuels to include

liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen,

electrically powered and others, the

rulemaking procedures for

implementing the provisions of AMFA

were already in process by the time

these other energy source fuels were

classified as ‘‘alternative’’ fuels, and the

final rule implementing the related

provisions of AMFA has procedures for

CAFE credit calculations for alcohol and

compressed natural gas powered

vehicles only (ref: 59 FR 39368; August

3, 1994).

In executing the study and preparing

the report, NHTSA will specifically

attempt to evaluate the effect of the

incentives upon the acceptance of

alternative fuels as measured by the

change in fuel use for light vehicle

transportation. NHTSA will also

examine the change in the number of

vehicles that operate on alternative fuels

manufactured since the 1993 model year

and evidence, if any, that associates the

design, development and production of

these vehicles to the incentives offered

in fuel economy calculations. Wherever

possible, the costs and benefits to both

consumers and industry will be

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Proposed Rules 26807

analyzed as well as the impact upon

energy security and the environment.

3. Questions and Comments

To assess the impacts of the CAFE

incentives program as described above,

NHTSA, in coordination with the

Environmental Protection Agency and

the Department of Energy, seeks specific

information and relevant comments. Set

forth below are questions organized

under three categories to facilitate

collection of data and relevant

information: (1) The automobile

industry; (2) the fuel industry; and (3)

general interest. NHTSA invites

comments and input from all interested

parties on any of the questions listed in

this document. The information sought

by the agency will assist in the

preparation of the study and report to

Congress on the effect of CAFE

incentives for dual-fuel and gaseous

dual-fuel vehicles and the agency’s

determination on whether to continue

the program with a reduced maximum

attributed allowance through the 2008

model year. In providing a comment on

a particular matter or in responding to

a particular question, interested parties

are requested to provide any relevant

factual information to support their

conclusions or opinions, including but

not limited to statistical and cost data or

marketing studies, and the source of

such information. Wherever used, the

terms ‘‘sale’’, ‘‘production’’ and

‘‘design’’ pertain to passenger cars and

light trucks up to 8,500 lbs. gross

vehicle weight rating that are

manufactured either domestically or

imported for sale in the United States

and U.S. Territories and possessions,

including lease sales, fleet sales, etc.

NHTSA requests information and

comments to the following questions:

(A) Questions/Issues Primarily Related

to Automobile Manufacturers

1. How and to what extent has the

AMFA CAFE incentives program

affected manufacturers’ decisions to

design, manufacture and sell dual-fuel

alcohol and natural gas powered

vehicles and other alternative fuel

vehicles? Specifically for MY 1993

through MY 2000, list all the alternative

fuel vehicles that are offered for sale and

for each vehicle line, indicate whether

credits were a major factor, a minor

factor, or of little or no consideration to

the company’s decision to offer an

alternative fuel vehicle.

2. What was/is the price differential

for offering alcohol and compressed

natural gas powered dual-fuel vehicles

and other alternative fuel vehicles

versus conventionally fueled models?

Please provide examples of

manufacturers’ suggested retail price of

applicable alternative fuel vehicle

models versus the retail price of their

conventional fuel counterpart models.

3. Using the response to Question 2,

what was/is the ‘‘dollar value’’ of each

AMFA qualifying vehicle, defined as the

savings generated by avoiding CAFE

penalties less the expenses associated

with design and manufacturing of these

alternative fuel vehicles?

4. What was/is the cost differential

(on a per vehicle basis) to produce

alcohol and compressed natural gas

powered dual-fuel vehicles and other

alternative fuel vehicles versus

conventionally fueled models?

5. What new technologies have been

specifically developed and

implemented in order to accommodate

the use of methanol/ethanol or natural

gas to qualify for the fuel economy

calculation benefit? What is the

attributed cost of each of the

technologies?

6. Have there been performance or

durability problems associated with

operating vehicles on methanol/ethanol

or natural gas? If yes, please specify the

nature (e.g., materials degradation due

to incompatibility of oxygenated fuels,

cold start and driveability issues, etc.)

and the extent of the problems.

7. What efforts have manufacturers

taken, or plan to take, to market dualfuel or other alternative fuel vehicles to

fleet operators? What information

relative to performance or durability has

been or will be provided by the fleet

operators to the automobile

manufacturer?

8. What initiatives have

manufacturers and dealers taken to

educate consumers about vehicles’

capability to operate on an alternative

fuel? Please provide any available

owner’s manual information, dealer

bulletins, or other point of sale literature

that is relevant.

9. What are the auto manufacturers’

plans for MY 2001 through MY 2008

relative to the AMFA CAFE incentive

program? How would the decision to

extend the maximum allowable mileage

increase at 0.9 mpg as prescribed by

AMFA effect manufacturers’ product

strategy? Conversely, what effect would

a decision not to extend the provision

beyond MY 2004 have on

manufacturers’ product plans?

(B) Questions/Issues Primarily Related

to Fuel Producers, Distributors and

Retailers

1. How has the AMFA CAFE program

affected the fuel industry’s production

and sales of alternative fuels from 1993

through 2000?

2. How has the AMFA CAFE program

directly affected the number of

alternative fuel refueling sites from 1993

through the present time?

3. How will the fuel industry’s

projected plans for production and

distribution be affected by the decision

to either continue or discontinue a

vehicle-specific incentive program

beyond 2004?

4. Does the fuel industry believe that

changes to the infrastructure as a result

of considerations other than/in addition

to the AMFA CAFE credits program

would be warranted in order to improve

an alternative fuels infrastructure?

Please recommend any possible changes

other than AMFA CAFE incentives that

would facilitate further development of

that infrastructure.

5. What efforts have been made by the

fuel industry and other groups to

educate consumers and promote the use

of methanol/ethanol or compressed

natural gas as an alternative fuel?

(C) Questions/Issues of General Interest

1. How difficult is it for consumers to

find fueling locations for, and

availability information on, alternative

fuels? How do they seek alternative fuel

locations?

2. What are the most common

consumer complaints regarding

problems or concerns related to the use

of the dual-fuel vehicles or availability

of the alternative fuels?

3. Assuming an ample supply of

alternative fuels and vehicles, would

consumers be willing to use alternative

fuels over conventional ones? Please

provide the basis for this response.

4. What changes would be necessary

to improve consumer awareness and

acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles?

5. What other efforts could

government or industry take to increase

the use of alternative fuels?

6. Is there any information available

on the approximate percentage of

vehicle mileage for which a owner/

driver of a dual-fuel vehicle uses the

alternative fuel versus gasoline or diesel

fuel? If so, should the ‘‘50/50 split’’ used

in the credit calculation formula be

revised to a value that more closely

represents actual alternative fuel use?

7. Are there companion programs

necessary to ensure that vehicles

manufactured for purposes of

complying with the CAFE requirement

are actually using alternative fuels?

8. Has the AMFA CAFE program

affected the total use of methanol/

ethanol and compressed natural gas

use? If so, how?

9. What changes could be made to this

program, either from the vehicle

production aspect or the fuel industry

26808 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Proposed Rules

aspect, that would be perceived as an

even greater incentive to produce,

distribute and market alternative fuels

in the future?

10. In addition to energy

conservation, energy security,

environmental considerations, and the

availability of alternative fuel vehicles

and alternative fuels to the public, what

other factors should be considered in

the evaluation of the policy of providing

additional CAFE credits for dual-fuel

vehicles?

11. Do you believe the policy of

providing additional CAFE credits for

dual-fuel vehicles should be continued?

Please explain the basis for your

position.

NHTSA solicits public comments on

this document. It is requested but not

required that two copies be submitted.

How Do I Prepare and Submit

Comments?

Your comments must be written and

in English. To ensure that your

comments are correctly filed in the

Docket, please include the Docket

number of this document in your

comments.

Your primary comments must not be

more than 15 pages long (49 CFR

553.21). However, you may attach

additional documents to your primary

comments. There is no limit on the

length of the attachments.

Please send two paper copies of your

comments to Docket Management or

submit them electronically. The mailing

address is: U. S. Department of

Transportation, Docket Management,

Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20590. If you submit

your comments electronically, log onto

the Dockets Management System

website at http://dms.dot.gov and click

on ‘‘Help and Information’’ or ‘‘Help/

Info’’ to obtain instructions.

How Can I Be Sure That My Comments

Were Received?

If you wish Docket Management to

notify you upon its receipt of your

comments, enclose a self-addressed,

stamped postcard in the envelope

containing your comments. Upon

receiving your comments, Docket

Management will return the postcard by

mail.

How Do I Submit Confidential Business

Information?

If you wish to submit any information

under claim of confidentiality, send

three copies of your complete

submission, including the information

you claim to be confidential business

information, to the Chief Counsel, NCC–

01, National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, Room 5219, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590. Include a cover letter supplying

the information specified in our

confidential business information

regulation (49 CFR Part 512).

In addition, send two copies from

which you have deleted the claimed

confidential business information to

Docket Management, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590.

Will the Agency Consider Late

Comments?

NHTSA will consider all comments

that Docket Management receives before

the close of business on the comment

closing date indicated above under

DATES. To the extent possible, NHTSA

will also consider comments that Docket

Management receives after that date.

Please note that even after the

comment closing date, NHTSA will

continue to file relevant information in

the Docket as it becomes available.

Further, some people may submit late

comments. Accordingly, we recommend

that you periodically check the Docket

for new material.

How Can I Read the Comments

Submitted by Other People?

You may read the comments by

visiting Docket Management in person

at Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street,

SW, Washington, DC from 9:00 a.m. to

5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.

You may also see the comments on

the Internet by taking the following

steps:

(1) Go to the Docket Management

System (DMS) Web page of the

Department of Transportation (http://

dms.dot.gov/search/)

(2) On that page, click on ‘‘search’’.

(3) On the next page (http://

dms.dot.gov/search/) type in the four

digit Docket number shown at the

beginning of this Notice. Click on

‘‘search’’.

(4) On the next page, which contains

Docket summary information for the

Docket you selected, click on the

desired comments. You may also

download the comments.

Authority: (49 U.S.C. 32905(g); delegation

of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 49 CFR

501.8)

Issued on: April 27, 2000.

Stephen R. Kratzke,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 00–11046 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P