```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 207 (Monday, October 27, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55635-55637]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28368]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-5914-2]

Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Engines; Tampering Enforcement 
Policy for Alternative Fuel Aftermarket Conversions; Addendum to Mobile 
Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A

September 4, 1997.
    A. Purpose. The purpose of this document is to clarify and revise 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) ``tampering'' 
enforcement policy for motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines 
originally designed to operate on gasoline or diesel fuel and 
subsequently modified to operate exclusively or in conjunction with 
compressed natural gas (CNG) or liquified petroleum gas (LPG or 
propane), hereinafter referred to as ``alternative fuels''. The 
provisions of this Addendum shall apply to all persons subject to the 
tampering prohibition of Section 203(a) of the Act. For the purpose of 
this policy Addendum, the term manufacturer will apply to any person 
who designs, produces, and/or assembles components for converting 
vehicles or engines to operate on alternative fuels and is responsible 
for complying with all applicable requirements of this policy Addendum.
    B. Background. EPA's policy is and has been that any alteration 
from an original configuration of a vehicle or engine as certified 
under Title II of the Act may constitute tampering under Section 
203(a)(3). Routine maintenance and repair of vehicles and engines 
requires the use of replacement parts which may be non-original or 
``aftermarket'' parts or systems. EPA's Office of Enforcement and 
General Counsel issued Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A (Memo 
1A) on June 25, 1974 to provide guidance to covered parties regarding 
how the Agency intended to enforce the ``tampering'' prohibition under 
Section 203(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act (Act) with respect to 
maintenance and the use of aftermarket parts.
    Memo 1A provides, in part, that the use of an aftermarket part, 
alteration or add-on part will not constitute tampering if the dealer 
has a ``reasonable basis'' to believe that such acts will not adversely 
affect emissions performance. It also provides specific procedures or 
options by which the dealer would have a ``reasonable basis''. One 
available procedure is emissions testing performed in accordance with 
``40 CFR 85'' (subsequently revised and incorporated under 40 CFR Part 
86) demonstrating compliance with emission standards for the useful 
life of the vehicle or engine. An alternate option is that ``a Federal, 
state or local environmental control agency represents that a 
reasonable basis exists' based on testing done in accordance with 
procedures specified by that agency. Many vehicles converted from 
gasoline fueled to CNG or propane have relied on the second option 
utilizing procedures established by California or Colorado for 
demonstrating emissions compliance.
    EPA has recently become aware of federal emission test data 
generated under a program conducted by the National Renewable Energy 
Laboratory (NREL) which indicate that a significant number of these 
vehicles modified to run on alternative fuels may be exceeding one or 
more applicable federal emission standards. The installers involved in 
the NREL program had attempted to comply with Memo 1A by using 
conversion systems certified by the state of California under the 
``California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for Systems 
Designed to Convert Motor Vehicles Certified for 1993 and Earlier Model 
Years to Use Liquefied Petroleum Gas or Natural Gas Fuels'' (pre-1994 
California Procedures). EPA has subsequently reviewed emission test 
data from other sources which generally substantiate the NREL results.
    In response to concerns raised by these data, the Agency conducted 
a public stakeholders meeting on February 21, 1997, with 
representatives of the affected industries, regulatory agencies and 
interested fleet operators. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss 
these data and the causes of the emission failures as well as to 
explore all available options to identify and remedy the problems. Many 
reasons were provided for the emission problems, including inadequate 
initial testing, insufficient durability evaluations, overly broad 
vehicle application based on limited testing, inadequate systems/parts 
specifications, improper installation and fuel variability. The 
concerns of the affected industries and fleets subject to several 
alternative fuel statutory mandates were also discussed.
    The most significant conclusion reached at that meeting, and from 
extensive data review and discussions subsequent to that meeting, was 
that the pre-1994 California and Colorado procedures as currently 
structured do not provide an adequate demonstration or assurance that a 
vehicle or engine modified to operate on an alternative fuel using an 
aftermarket conversion system will comply with the applicable emission 
standards for its useful life. As a result of the above and in light of 
the number of vehicles and engines that may be converted to alternative 
fuels in the near future, EPA believes it is appropriate to issue this 
Addendum to Memo 1A (this Addendum) to provide additional guidance to 
the regulated community, including manufacturers and installers of 
alternative fuel conversion systems.
    C. Revised Policy. Effective immediately, EPA will no longer accept 
a representation based on the pre-1994 California Procedures for 
alternative fuel conversion systems or on the test procedures under 
Colorado Regulation No. 14 in effect prior to the date of this Addendum 
as a ``reasonable basis'' under paragraph 3(c) of Memo 1A. 
Consequently, any future installation of an alternative fuel conversion 
system, or the modification of any motor vehicle or motor vehicle 
engine in compliance with Title II of the Clean Air Act to operate 
exclusively or in part with an alternative fuel, or the causing 
thereof, may constitute tampering under Section 203(a) of the Act, 
where the installer or manufacturer has relied exclusively on a 
representation by Colorado or California, as described above, that a 
reasonable basis exists in accordance with paragraph 3(c) of Memo 1A. 
Effective immediately, the ``reasonable basis'' under paragraph 3 of 
Memo 1A that EPA agrees may be relied on by any person, including a 
manufacturer, installer or operator, when converting, or causing the 
conversion of, a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine to operate on an 
alternative fuel is limited to one of the three options listed below.
    1. A Federal Certificate under 40 CFR Part 86 demonstrating 
compliance with the applicable standards or under 40 CFR Part 88 
demonstrating compliance with Clean Fuel Fleet standards for each 
engine family to be converted in accordance with 40 CFR Part 85, 
Subpart F; or

[[Page 55636]]

    2. A Retrofit System Certification under the ``California 
Certification and Installation Procedures For Alternative Fuel Retrofit 
Systems for Motor Vehicles Certified for 1994 and Subsequent Model 
Years'' for a conversion system installed and tested under the above 
procedures on a vehicle or engine from a ``50-state engine family'' for 
use nationwide, or for a conversion system installed and tested under 
the above procedures on a vehicle or engine from a ``California engine 
family'' for use in California only; or
    3. Until December 31, 1998, the use of an alternative fuel 
conversion system designed, tested and installed on a single engine 
family, or multiple engine families as provided under paragraph b.(4) 
below, if testing is completed by March 31, 1998, as follows:
    a. With the alternative fuel conversion system installed on the 
certified engine family, the manufacturer shall perform, or cause the 
performance of, one federal emission test while operating with the 
alternative fuel and one test with the original certification fuel, if 
dual fuel operation is retained, in accordance with the applicable test 
procedures under 40 CFR Part 86 or Part 88 for that class and model 
year vehicle or engine. Prior to testing, the vehicle or engine shall 
be operated with the conversion system installed for at least the 
number of miles or hours equal to the service accumulation period 
needed to stabilize the emission control system specified by the 
original manufacturer in its certificate application submitted to EPA. 
EPA encourages manufacturers to conduct at least one baseline emission 
test with the certification fuel prior to conversion to ascertain that 
the vehicle or engine meets the applicable standards.
    b. (1) With the application of an appropriate deterioration factor 
(DF) to the above test results, the vehicle or engine shall meet the 
applicable federal exhaust emission standards to which the vehicle or 
engine was originally certified. The DF shall be determined either 
based on full useful life durability testing, predictions based on 
engineering judgement for a similar light duty vehicle or heavy-duty 
engine with a similar emission control system using the same 
alternative fuel conversion system, or determined in accordance with 
the appropriate protocol contained in the ``Dear Manufacturer'' letter 
of September 27, 1995--Assigned Deterioration Factors for Gaseous-
Fueled Vehicles and Engines, identified as CD-95-14. For heavy-duty 
engines with aftertreatment (such as a catalyst), the deteriorated 
emissions are calculated by multiplying the DF with the exhaust 
emission results. For heavy-duty engines without aftertreatment, the 
deteriorated emissions are calculated by adding the DF with the exhaust 
emission results. For a vehicle or engine converted and tested prior to 
accumulating 50% of its useful life, the manufacturer shall apply the 
full DF. For a vehicle or engine converted and tested subsequent to 
accumulating 50% of its full useful life, apply a DF that is the midway 
point between no DF and the full DF. For example, an additive DF of 1.0 
may become 0.5 and a multiplicative DF of 2.0 may become 1.5. For a 
vehicle or engine converted and tested subsequent to accumulating its 
full useful life, apply no DF.
    (2) For heavy-duty engines used in vehicles with a gross vehicle 
weight rating (GVWR) less than or equal to 10,000 lbs, the manufacturer 
may demonstrate compliance with the applicable light-duty truck 
standards in accordance with the preceding paragraph.
    (3) In lieu of engine dynamometer testing for on-highway heavy duty 
vehicles with a GVWR less than or equal to 14,000 lbs, the manufacturer 
may conduct two or three emission tests as described below in 
accordance with the most current amendments to ``California Exhaust 
Emissions Standards and Test Procedures for 1988 and Subsequent Model 
Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks and Medium-Duty Vehicles''. These 
shall consist of one baseline test using the certification fuel prior 
to conversion, one test after conversion with the alternative fuel and 
one test after conversion with the certification fuel if the vehicle is 
intended to be dual fuel. The two tests after conversion shall not 
result in any exhaust emissions that exceed 1.10 times any of the 
baseline emission levels. In the case of pure CNG operation, the after 
conversion NMHC emissions shall not exceed 0.9 times the THC emissions 
before conversion. For heavy-duty vehicles operating on a mixture of 
CNG and either diesel fuel or gasoline, the conversion system 
manufacturer should contact EPA's Mobile Source Enforcement Branch to 
determine the appropriate ratio of NMHC emissions after conversion to 
THC emissions before conversion.
    (4) With respect to light duty vehicles, light duty trucks, or 
heavy-duty engines meeting the requirements of paragraph (2) above, the 
above demonstration may be applied as a reasonable basis for up to a 
maximum of three additional light duty engine families to that tested, 
provided:
    A. The results from testing done in accordance with the above 
procedures demonstrate compliance with low emission vehicle (LEV) or 
more stringent emission standards under 40 CFR 88.104,
    B. The additional engine families have engine displacements equal 
to, or within 0.8 liters (50 CID) less than, the engine tested,
    C. The additional engine families comprise vehicles equal to or 
less than the gross vehicle weight of the vehicles covered by the 
engine family tested, and
    D. The additional engine families are equipped with the same 
catalytic converter type (i.e. beaded vs monolith, OC vs OC/RC) and the 
same primary emission control technology (eg. EGR, Air Injection, EFI 
vs carburetor, closed loop vs open loop) as the engine family tested.
    (5) Option 3 of this policy is not available for conversion of 
California only engine families.
    (6) An alternative fuel conversion system that degrades a closed 
loop feedback system to a continuous non-feedback open loop system is 
not allowed under this option.
    (7) Compliance with this policy may be demonstrated based on 
existing data provided such data are the result of testing in 
accordance with the procedures and protocols specified herein.
    (8) Demonstration with the Cold CO requirements under 40 CFR Part 
86 Subpart C is not required under Option 3 of this policy.
    (9) The Certification Short Test requirements under 40 CFR Part 86, 
Subpart O is not required under Option 3 of this policy.
    (10) The evaporative emissions requirements under 40 CFR 86.094-
8(b) and 86.094-9(b) are not required under Option 3 of this policy.
    c. The manufacturer of the conversion system shall specify all part 
numbers/calibrations associated with that conversion system and provide 
all such information, specifications and installation requirements, 
including a permanent conversion system label which appropriately 
identifies the conversion system with reasonable specificity, with each 
system that is sold or provided for installation.
    d. In order to demonstrate that it has a reasonable basis to 
believe that its conversion system will not adversely affect emissions 
over the useful life of the vehicle or engine, the conversion system 
manufacturer should retain records including but not limited to all 
emission test data, including test results, description of vehicles 
and/or engines modified, all maintenance and modifications performed, 
laboratory data sheets, identification of test

[[Page 55637]]

laboratory, test dates, test personnel and test procedures followed, 
engine families tested, data to support additional engine family 
coverage, if applicable, VIN's, vehicle and engine mileage and/or age 
as applicable, fuel specifications, conversion system part numbers and 
calibrations, durability procedures followed including all durability 
data and all calculations and engineering analyses performed to 
determine compliance with the above requirements.
    e. In order to meet the requirements of this policy, any 
installation of a conversion system designed and tested in accordance 
with the above shall be done in accordance with the applicable part 
numbers/calibrations installed on the vehicle or engine that was 
tested, completed in accordance with manufacturer's specifications and/
or instructions and the conversion system label affixed to the vehicle 
or engine. The system shall only be installed on a vehicle or engine of 
the same engine family as that tested or as permitted under paragraph 
3.b.(4) above.
    f. In support of an appropriate installation, the installer should 
retain records of each vehicle or engine converted in accordance with 
the above, including the VIN, make and year of each vehicle or engine 
so modified, the name of the installer, the date of installation and a 
copy of the manufacturer's or marketer's/distributor's representation 
that the conversion system has been demonstrated on that engine family 
to meet the requirements of this policy.
    g. In support of any marketer's or distributor's compliance with 
the requirements of this policy, such parties should retain records of 
each conversion system sold or distributed, copies of the 
representation from the manufacturer that the system meets this policy 
and records of sales to others including the name of the purchasers, 
part numbers, dates of sales and the numbers of systems sold.
    h. Colorado has indicated that it will revise its administrative 
procedures under Colorado Regulation No. 14 to require that conversion 
system manufacturers conduct testing in accordance with option 3 of 
this Addendum in order to receive a Colorado Letter of Certification. 
Consequently, until December 31, 1998, EPA will not consider as 
tampering the sale and installation of a conversion system in Colorado 
pursuant to a Colorado Letter of Certification issued after the above-
referenced administrative procedure revisions have been made by 
Colorado, provided testing in support of the Letter of Certification is 
done in accordance with option 3 of this Addendum and is completed by 
March 31, 1998.
    D. Conclusion. EPA believes that the maximum degree of assurance 
that vehicles or engines modified to operate on alternative fuels will 
meet emissions standards throughout their useful life can only be 
achieved through full certification demonstration in accordance with 40 
CFR Parts 86 or 88. However, the cost and time associated with such a 
demonstration may be prohibitive for some conversion system 
manufacturers in the short term and may not provide sufficient 
equipment for fleets currently subject to various alternative fuel 
mandates to comply with those mandates. In addition, EPA will be 
attempting to implement various procedures to streamline federal 
certification for alternative fuel vehicles and on-highway engines, but 
it is likely that implementation of those procedures will take some 
time. In the interim, the procedures and requirements outlined in 
option 3 above should allow alternative fuel conversion systems to be 
developed and evaluated more quickly and at less cost, while providing 
a reasonable assurance that emissions will not be deteriorated. After 
December 31, 1998, manufacturers, marketers and installers must utilize 
equipment which meets the requirements of option 1 or option 2 above to 
be covered by the non-tampering policy of Memo 1A.
    EPA will be reviewing Memo 1A more thoroughly in the near future to 
determine if additional changes are required for other vehicle or 
engine modifications, parts or systems. Any questions regarding this 
interim policy should be directed to the Mobile Source Enforcement 
Branch at (202) 564-2255.
Bruce C. Buckheit,
Director, Air Enforcement Division, Office of Enforcement and 
Compliance Assurance.
[FR Doc. 97-28368 Filed 10-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```