Vehicle Comparison Strategy:
Eligibility for a High Occupancy Vehicle
(HOV) Facility Exemption Based on the
Energy-Effiecient Provision of the 2005
Transportation Act
Draft Technical Support Document
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
Vehicle Comparison Strategy:
Eligibility for a High Occupancy Vehicle
(HOV) Facility Exemption Based on the
Energy-Effiecient Provision of the 2005
Transportation Act
Draft Technical Support Document
Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
v>EPA
United States EPA420-D-07-005
Environmental Protection .. „„.,
Agency MaY2007
-------
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Background on the Safe, Accountable, Flexible Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users 3
Chapter 2: Discussion of Potential Vehicle Comparison Strategies 4
2.1 Hybrid-to-Gasoline Vehicle Comparison Method 6
2.2 Inertia Weight Class Method 8
2.3 Hybrid-to-"Best in Class" Method 28
2.4 Final Recommendation 36
Chapter 3: List of Eligible Vehicles Based on the Hybrid-to-Gasoline Comparison
Methodology 36
References 44
-------
Chapter 1: Background on the Safe, Accountable, Flexible
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (SAFETEA-LU), also known as the 2005 Transportation Act, was enacted on
August 10, 2005. SAFETEA-LU, which is codified at 23 United States Code (U.S.C.)
166, concerns the Federal surface transportation programs for highways, highway
safety, and transit for a 5-year period covering 2005-2009. Certain provisions of 23
U.S.C. 166 addresses the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) facility programs that some
states have in place.
In general, for vehicles to operate in HOV facilities, they must have two or more
occupants per vehicle. 23 U.S.C. 166 provides some exemptions to this occupancy
requirement for "inherently low emitting" vehicles and other "low emission and energy-
efficient" vehicles. Thus, 23 U.S.C. 166 allows, but does not require, a new occupancy
exemption for the use of "low emission and energy-efficient" vehicles that do not meet
the minimum occupancy requirement in (HOV) facilities. States with existing HOV
facilities may optionally adopt this exemption. If they choose to adopt the HOV
occupancy exemption for low emission and energy-efficient vehicles, states must
commit to update the eligibility and definition of low emission and energy-efficient
vehicles to be consistent and comply with the methodology that we to present in the
Final Rulemaking. Per 23 U.S.C. 166, the exemption for the use of low emission and
energy-efficient vehicles in HOV facilities expires September 30, 2009.
23 U.S.C. 166 directs EPA to provide a rulemaking establishing the criteria
required to certify, or designate, a vehicle as a low emission and energy-efficient vehicle
-------
that may be eligible for use in HOV facilities. 23 U.S.C. 166 defines a low emission
vehicle as one that is certified to EPA's Tier 2 emissions standards. In the Preamble to
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), we propose to further refine the definition
of a low emission vehicle as one that must comply with Tier 2 Bin 5 or better (Bins 5, 4,
3, 2 and 1). 23 U.S.C. 166 defines an energy-efficient vehicle as one operating on an
alternative fuel (as discussed in the Preamble to the NPRM), or one that is:
"...to have achieved not less than a 50-percent increase in
city fuel economy or not less than a 25-percent increase in
combined city/highway fuel economy... relative to a
comparable vehicle that is an internal combustion gasoline
fueled vehicle (other than a vehicle that has propulsion
energy from onboard hybrid sources)."1
23 U.S.C. 166 also directs EPA to establish guidelines and procedures for making the
vehicle comparisons and performance calculations needed to determine an energy-
efficient vehicle.
This Draft Technical Support Document describes the various vehicle
comparison strategies which were considered for purposes of certifying an energy-
efficient vehicle based on the prescribed fuel economy percent increase. Ultimately,
one comparison strategy is recommended to be codified through the Federal
rulemaking process, and this comparison strategy is described in further detail in this
document.
Chapter 2: Discussion of Potential Vehicle Comparison
Strategies
1 23 U.S.C. 166(f)(3)(B)(i).
-------
As discussed in the previous section, 23 U.S.C. 166 defines an energy-efficient
vehicle as one operating on an alternative fuel or one that achieves a 50-percent or
better increase in city fuel economy or a 25-percent increase in combined city/highway
fuel economy relative to a comparable gasoline-fueled vehicle, excluding hybrids, as a
basis of comparison. This Draft Technical Support Document explains the process we
used to 1) select a vehicle comparison strategy, 2) define what is considered to be a
comparable gasoline-fueled vehicle, and 3) describe the guidelines and procedures
needed to perform the calculations for comparing fuel economy values.
23 U.S.C. 166 provided some guidance that indicates the desired outcome of
EPA's analyses (e.g., would not degrade HOV facilities, would provide incentives for
purchase and use of hybrid and other energy efficient vehicles). 23 U.S.C. 166 also
provided EPA with some guidance on a "comparable" vehicle, by referencing 49 U.S.C
32908(b), Fuel Economy Labeling Requirements and Contents. Today's HOV proposal
for making fuel economy comparisons and performance calculations is in accordance
with 49 U.S.C 32908(b) because the fundamental fuel economy values that form the
basis of comparison are obtained from the same tests as those used for fuel economy
labeling purposes. The city fuel economy and combined city-highway fuel economy
comparisons that are specified in 23 U.S.C. 166 are based on the same city and city-
highway fuel economy that is determined by EPA regulations in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) under 40 CFR Part 600. This assures that automobile
manufacturers would not need to perform additional fuel economy tests for the purpose
of determining if their vehicles would qualify for HOV facility exemptions.
-------
Furthermore, we determined three goals for a desirable fuel economy
comparison methodology. First, the method should not result in a large number of
vehicles qualifying for the exemption to prevent HOV lane degradation. Second, the
method should be based on data and/or a method for analyzing data that is readily
available to the public or to the state administering HOV facility requirements. Third, the
vehicles that would qualify should be construed by a reasonable person as being truly
"energy efficient" per the intent of Congress. We considered a variety of methods, and
analyzed whether or not they met the above three goals. The following methods are
discussed in detail below:
1. Hybrid-to-Gasoline Vehicle Comparison
2. Inertia Weight Class
3. Hybrid-to-"Best in Class" Vehicle Comparison
2.1 Hybrid-to-Gasoline Vehicle Comparison Method
2.1.1 How does EPA propose to develop baseline fuel economy values for the
hybrid-to-gasoline vehicle comparison methodology?
In this method, hybrid vehicles would be compared to their gasoline namesake
counterparts (e.g. the Ford Escape Hybrid would be compared to the Ford Escape
gasoline model).
However, there are some hybrids that do not have similar gasoline counterparts
(e.g. the Honda Insight and the Toyota Prius). For those vehicles, EPA is proposing that
the comparison be based on gasoline vehicles within the same comparable class as
used EPA's annual Fuel Economy Guide, which is jointly published by EPA and DOE.
The median unadjusted fuel economy of all the gasoline vehicles in that class would be
determined, and then compared against the hybrid's fuel economy. This comparison
-------
would be done separately for each model year. For example, the Honda Insight is
classified as a "two-seater". For each model year, we would identify all of the "two-
seater" gasoline vehicles and determine the median unadjusted city and unadjusted
combined city-highway fuel economy values. These fuel economy values would form
the baseline fuel economy values to be used for the Honda Insight comparison.
As fuel economy can vary from year to year, these comparisons must be made
separately for each model year.
2.1.2. How is the comparison determined, based on a percent increase in vehicle
fuel economy value?
We are proposing the following process for making a fuel economy comparison
using the hybrid-to-gasoline vehicle comparison methodology:
1) Determine the list of all hybrid vehicles (separately for each model year)
emission-certified by EPA prior to September 30, 2009.
2) For hybrid vehicles with a similar gasoline counterpart, compare the
unadjusted city and unadjusted combined city-highway fuel economy values to
the similar gasoline counterpart.
3) For hybrid vehicles with no similar gasoline counterpart, calculate the
median unadjusted city and/or unadjusted combined city-highway fuel economy
values for all gasoline vehicles in the same EPA comparable vehicle class and
compare the hybrid vehicle fuel economy values to the median unadjusted city
fuel economy value and the unadjusted city-highway value for the comparison
gasoline vehicle.
4) Evaluate the results according to the following criteria:
-------
• If the candidate hybrid vehicle's city fuel economy is 50 percent
grater that the city fuel economy value of its gasoline counterpart
then the vehicle would qualify as energy-efficient;
• If the candidate hybrid vehicle's combined city-highway fuel
economy is 25 percent greater than the combined city/fuel
economy of its gasoline counter part, then the vehicle would qualify
as energy-efficient; or
• Conversely, if the hybrid vehicles do not meet either of these
required fuel economy thresholds relative to their gasoline
counterparts, then the vehicle would not qualify as energy-efficient.
Based on the low emission and energy-efficient vehicle criteria using the hybrid-to-
gasoline vehicle comparison methodology described above, the potential lists of
vehicles eligible for an HOV occupancy exemption are shown in Chapter 3 below.
2.2 Inertia Weight Class Method
2.2.1 Overview
The inertia weight classes used in this methodology are taken from the
Alternative Motor Vehicle Tax Credit portion of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (2005
Energy Act).2 The 2005 Energy Act specifies 14 of these classes, categorized
separately for passenger cars and light trucks, as follows: 1500/1750, 2000, 2250,
2500, 2750, 3000, 3500, 4000, 4500, 5000, 5500, 6000, 6500, and 7000/8500 Ibs. In
addition to being referred to in the 2005 Energy Act, these same inertia weight classes
are also codified by EPA regulations at 40 CFR 86.129-94. EPA defines inertia weight
2 Energy Policy Act of 2005 [Public Law 109-58, August 8, 2005].
8
-------
class as the class into which a vehicle is grouped for testing purposes based on its
loaded vehicle weight (nominal empty vehicle weight plus 300 pounds (Ibs.) used for
cars and for light-duty trucks up through 6000 Ibs. gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR))
or adjusted loaded vehicle weight (average of nominal empty weight and GVWR used
for light-duty trucks greater than 6000 Ibs. GVWR).
The 2005 Energy Act also designates associated baseline "2002 model year" city
fuel economy values, based on a sales-weighted harmonic average of the unadjusted
city fuel economy for the vehicle type (car or truck) for the purposes of tax credit
generation. We believe it would be appropriate to apply this same method for purposes
of determining vehicles that would qualify for HOV exemptions, since the Transportation
Act and 2005 Energy Act both intend to offer incentives to increase the sales and use
of energy-efficient vehicles, including hybrid and diesel technologies.3 23 U.S.C. 166
offers a commuting incentive, that is, the use of HOV facilities, for vehicles that do not
meet the minimum occupancy requirement and the 2005 Energy Act offers a motor
vehicle tax credit based on fuel economy, technology, and inertia weight. However,
regardless of this consistent rationale, the inertia weight class methodology does not
necessarily mean that a vehicle that is eligible for a tax credit would also eligible for an
HOV occupancy exemption or vice versa.
While the 2005 Energy Act provides baseline city fuel economy values, which we
are proposing to adopt for the city fuel economy provision in 23 U.S.C. 166, 23 U.S.C.
166 also provides criteria for a combined city/highway fuel economy. We developed the
2002 baseline values for the combined city/highway fuel economy for each inertia
weight class and vehicle type utilizing the same method - a sales-weighted harmonic
3 23 U.S.C. 166(f)(5)(B)(c).
-------
average - as the baseline city fuel economy values. These values were then
considered the baseline fuel economy values for a comparable gasoline vehicle.
Inertia weight classes are also codified by EPA regulations at 40 CFR 86.129-94.
Inertia weight class is the class into which a vehicle is grouped for testing purposes
based on its loaded vehicle weight (nominal empty vehicle weight plus 300 Ibs. used for
cars and for light-duty trucks up through 6000 Ibs. GVWR) or adjusted loaded vehicle
weight (average of nominal empty weight and GVWR used for light-duty trucks greater
than 6000 Ibs. GVWR).
It should be noted that while a vehicle would have the same inertia weight for the
purposes of applying for tax credits and an HOV occupancy exemption, the same
vehicle may not be eligible for both. Other factors that would influence a vehicle's
potential for a tax credit and an HOV occupancy exemption include: availability of tax
credit based on an imposed cap of 60,000 vehicles per manufacturer; the vehicle's
emission certification; the availability of HOV facilities within a state; and the stringency
of a State's HOV occupancy exemption given that the statute allows states the option to
make the fuel economy provisions codified by EPA more stringent.
2.2.2 Baseline Fuel Economy
The 2005 Energy Act designates baseline city fuel economy values in miles per
gallon (mpg) separately for cars and trucks. These values are defined for each inertia
weight class to which a vehicle's fuel economy value is compared to determine eligibility
for the tax credit. These baseline city fuel economy values are the sales-weighted
harmonic averages of unadjusted city fuel economy for all model year 2002 vehicles
within each inertia weight class. The use of an unadjusted fuel economy value, besides
10
-------
being the precedent set by the 2005 Energy Act as well as the Fuel Economy Trends
Report, is important; the other option would be to utilize the adjusted fuel economy
values, also known as the fuel economy label values. A Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking4 was recently issued that proposes changes to the methodology for
adjusting the fuel economy label values; the adjusted fuel economy label values are
displayed on vehicles at the time of sale and used in the Fuel Economy Guide and
Green Vehicle Guide. Thus, it is likely that the adjustment calculations would change
during the period of the HOV exemption program. Therefore, a methodology based on
an adjusted value would have to be recalculated. The unadjusted fuel economy values
would remain unchanged by the proposed rulemaking and would be the preferable
option as a basis of comparison for the purposes of this proposal.
Since the baseline city fuel economy values are based on the 2002 model year in
the 2005 Energy Act, these values are being proposed as the baseline for comparison
for each model year until the end of the HOV exemption program on September 30,
2009. We believe that it is technically sound to apply the 2002 model year as an
ongoing baseline since the data are based on gasoline-only vehicles, which have
maintained a nearly consistent fuel economy over the years. For example, as noted in
the Executive Summary of the Fuel Economy Trends Report for 1975 through 2004
model years:
"Model year 2004 light-duty vehicles are estimated to
average 20.8 miles per gallon (MPG). The MY2004 average
is within the 20.6 to 20.9 mpg range that has occurred for the
past eight years."5
4 71 FR 5426, February 9, 2006.
5 Hellman, 2004.
11
-------
While the example given applies specifically to model year 2004 vehicles, it also notes
that the average has not changed much in the past eight years except for light truck fuel
economy, which has increased for two years. This increase is likely due, at least in part,
to higher light-truck CAFE standards Overall, fuel economy has been influenced by
marginal changes in gasoline technology prior to the introduction of hybrid technology;
this time period includes the 2002 data and shows that this model year would be
relevant as a point of comparison for subsequent model years.
It is also preferable to use one model year as the ongoing baseline to avoid
having to annually recalculate the baseline and to provide certainty for manufacturers,
auto dealers, the public, and HOV administrators. Since the baseline is based on sales
data, it is difficult to calculate a sales-weighted average early in a model year as data
cannot be finalized until after the end of the model year. The benefits of an updated
baseline are minimal since fuel economy has remained steady, and the administrative
burden and loss of certainty are not worth minimal gains in accuracy. Finally, since the
baseline fuel economy values are listed in the 2005 Energy Act as a basis of
comparison, these numbers are considered codified and their use provides certainty
with minimal loss of accuracy over the relatively short lifetime of the HOV exemption for
energy-efficient vehicles.
2.2.2.1 Baseline City Fuel Economy
The baseline city fuel economy is generated from gasoline-only vehicles,
excluding hybrids, from the 2002 model year. Thus the baseline city fuel economy
values represent of a comparable gasoline vehicle within the same inertia weight class
12
-------
as the candidate vehicle being compared. The baseline city fuel economy values, as
listed in the 2005 Energy Act, are in Table 2-1, below.
13
-------
Table 2-1: 2002 Baseline City Fuel Economy
Inertia Weight
(Ibs.)
1500 or 1750
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000 to 8500
Passenger
Automobiles (mpg)
45.2
39.6
35.2
31.7
28.8
26.4
22.6
19.8
17.6
15.9
14.4
13.2
12.2
11.3
Light Trucks
(mpg)
39.4
35.2
31.8
29.0
26.8
24.9
21.8
19.4
17.6
16.1
14.8
13.7
12.8
12.1
Reference: Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-58, August 8, 2005)
2.2.2.2 Baseline Combined City/Highway Fuel Economy
While 23 U.S.C. 166 prescribes fuel economy eligibility requirements based on
the city and the combined city/highway fuel economy values, the 2005 Energy Act
eligibility requirements for fuel economy are based solely on city fuel economy values.
Today's proposal, therefore, must designate baseline fuel economy values for both city
and combined city/highway fuel economy values. As a result, we calculated the sales-
weighted harmonic average of the unadjusted combined city/highway fuel economy
values for each inertia weight class separately for cars and trucks, again using the 2002
model year as the baseline.
Before performing the baseline fuel economy calculations for combined
city/highway, we used the data set obtained for the 2002 model year to recalculate the
city fuel economy baseline to ensure that the data and methodology for the proposal
were consistent with the data and methodology used to calculate values presented in
14
-------
the 2005 Energy Act. The calculated values for city fuel economy were near matches to
those of the 2005 Energy Act, and hence we deemed the calculations appropriate for
the purposes of calculating the baseline combined city/highway fuel economy values.
To perform the baseline calculations, we first separated the vehicles to remove
any hybrids and any vehicles not fueled by gasoline, i.e., alternative fuels and diesel.
Once we limited the vehicle population to conventional gasoline-fueled vehicles only, we
further separated it into cars and trucks and then by inertia weight class, as listed below
in Table 2-2. Finally, we calculated a sales-weighted harmonic average of the
combined city/highway fuel economy for each inertia weight class within the data set
using Equations 3-1 and 3-2, listed below. Equation 3-2 was used to calculate the
sales-weighted harmonic average of fuel economy, mimicking how the baseline city fuel
economy was determined.
Table 2-2: Inertia Weight Classes
Inertia Weight
(Ibs.)
1500 or 1750
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000 to 8500
Equation 2-1. Combined (City/highway) Fuel Consumption
15
-------
Combined City/Highway Fuel Consumption =
1
Unadjusted Combined Fuel Economy
Equation 2-2. Combined (City/highway) Sales Weighted Fuel Economy
Sales - weighted Unadjusted Combined Fuel Economy =
I
Sales
Sales x Combined Fuel Consumption)
For both cars and trucks, some inertia weight classes were not represented by
the given data set, and thus the associated combined city/highway fuel economy values
for the missing inertia weight classes had to be extrapolated. We extrapolated the
combined city/highway fuel economy values by plotting the combined city/highway fuel
economy values against their associated inertia weight class. Using spreadsheet
software, we fit a curve to the data, shown in Figures 2-1 and 2-2, shown below, and
determined Equations 2-3 and 2-4, shown below, from the curves. Based on Equations
2-3 and 2-4, we calculated the combined city/highway values for all inertia weight
classes to fit the curve. The resulting values for the baseline combined city/highway
fuel economy are displayed in Table 2-3, shown below.
16
-------
car baseline cmb
y = 15339x07711
40.0
35.
0.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
inertia wt
Figure 2-1. Determination of Baseline Combined Fuel Economy Values for Cars
HI
LJ-
.Q
U
truck baseline cmb = 14768xo78o7
r>c. n
30 0
?5 0
on n
150
10 0
5 0
n n
tss^^
^^"v*^.^^
^ — »>— »
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
inertia wt
Figure 2-2. Determination of Baseline Combined Fuel Economy Values for Trucks
Equation 2-3. Baseline Combined City/Highway Fuel Economy for Light-Duty
Vehicles
Baseline Combined Fuel Economy = 15339 x [inertia Weight Class 07711J
Equation 2-4. Baseline Combined City/highway Fuel Economy for Light-Duty
Trucks
17
-------
Baseline Combined Fuel Economy = 14768 x (inertia Weight Class °780?)
18
-------
Table 2-3: 2002 Baseline Combined City/highway Fuel Economy
Inertia Weight
(Ibs.)
1500 or 1750
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000 to 8500
Passenger
Automobiles (mpg)
48.4
43.7
39.9
36.8
34.2
32.0
28.4
25.6
23.4
21.6
20.0
18.7
17.6
16.6
Light Trucks
(mpg)
43.4
39.1
35.7
32.9
30.5
28.5
25.3
22.8
20.8
19.1
17.8
16.6
15.6
14.7
2.2.3 Vehicle Comparison Strategy for Inertia Weight
Using the pre-defined inertia weight classes and baseline city fuel economy
values from the 2005 Energy Act and the extrapolated baseline combined city/highway
fuel economy values, fuel economy comparisons can be made to evaluate whether a
candidate vehicle meets the established fuel economy percent increase criteria, 50-
percent or better increase in city fuel economy or 25-percent or better increase in
combined city/highway fuel economy.
We used Equation 2-4, shown below to calculate the percent increase in
unadjusted fuel economy for all vehicles, according to their vehicle type, inertia weight
class, and the associated baseline city and combined city/highway fuel economy values.
Equation 2-4: Percent Increase
19
-------
(Unadjusted FE-2002 Baseline FE) 1rtrt
Percent Increase = x 100
2002 Baseline FE
*FE = fuel economy
After calculating the percent increase for the unadjusted city and unadjusted combined
city/highway fuel economy values for each vehicle within its associated inertia weight
class, we applied the following criteria:
1. If the percent increase for unadjusted city fuel economy was 50 percent or
better, at a minimum, then the vehicle would qualify as energy-efficient; or
2. If the percent increase for unadjusted combined city/highway fuel economy
was 25 percent or better, at a minimum, then the vehicle would qualify as
energy-efficient; or
3. If the percent increase for unadjusted city fuel economy was less than 50
percent and the percent increase for unadjusted combined city/highway fuel
economy is less than 25 percent, then the vehicle would not qualify as
energy-efficient.
Thus, all vehicles meeting Criteria 1 and 2 would be classified as "energy-
efficient." The minimum thresholds to qualify in miles per gallon are presented in Tables
2-4 and 2-5, shown below for the unadjusted city and unadjusted combine city/highway
fuel economy values. It should be noted that to be eligible for an HOV exemption, a
vehicle would have to meet the criteria for both energy-efficient and low emission, and
low emission vehicles are being proposed as those meeting the Federal Tier 2 Bin 5 or
cleaner (i.e. Bins 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1) emission standards, or comparable California Low
Emission Vehicle-ll (LEV-II) emission standards that are as or more stringent (i.e. LEV-
II, ULEV-II, SULEV-II, PZEV, and ZEVfor passenger cars - light-duty vehicles and light-
20
-------
duty trucks, including most sport utility vehicles and most large pickup trucks - up to
8500 Ibs. GVWR).
Table 2-4. EP
A Minimum Eligibility Thresholds for Unadjusted City F
Inertia Weight
(Ibs.)
1500 or 1750
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000 to 8500
Passenger
Automobiles (mpg)
67.8
59.4
52.8
47.6
43.2
39.6
33.9
29.7
26.4
23.9
21.6
19.8
18.3
17.0
Light Trucks
(mpg)
59.1
52.8
47.7
43.5
40.2
37.4
32.7
29.1
26.4
24.2
22.2
20.6
19.2
18.2
uel Economy
Table 2-5. EPA Minimum Eligibility Thresholds for Unadjusted Combined
City/Highway Fuel Economy
Inertia Weight
(Ibs.)
1500 or 1750
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000 to 8500
Passenger
Automobiles (mpg)
60.5
54.6
49.9
46.0
42.7
39.9
35.5
32.0
29.2
26.9
25.0
23.4
22.0
20.8
Light Trucks
(mpg)
54.2
48.9
44.6
41.1
38.1
35.6
31.6
28.5
26.0
23.9
22.2
20.7
19.5
18.4
21
-------
In addition to the criteria described above, we believe that an additional criterion
is necessary to determine if a vehicle is fuel efficient. The proposed inertia weight class
method, or any of the other methods considered, result in lists of potentially qualifying
vehicles that include a few models that fail to achieve the level of the Corporate
Average Fuel Economy standard. Thus we are proposing an additional comparison
criterion, to be used as a "floor" to prevent the inclusion of vehicles which may be fuel
efficient relative to others in the same inertia weight class. In order for a vehicle to
qualify as fuel efficient, it must also have a combined fuel economy that is higher than
25 percent above the applicable CAFE car or truck standard (Table 2-6). We believe
that this additional criterion is in keeping with the Transportation Act requirement that
the combined fuel economy be 25 percent better than a comparable gasoline vehicle.
Table 2-6. CAFE Standards for Cars and Trucks
All cars
2005 trucks
2006 trucks
2007 trucks
2008 trucks
CAFE
Standard
27.5 mpg
21.0mpg
21. 6 mpg
22.2 mpg
22. 5 mpg
25 percent
of the CAFE
Standard
34.4 mpg
26.3 mpg
27.0 mpg
27.8 mpg
28.1 mpg
22
-------
2.2.4. List of Eligible Vehicles Using Inertia Weight Methodology
The vehicles that would be eligible for HOV exemption using the inertial weight
methodology are shown in Tables 2.7 and 2.8 below.
Table 2.7. List of Eligible Federally Certified Low Emission and Energy-Efficient
Vehicles Generated Using the Inertia Weight Methodology
MY
Mfr
Vehicle
Model
Engine
Family
Iran
Int Wgt
(Ibs)
Tier 2
Std
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-line
(%)
CARS
2003
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Accord Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
3HNXVO
1 .36CV
3HNXVO
1 .36CV
3HNXVO
1.0PCE
4HNXVO
1.37CP
4HNXVO
1.37CP
4HNXVO
1.0NCE
4TYXVO
1.5MC1
5HNXVO
3.01 B4
5HNXVO
1 .3YCV
5HNXVO
1 .3YCV
5HNXVO
1 .OXCE
5TYXVO
1.5MC1
6HNXVO
1 .3XCP
6HNXVO
1 .OVK5
6TYXVO
1.5MC1
AV
M5
AV
AV
M5
AV
AV
L5
AV
M5
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
3000
3000
2250
3000
3000
2250
3000
3500
3000
3000
2250
3000
3000
2250
3000
B5
B5
B5
B5
B5
B5
B3
B5
B2
B2
B5
B3
B2
B5
B3
52.6
50.0
62.8
52.6
50.0
62.8
66.6
32.2
52.6
50.0
62.8
66.6
54.6
62.8
66.6
99
89
78
99
89
78
152
42
99
89
78
152
107
78
152
56.0
55.7
66.4
56.0
55.7
66.4
65.8
37.5
56.0
55.7
66.4
65.8
58.8
66.4
65.8
75
74
66
75
74
66
106
32
75
74
66
106%
84
66
106
23
-------
2007
2007
2007
2007
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Toyota
Accord
Hybrid
Civic
Hybrid
Camry
Hybrid
Prius
7HNXVO
3.0ZMC
7HNXVO
1.3JCP
7TYXVO
2.4HC1
7TYXVO
1.5HC1
L5
AV
AV
AV
4000
3000
4000
3000
B2
B2
B3
B3
31.3
54.6
44.2
66.6
58
107
123
152
36.3
58.8
45.9
65.8
42
84
79
106
TRUCKS
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
Ford
Ford
Honda
Ford
Ford
Lexus
Lexus
Lexus
Mercury
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Ford
Ford
Escape Hybrid
2WD
Escape Hybrid
4WD
Odyssey 2WD
Escape Hybrid
4WD
Escape Hybrid
FWD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Tribute Hybrid
4WD
Mariner
Hybrid 4WD
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
RAV4 2WD
RAV4 4WD
Escape
Hybrid 2WD
Escape
Hybrid FWD
5FMXTO
2.31 EE
5FMXTO
2.31 EE
5HNXTO
3.5AB4
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6TYXT03
.3CC1
6TYXT03
.3CC1
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6TYXT03
.3CC1
6TYXT03
.3CC1
6TYXT03
.5PEM
6TYXT02
.4PEM
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
AV
AV
L5
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
L5
L4
AV
AV
4000
4000
4500
4000
4000
4500
4500
4000
4000
4500
4500
4000
4000
4000
4000
B4
B4
B5
B4
B4
B3
B3
B4
B4
B3
B3
B5
B5
B3
B3
39.6
36.6
21.7
36.6
39.6
36.8
34.3
36.6
36.6
36.8
34.3
24.4
25.5
35.8
41.1
104
89
23
89
104
109
95
89
89
109
95
26
31
85
112
39.5
36.7
26.4
36.7
39.5
36.2
34.3
36.7
36.7
36.2
34.3
28.9
29.2
36.5
40.6
74
61
27
61
74
74
65
61
61
74
65
27
28
60
78
24
-------
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
Honda
Lexus
Lexus
Mercury
Saturn
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
CR-V 4WD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Mariner
Hybrid 4WD
Vue
Hybrid
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
RAV4 2WD
RAV4 4WD
Tacoma 2WD
7HNXTO
2.4FKR
7TYXT03
.3CC1
7TYXT03
.3CC1
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
7GMXTO
2.4130
7TYXT03
.3CC1
7TYXT03
.3CC1
7TYXT03
.5BEM
7TYXT02
.4BEM
7TYXT02
.7AEM
L5
AV
AV
AV
L4
AV
AV
L5
L4
M5
4000
4500
4500
4000
3500
4500
4500
4000
4000
4000
B5
B3
B3
B3
B5
B3
B3
B5
B5
B5
24.5
35.7
34.3
35.8
29.8
35.7
34.3
24.4
25.3
25.8
27
103
9585
85
37
103
95
26
31
33
28.5
35.0
34.3
36.5
34.0
35.0
35.3
28.9
29.0
29.4
25
69
65
60
35
69
65
27
27
29
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG) VEHICLES
2003
2004
2005
2003
2004
Honda
Honda
Honda
Ford
Ford
Civic- CNG
Civic- CNG
Civic- CNG
Crown Victoria
-CNG
Crown Victoria
-CNG
3HNXVO
1.73W3
4HNXVO
1 .74WO
5HNXVO
1.7BF3
3FMXVO
4.6VP5
4FMXVO
4.6VP5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
B2
B2
B2
B3
B3
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
Unless noted as a dedicated alternative fuel vehicle, all of the listed vehicles operate on gasoline, and some may also be flexible-fuel vehicles.
MY = Model Year
Mfr = Manufacturer
Iran = Transmission type
Int Wgt = Inertia Weight Class
Std = Standard
Unadj = Unadjusted
FE = Fuel Economy
Inc = Increase
Cmb = Combined city-highway
B = Bin
25
-------
Table 2.8 List of Eligible California Certified Low Emission and Energy-Efficient
Vehicles Generated Using the Inertia Weight Methodology
MY
Mfr
Vehicle
Model
Engine
Family
Iran
Int Wgt
(Ibs)
LEV- II
Std
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
CARS
2003
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
2007
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Toyota
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Accord Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Accord Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Camry Hybrid
Prius
3HNXVO
1.36CV
3HNXVO
1.36CV
3HNXVO
1.0PCE
4HNXVO
1.37CP
4HNXVO
1.37CP
4HNXVO
1.0NCE
4TYXV01
.5MC1
5HNXVO
3.01 B4
5HNXVO
1 .3YCV
5HNXVO
1 .3YCV
5HNXVO
1 .OXCE
5TYXV01
.5MC1
6HNXVO
1 .3XCP
6HNXVO
1 .OVK5
6TYXV01
.5MC1
7HNXVO
3.0ZMC
7HNXVO
1.3JCP
7TYXV02
.4HC1
7TYXV01
.5HC1
AV
M5
AV
AV
M5
AV
AV
L5
AV
M5
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
L5
AV
AV
AV
3000
3000
2250
3000
3000
2250
3000
3500
3000
3000
2250
3000
3000
2250
3000
4000
3000
4000
3000
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
U2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
52.6
50.0
62.8
52.6
50.0
62.8
66.6
32.2
52.6
50.0
62.8
66.6
54.6
62.8
66.6
31.3
54.6
44.2
66.6
99
89
78
99
89
78
152
42
99
89
78
152
107
78
152
58
107
123
152
56.0
55.7
66.4
56.0
55.7
66.4
65.8
37.5
56.0
55.7
66.4
65.8
58.8
66.4
65.8
36.3
58.8
45.9
65.8
75
74
66
75
74
66
106
32
75
74
66
106
84
66
106
42
84
79
106
26
-------
MY
Mfr
Vehicle
Model
Engine
Family
Iran
Int Wgt
(Ibs)
LEV- II
Std
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
TRUCKS
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
Ford
Ford
Honda
Ford
Ford
Lexus
Lexus
Mazda
Mercury
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Ford
Ford
Honda
Escape
Hybrid 2WD
Escape
Hybrid 4WD
Odyssey 2WD
Escape
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid FWD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Tribute Hybrid
4WD
Mariner
Hybrid 4WD
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
RAV4 2WD
RAV4 4WD
Escape
Hybrid
Escape
Hybrid
CR-V 4WD
5FMXTO
2.31 EE
5FMXTO
2.31 EE
5HNXTO
3.5AB4
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6TYXT03
.3CC1
6TYXT03
.3CC1
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6TYXT03
.3CC1
6TYXT03
.3CC1
6TYXT03
.5PEM
6TYXT02
.4PEM
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
7HNXTO
2.4FKR
AV
AV
L5
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
L5
L4
AV
AV
L5
4000
4000
4500
4000
4000
4500
4500
4000
4000
4500
4500
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
S2
S2
U2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
U2
U2
S2
S2
U2
39.6
36.6
21.7
36.6
39.6
36.8
34.3
36.6
36.6
36.8
34.3
24.4
25.5
35.8
41.1
24.5
104
89
23
89
104
109
95
89
89
109
95
26
31
85
112
27
39.5
36.7
26.4
36.7
39.5
36.2
34.3
36.7
36.7
36.2
34.3
28.9
29.2
36.5
40.6
28.5
74
61
27
61
74
74
65
61
61
74
65
27
28
60
78
25
27
-------
MY
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
Mfr
Lexus
Lexus
Mercury
Saturn
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Toyota
Vehicle
Model
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Mariner
Hybrid
Vue Hybrid
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
RAV4 2WD
RAV4 4WD
Tacoma 2WD
Engine
Family
7TYXT03
.3CC1
7TYXT03
.3CC1
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
7GMXTO
2.4130
7TYXT03
.3CC1
7TYXT03
.3CC1
7TYXT03
.5BEM
7TYXT02
.4BEM
7TYXT02
.7AEM
Tran
AV
AV
AV
L4
AV
AV
L5
L4
M5
Int Wgt
(Ibs)
4500
4500
4000
3500
4500
4500
4000
4000
4000
LEV- II
Std
S2
S2
S2
L2
S2
S2
U2
U2
M2
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
35.7
34.3
35.8
29.8
35.7
34.3
24.4
25.3
25.8
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
103
95
85
37
103
95
26
31
33
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
35
34.3
36.5
34.0
35
34.3
28.9
29
29.4
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
69
65
60
35
69
65
27
27
29
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG) VEHICLES
2004
2005
Honda
Honda
Civic- CNG
Civic -CNG
4HNXVO
1.74W2
5HNXVO
1.7BF4
N/A
N/A
S2
S2
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
Unless noted as a dedicated alternative fuel vehicle, all of the listed vehicles operate on gasoline, and some may also be flexible-fuel
vehicles.
MY = Model Year
Mfr = Manufacturer
Iran = Transmission
Int Wgt = Inertia Weight Class
Std = Standard
Unadj = Unadjusted
FE = Fuel Economy
Inc = Increase
Cmb = Combined city-highway
S2 = SULEVII
U2 = ULEVII
2.3 Hybrid-to-"Best in Class" Method
EPA also considered defining a "comparable vehicle" as the vehicle with the best
fuel economy of a particular class of vehicles as defined by EPA's annual Fuel
Economy Guide, which is jointly published by EPA and DOE. This approach is not a fuel
28
-------
and technology neutral approach, meaning that it only considers hybrid vehicles. No
gasoline, diesel, or flexible-fuel would be considered for an HOV facilities exemption
using this methodology.
For the "best in class" methodology, the following process would be used for
making a fuel economy comparison:
1) Sort the list of all hybrid vehicles (all model years certified for sale prior
to September 30, 2009) by the vehicle classes defined in EPA's annual Fuel
Economy Guide for each model year. The vehicle classes are defined in the Fuel
Economy Guide as follows: Two-seater, Minicompact Vehicle, Subcompact
Vehicle, Compact Vehicle, Midsize Vehicle, Large Vehicle, Small Station
Wagon, Midsize Station Wagon, Large Station Wagon, Small Pickup Truck,
Standard Pickup Truck, Passenger Van, Cargo Van, Minivan, Sport Utility
Vehicle (SUV), and Special Purpose Vehicle.
2) For each model year and each vehicle class, determine which gasoline
vehicle has the highest unadjusted city and unadjusted city-highway combined
fuel economy values. For example, for the 2006 model year, the compact
vehicle with the highest unadjusted city and unadjusted combined city-highway
fuel economy values is the Toyota Corolla. The Toyota Corolla would be the
comparison vehicle for any 2006 hybrid vehicle that is classified as a compact
car. In this case, the 2006 Honda Civic hybrid is the only hybrid classified as a
compact car. See Table 2.8 below for a complete list of comparison vehicles.
Table 2.8 Vehicles with highest unadjusted city fuel economy values and
unadjusted combined city-highway fuel economy vehicles by Fuel Economy
Guide Class
| Model | Hybrid | Comparison Gasoline | Fuel Economy~|
29
-------
Year
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
Make/Model
Honda Insight
Honda Civic Hybrid
Honda Insight
Honda Civic Hybrid
Toyota Prius
Honda Insight
Honda Civic Hybrid
Toyota Prius
Honda Accord Hybrid
Ford Escape Hybrid 2WD
Ford Escape Hybrid 4WD
Honda Insight
Honda Civic Hybrid
Toyota Prius
Honda Accord Hybrid
Ford Escape Hybrid FWD
Ford Escape Hybrid 4WD
Lexus RX 400 H 2WD
Lexus RX 400 H 2WD
Mazda Tribute Hybrid
Mercury Mariner Hybrid
Toyota Highlander Hybrid 2WD
Toyota Highlander Hybrid 2WD
Honda Insight
Honda Civic Hybrid
Lexus GS 450H
Toyota Prius
Honda Accord Hybrid
Ford Escape Hybrid FWD
Ford Escape Hybrid 4WD
Lexus RX 400H 2WD
Lexus RX 400H 2WD
Mercury Mariner Hybrid
Toyota Highlander Hybrid 2WD
Toyota Highlander Hybrid 2WD
Make/Model
Toyota MR2
Honda Civic
Toyota MR2
Honda Civic
Hyundai Elantra
Toyota MR2
Honda Civic
Hyundai Elantra
Hyundai Elantra
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Mazda MX-5
Toyota Corolla
Hyundai Elantra
Hyundai Elantra
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota RAV4 2WD
Toyota Corolla
Toyota Corolla
Toyota Corolla
Nissan Versa
Jeep Patriot 4WD
Jeep Patriot 4WD
Jeep Patriot 4WD
Jeep Patriot 4WD
Jeep Patriot 4WD
Jeep Patriot 4WD
Jeep Patriot 4WD
Jeep Patriot 4WD
Guide Class
Two-seater
Compact
Two-seater
Compact
Midsize
Two-seater
Compact
Midsize
Midsize
SUV
SUV
Two-seater
Compact
Midsize
Midsize
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
Compact
Compact
Compact
Midsize
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
3) Compare the hybrid vehicle fuel unadjusted economy values to the
unadjusted city fuel economy value and the unadjusted city-highway fuel
economy value for the comparison gasoline vehicle.
4) Evaluate the results according to the following criteria:
• If the percent increase for city fuel economy is greater than 50
percent over the baseline city fuel economy for the given specific
vehicle, then the vehicle would qualify as energy-efficient;
30
-------
• If the percent increase for combined city-highway fuel economy is
greater than 25 percent over the baseline combined city-highway
fuel economy for the given specific vehicle, then the vehicle would
qualify as energy-efficient; or
• Conversely, if the candidate vehicle's fuel economy does not meet
these required thresholds when compared to the baseline fuel
economy for that class of vehicle, then the vehicle would not qualify
as energy-efficient.
The vehicles that would be eligible for HOV exemption using the inertial weight
methodology are shown in Tables 2.9 and 2.10 below.
31
-------
Table 2.9. List of Eligible Federally Certified Low Emission and Energy-Efficient
Vehicles Generated Using the Hybrid-to-"Best in Class" Methodology
MY
Mfr
Vehicle
Model
Engine
Family
Tran
Fuel
Economy
Guide
Class
Tier 2
Std
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-line
(%)
CARS
2003
2004
2004
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Toyota
Insight
Insight
Prius
Insight
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Prius
3HNXVO
1.0PCE
4HNXVO
1.0NCE
4TYXVO
1.5MC1
5HNXVO
1 .OXCE
5TYXVO
1.5MC1
6HNXVO
1 .3XCP
6HNXVO
1 .OVK5
6TYXVO
1.5MC1
7HNXVO
1.3JCP
7TYXVO
1.5HC1
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
Two-seater
Two-seater
Midsize
Two-seater
Midsize
Compact
Two-seater
Midsize
Compact
Midsize
B5
B5
B3
B5
B3
B2
B5
B3
B2
B3
62.8
62.8
66.6
62.8
66.6
54.6
62.8
66.6
54.6
66.6
132
131
121
116
124
53
129
124
53
101
66.4
66.4
65.8
66.4
65.8
58.8
66.4
65.8
58.8
65.8
124
120
87
98
90
41
112
90
41
76
TRUCKS
2005
2006
2007
Ford
Ford
Ford
Escape Hybrid
2WD
Escape Hybrid
FWD
Escape Hybrid
FWD
5FMXTO
2.31 EE
6FMXTO
2.32EE
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
AV
AV
AV
SUV
SUV
SUV
B4
B4
B3
39.6
39.6
41.1
46
48
46
39.5
39.5
40.6
28
28
29
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG) VEHICLES
2003
2004
2005
2003
2004
Honda
Honda
Honda
Ford
Ford
Civic- CNG
Civic -CNG
Civic- CNG
Crown Victoria
-CNG
Crown Victoria
-CNG
3HNXVO
1.73W3
4HNXVO
1 .74WO
5HNXVO
1.7BF3
3FMXVO
4.6VP5
4FMXVO
4.6VP5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
B2
B2
B2
B3
B3
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
32
-------
Unless noted as a dedicated alternative fuel vehicle, all of the listed vehicles operate on gasoline, and some may also be flexible-fuel vehicles.
MY = Model Year
Mfr = Manufacturer
Iran = Transmission type
Std = Standard
Unadj = Unadjusted
FE = Fuel Economy
Inc = Increase
Cmb = Combined city-highway
B = Bin
33
-------
Table 2.10 List of Eligible California-Certified Low Emission and Energy-Efficient
Vehicles Generated Using the Hybrid-to-"Best in Class" Methodology
MY
Mfr
Vehicle
Model
Engine
Family
Iran
Fuel
Economy
Guide Class
LEV- II
Std
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
CARS
2003
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Accord
Hybrid
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Accord
Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Camry Hybrid
3HNXV01
.36CV
3HNXV01
.36CV
3HNXV01
.OPCE
4HNXV01
.37CP
4HNXV01
.37CP
4HNXV01
.ONCE
4TYXV01 .
5MC1
5HNXV01
.3YCV
5HNXV01
.3YCV
5HNXV01
.OXCE
5HNXV03
.0164
5TYXV01 .
5MC1
6HNXV01
.3XCP
6HNXV01
.OVK5
6TYXV01 .
5MC1
7HNXV03
.OZMC
7HNXV01
.3JCP
7TYXV02.
4HC1
AV
M5
AV
AV
M5
AV
AV
AV
M5
AV
L5
AV
AV
AV
AV
L5
AV
AV
Compact
Compact
Two-seater
Compact
Compact
Two-seater
Midsize
Midsize
Compact
Compact
Midsize
Two-seater
Midsize
Compact
Two-seater
Midsize
Midsize
Midsize
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
52.6
50.0
62.8
52.6
50.0
62.8
66.6
52.6
50.0
62.8
32.2
66.6
54.6
62.8
66.6
31.3
54.6
44.2
52
59
249
50
42
214
200
50
42
224
37
201
62
211
200
37
67
66
56.0
55.7
66.4
56.0
55.7
66.4
65.8
56.0
55.7
66.4
37.48
65.8
58.8
66.4
65.8
36.3
58.8
45.9
45
46
201
41
40
177
139
41
40
185
32
140
51
173
144
31
51
44
34
-------
MY
2007
Mfr
Toyota
Vehicle
Model
Prius
Engine
Family
7TYXV01 .
5HC1
Iran
AV
Fuel
Economy
Guide Class
Midsize
LEV- II
Std
S2
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
66.6
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
210
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
65.8
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
154
TRUCKS
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
Ford
Ford
Ford
Ford
Lexus
Lexus
Mazda
Mercury
Toyota
Toyota
Ford
Ford
Lexus
Lexus
Mercury
Escape
Hybrid 2WD
Escape
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid FWD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Tribute
Hybrid 4WD
Mariner
Hybrid 4WD
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid FWD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Mariner
Hybrid
5FMXT02.
31 EE
5FMXT02.
31 EE
6FMXT02.
32EE
6FMXT02.
32EE
6TYXT03.
3CC1
6TYXT03.
3CC1
6FMXT02.
32EE
6FMXT02.
32EE
6TYXT03.
3CC1
6TYXT03.
3CC1
7FMXT02.
32ZE
7FMXT02.
32ZE
7TYXT03.
3CC1
7TYXT03.
3CC1
7FMXT02.
32ZE
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
4000
4000
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
39.6
36.6
36.6
39.6
36.8
34.3
36.6
36.6
36.8
34.3
35.8
41.1
35.7
34.3
35.8
65
78
59
59
141
124
59
75
72
67
55
64
135
126
55
39.5
36.7
36.7
39.5
36.2
34.3
36.7
36.7
36.2
34.3
36.5
40.6
35
34.3
36.5
46
57
41
42
96
86
41
53
45
42
39
45
95
91
39
35
-------
MY
2007
2007
Mfr
Toyota
Toyota
Vehicle
Model
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
Engine
Family
7TYXT03.
3CC1
7TYXT03.
3CC1
Tran
AV
AV
Fuel
Economy
Guide Class
SUV
SUV
LEV- II
Std
S2
S2
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
35.7
34.3
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
103
52
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
35
34.3
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
69
32
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG) VEHICLES
2004
2005
Honda
Honda
Civic- CNG
Civic -CNG
4HNXV01
.74W2
5HNXV01
.7BF4
N/A
N/A
S2
S2
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
Unless noted as a dedicated alternative fuel vehicle, all of the listed vehicles operate on gasoline, and some may also be flexible-fuel
vehicles.
MY = Model Year
Mfr = Manufacturer
Iran = Transmission
Std = Standard
Unadj = Unadjusted
FE = Fuel Economy
Inc = Increase
Cmb = Combined city-highway
S2 = SULEVII
U2 = ULEVII
2.4 Final Recommendation
Based on the above discussion, EPA is proposing the Hybrid-to-gasoline vehicle
comparison methodology.
Chapter 3: List of Eligible Vehicles Based on the Hybrid-to-
Gasoline Comparison Methodology
As described in previous chapters, the hybrid-to-gasoline comparison vehicle
comparison method is being proposed as the methodology for designating a
comparable gasoline vehicle for purposes of this proposal.
Using the hybrid-to-gasoline vehicle comparison method as the comparison
strategy, we would annually generate a list of eligible vehicles based on the Federal
36
-------
criteria and make it available to the Department of Transportation (DOT), who is
primarily responsible for implementing HOV facilities and these associated exemptions.
The federal list of eligible vehicles is based on the statutory criteria for fuel economy
percent increases, but 23 U.S.C. 166 also provides an allowance to individual States
that may implement this exemption to increase the stringency of the designated fuel
economy increase percentages, using the described methodology and resulting
baselines as the basis for comparisons. As a result, the vehicles that the EPA lists as
eligible may not be eligible in all states.
The potential federal list of vehicles eligible for an HOV occupancy exemption
based on the emissions and fuel economy criteria is shown below in Table 3-1 and the
potential list of vehicles based on California emission certification for the low emission
criteria is shown below in Table 3-2. This list is only a proposed list and may change
when the final rule is issued. Vehicles for model years 2008-2009 will be added to the
list once they are available for use. Moreover, since states have the option to increase
the stringency of the designated fuel economy percent increase values, an individual
state's list may differ from these lists.
Table 3-1. Proposed List of Eligible Federally Certified Low Emission and Energy-
Efficient Vehicles
MY
Mfr
Vehicle
Model
Engine
Family
Iran
Fuel
Economy
Guide
Class
Tier 2
Std
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-line
(%)
CARS
2003
2003
Honda
Honda
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
3HNXVO
1.36CV
3HNXVO
1.36CV
AV
M5
Compact
Compact
B5
B5
52.6
50.0
52
59
56.0
55.7
75
74
37
-------
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
2007
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Toyota
Insight
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Accord Hybrid
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Accord
Hybrid
Civic
Hybrid
Camry
Hybrid
Prius
3HNXVO
1.0PCE
4HNXVO
1.37CP
4HNXVO
1.37CP
4HNXVO
1.0NCE
4TYXVO
1.5MC1
5HNXVO
1 .3YCV
5HNXVO
1 .3YCV
5HNXVO
1 .OXCE
5HNXVO
3.01 B4
5TYXVO
1.5MC1
6HNXVO
1 .3XCP
6HNXVO
1 .OVK5
6TYXVO
1.5MC1
7HNXVO
3.0ZMC
7HNXVO
1.3JCP
7TYXVO
2.4HC1
7TYXVO
1.5HC1
AV
AV
M5
AV
AV
AV
M5
AV
L5
AV
AV
AV
AV
L5
AV
AV
AV
Two-seater
Compact
Compact
Two-seater
Midsize
Compact
Compact
Two-seater
Midsize
Midsize
Compact
Two-seater
Midsize
Midsize
Compact
Midsize
Midsize
B5
B5
B5
B5
B3
B2
B2
B5
B5
B3
B2
B5
B3
B2
B2
B3
B3
62.8
52.6
50.0
62.8
66.6
52.6
50.0
62.8
32.2
66.6
54.6
62.8
66.6
31.3
54.6
44.2
66.6
249
50
42
214
200
50
42
224
37
201
62
211
200
37
67
66
210
66.4
56.0
55.7
66.4
65.8
56.0
55.7
66.4
37.48
65.8
58.8
66.4
65.8
36.3
58.8
45.9
65.8
66
75
74
66
106
41
40
185
32
140
51
173
144
31
51
44
154
TRUCKS
2005
2005
2006
Ford
Ford
Ford
Escape Hybrid
2WD
Escape Hybrid
4WD
Escape Hybrid
4WD
5FMXTO
2.31 EE
5FMXTO
2.31 EE
6FMXTO
2.32EE
AV
AV
AV
SUV
SUV
SUV
B4
B4
B4
39.6
36.6
36.6
65
78
59
39.5
36.7
36.7
46
57
41
38
-------
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
Ford
Lexus
Lexus
Lexus
Mercury
Toyota
Toyota
Ford
Ford
Lexus
Lexus
Mercury
Toyota
Toyota
Escape Hybrid
FWD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Tribute Hybrid
4WD
Mariner
Hybrid 4WD
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid 2WD
Escape
Hybrid FWD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Mariner
Hybrid 4WD
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6TYXTO
3.3CC1
6TYXTO
3.3CC1
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6FMXTO
2.32EE
6TYXTO
3.3CC1
6TYXTO
3.3CC1
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
7TYXTO
3.3CC1
7TYXTO
3.3CC1
7FMXTO
2.32ZE
7TYXTO
3.3CC1
7TYXTO
3.3CC1
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
B4
B3
B3
B4
B4
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
B3
39.6
36.8
34.3
36.6
36.6
36.8
34.3
35.8
41.1
35.7
34.3
35.8
35.7
34.3
59
141
124
59
75
72
67
55
64
135
126
55
67
52
39.5
36.2
34.3
36.7
36.7
36.2
34.3
36.5
40.6
35.0
34.3
36.5
35.0
34.3
42
96
86
41
53
45
42
39
45
95
91
39
40
32
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG) VEHICLES
2003
2004
2005
2003
2004
Honda
Honda
Honda
Ford
Ford
Civic- CNG
Civic -CNG
Civic- CNG
Crown Victoria
-CNG
Crown Victoria
-CNG
3HNXVO
1.73W3
4HNXVO
1 .74WO
5HNXVO
1.7BF3
3FMXVO
4.6VP5
4FMXVO
4.6VP5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
B2
B2
B2
B3
B3
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
39
-------
Unless noted as a dedicated alternative fuel vehicle, all of the listed vehicles operate on gasoline, and some may also be flexible-fuel vehicles.
MY = Model Year
Mfr = Manufacturer
Iran = Transmission type
Int Wgt = Inertia Weight Class
Std = Standard
Unadj = Unadjusted
FE = Fuel Economy
Inc = Increase
Cmb = Combined city-highway
B = Bin
40
-------
Table 3-2. Proposed List of Eligible California-Certified Low Emission and Energy-
Efficient Vehicles
MY
Mfr
Vehicle
Model
Engine
Family
Iran
Fuel
Economy
Guide Class
LEV- II
Std
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
CARS
2003
2003
2003
2004
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
2005
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
2007
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Honda
Honda
Toyota
Toyota
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Accord
Hybrid
Prius
Civic Hybrid
Insight
Prius
Accord
Hybrid
Civic Hybrid
Camry Hybrid
Prius
3HNXV01
.36CV
3HNXV01
.36CV
3HNXV01
.OPCE
4HNXV01
.37CP
4HNXV01
.37CP
4HNXV01
.ONCE
4TYXV01 .
5MC1
5HNXV01
.3YCV
5HNXV01
.3YCV
5HNXV01
.OXCE
5HNXV03
.0164
5TYXV01 .
5MC1
6HNXV01
.3XCP
6HNXV01
.OVK5
6TYXV01 .
5MC1
7HNXV03
.OZMC
7HNXV01
.3JCP
7TYXV02.
4HC1
7TYXV01 .
5HC1
AV
M5
AV
AV
M5
AV
AV
AV
M5
AV
L5
AV
AV
AV
AV
L5
AV
AV
AV
Compact
Compact
Two-seater
Compact
Compact
Two-seater
Midsize
Midsize
Compact
Compact
Midsize
Two-seater
Midsize
Compact
Two-seater
Midsize
Midsize
Midsize
Midsize
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
52.6
50.0
62.8
52.6
50.0
62.8
66.6
52.6
50.0
62.8
32.2
66.6
54.6
62.8
66.6
31.3
54.6
44.2
66.6
52
59
249
50
42
214
200
50
42
224
37
201
62
211
200
37
67
66
210
56.0
55.7
66.4
56.0
55.7
66.4
65.8
56.0
55.7
66.4
37.48
65.8
58.8
66.4
65.8
36.3
58.8
45.9
65.8
45
46
201
41
40
177
139
41
40
185
32
140
51
173
144
31
51
44
154
41
-------
MY
Mfr
Vehicle
Model
Engine
Family
Tran
Fuel
Economy
Guide Class
LEV- II
Std
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
TRUCKS
2005
2005
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2006
2007
2007
2007
2007
2007
Ford
Ford
Ford
Ford
Lexus
Lexus
Mazda
Mercury
Toyota
Toyota
Ford
Ford
Lexus
Lexus
Mercury
Escape
Hybrid 2WD
Escape
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid FWD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Tribute
Hybrid 4WD
Mariner
Hybrid 4WD
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid 4WD
Escape
Hybrid FWD
RX 400 H
2WD
RX 400 H
4WD
Mariner
Hybrid
5FMXT02.
31 EE
5FMXT02.
31 EE
6FMXT02.
32EE
6FMXT02.
32EE
6TYXT03.
3CC1
6TYXT03.
3CC1
6FMXT02.
32EE
6FMXT02.
32EE
6TYXT03.
3CC1
6TYXT03.
3CC1
7FMXT02.
32ZE
7FMXT02.
32ZE
7TYXT03.
3CC1
7TYXT03.
3CC1
7FMXT02.
32ZE
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
AV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
SUV
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
S2
39.6
36.6
36.6
39.6
36.8
34.3
36.6
36.6
36.8
34.3
35.8
41.1
35.7
34.3
35.8
65
78
59
59
141
124
59
75
72
67
55
64
135
126
55
39.5
36.7
36.7
39.5
36.2
34.3
36.7
36.7
36.2
34.3
36.5
40.6
35
34.3
36.5
46
57
41
42
96
86
41
53
45
42
39
45
95
91
39
42
-------
MY
2007
2007
Mfr
Toyota
Toyota
Vehicle
Model
Highlander
Hybrid 2WD
Highlander
Hybrid 4WD
Engine
Family
7TYXT03.
3CC1
7TYXT03.
3CC1
Tran
AV
AV
Fuel
Economy
Guide Class
SUV
SUV
LEV- II
Std
S2
S2
Unadj
City FE
(mpg)
35.7
34.3
City FE
Inc Over
Base-
line
(%)
103
52
Unadj
CmbFE
(mpg)
35
34.3
CmbFE
Inc Over
Base-
line (%)
69
32
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG) VEHICLES
2004
2005
Honda
Honda
Civic- CNG
Civic -CNG
4HNXV01
.74W2
5HNXV01
.7BF4
N/A
N/A
S2
S2
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
DEDICATED ALTERNATIVE FUEL (CNG)
VEHICLE
Unless noted as a dedicated alternative fuel vehicle, all of the listed vehicles operate on gasoline, and some may also be flexible-fuel
vehicles.
MY = Model Year
Mfr = Manufacturer
Iran = Transmission
Int Wgt = Inertia Weight Class
Std = Standard
Unadj = Unadjusted
FE = Fuel Economy
Inc = Increase
Cmb = Combined city-highway
S2 = SULEVII
U2 = ULEVII
43
-------
References
Energy Policy Act of 2005. Public Law 109-58, August 8, 2005.
Hellman, Karl, and Robert Heavenrich. "Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel
Economy Trends: 1975 Through 2004" (FE Trends). EPA420-R-04-001, 2004.
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fetrends.htm
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA-LU). Public Law 109-59, Section 1121 HOV Facilities. August 10,
2005.
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
"Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users." http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/
U.S. DOT, National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA). "Vehicles and
Equipment."
http://www.nhtsa.dot.qov/portal/site/nhtsa/menuitem.dOb5a45b55bfbe582f57529c
dba046aO/
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Transportation and Air Quality
(OTAQ). "Basic Information."
http://www.epa. qov/fueleconomv/basicinformation. htm
U.S. EPA, OTAQ. "Certification and Fuel Economy Information System (CFEIS)."
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cfeis.htm
U.S. EPA, OTAQ. "Green Vehicle Guide." www.epa.qov/qreenvehicles
U.S. EPA, OTAQ. "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Revisions to Improve Calculation of
Fuel Economy Estimates." 71 FR 5426, February 9, 2006.
http://www.epa. qov/fueleconomv/requlations.htm#estimates
U.S. EPA, OTAQ. "Regulations and Standards."
http://www.epa.qov/fueleconomv/requlations.htmffcafe
44
------- |