012-2013 Progress Report
Vehicl
ctivities
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-420-R-15-007
-------
2012-2013 Progress Report
Vehicle Engine
Compliance
Activities
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460
EPA-420-R-15-007
October 2015
www.epa.gov/otaq
Contributors
Peter Caffrey Gregory Orehowsky
Phil Carlson* Bill Pidgeon
Emily Chen Christi Poirier*
Karen Danzeisen Holly Pugliese
Allen Duncan Michael Sabourin
Dave Good Lynn Sohacki
Fakhri Hamady * David Swain
Stephen Healy Carl Wick
Michelle Ibarra Ching-shihYang
* Compliance Center Editor
General Editor Graphic Design
MarkWolcott Gwen Dietrich
-------
Table of Contents
List of Figures ii
Compliance Report Organization 1
I. Forward by the Compliance Division Director 2
Highlights 4
II. Scope of EPA's Vehicle, Engine, Equipment, and Fuel Compliance Programs 13
A. Statutory Authority for EPA Regulation of Vehicles, Engines, Equipment, & Fuels 13
B. Scope of EPA Vehicle, Engine, & Equipment Regulations 13
C. Scope of EPA Fuel Regulations 16
III. Compliance Programs and Processes 19
A. Overview 19
1. Preproduction Programs 21
2. Production Programs 24
3. Postproduction Programs 24
4. Regulatory Flexibility Programs 25
5. Exemption Programs 25
B. Light-Duty Vehicles 26
C. Highway Motorcycles 43
D. Heavy-Duty Highway Engines 47
E. Nonroad Compression Ignition (NRCI) Engines 52
F. Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines 57
G. Recreational Vehicles 61
IV. Industry Statistics 65
Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Conversions 65
Manufacturer Locations 76
-------
List of Figures
Figure F-l - Ford 2013-2014 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 4
Figure F-2- Hyundai 2012 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 5
Figure F-3 - Hyundai 2013 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 6
Figure F-4 - Kia 2012 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 7
Figure F-5 - Kia 2013 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 8
Figure F-6 - Mercedes 2013-2014 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 8
Figure F-7 - MY 2013 Early GHG Credit Engine and Vehicle Manufacturers 9
Figure F-8 - Certificates of Conformity by Model Year 10
Figure 1 - Industry Sectors and Examples 12
Figure 2 - Environmental Statutes 13
Figure 3 - Vehicle and Engine Regulations and Implementation Dates 14
Figure 4 - Fuels Regulations and Implementation Dates 17
Figure 5 - Compliance Schedule Examples 20
Figure 6 - Certificates of Conformity by Model Year 212
Figure 7 - Vehicle and Engine Exemptions 26
Figure 8 - MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Vehicle Test Groups by Manufacturer 27
Figure 9 - MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Production Volume by Manufacturer 28
Figure 10 - Ford 2013-2014 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 30
Figure 11 - Hyundai 2012 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 30
Figure 12-Hyundai 2 013 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 31
Figure 13 - Kia 2012 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 32
Figure 14 - Kia 2013 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 33
Figure 15 - Mercedes 2013-2014 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes 33
Figure 16 - Vehicles Tested in EPA's In-Use Testing Program in 2012-2013 CYs 35
Figure 17 - Example of IUVP Testing Process for a MY 2014 Vehicle 36
Figure 18 - Light-Duty Vehicle In-Use Verification Program Test Volumes and Failure Rates in 2012-2013 CYs.36
Figure 19-2012-2013 CY Light-Duty Vehicle Defect Reports by Manufacturer 37
Figure 20-2012-2013 CY Light-Duty Vehicle Defect Reports by Problem Category 38
Figure 21-2012-2013 CY Light-Duty Vehicle Recalls by Manufacturer 39
Figure 22 - 2012-2013 CY Light-Duty Vehicle Recalls by Problem Category 40
Figure 23 - MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Test Group Distribution by Tier 2 Emissions Bins 41
Figure 24 - MY 2012-2013 Tier 2 Bin 5 NOx Certification Levels and Compliance Margins by Manufacturer 41
Figure 25 - MY 2012-2013 Tier 2 Bin 5 NMOG Certification Levels and Compliance Margins by Manufacturer...42
Figure 26 - MY 2012-2013 Tier 2 Bin 5 CO Certification Levels and Compliance Margins by Manufacturer 43
Figure 27 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Class 44
Figure 28 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Manufacturers by Class 44
Figure 29 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Manufacturer 45
Figure 30 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Production Volumes by Manufacturer 46
Figure 31 - 2012-2013 CY Highway Motorcycle Defect Reports by Problem Category 46
Figure 32 - MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Service Class 48
Figure 33 - MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Service Class 48
Figure 34 - MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer 48
Figure 35 - MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer 49
Fimirp ^,f\ - 701 7-701 ^ TV Hpavy-Diity HiaViway Fnainp Dpfprf Rppnrfg hy Marmfartiirpr 50
-------
Figure 37 - 2012-2013 CY Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Defect Reports by Problem Category 50
Figure 38 - 2012-2013 CY Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Recalls by Manufacturer 51
Figure 39 - 2012-2013 CY Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Recalls by Problem Category 51
Figure 40 - MY 2013 Early GHG Credit Engine and Vehicle Manufacturers 52
Figure 41 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Diesel Engine Certificates by Tier 53
Figure 42 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Diesel Engine EPA and IMO Certificates by Manufacturer 53
Figure 43 - MY 2012-2013 Locomotive Certificates by Manufacturer 54
Figure 44 - MY 2012-2013 Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Service Class 54
Figure 45 - MY 2012-2013 Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Manufacturer 55
Figure 46 - MY 2012-2013 Small Spark Ignition Engine Families by Class 57
Figure 47 - MY 2012-2013 Small Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer 58
Figure 48 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer 59
Figure 49 - MY 2012-2013 Large Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer 60
Figure 50 - MY 2012-2013 Nonroad Spark Ignition Evaporative Component Families by Type 60
Figure 51 - MY 2012-2013 Recreational Vehicle Engine Families by Manufacturer 62
Figure 52 - MY 2012-2013 ATV and UTV Engine Families by Manufacturer 63
Figure 53 - MY 2012-2013 Off-Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Manufacturer 63
Figure 54 - MY 2012-2013 Snowmobile Engine Families by Manufacturer 64
Figure 55 - MY 2012-2013 Recreational Vehicle Two-Stroke Engine Families 64
Figure 56 - MY 2012 Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Fuel Type 66
Figure 57 - MY 2013 Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Fuel Type 66
Figure 58 - MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty OEM Diesel and Alternative Fuel Test Groups by Manufacturer 67
Figure 59 - MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Alternative Fuel Conversion Certificates by Manufacturer 69
Figure 60 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle OEM Alternative Fuel Engine Families by Manufacturer 70
Figure 61 - MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Engine OEM Alternative Fuel Engine Families by Manufacturer 61
Figure 62 - MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Alternative Fuel Conversion Certificates by Manufacturer 71
Figure 63 - MY 2012-2013 Alternative Fuel Small SI Engine Manufacturers 72
Figure 64 - MY 2012-2013 Alternative Fuel Large SI Engine Manufacturers 74
Figure 65 - MY 2012-2013 Small Spark Ignition Engine OEM Alternative Fuel Engine Families 75
Figure 66 - MY 2012-2013 Large Spark Ignition Engine OEM Alternative Fuel Engine Families 75
Figure 67 - MY 2012-2013 Recreational Vehicle OEM Diesel Engine Families by Manufacturer 76
Figure 68 - MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Manufacturer's Country of Origin 77
Figure 69 - MY 2012-2013 Motorcycle Manufacturer Engine Families by Country of Origin 77
Figure 70 - MY 2012-2013 ATV Manufacturer Engine Families by Country of Origin 78
Figure 71 - MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway CI and SI Engines by Manufacturing Location 78
Figure 72 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Diesel Engine Families by Manufacturing Location 79
Figure 73 - MY 2012-2013 Locomotive Engine Families by Country of Origin 79
Figure 74 - MY 2012-2013 Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Manufacturing Location 80
Figure 75 - MY 2012-2013 Small Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturing Location 80
Figure 76 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturing Location 81
Figure 77 - MY 2012-2013 Large Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturing Location 81
-------
COMPLIANCE REPORT ORGANIZATION
1. Chapter I, Forward by the Compliance Division Director and program highlights.
2. Chapter II, Scope of EPA's Vehicle, Engine, Equipment, and Fuel Compliance Programs, describes
the laws that authorize EPA's mobile source compliance activity.
3. Chapter III, Compliance Programs and Processes, describes the compliance programs and processes
in more detail and provides compliance data and other information organized by industry sector.
Please refer to Figure 1 on the next page for examples of the vehicles, engines, and equipment that
are included in each industry sector.
4. Chapter IV, Industry Statistics, presents industry statistics that are contained within the compliance
information that EPA collects.
-------
L Foreword by the Compliance Division Director
I
5
\
^
MY 2012 - 2013 Compliance Report
This is the fourth in a series of vehicle and engine compliance reports issued
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Office of Transportation and Air
Quality - Compliance Division. These reports offer a convenient reference to the
data that the Compliance Division collects in implementing emissions regulations for
vehicles, engines, and other motorized equipment. The environmental programs
the Compliance Division implements apply to virtually every vehicle, engine and
gallon of transportation fuel sold in the United States. It is EPA's job to make sure
that these regulated mobile sources comply with emissions and fuel economy
requirements. The Compliance Division's role in the Office of Transportation and
Air Quality is essential to realizing the Agency's national air quality and public
health goals.
The 2012 - 2013 Progress Report on vehicle and engine compliance activities
(2012 - 2013 Compliance Report) updates and builds upon the data and
information presented in the first three reports which cover compliance activities
for the 2007 - 2011 model years. These reports can be found on our web site
at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/hwy.htm. This report presents certification data and
other types of information EPA collected for model years (MY) 2012 and 2013
and for calendar years (CY) 2012 and 2013.1
The Compliance Division oversees a broad set of compliance activities to ensure
that vehicle and engine manufacturers satisfy their regulatory obligations. These
activities range from issuing certificates of conformity before vehicles
and engines enter into commerce to monitoring in-use testing and reporting
afterward. In addition to regulating vehicles and engines, EPA regulates motor
vehicle fuels, including gasoline, diesel and renewable fuels such as ethanol and
biodiesel. Please see EPA's fuels web site, http://epa.gov/otaq/fuels/, for further
information about the fuel compliance program.
We recommend that readers who are unfamiliar with EPA's mobile source
emission control programs refer to the 2007 Compliance Report for additional
background information, including descriptions of the vehicle, engine, and fuel
categories EPA regulates.
'Some information is reported by model year while other types of information (e.g., recalls and
defects) are reported by calendar year.
US-EPA I Foreword
-------
On an annual basis, EPA issues a report documenting light duty manufactur-
ers' compliance with the light duty greenhouse gas (GHG) standards. These
standards apply to cars and light trucks, beginning with the 2012 model year.
Manufacturers must meet standards for tailpipe methane and nitrous oxide
emissions, plus increasingly stringent fleet average standards for carbon
dioxide in each model year through 2025. Reports for both 2012 and 2013
model years have been published, please refer to these two reports for
detailed information on the light duty GHG program.
The highlights that follow provide additional examples of information that is
available today and that is explained in more detail in the body of the report.
Byron Bunker
Director, Compliance Division
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
USEPA National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48105
US-EPA I Foreword
-------
HIGHLIGHTS
Highlight 1 - EPA Investigation Prompts Carmakers to Correct Inflated Fuel Economy Claims
The fuel economy label (the window sticker that appears on new cars) provides consumers with reliable and
repeatable estimates of real-wo rid fuel economy for national average drivers and conditions. This allows
consumers to compare fuel economy across different car models. EPA requires auto manufacturers to revise
miles per gallon (MPG) values on fuel economy labels if relevant information becomes available that shows
that the original values are too high.
EPA oversees the MPG values on fuel economy labels by:
conducting independent testing on about 15% of vehicle models each year on pre-production
vehicles provided by manufacturers
testing cars and trucks that are already in use to confirm that the fuel economy labels are accurate for
production vehicles placed into commerce
assessing information provided by consumers, consumer groups, and the auto industry to identify
models for further testing.
If testing reveals that fuel economy labels are inaccurate, EPA will require manufacturers to update the MPG
label to provide consumers with the best information available. Such was the case for several manufacturers'
2012-2013 vehicle models described in figures Fl - F6 below.
Figure F-l
Ford 2013-2014 Model Year Fuel Economy (FE) Label Changes
Carline
Fusion
C-Max
Lincoln
Fusion
C-Max
Model
Hybrid
Hybrid
MKZ Hybrid
Energi Plug-In
Energi Plug-In
City FE (MPG)
old
47
45
45
44
44
new
42
40
38
38
38
change
-5
-5
-7
-6
-6
Highway FE (MPG)
old
47
40
45
41
41
new
41
37
37
36
36
change
-6
-3
-8
-5
-5
-------
Figure F-2
Hyundai 2012 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Accent
Azera
Elantra
Genesis
Sonata
Tucson
Veloster
Model
1.8 L Automatic
1.8 L Manual
3. 3 L Automatic
1.8 L Automatic
1.8 L Manual
5.0 L Automatic
4.6 L Automatic
5.0 L R- Spec Automatic
3.8 L Automatic
Hybrid
2.4L Automatic 4wd
2.4L Automatic 2 wd
2.4L Manual 4wd
2.4L Manual 2wd
2. OL Automatic 2wd
2.0L Manual 2wd
Automatic
Manual
City FE (MPG)
old
30
30
20
29
29
17
17
16
19
35
21
22
20
21
23
20
29
28
new
28
28
20
28
28
17
16
16
18
34
20
21
19
20
22
20
27
27
change
-2
-2
0
-1
-1
0
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
0
-2
-1
Highway FE (MPG)
old
40
40
29
40
40
26
26
25
29
40
28
32
27
29
31
27
38
40
new
37
37
28
38
38
25
25
25
28
39
27
30
25
27
29
26
35
37
change
-3
-3
-1
-2
-2
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
-2
-2
-2
-2
-1
-3
-3
-------
Figure F-3
Hyundai 2013 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Accent
Azera
Elantra
Genesis
Santa Fe
Tucson
Veloster
Model
Automatic
Manual
3. 3 L Automatic
1.8 L Automatic
1.8 L Manual
1.8 L Blue Automatic
1.8 LGT Automatic
1.8 L GT Manual
Elantra Coupe Automatic
Elantra Coupe Manual
5.0 L R- Spec Automatic
3.8 L Automatic
2.4 L Sport Automatic 4wd
2.4 L Sport Automatic 2wd
2.0 L Sport Automatic 4wd
2.0 L Sport Automatic 2wd
2.4L Automatic 4wd
2.4L Automatic 2wd
2.4L Manual 4wd
2.4L Manual 2wd
2. OL Automatic 2wd
2.0L Manual 2wd
Automatic
Manual
Turbo Automatic
Turbo Manual
City FE (MPG)
old
30
30
20
29
29
30
28
27
28
29
16
19
21
22
20
21
21
22
20
21
23
20
29
28
25
26
new
28
28
20
28
28
28
27
26
27
28
16
18
20
21
19
20
20
21
19
20
22
20
28
27
24
24
change
-2
-2
0
-1
-1
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-2
-2
Highway FE (MPG)
old
40
40
30
40
40
40
39
39
39
40
25
29
28
33
27
31
28
32
27
29
31
27
40
40
34
38
new
37
37
29
38
38
38
37
37
37
38
25
28
26
29
24
27
27
30
25
27
29
26
37
37
31
35
change
-3
-3
-1
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
0
-1
-2
-4
-3
-4
-1
-2
-2
-2
-2
-1
-3
-3
-3
-3
-------
Figure F-4
Kia 2012 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Optima
Rio
Sorento
Soul
Sportage
Model
Hybrid
Automatic
Manual
2.4 L Automatic 4wd SIDI
2.4 L Automatic 2wd SIDI
1. 6 L Soul Eco
1.6 L Soul Automatic
1.6 LSoul Manual
2. OL Soul Eco
2.0 L Soul Automatic
2.0 LSoul Manual
2.4 L Automatic 4wd
2.4 L Automatic 2wd
2.4 L Manual 4wd
2.4 L Manual 2wd
2.0 L Automatic 2wd
2.0 L Automatic 4wd
City FE (MPG)
old
35
30
30
21
22
29
27
27
27
26
26
21
22
20
21
22
21
new
34
28
29
20
21
26
25
25
24
23
24
20
21
19
20
21
20
change
-1
-2
-1
-1
-1
-3
-2
-2
-3
-3
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
Highway FE (MPG)
old
40
40
40
28
32
36
35
35
35
34
34
28
32
27
29
29
26
new
39
36
37
26
30
31
30
30
29
28
29
27
30
25
27
28
25
change
-1
-4
-3
-2
-2
-5
-5
-5
-6
-6
-5
-1
-2
-2
-2
-1
-1
-------
Figure F-5
Kia 2013 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Rio
Sorento
Soul
Sportage
Model
Automatic
Manual
Eco Automatic
2.4 L Automatic 4wd SIDI
2.4 L Automatic 2wd SIDI
1. 6 L Soul Eco
1.6 L Soul Automatic
1.6 LSoul Manual
2. OL Soul Eco
2.0 L Soul Automatic
2.0 LSoul Manual
2.4 L Automatic 4wd
2.4 L Automatic 2wd
2.4 L Manual 4wd
2.4 L Manual 2wd
2.0 L Automatic 2wd
2.0 L Automatic 4wd
City FE (MPG)
old
30
30
31
21
22
29
27
27
27
26
26
21
22
20
21
22
21
new
28
29
30
20
21
26
25
25
24
23
24
20
21
19
20
21
20
change
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-3
-2
-2
-3
-3
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
Highway FE (MPG)
old
40
40
40
28
32
36
35
35
35
34
34
28
32
27
29
29
26
new
36
37
36
26
30
31
30
30
29
28
29
27
30
25
27
28
25
change
-4
-3
-4
-2
-2
-5
-5
-5
-6
-6
-5
-1
-2
-2
-2
-1
-1
Figure F-6
Mercedes 2013-2014 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
C300
C300
Model
4-Matic FFV
4-Matic PZEV
City FE (MPG)
old
20
20
new
19
19
change
-1
-1
Highway FE (MPG)
old
27
29
new
26
28
change
-1
-1
Highlight 2 - Some Truck Manufacturers Earned Early Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Credits
In September 2011, EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for the first time
jointly introduced GHG and fuel efficiency standards for model years 2014 through 2018 medium and heavy
duty engines and vehicles.
Under the program, manufacturers required to meet the new greenhouse standards had the option to earn
early credits inMY2013 which can then be applied to subsequent model years. Figure F-7 on the next page
lists those manufacturers who certified products under these early credit provisions.
8
-------
Figure F-7
MY 2013 Early GHG Credit Engine and Vehicle Manufacturers
Manufacturer Name
Daimler Trucks
Navistar
PACCAR
Total
Number of Vehicle Families
Tractor
18
11
0
29
Vocational
12
10
5
27
Total
30
21
5
56
Highlight 3 -Certificates of Conformity Issued by EPA Stabilizes at 4000 Per Year
After a period of rapid growth with the advent of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments, the number of
different vehicle and engine families being sold each year appears to have stabilized at around 4,000
certificates of conformity. EPA issued 2,520 certificates of conformity1 in 2000, 3,641 in 2007, 3,642 in 2008,
3,927 in 2009, 3,689 in 2010 and 3,962 in 2011. In each of the model years 2012 - 2013, EPA issued about
4,000 certificates. Figure F-8 on the next page summarizes the certificates of conformity issued for model
years 2012 and 2013.
i A Certificate of Conformity is the document that EPA issues to a manufacturer to certify that a vehicle or engine class conforms to
EPA requirements. Every class of engines and vehicles introduced into commerce in the United States must have a Certificate of
Conformity. Certificates are valid for only one model year of production.
-------
Figure F-8
Certificates of Conformity by Model Year2
Industry Sector
Light-Duty Vehicles
Highway Motorcycles
Heavy- Duty Highway
Engines
Nonroad Compression
Ignition Engines
Nonroad Spark Ignition
(SI) Engines
Recreational Vehicles
Total
Category
Passenger cars and trucks
Independent commercial importers
Alternative fuel conversions
On-highway motorcycles
Compression ignition (mostly diesel)
Spark ignition (mostly gasoline)
Alternative fuel conversions
Evaporative emissions
Diesel powered equipment, such as tractors, generators,
construction equipment, forklifts, welders
Diesel boats and ships
Oceangoing vessels per International Maritime Organization
requirements
Locomotives
Small SI: Small nonroad gasoline powered equipment, such
as lawnmowers, string trimmers, chain saws, small
compressors, pumps, utility vehicles < 25 mph, snow
blowers, rammers, and floor cleaners
Marine SI: Gasoline boats and personal watercraft
Large SI: Large nonroad gasoline powered equipment, such
as forklifts, compressors, generators, and stationary
equipment
Evaporative components (mostly intended for small nonroad
gasoline and marine gasoline equipment)
All-terrain vehicles / Utility vehicles
Off-highway motorcycles
Snowmobiles
MY 2012
486
7
140
285
55
29
4
12
525
205
23
70
957
146
149
679
183
56
28
4,039
MY 2013
486
15
117
292
34
32
1
13
405
186
14
79
924
155
153
765
187
42
30
3,930
2 Most of the information in this report comes from Verify EPA's Engine and Vehicle Compliance System. Verify, collects emissions
and fuel economy compliance information for all types of engines, vehicles, and equipment used in transportation and other mobile
source applications. The Verify information system is used by engine and vehicle manufacturers to report this information to EPA.
10
-------
Highlight 4 - ATV / Motorcycle Certificates Voided
In 2013, after an extensive investigation, EPA voided 153 certificates of conformity for engine families
covering more than 170,000 on- and off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles produced between
model years 2005 and 2012. The products were imported or manufactured by the following companies:
Snyder Technology, Inc., Snyder Computer Systems, Inc. (doing business as Wildfire Motors Corporation),
American Lifan Industry Inc., and Jonway Motorcycles (USA) Co., Ltd. Consumers who own models covered
by the voided certificates are not responsible for the wrongdoing and can continue to use their vehicles.
Voiding certificates is a key step, potentially leading to EPA enforcement actions against companies holding
these certificates for violations of the CAA.
As a result of the August 2014 voiding of certificates of conformity for CF Moto America, Incorporated, the
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance took action that resulted in a civil penalty of
$725,000. The settlement also requires CF Moto to institute a recall and fuel tank replacement program, as
well as correct emission control labels for nonconforming labels within CF Moto's control. For more
information, please see: http://www2.epa.gov//enforcement/cfmoto-powersports-inc-cfmoto-america-inc-
zhejiang-cfmoto-power-co-ltd-and-chunfeng
As a result of the October 2013 voiding of certificates of conformity for American Lifan Industry,
Incorporated, the EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance took action that resulted in a civil
penalty of $630,000 and the posting of a bond of $300,000 to $500,000 to satisfy any Clean Air Act penalty
related to future importation of vehicles manufactured by the company in 2014, 2015, and 2016. For more
information, please see: http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/american-lifan-industry-inc-settlement
Highlight 5 -Defect and Recall Requirements Lead to Manufacturers Correcting Potential Problems in
Millions of Light Duty Vehicles and Heavy Duty Engines
In calendar years 2012 and 2013 manufacturers recalled approximately 3.7 million cars on the basis of
indicators of potential emission problems that were revealed through EPA-mandated surveillance and
reporting requirements. Consumers received free repairs, extended warrantees or other remedies to address
the emission defects identified in these vehicles. In addition, heavy duty manufacturers recalled more than
340 thousand engines in 2012 and2013.
II
-------
Figure 1 - Industry Sectors and Examples
Industry Sector
Examples
Key
Light-Duty
Vehicles
Passenger cars, vans, SUVs, small trucks
Highway
Motorcycles
On-highway motorcycles, cruisers, choppers, scooters,
touring bikes, mopeds, street bikes
Heavy-Duty
Highway
Engines
Tractor-trailers (semi-trucks), buses, delivery and work
trucks
Nonroad
Compression
Ignition Engines
(Nonroad CI)
Construction and agricultural equipment, such as tractors,
generators, construction and road-work equipment,
welders
Marine diesel boats and ships, oceangoing vessels
Locomotives
Nonroad Spark
Ignition Engines
(Nonroad SI)
Small SI: lawnmowers, string trimmers, chain saws, small
compressors, pumps, snow blowers
Marine SI: inboard and outboard motorboats, jet-skis
Large SI: forklifts, large compressors, generators
Evaporative components: hoses, fuel tanks
All-terrain vehicles (ATVs), utility vehicles (UTVs), sand
cars, dune buggies, go karts
Recreational
Vehicles
Off-highway motorcycles
Snowmobiles
12
-------
IL Scope of EPA's Vehicle, Engine,
Equipment, and Fuel Compliance Programs
A. STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR EPA REGULATION OF VEHICLES, ENGINES,
EQUIPMENT, & FUELS
EPA derives authority to do its work through a variety of environmental statutes enacted by Congress.
Figure 1 on the precious page describes all of the industry sectors included in the scope of EPA's Vehicle,
Engine, and Equipment Compliance Programs. Figure 2 outlines the primary environmental statutes that
give EPA the authority to develop and implement its mobile source clean air programs.3
Figure 2 - Environmental Statutes
Statute
Clean Air Act (CAA)
Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (EPCA)
Energy Policy Act (EPAct)
Energy Independence and
Security Act (EISA)
Authority
Emission standards for highway & nonroad vehicles
Fuel economy information programs for consumers,
fuel economy labels
and their fuels
including vehicle
Annual volume standards for renewable fuel content
From locomotives to lawnmowers, EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) has the authority
to regulate nearly all engines and vehicles that emit pollutants into the environment The statutory
authority also covers the fuels that power these mobile sources, and includes responsibility for emissions
compliance oversight that extends from initial product design to performance on the road and in the field.
B. SCOPE OF EPA VEHICLE, ENGINE, & EQUIPMENT REGULATIONS
Compliance programs play an essential role in achieving the benefits of statutes and regulations. OTAQ
oversees a comprehensive set of compliance activities to ensure that vehicle and engine manufacturers and
fuel refiners and producers satisfy their regulatory obligations.
3 This report focuses primarily on engines and vehicles even though fuels are also a part of EPA's clean air program. Additional
information on the EPA fuels program can be found in Light-Duty Automotive Technology. Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel
Economy Trends: 1975-2014 and in RFS2 EMTS Informational Data.
13
-------
EPA regulation of motor vehicles began in the 1970s; Figure 3 on the next page lists vehicle and engine
regulations that were proposed or established since 2004. For a comprehensive list of EPA mobile source
emission standards, refer to EPA's online Emission Standards Reference Guide, available at
www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/index.htm. Please see Section II.C of this report for a list of regulations
applicable to motor vehicle fuels.
Figure 3 - Vehicle and Engine Regulations and Implementation Dates
Affected Industry
Sector/Category
Program/Rulemaking Description
Effective
Model
Year*
Light-Duty Vehicles
Tier 2 Emission Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Fuel Control -
Strengthened emission standards for light-duty vehicles and
significantly reduced sulfur levels in gasoline
On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) -
Established new emissions system monitoring requirements for
light-duty diesel vehicles
Revisions to Motor Vehicle Fuel Economy Labeling -
Updated EPA method for determining fuel economy label values
to better represent typical driving patterns and more accurately
estimate actual consumer fuel economy
Mobile Source Air Toxics -
Set standards to lower gasoline benzene content, reduce cold
temperature exhaust emissions, and reduce evaporation and
permeation from portable fuel containers
Clean Alternative Fuel Vehicle and Engine Conversions5-
Updated anti-tampering provisions applicable to manufacturers
of clean alternative fuel conversion systems for highway vehicles
and engines
Light-Duty Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Standards -
Established the first mobile source emission standards for
greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous
oxide
Revisions and Additions to Motor Vehicle Fuel Economy Label -
Redesigned label provides new information on vehicle fuel
economy, energy use, fuel costs, and environmental impacts for
conventional and advanced technology vehicles (including
electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles)
2017 and Later Light-Duty vehicle GHG and Corporate Average
Fuel Economy Standards (including revisions to 2012-2016 GHG
& CAFE Standards
2004
2005
2008
2010
All*
2012
2013
4 Effective model year refers to the first year of a new program. Many programs are phased in over multiple model years.
5 This rule also applies to heavy-duty highway clean alternative fuel conversions.
6 Although the regulation took effect with its promulgation in 2011, because it applies to tampering, it applies to any model year
that is subject to any emissions standard.
14
-------
Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles: Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Emission and Fuel Standards
2014
Affected Industry
Sector/Category
Program/Rulemaking Description
Effective
Model
Year
Highway Motorcycles
Highway Motorcycle Exhaust Emissions-
Class I and II: Established more stringent HC and added new
optional hydrocarbons + oxides of nitrogen (HC+NOx) standards;
Added Class la (<50cc)
Class III: Established new Tier 1 HC+NOx standard
Class III: More stringent Tier II HC+NOx standard
Highway Motorcycle Permeation Emissions-
Established new evaporative/permeation standards for fuel
tank(s) and lines.
2006
2006
2010
2008
Heavy-Duty Highway
Engines and Vehicles
Light Heavy-Duty OBD -
Established OBD monitoring requirements for heavy-duty
chassis certified vehicles, and for engines certified for use in
heavy-duty vehicles between 8,500 and 14,000 pounds gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR)
Heavy-Duty Highway Rule -
Established more stringent exhaust emission standards for
heavy-duty vehicles and engines; required Ultra Low Sulfur
Diesel (ULSD) fuel (15 ppm sulfur maximum)
Heavy-Duty Engines OBD Rule -
New OBD monitoring requirements for engines certified for use
in heavy-duty vehicles above 14,000 pounds GVWR
Heavy-Duty GHG Standards -
Established first emission standards for greenhouse gas
pollutants from heavy-duty engines and heavy-duty vehicles
2004
2007
2010
2014
Nonroad
Compression
Ignition
Engines &
Equipment
Construction &
Agricultural
Tier 3/Interim Tier 4 -
Established more stringent emission standards for engines
between 37 and 560 kilowatts (50 and 750 hp)
Tier 4 Nonroad Diesel Rule -
Established more stringent emissions standards for all engines
greater than 19 kilowatts (25 hp) and lowered nonroad diesel
fuel sulfur to 15 ppm maximum
2006
2010
Marine
Diesel
Engines
Tier 3 and Tier 4 Emission Standards for Marine Diesel Engines -
Established more stringent emission standards for newly built
and remanufactured engines
2009
15
-------
Locomotives
Tier 3 and Tier 4 Emission Standards for Locomotive Diesel
Engines -
Established more stringent emission standards for newly built
and remanufactured engines
2011
Small Spark
Ignition
Engines
(Small SI)
Control of Emissions From Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines and
Equipment -
Established more stringent exhaust emission standards for Class
I (MY2012) and Class II (MY2011) engines below 19 kilowatts
and fuel permeation standards for all engines below 19 kilowatts
2011
2012
Nonroad
Spark Ignition
Engines &
Equipment
Marine Spark
Ignition
Engines
(Marine SI)
Control of Emissions From Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines and
Equipment -
Established first federal exhaust emission standards for
sterndrive and inboard Marine SI engines and increased the
stringency of exhaust emission standards for outboard and
personal watercraft engines. Established new evaporative
emission standards for all Marine SI engines
2010
Large Spark
Ignition
Engines
(Large SI)
New Emissions Standards for Large SI Engines -
Established new emission standards, diagnostic capability and
portable emission testing provisions
Tierl
Tier 2
2004
2007
Recreational Vehicles
New Exhaust Emission Standards for RVs -
Off-highway motorcycles, ATVs and UTVs
Snowmobiles
Tierl
Tier 2
Tire 3
New permeation standards for fuel components
2006
2006
2010
2012
2008
Aircraft7
Control of Air Pollution from Aircraft and Aircraft Engines;
Emission Standards and Test Procedures -
Established more stringent NOx exhaust emission standards for
aircraft engines
NOx Emission Standards for Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines -
Established new NOx emission standards for aircraft, engines
consistent with international standards
2005
2012
C. SCOPE OF EPA FUEL REGULATIONS
In addition to regulating vehicles and engines, EPA regulates motor vehicle fuels, including gasoline, diesel,
and renewable fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel. Figure 4 describes both historical and current fuels
programs and implementation dates. For a comprehensive list of ongoing fuels regulations, please visit
7 The Federal Aviation Administration has primary oversight responsibility for aircraft emissions compliance. A general overview
can be found at the Federal Aviation Administration Office of Environment and Energy.
16
-------
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/publications.htm. Additional information can be found on the OTAQ
website at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/index.htm. Please see Section II.B of this report for recent
regulatory actions applicable to vehicles and engines.
Figure 4 - Fuels Regulations and Implementation Dates
Affected Fuel Type-
Applicable Fuel Producer or
Importer
Program/Rulemaking Description
Effective
Imple-
mentation
Date
Motor vehicle fuels and fuel
additives -
Gasoline and diesel refiners and
importers, renewable fuel
producers and importers, fuel
additive producers and
Fuels and Fuel Additives Registration System (FFARS) -
Mandatory registration program for motor vehicle
gasoline, diesel, and their additives sold in the U.S.
Required all fuel and fuel additive manufacturers to
report the chemical composition of their products and
other technical, sales and health effects information
1975
Gasoline -
Gasoline Refiners and Importers
Volatility Standards -
Limited the vapor pressure of gasoline sold at retail
stations during the summer ozone season to reduce
evaporative emissions from gasoline, which contribute to
ground-level ozone formation
Oxygenated Fuel Requirements -
Established fuel oxygen standards to reduce carbon
monoxide emissions from motor vehicles during the
winter season
Reformulated Gasoline (RFC) -
Reduced smog-forming and toxic pollutants in U.S. cities
with worst smog pollution
Tier 2 Emission Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Regulations
Established stringent exhaust emission standards for all
fuel types and limits fuel sulfur levels to an average of 30
ppm
Mobile Source Air Toxics Regulations -
Limited the benzene content of gasoline and reduces toxic
emissions from passenger vehicles and gas cans
1989
1992
1995
2004
2011
Diesel -
Diesel Producers and Importers
Highway, Nonroad, Locomotive, and Marine Regulations -
Established suite of rules for highway, nonroad,
locomotive, and marine diesel engines that required
ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD), 15 ppm maximum
The C3 Marine Rule changed the diesel fuel program to
allow production and sale of diesel fuel up to 1000 ppm
for Category 3 marine vessels effective June 2010.
Modifications to the Transmix Provisions under the Diesel
Sulfur Program provided relief to transmix processors
and pipeline operators to allow the petroleum
distribution system to function efficiently effective Feb.
2013.
2006
2010
2013
17
-------
Heating Oil Rule expanded the definition of heating oil in
the RFS program effective December 2013
2013
Renewable Fuels (e.g.
ethanol, biodiesel) -
Gasoline Refiners and Importers,
Renewable Fuel Producers,
Importers, Exporters, Marketers,
and Blenders
The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) -
RFS1-
Regulations established under the Energy Policy Act
(EPAct) of 2005 required 7.5 billion gallons of renewable
fuel to be blended into gasoline by 2012.
RFS2-
Regulations established under the Energy Independence
and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 expanded upon RFS1.
The RFS2 regulations require renewable fuel to be
blended into both gasoline and diesel fuel, as well as jet
fuel and heating oil. EPA is responsible for publishing
annual updates to these renewable fuels standards.
2007
2010
IS
-------
IIL Compliance Programs and Processes
A. OVERVIEW
EPA uses a variety of testing and reporting programs to monitor compliance with emissions regulations.
The programs may apply to vehicles and engines before they are produced (preproduction), while they
are in production and after they are in customer service (postproduction). EPA has the authority and
flexibility to choose compliance strategies that best fit an industry sector at any given time. Factors that
influence the use of a particular compliance approach include regulatory requirements affecting a given
industry sector, the technology being used to meet the emission standards, industry-specific production
processes and cycles and sector or manufacturer size. This report describes compliance programs and
activities that OTAQ conducted in 2012-2013. Specifically, the report presents data we collected and
analyzed pertaining to MY 2012-2013 vehicles and engines, as well as test results and other types of
information OTAQ obtained during calendar years 2012-2013.
EPA regulations typically give manufacturers some flexibility about how they will achieve emissions
compliance. Examples include emissions standard phase-ins, averaging, banking and trading (ABT)
programs and several types of exemptions. This regulatory flexibility enables manufacturers to align
their business model with emissions requirements and sometimes allow manufacturers to earn credit for
introducing new technologies early. At the same time, some regulatory flexibilities introduce challenges
to compliance oversight because vehicles and engines subject to one regulation and set of standards may
legally certify to different emissions levels. This report includes some discussion of flexibility provisions
and presents data showing how manufacturers are using them.
EPA mobile source compliance programs allow for vehicle and engine testing and other compliance
activity that can generally be parsed into three life-cycle categories:
Preproduction activities include certification testing and reporting and other compliance processes
conducted before vehicles and engines are produced.
Production activities include audits and other compliance testing conducted on vehicles and engines
coming off the production line, but before they enter customer service.
Postproduction activities include in-use testing and reporting and other compliance processes
conducted after vehicles and engines enter customer service.
Figure 5 on the next page shows how EPA's compliance programs are related to one another.
19
-------
Figure 5 - Compliance Schedule Examples
EPA's mobile source compliance processes seek to ensure that the vehicles and engines are fully
compliant with emissions standard throughout their full useful life. This is accomplished with a
variety of testing programs and other requirements that occur over the life of vehicles and engines.
This figure shows example compliance schedules for certain sectors. Although other mobile source
sectors may differ with regard to timing, they generally follow similar protocols.
Compliance Schedule for Light-Duty Vehicles
EPA Confirmatory
Testing, Random
and Targeted
EPA Reviews Initial
Manufacturer
Application
i
EPA Reviews
Final
Manufacturer
Application
EPA In-Use Surveillance Testing
Vehicle Design
and Build
EPA Issues Certificate of
Conformity
0 Miles 10,000 Miles
EPA Action
Manufacturer Action
Manufacturer Prototype
Vehicle Emissions and
Durability Testing
f Representative of
Production!
20,000 Miles 50.000 Miles 90.000 Miles 120,000 Miles
Low-Mileage In-Use
Verification Testing
Performed by Manufacturer
High-Mileage In-Use
Verification Testing
Performed by Manufacturer
End of Useful Life
(per CAA)
[Emission Levels
Predicted Via Certifica-
tion Durability Testing!
Compliance Schedule for Certain Heavy-Duty Highway and Nonroad Engines
EPA Confirmatory Testing
EPA
Reviews Initial
Manufacturer Application
EPA
Reviews Final
Manufacturer
Application
Manufacturer
Testing of
Prototype Engine
Representative
of Production
EPA Selective Enforcement
Audit
EPA Issues Certificate
of Conformity
Begin Useful
Life
Engine Design . 0 Miles
and Build / 0 Hours
EPA Action
Manufacturer Action
EPA In-Use
Testing
Manufacturer
Production Line
Testing
Manufacturer In-Use
Testing
End of Useful Life
435,000 Miles or
50 to 10,000 Hours Depending
on the Engine/Application
End of Useful Life (per CAA)
Emission Levels Predicted via
Certification Durability Testing
20
-------
1. Preproduction Programs
CERTIFICATES OF CONFORMITY
Section 206 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires all engines and vehicles to be covered by a certificate of
conformity before they can enter into commerce. A certificate of conformity is a license to produce
products for one model year consistent with the vehicle description and any terms of the certificate.
Certificates of conformity are generally issued to a group of vehicles or engines having similar design and
emission characteristics. For light-duty vehicles, certificates are issued for each unique combination of
exhaust test group8 and evaporative family. For heavy-duty vehicles and nonroad equipment subject to
engine standards, the unit of certification is called an engine family. Test groups and engine families may
include multiple models. Conversely, different versions within a given model may be included in different
engine families or test groups.
Figure 6 on the next page shows the number of certificates that EPA issued in MY 2012-2 013.
After a period of rapid growth with the advent of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments, the number of
different vehicle and engine families being sold each year appears to have stabilized at around 4,000. EPA
issued 2,520 certificates of conformity9 in 2000, 3,641 in 2007, 3,642 in 2008, 3,927 in 2009, 3,689 in 2010
and 3,962 in 2011. In each of the model years 2012 - 2013, EPA issued about 4,000 certificates.
8 An exhaust test group is a group of vehicle models with similar engines, drive trains and emission control systems. It represents a
group of vehicles or engines that have a similar design and emission characteristics.
9 A Certificate of Conformity is the document that EPA issues to a vehicle manufacturer to certify that a vehicle class conforms to
EPA requirements. Every class of engines and vehicles introduced into commerce in the United States must have a Certificate of
Conformity. Certificates are valid for only one model year of production.
21
-------
Figure 6 - Certificates of Conformity by Model Year10
Industry Sector
Light-Duty Vehicles
Highway Motorcycles
Heavy-Duty Highway
Engines
Nonroad Compression
Ignition Engines
Nonroad Spark Ignition
(SI) Engines
Recreational Vehicles
Total
Category
Passenger cars and trucks
Independent commercial importers
Alternative fuel conversions
On-highway motorcycles
Compression ignition (mostly diesel)
Spark ignition (mostly gasoline)
Alternative fuel conversions
Evaporative emissions
Diesel powered equipment, such as tractors, generators,
construction equipment, forklifts, welders
Diesel boats and ships
Oceangoing vessels per International Maritime Organization
requirements
Locomotives
Small SI: Small nonroad gasoline powered equipment, such
as lawnmowers, string trimmers, chain saws, small
compressors, pumps, utility vehicles < 25 mph, snow
blowers, rammers, and floor cleaners
Marine SI: Gasoline boats and personal watercraft
Large SI: Large nonroad gasoline powered equipment, such
as forklifts, compressors, generators, and stationary
equipment
Evaporative components (mostly intended for small nonroad
gasoline and marine gasoline equipment)
All-terrain vehicles / Utility vehicles
Off-highway motorcycles
Snowmobiles
MY 2012
486
7
140
285
55
29
4
12
525
205
23
70
957
146
149
679
183
56
28
4,039
MY 2013
486
15
117
292
34
32
1
13
405
186
14
79
924
155
153
765
187
42
30
3,930
APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION
The certification process begins when a manufacturer submits an application for certification to EPA.
Applications cover an exhaust test group or engine family that represents a group of vehicles or engines
having similar design and emission characteristics. EPA requires manufacturers to provide detailed
information in the certification application to show that the vehicles or engines meet all of the applicable
emissions requirements and to describe the vehicles or engines to be covered by the certificate of
conformity. Each certificate covers only those vehicles or engines specifically described in the application.
10 Most of the information in this report comes from Venfy, EPA's Engine and Vehicle Compliance System. Verify, collects emissions
and fuel economy compliance information for all types of engines, vehicles, and equipment used in transportation and other mobile
source applications. The Verify information system is used by engine and vehicle manufacturers to report this information to EPA.
22
-------
The list below summarizes the general types of information and data that manufacturers submit to begin
the application process:
• A description of the basic engine design and list of distinguishable configurations to be covered by the
certification application
• An explanation of how the emission control system operates
• A description of the vehicle or engine being used to represent the group for certification testing
• A description of the test procedures and equipment used to test the vehicle or engine
• All emission data obtained on each test vehicle or engine
• The emission deterioration characteristics for each regulated pollutant over the useful life of the
vehicles and engines covered by the certification application
• The predicted production volumes of each configuration to be covered by the certificate
• An unconditional statement attesting that vehicles or engines covered by the certification application
comply with all requirements of the applicable regulation and the CAA
• Manufacturer representative and official company contact information
• Durability groupings (i.e., groups of vehicles/engines with similar emission deterioration and emission
component durability)
• Durability test procedures
• Description of each test group or engine family which is represented by the durability test vehicle or
engine
• Description of vehicles or engines used to demonstrate emissions and emission control component
durability
• List of all test results, official certification levels, and the applicable emission standards for each vehicle
or engine tested
• Statement of compliance with the applicable emission standards for all other configurations not tested
but represented by the test vehicles or engine and covered by the certification application
• Evaporative emissions system information
• Description of the evaporative, permeation or refueling families covered by the certification application
and test results demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards
• Information on emission control diagnostic systems, where applicable
CONFIRMATORY CERTIFICATION TESTING
23
-------
Manufacturers conduct the initial testing to support an application for a certificate of conformity and
report the results to EPA. Subsequent certification testing, called confirmatory testing, occurs after an
application has been submitted. Confirmatory tests are performed by either the manufacturer or by EPA
and serve to validate the manufacturer's initial emissions or fuel economy test results.
2. Production Programs
The objective of compliance activities that occur during production is to confirm that vehicles and
engines coming off production lines match specifications set forth in the certificate of conformity. In
other words, production programs are designed to verify that manufacturers are actually producing the
same vehicle or engine that they certified. Some mobile source regulations call for routine production
line testing. EPA may also audit production vehicles and engines without prior notice using selective
enforcement audits.
3. Postproduction Programs
IN-USE COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS
In-use compliance programs track emissions performance of production vehicles or engines after they
enter customer service. In-use testing programs are conducted by both EPA and manufacturers.
DEFECT REPORTING PROGRAMS
Manufacturers are required to report emission-related defects to EPA. An emission-related defect is a
defect in design, materials or workmanship in a device, system or assembly, as described in the
approved application for certification. Manufacturers must report a defect even if it does not increase
emission levels. EPA regulations generally establish minimum numbers of confirmed defects that trigger
defect information reporting requirements. An emission-related defect does not necessarily lead to an
emission recall because not all defects in emission-related parts increase emissions.
RECALL PROGRAMS
An emissions recall is a repair, adjustment or modification program conducted by a manufacturer to
remedy an emission-related problem. Vehicle and engine manufacturers are required to design and
build their products to meet emission standards for the useful life of the vehicle or engine specified by
law. Under Section 207(c)(l) of the CAA, if EPA determines that a substantial number ofvehicles or
engines in a category or class do not meet emission standards in actual use, even though they are
properly maintained and used, EPA can require the manufacturer to recall and fix the affected vehicles
and engines. EPA may use a variety of data sources including EPA and manufacturer test results to
determine that a recall is necessary. The purpose of a recall is to help ensure the problem gets fixed and
thereby prevent excessive pollution from vehicles or engines that are already in customer service. When
an emissions recall occurs, the manufacturer must notify vehicle owners and provide instructions about
how to have the vehicle repaired. Most recalls are initiated voluntarily by manufacturers once potential
noncompliance is discovered; however, EPA also has the authority to order the manufacturer to recall
and fix noncompliant vehicles or engines, if the manufacturer fails to implement a voluntary recall.
24
-------
4. Regulatory Flexibility Programs
EPA builds flexibility into its emissions regulations to increase compliance efficiency, decrease costs and
encourage manufacturers to introduce cleaner technologies sooner.
AVERAGE BANKING AND TRADING (ABT) PROGRAMS
Average Banking and Trading (ABT) provisions allow manufacturers to meet an overall fleet average
standard instead of an individual vehicle or engine standard. Manufacturers may comply with ABT
provisions by certifying some vehicles and engines at levels above the emission standard, provided that
these emission "deficits" are offset by positive credits from vehicles and engines certified below the
standard. Compliance is determined by calculating the manufacturer's fleet-wide average of each
exhaust test group's production or sales volume and emission level. The flexibility to meet fleet average
emission standards by ABT credits can facilitate earlier introduction of clean technology into the market
TRANSITION PROGRAM FOR EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS
The Transition Program for Equipment Manufacturers (TPEM) recognizes a potential challenge that can
face equipment manufacturers when new emission standards take effect If engines, of which there are
relatively few designs, must be redesigned to achieve the required emission reductions, equipment
powered by those engines, of which there could be 10,000 or more designs, may also need to be
redesigned. TPEM permits equipment manufacturers a transition period during which they may
continue to use a limited number of engines meeting previous standards while they update product
designs to accommodate engines meeting the new standards.
5. Exemption Programs
Vehicles and engines imported into the United States may be eligible for an exemption from federal
emission requirements. For example, vehicles belonging to military personnel or nonresidents may be
eligible for exemption. Vehicles that are being imported for testing or display may also be exempt.
Depending on the type of exemption, importers must request in advance written EPA approval. EPA
works with the Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection to ensure that
proper approvals have been issued before vehicles and engines may enter the United States. The
majority of the 2314 import exemptions EPA issued in 2012 and the 2453 exemptions issued in 2013
were for light-duty vehicles. The majority of exemptions EPA issued for heavy-duty highway and
nonroad engines or equipment were for test programs. EPA issued 309 heavy-duty or nonroad
exemptions in 2012 and 284 in 2013. An exemption may cover multiple vehicles and/or engines.
25
-------
Figure 7 summarizes the exemptions that EPA issued in calendar years 2012 - 2013.
Figure 7 - Vehicle and Engine Exemptions
900
824
2012
100
Military
Nonresident Repair or
Alteration
Testing
Display
Racing Competition
B. LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES
SECTOR PROFILE:
• The light-duty vehicle sector includes passenger vehicles such as cars, vans, SUVs, and light-
trucks
• Light-duty vehicles have been subject to increasingly stringent emissions and fuel economy
standards since the 1970s
• Primary emission standards in effect for MY 2012-2013 are Tier 2 emission standards for HC,
CO, NOx, and PM and GHG standards for C02 and other GHGs
CERTIFICATION
26
-------
EPA issued 486 certificates to light-duty vehicle11 original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) each year in
MY 2012-2013. Figure 8 shows the number of certified test groups for MY 2012 -2013 by
manufacturer.12,13
PRODUCTION VOLUME
Figure 9 on the next page presents by manufacturer the number of MY 2012-2013 cars and light-duty
trucks produced for sale in the United States.14 A comparison of Figures 8 and 9 shows that there is not
always a correlation between the number of test groups a manufacturer certifies and the number of
vehicles the manufacturer produces. Manufacturers with the most certified test groups do not necessarily
produce the most vehicles.
Figure 8 - MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Vehicle Test Groups by Manufacturer
2013 Truck
2013 Car
2012 Truck
i
'//
n Some heavy-duty vehicles that are between 8,500-14,000 pounds GVWRare chassis-certified and are included in the light-duty
vehicle certificate count.
12 Each light-duty vehicle certificate covers a unique combination of exhaust test group and evaporative emissions family.
Therefore the number of light-duty certificates and test groups is usually different. Manufacturers may create test groups that
include both cars and trucks.
13 'Other' in Figure 8 includes more than 20 manufacturers, each of whom had only a small number of test groups.
14 These production data only include vehicles subject to Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards.
27
-------
Figure 9 - MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Production Volume by Manufacturer15
3,000,000
2,500,000
2013 Truck
2013 Car
2012 Truck
12012 Car
CONFIRMATORY TESTING
EPA and manufacturers test pre-production vehicles and engines prior to their introduction into
commerce to confirm initial manufacturer emission test results. When a vehicle fails a confirmatory test,
the manufacturer is allowed one retestto confirm or refute the failure. If the vehicle passes on retest, the
retest is deemed the official certification test and the results from the retest stand as the official emission
levels for that vehicle. Sometimes a confirmatory test failure can be attributed to problems that render
the test vehicle unrepresentative of production vehicles. In those situations, the manufacturer corrects
the problem in the test vehicle and retests. In still other cases, failures over the confirmatory test reflect
actual engineering problems. These types of failures usually result in manufacturer action to change the
vehicle calibration and update the certification application accordingly, resulting in a quantifiable
emissions reduction for the vehicles that are ultimately produced. Regardless of whether a confirmatory
test failure is due to problems with the test vehicle or problems with the calibration, the problems must
be corrected and the vehicle must pass confirmatory testing before EPA will issue a certificate.
FUEL ECONOMY TESTING
EPA and manufacturers perform confirmatory testing for both emissions and fuel economy validation.
Fuel economy test results are the source for information that appears on new vehicle fuel economy labels
15 Total annual production for light-duty vehicle manufacturers in 2012 Model Year was over 13.7 million and for 2013 Model Year
was over 15.3 million.
28
-------
and that EPA and the U.S. Department of Transportation use to assess compliance with corporate average
fuel economy (CAFE) standards.
EPA reports fuel economy test data in an annual Fuel Economy Trends Report which includes both
laboratory test value results and results adjusted for real-world driving conditions.
EPA INVESTIGATION PROMPTS CARMAKERS TO CORRECT INFLATED FUEL
ECONOMY CLAIMS
The fuel economy label (the window sticker that appear on new cars) provides consumers with reliable
and repeatable estimates of real-world fuel economy for national average drivers and conditions. This
allows consumers to compare fuel economy across different car models. EPA requires auto manufacturers
to revise miles per gallon (MPG) values on fuel economy labels if relevant information becomes available
that shows that the original values are too high.
EPA oversees the MPG values on fuel economy labels by:
conducting independent testing on about 15% of vehicle models each year on pre-production
vehicles provided by manufacturers
testing in-use cars and trucks to confirm that the fuel economy labels are accurate for production
vehicles placed into commerce
assessing information provided by consumer groups, the auto industry and fueleconomy.gov to
identify models for further testing.
If testing reveals that fuel economy labels are inaccurate, EPA will require manufacturers to update the
MPG label to provide consumers with the best information available. Such was the case for several
manufacturers' 2012-2013 vehicle models described in Figures 10-15 starting on the next page.
As a result of an enforcement action made possible by an OTAQ investigation, automakers Hyundai and Kia
will pay a $100 million civil penalty to resolve alleged Clean Air Act violations based on their sale of more
than 1 million vehicles that collectively will emit approximately 4.75 million metric tons of greenhouse
gases (GHG) in excess of what the automakers certified to the EPA. The companies will forfeit GHG
emission credits in order to put the companies in the place they would have been had they accurately
reported the GHG emissions from these vehicles in the first place. The companies also will take measures to
prevent future violations. On November 3, 2014, the EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced this settlement, and lodged a
consent decree embodying the settlement in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
The California Air Resources Board joined the United States as a co-plaintiff in this settlement. For more
information, please see: http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/hyundai-and-kia-clean-air-act-settlement
29
-------
Figure 10
Ford 2013-2014 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Fusion
C-Max
Lincoln
Fusion
C-Max
Model
Hybrid
Hybrid
MKZ Hybrid
Energi Plug-In
Energi Plug-In
City FE (MPG)
old
47
45
45
44
44
new
42
40
38
38
38
change
-5
-5
-7
-6
-6
Highway FE (MPG)
old
47
40
45
41
41
new
41
37
37
36
36
change
-6
-3
-8
-5
-5
Figure 11
Hyundai 2012 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Accent
Azera
Elantra
Genesis
Sonata
Tucson
Veloster
Model
1.8 L Automatic
1.8 L Manual
3. 3 L Automatic
1.8 L Automatic
1.8 L Manual
5.0 L Automatic
4.6 L Automatic
5.0 L R- Spec Automatic
3.8 L Automatic
Hybrid
2.4L Automatic 4wd
2.4L Automatic 2wd
2.4L Manual 4wd
2.4L Manual 2wd
2. OL Automatic 2 wd
2.0L Manual 2wd
Automatic
Manual
City FE (MPG)
old
30
30
20
29
29
17
17
16
19
35
21
22
20
21
23
20
29
28
new
28
28
20
28
28
17
16
16
18
34
20
21
19
20
22
20
27
27
change
-2
-2
0
-1
-1
0
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
0
-2
-1
Highway FE (MPG)
old
40
40
29
40
40
26
26
25
29
40
28
32
27
29
31
27
38
40
new
37
37
28
38
38
25
25
25
28
39
27
30
25
27
29
26
35
37
change
-3
-3
-1
-2
-2
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
-2
-2
-2
-2
-1
-3
-3
30
-------
Figure 12
Hyundai 2013 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Accent
Azera
Elantra
Genesis
Santa Fe
Tucson
Veloster
Model
Automatic
Manual
3. 3 L Automatic
1.8 L Automatic
1.8 L Manual
1.8 L Blue Automatic
1.8 LGT Automatic
1.8 L GT Manual
Elantra Coupe Automatic
Elantra Coupe Manual
5.0 L R- Spec Automatic
3.8 L Automatic
2.4 L Sport Automatic 4wd
2.4 L Sport Automatic 2wd
2.0 L Sport Automatic 4wd
2.0 L Sport Automatic 2wd
2.4L Automatic 4wd
2.4L Automatic 2wd
2.4L Manual 4wd
2.4L Manual 2wd
2. OL Automatic 2wd
2.0L Manual 2wd
Automatic
Manual
Turbo Automatic
Turbo Manual
City FE (MPG)
old
30
30
20
29
29
30
28
27
28
29
16
19
21
22
20
21
21
22
20
21
23
20
29
28
25
26
new
28
28
20
28
28
28
27
26
27
28
16
18
20
21
19
20
20
21
19
20
22
20
28
27
24
24
change
-2
-2
0
-1
-1
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
0
-1
-1
-2
-2
Highway FE (MPG)
old
40
40
30
40
40
40
39
39
39
40
25
29
28
33
27
31
28
32
27
29
31
27
40
40
34
38
new
37
37
29
38
38
38
37
37
37
38
25
28
26
29
24
27
27
30
25
27
29
26
37
37
31
35
change
-3
-3
-1
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
-2
0
-1
-2
-4
-3
-4
-1
-2
-2
-2
-2
-1
-3
-3
-3
-3
31
-------
Figure 13
Kia 2012 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Optima
Rio
Sorento
Soul
Sportage
Model
Hybrid
Automatic
Manual
2.4 L Automatic 4wd SIDI
2.4 L Automatic 2wd SIDI
1. 6 L Soul Eco
1.6 L Soul Automatic
1.6 LSoul Manual
2. OL Soul Eco
2.0 L Soul Automatic
2.0 LSoul Manual
2.4 L Automatic 4wd
2.4 L Automatic 2wd
2.4 L Manual 4wd
2.4 L Manual 2wd
2.0 L Automatic 2wd
2.0 L Automatic 4wd
City FE (MPG)
old
35
30
30
21
22
29
27
27
27
26
26
21
22
20
21
22
21
new
34
28
29
20
21
26
25
25
24
23
24
20
21
19
20
21
20
change
-1
-2
-1
-1
-1
-3
-2
-2
-3
-3
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
Highway FE (MPG)
old
40
40
40
28
32
36
35
35
35
34
34
28
32
27
29
29
26
new
39
36
37
26
30
31
30
30
29
28
29
27
30
25
27
28
25
change
-1
-4
-3
-2
-2
-5
-5
-5
-6
-6
-5
-1
-2
-2
-2
-1
-1
32
-------
Figure 14
Kia 2013 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
Rio
Sorento
Soul
Sportage
Model
Automatic
Manual
Eco Automatic
2.4 L Automatic 4wd SIDI
2.4 L Automatic 2wd SIDI
1. 6 L Soul Eco
1.6 L Soul Automatic
1.6 LSoul Manual
2. OL Soul Eco
2.0 L Soul Automatic
2.0 LSoul Manual
2.4 L Automatic 4wd
2.4 L Automatic 2wd
2.4 L Manual 4wd
2.4 L Manual 2wd
2.0 L Automatic 2wd
2.0 L Automatic 4wd
City FE (MPG)
old
30
30
31
21
22
29
27
27
27
26
26
21
22
20
21
22
21
new
28
29
30
20
21
26
25
25
24
23
24
20
21
19
20
21
20
change
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-3
-2
-2
-3
-3
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
-1
Highway FE (MPG)
old
40
40
40
28
32
36
35
35
35
34
34
28
32
27
29
29
26
new
36
37
36
26
30
31
30
30
29
28
29
27
30
25
27
28
25
change
-4
-3
-4
-2
-2
-5
-5
-5
-6
-6
-5
-1
-2
-2
-2
-1
-1
Figure 15
Mercedes 2013-2014 Model Year Fuel Economy Label Changes
Carline
C300
C300
Model
4-Matic FFV
4-Matic PZEV
City FE (MPG)
old
20
20
new
19
19
change
-1
-1
Highway FE (MPG)
old
27
29
new
26
28
change
-1
-1
DURABILITY TESTING
The CAA requires EPA emission standards to apply for the full useful life of the vehicle. Since emissions
may degrade as vehicles age and accrue miles, manufacturers must perform durability testing to
demonstrate that a vehicle will remain compliant for its full useful life, despite any deterioration that may
occur over time or distance. EPA regulations establish processes by which manufacturers may
demonstrate durability using standard or custom methods. Manufacturers that use their own durability
aging procedures must provide EPA with an "equivalency factor" that enables comparison between the
proprietary method and the published, standard EPA method. This allows a third party that relies on the
EPA method to replicate the manufacturer's method.
33
-------
IN-USE COMPLIANCE TESTING
Both EPA and manufacturers conduct testing to monitor in-use vehicle emissions. EPA conducts in-use
vehicle surveillance testing at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory in Ann Arbor,
Michigan. The purpose of the EPA surveillance program is to assess emissions performance a few years
after vehicles enter the fleet EPA typically recruits two- or three-year-old vehicles from volunteers in
southeast Michigan. EPA selects vehicles for surveillance both randomly and based on certification data,
manufacturer in-use verification data, vehicle production volume, new technology, and public complaints
and inquiries. In CY2012 EPA selected about 33 classes for surveillance and generally tested three
vehicles from each selected class. In CY2013 EPA selected 25 classes and tested approximately three
vehicles per class. If any of the initial vehicles within a class failed a test, EPA recruited additional vehicles
from that class for follow-up testing to determine whether an emissions problem was likely to exist and
was not an artifact of the small sample size (or even a single defective vehicle).
EPA also conducts an in-use confirmatory testing program for vehicle classes that merit closer scrutiny.
These classes may be identified through failures in either EPA in-use surveillance or manufacturer in-use
testing programs.
Figure 16 on the next page shows the vehicle model year, manufacturer, and carline selected for EPA
surveillance testing in 2012-2013.
34
-------
Figure 16 - Vehicles Tested in EPA's In-Use Testing Program in 2012-2013 CYs
Model
Year
Manufacturer
Model
Surveillance Classes
2006
2007
2009
2009
2009
2009
2009
2009
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2010
2011
2011
2011
2011
2011
2011
2011
2011
2011
2012
Ford
Nissan
Audi
Chrysler
Ford
Fuji Subaru
General Motors
Mazda
American Honda
American Honda
BMW
Chrysler
Ford
Fuji Subaru
General Motors
GM Daewoo
Honda
Hyundai
Kia
Land Rover
Mazda
Mercedes Benz
Mitsubishi
Nissan
Toyota
Volkswagen
Volvo
Audi
Chrysler
Ford
General Motors
Honda
Kia
Nissan
Nissan
Toyota
Chrysler
Taurus
Frontier 2WD
A4 & A5 Audi Quattro
Town & Country, Dodge Caravan
Mustang
Legacy, Outback, Tribeca
Envoy, Trailblazer 2WD
6
Accord 4DR Sedan
Insight
128, 328, 528; Mini Clubman, Mini Convertible, Mini Cooper
VW Routan; Chrysler Commander 4WD, Jeep Grand Cherokee 4WD;
Dodge Caliber; Dodge Nitro, Jeep Liberty; Chrysler 300, 300/SRT-8
Dodge Challenger, Charger
Transit Connect; Edge FWD; Mercury Grand Marquis FFV
Forester AWD, Impreza AWD, Impreza Wagon/Outback Sport,
Legacy Awd
CMC Acadia FWD; Chevrolet Camaro; Chevrolet Equinox, CMC
Terrain; Chevrolet Impala
Chevrolet Aveo, Aveo 5
Acura TSX
Elantra, Elantra Blue; Genesis; Genesis Coupe; Accent
Soul; Forte
LR 4, Range Rover, Range Rover Sport
3; CX-7 2WD
GL 450 4Matic, GL 550 4Matic
Outlander
Altima; Frontier, Pathfinder, & Xterra
Camry ; Prius; RAV4 2WD
2.0L Diesel: Golf, Jetta, Jetta Sportwagen
Volvo S80, V70, XC60, XC70, XC90
Volkswagen CC
Jeep Compass & Patriot 4WD
Escape FWD
Cruze; Traverse FWD
Odyssey 2WD
Sorento 2WD
Sentra
Maxima
Avalon
Fiat 5 00
Confirmatory Class
2006
Ford
Ford Taurus
35
-------
In addition to its own in-use testing, EPA uses data from the mandatory manufacturer run In-Use
Verification Program (IUVP) to monitor in-use light-duty vehicle emissions performance. IUVP tests are
required at low mileage (between 10,000 and 50,000 miles) and high mileage (greater than 50,000
miles). Manufacturers must complete low mileage IUVP testing one year after the end of production and
complete high mileage IUVP testing five years after the end of production. Figure 17 shows a sample IUVP
test schedule for a MY2014 vehicle.
Figure 17 - Example of IUVP Testing Process for a MY 2014 Vehicle
2013
2014
2015
2016-2017
2018
2019
Ql Q2 Q3 Q4 Ql Q2 Q3 Q4
Ql Q2
Production
period
Low Mileage
Testing JL
Q3 Q4
Ql
Q4
Ql Q2
Q3 Q4
Ql Q2
High Mileage
Testing JL
Q3 Q4
1 = Testing is due for completion on or before this date
Figure 18 shows the total number of vehicles tested over each test procedure and their corresponding
failure rates by vehicle model year for all IUVP testing conducted.
Figure 18
Light-Duty Vehicle In-Use Verification Program Test Volumes and Failure Rates in 2012-2013 CYs
Model
Year
FTP
Vehicles
Tested
Failure
Rate
US06
Vehicles
Tested
Failure
Rate
2-Day Evap
Vehicles
Tested
Failure
Rate
ORVR16
Vehicles
Tested
Failure
Rate
High-Mileage Testing
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
1119
654
20
8
5
9.0%
8.7%
10.0%
0.0%
20.0%
783
477
14
7
4
1.0%
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
126
102
5
0
1
6.4%
4.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
132
94
5
1
0
6.8%
5.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Low-Mileage Testing
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
8
4
12
498
580
73
0.0%
0.0%
8.3%
3.6%
2.8%
2.7%
2
3
11
436
520
73
50.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.2%
0.4%
0.0%
1
0
2
131
148
18
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
3.8%
2.7%
5.6%
1
3
4
134
129
15
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.0%
1.6%
0.0%
Overall, the test results from this program show that the majority of the in-use fleet continues to comply
with the emission standards. However, when IUVP testing identifies potential emissions concerns, EPA
and manufacturers work together to implement solutions which may involve voluntary manufacturer
action to fix the problem, or, if necessary, an EPA-ordered emissions recall. This process is described in
greater detail in the 2007 Compliance Report.
16 Onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) is a vehicle emission control system that captures fuel vapors from the vehicle gas
tank during refueling. This requirement was phased-in from 1998 through 2006.
36
-------
DEFECT REPORTING
Figures 19 and 20 present 2012-2013 calendar year light-duty vehicle emission defect report
information. Defects reported in 2012 -2013 potentially affected more than 48 million vehicles. A single
defect incidence may affect multiple model years of a given vehicle.
Light-duty vehicle manufacturers are required to notify EPA when they learn of emission-related defects
in 25 or more vehicles of the same class (e.g., exhaust test group) and category (e.g., manufacturer and
model year).
Figure 19 - 2012-2013 CY Light-Duty Vehicle Defect Reports by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Audi
Bentley
BMW
Chrysler
Fisker
Ford
General Motors
Honda
Hyundai
Isuzu
Jaguar
Jaguar/Land Rover
Kia
Land Rover
Lotus
Mazda
Mercedes-Benz
Mitsubishi
Nissan
Porsche
Rolls Royce
Subaru
Toyota
Volkswagen
Volvo
Total
Reported in CY2012
Number of
Defect
Reports
16
2
22
8
8
7
14
9
0
0
3
0
0
4
0
4
15
1
19
19
0
6
2
10
3
172
Number of
Affected
Vehicles
415,501
15,893
520,290
514,069
2,753
1,133,253
2,726,536
2,216,687
0
0
9,999
0
0
49,808
0
203,248
230,680
400
2,102,476
235,618
0
469,540
310,800
879,789
131,268
12,168,608
Reported in CY2013
Number
of
Defect
Reports
10
0
27
21
3
15
16
22
11
1
0
2
12
0
1
16
12
2
16
15
1
2
3
8
4
220
Number of
Affected Vehicles
422,824
0
943,617
5,132,529
2,835
2,136,197
1,030,862
14,188,404
5,663,236
4,465
0
48,831
1,716,271
0
5,476
1,297,365
325,053
30,263
1,616,751
158,344
523
576,169
195,800
304,846
398,627
36,199,288
Figure 19 shows the number of defect reports submitted for each manufacturer in 2012-2013 calendar
years and the number of affected vehicles. The vehicle model years that are covered by the defect reports
37
-------
submitted in 2012-2013 calendar years range from MY 2003 through 2014.17 Manufacturers are required
to report defects up to five years after the end of production.
Figure 20 shows the number of defects by defect category for all the vehicles covered by defect reports in
2012-2013 calendar years.
Figure 20 - 2012-2013 CY Light-Duty Vehicle Defect Reports by Problem Category
Problem Category
Air Inlet/Intake System
Catalyst System
Computer Related (other than OBD)
Crankcase Ventilation System
Diesel Particulate Filter System
EGR System
Electrical, Mechanical & Cooling Systems
Emission Control Information Label
Evap Emissions System
Exhaust System
Fuel Delivery Component
Fuel Delivery System
Fuel Tank System
Hybrid Vehicle System
Ignition System
Monitoring/Measuring Sensor/System
NOx Absorber System
NOx Sensor
OBD System
On-Board Refueling and Vapor Recovery (ORVR)
Oxygen Sensor
Secondary Air System
Selective Catalytic Reduction System
Turbocharger/Supercharger
Total
Reported in CY2012
Number
of Defect
Reports
7
3
11
5
2
2
27
4
14
6
14
2
10
8
0
24
1
2
23
0
2
0
3
2
172
Number of
Affected
Vehicles18
1,708,931
22,977
639,937
204,688
108,303
225,952
2,400,355
47,782
1,209,577
415,271
752,429
87,120
783,198
5,184
0
2,148,244
184,167
12,014
1,077,276
0
9,009
0
36,545
89,649
12,168,608
Reported in CY2013
Number of
Defect
Reports
6
8
35
1
0
2
23
4
19
5
22
2
8
6
8
12
0
6
32
1
8
2
6
4
220
Number of
Affected
Vehicles
943,866
257,317
6,730,630
37,240
0
104,979
3,656,946
46,193
2,834,713
596,083
1,260,052
68,132
622,631
176,757
1,716,819
11,593,222
0
227,618
3,244,916
511,377
1,131,552
115,765
77,944
244,536
36,199,288
17 Defect and recall reports can be submitted in the calendar year prior to the designated model year because vehicles can be
certified and introduced into commerce starting January 2 of the prior calendar year. For example, MY 2014 vehicles can be
certified and introduced into commerce starting January 2,2013.
18 Vehicles that have defects in more than one category are counted in each problem category. Thus, the total number of affected
vehicles can be higher in Figure 16 than the total number of affected vehicles in Figure 15.
38
-------
RECALL REPORTING
Figure 21 shows the number of light-duty vehicle recalls by vehicle manufacturer in 2012-2013 calendar
years. Because a recall usually covers a single, specific condition, a vehicle with multiple emissions
problems may be subject to multiple recalls. Thus the total number of affected vehicles includes vehicles
that have been recalled more than once. Similarly, there is no direct correlation between the number of
defect reports, recalls, and the number of vehicles that are recalled. A manufacturer may identify a lot of
defects that are not significant enough to warrant a recall. On the other hand, a manufacturer could have
a few major defects that evolve into major recalls affecting large portions of their product line.
Historically, emissions recalls affect about three million vehicles annually although the number may vary
in any given year.
Figure 21 - 2012-2013 CY Light-Duty Vehicle Recalls by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Audi
BMW
Chrysler
Ford
General Motors
Honda
Lotus
Mazda
Nissan
Subaru
Toyota
Volkswagen
Total
Recalls in CY2012
Number
of
Recalls
3
4
7
5
4
0
0
1
11
1
0
1
37
Number of
Affected
Vehicles18
13,106
62,616
388,728
220,613
196,774
0
0
3,144
470,228
168,810
0
167
1,524,186
Recalls in CY2013
Number
of
Recalls
2
1
7
4
2
4
1
0
3
1
2
3
30
Number of
Affected
Vehicles
192,037
15,961
474,175
663,211
40,673
80,290
5,476
0
11,618
102,077
133,188
470,533
2,189,239
Figure 22 on the next page lists categories of defects that we re corrected by recalls in 2012 -
2013. EPA established the defect categories primarily for internal tracking purposes to identify
potential, industry-wide problems with a particular component or technology. Recalls in 2012-
2013 calendar years affected vehicles spanning 2004 through 2014 model years.
39
-------
Figure 22 - 2012-2013 CY Light-Duty Vehicle Recalls by Problem Category
Problem Category
Air Inlet/Intake System
Computer Related (other than OBD)
EGR System
Electrical, Mechanical & Cooling Systems
Emission Control Information Label
Evap Emissions System
Exhaust System
Fuel Delivery Component
Fuel Delivery System
Fuel Tank System
Hybrid Vehicle System
Ignition System
Monitoring/Measuring Sensor/System
NOx Sensor
OBD System
Oxygen Sensor
Secondary Air System
Turbocharger/Supercharger
Total
Recalls in CY2012
Number
of
Recalls
0
6
0
6
3
1
1
3
2
1
0
1
2
1
9
0
0
1
37
Number of
Affected
Vehicles
0
208,188
0
247,441
10,310
58,008
225,254
31,540
79,275
1,739
0
138,717
3,304
139,790
323,986
0
0
56,634
1,524,186
Recalls in CY2013
Number
of
Recalls
2
8
1
0
2
2
1
4
0
1
2
0
2
0
3
1
1
0
30
Number of
Affected
Vehicles
45,773
544,614
201,308
0
39,747
16,049
102,077
599,722
0
1,789
133,175
0
270.315
0
68,023
935
165,712
0
2,189,239
AVERAGING, BANKING AND TRADING (ABT) PROGRAMS
The 2007 Compliance Report provided an overview of EPA's Tier 2 program. The Tier 2 standards are the
set of emission standards that applied to cars and light-duty trucks during the period covered by this
report19 The Tier 2 regulations offer manufacturers a choice of eight emission bins to which they can
certify. Lower bin numbers reflect more stringent emission standards. The Tier 2 ABT program allows
manufacturers to use sales-weigh ted averaging to certify groups of vehicles to different bin levels, as long
as the fleet as a whole on average meets Bin 5 standards each year.
Figure 23 on the next page shows the percentage of exhaust test groups by emission certification bin for
MY 2012-2013. For MY 2012, about 94 percent of test groups were certified to Bin 5 or better. For MY
2013 about 95 percent of test groups were certified to Bin 5 or better.
19 The final Tier 3 standards were published April 28,2014.
40
-------
Figure 23
MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Test Group Distribution by Tier 2 Emissions Bins
Tier 2 Bin
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Percentage of Light- Duty Test Groups20
MY 2012
0.2%
1.0%
4.0%
23.1%
65.5%
0%
0%
6.2%
MY 2013
0.4%
2.4%
4.9%
26.8%
60.6%
0%
0%
4.9%
Figures 24-26 present the average certification levels for NOx, NMOG, and CO respectively along with
the standards for Tier 2 Bin 5 for each major manufacturer for MY 2012-2013. The lower the
certification levels relative to the standard, the greater the compliance margin.
Figure 24
MY 2012-2013 Tier 2 Bin 5 NOx Certification Levels and Compliance Margins by Manufacturer
NMOG
Stand
gram;
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0%
Percent of Standard
80.0%
100.0%
3rd: 0.09
per mile
20 Sum of rounded values may not equal 100 percent.
41
-------
Figure 25
MY 2012-2013 Tier 2 Bin 5 NMOG Certification Levels and Compliance Margins by Manufacturer
NMOG
Stand
Cram;
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0%
Percent of Standard
80.0%
100.0%
3rd: 0.09
per mile
42
-------
Figure 26
MY 2012-2013 Tier 2 Bin 5 CO Certification Levels and Compliance Margins by Manufacturer
1.1%
1.2%
1.2%
23.8%
24.7%
.9%
7.7%
29.7%
31.3%
30.9%
CO Standard:
msper
2013
12012
IT
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0%
Percent of Standard
80.0%
100.0%
ile
C. HIGHWAY MOTORCYCLES
SECTOR PROFILE:
• Highway and off-highway motorcycles are subject to different sets of regulations and
emission standards. This section covers the highway motorcycles. Information about off-
highway motorcycles is reported in the Recreational Vehicles section
• Highway motorcycles have been subject to HC and CO emissions standards since 1978
• A second set of more stringent emission standards took effect in MY2 006. Although the CO
emission standard remained unchanged at 12.0 g/km, the HC emission standard was
reduced from 5 g/km to 1.0 g/km for Class 1 and 2 motorcycles. In addition, an optional
HC + NOx 1.4 g/km standard was added.
CERTIFICATION
43
-------
Figure 27 presents the number of certified highway motorcycle engine families by class.
Figure 27 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Class
Highway Motorcycle Category
Class la (<50cc)
Class Ib (50 -169cc)
Class II (170-279cc)
Class III (>279cc)
Battery electric motorcycles
Total
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
42
54
44
137
8
285
MY 2013
44
53
39
153
3
292
For MY 2012, 87 manufacturers certified highway motorcycles; 87 manufacturers also certified highway
motorcycles in MY 2013. Figure 28 presents the number of motorcycle manufacturers in MY 2012-2013
for each highway motorcycle class.
Figure 28 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Manufacturers by Class
Highway Motorcycle Category
Class la (<50cc)
Class Ib (50 -169cc)
Class II (170-279cc)
Class III (>279cc)
Battery electric motorcycles
Number of Manufacturers Holding Certificates
MY 2012
40
39
27
35
5
MY 2013
39
42
28
36
3
Figure 29 on the next page presents the number of certified highway motorcycle engine families by
manufacturer for MY 2012-2013. The manufacturers that certified a small number of engine families
across the two model years are grouped together as "Other".
44
-------
Figure 29 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Manufacturer
MY 2012
Manufacturer
Yamaha Motor Corporation
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Suzuki Motor Corporation
Piaggio Group Americas, Inc.
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
KYMCO USA
Ducati North America, Inc.
Triumph Motorcycles America Ltd
BMW
Harley-Davidson Motor Company
KTM North America, Inc.
Other
Total
Number of
Engine Families
26
15
15
20
15
9
11
8
6
7
4
149
285
MY 2013
Manufacturer
Yamaha Motor Corporation
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Suzuki Motor Corporation
Piaggio Group Americas, Inc.
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
KYMCO USA
Ducati North America, Inc.
Triumph Motorcycles America
Ltd
BMW
Harley-Davidson Motor
Company
KTM North America, Inc.
Other
Total
Number of
Engine Families
28
19
18
17
15
12
10
10
9
7
6
141
292
PRODUCTION VOLUME
More than 80 highway motorcycle manufacturers certified products in MY 2012-2013, but the vast
majority of bikes sold in the United States were produced by just a few companies. Figure 30 on the next
page shows reported production volumes for the six highest sales volume motorcycle manufacturers in
model years 2012-2013. The production volume for lower-volume manufacturers is shown in aggregate.
The aggregated volume is based on available data manufacturers have reported to EPA. As with light-duty
vehicles, a comparison of Figures 29 and 30 show that there is not always a correlation between the
number of engine families a manufacturer certifies and the number of vehicles the manufacturer
produces. Manufacturers with the most certified engine families do not necessarily produce the most
vehicles.
45
-------
Figure 30 - MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Production Volumes by Manufacturer
200,000
180,000
a, 160,000
| 140,000
> 120,000
o 100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
• GO-
• GO-
j\XV(
^
DEFECT REPORTING
Figure 31 presents 2012-2013 emission defect report information for highway motorcycles. These
reports can include multiple model years of a given vehicle and can span more than one problem
category. Highway motorcycle manufacturers are required to notify EPA when they learn of the existence
of emission-related defects in 25 or more vehicles of the same class (e.g., engine family) and category
(e.g., manufacturer, model year).
Figure 31 - 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle Defect Reports by Problem Category
Problem Category
Catalytic converter
Evaporative canister
Engine Control Unit (ECU)
Fuel related components - Cap
Total
Reported in 2012
Number
of Defect
Reports
0
0
0
1
1
Number of
Affected
Vehicles
0
0
0
273,875
273,875
Reported in 2013
Number of
Defect
Reports
1
1
1
0
3
Number of
Affected
Vehicles
208
615
11,097
0
11,920
In calendar years 2012-2013, manufacturers submitted defect reports that affected highway motorcycles
in model years ranging from MY 2008-2011.
RECALL REPORTING
There was one highway motorcycle recall in 2012 for 273,875 motorcycles with a fuel cap problem.
There were three highway motorcycle recalls in 2013 for 11,920 motorcycles with problems categorized
as catalytic converter misbuilds, canister defects, and ECU defects.
46
-------
AVERAGE BANKING AND TRADING (ABT) PROGRAMS
The 2006 regulations added provisions allowing highway motorcycle manufacturers to use an EPA
specified emission averaging approach to show compliance with the applicable HC+NOx standards. For
MY 2012-2013 four manufacturers availed themselves of this provision.
Class III motorcycles (>279cc) represent the majority of motorcycle sales, and many Class III
manufacturers with large sales volumes take advantage of the fleet averaging flexibility for HC+NOx. For
model year 2012 and model year 2013 over 50 percent of the Class III motorcycle production used the
fleet averaging flexibility.
D. HEAVY-DUTY HIGHWAY ENGINES
SECTOR PROFILE:
• Heavy-duty highway engines are used in highway vehicles such as trucks and buses
that are more than 8,500 pounds GVWR.
• EPA has regulated heavy-duty highway engine emissions since 1982. Reductions in
diesel sulfur contentprior to 2007 enabled significant advances in emission controls.
Final phase-in of a more stringent NOx standard started in MY2010.
• For MY2012-2013 the primary emission standards in effect were NMHC, CO, NOx and
PM.
CERTIFICATION
EPA issued 62 heavy-duty highway certificates for MY 2012 and 39 heavy-duty certificates for MY 2013.21
These include alternative fuel conversion and evaporative emissions certificates. Most certificates were
for diesel engines.
Figures 32 and 33 on the next page present the number of MY 2012-2013 engine families certified in each
intended service class for compression ignition and spark ignition heavy-duty highway engines.22
21 Some vehicles that are between 8,500-14,000 pounds GVWR are chassis-certified and are included in the light-duty vehicles data.
22 The number of engine families is not directly correlated to engine production volumes.
47
-------
Figure 32
MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Service Class
Service Class
Light heavy-duty diesel
Medium heavy-duty diesel
CA only medium-duty
Heavy heavy-duty diesel
Urban Bus
CA only urban bus
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
10
15
0
33
3
1
MY 2013
8
10
0
18
2
1
Figure 33
MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Service Class
Service Class
Heavy-duty gasoline 1 (<=14klbs)
Heavy-duty gasoline 2 (>14k Ibs)
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
8
21
MY 2013
8
24
Figures 34 and 35 present the number of MY 2012-2013 compression ignition and spark ignition engine
families by each heavy-duty highway manufacturer.
Figure 34
MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer
01
e
'So
w
"o
s_
(U
S
3
I MY 2012
MY2013
!>C' ."
^
• cT
48
-------
Figure 35
MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer
t/5
01
tu
01
w
Ol
A
S
3
Z
X
IN-USE COMPLIANCE TESTING
The in-use compliance testing program assesses emission levels (hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen
oxides and particulate matter) from the engines of manufacturers' test fleets or customer-owned in-use
heavy-duty diesel trucks using portable emission measurement systems. Portable systems placed inside of
the vehicles measure emissions performance during real-world operating conditions. (Previously, engine
emission testing involved removing the engine from the truck and testing it in a laboratory on an engine
dynamometer.)
Manufacturers monitor compliance by testing in-use diesel engines during normal vehicle operation. If
non-complying engines are identified, the manufacturer tests more engines for the purpose of determining
if any further action is necessary. EPA also uses the in-use data to make independent evaluations about the
possible need to pursue further actions. The in-use test data are used by EPA to assure that emission
standards are being met, and by manufacturers to improve their engine designs.
All of the engines tested in this program were found to be in compliance with in-use emission standards
when evaluated using the prescribed testing procedures.
DEFECT REPORTING
Figure 36 shows the number of defect information reports heavy-duty highway engine manufacturers
submitted in 2012-2013 calendar years. Figure 37 shows the number of defect reports manufacturers
submitted for each problem category reported in 2012 - 2013 calendar years. Defect reports can include
multiple model years of a given engine.
49
-------
Figure 36 - 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Defect Reports by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Caterpillar
Cummins
Detroit Diesel Corporation
Ford
FTP Industrial S.p.A
General Motors
Hino
IVECO S.p.A
Isuzu
John Deere
Navistar
Paccar
Roush Industries, Inc.
UD Trucks Corporation
Volvo
Number of Defect Reports
Reported in CY2012
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
12
1
0
1
4
Reported in CY2013
0
8
4
1
0
0
11
1
2
0
5
4
0
0
9
Figure 37 - 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Defect Reports by Problem Category
Problem Category
Fuel delivery component / system
Turbocharger/supercharger
Passive diesel particulate filter [DPF]
Active diesel particulate filter [DPF]
Electrical, mechanical & cooling systems
VECI label
EGR system
Exhaust system
Crankcase ventilation component/system
NOx absorber system
NOx sensor
OBD system
Selective catalytic reduction [SCR] system
Monitoring/measuring sensor/system
Computer related [other than OBD]
Diesel oxidation catalyst [DOC]
Ignition component
Defective / Incorrect Catalyst System [non-diesel engine]
Oxygen sensor
Number of Defect Reports
Reported in
CY2012
3
3
0
0
0
3
5
1
0
0
1
0
3
1
0
1
0
0
0
Reported in
CY2013
4
3
7
7
2
1
4
3
0
0
1
4
11
0
2
2
0
0
0
RECALL REPORTING
Figure 38 shows the number of heavy-duty highway engine recalls issued in 2012-2013 calendar years.
Figure 39 on the next page shows the number of recalls for each problem category reported in 2012-
2013 calendar years. Recalls can include multiple model years of a given engine. Recalls in the 2012
50
-------
calendar year affected engines from 2007 - 2012 model years, while recalls in the 2013 calendar year
affected 2008 - 2013 modelyears.
Figure 38 - 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Recalls by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Caterpillar
Cummins
Detroit Diesel
Ford
FPT Industrial S.p.A.
General Motors
Hino
Isuzu
International-Navistar
IVECO S.pA
Mitsubishi Fuso Truck
PACCAR Inc.
Roush Industries, Inc.
Volvo
Total
Recalls in CY2012
Number
of
Recalls
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
6
Number of
Affected
Engines
0
0
72,399
196,424
0
0
0
18,795
0
1,800
0
31
0
0
289,449
Recalls in CY2013
Number
of
Recalls
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
Number of
Affected
Engines
0
0
0
0
0
0
51,309
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
51,309
Figure 39 - 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Recalls by Problem Category
Problem Category
Crankcase ventilation component/ system
Active diesel particulate filter (DPF)
EGR system
Electrical, mechanical & cooling systems
Turbocharger/supercharger
Fuel delivery component
Exhaust system
OBD system
VECI label
Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system
Computer related (other than OBD)
NOx Sensor
Monitoring/measuring sensor/system
Catalyst system
Total
Recalls in CY2012
Number
of
Recalls
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
6
Number of
Affected
Engines
0
0
0
0
17,808
0
0
0
31
74,199
0
139,790
0
0
231,828
Recalls in CY2013
Number
of
Recalls
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
9
Number of
Affected
Engines
0
16,338
2,672
0
4,980
0
4,980
0
0
25,492
0
4,980
0
0
59,442
51
-------
AVERAGE BANKING AND TRADING (ABT) PROGRAMS
Approximately 30 percent of heavy-duty highway compression ignition engine manufacturers
participated in ABT programs in both MYs 2012 and 2013.
MEDIUM AND HEAVY DUTY ENGINES AND VEHICLE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS
The years 2012 - 2013 marked the beginning of EPA's heavy duty greenhouse gas emission program (GHG)
In September 2011, EPA and NHTSA jointly introduced the first ever GHG and fuel efficiency standards for
model years 2014 through 2018 medium and heavy duty engines and vehicles.
Under the GHG program manufacturers required to meet the new greenhouse standards have the option to
earn early credits in MY2013 which can then be applied to subsequent model years. Figure 40 lists those
manufacturers who availed themselves of this opportunity.
Figure 40
MY 2013 Early GHG Credit Engine and Vehicle Manufacturers
Manufacturer Name
Daimler Trucks
Navistar
PACCAR
Total
Number of Vehicle Families
Tractor
18
11
0
29
Vocational
12
10
5
27
Total
30
21
5
56
E. NONROAD COMPRESSION IGNITION [NRCI) ENGINES
SECTOR PROFILE-
• EPA regulates several categories of nonroad compression ignition engines
including marine diesel engines, locomotives, and compression ignition engines
used in construction and agricultural equipment
• EPA has regulated emissions from nonroad compression ignition engines since
1996.
• Primary emission standards in effect for MY 2012-2013 were NMHC, CO, NOx, and
PM.
CERTIFICATION
Figure 41 on the next page presents the number of marine diesel certificates issued by certification tier
and classification. Figure 42 on the next page presents the number of marine diesel certificates by
manufacturer. Marine diesel engine manufacturers applying for engine certification may request an
International Maritime Organization (IMO) certificate in addition to an EPA certificate of conformity for
the same engine family. The IMO program, in general, is different from EPA's program, but certain
52
-------
jurisdictions require operators to display an EPA-issued IMO certificate. For the purposes of this
compliance report, only one certificate for each engine family was included in the counts listed below.
New marine diesel standards were phased in at different times for different engine sizes. In general, Tier
2 began to take effect around 2005; Tier 3 began in about 2009. Tier 3 phases in through 2018. Tier 4
begins for some engines in 2014 and will capture all engines to which it applies by 2017.
Figure 41 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Diesel Engine Certificates by Tier
Certification Tier
Tierl
Tier 2
TierS
Remanufacture
IMO
Total
Number of Certificates
MY 2012
0
141
44
18
23
226
MY 2013
10
86
82
16
25
219
Figure 42 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Diesel Engine EPA and IMO Certificates by Manufacturer
Manufacturer23
AB Volvo Penta
Alaska Diesel Electric
Caterpillar Inc.
Cummins Inc.
Detroit Diesel Corporation
Doosan Engine Co., Ltd.
Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc.
FPT Industrials p.A.
IHI Shibaura Machinery Corporation
John Deere Power Systems Group
MAN Nutzfahrzeuge AG
Marinediesel Sweden AB
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
MTU Detroit Diesel, INC.
NANNI INDUSTRIES SAS
Perkins Engines Co Ltd
Scania-CVAB
Transportation Systems Business Operations of GE
Yanmar CO., Ltd
Other
Total
Number of Certificates
MY 2012
17
4
28
17
5
0
17
13
11
26
4
6
6
4
5
8
6
5
18
26
226
MY 2013
17
6
29
15
4
12
11
8
10
24
5
2
5
4
3
1
6
3
11
43
219
Figure 43 on the next page shows locomotive certificates. Some engine manufacturers who make
engines for locomotives certify those engines to both non-road compression ignition standards
and to locomotive standards.
23 Manufacturers that certified only a few Marine CI engine families in MY 2012 2013 are aggregated under "Other". For MY 2012
"Other" represents 13 manufacturers; for MY 2013 "Other" represents 20 manufacturers.
53
-------
Figure 43 - MY 2012-2013 Locomotive Certificates by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Advanced Global Environmental
Bombardier Transport
CIT Rail
CSX Transportation, Inc.
Cummins Inc.
Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. (EMD)
HK Engine Components LLC
MotivePower Inc.
National Railway Equipment Co. [NREC]
OceanAir Environmental, LLC
Peaker Services, Inc.
Progress Rail Services
RJ Gorman Railpower LLC
Thoroughbred Emissions Research, LLC
TransPar Corporation
Transportation Systems Business Operations of General Electric Company [GE]
Total
MY 2012
11
1
2
7
4
16
1
1
5
3
1
3
1
0
0
14
70
MY 2013
11
0
0
8
4
16
1
1
5
3
2
3
1
2
0
17
74
Nonroad compression ignition engines intended for use in construction and agricultural equipment can
be certified for use in one or multiple service classes. Figure 44 presents the number of certificates that
were issued covering each power category. As new emission standards became effective for the 2013
model year, the number of engine families certified below 56 kilowatts dropped significantly. Figure 45
on the next page shows the number of engine families certified by each manufacturer for MY 2012 -
2013. The number of certifying engine manufacturers dropped from 67 in MY 2012 to 36 in MY 2013.
Figure 44 - MY 2012-2013 Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Service Class
Service Class (Power Category)
0-8 kW
8-19 kW
19-37 kW
37-56 kW
56-75 kW
75-130 kW
130-560 kW
>560 kW
Total2*
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
50
74
106
78
16
42
115
44
525
MY 2013
24
62
43
45
14
50
120
47
405
24 This figure does not include stationary-only engine families.
54
-------
Figure 45 - MY 2012-2013 Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Manufacturer
Manufacturer25
Caterpillar fCPX]
Changchai (CHC)
Changchai Kaito (CZK)
Changfa Group QCG)
Cummins (CEX)
Daedong (DCL]
Deere and Company (JDX)
Detroit Diesel [DDX]
Deutz (DZX)
Daihatsu Motor Company [DHX]
Doosan [DIG]
Escorts Limited (AEL)
FPT Industrial S.p. fFPX]
Fuzhou Leading Power (FLP)
Fuzhou Lingli (FZL)
Greaves Farymann Di [FDU]
Hailin (FHM)
Hino CHMX)
H-Power (WXP)
Huayuan Laidong fSHL]
Iseki fICL]
ISM (H3X)
Isuzu fSZX]
ITC Power (CTE)
JCB Power Systems (JCB]
Jiangdong fJDG]
Jiangsu Changfa Agr (JCA)
Jiangsu Jin Hongxia (JGH)
Jindong (SZJ)
Kapur CFZK]
Kohler Co. fKHX]
Komatsu Ltd. [KLX]
Koop fCKP]
Kubota [KBX]
Kukje Machinery [KMC]
Launtop[FLT]
Lion (LES)
Lister Fetter Limit [L5X]
Liebherr Machines Bulle (LHA)
LS Mtron [LGC]
M&M CMML]
Mercedes-Benz [MBX]
Mitsubishi Fuso [MFT]
Mitsubishi fMVX]
Motorenfabrik Hatz [HZX]
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
35
5
1
1
31
12
29
2
38
2
5
2
20
1
1
4
1
4
2
6
8
23
14
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
12
10
1
43
9
1
1
4
9
3
11
4
2
19
25
MY 2013
36
0
0
0
32
4
23
2
33
0
6
0
22
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
2
32
9
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
4
10
0
34
6
0
0
0
10
0
12
4
1
12
21
25 Manufacturers that certified only a few engine families in MY 2012-2013 are aggregated under "Other".
55
-------
Manufacturer25
MTU DD [MOD]
Navistar fNVX]
Nissan Diesel (NDX)
Nissan Forklift Co. (NFX)
Perkins fPKX]
PSA Peugeot Citroen (PEX)
Shineray (CSP)
Simpson & Co Limited [SCL]
Scania (Y9X)
Sinopower (FZW)
Sisu Diesel [SID]
Suntom (FZS)
Toyota Industrial Equipment Manufacturing [TIE]
Volkswagen (VWX)
Volvo Construction Equipment [VSX]
AB Volvo Penta (VPX)
Winsun [NWS]
World Best Kama fWWB]
Wuxi Kipor Power Co (WKP)
Xinchai fZHX]
XingguangfYKX]
Xingyue(CXG)
Yangdong [YND]
Yanmar (YDX)
Zongshen (CZH)
Total26
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
7
0
2
1
17
0
2
4
2
1
4
1
2
3
3
11
2
3
2
2
1
1
4
41
0
525
MY 2013
7
1
0
1
17
1
0
0
2
0
4
0
0
1
3
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
34
1
405
AVERAGE BANKING AND TRADING (ABT) PROGRAMS
Five construction and agricultural engine manufacturers participated in ABT programs in MY 2012;
seven manufacturers participated in MY 2013.
26 This figure does not include stationary-only engine families.
56
-------
F. NONROAD SPARK IGNITION ENGINES
SECTOR PROFILE:
Nonroad spark ignition (Nonroad SI) engines are generally divided into three categories
for purposes of exhaust emission compliance:
• Small spark ignition engines (Small SI) are rated below 25 horsepower (19 kW) and
are generally used in household and commercial applications, including lawn and
garden equipment, utility vehicles, generators, and a variety of other construction,
farm, and industrial equipment
• Marine spark ignition (Marine SI) engines are used in marine vessels, including
outboard engines, personal watercraft, and sterndrive/inboard engines
• Large spark ignition (Large SI) engines are generally rated above 19 kW and used in
forklifts, compressors, generators, stationary equipment
Equipment with NRSI engines installed is also subject to evaporative emissions
standards.
Nonroad SI engines have been subject to emissions regulations since 1997.
CERTIFICATION
For the 2012-2013 model years EPA certified more than 900 Small SI engine families, around 150
engine emissions families each for Marine SI and Large SI, and over 650 Evaporative Component families.
There are five classes of Small SI engines. Figure 46 presents the number of families certified in each
Small SI class.27 Figures 47-49 on the next page present the number of engine families certified by Small
SI, Marine SI, and Large SI. Figure 5 0 on the next page shows the number of families certified by
Evaporative Component type (e.g., fuel tank, and fuel line).
Figure 46 - MY 2012-2013 Small Spark Ignition Engine Families by Class
Small SI Class
Class I
Class II
Class III
Class IV
Class V
Total
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
216
325
2
271
143
957
MY 2013
205
311
1
257
150
924
27 Classes are defined by whether or not the engine is applied in a hand held piece of equipment and by power rating. Classes I and
II describe non-hand held equipment whereas class III, IV, and V engines are in hand held equipment.
57
-------
Figure 47 - MY 2012-2013 Small Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Andreas Stihl AG & Co KG
Echo Incorporated/Kioritz Corporation
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
Husqvarna AB
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Fuji Heavy Industries
Kohler Co.
Loncin Motor Co., Ltd.
Husqvarna Outdoor Products N.A. Inc.
Jiangsu Jiangdong Group Co. Ltd.
Chongqing Zongshen General Power Machinery
Lifan Industry (Group) Co., Ltd.
Chongqing Rato Power Co., Ltd.
Husqvarna Zenoah Co., Ltd.
Shandong Huasheng Zhongtian Machinery
Other28
Total
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
57
54
46
36
35
26
26
26
25
24
22
21
21
20
20
18
480
957
MY 2013
55
57
44
35
36
25
23
28
21
23
27
22
23
24
21
23
437
924
28 For MY 2012 "Other" represents 96 manufacturers that collectively produced 480 Small SI engine families. For MY 2013 "Other"
represents 83 manufacturers that collectively produced 437 Small SI engine families.
58
-------
Figure 48 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Mercury Marine
Yamaha Motor Corporation
Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Suzuki Motor Corporation
Tohatsu Corporation
Indmar Products Co., Inc.
Hangzhou Hidea Power Machinery Co., Ltd.
Suzhou Parsun Power Machine Co., Ltd.
Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC
KEM Equipment, Inc.
Pleasurecraft Marine Engine Company
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
LEHR Incorporated
Albert Weber Manufacturing, Inc.
Ilmor Engineering, Inc.
Other29
Total
Number of En
MY 2012
35
23
16
11
11
8
6
5
5
5
4
3
2
2
2
1
1
6
146
sine Families
MY 2013
34
25
15
11
12
8
5
5
5
7
4
4
2
2
3
2
4
7
155
29 For MY 2012 "Other" represents six manufacturers that collectively produced six Marine SI engine families. For MY 2013 "Other"
represents seven manufacturers that collectively produced seven Marine SI engine families.
59
-------
Figure 49 - MY 2012-2013 Large Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
Power Solutions International, Inc.
KEM Equipment, Inc.
Bucks Engines
Cummins Inc.
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
Power Solutions International
Zenith Power Products
Engine Distributors, Inc.
Woodward, Inc.
Wisconsin Motors, LLC.
Nissan Forklift Co., Ltd.
SRC Power Systems, Inc.
Kubota Corporation
Global Component Technologies Corporation
Guascor Power S.A.U.
Tognum America, Inc.
Other30
Total
Number of Eng
MY 2012
47
13
12
10
8
8
8
6
5
5
4
3
3
2
0
0
0
15
149
ine Families
MY 2013
43
12
12
9
9
8
8
5
3
3
4
0
3
4
3
5
3
19
153
Figure 50
MY 2012-2013 Nonroad Spark Ignition Evaporative Component Families by Type
Manufacturer
Fuel Line
Fuel Tank
Fuel Cap
Marine Diurnal
Handheld Equipment
Non handheld Equipment
Marine Vessel
Total
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
108
183
10
28
45
302
3
679
MY 2013
117
222
15
30
59
318
4
765
30 For MY 2012 "Other" represents 13 manufacturers that collectively produced 15 Large SI engine families. For MY 2013 "Other"
represents 15 manufacturers that collectively produced 19 Large SI engine families.
60
-------
PRODUCTION LINE TESTING (PLT)
Production line testing requires manufacturers to routinely test engines as they leave the assembly line
to demonstrate that production engines meet emission standards. In the Small SI and Marine SI sectors,
most engine manufacturers had at least one engine family subject to PLT.31 In the Large SI sector, many
engine families are not subject to PLT requirements because the projected sales volume is less than 150
units. These engine families are only required to submit production reports. Under the PLT program
manufacturers submit emissions data on thousands of production engines across the many engine
families certified each year. Based on the data submitted by manufacturers, nearly all engine families
demonstrate compliance with the emission requirements of the PLT program. The PLT program has
identified a small number of engine families in which manufacturers have had to make production
changes to improve the emission performance of their engines.
AVERAGE BANKING AND TRADING (ABT) PROGRAMS
Prior to MY 2010 all types of Small SI engines were averaged together. However, beginning in MY 2010,
handheld and non-handheld engines were averaged separately.
In MY 2012 and MY 2013, about 20 percent of Small SI engine manufacturers participated in the ABT
program.
G. RECREATIONAL VEHICLES
SECTOR PROFILE:
• Emissions from recreational vehicles (RVs) were unregulated prior to MY 2006.
• The regulations in 40 CFR part 1051 set the first emissions standards for RV categories,
including all-terrain vehicles (ATVs); certain off-road utility vehicles (UTVs) (less than 30
kW, less than 1,000 cc, and maximum speed more than 25 mph); off-highway
motorcycles; and snowmobiles. Each recreational vehicle category is subject to an
individual set of exhaust emission standards which phase in over several years. Regulated
pollutants are HC+NOx and CO.
• All RVs became subject to the same fuel component based permeation emission standards
beginning in MY 2008. The regulated pollutant is HC.
PLT requirements do not apply to small volume engine manufacturers.
61
-------
CERTIFICATION
There were 79 different recreational vehicle manufacturers that certified products in MY 2012-2013.
Figure 51 presents RV manufacturers that certified a total of at least five engine families in one or more
RV sectors in MY 2012 and/or 2013.32 Figures 52 - 54 present data for manufacturers that certified MY
2012 and/or 2013 engine families in the ATV and UTV, off-highway motorcycle or snowmobile sectors,
respectively.
Figure 51 - MY 2012-2013 Recreational Vehicle Engine Families by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Yamaha Motor Corporation
Polaris Industries Inc.
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Bombardier Recreational Products,
Arctic Cat
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
Baja Inc.
KYMCO USA
BMS Motorsports, Inc.
CF Moto Powersports, Inc.
Deere & Company
Linhai USA, Inc.
Suzuki Motor Corporation
Taotao USA Inc.
Hisun Motors
LIL PICK UP INC.
Other
Total
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
26
21
20
20
19
12
11
10
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
82
267
MY 2013
25
22
20
19
20
10
5
11
3
7
6
4
6
9
11
4
77
259
32The number of engine families has no bearing on vehicle production volumes.
62
-------
Figure 52-MY 2012-2013 ATV and UTV Engine Families by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Yamaha Motor Corporation
Polaris Industries Inc.
Arctic Cat
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc
KYMCO USA
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
CF Moto Powersports, Inc.
Deere & Company
Linhai USA, Inc.
BMS Motorsports, Inc.
Hisun Motors
Taotao USA Inc.
Suzuki Motor Corporation
LIL PICK UP INC.
Kandi USA, Inc.
BV Powersports, LLC
Shenke USA, Inc.
High Rev Motorsports, LLC
Baja Inc.
XY POWERSPORTS LLC
U-Storm Power Corporation
Other
Total
Number of Enj
MY 2012
14
13
13
11
11
10
9
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
4
3
3
3
3
3
0
39
183
ijine Families
MY 2013
13
14
13
11
11
11
7
7
6
4
3
10
8
5
4
4
4
4
2
1
1
3
41
187
Figure 53 - MY 2012-2013 Off-Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Baja Inc.
Yamaha Motor Corporation
XMotos USA, Inc.
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
KTM North America, Inc.
AB Distribution, Inc. dba American Beta
Apollo Motorsports, Inc.
Xingyue USA, INC
Yukon Trail, Inc.
Apollo Motorsports USA, Inc.
Maxtrade
Other
Total
Number of En
MY 2012
9
8
7
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
12
56
gine Families
MY 2013
9
4
7
0
3
4
2
0
0
0
2
2
9
42
63
-------
Figure 54 - MY 2012-2013 Snowmobile Engine Families by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc.
Polaris Industries Inc.
Arctic Cat Inc
Yamaha Motor Co., LTD.
HJR
Richmond Manufacturing Group
Total
Number of Eni
MY 2012
9
8
6
5
0
0
28
?ine Families
MY 2013
8
8
7
5
1
1
30
As shown in Figure 55, in model years 2012-2013 very few ATV/UTV or off-highway motorcycle
manufacturers produced two-stroke engines. However, approximately 50% of the snowmobile engine
families were two-stroke engines. This represents a technology shift to four-stroke engines. When the
current RV regulations were written, a majority of ATVs sold in the United States and almost all
snowmobiles used two-stroke engines (see 67 FR 68262).
Figure 55 - MY 2012-2013 Recreational Vehicle Two-Stroke Engine Families
Category
ATV/UTV
Off-Highway Motorcycles
Snowmobiles
Percentage of Two Stroke Engine Families
MY 2012
0.5%
11%
50%
MY 2013
0.5%
5%
47%
In addition, in MY 2012-2013 over 70 percent of ATVs and UTV engine families either employed
catalyst or fuel injection technologies, or both, to meet the emission standards.
ATV/MOTORCYCLE CERTIFICATES VOIDED
In 2013 EPA voided certificates covering more than 170,000 on- and off-highway motorcycles and all-
terrain vehicles produced in model years between 2005 and 2012. The products were imported or
manufactured by the following companies: Snyder Technology, Inc., Snyder Computer Systems, Inc. (doing
business as Wildfire Motors Corporation), American Lifan Industry Inc., and Jonway Motorcycles (USA) Co.,
Ltd. Consumers who own models covered by the voided certificates are not responsible for the
wrongdoing and can continue to use their vehicles. Voiding certificates is a key step leading to enforcement
actions for violations of the CAA.
As a result of the August 2014 voiding of certificates of conformity for CF Moto America, Incorporated, the
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance took action which resulted in a civil penalty of
$725,000. The settlement also requires CF Moto to institute a recall and fuel tank replacement program, as
well as correct emission control labels for nonconforming labels within CF Moto's control. For more
information, please see: http://www2.epa. gov//enforcement/cfmoto-powersporte-inc-cfmoto-america-
inc-zhejiang-cfmoto-power-co-ltd-and-chunfeng
As a result of the October 2013 voiding of certificates of conformity for American Lifan Industry,
Incorporated, the EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance took action which resulted in a
64
-------
civil penalty of $630,000 and the posting of a bond of $300,000 to $500,000 to satisfy any Clean Air Act
penalty related to future importation of vehicles manufactured by the company in 2014, 2015, and 2016.
For more information, please see: http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/american-lifan-industry-inc-
settlement
AVERAGE BANKING AND TRADING (ABT) PROGRAMS
Only a few of the larger ATV, utility vehicle, and off-highway motorcycle manufacturers made use of ABT.
On the other hand, almost all snowmobile manufacturers participated in ABT.
Industry Statistics
This section presents additional information that EPA collects in the course of implementing compliance
programs.
ALTERNATIVE FUEL AND ALTERNATIVE FUEL CONVERSIONS33
Some vehicles and engines are designed to operate on fuels other than gasoline and diesel. Some are
manufactured by the OEM to operate on alternative fuels, while others are certified by the OEM to operate
on gasoline or diesel fuel and later converted by an aftermarket manufacturer to operate on an alternative
fuel. Generally, the CAA prohibits any aftermarket changes to a certified vehicle or engine configuration
that could affect emissions, but a regulatory exemption to the prohibition is available in the case of
alternative fuel conversions. Each sector has different criteria under which vehicles and engines can be
converted to operate on a new fuel. In some sectors fuel conversions are certified using OEM certification
provisions.
LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE ALTERNATIVE FUEL DATA
Figures 56 - 57 on the next page present the production of MY 2012-2013 OEM light-duty vehicles by fuel
type. Gasoline vehicles comprise the dominant fuel type, followed by flexible fuel vehicles. After gasoline
and ethanol, diesel is the next most prevalent fuel, but still represents only about one percent of passenger
car and light-duty truck production. Compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles make up an even smaller
fraction of MY 2012-2013 vehicle production.
33 While alternative fuels are generally understood to mean non-petroleum alternatives to gasoline and diesel, this section of the
report also presents data for diesel-fueled vehicles and engines in the light-duty, motorcycle, and recreational vehicle sectors,
sectors that have historically been dominated by gasoline.
65
-------
Figure 56 - MY 2012 Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Fuel Type 34
Diesel
50,880; 1%
CNG & LPG
Conversions
6,801; 0%
• Gasoline
• Ethanol
Diesel
• CNG
Figure 57 - MY 2013 Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Fuel Type35
Diesel
76,272,1%
CNG&LPG
Conversions
8,497, 0%
• Gasoline
• Ethanol
Diesel
• CNG
All MY 2012 - 2013 ethanol vehicles were flexible-fuel vehicles which are capable of operating on gasoline,
E85 (85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline), or an intermediate blend.
34 Ethanol represents ethanol fuel blend of 85% denatured ethanol fuel and 15% gasoline
35 Ethanol represents ethanol fuel blend of 85% denatured ethanol fuel and 15% gasoline
66
-------
Figure 58 summarizes the number of OEM light-duty vehicle diesel and alternative fuel test groups by
manufacturer.
Figure 58
MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty OEM Diesel and Alternative Fuel Test Groups by Manufacturer
Fuel
Battery Electric
CNG
Diesel
E85-Gasoline
Hydrogen Fuel Cell
Manufacturer
Azure Dynamics
BYD Motors
Coda
Nissan
Tesla
Ford
Wheego
Toyota
Mitsubishi
Chrysler Group
American Honda
Chrysler Group LLC
The Vehicle Production
Group LLC
Audi
BMW
Cummins
Ford
General Motors Inc.
Isuzu
Mahindra & Mahindra
Mercedes Benz
Porsche AG
Volkswagen
Amer. Honda
Audi
Bentley Motors Ltd.
Chrysler Group LLC
Ford
General Motors LLC
Jaguar Land Rover Ltd.
Mercedes Benz
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd
SAAB
Toyota Motor
American Honda
Toyota Mercedes Benz
Number of Exhaust Test
Groups
MY 2012
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
3
1
0
6
0
2
1
0
2
12
19
22
0
3
1
1
1
1
1
MY 2013
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
2
3
1
0
8
1
2
0
2
2
14
17
30
1
3
1
0
1
1
0
67
-------
Vehicles originally designed and certified to operate on gasoline or diesel fuel can be converted to operate
on an alternative fuel. Converters of new vehicles must generally obtain a certificate of conformity to avoid
violating the CAA prohibition against tampering.
A regulation finalized in 2011 established alternative pathways to obtain a regulatory exemption from
tampering beyond certification for converters of older vehicles and engines (40 CFR part 85, subpart F).
In the light-duty vehicle alternative fuel conversion sector, a total of 18 alternative fuel conversion
manufacturers were issued conversion certificates for either the 2012 model year, the 2013 model year or
both model year vehicle test groups and thereby received an exemption from the CAA tampering
prohibition.
For the 2012 model year light-duty vehicle program, there were 140 conversion certificates issued to
alternative fuel conversion manufacturers, 45 conversion postings through the Intermediate Age program
which covers vehicles and engines at least two years old but within their regulatory useful life, and no
conversion postings through the Outside Useful Life program vehicles and engines that have exceeded their
regulatory useful life. For the 2013 model year program, there were 117 conversion certificates issued, 16
conversion postings through the Intermediate Age program and 2 conversion postings through the Outside
Useful Life program.
Figure 59 on the next page summarizes the number of certificates issued for light-duty vehicle alternative
fuel conversions by alternative fuel type and by manufacturer in MY 2012-2013.36
36 Each light-duty vehicle certificate covers a unique combination of exhaust test group and evaporative emissions family.
Therefore the number of light-duty certificates and test groups is usually different. MY 2012-2013 conversion certificates may be
issued for conversion of either current or earlier model year OEM vehicles.
68
-------
Figure 59
MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Alternative Fuel Conversion Certificates by Manufacturer
Fuel
CNG
CNG/E85-Gasoline
E85-Gasoline
LPG
LPG/E85-Gasoline
LPG/Gasoline
Plug In Hybrid
Manufacturer
Altech-Eco
BAF Technologies
Go Natural CNG
Landi-Renzo
Nat Gas Car
NaturalDrive Partners
IMPCO Technologies
PowerFuel CNG conversions
Altech-Eco
The CNG Store; dba Auto Gas
BAF Technologies
Go Natural CNG
Landi-Renzo
Nat Gas Car
Westport Light-Duly
IMPCO Technologies
Powerfuel CNG Conversions
Altech-ECO
The CNG Store; dba Auto Gas
BAF Technologies
CNG Interstate
Westport Light-Duly
Land Reno
Nat Gas Car
IMPCO Technologies
M-Tech Solutions
RGR Alternative Fuels
Roush Industries
ICOM North America
Yellow Checker Star
American Alternative Fuel
IMPCO Technologi
ICOM North America
American Alternative Fuel
Icon North America
IMPCO Technologies
Blossman Industries
Number of Certificates
MY 2012
14
4
4
1
8
3
5
0
4
5
5
1
3
10
3
11
0
6
2
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
7
0
1
3
8
22
0
0
3
0
0
MY 2013
6
5
0
5
0
0
4
4
0
1
4
0
0
2
0
0
6
5
3
1
2
3
3
10
10
1
0
0
4
2
1
0
0
8
6
2
5
12
0
69
-------
HIGHWAY MOTORCYCLE ALTERNATIVE FUEL DATA
The majority of highway motorcycles are certified to operate on gasoline. However, there are a few
highway motorcycle engine families certified to operate as battery-electrics, obtaining energy by charging a
battery with electricity from a 120V outlet. See Figure 60 for a breakdown of electric motorcycle
manufacturers for MY 2012-2013.
Figure 60
MY 2012-2013 Highway Motorcycle OEM Alternative Fuel Engine Families by Manufacturer
Fuel
Battery Electric37
Manufacturer
Brammo Inc.
Electric Vehicle
Hyosung Motors America,
Oxygen World, Inc.
Zero Motorcycles Inc.
Peel Engineering
Peraves AG
Westward Industries
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
2
1
1
1
3
0
0
0
MY 2013
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
HEAVY-DUTY HIGHWAY ALTERNATIVE FUEL DATA
Figure 61 presents the OEM heavy-duty highway engines that were certified to operate on alternative fuels
in model years 2012-2013.
Figure 61
MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Engine OEM Alternative Fuel Engine Families by Manufacturer
Fuel
CNG
CNG/Diesel
LPG
Manufacturer
Cummins Inc.
Doosan Infrcore, Co
Emission Solutions Inc.
Westport Fuel Systems
Cummins Inc
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
3
2
2
1
0
MY 2013
9
2
-
1
0
37 EPA began issuing certificates for battery electric highway motorcycles in MY 2009.
70
-------
HEAVY-DUTY HIGHWAY ALTERNATIVE FUEL CONVERSION DATA
Figure 62 shows the heavy-duty highway alternative fuel conversion certificates issued in model years
2012-2013.38
Figure 62
MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Alternative Fuel Conversion Certificates by Manufacturer
Fuel
CNG
CNG/Gasoline
LPG/Gasoline
Manufacturer
BAF Technologies
Baytech Corporation
Emission Solutions, Inc.
Evotek, LLC
Greenkraft, Inc.
Baytech Corporation
Bi-Phase Technologies, LLC
Clean Fuel USA, Inc.
Roush
Icom North America, LLC
Number of Certificates
MY 2012
1
1
1
0
2
0
3
1
3
1
MY 2013
1
1
2
0
2
0
3
1
2
0
38 MY 2012-2013 conversion certificates maybe issued for conversion of either current or earlier model year OEM highway
engines.
71
-------
NONROAD SPARK IGNITION ALTERNATIVE FUEL AND FUEL CONVERSION DATA
There are numerous engine manufacturers that certify nonroad spark ignition engines to run on alternative
fuels in both the Small SI and the Large SI categories.39 The following sections detail these two categories.
SMALL SPARK IGNITION ALTERNATIVE FUEL MANUFACTURERS
Figure 63 shows the model years2012 - 2013 small spark ignition engine manufacturers by the type of
alternative fuel used.
Figure 63
MY 2012-2013 Alternative Fuel Small SI Engine Manufacturers
Fuel
Gasoline - E85
Natural Gas
Propane
Manufacturer
Kohler Co.
Aisin World Corp. of America
Arrow Engine Company
Cummins Power Generation
Kubota Corporation
Repair Processes, Incorporated
Yanmar Co., Ltd.
Intellichoice Energy
Amano Pioneer Eclipse Corporation
Aztec Products Inc.
BETCO Corporation
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
ChongQing AM Pride Power & Machinery Co.,
Ltd
Chongqing Dajiang Power Equipment CO.,LTD
Chongqing Hybest Power Products
Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Chongqing Maifeng Power Machinery Co., Ltd
Chongqing Orbiswork Power Equipment Co.,
Ltd.
Cummins Power Generation
Feldmann Eng. & Mfg. Co., Inc.
Fuji Heavy Industries
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
Jiangsu Jiangdong Group Co. Ltd.
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
Kohler Co.
METROLAWN, LLC
Nilfisk Advance
ONYX ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS
Power Solutions, Inc.
Shanghai Grow Development Co., Ltd.
Stonekor LLC
Tacony Corporation
Number of Certificates
MY 2012
0
2
6
1
1
1
1
0
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
6
1
2
3
2
1
1
6
2
8
1
1
2
1
MY 2013
1
1
6
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
4
1
1
3
4
1
2
8
2
4
0
1
2
1
39 Of the marine SI engines certified in MY 2012 and 2013, two MY2012 families were designed to operate on alternative fuels and
three MY2013 families were designed to operate on alternative fuels.
72
-------
Natural Gas / Propane
Propane/Gasoline
Natural Gas /
Propane/Gasoline
Whitestorm Inc.
Yanmar Co., Ltd.
Intellichoice Energy
Linyi Sanhe Yongjia Power Co. Ltd.
Loncin Motor Co. Ltd.
Zhejiang Yaofeng Power Technology Co. Ltd.
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
CHONGQING SANDING GENERAL POWER
MACHINERY CO.,LTD
Carburetion & Turbo Systems, Inc.
Fuji Heavy Industries
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
Kohler Co.
Marathon Engine Systems
Shanghai Grow Development Co., Ltd.
Chongqing Dajiang Power Equipment CO. LTD
Chongqing Dajiang Power Equipment CO.,LTD
Chongqing Huansong Industries (Group) Co.,
Ltd.
Chongqing Maifeng Power Machinery Co., Ltd
Kubota Corporation
Power Solutions International
Wenling Jennfeng Industry Inc.
Yongkang Xingguang Electrical Manufacture
Co., Ltd
Yueqing Hejie Electric Co., Ltd
Zhejiang Yaofeng Power Technology Co. Ltd.
Winco
Chongqing Dajiang Power Equipment CO. LTD
CHONGQING SANDING GENERAL POWER
MACHINERY CO.LTD
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
7
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
0
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
1
2
1
1
2
3
1
5
1
1
1
5
2
1
2
2
0
1
1
2
1
1
4
3
2
1
2
2
73
-------
LARGE SPARK IGNITION ALTERNATIVE FUEL MANUFACTURERS
Figure 64 shows the model years 2012-2013 large spark ignition engine manufacturers by the type of
alternative fuel used.
Figure 64
MY 2012-2013 Alternative Fuel Large SI Engine Manufacturers
Fuel
Natural Gas
Natural Gas / Propane
Natural Gas /
Propane/ Gasoline
Propane
Manufacturer
GE Jenbacher, Ltd.
Industrial Engines Ltd.
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
Bucks Engines
Cummins Inc.
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
KEM Equipment, Inc.
Power Solutions International
Wisconsin Motors, LLC.
Guascor Power S.A.U.
ENER-G Rudox Inc.
Bucks Engines
Cummins Inc.
Don Hardy Race Cars, Inc.
KEM Equipment, Inc.
Origin Engines
Power Solutions International, Inc.
Power Solutions International
SRC Power Systems, Inc.
Westport Light Duty Inc.
Westport Power Inc.
Chongqing Panda Machinery Co., Ltd.
Kubota Corporation
Dresser, Inc.
MTU America, Inc.
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
Kubota Corporation
Engine Distributors, Inc.
Power Solutions International, Inc.
Toyota Industrial Equipment Manufacturing
Zenith Power Products
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
Deere & Company
Bucks Engines
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
KEM Equipment, Inc.
Kohler Co.
Number of Certificates
MY 2012
1
2
2
6
3
27
1
1
1
0
0
1
5
1
5
1
8
6
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
2
1
2
3
1
1
20
2
1
MY 2013
1
2
2
4
5
26
1
1
1
5
1
2
4
1
6
2
8
6
3
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
2
3
2
1
2
3
1
1
17
2
1
74
-------
Propane / Gasoline
Linde Material Handling N.A. Corp.
Power Solutions International, Inc.
Power Solutions International
Woodward, Inc.
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
Kubota Corporation
Global Component Technologies Corporation
Bucks Engines
EControls, Inc.
Engine Distributors, Inc.
KEM Equipment, Inc.
Power Solutions International, Inc.
Woodward, Inc.
Wisconsin Motors, LLC.
Zenith Power Products
2
2
1
2
2
1
3
2
1
2
4
1
3
1
4
2
1
1
1
2
1
3
2
0
0
3
1
2
1
3
About 10 percent of Small SI engine families in MY 2012-2013 were certified to operate on alternative
fuels. The majority of Large SI engine families were certified to operate on alternative fuels. In MY 2012 of
the 149 Large SI engine families, 144 were certified to operate on one or more alternative fuels. In MY
2013, of the 153 Large SI engines families, 149 were certified to operate on one or more alternative fuels.
Figures 65 and 66 summarize information about MY 2012-2013 Small SI and Large SI alternative fuel
engine families.
Figure 65
MY 2012-2013 Small Spark Ignition Engine OEM Alternative Fuel Engine Families
Fuel
E85-Gasoline
Natural Gas/CNG
Natural Gas/CNG / Propane/LPG
Propane/LPG
Propane/LPG / Gasoline
Natural Gas/CNG / Propane/LPG / Gasoline
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
0
12
19
53
12
1
MY 2013
1
13
21
50
16
5
Figure 66
MY 2012-2013 Large Spark Ignition Engine OEM Alternative Fuel Engine Families
Fuel
Natural Gas/CNG
Natural Gas/CNG / Propane/LPG
Natural Gas/CNG / Propane/LPG / Gasoline
Propane/LPG
Propane/LPG / Gasoline
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
44
31
10
35
24
MY 2013
49
41
11
30
18
75
-------
RECREATIONAL VEHICLE ALTERNATIVE FUEL DATA
The majority of recreational vehicles are certified to operate on gasoline. However, there were three ATV
engine families certified to operate on diesel in MY 2012 and four in MY 2013. Figure 67 shows a
breakdown of diesel recreational vehicle manufacturers.
Figure 67
MY 2012-2013 Recreational Vehicle OEM Diesel Engine Families by Manufacturer
Fuel
Diesel
Manufacturer
Tomcar NA Distribution
Deere & Company
JCB, Inc.
Polaris Industries
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
1
1
1
0
MY 2013
1
1
1
1
MANUFACTURER LOCATIONS
Consistent with past compliance reports, manufacturer locations here are attributed using two different
approaches.
For light-duty vehicles and locomotives, data are reported based on where a manufacturer's headquarters
are located, not necessarily where the vehicles are manufactured. For example, Toyota's corporate
headquarters are in Japan, so all of Toyota's MY 2012-2013 vehicles produced for sale in the United States
are presented with Japan listed as the country of origin, even though some Toyota vehicles are built in the
United States. For all other sectors, EPA generally reports manufacturer location based on the actual
location in which the vehicle or engine was manufactured.
LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE MANUFACTURER LOCATIONS
Figure 68 on the next page presents the country of origin of MY 2012-2013 light-duty vehicles produced for
sale in the United States.40
40 These production data only include vehicles subject to Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards. Pickup trucks greater than
8,500 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight are not included.
76
-------
Figure 68
MY 2012-2013 Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Manufacturer's Country of Origin
Country
USA
Japan
Korea
Germany
UK
Sweden
Italy
China
Total
Production Volume
MY 2012
5,657,856
5,433,737
1,164,920
1,108,916
55,378
71,807
6,454
11
13,499,079
MY 2013
6,270,952
5,691,017
0
1,071,996
64,143
73,354
2,780
32
13,174,274
HIGHWAY MOTORCYCLE MANUFACTURER LOCATIONS
Figure 69 presents the highway motorcycles sold in the United States. Chinese, Japanese, and Taiwanese
manufacturers produced a large fraction of Class la and Ib motorcycles while American, Japanese and
European manufacturers produced the largest share of U.S. Class III highway motorcycles.
Figure 69
MY 2012-2013 Motorcycle Manufacturer Engine Families by Country of Origin
Country
Austria
Canada
China41
Germany
India
Italy
Japan
Poland
Russia
Slovenia
South Korea
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
United Kingdom
USA
Vietnam
Total
Number of En
MY 2012
4
4
104
0
2
37
37
0
1
1
2
0
16
7
8
54
0
277
gine Families
MY 2013
6
6
89
1
2
35
40
1
1
1
3
0
22
9
11
61
1
289
41 Two of the 104 engine families were subsequently voided by EPA.
77
-------
ATV MANUFACTURER LOCATIONS
Figure 70 presents Chinese and U.S. manufacturers produced most of the ATVs sold in the United States.
Figure 70
MY 2012-2013 ATV Manufacturer Engine Families by Country of Origin
Country
Austria
Brazil
Canada
China
Italy
Japan
Mexico
Taiwan
Thailand
USA
Vietnam
Total
Number of En
MY 2012
3
2
9
107
3
14
1
22
1
74
1
237
gine Families
MY 2013
4
2
9
98
2
12
1
24
1
76
1
230
HEAVY-DUTY HIGHWAY MANUFACTURER LOCATIONS
Figure 71 presents the number of highway engine families (both compression ignition and spark ignition)
that were certified for sale in the United States by engine manufacturing plant location.
Figure 71
MY 2012-2013 Heavy-Duty Highway CI and SI Engines by Manufacturing Location
Country
USA
Japan
Germany
Brazil
Canada
Netherlands
Italy
Multiple countries42
Total
Number of En
MY 2012
51
7
0
0
1
1
0
0
60
gine Families
MY 2013
32
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
37
NONROAD COMPRESSION IGNITION MANUFACTURER LOCATIONS
Figures 72 - 74 present the number of engine families intended for use in marine diesel (both EPA and IMO
certificates), locomotive, and construction/agricultural equipment applications that were certified for sale
in the United States by engine manufacturing plant location or country of origin.
"Multiple countries" means that engines within an engine family are manufactured in more than one country.
78
-------
Figure 72 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Diesel Engine Families by Manufacturing Location
Country
USA
Japan
Italy
Sweden
United Kingdom
Korea
The Netherlands
Germany
France
Mexico
Croatia
Canada
Norway
Finland
Austria
Multiple Countries
Total
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
99
23
16
18
15
2
8
12
10
0
0
0
1
0
1
21
226
MY 2013
96
13
16
11
12
24
8
12
11
0
2
0
1
0
1
12
219
Figure 73 - MY 2012-2013 Locomotive Engine Families by Country of Origin
Country
USA
Multiple countries
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
65
5
MY 2013
70
4
79
-------
Figure 74
MY 2012-2013 Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Manufacturing Location
Country
Brazil
China
Finland
France
Germany
India
Italy
Japan
Republic of Korea
Mexico
Slovakia
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
United States
Multiple countries
Total43
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
1
47
4
7
76
19
20
146
29
4
4
14
9
10
48
87
525
MY 2013
1
2
4
10
61
14
16
105
16
2
0
16
10
10
54
84
405
NONROAD SPARK IGNITION MANUFACTURER LOCATIONS
Figures 75 - 77 present the number of Small SI, Marine SI and Large SI engine families that were certified
for sale in the United States by engine manufacturing plant location.
Figure 75 - MY 2012-2013 Small Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturing Location
Country
China
USA
Japan
Germany
Sweden
Italy
Mexico
Brazil
Multiple countries
Total
Number of En
MY 2012
435
220
134
14
28
7
18
58
43
957
gine Families
MY 2013
431
207
104
15
25
8
14
56
64
924
43 This figure does not include stationary-only engine families.
80
-------
Figure 76 - MY 2012-2013 Marine Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturing Location
Country
Japan
USA
China
Thailand
Canada
Germany
Total
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
55
66
17
5
2
1
146
MY 2013
57
70
18
6
2
2
155
Figure 77 - MY 2012-2013 Large Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturing Location
Country
USA
Korea
Canada
Spain
Japan
Mexico
Austria
China
Multiple countries
Total
Number of Engine Families
MY 2012
128
0
9
0
5
1
1
0
5
149
MY 2013
123
4
10
5
7
1
1
2
0
153
81
-------
------- |