2014-2017 Progress Report
\fenkle EmgffiSKg
Compliance
ctivities
v>EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
2014*2017 Progress Report
Vehicle Engine
Compliance
Activities
Compliance Division
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPA-420-R-19-003
April 2019
www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification
-------
Table of Contents
List of Tables iii
List of Figures v
Forward by the Compliance Division Director 1
Executive Summary 3
ES.l Overview 3
ES.2 EPA OTAQ's Compliance Activities Ensure that Clean Air Benefits of EPA's Regulations Are
Maximized 3
ES.2.1 Air Quality Has Improved Overall 3
ES.2.2 Air Quality Does Not Meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards in Many Areas
Across the Country, and Mobile Sources Are a Significant Contributor 5
ES.2.3 EPA's Compliance Activities Are Necessary to Ensure Regulations Deliver Clean Air 5
ES.3 EPA's Compliance Activities Are Diverse and Tailored to Different Industries 6
ES.3.1 Defect and Recall Reporting 6
ES.3.2 Compliance Audits 7
ES.4 EPA Continuously Considers Ways to Improve Compliance and Oversight Programs as
Industries Grow and Technologies Change 10
1. Introduction 13
1.1 Organization of this Report 13
1.2 Statutory Authority 15
1.3 Scope of EPA Vehicle, Engine, and Equipment Regulations 15
1.4 Air Quality Trends and the Contribution of Mobile Sources to Air Pollution 21
1.4.1 Air Quality Has Improved 21
1.4.2 National Emissions Inventory 22
2. Overview of Compliance Programs and Processes 26
2.1 Background 26
2.1.1 Compliance Flexibility 28
2.2 Preproduction Programs: Certificates of Conformity 28
2.2.1 Application for Certification 29
2.2.2 Certificates Issued for Model Years 2014 - 2017 29
2.2.3 Increase in Certificates Issued 31
2.2.4 EPA's Improved Data Collection System 33
2.2.5 Confirmatory Certification Testing 33
2.3 Production Programs 34
2.3.1 Compliance Audits 34
2.4 Postproduction Programs 38
2.4.1 In-Use Compliance Programs 38
2.4.2 Defect Reporting Programs 38
2.4.3 Recall Programs 38
2.5 Regulatory Flexibility Programs 40
2.5.1 Average Banking and Trading Programs 40
2.5.2 Transition Program for Equipment Manufacturers 40
2.5.3 Small Volume Manufacturers 40
i
-------
2.5.4 Exemption Programs 42
2.6 Enhanced Compliance Oversight as a Result of Volkswagen Clean Air Act Violations 44
3. Light-Duty Vehicles 47
3.1 Certification 47
3.2 Production Volume 48
3.3 Confirmatory Testing 51
3.4 Fuel Economy Testing 51
3.5 Durability Testing 52
3.6 In-Use Compliance Testing 52
3.7 Defect Reporting 58
3.8 Recall Reporting 62
3.9 Averaging, Banking, and Trading (ABT) Programs 64
4. Highway Motorcycles 67
4.1 Certification 67
4.2 Production Volume 68
4.3 Defect Reporting 69
4.4 Recall Reporting 70
5. Heavy-Duty Highway Engines 72
5.1 Certification 72
5.2 In-Use Compliance Testing 76
5.3 Defect Reporting 76
5.4 Recall Reporting 78
6. Nonroad Compression Ignition Engines 80
6.1 Marine Compression Ignition Engines 80
6.2 Locomotives 83
6.3 Construction and Agricultural Engines 85
7. Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines 88
7.1 Marine Spark Ignition Engines 88
7.2 Small Spark Ignition Engines 90
7.3 Large Spark Ignition Engines 92
7.4 Evaporative Components 94
7.5 Defect Reporting 94
7.6 Recall Reporting 95
8. Recreational Vehicles 97
8.1 Certification 97
8.1.1 All-Terrain Vehicles and Utility Vehicles 97
8.1.2 Off-highway Motorcycles 98
8.1.3 Snowmobiles 99
8.1.4 Two-Stroke Engines 99
8.2 Production Volume 99
8.3 Defect Reporting 100
8.4 Recall Reporting 101
9. Alternative Fuels and Alternative Fuel Conversion Systems 102
9.1 Use of Alternative Fuels in Light-Duty Vehicles 102
ii
-------
9.2 Vehicles and Engines Designed to Operate on Alternative Fuels by Their Manufacturers 104
9.2.1 Heavy-Duty Highway Engines 104
9.2.2 Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines 104
9.2.3 Recreational Vehicles 110
9.3 Alternative Fuel Conversions Systems Ill
9.3.1 Light-Duty Vehicles Ill
9.3.2 Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Engines 113
9.3.3 Conversion Systems for Intermediate Age and Outside Useful Life Vehicles 114
List of Tables
Table ES-1: Recall Reports and Affected Vehicles/Engines by Regulated Sector, 2014 - 2017 7
Table 1-1: Industry Sectors and Examples 14
Table 1-2: EPA References 15
Table 1-3: Environmental Statutes 15
Table 1-4: Vehicle and Engine Regulations and Implementation Dates 17
Table 2-1: Number of Certificates of Conformity, Model Years 2014 - 2017 30
Table 2-2: Comparison of Certificates Issued for Model Years 2007 and 2017 32
Table 2-3: Number of EPA OTAQ Compliance Audits, 2014 - 2017 35
Table 2-4: Defect Reports by Regulated Sector, 2014 -2017 38
Table 2-5: Recall Reports and Affected Vehicles/Engines by Regulated Sector, 2014 - 2017 39
Table 2-6: Small-Volume Manufacturer Thresholds 41
Table 2-7: Import Exemptions by Type, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017 42
Table 2-8: Volkswagen Light-Duty Diesel Vehicles and Model Years Affected by the Defeat Device 45
Table 3-1: Light-Duty Vehicle Sector Certificates of Conformity, Model Years 2014 -2017 47
Table 3-2: Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume of Cars and Trucks for the U.S., Model Years 2014 -
2017 48
Table 3-3: Vehicle Classes Tested in EPA's In-Use Testing Program, Calendar Years 2014-2017 53
Table 3-4: Light-Duty In-Use Verification Test Volumes and Failure Rates, Calendar Years 2014-2017... 57
Table 3-5: Light-Duty Vehicle Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014-2017 59
Table 3-6: Light-Duty Vehicle Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014-2017 60
Table 3-7: Light-Duty Vehicle Recalls by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014-2017 62
Table 3-8: Light-Duty Vehicle Recalls by Problem Category, 2014 - 2017 63
Table 3-9: Percentage of Exhaust Test Groups by Certification Bin, Model Years 2014 - 2017 64
Table 4-1: Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Class, Model Years 2014-2017 67
Table 4-2: Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017 68
Table 4-3: Number of Motorcycle Manufacturers by Class, Model Years 2014 - 2017 68
Table 4-4: Highway Motorcycle Production Volume for the U.S. by Class, Model Year 2017 69
Table 4-5: Highway Motorcycle Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Year 2014 - 2017 70
Table 4-6: Highway Motorcycle Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017 70
Table 4-7: Highway Motorcycle Recalls by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017 70
Table 4-8: Highway Motorcycle Recalls by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014 -2017 71
Table 5-1: Heavy-Duty Highway Vehicle and Engine Certificates, Model Years 2014 - 2017 72
iii
-------
Table 5-2: Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Service Class, Model Years
2014-2017 72
Table 5-3: Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years
2014-2017 73
Table 5-4: Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Service Class, Model Years 2014-2017
73
Table 5-5: Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014-2017
74
Table 5-6: Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017.. 77
Table 5-7: Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
77
Table 5-8: Heavy-Duty Engine Recalls by Manufacturer, 2014-2017 78
Table 5-9: Heavy-Duty Engine Recalls by Problem Category, 2014 - 2017 79
Table 6-1: Marine Engine EPA and IMO Certificates by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014 - 2017 81
Table 6-2: Locomotive Certificates by Manufacturer 83
Table 6-3: Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Service Class, Model Years 2014 - 2017 85
Table 6-4: Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017... 86
Table 7-1: Marine SI Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014- 2017 89
Table 7-2: Marine SI Engine Production Volume, Model Year 2017 90
Table 7-3: Small SI Engine Families by Class, Model Years 2014 - 2017 90
Table 7-4: Small SI Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 -2017 91
Table 7-5: Small SI Engine Production Volumes, Model Year 2017 92
Table 7-6: Large SI Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014-2017 93
Table 7-7: Nonroad Spark Ignition Evaporative Component Families by Type, Model Years 2014- 2017 94
Table 7-8: Nonroad Spark Ignition Engine Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Year 2014 - 201794
Table 7-9: Nonroad Spark Ignition Engine Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendary Year 2014 -
2017 95
Table 7-10: Nonroad Spark Ignition Engine Recalls by Manufacturer, 2014 - 2017 95
Table 7-11: Nonroad Spark Ignition Engine Recalls by Problem Category, 2014 - 2017 96
Table 8-1: ATV and UTV Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014-2017 97
Table 8-2: Certificates for Off-Highway Motorcycles, Model Years 2014-2017 98
Table 8-3: Snowmobile Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017 99
Table 8-4: Percentage of Two-Stroke Engine Recreational Vehicle Families, Model Years 2014 - 2017... 99
Table 8-5: Production Volume of Certified Recreational Vehicles, Model Year 2017 100
Table 8-6: Recreational Vehicle Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017 100
Table 8-7: Recreational Vehicle Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017 101
Table 8-8: Recreational Vehicle Recalls by Manufacturer, Calendar Year 2014 - 2017 101
Table 8-9: Recreational Vehicle Recalls by Problem Type, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017 101
Table 9-1: Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Alternative Fuel Engine Families by Original Equipment
Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017 104
Table 9-2: Small SI Engine Families by Fuel Type and Original Equipment Manufacturer, Model Years
2014 -2017 105
Table 9-3: Small SI Engine Families by Fuel Type Only, Model Years 2014 - 2017 107
iv
-------
Table 9-4: Large SI Engine Families by Fuel Type and Original Equipment Manufacturer, Model Years
2014-2017 108
Table 9-5: Large SI Engine Families by Fuel Type Only, Model Years 2014-2017 110
Table 9-6: Recreational Vehicle Diesel Engine Families by Original Equipment Manufacturer, Model
Years 2014-2017 110
Table 9-7: Light-Duty Alternative Fuel Conversion System Test Groups by Manufacturer, Model Years
2014-2017 112
Table 9-8: Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Alternative Fuel Conversion System Certificates by
Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017 113
Table 9-9: Alternative Fuel Conversions Systems by Program Type, Model Years 2014 - 2017 114
List of Figures
Figure ES-1: Comparison of Growth Areas and Declining Emissions, 1970 - 2017 4
Figure ES-2: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in North America, 2014 -2017 8
Figure ES-3: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in Europe, 2014 - 2017 9
Figure ES-4: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in Asia, 2014 - 2017 9
Figure ES-5: Total Number of Certificates Issued in Model Years Since 1995 11
Figure 1-1: Comparison of Growth Areas and Declining Emissions, 1970-2017 22
Figure 1-2: U.S. Mobile Source Emissions by Sector, 2014 24
Figure 2-1: Compliance Schedule for Light-Duty Vehicles 27
Figure 2-2: Compliance Schedule for Certain Heavy-Duty Highway and Nonroad Engines 28
Figure 2-3: Total Number of Certificates Issued in Model Years Since 1995 31
Figure 2-4: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in North America, 2014 - 2017 36
Figure 2-5: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in Europe, 2014 - 2017 37
Figure 2-6: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in Asia, 2014 - 2017 37
Figure 2-7: Import Exemptions by Type, 2014-2017 43
Figure 2-8: Import Exemptions by Sector, Combined for Years 2014 - 2017 43
Figure 3-1: Light-Duty Vehicle Test Groups by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014-2017 48
Figure 3-2: Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume for the U.S., Model Year 2014 - 2017 49
Figure 3-3: Car Production Volume by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014-2017 49
Figure 3-4: Light-Duty Truck Production Volume by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017 50
Figure 3-5: Overall Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Manufacturer, Model Year 2017 50
Figure 3-6: Example Timeline for IUVP Testing Process, Model Year 2017 Vehicle 56
Figure 3-7: In-Use Vehicle Testing by Test, Calendar Years 2014-2017 58
Figure 3-8: Number of Defect Reports (left) and Affected Vehicles (right) by Manufacturer, Calendar
Years 2014-2017 60
Figure 3-9: Tier 2 Bin 5 NOx Certification Levels by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017 65
Figure 3-10: Tier 2 Bin 5 NMOG Certification Levels by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017 66
Figure 3-11: Tier 2 Bin 5 CO Certification Levels by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 -2017 66
Figure 4-1: Highway Motorcycle Production Volume for the U.S., Model Years 2014 -2017 69
Figure 4-2: Highway Motorcycle Production Volume for the U.S. by Class, Model Year 2017 69
Figure 5-1: Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Year
2014-2017 75
v
-------
Figure 5-2: Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014-2017
75
Figure 6-1: Marine Engine Production Volume for the U.S, Model Year 2014-2017 82
Figure 6-2: Locomotive Certificates by Type, Model Year 2017 84
Figure 6-3: Locomotive Engine Production Volume for the U.S., Model Year 2014-2017 84
Figure 6-4: Construction and Agricultural Engine Production Volume for the U.S., Model Years 2014-
2017 87
Figure 7-1: Marine SI Engine Production Percentages by Category, Model Year 2017 90
Figure 7-2: Small SI Engine Production Percentages by Engine Class, Model Year 2017 92
Figure 8-1: Recreational Vehicle Types, Model Year 2017 100
Figure 9-1: Light-Duty Vehicle Production by Fuel Type, Model Year 2017 102
Figure 9-2: Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Fuel Type, Model Years 2014 - 2017 103
Figure 9-3: Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Alternative Fuel Type, Model Years 2014 - 2017103
vi
-------
Forward by the Compliance Division Director
This report is the fifth in a series of vehicle and engine compliance reports issued by U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Office of Transportation and Air Quality (EPA OTAQ). These reports provide a
compendium of data that EPA OTAQ's Compliance Division collects as we work to help ensure that
vehicles, engines, and other motorized equipment comply with emissions and fuel economy regulations.
The environmental programs the Compliance Division implements apply to virtually every vehicle,
engine, and gallon of transportation fuel sold in the United States. Previous reports cover the years
2007, 2008, 2009-2011, and 2012-2013.
This report covers the years 2014 - 2017. It focuses on a subset of the compliance data we collect in
implementing EPA regulations designed to reduce and control vehicle and engine emissions of certain
air pollutants that EPA regulates, such as nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, and particulate
matter. We include data about certificates issued, production volumes, defect reports and recalls for
the various sectors of vehicles and engines.1
The Compliance Division has been busy in these years. In 2015, Volkswagen admitted to equipping U.S.
diesel passenger cars dating back to the 2009 model year with software designed to circumvent the
emissions control system - sacrificing pollution control for other features important to the company.
The deceit involved software that detected when vehicles were undergoing emissions testing and
directed full activation of emission controls only during the test. During normal vehicle operation, the
software switched off certain emission controls, allowing the cars to emit nitrogen oxides at levels up to
40 times the standard.2 This type of software is known as a "defeat device" because it defeats the
purpose of the vehicles' emissions control systems.
As a result of the 2015 experience with Volkswagen, we decided to adapt and change our compliance
programs to become less predictable. In September 2015, we announced that we would be keeping
manufacturers' vehicles longer and that our testing would include additional evaluations not disclosed
to manufacturers. Since that time, we have screened more than 300 vehicles using nonstandard tests
and have taken action as appropriate when the testing identified potential issues.
EPA takes deliberate acts to circumvent emissions regulations very seriously. Not only does cheating
increase public exposure to harmful pollutants, it erodes trust in the regulated industry and EPA's
compact with the public to protect people from harmful pollution. We expect manufacturers to
produce vehicles and engines that serve a public good while meeting the spirit and letter of EPA
regulations, thereby protecting human health and the environment. We will continue to adapt our
approaches to prevent cheating and to take appropriately strong action where we find it.
The Volkswagen case presented a clear violation of law, unusual in the depth and scope of cheating
involved. But EPA's compliance program is also on alert to other forms of noncompliance which may
stem from unintentional failures by manufacturers. In the 2014 - 2017 time period, we undertook
1 This report does not cover vehicle/engine fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions compliance data, or transportation fuel
quality/compliance programs as these are covered in other EPA publications - see Section 1.1 for more information.
2 More information can be found on EPA's website, at www.epa.gov/vw.
1
-------
several significant compliance and recall actions across a broad range of vehicle and engine sectors, as
described in this report.
EPA OTAQ is always looking at ways we can assess and improve manufacturer compliance throughout
the life of the vehicles and engines produced. Given that vehicles and engines are manufactured all over
the world, we engage with manufacturers all over the world. We send teams to manufacturing
locations abroad to test vehicles and engines just as they are coming off the assembly line. We also
partner with other federal agencies, such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to leverage their
activities to inspect vehicles and engines at the point they're entering the U.S.
We've also improved the systems we use to collect and verify data from manufacturers. Disparate
systems of data collection had evolved for the various vehicle and engine sectors, but as of 2015, EPA
OTAQ consolidated them into one umbrella system, called "Engine and Vehicles - Compliance
Information System," or EV-CIS. This comprehensive data management system facilitates issuance of
certificates of conformity and allows vehicle and engine manufacturers to submit data efficiently and
securely, while also allowing EPA to share emissions data with a broad range of partners and
stakeholders. Indeed, much of the information presented in this report is accessible because of these
expanded EV-CIS functionalities. EV-CIS is not just a secure means to store compliance data. It includes
built-in validation of manufacturer and EPA data, thus helping to prevent data entry errors and even to
identify potential noncompliant products.
In the United States, we have seen tremendous improvement in air quality since the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990, even while the U.S. economy, our collective vehicle miles travelled, and the
number of vehicles and engines produced for the U.S. have grown significantly. Certainly, the Clean Air
Act and EPA's regulations to implement it have created the framework for achieving these results.
But regulations are just the first part of the success story. As the Volkswagen case and other actions
described in this report illustrate, the mere existence of regulations is not sufficient to reduce pollution.
The environmental results promised by regulation can only be achieved if manufacturers are held
accountable for meeting emission standards and fixing any defects when emissions problems show up
after their products are in customer use.
That's why EPA is invested in compliance. We see our mission as two-fold: to deliver on the air quality
promise of regulations, and to maintain a level playing field among manufacturers. EPA's role in helping
to ensure compliance with regulations is key to our mission to limit pollution coming from vehicles and
equipment that individuals and companies use every day - cars, trucks, construction equipment,
agricultural machinery, recreational vehicles, lawn and garden equipment, and others - to ensure that
even as we use these products, our air quality continues to be protected. New and improving
technologies will enable the twin virtues of ever improving environmental and economic performance.
Manufacturers that invest in developing new environmentally beneficial technologies to meet emission
standards will be at a competitive disadvantage if they see those investments undermined by
competitors that cheat to circumvent EPA regulations. Hence our actions to ensure a level playing field
among manufacturers is key both to our present and future success in protecting the public from
harmful emissions.
I hope through this report we can provide a window into our ongoing efforts to protect the public from
harmful emissions while ensuring a level playing field among the regulated industries.
2
-------
Executive Summary
ES.l Overview
This is the fifth in a series of vehicle and engine compliance reports issued by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Transportation and Air Quality (EPA OTAQ).3 These reports offer a
reference to the data that the EPA OTAQ Compliance Division collects in implementing emissions
regulations for vehicles, engines, and other motorized equipment.
This report presents compliance data for vehicle and engine model years 2014 through 2017, and data
related to testing, defects, and recalls in calendar years 2014 through 2017, for a variety of sectors
encompassing highway and nonroad engines and vehicles. These include, for example, light-duty
vehicles (i.e., passenger cars and passenger trucks), highway motorcycles, highway heavy-duty engines
and trucks such as tractor-trailers and buses, nonroad engines such as construction and agricultural
equipment, marine craft of all sizes, and locomotives.
ES.2 EPA OTAQ's Compliance Activities Ensure that Clean Air Benefits of EPA's
Regulations Are Maximized
Air quality in the U.S. has improved over the years, as regulations and technologies have affected
emissions from all pollution sectors. However, there are areas across the country where air quality does
not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, and in many of these areas, mobile sources are
the dominant contributor to emissions. EPA OTAQ's compliance program is key to ensuring that
regulations for vehicles, engines, and other motorized equipment achieve the result of clean air.
ES.2.1 Air Quality Has Improved Overall
As described in EPA's report, Our Nation's Air: Status and Trends Through 2017, nationally,
concentrations of air pollutants have dropped significantly since 1990.4 Concentrations of pollutants
refer to the amount of a pollutant per volume of air, as measured at an air quality monitor:
Carbon monoxide (CO) 8-hour average, concentrations down 77%;
Lead 3-month average, down 80%;
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) annual average, down 56%;
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 1-hour average, down 50%;
Ozone 8-hour average, down 22%;
Particulate matter < 10 microns (PM10) 24-hour average, down 34%;
Particulate matter <_2.5 microns (PM2.5) annual average, down 41%;
PM2.5 24-hour average, down 40%;
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 1-hour average, down 88%; and
Numerous air toxics have declined with percentages varying by pollutant.
3 EPA's previous vehicle and engine compliance reports can be found on EPA's website at yyyyyy.epa.goy/yehjcle-
and-engine-certification/compliance-activity-reports-vehicles-and-engines.
4 Found on EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/air-trends.
3
-------
Decreases in pollutant concentrations measured at air quality monitors indicate that EPA's air pollution
control programs are contributing to improved air quality.
Decreases in emissions estimates over time are also an indicator of the overall effectiveness of EPA's air
pollution control programs. Annual emissions estimates describe the total amount of a pollutant that is
emitted or released over the course of a year from all sources, such as power plants, industrial facilities,
highway vehicles, nonroad vehicles, and local area sources.
According to Our Nation's Air, between 1970 and 2017, the U.S. economy continued to grow, the
number of vehicle miles travelled in the U.S. continued to grow, and population and energy use also
increased, as seen in Figure ES~1. During the same time period, total emissions of six common air
pollutants dropped by 73 percent.5,6
1
Gross Domestic Product
Vehicles Miles Traveled
Population
A , , f
COz Emissions
Figure ES-1: Comparison of Growth Areas and Declining Emissions, 1970 - 2017
5 The six pollutants included are: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter of diameter less than or
equal to 10 microns, and less than or equal to 2.5 microns (PMio and PM2.5), volatile organic compounds (VOC), sulfur dioxide
(S02), and ammonia (NH3).
5 Note that vehicle emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases have increased during this period and are the
fastest-growing source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. The first EPA regulations controlling carbon dioxide as
a pollutant took effect with 2012 model year cars. For more information about light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas data, please
see The 2018 EPA Automotive Trends Report, available on EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/automotive-trends. For more
information about all greenhouse gas sources, see EPA's Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2017,
available on EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/gheemissions/inventorv-us-ereenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2017.
4
-------
ES.2.2 Air Quality Does Not Meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards in Many Areas
Across the Country, and Mobile Sources Are a Significant Contributor
While emissions of pollutants have been declining, there are still millions of people across the country
breathing pollution at levels above the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.7 Based on the 2014
National Emissions Inventory, mobile sources are significant contributors to total emissions, accounting
for more than half of the NOx and CO emissions nationwide (NOx is necessary for ozone, more
commonly known as smog, formation).
Furthermore, mobile sources are the
dominant emissions sources in many Mobile sources, which include highway vehicles and
individual urban areas. In addition, nonfood vehicles and equipment, are the dominant
mobile sources contribute to higher emissions sources in many individual urban areas.
localized levels of pollutants near roads ,
and transportation facilities. EPA
estimated that in 2009, more than 45 million people in the United States lived, worked, or attended
school within 300 feet of a major road, airport, or railroad. Individually and in combination, many of the
pollutants found near roadways have been associated with adverse health effects.8 Highway and
nonroad vehicles and engines are used by people as they go about their daily lives - at work, at home, in
transit, and in recreation.
These facts emphasize the importance of EPA's transportation-related air quality programs.
ES.2.3 EPA's Compliance Activities Are Necessary to Ensure Regulations Deliver Clean Air
EPA derives authority to regulate vehicles, fuels, and engines through a variety of environmental
statutes enacted by Congress. The Clean Air Act, as well as the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the
Energy Policy Act, and Energy Independence and Security Act give EPA the authority to regulate nearly
all engines and vehicles that emit pollutants into the environment. These statutes also give EPA the
authority to regulate the fuels that power these mobile sources, and the responsibility for emissions
compliance oversight that extends from initial product design to performance on the road and in the
field.
' All mobile SOUTCe SeCtOTS Contribute tO the national
inventory of emissions, and EPA OTAQ's compliance
EPA'S compliance activities confirm that programs cover these different sectors, as described in
vehicle and engine manufacturers are this report. Compliance programs play an essential role
satisfying their regulatory obligations. jn achieving the benefits of statutes and regulations.
EPA OTAQ oversees a comprehensive set of compliance
amtmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm actjvjtjes confirm that Vehicle and engine
7 See www.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/popexp.html. EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards for the pollutants
ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter of diameter less than or equal to 10 microns (PMio), particulate matter of
diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (N02), lead, and S02. Ozone is not directly emitted, but
forms in the atmosphere from volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). For more information, see EPA's
website at www.epa.gov/criteria7aiFp0llutants.
8 More information is available at: www.epa.gov/air-research/near-roadway-air-pollution-and-health-frequent-questions
5
-------
manufacturers and fuel producers and distributors are satisfying their regulatory obligations. Under
EPA's Tier 2 and Tier 3 programs, for example, light-duty vehicles, including SUVs and other light-duty
trucks, must meet a fleet average standard. Compliance data show that manufacturers are meeting
their regulatory targets: in model year 2017, 99 percent of the vehicle test groups were certified to Tier
2 Bin 5 or better (see Sections 2.5.1 and 3.9 for more information). Light-duty vehicle manufacturers are
achieving better emissions control than the standards by compliance margins of more than 50 percent,
for pollutants NOx, non-methane organic gases (NMOG), and CO.
The data we collect, and present in this report, provide the foundation of our compliance assessments.
ES.3 EPA's Compliance Activities Are Diverse and Tailored to Different Industries
The industries included in this report differ significantly, in terms of numbers of manufacturers,
complexity of the vehicles and engines they build, and the emissions standards and regulatory
requirements on those products. Some sectors are more consolidated than others. For example, there
are a larger number of highway motorcycle manufacturers (more than 100) obtaining certificates for
fewer than 300 engine families each year, compared to the light-duty vehicle sector, where 36 vehicle
manufacturers obtained certificates for more than 500 unique exhaust test group/evaporative families.
The small spark ignition engine sector, which includes products such as lawn and garden equipment for
residential use, has the largest number of engine families, as 900 or more were certified in each of these
model years.
EPA's compliance activities also vary and are tailored to the differences in these industries.
ES.3.1 Defect and Recall Reporting
One example is defect and recall reporting. Manufacturers in all regulated sectors 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.
EPA regulations generally establish minimum
numbers of confirmed defects that trigger
defect information reporting requirements. An
emission-related defect can lead to a recall, but
this does not happen in every case because
some defects in emission-related parts do not
increase emissions. Under the Clean Air Act, if
EPA determines that a substantial number of vehicles 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.
Over calendar years 2014 - 2017, the defect and recall programs have affected millions of vehicles and
engines currently in use. Table ES-1 shows recall reports and affected vehicles or engines by sector. A
vehicle or engine may be subject to multiple recalls, and therefore the same vehicle or engine may be
included more than once in the "Affected Vehicles" count.
Recall programs protect air quality by holding
manufacturers responsible for fixing defects in
their products at no cost to consumers.
6
-------
Table ES-1: Recall Reports and Affected Vehicles/Engines by Regulated Sector, 2014 - 2017
Regulated
Sector
2014
2015
2016
2017
Recalls
Affected
Vehicles
Recalls
Affected
Vehicles
Recalls
Affected
Vehicles
Recalls
Affected
Vehicles
Light-Duty
Vehicles
44
9,006,273
64
4,191,581
65
5,969,283
86
4,937,955
Highway
Motorcycles
0
0
2
1,050
3
23,931
2
8,179
Heavy-Duty
Highway
Engines
12
149,392
6
338,453
9
755,553
6
41,752
Nonroad
Spark
Ignition
Engines
2
21,502
0
0
3
9,362
3
4,171
Recreational
Vehicles
2
20,016
1
244
1
800
5
90,551
As seen in Table ES-1, the number of defects and recalls reported light-duty vehicles is greater than any
other industry sector. Because of the factors that make the light-duty sector unique, defect and recall
reporting are critical components of compliance for this sector. Light-duty emission standards are the
most stringent of any sector and light-duty vehicles have the most sophisticated and complex emission
control systems, including on-board diagnostic systems, that are integrated with other computer-
controlled systems within a vehicle. Given this greater complexity, there is a greater opportunity for
defects to occur. In addition, the light-duty vehicle sector has existing infrastructure, in the form of
dealerships, that facilitates conveying information about defects and recalls to consumers, as well as
implementing recalls and servicing vehicles. For these reasons, defect and recall reporting are critical
light-duty compliance tools.
ES.3.2 Compliance Audits
For other sectors, such as heavy-duty highway engines, nonroad spark ignition engines, recreational
vehicles, and highway motorcycles, compliance audits conducted in the field play a greater role in how
EPA assesses compliance. For these industry sectors, an essential part of EPA OTAQ's compliance
programs is the ability to inspect products and emission measurement processes in the field to validate
that the regulated sectors comply with applicable emission standards. EPA OTAQ has a variety of field
inspections tools that serve to validate the different facets of compliance, and because manufacturing
occurs across the globe, EPA's compliance audits do as well.
From calendar years 2014 to 2017, EPA OTAQ conducted 91 compliance audits across a variety of
regulated sectors in North America, Europe, and Asia, as shown on the maps below. In its audits, EPA
found issues such as problematic emissions measurement software, noncompliant calibration and
testing practices, missing records, use of test fuel that did not meet specifications, and others.
7
-------
EPA's world-wide compliance audits
promote a level playing field among
manufacturers.
Of these compliance audits, 16 were Selective
Enforcement Audits (SEAs). For SEAs, a formal
pass/fail determination is made at the end of the
audit, based on the emission test results of the
sampled products. In the period from 2014-2017, EPA
suspended one SEA that began in 2013 and the
manufacturer agreed to recall its products voluntarily. There were no failed audits among the 16 SEAs
conducted from 2014-2017; however, there were testing and laboratory issues that manufacturers were
required to correct.
Locations of compliance audits are marked with a pin on the maps in Figures ES-2 through ES-4 below. A
yellow or red shadow under a pin indicates multiple audits in that area. The darker the shadow, the
greater the number of audits in that location. For example, in Southern California, 14 audits occurred in
the 2014 - 2017 timeframe.
EPA will continue to use its diverse and targeted compliance tools as statutes and regulations provide, to
use its resources appropriately and efficiently to assess compliance of manufacturers in all industry
sectors.
ft
Minneapolis
? f
Itrawa
S^rame-r
San Fran d sco
Jail Lake
City
I N I T E 0 STATE
Phoenix
yptiita Tucson
Toronto
Rochester
Buffalo Albany
Chicago c|ewland
n
Boston
Providence
Indianapolis
Cincinnati
, [slew York
Pittsburgh ป
Columbus Philadelphia
Knomrillt Grซensbซro
O ChartoO. "al<,9h
Greenville
Birmingham Atlanta
Washington
Richmond
Norfolk
Torreon Monterrey
Orlando
Tampa
Figure ES-2: EPA OTAQ. Compliance Audit Locations in North America, 2014 -2017
8
-------
V
Edinburgh
ฆJNITED
BelfaSt""00 M
ii >{,i Leeds
Dublin Manchester q
'iREIANCJ . J
Birmingham
MET 11f:KL1 (D
Amsterdam
The Hague
DENMARI
Copenhagen
Helsinki
Tallinn
Bjl.**; ESTONIA
Riga latvia
I . LITHUANIA
RUSSIA Vilnius
Saint
Petersburg
Hamburg
Minsk
BELARUS
POLAND
Warsaw
Y GERMAN
Brussels Cologne
BELGIUM Frankfurt
Prague . Katowice
Luxembourg ^jgurembcrg REPUBLIC
Stuttgart SLOVAKIA
Munich Bratislava
Zurich AUSTBIA Budapest
E SWIT ZERLAND HUNGARY
SLOVENIA
L"" % Milan O Z>9'eb
Turin I" Belqrade
jL BOSNIA AfJD
Monaco. vi
Kiev
UKRAINE
Onipro
MOLDOVA
Kishinev
Marseille
ITALY
Rome
?VO SERBIA
Pristina Sofia BUI-ARIA
Podgorica
Ban. Tirana
ALBANIA Thessaloniki
saloniki
ml.
Ankara ..
Esri, HERE, 6a... esri
Figure ES-3: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in Europe, 2014 - 2017
MONGOLIA
Qiqihar
Hegang
Daqing Shuangyashan
VNGLA0E5H
Dhaka
Onttagong
Nanii
ChOTgjgtng
Lijiang
Kunming
MYANMAR
{BURMA)
Zhangjiakou
Datong Beijing
Baoding'ฎ|
Slujiazhuang
Shenyang
Anshan
DandoognTii KOREA
Pyongyang
Haixinn jjnan Weifang
Qingdao.
Zhengzhou
Zhumadian
Xiangfan
Yichang
Changsha
?
Nanjing Q
Shangl
langhai
oY
Hangzhoi
Ningbo
Nanning
FutfiOO
Quanzhou Taipei
jI^^^KaiwanS
Shantou
Shenzhen Kaohsiung
Seoul
SOUTH KORfiJ
Daejeon
Gwangju Busan Nagj
Hiroshima Kobe
Fuki^ka
Sendai
IAPAN I
J Esri, HERE, Ga...
Figure ES-4: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in Asia, 2014 - 2017
9
-------
ES.4 EPA Continuously Considers Ways to Improve Compliance and Oversight Programs
as Industries Grow and Technologies Change
As described throughout this report, EPA employs a rigorous, multi-layer process to test and certify new
vehicle models before they can be sold, and for testing vehicles and engines that are in production and
on the road. As technologies evolve and circumstances change, EPA continuously considers ways to
improve compliance and oversight programs. Over the past 45 years, EPA's oversight and testing
program has developed new tools and new techniques to adapt to technology advances, so that we
achieve the Agency's mission of protecting public health and the environment. EPA OTAQ intends to
continue to adapt its compliance oversight to be both efficient and unpredictable.
This compliance report covers model years 2014-2017 as well as compliance actions taken in calendar
years 2014-2017. During this time, EPA OTAQ learned that Volkswagen equipped their model year 2009
- 2016 diesel passenger vehicles with software that enabled cars to pass emissions tests, but exceed
pollution standards during normal vehicle operation. See Section 2.6 of this report for more
information. The Volkswagen defeat device case highlights the need for EPA's active and visible
presence in monitoring compliance with emissions standards.
Reinforcing this need is the ever-growing number and diversity of vehicles, engines, and products
developed by industry that must receive a Certificate of Conformity. The Clean Air Act requires each
vehicle and engine to have a Certificate of Conformity, which is a license to produce and sell products
for one model year consistent with the vehicle description and any terms of the certificate. The number
of certificates that EPA issues continues to grow. The total number of certificates EPA issued in model
years 1995, 2000, and 2007 - 2017 is shown in Figure ES-5. The dashed line in the figure denotes a
change in the x-axis (beginning with model year 2007, information is yearly). For model year 2017, EPA
issued close to 5000 certificates. In comparison, for model year 1995, EPA issued 810.
10
-------
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000 810
500
0
2520
I
4736
4424
4551
3927 3962 40 9 3930
4186
3641 3642
I
3689
1995 2000 ฆ 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Model Year
Figure ES-5: Total Number of Certificates Issued in Model Years Since 1995
Numbers of certificates in some sectors have remained relatively stable, but there have been substantial
changes in many sectors. For example, certificates for the category of "forklifts, generators, and
compressors" has increased more than five times. Also, new categories of certificates have been added
to EPA's list, for example, evaporative components for nonroad spark ignition engines, and heavy-duty
tractors and vocational vehicles.
EPA OTAQ recognizes the need to adapt and change compliance programs to become less predictable.
In September 2015, we announced that we would be keeping manufacturer vehicles longer and that our
testing would include additional evaluations not disclosed to manufacturers. Since that time, EPA OTAQ
has screened more than 300 vehicles using nonstandard tests and have taken action as appropriate
when the testing identified potential issues. EPA applies a "3 x 3" approach to vehicle testing, in which
we test cars at three times in their lifecycle: preproduction, production, and in-use, using three test
methods: standard laboratory test procedures, undisclosed laboratory procedures, and testing on the
road.
EPA OTAQ has also improved the systems we use to collect and verify data from manufacturers.
Disparate systems of data collection had evolved for the various vehicle and engine sectors, but as of
2015, EPA OTAQ consolidated them into one umbrella system, called "Engine and Vehicles - Compliance
Information System," or EV-CIS. This comprehensive data management system facilitates issuance of
certificates of conformity and allows vehicle and engine manufacturers to submit data efficiently and
securely, while also allowing EPA to share emissions data with a broad range of partners and
stakeholders. EV-CIS includes built-in validation of manufacturer and EPA data, thus helping to prevent
data entry errors and even to identify potential noncompliant products.
11
-------
EPA remains committed to developing compliance tools, tests, and methods that are unpredictable and
that employ efficiencies to keep pace with the ever changing and growing industry sectors. Compliance
is vital to ensure that Americans continue to breathe clean air and have confidence that the products
manufactured for sale in the U.S. meet emission control standards.
12
-------
1. Introduction
1.1 Organization of this Report
This is the fifth in a series of vehicle and engine compliance reports issued by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Transportation and Air Quality (EPA OTAQ). These reports offer a
convenient reference to the data that EPA OTAQ collects in implementing emissions regulations for
vehicles, engines, and other motorized equipment.
This report provides compliance data for vehicle and engine model years 2014 through 2017, and data
related to testing, defects, and recalls in calendar years 2014 through 2017 for a variety of sectors
encompassing highway and nonroad engines and vehicles. These include light-duty vehicles (i.e.,
passenger cars and passenger trucks), highway motorcycles, highway heavy-duty engines and trucks
such as tractor-trailers and buses, nonroad engines such as construction and agricultural equipment,
marine craft of all sizes, and locomotives.
The report is organized as follows:
Section 1, Introduction. This section provides the context for EPA's compliance programs,
including the statutory authority for these programs, the regulations that apply, and recent air
quality trends.
Section 2, Overview of Compliance Programs and Processes. This section describes generally
the programs and processes EPA employs to ensure that vehicles and engines comply with
emissions standards over their full lifecycle.
Sections 3-8: Compliance Data by Sector. These sections provide compliance data,
production volumes for the U.S., and other information, organized by industry sector:
o Section 3
Light-Duty Vehicles
o Section 4
Highway Motorcycles
o Section 5
Heavy-Duty Highway Engines
o Section 6
Nonroad Compression Ignition Engines
o Section 7
Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines
o Section 8
Recreational Vehicles
Table 1-1 provides examples of the types of vehicles and engines included in each sector.
Section 9: Alternative Fuels and Alternative Fuel Conversion Systems. This section provides
details about alternative fuel use among the different industry sectors, and information about
alternative fuel conversion systems.
13
-------
Table 1-1: Industry Sectors arid Examples
Industry Sector
Examples
Light-Duty
Vehicles
Passenger cars, vans, SUVs, small trucks
Highway On-highway motorcycles, cruisers, choppers, scooters,
Motorcycles touring bikes, mopeds, street bikes
Heavy-Duty
Highway
Engines
Tractor-trailers (semi-trucks), buses, delivery and work
trucks
Nonroad
Compression
Construction and agricultural equipment, such as
tractors, generators, construction and road-work
equipment, welders
Ignition Engines
(Nonroad CI)
Marine diesel boats and ships, oceangoing vessels
Locomotives
Nonroad Spark
Ignition Engines
Small SI: lawnmowers, string trimmers, chain saws,
small compressors, pumps, snow blowers
Marine SI: inboard and outboard motorboats, jet-skis
(Nonroad SI)
Large SI: forklifts, large compressors, generators
Evaporative components: fuel lines, fuel tanks
Recreational
Vehicles
All-terrain vehicles (ATVs), utility vehicles (UTVs), sand
cars, dune buggies
Off-highway motorcycles
Snowmobiles
This report does not cover transportation fuel quality/compliance programs or vehicle/engine fuel
economy and greenhouse gas emissions compliance data. More information on these programs, as well
as other EPA references, can be found on EPA's website, as listed in Table 1-2.
14
-------
Table 1-2: EPA References
Information
EPA Website Address
Fuel compliance information, including EPA
analyses of data
www.epa.gov/fuels-registration-reporting-and-
compliance-help
Gasoline standards
www.epa.gov/gasoline-standards
Diesel fuel standards
www.epa.gov/diesel-fuel-standards
Light-duty vehicle carbon dioxide and fuel
economy trends
www.epa.gov/fuel-economv-trends/explore-co2-
and-fuel-economv-trends-data
EPA's online Emission Standards Reference
Guide (comprehensive list of EPA mobile
source emission standards)
www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/index.htm
Comprehensive list of regulations for
emissions from vehicles and engines
www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-
engines
Previous vehicle and engine compliance
reports
www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-
certification/compliance-activitv-reports-vehicles-
and-engines
1.2 Statutory Authority
EPA derives authority to regulate vehicles, fuels, and engines through a variety of environmental
statutes enacted by Congress. Table 1-3 outlines the primary environmental statutes that give EPA the
authority to develop and implement its mobile source clean air programs.
Table 1-3: Environmental Statutes
Statute
Authority
Clean Air Act (CAA)
Emission standards for highway & nonroad vehicles and their fuels
Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (EPCA)
Fuel economy information programs for consumers, including
vehicle fuel economy labels
Energy Policy Act (EPAct)
Energy Independence and
Security Act (EISA)
Annual volume standards for renewable fuel content
These statutes give EPA the authority to regulate nearly all engines and vehicles that emit pollutants into
the environment, authority to regulate the fuels that power these mobile sources, and responsibility for
emissions compliance oversight that extends from initial product design to performance on the road and
in the field.
1.3 Scope of EPA Vehicle, Engine, and Equipment Regulations
Compliance programs play an essential role in achieving the benefits of statutes and regulations. EPA
oversees a comprehensive set of compliance activities to ensure that vehicle and engine manufacturers
and fuel producers and distributors satisfy their regulatory obligations.
15
-------
Compliance programs play an essential
role in ensuring the public receives the
benefits of clean air.
m EPA has been regulating motor vehicle emissions
since being established as a federal agency in 1970
Table 1-4 lists vehicle and engine regulations that
apply to model years 2004 and later. This table is
meant to be an overview of the regulations that
M
currently apply to the various sectors covered in
this report, but it does not include every regulation. For a comprehensive list of EPA vehicle and engine
emission standards, refer to EPA's online Emission Standards Reference Guide, available at
www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/index.htm. and see the comprehensive list of regulations for emissions
from vehicles and engines at www.epa.gov/reeulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines.
As Table 1-4 illustrates, over time, EPA has added regulations to previously unregulated mobile source
sectors and has improved regulations in other sectors to strengthen their efficacy.
16
-------
Table 1-4: Vehicle and Engine Regulations and Implementation Dates
Affected Industry
Sector/Category
Program/Rulemaking Description
Effective
Model
Year9
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel
Economy Standards Phase 2 - Established emission standards
for greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide, methane, and
nitrous oxide
2017 -
2025
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel
Economy Standards Phase 1 - First mobile source emission
standards for greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide,
methane, and nitrous oxide
2012-
2016
Control of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles: Tier 3 Motor
Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards - Established new vehicle
emission standards and further lowered the sulfur content of
gasoline
2017
Light-Duty Vehicles
Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards -Treated
vehicles and fuels as a system by concurrently regulating
gasoline sulfur content to enable use of vehicle aftertreatment
technology that would significantly reduce exhaust emissions
2004
Revisions and Additions to Motor Vehicle Fuel Economy Label -
Redesigned label to provide the public with information on
vehicles' fuel economy, energy use, fuel costs, and
environmental impacts, allowing comparisons between
conventional and advanced technology vehicles such as electric
vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.
2013
Revisions to Motor Vehicle Fuel Economy Labeling - Revised
the method for determining fuel economy label values to
better represent typical driving patterns and more accurately
estimate actual consumer fuel economy
2008
Clean Alternative Fuel Vehicle and Engine Conversions -
Provided additional compliance options for manufacturers of
clean alternative fuel conversion systems for highway vehicles
and engines
All10
Mobile Source Air Toxics - Set standards to lower gasoline
benzene content, reduce cold temperature exhaust emissions,
2010
9 Effective model year refers to the first year of a new program where only one year is noted. Many programs are phased in
over multiple model years.
10 Although this regulation took effect with its promulgation in 2011, it relates to clean alternative fuel conversion systems that
can apply to any model year that is subject to any emission standard.
17
-------
and reduce evaporation and permeation from portable fuel
containers
Mobile Source Air Toxics - First regulation identifying
compounds that should be considered mobile source air toxics
and required refiners beginning in 2002 to maintain their
average 1998-2000 gasoline toxic emission performance levels
2002
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program - Required reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy
2011
Highway Motorcycle Permeation Emissions - Established new
evaporative/permeation standards for fuel tank(s) and lines
2008
Highway Motorcycles
Highway Motorcycle Exhaust Emissions - Established emissions
standards for exhaust and evaporative emissions for
motorcycles, updating standards that were more than 20 years
old. Included previously unregulated motorcycles with engines
of <50 cc (scooters and mopeds)
2010 and
200611
Heavy-Duty GHG and Fuel Efficiency Standards Phase 2 -
Established vehicle and engine performance standards for
model years 2021-2027 for semi-trucks, large pickup trucks,
vans, and all types and sizes of buses and work trucks; and
model years 2018-2027 for certain trailers
2021
2018
Heavy-Duty GHG Standards - Established the first emission
standards for greenhouse gas pollutants from heavy-duty
engines and vehicles for model years 2014 -2018
2014
Standard for diesel fluid systems - Established minimum
maintenance intervals for replenishment of diesel exhaust fluid
with the use of selective catalytic reduction technologies
2014
Heavy-Duty Highway
Engines and Vehicles
Nonconformance Penalties for On-Highway Heavy-Duty Diesel
Engines - Established fines for manufacturers that are not
meeting standards
2012
Onboard Diagnostic (OBD) Systems - New OBD requirement
for engines over 14,000 pounds; revisions to OBD for engines
under 14,000 pounds
2010
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)
2004
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)
2007
11 New highway motorcycle standards applied in 2006; more stringent standards applied to Class III motorcycles (engine size
>280 cc) in 2010.
18
-------
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program - Required reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy
2011
Construction
& Agricultural
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
Tier 3/lnterim Tier 4 - Established more stringent emission
standards for engines between 37 and 560 kilowatts (50 and
750 hp)
2010
2006
Nonroad
Compression
Ignition
Marine Diesel
Engines
Standards for New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at or
Above 30 Liters per Cylinder - Established two additional tiers
of NOx standards for Category 3 marine diesel engines, taking
effect in 2011 and 2016; established HC and CO standards; and
established limit on sulfur in marine fuel in the Emission
Control Area (2012 for 1.0% and 2015 for 0.1%)
2016
2011
2015
2012
Engines &
Equipment
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program - Required reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy
2011
Tier 3 and Tier 4 Emission Standards for Marine Diesel Engines
- Established more stringent emission standards for newly built
and remanufactured Category 1 and 2 marine diesel engines
Commercial: Tier 4 2014-2017
Commercial and Recreational: Tier 3 2009-2014
2014
2009
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program - Required reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy
2011
Locomotives
Tier 3 and Tier 4 Emission Standards for Locomotive Diesel
Engines - Established more stringent emission standards for
newly built and remanufactured engines
Tier 3
Tier 4
2012
2015
Nonroad
Small Spark
Ignition
Engines
(Small SI)
Control of Emissions from Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines and
Equipment - Established more stringent exhaust emission
standards for Class 1 (model year 2012) and Class II (model year
2011) engines below 19 kilowatts and fuel permeation
standards for all engines below 19 kilowatts
2012
2011
Spark
Ignition
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program - Required reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy
2011
Engines and
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
19
-------
Large Spark
Ignition
Engines
(Large SI)
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program - Required reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy
2011
New Emissions Standards for Large SI Engines - Established
new exhaust and evaporative emission standards, diagnostic
capability and portable emission testing provisions
Tier 2
Tier 1
2007
2004
Recreational Vehicles
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program - Required reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy
2011
New permeation standards for fuel components
2008
New Exhaust Emission Standards for Recreational Vehicles -
Snowmobiles, Tier 3
Off-highway motorcycles, ATVs and UTVs
2012
2006
Aircraft12
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program - Required reporting of
greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy
2011
NOx Emission Standards for Aircraft Gas Turbine Engines -
Established new NOx emission standards for aircraft, engines
consistent with international standards (Committee on
Aviation Environmental Protection, or CAEP)
New Type standards: CAEP/8: 2014
CAEP/6: 2012
End of grandfather clause for engines in production before
the start of new standards: CAEP/6: 2013
Control of Air Pollution from Aircraft and Aircraft Engines;
Emission Standards and Test Procedures - Established more
stringent NOx exhaust emission standards for aircraft engines
2014
2013
2012
2005
In addition to regulating vehicles and engines, EPA regulates motor vehicle fuels, including gasoline,
diesel, and renewable fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel. Refer to Table 1-2 for EPA resources.
EPA also regulates portable fuel containers, as noted in Table 1-4. (This industry is not covered by a
specific section in this report.) EPA began validation test work on various manufacturers' portable fuel
container emission families, and that work is continuing. The industry consistently sells approximately
20 million containers per year.
12 The Federal Aviation Administration has primary oversight responsibility for aircraft emissions compliance. A general
overview can be found on the web at:
www.faa.gov/regulations policies/policy guidance/envir policy/media/Primer Jan2015.pdf.
20
-------
1.4 Air Quality Trends and the Contribution of Mobile Sources to Air Pollution
This section presents information about air pollution trends for context and perspective. This
information comes from EPA's report, Our Nation's Air: Status and Trends Through 2017, and from the
National Emissions Inventory for the year 2014.
1.4.1 Air Quality Has Improved
The concentration of a pollutant is the amount of that pollutant per volume of air, measured over a
specific averaging time at an air quality monitor. As described in Our Nation's Air: Status and Trends
Through 2017, nationally, concentrations of criteria and hazardous air pollutants have dropped
significantly since 1990, for example:
Carbon monoxide (CO) 8-hour average, concentrations down 77%;
Lead 3-month average, down 80%;
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) annual average, down 56%;
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 1-hour average, down 50%;
Ozone 8-hour average, down 22%;
Particulate matter < 10 microns (PM10) 24-hour average, down 34%;
Particulate matter <_2.5 microns (PM2.5) annual average, down 41%;
PM2.5 24-hour average, down 40%;
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) 1-hour average, down 88%; and
Numerous air toxics have declined with percentages varying by pollutant.13
Decreases in pollutant concentrations measured at air quality monitors indicate that EPA's air pollution
control programs are contributing to improved air quality.
Decreases in emissions estimates over time are also an indicator of the overall effectiveness of EPA's air
pollution control programs. Annual emissions estimates describe the total amount of a pollutant that is
emitted or released over the course of a year from all sources, such as power plants, industrial facilities,
highway vehicles, nonroad vehicles, and local area sources. According to Our Nation's Air, between
1970 and 2017, the U.S. economy continued to grow, the number of vehicle miles travelled in the U.S.
continued to grow, and population and energy use also increased, as seen in Figure 1-1. During the
same time period, total emissions of six common air pollutants dropped by 73 percent.14 However, the
graph also shows that between 1970 and 2017, C02 emissions - for which there are no ambient air
quality standards - increased 15 percent.
13 Our Nation's Air, found on EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/air-trends. "Criteria" air pollutants are those for which EPA sets
national ambient air quality standards.
14 The six pollutants included are CO, nitrogen oxides (NOx), PM10 and PM2.5, volatile organic compounds (VOC), S02, and
ammonia (NH3).
21
-------
Aggregate Emissions
(Six Common Pollutants)
-100
1970
Figure 1-1: Comparison of Growth Areas arid Declining Emissions, 1970-201715
While emissions of pollutants declined over this period, there are still areas of the country where
concentrations of air pollutants do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.16
1.4.2 National Emissions Inventory
EPA's estimates of national emissions also provide context for EPA's air pollution control programs. The
National Emissions Inventory (NEI) is a comprehensive national inventory of emissions of both criteria
and hazardous air toxic pollutants from 60 different emissions sectors, developed on a three-year
cycle.17
The NEI data for 2014, the most recent year available, show that mobile sources account for about 7% of
the emissions of both PM2.s and VOCs, and more than half of the NOx and CO emissions nationwide.
15 Our Nation's Air, found on EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/air-trends.
16 EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards for the pollutants ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter of
diameter less than or equal to 10 microns (PMio), particulate matter of diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM2.5),
nitrogen dioxide (N02), lead, and S02. Ozone is not directly emitted, but forms in the atmosphere from volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). For more information, see EPA's website at www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants.
For more information about areas not meeting National Ambient Air Quality Standards, see www.epa.gov/green-book.
17 This information is based primarily upon data provided by state, local, and tribal air agencies for sources in their jurisdictions,
and supplemented by data developed by EPA. The latest NEI available is for the year 2014. Information about the National
Emissions Inventory can be found on EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/national-emissions-inventorv-
nei.
22
-------
Figure 1-2 shows the contribution of the various types of mobile sources to the mobile source part of
the emissions inventory for these four pollutants. The pie charts are divided into the following
categories:
"Onroad" includes all vehicles built to operate on roadways, such as passenger cars and trucks,
heavy-duty trucks, and motorcycles;18
"Nonroad" includes vehicles and equipment used for construction and mining, agriculture,
recreation, industry, lawn and garden, and logging;
"Marine" refers to commercial marine vessels only; "Locomotive" and "Aircraft" are the other
mobile sources represented.
18 In this report, these sources are referred to as "highway" vehicles and engines.
23
-------
PM2.5 Primary Nitrogen Oxides
Aircraft
3% Locomotive
Aircraft
2%
Marine
10%
Marine
15%
Onroad
45%
Onroad
58%
Onroad
55%
Onroad
65%
Volatile Organic Compounds
Aircraft, Locomotive,
ฆ Marine: 1 % each
Carbon Monoxide
Aircraft
Locomotive,
Marine: <1 % each
Figure 1-2: U.S. Mobile Source Emissions by Sector, 2014
In all four cases, the "Onroad" sector makes up the single largest percentage of the mobile source
emission pie, followed by the "Nonroad" sector. "Marine," (i.e., commercial marine vessels),
"Locomotive," and "Aircraft" make up the remainder. Mobile sources are significant contributors to
24
-------
total national emissions and are the
dominant emissions sources in many Mobile sources,, which include highway vehicles and
individual urban areas. In addition,
nonroad vehicles and equipment, are the dominant
emissions sources in many individual urban areas.
mobile sources contribute to higher
localized levels of pollutants near
roads and transportation facilities.
EPA estimated that in 2009, more than 45 million people in the United States lived, worked, or attended
school within 300 feet of a major road, airport, or railroad. Individually and in combination, many of the
pollutants found near roadways have been associated with adverse health effects.19 Highway and
nonroad vehicles and engines are used by people as they go about their daily lives - at work, at home, in
transit, and in recreation.
These facts emphasize the importance of EPA's transportation-related air quality programs. All mobile
source sectors contribute to the national inventory of emissions. EPA OTAQ's compliance programs
cover all these sectors, as described in the next sections of this report.
19 More information is available at: www.epa.gov/air-research/near-roadyyay-air-pollution-and-health-frequent-questions
25
-------
2, Overview , ce Programs and Processes
2.1 Background
EPA emissions regulations have a variety of testing and reporting obligations that enable EPA OTAQto
monitor compliance. The programs may apply to vehicles and engines before they are produced
(preproduction), during 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 the 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.
However, another factor influencing EPA OTAQ's compliance approach emerged in the time period
covered by this report. In 2015, Volkswagen admitted to equipping U.S. diesel passenger cars dating
back to the 2009 model year with software designed to circumvent the emissions control system,
sacrificing pollution control for other features important to the company. The deceit involved software
that detected when vehicles were undergoing emissions testing and directed full activation of emission
controls only during the test. During normal vehicle operation, the software switched off emission
controls, allowing the cars to emit nitrogen oxides (NOx) at levels up to 40 times the standard.20 This
type of software is known as a "defeat device" because it defeats the purpose of the vehicles' emissions
control systems.
In January 2016, the Department of Justice filed a complaint on behalf of EPA in federal court, alleging
that Volkswagen violated the Clean Air Act. Since that time, the company has settled the lawsuit,
agreeing to pay billions of dollars to repair or buy back affected vehicles, mitigate excess air pollution,
and invest in electric vehicle infrastructure. Volkswagen also pleaded guilty to criminal action on the
part of individuals. Volkswagen has paid $4.3 billion in civil and criminal penalties.
EPA OTAQ is continuously evaluating how to assess and ;
improve manufacturer compliance throughout the life of EPA is continually adapting and
the vehicles and engines produced. As a result of the changing compliance programs to
2015 experience with Volkswagen, we recognized the become less predictable.
need to again adapt and change our compliance
programs to become less predictable. In September of
2015, we announced to manufacturers that our testing would include additional evaluations designed to
detect potential defeat devices.
Given that vehicle and engine manufacturing occurs worldwide, EPA sends teams to manufacturing
locations abroad, to test vehicles and engines coming off the assembly line. EPA also partners with
other federal agencies, such as U.S. Customs and Border Protection, to leverage their activities to
inspect vehicles and engines at the point these products enter the U.S.
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, so EPA's testing programs and other
20 More information can be found on EPA's website, at www.epa.gov/vw.
26
-------
requirements are designed to cover the lifespan of vehicles and engines. Generally, EPA's mobile source
compliance programs and activities can be divided into three periods:
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 or in-use activities include in-use testing and reporting and other compliance
processes conducted after vehicles and engines enter customer service.
Although compliance activities for the various mobile source sectors may differ in timing, they generally
follow similar protocols. Figure 2-1 illustrates the compliance timeline for light-duty vehicles. As shown
in the figure, there are compliance actions that occur preproduction, during production, and in-use at
specific mileage points that represent the light-duty vehicle period of useful life.
EPA Action
Manufacturer Action
Vehicle Design
and Build
50,000 Miles 90,000 Miles 120,000 Miles
0 Miles 10,000 Miles 20,000 Miles
EPA Issues Certificate of
Conformity
EPA Reviews
Final
Manufacturer
Application
EPA Confirmatory
Testing, Random
and Targeted
EPA Reviews Initial
Manufacturer
Application
EPA In-Use Surveillance Testing
Manufacturer Prototype
Vehicle Emissions and
Durability Testing
[Representative of
Production]
End of Useful Life
(per CAA)
[Emission Levels
Predicted Via Certifica-
tion Durability Testing]
Low-Mileage In-Use
Verification Testing
Performed by Manufacturer
High-Mileage In-Use
Verification Testing
Performed by Manufacturer
Figure 2-1: Compliance Schedule for Light-Duty Vehicles
Figure 2-2 shows a similar timeline for heavy-duty highway vehicles and nonroad engines. Note these
vehicles and engines have a "useful life" defined in regulations, appropriate for the intended service
class. For example, based on the regulations, useful life for heavy-duty highway engines is up to 435,000
miles, and for marine compression ignition engines it is up to 20,000 hours.21
21 Note that the figure's End of Useful Life text is an example. End of Useful Life depends on engine type.
27
-------
EPA Confirmatory Testing
EPA Selective Enforcement
Audit
EPA Action
Manufacturer Action
EPA Issues Certificate
EPA
Reviews Initial
Manufacturer Application
EPA
Reviews Final
Manufacturer
Application
Manufacturer
Testing of
Prototype Engine
Representative
of Production
of Conformity
Engine Design
and Build
Begin Useful
Life
Manufacturer
Production Line
Testing
0 Miles
0 Hours
Manufacturer In-Use
EPA In-Use End of Useful Life
Testing 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
Figure 2-2: Compliance Schedule for Certain Heavy-Duty Highway and Nonroad Engines
2.1.1 Compliance Flexibility
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 discussion of flexibility
provisions and presents data showing how manufacturers are using them.
2.2 Preproduction Programs: Certificates of Conformity
Section 206 of the Clean Air Act requires all engines and vehicles to be covered by a Certificate of
Conformity before they can enter commerce in the U.S. A Certificate of Conformity is a license to
produce and sell products for one model year consistent with the vehicle description and any terms of
the certificate. Every class of engines and vehicles introduced must have a Certificate of Conformity,
and these certificates 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 group and evaporative family.22 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.
22 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 similar design and emission characteristics.
28
-------
2.2.1 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 the applicable
emissions requirements, and to describe the vehicles or engines to be covered by the Certificate of
Conformity. The certificate is a license to produce and sell the vehicle and covers only those vehicles or
engines specifically described in the application. The list below generally describes the information and
data that manufacturers must submit to begin the application process:
A description of each test group/engine family, including the basic engine design and list of
distinguishable configurations to be included in the test group/engine family;
The production volumes for the U.S. of each configuration in the test group or engine family;
A description of the test engine representing the test group or engine family;
An explanation of how the emission control system operates;
A description of the test procedures and equipment used to test the engine;
The intended useful life of the family and emission deterioration characteristics over this useful
life;
Durability grouping (i.e., groups of vehicles/engines with similar emission deterioration and
emission component durability);
Durability test procedures;
A description of vehicles used to demonstrate tailpipe emissions and emission control
component durability;
List of all test results, official certification levels, and the applicable emission standards for each
vehicle/engine tested;
Evaporative and On-Board Recovery Vapor Refueling (ORVR) system information (light-duty
only);
Information on emission control diagnostic systems (i.e., On-Board Diagnostics for applicable
sectors);
Manufacturer representative and official company contact information.
At the end of the application process, manufacturers must attest to a statement that the information in
the application is accurate and complete.
2.2.2 Certificates Issued for Model Years 2014 - 2017
Table 2-1 shows the number of certificates that EPA issued in model years 2014 - 2017.23
23 Certificates for portable fuel containers are not shown in this table. These certificates are unique in that they are valid for
five years, rather than one. There were 12 valid certificates held by manufacturers in 2014; 19 in 2015; 21 in 2016, and 23 in
2017.
29
-------
Table 2-1: Number of Certificates of Conformity, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Industry Sector
Category
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
Light-Duty
Vehicles
Passenger cars and trucks
536
559
574
599
Alternative fuel conversions24
147
131
204
195
Highway
Motorcycles
On-highway motorcycles
289
289
293
299
Heavy-Duty
Highway Engines
Compression ignition (diesel)
30
32
34
41
Spark ignition (mostly gasoline)
10
14
12
15
Tractors and vocational vehicles
66
97
103
126
Alternative fuel conversions
31
31
25
22
Evaporative emissions systems
10
13
12
18
Nonroad
Compression
Ignition Engines
Diesel powered equipment, such as tractors,
generators, construction equipment, forklifts,
welders
432
456
489
491
Diesel boats and ships
148
177
172
193
Oceangoing vessels per International Maritime
Organization requirements
23
33
36
30
Locomotives
108
121
146
151
Nonroad Spark
Ignition Engines
Small SI: Small nonroad gasoline powered
equipment, such as lawnmowers, string trimmers,
chain saws, small compressors, pumps, utility
vehicles < 25 mph, snow blowers, floor cleaners
900
956
944
972
Marine SI: Gasoline boats and personal watercraft
169
189
172
178
Large SI: Large nonroad gasoline powered
equipment, such as forklifts, compressors,
generators, and stationary equipment
194
208
210
226
Evaporative components (mostly intended for small
nonroad gasoline and marine gasoline equipment)
815
831
843
866
Recreational
Vehicles
All-terrain vehicles/utility vehicles
197
205
206
232
Off-highway motorcycles
49
53
47
49
Snowmobiles
32
29
29
33
Total
4186
4424
4551
4736
24 Conversion systems modify vehicles and engines so that they can run on different fuels than the ones for which they were
originally designed. For more information, see EPA's website at: www.epa.eov/vehicle-and-eneine-certification/vehicle-and-
eneine-alternative-fuel-conversions.
30
-------
2.2.3 Increase in Certificates Issued
.. . . | r .1 , x .. r- . . By requiring certificates for all vehicles and
While it is typical for the number of certificates to
fluctuate from year to year, the overall trend has enQines> EPA ensures that manufacturers in
been one of growth, as shown by the increasing ฐ sectฐr meet the same requirements.
number of certificates issued each model year
from 2014 through 2017 in Table 2-1. This is a
longer-term trend: for model year 1995, EPA issued a total of 810 Certificates of Conformity across all
sectors; for model year 2000, EPA issued 2,520 certificates; for model year 2007, it was 3,641.25 The
total number of certificates EPA issued in model years 1995, 2000, and 2007 - 2017 is shown in Figure
2-3.26 The dashed vertical line in the figure denotes a change in the x-axis scale (beginning with model
year 2007, information is yearly).
5000
4500
4000
1 3500
CO
I/)
a 3000
cu
0
1 2500
-------
From model year 2007 to 2017, the number of certificates EPA has issued has increased from 3,641 to
4,736, an increase of 30%. Table 2-2 shows the number of model year 2007 certificates compared to the
number of model year 2017 certificates by category, along with the difference and percent change from
model year 2007. This table uses the category names from the 2007 and 2008 compliance activity
reports; new categories since that time are in italics. These years are just a snapshot; not shown is the
fluctuation in numbers of certificates for each category during the years in between.
Table 2-2: Comparison of Certificates Issued for Model Years 2007 and 2017
Industry Sector
Category Name
MY 2007
MY 2017
Change
Percent
Change
Light-Duty Vehicles
Cars & Light Trucks
518
590
72
14%
Light-Duty Vehicle
Independent Commercial
Importers
22
9
-13
-59%
Light-Duty Alternative Fuel
Conversions
-
195
195
Highway Motorcycles
Motorcycles
418
299
-119
-28%
Heavy-Duty Highway
Vehicles and Engines
Semi trucks and buses
(diesel)
58
42
-16
-28%
Semi trucks and buses
(gasoline)
38
36
-2
-5%
Heavy-Duty Alternative Fuel
Conversions
-
0
Heavy-Duty Tractors and
Vocational Vehicles
-
126
Heavy-Duty Engine
Evaporatives
19
18
-1
-5%
Nonroad
Compression Ignition
Engines
Diesel Boats and Ships
117
193
76
65%
Oceangoing vessels
31
30
-1
-3%
Locomotives
60
151
91
152%
Agricultural and Construction
Equipment
676
491
-185
-27%
Nonroad Spark
Ignition Engines
Lawn and Garden Equipment
1084
972
-112
-10%
Gasoline Boats and Personal
Watercraft
112
178
66
59%
Forklifts, Generators, and
Compressors
34
226
192
565%
Nonroad Spark Ignition
Evaporative Components
-
866
866
Recreational Vehicles
All-Terrain Vehicles
309
232
-77
-25%
Off-highway Motorcycles
106
49
-57
-54%
Snowmobiles
37
33
-4
-11%
Total
3639
4736
1097
30%
32
-------
As seen in the table, some sectors have remained relatively stable, such as oceangoing vessels, heavy-
duty gasoline trucks and buses, and snowmobiles; some sectors show general increases over time such
as light-duty vehicles; and in some sectors, there have been substantial changes. For example, the
category of "forklifts, generators, and compressors" has increased more than five times. Also, since
model year 2007, some new categories of certificates have been added to EPA's list:
alternative fuel conversions, for both light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles (a new category as a
result of a 2011 rulemaking for aftermarket system providers and installers);
evaporative components for nonroad spark ignition engines (a 2008 regulation established new
evaporative emissions standards); and
heavy-duty tractors and vocational vehicles (a new category created in 2011 heavy-duty
greenhouse gas rule; these were previously not regulated as complete vehicles).
2.2.4 EPA's Improved Data Collection System
EPA's "Engines and Vehicles - Compliance Information System," or EV-CIS, is a comprehensive system
used to collect and verify data from manufacturers, which facilitates the issuance of Certificates of
Conformity. As of 2015, the disparate systems of data collection that had evolved for the various vehicle
and engine sectors were consolidated into this one umbrella system. EV-CIS allows vehicle and engine
manufacturers to submit required data efficiently and securely, while also allowing EPA to share
nonconfidential data with government partners such as the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, as well as with other stakeholders.
EV-CIS covers a broad range of mobile
EPA's EV-CIS data system includes built-in validation source industries. It includes modules for
of manufacturer data, preventing errors. EV-CIS is 14 industries, each with its own unique
i xr-n*/ x if- -i i regulatory requirements, as well as
an example of EPA s use of LEaN principles to b ' M '
,, , . . , modules for implementing light-duty and
achieve our mission more effectively,
heavy-duty greenhouse gas programs.
" The system captures more than 11,000
data elements submitted by
manufacturers. The modular approach enables changes when EPA OTAQ needs to integrate new or
revised rules into the system.
EV-CIS is not just an internal EPA improvement. The system includes built-in validation of certain
manufacturer data, thus preventing errors in data entry and improving the process for everyone. EV-CIS
is an example of EPA's use of LEAN principles to create efficient and effective systems, and EPA remains
committed to continuous improvement.
2.2.5 Confirmatory Certification Testing
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.
33
-------
2.3 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 producing the same
vehicle or engine that they certified based on a preproduction prototype. 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. While EPA uses a variety of compliance tools
as appropriate for specific industry sectors, the goal is the same across sectors: to ensure that vehicles
and engines sold in the U.S. meet the emission standards.
2.3.1 Compliance Audits
An essential part of EPA OTAQ's compliance programs is the ability to inspect products and emission
measurement processes in the field to validate that the regulated sectors comply with applicable
emission standards. Assessing compliance in a comprehensive manner includes:
Ensuring that products perform according to applicable emission standards;
Ensuring that assembly processes result in products that are faithful to the Certificate of
Conformity;
Ensuring that emission measurements for submission to EPA conform to applicable
standards and procedures;
Ensuring that submitted records and reports are accurate, timely, and conform to regulatory
requirements.
EPA OTAQ has a variety of field inspection tools that serve to validate the different facets of compliance
described above, and because manufacturing occurs across the globe, EPA's compliance audits do as
well. Compliance audits in the field are a useful tool for certain industry sectors. They are used less
frequently in the light-duty vehicle industry, because other approaches are available to ensure that
vehicles produced are meeting regulations. For example, both EPA and manufacturers implement
confirmatory testing for light-duty vehicles, which involves testing pre-production vehicles and engines.
Furthermore, both EPA and light-duty vehicle manufacturers conduct in-use compliance testing to
monitor in-use vehicle emissions. However, in other sectors such as heavy-duty highway engines,
nonroad spark ignition engines, recreational vehicles, and highway motorcycles, compliance audits
conducted in the field play a greater role and are an important way for EPA to assess compliance.
Field inspection tools include the following:
Records Inspection - An inspection to determine whether the records and reports comply
with requirements of the Clean Air Act and associated regulations;
Emission Laboratory Audit - An inspection to determine whether the equipment, calibration
processes, and test procedures conform to applicable regulations, to ensure that the results
reported to EPA are accurate and valid;
34
-------
Test Monitoring - An inspection where EPA personnel observe testing conducted under
existing EPA programs such as Production Line Testing or In-Use Test Orders;
Assembly Line Audit - An inspection to assess whether the assembly procedures will reliably
result in a product that is materially the same as that for which a Certificate of Conformity
was granted, that the product is properly labeled, and that the ultimate purchaser is
provided with emission warranty terms and information on how to properly maintain and
use the product;
Selective Enforcement Audit (SEA) Test Orders - The most formal type of field audit where
products are randomly selected, secured, and tested, according to a regulatory
methodology and under EPA supervision. Manufacturers are required to test the products
according to a test order to demonstrate that the product represented at the time of
certification in fact conforms with applicable standards at the time of production. SEAs
usually include other field inspection processes, such as records inspections and test lab
audits.
The results of a compliance audit generally include
feedback to a manufacturer on how to fully comply with
regulatory requirements, including those that pertain to audits promote a level playing field
laboratory equipment standards, test procedures, among manufacturers.
records management, and reporting compliance.
From calendar years 2014 to 2017, EPA OTAQ's Compliance Division conducted 91 compliance audits
across a variety of regulated sectors. The number of compliance audits done in each year is shown in
Table 2-3.
Table 2-3: Number of EPA OTAQ Compliance Audits, 2014 - 2017
Type of Compliance Audit
2014
2015
2016
2017
Field Audits/Inspections
29
20
11
15
Selective Enforcement Audits (SEAs)
2
2
4
8
Total
31
22
15
23
EPA conducted compliance audits manufacturers on several continents, including North America,
Europe, and Asia, as shown on the maps below. In its compliance audits, EPA found issues such as
problematic emissions measurement software, noncompliant calibration and testing practices, missing
records, use of test fuel that did not meet specifications, and others. Left uncorrected, these issues
could result in EPA not accepting manufacturer's certification data. Thus manufacturers must correct
these issues to obtain certificates for their products.
Of these 91 compliance audits, 16 were Selective Enforcement Audits (SEAs). For SEAs, a formal
pass/fail determination is made at the end of the audit, based on the emission test results of the
sampled products. In the period from 2014-2017, EPA suspended one SEA that began in 2013 and the
manufacturer agreed to recall its products voluntarily. There were no failed audits among the 16 SEAs
35
-------
conducted from 2014-2017; however, there were testing and laboratory issues that manufacturers were
required to correct.
The Agency exercises discretion when selecting families for compliance audits in the field, based on
factors such as whether test results or other information suggest that emissions from a given family or
industry sector are likely to exceed a standard or Family Emission Limit, production volume for the U.S.,
contribution to the inventory, and other compliance program data, such as the results of in-use testing.
In addition to these factors, EPA incorporates a random selection component.
Locations of compliance audits are marked with a pin on the maps in Figures 2-4 through 2-6 below. A
yellow or red shadow under a pin indicates multiple audits in that area. The darker the shadow, the
greater the number of audits in that location. For example, in Southern California, 14 audits occurred in
the 2014 - 2017 timeframe.
EPA's compliance presence promotes a level playing field across manufacturers and industries, and
maximizes likelihood that the full measure of benefits that regulatory programs are expected to
generate are in fact delivered to the public. EPA will continue to use compliance audits, including SEAs,
to assess compliance wherever manufacturing occurs.
Sa|l Lake
Oty
ft
Minneapolis
Phoenix
ti^ana Tucson
|
ttawa
Rap,dS Cretroit
Lhrcaqo
Toronto
Rochester
Buffalo Albany
Indianapolis
Cincinnati
Cleveland
New York
Pittsburgh ซ
Columbus Philadelphia
Boston
Providence
N ashville Kn(Jwjte Greensboro
Memphis 9ฎ
Greenville
Washington
Richmond
Norfolk
Birmingham A,'anta
Austin
San Antonio
Torreon Monterrey
Orlando
Tampa
Figure 2-4: EPA OTAQ. Compliance Audit Locations in North America, 2014 - 2017
36
-------
V
Edinburgh
ฆjnited
BelfaSt""00 M
ii >{,i Leeds
Dublin Manchester q
'iREIANCJ . J
Birmingham
MET 11f:KL1 (D
Amsterdam
The Hague
DENUMjj
Copenhagen
Helsinki
Tallinn
Bjl.**; ESTONIA
Riga latvia
I . LITHUANIA
RUSSIA Vilnius
Saint
Petersburg
Hamburg
Minsk
BELARUS
POLAND
Warsaw
Y GERMAN
Brussels Cologne
BELGIUM Frankfurt
Prague . Katowice
Luxembourg ^jgurembcrg REPUBLIC
Stuttgart SLOVAKIA
Munich Bratislava
Zurich AUSTBIA Budapest
E SWIT ZERLAND HUNGARY
SLOVENIA
L"" % Milan O Z>9'eb
Turin I" Belqrade
jL BOSNIA AfJD
Monaco. vi
Kiev
UKRAINE
Onipro
MOLDOVA
Kishinev
Marseille
ITALY
Rome
?VO SERBIA
Pristina Sofia BUI-ARIA
Podgorica
Ban. Tirana
ALBANIA Thessaloniki
saloniki
ml.
Istanbul
Bursa
Ankara ..
Esri, HERE, 6a... esri
Figure 2-5: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in Europe, 2014 - 2017
MONGOLIA
Qiqihar
Daqing
Harbin
Hegang
Shuangyashan
m
4NGLA0ESH
Dhaka
Chtttagong
Baotou
Datong Beijing
Nandicng
ChGfjgjging
Lijiang
MYANMAR
(BURMA)
Baodinif^J
Shijiazhuang
Yarrt
Hanclan jjnan Wet fang
Qingdao
Zhengzhou
Zhumadian
Xtangfan
Yichang
Changsha
Shenyang
Anshan
DandaqgRTH nORtA-'
Pyongyang
at Seoul
^^SOUTHRO^M
Daejeon
Ulsdi
Gv/angju Busan
?
Nanjing O
Shanghai
Har. gz
Ningbo
Nanning
Fuzhou
Quanzhou Taipei
Shantou
Shenzhen Kaohsiung
Nagc
Hiroshima Kobe Haf
Sฃ
Sendai
JAPAN I
T^yo
iki^a
esri
Figure 2-6: EPA OTAQ Compliance Audit Locations in Asia, 2014 - 2017
37
-------
2.4 Postproduction Programs
2.4.1 In-Use Compliance Programs
In-use compliance programs track emissions performance of production vehicles and engines after they
enter customer service. In-use testing programs are conducted by both EPA and manufacturers. (See
Section 3.6, In-Use Compliance Testing.)
2.4.2 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 include defects even if they do not increase
emission levels. EPA regulations generally establish minimum numbers of confirmed defects that trigger
defect reporting requirements. An emission-related defect can lead to a recall, but this does not happen
in every case because some defects in emission-related parts do not increase emissions.
The next sections of this document cover defect reporting for the years 2014-2017. This information is
summarized in Table 2-4 below.
Table 2-4: Defect Reports by Regulated Sector, 2014 -2017
Regulated Sector
2014
2015
2016
2017
Light-Duty Vehicles
199
273
228
284
Highway Motorcycles
0
3
4
5
Heavy-Duty Highway Vehicles and Engines
22
29
27
31
Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines
9
2
4
4
Recreational Vehicles
1
2
4
9
2.4.3 Recall Programs
An emissions recall entails action by a manufacturer to repair, adjust, or modify customer-owned
vehicles to remedy an emission-related problem. The purpose of an emissions recall is to prevent
excessive pollution from vehicles or engines that are already in customer service.
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)(1) of the
Clean Air Act, if EPA determines that a substantial number of vehicles 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 whether a recall is necessary.
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
38
-------
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 declines to implement a voluntary
recall.
Recall programs protect air quality by holding
manufacturers responsible to fix defects in
their products at no cost to consumers.
The next sections of this document cover recalls
by sector for the years 2014-2017. This
information is summarized in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5: Recall Reports and Affected Vehicles/Engines by Regulated Sector, 2014 - 2017
Regulated
Sector
2014
2015
2016
2017
Recalls
Affected
Vehicles
Recalls
Affected
Vehicles
Recalls
Affected
Vehicles
Recalls
Affected
Vehicles
Light-Duty
Vehicles
44
9,006,273
64
4,191,581
65
5,969,283
86
4,937,955
Highway
Motorcycles
0
0
2
1,050
3
23,931
2
8,179
Heavy-Duty
Highway
Vehicles and
Engines
12
149,392
6
338,453
9
755,553
6
41,752
Nonroad
Spark Ignition
Engines
2
21,502
0
0
3
9,362
3
4,171
Recreational
Vehicles
2
20,016
1
244
1
800
5
90,551
The number of defects and recalls reported light-duty vehicles is greater than any other industry sector,
because this industry differs from the others in terms of requirements, complexity of systems, and
infrastructure of the industry. The light-duty sector has been regulated since the 1970s and the
emission standards are the most stringent of any sector. As described earlier, light-duty manufacturers
must conduct in-use testing, which allows them to identify defects issues in production, and EPA also
conducts this type of testing. In addition, light-duty vehicles have the most sophisticated and complex
emission control systems, including on-board diagnostic systems, that are integrated with other
computer-controlled systems within a vehicle. Given this greater complexity, there is a greater
opportunity for defects to occur. Finally, the light-duty vehicle sector has existing infrastructure, in the
form of dealerships, that facilitates conveying information about defects and recalls to consumers, as
well as implementing recalls and servicing vehicles. In other sectors, warranty tracking systems are not
as developed, and many smaller certificate holders lack appropriate infrastructure for robust reporting.
Therefore, defect and recall programs play a greater role in the light-duty industry, and as discussed in
Section 2.3.1; compliance audits play a more important role in other industry sectors.
39
-------
2.5 Regulatory Flexibility Programs
EPA builds flexibility into its emissions regulations to increase compliance efficiency, decrease costs, and
encourage manufacturers to introduce new technologies.
2.5.1 Average Banking and Trading 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 can use the ABT provisions
by certifying some vehicles and engines at levels below the emission standard, thus generating positive
credits that can be used to offset vehicles and engines with emissions above 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 reconciliation generally occurs on an annual basis.
The flexibility to meet fleet average emission standards by ABT credits can facilitate earlier introduction
of clean technology into the market.
2.5.2 Transition Program for Equipment Manufacturers
The Transition Program for Equipment Manufacturers (TPEM) applies to land-based nonroad
compression ignition (diesel) engines. A relatively small number of engine designs can be used in
thousands of different products. When new emission standards take effect and engines are redesigned
to achieve the required emission reductions, equipment powered by those engines may also need to be
redesigned. The TPEM program recognizes this potential challenge by providing manufacturers a
transition period. During the transition period, manufacturers may continue to use a limited number of
engines meeting the previous standards while they update their product designs to accommodate
redesigned engines that meet the new standards.
2.5.3 Small Volume Manufacturers
The regulations also allow for flexibility for "small-volume manufacturers" of vehicles, engines, and
equipment in meeting some of the compliance requirements. For example, a small-volume
manufacturer may use optional procedures to demonstrate compliance with general standards and
specific emission requirements. The definition of small-volume manufacturer varies by sector, and is
based on factors such as the number of units sold, the number of employees the manufacturer has, and
the manufacturer's revenue in either the current or a baseline year. Table 2-6 below provides examples
of these thresholds for the various sectors. The descriptions in this table are brief summaries of EPA
regulations; please refer to the regulations themselves for the legal definitions.
40
-------
Table 2-6: Small-Volume Manufacturer Thresholds
Industry Sector /
Regulation
Regulation
Small-Volume Manufacturer Threshold
Light-Duty
Vehicles
40 CFR
86.1838-01
5000 units with respect to the compliance with Tier 3 standards,
and 15,000 units for all other requirements, or a manufacturer
that qualifies as a small business under the Small Business
Administration regulations.
Highway
Motorcycles
40 CFR
86.410-2006
< 500 employees and producing < 3000 motorcycles per year for
the U.S.
Heavy-Duty
Highway Vehicles
and Engines
40 CFR
1036.801
and
1037.801
HD on-highway engine/vehicle manufacturer: defined by limits
on the total number of employees (< 1000 for engine
manufacturers, < 1,500 for vehicle manufacturers) and total
revenue.
Nonroad
Compression
Ignition Engines
(Nonroad CI)
40 CFR
1039.801
Construction and agricultural equipment: < 2500 units produced
for the U.S. and < 1000 employees.
40 CFR
1042.901
Marine diesel boats and ships, oceangoing vessels: annual
worldwide production of < 1,000 internal combustion engines of
Category 1 and 2 (marine and nonmarine). Manufacturers of
Category 3 engines are not small volume manufacturers.
40 CFR
1033.901
Locomotives: < 1,000 employees.
Nonroad Spark
Ignition Engines
(Nonroad SI)
40 CFR
1054.801
Small SI (lawnmowers, string trimmers, chain saws, small
compressors, pumps, snow blowers):
Handheld engines/equipment: < 25,000 units produced
for the U.S. per year;
Non-handheld engines: < 10,000 units produced for the
U.S. per year;
Non-handheld equipment: < 5000 units produced for the
U.S. per year.
40 CFR
1045.801
Marine SI (inboard and outboard motorboats, jet-skis)
Engines: < 250 employees;
Vessels: < 500 employees.
40 CFR
1048.801
Large SI (forklifts, large compressors, generators):
< 2000 units produced for the U.S. per year or with < 200
employees.
Recreational
Vehicles
40 CFR
1051.801
All-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and off-highway motorcycles:
< 5000 off-highway motorcycles and ATVs per year produced for
the U.S.
40 CFR
1051.801
Snowmobiles: U.S. production of < 300.
41
-------
2.5.4 Exemption Programs
Some vehicles and engines imported into the United States are eligible for an exemption from federal
emission requirements. For example, vehicles belonging to military personnel or nonresidents may be
eligible for exemption, and vehicles imported for testing or display may also be exempt. Depending on
the type of exemption, importers must request written EPA approval in advance. EPA works with the
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to ensure that proper approvals have been issued before vehicles
and engines may enter the United States. An exemption may cover multiple vehicles and/or engines.
Table 2-7 below shows the number of import exemptions for the categories of light-duty vehicles,
heavy-duty vehicles and nonroad engines and equipment, highway motorcycles, and recreational
vehicles in the years 2014 - 2017, by exemption type. Note that this information is generally limited to
those exemptions requiring EPA approval.
Table 2-7: Import Exemptions by Type, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
Import Exemption Type
2014
2015
2016
2017
Returning Military Service Personnel
634
599
616
544
Non Resident
579
724
701
688
Repair/Alteration
124
164
160
194
Testing
238
205
309
408
Display
45
57
68
62
Racing
349
343
474
484
Competition
94
138
152
162
Total
2063
2230
2480
2542
Figure 2-7 displays this same information in a bar chart.27
27 "Military" in this figure refers to exemptions for returning military service personnel.
42
-------
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
12014
12015
12016
2017
III
Military Non Repair/ Testing Display
Resident Alteration
Racing Competition
Figure 2-7: Import Exemptions by Type, 2014-2017
In calendar years 2014 through 2017, EPA issued a total of 9,315 import exemptions: 6,328 for light-
duty vehicles, 787 for heavy-duty and nonroad engines or equipment, and 2,200 for highway
motorcycles and recreational vehicles (ATVs, off-highway motorcycles, and snowmobiles). Figure 2-8
illustrates import exemptions by sector, and shows that more than two thirds of the total import
exemptions were for light-duty vehicles in these years. About a quarter were either for motorcycles or
recreational vehicles. Heavy-duty and nonroad engines and equipment comprised the remainder.
otorcycles and
Recreational
Vehicles
24%
Heavy Duty
8%
Light Duty
68%
I Light-Duty
I Heavy-Duty
I Motorcycles and
Recreational Vehicles
Figure 2-8: Import Exemptions by Sector, Combined for Years 2014 - 2017
43
-------
2.6 Enhanced Compliance Oversight as a Result of Volkswagen Clean Air Act Violations
As this compliance report covers model years 2014-2017 as well as compliance actions taken in calendar
years 2014-2017, it would not be complete without mention of Volkswagen diesel vehicle Clean Air Act
violations. Volkswagen, Audi, and Porsche (collectively, "Volkswagen" in this section), equipped their
model year 2009 - 2016 diesel passenger vehicles with software that enabled cars to pass emissions
tests, but exceed pollution standards during normal vehicle operation.
EPA has since resolved a civil enforcement case against Volkswagen, subject to three partial settlements.
These settlements resolve allegations that Volkswagen violated the Clean Air Act by the sale of
approximately 590,000 model year 2009 to 2016 diesel motor vehicles equipped with "defeat devices"
in the form of computer software designed to cheat on federal emissions tests. The major excess
pollutant at issue in this case is NOx, which causes serious health concerns. Volkswagen has also
pleaded guilty to criminal felony counts and has paid $4.3 billion in civil and criminal penalties.28
Volkswagen installed software on certain diesel vehicles that is designed to detect when the vehicle is
undergoing emissions testing and turns full emissions controls on only during the test. The effectiveness
of emissions control devices is reduced during all normal driving. This results in cars that meet
emissions standards in the laboratory or testing station, but during normal operation, emit NOx at levels
up to 40 times the standard. This software is a "defeat device" that is prohibited under the Clean Air
Act.29 Affected vehicles included both 2.0 liter and 3.0 liter diesel light duty vehicles, as shown in Table
2-8.
28 For additional information, see EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/vw and www.epa.gov/enforcement/volkswagen-clean-air"
act-civil-settlement
29 Section 203(a)(3)(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7522(a)(3)(b), prohibits the manufacture, selling, or installation of any
device that intentionally circumvents EPA emission standards by bypassing, defeating, or rendering inoperative a required
element of the vehicle's emissions control system.
44
-------
Table 2-8: Volkswagen Light-Duty Diesel Vehicles and Model Years Affected by the Defeat Device
Vehicle Model
Model Years
2.0 Liter Diesel
Jetta
2009-2015
Jetta Sportwagen
2009-2014
Beetle
2013-2015
Beetle Convertible
2013-2015
Audi A3
2010-2015
Golf
2010-2015
Golf Sportwagen
2015
Passat
2012-2015
3.0 Liter Diesel
Volkswagen Touareg
2009-2016
Porsche Cayenne
2013-2016
Audi A6 Quattro
2014-2016
Audi A6 Quattro
2014-2016
Audi A8
2014-2016
Audi A8L
2014-2016
Audi Q5
2014-2016
Audi A7
2009-2016
The Volkswagen defeat device case highlights the need for EPA's active and visible presence in
monitoring compliance with emissions standards. As described throughout Section 2 of this report, EPA
employs a rigorous, multi-layer process to test and certify new vehicle models before they can be sold,
and for testing vehicles that are in production and on the road. As technologies evolve and
circumstances change, EPA continuously considers ways to improve compliance and oversight programs.
Over the past 45 years, EPA's oversight and testing program has developed new tools and new
techniques to adapt to technology advances, to achieve the agency's mission of protecting public health
and the environment.
EPA's testing and oversight includes
standard and non-standard laboratory
EPA continuously develops new compliance tools , ,
testing using dynamometers and on-road
and techniques to achieve the Agency's mission: testjng jn rea|_woHd conditions. Both are
protecting public health and the environment. necessary as part of an active robust
program. This provides a multi-layered
oversight approach focused on:
Testing both pre-production prototypes and production vehicles on the dynamometer, which
provides accurate, reliable and repeatable measurements that can be used to compare against
the standard, and across vehicle types;
On-road testing using portable emissions measurement systems (PEMS) that measure emissions
during real world driving situations;
45
-------
Laboratory audits ensuring that manufacturer, contract, and other test labs conform to testing
protocols and data quality standards, so the data EPA gets from these sources meet standards
and that results can be compared among labs; and
Holding manufacturers accountable for their actions through rigorous enforcement of the Clean
Air Act, which provides a strong deterrence against cheating and helps maintain a level playing
field for the vast majority of automakers that comply with laws and regulations fairly.
A strong oversight and compliance program is critical to ensure that the clean air standards that EPA
OTAQ sets for vehicles to protect public health actually result in the emissions reductions anticipated.
EPA OTAQ will continue to adapt and improve as we have before to ensure we deliver on the
Agency's mission.
46
-------
3. Light-Duty Vehicles
Light-duty vehicles include passenger vehicles such as cars, vans, SUVs, and light trucks. This sector has
been subject to increasingly stringent emissions and fuel economy standards since the 1970s. The most
recent emissions standards in effect are the Tier 3 vehicle and fuel standards, which EPA adopted in
2014 and which took effect in 2017. The Tier 3 standards reduce NOx, VOC, PM2.5, and air toxics.
3.1 Certification
EPA issued more than 500 certificates to light-duty vehicle original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) for
each model year 2014 through 2017, almost reaching 600 in model year 2017. EPA also issued between
131 and 195 certificates for alternative fuel conversions systems for these model years, as shown below
in Table 3-1. More information about these systems is found in Section 9.1 of this document.
Table 3-1: Light-Duty Vehicle Sector Certificates of Conformity, Model Years 2014 -2017
Category
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Passenger cars and trucks
536
559
574
599
Alternative fuel conversions30
147
131
204
195
There were 36 manufacturers (OEMs) that received light-duty vehicle certificates for one or more of
these model years. For light-duty vehicles, certificates are issued for each unique combination of test
group and evaporative family. Figure 3-1 shows the number of certified light-duty vehicle test groups
for model year 2014-2017 by manufacturer. A test group can include multiple models, and in some
cases a test group includes both car and truck models. The manufacturers with a smaller number of test
groups in each of these figures are grouped together as "Other," (21 manufacturers).31
30 Conversion systems modify vehicles and engines so that they can run on different fuels than the ones for which they were
originally designed. For more information, see EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/vehicle-and-
eneine-alternative-fuel-conversions.
31 Some of these manufacturers did not certify vehicles in every model year.
47
-------
90
ฆ 2014
80
ฆ 2015
Q.
Figure 3-1: Light-Duty Vehicle Test Groups by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014-2017
3.2 Production Volume
The total production volume of model year 2014 -2017 cars and light-duty trucks for the U.S. is
presented in Table 3-2 and Figure 3-2 below. As seen in both the table and the figure, the annual
production volume of cars has remained around 9 million over this timeframe, while production of
trucks has been steadily increasing and is approaching the production volume of cars.32
Table 3-2: Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume of Cars and Trucks for the U.S., Model Years 2014 -
2017
Vehicle Type
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Car
9,209,352
9,602,428
9,002,444
8,939,040
Truck
6,304,986
7,138,461
7,277,467
8,072,414
Total Light-Duty
15,514,338
16,740,889
16,279,911
17,011,454
32 These broad categories of car and light-duty truck can be further disaggregated into vehicle types of sedan/wagon, car SUV,
truck SUV, pickup truck, and minivan/van. The first two types, sedan/wagon and car SUV comprise "cars;" the remaining are
considered light-duty trucks. Car SUVs are generally smaller two-wheel drive vehicles, while truck SUVs are larger or four-wheel
drive vehicles. Further information about market share of these vehicle types can be found in EPA's latest Automotive Trends
Report, found on EPA's website at: www.epa.eov/automotive-trends
48
-------
18,000,000
16,000,000
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
Truck
6,304,986
Truck
7,277,46/
Car
9,602,42ฃ
Car
9,002,444
Car
n n ^ n a a a
8,939,040
2014
2015
2016
2017
Figure 3-2: Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume for the U.S., Model Year 2014 - 2017
Figure 3-3 presents the number of model year 2014-2017 cars produced for sale in the U.S. by
manufacturer. Manufacturers with smaller production volumes in these figures are grouped together as
"Other" (19 manufacturers).
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
12014
12015
12016
2017
d
i
it
ฆ
1 J *
Figure 3-3: Car Production Volume by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014-2017
A comparison of Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-3 shows that the manufacturer that certifies the largest number
of car test groups does not necessarily produce the most cars. Light-duty truck production volumes are
shown in Figure 3-4, and again, the manufacturer that certifies the largest number of light-duty truck
test groups is not necessarily producing the most light-duty trucks. (In this figure, "Other" includes 15
manufacturers.)
49
-------
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
^tc. G*f
">s/f
12014
12015
12016
2017
llll llll -ฆ nil nil nil llll
S/ rฐyots N>
ฐh
'
-------
3.3 Confirmatory Testing
EPA and manufacturers test pre-production vehicles (i.e., prior to their introduction into commerce) to
confirm initial manufacturer emission test results. The confirmatory test results become the official
certification test results, whether the confirmatory testing is performed by the manufacturer or by EPA.
When a vehicle fails a confirmatory test, the manufacturer is allowed one retest to 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
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 manufacturer must correct problems and the vehicle
must pass confirmatory testing before EPA will issue a certificate.
3.4 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 and that EPA and the U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Safety
Administration (NHTSA) use to assess compliance with corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) and GHG
standards.
The national program for greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and fuel economy standards for light-duty
vehicles was developed jointly by EPA and NHTSA. The greenhouse gas and fuel economy standards
apply to passenger cars, light-duty trucks and medium-duty passenger vehicles, and were established in
two phases:
Phase 1, covering model years 2012 through 2016; and
Phase 2, covering model years 2017-2025.
EPA continues to work with manufacturers to implement these regulations. As part of the 2012
rulemaking establishing the 2017-2025 standards, EPA made a regulatory commitment to conduct a
"midterm evaluation" of the longer-term standards for model years 2022-2025. Following conclusion of
the mid-term evaluation, on August 24, 2018 NHTSA and EPA proposed to amend the Corporate
Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger cars and light
trucks and establish new standards, covering model years 2021 through 2026. The public comment
period for this proposal closed on October 23, 2018.33
33 For additional information, please see EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-enKines/safer-
and-affordable-fuel-efficient-vehicles-proposed.
51
-------
EPA reports fuel economy test data in an annual Automotive Trends Report, which includes both
laboratory test value results and results adjusted for real-world driving conditions.34 The Automotive
Trends Report also includes a section on manufacturer GHG compliance for model years through 2017.
3.5 Durability Testing
The Clean Air Act requires that EPA emission standards apply for the full useful life of the vehicle. Since
emissions may degrade as vehicles age and accrue miles, manufacturers must perform durability testing
prior to certification 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 EPA has a variety of compliance tools and tests for
manufacturers may demonstrate light-duty vehicles, covering pre-production,
durability using standard or custom production, and post-production time periods.
methods. Manufacturers that use their
own durability aging procedures must
provide EPA with an "equivalency factor" that enables comparison between the proprietary method and
EPA's published, standard method. This allows a third party that relies on the EPA method to replicate
the manufacturer's method.
3.6 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 consideration of
certification data, manufacturer in-use verification data, vehicle production volume, new technology,
and public complaints and inquiries. Generally, EPA tests three vehicles per class. A class is a vehicle
model or group of similar models from a given manufacturer. If any of the initial vehicles within a class
fails a test, EPA recruits additional vehicles from that class for follow-up testing to determine whether an
emissions problem is likely to exist and is 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.
Table 3-3 shows the vehicle classes selected for EPA surveillance testing in calendar years 2014 - 2017,
by model year, manufacturer, and model, as well as the vehicles selected for confirmatory testing in this
timeframe. Note that some of the classes selected include more than one model, and where that is the
case, all the models are listed in the third column of this table.
34 See EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/automotive-trends.
52
-------
Table 3-3: Vehicle Classes Tested in EPA's In-Use Testing Program, Calendar Years 2014-2017
Model Year
Manufacturer
Model
Surveillance Vehicles
General Motors
GMC Canyon, Chevrolet Colorado
2008
General Motors
Saturn Outlook, Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia
General Motors
Pontiac G6, Chevy Malibu, Saturn Aura
2009
Ford
F150
Ford
Escape
2010
General Motors
Chevrolet Equinox
Toyota
Matrix, Scion xB
Ford
Escape
Ford
F150 FFV
2011
General Motors
Buick Lucerne, Chevy Impala
Hyundai
Tucson
Mitsubishi
Outlander
Audi
A5, A5 Quattro
BMW
528i
Chrysler
Fiat 500
Chrysler
200, Dodge Avenger
Chrysler
Dodge Grand Caravan
Ford
Fiesta
Ford
Mustang
Ford
Focus
Ford
F250 Diesel
Ford
Focus
General Motors
Buick Lacrosse, Chevy Impala
General Motors
GMC Yukon/Sierra, Chevrolet Silverado/Tahoe
2012
General Motors
Chevrolet Cruze
Honda
CRV
Hyundai
Sonata
Kia
Forte
Kia
Sorento
Kia
Soul
Mazda
Mazda5
Mazda
Mazda3
Mercedes Benz
C 250, SLK 250
Mitsubishi
Outlander
Nissan
Altima, Rogue
Nissan
Infinity G37, M37
Nissan
Versa
Subaru
Forester, Impreza
53
-------
Model Year
Manufacturer
Model
Toyota
Scion XB
Toyota
Camry
Toyota
Tacoma
Volkswagen
Beetle, Golf, Jetta, Passat
Volvo
S60
Audi
A6 Quattro, A6
BMW
X5
Chrysler
Dodge Challenger
Chrysler
Dodge Dart
Chrysler
Dodge Ram
Chrysler
300, Dodge Charger
Ford
Escape
Ford
F150
Ford
Fusion Hybrid, C-Max Hybrid
Ford
Transit Connect
General Motors
Cadillac ATS
General Motors
Chevrolet Equinox
General Motors
Chevrolet Silverado
General Motors
Chevrolet Malibu
2013
Honda
Accord
Honda
Fit
Hyundai
Elantra
Kia
Optima
Land Rover
Evoque
Mazda
Mazda3
Mercedes Benz
GLK350
Mitsubishi
Outlander
Porsche
Cayenne
Subaru Fuji
Forester, Outlook
Subaru Fuji
Scion FR-S, Subaru BRZ
Toyota
Corolla
Toyota
Prius C
Toyota
Venza, Lexus RX 350
Volkswagen
Beetle, Golf, Jetta, Passat, Sportwagen
Audi
A4/A5 Quattro
BMW
Mini Cooper, Countryman, x3, x83
Chrysler
Dodge Dart, Fiat 500
2014
Chrysler
Dodge Ram 1500
Chrysler
Dodge Durango, Jeep Grand Cherokee
Chrysler
Jeep Compass, Jeep Patriot
Ford
Flex
54
-------
Model Year
Manufacturer
Model
Ford
Fusion
General Motors
Buick Encore, Chevrolet Traverse, GMC Enclave
General Motors
Chevrolet Captiva/Equinox, GMC Terrain
General Motors
Chevrolet Cruze/Malibu
General Motors
Chevrolet Silverado
Honda
Civic
Honda
CRV
Honda
Odyssey
Hyundai
Santa Fe, Santa Fe Sport
Hyundai
Sonata
Jaguar/Land Rover
Range Rover FFV
Kia
Sorento
Kia
Soul
Mazda
Mazda 6
Mitsubishi
Mirage
Nissan
Frontier
Nissan
Murano
Toyota
Camry
Toyota
4 Runner
Volvo
S60
Volkswagen
Tiguan
BMW
328i
FCA
Chrysler Town & Country
FCA
Dodge Durango, Jeep Grand Cherokee
FCA
Chrysler 200
Ford
Focus FFV
Ford
Fusion, Lincoln MKZ Hybrid
Ford
F150
General Motors
Buick LaCrosse, Chevrolet Impala/Cruze
General Motors
Chevrolet Silverado
2015
Honda
Accord
Honda
Acura TLX
Hyundai
Elantra
KIA
Sorrento
Mazda
CX5, CR-5
Mitsubishi
Outlander, Outlander Sport
Nissan
Sentra
Nissan
Versa
Subaru
Outback
Toyota
Avalon, Camry, Rav4; Lexus ES350
Toyota
Sequoia, Tundra
55
-------
Model Year
Manufacturer
Model
Volkswagen
Jetta
Volvo
S60
Confirmatory Vehicles
2008
General Motors
Cadillac Escalade, GMC Yukon
2009
General Motors
Chevrolet Equinox, Pontiac Torrent
2011
General Motors
Chevrolet Cruze
2012
Honda
Pilot
2013
Chrysler
Chrysler 300, Dodge Challenger, Dodge Charger
2013
Chrysler
Dodge Ram
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. Manufacturers
recruit IUVP vehicles from private citizens across the United States. The vehicles are minimally screened
for safety and tampering. The 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, and must report their IUVP data to EPA on a pre-determined schedule. Figure 3-6
shows a sample IUVP test schedule for a model year 2017 vehicle.
2016
Ql
Q2
Q3
Q4
2017
Ql
Q2
Q3
Q4
2018
Ql
Production
period
Low Mileage
Testing
Q3
Q4
2019-2020
Ql
Q4
2021
Ql
Q2
= Testing is due for completion on or before this date
Q3
Q4
2022
Ql
High Mileage
Testing
Q3
Q4
Figure 3-6: Example Timeline for IUVP Testing Process, Model Year 2017 Vehicle
If any manufacturer's failure rates for a particular test group surpass the threshold established in the
regulations, that manufacturer must automatically conduct an In-Use Confirmatory Test Program (IUCP)
on the test group that has failed. Depending on the results of the IUCP testing, manufacturers might
need to recall or implement other remedies for the failing test groups.
IUVP yields significant information about how light-duty vehicles perform in use. The data allow EPA to
work with manufacturers to identify potential design issues for future model years and target vehicles
that might need additional attention. Table 3-4 shows the total number of vehicles tested in each test
procedure and their corresponding failure rates by vehicle model year for all IUVP testing conducted and
56
-------
reported through March 2018. The test types include the Federal Test Procedure (FTP), US06 Cycle, the
2-day evaporative emissions test, and the onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) test.35
Table 3-4: Light-Duty In-Use Verification Test Volumes and Failure Rates, Calendar Years 2014-2017
Model
Year
FT
P
US06
2-Day
Evap
ORVR
Vehicles
Tested
Percent
Fail
Vehicles
Tested
Percent
Fail
Vehicles
Tested
Percent
Fail
Vehicles
Tested
Percent
Fail
High-Mileage Testing
2008
1185
8.9%
833
1.1%
157
5.1%
158
5.7%
2009
1103
11.0%
809
1.2%
168
3.6%
164
5.5%
2010
1043
11.3%
759
1.2%
161
4.3%
160
3.1%
2011
1015
12.2%
756
1.1%
160
6.3%
157
7.6%
2012
1025
12.4%
764
0.5%
162
3.7%
170
10.6%
2013
520
12.1%
413
0.7%
79
7.6%
75
10.7%
2014
14
21.4%
13
0.0%
4
0.0%
3
0.0%
Low-Mileage Testing
2008
647
4.3%
558
0.2%
155
1.3%
153
5.9%
2009
529
3.8%
479
0.4%
132
6.1%
130
6.9%
2010
613
3.4%
545
0.0%
164
1.8%
163
3.1%
2011
606
3.0%
539
0.9%
172
2.9%
170
7.1%
2012
665
3.9%
586
0.3%
182
2.7%
178
10.1%
2013
634
3.8%
575
0.2%
186
7.0%
181
4.4%
2014
649
3.9%
593
0.2%
177
1.7%
182
0.0%
2015
623
4.0%
560
0.2%
178
3.4%
174
0.0%
2016
509
4.5%
476
0.4%
118
1.7%
115
0.0%
2017
13
15.4%
13
0.0%
3
0.0%
3
0.0%
Figure 3-7 shows the light-duty in-use test information from Table 3-4 in terms of passes and fails by
each type of test. Overall, the test results from this program show that the majority of the in-use fleet
continues to comply with the emission standards.
35 ORVR is a vehicle emission control system that captures fuel vapors from the vehicle gas tank during
refueling. This requirement was phased in from 1998-2006.
57
-------
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
874 (7.7%)
Failed
ฆ Passed
58 (0.6%)
10519
9213
90 (3.8%)
122 (5.2%)
2268
2214
FTP
US06
2-Day Evap
ORVR
Figure 3-7: In-Use Vehicle Testing by Test, Calendar Years 2014-2017
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.
In-use testing is an important aspect of
EPA's light-duty vehicle compliance
program, identifying emissions concerns
and resolving them.
3.7 Defect Reporting
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). Table 3-5 presents the number of defect reports by manufacturer in calendar years 2014 -
2017, and the number of vehicles affected by these defects over the same period of time. Defects
reported in this timeframe potentially affected more than 156 million vehicles. A single defect incidence
may affect multiple model years of a given vehicle.
58
-------
Table 3-5: Light-Duty Vehicle Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014-2017
Reports in CY2014
Reports in CY2015
Reports in CY2016
Reports in CY2017
Mfr Name
Affected
Affected
Affected
Affected
Vehicles
ff
Vehicles
tf
Vehicles
Tf
Vehicles
Audi
23
889,046
10
145,333
15
285,243
14
635,500
Lamborghini
0
-
1
477
1
729
0
-
Bentley
1
2,208
1
2,903
1
2,184
1
5,355
BMW
14
527,811
33
1,379,393
23
486,492
0
-
Cummins
0
-
0
-
1
564
5
220,740
Fiat Chrysler
21
7,406,614
21
5,109,347
24
1,303,265
36
5,489,460
Ford
16
1,593,480
9
485,503
13
4,436,046
19
3,294,467
FPT
Industrial
0
-
9
78,856
0
-
0
-
General
Motors
22
3,257,424
34
11,329,891
33
8,790,279
31
15,547,581
Honda
11
5,552,262
19
4,242,279
16
4,337,396
13
2,762,605
Hyundai
19
842,867
15
1,546,059
19
4,518,898
13
3,183,332
Isuzu
0
-
2
2,671
0
-
0
-
Jaguar/Land
Rover
2
156,580
8
507,022
7
93,599
2
180,079
Kia
6
2,999,319
16
1,409,239
17
1,938,378
20
2,322,588
Maserati
0
-
1
12,990
1
36,478
0
-
Mazda
8
820,242
5
904,185
3
60,531
1
453,477
Mercedes
Benz
12
170,973
10
300,550
8
687,495
28
1,709,613
Mitsubishi
0
-
0
-
5
184,740
0
-
Nissan
7
530,971
10
905,776
11
1,594,905
13
1,792,533
Porsche
12
140,643
12
407,602
4
39,925
29
873,295
Rolls Royce
1
760
0
-
0
-
0
-
Subaru
9
132,699
5
1,036,228
5
77,283
6
1,600,351
Suzuki
0
-
1
19,249
0
-
0
-
Toyota
0
-
32
16,581,936
3
54,700
28
12,083,125
Volkswagen
12
879,214
17
1,095,065
15
634,936
22
611,030
Volvo
3
31,897
2
42,134
3
53,720
3
168,434
Total:
199
25,935,010
273
47,544,688
228
29,617,786
284
52,933,565
Figure 3-8 below presents the information in Table 3-5 graphically.
59
-------
Number of Defect Reports
Number of Affected Vehicles
Audi
Bentley
BMW
Cummins
Fiat Chrysler
Ford
FPT Industrial
General Motors
Honda
Hyundai
Isuzu
Jaguar/Land Rover
Kia
Lamborghini
Maserati
Mazda
Mercedes Benz
Mitsubishi
Nissan
Porsche
Rolls Royce
Subaro
Suzuki
Toyota
Volkswagen
Volvo
10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000
ฆ 2014
ฆ 2015
ฆ 2016
ฆ 2017
Figure 3-8: Number of Defect Reports (left) and Affected Vehicles (right) by Manufacturer, Calendar
Years 2014-2017
Table 3-6 shows the number of defects by defect category, for all the vehicles coved by defect reports in
calendar years 2014 - 2017. (The totals for this table are the same as the totals in Table 3-5.)
Table 3-6: Light-Duty Vehicle Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014-2017
Problem Categories
Reports in CY2014
Reports in CY2015
Reports in CY2016
Reports in CY2017
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
Air Inlet/Intake System
5
166,354
5
3,556,267
11
1,986,706
11
1,479,446
Catalyst/Aftertreatment
Com ponent/System
(non-diesel engine)
11
597,403
1
5,468
5
2,357,444
9
1,406,740
Computer Related
(Other than OBD)
27
4,950,098
32
5,282,200
25
2,615,177
33
5,102,613
Crankcase Ventilation
Com ponent/System
6
172,382
11
259,553
3
4,441
5
2,624,076
60
-------
Problem Categories
Reports in CY2014
Reports in CY2015
Reports in CY2016
Reports in CY2017
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
Diesel Particulate Filter
System
1
121,970
1
270,760
0
-
1
25,617
Electrical, Mechanical
and Cooling Systems
12
647,224
45
18,399,384
23
5,321,383
41
9,863,584
Emission Control
Information Label
1
367
9
56,476
7
12,016
8
162,395
Evaporative Emissions
Systems
15
4,246,626
18
1,194,356
8
2,879,256
21
3,321,952
Exhaust Gas
Recirculation (EGR)
System
2
26,422
3
123,832
5
100,401
5
1,488,485
Exhaust System
4
296,904
11
1,744,527
8
472,293
5
91,095
Fuel Delivery
Component
10
1,689,220
24
2,873,933
24
3,651,433
14
3,478,882
Fuel Delivery System
3
199,635
1
68,839
4
75,445
3
3,355,819
Fuel Tank Component
7
473,847
10
2,133,046
16
419,294
17
1,868,261
Hybrid Vehicle
Component/ System
1
85,284
4
474,103
2
2,194
12
216,164
Ignition Component
8
162,154
12
1,321,740
4
69,330
9
1,305,742
Monitoring/ Measuring
Sensor/ System
20
2,269,856
23
2,462,767
20
2,504,320
27
2,301,515
NOx Absorber System
2
17,558
1
12,881
1
171,441
NOx Sensor
2
110,655
3
68,407
1
85,993
4
215,482
On-Board Diagnostic
(OBD) System
49
8,545,394
40
6,557,661
38
5,772,343
40
4,358,322
On-Board Refueling and
Vapor Recovery (ORVR)
System
1
19,533
1
80,300
0
-
1
1,148,375
Oxygen Sensor
7
838,022
8
447,608
8
202,739
4
6,750,211
Secondary Air System
0
-
0
-
2
13,883
6
2,142,815
Selective Catalytic
Reduction System
5
142,694
5
112,334
9
455,466
5
37,920
Turbocharger/
Supercharger
2
172,966
4
33,569
4
603,348
2
16,613
Total
199
25,935,010
273
47,544,688
228
29,617,786
284
52,933,565
61
-------
3.8 Recall Reporting
Table 3-7 shows the number of light-duty vehicle recalls by vehicle manufacturer in calendar years 2014
- 2017 and the number of vehicles affected by the recall. Because a recall usually covers a single,
specific condition, a vehicle with multiple emissions problems may be subject to multiple recalls.
Therefore, the number of affected vehicles in Table 3-7 and Table 3-8 could include vehicles that have
been recalled more than once. Similarly, there is not a direct correlation among the number of defect
reports, recalls, and the number of vehicles that are recalled. A manufacturer may identify a defect that
is 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.
Table 3-7: Light-Duty Vehicle Recalls by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014-2017
Recalls in 2014
Recalls in 2015
Recalls in 2016
Recalls in 2017
MFR Name
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
#
Affected
Vehicles
Audi
4
279,384
3
280,552
2
19,121
1
11,088
BMW
1
367
9
401,536
2
25,322
27
1,441,759
Cummins
1
127,483
1
33,677
1
135,824
1
88,419
Fiat Chrysler
6
261,266
12
697,181
11
644,218
12
653,494
Ford
6
1,143,213
11
1,095,357
6
1,673,457
9
248,183
FPT Industrial
0
-
1
10,458
1
12,930
0
-
General Motors
4
101,940
9
762,691
5
201,689
6
250,935
Honda
2
971,247
6
88,318
4
991,456
6
232,665
Hyundai
1
62,586
0
-
2
79,905
1
260,792
Jaguar/Land Rover
1
115,510
1
19,269
1
1,934
0
-
Kia
1
26,864
0
-
4
146,961
1
61,023
Lamborghini
0
-
0
-
0
-
1
729
Maserati
0
-
0
-
1
23,479
0
-
Mazda
4
150,627
2
86,064
4
315,810
1
69,447
Mercedes Benz
0
-
0
-
1
73,696
0
-
Nissan
3
79,428
3
87,076
4
329,461
4
504,376
Porsche
0
-
0
-
0
-
1
2,299
Subaru
0
-
0
-
4
148,847
0
-
Suzuki
0
-
1
19,250
0
-
0
-
Toyota
6
5,487,623
1
170,172
8
996,401
11
694,351
Volkswagen
4
198,735
4
439,980
4
148,772
4
418,395
Total
44
9,006,273
64
4,191,581
65
5,969,283
86
4,937,955
Table 3-8 lists categories of defects that were corrected by recalls in the years 2014 - 2017. The totals in
this table are the same as the totals in Table 3-7. EPA established the defect categories primarily for
internal tracking purposes to identify potential, industry-wide problems with a particular component or
technology.
62
-------
Table 3-8: Light-Duty Vehicle Recalls by Problem Category, 2014 - 2017
2014
2015
2016
2017
Problem Category
#
Affected
#
Affected
#
Affected
#
Affected
Vehicles
Vehicles
Vehicles
Vehicles
Air Inlet/Intake System
3
1,175,761
0
-
4
467,978
3
451,728
Catalyst/Aftertreatment
Component/System (non-
3
122,251
3
183,761
0
-
4
204,999
diesel engine)
Computer Related (Other
than OBD)
8
238,358
12
1,722,786
8
1,316,777
5
501,303
Crankcase Ventilation
Co m po n e nt/Sy ste m
2
78,871
3
207,558
2
2,083
3
719,538
Diesel Particulate Filter
System
0
-
1
2,573
0
-
0
-
Electrical, Mechanical and
Cooling Systems
7
4,896,100
7
323,757
3
331,627
8
744,537
Emission Control
Information Label
1
367
7
46,100
7
35,467
5
127,518
Evaporative Emissions
Systems
0
-
4
471,062
5
552,659
5
293,324
Exhaust Gas Recirculation
(EGR) System
0
-
1
99,380
3
680,458
2
415,314
Exhaust System
0
-
1
2,471
1
12,540
2
49,840
Fuel Delivery Component
3
1,020,060
5
106,579
4
581,161
10
161,407
Fuel Delivery System
0
-
6
167,158
1
191,857
2
2,725
Fuel Tank Component
2
18,767
4
85,599
7
76,566
6
26,538
Hybrid Vehicle
Co m po n e nt/Sy ste m
2
794,284
0
-
2
109,740
6
22,508
Ignition Component
0
-
0
1
29,214
3
83,246
Monitoring/Measuring
Sensor/System
7
238,102
3
608,060
3
577,119
1
31,824
NOx Sensor
0
-
0
1
91,442
1
38,640
On-Board Diagnostic (OBD)
System
4
263,394
7
164,737
5
584,406
12
660,124
Oxygen Sensor
0
-
0
-
1
24,100
Secondary Air System
0
-
0
-
1
100,021
2
155,154
Selective Catalytic
Reduction System
0
-
0
-
5
179,286
4
144,115
Turbocharger/Supercharger
2
159,958
0
-
1
24,782
2
103,573
Total
44
9,006,273
64
4,191,581
65
5,969,283
86
4,937,955
63
-------
3.9 Averaging, Banking, and Trading (ABT) Programs
During the time period covered by this report, manufacturers certified vehicles to both EPA's Tier 3
vehicle standards, which began to take effect in 2017, and EPA's Tier 2 vehicle standards. The Tier 2
regulation marked the first time that SUVs and other light-duty trucks were subject to the same national
pollution standards as cars, and this is also a feature of Tier 3 vehicle standards.36
The Tier 2 regulation gives 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-weighted 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.
In Tier 3, the bins are named using their corresponding NMOG+NOx limit in mg/mi. The highest
emission bin, Bin 160 (NMOG+NOx = 160 mg/mi) is equivalent to Tier 2 Bin 5. There were other
important changes from Tier 2 to Tier 3, and EPA's website provides further information.
Table 3-9 shows the percentage of exhaust test groups by emission certification bin for model years
2014-2017. In model year 2017, 89% of the vehicle test groups were certified to Tier 3 instead of Tier 2;
99% of the vehicle test groups were certified to Tier 2 Bin 5 or better (again, because the highest Tier 3
bin, Bin 160, is equivalent to Tier 2 Bin 5).
Table 3-9: Percentage of Exhaust Test Groups by Certification Bin, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Standard
Bin
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Tier 2
Bin 1
3%
3%
4%
0%
Bin 2
3%
2%
1%
Bin 3
9%
8%
7%
0%
Bin 4
13%
13%
14%
2%
Bin 5
70%
71%
65%
10%
Bin 6
0%
Bin 7
0%
Bin 8
3%
2%
1%
1%
Tier 3
Bin 0
0%
5%
Bin 20
Bin 30
3%
14%
Bin 50
0%
Bin 70
2%
14%
Bin 125
3%
46%
Bin 160
9%
Total
100%
100%
100%
100%
36 For more information, see EPA's website at: www.epa.eov/reeulations-emissions-vehicles-and-eneines/reeulations-smoe-
soot-and-other-air-pollution-passeneer.
64
-------
Figure 3-9 through Figure 3-11 present the average
certification levels for NOx, NMOG, and CO respectively
for Tier 2 Bin 5 for the manufacturers with the largest
production volumes (as shown in Figure 3-5). The lower
the certification level is, relative to the standard (100%
on the y-axis), the greater the compliance margin. In
other words, a 30% compliance margin means that
vehicle emissions are 30% lower than the standard whereas a 70% compliance margin means that
emissions are 70% lower than the standard. Note that the y-axis for these three figures is not constant.
Also note that in 2014, the label "Volkswagen" includes only Volkswagen vehicles; after 2015,
"Volkswagen" is used to refer to the Volkswagen Group, which includes other brands. Several
manufacturers do not have data for model year 2017; these manufacturers certified their model year
2017 vehicles to the Tier 3 standards instead of Tier 2.
Figure 3-9: Tier 2 Bin 5 NOx Certification Levels by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Averaging, banking, and trading
programs give manufacturers
flexibility in how they satisfy clean air
emission standards.
65
-------
Figure 3-10: Tier 2 Bin 5 NMOG Certification Levels by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Figure 3-11: Tier 2 Bin 5 CO Certification Levels by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 -2017
66
-------
4. Highway Motorcycles
4.1 Certification
Highway and off-highway motorcycles are subject to different regulations and emission standards. This
section covers highway motorcycles; off-highway motorcycles are covered in Section 8, Recreational
Vehicles.
Table 4-1 presents the number of certified highway motorcycle engine families, which is equivalent to
the number of certificates EPA issued, by class, for model years 2014 - 2017. Class refers to engine
capacity, measured in terms of volume displaced by the motor in cubic centimeters (cc). The larger a
motorcycle's engine capacity, the more power it has. For example, small scooters belong to Class la.
The largest class, Class III, includes all motorcycles larger than 279 cc, the largest of which can be in the
range of 2000 cc.
Table 4-1: Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Class, Model Years 2014-2017
Highway Motorcycle Category
Number of Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Class la (<50cc)
40
35
30
33
Class lb (50 - 169cc)
49
43
43
46
Class II (170 -279cc)
34
31
30
26
Class III (>279cc)
166
179
185
181
Battery Electric Motorcycles
0
1
5
13
Total
289
289
293
299
Table 4-2 presents the number of certified highway motorcycle engine families by manufacturer for
model year 2014 - 2017. The totals in this table are the same as in Table 4-1. The manufacturers that
certified a smaller number of engine families across these model years (including the battery electric
manufacturers) are grouped together as "Other."
In every model year 2014 - 2017, there were more than 100 manufacturers. Comparing highway
motorcycle and light-duty vehicle sectors, there is less consolidation in motorcycle manufacturers: a
larger number of manufacturers (more than 100 in each year, compared to 36 for light-duty vehicles),
certifying a smaller number of distinct families (less than 300 engine families each year, compared to
more than 500 unique exhaust test group/evaporative families for light-duty vehicles).
EPA issues certificates to more than
100 different highway motorcycle
manufacturers.
67
-------
Table 4-2: Highway Motorcycle Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Manufacturer
Number of Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
25
22
24
24
BMW
9
9
8
7
Ducati North America, Inc.
12
13
14
16
Harley-Davidson Motor Company
8
11
11
12
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
16
16
17
19
KTM North America, Inc.
6
7
8
12
KYMCO USA
10
9
8
7
MV Agusta USA, LLC
6
6
7
8
Piaggio Group Americas, Inc.
20
21
23
20
Suzuki Motor Corporation
19
21
22
21
Triumph Motorcycles America Ltd
10
11
13
15
Yamaha Motor Corporation
27
29
28
24
Other (>90 manufacturers)
121
114
110
114
Total
289
289
293
299
Table 4-3 presents the number of manufacturers that obtained these certificates by class
Table 4-3: Number of Motorcycle Manufacturers by Class, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Number of Manufacturers
Highway Motorcycle Category
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Class la (<50cc)
33
28
24
25
Class lb (50 - 169cc)
33
28
30
31
Class II (170 -279cc)
24
19
18
15
Class lll(>279cc)
35
39
36
35
Battery Electric Motorcycles
0
1
4
11
Total
125
115
112
117
4.2 Production Volume
Figure 4-1 below shows the numbers of model year 2014 -2017 motorcycles produced for the U.S. In
these years there was a downward trend: about 62,000 fewer model year 2017 motorcycles were sold
compared to model year 2014. (Note the y-axis of this figure begins at 300,000 rather than zero.)
68
-------
500,000
480,000
460,000
440,000
420,000
400,000
380,000
360,000
340,000
320,000
300,000
487,483
432,139
425,388
MY 2014
MY 2015 MY 2016 MY 2017
Figure 4-1: Highway Motorcycle Production Volume for the U.S., Model Years 2014 -2017
Table 4-4 and Figure 4-2 below show model year 2017 production volume - the yellow bar in Figure 4-1
- by motorcycle class. The figure shows that nearly three quarters of the model year 2017 motorcycles
produced for sale in the U.S. were Class III motorcycles. Less than one percent were electric
motorcycles.
Table 4-4: Highway Motorcycle Production Volume
for the U.S. by Class, Model Year 2017
Highway Motorcycle
Production
Percent
Category
Volume
of Total
Class la (<50cc)
53,348
13%
Class lb (50 - 169cc)
39,439
9%
Class II (170 -279cc)
17,371
4%
Class III (>279cc)
313,929
74%
Battery Electric
1,301
<1%
Total
425,388
100%
<1%
l Class la
l Class lb
. Class II
I Class III
I Electric
Figure 4-2: Highway Motorcycle Production
Volume for the U.S. by Class, Model Year 2017
4.3 Defect Reporting
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). Table 4-5 includes the number of defect reports for highway motorcycles in
calendar years 2014 - 2017 by manufacturer, and Table 4-6 provides this information by problem
category. There were no defects reported in 2014.
69
-------
Table 4-5: Highway Motorcycle Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Year 2014 - 2017
Manufacturer
Number of Defect Reports in Calendar Year
2015
2016
2017
Harley Davidson
1
0
2
Honda
0
2
2
Suzuki
1
2
1
Victory Motorcycle/Polaris
1
0
0
Total:
3
4
5
Table 4-6: Highway Motorcycle Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
Problem Category
Number of Defect Reports in Calendar Year:
2015
2016
2017
Electrical, Mechanical & Cooling Systems
0
2
1
Engine Emission Control Information Label
0
0
1
Catalytic Converter
1
0
0
Exhaust System
1
0
0
Fuel Delivery Component
1
2
2
Owners' Manual
0
0
1
Total:
3
4
5
4.4 Recall Reporting
The same three manufacturers issued recalls for highway motorcycles in calendar years 2014 - 2017.
There were no recalls in calendar year 2014. Table 4-7 lists these recalls by manufacturer, and Table 4-8
lists them by problem category.
Table 4-7: Highway Motorcycle Recalls by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
Manufacturer
2015
2016
2017
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Harley Davidson
1
31
0
-
0
-
Honda
0
-
1
17,643
1
8,059
Suzuki
1
1,019
2
6,288
1
120
Total:
2
1,050
3
23,931
2
8,179
70
-------
Table 4-8: Highway Motorcycle Recalls by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014 -2017
Problem Category
2015
2016
2017
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Electrical, Mechanical &
Cooling Systems
0
-
2
6,288
0
-
Engine Emission Control
Information Label
0
-
0
-
1
120
Exhaust System
1
1,019
0
-
0
-
Fuel Delivery Component
1
31
1
17,643
0
-
Owners' Manual
0
-
0
-
1
8,059
Total:
2
1,050
3
23,931
2
8,179
71
-------
5. Heavy-Duty Highway Engines
Heavy-duty highway engines are used in highway vehicles such as trucks and buses that are more than
8,500 pounds in gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR, the maximum operating weight of a vehicle as
specified by the manufacturer.)
5.1 Certification
Table 5-1 below shows the number of certificates for the heavy-duty highway engine sector; it repeats a
portion of Table 2-1. As shown in the table, EPA issued 147, 187, 186, and 222 heavy-duty highway
certificates for model years 2014-2017, respectively. These include alternative fuel conversion and
evaporative emissions systems certificates.
Table 5-1: Heavy-Duty Highway Vehicle and Engine Certificates, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Category
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Compression ignition (diesel)
30
32
34
41
Spark ignition (mostly gasoline)
10
14
12
15
Tractors and vocational vehicles
66
97
103
126
Alternative fuel conversions
31
31
25
22
Evaporative emissions systems
10
13
12
18
Total
147
187
186
222
In Table 5-1, EPA distinguished certificates for alternative fuel conversions from those for compression
ignition or spark ignition engines. However, this distinction is not made in Tables 5-2 through 5-5.
These tables present the number of heavy-duty highway compression ignition engine families (in Tables
5-2 and 5-3), and the number of heavy-duty highway spark ignition engine families (in Tables 5-4 and 5-
5), that include the alternative fuel conversions for these engine types. Thus the total number of engine
families in these tables is larger than the corresponding row for the category in Table 5-1.
Table 5-2 and Table 5-3 present the number of model year 2014-2017 heavy-duty highway compression
ignition (diesel) engine families certified, by service class and by manufacturer, respectively.
Table 5-2: Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Service Class, Model Years
2014-2017
Heavy-Duty Engine Service Class
Number of Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Light heavy-duty
7
5
9
7
Medium heavy-duty
8
10
11
14
Heavy heavy-duty
15
17
16
21
Urban bus
3
4
4
0
Total
33"
36
40
42
37 This number does not match the number of heavy-duty highway engine certificates for compression ignition engines in Table
5-3 due to a manufacturer data entry error. This type of error is no longer possible as a result of EPA's update to the system
used to enter this data.
72
-------
Table 5-3: Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years
2014-2017
Heavy-Duty Highway Compression
Number of Engine Families
Ignition Engine Manufacturer
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Clean Air Power
0
1
0
0
Cummins Inc.
14
16
18
18
Detroit Diesel Corporation
4
4
3
4
Ford Motor Company
2
2
5
3
FPT Industrial S.p.A.
2
0
2
2
General Motors LLC
0
1
1
0
Hino Motors, Ltd
3
3
3
3
Isuzu Motors Limited
1
1
1
2
Navistar, Inc.
4
3
2
3
NGV Motori, USA, LLC
0
0
1
PACCAR Inc
1
1
2
3
Propane Fuel Technologies LLC
0
1
0
0
Volvo Powertrain North America A
0
0
0
O
Division of Mack Trucks, Inc.
o
VPT
3
3
3
0
Total
34
36
40
42
Table 5-4 and Table 5-5 present the number of model year 2014-2017 heavy-duty highway spark ignition
engine families certified, by service class and by manufacturer, respectively.
Table 5-4: Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Service Class, Model Years 2014-
201738
Heavy-Duty Engine Service Class
Number of Engine Fami
ies
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
Heavy-duty engines for vehicles < 14K lbs
10
8
1
0
Heavy-duty engines for vehicles >14K lbs
26
31
27
29
Heavy-duty spark ignition engines for vehicles of all gross
vehicle weight ratings
5
4
11
7
Total
41
43
39
36
38 For MY 2014, 2015, and 2016, the number of certificates for spark ignition engines was fewer than then number
of spark ignition engine families, because some vehicles between 8,500 - 14,000 lbs are chassis certified and were
included in light-duty vehicle data.
73
-------
Table 5-5: Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014-2017
Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition
Engine Manufacturer
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
AGA Systems, LLC
0
1
1
1
Auto Gas America
4
0
0
0
BAF Technologies
2
2
0
0
Bi-Phase Technologies, LLC.
3
2
1
0
Blossman Services, Inc.
1
3
0
1
Chrysler Group LLC
1
1
1
0
CleanFuel USA Inc.
2
2
1
2
Encore TEC LLC
0
0
6
4
FCA US LLC
0
0
0
1
Ford Motor Company
5
6
2
2
General Motors LLC
3
3
1
1
Greenkraft Inc.
4
5
4
5
Icom North America LLC
2
2
0
4
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
4
4
5
2
Landi Renzo USA Corporation
4
5
4
3
NGV Motori
2
0
0
0
OMNITEK
0
1
0
0
PARNELL USA, INC
0
0
3
0
Power Solutions International, Inc.
0
2
4
4
Powertrain Integration, LLC
0
0
0
1
Roush Industries, Inc.
2
4
3
3
Westport Dallas, Inc
0
0
2
2
Westport Power Inc.
1
0
0
0
Total
40
43
38
36
Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2 present the number of model year 2014 - 2017 compression ignition and spark
ignition engine families by each heavy-duty engine manufacturer.
74
-------
2016
?ฐ ,^e ^
Figure 5-1: Heavy-Duty Highway Compression Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Year
2014-2017
IIUL
r ip j j* >
Figure 5-2: Heavy-Duty Highway Spark Ignition Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014-2017
75
-------
5.2 In-Use Compliance Testing
As is the case for light-duty vehicles, EPA relies on both internal and manufacturer testing programs to
assess compliance with in-use emission standards for heavy-duty vehicles.39 Heavy-duty in-use testing
differs significantly from light-duty in-use testing. For light-duty vehicles, the test procedures used to
measure emissions are the same for both certification and in-use testing. However, heavy-duty
engines undergo certification testing in the laboratory, whereas in-use testing may be conducted over
the road. In other words, the heavy-duty vehicle regulations do not require manufacturers to test in-
use engines on a laboratory dynamometer, as they must for certification. Instead, the regulations
require manufacturers to measure the percentage of time that a vehicle exceeds certain emission
thresholds under real-world driving conditions using portable devices that monitor emissions of
hydrocarbons, CO, NOx, and PM. Heavy-duty manufacturers use portable equipment to measure in-
use emissions while a vehicle is being driven on the road in actual customer fleet applications, instead
of removing the engine from the vehicle to conduct laboratory testing on an engine dynamometer.
EPA also conducts a surveillance program
to assess the emissions performance of
EPA conducts surveillance testing to check heavy-duty vehicles near the end of their
heavy-duty compliance with regulations for their useful life. The program utilizes engine
entire useful life. dynamometer testing (where the engine is
removed from the vehicle), chassis
dynamometer testing on EPA's heavy-duty
chassis dynamometer, and portable emissions measuring equipment. The program is currently
focused on medium heavy-duty and heavy heavy-duty compression ignition engines.40
5.3 Defect Reporting
Table 5-6 provides the number of defect information reports that heavy-duty highway engine
manufacturers submitted during calendar years 2014 - 2017. Table 5-7 shows defect information for
the same years by problem category. Note that both of these tables include information about both
compression ignition and spark ignition heavy-duty engines.
39 Current regulations mandate a manufacturer-run heavy-duty in use test program for compression ignition engines. The
regulations do not require manufacturer in-use testing for heavy duty spark ignition engines at this time.
40 Definitions of medium heavy-duty and heavy heavy-duty compression ignition engines are found in the regulation at 40 CFR
1036.140.
76
-------
Table 5-6: Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
Heavy-Duty Highway Engine
Number of Defect Reports in Calendar Year:
Manufacturer
2014
2015
2016
2017
Cummins
2
4
11
11
Detroit Diesel Corporation
2
1
1
2
Ford
6
6
6
FPT Industrial
12
Hino Motors
1
Isuzu Motors
1
1
5
1
Navistar
8
Volvo Powertrain
9
5
4
10
Total
22
29
27
31
Table 5-7: Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
Problem category
Number of Defect Reports in Calendar Year:
2016
2017
Air Inlet/Intake System
1
1
2
Catalyst/Aftertreatment Component/System (non-
diesel engine)
1
1
Computer Related (Other than OBD)
1
2
1
Crankcase Ventilation Component/System
1
2
Diesel Particulate Filter System
3
1
3
3
Electrical, Mechanical and Cooling Systems
1
Emission Control Information Label
2
Evaporative Emissions Systems
1
Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) System
1
4
1
Exhaust System
3
3
2
Fuel Delivery Component
3
1
1
Fuel Delivery System
1
Fuel Tank Component
1
Ignition Component
3
Monitoring/Measuring Sensor/System
3
1
2
2
NOx Absorber System
2
NOx Sensor
1
3
2
On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) System
2
2
4
9
Selective Catalytic Reduction System
6
3
5
5
Turbocharger/Supercharger
3
2
1
Total
22
29
27
31
77
-------
5.4 Recall Reporting
The number of recalls and the number of affected engines for each recall for the calendar years 2014 -
2017 are shown in the following two tables, first by manufacturer, and then by problem category. Note
that these tables include information about both compression ignition and spark ignition heavy-duty
engines.
Table 5-8: Heavy-Duty Engine Recalls by Manufacturer, 2014-2017
2014
2015
2016
2017
Manufacturer
#
Affected
Engines
#
Affected
Engines
#
Affected
Engines
#
Affected
Engines
Cummins
2
1,851
2
400
1
4,582
Ford
3
327,595
5
731,153
2
37,170
FPT Industrial
1
10,458
1
12,930
Hino Motors
3
38,275
2
3,243
Isuzu
1
8,227
Navistar
7
109,266
Volvo Powertrain
3
0
Total
12
149,392
6
338,453
9
755,553
6
41,752
78
-------
Table 5-9: Heavy-Duty Engine Recalls by Problem Category, 2014 - 2017
2014
2015
2016
2017
Problem Category
#
Affected
Engines
#
Affected
Engines
#
Affected
Engines
#
Affected
Engines
Air Inlet/Intake System
1
10,458
Catalyst/Aftertreatment
Component/System (non-
diesel engine)
1
176
Computer Related
(Other than OBD)
2
29,432
2
10,234
1
91,042
Crankcase Ventilation
Co m po n e nt/Sy ste m
1
37,003
Diesel Particulate Filter
System
7
111,031
Electrical, Mechanical
and Cooling Systems
1
73
Exhaust System
1
317,361
Fuel Delivery System
1
316
Fuel Tank Component
1
167
Monitoring/Measuring
Sensor/System
1
553,595
On-Board Diagnostic
(OBD) System
2
8,753
4
23,761
2
Selective Catalytic
Reduction System
1
12,930
2
4,582
Turbocharger/
Supercharger
1
327
1
73,909
Total
12
149,392
6
338,453
9
755,553
6
41,752
There were no recalls in the problem categories of Emission Control Information Label, Exhaust Gas
Recirculation (EGR) System, or NOx Sensor over these calendar years.
79
-------
6, Nonroad Compression Ignition Engines
EPA regulates several categories of nonroad compression ignition engines, including marine engines,
locomotives, and compression ignition engines used in construction, agricultural, and other equipment.
6,1 Marine Compression Ignition Engines
Table 6-1 presents the number of certificates issued for marine engines by manufacturer. Marine
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.41 The IMO program is different from EPA's program but certain jurisdictions in the U.S. 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. Manufacturers that obtained
fewer than 10 certificates over these model years were grouped together as "Other."
41 The IMO is an agency of the United Nations whose main role is to create a regulatory framework for the shipping industry for
safety, security, and environmental performance, including the prevention of marine and atmospheric pollution by ships.
80
-------
Table 6-1: Marine Engine EPA and IMO Certificates by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014 - 2017
Manufacturer
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
AB Volvo Penta
11
11
11
13
Beta Marine Ltd
4
6
7
8
Caterpillar Inc.
19
21
19
23
Cummins Inc.
17
15
14
15
Deere & Company
22
26
19
21
Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc.
11
10
11
12
FPT Industrial S.p.A.
4
4
4
7
IHI Agri-Tech Corporation
9
10
IHI Shibaura Machinery Corporation
10
9
Ingram Barge Company
2
3
3
3
MAN Truck & Bus AG
4
4
6
4
Mercury Marine
4
2
2
2
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Engine & Turbocharger, Ltd.
1
4
5
MTU America, Inc.
1
4
4
4
NANNI INDUSTRIES SAS
2
3
7
9
National Railway Equipment Co.
3
4
4
Northern Lights Inc
4
4
4
5
Perkins Engines Co Ltd
3
2
3
3
Scania CV AB
10
8
9
11
Transportation Systems Business Operations of General
Electric Company
3
2
6
7
Wartsila Oyj
4
4
1
2
Yanmar Co., Ltd.
10
16
16
14
Other (24 manufacturers)
29
32
16
15
Total
174
190
179
197
81
-------
Figure 6-1 shows the number of marine engines produced for the U.S. in model year 2014-2017.
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
9930
MY 2014 MY 2015 MY 2016 MY 2017
Figure 6-1: Marine Engine Production Volume for the U.S, Model Year 2014-2017
82
-------
6.2 Locomotives
Some engine manufacturers who make engines for locomotives certify those engines to both nonroad
compression ignition standards and to locomotive standards. Table 6-2 shows the number of
certificates EPA issued for model year 2014 - 2017 locomotive engines:
Table 6-2: Locomotive Certificates by Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Number of Engine Families
2014
2015
2016
2017
Advanced Global Environmental
11
11
10
Advanced Global Holdings, Inc.
5
American Turbocharger Technologies, LLC
3
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway
1
2
CIT Rail
1
Clark Industrial Power LLC
2
CSX Transportation, Inc.
9
9
9
9
Cummins Inc.
4
4
6
6
Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc.
19
19
29
34
HK Engine Components LLC
1
1
1
Knoxville Locomotive Works
4
MotivePower Inc.
3
4
4
4
MTU America, Inc.
3
4
4
4
National Railway Equipment Co.
6
4
6
8
OceanAir Environmental, LLC
3
3
3
3
Peaker Services, Inc.
2
2
2
Progress Rail Services
5
7
8
9
Quality Turbocharger Components LLC
1
1
1
RJ Corman Railpower LLC
1
Thoroughbred Emissions Research, LLC
2
2
3
4
TMV Control Systems Inc.
1
1
1
Tognum America, Inc.
1
TransPar Corporation
2
2
2
2
Transportation Systems Business Operations of
35
45
55
54
General Electric Company
ZTR CONTROL SYSTEMS LLC
1
1
1
1
Total
108
121
146
151
Certificates in the locomotive industry sector include those for non-original equipment manufacturer
components, new switch engines, remanufactured switch engines, new line haul engines, and
remanufactured line haul engines. Figure 6-2 shows the percentage of each type of certificate in model
year 2017. As seen in the figure, the majority of certificates for locomotives are for remanufactured
("reman") engines.
83
-------
Non OEM
Component
Line Haul Reman
71%
Jew Switch
1%
Figure 6-2: Locomotive Certificates by Type, Model Year 2017
The number of locomotive engines produced for the U.S. in model year 2014 - 2017 is shown in Figure
6-3 below.
Figure 6-3: Locomotive Engine Production Volume for the U.S., Model Year 2014-2017
84
-------
6.3 Construction and Agricultural Engines
This category includes nonroad compression ignition engines that are used in vehicles and equipment
such as tractors, generators, construction equipment, agricultural equipment, forklifts, and welders.
These engines can be certified for use in one or more service classes. Table 6-3 presents the number of
certificates that were issued for model year 2014 - 2017 covering each power category.
Table 6-3: Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Service Class, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Service Class
Number of Engine Families
(Power Category)
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
1 = kW<8
11
16
18
18
2 = 8<=kW<19
69
66
69
72
3 = 19<=kW<37
63
69
74
66
4 = 37<=kW<56
66
79
87
90
5 = 56<=kW<75
17
15
13
13
6 = 56<=kW<130
6
18
27
7 = 75<=kW<130
57
42
35
35
8 = 130<=kW<225
11
12
10
10
9 = 130<=kW<=560
60
79
84
84
10 = 225<=kW<450
19
17
18
18
11 = 225<=kW<=560
12 = 450<=kW<=560
8
8
8
7
13 = 560560
4
5
6
16 = kW>900
7
7
9
9
17 = kW>2237
1
Total
432
456
487
491
Table 6-4 shows the number of engine families certified by each manufacturer for the same model
years. There are 41 manufacturers listed in this table, certifying one or more engine families for at least
one of these model years.
85
-------
Table 6-4: Construction and Agricultural Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Manufacturer
Number of Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
AG CO POWER INC.
6
7
7
6
CATERPILLAR
26
24
26
25
CMI
39
41
41
39
DAEDONG
4
6
8
7
DEERE
26
25
30
27
DETROIT DIESEL
2
2
2
2
DEUTZ
25
28
28
29
DOOSAN
5
6
7
8
FCA ITALY
1
2
2
FPT INDUSTRIAL S.P.
27
30
29
31
GLOBAL COMPONENT TC
1
1
2
2
HML
2
2
2
2
IAT
45
43
44
36
ISEKI
2
2
2
2
ISUZU
10
17
16
19
JCB POWER SYSTEMS
3
3
3
3
KOHLERCO.
7
10
11
10
KOMATSU LTD.
10
7
10
11
KOOP
1
1
KUBOTA
36
39
44
46
KUKJE MACHINERY
9
10
9
11
LMB
8
6
8
8
LS MTRON
4
3
4
M&M
16
15
16
29
MAN
2
2
MERCEDES-BENZ
5
6
6
6
MITSUBISHI
17
15
19
20
MOTORENFABRIK HATZ
9
13
12
9
MTU DD
8
8
8
7
NAV
1
PERKINS
18
21
18
16
PSA PEUGEOT CITROEN
1
1
1
SCANIA
4
4
4
4
SIMPSON & CO LIMITED
1
1
1
1
TIEM
2
2
2
2
VM MOTORI
1
VOLKSWAGEN
1
1
1
1
VOLVO CE
3
3
3
3
86
-------
Manufacturer
Number of Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
VPX
14
13
13
13
YANMAR
38
39
46
46
ZETOR NORTH AMERICA
1
Total
432
456
487
491
The number of construction and agricultural engines produced in the U.S. in model year 2014 - 2017 is
shown in Figure 6-4 below. Note the magnitude of these production numbers is in the hundreds of
thousands.
840,000
820,000
800,000
780,000
760,000
740,000
720,000
700,000
680,000
660,000
827,690
723,892
802,811
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Figure 6-4: Construction and Agricultural Engine Production Volume for the U.S., Model Years 2014-
2017
87
-------
7. Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines
Nonroad spark ignition (Nonroad SI) engines are divided into three categories for purposes of exhaust
emissions compliance:
1. Marine spark ignition (Marine SI) engines are used in marine vessels, including outboard
engines, personal watercraft, and sterndrive/inboard engines.
2. Small spark ignition (Small SI) engines are generally rated below 25 horsepower (19 kW) and are
used in household and commercial applications, including lawn and garden equipment,
generators, and a variety of other construction, farm, and industrial equipment.
3. Large spark ignition (Large SI) engines are generally rated above 19 kW and used in forklifts,
compressors, generators, and stationary equipment.
Most equipment with an Nonroad SI engine is also subject to evaporative emissions standards.
7,1 Marine Spark Ignition Engines
Marine SI engines are used in boats with outboard motors, personal watercraft, and boats with
sterndrive or inboard motors. Table 7-1 shows the Marine SI engine families by manufacturer, for
model year 2014 - 2017.
88
-------
Table 7-1: Marine SI Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014- 2017
Number of Engine Families
Marine Spark Ignition Engine Manufacturer
MY
MY
MY
MY
2014
2015
2016
2017
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
11
11
11
13
Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc
16
20
23
25
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
2
4
4
1
Hangzhou Hidea Power Machinery Co., Ltd.
6
6
0
6
Hangzhou Seanovo Power Machinery Co., Ltd.
0
6
0
0
Ilmor Engineering, Inc.
4
4
4
5
INDMAR PRODUCTS CO., INC
5
7
7
8
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
2
2
2
2
KEM Equipment, Inc.
4
6
7
7
LEHR LLC
4
5
5
4
MARINE POWER HOLDING LLC
1
2
2
4
Mercury Marine
35
37
31
27
OUTBOARDS GROUP C.V.
2
2
2
3
Pleasurecraft Marine Engine Company
4
5
5
5
Suzhou Parsun Power Machine Co., Ltd.
7
7
7
8
Suzuki Motor Corporation
11
11
10
10
Textron Specialized Vehicles
0
0
2
2
TOHATSU CORPORATION
9
10
9
10
Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC
8
9
8
7
Yamaha Motor Corporation
28
28
29
25
Zhe Jiang Hui Yuan Power Technology Co.Ltd.
0
0
0
3
Other
10
7
4
6
Total:
169
189
172
178
Table 7-2 shows the number of each of these types of marine SI engines produced for the U.S. for model
year 2017, and as Figure 7-1 illustrates, three quarters of the marine SI engines produced were outboard
motors.
89
-------
Marine SI Engine
Category
Production
Volume
Percent
of total
Personal Watercraft
66,775
Sterndrive/lnboard
31,397
Total Marine SI
386,079
100%
Table 7-2: Marine SI Engine Production Volume,
Model Year 2017
Sterndrive/lnboard
Outboard
287,907
Figure 7-1: Marine SI Engine Production
Percentages by Category, Model Year 2017
7.2 Small Spark Ignition Engines
There are five classes of Small SI engines. Classes are defined by whether or not the engine is used in a
handheld piece of equipment and by engine displacement. Classes I and II describe engines not used in
handheld equipment, and Classes III, IV, and V
engines are used in handheld equipment, such as
chainsaws, string trimmers, and leaf blowers.
Table 7-3 presents the number of Small SI engine
families that EPA certified in model year 2014-
2017, by engine class. This sector has the largest
number of engine families, as 900 or more were
certified in each of these model years.
Table 7-3: Small SI Engine Families by Class, Model Years 2014 - 2017
EPA OTAQ certifies the greatest number of
certificates for Small Spark Ignition engine
families. This sector has more
manufacturers than any other sector.
Small SI Engine Class
Number of Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Class 1 (non-handheld)
192
214
208
210
Class II (non-handheld)
303
328
322
336
Class III (handheld)
1
1
0
0
Class IV (handheld)
253
256
254
255
Class V (handheld)
151
157
160
171
Total
900
956
944
972
Table 7-4 shows the number of Small SI Engine families certified in model years 2014 - 2017 by
manufacturer. In addition to having the greatest number of engine families, this sector also has the
90
-------
largest number of manufacturers. A total of 146 manufacturers obtained certificates from EPA during
model years 2014 - 2017 for at least one engine family in at least one of these model years.
Table 7-4: Small SI Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 -2017
Number of Engine Famil
ies
Small SI Engine Manufacturer
MY
MY
MY
MY
2014
2015
2016
2017
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
26
25
25
26
ANDREAS STIHLAG& Co. KG
56
55
57
54
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
39
45
45
46
Chongqing Dajiang Power Equipment CO.,LTD
16
17
20
24
Chongqing Maifeng Power Machinery Co., Ltd
6
11
11
10
Chongqing Rato Technology Co., Ltd
25
23
24
25
Chongqing Shineray Agricultural Machinery Co.,Ltd
7
10
11
12
Chongqing Zongshen General Power Machine Co., Ltd
24
25
31
31
ECHO Incorporated/Yamabiko Corporation
51
53
54
56
EMAK S.p.a.
16
17
12
18
Fuji Heavy Industries
22
22
21
16
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
17
13
11
13
Hitachi Koki USA Ltd.
15
14
12
11
Husqvarna AB
31
29
26
29
Husqvarna Outdoor Products N.A., Inc.
19
18
26
18
Husqvarna Zenoah Co., Ltd.
22
24
18
16
Jiangsu Jiangdong Group Co. Ltd.
27
32
29
31
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
32
36
34
35
Kohler Co.
29
36
35
41
Lifan Industry (Group) Co., Ltd.
23
22
18
18
Liquid Combustion Technology, LLC
8
9
13
13
Loncin Motor Co., Ltd.
22
27
26
32
Makita Engineering Germany GmbH
12
12
12
13
MTD Consumer Group, Inc.
14
13
11
13
Shandong Huasheng Zhongtian Machinery Group
CO., LTD.
18
19
21
20
SHANDONG YONGJIA POWER CO.,LTD
0
1
12
14
Techtronic Industries North American, Inc.
11
13
15
12
Wenling Jennfeng Industry Inc.
12
17
13
14
Wuxi Kipor Power Co., Ltd.
9
9
9
12
Yamaha Motor Corporation
14
14
13
14
Yongkang Xingguang Electrical Manufacture Co.,Ltd
13
13
13
12
Zhejiang Xingyue Industry Co.,Ltd
14
15
16
15
Zhejiang Yaofeng Power Technology Co., Ltd.
8
13
12
16
Other (> 100 manufacturers)
242
254
238
242
Total
900
956
944
972
91
-------
Table 7-5 and Figure 7-2 show model year 2017 Small SI engine production volumes for the U.S. by
engine class. As seen in Figure 7-2, about half of the Small SI engines produced for the U.S. are handheld
categories, and about half are non-handheld categories.
Table 7-5: Small SI Engine Production Volumes,
Model Year 2017
Small SI Engine Class
Production
Volume
Percent
of total
Non-handheld Class 1
9,880,141
36%
Non-handheld Class II
4,140,248
15%
Handheld Class IV
10,881,386
40%
Handheld Class V
2,311,646
8%
Total Small SI
27,213,421
100%
Handheld Class V
9%
IMonhandheld
Class I
36%
Handheld Class
Figure 7-2: Small SI Engine Production
Percentages by Engine Class, Model Year 2017
7.3 Large Spark Ignition Engines
Large SI engines include nonroad engines powered by gasoline, propane, or compressed natural gas
rated over 19 kilowatts (25 horsepower). These engines are used in commercial and industrial
applications, including forklifts, electric generators, airport baggage transport vehicles, and a variety of
farm and construction applications.
Table 7-6 below shows model year 2014- 2017 Large SI engine families by manufacturer.
92
-------
Table 7-6: Large SI Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Year 2014-2017
Large Spark Ignition Engine Manufacturer
Number of Engine Famil
ies
2014
2015
2016
2017
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
55
54
59
64
Bucks Engines
9
9
0
0
Caterpillar Inc.
1
1
3
3
Chongqing Panda Machinery Co., Ltd.
2
3
2
2
Crown Equipment Corporation
1
1
1
2
Cummins Inc.
12
12
14
17
Deutz AG
2
5
5
5
Dresser, Inc.
1
1
1
3
ENER-G Rudox Inc.
2
3
3
2
Engine Distributors, Inc.
5
6
6
11
Global Component Technologies Corporation
3
3
3
3
Graham Ford Power Products
2
4
3
1
Guascor Power S.A.U.
5
8
8
8
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
9
9
4
0
KEM Equipment, Inc.
15
15
15
15
Kohler Co.
4
4
6
6
Kubota Corporation
5
7
7
6
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
2
2
2
2
MTU America, Inc.
3
5
5
7
Origin Engines
2
3
3
4
Power Solutions International, Inc.
21
20
23
24
Springfield Remanufacturing Corp.
5
4
4
4
Toyota Industrial Equipment Manufacturing, Inc.
2
2
2
2
Weichai America Corporation
0
2
0
3
Westport Power Inc.
1
1
2
3
Wisconsin Motors, LLC.
4
4
2
1
Woodward, Inc.
3
3
2
1
Zenith Power Products
9
10
13
11
Other (16 manufacturers)
9
7
12
18
Total:
194
208
210
226
Total production volume of model year 2017 Large SI engines for the U.S. was 242,121.
93
-------
7.4 Evaporative Components
In addition to spark ignition engines themselves, EPA certifies evaporative components used with these
engines, such as fuel lines and fuel tanks. Table 7-7 shows the variety of evaporative component types
that EPA certifies, and the number of evaporative component families that received certificates for
model years 2014 - 2017.
Table 7-7: Nonroad Spark Ignition Evaporative Component Families by Type, Model Years 2014- 2017
Component Type
Number of Evaporative Component Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Fuel Cap Permeation
14
15
16
18
Fuel Line Permeation
128
138
134
141
Fuel Tank Permeation
235
242
244
237
Large SI Diurnal
1
1
0
0
Marine SI Diurnal
30
33
32
29
Handheld Equipment Certification
68
67
74
76
Nonhandheld Equipment Certification
337
333
341
362
Vessel Certification
2
2
2
3
Total
815
831
843
866
7.5 Defect Reporting
Defect reports are for the entire category of nonroad spark ignition engines, rather than the
subcategories of Marine SI, Small SI, and Large SI engines. Table 7-8 presents defect reports by
manufacturer, and Table 7-9 presents them by problem category.
Table 7-8: Nonroad Spark Ignition Engine Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Year 2014 - 2017
Manufacturer
Number of Defect Reports in Calendar Year:
2014
2015
2016
2017
Bombardier Recreational Products
2
1
0
0
Briggs & Stratton
1
0
0
0
Cummins Power
0
0
0
1
Honda
4
0
1
0
Husqvarna AB
1
0
0
0
IMPCO Technologies
0
0
0
1
Indmar Products
0
0
0
2
Kubota Corp
0
1
0
0
Mercury/Sea Ray
1
0
0
0
Polaris
0
0
1
0
Stihl
0
0
1
0
Yamaha
0
0
1
0
Total:
9
2
4
4
94
-------
Table 7-9: Nonroad Spark Ignition Engine Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendary Year 2014 -
2017
Problem Category
Number of Defect Reports in Calendar Year:
2014
2015
2016
2017
Catalyst/Aftertreatment
0
0
0
i
Co m po n e nt/Sy ste m
-L
Computer Related (other than OBD)
1
0
0
0
Electrical, Mechanical & Cooling Systems
2
1
0
0
Engine Emission Control Information Label
3
0
0
0
Fuel Delivery Component
2
1
3
1
Ignition Component
1
0
0
0
Monitoring/Measuring Sensor/System
0
0
1
1
On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) System
0
0
0
1
Total:
9
2
4
4
7.6 Recall Reporting
As in the case with defect reports, the recall reports are provided for the nonroad spark ignition engine
category as a whole for calendar years 2014 - 2017. There were no recalls for this sector in 2015. Table
7-10 presents recall reports by manufacturer, and Table 7-11 presents them by problem category.
Table 7-10: Nonroad Spark Ignition Engine Recalls by Manufacturer, 2014 - 2017
2014
2016
2017
Manufacturer
Affected
ff
Affected
ff
Affected
ff
Engines
ff
Engines
ff
Engines
Briggs & Stratton
1
900
0
-
0
-
Honda
1
20,602
0
-
2
3,079
Indmar Products
0
-
0
-
1
1,092
Kohler
0
-
1
968
0
-
Stihl
0
-
1
5,294
0
-
Yamaha
0
-
1
3,100
0
-
Total:
2
21,502
3
9,362
3
4,171
95
-------
Table 7-11: Nonroad Spark Ignition Engine Recalls by Problem Category, 2014 - 2017
Problem Category
2014
2016
2017
#
Affected
Engines
#
Affected
Engines
#
Affected Engines
Electrical, Mechanical
& Cooling Systems
1
900
0
-
0
-
Fuel Delivery
Component
0
-
2
8,394
2
3,079
Fuel Delivery System
0
-
1
968
0
-
Monitoring/Measuring
Sensor/System
1
20,602
0
-
0
-
On-Board Diagnostic
(OBD) System
0
-
0
-
1
1,092
Total:
2
21,502
3
9,362
3
4,171
96
-------
8. Recreational Vehicles
Recreation vehicles include all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), utility vehicles (UTVs), sand cars, dune buggies,
off-highway motorcycles, and snowmobiles. Emissions from these vehicles were not regulated until
model year 2006. Each of the recreational vehicle categories is subject to an individual set of exhaust
emissions standards, and all recreational vehicles became subject to the same fuel component-based
permeation emission standards beginning in model year 2008.
8.1 Certification
8.1.1 All-Terrain Vehicles and Utility Vehicles
There were 85 different manufacturers that certified ATV and UTV products for model years 2014 -
2017. Table 8-1 lists the manufacturers that certified engine families over this four-year period (those
certifying fewer than 10 families during the four-year period are grouped together as "Other").
Table 8-1: ATV and UTV Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014-2017
Manufacturer
Number of ATV and UTV Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
11
8
11
11
Arctic Cat
15
14
13
15
Bennche, LLC.
5
6
BMS Motorsports, Inc.
3
1
2
4
Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc
13
12
15
16
BV Powersports, LLC
4
2
2
3
CF Moto Powersports, Inc.
9
5
7
8
Deere & Company
6
4
5
5
Global Resource Development, LLC
3
3
3
2
Hisun Motors Corp., U.S.A.
8
15
18
21
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
5
4
4
4
KYMCO USA
12
13
12
10
LIL PICK UP INC.
4
5
3
6
Linhai Powersports USA Corporation
2
5
7
Massimo Motor Sports LLC
7
7
Maxtrade
2
3
3
4
Polaris Industries Inc.
17
10
14
15
Ricky Power Sports, LLC
4
4
4
Suzuki Motor Corporation
6
4
4
5
Taotao USA Inc.
7
8
8
6
U-Storm Power Corporation
4
3
3
3
XY POWERSPORTS LLC
6
6
Yamaha Motor Corporation
11
5
8
9
Other (> 60 manufacturers)
51
67
50
68
Total
197
205
206
232
97
-------
8.1.2 Off-highway Motorcycles
There were 25 manufacturers that certified off-highway motorcycle engines for model years 2014 -
2017. Table 8-2 lists the manufacturers that certified at least five different emission families over this
four-year period; the rest are grouped together in the category of "Other."
Table 8-2: Certificates for Off-Highway Motorcycles, Model Years 2014-2017
Off-Highway Motorcycle Manufacturer
Number of Off-Highway MC Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
6
8
8
8
Apollo Motorsports USA, Inc.
3
3
3
3
APT Powersport and Utility Products, LLC
2
2
1
2
Baja Inc.
2
2
1
Hisun Motors Corp., U.S.A.
1
1
1
2
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
3
2
2
3
KTM North America, Inc.
4
3
3
Lianmei LLC
2
2
2
2
Maxtrade
2
2
2
2
Monster Moto, LLC
1
2
1
3
Ricky Power Sports, LLC
2
5
4
3
Suzuki Motor Corporation
1
2
2
3
Taotao USA Inc.
3
3
2
1
XMotos USA, Inc.
4
4
4
3
Yamaha Motor Corporation
6
7
7
7
Other (10 manufacturers)
7
5
4
7
Total
49
53
47
49
Emissions from recreational vehicles were
first regulated with model year 2006.
98
-------
8.1.3 Snowmobiles
Eight manufacturers certified snowmobile engines for model years 2014 - 2017, as shown in Table 8-3.
Table 8-3: Snowmobile Engine Families by Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Snowmobile Manufacturer
Number of Snowmobile Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Arctic Cat
8
7
8
9
Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc
9
8
8
8
HJR
1
IRBIS USA LLC
1
KING DISTRIBUTION LLC
1
Polaris Industries Inc.
7
6
6
6
Taotao USA Inc.
1
Yamaha Motor Corporation
7
7
6
9
Total
32
29
29
33
8.1.4 Two-Stroke Engines
As shown in Table 8-4, in model years 2014 - 2017, no ATV/UTV manufacturers produced certified two-
stroke engines, and only a small percentage of the certified off-highway motorcycle families were two-
stroke engines. As for snowmobiles, less than half of the certified families were two-stroke engines.
These data illustrate the continued technology shift to four-stroke engines, which typically have lower
emissions. When the current recreation vehicle regulations were written, most ATVs sold in the U.S.
and almost all snowmobiles used two-stroke engines.
Table 8-4: Percentage of Two-Stroke Engine Recreational Vehicle Families, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Recreational Vehicle Type
Percentage of Two Stroke Engine
Families
2014
2015
2016
2017
ATV/UTV
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Off-Highway Motorcycles
2.0%
1.9%
2.1%
2.0%
Snowmobiles
47%
43%
43%
45%
8.2 Production Volume
Total production of recreation vehicles for the U.S. is found in Table 8-5. There were 919,317
recreational vehicles produced for the U.S. in MY 2017. As seen in both Table 8-5 and Figure 8-1, the
ATV/UTV category makes up the largest share of these vehicles.
99
-------
Table 8-5: Production Volume of Certified
Recreational Vehicles, Model Year 2017
Snowmobile
Recreational
Production
Percent
Vehicle Type
Volume
All-Terrain
Vehicle/Utility
Vehicle
745,923
81%
Off-highway
Motorcycle
120,006
13%
Snowmobile
53,388
6%
Total:
919,317
100%
Off-Road
Motorcycle
13%
Figure 8-1: Recreational Vehicle Types, Model
Year 2017
8.3 Defect Reporting
Defect reports for the entire category of recreational vehicles for calendar years 2014 - 2017 are
provided by manufacture and by problem category, in Table 8-6 and Table 8-7, respectively.
Table 8-6: Recreational Vehicle Defect Reports by Manufacturer, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
Manufacturer
Number of Defect Reports
2014
2015
2016
2017
Arctic Cat
0
0
1
Bombardier Recreational Products
0
1
1
3
Honda
0
1
1
1
Kawasaki
0
0
0
4
Kawasaki Motors
1
0
0
0
Polaris
0
0
1
0
Yamaha
0
0
1
0
Total:
1
2
4
9
100
-------
Table 8-7: Recreational Vehicle Defect Reports by Problem Category, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
Problem Category
Number of Defect Reports
2014
2015
2016
2017
Computer Related (other than OBD)
0
0
1
0
Crankcase Ventilation Component/System
0
0
1
0
Electrical, Mechanical & Cooling Systems
0
1
0
0
Engine Emission Control Information Label
0
0
0
1
Exhaust System
0
0
0
1
Fuel Delivery Component
1
1
1
5
Monitoring/Measuring Sensor/System
0
0
1
2
Total:
1
2
4
9
8.4 Recall Reporting
Recalls for recreational vehicles are shown by manufacturer and by problem category in Table 8-8 and
Table 8-9, respectively.
Table 8-8: Recreational Vehicle Recalls by Manufacturer, Calendar Year 2014 - 2017
Manufacturer
2014
2015
2016
2017
Number of
Number of
Number of
Number of
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Arctic Cat
0
0
0
1
1,079
Bombardier
Recreational Products
0
1
244
Kawasaki
2
20,016
0
0
4
89,472
Yamaha
0
0
1
800
0
Total:
2
20,016
1
244
1
800
5
90,551
Table 8-9: Recreational Vehicle Recalls by Problem Type, Calendar Years 2014 - 2017
Problem Category
2014
2015
2016
2017
Number of
Number of
Number of
Number of
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Recalls
Affected
Engines
Crankcase Ventilation
Co m po n e nt/Sy ste m
0
0
1
800
0
Exhaust System
0
0
0
1
22,456
Fuel Delivery
Component
2
20,016
1
244
0
4
68,095
Total:
2
20,016
1
244
1
800
5
90,551
101
-------
9. Alternative Fuels and Alternative Fuel Conversion Systems
This section is organized into three parts, as follows:
Section 9.1: Information about the use of alternative fuels in the light-duty vehicle sector;
Section 9.2: Information about heavy-duty highway engines, nonroad spark ignition engines,
and recreational vehicles designed to operate on fuels other than gasoline and diesel by their
original equipment manufacturers; and
Section 9.3: Information about alternative fuel conversion systems, which are those systems
that convert vehicles and engines initially certified to operate on gasoline or diesel fuel to
operate on an alternative fuel. These systems are manufactured by "aftermarket providers"
rather than original equipment manufacturers.
9.1 Use of Alternative Fuels in Light-Duty Vehicles
Light-duty vehicles produced for the U.S. in model years 2014 - 2017 ran on a variety of fuels. Gasoline
vehicles comprise the dominant fuel type, followed by gasoline/ethanol, or "flexible fuel" vehicles.
Other vehicle fuel types include gasoline/electric (i.e., plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV), which can run on
either gasoline or electricity), electric, and hydrogen fuel cell.
Figure 9-1, which shows the percentage of vehicles produced for each fuel type for model year 2017,
illustrates the dominance of gasoline fueled vehicles in the U.S. market.
Gasoline/ Electric Electric Diesel
(PHEV)
1%
Hydrogen Fuel Cell
>1%
Gasoline;
Ethanol
ฆ Gasoline
ฆ Gasoline/ Ethanol
ฆ Gasoline/ Electric (PHEV)
ฆ Electric
Diesel
Gasoline
92%
ฆ Hydrogen Fuel Cell
Figure 9-1: Light-Duty Vehicle Production by Fuel Type, Model Year 2017
The Figure 9-1 pie chart shows light-duty vehicle production by fuel type for only model year 2017; in
contrast, Figure 9-2 and Figure 9-3 show light-duty vehicle production by fuel type for all four model
102
-------
years, 2014 - 2017. Figure 9-3 shows light-duty vehicle production by alternative fuel type for model
year 2014-2017. That is, this figure omits gasoline and gasoline/ethanol fuel types so the other fuel
types are more easily compared. In other words, the bars in Figure 9-3 are the tops of the bars in Figure
9-2; note the difference in scales in these two figures. As seen in these figures, U.S. production of
diesel-fueled light-duty vehicles has declined over the four-year period, while production of electric
vehicles has steadily increased. Production of plug-in hybrid vehicles in model year 2017 is more than
double that of model year 2014. (The colors representing the fuel types are consistent across Figure
9-1, Figure 9-2, and Figure 9-3.)
20,000,000
18,000,000
16,000,000
14,000,000
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
1>
&
I Gasoline/CNG
I Hydrogen Fuel
Cell
I LPG
ICNG
I Electric
I Gasoline/ Electric
(PHEV)
Diesel
Gasoline/ Ethanol
l Gasoline
Figure 9-2: Light-Duty Vehicle Production Volume by Fuel
Type, Model Years 2014 - 2017
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
\>
Figure 9-3: Light-Duty Vehicle
Production Volume by Alternative Fuel
Type, Model Years 2014 - 2017
103
-------
9.2 Vehicles and Engines Designed to Operate on Alternative Fuels by Their
Manufacturers
9.2.1 Heavy-Duty Highway Engines
Table 9-1 presents the heavy-duty highway engines that were certified to operate on alternative fuels in
model years 2014 - 2017 by their original manufacturer.
Table 9-1: Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Alternative Fuel Engine Families by Original Equipment
Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Alternative Fuel
Manufacturer
MY
MY
MY
MY
Type
2014
2015
2016
2017
LPG
CleanFuel USA Inc.
0
0
1
2
Greenkraft Inc.
0
0
1
0
Power Solutions International,
Inc.
0
0
0
2
Natural Gas
Cummins Inc.
4
5
3
8
Greenkraft Inc.
0
0
2
1
Landi Renzo USA Corporation
0
1
0
0
Power Solutions International,
Inc.
0
0
0
2
Roush Industries, Inc.
0
0
1
1
Propane
Greenkraft Inc.
0
0
1
1
Total:
4
6
9
17
9.2.2 Nonroad Spark Ignition Engines
There are numerous engine manufacturers that certify nonroad spark ignition engines to run on
alternative fuels in both the Small SI and Large SI categories.
Table 9-2 shows the model years 2014-2017 alternative fuel Small SI engine families certified, by type of
alternative fuel and manufacturer.
104
-------
Table 9-2: Small SI Engine Families by Fuel Type and Original Equipment Manufacturer, Model Years
2014 -2017
Fuel Type
Manufacturer
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
Gasoline - E85
Kohler Co.
1
1
1
1
Natural Gas
Aisin World Corp. of America
2
2
1
1
Arrow Engine Company
6
6
5
5
Cummins Power Generation
2
2
2
2
Diadema Engine
2
Kubota Corporation
1
1
1
1
Repair Processes, Incorporated
1
1
1
1
Yanmar Co., Ltd.
2
2
1
3
Natural
Gas/Propane
Aisin World Corp. of America
1
1
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
1
1
1
1
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
5
5
4
3
Carburetion & Turbo Systems, Inc.
1
1
1
1
Chongqing Dajiang Power Equipment Co.,Ltd.
2
2
3
4
Fuji Heavy Industries
1
1
1
1
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
6
4
4
5
Kohler Co.
1
4
4
4
Lifan Industry (Group) Co., Ltd.
3
3
1
Marathon Engine Systems
1
1
1
New England Gen-Connect LLC
2
2
Shanghai Chenchang Power Technology Co.,
Ltd
2
Shanghai Grow Development Co., Ltd.
2
Zhejiang Yaofeng Power Technology Co., Ltd.
2
2
3
Natural Gas/
Propane/Gasoline
Chongqing Dajiang Power Equipment CO.,LTD
2
2
3
5
Chongqing Maifeng Power Machinery Co., Ltd
2
4
4
4
Chongqing Sanding General Power Machinery
Co., Ltd.
2
4
4
4
Gaoyou City Shenfa Electrical and Mechanical
Manufacture Co.,Ltd
3
3
Kohler Co.
1
2
Kubota Corporation
1
1
1
Lifan Industry (Group) Co., Ltd.
1
1
3
4
Wenling Jennfeng Industry Inc.
1
2
2
2
Winco
1
1
1
1
Propane
Amano Pioneer Eclipse Corporation
1
1
1
1
Aztec Products Inc.
3
3
4
4
BETCO Corporation
1
1
1
1
105
-------
Fuel Type
Manufacturer
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
Blossman Services, Inc.
1
1
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
1
Carburetion & Turbo Systems, Inc.
1
1
1
China Xingyue Group Co.,Ltd.
1
1
1
Cummins Power Generation
3
3
3
3
Feldmann Eng. & Mfg. Co., Inc.
2
2
2
2
Fuji Heavy Industries
1
1
1
1
Fuzhou Launtop M&E Co., Ltd.
2
2
2
Gaoyou City Shenfa Electrical and Mechanical
Manufacture Co.,Ltd
3
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
3
2
2
2
Hendrix Industrial Gastrux, Inc.
3
3
3
3
Jiangsu Jiangdong Group Co. Ltd.
4
4
4
4
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
1
1
1
1
Kohler Co.
2
2
1
3
LEHR LLC
4
4
4
Linyi Sanhe Yongjia Power Co.,Ltd.
1
1
Loncin Motor Co., Ltd.
2
2
2
2
METRO LAWN, LLC
7
8
8
New England Gen-Connect LLC
1
1
Nilfisk Advance
2
2
1
Onyx Environmental Solutions
2
2
Propane Power Systems, LLC
3
5
7
Shandong Yongjia Power Co., Ltd.
1
1
Shanghai Chenchang Power Technology Co.,
Ltd
1
Shanghai Grow Development Co., Ltd.
1
STK LLC
2
2
2
2
Superabrasive Inc.
1
1
Tacony Corporation
1
1
1
1
TWEnterprises
1
Whitestorm Inc.
1
1
1
1
Yanmar Co., Ltd.
2
2
2
Zhejiang Xingyue Industry Co.,Ltd
2
Zhejiang Yaofeng Power Technology Co., Ltd.
1
1
Propane/Gasoline
ChongQing AM Pride Power & Machinery Co.,
Ltd
1
1
Chongqing Huansong Science And Technology
Industrial Co.,Ltd.
1
1
1
1
Gaoyou City Shenfa Electrical and Mechanical
Manufacture Co.,Ltd
3
Kubota Corporation
3
3
3
3
106
-------
Fuel Type
Manufacturer
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
Power Solutions International, Inc.
1
1
1
1
Sumec Machinery & Electric Co., Ltd.
2
2
Wenling Jennfeng Industry Inc.
2
6
4
5
Yongkang Xingguang Electrical Manufacture
Co., Ltd
8
8
8
7
Yueqing Hejie Electric Co., Ltd
3
Zhejiang Constant Engine Mading Co., Ltd.
1
Zhejiang Yaofeng Power Technology Co., Ltd.
2
2
5
6
Total
116
142
137
147
Table 9-3 provides a summary of alternative fuel Small SI engine families by fuel type only.
Table 9-3: Small SI Engine Families by Fuel Type Only, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Fuel Type
Number of Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Gasoline - E85
1
1
1
1
Natural Gas
16
14
11
13
Natural Gas/Propane
22
26
25
26
Natural Gas/Propane/Gasoline
9
15
22
26
Propane
48
61
53
55
Propane/Gasoline
20
25
25
26
Total
116
142
137
147
Table 9-4 shows the model years 2014-2017 alternative fuel Large SI engine families certified, by type of
alternative fuel and manufacturer.
107
-------
Table 9-4: Large SI Engine Families by Fuel Type and Original Equipment Manufacturer, Model Years
2014-2017
Fuel Type
Manufacturer
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
Natural Gas
2G Energietechnik GmbH
1
1
Aegenco, Inc.
1
1
1
Briggs & Stratton Corporation
1
Bucks Engines
4
4
Caterpillar Inc.
2
2
Cummins Inc.
7
6
6
7
Deutz AG
2
5
5
5
ENER-G Rudox Inc.
2
3
3
2
Engine Distributors, Inc.
1
1
1
3
GE Jenbacher, Ltd.
1
1
1
1
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
34
33
36
41
Graham Ford Power Products
1
2
Guascor Power S.A.U.
5
8
8
8
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
2
2
Industrial Engines Ltd.
2
1
1
KEM Equipment, Inc.
1
1
Kohler Co.
2
2
3
3
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Engine &
Turbocharger, Ltd.
2
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
2
2
2
Power Solutions International, Inc.
1
1
1
1
Tecogen
4
Weichai America Corporation
2
1
Wisconsin Engines, LLC.
1
Wisconsin Motors, LLC.
1
1
Yanmar Co., Ltd.
1
2
Zenith Power Products
1
1
Natural Gas/Propane
Bucks Engines
2
2
Caterpillar Inc.
1
1
1
1
Chongqing Panda Machinery Co., Ltd.
2
3
2
2
Computer Science
1
Cummins Inc.
5
6
8
10
Don Hardy Race Cars, Inc.
1
1
1
1
Dresser, Inc.
1
1
1
3
Engine Distributors, Inc.
1
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
1
1
Graham Ford Power Products
1
KEM Equipment, Inc.
9
9
10
10
Kubota Corporation
1
1
1
108
-------
Fuel Type
Manufacturer
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
MTU America, Inc.
5
5
7
Origin Engines
2
3
3
4
Power Solutions International, Inc.
14
14
13
13
Springfield Remanufacturing Corp.
1
4
SRC Power Systems, Inc.
5
4
3
Tognum America, Inc.
3
Weichai America Corporation
1
Westport Power Inc.
1
1
2
1
Zenith Power Products
2
3
7
7
Natural
Gas/Propane/Gasoline
Engine Distributors, Inc.
3
4
4
4
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
1
1
Kubota Corporation
3
5
5
5
Power Solutions International, Inc.
2
3
6
6
Toyota Industrial Equipment
i
i
i
i
Manufacturing, Inc.
-L
-L
Zenith Power Products
2
3
3
3
Propane
Bucks Engines
1
1
Crown Equipment Corporation
1
1
1
2
Engine Distributors, Inc.
1
1
1
3
Generac Power Systems, Inc.
21
21
22
22
Graham Ford Power Products
1
2
2
1
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
3
4
2
KEM Equipment, Inc.
2
2
2
2
KION North America Corp.
2
2
Kohler Co.
2
2
3
3
Linde Material Handling N.A. Corp.
2
2
Power Solutions International, Inc.
2
2
3
4
Weichai America Corporation
1
Westport Power Inc.
1
Woodward, Inc.
1
1
1
Propane/Gasoline
Bucks Engines
2
2
EControls, Inc.
1
1
1
Global Component Technologies
3
3
3
3
Corporation
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
3
2
2
KEM Equipment, Inc.
3
3
3
3
Kubota Corporation
1
1
1
1
Power Solutions International, Inc.
2
Toyota Industrial Equipment
i
i
i
i
Manufacturing, Inc.
-L
-L
-L
-L
Westport Power Inc.
1
109
-------
Fuel Type
Manufacturer
MY
MY
MY
MY
2014
2015
2016
2017
Wisconsin Engines, LLC.
1
1
Wisconsin Motors, LLC.
1
1
Woodward, Inc.
2
2
1
1
Zenith Power Products
3
2
2
Total:
189
204
207
223
Table 9-5 provides a summary of Table 9-4, showing alternative fuel large spark ignition engine families
by fuel type only.
Table 9-5: Large SI Engine Families by Fuel Type Only, Model Years 2014-2017
Fuel Type
Number of Engine Families
MY 2017
MY 2017
MY 2017
MY 2017
Natural Gas
69
77
74
84
Natural Gas/Propane
49
54
60
67
Natural Gas/Propane/Gasoline
12
17
19
19
Propane
37
39
39
41
Propane/Gasoline
22
17
15
12
Total
189
204
207
223
9.2.3 Recreational Vehicles
The majority of recreational vehicles are certified to operate on gasoline. However, a small number of
manufacturers certified recreational vehicles to operate on diesel fuel in model year 2014 - 2017, as
shown in Table 9-6.
Table 9-6: Recreational Vehicle Diesel Engine Families by Original Equipment Manufacturer, Model
Years 2014-2017
Manufacturer
Number of Engine Families
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Deere & Company
1
1
1
1
JCB, Inc.
1
Polaris Industries Inc.
1
110
-------
9.3 Alternative Fuel Conversions Systems
Alternative fuel conversion systems modify vehicles and engines so that they can run on different fuels
than the ones for which they were originally designed. Any change to the manufacturer's original
vehicle or engine design is a potential violation of the Clean Air Act and can cause problems, including
increased emissions. Therefore, EPA has established protocols through which conversion manufacturers
can demonstrate that:
Emission controls in the converted vehicle or engine will continue to function properly; and
Pollution will not increase as a result of conversion.42
The process for converters of new vehicles is much like the certification process for original equipment
manufacturers and involves obtaining a Certificate of Conformity. The regulations establish alternative
pathways that do not involve certification for conversion systems intended for use on older vehicles and
engines (40 CFR part 85, subpart F).
9.3.1 Light-Duty Vehicles
In the light-duty vehicle alternative fuel conversion sector, a total of 25 Alternative Fuel Conversion
Manufacturers were issued conversion system certificates for MYs 2014 - 2017. These manufacturers
are listed in Table 9-7, which shows the number of test groups for light-duty vehicle alternative fuel
conversion systems by alternative fuel type in 2014 - 2017.
42 For more information, see EPA's website at: www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/vehicle-and-engine-alternative-
fuel-conversions.
Ill
-------
Table 9-7: Light-Duty Alternative Fuel Conversion System Test Groups by Manufacturer, Model Years
2014-2017
Alternative
Fuel Type
Light-Duty Alternative Fuel Conversion 1
Manufacturer
Test Groups
2014
2015
2016
2017
CNG
AC Spolka Akcyjna
2
4
0
0
AGA Systems, LLC
4
4
4
5
Altech-Eco Corporation
8
6
14
15
BAF Technologies
7
3
0
0
CNG Interstate of Oklahoma, LLC
2
2
0
0
Crazy Diamond Performance Inc.
1
1
1
0
Encore TEC LLC
0
0
1
3
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
6
7
9
0
Landi Renzo USA Corporation
2
1
3
8
M-tech Solutions Inc
1
1
1
0
Nat Gas Car LLC
5
2
1
0
PowerFuel CNG Conversions, LLC
7
1
2
1
STAG USA
0
0
2
2
The CNG Store, LLC; dba Auto Gas
0
0
0
America
J
Westport Dallas, Inc
0
0
6
5
Westport Power Inc.
1
1
0
0
World CNG
3
5
0
0
LPG
AGA Systems, LLC
0
0
3
2
American Alternative Fuel
2
1
0
0
Blossman Services, Inc.
8
11
14
13
CleanFuel USA Inc.
0
4
3
2
Icom North America LLC
11
9
29
25
Imega International USA
0
1
0
0
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
2
3
4
1
Roush Industries, Inc.
2
1
1
0
STAG USA
0
0
4
2
Westport Dallas, Inc
0
0
4
6
Yellow Checker Star Transportation
0
1
2
1
PHEV
VIA Motors, Inc.
1
1
0
0
Total:
80
70
108
91
112
-------
9.3.2 Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Engines
Table 9-8 shows the heavy-duty highway alternative fuel conversion system certificates issued for model
years 2014 - 2017.
Table 9-8: Heavy-Duty Highway Engine Alternative Fuel Conversion System Certificates by
Manufacturer, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Alternative Fuel
Type
Manufacturer
MY
2014
MY
2015
MY
2016
MY
2017
CNG
Encore TEC LLC
0
0
6
4
Greenkraft Inc.
2
3
0
1
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
3
3
4
2
Landi Renzo USA Corporation
3
3
3
3
NGV Motori, USA, LLC
2
1
0
1
Omnitek
1
1
0
0
Power Solutions International,
Inc.
0
1
1
0
Westport Dallas, Inc/BAF
2
2
2
2
CNG/Gasoline
AGA Systems, LLC
4
1
1
1
IMPCO Technologies, Inc.
1
1
0
0
Landi Renzo USA Corporation
1
1
0
0
Westport Dallas, Inc/BAF
1
0
0
0
LPG
Bi-Phase Technologies, LLC.
3
1
1
0
Clean Fuel USA Inc.
2
2
0
0
Greenkraft Inc.
2
1
0
1
Icom North America LLC
1
1
0
2
Parnell
0
0
2
0
Power Solutions International,
Inc.
0
1
3
0
Propane Fuel Technologies LLC
0
1
0
0
Roush Industries, Inc.
2
4
2
2
LPG/Gasoline
Blossman Services, Inc.
1
2
0
1
Icom North America LLC
0
0
0
2
CNG/Diesel
Clean Air Power
0
1
0
0
Total
31
31
25
22
113
-------
9.3.3 Conversion Systems for Intermediate Age and Outside Useful Life Vehicles
Table 9-9 shows the number of EPA-listed alternative fuel conversion systems intended for use on older
vehicles for model years 2014 - 2017. This table includes both light-duty and heavy-duty vehicle
alternative fuel conversion systems.
Table 9-9: Alternative Fuel Conversions Systems by Program Type, Model Years 2014 - 2017
Program
MY 2014
MY 2015
MY 2016
MY 2017
Intermediate Age
42
68
20
5
Outside Useful Life
10
2
1
1
114
------- |