Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Mot [Federal Register: February 23, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 37)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 6949-6953] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 86 [A-94-13; FRL-5425-9] RIN 2060-AE07 Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Motor Vehicle Engines; Nonconformance Penalties for 1996 and 1998 Model Year Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Engines--Part II AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This final rule makes nonconformance penalties (NCPs) available for the 1998 and later model year Heavy-Duty Engine (HDE) oxides of nitrogen (NOX) standard for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines (HDDEs), the 1996 and later model year Light-Duty Truck 3 (LDT3) NOX standard, and the 1996 and later model year Urban Bus particulate matter (PM) standard. The availability of NCPs will allow manufacturers whose vehicles or engines fail to conform with these emission standards, but do not exceed a designated upper limit, to be issued a certificate of conformity upon payment of a monetary penalty. The associated upper limit will be the previous standard (5.0 grams per brake horsepower-hour (g/BHp-hr) NOX for HDDEs, 1.7 grams per mile (g/mi) NOX for LDT3s, and 0.07 g/BHp-hr PM for urban buses). A final rule published elsewhere in this Federal Register document addresses other emission standards for which NCPs have been considered and establishes NCPs for the 1996 PM standard for LDT3. EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule will be effective April 23, 1996 unless notice is received by March 25, 1996 that adverse or critical comments will be submitted or that an opportunity to submit such comments at a public hearing is requested. If such comments or a request for a public hearing are received by the Agency, EPA will then publish a subsequent Federal Register document withdrawing from this action only those items which are specifically listed in those comments or in the request for a public hearing. ADDRESSES: Public Docket: Copies of materials relevant to this rulemaking proceeding are contained in Public Docket A-94-13 at the Air Docket of the US Environmental Protection Agency, Room M1500, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, and are available for review in Room M1500 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on weekdays. As provided in 40 CFR Part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged for copying services. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gregory Orehowsky, Manufacturers Operations Division [6405-J], US Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, telephone (202) 233-9292. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA believes that the use of a direct final rule is appropriate because the changes made are expected to be noncontroversial. The direct final rule will allow the Agency to finalize such changes in a timely manner, allowing NCPs to be available before the start of production of affected vehicles. I. Statutory Authority Section 206(g) of the Clean Air Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. 7525(g), requires EPA to issue a certificate of conformity for HDEs or HeavyDuty Vehicles (HDVs) which exceed an applicable section 202(a) emissions standard, but do not exceed an upper limit associated with that standard, if the manufacturer pays an NCP established by rulemaking. Congress adopted section 206(g) in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 as a response to perceived problems with technologyforcing heavy-duty emissions standards. (It should be noted, however, that the existence of NCPs does not change the criteria under which the standards have been and will be set under section 202.) Following International Harvester v. Ruckelshaus, 478 F.2d 615 (D.C. Cir. 1973), Congress realized the dilemma that technology-forcing standards were likely to cause. If strict standards were maintained, then some manufacturers, ``technological laggards,'' might be unable to comply initially and would be forced out of the marketplace. NCPs were intended to remedy this potential problem. The laggards would have a temporary alternative that would permit them to sell their engines or vehicles by payment of a penalty. This penalty is based in part, on the money saved from the production of non complying engines, would protect conforming manufacturers from the competitive disadvantage of making more costly [[Page 6950]] engines which comply with technology forcing standards. Under section 206(g)(1) of the Clean Air Act, NCPs may be offered for HDVs or HDEs. The penalty may vary by pollutant and by class or category of vehicle or engine. HDVs are defined by section 202(b)(3)(C) of the Clean Air Act as vehicles in excess of 6,000 pounds gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR). The light-duty truck (LDT) classification includes trucks that have a GVWR of 8,500 lbs or less. Therefore, certain LDTs may be classified as HDVs. Historically, LDTs between 6,001 and 8,500 pounds GVWR have been considered Heavy Light Duty Trucks (HLDTs). Based on various new requirements established by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, HLDTs have been further subdivided into groups by weight. The HLDTs are divided at 5750 lbs Adjusted Loaded Vehicle Weight (ALVW) which is the average of the curb weight and the GVWR. The HLDTs that are up through 5750 lbs ALVW are called Light Duty Trucks 3 (LDT3). Those above 5750 lbs ALVW but less than or equal to 8500 lbs GVWR are Light Duty Trucks 4, or LDT4. The LDT3 and LDT4 subclasses make up the HLDT vehicle class. Since NCPs are only offered for heavy duty vehicles or engines, this notice addresses only emission standards for light duty trucks of the LDT3 and LDT4 categories. Section 206(g)(3) of the Clean Air Act requires that NCPs: (1) Account for the degree of emission nonconformity; (2) Increase periodically to provide incentive for nonconforming manufacturers to achieve the emission standards; and (3) Remove the competitive disadvantage to conforming manufacturers. Section 206(g) authorizes EPA to require testing of production vehicles or engines in order to determine the emission level on which the penalty is based. If the emission level of a vehicle or engine exceeds an upper limit of nonconformity established by EPA through regulation, the vehicle or engine would not qualify for an NCP under section 206(g) and no certificate of conformity could be issued to the manufacturer. If the emission level is below the upper limit but above the standard, that emission level becomes the ``compliance level,'' which is also the benchmark for warranty and recall liability; the manufacturer who elects to pay the NCP is liable for vehicles or engines that exceed the compliance level in-use, unless, for the case of HLDTs, the compliance level is below the in-use standard. The manufacturer does not have in-use warranty or recall liability for emissions levels above the standard but below the compliance level. II. Background A. The Generic Nonconformance Penalty Rule The generic NCP rule (Phase I) established three basic criteria for determining the eligibility of emission standards for nonconformance penalties in any given model year. See 40 CFR 1103-87. First, the emission standard in question must become more difficult to meet. This can occur in two ways, either by the emission standard itself becoming more stringent, or due to its interaction with another emission standard that has become more stringent. Second, substantial work must be required to meet the emission standard. EPA considers ``substantial work'' to mean the application of technology not previously used in that vehicle or engine class/ subclass, or a significant modification of existing technology, to bring that vehicle/engine into compliance. EPA does not consider minor modifications or calibration changes to be classified as substantial work. Third, a technological laggard must be likely to develop. A technological laggard is defined as a manufacturer who cannot meet a particular emission standard due to technological (not economic) difficulties and who, in the absence of NCPs, might be forced from the marketplace. EPA will make the determination that a technological laggard is likely to develop, based in large part on the above two criteria. However, these criteria are not always sufficient to determine the likelihood of the development of a technological laggard. An emission standard may become more difficult to meet and substantial work may be required for compliance, but if that work merely involves transfer of well-developed technology from another vehicle class, it is unlikely that a technological laggard would develop. The above three criteria were used to determine eligibility for NCPs in Phase II of the NCP rulemaking (50 FR 53454, December 31, 1985), in Phase III of the NCP rulemaking (55 FR 46622, November 5, 1990) concerning the 1991 model year HDE standards, and in Phase IV of the NCP rulemaking (58 FR 68532, December 28, 1993) concerning HDVs and HDEs subject to the 1994 and later model year emission standards for particulate matter (PM). As in the previous NCP rules, EPA is specifying values for the following parameters in the NCP formula for each standard: COC50, COC90, MC50, and F. The NCP formula is the same as that promulgated in the Phase I rule. COC50 is an estimate of the industry wide average incremental cost per engine (references to engines are intended to include vehicles as well) associated with meeting the standard for which an NCP is offered, compared with meeting the upper limit. COC50 is based on typical engine technology, as nearly as EPA can identify it. As in the previous NCP rules, costs include additional manufacturer costs and additional owner costs. The other NCP rules did not include certification costs in the calculation of COC50, and none will be allowed in this proposed rule because both complying and noncomplying manufacturers must incur certification costs. COC90 is EPA's best estimate of the 90th percentile incremental cost per engine associated with meeting the standard for which an NCP is offered, compared with meeting the associated upper limit. COC90 is based on a near worst case technology, as nearly as EPA can identify it. COC90, like COC50, includes both manufacturer and owner costs, but not certification costs. MC50 is an estimate of the industry wide average marginal cost of compliance per unit of reduced pollutant associated with the least cost effective emission control technology installed to meet the new standard. MC50 is measured in dollars per g/BHP-hr for HDEs and in dollars per gram per mile (g/mi) for LDTs. F is a factor used to derive MC90, the 90th percentile marginal cost of compliance with the NCP standard for engines in the NCP category. MC90 is defined as being the slope of the penalty rate curve near the standard and is equal to MC50 multiplied by F. For this rulemaking, as was the case in the previous NCP rules, EPA has determined that no reasonable estimate of MC90 can be made based on existing marginal cost data and has thus set F at a presumptive value of 1.2. This approach was generally supported by commentaries on the past NCP rulemakings. B. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (59 FR 43074, August 22, 1994), EPA identified the Tier I Heavy Light-Duty Trucks (HLDT) NOX standard of 0.98 g/mi becoming effective in 1996, the 1998 HDE NOX standard of 4.0 g/ [[Page 6951]] BHp-hr, and the 1996 Urban Bus PM standard of 0.05 g/BHp-hr as new standards for which it has statutory authority for considering NCPs. EPA did not propose to offer NCPs for these standards because, based on the information available at the time of the proposed rulemaking, these standards did not meet the criteria for offering NCPs. C. Summary and Analysis of Comments Based on comments to the NPRM received by EPA, EPA has decided to offer NCPs for the 1996 Light Duty Trucks 3 (LDT3) NOX standard of 0.98 g/mi for diesel-fueled vehicles, the 1998 HDE NOX standard of 4.0 g/BHp-hr for HDDEs, and the 1996 Urban Bus PM standard of 0.05 g/ BHp-hr. 1. Heavy Light Duty Trucks 3 NOX Standard General Motors, the only manufacturer in this market, commented that NCPs are justified for this standard since ``* * * the NOX standard change is large (1.7 g/mi to 0.98 g/mi) * * *'' and ``attempts to reach significantly lower NOX levels with the current technology results in very poor engine combustion control with significant increased smoke * * *'' GM goes on to state that new technology is required which ``concentrates on new EGR systems and control interfaces between this EGR technology and the fuel control system * * *'' EPA agrees with GM's assessment that current EGR flow rates cannot be increased to limit NOX emissions without changes to the fuel control system. Driveabiliity problems will occur at higher EGR flow rates unless the fuel control system is adjusted to account for these higher EGR flow rates. EPA believes that GM will need to recalibrate the engine computer to better control fuel delivery rates to allow for improved driveability at increased EGR flow rates. EPA also believes that air-to-air aftercooling will be necessary to further reduce NOX emissions below the standard. EPA acknowledges that the stringency of the NOX standard for this class of trucks has increased. Also, significant work will be involved in developing the appropriate fuel system calibration to allow for increased EGR flow. Further work will be necessary to develop airto -air aftercooling which is new to this segment of the truck market. Since the previously mentioned technology may not be developed by the start of the 1996 model year, a technological laggard may develop. For these reasons, EPA is offering NCPs for 1996 LTD3 NOX standard. 2. 1996 HDDE Urban Bus PM Standard Detroit Diesel Corporation (DDC) commented that they are capable of achieving 0.05 g/BHp-hr in development engines using only a catalytic converter, but they need new technology to ensure that production engines would be capable of satisfying the new standard during Selective Enforcement Audit (SEA) testing. The Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) stated that for the 1996 model year Urban Bus Engine PM standard the three criteria for offering NCPs are met. In the 1996 model year the PM standard applicable to Urban Bus Engines becomes more stringent. EPA acknowledges that new technologies need to be developed to provide for a compliance margin for SEA testing. These technologies include improving aftertreatment devices such as catalysts and traps and new turbocharger designs. EPA believes that substantial work will be involved in developing this diesel fueled technology. Particulate traps have not proven to be durable. Catalysts have reduced PM emissions but further reductions are necessary. Low inertia turbochargers are being developed but have yet to be offered in the urban bus market and their effectiveness is uncertain. EPA believes that Urban Bus Engine manufacturers will need to employ the unproven technology mentioned in the preceding paragraph to ensure compliance with this standard, thus; EPA believes a technological laggard is likely to develop and will be offering NCPs. 3. 1998 HDE NOX Standard EMA commented that ``based on the information presently available, it is likely that certain engine manufacturers and/or certain engine families may not be able to meet the 4.0 g/bhp-hr NOX standard in 1998''. Mack Truck suggested that NCPs should be offered for this standard since they were offered for the 1988 and 1991 NOX standards. DDC commented that several of their most advanced engines are using credits to meet the 1994 standards. Because of the NOXPM trade off and the stringency of the 1994 PM standard, none of their engines are capable of generating NOX credits which could be used toward the 1998 NOX standard. This could result in DDC having to discontinue several of its engine ratings in 1998. Navistar commented that a commercially important engine may not be finished in time causing an interruption in manufacturing. Navistar stated that NCPs would allow such an engine to be put into commerce. In the 1998 model year the NOX standard applicable to HDEs will become more stringent. EPA believes that this increase in stringency will require the HDE manufacturers to employ new emission control technology (e.g., oxidation catalysts, improved turbochargers, modifications to the fuel injection systems, or engine calibration changes). These new technologies will require substantial work. Also based on manufacturers' comments to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (59 FR 43074, August 22, 1994), EPA now believes that a technological laggard may develop. Therefore, EPA has decided to offer NCPs for the 1998 model year HDE NOX standard. III. Standards Addressed in a Concurrent NCP Rulemaking a. 1996 Tier 1 Standards for LDT3 other than diesel NOX b. 1996 Tier 1 Standards for LDT4 IV. Penalty Rates and Upper Limits This rule is the most recent in a series of NCP rulemakings. The discussion of penalty rates in the Phase IV rulemaking (58 FR 68532, December 28, 1993), Phase III rulemaking (55 FR 46622, November 5, 1990), the Phase II rulemaking (50 FR 53454, December 31, 1985) as well as the Phase I rulemaking (50 FR 35374, August 30, 1985) are incorporated by reference. The derivation of the proposed cost parameters is described in a support document entitled ``Calculation of Nonconformance Penalty Rates for 1996 and Later Model Year LDT3 Particulate Matter (PM), LDT3 Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX), 1996 and Later Model Year Urban Bus Particulate Matter (PM), and 1998 and Later Model Year HDDE Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) Standards'' which is available in the public docket for this rulemaking. The associated upper limits of 1.7 g/mi NOX and 0.12 g/mi PM for diesel LDT3, 5.0 g/BHp-hr NOX for HDDEs, and 0.07 g/ BHp-hr PM for urban bus engines were determined from the previous standards as per Section 86.1104-91 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). V. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: [[Page 6952]] (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action.'' This regulation will not have an annual effect on the economy in excess of $100 million and will not cause a major increase in the price of HDEs above those that would otherwise occur from compliance with the emission standards themselves. This regulation is intended to assist manufacturers that are having difficulty developing and marketing vehicles which comply with the 1996 Tier 1 PM standard for LDT3s. Without this rule, a manufacturer experiencing difficulty in complying with this new emission standard (after the use of credits) has only two alternatives: fix the nonconforming engines for the associated model years or not sell them at all. NCPs provide manufacturers with additional time to bring their engines into conformity. In addition, NCPs are calculated to deprive nonconforming manufacturers of any cost savings and competitive advantages stemming from marketing a nonconforming engine. Thus, NCPs will not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic or export markets. VI. Economic Impact Because the use of NCPs is optional, manufacturers have the flexibility and will likely choose whether or not to use NCPs based on their ability to comply with emissions standards. If a HDE manufacturer elects not to use NCPs, the manufacturer and its customers will not incur any additional costs related to NCPs. NCPs remedy the potential problem of having a manufacturer forced out of the marketplace due to that manufacturer's inability to conform to new, strict emission standards in a timely manner. Without NCPs, a manufacturer which has difficulty certifying HDEs in conformance with emission standards or whose engines fail a SEA has only two alternatives: fix the nonconforming engines, perhaps at a prohibitive cost, or prevent their introduction into commerce. The availability of NCPs provides manufacturers with a third alternative: continue production and introduce into commerce upon payment of a penalty for an engine that exceeds the standard until an emission conformance technique is developed. Therefore, NCPs represent a regulatory mechanism that allows affected manufacturers to have increased flexibility. A decision to use NCPs may be a manufacturer's only way to continue to introduce HDEs into commerce. Hence, NCPs may be considered to have no adverse economic impact. VII. Environmental Impact When evaluating the environmental impact of this rule, one must keep in mind that, under the Clean Air Act, NCPs are a consequence of enacting new, more stringent emissions requirements for heavy duty engines. Emission standards are set at a level that most, but not necessarily all, manufacturers can achieve by the model year in which the standard becomes effective. Following International Harvester v. Ruckelshaus, 478 F.2d 615 (D.C. Cir. 1973), Congress realized the dilemma that technology-forcing standards were likely to cause, and allowed manufacturers of heavy-duty engines to certify nonconforming vehicles/engines upon the payment of an NCP, under certain conditions. This mechanism would allow a manufacturer(s) who cannot meet technology-forcing standards immediately to continue to manufacture these nonconforming engines while they tackle the technological problems associated with meeting new emission standard(s). Thus, as part of the statutory structure to force technological improvements without driving manufacturers out of the market, NCPs provide flexibility that fosters long-term emissions improvement through the setting of lower emission standards at an earlier date than could otherwise be possible. By design, NCPs encourage the technological laggard that is using NCPs to reduce emission levels to the more stringent standard as quickly as possible. VIII. Compliance With Regulatory Flexibility Act Under section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., the Administrator is required to either perform a regulatory flexibility analysis or certify that this regulation will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small business entities. None of the affected manufacturers could be classified as small. Moreover, as already discussed, the NCP program can be expected to benefit manufacturers. Some small entities do exist as manufacturers' contractors for the testing of engines for Production Compliance Audits (PCAs). It is EPA's practice to conduct PCA scheduling (namely, tests per day limitations) in such a way as to consider the staff and manpower capabilities of such contractors and avoid any problems. The result is that these entities are not adversely affected. Thus, I certify that this rule will not have any adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. IX. Information Collection Requirements This rule requires that manufacturers perform certain record keeping and submit certain reports to EPA. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., provides that reporting and record keeping requirements be approved by OMB before they can be enforced by EPA. The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have been addressed in previous rulemaking and approved by OMB (OMB control no. 2060-0132). However, any person wishing to comment on these requirements is invited to do so. Comments on these requirements should be submitted to Chief, Information Policy Branch, Mail Code 2136, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., S.W., Washington, DC 20460 and to Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 726 Jackson Place, NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.'' X. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules [[Page 6953]] with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternative and adopt the least costly, most cost effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements. Today's rule contains no federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable duties on any of these governmental entities or the private sector. In addition, the UMRA excludes from the definition of ``Federal private sector mandate'' duties that arise from participation in a voluntary federal program. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Gasoline, Motor vehicles, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: February 12, 1996. Carol M. Browner, Administrator. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 86, is amended as follows: PART 86-CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM NEW AND IN-USE MOTOR VEHICLES AND NEW AND IN-USE MOTOR VEHICLE ENGINES: CERTIFICATION AND TEST PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 202, 203, 206, 207, 208, 215, 216, 217, 301(a), Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7521, 7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 7542, 7549, 7550, 7552, and 7601(a)). 2. Section 86.1105-87 of subpart L is amended by adding paragraphs (g)(2) and (3) and paragraph (h), reading as follows: Sec. 86.1105-87 Emission standards for which nonconformance penalties are available. * * * * * (g) * * * (2) Light-duty truck 3 diesel-fueled vehicle at full useful life (as defined in Sec. 86.094-2) oxides of nitrogen emission standard of 0.98 g/mi. (i) The following values shall be used to calculate an NCP for the standard set forth in Sec. 86.094-9(a)(1)(ii) in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(a): (A) COC50: $654. (B) COC90: $779. (C) MC50: $908 per gram per mile. (D) F: 1.2. (ii) The following factor shall be used to calculate the engineering and development component of the NCP for the standard set forth in Sec. 86.094-9(a)(1)(ii) in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(h): 0.082. (3) 1996 Urban Bus (as defined in Sec. 86.094-2) particulate matter emission standard of 0.05 g/BHp-hr. (i) The following values shall be used to calculate an NCP for the standard set forth in Sec. 86.094-9(a)(1)(ii) in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(a): (A) COC50: $576. (B) COC90: $6,569. (C) MC50: $28,800 per gram per brake horsepower-hour. (D) F: 1.2. (ii) The following factor shall be used to calculate the engineering and development component of the NCP for the standard set forth in Sec. 86.094-9(a)(1)(ii) in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(h): 0.500. (h) Effective in the 1998 model year, NCPs will be available for the following emission standard: (1) Petroleum-fueled diesel heavy-duty engine oxides of nitrogen standard of 4.0 grams per brake horsepower-hour. (i) For petroleum-fueled light heavy-duty diesel engines: (A) The following values shall be used to calculate an NCP in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(a): (1) COC50: $833. (2) COC90: $1,513. (3) MC50: $833 per gram per brake horsepower-hour. (4) F: 1.2. (B) The following factor shall be used to calculate the engineering and development component of the NCP for the standard set forth in Sec. 86.094-9(a)(1)(ii) in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(h): 0.039. (ii) For petroleum-fueled medium heavy-duty diesel engines: (A) The following values shall be used to calculate an NCP in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(a): (1) COC50: $444. (2) COC90: $1,368. (3) MC50: $444 per gram per brake horsepower-hour. (4) F: 1.2. (B) The following factor shall be used to calculate the engineering and development component of the NCP for the standard set forth in Sec. 86.094-9(a)(1)(ii) in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(h): 0.043. (iii) For petroleum-fueled heavy heavy-duty diesel engines: (A) The following values shall be used to calculate an NCP in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(a): (1) COC50: $1,086. (2) COC90: $2,540. (3) MC50: $1,086 per gram per brake horsepower-hour (4) F: 1.2. (B) The following factor shall be used to calculate the engineering and development component of the NCP for the standard set forth in Sec. 86.094-9(a)(1)(ii) in accordance with Sec. 86.1113-87(h): 0.039. (2) [Reserved] [FR Doc. 96-4039 Filed 2-22-96; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P