Clearing the
Air on the EPA's Final Ruling
Like many of
you, I've been waiting to see how the
Environmental Protection Agency plans
to regulate motorcycle emissions in the
future. It's been a hot topic for the past
year. On December 23, 2003, the EPA issued a press
release to announce the signing of a Final Rule by
EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt to establish the first
new emission standards for highway motorcycles in over
25 years. I am not at all an expert on technical
gobbledegook, but I'll do the best I can to put the
ruling into layman's terms for the rest of us.
In this
final rule, the EPA is adopting new emission standards
for exhaust and evaporative emissions from highway
motorcycles in two steps, or
"tiers".
Tier 1.
By the 2006
model year and later, a Class III engine (having a
displacement of 280 cc's or more) will be
limited to no more than 1.4 grams of HC
(hydrocarbons) + NOx(nitrogen oxides) and no more
than 12 grams of CO (carbon monoxide) per
kilometer. (CO levels remain consistent with
current levels)
Tier 2.
By the 2010
model year and later, a Class III engine (having a
displacement of 280 cc's or more) will be limited to
no more than 0.8 grams of HC (hydrocarbons) +
NOx(nitrogen oxides) and 12 grams of CO (carbon
monoxide) per kilometer. (CO levels remain
consistent with current levels)
These
standards apply only to new motorcycles. Anything
manufactured prior to the 2006 model year will not be
affected and will remain legal to own and operate.
The
standards are based on comparable requirements adopted
in California. The final rule extends the California
requirements nationwide two years after they initially
take effect in California. This gives manufacturers
the opportunity to work out any production kinks with
California being the guinea pig.
Small volume
manufacturers, producing 3000 motorcycles or
less per year, with 500 or less employees
worldwide, will only need to meet Tier 1 standards by
2008 and are not required to meet Tier 2 standards at
all. This could always change, but is seen as a major
victory.
The EPA does
not specify what emission control technologies are
necessary to comply with the new standards. Catalytic
converters, secondary air injection and electronic fuel
injection are all possibilities. The standards are
not expected to result in the
universal use of catalytic converters, leaving that
decision to manufacturers.
The EPA is
also adopting new evaporative emission standards to
control the loss of gasoline (described as
"permeation") through the walls of fuel hoses
and fuel tanks.
California's
standards for permeation emissions are actually more
stringent than the EPA which is evidenced in the use of
charcoal canisters. The EPA does not make mention
of using canisters to achieve their desired goals,
instead focusing on tank and hose technology.
"Averaging"
across a manufacturer's product line means that a
"clean burning" fuel injected V-Rod helps
offset the emissions of a "dirty burning"
carbureted Softail. The EPA will allow averaging,
banking and trading of emissions between and within
each of the three motorcycle classes, whereas
California only allows averaging within the Class III
standards.
There are no
"end of life" provisions. EPA uses the term
"useful life" to describe the period over
which the manufacturer must demonstrate the
effectiveness of the emissions control system.
Motorcyclists were concerned that the EPA would mandate
a motorcycle be scrapped or turned over to the
government after a predetermined mileage limit was met.
There is a
once-in-a-lifetime exemption for a "custom" or
"kit motorcycle" for your own personal use, as
long as you don't sell it for at least five years.
Rules
regarding customization by the consumer remain
unchanged. The EPA is not changing existing provisions
of section 203(a) of the Clean Air Act, established by
Congress in 1977, which essentially means that
owners of motor vehicles cannot legally make
modifications that cause the emissions to exceed the
applicable emissions standards, and they cannot remove
or disable emission control devices installed by the
manufacturer.
Exhaust
noise is a different issue entirely and is not addressed
in this ruling. However, responsible revving on
your behalf is expected, as more cities across the
nation are putting noise ordinances into effect. Also,
there is no mention of smog check, which could be
adopted at any time as it was in Arizona.
The
EPA has given concessions where we expected none.
Why? Because of your letters. The EPA received comments from a wide
variety of stakeholders, including the motorcycle
manufacturing industry, motorcycle rights groups,
various governmental bodies, environmental groups, and
the general public.
In this regard, the
ruling could be described as a relative victory for
motorcyclists. Good job!
