Greenkraft Inc.; Grant of Application for a Temporary Exemption From FMVSS No. 108 |
|---|
Topics: Greenkraft
|
Mark R. Rosekind
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
March 5, 2015
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 43 (Thursday, March 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12057-12061]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05101]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2013-0019]
Greenkraft Inc.; Grant of Application for a Temporary Exemption
From FMVSS No. 108
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of grant of petition for a temporary exemption from
paragraph S10 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108,
Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice grants the petition of Greenkraft, Inc.
(Greenkraft) for a temporary exemption from the headlamp requirements
of FMVSS No. 108 for the company's 1061 and 1083 model trucks for
headlamps complying with European regulatory requirements. The
exemption is limited to 120 vehicles. The agency has considered
Greenkraft's petition for exemption and has determined that the
exemption would facilitate the development or field evaluation of a
low-emission motor vehicle and would not unreasonably reduce the safety
level of that vehicle if
[[Page 12058]]
the vehicle is used in a manner consistent with the conditions
discussed in this notice.
DATES: This exemption is effective immediately and runs until December
31, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Piazza, Office of the Chief
Counsel, NCC-112, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building 4th Floor, Room W41-214,
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-2992; Fax: (202) 366-3820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Statutory Basis for Temporary Exemptions
The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act),
codified as 49 U.S.C. chapter 301, authorizes the Secretary of
Transportation to exempt, on a temporary basis and under specified
circumstances, motor vehicles from a motor vehicle safety standard or
bumper standard. This authority is set forth at 49 U.S.C. 30113. The
Secretary has delegated the authority in this section to NHTSA.
NHTSA established 49 CFR part 555, Temporary Exemption from Motor
Vehicle Safety and Bumper Standards, to implement the statutory
provisions concerning temporary exemptions. A vehicle manufacturer
wishing to obtain an exemption from a standard must demonstrate in its
application (A) that an exemption would be in the public interest and
consistent with the Safety Act and (B) that the manufacturer satisfies
one of the following four bases for an exemption: (i) Compliance with
the standard would cause substantial economic hardship to a
manufacturer that has tried to comply with the standard in good faith;
(ii) the exemption would facilitate the development or field evaluation
of a new motor vehicle safety feature providing a safety level at least
equal to the safety level of the standard; (iii) the exemption would
facilitate the development or field evaluation of a low-emission motor
vehicle and would not unreasonably lower the safety level of that
vehicle; or (iv) compliance with the standard would prevent the
manufacturer from selling a motor vehicle with an overall safety level
at least equal to the overall safety level of nonexempt vehicles.
For a petition for exemption from a standard to be granted on the
basis that the exemption would facilitate the development or field
evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle and would not unreasonably
lower the safety level of the vehicle, the petition must include
specified information set forth at 49 CFR 555.6(c). The main
requirements of that section include: (1) Substantiation that the
vehicle is a low-emission vehicle; (2) documentation establishing that
a temporary exemption would not unreasonably degrade the safety of a
vehicle; (3) substantiation that a temporary exemption would facilitate
the development or field evaluation of the vehicle; (4) a statement of
whether the petitioner intends to conform to the standard at the end of
the exemption period; and (5) a statement that not more than 2,500
exempted vehicles will be sold in the United States (U.S.) in any 12-
month period for which an exemption may be granted. Exemptions granted
on the basis that the exemption would facilitate the development or
field evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle are limited to two
years in duration.
II. Overview of Petition
Greenkraft petitioned the agency for a temporary exemption from the
requirements in FMVSS No. 108 applicable to headlamps for the company's
1061 and 1083 model trucks on the basis that ``the exemption would make
the development or field evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle
easier and would not unreasonably lower the safety level of that
vehicle.'' 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B)(iii). The agency received
Greenkraft's petition October 24, 2012. Greenkraft has requested that,
if granted, the exemption period begin immediately.
Greenkraft is a corporation incorporated in California in 2008 and
has its headquarters and manufacturing operations in Santa Anna,
California. Greenkraft stated that it plans to produce the 1061 and
1083 model trucks under the requested exemption. These trucks are
equipped with compressed natural gas (CNG) engines and have a gross
vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of over 14,000 pounds. Greenkraft said it
plans to import the vehicle's chassis already equipped with the
headlamps and install the engine at the company's manufacturing
facility in California. Greenkraft stated in the petition and in
subsequent communications with NHTSA that it plans to comply with FMVSS
No. 108 at the end of the exemption period. Greenkraft originally
planned to produce 2200 vehicles under the exemption but has revised
its production plans so that it now plans to produce no more than 120
vehicles during the exemption period.
Greenkraft stated in its petition that ``the [U.S.] market
currently is in need of alternative fuel vehicles that run on natural
gas which is abundantly available in the [U.S.].'' \1\ Greenkraft
further stated that the price of natural gas is half the price of
diesel and that many businesses in the U.S. wish to purchase natural
gas powered vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Greenkraft, Inc., Petition for Temporary Exemption on the
Basis that it Would Make the Development or Field Evaluation of a
Low Emission Vehicle Easier. Document No. NHTSA-2013-0019-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Low Emission Vehicle
In order to be eligible for a temporary exemption on the grounds
that the exemption would facilitate development or field evaluation of
a low-emission vehicle without unreasonably lowering the safety
performance of the vehicle, the applicant must substantiate that the
vehicle is a low-emission vehicle. In order to qualify as a low-
emission vehicle, the vehicle must meet the applicable standards for
new motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7521, et seq. and
emit an air pollutant in an amount significantly below one of those
standards. The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) regulations
issued pursuant to the Clean Air Act establish exhaust emissions
thresholds for heavy-duty low-emission vehicles. These exhaust emission
thresholds require that a heavy duty low-emission vehicle emit combined
emissions of oxides of nitrogen and nonmethane hydrocarbons (or
nonmethane hydrocarbon equivalent) of 3.8 grams or less per brake
horsepower-hour or combined emissions of oxides of nitrogen and
nonmethane hydrocarbons (or nonmethane hydrocarbon equivalent) of 3.5
grams or less per brake horsepower-hour when tested (certified) on fuel
meeting the specifications of California certification fuel. 40 CFR
88.105-94.
Greenkraft submitted a certification from the California
Environmental Protection Agency's Air Resources Board (CARB) to
substantiate that the vehicle that is the subject of the application is
a low-emission vehicle. The CARB certification states that the
vehicle's combined emissions of oxides of nitrogen and nonmethane
hydrocarbons are 0.13 grams per brake horsepower-hour.
B. Documentation That a Temporary Exemption Would Not Unreasonably
Degrade Safety
The requirements from which Greenkraft seeks a temporary exemption
are the headlamp requirements in S10 of FMVSS No. 108. Greenkraft
stated in its application for a temporary exemption that the primary
difference between
[[Page 12059]]
Greenkraft's low-emission vehicle, if exempted, and a compliant vehicle
would be that the headlamps on Greenkraft's low-emission vehicle would
not meet the minimum candela requirements for two upper beam test
points and six lower beam test points and would exceed the maximum
candela requirement for one upper beam test point for visually/
optically aimed headlamps. Greenkraft attached to its application for
an exemption a test report from a test laboratory showing that the
headlamps on the vehicles that would be the subject of the exemption do
not meet the upper and lower beam requirements for optically and
visually aimed headlamps. Greenkraft stated in the application that
granting the exemption would not unreasonably degrade the safety of the
vehicle because the lamps provide ``excellent illumination'' even
though they do not comply with the photometric requirements of FMVSS
No. 108.
C. Substantiation That a Temporary Exemption Would Facilitate the
Development or Field Evaluation of a Low Emissions Vehicle
Greenkraft stated that a temporary exemption would facilitate the
development or field evaluation of low-emission vehicles by allowing
Greenkraft to redesign the headlamp without interrupting the
development of the vehicle while the headlamp is being redesigned.
Greenkraft further claimed that, by beginning development and field
evaluation promptly, it could receive critical data and test results to
further the development of natural gas powered vehicles.
D. Public Interest
Greenkraft stated that granting the temporary exemption would be in
the public interest because the exemption would help increase the
availability of low-emission natural gas power vehicles to businesses
in the U.S. Greenkraft stated that this would reduce the U.S.
dependence on foreign oil.
III. Summary of Comments Received in Response to Notice of Receipt of
Application
NHTSA published a notice of receipt of Greenkraft's petition for a
temporary exemption in the Federal Register on February 21, 2013.\2\ We
received three comments in response to the notice of receipt. Advocates
for Highway Safety (Advocates) and Mr. Richard Karbowski opposed
granting the exemption. The Dunlap Group submitted a comment supporting
granting the exemption. Greenkraft also submitted supplemental
materials after the comment period closed responding to the comments of
Advocates and Mr. Karbowski. Greenkraft provided further supplemental
information in response to a request from NHTSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 78 FR 12138.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advocates stated that NHTSA should not grant Greenkraft an
exemption because Greenkraft had not demonstrated that a temporary
exemption from FMVSS No. 108 would not unreasonably degrade the safety
of the vehicle as required by the Safety Act. Advocates claimed that
the test report for the headlamp that Greenkraft submitted with its
petition did not constitute evidence that the failure of the lamp to
meet the requirements of FMVSS No. 108 would not unreasonably degrade
safety. Advocates argued that Greenkraft had not shown that a headlamp,
which in some cases does not meet the minimum intensity requirements of
the standard by a substantial margin, would not unreasonably degrade
the safety of the vehicle. Advocates also argued that Greenkraft had
not provided evidence that the non-compliant headlamp is necessary to
develop its low-emission vehicle.
Mr. Karbowski stated that Greenkraft had not provided any rationale
that the exemption would not unreasonably degrade the safety of the
vehicle. Mr. Karbowski further argued that since there are several
FMVSS compliant liquefied natural gas fueled vehicles available for
sale, granting the exemption would not result in the increased sales of
those vehicles or environmental benefits.
The Dunlap Group stated that Greenkraft's vehicles would fill a
market void for businesses looking for lower cost, clean fueled
commercial vehicles.
In its supplemental submission, Greenkraft stated that the
headlamps that would be installed on the 1061 and 1083 models have the
E-code designation and comply with European regulatory requirements.
Greenkraft argued that its analysis of the headlamp and engineering
judgment indicate that the headlamps provide sufficient illumination.
Greenkraft stated that the safety record of the lamps was proven by
their long history of use in Europe and other countries.
Greenkraft stated that if the exemption were granted, it could
begin production immediately and design a headlamp that complies with
the photometric requirements of FMVSS No. 108 during the exemption
period. Greenkraft stated that developing a compliant headlamp is a
time intensive and costly endeavor for a new manufacturer like itself.
Greenkraft stated that a delay in its ability to produce vehicles under
the exemption will lead to severe economic hardship and may require the
company to lay off workers. Greenkraft argued that granting the
petition will increase the public's awareness of the environmental and
financial benefits of low-emission commercial CNG vehicles that run on
domestically produced natural gas.
In response to a request from NHTSA, Greenkraft also provided data
from European regulatory authorities demonstrating the lamp's
compliance with European regulatory requirements and information about
Greenkraft's relationship with JAC Motors of China.
IV. Agency Analysis, Response to Comment, and Decision
We have decided to grant Greenkraft an exemption from the headlamp
requirements in paragraph S10 of FMVSS No. 108 until December 31, 2015,
at which time Greenkraft has stated that it will begin equipping its
vehicles with lamps that comply with FMVSS No. 108.
A. Eligibility
As discussed above, the applicant must demonstrate that the vehicle
emits an air pollutant in an amount significantly below one of the
standards established under the Clean Air Act in order to qualify as a
low-emission vehicle. Greenkraft submitted an engine certification from
CARB to demonstrate that its vehicle met this criterion of eligibility
for an exemption. The data from the CARB certification report shows
that the vehicle's engine emits a combined oxides of nitrogen and
nonmethane hydrocarbons value of 0.134 grams per brake horsepower-hour.
This is significantly below the 3.5 grams or less per brake horsepower-
hour emissions threshold for heavy-duty low-emission vehicles
established by the EPA.\3\ Based on this information, we determine that
the 1061 and 1083 models equipped with CNG engines are low-emission
vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 40 CFR 88.105-94.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. A Temporary Exemption Would Not Unreasonably Degrade Safety
NHTSA has concluded that granting the exemption so that Greenkraft
can use headlamps that comply with European regulatory requirements on
the 1061 and 1083 models will not unreasonably lower the safety or
impact protection level of the vehicle if the vehicle is used in a
manner consistent with the conditions discussed below. NHTSA has
previously granted
[[Page 12060]]
exemptions from the headlamp requirements of FMVSS No. 108 for vehicles
equipped with European headlamps.\4\ We believe that the impact of the
non-compliance in this case will be minimal considering the type of
vehicle for which the exemption is being sought and its expected use.
The headlamp that Greenkraft plans to install on the 1061 and 1083
models provide sufficient illumination for the purposes of lane keeping
and illuminating other motor vehicles that are equipped with
reflectors. The area of performance for which we believe that the non-
compliance of the headlamps with the minimum intensity requirements in
FMVSS No. 108 could have an impact is the ability of the lamp to
illuminate pedestrians and animals in the roadway in areas where there
is no overhead illumination. We believe this concern will be minimized
because vehicles similar to the 1061 and 1083 models generally have low
pedestrian crash rates. We also believe that these concerns will be
minimized because we expect, given the nature and geographic
availability of their fuel, that the 1061 and 1083 models will be
driven primarily in urban areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Koenigegg Automotive AB; Response to Application for a
Temporary Exemption From the Headlamp Requirements of FMVSS No. 108;
Advanced Air Bag Requirements of No. 208, 72 FR 17608 (Apr. 9,
2007); Group Lotus Plc; Grant of Application for a Temporary
Exemption From Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108 and
Part 581 Bumper Standard, 69 FR 5658 (Feb. 5, 2004); Ford Motor
Company; Disposition of Petition for Temporary Exemption From
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 58 FR 16907 (Mar. 31, 1993)
[Ford].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The vehicles that are the subject of Greenkraft's application are
medium-duty CNG fueled trucks with a GVWR of over 14,000 pounds that
Greenkraft is marketing for commercial applications. Vehicles with a
GVWR over 10,000 pounds are roughly half as likely to be involved in a
crash with a pedestrian as light-duty vehicles.\5\ Furthermore, NHTSA
expects that the vehicles that are the subject of the exemption will be
used in urban areas because that it where most of the public
infrastructure needed to fuel CNG vehicles is located and where their
use would be most feasible for commercial purposes.\6\ We have
previously stated in granting an exemption from the photometry
requirements of FMVSS No. 108 that the safety impacts resulting from
the differences between European and U.S. beam patterns are minimized
for vehicles operating in urban areas because of the generally high
nighttime ambient lighting in those environments.\7\ Overhead lighting
in urban areas provides illumination to help drivers detect pedestrians
in addition to a vehicle's low beam headlamps minimizing the impact of
the headlamp's non-compliance. This reduces the chance that these
vehicles will be in a situation in which the driver of the vehicle is
relying on the vehicle's low beam headlamps to illuminate pedestrians
in the roadway.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Minimum Sound for
Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles, 78 FR 2798, 2816
(proposed Jan. 14, 2013) (to be codified at 49 CFR pt. 571)
(comparing pedestrian crash rates between vehicles with a GVWR less
than 10000 pounds and those with a GVWR above 10000 pounds).
\6\ http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/natural_gas_locations.html.
\7\ See Ford, 58 FR 16910 (Mar. 31, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We disagree with Advocates and Mr. Karbowski as to whether
Greenkraft has provided sufficient information for us to make a
determination that the exemption would not unreasonably degrade the
safety or impact protection of the vehicle. Greenkraft has provided a
test report demonstrating the performance of the lamp and a statement
that the lamp conforms to European regulatory requirements. We believe
that these materials along with the description of the vehicle and
NHTSA's expertise regarding the use of commercial vehicles are
sufficient to enable us to make a determination that the exemption does
not unreasonably degrade the safety of the vehicle.
We do have some concerns about the decrease in performance of the
headlamp that Greenkraft wishes to install on the 1061 and 1083 models
when compared to a compliant lamp when the lamp is used to detect
pedestrians and animals in areas where there is no overhead
illumination of the roadway. A properly aimed low beam headlamp
meeting, but not exceeding, the minimum required luminous output in
FMVSS No. 108 at the down the road 0.6D-1.3R test point would
illuminate a pedestrian approximately 180 feet from the vehicle. The
headlamp Greenkraft wishes to use provides only 73% of the required
light output at this same test point, which could reduce the detection
distance of a pedestrian or animal in the roadway by around 20-30 feet.
Because of our concerns about the impact of the exemption on the
driver of the vehicle's ability to see pedestrians and other objects in
the road in areas where there is no overhead illumination we are
granting this petition with conditions on how the vehicle is to be
marketed. We believe that it is most appropriate for the 1061 and 1083
models to be used in urban areas during daylight hours with minimal
night time use. We believe that it is most appropriate that the
vehicles be marketed as commercial delivery vehicles. We do not believe
that it would be appropriate for these vehicles to be marketed for any
purpose that would entail substantial use at night. We also expect
Greenkraft to inform its dealers of the conditions regarding marketing
that accompany the grant of this exemption. If we determine that
vehicles produced under the exemption are being marketed in a manner
that is not consistent with these conditions, we will examine whether
the exemption should be terminated under 49 CFR 555.8(d) because the
exemption is no longer in the public interest. For these reasons, we
believe that the exemption will not unreasonably degrade the safety or
impact protection of the vehicle if used in a manner consistent with
the conditions described above.
C. A Temporary Exemption Would Facilitate the Development or Field
Evaluation of a Low Emissions Vehicle
We have concluded that an exemption from the headlamp requirements
of FMVSS No. 108 would make the development or field evaluation of a
low-emission motor vehicle easier. Granting the exemption will allow
Greenkraft to produce vehicles while the company designs a headlamp
that complies with FMVSS No. 108. We believe that allowing Greenkraft
to produce and sell vehicles during the exemption period will
demonstrate to the public the environmental benefits and viability of
CNG powered vehicles. For these reasons we agree with Greenkraft that
granting this exemption will aid the development of low-emission
vehicles.
D. An Exemption Is in the Public Interest
We also find that this exemption is consistent with the public
interest and the objectives of the Safety Act. NHTSA has traditionally
found that the public interest is served by affording consumers a wider
variety of motor vehicles, by encouraging the development and field
evaluation of fuel-efficient and alternative-energy vehicles, and by
providing additional employment opportunities. We believe that allowing
Greenkraft to produce vehicles during the exemption period will further
all of these objectives. Allowing Greenkraft to manufacture and sell
these vehicles during the exemption period will provide consumers
access to clean fueled vehicles that run on a domestically produced
energy source. Furthermore, Greenkraft is a manufacturer located in
California that employs approximately 35 people. Granting this
exemption will enable
[[Page 12061]]
Greenkraft to more quickly begin selling vehicles which will allow the
company to begin realizing revenues from vehicle sales. The revenues
from these vehicle sales will allow Greenkraft to continue to employee
individuals involved in the manufacture and sale of these vehicles.
We note that prospective purchasers will be notified that the
vehicle is exempted from the requirements in paragraph S10 of FMVSS No.
108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment. Under 49 CFR
555.9(b), a manufacturer of an exempted vehicle must affix securely to
the windshield or side window of each exempted vehicle a label
containing a statement that the vehicle conforms to all applicable
FMVSSs in effect on the date of manufacture ``except for Standard Nos.
[listing the standards by number and title for which an exemption has
been granted] exempted pursuant to NHTSA Exemption No. ____.'' This
label notifies prospective purchasers about the exemption and its
subject. Under Sec. 555.9(c), this information must also be included
on the vehicle's certification label.
E. Agency Decision
In consideration of the foregoing, we conclude that granting the
requested exemption from the requirements in paragraph S10 of FMVSS No.
108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment, would
facilitate the development or field evaluation of a low-emission
vehicle, and would not unreasonably lower the safety or impact
protection level of that vehicle if the vehicle is marketed as a
commercial vehicle for use during day light hours. Marketing the 1061
and 1083 models for any purpose that would entail substantial use at
night is not consistent with this temporary exemption. We further
conclude that granting this exemption is in the public interest and
consistent with the objectives of the Safety Act subject to the
conditions described above. We would like to emphasize that this
exemption from FMVSS No. 108, Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated
Equipment is limited to paragraph S10 of that standard. Any vehicle
manufactured or sold under this exemption must conform to all other
applicable requirements of FMVSS No. 108. This exemption is limited to
120 CNG fueled vehicles. In addition, this exemption is conditioned on
Greenkraft's marketing the exempted vehicles as commercial vehicles for
use during day light hours. As part of these efforts, Greenkraft should
ensure that potential purchasers are informed that the exempted
vehicles should be used primarily during daylight hours.
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(3)(B)(iii), Greenkraft is
granted NHTSA Temporary Exemption No. EX 15-01 from paragraph S10 of
FMVSS No. 108. The exemption shall be effective from the date on which
notice of this decision is published in the Federal Register until
December 31, 2015, as indicated in the DATES section of this document.
(49 U.S.C. 30113; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95)
Issued in Washington, DC, on February 25, 2015 under authority
delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95.
Mark R. Rosekind,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-05101 Filed 3-4-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P