Technical/Regulatory Elements: Comments and Responses

• 3.1 Model Year
• 3.2 Competition Vehicles
• 3.3 Military Vehicles used in Combat or Combat Support
• 3.4 Emission Control System and Defeat Device
• 3.5 Small Volume Manufacturers
• 3.6 Alternative Emission Standards
• 3.7 Emissions Averaging Requirements
• 3.8 Reporting Requirements
• 3.9 Importing a Vehicle or Engine
• 3.10 Rental Rate
• 3.11 Product Labelling
• 3.12 Technology Requirements

Yamaha Motor Canada Ltd. sought clarification on the model year provision and its application:

To facilitate Environment Canada's policy of alignment of smog-forming emission standards with the U.S. EPA, the definitions in the proposed Regulations are, to the extent possible, also aligned with those of the U.S. EPA. The model year provisions of the proposed Regulations, while worded differently, are intended to have the same effect as paragraph (1) of the U.S. EPA's definition of model year in section 801 of CFR 1051.

Environment Canada recognizes that certain vehicle categories are manufactured predominantly during the year preceding the model year associated with the vehicle. The proposed Regulations would apply to engines and vehicles of the 2008 and later model years that are manufactured after the planned coming into force date of January 1, 2008.

Canadian All-Terrain Vehicle Distributors Council stated:

Health Canada stated:

Engines and vehicles designed exclusively for competition and meeting established criteria would not be subject to the proposed Regulations. The definition of a competition vehicle corresponds, to the extent possible, to criteria outlined in the U.S. EPA rules. Competition vehicles and engines would also be required to have a label that identifies them as such.

Saint John Citizens Coalition for Clean Air stated:

Military vehicles that are designed exclusively for use in combat or combat support are not subject to the proposed Regulations. This exclusion is intended for those vehicles and engines that could be used in war or other foreign soil deployments and that would otherwise have emission control systems that would require the use of low sulphur gasoline which may not be available in some foreign locations. To ensure that this exclusion is only for combat or combat support vehicles, the term exclusively has been added in paragraph 6(3)(f) to reflect that intent.

Saint John Citizens Coalition for Clean Air stated:

The proposed Regulations would set out requirements for new marine spark-ignition engines and off-road recreational vehicles that prohibit vehicle and engine manufacturers from incorporating defeat devices into the design of new products. Issues related to tampering of in-use vehicles or engines by consumers are normally addressed under the jurisdiction of the provinces and territories.

The Engine Manufacturers Association commented that the U.S. EPA's Part 1051.145 (a) as it relates to small volume manufacturing should be incorporated in the proposed Regulations.

The U.S. rules provide compliance flexibilities for "small volume manufacturers," which are manufacturers and importers with fewer than 500 employees worldwide and fewer than 5000 combined off-road motorcycle and ATV sales or 300 snowmobiles sales in the U.S. per year. Small-volume manufacturers may delay complying with otherwise applicable standards for two model years. In addition, only 50% of the snowmobiles manufactured by small-volume manufacturers are required to comply with the standards in the two model years after the two-year delay.

Under the proposed Regulations, off-road recreational vehicles sold in the U.S under small-volume manufacturer provisions would be eligible for sale in Canada through the acceptance of the EPA certificate of conformity as evidence of conformity with Canada's corresponding emission standards. Given the established policy of alignment, Environment Canada also intends that off-road recreational vehicles manufactured in, or imported into, Canada by a company dealing in small volumes of vehicles that are not covered by U.S. certification be subject to emission standards equivalent to those of the U.S. Accordingly, similar provisions have been included in the proposed Regulations, such that companies manufacturing or importing less than 200 snowmobiles, 200 off-road motorcycles or 200 ATVs are not required to comply with evaporative emission standards for these vehicles during the 2008 and 2009 model years, giving two years additional time to conform than for larger companies.

Engine Manufacturers Association stated:

Canadian All-Terrain Vehicle Distributors Council stated:

Paragraph 145 (b) of CFR 1051 contains optional exhaust emission standards for the 2008 and earlier model year ATVs that are measured in g/kW-hr using the engine-based procedures instead of in g/km using the chassis-based procedures associated with the otherwise applicable standards. Under the proposed Regulations, ATVs or utility vehicles of the 2008 model year may conform to the exhaust emission standards incorporated by reference to paragraph 145 (b) of CFR 1051.

Subsections 19(2) and 20(2) of the proposed Regulations allow for off-road motorcycles with engines that have a total displacement of 70 cm³ or less and ATVs/utitlity vehicles with engines that have a total displacement of 100 cm³ or less to conform to alternative emission standards.

Health Canada requested clarification on a number of issues concerning the proposed fleet averaging provisions, including the provisions for the generation of credits and deficits.

Saint John Citizens Coalition for Clean Air stated:

Fleet averaging programs have become a common approach in the implementation of U.S. vehicle and engine emission regulations. The proposed Regulations would establish an optional emissions averaging program for marine engines and off-road recreational vehicles. The program would provide flexibility to allow companies to certify their engines and vehicles to a "family emission limit" that is less stringent than the prescribed standard as long as the increased emissions are offset, on a sales weighted basis, by engines or vehicles certified to a family emission limit that is better than the standard. The fleet average emission credits may be used in subsequent model years by the company or another company to offset a deficit. Fleet average emission deficits must be offset in the model year in which they are incurred by using previously generated credits or by obtaining credits from another company.

A company may exclude from its fleets all of its vehicles or engines that are covered by an EPA certificate from emissions averaging if the number of units sold in the U.S. covered by the certificate exceeds the number of units sold in Canada (i.e., categories A and C in the discussion document). However, in doing so, the company forfeits all previously obtained credits for that fleet and does not obtain any credits for that model year.

Emission credit systems and fleet averaging provisions have been used successfully by the U.S. EPA for many years. The emission credit system encourages manufacturers and importers to introduce early into the market cleaner vehicles and/or engines by allowing them to accumulate credits that can be used to offset future emission deficits.

The general approach proposed for emissions averaging is similar to that used in the On-Road Vehicle and Engine Emission Regulations for light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. Environment Canada has analysed companies' fleet average emissions data for the Canadian on-road light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks of the 2004 model year. The results of the analysis demonstrate that the emissions averaging approach resulted in fleet average NOx values below the applicable standards for these vehicle fleets. Accordingly, the department believes that accepting EPA certification and a flexible approach to emissions averaging delivers fleet average emissions comparable to that of the U.S. The approach under the proposed Regulations would be monitored to ensure that Environment Canada's environmental objective is met on a sustained basis.

Environment Canada recognizes that the emissions averaging programs are complex and can be confusing. However, the intent of Appendix B of the discussion document was to illustrate the development of simpler Canadian averaging equations from a number of complex equations outlined in the U.S. EPA CFR for marine engines. The resulting equations are outlined in Section 5.1 of the discussion document. Under the proposed Regulations, Environment Canada has opted to directly incorporate by reference the methodology/equations used for emissions averaging for marine engines in lieu of the equations proposed in Section 5.1 of the discussion document.

Saint John Citizens Coalition for Clean Air stated:

The proposed Regulations would require each company to submit to Environment Canada an end of model year report, no later than May 1 of the calendar year following each model year, containing a statement that the company's engines and vehicles either: (1) conform directly to the emission standard; (2) are covered by an EPA certificate and are sold concurrently in Canada and the U.S.; or (3) conform on the basis of emission averaging. Under option 3, the company must also report their fleet average emission values, fleet average emission credits/deficits and all values used in the calculations. A company that uses option 2 must also report these values even though it is not choosing to conform on the basis of fleet averaging.

Environment Canada intends to make a summary report available to the public concerning this information.

Canadian All-Terrain Vehicle Distributors Council stated:

Under the proposed Regulations, any person importing a vehicle or engine is required to submit a declaration containing the information set out in section 42. The information set out in that section is consistent with the information required under three other on-road and off-road vehicle and engine emission regulations.

Canadian All-Terrain Vehicle Distributors Council stated:

The rental rate of 12% remains under the proposed Regulations. Environment Canada would consider modifying the rental rate if data to demonstrate that the first year depreciation rate of marine spark-ignition engines and off-road recreational vehicles is different than 12%.

Canadian All-Terrain Vehicle Distributors Council stated:

Ministry of the Environment of Ontario stated:

The hangtag was intended to directly convey emissions information to the consumer. Environment Canada recognizes that consumers obtain information on products from brochures and websites and has not included a requirement for an information hangtag in the proposed Regulations.

Saint John Citizens Coalition for Clean Air stated:

The proposed Regulations would not specifically prohibit or require the use of any particular engine technology. The emission standards set out in the proposed Regulations would be performance-based, meaning that the Regulations would specify the maximum allowable levels of pollutants that an engine can emit. This allows manufacturers to have the flexibility to develop and choose the engine or emission control technologies that would ensure the vehicle or engine meets the emission standards.