[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 107 (Wednesday, June 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30656-30666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-14558]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Automotive Fuel Economy Program Report to Congress
The attached document, Automotive Fuel Economy Program, Twenty-
first Annual Report to the Congress, was prepared pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
32916 et seq. which requires that ``the Secretary
[[Page 30657]]
shall transmit to each House of Congress, and publish in the Federal
Register, a review of the average fuel economy standards under this
part.''
Issued: May 29, 1997.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
Automotive Fuel Economy Program
Twenty-First Annual Report to Congress
Calendar Year 1996
Table of Contents
Section I: Introduction
Section II: Fuel Economy Improvement by Manufacturers
A. Fuel Economy Performance by Manufacturer
B. Characteristics of the MY 1996 Passenger Car Fleet
C. Characteristics of the MY 1996 Light Truck Fleet
D. Passenger Car and Light Truck Fleet Economy Averages
E. Domestic and Import Fleet Fuel Economy Averages
Section III: 1996 Activities
A. Light Truck CAFE Standards
B. Low Volume Petitions
C. Enforcement
D. Contract Activities
Section I: Introduction
The Twenty-first Annual Report to Congress on the Automotive Fuel
Economy Program summarizes the activities of the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) during 1996, in accordance with
49 U.S.C. 32916 et seq., which requires the submission of a report each
year. Included in this report is a section summarizing rulemaking
activities during 1996. The Federal Reports Elimination Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-66) repealed Section 305, Title III, of the Department of
Energy Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-238), ``a discussion of the use of advanced
automotive technology by the industry.'' Accordingly, the advanced
automotive technology section is permanently eliminated from these
annual reports beginning with this edition.
The Secretary of Transportation is required to administer a program
for regulating the fuel economy of new passenger cars and light trucks
in the United States market. The authority to administer the program
was delegated by the Secretary to the Administrator of NHTSA, 49 CFR
1.50(f).
NHTSA's responsibilities in the fuel economy area include:
(1) Establishing and amending average fuel economy standards for
manufacturers of passenger cars and light trucks, as necessary;
(2) Promulgating regulations concerning procedures, definitions,
and reports necessary to support the fuel economy standards;
(3) Considering petitions for exemption from established fuel
economy standards by low volume manufacturers (those producing fewer
than 10,000 passenger cars annually worldwide) and establishing
alternative standards for them;
(4) Preparing reports to Congress annually on the fuel economy
program;
(5) Enforcing fuel economy standards and regulations; and
(6) Responding to petitions concerning domestic production by
foreign manufacturers, and other matters.
Passenger car fuel economy standards were established by Congress
for Model Year (MY) 1985 and thereafter at a level of 27.5 miles per
gallon (mpg). NHTSA is authorized to amend the standard above or below
that level. Standards for light trucks were established by NHTSA for
MYs 1979 through 1998. NHTSA set a combined standard of 20.7 mpg for
light truck fleets for MY 1998. All current standards are listed in
Table I-1.
Table I-1.--Fuel Economy Standards for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks; Model Years 1978 Through 1998 (in MPG)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Light trucks \1\
Passenger -----------------------------------------
Model year cars Two-wheel Four-wheel
drive drive Combined \2\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\3\-----
1978..................................................... \4\ 18.0 ........... ........... ..............
1979..................................................... \4\ 19.0 17.2 15.8
1980..................................................... \4\ 20.0 16.0 14.0 (\5\)
1981..................................................... 22.0 \6\ 16.7 15.0 (\5\)
1982..................................................... 24.0 18.0 16.0 17.5
1983..................................................... 26.0 19.5 17.5 19.0
1984..................................................... 27.0 20.3 18.5 20.0
1985..................................................... \4\ 27.5 \7\ 19.7 \7\ 18.9 \7\ 19.5
1986..................................................... \8\ 26.0 20.5 19.5 20.0
1987..................................................... \9\ 26.0 21.0 19.5 20.5
1988..................................................... \9\ 26.0 21.0 19.5 20.5
1989..................................................... \10\ 26.5 21.5 19.0 20.5
1990..................................................... \4\ 27.5 20.5 19.0 20.0
1991..................................................... \4\ 27.5 20.7 19.1 20.2
1992..................................................... \4\ 27.5 ........... ........... 20.2
1993..................................................... \4\ 27.5 ........... ........... 20.4
1994..................................................... \4\ 27.5 ........... ........... 20.5
1995..................................................... \4\ 27.5 ........... ........... 20.6
1996..................................................... \4\ 27.5 ........... ........... 20.7
1997..................................................... \4\ 27.5 ........... ........... 20.7
1998..................................................... \4\ 27.5 ........... ........... 20.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Standards for MY 1979 light trucks were established for vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR)
of 6,000 pounds or less. Standards for MY 1980 and beyond are for light trucks with a GVWR of 8,500 pounds or
less.
\2\ For MY 1979, light truck manufacturers could comply separately with standards for four-wheel drive, general
utility vehicles and all other light trucks, or combine their trucks into a single fleet and comply with the
standard of 17.2 mpg.
\3\ For MYs 1982-1991, manufacturers could comply with the two-wheel and four-wheel drive standards or could
combine all light trucks and comply with the combined standard.
\4\ Established by Congress in Title V of the Act.
\5\ A manufacturer whose light truck fleet was powered exclusively by basic engines which were not also used in
passenger cars could meet standards of 14 mpg and 14.5 mpg in MYs 1980 and 1981, respectively.
[[Page 30658]]
\6\ Revised in June 1979 from 18.0 mpg.
\7\ Revised in October 1984 from 21.6 mpg for two-wheel drive, 19.0 mpg for four-wheel drive, and 21.0 mpg for
combined.
\8\ Revised in October 1985 from 27.5 mpg.
\9\ Revised in October 1986 from 27.5 mpg.
\10\ Revised in September 1988 from 27.5 mpg.
Section II: Fuel Economy Improvement by Manufacturers
A. Fuel Economy Performance by Manufacturer
The fuel economy achievements for domestic and foreign-based
manufacturers in MY 1995 were updated to include final Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) calculations, where available, since the
publication of the Twentieth Annual Report to the Congress. These fuel
economy achievements and current projected data for MY 1996 are listed
in Tables II-1 and II-2.
Overall fleet fuel economy for passenger cars was 28.7 mpg in MY
1996, an increase of 0.1 mpg from the MY 1995 level. For MY 1996,
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) values increased above MY 1995
levels for seven of 23 passenger car manufacturers' fleets. (See Table
II-1.) These seven companies accounted for more than 42 percent of the
total MY 1996 production. Manufacturers continued to introduce new
technologies and more fuel-efficient models, and some larger, less
fuel-efficient models. For MY 1996, the overall domestic manufacturers'
fleet average fuel economy was 28.3 mpg. For MY 1996, General Motors
domestic passenger car CAFE value rose 0.9 mpg from its 1995 level,
while Chrysler, Ford, Mazda, and Toyota fell 0.8 mpg, 0.9 mpg, 0.5 mpg,
and 0.2 mpg, respectively, from their MY 1995 levels. Overall, the
domestic manufacturers' combined CAFE increased 0.6 mpg above MY 1995
level.
Table II-1.--Passenger Car Fuel Economy Performance by Manufacturer \1\
Model Years 1995 and 1996
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model year CAFE
(MPG)
Manufacturer -----------------
1995 1996
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Domestic:
Chrysler............................................ 28.4 27.6
Ford................................................ 27.7 26.8
General Motors...................................... 27.4 28.3
Honda............................................... (\2\) 33.2
Mazda............................................... 30.3 29.8
Toyota.............................................. 28.5 28.3
Sales Weighted Average (Domestic)..................... 27.7 28.3
Import:
BMW................................................. 25.3 27.3
Chrysler Imports.................................... 28.6 28.2
Fiat................................................ 15.7 13.8
Ford Imports........................................ 34.0 31.5
GM Imports.......................................... 36.7 35.8
Honda............................................... 32.7 27.8
Hyundai............................................. 31.2 32.9
Kia................................................. 31.2 29.0
Mazda............................................... 31.4 32.7
Mercedes-Benz....................................... 24.7 25.1
Mitsubishi.......................................... 29.9 29.9
Nissan.............................................. 29.5 30.4
Porsche............................................. 22.7 21.5
Subaru.............................................. 28.9 27.7
Suzuki.............................................. 40.8 34.0
Toyota.............................................. 30.4 29.8
Volvo............................................... 26.0 26.1
Volkswagen.......................................... 29.0 28.2
Sales Weighted Average (Import)....................... 30.3 29.7
Total Fleet Average............................... 28.6 28.7
Fuel Economy Standards............................ 27.5 27.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Manufacturers or importers of fewer than 1,000 passenger cars
annually are not listed.
\2\ In MY 1996 Honda achieved 75 percent domestic content for its United
States built passenger cars to become the third foreign-based
manufacturer with a domestic fleet.
Note: Some MY 1995 CAFE values differ from those used in the Twentieth
Annual Report to the Congress due to the use of final EPA
calculations.
Table II-2.--Light Truck Fuel Economy Performance by Manufacturer
[Model Years 1995 and 1996]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model year CAFE
(MPG)
-----------------
Manufacturer Combined
-----------------
1995 1996
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Domestic:
Chrysler............................................ 20.1 20.3
Ford................................................ 20.8 20.6
General Motors...................................... 20.1 20.7
Sales Weighted Average (Domestic)..................... 20.3 20.5
Import:
Isuzu............................................... 20.3 19.5
Land Rover.......................................... 16.3 17.2
Mazda............................................... 20.9 20.7
Mitsubishi.......................................... 20.2 19.1
Nissan.............................................. 22.4 23.0
Suzuki.............................................. 28.1 27.5
Toyota.............................................. 21.2 23.2
Volkswagen.......................................... 19.6 (\1\)
Sales Weighted Average (Import)....................... 21.5 22.1
Total Fleet Average................................. 20.5 20.7
Fuel Economy Standards.............................. 20.6 20.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Volkswagen did not produce light trucks for MY 1996.
Note: Some MY 1995 CAFE values differ from those used in the Twentieth
Annual Report to the Congress due to the use of final EPA
calculations.
In MY 1996, the fleet average fuel economy for import passenger
cars decreased by 0.6 mpg from the MY 1995 CAFE level to 29.7 mpg. Six
of the 18 import car manufacturers increased their CAFE values between
MYs 1995 and 1996, including three of the nine Asian manufacturers.
Fleet average fuel economy for all MY 1996 passenger cars combined
exceeded the level of the MY 1996 standard by 1.2 mpg. Figure II-1
illustrates the changes in total new passenger car fleet CAFE from MY
1978 to MY 1996.
The total light truck fleet CAFE increased 0.2 mpg above the MY
1995 CAFE level of 20.5 mpg (see Table II-2). Figure II-2 illustrates
the trends in total light truck fleet CAFE from MY 1979 to MY 1996.
Several passenger cars and a few light truck manufacturers are
projected to fail to achieve the levels of the MY 1996 CAFE standards.
However, NHTSA is not yet able to determine which of these
manufacturers may be liable for civil penalties for non-compliance.
Some MY 1996 CAFE values may change when final figures are provided to
NHTSA by EPA, in mid-1997. In addition, several manufacturers are not
expected to pay civil penalties because the credits they earned by
exceeding the fuel economy standards in earlier years offset later
shortfalls. Other manufacturers may file carryback plans to demonstrate
that they anticipate earning credits in future model years to offset
current deficits.
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
[[Page 30659]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JN97.004
[[Page 30660]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JN97.005
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
B. Characteristics of the MY 1996 Passenger Car Fleet
The characteristics of the MY 1996 passenger car fleet reflect a
continuing trend toward satisfying consumer demand for higher
performance cars. (See Table II-3.) From MY 1995 to MY 1996,
horsepower/100 pounds, a measure of vehicle performance, increased from
4.93 to 5.00 for domestic passenger cars. However, it decreased
slightly from 4.77 to 4.76 for import passenger cars. The total fleet
average for passenger cars increased from 4.87 horsepower/100 pounds in
MY 1995 to 4.92 in MY 1996. Compared with MY 1995, the average curb
weight for MY 1996 decreased by 35 pounds for the domestic fleet and
increased 25 pounds for the import fleet. The total new passenger car
fleet weight remained constant at 3,047 pounds, as in MY 1995. Average
engine displacement decreased from 188 to 178 cubic inches for domestic
passenger cars, and increased from 131 to 134 cubic inches for import
passenger cars, from MY 1995 to MY 1996.
The 0.6 mpg fuel economy improvement for the MY 1996 domestic
passenger car fleet may be attributed in part to weight reduction, mix
shifts, and an increase in the use of more automatic transmissions with
four speeds and front-wheel drive.
The size/class breakdown shows an increased trend primarily toward
compact passenger cars with the reduction of subcompact passenger cars
for the overall fleet. The size/class mix in the domestic fleet shifted
from mid-size and large passenger cars to minicompact, subcompact and
compact passenger cars. The size/class mix in the import fleet shifted
from minicompact, subcompact, and compact passenger cars to two-seater,
mid-size and large passenger cars. The import share of the passenger
car market declined in MY 1996, as more foreign-based manufacturers
achieved 75 percent domestic content for their U.S. and Canadian-
assembled passenger cars.
Table II-3.--Passenger Car Fleet Characteristics for MYs 1995 and 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total fleet Domestic fleet Import fleet
Characteristics -----------------------------------------------------------------
1995 1996 1995 1996 1995 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fleet Average Fuel Economy, mpg............... 28.6 28.7 27.7 28.3 30.2 29.7
Fleet Average Curb Weight, lbs................ 3047 3047 3146 3111 2881 2906
Fleet Average Engine Displacement, cu. in..... 166 164 188 178 131 134
Fleet Average Horsepower/Weight ratio, HP/100
lbs.......................................... 4.87 4.92 4.93 5.00 4.77 4.76
[[Page 30661]]
Percent of Fleet.............................. 100 100 62.7 68.6 37.3 31.4
Segmentation by EPA Size Class, Percent
Two-Seater.................................... 0.8 1.1 0.4 0.5 1.5 2.3
Minicompact................................... 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.5
Subcompact \1\................................ 17.1 15.5 8.9 10.9 30.9 25.6
Compact \1\................................... 39.3 41.3 36.1 40.5 44.7 43.0
Mid-Size \1\.................................. 28.5 28.3 33.5 29.2 20.2 26.1
Large \1\..................................... 13.6 13.4 21.1 18.9 0.9 1.5
Diesel Engines................................ 0.06 0.09 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3
Turbo or Supercharged Engines................. 0.7 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.8 2.5
Fuel Injection................................ 100 100 100 100 100 100
Front-Wheel Drive............................. 84.8 85.6 84.6 86.8 85.1 83.0
Automatic Transmissions....................... 83.2 84.1 89.8 87.9 72.1 75.7
Automatic Transmissions with Lockup Clutches.. 98.0 97.9 100 100 93.7 92.4
Automatic Transmissions with Four or more
Forward Speeds............................... 87.9 88.8 85.5 89.0 92.7 88.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes associated station wagons.
The import fleet rose above its MY 1996 level in the share of
turbocharged and supercharged engines. Diesel engine share increased
slightly in MY 1996, and diesels were offered by two import
manufacturers.
Passenger car fleet average characteristics have changed
significantly since MY 1978 (the first year of fuel economy standards).
(See Table II-4.) After substantial initial weight loss (from MY 1978
to MY 1982, the average passenger car fleet curb weight decreased from
3,349 to 2,808 pounds), the curb weight stabilized between 2,800 and
3,050 pounds. Table II-4 shows that the MY 1996 passenger car fleet has
nearly equal interior volume and higher performance, but with more than
40 percent better fuel economy, than the MY 1978 fleet. (See Figure II-
3.)
C. Characteristics of the MY 1996 Light Truck Fleet
The characteristics of the MY 1996 light truck fleet are shown in
Table II-5. Light truck manufacturers are not required to divide their
fleets into domestic and import fleets based on the 75-percent domestic
content threshold used for passenger car fleets. Therefore, beginning
with this report, the light truck fleet is subdivided in this table
according to drive wheels: two-wheel drive or four-wheel drive.
Table II-4.--New Passenger Car Fleet Average Characteristics
[Model Years 1978-1996]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuel Curb Interior Engine Horsepower/
Model year economy weight space size weight (hp/
(mpg) (lb.) (cu. ft.) (cu. in.) 100 lb.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1978................................................... 19.9 3349 112 260 3.68
1979................................................... 20.3 3180 110 238 3.72
1980................................................... 24.3 2867 105 187 3.51
1981................................................... 25.9 2883 108 182 3.43
1982................................................... 26.6 2808 107 173 3.47
1983................................................... 26.4 2908 109 182 3.57
1984................................................... 26.9 2878 108 178 3.66
1985................................................... 27.6 2867 108 177 3.84
1986................................................... 28.2 2821 106 169 3.89
1987................................................... 28.5 2805 109 162 3.98
1988................................................... 28.8 2831 107 161 4.11
1989................................................... 28.4 2879 109 163 4.24
1990................................................... 28.0 2908 108 163 4.53
1991................................................... 28.4 2934 108 164 4.42
1992................................................... 27.9 3007 108 169 4.56
1993................................................... 28.4 2971 109 164 4.62
1994................................................... 28.3 3011 109 169 4.79
1995................................................... 28.6 3047 109 166 4.87
1996................................................... 28.7 3047 109 164 4.92
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
[[Page 30662]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JN97.006
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
Table II-5.--Light Truck Fleet Characteristics for MYs 1995 and 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total fleet Two-wheel drive Four-wheel drive
Characteristics -----------------------------------------------------------------
1995 1996 1995 1996 1995 1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fleet Average Fuel Economy, mpg............... 20.5 20.7 21.6 21.9 18.9 19.3
Fleet Average Equivalent Test Weight, lbs..... 4339 4355 4192 4201 4575 4602
Fleet Average Engine Displacement, cu. in..... 245 244 235 231 261 265
Fleet Average Horsepower/Weight ratio, HP/100
lbs.......................................... 3.88 4.07 3.83 4.00 3.96 4.19
Percent of Fleet.............................. 100 100 61.7 61.6 38.3 38.4
Percent of Fleet from Foreign-Based
Manufacturers................................ 14.7 12.2 10.9 8.9 20.8 17.6
Segmentation by Type, Percent
Passenger Van................................. 22.3 22.7 34.7 36.1 2.3 1.3
Cargo Van..................................... 6.4 3.7 10.1 5.9 0.5 0.2
Small Pickup..................................
Two-Wheel Drive............................... 7.7 7.0 12.5 11.3 ......... .........
Four-Wheel Drive.............................. ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .........
Large Pickup..................................
Two-Wheel Drive............................... 19.0 19.4 30.8 31.5 ......... .........
Four-Wheel Drive.............................. 12.9 10.8 ......... ......... 33.8 28.2
Special Purpose...............................
Two-Wheel Drive............................... 7.3 9.3 11.9 15.1 ......... .........
Four-Wheel Drive.............................. 24.3 27.0 ......... ......... 63.4 70.3
Diesel Engines................................ 0.20 0.07 0.11 0.04 0.34 0.12
Turbo/Supercharged Engines.................... 0.20 0.07 0.09 0.04 0.34 0.12
Fuel Injection................................ 100 100 100 100 100 100
Automatic Transmissions....................... 79.5 84.3 78.7 82.2 80.8 87.6
Automatic Transmissions with Lockup Clutches.. 98.9 98.9 98.3 98.1 100 100
[[Page 30663]]
Automatic Transmissions with Four or More
Forward Speeds............................... 93.4 93.8 90.5 90.0 97.9 99.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The MY 1996 average test weight of the total light truck fleet
increased by 16 pounds over that for MY 1995. The average fuel economy
of the fleet increased by 0.2 mpg to 20.7 mpg. Diesel engine usage
decreased in light trucks to 0.07 percent in MY 1996 from 0.20 percent
in MY 1995. The share of the MY 1996 two-wheel drive fleet remained
near the MY 1995 level of 61.7 percent.
CAFE levels for light trucks in the 0-8,500 pounds gross vehicle
weight (GVW) class increased from 18.5 mpg in MY 1980 to 21.7 mpg in MY
1987, before declining to 20.7 mpg in MY 1996, influenced by an
increase in average weight, engine size, and performance. Light truck
production increased from 1.9 million in MY 1980 to 5.2 million in MY
1996. Light trucks comprised 40 percent of the total light duty vehicle
fleet production in MY 1996, more than triple the share in MY 1980.
D. Passenger Car and Light Truck Fleet Economy Averages
Figure II-4 illustrates an increase in the light duty fleet
(combined passenger cars and light trucks) average fuel economy through
MY 1987, followed by a gradual decline. (See also Table II-6.)
Passenger car average fuel economy remained relatively constant for MYs
1987-1996. The overall decline in fuel economy illustrates the growing
influence of light trucks and their significant impact on the light
duty fleet.
While passenger car and light truck fleet fuel economies increased
from MY 1995 to MY 1996 by 1.2 mpg and 0.2 mpg, respectively, the total
fleet fuel economy for MY 1996 remains at the MY 1995 level of 24.9
mpg. The shift to light trucks for general transportation is an
important trend in consumers' preference and has a significant fleet
fuel consumption effect.
E. Domestic and Import Fleet Fuel Economy Averages
Domestic and import passenger car fleet average fuel economies have
improved since MY 1978, although the increase is far more dramatic for
the domestic fleet. In MY 1996, the domestic passenger car fleet
average fuel economy increased from the prior year to 28.3 mpg, the
highest level since fuel economy standards were established. Import
passenger car fleet average fuel economy decreased to 29.7 mpg.
Compared to MY 1978, this reflects an increase of 9.6 mpg for domestic
cars and 2.4 mpg for import cars.
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
[[Page 30664]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JN97.007
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C
[[Page 30665]]
Table II-6.--Domestic and Import Passenger Car and Light Truck Fuel Economy Averages for Model Years 1978-1996
[in MPG]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Domestic Import
------------------------------------------------------------------ All light Total
Model Year Light Light All cars trucks fleet
Car Truck Combined Car truck \1\ Combined
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1978................................................. 18.7 ......... ......... 27.3 ......... ......... 19.9 ......... .........
1979................................................. 19.3 17.7 19.1 26.1 20.8 25.5 20.3 18.2 20.1
1980................................................. 22.6 16.8 21.4 29.6 24.3 28.6 24.3 18.5 23.1
1981................................................. 24.2 18.3 22.9 31.5 27.4 30.7 25.9 20.1 24.6
1982................................................. 25.0 19.2 23.5 31.1 27.0 30.4 26.6 20.5 25.1
1983................................................. 24.4 19.6 23.0 32.4 27.1 31.5 26.4 20.7 24.8
1984................................................. 25.5 19.3 23.6 32.0 26.7 30.6 26.9 20.6 25.0
1985................................................. 26.3 19.6 24.0 31.5 26.5 30.3 27.6 20.7 25.4
1986................................................. 26.9 20.0 24.4 31.6 25.9 29.8 28.2 21.5 25.9
1987................................................. 27.0 20.5 24.6 31.2 25.2 29.6 28.5 21.7 26.2
1988................................................. 27.4 20.6 24.5 31.5 24.6 30.0 28.8 21.3 26.0
1989................................................. 27.2 20.4 24.2 30.8 23.5 29.2 28.4 20.9 25.6
1990................................................. 26.9 20.3 23.9 29.9 23.0 28.5 28.0 20.8 25.4
1991................................................. 27.3 20.9 24.4 30.1 23.0 28.4 28.4 21.3 25.6
1992................................................. 27.0 20.5 23.8 29.2 22.7 27.9 27.9 20.8 25.1
1993................................................. 27.8 20.7 24.2 29.6 22.8 28.1 28.4 21.0 25.2
1994................................................. 27.5 20.5 23.5 29.6 22.0 27.8 28.3 20.7 24.7
1995................................................. 27.7 20.3 23.8 30.3 21.5 27.9 28.6 20.5 24.9
1996................................................. 28.3 20.5 24.1 29.7 22.1 27.7 28.7 20.7 24.9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Light trucks from foreign-based manufacturers.
Since MY 1980, the total light truck fleet average fuel economy and
the average for domestic light truck manufacturers have improved
overall, but both have remained below the fuel economy level for the
imported light truck fleet. The imported light truck average fuel
economy has decreased significantly since its highest level of 27.4 mpg
for MY 1981 to 22.1 mpg for MY 1996. For MY 1996, the domestic light
truck fleet has an average fuel economy level of 20.5 mpg, which is 1.6
mpg lower than the import light truck fleet. For MY 1996, the imported
light truck fleet fuel economy increased 0.6 mpg above the MY 1995
level to 22.1 mpg. The domestic manufacturers continued to dominate the
light truck market, comprising 87 percent of the total light truck
fleet.
The disparity between the average CAFEs of the import and domestic
manufacturers has declined in recent years as domestic manufacturers
have maintained relatively stable CAFE values while the import
manufacturers moved to larger vehicles, and more four-wheel drive light
trucks, thus lowering their CAFE values.
Section III: 1996 Activities
A. Light Truck CAFE Standards
On April 3, 1996, NHTSA published a final rule establishing a
combined standard of 20.7 mpg for light trucks for MY 1998. The
Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act
for Fiscal Year 1996, Pub. L. 104-50, precludes the agency from setting
the MY 1998 standard at a level other than the level for MY 1997.
B. Low Volume Petitions
49 U.S.C. 32902(d) provides that a low volume manufacturer of
passenger cars may be exempted from the generally applicable passenger
car fuel economy standards if these standards are more stringent than
the maximum feasible average fuel economy for that manufacturer and if
NHTSA establishes an alternative standard for that manufacturer at its
maximum feasible level. A low volume manufacturer is one that
manufactured fewer than 10,000 passenger cars worldwide, in the model
year for which the exemption is sought (the affected model year) and in
the second model year preceding that model year.
NHTSA acted on four low volume petitions in 1996, which were filed
by Lotus, Rolls-Royce (2), and Lamborghini. Lotus, once controlled by
Bugatti International, submitted to the agency its low volume petition
for MYs 1994, 1995, 1997, and 1998 separately from its previous owner,
Bugatti, because of that automaker's financial instability. Lotus is
now under new ownership. A Malaysian automaker, Perusahaan Otomobil
Nasional Berhad (Proton), acquired controlling interest in Lotus. The
agency is reviewing Lotus' petition and will respond in early 1997.
Lamborghini filed a joint low volume petition for Lamborghini and
Vector high performance vehicles since these two manufacturers are
under common ownership by V-Power Corporation. Lamborghini requested
alternative standards for its passenger cars for MYs 1995, 1996, and
1997. NHTSA issued a proposed decision to grant alternative standards
of 12.8 mpg for MY 1995, 12.6 mpg for MY 1996, and 12.5 mpg for MY 1997
(61 FR 39429; July 29, 1996).
Rolls-Royce requested an alternative standard for its passenger
cars for MY 1997. NHTSA established an alternative standard of 15.1 mpg
for MY 1997 (61 FR 4369; February 6, 1996). In December 1995, Rolls
Royce also filed a low volume petition for MYs 1998 and 1999. NHTSA
issued a proposed decision to grant an alternative standard of 16.3 mpg
for MYs 1998 and 1999 (61 FR 46756; September 5, 1996).
C. Enforcement
49 U.S.C. 32912(b) imposes a civil penalty of $5 for each tenth of
a mpg by which a manufacturer's CAFE level falls short of the standard,
multiplied by the total number of passenger automobiles or light trucks
produced by the manufacturer in that model year. Credits that were
earned for exceeding the standard in any of the three model years
immediately prior to or subsequent to the model years in question can
be used to offset the penalty.
Table III-1 shows CAFE fines paid by manufacturers in calendar year
1996. In calendar year 1996, manufacturers paid penalties totaling
$52,339,165 for failing to comply to the fuel economy standards of 27.5
mpg for passenger
[[Page 30666]]
cars, 20.5 mpg and 20.6 mpg for light trucks in MYs 1994 and 1995,
respectively.
Table III-1.--Cafe Fines Collected During Calendar Year 1996
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model year and manufacturer Amount fined Date paid
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994:
BMW............................. $10,140,120 12/96
Land Rover...................... 1,734,915 12/96
Porsche......................... 804,600 12/96
Volvo........................... 7,173,630 12/96
1995:
BMW............................. 13,136,530 12/96
Land Rover...................... 4,499,090 12/96
Mercedes-Benz................... 6,525,085 12/96
Porsche......................... 1,949,520 12/96
Volvo........................... 6,375,675 12/96
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Contract Activities
Database Maintenance: Products and Production Capabilities
of North American Automobile Manufacturing Plants.
During 1996, NHTSA continued to fund the maintenance of a database
that details the products and production capacities of North American
automobile manufacturing plants. This program is administered by the
Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (the Volpe Center) with
annual funding of $60,000.
Published Report: Light Truck Capabilities, Utility
Requirements and Uses: Implications for Fuel Economy.
In FY 1995, the House Appropriations Committee funded NHTSA with
$300,000 to prepare a report to identify the unique capabilities,
utility requirements, and use of light trucks that result in design
constraints for fuel economy improvements. The agency contracted with
the Volpe Center to conduct this study. In April 1996, the Volpe Center
concluded the study and the final results were published in a report
titled, Light Truck Capabilities, Utility Requirements and Uses:
Implications for Fuel Economy (DOT Report Number: HS 808 378). This
report was forwarded to Congress on May 22, 1996.
The report addresses two key questions:
1. What are the unique capabilities, utility requirements, and uses
of light trucks?
2. Do these requirements and other regulatory requirements
constrain the ability to improve light truck fuel economy?
The capabilities of light trucks that are notably superior to those
of passenger cars are referred to as enhanced capabilities of light
trucks. Five enhanced capabilities are identified, qualified, and
quantified: load carrying (passengers), load carrying (weight), load
carrying (volume), towing and off-road operation. Utility requirements
are treated as the functions and capabilities that truck buyers need.
Public domain survey data are used to identify utility requirements for
both personal and commercial uses. Two major surveys, the 1992 Truck
Inventory and Use Survey and the 1990 Nationwide Personal
Transportation Survey, are used to identify and quantify the actual
uses of light trucks for both personal and commercial purposes.
Observations on the relationships between light truck capabilities
and fuel economy are based on manufacturer specifications and EPA fuel
economy ratings for a sample of MY 1994 light trucks. Existing fuel
economy studies are referenced to identify potential fuel economy
technologies for MYs 1998-2006. The estimated fuel economy gain for
implementation of each fuel economy technology is presented. Potential
conflicts between the application of each fuel economy technology and
light truck capabilities, future emissions and safety standards, and
consumer choice attributes are also presented.
Published Report: Updated Vehicle Survivability and Travel
Mileage Schedules.
In November 1995, NHTSA published a report titled, Updated Vehicle
Survivability and Travel Mileage Schedules. This report authored by
NHTSA staff member, Alan Berkowitz, discusses the development of
revised survivability and vehicle miles traveled schedules for
passenger cars and light trucks by using current registration data and
government-sponsored vehicle mileage survey data. The registration data
source used is the National Vehicle Population Profile compiled by R.
L. Polk & Company. The recent government-sponsored mileage survey data
sources used are the Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey
conducted by the Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, for
the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation;
the Truck Inventory and Use Survey developed by the Bureau of Census;
and the Residential Transportation Energy Consumption Survey designed
by the Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy.
The amended projections confirmed that passenger vehicles,
especially light trucks, have extended vehicle life and are driven
farther than previous schedules have indicated. These new survivability
and travel mileage schedules may be used to compute the total weighted
travel mileage over the vehicle lifetime, which is used to estimate the
impact of proposed fuel economy standards on future fuel consumption
and operating costs. The survivability schedule will also be used to
estimate the phase-in of new safety equipment into the vehicle fleet.
Study Initiative: Fuel Economy Effects and Cost and
Leadtime Impacts of Variable Valve Timing Engine Technology.
A study was initiated with consultants to evaluate the fuel economy
effects and cost and leadtime impacts of variable valve timing engine
technology. The report of this effort, along with an in-house study of
retail costs, will be published in early 1997.
[FR Doc. 97-14558 Filed 6-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P