[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 66 (Wednesday, April 6, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-4752]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 6, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





_______________________________________________________________________



40 CFR Parts 86, 88, and 200




Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Motor Vehicle 
Engines; Refueling Emission Regulations for Light-Duty Vehicles and 
Light-Duty Trucks; Final Rule
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 
40 CFR Parts 86, 88, and 600 
[AMS-FRL-4831-6] 
RIN 2060-AC64

 
Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Motor 
Vehicle Engines; Refueling Emission Regulations for Light-Duty Vehicles 
and Light-Duty Trucks 
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document contains EPA's final rule implementing the 
control of vehicle refueling emissions through the use of vehicle-based 
systems. It applies to light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. The 
rule applies to all fuels used by a vehicle, and includes special 
provisions for vehicles/fuels judged to be inherently low in refueling 
emissions. For light-duty vehicles, the requirements begin in the 1998 
model year, and phase in over three model years. In the 1998 model 
year, 40 percent of each manufacturer's light-duty vehicles must meet 
the requirements. This increases to 80 percent in the 1999 model year 
and rises to 100 percent in model years 2000 and later. A special 
provision for phase-in is also included for small volume manufacturers 
of light-duty vehicles.
    This requirement also applies to light-duty trucks. For light-duty 
trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating of 0-6000 lbs, the 
requirement begins in model year 2001 and phases-in over three model 
years at the same rate as applied to light-duty vehicles. For light-
duty trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating of 6001-8500 lbs, the 
requirement commences in model year 2004 and phases-in over three model 
years at the same rate as light-duty vehicles. The rule does not apply 
to heavy-duty vehicles.
    This rule also establishes certification requirements covering test 
procedures for integrated and non-integrated control system designs, a 
refueling emission standard of 0.20 g/gallon and other related 
certification requirements and provisions. Finally, the rule contains 
enforcement provisions related to liability, Selective Enforcement 
Auditing and nonconformance penalties.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This final rule is effective on May 6, 1994.

    The new information collection requirements contained in 40 CFR 
parts 86 and 88 applying to 1998 and later model year vehicles have not 
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and are not 
effective until OMB has approved them. EPA will publish a technical 
amendment in the Federal Register once the information collection 
requirements are approved.

ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this final rule are contained in 
Public Docket No. A-87-11, located in the Air and Radiation Docket and 
Information Center of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M 
Street SW., Washington, DC, 20460 and is available for public review in 
room M-1500. Relevant materials may also be found in Public Docket No. 
A-84-07, established in support of EPA's assessment of air pollution 
regulatory strategies for the gasoline marketing industry. The dockets 
may be inspected from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except 
for government holidays. Under 40 CFR part 2, a reasonable fee may be 
charged by EPA for copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James G. Bryson, U.S. EPA (RDSD-12), 
Special Regulatory Projects Branch, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 
48105, Telephone: (313) 741-7828.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Description of the Rule
    A. Applicability
    1. Application of the Refueling Emission Standard to LDVs
    2. Extension of the ORVR Requirement to LDTs
    3. Heavy Duty Vehicles
    4. Applicability to California Vehicles
    5. Fuels Covered
    B. Implementation
    1. Leadtime, Effective Model Year and Phase-in Requirements
    2. Small Volume Manufacturers
    3. Inclusion of Inherently Low Refueling Emission Vehicles
    C. Refueling Emission Test Procedures and Standard
    1. Refueling Emissions Test
    2. Integrated System Preconditioning
    3. Non-Integrated System Preconditioning
    4. Seal Test
    5. Cap Removal Emissions
    6. Spitback Test
    7. Nozzle Geometry Standards
    8. Level of the Standard
    D. Safety of ORVR Systems
    1. Background
    2. Test Procedure/Safety
    3. DOT Consultation
    4. EPA Assessment
    5. Safety Reviews
    6. Alternative Control Technologies
    E. Certification Provisions
    1. General
    2. Fees
    3. Fuel Economy
    F. Onboard Diagnostics Requirements
    G. Enforcement and In-Use Performance
    1. Liability Periods
    2. Selective Enforcement Audit Testing
    3. Nonconformance Penalties (NCPs)
    4. In-Use Performance
III. Public Participation
IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis
    A. Environmental Impact
    B. Costs of Control
    C. Cost Effectiveness
    D. Other Benefits
    E. Benefit-Cost Ratio
V. Consultation with DOT
VI. Judicial Review
VII. Statutory Authority
VIII. Executive Order 12866
IX. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act
X. Information Collection Requirements

List of Key Acronyms

AA  Attainment Area
AAMA  American Automobile Manufacturers Association
    AIAM Association of International Automobile Manufacturers
CAA  Clean Air Act
CAAA  CAA Amendments
DoT  Department of Transportation
FMVSS  Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
GVWR  Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
HDV  Heavy-Duty Vehicle
LDV  Light-Duty Vehicle
LDT  Light-Duty Truck
LLDT  Light LDT
HLDT  Heavy LDT
NAA  Non-Attainment Area
NCP  Nonconformance Penalty
NHTSA  National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NPV  Net Present Value
ORVR  Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery
RIA  Regulatory Impact Analysis
RPE  Retail Price Equivalent
RVP  Reid Vapor Pressure
VOC  Volatile Organic Compounds

I. Background

    On August 19, 1987, EPA published in the Federal Register a Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the control of vehicle refueling 
emissions (52 FR 31162). The proposal described the need for these 
controls as well as the conclusions of an EPA study of gasoline 
marketing emissions comparing the relative merits of the two available 
control technologies: Systems incorporated into the gasoline dispensing 
pump system design (known as Stage II vapor recovery) and systems 
incorporated into the design of the vehicle (known as onboard refueling 
vapor recovery (ORVR)) (see Public Docket A-84-07). Based on this 
study, along with EPA's analysis and response to public comments 
published in documents separate from the NPRM (Evaluation of Air 
Pollution Regulatory Strategies for Gasoline Marketing Industry--
Response to Public Comments (II-A-20), Draft Regulatory Impact 
Analysis: Proposed Refueling Emission Regulations for Gasoline-Fueled 
Motor Vehicles, Vols. I and II) (II-A-18, 19), and technical support 
documents related to ORVR test procedure (II-A-08) and ORVR vehicle 
safety (II-A-17), EPA proposed to require refueling emission control 
through ORVR systems. The above mentioned studies are available in 
public docket A-87-11. All future references of this nature can be 
found at the cited location in public docket A-87-11 unless otherwise 
indicated.
    Subsequent to the publication of the NPRM, EPA held a public 
hearing in October 1987, followed by an extensive public comment period 
which closed in February 1988. Comments were analyzed by EPA and key 
issues were assessed. As a result, EPA determined that the final 
rulemaking should be delayed pending the resolution of safety concerns 
expressed by both the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
(NHTSA) (part of the Department of Transportation (DoT)) and a number 
of the commenters. The final rule was further delayed when it became 
evident that Congress would address issues concerning refueling 
controls in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA).
    The 1990 Amendments revised section 202(a)(6) of the CAA to read as 
follows:


    Within 1 year after the date of the enactment of the Clean Air 
Act Amendments of 1990, the Administrator shall, after consultation 
with the Secretary of Transportation regarding the safety of 
vehicle-based (`onboard') systems for the control of vehicle 
refueling emissions, promulgate standards under this section 
requiring that new light-duty vehicles manufactured beginning in the 
fourth model year after the model year in which the standards are 
promulgated and thereafter shall be equipped with such systems.


    Subsequent to the enactment of the CAAA, EPA continued its 
consultation with DOT/NHTSA related to the potential safety concerns 
regarding the implementation of vehicle-based refueling emission 
controls. In July 1991, NHTSA completed an updated safety study 
entitled ``An Assessment of the Safety on Onboard Refueling Vapor 
Recovery Systems''. On September 3, 1991, EPA published an additional 
Federal Register notice (56 FR 43682) releasing the NHTSA report for 
public review and seeking further comment on key issues involved with 
ORVR controls, most notably on circumstances that had changed since the 
publication of the NPRM. The notice also described and sought comment 
on a document entitled ``Summary of Changed Circumstances'', which 
discussed statutory changes, technology development, and potential 
modifications to the refueling test procedure.
    EPA held a public hearing on September 26 and 27, 1991, and public 
comments were received for 30 days thereafter. After reviewing these 
comments, EPA continued its consultation with NHTSA. Based on the 
outcome of the consultation, EPA determined that ORVR controls should 
not be required at that time. The Agency took this step because it 
concluded, after consultation with NHTSA and after considering the 
conclusions of NHTSA's safety study, that ORVR controls posed 
``unreasonable'' safety risks relative to Stage II systems. A Federal 
Register notice detailing the decision and the supporting rationale was 
published on April 15, 1992 (57 FR 13220).
    EPA's action was challenged by representatives of the petroleum 
refining, gasoline marketing, environmental and consumer auto safety 
communities. They argued that section 202(a)(6) of the CAA created a 
non-discretionary duty to promulgate ORVR standards for LDVs. The court 
agreed, holding that EPA had no choice but to promulgate such 
standards, and that the entire safety analysis in the April 15, 1992 
notice was flawed because of the comparison with Stage II technology, a 
comparison not allowed by the text of the statute. NRDC v. EPA, 983 F. 
2d 259, 261, 269-71 (D.C. Cir. 1993). The court stated further, in 
dicta, that the record did not establish that all ORVR systems present 
inherent and unreasonable safety risks. Id. at 261, 270. The court set 
aside the April 15, 1992 Agency action, and ordered EPA to promulgate 
regulations requiring vehicle-based refueling controls on LDVs in 
accordance with the CAA.
    The petitioners further moved the court for an order requiring EPA 
to issue ORVR requirements by a particular date. Before the court 
ruled, EPA and the petitioners entered into a settlement agreement 
whereby the Agency agreed to promulgate such rules by January 22, 1994 
(58 FR 33813, June 21, 1993).
    Subsequent to the court's decision, EPA published two Federal 
Register notices (May 27, 1993, 58 FR 30731 and June 17, 1993, 58 FR 
33418) seeking public comment on the key issues that had changed since 
the last public comment period. EPA also held a public hearing on these 
issues on July 22, 1993, and solicited comments for 30 days thereafter. 
EPA has analyzed these additional comments, and has revised its 
proposed regulations accordingly. To support this rule, two key 
documents, a Final Regulatory Impact Analysis and a Summary and 
Analysis of Comments have been completed and are available for review 
in the public docket.
    The remainder of the document is divided into sections. Section II 
describes the various aspects of the rule as listed in the Table of 
Contents above, and provides rationale for the approaches being 
implemented. Section III describes the long and extended public 
participation in the rulemaking process and previous study. Section IV 
summarizes the Regulatory Impact Analysis. Finally, sections V through 
X describe various aspects of the rule with regard to compliance with 
various administrative requirements such as the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act.

II. Description of the Rule

A. Applicability

1. Application of the Refueling Emission Standard to LDVs
    Section 202(a)(6) of the Act mandates that EPA promulgate 
requirements for new light-duty vehicles (LDVs) to be equipped with 
ORVR systems. In the August 1987 NPRM, EPA proposed that ORVR 
requirements apply to LDVs and, in this rule, is finalizing that LDV 
portion of the original NPRM, consistent with the statutory 
requirements. The model year, phase-in, certification and other 
requirements for LDVs are discussed in sections B through F, below.
2. Extension of the ORVR Requirement to LDTs
    Under the authority provided in Section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air 
Act (CAA), EPA is applying the ORVR requirement to light-duty trucks 
(LDTs). EPA is finalizing portions of that proposal in today's rules. 
Each manufacturer's LDTs will have to meet the refueling emission 
requirements under the phase-in schedule and compliance program for 
trucks described in the Implementation section below.
    In reaching this decision, EPA has conducted a detailed analysis of 
the need for and desirability of extending the requirement beyond the 
LDV class. The analysis is detailed in the supporting Regulatory Impact 
Analysis (RIA) available in the public docket. The key points are 
summarized below.
    First, the rule affects pollutants which ``cause or contribute to 
air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public 
health or welfare'' (Section 202(a)(1)). Hydrocarbons, as ozone 
precursors, have long been an essential object of emission control 
strategies (both vehicles and non-vehicles). Ambient ozone is an 
irritant that adversely affects pulmonary membranes, lung tissues, and 
lung functions, and is also associated with adverse ecological effects. 
Refueling emissions also contain benzene, a Group A human carcinogen. 
The gasoline vapors themselves also adversely affect public health and 
welfare.
    Second, and perhaps most compelling, is the large amount of 
refueling emissions which arise from these LDTs. In 1990, trucks 
represented about 33 percent of the gasoline used by highway motor 
vehicles. Using American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA) 
figures, retail truck sales have increased at a compound annual rate of 
4-5 percent over the past ten years, and this growth is projected to 
continue well into the next century. This increase in sales and market 
fraction has led to an increase in the gasoline used by trucks. The 
fraction of gasoline used by LDTs is projected to increase to 37 
percent by 2000 and continue at that level or higher in the future. 
Thus, the percentage of the refueling emissions inventory attributable 
to LDTs is large and is expected to increase in the future.
    Another way to look at the magnitude of the emissions from LDTs is 
the equivalent gram per mile (g/mi) emission rate attributable to their 
uncontrolled refueling emissions. As shown in the RIA, taking into 
account Phase II RVP control and the RVP effects of reformulated 
gasoline, the nationwide uncontrolled refueling emission rate during 
the ozone season for LDTs is about 0.22 g/mi. These are large emission 
rates in contrast to those controlled by other strategies being 
implemented under the 1990 CAAA and being considered by the states in 
their State Implementation Plans. A good example is the Clean-Fuel 
Fleet requirements under section 246 of the CAA and the Low Emission 
Vehicle program being implemented in California and perhaps in other 
states. In these cases the equivalent emission reductions are in the 
range of 0.12 to 0.18 g/mile.
    Third, EPA believes that ORVR controls are technologically feasible 
for LDTs. Reports and other materials submitted to the docket over the 
past several years as well as comments by the regulated industry 
indicate that prototype ORVR systems have been installed on a number of 
passenger cars and light trucks (IV-A-06, IV-D-682, 680, 682, 685, 688, 
864, 701, 712, 718, 719, 720, 721, IV-E-50, 73). As is now the case 
with evaporative control systems, we anticipate that the control 
technology used for LDT ORVR systems will be very similar to that 
applied to LDVs. Although there are some differences between LDV and 
LDT fuel systems (e.g., tank size in some larger LDTs), the general 
fuel system concepts, designs, and configurations are very similar. In 
addition, vehicles in both classes must meet the recently promulgated 
enhanced evaporative emission control requirements beginning in the 
1996 model year. As with LDVs, EPA anticipates that the same 
evaporative emission control technology can be applied to control 
refueling emissions in LDTs. To ensure that the enhanced evaporative 
control system canister and purge system can be applied to ORVR 
controls, EPA is applying the same refueling emission test procedure 
approach to LDTs as is being applied to LDVs. The only significant 
design difference will be the need for some form of a fillneck seal. 
However, with the anticipated liquid seal approach this requires at 
most a minor fillneck modification and does not involve new hardware.
    While there are vehicle-to-vehicle differences in fuel system 
designs, these affect both the evaporative and refueling emission rates 
for a given vehicle/fuel system design. To EPA's knowledge there is 
nothing unique about the design or function of LDT fuel systems 
relative to LDVs which would suggest that the test procedure approach 
being applied to LDVs would not be equally effective for LDTs in 
accomplishing the goal of allowing the widespread use of integrated 
enhanced evaporative/refueling emission control systems. Although 
uncertainty has been expressed, no commenter provided data or even a 
substantiated argument to support the view that the test procedure 
modifications would not be equally effective in facilitating LDT use of 
integrated enhanced evaporative/refueling control systems. In fact, 
testing conducted by the Coordinating Research Council (CRC-APRAC 
Project VE-6) (IV-D-565) and EPA (II-A-06) indicate no significant 
difference between LDV and LDT uncontrolled refueling emission rates. 
As is the case for LDVs, the refueling test procedure approach 
described above should allow the widespread use of integrated 
refueling/evaporative control systems for LDTs. Thus, since there is no 
problem with applying enhanced evaporative control systems to LDTs, 
there should be no problem with integrated evaporative/ refueling 
control systems.
    The benefits of applying the ORVR requirements to LDTs exceed the 
costs of the requirement. Since EPA believes, and the manufacturers' 
comments indicate, that most vehicles will use an integrated 
evaporative/refueling control system, the incremental costs of LDT ORVR 
controls are relatively small. As detailed in the RIA, EPA's cost is 
comprised of added hardware (mostly an improved vent/rollover valve and 
larger diameter vapor line) and short term development costs (for 
emissions and safety certification, facility modification hardware/
tooling modifications, and systems engineering) minus the fuel recovery 
credit. The size of the fuel recovery credit depends on the amount of 
vapor captured. This in turn depends on the fuel used, the emissions 
rate (g/gal), and the presence or absence of Stage II vapor recovery. 
Taking all of these factors into account, and assuming Stage II 
controls in most of the ozone NAAs, the cost estimate for LDTs/HDVs are 
shown below in Table 1. 

                         Table 1.--Estimated Per-Vehicle Costs of ORVR Systems in LDTs                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Hardware ($/       Develop ($/       Operating cost     Short term net     Long term net  
  Vehicle group         vehicle)           vehicle)            (NPV)               cost               cost      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LDT..............              $4.79              $2.65             -$3.70              $3.74             $1.09 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For vehicles operating in nonattainment areas (NAAs), the recovery 
credits are smaller and the short and long term net costs increase by 
about $3 per vehicle over those in the table above.
    As was discussed above, LDTs represent over 33 percent of the 
nation's gasoline consumption. With the test procedure and control 
system approach mentioned above, EPA expects that the in-use control 
efficiency of LDT ORVR systems will exceed 95 percent. Incremental to 
Stage II controls, LDT ORVR controls would provide a nationwide average 
annual emission reduction of 115,000 tons between 1998 and 2020. 
Reductions in NAAs with Stage II controls are large as well. With no 
Stage II phase-out, the average annual emission reduction in the NAAs 
is 31,000 tons. If Stage II is phased out when ORVR is in widespread 
use (2010), the average annual emission reduction in the NAAs 
attributable to LDT controls increases to 68,000 tons. These 
incremental reductions in NAAs are large relative to the other control 
options available.
    As is discussed below, reductions in refueling emissions have value 
in all areas of the country. However, the main focus of the ORVR 
requirement is to provide ozone NAAs additional reductions to assist 
them in complying or maintaining compliance with the ozone standard. 
Thus, the important areas to consider are those which are not now in 
compliance with the ozone standard. At present there are 54 marginal or 
worse ozone NA areas, which represent about 54.9 percent of the 
nationwide highway gasoline consumption. Of these 54 areas, about 43 
now have, or are expected to have, Stage II vapor recovery systems in 
place. Since ORVR controls are required on all LDVs, and Stage II vapor 
recovery is (or will be) in place in most moderate or worse ozone NAAs, 
the key comparison to be made is (1) retaining Stage II controls in the 
moderate or worse ozone NAAs solely for the purpose of controlling LDT/
HDV refueling emissions, versus (2) requiring ORVR controls for LDTs 
and possibly HDVs, assuming the Stage II control that is or will be in 
place. This comparison provides a worst case perspective on the LDT/HDV 
cost effectiveness, since benefits outside NAAs are ignored and planned 
Stage II is assumed to continue after the ORVR requirement is 
promulgated.
    As is described in the RIA, EPA has conducted the analysis for both 
the Stage II retention and ORVR options. The cost effectiveness of 
retaining Stage II solely for the purpose of controlling LDT/HDV 
refueling emissions is about $3400 per ton. The cost effectiveness of 
the LDT ORVR controls incremental to the Stage II now in place is about 
$200 per ton if Stage II is phased out when ORVR control is in 
widespread use (2010) and only about $700 per ton if Stage II is never 
phased out. Under either scenario the cost effectiveness of the ORVR 
option is attractive. Thus, even with the Stage II controls, it is more 
cost effective to require ORVR controls on LDTs than to retain Stage II 
solely for controlling LDT/HDV refueling emissions.
    In addition to the VOC emission reduction benefits cited above, LDT 
ORVR controls have other benefits. These benefits have not been 
considered in the calculations above, but would further enhance the 
attractiveness of LDT ORVR. LDT ORVR controls would result in an 
average annual fuel savings equivalent to about 31 million gallons of 
gasoline per year between the period 1998 and 2020 assuming no Stage II 
phase-out, and about 43 million gallons per year if Stage II is phased 
out. In addition, there will be health benefits as a result of 
reductions in air toxic emissions. Best estimates are the avoidance of 
2-3 cancer incidences per year as a result of lower refueling benzene 
emissions. Additional cancer avoidances are possible depending on the 
assumption regarding the toxicological impact of the remainder of the 
constituents of the gasoline vapor. Reductions in potential non-cancer 
health effects and welfare benefits such as reduced crop and material 
damage due to ozone would occur as well.
    In summary, EPA has decided to implement ORVR controls for LDTs for 
several reasons: Their contribution to the VOC inventory is significant 
and there is a need for additional VOC reductions to address air 
quality concerns, the control is technologically feasible and 
inexpensive, there are additional valuable benefits, and, as discussed 
in the RIA, the cost effectiveness is very attractive, especially when 
compared to other programs being implemented and under consideration. 
The analysis shows that the cost effectiveness of implementing ORVR 
controls for LDTs is superior to retaining Stage II controls for the 
same purpose. The overall benefit to cost ratio for LDT ORVR is about 
1.5. If the application of ORVR controls to LDVs and LDTs allows 
phaseout of Stage II controls in the future, the cost savings 
attributable to Stage II operations/ maintenance which would no longer 
occur would make the average annual costs of ORVR controls negative (an 
average annual savings of over $40 million). Based on the cost 
effectiveness analysis and benefit-cost ratio, one could also justify 
implementing LDT ORVR controls incremental to Stage II controls. 
However, the long-term retention of Stage II would seem problematic 
since it would be needed only for heavy-duty vehicles.
3. Heavy Duty Vehicles
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to require ORVR controls for all HDVs. 
However, as discussed below, this requirement is not being finalized in 
this rulemaking.
    Information available to EPA indicates that an HDV ORVR system 
would be conceptually similar to those applied LDVs and LDTs and the 
initial costs should be relatively small. However, motor vehicle 
manufacturers have argued that the design and production of ORVR 
systems for HDVs would be considerably more difficult than for LDVs and 
LDTs. Commenters have maintained that the technological step from 
light-duty technology is greatest with regard to HDVs which have the 
largest fuel tanks and different fuel/vapor system component designs 
and configurations than many smaller LDTs. Comments regarding 
incomplete HDVs expressed concern that secondary manufacturers would 
improperly modify or incorrectly complete the vehicle fuel system 
(which is usually not fully installed for incomplete HDVs) and perhaps 
affect the proper function of the manufacturer-provided ORVR system. 
Concern was also expressed that secondary manufacturers might not have 
the expertise to correctly install the ORVR systems in all cases. In 
each case the primary manufacturer may have legal liability for 
potential problems. It is also worth noting that many HDVs are also 
produced by the primary manufacturer as an incomplete HDVs, perhaps 
compounding the concern.
    EPA recognizes the manufacturers' strong concerns about ORVR 
implementation issues that are unique to HDVs, and agrees that in many 
cases the application of ORVR controls to HDVs would be more difficult 
than for LDTs. Oftentimes the fuel and vapor control systems are 
differently configured than those on LDTs and the fuel tanks are larger 
and of different design. The large number of commercial applications 
for HDVs leads to a larger number of unique body/chassis designs (e.g., 
12 passenger vans, crew cabs, long bed pick-ups, dual wheel axle 
trucks) and thus a larger number of different fuel system 
configurations. Another significant difference is that the engine in 
the HDV would be certified separate from the ORVR system and thus there 
are additional challenges in matching the canister purge provided by 
the engine with the needs of each ORVR system. The manufacturers' 
comments discussed above lay out the special concerns for incomplete 
HDVs, including potential legal liabilities for the primary 
manufacturer. Finally, it should be noted that unlike LDVs and LDTs EPA 
is not aware of any prototype ORVR-equipped HDVs.
    Given these concerns, the effort needed to implement LDV and LDT 
ORVR systems, the relatively small number of gasoline-fueled HDVs, and 
the fact that the application of ORVR standards to HDVs is 
discretionary, EPA is not finalizing the portion of the NPRM which 
applies to HDVs.
    Even without implementing HDV ORVR requirements at this time, the 
ORVR program still provides significant benefits. When viewed as a 
percentage of sales, ORVR still applies to 91 percent of all gasoline-
fueled trucks and 97 percent of all gasoline-fueled vehicles. 
Similarly, control is still achieved over 86 percent of all gasoline-
fueled truck refueling emissions and 94 percent of all gasoline vehicle 
refueling emissions. Thus, EPA's final decision that ORVR requirements 
are not required for these vehicles does not significantly reduce the 
effectiveness of the ORVR program.
4. Applicability to California Vehicles
    As discussed further in the summary and analysis of comments, 
today's final rule implements a federal standard applicable to all 
vehicles sold in the United States. Based on the language in section 
202(a)(6) of the Act, EPA considers refueling emissions control to be 
an evaporative standard. Although California has motor vehicle 
standards in place for model year 1998 and beyond, including 
evaporative emission standards, to date EPA has issued no section 
209(b) waivers which consider a federal ORVR refueling program when 
evaluating the protectiveness, in the aggregate, of those standards. 
However, EPA interprets section 209(b)(3) to provide that once a 
section 209(b) waiver is granted, compliance with the state program is 
deemed compliance with the federal program standards. (See 42 FR 3193, 
January 17, 1977). To the extent that a new federal standard is 
established subsequent to a waiver, such standard will be considered in 
a waiver reconsideration or future waiver request consideration. EPA is 
making no finding at this time how stringency, in the ORVR context, may 
be considered in a waiver proceeding, should one occur. (It should be 
noted that EPA in this notice is restating its consistent 
interpretation for the convenience of rulemaking participants, and does 
not intend to reopen for reconsideration the issue of the effect of 
existing section 209(b) waivers on post-waiver regulations.)
    The California Air Resources Board (CARB) staff has held one 
workshop to discuss the proper application of refueling control 
(November 2, 1993). CARB is considering three courses of action: 
adopting the federal ORVR rule, adopting a California-specific ORVR 
rule, test, or standard, or maintaining that California's current motor 
vehicle program, taken in the aggregate, is at least as stringent as 
the federal program notwithstanding the lack of ORVR controls. If 
California submits a waiver request for its evaporative emission 
control program applicable to model year 1998 or thereafter, which does 
not include federal ORVR requirements, EPA will decide at that time 
whether California's motor vehicle program is at least as protective as 
the federal program.
5. Fuels Covered
    In the September 1991 and May 1993 notices, EPA specifically 
solicited comments on applying the ORVR requirements to highway motor 
vehicles powered by fuels other than gasoline. Consistent with EPA 
policy on fuel neutrality and establishing a consistent set of 
requirements for all fuels, today's rule requires that LDVs and LDTs 
operating on any fuels be capable of meeting the refueling emission 
standard described below. It applies to vehicles certified under both 
40 CFR part 86 and 40 CFR part 88. Although many commenters stated that 
the refueling standard should not apply to vehicles operating on diesel 
fuels, the section 202(a)(6) requirement by its terms applies to all 
LDVs regardless of the type of fuel used. (In contrast, section 202(k) 
requires evaporative emission controls only for ``gasoline-fueled motor 
vehicles''.) However, EPA has attempted to tailor the refueling 
emission certification requirements to the fuel used.
    Manufacturers of vehicles capable of operating on gasoline, 
alcohol, or gasoline/alcohol blends must show that these vehicles 
comply when refueled with such fuels through testing as described later 
in this preamble. This requirement applies to dedicated neat alcohol 
fuel vehicles and vehicles using alcohol blends. Bi-fuel or dual-fuel 
vehicles must meet the requirements on both fuels. Flexible-fueled 
vehicles must meet the requirements on all fuel combinations. At the 
present time the only alcohol fuel affected is methanol.
    However, a waiver of emission testing requirements is available for 
those vehicles/fuels which are considered to be inherently low in 
refueling emissions. EPA believes that a general engineering evaluation 
approach is acceptable for diesel vehicles and diesel fuels for several 
reasons. Diesel fuel today has a Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) of less than 
one pound per square inch (psi) (7 kPa) and diesel engines today do not 
raise the temperature of fuel in their tanks substantially more than do 
gasoline engines (less than 130  deg.F under most conditions). For 
these reasons, the vapor space over the fuel in diesel tanks has a very 
low concentration of fuel vapor compared to that in gasoline tanks and 
thus displacement refueling emissions are low. EPA thus expects diesel 
fuel vehicles to meet the refueling emission standard without a control 
system.
    Under this approach, the vehicle manufacturer's certification 
application must include a statement that there is nothing about the 
vehicle, its fuel system, or fuel that is counter to EPA's assessment 
as discussed above, and the manufacturer's certification that the 
vehicle meets the refueling emission standard (even without a control 
system).
    EPA retains the opportunity to test vehicles to ensure that they 
comply with the emission standard during certification confirmatory 
testing, Selective Enforcement Audits, and in-use testing. EPA also 
retains the right to retract the engineering evaluation option for 
diesel vehicles if the RVP of in-use diesel fuel increases or is 
expected to increase beyond 1 psi (7 kPa) or a significant increase in 
fuel tank temperatures is expected.
    Since exhaust and evaporative emission requirements now exist for 
all new methanol-fueled (neat and blend) vehicles, these shall be 
required to comply with the ORVR standards under the same phase-in 
schedule as gasoline-fueled vehicles. EPA expects that these vehicles 
will use a technology similar to that used to comply with the 
evaporative emission requirement.
    The refueling control requirement will be applied to other 
dedicated, dual-fuel, bi-fuel, and flexible-fuel vehicles using other 
fuels (e.g., dedicated and hybrid electric vehicles, ethanol and 
ethanol blends, compressed and liquid natural gas, liquified petroleum 
gas) as regulations covering these fuels are implemented in the future. 
Lead time, safety, and other factors will be considered in the course 
of these actions. Full testing and engineering evaluation certification 
options will be considered.

B. Implementation

1. Leadtime, Effective Model Year and Phase-in Requirements
    Section 202(a)(6) of the Act specifies a four model year lead time 
before ORVR requirements are to become effective for LDVs (``vehicles 
manufactured beginning in the fourth model year after the model year in 
which the standards are promulgated''). After this four-year lead time, 
a three-year phase-in period begins, during which 40 percent, 80 
percent, and 100 percent, respectively, of each manufacturer's sales of 
new LDVs will need to meet the ORVR requirements. Today's action is 
occurring early in the 1994 model year. Thus, ORVR requirements for 
LDVs will become effective with the 1998 model year. At least 40 
percent of each manufacturer's LDV sales will need to meet ORVR 
requirements in model year 1998, 80 percent for model year 1999, and 
100 percent for model years 2000 and later.
    Since the application of ORVR requirements to LDTs is under the 
general authority in section 202(a)(1), the specific lead time and 
phase-in requirements of section 202(a)(6) do not automatically apply. 
Rather, the standard ``shall take effect after such period as the 
Administrator finds necessary to permit the development and application 
of the requisite technology, giving appropriate consideration to the 
cost of compliance `` (Section 202(a)(2)).
    As discussed elsewhere in this preamble, EPA believes that the 
nature of ORVR technology for LDTs will be very similar to that for 
LDVs and that the cost of controls, incremental to the cost of enhanced 
evaporative emission controls, is minimal. EPA also does not believe 
that ORVR controls for LDTs present different safety issues than 
canisters on LDVs where there is now general consensus that there are 
no unreasonable risks. We therefore believe that the lead time required 
for developing these systems could be similar regardless of vehicle 
class.
    While several commenters requested a delay in the LDT ORVR 
requirement, commenters did not indicate that it was not technically 
feasible to develop ORVR controls for LDTs during this timeframe. 
However, comments from the vehicle manufacturers did express a concern 
that resource and facility constraints would make simultaneous 
development of ORVR systems for LDVs and all trucks problematic. They 
have also indicated that design, development and some in-use experience 
with ORVR systems on passenger cars would be helpful in the design of 
LDT systems.
    EPA has concluded that the resource and facility concerns expressed 
by the manufacturers and the desirability for in-use experience with 
ORVR systems can be balanced against the need for emission reductions 
by beginning the phase-in of ORVR requirements for LDTs after the 
program for LDVs has been fully implemented. In the mid-to-late 1990's 
gasoline-powered vehicle manufacturers will need to respond to new 
evaporative emission requirements, cold CO exhaust emission standards, 
and California and Clean Fuel Fleet exhaust emission standards among 
others. Most of these requirements apply to all three vehicle classes 
and entail several hundred vehicle/engine families. Under the statutory 
requirement the manufacturers will need to comply with LDV ORVR 
requirements in the same timeframe. And while complying with the 
enhanced evaporative and ORVR requirements simultaneously using an 
integrated control system reduces the burden relative to separate 
approaches for LDTs, a delay for LDTs is not unreasonable given the 
already existing requirements. This trade-off is also acceptable in the 
short-term since Stage II refueling controls are or will be in place in 
many ozone NAAs. However, for the reasons discussed above, EPA believes 
that ORVR controls are the preferred long term approach for control of 
refueling emissions from LDTs.
    Therefore, the requirements promulgated today for LDTs will be 
implemented in two stages. The first stage will cover LDTs with a GVWR 
of 6,000 or less (LLDT), the second will cover LDTs with a GVWR of 
6,001 to 8,500 lbs GVWR (HLDT). LLDTs represent about 70 percent of LDT 
sales. HLDTs represent the remaining 30 percent. For LLDTs, the ORVR 
requirement will begin implementation in the 2001 model year and will 
phase in over three model years according to the same percentages as 
LDVs. For HLDTs, the ORVR requirement will begin implementation in the 
2004 model year and will phase in over three model years according to 
the same percentages as LDVs (40/80/100). This schedule will permit the 
development and application of cost-effective, economically achievable 
technology, as required by section 202(a)(2) and will still allow 
consideration of the Stage II phaseout provisions of section 202(a)(6) 
of the CAA in the long term.
    Provisions of 40 CFR 86.085-1(b) permit manufacturers to certify 
HDVs with a GVWR of 8,501-10,000 lbs GVWR as LDTs. This option will 
remain in effect for refueling controls. HDVs certified under this 
option would be treated as HLDTs for purposes leadtime, phase-in and 
sales compliance determination.
    EPA does not view the provisions of section 202(a)(3) as applying 
to refueling controls, as that provision was probably intended to apply 
only to exhaust emission standards, as did its predecessor provision. 
However, even if it did apply, this section would provide for at least 
four years of leadtime. Since EPA is allowing this much leadtime for 
HLDTs anyway, designating section 202(a)(2) or 202(a)(3) as authority 
for HDV leadtime has no practical significance here.
2. Small Volume Manufacturers
    Today's rule includes a short-term provision for small volume 
light-duty vehicle manufacturers. Several small volume manufacturers 
commented that, as a practical matter, they cannot phase in their 
compliance due to their small size and limited product lines. Small 
volume manufacturers also claimed that they sometimes rely on control 
technology developed by larger manufacturers to develop their 
compliance strategies, and this would not be possible if they must 
comply at essentially the 100 percent of sales level before the larger 
manufacturers. R&D cost concerns were cited as obstacles as well.
    EPA believes that these comments state valid concerns. As is 
described in three recent Federal Register notices, EPA has allowed 
small volume manufacturers to delay compliance to the last model year 
of the phase-in: in the Tier 1 exhaust emission standard rule (June 5, 
1991, 56 FR 25724), the cold CO exhaust emissions rule (July 17, 1992, 
57 FR 31888), and the enhanced evaporative emission standards rule 
(March 24, 1993, 58 FR 16003), and has decided to allow the same 
accommodation for the ORVR requirement for light-duty vehicles. This 
provision is included, not only for the reasons raised by the 
manufacturers, but also because it would be inconsistent to face ORVR 
compliance before evaporative emission compliance when the comments 
indicate that most manufacturers plan to use integrated refueling/
evaporative control systems and these are desirable for both cost and 
safety reasons. In addition, requiring phased compliance for these 
manufacturers effectively denies them the opportunity Congress intended 
to phase in the control technology. (Cf. State of Ohio v. EPA, 997 F. 
2d 1520, 1535 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (de minimis exception to seemingly 
literal statutory language can be allowed where failure to allow the 
exception frustrates a Congressional goal or leads to absurd results)). 
Thus, small volume manufacturers of light-duty vehicles, as defined in 
40 CFR part 86, may delay compliance to model year 2000 (i.e., the 
third model year of the phase-in), but must comply with 100 percent of 
sales in that and subsequent model years. Because of the additional 
leadtime EPA is affording to LDTs, the Agency is not implementing this 
small-volume manufacturer provision for these vehicles.
3. Inclusion of Inherently Low Refueling Emission Vehicles
    As was discussed in the May 1993 notice, vehicles meeting the 
refueling emission standard because they are inherently low in 
refueling vapor emissions (those certified without a control system 
using the engineering evaluation option), and thus are waived from 
testing, cannot be counted in either the vehicles complying or base 
sales figures in determining compliance with the sales requirements of 
the statute. Compliance for these vehicles is to be calculated 
separately.

C. Refueling Emission Test Procedures and Standard

    This final rule includes test procedures for the measurement of 
refueling emissions and a corresponding emissions standard by which to 
judge the adequacy of ORVR control system designs. The test procedures 
accommodate integrated system designs, which control both refueling and 
evaporative emissions with a common vapor storage unit, as well as non-
integrated system designs, which do not share vapor storage units.
    The test procedures for these two types of control systems, 
although different in some ways (explained below), involve the same 
basic steps: Load the storage canister with hydrocarbon vapor, drive 
the vehicle to provide opportunity for canister purge, and refuel the 
vehicle while measuring emissions (see Figures 1 and 2). The first two 
steps together are referred to as the preconditioning phase and are 
discussed in detail further on in this section.
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

TR06AP94.000


TR06AP94.001


    BILLING CODE 6560-P-C
1. Refueling Emissions Test
    The procedure for the refueling step is common to both integrated 
and non-integrated systems. It involves disconnecting the vapor line 
from the fuel tank to the canister, draining the fuel tank, refueling 
with test fuel to 10 percent of the nominal tank capacity, soaking the 
vehicle for 6 to 24 hours at 803  deg.F 
(26.71.7  deg.C), reconnecting the vapor line, and fueling 
the vehicle with test fuel at 671.5  deg.F 
(19.40.8  deg.C) in a sealed enclosure (SHED) while 
measuring emissions. Fueling is performed at a rate of 4 to 10 gallons 
per minute (15.1 to 37.9 liters per minute) and is terminated at the 
first automatic shutoff that occurs after a quantity of fuel has been 
pumped equal to at least 85 percent of the nominal tank capacity.
    One of the key issues raised in the July 1993 hearing and the 
subsequent comment period concerned the test temperature specifications 
for the dispensed fuel and the residual in-tank fuel, both of which 
have a major impact on the refueling vapor generation and therefore on 
ORVR system designs. Hearing participants discussed the merits of 
setting the test dispensed fuel temperature at 67  deg.F (19.4  deg.C) 
while maintaining the residual in-tank fuel temperature specification 
of 80  deg.F (26.7  deg.C). Previous proposals had included a dispensed 
fuel temperature specification of 81-84  deg.F (27.2-28.9  deg.C).
    Comments were received on both sides of this issue. The 
manufacturers supported the test temperature specifications discussed 
at the July 1993 hearing. They believed these specifications would 
enable the canisters planned for meeting the enhanced evaporative 
emission requirements to also capture refueling emissions and would 
facilitate the use of liquid seals as an option to mechanical seals in 
the fillneck. Manufacturers commented that this would provide much 
needed design flexibility and alleviate their safety concerns. The 
American Petroleum Institute (API) and the Natural Resources Defense 
Council (NRDC) supported the 81 deg.-84  deg.F dispensed temperature 
range proposed earlier. They expressed concern that 67  deg.F is not 
representative of actual dispensed fuel temperatures on high ozone days 
and therefore might lead to a situation where the test procedure does 
not adequately represent in-use conditions with the result that 
refueling emissions are controlled inadequately in use.
    EPA's goal in establishing test parameters is to ensure that the 
combination of test conditions results in designs that will achieve a 
very high level of control in use. Therefore, the representativeness of 
any one test parameter, such as dispensed fuel temperature, is of less 
concern than the net effect of the total test. For example, in-use RVPs 
in many parts of the nation during the summer months are lower than 
that specified in the test. What is important is the combined effects 
of the key parameters during an in-use refueling event. EPA's analysis 
of in-use effectiveness described in the Regulatory Impact Analysis and 
Summary and Analysis of Comments indicates that these test conditions 
will yield designs that achieve in-use control in excess of 95 percent 
during the ozone season in the NAAs (even assuming the accuracy of data 
showing that one region of the country has dispensed fuel temperatures 
within or exceeding the 81 deg.-84  deg.F range, a potentially 
questionable assumption, as explained in the next paragraph). Based on 
this analysis and the manufacturers' comments, EPA has concluded that 
the test specifications being finalized in this action are appropriate.
    The dispensed gasoline temperature parameter discussed in the NPRM 
was derived using limited survey information on in-use refueling 
events. The 81 deg.-84  deg.F dispensed temperature value in the NPRM 
was driven by refueling events in the Southeastern U.S. These dispensed 
fuel temperature values are seven or more degrees higher than any other 
region of the country. There is no obvious technical reason why the 
Southeastern U.S. values were so much higher than those found in other 
regions of the country. Thus, there is some possibility that they may 
be unrepresentative, in which case the        67  deg.F temperature 
used in the refueling test is even more representative. (EPA is not 
completely disavowing the Southeastern U.S dispensed fuel data, since 
it is the only data available to EPA at this time. The Summary and 
Analysis of Comments contains an analysis of the sensitivity of the in-
use effectiveness of the ORVR requirement to this dispensed temperature 
value.)
2. Integrated System Preconditioning
    The nature of integrated systems allows for a corresponding 
integration of ORVR and evaporative emission preconditioning 
procedures. This integration is desirable because of potential test 
resource savings. A major revision of the evaporative emission test 
procedure was completed recently and will be implemented beginning in 
the 1996 model year (58 FR 16002, March 24, 1993).
    EPA proposed three integrated system preconditioning options for 
the refueling test in the May 1993 Federal Register notice. Option A 
places the refueling test after the exhaust emissions portion of the 
supplemental evaporative emissions test procedure. Option B places the 
refueling test after the running loss portion of the evaporative 
emissions test sequence. As a logical extension to this option, EPA 
also proposed Option B1, which adds more driving to Option A in order 
to allow for more purging of the canister, similar to Option B, while 
avoiding the complexities of the Option B running loss procedure.
    EPA has selected Option B1, based on the above-described advantages 
and the support for this choice expressed by commenters. This procedure 
follows the supplemental evaporative emission test preconditioning 
procedure, involving an initial fuel tank drain and fill with 
certification test fuel to 40 percent full, a 12 to 36 hour soak at 
68 deg. to 86  deg.F (20 deg. to 30  deg.C), a preconditioning drive 
over one Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS) cycle, another fuel 
tank drain and fill to 40 percent, a canister preconditioning step 
detailed below, and then the exhaust emissions test. At this point the 
refueling test departs from the evaporative test sequence. Instead, 
additional driving is conducted to provide more opportunity for 
canister purge. This driving consists of a UDDS cycle followed by two 
New York City Cycles (NYCC) and then by another UDDS. This driving 
schedule corresponds to the driving specified for the evaporative 
running loss test, though not at the same high temperatures. After the 
driving, the above-described refueling procedure is conducted.
    The canister is preconditioned by loading it with a 50/50 mixture 
of butane and nitrogen, at a rate of 40 grams of butane per hour, until 
2 grams of hydrocarbons are emitted from the canister (referred to as 
the 2-gram breakthrough point). Alternatively, the canister can be 
loaded to this point with gasoline vapors by conducting repeated 
diurnal heat builds. All detailed aspects of the supplemental 
evaporative emission test procedure, up through the exhaust emission 
test, apply to integrated ORVR system testing as well (58 FR 16002, 
March 24, 1993). The three test sequences (full 3-diurnal evaporative, 
supplemental evaporative, and refueling) may be performed in any order 
and exhaust emissions measurements from any of the three may be 
considered valid. If either evaporative emission sequence has been 
conducted before the refueling test, the fuel tank drain and fill and 
vehicle soak that precede the one UDDS preconditioning drive in the 
refueling test sequence may be skipped.
3. Non-Integrated System Preconditioning
    Non-integrated ORVR systems store only refueling vapors and 
therefore warrant a preconditioning drivedown of 85 percent of the fuel 
tank capacity before being subjected to the 85 percent refueling event. 
This driving consists of repeated UDDS cycles, either on a track or on 
a dynamometer, until a volume of fuel equal to 85 percent of the fuel 
tank nominal capacity has been consumed. During the actual refueling 
test, the vehicle will be filled to at least 95 percent of tank 
capacity, as is the case for the integrated system. If manufacturers 
exercise the option to do less driving in certification testing, EPA 
may perform subsequent confirmatory and in-use testing using the same 
reduced driving schedule.
    At its discretion, EPA may test non-integrated systems with a 
partial refueling test procedure. This procedure helps to ensure 
control in those in-use refueling events in which less than a tankful 
of fuel is pumped. Because the non-integrated system test allows a 
nearly complete drivedown of the fuel tank capacity, thus enabling 
purge design strategies that inappropriately minimize purge during the 
exhaust emissions test, EPA considers the partial refueling test 
necessary. It also allows EPA to assess the basic question of whether 
the system has the capacity to handle a partial fill, a common 
refueling event in use.
    In this partial fill test, following the loading of the canister 
with butane and fueling of the vehicle to 95 percent of the fuel tank 
capacity, the vehicle will be driven some integer number of UDDS cycles 
such that some amount of fuel between 10 and 85 percent of the fuel 
tank capacity is consumed. After a one to six hour soak, the vehicle 
will be subjected to the refueling emissions measurement test with no 
intervening drain and fill. The fuel pumped in the test will be a 
metered amount, corresponding to the amount consumed in the drive. This 
amount will be based on the vehicle's fuel economy, as determined at 
certification.
4. Seal Test
    Also at its discretion, EPA may perform a seal test of integrated 
and non-integrated designs, aimed at verifying the integrity of 
fillpipe seals and vapor lines. This test eliminates consideration of 
potential canister emissions by thoroughly bench purging the canister 
prior to the refueling event. The canister preconditioning and 
preparatory driving are therefore likewise eliminated, although EPA may 
perform the test procedure up through the exhaust emission test (in 
order to obtain this measurement) and then conduct the bench purge and 
refueling test. Failure of the seal test would be considered equivalent 
to failing the full refueling emissions test and the same standard 
would apply to both.
5. Cap Removal Emissions
    In the May 1993 Notice, EPA requested comment on including a test 
to measure and control the ``puff loss'' emissions from a pressurized 
fuel tank when the fuel cap is removed for refueling.
    In addition to refueling emissions, vehicles can have emissions 
when the fuel cap is removed from a pressurized fuel tank before the 
refueling event. Although these emissions potentially warrant control, 
EPA does not view them as ``refueling'' emissions for purposes of 
section 202(a)(6), since they precede a refueling and are more akin to 
evaporative emissions. EPA in fact proposed, but did not finalize, such 
a cap-off test in the evaporative emissions NPRM (55 FR 1914, January 
19, 1990) rather than in the ORVR NPRM. Thus Congress would not have 
been considering such emissions when it enacted the 95 percent minimum 
control standard in section 202(a)(6) in the 1990 CAAAs.
    Manufacturers commented that the puff loss test would provide no 
additional control over that achieved by the refueling test and the 
evaporative emissions rule requirement that tanks pressurized to over 
10'' (25 cm) H2O be vented to the canister upon cap removal. EPA 
disagrees with this assessment. The refueling test does not measure 
emissions from cap removal directly after vehicle operation. The 
evaporative emissions requirement allows for the venting of tank 
pressures under 10'' H2O to the atmosphere. These emissions can be 
appreciable. General Motors (GM) calculated that the puff loss from 
venting a 10 percent full, 20 gallon (76 liter) tank at 10'' H2O 
would be about 3 grams. EPA agrees with this estimate but disagrees 
with the contention that this is minor, given that this same vehicle 
would only be allowed to emit a little over 3 grams during the 
refueling test.
    GM also argued that the execution of a cap-off test involving a 
warm-up drive followed immediately by a cap-off step in a SHED would be 
complex and formidable. EPA agrees with GM's contentions that hot soak 
emissions could confuse the puff loss measurement and that the time 
required to move a vehicle from a dynamometer cell to a SHED and remove 
the cap would be overly long compared to the actual in-use event, which 
typically involves less than a minute from key-off to cap-off. These 
two concerns would affect the measured emissions in opposite directions 
and would make it difficult to ascertain a puff loss emission 
corresponding to the in-use event.
    EPA remains concerned about puff loss emissions, particularly 
considering that the new evaporative emission control requirements may 
prompt manufacturers to rely more heavily on pressurized tank designs 
in the future. However, EPA believes it necessary to defer action on 
this issue so that an effective test procedure can be developed, 
involving more complete public participation. Therefore, EPA is leaving 
this portion of the rulemaking open for now and intends to take up this 
issue as part of the planned further action on pressurized designs 
announced in the evaporative emissions control final rule (58 FR 
16012). However, it should be noted that the enhanced evaporative 
emissions rule will require controls for systems whose pressure exceeds 
10 inches H2O, and thus control is already in place for these 
extreme situations.
6. Spitback Test
    EPA believes, and manufacturers' comments indicate, that vehicles 
would not be expected to comply with the refueling emission standard if 
they emitted significant spitback emissions during the refueling test. 
Fuel spilled on the side of the vehicle or in the SHED when the fuel 
nozzle shuts off will evaporate and be included as part of the 
refueling emissions. In recognition of this effect, this final rule 
also waives the spitback testing requirement for vehicles being 
certified to meet the ORVR requirements. Similar to the provision for 
``inherently low refueling emission vehicles'' discussed above, 
manufacturers can, at their option, certify as part of the 
certification application, that they agree with EPA's assessment 
regarding the effect of spitback emissions on the ability to pass the 
refueling emission standard and that their vehicle passes the spitback 
test standard. Of course, manufacturers may elect to comply with the 
spitback test in lieu of using this waiver option.
    Compliance with the spitback standard is still required, and EPA is 
retaining the spitback test and standard promulgated in the enhanced 
evaporative emissions control rule (58 FR 16002, March 24, 1993). EPA 
may conduct or require manufacturers to conduct the spitback test to 
demonstrate compliance should concerns over vehicle spitback arise.
7. Nozzle Geometry Standards
    In the NPRM, EPA asked for comment on the need for fuel nozzle 
geometry standards as part of an ORVR program, and suggested that auto 
makers and nozzle manufacturers undertake a voluntary initiative to 
develop national consensus standards in this area. This initiative is 
being undertaken under the auspices of the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE). An SAE technical committee, comprised of auto maker, 
fuel nozzle manufacturer, and other representatives, is considering 
revisions to SAE standard J285 ``Gasoline Dispenser Nozzle Spouts''.
    It is important that nozzles used in the design and testing of 
ORVR-equipped vehicles be similar to those found in use. Should this 
committee reach consensus on fuel nozzle geometry specifications, EPA 
will use a nozzle meeting this standard in all refueling emissions 
compliance testing, if the nozzle manufacturers agree to adopt these 
specifications for future retail and commercial fuel nozzles and the 
auto manufacturers design their ORVR systems to accommodate a nozzle 
with this geometry. If no standard is developed for nozzle geometry or 
if the above agreements cannot be reached, EPA will use any 
commercially available nozzle in its testing.
8. Level of the Standard
    This final rule adopts a refueling test standard of 0.20 grams of 
hydrocarbon emissions per gallon (g/gal) of fuel pumped (0.053 g/
liter). This standard applies to all vehicle classes covered by this 
rule and covers the full useful life. Setting the standard at this 
level ensures that the standard that meets the statutory requirement to 
provide a minimum emission capture efficiency of 95 percent, as 
discussed below.
    The August 1987 NPRM included a proposed refueling emission 
standard of 0.10 g/gal (0.026 g/liter) of fuel pumped, which at that 
time represented about a 98 percent emissions reduction from 
uncontrolled levels. Subsequently, the 1990 CAAA called for a refueling 
emission standard representing at least a 95 percent reduction over 
uncontrolled levels. EPA determined that this reduction corresponds to 
a standard of about 0.25 g/gal (0.066 g/liter) and requested comment in 
the May 1993 notice on the setting of a standard in the 0.10 to 0.25 g/
gal range.
    Manufacturers supported a standard of 0.20 g/gal, arguing that this 
standard would satisfy the CAA minimum requirement while providing for 
full useful life compliance and design flexibility. API and other 
commenters felt that a standard providing a 98 percent level of control 
is justified based on demonstrated and cost effective technology.
    After analyzing the comments and the projected in-use emission 
impacts, EPA has selected a standard of 0.20 g/gal. This standard was 
chosen because it meets or exceeds the statutory minimum requirement 
and, since it is representative of most refueling situations reasonably 
likely to occur (Cf Edison Electric Institute v. EPA, 2F.3J 438, 446-47 
(D.C. Cir. 1993)). At the same time, it meets the manufacturers' need 
for adequate design margin and flexibility. As is discussed in the 
Summary and Analysis of Comments, the nature of the canister-based 
control technology is such that setting the standard at a lower level 
would not be expected to achieve additional emission reductions in use. 
Systems will need to be designed for essentially zero emissions, with 
the standard providing an allowance for vehicle and test variability. 
It may also enhance the use of liquid fillneck seals which are 
projected to have lower costs, good in-use performance, and present no 
safety concerns.

D. Safety of ORVR Systems

1. Background
    Section 202(a)(6) of the 1990 CAA Amendments (as well as its 
predecessor provision) requires EPA to consult with the Secretary of 
Transportation regarding the safety of vehicle-based (ORVR) systems for 
the control of vehicle refueling emissions. EPA began this consultation 
in the Spring of 1986, prior to the NPRM, and the consultation has 
continued throughout the various stages of this rulemaking. DoT was 
represented by NHTSA throughout this process. A record of this 
consultation and the various analyses conducted by EPA and NHTSA to 
assess the safety issue is available in the public docket and is 
discussed in the April 15, 1992 Federal Register notice regarding ORVR 
controls (57 FR 13220). Early in the consultation process, NHTSA raised 
concerns about the safety of ORVR canister systems, and throughout the 
various stages of the rulemaking, safety has been a central issue in 
the public comments and in the deliberations on the ORVR rulemaking. 
Unresolved concerns regarding the safety of ORVR canister systems (at 
least relative to Stage II systems) delayed promulgation of the NPRM 
prior to the 1990 CAAAs and, in April 1992, led EPA to decide not to 
require ORVR controls at that time. Given the concerns raised about 
vehicle safety, it is important to address the potential safety 
concerns as part of the implementation of the ORVR requirement.
2. Test Procedure/Safety
    The safety comments regarding ORVR canister systems focused 
primarily on the concern that ORVR systems would increase fuel system 
complexity and that this would create vehicle safety risks. Many 
manufacturers' comments on the NPRM indicated that the test procedure, 
as proposed in 1987, would force the use of non-integrated (separate) 
systems for refueling and evaporative emissions control. They 
characterized these systems as making the fuel vapor control system 
more complex than current evaporative control systems, thus creating 
the potential for a safety risk.
    As noted earlier, the DC Circuit held that the consultation 
requirement in section 202(a)(6) does not alter EPA's duty to issue 
ORVR requirements. After the decision was issued and after publication 
of EPA's May 27, 1993 Federal Register notice (58 FR 30731), EPA held 
technical discussions with representatives of AAMA regarding the ORVR 
test procedure (See items IV-E-101,102,105,106 in the public docket for 
this rulemaking). The purpose of these discussions was to identify 
potential changes to the ORVR test procedure which, if enacted, would 
facilitate the use of an integrated evaporative/refueling control 
system approach with a liquid seal in the fillneck. (As was discussed 
above, in March 1993, EPA published a final rule requiring enhanced 
evaporative controls on gasoline-powered LDVs, LDTs, and HDVs. The 
enhanced evaporative requirements will lead to an increase in the size 
of the canister used to capture evaporative emissions, an upgrade in 
the purge system capabilities, as well as other system changes and 
improvements.) An integrated system approach would allow manufacturers 
to make use of the upgraded evaporative control hardware (common carbon 
canister, purge system, vapor hoses, etc.) as part of their ORVR 
control strategy and thus address both system complexity and cost 
issues. This approach would be used in lieu of the non-integrated 
control system approaches which were characterized as being complex and 
potentially less safe.
    ORVR test procedure changes which would ease the use of integrated 
evaporative/refueling control systems with liquid fillneck seal 
approaches were identified. EPA explained this option at the July 22, 
1993 public hearing and requested additional public comment.
    Auto manufacturer comments supported this approach. For example, 
Chrysler Corporation's comments indicated:

    ``Chrysler believes that the proposed AAMA revisions to the test 
procedure and the 0.20 g/gal. standard will allow Chrysler to design 
safe, efficient ORVR systems.''

    Ford Motor Company's comments stated:

    ``Ford recommends that EPA adopt the test procedure changes and 
standards outlined by AAMA at the Hearing on July 22, 1993, and 
contained in the attached comments. These changes should allow for 
the design and development of a canister-based, integrated refueling 
and evaporative emissions system which is less complex than a 
nonintegrated system and which addresses the safety issues raised in 
previous rulemakings. These procedural changes along with others 
identified in the comments should allow EPA, in consultation with 
NHTSA, to find that integrated systems do not present an 
unreasonable risk to automotive safety.''

    General Motors expressed similar views:

    ``The ORVR test procedure changes described in these comments 
are critical to permitting manufacturers to develop ORVR systems for 
passenger cars that minimize or eliminate any adverse impact upon 
motor vehicle safety.''

    And, in summary, an October 13, 1993 AAMA letter to NHTSA stated 
that:

    ``We believe this procedure will allow the use of an integrated 
ORVR/evaporative emissions system including a common carbon 
canister. An integrated ORVR/evaporative emissions system will allow 
manufacturers to design and build safe, efficient ORVR systems.''

    Comments by other manufacturers also supported this position. 
Accordingly, this rule enacts the test procedure option identified 
above. It is supported by AAMA, the Association of International 
Automobile Manufacturers (AIAM), and the individual manufacturers and, 
according to their comments, minimizes their longstanding vehicle 
safety concerns.
3. DOT Consultation
    In response to the changed circumstances since it's prior safety 
analysis, DoT/NHTSA undertook an independent assessment of vehicle 
safety concerns associated with ORVR systems. In November 1993, NHTSA 
completed a study entitled ``An Assessment of Onboard Refueling Vapor 
Recovery System Safety''. This document reexamined the conclusions 
raised in their July 1991 study, upon which EPA relied heavily on its 
April 1992 decision not to require ORVR controls.
    In this recent study, NHTSA revisited the principal findings of its 
July 1991 report to consider the positive safety impacts of the test 
procedure changes and other changed circumstances. The NHTSA report, 
which is available in the public docket, reached the following general 
conclusion regarding ORVR safety:

    ``Basically, there were three principal areas of concern pointed 
out in the July 1991 report: the increased size of vapor canisters 
to hold the fuel vapors, the mechanical complexity of the ORVR 
system, and the ability of the ORVR system to safely manage and 
purge the increased volume of vapors.
    As discussed above, technical developments, and test procedure 
and regulatory changes that have occurred since the July 1991 safety 
assessment, have had the net effect of reducing the safety concerns 
raised in the July 1991 report. The majority of vehicle 
manufacturers have stated that it is now possible to design safe 
ORVR systems that will function properly under all operating 
conditions. However, there still remains some small unquantifiable 
increase in safety risk due to the addition of the ORVR systems. 
This risk is unquantifiable since there are no data upon which to 
base a numerical estimate.''

    Thus, NHTSA views the changed circumstances, including the final 
test procedure and the use of integrated systems, as addressing many of 
their previous concerns. They also acknowledge that absent actual data 
they cannot determine the level of risk, and thus conclude that risks 
are unquantifiable. While the NHTSA report contained a brief assessment 
as to why trucks might be different than cars and stated that truck 
prototype systems and field tests for truck ORVR systems would be 
beneficial, no special safety risks were cited for using ORVR canisters 
to control LDT/HDV refueling emissions.
4. EPA Assessment
    EPA is withdrawing its April, 1992 finding that ORVR canisters pose 
unreasonable safety risks. First, that determination was based on an 
improper comparison with Stage II controls. NRDC v. Reilly, 983 F. 2d 
at 271. Considered on their own, ORVR canisters do not appear to pose 
significant safety risks. Indeed, as the Agency noted in 1987, this 
appears to be particularly true for integrated evaporative/refueling 
control systems--which now appear to be the preferred control system.
    Second, EPA is swayed because NHTSA has reviewed the safety of ORVR 
systems in light of recent developments and subsequently has withdrawn 
most of the adverse conclusions in the 1991 report. NHTSA also 
indicates (1993 Report pp. 17-24) that some of its remaining concerns 
can be addressed by choosing proper designs for canister systems. As 
noted above, EPA has taken NHTSA's views strongly into account 
throughout the course of this rulemaking, and accordingly is influenced 
by NHTSA's more positive outlook on ORVR canister safety.
    The record further indicates that installation of ORVR canisters 
can have some positive impacts on safety. See EPA's ``Summary and 
Analysis of Comments on the Potential Safety Implications of ORVR 
Systems'' (IV-H-04). Safety benefits include removal of the external 
fuel vapor vent line from the fillneck of these vehicles, the expected 
move of the canister from the engine compartment to the rear of the 
vehicle, the resultant shortening of the vapor vent line, and the 
capture of fuel vapor previously vented at the service station during 
refueling. All of these actions directionally reduce the risk of 
vehicle fires in crash and non-crash situations.
    In sum, given that the manufacturers indicate that integrated 
evaporative/refueling control systems minimize their safety concerns, 
NHTSA's significant reduction in concerns, EPA's longstanding view of 
the safety of integrated refueling/evaporative control systems and the 
safety benefits of ORVR controls, EPA has decided to withdraw its April 
15, 1992 finding (57 FR 13230-13231). Specifically, EPA concludes that 
onboard canister controls do not pose an unreasonable risk to public 
safety. ORVR canister systems are not inherently unsafe.
    Several commenters expressed concern about applying the ORVR 
requirement to trucks and incomplete vehicles (i.e., those produced by 
secondary manufacturers). However, for the most part, EPA does not 
believe the technical circumstances here to be substantially different 
than for LDVs. All trucks, including those produced by secondary 
manufacturers, are subject to the enhanced evaporative emission 
requirements and will have to upgrade their control systems in response 
to these new requirements. Also, the ORVR test procedure for these 
vehicles, as for LDVs, would facilitate the use of integrated 
evaporative/ refueling control systems. Potential safety concerns of 
vehicles completed by secondary manufacturers should not be 
substantially different for integrated enhanced evaporative/refueling 
control systems than they are for enhanced evaporative control systems 
alone. This is especially the case for those incomplete vehicles 
delivered to the secondary manufacturer with a complete fuel system as 
are most incomplete LDTs. Also, the potential safety benefits of ORVR 
systems would accrue to trucks and secondary manufacturer vehicles as 
well as to LDVs. Thus, EPA believes the safety concerns, if any, to be 
similar to those for LDVs. In fact, while the manufacturers opposed 
extending the ORVR requirement to trucks on several grounds, none 
indicated that safe truck ORVR systems were not possible.
    In any event, EPA's decision not to finalize ORVR requirements for 
HDVs (both complete and incomplete HDVs) at this time and to delay LDT 
implementation for three years or more should minimize any remaining 
safety concerns about ORVR systems for trucks (IV-H-23).
5. Safety Reviews
    Nonetheless, EPA is very sensitive to the uncertainties expressed 
by NHTSA, and plans a program to implement its authority to ensure safe 
systems. Sections 202(a)(4) and 206(a)(3)(A), (B) of the CAA give EPA 
broad authority to address the safety of emission control systems. 
Section 202(a)(4) reads:

    Effective with respect to vehicles and engines manufactured 
after model year 1978, no emission control device, system, or 
element of design shall be used in a new motor vehicle or new motor 
vehicle engine for purposes of complying with standards prescribed 
under this subsection if such device, system, or element of design 
will cause or contribute to an unreasonable risk to public health, 
welfare, or safety in its operation or function.

and section 206(a)(3)(A), (B) reads:

    (A) A certificate of conformity may be issued under this section 
only if the Administrator determines that the manufacturer (or in 
the case of a vehicle or engine for import, any person) has 
established to the satisfaction of the Administrator that any 
emission control device, system, or element of design installed on, 
or incorporated in, such vehicle or engine conforms to applicable 
requirements of section 202(a)(4).
    (B) The Administrator may conduct such tests and may require the 
manufacturer (or any such person) to conduct such tests and provide 
such information as is necessary to carry out subparagraph (A) of 
this paragraph. * * *

    This authority has been implemented for more than ten years. The 
Code of Federal Regulations Sec. 86.084-5(b) requires that any system 
installed on a new motor vehicle to enable such a vehicle to conform to 
standards shall not in its operation, function, or malfunction result 
in any unsafe condition endangering the motor vehicle, its occupants, 
or persons or property in close proximity to the vehicle. Furthermore, 
Sec. 86.091-23(d) requires that manufacturers certify that the vehicles 
for which emission certification is requested conform to the 
requirements of Sec. 86.084-5(b). The manufacturer must also agree to 
provide descriptions of the tests conducted, the results of such tests, 
and other information upon which that determination is based. Presently 
this safety certification is submitted in the application for 
certification which manufacturers must submit for every vehicle model 
they plan to produce for commerce in the United States. EPA intends to 
use this authority and the approach described above to implement the 
ORVR requirement. See also NRDC v. Reilly, 983 F.2d at 267 (ultimate 
issue of safety is to be addressed at certification).
    The ultimate responsibility for ORVR system safety (both design and 
performance in use) rests with the manufacturers. As part of the 
application for certification, manufacturers will be required to make 
the declarations prescribed in Sec. 86.091-23 (d). During review of the 
certification application, EPA will study the design of the vehicle's 
ORVR system, its on-vehicle configuration and operation, and will 
consult directly with NHTSA on these applications. Special 
consideration will be given to the potential concerns raised in the 
course of the rulemaking process such as component locations, materials 
used in the components, and connections between components. For 
canister-based systems, items of special interest will include canister 
location and shell construction, canister/vapor hose access for I/M 
testing, vapor hose routing and wall thickness, integrity of 
connections, and proximity of potential ignition sources. In addition, 
manufacturers will want to consider concerns raised in past NHTSA 
safety assessments. The November 1993 NHTSA report makes it clear that 
proper design is critical in system safety performance.
    As was mentioned above, EPA could ask for any or all of the 
information supporting the manufacturer's safety assessment and EPA 
will consider all information presented by the manufacturer in this 
assessment whether it is based on testing, engineering analysis, or 
some other source. As is present practice, EPA expects that 
manufacturers will conduct engineering risk assessments and component, 
system, and vehicle tests to assess the safety of various ORVR system 
designs and on-vehicle configurations and make any modifications or 
devise and implement the engineering solutions needed to address 
potential problems.
    ORVR-equipped vehicles would have to meet the applicable FMVSSs, 
including FMVSS 301 related to Fuel System Integrity. As noted above, 
NHTSA is considering amending the latter to address ORVR system safety. 
However, section 206(a)(3)(B) of the CAA provides EPA with broad 
latitude to require manufacturers to conduct tests or provide other 
information as may be needed to determine if an ORVR system meets the 
vehicle safety requirements prescribed in section 202(a)(4).
    In the May 27, 1993 Federal Register notice, EPA asked for comment 
on whether any specific tests or other information should be required 
up front as part of the certification process and, if so, what 
information and in what form would be most appropriate. No commenter 
provided input on this point and, given the resolution of the safety 
issue, EPA has decided not to require any specific information at this 
time.
    In the same notice, EPA also asked comment from auto manufacturers 
and other interested parties on the desirability of developing a 
process, after promulgation of the final rule, through which there 
could be a dialogue with EPA and NHTSA on design questions related to 
the in-use safety of ORVR systems. Manufacturers' comments indicated 
that resolution of the safety issue as part of the rule was most 
important, and they expressed little interest in establishing a 
dialogue at this time. EPA remains willing to work with the auto 
manufacturers in this area at any time in the future.
    Although ultimate safety determinations must await the 
certification process, EPA wishes to repeat that it knows of nothing 
that would preclude the certification of properly designed ORVR 
canister systems on LDVs and LDTs. EPA stresses that it has never 
determined for purposes of certification under section 206 that any 
specific ORVR system (including ORVR canisters) would present an 
unreasonable risk to public safety within the meaning of section 
202(a)(4), 58 FR 30740-30741. Consequently, the potential existence of 
means other than canisters to control refueling emissions should not 
preclude certification of properly-designed canister-based control 
systems.
6. Alternative Control Technologies
    As part of the technical analysis supporting the NPRM, EPA 
indicated that control technologies such as collapsible fuel bladders 
and cloth impregnated with activated carbon absorbers were potential 
alternatives to carbon canisters. As part of the technology assessment 
for this final rule, EPA reviewed the record of the rule to see what 
options had been put forth and to assess what progress had been made in 
applying these technologies to vehicle fuel systems. The collective 
determination from the review was that, in some cases, parties have 
pursued development of these technologies for other applications, such 
as aircraft fuel systems and chemical protection suits, but that less 
overall progress has been made in applying these technologies to 
automotive applications. In some cases no progress was made, and the 
technical feasibility of these designs therefore remains problematic. 
In one case commercial development was dependent on industry or 
government support. While EPA cannot arbitrarily preclude the use of 
any control system design approach, EPA concludes that such 
alternatives are not generally likely to be available for production 
application in the time frame when manufacturers must begin to install 
ORVR systems on their vehicles. The potential existence of these 
alternative control approaches does not preclude certification of 
properly designed canister-based ORVR controls.

E. Certification Provisions

1. General
    Today's action modifies the certification process by adding the 
requirement for demonstrating compliance with refueling emission 
standards according to the prescribed phase-in schedule. This action is 
expected to have no direct impact on manufacturers' fuel economy 
programs. The following paragraphs summarize EPA's certification and 
fuel economy requirements with regard to ORVR controls.
    The regulations promulgated in this action provide new definitions 
for refueling families and refueling emission control systems. For LDVs 
and LDTs, manufacturers will normally perform a refueling test on one 
emission-data vehicle per refueling emission control system and submit 
this test data (low altitude data) to EPA for possible confirmatory 
testing. Data submitted to EPA should include the exhaust emissions 
data from the exhaust emissions test which is contained in the 
refueling test sequence. The data should demonstrate compliance with 
all applicable emission standards. Manufacturers may submit high 
altitude test data to EPA for possible confirmatory testing, or provide 
a statement in the application for certification that vehicles will 
comply with applicable emission standards at high altitude. Note that 
this action requires manufacturers to perform exhaust and evaporative 
emission tests using pre-loaded canisters. Also note that vehicles 
inherently low in refueling emissions can be certified using an 
engineering evaluation approved by the Administrator in lieu of 
testing.
    After the testing has been completed, manufacturers typically 
submit to EPA an application for certification, containing information 
about the vehicles intended for production, emission test data used to 
support certification, statements of compliance with emission standards 
and device safety, and other information required by EPA. This action 
will require manufacturers to provide refueling information in their 
application for certification. To determine compliance with applicable 
emission standards, this action requires the refueling emission test 
data to be adjusted by an additive deterioration factor, developed by 
the manufacturer using good engineering judgement to assure that 
vehicles will comply in actual use for the useful life of the vehicle/
engine. Should EPA have any concerns about the safety of the ORVR 
refueling system used by the manufacturer, certification may be delayed 
or denied, under section 202(a)(4) and 206(a)(3) of the CAA. This 
should not happen, however, with properly designed systems.
2. Fees
    EPA-incurred costs associated with the certification program can be 
recovered in the Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program (MVECP) 
fee program (see 40 CFR part 86, subpart J). Today's action is likely 
to increase the amount of the MVECP fee which is collected during the 
certification process since the Agency's burden is expected to 
increase. As discussed in the Fee Updating Procedure section of the 
Fees final rule, (57 FR 30049, July 7, 1992), EPA will periodically 
review its fees. During that fee updating process, the Agency intends 
to assess the additional burden incurred due to this action, and if, as 
a result of the review, EPA determines that there has been a 
significant change in the MVECP costs, a proposal to revise the fee 
schedule will be published in the Federal Register. Thus, manufacturers 
will be provided with sufficient notice and comment period prior to any 
changes in the amount of the fee collected.
3. Fuel Economy
    This action does not have any direct impact on fuel economy 
labeling, Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), or gas guzzler data 
submission requirements. Because the changes to the test procedure 
promulgated in this action may affect fuel economy measurements,1 
EPA will not require use of the new procedure for fuel economy testing. 
Therefore, to generate city fuel economy values, manufacturers may use 
the previously established Federal Test Procedure or may optionally use 
the pre-loaded canister test procedures established in this action 
(which are essentially the same test procedures established in the 
enhanced evaporative emission final rule, ref. 58 FR 16002, March 24, 
1993). EPA will normally use the same procedure for confirmatory 
testing as used by the manufacturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\The fuel economy measurements may be affected because 
vehicles will now be tested with pre-loaded evaporative/onboard 
canisters. Purging these canisters during the city and highway tests 
could affect the air/fuel ratio of the engine which, in turn, could 
affect the measured fuel economy values for the test vehicle. EPA 
expects the effect to be minimal, although it is possible that 
measured fuel economy values could change for some vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Onboard Diagnostics Requirements

    Today's action extends the existing provisions for onboard 
diagnostic (OBD) systems to ORVR equipment. (The final rule for the 
existing program was published February 19, 1993, 58 FR 9468). ORVR 
systems are very similar to evaporative systems and this action 
requires that the OBD performance requirements which currently apply to 
evaporative systems apply on LDVs and LDTs also to ORVR systems, both 
integrated and non-integrated.
    As with the current OBD program for evaporative-only systems, OBD 
monitoring of the ORVR system is not mandatory. However, the same 
approach to in-use testing will be used. That is, any in-use vehicle 
with evaporative emissions of 30 g/test or higher measured over the 
first 24 hours of the three-day diurnal from the revised evaporative 
test procedure will be flagged for further evaluation. That evaluation 
will consist of making any necessary repairs to ensure system 
integrity, and then making a 0.04 inch (1 mm) orifice anywhere within 
the system. To demonstrate compliance, operating the vehicle in this 
condition over the full FTP must cause the malfunction indicator light 
(MIL) to illuminate. A failure of the OBD system to signal a problem 
could contribute to a decision to initiate a recall action. While a 
system operating in such a manner (i.e., without the MIL going on) may 
not detect a malfunction related solely to refueling events, EPA 
nevertheless believes that such a system will be sufficient if it 
detects general problems with vapor and purge system integrity.
    For integrated ORVR systems, manufacturers can use the same OBD 
systems they use to monitor evaporative systems. For non-integrated 
systems, both the evaporative and refueling sides of the system will 
need to be monitored. It should be possible for the same technology to 
be used for both monitoring tasks in most cases. For example, a 
strategy that uses engine vacuum to draw a certain minimum level of 
vacuum or uses a small pump to generate a positive pressure in the 
entire vapor system could include a non-integrated ORVR canister in the 
monitoring as well. For both integrated and non-integrated systems, EPA 
believes this approach will result in an adequate level of certainty 
that key potential malfunctions in ORVR systems will be identified and 
repaired. Since a 0.04 inch orifice would emit only about 3 grams of 
hydrocarbon vapor in a normal refueling event, this approach will 
assure a high level of in-use control.

G. Enforcement and In-Use Performance

1. Liability Periods
    In accordance with the CAAA of 1990, ORVR controls for new LDVs 
must have useful lives of 10 years or 100,000 miles (160,000 km) or the 
equivalent, with recall testing allowed up to 7 years or 75,000 miles 
(120,000 km) or the equivalent, whichever occurs first (CAA section 
202(d)(1); 42 U.S.C. 7521(d)(1)). LDTs with loaded vehicle weight up to 
3,750 pounds (1,700 kg) have the same useful life requirement as LDVs. 
All other LDTs have a useful life requirement of 11 years or 120,000 
miles (190,000 km) or the equivalent, whichever occurs first. Pursuant 
to section 207(i), expected designs for ORVR controls are not 
``specified major emission control components,'' because they cost less 
than $200. Therefore, unless more expensive components are utilized, 
manufacturers need only warrant them for 2 years or 24,000 miles 
(39,000 km) or the equivalent, whichever occurs first. If, at some time 
in the future, the Administrator should determine that the ORVR 
controls are ``specified major emission control components,'' 
manufacturers must warrant them for 8 years or 80,000 miles (130,000 
km) or the equivalent, whichever occurs first (CAA section 207(i)(2); 
42 U.S.C. 7541(i)(2)).
2. Selective Enforcement Audit Testing
    Pursuant to CAA section 206(b), the Administrator is authorized to 
test new motor vehicles in order to determine whether vehicles being 
manufactured do in fact conform to the regulations with respect to 
which a certificate of conformity was issued. Therefore, LDVs and LDTs 
that are certified to meet the refueling emission standard are subject 
to this standard in a Selective Enforcement Audit (SEA).
    In the 1987 NPRM, EPA discussed two testing issues which resulted 
from performing the refueling test on newly built motor vehicles. The 
first issue regarded the possible influence of new vehicle background 
evaporative emissions (i.e., hydrocarbon emissions from such things as 
the fresh paint on a new vehicle which has not fully cured) on 
refueling emission measurements. Historically, EPA has not conducted 
SEA testing for evaporative emissions due to the relatively large non-
fuel background emissions emitted from newly built vehicles. However, 
EPA expected that background emissions would not significantly affect 
refueling emission measurements because the actual time for background 
evaporative losses to occur would be very short (refueling emission 
measurements have a duration of less than five minutes). Also, 
refueling measurements would be taken at an ambient temperature of 
approximately 80 deg. F, so fuel and non-fuel evaporative emissions 
would not be increased by heating of the tank, engine, or other 
subsystems, as would occur during the usual evaporative emissions test. 
However, to address any concerns over the effects of background 
emissions, EPA proposed an additional SEA testing procedure where 
background emissions would be measured and then subtracted from the 
refueling emissions measurement. This additional procedure would be 
used if manufacturers provided evidence that newly built vehicle 
background emissions would significantly exceed in-use vehicle 
background emissions, which were intended to be included in the 
refueling standard.
    Because manufacturers' comments raised concerns about conducting 
the refueling test without measuring for background emissions, and 
about the extra time needed for the measurement, this final rule will 
include the new vehicle background emissions measurement proposed in 
the 1987 NPRM as an optional procedure. However, this decision must be 
made before SEA testing is conducted. It will apply to all vehicles 
tested. EPA realizes that when this background procedure is performed, 
in-use background emissions, which are included in the refueling 
standard, will also be subtracted from the refueling measurement. At 
this time, EPA has no way of separating new vehicle background 
emissions from in-use background emissions. For purposes of SEA testing 
only, both may therefore be subtracted off. Background emissions from 
the refueling measurements during in-use testing will not be subtracted 
since the standard includes measurement of such emissions and there is 
no concern regarding the higher background emissions from new vehicles. 
Additionally, upon approval by EPA, a manufacturer may develop and use 
its own background emissions measurement procedure for use during SEA 
testing. Revisions to 40 CFR part 86, subpart G, Sec. 86.608 (for LDVs) 
and to subpart K, Sec. 86.1008 (for LDTs) incorporate this additional 
procedure.
    The second issue pertained to the unstabilized condition of the 
vapor storage canister(s) prior to SEA testing. In the NPRM, EPA 
proposed that the canisters of SEA vehicles be stabilized through a 
bench procedure, prior to refueling emissions testing, to help account 
for any large differences that may exist between an unused canister and 
a broken-in (aged) canister.
    Most manufacturers commented that artificially aging canisters 
prior to emissions testing using either the procedure in the 1987 
proposal or the evaporative emissions rulemaking is inconsistent with 
SEA testing and that performing the aging process would significantly 
add to the time needed to complete testing. This would make it 
difficult to conduct the correct number of tests per twenty-four hour 
period as proposed by Sec. 86.608(g) for LDVs and Sec. 86.1008(g)(3) 
for LDTs. Additionally, several manufacturers indicated that if their 
vehicles were to undergo the entire refueling test procedure (with all 
of the necessary preconditioning drive-downs), the vehicles may 
accumulate too many miles to be sold as new.
    EPA agrees that the proposed bench-aging procedure, as well as the 
updated procedure, adds significant time to SEA testing and, therefore, 
this final rule does not include an artificial aging procedure. EPA 
would have preferred to include an aged canister in the SEA test 
requirement, but at this point sees no practical way to incorporate the 
aged canister requirement and also address the manufacturers' concerns. 
Manufacturers are required to perform the complete refueling test with 
new canisters for both integrated and non-integrated designs. However, 
if manufacturers still have concerns about conducting the required 
number of tests per twenty-four hour period or accumulating too much 
mileage, they may, upon EPA approval, perform the seal test described 
in Section C above, for either integrated or non-integrated designs, 
during an SEA. The seal test is aimed at verifying the integrity of 
fillpipe seals and vapor lines and eliminates consideration of 
potential canister emissions by thoroughly bench purging the canister 
prior to the refueling event. The canister preconditioning and 
preparatory driving are also eliminated, allowing manufacturers to 
complete testing without the additional mileage accumulation associated 
with the full test. Finally, the same 0.20 g/gal standard would apply 
and failure of the seal test would be considered equivalent to failing 
the full refueling emissions test.
    During an SEA, manufacturers will test selected SEA vehicles until 
a pass or fail decision has been reached for both the exhaust emission 
test and the refueling test. The 0.20 g/gal refueling standard is 
subject to 40 percent Acceptable Quality Level, which is the same 
criteria used for exhaust emissions.
3. Nonconformance Penalties (NCPs)
    In the regulations governing NCPs (40 CFR 86.1103-87), EPA 
specifies the criteria which must be met before an NCP will be made 
available for a new emission standard applicable to any subclass of 
heavy-duty vehicles (i.e., vehicles with a GVWR in excess of 6000 lbs, 
including the LDTs with a GVWR between 6,001 and 8,500 lbs. which are 
covered in this regulation (HLDTs)). As described in those regulations, 
an NCP may be established for a new emission standard if substantial 
work will be required to meet the new standard and a technological 
laggard is likely to exist. Substantial work means the application of 
technology not previously used in a vehicle class or subclass or the 
significant modification of existing technology or design parameters.
    While ORVR systems have not been used to control refueling 
emissions on HLDTs and HDVs, EPA does not believe that an ORVR 
requirement constitutes substantial work as defined in the NCP 
regulations nor does EPA believe that a technological laggard will 
exist in the vehicle groups. The ORVR system is expected to be a minor 
extension of existing evaporative emission control technology rather 
than the application of new technology or the significant modification 
of existing technology or design. EPA expects manufacturers would use 
activated carbon for storage of refueling vapors and air stripping for 
regeneration, just as are now used in evaporative emission control 
systems on LDTs and heavy-duty gasoline vehicles. The purge systems 
will essentially be the same as those used for evaporative controls.
    While there may be some subjective disagreement on whether 
``substantial work'' will be involved in meeting the standard, EPA 
believes all the manufacturers of HLDTs will be able to comply with the 
standard and that no technological laggard will exist. EPA recognizes 
that effort will be required to equip the HLDTs with ORVR systems, but 
the control technology required is well defined and available to all 
affected manufacturers. Furthermore, this regulation provides a 
generous leadtime and control is phased in over a three-model-year 
period. Both of these factors will provide relief to any manufacturer 
who is having difficulty. In addition, the adopted test procedures 
address the manufacturers' technical concerns and should negate the 
need for an NCP for any manufacturer.
    The regulations also permit consideration of NCPs for other 
emission standards, for which NCPs are not already provided, if the 
standards become more difficult to meet as a result of a new standard. 
However, as the test procedure is structured, EPA does not believe that 
manufacturers will encounter significant additional difficulty in 
maintaining compliance with exhaust or evaporative emission standards 
as a result of the ORVR requirement.
    In sum, ``substantial work'' will not be required and no 
technological laggards are expected. Therefore, EPA will not make NCPs 
available for refueling exhaust or evaporative emission standards.
4. In-Use Performance
    As in the case of other evaporative emissions, the control of 
refueling emissions is highly dependent on vehicle operating and 
environmental factors such as vehicle speed and ambient temperature. 
EPA recognizes, therefore, that simply passing a test procedure cannot 
always ensure vehicle designs that achieve good control in use.
    EPA expects that manufacturers will design vehicles that pass the 
test and perform well in use. However, in order to best achieve the 
statutory goal of a high degree of control efficiency, the Agency will, 
if necessary, make full use of existing regulations against defeat 
devices. Thus, EPA may deny certification upon determination that a 
particular refueling emission control system design constitutes a 
defeat device (40 CFR 86.094-16).2 EPA could also invoke the 
defeat device regulations in the course or on the basis of the results 
of selective enforcement audit (SEA) and recall testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\''Prohibition of Use of Emission Control Defeat Devices,'' 
MSPC Advisory Circular No. 24, December 11, 1972.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following discussion, while not necessarily all-inclusive, 
provides examples of potential defeat devices related to compliance 
with refueling emission standards. EPA's main concern is that some 
purge strategies used to pass emission tests may be ineffective over a 
wide range of in-use driving patterns. For integrated systems, this 
concern will be addressed in the Agency's evaluation of evaporative 
system purge strategies during the certification process, as discussed 
in the evaporative emissions final rule (58 FR at 16007). The Agency 
will extend this evaluation to non-integrated refueling system purge 
strategies as well.
    This evaluation is intended to identify vehicle designs that, 
though capable of passing emission tests, may not function effectively 
in use. These would include non-integrated system designs that purge 
well during the prolonged warm-vehicle driving allowed in the refueling 
test drivedown, but not in the driving patterns involving frequent cold 
starts often encountered in use.
    EPA also will consider to be defeat devices those designs that 
purge at substantially higher rates during high-speed operation than 
during low-speed operation, such that they primarily depend on the 
high-speed purge to pass emission tests. Even if such designs do pass 
the test, they may produce high refueling emissions if they purge 
substantially less during typical non-freeway urban driving than during 
the refueling test drivedown. Also, designs that shut purge off at any 
time for other than safety reasons would be closely examined by EPA for 
possible classification as defeat devices.

III. Public Participation

    ORVR controls have been under consideration by EPA since the CAAAs 
of 1977. The public process, which first began in 1978, has proceeded 
through various stages over the past 15 years.
    In response to the provisions of section 202(a)(6) of the 1977 
CAAAs, EPA initiated a public process in 1978 to receive comments on 
the feasibility and desirability of implementing ORVR controls. In 
1980, EPA published a technical report which tentatively concluded that 
ORVR controls were feasible for LDVs. However, no action was taken at 
the time due to concerns over economic difficulties in the auto 
industry.
    EPA reinstituted its assessment of ORVR controls in 1983 as part of 
a broad assessment of the strategies available to control emissions in 
the gasoline marketing industry. As part of this study, in August 1984, 
EPA published an extensive analysis of the options available to control 
refueling emissions including ORVR controls. Supporting documentation 
for this analysis are in public docket A-84-07, along with the public 
comments received on the ``Gasoline Marketing Study''.
    After receiving comments on the study, EPA prepared an in-depth 
analysis of the comments, developed further work on several key issues 
related to ORVR controls, and conducted enhanced assessments of the 
options under consideration. This resulted in a draft Regulatory Impact 
Analysis, Response to Public Comments, and related analysis and 
documentation related to ORVR controls. This information is also in 
public docket A-84-07. A public meeting regarding the ORVR test 
procedure was also held during this time frame.
    The results of EPA's study of emission control options for the 
gasoline marketing industry culminated in an August 1987 proposal to 
require ORVR controls on gasoline-powered LDVs, LDTs, and HDVs. A 
public hearing was held in October 1987 and the comment period closed 
in February 1988. Information supporting the NPRM and comments on the 
proposal are in public docket A-87-11. However, due initially to safety 
concerns raised by some commenters and later to pending revisions to 
the CAA, EPA deferred action on finalizing the ORVR rule.
    The 1990 CAAAs contained provisions requiring an integrated program 
of LDV ORVR and Stage II controls. In response to the ORVR provisions, 
on September 3, 1991 (56 FR 43682), EPA published a Federal Register 
notice seeking further comment on the NPRM and the safety issues 
related to ORVR controls including a safety assessment prepared by the 
DoT. A public hearing was held to receive comment on these issues on 
September 26, 27, 1991. The comment period closed in late October 1991. 
These comments and related materials are in public docket A-87-11. On 
April 15, 1992, EPA published a Federal Register notice (57 FR 13220) 
announcing its decision not to proceed with implementing ORVR controls 
at that time, based on safety concerns raised by DoT.
    Subsequently, a panel of the DC Circuit overturned EPA's 1992 
action. EPA then published another Federal Register notice (May 27, 
1993, 58 FR 30731) raising issues for public comment and allowing 
approximately 90 days for comment. Another public hearing seeking 
comment on the NPRM and other changed circumstances was also held. This 
hearing was held on July 22, 1993 and comments closed 30 days later. 
These comments are in public docket A-87-11 as are EPA materials in 
support of the notice.
    During the years in which ORVR has been under consideration, there 
have been at least five formal opportunities for oral and/or written 
public comment. In addition, numerous other public interactions have 
occurred on this matter and have been documented and placed in the 
docket for public review.
    Over the fifteen years of the ORVR public process, EPA has received 
hundreds of written comments regarding this requirement. However, many 
of the past comments have essentially been addressed by changed 
circumstances or other developments. Major issues such as fuel 
volatility and improved vehicle evaporative emission controls have now 
been decided by regulation, and the control of refueling emissions 
using Stage II equipment was addressed by the 1990 CAAAs. Also, many 
previous comments in areas such as ORVR costs and test procedures were 
factored into subsequent analyses and notices, making only the most 
recent set of comments applicable.
    The public docket contains a Summary and Analysis of Comments 
document which addresses still-relevant issues raised by the 
commenters. It generally does not address past comments on issues which 
have been resolved by related statutory or regulatory action or through 
subsequent published analyses or Federal Register notices. Also, it 
does not address comments which were received at one point but later 
negated by subsequent comments due to further developments and changed 
circumstances. The Summary and Analysis of Comments focuses primarily 
on comments received in response to the June 1993 Federal Register 
notice and unresolved comments from both the August 1987 NPRM and 
September 1991 Federal Register notices.

IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis

    As part of the assessment and decision making process regarding 
ORVR controls, EPA has prepared an in-depth Regulatory Impact Analysis 
(RIA). This RIA is available in the public docket. The RIA assesses the 
environmental impact, costs, and cost effectiveness of ORVR controls, 
as well as other associated benefits, for the combined LDV and LDT 
program described above for a number of scenarios. It also includes a 
sensitivity analysis for several key parameters. It should be noted 
that the RIA was completed prior to EPA's decision to delay the 
requirements for LDTs and to exclude HDVs. These controls were included 
in the analysis and were assumed to begin in 1998. EPA expects that 
inclusion of these items in the analysis has no significant effect on 
the results and does not affect the conclusions which are based on the 
analysis. The major findings of the RIA for LDV and LDT ORVR controls 
are presented below.
    Before discussing these key findings, it is important to note that 
EPA analysis has assumed that ORVR controls will apply nationwide to 
all vehicle classes. However, the scenarios analyzed focus not only on 
the overall nationwide control program, but also on the control in the 
ozone NAAs. Furthermore, since Stage II controls are in place or 
expected in most of the ozone NAAs, the incremental impacts of ORVR 
controls relative to Stage II are assessed as well.

A. Environmental Impact

    While refueling emissions control has value whenever it occurs, it 
is most critical during the ozone season. The five month ozone season 
refueling emission inventory is about 200,000 tons per year; when 
annualized, this value increases to approximately 475,000 tons per 
year. Refueling emissions vary directly with fuel use and fuel RVP/
temperatures. Approximately 52 percent of refueling emissions occur in 
AAs and 48 percent occur in NAAs. Of this 48 percent, about 33 percent 
currently are, or are expected to be, subject to Stage II control 
equipment. The percentage of gasoline consumption in the NAAs and 
covered by Stage II is slightly higher (55 and 44 percent respectively) 
than the contribution to the refueling emission inventory, primarily 
due to RVP controls.
    The emission reductions achieved by ORVR controls depend on the in-
use efficiency of the control system and the area in which the control 
is applied. Based on the stringency of the test procedure the full life 
useful life certification requirement, and the salutary effect of 
Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) programs and onboard diagnostics, EPA 
expects very high in-use efficiency from ORVR systems. In the ozone 
NAAs, where RVP control and basic and enhanced I/M are prevalent, EPA 
expects in-use efficiency of over 95 percent, with a somewhat lower 
value in attainment areas due to lack of RVP control and I/M. In the 
ozone NAAs, EPA expects in-use efficiency of approximately 97 percent. 
The in-use efficiency in attainment areas (which would lack RVP control 
and enhanced I/M) is somewhat less, and in some cases is predicted to 
be less than 95 percent. The Agency notes, however, that this 
prediction is skewed because data for the southeast U.S. indicate that 
average dispensed fuel temperature in that region is seven fahrenheit 
degrees higher than anywhere else in the country. EPA is basing its 
predictions on this information because it is the only available data. 
However, the Agency knows of no reason why dispensed fuel temperatures 
should be so much higher in this region. If the same range of dispensed 
fuel temperatures were used for the southeast region as for the 
southwest U.S., the in-use efficiency of properly operating systems in 
all areas would be predicted to average 95 percent.
    The benefits vary over time and with the scenario analyzed. 
Benefits vary over time because of the phase-in of the ORVR requirement 
and the need for fleet turnover to occur before full implementation of 
ORVR-equipped vehicles occurs. The key variable with regard to 
scenarios is the presence and possible phase-out of Stage II controls. 
ORVR benefits in NAAs include control over service stations in NAAs 
without Stage II, control at service stations which now receive 
waivers, and control over vapors missed by Stage II equipment.
    For the rulemaking as a whole, neglecting the presence of Stage II 
controls, LDV/LDT ORVR would achieve average annual emission reductions 
of over 420,000 tons per year. With Stage II phaseout when ORVR and 
Stage II would cover the same percent of fuel in use, the average 
annual emission reduction is about 378,000 tons. Even if Stage II 
controls are retained, an incremental benefit of 285,000 tons occurs 
nationwide. Of these reductions, approximately 20 percent occur in NA 
areas, with the overall percentage in NAAs increasing substantially if 
Stage II is phased out.

B. Costs of Control

    ORVR costs of control are comprised of control system hardware 
costs plus short term (five year) costs for research, development, and 
testing (R,D,& T) minus fuel vapor recovery credits. Costs were derived 
incremental to the effects of enhanced evaporative emissions and RVP 
control, with the assumption that most vehicles would use integrated 
evaporative/refueling control systems with liquid seals in the 
fillneck. The retail price equivalent (RPE) for hardware and R,D,& T 
costs range from $6-8 for LDVs and LDTs.
    Even these small costs are somewhat offset by ORVR fuel recovery 
credits. The level of the ORVR recovery credit depends on whether Stage 
II equipment is used when refueling. For the nationwide case, which 
involves Stage II and non-Stage II areas, the NPV of the recovery 
credit ranges from $2-$4 per-vehicle for LDVs and LDTs. Accounting for 
these recovery credits, both short and long term net costs are under $5 
for LDVs and LDTs.
    EPA assessed the net costs of LDV and LDT ORVR controls for three 
scenarios. The first (baseline) scenario neglected the presence of 
Stage II controls, the second accounted for Stage II controls with 
phaseout in 2010, and the third included Stage II with no phaseout. In 
each case, the ORVR hardware and R,D,& T costs are the same, but the 
recovery credit varies. In the first case the average annual cost is 
about -$6 million over the period 1998-2020. With Stage II present and 
phasing out in 2010, the average annual costs is $2 million. With no 
phase out average annual costs increase to $27 million over the period 
1998 to 2020. The 1998 NPV costs (discounted at 7 percent to 1998) for 
the same three scenarios are $102 million, $264 million, and $435 
million, respectively. In the cases where costs are negative, it is 
because the value of the recovery credits exceeds the hardware and R, 
D, & T costs.

C. Cost Effectiveness

    Using the net present value of the costs and emission reduction 
benefits, EPA has calculated the cost effectiveness of LDV/LDT ORVR 
controls for the three scenarios mentioned above. For the first case 
where Stage II controls are neglected, the cost effectiveness is about 
$35 per ton. In the second case where Stage II control is considered, 
but phased out in 2010, the cost effectiveness is about $100 per ton. 
In the final case where Stage II is not phased out, the cost 
effectiveness is about $210 per ton.
    When all costs are included in the calculations but only NAA 
emission reductions are credited, the cost effectiveness values change. 
For the first case discussed above, cost effectiveness value is $70 per 
ton. In the second and third scenarios, the cost effectiveness would 
increase to about $250 and $775 per ton, respectively.

D. Other Benefits

    In addition to the VOC emission reduction benefits cited above, 
LDV/LDT ORVR controls have other benefits. ORVR controls would result 
in an average energy savings equivalent to 78 million gallons of 
gasoline per year between the period 1998 and 2020 assuming no Stage II 
phaseout and about 108 million gallons per year if Stage II is phased 
out. In addition, there will be health benefits as a result of 
reductions in air toxic emissions. Best estimates are the avoidance of 
about 5-6 cancer incidences per year as a result of lower refueling 
benzene emissions. Additional cancer avoidances are possible depending 
on the assumption regarding the toxicological impact of the remainder 
of the constituents of the gasoline vapor. Reductions in potential non-
cancer health effects and welfare benefits such as reduced crop and 
material damage due to ozone would occur as well.

E. Benefit-Cost Ratio

    Comparing the average annual cost and emission reduction benefits 
shown in the tables presented in the RIA, if even a minimal dollar 
value of $500 per ton is ascribed to the health and environmental 
benefits, the dollar benefits of LDV/LDT ORVR controls exceed the 
costs. The benefit to cost ratio for NA areas ranges from 1.3 for the 
scenario where Stage II is retained to 32 if Stage II is phased out. If 
Stage II operating costs which are no longer incurred after Stage II 
phaseout are considered, there is an annual average monetary savings of 
about $40 million since the costs of operating the Stage II control 
technology are eliminated.

V. Consultation With DOT

    As required by section 202(a)(6) of the Clean Air Act, EPA has 
consulted at length with the Department of Transportation before 
promulgating this rule. Interagency review documents are contained in 
section IV-H of this rulemaking's docket. In addition, the docket 
contains a November 1993 DOT/NHTSA report entitled ``An Assessment of 
Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery System Safety'' provided to EPA by 
DOT/NHTSA as part of the consultation process.

VI. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, EPA hereby finds that 
these regulations are of national applicability. Accordingly, judicial 
review of this action is available only by filing a petition for review 
in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit within 60 days of publication. Under section 307(b)(2) of the 
Act, the requirements which are the subject of today's notice may not 
be challenged later in judicial proceedings brought by EPA to enforce 
these requirements.

VII. Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this proposal is provided by sections 
202(a) (1) and (2), 202(a)(6), 206, and 301(a) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 
7521(a)(1) and (2), 7521(a)(6), 7525, and 7601(a).

VIII. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) the 
Agency 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:

    (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 he principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.

    These final regulations have been reviewed in accordance with 
Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the Order the Administrator 
has assessed the potential costs and benefits of this regulatory 
action.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory action'' 
because this rule has an effect on the long-term implications of 
stationary and mobile source controls and requires interagency 
consultations. The average annual cost is about $27 million over the 
period 1998 to 2020, assuming no Stage II phaseout. If Stage II is 
phased out, recovery credits for ORVR systems increase to the point 
that average annual costs are only about $2 million (ignoring the 
savings in Stage II maintenance). As such, this action was submitted to 
OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or 
recommendations will be documented in the public record.

IX. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-602, requires that 
Federal agencies examine the impacts of their regulations on small 
entities. Under 5 U.S.C. 604(a), whenever an agency is required to 
publish a rulemaking, it must prepare and make available for public 
comment a regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA). Such an analysis is 
not required if the head of an agency certifies that a rule will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    The requirements for ORVR systems in this regulation apply to motor 
vehicle manufacturers. Small LDV manufacturers have been granted a 
delayed phase-in of the ORVR requirement and LDT manufacturers have a 
longer leadtime than originally proposed. Therefore, I certify that 
this rule will not have a significant adverse impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

X. Information Collection Requirements

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this rule will be 
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An 
Information Collection Request document has been prepared by EPA (ICR 
#783.32) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, Information 
Policy Branch; EPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 or by 
calling 202-260-2740. These requirements are not effective until OMB 
approves them and a technical amendment to that effect is published in 
the Federal Register.
    This collection of information has an estimated annual reporting 
and recordkeeping burden averaging 334 hours per response. These 
estimates include time for reviewing instructions, searching existing 
data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing 
and reviewing the collection of information.
    Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of 
this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 
burden to Chief, Information Policy Branch; EPA; 401 M Street, SW (Mail 
Code 2136); Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 
20503, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.''

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 86

    Administrative practice and procedures, Confidential business 
information, Labeling, Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 88

    Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 600

    Administrative practice and procedure, Electric power, Fuel 
economy, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: January 24, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, parts 86, 88, and 600 of 
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations are 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, 205, 207, 208, 215, 216, and 301(a), 
Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7521, 7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 
7542, 7549, 7550, 7552, and 7601(a)).

Subpart A--[Amended]

    2. A new Sec. 86.001-2 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-2  Definitions.

    The definitions of Sec. 86.098-2 continue to apply to 1998 and 
later model year vehicles. The definitions listed in this section apply 
beginning with the 2001 model year.
    Useful life means:
    (1) For light-duty vehicles, and for light light-duty trucks not 
subject to the Tier 0 standards of Sec. 86.094-9(a), intermediate 
useful life and/or full useful life. Intermediate useful life is a 
period of use of 5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. Full 
useful life is a period of use of 10 years or 100,000 miles, whichever 
occurs first, except as otherwise noted in Sec. 86.094-9. The useful 
life of evaporative and/or refueling emission control systems on the 
portion of these vehicles subject to the evaporative emission test 
requirements of Sec. 86.130-96, and/or the refueling emission test 
requirements of Sec. 86.151-2001, is defined as a period of use of 10 
years or 100,000 miles, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For light light-duty trucks subject to the Tier 0 standards of 
Sec. 86.094-9(a), and for heavy light-duty truck engine families, 
intermediate and/or full useful life. Intermediate useful life is a 
period of use of 5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. Full 
useful life is a period of use of 11 years or 120,000 miles, whichever 
occurs first. The useful life of evaporative emission and/or refueling 
control systems on the portion of these vehicles subject to the 
evaporative emission test requirements of Sec. 86.130-96, and/or the 
refueling emission test requirements of Sec. 86.151-2001, is also 
defined as a period of 11 years or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs 
first.
    (3) For an Otto-cycle heavy-duty engine family:
    (i) For hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide standards, a period of use 
of 8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.
    (ii) For the oxides of nitrogen standard, a period of use of 10 
years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.
    (iii) For the portion of evaporative emission control systems 
subject to the evaporative emission test requirements of Sec. 86.1230-
96, a period of use of 10 years or 110,000 miles, whichever occurs 
first.
    (4) For a diesel heavy-duty engine family:
    (i) For light heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon 
monoxide, and particulate standards, a period of use of 8 years or 
110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.
    (ii) For light heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides of 
nitrogen standard, a period of use of 10 years or 110,000 miles, 
whichever first occurs.
    (iii) For medium heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon 
monoxide, and particulate standards, a period of use of 8 years or 
185,000 miles, whichever first occurs.
    (iv) For medium heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides of 
nitrogen standard, a period of use of 10 years or 185,000 miles, 
whichever first occurs.
    (v) For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon 
monoxide, and particulate standards, a period of use of 8 years or 
290,000 miles, whichever first occurs, except as provided in paragraph 
(4)(vii) of this definition.
    (vi) For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides of 
nitrogen standard, a period of use of 10 years or 290,000 miles, 
whichever first occurs.
    (vii) For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines used in urban buses, for 
the particulate standard, a period of use of 10 years or 290,000 miles, 
whichever first occurs.
    3. A new Sec. 86.001-9 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-9  Emission standards for 2001 and later model year light-
duty trucks.

    Section 86.001-9 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.096-9 or Sec. 86.097-9. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.096-9 or Sec. 86.097-9 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.001-9, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-
9.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.097-9.''.
    (a) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.097-9.
    (b) introductory text through (b)(5) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.096-9.
    (b)(6) Vehicles certified to the refueling standards set forth in 
paragraph (d) of this section are not required to demonstrate 
compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback standards contained in 
Sec. 86.096-9 (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii): Provided, that they meet the 
requirements of Sec. 86.001-28(f).
    (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.097-9.
    (d) Refueling emissions from 2001 and later model year gasoline-
fueled and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle- and petroleum-fueled and 
methanol-fueled diesel-cycle-light duty trucks of 6,000 pounds or less 
GVW shall not exceed the following standards. The standards apply 
equally to certification and in-use vehicles.
    (1) Standards--(i) Hydrocarbons (for gasoline-fueled Otto-cycle and 
petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 
gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.
    (ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon Equivalent (for methanol-fueled 
vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per liter) of fuel 
dispensed.
    (2)(i) The standards set forth in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of 
this section refer to a sample of refueling emissions collected under 
the conditions as set forth in subpart B of this part and measured in 
accordance with those procedures.
    (ii) For vehicles powered by petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines, 
the provisions set forth in paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section may be 
waived: Provided, that the manufacturer complies with the provisions of 
Sec. 86.001-28(f) of this subpart.
    (3) A minimum of the percentage shown in Table A01-09 of a 
manufacturer's sales of the applicable model year's gasoline- and 
methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled 
diesel-cycle light-duty trucks of 6,000 pounds or less GVW shall be 
tested under the procedures in subpart B of this part indicated for 
2001 and later model years, and shall not exceed the standards 
described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. Vehicles certified in 
accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section, as determined by 
the provisions of Sec. 86.001-28(g), shall not be counted in the 
calculation of the percentage of compliance. 

  Table A01-09.--Implementation Schedule for Light-Duty Truck Refueling 
                            Emission Testing                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Sales   
                        Model year                            percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2001.......................................................           40
2002.......................................................           80
2003 and subsequent........................................         100 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) through (f) [Reserved]
    (g) through (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.097-9.
    4. A new Sec. 86.001-21 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-21  Application for certification.

    Section 86.001-21 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-21 or Sec. 86.096-21. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.094-21 or Sec. 86.096-21 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.001-21, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
21.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-21.''.
    (a) through (b)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (b)(4)(i) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, a 
description of the test procedures to be used to establish the 
evaporative emission and/or refueling emission deterioration factors, 
as appropriate, required to be determined and supplied in Sec. 86.001-
23(b)(2).
    (b)(4)(ii) through (b)(5)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-21.
    (b)(5)(v) For light-duty vehicles and applicable light-duty trucks 
with non-integrated refueling emission control systems, the number of 
continuous UDDS cycles, determined from the fuel economy on the UDDS 
applicable to the test vehicle of that evaporative/ refueling emission 
family-emission control system combination, required to use a volume of 
fuel equal to 85% of fuel tank volume.
    (b)(6) through (8) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (b)(9) For each light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, evaporative/
refueling emission family or heavy-duty vehicle evaporative emission 
family, a description of any unique procedures required to perform 
evaporative and/or refueling emission tests, as applicable, (including 
canister working capacity, canister bed volume, and fuel temperature 
profile for the running loss test) for all vehicles in that evaporative 
and/or evaporative/refueling emission family, and a description of the 
method used to develop those unique procedures.
    (10) For each light-duty vehicle or applicable light-duty truck 
evaporative/refueling emission family, or each heavy-duty vehicle 
evaporative emission family:
    (i) Canister working capacity, according to the procedures 
specified in Sec. 86.132-96(h)(1)(iv);
    (ii) Canister bed volume; and
    (iii) Fuel temperature profile for the running loss test, according 
to the procedures specified in Sec. 86.129-94(d).
    (c) through (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (j) and (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-21.
    5. A new Sec. 86.001-22 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-22  Approval of application for certification; test fleet 
selections; determinations of parameters subject to adjustment for 
certification and Selective Enforcement Audit, adequacy of limits, and 
physically adjustable ranges.

    Section 86.001-22 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-22. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.094-22 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.001-22, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-22.''.
    (a) through (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-22.
    (d) Approval of test procedures. (1) The Administrator does not 
approve the test procedures for establishing the evaporative or 
refueling emission deterioration factors for light-duty vehicles and 
light-duty trucks. The manufacturer shall submit the procedures as 
required in Sec. 86.098-21(b)(4)(i) prior to the Administrator's 
selection of the test fleet under Sec. 86.098-24(b)(1), and if such 
procedures will involve testing of durability data vehicles selected by 
the Administrator or elected by the manufacturer under Sec. 86.098-
24(c)(1), prior to initiation of such testing.
    (d)(2) through (g) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-22.
    6. A new Sec. 86.001-23 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-23  Required data.

    Section 86.001-23 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.095-23 or Sec. 86.098-23. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.095-23 or Sec. 86.098-23 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.001-23, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-
23.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-23.''.
    (a) through (b)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-23.
    (b)(2) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, the 
manufacturer shall submit evaporative emission and/or refueling 
emission deterioration factors for each evaporative/refueling emission 
family-emission control system combination and all test data that are 
derived from testing described under Sec. 86.001-21(b)(4)(i) designed 
and conducted in accordance with good engineering practice to assure 
that the vehicles covered by a certificate issued under Sec. 86.001-30 
will meet the evaporative and/or refueling emission standards in 
Sec. 86.099-8 or Sec. 86.001-9, as appropriate, for the useful life of 
the vehicle.
    (b)(3) through (b)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-
23.
    (b)(4)(iii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-23.
    (c) through (e)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-23.
    (e)(2) For evaporative and refueling emission durability, or light-
duty truck or heavy-duty engine exhaust emission durability, a 
statement of compliance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section or 
Sec. 86.095-23 (b)(1)(ii), (b)(3) or (b)(4) (i) and (ii) or 
Sec. 86.098-23 (b)(4)(iii), as applicable.
    (3) For certification of vehicles with non-integrated refueling 
systems, a statement that the drivedown used to purge the refueling 
canister was the same as described in the manufacturers' application 
for certification. Furthermore, a description of the procedures used to 
determine the number of equivalent UDDS miles required to purge the 
refueling canisters, as determined by the provisions of Sec. 86.098-
21(b)(5)(v) and subpart B. Furthermore, a written statement to the 
Administrator that all data, analyses, test procedures, evaluations and 
other documents, on which the above statement is based, are available 
to the Administrator upon request.
    (f) through (l) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-23.
    (m) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098.23.
    7. A new Sec. 86.001-24 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-24  Test vehicles and engines.

    Section 86.001-24 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.096-24 or Sec. 86.098-24. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.096-24 or Sec. 86.098-24 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.001-24, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-
24.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-24.''.
    (a) introductory text through (a)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.096-24.
    (a)(5) through (a)(7) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-24.
    (a)(8) through (b)(1)(vi) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-
24.
    (b)(1)(vii)(A) through (b)(1)(viii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.098-24.
    (b)(viii)(B) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-
24.
    (f) Carryover and carryacross of durability and emission data. In 
lieu of testing an emission-data or durability vehicle (or engine) 
selected under Sec. 86.096-24 (b) or (c), and submitting data therefor, 
a manufacturer may, with the prior written approval of the 
Administrator, submit exhaust emission data, evaporative emission data 
and/or refueling emission data, as applicable, on a similar vehicle (or 
engine) for which certification has been obtained or for which all 
applicable data required under Sec. 86.098-23 has previously been 
submitted.
    (g) through (h) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-24.
    8. A new Sec. 86.001-25 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-25  Maintenance.

    Section 86.001-25 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-25 or Sec. 86.098-25. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.094-25 or Sec. 86.098-25 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.001-25, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
25.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-25.''.
    (a)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-25.
    (a)(2) Maintenance performed on vehicles, engines, subsystems, or 
components used to determine exhaust, evaporative or refueling emission 
deterioration factors, as appropriate, is classified as either 
emission-related or non-emission-related and each of these can be 
classified as either scheduled or unscheduled. Further, some emission-
related maintenance is also classified as critical emission-related 
maintenance.
    (b) Introductory text through (b)(3)(vi)(D) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.094-25.
    (b)(3)(vi)(E) through (b)(3)(vi)(J) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.098-25.
    (b)(3)(vii) through (b)(6)(i)(E) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-25.
    (b)(6)(i)(F) Evaporative and refueling emission control system 
components (excluding canister air filter).
    (b)(6)(i)(G) through (H) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
25.
    9. A new Sec. 86.001-26 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-26  Mileage and service accumulation; emission 
measurements.

    Section 86.001-26 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-26, Sec. 86.095-26, Sec. 86.096-26 or 
Sec. 86.098-26. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.094-26, Sec. 86.095-26, 
Sec. 86.096-26 or Sec. 86.098-26 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.001-26, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
26.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-26.''or 
``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-26.'' or ``[Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.098-26.'' .
    (a)(1) and (2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (a)(3) introductory text through (a)(3)(i)(A) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.098-26.
    (a)(3)(i)(B) through (a)(3)(ii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-26.
    (a)(3)(ii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-26.
    (a)(3)(ii)(D) through (b)(2)(iii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-26.
    (b)(2)(iv) Service or mileage accumulation which may be part of the 
test procedures used by the manufacturer to establish evaporative and/
or refueling emission deterioration factors.
    (b)(3) through (b)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-26.
    (b)(4)(i)(C) Exhaust, evaporative and/or refueling emission tests 
for emission-data vehicle(s) selected for testing under Sec. 86.096-
24(b)(1) (ii), (iii) or (iv)(A) or Sec. 86.098-24 (b)(1)(vii) shall be 
conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile minimum) at which the engine-
system combination is stabilized for emission testing or at 6,436 
kilometer (4,000 mile) test point under low-altitude conditions.
    (b)(4)(i)(D) through (b)(4)(ii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-26.
    (b)(4)(ii)(C) Exhaust, evaporative and/or refueling emission tests 
for emission data vehicle(s) selected for testing under Sec. 86.094-
24(b)(1) (ii), (iii), and (iv) shall be conducted at the mileage (2,000 
mile minimum) at which the engine-system combination is stabilized for 
emission testing or at the 6,436 kilometer (4,000 mile) test point 
under low-altitude conditions.
    (b)(4)(ii)(D) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-26.
    (b)(4)(iii) [Reserved]
    (b)(iv) through (c)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (c)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-26.
    (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    10. A new Sec. 86.001-28 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-28  Compliance with emission standards.

    Section 86.001-28 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Secs. 86.094-28 and 86.098-28. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.094-28 or Sec. 86.098-28 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.001-28, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
28.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.''.
    (a)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(4) introductory text through (a)(4)(i) introductory text 
[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a)(4)(i)(A) and (a)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(4)(i) (C) through (D) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-
28.
    (a)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(4)(ii) (B) through (C) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a)(4)(iii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a)(4)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(4)(v) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a) (5) and (6) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(7) introductory text through (a)(7)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance 
see Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a)(7)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (b)(1) Paragraph (b) of this section applies to light-duty trucks.
    (2) Each exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission standard (and 
family emission limits, as appropriate) of Sec. 86.001-9 applies to the 
emissions of vehicles for the appropriate useful life as defined in 
Secs. 86.098-2 and 86.001-9.
    (b)(3) through (b)(6) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (b)(7)(i) Paragraph (b)(7) of this section describes the procedure 
for determining compliance of a new vehicle with evaporative emission 
standards. The procedure described here shall be used for all vehicles 
in applicable model years.
    (ii) The manufacturer shall determine, based on testing described 
in Sec. 86.001-21(b)(4)(i)(A), and supply an evaporative emission 
deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission family-
emission control system combination. The factor shall be calculated by 
subtracting the emission level at the selected test point from the 
emission level at the useful life point.
    (iii) The official evaporative emission test results for each 
evaporative/refueling emission-data vehicle at the selected test point 
shall be adjusted by the addition of the appropriate deterioration 
factor. However, if the deterioration factor supplied by the 
manufacturer is less than zero, it shall be zero for the purposes of 
this paragraph.
    (iv) The emission value to compare with the standards shall be the 
adjusted emission value of paragraph (b)(7)(iii) of this section 
rounded to two significant figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 
(reapproved 1980) (as referenced in Sec. 86.094-
28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii))for each evaporative emission-data vehicle.
    (8)(i) Paragraph (b)(8) of this section describes the procedure for 
determining compliance of a new vehicle with refueling emission 
standards. The procedure described here shall be used for all 
applicable vehicles in the applicable model years.
    (ii) The manufacturer shall determine, based on testing described 
in Sec. 86.098-21(b)(4)(i)(B), and supply a refueling emission 
deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission family-
emission control system combination. The factor shall be calculated by 
subtracting the emission level at the selected test point from the 
emission level at the useful life point.
    (iii) The official refueling emission test results for each 
evaporative/refueling emission-data vehicle at the selected test point 
shall be adjusted by the addition of the appropriate deterioration 
factor. However, if the deterioration factor supplied by the 
manufacturer is less than zero, it shall be zero for the purposes of 
this paragraph.
    (iv) The emission value to compare with the standards shall be the 
adjusted emission value of paragraph (b)(8)(iii) of this section 
rounded to two significant figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 
(reapproved 1980) (as referenced in Sec. 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) 
for each evaporative emission-data vehicle.
    (9) Every test vehicle of an engine family must comply with all 
applicable standards (and family emission limits, as appropriate), as 
determined in paragraphs (b)(4)(iv), (b)(7)(iv) and (b)(8)(iv) of this 
section, before any vehicle in that family will be certified.
    (c) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (e) [Reserved]
    (f) Fuel dispensing spitback testing waiver. (1) Vehicles certified 
to the refueling emission standards set forth in Secs. 86.098-8, 
86.099-8 and 86.001-9 are not required to demonstrate compliance with 
the fuel dispensing spitback standards contained in these sections: 
Provided, that--
    (i) The manufacturer certifies that the vehicle inherently meets 
the Dispensing Spitback Standard as part of compliance with the 
refueling emission standard.
    (ii) This certification is provided in writing and applies to the 
full useful life of the vehicle.
    (2) EPA retains the authority to require testing to enforce 
compliance and to prevent non-compliance with the Fuel Dispensing 
Spitback Standard.
    (g) Inherently low refueling emission testing waiver. (1) Vehicles 
using fuels/fuel systems inherently low in refueling emissions are not 
required to conduct testing to demonstrate compliance with the 
refueling emission standards set forth in Secs. 86.098-8, 86.099-8 or 
86.001-9: Provided, that--
    (i) This provision is only available for petroleum diesel fuel. It 
is only available if the Reid Vapor Pressure of in-use diesel fuel is 
equal to or less than 1 psi (7 Kpa) and for diesel vehicles whose fuel 
tank temperatures do not exceed 130  deg.F (54  deg.C); and
    (ii) To certify using this provision the manufacturer must attest 
to the following evaluation: ``Due to the low vapor pressure of diesel 
fuel and the vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon vapor 
concentrations are low and the vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon 
refueling emission standard without a control system.''
    (2) The certification required in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this 
section must be provided in writing and must apply for the full useful 
life of the vehicle.
    (3) EPA reserves the authority to require testing to enforce 
compliance and to prevent noncompliance with the refueling emission 
standard.
    (4) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standard under 
this provision shall not be counted in the sales percentage compliance 
determinations for the 2001, 2002 and subsequent model years.
    11. A new Sec. 86.001-30 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-30  Certification.

    Section 86.001-30 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-30, Sec. 86.095-30 or Sec. 86.098-30. Where a 
paragraph in Sec. 86.094-30, Sec. 86.095-30 or Sec. 86.098-30 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.001-30, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.''.
    (a)(1) and (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(3)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.
    (a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(4)(iii) introductory text through (a)(4)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(4)(iv)(A) through (a)(12) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(13) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(14) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a) (15) through (18) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-30.
    (a)(19) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.
    (a)(20) For all light-duty trucks certified to refueling emission 
standards under Sec. 86.001-9, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(20) (i) 
through (iii) this section apply.
    (i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer 
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.001-9 both during and after 
model year production.
    (ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales 
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.001-9 will be considered to be a 
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was 
issued and the individual vehicles sold in violation of the 
implementation schedule shall not be covered by the certificate.
    (iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the 
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the 
certificate was issued were satisfied.
    (b)(1) introductory text through (b)(1)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance 
see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(1)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(1)(ii)(B) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under 
Sec. 86.001-24(b)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent all vehicles of the 
same evaporative/refueling control system within the evaporative/
refueling family.
    (b)(1)(ii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(1)(ii)(D) The emission-data vehicle(s) selected under 
Sec. 86.098-24(b)(1)(viii) shall represent all vehicles of the same 
evaporative/refueling control system within the evaporative/refueling 
emission family, as applicable.
    (b)(1) (iii) and (iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.
    (b)(3) through (b)(4)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
30.
    (b)(4)(ii) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.098-30.
    (b)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(4)(ii)(B) through (iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.098-30.
    (b)(5) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (f) introductory text through (f)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (f)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.
    12. A new Sec. 86.001-35 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.001-35  Labeling.

    Section 86.001-35 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.095-35, Sec. 86.096-35 and Sec. 86.098-35. Where a 
paragraph in Sec. 86.095-35, Sec. 86.096-35 or Sec. 86.098-35 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.001-35, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.095-35.'' or [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.096-35. or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.''.
    (a) introductory text through (a)(1)(iii)(B) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(1)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-35.
    (a)(1)(iii)(D) through (L) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(1)(iii)(M) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-35.
    (a)(1)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-35.
    (a)(2) heading through (a)(2)(iii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(2)(iii)(C) Engine displacement (in cubic inches or liters), 
engine family identification and evaporative/refueling family 
identification.
    (a)(2)(iii)(D) through (a)(2)(iii)(E) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(2)(iii)(F) [Reserved]
    (a)(2)(iii)(G) through (a)(2)(iii)(K) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(2)(iii)(L) [Reserved].
    (a)(2)(iii)(M) through (a)(2)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(2)(iii) (O) through (P) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.096-35.
    (a)(3) heading through (a)(4)(iii)(F) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(4)(ii)(G) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-35.
    (b) through (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-35.
    13. A new Sec. 86.004-9 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-9  Emission standards for 2004 and later model year light-
duty trucks.

    Section 86.004-9 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.096-9 or Sec. 86.097-9. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.096-9 or Sec. 86.097-9 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.004-9, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-
9.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.097-9.''.
    (a) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.097-9.
    (b) introductory text through (b)(5) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.096-9.
    (b)(6) Vehicles certified to the refueling standards set forth in 
paragraph (d) of this section are not required to demonstrate 
compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback standards contained in 
Sec. 86.096-9 (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii): Provided, that they meet the 
requirements of Sec. 86.001-28(f).
    (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.097-9.
    (d) Refueling emissions from 2004 and later model year gasoline-
fueled and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and 
methanol-fueled diesel-cycle light duty trucks shall not exceed the 
following standards. The standards apply equally to certification and 
in-use vehicles.
    (1) Standards--(i) Hydrocarbons (for gasoline-fueled Otto-cycle and 
petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 
gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.
    (ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon Equivalent (for methanol-fueled 
vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per liter) of fuel 
dispensed.
    (2)(i) The standards set forth in paragraphs (d)(1) (i) and (ii) of 
this section refer to a sample of refueling emissions collected under 
the conditions as set forth in subpart B of this part and measured in 
accordance with those procedures.
    (ii) For vehicles powered by petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines, 
the provisions set forth in paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section may be 
waived: Provided, that the manufacturer complies with the provisions of 
Sec. 86.001-28(f) of this subpart.
    (iii) Heavy-duty vehicles certified as light-duty trucks under the 
provisions of Sec. 86.085-1 shall comply with the provisions of 
paragraphs (d)(1) (i) and (ii) of this section.
    (3)(i) All light-duty trucks of a GVWR equal to 6,000 pounds or 
less (100%) must meet the refueling emission standard.
    (ii) A minimum of the percentage shown in Table A04-09 of a 
manufacturer's sales of the applicable model year's gasoline- and 
methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled 
diesel-cycle light-duty trucks of 6,001 to 8,500 pounds GVW shall be 
tested under the procedures in subpart B of this part indicated for 
2004 and later model years, and shall not exceed the standards 
described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. Vehicles certified in 
accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section, as determined by 
the provisions of Sec. 86.001-28(g), shall not be counted in the 
calculation of the percentage of compliance. 

  Table A04-09.--Implementation Schedule for Light-Duty Truck Refueling 
                            Emission Testing                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Sales   
                         Model year                           percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004.......................................................           40
2005.......................................................           80
2006 and subsequent........................................         100 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) through (f) [Reserved]
    (g) through (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.097-9.
    14. A new Sec. 86.004-28 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-28  Compliance with emission standards.

    Section 86.004-28 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Secs. 86.094-28 and 86.098-28. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.094-28 or Sec. 86.098-28 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.001-28, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
28.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.''.
    (a)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(4) introductory text through (a)(4(i) introductory text 
[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a)(4)(i)(A) and (a)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a) (5) and (6) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(7) introductory text through (a)(7)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance 
see Sec. 86.098-28.
    (a)(7)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (b)(1) Paragraph (b) of this section applies to light-duty trucks.
    (2) Each exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission standard (and 
family emission limits, as appropriate) of Sec. 86.004-9 applies to the 
emissions of vehicles for the appropriate useful life as defined in 
Secs. 86.098-2 and 86.001-9.
    (b)(3) through (b)(6) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (b)(7)(i) Paragraph (b)(7) of this section describes the procedure 
for determining compliance of a new vehicle with evaporative emission 
standards. The procedure described here shall be used for all vehicles 
in applicable model years.
    (ii) The manufacturer shall determine, based on testing described 
in Sec. 86.001-21(b)(4)(i)(A), and supply an evaporative emission 
deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission family-
emission control system combination. The factor shall be calculated by 
subtracting the emission level at the selected test point from the 
emission level at the useful life point.
    (iii) The official evaporative emission test results for each 
evaporative/refueling emission-data vehicle at the selected test point 
shall be adjusted by the addition of the appropriate deterioration 
factor. However, if the deterioration factor supplied by the 
manufacturer is less than zero, it shall be zero for the purposes of 
this paragraph.
    (iv) The emission value to compare with the standards shall be the 
adjusted emission value of paragraph (b)(7)(iii) of this section 
rounded to two significant figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 
(reapproved 1980) (as referenced in Sec. 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) 
for each evaporative emission-data vehicle.
    (8)(i) Paragraph (b)(8) of this section describes the procedure for 
determining compliance of a new vehicle with refueling emission 
standards. The procedure described here shall be used for all 
applicable vehicles in the applicable model years.
    (ii) The manufacturer shall determine, based on testing described 
in Sec. 86.098-21(b)(4)(i)(B), and supply a refueling emission 
deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission family-
emission control system combination. The factor shall be calculated by 
subtracting the emission level at the selected test point from the 
emission level at the useful life point.
    (iii) The official refueling emission test results for each 
evaporative/refueling emission-data vehicle at the selected test point 
shall be adjusted by the addition of the appropriate deterioration 
factor. However, if the deterioration factor supplied by the 
manufacturer is less than zero, it shall be zero for the purposes of 
this paragraph.
    (iv) The emission value to compare with the standards shall be the 
adjusted emission value of paragraph (b)(8)(iii) of this section 
rounded to two significant figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 
(reapproved 1980) (as referenced in Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) 
for each evaporative emission-data vehicle.
    (9) Every test vehicle of an engine family must comply with all 
applicable standards (and family emission limits, as appropriate), as 
determined in Sec. 86.094-28(b)(4)(iv) and paragraphs (b)(7)(iv) and 
(b)(8)(iv) of this section, before any vehicle in that family will be 
certified.
    (c) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (e) [Reserved]
    (f) Fuel dispensing spitback testing waiver. (1) Vehicles certified 
to the refueling emission standards set forth in Secs. 86.099-8, 
86.001-9 and 86.004-9 are not required to demonstrate compliance with 
the fuel dispensing spitback standards contained in these sections: 
Provided, that--
    (i) The manufacturer certifies that the vehicle inherently meets 
the Dispensing Spitback Standard as part of compliance with the 
refueling emission standard; and
    (ii) This certification is provided in writing and applies to the 
full useful life of the vehicle.
    (2) EPA retains the authority to require testing to enforce 
compliance and to prevent non-compliance with the Fuel Dispensing 
Spitback Standard.
    (g) Inherently low refueling emission testing waiver. (1) Vehicles 
using fuels/fuel systems inherently low in refueling emissions are not 
required to conduct testing to demonstrate compliance with the 
refueling emission standards set forth in Secs. 86.099-8, 86.001-9 or 
86.004-9: Provided, that--
    (i) This provision is only available for petroleum diesel fuel. It 
is only available if the Reid Vapor Pressure of in-use diesel fuel is 
equal to or less than 1 psi (7 kPa) and for diesel vehicles whose fuel 
tank temperatures do not exceed 13  deg.F (54  deg.C), and
    (ii) To certify using this provision the manufacturer must attest 
to the following evaluation: ``Due to the low vapor pressure of diesel 
fuel and the vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon vapor 
concentrations are low and the vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon 
refueling emission standard without a control system.''
    (2) The certification required in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this 
section must be provided in writing and must apply for the full useful 
life of the vehicle.
    (3) EPA reserves the authority to require testing to enforce 
compliance and to prevent noncompliance with the refueling emission 
standard.
    (4) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standard under 
this provision shall not be counted in the sales percentage compliance 
determinations for the 2004, 2005 and subsequent model years.
    15. A new Sec. 86.004-30 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-30  Certification.

    Section 86.004-30 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Secs. 86.094-30, 86.095-30, 86.096-30, 86.098-30 or 86.001-
30. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.094-30, Sec. 86.095-30, Sec. 86.096-
30, Sec. 86.098-30 or Sec. 86.001-30 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.004-30, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
30.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-30.'' or 
``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-30.'' or ``[Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.001-30.''.
    (a)(1) and (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(3)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.
    (a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(4)(iii) introductory text through (a)(4)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(4)(iv)(A) through (a)(12) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(13) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(14) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a) (15) through (18) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-30.
    (a)(19) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.
    (a)(20) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.001-30.
    (a)(21) For all light-duty trucks certified to refueling emission 
standards under Sec. 86.004-9, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(21) (i) 
through (iii) of this section apply.
    (i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer 
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.004-9 both during and after 
model year production.
    (ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales 
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.004-9 will be considered to be a 
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was 
issued and the individual vehicles sold in violation of the 
implementation schedule shall not be covered by the certificate.
    (iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the 
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the 
certificate was issued were satisfied.
    (b)(1) introductory text through (b)(1)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(1)(ii)(B) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under 
Sec. 86.001-24(b)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent all vehicles of the 
same evaporative/refueling control system within the evaporative/
refueling family.
    (b)(1)(ii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(1)(ii)(D) The emission-data vehicle(s) selected under 
Sec. 86.098-24(b)(1)(viii) shall represent all vehicles of the same 
evaporative/refueling control system within the evaporative/refueling 
emission family, as applicable.
    (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(1)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.
    (b)(3) through (b)(4)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
30.
    (b)(4)(ii) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.098-30.
    (b)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(4)(ii)(B) through (b)(4)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.098-30.
    (b)(5) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (f) introductory text through (f)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (f)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-30.
    16. Section 86.098-2 of subpart A is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-2  Definitions.

    The definitions of Sec. 86.096-2 continue to apply to 1996 and 
later model year vehicles. The definitions listed in this section apply 
beginning with the 1998 model year.
    Dispensed fuel temperature means the temperature (deg.F or deg.C 
may be used) of the fuel being dispensed into the tank of the test 
vehicle during a refueling test.
    Evaporative/refueling emission control system means a unique 
combination within an evaporative/refueling family of canister 
adsorptive material, purge system configuration, purge strategy, and 
other parameters determined by the Administrator to affect evaporative 
and refueling emission control system durability or deterioration 
factors.
    Evaporative/refueling emission family means the basic 
classification unit of a manufacturers' product line used for the 
purpose of evaporative and refueling emissions test fleet selection and 
determined in accordance with Sec. 86.098-24.
    Integrated refueling emission control system means a system where 
vapors resulting from refueling are stored in a common vapor storage 
unit(s) with other evaporative emissions of the vehicle and are purged 
through a common purge system.
    Non-integrated refueling emission control system means a system 
where fuel vapors from refueling are stored in a vapor storage unit 
assigned solely to the function of storing refueling vapors.
    Refueling emissions means evaporative emissions that emanate from a 
motor vehicle fuel tank(s) during a refueling operation.
    Refueling emissions canister(s) means any vapor storage unit(s) 
that is exposed to the vapors generated during refueling.
    Resting losses means evaporative emissions that may occur 
continuously, that are not diurnal emissions, hot soak emissions, 
refueling emissions, running losses, or spitback emissions.
    Useful life means:
    (1) For light-duty vehicles, and for light light-duty trucks not 
subject to the Tier 0 standards of Sec. 86.094-9(a), intermediate 
useful life and/or full useful life. Intermediate useful life is a 
period of use of 5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. Full 
useful life is a period of use of 10 years or 100,000 miles, whichever 
occurs first, except as otherwise noted in Sec. 86.094-9. The useful 
life of evaporative and/or refueling emission control systems on the 
portion of these vehicles subject to the evaporative emission test 
requirements of Sec. 86.130-96, and/or the refueling emission test 
requirements of Sec. 86.151-98, is defined as a period of use of 10 
years or 100,000 miles, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For light light-duty trucks subject to the Tier 0 standards of 
Sec. 86.094-9(a), and for heavy light-duty truck engine families, 
intermediate and/or full useful life. Intermediate useful life is a 
period of use of 5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. Full 
useful life is a period of use of 11 years or 120,000 miles, whichever 
occurs first. The useful life of evaporative emission control systems 
on the portion of these vehicles subject to the evaporative emission 
test requirements of Sec. 86.130-96 is also defined as a period of 11 
years or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs first.
    (3) For an Otto-cycle heavy-duty engine family:
    (i) For hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide standards, a period of use 
of 8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.
    (ii) For the oxides of nitrogen standard, a period of use of 10 
years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.
    (iii) For the portion of evaporative emission control systems 
subject to the evaporative emission test requirements of Sec. 86.1230-
96, a period of use of 10 years or 110,000 miles, whichever occurs 
first.
    (4) For a diesel heavy-duty engine family:
    (i) For light heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon 
monoxide, and particulate standards, a period of use of 8 years or 
110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.
    (ii) For light heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides of 
nitrogen standard, a period of use of 10 years or 110,000 miles, 
whichever first occurs.
    (iii) For medium heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon 
monoxide, and particulate standards, a period of use of 8 years or 
185,000 miles, whichever first occurs.
    (iv) For medium heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides of 
nitrogen standard, a period of use of 10 years or 185,000 miles, 
whichever first occurs.
    (v) For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon 
monoxide, and particulate standards, a period of use of 8 years or 
290,000 miles, whichever first occurs, except as provided in paragraph 
(3)(vii) of this definition.
    (vi) For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides of 
nitrogen standard, a period of use of 10 years or 290,000 miles, 
whichever first occurs.
    (vii) For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines used in urban buses, for 
the particulate standard, a period of use of 10 years or 290,000 miles, 
whichever first occurs.
    17. A new Sec. 86.098-3 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-3  Abbreviations.

    (a) The abbreviations in Sec. 86.094-3 continue to apply to 1996 
and later model year vehicles. The abbreviations in this section apply 
beginning with the 1998 model year.
    (b) The abbreviations in this section apply to this subpart, and 
also to subparts B, E, F, G, K, M, N, and P of this part, and have the 
following meanings:

TD--dispensed fuel temperature

    18. A new Sec. 86.098-7 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-7  Maintenance of records; submittal of information; right 
of entry.

    Section 86.098-7 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from those specified in Secs. 86.091-7, 86.094-7 and 86.096-7. 
Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.091-7, Sec. 86.094-7 or Sec. 86.096-7 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-7, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.091-7.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-7.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-7.''.
    (a) Introductory text through (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.091-7.
    (a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-7.
    (b) through (c)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.091-7.
    (c)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-7.
    (c)(4) through (d)(1)(v) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.091-
7.
    (d)(1)(vi) through (d)(2)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-7.
    (d)(3) through (g) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.091-7.
    (h)(6) Voiding a certificate. (i) EPA may void ab initio a 
certificate for a vehicle certified to Tier 0 certification standards 
or to the respective evaporative and/or refueling test procedure and 
accompanying evaporative and/or refueling standards as set forth or 
otherwise referenced in Secs. 86.098-8, 86.098-9, or 86.098-10 for 
which the manufacturer fails to retain the records required in this 
section or to provide such information to the Administrator upon 
request.
    (h)(6)(ii) to (h)(7)(vi) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-
7.
    (h)(6)(vii) EPA evaporative/refueling family.
    19. A new Sec. 86.098-8 is added to subpart A, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-8  Emission standards for 1998 and later model year light-
duty vehicles.

    Section 86.098-8 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.096-8. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.096-8 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-8, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.096-8.''
    (a) through (b)(5) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-8.
    (b)(6) Vehicles certified to the refueling standards set forth in 
paragraph (d) of this section are not required to demonstrate 
compliance with the fuel dispensing spitback standards contained in 
Sec. 86.096-8 (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii): Provided, that they meet the 
requirements of Sec. 86.098-28(f).
    (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-8.
    (d) Refueling emissions from 1998 and later model year gasoline-
fueled and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and 
methanol-fueled diesel-cycle light-duty vehicles shall not exceed the 
following standards. The standards apply equally to certification and 
in-use vehicles.
    (1) Standards--(i) Hydrocarbons (for gasoline-fueled Otto-cycle and 
petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 
gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.
    (ii) Organic material hydrocarbon equivalent (for methanol-fueled 
vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per liter) of fuel 
dispensed.
    (2)(i) The standards set forth in paragraphs (d)(1) (i) and (ii) of 
this section refer to a sample of refueling emissions collected under 
the conditions set forth in subpart B of this part and measured in 
accordance with those procedures.
    (ii) For vehicles powered by petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines, 
the provisions set forth in paragraph (d)(1) of this section may be 
waived: Provided, that the manufacturer complies with the provisions of 
Sec. 86.098-28(g).
    (3)(i) A minimum of the percentage shown in Table A98-08 of a 
manufacturer's sales of the applicable model year's gasoline- and 
methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled 
diesel-cycle light-duty vehicles shall be tested under the procedures 
in subpart B of this part indicated for 1998 and later model years, and 
shall not exceed the standards described in paragraph (d)(1) of this 
section. Vehicles certified in accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of 
this section, as determined by the provisions of Sec. 86.098-28(g), 
shall not be counted in the calculation of the percentage of 
compliance. 

 Table A98-08.--Implementation Schedule for Light-Duty Vehicle Refueling
                            Emission Testing                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Sales   
                        Model year                            percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998.......................................................           40
1999.......................................................           80
2000 and subsequent........................................         100 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) Small volume manufacturers, as defined in Sec. 86.094-14(b) 
(1) and (2), are exempt from the implementation schedule of Table A98-
08 of this section for model years 1998 and 1999. For small volume 
manufacturers, the standards of paragraph (d) of this section, and the 
associated test procedures, shall not apply until model year 2000, when 
100 percent compliance with the standards of this section is required. 
This exemption does not apply to small volume engine families as 
defined in Sec. 86.094-14(b)(5).
    (e) through (f) [Reserved]
    (g) through (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-8.
    20. A new Sec. 86.098-14 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-14  Small-volume manufacturers certification procedures.

    Section 86.098-14 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Secs. 86.094-14 or 86.095-14. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.094-14 or Sec. 86.095-14 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.098-14, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
14.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-14.''.
    (a) through (c)(7)(i)(C)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-14.
    (c)(7)(i)(C)(4) For light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, and 
heavy-duty vehicle evaporative and/or refueling emissions (as 
applicable) and for light-duty truck, and heavy-duty engine exhaust 
emissions, deterioration factors shall be determined in accordance with 
Sec. 86.098-24.
    (c)(7)(ii) through (c)(11)(ii)(B) introductory text [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.094-14.
    (c)(11)(ii)(B)(1) Engine evaporative/refueling family names and 
vehicle (or engine) configurations.
    (c)(11)(ii)(B)(2) through (c)(11)(ii)(B)(15) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.094-14.
    (c)(11)(ii)(B)(16) through (c)(11)(ii)(B)(18) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.095-14.
    (c)(11)(ii)(B)(19) For each light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, 
or heavy-duty vehicle evaporative/refueling emission family, a 
description of any unique procedures required to perform evaporative 
and/or refueling emission tests (as applicable) (including canister 
working capacity, canister bed volume, and fuel temperature profile for 
the running loss test) for all vehicles in that evaporative/refueling 
emission family, and a description of the method used to develop those 
unique procedures.
    (20) For each light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or heavy-duty 
vehicle evaporative/refueling emission family:
    (i) Canister working capacity, according to the procedures 
specified in Sec. 86.132-96(h)(1)(iv);
    (ii) Canister bed volume; and
    (iii) Fuel temperature profile for the running loss test, according 
to the procedures specified in Sec. 86.129-94(d).
    (c)(11)(ii)(C) through (c)(11)(ii)(D)(5) [Reserved]. For guidance 
see Sec. 86.095-14.
    (c)(11)(ii)(D)(6) [Reserved].
    (c)(11)(ii)(D)(7) through (c)(15) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-14.
    21. A new Sec. 86.098-17 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-17  Emission control diagnostic system for 1998 and later 
light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks.

    Section 86.098-17 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-17. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.094-17 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-17, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-17.''
    (a) introductory text through (a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-17.
    (a)(4) Any other deterioration or malfunction within the powertrain 
which occurs in actual use and which results in an exhaust emission 
increase of greater than 0.2 g/mi HC, 1.7 g/mi CO, or 0.5 g/mi 
NOX, or any vapor leak in the evaporative and/or refueling system 
which results in an evaporative emissions increase of greater than 30.0 
g/test measured over the first 24 hours of the diurnal portion of the 
revised evaporative emissions test procedure, in accordance with test 
procedures set forth in subpart B of this part, for vehicles certified 
to that test procedure.
    (b)(1) The electronic evaporative and/or refueling emission purge 
control, if equipped, and all emission-related powertrain components 
connected to a computer shall, at a minimum, be monitored for circuit 
continuity. All components required by these regulations to be 
monitored shall be evaluated periodically, but no less frequently than 
once per Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule as defined in 40 CFR part 
86, appendix I, paragraph (a), or similar trip.
    (b)(2) through (j) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-17.
    22. A new Sec. 86.098-21 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-21  Application for certification.

    Section 86.098-21 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-21 or Sec. 86.096-21. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.094-21 or Sec. 86.096-21 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.098-21, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
21.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-21.''.
    (a) through (b)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (b)(4)(i) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, a 
description of the test procedures to be used to establish the 
evaporative emission and/or refueling emission deterioration factors 
(as applicable) required to be determined and supplied in Sec. 86.098-
23(b)(2).
    (b)(4)(ii) through (iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
21.
    (b)(5)(v) For light-duty vehicles with non-integrated refueling 
emission control systems, the number of continuous UDDS cycles, 
determined from the fuel economy on the UDDS applicable to the test 
vehicle of that evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control 
system combination, required to use a volume of fuel equal to 85% of 
fuel tank volume.
    (b)(6) through (8) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (b)(9) For each light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or heavy-duty 
vehicle evaporative/refueling emission family, a description of any 
unique procedures required to perform evaporative and/or refueling 
emission tests (as applicable) (including canister working capacity, 
canister bed volume, and fuel temperature profile for the running loss 
test) for all vehicles in that evaporative/refueling emission family, 
and a description of the method used to develop those unique 
procedures.
    (10) For each light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or heavy-duty 
vehicle evaporative/refueling emission family:
    (i) Canister working capacity, according to the procedures 
specified in Sec. 86.132-96(h)(1)(iv);
    (ii) Canister bed volume; and
    (iii) Fuel temperature profile for the running loss test, according 
to the procedures specified in Sec. 86.129-94(d).
    (c) and (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (e) For vehicles equipped with gasoline-fueled or methanol-fueled 
heavy-duty engines, the manufacturer shall specify a maximum nominal 
fuel tank capacity for each evaporative/refueling emission family-
emission control system combination.
    (f) through (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (j) and (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-21.
    23. A new Sec. 86.098-22 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-22  Approval of application for certification; test fleet 
selections; determinations of parameters subject to adjustment for 
certification and Selective Enforcement Audit, adequacy of limits, and 
physically adjustable ranges.

    Section 86.098-22 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-22. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.094-22 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-22, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-22.''
    (a) through (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-22.
    (d) Approval of test procedures. (1) The Administrator does not 
approve the test procedures for establishing the evaporative and/or 
refueling emission deterioration factors for light-duty vehicles and 
light-duty trucks. The manufacturer shall submit the procedures as 
required in Sec. 86.098-21(b)(4)(i) prior to the Administrator's 
selection of the test fleet under Sec. 86.098-24(b) (1), and if such 
procedures will involve testing of durability data vehicles selected by 
the Administrator or elected by the manufacturer under Sec. 86.098-
24(c)(1), prior to initiation of such testing.
    (d)(2) through (g) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-22.
    24. Section 86.098-23 of subpart A is amended by revising the 
introductory text and paragraphs (a) through (l) to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-23  Required data.

    Section 86.098-23 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.095-23. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.095-23 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-23, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.095-23.''
    (a) through (b)(1)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-23.
    (b)(2) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, the 
manufacturer shall submit evaporative emission and/or refueling 
emission deterioration factors for each evaporative/refueling emission 
family-emission control system combination and all test data that are 
derived from testing described under Sec. 86.098-21(b)(4)(i) designed 
and conducted in accordance with good engineering practice to assure 
that the vehicles covered by a certificate issued under Sec. 86.098-30 
will meet the evaporative and/or refueling emission standards in 
Sec. 86.098-8 or Sec. 86.098-9, as appropriate, for the useful life of 
the vehicle.
    (b)(3) through (b)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-
23.
    (b)(4)(iii) For petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles certifying 
under the waiver provisions of Sec. 86.098-28, the certifications and 
representations specified in Sec. 86.098-28.
    (c) through (e)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-23.
    (e)(2) For evaporative and refueling emission durability, or light-
duty truck or heavy-duty engine exhaust emission durability, a 
statement of compliance with paragraph (b)(2) or (b)(4)(iii) of this 
section or Sec. 86.095-23 (b)(1)(ii), (b)(3) (b)(4)(i) or (b)(4)(ii), 
as applicable.
    (3) For certification of vehicles with non-integrated refueling 
systems, a statement that the drivedown used to purge the refueling 
canister was the same as described in the manufacturers' application 
for certification. Furthermore, a description of the procedures used to 
determine the number of equivalent UDDS miles required to purge the 
refueling canisters, as determined by the provisions of Sec. 86.098-
21(b)(5)(v) and subpart B of this part. Furthermore, a written 
statement to the Administrator that all data, analyses, test 
procedures, evaluations and other documents, on which the above 
statement is based, are available to the Administrator upon request.
    (f) through (l) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-23.
* * * * *
    25. A new Sec. 86.098-24 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-24  Test vehicles and engines.

    Section 86.098-24 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.096-24. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.096-24 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-24, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.096-24.''
    (a) introductory text through (a)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.096-24.
    (a)(5) The gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled light-duty vehicles 
and light-duty trucks covered by an application for certification will 
be divided into groupings which are expected to have similar 
evaporative and/or refueling emission characteristics (as applicable) 
throughout their useful life. Each group of vehicles with similar 
evaporative and/or refueling emission characteristics shall be defined 
as a separate evaporative/refueling emission family.
    (a)(6) For gasoline-fueled or methanol-fueled light-duty vehicles 
and light-duty trucks to be classed in the same evaporative/refueling 
emission family, vehicles must be similar with respect to the items 
listed in paragraphs (a)(6) (i) through (xii) of this section.
    (i) Type of vapor storage device (e.g., canister, air cleaner, 
crankcase).
    (ii) Basic canister design.
    (A) Working capacity--grams adsorption within a 10g. range.
    (B) System configuration--number of canisters and method of 
connection (i.e., series, parallel).
    (C) Canister geometry, construction and materials.
    (iii) Fuel system.
    (iv) Type of refueling emission control system--non-integrated or 
integrated with the evaporative control system. Further, if the system 
is non-integrated, whether or not any other evaporative emissions, e.g. 
diurnal or hot soak emissions, are captured in the same storage device 
as the refueling emissions.
    (v) Fillpipe seal mechanism--mechanical, liquid trap, other.
    (vi) Fill limiter system.
    (vii) Vapor control system or method of controlling vapor flow 
through the vapor line to the canister.
    (viii) Vapor/liquid separator usage.
    (ix) Purge system (valve, purge strategy and calibrations).
    (x) Vapor hose diameter and material.
    (xi) Canister location (front, rear, mid-vehicle).
    (xii) Onboard diagnostic hardware and calibrations.
    (a)(7) Where vehicles are of a type which cannot be divided into 
evaporative/refueling emission families based on the criteria listed 
above (such as non-canister control system approaches), the 
Administrator will establish families for those vehicles based upon the 
features most related to their evaporative and/or refueling emission 
characteristics.
    (a)(8) through (b)(1)(vi) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-
24.
    (b)(1)(vii)(A) Vehicles of each evaporative/refueling emission 
family will be divided into evaporative/refueling emission control 
systems.
    (B) The Administrator will select the vehicle expected to exhibit 
the highest evaporative and/or refueling emissions, from within each 
evaporative/refueling family to be certified, from among the vehicles 
represented by the exhaust emission-data selections for the engine 
family, unless evaporative and/or refueling testing has already been 
completed on the vehicle expected to exhibit the highest evaporative 
and/or refueling emissions for the evaporative/refueling family as part 
of another engine family's testing.
    (C) If the vehicles selected in accordance with paragraph 
(b)(1)(vii)(B) of this section do not represent each evaporative/
refueling emission control system then the Administrator will select 
the highest expected evaporative/refueling emission vehicle from within 
the unrepresented evaporative/refueling system.
    (viii) For high-altitude evaporative and/or refueling emission 
compliance for each evaporative/refueling emission family, the 
manufacturer shall follow one of the following procedures:
    (A) The manufacturer will select for testing under high-altitude 
conditions the one nonexempt vehicle previously selected under 
paragraph (b)(1)(vii)(B) or (b)(1)(vii)(C) of this section which is 
expected to have the highest level of evaporative and/or refueling 
emissions when operated at high altitude; or
    (B) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-24.
    (b)(ix) through (e)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-24.
    (f) Carryover and carryacross of durability and emission data. In 
lieu of testing an emission-data or durability vehicle (or engine) 
selected under paragraph (b)(1) (vii) through (viii) of this section 
and Sec. 86.096-24 (b)(1) (i) through (vii) and (b)(2) through (c), and 
submitting data therefor, a manufacturer may, with the prior written 
approval of the Administrator, submit exhaust emission data, 
evaporative emission data and/or refueling emission data, as applicable 
on a similar vehicle (or engine) for which certification has been 
obtained or for which all applicable data required under Sec. 86.098-23 
has previously been submitted.
    (g) through (h) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-24.
    26. A new Sec. 86.098-25 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-25  Maintenance.

    Section 86.098-25 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-25. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.094-25 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-25, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-25.''
    (a)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-25.
    (a)(2) Maintenance performed on vehicles, engines, subsystems, or 
components used to determine exhaust, evaporative or refueling emission 
deterioration factors is classified as either emission- related or non-
emission-related and each of these can be classified as either 
scheduled or unscheduled. Further, some emission-related maintenance is 
also classified as critical emission-related maintenance.
    (b) Introductory text through (b)(3)(vi)(D) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.094-25.
    (b)(3)(vi)(E) Evaporative and/or refueling emission canister(s).
    (F) Turbochargers.
    (G) Carburetors.
    (H) Superchargers.
    (I) EGR System including all related filters and control valves.
    (J) Mechanical fillpipe seals.
    (b)(3)(vii) through (b)(6)(i)(E) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-25.
    (b)(6)(i)(F) Evaporative and refueling emission control system 
components (excluding canister air filter).
    (b)(6)(i)(G) through (h) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
25.
    27. A new Sec. 86.098-26 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-26  Mileage and service accumulation; emission 
measurements.

    Section 86.098-26 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-26, Sec. 86.095-26 or Sec. 86.096-26. Where a 
paragraph in Sec. 86.094-26, Sec. 86.095-26 or Sec. 86.096-26 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-26, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-26.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-26.''.
    (a)(1) and (2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (a)(3) Emission data vehicles. Unless otherwise provided for in 
Sec. 86.098-23(a), emission-data vehicles shall be operated and tested 
as described in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and (ii)(C) of this section and 
Sec. 86.094-26 (a)(3)(ii)(A), (B) and (D).
    (i) Otto-cycle. (A) The manufacturer shall determine, for each 
engine family, the mileage at which the engine-system combination is 
stabilized for emission-data testing. The manufacturer shall maintain, 
and provide to the Administrator if requested, a record of the 
rationale used in making this determination. The manufacturer may elect 
to accumulate 4,000 miles on each test vehicle within an engine family 
without making a determination. The manufacturer must accumulate a 
minimum of 2,000 miles (3,219 kilometers) on each test vehicle within 
an engine family. All test vehicle mileage must be accurately 
determined, recorded, and reported to the Administrator. Any vehicle 
used to represent emission-data vehicle selections under Sec. 86.098-
24(b)(1) shall be equipped with an engine and emission control system 
that has accumulated the mileage the manufacturer chose to accumulate 
on the test vehicle. Fuel economy data generated from certification 
vehicles selected in accordance with Sec. 86.098-24(b)(1) with engine-
system combinations that have accumulated more than 10,000 kilometers 
(6,200 miles) shall be factored in accordance with 40 CFR 600.006-
87(c). Complete exhaust, evaporative and refueling (if required) 
emission tests shall be conducted for each emission-data vehicle 
selection under Sec. 86.098-24(b)(1). The Administrator may determine 
under Sec. 86.094-24(f) that no testing is required.
    (B) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (C) Exhaust, evaporative and refueling emissions tests for 
emission-data vehicle(s) selected for testing under Sec. 86.096-
24(b)(1) (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv) or Sec. 86.098-24(b)(1)(vii)(B) shall 
be conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile minimum) at which the engine-
system combination is stabilized for emission testing under low-
altitude conditions.
    (a)(3)(i)(B) through (a)(3)(ii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-26.
    (a)(3)(ii)(C) Exhaust, evaporative and refueling emissions tests 
(as required) for emission-data vehicle(s) selected for testing under 
Sec. 86.096-24(b)(1) (i), (ii), (iii), or (iv), or Sec. 86.098-24 
(b)(1)(vii)(B) shall be conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile minimum) 
at which the engine-system combination is stabilized for emission 
testing under low-altitude conditions.
    (a)(3)(ii)(D) through (b)(4)(i)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-26.
    (b)(4)(i)(D) through (b)(4)(ii)(D) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-26.
    (b)(4)(iii) [Reserved].
    (b)(4)(iv) through (c)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
26.
    (c)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-26.
    (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    28. A new Sec. 86.098-28 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-28  Compliance with emission standards.

    Section 86.098-28 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-28. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.094-28 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-28, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.''
    (a)(1) Paragraph (a) of this section applies to light-duty 
vehicles.
    (2) Each exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission standard (and 
family particulate emission limits, as appropriate) of Sec. 86.098-8 
applies to the emissions of vehicles for the appropriate useful life as 
defined in Secs. 86.098-2 and 86.098-8.
    (3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (4) The procedure for determining compliance of a new motor vehicle 
with exhaust, evaporative and/or refueling emission standards (or 
family particulate emission limit, as appropriate) is as described in 
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) introductory text, (a)(4)(i)(C), (a)(4)(ii)(B) and 
(C), (a)(4)(iii), (a)(4)(v), (f) and (g) of this section and 
Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(A) and (B), (a)(4)(ii)(A), (a)(4)(iv)) except 
where specified by paragraph (a)(7) of this section for the Production 
AMA Durability Program.
    (i) Separate emission deterioration factors shall be determined 
from the exhaust emission results of the durability-data vehicle(s) for 
each engine-system combination. Separate evaporative and/or refueling 
emission deterioration factors shall be determined for each 
evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control system 
combination from the testing conducted by the manufacturer (gasoline-
fueled and methanol-fueled vehicles only). Separate refueling emission 
deterioration factors shall be determined for each evaporative/
refueling emission family-emission control system combination from the 
testing conducted by the manufacturer (petroleum-fueled diesel cycle 
vehicles not certified under the provisions of paragraph (g) of this 
section only).
    (a)(4)(i)(A) and (a)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(4)(i)(C) Evaporative deterioration factor determination. An 
evaporative emissions deterioration factor (gasoline-fueled and 
methanol-fueled vehicles only) shall be determined from the testing 
conducted as described in Section 86.094-21(b)(4) (i) (A), and in 
accordance with paragraphs (a)(4)(i)(C) (1) and (2) of this section, 
for each evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control system 
combination to indicate the evaporative emission level at the 
applicable useful life relative to the evaporative emission level at 
4,000 miles as follows:
    (1) Factor = Evaporative emission level at the useful life mileage 
for that standard minus the evaporative emission level at 4,000 miles.
    (2) The factor shall be established to a minimum of two places to 
the right of the decimal.
    (D) A refueling emissions deterioration factor (gasoline-fueled, 
methanol-fueled and petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles not 
certified under the provisions of paragraph (g) of this section) shall 
be determined from testing conducted and described in Sec. 86.098-
21(b)(4)(i)(B) for each evaporative/refueling emission family-emission 
control system combinationto indicate the refueling emission level at 
the applicable usefule life relative to the refueling emission level at 
4,000 miles as follows:
    (1) Factor = Refueling emission level at the useful life mileage 
for that standard minus the refueling emission level at 4,000 miles.
    (2) The factor shall be established to a minimum of two places to 
the right of the decimal.
    (a)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(4)(ii)(B) The official evaporative emission test results 
(gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled vehicles only) for each 
evaporative emission-data vehicle at the selected test point shall be 
adjusted by addition of the appropriate deterioration factor: Provided, 
that if a deterioration factor as computed in paragraph (a)(4)(i)(C) of 
this section is less than zero, that deterioration factor shall be zero 
for the purposes of this paragraph.
    (C) The official refueling emission test results (gasoline-fueled, 
methanol-fueled, and petroleum-fueled diesel cycle vehicles not 
certified under the provisions of paragraph (g) of this section) for 
each refueling emission-data vehicle at the selected test point shall 
be adjusted by addition of the appropriate deterioration factor: 
Provided, that if a deterioration factor as computed in paragraph 
(a)(4)(i)(D) of this section is less than zero, that deterioration 
factor shall be zero for purposes of this paragraph.
    (iii) The emissions to compare with the standard (or the family 
particulate emission limit, as appropriate) shall be the adjusted 
emissions of paragraphs (a)(4)(ii) (B) and (C) of this section and 
Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(4)(ii)(A) for each emission-data vehicle. Before any 
emission value is compared with the standard (or the family particulate 
emission limit, as appropriate), it shall be rounded, in accordance 
with ASTM E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in Sec. 86.094-
28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)), to two significant figures. The rounded 
emission values may not exceed the standard (or the family particulate 
emission limit, as appropriate).
    (iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (v) Every test vehicle of an evaporative/refueling emission family 
must comply with the evaporative and/or refueling emission standards, 
as determined in paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of this section, before any 
vehicle in that family may be certified.
    (a)(5) through (a)(6) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (a)(7) The procedure to determine the compliance of new motor 
vehicles in the Production AMA Durability Program described in 
Sec. 86.094-13 is the same as described in paragraphs (a)(4)(iii) and 
(v) of this section and Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(4)(iv). For the engine 
families that are included in the Production AMA Durability Program, 
the exhaust emission deterioration factors used to determine compliance 
shall be those that the Administrator has approved under Sec. 86.094-
13. The evaporative emission deterioration factor for each evaporative 
/refueling emission family shall be determined and applied according to 
paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(B) of this section. The refueling emission 
deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission family 
shall be determined and applied according to paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) of 
this section. The procedures to determine the minimum exhaust emission 
deterioration factors required under Sec. 86.094-13(d) are as described 
in paragraph (a)(7)(i) of this section and Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(7)(ii).
    (i) Separate deterioration factors shall be determined from the 
exhaust emission results of the durability data vehicles for each 
emission standard applicable under Sec. 86.098-8, for each engine 
family group. The evaporative and/or refueling emission deterioration 
factors for each evaporative/refueling family will be determined and 
applied in accordance with paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
    (a)(7)(ii) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-28.
    (e) [Reserved]
    (f) Fuel dispensing spitback testing waiver. (1) Vehicles certified 
to the refueling emission standards set forth in Sec. 86.098-8 are not 
required to demonstrate compliance with the fuel dispensing spitback 
standard contained in that section: Provided, that--
    (i) The manufacturer certifies that the vehicle inherently meets 
the Dispensing Spitback Standard as part of compliance with the 
refueling emission standard; and
    (ii) This certification is provided in writing and applies to the 
full useful life of the vehicle.
    (2) EPA retains the authority to require testing to enforce 
compliance and to prevent non-compliance with the Fuel Dispensing 
Spitback Standard.
    (g) Inherently low refueling emission testing waiver. (1) Vehicles 
using fuels/fuel systems inherently low in refueling emissions are not 
required to conduct testing to demonstrate compliance with the 
refueling emission standards set forth in Sec. 86.098-8: Provided, 
that--
    (i) This provision is only available for petroleum diesel fuel. It 
is only available if the Reid Vapor Pressure of in-use diesel fuel is 
equal to or less than 1 psi (7 kPa) and for diesel vehicles whose fuel 
tank temperatures do not exceed 130  deg.F (54  deg.C); and
    (ii) To certify using this provision the manufacturer must attest 
to the following evaluation: ``Due to the low vapor pressure of diesel 
fuel and the vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon vapor 
concentrations are low and the vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon 
refueling emission standard without a control system.''
    (2) The certification required in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this 
section must be provided in writing and must apply for the full useful 
life of the vehicle.
    (3) EPA reserves the authority to require testing to enforce 
compliance and to prevent noncompliance with the refueling emission 
standard.
    (4) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standard under 
this provision shall not be counted in the sales percentage compliance 
determinations for the 1988, 1989 and subsequent model years.
    29. A new Sec. 86.098-30 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-30  Certification.

    Section 86.098-30 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-30, Sec. 86.095-30 or Sec. 86.096-30. Where a 
paragraph in Sec. 86.094-30, Sec. 86.095-30 or Sec. 86.096-30 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.098-30. This may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-30.''.
    (a)(1) and (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(3)(i) One such certificate will be issued for each engine 
family. For gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled light-duty vehicles and 
light duty-trucks and petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle light-duty vehicles 
and light duty-trucks not certified under Sec. 86.098-28(g), one such 
certificate will be issued for each engine family-evaporative/refueling 
emission family combination. Each certificate will certify compliance 
with no more than one set of in-use and certification standards (or 
family emission limits, as appropriate).
    (a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(4)(iii) introductory text through (a)(4)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(4)(iv)(A) through (a)(12) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(13) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-30.
    (a)(14) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (a)(15) through (18) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-30.
    (a)(19) For all light-duty vehicles certified to refueling emission 
standards under Sec. 86.098-8, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(19) (i) 
through (iii) of this section apply.
    (i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer 
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.098-8, both during and after 
model year production.
    (ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales 
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.094-8 be considered to be a failure 
to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was issued and 
the vehicles sold in violation of the implementation schedule shall not 
be covered by the certificate.
    (iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the 
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the 
certificate was issued were satisfied.
    (b)(1) introductory text through (b)(1)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(1)(i)(C) The emission-data vehicle(s) selected under 
Sec. 86.098-24(b)(1)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent all vehicles of 
the same evaporative/refueling control system within the evaporative /
refueling family.
    (b)(1)(ii) through (b)(1)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(2) The Administrator will proceed as in paragraph (a) of this 
section with respect to the vehicles (or engines) belonging to an 
engine family or engine family-evaporative/refueling emission family 
combination (as applicable), all of which comply with all applicable 
standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate).
    (b)(3) through (b)(4)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
30.
    (b)(4)(ii) Remove the vehicle configuration (or evaporative/
refueling vehicle configuration, as applicable) which failed, from his 
application:
    (b)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (b)(4)(ii)(B) If the failed vehicle was tested for compliance with 
one or more of the exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission 
standards: The Administrator may select, in place of the failed 
vehicle, in accordance with the selection criteria employed in 
selecting the failed vehicle, a new emission data vehicle which will be 
tested for compliance with all of the applicable emission standards. If 
one vehicle cannot be selected in accordance with the selection 
criteria employed in selecting the failed vehicle, then two or more 
vehicles may be selected (e.g., one vehicle to satisfy the exhaust 
emission vehicle selection criteria and one vehicle to satisfy the 
evaporative and refueling emission vehicle selection criteria). The 
vehicle selected to satisfy the exhaust emission vehicle selection 
criteria will be tested for compliance with exhaust emission standards 
(or family emission limits, as appropriate) only. The vehicle selected 
to satisfy the evaporative and/or refueling emission vehicle selection 
criteria will be tested for compliance with exhaust, evaporative and/or 
refueling emission standards; or
    (iii) Remove the vehicle configuration (or evaporative/refueling 
vehicle configuration, as applicable) which failed from the application 
and add a vehicle configuration(s) (or evaporative/refueling vehicle 
configuration(s), as applicable) not previously listed. The 
Administrator may require, if applicable, that the failed vehicle be 
modified to the new engine code (or evaporative/refueling emission 
code, as applicable) and demonstrate by testing that it meets 
applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate) for 
which it was originally tested. In addition, the Administrator may 
select, in accordance with the vehicle selection criteria given in 
Sec. 86.001-24(b), a new emission data vehicle or vehicles. The 
vehicles selected to satisfy the exhaust emission vehicle selection 
criteria will be tested for compliance with exhaust emission standards 
(or family emission limits, as appropriate) only. The vehicles selected 
to satisfy the evaporative emission vehicle selection criteria will be 
tested for compliance with all of the applicable emission standards (or 
family emission limits, as appropriate); or
    (iv) Correct a component or system malfunction and show that with a 
correctly functioning system or component the failed vehicle meets 
applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate) for 
which it was originally tested. The Administrator may require a new 
emission data vehicle, of identical vehicle configuration (or 
evaporative/refueling vehicle configuration, as applicable) to the 
failed vehicle, to be operated and tested for compliance with the 
applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate) for 
which the failed vehicle was originally tested.
    (b)(5) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-30.
    (f) introductory text through (f)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-30.
    (f)(4) The electronic evaporative and/or refueling purge control 
device (if equipped) or any emission-related powertrain component 
connected to a computer is electrically disconnected.
    30. A new Sec. 86.098-35 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-35  Labeling.

    Section 86.098-35 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Secs. 86.095-35 and 86.096-35. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.095-35 or Sec. 86.096-35 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.098-35, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-
35.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-35.''.
    (a) introductory text through (a)(1)(iii)(B) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(1)(iii)(C) Engine displacement (in cubic inches or liters), 
engine family identification and evaporative/refueling family 
identification.
    (a)(1)(iii)(D) through (L) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(1)(iii)(M) For model year 1998 light-duty vehicles, a clear 
indication of which test procedure was used to certify the evaporative/
refueling family, e.g., ``Evaporative /refueling Family xx 
(Sec. 86.130-96 procedures)'' or ``Evaporative /refueling Family xx 
(Sec. 86.130-78 procedures).''
    (a)(1)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-35.
    (a)(2) heading through (a)(2)(iii)(K) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(2)(iii)(L) [Reserved].
    (a)(2)(iii)(M) through (a)(2)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(2)(iii)(O) through (a)(2)(iii)(P) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.096-35.
    (a)(3) heading through (a)(4)(iii)(F) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-35.
    (a)(4)(iii)(G) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-35.
    (b) through (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-35.
    31. Section 86.099-8 of subpart A is amended by adding paragraphs 
(b)(5) and (6), revising paragraph (c), adding paragraph (d), and 
revising paragraphs (e) through (k) to read as follows:


Sec. 86.099-8  Emission standards for 1999 and later model year light-
duty vehicles.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-8.
    (b)(6) Vehicles certified to the refueling standards set forth in 
paragraph (d) of this section are not required to demonstrate 
compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback standards contained in 
paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii) of this section: Provided, that 
they meet the requirements of Sec. 86.098-28(f).
    (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-8.
    (d) Refueling emissions from 1999 and later model year gasoline-
fueled and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and 
methanol-fueled diesel-cycle light duty vehicles shall not exceed the 
following standards. The standards apply equally to certification and 
in-use vehicles.
    (1) Standards--(i) Hydrocarbons (for gasoline-fueled Otto gallon 
(0.053 gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.
    (ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon Equivalent (for methanol-fueled 
vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per liter) of fuel 
dispensed.
    (2)(i) The standards set forth in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of 
this section refer to a sample of refueling emissions collected under 
the conditions set forth in subpart B of this part and measured in 
accordance with those procedures.
    (ii) For vehicles powered by petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines, 
the provisions set forth in paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section may be 
waived: Provided, that the manufacturer complies with the provisions of 
Sec. 86.098-28(f) of this subpart.
    (3)(i) A minimum of the percentage shown in Table A99-08 of a 
manufacturer's sales of the applicable model year's gasoline- and 
methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum- and methanol-fueled diesel 
cycle light-duty vehicles shall be tested under the procedures in 
subpart B of this part indicated for 1998 and later model years, and 
shall not exceed the standards described in paragraph (d)(1) of this 
section. Vehicles certified in accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of 
this section, as determined by the provisions of Sec. 86.098-28(g), 
shall not be counted in the calculation of the percentage of 
compliance.

 Table A99-08. Implementation Schedule for Light-Duty Vehicle Refueling 
                            Emission Testing                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Sales   
                        Model year                            percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999.......................................................           80
2000 and subsequent........................................          100
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) Small volume manufacturers, as defined in Sec. 86.094-14(b) 
(1) and (2), are exempt from the implementation schedule of Table A99-
08 of this section for model year 1999. For small volume manufacturers, 
the standards of paragraph (d) of this section, and the associated test 
procedures, shall not apply until model year 2000, when 100 percent 
compliance with the standards of this section is required. This 
exemption does not apply to small volume engine families as defined in 
Sec. 86.094-14(b)(5).
    (e) through (f) [Reserved]
    (g) through (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-8.

Subpart B--[Amended]

    1. Section 86.101 of subpart B is amended by adding a new paragraph 
(a)(3) to read as follows:


Sec. 86.101  General applicability.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Sections 86.150-98 through 86.156-98 describe the refueling 
test procedures for light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks and apply 
for 1998 and later model years.
* * * * *
    2. Section 86.105 of subpart B is amended by revising paragraph (b) 
to read as follows:


Sec. 86.105  Introduction; structure of subpart.

* * * * *
    (b) Three topics are addressed in this subpart. Sections 86.106-82 
through 86.115-78 set forth specifications and equipment requirements; 
Secs. 86.116-82 through 86.126-90 discuss calibration methods and 
frequency; test procedures and data requirements are listed (in 
approximate order of performance) in Secs. 86.127-82 through 86.156-98.
    3. A new Sec. 86.107-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec. 86.107-98  Sampling and analytical system.

    Section 86.107-98 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from
    Sec. 86.107-96. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.107-96 is identical 
and applicable to Sec. 86.107-98, this may be indicated by specifying 
the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.107-96.'' Where a corresponding paragraph of 
Sec. 86.107-96 is not applicable, this is indicated by the statement 
``[Reserved].''
    (a)(1) through (a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.107-96.
    (a)(4) Refueling emissions test. The requirements detailed in 
Sec. 86.107-90 (a)(1) shall apply. Alternatively, an enclosure meeting 
the specifications detailed in Sec. 86.107-96 (a)(1), (2), or (3) may 
be used if approved in advance by the Administrator. In addition, the 
enclosure shall have one or more access ports leading to flexible, 
automatic sealing boots, in the wall(s) of the enclosure. The function 
of the access port(s) and boots shall be to allow fueling of the test 
vehicle from a fuel nozzle and hose located outside of the enclosure, 
with only the spout of the nozzle passing through the automatic sealing 
opening of the boot during fueling. There shall be no loss in the gas 
tightness of the enclosure at the opening of the boot either when the 
nozzle is inserted or when the nozzle is not inserted.
    (b) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.107-96.
    (e) Temperature recording system. (1) For all emission testing. A 
strip chart potentiometric recorder, an on-line computer system, or 
other suitable means shall be used to record enclosure ambient 
temperature during all evaporative emission test segments, as well as 
vehicle fuel tank temperature during the running loss test. The 
recording system shall record each temperature at least once every 
minute. The recording system shall be capable of resolving time to 
15s and capable of resolving temperature to 
0.75  deg.F     (0.42  deg.C). The recorder 
(data processor) shall have a time accuracy of 15s and a 
precision of 15s. Two ambient temperature sensors, 
connected to provide one average output, shall be located 3 feet above 
the floor at the approximate mid-length of each side wall of the 
enclosure and within 3 to 12 inches of each side wall. Manufacturers 
shall arrange that vehicles furnished for testing at Federal 
certification facilities be equipped with iron-constantan Type J 
thermocouples for measurement of fuel tank temperature. Vehicles shall 
be equipped with 2 temperature sensors installed to provide an average 
liquid fuel temperature. The temperature sensors shall be placed to 
measure the temperature at the mid-volume of the liquid fuel at a fill 
level of 40 percent of nominal tank capacity. In-tank temperature 
sensors are not required for the supplemental two-diurnal test sequence 
specified in Sec. 86.130-96 or for the refueling test specified in 
Sec. 86.151-98.
    (2) Refueling emission testing only. In addition to the enclosure 
ambient temperature recording system described in paragraph (e)(1) of 
this section, strip chart recorder(s) or automatic data processor shall 
be used to record vehicle soak area ambient temperature and dispensed 
fuel temperature at the nozzle during the test. The temperature 
recorder(s) or data processor shall record each temperature at least 
once every 20 seconds (the soak area ambient temperature recorder may 
be a continuous recording system). The recording system shall be 
capable of resolving time to 15s and be capable of 
resolving temperature to 0.75  deg.F     (0.42  deg.C).
    (f) through (h)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.107-96.
    (h)(4) Refueling emission test. Blowers or fans must have a 
capacity of 0.80.2 cfm per cubic foot of the nominal 
enclosure volume. Circulated air shall not be aimed directly at the 
vehicle.
    (5) Spilled fuel mixing blower; refueling emission test. An 
explosion-proof blower of 100-200 ft3/min (2.8-5.7 m3/min) 
capacity is required to enhance mixing of vapors from spilled fuel 
through the enclosure atmosphere during tests. The discharge from this 
blower shall be directed toward the region of the enclosure floor where 
fuel spillage during fueling may occur.
    (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.107-96.
    (j) Refueling equipment. The refueling equipment shall consist of a 
fuel delivery system with temperature control equipment, fuel flow 
safety switch, dispensing pump, hose, nozzle and a meter to measure the 
dispensed fuel volume. The dispensing nozzle shall be a commercial 
model, not equipped with vapor recovery hardware. A fuel recirculation 
system may be utilized to avoid trapping of unheated fuel in the hose. 
The fuel delivery system must be capable of delivering fuel at 
671.5  deg.F (19.40.8  deg.C) and a constant 
flow rate between 4.2 and 9.8 gal/min (15.9 and 37.1 liter/min) with a 
tolerance of 0.3 gal/min (1.1 liter/min) during 
the refueling emissions measurement phase of the test. The accuracy of 
the meter for measuring the dispensed fuel volume shall be 
2 percent at the test flow rate.
    4. Section 86.115-78 of subpart B is amended by revising paragraphs 
(b)(3)(ii) and (b)(5) to read as follows:


Sec. 86.115-78  EPA urban dynamometer driving schedules.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * *  *
    (ii) When conducted to meet the requirements of Sec. 86.129-94 or 
Sec. 86.153-98(d), up to three additional occurrences of speed 
variations greater than the tolerance are acceptable, provided they 
occur for less than 15 seconds on any occasion, and are clearly 
documented as to the time and speed at that point of the driving 
schedule.
* * * * *
    (5) When conducted to meet the requirements of Sec. 86.129-94, 
86.132-96, 86.146-96, or 86.153-98(d), the speed tolerance shall be as 
specified above, except that the upper and lower limits shall be 4 mph 
(6.4 km/h).
* * * * *
    5. Section 86.132-96 of subpart B is amended by revising paragraphs 
(h) introductory text, (j) introductory text, (j)(1)(i) and 
(j)(1)(viii) to read as follows:


Sec. 86.132-96  Vehicle preconditioning.

* * * * *
    (h) During the soak period for the three-diurnal test sequence 
described in Sec. 86.130-96, evaporative canisters, if the vehicle is 
so equipped, shall be preconditioned according to the following 
procedure. For vehicles with multiple canisters, each canister shall be 
preconditioned separately. In addition, for model year 1998 and later 
vehicles equipped with refueling canisters, these canisters shall be 
preconditioned for the three-diurnal test sequence according to the 
procedure in Sec. 86.132-96 (j)(1). If a vehicle is designed to 
actively control evaporative or refueling emission without a canister, 
the manufacturer shall devise an appropriate preconditioning procedure 
subject to the approval of the Administrator.
* * * * *
    (j) For the supplemental two-diurnal test sequence described in 
Sec. 86.130-96, one of the following methods shall be used to 
precondition evaporative canisters during the soak period specified in 
paragraph (g) of this section. For vehicles with multiple canisters, 
each canister shall be preconditioned separately. In addition, for 
model year 1998 and later vehicles equipped with refueling canisters, 
these canisters shall be preconditioned for the supplemental two-
diurnal test sequence according to the procedure in paragraph (j)(1) of 
this section. Canister emissions are measured to determine 
breakthrough. Breakthrough is here defined as the point at which the 
cumulative quantity of hydrocarbons emitted is equal to 2 grams.
    (1) * * *
    (i) Prepare the evaporative/refueling emission canister for the 
canister loading operation. The canister shall not be removed from the 
vehicle, unless access to the canister in its normal location is so 
restricted that purging and loading can only reasonably be accomplished 
by removing the canister from the vehicle. Special care shall be taken 
during this step to avoid damage to the components and the integrity of 
the fuel system.
* * * * *
    (viii) Reconnect the evaporative/refueling emission canister and 
restore the vehicle to its normal operating condition.
* * * * *
    6. A new Sec. 86.150-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec. 86.150-98  Overview; refueling test.

    (a) The refueling emissions test procedure described in this and 
subsequent sections is used to determine the conformity of vehicles 
with the refueling emissions standards set forth in subpart A of this 
part for light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. The refueling 
emissions test procedure may be performed as an individual test or in 
combination with the evaporative and exhaust emissions test sequences 
of Sec. 86.130-96.
    (b) The refueling emissions test is designed to measure hydrocarbon 
emissions resulting from the generation or displacement of fuel tank 
vapor during vehicle refueling. The refueling emissions shall be 
measured by the enclosure technique.
    (c) All emission control systems installed on or incorporated in a 
new motor vehicle shall be functioning during all procedures in this 
subpart except:
    (1) In cases of component malfunction or failure; and
    (2) during certain specified fuel drain and fill operations, at 
which times the refueling emission control canister is disconnected. 
Maintenance to correct component malfunction or failure shall be 
authorized in accordance with Sec. 86.098-25.
    7. A new section 86.151-98 is added to subpart B to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.151-98  General requirements; refueling test.

    (a) The refueling emissions procedure, shown in Figure B98-12, 
starts with the stabilizing of the vehicle and the loading of the 
refueling emissions canister(s) to breakthrough, and continues with the 
vehicle drive for purging of the canister, followed by the refueling 
emissions measurement. The test is conducted following Secs. 86.152-98 
through 86.154-98 in order.
    (b) Ambient temperature levels encountered by the test vehicle 
throughout the test sequence shall not be less than 68  deg.F (20 
deg.C) nor more than 86  deg.F (30  deg.C).
    (c) The vehicle shall be approximately level during all phases of 
the test sequence to prevent abnormal fuel distribution.
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

TR06AP94.002


    BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
    8. A new Sec. 86.152-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec. 86.152-98  Vehicle preparation; refueling test.

    (a) Provide additional fittings and adapters, as required, to 
accommodate a fuel drain at the lowest point possible in the tank(s) as 
installed on the vehicle. The canister shall not be removed from the 
vehicle, unless access to the canister in its normal location is so 
restricted that purging and loading can only reasonably be accomplished 
by removing the canister from the vehicle. Special care shall be taken 
during this step to avoid damage to the components and the integrity of 
the fuel system.
    (b) Provide valving or other means to allow the venting of the 
refueling vapor line to the atmosphere rather than to the refueling 
emissions canister(s) when required by this test procedure.
    (c) For preconditioning that involves loading the vapor collection 
canister(s) with butane, provide valving or other means as necessary to 
allow loading of the canister(s).
    9. A new Sec. 86.153-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec. 86.153-98  Vehicle and canister preconditioning; refueling test.

    (a) Vehicle and canister preconditioning. Vehicles and vapor 
storage canisters shall be preconditioned in accordance with the 
preconditioning procedures for the supplemental two-diurnal evaporative 
emissions test specified in Sec. 86.132-96 (a) through (j). For 
vehicles equipped with non-integrated refueling emission control 
systems, the canister must be loaded using the method involving butane 
loading to breakthrough (see Sec. 86.132-96 (j)(1)). If the refueling 
test procedure is started within 24 hours of the completion of an 
evaporative emission test on the same vehicle at the same ambient 
conditions, the fuel tank drain and fill and minimum soak period 
requirement described in Sec. 86.132-96 (b) and (c) may be omitted from 
the refueling test procedure.
    (b) Seal test. The Administrator may choose to omit certain 
canister load and purge steps, and replace them with a bench purge of 
the refueling canister(s), in order to verify the adequacy of refueling 
emission control system seals. Failure of this seal test shall 
constitute a failure of the refueling emission control test. For 
integrated systems, this bench purge may be performed after the exhaust 
testing in order to obtain exhaust emission test results. Non-
integrated system seal testing shall be performed using paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section.
    (1) Without the exhaust emission test. The Administrator may 
conduct the canister preconditioning by purging the canister(s) with at 
least 1200 canister bed volumes of ambient air (with humidity 
controlled to 5025 grains of water vapor per pound of dry 
air) maintained at a nominal flow rate of 0.8 cfm directly following 
the preconditioning drive described in Sec. 86.132-96 (c) through (e). 
In this case, the canister loading procedures and the vehicle driving 
procedures described in Sec. 86.132-96 (f) through (j) and in 
paragraphs (c) through (d) of this section shall be omitted, and the 10 
minute and 60 minute time requirements of paragraph (e) of this section 
shall apply to time after completion of the bench purge. In the case of 
multiple refueling canisters, each canister shall be purged separately.
    (2) With the exhaust emission test. The Administrator may conduct 
the canister preconditioning by purging the canister(s) directly after 
the exhaust test (see paragraph (c)(1) of this section). The canister 
shall be purged with at least 1200 canister bed volumes of ambient air 
(with humidity controlled to 5025 grains of water vapor per 
pound of dry air) maintained at a nominal flow rate of 0.8 cfm. In this 
case, the vehicle driving procedures described in paragraphs (c)(2) 
through (d) of this section shall be omitted, and the 10 minute and 60 
minute time requirements of paragraph (e) of this section shall apply 
to time after completion of the bench purge. In the case of multiple 
refueling canisters, each canister shall be purged separately.
    (c) Canister purging; integrated systems (1) Vehicles to be tested 
for exhaust emissions only shall be processed according to 
Secs. 86.135-94 through 86.137-96. Vehicles to be tested for refueling 
emissions shall be processed in accordance with the procedures in 
Secs. 86.135-94 through 86.137-96, followed by the procedures outlined 
in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
    (2) To provide additional opportunity for canister purge, conduct 
additional driving on a dynamometer, within one hour of completion of 
the hot start exhaust test, by operating the test vehicle through one 
UDDS, a 2 minute idle, two NYCCs, another 2 minute idle, another UDDS, 
then another 2 minute idle (see Sec. 86.115-78 and Appendix I of this 
part). Fifteen seconds after the engine starts, place the transmission 
in gear. Twenty seconds after the engine starts, begin the initial 
vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule. The transmission shall be 
operated according to the specifications of Sec. 86.128-79 during the 
driving cycles. A cooling fan(s) shall be positioned as described in 
Sec. 86.135-94(b).
    (d) Canister purging; non-integrated systems. Within one hour of 
completion of canister loading to breakthrough, the fuel tank(s) shall 
be further filled to 95 percent of nominal tank capacity determined to 
the nearest one-tenth of a U.S. gallon (0.38 liter) with the fuel 
specified in Sec. 86.113-94. During this fueling operation, the 
refueling emissions canister(s) shall be disconnected. Following 
completion of refueling, the refueling emissions canister(s) shall be 
reconnected. Special care shall be taken during this step to avoid 
damage to the components and the integrity of the fuel system. Vehicle 
driving to purge the refueling canister(s) shall be performed using 
either the chassis dynamometer procedure or the test track procedure, 
as described in paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of this section. The 
Administrator may choose to shorten the vehicle driving for a partial 
refueling test as described in paragraph (d)(3) of this section. For 
vehicles equipped with dual fuel tanks, the required volume of fuel 
shall be driven out of one tank, the second tank shall be selected as 
the fuel source, and the required volume of fuel shall be driven out of 
the second tank.
    (1) Chassis dynamometer procedure. (i) Vehicle driving on a chassis 
dynamometer shall consist of repeated drives with the UDDS until 85 
percent of fuel tank capacity has been consumed. Driving in testing 
performed by manufacturers may be terminated before 85 percent of the 
fuel tank capacity has been consumed, provided that driving is not 
terminated partway through a UDDS cycle. Driving in testing performed 
by the Administrator may be terminated after the same number of UDDS 
cycles as driven in the manufacturer's certification testing.
    (ii) Except with the advance approval of the Administrator, the 
number of UDDSs required to consume 85 percent of tank fuel capacity 
(total capacity of both tanks when the vehicle is equipped with dual 
fuel tanks) shall be determined from the fuel economy on the UDDS 
applicable to the test vehicle and from the number of gallons to the 
nearest 0.1 gallon (0.38 liter) that constitutes 85 percent of tank 
volume. If this ``fuel consumed point'' occurs partway through a UDDS 
cycle, the cycle shall be completed in its entirety.
    (iii) For vehicles equipped with dual fuel tanks, fuel switching 
from the first tank to the second tank shall occur at the 10 percent 
volume of the first tank regardless of the point in the UDDS cycle at 
which this occurs.
    (iv) If necessary to accommodate work schedules, the engine may be 
turned off and the vehicle parked on the dynamometer. The vehicle may 
be parked off of the dynamometer to facilitate maintenance or repairs 
if required.
    (v) During the driving on the dynamometer, a cooling fan(s) shall 
be positioned as described in Sec. 86.135-94(b).
    (2) Test track procedure. (i) Vehicle driving on a test track shall 
consist of repeated drives with the UDDS until 85 percent of fuel tank 
capacity has been consumed. Driving performed by manufacturers may be 
terminated before 85 percent of the fuel tank capacity has been 
consumed, provided that driving is not terminated partway through a 
UDDS cycle. Driving performed by the Administrator may be terminated 
after the same number of UDDS cycles as driven in the manufacturer's 
certification testing.
    (ii) If the distance from the emission laboratory to the test track 
is less than 5 miles (8.05 km) the vehicle may be driven to the test 
track at a speed not to exceed 25 mph. If the distance is greater than 
5 miles (8.05 km) the vehicle shall be moved to the test track with the 
engine off.
    (iii) Except with the advance approval of the Administrator, the 
number of UDDSs required to consume 85 percent of tank fuel capacity 
(total capacity of both tanks when the vehicle is equipped with dual 
fuel tanks) shall be determined from the fuel economy on the UDDS 
applicable to the test vehicle and from the number of gallons to the 
nearest 0.1 gallon (0.38 liter) that constitutes 85 percent of tank 
volume. If this ``fuel consumed point'' occurs partway through a UDDS 
cycle, the cycle shall be completed in its entirety.
    (iv) The vehicle shall be driven at a speed not to exceed 25 mph 
from the test track to the laboratory provided the distance from the 
test track to the laboratory does not exceed 5 miles (8.05 km). If the 
distance from the test track to the emission laboratory is greater than 
5 miles (8.05 km) the vehicle shall be moved from the test track with 
the engine off.
    (v) For vehicles equipped with dual fuel tanks, fuel switching from 
the first tank to the second tank shall occur at the 10 percent volume 
of the first tank regardless of the point in the UDDS cycle at which 
this occurs.
    (vi) If necessary to accommodate work schedules, the engine may be 
turned off and the vehicle parked on the test track. The vehicle may be 
parked off of the test track to facilitate maintenance or repairs if 
required. If the vehicle is moved from the test track, it shall be 
returned to the track with the engine off when mileage accumulation is 
to be resumed.
    (3) Drive schedule for partial refueling test. The Administrator 
may conduct a partial refueling test involving a shortening of the 
drive procedures described in paragraphs (d) (1) and (2) of this 
section and a modified soak and refueling procedure as described in 
paragraph (e) of this section and Sec. 86.154-98(e)(7)(i). The drive 
shall be performed as described in paragraph (d) (1) or (2) of this 
section except that the drive shall be terminated when at least 10 
percent but no more than 85 percent of the fuel tank nominal capacity 
has been consumed and not partway through a UDDS cycle. The amount of 
fuel consumed in the drive shall be determined by multiplying the 
number of UDDSs driven by the mileage accumulated per UDDS and dividing 
by the fuel economy for the UDDS applicable to the test vehicle.
    (e) Vehicle cool down--(1) Partial refueling test. If the 
Administrator is conducting the non-integrated system partial refueling 
test, after the driving procedure specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 
section, the vehicle shall be parked (without starting the engine) and 
soaked at 803  deg.F (271.7  deg.C) for a 
minimum of 1 hour and a maximum of 6 hours.
    (2) For all other refueling emission tests. Within 10 minutes of 
completion of refueling emissions canister stabilization (see paragraph 
(c) or (d) of this section), the refueling emissions canister(s) shall 
be disconnected. Within 60 minutes of completion of refueling emissions 
canister stabilization (see paragraph (c) or (d) of this section), the 
vehicle fuel tank(s) shall be drained, the fuel tank(s) fueled to 10 
percent of nominal tank capacity determined to the nearest one-tenth of 
a U.S. gallon (0.38 liter) with the specified fuel, and the vehicle 
parked (without starting the engine) and soaked at 803 
deg.F (271.7  deg.C) for a minimum of 6 hours and a maximum 
of 24 hours.
    10. A new Sec. 86.154-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec. 86.154-98  Measurement procedure; refueling test.

    (a) The refueling test measurement procedure described in this 
section immediately follows the vehicle and canister preconditioning 
described in Sec. 86.153-98.
    (b) The refueling emission enclosure shall be purged for several 
minutes immediately prior to the test. Warning: If at any time the 
concentration of hydrocarbons, of methanol, or of methanol and 
hydrocarbons exceeds 15,000 ppm C, the enclosure should be immediately 
purged. This concentration provides a 4:1 safety factor against the 
lean flammability limit.
    (c)(1) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon analyzer, and additional 
analyzer, if needed, shall be zeroed and spanned immediately prior to 
the test.
    (2) For methanol-fueled vehicles only, impingers charged with known 
volumes of pure deionized water shall be placed in the methanol 
sampling system.
    (d) If not already on, the enclosure mixing fan and the spilled 
fuel mixing blower shall be turned on at this time.
    (e) The refueling emission measurement portion of the refueling 
test shall be performed as follows:
    (1) The line from the fuel tank(s) to the refueling emissions 
canister(s) shall be connected.
    (2) The test vehicle, with the engine shut off, shall be moved into 
the enclosure. The test vehicle windows and luggage compartment shall 
be opened if not already open.
    (3) An electrical ground shall be attached to the vehicle. The 
enclosure door shall be closed and sealed. The FID (or HFID) trace 
shall be allowed to stabilize.
    (4) The dispensed fuel temperature recording system shall be 
started.
    (5)(i) Within 10 minutes of closing and sealing the doors, analyze 
enclosure atmosphere for hydrocarbons and record. This is the initial 
(time=0 minutes) hydrocarbon concentration, CHCi, required in 
Sec. 86.143-96.
    (ii) For methanol-fueled vehicles only, measure the initial 
concentration of methanol as described in Sec. 86.133-96(i)(6).
    (6) Within one minute of obtaining the initial FID (or HFID) 
reading, and methanol reading if applicable, the fuel nozzle shall be 
inserted into the filler neck of the test vehicle, to its maximum 
penetration, and the refueling operation shall be started. The plane of 
the nozzle's handle shall be approximately perpendicular to the floor 
of the laboratory. The fuel shall be dispensed at a temperature of 
671.5  deg.F (19.40.8  deg.C) and at a 
dispensing rate of 9.80.3 gal/min (37.11.1 
liter/min). In testing conducted by the Administrator, a lower 
dispensing rate (no lower than 4.0 gal/min (15.1 liter/min)) may be 
used.
    (7)(i) Partial refueling test. If the Administrator conducts the 
non-integrated system partial refueling test, the fuel flow shall 
continue until the amount of fuel pumped is equal to the fuel consumed 
during the driving, as determined in accordance with Sec. 86.153-
98(d)(3). The final volume of fuel dispensed must be within one-tenth 
of a U.S. gallon (0.38 liter) of the targeted amount. If automatic 
nozzle shut-off occurs prior to this point, the nozzle shall be 
reactivated within 15 seconds and fuel dispensing continued as needed. 
A minimum of 3 seconds shall elapse between any automatic shutoff and 
subsequent resumption of dispensing.
    (ii) For all other refueling tests. The fuel flow shall continue 
until the refueling nozzle automatic shut-off is activated. The amount 
of fuel dispensed must be at least 85 percent of nominal fuel tank 
volume, determined to the nearest one-tenth of a U.S. gallon (0.38 
liter). If automatic nozzle shut-off occurs prior to this point, the 
nozzle shall be reactivated within 15 seconds and fuel dispensing 
continued as needed. A minimum of 3 seconds shall elapse between any 
automatic shutoff and subsequent resumption of dispensing. Dispensing 
may not be manually terminated, unless the test vehicle has already 
clearly failed the test.
    (8)(i) The final reading of the evaporative enclosure FID analyzer 
shall be taken 605 seconds following the final shut-off of 
fuel flow. This is the final hydrocarbon concentration, CHCf, 
required in Sec. 86.143-96. The elapsed time, in minutes, between the 
initial and final FID (or HFID) readings shall be recorded.
    (ii) For methanol-fueled vehicles only. Measure the final 
concentration of methanol as described in Sec. 86.133-96(m)(2).
    (9) For vehicles equipped with more than one fuel tank, the 
procedures described in this section shall be performed for each fuel 
tank.
    11. A new Sec. 86.155-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec. 86.155-98  Records required; refueling test.

    The following information shall be recorded with respect to each 
test:
    (a) Test number.
    (b) System or device tested (brief description).
    (c) Date and time of day.
    (d) Instrument operated.
    (e) Operator.
    (f) Vehicle: ID number, manufacturer, model year, engine family, 
evaporative/refueling emission family, refueling emission control 
system, refueling emissions canister continuous drive purge miles and 
number of UDDSs driven for non-integrated systems, fuel system 
(including fuel tank(s) capacity and location), basic engine 
description (including displacement, number of cylinders, turbocharger 
(if used), and catalyst usage), engine code, and odometer reading.
    (g) All pertinent instrument information including nozzle and fuel 
delivery system description. As an alternative, a reference to a 
vehicle test cell number may be used, with advance approval of the 
Administrator, provided test cell calibration records show the 
pertinent instrument information.
    (h) Recorder charts: Identify zero, span, and enclosure gas sample 
traces.
    (i) Enclosure barometric pressure and ambient temperature: a 
central laboratory barometer may be used, provided that individual test 
cell barometric pressures are shown to be within 0.1 
percent of the barometric pressure at the central barometer location.
    (j) Temperatures: Soak area; dispensed fuel, initial and final.
    (k) Fuel dispensing rate(s).
    (l) Dispensed fuel volume.
    (m) For methanol-fueled vehicles:
    (1) Volume of sample passed through the methanol sampling system 
and the volume of deionized water in each impinger.
    (2) The methanol concentration in the reference sample and the peak 
area from the GC analysis of the reference sample.
    (3) The peak area of the GC analyses of the test samples 
(methanol).
    (n) All additional information necessary for the calculations 
specified in Sec. 86.156-98.
    12. A new Sec. 86.156-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec. 86.156-98  Calculations; refueling test.

    (a) The calculation of the net hydrocarbon mass change and methanol 
mass change (if applicable) in the enclosure is used to determine 
refueling mass emissions. The mass is calculated from initial and final 
hydrocarbon and methanol (if applicable) concentrations in ppm carbon, 
initial and final enclosure ambient temperatures, initial and final 
barometric pressures, and net enclosure volume using the equations of 
Sec. 86.143-96. For vehicles with multiple tanks, the results for each 
tank shall be calculated and then summed to determine overall refueling 
emissions.
    (b) The final results for comparison with the refueling control 
emission standard shall be computed by dividing the total refueling 
mass emissions by the total gallons of fuel dispensed in the refueling 
test (see Sec. 86.154-98(e)(7)(ii)).
    (c) The results of all emission tests shall be rounded, in 
accordance with ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in 
Sec. 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) to the number of decimal places 
contained in the applicable emission standard expressed to one 
additional significant figure.

Subpart G--[Amended]

    1. A new Sec. 86.602-98 is added to subpart G to read as follows:


Sec. 86.602-98  Definitions.

    Section 86.602-98 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.602-84. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.602-84 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.602-98, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.602-84.'' Where a corresponding paragraph of 
Sec. 86.602-84 is not applicable, this is indicated by the statement 
``[Reserved].''.
    (a) through (b)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.602-84.
    (b)(3)(i) Configuration, when used for LDV exhaust emissions 
testing, means a subclassification of an engine-system combination on 
the basis of engine code, inertia weight class, transmission type and 
gear ratios, axle ratio, and other parameters which may be designated 
by the Administrator.
    (ii) Configuration, when used for LDV refueling emissions testing, 
means a subclassification of an evaporative/refueling emission family 
on the basis of evaporative and refueling control system and other 
parameters which may be designated by the Administrator.
    (4) Test sample means the collection of vehicles of the same 
configuration which have been drawn from the population of vehicles of 
that configuration and which will receive emission testing.
    (b)(5) through (b)(8) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.602-84.
    2. A new Sec. 86.603-98 is added to subpart G to read as follows:


Sec. 86.603-98  Test orders.

    Section 86.603-98 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.603-88. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.603-88 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.603-98, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.603-88.'' Where a corresponding paragraph of 
Sec. 86.603-88 is not applicable, this is indicated by the statement 
``[Reserved].''.
    (a) through (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.603-88.
    (d) A manufacturer may indicate preferred assembly plants for the 
various engine families and evaporative/refueling families produced by 
the manufacturer for selection of vehicles in response to a test order. 
This shall be accomplished by submitting a list of engine families with 
the associated evaporative/refueling families, and the corresponding 
assembly plants from which the manufacturer desires to have vehicles 
selected, to the Administrator. In order that a manufacturer's 
preferred location for issuance of a test order for a configuration of 
a particular engine family and/or evaporative/refueling family be 
considered, the list must be submitted prior to issuance of the test 
order. Notwithstanding the fact that a manufacturer has submitted the 
above list, the Administrator may, upon making the determination that 
evidence exists indicating noncompliance at other than the 
manufacturer's preferred plant, order selection at such other plant 
where vehicles of the configuration specified in the test order are 
assembled.
    (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.603-88.
    3. A new Sec. 86.605-98 is added to subpart G read as follows:


Sec. 86.605-98  Maintenance of records; submittal of information.

    Section 86.605-98 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.605-88. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.605-88 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.605-98, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.605-88.'' Where a corresponding paragraph of 
Sec. 86.605-88 is not applicable, this is indicated by the statement 
``[Reserved].''.
    (a) through (a)(1)(i)(D) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.605-
88.
    (E) Refueling Enclosure (Refueling SHED).
    (1) Total internal volume.
    (2) Capacity of mixing blower.
    (3) Location of refueling access ports.
    (4) Enclosure barometric pressure and ambient temperature.
    (5) Soak area temperature records.
    (F) Fuel Dispenser for Refueling.
    (1) Fuel dispensing rate.
    (2) Manufacturer and model of fuel nozzle.
    (3) Dispensed fuel temperature.
    (4) Dispensed fuel volume.
    (a)(1)(ii) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.605-88.
    4. A new Sec. 86.608-98 is added to subpart G to read as follows:


Sec. 86.608-98  Test procedures.

    (a) The prescribed test procedures are the Federal Test Procedure, 
including the refueling test procedure or the fuel spitback test, 
whichever is applicable, as described in subpart B of this part, the 
cold temperature CO test procedure as described in subpart C of this 
part, and the Certification Short Test as described in subpart O of 
this part. For purposes of Selective Enforcement Audit Testing, the 
manufacturer shall not be required to perform any of the test 
procedures in subpart B of this part relating to evaporative emission 
testing, other than refueling emissions testing, except as specified in 
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
    (1) The Administrator may omit any of the testing procedures 
described in paragraph (a) of this section and may select and prescribe 
the sequence of any CSTs. Further, the Administrator may, on the basis 
of a written application by a manufacturer, approve optional test 
procedures other than those in subparts B, C, and O of this part for 
any motor vehicle which is not susceptible to satisfactory testing 
using the procedures in subparts B, C, and O of this part.
    (2) The following exceptions to the test procedures in subpart B of 
this part are applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing:
    (i) For mileage accumulation, the manufacturer may use test fuel 
meeting the specifications for mileage and service accumulation fuels 
of Sec. 86.113-94. Otherwise, the manufacturer may use fuels other than 
those specified in this section only with the advance approval of the 
Administrator.
    (ii) The manufacturer may measure the temperature of the test fuel 
at other than the approximate mid-volume of the fuel tank, as specified 
in Sec. 86.131-96(a) with only a single temperature sensor, and may 
drain the test fuel from other than the lowest point of the tank, as 
specified in Sec. 86.131-96(b) and Sec. 86.152-98(a), provided an 
equivalent method is used. Equivalency documentation shall be 
maintained by the manufacturer and shall be made available upon 
request.
    (iii) The manufacturer may perform additional preconditioning on 
SEA test vehicles other than the preconditioning specified in 
Sec. 86.132-98 only if the additional preconditioning had been 
performed on certification test vehicles of the same configuration.
    (iv) If the Administrator elects to use the evaporative/refueling 
canister preconditioning procedure described in Sec. 86.132-96(k), the 
manufacturer shall perform the heat build procedure 11 to 34 hours 
following vehicle preconditioning rather than according to the time 
period specified in Sec. 86.133-90(a). All references to an evaporative 
emission enclosure and analyzing for HC during the heat build can be 
ignored.
    (v) The manufacturer may substitute slave tires for the drive wheel 
tires on the vehicle as specified in paragraph Sec. 86.135-90(e): 
Provided, that the slave tires are the same size.
    (vi) If the Administrator elects to use the evaporative/refueling 
canister preconditioning procedure described in Sec. 86.132-96(k), the 
cold start exhaust emission test described in Sec. 86.137-96 shall 
follow the heat build procedure described in Sec. 86.133-90 by not more 
than one hour.
    (vii) In performing exhaust sample analysis under Sec. 86.140-94.
    (A) When testing diesel vehicles, or methanol-fueled Otto-cycle 
vehicles, the manufacturer shall allow a minimum of 20 minutes warm-up 
for the HC analyzer, and for diesel vehicles, a minimum of two hours 
warm-up for the CO, CO2, and NOX analyzers. (Power is 
normally left on infrared and chemiluminescent analyzers. When not in 
use, the chopper motors of the infrared analyzers are turned off and 
the phototube high voltage supply to the chemiluminescent analyzers is 
placed in the standby position.)
    (B) The manufacturer shall exercise care to prevent moisture from 
condensing in the sample collection bags.
    (viii) The manufacturer need not comply with Sec. 86.142-90 or 
Sec. 86.155-98, since the records required therein are provided under 
other provisions of this subpart G.
    (ix) If a manufacturer elects to perform the background 
determination procedure described in paragraph (a)(2)(xi) of this 
section in addition to performing the refueling emissions test 
procedure, the elapsed time between the initial and final FID readings 
shall be recorded, rounded to the nearest second rather than minute as 
described in Sec. 86.154-98(e)(8). In addition, the vehicle soak 
described in Sec. 86.153-98(e) shall be conducted with the windows and 
luggage compartment of the vehicle open.
    (x) The Administrator may elect to perform a seal test, described 
in Sec. 86.153-98(b), of both integrated and non-integrated systems 
instead of the full refueling test. When testing non-integrated 
systems, an manufacturer may conduct the canister purge described in 
Sec. 86.153-98(b)(1) directly following the preconditioning drive 
described in Sec. 86.132-96(e) or directly following the exhaust 
emissions test described in Sec. 86.137-96.
    (xi) In addition to the refueling test, a manufacturer may elect to 
perform the following background emissions determination immediately 
prior to the refueling measurement procedure described in Sec. 86.154-
98, provided EPA is notified of this decision prior to the start of 
testing in an SEA.
    (A) The SHED shall be purged for several minutes immediately prior 
to the background determination. Warning: If at any time the 
concentration of hydrocarbons, of methanol, or of methanol and 
hydrocarbons exceeds 15,000 ppm C, the enclosure should be immediately 
purged. This concentration provides a 4:1 safety factor against the 
lean flammability limit.
    (B) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon analyzer shall be zeroed and 
spanned immediately prior to the background determination. If not 
already on, the enclosure mixing fan and the spilled fuel mixing blower 
shall be turned on at this time.
    (C) Place the vehicle in the SHED. The ambient temperature level 
encountered by the test vehicle during the entire background emissions 
determination shall be 80  deg.F 3  deg.F. The windows and 
luggage compartment of the vehicle must be open and the gas cap must be 
secured.
    (D) Seal the SHED. Immediately analyze the ambient concentration of 
hydrocarbons in the SHED and record. This is the initial background 
hydrocarbon concentration.
    (E) Soak the vehicle for ten minutes 1 minute.
    (F) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon analyzer shall be zeroed and 
spanned immediately prior to the end of the background determination.
    (G) Analyze the ambient concentration of hydrocarbons in the SHED 
and record. This is the final background hydrocarbon concentration.
    (H) The total hydrocarbon mass emitted during the background 
determination is calculated according to Sec. 86.156-98. To obtain a 
per-minute background emission rate, divide the total hydrocarbon mass 
calculated in this paragraph by the duration of the soak, rounded to 
the nearest second, described in paragraph (a)(2)(xi)(G) of this 
section.
    (I) The background emission rate is multiplied by the duration of 
the refueling measurement obtained in paragraph (a)(2)(ix) of this 
section. This number is then subtracted from the total grams of 
emissions calculated for the refueling test according to Sec. 86.156-
98(a) to obtain the adjusted value for total refueling emissions. The 
final results for comparison with the refueling emission standard shall 
be computed by dividing the adjusted value for total refueling mass 
emissions by the total gallons of fuel dispensed in the refueling test 
as described in Sec. 86.156-98(b).
    (xii) In addition to the requirements of subpart B of this part, 
the manufacturer shall prepare gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled 
vehicles as follows prior to emission testing:
    (A) The manufacturer shall inspect the fuel system to ensure the 
absence of any leaks of liquid or vapor to the atmosphere by applying a 
pressure of 14.50.5 inches of water (3.60.1 
Kpa) to the fuel system allowing the pressure to stabilize and 
isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Following isolation 
of the fuel system, pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches of 
water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If required, the manufacturer shall 
perform corrective action in accordance with paragraph (d) of this 
section and report this action in accordance with Sec. 86.609-98(d).
    (B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer shall 
exercise care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling 
emission control systems.
    (C) The manufacturer may not modify the test vehicle's evaporative 
or refueling emission control systems by component addition, deletion, 
or substitution, except to comply with paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this 
section if approved in advance by the Administrator.
    (3) The following exceptions to the test procedures in subpart C of 
this part are applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing:
    (i) The manufacturer may measure the temperature of the test fuel 
at other than the approximate mid-volume of the fuel tank, as specified 
in Sec. 86.131-90(a), and may drain the test fuel from other than the 
lowest point of the fuel tank as specified in Sec. 86.131-90(b), 
provided an equivalent method is used. Equivalency documentation shall 
be maintained by the manufacturer and shall be made available to the 
Administrator upon request.
    (ii) In performing exhaust sample analysis under Sec. 86.140-94, 
the manufacturer shall exercise care to prevent moisture from 
condensing in the sample collection bags.
    (iii) The manufacturer need not comply with Sec. 86.142-90 since 
the records required therein are provided under other provisions of 
this subpart G.
    (iv) In addition to the requirements of subpart C of this part, the 
manufacturer shall prepare gasoline-fueled vehicles as follows prior to 
exhaust emission testing:
    (A) The manufacturer shall inspect the fuel system to ensure the 
absence of any leaks of liquid or vapor to the atmosphere by applying a 
pressure of 14.50.5 inches of water (3.60.1 
Kpa) to the fuel system allowing the pressure to stabilize and 
isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Following isolation 
of the fuel system, pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches of 
water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If required, the manufacturer shall 
perform corrective action in accordance with paragraph (d) of this 
section and report this action in accordance with Sec. 86.609-98(d).
    (B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer shall 
exercise care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling 
emission control system.
    (C) The manufacturer shall not modify the test vehicle's 
evaporative or refueling emission control system by component addition, 
deletion, or substitution, except if approved in advance by the 
Administrator, to comply with paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section.
    (4) The exceptions to the test procedures in subpart O of this part 
applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing are listed in 
paragraphs (a)(4) (i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) The manufacturer need not comply with Sec. 86.1442, since the 
records required therein are provided under provisions of this subpart 
G.
    (ii) In addition to the requirements of subpart O of this part, the 
manufacturer must prepare vehicles as in paragraphs (a)(4)(ii) (A) 
through (C) of this section prior to exhaust emission testing.
    (A) The manufacturer must inspect the fuel system to insure the 
absence of any leaks of liquid or vapor to the atmosphere by applying a 
pressure of 14.50.5 inches of water (3.60.1 
Kpa) to the fuel system, allowing the pressure to stabilize, and 
isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Pressure must not 
drop more than 2.0 inches of water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If 
required, the manufacturer performs corrective action in accordance 
with paragraph (d) of this section and must report this action in 
accordance with Sec. 86.609-98(d).
    (B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer must 
exercise care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling 
emission control system.
    (C) The manufacturer may not modify the test vehicle's evaporative 
or refueling emission control system by component addition, deletion, 
or substitution.
    (b)(1) The manufacturer shall not adjust, repair, prepare, or 
modify the vehicles selected for testing and shall not perform any 
emission tests on vehicles selected for testing pursuant to the test 
order unless this adjustment repair, preparation, modification, and/or 
tests are documented in the manufacturer's vehicle assembly and 
inspection procedures and are actually performed or unless these 
adjustments and/or tests are required or permitted under this subpart 
or are approved in advance by the Administrator.
    (2) For 1981 and later model years the Administrator may adjust or 
cause to be adjusted any engine or vehicle parameter which the 
Administrator has determined to be subject to adjustment for new 
vehicle compliance testing (e.g., for certification or Selective 
Enforcement Audit testing) in accordance with Sec. 86.081-22(c)(1), to 
any setting within the physically adjustable range of that parameter, 
as determined by the Administrator in accordance with Sec. 86.081-
22(e)(3)(ii), prior to the performance of any tests. However, if the 
idle speed parameter is one which the Administrator has determined to 
be subject to adjustment, the Administrator shall not adjust it to a 
setting which causes a lower engine idle speed than will be possible 
within the physically adjustable range of the idle speed parameter on 
the vehicle when it has accumulated 4,000 miles, all other parameters 
being adjusted identically for the purpose of comparison. The 
Administrator, in making or specifying such adjustments, will consider 
the effect of the deviation from the manufacturer's recommended setting 
on emissions performance characteristics as well as the likelihood that 
similar settings will occur on in-use light-duty vehicles or light-duty 
trucks. In determining likelihood, the Administrator will consider 
factors such as, but not limited to, the effect of the adjustment on 
vehicle performance characteristics and surveillance information from 
similar in-use vehicles.
    (c) Prior to performing emission testing pursuant to paragraph (a) 
of this section on an SEA test vehicle, the manufacturer may accumulate 
on each vehicle a number of miles equal to the greater of 4,000 miles, 
or the number of miles the manufacturer accumulated during 
certification on the emission-data vehicle corresponding to the 
configuration specified in the test order.
    (1) Mileage accumulation must be performed in any manner using good 
engineering judgment to obtain emission results representative of 
normal production vehicles. This mileage accumulation must be 
consistent with the new vehicle break-in instructions contained in the 
applicable vehicle owner's manual, if any.
    (2) The manufacturer shall accumulate mileage at a minimum rate of 
300 miles per vehicle during each 24-hour period, unless otherwise 
provided by the Administrator.
    (i) The first 24-hour period for mileage accumulation shall begin 
as soon as authorized vehicle checks, inspections and preparations are 
completed on each vehicle.
    (ii) The minimum mileage accumulation rate does not apply on 
weekends or holidays.
    (iii) If the manufacturer's mileage accumulation target is less 
than the minimum rate specified (300 miles per day), then the minimum 
daily accumulation rate shall be equal to the manufacturer's mileage 
accumulation target.
    (3) Mileage accumulation shall be completed on a sufficient number 
of test vehicles during consecutive 24-hour periods to assure that the 
number of vehicles tested per day fulfills the requirements of 
paragraph (g) of this section.
    (d) The manufacturer shall not perform any maintenance on test 
vehicles after selection for testing nor shall the Administrator allow 
deletion of any test vehicle from the test sequence, unless requested 
by the manufacturer and approved by the Administrator before any test 
vehicle maintenance of deletion.
    (e) The manufacturer will be allowed 24 hours to ship test vehicles 
from the assembly plant or storage facility to the test facility if the 
test facility is not located at the plant or storage facility or in 
close proximity to the plant or storage facility: Except, that the 
Administrator may approve more time based upon a request by the 
manufacturer accompanied by a satisfactory justification.
    (f) If a vehicle cannot complete the mileage accumulation or 
emission tests because of vehicle malfunction, the manufacturer may 
request the Administrator to authorize the repair of that vehicle or 
its deletion from the test sequence.
    (g) Whenever the manufacturer conducts testing pursuant to a test 
order issued under this subpart, the manufacturer shall notify the 
Administrator within one working day of receipt of the test order, 
which test facility will be used to comply with the test order and the 
number of available test cells at that facility. If no test cells are 
available at the desired facility, the manufacturer must provide 
alternate testing capability satisfactory to the Administrator.
    (1) The manufacturer shall perform a combination of tests pursuant 
to paragraph (a) of this section so that a minimum of four tests are 
performed per 24 hour period, including voided tests, for each 
available test cell.
    (2) The Administrator may approve a longer period based upon a 
request by a manufacturer accompanied by satisfactory justification.
    (h) The manufacturer shall perform test vehicle selection, 
preparation, mileage accumulation, shipping, and testing in such a 
manner as to assure that the audit is performed in an expeditious 
manner.
    (i) The manufacturer may retest any test vehicle after a fail 
decision has been reached in accordance with Sec. 86.610-98(d) based on 
the first test on each vehicle; except that the Administrator may 
approve retests at other times during the audit based upon a request by 
the manufacturer accompanied by a satisfactory justification. The 
manufacturer may test each vehicle a total of three times. The 
manufacturer shall test each vehicle the same number of times. The 
manufacturer may accumulate additional mileage on test vehicles before 
conducting retests, subject to the provisions of paragraph (c) of this 
section.
    5. A new Sec. 86.609-98 is added to subpart G to read as follows:


Sec. 86.609-98  Calculation and reporting of test results.

    (a) Initial test results are calculated following the test 
procedures specified in Sec. 86.608-98(a). Round the initial test 
results to the number of decimal places contained in the applicable 
emission standard expressed to one additional significant figure. 
Rounding is done in accordance with ASTM E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as 
referenced in Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii).
    (b) Final test results for each test vehicle are calculated by 
summing the initial test results derived in paragraph (a) of this 
section for each test vehicle, dividing by the number of times that 
specific test has been conducted on the vehicle, and rounding to the 
same number of decimal places contained in the applicable standard 
expressed to one additional significant figure. Rounding is done in 
accordance with ASTM E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in 
Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii).
    (c) Final deteriorated test results.
    (1) For each test vehicle. The final deteriorated test results for 
each light-duty vehicle tested for exhaust emissions and/or refueling 
emissions according to subpart B or subpart C of this part are 
calculated by multiplying or adding the final test results by the 
appropriate deterioration factor derived from the certification process 
for the engine or evaporative/refueling family and model year to which 
the selected configuration belongs and rounding to the same number of 
decimal places contained in the applicable emission standard. Rounding 
is done in accordance with ASTM E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as 
referenced in Sec. 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii). For the purpose of 
this paragraph, if a multiplicative deterioration factor as computed 
during the certification process is less than one, that deterioration 
factor shall be one. If an additive deterioration factor as computed 
during the certification process is less than zero, that deterioration 
factor will be zero.
    (2) Exceptions. There are no deterioration factors for light-duty 
vehicle emissions obtained during testing in accordance with subpart O 
of this part or with Sec. 86.146-96. Accordingly, for the CST and the 
fuel dispensing spitback test the term ``final deteriorated test 
results'' means the final test results derived in paragraph (b) of this 
section for each test vehicle, rounded to the same number of decimal 
places contained in the applicable emission standard. Rounding is done 
in accordance with ASTM E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in 
Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii).
    (d) Within five working days after completion of testing of all 
vehicles pursuant to a test order, the manufacturer shall submit to the 
Administrator a report which includes the following information:
    (1) The location and description of the manufacturer's emission 
test facilities which were utilized to conduct testing reported 
pursuant to this section.
    (2) The applicable standards against which the vehicles were 
tested.
    (3) Deterioration factors for the selected configuration.
    (4) A description of the vehicle selection method used.
    (5) For each test conducted.
    (i) Test vehicle description including:
    (A) Configuration, engine family, and refueling family 
identification.
    (B) Year, make, build date, and model of vehicle.
    (C) Vehicle Identification Number.
    (D) Miles accumulated on vehicle.
    (ii) Location where mileage accumulation was conducted and 
description of accumulation schedule.
    (iii) Test number, date initial test results, final results and 
final deteriorated test results for all valid and invalid exhaust 
emission tests, and the reason for invalidation.
    (iv) A complete description of any modification, repair, 
preparation, maintenance and/or testing which was performed on the test 
vehicle and:
    (A) Has not been reported pursuant to any other paragraph of this 
subpart; and
    (B) Will not be performed on all other production vehicles.
    (v) Carbon dioxide emission values for all valid and invalid 
exhaust emission tests.
    (vi) Where a vehicle was deleted from the test sequence by 
authorization of the Administrator, the reason for the deletion.
    (vii) Any other information the Administrator may request relevant 
to the determination as to whether the new motor vehicles being 
manufactured by the manufacturer do in fact conform with the 
regulations with respect to which the certificate of conformity was 
issued.
    (6) The following statement and endorsement:

    This report is submitted pursuant to sections 206 and 208 of the 
Clean Air Act. This Selective Enforcement Audit was conducted in 
complete conformance with all applicable regulations under 40 CFR 
part 86 and the conditions of the test order. No emission related 
change(s) to production processes or quality control procedures for 
the vehicle configuration tested have been made between receipt of 
this test order and conclusion of the audit. All data and 
information reported herein is, to the best of
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Company Name)
knowledge, true and accurate. I am aware of the penalties associated 
with violations of the Clean Air Act and the regulations thereunder.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Authorized Company Representative)

    6. A new Sec. 86.610-98 is added to subpart G to read as follows:


Sec. 86.610-98  Compliance with acceptable quality level and passing 
and failing criteria for Selective Enforcement Audits.

    (a) The prescribed acceptable quality level is 40 percent.
    (b) A failed vehicle is one whose final deteriorated test results 
pursuant to Sec. 86.609-98(c) exceed at least one of the applicable 
emission standards associated with the test procedures pursuant to 
Sec. 86.608-98(a).
    (c)(1) Pass/fail criteria. The manufacturer shall test vehicles 
comprising the test sample until a pass decision is reached for all of 
the pollutants associated with all of the test procedures pursuant to 
Sec. 86.608-98(a) or a fail decision is reached for one of these 
pollutants. A pass decision is reached when the cumulative number of 
failed vehicles, as defined in paragraph (b) of this section, for each 
pollutant is less than or equal to the fail decision number appropriate 
to the cumulative number of vehicles tested. A fail decision is reached 
when the cumulative number of failed vehicles for one pollutant is 
greater than or equal to the fail decision number appropriate to the 
cumulative number of vehicles tested. The pass and fail decision 
numbers associated with the cumulative number of vehicles tested are 
determined by use of the tables in appendix XI of this part appropriate 
for the annual projected sales as made by the manufacturer in its 
report submitted under Sec. 600.207-80(a)(2) of this chapter 
(Automobile Fuel Economy Regulations). In the tables in appendix XI of 
this part, sampling plan ``stage'' refers to the cumulative number of 
vehicles tested. Once a pass decision has been made for a particular 
pollutant associated with a particular test procedure pursuant to 
Sec. 86.608-98(a), the number of vehicles whose final deteriorated test 
results exceed the emission standard for that pollutant may not be 
considered any further for purposes of the audit.
    (2) CST criteria only. For CST testing pursuant to subpart O, a 
pass or fail decision is determined according to the pass/fail criteria 
described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, except that for each 
vehicle, the CST in its entirety is considered one pollutant.
    (d) Passing or failing of an SEA audit occurs when the decision is 
made on the last vehicle required to make a decision under paragraph 
(c) of this section.
    (e) The Administrator may terminate testing earlier than required 
in paragraph (c) of this section.

Subpart K--[Amended]

    1. A new Sec. 86.1002-2001 is added to subpart K to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1002-2001  Definitions.

    (a) The definitions in this section apply to this subpart.
    (b) As used in this subpart, all terms not defined in this section 
have the meaning given them in the Act.
    (1) Acceptable quality level (AQL) means the maximum percentage of 
failing engines or vehicles, that for purposes of sampling inspection, 
can be considered satisfactory as a process average.
    (2) Compliance level means an emission level determined during a 
Production Compliance Audit pursuant to subpart L of this part.
    (3) Configuration means a subclassification, if any, of a heavy-
duty engine family for which a separate projected sales figure is 
listed in the manufacturer's Application for Certification and which 
can be described on the basis of emission control system, governed 
speed, injector size, engine calibration and other parameters which may 
be designated by the Administrator, or for light-duty trucks a 
subclassification of a light-duty truck engine family/emission control 
system combination on the basis of engine code, inertia weight class, 
transmission type and gear ratios, axle ratio, and other parameters 
which may be designated by the Administrator and/or a subclassification 
of a light-duty truck evaporative/refueling emission family/emission 
control system.
    (4) Test sample means the collection of vehicles or engines of the 
same configuration which have been drawn from the population of 
vehicles or engines of that configuration and which will receive 
emission testing.
    (5) Inspection criteria means the pass and fail numbers associated 
with a particular sampling plan.
    (6) Test engine means an engine in a test sample.
    (7) Test vehicle means a vehicle in a test sample.
    2. A new Sec. 86.1003-2001 is added to subpart K to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1003-2001  Test orders.

    Section 86.1003-2001 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.1003-88. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.1003-88 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.1003-2001, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.1003-88.'' Where a corresponding paragraph of 
Sec. 86.1003-88 is not applicable, this is indicated by the statement 
``[Reserved].''.
    (a) through (c)(1)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.1003-
88.
    (c)(1)(iii) Heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers will be required to 
select a minimum of four vehicles per day unless an alternate selection 
procedure is approved pursuant to Sec. 86.1007-84(a) or unless total 
production of the specified configuration is less than four vehicles 
per day. If total production of the specified configuration is less 
than four vehicles per day, the manufacturer will select the actual 
number of vehicles produced per day.
    (2) The test order may include alternative configurations to be 
selected for testing in the event that engines or vehicles of the 
specified configuration are not available for testing because those 
engines or vehicles are not being manufactured during the specified 
time, or not being stored at the specified assembly plant or associated 
storage facilities.
    (3) If the specified configuration is not being manufactured at a 
rate of at least four vehicles per day, in the case of light-duty truck 
manufacturers, two heavy-duty engines or heavy-duty vehicles, in the 
case of heavy-duty vehicle and heavy-duty engine manufacturers 
specified in Sec. 86.1008-2001(g)(1), or one engine or heavy-duty 
vehicle per day, in the case of heavy-duty vehicle or engine 
manufacturers specified in Sec. 86.1008-2001(g)(2), over the expected 
duration of the audit, the Assistant Administrator or a designated 
representative may select engines or vehicles of an alternate 
configuration for testing.
    (4) In addition, the test order may include other directions or 
information essential to the administration of the required testing.
    (d) A manufacturer may submit a list of engine families and, if 
applicable, evaporative/refueling families and the corresponding 
assembly plants or associated storage facilities from which the 
manufacturer prefers to have engines or vehicles selected for testing 
in response to a test order. In order that a manufacturer's preferred 
location be considered for inclusion in a test order for a 
configuration of a particular engine family and/or evaporative/
refueling family, the list must be submitted prior to issuance of the 
test order. Notwithstanding the fact that a manufacturer has submitted 
the above list, the Administrator may, upon making the determination 
that evidence exists indicating noncompliance at other than the 
manufacturer's preferred plant, order testing at such other plant where 
vehicles of the configuration specified in the test order are 
assembled.
    (e) Upon receipt of a test order, a manufacturer shall proceed in 
accordance with the provisions of this subpart.
    (f)(1) During a given model year, the Administrator shall not issue 
to a manufacturer more Selective Enforcement Auditing (SEA) test orders 
than the annual limit determined by the following:
    (i) For manufacturers of heavy-duty engines or vehicles, either 
gasoline-fueled or diesel, the number determined by dividing the 
projected sales bound for the United States market for that year, as 
made by the manufacturer in its Application for Certification, by 
30,000 and rounded to the nearest whole number, unless the projected 
sales are less than 15,000, in which case the number is one;
    (f)(1)(ii) through (f)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.1003-88.
    3. A new Sec. 86.1008-2001 is added to subpart K to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1008-2001  Test procedures.

    (a)(1)(i) For heavy-duty engines, the prescribed test procedure is 
the Federal Test Procedure as described in subparts N, I, and P of this 
part. The Administrator, may on the basis of a written application by a 
manufacturer, approve optional test procedures other than those in 
subparts N, I, and P of this part for any heavy-duty vehicle which is 
not susceptible to satisfactory testing using the procedures in 
subparts N, I, and P of this part.
    (ii) For heavy-duty vehicles the prescribed test procedures are the 
Fuel Dispensing Spitback Test as described in Sec. 86.1246-96 (for HDVs 
with a GVW of less than 14,000 pounds (6,400 kilograms)); this test for 
fuel spitback is conducted as a stand alone test, thus all references 
to the test sequence described in figure M96-1 of subpart M of this 
part can be ignored. Further, the Administrator may, on the basis of a 
written application by a manufacturer, approve optional test procedures 
other than those in subpart M of this part for any heavy-duty vehicle 
which is not susceptible to satisfactory testing using the procedures 
in subpart M of this part.
    (2) For light-duty trucks, the prescribed test procedures are the 
Federal Test Procedure, including the refueling test procedure or the 
fuel spitback test, whichever is applicable, as described in subpart B 
of this part, the idle test procedure as described in subpart P of this 
part, the cold temperature CO test procedure as described in subpart C 
of this part, and the Certification Short Test as described in subpart 
O of this part. For purposes of Selective Enforcement Audit Testing, 
the manufacturer shall not be required to perform any of the test 
procedures in subpart B of this part relating to evaporative emission 
testing, other than refueling emissions testing, except as specified in 
paragraph (a)(3) of this section. The Administrator may select and 
prescribe the sequence of any CSTs. Further, the Administrator may, on 
the basis of a written application by a manufacturer, approve optional 
test procedures other than those in subparts B, C, P, and O of this 
part for any motor vehicle which is not susceptible to satisfactory 
testing using the procedures in subparts B, C, P, and O of this part.
    (3) When testing light-duty trucks, the following exceptions to the 
test procedures in subpart B of this part are applicable to Selective 
Enforcement Audit testing:
    (i) For mileage accumulation, the manufacturer may use test fuel 
meeting the specifications for mileage and service accumulation fuels 
of Sec. 86.113-94. Otherwise, the manufacturer may use fuels other than 
those specified in this section only with the advance approval of the 
Administrator.
    (ii) The manufacturer may measure the temperature of the test fuel 
at other than the approximate mid-volume of the fuel tank, as specified 
in Sec. 86.131-96(a) with only a single temperature sensor, and may 
drain the test fuel from other than the lowest point of the tank, as 
specified in Sec. 86.131-96(b) and Sec. 86.152-98(a), provided an 
equivalent method is used. Equivalency documentation shall be 
maintained by the manufacturer and shall be made available upon 
request.
    (iii) The manufacturer may perform additional preconditioning on 
SEA test vehicles other than the preconditioning specified in 
Sec. 86.132-96 only in the additional preconditioning had been 
performed on certification test vehicles of the same configuration.
    (iv) If the Administrator elects to use the evaporative/refueling 
canister preconditioning procedure described in Sec. 86.132-96(k), the 
manufacturer shall perform the heat build procedure 11 to 34 hours 
following vehicle preconditioning rather than according to the time 
period specified in Sec. 86.133-90(a). All references to an evaporative 
emission enclosure and analyzing for HC during the heat build can be 
ignored.
    (v) The manufacturer may substitute slave tires for the drive wheel 
tires on the vehicle as specified in paragraph Sec. 86.135-90(e): 
Provided, that the slave tires are the same size.
    (vi) If the Administrator elects to use the evaporative/refueling 
canister preconditioning procedure described in Sec. 86.132-96(k), the 
cold start exhaust emission test described in Sec. 86.137-96 shall 
follow the heat build procedure described in Sec. 86.133-90 by not more 
than one hour.
    (vii) In performing exhaust sample analysis under Sec. 86.140-94.
    (A) When testing diesel vehicles, or methanol-fueled Otto-cycle 
vehicles, the manufacturer shall allow a minimum of 20 minutes warm-up 
for the HC analyzer, and for diesel vehicles, a minimum of two hours 
warm-up for the CO, CO2, and NOx analyzers. (Power is 
normally left on infrared and chemiluminescent analyzers. When not in 
use, the chopper motors of the infrared analyzers are turned off and 
the phototube high voltage supply to the chemiluminescent analyzers is 
placed in the standby position.)
    (B) The manufacturer shall exercise care to prevent moisture from 
condensing in the sample collection bags.
    (viii) The manufacturer need not comply with Sec. 86.142-90 or 
Sec. 86.155-98, since the records required therein are provided under 
other provisions of this subpart K.
    (ix) If a manufacturer elects to perform the background 
determination procedure described in paragraph (a)(3)(xi) of this 
section in addition to performing the refueling emissions test 
procedure, the elapsed time between the initial and final FID readings 
shall be recorded, rounded to the nearest second rather than minute as 
described in Sec. 86.154-98(e)(8). In addition, the vehicle soak 
described in Sec. 86.153-98(e) shall be conducted with the windows and 
luggage compartment of the vehicle open.
    (x) The Administrator may elect to perform a seal test, described 
in Sec. 86.153-98(b), of both integrated and non-integrated systems 
instead of the full refueling test. When testing non-integrated 
systems, a manufacturer may conduct the canister purge described in 
Sec. 86.153-98(b)(1) directly following the preconditioning drive 
described in Sec. 86.132-96(e) or directly following the exhaust 
emissions test described in Sec. 86.137-96.
    (xi) In addition to the refueling test, a manufacturer may elect to 
perform the following background emissions determination immediately 
prior to the refueling measurement procedure described in Sec. 86.154-
98, provided EPA is notified of this decision prior to the start of 
testing in an SEA.
    (A) The SHED shall be purged for several minutes immediately prior 
to the background determination. Warning: If at any time the 
concentration of hydrocarbons, of methanol, or of methanol and 
hydrocarbons exceeds 15,000 ppm C, the enclosure should be immediately 
purged. This concentration provides a 4:1 safety factor against the 
lean flammability limit.
    (B) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon analyzer shall be zeroed and 
spanned immediately prior to the background determination. If not 
already on, the enclosure mixing fan and the spilled fuel mixing blower 
shall be turned on at this time.
    (C) Place the vehicle in the SHED. The ambient temperature level 
encountered by the test vehicle during the entire background emissions 
determination shall be 80  deg.F 3  deg.F. The windows and 
luggage compartment of the vehicle must be open and the gas cap must be 
secured.
    (D) Seal the SHED. Immediately analyze the ambient concentration of 
hydrocarbons in the SHED and record. This is the initial background 
hydrocarbon concentration.
    (E) Soak the vehicle for ten minutes 1 minute.
    (F) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon analyzer shall be zeroed and 
spanned immediately prior to the end of the background determination.
    (G) Analyze the ambient concentration of hydrocarbons in the SHED 
and record. This is the final background hydrocarbon concentration.
    (H) The total hydrocarbon mass emitted during the background 
determination is calculated according to Sec. 86.156-98. To obtain a 
per-minute background emission rate, divide the total hydrocarbon mass 
calculated in this paragraph by the duration of the soak, rounded to 
the nearest second, described in paragraph (a)(3)(xi)(G) of this 
section.
    (I) The background emission rate is multiplied by the duration of 
the refueling measurement obtained in paragraph (a)(3)(ix) of this 
section. This number is then subtracted from the total grams of 
emissions calculated for the refueling test according to Sec. 86.156-
98(a) to obtain the adjusted value for total refueling emissions. The 
final results for comparison with the refueling emission standard shall 
be computed by dividing the adjusted value for total refueling mass 
emissions by the total gallons of fuel dispensed in the refueling test 
as described in Sec. 86.156-98(b).
    (xii) In addition to the requirements of subpart B of this part, 
the manufacturer shall prepare gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled 
vehicles as follows prior to emission testing:
    (A) The manufacturer shall inspect the fuel system to ensure the 
absence of any leaks of liquid or vapor to the atmosphere by applying a 
pressure of 14.50.5 inches of water (3.60.1 
Kpa) to the fuel system allowing the pressure to stabilize and 
isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Following isolation 
of the fuel system, pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches of 
water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If required, the manufacturer shall 
perform corrective action in accordance with paragraph (d) of this 
section and report this action in accordance with Sec. 86.1009-2001(d).
    (B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer shall 
exercise care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling 
emission control systems.
    (C) The manufacturer may not modify the test vehicle's evaporative 
or refueling emission control systems by component addition, deletion, 
or substitution, except to comply with paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this 
section if approved in advance by the Administrator.
    (4) When testing light-duty trucks, the following exceptions to the 
test procedures in subpart C of this part are applicable to Selective 
Enforcement Audit testing:
    (i) The manufacturer may measure the temperature of the test fuel 
at other than the approximate mid-volume of the fuel tank, as specified 
in Sec. 86.131-90(a), and may drain the test fuel from other than the 
lowest point of the fuel tank as specified in Sec. 86.131-90(b), 
provided an equivalent method is used. Equivalency documentation shall 
be maintained by the manufacturer and shall be made available to the 
Administrator upon request.
    (ii) In performing exhaust sample analysis under Sec. 86.140-94, 
the manufacturer shall exercise care to prevent moisture from 
condensing in the sample collection bags.
    (iii) The manufacturer need not comply with Sec. 86.142-90 since 
the records required therein are provided under other provisions of 
this subpart K.
    (iv) In addition to the requirements of subpart C of this part, the 
manufacturer shall prepare gasoline-fueled vehicles as follows prior to 
exhaust emission testing:
    (A) The manufacturer shall inspect the fuel system to ensure the 
absence of any leaks of liquid or vapor to the atmosphere by applying a 
pressure of 14.50.5 inches of water (3.60.1 
Kpa) to the fuel system allowing the pressure to stabilize and 
isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Following isolation 
of the fuel system, pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches of 
water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If required, the manufacturer shall 
perform corrective action in accordance with paragraph (d) of this 
section and report this action in accordance with Sec. 86.1009-2001(d).
    (B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer shall 
exercise care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling 
emission control system.
    (C) The manufacturer shall not modify the test vehicle's 
evaporative or refueling emission control system by component addition, 
deletion, or substitution, except if approved in advance by the 
Administrator, to comply with paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section.
    (5) When testing light-duty trucks, the exceptions to the test 
procedures in subpart O of this part applicable to Selective 
Enforcement Audit testing are listed in paragraphs (a)(5) (i) and (ii) 
of this section.
    (i) The manufacturer need not comply with Sec. 86.1442, since the 
records required therein are provided under provisions of this subpart 
K.
    (ii) In addition to the requirements of subpart O of this part, the 
manufacturer must prepare vehicles as in paragraphs (a)(5)(ii) (A) 
through (C) of this section prior to exhaust emission testing.
    (A) The manufacturer must inspect the fuel system to insure the 
absence of any leaks of liquid or vapor to the atmosphere by applying a 
pressure of 14.50.5 inches of water (3.60.1 
Kpa) to the fuel system, allowing the pressure to stabilize, and 
isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Pressure must not 
drop more than 2.0 inches of water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If 
required, the manufacturer performs corrective action in accordance 
with this section and must report this action in accordance with 
Sec. 86.1009-2001.
    (B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer must 
exercise care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling 
emission control system.
    (C) The manufacturer may not modify the test vehicle's evaporative 
or refueling emission control system by component addition, deletion, 
or substitution.
    (b)(1) The manufacturer shall not adjust, repair, prepare, or 
modify the vehicles selected for testing and shall not perform any 
emission tests on vehicles selected for testing pursuant to the test 
order unless this adjustment repair, preparation, modification, and/or 
tests are documented in the manufacturer's vehicle assembly and 
inspection procedures and are actually performed or unless these 
adjustments and/or tests are required or permitted under this subpart 
or are approved in advance by the Administrator.
    (2) For 1984 and later model years the Administrator may adjust or 
cause to be adjusted any engine or vehicle parameter which the 
Administrator has determined to be subject to adjustment for 
certification, Selective Enforcement Audit testing, and Production 
Compliance Audit testing in accordance with Sec. 86.090-22(c)(1), to 
any setting within the physically adjustable range of that parameter, 
as determined by the Administrator in accordance with Sec. 86.090-
22(e)(3)(ii), prior to the performance of any tests. However, if the 
idle speed parameter is one which the Administrator has determined to 
be subject to adjustment, the Administrator shall not adjust it to a 
setting which causes a lower engine idle speed than will be possible 
within the physically adjustable range of the idle speed parameter if 
the manufacturer had accumulated 125 hours of service on the engine or 
4,000 miles on the vehicle under paragraph (c) of this section, all 
other parameters being identically adjusted for the purpose of 
comparison. The manufacturer may be requested to supply information to 
establish such an alternative minimum idle speed. The Administrator, in 
making or specifying such adjustments, will consider the effect of the 
deviation from the manufacturer's recommended setting on emissions 
performance characteristics as well as the likelihood that similar 
settings will occur on in-use heavy-duty engines or light-duty trucks. 
In determining likelihood, the Administrator will consider factors such 
as, but not limited to, the effect of the adjustment on engine or 
vehicle performance characteristics and surveillance information from 
similar in-use vehicles.
    (c) Prior to performing emission testing on an SEA test engine, the 
manufacturer may accumulate on each engine a number of hours of service 
equal to the greater of 125 hours or the number of hours the 
manufacturer accumulated during certification on the emission-data 
engine corresponding to the configuration specified in the test order. 
Prior to performing emission testing on an SEA test vehicle, the 
manufacturer may accumulate on each vehicle a number of miles equal to 
the greater of 4,000 miles, or the number of miles the manufacturer 
accumulated during certification on the emission-data vehicle 
corresponding to the configuration specified in the test order.
    (1) Service or mileage accumulation must be performed in a manner 
using good engineering judgment to obtain emission results 
representative of normal production vehicles. This service or mileage 
accumulation must be consistent with the new vehicle break-in 
instructions contained in the applicable vehicle owner's manual, if 
any.
    (2) The manufacturer shall accumulate service at a minimum rate of 
16 hours per engine or mileage at a minimum rate of 300 miles per 
vehicle during each 24-hour period, unless otherwise provided by the 
Administrator.
    (i) The first 24-hour period for service or mileage accumulation 
shall begin as soon as authorization checks, inspections and 
preparations are completed on each engine or vehicle.
    (ii) The minimum service or mileage accumulation rate does not 
apply on weekends or holidays.
    (iii) If the manufacturer's service or mileage accumulation target 
is less than the minimum rate specified (16 hours or 300 miles per 
day), then the minimum daily accumulation rate shall be equal to the 
manufacturer's service or mileage accumulation target.
    (3) Service or mileage accumulation shall be completed on a 
sufficient number of test engines or vehicles during consecutive 24-
hour periods to assure that the number of engines or vehicles tested 
per day fulfills the requirements of paragraph (g) of this section.
    (d) The manufacturer shall not perform any maintenance on test 
vehicles or engines after selection for testing, nor shall the 
Administrator allow deletion of any test vehicle or engine from the 
test sequence, unless requested by the manufacturer, and approved by 
the Administrator before any test vehicle or engine maintenance or 
deletion.
    (e) The manufacturer shall expeditiously ship test engines or 
vehicles from the point of selection to the test facility. If the test 
facility is not located at or in close proximity to the point of 
selection, the manufacturer shall assure that the test engines or 
vehicles arrive at the test facility within 24 hours of selection: 
Except, that the Administrator may approve more time based upon a 
request by the manufacturer accompanied by a satisfactory 
justification.
    (f) If an engine or vehicle cannot complete the service or mileage 
accumulation or emission test because of a malfunction, the 
manufacturer may request that the Administrator authorize the repair of 
that engine or vehicle or its deletion from the test sequence.
    (g) Whenever the manufacturer conducts testing pursuant to a test 
order issued under this subpart, the manufacturer shall notify the 
Administrator within one working day of receipt of the test order, 
which test facility will be used to comply with the test order and the 
number of available test cells at that facility. If no test cells are 
available at the desired facility, the manufacturer must provide 
alternate testing capability satisfactory to the Administrator.
    (1) Heavy-duty engine manufacturers with projected sales for the 
United States market for that year of 30,000 or greater shall complete 
emission testing at their facility on a minimum of two engines per 24-
hour period, including each voided test and each diesel engine smoke 
test.
    (2) Heavy-duty engine manufacturers with projected sales for the 
United States market for that year of less than 30,000 shall complete 
emission testing at their facility on a minimum of one engine per 24-
hour period, including each voided test and each diesel engine smoke 
test.
    (3) Light-duty truck and heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers shall 
perform a combination of tests pursuant to paragraph (a) of this 
section so that a minimum of four tests are performed per 24 hour 
period, including voided tests, for each available test cell.
    (4) The Administrator may approve a longer period based upon a 
request by a manufacturer accompanied by satisfactory justification.
    (h) The manufacturer shall perform test engine or vehicle 
selection, shipping, preparation, service or mileage accumulation, and 
testing in such a manner as to assure that the audit is performed in an 
expeditious manner.
    (i) The manufacturer may retest any test vehicle or engine after a 
fail decision has been reached in accordance with Sec. 86.1010-2001(d) 
based on the first test on each vehicle or engine; except that the 
Administrator may approve retests at other times during the audit based 
upon a request by the manufacturer accompanied by a satisfactory 
justification. The manufacturer may test each vehicle or engine a total 
of three times. The manufacturer shall test each vehicle or engine the 
same number of times. The manufacturer may accumulate additional 
service or mileage before conducting retests, subject to the provisions 
of paragraph (c) of this section.
    4. A new Sec. 86.1009-2001 is added to subpart K to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1009-2001  Calculation and reporting of test results.

    (a) Initial test results are calculated following the Federal Test 
Procedure specified in Sec. 86.1008-2001(a). Rounding is done in 
accordance with ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in 
Sec. 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii) to the number of decimal places 
contained in the applicable emission standard expressed to one 
additional significant figure.
    (b) Final test results are calculated by summing the initial test 
results derived in paragraph (a) of this section for each test vehicle 
or engine, dividing by the number of times that specific test has been 
conducted on the vehicle or engine, and rounding to the same number of 
decimal places contained in the applicable standard expressed to one 
additional significant figure. Rounding is done in accordance with ASTM 
E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in Sec. 86.094-
28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)).
    (c) Final deteriorated test results. (1) The final deteriorated 
test results for each light-duty truck, heavy-duty engine, or heavy-
duty vehicle tested according to subpart B, C, D, I, M, N, or P of this 
part are calculated by multiplying or adding the final test results by 
the appropriate deterioration factor derived from the certification 
process for the engine or evaporative/refueling family and model year 
to which the selected configuration belongs. For the purpose of this 
paragraph, if a multiplicative deterioration factor as computed during 
the certification process is less than one, that deterioration factor 
shall be one. If an additive deterioration factor as computed during 
the certification process is less than zero, that deterioration factor 
will be zero.
    (2) Exceptions. There are no deterioration factors for light-duty 
truck emissions obtained during testing in accordance with subpart O of 
this part or with Sec. 86.146-96. Accordingly, for the CST and the fuel 
dispensing spitback test the term ``final deteriorated test results'' 
means the final test results derived in paragraph (b) of this section 
for each test vehicle.
    (3) The final deteriorated test results obtained in paragraph (c) 
(1) and (2) of this section are rounded to the same number of decimal 
places contained in the applicable emission standard. Rounding is done 
in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in 
Sec. 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)).
    (d) Within five working days after completion of testing of all 
engines or vehicles pursuant to a test order, the manufacturer shall 
submit to the Administrator a report which includes the following 
information:
    (1) The location and description of the manufacturer's emission 
test facilities which were utilized to conduct testing reported 
pursuant to this section.
    (2) The applicable standards or compliance levels against which the 
engines or vehicles were tested.
    (3) Deterioration factors for the selected configuration.
    (4) A description of the engine or vehicle and any emission-related 
component selection method used.
    (5) For each test conducted.
    (i) Test engine or vehicle description including:
    (A) Configuration, engine family, and evaporative/refueling family 
identification.
    (B) Year, make, build date, and model of vehicle.
    (C) Vehicle Identification Number.
    (D) Miles accumulated on vehicle.
    (ii) Location where mileage accumulation was conducted and 
description of accumulation schedule.
    (iii) Test number, date initial test results, final results and 
final deteriorated test results for all valid and invalid exhaust 
emission tests, and the reason for invalidation, if applicable.
    (iv) A complete description of any modification, repair, 
preparation, maintenance and/or testing which was performed on the test 
engine or vehicle and has not been reported pursuant to any other 
paragraph of this subpart and will not be performed on all other 
production engines or vehicles.
    (v) Where an engine or vehicle was deleted from the test sequence 
by authorization of the Administrator, the reason for the deletion.
    (vi) For all valid and invalid exhaust emission tests, carbon 
dioxide emission values for LDTs and brake-specific fuel consumption 
values for HDEs.
    (vii) Any other information the Administrator may request relevant 
to the determination as to whether the new motor vehicles being 
manufactured by the manufacturer do in fact conform with the 
regulations with respect to which the certificate of conformity was 
issued.
    (6) The following statement and endorsement:

    This report is submitted pursuant to sections 206 and 208 of the 
Clean Air Act. This Selective Enforcement Audit was conducted in 
complete conformance with all applicable regulations under 40 CFR 
part 86 and the conditions of the test order. No emission related 
change(s) to production processes or quality control procedures for 
the engine or vehicle configuration tested have been made between 
receipt of this test order and conclusion of the audit. All data and 
information reported herein is, to the best of
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Company Name)
knowledge, true and accurate. I am aware of the penalties associated 
with violations of the Clean Air Act and the regulations thereunder.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Authorized Company Representative)

    5. A new Sec. 86.1010-2001 is added to subpart K to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1010-2001  Compliance with acceptable quality level and passing 
and failing criteria for Selective Enforcement Audits.

    (a) The prescribed acceptable quality level is 40 percent.
    (b) A failed vehicle or engine is one whose final deteriorated test 
results pursuant to Sec. 86.1009-2001(c) exceed at least one of the 
applicable emission standards associated with the test procedures 
pursuant to Sec. 86.1008-2001(a).
    (c)(1) Pass/fail criteria. The manufacturer shall test light-duty 
trucks, heavy-duty engines, or heavy-duty vehicles comprising the test 
sample until a pass decision is reached for all of the pollutants 
associated with all of the test procedures pursuant to Sec. 86.1008-
2001(a) or a fail decision is reached for one of these pollutants. A 
pass decision is reached when the cumulative number of failed vehicles 
or engines, as defined in paragraph (b) of this section, for each 
pollutant is less than or equal to the fail decision number appropriate 
to the cumulative number of vehicles tested. A fail decision is reached 
when the cumulative number of failed vehicles or engines for one 
pollutant is greater than or equal to the fail decision number 
appropriate to the cumulative number of vehicles tested. The pass and 
fail decision numbers associated with the cumulative number of vehicles 
tested are determined by use of the tables in appendix X of this part 
appropriate to the projected sales as made by the heavy-duty engine or 
heavy-duty vehicle manufacturer in its Application for Certification, 
or as made by the light-duty truck manufacturer in its report submitted 
under Sec. 600.207-80(a)(2) of this chapter (Automobile Fuel Economy 
Regulations). In the tables in appendix X of this part, sampling plan 
``stage'' refers to the cumulative number of vehicles or engines 
tested. Once a pass decision has been made for a particular pollutant 
associated with a particular test procedure pursuant to Sec. 86.1008-
2001(a), the number of vehicles or engines whose final deteriorated 
test results exceed the emission standard for that pollutant may not be 
considered any further for purposes of the audit.
    (2) CST criteria only. For CST testing pursuant to subpart O, a 
pass or fail decision is determined according to the pass/fail criteria 
described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, except that for each 
vehicle, the CST in its entirety is considered one pollutant.
    (d) Passing or failing of an SEA audit occurs when the decision is 
made on the last vehicle or engine required to make a decision under 
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (e) The Administrator may terminate testing earlier than required 
in paragraph (c) of this section.

PART 88--CLEAN-FUEL VEHICLES

    1. The authority citation for part 88 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7410, 7418, 7581, 7582, 7583, 7584, 7586, 
7588, 7589, and 7601(a).

    2. A new Sec. 88.311-98 is added to subpart C, to read as follows:


Sec. 88.311-98  Emissions standards for Inherently Low-Emission 
Vehicles.

    Section 88.311-98 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 88.311-93. Where a paragraph in Sec. 88.311-93 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 88.311-98, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 88.311-93.''
    (a) heading through (a)(1)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 88.311-93.
    (iii) The vehicle must meet other special requirements applicable 
to conventional or clean-fuel vehicles and their fuels as described in 
any other regulations in 40 CFR chapter I, subchapter C, including 40 
CFR parts 86 and 88 (e.g., onboard refueling provisions).
    (b) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 88.311-93.

PART 600--FUEL ECONOMY OF MOTOR VEHICLES

    1. The authority citation for part 600 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
of 1975, Pub. L. 94-163, 89 Stat. 871, Title IV of the National 
Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-619, 92 Stat. 
3206, Section 371 of the North American Free Trade Agreement 
Implementation Act of 1993, Pub. L. 103-182, 107 Stat. 2057.

    2. Section 600.111-80 in subpart B is amended by revising paragraph 
(a) to read as follows:


Sec. 600.111-80  Test procedures.

    (a) The test procedures to be followed for generation of the city 
fuel economy data are those prescribed in Secs. 86.127-94 through 
86.138-78 of this chapter, as applicable. (The evaporative and 
refueling loss portions of the test procedure may be omitted unless 
specifically required by the Administrator.)
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-4752 Filed 4-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P