[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 160 (Friday, August 18, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43092-43099]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-20539]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 85

[FRL-5270-5]


Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirement--On-Board Diagnostic 
Checks

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This notice proposes revisions to the motor vehicle 
Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program Requirements. The proposed 
revisions include additions and modifications regarding requirements 
that I/M inspectors check the on-board diagnostic system as part of the 
overall inspection. This rule proposes the minimum requirements for 
inspecting vehicles equipped with on-board diagnostic systems as part 
of the inspections required in basic and enhanced Inspection/
Maintenance programs.

DATES: Written comments on this proposal must be received no later than 
September 18, 1995.
    The Agency will hold a public hearing on this proposed amendment if 
one is requested on or before September 5, 1995.
    If a public hearing is held, comments must be received within 30 
days after the hearing.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit written comments (in duplicate 
if possible) to Public Docket No. A-94-21. It is requested that a 
duplicate copy be submitted to Eugene J. Tierney at the address in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below. The docket is located at 
the Air Docket, Room M-1500 (6102), Waterside Mall, 401 M. Street S.W., 
Washington, DC 20460. The docket may be inspected between 8:00 a.m. and 
4:00 p.m. on weekdays. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying 
docket material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene J. Tierney, Office of Mobile 
Sources, National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth 
Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105. Telephone (313) 668-4456.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Contents
II. Summary of Proposal
III. Authority
IV. Background of Proposed Rule
V. Discussion of Major Issues
    A. Components of the OBD Inspection
    1. Test Procedure
    2. Anti-Tampering Provisions
    B. Standards for Failure of the OBD Inspection
    C. OBD Component of the Performance Standard
    D. Administrative Program Requirements
    1. Data Collection and Analysis
    E. State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions
    F. Implementation Deadlines
VI. Economic Costs and Benefits
VII. Public Participation
    A. Comments and the Public Docket
    B. Public Hearing
VIII. Administrative Requirements
    A. Administrative Designation
    B. Reporting and Record Keeping Requirement
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

II. Summary of Proposal

    Motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs are an 
integral part of the effort to reduce mobile source air pollution. 
Despite being subject to the most rigorous vehicle pollution control 
program in the world, vehicles in the United States still create a 
substantial amount of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, 
and other air pollutants. One reason for this is the fact that the 
number of vehicle miles traveled on U.S. roads has doubled in the last 
two decades to 2 trillion miles per year, partially offsetting the 
technological progress in vehicle emission control made during that 
time. Projections of continued growth in vehicle travel necessitate 
continued emission-reduction efforts so that air quality goals may be 
achieved.
    Under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the Act), 42 U.S.C. 
7401 et. seq., the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 
pursuing a three-point strategy for reducing emissions from 
transportation sources. The first two points involve the development 
and commercialization of cleaner vehicles and cleaner fuels. The third 
point focuses on in-use control to ensure that cars in customer use are 
properly maintained. I/M programs are intended to address this third 
point. The Act was prescriptive with respect to certain aspects of the 
I/M program design. In particular, section 202(m)(3) of the Act directs 
EPA to require on-board diagnostic (OBD) system checks as a component 
of I/M programs. In addition, section 182(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act 
requires that states revise their I/M programs within two years after 
promulgation of regulations under section 202(m)(3) to meet the 
requirements of those regulations.
    EPA is proposing today to establish requirements for the inspection 
of on-board diagnostic systems as part of I/M programs. The purpose of 
this notice is to propose amendments to those sections of the 
Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements in Subpart S, 40 CFR Part 
51 (November 5, 1992) that were reserved for OBD requirements and 
elsewhere, as needed. Specifically, the reserved sections to be 
modified include Sec. 51.351(c), Sec. 51.352(c), Sec. 51.357(a)(12), 
Sec. 51.357(b)(4), and Sec. 51.358(b)(4) of Part 51. This notice also 
proposes additions to sections of Subpart S pertaining to data 
collection and analysis as well as implementation deadlines. 
Specifically, these sections include Sec. 51.365, Sec. 51.366, and 
Sec. 51.373. Finally, this notice proposes additions to Subpart W of 40 
CFR Part 85 pertaining to test procedures, test equipment, and 
standards for failure for purposes of the emission control system 
performance warranty. These Subpart W changes will provide vehicles 
subject to the OBD test with emission control performance warranty 
coverage for OBD test failures.

III. Authority

    Authority for the actions proposed in this notice is granted to EPA 
by sections 182(a)(2)(B)(ii), 182(c)(3), 202(m)(3), 

[[Page 43093]]
207(b), and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 
7511a(a)(2)(B)(ii), 7511a(c)(3), 7521(m)(3), 7541(b), and 7601(a).
IV. Background of Proposed Rule

    During the last two decades, there have been considerable emission 
control development efforts on the part of both vehicle manufacturers 
and the federal government. As a result, passenger cars and light-duty 
trucks produced in recent years emit significantly lower emissions than 
their predecessors, provided that they are properly operating.
    A large body of evidence, however, demonstrates that current 
generation vehicles are not all operating properly during actual use. 
Moreover, they are often used under different temperature and driving 
conditions than are encountered in emission certification tests, and 
may emit significantly greater emissions when operating at those 
temperatures and conditions. As manufacturers have achieved significant 
reductions in the emissions of properly functioning, new vehicles, the 
lack of equivalent control over malfunctions and during non-standard 
conditions has become increasingly evident. Emission-related 
malfunctions do not always cause an outward indication of a problem 
(e.g., poor driveability or decreased fuel economy) and thus are 
sometimes difficult to detect and repair.
    The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, signed into law on November 
15, 1990, reflect a recognition of the problems encountered in 
identifying malfunctioning vehicles and contain several provisions 
aimed at reducing them. One of these is the requirement for 
incorporation and inspection of on-board diagnostic systems (OBD) in 
new vehicles. Section 207 of these amendments added paragraph (m) to 
section 202 of the Act, directing the EPA to promulgate regulations 
requiring the installation and inspection of OBD systems.
    Section 202(m)(1) of the Act requires OBD systems to monitor 
emission-related components for malfunctions or deterioration which 
render vehicles incapable of complying with the emission standards 
established for such vehicles. On February 19, 1993, EPA promulgated 
requirements for OBD systems (hereafter, OBD rules) on 1994 and later 
model year light duty vehicles and light duty trucks (58 FR 9468, 
February 19, 1993). These regulations (40 CFR 86.094-17) require all 
vehicle manufacturers to install equipment and establish operating 
parameters for the purpose of detecting malfunctions or deterioration 
in performance that would be expected to cause a vehicle to fail 
federal emission standards. Specifically, the on-board diagnostic 
system must be capable of identifying catalyst deterioration, engine 
misfire, oxygen sensor deterioration, and any other deterioration or 
malfunction within the powertrain which could cause emission increases 
greater than or exceeding the threshold levels established in 
Sec. 86.094-17.
    A malfunction indicator light (MIL) located in the dashboard of the 
vehicle is required to be illuminated when the OBD system detects 
malfunctions. The purpose of the MIL is to inform the vehicle operator 
of the need for service when the vehicle is operating under potentially 
high emitting conditions. Once illuminated to indicate a malfunction, 
the MIL must remain illuminated during all periods of engine operation 
until the trouble codes stored in the on-board computer are cleared by 
a service technician or after repeated reevaluation by the OBD system 
fails to detect a reoccurrence of the problem. The regulations allow 
the OBD system to extinguish the MIL after three subsequent driving 
cycles of similar operation in which a system fault does not reoccur. 
Similar operating conditions are defined as being within ten (10) 
percent of the load condition and 375 rpm with the same engine warm-up 
status which existed when the malfunction was first determined (40 CFR 
86.094-17).
    Codes indicating the likely problem will be stored in the vehicle's 
on-board computer for ready access by technicians, enabling proper 
diagnosis and repair. Section 202(m)(4) of the Act requires that OBD 
system information be unrestricted and accessible to anyone via 
standardized connectors without requiring access codes or any device 
only available from the manufacturer. Further, the OBD system 
information must be usable without need for any unique decoding 
information or device. In accordance with this mandate, the OBD rules 
require codes to be standardized to follow the diagnostic trouble code 
definitions established in Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) J2012, 
published in March 1992. EPA allows the computer-stored fault codes to 
be cleared after forty (40) engine warm-up cycles if the same fault is 
not reregistered. Anyone desiring more detailed information on the OBD 
system should refer to the OBD rules and the preamble promulgated on 
February 19, 1993, (58 FR 9468).
    The Act also revised and strengthened EPA's authority to prescribe 
vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs for ozone 
nonattainment areas. Section 182 of the Act requires EPA to review, 
revise, and republish I/M program requirements, taking into 
consideration investigations and audits of I/M programs, and the I/M 
requirements established in the Act.
    One of these program requirements is inspection of vehicle OBD 
systems. The Act requires that OBD inspections be incorporated into all 
basic and enhanced I/M programs once vehicles with mandated OBD systems 
become part of the fleet. Section 182(c)(3)(vii) requires that I/M 
programs include ``inspection of emission control diagnostic systems 
and the maintenance or repair of malfunctions or systems deterioration 
identified by or affecting such diagnostic systems.'' Sections 
182(a)(2) and 202(m)(3) require states to amend I/M program 
implementation plans to incorporate the inspection of on-board 
diagnostic systems within two years after promulgation of regulations 
requiring such inspection.
    EPA's initial rule implementing section 182's I/M requirements (the 
I/M rule) was promulgated on November 5, 1992. It establishes 
performance standards and other requirements for basic and enhanced 
vehicle I/M programs. Several sections of the I/M rule were reserved 
for OBD requirements, since the OBD rules had not yet been promulgated. 
This proposed rule addresses those sections of the I/M rule reserved 
for OBD requirements.
    OBD systems will allow an inspector to scan for stored malfunction 
codes at the time of the periodic I/M test by simply attaching a 
computerized scan tool to the standardized plug provided on all OBD 
equipped vehicles. The presence of one or more emissions-related codes 
in a vehicle's OBD system will indicate current or recent existence of 
a malfunction with the potential to cause high emissions. Furthermore, 
current emissions problems are also indicated if the MIL is commanded 
to be illuminated by the OBD system. Thus, EPA proposes that if the MIL 
is commanded to be illuminated and an emissions-related code is 
present, the vehicle shall fail the OBD inspection and be required to 
obtain the repairs indicated by the malfunction code.
    On-board diagnostic system inspections are intended to improve the 
accuracy of I/M programs, thus enhancing air quality benefits. The 
short emission tests used in I/M programs allow some vehicles that need 
repair to nevertheless ``pass'' the test. In addition, visual 
inspections of emission control devices can only determine presence and 
possibly proper connection but do not necessarily establish that the 
devices are functioning properly. 

[[Page 43094]]
Interrogation of the OBD system provides another means of identifying 
vehicles in need of repair. It also enables more accurate and efficient 
repairs by identifying vehicle components responsible for emission 
increases.
    A vehicle's failure to pass an approved I/M test may provide the 
basis for a warranty claim under the Act. Section 207(b) of the Act 
requires vehicle manufacturers to bear the cost of repairing a failing 
vehicle such that it passes the I/M test, if: (1) Such vehicle is 
maintained and operated in accordance with manufacturer instructions; 
(2) the vehicle fails the test during the appropriate warranty period; 
and (3) if such nonconformity results in the owner having to bear any 
penalty or other sanction under state or Federal law. Section 207(b) 
establishes a mechanism to provide emission control performance 
warranty coverage for motor vehicles subject to such tests under the 
circumstance enumerated in the previous sentence (40 CFR Part 85, 
Subpart V). Section 207(b) requires the Administrator to establish, by 
regulation, I/M short test procedures to be used for determining 
whether in-use vehicles comply with Federal emission standards if the 
Administrator determines that the following three conditions have been 
met: (1) The short test methods and procedures are ``available'' (i.e., 
that the necessary equipment may be readily obtained and that the 
procedure is reasonably expected to serve its function); (2) the 
procedures are consistent with good engineering practices; and (3) the 
results are reasonably capable of being correlated with tests conducted 
under Sec. 206(a)(1), the tests used to certify new vehicles.
    The OBD inspection meets these three conditions. Therefore, the Act 
requires promulgation of regulations to implement the performance 
warranty for vehicles that fail the OBD inspection. EPA is therefore 
proposing to incorporate the OBD test procedures, equipment, and 
standards for failure into its emission warranty short test 
regulations, Subpart W of Part 85 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations, in order to extend warranty coverage to failure of the OBD 
test.
    OBD equipped vehicles will not constitute a significant portion of 
the fleet for several years and existing I/M tests will be identifying 
malfunctioning vehicles during that time. Therefore, EPA does not 
attribute substantial air quality benefits to OBD until the year 2005. 
At this point, EPA believes it is too early to determine whether 
existing or newly established I/M test procedures may be replaced by 
OBD or how long it will take to refine the OBD technology to the point 
where it could substitute for other I/M test procedures. The Agency 
plans to evaluate the effectiveness of OBD checks to determine whether 
they can substitute for all or some of the I/M tests otherwise being 
performed on OBD equipped vehicles. Nevertheless, as long as a 
significant fraction of the fleet is not OBD equipped, the high-
technology I/M tests established in the federal I/M rule will continue 
to be needed.

V. Discussion of Major Issues

A. Components of the OBD Inspection

1. Test Procedure
    When a vehicle arrives at the I/M lane, the inspector must 
determine whether that vehicle is equipped with an OBD system 
consistent with Sec. 86.094-17 in order to determine whether an OBD 
check will be performed during the inspection. In accordance with 
section 202(m) of the Act, case-by-case waivers are available to any 
manufacturer that is unable to meet these requirements in 1994 or 1995 
model years. Thus, the OBD inspection will apply to all 1996 and later 
light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. Subpart S requires the 
inspector to determine the model year of the vehicle when inputting 
other vehicle identification parameters.
    After establishing that the vehicle is subject to OBD system 
requirements, the inspector will perform several steps to complete the 
test. First, the inspector must locate the vehicle connector (the data 
link connector) and attach the inspection computer to it. The OBD rules 
require that the vehicle connector's location, accessibility, design, 
and function be consistent with SAE J1962 ``Diagnostic Connector,'' 
published in June 1992.
    The connector is required to be located in the passenger 
compartment in the area bounded by the driver's end of the instrument 
panel to 300 mm beyond the vehicle centerline. It is to be attached to 
the instrument panel and accessible from the driver's seat.
    The vehicle connector is required to be readily accessible. Removal 
of the instrument panel cover, connector cover, or any other barriers 
must not require the use of a tool. The vehicle connector should allow 
the inspector to employ a one-handed/blind insertion of the mating test 
equipment connector.
    After the test system is connected to the vehicle, EPA proposes 
that the test system employ the procedure for retrieving codes 
specified in SAE J1979 ``E/E Diagnostic Test Modes,'' (DEC91), cited in 
the OBD rules. This involves two steps. Initially, the test system 
should send to the OBD computer a request to retrieve and record 
whether the MIL is commanded to be illuminated. Following this, the 
test equipment should send a request to retrieve and record the 
specific codes that are stored.
    EPA proposes that the State establish in its test procedure the 
condition the vehicle shall be in during the OBD inspection: ``key-on/
engine-off'' (KOEO) or ``key-on/engine-running'' (KOER). This must be 
clearly specified in the State's test procedure to allow for 
consistency among all State test sites.
    Finally, this proposal does not specify whether the OBD inspection 
should take place before or after the other I/M tests. EPA is allowing 
the states to determine the placement of the OBD test within the I/M 
lane. In addition, EPA is seeking comments on the feasibility of 
conducting OBD inspections while the IM240 test is being conducted, and 
thus seeks information on manufacturer specifications for accessing OBD 
systems. Individuals with information relevant to this inquiry are 
requested to submit such information during the public comment period.
2. Anti-Tampering Provisions
    In addition to providing data pertaining to stored OBD codes, the 
information provided by the test equipment's initial request provides a 
safeguard against any tampering with the OBD system immediately prior 
to the test. The OBD rules require that a readiness code be stored in 
the on-board computer to indicate when the diagnostic system has 
completed all monitoring checks and determined that all monitored 
systems are functioning properly. This will enable I/M inspectors to be 
certain that malfunction codes have not merely been cleared, without 
actual repair of the malfunction, since the last OBD check of the 
vehicle's emission-related control systems. If the vehicle's OBD system 
indicates that the on-board diagnostic evaluation of any module is 
incomplete, EPA proposes that the information contained in the OBD 
system be considered void and the driver instructed to return after the 
vehicle has been run long enough to allow the test cycle of all 
supported modules to be completed.

B. Standards for Failure of the OBD Inspection

    Inspection of the OBD system requires the presence of a properly 
functioning vehicle connector. Therefore, if the inspector has 
determined that the 

[[Page 43095]]
vehicle is subject to OBD inspections but the vehicle connector is 
missing or has been tampered with, EPA proposes that the vehicle shall 
fail the inspection.
    Section 202(m)(4) of the CAAA requires that OBD system information 
be unrestricted and accessible via standardized connectors and not 
dependent on access codes or any device provided only by the 
manufacturer. The information obtained from the OBD system must be 
usable without need for any unique decoding information or device.
    To satisfy these mandates, EPA requires manufacturers to conform to 
uniform industry standards adopted through the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE). The OBD rules require that diagnostic trouble codes be 
consistent with SAE J2012 ``Recommended Format and Messages for 
Diagnostic Trouble Code Definitions,'' published in March 1992.
    The standardization of diagnostic codes allows failing codes to be 
specifically identified in this proposal. EPA has developed a list of 
all emission-related powertrain diagnostic trouble codes which will 
result in failure of the OBD test if present when the MIL is commanded 
to be illuminated. Thus, EPA is proposing that the vehicle shall fail 
inspection if the vehicle's MIL is commanded to be illuminated as a 
result of a failure related to the emission control system. Emission-
related failures are determined by the presence of an emission-related 
trouble code.
    Trouble codes may be present due to temporary, reversible 
conditions. As discussed above, EPA regulations require trouble codes 
to continue to be stored, once registered, unless 40 engine warm-ups 
occur without the fault of being redetected, while the regulations 
allow the MIL to be extinguished after three driving cycles of similar 
operation in which the fault does not reoccur. EPA is proposing to 
limit the potential for false I/M failures by proposing that vehicles 
fail the OBD inspection only if both (1) emission-related failure codes 
are present and (2) the MIL is commanded to be illuminated.
    Furthermore, if the MIL is commanded to be illuminated, EPA 
proposes that the inspector visually inspect the MIL. EPA proposes that 
the vehicle also fail the OBD inspection if the MIL is commanded to be 
illuminated and is not illuminated.
    Note that the list generated for the purpose of this rule does not 
define what constitutes ``emission-related'' for the purpose of any 
other regulation. This list defines what constitutes I/M failures. 
EPA's proposed list of codes resulting in I/M failure includes all 
codes related to fuel and air metering, the ignition system or misfire, 
auxiliary emission controls, and the computer and output circuits. Some 
of the codes related to the transmission are also included. For 
example, power steering codes are included because power steering 
affects fuel and air management during certain vehicle operations, such 
as turning right or left. However, codes pertaining to air conditioning 
and cruise control are not included.
    The OBD rule in Sec. 86.094-17(h)(2) specifically requires fault 
codes to be consistent with SAE J2012, Part C, of March 1992. However, 
the proposed list of codes was generated using the March 1994 version 
of J2012. This version is currently on the ballot for SAE approval. If 
it is not approved, the final rule will use the March 1992 version.
    SAE is likely to continue to update J2012, primarily in response to 
changes in automotive technology and industry needs. Therefore, EPA 
shall make revisions to this rule as SAE J2012 is revised. As the list 
of diagnostic trouble code definitions is updated by SAE and EPA 
through rulemaking, EPA expects states to revise the list of codes used 
to determine vehicle pass/fail status.

C. OBD Component of the Performance Standard

    Since OBD inspections are an element of the I/M performance 
standard as established in the rule promulgated on November 5, 1992 and 
a specifically required component of the program, OBD inspections do 
not generate emission reduction surpluses relative to the performance 
standard, i.e., they are not substitutes for achieving required 
emissions reductions but rather required supplements. However, while 
including OBD inspections does not generate additional credit toward 
the I/M performance standard, it may generate additional benefit. The 
actual magnitude of benefits were estimated in the OBD rule itself (58 
FR 9482-9483). EPA will be assessing the contribution the OBD 
inspection actually makes once testing starts and will revise future 
revisions of the MOBILE emissions model to account for these benefits. 
Due to the timing of this requirement, OBD checks will play no 
significant role in attaining 15% reductions by 1996.

D. Administrative Program Requirements

1. Data Collection and Analysis
    The proposed regulations included in today's action set out 
specific requirements for data collection and analysis to include 
information which will enable an analysis of OBD's role in the I/M 
program.
    Inconsistent data collection has often hampered analysis of program 
operation: some programs have been unable to calculate basic statistics 
such as the number of vehicles tested and failed because of incomplete 
data collection. Even in programs where data collection has occurred, 
data analysis has not been used extensively in program evaluation. 
Subpart S establishes specific data collection requirements for I/M 
programs. This action proposes additional data collection and analysis 
requirements for vehicles subject to OBD inspection. This will allow 
the results of the OBD check to be compared with those of the emission 
test. Specifically, these data include the number of vehicles that fail 
the OBD test and pass the emission test and the number of vehicles 
which pass the OBD test and fail the emission test. This action also 
proposes that the number of vehicles which have consistent test results 
(i.e., fail or pass both tests) be reported.
    EPA is also proposing the collection and analysis of data 
pertaining to the MIL. Specifically, these data include the number of 
vehicles whose MIL is commanded to be illuminated but who have no codes 
stored and the number of vehicles whose MIL is not commanded to be 
illuminated but who have codes stored. This action also proposes that 
data collection include the number of vehicles whose MIL is commanded 
to be illuminated and who have OBD codes stored, and the number of 
vehicles whose MIL is not commanded to be illuminated and who have no 
OBD codes stored.
    OBD inspections can be viewed as a supplement to the inspection 
regime which improves its effectiveness in finding high emitting 
vehicles, but also as a possible long-term replacement to the other 
tests for identifying high emitting vehicles. The analysis of the 
estimated emission reductions associated with OBD assumes that OBD will 
ultimately identify and cause to be repaired those vehicles in all I/M 
areas which are capable of being identified by an enhanced I/M test, 
specifically the IM240, purge and pressure tests. This will be verified 
by data collection and analysis during the initial years of OBD 
implementation. Thus, this information is essential to evaluating the 
present and future role of IM240, purge, pressure, and OBD tests in I/M 
programs.
E. State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions

    Section 202(m)(3) of the Act requires states to amend I/M program 

[[Page 43096]]
    implementation plans to incorporate the inspection of on-board 
diagnostic systems within two years after promulgation of regulations 
requiring such inspection. Thus, in order to be considered complete and 
fully approvable, I/M SIP submittals must include OBD inspections 
within two years after final promulgation of this rule.

F. Implementation Deadlines

    The incorporation of OBD inspections into both basic and enhanced 
I/M programs should be implemented as expeditiously as possible. This 
action proposes that OBD requirements for I/M programs be fully 
implemented with respect to all administrative details by January 1, 
1998. However, there will be some variation depending upon model year 
coverage of the local I/M program.

VI. Economic Costs and Benefits

    Code inspections will not add significantly to the time or cost for 
an inspection due to the rapid connection and data transfer 
capabilities which have been developed by industry and are required by 
EPA's OBD rule. Each I/M lane will need to purchase the equipment 
necessary for OBD interrogation. However, this equipment is relatively 
inexpensive and these costs may be distributed over thousands of tests. 
For enhanced I/M programs, the capital and maintenance costs associated 
with conducting OBD tests have been calculated to be $0.05 per test. 
The OBD cost for basic centralized I/M programs is only $0.025 per test 
due to the higher volume of cars that can be inspected in these lanes. 
The total cost of incorporating OBD inspections into enhanced and basic 
centralized programs nationwide has been calculated to be about $1.7 
million.
    Very few states continue to operate decentralized test-and-repair 
I/M programs. Assuming that 1200 tests will be conducted with every 
scan tool, the incorporation of OBD inspections into test-and-repair 
programs has been calculated to be about $2 million. Thus, the total 
cost of incorporating OBD inspections into all I/M programs is $3.7 
million.
    In addition to improving the identification of high emitting 
vehicles in an I/M program, OBD systems will also be of great utility 
in the repair of vehicles which fail the inspection, including the 
exhaust emission test. OBD will speed identification of the responsible 
component, and help avoid trial and error replacement of components.
    In addition to providing information about malfunctions which 
result in excess emissions, OBD code inspections will provide 
information about other faulty vehicle components. EPA recommends that 
this information be provided to the vehicle owner even if the vehicle 
passes the OBD test, enabling the owner to more efficiently repair any 
malfunctioning components.

VII. Public Participation

A. Comments and the Public Docket

    EPA desires full public participation in arriving at final 
decisions in this Rulemaking action. EPA solicits comments on all 
aspects of this proposal from all interested parties. Wherever 
applicable, full supporting data and detailed analysis should also be 
submitted to allow EPA to make maximum use of the comments. All 
comments should be directed to the Air Docket, Docket No. A-94-21.
    Commenters are especially encouraged to provide information on 
manufacturer specifications for accessing OBD systems. Commenters who 
wish to submit proprietary information for consideration should clearly 
separate such information from other comments by--
     Labeling proprietary information ``Confidential Business 
Information'' and
     Sending proprietary information directly to the contact 
person listed (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) and not to the 
public docket.
    This will help insure that proprietary information is not 
inadvertently placed in the docket. If a commenter wants EPA to use a 
submission labeled as confidential business information as part of the 
basis of the final rule, then a nonconfidential version of the 
document, which summarizes the key data or information, should be sent 
to the docket.
    Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed 
by EPA only to the extent allowed and by the procedures set forth in 40 
CFR Part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the submission 
when it is received by EPA, the submission may be made available to the 
public without notifying the commenters.

B. Public Hearing

    Anyone wishing to present testimony about this proposal at the 
public hearing (see DATES) should, if possible, notify the contact 
person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least seven days prior 
to the day of the hearing. The contact person should be given an 
estimate of the time required for the presentation of testimony and 
notification of any need for audio/visual equipment. A sign-up sheet 
will be available at the registration table the morning of the hearing 
for scheduling those who have not notified the contact earlier. This 
testimony will be scheduled on a first-come, first-serve basis to 
follow the previously scheduled testimony.
    EPA requests that approximately 50 copies of the statement or 
material to be presented be brought to the hearing for distribution to 
the audience. In addition, EPA would find it helpful to receive an 
advance copy of any statement or material to be presented at the 
hearing at least one week before the scheduled hearing date. This is to 
give EPA staff adequate time to review such material before the 
hearing. Such advance copies should be submitted to the contact person 
listed.
    The official records of the hearing will be kept open for 30 days 
following the hearing to allow submission of rebuttal and supplementary 
testimony. All such submittals should be directed to the Air Docket, 
Docket No. A-94-21 (see ADDRESSES).
    The hearing will be conducted informally, and technical rules of 
evidence will not apply. A written transcript of the hearing will be 
placed in the above docket for review. Anyone desiring to purchase a 
copy of the transcript should make individual arrangements with the 
court reporter recording the proceeding.
VIII. Administrative Requirements

A. Administrative Designation

    Under Executive Order 12866 [58 Federal Register 51,735 (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 the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order. 

[[Page 43097]]

    It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is 
therefore not subject to OMB review. Any impacts associated with these 
requirements do not exceed the impacts that were dealt with in the I/M 
requirements published in the Federal Register on November 5, 1992 (57 
FR 52950). This regulation is not expected to be controversial. This 
regulation does not raise any of the issues associated with 
``significant regulatory actions.'' It does not create an annual effect 
on the economy of $100 million or more or otherwise adversely affect 
the economy or the environment. The total cost of incorporating OBD 
inspections into all I/M programs nationwide has been calculated to be 
less than $4 million. It is not inconsistent with nor does it interfere 
with actions by other agencies. It does not alter budgetary impacts of 
entitlements or other programs, and it does not raise any new or 
unusual legal or policy issues. Accordingly, it is appropriate to 
consider this a ``non-significant'' or ``minor'' rule action and it 
should be exempt from OMB review.

B. Reporting and Record Keeping Requirement

    This proposal only marginally increases the existing burden through 
the addition of requirements to electronically capture and store one 
additional data element (existing diagnostic trouble codes) and to 
provide EPA with eight additional summary statistics based on this 
information. The existing collection has been approved (OMB no. 2060-
0252) through February 28, 1996. This additional burden will not be 
imposed until after the current Information Collection Request has been 
renewed. When the current Information Collection Request is renewed, 
any modifications necessary to incorporate OBD inspection data 
collection will be made. These few additional elements will not add a 
measurable amount to the existing estimated burden of 85 hours.
    Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of 
this collection information, including suggestions for reducing this 
burden to Chief, Information Policy Branch, EPA, 401 M. Street S.W. 
(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.'' The 
final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on the 
information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 
U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator certifies that this proposal will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities and, therefore, is not subject to the requirement of a 
Regulatory Impact Analysis. A small entity may include a small 
government entity or jurisdiction. A small government jurisdiction is 
defined as ``governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, 
villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of 
less than 50,000.'' This certification is based on the fact that the I/
M areas impacted by the proposed rulemaking do not meet the definition 
of a small government jurisdiction, that is, ``governments of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts, with a population of less than 50,000.''

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations, 
Lead, Motor vehicle pollution, Nitrogen oxide, Ozone, Particulate 
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, 
Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 85

    Confidential business information, Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle 
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research, 
Warranties.

    Dated: July 25, 1995.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, parts 51 and 85 of title 
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations are proposed to be amended to 
read as follows:

PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF 
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

    1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401(a)(2), 7475(e), 7502 (a) and (b), 
7503, 7601(a)(1) and 7602. Q04
    2. Section 51.351 is proposed to be amended by adding text to 
paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec. 51.351  Enhanced I/M performance standard.

* * * * *
    (c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). The performance standard shall 
include inspection of all 1996 and newer light duty vehicles and light 
duty trucks equipped with certified on-board diagnostic systems 
pursuant to 40 CFR 86.094-17, and repair of malfunctions or system 
deterioration identified by or affecting OBD systems as specified in 40 
CFR 51.357.
* * * * *
    3. Section 51.352 is proposed to be amended by adding text to 
paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec. 51.352  Basic I/M performance standard.

* * * * *
    (c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). The performance standard shall 
include inspection of all 1996 and newer light duty vehicles and light 
duty trucks equipped with certified OBD systems pursuant to 40 CFR 
86.094-17, and repair of malfunctions or system deterioration 
identified by or affecting OBD systems as specified in 40 CFR 51.357.
* * * * *
    4. Section 51.357 is proposed to be amended by adding text to 
paragraphs (a)(12) and (b)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 51.357  Test Procedures and Standards.

    (a) * * *
    (12) On-board diagnostic checks. Inspection of the on-board 
diagnostic system shall be according to the procedure described in 40 
CFR 85.2223, at a minimum.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) On-board diagnostics test standards. Vehicles shall fail if the 
vehicle connector has been tampered with, or if the malfunction 
indicator light is commanded to be illuminated and any of the 
diagnostic trouble codes listed in 40 CFR 85.2207 are present, at a 
minimum.
* * * * *
    5. Section 51.358 is proposed to be amended by adding text to 
paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:


Sec. 51.358  Test Equipment.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) On-board diagnostic test equipment requirements. The test 
equipment used to perform on-board diagnostic inspections shall 
function as specified in 40 CFR 85.2231.
* * * * *
    6. Section 51.365 is proposed to be amended by adding (a)(25) as 
follows:


Sec. 51.365  Data collection.

    (a) * * * 

[[Page 43098]]

    (25) Results of the on-board diagnostic check expressed as a pass 
or fail along with the diagnostic trouble codes revealed.
* * * * *
    7. Section 51.366 is proposed to be amended by adding (a)(2)(xi) 
through (xviii) to read as follows:


Sec. 51.366  Data Analysis and Reporting.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (xi) Passing the on-board diagnostic check and failing the I/M 
emission tests.
    (xii) Failing the on-board diagnostic check and passing the I/M 
emission tests.
    (xiii) Passing both the on-board diagnostic check and I/M emission 
tests.
    (xiv) Failing both the on-board diagnostic check and I/M emission 
tests.
    (xv) MIL is commanded on and no codes are stored.
    (xvi) MIL is not commanded on and codes are stored.
    (xvii) MIL is commanded on and codes are stored.
    (xviii) MIL is not commanded on and codes are not stored.
* * * * *
    8. Section 51.372 is proposed to be amended by revising paragraph 
(b)(3) to read as follows:


Sec. 51.372  State implementation plan submissions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) States shall revise SIPs as EPA develops further regulations. 
Revisions to incorporate on-board diagnostic checks in the I/M program 
shall be submitted by (two years after publication of final rule).
* * * * *
    9. Section 51.373 is proposed to be amended by adding paragraph (f) 
as follows:


Sec. 51.373  Implementation Deadlines.

* * * * *
    (f) On-board diagnostic checks shall be implemented as part of I/M 
programs by January 1, 1998.

PART 85--CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTOR 
VEHICLE ENGINES

    10. The authority citation for part 85 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7507, 7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 7542, 7543, 
7547, 7601(a), unless otherwise noted.

    11-12. A new Sec. 85.2207 is proposed to be added to subpart W to 
read as follows:


Sec. 85.2207  On-Board Diagnostics Test Standards.

    (a) A vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostics test if it is a 
1996 or newer vehicle and the vehicle connector is missing or has been 
tampered with.
    (b) A vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostics test if the 
malfunction indicator light is commanded to be illuminated and it is 
not illuminated.
    (c) A vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostics test if the 
malfunction indicator light is commanded to be illuminated and any of 
the following OBD codes, as defined by SAE J2012 ``Recommended Format 
and Messages for Diagnostic Trouble Code Definitions,'' (MAR94) Part C, 
are present (where X refers to any digit). Copies of SAE J2012 may be 
obtained from the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 
Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001:
    (1) Any PX1XX Fuel and Air Metering codes.
    (2) Any PX2XX Fuel and Air Metering codes.
    (3) Any PX3XX Ignition System or Misfire codes.
    (4) Any PX4XX Auxiliary Emission Controls codes.
    (5) P0500 Vehicle Speed Sensor Malfunction.
    (6) P0501 Vehicle Speed Sensor Range/Malfunction.
    (7) P0502 Vehicle Speed Sensor Circuit Low Input.
    (8) P0503 Vehicle Speed Sensor Intermittent/Erratic/High.
    (9) P0505 Idle Control System Malfunction.
    (10) P0506 Idle Control System RPM Lower Than Expected.
    (11) P0507 Idle Control System RPM Higher Than Expected.
    (12) P0510 Closed Throttle Position Switch Malfunction.
    (13) P0550 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Malfunction.
    (14) P0551 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Malfunction.
    (15) P0552 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Low Input.
    (16) P0553 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Intermittent.
    (17) P0554 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Intermittent.
    (18) P0560 System Voltage Malfunction.
    (19) P0561 System Voltage Unstable.
    (20) P0562 System Voltage Low.
    (21) P0563 System Voltage High.
    (22) Any PX6XX Computer and Output Circuits codes.
    (23) P0703 Brake Switch Input Malfunction.
    (24) P0705 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit Malfunction (PRNDL 
Input).
    (25) P0706 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit. Range/Performance.
    (26) P0707 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit Low Input.
    (27) P0708 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit High Input.
    (28) P0709 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit Intermittent.
    (29) P0719 Torque Converter/Brake Switch ``B'' Circuit Low.
    (30) P0720 Output Speed Sensor Circuit Malfunction.
    (31) P0721 Output Speed Sensor Circuit Range/Performance.
    (32) P0722 Output Speed Sensor Circuit No Signal.
    (33) P0723 Output Speed Sensor Circuit Intermittent.
    (34) P0724 Torque Converter/Brake Switch ``B'' Circuit High.
    (35) P0725 Engine Speed Input Circuit Malfunction.
    (36) P0726 Engine Speed Input Circuit Range/Performance.
    (37) P0727 Engine Speed Input Circuit No Signal.
    (38) P0728 Engine Speed Input Circuit Intermittent.
    (39) P0740 Torque Converter Clutch System Malfunction.
    (40) P0741 Torque Converter System Performance or Stuck Off.
    (41) P0742 Torque Converter Clutch System Stuck On.
    (42) P0743 Torque Converter Clutch System Electrical.
    (43) P0744 Torque Converter Clutch Circuit Intermittent.
    (d) The list of codes shall be updated with future revisions of 
this rule, in conjunction with changes to 40 CFR 86.094-17(h) (3).
    13. A new Sec. 85.2223 is proposed to be added to subpart W to read 
as follows:


Sec. 85.2223  On-Board Diagnostic Test Procedures.

    (a) The test sequence for the inspection of on-board diagnostic 
systems on 1996 and newer light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks 
shall consist of the following steps:
    (1) The on-board diagnostic inspection shall be conducted either 
with key-on/engine-off or key-on/engine-running.
    (2) The inspector shall locate the vehicle connector and plug the 
test system into the connector.
    (3) The test system shall send a Mode $01, PID $01 request to 
determine the evaluation status of the vehicle's on-board diagnostic 
system. The vehicle shall be automatically rejected from testing if 
Data B, Data C, and Data D indicate that the evaluation is not complete 
for any module supported by on-board diagnostic evaluation. The 
customer shall be instructed to return 

[[Page 43099]]
after the vehicle has been run long enough to allow the testing of all 
supported modules to be completed. If Data B, Data C, and Data D again 
indicate that the vehicle should be rejected when it returns, the 
vehicle shall be failed.
    (4) If Data B, Data C, and Data D indicate that the vehicle's on-
board diagnostic evaluation is complete, the test system shall 
determine the status of the MIL illumination bit and record status 
information in the vehicle test record.
    (i) If the malfunction indicator light bit is commanded to be 
illuminated and any of the codes listed at 40 CFR 85.2207(c) are 
present, the test system shall retrieve and record the codes in the 
vehicle test record. The vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostic 
inspection.
    (ii) If the malfunction indicator light bit is not commanded to be 
illuminated and any of the codes listed at 40 CFR 85.2207(c) are 
present, the test system shall retrieve and record the codes in the 
vehicle test record. The vehicle shall pass the on-board diagnostic 
inspection.
    (iii) If the malfunction indicator light bit is commanded to be 
illuminated, the inspector shall inspect the MIL to determine if it is 
illuminated. The status of the MIL shall be recorded in the vehicle 
test record. If the MIL is commanded to be illuminated but is not, the 
vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostic inspection.
    (5) The motorist shall be provided with the on-board diagnostic 
test results, including the codes retrieved, the status of the MIL 
illumination command, and the pass or fail result.
    14. A new Sec. 85.2231 is proposed to be added to subpart W to read 
as follows:


Sec. 85.2231  On-board diagnostic test equipment requirements.

    (a) The test system interface to the vehicle shall include a plug 
that conforms to SAE J1962 ``Diagnostic Connector.''
    (b) The test system shall meet all vehicle electrical/electronic 
compatibility requirements for ``OBD II Scan Tools'' as specified in 
SAE J1978 and J2201, including the length of the electrical cable 
between the vehicle and the test system.
    (c) The test system shall be capable of performing all 
communication functions as specified in SAE J1978, J1979, and J2205. 
Specifically, the system shall be capable of checking for the systems 
supported by the on-board diagnostic system and the evaluation status 
of supported systems (test complete/test not complete) in Mode $01 PID 
$01, as well as be able to request the codes, as specified in SAE 
J1979. In addition, the system shall have the capability to include bi-
directional communication, when such features are available, and allow 
for non-intrusive pressure and purge checks. Copies of all of the SAE 
documents cited above may be obtained from the Society of Automotive 
Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001.
    (d) The test system shall automatically make a pass, fail, or 
reject decision, as specified in the test procedure in 40 CFR 
85.2223(a).

[FR Doc. 95-20539 Filed 8-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P