[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 195 (Friday, October 6, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59896-59978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-20144]



[[Page 59895]]

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

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Parts 85 and 86



Emissions Control, Air Pollution From 2004 and Later Model Year Heavy-
Duty Highway Engines and Vehicles; Light-Duty On-Board Diagnostics 
Requirements, Revision; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 195 / Friday, October 6, 2000 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 59896]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 85 and 86

[AMS-FRL-6846-4]
RIN 2060-AI12


Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from 2004 and Later Model 
Year Heavy-Duty Highway Engines and Vehicles; Revision of Light-Duty 
On-Board Diagnostics Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Today's action finalizes a major new program to reduce 
emissions from on-highway heavy-duty engines and vehicles. These 
reductions will provide for cleaner air and greater public health 
protection, primarily by reducing ozone pollution. This program is the 
first phase of a multi-phase strategy to reduce emissions from heavy-
duty engines and vehicles.
    A key element of this action is a reaffirmation of the technical 
and economic feasibility of the non-methane hydrocarbon plus nitrogen 
oxide (NMHC+NOX) standard promulgated in October, 1997 for 
diesel heavy-duty engines. This previously-codified standard will 
therefore remain unchanged and effective starting with the 2004 model 
year for heavy-duty diesel engines. This standard represents about a 50 
percent reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides, as well as 
reductions in hydrocarbons, from diesel trucks and buses. Heavy-duty 
diesel engines and vehicles will also be subject to new test procedures 
and associated requirements beginning in the 2007 model year that will 
ensure that emission standards are met across a broad range of engine 
operating conditions.
    In addition, this action puts in place new more stringent emission 
standards and related provisions for heavy-duty Otto-cycle (e.g., 
gasoline-fueled) engines and vehicles, beginning in the 2005 model year 
or sooner under two optional programs finalized today. Vehicles in this 
category include large full size pick-up trucks and the largest cargo 
and passenger vans. Today's action does not affect vehicles classified 
as Medium-duty Passenger Vehicles (generally, large SUVs and vans), 
which are subject to the recently finalized Tier 2 program standards. 
For heavy-duty Otto-cycle engines and vehicles affected by today's 
action, emission standards for oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbons are 
reduced by approximately 75 percent from current standards.
    We are also finalizing requirements for on-board diagnostics 
systems for all heavy-duty vehicles and engines at or below 14,000 
pounds gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), as well as revising the on-
board diagnostics requirements for diesel light-duty vehicles and 
trucks.
    The requirements promulgated or reaffirmed in today's action will 
result in lower emissions of oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbons, as 
well as lower particulate matter due to reductions in secondary 
particulate formation (secondary particulate matter is not emitted 
directly from the engine, but is formed when emissions of oxides of 
nitrogen react with ammonia in the atmosphere to produce ammonium 
nitrate particulates) and will assist states and regions facing ozone 
air quality problems that are causing a range of adverse health 
effects, particularly respiratory impairment and related illnesses. For 
example, we project a reduction in oxides of nitrogen emissions of 
1,028,000 tons per year by 2010, the time frame when all states will 
have had to demonstrate compliance with air quality standards. In 
addition, the program will reduce the contribution of the on-highway 
heavy-duty category to other serious public health and environmental 
problems, including volatile organic compounds (VOC), secondary 
particulate matter (PM), and toxic air pollutants.
    Furthermore, we project that the significant environmental benefits 
of this program would come at an average projected long-term cost 
increase of less than $400 per vehicle for heavy-duty diesel engines 
(less than approximately $800 in the near-term) and less than $300 per 
vehicle for heavy-duty gasoline vehicles and engines in both the long-
term and near-term.

DATES: This rule is effective December 5, 2000. The incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved 
by the Director of the Federal Register as of December 5, 2000.

ADDRESSES: All comments and materials relevant to today's action have 
been placed in Public Docket No. A-98-32 at the following address: U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Air Docket (6102), Room M-1500, 
401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. EPA's Air Docket makes 
materials related to this rulemaking available for review at the above 
address (on the ground floor in Waterside Mall) from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except on government holidays. You can 
reach the Air Docket by telephone at (202) 260-7548 and by facsimile at 
(202) 260-4400. We may charge a reasonable fee for copying docket 
materials, as provided in 40 CFR Part 2.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret Borushko, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Assessment and Standards Division, 2000 Traverwood 
Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105-2498. Telephone (734) 214-4334; Fax (734) 
214-4816; e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

    This regulation will affect you if you manufacture and sell new 
heavy-duty motor vehicles, new heavy-duty engines, or new diesel light-
duty motor vehicles in the United States. The table below gives some 
examples of entities that may have to comply with the regulations. But 
because these are only examples, you should carefully examine these and 
existing regulations in 40 CFR part 86. If you have questions, call the 
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Examples of regulated
                 Category                             entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..................................  Manufacturers of new heavy-
                                             duty motor vehicles and
                                             engines.
                                            Manufacturers of new diesel
                                             light-duty motor vehicles
                                             and engines.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Internet Access to Rulemaking Documents

    Today's action is available electronically on the day of 
publication from the Internet Web site listed below. Electronic copies 
of this preamble and regulatory language as well as the Response to 
Comments document, the Regulatory Impact Analysis and other documents 
associated with today's final rule are available from the EPA Office of 
Transportation and Air Quality Web site listed below shortly after the 
rule is signed by the Administrator. This service is free of charge, 
except any cost that you already incur for connecting to the Internet.
    EPA Web Site:
http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/epa-air/
    Either select a desired date or use the Search feature.)
    Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) Web Site:
http://www.epa.gov/oms/
    (Look in ``What's New'' or under the ``Trucks/Buses'' or ``Highway 
Heavy-Duty Vehicles'' topics.)

[[Page 59897]]

    Please note that due to differences between the software used to 
develop the document and the software into which the document may be 
downloaded, changes in format, page length, etc., may occur.

Outline of This Preamble

I. Introduction

A. How Does This Action Relate to the Statement of Principles and 
Other Rulemakings?
B. What Is the ``1999 Technology Review''?
C. How Does This Action Relate to the Consent Decrees With Heavy-
Duty Diesel Engine Manufacturers?
D. How Does This Action Relate to the Light-Duty Tier 2 Program?
E. What Are the Basic Components of the Program?
    1. What Applies to Diesel Engines and Vehicles?
    2. What Applies to Otto-cycle Engines and Vehicles?

II. Is the Program Needed, and How Much Effect Will It Have on 
Emissions?

A. Environmental Need
    1. Need for Additional NOX and NMHC Reductions
    a. NOX and NMHC Cause Adverse Health and Welfare 
Effects
    b. Standards for 2004 HD Diesels Are a Key Part of State Air 
Pollution Control Plans
    c. New Standards for 2005 HD Gasoline Engines and Vehicles Are 
Important for States in Meeting Their Air Quality Goals
    d. HD Diesel and Gasoline Engines Contribute to Total 
NOX and VOC Emissions
    2. Need for Particulate Matter Reductions
    a. PM Emissions Cause Adverse Health and Welfare Effects
    b. Current and Future Compliance with the PM10 NAAQS
    c. Contribution of HD Diesel and Gasoline Vehicles to 
Particulate Matter
    3. Air Toxics From HD Engines and Vehicles
B. Today's Action Will Result in Large Emission Reductions
    1. Reductions Due to Emission Standards for Heavy-duty Diesel 
Engines
    2. Reductions Due to Emission Standards for Heavy-duty Gasoline 
Vehicles and Engines
C. Benefits of the Supplemental Requirements and In-Use Control 
Measures of Today's Action

III. Content of the Final Rule

A. What Are the Requirements for Heavy-duty Diesel Engines?
    1. Review of 2004 NMHC+NOX Standard
    2. New Requirements
    a. Not-to-Exceed Test under Expanded Conditions
    b. Deficiencies for NTE Emission Standards
    c. Supplemental Steady State Test
    d. Maximum Allowable Emission Limits
    3. Altitude Requirements and Expanded Temperature and Humidity 
Conditions for NTE Testing
    4. On-board Diagnostics for Heavy-duty Diesel Engines
    a. OBD Malfunction Thresholds and Monitoring Requirements
    b. Standardization Requirements
    c. Deficiency Provisions
    d. Applicability and Waivers
    e. Certification Provisions
    5. Submission of Load Response Test Data
    6. EPA Policy and Regulations Regarding Defeat Devices and 
Auxiliary Emission Control Devices
B. What Are the Requirements of the Heavy-duty Otto-cycle Vehicle-
based Program?
    1. Emission Standards
    2. Revision to Vehicle Useful Life
    3. Averaging, Banking, and Trading Provisions
    a. Background
    b. Final ABT Program for Vehicle-based Standards
    c. Exchanging Credits Between the Vehicle-based and the Engine-
based ABT Programs
    4. CAP 2000
    5. Evaporative Emissions and Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery
    a. Enhanced Evaporative Emissions
    b. Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery
    6. On-board Diagnostics Requirements for Otto-cycle Vehicles
    a. Federal OBD Malfunction Thresholds and Monitoring 
Requirements
    b. Standardization Requirements
    c. Deficiency Provisions
    d. Applicability and Waivers
    e. Certification Provisions
C. What Are the Requirements of the Heavy-duty Otto-cycle Engine-
based Program?
    1. Emission Standards
    2. Durability Procedures
    3. Averaging, Banking, and Trading for Otto-cycle Engines
    4. On-board Diagnostics for Otto-cycle Engines
    5. Evaporative Emissions Test Procedures
D. What Are the New On-board Diagnostics Requirements for Light-duty 
Diesel Vehicles?
    1. Federal OBD Malfunction Thresholds and Monitoring 
Requirements
    2. Applicability and Waivers
E. Access to On-board Computer Information

IV. The Heavy-duty Requirements Are Technologically Feasible

A. Emission Standards for Heavy-duty Diesel Engines
B. Emission Standards for Heavy-duty Otto-cycle Vehicles and Engines
    1. Current Technologies
    2. Chassis-based Standards
    3. Engine-based Standards
    4. Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery
C. On-board Diagnostics

V. What Is the Economic Impact and Cost-effectiveness for These 
Requirements?

A. Emission Standards for Heavy-duty Diesel Engines
    1. Expected Technologies
    2. Per Engine Costs
    3. Aggregate Costs to Society
    4. Cost-effectiveness
B. Emission Standards for Heavy-duty Otto-cycle
    Vehicles and Engines
    1. Expected Technologies
    2. Per Vehicle Costs
    3. Aggregate Costs to Society
    4. Cost-effectiveness

VI. How Has EPA Responded to Input from the Public?

VII. What Administrative Requirements Apply to This Final Rule?

A. Compliance With Executive Order 12866
B. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act: Impact on Small 
Entities
C. Compliance With the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
D. Compliance With the Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Compliance With Executive Order 13045: Children's Health 
Protection
F. Compliance With Executive Order 13084: Consultation and 
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
H. Compliance With Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
I. Compliance With the Congressional Review Act

VIII. What Is EPA's Statutory Authority for This Action?

I. Introduction

    Under EPA's classification system, heavy-duty vehicles are those 
with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 8,500 pounds or more.\1\ 
The State of California classifies the lighter end of this class--up to 
14,000 pounds GVWR--as ``medium-duty vehicles,'' and recent EPA 
regulations define certain vehicles from 8,500 to 10,000 pounds GVWR 
and designed primarily for passenger transportation as ``medium-duty 
passenger vehicles'' (MDPVs) subject to the recently finalized Tier 2 
standards. (See 65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000). Heavy-duty engines 
(HDEs) are engines used in heavy-duty vehicles. Heavy-duty engines and 
vehicles are used in a wide range of applications, from large full size 
pick-up trucks to the largest commercial trucks. Because one type of 
heavy-duty engine may be used in many different applications, EPA 
emission standards for the heavy-duty class of vehicles have generally 
been based on the emissions performance of the engine

[[Page 59898]]

(and any associated aftertreatment devices) as tested separately from 
the vehicle chassis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Clean Air Act defines heavy-duty vehicles as those with 
a GVWR of greater than 6,000 pounds. However, EPA has classified 
vehicles between 6,000 and 8,500 pounds GVWR as light-duty vehicles, 
while treating them as heavy-duty for statutory purposes. Vehicles 
weighing between 6,000 and 8,500 pounds GVWR are not addressed 
generally in this final rulemaking. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating 
(GVWR) is defined by federal regulation in 40 CFR 86.082-2 as ``The 
value specified by the manufacturer as the maximum design loaded 
weight of a single vehicle.'' In other words, it is the weight of 
the vehicle completely loaded with the maximum load that the 
manufacturer states the vehicle is capable of carrying.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Highway HDEs are categorized into diesel-cycle (compression-
ignited) and Otto-cycle (spark-ignited) engines. Most diesel-cycle 
engines are fueled by diesel fuel, but heavy-duty diesel-cycle engines 
can also be fueled by methanol or natural gas. The heavy-duty diesel 
engine (HDDE) class is further subdivided by EPA into three 
subclassifications or ``primary intended service classes''; light, 
medium, and heavy HDDEs (see 40 CFR 86.090-2).\2\ HDDEs are categorized 
into one of the three subclasses depending on the GVWR of the vehicles 
for which they are intended, the usage of the vehicles, the engine 
horsepower rating, and other factors. The subclassifications allow EPA 
to more effectively set requirements that are appropriate for the wide 
range of sizes and uses of HDDEs.
    Most highway heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles and engines are 
gasoline-fueled, but may also be fueled with alternative fuels 
including methanol and gaseous fuels such as natural gas. Heavy-duty 
Otto-cycle vehicles and engines include large full size pick-up trucks, 
full size cargo and passenger vans, and the largest sport utility 
vehicles. Approximately 75 percent of heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles 
are in the 8,500-10,000 pound GVWR range, and the vast majority of 
these are sold as ``complete'' vehicles.\3\ The majority of heavy-duty 
Otto-cycle vehicles above 10,000 pounds GVWR are sold as ``incomplete'' 
vehicles, meaning that they are manufactured without their primary 
cargo carrying container or device attached. These incomplete vehicles 
(basically the engine plus a chassis) are then manufactured into a 
variety of vehicles, including recreational vehicles, panel trucks, tow 
trucks, and dump trucks.
    EPA's NOX standard for 1998 to 2003 model year diesel 
and Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines is 4.0 grams per brake horsepower-
hour (g/bhp-hr). The hydrocarbon standards for 1998 to 2003 model year 
Otto-cycle engines are 1.1 g/bhp-hr for engines used in lighter 
vehicles (8500 to 14,000 pounds GVWR) and 1.9 g/bhp-hr for engines used 
in heavier vehicles (greater than 14,000 pounds GVWR), and the 1998 to 
2003 model year hydrocarbon standard for HDDEs is 1.3 g/bhp-hr. EPA 
currently requires testing of the engine (with emissions control 
systems in place) rather than the entire vehicle. Thus, the standards 
are in units of g/bhp-hr (i.e., grams of emissions per unit of work the 
engine performs over the test cycle), rather than the grams-per-mile 
unit used for testing passenger cars and light-duty trucks.
    Today's action is the continuation of a rulemaking process for 
heavy-duty engines which began in 1995 with an Advanced Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) (60 FR 45580, August 31, 1995). As 
discussed below, a 1996 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposed the same 
NMHC+NOX standards for both Otto-cycle and diesel-cycle 
engines (61 FR 33421, June 27, 1996). However, EPA did not finalize the 
proposed NMHC+NOX standard for Otto-cycle engines in the 
final rule published in October 1997 (62 FR 54694, October 21, 1997). 
EPA did finalize a new NMHC+NOX emission standard for HDDEs, 
starting with the 2004 model year, but committed to review the 
appropriateness of this standard in 1999. Today's final action thus 
addresses two broad issues that remain from earlier rulemaking 
efforts--a reaffirmation of the NMHC+NOX standard for diesel 
engines and new emission standards for heavy-duty Otto-cycle engines 
and vehicles. The previous rulemaking documents, and the documents 
referenced therein (see EPA Air Docket No. A-95-27), contain extensive 
background on the engines and vehicles, the affected industry, and the 
need for lower emissions standards.
    Section I of this preamble provides some background information and 
the regulatory context of today's action, as well as a brief overview 
of the program. Section II details the air quality need for and the 
benefits of the program. Subsequent sections provide a detailed 
description of the specifics of the program and expand on the 
technological feasibility and economic impacts of the program. A public 
participation section reviews the process we followed in soliciting and 
responding to public comment. The final sections deal with several 
administrative requirements. You may also want to review our Final 
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) and our Response to Comments document, 
both of which are found in the docket and on the Agency's website. They 
provide additional analyses and discussions of many topics raised in 
this preamble.

A. How Does This Action Relate to the Statement of Principles and Other 
Rulemakings?

    In July of 1995, EPA, the California Air Resources Board, and 
heavy-duty engine manufacturers representing over 90 percent of annual 
nationwide engine sales signed a Statement of Principles (SOP) that 
established a framework for a proposed rulemaking to address concerns 
regarding the growing contribution of heavy-duty engines to air 
pollution problems. The SOP contained levels for a new proposed 
standard for NMHC+NOX that would become effective in model 
year 2004. The SOP also contained several key provisions in addition to 
the standards. The SOP discusses the need to review in 1999 the 
technological feasibility of the NMHC+NOX standard and its 
appropriateness under the Clean Air Act. Also, the SOP outlines a plan 
for developing technology with the goal of reducing NOX 
emissions to 1.0 g/bhp-hr and particulate matter to 0.05 g/bhp-hr while 
maintaining performance, reliability, and efficiency of the engines. 
EPA sought early comment on the general regulatory framework laid out 
in the SOP in an ANPRM on August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45580), then 
subsequently issued an NPRM on June 27, 1996 (61 FR 33421).
    On October 21, 1997, EPA issued a final rule (62 FR 54694). The 
centerpiece of the final rule was a new NOX+NMHC standard of 
2.4 g/bhp-hr (or 2.5 g/bhp-hr with a 0.5 g/bhp-hr NMHC cap) for 2004 
and later model year heavy-duty diesel-cycle engines. The rule also 
adopted other related compliance provisions for diesel-cycle heavy-duty 
engines beginning with the 2004 model year, as well as revisions to the 
useful life for the heavy heavy-duty diesel engine service class.
    In the June 27, 1996, NPRM, EPA proposed the same 
NMHC+NOX standard for diesel and Otto-cycle heavy-duty 
engines. During the comment period several commenters urged the Agency 
to reconsider its proposal for Otto-cycle engines. The commenters 
argued that the proposal ignored the true low emissions capability of 
gasoline-powered vehicles equipped with advanced three way catalysts. 
Environmental groups provided comments highlighting manufacturers' 
certification data for the 1996 model year, which included some engine 
families with emission levels considerably below the standards proposed 
for the 2004 model year. One commenter recommended that the proposed 
standard be phased in earlier than 2004 for Otto-cycle engines since 
the emissions control technology capable of meeting the 
NMHC+NOX standard was more advanced for Otto-cycle engines 
than for diesel engines. On the basis of these comments, EPA determined 
to reexamine the proposed standards for Otto-cycle engines and no new 
NMHC+NOX standards were finalized for on-highway heavy-duty 
Otto-cycle engines in the October 21, 1997, final rule.

[[Page 59899]]

    Lastly, on October 29, 1999, EPA published an NPRM that proposed, 
among other things, to reaffirm the technical and economic feasibility 
of the 2004 model year diesel NOX+NMHC standard and to add 
appropriate emission standards for heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles and 
engines. (See 64 FR 58472, October 29, 1999. ) Today's final rule is 
the conclusion of the first phase of EPA's strategy to achieve 
substantial emission reductions from heavy-duty vehicles and engines. 
The second phase, affecting the 2007 and later model years, is 
addressed in a proposal published on June 2, 2000 (65 FR 35430).

B. What Is the ``1999 Technology Review''?

    In addition to the elements of the 1997 final rule described above, 
EPA finalized a regulatory provision providing for a 1999 review of the 
new NMHC+NOX emission standard for HDDEs. EPA committed to 
``reassess the appropriateness of the standards under the Clean Air 
Act, including the need for and technical and economic feasibility of 
the standards based on information available in 1999'' (See 62 FR 
54699, October 21, 1997). This provision was put in place because the 
technologies required to meet the 2004 NMHC+NOX standard for 
HDDEs were, at the time the standard was finalized, not yet fully 
developed and proven. This commitment was spelled out in regulatory 
language in the final rule in 40 CFR 86.004-11, paragraph (a)(1)(i)(E), 
which reads:
    ``No later than December 31, 1999, the Administrator shall review 
the emissions standards set forth in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this 
section and determine whether these standards continue to be 
appropriate under the Act.''
    While this specific regulatory provision is limited to the 
NMHC+NOX standard for review in 1999, in the preamble to the 
final rule EPA committed to investigating or seeking comment on several 
other issues in the context of the 1999 review. Our October 29, 1999 
NPRM proposed to make certain findings regarding these issues and 
sought comment. Today's action presents our final findings regarding 
these issues. These additional issues include:
     An evaluation of whether the appropriateness and technical 
feasibility of the 2004 standards depend upon changes to diesel fuel.
     A review of the appropriateness of the 2004 
NMHC+NOX standard in the context of the current PM standard.

C. How Does This Action Relate to the Consent Decrees With Heavy-duty 
Diesel Engine Manufacturers?

    The Department of Justice and EPA completed consent decrees with 
seven of the largest heavy-duty diesel engine manufacturers in the U.S. 
in order to resolve the problems uncovered from current and past heavy-
duty diesel engines which the government does not believe meet existing 
standards and defeat device rules. In these consent decrees with the 
Federal Government six of the manufacturers are required, among other 
things, to meet a 2.5 g/bhp-hr limit on NMHC+NOX no later 
than October 1, 2002. The majority of these engine manufacturers have 
also agreed to produce engines by October 1, 2002 that meet a not-to-
exceed limit, a Euro III limit (on which the Agency's finalized 
supplemental steady-state cycle is based), and to test engines over and 
eventually comply with a load response test and emission limits.\4\ The 
fact that these engine manufacturers have agreed to meet the 2004 
standards in 2002 gives the Agency additional confidence that the 
NMHC+NOX standard reviewed in today's action is appropriate 
for the 2004 model year. However, these Consent Decrees are not the 
basis for the Agency's factual finding that the standards contained in 
today's final rule are appropriate under the Clean Air Act. Other 
elements of these consent decrees that are carried over to today's 
final rule include the addition of a new steady state certification 
test and a new ``not-to-exceed'' (NTE) approach to assure in-use 
compliance. In addition, under the consent decrees the manufacturers 
are required to invest considerable resources to evaluate 
instrumentation and methodologies for on-road testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Consent Decrees establish target limits for a load 
response test of 1.3 times the federal test procedure (FTP) standard 
for NMHC+NOX and 1.7 times the FTP standard for PM. These 
limits would take effect for affected manufacturers after October 1, 
2002. However, the Consent Decrees establish a process to determine 
whether these limits should be modified to ensure that they are the 
lowest achievable given the technology available at the time. Under 
this process, manufacturers would submit load response test data 
with their certification applications starting with the 1999 model 
year, and by October 1, 2000, the parties to the Consent Decrees 
would review these data to determine appropriate emission limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency believes these consent decrees will partially address 
the emission problems from previously produced engines. However, we do 
not believe that relying on the current compliance program and the use 
of enforcement actions in the future is the most appropriate long term 
method to assure in-use compliance of heavy-duty engines under all 
operating conditions. We estimate that the more than one million 
engines at issue in these consent decrees produced since 1988 will have 
resulted in excess NOX emissions of more than 15 million 
tons over the lifetime of the engines, with an estimated 1.3 million 
excess tons of NOX being emitted in 1998 alone. To put this 
in perspective, the Agency's National Air Pollutant Emission Trends 
report for 1900-1996 estimates the total U.S. emission inventory for 
annual NOX emissions was 23.3 million tons. These estimates 
do not include the previously unknown excess NOX emissions 
from on-highway heavy-duty diesels. Assuming the total 1998 national 
NOX emissions are similar to 1996, the 1.3 million tons 
excess NOX emissions from heavy-duty diesels in 1998 
represent approximately five percent of the national total. The new 
compliance requirements contained in this final rule assure that the 
public's health and welfare will be better protected from these types 
of excess emissions in the future.

D. How Does This Action Relate to the Light-duty Tier 2 Program?

    In December of 1999 we finalized a major, comprehensive program 
designed to reduce emission standards for passenger cars, light trucks, 
and large passenger vehicles (including sport-utility vehicles, 
minivans, vans, and pickup trucks) and to reduce the sulfur content of 
gasoline (see 65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000). Under the program, 
automakers will produce vehicles designed to have very low emissions 
when operated on low-sulfur gasoline, and oil refiners will provide 
such cleaner gasoline nationwide. This comprehensive program is 
referred to in this preamble as the ``Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program,'' 
or simply the ``Tier 2 program.''
    The proposal for the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program (64 FR 26004, 
May 13, 1999) raised specific issues relating to vehicles over 8,500 
pounds GVWR, and thus classified as heavy-duty vehicles. We requested 
comment in the Tier 2 NPRM on several potential options that would have 
applied more stringent standards to vehicles over 8,500 pounds GVWR, 
including the possibility of extending the GVWR limits that define 
light-duty trucks. Specifically, we requested comment in the Tier 2 
NPRM on, among other options, requiring ``all complete trucks in the 
8,500-10,000 pound GVWR range to meet light-duty standards ``(64 FR 
26089).
    We subsequently proposed to include all personal use passenger 
vehicles (including gasoline and diesel fueled)

[[Page 59900]]

between 8,500 and 10,000 pounds GVWR in the Tier 2 program. This group 
of vehicles would include large SUVs and passenger vans and may include 
other types of ``crossover'' multipurpose vehicles in the future, 
depending on new vehicle designs. We proposed this change in our NPRM 
concerning emissions standards for 2004 and later heavy-duty vehicles 
and engines (64 FR 58472, October 29, 1999).
    Tier 2 standards for these passenger vehicles above 8,500 pounds 
GVWR were finalized in the Tier 2 final rule (65 FR 6698, February 10, 
2000). These vehicles are included in the Tier 2 program beginning in 
2004 and are required to meet the final Tier 2 standards in 2009 and 
later. To effect this, we created a new category of heavy-duty vehicles 
termed ``medium-duty passenger vehicles'' (MDPVs). We define medium-
duty passenger vehicles as any complete heavy-duty vehicle less than 
10,000 pounds GVWR designed primarily for the transportation of persons 
including conversion vans (i.e., vans that are intended to be converted 
to vans primarily intended for the transportation of persons).\5\ We do 
not include any vehicle that (1) has a capacity of more than 12 persons 
total or, (2) that is designed to accommodate more than 9 persons in 
seating rearward of the driver's seat or, (3) has a cargo box (e.g., a 
pick-up box or bed) of six feet or more in interior length. MDPVs will 
generally be grouped with heavy light-duty trucks (HLDTs) in the Tier 2 
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The conversion from cargo to passenger use usually includes 
the installation of rear seating, windows, carpet, and other 
amenities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today's final rule does not, therefore, include provisions for 
those vehicles that meet the new definition of medium-duty passenger 
vehicle. The provisions in this final rule applicable to complete 
heavy-duty vehicles are applicable to (1) vehicles under 10,000 pounds 
GVWR that are not captured in the medium-duty passenger vehicle 
definition (e.g., large pick-up trucks, 15-passenger vans), or (2) 
vehicles over 10,000 pounds GVWR. For more information on the new 
medium-duty passenger vehicle category see the Tier 2 final rule. (See 
65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000.)

E. What Are the Basic Components of the Program?

    Today's action contains requirements that can generally be 
separated into those that apply to diesel engines and vehicles and 
those that apply to Otto-cycle engines and vehicles. Some elements of 
the program harmonize EPA's regulatory program with California's 
Medium-duty vehicle (MDV) program (e.g., vehicle-based standards for 
complete Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles below 14,000 pounds GVWR), 
while others may differ from California's current requirements. (Also, 
as noted above, some complete gasoline and diesel-fueled heavy-duty 
vehicles from 8,500 to 10,000 pounds GVWR are incorporated into the 
Tier 2 program, and are thus are not subject to the requirements in 
today's action (See 65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000).) The details of 
these requirements are found in section III of this preamble.
    Due to lead time requirements in the Clean Air Act (CAA, or ``the 
Act''),\6\ we are not able to finalize some of the new provisions 
described below to be in effect in time to apply to the 2004 model year 
as we originally proposed.\7\ We are therefore not finalizing some of 
the heavy-duty diesel provisions until the 2007 model year, which 
avoids uncertainties regarding lead time and stability issues. New 
standards for heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles and engines can not be 
implemented earlier than the 2005 model year due to the lead time 
provisions in the Act. However, manufacturers of these vehicles and 
engines are given two optional compliance programs that they may select 
in lieu of the 2005 program, one that starts in 2003 (referred to as 
``Option 1'' in the remainder of this preamble) and one that starts in 
2004 (Option 2). The 2003 and 2004 implementation options offer some 
incentives relative to the 2005 program to encourage adoption by 
manufacturers. The two early-introduction options would result in 
greater emission reductions than the 2005 program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Clean Air Act Section 202(a)(3)(C) requires that ``Any 
standard promulgated or revised under this paragraph and applicable 
to classes or categories of heavy duty vehicles or engines shall 
apply for a period of no less than 3 model years beginning no 
earlier than the model year commencing 4 years after such revised 
standard is promulgated.''
    \7\ An exception is the 2004 NMHC+NOX standard for 
heavy-duty diesel engines, which was finalized in a 1997 rulemaking. 
We did not revise or reconsider this standard in this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This final rule therefore allows heavy-duty manufacturers to retain 
the statutorily-allowed four year lead time and begin implementation of 
the new provisions in a time frame that provides enough lead time under 
the Clean Air Act. However, this final rule also allows manufacturers 
to meet some new requirements early. Manufacturers electing to comply 
early would be essentially waiving the four years of lead time that the 
Clean Air Act allows. Manufacturers that participate in these programs 
and introduce cleaner technologies early are to be commended for taking 
positive steps towards protection of the environment. These early 
introduction options are described further under section III below and 
also in the Response to Comments document.
1. What Applies to Diesel Engines and Vehicles?
    Today's action finalizes our finding that the 2004 
NMHC+NOX standard for heavy-duty diesel engines (HDDEs) is 
technologically feasible, cost-effective, and appropriate under the 
Clean Air Act, in the context of the current PM standard. This includes 
a finding that a change in diesel fuel formulation is not required to 
make the 2004 model year NMHC+NOX standards technologically 
feasible and appropriate under the CAA.
    In addition, this action finalizes a new set of supplemental test 
procedures to more closely represent the range of real world driving 
conditions of heavy-duty diesel engines. These elements are 
specifically designed to provide additional certainty that the 
standards will be met under a wide range of operating conditions. These 
elements apply to all heavy-duty diesel engines, except those in 
Medium-duty Passenger Vehicles, which are subject to the Tier 2 
program. First, we are adding a steady-state test requirement to the 
current Federal test procedures (FTP) for HD diesel engines. Emission 
results from this test must meet the numerical standards for the pre-
existing Federal test procedure (i.e., the NMHC+NOX 
standards noted above, a CO standard of 15.5 g/bhp-hr, and a PM 
standard of 0.10 g/bhp-hr). This steady-state test requirement becomes 
effective starting with the 2007 model year. Second, we are also 
finalizing Not-to-Exceed (NTE) test procedures for testing of in-use 
engines. These NTE procedures apply under any conditions that could 
reasonably be expected to be seen in normal vehicle operation and use, 
including an expanded range of ambient conditions. Emission results 
from this test procedure must be less than or equal to 1.25 times the 
pre-existing Federal test procedure standards noted above. The NTE test 
and associated emission limits are effective starting with the 2007 
model year. Third, we are finalizing a Load Response Test (LRT) 
certification data submittal requirement for heavy-duty diesel engines, 
effective starting with the 2004 model year.
    We are also finalizing on-board diagnostic (OBD) requirements 
applicable to heavy-duty diesel vehicles and engines up to 14,000 
pounds GVWR. Heavy-duty diesel vehicles and

[[Page 59901]]

engines must be equipped with an OBD system capable of detecting and 
alerting the driver of certain emission-related malfunctions or 
deterioration. These requirements are phased in from the 2005 through 
2007 model years.
    Lastly, we are finalizing the proposed provisions that require 
engine manufacturers to provide, to EPA, documentation necessary to 
read and interpret information broadcast by engine on-board computers 
and ECM's which relate to emission control devices and auxiliary 
emission control devices (AECDs). As explained in section III.A.6, 
these provisions are finalized with minor revisions based on public 
comment.
2. What Applies to Otto-cycle Engines and Vehicles?
    Today's action finalizes new, more stringent emission standards for 
all Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles (except, as already 
noted, those vehicles defined as MDPVs and covered by the Tier 2 
program). We are also finalizing a major change to the structure of the 
regulatory program for Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles and engines and 
the way in which it applies to the different categories of vehicles. 
Currently, EPA has an engine-based regulatory program for all heavy-
duty vehicles, in that the engine alone is tested and must currently 
meet engine-based standards.\8\ Engine testing currently applies to all 
diesel-cycle and Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles. One of the key 
elements of today's action is to begin regulating a subset of heavy-
duty vehicles using chassis-based requirements. The heavy-duty vehicles 
that are subject to chassis-based requirements are complete Otto-cycle 
heavy-duty vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) up to 
14,000 pounds.\9\ We are retaining an engine-based approach for engines 
used in incomplete Otto-cycle vehicles up to 14,000 pounds GVWR and all 
Otto-cycle vehicles above 14,000 pounds GVWR (and optionally, for Otto-
cycle complete vehicles, under Option 1, for the 2003 through 2006 
model years). As noted earlier, manufacturers have the choice of three 
options, one that provides the lead time that we must allow by statute 
(Option 3), and two others that allow earlier introduction of cleaner 
technologies (Options 1 and 2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Engine-based standards are expressed in terms of emissions 
per unit of work per unit of time, whereas chassis-based (or 
vehicle-based) standards are expressed in terms of amount of 
emissions per mile driven by the vehicle.
    \9\ ``Complete'' vehicles are those that are manufactured with 
their primary cargo carrying container or device attached, whereas 
``incomplete'' vehicles are those that are manufactured without the 
primary cargo carrying container or device attached. Incomplete 
vehicles (basically the engine plus a chassis) are then manufactured 
into a variety of vehicles, such as recreational vehicles, panel 
trucks, dump trucks, fire trucks, and tow trucks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the primary engine-based program, we are finalizing a new 
NMHC+NOX standard of 1.0 g/bhp-hr that will start in the 
2005 model year and remain in place at least through the 2007 model 
year (Option 3). As an alternative, manufacturers may select a standard 
of 1.5 g/bhp-hr NMHC+NOX that would apply to the 2004 
through 2007 model years, then change to a 1.0 g/bhp-hr 
NMHC+NOX standard in the 2008 model year (Option 2).\10\ 
Further, if a manufacturer desires some additional flexibility beyond 
that provided by Option 2, they may certify their Otto-cycle complete 
vehicles to engine-based standards (rather than to the California LEV-I 
chassis-based standards that would apply under Option 2) through the 
2006 model year, provided that they implement these new standards for 
engines and vehicles starting with the 2003 model year (Option 1). Like 
Option 2, the engine-based standard in Option 1 transitions from 1.5 g/
bhp-hr to 1.0 g/bhp-hr in the 2008 model year. We believe that 
manufacturers are capable of meeting the requirements under any of 
these options, and we encourage them to take advantage of the 
opportunity to introduce cleaner Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles sooner 
rather than later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ It is very important that readers note the recent EPA 
proposal (65 FR 35430, June 2, 2000) regarding the second phase of 
our strategy to reduce emissions from heavy-duty vehicles. This 
second phase will include more stringent emission standards for 
heavy-duty vehicles and engines (diesel and Otto-cycle) in the 2007/
2008 time frame. EPA's recent proposal proposed standards for heavy-
duty Otto-cycle engines that would take effect in the 2008 model 
year. The recent proposal gives manufacturers notice of the 
stringency of future standards being sought by the Agency, and in 
fact, these future standards may be finalized before manufacturers 
have to ultimately commit to Option 1 or Option 2. Consequently, the 
2008 standard of 1.0 g/bhp-hr in today's final rule is intended to 
be a placeholder for tighter standards that will result from future 
final action by EPA prior to 2004; it is not intended to represent 
the standard that the Agency believes to be ultimately feasible or 
appropriate in that time frame.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the vehicle-based program, we are harmonizing federal standards 
with the California Medium-duty Vehicle (MDV) Low Emission Vehicle I 
(LEV-I) standards. These standards, shown in the table below, would 
apply to Otto-cycle complete vehicles in the weight categories shown. 
The standards are for emissions over the FTP and vehicles will be 
tested at adjusted loaded vehicle weight (ALVW), also known as test 
weight (TW).\11\ The standards apply at a useful life of 120,000 miles. 
We are also finalizing an averaging, banking, and trading (ABT) program 
tied specifically to this vehicle-based program. Under Option 3, these 
standards would begin with the 2005 model year. Under Option 2, these 
standards would apply starting with the 2004 model year. Under Option 
1, Otto-cycle complete vehicles could be certified to these standards 
or to the engine-based standards through the 2006 model year, as noted 
earlier, starting with the 2003 model year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ALVW or TW is the actual weight of the vehicle, known as 
curb weight, plus half pay load. It is also the average of the curb 
weight and GVWR, or (CW + GVWR)/2.

 Table 1.--Full-Life Emission Standards for Otto-cycle Complete Vehicles
                            [Grams per mile]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Nonmethane
         Vehicle weight category  (GVWR)           organic gas  NOX   CO
                                                      (NMOG)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8,500-10,000 lbs1...............................         0.28  0.9  7.3
10,001-14,000 lbs................................         0.33  1.0  8.1
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Excluding medium-duty passenger vehicles, which are covered by the
  Tier 2 program.

    In addition, the Otto-cycle vehicle-based program includes the 
chassis-based enhanced evaporative emission test procedures. We are 
also requiring onboard refueling and vapor recovery (ORVR) controls on 
all complete Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles up to 10,000 pounds GVWR. 
These requirements are phased from 2004 to 2006 under Options 1 and 2, 
and from 2005 to 2006 under Option 3.
    As with diesel heavy-duty vehicles, we are finalizing OBD 
requirements applicable to heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles and engines 
up to 14,000 pounds GVWR. Heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles and engines 
must be equipped with an OBD system capable of detecting and alerting 
the driver of certain emission-related malfunctions or deterioration. 
These requirements are phased in from 2004 to 2007 under Options 1 and 
2, and from 2005 to 2007 under Option 3.
    Lastly, as with diesel heavy-duty engines, we are finalizing the 
proposed provisions that require engine manufacturers to provide, to 
EPA, documentation necessary to read and interpret information 
broadcast by engine on-board computers and ECM's which relate to 
emission control devices and auxiliary emission control devices 
(AECDs). As explained in section

[[Page 59902]]

III.A.6, these provisions are finalized with minor revisions based on 
public comment.
    As noted above, to address statutory lead time requirements we are 
offering three options for manufacturers of Otto-cycle heavy-duty 
engines and vehicles, one that starts with the 2003 model year, one 
that starts with the 2004 model year, and one that starts with the 2005 
model year. A manufacturer must select one option for its entire heavy-
duty Otto-cycle product line. (Manufacturers may not select one option 
for some engine families and another option for other engine families, 
or one option for engines and another for vehicles. The selected option 
must apply to all HD Otto-cycle vehicles and engines sold by the 
manufacturer, for the time prescribed under the regulations that 
describe the options.) These options, summarized briefly below, are 
described in greater detail in section III of this preamble.

Option 1 (2003 implementation)

     Engine-based standard of 1.5 g/bhp-hr for the 2003--2007 
model years.
     Engine-based standard of 1.0 g/bhp-hr starting with the 
2008 model year.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ A recent EPA proposal would replace the 2008 standards 
finalized today by more stringent standards. See 65 FR 35430, June 
2, 2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Chassis-based standards shown in Table 1.
     Option to certify Otto-cycle complete vehicles to chassis-
based or engine-based standards for 2003--2006 model years.
     OBD phased in from 2004 to 2007, for 8,500 to 14,000 lbs 
GVWR.
     ORVR phased in from 2004 to 2006, for 8,500 to 10,000 lbs 
GVWR.

Option 2 (2004 implementation)

     Engine-based standard of 1.5 g/bhp-hr for the 2004--2007 
model years.
     Engine-based standard of 1.0 g/bhp-hr starting with the 
2008 model year.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Chassis-based standards shown in Table 1; 100% compliance 
in 2004 model year.
     OBD phased in from 2004 to 2007, for 8,500 to 14,000 lbs 
GVWR.
     ORVR phased in from 2004 to 2006, for 8,500 to 10,000 lbs 
GVWR.

Option 3 (2005 implementation) \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 2005 model year engines or vehicles whose model year begins 
prior to 4 years from the date of signature of this final rule may 
be exempted from the 2005 model year requirements under this option. 
Exempted engines or vehicles would comply with requrements otherwise 
applicable to the 2004 model year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Engine-based standard of 1.0 g/bhp-hr starting in 2005 
model year.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ A recent EPA proposal would introduce more stringent 
standards starting in the 2008 model year. See 65 FR 35430, June 2, 
2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Chassis-based standards shown in Table 1; 100% compliance 
in 2005 model year.
     OBD phased in from 2005 to 2007, for 8,500 to 14,000 lbs 
GVWR.
     ORVR phased in from 2005 to 2006, for 8,500 to 10,000 lbs 
GVWR.

II. Is the Program Needed, and How Much Effect Will It Have on 
Emissions?

A. Environmental Need

    This section presents information on the health and environmental 
impacts caused by air pollution from heavy-duty (HD) engines and 
vehicles (diesel and gasoline \16\), as well as EPA's assessment of the 
continuing need for additional emission reductions from HD engines and 
vehicles in order to meet the air quality needs of the U.S. This 
section also reviews our projections of the emission reductions that 
will result from today's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ We will use the terms ``otto-cycle engine'' and ``gasoline 
engine'' interchangeably in this document. Most otto-cycle engines 
today are powered by gasoline, but some alternative fuel 
technologies also operate as otto-cycle engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When we published the original 1997 final rule for the 2004 
standards, we included a detailed analysis and explanation of the 
health impacts and air quality need for the program. Recently, as a 
part of our October 29, 1999 proposal of today's program mentioned 
above, we reassessed and updated our evaluation of the air quality need 
for the original program, as well as for the new provisions we proposed 
in the October proposal. Today, after performing further analysis and 
with the benefit of a range of comments from the public, we present our 
conclusions. As explained below and in the Regulatory Impact Analysis, 
our most recent analyses confirm our earlier assessments that the 
nationwide emission reductions from the original 1997 program, as well 
as the additional reductions that will occur from today's new 
requirements, are significant and will help many areas to comply with 
the health-based ambient air quality standards.
1. Need for Additional NOX and NMHC Reductions
a. NOX and NMHC Cause Adverse Health and Welfare Effects
    Oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic compounds 
(VOC) are precursors in the photochemical reaction which forms 
tropospheric ozone. VOC emissions from mobile sources consist mostly of 
nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC). There is a large body of evidence 
showing that ozone can cause harmful respiratory effects including 
chest pain, coughing, and shortness of breath, most severely affecting 
people with compromised respiratory systems, children, and outdoor 
workers. In addition, NOX and VOCs can both harm human 
health directly. Beyond their human health effects, other negative 
environmental effects are also associated with ozone, NOX, 
and VOCs. Ozone reduces crop yields and forestry yields and harms 
ornamental plants. NOX, and in some cases VOCs, contribute 
to the secondary formation of particulate matter (PM), acid deposition, 
and the overgrowth of algae in coastal estuaries. These environmental 
effects, as well as the health effects noted above, are described in 
the Regulatory Impact Analysis.
b. Standards for 2004 HD Diesels Are a Key Part of State Air Pollution 
Control Plans
    Since we published the final rule establishing the 2004 HD diesel 
emission standards in 1997, states have considered the projected 
emission reductions from these engines to be an important component of 
their overall State Implementation Plans (SIPs). The NOX and 
NMHC nationwide emission reductions that will result from these 
standards beginning in the 2004 model year will help states to attain 
the ozone NAAQS. States have incorporated the beneficial effects of the 
2004 HD diesel standards into their air quality modeling and they 
continue to count on the emission reductions from this program to meet 
their air quality goals.
c. New Standards for 2005 HD Gasoline Engines and Vehicles Are 
Important for States in Meeting Their Air Quality Goals
    Today, many states are finding it difficult to show how they can 
meet or maintain compliance with the current National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone by the deadlines established in the 
Clean Air Act. In December, 1999, 92 million people (1990 population) 
lived in 32 metropolitan areas designated

[[Page 59903]]

nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Memorandum to the Docket, Drew Kodjak, EPA, January 12, 
2000 (found in the docket for this rule as well). Information on 
ozone nonattainment areas and population as of December 13, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There is a very clear risk that there will be elevated levels of 
ground-level ozone above the 1-hour NAAQS during the time period when 
the heavy-duty gasoline vehicle standards of this rulemaking will take 
effect. The reductions in oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) projected from the proposed new 
standards will benefit public health and welfare by reducing ozone 
levels. This assessment is based upon our recent and extensive ozone 
air quality modeling and analysis performed for the Tier 2/Gasoline 
Sulfur rulemaking, which predicts that a significant number of areas 
across the nation are at risk of failing to meet the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 
even with Tier 2 and other controls currently in place. Because ozone 
concentrations causing violations of the 1-hour ozone standard are well 
established to endanger public health and welfare, we conclude that 
today's new standards for 2005 and later gasoline heavy-duty vehicles 
are warranted.

Projected Air Quality Problems Remain After Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur 
Program Is in Place

    In conjunction with our Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur rulemaking efforts, 
we performed ozone air quality modeling for nearly the entire eastern 
U.S. covering metropolitan areas from Texas to the Northeast, and for a 
western U.S. modeling domain. This modeling predicted that without 
further emission reductions, a significant number of areas now 
experiencing ozone exceedances across the nation are at risk of failing 
to meet the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in 2004 and beyond, even with the Tier 
2/Gasoline Sulfur program and other controls currently in place.
    The general pattern that the ozone modeling shows is a broad 
reduction between 1996 and 2007 in the geographic extent of ozone 
concentrations above the 1-hour NAAQS, and in the frequency and 
severity of exceedances. In the absence of additional controls beyond 
those that will be achieved by current control programs--including the 
Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program--we expect there will be a slight 
decrease below 2007 ozone concentrations and frequencies of exceedances 
in 2030. However, the general trends and modeling results show that 
many of the areas we modeled may have exceedances continuously 
throughout the period from 2007 to 2030 without further reductions in 
emissions. Others may briefly attain and then return to nonattainment 
by 2030 or earlier. Although for practical reasons we limited our 
modeling of ozone concentrations to 1996, 2007, and 2030, we expect 
that concentrations between 2007 and 2030 will generally track the 
national emissions trend, showing a period of improvement after 2007 
followed by a reversal of the trend and deterioration back towards the 
2007 levels. Because individual areas' emissions trends differ, we 
expect that the air quality of individual areas will also vary from 
this general pattern.
    We believe that there is a risk that future air quality in each of 
these areas would exceed the ozone standard during the time period when 
this rule will take effect. This belief is based on three factors: (1) 
Recent exceedances in 1995-1997 or 1996-1998, (2) predicted exceedances 
in 2007 or 2030 after accounting for reductions from Tier 2 and other 
local or regional controls currently in place or required, and (3) our 
assessment of the magnitude of recent exceedances, the variability of 
meteorological conditions, transport from areas with later attainment 
dates, and other variables involved in predicting future attainment 
such as the potential for some areas to experience unexpectedly high 
economic growth rates, growth in vehicle miles traveled, varying 
population growth from area to area, and differences in vehicle choice.
    Based on the Tier 2 modeling analyses and information from 
recently-submitted SIPs, we have determined that over 71 million people 
(1996 population) in 21 metropolitan areas are likely to be exposed to 
unhealthy levels of ground level ozone at some point in time between 
2004 and 2030 without significant additional controls. These 21 areas 
are those that currently violate 1-hour ozone NAAQS and are predicted 
by the best ozone modeling we have available to be likely to exceed the 
1-hour ozone standard without significant new controls. This analysis 
accounts for the expected benefits from the Tier 2 program and other 
control programs already in place.\18\ It does not include additional 
control measures that states would need to implement to meet their 
requirements under the recently proposed SIP findings. We list these 
metropolitan areas and discuss how we conducted the analysis in the RIA 
for this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Air quality modeling shows that improvements in ozone 
levels can be expected to occur throughout the country because of 
the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program. EPA found that the program 
significantly lowers the model-predicted number of exceedances of 
the ozone standard by one tenth in 2007, and by almost one-third in 
2030 (Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur Final RIA, Docket A-97-10, Document 
Number V-B-1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are 14 additional metropolitan areas, with another 35 million 
people in 1996, for which the available ozone modeling and other 
evidence is less clear regarding the need for additional reductions. 
The RIA lists the areas we put in this second category. Our Tier 2 
ozone modeling predicted these 14 areas to need further reductions to 
avoid exceedances during the period when the standards are effective. 
For all of these areas, recent air quality monitoring data indicate 
that exceedances may occur in 2007 or 2030. Eight areas have recent 
exceedances, but local ozone modeling and other evidence indicates 
attainment in 2007. Based on this evidence, we have kept these areas 
separate from the previous set of 21 areas. However, we still consider 
there to be some risk of future exceedances for these eight areas.
    For the other six of the 14 areas, the air quality monitoring data 
shows current attainment but with less than a 10 percent margin below 
the NAAQS. This suggests that these areas may remain without 
exceedances for some time, but that there is still a risk of future 
exceedance of the NAAQS due, for example, to meteorological conditions 
that may be more severe in the future.
    There is significant risk that at least some of these 35 areas will 
violate the NAAQS in 2004 or thereafter without additional reductions. 
We consider the situation in these areas to support our belief that, 
overall, additional reductions are needed.

Today's Program Will Help Areas Meet Their Attainment and Maintenance 
Requirements

    The HD gasoline vehicle standards finalized today, and the HD 
diesel standards reviewed today, will help all of the areas discussed 
above to either meet their attainment deadlines, to maintain attainment 
in the future, or both. The new program will be very important to each 
of the areas with deadlines in 2005 and later that will require (or may 
require) additional emission reductions (2005 is the year that new 
gasoline HD vehicles will begin to enter the fleet). As Table 2 shows, 
there are 10 such areas with almost 66 million people. The following 
table lists these areas and their expected attainment dates:

[[Page 59904]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      Population
           Metropolitan area                 Attainment deadline           Modeling predictions       (millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Baltimore...........................  2005.........................  VOC Shortfall................          2.6
 Philadelphia........................  2005.........................  NOX and VOC Shortfall........          6.0
 Greater Connecticut (Hartford and     2007 (requested extension)...  Contingent on New York                 2.4
 other MSAs).                                                          Attainment.
 New York City, NY-NJ-CT.............  2007.........................  VOC and NOX Shortfall........         19.9
 Houston, TX.........................  2007.........................  NOX Shortfall................          4.3
 Chicago, IL-IN......................  2007.........................  Regional modeling to analyze           8.6
                                                                       existence of shortfall is
                                                                       underway.
 Milwaukee, WI.......................  2007.........................  Regional modeling to analyze           1.6
                                                                       existence of shortfall is
                                                                       underway.
 Dallas, TX..........................  2007 (requested extension)...  Local modeling shows                   4.6
                                                                       nonattainment in 2007.
 Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX............  2007 (requested extension)...  Local modeling shows                   0.4
                                                                       nonattainment in 2007.
 Los Angeles (South Coast Air Basin),  2010.........................  Approved SIP with commitments         15.5
 CA.                                                                   for unspecified additional
                                                                       controls.
                                                                                                            65.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All of the areas in Table 2 with 2005 or later attainment deadlines 
will be able to take credit in their attainment demonstrations (or in 
revisions to their demonstrations) for the expected reductions from 
both the preexisting standards for HD diesel engines and from today's 
new standards for HD gasoline engines and vehicles. (EPA has not 
approved deadline extensions for Dallas and Beaumont/Port Arthur at 
this time; if their requested extensions (to 2007) are approved, these 
areas, too, could take credit for today's program). The ability to take 
credit for the new HD gasoline vehicle standards will be especially 
important for the several areas with emission ``shortfalls'' (i.e., 
those for which we have made our proposal to approve their attainment 
demonstrations contingent on their adoption of new measures for further 
emission reductions).
    In addition to helping 8 areas from Table 2 meet their attainment 
deadlines (plus Dallas and Beaumont/Port Arthur if they receive a 
deadline extension to 2005 or later), the new program will help these 
and all other areas with current or potential future ozone problems to 
maintain their attainment into the future. This includes at least the 
37 areas we expressed concern about earlier. In effect, the emission 
reductions of this program will reduce the risk that these areas that 
today are in or approaching attainment will fall back into 
nonattainment as they face economic development and growth in vehicle 
travel.

The Program Will Help States Avoid More Costly Measures

    In general, the task of states to reach and maintain attainment 
will be easier and the economic impact on their industries and citizens 
will be lighter if, as a result of today's new gasoline HD vehicle 
standards, they are able to forego other, less cost effective programs. 
Following implementation of the Regional Ozone Transport Rule, states 
will have already adopted emission reduction requirements for nearly 
all large sources of VOC and NOX for which cost-effective 
control technologies are known and for which they have authority to 
control. Those that remain in nonattainment therefore will have to 
consider their remaining alternatives.
    Thus, the emission reductions from the standards we are proposing 
today will ease the need for states to find first-time reductions from 
the mostly smaller sources that have not yet been controlled, including 
area sources that are closely related to individual and small business 
activities. The emission reductions from today's standards will also 
reduce the need for states to seek even deeper reductions from large 
and small sources that have previously implemented emission controls.

Conclusion

    In summary, the best air quality modeling available shows that, in 
the absence of further emission controls, many metropolitan areas 
totaling over 100 million people are at risk of failing to meet the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS during the period when these standards will be 
implemented. Further, as we discussed earlier, ozone concentrations 
exceeding the 1-hour ozone NAAQS have clearly been shown to endanger 
public health and welfare. We conclude, therefore, that, given the 
concentrations of ozone during the time period when this rule will take 
effect, further control of ozone-forming NOX and 
hydrocarbons is justified under the Act.
    Today's new national standards for HD gasoline vehicles will result 
in significant reductions in these pollutants. Thus, this program will 
be an important part of many states' strategies for meeting their air 
quality requirements and maintaining attainment into the future, 
including at least 8-10 of these areas that, as discussed above, will 
be directly assisted in meeting their upcoming attainment deadlines. At 
the same time, this program will allow states to avoid less attractive 
measures that would generally provide less emission reduction at a 
higher cost.
d. HD Diesel and Gasoline Engines Contribute to Total NOX 
and VOC Emissions
    HD engines and vehicles are major contributors to nationwide 
emissions of NOX and they are moderate contributors to 
nationwide emissions of VOC (estimates of a geographic area's emissions 
are called ``emission inventories''). The RIA for this rule describes 
in detail recent emission inventory modeling completed by EPA for this 
rule. Table 3 summarizes EPA's current estimates for national 
NOX and VOC contributions from major mobile source 
categories.

[[Page 59905]]



                             Table 3.--Estimated 2000 National NOX and VOC Emissions
                                         [Thousand short tons per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                NOX                       VOC
                       Emission source                            NOX       (percent)        VOC      (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Light-Duty Vehicles........................................        4,420           18        4,098           25
 Heavy-Duty Vehicles........................................        3,759           15          355            2
 Nonroad Engines and Vehicles...............................        5,343           22        2,485           15
 Other (Stationary Point and Area Sources)..................       10,656           44        9,567           58
   Total Nationwide Emissions...............................       24,178                    16,505
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 3 indicates that HD gasoline and diesel vehicles currently 
represent about 15 percent of national NOX emissions and two 
percent of national VOC emissions. Moreover, as described in more 
detail in the RIA, the local heavy-duty vehicle NOX 
contributions are higher than the national average in many important 
urban areas.
    The RIA also contains updated emission inventory modeling for HD 
vehicles in future years. The results show that without additional HD 
NOX control beyond the 1998 standards, national 
NOX emissions from HD vehicles would decline for the next 
few years but that this trend would reverse around 2006. After that, 
without additional emission controls, NOX emissions from the 
HD vehicle fleet would again increase as a result of future growth in 
the HD vehicle market. A similar trend is seen for national NMHC 
emissions from HD vehicles--we project that NMHC emissions will 
decrease until around 2009, after which growth in numbers of vehicles 
will offset emission reductions and NMHC emissions from HD vehicles 
will increase (see Chapters 6 and 7 of the RIA).\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The emission inventory modeling we performed for this rule 
includes the excess emissions that occurred as a result of certain 
HD diesel engines manufactured between 1988 and 1998. These engines 
were at issue in the ``consent decrees'' involving certain HD diesel 
engine manufacturers, as discussed in Section I.C. above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Need for Particulate Matter Reductions
a. PM Emissions Cause Adverse Health and Welfare Effects
    Particulate matter is the general term for the mixture of solid 
particles and liquid droplets found in the air.
    Particulate matter includes dust, dirt, soot, smoke, and liquid 
droplets that are directly emitted into the air from natural and 
manmade sources, such as windblown dust, motor vehicles, construction 
sites, factories, and fires. Particles are also formed in the 
atmosphere by condensation or the transformation of emitted gases such 
as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds. 
Motor vehicle particle emissions and the particles formed by the 
transformation of motor vehicle gaseous emissions (secondary particles) 
tend to be in the fine particle range. Fine particles (those less than 
2.5 micrometers in diameter) are a health concern because they easily 
reach the deepest recesses of the lungs.
    Scientific studies suggest that airborne particles likely play a 
causal role in a range of serious respiratory health problems. The key 
health effects categories associated with particulate matter include 
premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular 
disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions and emergency 
room visits, school absences, work loss days, and restricted activity 
days), aggravated asthma, acute respiratory symptoms (e.g., coughing, 
difficult or painful breathing, chronic bronchitis, and shortness of 
breath). Exposure to fine particles is associated with such health 
effects as premature mortality or hospital admissions for 
cardiopulmonary disease. PM also causes damage to materials and soiling 
and is a major cause of substantial visibility impairment in many parts 
of the U.S.
    These health and environmental effects are discussed further in the 
RIA, and additional information may be found in EPA's Air Quality 
Criteria Document for particulate matter.\20\ In addition to the 
harmful health effects that are linked to particulate matter, diesel 
exhaust as a whole is also suspected of causing serious health effects. 
(See Section II.A.3. below)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ U.S. EPA, 1996, Air Quality Criteria for Particulate 
Matter, EPA/600/P-95/001aF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Current and Future Compliance With the PM10 NAAQS
    Compliance with the current PM10 standard continues to 
be a problem. The most recent PM10 monitoring data indicates 
that 15 counties designated PM10 nonattainment counties, 
with a population of 8.6 million in 1996, violated the PM10 
NAAQS in the period 1996-1998. The RIA lists these 15 counties. The 
recent PM modeling analysis we performed for the Tier 2 rulemaking 
predicts that without additional controls, 8 of these areas, comprising 
a population of 7.8 million, are at high risk of failing to meet or 
maintain the PM10 NAAQS even with Tier 2 and other controls 
currently in place. An additional 5 areas, with a population of almost 
17 million, are at significant risk of failing to maintain the NAAQS 
without further reductions in PM10.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Tier 2/Gasoline 
Sulfur final rule, which is available in the docket for this rule 
and through the Office of Transportation and Air Quality web page at 
www.epa.gov/oms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Contribution of HD Diesel and Gasoline Vehicles to Particulate 
Matter
    Because we are not changing the particulate matter emission 
standards for HD vehicles in this rule, the effect of this rule on PM 
results primarily from reductions in NOX emissions and in 
turn reductions in the secondary formation of nitrate particles in the 
atmosphere. Most available modeling of PM emissions, however, focuses 
only on direct (primary) emissions of PM.
    We have not attempted to quantify the contribution of HD vehicles 
to the secondary nitrate particles formed from the large NOX 
emissions of these vehicles in this final rule. We are convinced that 
this contribution is substantial, especially in regions of the country 
where ammonia levels in the air are relatively high (NOX 
reacts with ammonia to form ammonium nitrate particles). Similarly, we 
believe that the very significant NOX reductions from HD 
diesel and gasoline vehicles that will result from the 2004 standards 
will also result in important reductions in the HD contribution to 
nitrate PM.
3. Air Toxics From HD Engines and Vehicles
    In addition to contributing to the health and welfare problems 
associated with exceedances of the National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards for ozone and PM10, emissions from HD diesel and 
gasoline vehicles include a

[[Page 59906]]

number of air pollutants that increase the risk of cancer or have other 
negative health effects. These air pollutants include benzene, 
formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and diesel exhaust. For 
several of these pollutants, motor vehicle emissions are believed to 
account for a significant proportion of total nation-wide emissions. 
All of these compounds are products of combustion; benzene is also 
found in nonexhaust emissions from gasoline-fueled vehicles. The 
reductions in hydrocarbon emissions from HD vehicles resulting from 
today's program will further reduce the potential cancer risk and other 
health risks from these air toxics because many of these pollutants are 
themselves VOCs. Diesel engine exhaust is also a potential concern 
because of its possible carcinogenic and mutagenic effects on people.
    We are addressing the issues raised by air toxics from motor 
vehicles and their fuels in a separate rulemaking, pursuant to section 
202(l)(2) of the Act. Our proposed rule, which was signed July 14, 
2000, proposes a list of 21 mobile source air toxics as well as 
standards to limit on the amount of benzene in gasoline. It also sets 
out a Technical Analysis Plan whereby EPA will continue to conduct 
research and analysis and to revisit the need for and appropriateness 
of additional controls on toxic emissions from motor vehicles and fuels 
in a 2004 rulemaking.

B. Today's Action Will Result in Large Emission Reductions

1. Reductions Due to Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines
    We have made several improvements in our analysis of HDDE emissions 
since our earlier analyses (in the original 1997 rulemaking and in the 
1999 proposal). Chapter 6 of the RIA provides a detailed explanation of 
the methodology we used to estimate the emission reductions that will 
result from the requirements for heavy-duty diesel engines associated 
with today's action. The primary improvement is to include the 
previously unknown excess emissions from many engines between 1988 and 
1998. These engines were at issue in the ``consent decrees'' involving 
certain HD diesel engine manufacturers, as discussed in Section I.C. 
above (``How Does This Action Relate to the Consent Decrees?''). As 
result of this modeling change, our estimates of the contribution of 
the emissions of pre-1999 engines rose significantly relative to those 
in the proposal, which did not include these excess emissions.
    The other important improvement in the modeling resulted from a 
better understanding of the likely balance manufacturers will make in 
their efforts to control both NOX and NMHC in order to meet 
the combined NOX + NMHC standard. Since some current engines 
are already able to meet very low NMHC levels, we expect that 
manufacturers will generally be able to design for NOX 
levels slightly less stringent than we had originally expected and 
still meet the combined standard. Our modeling for the final rule thus 
results in slightly less NOX control as well as somewhat 
more NMHC control than did our analysis for the proposed rule.
    Table 4 and Figures 1 and 2 show our projections of total national 
NOX and NMHC emissions and the estimated emission reductions 
from HD engine controls in future years. The projected emissions 
decline over the next several years, due to implementation of stricter 
controls, but then, unless there are additional controls (including the 
HD diesel NOX controls reaffirmed in this rule), they begin 
to rise due to growth in the number of vehicle miles traveled. Without 
additional emission controls, by the 2005-2010 time frame, the 
NOX and NMHC emissions from HD diesels will be on an 
accelerating rise into the future. With the diesel engine emission 
controls reaffirmed in today's action, we believe that NMHC emissions 
from these engines will not return to the 2005 ``without-control'' 
levels until after 2020, and that NOX emissions will not 
return to the 2005 ``without-control'' levels until after 2030.

   Table 4.--Estimated National NOX and NMHC Emissions and Emission Reductions From Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles
                                         [Thousand short tons per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     NOX                                    NMHC
                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Year                 Without new    With new     Emission   Without new    With new     Emission
                                      controls     controls    reduction     controls     controls    reduction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005..............................        2,450        2,260          186          178          168           10
2010..............................        2,460        1,820          635          177          142           35
2015..............................        2,700        1,750          949          208          156           52
2020..............................        2,990        1,810        1,180          238          173           65
2030..............................        3,610        2,090        1,520          286          203           84
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 59907]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.000

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.001

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
    Although this rule does not require reductions in direct PM 
emissions, the standards are expected to result in significant 
reductions in the concentrations of secondary PM. Secondary PM is 
formed when NOX reacts with ammonia in the atmosphere to 
yield fine particles in the form of ammonium nitrate. The chemistry 
governing the conversion of NOX to secondary PM is very 
complex and varies from region to region. As a result, we do not 
present an estimate of the tons of PM reduction that can be expected 
from this program. However, because of the large NOX 
reductions that this program will cause, we believe that the reductions 
in NOX-related PM will also be significant.

[[Page 59908]]

    The term ``hydrocarbons'' includes many different chemical 
compounds. Analysis of hydrocarbons in the ambient air shows that many 
of these compounds can be classified as toxic air emissions including 
benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene. Hydrocarbons 
from HD diesel engines include approximately 1.1 percent benzene, 7.8 
percent formaldehyde, 2.9 percent acetaldehyde, and 0.6 percent 1,3-
butadiene. Therefore, the 117,000 tons per year reduction in NMHC we 
project for 2030 would result in about a 14,000 tons per year reduction 
in air toxics. These issues are discussed in more detail in the RIA.
    EPA also believes the regulations in today's action will tend to 
reduce noise. One important source of noise in diesel combustion is the 
sound associated with the combustion event itself. When a premixed 
charge of air and fuel ignites, the very rapid combustion leads to a 
sharp increase in pressure, which is easily heard and recognized as the 
characteristic sound of a diesel engine. The conditions that lead to 
high noise levels also cause high levels of NOX formation. 
Fuel injection changes and other NOX control strategies we 
expect manufacturers to pursue in meeting HD diesel standards should 
generally have the effect of reducing engine noise.
2. Reductions Due to Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Gasoline 
Vehicles and Engines
    In evaluating the environmental impact of today's heavy-duty 
gasoline engine and vehicle standards for 2005 and later, we developed 
estimates of exhaust NOX and NMHC emissions from HDGVs 
(excluding California) both with and without the effect of the 
standards. The analysis performed to estimate the emission reductions 
from HD gasoline vehicles and engines in this final rule is identical 
to the analysis performed for the Agency's recently announced proposal 
to reduce emissions from HD gasoline engines in the 2007 time frame 
(published on June 2, 2000 (65 FR 35430)). This analysis is different 
than the analysis we performed for the proposed rulemaking. In the 
proposal we used the EPA MOBILE5 emission model, with in-use adjustment 
factors developed specifically for the proposal. As discussed in the 
RIA, the draft MOBILE6 emission rates for HD gasoline engines and 
vehicles have been completed, so we use those emission rates in this 
final rule. Because MOBILE6 is not complete, we used the updated 
emission rates from MOBILE6 in MOBILE5 for our analysis. The EPA report 
in which these emission rates are reported has gone through an external 
stakeholder review.\22\ For this final rule we use zero-mile 
deterioration rates for 1988 and later model year HD gasoline exhaust 
emissions developed for the draft MOBILE6 emission model. The impact of 
this change on this final rule, as compared to the proposal, was to 
decrease the estimated in-use emission rates, for both the baseline and 
controlled scenarios, for 1998 and later model year HD gasoline 
engines. Full details of the environmental impact analysis can be found 
in Chapter 7 of the RIA. The following paragraphs summarize the key 
results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ ``Update of Heavy-Duty Emission Levels (Model Years 1988-
2004+) for use in MOBILE6'', EPA document EPA-420-R-99-010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 5 and Figures 3 and 4 show our projections of exhaust 
NMHC+NOX emissions from HD gasoline vehicles both with and 
without the standards established today. As the table and figures show, 
without further controls we project that NOX emissions will 
increase from current levels without further controls. With 
implementation of the standards, we expect that NOX 
emissions from HDGVs will begin decreasing immediately in 2005 and will 
continue to decrease far into the future. In the case of exhaust NMHC 
emissions, we project that in the absence of new controls, they will 
decline over the next several years but then begin to increase 
beginning around 2010. With implementation of the standards, we expect 
the exhaust NMHC emissions from HDGVs to decrease significantly from 
``without control'' emissions. Although we project that these emissions 
will level off and gradually begin to rise again after 2020, the level 
of emissions will remain well below ``without control'' emissions well 
past 2030.

  Table 5.--Estimated National NOX and NMHC Emissions and Emission Reductions From Heavy-Duty Gasoline Vehicles
                                            [Thousand tons per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     NOX                                    NMHC
                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Year                   Without        With       Emission     Without        With       Emission
                                      controls     controls    reduction     controls     controls    reduction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005..............................          378          362           16           70           69            1
2010..............................          409          258          151           61           48           13
2015..............................          441          199          242           62           41           21
2020..............................          476          172          304           68           40           28
2030..............................          539          152          387           80           43           37
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[[Page 59909]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.003

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
    As with HD diesel engines, we believe that the NOX 
reductions that will result from these standards will result in a 
corresponding reduction in secondary nitrate PM formed from 
NOX. Similarly, we believe that the NMHC reductions will 
result in corresponding reductions in several toxic air pollutants.

C. Benefits of the Supplemental Requirements and In-Use Control 
Measures of Today's Action

    We consider that the supplemental test procedure and in-use control 
measures of today's action will play a vital role in achieving the full 
emission

[[Page 59910]]

reductions expected from the diesel and gasoline engine standards 
promulgated or reviewed today. As described elsewhere in this preamble, 
these measures include the following:
     new supplemental test procedure requirements for diesel 
engines,
     onboard diagnostics (OBD) requirements for vehicles (and 
engines intended for vehicles) rated at less than 14,000 lbs GVWR, and
     the ``CAP-2000'' in-use testing requirements for gasoline 
vehicles below 14,000 lbs GVWR.
    The new supplemental test procedure requirements will ensure that 
engines are designed to meet the appropriate standards under a broad 
range of operating conditions. The in-use testing requirements will 
ensure that engines meet the appropriate standards throughout their 
useful lives. Finally, the OBD requirements will help ensure that 
engines in-use continue to operate according to design intent and that 
designs are durable and robust in the field. If vehicles and engines 
malfunction or deteriorate in ways that are not noticed by the driver, 
emissions may be far above the design intent of the engine or vehicle 
for thousands, if not tens of thousands of miles. On-board diagnostic 
systems are uniquely suited to identify such malfunctions. Such 
identification is a very important part of ensuring that the engines 
and vehicles continue to operate as they were designed and thus 
continue to provide the air quality benefits envisioned by this 
program.
    For example, we expect that use of EGR will become increasingly 
widespread as manufacturers comply with the 2004 diesel standards. The 
EGR systems will likely cut engine-out emissions by as much as one-
half. Should an EGR system malfunction in the absence of OBD 
provisions, the emissions could double without the driver becoming 
aware of the malfunction (since a non-functional EGR system may not 
change the performance of the vehicle, depending upon the nature of the 
specific malfunction). A similar situation exists for gasoline (Otto-
cycle) vehicles and engines, which depend on catalytic converters and 
evaporative emission control systems. A failed or deteriorated 
catalyst, or a defective evaporative leak detection monitor, can result 
in a large increase in emissions. Without the OBD system, those 
emissions may never be identified and the malfunctions would probably 
never be repaired.
    Benefits such as those described above are not easily quantified 
but are critical to the success of our program as a whole. Without any 
one of these compliance and in-use control measures, the benefits of 
today's action will undoubtedly be diminished, and perhaps to a very 
significant degree.
    As we discussed in the proposal, we are also very concerned that 
additional factors may jeopardize the large emission reductions 
estimated in today's rule: the lack of OBD systems for HD vehicles 
rated at greater than 14,000 lbs GVWR; the lack of an effective in-use 
program for all HD engines and vehicles; and the lack of supplemental 
test procedures for HD gasoline engines similar to those being 
finalized today for diesels. As we discuss in the Response to Comments 
document, and in the proposal, we received broad support from states, 
environmental organizations, and industry to move forward with 
developing a proposal to address these important issues through a 
subsequent rulemaking process.

III. Content of the Final Rule

    The following is a description of the regulations being adopted in 
this final rule, with any changes from the proposal also noted. A 
summary of the requirements is contained in preamble Section I., above. 
A full description of our analysis of comments received on the 
proposal, and our rationale for our response to those comments and any 
subsequent change to the final rule from the proposal, are contained in 
the Response to Comments for the rule.

A. What Are the Requirements for Heavy-duty Diesel Engines?

    This section summarizes those actions which are being finalized in 
today's rule which will effect heavy-duty diesel engines.
1. Review of 2004 NMHC+NOX Standard
    One of the principal components of today's final action is the 
decision that the 2004 NMHC+NOX standards for HDDE continue 
to be appropriate under the Clean Air Act. In our 1997 final rule (62 
FR 54694) which established the 2.4 g/bhp-hr NMHC+NOX 
standards (or optionally a 2.5 g/bhp-hr NMHC+NOX with a 
limit of 0.5 g/bhp-hr NMHC) we agreed to perform a technological review 
of the standards to review the standards' appropriateness. Based on the 
information presented in our NPRM, as well as our analysis of comments 
received on the proposal and the technological feasibility and cost 
discussions below, we have determined these standards continue to be 
appropriate for the 2004 model year. As part of the reaffirmation 
process, EPA also examined the relationship between on-highway diesel 
fuel quality and the 2004 emission standards. Based on the data 
presented in the proposal, and our analysis of the comments received on 
the NPRM, no changes in on-highway diesel fuel quality are necessary or 
will be provided for the 2004 model year. Therefore, we have decided 
not to reconsider or revise these standards.
2. New Requirements
    The October 29, 1999 NPRM for HDDEs contained a proposal for a new 
set of supplemental test requirements which would take effect in model 
year 2004 concurrent with the existing 2004 FTP standards 
(NMHC+NOX standard of 2.5g/bhp-hr, PM standard of 0.10 g/
bhp-hr for all HDDEs except urban buses, etc.). The proposed 
supplemental tests included the NTE, the supplemental steady-state 
test, and additional requirements. In the NPRM, we expressed concern 
regarding our ability to provide HDDE manufacturers with the four years 
of lead time required by the Clean Air Act for the implementation of 
the supplemental requirements in model year 2004 considering our 
compressed rulemaking schedule (See 64 FR 58475). Clean Air Act Section 
202(a)(3)(C) requires that ``Any standard promulgated or revised under 
this paragraph and applicable to classes or categories of heavy duty 
vehicles or engines shall apply for a period of no less than 3 model 
years beginning no earlier than the model year commencing 4 years after 
such revised standard is promulgated.'' Due to this CAA requirement and 
the timing of this final rule, the Agency is not able to promulgate a 
mandatory supplemental program with a model year 2004 implementation. 
Due to stability concerns raised by engine manufacturers, EPA will 
implement the supplemental requirements beginning in 2007. In the time 
frame from 2004 through 2006, the Agency has existing regulatory and 
enforcement authority, and policy guidelines which we are confident 
will ensure the majority of the environmental benefits of the 
supplemental test procedures will be met. As discussed below this 
includes the existing CAA prohibition on the use of defeat devices, and 
our existing guidance policy on the use of AECDs and defeat devices. 
With these policies and agreements in place, the Agency sees no need to 
establish a voluntary program which would implement the supplemental 
test procedures for the time frame prior to 2007. The following is a 
detailed discussion of the tools available to the Agency to ensure that 
the anticipated environmental benefits of the supplemental test 
procedures will occur prior to model year 2007.

[[Page 59911]]

    Section I.C. of this preamble provides background information on 
the HD Consent Decrees (CD) which the Agency established with a number 
of HDDE manufacturers in 1998. The great majority of heavy-duty diesel 
engines are manufactured by companies covered by a CD--approximately 90 
percent of the estimated model year 1999 total HDDE U.S. production, 
and greater than 95 percent of heavy-heavy duty diesel engines which 
power the line-haul truck application. The heavy heavy-duty diesel 
engines are the largest on-highway engines and accumulate the most 
miles of usage, therefore the engines manufactured by CD companies 
represent the vast majority of HDDE emissions.
    The majority of the engines subject to the CDs must meet a not-to-
exceed emission limit of 1.25 times the 2004 HDDE standards, as well as 
a number of additional supplemental requirements, no later than October 
1, 2002 (these are sometimes referred to as ``pull-ahead'' engines). 
The CD manufacturers must produce these pull-ahead engines for two 
years from the date they are in full compliance with all requirements 
of the Consent Decrees. Therefore, the pull-ahead engines will be 
manufactured for what is essentially model years 2003 and 2004, and 
possibly beyond, depending on whether the engines produced by October 
2002 are in full compliance with the Consent Decrees. During the 
rulemaking process, several of the CD companies made public statements 
that they were having difficulty in preparing to meet all the CD 
requirements for pull-ahead engines. If these companies cannot 
manufacturer engines meeting all the CD requirements by October, 2002, 
the Agency believes that under the terms of the Consent Decrees, the 
noncomplying companies will be required to manufacturer pull-ahead 
engines beyond model year 2004 until they are in full compliance for 
two straight years.
    For engines which meet all of the Consent Decree requirements as of 
October 2002 and therefore would no longer be subject to these 
requirements for engines produced after October of 2004, EPA would not 
expect manufacturers to change their designs in ways that would 
noticeably increase emissions and will closely scrutinize designs and 
use our defeat device prohibition and guidance policy to assure this 
does not happen.\23\ Therefore, regardless of whether the CD provisions 
terminate after model year 2004, the Agency believes the CD 
manufacturers will continue to manufacture engines for model years 2005 
and 2006 which demonstrate compliance with the 2004 standards and 
satisfy the emission performance provisions of the Consent Decrees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See ``Heavy-duty Diesel Engines Controlled by Onboard 
Computers: Guidance on Reporting and Evaluating Auxiliary Emission 
Control Devices and the Defeat Device Prohibition of the Clean Air 
Act'', October 15, 1998. Document available in EPA Air Docket A-98-
32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are a number of HDDE companies not covered by a CD, and not 
all engines covered by a CD must meet a pull-ahead requirement which 
includes supplemental test procedure limits at the 2.5g/bhp-hr 
NMHC+NOX level. These engines are concentrated in the light-
heavy and medium-heavy-duty diesel market, therefore their overall 
emission impact is relatively small--less than 25 percent of the 
emissions from a given year's total HDDE production based on recent 
certification estimates. However, we will continue to apply our 
existing statutory authority, regulatory authority, and policy guidance 
to those engines not covered by a consent decree between model years 
2004 and 2006 to ensure that these engines comply with all applicable 
2004 emission standards and control emissions over the wide range of 
anticipated operating conditions.
    In October of 1998, EPA issued guidance policy on AECDs and the 
defeat device prohibition for HDDEs. This guidance document includes 
the recommended use of the not-to-exceed test procedure and the Euro-3 
steady state test (on which the 2007 supplemental steady state test is 
based) as screening tools for the manufacturers to use to provide the 
Agency additional assurance they are meeting all applicable regulatory 
requirements. One company not covered by a Consent Decree has already 
voluntarily submitted documentation and test data for their 2000 model 
year HDDE engine family as requested in the Agency's October 1998 
guidance regarding emissions during the Euro-3 steady state test and 
not-to-exceed emission performance, including a voluntary statement of 
compliance with NTE and Euro-3 emission limits.\24\ The Agency 
anticipates engine manufacturers will submit the requested information 
for model years up to 2006, after which the NTE and supplemental steady 
state test procedures will be mandatory certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See--Statement of Compliance for Engine Family 
YNDXH04.6FAB, available in EPA Air Docket A-98-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, we are adding two supplemental sets of requirements 
for HDDEs: (1) A supplemental steady-state test (SSS); and (2) Not-To-
Exceed requirements (NTE). Like current emission requirements, these 
new requirements apply to certification, production line testing, and 
vehicles in actual use. These supplemental requirements will take 
effect with the 2007 model year. All existing compliance provisions 
(e.g., warranty, certification, production line testing, recall) are 
applicable to these new requirements as well, except as noted in the 
regulations. The supplemental requirements establish new emission 
standards for HDDEs, and these new standards will be enforced in the 
same manner as the preexisting FTP standard. The new SSS will become 
part of the Agency's existing selective enforcement audit (SEA) 
program; however, as discussed in the Response to Comments document, 
the NTE, as well as the MAEL and EPA selected steady-state ``mystery 
points'' discussed below have been excluded from the SEA regulations. 
In addition, we are finalizing a third supplemental test procedure for 
heavy-duty diesel engines--a Load Response Test--as a data submittal 
requirement only, which will take effect with the 2004 model year. 
These supplemental requirements will provide assurance that engines are 
designed to achieve the expected level of in-use emissions control over 
all expected operating regimes in-use. These procedures are described 
in greater detail in the following sections.
a. Not-to-Exceed Test Under Expanded Conditions
    We are finalizing a Not-To-Exceed (NTE) requirement applicable to 
HDDEs. The NTE approach establishes an area (the ``NTE control area'') 
under the torque curve of an engine where emissions must not exceed a 
specified value for any of the regulated pollutants.\25\ The NTE 
requirement would apply under any engine operation conditions that 
could reasonably be expected to be seen by that engine in normal 
vehicle operation and use, as well as a wide range of real ambient 
conditions. The NTE control area, emissions requirements, and ambient 
conditions and test procedures for HDDEs are described below. These 
requirements would take effect starting in the 2007 model year and 
would apply to new engines as well as in use throughout the useful life 
of the engine.

[[Page 59912]]

At the time of certification manufacturers would have to submit a 
statement that its engines will comply with these requirements under 
all conditions which may reasonably be expected to occur in normal 
vehicle operation and use. The manufacturer must provide a detailed 
description of all testing, engineering analysis, and other information 
that forms the basis for the statement. This certification statement 
must be based on testing and/or research reasonably necessary to 
support such a statement. This supporting information must be submitted 
to EPA at certification upon request; manufacturers are not necessarily 
required to submit NTE test data during certification. Start up 
conditions are excluded from NTE testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Torque is a measure of rotational force. The torque curve 
for an engine is determined by an engine ``mapping'' procedure 
specified in the Code of Federal Regulations. The intent of the 
mapping procedure is to determine the maximum available torque at 
all engine speeds. The torque curve is merely a graphical 
representation of the maximum torque across all engine speeds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NTE test procedure can be run in a vehicle on the road or in an 
emissions testing laboratory using an appropriate dynamometer. The test 
itself does not involve a specific driving cycle of any specific length 
(mileage or time), rather it involves driving of any type which could 
reasonably be expected to occur in normal vehicle operation that could 
occur within the bounds of the NTE control area. The vehicle (or 
engine) is operated under conditions that may reasonably be expected to 
be encountered in normal vehicle operation and use, including operation 
under steady-state or transient conditions and under varying ambient 
conditions. Emissions are averaged over a minimum time of thirty 
seconds and then compared to the applicable emission limits. The 
applicable ambient conditions and the methodology for correcting 
emissions results for temperature and/or humidity are described in the 
following section. The test procedure can be found in Sec. 86.1370-2007 
of the regulations.
    Examples of the NTE control area are illustrated in Figures 5 and 
6. With the exception of two limited regions under the torque curve 
(described below), the NTE control area for diesels includes all engine 
operation at or above 30 percent of the maximum torque value of the 
engine and all engine operation at or above a specific engine speed 
calculated based on the maximum power of the engine.\26\ Two small 
regions are excluded (or ``carved out'') from the NTE control area. As 
described in the proposed rule, these regions are excluded due to the 
technical challenges associated with controlling emissions in these 
areas, as well as the fact that engines do not tend to spend a lot time 
operating in these regions. The combination of the NTE control area and 
the emission limits within the zone effectively accomplish the Agency's 
goals of ensuring that emissions are controlled over a wide range of 
in-use operation. First, we exclude the area under the torque curve 
that falls below the curve representing 30 percent of the maximum power 
value of the engine (as distinguished from maximum torque). This region 
is carved out for all pollutants. Second, a PM-specific region is 
``carved out'' of the NTE control area. The PM-specific area of 
exclusion is generally in the area under the torque curve where engine 
speeds are high and engine torque is low, and can vary in shape 
depending upon several speed-related criteria and calculations detailed 
in the regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The maximum torque value and maximum power of the engine 
are derived as part of the engine mapping procedures specified in 40 
CFR 86.1332.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Examples of the NTE control area, including the areas excluded from 
the zone, are shown below in Figures 5 and 6. The A, B, and C engine 
speeds are the same as those defined for the supplemental steady state 
test and described in the regulations. Note that there are two possible 
constructions of the PM ``carve-out'' detailed in the regulatory 
language. The example in Figure 5 shows the PM carve-out as it would 
look if the C speed is below 2400 revolutions per minute (rpm), while 
Figure 6 shows the construct of the PM carve-out if the C speed is 
above 2400 rpm.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[[Page 59913]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.004


[[Page 59914]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.005

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
    Within the NTE control area, emissions of each of the regulated 
pollutants (NMHC + NOX, CO, PM), when averaged over a 
minimum time of 30 seconds, must not exceed 1.25 times the applicable 
FTP standards (or FEL if ABT is used). In addition, manufacturers must 
meet either a smoke limit or an opacity limit within the NTE control 
area. The filter smoke limit is 1.0 on the Bosch smoke number scale. 
The alternative opacity limits is a thirty second average smoke opacity 
of four percent for a five inch path for transient testing and a ten 
second average smoke opacity of four percent for a five inch path for 
steady state testing.
b. Deficiencies for NTE Emission Standards
    Today's action establishes NTE deficiency provisions for HDDEs 
similar to the deficiency provisions that apply to OBD systems. This 
will allow the Administrator to accept a HDDE as compliant with the NTE 
standards even though some specific requirements are not fully met. We 
are finalizing these NTE deficiency provisions because we believe that, 
despite the best efforts of manufacturers, for the first few model 
years it is possible some manufacturers may have technical problems 
that are limited in nature but cannot be remedied in time to meet 
production schedules. This provision will be available for 
manufacturers through model year 2009. The NTE deficiency provision 
will only be considered for failures to meet the NTE requirements. EPA 
will not consider an application for a deficiency for failure to meet 
the FTP or Supplemental Steady State standards.
    The NTE requirements are a new regulatory provision HDDE 
manufacturers have not been required to meet in the past. The NTE, in 
combination with the expanded conditions requirements, require 
compliance with the standard over a wide range of engine operating 
conditions. Given the complexity of designing, producing, and 
installing the components and systems that are needed to comply with 
the emission standards, a number of HDDE manufacturers have expressed 
concern with their ability to comply with all aspects of the NTE. In 
particular, manufacturers have expressed concern regarding compliance 
at the higher ambient temperature and altitude conditions that are 
covered by the NTE test for higher engine family horsepower ratings 
under high load operation. While we believe that full compliance can 
and in most cases will be achieved by model year 2007 given other 
changes in the NTE standards we have made to address these issues, we 
also believe that some level of relief may be needed to allow for 
certification of some engines that, despite the best efforts of the 
manufacturers, are deficient in their

[[Page 59915]]

ability to achieve the NTE emission requirements.
    As discussed elsewhere in this final rule, manufacturers have 
identified a number of technical issues which they anticipate 
manufacturers having difficulties overcoming. These include the 
availability of sensors and actuators with the necessary accuracy, 
precision, and repeatability to control engine and emission control 
hardware to the degree necessary to meet the NTE requirements under 
high load conditions during elevated temperatures and altitudes. 
Another example raised by some engine manufacturers was concerns with 
the limitation of current generation turbochargers, including 
compressor exit temperature limits and turbine wheel speed limits. 
While EPA projects that improvements in sensors, actuators and 
turbocharger materials will reduce these limitations in the future, 
manufacturers are concerned improvements may not be sufficient or may 
not occur early enough to allow the NTE requirements to be met for all 
engine families under certain operating conditions by 2007. These 
issues are discussed in more detail in the Response to Comments 
document and in the docket for this rulemaking.\27\ The NTE deficiency 
provision will provide additional lead time to manufacturers to resolve 
those technical compliance issues, if such lead time is needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See ``Summary of Conference Call between U.S. EPA and 
Honeywell Turbocharging Systems on December 22, 1999 regarding 2004 
On-highway Heavy-duty Diesel Proposal'', ``Summary of CBI 
Information regarding proposed HD Supplemental Test Requirements'', 
both available in EPA Air Docket A-98-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NTE deficiencies will be granted only if compliance would be 
infeasible or unreasonable considering such factors as, but not limited 
to: technical feasibility of the given hardware, need for more lead 
time, or production cycles including phase-in or phase-out of engine 
designs.
    Specific NTE deficiencies should not be carried over from the 
previous model year except where unreasonable hardware or software 
modifications would be necessary to correct the deficiency, and the 
manufacturer has demonstrated an acceptable level of effort toward 
compliance as determined by the Administrator. Furthermore, EPA will 
not accept any NTE deficiency requests that result from the complete 
failure of a major emission control component or system to operate 
(``major'' emission control components being those for exhaust 
aftertreatment devices, exhaust gas recirculation system components, 
turbo-machinery components, other emission control hardware, or other 
sensor or actuator hardware).
    An NTE deficiency request must include a description of all AECDs 
which would be used by the engine to comply with the deficiency being 
requested, if applicable. In addition, the NTE deficiency request must 
include a description of the control system the manufacturer will use 
to maintain regulated NTE emissions to the lowest practical level.
    The EPA NTE deficiency allowance should only be seen as an 
allowance for minor deviations from the NTE requirements. The NTE 
deficiency provisions contained in this final rule would allow a 
manufacturer to apply for relief from the NTE emission requirements 
under limited conditions. EPA expects that manufacturers should have 
the necessary functioning emission control hardware in place to comply 
with the NTE, especially given the lead time afforded to the NTE 
requirements in this final rule. Nonetheless, we recognize that there 
may be situations where a deficiency(ies) is necessary and appropriate. 
Deficiencies will be approved on an engine model basis, for a single 
model year, though a manufacturer may request a deficiency for all 
models and/or horsepower ratings within an engine family, if 
appropriate. These limitations are intended to prevent a manufacturer 
from using the deficiency allowance as a means to avoid compliance or 
delay implementation of any emission control hardware or to compromise 
the overall effectiveness of the NTE emission requirements.
    In the past, EPA has sometimes established non-conformance 
penalties (NCPs) as an available alternative for manufacturers who want 
to sell engines which do not meet an emission standard. Once an NCP is 
established for an emission standard, the NCP is available to all 
engine manufacturers, i.e., no approval from EPA is required. The NTE 
deficiency provisions established in today's rule are significantly 
different from NCPs. First, the deficiency provision are for minor 
deviations from the NTE requirements, such as the failure to meet the 
NTE emission limit under specific engine operation, during limited 
regions of the engine map, and during limited temperature and/or 
altitude conditions, for reasons such as lead time or technological 
feasibility. NCPs apply under all conditions covered by the applicable 
FTP, the manufacturer determines the level by which they will fail to 
meet the applicable standard, and they then calculate the per-engine 
penalty to be paid. Second, the manufacturer must apply for the 
deficiency, and EPA must then decide whether or not to grant such a 
deficiency. Once established, NCP's are available to all manufacturers, 
i.e., EPA cannot deny an NCP request. The fact that we are establishing 
an NTE deficiency provision in today's action does not foreclose the 
Agency's ability to establish NCPs for the NTE emission requirements in 
the future. As discussed in the Response to Comments Document, the 
Agency will continually monitor the status of technological development 
towards compliance with the NTE requirements and we will establish 
appropriate NCPs for the NTE emission standards should the criteria for 
establishing NCPs be met.
c. Supplemental Steady State Test
    We are adding a steady-state test cycle to the current Federal test 
procedures for HD diesel engines. This steady-state test cycle is 
consistent with the test cycle found in the European's ``EURO III ESC 
Test''; however not all aspects are identical to the EURO III ESC 
Test.\28\ Manufacturers are required to meet the standards under this 
test cycle as well as the standards using the current test procedure 
(including the current transient test cycle) in 40 CFR part 86, subpart 
N. This test takes effect starting with the 2007 model year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ ``Draft Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament 
and the Council Amending Directive 88/77/EEC of 3 December 1987 on 
the Approximation of the Laws of the Member States Relating to the 
Measures to be Taken Against the Emission of Gaseous and Particulate 
Pollutants from Diesel Engines for Use in Vehicles'', a proposal 
adopted by the Commission of the European Union on 3 December 1997, 
for presentation to the European Council and Parliament.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The supplemental steady-state test cycle consists of 13 modes of 
speed and power, primarily covering the typical highway cruise 
operating range of heavy-duty diesel engines. The cycle concentrates on 
the engine speed range bounded by 50 percent and 70 percent of rated 
power. This speed range is then divided into bands (engine speeds A, B 
and C, as defined in Sec. 86.1360-2007(c)). The ``control area'' is 
defined by the area between engine speeds A and C, and between 25 to 
100 percent load. During the test cycle, the engine is initially run at 
idle speed, then through a defined sequence of 12 modes at various 
speeds and engine loads of 25, 50, 75 and 100 percent. Each mode 
(except idle) is run for two minutes. During each mode of operation, 
the concentration of the gaseous pollutants is measured and weighted 
(according to the weighting factors in Sec. 86.1360-2007(b)(1)). The 
weighted average emissions for each pollutant, as

[[Page 59916]]

calculated according to this steady-state test procedure, must not be 
greater than the applicable FTP emission standards. (See Sec. 86.005-
11(a)(3).) A single, time weighted PM measurement is made for the 
entire 13 mode test, as specified in Sec. 86.1360-2007(e)(3).
    Manufacturers will perform the supplemental steady-state test in 
the laboratory following all applicable test procedures in 40 CFR part 
86, subpart N (e.g., procedures for engine warm-up and exhaust 
emissions measurement). The test must be conducted with all emission-
related engine control variables in the maximum NOX 
producing condition which could be encountered for a 30 second or 
longer averaging period at the given test point.
    In addition to the 13 modes of the test cycle, EPA has the 
opportunity to select an additional three test points as a check to 
ensure the effectiveness of the engine's gaseous emission controls 
within the control area (e.g., ensuring that emissions do not ``peak'' 
outside of the 13-mode test points). During the test, the regulated 
gaseous pollutants would be measured at each of these EPA-selected test 
points. PM emissions do not need to be measured during the measurement 
of emissions for the EPA selected points. The manufacturer also will 
determine an interpolated value of gaseous pollutant emissions at each 
EPA-selected test point, using the measured emissions of the closest 
four adjacent test points. See the illustration in Figure 2 of 
Sec. 86.1360-2007(g). We are finalizing a four-point linear 
interpolation procedure that is consistent with that of the European's 
``EURO III'', referenced above. (See Sec. 86.1360-2007(g)(2).) The 
measured emissions value is then compared to the interpolated emissions 
value. The measured pollutant value must not exceed the interpolated 
pollutant value by more than ten percent.
d. Maximum Allowable Emission Limits
    The emission levels at the 12 non-idle test points and the 
calculated emissions values from the four-point interpolation procedure 
for intermediate test points described in the previous section 
establish an emissions ``surface'' of Maximum Allowable Emission Limits 
(MAELs), as illustrated in Figure 1 of Sec. 86.1360-2007(f). This 
surface will limit gaseous emissions levels during all normal steady-
state engine operations that occur within the control area defined 
above, there is no MAEL surface for PM.
    Based on comments received and on further analysis of the MAEL 
concept, we have modified the final regulations such that the MAEL 
surface is applicable only to steady-state engine operation, and only 
during standard FTP laboratory conditions. The MAEL is specific to the 
test engine, and each engine must comply with it's MAEL surface. Each 
point on this surface will have a MAEL associated with it.\29\ The MAEL 
for each point is calculated using the same four-point linear 
interpolation procedure used to determine the emission value for the 
EPA test points discussed above. The MAEL applies throughout the 
regulatory useful life of the engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The emissions surface would include all points in the 
Supplemental Steady-State control area, as defined above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At certification, manufacturers would be responsible for testing 
the MAELs by performing the ``check'' described above for the three 
EPA-selected test points. To determine compliance, test results from 
operation within the control area must comply with the MAEL generated 
from running the 12 non-idle points of the supplemental steady state 
test for the specific test engine. These requirements are effective 
starting with the 2007 model year.
3. Altitude Requirements and Expanded Temperature and Humidity 
Conditions for NTE Testing
    The FTP, Supplemental Steady State, and MAEL tests are laboratory-
based test procedures that would be conducted under standard laboratory 
conditions defined in the regulations, with emission results corrected 
according to existing regulations regarding laboratory testing 
procedures.\30\ The NTE could be conducted in the laboratory or during 
on-the-road driving, and the standards associated with these tests, 
where applicable, apply under a wide range of conditions. The 
manufacturer must choose between two options for the range of 
conditions over which the engine must comply with the NTE requirements. 
We will briefly outline here these two options, an additional 
discussion is contained in the Response to Comments document under 
Issue 8.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The acceptable temperature range for FTP testing is defined 
by regulation as 68-86 degrees Fahrenheit. There is no specified 
humidity range in the regulations, but NOX emission 
results are to be corrected to 75 grains of water per pound of dry 
air.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First, manufacturers can choose to comply with the NTE limits at 
all altitudes less than or equal to 5,500 feet above sea level, under 
all temperature conditions. For temperatures outside a range of 55-95 
deg. Fahrenheit (F), a correction factor for NOX and PM is 
allowed. Inside the 55-95 deg. F range no correction factor for 
temperature is allowed.
    Under option two, a manufacturer can choose to comply with the NTE 
limits at all altitudes less than or equal to 5,500 feet above sea 
level, for all temperatures less than a specified temperature at each 
altitude. The upper temperature limit under option two is 100 deg. F at 
sea-level and 86 deg. F at 5,500 feet above sea-level, with a linear 
interpolation for altitudes in between. Temperature correction factors 
for PM and NOX are allowed for temperatures less than 55 
deg. F. However, unlike option one, under option two NTE limits do not 
apply above the upper temperature limits defined in the regulations. 
However, the prohibition against defeat devices would apply above the 
high temperature limits.
    Under either operating condition option, emissions of 
NOX can be corrected for humidity outside a range from 50 to 
75 grains of water per pound of dry air (7.14 to 10.71 grams of water 
per kilogram of dry air).
    Within the specific altitude, temperature and humidity ranges, 
emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines must meet the requirements 
described above, without corrections for temperature and humidity. For 
situations within the specified altitude limits in which the 
temperature and humidity conditions are outside these ranges, 
NOX is corrected for humidity and both NOX and PM 
are corrected for temperature. Corrections are to the end of the 
specified temperature or humidity range nearest the actual conditions. 
Good engineering judgment is to be used when correcting for humidity 
and temperature outside of the specified ranges, as specified in the 
regulations.
4. On-board Diagnostics for Heavy-duty Diesel Engines
    Today's final rule ``establishes'' new on-board diagnostic 
requirements for HD diesel engines used in the 8,500 to 14,000 pound 
GVWR category. In general, the OBD system must monitor emission-related 
engine components for deterioration or malfunction causing emissions to 
exceed 1.5 times the applicable standards. Upon detecting a 
malfunction, a dashboard malfunction indicator light (MIL) must be 
illuminated informing the driver of the need for repair. To assist the 
repair technician in diagnosing and repairing the malfunction, the OBD 
system must also incorporate standardization features (e.g., the 
diagnostic data link connector; computer communication protocols; etc.) 
the intent of which is to allow the technician to diagnose and repair 
any OBD compliant truck or engine through the use of a ``generic'' 
hand-held OBD scan tool. We received

[[Page 59917]]

a number of comments on the proposed OBD requirements and have 
incorporated those recommendations that we deemed to be appropriate. 
The summarized comments and our responses can be reviewed in the 
Response to Comments Document. The following is a summary of the 
requirements for HD diesel engines between 8,500 and 14,000 pounds 
GVWR.
a. OBD Malfunction Thresholds and Monitoring Requirements
    This final rule requires that, beginning in the 2005 model year, 
heavy-duty diesel engines used in vehicles less than 14,000 pounds must 
be equipped with an OBD system capable of detecting and alerting the 
driver of the following emission-related malfunctions or deterioration 
as evaluated over the appropriate certification test procedure: \31\

    \31\ The FTP minus the Supplemental FTP for chassis certified 
systems; the engine certification test procedure minus any 
supplemental test procedures for engine certified systems. While 
malfunction thresholds are based on certification test procedure 
emissions, this does not mean that OBD monitors need operate only 
during the test procedure. All OBD monitors that operate 
continuously during the test procedure should operate in a similar 
manner during non-test procedure conditions. The prohibition against 
defeat devices in Sec. 86.004-16 applies to these OBD requirements.

    (i) Catalyst deterioration or malfunction--before it results in 
exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable standard or FEL 
for NMHC+NOX. This monitoring would not need to be done 
if the manufacturer can demonstrate that deterioration or 
malfunction of the system will not result in exceedance of the 
threshold. The above requirement only applies to reduction 
catalysts; oxidation catalysts are not required to be monitored.
    (ii) Particulate trap malfunction--any particulate trap whose 
complete failure results in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times 
the applicable standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX or PM must be 
monitored. Particulate trap monitoring must be capable of detecting 
a catastrophic failure of the device. Monitoring to the precise 1.5 
threshold is not necessary. This monitoring would not need to be 
done if the manufacturer can demonstrate that a catastrophic failure 
of the system will not result in exceedance of the threshold.
    (iii) Engine misfire--lack of combustion must be monitored.
    (iv) If the vehicle or engine contains an oxygen sensor, then 
oxygen sensor deterioration or malfunction before it results in an 
exhaust emission exceedance of 1.5 times the applicable standard or 
FEL for NMHC+NOX or CO.
    (v) If the vehicle or engine contains an evaporative emission 
control system, then any vapor leak in the evaporative and/or 
refueling system (excluding the tubing and connections between the 
purge valve and the intake manifold) greater than or equal in 
magnitude to a leak caused by a 0.040 inch diameter orifice; an 
absence of evaporative purge air flow from the complete evaporative 
emission control system. On vehicles with fuel tank capacity greater 
than 25 gallons, the Administrator would be required to revise the 
size of the orifice to the feasibility limit, based on test data, if 
the most reliable monitoring method available was unable to reliably 
detect a system leak equal to a 0.040 inch diameter orifice.
    (vi) Any deterioration or malfunction occurring in an engine 
system or component directly intended to control emissions, 
including but not necessarily limited to, the EGR system, if 
equipped, the secondary air system, if equipped, and the fuel 
control system, singularly resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 
1.5 times the applicable emission standard or FEL for 
NMHC+NOX, PM, or CO. For vehicles equipped with a 
secondary air system, a functional check, as described in paragraph 
(f) below, may satisfy the requirements of this paragraph provided 
the manufacturer can demonstrate that deterioration of the flow 
distribution system is unlikely. This demonstration would be subject 
to Administrator approval and, if the demonstration and associated 
functional check are approved, the diagnostic system would be 
required to indicate a malfunction when some degree of secondary 
airflow is not detectable in the exhaust system during the check.
    (vii) Any other deterioration or malfunction occurring in an 
electronic emission-related engine system or component not otherwise 
described above that either provides input to or receives commands 
from the on-board computer and has a measurable impact on emissions; 
monitoring of components required by this paragraph would be 
satisfied by employing electrical circuit continuity checks and, 
wherever feasible, rationality checks for computer input components 
(input values within manufacturer specified ranges based on other 
available operating parameters), and functionality checks for 
computer output components (proper functional response to computer 
commands); malfunctions would be defined as a failure of the system 
or component to meet the electrical circuit continuity checks or the 
rationality or functionality checks.

    Upon detection of a malfunction, the MIL would be required to 
illuminate and a fault code stored no later than the end of the next 
driving cycle during which monitoring occurs provided the malfunction 
is again detected. Alternatively, upon Administrator approval, a 
manufacturer would be allowed to use a diagnostic strategy that employs 
statistical algorithms for malfunction determination. Manufacturers 
would be required to determine the appropriate operating conditions for 
diagnostic system monitoring with the limitation that monitoring 
conditions are encountered at least once during the applicable 
certification test procedure or a similar test cycle as approved by the 
Administrator. This is not meant to suggest that monitors be designed 
to operate only under test procedure conditions, as such a design would 
not encompass the complete operating range required for OBD malfunction 
detection.
    As an option to the above requirements, EPA will allow compliance 
demonstration according to the California OBDII requirements for HD 
diesel with one exception. This option allows manufacturers to 
concentrate on one set of OBD requirements for nationwide 
implementation (although federal OBD emission malfunction thresholds 
and monitoring requirements are essentially equivalent to those of the 
California OBDII regulation) and provides the highest level of OBD 
system effectiveness toward meeting nationwide clean air goals. 
However, the exception to this option is the requirement for catalyst 
and particulate trap monitoring. CARB does not require catalyst or 
aftertreatment monitoring, but as described above, this final rule 
does. Therefore, if a manufacturer chooses the California OBDII 
compliance option for a diesel engine, that manufacturer would still be 
required to satisfy the catalyst or particulate trap OBD monitoring 
requirements established in today's final rule.
b. Standardization Requirements
    The light-duty OBD regulations contain requirements for 
standardization of certain critical aspects of the OBD system. These 
critical aspects include the design of the data link connector, 
protocols for on-board to off-board computer communication, formats for 
diagnostic trouble codes, and types of test modes the on-board system 
and the off-board scan tool must be capable of supporting. Today's 
action contains similar standards for heavy-duty OBD systems, as 
detailed in the regulatory requirements under section Sec. 86.1806-05.
c. Deficiency Provisions
    Today's action also establishes the same deficiency provisions for 
heavy-duty diesel OBD systems as currently apply to light-duty OBD 
systems. This would allow the Administrator to accept an OBD system as 
compliant even though specific requirements are not fully met. The 
deficiency provisions were first introduced on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 
15242), and were recently revised on December 22, 1998 (63 FR 70681).

[[Page 59918]]

    To clarify our deficiency provisions, EPA does not expect to 
certify vehicles with federal OBD systems that have more than one OBD 
system deficiency, or to allow carryover of any deficiency to the 
following model year unless it can be demonstrated that correction of 
the deficiency requires hardware and/or software modifications that 
cannot be accomplished in the time available, as determined by the 
Administrator. Nonetheless, we recognize that there may be situations 
where more than one deficiency is necessary and appropriate, or where 
carry-over of a deficiency(ies) for more than one year is necessary and 
appropriate. In such situations, more than one deficiency, or carry-
over for more than one year, may be approved, provided the manufacturer 
has demonstrated an acceptable level of effort toward OBD compliance. 
These deficiency provisions cannot be used as a means to avoid 
compliance or delay implementation of any OBD monitors or as a means to 
compromise the overall effectiveness of the OBD program.
d. Applicability and Waivers
    Today's federal HD diesel OBD requirements would be implemented 
beginning with the 2005 model year. OBD requirements for diesel heavy-
duty engines used in vehicles up to 14,000 pounds GVWR would be phased 
in over a three year period, from 2005 until 2007. The percentage 
phase-in schedule will be 60/80/100 for the 2005/06/07 model years, 
respectively, based on projected sales. For those manufacturers with a 
single heavy-duty engine family (including otto-cycle and diesel), 
implementation of OBD requirements would not have to occur until the 
2007 model year. As discussed in Section II(B)(6) and III(C)(4), this 
final rule establishes OBD requirements for heavy-duty Otto-cycle 
engines and vehicles up to 14,000 pounds GVWR which are similar to the 
requirements for HD diesel, including an identical phase-in schedule. 
For Otto-cycle manufacturers who choose options 1 or 2, the phase-in 
schedule is 40/60/80/100 percent for the 2004/05/06/07 model years, 
respectively. HD manufacturers will be allowed to meet the OBD phase-in 
requirements by combining their projected sales of HD Otto-cycle and HD 
diesel engines to meet a combined diesel and Otto-cycle phase-in, at 
their option.
    For heavy-duty vehicles and engines up to 14,000 pounds GVWR 
operating on alternative fuel, EPA would grant OBD waivers during 
alternative fuel operation through the 2006 model year to the extent 
that manufacturers can justify the inability to fully comply with any 
of today's proposed OBD requirements.\32\ Such inability would have to 
be based upon technological infeasibility, not resource reasons. 
Further, any heavy-duty vehicles and engines that are subsequently 
converted for operation on alternative fuel would not be expected to 
comply with the OBD requirements if the non-converted vehicle or engine 
does not comply. In other words, if the vehicle or engine never 
completes any assembly stage in OBD compliance, it need not comply with 
the OBD requirements while operating on the alternative fuel. If the 
vehicle or engine does complete any assembly stage with a compliant OBD 
system, it would have to comply with the OBD requirements while 
operating on the fuel of original intent and, to the extent feasible, 
while operating on the alternative fuel. For these latter situations, 
EPA could grant waivers through the 2006 model year if the manufacturer 
can show it is infeasible to meet the requirements. Beginning in the 
2007 model year, all heavy-duty alternative fueled vehicles and engines 
up to 14,000 pounds GVWR will have to be fully compliant during both 
operation on the fuel of original intent and alternative fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Note that this provision currently exists for light-duty 
vehicles and trucks operating on alternative fuel through the 2004 
model year; that existing provision does not change with today's 
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

e. Certification Provisions
    The OBD certification information requirements of today's rule are 
consistent with the existing requirements for light-duty vehicles. The 
manufacturers application for certification must include, for each OBD 
system: a description of the functional operating characteristics of 
the diagnostic system; the method of detecting malfunctions for each 
emission-related engine component; and a description of any 
deficiencies including resolution plans and schedules. Anything 
certified to the California OBDII regulations would be required to 
comply with California ARB information requirements. EPA may consider 
abbreviating the OBD information requirements through rulemaking if it 
gains confidence that manufacturers are designing OBD systems that are 
fully compliant with all applicable regulations.
    During EPA certification of engines optionally certified to the 
California OBDII regulation, EPA may conduct audit and confirmatory 
testing consistent with the provisions of the California OBDII 
requirements. Therefore, while the Agency will consider California 
certification in determining whether to grant a federal certificate, 
EPA may also elect to conduct its own evaluation of that OBDII system. 
While it is unlikely, EPA may make a compliance determination that is 
not identical to that of the California Air Resources Board.
    Further, the final rule provisions allow for a ``drop-in'' 
demonstration. This provision allows engine certified and engine 
demonstrated OBD system to fulfill the demonstration requirements of a 
chassis certified OBD system, however, the chassis certified system 
would have to incorporate transmission diagnostics even though the 
``dropped-in'' engine system may not have been certified with 
transmission diagnostics. The drop-in provision also allows a chassis 
certified and chassis demonstrated OBD system to fulfill any 
demonstration requirements of an engine certified OBD system. The drop-
in provision discussed here requires the manufacturer to rigorously 
demonstrate its OBD concept and approach on one engine or model, but 
allows the manufacturer to apply that demonstration via engineering 
judgement to the different engine and powertrain calibrations used 
across its fleet. The Agency will accept such a demonstration provided 
sound engineering judgement is employed.
5. Submission of Load Response Test Data
    We are finalizing a new data submission requirement for HD diesel 
engine manufacturers. Within 180 days after submission of the 
application for certification, manufacturers of HD diesel engines for 
the 2004 model year will need to submit laboratory certification data 
generated during a test procedure referred to as the Load Response Test 
(LRT). This data submission requirement will remain through model year 
2007. This test procedure is intended to provide the Agency with needed 
information regarding the emission impacts of very short, rapid engine 
loadings on new emission control technology. We have finalized a LRT 
data submittal requirement similar to that which was proposed, with 
minor modifications to reflect our response to the technical test 
procedure comments received during the comment period. In addition, we 
have finalized certification data submission requirements which would 
allow manufacturers to carry across LRT data from one model year to 
future model years for the same engine family, and we have finalized 
requirements which will allow manufacturers to carry-across LRT data 
from one engine family to other engine

[[Page 59919]]

families which utilize similar emission control hardware. The use of 
carry-over and carry-across provisions will provide the Agency with 
important information on new control technologies, while minimizing the 
testing and reporting requirements for the manufacturers.
    As discussed in more detail in the Response to Comments document, 
the Load Response Test represents operation not adequately represented 
by the current FTP or the supplemental test procedures (NTE and SSS), 
and could eventually be used to ensure effective control of 
NOX and PM during this type of operation. We believe that 
establishing a future Load Response Test with appropriate emission 
limits may be a valuable addition to EPA's compliance program, and when 
the process of evaluating the available data is complete we intend to 
evaluate the addition of specific Load Response Test emission limits to 
EPA's compliance program in a future proposal. The data submittal 
requirement will enable a better understanding of the emissions that 
occur under this type of operation and would ensure that EPA 
establishes well supported standards in a future action, if we 
determine it is appropriate to do so. We have established this data 
submission requirement for a four year period, from model years 2004 
through 2007. In this time period the on-highway HD diesel engine 
industry will be utilizing a range of new emission control technology 
not previously used on these engines. As discussed throughout this 
document, in the 2004 time frame all manufacturers will likely be 
applying cooled EGR and advanced turbochargers in order to comply with 
the 2004 emission standards. As discussed in the Response to Comments 
document, the application of EGR systems has the potential to result in 
high emission rates of PM and NOX under the type of 
operation conditions simulated by the LRT. In a recent Agency proposal 
(June 2, 2000, 65 FR 35430), the Agency proposed to establish new 
emission standards based on advanced aftertreatment for HD diesel 
engines in model year 2007. We believe it is important to collect LRT 
emission data on these new technologies in order for the Agency to make 
an informed decision regarding the need for a new emission standard 
based on the LRT.
    The four years worth of LRT data should provide the Agency with 
sufficient information on which to make a determination regarding the 
appropriateness of establishing an emission standard based on the LRT.

6. EPA Policy and Regulations Regarding Defeat Devices and Auxiliary 
Emission Control Devices

    The NPRM for this final rule proposed to modify the existing defeat 
device definition for HD diesel engines and vehicles. The NPRM proposed 
to modify the current definition of defeat device contained in 
Sec. 86.094-2 by explicitly stating that AECD's which operate under 
conditions substantially included in the proposed NTE and MAEL test 
procedures would not be excluded from consideration for a possible 
defeat device. We discussed in the NPRM our rationale for this proposed 
change, i.e., the range of vehicle operation covered by the NTE and 
MAEL procedures is very broad compared to the existing FTP and covers 
much of the operation which is encountered by many engines.
    A number of engine manufacturers expressed concern in their 
comments with the proposed definition. Some manufacturers commented the 
proposed definition is unclear and has the potential to be interpreted 
too broadly.\33\ A detailed discussion of these comments and our 
response is contained in the Response to Comments for this final rule. 
In light of our further analysis of how best to control for defeat 
devices, we have decided in this final rule to retain the existing 
definition of defeat device contained in Sec. 86.094-2, with only a 
minor change to clarify that the applicable heavy-duty diesel federal 
emission test procedure includes the supplemental steady-state and not-
to-exceed test procedures beginning in model year 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See EPA Air Docket A-98-32, comments from Navistar 
International, item IV-D-29; comments from Caterpillar Inc., item 
IV-D-37; comments from Detroit Diesel Corp., item IV-D-28; and 
comments from the Engine Manufacturers Association, item IV-D-05.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As with the current definition of a defeat device, use of a control 
strategy during conditions which are substantially included in the 
existing FTP, the supplemental steady state test, or the not-to-exceed 
test, would not be considered a defeat device, even where it otherwise 
would be considered to reduce the effectiveness of the emissions 
control system during such operation. For example, use of such an AECD 
during the appropriate FTP, steady state supplemental, or NTE test 
procedure is not a violation of the defeat device prohibition. However, 
the engine still must comply with the applicable emission standards. 
For example, operation of the AECD within the NTE control zone during 
operation which is applicable to the NTE standard must never cause the 
engine to exceed 1.25 times any applicable existing FTP standard, 
except where EPA has approved a manufacturers request for an NTE 
deficiency under 40 CFR 86.007-11(a)(4)(iv). The fact that operation of 
the AECD during such condition is not a violation of the defeat device 
prohibition does not change the obligation to also comply with the 
applicable emissions standard. The two obligations are separate and 
distinct, and both must be met. An engine may not have a defeat device 
and it also must comply with the applicable emissions standards. When 
an AECD operates under conditions which are not substantially included 
in the existing FTP, steady state supplemental test, or the NTE test 
procedure, then the AECD will be considered a defeat device if it 
reduces the effectiveness of the emissions control system under 
operations which could reasonably be expected to occur in normal 
vehicle operation and use, unless it meets one of the other exceptions 
to the defeat device definition (such as engine start up). EPA will 
continue to interpret this provision as it has in the past, focusing on 
changes to the emissions control system that cause emissions to 
increase above what they would be without the change.
    The Agency recognizes that emission control strategies which are 
employed during the existing FTP and the supplemental test procedures 
(NTE and supplemental steady state) require the manufacturer to control 
a complex system of engine hardware. This includes the modulation of 
engine sub-systems (e.g., EGR temperature, EGR flow rate, turbocharger 
boost, fuel injection timing and pressure) to maintain emissions 
performance and also achieve engine performance, with the potential to 
increase or decrease NOX, PM and/or other regulated 
pollutants while keeping all pollutants at or below all applicable 
emission standards. The Agency's prohibition of the use of defeat 
devices will continue to protect against the use of illegal emission 
control strategies, including but not limited to timers or ``cycle 
sensors'', whose purpose or result is to reduce the effectiveness of 
the emission control system during conditions which are not 
substantially included in the applicable federal emission test 
procedures, and do not meet the other exemptions in the defeat device 
definition. Strategies that ``reduce effectiveness'' of the emission 
control system would include those that change the way the emission 
control system operates during off-cycle conditions and increase 
emissions from the engine

[[Page 59920]]

above what they would be without the change. For example, if a 
manufacturer operates an EGR system during on-cycle conditions in order 
to comply with applicable emission standards, it must operate the EGR 
system in a similar manner during off-cycle conditions, unless, for one 
of the allowable reasons set forth in the definition of defeat device, 
it cannot do so.
    Moreover, while the definition of defeat device allows as exception 
strategies needed to protect the engine against accident or damage, EPA 
intends to continue its policy of closely reviewing the use of this 
exception. In determining whether a reduction in emissions control 
effectiveness is ``needed'' for engine protection, EPA would closely 
evaluate the actual technology employed on the engine family, as well 
as the use and availability of other emission control technologies 
across the industry, taking into consideration how widespread the use 
is, including its use in similar applications.
    For example, as discussed throughout this final rule, in the 
context of the HD diesel 2004 standards we expect to see wide-spread 
use across all HD applications of advanced electronic fuel injection 
systems (such as common-rail or second generation unit injectors), 
advanced turbocharging systems (such as VGT systems), and cooled EGR 
systems. If, for example, a manufacturer uses hot EGR instead of cooled 
EGR, and seeks approval to reduce the emissions control system 
effectiveness to protect against engine damage during operation not 
substantially included in the FTP, EPA will closely review the request 
and intends among other things to evaluate the feasibility of cooled 
EGR in determining whether the reduction in emissions control 
effectiveness is in fact ``needed'' and appropriate. Under appropriate 
circumstances, EPA could determine that a reduction in emissions 
control effectiveness was not needed to protect the engine, based on a 
choice of a certain technology in the context of the widespread use in 
similar application of a different technology without the same need for 
protection.
    Manufacturers must continue to comply with the existing 
certification requirement to fully disclose and describe all AECDs in 
their certification applications. The Agency will continue to review 
all AECDs, in particular those which impact emission performance during 
conditions not substantially included in testing under the applicable 
federal emission test procedures, including beginning in model year 
2007, the supplemental steady-state and not-to-exceed test procedures.
    The revised definition of defeat device, in addition to the 
Agency's existing policy and guidance documents concerning defeat 
devices, provide engine manufacturers with appropriate guidance on the 
requirements they need to design and manufacturer their engines to 
meet, as well as provide the Agency and the environment with the 
appropriate protection from the use of defeat devices on on-highway HD 
diesel engines.

B. What Are the Requirements of the Heavy-duty Otto-cycle Vehicle-based 
Program?

1. Emission Standards
    EPA is adopting vehicle-based standards and test procedures for 
complete Otto-cycle vehicles between 8,500 and 14,000 pounds GVWR. As 
in the California MDV program, these complete vehicles will be tested 
on the federal light-duty vehicle and light-duty truck test 
procedure.\34\ We are finalizing as proposed the chassis-based 
standards contained in Table 6 below. The standards apply to complete 
vehicles in the weight categories shown. The standards are for 
emissions over the FTP and vehicles will be tested at adjusted loaded 
vehicle weight (ALVW), also known as test weight (TW).\35\ 
Manufacturers have some flexibility in meeting these standards with the 
ABT program applicable to heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles contained in 
today's final rule and described in a subsequent section of this 
preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Test procedures contained in 40 CFR Part 86 Subpart B, 
excluding the Supplemental FTP.
    \35\ ALVW or TW is the actual weight of the vehicle, known as 
curb weight, plus half pay load. Its also the average of the curb 
weight the GVWR, which is curb weight plus full pay load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Vehicles must meet these standards starting with the 2007 model 
year under Option 1, the 2004 model year under Option 2, or with the 
2005 model year under Option 3, as described in section I of this 
preamble. As noted in section I of this preamble, manufacturers 
selecting Option 1 may optionally meet these standards or an engine-
based standard for the 2003 through 2006 model years.

                 Table 6.--Full Useful Life Emission Standards for Otto-cycle Complete Vehicles
                                                [Grams per mile]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Nonmethane
                 Vehicle weight category  (GVWR)                    organic gas         NOX             CO
                                                                      (NMOG)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8,500--10,000 lbs*..............................................            0.28             0.9             7.3
10,001--14,000 lbs..............................................            0.33             1.0             8.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Excluding Medium-duty Passenger Vehicles covered by the Tier 2 program.

    EPA is finalizing a hydrocarbon standard in the form of nonmethane 
organic gas (NMOG), which is consistent with California's MDV 
standards. We will also accept hydrocarbon emissions data in the form 
of NMHC or total hydrocarbons (THC) in lieu of NMOG, which are forms of 
hydrocarbon standards typically used by EPA under the heavy-duty Otto-
cycle control program. Accepting emissions data in these various forms 
provides manufacturers with additional flexibility since establishing 
NMOG levels can be more complex than NMHC or total hydrocarbon levels. 
Manufacturers submitting California certification data would submit 
NMOG emissions data under the California requirements.
    The vehicle manufacturer is responsible for determining whether a 
vehicle is a complete vehicle and subject to the vehicle-based 
standards or an incomplete vehicle and subject to engine-based 
standards. The manufacturer shall make this determination based on the 
definition of incomplete vehicle described above and in the 
regulations. The vehicle manufacturer may request a determination from 
EPA when the status of a specific vehicle model is unclear. 
Manufacturers of complete vehicles are responsible for vehicle 
emissions certification, as is the case

[[Page 59921]]

currently in EPA light-duty vehicle programs.
2. Revision to Vehicle Useful Life
    Currently, the useful life mileage interval for Otto-cycle HD 
engines is 8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever occurs first. The useful 
life for these vehicles in the California MDV program is 120,000 miles, 
which is also the useful life of heavy light-duty trucks. We proposed 
to adopt the useful life mileage interval of 120,000 miles for the HD 
Otto-cycle vehicles program. This approach allows consistency across 
the programs and is consistent with the use of the vehicles. No adverse 
comments were received on this provision, and it is being finalized as 
proposed.
3. Averaging, Banking, and Trading Provisions
a. Background
    An ABT program is an important factor that EPA takes into 
consideration in setting emission standards that are appropriate under 
section 202 of the Clean Air Act. ABT allows us to consider a lower 
emissions standard, or one that otherwise results in greater emissions 
reductions, compared to a standard that might otherwise be appropriate 
under section 202(a)(3) of the CAA, since ABT reduces the cost and 
improves the technological feasibility of achieving the standard. ABT 
enhances the technological feasibility and cost effectiveness of the 
proposed standard and allows the standard to be attainable earlier than 
might otherwise be possible. ABT provides manufacturers with additional 
product planning flexibility and the opportunity for a more cost 
effective introduction of product lines. ABT creates incentive for 
early introduction of new technology, allowing certain engine families 
to act as trail blazers for new technology.
    We view the ABT provisions in today's rule as environmentally 
neutral because the use of credits by some vehicles is offset by 
credits generated by other vehicles. However, when coupled with the new 
standards, ABT will have environmental benefits because it allows the 
new standards to be implemented earlier than would otherwise be 
appropriate.
    Manufacturers are able to bank credits by certifying some engine 
families to emissions levels lower than applicable standards. The 
credits may be banked and then used to certify other engine families to 
levels higher than the emissions standards. For HD Otto-cycle engines, 
ABT is available for meeting NOX standards. Under the 
current ABT program, banked credits are discounted by 20 percent and 
have a three year life, after which they expire.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ With ABT, manufacturers are able to establish a Family 
Emissions Limit (FEL) for an engine family which becomes the 
standard for that family. Manufacturers earn or use credits based on 
the difference between the FEL and the applicable standard. A full 
overview of the ABT program is contained in EPA's 1996 NPRM, 61 FR 
33451.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CAA requires that EPA set emission standards with appropriate 
consideration to feasibility and cost. EPA is finalizing separate 
averaging, banking, and trading programs for vehicles certified to the 
vehicle-based standards and engines certified to the engine-based 
standards. The engine-based ABT program is discussed in section 
III.C.3., below. We believe that the ABT programs in today's final rule 
are appropriate in the context of the technical feasibility and the 
cost of the emission standards.
b. Final ABT Program for Vehicle-Based Standards
    This section addresses the ABT program for the vehicle-based 
standards. We are finalizing the vehicle-based ABT program as proposed. 
We are also finalizing options that allow manufacturers to transfer 
credits between the vehicles and the engines ABT programs. This is 
discussed below in the following section.
    For the vehicles ABT program, we are finalizing the following 
provisions:
     Beginning in 2000, manufacturers may bank vehicle-based 
credits by choosing to certify vehicles rather than engines.
     Manufacturers will earn NOX credits up to the 
0.9 g/mile NOX standard by establishing an FEL below the 0.9 
g/mile standard.
     Vehicles with FELs at or below 0.6 g/mile NOX 
will earn undiscounted credits, engines with FELs above 0.6 g/mile will 
earn credits discounted by 10 percent.
     Vehicles using credits may not exceed a NOX 
level of 1.53 g/mile.
     Heavy-duty vehicles equipped with Otto-cycle engines and 
certified to the vehicle-based standards will be a single grouping or 
averaging set.
    The ABT program can help manufacturers certify especially difficult 
or low volume applications and help manufacturers comply across their 
full product line without having to restrict vehicle offerings. The 
Agency believes the above program offers sufficient flexibility in 
light of the technology and cost requirements associated with the final 
vehicle standards. Based on current certification data and 
technological capabilities we believe manufacturers will have 
opportunities to generate credits to help with meeting the standards in 
the 2004 time frame. Moreover, because these standards are required in 
California for several model years prior to 2004, EPA does not expect 
feasibility issues with the vast majority of vehicle models.
c. Exchanging Credits Between the Vehicle-Based and the Engine-Based 
ABT Programs
    In the proposal, we requested comment on credit exchanges between 
the separate engine and vehicle-based ABT programs. As described below, 
we are finalizing provisions allowing manufacturers to transfer credits 
between the vehicles and the engines program as part of Options 1 and 2 
(full 2003 or 2004 model year implementation). We believe that allowing 
credit transfers under these options provides significant incentive for 
manufacturers to choose one of these optional programs. Therefore, the 
provision enhances the likelihood that significantly cleaner technology 
will be introduced sooner (2003 or 2004) than would otherwise occur. We 
also believe this temporary flexibility will help address any 
feasibility concerns manufacturers may have with the shorter lead time 
associated with the optional programs. However, because this is the 
first ABT program to allow such credit exchanges, we are proceeding 
conservatively and constraining the transfer of credits in several 
respects. However, early implementation of Options 1 and 2 provide 
clear emission reduction benefits compared to Option 3 and we believe 
it is appropriate to provide additional incentives to manufacturers to 
select one of these options. Therefore, we are allowing credit 
transfers between the vehicles and engines programs as part of Option 1 
and Option 2 for a limited time. This flexibility, in addition to the 
somewhat higher standards, should provide incentive for manufacturers 
to select one of these early implementation options. To the extent that 
manufacturers select Options 1 and 2, technology will be introduced 
earlier (2003 or 2004) than would otherwise occur (2005). The 
experience gained by EPA in implementing Options 1 and 2, including the 
development of appropriate credit conversion factors by the 
manufacturers, will provide a valuable source of information for the 
Agency in evaluating whether to extend this flexibility more generally 
in a future rule. Additional discussion can be found in the Response to 
Comments document.

[[Page 59922]]

    Manufacturers selecting Option 3 will not have the option of 
transferring credits between the vehicles and the engines ABT programs. 
For Option 3, manufacturers must use credits within the same averaging 
set in which they are generated. Providing the additional flexibility 
only to manufacturers selecting Options 1 or 2 provides further 
incentive to manufacturers to select one of the early implementation 
options. We believe the ABT programs provide sufficient flexibility to 
meet the standards without the ability to transfer credits.
    We recognize that under Option 1, vehicle-based certification 
remains optional through the 2006 model year. While the option to 
transfer credits during the years preceding 2007 might not be 
particularly useful under Option 1, we do not believe it is necessary 
to restrict its use prior to 2007. Manufacturers may choose to 
voluntarily phase-in chassis-certified vehicles early for product 
planning reasons.
    Manufacturers argued for allowing the transfer of credits between 
the programs. They were concerned about the stringency of the proposed 
engine standard and their ability to generate credits with the low 
volume of engine families that will be subject to the engine-based 
standards. The pool of engine families is likely to be very small 
because the majority of Otto-cycle vehicles would be certified to 
vehicle-based standards. We believe that the structure of the final 
program, which includes the flexibility of three options and a longer 
lead time for Option 3 (1.0 g/bhp-hr standard in 2005), addresses 
feasibility concerns. For Options 1 and 2, the somewhat higher standard 
of 1.5 g/bhp-hr diminishes the feasibility concerns for the 2003 and 
2004 model years. However, there may also be a diminished opportunity 
for early banking under these early implementation options which the 
additional flexibility of credit transfers could help offset.
    Manufacturers choosing Options 1 or 2 may transfer credits between 
the vehicle and engine ABT programs for compliance during model years 
2003 or 2004, whichever is applicable, through the 2007 model year. We 
continue to believe that the ability to trade credits between the 
vehicle and engine-based ABT programs prior to the implementation of 
the new standards would unnecessarily complicate the ABT programs. 
Prior to the implementation of the new standards, EPA emission 
standards for heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles are engine-based 
standards. Absent any credit exchange provisions, manufacturers could 
still generate vehicle-based credits by voluntarily certifying engines 
to the vehicle-based program. These provisions already provide the 
flexibility for manufacturers to decide how many engine-based and 
vehicle-based credits to generate. Therefore, we are not allowing the 
transfer of any pre-2004 (or 2003 under Option 1) model year credits 
between the programs.
    We requested comment on several specific concerns, including the 
derivation of engine and vehicle-specific conversion factors. The 
chassis-based ABT program is based on emissions in units of grams per 
mile (g/mi) and the engine ABT program is based on emissions in units 
of grams per brake horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr). Consequently, trading 
credits between the two programs requires a conversion factor. Although 
the Agency uses conversion factors to estimate g/mi emissions based on 
g/bhp-hr emissions rates for purposes of emissions inventory modeling, 
these conversion factors are estimates of a fleet average, not an 
engine-or vehicle-specific conversion factor. There is considerable 
variation in the conversion factors from vehicle to vehicle. Also, 
conversion factors that have been previously derived don't necessarily 
predict emissions over the specific test cycles. Both the emission 
standards and the ABT credits are based on emissions over specific test 
cycles. Conversion factors developed for specific engines and vehicles 
on specific test cycles could vary widely from an ``average'' 
conversion factor. EPA believes that vehicle and engine test cycle 
specific conversion factors would be needed in order to allow transfers 
of credits between the two Otto-cycle ABT programs.
    EMA recommended that we allow individual manufacturers to submit 
plans prior to the model year for converting credits and that the plans 
be subject to EPA approval on a case-by-case basis. In general, we are 
adopting the approach for establishing the conversion factor suggested 
by the commenter. Manufacturers requesting to transfer credits must 
submit plans to convert credits between the vehicle-based program and 
the engine-based program and the plan must be approved by EPA prior to 
any exchange of credits. Manufacturer plans must include data that 
supports the specific conversion factor for the vehicle families and 
engine families involved. Although manufacturers would design their 
test programs using good engineering judgement, each conversion factor 
would likely have to be based upon a number of engine and vehicle tests 
to provide reasonable accuracy. The conversion factors must be 
developed by testing engines and vehicles expected to generate ``worst-
case'' emissions.
    The transferred credits must be earned in model year 2004 (or 2003 
under Option 1) or later and must be used during the same year in which 
they are transferred (no banking after transfer). This provision is 
needed to ensure that vehicle credits that are transferred to the 
engines program are not used after 2007.
    Another issue for credit exchanges in the 2003 or 2004 and later 
model years is that vehicle credits will be based on NOX 
only emissions and the engine credits will be based on 
NMHC+NOX emissions. We believe that the NMHC portion of 
engine emissions compared to NOX emissions is about 15 
percent of total emissions, or between 0.1 and 0.2 g/bhp-hr. We 
requested comment on allowing credit exchanges without regard to this 
difference in the standards, or alternatively, requiring the use of an 
appropriate factor (e.g., the 15 percent factor noted above) to apply 
to exchanges of NOX-only and NMHC+NOX credits. We 
did not receive any comment on this issue. We do not believe there is a 
significant difference with regard to air quality from either approach 
due to the relatively small number of engines likely to be involved in 
the program. Therefore, in order to simplify the transfer of credits, 
we will allow the NOX credits from the vehicles program and 
NOX plus NMHC engine-based credits to be exchanged without 
adjustments to account for NMHC.
4. CAP 2000
    On May 4, 1999, we adopted a new compliance assurance program for 
light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks known as ``CAP 2000'' (see 64 
FR 23906, May 4, 1999). In brief, as compared with our traditional 
chassis-based compliance program, CAP 2000 is designed to redirect 
manufacturer and Agency efforts towards in-use compliance and give 
manufacturers more control of certification timing, and yet maintain 
the integrity of the compliance assurance program. Aspects of the CAP 
2000 program include streamlined certification and manufacturer in-use 
testing.
    In today's action, we are requiring that the CAP 2000 program be 
the compliance assurance program for heavy-duty vehicles certified to 
chassis-based standards (hereafter referred to as ``chassis-based 
HDVs''). We are including modifications to Part 86, Subpart S, that 
would extend the applicability of CAP 2000 to chassis-

[[Page 59923]]

based HDVs. Key aspects of the CAP 2000 program as it will apply to 
chassis-based HDVs are described below.
    For the certification process, manufacturers will divide their 
product lines into new units called ``durability groups'', determined 
according to common emission deterioration elements. A vehicle with the 
``worst case'' durability will be chosen from the durability group to 
establish the rate of emission deterioration expected from that group. 
The procedures used to determine durability will be developed by the 
manufacturer, with our approval. Durability groups will then be 
subdivided into ``test groups'', and a vehicle representative of each 
test group will be tested to show emission compliance. Once compliance 
has been demonstrated, certification can proceed. The CAP 2000 program 
provisions for information collection are streamlined from the 
traditional light-duty chassis-based compliance regulations. The timing 
of information submittal has been optimized to provide some flexibility 
for manufacturers, and the amount of information has been reduced, 
without compromising our information needs for future compliance or 
enforcement issues.
    A second element of the chassis-based HDV CAP 2000 requirements is 
manufacturer in-use testing. There are two parts to the program. Part 
one requires manufacturers to perform in-use emission testing on 
privately owned vehicles in an ``as-received'' state. This ``in-use 
verification testing'' will occur on low mileage and high mileage test 
fleets. The size of the low and high mileage fleets will be dictated by 
sales categories. Small volume manufacturers and small volume test 
groups will have little or no testing, depending on sales limits. In-
use verification testing data will be used by the manufacturer to 
improve the predictive quality of its durability program, and by us to 
target vehicle testing for a recall program. Manufacturers are required 
to conduct additional testing of a test group when the in-use 
verification program data for the test group equals or exceeds a mean 
of 1.3 times the standard, with a 50 percent or greater failure rate 
for the test group sample at either the low or high mileage test point. 
The second level of in-use testing, known as ``in-use confirmatory 
testing'', will be performed on ``properly maintained and used'' 
vehicles and could be used to determine the need for recall.
    The ``heavy-as-light'' provision in the current regulations (see 40 
CFR 86.001-01(b) and 40 CFR 86.1801(c)(1)) will be available through 
the 2004 model year; starting with the 2005 model year, the ``heavy-as-
light'' provision will no longer be available. For manufacturers 
choosing the 2003 or 2004 compliance option (Option 1 or 2) discussed 
previously, the ``heavy-as light'' provision will only be available 
through the 2002 or 2003 model year, respectively. Our ``heavy-as-
light'' provision permits a manufacturer to certify a HDV of 14,000 
pounds GVWR or less in accordance with the light-duty truck provisions. 
In effect, this provision allows manufacturers to certify these HDVs on 
a chassis dynamometer rather than on an engine dynamometer, as long as 
the HDVs comply with the more stringent light-duty truck standards. 
Today's action obviates the ``heavy-as-light'' provision after the 2003 
or 2004 model year. We are including in today's action a provision 
allowing manufacturers to certify incomplete HDVs under the chassis-
based HDV program. This provision is similar to the current ``heavy-as 
light'' provision.
    We are including provisions to allow manufacturers to request that 
vehicles from different weight categories be grouped together in the 
same test group, as long as the vehicles are then subject to the most 
stringent standards that would be applicable to any vehicles within 
that grouping. Voluntary certification to the more stringent emission 
standards means that the manufacturer would be subject to enforcement 
against the more stringent standards.
    Manufacturers have expressed concerns about potential difficulties 
in procuring vehicles for testing given the commercial use of many of 
these vehicles. Thus, if any manufacturer believes it is unable to 
procure the test vehicles necessary to test the required number of 
vehicles in a test group, the manufacturer may request a smaller sample 
size for any test group, subject to our advance approval (see 40 CFR 
86.1845-01(c)(3)).
    The ``AMA'' cycle will not be automatically available as a 
durability procedure for chassis-based HDVs. (The CAP 2000 program 
likewise disallows the AMA durability procedure for light-duty, but 
does allow for the carryover of AMA-based deterioration factors.) 
Although the AMA cycle will not be automatically available as a 
durability procedure for chassis-based HDVs, a manufacturer may be able 
to obtain approval for it. As in the light-duty CAP 2000 program, to 
obtain approval for a durability process, we will require that 
manufacturers provide data showing that the aging procedures would 
predict the deterioration of the significant majority of in-use 
vehicles over the breadth of their product line that would ultimately 
be covered by this procedure. This demonstration would be more than 
simply matching the average in-use deterioration; manufacturers will 
need to demonstrate to our satisfaction that their durability processes 
will result in the same or more deterioration than is reflected by the 
in-use data for a significant majority of their vehicles. This approval 
process is the same as that already established for our first phase of 
the light-duty revised durability program (RDP-I).\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ In RDP-I manufacturers have typically shown that their 
durability programs cover ninety percent or higher of the 
distribution of deterioration rates experienced by vehicles in 
actual use. See EPA's guidance letter CD-94-13 dated July 29, 1994, 
available for review in the public docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In order to provide a transition to the in-use confirmatory testing 
requirements over a period of years, as was available in the light-duty 
vehicle CAP 2000 program, we are delaying the in-use confirmatory 
testing requirements in order to allow manufacturers to gain experience 
with chassis-based certification and in-use verification testing for 
chassis-based HDVs. Thus, the in-use confirmatory requirements will be 
applicable to vehicles produced starting with the 2007 model year. 
While manufacturers will not be required to conduct in-use confirmatory 
testing for vehicles produced prior to the 2007 model year, we will be 
fully prepared to investigate any high emissions indicated through 
manufacturer in-use verification testing or any other means.
    Finally, certain aspects of the light-duty CAP 2000 program, as 
contained in 40 CFR part 86, subpart S, will not apply to chassis-based 
HDVs, since we are not including requirements for HDVs in these areas 
at this time. These areas include provisions relating to intermediate 
useful lives, certification short test, cold temperature CO 
requirements, fuel economy programs, and supplemental FTP requirements.
    In summary, we are extending the light-duty CAP 2000 program to 
chassis-based HDVs, with the following minor modifications. First, the 
option to certify HDVs under ``heavy-as-light'' provisions would no 
longer be available after the 2004 model year (2003 model year if a 
manufacturer elects the 2004 compliance option, or 2002 model year if a 
manufacturer elects the 2003 compliance option); instead, manufacturers 
can request to certify incomplete HDVs under the chassis-based HDV 
program. Second, manufacturers can request to group vehicles from 
different weight categories or subject to different standards into the

[[Page 59924]]

same test group, provided that they meet the most stringent standards 
applicable to vehicles within that test group. Third, the AMA cycle 
will not automatically be available for HDVs as a durability procedure. 
Fourth, the in-use confirmatory testing requirement will be delayed for 
HDVs until the 2007 model year. Fifth, certain elements of the CAP 2000 
program will not apply to chassis-based HDVs.
5. Evaporative Emissions and Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery
a. Enhanced Evaporative Emissions
    In 1993, EPA adopted enhanced evaporative test procedures for LDVs, 
LDTs and HDVs to be phased in beginning with the 1996 model year, with 
full compliance required by the 1999 model year (see 55 FR 16002, March 
24, 1993). Under the enhanced evaporative requirements adopted in 1993 
the provisions for LDVs and LDTs are essentially the same as those for 
HDVs with two main differences. The first difference is that the actual 
levels of the emission limits are higher for HDVs due to their 
typically larger fuel tanks. The second difference is in the driving 
cycles used in the test sequence, as described in the next paragraph. 
We are not making any changes to the levels of the HDV evaporative 
standards in today's action.
    The urban dynamometer driving schedule (UDDS) currently used for 
HDVs is somewhat shorter than that used for light-duty, both in terms 
of mileage covered and minutes. What this means in practical terms is 
that, while the light-duty and heavy-duty procedures generally parallel 
each other, under the heavy-duty procedure there is considerably less 
driving time than under the light-duty procedure. This results in 
considerably less time for canister purge under the heavy-duty 
procedure than under the light-duty procedure.
    We recognize this discrepancy between our light-duty and heavy-duty 
programs, and have routinely provided waivers under the enhanced 
evaporative program which allow the use of the light-duty procedures 
for heavy-duty certification testing. In today's action we are formally 
adopting this approach for all complete vehicles that are certified 
according to the provisions of the chassis-based program discussed 
elsewhere in this notice. Thus, we are not making any changes to the 
CAP 2000 regulations intended to maintain the heavy-duty UDDS for HDV 
evaporative testing. Rather, the light-duty UDDS currently in the CAP 
2000 regulations will apply to all light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles 
and trucks certified according to the provisions of CAP 2000. 
Additionally, we are extending the application of the light-duty UDDS 
to all heavy-duty evaporative emissions testing upon the effective date 
of this rule.
b. Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery
    Onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) systems prevent the fuel 
vapors that are displaced from a vehicle's fuel tank during refueling 
from entering the atmosphere. Typically, the displaced fuel vapors are 
routed to a charcoal canister where they are subsequently routed to the 
engine to be burned as fuel. We previously adopted ORVR requirements 
applicable to light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks (see 59 FR 
16262, April 6, 1994). These requirements are being phased in beginning 
with the 1998 model year for LDVs, the 2001 model year for light LDTs 
(6,000 lb and under GVWR), and 2004 for heavy LDTs (6,001 through 8,500 
lb GVWR).
    We are today requiring ORVR controls on all complete HDVs up to 
10,000 lb GVWR in the same manner and generally on the same schedule as 
heavy LDTs. Thus, complete HDVs will be required to meet a refueling 
emission standard of 0.20 grams per gallon of fuel dispensed. For 
purposes of ORVR applicability, complete vehicle means a vehicle that 
leaves the primary manufacturer's control with its primary load 
carrying device or container attached.
    The ORVR standard will be phased in with 80 percent compliance in 
the 2005 model year and 100 percent compliance in the 2006 model year. 
This phase-in is the same as that currently in place for heavy LDTs 
except that no compliance is required in the 2004 model year. For those 
manufacturers choosing the 2003 or 2004 compliance option discussed 
previously (Option 1 or 2), the ORVR standard will be phased in with 40 
percent compliance required in the 2004 model year, 80 percent 
compliance in the 2005 model year, and 100 percent compliance in the 
2006 model year. Heavy LDTs and HDVs will be considered a single 
category for the purposes of the phase in. In other words, the percent 
compliance requirements for a given model year apply to heavy LDTs and 
HDVs as a single group, rather than to each group separately. We are 
including an exception to this phase-in approach to allow additional 
lead time for complete HDVs that do not have light-duty counterparts 
and those whose fuel tank capacity is greater than 35 gallons. Thus, 
for those complete HDVs up to 10,000 lb GVWR that do not share an 
identical fuel system with a light-duty counterpart, and for those 
whose fuel tank(s) have a total capacity of more than 35 gallons, the 
ORVR requirements take effect with the 2006 model year. This additional 
lead time is appropriate for these vehicles because ORVR systems will 
have to be developed specifically for them, whereas for those heavy-
duty vehicles that have light-duty counterparts the required ORVR 
development work is already underway in order to comply with the heavy 
light-duty truck ORVR requirements.
    Currently, in the review of certification applications for ORVR-
equipped LDVs and LDTs, we study the design of the vehicle's ORVR 
system, its on-vehicle configuration and operation, and consult 
directly with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
(NHTSA) on these applications. We will extend this practice of 
consulting with NHTSA in the review of certification applications for 
ORVR-equipped HDVs as well.
6. On-board Diagnostics Requirements for Otto-cycle Vehicles
    Today's final rule establishes new on-board diagnostic requirements 
for complete HD Otto-cycle vehicles in the 8,500 to 14,000 pound GVWR 
category. The new OBD requirements for heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles 
are identical to those already in place for light-duty Otto-cycle 
vehicles and trucks. In general, the OBD system must monitor emission-
related powertrain components for deterioration or malfunction causing 
emissions to exceed 1.5 times the applicable standards. Upon detecting 
a malfunction, a dashboard MIL must be illuminated informing the driver 
of the need for repair. To assist the repair technician in diagnosing 
and repairing the malfunction, the OBD system must also incorporate 
standardization features (e.g., the diagnostic data link connector; 
computer communication protocols; etc.) the intent of which is to allow 
the technician to diagnose and repair any OBD compliant truck or engine 
through the use of a ``generic'' hand-held OBD scan tool. The following 
is a summary of the requirements for HD Otto-cycle vehicles.
a. Federal OBD Malfunction Thresholds and Monitoring Requirements
    This final rule requires that, beginning in the 2005 model year (or 
2004 under Option 1), complete heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles must be 
equipped with an OBD system capable of detecting and alerting the 
driver of the following emission-related

[[Page 59925]]

malfunctions or deterioration as evaluated over the appropriate 
certification test procedure: \38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ The FTP minus the Supplemental FTP for chassis certified 
systems; the engine certification test procedure minus any 
supplemental test procedures for engine certified systems. While 
malfunction thresholds are based on certification test procedure 
emissions, this does not mean that OBD monitors need operate only 
during the test procedure. All OBD monitors that operate 
continuously during the test procedure should operate in a similar 
manner during non-test procedure conditions. The prohibition against 
defeat devices in Sec. 86.004-16 applies to these OBD requirements.

    (i) Catalyst deterioration or malfunction before it results in 
an increase in NMHC \39\ emissions equal to or greater than 1.5 
times the NMHC standard or FEL, as compared to the NMHC emission 
level measured using a representative 4,000 mile catalyst system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ As a point of clarification, federal emissions standards 
are expressed in terms of NMHC. Therefore, in order to remain 
consistent, all references to HC will be referred to as NMHC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) Engine misfire before it results in an exhaust emission 
exceedance of 1.5 times the applicable standard or FEL for NMHC, CO 
or NOX.
    (iii) If the vehicle or engine contains an oxygen sensor, then 
oxygen sensor deterioration or malfunction before it results in an 
exhaust emission exceedance of 1.5 times the applicable standard or 
FEL for NMHC, CO or NOX.
    (iv) If the vehicle or engine contains an evaporative emission 
control system, then any vapor leak in the evaporative and/or 
refueling system (excluding the tubing and connections between the 
purge valve and the intake manifold) greater than or equal in 
magnitude to a leak caused by a 0.040 inch diameter orifice; an 
absence of evaporative purge air flow from the complete evaporative 
emission control system. On vehicles with fuel tank capacity greater 
than 25 gallons, the Administrator will revise the size of the 
orifice to the feasibility limit, based on test data, if the most 
reliable monitoring method available is unable to reliably detect a 
system leak equal to a 0.040 inch diameter orifice.
    (v) Any deterioration or malfunction occurring in a powertrain 
system or component directly intended to control emissions, 
including but not necessarily limited to, the EGR system, if 
equipped, the secondary air system, if equipped, and the fuel 
control system, singularly resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 
1.5 times the applicable emission standard or FEL for NMHC, CO, 
NOX. For vehicles equipped with a secondary air system, a 
functional check, as described in paragraph (vi) below, may satisfy 
the requirements of this paragraph provided the manufacturer 
demonstrates that deterioration of the flow distribution system is 
unlikely. This demonstration is subject to Administrator approval 
and, if the demonstration and associated functional check are 
approved, the diagnostic system is required to indicate a 
malfunction when some degree of secondary airflow is not detectable 
in the exhaust system during the check.
    (vi ) Any other deterioration or malfunction occurring in an 
electronic emission-related powertrain system or component not 
otherwise described above that either provides input to or receives 
commands from the on-board computer and has a measurable impact on 
emissions; monitoring of components required by this paragraph may 
be satisfied by employing electrical circuit continuity checks and, 
wherever feasible, rationality checks for computer input components 
(input values within manufacturer specified ranges based on other 
available operating parameters), and functionality checks for 
computer output components (proper functional response to computer 
commands); malfunctions are defined as a failure of the system or 
component to meet the electrical circuit continuity checks or the 
rationality or functionality checks.

    Upon detection of a malfunction, the MIL is required to illuminate 
and a fault code stored no later than the end of the next driving cycle 
during which monitoring occurs provided the malfunction is again 
detected. Alternatively, upon EPA approval, a manufacturer is allowed 
to use a diagnostic strategy that employs statistical algorithms for 
malfunction determination. Manufacturers are required to determine the 
appropriate operating conditions for diagnostic system monitoring with 
the limitation that monitoring conditions are encountered at least once 
during the applicable certification test procedure or a similar test 
cycle as approved by EPA. This is not meant to suggest that monitors be 
designed to operate only under test procedure conditions, as such a 
design would not encompass the complete operating range required for 
OBD malfunction detection.
    As an option to the above requirements, EPA will allow compliance 
demonstration according to the California OBDII requirements for HD 
Otto-cycle vehicles. This option allows manufacturers to concentrate on 
one set of OBD requirements for nationwide implementation (although 
federal OBD emission malfunction thresholds and monitoring requirements 
are essentially equivalent to those of the California OBDII regulation) 
and provides the highest level of OBD system effectiveness toward 
meeting nationwide clean air goals.
b. Standardization Requirements
    The light-duty OBD regulations contain requirements for 
standardization of certain critical aspects of the OBD system. These 
critical aspects include the design of the data link connector, 
protocols for on-board to off-board computer communication, formats for 
diagnostic trouble codes, and types of test modes the on-board system 
and the off-board scan tool must be capable of supporting. Today's 
action contains similar standards for heavy-duty OBD systems, as 
detailed in the regulatory requirements under section Sec. 86.1806-05.
c. Deficiency Provisions
    Today's action also establishes the same deficiency provisions for 
HD Otto-cycle vehicle OBD systems as currently apply to light-duty OBD 
systems. This will allow the Administrator to accept an OBD system as 
compliant even though specific requirements are not fully met. The 
deficiency provisions were first introduced on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 
15242), and were revised on December 22, 1998 (63 FR 70681).
    To clarify our deficiency provisions, EPA does not expect to 
certify vehicles with federal OBD systems that have more than one OBD 
system deficiency, or to allow carryover of any deficiency to the 
following model year unless it can be demonstrated that correction of 
the deficiency requires hardware and/or software modifications that 
cannot be accomplished in the time available, as determined by the 
Administrator. Nonetheless, we recognize that there may be situations 
where more than one deficiency is necessary and appropriate, or where 
carry-over of a deficiency(ies) for more than one year is necessary and 
appropriate. EPA may approve such deficiencies provided the 
manufacturer has demonstrated an acceptable level of effort toward OBD 
compliance. These deficiency provisions cannot be used as a means to 
avoid compliance or delay implementation of any OBD monitors or as a 
means to compromise the overall effectiveness of the OBD program.
d. Applicability and Waivers
    The federal HD Otto-cycle vehicle OBD requirements finalized in 
today's action will be implemented beginning with the 2005 model year. 
OBD requirements for HD Otto-cycle vehicles up to 14,000 pounds GVWR 
will be phased in over a three year period, from 2005 until 2007. The 
percentage phase-in schedule will be 60/80/100 for the 2005/06/07 model 
years, respectively, based on projected sales. For those manufacturers 
who choose the optional 2003 or 2004 compliance path for HD Otto-cycle 
engines and vehicles (Option 1 or 2), the OBD phase-in schedule will be 
40/60/80/100 percent for the 2004/05/06/07 model years respectively. 
For those manufacturers with a single heavy-duty engine family 
(including otto-cycle and diesel), implementation of OBD requirements 
would not have to occur until the 2007 model year. As discussed in 
Section III.A.4 and III.C.4,

[[Page 59926]]

this final rule also establishes OBD requirements for heavy-duty diesel 
engines used in vehicles up to 14,000 pounds GVWR, and for HD Otto-
cycle engines used in incomplete vehicles up to 14,000 pounds GVWR that 
are similar to the requirements for HD complete Otto-cycle vehicles, 
including an identical phase-in schedule. HD manufacturers will be 
allowed to meet the OBD phase-in requirements by combining their 
projected sales of HD Otto-cycle engines and vehicles and HD diesel 
engines to meet a combined diesel and Otto-cycle phase-in, at their 
option.
    For heavy-duty vehicles and engines up to 14,000 pounds GVWR 
operating on alternative fuel, EPA may grant OBD waivers during 
alternative fuel operation through the 2006 model year to the extent 
that manufacturers can justify the inability to fully comply with any 
of the OBD requirements.\40\ Such inability must be based upon 
technological infeasibility, not resource reasons. Further, any heavy-
duty vehicles and engines that are subsequently converted for operation 
on alternative fuel are not expected to comply with these OBD 
requirements if the non-converted vehicle or engine does not comply. In 
other words, if the vehicle or engine never completes any assembly 
stage in OBD compliance, it need not comply with the OBD requirements 
while operating on the alternative fuel. If the vehicle or engine does 
complete any assembly stage with a compliant OBD system, it must comply 
with the OBD requirements while operating on the fuel of original 
intent and, to the extent feasible, while operating on the alternative 
fuel. For these latter situations, EPA may grant waivers through the 
2006 model year if the manufacturer shows it is infeasible to meet the 
requirements. Beginning in the 2007 model year, all heavy-duty 
alternative fueled vehicles and engines up to 14,000 pounds GVWR must 
be fully compliant during both operation on the original fuel and the 
alternative fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Note that this provision currently exists for light-duty 
vehicles and trucks operating on alternative fuel through the 2004 
model year; that existing provision does not change with today's 
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

e. Certification Provisions
    The OBD certification information requirements of today's action 
are consistent with the Compliance Assurance Programs 2000 (CAP 2000) 
rulemaking discussed above. The Part 1 Application must include, for 
each OBD system: a description of the functional operating 
characteristics of the diagnostic system; the method of detecting 
malfunctions for each emission-related powertrain component; and a 
description of any deficiencies including resolution plans and 
schedules. Anything certified to the California OBDII regulations is 
required to comply with California ARB information requirements. EPA 
may consider abbreviating the OBD information requirements through 
rulemaking if it gains confidence that manufacturers are designing OBD 
systems that are fully compliant with all applicable regulations.
    During EPA certification of vehicles optionally certified to the 
California OBDII regulation, EPA may conduct audit and confirmatory 
testing consistent with the provisions of the California OBDII 
requirements. Therefore, while the Agency will consider California 
certification in determining whether to grant a federal certificate, 
EPA may also elect to conduct its own evaluation of that OBDII system. 
While it is unlikely, EPA may make a compliance determination that is 
not identical to that of the California Air Resources Board.
    Further, this final rule establishes ``drop-in'' demonstration 
provisions for HD Otto-cycle OBD systems similar to those discussed 
under the HD diesel OBD requirements. This provision allows engine-
certified and engine-demonstrated OBD system to fulfill the 
demonstration requirements of a chassis-certified OBD system, however, 
the chassis-certified system would have to incorporate transmission 
diagnostics even though the ``dropped-in'' engine system may not have 
been certified with transmission diagnostics. The drop-in provision 
also allows a chassis-certified and chassis-demonstrated OBD system to 
fulfill any demonstration requirements of an engine-certified OBD 
system. The drop-in provision discussed here requires the manufacturer 
to rigorously demonstrate its OBD concept and approach on one engine or 
model, but allows the manufacturer to apply that demonstration via 
engineering judgement to the different engine and powertrain 
calibrations used across its fleet. The Agency will accept such a 
demonstration provided sound engineering judgement is employed.

C. What Are the Requirements of the Heavy-duty Otto-cycle Engine-based 
Program?

1. Emission Standards
    We are finalizing an NMHC+NOX standard for Otto-cycle 
engines, applicable to engines used in vehicles over 14,000 pounds GVWR 
and in incomplete vehicles, of 1.0 g/bhp-hr.\41\ Existing CO standards 
for these engines and vehicles will continue to remain in place. This 
approach is consistent with California which allows engine-based 
testing for these vehicles in its Medium-duty Vehicle program. This 
standard will take effect starting with the 2005 model year. As 
discussed in the proposal, and after consideration of comments received 
on the proposal, we continue to believe that this standard, implemented 
in the 2005 model year, represents the most stringent standard 
reasonably achievable for these engines, in keeping with the 
requirements of the CAA (including the four-year lead time 
requirement). We also believe that the ABT program for engines 
(described below) provides manufacturers with desirable flexibility to 
meet the new standard as their product lines become subject to the new 
engine standards. However, as noted earlier, we are also providing 
options to allow manufacturers to achieve lower levels of emissions 
starting with the 2003 or 2004 model year. Under these options (Options 
1 and 2 for the 2003 and 2004 model years, respectively), manufacturers 
have to meet an engine-based standard of 1.5 g/bhp-hr until the 2008 
model year, when the standard becomes 1.0 g/bhp-hr. (As noted earlier, 
EPA has recently proposed new standards for on-highway heavy-duty 
vehicles and engines. Thus, the 2008 standard finalized in today's rule 
serves only as a ``placeholder'' for standards resulting from future 
EPA action affecting the 2007, 2008, and later model years. The 
standards in EPA's recent proposal would supercede the standards 
finalized in today's action. See EPA's recent proposal at 65 FR 35430, 
June 2, 2000.) Option 1 provides more flexibility than Option 2 by 
allowing manufacturers to choose chassis-based or engine-based 
standards for their complete vehicles for the 2003 through 2006 model 
years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Incomplete vehicles less than 14,000 lbs GVWR could 
optionally certify to the new vehicle-based standards, as discussed 
in a later section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Durability Procedures
    Under the current certification regulations, manufacturers develop 
deterioration factors based on testing of development engines and 
emissions control systems. Because emissions control efficiency 
generally decreases with the accumulation of service on the engine, the 
regulations require that a deterioration factor (DF) be used in 
conjunction with engine test results as the basis for determining 
compliance with the standards. The regulations

[[Page 59927]]

require that the manufacturer develop an appropriate DF, which is then 
subject to review by EPA in the certification process. These 
deterioration factors are applied to low mileage emissions levels of 
certification engines in order to predict emissions at the end of the 
engines' useful life. The emissions level after the deterioration 
factor is applied is the engine certification level, which must be 
below the standard for the engine to be certified. For engines equipped 
with aftertreatment (e.g., catalysts), the DF must be 
``multiplicative'' (i.e., a factor that can be multiplied by the low 
mileage emissions level of the certification engine to project 
emissions at the end of the engine useful life). For engines lacking 
aftertreatment (e.g., most current diesels), the DF must be 
``additive'' (i.e., a factor that can be added to the low mileage 
emissions level of the certification engine to project emissions at the 
end of the engine useful life).
    Manufacturers provided comments indicating that their current 
deterioration factors are based on 50th percentile in-use deterioration 
rates, or average in-use deterioration. They also commented that they 
account for more severe deterioration than average by certifying with 
certification levels well below the standards.
    EPA believes that the manufacturer's durability process should 
result in the same or greater level of deterioration than is observed 
in-use for a significant majority of their vehicles, rather than simply 
matching the average in-use deterioration. This is especially important 
considering that incomplete vehicles and vehicles over 14,000 pounds 
GVWR are more likely to be work vehicles and operated under more severe 
conditions a greater percentage of their useful lives. EPA believes 
that it is important for certification levels (emissions tests adjusted 
by the DF) to represent anticipated in-use emissions levels of a 
significant majority of in-use engines. As the standards are reduced, 
this will continue to be a key aspect of EPA's compliance programs. 
Deterioration factors are also used during production line testing to 
verify the emissions performance of production engines. Finally, the 
ABT program relies on certification data as the basis for determining 
credits. Although Otto-cycle engine manufacturers have not made wide 
use of the ABT program to date, EPA expects more use of the program in 
future years due to the new more stringent emissions standards and new 
ABT flexibilities.
    EPA is finalizing today, as proposed, that the compliance 
provisions for heavy-duty engines contained in 40 CFR part 86, subpart 
A would continue to apply to HDVs subject to the engine-based 
standards, with modifications designed to ensure that the durability 
demonstration procedures used by manufacturers in the certification 
process, and deterioration factors calculated by means of these 
procedures, predict the emission deterioration of a significant 
majority of in-use engines to be covered by the procedure.
    The deterioration factor determination procedures in the 
regulations are modified to specify that emission control component 
aging procedures will predict the deterioration of the significant 
majority of in-use engines over the breadth of their product line that 
would ultimately be covered by this procedure (manufacturers would be 
expected to show that their durability programs cover on the order of 
ninety percent or higher of the distribution of deterioration rates 
experienced by vehicles in actual use). In addition, manufacturers are 
required to calculate multiplicative DFs by dividing high mileage 
exhaust emissions by the low milage exhaust emissions (e.g., emissions 
at the useful life mileage by exhaust emissions at 4,000 miles).\42\ 
This change only adds specificity to the regulations so that DFs are 
calculated using a consistent and credible methodology. These 
modifications to the engine-based HDV compliance procedures would also 
be effective for any engine family generating ABT credits prior to the 
2004 model year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Manufacturers are not required to accumulate actual mileage 
on vehicles or engines in order to determine a deterioration rate. 
In many cases, the accumulation of mileage (or ``service'') is 
simulated by various ``bench aging'' techniques that allow the 
process to consume less time and resources than accumulating actual 
mileage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Manufacturers commented that multiplicative deterioration factors 
are becoming less accurate and reliable as low mileage emissions 
durability levels become very low resulting in increased test-to-test 
variability.\43\ The low mileage levels, when divided into the 120,000 
mile emissions level, produce DFs that are highly variable and 
inaccurate. Manufacturers recommended allowing the optional use of 
additive deterioration factors for engines equipped with 
aftertreatment. We have analyzed this issue and believe that in some 
cases additive DFs may be appropriate. Consequently, we have included a 
provision in this final rule that enables manufacturers to use additive 
DFs under certain conditions. Manufacturers need prior approval from 
EPA to use an additive deterioration factor and would be required to 
conduct in-use verification testing to ensure that the additive DF 
reasonably predicted in-use emissions performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ High mileage emissions levels are divided by the low 
mileage emissions levels to calculate the multiplicative 
deterioration factor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Averaging, Banking, and Trading for Otto-Cycle Engines
    As part of finalizing more stringent engine-based standards, EPA is 
finalizing a modified ABT program for these engines. The program is 
similar in design to the program adopted for diesel engines. EPA is 
finalizing ABT modifications to allow more flexibility within the ABT 
framework to help meet the more stringent standards. ABT credits can 
help manufacturers with engine configurations that are more difficult 
to modify, where more time would help reduce costs. Credits can also 
allow manufacturers to continue with product plans that might call for 
the retirement of an engine family at some point shortly after the 
implementation of the new standards. By banking credits manufacturers 
can also reduce the uncertainty or risk associated with the new 
standards. EPA believes that the modified ABT program contained in this 
rule will not decrease emissions reductions associated with the new 
standards.
    For the 1999 model year, the ABT program was used for only one 
Otto-cycle engine family to meet the current 4.0 g/bhp-hr 
NOX standard which went into effect in the 1998 model year. 
For the 2000 model year, no engine families were certified using the 
ABT program. Advances in catalyst technology and engine/fuel system 
improvements have allowed manufacturers to meet the standard across 
their product line. Most engine families have certification levels of 
less than half the standard. However, with the new more stringent 
engine-based standards, EPA expects that ABT may become a more 
important tool for Otto-cycle engine manufacturers.
    An ABT program allows the Agency to consider lower emissions 
standard, or one that otherwise results in greater emissions 
reductions, compared to a standard that might otherwise be appropriate 
under section 202(a)(3) of the CAA, since ABT reduces the cost and 
improves the technological feasibility of achieving the standard. EPA 
is finalizing changes to the ABT program with the intent that the 
changes would enhance the technological feasibility and cost-
effectiveness of the new standard, and thereby help to ensure the new 
standard would be attainable earlier than would otherwise be possible. 
The changes would provide

[[Page 59928]]

manufacturers with additional product planning flexibility and the 
opportunity for a more cost effective introduction of product lines 
meeting the new standard. Also, EPA believes that ABT creates an 
incentive for early introduction of new technology, which allows 
certain engine families to act as trail blazers for new technology. 
This can help provide valuable information to manufacturers on the 
technology prior to manufacturers applying the technology throughout 
their product line. This further improves the feasibility of achieving 
the standard. This early introduction can also provide valuable 
information for use in other regulatory programs that may benefit from 
similar technologies (e.g., nonroad programs). EPA views the effect of 
the ABT program itself as environmentally neutral because the use of 
credits by some engines is offset by the generation of credits by other 
engines. However, when coupled with the new standards, the ABT program 
would be environmentally beneficial because it would allow the new 
standards to be implemented earlier than would otherwise be appropriate 
under the Act.
    EPA is finalizing the following provisions for the modified ABT 
program for Otto-cycle engines. The provisions are being finalized 
essentially as proposed except for minor adjustments to account for the 
three program options.

Early Credits

     Manufacturers may bank NOX credits beginning in 
MY 2000 for use in meeting the more stringent standards (MYs 2003/2004/
2005 and later).
     Early credits may be earned up to a NOX level 
of 2.0 g/bhp-hr.
     Early credits will be discounted by 10 percent for engine 
families with FELs above the 1.0 g/bhp-hr NMHC+NOX level and 
undiscounted for engine families with FELs at or below the 1.0 g cut 
point.
     Engine families generating credits must meet the revised 
requirements for deterioration factors contained in this rule (See 
Section 2 above)
     Early NOX credits may be used to meet the new 
combined NMHC+NOX standard

Regular Credits

    For credits earned after the implementation of the new standard 
(2003/2004/2005, as applicable):
     Credits will be earned on a NOX plus NMHC basis
     Engine families with FELs above 0.5 g/bhp-hr 
NMHC+NOX will be discounted by 10 percent. Engine families 
with FELs at or below 0.5 g/bhp-hr will earn undiscounted credits.
     Credits will be earned up to the level of the standard 
(1.5 g/bhp-hr or 1.0 g/bhp-hr, as applicable)

Credit Use

     Credits banked under the modified program have unlimited 
credit life
     Engine families using credits may not exceed the previous 
NOX standard of 4.0 g/bhp-hr
     Credits generated under the modified program may not be 
used to meet the current 4.0 g/bhp-hr standard
    Manufacturers may continue to use the current ABT program for 
engines certified to the current 4.0 g/bhphr NOX standard. 
The current program will not be available for engines certified to the 
new NOX plus NMHC standards finalized in this rule. Credits 
generated in the current program cannot be used to meet the new 
standards. The modified program outlined above is effective for these 
engines. Therefore, the current program will be phased out in 2003, 
2004, or 2005 depending on the option chosen by the manufacturer. EPA 
is ending the current program because of concern that manufacturers 
could generate enough credits under the current program to 
significantly delay the new standards. The current program allows 
manufacturers to earn credits up to the current NOX standard 
of 4.0 g/bhp-hr. With most engines currently certified with 
NOX levels below 2.0 g/bhp-hr, there is potential for 
substantial credit generation without the application of improved 
technology under the current ABT program. If manufacturers were to bank 
these credits, they could potentially use them to delay the 
introduction of engines meeting the new standards for a large majority 
of their sales for up to three years.
    EPA received comments from manufacturers that the ceiling of 2.0 g/
bhp-hr for early credit generation is too restrictive because 
manufacturers must account for compliance margin and more severe 
deterioration when establishing FELs and therefore would not set FELs 
at their certification level. Manufacturers recommended a ceiling of 
3.0 g/bhp-hr. EPA is concerned that even after accounting for more 
severe deterioration and compliance cushion manufacturers would still 
have the ability to generate a large pool of credits prior to the 
implementation of the new standards if the ceiling were revised to 3.0 
g/bhp-hr. EPA's concerns are increased with Option 3 which allows an 
additional model year (2004 model year) for early banking.
    The 2.0 g/bhp-hr ceiling for credit generation in the modified 
program provides opportunity for manufacturers to earn credits through 
the use of emissions controls that are superior to the average controls 
currently being used. It helps ensure that the credits represent a 
pull-ahead of technology and are not windfall credits. The changes to 
credit life and discounting in the modified program provide 
manufacturers with more flexibility in the way they use those credits 
once they are earned. EPA believes this approach is consistent with the 
goals of ABT. For these reasons, we are finalizing the 2.0 g/bhp-hr 
ceiling for credit generation, as well as the changes to credit life 
and discounting (discussed below), as proposed.
    EPA is finalizing the requirement that engines families generating 
early credits for use in the modified program be certified using the 
revised durability procedures described above in section III.C.2. These 
new procedures are necessary to ensure that the certification level 
reflects a significant majority of in-use engines within the engine 
family. The revised procedures are important for the ABT program 
because the program allows manufacturers to establish their FEL at the 
certification level for purposes of generating or using credits. As 
discussed in the Response to Comments document, the requirement to use 
revised durability procedures also helps address windfall credits 
issues with regard to the program.
    We received comments that we should not require revised durability 
procedures for engines generating early credits because it will take 
manufacturer's up to three years to develop the new DFs, thus delaying 
their ability to generate early credits. While we anticipate some time 
being needed to generate new deterioration factors, we do not expect a 
long delay due to the new requirements in most cases. Comments from 
manufacturers that they currently consider more severe deterioration 
during the certification process suggest that the manufacturers have 
data on more severe deterioration. Also, there are accelerated aging 
methods available for use in deriving deterioration factors that can 
significantly decrease the amount of time required to derive new 
deterioration factors. These available methods generally require less 
than a year to carry out.
    Nevertheless, in cases where manufacturers do not currently have 
adequate data on which to base a revised deterioration factor, the 
generation of new data will take time and may delay the manufacturer's

[[Page 59929]]

ability to generate credits in the earliest years of the ABT program. 
There will, however, still be at least a few years for manufacturers to 
generate and bank early credits even if new data must be generated, 
especially for Option 3 (1.0 g/bhp-hr in MY 2005). Options 1 and 2 do 
not provide as much lead time for early credit generation but they 
contain a somewhat less stringent standard so early credits may be less 
important for manufacturers selecting one of these options. Also, 
Options 1 and 2 contain provisions within the ABT program for 
manufacturers to exchange credits between the vehicles and engines 
programs. For these reasons, we do not expect the requirements for 
using a revised DF to significantly impact the feasibility of the 
standards.
    The changes to credit life and discounting being finalized for 
Otto-cycle engines are conceptually consistent with the modifications 
finalized for diesel engines. We are finalizing our proposal to 
discount credits by 10 percent if the engine has an FEL above a certain 
value or cut-point. We adopted cut points in the diesel program in 
order to identify the introduction of new technology as opposed to 
recalibrating or enhancing existing technology. We believe that 
adoption of cut points in the HD Otto-cycle engine program will provide 
similar technology forcing incentives. We selected cut-point levels 
which represent a clear step in emissions control rather than a 
marginal emissions reduction. The 10 percent discount selected for the 
HD Otto-cycle engine ABT program is consistent with the program 
finalized for diesel engines. In that final rule, we noted that a 10 
percent discount strikes a balance between zero (which significantly 
reduces the incentive to develop and implement significantly cleaner 
technology) and 20 percent (which manufacturers indicated in comments 
was far too large and would create a disincentive for the introduction 
of cleaner technology). (See 62 FR 54708, October 21, 1997.)
    For diesels, EPA removed the three year credit life limit that 
allows manufacturers to earn credits to be used in 2004 and later as 
early as the 1998 model year. For Otto-cycle engines, MY 2000 will be 
the earliest model year that the rule would be effective due to the 
timing of the rulemaking. Removing the credit life limit will provide 
an additional year of potential credit banking and allows manufacturers 
to retain credits after 2004 rather than having them expire after a 
certain year. We believe that having credits expire would simply 
encourage manufacturers to use the credits rather than save them; thus, 
removing the credit life limit should provide a net environmental 
benefit.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ EPA presented a detailed analysis of its ABT program in the 
Response to Comments for the Diesel Final Rule, Docket A-95-27, 
document no. V-C-01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We believe the program effectively balances the manufacturer's 
needs for flexibility given the stringency of the standards being 
adopted with the environmental goals of the ABT program. We believe 
that our ABT program detailed above will encourage the early use of 
cleaner technologies and provide manufacturers with valuable 
flexibility in transitioning to more stringent standards. EPA is 
finalizing the modification to the ABT program in conjunction with the 
engine-based standards to provide the flexibility necessary to enable 
manufacturers to meet the standard across their product line.
4. On-Board Diagnostics for Otto-Cycle Engines
    Today's final rule establishes new on-board diagnostic requirements 
for HD Otto-cycle engines used in incomplete vehicles in the 8,500 to 
14,000 pound GVWR category. The new OBD requirements for heavy-duty 
Otto-cycle engines are essentially identical to those already in place 
for light-duty Otto-cycle vehicles and trucks. In general, the OBD 
system must monitor emission-related engine components for 
deterioration or malfunction causing emissions to exceed 1.5 times the 
applicable standards. Upon detecting a malfunction, a dashboard MIL 
must be illuminated informing the driver of the need for repair. To 
assist the repair technician in diagnosing and repairing the 
malfunction, the OBD system must also incorporate standardization 
features (e.g., the diagnostic data link connector; computer 
communication protocols; etc.) the intent of which is to allow the 
technician to diagnose and repair any OBD compliant truck or engine 
through the use of a ``generic'' hand-held OBD scan tool.
    The provisions for HD Otto-cycle engines used in incomplete 
vehicles are identical to the provisions discussed in Section III.B.6 
in almost every respect. The differences for the HD Otto-cycle engines 
used in incomplete vehicles, as specified in the regulatory language, 
are: (1) Engine emission related components must be monitored, not 
powertrain related components, and (2) NMHC+NOX thresholds 
must be monitored, not NOX and NMHC separately. In all other 
respects the regulatory requirements for HD Otto-cycle engines used in 
incomplete vehicles are the same as those for complete HD Otto-cycle 
vehicles.
5. Evaporative Emissions Test Procedures
    We are not making any changes to the levels of the HD Otto-cycle 
engine evaporative emission standards in today's action. However, we 
are allowing, upon the effective date of this rule, manufacturers to 
use the light-duty urban dynamometer driving schedule (UDDS) in place 
of the heavy-duty UDDS for evaporative testing of HD Otto-cycle 
engines. A more complete discussion of this issue can be found in 
section III.B.5.a.

D. What Are the New On-Board Diagnostics Requirements for Light-Duty 
Diesel Vehicles?

    Today's final rule establishes new on-board diagnostic requirements 
for LD diesel vehicles. OBD requirements for LD diesel vehicles have 
existed for many years. However, LD diesel vehicles have not been 
required to monitor aftertreatment devices, such as diesel oxidation 
catalysts or particulate traps. Similar to the new requirements for HD 
diesel OBD aftertreatment monitoring, today's action requires LD diesel 
vehicles to monitor aftertreatment devices. We received a number of 
comments on the proposed OBD requirements and have incorporated those 
recommendations that we deemed to be appropriate. The summarized 
comments and our responses can be reviewed in the Summary and Analysis 
of Comments Document. The following is a summary of the new 
requirements for LD diesel vehicles.
1. Federal OBD Malfunction Thresholds and Monitoring Requirements
    This final rule requires that, beginning in the 2004 model year for 
LD diesel vehicles less than 6,000 pounds GVWR, and the 2005 model year 
for LD diesel vehicles between 6,000 pounds and 8,500 pounds GVWR must 
be equipped with an OBD system capable of detecting and alerting the 
driver of the following emission-related malfunctions or deterioration 
as evaluated over the appropriate certification test procedure: \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ The FTP minus the Supplemental FTP. While malfunction 
thresholds are based on certification test procedure emissions, this 
does not mean that OBD monitors need operate only during the test 
procedure. All OBD monitors that operate continuously during the 
test procedure should operate in a similar manner during non-test 
procedure conditions. The prohibition against defeat devices in 
Sec. 86.004-16 applies to these OBD requirements.

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

[[Page 59930]]

    (i) Catalyst deterioration or malfunction--before it results in 
exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable standard or FEL 
for NOX or PM, as compared to the NOX or PM 
emission level measured using a representative 4,000 mile catalyst 
system. The above requirement only applies to reduction catalysts; 
oxidation catalysts are not required to be monitored.
    (ii) Particulate trap malfunction--any particulate trap whose 
complete failure results in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times 
the applicable standard or FEL for NOX or PM, as compared 
to the NOX or PM emission level measured using a 
representative 4,000 mile particulate trap system must be monitored. 
Particulate trap monitoring must be capable of detecting a 
catastrophic failure of the device, monitoring to the precise 1.5 
threshold is not necessary. This monitoring would not need to be 
done if the manufacturer can demonstrate that a catastrophic failure 
of the system will not result in exceedance of the threshold.
2. Applicability and Waivers
    The federal LD diesel vehicle OBD requirements finalized in today's 
action would be fully implemented (100%) in the 2004 model year for 
vehicles less than 6,000 pounds GVWR . The federal OBD requirements for 
LD diesel vehicles between 6,000 pounds and 8,500 pounds GVWR and 
diesel MDPVs would be fully implemented (100%) in the 2005 model year.

E. Access to On-Board Computer Information

    We are finalizing the proposed requirement that manufacturers be 
required to provide to us information and hardware that we request to 
read and interpret emission control information broadcast by an 
engine's electronic control module. Specifically, we proposed:

    Upon request from EPA, a manufacturer must provide to EPA 
hardware (including scan tools), passwords, and/or documentation 
necessary for EPA to read and interpret (in engineering units if 
applicable) any information broadcast by an engine's on-board 
computers and electronic control modules which relates in anyway to 
emission control devices and auxiliary emission control devices. 
Passwords include any information necessary to enable generic scan 
tools or personal computers access to proprietary emission related 
information broadcast by an engine's on-board computer, if such 
passwords exist. This requirement includes access by EPA to any 
proprietary code information which may be broadcast by an engine's 
on-board computer and electronic control modules. Information which 
is confidential business information must be marked as such. 
Engineering units refers to the ability to read and interpret 
information in commonly understood engineering units, for example, 
engine speed in revolutions per minute or per second, injection 
timing parameters such as start of injection in degree's before top-
dead center, fueling rates in cubic centimeters per stroke, vehicle 
speed in miles per hour or kilometers per hour.

In response to a comment that manufacturers should not be required to 
provide EPA with a commercially available scantool, we are revising 
this language to clarify that manufacturers are not required to provide 
hardware that is otherwise commercially available. This new regulatory 
requirement is not intended to limit our authority under section 208 of 
the Clean Air Act to require manufacturers to provide us with 
commercially available tools and other information.
    We believe that this requirement is necessary to ensure in-use 
compliance. We recognize manufacturers' concern regarding the potential 
burden of this requirement; however, it should be noted that this 
requirement does not mean that manufacturers will need to submit all of 
this information with each application for certification. We intend to 
require this information only to the extent that is necessary. 
Moreover, we are willing to work with the manufacturers in implementing 
this regulatory provision to find ways to minimize the burden while 
enabling us to ensure in-use compliance. Thus, we may revise this 
provision in a later rulemaking. This section is not intended to limit 
our authority under section 208 of the Clean Air Act to require 
manufacturers to provide us with commercially available tools and other 
information.

IV. The Heavy-Duty Requirements Are Technologically Feasible

A. Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines

    Today's final rule contains a reaffirmation of the 2004 
NMHC+NOX standards as well as several supplemental standards 
and test cycles for 2007 model year HDDE;

--2004--2.4 g/bhp-hr NMHC + NOX or 2.5 g/bhp NMHC + 
NOX with a limit of 0.5 g/bhp-hr on NMHC on the existing 
Federal Test Procedure
--2007--Emission requirements of 1.0 times the FTP standards on the new 
Supplemental Steady-State Test cycle and compliance under steady-state 
conditions with Maximum Allowable Emission Limits
--2007--Emission requirements of 1.25 times the FTP standards under the 
new Not-to-Exceed test zone

    EPA has determined these standards and new test procedures are 
feasible in this time frame based on a number of factors. First, as 
detailed in the proposal and in the final rule, enormous progress has 
been made in the last few years regarding HD diesel emission control 
technology, principally in the areas of: Second generation full 
authority fuel injection systems; cooled EGR for HD diesels, advanced 
turbocharging systems (such as VGT), and advanced electronic control 
systems. Second, data published in the scientific literature has shown 
that individually and in combination, these emission control 
technologies can produce substantial emission reductions in 
NOX, PM and hydrocarbons, over a broad range of engine 
operating conditions. As detailed in the RIA for this final rule, 
emission reductions on the order of 50 to 90 percent from current 
generation HD diesel engines have been demonstrated using combinations 
of these technologies. Third, with respect to the new supplemental 
requirements, a number of manufacturers have requested and received 
certificates of conformity for a large number of HD diesel engine 
families which meet NTE limits, Supplemental Steady-state limits, and 
MAEL limits using existing HD diesel engine technology (i.e., engines 
certified to the 4.0g/bhp-hr NOX standard, the 0.10 g/bhp-hr 
PM standard (0.05 for urban buses), and the 0.13 g/bhp-hr HC standard). 
These engine families are certified to NTE limits between 1.25 and 1.75 
times the current NOX standard of 4.0 g/bhp-hr. In addition, 
they have certified to Supplemental Steady-state (SSS) limits between 
1.0 and 1.5 times the current NOX standard, and 1.0 times 
the current standard for all other regulated emissions, including THC, 
PM, CO. While these engine families are not certified to the 2004 
standards, they have used existing technology (i.e., without the use of 
cooled EGR, VGT or Second generation electronic fuel injection systems) 
to meet NTE and SSS requirements similar to the requirements for 2007 
HDDEs. As discussed previously, the application of cooled EGR systems 
(in combination with advanced fuel injection, turbomachinery, and 
electronic controls), can produce substantial emission reductions on 
current technology HD diesel engines over a broad range of operating 
conditions and therefore can be used to bring future engines into 
compliance with the supplemental requirements.
    Fourth, in response to EPA's proposal, several manufacturers 
provided EPA with confidential business information (CBI) data 
regarding testing and development work they have performed

[[Page 59931]]

in their attempt to meet the NTE at the standard levels contained in 
today's final rule. This CBI information has been summarized by EPA, 
and the summary information can be found in a technical memorandum to 
the docket.\46\ This technical memorandum shows that some HD diesel 
engine manufacturers have been able to achieve the 2007 NTE limit over 
a broad range of the NTE control area, and over a range of temperatures 
and altitudes, though not over the entire expanded conditions 
established in today's action. The memorandum also highlights a number 
of technical issues manufacturers have encountered in their attempts to 
meet NTE limits at the levels contained in today's final rule over the 
entire NTE control area, and at the limits of the expanded conditions. 
The RIA and the Response to Comments document for this final rule 
contains EPA's analysis of these issues, including our assessment of 
the technologies which manufacturers will be able to use to overcome 
the technical issues they have encountered within the time frame 
provided by the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Memorandum to EPA Air Docket A-98-32, ``Summary of CBI 
Information regarding proposed HD Supplemental Test Requirements''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, we have determined the 2004 NMHC+NOX 
standard, and the 2007 supplemental requirements, are appropriate and 
feasible without changes in current on-highway diesel fuel formulation. 
The RIA for this final rule contains the information we have analyzed 
in making this decision, and the Response to Comments document contains 
our analysis of the comments we received on this issue. Only a brief 
summary will be presented here. The most detailed and relevant test 
program which examined the impact of diesel fuel formulation on 2004 
technology engines was discussed in our proposal, and is repeated in 
the final RIA. The test program, a joint program sponsored by EPA, the 
American Petroleum Institute, and the Engine Manufacturers Association, 
showed that large changes in several key fuel parameters resulted in 
only modest improvements in NMHC+NOX emissions from a 2004 
technology HD diesel engine. In addition, as discussed above, engine 
control technology alone can result in NMHC+NOX emission 
reductions sufficient to meet the 2004 and 2007 requirements. In 
response to our proposal, a number of engine manufacturers raised 
engine durability issues associated with the level of the proposed 
standards and current diesel fuel sulfur levels. As discussed in the 
RIA and the Response to Comments document, we believe these durability 
issues can be resolved thru cooled EGR temperature management combined 
with the selection of corrosive resistant material and bonding 
processes for the cooled EGR system.

B. Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Otto-cycle Vehicles and 
Engines

    We believe that the new standards contained in this final rule are 
the most stringent standards technologically feasible in the 2004/2005 
time frame. We are finalizing three program options for Otto-cycle 
engines and vehicles, increasing the flexibility of the program and 
further enhancing program feasibility. Manufacturers may select the 
option that best fits with their product line and product planning.
    This section discusses the current technologies being used by 
manufacturers and the key technology changes we believe will be 
available to meet the new vehicle and engine emission standards. 
Technological feasibility of the exhaust emission standards is 
presented first, followed by analyses for ORVR controls. Manufacturers 
will ultimately decide what is best for their individual product lines. 
It is likely, however, that manufacturers will employ technologies 
developed first for light-duty vehicles such as improved catalysts. 
Further information on the various available technologies and EPA's 
technological feasibility assessment is contained in the Technological 
Feasibility section of the Regulatory Impact Analysis and the Response 
to Comments.
1. Current Technologies
    Gasoline engine manufacturers are already producing heavy-duty 
engines that achieve a level of emission control better than the 
control required by current standards. Table 7 provides a list of some 
key technologies currently being used for HD engine emissions control. 
Manufacturers have introduced improved systems as they have introduced 
new or revised engine models. These systems can provide very good 
emissions control and many engines are being certified to levels of 
less than half the current standards. Many of the technologies have 
been carried over from light-duty applications.

  Table 7.--Key Technologies for Current Heavy-duty Otto-cycle Engines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sequential fuel injection/electronic control
3 way catalyst
pre and post catalyst heated oxygen sensors
Electronic EGR
Secondary air injection
Improved electronic control modules
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Improving fuel injection has been proven to be an effective and 
durable strategy for controlling emissions and reducing fuel 
consumption from gasoline engines. Improved fuel injection will result 
in better fuel atomization and a more homogeneous charge with less 
cylinder-to-cylinder and cycle-to-cycle variation of the air-fuel 
ratio. These engine performance benefits will increase as technology 
advances allow fuel to be injected with better atomization. Increased 
atomization of fuel promotes more rapid evaporation by increasing the 
surface area to mass ratio of the injected fuel. This results in a more 
homogeneous charge to the combustion chamber and more complete 
combustion. Currently, sequential multi-port fuel injection (SFI) is 
used in most, if not all, applications under the new standards because 
of its proven effectiveness.
    One of the most effective means of reducing engine-out 
NOX emissions is EGR. By recirculating spent exhaust gases 
into the combustion chamber, the overall air-fuel mixture is diluted, 
lowering peak combustion temperatures and reducing NOX. 
Exhaust gas recirculation is currently used on heavy-duty Otto-cycle 
engines as a NOX control strategy. Many manufacturers now 
use electronic EGR in place of mechanical back-pressure designs. By 
using electronic solenoids to open and close the EGR valve, the flow of 
EGR can be more precisely controlled.
    EPA believes that the most promising overall emission control 
strategy for heavy-duty Otto-cycle engines is the combination of a 
three-way catalyst and closed loop electronic control of the air-fuel 
ratio. Control of the air-fuel ratio is important because the three-way 
catalyst is effective only if the air-fuel ratio is at a narrow band 
near stoichiometry. For example, for an 80 percent conversion 
efficiency of HC, CO, and NOX with a typical three-way 
catalyst, the air-fuel ratio must be maintained within a fraction of 
one percent of stoichiometry. During transient operation, this minimal 
variation cannot be maintained with open-loop control. For closed-loop 
control, the air-fuel ratio in the exhaust is measured by an oxygen 
sensor and used in a feedback loop. The throttle position, fuel 
injection, and spark timing can then be adjusted for given operating 
conditions to result in the

[[Page 59932]]

proper air-fuel ratio in the exhaust. Most if not all engines have 
already been equipped with closed loop controls. Some engines have been 
equipped with catalysts that achieve efficiencies in excess of 90 
percent. This is one key reason engine and vehicle certification levels 
are very low. In addition, electronic control can be used to adjust the 
air-fuel ratio and spark timing to adapt to lower engine temperatures, 
therefore controlling HC emissions during cold start operation.
    All HD Otto-cycle engines are already equipped with three-way 
catalysts. Engines may be equipped with a variety of different catalyst 
sizes and configurations. Manufacturers choose catalysts to fit their 
needs for particular vehicles. Typically, catalyst systems are a single 
converter or two converters in series or in parallel. A converter is 
constructed of a substrate, washcoat, and catalytic material. The 
substrate may be metallic or ceramic with a flow-through design similar 
to a honeycomb. A high surface area coating, or washcoat, is used to 
provide a suitable surface for the catalytic material. Under high 
temperatures, the catalytic material will increase the rate of chemical 
reaction of the exhaust gas constituents.
    Significant changes in catalyst formulation have been made in 
recent years and additional advances in these areas are still possible. 
Platinum, Palladium and Rhodium (Pt, Pd, and Rh) are the precious 
metals typically used in catalysts. Historically, platinum has been 
widely used. Today, palladium is being used much more widely due to its 
ability to withstand very high exhaust temperatures. In fact, some HD 
vehicles currently are equipped with palladium-only catalysts. Other 
catalysts contain all three metals or contain both palladium and 
rhodium. Some manufacturers have suggested that they will use Pd/Rh in 
lieu of tri-metal or conventional Pt/Rh catalysts for underfloor 
applications. Improvements in substrate and washcoat materials and 
technology have also significantly improved catalyst performance.
2. Chassis-Based Standards
    We are finalizing standards that effectively extend nationwide the 
California LEV-I MDV standards in place prior to 2004. California began 
requiring some vehicles to meet LEV standards in 1998 and the phase-in 
will be complete in 2001. The technological feasibility assessment and 
technology projections are based primarily on the mix of technologies 
being used to achieve California LEV emission levels.
    Of the anticipated changes, enhancements to the catalyst systems 
are expected to be most critical. Catalyst configurations are likely to 
continue to vary widely among the manufacturers because manufacturers 
must design the catalyst configurations to fit the vehicles. One 
potential change is that manufacturers may move the catalyst closer to 
the engine (close-coupled) or may place a small catalyst close to the 
engine followed by a larger underfloor catalyst. These designs provide 
lower cold start emissions because the catalyst is closer to the engine 
and warms up more quickly. Typically, the catalyst systems used in HD 
applications have a large total volume but with lower precious metal 
content per liter compared to light-duty catalyst systems. To meet the 
chassis-based standards, EPA projects an increase in overall catalyst 
system precious metal loading with no expected significant increases in 
total catalyst volume.
    Calibration changes will also be important. The engine and catalyst 
systems must be calibrated to optimize the performance of the systems 
as a whole. Post catalyst oxygen sensors will allow further air fuel 
control. Manufacturers are moving to more powerful computer systems and 
EPA expects this trend to continue. Other technologies such as 
insulated exhaust systems may also be used in some cases to reduce cold 
start emissions.
    HD vehicles in California have typically been certified with full 
life emission levels in the 0.3-0.5 g/mile range for NOX and 
the 0.1-0.3 g/mile range for NMOG. These levels are well within the LEV 
standards and provide manufacturers with a compliance cushion. EPA 
expects manufacturers to sell these vehicles or very similar vehicles 
nationwide to meet the new vehicle standards.
3. Engine-Based Standards
    EPA believes that the engine standards contained in the three 
options are appropriate standards for HD Otto-cycle engines in the 
2003-2005 time frame. Manufacturers may select the option that is the 
best fit for their product line and planning. Certification levels 
below 1.0 g/bhp-hr NMHC+NOX have been achieved on recently 
introduced engines of varied sizes. EPA believes that the standards 
being adopted are feasible and provide sufficient opportunity for 
manufacturers to maintain a reasonable compliance margin. Options 1 and 
2 contain a standard of 1.5 g/bhp-hr which we believe is reasonably 
achievable in the 2003/2004 time frame. With the lead-time available 
for Option 3 (1.0 g/bhp-hr in 2005), we believe manufacturers will be 
able to modify systems to improve their performance and durability so 
that manufacturers can retain necessary compliance margins.
    Currently, most engine families are certified with emission levels 
of less than half the standard. Manufacturers have begun to apply 
advanced system designs to their heavy-duty applications. Recently 
introduced engine families have been certified with emission levels 
below 1.0 g/bhp-hr combined NMHC+NOX. These engines and 
systems feature precise air/fuel control and superior catalyst designs 
comparable to the catalyst systems being used in the California LEV I 
program. Based on industry input, we believe that manufacturers will 
continue the process of replacing their old engine families with 
advanced engines over the next several years. As new and more advanced 
engines and catalyst systems are introduced, EPA anticipates that they 
will be capable of achieving the engine standards finalized today.
    Manufacturers commented that their current certification data 
represents average deterioration and therefore EPA cannot base the 
level of the new standards on current certification data. Manufacturers 
have stated on several occasions that they target emission 
certification levels of about half the standard, due to the potential 
for in-use deterioration of catalysts and oxygen sensors. Catalysts 
experience wide variations in exhaust temperature due to the wide and 
varied usage of vehicles in the field. Some vehicles may experience 
more severe in-use operation than is represented by the durability 
testing currently conducted for engine certification. Manufacturers 
have argued that EPA should not set new standards based on 
certification data because certification levels do not account for 
severe in-use deterioration.
    We proposed standards not at the lowest current certification 
levels but at twice the lowest current certification levels in order to 
accommodate the need for compliance margins. EPA continues to believe 
that with the lead-time available (2005 model year implementation for 
Option 3, 2008 model year implementation for Options 1 and 2) and the 
flexibility provided by the ABT program manufacturers will be able to 
meet the 1.0 g/bhp-hr standard cost effectively. We understand that 
manufacturers in many cases will have to modify their emission control 
systems to provide necessary system durability and compliance margins. 
We believe the technologies are available and can be incorporated into 
current emission control systems in the time available. The RIA and 
Response to Comments document provide detailed

[[Page 59933]]

information about Technological Feasibility.
    We are finalizing early implementation options (Options 1 and 2) 
which allow manufacturers to meet an engine standard of 1.5 g/bhp-hr 
standard through model year 2007 if they sign up to meet the standard 
starting in either model year 2003 or 2004 (Manufacturers also must 
meet the vehicle-based standards for complete vehicles starting in 2004 
model year under Option 2. These vehicle-based standards are optional 
under Option 1). We proposed a standard of 1.0 g/bhp-hr to begin in the 
2004 model year but are not finalizing the 1.0 g/bhp-hr standards for 
the 2004 model year due to the lead time requirements of the Clean Air 
Act. We expected that the 1.0 g/bhp-hr standard would be 
technologically feasible for the 2004 model year for the reasons 
described in the proposed rule. Therefore, we also believe the optional 
1.5 g/bhp-hr standard will be feasible in the 2004 model year. Any 
potential feasibility concerns for the 2004 model year are diminished 
relative to the proposal by the higher level of the standard (1.5 g 
compared to 1.0 g) and the potential opportunities for credit transfers 
from the vehicles to the engine ABT programs. Also, the 1.5 g/bhp-hr 
standard level is consistent with the recommendations of two 
manufacturers (Ford and Daimler Chrysler) providing comments on the 
rule. For these reasons, we expect that Option 2 is technologically 
feasible and that manufacturers will consider selecting the option.
    Option 1 provides incentive for further acceleration of the new 
standards to the 2003 model year. We believe manufacturers may find 
this attractive for product planning reasons. The option provides 
further flexibility for manufacturers to choose between engine and 
chassis-based testing for the initial years of the program. Based on 
certification data and the availability of advanced technology, we 
believe Option 1 would be within reach for manufacturers even though 
manufacturers would have less lead time if they chose this option.
    Catalyst systems with increased precious metal loading will be a 
critical hardware change for meeting the new engine standards. 
Optimizing and calibrating the catalyst and engine systems as a whole 
will also be important in achieving the standards. Increased use of air 
injection to control cold start emissions may also be needed, 
especially to reduce NMHC emissions during cold start operation. Also, 
improved EGR systems and retarded spark timing may be needed to reduce 
engine out NOX emission levels.
    Catalyst system durability is a key issue in the feasibility of the 
standards. Historically, catalysts have deteriorated when exposed to 
very high temperatures and this has long been a concern for heavy-duty 
work vehicles. Manufacturers have often taken steps to protect 
catalysts by ensuring exhaust temperatures remain in an acceptable 
range. Catalyst technologies in use currently are much improved over 
the catalysts used only a few years ago. The improvements have come 
with the use of palladium, which has superior thermal stability, and 
through much improved washcoat technology. The catalysts have been 
shown to withstand temperatures typically experienced in HD 
applications. Manufacturers also continue to limit exhaust temperature 
extremes not only to protect catalyst systems but also to protect the 
engine.
    To help address phase in concerns that could arise for 
manufacturers, EPA is finalizing a modified ABT program for engines, as 
described above. The ABT program can be an important tool for 
manufacturers in implementing a new standard. The program allows 
manufacturers to comply with the more stringent standards by 
introducing emission controls over a longer period of time, as opposed 
to during a single model year. Manufacturers plan their product 
introductions well in advance. With ABT, manufacturers can better 
manage their product lines so that the new standards don't interrupt 
their product introduction plans. Also, the program allows 
manufacturers to focus on higher sales volume vehicles first and use 
credits for low sales volume vehicles. EPA believes manufacturers have 
significant opportunity to earn credits in the pre-2004 (pre-2005 for 
Option 2) time frame.
    We are finalizing three options that we believe will be viable for 
manufacturers to choose among. The three options provide a range of 
choices and offer manufacturers flexibility to fit the program with 
their product planning. As manufacturers continue with normal product 
plans between now and the start of the new standards, improved engines 
will continue to replace older models. The ABT program is available for 
manufacturers who have not completely changed over to new engine models 
by 2003/2004/2005. ABT provides manufacturers with the opportunity to 
earn credits prior to implementation and use the credits to continue to 
offer older engine models that have not yet been redesigned or retired 
by the start of the program.
4. Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery
    We believe that today's ORVR requirements are technologically 
feasible. In our previous ORVR rulemaking, we elected to apply ORVR 
requirements only to LDVs and LDTs (see 59 FR 16262, April 6, 1994). We 
chose at the time of the original rulemaking not to apply ORVR to HDVs 
because of concerns over secondary manufacturers, different fuel tank 
designs for larger HDVs than for LDVs and LDTs, and the fact that HDVs 
are certified under an engine-based testing program. These three issues 
are addressed in today's requirements by limiting ORVR to complete 
vehicles under 10,000 lbs GVWR. In the original ORVR rule we analyzed 
the potential application of ORVR to all HDVs. In that analysis we 
concluded that ORVR is technologically feasible for application to 
HDVs. We concluded that the systems which would be required for the 
covered subset of HDVs would be essentially the same as those for LDVs 
and LDTs. Such systems have already been successfully implemented on a 
portion of the LDV fleet. We are aware of no information on fundamental 
changes to HDV fuel system design which would cause it to believe that 
the original analysis is no longer valid.
    ORVR systems must meet certain basic requirements in order to be 
effective at controlling refueling emissions. In general, they must 
provide for the routing of displaced vapors from the fuel tank to the 
engine rather than allowing them to escape uncontrolled to the 
atmosphere. This will likely be accomplished through the use of (1) a 
fillneck seal which prevents the vapors from escaping out the fillneck, 
(2) a fuel tank vent mechanism, to allow for the controlled routing of 
the vapors from the fuel tank, (3) vapor lines for transporting vapors, 
(4) a canister containing activated carbon to temporarily store the 
vapors, and 5) a purge system to regenerate the canister and route the 
vapors to the engine.
    The major components of an ORVR system are already in place on HDVs 
in response to EPA's enhanced evaporative emission requirements (see 58 
FR 16002, March 24, 1993). The primary differences between an enhanced 
evaporative control system and an ORVR system lie in the need to 
prevent vapors from escaping via the fillneck during a refueling event, 
and the fact that the vapor flow rates out of the fuel tank are much 
higher during refueling than during vehicle operation and diurnal 
events that enhanced evaporative systems are designed to control.

[[Page 59934]]

C. On-Board Diagnostics

    For Otto-cycle vehicles and engines, the most difficult monitors to 
implement are those for the catalyst system, the evaporative emission 
control system, and engine misfire. While each of these monitors poses 
technological challenges, none of them pose technological feasibility 
concerns. Rather than concerns over technological feasibility, EPA 
expects concerns, where today's rule applies to Otto-cycle vehicles and 
engines, over resource constraints for OBD calibration and associated 
verification testing.
    EPA does not consider resource constraints a feasibility issue, nor 
does EPA believe the manufacturers will be constrained by today's OBD 
provisions. EPA believes this is true for both the Otto-cycle and the 
diesel OBD requirements. Since the 1996 model year, manufacturers have 
been equipping their vehicles and engines with OBD systems essentially 
identical to those being finalized today. This is true federally for 
all vehicles below 8500 pounds GVWR, and in California for all vehicles 
and engines below 14,000 pounds GVWR. The Agency believes that the four 
year lead time within today's final rulemaking matched with the OBD 
phase-in of 60/80/100 or 40/60/80/100 for the optional 2005 path, 
provides adequate lead time to apply the real world tested OBD system 
technology to their new sales fleet below 14,000 pounds GVWR without 
resource difficulties.
    The transmission represents an area of potential concern for engine 
certified as opposed to chassis certified Otto-cycle and diesel 
engines. Typically, the engine manufacturer certifies and sells its 
engine, without an associated transmission, to a chassis manufacturer. 
The chassis manufacturer then ``mates'' the engine to a transmission 
purchased from a transmission manufacturer representing a third 
industry party. The final regulations require that chassis certified 
systems employ transmission diagnostics, but would not require that 
engine certified systems employ transmission diagnostics.
    EPA believes that it is reasonable to expect that electronically 
controlled transmissions will be designed with some level of 
diagnostics to ensure proper operation. In addition, the Agency expects 
that those transmissions will utilize industry standard communication 
protocols allowing the transmission and the engine control computers to 
communicate, and allowing any transmission-related OBD codes to be 
downloaded via the standard diagnostic data link connector without 
engine manufacturer involvement.
    Specific to diesel vehicles and engines, the Agency believes there 
are three areas of concern associated with technological feasibility: 
EGR monitoring; misfire monitoring; and, aftertreatment monitoring. 
With respect to EGR monitoring, the primary concern is expected to be 
the cooling componentry of a cooled EGR system. Other aspects of the 
EGR system, such as activation of the EGR valve, verification of proper 
flow, etc., can be accomplished as is already being done on Otto-cycle 
and diesel vehicles and engines under 14,000 pounds GVWR.\47\ However, 
the cooling system presents a new challenge. The Agency believes 
monitoring of the cooling system is feasible by employing temperature 
sensors to ensure proper EGR cooling (heat transfer) given existing 
engine conditions, and coolant flow. If the cooling system becomes 
fouled, its ability to transfer heat from the exhaust gases to the 
coolant will be diminished and a resultant temperature inconsistency 
should be observed. Likewise, if coolant ceases to flow through the 
cooling system, a resultant temperature inconsistency should be 
observed. In fact, EPA believes that manufacturers will monitor EGR 
cooling system performance absent a requirement to do so. As discussed 
in Chapter 3 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis for today's final rule, 
manufacturers will be designing their EGR systems to cool the EGR to 
specific design targets to optimize engine performance and to minimize 
condensation of sulfuric acid. The only way to ensure that engine 
performance is being optimized is to monitor the performance of the EGR 
system and compare it to the specific design targets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Current EGR monitoring systems may use the existing intake 
air temperature sensor--opening the EGR valve should result in an 
increased intake air temperature. Systems may also use an intake air 
pressure sensor--opening the EGR valve will change the intake air 
pressure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As for diesel misfire monitoring, the Agency believes that the 
final requirement is technologically feasible. In fact, manufacturers 
are certifying compliant diesel misfire monitors for sale in California 
on vehicles and engines under 14,000 pounds GVWR. We believe, like 
CARB, that diesel misfire is an air quality concern. Also, we believe 
that most users of diesel vehicles and engines under 14,000 pounds 
GVWR, particularly vehicles and engines less than 10,000 pounds GVWR, 
will not notice or may ignore diesel misfires. In contrast, we believe 
that most users of engines above 14,000 pounds GVWR will notice and not 
ignore misfires. We believe this is true because most of these engines 
are driven by professionals for whom minimizing fuel consumption and 
maximizing engine performance is a primary business concern. 
Conversely, most vehicles and engines under 14,000 pounds GVWR, 
particularly vehicles and engines under 10,000 pounds GVWR, are driven 
by individuals as personal transportation or for small business use. 
Such drivers are probably less familiar with the day-to-day operating 
characteristics of their engines and are probably less concerned with 
fuel consumption and engine performance.
    With respect to diesel catalyst monitoring, we stated in the NPRM 
that we expected such monitoring to be conducted using temperature 
sensing devices to detect an exotherm within the aftertreatment device. 
We received several comments stating that diesel catalyst monitoring, 
especially for oxidation catalysts, is less critical to ensuring in-use 
compliance than monitoring of otto-cycle catalysts. They stated that 
diesel catalysts are relied upon to reduce emissions much less than 
their otto-cycle counterparts. They also stated that diesel catalysts 
have much lower conversion efficiencies and even complete failure of 
the catalyst is unlikely to result in emission levels in excess of the 
emissions threshold. They point out that diesel catalysts encounter 
much lower exhaust temperatures than otto-cycle engines and, as a 
result diesel catalysts are very durable, exhibiting very good catalyst 
performance at and beyond useful life. Limited data presented to the 
Agency from an engine manufacturer \48\ supports these comments. The 
data suggests that for diesel oxidation catalysts, there is essentially 
no deterioration up to 120,000 miles. Therefore, in light of these 
comments and the above mentioned data, we feel it is appropriate at 
this time to not require diesel oxidation catalysts to be monitored.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ Memo to EPA Air Docket A-98-32 from William Charmley dated 
October 12, 1999. A-98-32, II-B-06.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There was also several comments expressing concern about the 
ability to monitor diesel reduction catalysts by the 2004 model year. 
We believe that diesel reduction catalysts may play an important role 
for future light-duty vehicle applications, especially in meeting Tier 
2 emission standards. Information from catalyst technology literature 
\49\ indicates that diesel

[[Page 59935]]

reduction catalysts are not nearly as durable as diesel oxidation 
catalysts. Thus, if a manufacturer were to rely on a reduction catalyst 
to meet today's final standards, it is imperative that they be 
monitored. We disagree with comments suggesting that technology needed 
to monitor diesel reduction catalysts will not be ready by the 2004 
model year. We believe that manufacturers will be capable of monitoring 
diesel reduction catalysts to the required emissions threshold by using 
NOX sensor technology. Direct emission measurement has been 
identified as an important technology to achieve diesel engine closed-
loop feedback control and to achieve after-treatment OBD. Researchers 
already have achieved promising results on a compact NOX 
sensor that is capable of measuring real-time NOX within 10% 
accuracy of laboratory-grade instruments under a wide range of 
operating conditions, including the temperature, pressure, and oxygen 
concentration typical of diesel engine exhaust. This breakthrough 
technology could be used for closed-loop control, and, because it can 
accurately measure NOX in the 100 ppm range, it would enable 
monitoring of NOX aftertreatment technologies.\50\ The most 
recent of these papers (Kato et al., 1999) provides an in depth 
discussion of the accuracy, repeatability, and durability of an on-
board NOX sensor, as well as strategies for using the sensor 
for closed loop control and OBD monitoring of an active lean 
NOX absorber.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ Discussion on diesel lean NOX catalysts from 
www.DieselNet.com.
    \50\ See Kato N., H. Kurachi, Y. Hamada: ``Thick Film ZrO2 
NOX Sensor for the Measurement of Low NOX 
Concentration'', SAE paper 980170, pp. 76-77, 1998, and Kato N., N. 
Kokune, B. Lemire, T. Walde: ``Long term stable NOX 
sensor with integrated in-connector control electronics'', SAE paper 
1999-01-0202, also see memorandum from Mr. Linc Wehrly to EPA Air 
Docket A-98-32 summarizing this paper.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also received several comments on the feasibility of monitoring 
diesel particulate traps. All of the commenters agreed that the sensor 
technology needed to measure PM concentrations in particulate traps 
does not exist. They also stated that back-pressure measurement is not 
capable of monitoring to an emissions threshold. However, it was 
generally agreed that back-pressure measurement could be used to 
determine significant failures in the trap, such as a crack. We believe 
these comments to be reasonable and have decided that for the final 
rule, manufacturers will not be required to monitor the particulate 
trap to an emission threshold, rather they must monitor for the 
complete failure of the device. We define complete failure as a sudden 
drop in exhaust back-pressure below that of a clean or unloaded trap 
under monitoring conditions specified by the manufacturer.
    Note that, for diesel vehicles and engines, the Agency considers 
the EGR system to be the primary emission control system that will be 
used to meet the 2004 standards. This makes the EGR system somewhat 
analogous to the catalyst in an Otto-cycle emission control system. 
Because the Otto-cycle catalyst is responsible for roughly 90 percent 
of emission control, the Agency considers it imperative that the 
catalyst be monitored via OBD to ensure its continued performance. 
Likewise, the diesel EGR system is expected to account for roughly 50 
percent of the emission control, making it perhaps the single largest 
contributor to emission control on a diesel engine. Therefore, the 
Agency considers it imperative that the EGR system be monitored on a 
diesel vehicle or engine. This is especially true given what the Agency 
considers to be a rather low cost associated with the requirement in 
this rule for monitoring this critical emission control system.\51\ The 
Agency fully expects that manufacturers will employ OBD techniques on 
their diesel EGR systems to ensure satisfactory engine performance for 
their customers. Today's final rule simply ensures that the monitoring 
will occur, and it ensures that the monitoring will consider not only 
engine performance, but also emission performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ The Agency estimates $3 to $7 per vehicle/engine for the 
OBD requirements in today's rule, primarily for development and 
demonstration testing given that most of the diesel monitoring will 
be done by the manufacturer absent any requirement to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. What Is the Economic Impact and Cost-Effectiveness for These 
Requirements?

A. Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines

1. Expected Technologies
    In assessing the economic impact of the 2004 emission standards and 
the 2007 supplemental requirements (including the standards finalized 
in 1997 and the standards finalized today), EPA has used a current best 
judgement of the combination of technologies that an engine 
manufacturer might use to meet the new standards at an acceptable cost. 
Full details of EPA's cost analysis, including information not 
presented here, can be found in the Regulatory Impact Analysis in the 
public docket. The costs presented here were developed assuming that 
heavy-duty diesel engines would need high-flow cooled EGR, combustion 
chamber optimization, improved electronic fuel injection, and variable 
geometry turbochargers (except for light heavy-duty engines). The costs 
also include testing costs necessary to comply with the OBD and not-to-
exceed requirements. As was done in the proposal, EPA is projecting 
costs assuming that this testing to be completed in time for the 2004 
model, even though the new requirements will not be mandatory until the 
2007 model year. We believe that many manufacturers will choose (as a 
convenience) to incorporate the calibration changes necessary to comply 
with these requirements during the 2004 model year, rather than to 
modify their 2004 designs for the 2007 model year. Since this 
assumption means that manufacturers would incur the testing costs three 
years earlier than required, it results in a slight increase in the net 
present value of the costs, and is thus somewhat conservative.
    The analysis also assumes that manufacturers would introduce the 
improved electronic fuel injection systems and variable geometry 
turbochargers for some engine models even without the more stringent 
standard in 2004. Both of these technologies will provide significant 
performance benefits both directly, and by allowing manufacturers to 
reduce the use of injection timing retard to comply with the current 
4.0 g/bhp-hr NOX standard. The Agency believes that 
manufacturers may draw similar conclusions for using EGR on some of 
these same engines, however, as a conservative assumption, EPA is 
assuming that no EGR would be used to comply with the current 4.0 g/
bhp-hr NOX standard. For this analysis EPA is also assuming 
that only 50 percent of the costs for the improved electronic fuel 
injection and the use of variable geometry turbochargers are 
attributable to emission control. This is because EPA believes that 
manufacturers would make these improvements for many of their engines, 
even in the absence of these emission standards, to reduce fuel 
consumption and improve engine performance, a similar approach was used 
in the 1997 final rule. The docket for this rulemaking contains 
additional information on this aspect of the Agency's cost analysis, 
including a cost sensitivity analysis regarding the fifty percent 
assumption.\52\ In addition, the RIA contains an estimate of the impact 
this 50 percent assumption has on the

[[Page 59936]]

HD diesel cost-effectiveness. We recognize this 50 percent assumption 
is not a precise approach to characterizing the costs which could 
otherwise be attributed to our baseline assumptions. However, 
developing a more precise estimate is problematic due to the complexity 
of market demand as well as other uncertainties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ See EPA Air Docket A-98-32, ``Analysis of Costs and 
Benefits of VGT and Improved Fuel Injection'', EPA Memorandum from 
Charles Moulis
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Per Engine Costs
    Estimated per engine cost increases are broken into purchase price 
and total life-cycle operating costs. The incremental purchase price 
for new engines is comprised of variable costs (for hardware and 
assembly time) and fixed costs (for R&D, retooling, and certification). 
Total operating costs include expected increases in maintenance. Cost 
estimates based on these projected technology packages represent an 
expected incremental cost of engines in the 2004 model year. Costs in 
subsequent years would be reduced by several factors, as described 
below. Separate projected costs were derived for engines used in three 
service classes of heavy-duty diesel engines. All costs are presented 
in 1999 dollars. Life-cycle costs have been discounted to the year of 
sale.
    For the long term, EPA has identified various factors that would 
cause cost impacts to decrease over time. First, the analysis 
incorporates the expectation that manufacturers will apply ongoing 
research to making emission controls more effective and less costly 
over time. This expectation is similar to manufacturers' stated goal of 
decreasing their reliance on catalysts to meet emission standards in 
the future. Second, research in the costs of manufacturing has 
consistently shown that as manufacturers gain experience in production, 
they are able to apply innovations to simplify machining and assembly 
operations, use lower cost materials, and reduce the number or 
complexity of component parts. The analysis incorporates the effects of 
this learning curve by projecting that the variable costs of producing 
the low-emitting engines decreases by 20 percent starting with the 
third year of production (2006 model year) and by reducing variable 
costs again by 20 percent starting with the sixth year of production. 
Chapter 4, Section III in the RIA for this rule, as well as Chapter V, 
Section IV of the final RIA for the 1997 final rulemaking (see Docket 
A-95-27, Docket Item # V-B-01) contain additional discussion of the 
application of this learning curve. The 2004 HD diesel standards will 
require a fundamental change in technology for the engine 
manufacturers. Considering this change, we believe the learning curve 
concept is appropriate for this rulemaking.
    Finally, since fixed costs (excluding in-use testing costs) are 
assumed to be recovered over a five-year period, these costs are not 
included in the analysis after the first five model years. Table 8 
lists the projected schedule of costs for each category of vehicle over 
time.

                           Table 8.--Projected Diesel Engine Cost and Price Increases
                                    [1999 dollars discounted to year of sale]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Purchase       Life-cycle
               Vehicle class                              Model year                   price         operating
                                                                                     increase          cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Light heavy-duty...........................  2004...............................           $ 485             $ 8
                                             2009 and later.....................             241               8
Medium heavy-duty..........................  2004...............................             657              49
                                             2009 and later.....................             275              49
Heavy heavy-duty...........................  2004...............................             803             104
                                             2009 and later.....................             368             104
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Aggregate Costs to Society
    The above analysis develops per-vehicle cost estimates for each 
vehicle class. Using current data for the size and characteristics of 
the heavy-duty vehicle fleet and making projections for the future, 
these costs can be used to estimate the total cost to the nation for 
the new emission standards in any year. The result of this analysis is 
a projected total cost starting at $479 million in 2004. Per-vehicle 
costs savings over time reduce projected costs to a minimum value of 
$248 million in 2009, after which the growth in truck population leads 
to an increase in costs to $325 million in 2020. Total costs for these 
years are presented by vehicle class in Table 9. The calculated total 
costs represent a combined estimate of fixed costs as they are 
allocated over fleet sales, variable costs assessed at the point of 
sale, and operating costs as they are incurred in each calendar year. 
Future sales are projected for years beyond 1995, sales are projected 
to increase each year by a constant value equal to 2 percent of the 
number of engines sold in 1995.

                        Table 9.--Estimated Annual Costs for Improved Heavy-Duty Vehicles
                                              [Millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Category                                   2004            2009            2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Light heavy-duty................................................             161              89             105
Medium heavy-duty...............................................             109              50              67
Heavy heavy-duty................................................             210             110             153
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             479             248             325
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Cost-Effectiveness
    EPA has estimated the per-vehicle cost-effectiveness (i.e., the 
cost per ton of emission reduction) of the model year 2004 
NMHC+NOX standards over the typical lifetime of heavy-duty 
diesel vehicles covered by today's rule. The RIA contains a more 
detailed discussion of the cost-effectiveness analyses. As described 
above in the cost section, the cost of complying with the standards

[[Page 59937]]

will vary by model year. Therefore, the cost-effectiveness will also 
vary from model year to model year. For comparison purposes, the 
discounted costs, emission reductions and cost-effectiveness of the 
standards are shown in Table 10 for the same model years discussed 
above in the cost section. The cost-effectiveness results contained in 
Table 10 present the range in cost-effectiveness resulting from the two 
cost-effectiveness scenarios described above.

                      Table 10.--Discounted Per-Vehicle Costs, Emission Reductions and Cost-Effectiveness of the NMHC+NOX Standard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          Discounted lifetime reductions    Discounted
                                                                                            Discounted                 (tons)                  cost
                Vehicle class                                  Model year                    lifecycle   --------------------------------  effectiveness
                                                                                               costs            NOX            NMHC           ($/ton)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Light Heavy-Duty Diesel vehicles.............  2004.....................................            $493           0.232           0.018           $1969
                                               2009 and later...........................             249                                             995
Medium Heavy-Duty Diesel vehicles............  2004.....................................             706           0.764           0.067             849
                                               2009 and later...........................             323                                             389
Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles.............  2004.....................................             907           3.189           0.151             272
                                               2009 and later...........................             472                                             141
Overall (For All Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles).  2004.....................................  ..............  ..............  ..............             474
                                               2009 and later...........................                                                             238
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the benefits of reducing ozone within and 
transported into urban ozone nonattainment areas, the NOX 
reductions from the new engine standards are expected to have 
beneficial impacts with respect to crop damage, secondary particulate, 
acid deposition, eutrophication, visibility, and forest health. Due to 
the difficulty in accurately quantifying the monetary value of these 
societal benefits, the cost-effectiveness values presented do not 
assign any numerical value to these additional benefits.

B. Emission Standards for Heavy-duty Otto-Cycle Vehicles and Engines

    This section contains a summary of our comprehensive analyses of 
the economic impacts of today's regulations for heavy-duty Otto-cycle 
vehicles and engines. The following separate factors are analyzed: (1) 
The technologies expected to be used and their projected rates of 
application; (2) the costs of these technology packages incremental to 
today's vehicle designs (presented on a per-vehicle basis separately 
for chassis and engine certified configurations); (3) the aggregate 
cost to society of the requirements and; (4) the cost-effectiveness of 
the regulations. More information on these analyses can be found in the 
Regulatory Impact Analysis contained in the docket for this rule.
1. Expected Technologies
    The various technologies that could be used to comply with today's 
regulations were previously discussed in the section on technological 
feasibility. In developing costs for the associated technologies we 
looked at the current technology used on HDVs and compared that to the 
technology expected to be used to meet these regulations. The 
incremental costs difference was then calculated based on the 
differences between the current (i.e., baseline) technology packages 
and those expected to be used in 2005. Table 11 shows both the current 
baseline and expected technologies for complete vehicles. Table 12 
shows the current baseline and expected technologies for the engine-
based standards. These tables only show the technologies which are 
expected to change in some way from their current design or be applied 
to different percentages of the fleet than they are currently. 
Technologies such as sequential multi-port fuel injection and EGR, 
while important to meeting the standards in this rule, are not expected 
to be fundamentally changed in their design, or be utilized in 
different percentages of the fleet than they currently are. Thus, such 
technologies are not included in these tables. However, in some cases 
the cost of optimizing such technologies is included in the cost 
estimates.

               Table 11.--Current and Expected Technology Packages for Complete Vehicle Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Technology                         Baseline Federal                       Estimated 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catalysts..........................  60% single underfloor                  13% single enhanced underfloor.
                                     40% dual underfloor                    50% dual enhanced underfloor.
                                                                            37% dual close-coupled and dual
                                                                             enhanced underfloor.
Oxygen sensors.....................  70% dual heated                        13% dual heated.
                                     10% triple heated                      87% quadruple heated.
                                     20% quadruple heated
ECM................................  50% 32 bit computers                   100% 32 bit computers.
                                     50% 16 bit computers
Adaptive learning..................  0%                                     80%.
Individual cylinder A/F control....  0%                                     10%.
Leak free exhaust..................  90%                                    100%.
Insulated exhaust..................  0%                                     40%.
Secondary air injection............  20%                                    30%.

[[Page 59938]]

 
ORVR...............................  0%                                     100%.\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ORVR only applies to complete vehicles 10,000 lbs GVWR and under, and is phased in, with 100% application to
  those vehicles in 2006.


                 Table 12.--Current and Expected Technology Packages for Engine-based Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Technology                         Baseline Federal                       Estimated 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catalysts..........................  60% single underfloor                  13% single enhanced underfloor.
                                     40% dual underfloor                    87% dual enhanced underfloor.
Oxygen sensors\1\..................  70% dual heated                        13% triple heated.
                                     10% triple heated                      87% quadruple heated.
                                     20% four heated
ECM................................  50% 32 bit computers                   100% 32 bit computers.
                                     50% 16 bit computers
Improved fuel control..............  50%                                    100%.
Secondary air injection............  20%                                    50%.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ OBD only applies to HDGEs under 14,000 lbs GVWR (approximately 60 percent of HDGEs).

2. Per Vehicle Costs
    The costs of the projected technologies presented in the previous 
section are itemized and discussed in detail in the RIA. On a per-
vehicle basis these costs are summarized in Table 13 They are presented 
in two components: Purchase price and operating cost. The operating 
costs only apply to ORVR-equipped vehicles and include the combined 
effects of a small fuel economy penalty due to the increased weight of 
the ORVR hardware, and a larger fuel economy benefit resulting from the 
vehicle being able to utilize fuel vapors that would otherwise escape 
to the atmosphere in the absence of ORVR.
    We believe that the manufacturers will recover the fixed costs 
associated with research and development, tooling and certification 
over the first five years of production. Thus, these fixed costs are 
not included in the analysis after the first five model years. The 
fixed costs associated with the in-use testing programs will continue 
indefinitely. The projected per vehicle costs impacts are summarized in 
Table 13.

                           Table 13.--Projected HDV Price and Operating Cost Increases
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Purchase price     Lifetime
                   Class                                 Model year                  increase     operating cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complete Vehicles.........................  20051...............................            $285            - $6
                                            2010 and later......................             281             - 6
Engines...................................  20052...............................             296
                                            2010 and later......................             256
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 This cost includes both ORVR and OBD, which are phased in, but which are not required on all complete vehicles
  until the 2006 model year for ORVR and the 2007 model year for OBD.
2 This cost includes an OBD hardware cost. OBD requirements are phased in, but are not required on all engines
  under 14,000 lbs GVWR until the 2007 model year.

3. Aggregate Costs to Society
    In addition to the per vehicle costs just described, we also 
calculated the aggregate cost to society. This was done by combining 
the per vehicle costs with assumed future sales of HDVs. The results of 
this analysis are summarized in Table 14. The recovery of most fixed 
costs results in slightly reduced costs beginning in 2010, after which 
costs begin to rise in accordance with projected increased sales. The 
aggregate costs represent a combined estimate of the fixed costs for 
research and development, tooling and certification as they are 
allocated over the first five years of sales, variable costs assessed 
at the point of sale, and operating costs (primarily in the form of 
fuel cost savings) for ORVR-equipped vehicles (calculated to net 
present value and applied at the point of sale). Future sales are 
projected for years beyond 1996, sales are projected to increase each 
year by a constant value equal to 2 percent of the number of engines 
sold in 1996.

    Table 14.--Aggregate Cost to Society of the Heavy-duty Otto-cycle
                              Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Cost
                          Year                              ($million)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005....................................................            $110
2010....................................................             124
2020....................................................             146
------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Cost-effectiveness
    We estimated the per-vehicle cost-effectiveness (i.e., the cost per 
ton of emission reduction) of the NMHC plus NOX exhaust 
emission standards over the lifetime of typical heavy-duty gasoline 
vehicles. The RIA contains a more detailed discussion of the cost-
effectiveness analysis.
    The cost of complying with the standards will vary by vehicle 
category (i.e., a complete Class 2b heavy-duty gasoline vehicle, a 
complete Class 3 heavy-duty gasoline vehicle, or an incomplete heavy-
duty gasoline vehicle) and model year. Therefore, the lifetime cost-
effectiveness of the standards will vary by model year. For comparison 
purposes, the discounted lifetime costs,

[[Page 59939]]

emission reductions (in short tons), and cost-effectiveness of the 
standards are shown in Table 15 for the same model years discussed in 
the per vehicle costs section. This table does not contain the costs 
and benefits of the ORVR requirements, which are analyzed separately.

                                     Table 15.--Cost-Effectiveness of the Standards for Heavy-Duty Gasoline Vehicles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Discounted       Discounted lifetime NMHC+NOX       Discounted  lifetime
                 HDGV                           Year of production           lifetime cost               reduction                 cost-effectiveness
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class 2B Complete....................  1..................................            $274  0.43 tons.........................  $635/ton
                                       6 and later........................             273                                       633/ton
Class 3 Complete.....................  1..................................             274  0.46 tons.........................   596/ton
                                       6 and later........................             273                                       594/ton
Incomplete HDGV......................  1..................................             296  0.52 tons.........................   565/ton
                                       6 and later........................             256                                       489/ton
All HDGVs............................  1..................................             280  0.46 tons.........................   612/ton
                                       6 and later........................             268                                       586/ton
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also separately estimated the cost-effectiveness of the ORVR 
requirements for Class 2B heavy-duty gasoline vehicles. Table 16 
contains the discounted lifetime cost-effectiveness of the ORVR 
requirements.

  Table 16.--Discounted, Lifetime Cost-Effectiveness of the ORVR Requirements for Class 2B Heavy-Duty Gasoline
                                                    Vehicles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Discounted    Discounted lifetime NMHC +   Discounted lifetime cost-
           Year of production             lifetime cost    NOX emission reductions          effectiveness
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................................              $5  0.035 tons................  $141/ton
6......................................               2  0.035 tons................    56/ton
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the benefits of reducing ozone within and 
transported into urban ozone nonattainment areas, the NOX 
emission reductions from the heavy-duty gasoline vehicle and engine 
standards are expected to have beneficial impacts with respect to crop 
damage, secondary particulate, acid deposition, eutrophication, 
visibility, and forest health. The cost-effectiveness values presented 
above do not assign any numerical value to these additional benefits. 
Based on existing studies that have estimated the value of such 
benefits in the past, we believe that the actual monetary value of the 
multiple environmental and public health benefits that would be 
produced by the NOX reductions under this rule will be 
greater than the estimated compliance costs.

VI. How Has EPA Responded to Input From the Public?

    A wide variety of interested parties participated in the rulemaking 
process that culminates with this final rule. The formal comment period 
and public hearing associated with the NPRM provided additional 
opportunities for public input. EPA also met with a variety of 
stakeholders, including environmental and public health organizations, 
auto and heavy-duty engine and vehicle company representatives, 
emission control equipment manufacturers, and states at various points 
in the process.
    We have prepared a detailed Response to Comments document that 
describes the comments received on the NPRM and presents our response 
to each of these comments. The Response to Comments document is 
available in the docket for this rule and from the Office of Mobile 
Sources internet home page. Comments and our responses are also 
included throughout this preamble for several key issues where relevant 
to the discussion of the final rule provisions.

VII. What Administrative Requirements Apply to This Final Rule?

A. Compliance With Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency 
is required to determine whether this regulatory action would be 
``significant'' and therefore subject to review by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) and the requirements of the Executive 
Order. The order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as any 
regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:
     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;
     Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with 
an action taken or planned by another agency;
     Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, 
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of 
recipients thereof; or,
     Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, EPA has determined 
that this final rule is a ``significant regulatory action'' because the 
engine and vehicle standards, supplemental test requirements, on-board 
diagnostic requirements, and other regulatory provisions, if 
implemented, would have an annual effect on the economy in excess of 
$100 million. Accordingly, a Final Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) has 
been prepared and is available in the docket for this rulemaking and at 
the internet address listed under ADDRESSES above. This action was 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review as 
required by Executive Order 12866. Any written comments from OMB on 
today's action and any responses from EPA to OMB comments are in the 
public docket for this rulemaking.

[[Page 59940]]

B. Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act: Impact on Small 
Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601) requires federal 
agencies to consider potential impacts of federal regulations upon 
small entities. If a preliminary analysis indicates that a regulation 
would have a significant adverse economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, then EPA must prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis.
    The Agency has determined that this action would not have a 
significant adverse impact on a substantial number of small entities, 
and thus it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility 
analysis in connection with this rule. Only two small entities are 
known to be affected by this rule. The entities are small businesses 
that certify alternative fuel engines or vehicles, either newly 
manufactured or modified from previously certified gasoline versions. 
EPA contacted these businesses and discussed the proposed rule with 
them, identifying their concerns. The concerns they expressed prompted 
revisions to the rule, which are addressed elsewhere in the preamble. 
Rule revisions finalized by EPA are intended to minimize adverse 
impacts on the small entities affected by the rule.

C. Compliance With the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. 
L. 104-4, establishes requirements for federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal 
governments, and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to state, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more for 
any single year. Before promulgating a rule for which a written 
statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of 
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable 
law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative that is 
not the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome 
alternative if EPA provides an explanation in the final rule of why 
such an alternative was adopted.
    Before we establish any regulatory requirement that may 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal 
governments, we must develop a small government plan pursuant to 
section 203 of the UMRA. Such a plan must provide for notifying 
potentially affected small governments, and enabling officials of 
affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the 
development of our regulatory proposals with significant federal 
intergovernmental mandates. The plan must also provide for informing, 
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the 
regulatory requirements.
    This rule contains no federal mandates for state, local, or tribal 
governments as defined by the provisions of Title II of the UMRA. The 
rule imposes no enforceable duties on any of these governmental 
entities. Nothing in the rule would significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments.
    EPA has determined that this rule contains federal mandates that 
may result in expenditures of more than $100 million to the private 
sector in any single year. EPA believes that today's final rule 
represents the least costly, most cost-effective approach to achieve 
the air quality goals of the rule. The cost-benefit analysis required 
by the UMRA is discussed in Section IV.D. above and in the Draft RIA. 
See the ``Compliance with Executive Order 12866'' section in today's 
preamble (VII.A) for further information regarding these analyses.
    As explained in section III.A.1 of this preamble, the 2004 heavy-
duty diesel FTP standards reaffirmed in this final rule were 
established in the Agency's 1997 final rulemaking for heavy-duty 
diesels, and the 1997 rulemaking laid the ground work for this 
proposal. Today's final rule for HD diesel engines is simply a review 
of the appropriateness under the Clean Air Act of the standard 
finalized in 1997, including the need for and technical and economic 
feasibility of the standard based on information available in 1999. 
Therefore, today's final rule does not contain any further analysis of 
other, alternative FTP standards for heavy-duty diesel engines. The 
reader is directed to the rulemaking record for the 1997 rule, 
contained in EPA Air Docket A-95-27, for information on alternatives 
the Agency considered during that rulemaking.
    The goal of EPA's heavy-duty compliance program is to ensure real-
world emissions control over a broad range of in-use conditions, rather 
than just controlling emissions under certain laboratory conditions. 
The 1997 final rule that put new standards in place for heavy-duty 
diesel engines was based on the expectation that emission benefits 
would accrue from a broad range of driving conditions. The 1997 rule's 
projected emissions benefit, expected control technology, cost, and 
cost-effectiveness were derived with the belief that the engines would 
be meeting the standards in-use under typical operating conditions. 
Since 1997 it has become clear that manufacturers have substantially 
increased emissions during operation outside the bounds of the current 
federal test procedure.
    In order to adequately control these ``off-cycle'' emissions, EPA 
evaluated whether new standards and test procedures were necessary or 
whether such emissions could be adequately addressed by continued 
reliance on the defeat device prohibition in addition to the FTP to 
ensure the emission reductions predicted by the standards are met 
during actual in-use operation. We evaluate in this final rule the 
necessity of the new supplemental requirements and explain the many 
significant drawbacks to relying wholly on the defeat device 
definition. In addition, given the level of emissions from heavy-duty 
diesel emissions prior to the consent decrees, the supplemental 
requirements achieve very large emission reductions and are very cost-
effective requirements.
    In addition, we considered and requested comment on alternatives 
for several aspects of the supplemental requirements, and in response 
to comments we have made a number of changes in this rule. For example, 
we requested comment on the appropriate ambient conditions 
(temperature, humidity, altitude) which should apply to the 
supplemental requirements, and in this rule we establish more limited 
conditions than were proposed.
    Section 202(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA must set 
emission standards for heavy-duty engines to reflect the greatest 
degree of emission reduction achievable through the application of 
technology which EPA determines will be available for the model year to 
which the standards apply, giving appropriate consideration to cost, 
energy, and safety factors associated with the application of such 
technology. As indicated above, EPA believes the standards reflect the 
greatest degree of emission reduction achievable by HD Otto-cycle 
engines in the 2004 model year and are cost-effective. EPA requested 
comment on the standards and alternatives.

[[Page 59941]]

    The proposed rule included an analysis of alternative standards for 
HD Otto-cycle engines. We requested comment on a range of standards for 
HD Otto-cycle engines, and described in detail the alternative standard 
proposed by the engine manufacturers (see Chapter 3, Section III(H) of 
the RIA). As a consequence of discussions with engine manufacturers the 
final rule contains several options that manufacturers may select from, 
based on their own corporate requirements and issues. These options 
allow greater emission reductions to be achieved while providing a menu 
of emission reduction programs, thus allowing each manufacturer to 
select the least costly set of requirements based on their own 
individualized set of needs.

D. Compliance With the Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this final rule have 
been 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 (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA 
(ICR No. 1851.02) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail 
at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822), Office of Environmental 
Information, Collection Strategies Division, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 
NW, Washington, DC 20460, by email at [email protected], or 
by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy may also be downloaded off the 
internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. The following ICR document has been 
prepared by EPA:


EPA ICR # 1851.02...................  Title: Non-road Compression-
                                       Ignition Engine At or Above 50
                                       Kilowatts and On-road Heavy Duty
                                       Engine Application for Emission
                                       Certification, and Participation
                                       in the Averaging, Banking and
                                       Trading Program

    The Agency will collect information related to certification 
results. This information will be used to ensure compliance with and 
enforce the provisions in this rule. Responses will be mandatory in 
order to complete the certification process. Section 208(a) of the 
Clean Air Act requires that manufacturers provide information the 
Administrator may reasonably require to determine compliance with the 
regulations; submission of the information is therefore mandatory. EPA 
will consider confidential all information meeting the requirements of 
section 208(c) of the Clean Air Act.
    This collection of information affects an estimated 66 respondents 
with a total of 459 responses per year and a total hour burden of 
65,859 hours, for an estimated 143 hours per response, with estimated 
total annualized costs of $1,599,684 per year. The hours and annual 
cost of information collection activities by a given manufacturer 
depends on manufacturer-specific variables, such as the number of 
engine families, production changes, emissions defects, and so forth. 
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by 
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide 
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed 
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
    Comments are requested on the Agency's need for this information, 
the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested 
methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of 
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the 
Director, Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental 
Information, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822); 1200 
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention: Desk 
Officer for EPA.'' Include the ICR number in any correspondence. Since 
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 
days after October 6, 2000, a comment to OMB is best assured of having 
its full effect if OMB receives it by November 6, 2000.

E. Compliance With Executive Order 13045: Children's Health Protection

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies 
to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' 
as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health 
or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as applying only to those regulatory 
actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the 
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to 
influence the regulation. Today's final rule falls into that category 
only in part: risk considerations may be taken into account only to the 
extent the Agency may consider the inherent toxicity of a regulated 
pollutant, and any differential impacts such a pollutant may have on 
children's health, in deciding how to take cost and other relevant 
factors into consideration.
    This rulemaking will achieve important reductions of various 
emissions from heavy-duty trucks, primarily emissions of 
NOX. The rulemaking also addresses NMHC and PM. These 
pollutants raise concerns about a disproportionately greater effect on 
children's health, such as impacts from ozone, PM, and certain toxic 
air pollutants. See section II of this rule and the RIA for a further 
discussion of these issues.
    The effects of ozone and PM on children's health was addressed in 
detail in EPA's rulemaking to establish these NAAQS, and we are not 
revisiting those issues here. We also believe the emissions reductions 
from the strategies in today's rule will reduce air toxics and the 
related impacts on children's health. We are addressing the issues 
raised by air toxics from motor vehicles and their fuels in a separate 
rulemaking, pursuant to section 202(l)(2) of the Act. Our proposed 
rule, which was signed July 14, 2000, proposes a list of 21 mobile 
source air toxics as well as standards to limit the amount of benzene 
in gasoline. It also sets out a Technical Analysis Plan whereby EPA 
will continue to conduct research and analysis and to revisit the need 
for and appropriateness of additional controls on toxic emissions from 
motor vehicles and fuels in a 2004 rulemaking.
    In this final rule we have evaluated several regulatory strategies 
for reductions in these emissions from heavy-duty engines. For the 
reasons

[[Page 59942]]

described in this preamble, we believe that the strategies in today's 
rule are preferable under the Clean Air Act to other potentially 
effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the 
Agency, for purposes of reducing emissions from these sources as a way 
of helping areas achieve and maintain the NAAQS for ozone and PM. 
Moreover, consistent with the Clean Air Act, the levels of control in 
today's rule are designed to achieve the greatest degree of reduction 
of emissions of these pollutants achievable through technology that 
will be available, taking cost and other factors into consideration.

F. Compliance With Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination 
With Indian Tribal Governments

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian Tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian Tribal governments. The engine and vehicle 
standards, supplemental test requirements, on-board diagnostic 
requirements, and other related requirements for private businesses in 
today's rule would have national applicability, and thus would not 
uniquely affect the communities of Indian Tribal Governments. Further, 
no circumstances specific to such communities exist that would cause an 
impact on these communities beyond those discussed in the other 
sections of today's document. Thus, EPA's conclusions regarding the 
impacts from the implementation of today's rule discussed in the other 
sections of this preamble are equally applicable to the communities of 
Indian Tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 
3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Section 12(d) of Public Law 104-113, directs EPA 
to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities 
unless it would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards 
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and 
business practices) developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through 
OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and 
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This rule references technical standards adopted by the Agency 
through previous rulemakings. No new technical standards are 
established in today's rule. The standards referenced in today's rule 
involve the measurement of gasoline fuel parameters and motor vehicle 
emissions. The measurement standards for gasoline fuel parameters 
referenced in today's rule are all voluntary consensus standards. The 
motor vehicle emissions measurement standards referenced in today's 
rule are government-unique standards that were developed by the Agency 
through previous rulemakings. These standards have served the Agency's 
emissions control goals well since their implementation and have been 
well accepted by industry. EPA is not aware of any voluntary consensus 
standards for the measurement of motor vehicle emissions. Therefore, 
the Agency is using the existing EPA-developed standards found in 40 
CFR Part 86 for the measurement of motor vehicle emissions.

H. Compliance With Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    Under Section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law, unless 
the Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process 
of developing the proposed regulation.
    Section 4 of the Executive Order contains additional requirements 
for rules that preempt State or local law, even if those rules do not 
have federalism implications (i.e., the rules will not have substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government). Those 
requirements include providing all affected State and local officials 
notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation in the 
development of the regulation. If the preemption is not based on 
express or implied statutory authority, EPA also must consult, to the 
extent practicable, with appropriate State and local officials 
regarding the conflict between State law and Federally protected 
interests within the agency's area of regulatory responsibility.
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not 
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This rule adopts national 
emissions standards for certain categories of motor vehicles. The 
requirements of the rule will be enforced by the federal government at 
the national level. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the 
Executive Order do not apply to this rule. Although section 6 of 
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule, EPA did consult with 
State and local officials in developing this rule. In addition, EPA 
provided state and local

[[Page 59943]]

officials an opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations. A 
summary of concerns raised by commenters, including state and local 
commenters, and EPA's response to those concerns, is found in the 
Response to Comments document for this rulemaking.
    Although this rule was proposed before the November 2, 1999 
effective date of Executive Order 13132, EPA provided State and local 
officials notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation when 
it published the proposed rule, as described above. Thus, EPA has 
complied with the requirements of section 4 of the Executive Order.

I. Compliance With the Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is a 
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

VIII. What Is EPA's Statutory Authority for This Action?

    Section 202(a)(3) authorizes EPA to establish emission standards 
for heavy duty vehicles and engines. \53\ These standards are to 
reflect the greatest degree of emission reduction achievable through 
the application of technology which EPA determines will be available 
for the model year to which the standards apply. EPA is to give 
appropriate consideration to cost, energy, and safety factors 
associated with the application of such technology. EPA may revise such 
regulations on the basis of information concerning the effects of 
emissions from these engines and vehicles and from other sources of 
mobile source related pollutants on the public health and welfare. 
Section 202(a)(3)(C) requires that promulgated standards apply for no 
less than three years and go into effect no less than 4 years after 
promulgation. Section 202(m) authorizes regulations requiring 
installation of on-board diagnostics systems for light-duty and heavy-
duty vehicles and engines. Pursuant to sections 202(a)(1) and 202(d), 
these emission standards must be met throughout the entire useful life 
of the engine or vehicle as determined by EPA's regulations. If the 
Administrator determines that a substantial number of vehicles do not 
conform to emission standards when in actual use throughout their 
useful lives, section 207(c) of the Act requires EPA to make a 
determination of nonconformity. Section 208 of the Act requires 
manufacturers to perform tests (where not otherwise reasonably 
available), make reports and provide information the Administrator may 
reasonably require to determine whether the manufacturer is acting in 
compliance with the Act and regulations thereunder. The remainder of 
section 202, as well as sections 203, 206, 207, 208, and 301, provide 
additional authority for promulgation of these regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 85

    Environmental projection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Confidential business information, Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle 
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research, 
Warranties.

40 CFR Part 86

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Incorporation by reference, Labeling, Motor vehicle 
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 31, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.


    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, chapter I, title 40 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 85--CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOBILE SOURCES

    1. The authority citation for part 85 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7521, 7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 7542, 7543, 
7547, 7554, and 7601(a).

Subpart F--[Amended]

    2. Section 85.501 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 85.501  General applicability.

    (a) Sections 85.502 through 85.505 are applicable to aftermarket 
conversion systems for which an enforcement exemption is sought from 
the tampering prohibitions contained in section 203 of the Act.
    (b) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty 
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty 
vehicles under the provisions of 40 CFR part 86, subpart S.

Subpart P--[Amended]

    3. Section 85.1501 is amended by revising paragraph (c), to read as 
follows:


Sec. 85.1501  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (c) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty 
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty 
vehicles under the provisions of 40 CFR part 86, subpart S.

Subpart R--[Amended]

    4. Section 85.1701 is amended by revising paragraph (c), to read as 
follows:


Sec. 85.1701  General applicability.

* * * * *
    (c) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty 
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty 
vehicles under the provisions of 40 CFR part 86, subpart S.

PART 86--CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY VEHICLES 
AND ENGINES

    5. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.


    6. Section 86.1 is amended by adding entries in alphanumeric order 
to the table in paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(5), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1  Reference materials.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *

[[Page 59944]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Document No. and name              40 CFR part 86  reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *
                  *                  *                  *
SAE J1939-11, December 1994, Physical      86.005-17; 86.1806-05
 Layer-250K bits/s, Shielded Twisted Pair.
SAE J1939-13, July 1999, Off-Board         86.005-17; 86.1806-05
 Diagnostic Connector.
SAE J1939-21, July 1994, Data Link Layer.  86.005-17; 86.1806-05
 
*                  *                  *                  *
                  *                  *                  *
SAE J1939-31, December 1997, Network       86.005-17; 86.1806-05
 Layer.
SAE J1939-71, May 1996, Vehicle            86.005-17; 86.1806-05
 Application Layer.
SAE J1939-73, February 1996, Application   86.005-17; 86.1806-05
 Layer-Diagnostics.
 
*                  *                  *                  *
                  *                  *                  *
SAE J1939-81, July 1997, Recommended       86.005-17; 86.1806-05
 Practice for Serial Control and
 Communications Vehicle Network--Part 81--
 Network Management.
 
*                  *                  *                  *
                  *                  *                  *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
    (5) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Document No. and name              40 CFR part 86  reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *
                  *                  *                  *
ISO 14230-4:2000(E), June 1, 2000 Road     86.005-17; 86.1806-05
 Vehicles--Diagnostic Systems--Keyword
 Protocol 2000--Part 4: Requirements for
 emission-related systems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart A--[Amended]

    7. A new Sec. 86.000-15 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.000-15  NOX and particulate averaging, trading, and 
banking for heavy-duty engines.

    Section 86.000-15 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.094-15 or Sec. 86.098-15. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.094-15 or Sec. 86.098-15 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.000-15, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
15.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-15.''.
    (a)(1) Heavy-duty engines eligible for NOX and 
particulate averaging, trading and banking programs are described in 
the applicable emission standards sections in this subpart. All heavy-
duty engine families which include any engines labeled for use in 
clean-fuel vehicles as specified in 40 CFR part 88 are not eligible for 
these programs. For manufacturers selecting Option 1 Otto-cycle engine 
standards contained in Sec. 86.005-10(f)(1), the ABT program 
requirements in Sec. 86.004-15 apply for 2003 model year Otto-cycle 
engines, rather than the provisions contained in this Sec. 86.000-15. 
Participation in these programs is voluntary.
    (a)(2) through (b) [Reserved] For guidance see Sec. 86.094-15.
    (c) [Reserved] For guidance see Sec. 86.098-15.
    (d) through (i) [Reserved] For guidance see Sec. 86.094-15.
    (j) Optional program for early banking for diesel engines. 
Provisions set forth in Secs. 86.094-15 (a), (b), (d) through (i), and 
86.098-15 (c) apply except as specifically stated otherwise in 
Sec. 86.098-15 (j)(1) through (j)(3)(iii).
    (j)(1) through (j)(3)(iii) [Reserved] For guidance see Sec. 86.098-
15.
    (k) Optional program for early banking for Otto-cycle engines. 
Provisions set forth in Secs. 86.094-15(a), (b), (d) through (i), and 
86.098-15(c) apply except as specifically stated otherwise in this 
paragraph (k).
    (1) To be eligible for the optional program described in this 
paragraph (k), the following must apply:
    (i) Credits are generated from Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines which 
have been certified using certification durability demonstration 
procedures which meet the criteria contained in Sec. 86.004-26 and with 
deterioration factors calculated in accordance with Sec. 86.004-28.
    (ii) During certification, the manufacturer shall declare its 
intent to include specific engine families in the program described in 
this paragraph. Separate declarations are required for each program and 
no engine families may be included in both programs in the same model 
year.
    (2) Credit generation and use. (i) Credits shall only be generated 
by 2000 and later model year engine families.
    (ii) Except as provided in paragraph (k)(2)(iii) of this section, 
credits generated under this paragraph (k) may only be used for 2003 
and later model year heavy-duty Otto-cycle engines subject to 
NOX or NOX plus NMHC standards more stringent 
than 4.0 g/bhp-hr. When used with 2003 and later model year engines, 
NOX credits may be used to meet an applicable NOX 
plus NMHC standard, except as otherwise provided in Sec. 86.004-
10(a)(1)(i)(C).
    (iii) If a manufacturer chooses to use credits generated under this 
paragraph (k) for engine families subject to the NOX 
standard contained in Sec. 86.098-10 (4.0 g/bhp-hr) the averaging, 
trading, and banking of such credits shall be governed by the program 
provided in Secs. 86.094-15(a), (b), (d) through (i) and 86.098-15(c) 
and shall be subject to all discounting, credit life limits and all 
other provisions contained in Secs. 86.094-15(a), (b), (d) through (i) 
and 86.098-15(c). In the case where the manufacturer can demonstrate 
that the credits were discounted under the program provided in this 
paragraph (k), that discount may be accounted for in the calculation of 
credits described in Sec. 86.098-15(c).
    (iv) For NOX credits generated under this paragraph (k), 
a Std value of 2.0 grams per brake horsepower-hour shall be used in 
place of the current and applicable NOX standard in the 
credit availability equation in Sec. 86.098-15(c)(1).

[[Page 59945]]

    (3) Program flexibilities. (i) NOX credits that are 
banked under this paragraph (k) and not used as provided by paragraph 
(k)(2)(iii) of this section may be used without being forfeited due to 
credit age. The requirement in this paragraph (k)(3) applies instead of 
the requirements in Sec. 86.094-15(f)(2)(i).
    (ii) There are no regional category restraints for averaging, 
trading, and banking of credits generated under the program described 
in this paragraph (k) except if they are used under paragraph 
(k)(2)(iii) of this section. This applies instead of the regional 
category provisions described in the introductory text of Sec. 86.094-
15(d) and (e).
    (iii) Credit discounting. (A) For NOX credits generated 
under this paragraph (k) from engine families with NOX FELs 
greater than 1.0 grams per brake horsepower-hour for oxides of 
nitrogen, a Discount value of 0.9 shall be used instead of 0.8 in the 
credit availability equation in Sec. 86.098-15(c)(1).
    (B) For NOX credits generated under this paragraph (k) 
from engine families with NOX FELs less than or equal to 1.0 
grams per brake horsepower-hour for oxides of nitrogen, a Discount 
value of 1.0 shall be used in place of 0.8 in the credit availability 
equation in Sec. 86.098-15 (c)(1).
    (4) 2003 model year. Manufacturers selecting Option 1, described in 
Sec. 86.005-10(f)(1), may not generate or bank early credits under this 
paragraph (k) for the 2003 model year. Credit generation and banking 
provisions contained in Sec. 86.004-15 apply for the 2003 model year.
    (l) Credit apportionment. At the manufacturer's option, credits 
generated under the provisions described in paragraph (j) or (k) of 
this section may be sold to or otherwise provided to another party for 
use in programs other than the averaging, trading and banking program 
described in this section.
    (1) The manufacturer shall pre-identify two emission levels per 
engine family for the purposes of credit apportionment. One emission 
level shall be the FEL and the other shall be the level of the standard 
that the engine family is required to certify to under Sec. 86.098-10 
or Sec. 86.098-11, as applicable. For each engine family, the 
manufacturer may report engine sales in two categories, ``ABT-only 
credits'' and ``non-manufacturer-owned credits.''
    (i) For engine sales reported as ``ABT-only credits'', the credits 
generated must be used solely in the ABT program described in this 
section.
    (ii) The engine manufacturer may declare a portion of engine sales 
``non-manufacturer-owned credits'' and this portion of the credits 
generated between the standard and the FEL, based on the calculation in 
Sec. 86.098-15(c)(1), would belong to another party. For ABT, the 
manufacturer may not generate any credits for the engine sales reported 
as ``non-manufacturer-owned credits.'' Engines reported as ``non-
manufacturer-owned credits'' shall comply with the FEL and the 
requirements of the ABT program in all other respects.
    (2) Only manufacturer-owned credits reported as ``ABT-only 
credits'' shall be used in the averaging, trading, and banking 
provisions described in this section.
    (3) Credits shall not be double-counted. Credits used in the ABT 
program may not be provided to an engine purchaser for use in another 
program.
    (4) Manufacturers shall determine and state the number of engines 
sold as ``ABT-only credits'' and ``non-manufacturer-owned credits'' in 
the end-of-model year reports required under Sec. 86.098-23.
    8. Section 86.000-16 is amended by removing paragraphs (a) through 
(d) introductory text, adding paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d) 
introductory text, and revising paragraph (d)(1), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.000-16  Prohibition of defeat devices.

* * * * *
    (a) No new light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, heavy-duty 
vehicle, or heavy-duty engine shall be equipped with a defeat device.
    (b) The Administrator may test or require testing on any vehicle or 
engine at a designated location, using driving cycles and conditions 
which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal operation 
and use, for the purpose of investigating a potential defeat device.
    (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-16.
    (d) For vehicle and engine designs designated by the Administrator 
to be investigated for possible defeat devices:
    (1) The manufacturer must show to the satisfaction of the 
Administrator that the vehicle or engine design does not incorporate 
strategies that unnecessarily reduce emission control effectiveness 
exhibited during the Federal emissions test procedure when the vehicle 
or engine is operated under conditions which may reasonably be expected 
to be encountered in normal operation and use.
* * * * *

    9. Section 86.001-1 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.001-1  General applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) Optional applicability. (1) A manufacturer may request to 
certify any heavy-duty vehicle of 14,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight 
Rating or less in accordance with the light-duty truck provisions 
located in subpart S of this part through the 2004 model year (through 
the 2003 model year for manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle HDE Option 2 
in Sec. 86.005-1(c)(2), or through the 2002 model year for 
manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle HDE Option 1 in Sec. 86.005-1(c)(1)). 
Heavy-duty engine or vehicle provisions of this subpart A do not apply 
to such a vehicle.
    (2) Beginning with the 2000 model year, a manufacturer may certify 
any Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicle of 14,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight 
Rating or less in accordance with the provisions for Otto-cycle 
complete heavy-duty vehicles located in subpart S of this part for 
purposes of generating credits in the heavy-duty vehicle averaging, 
banking, and trading program contained in Sec. 86.1817-05. Heavy-duty 
engine or heavy-duty vehicle provisions of this subpart A do not apply 
to such a vehicle.
* * * * *

    10. Section 86.004-2 is amended by adding a new definition in 
alphabetical order, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Defeat device means an auxiliary emission control device (AECD) 
that reduces the effectiveness of the emission control system under 
conditions which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal 
vehicle operation and use, unless:
    (1) Such conditions are substantially included in the applicable 
Federal emission test procedure for heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty 
engines described in subpart N of this part;
    (2) The need for the AECD is justified in terms of protecting the 
vehicle against damage or accident; or
    (3) The AECD does not go beyond the requirements of engine 
starting.
* * * * *

    11. Section 86.004-11 is amended by adding introductory text, 
removing and reserving paragraph (a)(1)(i)(E), and revising paragraph 
(d), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-11  Emission standards for 2004 and later model year diesel 
heavy-duty engines and vehicles.

    This section applies to 2004 and later model year diesel HDEs.
    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) * * *

[[Page 59946]]

    (E) [Reserved]
* * * * *
    (d) Every manufacturer of new motor vehicle engines subject to the 
standards prescribed in this section shall, prior to taking any of the 
actions specified in section 203(a)(1) of the Act, test or cause to be 
tested motor vehicle engines in accordance with applicable procedures 
in subpart I or N of this part to ascertain that such test engines meet 
the requirements of this section.
* * * * *

    12. Section 86.004-15 is amended by:
    a. Revising the section heading
    b. Revising paragraph (a)(1).
    c. Removing paragraph (a)(2)(iii).
    d. Revising paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1)(i), and 
(b)(1)(ii).
    e. Revising paragraphs (c)(1) introductory text and (c)(1)(iii).
    f. Revising paragraphs (d) heading, (d) introductory text and 
(d)(1).
    g. Revising the heading for paragraph (f), and revising paragraphs 
(f)(1)(i), (f)(2)(i), (f)(2)(ii), (f)(3)(ii), and (f)(3)(iii).
    h. Adding paragraph (f)(3)(iv).
    i. Revising paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and(g)(4).
    j. Revising paragraphs (j) introductory text and (j)(1) 
introductory text.
    k. Revising the heading and introductory text of paragraph (k).
    l. Adding paragraph (l).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-15  NOX plus NMHC and particulate averaging, 
trading, and banking for heavy-duty engines.

    (a)(1) Heavy-duty engines eligible for NOX plus NMHC and 
particulate averaging, trading and banking programs are described in 
the applicable emission standards sections in this subpart. All heavy-
duty engine families which include any engines labeled for use in 
clean-fuel vehicles as specified in 40 CFR part 88 are not eligible for 
these programs. For manufacturers not selecting Options 1 or 2 
contained in Sec. 86.005-10(f), the ABT program requirements contained 
in Sec. 86.000-15 apply for 2004 model year Otto-cycle engines, rather 
than the provisions contained in this Sec. 86.004-15. Participation in 
these programs is voluntary.
* * * * *
    (b) Participation in the NOX plus NMHC and/or 
particulate averaging, trading, and banking programs shall be done as 
follows:
    (1) * * *
    (i) Declare its intent to include specific engine families in the 
averaging, trading and/or banking programs. Separate declarations are 
required for each program and for each pollutant (i.e., NOX 
plus NMHC, and particulate).
    (ii) Declare an FEL for each engine family participating in one or 
more of these two programs.
    (A) The FEL must be to the same level of significant digits as the 
emission standard (one-tenth of a gram per brake horsepower-hour for 
NOX plus NMHC emissions and one-hundredth of a gram per 
brake horsepower-hour for particulate emissions).
    (B) In no case may the FEL exceed the upper limit prescribed in the 
section concerning the applicable heavy-duty engine NOX plus 
NMHC and particulate emission standards.
* * * * *
    (c)(1) For each participating engine family, NOX plus 
NMHC, and particulate emission credits (positive or negative) are to be 
calculated according to one of the following equations and rounded, in 
accordance with ASTM E29-93a (incorporated by reference at Sec. 86.1), 
to the nearest one-tenth of a Megagram (Mg). Consistent units are to be 
used throughout the equation.
* * * * *
    (iii) For purposes of the equation in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) 
of this section:

Std = the current and applicable heavy-duty engine NOX 
plus NMHC or particulate emission standard in grams per brake 
horsepower hour or grams per Megajoule.
FEL = the NOX plus NMHC, or particulate family emission 
limit for the engine family in grams per brake horsepower hour or 
grams per Megajoule.
CF = a transient cycle conversion factor in BHP-hr/mi or MJ/mi, as 
given in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
UL = the useful life described in Sec. 86.004-2, or alternative life 
as described in Sec. 86.004-21(f), for the given engine family in 
miles.
Production = the number of engines produced for U.S. sales within 
the given engine family during the model year. Quarterly production 
projections are used for initial certification. Actual production is 
used for end-of-year compliance determination.
Discount = a one-time discount applied to all credits to be banked 
or traded within the model year generated. Except as otherwise 
allowed in paragraphs (k) and (l) of this section, the discount 
applied here is 0.9. Banked credits traded in a subsequent model 
year will not be subject to an additional discount. Banked credits 
used in a subsequent model year's averaging program will not have 
the discount restored.
* * * * *
    (d) Averaging sets for NOX plus NMHC emission credits. 
The averaging and trading of NOX plus NMHC emission credits 
will only be allowed between heavy-duty engine families in the same 
averaging set. The averaging sets for the averaging and trading of 
NOX plus NMHC emission credits for heavy-duty engines are 
defined as follows:
    (1) For NOX+NMHC credits from Otto-cycle heavy-duty 
engines:
    (i) Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines constitute an averaging set. 
Averaging and trading among all Otto-cycle heavy-duty engine families 
is allowed. There are no subclass restrictions.
    (ii) Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles certified under the chassis-
based provisions of Subpart S of this Part may not average or trade 
with heavy-duty Otto-cycle engines except as allowed in Sec. 86.1817-
05(o).
* * * * *
    (f) Banking of NOX plus NMHC, and particulate emission 
credits. (1) * * * (i) NOX plus NMHC, and particulate 
emission credits may be banked from engine families produced in any 
model year.
* * * * *
    (2) * * * (i) NOX plus NMHC and particulate credits 
generated in 2004 and later model years do not expire. NOX 
plus NMHC credits generated by Otto-cycle engines in the 2003 model 
year for manufacturers selecting Option 1 contained in Sec. 86.005-
10(f)(1) also do not expire.
    (ii) Manufacturers withdrawing banked NOX plus NMHC, 
and/or particulate credits shall indicate so during certification and 
in their credit reports, as described in Sec. 86.091-23.
    (3) * * *
    (ii) Banked credits may not be used for NOX plus NMHC or 
particulate averaging and trading to offset emissions that exceed an 
FEL. Banked credits may not be used to remedy an in-use nonconformity 
determined by a Selective Enforcement Audit or by recall testing. 
However, banked credits may be used for subsequent production of the 
engine family if the manufacturer elects to recertify to a higher FEL.
    (iii) NOX credits banked under paragraph Sec. 86.098-
15(j) or Sec. 86.000-15(k) may be used in place of NOX plus 
NMHC credits in 2004 and later model years provided that they are used 
in the correct averaging set. NOX credits banked under 
paragraph Sec. 86.000-15(k) may also be used in place of NOX 
plus NMHC credits in the 2003 model year for manufacturers selecting 
Option 1 contained in Sec. 86.005-10(f)(1), provided that they are used 
in the correct averaging set.
    (iv) Except for early credits banked under Sec. 86.000-15(k), 
NOX credits

[[Page 59947]]

banked in accordance with Sec. 86.000-15 may not be used to meet the 
Otto-cycle engine standards contained in Sec. 86.005-10.
    (g)(1) This paragraph (g) assumes NOX plus NMHC, and 
particulate nonconformance penalties (NCPs) will be available for the 
2004 and later model year HDEs.
    (2) Engine families using NOX plus NMHC and/or 
particulate NCPs but not involved in averaging:
    (i) May not generate NOX plus NMHC or particulate 
credits for banking and trading.
    (ii) May not use NOX plus NMHC or particulate credits 
from banking and trading.
* * * * *
    (4) If a manufacturer has any engine family in a given averaging 
set which is using NOX plus NMHC and/or particulate NCPs, 
none of that manufacturer's engine families in that averaging set may 
generate credits for banking and trading.
* * * * *
    (j) Credit apportionment. At the manufacturer's option, credits 
generated under the provisions described in this section may be sold to 
or otherwise provided to another party for use in programs other than 
the averaging, trading and banking program described in this section.
    (1) The manufacturer shall pre-identify two emission levels per 
engine family for the purposes of credit apportionment. One emission 
level shall be the FEL and the other shall be the level of the standard 
that the engine family is required to certify to under Sec. 86.005-10 
or Sec. 86.004-11. For each engine family, the manufacturer may report 
engine sales in two categories, ``ABT-only credits'' and 
``nonmanufacturer-owned credits''.
* * * * *
    (k) Additional flexibility for diesel-cycle engines. If a diesel-
cycle engine family meets the conditions of either paragraph (k)(1) or 
(2) of this section, a Discount of 1.0 may be used in the trading and 
banking calculation, for both NOX plus NMHC and for 
particulate, described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
* * * * *
    (l) Additional flexibility for Otto-cycle engines. If an Otto-cycle 
engine family meets the conditions of paragraph (l)(1) or (2) of this 
section, a discount of 1.0 may be used in the trading and banking 
credits calculation for NOX plus NMHC described in paragraph 
(c)(1) of this section, as follows:
    (1) The engine family has a FEL of 0.5 g/bhp-hr NOX plus 
NMHC or lower;
    (2) All of the following conditions are met:
    (i) For first three consecutive model years that the engine family 
is certified to a NOX plus NMHC standard contained in 
Sec. 86.005-10;
    (ii) The engine family is certified using carry-over data from an 
engine family which was used to generate early NOX credits 
per Sec. 86.000-15(k) where the sum of the NOX FEL plus the 
HC (or hydrocarbon equivalent where applicable) certification level is 
below 1.0 g/bhp-hr.

    13. Section 86.004-16 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-16  Prohibition of defeat devices.

    (a) No new heavy-duty vehicle or heavy-duty engine shall be 
equipped with a defeat device.
    (b) The Administrator may test or require testing on any vehicle or 
engine at a designated location, using driving cycles and conditions 
which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal operation 
and use, for the purpose of investigating a potential defeat device.
    (c) [Reserved].
    (d) For vehicle and engine designs designated by the Administrator 
to be investigated for possible defeat devices:
    (1) General. The manufacturer must show to the satisfaction of the 
Administrator that the vehicle or engine design does not incorporate 
strategies that reduce emission control effectiveness exhibited during 
the Federal emissions test procedures, described in subpart N of this 
part, when the vehicle or engine is operated under conditions which may 
reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal operation and use, 
unless one of the specific exceptions set forth in the definition of 
``defeat device'' in Sec. 86.004-2 has been met.
    (2) Information submissions required. The manufacturer will provide 
an explanation containing detailed information (including information 
which the Administrator may request to be submitted) regarding test 
programs, engineering evaluations, design specifications, calibrations, 
on-board computer algorithms, and design strategies incorporated for 
operation both during and outside of the Federal emission test 
procedure described in subpart N of this part.

    14. Section 86.004-21 is amended by adding paragraphs (m) and (n), 
to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-21  Application for certification.

* * * * *
    (m) For model years 2004 through 2007, within 180 days after 
submission of the application for certification of a heavy-duty diesel 
engine, the manufacturer must provide emission test results from the 
Load Response Test conducted according to Sec. 86.1380-2004, including, 
at a minimum, test results conducted at each of the speeds identified 
in Sec. 86.1380-2004. Load Response Test data submissions are not 
necessary for carry-over engine families for which Load Response Test 
data has been previously submitted. In addition, upon approval of the 
Administrator, manufacturers may carry Load Response Test data across 
from one engine family to other engine families, provided that the 
carry-across engine families use similar emission control technology 
hardware which would be expected to result in the generation of similar 
emission data when run over the Load Response Test.
    (n) Upon request from EPA, a manufacturer must provide to EPA any 
hardware (including scan tools), passwords, and/or documentation 
necessary for EPA to read, interpret, and store (in engineering units 
if applicable) any information broadcast by an engine's on-board 
computers and electronic control modules which relates in any way to 
emission control devices and auxiliary emission control devices, 
provided that such hardware, passwords, or documentation exists and is 
not otherwise commercially available. Passwords include any information 
necessary to enable generic scan tools or personal computers access to 
proprietary emission related information broadcast by an engine's on-
board computer, if such passwords exist. This requirement includes 
access by EPA to any proprietary code information which may be 
broadcast by an engine's on-board computer and electronic control 
modules. Information which is confidential business information must be 
marked as such. Engineering units refers to the ability to read, 
interpret, and store information in commonly understood engineering 
units, for example, engine speed in revolutions per minute or per 
second, injection timing parameters such as start of injection in 
degree's before top-dead center, fueling rates in cubic centimeters per 
stroke, vehicle speed in miles per hour or kilometers per hour. This 
paragraph (n) does not restrict EPA authority to take any action 
authorized by section 208 of the Clean Air Act.

    15. A new Sec. 86.004-26 is added to Subpart A, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-26  Mileage and service accumulation; emission 
measurements.

    Section 86.004-26 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from

[[Page 59948]]

Sec. 86.094-26, Sec. 86.095-26, Sec. 86.096-26, Sec. 86.098-26, 
Sec. 86.000-26, or Sec. 86.001-26. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.094-26, 
Sec. 86.095-26, Sec. 86.096-26, Sec. 86.098-26, Sec. 86.000-26 or 
Sec. 86.001-26 is identical and applicable to Sec. 86.004-26, 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.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.000-26.'' 
or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.001-26.''.
    (a)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (a)(2) through (a)(3)(i)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.000-26.
    (a)(3)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (a)(3)(i)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-26.
    (a)(3)(i)(D) 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 (a)(4)(i)(B)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-26.
    (a)(4)(i)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.000-26.
    (a)(4)(i)(D) through (a)(6)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-26.
    (a)(6)(iii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.000-26.
    (a)(7) through (a)(9)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
26.
    (a)(9)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.000-26.
    (a)(9)(iii) through (b)(2) introductory text [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.000-26.
    (b)(2)(iii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (b)(2)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.001-26.
    (b)(3) through (b)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-26.
    (b)(4)(i)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.001-26.
    (b)(4)(i)(D) through (b)(4)(ii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.095-26.
    (b)(4)(ii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.001-26.
    (b)(4)(ii)(D) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.095-26.
    (b)(4)(iii) [Reserved]
    (b)(4)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (c)(1) Paragraph (c) of this section applies to heavy-duty engines.
    (2) Two types of service accumulation are applicable to heavy-duty 
engines, as described in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section. 
For Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines exhaust emissions, the service 
accumulation method used by a manufacturer must be designed to 
effectively predict the deterioration of emissions in actual use over 
the full useful life of the of the candidate in-use vehicles and must 
cover the breadth of the manufacturer's product line that will be 
covered by the durability procedure. Manufacturers not selecting 
Options 1 or 2 described in Sec. 86.005-10(f) may certify Otto-cycle 
engines using the provisions contained in Sec. 86.094-26(c)(2) rather 
than those contained in this paragraph (c)(2) for 2004 model year 
engine families certified using carry-over durability data, except for 
those engines used for early credit banking as allowed in Sec. 86.000-
15(k).
    (i) Service accumulation on engines, subsystems, or components 
selected by the manufacturer under Sec. 86.094-24(c)(3)(i). The 
manufacturer determines the form and extent of this service 
accumulation, consistent with good engineering practice, and describes 
it in the application for certification.
    (ii) Dynamometer service accumulation on emission data engines 
selected under Sec. 86.094-24(b)(2) or (3). The manufacturer determines 
the engine operating schedule to be used for dynamometer service 
accumulation, consistent with good engineering practice. A single 
engine operating schedule shall be used for all engines in an engine 
family-control system combination. Operating schedules may be different 
for different combinations.
    (3) Exhaust emission deterioration factors will be determined on 
the basis of the service accumulation described in Sec. 86.000-
26(b)(2)(i) and related testing, according to the manufacturer's 
procedures.
    (c)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-26.
    (d)(1) through (d)(2)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-
26.
    (d)(2)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.000-26.
    (d)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.
    (d)(4) and (5) [Reserved].
    (d)(6) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-26.

    16. Section 86.004-28 is amended by revising paragraph 
(c)(4)(iii)(A)(2) and adding paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.004-28  Compliance with emissions standards.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (2) Otto-cycle HDEs utilizing aftertreatment technology (e.g., 
catalytic converters). For transient NMHC (NMHCE), CO, NOX, 
and for idle CO, the official exhaust emission results for each 
emission data engine at the selected test point shall be adjusted by 
multiplication by the appropriate deterioration factor, except as 
otherwise provided in paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A)(3) of this section. The 
deterioration factor must be calculated by dividing the exhaust 
emissions at full useful life by the stabilized mileage emission level 
(reference Sec. 86.096-26(c)(4), e.g., 125 hours). However, if the 
deterioration factor supplied by the manufacturer is less than one, it 
shall be one for purposes of this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A)(2).
    (3) An Otto-cycle heavy-duty engine manufacturer who believes that 
a deterioration factor derived using the calculation methodology 
described in paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(4)(A)(2) of this section are 
significantly unrepresentative for one or more engine families (either 
too high or too low) may petition the Administrator to allow for the 
use of an additive rather than a multiplicative deterioration factor. 
This petition must include full rationale behind the request together 
with any supporting data or other evidence. Based on this or other 
information the Administration may allow for an alternative procedure. 
Any petition should be submitted in a timely manner, to allow adequate 
time for a thorough evaluation. Manufacturers using an additive 
deterioration factor under this paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(A)(3) must 
perform in-use verification testing to determine if the additive 
deterioration factor reasonably predicts actual in-use emissions. The 
plan for the in-use verification testing must be approved by the 
Administrator as part of the approval process described in this 
paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(4)(A)(3) prior to the use of the additive 
deterioration factor. The Administrator may consider the results of the 
in-use verification testing both in certification and in-use compliance 
programs.
* * * * *

    17. Section 86.004-30 is amended by removing paragraphs (f) 
introductory text through (f)(3) and (f)(4) and by adding new paragraph 
(f), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.004-30  Certification.

* * * * *
    (f) For engine families required to have an OBD system, 
certification will

[[Page 59949]]

not be granted if, for any test vehicle approved by the Administrator 
in consultation with the manufacturer, the malfunction indicator light 
does not illuminate under any of the following circumstances, unless 
the manufacturer can demonstrate that any identified OBD problems 
discovered during the Administrator's evaluation will be corrected on 
production vehicles.
    (1)(i) Otto-cycle. A catalyst is replaced with a deteriorated or 
defective catalyst, or an electronic simulation of such, resulting in 
an increase of 1.5 times the NMHC+NOX standard or FEL above 
the NMHC+NOX emission level measured using a representative 
4000 mile catalyst system.
    (ii) Diesel. (A) If monitored for emissions performance--a catalyst 
is replaced with a deteriorated or defective catalyst, or an electronic 
simulation of such, resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times 
the applicable standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX or PM.
    (B) If monitored for performance--a particulate trap is replaced 
with a trap that has catastrophically failed, or an electronic 
simulation of such.
    (2)(i) Otto-cycle. An engine misfire condition is induced resulting 
in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable standards or 
FEL for NMHC+NOX or CO.
    (ii) Diesel. An engine misfire condition is induced and is not 
detected.
    (3) If so equipped, any oxygen sensor is replaced with a 
deteriorated or defective oxygen sensor, or an electronic simulation of 
such, resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable 
standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX or CO.
    (4) If so equipped, a vapor leak is introduced in the evaporative 
and/or refueling system (excluding the tubing and connections between 
the purge valve and the intake manifold) greater than or equal in 
magnitude to a leak caused by a 0.040 inch diameter orifice, or the 
evaporative purge air flow is blocked or otherwise eliminated from the 
complete evaporative emission control system.
    (5) A malfunction condition is induced in any emission-related 
engine system or component, including but not necessarily limited to, 
the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system, if equipped, the secondary 
air system, if equipped, and the fuel control system, singularly 
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable 
emission standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX, CO or PM.
    (6) A malfunction condition is induced in an electronic emission-
related engine system or component not otherwise described above that 
either provides input to or receives commands from the on-board 
computer resulting in a measurable impact on emissions.

    18. A new Sec. 86.005-1 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.005-1  General applicability.

    Section 86.005-1 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.001-1. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.001-1 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.005-1, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.001-1.''.
    (a) Applicability. The provisions of this subpart generally apply 
to 2005 and later model year new Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines used in 
incomplete vehicles and vehicles above 14,000 pounds GVWR and 2005 and 
later model year new diesel-cycle heavy-duty engines. In cases where a 
provision applies only to a certain vehicle group based on its model 
year, vehicle class, motor fuel, engine type, or other distinguishing 
characteristics, the limited applicability is cited in the appropriate 
section or paragraph. The provisions of this subpart continue to 
generally apply to 2000 and earlier model year new Otto-cycle and 
diesel-cycle light-duty vehicles, 2000 and earlier model year new Otto-
cycle and diesel-cycle light-duty trucks, and 2004 and earlier model 
year new Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty vehicles at or below 14,000 
pounds GVWR. Provisions generally applicable to 2001 and later model 
year new Otto-cycle and diesel-cycle light-duty vehicles, 2001 and 
later model year new Otto-cycle and diesel-cycle light-duty trucks, and 
2005 and later model year Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty vehicles at or 
below 14,000 pounds GVWR are located in subpart S of this part.
    (b) Optional applicability. (1) A manufacturer may request to 
certify any 2003 or 2004 model year heavy-duty vehicle of 14,000 pounds 
Gross Vehicle Weight Rating or less in accordance with the light-duty 
truck provisions located in subpart S of this part. Heavy-duty engine 
or vehicle provisions of this subpart A do not apply to such a vehicle. 
This option is not available in the 2003 model year for manufacturers 
choosing Otto-cycle HDE option 1 in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, 
or in the 2004 model year for manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle HDE 
option 2 in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
    (2) For 2005 and later model years, a manufacturer may request to 
certify any incomplete Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicle of 14,000 pounds 
Gross Vehicle Weight Rating or less in accordance with the provisions 
for Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty vehicles located in subpart S of 
this part. Heavy-duty engine or heavy-duty vehicle provisions of this 
subpart A do not apply to such a vehicle. This option is available 
starting with the 2003 model year to manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle 
HDE option 1 in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. This option is 
available starting with the 2004 model year to manufacturers choosing 
Otto-cycle HDE option 2 in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (c) Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles. The manufacturer 
must select one of the three options for Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines 
and vehicles in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(3) of this section. The 
emission standards and other requirements that apply under a given 
option shall apply to all Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles 
certified by the manufacturer (e.g., a manufacturer may not select one 
option for certain engine families and the other option for other 
engine families). The requirements under each option shall remain 
effective, once selected, for subsequent model years, until superceded 
or otherwise revised by the Administrator (e.g., a manufacturer may not 
select one option prior to the 2004 model year and change to another 
option in the 2006 model year). The complete requirements under each 
option are contained in subparts A and S of this part.
    (1) Otto-cycle HDE Option 1. The following requirements apply to 
Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles certified by manufacturers 
selecting this option:
    (i) Emission standards for 2003 and later model year Otto-cycle 
heavy-duty engines, according to the provisions of Sec. 86.005-
10(f)(1).
    (ii) Emission standards for 2003 and later model year Otto-cycle 
complete heavy-duty vehicles, according to the provisions of 
Sec. 86.1816-05, except that, for 2003 through 2006 model year Otto-
cycle complete heavy-duty vehicles, manufacturers may optionally comply 
with the standards in either 86.005-10 or 86.1816-05.
    (iii) Averaging, banking, and trading provisions that allow 
transfer of credits between a manufacturer's complete vehicle averaging 
set and their heavy-duty Otto-cycle engine averaging set, according to 
the provisions of Sec. 86.1817-05(o).
    (iv) On-board diagnostics requirements effective starting with the 
2004 model year for Otto-cycle engines and complete vehicles, according 
to the provisions of Secs. 86.005-17 and 86.1806-05.

[[Page 59950]]

    (v) Refueling emissions requirements effective starting with the 
2004 model year for Otto-cycle complete vehicles, according to the 
provisions of Secs. 86.1810-01 and 86.1816-05.
    (2) Otto-cycle HDE Option 2. The following requirements apply to 
Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles certified by manufacturers 
selecting this option:
    (i) Emission standards for 2004 and later model year Otto-cycle 
heavy-duty engines, according to the provisions of Sec. 86.005-
10(f)(2).
    (ii) Emission standards for 2004 and later model year Otto-cycle 
complete heavy-duty vehicles, according to the provisions of 
Sec. 86.1816-05.
    (iii) Averaging, banking, and trading provisions that allow 
transfer of credits between a manufacturer's complete vehicle averaging 
set and their heavy-duty Otto-cycle engine averaging set, according to 
the provisions of Sec. 86.1817-05(o).
    (iv) On-board diagnostics requirements effective starting with the 
2004 model year for Otto-cycle engines and complete vehicles, according 
to the provisions of Secs. 86.005-17 and 86.1806-05.
    (v) Refueling emissions requirements effective starting with the 
2004 model year for Otto-cycle complete vehicles, according to the 
provisions of Secs. 86.1810-01 and 86.1816-05.
    (3) Otto-cycle HDE Option 3. The following requirements apply to 
Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles certified by manufacturers 
that do not select one of the options for 2003 or 2004 model year 
compliance in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section:
    (i) Emission standards for 2005 and later model year Otto-cycle 
heavy-duty engines, according to the provisions of Sec. 86.005-10.
    (ii) Emission standards for 2005 and later model year Otto-cycle 
complete heavy-duty vehicles, according to the provisions of 
Sec. 86.1816-05.
    (iii) On-board diagnostics requirements effective starting with the 
2005 model year for Otto-cycle engines and complete vehicles, according 
to the provisions of Secs. 86.005-17 and 86.1806-05.
    (iv) Refueling emissions requirements effective starting with the 
2005 model year for Otto-cycle complete vehicles, according to the 
provisions of Secs. 86.1810-01 and 86.1816-05.
    (v) Manufacturers selecting this option may exempt 2005 model year 
Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles whose model year commences 
before July 31, 2004 from the requirements in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) 
through (iv) of this section.
    (vi) For 2005 model year engines or vehicles exempted under 
paragraph (c)(3)(v) of this section, a manufacturer shall certify such 
Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles to all requirements in this 
subpart applicable to 2004 model year Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines. 
The averaging, banking, and trading provisions contained in 
Sec. 86.000-15 remain effective for these engines.
    (d) [Reserved].
    (e) through (f) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.001-1.

    19. A new Sec. 86.005-10 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.005-10  Emission standards for 2005 and later model year Otto-
cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles.

    Section 86.005-10 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.098-10 or Sec. 86.099-10. Where a paragraph in 
Sec. 86.098-10 or Sec. 86.099-10 is identical and applicable to 
Sec. 86.005-10, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding 
paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-
10.'' or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.099-10.''.
    (a)(1) Exhaust emissions from new 2005 and later model year Otto-
cycle HDEs, except for Otto-cycle HDEs subject to the alternative 
standards in paragraph (f) of this section, shall not exceed:
    (i)(A) Oxides of Nitrogen plus Non-methane Hydrocarbons (NOX 
+ NMHC) for engines fueled with either gasoline, natural gas, or 
liquefied petroleum gas. 1.0 grams per brake horsepower-hour (0.37 
grams per megajoule).
    (B) Oxides of Nitrogen plus Non-methane HydrocarbonEquivalent 
(NOX + NMHCE) for engines fueled with methanol. 1.0 grams 
per brake horsepower-hour (0.37 grams per megajoule).
    (C) A manufacturer may elect to include any or all of its Otto-
cycle HDE families in any or all of the emissions ABT programs for 
HDEs, within the restrictions described in Sec. 86.098-15. If the 
manufacturer elects to include engine families in any of these 
programs, the NOX plus NMHC (or NOX plus NMHCE 
for methanol-fueled engines) FELs may not exceed 4.5 grams per brake 
horsepower-hour (1.7 grams per megajoule). This ceiling value applies 
whether credits for the family are derived from averaging, banking, or 
trading programs.
    (ii)(A) Carbon monoxide for engines intended for use in all 
vehicles, except as provided in paragraph (a)(3) of this section. 14.4 
grams per brake horsepower-hour (5.36 grams per megajoule), as measured 
under transient operating conditions.
    (B) Carbon monoxide for engines intended for use only in vehicles 
with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of greater than 14,000 pounds. 37.1 
grams per brake horsepower-hour (13.8 grams per megajoule), as measured 
under transient operating conditions.
    (C) Idle carbon monoxide. For all Otto-cycle HDEs utilizing 
aftertreatment technology: 0.50 percent of exhaust gas flow at curb 
idle.
    (2) The standards set forth in paragraphs (a)(1) and (f) of this 
section refer to the exhaust emitted over the operating schedule set 
forth in paragraph (f)(1) of appendix I to this part, and measured and 
calculated in accordance with the procedures set forth in subpart N or 
P of this part.
    (3)(i) A manufacturer may certify one or more Otto-cycle HDE 
configurations intended for use in all vehicles to the emission 
standard set forth in paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(B) of this section: 
Provided, that the total model year sales of such configuration(s), 
segregated by fuel type, being certified to the emission standard in 
paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(B) of this section represent no more than five 
percent of total model year sales of each fuel type Otto-cycle HDE 
intended for use in vehicles with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating of up 
to 14,000 pounds by the manufacturer.
    (ii) The configurations certified to the emission standards of 
paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(B) of this section under the provisions of 
paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section shall still be required to meet the 
evaporative emission standards set forth in Sec. 86.099-10(b)(1)(i), 
(b)(2)(i) and (b)(3)(i).
    (4) The manufacturer may exempt 2005 model year HDE engine families 
whose model year begins before July, 31, 2004 from the requirements in 
this paragraph (a). Exempted engine families shall be subject to the 
requirements in Sec. 86.099-10.
    (b) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.099-10.
    (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-10.
    (d) Every manufacturer of new motor vehicle engines subject to the 
standards prescribed in this section shall, prior to taking any of the 
actions specified in section 203(a)(1) of the Act, test or cause to be 
tested motor vehicle engines in accordance with applicable procedures 
in subpart N or P of this part to ascertain that such test engines meet 
the requirements of this section.
    (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.099-10.
    (f) Alternative exhaust emission standards. In lieu of the exhaust 
emission standards in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) or (B) of this section, 
the

[[Page 59951]]

manufacturer may select the standards and provisions in either 
paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this section.
    (1) Otto-cycle HDE Option 1. The alternative exhaust emission 
standards in this paragraph (f)(1) shall apply to new 2003 through 2007 
model year Otto-cycle HDEs and, at the manufacturers option, to new 
2003 through 2006 model year Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty vehicles 
less than or equal to 14,000 pounds GVWR
    (i) Oxides of Nitrogen plus Non-methane Hydrocarbons (NOX 
+ NMHC) for engines fueled with either gasoline, natural gas, or 
liquefied petroleum gas. 1.5 grams per brake horsepower-hour (0.55 
grams per megajoule).
    (ii) Oxides of Nitrogen plus Non-methane Hydrocarbon Equivalent 
(NOX + NMHCE) for engines fueled with methanol. 1.5 grams 
per brake horsepower-hour (0.55 grams per megajoule).
    (2) Otto-cycle HDE Option 2. The alternative exhaust emission 
standards in this paragraph (f)(2) shall apply to new 2004 through 2007 
model year Otto-cycle HDEs.
    (i) Oxides of Nitrogen plus Non-methane Hydrocarbons (NO,X 
+ NMHC) for engines fueled with either gasoline, natural gas, or 
liquefied petroleum gas. 1.5 grams per brake horsepower-hour (0.55 
grams per megajoule).
    (ii) Oxides of Nitrogen plus Non-methane Hydrocarbon Equivalent 
(NOX + NMHCE) for engines fueled with methanol. 1.5 grams 
per brake horsepower-hour (0.55 grams per megajoule).

    20. Section 86.005-17 is added to subpart A, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.005-17  On-board diagnostics.

    (a) General. (1) All heavy-duty engines intended for use in a 
heavy-duty vehicle weighing 14,000 pounds GVWR or less must be equipped 
with an on-board diagnostic (OBD) system capable of monitoring all 
emission-related engine systems or components during the applicable 
useful life. Heavy-duty engines intended for use in a heavy-duty 
vehicle weighing 14,000 pounds GVWR or less must meet the OBD 
requirements of this section according to the phase-in schedule in 
paragraph (k) of this section. All monitored systems and components 
must be evaluated periodically, but no less frequently than once per 
applicable certification test cycle as defined in Appendix I, paragraph 
(f), of this part, or similar trip as approved by the Administrator.
    (2) An OBD system demonstrated to fully meet the requirements in 
Sec. 86.1806-05 may be used to meet the requirements of this section, 
provided that the Administrator finds that a manufacturer's decision to 
use the flexibility in this paragraph (a)(2) is based on good 
engineering judgement.
    (b) Malfunction descriptions. The OBD system must detect and 
identify malfunctions in all monitored emission-related engine systems 
or components according to the following malfunction definitions as 
measured and calculated in accordance with test procedures set forth in 
subpart N of this part (engine-based test procedures) excluding the 
test procedure referred to as the ``Supplemental steady-state test; 
test cycle and procedures'' contained in Sec. 86.1360-2007, and 
excluding the test procedure referred to as the ``Not-To-Exceed Test 
Procedure'' contained in Sec. 86.1370-2007, and excluding the test 
procedure referred to as the ``Load Response Test'' contained in 
Sec. 86.1380-2004.
    (1) Catalysts and particulate traps. (i) Otto-cycle. Catalyst 
deterioration or malfunction before it results in an increase in NMHC 
emissions 1.5 times the NMHC+NOX standard or FEL, as 
compared to the NMHC+NOX emission level measured using a 
representative 4000 mile catalyst system.
    (ii) Diesel. (A) If equipped, catalyst deterioration or malfunction 
before it results in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the 
applicable standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX or PM. This 
requirement applies only to reduction catalysts; monitoring of 
oxidation catalysts is not required. This monitoring need not be done 
if the manufacturer can demonstrate that deterioration or malfunction 
of the system will not result in exceedance of the threshold.
    (B) If equipped with a particulate trap, catastrophic failure of 
the device must be detected. Any particulate trap whose complete 
failure results in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable 
standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX or PM must be monitored. This 
monitoring need not be done if the manufacturer can demonstrate that a 
catastrophic failure of the system will not result in exceedance of the 
threshold.
    (2) Engine Misfire. (i) Otto-cycle. Engine misfire resulting in 
exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable standard or FEL 
for NMHC+NOX or CO; and any misfire capable of damaging the 
catalytic converter.
    (ii) Diesel. Lack of cylinder combustion must be detected.
    (3) Oxygen sensors. If equipped, oxygen sensor deterioration or 
malfunction resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the 
applicable standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX or CO.
    (4) Evaporative leaks. If equipped, any vapor leak in the 
evaporative and/or refueling system (excluding the tubing and 
connections between the purge valve and the intake manifold) greater 
than or equal in magnitude to a leak caused by a 0.040 inch diameter 
orifice; an absence of evaporative purge air flow from the complete 
evaporative emission control system. Where fuel tank capacity is 
greater than 25 gallons, the Administrator may, following a request 
from the manufacturer, revise the size of the orifice to the smallest 
orifice feasible, based on test data, if the most reliable monitoring 
method available cannot reliably detect a system leak equal to a 0.040 
inch diameter orifice.
    (5) Other emission control systems. Any deterioration or 
malfunction occurring in an engine system or component directly 
intended to control emissions, including but not necessarily limited 
to, the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system, if equipped, the 
secondary air system, if equipped, and the fuel control system, 
singularly resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the 
applicable emission standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX, CO or 
diesel PM. For engines equipped with a secondary air system, a 
functional check, as described in paragraph (b)(6) of this section, may 
satisfy the requirements of this paragraph (b)(5) provided the 
manufacturer can demonstrate that deterioration of the flow 
distribution system is unlikely. This demonstration is subject to 
Administrator approval and, if the demonstration and associated 
functional check are approved, the diagnostic system must indicate a 
malfunction when some degree of secondary airflow is not detectable in 
the exhaust system during the check. For engines equipped with positive 
crankcase ventilation (PCV), monitoring of the PCV system is not 
necessary provided the manufacturer can demonstrate to the 
Administrator's satisfaction that the PCV system is unlikely to fail.
    (6) Other emission-related engine components. Any other 
deterioration or malfunction occurring in an electronic emission-
related engine system or component not otherwise described above that 
either provides input to or receives commands from the on-board 
computer and has a measurable impact on emissions; monitoring of 
components required by this paragraph (b)(6) must be satisfied by 
employing electrical circuit continuity checks and rationality checks 
for computer input

[[Page 59952]]

components (input values within manufacturer specified ranges based on 
other available operating parameters), and functionality checks for 
computer output components (proper functional response to computer 
commands) except that the Administrator may waive such a rationality or 
functionality check where the manufacturer has demonstrated 
infeasibility. Malfunctions are defined as a failure of the system or 
component to meet the electrical circuit continuity checks or the 
rationality or functionality checks.
    (7) Performance of OBD functions. Oxygen sensor or any other 
component deterioration or malfunction which renders that sensor or 
component incapable of performing its function as part of the OBD 
system must be detected and identified on vehicles so equipped.
    (c) Malfunction indicator light (MIL). The OBD system must 
incorporate a malfunction indicator light (MIL) readily visible to the 
vehicle operator. When illuminated, the MIL must display ``Check 
Engine,'' ``Service Engine Soon,'' a universally recognizable engine 
symbol, or a similar phrase or symbol approved by the Administrator. 
More than one general purpose malfunction indicator light for emission-
related problems should not be used; separate specific purpose warning 
lights (e.g., brake system, fasten seat belt, oil pressure, etc.) are 
permitted. The use of red for the OBD-related malfunction indicator 
light is prohibited.
    (d) MIL illumination. The MIL must illuminate and remain 
illuminated when any of the conditions specified in paragraph (b) of 
this section are detected and verified, or whenever the engine control 
enters a default or secondary mode of operation considered abnormal for 
the given engine operating conditions. The MIL must blink once per 
second under any period of operation during which engine misfire is 
occurring and catalyst damage is imminent. If such misfire is detected 
again during the following driving cycle (i.e., operation consisting 
of, at a minimum, engine start-up and engine shut-off) or the next 
driving cycle in which similar conditions are encountered, the MIL must 
maintain a steady illumination when the misfire is not occurring and 
then remain illuminated until the MIL extinguishing criteria of this 
section are satisfied. The MIL must also illuminate when the vehicle's 
ignition is in the ``key-on'' position before engine starting or 
cranking and extinguish after engine starting if no malfunction has 
previously been detected. If a fuel system or engine misfire 
malfunction has previously been detected, the MIL may be extinguished 
if the malfunction does not reoccur during three subsequent sequential 
trips during which similar conditions are encountered and no new 
malfunctions have been detected. Similar conditions are defined as 
engine speed within 375 rpm, engine load within 20 percent, and engine 
warm-up status equivalent to that under which the malfunction was first 
detected. If any malfunction other than a fuel system or engine misfire 
malfunction has been detected, the MIL may be extinguished if the 
malfunction does not reoccur during three subsequent sequential trips 
during which the monitoring system responsible for illuminating the MIL 
functions without detecting the malfunction, and no new malfunctions 
have been detected. Upon Administrator approval, statistical MIL 
illumination protocols may be employed, provided they result in 
comparable timeliness in detecting a malfunction and evaluating system 
performance, i.e., three to six driving cycles would be considered 
acceptable.
    (e) Storing of computer codes. The OBD system shall record and 
store in computer memory diagnostic trouble codes and diagnostic 
readiness codes indicating the status of the emission control system. 
These codes shall be available through the standardized data link 
connector per specifications as referenced in paragraph (h) of this 
section.
    (1) A diagnostic trouble code must be stored for any detected and 
verified malfunction causing MIL illumination. The stored diagnostic 
trouble code must identify the malfunctioning system or component as 
uniquely as possible. At the manufacturer's discretion, a diagnostic 
trouble code may be stored for conditions not causing MIL illumination. 
Regardless, a separate code should be stored indicating the expected 
MIL illumination status (i.e., MIL commanded ``ON,'' MIL commanded 
``OFF'').
    (2) For a single misfiring cylinder, the diagnostic trouble code(s) 
must uniquely identify the cylinder, unless the manufacturer submits 
data and/or engineering evaluations which adequately demonstrate that 
the misfiring cylinder cannot be reliably identified under certain 
operating conditions. For diesel engines only, the specific cylinder 
for which combustion cannot be detected need not be identified if new 
hardware would be required to do so. The diagnostic trouble code must 
identify multiple misfiring cylinder conditions; under multiple misfire 
conditions, the misfiring cylinders need not be uniquely identified if 
a distinct multiple misfire diagnostic trouble code is stored.
    (3) The diagnostic system may erase a diagnostic trouble code if 
the same code is not re-registered in at least 40 engine warm-up 
cycles, and the malfunction indicator light is not illuminated for that 
code.
    (4) Separate status codes, or readiness codes, must be stored in 
computer memory to identify correctly functioning emission control 
systems and those emission control systems which require further engine 
operation to complete proper diagnostic evaluation. A readiness code 
need not be stored for those monitors that can be considered 
continuously operating monitors (e.g., misfire monitor, fuel system 
monitor, etc.). Readiness codes should never be set to ``not ready'' 
status upon key-on or key-off; intentional setting of readiness codes 
to ``not ready'' status via service procedures must apply to all such 
codes, rather than applying to individual codes. Subject to 
Administrator approval, if monitoring is disabled for a multiple number 
of driving cycles (i.e., more than one) due to the continued presence 
of extreme operating conditions (e.g., ambient temperatures below 40 
deg.F, or altitudes above 8000 feet), readiness for the subject 
monitoring system may be set to ``ready'' status without monitoring 
having been completed. Administrator approval shall be based on the 
conditions for monitoring system disablement, and the number of driving 
cycles specified without completion of monitoring before readiness is 
indicated.
    (f) Available diagnostic data. (1) Upon determination of the first 
malfunction of any component or system, ``freeze frame'' engine 
conditions present at the time must be stored in computer memory. 
Should a subsequent fuel system or misfire malfunction occur, any 
previously stored freeze frame conditions must be replaced by the fuel 
system or misfire conditions (whichever occurs first). Stored engine 
conditions must include, but are not limited to: engine speed, open or 
closed loop operation, fuel system commands, coolant temperature, 
calculated load value, fuel pressure, vehicle speed, air flow rate, and 
intake manifold pressure if the information needed to determine these 
conditions is available to the computer. For freeze frame storage, the 
manufacturer must include the most appropriate set of conditions to 
facilitate effective repairs. If the diagnostic trouble code causing 
the conditions to be stored is erased in accordance with

[[Page 59953]]

paragraph (d) of this section, the stored engine conditions may also be 
erased.
    (2) The following data in addition to the required freeze frame 
information must be made available on demand through the serial port on 
the standardized data link connector, if the information is available 
to the on-board computer or can be determined using information 
available to the on-board computer: Diagnostic trouble codes, engine 
coolant temperature, fuel control system status (closed loop, open 
loop, other), fuel trim, ignition timing advance, intake air 
temperature, manifold air pressure, air flow rate, engine RPM, throttle 
position sensor output value, secondary air status (upstream, 
downstream, or atmosphere), calculated load value, vehicle speed, and 
fuel pressure. The signals must be provided in standard units based on 
SAE specifications incorporated by reference in paragraph (h) of this 
section. Actual signals must be clearly identified separately from 
default value or limp home signals.
    (3) For all OBD systems for which specific on-board evaluation 
tests are conducted (catalyst, oxygen sensor, etc.), the results of the 
most recent test performed by the vehicle, and the limits to which the 
system is compared must be available through the standardized data link 
connector per the appropriate standardized specifications as referenced 
in paragraph (h) of this section.
    (4) Access to the data required to be made available under this 
section shall be unrestricted and shall not require any access codes or 
devices that are only available from the manufacturer.
    (g) Exceptions. The OBD system is not required to evaluate systems 
or components during malfunction conditions if such evaluation would 
result in a risk to safety or failure of systems or components. 
Additionally, the OBD system is not required to evaluate systems or 
components during operation of a power take-off unit such as a dump 
bed, snow plow blade, or aerial bucket, etc.
    (h) Reference materials. The OBD system shall provide for 
standardized access and conform with the following Society of 
Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards and/or the following International 
Standards Organization (ISO) standards. The following documents are 
incorporated by reference (see Sec. 86.1):
    (1) SAE material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from 
the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, 
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001.
    (i) SAE J1850 ``Class B Data Communication Network Interface,'' 
(July 1995) shall be used as the on-board to off-board communications 
protocol. All emission related messages sent to the scan tool over a 
J1850 data link shall use the Cyclic Redundancy Check and the three 
byte header, and shall not use inter-byte separation or checksums.
    (ii) Basic diagnostic data (as specified in Secs. 86.094-17(e) and 
(f)) shall be provided in the format and units in SAE J1979 ``E/E 
Diagnostic Test Modes,'' (July 1996).
    (iii) Diagnostic trouble codes shall be consistent with SAE J2012 
``Recommended Practices for Diagnostic Trouble Code Definitions,'' 
(July 1996).
    (iv) The connection interface between the OBD system and test 
equipment and diagnostic tools shall meet the functional requirements 
of SAE J1962 ``Diagnostic Connector,'' (January 1995).
    (v) As an alternative to the above standards, heavy-duty engines 
may conform to the specifications of the SAE J1939 series of standards 
(SAE J1939-11, J1939-13, J1939-21, J1939-31, J1939-71, J1939-73, J1939-
81).
    (2) ISO materials. Copies of these materials may be obtained from 
the International Organization for Standardization, Case Postale 56, 
CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland.
    (i) ISO 9141-2 ``Road vehicles--Diagnostic systems--Part 2: CARB 
requirements for interchange of digital information,'' (February 1994) 
may be used as an alternative to SAE J1850 as the on-board to off-board 
communications protocol.
    (ii) ISO 14230-4 ``Road vehicles--Diagnostic systems--Keyword 
Protocol 2000--Part 4: Requirements for emission-related systems'' may 
also be used as an alternative to SAE J1850.
    (i) Deficiencies and alternate fueled engines. Upon application by 
the manufacturer, the Administrator may accept an OBD system as 
compliant even though specific requirements are not fully met. Such 
compliances without meeting specific requirements, or deficiencies, 
will be granted only if compliance would be infeasible or unreasonable 
considering such factors as, but not limited to: technical feasibility 
of the given monitor and lead time and production cycles including 
phase-in or phase-out of engines or vehicle designs and programmed 
upgrades of computers. Unmet requirements should not be carried over 
from the previous model year except where unreasonable hardware or 
software modifications would be necessary to correct the deficiency, 
and the manufacturer has demonstrated an acceptable level of effort 
toward compliance as determined by the Administrator. Furthermore, EPA 
will not accept any deficiency requests that include the complete lack 
of a major diagnostic monitor (``major'' diagnostic monitors being 
those for exhaust aftertreatment devices, oxygen sensor, engine 
misfire, evaporative leaks, and diesel EGR, if equipped), with the 
possible exception of the special provisions for alternate fueled 
engines. For alternate fueled heavy-duty engines (e.g. natural gas, 
liquefied petroleum gas, methanol, ethanol), beginning with the model 
year for which alternate fuel emission standards are applicable and 
extending through the 2006 model year, manufacturers may request the 
Administrator to waive specific monitoring requirements of this section 
for which monitoring may not be reliable with respect to the use of the 
alternate fuel. At a minimum, alternate fuel engines must be equipped 
with an OBD system meeting OBD requirements to the extent feasible as 
approved by the Administrator.
    (j) California OBD II compliance option. For heavy-duty engines at 
or below 14,000 pounds GVWR, demonstration of compliance with 
California OBD II requirements (Title 13 California Code section 
1968.1), as modified pursuant to California Mail Out #97-24 (December 
9, 1997), shall satisfy the requirements of this section, except that 
the exemption to the catalyst monitoring provisions of California Code 
section 1968.1(b)(1.1.2) for diesel engines does not apply, and 
compliance with California Code sections 1968.1(b)(4.2.2), pertaining 
to 0.02 inch evaporative leak detection, and 1968.1(d), pertaining to 
tampering protection, are not required to satisfy the requirements of 
this section. Also, the deficiency fine provisions of California Code 
sections 1968.1(m)(6.1) and (6.2) do not apply.
    (k) Phase-in for heavy-duty engines. Manufacturers of heavy-duty 
engines must comply with the OBD requirements in this section according 
to the phase-in schedule in this paragraph (k), based on the percentage 
of projected engine sales within each category. The 2004 model year 
requirements in the phase-in schedule in this paragraph (k) are 
applicable only to heavy-duty Otto-cycle engines where the manufacturer 
has selected Otto-cycle Option 1 for alternative 2004 compliance 
according to Sec. 86.005-1 (c)(2). The 2005 through 2007 requirements 
in the phase-in schedule in this paragraph (k) apply to all heavy-duty 
engines intended for use in a heavy-duty vehicle weighing 14,000 pounds 
GVWR or less. Manufacturers

[[Page 59954]]

may exempt 2005 model year diesel heavy-duty engines and 2005 model 
year Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles if the manufacturer has 
selected Otto-cycle Option 3 whose model year commences before July 31, 
2004 from the requirements of this section. For the purposes of 
calculating compliance with the phase-in provisions of this paragraph 
(k), heavy-duty engines may be combined with heavy-duty vehicles 
subject to the phase-in requirements of paragraph Sec. 86.1806-04(l). 
The phase-in schedule follows:

  OBD Compliance Phase-in for Heavy-Duty Engines Intended for Use in a
         Heavy-Duty Vehicle Weighing 14,000 Pounds GVWR or Less
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Model year                Phase-in based on projected sales
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 MY.............................  --applicable only to Otto-cycle
                                       engines complying with Options 1
                                       or 2.
                                      --40% compliance.
                                      --alternative fuel waivers
                                       available.
2005 MY.............................  --60% compliance.
                                      --alternative fuel waivers
                                       available.
2006 MY.............................  --80% compliance.
                                      --alternative fuel waivers
                                       available.
2007 + MY...........................  --100% compliance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    21. A new Sec. 86.007-11 is added to subpart A, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.007-11  Emission standards and supplemental requirements for 
2007 and later model year diesel heavy-duty engines and vehicles.

    This section applies to new 2007 and later model year diesel HDEs. 
Section 86.007-11 includes text that specifies requirements that differ 
from Sec. 86.004-11. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.004-11 is identical 
and applicable to Sec. 86.007-11, this may be indicated by specifying 
the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.004-11.''.
    (a) through (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.004-11.
    (a)(3)(i) The weighted average exhaust emissions, as determined 
under Sec. 86.1360-2007(e)(5) pertaining to the supplemental steady-
state test cycle, for each regulated pollutant shall not exceed 1.0 
times the applicable emission standards or FELs specified in 
Sec. 86.004-11(a)(1).
    (ii) Gaseous exhaust emissions shall not exceed the steady-state 
interpolated values determined by the Maximum Allowable Emission Limits 
(for the corresponding speed and load), as determined under 
Sec. 86.1360-2007(f), when the engine is operated in the steady-state 
control area defined under Sec. 86.1360-2007(d), during steady-state 
engine operation.
    (4)(i) The brake-specific exhaust emissions in grams/bhp-hr, as 
determined under Sec. 86.1370-2007 pertaining to the not-to-exceed test 
procedures, for each regulated pollutant shall not exceed 1.25 times 
the applicable emission standards or FELs specified in Sec. 86.004-
11(a)(1) during engine and vehicle operation specified in paragraph 
(a)(4)(ii) of this section, except as noted in paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of 
this section.
    (ii) For each engine family, the not-to-exceed emission limits must 
apply during one of the following two ambient operating regions:
    (A) The not-to-exceed limits apply for all altitudes less than or 
equal to 5,500 feet above sea-level, during all ambient conditions 
(temperature and humidity). Temperature and humidity ranges for which 
correction factors are allowed are specified in Sec. 86.1370-2007(e); 
or
    (B)(1) The not-to-exceed emission limits apply at all altitudes 
less than or equal to 5,500 feet above sea-level, for temperatures less 
than or equal to the temperature determined by the following equation 
at the specified altitude:

T = -0.00254  x  A + 100

Where:

T = ambient air temperature in degrees Fahrenheit.
A = altitude in feet above sea-level (A is negative for altitudes below 
sea-level).

    (2) Temperature and humidity ranges for which correction factors 
are allowed are specified in Sec. 86.1370-2007(e);
    (iii) For engines equipped with exhaust gas recirculation, the not-
to-exceed emission limits specified in paragraph (a)(4)(i) of this 
section do not apply to engine or vehicle operation during cold 
operating conditions as specified in Sec. 86.1370-2007(f).
    (iv) Deficiencies for NTE emission standards. (A) For model years 
2007 through 2009, upon application by the manufacturer, the 
Administrator may accept a HDDE as compliant with the NTE standards 
even though specific requirements are not fully met. Such compliances 
without meeting specific requirements, or deficiencies, will be granted 
only if compliance would be infeasible or unreasonable considering such 
factors as, but not limited to: Technical feasibility of the given 
hardware and lead time and production cycles including phase-in or 
phase-out of engines or vehicle designs and programmed upgrades of 
computers. Deficiencies will be approved on a engine model and/or 
horsepower rating basis within an engine family, and each approval is 
applicable for a single model year. A manufacturer's application must 
include a description of the auxiliary emission control device(s) which 
will be used to maintain emissions to the lowest practical level, 
considering the deficiency being requested, if applicable. An 
application for a deficiency must be made during the certification 
process; no deficiency will be granted to retroactively cover engines 
already certified.
    (B) Unmet requirements should not be carried over from the previous 
model year except where unreasonable hardware or software modifications 
would be necessary to correct the deficiency, and the manufacturer has 
demonstrated an acceptable level of effort toward compliance as 
determined by the Administrator. The NTE deficiency should only be seen 
as an allowance for minor deviations from the NTE requirements. The NTE 
deficiency provisions allow a manufacturer to apply for relief from the 
NTE emission requirements under limited conditions. EPA expects that 
manufacturers should have the necessary functioning emission control 
hardware in place to comply with the NTE.
    (b)(1) introductory text through (b)(1)(iii) [Reserved]. For 
guidance see Sec. 86.004-11.
    (b)(1)(iv) Operation within the NTE zone (defined in Sec. 86.1370-
2007) must comply with a filter smoke number of 1.0 under steady-state 
operation, or the following alternate opacity limits:
    (A) A 30 second transient test average opacity limit of 4% for a 5 
inch path; and
    (B) A 10 second steady state test average opacity limit of 4% for a 
5 inch path.
    (2)(i) The standards set forth in Sec. 86.004-11 (b)(1)(i) through 
(iii) refer to exhaust smoke emissions generated under the conditions 
set forth in subpart I of this part and measured and calculated in 
accordance with those procedures.
    (ii) The standards set forth in paragraph (b)(1)(iv) of this 
section refer to exhaust smoke emissions generated under the conditions 
set forth in Sec. 86.1370-2007 and calculated in accordance with the 
procedures set forth in Sec. 86.1372-2007.
    (b)(3) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.004-11.

    22. A new Sec. 86.007-21 is added to Subpart A, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.007-21  Application for certification.

    Section 86.007-21 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.004-21, 86.094-21 or 86.096-21. Where a paragraph 
in Sec. 86.004-21, 86.094-21 or 86.096-21 is identical and applicable 
to Sec. 86.007-21, this may be

[[Page 59955]]

indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement 
``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.004-21.'', ``[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) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.004-21.
    (b)(4)(ii) through (b)(5)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.094-21.
    (b)(5)(v) through (b)(6) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.004-
21.
    (b)(7) and (b)(8) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (b)(9) and (b)(10) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.004-21.
    (c) through (j) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.094-21.
    (k) and (l) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.096-21.
    (m) and (n) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.004-21.
    (o) For diesel heavy-duty engines, the manufacturer must provide 
the following additional information pertaining to the supplemental 
steady-state test conducted under Sec. 86.1360-2007:
    (1) Weighted brake-specific emissions data (i.e., in units of g/
bhp-hr), calculated according to Sec. 86.1360-2007(e)(5), for all 
pollutants for which an emission standard is established in 
Sec. 86.004-11(a);
    (2) Brake specific gaseous emission data for each of the 13 test 
points (identified under Sec. 86.1360-2007(b)(1)) and the 3 EPA-
selected test points (identified under Sec. 86.1360-2007(b)(2));
    (3) Concentrations and mass flow rates of all regulated gaseous 
emissions plus carbon dioxide;
    (4) Values of all emission-related engine control variables at each 
test point;
    (5) Weighted break-specific particulate matter (i.e., in units of 
g/bhp-hr);
    (6) A statement that the test results correspond to the maximum 
NOX producing condition specified in Sec. 86.1360-
2007(e)(4). The manufacturer also must maintain records at the 
manufacturer's facility which contain all test data, engineering 
analyses, and other information which provides the basis for this 
statement, where such information exists. The manufacturer must provide 
such information to the Administrator upon request;
    (7) A statement that the engines will comply with the weighted 
average emissions standard and interpolated values comply with the 
Maximum Allowable Emission Limits specified in Sec. 86.007-11(a)(3) for 
the useful life of the engine. The manufacturer also must maintain 
records at the manufacturer's facility which contain a detailed 
description of all test data, engineering analyses, and other 
information which provides the basis for this statement, where such 
information exists. The manufacturer must provide such information to 
the Administrator upon request.
    (p)(1) The manufacturer must provide a statement in the application 
for certification that the diesel heavy-duty engine for which 
certification is being requested will comply with the applicable Not-
To-Exceed Limits specified in Sec. 86.007-11(a)(4) when operated under 
all conditions which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in 
normal vehicle operation and use. The manufacturer also must maintain 
records at the manufacturers facility which contain all test data, 
engineering analyses, and other information which provides the basis 
for this statement, where such information exists. The manufacturer 
must provide such information to the Administrator upon request.
    (2) For engines equipped with exhaust gas recirculation, the 
manufacturer must provide a detailed description of the control system 
the engine will use to comply with the requirements of Sec. 86.007-
11(a)(4)(iii) and Sec. 86.1370-2007(f) for NTE cold temperature 
operating exclusion, including but not limited to the method the 
manufacturer will use to access this exclusion during normal vehicle 
operation.
    (3) For each engine model and/or horsepower rating within an engine 
family for which a manufacturer is applying for an NTE deficiency(ies) 
under the provisions of Sec. 86.007-11(a)(4)(iv), the manufacturer's 
application for an NTE deficiency(ies) must include a complete 
description of the deficiency, including but not limited to: the 
specific description of the deficiency; what pollutant the deficiency 
is being applied for, all engineering efforts the manufacturer has made 
to overcome the deficiency, what specific operating conditions the 
deficiency is being requested for (i.e., temperature ranges, humidity 
ranges, altitude ranges, etc.), a full description of the auxiliary 
emission control device(s) which will be used to maintain emissions to 
the lowest practical level; and what the lowest practical emission 
level will be.

    23. A new Sec. 86.008-10 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


Sec. 86.008-10  Emission standards for 2008 and later model year Otto-
cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles.

    Section 86.008-10 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.098-10, Sec. 86.099-10, Sec. 86.005-10. Where a 
paragraph in Sec. 86.098-10, Sec. 86.099-10, or Sec. 86.005-10 is 
identical and applicable to Sec. 86.008-10, this may be indicated by 
specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement ``[Reserved]. 
For guidance see Sec. 86.098-10.'', ``[Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.099-10.'', or ``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.005-10.''.
    (a)(1) Exhaust emissions from new 2008 and later model year Otto-
cycle HDEs shall not exceed:
    (i)(A) Oxides of Nitrogen plus Non-methane Hydrocarbons (NOX 
+ NMHC) for engines fueled with either gasoline, natural gas, or 
liquefied petroleum gas. 1.0 grams per brake horsepower-hour (0.37 
grams per megajoule).
    (B) Oxides of Nitrogen plus Non-methane Hydrocarbon Equivalent 
(NOX + NMHCE) for engines fueled with methanol. 1.0 grams 
per brake horsepower-hour (0.37 grams per megajoule).
    (a)(1)(i)(C) through (a)(3)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 
Sec. 86.005-10.
    (4) [Reserved]
    (b) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.099-10.
    (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.098-10.
    (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.005-10.
    (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.099-10.
    (f) [Reserved]

    24. Section 86.098-10 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) 
introductory text, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.098-10  Emission standards for 1998 and later model year Otto-
cycle heavy-duty engines and vehicles.

* * * * *
    (a)(1) Except as provided for 2003 and 2004 model years in 
Secs. 86.005-10(f) and 86.1816-05, exhaust emissions from new 1998 and 
later model year Otto-cycle heavy-duty engines shall not exceed:
* * * * *
    25. Subpart B is amended by revising the heading of the subpart, to 
read as follows:

[[Page 59956]]

Subpart B--Emission Regulations for 1977 and Later Model Year New 
Light-Duty Vehicles and New Light-Duty Trucks and New Otto-Cycle 
Complete Heavy-Duty Vehicles; Test Procedures

    26. Section 86.101 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) 
introductory text, (a)(3) and (d), and by adding paragraph (e) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.101  General applicability.

    (a) The provisions of this subpart are applicable to 1977 and later 
model year new light-duty vehicles and light duty trucks, and 2001 and 
later model year new Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles and engines 
certified under the provisions of subpart S of this part.
* * * * *
    (3) Sections 86.150 through 86.157 describe the refueling test 
procedures for light-duty vehicles and light duty trucks and apply for 
model years 1998 and later. They also describe the refueling test 
procedures for 2004 and later model year Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty 
vehicles that must meet the ORVR standards under the provisions of 
subpart S of this part.
* * * * *
    (d) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty 
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and heavy-duty vehicles under the 
provisions of subpart S of this part.
    (e) References in this subpart to light-duty vehicles or light-duty 
trucks shall be deemed to apply to light-duty vehicles, light-duty 
trucks, or heavy-duty vehicles and engines as applicable for 
manufacturers certifying new light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, 
and heavy-duty vehicles and engines under the provisions of subpart S 
of this part.

    27. Section 86.129-94 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.129-94  Road load power, test weight, inertia weight class 
determination, and fuel temperature profile.

* * * * *
    (a) Flywheels, electrical, or other means of simulating test weight 
as shown in the following table shall be used. If the equivalent test 
weight specified is not available on the dynamometer being used, the 
next higher equivalent test weight (not to exceed 250 pounds) available 
shall be used:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Test
 Road load power at   Test weight  basis    equivalent    Inertia weight
  50 mi/hour--light           4 5           test weight        class
  duty trucks 1 2 3                          (pounds)        (pounds)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Up to 1062........           1,000           1,000
                      1063 to 1187......           1,125           1,000
                      1188 to 1312......           1,250           1,250
                      1313 to 1437......           1,375           1,250
                      1438 to 1562......           1,500           1,500
                      1563 to 1687......           1,625           1,500
                      1688 to 1812......           1,750           1,750
                      1813 to 1937......           1,875           1,750
                      1938 to 2062......           2,000           2,000
                      2063 to 2187......           2,125           2,000
                      2188 to 2312......           2,250           2,250
                      2313 to 2437......           2,375           2,250
                      2438 to 2562......           2,500           2,500
                      2563 to 2687......           2,625           2,500
                      2688 to 2812......           2,750           2,750
                      2813 to 2937......           2,875           2,750
                      2938 to 3062......           3,000           3,000
                      3063 to 3187......           3,125           3,000
                      3188 to 3312......           3,250           3,000
                      3313 to 3437......           3,375           3,500
                      3438 to 3562......           3,500           3,500
                      3563 to 3687......           3,625           3,500
                      3688 to 3812......           3,750           3,500
                      3813 to 3937......           3,875           4,000
                      3938 to 4125......           4,000           4,000
                      4126 to 4375......           4,250           4,000
                      4376 to 4625......           4,500           4,500
                      4626 to 4875......           4,750           4,500
                      4876 to 5125......           5,000           5,000
                      5126 to 5375......           5,250           5,000
                      5376 to 5750......           5,500           5,500
                      5751 to 6250......           6,000           6,000
                      6251 to 6750......           6,500           6,500
                      6751 to 7250......           7,000           7,000
                      7251 to 7750......           7,500           7,500
                      7751 to 8250......           8,000           8,000
                      8251 to 8750......           8,500           8,500
                      8751 to 9250......           9,000           9,000
                      9251 to 9750......           9,500           9,500
                      9751 to 10250.....          10,000          10,000
                      10251 to 10750....          10,500          10,500
                      10751 to 11250....          11,000          11,000
                      11251 to 11750....          11,500          11,500
                      11751 to 12250....          12,000          12,000
                      12251 to 12750....          12,500          12,500
                      12751 to 13250....          13,000          13,000
                      13251 to 13750....          13,500          13,500

[[Page 59957]]

 
                      13751 to 14000....          14,000         14,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 For all light-duty trucks except vans, and for heavy-duty vehicles
  optionally certified as light-duty trucks, and for complete heavy-duty
  vehicles, the road load power (horsepower) at 50 mi/h shall be 0.58
  times B (defined in footnote 3 of this table) rounded to the nearest
  \1/2\ horsepower.
2 For vans, the road load power at 50 mi/h (horsepower) shall be 0.50
  times B (defined in footnote 3 of this table) rounded to the nearest
  \1/2\ horsepower.
3 B is the basic vehicle frontal area (square foot) plus the additional
  frontal area (square foot) of mirrors and optional equipment exceeding
  0.1 ft 2 which are anticipated to be sold on more than 33 percent of
  the car line. Frontal area measurements shall be computed to the
  nearest 10th of a square foot using a method approved in advance by
  the Administrator.
4 For model year 1994 and later heavy light-duty trucks not subject to
  the Tier 0 standards of Sec.  86.094-9, test weight basis is as
  follows: for emissions tests, the basis shall be adjusted loaded
  vehicle weight, as defined in Sec.  86.094-2; and for fuel economy
  tests, the basis shall be loaded vehicle weight, as defined in Sec.
  86.082-2, or, at the manufacturer's option, adjusted loaded vehicle
  weight as defined in Sec.  86.094-2. For all other vehicles, test
  weight basis shall be loaded vehicle weight, as defined in Sec.
  86.082-2.
5 Light-duty vehicles over 5,750 lb. loaded vehicle weight shall be
  tested at a 5,500 lb. equivalent test weight.

* * * * *

Subpart H--[Amended]

    28. Section 86.701-94 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 86.701-94  General applicability.

    (a) The provisions of this subpart apply to: 1994 and later model 
year Otto-cycle and diesel light-duty vehicles; 1994 and later model 
year Otto-cycle and diesel light-duty trucks; and 1994 and later model 
year Otto-cycle and diesel heavy-duty engines; and 2001 and later model 
year Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles and engines certified under the 
provisions of subpart S of this part. The provisions of subpart B of 
this part apply to this subpart.
    (b) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty 
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicles and 
engines under the provisions of subpart S of this part.

Subpart K--[Amended]

    29. Section 86.1001-84 is amended by revising paragraph (b), to 
read as follows:


Sec. 86.1001-84  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty 
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty 
vehicles under the provisions of subpart S of this part.

    30. A new Sec. 86.1008-2004 is added to subpart K, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1008-2004  Test procedures.

    Section 86.1008-2004 includes text that specifies requirements that 
differ from Sec. 86.1008-2001. Where a paragraph in Sec. 86.1008-2001 
is identical and applicable to Sec. 86.1008-2004, this may be indicated 
by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement 
``[Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.1008-2001.''.
    (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, except that 2004 and later model year engines shall not be 
subject to the test procedures specified in Sec. 86.1380, and 2007 and 
later model year engines shall not be subject to the test procedures 
specified in Secs. 86.1360(b)(2), 86.1360(f), 86.1370, and 86.1372. 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.
    (a)(1)(ii) through (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see Sec. 86.1008-
2001.

Subpart L--[Amended]

    31. Section 86.1101-87 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1101-87  Applicability.

    (a) The provisions of this subpart are applicable for 1987 and 
later model year gasoline-fueled and diesel heavy-duty engines and 
heavy-duty vehicles. These vehicles include light-duty trucks rated in 
excess of 6,000 pounds gross vehicle weight.
    (b) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty trucks 
and Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty vehicles under the provisions of 
subpart S of this part.

Subpart M--[Amended]

    32. Section 86.1206-96 is amended by revising the last sentence of 
paragraph (b), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1206-96  Equipment required; overview.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * The driving cycle is specified in Sec. 86.1215.

    33. Section 86.1215-85 is amended by redesignating paragraph (a) as 
paragraph (a)(1) and adding a new paragraph (a)(2), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1215-85  EPA heavy-duty vehicle (HDV) urban dynamometer driving 
schedule.

    (a)(1) * * *
    (2) For evaporative emission testing of heavy-duty vehicles a 
manufacturer may optionally use the dynamometer driving schedule for 
light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks specified in appendix I(a) of 
this part. This driving schedule may not be used for exhaust emissions 
testing of heavy-duty vehicles. If the manufacturer chooses to use this 
option, the Administrator will use this driving schedule when 
conducting evaporative emission tests, as described in Sec. 86.1230-96.
* * * * *

    34. Section 86.1229-85 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(5)(vi), 
to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1229-85  Dynamometer load determination and fuel temperature 
profile.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (vi) Time of initiation of the first driving cycle;
* * * * *

    35. Section 86.1232-96 is amended by revising the third sentence in 
paragraph (c), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1232-96  Vehicle preconditioning.

* * * * *

[[Page 59958]]

    (c) * * * Following this soak period, the test vehicle shall be 
placed, either by being driven or pushed, on a dynamometer and operated 
through one driving schedule, specified in Sec. 86.1215 and appendix I 
of this part. * * *
* * * * *

    36. Section 86.1234-96 is amended by revising paragraph (b), to 
read as follows:


Sec. 86.1234-96  Running loss test.

* * * * *
    (b) Driving schedule. Conduct the running loss test by operating 
the test vehicle through three driving schedules (see Sec. 86.1215 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. 86.1228 during the driving cycles.
* * * * *

    37. Section 86.1235-96 is amended by revising the first sentence of 
paragraph (a), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1235-96  Dynamometer procedure.

* * * * *
    (a) The dynamometer run consists of one dynamometer driving 
schedule cycle (see Sec. 86.1215 and appendix I of this part) starting 
not less than 12 nor more than 36 hours after completion of the drive 
specified in Sec. 86.1232-96. * * *
* * * * *

    38. Section 86.1246-96 is amended by revising paragraph (e), to 
read as follows:


Sec. 86.1246-96  Fuel dispensing spitback procedure.

* * * * *
    (e) The vehicle shall be soaked at 806  deg.F 
(273  deg.C) for a minimum of six hours, then placed, 
either by being driven or pushed, on a dynamometer and operated through 
one dynamometer driving schedule (specified in Sec. 86.1215 and 
appendix I of this part). The test vehicle may not be used to set the 
dynamometer horsepower.
* * * * *

Subpart N--[Amended]

    39. Section 86.1304-90 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1304-90  Section numbering; construction.

    (a) Section numbering. The model year of initial applicability is 
indicated by the section number. The two digits following the hyphen 
designate the first model year for which a section is applicable. The 
section continues to apply to subsequent model years unless a later 
model year section is adopted.

    Example: Section 86.13xx-2004 applies to the 2004 and subsequent 
model years. If a Sec. 86.13xx-2007 is promulgated it would apply 
beginning with the 2007 model year; Sec. 86.13xx-2004 would apply to 
model years 2004 through 2006.

    (b) A section reference without a model year suffix refers to the 
section applicable for the appropriate model year.

    40. A new Sec. 86.1305-2004 is added to subpart N, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1305-2004  Introduction; structure of subpart.

    (a) This subpart describes the equipment required and the 
procedures to follow in order to perform exhaust emissions tests on 
Otto-cycle and diesel-cycle heavy duty engines. Subpart A of this part 
sets forth the emission standards and general testing requirements to 
comply with EPA certification procedures.
    (b) This subpart contains five key sets of requirements, as 
follows: specifications and equipment needs (Secs. 86.1306 through 
86.1314); calibration methods and frequencies (Secs. 86.1316 through 
86.1326); test procedures (Secs. 86.1327 through 86.1341 and 
Secs. 86.1360 through 86.1380); calculation formulas (Secs. 86.1342 and 
86.1343); and data requirements (Sec. 86.1344).

    41. A new Sec. 86.1360-2007 is added to subpart N to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1360-2007  Supplemental steady-state test; test cycle and 
procedures.

    (a) Applicability. This section applies to 2007 and later diesel 
heavy duty engines.
    (b) Test cycle. (1) The following 13-mode cycle must be followed in 
dynamometer operation on the test engine:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        Weighting    Mode length
                        Mode No.                          Engine speed  Percent load     factor       (minutes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.......................................................         Idle        NA              0.15             4
2.......................................................            A       100              0.08             2
3.......................................................            B        50              0.10             2
4.......................................................            B        75              0.10             2
5.......................................................            A        50              0.05             2
6.......................................................            A        75              0.05             2
7.......................................................            A        25              0.05             2
8.......................................................            B       100              0.09             2
9.......................................................            B        25              0.10             2
10......................................................             C      100              0.08             2
11......................................................             C       25              0.05             2
12......................................................             C       75              0.05             2
13......................................................             C       50              0.05             2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) In addition to the 13 test points identified in paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section, EPA may select, and require the manufacturer to 
conduct the test using, up to 3 additional test points within the 
control area (as defined in paragraph (d) of this section). EPA will 
notify the manufacturer of these supplemental test points in writing in 
a timely manner before the test. Emissions sampling for the additional 
test modes must include all regulated gaseous pollutants. Particulate 
matter does not need to be measured.
    (c) Determining engine speeds. (1) The engine speeds A, B and C, 
referenced in the table in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, and speeds 
D and E, referenced in Sec. 86.1380, must be determined as follows:
Speed A = nlo + 0.25  x  (nhi-nlo)
Speed B = nlo+ 0.50  x  (nhi-nlo)
Speed C = nlo + 0.75  x  (nhi-nlo)
Speed D = nhi
Speed E = nlo + 0.15  x  (nhi-nlo)

Where:

nhi = High speed as determined by calculating 70% of the 
maximum power. The highest engine speed

[[Page 59959]]

where this power value occurs on the power curve is defined as 
nhi.
nlo = Low speed as determined by calculating 50% of the 
maximum power. The lowest engine speed where this power value occurs on 
the power curve is defined as nlo.
Maximum power = the maximum observed power calculated according to the 
engine mapping procedures defined in Sec. 86.1332.

    (d) Determining the control area. The control area extends from the 
engine speed A to C, as defined in paragraph (c) of this section, and 
extends from 25 to 100 percent load.
    (e) Test requirements--(1) Engine warm-up. Prior to beginning the 
test sequence, the engine must be warmed-up according to the procedures 
in Sec. 86.1332-90(d)(3)(i) through (iv).
    (2) Test sequence. The test must be performed in the order of the 
mode numbers in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. The EPA-selected test 
points identified under paragraph (b)(2) of this section must be 
performed immediately upon completion of mode 13. The engine must be 
operated for the prescribed time in each mode, completing engine speed 
and load changes in the first 20 seconds of each mode. The specified 
speed must be held to within plus-minus>50 rpm and the specified torque 
must be held to within plus or minus two percent of the maximum torque 
at the test speed.
    (3) Particulate sampling. One pair of filters (primary and back-up) 
shall be used for sampling PM over the 13-mode test procedure. The 
modal weighting factors specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section 
shall be taken into account by taking a sample proportional to the 
exhaust mass flow during each individual mode of the cycle. This can be 
achieved by adjusting sample flow rate, sampling time, and/or dilution 
ratio, accordingly, so that the criterion for the effective weighting 
factors is met. The sampling time per mode must be at least 4 seconds 
per 0.01 weighting factor. Sampling must be conducted as late as 
possible within each mode. Particulate sampling shall be completed no 
earlier than 5 seconds before the end of each mode.
    (4) The test must be conducted with all emission-related engine 
control variables in the highest brake-specific NOX 
emissions state which could be encountered for a 30 second or longer 
averaging period at the given test point and for the conditions under 
which the engine is being tested.
    (5) Exhaust emissions measurements and calculations. Manufacturers 
must follow the exhaust emissions sample analysis procedures under 
Sec. 86.1340, and the calculation formulas and procedures under 
Sec. 86.1342, for the 13-mode cycle and the 3 EPA-selected test points 
as applicable for steady-state testing, including the NOX 
correction factor for humidity.
    (6) Calculating the weighted average emissions. (i) For each 
regulated gaseous pollutant, the weighted average emissions must be 
calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.008

Where:

AWA = Weighted average emissions for each regulated gaseous 
pollutant, in grams per brake horse-power hour.
AM = Modal average mass emissions level, in grams per hour. 
Mass emissions must be calculated as described in Sec. 86.1342.
AP = Modal average power, in brake horse-power. Any power 
measured during the idle mode (mode 1) is not included in this 
calculation.
WF = Weighting factor corresponding to each mode of the 
steady-state test cycle, as defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this 
section.
i = The modes of the steady-state test cycle, as defined in paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section.
n = 13, corresponding to the 13 modes of the steady-state test cycle, 
as defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

    (ii) For PM measurements, a single pair of filters must be used to 
measure PM over the 13 modes. The brake-specific PM emission level for 
the test must be calculated as described for a transient hot start test 
in Sec. 86.1343. Only the power measured during the sampling period 
shall be used in the calculation.
    (f) Maximum allowable emission limits. (1) For gaseous emissions, 
the 12 non-idle test point results and the four-point linear 
interpolation procedure specified in paragraph (g) of this section for 
intermediate conditions, shall define Maximum Allowable Emission Limits 
for purposes of Sec. 86.007-11(a)(3) except as modified under paragraph 
(f)(3) of this section. Each engine shall have it's own Maximum 
Allowable Emission Limits generated from the 12 non-idle supplemental 
steady state test points from that engine. The control area extends 
from the 25% to the 75% engine speeds, at engine loads of 25% to 100%, 
as defined in paragraph (d) of this section. Figure 1 of this paragraph 
(f)(1) depicts a sample Maximum Allowable Emission Limit curve, for 
illustration purposes only, as follows:

[[Page 59960]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.006

    (2) If the weighted average emissions, calculated according to 
paragraph (e)(6) of this section, for any gaseous pollutant is equal to 
or lower than required by Sec. 86.007-11(a)(3), each of the 13 test 
values for that pollutant shall first be multiplied by the ratio of the 
applicable emission standard (under Sec. 86.007-11(a)(3)) to the 
weighted average emissions value, and then by 1.10 for interpolation 
allowance, before determining the Maximum Allowable Emission Limits 
under paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
    (3) If the Maximum Allowable Emission Limit for any point, as 
calculated under paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section, is greater 
than the applicable Not-to-Exceed limit (if within the Not-to-Exceed 
control area defined in Sec. 86.1370-2007(b)), then the Maximum 
Allowable Emission Limit for that point shall be defined as the 
applicable Not-to-Exceed limit.
    (g) Calculating intermediate test points. (1) For the three test 
points selected by EPA under paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the 
emissions must be measured and calculated as described in paragraph 
(e)(6)(i) of this section (except that n = 1 and WF = 1). The measured 
values then must be compared to the interpolated values according to 
paragraph (g)(3) of this section. The interpolated values are 
determined from the modes of the test cycle closest to the respective 
test point according to paragraph (g)(2) of this section.
    (2) Interpolating emission values from the test cycle. The gaseous 
emissions for each regulated pollutant for each of the control points 
(Z) must be interpolated from the four closest modes of the test cycle 
that envelop the selected control point Z as shown in Figure 2 of this 
paragraph (g)(2).
    (i) For these modes (R, S, T, U), the following definitions apply:
    (A) Speed (R) = Speed(T) = nRT.
    (B) Speed (S) = Speed(U) = nSU.
    (C) Per cent load (R) = Per cent load (S).
    (D) Per cent load (T) = Per cent load (U).
    (ii) The interpolated value of the brake specific gaseous emissions 
of the selected control point Z(EZ) must be calculated as follows:

EZ = ERS + (ETU-ERS) * 
(MZ-MRS) / (MTU-MRS)
ETU = ET + (EU-ET) * 
(nZ-nRT) / (nSU-nRT)
ERS = ER + (ES-ER) * 
(nZ-nRT) / (nSU-nRT)
MTU = MT + (MU-MT) * 
(nZ-nRT) / (nSU-nRT)
MRS = MR + (MS-MR) * 
(nZ-nRT) / (nSU-nRT)

Where:

ER, ES, ET, EU = for 
each regulated pollutant, brake specific gaseous emissions of the 
enveloping modes adjusted according to the factors in(f)(2).
MR, MS, MT, MU = engine 
torque of the enveloping modes.
MZ = engine torque of the selected control point Z.
nZ = engine speed of the selected control point Z.

    (iii) Figure 2 follows:

[[Page 59961]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.007

    (3) Comparing calculated and interpolated emission values. The 
measured brake specific gaseous emissions of the control point Z 
(XZ) must be less than or equal to the interpolated value 
(EZ).
    (h) Test fuel specifications. The test fuel used for supplemental 
steady-state testing under this section must meet the requirements of 
Sec. 86.1313.
    (i) General requirements. Ambient conditions, charge cooling 
specifications, and intake and exhaust restrictions for supplemental 
steady-state testing and maximum allowable emission limit testing under 
this section must meet the requirements of Sec. 86.1330.

    42. A new Sec. 86.1370-2007 is added to subpart N, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1370-2007  Not-To-Exceed test procedures.

    (a) General. The purpose of this test procedure is to measure in-
use emissions of heavy-duty diesel engines while operating within a 
broad range of speed and load points (the Not-To-Exceed Control Area) 
and under conditions which can reasonably be expected to be encountered 
in normal vehicle operation and use. Emission results from this test 
procedure are to be compared to the Not-To-Exceed Limits specified in 
Sec. 86.007-11(a)(4).
    (b) Not-to-exceed control area for diesel heavy-duty engines. The 
Not-To-Exceed Control Area for diesel heavy-duty engines consists of 
the following engine speed and load points:
    (1) All operating speeds greater than the speed calculated using 
the following formula, where nhi and nlo are 
determined according to the provisions in Sec. 86.1360(c):

nlo+0.15 x (nhi-nlo)

    (2) All engine load points greater than or equal to 30% or more of 
the maximum torque value produced by the engine.
    (3) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) 
of this section, all operating speed and load points with brake 
specific fuel consumption (BSFC) values within 5% of the minimum BSFC 
value of the engine. For the purposes of this requirement, BFSC must be 
calculated under the general test cell conditions specified in 
Sec. 86.1330. The manufacturer may petition the Administrator at 
certification to exclude such points if the manufacturer can 
demonstrate that the engine is not expected to operate at such points 
in normal vehicle operation and use. Engines equipped with drivelines 
with multi-speed manual transmissions or automatic transmissions with a 
finite number of gears are not subject to the requirements of this 
paragraph (b)(3).
    (4) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (b)(1) through 
(b)(3) of this section, speed and load points below 30% of the maximum 
power value produced by the engine shall be excluded from the Not-To-
Exceed Control Area for all emissions.
    (5) For particulate matter only, speed and load points determined 
by one of the following methods, whichever is applicable, shall be 
excluded from the Not-To-Exceed Control Area. B and C engine speeds 
shall be determined according to the provisions of Sec. 86.1360 (c):
    (i) If the C speed is below 2400 rpm, the speed and load points to 
the right of or below the line formed by connecting the following two 
points:
    (A) 30% of maximum torque or 30% of maximum power, whichever is 
greater, at the B speed;
    (B) 70% of maximum power at 100% speed (nhi);
    (ii) If the C speed is above 2400 rpm, the speed and load points to 
the right of the line formed by connecting the two points in paragraphs 
(b)(5)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section and below the line formed by 
connecting the two points in paragraphs (b)(5)(ii)(B) and (C) of this 
section:
    (A) 30% of maximum torque or 30% of maximum power, whichever is 
greater, at the B speed;
    (B) 50% of maximum power at 2400 rpm;
    (C) 70% of maximum power at 100% speed (nhi).
    (6) For natural gas and other non-diesel fueled diesel cycle 
engines, the manufacturer may petition the

[[Page 59962]]

Administrator at certification to exclude operating points from the 
Not-to-Exceed Control Area defined in Sec. 86.1370(b)(1) through (5) if 
the manufacturer can demonstrate that the engine is not expected to 
operate at such points in normal vehicle operation and use.
    (c) [Reserved]
    (d) Not-to-exceed control area limits. (1) When operated within the 
Not-To-Exceed Control Area defined in paragraph (b) of this section, 
diesel engine emissions shall not exceed the applicable Not-To-Exceed 
Limits specified in Sec. 86.007-11(a)(4) when averaged over any period 
of time greater than or equal to 30 seconds.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (e) Ambient corrections. The measured data shall be corrected based 
on the ambient conditions under which it was taken, as specified in 
this section.
    (1) For engines operating within the ambient conditions specified 
in Sec. 86.007-11(a)(4)(ii)(a):
    (i) NOX emissions shall be corrected for ambient air 
humidity to a standard humidity level of 50 grains (7.14 g/kg) if the 
humidity of the intake air was below 50 grains, or to 75 grains (10.71 
g/kg) if above 75 grains.
    (ii) NOX and PM emissions shall be corrected for ambient 
air temperature to a temperature of 55 degrees F (12.8 degrees C) for 
ambient air temperatures below 55 degrees F or to 95 degrees F (35.0 
degrees C) if the ambient air temperature is above 95 degrees F.
    (iii) No ambient air temperature or humidity correction factors 
shall be used within the ranges of 50-75 grains or 55-95 degrees F.
    (iv) Where test conditions require such correction factors, the 
manufacturer must use good engineering judgement and generally accepted 
engineering practice to determine the appropriate correction factors, 
subject to EPA review.
    (2) For engines operating within the ambient conditions specified 
in Sec. 86.007-11(a)(4)(ii)(b):
    (i) NOX emissions shall be corrected for ambient air 
humidity to a standard humidity level of 50 grains (7.14 g/kg) if the 
humidity of the intake air was below 50 grains, or to 75 grains (10.71 
g/kg) if above 75 grains.
    (ii) NOX and PM emissions shall be corrected for ambient 
air temperature to a temperature of 55 degrees F (12.8 degrees C) for 
ambient air temperatures below 55 degrees F.
    (iii) No ambient air temperature or humidity correction factors 
shall be used within the ranges of 50-75 grains or for temperatures 
greater than or equal to 55 degrees F.
    (iv) Where test conditions require such correction factors, the 
manufacturer must use good engineering judgement and generally accepted 
engineering practice to determine the appropriate correction factors, 
subject to EPA review.
    (f) NTE cold temperature operating exclusion. Engines equipped with 
exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) whose operation within the NTE control 
area specified in Sec. 86.1370(b) when operating during cold 
temperature conditions as specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this section 
are not subject to the NTE emission limits during the specified cold 
temperature operation conditions.
    (1) Cold temperature operation is defined as engine operating 
conditions meeting either of the following two criteria:
    (i) Intake manifold temperature (IMT) less than or equal to the 
temperature defined by the following relationship between IMT and 
absolute intake manifold pressure (IMP) for the corresponding IMP:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.009


Where:

P = absolute intake manifold pressure in bars.
IMT = intake manifold temperature in degrees Fahrenheit.

    (ii) Engine coolant temperature (ECT) less than or equal to the 
temperature defined by the following relationship between ECT and 
absolute intake manifold pressure (IMP) for the corresponding IMP:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06OC00.010


Where:

P = absolute intake manifold pressure in bars.
ECT = engine coolant temperature in degrees Fahrenheit.

    (2) [Reserved]

    43. A new Sec. 86.1372-2007 is added to subpart N, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1372-2007  Measuring smoke emissions within the NTE zone.

    This section contains the measurement techniques to be used for 
determining compliance with the filter smoke limit or opacity limits in 
Sec. 86.007-11(b)(1)(iv).
    (a) For steady-state or transient smoke testing using full-flow 
opacimeters, equipment meeting the requirements of subpart I of this 
part or ISO/DIS-11614 ``Reciprocating internal combustion compression-
ignition engines--Apparatus for measurement of the opacity and for 
determination of the light absorption coefficient of exhaust gas'' is 
required. This document is incorporated by reference (see Sec. 86.1).
    (1) All full-flow opacimeter measurements shall be reported as the 
equivalent percent opacity for a five inch effective optical path 
length using the Beer-Lambert relationship.
    (2) Zero and full-scale (100 percent opacity) span shall be 
adjusted prior to testing.
    (3) Post test zero and full scale span checks shall be performed. 
For valid tests, zero and span drift between the pre-test and post-test 
checks shall be less than two percent of full-scale.
    (4) Opacimeter calibration and linearity checks shall be performed 
using manufacturer's recommendations or good engineering practice.
    (b) For steady-state testing using a filter-type smokemeter, 
equipment meeting the requirements of ISO/FDIS-10054 ``Internal 
combustion compression-ignition engines--Measurement apparatus for 
smoke from engines operating under steady-state conditions--Filter-type 
smokemeter'' is recommended. Other equipment may be used provided it is 
approved in advance by the Administrator.
    (1) All filter-type smokemeter results shall be reported as a 
filter smoke number (FSN) that is similar to the Bosch smoke number 
(BSN) scale.
    (2) Filter-type smokemeters shall be calibrated every 90 days using 
manufacturer's recommended practices or good engineering practice.
    (c) For steady-state testing using a partial-flow opacimeter, 
equipment meeting the requirements of ISO-8178-3 and ISO/DIS-11614 is 
recommended. Other equipment may be used provided it is approved in 
advance by the Administrator.
    (1) All partial-flow opacimeter measurements shall be reported as 
the equivalent percent opacity for a five inch effective optical path 
length using the Beer-Lambert relationship.
    (2) Zero and full scale (100 percent opacity) span shall be 
adjusted prior to testing.
    (3) Post-test zero and full scale span checks shall be performed. 
For valid tests, zero and span drift between the pre-test and post-test 
checks shall be less than two percent of full scale.
    (4) Opacimeter calibration and linearity checks shall be performed 
using manufacturer's recommendations or good engineering practice.
    (d) Replicate smoke tests may be run to improve confidence in a 
single test or stabilization. If replicate tests are run, three 
additional tests which confirm to this section shall be run, and the 
final reported test results must be the average of all the valid tests.

[[Page 59963]]

    (e) A minimum of thirty seconds sampling time shall be used for 
average transient smoke measurements. The opacity values used for this 
averaging must be collected at a minimum rate of 1 data point per 
second, and all data points used in the averaging must be equally 
spaced in time.

    44. A new Sec. 86.1380-2004 is added to subpart N, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1380-2004  Load response test.

    (a) General. This section applies to 2004 through 2007 model year 
heavy-duty diesel engines. The purpose of this test procedure is to 
measure the brake-specific gaseous and particulate emissions from a 
heavy-duty diesel engine as it is suddenly loaded, with its fueling 
lever, at a given engine operating speed. The results of this test 
procedure are not compared to emission standards, and this test is not 
considered part of the Federal Test Procedure. This procedure shall be 
conducted on a dynamometer.
    (b) Test conditions and equipment. All laboratory conditions, 
laboratory equipment, engine set-up procedures, test fuel, and testing 
conditions specified in this subpart for transient testing shall apply 
to the Load Response Test where applicable.
    (c) Test sequence. (1) The test has 5 separate measurement 
segments, each identified by a specific engine speed. At each of the 
following speeds, beginning with the lowest torque point at that engine 
speed within the NTE control area for NMHC+NOX, the engine 
fuel control shall be moved suddenly to the full fuel position and held 
at that point for four seconds, while the specified speed is maintained 
constant within the tolerances of the test facility. After the four 
second full fuel position, the load should be immediately brought back 
to the minimum NTE control area load for the specified engine speed for 
a period of 6 seconds. Prior to the beginning of each measurement 
segment, the engine shall be warmed up at the supplemental steady-state 
Mode 4 conditions (75% engine load, Speed B as specified in 
Sec. 86.1360) until engine oil temperature has stabilized.
    (i) Speed A as determined in Sec. 86.1360(c);
    (ii) Speed B as determined in Sec. 86.1360(c);
    (iii) Speed C as determined in Sec. 86.1360(c);
    (iv) Speed D as determined in Sec. 86.1360(c);
    (v) Speed E as determined in Sec. 86.1360(c).
    (2) The test sequence at each engine speed may be repeated, without 
pause between repeats, if it is necessary to obtain sufficient 
particulate matter sample amount for analysis.
    (3) The exhaust emissions sample shall be analyzed using the 
applicable procedures under Sec. 86.1340, and the exhaust emission 
shall be calculated using the applicable procedures under Sec. 86.1342, 
for each measurement segment. Sampling rates for engine speed, engine 
load, and gaseous emissions shall performed a minium rate of 10 Hz. 
Emissions for all regulated pollutants must be calculated and reported 
for each test speed condition in terms of g/bhp-hr.
    (4) Data must be collected beginning with the start of the 
transition from the minimum NTE control area load to the full fuel 
position. Data must be collected until the end of the (final if 
repeated) 6 second operational period at the minimum NTE control area 
load described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. Good engineering 
practice must be used to ensure that the sampling time is properly 
aligned with the engine operation.

Subpart P--[Amended]

    45. Section 86.1501-94 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1501-94  Scope; applicability.

    (a) This subpart contains gaseous emission idle test procedures for 
light-duty trucks and heavy-duty engines for which idle CO standards 
apply. It applies to 1994 and later model years. The idle test 
procedures are optionally applicable to 1994 through 1996 model year 
natural gas-fueled and liquified petroleum gas-fueled light-duty trucks 
and heavy-duty engines.
    (b) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty trucks 
and Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty vehicles under the provisions of 
subpart S of this part.

Subpart Q--[Amended]

    46. Section 86.1601 is amended by revising paragraph (d), to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.1601  General applicability.

* * * * *
    (d) References in this subpart to engine families and emission 
control systems shall be deemed to apply to durability groups and test 
groups as applicable for manufacturers certifying new light-duty 
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty 
vehicles under the provisions of subpart S of this part.

    47. Subpart S is amended by revising the subpart heading to read as 
follows:

Subpart S--General Compliance Provisions for Control of Air 
Pollution From New and In-Use Light-Duty Vehicles, Light-Duty 
Trucks, and Complete Otto-Cycle Heavy-Duty Vehicles

    47. Section 86.1801-01 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), 
(c), the last sentence of paragraph (d), and paragraph (h), to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1801-01  Applicability.

    (a) Applicability. Except as otherwise indicated, the provisions of 
this subpart apply to new 2001 and later model year Otto-cycle and 
diesel cycle light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, medium-duty 
passenger vehicles, and 2005 and later model year Otto-cycle complete 
heavy-duty vehicles (2003 or 2004 model year for manufacturers choosing 
Otto-cycle HDE option 1 or 2, respectively, in Sec. 86.005-1(c)) 
including multi-fueled, alternative fueled, hybrid electric, and zero 
emission vehicles. These provisions also apply to 2001 model year and 
later new incomplete light-duty trucks below 8,500 Gross Vehicle Weight 
Rating, and to 2001 and later model year Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty 
vehicles participating in the provisions of the averaging, trading, and 
banking program under the provisions of Sec. 86.1817-05(n). In cases 
where a provision applies only to a certain vehicle group based on its 
model year, vehicle class, motor fuel, engine type, or other 
distinguishing characteristics, the limited applicability is cited in 
the appropriate section of this subpart.
    (b) Aftermarket conversions. The provisions of this subpart apply 
to aftermarket conversions of all model year Otto-cycle and diesel-
cycle light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and complete Otto-cycle 
heavy-duty vehicles as defined in 40 CFR 85.502.
    (c) Optional applicability. (1) A manufacturer may request to 
certify any Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicle of 14,000 pounds Gross 
Vehicle Weight Rating or less in accordance with the light-duty truck 
provisions through the 2004 model year (2002 model year for 
manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle HDE option 1 in Sec. 86.005-1(c) or 
2003 model year for manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle HDE option 2 in 
Sec. 86.005-1(c)). Heavy-duty engine or heavy-duty vehicle provisions 
of subpart A of this part do not apply to such a vehicle. A 2004 model 
year heavy-duty vehicle optionally certified as a light-duty truck 
under this provision must comply with all provisions applicable to 
MDPVs

[[Page 59964]]

including exhaust and evaporative emission standards, test procedures, 
on-board diagnostics, refueling standards, phase-in requirements and 
fleet average standards under 40 CFR part 85 and this part.
    (2) Beginning with the 2001 model year, a manufacturer may request 
to certify any incomplete Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicle of 14,000 
pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating or less in accordance with the 
provisions for complete heavy-duty vehicles. Heavy-duty engine or 
heavy-duty vehicle provisions of subpart A of this part do not apply to 
such a vehicle.
    (3) A manufacturer may optionally use the provisions of this 
subpart in lieu of the provisions of subpart A beginning with the 2000 
model year for light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. Manufacturers 
choosing this option must comply with all provisions of this subpart. 
Manufacturers may elect this provision for either all or a portion of 
their product line.
    (4) Upon preapproval by the Administrator, a manufacturer may 
optionally certify an aftermarket conversion of a complete heavy-duty 
vehicle greater than 10,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating and of 
14,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating or less under the heavy-duty 
engine or heavy-duty vehicle provisions of subpart A of this part. Such 
preapproval will be granted only upon demonstration that chassis-based 
certification would be infeasible or unreasonable for the manufacturer 
to perform.
    (5) A manufacturer may optionally certify an aftermarket conversion 
of a complete heavy-duty vehicle greater than 10,000 pounds Gross 
Vehicle Weight Rating and of 14,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating 
or less under the heavy-duty engine or heavy-duty vehicle provisions of 
subpart A of this part without advance approval from the Administrator 
if the vehicle was originally certified to the heavy-duty engine or 
heavy-duty vehicle provisions of subpart A of this part.
    (d) * * * The small volume manufacturer's light-duty vehicle, 
light-duty truck and complete heavy-duty vehicle certification 
procedures are described in Sec. 86.1838-01.
* * * * *
    (h) Applicability of provisions of this subpart to LDVs, LDTs, 
MDPVs and HDVs. Numerous sections in this subpart provide requirements 
or procedures applicable to a ``vehicle'' or ``vehicles.'' Unless 
otherwise specified or otherwise determined by the Administrator, the 
term ``vehicle'' or ``vehicles'' in those provisions apply equally to 
LDVs, LDTs, MDPVs and HDVs.

    48. Section 86.1803-01 is amended by revising the definitions for 
``Car line,'' ``Curb-idle,'' ``Durability useful life,'' and ``Van,'' 
and by adding new definitions in alphabetical order, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1803-01  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Averaging for chassis-bases heavy-duty vehicles means the exchange 
of NOX emission credits among test groups within a given 
manufacturer's product line.
    Averaging set means a subcategory of complete heavy-duty vehicles 
within which test groups can average and trade emission credits with 
one another.
* * * * *
    Banking means the retention of NOX emission credits for 
complete heavy-duty vehicles by the manufacturer generating the 
emission credits, for use in future model year certification programs 
as permitted by regulation.
* * * * *
    Car line means a name denoting a group of vehicles within a make or 
car division which has a degree of commonality in construction (e.g., 
body, chassis). Car line does not consider any level of decor or 
opulence and is not generally distinguished by characteristics as 
roofline, number of doors, seats, or windows except for station wagons 
or light-duty trucks. Station wagons, light-duty trucks, and complete 
heavy-duty vehicles are considered to be different car lines than 
passenger cars.
* * * * *
    Complete heavy-duty vehicle means any Otto-cycle heavy-duty vehicle 
of 14,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating or less that has the 
primary load carrying device or container attached at the time the 
vehicle leaves the control of the manufacturer of the engine.
* * * * *
    Curb-idle means, for manual transmission code motor vehicles, the 
engine speed with the transmission in neutral or with the clutch 
disengaged and with the air conditioning system, if present, turned 
off. For automatic transmission code motor vehicles, curb-idle means 
the engine speed with the automatic transmission in the park position 
(or neutral position if there is no park position), and with the air 
conditioning system, if present, turned off.
* * * * *
    Durability useful life means the highest useful life mileage out of 
the set of all useful life mileages that apply to a given vehicle. The 
durability useful life determines the duration of service accumulation 
on a durability data vehicle. The determination of durability useful 
life shall reflect any light-duty truck or complete heavy-duty vehicle 
alternative useful life periods approved by the Administrator under 
Sec. 86.1805-01(c). The determination of durability useful life shall 
exclude any standard and related useful life mileage for which the 
manufacturer has obtained a waiver of emission data submission 
requirements under Sec. 86.1829-01.
* * * * *
    Emission credits mean the amount of emission reductions or 
exceedances, by a complete heavy-duty vehicle test group, below or 
above the emission standard, respectively. Emission credits below the 
standard are considered as ``positive credits,'' while emission credits 
above the standard are considered as ``negative credits.'' In addition, 
``projected credits'' refer to emission credits based on the projected 
U.S. production volume of the test group. ``Reserved credits'' are 
emission credits generated within a model year waiting to be reported 
to EPA at the end of the model year. ``Actual credits'' refer to 
emission credits based on actual U.S. production volumes as contained 
in the end-of-year reports submitted to EPA. Some or all of these 
credits may be revoked if EPA review of the end of year reports or any 
subsequent audit actions uncover problems or errors.
* * * * *
    Family emission limit (FEL) means an emission level declared by the 
manufacturer which serves in lieu of an emission standard for 
certification purposes in the averaging, trading and banking program. 
FELs must be expressed to the same number of decimal places as the 
applicable emission standard.
* * * * *
    Incomplete heavy-duty vehicle means any heavy-duty vehicle which 
does not have the primary load carrying device or container attached.
* * * * *
    Trading means the exchange of complete heavy-duty vehicle 
NOX emission credits between manufacturers.
* * * * *
    Van means a light-duty truck or complete heavy-duty vehicle having 
an integral enclosure, fully enclosing the driver compartment and load 
carrying device, and having no body sections protruding more than 30 
inches ahead of the leading edge of the windshield.
* * * * *

[[Page 59965]]


    49. Section 86.1804-01 is amended by adding ``FEL'' and ``HDV'' as 
new abbreviations in alphabetical order, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1804-01  Acronyms and abbreviations.

* * * * *
FEL--Family Emission Limit.
* * * * *
HDV--Heavy-duty vehicle.
* * * * *

    50. Section 86.1805-01 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (a).
    b. Adding paragraph (b)(3).
    c. Revising the first and last sentences of paragraph (c).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec. 86.1805-01  Useful life.

    (a) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, intermediate 
useful life is a period of use of 5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever 
occurs first.
    (b) * * *
    (3) For complete heavy-duty vehicles, the full useful life is a 
period of use of 11 years or 120,000 miles, which ever occurs first.
    (c) Manufacturers may petition the Administrator to provide 
alternative useful life periods for light-duty trucks or complete 
heavy-duty vehicles when they believe that the useful life periods are 
significantly unrepresentative for one or more test groups (either too 
long or too short). * * * For light-duty trucks, alternative useful 
life periods will be granted only for THC, THCE, and idle CO 
requirements.

    51. Section 86.1805-04 is amended by revising paragraph (a), to 
read as follows:


Sec. 86.1805-04  Useful life.

    (a) Except as required under paragraph (b) of this section or 
permitted under paragraphs (d), (e) and (f) of this section, the full 
useful life for all LDVs, LDT1s and LDT2s is a period of use of 10 
years or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs first. For all HLDTs, MDPVs, 
and complete heavy-duty vehicles full useful life is a period of 11 
years or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs first. This full useful life 
applies to all exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission requirements 
except for standards which are specified to only be applicable at the 
time of certification.
* * * * *

    52. A new Sec. 86.1806-05 is added to subpart S, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1806-05  On-board diagnostics.

    (a) General. (1) Except as provided by paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section, all light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks and complete heavy-
duty vehicles weighing 14,000 pounds GVWR or less (including MDPVs) 
must be equipped with an onboard diagnostic (OBD) system capable of 
monitoring all emission-related powertrain systems or components during 
the applicable useful life of the vehicle. All systems and components 
required to be monitored by these regulations must be evaluated 
periodically, but no less frequently than once per applicable 
certification test cycle as defined in paragraphs (a) and (d) of 
Appendix I of this part, or similar trip as approved by the 
Administrator.
    (2) Diesel fueled MDPVs and heavy-duty vehicles weighing 14,000 
pounds GVWR or less that are not MDPVs must meet the OBD requirements 
of this section according to the phase-in schedule in paragraph (l) of 
this section. Paragraph (l) of this section does not apply to Otto-
cycle MDPVs.
    (3) An OBD system demonstrated to fully meet the requirements in 
Sec. 86.004-17 may be used to meet the requirements of this section, 
provided that such an OBD system also incorporates appropriate 
transmission diagnostics as may be required under this section, and 
provided that the Administrator finds that a manufacturer's decision to 
use the flexibility in this paragraph (a)(3) is based on good 
engineering judgement.
    (b) Malfunction descriptions. The OBD system must detect and 
identify malfunctions in all monitored emission-related powertrain 
systems or components according to the following malfunction 
definitions as measured and calculated in accordance with test 
procedures set forth in subpart B of this part (chassis-based test 
procedures), excluding those test procedures defined as 
``Supplemental'' test procedures in Sec. 86.004-2 and codified in 
Secs. 86.158, 86.159, and 86.160.
    (1) Catalysts and particulate traps. (i) Otto-cycle. Catalyst 
deterioration or malfunction before it results in an increase in NMHC 
emissions 1.5 times the NMHC+NOX standard or FEL, as 
compared to the NMHC+NOX emission level measured using a 
representative 4000 mile catalyst system.
    (ii) Diesel. (A) If equipped, catalyst deterioration or malfunction 
before it results in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the 
applicable standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX or PM. This 
requirement applies only to reduction catalysts; monitoring of 
oxidation catalysts is not required. This monitoring need not be done 
if the manufacturer can demonstrate that deterioration or malfunction 
of the system will not result in exceedance of the threshold.
    (B) If equipped with a particulate trap, catastrophic failure of 
the device must be detected. Any particulate trap whose complete 
failure results in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable 
standard or FEL for NMHC+NOX or PM must be monitored. This 
monitoring need not be done if the manufacturer can demonstrate that a 
catastrophic failure of the system will not result in exceedance of the 
threshold.
    (2) Engine misfire. (i) Otto-cycle. Engine misfire resulting in 
exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable standard or FEL 
for NMHC, CO or NOX; and any misfire capable of damaging the 
catalytic converter.
    (ii) Diesel. Lack of cylinder combustion must be detected.
    (3) Oxygen sensors. If equipped, oxygen sensor deterioration or 
malfunction resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the 
applicable standard or FEL for NMHC, CO or NOX.
    (4) Evaporative leaks. If equipped, any vapor leak in the 
evaporative and/or refueling system (excluding the tubing and 
connections between the purge valve and the intake manifold) greater 
than or equal in magnitude to a leak caused by a 0.040 inch diameter 
orifice; an absence of evaporative purge air flow from the complete 
evaporative emission control system. On vehicles with fuel tank 
capacity greater than 25 gallons, the Administrator may, following a 
request from the manufacturer, revise the size of the orifice to the 
smallest orifice feasible, based on test data, if the most reliable 
monitoring method available cannot reliably detect a system leak equal 
to a 0.040 inch diameter orifice.
    (5) Other emission control systems. Any deterioration or 
malfunction occurring in a powertrain system or component directly 
intended to control emissions, including but not necessarily limited 
to, the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system, if equipped, the 
secondary air system, if equipped, and the fuel control system, 
singularly resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the 
applicable emission standard or FEL for NMHC, CO, NOX, or 
diesel PM. For vehicles equipped with a secondary air system, a 
functional check, as described in paragraph (b)(6) of this section, may 
satisfy the requirements of this paragraph provided the manufacturer 
can demonstrate that deterioration of the flow distribution system is 
unlikely. This demonstration is subject to Administrator approval and, 
if the

[[Page 59966]]

demonstration and associated functional check are approved, the 
diagnostic system must indicate a malfunction when some degree of 
secondary airflow is not detectable in the exhaust system during the 
check. For vehicles equipped with positive crankcase ventilation (PCV), 
monitoring of the PCV system is not necessary provided the manufacturer 
can demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that the PCV system 
is unlikely to fail.
    (6) Other emission-related powertrain components. Any other 
deterioration or malfunction occurring in an electronic emission-
related powertrain system or component not otherwise described in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(5) of this section that either provides 
input to or receives commands from the on-board computer and has a 
measurable impact on emissions; monitoring of components required by 
this paragraph (b)(6) must be satisfied by employing electrical circuit 
continuity checks and rationality checks for computer input components 
(input values within manufacturer specified ranges based on other 
available operating parameters), and functionality checks for computer 
output components (proper functional response to computer commands) 
except that the Administrator may waive such a rationality or 
functionality check where the manufacturer has demonstrated 
infeasibility. Malfunctions are defined as a failure of the system or 
component to meet the electrical circuit continuity checks or the 
rationality or functionality checks.
    (7) Performance of OBD functions. Oxygen sensor or any other 
component deterioration or malfunction which renders that sensor or 
component incapable of performing its function as part of the OBD 
system must be detected and identified on vehicles so equipped.
    (8) Hybrid electric vehicles. For Tier 2 and interim non-Tier 2 
hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) only. Unless added to HEVs in 
compliance with other requirements of this section, or unless otherwise 
approved by the Administrator:
    (i) The manufacturer must equip each HEV with a maintenance 
indicator consisting of a light that must activate automatically by 
illuminating the first time the minimum performance level is observed 
for each battery system component. Possible battery system components 
requiring monitoring are: battery water level, temperature control, 
pressure control, and other parameters critical for determining battery 
condition.
    (ii) The manufacturer must equip ``off-vehicle charge capable 
HEVs'' with a useful life indicator for the battery system consisting 
of a light that must illuminate the first time the battery system is 
unable to achieve an all-electric operating range (starting from a full 
state-of-charge) which is at least 75 percent of the range determined 
for the vehicle in the Urban Driving Schedule portion of the All-
Electric Range Test (see the California Exhaust Emission Standards and 
Test Procedures for 2003 and Subsequent Model Zero-Emission Vehicles, 
and 2001 and Subsequent Model Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the 
Passenger Car, Light-Duty Truck and Medium-Duty Vehicle Classes. These 
requirements are incorporated by reference (see Sec. 86.1).
    (iii) The manufacturer must equip each HEV with a separate odometer 
or other device subject to the approval of the Administrator that can 
accurately measure the mileage accumulation on the engines used in 
these vehicles.
    (c) Malfunction indicator light (MIL). The OBD system must 
incorporate a malfunction indicator light (MIL) readily visible to the 
vehicle operator. When illuminated, the MIL must display ``Check 
Engine,'' ``Service Engine Soon,'' a universally recognizable engine 
symbol, or a similar phrase or symbol approved by the Administrator. A 
vehicle should not be equipped with more than one general purpose 
malfunction indicator light for emission-related problems; separate 
specific purpose warning lights (e.g. brake system, fasten seat belt, 
oil pressure, etc.) are permitted. The use of red for the OBD-related 
malfunction indicator light is prohibited.
    (d) MIL illumination. (1) The MIL must illuminate and remain 
illuminated when any of the conditions specified in paragraph (b) of 
this section are detected and verified, or whenever the engine control 
enters a default or secondary mode of operation considered abnormal for 
the given engine operating conditions. The MIL must blink once per 
second under any period of operation during which engine misfire is 
occurring and catalyst damage is imminent. If such misfire is detected 
again during the following driving cycle (i.e., operation consisting 
of, at a minimum, engine start-up and engine shut-off) or the next 
driving cycle in which similar conditions are encountered, the MIL must 
maintain a steady illumination when the misfire is not occurring and 
then remain illuminated until the MIL extinguishing criteria of this 
section are satisfied. The MIL must also illuminate when the vehicle's 
ignition is in the ``key-on'' position before engine starting or 
cranking and extinguish after engine starting if no malfunction has 
previously been detected. If a fuel system or engine misfire 
malfunction has previously been detected, the MIL may be extinguished 
if the malfunction does not reoccur during three subsequent sequential 
trips during which similar conditions are encountered and no new 
malfunctions have been detected. Similar conditions are defined as 
engine speed within 375 rpm, engine load within 20 percent, and engine 
warm-up status equivalent to that under which the malfunction was first 
detected. If any malfunction other than a fuel system or engine misfire 
malfunction has been detected, the MIL may be extinguished if the 
malfunction does not reoccur during three subsequent sequential trips 
during which the monitoring system responsible for illuminating the MIL 
functions without detecting the malfunction, and no new malfunctions 
have been detected. Upon Administrator approval, statistical MIL 
illumination protocols may be employed, provided they result in 
comparable timeliness in detecting a malfunction and evaluating system 
performance, i.e., three to six driving cycles would be considered 
acceptable.
    (2)(i) For interim non-Tier 2 and Tier 2 LDV/LLDTs and HLDT/MDPVs, 
vehicles produced through the 2007 model year, upon a manufacturer's 
written request, EPA will consider allowing the use of an on-board 
diagnostic system during the certification process, that functions 
properly on low-sulfur gasoline, but indicates sulfur-induced passes 
when exposed to high sulfur gasoline.
    (ii) For interim non-Tier 2 and Tier 2 LDV/LLDTs and HLDT/MDPVs, if 
vehicles produced through the 2007 model year exhibit illuminations of 
the emission control diagnostic system malfunction indicator light due 
to high sulfur gasoline, EPA will consider, upon a manufacturer's 
written request, allowing modifications to such vehicles on a case-by-
case basis so as to eliminate the sulfur induced illumination.
    (e) Storing of computer codes. The OBD system shall record and 
store in computer memory diagnostic trouble codes and diagnostic 
readiness codes indicating the status of the emission control system. 
These codes shall be available through the standardized data link 
connector per specifications as referenced in paragraph (h) of this 
section.
    (1) A diagnostic trouble code must be stored for any detected and 
verified malfunction causing MIL illumination. The stored diagnostic 
trouble code must identify the malfunctioning system or

[[Page 59967]]

component as uniquely as possible. At the manufacturer's discretion, a 
diagnostic trouble code may be stored for conditions not causing MIL 
illumination. Regardless, a separate code should be stored indicating 
the expected MIL illumination status (i.e., MIL commanded ``ON,'' MIL 
commanded ``OFF'').
    (2) For a single misfiring cylinder, the diagnostic trouble code(s) 
must uniquely identify the cylinder, unless the manufacturer submits 
data and/or engineering evaluations which adequately demonstrate that 
the misfiring cylinder cannot be reliably identified under certain 
operating conditions. For diesel vehicles only, the specific cylinder 
for which combustion cannot be detected need not be identified if new 
hardware would be required to do so. The diagnostic trouble code must 
identify multiple misfiring cylinder conditions; under multiple misfire 
conditions, the misfiring cylinders need not be uniquely identified if 
a distinct multiple misfire diagnostic trouble code is stored.
    (3) The diagnostic system may erase a diagnostic trouble code if 
the same code is not re-registered in at least 40 engine warm-up 
cycles, and the malfunction indicator light is not illuminated for that 
code.
    (4) Separate status codes, or readiness codes, must be stored in 
computer memory to identify correctly functioning emission control 
systems and those emission control systems which require further 
vehicle operation to complete proper diagnostic evaluation. A readiness 
code need not be stored for those monitors that can be considered 
continuously operating monitors (e.g., misfire monitor, fuel system 
monitor, etc.). Readiness codes should never be set to ``not ready'' 
status upon key-on or key-off; intentional setting of readiness codes 
to ``not ready'' status via service procedures must apply to all such 
codes, rather than applying to individual codes. Subject to 
Administrator approval, if monitoring is disabled for a multiple number 
of driving cycles (i.e., more than one) due to the continued presence 
of extreme operating conditions (e.g., ambient temperatures below 40 
deg.F, or altitudes above 8000 feet), readiness for the subject 
monitoring system may be set to ``ready'' status without monitoring 
having been completed. Administrator approval shall be based on the 
conditions for monitoring system disablement, and the number of driving 
cycles specified without completion of monitoring before readiness is 
indicated.
    (f) Available diagnostic data. (1) Upon determination of the first 
malfunction of any component or system, ``freeze frame'' engine 
conditions present at the time must be stored in computer memory. 
Should a subsequent fuel system or misfire malfunction occur, any 
previously stored freeze frame conditions must be replaced by the fuel 
system or misfire conditions (whichever occurs first). Stored engine 
conditions must include, but are not limited to: engine speed, open or 
closed loop operation, fuel system commands, coolant temperature, 
calculated load value, fuel pressure, vehicle speed, air flow rate, and 
intake manifold pressure if the information needed to determine these 
conditions is available to the computer. For freeze frame storage, the 
manufacturer must include the most appropriate set of conditions to 
facilitate effective repairs. If the diagnostic trouble code causing 
the conditions to be stored is erased in accordance with paragraph (d) 
of this section, the stored engine conditions may also be erased.
    (2) The following data in addition to the required freeze frame 
information must be made available on demand through the serial port on 
the standardized data link connector, if the information is available 
to the on-board computer or can be determined using information 
available to the on-board computer: Diagnostic trouble codes, engine 
coolant temperature, fuel control system status (closed loop, open 
loop, other), fuel trim, ignition timing advance, intake air 
temperature, manifold air pressure, air flow rate, engine RPM, throttle 
position sensor output value, secondary air status (upstream, 
downstream, or atmosphere), calculated load value, vehicle speed, and 
fuel pressure. The signals must be provided in standard units based on 
SAE specifications incorporated by reference in paragraph (h) of this 
section. Actual signals must be clearly identified separately from 
default value or limp home signals.
    (3) For all OBD systems for which specific on-board evaluation 
tests are conducted (catalyst, oxygen sensor, etc.), the results of the 
most recent test performed by the vehicle, and the limits to which the 
system is compared must be available through the standardized data link 
connector per the appropriate standardized specifications as referenced 
in paragraph (h) of this section.
    (4) Access to the data required to be made available under this 
section shall be unrestricted and shall not require any access codes or 
devices that are only available from the manufacturer.
    (g) Exceptions. The OBD system is not required to evaluate systems 
or components during malfunction conditions if such evaluation would 
result in a risk to safety or failure of systems or components. 
Additionally, the OBD system is not required to evaluate systems or 
components during operation of a power take-off unit such as a dump 
bed, snow plow blade, or aerial bucket, etc.
    (h) Reference materials. The OBD system shall provide for 
standardized access and conform with the following Society of 
Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards and/or the following International 
Standards Organization (ISO) standards. The following documents are 
incorporated by reference (see Sec. 86.1):
    (1) SAE material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from 
the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, 
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001.
    (i) SAE J1850 ``Class B Data Communication Network Interface,'' 
(July 1995) shall be used as the on-board to off-board communications 
protocol. All emission related messages sent to the scan tool over a 
J1850 data link shall use the Cyclic Redundancy Check and the three 
byte header, and shall not use inter-byte separation or checksums.
    (ii) Basic diagnostic data (as specified in Secs. 86.094-17(e) and 
(f)) shall be provided in the format and units in SAE J1979 ``E/E 
Diagnostic Test Modes,''(July 1996).
    (iii) Diagnostic trouble codes shall be consistent with SAE J2012 
``Recommended Practices for Diagnostic Trouble Code Definitions,'' 
(July 1996).
    (iv) The connection interface between the OBD system and test 
equipment and diagnostic tools shall meet the functional requirements 
of SAE J1962 ``Diagnostic Connector,'' (January 1995).
    (v) As an alternative to the above standards, heavy-duty vehicles 
may conform to the specifications of the SAE J1939 series of standards 
(SAE J1939-11, J1939-13, J1939-21, J1939-31, J1939-71, J1939-73, J1939-
81).
    (2) ISO materials. Copies of these materials may be obtained from 
the International Organization for Standardization, Case Postale 56, 
CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland.
    (i) ISO 9141-2 ``Road vehicles--Diagnostic systems--Part 2: CARB 
requirements for interchange of digital information,'' (February 1994) 
may be used as an alternative to SAE J1850 as the on-board to off-board 
communications protocol.
    (ii) ISO 14230-4 ``Road vehicles--Diagnostic systems--Keyword 
Protocol 2000--Part 4: Requirements for

[[Page 59968]]

emission-related systems'' may also be used as an alternative to SAE 
J1850.
    (i) Deficiencies and alternate fueled vehicles. Upon application by 
the manufacturer, the Administrator may accept an OBD system as 
compliant even though specific requirements are not fully met. Such 
compliances without meeting specific requirements, or deficiencies, 
will be granted only if compliance would be infeasible or unreasonable 
considering such factors as, but not limited to: Technical feasibility 
of the given monitor and lead time and production cycles including 
phase-in or phase-out of engines or vehicle designs and programmed 
upgrades of computers. Unmet requirements should not be carried over 
from the previous model year except where unreasonable hardware or 
software modifications would be necessary to correct the deficiency, 
and the manufacturer has demonstrated an acceptable level of effort 
toward compliance as determined by the Administrator. Furthermore, EPA 
will not accept any deficiency requests that include the complete lack 
of a major diagnostic monitor (``major'' diagnostic monitors being 
those for exhaust aftertreatment devices, oxygen sensor, engine 
misfire, evaporative leaks, and diesel EGR, if equipped), with the 
possible exception of the special provisions for alternate fueled 
vehicles. For alternate fueled vehicles (e.g. natural gas, liquefied 
petroleum gas, methanol, ethanol), beginning with the model year for 
which alternate fuel emission standards are applicable and extending 
through the 2004 model year, manufacturers may request the 
Administrator to waive specific monitoring requirements of this section 
for which monitoring may not be reliable with respect to the use of the 
alternate fuel; manufacturers may request this alternate fuel waiver 
for heavy-duty vehicles through the 2006 model year. At a minimum, 
alternate fuel vehicles must be equipped with an OBD system meeting OBD 
requirements to the extent feasible as approved by the Administrator.
    (j) California OBDII compliance option. For light-duty vehicles, 
light-duty trucks, and heavy-duty vehicles at or below 14,000 pounds 
GVWR, demonstration of compliance with California OBD II requirements 
(Title 13 California Code section 1968.1), as modified pursuant to 
California Mail Out #97-24 (December 9, 1997), shall satisfy the 
requirements of this section, except that the exemption to the catalyst 
monitoring provisions of California Code section 1968.1(b)(1.1.2) for 
diesel vehicles does not apply, and compliance with California Code 
sections 1968.1(b)(4.2.2), pertaining to 0.02 inch evaporative leak 
detection, and 1968.1(d), pertaining to tampering protection, are not 
required to satisfy the requirements of this section. Also, the 
deficiency fine provisions of California Code section 1968.1(m)(6.1) 
and (6.2) do not apply.
    (k) Certification. For test groups required to have an OBD system, 
certification will not be granted if, for any test vehicle approved by 
the Administrator in consultation with the manufacturer, the 
malfunction indicator light does not illuminate under any of the 
following circumstances, unless the manufacturer can demonstrate that 
any identified OBD problems discovered during the Administrator's 
evaluation will be corrected on production vehicles.
    (1)(i) Otto-cycle. A catalyst is replaced with a deteriorated or 
defective catalyst, or an electronic simulation of such, resulting in 
an increase of 1.5 times the NMHC standard or FEL above the NMHC 
emission level measured using a representative 4000 mile catalyst 
system.
    (ii) Diesel. (A) If monitored for emissions performance--a catalyst 
is replaced with a deteriorated or defective catalyst, or an electronic 
simulation of such, resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times 
the applicable standard or FEL for NOX or PM.
    (B) If monitored for performance--a particulate trap is replaced 
with a trap that has catastrophically failed, or an electronic 
simulation of such.
    (2)(i) Otto-cycle. An engine misfire condition is induced resulting 
in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable standards or 
FEL for NMHC, CO or NOX.
    (ii) Diesel. An engine misfire condition is induced and is not 
detected.
    (3) If so equipped, any oxygen sensor is replaced with a 
deteriorated or defective oxygen sensor, or an electronic simulation of 
such, resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable 
standard or FEL for NMHC, CO or NOX.
    (4) If so equipped, a vapor leak is introduced in the evaporative 
and/or refueling system (excluding the tubing and connections between 
the purge valve and the intake manifold) greater than or equal in 
magnitude to a leak caused by a 0.040 inch diameter orifice, or the 
evaporative purge air flow is blocked or otherwise eliminated from the 
complete evaporative emission control system.
    (5) A malfunction condition is induced in any emission-related 
powertrain system or component, including but not necessarily limited 
to, the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system, if equipped, the 
secondary air system, if equipped, and the fuel control system, 
singularly resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the 
applicable emission standard or FEL for NMHC, CO, NOX or PM.
    (6) A malfunction condition is induced in an electronic emission-
related powertrain system or component not otherwise described in this 
paragraph (k) that either provides input to or receives commands from 
the on-board computer resulting in a measurable impact on emissions.
    (l) Phase-in for complete heavy-duty vehicles. Complete heavy-duty 
vehicles weighing 14,000 pounds GVWR or less that are not Otto-cycle 
MDPVs must meet the OBD requirements of this section according to the 
following phase-in schedule, based on the percentage of projected 
vehicle sales. The 2004 model year requirements in the following phase-
in schedule are applicable only to heavy-duty Otto-cycle vehicles where 
the manufacturer has selected Otto-cycle Option 1 or 2 for alternative 
2003 or 2004 compliance according to Sec. 86.005-1(c)(1) or (c)(2). The 
2005 through 2007 requirements in the following phase-in schedule apply 
to all heavy-duty vehicles weighing 14,000 pounds GVWR or less, 
excluding MDPVs. If the manufacturer has selected Otto-cycle Option 3 
they may exempt 2005 model year complete heavy-duty engines and 
vehicles whose model year commences before July 31, 2004 from the 
requirements of this section. For the purposes of calculating 
compliance with the phase-in provisions of this paragraph (l), heavy-
duty vehicles subject to the phase-in requirements of this section may 
be combined with heavy-duty vehicles subject to the phase-in 
requirements of paragraph Sec. 86.004-17(k). The phase-in schedule 
follows:

OBD Compliance Phase-in for Complete heavy-Duty Vehicles Weighing 14,000
                           Pounds GVWR or Less
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Model year                Phase-in based on projected sales
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 MY.............................  --Applicable only to Otto-cycle
                                       engines complying with Options 1
                                       or 2
                                      --40% compliance
                                      --Alternative fuel waivers
                                       available
2005 MY.............................  --60% compliance
                                      --Alternative fuel waivers
                                       available
2006 MY.............................  --80% compliance

[[Page 59969]]

 
                                      --Alternative fuel waivers
                                       available
2007+ MY............................  --100% compliance
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    53. Section 86.1807-01 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraphs (a)(3)(v) and (a)(3)(vi).
    b. Adding paragraph (c)(3).
    c. Revising paragraphs (d), (e), and (f).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec. 86.1807-01  Vehicle labeling.

    (a) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (v) An unconditional statement of compliance with the appropriate 
model year U.S. EPA regulations which apply to light-duty vehicles, 
light-duty trucks, or complete heavy-duty vehicles;
    (vi) The exhaust emission standards (or FEL, as applicable) to 
which the test group is certified, and for test groups having different 
in-use standards, the corresponding exhaust emission standards that the 
test group must meet in use. In lieu of this requirement, manufacturers 
may use the standardized test group name designated by EPA;
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) The manufacturer of any complete heavy-duty vehicle subject to 
the emission standards of this subpart shall add the information 
required by paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section to the label required 
by paragraph (a) of this section. The required information will be set 
forth in the manner prescribed by paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this 
section.
    (d)(1) Incomplete light-duty trucks shall have the following 
prominent statement printed on the label required by paragraph 
(a)(3)(v) of this section: ``This vehicle conforms to U.S. EPA 
regulations applicable to 20xx Model year Light-Duty Trucks under the 
special provisions of 40 CFR 86.1801-01(c)(1) when it does not exceed 
XXX pounds in curb weight, XXX pounds in gross vehicle weight rating, 
and XXX square feet in frontal area.''
    (2) Incomplete heavy-duty vehicles optionally certified in 
accordance with the provisions for complete heavy-duty vehicles under 
the special provisions of Sec. 86.1801-01(c)(2) shall have the 
following prominent statement printed on the label required by 
paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this section: ``This vehicle conforms to U.S. 
EPA regulations applicable to 20xx Model year Complete Heavy-Duty 
Vehicles under the special provisions of 40 CFR 86.1801-01(c)(2) when 
it does not exceed XXX pounds in curb weight, XXX pounds in gross 
vehicle weight rating, and XXX square feet in frontal area.''
    (e) The manufacturer of any incomplete light-duty vehicle, light-
duty truck, or heavy-duty vehicle shall notify the purchaser of such 
vehicle of any curb weight, frontal area, or gross vehicle weight 
rating limitations affecting the emission certificate applicable to 
that vehicle. This notification shall be transmitted in a manner 
consistent with National Highway Traffic Safety Administration safety 
notification requirements published in 49 CFR part 568.
    (f) All light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and complete heavy-
duty vehicles shall comply with SAE Recommended Practices J1877 
``Recommended Practice for Bar-Coded Vehicle Identification Number 
Label,'' (July 1994), and J1892 ``Recommended Practice for Bar-Coded 
Vehicle Emission Configuration Label'' (October 1993). SAE J1877 and 
J1892 are incorporated by reference (see Sec. 86.1).
* * * * *
    54. Section 86.1809-01 is amended by revising paragraph (a), to 
read as follows:


Sec. 86.1809-01  Prohibition of defeat devices.

    (a) No new light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or complete heavy-
duty vehicle shall be equipped with a defeat device.
* * * * *

    55. Section 86.1810-01 is amended by:
    a. Revising the introductory text.
    b. Revising paragraphs (d) and (e).
    c. Revising paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(3).
    d. Revising paragraphs (k)(1)(i) introductory text, and (k)(2).
    e. Revising paragraph (l)(1) introductory text.
    f. Revising paragraph (m)(1) introductory text.
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec. 86.1810-01  General standards; increase in emissions; unsafe 
conditions; waivers.

    This section applies to model year 2001 and later light-duty 
vehicles and light-duty trucks fueled by gasoline, diesel, methanol, 
natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas fuels. This section also 
applies to complete heavy-duty vehicles certified according to the 
provisions of this subpart. Multi-fueled vehicles (including dual-
fueled and flexible-fueled vehicles) shall comply with all requirements 
established for each consumed fuel (or blend of fuels in the case of 
flexible fueled vehicles). The standards of this subpart apply to both 
certification and in-use vehicles unless otherwise indicated. For Tier 
2 and interim non-Tier 2 vehicles, this section also applies to hybrid 
electric vehicles and zero emission vehicles. Unless otherwise 
specified, requirements and provisions of this subpart applicable to 
methanol fueled vehicles are also applicable to Tier 2 and interim non-
Tier 2 ethanol fueled vehicles.
* * * * *
    (d) Crankcase emissions prohibited. No crankcase emissions shall be 
discharged into the ambient atmosphere from any 2001 and later model 
year light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or complete heavy-duty 
vehicle certified according to the provisions of this subpart.
    (e) On-board diagnostics. All light-duty vehicles, light-duty 
trucks and complete heavy-duty vehicles must have an on-board 
diagnostic system as described in Sec. 86.1806-01 or Sec. 86.1806-04, 
as applicable.
* * * * *
    (j) * * * (1) The evaporative standards in Secs. 86.1811-01(d), 
86.1811-04(e), 86.1812-01(d), 86.1813-01(d), 86.1814-01(d), 86.1814-
02(d), 86.1815-01(d), 1815-02(d) and 86.1816-04(d) apply equally to 
certification and in-use vehicles and trucks. The spitback standard 
also applies to newly assembled vehicles.
* * * * *
    (3) All fuel vapor generated in a gasoline- or methanol-fueled 
light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or complete heavy-duty vehicle 
during in-use operation shall be routed exclusively to the evaporative 
control system (e.g., either canister or engine purge.) The only 
exception to this requirement shall be for emergencies.
    (k) * * * (1) * * * (i) Tables S01-3, S01-4, and S01-5 in this 
paragraph (k)(1)(i) give the minimum percentage 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, light-duty trucks and complete heavy-duty vehicles which 
shall be tested under the applicable procedures in subpart B of this 
part, and shall not exceed the standards described in Secs. 86.1811-
01(e), 86.1811-04(e)(3), 86.1812-01(e), 86.1813-01(e), and 86.1816-
04(e). Vehicles waived from the emission standards under the provisions 
of paragraphs (m) and (n) of this section shall not be counted in the 
calculation of the percentage of compliance. Either manufacturer sales

[[Page 59970]]

or actual production intended for sale in the United States may be used 
to determine combined volume, at the manufacturers option. Tables S01-
3, S01-4, and S01-5 follow:
* * * * *
    (2) Determining sales percentages. Sales percentages for the 
purposes of determining compliance with the applicable refueling 
emission standards light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, medium-duty 
passenger vehicles, and complete heavy-duty vehicles shall be based on 
total actual U.S. sales of heavy light-duty trucks and complete heavy-
duty vehicles of the applicable model year by a manufacturer to a 
dealer, distributor, fleet operator, broker, or any other entity which 
comprises the point of first sale.
* * * * *
    (l) * * * (1) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission 
standards set forth in Secs. 86.1811-01(e), 86.1811-04(e)(3), 86.1812-
01(e), 86.1813-01(e), and 86.1816-04(e) are not required to demonstrate 
compliance with the fuel dispensing spitback standard contained in that 
section provided that:
* * * * *
    (m) * * *
    (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. 86.1811-01(e), 
86.1811-04(e)(3), 86.1812-01(e), 86.1813-01(e), and 86.1816-04(e), 
provided that:
* * * * *

    56. Section 86.1811-01 is amended by adding paragraph (g), to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.1811-01  Emission standards for light-duty vehicles.

* * * * *
    (g) Manufacturers may request to group light-duty vehicles into the 
same test group as vehicles subject to more stringent standards, so 
long as those light-duty vehicles meet the most stringent standards 
applicable to any vehicle within that test group, as provided at 
Sec. 86.1827(a)(5) and (d)(4).

    57. Section 86.1811-04 is amended by adding a new paragraph (s), to 
read as follows:


Sec. 86.1811-04  Emission standards for light-duty vehicles, light-duty 
trucks and medium-duty passenger vehicles.

* * * * *
    (s) Manufacturers may request to group heavy-duty vehicles into the 
same test group as other vehicles subject to more stringent standards, 
so long as all vehicles in the test group meet the most stringent 
standards applicable to any vehicle within that test group, as provided 
at Sec. 86.1827-1(a)(5) and (d)(4).

    58. Section 86.1812-01 is amended by adding paragraph (h), to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.1812-01  Emission standards for light-duty trucks 1.

* * * * *
    (h) Manufacturers may request to group light-duty truck 1's into 
the same test group as vehicles subject to more stringent standards, so 
long as those light-duty truck 1's meet the most stringent standards 
applicable to any vehicle within that test group, as provided at 
Sec. 86.1827(a)(5) and (d)(4).

    59. Section 86.1813-01 is amended by adding paragraph (h), to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.1813-01  Emission standards for light-duty trucks 2.

* * * * *
    (h) Manufacturers may request to group light-duty truck 2's into 
the same test group as vehicles subject to more stringent standards, so 
long as those light-duty truck 2's meet the most stringent standards 
applicable to any vehicle within that test group, as provided at 
Sec. 86.1827(a)(5) and (d)(4).

    60. Section 86.1814-01 is amended by adding paragraph (h), to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.1814-01  Emission standards for light-duty trucks 3.

* * * * *
    (h) Manufacturers may request to group light-duty truck 3's into 
the same test group as vehicles subject to more stringent standards, so 
long as those light-duty truck 3's meet the most stringent standards 
applicable to any vehicle within that test group, as provided at 
Sec. 86.1827(a)(5) and (d)(4).

    61. Section 86.1814-02 is amended by adding paragraph (h), to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.1814-02  Emission standards for light-duty trucks 3.

* * * * *
    (h) Manufacturers may request to group light-duty truck 3's into 
the same test group as vehicles subject to more stringent standards, so 
long as those light-duty truck 3's meet the most stringent standards 
applicable to any vehicle within that test group, as provided at 
Sec. 86.1827(a)(5) and (d)(4).

    62. Section 86.1815-01 is amended by adding paragraph (h), to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.1815-01  Emission standards for light-duty trucks 4.

* * * * *
    (h) Manufacturers may request to group light-duty truck 4's into 
the same test group as vehicles subject to more stringent standards, so 
long as those light-duty truck 4's meet the most stringent standards 
applicable to any vehicle within that test group, as provided at 
Sec. 86.1827(a)(5) and (d)(4).

    63. Section 86.1815-02 is amended by adding paragraph (h), to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.1815-02  Emission standards for light-duty trucks 4.

* * * * *
    (h) Manufacturers may request to group light-duty truck 4's into 
the same test group as vehicles subject to more stringent standards, so 
long as those light-duty truck 4's meet the most stringent standards 
applicable to any vehicle within that test group, as provided at 
Sec. 86.1827(a)(5) and (d)(4).

    64. A new section 86.1816-05 is added to subpart S, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1816-05  Emission standards for complete heavy-duty vehicles.

    This section applies to 2005 and later model year complete heavy-
duty vehicles (2003 model year for manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle 
HDE option 1 in Sec. 86.005-1(c)(1), or 2004 model year for 
manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle HDE option 2 in Sec. 86.005-1(c)(2)) 
fueled by gasoline, methanol, natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas 
fuels except as noted. This section does not apply to Medium-duty 
Passenger Vehicles, which are covered under Sec. 86.1811. This section 
also applies to 2000 and later model year complete heavy duty vehicles 
participating in the early banking provisions of the averaging, trading 
and banking program as specified in Sec. 86.1817-05(n). Multi-fueled 
vehicles shall comply with all requirements established for each 
consumed fuel. For methanol fueled vehicles, references in this section 
to hydrocarbons or total hydrocarbons shall mean total hydrocarbon 
equivalents and references to non-methane hydrocarbons shall mean non-
methane hydrocarbon equivalents.
    (a) Exhaust emission standards. (1) Exhaust emissions from 2005 and 
later model year complete heavy-duty vehicles at and above 8,500 pounds 
Gross Vehicle Weight Rating but equal to or less than 10,000 Gross 
Vehicle Weight Rating pounds shall not exceed the following standards 
at full useful life:
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Non-methane organic gas. 0.280 grams per mile; this 
requirement may be satisfied by measurement of non-methane hydrocarbons 
or total hydrocarbons, at the manufacturer's option.
    (iii) Carbon monoxide. 7.3 grams per mile.
    (iv) Oxides of nitrogen. 0.9 grams per mile.

[[Page 59971]]

    (v) [Reserved]
    (2) Exhaust emissions from 2005 and later model year complete 
heavy-duty vehicles above 10,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating but 
less than 14,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating shall not exceed 
the following standards at full useful life:
    (i) [Reserved].
    (ii) Non-methane organic gas. 0.330 grams per mile; this 
requirement may be satisfied by measurement of non-methane hydrocarbons 
or total hydrocarbons, at the manufacturer's option.
    (iii) Carbon monoxide. 8.1 grams per mile.
    (iv) Oxides of nitrogen. 1.0 grams per mile.
    (v) [Reserved].
    (b) [Reserved].
    (c) [Reserved].
    (d) Evaporative emissions. Evaporative hydrocarbon emissions from 
gasoline-fueled, natural gas-fueled, liquefied petroleum gas-fueled, 
and methanol-fueled complete heavy-duty vehicles shall not exceed the 
following standards. The standards apply equally to certification and 
in-use vehicles. The spitback standard also applies to newly assembled 
vehicles.
    (1) Gasoline, natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, and methanol 
fuel. For the full three-diurnal test sequence, diurnal plus hot soak 
measurements: 3.0 grams per test.
    (2) Gasoline and methanol fuel only. For the supplemental two-
diurnal test sequence, diurnal plus hot soak measurements: 3.5 grams 
per test.
    (3) Gasoline and methanol fuel only. Running loss test: 0.05 grams 
per mile.
    (4) Gasoline and methanol fuel only. Fuel dispensing spitback test: 
1.0 grams per test.
    (e) Refueling emissions. (1) Standards. Refueling emissions from 
Otto-cycle complete heavy-duty vehicles equal to or less than 10,000 
pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating shall be phased in, in accordance 
with the schedule in Table S01-5 in Sec. 86.1810-01 not to exceed the 
following emission standards:
    (i) For gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled vehicles: 0.20 grams 
hydrocarbon per gallon (0.053 gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.
    (ii) For liquefied petroleum gas-fueled vehicles: 0.15 grams 
hydrocarbon per gallon (0.04 gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.
    (2) Phase-in. Complete heavy-duty vehicles subject to refueling 
standards must comply with the phase-in requirements found in Table 
S01-5 in Sec. 86.1810-01, and must be grouped with HLDTs and MDPVs to 
determine phase-in compliance.
    (3) Alternate timing. (i) For manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle HDE 
option 3 under Sec. 86.005-1(c)(3), the refueling emissions standards 
are optional for 2004 model year complete heavy-duty vehicles.
    (ii) For manufacturers choosing Otto-cycle HDE option 3 under 
Sec. 86.005-1(c)(3), the manufacturer may exempt 2005 model year HDE 
test groups whose model year begins before July 31, 2004. Only 2005 
model year HDE test groups whose model year begins on or after July 31, 
2004 shall be considered (together with all 2005 model year HLDTs and 
MDPVs) for purposes of calculating the sales percentage for phase-in as 
outlined in Sec. 86.1810-01(k).
    (iii) For complete heavy-duty vehicles which have total fuel tank 
capacity of greater than 35 gallons, or which do not share a common 
fuel system with a light-duty truck or medium-duty passenger vehicle 
configuration, the refueling emissions standards are optional for the 
2004 and 2005 model years.
    (4) Exceptions. The provisions of this Sec. 86.1816-05(e) do not 
apply to incomplete heavy-duty vehicles optionally certified to 
complete heavy duty vehicle standards under the provisions of 
Sec. 86.1801-01(c)(2).
    (f) [Reserved]
    (g) Idle exhaust emission standards, complete heavy-duty vehicles. 
Exhaust emissions of carbon monoxide from 2005 and later model year 
gasoline, methanol, natural gas-and liquefied petroleum gas-fueled 
complete heavy-duty vehicles shall not exceed 0.50 percent of exhaust 
gas flow at curb idle for a useful life of 11 years or 120,000 miles, 
whichever occurs first.
    (h) Alternate test groups. Manufacturers may request to group 
complete heavy-duty vehicles into the same test group as vehicles 
subject to more stringent standards, so long as those complete heavy-
duty vehicles meet the most stringent standards applicable to any 
vehicle within that test group, as provided at Sec. 86.1827- (a)(5) and 
(d)(4).

    65. A new section 86.1817-05 is added to subpart S, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1817-05  Complete heavy-duty vehicle averaging, trading, and 
banking program.

    (a) General. (1) Complete heavy-duty vehicles eligible for the 
NOX averaging, trading and banking program are described in 
the applicable emission standards section of this subpart. All heavy-
duty vehicles which include an engine labeled for use in clean-fuel 
vehicles as specified in 40 CFR part 88 are not eligible for this 
program. Participation in this averaging, trading, and banking program 
is voluntary.
    (2)(i) Test groups with a family emission limit (FEL) as defined in 
Sec. 86.1803-01 exceeding the applicable standard shall obtain emission 
credits as defined in Sec. 86.1803-01 in a mass amount sufficient to 
address the shortfall. Credits may be obtained from averaging, trading, 
or banking, as defined in Sec. 86.1803-01 within the averaging set 
restrictions described in paragraph (d) of this section.
    (ii) Test groups with an FEL below the applicable standard will 
have emission credits available to average, trade, bank or a 
combination thereof. Credits may not be used for averaging or trading 
to offset emissions that exceed an FEL. Credits may not be used to 
remedy an in-use nonconformity determined by a Selective Enforcement 
Audit or by recall testing. However, credits may be used to allow 
subsequent production of vehicles for the test group in question if the 
manufacturer elects to recertify to a higher FEL.
    (b) Participation. Participation in the NOX averaging, 
trading, and banking program shall be done as follows:
    (1) During certification, the manufacturer shall:
    (i) Declare its intent to include specific test groups in the 
averaging, trading and banking program.
    (ii) Declare an FEL for each test group participating in the 
program.
    (A) The FEL must be to the same level of significant digits as the 
emission standard (one-hundredth of a gram per mile for NOX 
emissions).
    (B) In no case may the FEL exceed the upper limit prescribed in the 
section concerning the applicable complete heavy-duty vehicle chassis-
based NOX emission standard.
    (iii) Calculate the projected NOX emission credits 
(positive or negative) as defined in Sec. 86.1803-01 based on quarterly 
production projections for each participating test group, using the 
applicable equation in paragraph (c) of this section and the applicable 
factors for the specific test group.
    (iv)(A) Determine and state the source of the needed credits 
according to quarterly projected production for test groups requiring 
credits for certification.
    (B) State where the quarterly projected credits will be applied for 
test groups generating credits.
    (C) Emission credits as defined in Sec. 86.1803-01 may be obtained 
from or applied to only test groups within the same averaging set as 
defined in Sec. 86.1803-01. Emission credits available for averaging, 
trading, or banking, may be applied exclusively to a given test

[[Page 59972]]

group, or designated as reserved credits as defined in Sec. 86.1803-01.
    (2) Based on this information, each manufacturer's certification 
application must demonstrate:
    (i) That at the end of model year production, each test group has a 
net emissions credit balance of zero or more using the methodology in 
paragraph (c) of this section with any credits obtained from averaging, 
trading or banking.
    (ii) The source of the credits to be used to comply with the 
emission standard if the FEL exceeds the standard, or where credits 
will be applied if the FEL is less than the emission standard. In cases 
where credits are being obtained, each test group involved must state 
specifically the source (manufacturer/test group) of the credits being 
used. In cases where credits are being generated/supplied, each test 
group involved must state specifically the designated use 
(manufacturer/test group or reserved) of the credits involved. All such 
reports shall include all credits involved in averaging, trading or 
banking.
    (3) During the model year, manufacturers must:
    (i) Monitor projected versus actual production to be certain that 
compliance with the emission standards is achieved at the end of the 
model year.
    (ii) Provide the end-of-year reports required under paragraph (i) 
of this section.
    (iii) For manufacturers participating in emission credit trading, 
maintain the quarterly records required under paragraph (l) of this 
section.
    (4) Projected credits based on information supplied in the 
certification application may be used to obtain a certificate of 
conformity. However, any such credits may be revoked based on review of 
end-of-model year reports, follow-up audits, and any other compliance 
measures deemed appropriate by the Administrator.
    (5) Compliance under averaging, banking, and trading will be 
determined at the end of the model year. Test groups without an 
adequate amount of NOX emission credits will violate the 
conditions of the certificate of conformity. The certificates of 
conformity may be voided ab initio for test groups exceeding the 
emission standard.
    (6) If EPA or the manufacturer determines that a reporting error 
occurred on an end-of-year report previously submitted to EPA under 
this section, the manufacturer's credits and credit calculations will 
be recalculated. Erroneous positive credits will be void. Erroneous 
negative balances may be adjusted by EPA for retroactive use.
    (i) If EPA review of a manufacturer's end-of-year report indicates 
a credit shortfall, the manufacturer will be permitted to purchase the 
necessary credits to bring the credit balance for that test group to 
zero, at the ratio of 1.2 credits purchased for every credit needed to 
bring the balance to zero. If sufficient credits are not available to 
bring the credit balance for the test group in question to zero, EPA 
may void the certificate for that test group ab initio.
    (ii) If within 180 days of receipt of the manufacturer's end-of-
year report, EPA review determines a reporting error in the 
manufacturer's favor (i.e. resulting in a positive credit balance) or 
if the manufacturer discovers such an error within 180 days of EPA 
receipt of the end-of-year report, the credits will be restored for use 
by the manufacturer.
    (c) Calculations. For each participating test group, NOX 
emission credits (positive or negative) are to be calculated according 
to one of the following equations and rounded, in accordance with ASTM 
E29-93a (incorporated by reference at Sec. 86.1), to the nearest one-
tenth of a Megagram (MG). Consistent units are to be used throughout 
the equation.
    (1) For determining credit need for all test groups and credit 
availability for test groups generating credits for averaging only:

Emission credits=(Std-FEL)  x  (UL)  x  (Production)  x  
(10-6)

    (2) For determining credit availability for test groups generating 
credits for trading or banking:

Emission credits=(Std-FEL)  x  (UL)  x  (Production)  x  
(10-6) (Discount)
    (3) For purposes of the equations in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) 
of this section:

Std=the current and applicable complete heavy-duty vehicle 
NOX emission standard in grams per mile or grams per 
kilometer.
Std=0.9 grams per mile for heavy-duty vehicles at and above 8,500 
pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating but equal to or less than 10,000 
Gross Vehicle Weight Rating pounds and 1.0 grams per mile for heavy-
duty vehicles above 10,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating but 
less than 14,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating for cases where 
certification to chassis-based standards is optional for purposes of 
early credit banking.
FEL=the NOX family emission limit for the test group in 
grams per mile or grams per kilometer.
UL=the useful life, or alternative life as described in paragraph 
(c) of Sec. 86.1805-01, for the given test group in miles or 
kilometers.
Production=the number of vehicles produced for U.S. sales within the 
given test group during the model year. Quarterly production 
projections are used for initial certification. Actual production is 
used for end-of-year compliance determination.
Discount=a one-time discount applied to all credits to be banked or 
traded within the model year generated. Except as otherwise allowed 
in paragraph (m) of this section, the discount applied here is 0.9. 
Banked credits traded in a subsequent model year will not be subject 
to an additional discount. Banked credits used in a subsequent model 
year's averaging program will not have the discount restored.

    (d) Averaging sets. The averaging and trading of NOX 
emission credits will be allowed between all test groups of heavy-duty 
vehicles subject to chassis-based standards excluding those vehicles 
produced for sale in California. Averaging, banking, and trading are 
not applicable to vehicles sold in California.
    (e) Banking of NOX emission credits--(1) Credit 
deposits. (i) NOX emission credits may be banked from test 
groups produced in 2000 and later model years. Early banking is 
described in paragraph (n) of this section.
    (ii) Manufacturers may bank credits only after the end of the model 
year and after actual credits have been reported to EPA in the end-of-
year report. During the model year and before submittal of the end-of-
year report, credits originally designated in the certification process 
for banking will be considered reserved and may be redesignated for 
trading or averaging.
    (2) Credit withdrawals. (i) NOX credits do not expire, 
except as provided in paragraph (o)(2) of this section.
    (ii) Manufacturers withdrawing banked emission credits shall 
indicate so during certification and in their credit reports, as 
described in paragraph (i) of this section.
    (3) Use of banked emission credits. The use of banked credits shall 
be within the averaging set and geographic restrictions described in 
paragraph (d) of this section, and only for the following purposes:
    (i) Banked credits may be used in averaging, or in trading, or in 
any combination thereof, during the certification period. Credits 
declared for banking from the previous model year but not reported to 
EPA may also be used. However, if EPA finds that the reported credits 
cannot be proven, they will be revoked and unavailable for use.
    (ii) Banked credits may not be used for averaging and trading to 
offset emissions that exceed an FEL. Banked credits may not be used to 
remedy an in-use nonconformity determined by a Selective Enforcement 
Audit or by recall testing. However, banked credits may be

[[Page 59973]]

used for subsequent production of the test group if the manufacturer 
elects to recertify to a higher FEL.
    (f) Negative credit balance. In the event of a negative credit 
balance in a trading situation, both the buyer and the seller would be 
liable.
    (g) Fuel. Certification fuel used for credit generation must be of 
a type that is both available in use and expected to be used by the 
vehicle purchaser. Therefore, upon request by the Administrator, the 
vehicle manufacturer must provide information acceptable to the 
Administrator that the designated fuel is readily available 
commercially and would be used in customer service.
    (h) Credit apportionment. At the manufacturers option, credits 
generated from complete heavy-duty vehicles under the provisions 
described in this section may be sold to or otherwise provided to 
another party for use in programs other than the averaging, trading and 
banking program described in this section.
    (1) The manufacturer shall pre-identify two emission levels per 
test group for the purposes of credit apportionment. One emission level 
shall be the FEL and the other shall be the level of the standard that 
the test group is required to certify under Sec. 86.1816-04. For each 
test group, the manufacturer may report vehicle sales in two 
categories, ``ABT-only credits'' and ``nonmanufacturer-owned credits''.
    (i) For vehicle sales reported as ``ABT-only credits'', the credits 
generated must be used solely in the averaging, trading and banking 
program described in this section.
    (ii) The vehicle manufacturer may declare a portion of vehicle 
sales ``nonmanufacturer-owned credits'' and this portion of the credits 
generated between the standard and the FEL, based on the calculation in 
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, would belong to the vehicle 
purchaser. The manufacturer may not generate any credits for the 
vehicle sales reported as ``nonmanufacturer-owned credits'' for this 
averaging, trading and banking program. Vehicles reported as 
``nonmanufacturer-owned credits'' shall comply with the FEL and the 
requirements of this averaging, trading and banking program in all 
other respects.
    (2) Only manufacturer-owned credits reported as ``ABT-only 
credits'' shall be used in the averaging, trading, and banking 
provisions described in this section.
    (3) Credits shall not be double-counted. Credits used in this 
averaging, trading and banking program may not be provided to a vehicle 
purchaser for use in another program.
    (4) Manufacturers shall determine and state the number of vehicles 
sold as ``ABT-only credits'' and ``nonmanufacturer-owned credits'' in 
the end-of-model year reports required under paragraph (i) of this 
section.
    (i) Application for certification and end-of-year reports. 
Manufacturers participating in the emissions averaging, trading and 
banking program, shall submit for each participating test group the 
items listed in paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) Application for certification. (i) The application for 
certification will include a statement that the vehicles for which 
certification is requested will not, to the best of the manufacturer's 
belief, when included in the averaging, trading and banking program, 
cause the applicable NOX emissions standard to be exceeded.
    (ii) The application for certification will also include 
identification of the section of this subpart under which the test 
group is participating in the averaging, trading and banking program 
(e.g., Sec. 86.1817-05), the type (NOX), and the projected 
number of credits generated/needed for this test group, the applicable 
averaging set, the projected U.S. production volumes (excluding 
vehicles produced for sale in California), by quarter, and the values 
required to calculate credits as given in the applicable averaging, 
trading and banking section. Manufacturers shall also submit how and 
where credit surpluses are to be dispersed and how and through what 
means credit deficits are to be met, as explained in the applicable 
averaging, trading and banking section. The application must project 
that each test group will be in compliance with the applicable emission 
standards based on the vehicle mass emissions and credits from 
averaging, trading and banking.
    (2) [Reserved].
    (3) End-of-year report. The manufacturer shall submit
    end-of-year reports for each test group participating in the 
averaging, trading and banking program, as described in paragraphs 
(i)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section.
    (i) These reports shall be submitted within 90 days of the end of 
the model year to: Director, Engine Programs and Compliance Division 
(6405J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20460.
    (ii) These reports shall indicate the test group, the averaging 
set, the actual U.S. production volume (excluding vehicles produced for 
sale in California), the values required to calculate credits as given 
in the applicable averaging, trading and banking section, and the 
resulting type and number of credits generated/required. Manufacturers 
shall also submit how and where credit surpluses were dispersed (or are 
to be banked) and how and through what means credit deficits were met. 
Copies of contracts related to credit trading must also be included or 
supplied by the broker if applicable. The report shall also include a 
calculation of credit balances to show that net mass emissions balances 
are within those allowed by the emission standards (equal to or greater 
than a zero credit balance). Any credit discount factor described in 
the applicable averaging, trading and banking section must be included 
as required.
    (iii) The production counts for end-of-year reports shall be based 
on the location of the first point of retail sale (e.g., customer, 
dealer, secondary manufacturer) by the manufacturer.
    (iv) Errors discovered by EPA or the manufacturer in the end-of-
year report, including changes in the production counts, may be 
corrected up to 180 days subsequent to submission of the end-of-year 
report. Errors discovered by EPA after 180 days shall be corrected if 
credits are reduced. Errors in the manufacturer's favor will not be 
corrected if discovered after the 180 day correction period allowed.
    (j) Failure to submit quarterly or end-of-year reports. Failure by 
a manufacturer participating in the averaging, trading and banking 
program to submit any quarterly or end-of-year report (as applicable) 
in the specified time for all vehicles that are part of an averaging 
set is a violation of section 203(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 
7522(a)(1)) for such vehicles.
    (k) Failure to submit end-of-year reports for banked credits. 
Failure by a manufacturer generating credits for deposit only in the 
complete heavy-duty vehicle banking program to submit their end-of-year 
reports in the applicable specified time period (i.e., 90 days after 
the end of the model year) shall result in the credits not being 
available for use until such reports are received and reviewed by EPA. 
Use of projected credits pending EPA review will not be permitted in 
these circumstances.
    (l) Quarterly records. Any manufacturer producing a test group 
participating in trading using reserved credits, shall maintain the 
following records on a quarterly basis for each test group in the 
trading subclass:
    (1) The test group;
    (2) The averaging set;
    (3) The actual quarterly and cumulative U.S. production volumes

[[Page 59974]]

excluding vehicles produced for sale in California;
    (4) The values required to calculate credits as given in paragraph 
(c) of this section;
    (5) The resulting type and number of credits generated/required;
    (6) How and where credit surpluses are dispersed; and
    (7) How and through what means credit deficits are met.
    (m) Additional flexibility for complete heavy-duty vehicles. If a 
complete heavy-duty vehicle has a NOX FEL of 0.6 grams per 
mile or lower, a discount of 1.0 may be used in the trading and banking 
credits calculation for NOX described in paragraph (c)(2) of 
this section.
    (n) Early banking for complete heavy-duty vehicles. Provisions set 
forth in paragraphs (a) through (m) of this section apply except as 
specifically stated otherwise in this paragraph (n).
    (1) Early banking eligibility. To be eligible for the early banking 
program described in this paragraph, the following must apply:
    (i) Credits are generated from complete heavy-duty vehicles.
    (ii) During certification, the manufacturer shall declare its 
intent to include specific test groups in the early banking program 
described in this paragraph (n).
    (2) Credit generation and use. (i) Early credits may be generated 
by test groups starting in model year 2000.
    (ii) Credits may only be used for complete heavy-duty vehicles 
subject to chassis-based standards, except as provided by paragraph (o) 
in this section, and all credits shall be subject to discounting and 
all other provisions contained in paragraphs (a) through (m) of this 
section.
    (o) Credit transfers. A manufacturer that elects to comply with 
Option 1 or 2 contained in Sec. 86.005-10(f) may transfer credits 
between its complete vehicle averaging set and its heavy-duty Otto-
cycle engine averaging set as follows:
    (1) Credits earned in model years 2004 (2003 for Option 1) through 
2007 are eligible to be transferred.
    (2) Transferred credits may not be banked for use in model years 
2008 and later. Credits that are transferred but not used prior to 
model year 2008 must be forfeited.
    (3) Prior to transferring credits, a manufacturer must develop a 
methodology to transfer the credits including a conversion factor that 
may be used to convert between chassis-based credits (derived on a 
grams per mile basis) and equivalent engine-based credits (derived on a 
grams per brake horsepower-hour basis). The methodology must be 
approved by EPA prior to the start of the model year in which the 
credits are to be transferred. The conversion factor must provide 
reasonable certainty that the credits are equivalent for the specific 
vehicle test group(s) and engine family(s) involved in the generation 
and use of the credits.

    66. Section 86.1823-01 is amended by revising the introductory 
text, paragraph (c)(2) introductory text, and the first sentence of 
paragraph (h), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1823-01  Durability demonstration procedures for exhaust 
emissions.

    This section applies to light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, 
complete heavy-duty vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicles certified under 
the provisions of Sec. 86.1801-01(c). Eligible small volume 
manufacturers or small volume test groups may optionally meet the 
requirements of Secs. 86.1838-01 and 86.1826-01 in lieu of the 
requirements of this section. For model years 2001, 2002, and 2003 all 
manufacturers may elect to meet the provisions of paragraph (c)(2) of 
this section in lieu of these requirements for light-duty vehicles or 
light-duty trucks.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) For the 2001, 2002, and 2003 model years, for light-duty 
vehicles and light-duty trucks the manufacturer may carry over exhaust 
emission DF's previously generated under the Standard AMA Durability 
Program described in Sec. 86.094-13(c), the Alternate Service 
Accumulation Durability Program described in Sec. 86.094-13(e) or the 
Standard Self-Approval Durability Program for light-duty trucks 
described in Sec. 86.094-13(f) in lieu of complying with the durability 
provisions of paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
* * * * *
    (h) The Administrator may withdraw approval to use a durability 
process or require modifications to a durability process based on the 
data collected under Secs. 86.1845-01, 86.1846-01, and 86.1847-01 or 
other information if the Administrator determines that the durability 
processes have not been shown to accurately predict emission levels or 
compliance with the standards (or FEL, as applicable) in use on 
candidate vehicles (provided the inaccuracy could result in a lack of 
compliance with the standards for a test group covered by this 
durability process). * * *
* * * * *

    67. Section 86.1824-01 is amended by revising the first sentence of 
the introductory text, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1824-01  Durability demonstration procedures for evaporative 
emissions.

    This section applies to gasoline-, methanol-, liquefied petroleum 
gas-, and natural gas-fueled LDV/Ts, MDPVs, complete heavy-duty 
vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicles certified under the provisions of 
Sec. 86.1801-01(c). * * *
* * * * *

    68. Section 86.1825-01 is amended by revising the first two 
sentences of introductory text to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1825-01  Durability demonstration procedures for refueling 
emissions.

    This section applies to light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and 
complete heavy-duty vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicles which are 
certified under light-duty rules as allowed under the provisions of 
Sec. 86.1801-01(c) which are subject to refueling loss emission 
compliance. Refer to the provisions of Secs. 86.1811-01, 86.1811-04, 
86.1812-01, 86.1813-01, and 86.1816-04 to determine applicability of 
the refueling standards to different classes of vehicles for various 
model years. * * *
* * * * *

    69. Section 86.1826-01 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2) 
introductory text and (b)(3) introductory text, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1826-01  Assigned deterioration factors for small volume 
manufacturers and small volume test groups.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Manufacturers with aggregated sales from and including 301 
through 14,999 motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines per year 
(determined under the provisions of Sec. 86.1838-01(b)) certifying 
vehicles equipped with proven emission control systems shall conform to 
the following provisions:
* * * * *
    (3) Manufacturers with aggregated sales from 301 through 14,999 
motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines per year (determined under the 
provisions of Sec. 86.1838-01(b)) certifying vehicles equipped with 
unproven emission control systems shall conform to the following 
provisions:
* * * * *

    70. Section 86.1827-01 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (a)(5).
    b. Removing ``and'' at the end of paragraph (d)(2).
    c. Removing the period at the end of paragraph (d)(3) and adding 
``; and'' in its place.

[[Page 59975]]

    d. Adding paragraph (d)(4).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec. 86.1827-01  Test group determination.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (5) Subject to the same emission standards, except that a 
manufacturer may request to group vehicles into the same test group as 
vehicles subject to more stringent standards, so long as all the 
vehicles within the test group are certified to the most stringent 
standards applicable to any vehicle within that test group. Light-duty 
trucks which are subject to the same emission standards as light-duty 
vehicles with the exception of the light-duty truck idle CO standard 
and/or total HC standard may be included in the same test group.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) A statement that all vehicles within a test group are certified 
to the most stringent standards applicable to any vehicle within that 
test group.
* * * * *

    71. Section 86.1829-01 is amended by revising paragraphs 
(b)(1)(ii)(B), (b)(2)(ii)(B), and (b)(5), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1829-01  Durability and emission testing requirements; waivers.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (B) In lieu of testing vehicles according to the provisions of 
paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A) of this section, a manufacturer may provide a 
statement in its application for certification that, based on the 
manufacturer's engineering evaluation of appropriate high-altitude 
emission testing, all light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and 
complete heavy-duty vehicles comply with the emission standards at high 
altitude.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (B) In lieu of testing vehicles according to the provisions of 
paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(A) of this section, a manufacturer may provide a 
statement in its application for certification that, based on the 
manufacturer's engineering evaluation of such high-altitude emission 
testing as the manufacturer deems appropriate, all light-duty vehicles, 
light-duty trucks, and complete heavy-duty vehicles comply with the 
emission standards at high altitude.
* * * * *
    (5) Idle CO testing. To determine idle CO emission compliance for 
light-duty trucks and complete heavy-duty vehicles, the manufacturer 
shall follow one of the following two procedures:
    (i) For test groups containing light-duty trucks and complete 
heavy-duty vehicles, each EDV shall be tested in accordance with the 
idle CO testing procedures of subpart B of this part; or
    (ii) In lieu of testing light trucks and complete heavy-duty 
vehicles for idle CO emissions, a manufacturer may provide a statement 
in its application for certification that, based on the manufacturer's 
engineering evaluation of such idle CO testing as the manufacturer 
deems appropriate, all light-duty trucks and complete heavy-duty 
vehicles comply with the idle CO emission standards.
* * * * *

    72. Section 86.1834-01 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (b)(3) introductory text.
    b. Redesignating paragraph (b)(3)(i) as paragraph (b)(3)(i)(A), and 
adding paragraph (b)(3)(i)(B).
    c. Revising paragraph (b)(3)(ii) introductory text.
    d. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(3)(iii) and (b)(3)(iv) as 
paragraphs (b)(3)(iv) and (b)(3)(v).
    e. Adding a new paragraph (b)(3)(iii).
    f. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (b)(3)(iv) and (b)(3)(v).
    g. Adding a new paragraph (b)(3)(vi).
    h. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(5) and (b)(6) as paragraphs (b)(6) 
and (b)(7); adding and reserving paragraph (b)(5).
    i. Adding paragraph (b)(6)(i)(H).
    j. Revising the first sentence of newly redesignated paragraph 
(b)(6)(iii), the seventh sentence of newly redesignated paragraph 
(b)(7)(ii), and the first sentence of newly redesignated paragraph 
(b)(7)(iii).
    k. Revising the heading of paragraph (d).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec. 86.1834-01  Allowable maintenance.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Emission-related maintenance in addition to, or at shorter 
intervals than, that listed in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through (vi) of 
this section will not be accepted as technologically necessary, except 
as provided in paragraph (b)(7) of this section.
    (i)(A) * * *
    (B) The cleaning or replacement of complete heavy-duty vehicle 
spark plugs shall occur at 25,000 miles (or 750 hours) of use and at 
30,000-mile (or 750 hour) intervals thereafter, for vehicles certified 
for use with unleaded fuel only.
    (ii) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, the adjustment, 
cleaning, repair, or replacement of the following items shall occur at 
50,000 miles of use and at 50,000-mile intervals thereafter:
* * * * *
    (iii) For complete heavy-duty vehicles, the adjustment, cleaning, 
repair, or replacement of the following items shall occur at 50,000 
miles (or 1,500 hours) of use and at 50,000-mile (1,500 hour) intervals 
thereafter:
    (A) Positive crankcase ventilation valve.
    (B) Emission-related hoses and tubes.
    (C) Ignition wires.
    (D) Idle mixture.
    (E) Exhaust gas recirculation system related filters and coolers.
    (iv) For light-duty trucks, light-duty vehicles, and complete 
heavy-duty vehicles, the adjustment, cleaning, repair, or replacement 
of the oxygen sensor shall occur at 80,000 miles (or 2,400 hours) of 
use and at 80,000-mile (or 2,400-hour) intervals thereafter.
    (v) For light-duty trucks and light-duty vehicles, the adjustment, 
cleaning, repair, or replacement of the following items shall occur at 
100,000 miles of use and at 100,000-mile intervals thereafter:
    (A) Catalytic converter.
    (B) Air injection system components.
    (C) Fuel injectors.
    (D) Electronic engine control unit and its associated sensors 
(except oxygen sensor) and actuators.
    (E) Evaporative and/or refueling emission canister(s).
    (F) Turbochargers.
    (G) Carburetors.
    (H) Superchargers.
    (I) Exhaust gas recirculation system including all related filters 
and control valves.
    (J) Mechanical fillpipe seals.
    (vi) For complete heavy-duty vehicles, the adjustment, cleaning, 
repair, or replacement of the following items shall occur at 100,000 
miles (or 3,000 hours) of use and at 100,000-mile (or 3,000 hour) 
intervals thereafter:
    (A) Catalytic converter.
    (B) Air injection system components.
    (C) Fuel injectors.
    (D) Electronic engine control unit and its associated sensors 
(except oxygen sensor) and actuators.
    (E) Evaporative and/or refueling emission canister(s).
    (F) Turbochargers.
    (G) Carburetors.
    (H) Exhaust gas recirculation system (including all related control 
valves and tubing) except as otherwise provided in paragraph 
(b)(3)(iii)(E) of this section.
    (I) Mechanical fillpipe seals.
* * * * *

[[Page 59976]]

    (5) [Reserved].
    (6) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (H) Any other add-on emissions-related component (i.e., a component 
whose sole or primary purpose is to reduce emissions or whose failure 
will significantly degrade emissions control and whose function is not 
integral to the design and performance of the engine.)
* * * * *
    (iii) Visible signal systems used under paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(C) of 
this section are considered an element of design of the emission 
control system. * * *
    (7) * * *
    (ii) * * * For maintenance items established as emission-related, 
the Administrator will further designate the maintenance as critical if 
the component which receives the maintenance is a critical component 
under paragraph (b)(6) of this section. * * *
    (iii) Any manufacturer may request a hearing on the Administrator's 
determinations in this paragraph (b)(7). * * *
* * * * *
    (d) Unscheduled maintenance on durability data vehicles. * * *
* * * * *

    73. Section 86.1835-01 is amended by revising the third sentence of 
paragraph (a)(1)(i), paragraph (b)(1) introductory text, and paragraph 
(b)(3) introductory text, to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1835-01  Confirmatory certification testing.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) * * * 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, light-duty trucks, or complete 
heavy-duty vehicles. * * *
* * * * *
    (b) * * * (1) If the Administrator determines not to conduct a 
confirmatory test under the provisions of paragraph (a) of this 
section, light-duty vehicle and light-duty truck manufacturers will 
conduct a confirmatory test at their facility after submitting the 
original test data to the Administrator whenever any of the conditions 
listed in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (v) of this section exist, and 
complete heavy-duty vehicles manufacturers will conduct a confirmatory 
test at their facility after submitting the original test data to the 
Administrator whenever the conditions listed in paragraph (b)(1)(i) or 
(b)(1)(ii) of this section exist, as follows:
* * * * *
    (3) For light-duty vehicles, and light-duty trucks, the 
manufacturer shall conduct a retest of the FTP or highway test if the 
difference between the fuel economy of the confirmatory test and the 
original manufacturer's test equals or exceeds three percent (or such 
lower percentage to be applied consistently to all manufacturer 
conducted confirmatory testing as requested by the manufacturer and 
approved by the Administrator).
* * * * *

    74. Section 86.1840-01 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1840-01  Special test procedures.

    (a) The Administrator may, on the basis of written application by a 
manufacturer, prescribe test procedures, other than those set forth in 
this part, for any light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or complete 
heavy-duty vehicle which the Administrator determines is not 
susceptible to satisfactory testing by the procedures set forth in this 
part.
    (b) If the manufacturer does not submit a written application for 
use of special test procedures but the Administrator determines that a 
light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or complete heavy-duty vehicle is 
not susceptible to satisfactory testing by the procedures set forth in 
this part, the Administrator shall notify the manufacturer in writing 
and set forth the reasons for such rejection in accordance with the 
provisions of Sec. 86.1848(a)(2).
* * * * *

    75. Section 86.1844-01 is amended by revising the fourth sentence 
of paragraph (d)(12), the fourth sentence of paragraph (e)(3), and 
paragraph (g)(5), and adding paragraph (g)(14) to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1844-01  Information requirements: Application for 
certification and submittal of information upon request.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (12) * * * The description shall include, but is not limited to, 
information such as model name, vehicle classification (light-duty 
vehicle, light-duty truck, or complete heavy-duty vehicle), sales area, 
engine displacement, engine code, transmission type, tire size and 
parameters necessary to conduct exhaust emission tests such as 
equivalent test weight, curb and gross vehicle weight, test horsepower 
(with and without air conditioning adjustment), coast down time, shift 
schedules, cooling fan configuration, etc. and evaporative tests such 
as canister working capacity, canister bed volume and fuel temperature 
profile. * * *
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) * * * The description shall include, but is not limited to, 
information such as model name, vehicle classification (light-duty 
vehicle, light-duty truck, or complete heavy-duty vehicle), sales area, 
engine displacement, engine code, transmission type, tire size and 
parameters necessary to conduct exhaust emission tests such as 
equivalent test weight, curb and gross vehicle weight, test horsepower 
(with and without air conditioning adjustment), coast down time, shift 
schedules, cooling fan configuration, etc and evaporative tests such as 
canister working capacity, canister bed volume and fuel temperature 
profile. * * *
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (5) Any information necessary to demonstrate that no defeat devices 
are present on any vehicles covered by a certificate including, but not 
limited to, a description of the technology employed to control CO 
emissions at intermediate temperatures, as applicable.
* * * * *
    (14) For complete heavy-duty vehicles only, all hardware (including 
scan tools) and documentation necessary for EPA to read, interpret, and 
store (in engineering units if applicable) any information broadcast by 
an engine's on-board computers and electronic control modules which 
relates in anyway to emission control devices and auxiliary emission 
control devices, provided that such hardware, passwords, or 
documentation exists and is not otherwise commercially available. 
Passwords include any information necessary to enable generic scan 
tools or personal computers access to proprietary emission related 
information broadcast by an engine's on-board computer, if such 
passwords exist. This requirement includes access by EPA to any 
proprietary code information which may be broadcast by an engine's on-
board computer and electronic control modules. Information which is 
confidential business information must be marked as such. Engineering 
units refers to the ability to read, interpret, and store information 
in commonly understood engineering units, for example, engine speed in 
revolutions per minute or per second, injection timing parameters such 
as start of injection in degree's before top-dead

[[Page 59977]]

center, fueling rates in cubic centimeters per stroke, vehicle speed in 
milers per hour or per kilometer.
* * * * *

    76. Section 86.1845-01 is amended by revising paragraph (a), to 
read as follows:


Sec. 86.1845-01  Manufacturer in-use verification testing requirements.

    (a) General requirements. A manufacturer light-duty vehicles, 
light-duty trucks, and complete heavy-duty vehicles shall test, or 
cause to have tested a specified number of light-duty vehicles, light-
duty trucks, and complete heavy-duty vehicles. Such testing shall be 
conducted in accordance with the provisions of this section. For 
purposes of this section, the term vehicle shall include light-duty 
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and complete heavy-duty vehicles.
* * * * *

    77. Section 86.1845-04 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) and 
adding a new sentence to the end of paragraph (a)(3), to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1845-04  Manufacturer in-use verification testing requirements.

    (a) * * * (1) A manufacturer of LDVs, LDTs, MDPVs and/or complete 
HDVs must test, or cause to have tested, a specified number of LDVs, 
LDTs, MDPVs and complete HDVs. Such testing must be conducted in 
accordance with the provisions of this section. For purposes of this 
section, the term vehicle includes light-duty vehicles, light-duty 
trucks and medium-duty vehicles.
* * * * *
    (3) * * * Such procedures are not available for complete HDVs.
* * * * *

    78. Section 86.1846-01 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1), 
(a)(3), (a)(4), (b) introductory text, (b)(1), (b)(2), (c), (g), (h), 
and (j), to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1846-01  Manufacturer in-use confirmatory testing requirements.

    (a) * * * (1) A manufacturer of LDVs, LDTs and/or MDPVs must test, 
or cause testing to be conducted, under this section when the emission 
levels shown by a test group sample from testing under Secs. 86.1845-01 
or 86.1845-04, as applicable, exceeds the criteria specified in 
paragraph (b) of this section. The testing required under this section 
applies separately to each test group and at each test point (low and 
high mileage) that meets the specified criteria. The testing 
requirements apply separately for each model year starting with model 
year 2001. These provisions do not apply to heavy-duty vehicles or 
engines prior to the 2007 model year.
* * * * *
    (3) For purposes of this section, the term vehicle includes light-
duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty 
vehicles and engines, as applicable.
    (4) Upon a manufacturer's written request, prior to in-use testing, 
that presents information to EPA regarding pre-conditioning procedures 
designed solely to remove the effects of high sulfur in gasoline from 
vehicles produced through the 2007 model year, EPA will consider 
allowing such procedures on a case-by-case basis. EPA's decision will 
apply to manufacturer in-use testing conducted under this section and 
to any in-use testing conducted by EPA. This provision does not apply 
to heavy-duty vehicles and engines.
    (b) Criteria for additional testing. A manufacturer shall test a 
test group or a subset of a test group as described in paragraph (j) of 
this section when the results from testing conducted under 
Secs. 86.1845-01 and 86.1845-04, as applicable, show mean emissions for 
that test group of any pollutant(s) to be equal to or greater than 1.30 
times the applicable in-use standard and a failure rate, among the test 
group vehicles, for the corresponding pollutant(s) of fifty percent or 
greater.
    (1) This requirement does not apply to Supplemental FTP testing 
conducted under Sec. 86.1845-04(b)(5)(i) or evaporative/refueling 
testing conducted under Sec. 86.1845-01 or Sec. 86.1845-04. Testing 
conducted at high altitude under the requirements of Secs. 86.1845-01 
and 86.1845-04 will be included in determining if a test group meets 
the criteria triggering testing required under this section.
    (2) The vehicle tested under the requirements of Sec. 86.1845-
01(c)(2) or Sec. 86.1845-04(c)(2) with a minimum odometer miles of 75% 
of useful life will not be included in determining if a test group 
meets the triggering criteria.
* * * * *
    (c) Useful life. Vehicles tested under the provisions of this 
section must be within the useful life specified for the emission 
standards which were exceeded in the testing under Sec. 86.1845-01 or 
Sec. 86.1845-04, as applicable. Testing should be within the useful 
life specified, subject to sections 207(c)(5) and (c)(6) of the Clean 
Air Act where applicable.
* * * * *
    (g) Testing. Testing required under this section must commence 
within three months of completion of the testing under Sec. 86.1845-01 
or Sec. 86.1845-04 which triggered the confirmatory testing and must be 
completed within seven months of the completion of the testing which 
triggered the confirmatory testing. Any industry review of the results 
obtained under Sec. 86.1845-01 or Sec. 86.1845-04 and any additional 
vehicle procurement and/or testing which takes place under the 
provisions of Sec. 86.1845-01 or Sec. 86.1845-04 which the industry 
believes may affect the triggering of required confirmatory testing 
must take place within the three month period. The data and the 
manufacturers reasoning for reconsideration of the data must be 
provided to the Agency within the three month period.
    (h) Limit on manufacturer conducted testing. For each manufacturer, 
the maximum number of test group(s) (or Agency-designated subset(s)) of 
each model year for which testing under this section shall be required 
is limited to 50 percent of the total number of test groups of each 
model year required to be tested by each manufacturer as prescribed in 
Sec. 86.1845-01 or Sec. 86.1845-04 rounded to the next highest whole 
number where appropriate. For each manufacturer with only one test 
group under Sec. 86.1845-01 or Sec. 86.1845-04, as applicable, such 
manufacturer shall have a maximum potential testing requirement under 
this section of one test group (or Agency-designated subset) per model 
year.
* * * * *
    (j) Testing a subset. EPA may designate a subset of the test group 
based on transmission type for testing under this section in lieu of 
testing the entire test group when the results for the entire test 
group from testing conducted under Sec. 86.1845-01 or Sec. 86.1845-04 
show mean emissions and a failure rate which meet these criteria for 
additional testing.

    79. Section 86.1848-01 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(4) and 
the first sentence of paragraph (e) introductory text to read as 
follows:


Sec. 86.1848-01  Certification.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (4) For incomplete light-duty trucks and incomplete heavy-duty 
vehicles, a certificate covers only those new motor vehicles which, 
when completed by having the primary load-carrying device or container 
attached, conform to the maximum curb weight and frontal area 
limitations described in the application for certification as required 
in Sec. 86.1844-01.
* * * * *

[[Page 59978]]

    (e) A manufacturer of new light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, 
and complete heavy-duty vehicles must obtain a certificate of 
conformity covering such vehicles from the Administrator prior to 
selling, offering for sale, introducing into commerce, delivering for 
introduction into commerce, or importing into the United States the new 
vehicle. * * *
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-20144 Filed 10-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P