[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