# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 59 Fed. Reg. 16262 1994

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Tue Dec 9 18:50:41 2014

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.

### 16262 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 86, 88, and 600 [AMS-FRL-4831-61 RIN 2060-AC64

Control of Air Pollution From New MotorVehicles and New Motor Vehicle Engines; Refueling Emission Regulations for Light-DutyVehicles and Light-DutyTrucks AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document contains EPA's final rule implementing the control ofvehicle refueling emissions through the use ofvehicle-based systems. It applies to light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. Therule applies
to all fuels used by a vehicle, and includes special provisions forvehicles/ fuels judged to be inherently low in refueling emissions. For light-duty vehicles, the requirements begin in the 1998 model year, and phase in over three model years. In the 1998 model
year, 40 percent ofeach manufacturer's light-duty vehicles must meet the requirements. This increases to 80 percent in the 1999 model year and rises
to 100 percent in model years 2000 and later. A special provision for phase-in is also included for small volume manufacturers oflight-duty vehicles. '

This requirement also applies to'lightduty trucks. For light-duty trucks with

a gross vehicle weight rating of 0-6000 lbs, the requirement begins inmodel
year 2001 and phases-in over three model years at the same rate as applied
to light-duty vehicles. For light-duty trucks with agross vehicle weight-rating of6001-8500 lbs, the requirement

commences in model year 2004 and phases-in over three model years at the

same rate as light-duty vehicles. The rule doesnot apply to heavy-duty vehicles.

This rule also establishes certification requirements covering test procedures for integrated and non-integrated control system designs, a refueling emission standard of0.20 g/gallon and other related certification requirements and provisions. Finally, the rule contains enforcement provisions related
to liability, Selective Enforcement Auditing and nonconformance penalties. EFFECTIVE DATES: Thig final rule is effective on May 6, 1994.

The new information collection requirements contained in 40 CFRparts 86 and 88 applying to 1998 and later model year vehicles have not been 

### approved by the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) and are not effective until OMB has approved them. EPA will publish a technical amendment in the Federal Register once the information collection requirements are approved. ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this final rule are contained inPublic Docket No. A-87-11, located in the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center ofthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC, 20460 and is available forpublic review inroom M-1500. Relevant materials may also be found in Public Docket No. A-84-07, established in support ofEPA's assessment ofair pollution regulatory strategies for the gasoline marketing industry.The dockets maybe inspected from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except forgovernment holidays. Under 40 CFR part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged by EPA for copying docket materials. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James G.Bryson, U.S.'EPA (RDSD-12), Special Regulatory Projects Branch, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, Telephone: (313) 741-7828. 

### SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table ofContents
I.Background II.Description ofthe Rule

A. Applicability 1.Application ofthe Refueling Emission

Standard to LDVs 2.Extension ofthe ORVR Requirement to



### LDTs 3.,Heavy DutyVehicles 4.Applicability toCalifornia Vehicles 5.FuelsCovered B.Implementation 1.Leadtime, Effective Model Yearand

Phase-in Requirements 2. Small Volume Manufacturers 3.Inclusion ofInherently Low Refueling

Emission Vehicles C.Refueling Emission TestProcedures and

Standard 1.Refueling Emissions Test 2.Integrated System Preconditioning 3.Non-Integrated System Preconditioning 4.Seal Test 5.Cap Removal Emissions 6. Spitback Test 7.Nozzle Geometry Standards 8. Level of the Standard D. Safety ofORVR Systems 1.Background 2.Test Procedure/Safety 3.DOT Consultation 4.EPA Assessment 5. Safety Reviews 6. Alternative Control Technologies E.Certification Provisions 1.General 2.Fees 3.Fuel Economy F. Onboard Diagnostics Requirements G. Enforcement and In-Use Performance 1.Liability Periods 2.Selective Enforcement Audit Testing 3.Nonconformance Penalties (NCPs) 4. In-Use Performance II1. Public Participation IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis

A. Environmental Impact B. Costs ofControl C.Cost Effectiveness D.OtherBenefits E. Benefit-Cost Ratio V. Consultation with DOT VI. Judicial Review VII. Statutory Authority VIII. Executive Order 12866 IX Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act X.Information Collection Requirements
List ofKey Acronyms AA Attainment Area AAMA American Automobile Manufacturers Association AIAM Association ofInternational

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

I. Background

On August 19, 1987, EPA published in the Federal Register a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the control of vehicle refueling emissions (52 FR 31162). The proposal described the need for these controls as well asthe conclusions of an EPA study ofgasoline marketing emissions comparing the relative merits ofthe two available control technologies: Systems incorporated into the gasoline dispensing pump system design (known

as Stage II vapor recovery) and systems incorporated into the design ofthe vehicle (known as onboard refueling
vapor recovery (ORVR)) (see Public Docket A-84-07). Based on this study, along with EPA's analysis and response to public comments published in documents separate from the NPRM (Evaluation ofAir Pollution Regulatory Strategies for Gasoline Marketing Industry-Response to Public Comments (II-A-20), Draft*Reeulatory Impact Analysis: Proposed Refueling Emission Regulations for GasolineFueled Motor Vehicles, Vols. Iarid II)

### Federal Register /Vol. 59, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 6, 1994 /Rules and Regulations

(II-A-18, 19), and technical support documents related to ORVR test procedure (II-A-08) and ORVR vehicle safety (II-A-17), EPA proposed to require refueling emission control through ORVR systems. The above mentioned studies are available in public docket A-87-11. All future references ofthis nature can be found at the cited location inpublic docket A87-11 unless otherwise indicated.

Subsequent to the publication ofthe NPRM, EPA held a public hearing in October 1987, followed by an extensive public comment period which closed in February 1988. Comments were analyzed by EPA and key issues were assessed. As a result, EPA determined that the final rulemaking shouldbe delayed pending the resolution of safety

concerns expressed by both the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) (part ofthe Department of Transportation (DoT)) and a number of the commenters. The final rule was further delayed when it became evident that Congress would address issues concerning refueling controls in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA).

The 1990 Amendments revised section 202(a)(6) ofthe CAA to read as follows:

Within 1year after the date ofthe
enactment ofthe Clean Air Act Amendments of1990, the Administrator shall, after consultation with the Secretary of Transportation regarding the safetyof vehicle-based ('onboard') systems for the control ofvehicle refueling emissions, promulgate standards underthis section requiring thatnew light-duty vehicles manufactured beginning in the fourth model year after the model year in which the standards are promulgated and thereafter shall be equipped with such systems.

Subsequent to the enactment ofthe CAAA, EPA continued its consultation with DOT/NHTSA related to the potential safety concerns regarding the implementation ofvehicle-based refueling emission controls. In July 1991, NHTSA completed an updated safety study entitled "An Assessment of the Safety on Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery Systems". On September 3, 1991, EPA published an additional Federal Register notice (56 FR 43682) releasing the NHTSA report for public review and seeking further comment on key issues involved with ORVR controls, most notably on circumstances that had changed since the publication ofthe NPRM. The notice also described and sought comment on a document entitled "Summary ofChanged Circumstances", which discussed statutory changes, technology development, and potential modifications to the refueling test procedure.

EPA held a public hearing on September 26 and 27, 1991, and public
comments were received for 30 days thereafter. After reviewing these comments, EPA continued its consultation with NHTSA. Based on the
outcome ofthe consultation, EPA determined that ORVR controls should
notbe required at that time. The Agency took this step because it concluded, after consultation with NHTSA and after considering the conclusions ofNHTSA's safety study, that ORVR controls posed "unreasonable" safety risks relative to Stage II systems. A Federal Register notice detailing the decision and the supporting rationale was published on April 1.5, 1992 (57 FR 13220).

EPA's action was challenged by representatives ofthe petroleum refining, gasoline marketing, environmental and consumer auto safety communities. They argued 1hat section 202(a)(6) ofthe CAA created a non-discretionary duty to promulgate ORVR standards for LDVs. The court agreed, holding that EPA had no choice but to promulgate such standards, and that the entire safety analysis in the April 15, 1992 notice was flawed • because ofthe comparison with Stage II technology, a comparison not allowed by the text of the statute. NRDCv. EPA, 983 F. 2d 259, 261, 269-71 (D.C. Cir. 1993). The court stated further, in dicta, that the record did not establish that all ORVR systems present inherent and unreasonable safety risks. Id. at 261, 270. The court set aside the April 15, 1992 Agency action, and ordered EPA to promulgate regulations requiring vehicle-based refueling controls on LDVs in accordance withthe CAA.

The petitioners further moved the
court for an order requiring EPA to issue ORVR requirements by a particular date. Before the court ruled, EPA and the petitioners entered into a settlement agreement whereby the Agency agreed
to promulgate such rules by January 22, 1994 (58 FR 33813, June 21, 1993).

Subsequent to the court's decision,

- EPA published two Federal Register notices (May 27, 1993, 58 FR 30731 and June 17, 1993, 58 FR 33418) seeking public comment on the key issues that had changed since the last public
comment period. EPA also held a public hearing on these issues on July 22, 1993, and solicited comments for 30 days thereafter. EPA has analyzed these additional comments, and has revised its proposed regulations accordingly. To support this rule, two key documents, a Final Regulatory Impact Analysis and a Summary and Analysis of Comments have been completed and are available for review in the public docket.

The remainder ofthe document is divided into sections. Section II describes the various aspects ofthe rule

as listed in the Table ofContents above, and provides rationale for the approaches being implemented. Section III describes the long and extended public participation in the rulemaking
process and previous study. Section IV f~ummarizes the Regulatory Impact Analysis. Finally, sections V through X describe various aspects oftherule with regard to compliance with various administrative requirements suchas the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Paperwork Reduction Act.

II. Description ofthe Rule

A. Applicability

1. Application ofthe Refueling Emission Standard to LDVs

Section 202(a)(6) ofthe ct mandates that EPA promulgate requirements for

new light-duty vehicles,(LDVs) to be equipped with ORVR systems. In the August 1987 NPRM, EPA proposed that ORVR requirements apply to LDVs and, in this rule, is finalizing that LDV portion ofthe original NPRM, consistent with the statutory requirements. The model year, phase-in, certification and other requirements for LDVs are discussed in sections B through F, below.

2. Extension ofthe ORVR Requirement
to LDTs

Under the authority provided in Section 202(a)(1) ofthe.Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is applying the ORVR requirement to light-duty trucks (LDTs). EPA is finalizing portions ofthat proposal in today's rules. Each manufacturer's LDTs will have to meet the refueling emission requirements under the phase-in schedule and compliance program for trucks described in the Implementation section below.

In reaching this decision, EPA has conducted a detailed analysis ofthe need for and desirability ofextending the requirement beyond the LDV class. The analysis is detailed in the supporting Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) available in the public docket. The key points are summarized below.

First, the rule affects pollutants which "cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare" (Section 202(a)(1)). Hydrocarbons, as

ozone precursors, have long been an essential object ofemission control strategies (bothvehicles and nonvehicles). Ambient ozone is an irritant 16263

### 16264 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

that adversely affects pulmonary membranes, lungtissues, and lung functions, and is also associated with adverseecological effects. Refueling emissions also contain benzene, a Group A human carcinogen. The gasoline vapors themselves also adversely affect public health andwelfare.

Second, andperhaps most compelling, is the large amount of refueling emissions which arise from these LDTs. In 1990, trucks represented about 33 percent ofthe gasoline used by highway motor vehicles. Using American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA) figures, retail truck saleshave increased at a compound annual rate of4-5 percent overthe past tenyears, and this growth is projected to continue well into the nextcentury. This increase in sales and market fraction has led to an increase in the gasoline used bytrucks. The fraction of gasoline used byLDTs isprojected to increase to 37 percent by 2000 and continue at that level orhigher in the future. Thus,the percentage ofthe refueling emissions inventory attributable to LDTs is large and is expected to increase inthe future.

Another way tolook atthe magnitude ofthe emissions from LDTs is the equivalent gram permile (g/mi) emission rate attributable totheir uncontrolled refueling emissions. As shown inthe RIA, taking into account Phase IIRVP control and the RVP effects ofreformulated gasoline, the nationwide uncontrolled refueling emission rate during the ozone'season for LDTs is about 0.22 g/mi. These are large emission rates in contrast to those controlled by other strategies being implemented under the 1990 CAAA and being considered by the states in their State Implementation Plans. A good example is the.Clean-Fuel Fleet requirements under section 246 ofthe CAA and the Low Emission Vehicle program being implemented in California andperhaps in other states. In these cases'the equivalent emission reductions arein the range of0.12 to 0.18 g/mile. Third, EPAbelieves that ORVR controls are technologically feasible for LDTs. Reports and other materials submitted to the docket over the past several years as well as comments by the regulated industry indicate that prototype ORVR systems have been installed on a number ofpassenger cars and light trucks (IV-A-06, IV-D-682, 680, 682,685,688, 864,701,712,718, 719, 720, 721, IV-E-50, 73). As is now the case with evaporative control systems, we anticipate thatthe control technology used for LDTORVR systems will be very similarto that applied to LDVs. Although there are some differences between LDV and LDT fuel systems (e.g., tank size in some larger LDTs), the general fuel system concepts, designs, and configurations are very similar. In addition, vehicles inboth classes must meet the recently promulgated enhanced evaporative emission control requirements beginning in the 1996 model year. As with LDVs, EPAanticipates that the

same evaporative emission control technology canbe applied to control refueling emissions in LDTs. To ensure that the enhanced evaporative control system canister and purge system can be applied to ORVR controls, EPA is applying the same refueling emission
testprocedure approach to LDTs as is being applied to LDVs. The only significant design difference will be the need for some form of afillneck seal. However, with the anticipated liquid seal approach this requires at most a minor fillneck modification and does
notinvolve new hardware.

While there are vehicle-to-vehicle differences in fuel system designs, these affect both the evaporative and refueling emission rates for a given vehicle/fuel system design. To EPA's knowledge there is nothing unique about the design

or function of LDT fuel systemsrelative
to LDVs which would suggest that the
testprocedure approach being applied
to LDVs would not be equally effective for LDTs in accomplishing the goal of allowing the widespread use of integrated enhanced evaporative/ 

### refueling emission control systems. Although uncertainty hasbeen expressed, nocommenter provided data

or even a substantiated argument to support the view that the test procedure modifications would notbe equally effective in facilitating LDTuse of integrated enhanced evaporative/ refueling control systems. In fact, testing conducted bythe Coordinating Research Council (CRC-APRACProject VE-6) (IV-D-565) andEPA (II-A-06) indicate

no significant difference between LDV andLDT uncontrolled refueling emission rates. As is the case for LDVs, therefueling test procedure approach described above should allowthe widespread use ofintegrated refueling/ evaporative control systems forLDTs. Thus, since there is no problem with applying enhanced evaporative control systems to LDTs,there shouldbe no problem with integrated evaporative/ refueling control systems.

The benefits ofapplying the ORVR requirements toLDTs exceed the costs ofthe requirement. Since EPA believes, and the manufacturers' comments indicate, that most vehicles will use an integrated evaporative/refueling control system, the incremental costs ofLDT ORVR controls are relatively small. As detailed in the RIA, EPA's cost is comprised ofadded hardware (mostly

an improved vent/rollover valve and larger diameter vapor line) and short
term development costs (for emissions and safety certification, facility modification hardware/tooling modifications, and systems engineering) minus the fuel recovery credit. The size ofthe fuel recovery credit depends on the amount ofvaporcaptured. This in
turn depends on the fuelused, the emissions rate (g/gal), and the presence

or absence of Stage II vapor recovery. Taking all ofthese factors into account, and assuming Stage II controlsin most ofthe ozone NAAs, the cost estimate for LDTs/HDVs are shown below inTable 1.

TABLE 1.-ESTIMATED PER-VEHICLE COSTS OF 

### ORVR SYSTEMS IN 

### LDTs

Vehicle group Hardware Develop Operating cost Short term Long term ($/vehicle) ($/vehicle) (NPV) net cost net cost

LDT

....................................................... $4.79 $2.65 -$3.70 $3.74 $1.09



### For vehicles operating in nonattainment areas (NAAs), the
recovery credits are smaller andthe short and long term net costs increase by about $3 per vehicle over those inthe table above. As was discussed above, LDTs represent over 33 percent ofthe nation's gasoline consumption. With the test procedure and control system approach mentioned above, EPA expects that the in-use control efficiency of.LDT ORVR systems will exceed 95 percent. Incremental to Stage IIcontrols, LDT ORVR controls would provide a nationwide average annual emission reduction of 115,000 tons between 1998 and 2020. Reductions in NAAs with

### Federal Register 

### I Vol. 59, No. 66 I Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16265

Stage IIcontrols are large as well. With

no Stage I phase-out, the average annual emissionreduction inthe NAAs is 31,000 tons. IfStage IIisphased out when ORVR is in widespread use (2010), the average annual emission reduction in the NAAs attributable to LDT controls increases to 68,000 tons. These incremental reductions inNAAs

arelarge relative tothe other control options available.

As is discussed below, reductions in refueling emissions have value in all

areas ofthe country. However, the main focus ofthe ORVR requirement isto provide ozone NAAs additional reductions to assistthem in complying

or maintaining compliance with the

ozone standard. Thus, the important

areas to consider are those which are not now incompliance with theozone standard. At present there are 54 marginal or worse ozone NA areas, which represent about 54.9 percent of the nationwide highway gasoline consumption. Ofthese 54 areas, about 43 now have, or areexpected to have, Stage II vapor recovery systems in place. SinceORVR controls arerequired onall LDVs, and Stage IIvapor recovery is (or willbe) in place inmost moderate or
worse ozone NAAs,the key comparison tobe made is (1)retaining Stage II controls inthe moderate orworse ozone NAAs solely forthe purpose of controlling LDT/HDV refueling emissions, versus (2) requiring ORVR controls forLDTs and possibly HDVs, assuming the Stage II control that isor willbe inplace. Thiscomparison provides a worstcase perspective on the LDT/HDV cost effectiveness, since benefits outside NAAs are ignored and planned Stage IIis assumed to continue after the ORVR requirement is promulgated.

As is described inthe RIA, EPA has conducted the analysis for both the Stage 11retention and ORVR options. The cost effectiveness ofretaining Stage 11

solely forthe purpose ofcontrolling LDT/HDV refueling emissions is about $3400 per ton.The cost effectiveness of the LDTORVR controls incremental to the Stage IInow inplace is about $200 per ton ifStage II is phased out when ORVR control is inwidespread use (2010) and only about $700 pertonif Stage IIis never phased out.Under either scenario the cost effectiveness of the ORVR option is attractive. Thus,

even with the Stage II controls, it is

more cost effective torequire ORVR contrbls on LDTsthan to retain Stage I solely forcontrolling LDT/HDV refueling emissions.

In addition to the VOCemission reduction benefits cited above, LDT ORVR controls have other benefits. Thesebenefits have notbeen considered in the calculations above, but would' further enhance the attractiveness of LDT ORVR. LDT ORVR controls would result in an average annual fuel savings equivalent to about 31 million gallons of gasoline peryearbetween the period 1998 and 2020 assuming no Stage II phase-out, and about 43 million gallons per year if Stage IIisphased out. In addition, there willbe health benefits as
a result ofreductions in air toxic emissions. Best estimates are the avoidance of2-3 cancer incidences per year asa result oflower refueling benzene emissions. Additional cancer avoidances are possible depending on the assumption regarding the toxicological impact ofthe remainder of the constituents ofthe gasoline vapor. Reductions inpotential non-cancer health effects andwelfare benefits such

as reduced crop and materialdamage due to ozone would occur as well.

In summary, EPA has decided to implement ORVR controls for LDTsfor several reasons: Their contribution to the VOC inventory is significant and there is a need for additional VOC reductions to address airquality
concerns, the control is technologicallyfeasible and inexpensive, there are additional valuable benefits, and, as discussed inthe RIA, the cost effectiveness is very attractive, especially whencompared to other programs being implemented and under consideration. The analysis shows that the cost effectiveness ofimplementing ORVR controls forLDTs is superior to retaining Stage Icontrols forthe same purpose. The overall benefit to cost ratio for LDTORVR is about 1.5. Ifthe application ofORVR controls to LDVs and LDTs allows phaseout ofStage II controls in the future, the cost savings attributable to Stage 11 operations/ maintenance which would no longer

occur would make the average annual costs ofORVR controls negative (an average annual savings ofover $40 million). Based onthe cost effectiveness analysis andbenefit-cost ratio, one could also justifyimplementing LDT ORVR controls incremental to Stage I1 controls. However, the long-term retention ofStage IIwould seem problematic since it would be needed only forheavy-duty vehicles. 3, HeavyDuty Vehicles

In the NPRM, EPA proposed to require ORVR controls forall HDVs. However, asdiscussed below, this requirement is notbeing finalized in this rulemaking.

Information available toEPA indicates that an HDV ORVR system would be conceptually similar tothose applied LDVs and LDTs and the initial
costs shouldbe relatively small. However, motor vehicle manufacturers have argued that the design and production ofORVR systems for HDVs would be considerably more difficult than for.LDVs and LDTs. Commenters have maintained that the technological step from light-duty technology is greatest with regard to HDVs which have the largest fuel tanks and different fuel/vapor system component designs and configurations than many smaller LDTs. Comments regarding incomplete HDVs expressed concern that secondary manufacturers would improperly modify or incorrectly complete the vehicle fuel system (whichis usually
not fully installed for incomplete HDVs) and perhaps affect the proper function ofthe manufacturer-provided ORVR system. Concern was also expressed that secondary manufacturers might not have the expertise to correctly install the ORVR systems in allcases. In each

case the primary manufacturer may have legal liability forpotential problems. It is also worth noting that
many HDVs are also produced by the primary manufacturer as an incomplete HDVs, perhaps compounding the

concern.

EPA recognizes the manufacturers' strong concerns about ORVR implementation issues that are unique
to HDVs, and agrees that inmany cases the application ofORVR controls to HDVs wouldbe more difficult than for LDTs. Oftentimes the fuel and vapor control systems are differently configured than those on LDTs and the fuel tanks are larger and ofdifferent design.The large number ofcommercial applications for HDVs leads to alarger number ofunique body/chassis designs (e.g., 12 passenger vans, crew cabs, long bed pick-ups, dual wheel axle trucks) and thus a larger number ofdifferent fuel system configurations. Another significant difference is that the engine in the HDVwould becertified separate from the ORVR system and thusthere

are additional challenges in matching the canister purge provided by the engine with the needs ofeach ORVR system. The manufacturers' comments discussed above lay out the special

concerns for incomplete HDVs, including potential legal liabilities for the primary manufacturer. Finally, it should be notedthat unlike LDVs and LDTs EPA is not aware ofany prototype ORVR-equipped HDVs.

Given these concerns, the effort needed to implement LDV'and LDT ORVR systems, the relatively small number ofgasoline-fueled HDVs, and the factthat the application ofORVR

' standards to HDVs is discretionary, EPA

### 16266 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

is not finalizing the portion ofthe NPRM which applies to HDVs.

Even without implementing HDV ORVR requirements at this time,the ORVR program still provides significant benefits. When viewed as a percentage ofsales, ORVR still applies to 91 percent ofall gasoline-fueled trucks and 97 percent ofall gasoline-fueled vehicles. Similarly, control is still achieved over 86 percent ofall gasolinefueled truck refueling emissions and 94 percent ofall gasoline vehicle refueling emissions. Thus, EPA's final decision that ORVR requirements are not required for these vehicles does not significantly reduce the effectiveness of the ORVR program. 4. Applicability to California Vehicles

As discussed further inthe summary and analysis ofcomments, today's final rule implements a federal standard applicable to allvehicles sold inthe United States. Based onthe language in section 202(a)(6) of the Act, EPA considers refueling emissions controlto be an evaporative standard. Although California has motor vehicle standards in place formodel year 1998 and beyond, including evaporative emission standards, to date EPA has issued no section 209(b) waivers which consider a federal ORVRrefueling program when evaluating the protectiveness, in the aggregate, ofthose standards. However, EPA interprets section 209(b)(3) to provide that once a section 209(b) waiver is granted, compliance with the state program is deemed compliance with the federal program standards. (See 42 FR 3193, January 17, 1977). To the 

### extent that a new federal standard is established subsequent to a waiver, such standard will beconsidered in a waiver reconsideration or.future waiver request consideration. EPA is making nofinding at this time how stringency, inthe ORVR context, may be considered in a waiver proceeding, should one occur. (It should be noted that EPA in this notice isrestating its consistent interpretation forthe convenience ofrulemaking participants, and does not intend to reopen for reconsideration theissue of the effect ofexisting section 209(b) waivers on post-waiver regulations.)

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) staffhas held'one workshop to discuss the proper application of refueling control (November 2, 1993). CARB is considering three courses of action: adopting the federal ORVR rule, adopting aCalifornia-specific ORVR rule, test,or standard, ormaintaining that California's current motorvehicle program, taken in the aggregate, is at least as stringent as the federal program" notwithstanding the lack ofORVR controls. IfCalifornia submits awaiver request forits evaporative emission control program applicable to model year 1998 or thereafter, which does not include federal ORVR requirements, EPA will decide atthat time whether California's motor vehicle program is at least as protective asthe federal program. 5.Fuels Covered

In the September 1991 and May 1993 notices, EPA specifically solicited comments on applying the ORVR requirements to highway motor vehicles powered by fuels other than gasoline. Consistent with EPA policy on fuel neutrality and establishing a consistent
set ofrequirements forall fuels, today's rulerequires that LDVs and LDTs operating on any fuels be capable of meeting the refueling emission standard described below. It applies to vehicles certified under both 40 CFR part 86 and 40 CFR part 88. Although many commenters stated that the refueling standard should notapply to vehicles operating on diesel fuels, the section 202(a)(6) requirement by its terms applies to all LDVs regardless ofthe type offuel used. (In contrast, section 202(k) requires evaporative emission controls only for "gasoline-fueled motor vehicles".) However, EPA has attempted
to tailor the refueling emission certification requirements to the fuel used.

Manufacturers ofvehicles capable of operating on gasoline, alcohol, or - gasoline/alcohol blends must show that these vehicles comply when refueled with such fuels through testing as described later in this preamble. This requirement applies to dedicated neat alcohol fuel vehicles and vehicles using alcohol blends. Bi-fuel or dual-fuel vehicles must meet the requirements on both fuels. Flexible-fueled vehicles must meet the requirements on all fuel combinations. At the present time the only alcohol fuel affected is methanol.

However, a waiver ofemission testing requirements is available for those vehicles/fuels which are considered to be inherently low in refueling emissions. EPA believes that ageneral engineering evaluation approach is acceptable for diesel vehicles and diesel fuels for several reasons. Diesel fuel today has a Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) ofless than one pound per square inch (psi) (7kPa) and diesel engines today do not raise the temperature offuel in their

' tanks substantially more than do



### gasoline engines (less than 130 OF under most conditions). Forthese reasons, the vapor space overthe fuel in diesel tanks has a very low concentration offuel vapor compared to that in gasoline tanks and thus displacement refueling emissions are low. EPA thus expects diesel fuelvehicles to meet therefueling emission standard without acontrol system.

Under this approach, the vehicle manufacturer's certification application must include a statement that there is nothing about the vehicle, its fuel system, or fuelthat is counter to EPA's
assessment as discussed above, andthe manufacturer's certification that the vehicle meets the refueling emission standard (even without a control system).

EPA retains the opportunity to test vehicles to ensure that they comply with the emission standard during certification confirmatory testing, Selective Enforcement Audits, and inuse testing. EPA also retains the right to retract the engineering evaluation option for diesel vehicles ifthe RVP of in-use diesel fuel increases or is expected to increase beyond I psi (7 kPa) or a significant increase in fuel tank temperatures is expected.

Since exhaust and evaporative emission requirements now exist for all

new methanol-fueled (neatand blend) vehicles, these shallbe required to comply with the ORVR standards under the same phase-in schedule as gasolinefueled vehicles. EPA expects that these vehicles will use atechnology similarto that used to comply with the evaporative emission requirement.

The refueling control requirement willbe applied to other dedicated, dualfuel, bi-fuel, and flexible-fuel vehicles using other fuels (e.g., dedicated and hybrid electric vehicles, ethanol and ethanol blends, compressed and liquid natural gas, liquified petroleum gas) as regulations covering these fuels are implemented in the future. Lead time, safety, and other factors willbe considered inthe course ofthese actions. Full testing and engineering evaluation certification options will be considered.

B.Implementation

1.Leadtime, Effective Model Year and Phase-in Requirements
Section 202(a)(6) ofthe Act specifies

a four model year lead time before ORVR requirements are to become effective for LDVs ("vehicles manufactured beginning in the fourth model year afterthe model yearin which the standards are promulgated"). After this four-year lead time, a threeyear phase-in period begins, during which 40 percent, 80 percent, and 100 percent, respectively, ofeach manufacturer's sales ofnew LDVs will need to meetthe ORVRrequirements.

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday. April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16267

Today's action is occurring early in the 1994 model year.Thus, ORVR requirements for LDVs will become effective withthe 1998 model year. At least 40 percent ofeach manufacturer's LDV sales will need to meet ORVR requirements inmodel year 1998, 80 percent formodel year'1999, and 100 percent for model years 2000 and later.

Since the application ofORVR requirements to LDTs is under the general authority in section 202(a)(1), the specific lead time and phase-in requirements ofsection 202(a)(6) do not. automatically apply. Rather, the standard "shall take effect after such period asthe Administrator finds
necessary to permit the development and application of the requisite technology, giving appropriate consideration to the cost ofcompliance "(Section 202(a)(2)).

As discussed elsewhere in this preamble, EPA believes that the nature ofORVR technology for LDTs will be very similar to that for LDVs and that the cost ofcontrols, incremental to the
cost ofenhanced evaporative emission controls, is minimal. EPA also does not believe that ORVR controls for LDTs present different safety issues than

. canisters on LDVs where there is now general consensus that there are no unreasonable risks. We therefore believe that the lead time required for developing these systems could be similar regardless ofvehicle class.

While several commenters requested a delay in the LDTORVR requirement,
commenters did not indicate that it was nottechnically feasible to develop ORVR controls for LDTs during this timeframe. However, comments from the vehicle manufacturers did express a

concern that resource and facility constraints would make simultaneous development ofORVR systems for LDVs and all trucks problematic. They have also indicated that design, development and some in-use experience with ORVR systems on passenger cars would be helpful in the design ofLDT systems.

EPA has concluded that the resource and facility concerns expressed by the manufacturers and the desirability for in-use experience with ORVR systems

can bebalanced against the need for emission reductions by beginning the phase-in ofORVR requirements for LDTs after the program forLDVs has been fully implemented. In the mid-tolate 1990's gasoline-powered vehicle manufacturers will need to respond to

new evaporative emission requirements, cold CO exhaust emission standards, and California and Clean Fuel Fleet exhaust emission standards among others. Most ofthese requirements apply to all three vehicle classes and 

### entail several hundred vehicle/engine families. Under the statutory requirement the manufacturers will need to comply with LDV ORVR requirements in the same timeframe. And while complying with the enhanced evaporative and ORVR requirements simultaneously using an integrated control system reduces the burden relative to separate approaches for LDTs, adelay forLDTs is not unreasonable given the already existing requirements. This trade-off is also acceptable inthe short-term since Stage IIrefueling controls are orwill be in place in many ozone NAAs. However, forthe reasons discussed above, EPA believes thatORVR controls are the preferred long term approach forcontrol ofrefueling emissions from LDTs.

Therefore, the requirements promulgated today for LDTswill be implemented intwo stages. The first stage will cover LDTs with aGVWR of 6,000 

### or less (LLDT), thle second will

cover LDTs with a GVWR of 6,001 to 8,500 lbs GVWR (HLDT). LLDTs represent about 70percent ofLDT sales. HLDTsrepresent the remaining 30 percent. For LLDTs, the ORVR requirement willbegin implementation inthe 2001 model year and willphase inover three model years according to the same percentages as LDVs. For HLDTs, theORVR requirement will begin implementation n the 2004 model year and will phasein over three model years according to the same percentages as LDVs (40/80/100). This schedule willpermit the development and application ofcost-effective, -conomically achievable technology, as required by section 202(a)(2) and will stillallow consideration ofthe Stage II phaseout provisions ofsection.202(a)(6) ofthe CAAin the long term.

Provisions of40 CFR 86.085-1(b) permit manufacturers to certify HDVs with a GVWR of8,501-10,000 lbs GVWR as LDTs. Thisoption will remain in effect for refueling controls. HDVs certified under this option would be treated as HLDTs forpurposes leadtime, phase-in and sales compliance determination.

EPA does notview the provisions of section 202(a)(3) as applying to refueling controls, as that provision was probably intended to apply only to exhaust emission standards, as did its predecessor provision. However, even if it did apply, this section would provide for at leastfour years ofleadtime. Since EPA is allowing thismuch leadtime for HLDTs anyway, designating section 202(a)(2) or 202(a)(3) asauthority for HDV leadtime has no practical -significancehere., 2. Small Volume Manufacturers
Today's rule includes a short-term provision for small Volume light-duty vehicle manufacturers. Several small volume manufacturers commented that,

as a practical matter, they cannot phase in their compliance due to their small size and limited product lines. Small volume manufacturers also claimed that they sometimes rely on control technology developed by larger manufacturers to develop their compliance strategies, and this would
not be possible ifthey must comply at essentially the 100 percent ofsales level before the larger manufacturers. R&D
cost concerns were cited as obstacles as well.

EPA believes that these comments
state valid concerns. As is described in three recent Federal Register notices, EPA has allowed small volume manufacturers to delay compliance to the last model year ofthe phase-in: in the Tier I exhaust emission standard rule (June 5, 1991, 56 FR 25724), the cold CO exhaust emissions rule (July17, 1992, 57 FR 31888), and the enhanced evaporative emission standards rule (March 24, 1993, 58 FR 16003), and has decided to allow the same accommodation for the ORVR requirement for light-duty vehicles. This provision is included, not only for the

reasons raised by the'manufacturers, but also because it would be inconsistent to face'ORVR compliance before evaporative emission compliance when the comments indicate that most manufacturers plan to use integrated refueling/evaporative control systems and these are desirable for both cost and safety reasons. In addition, requiring phased compliance for these manufacturers effectively denies them the opportunity Congress intended to phase inthe control technology. (Cf. State ofOhiov. EPA, 997 F. 2d 1520, 1535 (D.C. Cir. 1993) 

### (deminimis exception toiseemingly literal statutory language can be allowed where failure
to allow the exception frustrates a Congressional goal or leads to absurd results)). Thus, small volume manufacturers oflight-duty vehicles, as defined in40 CFR part 86, may delay compliance to model year 2000 (i.e., the third model year ofthe phase-in), but
must comply with 100 percent of sales in that and subsequent model years. Because ofthe additional leadtime EPA is affording to LDTs, the Agency is not implementing,this small-volume. manufacturer provision for these vehicles...

. . '

### 16268 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

3. Inclusion of Inherently Low Refueling C.RefuelingEmission TestProcedures Emission Vehicles andStandard

As was discussed in the May 1993 notice, vehicles meeting the refueling emission standard because they are inherently low in refueling vapor emissions (those certified without a control system using the engineering evaluation option), and thus are waived from testing, cannot be counted in either the vehicles complying or base sales figures in determining compliance with the sales requirements ofthe statute. Compliance for these vehicles is to be calculated separately. 

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

BILLING CODE 6560-60-P

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6. 1994 / Rules and Reulatinn 2



# Figure 1 supplemental

"-'12-36 hours

1 hour MAX 

## optional seal test (EPA only)

---or

Bench purge Additic

1200 bed volumes at.8 cfm

I 

### continue supplemental evap test
hot soak test

-- 2-diurnal test

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



# 1 6-24 

### hours Refueling test
Fuel to at least 95% 4-10 gpm, 67 F± 1.5F 

# ORVR Test for 

# Integrated Systems 166 1R2R

### 16270 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations



# Figure 2 

# ORVR Test for Non-Integrated Systems 

# l1-hurs,

optional seal
test (EPA only) Fuel drain &40%till



# I ICanister preconditioning 

# I [2 g breakthru w/butane



## I Fuel to 95% full

Drivedown atnch 08 Repeated-UDDS's as 1200 bed volumes specified by manufacturer at 0.8 clrm [(up to 85%of tankful).



### LJ 1hourMAX

partial refueling option 

### (EPA only)

Ddivedown 

### Repeated UDDS's as

specified by EPA (10 to 85% of tankful)

r

### 6-24 hoursE 1-6 hours

u I-..3 I II

J Refueling lost



### Fuel toat least 95% 4-1ogpm, 67 F + 1.5 F

BIWNG CODE 560,-P-C

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

1. Refueling Emissions Test

The procedure for the refueling step is

common to both integrated and nonintegrated systems. It involves disconnecting the vapor line from the fuel tank to the canister, draining the fuel tank, refueling with test fuel to 10 percent of thenominal tank capacity, soaking the vehicle for 6 to 24 hours at 80±3 °F (26.7±1.7 °C), reconnecting the
vapor line, and fueling the vehicle with

test fuel at 67±1.5 °F (19.4±0.8 'C in a sealed enclosure (SHED) while measuring emissions. Fueling is performed at a rate of 4 to 10 gallons per minute (15.1 to 37.9 liters per minute) and is terminated at the first automatic shutoffthat occurs after a quantity of fuel hasbeen pumped equal to at least 85 percent ofthe nominal tank capacity.

One ofthe key issues raised inthe July 1993 hearing and the subsequent
comment period concerned the test temperature specifications for the dispensed fuel and the residual in-tank fuel, both ofwhich have a major impact

on the refueling vapor generation and therefore on ORVR system designs. Hearing participants discussed the merits ofsetting the test dispensed fuel temperature at 67 °F (19.4 °C)while maintaining the residual in-tank fueltemperature specification of80 °F (26.7 *C. Previous proposals had included a dispensed fuel temperature specification of81-84 °F (27.2-28.9 °C.

Comments were received on both sides ofthis issue. The manufacturers supported the testtemperature specifications discussed at the July 1993 hearing. They believed these specifications would enable the canisters planned for meeting the enhanced evaporative emission requirements to also capture refueling emissions and would facilitate the use of liquid seals as an option to mechanical seals in the fillneck. Manufacturers commented that this would provide much needed design flexibility and alleviate their safety

concerns. The American Petroleum Institute (API) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

- supported the 81*-84 OF dispensed temperature range proposed earlier. They expressed concern that 67 OF is not representative ofactual dispensed fuel temperatures on high ozone days and' therefore might lead to a situation where the test procedure does not adequately represent in-use conditions with the result that refueling emissions are controlled inadequately in use.

EPA's goal in establishing test parameters is to ensure that the combination oftest conditions results in designs that will achieve a very high level ofcontrol in use. Therefore, the representativeness ofany one test parameter, such as dispensed fuel temperature, is ofless concern than the
net effect ofthe total test. For example, in-use RVPs in many parts ofthe nation during the summer months are-lower than that specified in the test. What is important is the combined effects ofthe key parameters during an in-use refueling event. EPA's analysis ofin-use effectiveness described in the Regulatory Impact Analysis and Summary and Analysis ofComments indicates that these test conditions will yield designs that achieve in-use control in excess of95 percent during the ozone

season in the NAAs (even assuming the
accuracy ofdata showing that one region ofthe country has dispensed fuel temperatures within or exceeding the 81*-84 OF range, a potentially questionable assumption, as explained in the next paragraph). Based on this analysis and the manufacturers' comments, EPA has concluded that the
test specifications being finalized in this action are appropriate.

The dispensed gasoline temperature parameter discussed inthe NPRM was derived using limited survey information on in-use refueling events. The 810-84 OF dispensed temperature value in the NPRM was driven by refueling events in the Southeastern U.S. These dispensed fuel temperature values are seven or more degrees higher than any other region ofthe country. There is no obvious technical reason why the Southeastern U.S. values were

so much higher than those found in other regions ofthe country. Thus, there is some possibility that they maybe unrepresentative, in which case the 67 OF temperature used in the refueling
test is even more representative. (EPA is
not completely disavowing the Southeastern U.S dispensed fuel data, since it is the only data available to EPA

at this time. The Summary and Analysis ofComments contains an analysis ofthe sensitivity of the in-use effectiveness of the ORVR requirement to this dispensed temperature value.)

2. Integrated System Preconditioning

The nature ofintegrated systems allows for a corresponding integration of ORVR and evaporative emission preconditioning procedures. This integration is desirable because of potential test resource savings. A major revision ofthe evaporative emission test procedure was completed recently and will beimplemented beginning in the 1996 model year (58 FR 16002, March 24, 1993).

EPA proposed three integrated system preconditioning options for the refueling test in the May 1993 Federal Register notice. Option A places the refueling test after the exhaust emissions portion ofthe supplemental evaporative emissions test procedure. Option B places the refueling test after the running loss portion ofthe evaporative emissions test sequence. As

a logical extension to this option, EPA also proposed Option B1, which adds

more driving to Option A in order to allow for more purging ofthe canister, similar to Option B, while avoiding the complexities ofthe Option B running loss procedure.

EPA has selected Option B1, based on the above-described advantages and the support for this choice expressed by
commenters. This procedure follows the supplemental evaporative emission test preconditioning procedure, involving an initial fuel tankdrain and fill with certification test fuel to 40 percent full,

a 12 to 36 hour soak at 680 to 86 OF (20'
to 30 °C), apreconditioning drive over

one Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS) cycle, another fuel tank drain and fill to 40 percent, a canister preconditioning step detailed below, and then the exhaust emissions
test. At this point the refueling test departs from the evaporative test sequence. Instead, additional driving is conducted to provide more opportunity for canister purge. This driving consists ofa UDDS cycle followed by two New York City Cycles (NYCC) and- then by another UDDS. This driving schedule corresponds to the driving specified for the evaporative running loss test, though not at the same high temperatures. After the driving, the above-described refueling procedure is conducted,

The canister is preconditioned by loading it with a 50/50 mixture of butane and nitrogen, at arate of40
grams ofbutane per hour, until 2 grams ofhydrocarbons are emitted from the canister (referred to asthe 2-gram breakthrough point). Alternatively, the canister can be loaded to this point with gasoline vapors by conducting repeated diurnal heat builds. All detailed aspects ofthe supplemental evaporative emissioitest procedure, up through the exhaust emission test, apply to integrated ORVR system testing as well (58 FR 16002, March 24, 1993). The three test sequences (full 3-diurnal evaporative, supplemeital evaporative, and refueling) may be performed in any order and exhaust emissions
measurements from any ofthe three
may be considered valid. Ifeither evaporative emission sequence has been conducted before the refueling test, the fuel tank drain and fill and vehicle soak that precede the one UDDS 

### 16271

### 16272 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

preconditioning drive in the refueling

test sequence may be skipped.
3.Non-Integrated System Preconditioning

Non-integrated ORVR systems store only refueling vapors and therefore
warrant a preconditioning drivedown of 85 percent ofthe fuel tank capacity before being subjected tothe 85 percent refueling event. This driving consists of repeated UDDS cycles, either on atrack

or on a dynamometer, until a volume of fuel equal to 85 percent ofthe fueltank nominal capacity has been consumed. Duringthe actual refueling test, the vehicle willbe filled to at least 95 percent oftank capacity, as is the case for the integrated system. If manufacturers exercise the optionto do less driving in certification testing, EPA may perform subsequent confirmatory and in-use testing using the same reduced driving schedule. At its discretion, EPA may test nonintegrated systems with a partial refueling testprocedure. This procedure helps to ensure control in those in-use refueling events inwhich less than a tankful of fuelis pumped. Because the non-integrated system test allows a nearly complete drivedown ofthe fuel tank capacity, thus enabling purge design strategies that inappropriately minimize purge during-theexhaust emissions test, EPA considers the partial refueling test necessary. It also allows EPA to assess thebasic question of whether the system has the capacity to handle a partial fill, a common refueling
event in use.

Inthis partial fill test,.following the loading ofthe canister with butane and fueling ofthe vehicle to 95 percent of the fuel tank capacity, the vehicle will be driven some integer number ofUDDS cycles such that some amount offuel between 10 and 85 percent ofthe fuel tank capacity is consumed. After a one to six hour soak, the vehicle willbe subjected to the refueling emissions
measurement test with no intervening drain and fill. The fuel pumped inthe
test willbe a metered amount, corresponding to-the amount consumed inthe drive. This amount willbe based

on the vehicle's fueleconomy, as determined at certification.

4. Seal Test

Also at its discretion, EPA may perform a seal test ofintegrated and non-integrated designs, aimed at verifying the integrity of fillpipe seals andvapor lines. This test eliminates consideration ofpotential canister, emissions by thoroughly bench purging the canister priorto the refueling event. The canister preconditioning and preparatory driving are therefore likewise eliminated, although EPA may perform the test procedure up through the exhaust emission test (inorder to obtain this measurement) and then conduct thebench purge and refueling

test. Failure ofthe seal test would be considered equivalent to failing the full refueling emissions test and the same standard would apply to both.

5. Cap Removal Emissions

Inthe May 1993 Notice, EPA requested comment on including a test
to measure and control the "puff loss" emissions from a pressurized fuel tank when the fuel cap is removed for refueling.

In addition to refueling emissions, vehicles can have emissions when the fuel cap is removed from a pressurized fuel tank before the refueling event. Although these emissions potentially
warrant control, EPA does fiot view them as "refueling" emissions for
purposes ofsection 202(a)(6), since they precede a refueling and are more akin to evaporative emissions. EPA in fact proposed, but did not finalize, such a cap-offtest in theevaporative emissions NPRM (55 FR 1914, January 19, 1990) rather than in theORVR NPRM. Thus Congress would not have been considering such emissions when it enacted the 95 percent minimum control standard in section 202(a)(6) in the 1990 CAAAs.

Manufacturers commented that the puffloss test would provide no additional control over that achieved by the refueling test and the evaporative emissions rule requirement that tanks pressurized to over 10" (25 cm) H20 be vented to the canister upon cap removal. EPA disagrees with this
assessment. Therefueling test does not

measure emissions from cap removal directly after vehicle operation. The evaporative emissions requirement allows for-the venting oftank pressures under 10" H20 to the atmosphere. These emissions can be appreciable. General Motors (GM) calculated that the puff loss from venting a 10 percent full, 20 gallon (76 liter)tank at 10" H20 would be about 3 grams. EPA agrees with this estimate but disagrees with the contention that this is minor, given that this same vehicle would only be allowed to emit a little over 3 grams during the refueling test.

GM also argued that the execution of

a cap-off test involving a warm-up drive followed immediately by a cap-off step in a SHED wouldbe complex and formidable. EPA agrees with GM's contentions that hot soak emissions could confuse the puffloss

measurement and that the time required 

### to move a vehicle from a dynamometer cell to a SHED andremove the cap would be overly long compared to the actual in-use event, which typically involves lessthan a minute from key-off to cap-off. These two concerns would affect the measured emissions in opposite directions and would make it difficult to ascertain a puffloss emission corresponding to the in-use event.

EPA remains concerned about puff loss emissions, particularly considering that the new evaporative emission control requirements may prompt manufacturers to'rely more heavily on pressurized tank designs in the future. However, EPAbelieves it necessary to deferaction on thisissue so that an effective test procedure can be developed, involving more complete public participation. Therefore, EPA is leavingthis portion ofthe rulemaking open for now and intends to take up this issue as part ofthe planned further action on pressurized designs announced inthe evaporative emissions control final rule (58 FR 16012). However, it shouldbe noted that the enhanced evaporative emissions rule will require controls for systems whose
pressure exceeds 10 inches H 20, and 

### thus control is already in place for these
extreme situations.

6. Spitback Test



### EPA believes, and manufacturers'
comments indicate, that vehicles would not be expected to comply with the refueling emission standard ifthey emitted significant spitback emissions during the refueling test. Fuel spilled on the side ofthe vehicle or in the SHED when the fuel nozzle shuts offwill evaporate and be included aspart'ofthe refueling emissions. In recognition of this effect, this final rule also waives the spitback testing requirement forvehicles being certified tomeet the ORVR requirements. Similar to the provision for "inherently lowrefueling emission vehicles" discussed above, manufacturers can, at their option, certify as part ofthe certification application, that theyagree with EPA's
assessment regarding the effect of spitback emissions on the ability to pass the refueling emission standard and that their vehicle passes the spitbacktest standard. Ofcourse, manufacturers may elect to comply with the spitback test in lieu ofusingthis waiver option.

Compliance with the spitback standard is still required, and EPA is retaining the spitback test and standard promulgated in the enhanced evaporative emissions control rule (58
FR 16002, March 24, 1993). EPA may 

### conduct or require manufacturers to conduct the spitback testto demonstrate

### Federal Regiser I Vot 

### 59, No.

### 66. 1 Wednesday, April 6, 1994 [ Rules and' Regulations 16273

compliance should concerns over vehicle spitback arise.

7. 

### Nozzle Geometry Standards

In the NPRM, EPA asked for comment

on the need forfuel nozzle geometry standards as part ofan ORVR program, and suggested thatauto makers and nozzle manufacturers undertake a voluntary initiative to develop national

consensus standards in this area. This initiative isbeing undertaken under the auspices ofthe Society ofAutomotive Engineers (SAE). An SAE technical committee, comprised ofauto maker, fuel nozzle manufacturer, and other representatives, is considering revisions

to SAE standard J285 "Gasoline Dispenser Nozzle Spouts".

It is important thatnozzles used in the design and testing ofORVRequipped vehicles be similar to those found in use. Should this committee reach consensus on fuel nozzle geometry specifications, EPA will use a nozzle meeting this standard in all refueling emissions compliance testing, ifthe nozzle manufacturers agree to adopt these specifications for future retail and commercial fuel nozzles and the auto manufacturers design their ORVR systems to accommodate a nozzle with this geometry. Ifno standard is developed for nozzle geometry orif the above agreements cannot be reached, EPA will use any commercially available nozzle in its testing.

8. Level ofthe Standard

This final rule adopts a refueling test standard of0.20 grams of hydocarbon emissions per gallon (g/gal) offuel pumped (0.053 g/liter. This standard applies to all vehicle classes covered by thisrule and covers the full useful life. Setting the standard at this level ensures that the standard that meets the statutory requirement to provide a minimum emission capture efficiency of 95 percent, as discussed below.

The August 1987 NPRM included a proposed refueling emission standard of 0.10 g/gal (0.026 g/liter)offuel pumped, which at that time represented about a 98 percent emissions reduction from uncontrolled levels. Subsequently, the 1990 CAAA called for a refueling emission standard representing at least

a 95 percent reduction over uncontrolled levels. EPA determined that thisreduction corresponds to a standard ofabout 0.25 g/gal (0.066 g/ liter) and requested comment in the May 1993 notice on the setting ofa standard in the 0.10 to 0.25 g/gal range.

Manufacturers supported a standard of0.20 g/gal, arguing that this standard would satisfy the CAA minimum requirement while providing for full 

### useful life compliance and design flexibility, API and other commenters felt that a standard providing a 98 percent level of control isjustified based

on demonstrated and cost effective technology.

After analyzing the comments and the rojected in-use emission impacts, EPA

as selected a standard of0.20 g/gal. This standard was chosen because it
meets or exceeds the statutory minimum requirement and, since It is representative ofmost refueling situations reasonably likely tooccur (Cf EdisonElectric Institutev. EPA, 2F.3J 438, 446-47 (D.C. Cir. 1993)). At the

same time,it meets the manufacturers' need foradequate design margin and flexibility. As is discussed in the Summary and Analysis of Comments, the nature ofthe canister-based control technology is such that setting the standard at a lower level would notbe expected to achieve additional emission reductions in use. Systems will need to be designed for essentially zero emissions, with the standard providing

an allowance for vehicle and test variability. It may also enhance the use ofliquid fillneck sealswhich are projected to have lower costs, good inuse performance, and present no safety

concerns. D. Safety ofORVR Systems
1. Background

Section 202(a)(6) ofthe 1990 CAA Amendments (aswell asits predecessor provision) requiresEPA to consult with the Secretary ofTransportation regarding the safety of vehicle-based (ORVR) systems for the control of vehicle refueling emissions. EPAbegan this consultation in the Spring of 1986, prior to the NPRM, and the consultation has continued throughout the various stages ofthis rulemaking. DoT was represented by NHTSA throughout this process. A record ofthis consultation and the various analyses conducted by EPA and NHTSA to assess the safety issue is-availablein the public docket and isdiscussed in the April 15, 1992 Federal Register notice regarding ORVR controls (57 FR 13220). Early inthe consultation process, NHTSA raised

concerns about the safety ofORVR canister systems, and throughout the various stages ofthe rulemaking, safety has been a central issue in the public
comments and in the deliberations on the ORVR rulemaking. Unresolved

concerns regarding the safety ofORVR canister systems (at leastrelative to Stage IIsystems) delayed promulgation ofthe NPRM prior to the 1990 CAAAs and, in April 1992, led EPA to decide not to require ORVR controls at that time. Given the concerns raised about vehicle safety, it Is important to address the potential safety concerns aspart of the implementation ofthe ORVR requirement.

2. Test Procedure/Safety

The safety comments regarding ORVR canister systems focused primarily on the concern that ORVR systemswould increase fuel system complexity and that thiswould create vehicle safety risks. Many manufacturers' comments

on the NPRM indicated that thetest procedure, as proposed in 1987, would force the use ofnon-integrated (separate) systems for refueling and evaporative emissions control. They characterized these systems as making the fuel vapor control system more complex than current evaporative control systems, thus creating the potential for asafety risk.

As noted earlier, the DC Circuit held that the consultation requirement in section 202(a)(6) doesnot alter EPA's duty to issue ORVR requirements. After the decision wasissued and after publication ofEPA's May 27, 1993 Federal Register notice (58 FR 30731), 

### EPA held technical discussions with representatives ofAAMA regarding the ORVR test procedure (See items IV-E101,102,105,106 in the public docket for this rulemaking). The purpose ofthese discussions was to identifypotential changes to the ORVR test procedure which, ifenacted, would facilitate the

use ofan Integrated evaporative/ refueling control system approach with

a liquid seal in the fillneck. (Aswas discussed above, inMarch 1993, EPA published a final rule requiring enhanced evaporative controls on gasoline-powered LDVs, LDTs, and 

### HDVs. The enhanced evaporative rerquirements will lead to an increase in the size ofthe canister used to capture evaporative emissions, an upgrade in the purge systemcapabilities, as well as other system changes and improvements.) An integrated system approach would allow manufacturers to make use ofthe upgraded evaporative control hardware (common carbon canister, purge system, vapor hoses, etc.) as part oftheir ORVR control strategy and thusaddress both system complexity and cost issues. This approach would be used in lieu ofthe non-integrated control system approaches which were characterized as being complex and potentially less safe.

ORVR test procedure changes which would ease the use ofintegrated 

### evaporative/refueling control systems with liquid fillneck seal approaches

were identified. EPAexplained this option at the July 22, 1993 public

### 16274 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

hearing and requested additional public

comment.

Auto manufacturer comments supported this approach. For example, Chrysler Corporation's comments indicated:

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

FordMotor Company's comments stated: "Ford recommends that EPA adopt the test procedure changes and standards outlined by AAMA atthe Hearing on July 22, 1993, and contained in the attached comments. These changes should allow for the design and development ofa canister-based, integrated refueling and evaporative emissions system which is less complex than a nonintegrated system and which addresses the safety issues raised in previous rulemakings. These procedural changes alongwith others identified in the comments should allow EPA. in consultation with NHTSA, tofind that integrated systems do not present an unreasonable risk toautomotive safety."

General Motors expressed similar views: "The ORVR test procedure changes described in these comments are critical to permitting manufacturers to develop ORVR systems for passenger cars that minimize or eliminate any adverse impact upon motor vehicle safety."

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

"We believe this procedure will allow the

use of an integrated ORVRlevaporative emissions system including a common carbon canister. An integrated ORVR/ evaporative emissions system will allow manufacturers to design and build safe, efficient ORVR systems."

Comments by other manufacturers also supported this position. Accordingly, this rule enacts the test procedure option identified above. It is supported by AAMA, the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers (AIAM), and the individual manufacturers and, according to their comments, minimizes their longstanding vehicle safety concerns.
3. DOT Consultation

In response to the changed circumstances since it's prior safety analysis, DoT/NHTSA undertook an independent assessment ofvehicle safety concerns associated with ORVR systems. In November 1993, NHTSA completed a study entitled "An Assessment ofOnboard Refueling Vapor Recovery System Safety". This document reexamined the conclusions raised in their July 1991 study, upon which EPA relied heavily on its April 1992 decision not to require ORVR controls.

In this recent study, NHTSA revisited the principal findings ofits July 1991 report to consider thepositive safety impacts of the testprocedure changes and other changed circumstances. The NHTSA report, which is available in the public docket, reached the following general conclusion regarding ORVR safety:

"Basically, there were three principal areas of concern pointed out in the July 1991 report: the increased size ofvapor canisters
to hold the fuel vapors, the mechanical complexity ofthe ORVR system, and the ability ofthe ORVR system to safely manage and purge the increased volume ofvapors.

Asdiscussed above, technical developments, and testprocedure and regulatory changes that have occurred since the July 1991 safety assessment, have had the net effect ofreducing the safety concerns raised in the July 1991 report. The majority ofvehicle manufacturers have stated that it is now possible to design safe ORVR systems that will function properly under all operatingconditions. However, there still remains some small unquantifiable increase in safety risk due to the addition ofthe ORVR systems. This risk is unquantifiable since there are no data uponwhich to base a numerical estimate."

Thus, NHTSA views the changed circumstances, including the final test procedure and the use ofintegrated systems, as addressing many oftheir previous concerns. They also acknowledge that absent actual data they cannot determine the level ofrisk, and thus conclude that risks are unquantifiable. While the NHTSA report contained abrief assessment as to why trucks might be different than cars and stated that truck prototype systems and field tests for truck ORVR systems would be beneficial, no special safety risks were cited for using ORVR canisters to control LDT/HDV refueling emissions.

4. EPA Assessment

EPA is withdrawing its April, 1992 finding that ORVR canisters pose unreasonable safety risks. First, that determination was based on an improper comparison with Stage II controls. NRDCv. Reilly,983 F. 2d at 271. Considered on their own, ORVR canisters do not appear to pose significant safety risks. Indeed, as the Agency noted in 1987, this appears to be particularly true for integrated evaporative/refueling control systemswhich now appear to be the preferred control system.

Second, EPA is swayed because NHTSA has reviewed the safety of ORVR systems in light ofrecent developments and subsequently has withdrawn most ofthe adverse conclusions in the 1991 report. NHTSA also indicates (1993 Report pp. 17-24) that some ofits remaining concerns can be addressed by choosing proper designs for canister systems. As noted above, EPA has taken NHTSA's views strongly into account throughout the

course ofthis rulemaking, and accordingly is influenced by NHTSA's

more positive outlook on ORVR canister safety.

The record further indicates that installation ofORVR canisters can have

some positive impacts on safety. See EPA's "Summary and Analysis of Comments on the Potential Safety. Implications ofORVR Systems" (IV-H04). Safety benefits include removal of the external fuel vapor vent line from the fillneck ofthese vehicles, the expected move ofthe canister from the engine compartment to the rear ofthe vehicle, the resultant shortening ofthe
vapor vent line, and the capture offuel
vapor previously vented at the service station during refueling. All ofthese actions directionally reduce the risk of vehicle fires in crash and non-crash situations.

In sum, given that the manufacturers indicate that integrated evaporative/ refueling control systems minimize their safety concerns, NHTSA's significant reduction in concerns, EPA's • longstanding view of the safety of integrated refueling/evaporative control systems and the safety benefits ofORVR controls, EPA has decided to withdraw its.April 15, 1992 finding (57 FR 13230- 13231). Specifically, EPA concludes that onboard canister controls do not pose an unreasonable riskto public safety. ORVR canister systems are not inherently unsafe.

Several commenters expressed

concern about applying the ORVR requirement to trucks and incomplete vehicles (i.e., those produced by secondary manufacturers). However, for the most part, EPA does not believe the technical circumstances here to be substantially different than for LDVs. All trucks, including those produced by secondary manufacturers, are subject to the enhanced evaporative emission requirements and will have to upgrade their control systems inresponse to these new requirements. Also, the ORVR testprocedure for these vehicles,

as for LDVs, would facilitate the use of integrated evaporative/ refueling control systems. Potential safety concerns of vehicles completed by secondary manufacturers should not be substantially different for integrated enhanced evaporative/refueling control systems than they are for enhanced evaporative control systems alone. This is especially the case for those incomplete vehicles delivered to the secondary manufacturer with a complete fuel system as are mostFederal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16275

incomplete LDTs. Also, the potential safety benefits of ORVR systems would

accrue to trucks and secondary manufacturer vehicles as well as to LDVs. Thus, EPA believes the safety

concerns, ifany, to be similar to those for LDVs. In fact, while the manufacturers opposed extending the ORVR requirement to trucks on several grounds, none indicated that safetruck ORVR systems were not possible.

In any event, EPA's decision not to finalize ORVR requirements for HDVs (both complete and incomplete HDVs)
at this time and to delay LDT implementation for three years or more should minimize any remaining safety

concerns about ORVRsystems for trucks (IV-H-23).

5. Safety Reviews

Nonetheless, EPA is very sensitive to theuncertainties expressed by NHTSA, and plans a program to implement its authority to ensure-safe systems. Sections 202(a)(4) and 206(a)(3)(A). (B) ofthe CAA give EPA broad authority to address the safety ofemission control systems. Section 202(a)(4) reads:

Effective with respect to vehicles and engines manufactured after modelyear 1978,

no emission control device, system, or element ofdesign shall be usedin a new motorvehicle or new motor vehicle engine for purposes ofcomplying with standards prescribed under this subsection ifsuch device. system, orelement of design will

cause or contribute to an unreasonable risk to public health, welfare, or safety in its operation or function.

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

(A)A certificate ofconformity may be issued under this section onlyif the Administrator determines that the manufacturer (or inthe case ofa vehicle or engine for import, anyperson) has established to the satisfaction ofthe Administrator that any emission control

- device, system, or element of design installed

on,or incorporated in, such vehicle or engine conforms to applicable requirements of section 202(a)(4).

(B) The Administrator may conduct such tests and mayrequire the manufacturer (or any such person) to conduct such tests and provide such information as is necessary to carry out subparagraph (A) ofthis paragraph. * * *

This authority has been implemented for more than ten years. The Code of Federal Regulations § 86.084-5(b) requires that any system installed on a

new motor vehicle to enable such a vehicle to conform to standards shall
not in its operation, function, or malfunction resultin any unsafe condition endangering the motor vehicle, its occupants, or persons or property in close proximity to the vehicle. Furthermore, § 86.091-23(d) requires that manufacturers certify that the vehicles for which emission certification isrequested conform to the requirements of§86.084-5(b). The manufacturer must also agree to provide descriptions ofthe tests conducted, the results ofsuch tests, and other information upon which that determination is based. Presently this safety certification is submitted in the application for certification which manufacturers must submit for every vehicle model they plan to produce for

commerce in the United States. EPA intends to use this authority and the approach described above to implement the ORVR requirement. See also NRDC

v. Reilly,983 F.2d at 267 (ultimate issue ofsafety is to be addressed at certification).

The ultimate responsibility for ORVR system safety (both design and performance inuse) rests with the manufacturers. As part ofthe application for certification, manufacturers will berequired to make the declarations prescribed-in §86.091- 23 (d). During review ofthe certification application, EPA will study the design ofthe vehicle's ORVR system, its onvehicle configuration and operation, and will consult directly with NHTSA

on these applications. Special consideration will be given tothe potential concerns raised in the course ofthe rulemaking process such as component locations, materials used in the components, and connections between components. For canister-based systems, items ofspecial interest will include canister location and shell construction, canister/vapor hose access for I/M testing, vapor hose routing and wall thickness, integrity ofconnections, and proximity ofpotential ignition



### sources. In addition,manufacturers will
want to consider concerns raised in past NHTSA safety assessments. The November 1993 NHTSA report makes it clear that proper design is critical in system safety performance.

As was mentioned above, EPA could ask for any or all ofthe information, supporting the manufacturer's safety
assessment and EPA will consider all information presented by the manufacturer inthis assessment whether it is based on testing, engineering analysis, or some other

source. As is present practice, EPA expects that manufacturers will conduct engineering risk assessments and component, system, and vehicle tests to

assess the safety ofvarious ORVR system designs and on-vehicle configurations and make any modifications or devise and implement the engineering solutions needed to address potential problems. ORVR-equipped vehicles would have
to meet the applicable FMVSSs, including FMVSS 301 related to Fuel System Integrity. As noted above, 

### NHTSA is considering amending the latterto address ORVR system safety. However, section 206(a)(3)(B) ofthe 

### CAAprovides EPA withbroad latitude
to require manufacturers to conduct
tests or provide other information as may be needed to determine ifan ORVR system meets the vehicle safety 

### requirements prescribed in section 202(a)(4).

In the May 27, 1993 Federal Register notice, EPA asked for comment on whether any specific tests or other information should berequired up front

as part ofthe certification process and, ifso, what information and in what form would be most appropriate. No
commenter provided input on this point and, given the resolution ofthe safety issue, EPA has decided not to require
any specific information at this time.

In the same notice, EPA also asked
comment from automanufacturers and 

### other interested parties on the desirability ofdeveloping a process, 

### after promulgation ofthe finalrule, through which there could be a dialogue 

### with EPA and NHTSA on design questions related to thein-use safety of ORVR systems. Manufacturers' 

### comments indicated that resolution of the safety issue as part ofthe rulewas mostimportant, and they expressed little interest in establishing a dialogue 

### atthis time.EPAremains willing to work with the auto manufacturers in 

### this area at any time in the future.

Although ultimate safety determinations must await the certification process, EPAwishes to repeat that itknows ofnothing that would preclude the certification of properly designed ORVR canister 

### systems on LDVs andLDTs. EPA
stresses that it hasnever determined for purposes ofcertification under section 206 thatany specific ORVR system (including ORVR canisters) would present an unreasonable risk to public safety within themeaning ofsection 202(a)(4), 58 FR 30740-30741. Consequently, the potential existence of

means other than canisters to control refueling emissions should not preclude certification ofproperly-designed canister-based control systems.

6. Alternative Control Technologies

As part ofthe technical analysis supporting the NPRM, EPA indicated that controltechnologies such as collapsible fuel bladders and cloth impregnated with activated carbon absorbers were potential alternatives to carbon canisters. As part ofthe

### 16276 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

technology assessment forthis final rule, EPA reviewed the record ofthe rule to see what options had been put forth and to assess what progress had been made in applying these technologies to vehicle fuel systems. The collective determination from the review was that, in some cases, parties have pursued development ofthese technologies for other applications, such

as aircraft fuel systems and chemical protection suits,but that less overall progress hasbeen made in applying these technologies to automotive applications. In some cases noprogress
was made, and the technical feasibility ofthese designs therefore remains problematic. In one case commercial development was dependent on industry or government support. While EPA cannot arbitrarily lreclude theuse ofany control system design approach, EPA concludes that such alternatives

arenot generally likely to be available forproduction application in the time frame when manufacturers must begin toinstall ORVR systems on their " vehicles. The potential existence of these alternative control approaches does not preclude certification of properly designed canister-based ORVR controls.

E. Certification Provisions


### 1.General

Today's action modifies the certification process by adding the requirement for demonstrating. compliance with refueling emission standards according to the prescribed phase-in schedule. This action is expected to have no direct impact on manufacturers' fuel economy programs. The following paragraphs summarize EPA's certification and fuel economy requirements with regard to ORVR controls.

The regulations promulgated in this action provide new definitions for refueling families and refueling emission control systems. For LDVs and LDTs, manufacturers will normally perform a refueling test on one emission-data vehicle per refueling emission control system and submit this
testdata (low altitude data) to EPA for possible confirmatory testing. Data submitted to EPA should include the exhaust emissions data from the exhaust emissions test which is contained in the. refueling test sequence. The data should demonstrate compliance with all applicable emission standards. Manufacturers may submit high altitude test data to EPA for possible confirmatory testing, or provide a statement inthe application for certification that vehicles will comply with applicable emission standards at high altitude. Note that this action requires manufacturers to perform exhaust and evaporative emission tests using pre-loaded canisters. Also note that vehicles inherently low in refueling emissions can be certified using an engineering evaluation approved by the Administrator inlieu oftesting.

After the testing has been completed, manufacturers typically submit to EPA

an application for certification, containing information about the vehicles intended forproduction, emission test data used to support certification, statements ofcompliance with emission standards and device safety, and other information required by EPA. This action will require manufacturers to provide refueling information in their application for certification. To determine compliance with applicable emission standards, this action requires the refueling emission testdata to be adjusted by an additive deterioration factor, developed by the manufacturer using good engineering judgement to assure that vehicles will comply in actual use for the useful life ofthe vehicle/engine. Should EPA have any concerns aboutthe safety ofthe ORVRrefueling system used by the manufacturer, certification may be delayed or denied, under section 202(a)(4) and 206(a)(3) ofthe CAA. This should not happen, however, with properly designed systems.

2. Fees



### EPA-incurred costs associated with the certification program canbe recovered in the Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program (MVECP) fee program (see40 CFR part 86, subpart J). Today's action is likely to increase the amount ofthe MVECP fee which is collected during the certification process since the Agency's burden is expected to increase. As discussed in the Fee Updating Procedure section of the Fees final rule, (57 FR 30049, July 7, 1992), EPA will periodically review 

### its fees. During that fee updating process, theAgency intends to assess the additional burden incurred due to this action, and if, as a result ofthe review, EPA determines that there has 'been a significant change in theMVECP costs, aproposal to revise the fee schedule willbe published inthe Federal Register. Thus, manufacturers will be provided with sufficient notice and comment period prior to any changes in the amount ofthe fee collected.
3.Fuel Economy

This action does not have any direct impact on fuel economy labeling, Corp.Qrate Average Fuel Economy

. (CAFE), or gas guzzler data submission requirements. Because the changes to the test procedure promulgated in this action may affect fuel economy measurements,I EPA will notrequire

use of the new procedure for fuel
economy testing. Therefore, to generate city fuel economy values, manufacturers
may use the previously established Federal Test Procedure or may optionally use the pre-loaded canister
test procedures established in this action (which are essentially the same test procedures established in the enhanced evaporative emission final rule, ref.58 FR 16002, March 24, 1993). EPA will normally use the same procedure for confirmatory testing as used by the manufacturer.

F. OnboardDiagnostics Requirements Today's action extends the existing provisions for onboard diagnostic (OBD) systems to ORVR equipment. (Thefinal rule for the existing program was published February 19, 1993, 58 FR 9468). ORVR systems are very similar to evaporative systems and this action requires.that the OBD performance requirements which currently apply to evaporative systems apply on LDVs and LDTs also to ORVR systems, both integrated and non-integrated.

As with the current OBD program for evaporative-only systems, OBD monitoring ofthe ORVR system is not mandatory. However, the same approach to in-use testing will be used. That is, any in-use vehicle with evaporative emissions of30 g/test or higher measured over the first 24 hours of the three-day diurnal from the revised evaporative test procedure will be flagged for further evaluation. That evaluation will consist ofmaking any necessary repairs to ensure system integrity, and then making a 0.04 inch (1 mm) orifice anywhere within the system. To demonstrate compliance, operating the vehicle in this condition

over the full FTP must cause the malfunction indicator light (MIL) to illuminate. A failure ofthe OBD system
to signal a problem could contribute to

a decision to initiate a recall action. While a system operating in such a

manner (i.e., without the MIL going on)
may not detect a malfunction related solely to refueling events, EPA

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

### Federal Register /Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16277

nevertheless believes that such a system will be sufficient ifit detects general problems with vapor and purge system integrity.

For integrated ORVR systems, manufacturers can use the same OBD systems they use to nonitor evaporative systems.For non-integrated systems, both the evaporative and refueling sides ofthe system will need to be monitored. It should be possible forthe same technology to be used forboth monitoring tasks in most cases. For example, a strategy that uses engine

vacuum to draw a certain minimum level ofvacuum or uses a small pump to generate a positive pressure in the entire vapor system could include a non-integrated ORVR canister inthe monitoring as well. For both integrated and non-integrated systems,EPA believes this approach willresult in an adequate level ofcertainty thatkey potential malfunctions in ORVR systems willbe identified and repaired. Since a 0.04 inch orifice would emit only about 3grams ofhydrocarbon vapor in a normal refueling event,this approach will assure a high level ofin-use control.

G. EnforcementandIn-UsePerformance


### 1.Liability Periods

In accordance with the CAAA of 1990, ORVR controls for new LDVs must have useful lives of10 years or 100,000 miles (160,000 km) orthe equivalent, with recall testing allowed up to 7years or 75,000 miles (120,000 kin) orthe equivalent, whichever occurs first (CAA section 202(d)(1); 42 U.S.C. 

### 7521(d)(1)). LDTs with loaded vehicle weight up to 3,750 pounds (1,700 kg) have the same useful life requirement as LDVs. All other LDTs have a useful life requirement of 11 years or 120,000 miles (190,000 kin) or the equivalent, whichever occurs first. Pursuant to section 207(i), expected designs for ORVR controls are not "specified major emission control components," because they cost less than $200. Therefore, 

### unless more expensive components are utilized, manufacturers need only warrant them for 2years or 24,000 miles (39,000 km) or the equivalent, whichever occurs first. If, at some time in the future, the Administrator should determine that the ORVR controls are "specified major emission control components," manufacturers must warrant them for 8 years or 80,000 miles (130,000 km) or the equivalent, whichever occurs first (CAA section 207(i)(2); 42 U.S.C. 7541(i)(2)). 2. Selective Enforcement Audit Testing

Pursuant to CAA section 206(b), the Administrator is authorized to test new motor vehicles in order to determine whether vehicles being manufactured do in fact conform to the regulations with respect to which a certificate of conformity was issued. Therefore, LDVs and LDTs that are certified to meet the refueling emission standard are subject
to this standard in a Selective Enforcement Audit (SEA).

In the 1987 NPRM, EPA discussed
two testing.issues which resulted from performing the refueling test on newly built motor vehicles. The first issue regarded the possible influence ofnew vehicle background evaporative emissions (i.e., hydrocarbon emissions from such things asthe fresh paint on

anew vehicle which has not fully cured) on refueling emission
measurements. Historically, EPA has
not conducted SEA testing for evaporative emissions due to the relatively large non-fuel background emissions emitted from newly built vehicles. However, EPA expected that background emissions would not significantly affect refueling emission
measurements because the actual time forbackground evaporative losses to

occur would be very short (refueling emission measurements have a duration of less than five minutes). Also, refueling measurements would be taken
at an ambient temperature of approximately 800 F, so fuel and nonfuel evaporative emissions would not be increased by heating ofthe tank, engine,

or other subsystems, as would occur during theusual evaporative emissions
test. However, to address any concerns

over the effects ofbackground emissions, EPA* proposed an additional SEA testing procedure where background emissions would be measured and then subtracted from the refueling emissions measurement. This additional procedure would be used if manufacturers provided evidence that newly built vehicle background emissions would significantly exceed in-use vehicle background emissions, which were intended to be included in the refueling standard.

Because manufacturers' comments raised concerns about conducting the refueling test without measuring for background emissions, and about the
extra time needed for the measurement, this final rule will include the new vehicle background emissions
measurement proposed in the 1987 NPRM as an optional procedure.. However, this decision must be made before SEA testing is conducted. It will apply to all vehicles tested. EPA realizes 

### that whenthisbackground procedure is performed, in-use background emissions, which are included inthe refueling standard, will also be subtracted from the refueling
measurement. At this time, EPA has no way ofseparating new vehicle background emissions from in-use background emissions. For purposes of SEA testing only, both may therefore be subtracted off.Background emissions from the refueling measurements during in-use testing will notbe subtracted since the standard includes measurement ofsuch emissions and there is no concern regarding the higher background emissions from new vehicles. Additionally, upon approval byEPA, amanufacturer may develop and use its own background emissions
measurement procedure for useduring SEA testing. Revisions to 40 CFR part 86, subpart G, §86.608 (for LDVs) and to subpart K, §86.1008 (forLDTs) incorporate this additional procedure.

The second issue pertained to the unstabilized condition ofthe vapor storage canister(s) prior to SEA testing. Inthe NPRM, EPA proposed that the canisters ofSEA vehicles be stabilized through abench procedure, prior to refueling emissions testing, to help account for anylarge differences that may exist between an unused canister and abroken-in (aged)canister.

Most manufacturers commented that artificially aging canisters prior to emissions testing using either the procedure in the 1987 proposal or the evaporative emissions rulemaking is inconsistent with SEA testing and that performing the aging process would significantly add to the time needed to complete testing. This would make it difficult to conduct the correct number oftests per twenty-four hour period as proposed by §86.608(g) for LDVs and § 86.1008(g)(3) for LDTs. Additionally, 

### several manufacturers indicated that if their vehicles were to.undergothe entire refueling test procedure (with all of the necessary preconditioning drivedowns), the vehicles may accumulate too many miles to be sold as new.

EPA agrees that the proposed benchaging procedure, as well as the updated procedure, adds significant time to SEA testing and, therefore, this finalrule does not include an artificial aging procedure. EPA would have preferred to include an aged canister in the SEA test requirement, but at this point sees no 

### practical wayto incorporate the aged canister requirement and also address the manufacturers' concerns. Manufacturers are required to perform the complete refueling test.with new canisters for both integrated and nonintegrated designs. However, ff

### 16278 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

manufacturers still have concerns about conducting the required number oftests per twenty-four hourperiod or accumulating too much mileage, they may, upon EPA approval, perform the seal test described in Section C above, for either integrated or non-integrated designs, during an SEA. The seal testis aimed at verifying the integrity of fillpipe seals and vapor lines and eliminates consideration ofpotential canister emissions by thoroughly bench purging thecanister prior to the refueling event.The canister preconditioning and preparatory driving

are also eliminated, allowing manufacturers to complete testing without the additional mileage accumulation associated with the full test. Finally, the same 0.20 g/gal standard would apply and failure ofthe seal testwould be considered equivalent to failing the full'refueling emissions
test.

During an SEA, manufacturers will
test selected SEA vehicles until apass

or fail decision has been reached for both theexhaust emission test and the refueling test. The 0.20 g/gal.refueling standard is subject to 40 percent Acceptable Quality Level, which is the

same criteria used for exhaust emissions.
3.Nonconformance Penalties (NCPs)

In the regulations governing NCPs (40 CFR 86.1103-87), EPA specifies the criteria which mustbe met before an NCP will be made available for a new emission standard applicable to any subclass ofheavy-duty vehicles (i.e., vehicles with aGVWR in excess of 6000 lbs, including the LDTs with a GVWR between 6,001 and 8,500 lbs. which are covered inthis regulation (HLDTs)). As described in those regulations, an NCP may be established fora new emission standard ifsubstantial work willbe required to meet the new standard and

a technological laggard is likely to exist. Substantial work means the application oftechnology not previously used in a vehicle class or.subclass or the significant modification ofexisting technology ordesign parameters.

. While ORVR systems have not been used to control refueling emissions on HLDTs and HDVs, EPA does not believe that anORVR requirement constitutes substantial workas defined in the NCP regulations nor does EPAbelieve that a technological laggard will existin the vehicle groups. The ORVR system is expected tobe a minorextension of existing evaporative emission control technology rather than the application ofnew technology or the-significant modification ofexisting technology or design. EPAexpects manufacturers would use activated carbon for storage ofrefueling vapors and air stripping for regeneration, just as are now used in evaporative emission control systems on LDTs and heavy-duty gasoline vehicles. The purge systems will essentially be the same as those used for evaporative controls.

While there may be some subjective disagreement on whether "substantial work" will be involved in meeting the standard, EPAbelieves allthe manufacturers ofHLDTs willbe able to comply with the standard and thatno technological laggard will exist.EPA recognizes that effort willbe required to equip the HLDTs with ORVR systems, but the control technology required is well defined and available to all affected manufacturers. Furthermore, this regulation provides a generous leadtime and control is phased in over a threemodel-year period. Both ofthese factors will provide reliefto any manufacturer who ishaving difficulty. In addition, the adopted test procedures address the manufacturers' technical concerns and should negate the need for anNCP for any manufacturer.

The regulations also permit consideration ofNCPs for other emission standards, for which NCPs are not already provided, ifthe standards become more difficult to meet as aresult ofa new standard. However, as the test procedure is structured, EPA doesnot believe that manufacturers will
encounter significant additional difficulty in maintaining compliance with exhaust orevaporative emission standards as a result ofthe ORVR requirement.

In sum, "substantial work" will notbe required and no technological laggards

are expected. Therefore, EPAwill not makeNCPs available forrefueling exhaust or evaporative emission standards.

4. In-Use Performance

As inthe case ofother evaporative emissions, the control ofrefueling emissions is highly dependent on vehicle operating and environmental factors such as vehicle speed and ambient temperature. EPA recognizes,

- 

### therefore, that simply passing a test procedure cannot always ensure vehicle designs that achieve good control inuse.

EPA expects that manufacturers will design vehicles thatpass the test and perform well in use. However, inorder
to best achieve-the statutory goal ofa high degree ofcontrol efficiency, the Agency will,ifnecessary,make full use ofexistingregulations against defeat devices. Thus, EPA may deny certification upon determination that a particular refueling emission control system design constitutes a defeat device (40 CFR 86.094-16).2 EPA could 

### also invoke the defeat device regulations in the course oron the basis of the results ofselective enforcement audit (SEA) andrecall testing.

The following discussion, while not necessarily all-inclusive, provides examples ofpotential defeat devices related to compliance with refueling emission standards. EPA's main concern is that some purge strategies used to pass emission tests may be ineffective

over a wide range of in-use driving patterns. For integrated systems, this

concern will be addressed in the Agency's evaluation ofevaporative system purge strategies during the certification process, as discussed in the evaporative emissions final rule (58 FR
at 16007). The Agency will extend this evaluation to non-integrated refueling system purge strategies as well.

This evaluation is intended to identify vehicle designs that, though capable of passing emission tests, may not function effectively inuse. These would include non-integrated system designs that
purge well during the prolonged warmvehicle driving allowed in the refueling
test drivedown, but not in the driving patterns involving frequent cold starts often encountered in use.

EPA also will consider to be defeat devices those designs that .purgeat substantially higher rates during highspeed operation than during low-speed operation, such that they primarily depend on the high-speed purge to pass emission tests.Even ifsuch designs do
pass the test, they may produce high refueling emissions ifthey purge substantially less during typical nonfreeway urban driving than during the refueling test drivedown. Also, designs that shut purge offat anytime for other than safety reasons would be closely examined by EPA for possible classification as defeat devices.

III. Public Participation

ORVR controls have been under consideration by EPA since the CAAAs of 1977. The public process, which first began in 1978, has proceeded through various stages over the past 15 years.

Inresponse to the provisions of section 202(a)(6) ofthe 1977 CAAAs, EPA initiated a public processin 1978
to receive comments on the feasibility and desirability ofimplementing ORVR controls. In 1980;EPA published a technical report which tentatively concluded that ORVR controls were feasible for LDVs. However, no action

2 "Prohibition ofUse of Emission Control Defeat Devices," MSPC Advisory Circular No. 24, December 11. 1972.

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 86 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16279

was taken at the time due to concerns

over economic difficulties in the auto industry.

EPA reinstituted its assessment of ORVR controls in 1983 as part of a broad assessment ofthe strategies available to control efiissions inthe gasoline marketing industry. As part of this study, in August 1984, EPA published an extensive analysis ofthe options available to control refueling emissions including ORVR controls. Supporting documentation for this analysis are in public docket A-84-07, alongwith the public comments received on the "Gasoline Marketing Study".

Afterreceiving comments on the study, EPA prepared an in-depth analysis ofthe comments, developed further work on several keyissues related to ORVR controls, and conducted enhanced assessments ofthe options under consideration. This resulted in a draft Regulatory Impact Analysis, Response toPublic Comments, and related analysis and documentation related-to ORVR controls. Thisinformation is also in public docket A-84-07. A public meeting regarding the ORVR test procedure was also held during this time frame.

The results ofEPA's study ofemission control options for the gasoline marketing industry culminated in an August 1987 proposal to require ORVR controls on gasoline-powered LDVs, LDTs, andHDVs. A public hearing was held in October 1987 and the comment period closed inFebruary 1988. Information supporting the NPRM and
comments onthe proposal are in public docket A-87-11. However, due initially to safety concerns raised by some commenters and later to pending revisions to the CAA, EPA deferred action on finalizingthe ORVR rule.

The 1990 CAAAs contained provisions requiring an integrated program of LDVORVR and Stage II controls. In response to the ORVR provisions, on September 3, 1991 (56FR 43682), EPA published aFederal Register notice seeking further comment

on the NPRM and the safety issues related to ORVR controls including a safety assessment prepared bythe DoT. A public hearing was held to receive
comment onthese issues on September 26, 27, 1991. The comment period closed in late October 1991. These comments andrelated materials are in public docket A-87-11. On April 15, 1992, EPA published a Federal Register notice (57 FR 13220) announcing its decision not to proceed with implementing ORVR controls at that time, based on safety concerns raised by DoT.

Subsequently, a panel ofthe DC Circuit overturned EPA's 1992 action. EPA then published another Federal Register notice (May27, 1993, 58FR 30731) raising issues for public
comment and allowing approximately 90 days for comment. Another public hearing seeking comment on the NPRM and other changed circumstances was alsoheld. This hearing was held on July 22, 1993 and comments closed 30 days later. These comments are inpublic docket A-87-11 as are EPA materials in support ofthe notice.

During the years in. which ORVR has beenunder consideration, therehave been at least five formal opportunities for oral and/or written public comment. In addition, numerous other public interactions have occurred on this
matter and have been documented and placed in the docket for public review.

Over the fifteen years of the ORVR public process, EPA has received hundreds ofwritten comments ,regarding thisrequirement. However,
many ofthe past comments have essentially been addressed by changed circumstances or other developments. Major issues such as fuel volatility and improved vehicle evaporative emission controls have now been decided by regulation, and the control ofrefueling emissions using Stage IIequipment was addressed bythe 1990 CAAAs. Also, many previous comments in areas such

as ORVR costs and test procedures were factored into subsequent analyses and notices, making only themost recent set ofcomments applicable.

The public docket contains a Summary andAnalysis ofComments document which addresses still-relevant issues raised by the commenters. It generally does not address past comments on issues which have been resolved byrelated statutory or regulatory action orthrough subsequent published analyses orFederal Register notices. Also, it doesnot address comments which were received at one point but laternegated by subsequent comments due to further developments and changed circumstances. The Summary and Analysis ofComments focuses primarily oncomments received inresponse to the June 1993 Federal Register notice and unresolved
comments from both the August 1987 NPRM and September 1991 Federal Register notices.

IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis



### As part ofthe assessment and decision making process regarding ORVR controls, EPA has prepared an indepth Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA). This RIA is available in the public docket. The RIA assesses the environmental impact, costs, and cost effectiveness ofORVR controls, as well

as other associated benefits, for the combined LDV and LDT program described above for anumber of scenarios. It also includes a sensitivity analysis for several key parameters. It should be noted that the RIA was completed prior to EPA's decision to delay the requirements for LDTs and to exclude HDVs. These controls were included in the analysis and were assumed to begin in 1998. EPA expects that inclusion ofthese items in the analysis has no significant effect on the results and does not affect the conclusions which are based on the analysis. The major findings ofthe RIA for LDV and LDT ORVR controls are presented below.

Before discussing these key findings, it is important to note that EPA analysis has assumed that ORVR controls will apply nationwide to all vehicle classes. However, the scenarios analyzed focus
not only on the overall nationwide control program, but also on the control in the ozone NAAs. Furthermore, since Stage II controls are in place or expected in most of the ozone NAAs, the incremental impacts ofORVR controls relative to Stage II are assessed as well.
A., Environmental Impact
While refueling emissions control has value whenever it occurs, it is most critical during the ozone season. The five month ozone season refueling emission inventory isabout 200,000
tons per ypar; when annualized, this value increases to approximately 475,000 tons per year.Refueling emissions vary directly with fuel use and fuel RVP/temper.atures. Approximately 52 percent ofrefueling emissions occur in AAs and 48 percent

occur inNAAs. Ofthis 48 percent, about 33 percent currently are, or are expected to be, subject to Stage II control equipment. The percentage of gasoline consumption inthe NAAs and covered by Stage II is slightly higher (55 and 44 percent respectively) than the contribution to the refueling emission inventory, primarily due to RVP controls.

The emission reductions achieved by ORVR controls depend on the in-use efficiency ofthe control system and the

area in which the control is applied. Based on the stringency ofthe test procedure the full life useful life certification.requirement, and the salutary effect ofInspection/ Maintenance (I/M) programs and onboard diagnostics, EPA expects very high in-use efficiency from ORVR

### 16280 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

systems. In the ozone NAAs, where RVP control and basic and enhanced I/M are prevalent, EPA expects in-use efficiency ofover 95 percent, with a somewhat lower value in attainment areas due to lack ofRVP control and I/M. In the

ozone NAAs, EPA expects in-use efficiency ofapproximately 97 percent. The in-use efficiency in attainment

areas (which would lack RVP control and enhanced I/M) is somewhat less, and in some cases is predicted to be less than 95 percent. The Agency notes, however, that this prediction is skewed because data for the southeast U.S. indicate that average dispensed fuel temperature in that region is seven fahrenheit degrees higher than anywhere else inthe country. EPAis basing its predictions on this information because it is the only available data. However, the Agency knows ofno reason why dispensed fuel temperatures should be so much higher in this region. Ifthe same range of dispensed fuel temperatures were used for the southeast region as for the southwest U.S., the in-use efficiency of properly operating systems inall areas would be predicted to average 95 percent.

The benefits vary over time and with the scenario analyzed. Benefits vary

over time because ofthe phase-in ofthe ORVR requirement and the need for fleet turnover to occur before full implementation ofORVR-equipped vehicles occurs. The key variable with regard to scenarios is the presence and possible phase-out ofStage II controls. ORVR benefits inNAAs include control

over service stations inNAAs without Stage II,control at service stations which now receive waivers, and control

over vapors missed by Stage II equipment.

For the rulemaking as a whole, neglecting the presence ofStage II controls, LDV/LDT ORVR would achieve average annual emission reductions ofover 420,000 tons per year. With Stage II phaseout when ORVR and Stage.II would cover the

same percent of fuel in use, the average annual emission reduction is about 378,000 tons.Even if Stage II controls

are retained, an incremental benefit of 285,000 tons occurs nationwide. Of these reductions, approximately 20 percent occur in.NA areas, with the overall percentage in NAAs increasing substantially ifStage II is phased out.

B. Costs ofControl

ORVR costs ofcontrol are comprised ofcontrol system hardware costs plus short term (five year) costs for research, development, and testing (R,D,&T) minus fuel vapor recovery credits. Costs 

### were derived incremental to the effects ofenhanced evaporative emissions and RVP control, with the assumption that
most vehicles would use integrated evaporative/refueling control systems with liquid seals in the fillneck. The retail price equivalent (RPE) for hardware and R,D,&Tcosts range from $6-8 forLDVs and LDTs.

Even these small costs are somewhat offset by ORVR fuel recovery credits. The level ofthe ORVR recovery credit depends on whether Stage IIequipment is used whenrefueling. Forthe nationwide case, which involves Stage IIand non-Stage II areas, the NPV ofthe recovery credit ranges from $2-$4 pervehicle for LDVs and LDTs. Accounting for these recovery credits, both short and long term net costs are under $5 for LDVs and LDTs.

EPA assessed the net costs ofLDV and LDT ORVR controls forthree scenarios. The first (baseline) scenario neglected the presence of Stage IIcontrols, the second accounted for Stage IIcontrols with phaseout in 2010, and the third included Stage IIwith no phaseout. In each case,the ORVR hardware and R,D,&Tcosts are the same, but the recovery credit varies. Inthe firstcase the average annual cost is about

- $6 million over the period 1998-2020. With Stage II present and phasing outin 2010, the average annual costs is $2 million.With nophase outaverage annual costs increase to $27 million

over the period 1998 to 2020. The 1998 NPV costs (discounted at 7percent to 1998) for the same three scenarios are $102 million, $264 million, and $435 million,respectively. In the cases where
costs are negative, it isbecause the value ofthe recovery credits exceeds the hardware and R, D,&'t costs.
C. CostEffectiveness

Using the net present value ofthe
costs and emission reduction benefits, EPA has calculated the cost effectiveness ofLDV/LDT ORVR controls forthe three scenarios mentioned above. For the first case where Stage II controls are neglected, the cost effectiveness is about $35 per ton. Inthe second case where Stage II control is considered, but phased out in 2010, the cost effectiveness is about $100 per ton. In the final case where Stage IIis notphased out, the cost effectiveness is about $210 per ton.

When all costs are included in the calculations but only NAA emission reductions are credited, the cost, effectiveness values change. Forthe first

case discussed above, cost effectiveness value is $70 per ton. In the second and third scenarios, the costeffectiveness would increase to about $250 and $775
per ton, respectively.

D. OtherBenefits

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

non-cancer health effects and welfare benefits such as reduced crop and material damage due to ozone would

occur as welL

E.Benefit-CostRatio

Comparing the average annual cost and emission reduction benefits shown in the tables presented in the RIA, if

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

V. Consultation With DOT

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

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean AirAct, EPA hereby finds that these regulations are ofnational applicability. Accordingly, judicial review ofthis action is available only by filing a

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations "16281

petition forreview in the United States Court ofAppeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days of publication. Under section 307(b)(2) of 

### theAct, the requirements which arethe subject oftoday's notice may notbe challenged later injudicial proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.

VII. Statutory Authority

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

VIII. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) the Agency
must determine whether theregulatory action is "significant" and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements ofthe Executive Order. The Order defines "significant regulatory action" asone that is likely
to result in arule that may:

(1)Have an annual effecton the economy of$100 million ormore oradversely affect in a material way the economy,.a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,local, ortribal governments or communities;

(2)Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by anotheragency;

(3)Materially alter thebudgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs orthe rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising outof legal mandates, thePresident's priorities, orhe principles set forth in the Executive Order.

These final regulations have been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 12866. Under the terms ofthe Order the Administrator has assessed the potential costs and benefits ofthis regulatory action. Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been determined that this rule is a "significant regulatory action" because this rule has an effect

on the long-term implications of stationary and mobile source controls and requires interagency consultations. The-average annual cost is about $27 million over the period 1998 to 2020, assuming no Stage IIphaseout. If Stage II is phased out, recovery credits for ORVR systems increase to the point that
average annual costs are only about $2 million (ignoring the savings in Stage II maintenance). As such, this action was submitted to OMB forreview. Changes made inresponse to 0MB suggestions or recommendations will be documented in the public record. 

### IX.Compliance With the Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-602, requires that Federal agencies examine the impacts oftheir regulations on small entities. Under 5 U.S.C. 604(a), whenever an agency is required to publish a rulemaking, it .Must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA). Such an analysis is not required ifthe head ofan agency certifies that a rule willnot have a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

The requirements for ORVR systems in thisregulation apply tomotor vehicle manufacturers. Small LDV manufacturers have been granted a delayed phase-in ofthe ORVR requirement and LDTmanufacturers have a longer leadtime than originally proposed. Therefore, Icertify that this rule will nothave a significant adverse impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities.
X. Information Collection Requirements Paperwork ReductionAct

The information collection requirements in thisrule willbe submitted for approval tothe Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.An Information Collection Request document has been prepared by EPA (ICR#783.32) and a copy maybe obtained from SandyFarmer, Information Policy Branch; EPA, 401 M 'Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 or by calling 202-260-2740. These requirements are noteffective until OMB approves them and a technical amendment tothat effect ispublished in the Federal Register.

This collection ofinformation has an estimated annual reporting and recordkeeping burden averaging 334 hours perresponse, These estimates include time forreviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection ofinformation.

Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect ofthis collection ofinformation, including suggestions forreducing this burden to Chief, Information Policy Branch; EPA; 401 M Street, SW (MailCode 2136); Washington, DC 20460; andto the Office ofInformation and Regulatory Affairs, Office ofManagement and Budget, Washington, DC 20503, marked "Attention: Desk Officer forEPA." List ofSubjects

40 CFRPart 86

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

40 CFRPart88

Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFRPart 600

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

Dated: January 24, 1994. Carol M.Browner, Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, parts 86, 88, and 600 oftitle 40 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations

are amended as follows:

PART 86-CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM NEW AND IN-USE MOTOR VEHICLES AND NEW AND INUSE MOTOR VEHICLE ENGINES: CERTIFICATION AND TEST
PROCEDURES

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

Authority: Secs. 202, 203, 205, 207, 208, 215, 216, and 301(a), Clean Air Act, as' amended (42 U.S.C. 7521, 7522, 7524. 7525, 7541, 7542, 7549, 7550, 7552, and 7601(a)).
Subpart A-[Amended]

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

The definitions of§ 86.098-2 continue to apply to 1998 and later model year vehicles. The definitions listed inthis section apply beginning with the 2001 model year.

Usefullifemeans: (1) For light-duty vehicles, and for light light-duty trucks not subject to the Tier 0 standards of§ 86.094-9(a), intermediate useful life and/or full useful life. Intermediate useful life is a period ofuse of 5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. Fulluseful life is

aperiod ofuse of 10years or 100,000 miles, whichever occurs first; except as otherwise noted in § 86.094-9. The useful life ofevaporative and/or refueling emission control systems on the portion of these vehicles subject to the evaporative emission test requirements of§86.130-96, and/or the refueling emission test requirements of §86.151-2001, is defined as a period of

### 16282 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

use of 10 years or 100,000 miles, whichever occurs first.

•(2) For light light-duty trucks subject
to the Tier 0 standards of§ 86.094-9(a), and for heavy light-duty truck engine families, intermediate and/or full useful life. Intermediate useful life is a period of use of5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. Full useful life is

a period ofuse of 11 years or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs first. The useful life ofevaporative emission and/

or refueling control systems on the portion ofthese vehicles subject to the evaporative emission test requirements of §86.130-96, and/or the refueling emission test requirements of § 86.151- 2001, is also defined as a period of 11
years or 120,000 miles, whichever

occurs first. (3)For an Otto-cycle heavy-duty engine family: (i) For hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide standards, a period ofuse of 8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first

occurs.

(ii) For the oxides ofnitrogen standard, a period ofuse of 10 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(iii) For the portion ofevaporative emission control systems subject to the evaporative emission test requirements of§ 86.1230-96, a period ofuse of 10 years or 110,000 miles, whichever

occurs first.

(4) For a diesel heavy-duty engine family:

(i) For light heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and particulate standards, a period ofuse of 8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(ii) For light heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides of nitrogen standard, a period ofuse of 10 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(iii) For medium heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and particulate standards, a period ofuse of8 years or 185,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(iv) For medium heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides ofnitrogen standard, a period ofuse of 10 years or 185,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(v)For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and particulate standards, a period ofuse of8 years or 290,000 miles, whichever first occurs, except as provided in paragraph (4)(vii) ofthis definition.

(vi) Forheavy heavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides of nitrogen standard, a period ofuse of10 years or 290,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(vii) For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines used inurban buses, for the particulate standard, a period ofuse of 10 years or 290,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

3. A new § 86.001-9 is added to subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-9 Emission standards for2001 and later model year light-duty trucks.

Section 86.001-9 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.096-9 or § 86.097-9. Where a paragraph in § 86.096-9 or § 86.097-9 is identical and applicable to § 86.001-9, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-9." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.097-9.". (a) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.097-9.

(b) introductory text through (b)(5) [Reserved]. For guidance see. § 86.096-9.

(b)(6) Vehicles certified to the refueling standards set forth in paragraph (d) ofthis section are not required to demonstrate compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback standards contained in § 86.096-9 (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii): Provided,that they meet the requirements of § 86.001- 28(o.

(c) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.097-9.

(d) Refueling emissions from 2001 and later model year gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle- and petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled diesel-cycle-light duty trucks of6,000 pounds or less GVW shall not exceed the following standards. The standards apply equally to certification and in-use vehicles.

(1) Standards-(i) Hydrocarbons (for gasoline-fueledOtto-cycleand petroleum-fueleddiesel-cyclevehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per liter) offuel dispensed.

(ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon Equivalent(for methanol-fueled vehicles).0.20 gram per gallon (0.053
gram per liter)of fuel dispensed. (2)(i) The standards set forth in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) ofthis section refer to a sample ofrefueling emissions collected under the conditions as set forth in subpart B of this part and measured in accordance with those procedures.

. (ii)For vehicles powered by petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines, the provisions set forth in paragraph (d)(1)(i) ofthis section may be waived: Provided,that the manufacturer complies with the provisions of § 86.001-28(o ofthis subpart.

(3) A minimum ofthe percentage shown in Table AOl-09 ofa manufacturer's sales ofthe applicable model year's gasoline- and methanolfueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled 

### and methanol-fueled diesel-cycle lightduty trucks of6,000 pounds or less GVW shall be tested under the procedures in subpart Bofthis part indicated for 2001 and latermodel years, and shall not exceed the standards described in paragraph (d)(1) ofthis section. Vehicles certified in accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of 

### this section, as determined by the provisions of§86.001-28(g), shall not be counted inthe calculation ofthe percentage ofcompliance.

TABLE A01-09.-IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK REFUELING EMISSION TESTING

Model year Sales 

### percentage

2001

........................................ 40 2002

..................................... . 80 2003 and subsequent

............... 100
(e)through (f) [Reserved] (g) through (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.097-9.

4. A new § 86.001-21 is added to subpart A to read as follows:
§86.001-21 Application forcertification.

Section 86.001-21 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.094-21 or § 86.096-21. Where a paragraph in § 86.094-21 or § 86.096-21 is identical and applicable to § 86.001- 21, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. Forguidance gee § 86.094-21." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-21.". (a)through (b)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-21. (b)(4)(i) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, a description ofthe
testprocedures to be used to establish the evaporative emission and/or refueling emission deterioration factors,

as appropriate, required to be determined and supplied in § 86.001- 23(b)(2). (b)(4)(ii) through (b)(5)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-21.

(b)(5)(v) For light-duty vehicles and applicable light-duty trucks with nonintegrated refueling emission control systems, the number ofcontinuous UDDS cycles, determined from the fuel
economy on the UDDS applicable to the
test vehicle ofthat evaporative/ refueling emission family-emission control system combination, required to

use a volume of fuel equal to 85% of fuel tank volume.

(b)(6) through (8) [Reseirved]. For guidance see § 86.094-21.

(b)(9)For each light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, evaporative/refueling emission family or heavy-duty vehicle

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16283

.evaporative emission family, a description of any unique procedures required to perform evaporative and/or refueling emission tests, asapplicable, (including canister working capacity, canister bed volume, and fuel temperature profile forthe running loss test) for all vehicles inthat evaporative and/or evaporative/refueling emission family, and a description ofthe method used to develop those unique procedures.

(10) Foreach light-duty vehicle or applicable light-duty truck evaporative/ refueling emission family, oreach heavy-duty vehicle evaporative emission family:

(i)Canisterworking capacity, according to the procedures specified in §86.132-96(h)(1)(iv);

(ii) Canisterbed volume; and (iii)Fuel temperature profile for the running loss test, according to the procedures specified in § 86.129-94(d).

(c) through (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-21.

(j)and (k).[Reserved]. For guidance

see.§86.096-21.



### 5.A new §86.001-22 is added to subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-22 Approval ofapplication for certification;test fleet selections; determinations o parameters subjectto adjustment for certificationand Selective Enforcement Audit, adequacy of limits,and physicallyadjustable ranges.

Section 86.001-22 includes text that 

### specifies requirements that differ from §86.094-22. Where a paragraph in §86.094-22 isidentical and applicable
to §86.001-22, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-22.".



### (a) through (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-22.

(d)Approvaloftestprocedures.(1) The Administrator does not approve the testprocedures forestablishing the evaporative or refueling emission deterioration factors for light-duty vehicles andlight-duty trucks.The manufacturer shall submit the procedures asrequired in §86.098- 21(b)(4)(i) prior to the Administrator's selection ofthe test fleet under §86.098-24(b)(1), and ifsuch procedures will involve testing of durability data vehicles selected by the Administrator or elected by the manufacturer under §86.098-24(c)(1), prior to initiation of such testing.

(d)(2) through (g)[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-22.

6. A new §86.001-23 is added to subpart Ato read as follows:

. §86.001-23 Required data. Section 86.001-23 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from §86.095-23 or § 86.098-23. Where a paragraph in § 86.095-23 or § 86.098-23 is identical and applicable to §86.001- 23, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the.

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-23." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-23.".

(a) through (b)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-23.

(b)(2)For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, the manufacturer shall submit evaporative emission and/or refueling emission deterioration factors for each evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control system combination and all test data that are derived from testing described under § 86.001-21(b)(4)(i) designed and conducted in accordance with good engineering practice to assure that the vehicles covered by a certificate issued under § 86.001-30 will meet the evaporative and/or refueling emission standards in § 86.099-8 or § 86.001-9,

as appropriate, for the useful life ofthe vehicle.

(b)(3) through (b)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-23. (b)(4)(iii) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-23.

(c)through (e)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-23.

(e)(2) For evaporative and refueling emission durability, or light-duty truck

orheavy-duty engine exhaust emission durability, a statement ofcompliance with paragraph (b)(2) ofthis section or §86.095-23 (b)(1)(ii), (b)(3) or (b)(4) (i) and 

### (ii)or § 86.098-23 

### (b)(4)(iii), as applicable.

(3] For certification ofvehicles with non-integrated refueling systems, a statement that the drivedown used to purge the refueling canister was the

same as desqribed in the manufacturers' applicotion for certification. Furthermore, a description ofthe procedures used to determine the number ofequivalent UDDS miles required to purge the refueling canisters,

as determined by the provisions of § 86.098-21(b)(5)(v) and subpart B. Furthermore, awritten statement to the Administrator that all data, analyses,
test procedures, evaluations and other documents, on which the above
statement is based, are available to the Administrator upon request. (f)through (1)[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-23. (m) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### §86.098.23.

7.A new § 86.001--24 is added to subpart A to read as follows: §86.001-24. Test vehiclesand engines.
Section 86.001-24 includes text that 

### specifies requirements that differ from § 86.096-24 or § 86.098-24. Where a 

### paragraph in §86.096-24 or §86.098-24 is identical and applicable to §86.001- 24, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-24." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.098-24.". (a) introductory text through (a)(4) [Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.096- 24.



### (a)(5)through (a)(7) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.098-24.

(a)(8) through (b)(1)(vi) [Reserved]. Forguidance see § 86.096-24.

(b)(1)(vii)(A) through (b)(1)(viii)(A} (Reserved]. Forguidance see § 86.098- 24.



### (b}(viii)(B) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-24. (f) Carryover andcarryacross of durabilityandemissiondata.In lieu of testing an emission-data ordurability vehicle (or engine) selected under §86.096-24 (b) or (c), and submitting data therefor, a manufacturer may, with the prior written approval ofthe Administrator, submit exhaust emission data, evaporative emission data and/or refueling emission data, as applicable,

on a similar vehicle (orengine) for which certification has been obtained or for which all applicable data required under §86.098-23 has previously been submitted.

(g)through (h) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-24.

8. A new §86.001-25 is added to subpart A to read as follows: §86.001-25 Maintenance.



### Section 86.001-25 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.094-25 or §86.098-25. Where a 

### paragraph in §86.094-25 or §86.098-25 is identical and applicable to §86.001- 25, this may beindicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.094-25." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-25.". 

### (a)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-25.

(a)(2) Maintenance performed on vehicles, engines, subsystems, or components used to determine exhaust, evaporative orrefueling emission deterioration factors, as appropriate,'is classified as either emission-related or non-emission-related and each of these

can be classified as either scheduled or unscheduled. Further, some emissionrelated maintenance is also classified as critical emission-related maintenance.

### 16284 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations "

(b) Introductory text through 

### (b)(3)(vi)(D) [Reserved]. For guidance

see §86.094-25.



### (b)(3)(vi)(E) through (b)(3)(vi)(J) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098- 25.

(b)(3)(vii) through (b)(6)(i)(E) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094- 25.

(b)(6)(i)(F) Evaporative and refueling emission control system components (excluding canister airfilter).

(b)(6)(i)(G) through (H) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-25.

9. A new §86.001-26 is added to subpart A to read as follows:
§86.001-26 Mileage and service. accumulation; emission measurements.

Section 86.001-26 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from 

### §86.094-26, §86.095-26, 

### §86.096-26 or 

### §86.098-26. Where a paragraph in 

### §86.094-26, §86.095-26, 

### §86.096-26 or §86.098-26 is identical and applicable to 

### §86.001-26, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-26." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095- 26."or "[Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.096-26." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098-26.". (a)(1) and (2) [Reserved]. Forguidance

see §86.094-26.

(a)(3) introductory text through (a)(3)(i)(A) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### §86.098-26.

(a)(3)(i)(B) through (a)(3)(ii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094- 26.

(a)(3)(ii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance

see 

### §86.098-26.

(a)(3)(ii)(D) through (b)(2)(iii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094- 26.

(b)(2)(iv) Service ormileage accumulation whichmay be part ofthe test procedures used by the manufacturer to establish evaporative and/or refueling emission deterioration factors.

(b)(3) through (b)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-26.

(b)(4)(i)(C) Exhaust, evaporative and/

orrefueling emission tests for emissiondala vehicle(s) selected for testing under 

### §86.096-24(b)(1} (ii), (iii) or (iv)(A) or 

### §86.098-24 (b)(1)(vii) shall be conducted atthe mileage (2,000 mile minimum) at which the engine-system combination is stabilized for emission testing or at 6,436 kilometer (4,000 mile) test point under low-altitude conditions.

(b)(4)(i)(D) through (b)(4)(ii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095- 26.

(b)(4)(ii)(C) Exhaust, evaporative and/

orrefueling emission tests for emission data vehicle(s) selected for testing under §86.094-24(b)(1) (ii), (iii), and (iv) shall 

### be conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile minimum) atwhich the engine-system combination is stabilized for emission testing or at the 6,436 kilometer (4,000 

### mile) test point under low-altitude conditions.

(b)(4)(ii)(D) [Reserved]. Forguidance

see 

### § 86.095-26.

(b)(4)(iii) [Reserved] (b)(iv) through (c)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-26.

(c)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.096-26.

(d) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-26.

10. A new §86.001-28 is added to subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-28 Compliance with emission standards.

Section 86.001-28 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from 

### §§ 86.094-28 and 86.098-28. Where a paragraph in 

### §86.094-28 or 

### §86.098-28 is identical and applicable to 

### §86.001- 28, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-28." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-28.".

(a)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.094-28.

(a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098-28.

(a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-28.

(a)(4) introductory text through (a)(4)(i) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-28.

(a)(4)(i)(A) and (a)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-28.

(a)(4)(i) (C) through (D) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.098-28.

(a)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance

see §86.094-28.

(a)(4)(ii) (B) through (C) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.098-28.

(a)(4)(iii) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### §86.098-28.

(a)(4)(iv) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### §86.094-28.

(a)(4)(v) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098-28.

(a) (5) and (6) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-28.

(a)(7) introductory text through (a)(7)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098-28.

(a)(7)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-28.

(1)(1) Paragraph (b) ofthis section applies to light-duty trucks.

(2) Each exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission standard (and family emission limits, as appropriate) of 

### §86.001-9 applies to the emissions of vehicles for the appropriate useful life

as defined in 

### §§ 86.098-2 and 86.001-9. 

### (b)(3) through (b)(6) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-28.

(b)(7)(i) Paragraph (b)(7) ofthis section describes the procedure for determining compliance ofa new vehicle with evaporative emission standards. The procedure described here shall be used for all vehicles in applicable model years.

(ii) The manufacturer shall determine, based on testing described in 

### §86.001- 21(b)(4)(i)(A), and supply an evaporative emission deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control system combination. The factor shall be calculated by subtracting the emission level at the selected testpoint from the emission level at the useful life point.

(iii) The official evaporative emission
test results for each evaporative/ refueling emission-data vehicle at the selected test point shall be adjusted by the addition ofthe appropriate deteriofation factor. However, ifthe deterioration factor supplied by the manufacturer is lessthan zero,it shall be zero for the purposes ofthis paragraph.

(iv)The emission value to compare with the standards shall be the adjusted emission value ofparagraph (b)(7)(iii) of this section rounded to two significant figures in accordance with ASTM E 29- 67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in §86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii))for each evaporative emission-data vehicle.

(8)(i)Paragraph (b)(8) ofthis section describes the procedure for determining compliance ofa newvehicle with refueling emission standards. The procedure described here shall be used for all applicable vehicles in the applicable model years.

(i) The manufacturer shall determine, based on testing described in 

### §86.098- 21(b)(4)(i)(B), and supply a refueling emission deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combination. The factor shall be calculated by subtracting the emission level at the selected testpoint from the emission level at the useful life point.

(iii)The official refueling emission
testresults foreach evaporative/ refueling emission-data vehicle atthe selected testpoint shall be adjusted by the addition of the appropriate deterioration factor. However, if the deterioration factor supplied by the manufacturer is less than zero, it shall be zero forthe purposes ofthis paragraph.

(iv) The emission value to compare with the standards shallbe the adjusted emission value ofparagraph (b)(8)(iii) of this section rounded to two significant figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

- 

### 16285

67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in 

### § 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii))for each evaporative emission-data vehicle.

(9) Every test vehicle of an engine family must comply with all applicable standards (and family emission limits,

as appropriate), as determined in paragraphs (b)(4)(iv), (b)(7)(iv) and (b)(8)(iv) ofthis section, before any vehicle inthat family will be certified. (c) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.094-28. (e) [Reserved] (f)Fueldispensingspitbacktesting waiver.(1) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standards set forth in 

### §§ 86.098-8, 86.099-8 and 86.001-9 are not required to demonstrate compliance with the fuel dispensing spitback standards contained inthese sections: Provided,that-

(i) The manufacturer certifies that the vehicle inherently meets the Dispensing Spitback Standard as part ofcompliance with the refueling emission standard.

(ii) This certification is provided in writing and applies to the full useful life ofthe vehicle.

-(2) EPA retains the authority to require testing to enforce compliance and to prevent non-compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback Standard.

(g)Inherentlylowrefuelingemission testing waiver.(1) Vehicles using fuels/ fuel systems inherently low in refueling emissions are not required to conduct testing to demonstrate compliance with the refueling emission standards set forth in 

### §§ 86.098-8, 86.099-8 or 86.001-9: Provided,that-

(i) This provision is only available for petroleum diesel fuel. It is only available ifthe Reid Vapor Pressure of in-use diesel fuel is equal to or less than 1psi (7 Kpa) and for diesel vehicles whose fuel tank temperatures do not exceed 130 *F (54 °C); and

(ii) To certify using this provision the manufacturer must attest to the following evaluation: "Due to the low vapor pressure ofdiesel fuel and the vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon vapor concentrations are low and the vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon refueling emission standard without a control system."

(2) The certification required in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) ofthis section must be provided in writing and must apply forthe full useful life ofthe vehicle.

(3)EPA reserves the authority to require testing to enfoice compliance and to prevent noncompliance with the refueling emission standard.

(4) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standard under this provision shall not be counted in the sales percentage compliance determinations for the 2001, 2002 and subsequent model years. 11. A new 

### §86.001-30 is added to subpart A to read as follows:

986.001-30 * Certification. Section 86.001-30 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.094-30, 

### §86.095-30 or 

### §86.098-30. Where a paragraph in 

### §86.094-30, 

### §86.095-30 or 

### §86.098-30 is identical and applicable to 

### § 86.001-30, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### §86.094-30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095-30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098- 30.".

(a)(1) and (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-30.

(a)(3)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see 986.098-30.

(a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iiiJ introductory text through (a)(4)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.094-30.

(a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iv)(A)' through (a)(12)
[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094- 

### 30.

(a)(13) [Reserved]. Forguidance see § 86.095-30.

(a)(14) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### § 86.094-30.

(a) (15) through (18) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-30.

(a)(19) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098-30.

(a)(20) For all light-duty trucks certified to refueling emission standards under 

### §86.001-9, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(20) (i) through (iii) this section apply.

(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer complying with all provisions of §86.001-9 both during and after model year production.

(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales percentages as specified in 

### § 86.001-9 will be considered to be a failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was issued and the individual vehicles sold in violation of the implementation schedule shall not be covered by the certificate. (iii)The manufacturer shall bearthe burden ofestablishing to the satisfaction ofthe Administrator thatthe conditions upon which the certificate was issued

were satisfied.

(b)(1) introductory text through (b)(1)(i) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### §86.094-30. b)(1)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. Forguidance

see 

### §86.094-30. (b)(1)(ii)(B) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under 

### §86.001- 24(b)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent all vehicles ofthe same evaporative/ refueling control system within the evaporative/refueling family.,

(b)(1)(ii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.094-30.

0b)(1)(ii)(D) The emission-data vehicle(s) selected under 

### § 86.098- 24(b)(1)(viii) shallrepresent all vehicles ofthe same evaporative/refueling control system within the evaporative/ refueling emission family, as applicable.

(b)(1) (iii) and (iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-30.

(b)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.098-30.

(b)(3) through (b)(4)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-30.

(b)(4)(ii) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.098-30.

(b)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance

see §86.094-30.

(b)(4)(ii)(B) through (iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.098-30.

(b)(5) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-30.

(f) introductory text through (f)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095- 30.

(f)(4) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### §86.098-30.

12. A new §86.001-35 is added to subpart A to read as follows: 

### §86.001-35 Labeling.

Section 86.001-35 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from 

### §86.095-35, 

### §86.096-35 and 

### §86.098- '35. Where a paragraph in 

### §86.095-35;



### §86.096-35 or

### § 86.098-35 is identical and applicable to 

### §86.001-35, this may be indicated by specifying the' corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### § 86.095-35." or [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-35. or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098- 28.".

(a) introductory text through (a)(1)(iii)(B) [Reserved]. Forguidance

see 

### §86.095-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance

see 

### §86.098-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(D)through (L) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-35. (a)(1)(iii)(M) [Reserved]. For guidance

see 

### §86.098-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance

see 

### §86.096-35.

(a)(2) heading through (a)(2)(iii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.095- 35.

(a)(2)(iii)(C) Engine displacement (in cubic inches or liters), engine family identification and evaporative/refueling family identification.

### 16286 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

(a)(2)(iii)(D) through (a)(2)(iii)(E) [Reserved]. For guidance see 586.095- 35.

(a)(2)(iii)(F) [Reserved) (a)(2)(iii)(G) through (a)(2)(iii)(K) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095- 35.

(a)(2)(iii)(L) [Reserved]. (a)(2)(iii)(M) through (a)(2)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095- 35.,

(a)(2)(iii) (0) through (P) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-35.

(a)(3) heading through (a)(4)(iii](F) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095- ,35.(a)(4)(ii)(G) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.096-35.

(b) through (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095-35.

13. A new 

### §86.004-9 is added to subpart A to read as follows: 

### §86.004-9 Emission standards for2004 and later model year light-dutytrucks.

Section 86.004-9 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from 

### § 86.096-9 or 

### §86.097-9. Where a paragraph in 

### §86.096-9 or 

### §86.097-9 is identical and applicable to 

### §86.004-9, this maybe indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### § 86.096-9." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.097-9.".

(a) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.097-9. (b) introductory text through (b)(5) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.096-9.

(b)(6) Vehicles certified to the refueling standards set forth in paragraph (d) ofthis section are not required to demonstrate compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback standards contained in 

### §86.096-9 (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii): Provided,that. they meet the requirements of5 86.001- 28(f).

(c) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.097-9.

(d) Refueling emissions from 2004 and later model year gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled diesel-cycle light dutytrucks shallnot exceed the following standards. The standards apply equally to certification and in-use vehicles.

(1) Standards--(i) Hydrocarbons(for gasoline-fueledOtto-cycleand petroleum-fueleddiesel-cyclevehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per liter)of fuel dispensed.

(ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon Equivalent(for methanol-fueled vehicles).0.20 gram per gallon (0.053
gram perliter) of fuel dispensed.

(2)(i) The standards setforth in paragraphs (d)(1) (i) and (ii) ofthis section refer to a sample ofrefueling emissions collected under the conditions as set forth in subpart B of this part and measured in accordance with those procedures.

(ii) For vehicles powered by petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines, the provisions set forth inparagraph (d)(1)(i) of this section may be waived: Provided,that the manufacturer complies with the provisions of § 86.001-28(f) ofthis subpart.

(iii) Heavy-duty vehicles certified as light-duty trucks under the provisions of 

### §86.085-1 shall comply with the provisions ofparagraphs (d)(1) (i) and (ii) ofthis section.

(3)(i) All light-duty trucks ofa GVWR equal to 6,000 pounds or less (100%)
must meet the refueling emission standard.

(ii)A minimum ofthe percentage shown inTable A04-09 ofa manufacturer's sales ofthe applicable model year's gasoline- and methanolfueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and methaiol-fueled diesel-cycle lightduty trucks of6,001 to 8,500 pounds GVW shall be tested under the procedures in subpart B ofthis part indicated for 2004 and later model
years, and shall not exceed the standards described in paragraph (dl(1) ofthis section. Vehicles certified in accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section, as determined bythe provisions of

### §86.001-28(g), shall not be counted in the calculation ofthe percentage ofcompliance.

TABLE A04-09.-IMPLEMENTATION

SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK REFUELING EMISSION TESTING

Model year .Sales percentage

2004

........ ............. 40 2005

......... ............. . 80 2006 and subsequent

............... 100

(e) through (f). [Reserved] (g) through (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.097-9.

14. A new 

### §86.004-28 is added to subpart A to read as follows:

S86.004-28 Compliance with emission standards.

Section 86.004-28 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from 

### §§ 86.094-28 and 86.098-28. Where a paragraph in 

### §86.094-28 or 

### §86.098-28 is identical and applicable to

### § 86.001-' 28, this maybe indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-28." or "[Reserved). For guidance see 

### §86.098-28.". 

### (a)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-28.

(a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

## §86.098-28.

(a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 5 86.094-28. (a)(4) introductory textthrough (a)(4(i) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see §86:098-28. "

(a)(4)(i)(A) and (a)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-28.

(a) (5)and (6) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-28.

(a)(7) introductory textthrough (a)(7)(i) [Reserved). For guidance see § 86.098-28.

(a)(7)(ii) [Reserved). For guidance see 

### §86.094-28.

(b)(1) Paragraph (b)of this section applies tolight-duty trucks. (2)Eath exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission standard (andfamily emission limits, as appropriate) of §86.004-9 applies tothe emissions of vehicles for the appropriate useful life

as defined in §§ 86.098-2 and 86.001-9. (b)(3)through (b)(6) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-28. (b)(7)(i) Paragraph (b)(7) ofthis section describes theprocedure for determining compliance ofanew vehicle with evaporative emission standards. The procedure described here shallbe used forall vehicles in applicable model years. (ii)The manufacturer shall determine, based on testing described in 

### §86.001- 21(b)(4)(i)(A), and supply an evaporative emission deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control system combination. The factor shall be calculated by subtracting the emission level at the selected test point from the emission level at the useful life point. (iii)The official evaporative emission test results for each evaporative/ refueling emission-data vehicleat the selected testpoint shall be adjusted by the addition of the appropriate deterioration factor. However, ifthe deterioration factor supplied by the manufacturer is less than zero,it shall be zero forthe purposes ofthis ,paragraph. (iv)The emission value to compare with the standards shall be the adjusted emission value ofparagraph (b)(7)(iii)of this section rounded totwo significant figuresin accordance with ASTM E 29- 67 (reapproved 1980) (asreferenced in § 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii))foreach 

### evaporative emission-data vehicle. (8)(i)Paragraph (b)(8) ofthis section describes the procedure fordetermining compliance ofa new vehicle with refueling emission standards. The procedure described here shallbe used

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16287

for all applcable vehicles in the applicable model years.

(ii)The manufacturer shall determine, based on testing described in 

### §86.098- 21(b)(4)(i)(B), and supply a refueling emission deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combination. The factor shall be calculated by subtracting the emission level at the selected test pointfrom the emission level at the useful life point.

(iii)The official refueling emission test results for each evaporative/ refueling emission-data vehicle atthe selected test point shallbe adjustedby the addition ofthe appropriate deterioration factor. However, ifthe deterioration factor supplied by the manufacturer is less than zero, it shall be zero forthe purposes-of this paragraph.

(iv)The emission value to compare with the standards shallbe the adjusted emission value ofparagraph (b)(8)(iii) of this section rounded to two significant figures in accordance with ASTM E29- 67 (reapproved 1980) (asreferenced in 

### §86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) for each evaporative emission-data vehicle.

(9) Every test vehicle ofan engine family must comply With all applicable standards (andfamily emission limits,*

as appropriate), as determined in 

### §86.094-28(b)(4)(iv) and paragraphs (b)(7)(iv) and (b)(8)(iv) ofthis section, before any vehicle inthat family will be certified.

(c) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-28.

(e) [Reserved] (f)Fueldispensing spitbacktesting waiver.(1)Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standards setforth in 

### §§ 86.099-8, 86.001-9 and 86.004-9 are notrequired to demonstrate compliance with-the fuel dispensing spitback standards contained inthese sections: Provided,that-

(i) The manufacturer certifies that the vehicle inherently meets the Dispensing Spitback Standard as part ofcompliance with the refueling emission standard; and

(ii)This certification is provided in writing and applies to the full useful life ofthe vehicle.

(2) EPA retains theauthority to require testing to enforce compliance andto prevent non-compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback Standard.

(g)Inherentlylowrefuelingemission testingwaiver.(1)Vehicles using fuels/ fuel systems inherently low inrefueling emissions are notrequired to conduct testing to demonstrate compliance with the refueling emission standards set forth in 

### §§ 86.099-8, 86.001-9 or 86.004-9: Provided,that- (i) This provision is only available for petroleum diesel fuel. It is only available ifthe Reid Vapor Pressure of in-use diesel fuel is equal to or less than 1 psi (7 kPa) and for diesel vehicles whose fuel tank temperatures do not exceed 13 OF (54 OC), and

(ii) To certify using this provision the manufacturer must attest to the following evaluation: "Due to the low
vapor pressure ofdiesel fuel and the vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon
vapor concentrations are low and the vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon refueling emission standard without a control system."

(2) The certification required in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) ofthis section must be provided in'writing and must apply forthe full useful life ofthe vehicle.

(3) EPA reserves the authority to require testing to enforce compliance and to prevent noncompliance with the refueling emission standard.

(4) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standard under this provision shall notbe counted in the sales percentage compliance determinations forthe 2004, 2005 and subsequent model years.

15. A new 

### § 86.004-30 is added to subpart A to read as follows: 

### §86.004-30 Certification.

Section 86.004-30 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from 

### §§ 86.094-30, 86.095-30, 86.096-30, 86.098-30 or 86.001-30. Where a paragraph in 

### §86.094-30, 

### §86.095-30, 

### §86.096-30, 

### §86.098-30 or 

### §86.001-30 is identical and applicable to 

### §86.004- 30, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095-30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.096- 30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098-30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.001-30.".

(a)(1) and (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-30.

(a)(3)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.098-30.

(a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iii) introductory text through (a)(4)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.094-30.

-

(a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095-30. (a)(4)(iv)(A) through (a)(12) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094- 30.

(a)(13) [Reserved]. Forguidance see § 86.095-30.

(a)(14) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.094-30.

(a) (15) through (18) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.096-30. (a)(19) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.098-30.

(a)(20) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### §86.001-30.

(a)(21) For all light-duty trucks certified to refueling emission standards under § 86.004-9, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(21) (i) through (iii) ofthis section apply.

(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer complying with all provisions of 

### §86.004-9 both during and after model year production.

(ii) Failure tomeet the required implementation schedule sales percentages as specified in §86.004-9 will be considered to be a failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was issued and the individual vehicles sold in violation of the implementation schedule shall not be covered by the certificate. (iii).The manufacturer shall bear the burden ofestablishing to the satisfaction ofthe Administrator that the conditions upon which the certificate was issued

were satisfied.

(b)(1) introductory text through (b)(1)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. Forgiidance see 

### §86.094-30.

(b)(1)(ii)(B) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under 

### § 86.001- 24(b)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent all vehicles ofthe same evaporative/ refueling control system within the evaporative/refueling family.

(b)(1)(ii)(C) [Reserved]. Forguidance

see § 86.094-30.

(b)(1)(ii)(D) The emission-data vehicle(s) selected under 

### §86.098- 24(b)(1)(viii) shallrepresent all vehicles ofthe same evaporative/refueling control system within the evaporative/ refueling emission family, as applicable.

(b)(1)(iii) and (b)(1)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-30.

(b)(2) [Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.098-30.

(b)(3) through (b)(4)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.094-30. (b)(4)(ii) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.098-30. (b)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance

see 

### §86.094-30.

(b)(4)(ii)(B) through (b)(4)(iv) [Reserved]. Forguidance see 

### § 86.098- 30.

(b)(5) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### § 86.094-30.

(f)introductory text through (f)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.095- 30.

(f)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.098-30.

16. Section 86.098-2 ofsubpart A is revised to read as follows:

### 16288 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

§86.098-2 Definitions.

The definitions of §86.096-2 continue to apply to 1996 and later model year vehicles. The definitions listed in this section apply beginning with the 1998 model year.

Dispensed fuel temperature means the temperature (deg.F or deg.C maybe used) ofthe fuel being dispensed into the tank ofthe test vehicle during a refueling test.

Evaporative/refueling emission controlsystem means a unique combination within an evaporative/ refueling family ofcanister adsorptive material, purge system configuration,
purge strategy, and other parameters determined by the Administrator to affect evaporative and refueling emission control system durability or deterioration factors.

Evaporative/refueling emission family

means the basic classification unit ofa manufacturers' product line used for the
purpose ofevaporative and refueling emissions test fleet selection and determined in accordance with §86.098-24.

Integrated refuelingemissioncontrol system means a system where vapors resulting from refueling are stored in a

common vapor storage unit(s) with other evaporative emissions ofthe vehicle and are purged through a

common purge system.

•Non-integratedrefuelingemission controlsystem means a system where fuel vapors from refueling are stored in

a vapor storage unit assigned solely to the function ofstoring refueling vapors.

.Refuelingemissionsmeans evaporative emissions that emanate from a motor vehicle fuel tank(s) during

a refueling operation.

Refueling emissionscanister(s)means any vapor storage unit(s) that is exposed
to the vapors generated during refueling.

Restinglossesmeans evaporative emissions thatmay occur continuously, that are not diurnal emissions, hot soak emissions, refueling emissions, running losses, or spitback emissions. Usefullifemeans: (1) For light-duty vehicles, and for light light-duty trucks not subject to the Tier 0 standards of§ 86.094-9(a), intermediate useful life and/or full useful life. Intermediate useful life is a period of use of5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever occurs first. Full useful life is

a period ofuse of 10 years or 100,000 miles, whichever occurs first, except as otherwise noted in §86.094-9. The useful life ofevaporative and/or refueling emission control systems on the portion ofthese vehicles subject to the evaporative emission test requirements of§ 86.130-96, and/or the refueling emission test requirements of §86.151-98, is defined as a period of



### use of10 years or 100,000 miles, whichever occurs first. (2)For light light-duty trucks subject,
to the Tier0 standards of §86.094-9(a), and forheavy light-duty truck engine families, intermediate and/or fulluseful life. Intermediate useful life is a period ofuse of 5years or 5%,000 miles, whichever occurs first. Full useful life is

a period ofuse of 11years or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs first. The useful life ofevaporative emission control systems onthe portion ofthese vehicles subject tothe evaporative emission testrequirements of§86.130- 96 is also defined asa period of 11 years

or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs first.

(3)For an Otto-cycle heavy-duty engine family:

(i) For hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide standards, a period ofuse of 8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first

occurs.

(ii) Forthe oxides ofnitrogen standard, a-period ofuse of 10years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(iii)For the portion ofevaporative emission control systems subject to the evaporative emission test requirements of§ 86.1230-96, a period ofuse of10 

### years or 110,000 miles, whichever

occurs first.

(4) 

### For a diesel heavy-duty engine family:

(i)For light heavy-duty diesel engines, forhydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, andparticulate standards, a period ofuse of 8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(ii)For lightheavy-duty diesel engines, for the oxides ofnitrogen standard, a period ofuse of10 years or 110,000 miles,whichever first occurs.

(iii)For medium heavy-duty diesel engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and particulate standards, a period ofuse of8 years or,185,000 miles,whichever first occurs.

(iv)For medium heavy-duty diesel engines, forthe oxides ofnitrogen standard, a period ofuse of 10years or 185,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(v) Forheavy heavy-duty diesel engines, forhydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, and particulate standards, a period ofuse of8 years or 290,000 miles, whichever first occurs, except as provided in paragraph (3)(vii) ofthis definition.

(vi) Forheavy heavy-duty diesel engines, forthe oxides ofnitrogen standard, a period ofuse of 10 years or 290,000 miles,whichever firstoccurs.

(vii) For heavy heavy-duty diesel engines used in urbanbuses, forthe particulate standard, a period ofuse of 10years or 290,000 miles, whichever first occurs. 17. A new §86.098-3 is added to subpart A to read as follows:

§86.098-3 Abbreviations.

(a)The abbreviations in §86.094-3 continue to apply to 1996 and later 

### modelyear vehicles. The abbreviations inthis section apply beginning withthe 1998 model year.

(b) The abbreviations in this section apply to this subpart, and also to, subparts B, E, F,G, K, M, N, and P of this part, and have the following meanings: TD-dispensed fuel temperature

18. A new §86.098-7 is added to subpart A to read as follows: §86.098-7 Maintenance of records; submittal ofInformation; right ofentry.

Section 86.098-7 includes textthat specifies requirements that differ from those specified in §§ 86.091-7, 86.094- 7 and 86.096-7.- Where a paragraph in §86.091-7, §86.094-7 or § 86.096-7 is identical and applicable to §86.098-7, thismay be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.091-7." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-7." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096- 7.".

(a) Introductory text through (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.091-7.

(a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-7.

(b) through (c)(2) [Reserved]. For' guidance see §86.091-7..

(c)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86,094-7.

(c)(4) through (d)(1)(v) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.091-7.

(d)(1)(vi) through (d)(2)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-7.

(d)(3) through (g) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.091-7. (h)(6) Voidingacertificate.(i) EPA
may void ab initio a certificate for a vehicle certified to Tier 0 certification standards or to the respective evaporative and/or refueling test procedure and accompanying evaporative and/or refueling standards

as set forth or otherwise referenced in §§ 86.098-8, 86.098-9, or 86.098-10 for which the manufacturer fails to retain the records required in this section orto provide such information to the Administrator upon request.



### (h)(6)(ii) to (h)(7)(vi) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-7.

(h)(6)(vii) EPA evaporative/refueling 

### family.

19. A new §86.098-8 is added to subpart A, to read as follows:

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16289

§86.098-8 Emission standardsfor 1998 and latermodel year light-duty vehicles. Section 86.098-8 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.096--8. Where a paragraph in § 86.096-8 is identical and applicable to § 86.098-8, this may beindicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "LReservedl. For guidance see §86.096-8."

(a) through (b)(5) [Reserved). For guidance see §86.096-8.

(b)(61 Vehicles certified to the refueling standards setforth in paragraph (d) ofthis section are not required to demonstrate compliance with the fuel dispensing spitback standards contained in §86.096-8 (b)(1)(iii)and (b)(2}(iii): Provided, that they meet the requirements of §86.098- 28(fl.

(c) [Reservedi. Forguidance see § 86.096-8.

(d)Refueling emissions from 1998 and later model year gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled diesel-cycle light-duty vehicles shallnot exceed the following standards-The standards apply equally to certification and in-usevehicles.

(1) Standards-(i) I-fydrocarbons(for gasoline-fueledOtto-cycleand petroleum-fueleddiesel-cycle vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per liter) offuel dispensed.

(ii) Organic material hydrocarbon equivalent(formethanol-fueled vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053
gram per liter] of fuel dispensed.

(2)(i) The standards setforth in paragraphs (d)(il (i) and (ii) ofthis section refer to asample ofrefueling emissions collected under the conditions setforth in subpart B ofthis part and measured in accordance with those procedures.

(ii) For vehicles powered by petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines, the provisions set forth in paragraph (d)(1) ofthis section maybe waived: Provided,that the manufacturer complies with the provisions of 

### §86.098-28(g. "

- (3)(i) A minimum ofthe percentage shown inTable A98-08 ofa manufacturer's sales ofthe applicable modelyear's gasoline- and methanolfueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled *and methanol-fueled diesel-cycle lightduty vehicles shall be tested under the procedures in subpart B ofthis part indicated for 1998 and later model
years, and shall not exceed the standards described inparagraph (d)(1) ofthis section..Vehicles certified in accordance withparagraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section, as determined by the provisions of §86.098--28g), shallnot 

### be counted in the calculation of the percentage ofcompliance.

TABLE A98-0&-MPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE REFUELING EMISSION TESTING

Model year Sales. percentage

1998

...................................... . 40 1999

........... ...... 80 

### 2000 and subsequent 100

(ii) Small volume manufacturers, as defined in §86.094-14(b) (1)and (2), are exempt fromthe implementation schedule ofTableA98-08 ofthis section for model years 1998 and 1999. For small volume manufacturers,the standards ofparagraph (d)ofthis section, and the associated test procedures, shall not apply until model year 2000. when 100percent compliance with the standards ofthis section isrequired. Thisexemption does
notapplyto small volume engine families as defined in §86.094-14b)(5).

(e)through (f} [Reservedi (g)through (k) (Reserved. For guidance see §86.096-8.

20. A new §86.098-14 is added to subpart A toread as follows:
§86.098-14 Small-volume manufacturers certificationprocedures.

Section 86.098-14 includes textthat specifies requirements that differ from §§ 86.094-14 or86.095-14. Where a paragraph in §86.094-14 or §86.095-14 is identical and applicable to §86.098- 14, thismay be indicated byspecifying the corresponding paragraph andthe
statement "[Reserved. Forguidance see § 86.094-14." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-14.". (a) through (c)(7)(i}[C)(3) [Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.094-14.

(c)(7)(i)(C)(4) For light-duty vehicle. light-duty truck, and heavy-duty vehicle evaporative and/orrefueling emissions (asapplicable) and for light-duty truck, and heavy-duty engine exhaust emissions, deterioration factors shallbe determined in accordance with §86.098-24.

(c)(7)(ii)through (c)(11)(ii)(B) introductory text [Reservedl. For guidance see §86.094-14. (c){tl)(ii)(B)(1) Engine evaporative! refueling family names andvehicle (or engine)configurations. 

## ()(}ii}(BI(2} through (c)(11)(ii)(B)(15) [Reserved. For guidance see §86.094-14.

(c){11)(ii)(B)(16) through (c)(11)(ii)(B)(181 (Reservedl. For guidance see 

### §86.095-14.

(c)(11)(ii)(B)(19)For each light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or heavy-duty vehicle evaporative/refueling emission family, adescription ofany unique procedures required toperform evaporative and/or refueling emission
tests (as applicable) (including canister working capacity, canister bed volume, and fueltemperature profile forthe running loss test) for allvehicles inthat evaporative/refueling emission family, and a description ofthe method used to develop those uniqueprocedures.

(20)For each light-duty vehicle, lightduty truck,or heavy-duty vehicle evaporativelrefueling emission family:

(i)

Canister working capacity, according tothe procedures specified in 

### §86.13Z-96(h)(1)(iv);

(i Canister bed volume; and (iii) Fuel temperature profile forthe running losstest, according to the procedures specified in §86.129-94(d).

(c)(11)(ii)(C)through (c)(11)(ii)(D)(S} [Reserved). For guidance see §86.095- 14.

(c)(11)(ii)(D)(6) [Reserved). (c)(11)(ii)(D)(7) through (c)(15) [Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.094- 14.

21. A new§ 86.098-17 is addedto subpart Ato read as follows: 

### §86.098-17 Emission controldiagnostic systemfor 1998and laterlight-duty vehiclesand light-duty truck& Section 86.098-17 includes textthat specifies requirements that differ from §86.094-17. Where a paragraph in, §86.094-17 isidentical and applicable to §86.098-17, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph andthe statement "[Reservedl. For guidance see §86.094-17."

(a)introductory text through (a)(31 [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094- 17.

(a)C4) Any other deterioration or malfunction within thepowertrain which occursin actual use and which results in an exhaust emission increase ofgreater than 0,2 gfmi HC, 1.7 g/mi CO, or 0.5 g/mi NOx. orany vapor leak in the evaporative and/or refueling system which results in an evaporative emissions increase ofgreater than 30.0 g/test measured over the first 24 hours ofthe diurnal portion oftherevised evaporative emissions testprocedure, in accordance with testprocedures set forth in subpart B ofthispart, for vehicles certified to that testprocedure.

(b)(1) The electronic evaporative and/

or refueling emission purge control,if equipped, and allemission-related powertrain components connected to a computer shall, ata minimum,be monitored for circuit continuity.All components required by these regulations tobe monitored shall be evaluated periodically, butno less

### 16290 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

frequently than once per Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule as' defined in 40 CFR part 86, appendix I, paragraph (a), or similar trip.

(b)(2) through (j) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-17T.

22. A new §86.098-21 is added to subpart A to read as follows:

§86.098-21 Application forcertification.

Section 86.098-21 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from §86.094-21 or §86.096-21. Where a paragraph in §86.094-21 or §86.096-21 is identical and applicable to § 86.098- 21, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-21." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-21.". (a) through (b)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-21. (b)(4)(i) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, a description ofthe
test procedures to be used to establish the evaporative emission and/or refueling emission deterioration factors (as applicable) required to be determined and supplied in §86.098- 23(b)(2).

(b)(4)(ii) through (iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-21.

(b)(5)(v) For light-duty vehicles with non-integrated refueling emission control systems, the number of continuous UDDS cycles, determined from the fuel economy on the UDDS applicable to the test vehicle of that evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combination, required to use a volume offuel equal
to 85% offuel tank volume.

(b)(6) through (8) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-21.

(b)(9)For each light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, or heavy-duty vehicle evaporative/refueling emission family, a description ofany unique procedures required to perform evaporative and/or refueling emission tests (as applicable) (including canister working capacity, canister bed volume, and fuel temperature profile for the running loss test) for all vehicles in that evaporative/ refueling emission family, and a description ofthe method used to develop those unique procedures.

(10) For each light-duty vehicle, lightduty truck, orheavy-duty vehicle evaporative/refueling emission family:

(i) Canister working capacity, according to the procedures specified in §86.132-96(h)(1)(iv);

(ii) Canister bed volume; and (iii) Fuel temperature profile for the running loss test, according to the procedures specified in §86.129-94(d).

(c) and (d) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.094-21. 

### (e) For vehicles equipped with gasoline-fueled ormethanol-fueled heavy-duty engines, the manufacturer shall specify amaximum nominal fuel tank capacity for each evaporative/ refueling emission family-emission control system combination.

(f)through (i)[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-21. (j)and (k) [Reserved]. For guidance

see §86.096-21.

23. A new §86.098-22 is added to subpart A to read as follows: 

### §86.098-22 Approval ofapplication for certification;testfleet selections; determinations of parameters subject to adjustment for certificationand Selective Enforcement Audit,adequacy of limits,and physicallyadjustable ranges.

Section 86.098-22 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from §86.094-22. Where aparagraph in §86.094-22 is identical and applicable to §86.098-22, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-22."

(a) through (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-22.

(d) Approval oftest procedures. (1) The Administrator does not approve the testprocedures forestablishing the evaporative and/or refueling emission deterioration factors for light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. The manufacturer shall submit the procedures as required in §86.098- 21(b)(4)(i) prior to the Administrator's selection ofthe testfleet under §86.098-24(b) (1), and ifsuch procedures will involve testing of durability data vehicles selected by the Administrator or elected by the manufacturer under §86.098-24(c)(1), prior to initiation of such testing.

(d)(2) through (g) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-22.

24. Section 86.098-23 ofsubpart A is amended byrevising the introductory text and paragraphs (a) through (1) to read as follows: 

### §86.098-23 Required data.

Section 86.098-23 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from. §86.095-23. Where a paragraph in §86.095-23 is identical and applicable to §86.098-23, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-23." (a)through (b)(1)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-23. (b)(2)For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, the manufacturer shall submit evaporative emission and/or refueling emission deterioration factors for each evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control system combination and all test data that are derived from testing described under §86.098-21(b)(4)(i) designed and conducted in accordance with good engineering practice to assure that the vehicles covered by a certificate issued under § 86.098-30 will meet the evaporative and/or refueling emission standards in §86.098-8 or §86.098-9,

as appropriate, for the useful life ofthe vehicle. (b)(3) through (b)(4)(iij [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-23. (b)(4)(iii) For petroleum-fueled dieselcycle vehicles certifying under the waiver provisions of§-86.098-28, the certifications and representations specified in § 86.098-28.

(c) through (e)(1) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-23.

(e)(2) For evaporative and refueling emission durability, or light-duty truck

or heavy-duty engine exhaust emission durability, a statement ofcompliance with paragraph (b)(2) or (b)(4)(iii) ofthis section or §86.095-23 (b)(1)(ii), (b)(3) (b)(4)(i) or (b)(4)(ii), as applicable.

(3) For certification ofvehicles with non-integrated refueling systems, a statement that the drivedown used to purge the refueling canister was the

same as described in the manufacturers' application for certification. Furthermore, a description ofthe procedures used to determine the number ofequivalent UDDS miles required to purge the refueling canisters,

as determined by the provisions of §86.098-21(b)(5)(v) and subpart B of this part. Furthermore, a written
statement to the Administrator that all data, analyses, test procedures,. evaluations and other documents, on which the above statement isbased, are available to the Administrator upon request.

(f) through (1)[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-23.

* * * * *

25. A new §86.098-24 is added to subpart A to read as follows: 

### §86.098-24 Test vehicles and engines.

Section 86.098-24 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.096-24. Where a paragraph in § 86.096-24 is identical and applicable
to §86.098-24, this may be indicatedby specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-24."

(a) introductory text through (a)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096- 24.

(a)(5) The gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks covered by an application for certification will be divided into groupings which are

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16291

expected tohave similarevaporative and/or refueling emission characteristics (asapplicable) throughout their useful life. Each group ofvehicles with similar evaporative and/orrefueling emission characteristics shall be defined as a separate evaporative/refueling emission family.

(a)(6) For gasoline-fueled ormethanolfueled light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks to be'classed in the same evaporative/refueling emission family, vehicles mustbe similar with respect to the items listed in paragraphs (a)(6) (i) through (xii) ofthis section.

(i)Type ofvapor storage device (e.g., canister, air cleaner, crankcase).

(ii) Basic canister design. (A) Working capacity--grams adsorption within a log. range.

(B) System configuration-number of canisters andmethod ofconnection (i.e., series, parallel).

(C) Canistergeometry, construction and materials.

(iii)Fuel system. (iv) Typeofrefuelingemission control system-non-integrated or integrated withthe evaporative control system. Further, ifthe system is non-integrated, whether or notany other evaporative emissions, e.g. diurnal orhot soak emissions, are captured in thesame storage device as the refueling emissions.

(v) Fillpipe seal mechanismmechanical, liquid trap, other.

(vi)Fill limiter system. (vii)Vapor control system ormethod ofcontrolling vapor flow through the vapor line to the canister.

(viii)Vapor/liquid separator usage. (ix)Purge system (valve, purge strategy and calibrations).

(x) Vapor hose diameter andmaterial. (xi) Canisterlocation (front, rear, midvehicle).

(xii)Onboard diagnostic hardware and calibrations.

(a)(7) Where vehicles are ofa type which cannot be divided into evaporative/refueling emission families based on thecriteria listed above (such

as non-canister control system approaches), theAdministrator will establish families forthose vehicles based upon the features most related to their evaporative and/or refueling emission characteristics. (a)(8)through.(b}(1)vi)tReservedl. For guidance see §86.096-24.

(b)(l)(vii)(A) Vehicles ofeach 

### evaporative/refueling emission family willbe divided intoevaporative/ refueling emission control systems

(B)TheAdministrator will select the vehicle expected to exhibit the highest evaporative and/orrefueling emissions, fromwithin each evaporative/refueling family to be certified, from among the vehicles represented by theexhaust 

### emission-data selections forthe engine family,unless evaporative and/or refueling testing hasalready been completed on thevehicle expected to exhibit thehighest evaporative and/or refueling emissions for theevaporative/ refueling family as part ofanother engine family's" testing. (C)Ifthe vehicles selected in accordance withparagraph (b}{1)(vii)(B) ofthis section donot represent each evaporative/refueling emission control system then the Administrator will select thehighest expected evaporative/ refueling emission vehicle from within the unrepresented evaporative/refueling system.

(viii) Forhigh-altitude evaporative and/or refueling emission compliance foreach evaporative/refueling emission family, the manufacturer shall follow

one ofthe followingprocedures:

(A)The manufacturer will select for testingunder high-altitude conditions the one nonexempt vehicle previously selected under paragraph (b)(l)(vii)(B)

or (b)(1}{vii)(Cl ofthissection which is expected to have thehighestlevel of evaporative and/or refuelingemissions when operated at high altitude; or

(B)[Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.096-24.

(b)(ix)through (e)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-24.

(f) Carryover andcarryacross of durability andemissiondata.In lieuof testing anemission-data ordurability vehicle (orenginel selected under paragraph (b)(1) (vii)through (viii)of this section and §86.096-24 (b)(1) (i) through (viil and (b)(2) through (c),and submitting datatherefor, amanufacturer may, with theprior written approval of the Administrator, submit exhaust emission data, evaporative emission data and/or refueling emission data,as applicable on a similar vehicle (or engine) for whichcertification hasbeen obtained orfor whichall applicable data required under §86.098-23 has previously been submitted.

(g)through (h) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-24.

26. A new§ 86.098-25 is added to subpart Atoread as follows: §

86.098-25 Maintenance.

Section 86.098-25 includes text that specifies requirements that differfrom §86.094-25. Where aparagraph in §86.094-25 is identical and,applicable
to §86.098-25, thismay beindicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-25." (a)(1) [Reserved]. Forguidance see § 86.094-25.

(a)(2) Maintenance performed on vehicles, engines, subsystems, or components used to determine exhaust. evaporative orrefueling emission deterioration factors is classified as 

### either emission-related or nonemission-related and each ofthese.can be classified as either scheduled or unscheduled. Further, some emissionrelated maintenance is also classified as critical emission-related maintenance.

(b) Introductory text through (b)(3)(vi)(D) [Reserved). For guidance

see §86.094-25.

(b)}3)(vi)(E) Evaporative and/or refueling emission canister(s).

(F)Turbochargers. (G) Carburetors. (H) Superchargers. (I) EGR System including allrelated filters and control valves.



### (J) Mechanical fillpipe seals. (b)(3)(vii)through (b)(6)(i)(E) [Reservedl. For guidance see §86.094- 25.

(b)(6)(i)(F) Evaporative andrefueling emission control system components (excluding canister air filter).

(b)(6)(i)(G) through (h) [Reservedi. For guidance see 

### §86.094-25.

27. A new 

### §86.098-26 is added to subpart A toread as follows:
§86.098-26 Mileage and service accumulation;emission measurements.

Section 86.098-26 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.094-26, § 86.095-26 or §86.096-26. Where a paragraph in §86.094-26, § 86.095-26 or §86.096-26 is identical and applicable to § 86.098-26, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reseryed), For guidance see § 86.094-26." or "[Reserved. For guidance see § 86.095-26." or "[Reservedl. For guidance see §86.096- 26.". (a)(l) and (2) [Reservedl. For guidance

see §86.094-26.

(a)(3) Emissiondatavehicles.Unless otherwise provided forin § 86.098- 23(a), emission-data vehicles shall be operated and tested as described in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and (ii)(C) ofthis section and §86.094-26 (a)(3)(ii)(A), (B) and (D).

(i) Otto-cycle. (A) The manufacturer shall determine, for each engine family, the mileage at which the engine-system combination is stabilized for emissiondata testing, The manufacturer shall maintain, and'provide to the Administrator ifrequested, arecord of the rationale used in making this determination. The manufacturer may elect to accumulate 4,000 miles on each

### 16292 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

test vehicle within an engine family without making a determination. The manufacturer must accumulate a minimum of 2,000 miles (3,219 kilometers) on each test vehicle within

an engine family. All test vehicle mileage must be accurately determined, recorded, and reported to the

- Administrator. Any vehicle used to represent emission-data vehicle selections under §86.098-24(b)(1) shall be equipped with an engine and emission control system that has accumulated the mileage the manufacturer chose to accumulate on the test vehicle. Fuel economy data generated from certification vehicles selected in accordance with §86.098- 24(b)(1) with engine-system combinations that have accumulated

more than 10,000 kilometers (6,200 miles) shallbe factored in accordance with 40 CFR 600.006-87(c). Complete exhaust, evaporative and refueling (if required) emission tests shall be, conducted for each emission-data vehicle selection under §86.098- 24(b)(1). The Administrator may determine under § 86.094-24(f) that no testing is required.

(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-26.

(C) Exhaust, evaporative and refueling emissions-tests for emission-data vehicle(s) selected for testing under § 86.096-24(b)(1) (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv) or §86.098-24(b)(1)(vii)(B) shall be conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile minimum) at which the engine-system combination is stabilized for emission testing under low-altitude conditions.

(a)(3)(i)(B) through (a)(3)(ii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094- 26.

(a)(3)(ii)(C) Exhaust, evaporative and refueling emissions tests (asrequired) for emission-data vehicle(s) selected for testing under §86.096-24(b)(1) (i), (ii), (iii), or (iv), or §86.098-24 b)(1)(vii)(B) shall be conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile minimum) at which the enginesystem combination is stabilized for emission testing under low-altitude conditions. (a)(3)(ii)(D) through (b)(4)(i)(C) [Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.094- 26.

(b)(4)(i)(D)through (b)(4)(ii)(D) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095- 26.

(b)(4)(iii) [Reserved]. (b)(4)(iv) through (c)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-26.

(c)(4) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-26.

(d) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-26.

28. A new §86.098-28 is added to subpart A to read as follows: 

### §86.098-28 Compliance with emission standards.

Section 86.098-28 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from §86.094-28. Where aparagraph in § 86.094-28 is identical and applicable
to § 86.098-28, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-28. " • (a)(1) Paragraph (a) ofthis section applies to light-duty vehicles.

(2) Each exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission standard (and family particulate emission limits, as appropriate) of§ 86.098-8 applies to the emissions ofvehicles for the appropriate useful life as defined in §§ 86.098-2 and .86.098-8.

(3) [Reserved]. Forguidance see § 86.094-28.

(4) The procedure for determining compliance of anew motor vehicle with exhaust, evaporative and/or refueling emission standards (orfamily particulate emission limit, as appropriate) is as described in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) introductory text, (a)(4)(i)(C), (a)(4)(ii)(B) and (C), (a)(4)(iii), (a)(4)(v), (f) and (g) ofthis section and,§ 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(A) and (B), (a)(4)(ii)(A), (a)(4)(iv)) except where specified by paragraph (a)(7) ofthis section for the Production AMA Durability Program. (i) Separate emission deterioration factors shall be determined from the exhaust emission results ofthe durability-data vehicle(s) for each engine-system combination. Separate. evaporative and/or refueling emission deterioration factors shall be determined for each evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control system combination from the testing conducted by the manufacturer (gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled vehicles only). Separate refueling emission deterioration factors shall be determined for each evaporative/refueling emission family-emission control system combination from the testing conducted by the manufacturer (petroleum-fueled diesel cycle vehicles not certified under the provisions ofparagraph (g) ofthis section only).

(a)(4)(i)(A) and (a)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved]. Forguidance see §86.094-28.

(a)(4)(i)(C) Evaporativedeterioration factordetermination.An evaporative emissions deterioration factor (gasolinefueled and methanol-fueled vehicles only) shallbe determined from the testing conducted as described in Section 86.094-21(b)(4) (i) (A), and in accordance with paragraphs (a)(4)(i)(C) (1)and (2) ofthis section, for each evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combination to 

### indicate the evaporative emission level at the applicable useful life relative to the evaporative emission level at 4,000 miles as follows:

(1) Factor = Evaporative emission 

### level at the useful life mileage forthat standard minus the evaporative emission level at 4,000 miles.

(2)The factor shall be established to

a minimum oftwo places to the right of the decimal.

(D)A refueling emissions deterioration factor (gasoline-fueled, methanol-fueled andpetroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles not certified under the provisions ofparagraph (g) ofthis section) shallbe determined from testing conducted and described in §86.098-21(b)(4)(i)(B) for each evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combinationto indicate therefueling emission level at the applicable usefule life relative to the refueling emission level at 4,000 miles

as follows:

1(1) Factor = Refueling emission level 

### at the useful life mileage for that standard minus the refueling emission level at 4,000 miles.

(2)The factor shallbe established to
a minimum oftwoplaces to the right of the decimal.

(a)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance

see §86.094-28.

(a)(4)(ii)(B) The official evaporative emission test results (gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled vehicles only) for each evaporative emission-data vehicle atthe selected testpoint shall be adjusted by addition ofthe appropriate deterioration factor: Provided,that if a deterioration factor as computed in paragraph (a)(4)(i)(C) ofthis section is less than zero, that deterioration factor shall be zero forthe purposes ofthis paragraph.

(C]The official refueling emission test results (gasoline-fueled, methanolfueled, and petroleum-fueled diesel cycle vehicles not certified under the provisions ofparagraph (g)ofthis section) for eachrefueling emission-data vehicle at the selected test point shall be adjusted by addition ofthe appropriate deterioration factor: Provided,that ifa 

### deterioration factor as computed in paragraph (a)(4)(i)(D) ofthis section is less than zero, that deterioration factor shallbe zero for purposes ofthis paragraph-



### (Pi) The-emissions to compare with
the standard (orthe family particulate emission limit, as appropriate) shallbe the adjusted emissions ofparagraphs (a)(4)(ii) (B)and (C) of this section and §86.094-28 (a)(4)(ii)(A) for each emission-data vehicle. Before any 

### emission value is compared with the standard (orthe family particulate

### Federat Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16293

emission limit, as appropriate), it shall be rounded, in accordance with ASTM E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in § 86.094- 28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)),to two significant figures. The rounded emission values
may not exceed the standard (orthe family particulate emission limit, as appropriate).

(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-28.

(v)Every test vehicle ofan evaporative/refueling emission family
must comply with the evaporative and]/

orrefueling emission standards, as determined in paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of this section, before any vehicle in that family may be certified.

(a)(5) through (a)(6) [Reserved]. For. guidance see §86.094-28.

(a)(7) The procedure to determine the compliance ofnew motorvehicles in the Production AMA Durability Program described in § 86.094-13 is the same as described in paragraphs (a)(4)(iii) and (v) of this section and § 86.094-28 (a)(4)(iv). For the engine families that

are included in the'Production AMA Durability Program, the exhaust emission deterioration factors used to determine compliance shall be thosethat the Administrator has approved under §86.094-13. The evaporative emission deterioration factor for each evaporative /refueling emission family shall be determined and applied " according to paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(B) of this section. The refueling emission deterioration factor for each evaporative/refueling emission family shall be determined and applied according to paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) of this section. The procedures to determine the minimum exhaust emission deterioration factors required under §86.094-13(d) are as described in paragraph (a)(7)(i) ofthis section and 

### §86.094-28 (a)(7)(ii).

(i) Separate deterioration factors shall be determined from the exhaust emission results ofthe durability data vehicles for each emission standard applicable under §86.098-8, for each engine family group. The evaporative and/or refueling emission deterioration factors for each evaporative/refueling family will be determined and applied in accordance withparagraph (a)(4) of this section.

(a)(7)(ii) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-28.

(e) [Reserved] ' (f) Fueldispensing spitbacktesting waiver.(1) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standards set forth in §86.098-8 are not required to demonstrate compliance with the fuel dispensing spitback standard contained in that section: Provided,that- (i) The manufacturer certifies that the vehicle inherently meets the Dispensing Spitback Standard as part ofcompliance with the refueling emission standard; and

(ii)This certification is provided in writing and applies to the full useful life ofthe vehicle.

(2) EPA retains the authority to require testing to enforce compliance and to prevent non-compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback Standard. (g) Inherentlylow refuelingemission testingwaiver. (1) Vehicles using fuels/ fuel systems inherently low in refueling emissions are notrequired to conduct testing to demonstrate compliance with the refueling emission standards set forth in §86.098-8: Provided, that- (i) This provision is only available for petroleum diesel fuel. It is only available ifthe Reid Vapor Pressure of in-use diesel fuel is equal to or less than 1 psi (7 kPa) and for diesel vehicles whose fuel tank temperatures do not exceed 130 °F (54 'C); and (ii)To certify using this provision the manufacturer must attest to the following evaluation: "Due to the low
vapor pressure of diesel fuel and the vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon
vapor concentrations are low and the vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon refueling emission standard without a control system." (2) The certification required in paragraph (g)(1)(ii) ofthis section must be provided in writing and must apply for the full useful life ofthe vehicle.

(3) EPA reserves the authority to require testing to enforce compliance and to prevent noncompliance with the refueling emission standard.

(4) Vehicles certified to the refueling emission standard under this provision shall not be counted in the sales percentage compliance determinations for the 1988, 1989 and subsequent model years.

29. A new §86.098-30 is added to subpart A to read as follows:


### §86.098-30 Certification.

Section 86.098-30 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.094-30, §86.095-30 or §86.096-30. Where a paragraph in § 86.094-30, §86.095-30 or §86.096-30 is identical and applicable to §86.098-30. This may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-30." or "[Reseived]. For guidance see 

### §86.096- 30.".

(a)(1).and (a)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-30. (a)(3)(i) One such certificate will be issued for each engine family. For gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled light-duty vehicles and light duty-trucks and petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle lightduty vehicles and light duty-trucks not certified under § 86.098-28(g), one such certificate will be issued for each engine family-evaporative/refueling emission family combination. Each certificate will certify compliance with no more than one set ofin-use and certification standards (orfamily emission limits, as appropriate).

(a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iii) introductory text through (a)(4)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.094-30.

(a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iv)(A) through (a)(12) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094- 30.

(a)(13) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-30.

(a)(14) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-30.

(a)(15) through (18) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-30.

(a)(19) For all light-duty vehicles certified to refueling emission standards under §86.098-8, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(19) (i) through (iii)ofthis section apply.

(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer complying with all provisions of §86.098-8, both during and after model
year production. (ii)Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales percentages as specified in § 86.094-8 be considered to be a failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was issued and the vehicles sold in violation ofthe implementation schedule shall not be covered by the certificate.

(iii)The manufacturer shallbear the burden ofestablishing to the satisfaction ofthe Administrator that the conditions
upon which the certificate was issued

were satisfied.

(b)(1) introductory text through (b)(1)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-30.

(b)(1)(i)(C) The emission-data vehicle(s) selected under §86.098- 24(b)(1)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent all vehicles ofthe same evaporative/ refueling control system within the evaporative /refueling family.

(b)(1)(ii) through (b)(1)(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-30.

(b)(2) The Administrator will proceed

as in paragraph (a) ofthis section with respect to the vehicles (or engines) belonging to an engine family or engine

### 16294 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

family-evaporative/refueling emission family combination .(asapplicable), all ofwhich comply with all applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate).

(b)(3)through (b)(4)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-30.

(b)(4)(ii) Remove the vehicle configuration (or evaporative/refueling vehicle configuration, as applicable) which failed, from his application:

(b)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.094-30.

(b){4)(ii)(B) Ifthe failed vehicle was tested for compliance with one or more ofthe exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission standards: The Administrator may select, in place of the failed vehicle, in accordance with the selection criteria employed in selecting the failed vehicle, a new emission data vehicle which will be tested for compliance with all ofthe applicable emission standards. Ifone vehicle cannotbe selected in accordance with the selection criteria employed in selecting the failed vehicle, then two or more vehicles may be selected (e.g., one vehicle to satisfy the exhaust emission vehicle selection criteria and one vehicle to satisfy the evaporative and refueling emission vehicle selection criteria). The vehicle selected to satisfy the exhaust emission vehicle selection criteria willbe tested for compliance with exhaust emission standards (orfamily emissionlimits, as appropriate) only.The vehicle selected
to satisfy the evaporative and/or refueling emission Vehicle selection criteria willbe tested for compliance withexhaust, evaporative and/or refueling emission standards; or

(iii)Remove the vehicle configuration (orevaporative/refueling vehicle configuration, as applicable) which failed from the application and add a vehicle configuration(s) (orevaporative/ refueling vehicle configuration(s), as applicable) not previously listed. The Administrator may require, if applicable, that the failed vehicle be modified to the new engine code (or evaporative/refueling emission code, as applicable) and demonstrate by testing that itmeets applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate) for which itwas originally tested. In addition, the Administrator may select, in accordance with the vehicle selection criteria given in §86.001-24(b). anew emission data vehicle or vehicles.The vehicles selected to satisfy the exhaust emission vehicle selection criteria will be tested forcompliance with exhaust emission standards (orfamily emission limits, asappropriate) only.The vehicles selected to satisfy the evaporative emission vehicle selection criteria willbe tested forcompliance with all ofthe applicable emission , standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate); or

(iv) Correct a component or system malfunction and show that with a correctly functioning system or component the failed vehicle meets applicable standards (orfamily emission limits, asappropriate) for which it was originally tested. The Administrator may require a new emission data vehicle, ofidentical vehicle configuration (orevaporative/refueling vehicle configuration, as applicable) to, the failed vehicle, to be operated and tested for compliance with the applicable standards (orfamily emission limits, as appropriate) forwhich the failed vehicle was originally tested.

(b)(5) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.094-30.

(f)introductorytext through (f0(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095- 30.

(f)(4) The electronic evaporative and/

orrefueling purge control device (if equipped) orany emission-related powertrain component connected to a computer is electrically disconnected.

30. A new §86.098-35 is added to subpart A toread as follows: 

### §86.098-35 Labeling.

Section 86.098-35 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from §§86.095-35 and 86.096-35. Where a paragraph in §86.095-35 or §86.096-35 is identical and applicable to §86.098-. 35, this-may beindicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph andthe statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-35.'"or '[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-35.". (a)introductory text through (a)(1)(iii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance

see §86.095-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(C)Engine displacement (in cubic inches or liters), engine family identification and evaporative/refueling family Identification.

(a})1)(iii)(D) through (L) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(M) Formodel year 1998 light-duty vehicles, a clear indication of whichtest procedure was used to certify the evaporative/refueling family, e.g., "Evaporative /refueling Family xx 

### (§

86.130-96 procedures)" or "Evaporative /refueling Family xx 

### (§

86.130-78 procedures)." (a)(1)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance

see §86.096-35.

.(a)(2) heading through (a)(2)(iii)(K) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095- 35.

(a)(2)(iii)(L) [Reserved]. (a)(2)(iii)(M) through (a)(2)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.095- 35. (a)(2)(iii)(O) through (a)(2)(iii)(P) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096- 35. (a)(3) heading through (a)(4)(iii)(F) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095- 35.

(a)(4)(iii)(G) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.096-35.

(b)through (i) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-35.

31. Section 86.099-8 ofsubpart A is amended by adding paragraphs (b)(5) and (6), revising paragraph (c), adding paragraph (d), and revising paragraphs (e)through (k)to read as follows:

§88.099- Emission standards for 1999 and later model year light-duty vehicles.

Sb)* * *

(5) [Reserved]. For guidance see 

### §86.096-8.

(b)(6) Vehiclescertified to the refueling standards set forth in paragraph (d) ofthis section are not required to demonstrate compliance with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback standards contained in paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii) ofthis section: Provided,that they meet the requirements of§ 86.098-28(f).

(c) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.096-8.

(d) Refueling emissions from 1999 and later model year gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled diesel-cycle light duty vehicles shall not exceed the following standards. The standards apply equally to certification and in-use vehicles.

(1) Standards--(i) Hydrocarbois (for gasoline-fueledOtto gallon (0.053 gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.

(ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon Equivalent(for methanol-fueled vehicles).0.20 gram per gallon (0.053
gram per liter) offuel dispensed.

(2)(i) The standards set forth in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii)of this section refer to a sample ofrefueling emissions collected under the conditions set forthin subpart B ofthis part and measured in accordance with those procedures. (ii)For vehicles powered by petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines, the provisions set forth in paragraph (d)(1)(i) ofthis section may be waived: Provided,that the manufacturer complies with the provisions of § 86.098-28(f) ofthis subpart.

(3)(i) A minimum of the percentage shown in Table A99-08 of a manufacturer's sales ofthe applicable model year's gasoline- andmethanolfueled Otto-cycle and petroleum. and methanol-fueled diesel cyclelight-duty vehicles shall betested under the

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16295

procedures in subpart B ofthis part indicated for 1998 and later model
years, and shall not exceed the standards described in paragraph (d)(1) ofthis section.Vehicles certified in accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section, as determined by the provisions of § 86:098-28(g), shall not be counted in the calculation ofthe percentage ofcompliance.



### TABLE A99-08. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE REFUELING EMISSION TESTING

Sales Model year percentage

1999

..................................... .. 80 2000 and subsequent

............... 100

(ii) Small volume manufacturers, as defined in § 86.094-14(b) (1) and (2), are exempt from the implementation schedule ofTable A99-08 ofthis section for model year 1999. For small volunme manufacturers, the standards of paragraph (d) ofthis section, and the associated test procedures, shall not apply until model year 2000, when 100 percent compliance with the standards ofthis section is required. This exemption does not apply to small volume engine families as defined in § 86.094-14(b)(5).

(e)through (f) [Reserved] (g) through (k) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096--8.

Subpart B---[Amended]

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



### (a) * * * (3) Sections 86.150-98 through 86.156-98 describe the refueling test procedures forlight-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks and apply for 1998 and later model years.

2. Section 86.105 ofsubpart B is amended by revising paragraph(b) to read as follows:

§86.105 Introduction;structure of subpart.

R * * * *

(b) Three topics are addressed inthis subpart. Sections 86.106-82 through 86.115-78 set forth specifications and equipment requirements; §§86.116-82 through 86.126-90 discuss calibration methods and frequency; test procedures * and data requirements are listed (in approximate order ofperformance) in §§ 86.127-82 through 86.156-98.

3. A new § 86.107-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows: §86.107-98 Sampling and analytical system.

Section 86.107-98 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.107-96. Where a paragraph in § 86.107-96 is identical and applicable

to § 86.107-98, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.107-96." Where a corresponding paragraph of §86.107-96 is not applicable, this is indicated by the

statement "[Reserved]."

(a)(1) through (a)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.107-96.

(a)(4) Refuelingemissionstest. The requirements detailed in § 86.107-90 (a)(1) shall apply. Alternatively, an enclosure meeting the specifications detailed in § 86.107-96 (a)(1), (2), or (3)
may beused if approved in advance by the Administrator. In addition, the enclosure shall have one or more access ports leading to flexible, automatic sealing boots, in the wall(s) ofthe enclosure. The function ofthe access port(s) and boots shall beto allow fueling ofthe testvehicle from a fuel nozzle and hose located outside ofthe enclosure, with only the spout ofthe nozzle passing through the automatic sealing opening ofthe boot during fueling. There shall be no loss in the gas tightness ofthe enclosure at the opening ofthe boot either when the nozzle is inserted or when the nozzle is not inserted.

(b) through (d) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.107-96.

(e) Temperaturerecording system. (1) Forallemission testing.A strip chart potentiometric recorder, an on-line computer system, or other suitable

means shall be used to record enclosure ambient temperature during all evaporative emission test segments, as well asvehicle fuel tank temperature during the running loss test.The recording system shall record each temperature at least once every minute.. The recording system shall be capable of resolving time to ±15s and capable of resolving temperature to ±0.75 OF (±0.42 0C). The recorder (data processor) shall have atime accuracy of±15s and

a precision of±15s.Two ambient temperature sensors, connected to provide one average output, shall be located 3 feet above the floor ltthe approximate mid-length ofeach side wall of the enclosure and within 3 to 12 inches of each sidewall. Manufacturers shall arrange that vehicles furnished for testing at Federal certification facilities be equipped with iron-constantan Type Jthermocouples formeasurement offuel tank temperature. Vehicles shall be equipped with 2 temperature sensors installed to provide an average liquid fuel temperature. The temperature

sensors shall be placed to measure the temperature,at the mid-volume ofthe liquid fuel at a fill level of40 percent ofnominal tank capacity. In-tank temperature sensors are not required for the supplemental two-diurnal test
sequence specified in § 86.130-96 or for therefueling test specified in § 86.151- 98.

(2) Refueling emission testingonly.In addition to the enclosure ambient temperature recording system described in paragraph (e)(1) ofthis section, strip chart recorder(s) or automatic data
processor shall be used to record vehicle soak area ambient temperature and dispensed fueltemperature atthe nozzle during the test. The temperature recorder(s) or data processor shall record each temperature at least once every 20 seconds (the soak area ambient temperature recorder may be a continuous recording system). The recording system shallbe capable of resolving time.to ±15sand be capable of resolving temperature to ±0.75 'F (0.42 C).

(f) through (h)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.107-96.

(h)(4)Refueling emissiontest.Blowers

or fans must have a capacity of0.8±0.2 •cfm per cubic foot ofthe nominal enclosure volume. Circulated air shall
notbe aimed directly at the vehicle.

(5) Spilled fuel mixingblower; refuelingemission test.An explosionproofblower of 100-200 ft3/min (2.8- 5.7 m3/min) capacity is required to enhance mixing ofvapors from spilled fuel through the enclosure atmosphere during tests.The discharge from this blower shallbe'directed toward the region ofthe enclosure floor where fuel spillage during fueling may occur.

(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.107-96.

(j)Refueling equipment.The refueling equipment shallconsist ofa fuel delivery system with temperature control equipment, fuel flow safety switch, dispensing pump, hose, nozzle and a meter tomeasure the dispensed fuel volume. The dispensing nozzle shallbe acommercial model, not equipped with vapor recovery hardware. A fuel recirculation system
may be utilized to avoid trapping of unheated fuel in the hose. The fuel delivery system must be capable of delivering fuel at 67±1.5 *F (19.4±0.8 0C) and aconstant flow rate between 4.2 and 9.8 gal/min (15.9 and 37.1 liter/ min) with atolerance of±0.3 gal/min (±1.1 liter/min) during the refueling emissions measurement phase ofthe

test. The accuracy ofthe meter for measuring the dispensed fuel volume shall be ±2percent atthe test flow rate.

### 16296 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulatiofis

4. Section 86.115-78 ofsubpart B is 

### amended byrevising paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) and (b)(5) to read as follows:

§86.115-78 EPA urban dynamometer drivingschedules.

* * * * *



## (b)*

(3)* * *
(ii)When conducted to meet the requirements of§ 86.129-94 or §86.153-98(d), up to three additional

occurrences ofspeed variations greater than the tolerance are acceptable, provided they occur for less than 15 seconds on any occasion, and are clearly documented as tothe time and speed at that point ofthe driving schedule.

* * * * *

(5)When conducted to meet the requirements of §86.129-94, 86.132-96, 86.146-96, or 86.153-98(d), the speed tolerance shall be as specified above, except that the upper and lower limits shallbe 4 mph (6.4 km/h).

* * * * *

5. Section 86.132-96 ofsubpart B is amended by revising paragraphs (h) introductory text. (j)introductory text. (j)(1)(i) and (j)(1)(viii)to read as follows:
§86.132-6 Vehicle preconditioning.

* * * * *

(h)During the soak period for the three-diurnal test sequence described in §86.130-96, evaporative canisters, ifthe vehicle is so equipped, shall be preconditioned according to the following procedure. For vehicles with multiple canisters, each canister shall be preconditioned separately. In addition, for model year 1998 and later vehicles equipped with refueling canisters, these canisters shall be preconditioned forthe three-diurnal test sequence according to the procedure in § 86.132-96 (j)(1). Ifa vehicle is designed to actively control evaporative or refueling emissioh without a canister, the manufacturer shall devise an appropriate 

### preconditioning procedure subjectto he approval ofthe Administrator.

* * * * *



### (j)

Forthe supplemental two-diurnal
test sequence described in §86.130-96,

one ofthe following methods shall be used to precondition evaporative canisters during the soakperiod specified inparagraph (g)ofthis section. Forvehicles with multiple canisters, each canister shall be preconditioned separately. In addition, formodel year 1998 and latervehicles equipped with refueling canisters, these canisters shallbe preconditioned forthe supplemental two-diurnal test sequence according to the procedure in paragraph (j)(1) ofthis section. Canister emissions

are measured to determine breakthrough. Breakthrough is here defined asthe point at which the cumulative quantity ofhydrocarbons emitted is equal to 2 grams.

(1) * * * 

### (i)Prepare the evaporative/refueling emission canister for the canister loading operation. The canister shall not be removed from the vehicle, unless

access to the canister in its normal location is so restricted that purging and loading can onlyreasonably be accomplished byremoving the canister from the vehicle. Special care shall be taken during this step to avoid damage to the components and the integrity of the fuel system.

* * * * *.-



### (viii)Reconnect the evaporative/ refueling emission canister andrestore the vehicle toitsnormal operating condition.

* * * * *



### 6. A new §86.150-98 is added to subpart B to readas follows:
§8.150-08 Overview refueling test.

(a) The refueling emissions test procedure described in this and subsequent sections is used to determine the conformity ofvehicles with the refueling emissions standards setforth in subpart A ofthispart for light-duty,vehicles and light-duty trucks. The refueling emissions test procedure may be performed as an individual test or in combination with the evaporative and exhaust emissions test sequences of §86.130-96.

(b)The refueling emissions testis designed to measure hydrocarbon emissions resulting from the generation

or displacement of fueltank vapor - during vehicle refueling. The refueling emissions shall be measured by the enclosure technique.

(c)All emission control systems installed on or incorporated in a new motorvehicle shallbe functioning during all procedures in this subpart except:

(1)Incases ofcomponent malfunction

or failure; and

(2) during certain specified fuel drain and fill operations, atwhich times the refueling emission control canister is disconnected. Maintenance to correct component malfunction orfailure shall be authorized in accordance with §86.098-25.



### 7.A new section 86.151-98 is added to subpart B toread as follows: 

### §86.151-98 General requirements;' refueling tesL

(a)The refueling emissions procedure, shown in.Figure B98-12, starts with the stabilizing ofthe vehicle and the loading ofthe refueling emissions canister(s) to breakthrough, and continues with the vehicle drive for purging ofthe canister, followed by the refueling emissions measurement. The testis conducted following §§ 86.152- 98 through 86.154-98 in order.

(b)Ambient temperature levels encountered by the testvehicle throughout the test sequence shall not be less than 68 OF (20 °C) nor more than 86 OF (30 0 

### C). (c)The vehicle shall be approximately level during all phases ofthe test sequence to prevent abnormal fuel distribution.

BILLING CODE 6560-60-P

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

optional seal test (EPA only)

i-

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

I,

I
I,

t

or

F si curge I. 

### partial refueling option (EPA only)

Drivedown Repeated UDDSs as

specified by EPA (0to 85% oftankful)

1-6 hours I I.

6-24 hours



# Figure B98-12: Refueling Test Sequence

BILUNG CODE 6560-C0-C 12-36 hours

I hour MAX 

### 16297

### 16298 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

8. A new §86.152-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:

§86.152-98 Vehicle preparation; refueling
test. (a) Provide additional fittings and adapters, as required, to accommodate a fuel drain at the lowest point possible in the tank(s) as installed on the vehicle. The canister shall not be removed from the vehicle, unless access to the canister in its normal location is so restricted that purging and loading can only reasonably be accomplished by removing the canister from the vehicle. Special care shall be taken during this step to avoid damage to the components and the integrity ofthe fuel system.

(b) Provide valving or other means to allow the venting ofthe refueling vapor line to the atmosphere rather than to the refueling emissions canister(s) when required by this test procedure.

(c)For preconditioning that involves loading the vapor collection canister(s) with butane, provide valving or other

means as necessary to allow loading of the canister(s).

.9.A new § 86.153-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:

§88.153-98 Vehicle and canister preconditioning;refueling test.

(a) Vehicle andcanister preconditioning. Vehicles and vapor storage canisters shall be preconditioned in accordance with the preconditioning procedures for the supplemental two-diurnal evaporative emissions test specified in § 86.132-96 (a)through (j).For vehicles equipped with non-integrated refueling emission control systems, the canister must be loaded using the method involving butane loading to breakthrough (see § 86.132-96 (j)(1)). Ifthe refueling test procedure is started within 24 hours of the completion ofan evaporative emission test on the same vehicle at the

same ambient conditions, the fuel tank drain and fill and minimum soak period requirement described in § 86.132-96 (b)and (c)may be omitted from the refueling test procedure.

(b) Seal test.The Administrator may choose to omit certain canister load and
purge steps, and replace them with a bench purge ofthe refueling canister(s), in order to verify the adequacy of refueling emission control system seals. Failure ofthis seal test shall constitute

a failure ofthe refueling emission control test. For integrated systems, this bench purge may beperformed after the exhaust testing in order to obtain exhaust emission test results. Nonintegrated system seal testing shallbe performed using paragraph (b)(1) ofthis section. 

### (1) Withouttheexhaustemission test. The Administrator may conduct the canister preconditioning by purging the canister(s) with at least 1200 canister bed volumes ofambient air (with humidity controlled to 50±25 grains of
water vapor per pound ofdry air) maintained at a nominal flow rate of0.8 cfm directly following the preconditioning drive described in §86.132-96 (c) through (e). In this case, the canister loading procedures and the vehicle driving procedures described in 

### §86.132-96 (f)through (j) and in paragraphs (c) through (d) ofthis section shallbe omitted,'and the 10 minute and 60 minute time requirements of paragraph (e) of this section shall apply
to time after completion ofthe bench
purge. In the case ofmultiple refueling canisters, each canister shall be purged separately.

(2) With the exhaustemissiontest. The Administrator may conduct the canister preconditioning by purging the canister(s)-directly after the exhaust test (seeparagraph (c)(1) ofthis section). The canister shall be purged with at least 1200 canister bed volumes of ambient air (with humidity controlled to 50±25 grains ofwater vapor per pound ofdry air) maintained at a nominal flow
rate of0.8 cfm. In this case, the vehicle driving procedures described in paragraphs (c)(2) through (d)ofthis section shallbe omitted, and the 10 minute and 60 minute time requirements ofparagraph (e) ofthis section shall apply to time after completion ofthe bench purge. In the

case ofmultiple refueling canisters, each canister shall be purged separately.

(c) Canister purging;integrated systems (1) Vehicles to be tested for exhaust emissions only shallbe processed according to §§ 86.135-94 through 86.137-96. Vehicles to be tested for refueling emissions shall be processed in accordance with the procedures in §§ 86.135-94 through 86.137-96, followed by the procedures outlined in paragraph (c)(2) ofthis section.

(2) To provide additional opportunity for canister purge, conduct additional driving on a dynamometer, within one hour ofcompletion ofthe hot start exhaust test, by operating the test vehicle through one UDDS, a 2 minute idle, two NYCCs, another 2 minute idle, another UDDS, then another 2 minute idle (see §86.115-78 and Appendix Iof this part). Fifteen seconds after the engine starts, place the transmission in
gear. Twenty seconds after the engine starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration ofthe driving schedule. The transmission shall be operated according to the specifications of § 86.128-79 during the driving cycles. A cooling fan(s) shallbe positioned as described in § 86.135-94(b).

(d) Canister purging;non-integated systems. Within one hour ofcompletion ofcanister loading to breakthrough, the fuel tank(s) shallbe further filled to 95 percent ofnominal tank capacity determined to the nearest one-tenth ofa U.S. gallon (0.38 liter)with the fuel specified in § 86.113-94. During this fueling operation, the refueling emissions canister(s) shallbe disconnected. Following completion of refueling, the refueling emissions canister(s) shall be reconnected. Special

care shallbe taken during this step to avoid damage to the components and the integrity ofthe fuel system. Vehicle driving to purge the refueling canister(s) shallbe performed using either the chassis dynamometer procedure or the
testtrack procedure, as described in -paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) ofthis section. The Administrator may choose
to shorten the vehicle driving for a partial refueling test as described in paragraph (d)(3) ofthis section. For vehicles equipped with dual fueltanks, the required volume offuel shallbe driven out ofone tank, the second tank shall be selected as the fuel source, and the required volume offuel shall be driven out ofthe second tank.

(1) Chassisdynamometer procedure. (i)Vehicle driving on a chassis dynamometer shall consist ofrepeated drives with the UDDS until 85 percent offuel tank capacity has been consumed. Driving in testing performed by manufacturers may be terminated before 85 percent ofthe fuel tank capacity has been consumed, provided that driving is not terminated partway through a UDDS cycle. Driving in testing performed by the Administrator
may be terminated after the same number of UDDS cycles as driven in the manufacturer's certification testing.

(ii)Except with the advance approval ofthe Administrator, the number of UDDSs required to consume 85 percent oftank fuel capacity (total capacity of both tanks when the vehicle is equipped with dual fuel tanks) shallbe determined from the fuel economy on the UDDS applicable to thetest vehicle and from the number ofgallons to the

nearest 0.1 gallon (0.38 liter) that constitutes 85 percent oftank volume. If this "fuel consumed point" occurs partway through a UDDS cycle, the cycle shall be completed in its entirety.

(iii) For vehicles equipped with dual fuel tanks, fuel switching from the first tank to the second tank shall occur at the 10 percent volume ofthe first tank regardless ofthe point in the UDDS cycle at which this occurs.

### Federal Register I Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994"/ Rules and Regulations 

### 16299

(iv) Ifnecessary to accommodate work schedules, the engine may be turned off and the vehicle parked on the dynamometer. The vehicle maybe parked offofthe dynamometer to facilitate maintenance or repairs if required.

re)During the driving on the

dynamometer, a cooling fan(s) shall be positioned as described in § 86.135- 94(b).

(2). Test trackprocedure.(i) Vehicle driving on a test track shall consist of repeated drives with the UDDS until 85 percent of.fuel tank capacity has been consumed. Driving performed by manufacturers may be terminated before 85 percent ofthe fuel tank capacity has been consumed, provided that driving is
not terminated partway through a UDDS cycle. Driving performed by theAdministrator may be terminated after the same number ofUDDS cycles as driven in the manufacturer's certification testing.

(ii) Ifthe distance from the emission laboratory to the test track is less than 5 miles (8.05 kin) the vehicle may be driven to the test track at a speed not to exceed 25 mph. If the distance is greater than 5 miles (8.05 km) the vehicle shall be moved to the test track with theengine off.

(iiijExcept with the advance approval ofthe Administrator, the number of 4JDDSs required to consume 85 percent oftank fuel capacity (total capacity of both tanks when the vehicle isequipped with dual fuel tanks) shall be determined from the fuel economy on the UDDS applicable to the test vehicle and from the numberofgallons to the
nearest 0.1 gallon (0.38 liter) that constitutes 85 percent oftank volume. If this "fuel consumed point" occurs partway through a UDDS cycle, the cycle shall-be completed in its entirety.

(iv) The vehicle shall be driven at a speed not to exceed 25 mph from the
test track to the- laboratory provided the distance from the test track to the laboratory does not exceed 5 miles (8.05 km). Ifthe distance from the test track
to the emission laboratory is greater than 5 miles (8.05 kin) the vehicle shall be moved from the test track with the engine off.

(v) For vehicles equipped with dual fuel tanks, fuel switching from the first tank to the second tank shall occur at the 10 percent volume ofthe first tank regardless ofthe point in the UDDS cycle at which this occurs.

(vi) Ifnecessary to accommodate work schedules, the engine may be turned off and the vehicle parked on the testtrack. The vehicle maybe parked offofthe test track to facilitate maintenance or repairs ifrequired. Ifthe vehicle is moved from 

### the test track, it shall be returned to the track with theengine offwhen mileage accumulation is to be resumed.

(3) Driveschedule forpartial refueling
test.The Administrator may conduct a partial refueling test involving a shortening ofthe drive procedures described in paragraphs (d)(1)and. 2) ofthis section and a modified soak and refueling procedure asdescribed in paragraph (e) of this section and § 86.154-98(e)(7)(i). The drive shall be performed as described in paragraph (d) (1)or (2)ofthis section except that the drive shall be terminated when atleast 10 percent but no more than 85 percent of the fuel tank nominal capacity has been consumed and notpartway through a UDDS cycle. The amount of fuel consumed in the drive shallbe determined by multiplying the number ofUDDSsdriven by the mileage accumulated per UDDS anddividing by the fuel economy forthe UDDS applicable to the test vehicle.

(e) Vehicle cooldown-(1) Partial refuelingtest.Ifthe Administrator is conducting the non-integrated system partial refueling test,after the driving procedure specified in paragraph (d)(3) ofthis section, the vehicle shall be parked (without starting the engine) and soaked at 80±3 °F (27±1.7 'C) for a 

### minimum of 1hour and a maximum of 6 hours.

(2)Forallotherrefuelingemission
tests.Within 10 minutes ofcompletion ofrefueling emissions canister stabilization (see paragraph (c) or (d) of this section), the refueling emissions canister(s) shall be disconnected. Within 60 minutes ofcompletion of refueling emissions canister stabilization (see paragraph (c)or (d)of this section), the vehicle fuel tank(s) shall be drained, the fuel tank(s) fueled
to 10percent ofnominal tank capacity determined tothe nearest one-tenth ofa U.S. gallon (0.38 liter) with the specified fuel, and the vehicle parked (without starting the engine) and soaked at 80±3 IF (27±1.7 °C) fora minimum of6 hours and a maximum of 24hours.

10. A new §86.154;-98 is added to subpart Bto read asfollows:
§86.154-98 Measurement procedure; refueling test.

(a) The refueling test measurement procedure described in this section immediately follows the vehicle and canister preconditioning described in § 86.153-98..



### (b)The refueling emission enclosure shall be purged for several minutes immediately prior tothe test. Warning: If atany time the concentration of hydrocarbons, ofmethanol, or of methanol andhydrocarbons exceeds 15,000 

### ppm C, the enclosure should be immediately purged. This concentration provides a 4:1 safety factor against the lean flammability limit.

(c)(1) The FID (orHFID)hydrocarbon analyzer, and additional analyzer, if needed, shall be zeroed and spanned immediately prior to the test.

(2) 

### Formethanol-fueled vehicles only, impingers charged withknown volumes ofpure deionized water shallbeplaced in the methanol sampling system.

. (d) Ifnot already on, the enclosure mixing fan and the spilled fuel mixing blower shall beturned on at this time:

(e)The refueling emission measurement portion ofthe refueling
test shall be performed as follows:

(1)The line from the fuel tank(s) to the refueling emissions canister(s) shall be connected.

(2) 

### The test vehicle, with the engine shut off, shall be moved into the enclosure. The test vehicle windows and luggage compartment shall be opened ifnot already open.

(3) 

### An electrical ground shall be attached to the vehicle. The enclosure door shallbe closed and sealed. The FID (orHFID) trace shall be allowed to stabilize.

(4)

### The dispensed fuel temperature recording system shall be started. (5)(i)Within 10 minutes of closing and sealing thedoors, analyze enclosure atmosphere for hydrocarbons and record. This isthe initial (time=0 minutes) hydrocarbon concentration, CHc, required in § 86.143-96. 

### (ii) For methanol-fueled vehicles only,

measure the initial concentration of methanol as described in § 86.133- 96(i)(61.

(6) 

### Within one minute ofobtaining the initial FID(or HFID) reading, and methanol reading if applicable, the fuel nozzle shall be inserted into the filler neck ofthe test vehicle,to itsmaximum penetration, and the refueling operation shallbe started. The plane ofthe nozzle's handle shall be approximately perpendicular to the floor ofthe laboratory. The fuel shall be dispensed

at a temperature of67±1.5 °F (19.4±0.8 0 

### C)and at a dispensing rate of 9.8±0.3 gal/min (37.1±1.1 liter/min). In-testing conducted bythe Administrator, alower dispensing rate (no lower than 4.0 

### gal/ min (15.1 liter/min))may be used.

- (7)(i) Partial refuelingtest.Ifthe Administrator conducts the nonintegrated system partial refueling test, the fuel flow shall continue until the amount offuel pumpedis equal to the fuel consumed during the driving, as determined in accordance with §86.153-98(d)(3). The final volume of fuel dispensed must bewithin one-tenth ofa U.S. gallon (0.38 liter) ofthe

### 16300 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

targeted amount' Ifautomatic nozzle shut-offoccurs prior to this point, the nozzle shall be reactivated within 15 seconds and fuel dispensing continued

as needed. A minimum of3 seconds shall elapse between any automatic shutoffand subsequent resumption of dispensing.

(ii) Forallotherrefuelingtests. The fuel flow shall continue until the refueling nozzle automatic shut-offis activated.The amount offuel dispensed
must be at least 85 percent ofnominal fuel tank volume, determined to the
nearest one-tenth ofa U.S. gallon (0.38 liter). Ifautomatic nozzle shut-off occurs prior to this point, the nozzle shall be reactivated within 15 seconds and fuel dispensing continued as needed. A minimum of3 seconds shall elapse between any automatic shutoff and subsequent resumption ofdispensing. Dispensing may not be manually terminated, unless the test vehicle has already clearly failed the test.

(8)(i) The final reading ofthe evaporative enclosure FID analyzer shall be taken 60±5 seconds following the final shut-offof fuel flow. This is the final hydrocarbon concentration, Ccr, required in §86.143-96. The elapsed time, in minutes; between the initial and final FID (or HFID) readings shall be recorded.

(ii)For methanol-fueledvehicles only. Measure the final concentration of methanol as described in.§ 86.133- 96(m)(2).

(9) For vehicles equipped with more than one fuel tank, the procedures described in this section shall be performed for each fuel tank.

11. A new § 86.155-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:

§86.155-98 Records required; refueling test.

The following information shallbe recorded with respect to each test:

(a)Test number. (b) System or device tested (brief description).

(c) Date and time ofday. (d)Instrument operated. (e) Operator. (f) Vehicle: ID number, manufacturer, model year,engine family, evaporative/ refueling emission family, refueling emission control system, refueling emissions canister continuous drive
purge miles and number ofUDDSs driven for non-integrated systems, fuel system (including fuel tank(s) capacity and location), basic engine description (including displacement, number of cylinders, turbocharger (ifused), and catalyst usage), engine code, and odometer reading.

(g) All pertinent instrument information including nozzle and fuel delivery system description. As an alternative, a reference to avehicle test cell number may be used, with advance approval ofthe Administrator, provided
test cell calibration records show the pertinent instrument information.

(h)Recorder charts: Identify zero, span, and enclosure gas sample traces.

(i) Enclosure barometric pressure and ambient temperature: a central laboratory barometer may be used, providedthat individual test cell barometric pressures are shown to be within ±0.1 percent ofthe barometric
pressure atthe central barometer location.

(j) Temperatures: Soak area; dispensed fuel, initial and final.

(k) Fuel dispensing rate(s). (1)

Dispensed fuel volume. (m) For methanol-fueled vehicles: (1)Volume of sample passed through the methanol sampling system and the volume ofdeionized water in each impinger.

(2) The methanol coricentration in the reference sample and the peak area from theGC analysis ofthe reference sample.

(3) The peak area ofthe GC analyses ofthe test samples (methanol).

(n)All additional information
necessary for the calculations.specified in § 86.156-98.

12. A new § 86.156-98 is added to subpart B to read as follows:
§86.156-98 Calculations; refueling test.

(a) The calculation ofthe net hydrocarbon mass change and methanol

mass change (ifapplicable) in the enclosure is used to determine refueling'

mass emissions. The mass is calculated from initial and final hydrocarbon and methanol (ifapplicable) concentrations in ppm carbon, initial and final enclosure ambient temperatures, initial and final barometric pressures, and net enclosure volume using the equations of §86.143-96. For vehicles with multiple tanks, the results for each tank shallbe calculated and ihen summed to determine overall refueling emissions.

(b)The final results forcomparison with the refueling control emission standard shall be computed by dividing the total refueling mass emissions by the total gallons offuel dispensed inthe refueling test (see § 86.154-98(e)(7)(ii)).

(c) The results ofall emission tests shall be rounded, in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in § 86.094- 28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii))to the number of decimal places contained in the applicable emission standard expressed
to one additional significant figure. Subpart G-[Amended]

1.A new §86.602-98 is added to subpart Gto read as follows:


### §86.602-98 Definitions.

Section 86.602-98 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86;602-84. Where aparagraph in §86.602-84 is identical and applicable
to §86.602-98, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.602-84." Where a corresponding paragraph of§86.602-84 is not applicable, this is indicated by the
statement [Reserved].".

(a) through (b)(2) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.602-84.

(b)(3)(i) Configuration, when used for LDV exhaust emissions testing, means a subclassification ofan engine-system combination on the basis ofengine code, inertia weight class,transmission type and gear ratios, axle ratio, and other parameters which may be designated by the Administrator.

(ii)Configuration,when used for LDV refueling emissions testing, means a subclassification of an evaporative/ refueling emission family on the basis of evaporative and refueling control system and other parameters which may be designated by the Administrator.

(4) Testsamplemeans the collection ofvehicles ofthe same configuration which have been drawn from the population ofvehicles ofthat configuration and which will receive emission testing.

(b)(5) through (b)(8) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.602-8-4.

2. A new §86.603-98 is added to subpart Gto read as follows:


### §86.603-98 Test orders.

Section 86.603-98 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from §86.603-88. Where aparagraph in § 86.603-88 is identical and applicable
to § 86.603-98, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.603-88." Where a corresponding paragraph of §86.603-88 is not applicable, this is indicated by the
statement "[Reserved].".

(a) through (c) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.603-88.

(d)A manufacturer may indicate preferred assembly plants for the various engine families and evaporative/ refueling families produced by the manufacturer for selection ofvehicles in
response to a test order. This shall be accomplished by submitting a list of engine families with the associated evaporative/refueling families, and the corresponding assembly plants from

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

which the manufacturer desires to have vehicles selected, to the Administrator. In order that amanufacturer's preferred location for issuance ofa testorder for

a configuration ofaparticular engine family and/or evaporative/refueling family be considered, the list mustbe submitted priorto issuance ofthe test order. Notwithstanding the fact that a manufacturer has submitted the above list,the Administrator may, upon making the determination that evidence exists indicating noncompliance at otherthan the manufacturer's preferred plant, order selection at such other plant where vehicles of theconfiguration specified in the test order are assembled.

(e) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.603-88.

3.A new §86.605-98 is added to subpart G read as follows:
§86.605-8 Maintenance of records; submittalof Information.

Section 86.605-98 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from § 86.605--88. Where a paragraph in § 86.605-88 is identical and applicable
to §86.605-98, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see §86.605-88." Where a corresponding paragraph of §86.605-88 is not applicable, this is indicated by the
statement "[Reserved].".

(a) through (a)(1)(i)(D) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.605-88.

(E) Refueling Enclosure (Refueling SHED).

(1)Total internal volume. (2) Capacity ofmixingblower. (3)Location ofrefueling access ports. (4) Enclosure barometric pressure and ambient temperature.

(5)Soak area temperature records. (F) Fuel Dispenser for Refueling. (1)Fuel dispensing rate. (2) Manufacturer and model of fuel nozzle.

(3)Dispensed fuel temperature. (4)Dispensed fuel volume. (a)(1)(ii) through (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see §86.605-88.

4.A new §86.608-98 is added to subpart G to read as follows:
§86.608-98 Test procedures.

(a)The prescribed testprocedures are the Federal Test Procedure, including the refueling testprocedure or the fuel spitback test, whichever is applicable,

asdescribed in subpart Bofthis part, the cold temperature CO testprocedure

asdescribed in subpart Cofthis part, and the Certification Short Test as described in subpart 0 ofthispart. For purposes of Selective Enforcement Audit Testing, the manufacturer shall not be required to perform any ofthe
test procedures in subpart Bofthis part relating to evaporative emission testing, other than refueling emissions testing, except as specified inparagraph (a)(2) of this section. (1)The Administrator may omit any ofthe testing procedures described in paragraph (a) ofthis section and may select and prescribe the sequence ofany CSTs. Further, the Administrator may,
onthe basis ofawritten application by

a manufacturer, approve optional test procedures other than those in subparts B,C,and 0 of thispart for any motor vehicle which is not susceptible to satisfactory testing using the procedures in subparts B, C,and 0 ofthis part.

(2)The following exceptions to the test procedures in subpart Bofthis part

are applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing:

(i)For mileage accumulation, the manufacturer may use test fuelmeeting the specifications for mileage and service accumulation fuels of§86.113- 94. Otherwise, the manufacturer may

use fuels otherthan those specified in this section only with the advance approval ofthe Administrator. (ii)The manufacturer may measure the temperature ofthe test fuel at other than the approximate mid-volume ofthe fuel tank, as specified in §86.131-96(a) with only a single temperature sensor, and may drain the test fuel from other than the lowest point of thetank, as specified in §86.131-96(b) and §86.152-98(a), provided an equivalent method is used. Equivalency documentation shallbe maintained by the manufacturer and shall be made available uponrequest.

(iii) The manufacturer may perform additional preconditioning on SEA test vehicles other than the preconditioning specified in §86.132-98 only ifthe additional preconditioning had been performed oncertification test vehicles ofthe same configuration.

(iv) Ifthe Administrator elects to use the evaporative/refueling canister preconditioning procedure described in § 86.132-96(k), the manufacturer shall 

### perform the heat build procedure 11 to 34 h6urs following vehicle preconditioning rather than according to
the time period specified in § 86.133- 90(a). All references to an evaporative 

### emission enclosure and analyzing for HC during the heat build can be ignored.

(v) The manufacturer may substitute slave tires for the drive wheel tires on the vehicle as specified in paragraph §86.135-90(e): Provided,that the slave tires are the same size.

(vi)Ifthe Administrator elects to use the evaporative/re fueling canister . preconditioning procedure described in §86.132-96(k), the cold startexhaust emission testdescribed in §86.137-96 shall follow the heatbuild procedure described in §86.133-90 by notmore than one hour.

(vii)In performing exhaust sample analysis under § 86.140-94.

(A)When testing diesel vehicles, or methanol-fueled Otto-cycle vehicles, the manufacturer shall allow a minimum of 20 minutes warm-up for the HC analyzer, and for diesel vehicles, a minimum oftwohours warm-up for the CO, CO2,and NOx analyzers. (Poweris 

### normally left on infrared and chemiluminescent analyzers. When not in use, the chopper motors ofthe infrared analyzers are turned offand the phototube high voltage supply to the chemiluminescent analyzers is placed in the standby position.)

(B)The manufacturer shall exercise

care to prevent moisture from condensing in the sample collection bags.

(viii) The manufacturer need not comply with § 86.142-90 or §86.155- 98, since the records required therein

are provided under other provisions of this subpart G.

(ix)If a manufacturer elects to perform the background determination procedure described inparagraph (a)(2)(xi) ofthis section in addition to performing the refueling emissions test procedure, the elapsed time between the initial and final FID readings shall be recorded, rounded to the nearest second rather than minute as described in §86.154-98(e)(8). In addition, the vehicle soak described in §86.153-98(e) shallbe conducted with the windows and luggage compartment ofthe vehicle open.

(x) The Administrator may elect to perform a seal test, described in §86.153-98(b), ofboth integrated and 

### non-integrated systems instead ofthe full refueling test. When testing nonintegrated systems, an manufacturer may conduct the canister purge described in § 86.153-98(b)(1) directly following the preconditioning drive described in §86.132-96(e) or directly following the exhaust emissions test described in §86.137-96.

(xi) Inaddition to the refueling test,

a manufacturer may elect to perform the following background emissions determination immediately prior to the refueling measurement procedure 

### described in §86.154-98, provided EPA is notified ofthis decision prior to the
start oftesting in an SEA.

(A) The SHED shall be purged for several minutes immediately prior to the background determination. Warning: Ifat any time the concentration of 16301

### 16302 Federal Register 

### I Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

hydrocarbons, ofmethanol, or of methanol and hydrocarbons exceeds 15,000 ppm C, the enclosure shouldbe immediately purged.Thisconcentration provides a 4:1 safety factor against the lean flammability limit.

(B)TheFID for HFID)hydrocarbon analyzer shallbe zeroed and spanned immediately prior to thebackground determination. Ifnotalready on, the enclosure mixing fanand the spilled fuel mixing blower shall beturned on at this time.

(C)Place the vehicle in the SHED. The ambient temperature level encountered by the testvehicle during the entire background emissions determination shallbe 80 *F±3 'F. The windows and 

### luggage.compartment ofthevehicle mustbe open and the gas' cap mustbe secured.

(D) Seal the SHED. Inmediately analyze the ambient concentration of hydrocarbons inthe SHED and record. This is the initialbackground hydrocarbon concentration. (E)Soak the vehicle forten minutes ±1 minute. 

### (F)The FID(or HFID) hydrocarbon analyzer shall bezeroed and spanned immediately prior to the end ofthe background determination.

(GfAnalyze the ambient concentration ofhydrocarbons in the SHED and record. This is the final background hydrocarbon concentration. (H)The total hydrocarbon mass emitted during thebackground determination is calculated according to § 86.156-98. To obtain a per-minute 

### background emission rate, dividethe total hydrocarbon mass calculated in this paragraph by theduration ofthe soak, rounded tothe nearest second, described in paragraph (a)(2)(xi)(G)of this section.

(I)The background emission rate is multiplied by the durationofthe refueling measurement obtained in paragraph (a)(2)(ix)of this section. This number is then subtracted from the total grams ofemissions calculated forthe refueling test according to §86.156- 98(a) to obtain the adjusted value for totalrefueling emissions.The final resuits forcomparison withthe refueling emission standard shall be computed by dividing the adjusted value fortotal refueling mass emissions by the total gallons offuel dispensed in the refueling test asdescribed in §86.156-98(b).

(xii)In addition to the requirements of subpart Bofthispart, the manufacturer shall prepare gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled vehicles asfollows prior to emission testing:

(A) The manufacturer shallinspect the fuel system toensure the absence of any leaks of liquid orvapor to the atmosphere by applying a pressure of 14.5±0.5 inches ofwater (3.6±0.1 kPa)to the fuel system allowing the pressure to stabilize and isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Following isolation ofthe fuel system,pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches of
water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If required, the manufacturer shall perform corrbctive action in accordance with paragraph (d) ofthis section and report this action in accordance with 

### §86.609-98(d).

(B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer shall exercise

care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling emission control systems.

(C) The manufacturer may not modify the test vehicle's evaporative or refueling emission control systems by component addition, deletion, or ubstitution, except to comply with paragraph (a)(2)(ii) ofthis section if approved in advance by the Administrator.

(3) The following exceptions to the
testprocedures in subpart C ofthis part

are applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing:

(i)The manufacturer may measure the temperature ofthe test fuel atother than the approximate mid-volume ofthe fuel tank, as specified in § 86.131-90(a), and
may drain the test fuel from other than the lowest point ofthe fuel tank as specified in §86.131-0(b), provided an equivalent method is used. Equivalency documentation shallbe maintained by the manufacturer and shall be made available to the Administrator upon request.

(ii)In performing exhaust sample analysis under §86.140-94, the manufacturer shall exercise care to prevent moisture from condensing in the sample collection bags.

(iii) The manufacturer need not comply with § 86.142-90 since the records required therein are provided under other provisions ofthis subpart G.

(iv) In addition to the requirements of subpart Cofthis part, the manufacturer shall prepare gasoline-fueled vehicles as follows prior to exhaust emission testing:

(A) The manufacturer shall inspect the fuel system to ensure the absence of
any leaks ofliquid orvapor to the atmosphere by applying a pressure of 14.5±0.5 inches ofwater (3.6±0.1 Kpa)
to the fuel system allowing the pressure to stabilize and isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Following isolation ofthe fuel system, pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches of
water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If required, the manufacturer shall perform corrective action in accordance with paragraph (d)ofthis section and report this action in accordance with §86.609-98(d).

(B) When performing thispressure check, the manufacturer shall exercise

care toneither purge nor load the evaporative orrefueling emission control system.

(C) The manufacturer shallnot modify the test vehicle's evaporative or refueling emission control system by component addition, deletion, or substitution, except ifapproved in advance by theAdministrator, to comply with paragraph (a)(3)(i) ofthis section.

(4)The exceptions to the test procedures in subpart 0 of this part applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing are listed in paragraphs (a)(4) (i) and (ii) ofthis section.

(i)The manufacturer need not comply with § 86.1442, since therecords required therein are provided under provisions ofthis subpart G.

(ii)In addition to the requirements of subpart 0 ofthispart, the manufacturer

must prepare vehicles as inparagraphs (a)(4)(ii) (A) through (C),ofthis section prior to exhaust emission testing.

(A) The manufacturer mustinspect the fuel system to insure the absence of
any leaks of liquidor vapor tothe atmosphere by applying a pressure of 14.5±0.5 inches ofwater (3.6±0.1 Kpa)
to the fuel system, allowing the pressure to stabilize, and isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. _Pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches ofwater (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. Ifrequired, the manufacturer performs corrective action in accordance with paragraph (d) ofthis section and must report this action in accordance with §86.609-98(d).

(B) When performing thispressure check, the manufacturer must exercise

care to neither purge nor load the evaporative orrefueling emission control system.

(C) The manufacturer may not modify the test vehicle's evaporative or refueling emission control system by component addition, deletion, or substitution.

(b)(1) The manufacturer shall not adjust, repair, prepare, ormodify the vehicles selected for testing and shall
notperform any emission tests on vehicles selected for testing pursuant to the test order unless this adjustment repair, preparation, modification, and/or
tests are documented in the manufacturer's vehicle assembly and inspection procedures and are actually performed or unless these adjustments -and/or tests are reqtuired or permitted

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16303

underthis subpart or are approved in advance by the Administrator.

(2)For 1981 and later model years the Administrator may adjust orcause to be 'adjusted any engine or vehicle parameter which the Administrator has determined to be subject to adjustment for newvehicle compliance testing (e.g., for certification or Selective Enforcement'Audit testing) in 

### accordance with §86.081-22(c)(1), to any settingwithin the physically adjustable range ofthat parameter, as determined bythe Administrator in accordance with §86.081-22(e)(3)(ii), prior to the performance ofany tests. However, ifthe idle speed parameter is

one which the Administrator has determined to be subject to adjustment, the Administrator shall not adjust it to

a setting which causes a lower engine idle speed than willbe possible within the physically adjustable 'range ofthe idle speed parameter on the vehicle when ithas accumulated 4,000 miles, all other parameters being adjusted identically.for the purpose of comparison. The Administrator, in making or specifying such adjustments, will consider the effect ofthe deviation from the manufacturer's recommended setting on emissions performance characteristics as well as the likelihood that similar settings will occur onin-use light-duty vehicles or light-duty trucks. In determining likelihood, the Administrator will consider factors such
as, but not limited to, the effect ofthe adjustment on vehicle performance 

### characteristics and surveillance information from-similarin-use vehicles. (c)Priorto performing emission testing pursuant to paragraph (a) ofthis section on an SEA test vehicle, the 

### manufacturer may accumulate on each vehicle anumber ofmiles equal to the greater of4,000 miles, orthe number of miles themanufacturer accumulated during certification on the emissiondata vehicle corresponding to the configuration specified in the test order.

(1)Mileage accumulation must be performed in any manner using good engineering judgment to obtain emission results representative of normal production vehicles. This mileage accumulation mustbe consistent with thenew vehicle breakin instructions contained in the applicable vehicle owner's manual, if

a'i) The manufacturer shall

accumulate mileage at aminimum rate of 300 miles per vehicle during each 24- hour period, unless otherwise provided by the Administrator. (i) The first 24-hour period for mileage accumulation shall begin as soon as authorized vehicle checks, inspections and preparations are completed on each vehicle.,

(ii) The minimum mileage accumulation rate does notapply on weekends or holidays.

(iii)Ifthe manufacturer's mileage accumulation target is less than the minimum rate specified (300 miles per day), then the minimum daily accumulation rate shall be equal to the manufacturer's mileage accumulation target.

(3)Mileage accumulation shall be completed on a sufficient number-of test vehicles during consecutive 24-hour periods to assure that the number of vehicles tested per day fulfills the requirements ofparagraph (g) ofthis section.

(d)The manufacturer shallnot perform anymaintenance on test vehicles after selection for testing nor shall the Administrator allow deletion ofany test Vehicle from the test sequence, unless requested by the manufacturer and approved by the Administrator before any test vehicle maintenance ofdeletion.

(e)The manufacturer willbe allowed 24 hours to shiptest vehicles from the assembly plant or storage facility to the
test facility ifthe testfacility is not located at the plant or storage facility or in close proximity to the plant or storage facility: Except, thatthe Administrator may approve more timebased upon a request by the manufacturer accompanied by a satisfactory justification. (f)Ifa vehicle cannot complete the mileage accumulation or emission tests because ofvehicle malfunction, the manufacturer may request the Administrator to authorize the repair of that vehicle or its deletion from the test
sequence.

(g)Whenever the manufacturer conducts testing pursuant to atest order issued under this subpart, the manufacturer.shall notify the Administrator within one working day ofreceipt ofthe test order, which test facility willbe used to comply with the
test order and the number ofavailable
test cellsat that facility. Ifnotest cells

are available at the desired facility, the manufacturer must provide alternate testing capability satisfactory to the Administrator.



### (1)The manufacturer shall perform a combination oftests pursuant to paragraph (a) ofthis section so that a minimum offour tests are performed per 24hour period, including voided tests, for each available test cell. (2) TheAdministrator may approve a longer period based upon a request by a manufacturer accompanied by satisfactory justification.

(h)The manufacturer shall perform
test vehicle selection, preparation, mileage accumulation, shipping, and testing in such amanner as to assure that the audit isperformed in an expeditious manner.

(i) The manufacturer may retest any test vehicle after a fail decision hasbeen reached in accordance with § 86.610- 98(d)based onthe first teston each vehicle; except that the Administrator may approve retests at other times during the audit based upon a request bythe manufacturer accompanied by a satisfactoryjustification. The manufacturer may test each vehicle a total ofthree times. The manufacturer shall test each vehicle the same number of times.The manufacturer may accumulate additional mileage on test vehicles before conducting retests, subjectto the provisions ofparagraph (c)of this section.

5. A new §86.609-98 is added to subpartG to read as follows:
§86.609-98 Calculation and reporting of testresults.

(a) Initial test results are calculated following the testprocedures specified in §86.608-98(a). Round the initial test results to the number ofdecimal places contained inthe applicable emission standard expressed to one additional significant figure. Rounding is done in accordance with ASTM E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in § 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii).

(b)Final testresults for each test vehicle are calculated by summingthe initial test results derived inparagraph (a)ofthis section for each test-vehicle, dividing by the number oftimes that specific testhas been conducted on the vehicle, and roundingto the same number ofdecimal places contained in the applicable standard expressed to

one additional significant figure. Rounding is done in accordance with ASTM E29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in §86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii). '



### (c)Final deteriorated testresults. (1)Foreachtest vehicle.The final deteriorated testresults for each lightduty vehicle tested for exhaust emissions and/or refueling emissions according to subpart Bor subpart C of this part are calculated bymultiplying

or adding the final test results by the appropriate deterioration factor derived from the certification process forthe engine or evaporative/refueling family and model year to which the selected configuration belongs and rounding tu the same number ofdecimal places contained in the applicable emission

### 16304 Federal Register I Vol. 59. No. 66 /-Wednesday, April 6, 1994'1 Rules and Regulations

standard. Rounding is done in accordance with ASTME 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in §86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii). For the purpose ofthis paragraph, ifa multiplicative deterioration factor as computed during the certification process is less than one, that deterioration factor shallbe one. Ifan additive deterioration factor as computed during the certification process is less than zero, that deterioration factor will be zero.

(2)Exceptions.There are no deterioration factors for light-duty vehicle emissions obtained during testing in accordance,withsubpart 0 of thispart or with §86.146-96. Accordingly, for the CSTandthe fuel dispensing spitbackAtest the term "final deteriorated testresults" meansthe final testresults derived inparagraph (b) of this section foreach test vehicle, rounded to the samenumber ofdecimal places contained in the applicable emission standard. Rounding Is done in accordance with ASTM E29-67, (reapproved 1980) (asreferenced in §86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(h.

(d)Within five working days after completion of testing ofall vehicles pursuant to a testorder, the manufacturer shall submit to the Administrator areport which includes the following information:

(1)The location and description ofthe manufacturer's emission test facilities which were utilized to conduct testing reported pursuant tothis section.

(2)The applicable standards against which the vehicles were tested.

(3) Deterioration factors for the 

### selected configuration.

(4) A description of the vehicle selection method used.

(5)For each test conducted. (i)Testvehicle description including: (A) Configuration, engine family, and refueling family identification.

(B)Year, make, build date, and model ofvehicle.

(C)Vehicle Identification Number. (D) Miles accumulated on vehicle. (ii) Location where mileage accumulation was conducted and description ofaccumulation schedule.

(iii)Test number, date initial test results, final results and final deteriorated testresults for allvalid and invalid exhaust emission tests, and the
reason for invalidation.

(iv) A complete description ofany modification, repair, preparation, maintenance and/ortesting which was performed onthe testvehicle and:

(A) Has not been reported pursuant to any other paragraph ofthis'subpart; and

(B) Will not be performed on all other production vehicles. (v) Carbon dioxide emission values for all valid and invalid exhaust emission tests.

(vi)Where a vehicle was deleted from the test sequence by authorization of the Administrator, the reason for the deletion.

(vii)Any other information the Administrator mayrequest relevant to the determination as to whether the new motor vehiclesbeing manufactured by the manufacturer do in fact conform with the regulations with respect to which the certificate ofconformity was issued. (6)The following statement and endorsement:

This report is submitted pursuantto sections 206 and 208 oftheClean Air Act. This SelectiveEnforcement Audit was conducted in complete conformance with all applicable regulations under40CFR part 86 and the conditions ofthe test order. No emission related change(s) to production processes orquality control procedures for the vehicle configuration tested have been made between receipt ofthistest order and conclusion ofthe audit.All data and information reported herein is,tothebestof (Company Name) knowledge, true andaccurate. Iamaware of thepenalties associated with violations ofthe CleanAirAct and theregulations thereunder.
(AuthorizedCompany Representative)

6. A new §86.610-98 isadded to subpart Gtoread as follows:
§86.610--98 Compliance withacceptable qualitylevel and passing and fallingcriteria forSelective Enforcement Audits



### (a)The prescribed acceptable quality level is 40 percent.

(b)A failed vehicle isone whose final deteriorated test results pursuant to §86.609-98(c) exceed atleast one ofthe applicable emission standards associated with the test procedures pursuant to §86.608-98(a).

(c)(1) Pass/fail criteria. The manufacturer shalltest vehicles comprising the test sample untila pass decision isreached for allofthe pollutants associated with all ofthe test procedures pursuant to § 86.608-98(a)

ora fail decision is reached for one of these pollutants. A pass decision is reached when the cumulative number of failed vehicles, as defined in paragraph (b) ofthis section, for eachpollutant is less than orequal to the fail decision number appropriate to the cumulative number ofvehicles tested. A fail decision isreached whenthe cumulative numberof failedvehicles for

onepollutant is greater than orequal to the fail decision number appropriate to the cumulative number ofvehicles tested.The pass and fail decision numbers associated withthecumulative number ofvehicles tested are determined byuse ofthe tables in appendix XI ofthispart appropriate for the annual projected sales as madeby the manufacturer in itsreport submitted under § 600.207-80(a)(2) ofthis chapter 

### (Automobile Fuel Economy Regulations). Inthe tables inappendix XI ofthis part, samplingplan "stage" refers tothe cumulative number of vehicles tested.Once apass decision has been made for a particular pollutant associated with a particular test procedure pursuant to §86.608-98(a), the number ofvehicles whose final deteriorated test results exceed the emission standard forthat pollutant may notbe considered any further for purposes ofthe audit.

(2)CST criteria only. For CSTtesting pursuant to subpart 

### 0,a pass or fail decision is determined according to the pass/fail criteria described inparagraph (c)(1) ofthis section, except that foreach vehicle, the CST in its entirety is considered one pollutant.

(d)Passing or failing ofan SEA audit

occurs when the decision is made on the last vehicle required to make a decision under paragraph (c) ofthis section.

(e)The Administrator mayterminate testing earlier than required in paragraph (c) ofthis section.
Subpart K-Amended]

1.

A new § 86.1002-2001 is addedto 

### subpart Ktoread as follows:
§86.1002-2001 Definitions.



### (a) The definitions in this section apply to this subpart.



### (b) As used in this subpart, all terms not defined in this section have the meaninggiven them inthe Act.

(1) Acceptablequalitylevel (AQL)

means the maximum percentage of failing engines or vehicles, that for purposes ofsampling inspection,can be consjdered satisfactory as a process average.

(2) Compliancelevelmeans an emission level determined during a Production Compliance Audit pursuant to subpart L ofthispart. (3)Configuration means a subclassification, ifany,ofa heavy-duty engine family-forwhich a separate projected sales figure islisted inthe manufacturer's Application for Certification andwhich can be described onthebasis ofemission control system, governed speed,injector size, engine calibration and other parameters which may be designated by the Administrator, or forlight-duty trucks a subclassification ofa light-duty

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16305

truck engine family/emission control system combination on the basis of engine code, inertia weight class, transmission type and gear ratios, axle ratio, and other parameters which may be designated by the Administrator and/

or a subclassification of alight-duty truck evaporative/refueling emission 

### family/emission control system.

(4) Testsamplemeans the collection ofvehicles or engines ofthe same configuration whichhave been drawn from the population ofvehicles or engines of that configuration and which will receive emission.testing.

(5) Inspectioncriteria means 

### the pass and fail numbers associated with a particular sampling plan.

(6) Test enginemeans an engine in a test sample.

(7) Testvehiclemeans a vehicle in a test sample.

2. A new §86.1003-2001 is added to subpart K to read as follows:
§88.1003-2001 Testorders.

Section 86.1003-2001 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from .§ 86.1003-88. Where a paragraph in § 86.1003-88 is identical and applicable to § 86.1003-2001, this may be indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the
statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.1003-88." Where a corresponding paragraph of§ 86.1003-88 is not applicable, this is indicated by the
statement "[Reserved].".

(a)through (c)(1)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.1003-88.

(c){1)(iii) Heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers will be required to select

a minimum of four vehicles per day unless an alternate selection procedure is approved pursuant to § 86.1007-84(a)

or unless total production ofthe specified configuration is less than four vehicles perday. Iftotal production of the specified configuration is less than four vehicles per day, the manufacturer will select the actual number ofvehicles produced per day.

(2) The test order may include alternative configurations to be selected for testing in the event that engines or vehicles ofthe specified configuration
aye not available for testing because 1hose engines or vehicles are notbeing msnufactured during the specified time,

or notbeing stored at the specified

.. sembly plant or associated storage Gacilities.

(3) Ifthe specified configuration is not )eing manufactured at a rate ofat least our'vehicles per day, inthe case of ight-duty truck manufacturers, two ieavy-duty engines orheavy-duty 'ehicles, in the case ofheavy-duty 'chicle and heavy-duty engine manufacturers specified in §86.1008- 2001(g)(I), or one engine or heavy-duty vehicle perday, in the case ofheavyduty vehicle or engine manufacturers spocified in § 86.100&-2001(g)(2), over the expected duration ofthe audit, the Assistant Administrator or a designated representative may select engines or vehicles ofan alternate configuration for testing.

.(4) In addition, the test order may include other directions or information essential to the administration ofthe requiired testing.

Id)A manufacturer may submit a list ofengine families and, ifapplicable, evaporative/refueling families and the corresponding assembly plants or associated storage facilities from which the manufacturer prefers tohave engines orvehicles selected for testing in response to a test order. In order that

amanufacturer's preferred location be considered for inclusion in a test order for a configuration ofa particular engine family and/or evaporative/refueling family, the listmust be submitted prior
to issuance ofthe test order. Notwithstanding the fact that a manufacturer has submitted the above list, the Administrator may, upon making the determination that evidence exists indicating noncompliance at other than themanufacturer's preferred plant, order testing at such other plant where vehicles ofthe configuration specified inthe test order are assembled.

(e) Upon receipt ofa test order, a manufacturer shall proceed in accordance with the provisions ofthis subpart.

(W)(i) During agiven model year, the Administrator shall not issue to a manufacturer more Selective Enforcement Auditing (SEA) test orders than the annual limit determined bythe following:

(i) For manufacturers ofheavy-dutyengines or vehicles, either gasolinefueled ordiesel, the number determined by dividing the projected sales bound for the United States market forthat
year, as made by the manufacturer in its Application for Certification, by 30,000 and rounded to the nearest whole number, unless the projected sales are less than 15,O00, in which case the number is one;

(fl(1)(ii) through (f)(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.1003-88.

3..A new § 86.1008-2001 is added to subpart K to read as follows:

§86.1008-2001 Testprocedures.

(a)(1)(i) For heavy-duty engines, the prescribed testprocedure is the Federal Test Procedure as described in subparts N, I,and P ofthispart. The 

### Administrator, may onthe basis ofa written application by a manufacturer, approve optional test procedures other than those in subparts N, I, and P ofthis part for any heavy-duty vehicle which is
not susceptible to satisfactory testing using the procedures in subparts N,I, and P ofthis part.

(ii)For heavy-duty vehicles the prescribed test procedures are the Fuel Dispensing Spitback Test as described in §86.,1246-96 (for HDVs with a GVW of less than 14,000 pounds (6,400 kilograms)); thistest for fuel spitback is conducted as a stand alone test, thus all references to the test sequence described in figure M96-1 of subpart M ofthis part can be ignored. Further, the Administrator may, on the basis ofa written application by a manufacturer,
approve optional test procedures other than those in subpart M ofthis part for
any heavy-duty vehicle which is not susceptible to satisfactory testing using the procedures In subpart M ofthis part. For light-duty trucks, the prescribed test procedures are the Federal Test Procedure, including the refueling testprocedure or the fuel spitback test, whichever is applicable,

as described in subpart B ofthis part, the idle test procedure as described in subpart P ofthis part, the cold temperature COtest procedure as described in subpart C of this part, and the Certification Short Test as described in subpart 0 ofthis part. For purposes ofSelective Enforcement Audit Testing, the manufacturer shall not be required
to perform any ofthe test procedures in subpart B ofthis partrelating to evaporative emission testing, other than refueling emissions testing, except as specified in paragraph (a)(3) ofthis section. The Administrator may select and prescribe the sequence of any CSTs. Further, the Administrator may, on the basis ofa written application by a manufacturer, approve optional test procedures other than those in subparts B, C, P, and 0 ofthis part for any motor vehicle which is not susceptible to satisfactory testing using the procedures in subparts B, C, P, and 

### 0 of thispart.

(3) When testing light-duty trucks, the following exceptions to the test procedures in subpart B ofthis part are applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing:

(i) For mileage accumulation, the manufacturer may use test fuel meeting the specifications formileage and service accumulation fuels of§ 86.113- 94. Otherwise, the manufacturer may

use fuels other than those specified in this section only with the advance approval ofthe Administrator.

(it) The manufacturer may measure the temperature ofthe test fuel at other

### 16306 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

than the approximate mid-volume ofthe fuel tank, asspecified in §86.131-96(a) with only a single temperature sensor, and may drain the test fuel fromother than the lowest point ofthe tank,,as specified in §86.131-96(b) and §86.152-98(a), provided an equivalent method isused. Equivalency documentation shallbe maintained by the manufacturer and shall be made available uponrequest. (iii)The manufacturer may perform additional preconditioning on SEA test vehicles otherthan the preconditioning specified in §86.132-96 only'in the additional preconditioning had been performed on certification test vehicles ofthe same configuration.

(iv)Ifthe Administrator elects touse the evaporative/refueling canister preconditioning procedure described in §86.132-96(k), the manufacturer shall perform the heat build procedure 11 to 34 hours following vehicle preconditioning rather than according to the time period specified in §86.133- 90(a). All references to an evaporative emission enclosure and analyzing for HC during the heatbuild can be ignored. (v)The manufacturer may substitute slave tires forthe drive wheel tires on the vehicle as specified in paragraph §86.135-90(e): Provided,thatthe slave tires arethe same size. (vi)Ifthe Administrator elects to use the evaporative/refueling canister preconditioning procedure described in §86.132-96(k), the cold start exhaust emission test described in §86.137-96 shall follow theheat build procedure described in §86.133-90 bynot more than one hour.

(vii)In performing exhaust sample analysis under §86.140-94.

(A)When testing diesel vehicles, or methanol-fueled Otto-cycle vehicles, the manufacturer shall-allow a minimum of 20 minutes warm-up forthe HC analyzer, and for diesel vehicles, a minimum oftwo hours warm-up forthe CO, CO2, and NO, analyzers. 

### (Poweris 

### normally left oninfrared and chemiluminescent analyzers. When not in use, the chopper motors ofthe infrared analyzers are turned offand the phototube highvoltage supply to the chemiluminescent analyzers isplaced in the standby position.) (B) The manufacturer shall exercise

care to prevent moisture from condensing in the sample collection bags. (viii)Themanufacturer need not comply with §86.142-90 or §86.155- 98, since the records required therein

are provided under other provisions of this subpart K. (ix)Ifa manufacturer elects to perform thebackground determination procedure described in paragraph (a)(3)(xi) of this section in addition to performing the refueling emissions test procedure, the elapsed time between the initial and final FID readings shallbe recorded, rounded to the nearest second rather than minute as described in §86.154-98(e)(8). In addition, the Vehicle soak described in §86.153-98(e) shall be conducted with the windows and luggage compartment ofthe vehicle
open.

(x)The Administrator may elect to perform a seal test, described in § 86.153-98(b), ofboth integrated and non4ntegrated systems instead ofthe full refueling test. When testing nonintegrated systems, amanufacturer may conduct the canister purge described in §86.153-98(b)(1) directly following the preconditioning drive described in §86.132-96(e) or directly following the exhaust emissions test described in § 86.137-96.

(xi) In addition to the refueling test,

amanufacturer may elect to perform the following background emissions determination immediately prior to the refueling measurement procedure described in §86.154-98, provided EPA is notified ofthis decision priorto the
start oftesting in an SEA.

(A) The SHED shallbe purged for several minutes immediately prior to the background determination. Warning: If at any time the concentration of hydrocarbons, ofmethanol, or of methanol and hydrocarbons exceeds 15,000 ppm C, the enclosure shouldbe immediately purged. This concentration provides a 4:1 safety factor against the lean flammability limit.

(B) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon analyzer shallbe zeroed and spanned immediately prior to thebackground determination. Ifnot already on, the enclosure mixing fan and the spilled fuel mixing blower shall be turned on at this time. (C) Place the vehicle in the SHED. The ambient temperature level encountered by the test vehicle during the entire background emissions determination shall be 80 'F ±3 *F.The windows and luggage compartment ofthe vehicle
mustbe open and the gas cap mustbe secured.

(D) Seal the SHED. Immediately analyze the ambient concentration of hydrocarbons in the SHED and record. This is the initialbackground hydrocarbon concentration. (E) Soak the vehicle for ten minutes ±1 minute. (F)The FID (orHFID) hydrocarbon analyzer shallbe zeroed and spanned 

### immediately prior tothe end ofthe background determination.

(G) Analyze the ambient concentration ofhydrocarbons in the SHED and record. This is the final backgroundhydrocarbon concentration. (H) The totalhydrocarbon mass emitted during thebackground determination iscalculated according to §86.156-98. To obtain aper-minute background emission rate, divide the totalhydrocarbon mass calculated in this paragraph bythe duration ofthe soak, rounded to the nearest second, described in paragraph (a)(3)(xi)(G) of this section.

(I)The background emission rate is multiplied bythe duration ofthe refueling measurement obtained in paragraph (a)(3)(ix) ofthis section. This number is then subtracted from the total grams ofemissions calculated forthe refueling test according to §86.156- 98(a) to obtainthe adjusted value for total refueling emissions. The final results for comparison with the refueling emission standard shall be computedby dividing the adjusted value for total refueling mass emissions by the total gallons offuel dispensed in the refueling test as described in §86.156-98(b).

(xii)In addition tothe requirements of subpart B ofthispart, the manufacturer shall prepare gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled vehicles as follows prior to emission testing:

(A) The manufacturer shall inspect the fuel system to ensure the absence of any leaks ofliquid orvapor to the atmosphere by applying a pressure of 14.5±0.5 inches ofwater (3.6±0.1 Kpa) to the fuel system allowing thepressure to stabilize and isolating the fuel system from thepressure source. Following isolation ofthe fuel system, pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches of
water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If required, the manufacturer shall perform corrective action in accordance with paragraph (d)ofthis section and report this action in accordance with §86.1009-2001(d).



### (B) When performingthis pressure check, the manufacturer shall exercise

care toneither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling emission control systems.

(C) The manufacturer may not modify the test vehicle's evaporative or refueling emission control systemsby component addition, deletion, or substitution, except to comply with paragraph (a)(3)(ii) ofthis section if approved in advance by the Administrator.

(4) When testing light-duty trucks, the following exceptions to the test procedures in subpart C ofthis part areFederal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16307

applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing:

(i) The manufacturer may measure the temperature of the test fuel at other than the approximate mid-volume ofthe fuel tank, as specified in §86.131-90(a), and
may drain the test fuel from other than the lowest point ofthe fuel tank as specified in §86.131-90(b), provided an equivalent method is used. Equivalency documentation shall be maintained by the manufacturer and shall be made available to the Administrator upon request. (ii)In performing exhaust sample analysis under §86.140-94, the manufacturer shall exercise care to prevent moisture from condensing in the sample collection bags.

(iii)The manufacturer need not comply with § 86.142-90 since the records required therein are provided under other provisions ofthis subpart K.

(iv) In addition to therequirements of subpart C ofthis part, the manufacturer shall prepare gasoline-fueled vehicles as follows prior to exhaust emission testing: (A) The manufacturer shall inspect the fuel system to ensure the absence of
any leaks of liquid or vapor to the atmosphere by applying a pressure of 14.5±0.5 inches ofwater (3.6±0.1 Kpa)
to the fuel system allowing the pressure to stabilize and isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Following isolation ofthe fuel system, pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches of
water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If required, the manufacturer shall perform corrective action in accordance. with paragraph (d)of this section and report this action in accordance with 

### §86.1009-2001(d).

(B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer shall exercise

care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling emission control system.

(C) The manufacturer shall not modify the test vehicle's evaporative or refueling emission control system by component addition, deletion, or substitution, except ifapproved in advance by the Administrator, to comply with paragraph (a)(4)(ii) ofthis section.

(5) When testing light-duty trucks, the exceptions to the test procedures in subpart 0 ofthis part applicable to Selective Enforcement Audit testing are listed in paragraphs (a)(5) (i) and (ii) of tbis section.

(i) The manufacturer need not comply with §86.1442, since the records required therein are provided under provisions ofthis subpart K.

(iO In addition to the requirements of qubpart 0 ofthis part, the manufacturer must prepare vehicles as in paragraphs (a)(5)(if) (A) through (C)of this section prior to exhaust emission testing.

(A) The manufacturer must inspect the fuel system to insure the absence of
any leaks of liquid or vapor to the atmosphere by applying a pressure of 14.5±0.5 inches ofwater (3.6±0.1 Kpa)
to the fuel system, allowing the pressure to stabilize, and isolating the fuel system from the pressure source. Pressure must not drop more than 2.0 inches ofwater (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. Ifrequired, the manufacturer performs corrective action in accordance with this section and must report this action in accordance with §86.1009-2001.

(B) When performing this pressure check, the manufacturer must exercise

care to neither purge nor load the evaporative or refueling emission control system.

(C) The manufacturer may not modify the test vehicle's evaporative or refueling emission control system by component addition, deletion, or substitution.

(b)(1) The manufacturer shall not adjust, repair, prepare, or modify the vehicles selected for testing and shall
not perform any emission tests on vehicles selected for testing pursuant to the test order unless this adjustment repair, preparation, modification,. and/or
tests are documented in the manufacturer's vehicle assembly and inspection procedures and are actually performed or unless these adjustments and/or tests are required or permitted under this subpart or are approved in advance by the Administrator. (2) For 1984 and later model years the Administrator may adjust orcause to be adjusted any engine or vehicle parameter which the Administrator has determined tobe subject to adjustment for certification, Selective Enforcement Audit testing, and Production Compliance Audit testing in accordance with §86.096-22(c)(1), to any setting within the physically adjustable range ofthat parameter, as determined by the Administrator in accordance with § 86.090-22(e)(3)(ii), prior to the performance ofany tests. However, if the idle speed parameter is one which the Administrator has determined to be subject to adjustment, the Administrator shall not adjust it to a setting which

causes a lower engine idle speed than will be possible within the physically adjustable range ofthe idle speed parameter ifthe manufacturer had accumulated 125 hours ofservice on the engine or 4,000 miles on the vehicle under paragraph (c) ofthis section, all other parameters being identically adjusted forthe purpose ofcomparison. The manufacturer may be requested to supply information to establish such an alternative minimum idle speed. The Administrator, in making or specifying such adjustments, will consider the effect ofthe deviation fromthe manufacturer's recommended setting on emissions performance characteristics

as well as the likelihood that similar settings will occur on in-use heavy-duty engines or light-duty trucks. In determining likelihood, the Administrator will consider factors such

as,but not limited to, the effect ofthe adjustment on engine or vehicle performance characteristics and surveillance information from similar in-use vehicles.

(c) Prior to performing emission testing on an SEA test engine, the manufacturer may accumulate on each engine a number ofhours ofservice equal to the greater of 125 hours or the number ofhours the manufacturer accumulated during certification on the emission-data engine corresponding to the configuration specified in the test order. Prior to performing emission testing on an SEA testvehicle, the manufacturer may accumulate on each vehicle a number ofmiles equal to the greater of4,000 miles, orthe number of miles the manufacturer accumulated during certification on the emissiondata vehicle corresponding to the configuration specified in the test order.

(1) Service or mileage accumulation
must be performed in a manner using good engineering judgment to obtain emission results representative of normal production vehicles. This service ormileage accumulation must be consistent with the new vehicle break-in instructions contained in the applicable vehicle owner's manual, if
any.

(2) The manufacturer shall accumulate service at aminimum rate of 16 hours per engine ormileage at a minimum rate of 300 miles per vehicle during each 24-hour period, unless other-wise provided by the Administrator.

(i) The first 24-hour period for service

or mileage accumulation shall begin as

soon as authorization checks, inspections and preparations are completed on each engine or vehicle.

(ii) The minimum service or mileage accumulation rate does not apply on weekends orholidays. (ii) Ifthemanufacturer's service or mileage accumulation target is less than the minimum rate specified (16 hours or 300 miles per day), then the minimum daily accumulation rate shallbe equal to the manufacturer's service ormileage accumulation target,16308 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

(3) Service or mileage accumulation shall be completed on a sufficient number oftest engines or vehicles during consecutive 24-hour periods to

assure that the number ofengines or vehicles tested per day fulfills the requirements ofparagraph (g) ofthis section.

(d)The manufacturer shall not perform anymaintenance on test vehicles or engines after selection for testing, nor shall the Administrator allow deletion ofany test vehicle or engine from the test sequence, unless requested by the manufacturer, and approved by the Administrator before
any test vehicle or engine maintenance

or deletion.

(e)The manufacturer shall expeditiously ship test engines or vehicles from the point ofselection to the test facility. If the test facility is not located at or inclose proximity to the point ofselection, the manufacturer shall assure that the test engines or vehicles arrive at the test facility within 24 hours of selection: Except,that the Administrator may approve more time based upon arequest by the manufacturer accompanied by a satisfactory justification.

(fl Ifan engine orvehicle cannot complete the service or mileage accumulation oremission testbecause ofamalfunction, the manufacturer may request that the Administrator authorize the repair ofthat engine orvehicle or its deletion from the test sequence.

(g) Whenever the manufacturer conducts testing pursuant to a test order issued under this subpart, the manufacturer shall notify the Administrator within one working day ofreceipt ofthe test order, which test facility will be used to comply with the
test order and the number ofavailable

test cells at that facility. Ifno test cells

are available at the desired facility, the manufacturer must provide alternate testing capability satisfactory to the Administrator. (1)Heavy-duty engine manufacturers with projected sales for the United States market for that year of30,000 or greater shall complete emission testing
at their facility on a minimum oftwo engines per 24-hour period, including each voided test and each diesel engine smoke test.

(2) Heavy-duty engine manufacturers with projected sales for the United States market for that year ofless than 30,000 shall complete emission testing

at their facility on aminimum ofone engine per 24-hour period, including each voided test and each diesel engine Smoke test.

(3)Light-duty truck and heavy-duty vehicle manufacturers shallperform a combination oftests pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section so that a minimum offour tests are performed
per 24 hour period, including voided tests, for each available test cell. (4) The Administrator may approve a longer period based upon arequest by

a manufacturer accompanied by satisfactory justification.

(h)The manufacturer shall perform
test engine or vehicle selection, shipping, preparation, service or mileage accumulation, and testing in such a manner as to assure that the audit is performed in an expeditious

manner.

(i) The manufacturer may retest any test vehicle or engine after a fail decision has been reached in accordance with §86.1010-2001(d) based on the first test on each vehicle

or engine; except that the Administrator
may approve retests at other times during the audit based upon arequest by the manufacturer accompanied by a satisfactory justification. The manufacturer may test each vehicle or engine a total ofthree times. The manufacturer shall test each vehicle or engine the same number oftimes. The manufacturer may accumulate additional service or mileage before conducting retests, subject to the provisions of paragraph (c) of this section.

4. A new § 86.1009-2001 is added to subpart K to read as follows:
§86.1009-2001 Calculation and reporting oftest results.

(a) Initial test results are calculated following the Federal Test Procedure specified in § 86.1008-2001(a). Rounding is done in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in §86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)to the number of decimal places contained in the applicable emission standard expressed

to one additional significant figure. (b)Final test results are calculated by summing the initial test results derived in paragraph (a) ofthis section for each
test vehicle or engine, dividing by the number oftimes that specific test has been conducted on the vehicle or engine, and rounding to the same number ofdecimal places contained in the applicable standard expressed to

one additional significant figure. Rounding is done in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in §86.094- 28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)).

(c) Final deterioratedtestresults.(1) The final deteriorated testresults for each light-duty truck, heavy-duty engine, or heavy-duty vehicle tested according to subpart B, C, D, I, M, N, or P ofthis part are calculated by multiplying or adding the final test results by the appropriate deterioration factor derived from the certification
process for the engine or evaporative/ refueling family and model year to which the selected configuration belongs. For the purpose ofthis paragraph, ifamultiplicative deterioration factor as computed during the certification process is less than one. that deterioration factor shall be one. If

an additive deterioration factor as computed during the certification
process is less than zero, that deterioration factor will be zero.

(2) Exceptions.There are no deterioration factors for light-duty truck emissions obtained during testing in accordance with subpart 0 ofthis part

orwith § 86.146-96. Accordingly, for the CST and the fuel dispensing spitback testthe term "final deteriorated
testresults" means the final test results derived in paragraph (b) ofthis section for each test vehicle.

(3) The final deteriorated test results obtained in paragraph (c) (1) and (2) of this section are rounded to the same number ofdecimal places contained in the applicable emission standard. Rounding is done in accordance with ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in §86.094- 28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)).

(d)Within five working days after completion oftesting ofall engines or vehicles pursuant to a test order, the manufacturer shall submit to the Administrator a report which includes the following information:

(1) The location and description ofthe manufacturer's emission test facilities which were utilized to conduct testing reported pursuant to this section.

(2) The applicable standards or compliance levels against which the engines or vehicles were tested.

(3) Deterioration factors for the selected configuration.

(4) A description ofthe engine or vehicle and any emission-related component selection method used.

(5) For each test conducted. (i) Test engine or vehicle description including:

(A) Configuration, engine family, and evaporative/refueling family identification.

(B) Year, make, build date, and model ofvehicle.

(C) Vehicle Identification Number. (D) Miles accumulated on vehicle. (ii) Location where mileage accumulation was conducted and description ofaccumulation schedule.

(iii)Test number, date initial test results, final results and final deteriorated test results for all valid and

### Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16309

invalid exhaust emission tests, and the

reason for invalidation, ifapplicable.

(iv)A complete description ofany modification, repair, preparation, maintenance and/or testing which was performed on the test engine orvehicle andhas not been reported pursuant to any other paragraph ofthis subpart and willnotbe performed on all other production engines orvehicles.

(v)Where an engine or vehicle was deleted from the test sequence by authorization ofthe Administrator, the

reason forthe deletion.

(vi) For allvalid and invalid exhaust emission tests, carbon dioxide emission values for LDTs and brake-specific fuel consumption values forHDEs.

(vii)Any other information the Administrator may request relevant to the determination as to whether thenew motor vehicles beingmanufactured by the manufacturer do in fact conform with the regulations with respect to which the certificate ofconformity was issued.

(6) The following statement and endorsement:

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

5. A new § 86.1010-2001 is added to 

### subpart K to read as follows: §86.1010-2001 Compliance with acceptable quality leveland passingand falling criteriaforSelective Enforcement Audits.

(a)The prescribed acceptable quality level is 40 percent.

(b) A failed vehicle orengine is one whose final deteriorated testresults pursuant to §86.1009-2001(c) exceed at least one ofthe applicable emission 3tandards associated with the test procedures pursuant to §86.1008-

001(a).

(c)(1) Pass/failcriteria. The 

### nanufacturer shall testlight-duty trucks, heavy-duty engines, orheavyduty vehicles comprising thetest sample untila pass decision isreached for all ofthe pollutants associated with all ofthe testprocedures pursuant to §86.1008-2001(a) or a fail decision is reached for one ofthese pollutants. A pass decision isreached when the cumulative number of failed vehicles or engines, as defined inparagraph (b)of' thig section, for each pollutant is less than orequal to the fail decision number appropriate to the cumulative number ofvehicles tested. A fail decision is reached when the cumulative number offailed vehicles or engines for one pollutant is greater than

or equal to the fail decision number appropriate to the cumulative number of vehicles tested.The pass and fail decision numbers associated with the cumulative number ofvehicles tested

are determined by use ofthe tables in .appendix X ofthispart appropriate to the projected sales asmade by the heavy-duty engine orheavy-duty vehicle manufacturer in its Application for Certification, or as made by the lightdutytruck manufacturer inits report submitted under §600,207-80(a)(2) of this chapter (AutomobileFuel Economy Regulations). Inthe tables in appendix X of this part, sampling plan "stage" refers to the cumulative number of vehicles or engines tested. Once a pass decision has been made for a particular pollutant associated with a particular testprocedure pursuant to §86.1008- 2001(a), the number ofvehicles or engines whose final deteriorated test results exceed the emission standard for that pollutant may notbe considered any further for purposes ofthe audit.

(2) CSTcriteriaonly.For CST testing 

### pursuant to subpart 0, a pass orfail decision is determined according to the pass/fail criteria described in paragraph (c)(1) ofthis section, except that for each vehicle, the CST in its entirety is considered onepollutant.

(d)Passing or failing ofan SEA audit

occurs when the decision is made on the last vehicle or engine required.to make a decision under paragraph (c) of this section.

(e) The Administrator may terminate testing earlier than required in 

### paragraph (c) ofthis section.

PART 88--CLEAN-FUEL VEHICLES

1.The authority citation for part 88 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7410, 7418, 7581,

7582, 7583,7584, 7586, 7588,7589,and 7601(a).

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

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

Section 88.311-98 includes text that specifies requirements that differ from §88.311-93. Where a paragraph in § 88.3 11-93 is identical and applicable
to § 88.311-98, this maybe indicated by specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 88.311-93."

(a) heading through (a)(1)(ii) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 88.311- 93.

(iii) The vehicle must meet other special requirements applicable to conventional or clean-fuel vehicles and their fuels as described in any other regulations in 40 CFR chapter I, subchapter C, including 40 CFR parts 86' and 88 (e.g., onboard refueling provisions). (b)through (e) [Reserved). For guidance see § 88.311-93.

PART 600-FUEL ECONOMY OF MOTOR VEHICLES

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

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

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

§600.111-80 Test procedures.

(a) The test procedures to be followed for generation of the city fuel economy data are those prescribed in §§,86.127- 94 through 86.138-78 ofthis chapter, as applicable. (The evaporative and refueling loss portions ofthe test procedure may be omitted unless specifically required by the Administrator.)

[FR Doc. 94-4752 Filed 4-5-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-0-P