CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR RESOURCES BOARD

STAFF REPORT: INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS

ADVANCED CLEAN CARS

2012 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CALIFORNIA ZERO EMISSION VEHICLE PROGRAM REGULATIONS

This report has been reviewed by the staff of the California Air Resources Board and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Air Resources Board, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled fo r Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2ES

- 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 1990, the California Air Resources Board (ARB or the Board) adopted an ambitious program to significantly reduce the environmental impact of light

- duty vehicles through the commercial introduction of zero emission vehicles (ZEV) into the California fleet. Since then the requirements of the ZEV program have result ed in several important milestones being achieved. Many gasoline engines now emit at near zero emission levels of smog

- forming emissions. Non

- plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) have been commercialized, and the number of models offered for sale is qu ickly expanding. Recently, battery electric vehicles (BEV) and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) have been introduced for sale, and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCV) are expected to be sold beginning in 2015. This movement to commercializ e advanced clean cars has occurred in large part because of the ZEV regulation.

The ZEV regulation, which affects passenger cars and light

- duty trucks, remains critically important to California’s efforts to meet health based air quality goals. More recently, the program’s goals have evolved to also include paving the way for achieving California’s long term climate change emission reduction goals. For these reasons, California remains committed to the commercialization of ZEV technologies.

At its March 2008 hear ing, the Board directed staff to redesign the 2015 and subsequent model year requirements for the ZEV regulation . It directed staff to strengthen the r egulation above what is currently required and focus primarily on the zero emission drive, that is BEV, hydrogen FCV, and PHEV technologies. The goal of the Board direction was to ensure California as the central location for moving advanced, low greenhouse gas (GHG) technology vehicles from the demonstration phase to commercialization.

In 2009, staff un dertook an analysis of pathways to meeting California’s long term 2050 GHG reduction goals in the light duty vehicle subsector. 1 The analysis showed ZEVs will need to reach nearly 100 percent of new vehicle sales between 2040 and 2050, with commercial mar kets for ZEVs launching in the 2015 to 2020 timeframe. The analysis concluded that even widespread adoption of advanced conventional technologies, like

non

- plug

- in HEVs , will not be enough to meet the 2050 targets. Staff presented its findi ngs at the Dec ember 2009 Board h earing.

At the December hearing, the Board adopted Resolution 09

- 66, reaffirming its commitment to meeting California’s long term air quality and climate change reduction goals through commercialization of ZEV technologies. The Board further directed staff to consider shifting the focus of the ZEV regulation to both GHG and criteria pollutant emission reductions, commercializing ZEVs and PHEVs in order to meet the 2050 goals, and to take into consideration the new Low Emission Vehicle (LEV III) fleet standards and propose revisions to the ZEV regulation accordingly.

1 California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger enacted Executive Order S

- 03

- 05, requiring a reducti on in state

- wide GHG emissions to 80

- percent below 1990 levels by 2050ES

- 2 This rulemaking is an opportunity for the Board to commit to the transformation of California’s light

- duty vehicle fleet. As the technology

- forcing piece of the Advance d Clean Car package, the ZEV regulation along with new LEV III criteria pollutant and GHG standards can be the catalyst to that transformative process. Proposed amendments to the regulation focus on technologies that help meet long term emission reduction goals, simplify the program where needed, and increase requirements for 2018 and subsequent model years.

Proposed Amendments to the Regulations 2009 through 2017 Model Year Amendments Staff’s goal for amendments affecting the cur rent ZEV regulation throu gh 2017 model year is to make minor mid

- course corrections and clarifications, and enable manufacturers to successfully meet 2018 and subsequent model year requirements. The amendments include:

A. Provide Compliance Flexibility: Remove carry forward credit limitations for ZEVs, allowing manufacturers to bank ZEV credits indefinitely for use in later years. Slightly reduce the 2015 through 2017 credit requirement for intermediate volume manufacturers (IVM, less than 60,000 vehicle s produced each year), to allow them to prepare for requirements in 2018. Extend the provision that allows ZEVs placed in any state that has adopted the California ZEV regulation to count towards the ZEV requirement through 2017 (i.e. extending the “trave l provision” for BEVs through 2017).

B. Adjust Credits and Allowances: Increase credits for Type V (300 mile FCV)
ZEV s to appropriately incentivize this longer term technology.

C. Add New Vehicle Category: Add Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles as a compliance option for manufacturers to meet up to half of their minimum ZEV requirement. The proposed vehicle is closer to a BEV than to a PHEV: a vehicle with primarily zero

- emission operation equipped with a small non

- ZEV fuel auxiliary p ower unit (APU) for limited range extension.

2018 and Subsequent Model Year Amendments Staff’s goal for the proposed amendments for 2018 and subsequent model years is to achieve ZEV and transitional zero emission vehicle (TZEV; most commonly a PHEV )

comme rcialization through simplifying the regulation and pushing technology to higher volume production in order to achieve cost reductions. The amendments include:

A. Increase Requirement for 2018 and Subsequent Model Years. Increase requirements which push ZE Vs and TZEVs to over 15 percent of new sales by 2025. This will ensure production volumes are at a level sufficient to bringES

- 3 battery and fuel cell technology down the cost curve and reduce incremental ZEV prices.

B. Focus Regulation on ZEVs and Transitiona l Zero Emission Vehicles (TZEV):
Remove partial zero emission allowance vehicle (PZEV, near

- zero emitting conventional technologies) and advanced technology partial zero emission
allowance vehicle (AT PZEV, typically non

- plug

- in HEVs ) credits as compliance options for manufacturers because these technologies are now commercialized and their emissions are better reflected in the LEV III program. Allow
manufacturers to use banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits earned in 2017 and previous mod el years, but discount the credits, and place a cap on usage in 2018 and subsequent model years. Focus the 2018 and subsequent model year requirements on ZEVs and TZEVs

C. Amend Manufacturer Size Definitions, Ownership Requirements, and
Transitions . Amend IVM and large volume manufacturer (LVM) size definitions to bring all but the smallest manufacturers under the full ZEV requirements by model year 2018. Align LEV III and ZEV ownership requirements, so that
manufacturers who own more than 33.4 percent of each other are considered as the same manufacturer for determination of size. Modify transition periods for manufacturers switching size categories. These changes result in applying the ZEV regulation to manufacturers that represent 97 percent of the li ght duty
vehicle market.

D. Modify Credit System. Base credits for ZEVs on range, with 50 mile BEVs earning 1 credit each and 350 mile FCVs earning 4 credits each. Allow extended range BEVs (BEVx) which have a limited combustion engine range extender to

me et up to half of a manufacturer’s minimum ZEV requirement. The range of credits reflects the utility of the vehicle (i.e. the zero emitting miles it may travel) and its expected timing for commercialization. Simplify and streamline TZEV
credit based on t he vehicle’s zero

- emission range capability, and ability to perform 10 miles on the more aggressive US 06 drive schedule. In addition to simplifying the program, reducing the spread of credits makes the technologies more evenly treated and reduces the vari ation in compliance outcomes (numbers of vehicles produced to meet the regulation requirements).

E. Modify Travel Provision: End the Travel Provision for BEVs after model year 2017. Extend the Travel Provision for FCVs until sufficient complementary police s are in place in states that have adopted the California ZEV regulation. This will allow FCV technology to continue to mature, and provide time forES

- 4 Section 177 States to build infrastructure and put in place incentives to foster
FCVs.

F. Add GHG

- ZEV Over

- Compliance Credits: Allow manufacturers who systematically over comply with the proposed LEV III GHG fleet standard to offset a portion of their ZEV requirement in 2018 through 2021 model years only.

Effect of Proposed Amendments As a result of staff’s proposal, over 1.4 million ZEVs and TZEVs are expected to be produced cumulatively in California by 2025, with 500,000 of those vehicles being pure ZEVs (BEVs and FCVs).

Expected ZEV Regulation Compliance for 2018 through 2025 Mod el Years

During this time frame, the incremental price of a ZEV or TZEV is expected to rapidly decline, but remain higher than a conventional vehicle, by approximately $10,000 (high

end estimate).

The proposed amendments will also result in an emissio ns benefit as compared to the current regulations, and will likely provide benefits beyond that achieved by complying with the LEV III criteria pollutant standard with conventional vehicles only. This is due to increased electricity and hydrogen use, and subsequently decreased gasoline production and refinery emissions. - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Annual California Sales

Model Year 17%

14%

11%

9%

6%

3%%of 2025 Sales 15.4% of 2025

New Sales



### FCVs

BEVs



## TZEVsES

- 5 Advanced Clean Cars Continuing its leadership role in the development of innovative and ground breaking emission control programs and to achieve California’s goals of meeting ambient air quality standards and reducing climate changing GHG emissions, ARB has developed the Adva nced Clean Cars (ACC) program. The ACC program combines the control of
smog

- causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2015 through 2025 and assures the development of environmentally superior ca rs that will continue to deliver the performance
, utility and safety car owners have come to expect. The ZEV regulation (with amendments proposed herein) will act as the technology forcing piece of the ACC program, pushing manufacturers to produce ZEVs an d PHEVs in the 2018 through 2025 model years. In addition, the ACC program also includes amendments to the Clean Fuels Outlet (CFO) requirements that will assure that ultra

- clean fuels such as hydrogen are available to meet vehicle demands brought on by a mendments to the ZEV regulation.

Beyond 2025, the driving force for lower emissions will be climate change. In order to meet our 2050 GHG goal, the new vehicle feet will need to be primarily composed of advanced technology vehicles such as electric and FCVs by 2035 in order to address fleet turnover. Accordingly, the ACC program coordinates the goals of the LEV, ZEV, and CFO programs in order to lay the foundation for commercialization and support of ultra

- clean vehicles.

A more complete description of the impacts and benefits of the ACC can be found in the LEV staff report, including in its Executive Summary.

Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Board adopt the amendments as proposed in this Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR). The pro posed amendments will help support future commercialization of ZEVs and TZEVs through simplification of the regulation and increasing requirements in 2018 and subsequent model years.TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 1

1.1 ZEV P ROGRAM O BJECTIVES (O VERALL S UMMARY )

................................ ................. 2 1.2 A IR Q UALITY AND C LIMATE C HANGE IN C ALIFORNIA

................................ ................. 3 1.3 ZEV P ROGRAM H ISTORY

................................ ................................ ...................... 5 1.4 2008 A MENDMENTS AND 2009 T ECHNOLOGY R EVIEW

................................ ............. 6 1.5 T HE C URRENT P ROGRAM

................................ ................................ ...................... 8

2 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

................................ ....................... 13

2.1 P ART I: M ODEL Y EAR 2012 THROUGH 2017 A MENDMENTS

................................ .... 13 2.2 P ART II: 2018 AND S UBSEQUENT M ODEL Y EAR A MENDMENTS

............................... 25

3 EFFECT OF PROPOSED C HANGES

................................ ................................ ... 44

3.1 O VERALL E FFECTS OF M ANUFACTURER ’ S B ANKED ZEV C REDITS

.......................... 44 3.2 E FFECTS OF P ROPOSED C HANGES : 2009 THROUGH 2017 M ODEL Y EARS

.............. 46 3.3 E FFECTS OF P ROPOSED C HANGES : 2018 AND S UBSEQUENT M ODEL Y EARS

........... 46 3.4 E FFECTS OF P ROPOSED C HANGES : T RAVEL P ROVISION

................................ ........ 51

4 REGULATORY ALTERNATI VES

................................ ................................ .......... 53

4.1 A LTERNATIVE A: L OWER ZEV R EQUIREMENTS

................................ ...................... 53 4.2 A LTERNATIVE B: H IGHER ZEV R EQUIREMENTS

................................ ..................... 54 4.3 A LTERNATIVE C: D O N OT A MEND P ROGRAM

................................ ......................... 54

5 ECONOMIC IMPACTS

................................ ................................ .......................... 55

5.1 L EGAL R EQUIREMENT

................................ ................................ ......................... 55 5.2 D IRECTLY A FFECTED B USINESSES

................................ ................................ ....... 55 5.3 P OTENTIAL I MPACTS TO I NDIVIDUALS (C AR B UYERS )

................................ ............. 64 5.4 P OTENTIAL I MPACT ON B USINESS C OMPETITIVENESS

................................ ............ 68 5.5 P OTENTIAL I MPACT ON B USINESS C REATION
, E LIMINATION OR E XPANSION

............. 68 5.6 P OTENTIAL C OSTS TO L OCAL AND S TATE A GENCIES

................................ ............. 70

6 EMISSIONS AND HEALTH IMPACTS

................................ ................................ .. 72

6.1 C ALIFORNIA E NVIRONMENTAL Q UALITY A CT

................................ ......................... 73 6.2 I MPACTS TO M INORITY AND L OW I NCOME C OMMUNITIES

................................ ........ 73 6.3 H EALTH I MPACTS

................................ ................................ ................................ 74 6.4 E MISSIONS I MPACTS

................................ ................................ ........................... 75

7 COST

- EFFECTIVENESS

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

8 SUMMARY AND STAFF RE COMMENDATION

................................ ................... 81

9 SUMMARY AND RATIONAL E FOR PROPOSED REGUL ATIONS

..................... 83

10 REFERENCES

................................ ................................ ................................ . 107APPENDIX A: PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER: AMENDMENTS TO THE ZERO

- EMISSION VEHICLE REGULATION

Appendix A

- 1. §1962.1 Zero Emission Vehicle Standards for 2009 through 2017 Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles

Appendix A

- 2. California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2009 through 2017 Model Zero

- Emission Vehi cles and Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck and Medium

- Duty Vehicle Classes

Appendix A

- 3. §1962.2 Zero Emission Vehicle Standards for 2018 and subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles

Appendix A

- 4. California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2018 and subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck and Medium

- Duty Vehicle Classes

Appendix A

- 5. §1962.3 California Vehicle Charging Requirements

APPENDIX B: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FOR ADVANCE CLEAN CARS REGULATION PACKAGE

APPENDIX C: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS INPUTS

### Table of Acronyms

AB

............... Assembly B ill ACC

............. Advanced Clean Car APU

............. Auxiliary Power Unit ARB

............ California Air Resources Board AT PZEV

.... A dvanced Technology Partial Zero Emission Allowance Vehicle , typically

a non

- plug in hybrid such as the Prius BEV

............. Battery Electric Vehicle BEVx

........... Range E xtended Battery Electric Vehicle CAFE

........... Corporate Average Fuel Economy CEC

............. California Energy Co mmission CEQA

.......... California Environmental Quality Act CO 2

............. Carbon Dioxide CPUC

.......... California Public Utilities Commission DC

............... Direct Current E

- DRAM

...... Economic Dynamic Revenue Assessment Model EA

............... Joint Environmental Assessment for Advanced Clean Car Rulemaking EAER

......... Equivalent All Electric Range EMFAC

....... ARB’s mobile emissions inventory modeling program Enhanced AT PZEV... Enhanced Advanced Technology Partial Zero Emission Allowance Vehicle, now called a Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle or TZEV EPL

............. Environmental Performance Label EPRI

............ Electric Power Research Institute EU

............... European Union EVSE

........... Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment FCV

............. Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle FSOR

.......... Final Statement of Reasons g/mi

............. gra ms per mile gCO 2 /mi

...... grams carbon dioxide per mile GHG

............ Greenh ouse G as HEV

............. Hybrid electric vehicle (non plug

- in) HICE

............ Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engine ICM

.............. Indirect Cost Multiplier ILVM

............ Independent Low Volume Manufacturer ISOR

.......... Initial Statement of Reasons IVM

.............. In termediate Vehicle Manufacturer kW

............... Kilowatt LCFS

........... Low Carbon Fuel Standard LDT

............. Ligh t

- Duty Truck with loaded vehicle weight up to 8500 pounds LEV I

.......... First generation Low Emission Vehicle program, adopted in a 1990

- 1991 rulemaking, and generally applicable in the 1994

- 2003 model years LEV II

......... Second generation Low Emission Vehicle program, adopted in a 1998

- 1999 rulemaking, and generally applicable in the 2004 and subsequent model yearsLEV III

......... Third generation Low Emission Vehicle prog ram (criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas emission fleet standards), proposed as part of the Advanced Clean Cars rulemaking package in 2012, and generally applicable to 201 5 and subsequent model years for Criteria Pollutants, and applicable to 2017 and su bsequent model years for Greenhouse Gases. MDV

............ Medium Duty Vehicle MMT

............ Million Metric Tonnes MOA

........... Memorandum of Agreement NAS

............. National Academy of Sciences NEV

............. Neighborhood Electric Vehicle NHTSA

........ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NMOG

........ Non

- Methane Organic Gas NOx

............ Oxides of Nitrogen NMOG+ NOx

... Non

- Methane Organic Gas plus Oxides of Nitrogen PC

............... Passenger Car PHEV

......... Plug

- in Hybrid

- Electric Vehicle PM

............... Particulate Matter ppb

.............. parts per billion PZEV

.......... Partial Zero Emission Allowance Vehicle , typ ically, a conventional gasoline, diesel, or natural gas vehicle that meets the most stringent standards for smog

- forming emissions R cda

............. Charge Depleting Range Actual RD&D

.......... Research, Development, and Demonstration ROG

........... Reactive Organic Gases RPS

............. Renewable Portfolio Standard SIP

.............. State Implementation Plan SULEV

........ Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle SVM

............ Small Volume Manufacturer TAR

............. Joint Agency Technical Assessment Report Release September 2010 TTW

............ Tank

- To

- Wheel (emissions) Type 0

........ Utility EV, less than 50 mile range Type I

......... City EV, range of 50 to less than 100 miles Type II

........ Full Function EV, range of 100 or more miles Type III

....... ZEV, range of 100 or more miles plus fast refueling , or 200 miles Type IV

........ ZEV, range of 200 or more miles plus fast refueling Type V

......... ZEV, range of 300 or more miles plus fast refueling TZEV

........... Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle , typically a plug

- in hybrid electric vehicle UAW

............ United Auto

- Workers (union) UDDS

......... Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule US06

........... US06 drive schedule U.S. DOE

.... United Stat es Department of Energy U

. S

. DOT

..... United States Department of Transportation U

. S

. EPA

..... United States Environmental Protection Agency VAC

............. Volts Alternative CurrentVMT

............ Vehicle Miles Traveled WTW

........... Well

- To

- Wheel (emissions) ZEV

............ Zero Emission Vehicle1 1 INTRODUCTION

In 1990, the California Air Resources Board (ARB or the Board) adopted an ambitious program to dramatically reduce the environmental impact of light

- duty vehicles (LDV) through the gradual introduction of zero emission vehicles (ZEV) into the California fleet as part of the original Low Emission Vehicle (LEV I) program . The ZEV program, which affects passenger cars (PC) and light

- duty trucks (LDT), has been adjusted fiv e times since its inception

- in 1996, 1998, 2001, 2003, and 2008 , to reflect the pace of ZEV development and the emergence of new ZEV and ZEV

- like technologies

. Through these adjustments the fundamental goal of the program has not changed: California re mains committed to the commercialization of ZEV technologies.

California’s strong commitment to the ZEV program reflects the essential need for ZEV technology in order to achieve the State’s public health protection goals, including criteria pollutant and long

- term climate change emission reductions. Health

based state and federal air quality standards continue to be exceeded in regions throughout California. California’s growing population and increasing use of motor vehicles mean continued upward press ure on statewide emissions.

Faced with ever more stringent regulations, vehicle manufacturers have made remarkable progress in advancing vehicle technology. Conventional vehicles meeting ARB’s most stringent emission certification standards achieve emi ssion levels that seemed impossible when the ZEV program was adopted in 1990. The relativ e contribution of PCs and LDTs is expected to decline over time as new standards phase in, but in 2020 such vehicles will still be responsible for approximately 10
pe rcent of total emissions

. Sta te and federal law requires implementation of control strategies to attain ambient air quality standards as quickly as practicable.

Due to California’s long history in leading the charge for ZEVs and ZEV enabling technologie s and the state’s need for criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas ( GHG ) emission reductions, it is essential that California continues to lead in launching the ZEV commercialization effort. California consumers have a history of adopting new and “green” technologies. Manufacturers have targeted California for many of their demonstration programs, research efforts, and early deployment due to California’s mild climate and “green” consumer base. For The EV Project, a project run by ECOtality through a grant from the United States Department of Energy ( U.S. DOE )

, nearly half o f the Nissan Leafs and Chevrolet Volts for the project were placed in California. 2 It is important that California continue as the proving grounds and launching point for emerging ZEV technologies.

This rulemaking is an opportunity for the Board to f urther the transformation of California’s light duty vehicle ( LDV ) fleet to zero emission and low carbon . As the

2 ECOtality, 2011. ECOtality. “Quarterly Report: Second Quarter 2011” http://www.theevproject.com/downloads/documents/Q2%20EVP%20INL%20Report.pdf.2 technology

- forcing piece of the Advanced Clean Car (ACC) package , the ZEV
reg ulation along with staff proposed amendments to the Low Emission Vehicle (LEV III) Criteria P ollutant and LEV III GHG standards can be the catalyst for that transformative process.

Public Process for ZEV Regulation Development

To support development of the ACC package, beginning in May 2010, ARB staff held two publi c workshops to engage stakeholders and obtain input on the proposed regulations. These stakeholders primarily included representatives from regulated and non

- regulated manufacturers, vehicle component suppliers, and environmental advocates.

These worksh ops were held at ARB offices in Sacramento and El Monte. The announcements and materials for these workshops were posted on ARB’s website and distributed through a list serve that included over 1 4 500 recipients. Each workshop attracted over 30 attendees in person. Both meetings were either telecast, webcast or available by teleconference. The dates and materials presented at the workshops are available on ARB’s ZEV program website
at http: //www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zevprog.htm

.

1.1 ZEV Program Objectives (Overall Summary)

Since its adoption, the ZEV program has pushed the boundaries of ZEV development and emission reduction from cars and trucks, while taking into account the cost, performance, suitability for volume production

, and long

- term prospects of various technologies. The following are the main objectives of staff’s proposed changes:

● Maintain requirements that facilitate and accelerate ZEV technologies needed to meet Cali fornia’s long term GHG and criteria pollutant targets,

● Push technology to high er volume production in order to achieve cost reductions,

● Minor mid

- course corrections and clarifications for model years 2012 through 2017,

● Maintain compliance flexibility in meeting the ZEV requirements, and

● Simplify the structure of the ZEV program.

In the wake of the commercial release of General Motor’s Volt PHEV and Nissan’s battery electric Leaf, it appears ZEVs have successfully entered the market. However, amendin g and strengthening ZEV regulatory requirements at this time will ensure continued technology development by multiple manufacturers. Two or three manufacturers succeeding in a particular vehicle technology does not guarantee3 achieving our air quality or 2 050 GHG goals . The key is moving beyond the early adopters and providing viable choices for the everyday consumer.

The most significant amendment in staff’s proposal is the increased ZEV volume requirement for 2018 and subsequent model years . Staff’s 2009 analysis showed that almost every LDV sold by model year 2040 would need to be a ZEV in order to meet California’s long term GHG goals. More recent analyses by various organizations continue to confirm this trend: the need for large

- scale electrific ation of the LDV fleet. 3

, 4

, 5 Staff’s proposal helps to get California’s fleet on an appropriate trajectory toward meeting th i s long term GHG goal, while offering compliance flexibility and not placing unnecessary and burdensome requirements on those manuf acturers clearly on their way to commercializing ZEV technology.

Staff’s proposed amendments also help simplify the regulation in model years 2018 and beyond. ZEV credits are now linear, based only on the vehicle’s range. Also, the PHEV 6 credit calcul ation has been simplified, allowing manufacturers to do one calculation, as opposed to the old method of adding up various allowances. Another change affecting many manufacturers in both the LEV III proposal and the ZEV regulation proposal is a new manufa cturer size definition. This change will bring nearly all manufacturers under the full ZEV requirements by model year 2018. This amendment is important for commercialization of 2050 vehicle technologies, ensuring a portfolio of vehicle models and technol ogies become available

.

1.2 Air Quality and Climate Change in California

There are currently roughly 25 million cars operating in California, and by 2035

, will grow to more than 30 million cars

. Prior to the establishment of ARB in 1968

, photochemical smog pollution was a major health concern that caused acute health impacts to Californians. Much of this smog was formed by automobile emissions. Over the next 40 years

, ARB adopted the most stringent automobile emissions standards in the world , requiring use of the catalytic converter that revolutionized emissions control and dramatically reduced emissions from automobiles. Those regulations, in conjunction with regional programs to reduce emissions from refineries, power

- plants, and othe r stationary sources, led to a major improvement in air quality. In 1980, the South Coast Air Basin experienced widespread ozone levels which exceeded air quality standard for 179 days per
year 7

. In 2010

, that number was reduced to 63 days per year, and those violations occurred in a much smaller portion of the Air Basin. During this same period, peak ozone concentrations in Southern California dropped more than 60 percent

- from 273

3 CCST, 2011. California Council on Science and Technology, May 2011. “California’s Energy Future: The View to 2050.”
4 NREL, 2011a. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. February 15, 2011 “Role of Fuel Carbon Intensity in Achieving 2050 GHG Reduction Goals within t he LDV Sector.”
5 IEA, 2011. International Energy Agency. June 2011. “Technology Roadmap: Electric and Plug

- in Hybrid Electric Vehicles.”
6 Plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) are also referred to as Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles, or TZEVs. S taff is proposing new terminology to be straighter forward and simple.

7 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard of 0.08 ppm.4 parts per billion (ppb) to 112 ppb. Similar air quality improvements w ere seen in many other regions of California.

Despite these major improvements

, air quality in both the greater Los Angeles region and the San Joaquin Valley are classified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( U.S. EPA ) as “extreme” ozon e non

- attainment areas. This is the
most severe federal non

- attainment classification, and these two areas of Cal ifornia are the only two areas in the nation granted this designation. Bringing these regions into attainment requires more significant emission controls than anywhere else in the United States.

In 2007, California adopted State Implementation Plans ( SIP ) to chart the course to attainm ent of the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard. To achieve the 1997 ozone standard by the attainment date in 2023, oxides of nitrogen ( NOx ) emissions in the greater Los Angeles region must be reduced by two thirds, even after considering all of the regulat ions in place today, with the most significant share of needed emission reductions coming from long

- term advanced clean air technologies. In the San Joaquin Valley, the SIP identified the need to reduce NOx emissions by 80 tons/day in 2023 through the use of long

- term and advanced technology strategies. To put this in context, this is equivalent to eliminating the NOx emissions from all on

- road vehicles operating in these regions.

Despite the dramatic emission reductions and air quality improvements ach ieved to date, most urban areas of California, including Southern California, and the Central Valley continue to exceed the federal ozone standard 8

. ARB, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Di strict are beginning to evaluate the emission reductions needed to attain the more health

protective ozone standard U.S. EPA established in 2008. In order to meet these challenges, air quality and land

- use agencies in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valle y are actively pursu ing a coordinated strategy that would result in the widespread use of zero

- emission technologies on transportation networks designed to reduce
smog

- forming emissions from single

- occupant vehicle use.

Climate change poses a serious thr eat to the economic well

- being, public health, natural resources, and environment of California. Global warming is projected to have detrimental effects on some of California’s largest industries (including agriculture and tourism), increase the strain on electricity supplies, and contribute to unhealthy air. 9

, 10

, 11

8 2008 federal 8

- hour ozone standard of 0.075 ppm. Designations, classifications, attainment date and planning requirements for the 2008 federal ozone standard have not yet been established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ARB anticipates t hat SIPs will be due to U.S. EPA by 2015 with attainment required in the 2031/32 timeframe.
9 C N R A, 2009. California Natural Resource s Agency. 2009. “ 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy ” http://www.energy.ca.gov/2011publications/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 007/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 007

- SD.pdf
10 UC Berkeley, 2008. University of California, Berkeley. November 2008. “ California Climate Risk and Response ”
11 ARB 2009a. California Air Resources Board. May 11, 2009 Update. “Climate Change Scoping Plan” http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf5 A number of state policies directly address climate change emissions. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (2006) requires that statewide climate change emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. AB 1 007 (2005) indicates a need for electric drive trains as well as other significant actions to meet California’s goals. Fleet performance standards outlined by AB 1493 (2002) and the LEV III program provide a foundation for these emission reductions, howev er, performance standards alone cannot provide reasonable assurance that ZEVs will be produced in necessary volumes to provide a sufficient launch of the technology in the marketplace. The ZEV regulation is the necessary tool to ensure a portfolio of adva nced technologies are available to

consumers

.
In recognizing the potential for large, damaging impacts from climate change, former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger enacted Executive Order S

- 03

- 05, requiring a reduction in state

- wide GHG emissions to 80

- percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Staff’s 2009 analysis 12 showed widespread adoption of conventional technologies, even conventional mild hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) , will not be enough to meet these stringent targets. ZEVs will need to reach nearly 100 percent of new vehicle sales between 2040 and 2050, with commercial markets for ZEVs launching in the 2015 to 2020 timeframe. All ZEV technologies

– fuel cell electric vehicle (FCV), battery electric vehicle (BEV), and plug

- in hybrid e lectric vehicle (PHEV)

– need to be encouraged and promoted through regulatory and non

regulatory methods.

1.3 ZEV Program History

Manufacturers originally pursued the development of BEVs to meet the ZEV requirements. In 1996, ARB eliminated the requirements for the 1998 through 2002 model years due to cost and performance issues, to allow additional time for battery research and development. ARB entered into memorandums of agreement (MO A) with vehicle manufacturers to place

, in California

, roughly 1,800 advanced

- B EVs between 1998 and 2000. The agreements were designed to provide battery developers with the necessary initial production volumes to meet the cost and performance goals neede d for begin early commercial production.

Contrary to expectations, advanced battery cost s remained too high for commercial viability. Notwithstanding these costs, several manufacturers continued to place a modest number of BEV s beyo nd the MOA volumes. These vehicles earned ZEV credits that have been used for compliance with the regulation.

Manufacturers began to look seriousl y at hydrogen FCVs in the late 1990’s as an alternative to BEV s. This interest led to cooperative efforts among ARB, industry and other governmental agencies to create the California Fuel Cell Partnership in 1999.

12 ARB, 2009b. California Air Resources Board. November 25, 2009. “White Paper: Summary of Staff’s Preliminary Assessment of the Need for Revisions to the Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation

- Attachment B: 2050 Greenhouse Gas Analysis” http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009zevreview/attachment_b_205 0ghg.pdf6 The Partnership demonstrates vehicle technology while exploring the paths to commercialization , including the development of public hydrogen fueling infrastructure

. C hanges to the ZEV regulation in 2003 provided new incentives for FCV s , resolved legal challenges, and addressed the state of technology at that time.

1.4 2008 Amendment s and 2009 Technology Review

The Board adopted Resolution 08

- 24 at the March 2008 heari ng, directing staff to redesign the 2015 and beyond requirements for the ZEV program, strengthen the requirement more than the current program

, focus primarily on the zero emission drive , that is BEV

, FCV , and PHEV technologies, and ensur e California as the central location for advanced, low GHG technol ogy vehicles from the demonstration phase to commercialization.

In 2009, staff undertook an assessment of ZEV technologies, an analysis of pathways to meeting California’s long term 2050 G HG reduction goals in the LDV subsector 13 and a review of current and possible future complementary policies that would be needed to aid in infrastructure development and market pull policies for ZEVs. Based

on the U.S. DOE Vision model 14 , staff developed a California

- specific model for the LDV subsector, relying heavily on model inputs and assumptions from peer

- reviewed studies. Figure 1 shows what the cumulative on

- road PC s would need to be to reach the 2050 goal

.
Figure 1 : On Road Passenger Car Scenario to Reach 2050 Goal

13 This analysis assumed a 2050 target of 80% below the passenger vehicle portion of 1990’s GHG inventory, or 20% of 108.5 MMT of CO 2 equivalent emissions.
14 DOE, 2008. United States Department of Energy. Vision Model, 2008. http://www.transportation.anl.gov/modeling_simulation/VISION/7 This graph shows the cumulative on

- road PC mix for the scenario developed by staff that reaches the Governor’s GHG emission reduction goal . The most important trend to highlight is that ZEVs grow to become a pproximately 87 percent of on

- road PC s after ZEV sales reached nearly 100 percent in 2040.

Through modeling various scenarios, including the scenario shown in Figure 1 , staff concluded:

● ZEVs are essential to meeting California’s long term GHG emission reduction goals

.

● A h igh

- volume (100,000s) ZEV market need s to exist by 2020 in order for ZEV sales and fleet turn

- over rates to result in enough ZEVs to achieve deep reductions in GHG emissions.

● Any amendment s to the ZEV regulation should help keep the LDV subsector on track to reach an 80 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2050.

● FCVs, BEVs, and PHEVs with low carbon biofuels are the three most viable candidates for near

- zero carbon transportation. All three vehicle technologies will be necessary in order to ac hieve the GHG goal, and to lessen the risk of market failures.

Staff presented its findings at the December 2009 Board Hearing. At the December hearing, the Board adopted Resolution 09

- 66 15 , reaffirming its direction to meet California’s long term air quality and climate change reduction goals through

com mercialization of low

- carbon emitting vehicle technologies. The Board directed staff to consider the following in preparing amendments to the ZEV regulation:

• Shift focus from only criteria pollutant e mission regulations to GHG emission reductions and criteria pollutants;

• Focus on transforming California’s light

- duty fleet and commercializing low

carbon emitting t echnologies, such as ZEVs and PHEV in a timeframe sufficient to meet the 2050 target of 80 percent reduction in GHG emissions compared to 1990 levels;

• Take into consideration new LEV III GHG fleet standards and revise the ZEV regulatory structure, credit values, and stringency of the current requirements accordingly.

In 2010, President Barack Obama directed the U

. S

. EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA ) to work with California to develop GHG fleet standards

15 ARB 2009c. California Air Resources Board. Resolution 09

- 66. December 9, 2009. http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009zevreview/res09_66.pdf8 for model year 2017 through 2025 LDVs . T he Joint Technical Assessment Report (TAR) was released in September 201 0. The report concluded “electric drive vehicles including hybrid(s)...battery electric vehicles...plug

- in hybrid(s)...and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles...can dramatically reduce petroleum consumption and GHG emissions compared to conventional technologies...The fu ture rate of penetration of these technologies into the vehicle fleet is not only related to future GHG and CAFE standards, but also to future reductions in HEV/PHEV/EV [electric vehicle] battery costs, the overall performance and consumer demand for the a dvanced technologies...” 16 Manufacturers confirmed in meetings leading up to the release of the TAR

, their comm itment to develop ZEV technologies. “...[A] number of the firms suggested that in the 2020 timeframe their U.S. sales of HEVs, PHEVs, and EVs [electric vehicle] combined could be on the order of 15

- 20% of their production.” (EPA

, 2010, p p.2

- 5)

1.5 The Current Program

Table 1.1 below speci fies large volume manufacturer credit obligation s for 2012 through 2014 and 2015 th r ough 2017 model year s

.

16 EPA, 2010. United States Environmental Protection Agency, National Highway Safety and Traffic Administration and California Air Resources Bo ard. September 2010. “ Interim Joint Technical Assessment Report: Light

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards for Model Years 2017

- 2025” (p. vii)9 T able 1.1 : Summary of 2012 Through 2017 Model Year Requirements For Large Volume Manufacturers *

Vehicle Category Vehicle Technology Descriptions 2012

- 2014 Annual Credit Requirement 2012

- 2014 Annual % of Fleet 2015

- 2017 Annual Credit Requirement 2015

- 2017 % of Fleet

ZEV Zero tailpipe emissions: battery electric vehicles, and hydrogen fuel cells. 0.79% 0.2 % 3% 0.7%

TZEV Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles; Vehicles certified to PZEV standards that utilize a ZEV fuel: e.g. plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles or hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicles. Proposed terminology replacing

“ E nhanced AT PZEV” 2.21% 1.5% 3% 2%

AT PZEV Vehicles certified to PZEV standards and employing ZEV

- enabling technologies: e.g. hybrids or compressed natural gas vehicles. 3% 7% 2% 6 %

PZEV Conventional vehicles certified to the most stringent tailpipe emission standards, zero evaporative emissions, and extended warranty. 6% 30% 6% 30%

*The ZEV regulation establishes a credit requirement, shown in shaded columns , for manufacturers each year. Manufacturers earn credits through production of vehicles from different categories. The “Annual % of Fleet” represents the percentage of new veh icle sales expected from each vehicle category due to compliance with the regulations.

The four categories of vehicles used to meet the ZEV regula tion are ZEVs, TZEVs (formerly “E nhanced advanced technology partial zero emission allowance vehicles” or “Enhanced AT PZEV ” ), advanced technology partial zero emission allowance vehicles (AT PZEV) , and partial zero emission allowance vehicles (PZEV) . To date all manufacturers are full y in compliance, with nearly 5,6 00 ZEVs demonstrated, and over 1,700,000 PZEVs and 35 0,000 AT PZEVs commercially introduced, resulting in significant emis sions reductions. Examples of PZEV s are the Honda Civic and Mazda 6 while an example of an AT PZEV is the Ford Fusion Hybrid

. Table 1.2 , below, shows the cumulative number of vehicles placed in compliance with the ZEV regulation.10 Table 1.2: Cumulative Vehicle Placement ZEV Credit Category Technology Type Quantity of Vehicles
ZEV Fuel Cell 350 Battery Electric 5,200 Neighborhood Electric 28,800
AT PZEV Hybrid or Compressed Natural Gas 380,000

PZEV Conventional Gas 1,750,000
*On

- road number is less for FCVs and NEV s.

**M**

**anufacturer Compliance Status and Near Term Production Plans** All manufacturers have complied with ZEV regulation requirements. For the 2012 model year, s ix large volume manufacturers (LVM) are required to comply with the entire regulation , meaning these manufacturers must produce pure ZEVs : Chrysler, Ford Motor Co mpany, General Motors, Honda, Nissan, and Toyo ta. Ten intermediate volume manufacturers (IVM) have the option to meet their entire requirement with credits from PZEV

. These ten manufacturers include: BMW, Hyundai, Jaguar

- Land Rover, Kia, Mazda, Mercedes Benz , Subaru, Volkswagen and Volvo. Several other

non

- regulated manufacturers are actively producing ZEVs and neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV) , and earning ZEV credits.

The 2008 amendment s provided greater flexibility in the regulation for model year s 2012 and beyond, offering more equal treatment of ZEV technologies. Manufacturers have complied by producing the maximum number of PZEVs and AT PZEVs. Half of the LVMs have heavily pursued FCV technology, while the other half have focused predominately on BEV technology.

**Fuel Cell Vehicle Technology, Deployment, and Infrastructure Status** Manufacturers have continued to pursue FCV technology, publically committing to early

- commercialization in the 2015 to 2020 timeframe. In a joint letter issued in September 2009, manufacturers (Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Toyota

, alliance Renault SA

, and Nissan) strongly supported fuel cell technology, anticipating that from 2015 onwards, FCVs could reach commercialization. Recently, Mercede s Benz announced a three year lease program for its 2011 B

- Class F

- Cell vehicle. 17

In January 2011

, thirteen Japanese companies jointly announced significant cost reductions in manufacturing FCVs, commitment to 100 hydrogen stations in Japan by 2015, and joint support for spreading FCV technology throughout Japan. 18 Such

17 Autobloggreen, 2010. AutoBlogGreen.com. Eric Loveday . “ Mercedes

- Benz prices B

- Class F

- Cell lease at $849 a month ” http://www.green.autoblog.com/2010/11/22/mercedes

- benz

- prices

- b

- class

- f

- cell

- lease

- at

- 849

- a

- month/
18 Toyota, 2011. Toyota Motor Company. January 13, 2011 “Japanese Companies Eye Smooth Domestic Launch of FCVs” http :// www 2. toyota

. co

. jp / en / news /11/01/0113. html11 worldwide developments help to bring vehicle costs down, advancing FCVs closer towards commercialization.

Hydrogen infrastructure technology is advancing and station performance is improv ing. As a result, customer experience is progressing toward being comparable to today’s gasoline fueling experience. Through ARB and California Energy Commission (CEC) funding, five new stations are currently under construction or will have opened by the end of the year. Also, an existing station has been updated and put back into service with improvements in accessibility. Additionally, eight new hydrogen stations will be opening in the next two years, with three more stations planned to be upgraded wi th increased capacity and accessibility. In total, over 2000 additional kilograms per day of hydrogen will have been made available to FCVs located in the California’s Bay Area and South Coast air quality management districts. The increased capacity will support up to 2500 FCVs total. Confidential submittals auto manufacturers reveal that over 50,000 FCVs are planned to be in operation in California by 2017.

Recently, a number of manufacturers have announced aggressive production plans for PHEVs and BEVs for the next three model years. These announcements reflect technological advancement in lithium ion battery technology and a general shift in customer demand and corporate enviro nmental stewardship. The following table provides a summary of manufacturers’ current program commitments, by technology category, as publicly stated.12 Table 1.3 : Manufacturer ZEV and TZEV Announcements
Manufacturer Model Type Timeframe Reference

BMW ActiveE BEV 2011 BMW, 2011a

i3 BEV 2013 BMW, 2011b

i3 Rex PHEV BMW, 2011c

i8 PHEV 2014 BMW, 2011b

BYD e6 BEV 2012 BYD, 2010

CODA ( unknown) BEV 2011 PopularMechanics , 2011
Chrysler Fiat 500 EV BEV 2012 Chrysler, 2010

Fisker Karma PHEV 2011 Fisker, 2011

Ford C

- MAX Energi PHEV 2012 Ford, 2011a

Focus Electric BEV 2011 Ford, 2011b

Transit Connect Electric BEV in production n/a

GM Cadillac ELR PHEV (unknown) GM, 2011a
Spark BEV 2012 GM, 2011b

Volt PHEV in production n/a

(unknown) FCV 2015 USA TODAY, 2010

Honda Fit EV BEV 2012 Honda, 2011 (unknown) PHEV 2012
Clarity FCX FCV in production n/a

Hyundai Tucson IX FCV 2015 Bloomberg, 2010

Mercedes Benz (unknown) BEV 2012 Mercedes , 2011

F

- Cell FCV in production Autobloggreen, 2010

Mitsubishi i BEV in production n/a

Outlander PHEV 2013 Motor Trend , 2011

Nissan LEAF BEV in production n/a

Smart fortwo ED BEV in production n/a

Tesla Model S BEV 2012 Tesla , 2011

Think City BEV in production n/a

Toyota Prius Plug

- In PHEV 2012 Toyota , 2011 b

RAV

- 4 EV BEV 2012 Toyota , 2011 c Scion iQ

- EV BEV 2012 (unknown) FCV 2015 Toyota , 2011 d

Volkswagen e

- up! BEV 2013 Volkswagen , 2011
Wheego Whip LiFe BEV in production n/a

The table reveals that nearly every manufacturer will be introducing production BEV and PHEV pro ducts within the next one to three years, and five manufacturers will commercially introduce FCVs by 2015.13 2 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT S

In response to the Board’s direction in 2008 an d in 2009, and in consideration of the issues related to technology commercialization and new propos ed GHG and criteria pollutant standards, staff proposes amendments to the program that strengthen and simplify the regulation. The amendment s are spilt int o two parts: M odel year 2012 through 2017 (Part I), and model years 2018 and beyond (Part II). The amendment s identified in this section represent the most significant changes being proposed in each “Part.” Additional minor proposed amendments and concu rrent rati onale can be found below in Section 9.

The following sections more fully describe each of the major proposed amendments and the rationale for the proposed change.

2.1 Part I: Model Year 2012 through 2017 Amendment s

2.1.1 Type I.5x and Type IIx: Range Extended Battery Electric Vehicles Some manufacturers have proposed a new class of advanced vehicles for separate treatment as part of the ZEV program : range extended battery electric vehicle (referred to as a “Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles” or “BEVx” i n this proposal) . The proposed vehicle is closer to a BEV than to a PHEV: a vehicle with primarily zero

emission operation equipped with a small non

- ZEV fuel auxiliary power unit (APU) for limited range extension. Manufacturers proposing this type of veh icle describe it as having reduced performance while operating in APU mode that allows drivers to find a charging location, and discouraging non

- zero emission driving. Most of these vehicles are expected to have a zero

- emission range of 80 miles or greate r. This vehicle has substantially more range than currently announced PHEVs, with electric range comparable to full function BEVs and will probably r equire ground

- up BEV design

. Manufacturers believe that the APU will be a relatively high

- cost option on top of an existing, full function (100+ mile), BEV.

BEVs are expected to play an important role in ARB’s long

- term emissions reduction strategy, but the marke t for current technology BEVs might be limited

. The proposed vehicle has the potential to expa nd the BEV market beyond current market estimates by giving interested BEV customers an extra measure of confidence about range, and if success ful, would add su bstantial zero

- emission vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to the overall California fleet. While the APU within the vehicle may evolve during this transition, from gasoline to advanced biofuels to hydrogen, it is reasonable to believe that this proposed vehicle may help meet ARB’s long

- term GHG and criteria pollutant emissions reduction goals.

Sta ff expects BEVxs to play a longer

- term role than TZEVs because of their improved zero emission mileage potential. These vehicles would be particularly well suited to use of low upstream GHG fuels that might be more expensive, since the predominant operati ng cost would be offset by relatively low

- cost electricity. In addition to potential for emerging alternative fuel use, there is an opportunity to explore engine14 technologies that are advantageous but otherwise unsuitable for application in conventional v ehicles

. Engine technology applied to existing PHEVs is derived from small conventional production gasoline engines, but highly specialized APUs for BEVxs may eventually spin off and evolve in completely different directions. Future BEVxs with highly spe cialized engine and fuel technologies could be optimized to drive cost, weight, size, and emissions down and make these specialized BEVx APUs suitable for more affordable and therefore more widespread application. Lotus Engineering and other automotive des ign firms have been developing hybrid

- specific APUs and have several unique concepts under development already. 19

There are several reasons to consider equivalent regulatory treatment for BEVxs relative to BEVs with the same range capability. Most BEV dr ivers must plan their vehicle use with some degree of “reserve” range left in the battery, while BEVx drivers will have the confidence plan trips that consume all, or nearly all, of the energy storage capability of their battery systems. In this way, the BEVx market may appeal to drivers who would not otherwise consider a BEV with the same range

. Also, since staff considers these vehicles full function BEVs with short range APUs, it is important that the minimum range for eligibility be equivalent to full function BEVs in the marketplace.

Staff proposes the following criteria to these proposed vehicles: (1) the APU range is equal to or less than the all

- electric range

, (2) engine operation cannot occur until the battery charge has been depleted to the charge

- sustaining lower limit, (3) have a minimum 80 miles electric range, and (4) super ultra low emission vehicle ( SULEV ) and zero evaporative emissions compliant and TZEV warranty requirements on the battery system.

Though not required, manufactur ers are expected to incorporate further performance limits on charge sustaining APU mode operation, including speed restrictions. The intent of the backup APU is not to charge the battery, but rather, to enable the vehicle to drive to a charging station. BEVxs will fit the needs of drivers who are looking for an improved regional driving capability, but not for use in long

- distance driving

.
Because of the potential for strong zero emissions mileage performance potential, staff proposes to tr eat this em erging class of BEVx s similar to BEVs, similar to current treatment of NEVs. For the 2012 through 2017 model years, BEVxs will be referred to as Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles , to fit in with the pre

- 2018 nomenclature for ZEVs. Staff proposes Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicle s will receive the same credits as Type I.5 and Type II ZEVs: 2.5 and 3 credits, respectively. Staff proposes that a manufacturer may meet up to 50 percent of the portion of their requirement that must be met with pure ZEVs with these Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles. Additionally, staff proposes that these vehicles will qualify under the Travel Provision, through 2017, like their ZEV counterparts. Lastly, Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles will be eligible for

19 Lotus, 2010. Lotus Engineering. Turner, James, et al,. “The Lotus Range Extender Engine.” SAE Int J E ngines 3:318

- 351.15 advanced demonstration credit through 2017 model year. See Section 2.2.6, below, for 2018 and subsequent model year treatment.

It is staff’s intent to provide equivalent incentives for BEVxs , and to encourage outside stakeholders distributing or controlling incentives normally allocated to ZEVs to also allocate equivalent benefits to vehicles meeting the new BEVx requirements.

2.1.2 Extend Compliance Flexibility Provisions Through Model Year 201 7

Advanced Demonstrations Currently, up to 25 20 ZEVs or TZEVs 21 that are placed in a California advanced technology demonstration program may earn ZEV credits even if they are not “delivered for sale.” Instead of being sold or leased, these demonstration v ehicles are typically operated by the manufacturer to gain needed experience and information about the technology. In addition, vehicles in these programs are required to be in California for at least one year of a two year placement. The current regulat ion sunsets advanced demonstration credits after model year 2014.

Even though some manufacturers hav e seemingly commercialized ZEVs, many manufacturers are still in the research and development phase for zero emission technologies . Staff is proposing to extend advanc ed demonstrations for ZEVs, but not TZEVs, through model year 2017, allowing advanced demonstrations credits for TZEVs to sunset after model year 2014 as currently written. With staff’s propos al to amend the definition for LVMs which cause s additional manufacturers to come under the full ZEV requirements in model year 2018, extension of this provision will allow prospective 2018 LVMs to demonstrate technologies needed to meet future requirements, while lessening the burden of placing the ve hicles in service.

Travel Provision Section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act 22 allows other states to adopt California motor vehicle emission standards including the ZEV regulation. Currently, there are 11 states which have adopted the California ZEV re gulation: Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont (hereafter, referred to as section 177 ZEV states). The current ZEV regulation allows all ZEV “types”

, except TZEVs

, placed in service in S ection 177 ZEV states to be counted towards compliance with the California percentage ZEV requirements as if they are placed in service in California. Similarly, a vehicle placed in California counts towards compliance in a S ection 177 ZEV state. The effect of travel is the number of ZEVs required to be produced by vehicle manufacturers, regardless of how many states adopt the ZEV program, will not exceed those required by ARB’s regulation alone. Typically the number of vehicles that h ave to be produced for the

20 California Code of Regulation (CCR), title 13, section 1962.1(g)(4) language states 25 vehicles per model, per ZEV state, per year.
21 CCR, title 13, section 1962.1(g)(4) language currently states Enhanced AT PZEVs are eligible. Staff is proposing to replace Enhanced AT PZEVs with Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles or TZEVs.
22 United States Code, title 42, section 750716 Section 177 ZEV states is 1.5 to 2 times the number that has to be produced for California (two times is used in this document for simplicity).

There is currently no travel provision for TZEVs, and staff is not proposing to chan ge this provision. This means that manufacturers that choose to comply in California using TZEVs may not use those credits for compliance in the S ection 177 ZEV states.

Currently the Travel Provision sunsets after model year 2014 for Type I, Type I.5, a nd Type II ZEVs, which are typically BEVs . Staff propos es to extend this provision through model year 2017 for these three ZEV types. California markets have matured and are well prepared for increased sales r equirements. However, markets in S ection 177 ZEV states need additional time to prepare for ZEVs , and some vehicle manufacturers need time to expand their BEV offerings to other states and to different climates

.
Staff is also proposing clarifying language within this provision to ensure only manufacturers with a requirement are allowed to use this provision. This is the current intent of the language in this provision, and the proposed language is only for clarif ication

.

2.1.3 Increase Incentives for Fuel Cell Vehicles: Model Year s 2015

– 2017 Under the current regulation, travel for BEVs expires after 2014 model year

, but FCVs travel through model year 2017 . Thus the production of a BEV to meet California’s regulat ion means an additional obligation to produce approximately two more BEVs to comply with the combined requirement of the section 177 ZEV states. If a FCV is produced for compliance in California, there is no f urther production obligation in the S ection 177 ZEV states because the travel provision applies to FCVs.

Due to staff’s proposed extension of the travel provision for BEV s for model year s 2015 through 2017 described above

, production of a BEV satisfies the obligation of both Section 177 ZEV states and California, whereas the current regulation would result in a requirement to produce three BEVs, compared to one FCV. As a result there will be a substantially reduced incentive to produce FCV s in this timeframe.

California is investing heavily to c reate a publically accessible hydrogen fueling infrastructure which is a necessary prerequisite to manufacturer s introducing to the market FCV s. Staff’s 2009 fleet

- wide GHG analysis showed FCV technology would be the predominate on

- road ZEV technology in model year 2050. In development of the 2009 analysis, as well as this rulemaking, many manufacturers stated BEV technology would only be able to fulfill 20 to 30 percent of future fleet sales. 23 Thus decreasing the relative cred it derived from producing a FCV, compared to a BEV,

23 ARB, 2009d. California Air Resources Board. “White Paper: Summary of Staff’s Preliminary Assessment of the Need for Revisions to the Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation,” http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009zevreview/17 sends the wrong signal to those five manufacturers planning the introduction of FCVs prior to 2017.

Staff proposes to address this issue by increasing the amount of credit earned by Type V ZEVs, or 300 m ile range fast

- refueling capable FCV s. Currently, Type V ZEVs

earn seven credits each. Staff proposes to increase the credit value to nine credits. Thi s would be three times the amount a Type II ZEV (a 100 mile BEV) would earn in this time frame. Propo nents of this change h ave requested significantly greater credit. H owever, staff believes the proposed credit level appropriately recognizes and provides an incentive for the technology without greatly reducing the number of vehicles produce d in this timef rame for compliance. It also better reflects the current higher cost of producing a FCV, compared to a BEV, at the current state of FCV development and lower production quantities.

2.1.4 Decrease Overall Requirement for IVMs for Model Years 2015

– 2017 IVMs currently are allowed to comply fully with credits from PZEVs to meet their ZEV obli gation. Table 2.1 below shows an IVM ’s credit requirement, and what this means i n terms of a percentage of its annual vehicle sales being PZEVs.

Table 2.1 : Current IVM Re quirement 2012 through 2017 Model Years Current Credit Percentage Requirement Percentage of IVM Fleet

2012 through 2014 12% ~60% 2015 through 2017 14% ~80%

Due to staff proposed amendment s to manufacturer size definitions, many current IVMs will become LVMs by model year 2018. Staff is not proposing any additional lead time for these manufacturers, and considers the next six model years (up to model year 2018) adequate for ZEV development , considering many of the manufacturers have development programs underway.

For these reasons, staff proposes to reduce the credit percentage for IVMs for model years 2015 through 2017, from 14 percent to 12 percent . This still guarantees 60 percent of each IVM’s fleet will be PZEVs, a substantially higher percentage of the manufacturers’ fleets than LVM fleets

. The change will allow IVMs, especially those becoming LVMs in 2018

, to focus on development of ZEV technologies necessary for meeting more stringent ZEV requirements in 2018

.

2.1.5 Remove Carry Forward Provisions Historically, the ZEV regulation allowed the banking and trading of credits earned from early introduction or over

- compliance with the regulation. In 2008, staff modified the way banked ZEV credits could be used to meet future requirements. ZEV credits could be used to meet ZEV obligations for the model year in which they were earned and two additional model years. For ex ample, if a manufacturer e arns three ZEV18 credits from placing a Type II ZEV 24 in model year 2010, th e manufacturer may bank and use those credits to meet the portion of the regulation that must be met with ZEVs for model years 2011 and 2012 compliance. In 2013, the credits may only satisfy the portion of the requirement that may be met with TZEVs.

Staff proposes to remov e this provision, and allow ZEV credits to be banked and used to meet the full requirement in all future mo del years. The decision to remove this provision is justified based on the substantial increase in ZEV volume proposed for model years 2018 and beyond , and the incentive it provides to produce ZEVs prior to 2018

. Currently requirements plateau for three years at a time but hold steady indefinitely at a relatively low level for 2018 through 2025 model years . Because staff is proposing to increase volumetric requirements each year for model year s 2018 through 2025 , it is unlikely that manufacturers will be able to bank large volumes of credits for later use. Also, some manu facturers will likely need banked credits to assist with compliance in later years. Lastly, this proposed amen dment simplifies the regulation in 2018 and subsequent model years.

2.1.6 Minor Amendment s

Amend PZEV Calculations Staff is proposing several minor amendments to the PZEV calculations. First, ARB received several comments regarding the zero

- emission VMT PZEV allowance, many of which were received during 2009 rulemaking for PHEV test p rocedure amendments and aftermarket parts certification requirements. 25 The issues concerned the equation for greater than 40 mile PHEVs, in section 1962.1(c) (3)(A)

, and potential future PHEVs with blended operation

. S taff is proposing to correct inconsistencies in the

zero

- e mission VMT allowance equation as indicated in Table 2.2 below

.

24 An example of a Type II ZEV is a 100 mile BEV.
25 Rulemaking documents and public comments received during the 45

- day and subsequent comment periods for the PHEV test procedure rulemaking can be accessed at the following link: http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008/phev09/phev09.htm19 T able 2.2 : Proposed R egulatory Language

– Zero Emission VMT Allowance

2.1.6.1 Range Zero

- emission VMT Allowance

EAER u < 10 miles 0.0

EAER u ≥ 10 miles to 40 miles
and
R cda ≥ 10 miles to 40 miles EAER u x (1

– UF Rcda )/11.028

R cda EAER u > 40 miles EAER u40 / 29.63 (EAER u40 ) x [1

– (UF 40 *R cda /EAER u )]/ 11.028 Where,
UF 40 = utility factor at 40 miles
EAER u40 = 40 miles
*EAER means equivalent all electric range. *R cda means charge depleting range actual.

Second, staff is providing clarifying language as to the utility factors (UF) to be used in determining a manufacturer’s zero emission VMT allowance. W ithin the update Society of Automotive Engineers J2841 (March 2009), there are multiple UFs . Staff proposes to specify the UF determined to be according to Section 4.5.2 Equation 5 and the “Fleet UF” Utility Factor Equation Coefficients in Section 4.5.2, Table 3, in J2841 (March 2009 )

.
Third, staff is proposing to delete the alternative test procedures for determining a manufacturer’s zero emission VMT allowance

. The alternative test procedures allowed manufacturers to receive zero emission VMT allowance for vehicles using fuels that produce near

- zero, but not zero criteria pollutants. Staff is proposing this amendment because no automakers have included vehicles requiring or requesting such exemptions in any vehicle planned through 2017. This change would most likely impact a manufacturer planning to certify and sell hydrogen internal combustion engine (HICE) vehicles in the near

- term, but staff believes that HI CE vehicles are not under consideration for sales until the 2020 and beyond timeframe when hydrogen fueling infrastructure may be more commonly available in California.

Also, staff is proposing to eliminate the Type C advanced componentry allowance. In
p ast years , manufacturers produced conventional hybrids with lower system voltages, and there was still some degree of motor system technology transferrable to ZEVs. Since that time, ZEV technology has advanced and staff now believes that the minimum quali fying system should be increased to the higher voltage Type D because (1) AT PZEVs need to make use of systems that more closely represent those that are needed for ZEVs, and (2) no manufacturers have certified, or have disclosed plans to certify, a Type C AT PZEV.20 Decrease Value of Tr ansportation System Credits Transportation system credits were included in the ZEV regulation in 2001 to evaluate the benefits and issues related to the shared use of ZEVs, and the application of new technologies (at that time) such as reservation management, card systems, depot management, etc. Manufacturers earn transportation system credits by placing vehicles (currently PZEVs, AT PZEVs, TZEVs, and ZEVs) in car

- sharing programs with automated reservation system technol ogies , and receive additional credits for linking these car

- sharing programs to transit

. Car sharing programs may be run by a manufacturer, or by a third party (e.g., Zipcar).

Transportation system credits have been a lucrative compliance strategy for manufacturers. When originally conceived, transportation system credits were thought to give manufacturers a different venue for placing new technologies in multiple

con s u mer hand s without requiring vehicle purchase or lease

.

In Resolution 09

- 66, the Board found that the ZEV regulation will help assure the successful launch of commercial ZEVs and TZEVs (enhanced AT PZEV, as stated in Resolution 09

- 66) in the next decade. Staff believes limiting the number of credits offered for reasons othe r tha n vehicle placement is key to en suring ZEV and TZEV commercial success. For this reason, and in an effort to simplify the regulation, staff proposes to decrease the amount of extra credits for TZEVs and ZEVs placed in transportation systems. The fol lowing table 2.3 enumerates the adjusted credit volumes for model year 2012 through 201 7

.

Table 2.3 : Proposed Transportation System Amendment s 2012

- 2017 Type of Vehicle Current Credit for Shared Use, Intelligence Proposed Credit for Shared Use, Intelligence Current Credit for Linkage to Transit Proposed Credit for Linkage to Transit TZEV 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 ZEV 2.0 1.0 1.0 0.5

End Transportation System Credit Provision after Model Year 2017 Car sharing programs are important for air quality and GHG emission reductions, and have potential to play an important role in land use policies such as SB 375 26

. However, the proposed amendments for 2018 and subsequent model years are meant to simplify the program and require manufacturers to place large numbers of ZEVs in the hands of customers.

Staff proposes to end the transportation system credit provision after model year 2017. Staff met with interested stakeholders regarding expiration of this provision and

26 SB 375, 2008. Steinberg. September 30, 2008. http:/ /www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07

- 08/bill/sen/sb_0351

- 0400/sb_375_bill_20080930_chaptered.pdf Accessed September 7, 2011.21 learned that monetary ince ntives for vehicle purchase might have the same effect as earning ZEV credits. Currently, most parties earning transportation system credits a re not regulated, and sell those credits to regulated manufacturers. Staff believes ensuring monetary incentives are available for car

- sharing programs to purchase advanced technology vehicles, like ZEVs and TZ EVs, will work similarly to car sharing programs earning ZEV credits

. This policy shift is reflected in the recently approved spending plan for the A B 118 Cl ean Vehicle Rebate Program which sets aside specific amounts of rebate funds for share car programs.

ZEV Bank Account Conversion Staff proposes to no longer use non

- methane organic gas ( NMOG ) fleet values when calculating manufacturers ’ ZEV credit accou nt balances starting for 2015 model year compliance

. NMOG values are used in ZEV banking to offer an incentive for early vehicle placement, because g rams per mile (g/mi) NMOG fleet requirements decrease each year in LEV II. In the LEV III rulemaking for criteria pollutant emission standards for cars and trucks (see rulemaking documents related to LEV III), staff is proposing to change from an NMOG fleet standard to an NMOG plus NOx ( NMOG + NOx ) fleet standard . A combined NMOG + NOx value would be higher than the lowest NMOG standard in the LEV II regulation, and would not serve as an early compliance incentive in the ZEV regulation.

Staff proposes to divide each ZEV account holder’s b ank balances after model year 2014 complianc e b y the lowest NMOG value, 0.0 3 5 , to convert the credits from g/mi NMOG to straight ZEV credits. This will enable all banking in 2015 and s ubsequent model years to be in ZEV credits , simplifying the regulation

. Due to this change, staff proposes clarifying language throughout section 1962.1, title 13, CCR to make clear the change over from g/mi NMOG ZEV credit to straight ZEV credits.

PZEV Qualification Staff is proposing to begin LEV III criteria pollutant fleet standards in model year 2015. These will include new tailpipe NMOG + NOx standards as well as evaporative emission standards. Staff will also be proposing new emission certificat ion categories that go beyond SULEV standards. Due to these change in LEV III, staff proposes that in order to earn PZEV credit within the ZEV regulation in 2015 and subsequent model years, the vehicle must be certified to the more stringent SULEV 30 or SULEV 20 standar ds, and meet LEV III zero

- evaporative standards. See the LEV III ISOR for more information on these certification categories.

Charging Requirement Specifications ARB requires a minimum degree of charging connection compatibility amongst all grid

- charge d electric vehicles . This requirement ensure s the use of standard chargers
to facilitate ZEV and TZEV commercialization

. The requirement for minimal charging commonality does not preclude the installation of additional vehicle charging capabilities such as dire ct current (DC) fast charge

.22 Several unanticipated changes in BEV and PHEV designs have occurred s ince the Board adopted infrastr ucture requirements in 2001

. Low

- range BEVs and PHEVs w ith both 220 and 120 volt charging capability and battery packs small enough to achieve reasonable charge times with chargers of less than the 3.3 kilowatt ( kW ) minimum capability were not anticipated when the requirements were adopted. Additionally, charging connection capability was never explicitly required of NEVs.

Staff believes the capability of low

- range BEVs to charge on both 220 and 120 volts alternating cur rent (VAC) should be encouraged; it enhances the overall compatibility of low

- range BEVs tha t make use of shared charging stations. ARB has provided an exemption from the current requirements for the 2012 Toyota Plug

- in Prius because it is both 220 and 120 VAC compatible, but still capable of fully charging its battery in less than 2 hours even though it is equipped with a relatively low

- power on

- board charger. S taff proposes to delete the exception for B EVs that only charge at 120 VAC and instead allow for lower power on

- board chargers on these low

- range B EVs, as long as an optional minimum ch arge time requirement of 4 hours is met.

Since the original charging requirement went into effect, no manufacturer has certified a vehicle with the 120 VAC only exemption, and none have indicated an interest in future vehicles with 120 VAC only charging . Instead, several manufacturers have agreed that an alternative minimum charge time would be a better way to provide an exemption to the 3.3 kW minimum power requirement for small vehicles because a 120 VAC only vehicle would be (1) less attractive to cu stomers, and (2) incompatible with the objectives of this charging requirement because these vehicles would be incompatible with most planned public infrastructure or even stations installed under future building code requirements.

Staff proposes to require NEVs to meet this same charging connection requirement, beginning in model year 2014 to align with charging requirements for other grid

charged electric vehicles.

Modifications for NEVs NEVs are simple, low cost, speed limited (25 m iles per hour ) BEV whose profile is often similar to a golf cart. Currently, ZEV credits for producing a NEV are only allowed to be used to meet up to certain amounts of a manufacturer’s ZEV requirement. Pre

- 2006 model year NEV credits are more stringently capped than 2006 and beyond NEV credits. Staff proposes to extend caps for 2012 through 2014,
to 2015 through 2017 model years. Table 2.4 , below, lists staff proposed caps for pre 2006 NE V credits for 2015 through 2017 model years.

Table 2.4 : Proposed Pre

- 2006 NEV Credit Limits

Model Years Portion of the Obligation that: Percentage of the Obligation that may be

met with NEV credits

**2012**

**– 2017**  Must be met with ZEVs 0%23 May be met with TZEVs, AT PZEVs, or PZEVs 50%

Table 2.5 , below, lists staff proposed caps for post

- 2006 NEV credits for 2015 through 2017 model years.

Table 2.5 : Proposed Post

- 2006 NEV Credit Limits

Model Years Portion of the Obligation that: Percentage of the Obligation that may be

met with NEV credits

**2012**

**– 2017**  Must be met with ZEVs 0%
May be met with TZEVs, AT PZEVs, or PZEVs No Limit

Additionally, staff is proposing to add NEV acceleration, top speed, and constant speed range testing requirements to the “Test Procedures for 2009 through 2017 Model Zero

- Emission Vehicle and Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in t he Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck And Medium

- Duty Vehicle Classes ” to specify testing methods for NEV certification.

Clarifications in Penalty Equation California Health and Safety Code s ection 43211 applies a penalty to manufacturers of $5,000 per vehicle not produced in compliance with ARB’s standards. In looking at the penalty equation currently in the ZEV regulation, it is not clear how the penalty is to be applied to manufacturers out of compliance. In the ZEV regulation, manufacturers have a wide array of compliance options, with vehicles earning various amounts of credits. However, a manufacturer’s ZEV requirement is ZEV credit productio n; all other vehicle credit types are compliance options, not requirements. Therefore, staff interprets the overall penalty for ZEV non

- compliance to be $5,000 per whole credit not produced. Staff proposes to clarify the regulatory language in section 19 62.1, title 13, CCR to reflect this intent, and proposes the following equations in Table 2.6 t o determine the penalty to be applied to manufacturers not in compliance with the ZEV regulation:

Table 2.6 : Proposed ZEV Regulation Penalty Equations Applicable Model Years Equation

2009 through 2014 (No. of credits required to be generated for the model year)

– (Amount of credits submitted for compliance for the model year) / (the fleet average requirement for PCs and LDT1s for the model year) 2015 and Subsequent (No. of credits required to be generated for the model year)

– (Amount of credits submitted for compliance for the model year)24 Lead Time Provisions Currently, manufacturers are given five years of lead time when transitioning into a larger size definition. For example, if a manufacturer were to increas e in sales, such that their 2011 through 2013 sales average exceeded the current LVM threshold of 60,000 sales, the manufacturer would be subject to the full ZEV requirements in model
y ear 201 9 . However, due to staff proposed modifications for definition and lead time, to be discussed in subsection 2.2.1 below, staff proposes that manufacturers starting their transition before 2018 will be subject to full ZEV requirements starting in 20 18 model year. This means, for example, if a manufacturer’s 2013 through 2015 sales average (for the first time) is 61,000 vehicles, then instead of being subject to LVM requirements in 2021, the manufacturer will be subject to LVM requirements in 2018

.
There is a group of current IVMs that will become subject to LVM requirements in 2018, due to staff’s proposed amendments to the definition thresholds, as discussed below in subsection 2.2.1. Some of these current IVMs are closer to becoming an LVM unde r the current definition of 60,000 vehicles sold, and others will only become an LVM due to staff proposed definition changes. The purpose of staff’s proposed amendments is to bring a larger percentage of manufacturers under the full ZEV requirements. T his proposed amendment to the lead time provision ensures a level playing field, making manufacturers close to the current definition thresholds (60,000 vehicles per year), subject to LVM requirements at the same time as manufacturers effected by staff’s p roposed definition change.

Change of Ownership Provisions Currently, section 1962.1, title 13, CCR, specifies how to calculate a manufacturer’s sales when a change of ownership occurs. Staff proposes to include additional clarifying language to this pro vision to specify w hen a manufacturer is simultaneously producing two model years of vehicles at the time of a change of ownership, the basis of determining next model year must be the earlier model year. This amendment ensures additional lead time is not earned in this type of situation.

Vehicle Credit Eligibility Currently, ZEVs earn one

- credit for the ZEV to be “deliver ed for sale” and the additional credits for the ZEV to be “placed in service ”

. Staff proposes two change regarding vehicle credit eligibility. First, staff proposes that a vehicle must be both delivered for sale and placed in service in California in order to receive the total credit
amount . This change is due to some manufacturers having internet based sales, and questions surrounding the location of a vehicle’s delivery and placement in service. Staff’s proposed change clarifies the original intent of the provision . The vehicle may still receive partial credit if the vehicle is just delivered for sale. Second, s taff proposes to place a five year limit on 2012 and prior model year ZEVs to collect “placed in service” credit. Staff is proposing this five year limit to ensure that the ZEVs25 offered to consumers are moderately curren t advanced technology and advanced technology components have not deteriorated.

Rounding Convention Staff proposes ZEV credit and debits to be rounded to the nearest thousandth of a credit or debit only on the final credit and debit total for a complia nce year using the conventional rounding method , for 2009 through 2014 model year . For example all numbers including the vehicle production numbers, the debit requirement, and the credits earned will not be rounded. Only the final total for each complian ce year will be rounded to the nearest thousandth. This amendment is meant to provide clarification and to avoid differences in calculating ZEV credits and debits. Staff proposes ZEV credits and debits to be rounded to the nearest thousandth on the final credit and debit total for a compliance year using the conventional rounding method for 2015 and subsequent model years.

2.2 Part II: 2018 and Subsequent Model Year Amendment s

2.2.1 Amend Manufacturer Size Definitions A manufa c turer’s California sa les volume plays an important role in determining a manufacturer’s treatment under various LDV regulations. Size is based on a manufa cturer’s average PC , LDT, and medium duty vehicle (MDV) sa les in California. T able 2.7 lists the current manufacturer siz e definitions, and the regulations that apply to each manufacturer size definition.

Table 2.7 : Current Size Definition Categories and Applicable California Regulations Current Size Category Current Definition (PC, LDT, MDV Avg Sales) Applicable Regulations

Small Volume (SVM) Between 1 and 4,500 Limited LEV II, Limited Pavley Independent Low Volume (ILVM) Less than 10,000 (must apply to Executive Officer) Limited LEV II, Limited Pavley Intermediate Volume (IVM) Between 4,501 and 60,000 Full LEV II, Full Pavley Compliance by 2016, Limited ZEV (PZEV Only) Large Volume (LVM) 60,001 and greater Manufacturers subject to full regulations

Currently, IVMs (those having more than 4,500 PC, LDT, and MDV, on average, in California) and LVMs (those having more than 60,000 PC, LDT, and MDV sales, on average, in California) are the two groups of manufacturers mandated by the ZEV regulation. LVMs are required to comply with a minimum amount of ZEVs, while IVMs may meet their entire requirement through PZEV production. Small volume manufact urers (SVM) and independent low volume manufacturers (ILVM) are not26 required to comply w ith the ZEV regulation, but may generate, trade, and sell ZEV credits. T able 2.8 below lists current LVMs and IVMs, along with a n average of each company’s 2008 through 2010 vehicle sales.

Table 2.8 : Current Manufacturer Size Status (2008

– 2010 MY Sales Averages, Rounded) Large Volume Manufacturers

(<60,000 PCs, LDTS, MDVs) Intermediate Volume Manufacturers (<4,500 PCs, LDTs, MDVS) Chrysler 89,000 BMW 53,000 Ford 130 ,000 Daimler 52,000 GM 167,000 Hyundai 34,000 Honda 175,000 Jaguar Land Rover 9,000 Nissan 112,000 Kia 21,000 Toyota 315,000 Mazda 30,000 Mitsubishi 8,400 Subaru 14,000 Volkswagen 52,000 Volvo 8,000

At the 2008 March h earing, the Board did not adopt staff’s proposal to extend the transition time for an IVM be coming an LVM from six years to twelve years. Board members questioned the differing treatment of the two s izes of manufacturers, conclu ding both sizes should be treated similarly. 27 Though sales in California differ between each manufacturer, many current IVMs have similar sales figures as LVMs on a worldwide basis.

Inconsistencies exist between the LEV and ZEV regulations regarding LV M and IVM definitions and ownership. Under the light

- duty GHG regulations, two manufacturer s are to aggregate their sales when one manufacturer owns more than 10 percent of another manufacturer. Under the ZEV regulation, two manufacturer s are to aggregat e their sales for size determination when one manufacturer owns greater than 50 percent of another manufacturer. Another discrepancy between the two regulations i s lead time for manufacturers changing sizes. A manufacturer who has moved from IVM status t o LVM status under the light

- duty GHG regulations has 3 years lead time, while under ZEV the manufacturer has 5 years lead time, before having to comply with the full requirements.

As staff began to examine differential trea tment of companies under the three regulations, the need to align ownership thresholds, re

- examine the cut points for IVM and LVM size definitions, and align lead time provisions became apparent to reduce confusion. Staff proposes to decrease the IVM

– LVM threshold from 60,000 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs on average in California to 20,000 on average. Manufacturers will

27 ARB, 2008. California Air Resources Board. March 27, 2008 Board Hearing Transcript. http://www.arb.ca.gov/board/mt/2008/mt032708.txt27 be redefined and will determine their requirement based on their 2015 through 2017 sales average.

Additionally, to align ownership thresholds between the light

- duty GHG fl eet regulations with the ZEV regulations, staff proposes that two manufacturer s ’ sales will be aggregated for determination of size if on e manufacturer owns greater than 33.4 percent of another manufacturer

.
Lastly, staff proposes new lead time provisio ns under the ZEV regulation, as well as provisions for manufacturers decreasing sizes, from LVM to IVM, or IVM to SMV
status. A manufacturer with three consecutive averages over a size threshold will be subject to the stepped

- up requir ement the first mode l year following the last year of the third consecutive threshold. Below is an example of how this would work:

Manufacturer A Sales Averages 2017

- 2019 2018

- 2020 2019

- 2021 2020

- 2022
19,000 21,000 25,000 28,000

Manufacturer A, formerly an IVM would be subject to LVM requirements in model year 2023. Similarly, staff proposes manufacturers decreasing in size, and moving from one size category to another would only do so after three consecutive averages below a size threshold. Below is an example for a m anufacturer moving from a larger size category to a small size category:

Manufacturer B Sales Averages 2017

- 2019 2018

- 2020 2019

- 2021 2020

- 2022
6,000 4,200 3,900 4,000

Manufacturer B, formerly an IVM, would be treated as an SVM starting in model year 2023, and no longer subject to the ZEV regulation. Also, staff proposes that manufacturers will no longer be able to qualify as an ILVM for purposes of the ZEV regulation after model year 2017.

The effect of these changes is all the IVMs listed in Table 2.8, except Volvo, Subaru, Jag uar/Land Rover and Mitsubishi, would be expected to become LVMs in 2018, and meet the full ZEV requirements starting that year. This proposed change is needed to assure that major manufacturers compete on a level playing fiel d, and to assure a variety of ZEVs are available to the consumer. Other changes are discussed in Section 2.2.4.

2.2.2 Remove PZEV and AT PZEV Compliance Options PZEVs and AT PZEVs have been compliance options for manufacturers since 1996. Credit multipliers a long with high credit amounts were used to encourage manufacturers to develop ZEV

- enabling technologies, and offset manufacturers’ overall ZEV requirements. Most manufacturers are currently selling or have near term28 plans to sell PZEVs and AT PZEVs (namel y conventional HEV s like the Toyota Prius). To date, over 1.7 million PZEVs and 350,000 AT PZEVs have been delivered for sale in California as a result of the ZEV regulation. This leads staff to conclude that PZEV and AT PZEVs have reached commercializat ion and are no longer appropriate as a compliance option in the ZEV regulation. Additionally, at the 2009 December Board Hearing, the Board adopted Resolution 09

- 66, which resolves that PZEVs and AT PZEVs, currently a part of the ZEV regulation, are comme rcial and can be removed from the ZEV regulation as a compliance option.

Therefore, staff proposes to remove new production of PZEVs and AT PZEVs as compliance options under the ZEV regulation for 2018 and subsequent model years. Capitalizing on the su ccessful commercialization of these technologies, it is appropriate that the LEV III Criteria Pollutant and GHG fleet regulations will rely upon these vehicles to aide in compliance with the standards being proposed. The LEV III rulemaking for criteria pollutant standards is proposing to require the PC and truck fleet to meet the SULEV tailpipe NMOG + NOx fleet standard by 2025. Vehicles will also be required to have virtually zero

- evaporative emissions. Additionally , the LEV III rulemaking for GHG standards could result in over 40 percent of hybridization of the PC and truck fleet by 2025, dependent on each manufacturer’s compliance method. These regulations will continue to ensure the expansion of volu mes of PZEV a nd AT PZEV

- like vehicles , allowing the ZEV regulation to focus on commercialization of zero and near

- zero emitting vehicle technologies.

2.2.3 Increase ZEV Requirement for 2018 and Subsequent Model Years Currently, manufacturers’ 2018 and subsequent model year ZEV requirements are held at the same percentage each year , as shown in Table 2.9 below

.

Table 2.9: Current 2018 and Subsequent ZEV Credit Requirement Credit Category Credit Requirement Minimum ZEV 5.0% Maximum TZEV* 3.0 % Maximum AT PZEV* 2.0 % Maximum PZEV 6.0% Total ZEV Requirement 16.0% *The regulation does not specify the split between TZEVs and AT PZEVs. For this analysis, staff assumed AT PZEV TZEV credit requirement would remain the same from the 2015 through 2017 requirements

. If the PZEV and AT PZEVs (highlighted in grey) are moved to the LEV III program as proposed, the remaining ZEV requirement under the current regulation would be 8 %.

To address one of the pr ogram’s primary objectives ( ZEV technology commercialization and long

- term GHG and criteria emission goals), staff proposes to increase each manufacturer’s compliance requirements for 2018 and subsequent model years, ultimately reaching credit requirements of 6 percent for TZEVs and 16 percent for pure ZEVs in 2025. This increase is outlined in Table 2.10 below.29 Table 2.10: Proposed ZEV Credit Requirement for 2018 and Subsequent Model Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 and Subsequent Overall ZEV Requirement 4.5% 7.0% 9.5% 12.0% 14.5% 17.0% 19.5% 22.0%
Min. ZEV 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% Max. TZEV 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0%

As shown in Table 2.10 above, the proposed overall ZEV credit requirement

, between model year 2018 and model year 2022, is less than the current program. Because staff is proposing to revise the number of credits earned per vehicle (typically by one half), and PZEVs and AT PZEVs no longer would count towards meeting a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation , it is more illustrative to compare the actual number of ZEVs required to be produced given the current and proposed crediting structure. This is shown below in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Staff’s Proposal vs. Current Regulation

– An nual Sales Requirements

In establishing the proposed requirements above, staff reviewed a range of compliance alternatives to ensure program objectives were met, including work done - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 

### Staff's Proposal

- ZEVs

Staff's Proposal

- TZEVs

Current Regulation

- ZEVs

Current Regulation

- TZEVs 15.4% of New
Sales in 2025

Current Regulation

- 4% of New Sales in 202530 in 2009 to examine the LDV sector meeting long term GHG emission reduction goals. (ARB, 2009a) Starting from staff’s 2050 analysis, staff considered the appropriate level of ZEVs and TZEVs that should be required in the 2018 through 2025 model year timeframe based on a number o f factors: ZEV platforms, technology cost curves, and the future GHG fleet standards.

Staff’s 2050 analysis suggests over 35 percent of LVMs’ 2025 LDV sales would need to be ZEVs and TZEVs to keep California on a trajectory to meet the 2050 GHG reduction goal. In terms of PC sales that would need to be ZEVs or TZEVs would likely be higher because staff expects that manufacturers will preferentially produce ZEV as PCs r ather than LDTs , in order to reduce cost s, especially for BEVs

. While these sorts of production numbers would likely help the LDV sector reach its long term GHG emission reduction goals, the effect on the PC market in such a short timeframe suggest s staff consider less stringent requirements. Staff chose requirements which push ZEVs and TZEVs to 15 percent of new LDV sales by 2025

.
Another important factor staff considered in choosing future requirements was cost. In order to highlight the scale of cost reductions anticipated as a result of high volume production, the following four Figures (3, 4, 5, and 6) show declining production costs

, over the period of the regulation, for the advanced batteries and fuel cell systems considered in the analysis. To highlight the most relevant and expensi ve components of the advanced vehicle platforms, the values shown here assume direct manufacturing. 28

Generally, battery and fuel cell costs decline over time due to several factors. As production volumes increase, costs decline due to economies of scal e. Additionally, as manufacturers operate production systems for a number of years, costs can decline from the manufacturing process as improvements are identified. Both of these factors (production volume and production experience) are incorporated into the time

based costs presented in Figures 3 and 5

.
Figure 3 shows the declining costs of batteries , as assumed in the joint model used in staff’s ACC analysis, with time on three platforms: a PHEV with 20 mile electric range (PHEV20), a BEV with 75 mile all

- electric range (BEV 75), and a BEV with 100 mile all

- electric range (BEV100). Costs for PHEV battery systems are higher than BEVs (on a per kWh basis) primarily because the relative cost of auxiliary systems (battery thermal management and controls) in creases with smaller batteries.

28 High volume production is assumed by 2025 on world

- wide platforms (greater than 100,000 units/yr).31 Figure 3: Battery System Direct Manufacturing Cost vs. Time (2009$)

As described in the LEVIII ISOR Section III

- A

- 4.3 , battery cost projections (above) were developed jointly with the U.S. EPA and NHTSA and leveraged analysis by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), as well as input from manufacturers. Figure 4 shows battery cost reductions with increasing production of battery packs. 29

Figure 4: Battery System Direct Manufacturing Cost vs. Production Scale ( 2009$) (ANL, 2010)

29 ANL, 2010. Argonne National Laboratory. D.J.Santini et al, EVS

- 25, Nov 5

- 9 2010. “Modeling of Manufacturing Costs of Lithium

- Ion Batteries for HEVs, PHEVs, and EVs.”32 Figure 5 shows the declining cost of fuel cell systems as a function of time , as assumed in the joint model used in staff’s ACC analysis

. Figure 5 : Fuel Cell System Direct Manufacturing Cost vs. Time (2009$) *

* does not include hydrogen storage
Fuel cell cost projections relied, in part, on high volume cost functions developed by Directed Technologies Incorporated (DTI), one of two long

- term contractors evaluating future system costs for the U.S. DOE. Figure 6 below show DTI’s fuel cell system costs based on annual production volumes.

Figure 6: Fuel Cell System Direct Manufacturing Costs vs. Production Scale (2009$) 30

30 DTI, 2010. Directed Technologies Inc., 2010 U.S. DOE Merit Review. June 7

- 11, 2010. “Mass Production Cost Estimation for Automotive Fuel Cell Systems”.33 Staff’s proposed requirements push production volumes to levels tha t reduce incremental ZEV prices below what would have occurred in the existing regulation. It also encourages multiple platforms, and brings a selection of vehicles to a larger portion of the market (well beyond early adopters).

Lastly, staff considered expected ZEVs under fu ture GHG fleet standards for LDVs. Without a ZEV regulation, the California proposed GHG standards would likely result in approximately 6 percent of annual sales by 2025 would be ZEVs and TZEVs. This level of penetration would not likely achieve the cost reductions needed for commercialization in the timeframe needed to meet long term emission reduction goals.

2.2.4 IVM Treatment As discussed above, s taff is proposing to reduce the sales volume which separates an IVM f rom an LVM from 60,000 annual sales in California to 20,000 annual sales, starting in 2018 . Four manufacturers would remain IVMs (Subaru, Volvo, Jaguar Land Rover, and Mitsubishi). This raises the issue of what should be the ZEV requirements for these smaller manu facturers ? Currently

, IVMs are allowed to meet their entire ZEV requirement with credits from conventional PZEVs. Due to the proposed removal of PZEVs as a compliance option for ZEV in 2018 and subsequent model yea rs, staff consider ed what ZEV requirements, if any, should apply to IVMs beginning in 2018.

These manufacturers are significantly smaller than other manufacturers in terms of research and development funds, California s ales, and worldwide sales. However, most have disp layed ZEV or TZEV s at recent auto shows, and have active ZEV development programs. This is necessary to remain competitive with LVMs. What limits the ability of IVMs is the potential of having to develop multiple technologies given their relatively small er research, development, and demonstration ( R D &D )34 budgets. Therefore, s taff proposes that IVMs be subject to the ZEV mandate, but have no limits on the type of ZEVs , other than NEVs, they produce. For example, an IVM could fulfill the requiremen ts by pr oducing only TZEVs (e.g. PHEVs ). By comparison, a LVM that choses to produce TZEVs must also produce specified numbers of ZEVs. Further f lexibilities for IVMs will be discussed throughout the following subsections.

2.2.5 Excess PZEV and AT PZEV Credits T reatment Staff’s proposal to remove new produ ction of PZEVs and AT PZEVs as compliance option s for the ZEV program for model years 2018 and beyond will likely leave manufacturers with banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits. Manufacturer s ’ PZEV and AT PZEV banks reflect over compliance with the ZEV regulation, as well as old multipliers offered for early compliance. In a shift toward requiring ma nufacturers to place vehicles in order to comply with the regulation rather than use banked credits

, staff believes it is appropriate to limit the us e of banked ZEV credits in 2018 and subsequent model years. Staff proposes to first discount the banked PZEV and AT PZ EV credits, then cap their use at 25 percent of a manufacturer’s portion of its overall ZEV requirement tha t may be fulfilled with credits from TZEVs . Banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits could not be used to comply with any of the portion of the requirement that must be met with ZEVs . Staff’s proposed discount for the PZEV and AT PZEV credit banks after model ye ar 2017 compliance may be found in T able 2.11 below.

Table 2.11 : Proposed Credit Discounts for PZEV and AT PZEV Credit Banks Affected Manufacturer Size Discount Equivalency

PZEV LVM 93.25% 1 TZEV(20 mile) = ~51 PZEVs PZEV IVM 75% 1 TZEV(20 mile) = ~14 PZEVs AT PZEV IVM and LVM 75% 1 TZEV(20 mile) = ~5 AT PZEVs

The cap on usage of PZEV and AT PZEV credits f o r 25 percent of the portion of a manufacturer’s ZEV require ment that may be met with TZEVs, equals approximately 7 percent to 14 percent of a manufacturer’s overall ZEV requirement each year.

For IVMs

, for model years 2018 and 2019, staff proposes to not cap the usage of banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits as a way to increase flexibility for the se smaller manufacture r s as they develop new products . For 2020 and subsequent model years, staff proposes to cap the usage of PZEV and AT PZEV credits to 25 percent of an IVM’s overall requirement. Staff also proposes to cap NEV credits in the same manner as banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits. There fore, all PZEV, AT PZEV, and NEV credits would be under the same cap in 2018 and subsequent model years. The proposed allowed pe rcentages are enumerated in T able 2.12 below.

T able 2.12 : Proposed Limits on Banked PZEV and AT PZEV Credits , and NEV Credits for 2018 and Subsequent Model Years: 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 202535 Allowed Usage

in an LVM’s TZEV portion of

Requirement Up to 25%

OR Allowed Usage

in an LVM’s overall Requirement 13.9% 10.7% 9.2% 8.3% 7.8% 7.4% 7.1% 6.8%

Allowed Usage in an IVM’s overall Requirement 100% 100% Up to 25%

Staff’s proposal helps to move manufacturers from relying on banked ZEV credits for compliance, and helps to en sure ZEVs and TZEVs will be produced in compliance with the regulations.

2.2.6 ZEV Treatment and Credits Currently, ZEV credits for Type III, Type IV, and Type V ZEVs are scheduled to decrease for 2018 and subse quent model years. Below, T able 2.13 show s credit levels currently in the regulation for 2018 and subsequent model years.

Table 2.13: Curren t ZEV Types and Credit Levels Definition 2009 through 2017 2018 and Subsequent NEVs Low Speed Neighborhood Electric Vehicles 0.30 0.30

Type 0 <50 Mile BEVs 1 1 Type I >50

- <75 Mile BEVs 2 2 Type I.5 >75

- <100 Mile BEVs 2.5 2.5 Type II >100 Mile BEVs 3 3 Type III >100 Mile FCVs (with fast refueling) OR >200 Mile BEVs 4 3

Type IV >200 Mile FCVs (with fast refueling) 5 3

Type V >300 Mile FCVs (with fast refueling) 7 3

The current system of tiered credit levels encourages manufacturers to produce a vehicle meeting the range threshold rather than rewarding the actual mileage of the vehicle. Staff considered several ways of amend ing the current crediting system. Credit factors such a s a vehicle’s physical size, weight, a manufacturer’s monetary investment in the vehicle technology, refueling capabilities, refueling access, long term vehi cle cost potential, GHG well

- to

- wheel (WTW) performance, as well as others were36 considered and discuss ed at a May 2010 workshop. In the spirit of simplicity, many factors were dis c arded due to the subjective nature of the factor, such as a manufacturer’s investment in the technology. Other factors had little to do with the vehicle’s design and engineerin g, or the manufacturer would have no control over the amount of credit earned. Staff considered including a vehicle’s size i n a future credit system, which would encourage ZEV technologies to be placed on larger platform vehicles, and credit based on the vehicle’s footprint and range . As staff explored this option, it appeared that longer range vehicles would ge nerally be on larger platforms, which reduced the need to credit the vehicle’s footprint as well as its range.

For the reason s stated above , an d in an effort to simplify the regulation, staff is proposing to base the amount of credits earned by each ZEV exclusively on the vehicle’s urban dynamometer driving schedule (UDDS) range. Credits for ZEVs would range from 1 and 4 credits each, with a min imum 50 mile range ZEV earning 1 credit and a 350 mile range ZEV earning 4 credits. Below is the staff’s proposed credit equation for ZEVs:

ZEV Credit = (0.01) * (UDDS range) + 0.5

Figure 7 below shows the amount of credit various vehicles would receive using staff ’s proposed ZEV credit equation, along with the current credit structure.

F igure 7 : Proposed ZEV Credits As Compared to Current ZEV Credits (2018 and Subsequent Model Years)

Es sentially, a ZEV will receive half as much credit in 2018 and subsequent model years as was earned in 2017 and earlier model years. To align credits earned by 0 1 2 3 4 5

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400Credit

UDDS mi Range 50 Mile BEV 200 Mile FCV Credit= 3 / 2.5

100 Mile BEV Credit= 3 / 1.5 350 Mile FCV Credit= 3 / 4

75 Mile BEV Credit= 2.5 /

Current 2018+ ZEV Credits Proposed 2018+ ZEV Credits37 NEVs in 2018 and later model years, staff proposes to reduce NEV credits by 50 percent as well, from 0.30 to 0.15 credits each.

Additionally, staff proposes BEVx credit will be equivalent to that received by BEVs, based on range. Like in 2012 through 2017 model years, manufacturers w ill be allowed to meet up to 50 percent of the portio n of their requirement that must be met with pure ZEVs with credits from BEVxs.

2.2.7 TZEV Treatment and Credits AT PZEV s were included as a compliance option in the ZEV regulation to accelerate the development and manufacturing capacity of the component techn ologies that are also necessary to build ZEVs. These components include traction motors, power electronics, batteries, battery management systems, and hydrogen storage tanks. About 350,000 AT PZEVs have been placed in California since 2004 . ZEV technol ogies have improved at a faster pace than normal mark et forces would have otherwise expected due to commercialization of AT PZEVs . As a result, the industry is now progressing to a “transition” phase where ZEV component production is increasing, and the r esulting component costs are decreasing

.
The emphasis of the AT PZEV compliance option within the ZEV regulation was the initial introduction of these component technolo gies into production vehicles. TZEVs will encourage further evolution of these ZE V components and technologies by significantly “raising the bar” for qualifying vehicles. In this way, staff believes the overall California fleet will incorporate more ZEV

- component intensive vehicles, and will provide more significant emissions reductio n benefits from actual

zero

- emission VMT and zero

- emissions fuel use. For this reason, staff is proposing a simplified TZEV credit system for 2018 and subsequent model years based primarily

on zero emission VMT c apability . Table 2.14 below shows staff’s proposed equation for TZEV zero emission VMT allowance

.

Table 2.14 : TZEV Zero

- Emission VMT Allowance UDDS Test Cycle Range (R cda ) Credit

<10 miles 0.0

> 10 miles range TZEV Credit = [(0.01) * EAER + 0.3] >80 miles (credit cap) 1.3

TZEVs with a t least 10 miles all electric UDDS range will be eligible for zero emission VMT allowance. Manufacturers may earn an extra allowance of 0.2 if the vehicle is capable of driving 10 miles all electric on the US06. Figure 8 below shows the total credit amount manufacturers would be eligible for in 2018 and subsequent model
years.

Figure 8 : Proposed TZEV Credits

- PHEVs38 Staff also proposes a fixed allowance for HICE vehicles of 0.75. HICE vehicles that also have all

- el ectric range would also be eligible for a zero emission VMT allowance, but subject to an overall credit cap of 1.25.

New technologies, performance features, and vehicle types have recently emerged that are challenging to assess under the current ZEV regul atory structure. A key example of such a development is the range

- extended BEV explained earlier in this staff report : a BEV with a n APU range extender

. This is particularly challenging when many of these vehicles are only just now being announced or int roduced into the market and little is known about them. PHEV driver behavior is still relatively unknown and staff cannot predict performance results based on vehicle attributes. Over the next two to three years, staff commits to studying PHEV and BEV x u ser

- behavior to find a more refined attribute

- based methodology that can better correlate with desirable zero

- emission VMT and emissions reductions

.

2.2.8 Travel Provision During the development of the TAR, the involved agencies jointly met with states that have adopted California’s air quality regulations through the Clean Air Act, often referred to as S ection 177 ZEV s tates. “Several states mentioned activities they have underway to develop the infrastructure needed to support electrified vehicles.” ( E PA

, 2010, p p .2

- 11) As proposed above, staff believes it is appropriate to extend the travel provision for Type I, Type I.5, and Type II ZEVs (BEVs) through 2017. However, for 2018 and subsequent model years, staff bel ieves BEVs will be reaching commercial levels, and be available in most states. Nissan has announced that the Leaf will be available for model year 2012 in over half of the United States. 31 From that

31 Nissan, 2011. Press Release, July 19,2011. “ Nissan To Launch All

- Electric Leaf As Upgraded 2012 Model In New U.S. Markets” http://www.nissannews.com/pre ssrelease/2682/185/nissan

- launch

- all

- electric

- leaf

- upgraded

2012

- model

.39 perspective, staff believes it is not appropriate to extend the travel provision for BEV credi ts past the 2017 model year.

Commercialization of FCVs lags commercialization of BEVs by several years. BEVs have entered the marketplace this year, while the first FCVs in volume production are not expected until 2015 or later, and then only in those regions such as California and New York that are preparing the necessary hydrogen fueling infrastructure. Thus staff proposes to extend travel for FCV credits. Travel would be extended for FCV s until there are clear plans for sufficient hydrogen infrastr ucture in Section 177 ZEV s tates to support these vehicles.

2.2.9 GHG Over

- Compliance Credits On July 29, 2011, President Barack Obama announced a joint agreement between the U.S. EPA, NHTSA, the state of California, the United Auto Workers (UAW) and thirteen manufacturers to improve GHG emission performance of all PC s by 2025. 32
California submitted a letter to U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) Secretary Ray LaHood on July 28, 2011 affirming its comm itment to a one

- n ational GHG tailpipe s tandard. The following statement was included in the July 28, 2011 commitment letter:

“California commits to propose that its revised ZEV program for the 2018

- 2021 MYs include a provision providing that over

- compl iance with the federal GHG standards in the prior model year may be used to reduce in part a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in the next model year.” 33

Staff proposes to allo w a manufacturer that comp lies with its national light

- duty fleet GHG standard to use those over

- compliance credits to offset a portion of it s ZEV requirement in 2018 through 2021 model years. T able 2.15 , below, enumerates the percentage of ZEV credits a manufacturer may off

- set with GHG over

- compliance credits.

Table 2.15 : Maximum Percentage of ZEV Credit Offset Each Model Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 50 % 50% 40% 30%

The percentages in Table 2.15 represent two caps: 1) the total percentage of a manufacturer’s requirement able to be met with GHG

- ZEV over

- compliance credits, and 2) the maximum percentage allowed to be met within the portion of the regulations that must be met with ZEVs. Manufacture rs will not be limited (other than by the cap on the total requirement) on use of GHG

- ZEV over

- compliance credits within the TZEV category.

32 White House, 2011. United States White House. Press Release. July 29, 2011. “President Obama Announces Historic 54.5 MPG Fuel Efficiency Standards.” http://www.whitehouse.gov/the

- press

- office/2011/07/29/president

obama

- announces

- historic

- 545

- mpg

- fuel

- efficiency

- standard . Accessed September 9, 2011
33 ARB, 2011a. California Air Resources Board. Commitment Letter. July 28, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/letters/carb

- commitment

- ltr.pdf

.40 Based on historical compliance with the ARB LEV II regulation and from NHTSA’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CA FE) program, manufacturers often run debits and credits in alternating model years that balance out due to carry

- back and
carry

- forward provisions. Staff projects that fully compliant manufacturers will typically operate with 1 to 4 grams carbon dioxide p er mile ( gCO 2 /mile ) of credits or debits GHG credits as a normal course of action as part of the GHG program. It is not the intent of the ZEV

- GHG over

- compliance provisions to reward this small fluctuation in g/mi credits that naturally occur from program compliance or to reward accumulated GHG emission reductions that occurred before model year 2018.

To award consistent and planned over

- compliance with the GHG fleet standard, s taff
propos es that manufactur ers be eligible to utilize the ZEV

- GHG over

- compliance provisions only if particular conditions are met before the regulation start date and in each model year (i.e., between 2018

- 2021) of the program. First, staff proposes that the following t wo precondi tions must be met in order for manufacturers to qualify for use of the ZEV

- GHG over

- compliance provision:

1. Model year 2017 GHG precondition: A company must have no GHG program
debits in mod el year 2017 and no outstanding debits from previous model

years

.

2. Model year 2017 ZEV precondition: A company must have no ZEV program debits in model year 2017 and no outstanding debits from previous model

years.

Staff proposes a manufacturer must submit an application to ARB by May 1, 2018 documenting the company’s i ntent to use the ZEV

- GHG over

- compliance provision. The application must include test model, vehicle sales, and GHG standard data for documenting federal compliance model year 2017 data for the GHG program. The application must also declare any existing credits or debits from the 2012

- 2016 GHG fleet regulations . Lastly, a manufacturer must submit its projected product plan information for model years 2018

- 2021 that documents its expected GHG program

over

- compliance by at least 2 gCO 2 /mile in each model y ear through the entire period without receiving GHG program credits from any other automaker for model years 2018 through 2021.

To lessen reporting issues and allow manufacturers adequate planning time, staff proposes ZE V

- GHG over

- compliance credits be ba sed on the manufacturer’s previous model year compliance. For example, a manufacturer generating ZEV

- GHG

over

- compliance credits to meet ZEV requirements in model year 2019 would calculate GHG over

- compliance based on model year 2018. A nnual ly, manufactu rers would be required to report credits/debits from the model year, any remaining credits/debits from previous model years, and projected credits/debits for future years through 2021. Also, staff proposes a t a minimum, the manufacturer must over

- comply41 b y at least 2 gCO 2 /mile each year, and must not include the following credits and multipliers in calculating a manufacturer’s GHG fleet standard over

- compliance:

1. Additional credit earned from a dditional incentive multiplier s greater than 1.0 (i.e. truck technology credit multipliers), and

2. Banked GHG gCO 2 /mile credits from previous model years or from other manufacturers.

Note, that California is not proposing to include advanced electric

- drive vehicle technology multiplier incentives in the 2017 and subsequent GHG standards. However, manufacturers will have the option of directly complying with California’s standards or complying with the federal standards. In the event of a given manufacturer selecting the federal compliance option, the manufactur er will also not be allowed to include the multiplier received for advanced electric drive vehicle technologies in their ZEV

- GHG over

- compliance calculation.

Staff pro poses the following equation be used to calculate a manufacturer’s ZEV

- GHG

over

- compli ance credits for use in California and Section 177 ZEV s tates :

ZEV Credit Calculation (for given model year):

Manufacturers will be required to remove the gCO 2 /mile credits used to calculate ZEV offset credits from their GHG fleet standard banks.

In the event that a manufacturer is not generating a GHG compliance credit or receives GHG credit from any other automaker for any model year from 2018 through 2021, the company would no longer be eligible for the ZEV

- GHG over

- compliance program, and would be subject to the full requirements and penalties of the ZEV regulation.

2.2.10 Minor Amendment s

Counting ZEVs in Applicable Sales Volume Each model year, m anufacturer s calculate their applicable vehicle sales volume to which the ir ZEV requirement is applied . In 2003, staff modified the regulation to not
count a manufacturer’s ZEVs produced in the manufacturer’s applicable sales volume. This was to prevent NEV manufacturers from gene rating a larger requirement than could be met , due to NEVs earning less than one ZEV credit. When considering the (Manufacturer U.S. Sales of PC & LDT) * ( gCO 2 /mile below manufacturer GHG standard)

(manufacturer GHG standard)42 effect of this provision on developing future requirements , staff concluded removing this provision for manufacturers would simplify the program and not have an adverse effect on manufacturers.

Staff proposes to end this provision for ZEVs for 2018 and subsequent model years, and include all ZEVs produced in the manufacturer’s applicable sales volume. However, staff proposes that NEV manufacturers would not include NEV s in their applicable sales volumes to prevent manufacturers from facing a larger requirement than could be fulfilled.

Amendment to Applicable Sales Volume Determination “Previous Years Method” Since 2003, staff has allowed each manufacturer to choose its applicable sales volume determination method. As stated previously, a manufacturer’s applicable sales volume is the number of vehicles a manufacturer’s requirement is ap plied to for a model year. Manufacturers may choose to use their current year sales, or an average of previous year sales, from the fourth, fifth, and sixth model years prior to the model year with which they are complying. For example, for the 2011 model year, manufacturers may choose their applicable sales volume based on 2011 sales, or on an average of 2005, 2006 and 2007 model year sales. Manufacturers are allowed to switch methods each year. This provision cause s uncertainty for ARB when t rying to determine how many ZEVs and TZEVs will be made each year. Also, manufacturers are able to take advantage of a low sales volume year to reduce their obligation for up to nine years, which greatly impacts the number of ZEVs required.

Staff propose s a manufacturer’s applicable sales volume to be based on an average of the second, third , and fourth years back. For example, for 2019, a manufacturer’s applicable sales volume would be based on an average of 2016, 2 017, and 2018 model year sales . This change would make the applicable average more contemporaneous and helps even out the sales bumps year to year. However, staff understands unforeseen circumstances cannot be planned for, and should be considered in regards to a manufacturer ’ s ZEV requireme nt. An example of an unforeseen circumstance could be a severe economic downturn or a natural disaster. Staff proposes that manufacturers could apply to the Executive Officer to use a current model year for their applicable sales volume, for a maximum of two model years. Manufacturers applying to the Executive Officer would need to do so by January 1 of the year following the compliance model year. For example, a manufacturer applying
to use a current model year for their applicable sales volume for mod el year 2020, would need to apply to the Executive Officer no later than January 1, 2021. If a manufacturer does switch to the same year method, then switch back, it only continue s to benefit from a bad year for four years, as it is included into its prev ious second, third, and fourth year average.

Amendment s to Carry Back Provision Currently, manufacturers are allowed to carry a ZEV credit deficit for up to three model years. For example, a manu facturer who does not meet its ZEV requirement in model year 2016 would not be subject to penalties for non

- compliance until after model year43 2018 compliance , and would be allowed to make up deficits with credits from ZEVs in model years 2017 and 2018 . Up to this point, all manufactur ers have been in full compliance with the ZEV regulation , and have not had to make use of this provision. However, this provision creates uncertainty in the number of ZEVs to be delivered for sale each year.

In an effort to strengthen and provide more certainty of the number of ZEVs to be delivered to California for a given model year, staff proposes to shorte n a manufacturer’s allowed deficit to one year. This means, for example, a manufacturer could fail to submit the required amount of ZEV credits i n 2019, and proceed to make up the credit deficit in 2020 model year compliance. After model year 2020 compliance, the manufacturer would be subject to ZEV penalties.

Removing Placed In Service Requirement Currently, for manufacturers to receive full credit for ZE Vs, each ZEV must be placed in service. 34 This requirement was added in 2001 to encourage manufacturers to place ZEVs, particularly NEVs, with end

- users and further ZEV commercialization and markets. Manufacturers currently receive one credi t for each vehicle delivered for sale, and earn the rest of the credits for each vehicle when it is placed in service (i.e. sold or leased to an end user ) . Staff believes this requirement w ill no longer be necessary for B EVs in 2018 and subsequent model y ears as requirements increase. This greatly simplifies tracking and acknowledges the maturing market for BEVs. However, staff will continue to require all FCVs and NEVs to be placed in service in order to earn credit through the regulation. FCVs need to be tracked by vehicle identification number (VIN) for purposes of the travel provision, and accounting across states. The regulation will also retain ARB ’s authority to request VINs of delivered ZEVs to verify the vehicles have been delivered to Californ ia.

Additional minor modifications are discussed in Section 9 of this ISOR.

34 CCR 1962.1(h)(7) stat es “placed in service” means “having been sold or leased to an end

- user and not to a dealer or other distribution chain entity, and having been individually registered for on

- road use by the California Department of Motor Vehicles.”44 3 EFFECT OF PROPOSED CHANGES

This section provides an assessment of the industry wide number of vehicles that may be produced due to the proposed changes. Sections 5, 6 and 7 then use these estimates to project the economic and environmental i mpacts of the proposed changes. Staff is proposing limited amendment s to the 2012 through 2017 timeframe which have little impact on the numbers of vehicles produced in compliance wi th the ZEV requirements

. Staff’s analysis of manufacturer’s current ZEV credit banks is in subsection 3.1. Staff’s analysis of the effects of the proposed changes to Type V credits, and decreased IVM requirement is presented below in subsection 3

. 2 . The bulk of staff’s analysis focuses on the 2018 through 2025 timeframe, and can be found below in subsection 3 .3

.

3.1 Overall Effects of Manufacturer’s Banked ZEV Credits

Manufacturers have over complied with the ZEV regulation, which has caused them to have b anks of excess ZEV credits. A manufacturer may bank an unlimited amount of credits from each vehicle category. Table 3.1 below shows manufacturer’s ZEV bank balances as of September 30, 2011.

Table 3.1: Manufacturer Current Bank Balances (g/mi NMOG)*

Manufacturer ZEVs (excluding NEVs) NEVs Enhanced AT PZEVs AT PZEVs PZEVs

BMW 106.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 209.547
Chrysler Group 55.611 665.316 0.000 0.000 0.000

Ford 274.687 1,069.090 0.000 596.272 1,135.289 FUJI Heavy Industries/Subaru 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 65.662

General Motors 408.156 787.166 0.000 454.352 120.388

Honda 404.105 804.666 0.000 946.318 62.655
Hyundai 31.360 0.000 0.000 0.000 22.378

KIA 22.647 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Land Rover 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.139

Mazda 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 246.998

Mercedes Benz 28.520 193.066 0.000 9.849 6.278

Mitsubishi 1.400 0.000 0.000 0.000 53.432

Nissan 189.321 0.000 0.000 0.000 1,523.912

Tesla 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Toyota 1,116.293 0.000 7.721 6,723.705 734.941
Volkswagen 35.558 0.000 0.000 17.130 11.929

Volvo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 108.49345 Zipcar 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 17.083
TOTALS 2,673.657 3,519.305 7.721 8,747.627 4,329.126 *Manufacturer ZEV bank balances are posted each year, on September 30, on the following
website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zevcredits/2010zevcredits.htm

Manufacturers can comply in innumerable ways with the regulation. Manufacturers may fulfill their entire requirement with credits from ZEVs, or produce more AT PZEVs to fulfill the portion of the requirement that may be met with PZEVs. The regulation def ines the upper limits of how the various credit categories can be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s requirement.

Taking the manufacturer’s current credit banks into account, staff analyzed potential credit usage in the 2012 through 2017 timeframe, and in the 2018 through 2025 timeframe.

For 2012 through 2017 model year, it is difficult to determine the impact of banked PZEV and AT PZEVs credits on actual PZEV and AT PZEV production. PZEVs and AT PZEVs are a compliance option within the regulation. For example, some manufacturers use NEV credits in lieu of producing AT PZEVs. Staff is proposing to allow manufacturers to use their banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits to meet up to 25 percent of the TZEV portion of their requirement in 2018 and subsequent mod el years. This could incentivize manufacturer s to continue producing PZEV and AT PZEVs through model year 2017, as discussed below.

As shown above in Table 3.1, manufacturers currently have no banked TZEV (referred to in the table as Enhanced AT PZEV) credits, except for one manufacturer. It is possible that LVMs might use ZEV credits, and NEV credits, as allowed, to meet some of the TZEV portion of their requirement. Still, staff predicts most LVMs will produce TZEVs to fulfill this portion of their 2012 through 2017 requirement.

Looking at LVM’s minimum ZEV requirement, and assuming manufacturers only used banked credits to comply with the regulation in 2012 through 2017, most LVMs would be able to comply through model year 2014 using only banked ZEV credits. Four out of six LVMs would be able to comply through model year 2015, and one LVM would likely be able to meet their 2016 minimum ZEV obligation with banked credits.

In order to complete an analysis of possible credit usage in 2018 and su bsequent model years, multiple assumptions must be made. Though many manufacturers have announced plans to produce ZEV program vehicles (see Section 1), few shed light on expected volumes. For the purposes of this analysis, staff did not assume an increa se in manufacturer’s banked ZEV credits. It is clear that most manufacturers will likely need to produce TZEVs, since there are few TZEV credits currently in manufacturer’s ZEV banks.

Assuming LVMs keep their current credit banks constant through model year 2017, meaning they are meeting their yearly obligations through model year 2017 by46 producing vehicles and not using banked credits, most manufacturers would be able to comply only with their model year 2018 minimum ZEV requirement.

This credit ana lysis leads to two conclusions: 1) most manufacturers will likely need to produce TZEVs to meet a portion of their 2012 and subsequent model year requirements, and 2) manufacturers will run out of pure ZEV credits, and will need to produce ZEVs in order to meet their future requirements. 35

3.2 Effects of Proposed Changes: 2009 through 2017 Model Years

Decreased IVM Requirements: 2015 through 2017 Model Years Staff is proposing to decrease the overall requirement that applies to IVMs from 14 percent to 12 percent credits each year for model y ears 2015 through 2017. Table 3.2 shows the differential in expected PZEVs due to staff’s proposed change.

Table 3.2: Effect of Decreased IVM Requirements in 2015 through 2017 **Existing IVM Requirement**  Proposed IVM R equirement Differential

Annual Credit

Percentage 14% 12% 2% less per year
Annual Percentage of IVM Sales That Are PZEV 7 0% 6 0% 10% less per year

Cumulative PZEV Sales 617,000 530,000 87,000 fewer cumulatively

The proposed decreased PZEV requirements for IVMs will likely result in a cost savings over existing requirements. Because IVMs will be required to start complying with TZEVs in 2018, IVMs will likely use cost savings from decreased PZEV production to invest in research, development, and demons tration ( RD&D ) in TZEV technologies (the reason for the proposed change)

.

3.3 Effects of Proposed Changes: 2018 and Subsequent Model Years

2018

– 2025 Model Year Likely Compliance Scenario Development Manufacturers are offered much flexibility in complying with the ZEV regulation. As

ex plained above, LVMs must comply with a minimum amount of credit from producing ZEV s. Staff proposes that LVMs be allowed to meet the rest of their requirement with credits from producing TZEVs. Thus LVMs may fulfill their entire requirement with credits from ZEVs, but may not fulfill their entire requirement with credits from TZEVs. However, IVMs are allowed to fulfill their entire requirement with credits from TZEVs, although they may use ZEV credit s if desired . Due to these uncertainties, and the wide array of ZEVs a nd TZEVs that could be produced to comply with staff’s proposed ZEV requirements, staff developed a likely compliance scenario to be used for its analys e s.

35 Confidential informat ion, regarding historical credit usage patterns, was used to determine the effects of manufacturer’s banked credits.47 First, staff made the broa d assumption that LVMs would fulfill their obligation with the maximum allowed percentage of TZEV credit s

. This is based on a belief that initial the market for TZEVs may be greater than for BEVs due to the latter’s range limitations. Most LVMs have annou nced TZEV demonstration or production programs set to start prior to model year 2018.

Second, staff assumed a combination of BEVs and FCVs would be produced to comply with t he ZEV requirements. Table 3.3 provides the assumed fraction of the total ZEVs produced that would be BEVs or FCVs.

Table 3.3 : Fraction of ZEV Technologies 2018 and Subsequent Model Years

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

FCVs 17.5% 18.6% 22.0% 25.0% 29.2% 31.8% 35.4% 40.0%

BEVs 82.5% 81.4% 78.0% 75.0% 70.8% 68.2% 64.6% 60.0%

Staff developed an average weighted credit using the above percentages in Table 3.3 to establish the minimum number of ZEVs produced each year. Each regulated manufacturer has a ZEV credit requirement. To translate the number of credits into a

n umber of vehicles, a credit per vehicle must be assumed. Staff assumed all FCVs produced would have a 350 mile range, earn ing 4 credits each, and all BEVs produced would

, on average, have a 100 mile range, e arn ing 1.5 credits eac h. The average weighted credit used each year is enumerated in Table 3.4 below:

Table 3.4 : Average Weight Credits Used in Likely Compliance Scenario

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 and beyond Average Weighted Credit 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5

Using these base assumptions, a num ber of analyses were run to determine the effect of staff’s proposed amendment s.

3.3.1 Manufacture r Size Definition Amendment s Staff’s proposed amendment s to manufacturer size definitions will affect most IVMs, bring ing nearly 97 % of manufacturer s ’ vehicle sales in California subject to the full LVM ZEV requirements. Table 3.5 shows the size classifications for LVMs and IVMs under staff’s proposed amendments48 Table 3.5 : Proposed Size Classifications for Manufacturers 2018 and Beyond LVMs (>20,000 CA Sales) IVMs (<20,000 CA Sales

–

>4,500 CA Sales)

• BMW

• Chrysler

• Daimler

• Ford

• General Motors

• Honda

• Hyundai

• Kia

• Mazda

• Nissan

• Toyota

• Volkswagen • Jaguar Land Rover

• Mitsubishi

• Subaru

• Volvo

These size definitions greatly affect the overall number of ZEVs expected to be produced in compliance with the ZEV regulations. Additionally, IVMs previously allowed to meet their entire requirement with PZEVs will now be allowed to produce TZEVs. This is important for setting future standards and ensuring that most manufacturers will have some level of electric drive technology in their f leet. In 2025, if all IVMs take advantage of the flexibilities provided, over 30 per cent of their annual sales will be TZEVs.

3.3.2 ZE V and TZEV Credit Calculations and Increased 2018 and Subsequent ZEV requirement Putting all of the factors and assumptions discussed above together, staff has developed the following expected compliance scenario. As a result of staff’s proposal, over 1.4 million ZEVs and TZEVs are expected to be produced cumulatively in California by 2025, which represents a 200 percent increase over the current ZEV requirements. Over 500,000 ZEVs (excluding TZEVs) are expected to be produced cumulatively in California by 2025. Figure 9 , below, show s the total number of vehicles expected to be produced each year in compliance with staff’s proposal. By model year 2025, staff expects 15.4 percent of new sales will be ZEVs and TZEVs. 

## 2.8% of California Sales 96.9 % of California Sales49 Figure 9 : Expected Compliance for 2018 through 2025 Model Years

The expected numbers for each model year are enumerated in Table 3.6 below. These numbers are based on future sales projections from ARB’s Emissions Inventory Model, ( EMFAC ) 2011 36

.

Table 3.6 : Number of Vehicles Expected Annually

– 2018 through 2025 Model Year ( Expected Compliance Scenario

- Rounded to Nearest 100 )

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Cumulative TOTALFCVs 2,900 6,200 10,600 15,400 21,600 27,800 35,200 43,600 163,300BEVs 13,900 27,300 37,700 46,300 52,600 59,500 64,200 65,400 366,900TZEVs 61,300 75,300 89,100 101,900 116,300 131,200 146,900 161,700 883,700TotalVehicles
78,100 108,800 137,400 163,600 190,500 218,500 246,300 270,700 1,413,900

There are an innumerable number of compliance scenarios. As explained above, manufacturers are not required to make ea ch technology stated in Table 3.6

. LVMs

36 ARB 2011b. California Air Resources Board. Emission Inventory Model, EMFAC 2011. htt p://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Annual California Sales

Model Year 17%

14%

11%

9%

6%

3%%of 2025 Sales 15.4% of 2025



### FCVs

BEVs



## TZEVs50 may fulfill their entire requirement with credits from ZEVs, either BEVs or FCVs, or a mixture of both. If LVMs were to only pursue BEV technology to meet their minimum ZEV requirement, the number of ZEVs would nearly double each year; if only FCVs were used to meet their minimum ZEV requirements , the total number of ZEVs would be reduced by one third compared to numbers shown in Table 3.6

.

3.3.3 Compliance Flexibility: Use of B anked PZEV and AT PZEV Credits Staff is proposing to a llow manufacturers to use PZEV and AT PZEV credits banked
up to 2 017 model year for 2018 through 2025 model year compliance, even though PZEV and AT PZEVs will be removed as compliance options. NEV credits, banked or new, would also be under the same cap as banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits. Figure 10 shows the amount of the 2018 thr ough 2025 model year ZEV requirements that could be met with historical banked PZEV and A T PZEV credits, and NEV credits.

Figure 10 : Impact of Banked PZEV AT PZEV Credits, and NEV Credits (2018 through 2025 Model Years)

I f all manufactu rers use banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits to the maximum extent allowed in 2018 through 2025 model years, they will avoid up to 227,000 TZEVs cumulatively. This is about a 25 percent reduction in TZEVs from the values shown above in Table 3.6. - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Annual California Sales

Model Year 

## FCVs

BEVs

TZEVs

25% Cap

- Banked PZEV and AT PZEV Credits 227,000 TZEVs Avoided Due to Banked PZEV and AT PZEV Credits and NEV Credits Reaches 14.4% of 2025 Sales, instead of 15.4%51 3.3.4 Compliance Flexibility: GHG

- ZEV Over

- Compliance Credits Staff does not know which manufacturers will take advantage of the GHG

- ZEV

over

- compliance provisions in model years 2018 through 2021, the only four model years these credits will be available . In Figure 11 below, the minimum (if zero manufacturers use this option) and maximum (if all manufacturers use this option) cases are shown.

Figure 11 : Impact of GHG

- ZEV Over

- Compliance Credits

The h ash marked area in Figure 11 represent s total ZEV and TZEV sales if manufacturers responsible for half of vehicle sales take advantage of the GHG

- ZEV

over

- compliance provision. The error bars indicate the impact if all manufacturers use this provision, or if no manufacturers use this provision. Staff ’s best guess at this point of time is manufacturers accounting for sales between 15 percent and 50 percent of total sales may be able to use the over compliance prov ision.

3.4 Effects of Proposed Changes: Travel Provision

Staff is proposing to extend the travel provision for BEVs through 2017 model year. This will likely result over 40,000 fewer BEVs placed in the Section 177 ZEV states, assuming the volume of vehicle s sold in Section 177 ZEV states was twice as much as the volume of vehicles sold in California. This provision will be sunset for BEVs after 2017 model year. Due to this sunset, there will be a dramatic increase the total amount of ZEVs a manufacturer m ust produce in compliance with California and the Section 177 ZEV state regulations. Figure 12, below, shows the likely increase in the total number of BEVs placed in compliance with the ZEV regulation in Cal ifornia and in the Section 177 ZEV s tates. - 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000

2018 2019 2020 2021Total ZEV (BEV, FCV, TZEV) Sales

Total ZEVs and TZEVs No Manufacturers Take Option

All Manufacturers Take Option52 Figure 12: Effect of BEV Travel Provision Sunset in 2017 Model Year

As shown above, the existing regulation requires manufacturers to place more BEVs than staff’s proposal during 2015 to 2017 model years. However, due to staff’s proposed extension of travel for BEVs, manufacturers are allowed to produce fewer BEVs in compliance with the regulation, and required to significantly ramp up their volum es in later years.

During the development of this ISOR, manufacturers and Section 177 ZEV states have discussed options regarding amendments to the travel provision. Some states have indicated that they would like to have ZEVs in their states prior to model year 2018, while others continue to prepare for increased volumes starting in 2018. Manufacturers have indicated the need for TZEVs to travel, which is not currently permitted under the regulation, and is not being proposed. Some manufacturers have also requested a reduction in the required volumes of ZEVs and TZEVs in the Section 177 ZEV states in model years 2018 and beyond. At the time of release of this ISOR, manufacturers and Section 177 ZEV states were still discussing these various issues. - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Proposed: Total # ZEVs (CA + Section 177 State) Existing: Total # ZEVs (CA + Section 177 State)53 4 REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES

As part of the regulatory development process, staff considered four alternatives regarding the number of vehicles required to be produced in 2018 and subsequent model years. A consistently calculated scenario of expected ZEV and TZEV sales used to comply for each of the f our alternatives is presented below in Table 4.1

. The options were then evaluated in the context of two of staff’s primary objectives: commercialization of ZEV technology to ensure reduced incremental co sts and addressing long

- term GHG and criteria emission goals.

Table 4.1 : Alternatives

– Annual Combined ZEV and TZEVs (Rounded) 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Staff Proposal 78,000 109,000 137,000 164,000 191,000 218,000 246,000 271,000

Alt A (Lower) 44,000 56,000 83,000 122, 000 157,000 195,000 229,000 261,000

Alt B (Higher) 120,000 161,000 191,000 218,000 246,000 274,000 302,000 325,000

Alt C * (Existing Program) 54,000 54,000 60,000 60,000 61,000 61,000 62,000 62,000

*Assumes PZEVs and AT PZEVs are removed and covered in LEV III.

4.1 Alternative A: Lower ZEV Requirements

Alternati ve A combines aspect s of a proposal from a subset of auto manufacturers with staff’s assumptions on amendments to the travel provision. This alternative includes a gradual phasing in (reduction) of the ZEV and TZEV credit values, increasing the fraction of the ZEV requirement that may b e met with credits from TZEVs, and lower overall requirements. 37 Compared to staff’s proposal, the number of ZEVs required is much lower in the early years, consists of a much higher portion of TZEVs relative to ZEVs, but gets closer to the staff proposal in terms of annual volume by 2025

.
Staff rejected Alternative A because it could undercut the launch of and resultant

co mmercialization of pure ZEVs (BEVs and FCVs). To achieve full commercialization and place the industry on a pathway consistent with meeting long term goals, volume sales of ZEVs need to ramp up quickly. Alternative A delays the ramp up. W hile l ower num bers of ZEVs would result in lower compliance costs to manufacturers

, progress toward lowering unit costs through increased volume is also delayed, pushing out the date at which a sustainable market is reached. A lt hough TZEVs are an important bridging technology, too much uncertainty surrounds the availability of

37 Manufacturers proposed reducing the number of ZEVs and TZEVs required to be placed in the Section 177 ZEV

s tates. Staff modified the manufacturer’s original proposal to reflect a one

- third reduction in vehicle requireme nts in Califor nia as well as the Section 177 ZEV s tates for purposes of analyzing Alternative A.54 low

- carbon biofuels and understanding of how much zero emission VMT is achieved with TZEVs to depend fully on TZEVs to achieve long term emission reduction s.

4.2 Alternative B: Higher ZEV Requirements

Alternative B represents a proposal from a group of non

- governmental organizations, the California Clean Car Coalition. This alternative is similar to the staff proposal

, except the jump in volume requirement between 2017 and 2018 is much greater (more than a doubling), and requirements for subsequent years are higher by 20 to 50 percent compared to staff’s proposal

.
Staff rejected this proposal due to the steep jump in volume requireme nt between the model year 2017 and 2018 requirements and increased overall compliance costs.

4.3 Alternative C : Do Not Amend Program

Staff also considered not recommending any amendments to the ZEV regulation. In this case, PZEVs and AT PZEVs would continue to be an option for compliance through model year 2018 and require no more than 1.7 percent of manufacturer’s new vehicles to be ZEVs in 2018 and subsequent model years. Additionally, manufacturers would be required to produc e more ZEVs in the Se ction 177 ZEV

s tates, due to the travel provision expiring for Type I, I.5, and II ZEVs (BEVs) following model year 2014, and expiring for Type III, IV, and V ZEVs (FCVs) following model year 2017. Staff rejected this alternative because it is not consist ent with achieving a commercial ma r ket for ZEVs or TZEVs.55 5 ECONOMIC IMPACTS

This section discuss es the economic impacts of the ZEV requirements on regulated manufacturers inside and outside California, individual consumers, and local and State
governme nt. For the manufacturers, the impact is from higher manufacturing costs, which is expressed as an incremental price above a baseline 2016 gasoline vehicle, and the total compliance cost s (calculated as the sales multiplied by the individual incremental prices for any given year). The economic impacts to consumers are presented in a variety of ways, including the impact of the incremental price they

wo uld see when purchasing a ZEV (a ssumi ng the manufacturer passes all of the costs of compliance to the ZEV compliance vehicles), juxtaposed with the cost savings they would recover when operating the vehicle, the incremental costs to all vehicles if the compliance costs of the ZEV program were spread across the entire new vehicle fleet and a discussion of other factors influencing the price of ZEVs in the marketplace. For local and State government, impacts are presented qualitatively.

5.1 Legal Requirement

Sections 11346.3 and 11346.5 of the Government Code require state agencies to assess the potential for adverse economic impacts on California business enterprises and individuals when proposing to adopt or amend any administrative regulation. The assessment shall include consideration of t he impact of the proposed regulation on California jobs, business expansion, elimination, or creation, and the ability of California businesses to compete. State agencies are also required to estimate the cost or savings to any state or local agency and s chool districts in accordance with instruction adopted by the Department of Finance. This estimate is to include any nondiscretionary costs or savings to local agencies and the costs or savings in federal funding to the state.

5.2 Directly Affected Business es

At present, there are no companies in California whose sales volumes are high enough for them to be considered IVMs to make them subject to the existing ZEV requirements or the proposed amendments. There are three California

- based businesses that cou ld be subject to this regulation in the future

. T hree motor vehicle manufacturing plants are located in California: a Fremont facility and Palo Alto facility owned by Tesla Motor Company, and an assembly facility in Benicia owned by Coda. Due to staff’s proposed amendment to count ZEVs in a manufacturer’s applicable sales volume (as discussed in section 2.2.10, above), these three California manufacturers could become subject to the ZEV regulation if their individual California sales volume each exceed 4,500 vehicles per year

.
Outside of California, LVMs and IVMs subject to the ZEV regulation are directly affected by the proposed amendments. As described in Section 2.2.1, nearly all manufacturers are required to comply with the current ZEV regulation. The largest six vehicle manufacturers, which account for nearly 80 percent of California’s LDV56 m arket, are currently required to make ZEVs, which results in a greater economic impact. The eight IVMs are allowed to comply with PZEVs, which are nearer to conventional technology, and are usually less financially impacted. However, due to staff’s propo sed amendments which redefine the size of the IVM and LVMs (discussed in Section 2.2.1), it is projected that 12 manufacturers , accounting for approximately 97 percent of all LDV PC and LDT sales, will be directly regulated to make ZEVs starting in 2018 mo del year.

5.2.1 Potential Impact on Manufacturers Manufacturers may take many different paths to comply with the ZEV regulation. In general, as a result of staff’s proposed amendments, regulated manufacturers are likely to adjust their future vehicle product portfolios and accelerate development and production of advanced technology vehicles . This will have a direct impact on research, development, and production programs, and a secondary impact on the suppliers of components and infrastructure. A manufacturer’s involvement in advanced technologies for global markets and the manufacturer’s quantity of banked ZEV credits, will also affect the impact from the regulation. The impact of the proposed amendments will affect manufacturers differently depending on the size of their California sales, company resources, and technology expertise.

T

echnology Choice In general, manufacturers with larger market shares, like Toyota and General Motors, sell a larger variety of cars and trucks. Though staff predicts most ZEVs and TZEVs will be primarily PC s, manufacturers’ compliance strategies for the Z EV regulation may take into account a specific technology best suited for varying platform sizes. For example, manufacturers with a broad mix of cars and trucks may pursue multiple technologies to apply across their varied platforms. However, manufacture rs with fewer and more consistent platforms may pursue a single technology that applies well to their model mix. Examples of platform specific considerations for the various technologies follow:

• BEVs may predominantly be on small car platforms given the relationship between vehicle weight, range and cost associated with batteries. Namely, to minimize cost and maximize range, batteries are applied to the smallest or lightest vehicles. Additionally, smaller platforms are a better match with vehicles limi ted to 100 to 150 miles electric range that may be predominantly used in urban areas.

• FCVs may predominantly be on mid

- sized car and light truck platforms given their longer

- range performance and the capability to scale up powertrain output with less addi tional weight compared to batteries (adding range is a function of adding hydrogen storage capacity which can be done more cost effectively than adding batteries on a BEV in larger vehicle platforms).57 • PHEVs may be developed on a wide range of platforms de pending on the size of the battery used. The more battery dominant the drive

- train, the smaller the platform that will likely be used.

5.2.2 Incremental Direct Manufacturing System Costs Estimates For manufacturers, incremental cost represents the added cost t o manufacture advanced vehicle components and higher material costs (e.g. lithium for batteries and platinum for fuel cells). In some cases, specific advanced vehicles are more complex than conventional cars (e.g. PHEVs have both combustion engines and ba tteries). Determining incremental costs is important to evaluate the impact to manufacturers when coupled with total sales.

For this analysis, staff estimated incremental direct manufacturing system costs for each model year of the regulation and compa red them to a 2008 baseline gasoline vehicle. 38 Model year 2008 is used as a technology reference for the GHG

- reduction effectiveness calculations because it is the year with the most comprehensive dataset (e.g., for sales, footprint, technology, CO 2 emissi ons for every model), and it closely matches the vehicle simulation modeling baseline. As a result, incremental technology costs are also indexed to the 2008 technology level. Subsequent calculations of incremental compliance costs for new proposed regul ations are relative to the technology required to comply with existing regulations, including model year 2016 GHG standards. A description of cost impacts for each technology follows:

Plug

- in Hybrid Electric Vehicles The variation in the incremental costs for PHEVs between vehicle classes is smaller than the BEV technology given the smaller battery pack size. However, PHEVs will remain inherently more complex than BEVs because of the combustion engine.

Battery Electric Vehicles The incremental costs are particularly sensitive to the vehicle’s electric range given its direct relationship to the size of the battery pack.

Fuel Cell Vehicles FCVs are expected to have higher incremental costs when first introduced into the market c ompared to BEVs, but will decline rapidly with production volumes (2012 vs. 2025 system costs shown in Table 5.1).

The most expensive components of ZEVs are the battery modules and fuel cell systems. To better understand the declining costs of these ad vanced components, Table 5.1, below shows the direct manufacturing costs of the battery packs and fuel

38 As described in the LEVIII ISOR, staff developed a comprehensive model for projecting the incremental costs of advanced vehicle technologies in future year s. This modeling effort was conducted jointly with the U.S. EPA and NHTSA in support of the Federal rulemaking, and was first presented in the Technical Assessment Report (EPA, 2010). This analysis was revised in 2011 and is outlined in the LEVIII ISOR S ection III

- A

- 4.3

.58 cell systems 39 for midsized platforms. Because, as shown in the table below, incremental system costs decrease with increased volume, staff’s proposal wil l have the effect of decreasing per vehicle direct manufacturing system costs as compared to the existing requirements. Incremental system costs are shown for multiple years between 2012 and 2025, revealing the declining cost of batteries and fuel cells ov er time as production volumes rise.

Table 5.1: Incremental Direct System Manufacturing Costs* (2009$)

2012 2015 2020 2025 System per

- vehicle costs ($) **a** PHEV20 battery pack 8,078 6,462 3,309 2,647 BEV100 battery pack 21,367 17,094 8,752 7,002 FCV fuel cell system 18,908 10,208 5,220 4,756 System per

- unit costs PHEV20 battery pack ($/kWh) 1053 842 431 345 BEV100 battery pack ($/kWh) 605 484 248 198 FCV fuel cell system ($/kW) 163 88 45 41 *Based on midsize car / small multipurpose vehicle class , as compared to a 2008 baseline ; Figures 3 and 4, in Section 2.2.3, show the system costs graphically.
Battery packs and fuel cell stacks are assumed to last the life of the vehicle (no replacement). As compared to BEVs where the system cos t is predominantly the battery pack, FCVs include three major sub

- systems in addition to the electric drive components shared by both technologies. The three sub

- systems include the fuel cell system (fuel cell stack and auxiliary equipment), the hydrogen storage assembly, and the hybrid battery pack (similar size to existing conventional hybrids).

The table above shows that incremental system costs decline with volume production

– an important reason that the ZEV requirements ramp up through the program y ears. It is also important to point out that the incremental system costs of FCV s drop below the incremental system costs of BEVs in the later years of the program. This factor was used in the staff’s estimates of vehicle technology mix in the expected co mpliance scenario.

5.2.3 Vehicle Package Incremental Prices To determine the total impact to manufacturers, staff analyzed incremental vehicle prices for each ZEV technology. Incremental vehicle prices include the direct manufacturer costs, as shown above, a s well as an indirect cost multiplier (ICM). As described the LEVIII ISOR Section III

- A

- 4.3, the ICM markup includes a number of indirect cost components, including overhead , warranty, RD&D, depreciation, marketing, and dealer profit. Table 5.2 below sho ws the ICM values used in the full ACC analysis. The “High 2” complexity category was used for the BEV and PHEV platforms, whereas “High 1” was used for FCV platforms (and non

- battery components for PHEVs).

39 These costs differ from those in Table 6.1 as they do not include all other package components such as electric motors, power electronics, or small combustion engines for PHEVs , and are compared to a 2008 baseline rather than a 2016 baseline vehicle

.59 Table 5.2: (Un

- Modified) Indirect Cost Multipliers Tech Complexity Level Near term (2017

- 2021) Long term (2022

- 2025) High 1 1.56 1.35 High 2 1.77 1.50 Note: ICM factors shown are approximate; mark

- up factors involve separate components for warranty and non

- warranty related indirect costs

These ICM factors for advanced vehicles are conservative estimates about how these advanced technology cost factors (by battery and fuel cell stack developers, in

- house or at supplier companies) may ultimately affec t automakers’ indirect costs. Hereafter, the ICM values in Table 5.2, above, will be referred to as “un

- modified ICMs”.

For comparison, an alternate ICM value of 1.33 (modified ICM) was also analyzed to represent the scenario where the auto industry bett er manages the associated complexity and indirect costs associated with the emerging advanced technologies. Staff believes that this lower ICM is of higher likelihood as ZEVs are commercialized and automakers work in

- house and with suppliers to minimize t he cost factors inherent to the ICM framework. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) similarly suggests lower ICM values in its 2011 technology assessment for hybrid and plug

- in vehicles due to the likelihood that many of the indirect costs (e.g., engine ering, labor, overhead, and integration costs) would otherwise be double counted. 40

Table 5.3 below, shows the sensitivity of incremental vehicle prices to the ICM assumption. All values are referenced to a MY2016 average baseline technology.

Table 5.3: ICM Sensitivity Analysis of Incremental Vehicle Price

**Un**

**- Modified ICM**  **Modified ICM**
2020 2025 2020 2025 PHEV20 (6.6 kWh) 10,249 8,448 7,969 7,312 BEV100 (30 kWh) 14,593 10,829 11,428 9,406 FCV (3.3 kg H 2 ) 9,811 7,513 8,224 7,387
All technologies on subcompact platforms.

As shown, the use of a 1.33 ICM factor would bring down BEV and PHEV costs by $1000 to $3000 per vehicle; the lower ICM would reduce FCV costs by $200 to $1500. Staff believes that the 1.33 is likely to be a maximum ICM for the cost multiplier for the indirect costs of conventional hybrids and PHEVs and that BEV technology is likely to have a lower cost multiplier (though higher gross per

- vehicle indirect cost) due their reduced OEM integration complexity (i.e., with out combustion engine and associated integration issues). Nonetheless, the un

- modified, more conservative ICMs were utilized for consistency with the LEV III analysis (and related joint

- agency technology cost analysis).

Table 5.4, below, shows incrementa l ZEV technology prices for model years 2016 and 2025. Model year 2016 was chosen as the reference vehicle technology for this

40 NAS, 2011. National Academy of Sciences. 2010. Committee on the Assessment of Technologies for Improving Light

- Duty Vehicle Fuel Economy; National Research Council “Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies Light Duty Vehicles”.60 analysis, as it is the final model year of the currently adopted GHG regulations. 41 So for example, for the 2025 model year comp arison, a 2025 model year vehicle with 2016 technology was compared with a 2025 model year vehicle equipped with technology necessary for meeting the new proposed standards in 2025.

Table 5.4: Incremental technology package prices above average MY2016 b aseline technology (2009$) 1

Vehicle Class Technology Package (energy capacity) 2 Incremental Vehicle Price in 2016 Incremental Vehicle Price in 2025
Subcompact PHEV20 3 (6.6 kWh) 13,233 8,448 PHEV40 (13.4 kWh) 16,580 10,259 BEV75 4 (23 kWh) 17,010 9,405 BEV100 (30 kWh) 19,655 10,829 FCV 5 (3.3 kg H 2 ) 19,060 7,513 Midsize car / Small MPV PHEV20 (7.7 kWh) 13,807 8,876 PHEV40 (15.5 kWh) 17,818 11,043 BEV75 (27 kWh) 17,562 9,794 BEV100 (35 kWh) 20,785 11,551 FCV (3.8 kg H 2 ) 23,472 9,334 Large Car PHEV20 (9.1 kWh) 17,280 11,205 PHEV40 (18.7 kWh) 23,134 14,390 BEV75 (30 kWh) 20,820 11,628 BEV100 (40 kWh) 23,959 13,363 FCV (4.3 kg H 2 ) 33,238 13,406

1 Refer to the LEVIII ISOR Section III

- A

- 4.3 and Appendix R for additional vehicle packages
2 Energy capacity for BEV/PHEV is kWh rated battery pack capacity, kg H 2 for FCV
3 EPA and NHTSA designation for a PHEV is a “range extended electric vehicle” or RE EV.
4 For BEVs and PHEVs, the residential charging equipment costs are included in these technology packages.
5 FCV costs include the fuel cell system (as shown in later figures), the hydrogen storage system, the hybrid battery module, and other EV compo nents and power electronics similar to the BEV technology package.

5.2.4 Component Costs and Baseline Comparisons Figures 13 and 14 , below, show the individual component costs of BEVs and FCVs, along with the ICM, above reference 2016 model year technology. Th e figures show the break

- out for various components within the vehicle, displaying the relative difference in cost between individual parts and the projected cost reduction from learning effects between 2020 and 2025. Several gasoline vehicle reference po ints are shown for context. Note that these two figures show a baseline 2008 powertrain (i.e., engine and transmission) at $2500, and a model year 2016 vehicle would represent about $1000 per vehicle in additional cost. Also note that several of the BEV and FCV components that are shown (aerodynamics, low rolling resistance tires, improved accessories) in the figures are also likely to be deployed widespread on future gasoline vehicles. As described in Section 5, the battery costs are the dominant

41 Staff notes that model year 2008 is the technology level from which vehicle attributes are well characterized and is the fundamental reference for technology, cost, and emission

- reduction effectiveness in ARB staff's joint work with the federal agencies on LEV III assessment. The average projected incremental price for model year 2016

non

- ZEV vehicle modifications related to the LEVIII GHG program is $951 per vehicle over the model year 2008 reference.61 factor for BEVs, and the fuel cell system coupled with the hydrogen storage assembly dominate the costs for FCVs.

Figure 1 3 : BEV Component Costs and ICE Comparisons (2009$) *

*Component costs reflect subcompact 100 mile BEV

Figure 1 4 : FCV Component Costs and ICE Comparisons (2009$)*

*Component costs reflect mid

- size 350 mile FCV62 5.2.5 Annual Manufacturer Costs For manufacturers, an annual compliance cost is calculated by multiplying the total advanced vehicles required due to staff’s proposal by the incremental prices for each vehicle type and size. Due to staff’s proposal to increase the 2018 and subsequent model year ZEV requirement, regulated manufacturers will experience an increase in compliance costs as compared to curr ent ZEV requirements. Ta ble 5.5 shows the annual impact to manufacturers (for two model years: 2020 and 2025) due to staff’s proposed changes, and the difference in impact as compared to the existing regulation.

T he compliance costs in Table 5.5 , below, include the un

- modified ICM mark

- up

. It was important to directly capture all of these cost components in the estimated compliance cost. The small fraction associated with assumed profit would represent future expenditures on required RD&D or costs to supplier systems.

Table 5. 5 : Estimated Annual Compliance Costs for 2020 and 2025 * (2009$)
2020 2025
Sales

- Rounded (vehicles) Average Incremental Vehicle Price Total Cost (millions) Sales

– Rounded (vehicles) Average Incremental Vehicle Price Total Cost (millions)

Staff Proposal BEV 39,000 12,900 $502 65,000 9,500 $618 FCV 11,000 12,400 $136 44,000 9,300 $411
PHEV 93,000 10,900 $1,017 164,000 8,900 $1,465 Total 143,000 11,600 $1,655 272,000 9,200 $2,494 Existing Regulation BEV 22,000 13,000 $287 16,997 9,700 $164 FCV 6,000 10,800 $65 11,331 8,000 $90
PHEV 35,000 10,400 $363 33,993 8,700 $295 Total 63,000 11,400 $715 62,321 8,800 $550 Total Incremental Costs $940 $1,983 * Costs are based on incremental ZEV technology vehicle prices above non

- ZEV model year 2016 technology

The incremental costs in Table 5. 5 above represent an average of incremental prices amongst vario us platforms, found in Table 5.4

. Lower incremental costs in the “Existing Regulation” case are due to lower volumes being assumed on smaller platforms with lower incremental prices. The higher volumes required by staff’s proposal result in ZEV technologies moving into larger platforms, a nd therefore have a higher incremental price per vehicle.

S taff estimates the entire incremental compliance cost for the ZEV proposal alone

, above the existing regulation for the years 2018

- 2025, to be approximately $10.5 billion. However, subsection 5 .2.6 will discuss the cost of the proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation in context with compliance with LEV III fleet average standard s

.

5.2.6 Incremental Price Increase in the Context of Advanced Clean Cars The ZEV regulation must be considered in conjun ction with the proposed LEV III amendments

. Vehicles produced as a result of the ZEV regulation are part of a63 manufacturer’s light

- duty fleet and are therefore included when calculating fleet averages for compliance with the LEV III GHG amendments. Becau se the ZEVs have ultra

- low GHG emission levels that are far lower than non

- ZEV technology, they are a critical component of automakers’ LEV III GHG standard compliance strategies. As such the ZEV program cost is considered as the difference in complying w ith the LEV III G HG fleet standard without the proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation versus with the proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation.

Assuming that all of the associated direct manufacturing and ICMs are passed on to consumers, the average incremental price increase that results from the proposed LEV III GHG fleet standards and proposed ZEV regulation over the 2017 through 2025 timeframe will differ from the average increase resulting from compliance with only the LEV III GHG amendments

. The average incremental vehicle price due to proposed LEV III GHG standards, but with no amendments to the current ZEV regulation, in 2025 is expected to be $1

, 340. The average incremental vehicle price considering the proposed LEV III GHG fleet standard s and the proposed ZEV requirements in 2025 model year increases to $1, 840, a $500 incremental increase. Using the modified ICM, the incremental price increase due to the proposed ZEV requirements would by $370 instead of $500. Figure 1 5 below shows the incremental vehicle prices, with and without staff’s proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation. In the broader context of the overall fleet, the ultra

- low GHG ZEV technology is a major component of compliance with the LEV III GHG fleet standards for the o verall light duty fleet. In that fleet context, the overall cost of the ZEV program is the difference in costs between the “GHG

- plus

- ZEV” and the “GHG only” scenarios.

Figure 1 5 : Incremental Vehicle Price (With and Without* ZEV Proposal)

*Proposed 2025 GHG Standards means 2025 GHG standards with no change to the current ZEV requirements.

Table 5.6 summarizes the total incremental cumulative cost of the ZEV program in two different contexts. First, the incremental cost of the expected deployment of ZEV technology is summed versus the reference model year 2025 as if the current64 requirements for the ZEV regulation remained unchanged . This cumulative ZEV incremental technology cost is equiva lent to $10.5 billion over 2018 through 2025 model years. In the second context, the amended ZEV program vehicle cost is compared in combination with compliance with the LEV III amendments . As illustrated above in Figure 1 5 , the difference between LEV II I GHG with the existing ZEV regulation and GHG with the proposed ZEV regulation in each model year (times the number of total vehicles sales) is the equivalent cost premium of the ZEV program. In this overall fleet context where the ZEV technology produce s substantial GHG reductions in the LEV III program, the additional cost of the amended ZEV program is $4.6 billion over 2018

- 2025 model years.

Table 5.6: Estimated Compliance Costs for ZEV regulation in two contexts Program cost, MY2018

- 2025
ZEV techno logy

- Incremental compliance cost from proposed ZEV amendments to current Z EV program $10.5 billion

Incre mental compliance

- Incremental cost to comply with GHG program with new ZEV program (versus without new ZEV program) through each model year $4.6 billion

5.3 Potential Impacts to Individuals (Car Buyers)

For individual consumers, incremental price represents the added price they would pay for a ZEV compliant car over a baseline vehicle, creating a higher “ initial ” or “up front” cost. For this analys is, staff estimated incremental prices for each model year of the r egulation and compared them to 20 16 baseline vehicle technology . Determining incremental prices is important to evaluate the potential upper bounds impact to individual consumers, and is l ater coupled with operating cost savings to determine payback periods

.
Staff’s proposed amendments will likely decrease the per

- vehicle initial cost to

c onsumers compared to the existing regulation because of the impact of higher production volume reducin g incremental costs , but costs will remain $7,500 to $14,5 00 higher than the 20 16 vehicle technology in 2025. The incremental price per vehicle can be found in subsection 5.2.3 above.

5.3.1 Lifetime Costs and Consumer Payback 42 With significant changes in technology and in alternative fuels, car buyers have the opportunity to think about the cost of their personal transportation choices differently by considering both initial purchase prices and in

- use costs such as fuel, maintenance and other factors. As shown below in Table 5. 7 43 , ZEVs’ incremental price increase is paid back over the life of the car. Table 5 .7 below outlines the lifetime costs and

consumer savings resulting from staff’s proposed amendments. Lifetime costs include varying fuel costs due to improved efficiency and using an alternative fuel, electric

42 See Appendix C for cost inputs and assumptions.
43 A further explanation on lifetime costs can be found in the LEVIII ISOR Section III

- A

- 4.4.65 charging equipment purchases, and vehicle and equipment purchase incentives. The table shows the incremental prices for vehicles purchased in 2025 and then shows lifetime consumer savings.

Table 5. 7 : Lifetime Costs and Consumer Payback a (2009$) Technology Package **b** Incremental Vehicle Price in 2025 **c** Lifetime Consumer Savings **d**
PHEV20 (7.7 kWh) 8,876 10,382 PHEV40 (15.5 kWh) 11,043 10,565 BEV75 (27 kWh) 9,794 10,594 BEV100 (35 kWh) 11,551 10,594 FCV (3.8 kg H2) 9,334 6,067

a Costs based on increme ntal vehicle prices above a 2016 baseline technology
b Based on mid

- size car / small multipurpose vehicle

c Vehicle prices, including residential charging equipment/installation costs for plug

- in vehicles
d A verage car lifeti me in California is 14 years, 18 6,000 miles; Future fuel savings discounted by 5%. Fuel prices from CEC (e.g., for 2025, gasoline = $4.02/ gal); electrici ty = $0.15/kWh; Hydrogen = $6 /kg

ARB estimates the median life in California for PC s is 14 years, or approximately 18 6,000 miles. For two vehicle types shown, the consumer payback occurs within the median life of the vehicle. The “consume r payback period” is the year at which the cumulative fuel savings equals the incremental purchase price. Though the payback period will not occur within the life of the vehicle for the three other vehicle types, consumers will still experience $6,000 to $10,000 in lifetime savings. Note that these savings are based on average annual VMT ; to the extent that consumers travel more or less than average or own their vehicles for longer or shorter than the median life, savings could be higher or lower.

As d iscussed further in this subsection 5.2.4, manufacturers may also spread some or all of the compliance cost of ZEVs across their whole vehicle fleet, which would reduce the incremental cost per ZEV vehicle , as well as the consumer payback period

. The LEV III ISOR shows when costs for LEV and ZEV compliance are considered in a join context, th e average payback period is 3 years for model year 2025 vehicles

. Other factors that impact the actual cost of ZEVs to consumers are discussed below in sub section 5.3.2.

5.3.2 Other Cost Factors This section has so far laid out the incremental price of ZEVs compared to conventional cars as well as the incremental impact of the ZEV amendments in the context of the entire ACC program. But there are other factors that may influence the price, operating cost savings and operational benefits of ZEVs. Some of these are discussed below. These additional economic factors are not quantified as a part of staff’s analysis of the proposed amendments, but can be evaluated at a future time when they are better understood

.

• International Factors : If a manufacturer is developing ZEVs for other markets outside of the United States, it will be better prepared to meet staff's proposed66 ZEV requirements in 2018 and subsequent model years. Coupled with the production plans for BEVs and PHEVs from manufacturers, substantial international investments are being made into advanced battery production and development. These trends are outlined in several studies, including Roland Be rger 44

, 45 and the International Energy Agency’s recent EV Roadmap 46 . As global markets grow, the production capacity is growing rapidly which helps to bring costs down.

National government support for battery manufacturing, vehicle development, and incent ives are also influential factors in international market costs (e.g. China, Japan, United States). 47 The European Union (EU), particularly France and Germany, have strong policies and incentives supporting FCVs, BEVs, and PHEVs. China has substantial veh icle incentives, infrastructure funding, and manufacturing subsidies in place. South Korea has national support for hydrogen infrastructure. Japan has infrastructure support for both electricity and hydrogen. In addition to centralized financial support, national emission regulation targets will also influence advanced vehicle programs. The EU, China, and Japan all have aggressive gCO 2 /kilometer targets for the 2020

- 2025 timeframe. 48

• Vehicle Maintenance

– Although BEVs and FCVs still have some moving parts, the number of components and fluids that need to be serviced is likely to be lower than conventional vehicles. Although this is difficult to estimate today, it is expected that BEVs and FCVs will hav e lower maintenance costs over the life of the vehicles. As an example, Ford has recently stated that maintenance costs of its upcoming Focus BEV could be $1,200 lower than the conventional Focus over 10 years. 49

• Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) credit val ue

– Depending on policy decisions by ARB and the California Public Utilities Commission ( C PUC), LCFS credit value for electricity may be returned to electricity providers and ultimately ZEV drivers. A recent research study identified the potential revenu e this would provide for BEV users. With California’s 2020 grid, the value could range from $75 per vehicle per year (at $25 per tonne CO 2 equivalent) to $300 per vehicle

44 Roland Berger, 2010a. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants “Powertrain 2020: Li

- Ion B atteries

– The Next Bubble Ahead ”
45 Roland Berger, 2011. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants. “Automotive Landscape 2025: Opportunities and Challenges Ahead”
46 IEA, 2011. International Energy Agency, June 2011. “Technology Roadmap

– Electric and Plug

- in Hybrid Electric Vehicles”
47 PRTM, 2011 . PRTM and World Bank, April 2011 “The China New Energy Vehicles Program

– Challenges and Opportunities”
48 ICCT, 2011. International Council on Clean Transportation, April 2011 Update. “Global Light

- Duty Vehicles: Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gas Emissio ns Standards”
49 PluginCars , 2011. PluginCars.com. Zach McDonald. February 9, 2011. “Ford Pushes Key Marketing Message: Lower Maintenance Costs.” http://www.plugincars.com/ford

- pushes

- key

- marketing

- message

- electric

- cars

- lower

maintenance

- costs

- 106793.html Accessed September 26, 2011.67 per year (at $100 per tonne CO 2 equivalent). 50 This could result in a fueling rebate, or discount on electricity rates for PHEVs and BEVs.

• Fuel tax change

– The current state and national gasoline tax es are no longer sufficient as the LDV fleet becomes more efficient and as alternative fuels are introduced. Several national studies have identified the scale of the funding gap and potential solutions Congress could consider. 51

, 52 This may change into a VMT

- bas ed tax, which would treat all fuels equally, or may become an
energy

- based tax which would favor alternativ e fuels with lower WTW energy usage. Currently, hydrogen and electricity for transportation do not pay road taxes, though their contribution to the funding shortfall is small.

• Feebates

– A revenue neutral feebate policy on new vehicles would increase purchase costs for vehicles with higher carbon emissions while reducing costs for vehicles with lower carbon emissions. A recent study prepared for ARB analyzed a California specific feebate policy and the potential benefits and challenges. 53 As financial purchase incentives are discontinued in the next few years, a feebate policy c ould create a permanent cost offset for efficient advanced vehicles witho ut relying on government funds.

• Battery grid services

- For BEVs and PHEVs, there may be additional revenue opportunities in the future for battery second

- life usage 54

, 55 and vehicle

- to

- grid services. However, these factors are speculative at this point an d would require a number of barriers to be addressed. California stakeholders, such as the CEC, C PUC, and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), are studying these concepts.

• Non

- Monetary Factors affecting Purchase Behavior

– It is important to note th at initial purchase price, lifetime costs, and payback estimations are not the dominant factors to all buyers; a certain fraction of consumers will consider

non

- monetary factors when purchasing their vehicle. The convenience of charging a vehicle at home a nd work, the synergies of integrating vehicles with the electric grid, the attractiveness of electric drive characteristics (reduced noise, low speed torque from FCVs and BEVs), energy security benefits (reduced oil consumption), making a “green” purchasin g decision (reducing emissions), access to high

- occupancy vehicle lanes, and even the ability to

50 UC Davis, 2011a. University of California, Davis. Chris Yang. June 23, 2011. “Fuel Electricity and Plug

- in Electric Vehicles in an LCFS.”
51 Carnegie, 2011. Carnegie Endowment, 2011. “Road To Recovery

– Transforming America’s Transportation” http://carnegieendowment .org/files/road_to_recovery.pdf
52 Greene, 2011. David Greene, Transportation Research Part D, 2011. “What is greener than a VMT tax? The case for an indexed energy user fee to finance U.S. surface transportation”
53 UC Davis, 2011b. University of Califo rnia, Davis. D. Bunch and D. Greene, February 2011. “Potential Design, Implementation, and Benefits of a Feebate Program for New Passenger Vehicles in California: Final Report.”
54 NREL, 2011b. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. J. Neubauer and A. Pes aran. June 2011. “The ability of battery second use strategies to impact plug

- in electric vehicle prices and serve utility energy storage applications. ”
55 UC Berkeley, 2011. University of California, Berkeley. B.Williams and T.Lipman. April 2011. “ A nalysis of the combined vehicle and post vehicle use value of lithium ion plug

- in vehicle propulsion batteries.” (Draft Final)68 directly connect renewable power to BEVs and PHEVs at home may influence the value customers consider in purchasing these vehicles

. 56

, 57

5.4 Potential Impact on Bu siness Competitiveness

Automobile manufacturing in California represents a small fraction of th e State’s economy, less than 0.5 percent . The California businesses impacted by this regulation are largely indirectly affected as affiliated businesses such as gasoline service stations, automobile dealers, and automobile repair shops. Affiliated businesses are mostly local businesses. These businesses compete within the State and generally are not subject to competition from out

- of

- state businesses. Therefore, the proposed regulations are not expected to impose significant competitive disadvantages on affiliated businesses.

5.5 Potential Impa ct on Business Creation, Elimination or Expansion

California businesses that purchase the same LDVs as consumers would, like consumers, pay higher prices for the vehicles but save on operating costs, as is discussed in Section 5.3 above.

It is very lik ely that savings from reduced vehicle operating costs would end up as expenditures for other goods and services. These expenditures would flow through the economy, causing expansion or creation of new businesses in several sectors. Staff's economic analy sis shows that as the expenditures occur, jobs and personal income increase. As discussed in the LEV III ISOR, the Environmental Revenue Dynamic Assessment Model (E

- DRAM) was used to assess the overall impact of the regulation on California’s economy. Sp ecifically, E

- DRAM was used to estimate impacts on California's output of goods and services, personal income, and employment. In the analysis for the full ACC program which includes the proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation , jobs increase by 0.1 perc ent in 2025, and 0.2 percent in 2030 compared to the baseline economy that excludes the proposed ACC program. Similarly, personal income grows by $1 billion in 2020, by $3 billion in 2025, and $6 billion 2030. The estimates of the regulation's impact on these economic factors are used to assess the potential impacts on business creation, elimination, or expansion in California.

Staff’s proposed amendments will likely increase benefits to companies specializing in ZEVs and ZEV infrastructure. The creat ion of these businesses cannot be fully attributed to staff’s proposed amendments. Business and job creation from advanced vehicle technologies is part of the clean technology sector, which is currently experiencing higher than average job growth in Calif ornia and nationally. 58 However,

56 UC Davis, 2010. University of California, Davis. J.Axsen and K.Kurani. July 2010. “Reflexive Layers of Influence (RFI): A m odel of social influence, vehicle purchase behavior, and pro

- societal values .”
57 UC Davis, 2011c. University of California, Davis. T.Turrentine et al. Mary 2011. “The UC Davis MINI E Consumer Study .”
58 Brookings, 2011. The Brookings Institution. M. Mu ro, J. Rothwell, and D. Saha. “Sizing the Clean Economy: A National and Regional Green Jobs Report”69 staff’s proposal will likely increase opportunities for California

- based manufacturers to generate credits through production of ZEVs and TZEVs to increase flexibility for regulated manufacturers who may purchase credits fo r ZEV regulation compliance. Some specific sectors are discussed below.

5.5.1 Manufacturing Staff’s proposed amendments will require increased manufacturing of ZEV and PHEV componentry. There is very little vehicle component and final assembly in California, most of it occurring in other parts of the United States and internationally. However, as the ZEV amendments are expected to increase demand for these components and vehicles, these businesses would likely expand, which could offset any reductions experie nced in the conventional vehicle segment.

In California, smaller manufacturers not currently mandated to build ZEVs under the regulation do have plans to increase ZEV and ZEV component production. One vehicle assembly plant in the state, formerly a joint venture between General Motors and Toyota that produced conventional vehicles, was recently purchased by Tesla, a California company developing BEVs. Tesla intends to use the facility to manufacture the Model S BEV due to arrive on the market in mid

- 2012 . At one time, the Fremont facility employed approximately 4,000 people. Under Tesla’s plans, it may employ nearly 1,000 people. Coda Automotive, another California BEV company has announced plans to assemble vehicles in Benicia, California. 59

5.5.2 Infrast ructure Staff’s proposed amendments will increase demand for fueling infrastructure in California. There are several California

- based companies developing electric vehicle charging equipment, including Coulomb, AeroVironment, Better Place

, Clipper Creek, and 350Green. Additional non

- California based electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) providers are installing equipment in the state to support the growing BEV and PHEV markets

– including ECOtality, Leviton, and General Electric. Many of these
compan ies are leveraging external grants, for example U.S. DOE awards, and marketing and installing chargers in California. 60

Several major companies are entering the EVSE market and using traditional large retail outlets. General Electric is planning to dis tribute its EVSE, the WattStation, through Lowes home improvement stores. 61 Ford and its EVSE supplier, Leviton, are partnering with Best Buy and its Geek Squad for retail and distribution of their equipment to homes. 62 Over time, it is expected that partn erships will grow and innovative business models will emerge for servicing and installing EVSE.

59 BusinessTimes, 2011. San Francisco Business Times, September 12, 2011. “Coda to assemble electric cars in Benicia” http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2011/09/12/coda

- to

- assemble

- evs

- in

- benicia.html
60 Coulomb, 2011. Coulomb ChargePoint America. Website. http://chargepointamerica.com/ . Accessed September 20, 2011
61 Green Car Congress, 2011a. Green Car Congress.com, July 18, 201.1 “GE Energy partners with Lowe’s to provide EV chargers for home and commercial use; Siemens Energy providing char gers to Town of Cary, NC” http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/07/gesiemens

- 20110718.html Accessed September 9, 2011.
62 Green Car Congress, 2011b. Green Car Congress.com, January 13, 2011 “Ford developed home charging station for the Focus with Leviton” http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/01/ford

- 20110113.html70 Staff’s proposal will also create a demand for hydrogen fueling stations 63 . Several companies are already active in developing these stations, including Air Pr oducts

, Praxair, and Linde. Most of the hydrogen dispensed at these stations is expected to be produced within the state, primarily from central production facilities and then transported by truck to retail outlets. The Clean Fuels Outlet (CFO) ISOR prov ides more information regarding future hydrogen fueling demand, and infrastructure development.

5.6 Potential Costs to Local and State Agencies

The proposed amendments are not expected to result in an increase in costs for local and state agencies in the next three to five years. However, as advanced vehicles enter the fleet in larger numbers (10

- 15 years from now), there will likely be an impact to state and local revenue from vehicle and fuel sales taxes.

As a result of the projected fleet from the pro posed ACC program, large revenue losses could occur in later years unless fuel tax policy changes occur. The vast majority of the fuel tax loss will result from gasoline vehicles given that the existing tax structure applies only to gasoline and diesel fu el and has not changed over the years to adjust for inflation or changes in consumption levels. Although a small portion of the funding shortfall, ZEVs will result in a loss of fuel taxes because there are currently no road taxes on hydrogen and electrici ty sold for vehicles. Between 2017 and 2025, if gasoline taxation rates remain the same, California fuel tax revenue losses would be approximately $ 3.8 billion 64 , only a small portion of which would be associated with the ZEV population. These state reven ue losses will partially be offset by higher vehicle sales tax revenues given the higher incremental vehicle prices.

Although not a direct effect of the ZEV regulation, local governments will need to devote resources to planning and implementing electric charging and hydrogen infrastructure. These impacts are becoming clear as the Nissan Leaf and General Motors Volt are entering California communities, and as new hydrogen stations are being constructed today. These impacts can include the need to prepare city inspectors and permitting officials to approve residential charging equipment; the need for city planning officials to identify appropriate public and workplace charging; and the need for local officials to help evaluate and permit hydrogen stations.

To reduce the impact on local agencies, there are a number of programs designed to help communities implement planning programs for alternative fuels. 65

, 66

, 67 For

63 CaFCP, 2009 . California Fuel Cell Partnership. CaFCP Action Plan, February 2009. “Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle and Station Deployment Plan: A Strategy for Meeting the Challenge Ahead” http:// www.cafcp.org/sites/files/Action Plan FINAL.pdf
64 See Appendix C for more information.
65 Sonoma, 2011. County of Sonoma (CA), General Services Department, July 2011. “Electric Vehicle Charging Station Program and Installation Guidelines”
66 Rocky Mountain Institute, 2009. Rocky Mountain Institute, February 24, 2009. “Project Get Ready: Helping Communities Become Electrified Vehicle Pioneers”71 electric charging infrastructure, the U.S. DOE and the CEC are both providing grants directly to local governments for planning purposes. To augment this resource, several partnerships are preparing guidance documents with best practices for local governments to aid in their implementation. For electric charging, one partnership is the Californi a Plug

- Electric Vehicle (PEV) Collaborative

. For hydrogen, the California Fuel Cell Partnership has been working for a number of years to help local governments become prepared in planning, siting, and safety review of new stations. The U.S. DOE’s Clean Cities coalitions (California has 13 of these cities) also are instrumental in helping local governments become prepared for a number of alternative fuels.

Implementation of the ZEV regulation requires staff resources to oversee annual compliance by manuf acturers with ZEV program credits. As the regulation compliance requirements increase in future years, and more manufacturers are classified as LVMs, this state oversight role may require additional resources.

67 RolandBerger, 2010b. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants in collaboration with Rocky Mountain Institute, 2010.

“ PEV Readiness Study.”72 6 E MISSIONS AND HEALTH IMPACTS

Staff’s proposed ZEV amendments will result in an emissions benefit as compared to
current ZEV regulations , as will the entire ACC program as compared to no ACC
program

. Staff performed a combined LEV, ZEV, and CFO emissions analysis, which can be found i n Section V of the LEV ISOR. For the purpo ses of the ZEV regulation analysis , staff’s emissions assessment includes both criteria pollutant, particulate matter (PM) and GHG emissions, accounting for both tailpipe emissions in PHEVs, and upstream emissions from all advanced technologies considered. As illustrated below, the ZEV requirements provide benefits beyond that achieved by using a fleet NMOG + NOx average as proposed in the LEV III criteria emission regulation. This is primarily because upstream c riteria and PM emissions will be reduced after accounting for higher electricity and hydrogen production and lower gasoline production at refineries. However, because vehicles produced for the ZEV regulation are counted in the LEV III GHG fleet average standard, and because the GHG fleet average standard accounts for differences in upstream emissions for electricity and hydrogen, the ZEV regulation does not result in further GHG emission improvements beyond the LEV III GHG program.

The recently update d EMFAC 2011 was used to assess the vehicle emission impacts of staff’s proposal. Using EMFAC, staff modeled the proposed requirements and compared these results to a vehicle fleet under the current ZEV regulation (ARB, 2011b). A separate model was used to estimate upstream emissions, including production and delivery of electricity and hydrogen and vehicle manufacturing emissions. 68 Emission impacts from the Regulatory Alternatives A (lower case) and B (higher case) are not presented here, although impac ts from Alternative C (existing regulation) are shown.

As stated in Section 1, climate change poses a serious threat to the economic well

being, public health, natural resources, and environment of California. According to staff’s 2009 analysis, ZEVs ar e the most important technology for the LDV to achieve long

- term GHG emission reductions. As for criteria pollutant emissions, NOx emissions in the greater Los Angeles region must be reduced by two thirds to meet the current ozone attainment goal, even af ter considering all of the regulations in place today, with the most significant share of needed emission reductions com ing from long

- term advanced clean air technologies. In the San Joaquin Valley, the SIP identified the need to reduce NOx emissions by 8 0 tons/day in 2023 through the use of long

- term and advanced technology strategies. To put this in context, this is equivalent to eliminating the NOx emissions from all on

- road vehicles operating in these regions. This implies ZEVs are need ed as a critic al part of the future California fleet to achieve climate change goals and critical criteria pollutant emission reductions.

68 See Section V LEV III ISOR for more information.73 6.1 California Environmental Quality Act

ARB is the lead agency for the proposed regulation and has prepared an environmental analysis pursuant to its certified regulatory program. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) at Public Resources Code section 21080.5 allows public agencies with regulatory programs to prepare a plan or other written document in lieu of an environmental impact report or negative declaration once the Secretary of the Resources Agency has certified the regulatory program. ARB’s regulatory program has been certified by the Secretary of the Resources Agency. 69 As required by ARB’s certified regulatory progr am for the proposed regulations, the environmental analysis is included as Appendix B to this ISOR for the rulemaking. 70

Appendix B to the ISOR is an Environmental Analysis (EA) that provides an evaluation of the potential for environmental impacts associa ted with the proposed ACC Program. The proposed ACC program consists of amendments to the following regulations: LEV III, the E

- 10 Fuels Certification, Environmental Performance Label (EPL), ZEV, and the CFO. Four separate Regulatory Notices and Staff Re ports have been prepared for these proposed amendments. A single coordinated analysis of the potential environmental impacts can be found in Appendix B. The EA assesses the potential for significant long or short term adverse environmental impacts associ ated with the proposed actions and an analysis of those impacts. 71 In accordance with ARB’s regulations, the EA also describes any beneficial impacts. 72 The resource areas from the state CEQA Guidelines environmental checklist were used as a framework for assessing potentially significant impacts. 73

If comments that are received during the public review period raise significant environmental issues, staff will summarize and respond to the comments in writing. The written responses will be included in the Final Statement of Reasons (FSOR) for the regulation. In accordance with ARB certified regulatory program, prior to taking final action on the proposed regulation, the decision maker will approve the written
responses. 74 If the regulation is adopted, a N otice of Decision will be posted on ARB’s website and filed with the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency for public inspection. 75

6.2 Impacts to Minority and Low Income Communities

This section provides information on the ARB's activities to reach out t o minority and low

- income communities in the development of the ACC regulations.

69 State CEQA Guidelines section 15251 (d); CCR, title 17, sections 60005

- 60008.)
70 CCR, title 17, section 60005.
71 CCR, title 17, section 60005, subd (b).
72 CCR, title 17, section 60005, subd. (d).
73 State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G.

74 CCR, title 17, section 60007, subd (a).
75 CCR, title 17, section 60007, subd. (b).74 ARB Environmental Justice Policy ARB is has made inclusion of environmental justice an integral part of its activities. State law defines environmental justice as the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.

The Board approved Environmental Justice Policies and Actions (Policies) o n December 13, 2001. These Policies establish a framework for incorporating environmental justice into the ARB's programs consistent with the directives of State law. The Policies apply to all communities in California, but recognize that environmental jus tice issues have been raised more in the context of low

- income and minority communities.

Outreach to Minority and Low Income Communities Staff conducted workshops in communities with environmental justice concerns. The dates of all the workshops were as f ollows:

Date Location July 12, 2011 Fresno July 19, 2011 Pacoima July 26, 2011 Oakland

Each of the three workshops included an expert panel with opening remarks from a local community leader. The panels included one expert that focused on background information and environmental impacts of air pollution, one expert in the medical field that focused on the health impacts of air pollution, one expert from the American Lung Association of California that discussed its report titled “The Road to Clean Air,” and in some workshops also had an expert speak about local concerns. For instance, in F resno, one speaker addressed agriculture impacts of climate change. Having local community members and leaders participate in the workshops was greatly appreciated and added value and a local context to ARB's presence in these communities. After communit y members heard from the panel members, staff presented information about the ACC regulations and the CEQA scoping process.

There were a number of different comments and concerns expressed at each workshop and staff was able to engage in a constructive d ialogue with attendees about many air quality and climate change related issues. In general, community leaders and community members were very supportive of the work ARB is doing to take steps to reduce emissions from PCs and LDT s.

6.3 Health Impacts

Staff estimates that, statewide, implementation of the ACC regulations from 2010 through 2025 will eliminate approximately 1,4 00 tons of PM2.5 and 40,000 tons of NO X emissions from passenger vehicles. The estimate of the reduction of premature deaths assoc iated with these emission reductions for both primary PM and secondary75 PM (produced in the atmosphere from the precursor NO X ) are between 330 and 53 0. See the LEV III ISOR, subsection V.F for more details on this assessment of health impacts.

6.4 Emissions Impacts

Staff analyzed the emissions impacts resulting from the ZEV proposal compared to the existing regulation. Similar to the cost analysis, this was done assuming manufacturers also complied with proposed LEV III fleet standard. Several scenarios were created to evaluate a LEV III fleet with and without the new ZEV proposal. 76

WTW emissions profiles were derived from the upstream emissions factors and the LEV III fleet vehicle efficiency attributes. This information is summarized in Section V.E of the LEV III Staff Report.

6.4.1 Emissions Comparisons: Vehicle Technologies BEVs, FCVs, and PHEVs are all ultra

- low criteria pollutant and GHG emi tting technologies, even on a WTW basis. WTW emissions include upstream emissions from fuel production and ve hicle manufacturing, as well as vehicle emissions from PHEVs

. Three categories of conventional vehicles are shown to emphasize that their emissions profiles are improving over time as a result of the proposed LEV III Criteria Pollutant and GHG regulations.

Figure 1 6 : WTW NOx emissions comparison

76 In developing this new analysis, it was not accurate to compare this to the ZEV emissions i mpacts from the 2008 staff analysis for two reasons. The proposed LEV III emissions regulations mean that the entire fleet will become cleaner with or without the ZEV regulation. Additionally, the 2008 staff analysis only included the South Coast air bas in emission inventory.76 Figure 1 7 : W TW PM emissions comparison

Figure 1 8 : WTW ROG emissions comparison

* ROG means reactive organic gas77 Figure 1 9 : WTW GHG emissions comparison

6.4.2 Total Emissions

– Criteria and PM Overall, there will be a reduction in criteria pollutants as a result of the proposed ACC program standards. Criteria pollutant emission benefits for the ACC program are fully realized in the 2035

- 2040 timeframe when nearly all vehicles operating in the f leet are expected to be compliant with the proposed standards. By 2035 reactive organic gas ( ROG ) emissions woul d be reduced by an additional 34 percent

, and NOx emissions

, by an additional 37 percent, compared to 2035 without the proposed ACC rules. Unde r the proposed rule, the new PM2.5 standard is reduced to 3 mg/mi in 2020 and 1 mg/mi in 2028. With these standards, PM2.5 emissions will be essentially unchanged between 2010 and 2040 as growth in VMT offsets the tightening of the standard.

There is no benefit from including the ZEV proposal in terms of vehicle (tank

- to

- wheel or TTW) emissions. The LEV III criteria pollutant fleet standard is responsible for those emission reductions in the fleet; the fleet would become cleaner regardless of the ZEV
regu lation because manufacturers would adjust their compliance response to the standard by making cleaner conventional vehicles. However, upstream criteria and PM emissions are not captured in the LEV III criteria pollutant standard, so additional electricity and fuel production in the fleet results in increased upstream criteria pollutant emissions.

Table 6.1 presents the emissions impacts in WTW criteria pollutant and PM emissions in 2030 due to staff’s proposal. 2030 was chosen as a reference year to acc ount for a significant amount of fleet turn

- over.78 Table 6.1: Statewide Criteria and PM Emissions in 2030 (tons per day) 1

2030 ROG NMOG+ NOx PM

LEVIII fleet WTW emissions without new ZEV proposal 231 233 56.4

LEVIII fleet WTW emissions with new ZEV proposal 225 229.5 56.2

1 Refer to the LEVIII ISOR Section V and Appendix Q for additional details. Includes reduced petroleum upstream emissions and increased hydrogen and electricity production emissions

The upstream emissions from the production of hydrogen and electricity represents a very small fraction of the combined vehicle and upstream emissions impacts of the fleet, and is far outweighed by the reduction in gasoline production emissions, creating the net benefit shown in Table 6. 1 and 6.2 . Additionally, a portion of these upstream emissions are in non

- urban areas. 77

Table 6.2 below provides expanded details on the emission impacts shown in Table 6.1, and shows the WTW impacts for these emissions types

. 78

Table 6.2: Detailed Statewide Criteria and PM Emission Inputs in 2030 (tons per day)

2030 ROG NOx PM LEVIII fleet vehicle emissions (TTW) 1 126 116 26 Upstream emissions from LEVIII fleet without ZEV proposal (WTT) 105 117 30.4

LEVIII fleet WTW emissions benefits without new ZEV proposal 231 233 56.4 Increased upstream emissions from hydrogen 0.22 1.11 0.27 Increased upstream emissions from electricity 0.24 1.00 0.22 Reduced upstream refinery emissions due to ZEVs

- 6.4

- 5.6

- 0.66

LEVIII fleet WTW emissions benefits with new ZEV proposal 225 229.5 56.2

Criteria and PM emissions benefits will vary by region throughout the state depending on the location of emission sources. Refinery emission reductions will occur primarily in the east Bay Area and South Coast region where existing refinery facilities operate. As refinery operations reduce production and emissions, the input and output activities, such as truck and ship deliveries, will also decline. This includes crude oil import ed through the Los Angeles and Oakland ports, as well as pipeline and local gasoline truck distribution in all regions of the state.

The small increase in upstream emissions associated with new electricity and hydrogen transportation fuel production will occur in various regions. H ydrogen production will predominantly occur from existing centralized hydrogen facilities already operatin g to supply refinery and industrial applications. These facilities are primarily located in the large metropolitan areas near gasoline refinery operations. The majority of early FCV sales are expected to occur in the South Coast region, the hydrogen faci lities in this region will likely be used to produce the fuel for the market

.

77 For details on how these emissions are incorporated into the full fleet, refer to the LEVIII ISOR Section V

. E

. 78 Refer to the LEVIII ISOR Appendix Q for additional details and a graphical representation of the upstream portion of t his analysis.7 9 Electricity production increases will occur throughout the state at power facilities that supply regions where BEV and PHEV sales and use occur. Staff assumes that by 2020 , em issions associated with plug

- in vehicle charging will be characterized by new power facilities added to the grid between now and 2020 . This is assumed to be cleaner natural gas facilities as well as new renewables to comply with California’s 33 percent re newable portfolio standard (RPS)

.
The upstream emissions impacts are quantified in the LEVIII ISOR in Appendix V.E

, and include an estimation of the split between urban and non

- urban source locations.

6.4.3 Total Emissions

- Climate Change Overall, the ACC pr ogram would provide major reductions in GHG emissions. By 2025, CO 2 emissions would be reduced by almost 14 million metric tonnes (MMT) per year, which is 12 percent from baseline levels. In r eduction increases in 2035 to 32 MMT which is a 27 percent red uction from baseline levels. By 2050, the proposed regulation will reduce emissions by more than 42 MMT per year, which is a reduction of 33 percent from baseline levels.

The ZEV regulation does not provide GHG emission reductions in addition to the LEV III GHG regulation given that ZEV emissions are included in determ ining compliance with the GHG standard. Specifically, because the GHG standard includes upstream emissions, in addition to the vehicle emissions, there is no difference in GHG emissions und er varying ZEV scenarios.

Given that climate change emissions remain in the upper atmosphere for long periods of time (50

- 100 years), climate impacts are a function of the cumulative emissions. As a result, early reduction in annual climate emission rates is important to ultimately stabilize the atmosphere. For the 2050 emission projections from this proposal, emission rates were assumed to remain fixed at the levels in this analysis: 2020 emission rates for upstream factors and 2025 emission rates fo r vehicle performance.

6.4.4 Energy Diversity and Energy Demand The vehicle technologies expected to be used in compliance with the regulation typically use fuel more efficiently and/or use alternative fuels, and thus when fully commercialized will reduce deman d for petroleum fuels. Reduced demand for gasoline and diesel alleviates the reliance on a single fuel source, creating a more robust fuel supply. Additionally, the erratic and increasing price trends of oil create economic losses for California. Reduc ing gasoline demand will also reduce the need for additional refining, transportation and distribution facilities, thus preventing additional air and water pollution as noted above.

Moreover, because electricity and hydrogen can be produced from renewabl e resources such as solar, wind, or h ydropower, or biomass feedstock , the staff’s proposed amendments would increase the number of vehicles using these fuels and help pave the way towards a sustainable energy future.80 7 COST

- EFFECTIVENESS

Cost

- effectiveness is a measure of the cost incurred to achieve a specific outcome, and is a metric that is used to compare alternatives to achieve the same outcome. In ARB regulations, the specific outcome measured is vehicle emissions. Although a
cost

- effectiveness valu e with emissions is determined here, the ZEV regulation does not have explicit emission reduction targets given that the measure of compliance is the number of advanced vehicles sold. As a result, the cost effectiveness value is not the primary factor use d to determine the proposed requirement. However, looking at the both the LEV III Criteria Pollutant and GHG regulations and ZEV regulation together, there will likely be a $290 savings per ton of CO 2 reduced in 2025 and $320 savings per ton CO 2 reduced i n 2035. For criteria pollutants, the cost effectiveness of the three regulations will be $4 per ton of ROG plus NOx reduced.81 8 SUMMARY AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Adoption of staff’s proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation will begin a transformation of California’s LDV fleet to one that uses a portfolio of fuels most of which will sustainable and exhibit low carbon emissions . As the technology

- forcing piece of the ACC package, the ZEV regulation is the catalyst to th is transfor mative process. Proposed amendments to the regulation focus on technologies that help
meet mid

- and long

- term climate goals, while simplifying the program where needed as much as possible. By requiring increased numbers of ZEVs and TZEVs in the 2018 thr ough 2025 model year timeframe, vehicle costs will decrease due increased production volumes driving down battery and fuel cell cost s , which will help these advanced technologies achieve commercial success in the California LDV market. The following table is a summary of staff proposed changes:

Timeframe Purpose of Proposed Amendment Proposed Amendment

2009

– 2017 Model Year Compliance Flexibility Extend travel provision for BEVs Extend advanced demonstration provision Remove carry forward provision Reduce 2015 through 2017 requirement for IVMs Adjust Credits and Allowances Increase credits for Type V ZEVs to 9 credits per vehicle Add Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles
2018 and Subsequent Model Years Adjust Manufacturer Size Definitions Modify IVM and LVM size definitions Modify transitions for manufacturers changing size categories Focus Requirements on ZEVs and TZEVs Remove PZEV and AT PZEVs from 2018 and beyond compliance Allow manufacturers to use banked PZEV and AT PZEVs, under a cap Increase 2018 + Requirements Increase overall credit requirements and reduce the amount of credits earned per vehicle Provide Flexibility for IVMs Allow IVMs to meet requirement with credits from TZEVs Continue Advanced Demonstration credits for

non

- LVMs Simplify Credit Calculations Calculate ZEV and TZEV credits based on
range Modify Travel Provision Extend Travel Provision for FCVs only Encourage GHG Over Compliance Allow manufacturers to offset part of the 2018 through 2021 ZEV requirement through over

compliance with GHG fleet standard Add New Vehicle Add range extended BEVs as compliance option82 Staff recommends that the Board amend section s 1962.1 and 1962.3(renumbered from 1962.2) , Title 13, California Code of Regulations, and the incorporated test procedures and related regulations, and adopt section 1962.2, and t he incorporated test procedures . The proposed amendments and adoptions are set forth in the Proposed Regulation Order in Appendix A.83 9 SUMMARY AND RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED REGULATIONS The need and rationale for the proposed amendments were di scussed extensively in Chapter 2 . In addition, in this chapter, staff provides a plain English description of the proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation.

Pursuant to Government Code section 11349.1, Government Code section 11346.2(b)(1), and title 1, California Code of Regulations, section 10, staff is providing a brief summary below that identifies each section in the regulation where amendments are propos ed and describes the rationale for each proposed amendment.

§1962.1 Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards for 2009 through 2017 Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles.

Previously, section 1962.1 and incorporated test procedure s applied to 2009 and subsequent model years. Section 1962.1 and its incorporated test procedure s now apply to 2009 through 2017 model years, and a new section (section 1962.2) and its incorporated test procedure s apply to 2018 and subsequent model years. Language is being changed throughout section 1962.1 to clarify the applicable model years. Also, the word “section” was changed to “subdivision” for clarification purposes. Also, the word “Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle” or “TZEV” has replaced the word “Enhanced Advanced Technology Partial Zero Emission Allowance Vehicle” or “Enhanced AT PZEV”. Throughout, spelling and grammatical changes have also been made.

(a) The purpose of this subdivision is to define ZEV certification standards. This subd ivision was amended to clarify that the standards apply to 2009 through 2017 model years, rather than just models.

(b)(1)(A) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe manufacturer’s minimum percentage ZEV credit requirement. This subdivision was mo dified to clarify the origin of the production number that a manufacturer’s requirement is to be based on, which is in the annual NMOG production report. The NMOG production report submitted by a regulated manufacturer to ARB i ndicates the number of vehic les delivered for sale in California, and to which standard each vehicle is certified. A sentence was added to ensure there were no discrepancies as to which production number is used to determine a manufacturer’s requirement.

(b)(1)(B) The purpose of t his subdivision is to calculate the number of vehicles to which the percentage ZEV requirement is applied. This subdivision was amended to organize the methods by applicable model years and to clarify the original intent of the language. This subdivision allows a manufacturer to switch production determination methods, explains that production averaging has no effect on a manufacturer’s size determination, and clarifies how a manufacturer should treat vehicles delivered for sale by other manufacturers in t heir production determination.84 (b)(1)(B)1. A clarifying sentence was added to explain that a manufacturer could base its ZEV obligation on the number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale in the same year, rather than on a three year average method

.
(b)(1)(B)2. A sentence was added to clarify an example of how the prior year method works.

(b)(2)(D)1. The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the ZEV requirements for LVMs for model years 2012 through 2014. The language was amended to cla rify the intent of the subdivision, which is that credits are required for compliance and are generated from manufacturers delivering ZEVs for sale.

(b)(2)(D)2. The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the ZEV requirements for LVMs for model year s 2015 through 2017. The language was amended to clarify the intent of the subdivision, which is that credits are required for compliance and are generated from manufacturers delivering ZEVs for sale.

(b)(2)(D)4. The purpose of this subdivision is to describe how additional credits for ZEVs placed in transportation system s can be used to meet a manufacturer’s ZEV requirement. The language was modified to clarify that the limit described applies to credits earned by ZEVs placed in transportation system s.

(b)(2)(E) This subdivision is being deleted because requirements for 2018 and subsequent model years have been moved to section 1962.2.

(b)(3) This subdivision allows IVMs to meet their entire ZEV requirement through delivering for sale PZEVs . T his subdivision was amended to reduce the IVM ’s overall credit requirement in model years 2015 through 2017 to allow them more time to transition into more stringent requirements starting in model year 2018.

(b)(4) This subdivision describes how SVMs and ILVM s are not mandated to produce ZEVs by the ZEV regulation, but may earn and market ZEV credits. This subdivision was clarified to ensure SVMs and ILVM s are able t o earn and market TZEV and AT PZEV credits.

(b)(5) This subdivision is being deleted because it is not necessary to clarify how a manufacturer is to count ZEVs and PZEV in a manufacturer’s fleet average NMOG calculations. Section 1961 clearly explains how a PZEV and ZEV should be counted in a manufacturer ’s NMOG calculations.

(b)(7)(A) This subdivision explains how a manufacturer applies the ZEV regulation as the manufacturer increases its California production volume and is redefined as a differently sized manufacturer. Currently, manufacturers are giv en five years of lead time when transitioning into a larger size definition. For example, if a manufacturer were to increase in sales, such that its 2011 through 2013 sales average exceeded the current large volume manufacturer threshold of 60,000 sales, the85 manufacturer would be subject to the full ZEV requirements in model year 2019. However, due to staff proposed modifications for definition and lead time, the language is being modified to reflect that manufacturers starting their transition before 201 8 will be subject to full ZEV requirements starting in model year 2018. This means, for example, if a manufacturer’s 2013 through 2015 sales average (for the first time) is 61,000 vehicles, then instead of being subject to large volume manufacturer requir ements in 2021, the manufacturer will be subject to large volume manufacturer requirements in 2018. Similar language is being added to reflect that when aggregation affects a manufacturer’s size, the manufacturer will be subject to the stepped up requirem ents starting in the fourth model year or in 2018, whichever occurs first.

(b)(7)(C) This subdivision explains how to calculate California production volume in change of ownership situations. This subdivision was modified to explain how to determine the model year when a manufacturer is simultaneously producing two model years of vehicles at the time of a change of ownership, which is to be based on the earlier model year. Additionally, an example was added to clarify the application of the model yea r determination.

(c)(2)(A) This subdivision establishes which tailpipe emission standards a PZEV is to certify to in section 1961. This subdivision is being amended to separate the 2009 through 2014 model years standards from the 2015 through 2017 model year standards. This is due to new LEV III criteria pollutant fleet standards beginning in model year 2015. These will include new tailpipe standards f or NMOG + NOx

. Staff will also be proposing new emission certification categories that go b eyond SULE V standards. Due to these change in LEV III, the language is being modified so that for a PZEV to earn credit within the ZEV regulation in 2015 and subsequent model years, the vehicle must be certified to the more stringent SULEV 30 or SULEV 20 standards, and meet LEV III zero

- evaporative standards.

(c)(2)(B) This subdivision establishes which evaporative emission standards a PZEV is to certify to in section 1976, which is the zero evaporative standard. This subdivision is being amended to separate 20 09 through 2014 model
year standards from the 2015 through 2017 model year standards. This is due to new LEV III criteria pollutant fleet standards beginning in model year 2015. There will be two options for meeting the zero evaporative emissions requir ement in model year 2015 and beyond. Option 1 is identical to the current "optional zero evaporative" requirement in that manufacturers must demonstrate a zero evaporative fuel system using a rig test and also meet a whole vehicle test value of 350 mg. O ption 2 allows manufacturers to demonstrate a zero evaporative system by doing a "mini rig test" and by meeting a whole vehicle test value of 300 mg. In addition, if a manufacturer chooses this second option, they can average among the vehicles within a s tandard category. Option 1 and Option 2 are equivalent. Due to these change in LEV III, the language is being modified so that for a PZEV to earn credit within the ZEV regulation in 2015 and subsequent model years, the vehicle mu st be certified to LEV I II zero evaporative standards, but can use either option.86 (c)(3)(A) The purpose of this subdivision is to show the equation for determining a vehicle’s zero e mission VMT allowance. The table within t his subdivision is being corrected to reso lve inconsist encies in the zero emission VMT allowance equation. The language has also been clari fied as to the UF to be used in determining a manufacturer’s zero emission VMT allowance, which is according to Section 4.5.2 Equation 5 and the “Fleet UF” Utility Factor E quation Coefficients in Section 4.5.2, Table 3, in J2841 (March 2009). Also the language is being clarified that a vehicle may not earn more than 1.39 zero emission VMT PZEV allowances.

(c)(3)(B) This subdivision is being deleted because no automakers h ave included vehicles requiring or requesting such exemptions in any vehicle planned through 2017 model year.

(c)(4)(B)1. The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the varying types of advanced componentry allowances for which a manufacturer may qua lify . This subdivision is being amended to remove Type C advanced componentry allowance. ZEV technology has advanced and staff now believes that the minimum qualifying system should be increased to the higher voltage Type D because (1) AT PZEVs need
to m ake use of systems that more closely represent those that are needed for ZEVs, and (2) no manufacturers have certified, or have disclosed plans to certify, a Type C AT PZEV. The language prior to the table explaining the various advanced componentry types is being amended to reflect that there are four rather than five types of advanced componentry allowances. Additionally, the table is being updated with new language to reflect the intent of the electric drive system peak power output for Type F and Type G advanced componentry allowance s and that the vehicle must travel 10 miles all electrically on either the UDDS or the US06 drive schedule.

(c)(4)(B)4. This subdivision is being deleted to remove Type C advanced componentry allowance. ZEV technology has advanced and staff now believes that the minimum qualifying system should be increased to the h igher voltage Type D because AT PZEVs need to make use of systems that more closely represent those th at are needed for ZEVs, and no manufacturers have certi fied, or have disclosed plans to certify, a Type C AT PZEV.

(c)(4)(B)9. The purpose of this subdivision is to establish severability, which allows that if any of 1962.1(c)(4)(B)1.

– 8. is found, that the remainder of section 1962.1 remains in full force and effect. The text in this subdivision is being simplified to reflect the intent of the language.

(c)(7)(B) The purpose of this subdivision is to allow a PZEV which earns a zero emission VMT allowance to earn an additional credit multiplier if the vehicle is purchased or offered for an extended lease. This subdivision is being clarified to reflect the intent that the multiplier will no longer be available after model year 2011.

(d)(5)(A) The purpose of this subdivision is to define the various ZEV tiers for determining a vehicle’s credit. This subdivision is being modified to define Type87 I.5x and Type IIx vehicles (range extended BEV s), vehicles are referenced in two other places in secti on 1962.1.

(d)(5)(C) The purpose of this subdivision is to explain how a manufacturer earns ZEV credits, and how delivered for sale and placed in service is credited for each ZEV. The language is being modified to reflect that a vehicle must be deliv ered for sale and placed in service in the same state in order to earn the total credit amount. This change is due to some manufacturers having internet based sales, and questions surrounding the location of a vehicle’s delivery and placement in service. Staff’s proposed change clarifies the original intent of the provision. The language has also been modified to place a five year limit on 2012 and prior model year ZEVs to collect “placed in service” credit. This five year limit to ensure that the ZEVs offered to consumers are moderately current advanced technology and advanced technology components have not deteriorated. Additionally, the language and table have been modified to reflect the new Type I.5x and Type IIx category, and the amount of credits earned in the 2012 through 2017 timeframe. The table has also been amended to reflect that Type V ZEVs, which are 300 mile range FCV s, earn 9 credits each in the 2015 through 2017 timeframe. This modification gives FCV s additional incentives as compared to BEV s, which have been affected due to other modifications in this timeframe.

(d)(5)(D) The purpose of this subdivision is to allow a ZEV to earn an additional credit multiplier if the vehicle is purchased or offered for an extended lease. This subdi vision is being clarified to reflect the intent that the multiplier will no longer be available after model year 2011.

(d)(5)(E) The purpose of this subdivision is allow manufacturers to count a ZEV delivered for sale and placed in service in California as if it were also delivered for s ale and placed in service in a S ection 177 ZEV state

.
(d)(5)(E)1.a. This subdivision is being clarified to apply to manufacturers with a ZEV requirement only, which is the original intent of the text.

(d)( 5)(E)1.b. This subdivision is being clarified to apply to manufacturers with a ZEV requirement only, which is the original intent of the text.

(d)(5)(E)2. This subdivision is being clarified to apply to manufacturers with a ZEV requirement only, which is the original intent of the text. This subdivision has also been clarified to allow Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles under this provision, through 2017 model year. Additionally, this subdivision is being changed to reflect that both intermediate volume and LVMs may use this provision, not just LVMs . Also, manufacturers producing Type I, I.5, and II ZEVs, which are BEVs , may use this provision for those vehicle s through 2017 model year, rather than just 2014 model
year. California markets have matured and are well prepared for increased sales
requ irements. However, markets in S ection 177 ZEV states need additional time to88 prepare for ZEVs, and some vehicle manufacturers need time to expand their BEV offerings to other states and to different climates.

(d)(5)(F) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the specifications and requirements that a NEV must meet in order to received ZEV credit.

(d)(5)(F)3. The purpose of this section is to describe the warranty that must be offered for NEVs that qual ify for credits under the ZEV regulation. The language is being simplified and clarified to better explain rules regarding prorated NEV warranties

.
(d)(5)(F)5. This subdivision is being added to require that NEVs must meet the charging connection standar d starting in model year 2014 to ensure all electric vehicles, including NEVs meet the same standard.

(d)(5)(G) This subdivision is being added to describe how Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles earn ZEV credit. Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles are BEV s equ ipped with an APU

.
(d)(5)(G)1. This subdivision is being added to require Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles to meet PZEV requirements, ensuring the vehicles are low emitting under all operation.

(d)(5)(G)2. This subdivision is being added to require Ty pe I.5x and Type IIx vehicles to meet Type G advanced componentry requirements, that is

, the vehicles must at least be able to run 10 all electric US06 miles before the APU turns on.

(d)(5)(G)3. This subdivision is being added to require the vehicle’s UDDS range after the APU first starts is less than or equal to the vehicle’s all electric UDDS test range prior to the APU start. The subdivision also clarifies that the APU may not start until the battery is being full depleted. These requirements ensur e that the APU functionality is limited and that the unit is not relied upon instead of the battery electric
power.

(d)(5)(G)4. This subdivision is being added to require that Type I.5x vehicles must have at least 75 miles electric urban dynamometer rang e and that Type IIx vehicles must have at least 100 miles electric urban dynamometer range. Staff established a minimum range of 80 miles for Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles because the examples of “full function” BEVs coming to market all have at least 8 0 miles range. It is important that the minimum range for eligibility be equivalent to full function BEVs in the marketplace.

(g)(2)(A) This subdivision explains how the credits earned by a manufacturer are expressed in the ZEV bank. This subdivision is being amended to separate the 2009 through 2014 model years standards from the 2015 through 2017 model year standards. Up to model year 2014, ZEV credits are expressed in terms of89 g/mi NMOG. After model year 2015, the language is being modified to re flect that ZEV credits will now be expressed in terms of whole ZEV credits. This is due to new LEV III criteria pollutant fleet standards beginning in model year 2015.

(g)(2)(B) This subdivision explains how the credits earned by a manufacturer are expressed in the ZEV bank. This subdivision is being amended to separate the 2009 through 2014 model years standards from the 2015 through 2017 model year standards. Up to model year 2014, PZEV credits are expressed in terms of g/mi NMOG. After model year 2015, the language is being modified to reflect that PZEV credits will now be expressed in terms of whole ZEV credits. This is due to new LEV III criteria pollutant fleet standards beginning in model year 2015.

(g)(2)(C) This subdivision explains that various credit types are held in separate accounts within the ZEV bank. This subdivision is being amended to include a separate account for Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles, since those credits are treated differently.

(g)(2)(D) This subdivision is being added to clarify how ZEV credits and debits are to be rounded. This amendment is meant to provide clarification and to avoid differen ces in calculating ZEV credits and debits.

(g)(2)(E) This subdivision is being added to explain how g/mi NMOG ZEV credits will be converted into ZEV credits after 2014 model year. This will be accomplished by di viding each manufacturer’s 2014 model year g/mi NMOG ZEV credit balance by 0.035. This is due to ZEV credits being expressed in terms of whole ZEV credits starting in model year 2015.

(g)(2)(F) This subdivision is being added to explain how a manufacturer is to convert its PZEV and AT PZEV cred its for use after model year 2017. Due to staff’ s proposed change no longer allow ing a manufacture to meet part of its ZEV requirement with PZEV and AT PZEV credits, manufacturers will be left with banks of PZEV and AT PZEV credits. In a shift toward req uiring manufacturers to place vehicles rather than use banked credits in order to comply with the regulation, it is appropriate to discount and limit the use of banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits in 2018 and subsequent model years. This provision allows manu facturers to convert those credits through discounting the value of the credits after model year 2017 model year compliance.

(g)(4) The purpose of this subdivision is to allow manufacturers to earn full credit for TZEVs and ZEVs placed in advanced dem onstration programs, even if the vehicle is not delivered for sale or placed in service. This subdivision is being reorganized to into two subdivisions: (A) TZEVs and (B) ZEVs. This is due to advanced demonstration programs expiring for TZEVs in 2014 mod el year, and continuing for ZEVs through model year 2017. New text in subdivision (B) is duplicative, only extending the availability of advanced demonstration credits for90 ZEVs, and describes guidelines for ZEVs placed in advanced demonstration
programs.

(g)(5)(A) The purpose of this subdivision is to explain transportation system credits and the general guideline s for manufacturers placing ZEV program vehicles into transportation systems. This subdivision is being amended to explicitly restrict manuf acturers from being able to use subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(E)

– the travel provision

- for transportation system credits. This language is being added to clarify the original intent of the language: manufacturers are only allowed to travel vehicle credits, n ot additional credits earned by vehicles placed in specific applications.

(g)(5)(B) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe how manufacturers earn transportation system credits. This subdivision is being amended to allow Type I.5x and Type IIx ve hicles to earn transportation system credits. This is because Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles are a new vehicle category and are to be treated the same as ZEVs under most circumstances. The table in this subdivision is also being amended to award fewer c redits for TZEVs and ZEVs placed in transportation system credits. Limiting the number of credits offered for reasons other than vehicle placement is to ensure ZEV and TZEV commercial success, and simplifies the regulation.

(g)(5)(C)1. The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the caps on the use of credits earned by manufacturers placing ZEVs in a transportation system. This subdivision is being amended to include Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles. This is because Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles are a new vehicle category and are to be treated the same as ZEVs under most circumstances.

(g)(5)(D) The purpose of this subd ivision is to explain how ARB Executive Officer is to allocate transportation system credits to manufacturers. The intent of the language is being clarified to specify that vehicles must be placed in a tran sportation system for at least two years, as stated in 1962.1(g)(5)(A). This subdivision is also being amended to sunset after model year 2017 compliance. It is not necessar y to continue these car shar ing programs, when mostly third parties are running transportation system programs, and earning credit, rather than the manufacturers themselves. After meeting with the third parties responsible for transportation systems, staf f believes it is more important to establish incentive programs for transportation system, rather than allow third parties to earn credit through transportation systems, and sell their credits to regulated manufacturers.

(g)(6) The purpose of this subdivision is to explain how a manufacturer submits credits for compliance with the regulation to ARB’s Executive Officer, and how ZEV credits can be used to meet a manufacturer’s obligation. This subdivision is being amended to separ ate 2009 through 2014 model years from the 2015 through 2017 model years. This is due to ZEV credits being expressed in terms of ZEV credits, instead of in g/mi NMOG ZEV credits, starting in model year 2015.91 (g)(6)(A) The purpose of this subdivision is to explain how manufacturers are allowed to use NEV credits to meet its obligation. The table in this subdivision is being amended to extend the caps for NEV credits through 2017. The caps through 2014 were sufficient, and it is appropriate to extend the same caps through model year 2017.

(g)(6)(B) The purpose of this subdivision is to limit a large volume manufacturer ’s ability to bank a ZEV credit after it is earned. After the time limit is reached, the manufacturer may only use the banked ZEV credit to meet the portion of its requirement that can be met with TZEVs, AT PZEVs, or PZEVs. This subdivision is being amended to clarify the intent of the text: credits from ZEVs but not from NEVs are limited under this provision. Additionally, this subdivis ion is being amended to sunset the carry forward provisions for ZEVs after 2011 model year. Currently requirements plateau for three years at a time but hold steady indefinitely at a relatively low level for 2018 through 2025 model years. Because staff i s proposing to increase volumetric requirements each year for model years 2018 through 2025, it is unlikely that manufacturers will be able to bank large volumes of credits for later use.

(g)(6)(C) The purpose of this subdivision is to limit to two years how long manufacturers other than LVMs are able to bank a ZEV credit after it is earned. This subdivision is being amended to clarify the intent of the text: credits from ZEVs but not from NEVs are limited under this provision. Additionally, this subdiv ision is being amended to sunset the carry forward provisions for ZEVs after 2011 model year. Currently requirements plateau for three years at a time but hold steady at a relatively low level for 2018 through 2025 model years. Because staff is proposing to increase volumetric requirements each year for model years 2018 through 2025, it is unlikely that manufacturers will be able to bank large volumes of credits for later use.

(g)(6)(D) This subdivision is being added to specify that manufacturers may

u se Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles to meet up to 50 percent of the portion of a manufacturer’s requirement that must be met with credits from ZEVs. Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicle credits are limited to ensure LVMs still produce pure ZEVs in the 2012 throu gh 2017 timeframe.

(g)(7)(A) This subdivision describes the amount of time a manufacturer has to fulfill a ZEV obligation deficit. This subdivision is being amended to separate 2009 through 2014 model years from the 2015 through 2017 model years. This is due to ZEV credits being expressed in terms of whole ZEV credits, instead of in g/mi NMOG ZEV credits, starting in model year 2015. Additionally, the word “credits” is added throughout to clarify that a manufacturer is required to submit credits in compliance with the requirement, rather than vehicles. This subdivision is also being ame nded to clarify the intent that only credits from ZEVs are allowed to fulfill a ZEV deficit.

(g)(8) The purpose of this subdivision is to explain that a manufacturer will be subject to penalties if it fails to make up a ZEV deficit, and gives the equa tion for calculating the resulting ZEV penalty. This subdivision is being amended to92 separate 2009 through 2014 model years from the 2015 through 2017 model years. This is due to ZEV credits being expressed in terms of whole ZEV credits, instead of in g/ mi NMOG ZEV credits, starting in model year 2015. Staff interprets the overall penalty for ZEV non

- compliance to be $5,000 per whole credit not produced. The language in this subdivision is being amended to reflect this intent

(i)(2) This subdivision is being added to define “auxiliary power unit” because range extended BEV s are equi pped with an auxiliary power unit

.
(i)(3) This subdivision is being renumbered due to the addition of other definitions.

(i)(4) This subdivision is being renumbered d ue to the addition of other definitions.

(i)(5) This subdivision is being renumbered due to the addition of other definitions.

(i)(6) This subdivision defines Enhanced AT PZEVs. This subdivision is being amended to indicate that Enhanced AT PZEV is no menclature used through 2011 model year, and that Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle or TZEV is interchangeable for Enhanced AT PZEV. This subdivision is being renumbered due to the addition of other definitions.

(i)(7) This subdivision is being renumbe red due to the addition of other definitions.

(i)(8) This subdivision is being renumbered due to the addition of other definitions.

(i)(9) This subdivision is being added to define “proportional value” because this value is used to calculate the ratio applied to credits earned in Section 177 ZEV states for subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(E).

(i)(10) This subdivision is being added to define “Range Extended Battery Electric Vehicle” because manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation with this new type of vehicle.

(i)(11) This subdivision is being renumbered due to the addition of other definitions.

(i)(12) This subdivision is being renumbered due to the addition of other definitions.93 (i)(13) This subdivision is being added to define “Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle” to redefine Enhanced AT PZEVs, and is the new nomenclature for these types of vehicles for 2012 and subsequent model years.

(i)(14) This subdivision is being renumbered due to the addition of other definitions.

(i)(15) This subdivision is being renumbered due to the addition of other definitions.

(j) The purpose of this subdivision is to define abbreviations us ed throughout section 1962.1. N ew abbreviations are being added as appropriate.

(l)(1)(A) The purpose of this subdivision is to clarify that credit balances for each type of ZEV regulation vehicle is required to be disclosed annually. This subdivision is being amended to include Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles. Thi s is because Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles are a new vehicle category and are to be treated the same as ZEVs under most circumstances.

Health & Safety Code sections 38562 and 43018.5 are being added as references to reflect the contribution of those s ections towards the GHG emission reductions referenced in sections 38562 and 43018.5. Health and Safety Code section 43204 was added as a reference because subdivisions 1962.1(c)(2)(D) and 1962.2(c)(2)(D) reference the warranty requirements of California Code of Regulations subdivisions 2037(b)(2) and 2038(b)(2) and, in turn, those subdivisions reference the requirements of Health and Safety Code section 43204.

List of Changes to “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2009 through 2017 Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid Electric Vehicles in the Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicle Classes”

The test procedure s are included by reference in section 1962.1, and contain an exact copy of the regulatory text, including the amendments being proposed in section 1962.1 in Section C. Previously, section 1962.1 and incorporated test procedure s applied to 2009 and subsequent model years. Section 1962.1 and its incorpo rated
te st procedure now apply to 2009 through 2017 model years, and a new section (section 1962.2) and its incorporated test procedure s apply to 2018 and subsequent model years. Language is being changed throughout the test procedure s to clarify the applicable m odel years. Additionally, due to the addition of a new Section E, existing Sections E through I have been renumbered accordingly.94 Section B. Definitions and Terminology

“All

- Electric Range”

– This definition is being amended to remove language tha t applies to blended off vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles because equivalent all electric range does not mean all electric range.

“Auxiliary power unit”

– This definition is being amended to add language that specifies what auxiliary power unit means for the purposes of range extended BEV s. This definition conforms with the definition found in section 1962.1.

“Enhanced AT PZEV”

– This definition is being amended to apply only to model year 2009 through 2011 vehicles , due to new nomenclatur e used in model year 2012 and subsequent model years. Additionally, clarification is being added to the definition that Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle or TZEV means Enhanced AT PZEV.

“Proportional value”

– This definition is being added to define the value used to calculate the ratio applied to credits earned in Section 177 ZEV states for subdivision 1962.1 (d)(5)(E) (subdivision C.4.5(e) of test procedures).

“Range extended battery electric vehicle”

– This definition is being added to define a new vehicle category with which manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation.

“Transitional zero emission vehicle”

– This definition is being added to redefine Enhanced AT PZEVs, and is the new nomenclature for these types of vehicles in 2012 and subsequent model years.

“Type I.5x”

- This definition is being added to define a new vehicle category with which manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation.

“Type IIx”

- This definition is being added to define a new vehicle category with which manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation.

“Zero Emission Vehicle Miles Traveled”

– This definition is being amended to clarify that “VMT” means vehicle miles traveled.

Section C. Zero Emission Vehic le Standards

The amendments made throughout section 1962.1 have been duplicated in this section of the test procedure.

Section D. Certification Requirements

D.1. This subdivision exempts ZEVs from all mileage and service accumulation, durability

- data vehicle, and emission

- data vehicle testing, because ZEVs do not emit. This subdivision is being amended to ensure Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles are not95 exempt from such require ments because these vehicles have tailpipe and evaporative emissions.

Sect ion E. Determination of NEV Acceleration, Top Speed, and Constant Speed Range

This new subdivision is being added to specify testing methods for NEV certification.

Section G. Test Procedures for 2012 and Subsequent Model Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

G.12 This new subdivision is needed to establish the calculations that must be used to determine the GHG emissi ons values attributable to off vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles for the 2017 and subsequent model years.

G.12.1 This subdivision is needed to calculate the combined city/highway GHG emissions value for an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle.

G.12.2 This subdivision is needed to calculate the city (urban) GHG emissions value for off

- vehicle ch arge capable hybrid electric vehicles.

G.12.2.1 This subdivision is needed to provide the equation used to calculate the urban GHG emissions value for off vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles.

G.12.2.2 This subdivision is needed to define th e “Charge

- Depleting to C harge

Sustaining Range” that is used in the calculations in subsections G.12.2.5 and G.12.3.

G.12.2.3 This subdivision is needed to provide the utility factors for urban and highway cycles that are used in the calculations in subs ections G.12.2.1 and G.12.3.

G.12.2.4 This subdivision is needed to provide the equation used to calculate the charge

- depleting GHG rate from electricity use in each test cycle used in the calculation in subsection G.12.2.1.

G.12.2.5 This subdivision is needed to provide the equation used to calcul ate the urban or highway charge

- depleting electricity use used in the calculation in subsection G.12.2.4.

G.12.2.6 This subdivision is needed to provide the equation used to calculate the weighted CO 2 mass emissions of the charge

- sustaining test used in the calculation in subsection G.12.2.1.

G.12.3 This subdivision is needed to calculate the highway GHG emissions value for off vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles.96 Section K. Advanced T echnology Demonstration Program Data Requirements This new subdivision is being added to specify what is required of manufacturer s to submit to ARB’s Executive Officer for approval of credits earned in an advanced technology demonstration program, accordin g to subdivision 1962.1(g)(4) (subdivision C.7.4 of test procedures). These data requirements have been available in Manufacturers Advisory Correspondence 06

- 02, and have now been added to these test procedures.

K.1. The purpose of this subdivision i s to request a project description, including a general description, goal, objectives, and location of the advanced demonstration project.

K.2. The purpose of this subdivision is to request vehicle data, including the vehicle’s model, model year, date pl aced in program, and vehicle identification number of the vehicle being demonstrated.

K.3. The purpose of this subdivision is to request the vehicle specifications including its class, curb weight, payload, electric range, fuel economy, fuel type, refueling time, electric motor output, hybrid energy storage, and fuel cell stack type, if applicab le. This information is necessary for staff to gain more knowledge regarding the vehicle’s technology.

Section L. Fast Refueling Capability

This new subdivision is being added to outline the criterion to verify a Type III, Type IV, and Type V ZEV’s fa st refueling capability. These criterion for fast refueling capability have been available in Manufacturers Advisory Correspondence 06

- 02, and have now been added to these test procedures.

§1962.2 Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards for 2018 and Subseq uent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles.

This new section 1962.2, CCR, title 13 is being added to describe the ZEV requirements for 2018 and subsequent model years, and is similar in style and structure to section 1962. 1.

(a) The purpose of this subdivision explains the ZEV emission standard, and allows ARB’s Executive Officer to certify vehicles as ZEVs that meet the definition of the standard.

(b) The purpose of this subdivision is to outline the percentage ZEV requirements for manufacturers.97 (b)(1) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the percentage ZEV requirement, and how to calculate the number of vehicle to which the percentage ZEV requirements applies.

(b)(1)(A) The purpose of this subdiv ision is to describe the basic credit percentage requirement for each year that must be ZEVs, and that the ZEV requirement is to be based on the manufacturer’s annual NMOG production report. This is a report submitted by a regulated manufacturer to ARB th at indicates the number of vehicles delivered for sale in California, and to which standard each vehicle is certified.

(b)(1)(B) The purpose of this subdivision is to calculate the number of vehicles to which the percentage ZEV requirement is applied. This subdivision also describes that production averaging has no effect on a manufacturer’s size determination and clarifies how a manufacturer should treat vehicles delivered for sale by other manufacturers in their production determination.

(b)(1)(B) 3

. The purpose of this subdivision is to allow manufacturers to elect a same year calculation method if the manufacturer applies to ARB’s Executive Officer under the circumstances if the manufacturer’s volume of PC s and LDT s produced and delivered for sale in California has decreased by 40 percent from the previous year due to circumstances that were unforeseeable and beyond its control. A manufacturer may only elect this option for 2 years.

(b)(1)(D) Th e purpose of this subdivision is to exclude NEVs p roduced by the manufacturer itself or by a subsidiary from a manufacturer’s applicable sales volume to which the ZEV requirement is applied. This prevents manufacturers producing only NEV s from generating a larger requirement than can be fulfilled, since each NEV is worth less than one ZEV credit.

(b)(2) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the ZEV requirements for LVMs

.
(b)(2)(E) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the requirements and allowed usage of credits from TZEVs for model year 2018 through 2025. The table describes the portion of the requirement that must be met with credits from ZEVs and the portion of the requirement that is allowed to be met with credits from TZEVs.

(b)(2)(F) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the requirements and allowed usage of credits from TZEVs for 2026 and subsequent model years.

(b)(3) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe how IVMs are allowed to meet their 2018 and subsequent model year requirements, which is with credits from TZEVs.98 (b)(4) The purpose of this subdivision is to exempt SVMs from meeting ZEV percentage credit requirements, but to allow a SVM to earn, bank, market, and trade credits for the ZEVs and TZEVs it produces.

(b)(7) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the lead time and method for determining when and how a manufacturer is subject to requirements as it increases and decreases in size definition.

(b)(7)(A) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe th at a manufacturer increasing in size, either due to aggregation or through increase in the manufacturer’s sales, will become subject to more stringent requirements after the manufacturer has three consecutive sales averages above the intermediate or large volume thresholds.

(b)(7)(B) The purpose of this subdivision is to describe that a manufacturer decreasing in size will become subject to less stringent requirements after the manufacturer has three consecutive sales averages below the intermediate or small volume thresholds.

(b)(7)(C) This subdivision explains how to calculate California production volume in change of ownership situations.

(c) This subdivision describes the requirements and credits for TZEVs.

(c)(1) This subdivision introdu ces the rest of the subdivision.

(c)(2) This subdivision outlines the requirements that a vehicle must meet in order to be eligible for credit through the ZEV regulation.

(c)(2)(A) This subdivision describes that a manufacturer must certify to SULEV tailpipe standards, even if the vehicle is bi

- fuel, fuel flexible and dual

- fuel capable.

(c)(2)(B) This subdivision describes the evaporative emissions standards a TZEV must certify to in order to receive credit.

(c)(2)(C) This subdivision describe s the on

- board diagnostic requirements for 150,000 miles that a TZEV must meet in order to receive credit.

(c)(2)(D) This subdivision describes the warranty a manufacturer must provide for each TZEV in order to receive credit.

(c)(3) This subdivision describes the allowances a TZEV can earn.

(c)(3)(A) This subdivision describes how a manufacturer is to calculate its zero emission VMT allowance. The table in this subdivision describes equations99 manufacturers must use to determine their zero emission VMT allowance and that TZEVs with less than 10 all electric UDDS does not qualify for this allowance.

(c)(3)(A)1. This subdivision allows TZEVs with 10 miles all electric range on the US06 drive schedule to receive additional credits.

(c)(3)(E) This subdivision describes the minimum requirements for HICE vehicle s and the amount of credit each HICE vehicle is to earn.

(d) This subdivision describes the requirements and credits for ZEVs.

(d)(5) This subdivision describes the va rious types of credits for 2018 and subsequent model year ZEVs.

(d)(5)(A) This subdivision describes how a manufacturer is to calculate the amount of credit earned by each ZEV, which is based on range, according to the equation in this subdivision.

(d)(5)(A)1. This subdivision requires all ZEVs to have greater than 50 UDDS all electric miles in order to receive credit.

(d)(5)(A)2. This subdivision caps the amount of credit that may be received through the equation in subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(A) for each ZEV.

(d)(5)(E) This subdivision allows manufacturers to count hydrogen FCV s delivered for sale and placed in service in California to be counted toward meeting the

man ufacturer’s requirement in the S ection 177 ZEV states that have adopted the ZE V regulation. This is due to hydrogen FCV s being dependent on hydrogen infrastructur e, which is less robust in the S ection 177 ZEV states.

(d)(5)(F) This subdivision describes how NEV s are eligible to receive 0.15 credits.

(d)(5)(F)1. This subdivi sion describes the technical specifications that NEV s must meet in order to receive credit. These specifications guarantee only the most advanced NEV s are eligible to receive credit.

(d)(5)(F)1.a. This subdivision describes the acceleration requiremen ts that a NEV must meet in order to receive credits.

(d)(5)(F)1.b. This subdivision describes the top speed requirements that a NEV must meet in order to receive credits.

(d)(5)(F)1.c. This subdivision describes the constant speed range requirements that a NEV must meet in order to receive credits.100 (d)(5)(F)2.. This subdivision describes the battery requirements that a NEV must meet in order to receive credits.

(d)(5)(F)3. This sub division describes the warranty requirements that a NEV must meet in order to receive credits.

(d)(5)(F)4. This subdivision describes the charging requirements that a NEV must meet in order to receive credits.

(d)(5)(G) This subdivision describes the requirements manufacturers must meet in order for BEVxs, which is a BEV with an APU for back

- up power to be eligible to receive credit

.
(d)(5)(G)1. This subdivision describes the emissions requirements a BEVx must meet in order to receive credit to ensur e the vehicle is low

- emitting under all circumstances.

(d)(5)(G)2. This subdivision requires the vehicle’s UDDS all electric range after the APU first starts is less than or equal to the vehicle’s all electric UDDS test range prior to the APU start. The subdivision also clarifies that the APU may not start until the battery is being full depleted. These requirements ensure that the APU functionality is limited and that the unit is not relied upon instead of the battery electric
power.

(d)(5)(G)3. This s ubdivision requires that in order to receive credit, BEVxs must have at least 80 miles UDDS all electric range.

(g) The purpose of this subdivision it to describe the generation and use of credits, as well as the calculations of penalties if the manufact urer is unable to make up a deficit in meeting its ZEV obligation.

(g)(1) This subdivision allows manufacturers to bank ZEV credits produced in excess of its requirement.

(g)(2) This subdivision describes how manufacturers are to calculate and main tain credits earned under this regulation.

(g)(2)(A) This subdivision describes that credits from ZEVs shall be expressed in terms of credits, and that those credits may be applied toward meeting a manufacturer’s ZEV requirement.

(g)(2)(B) This subdivi sion describes that credits from TZEVs shall be expressed in terms of credits, and that those credits may be applied toward meeting a manufacturer’s ZEV requirement.101 (g)(2)(C) This subdivision describes that a manufacturer’s various credits will be maintained in separate accounts within the ZEV bank.

(g)(2)(D) This subdivision describes how ZEV credits and debits are to be rounded. The language is meant to provide clarification and to avoid differences in calculating ZEV credits and debits. (g)(3) This subdivision allows manufacturers to earn credit for MDV s produced as ZEVs or TZEVs, and apply those credits towards its ZEV obligation.

(g)(4) This subdivision outlines how manufacturers other than LVMs are to earn advanced demonstration cr edits for ZEVs and BEVxs.

(g)(4)(B) This subdivision describes the requirements and limits for manufacturers other than LVMs that place ZEVs in advance demonstration programs, and earn credit as if the vehicle was delivered for sale.

(g)(5) This sub division describes how ZEV credits earned by vehicle placed in transportation systems may be used in 2018 and subsequent model years.

(g)(5)(C) This subdivision describes the limits on the use of transportation system credits for meeting a manufacturer’s requirement.

(g)(5)(C)1. This subdivision describes the treatment and limits on the use of transportation system credits earned by ZEVs and BEVxs for meeting a manufacturer’s requirement.

(g)(5)(C)2. This subdivision describes the treatment and limi ts on the use of transportation system credits earned by TZEVs for meeting a manufacturer’s requirement.

(g)(6) This subdivision describes how a manufacturer submits credits for compliance with the regulation to ARB’s Executive Officer, and how ZEV cr edits can be used to meet a manufacturer’s obligation.

(g)(6)(A) This subdivision describes how discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits and NEV credits may be used to meet a portion of a manufacturer’s obligation, and that these credits expire after model ye ar 2025.

(g)(6)(B) This subdivision describes how BEVx credits may be used to meet a portion of a manufacturer’s obligation.

(g)(6)(C) This subdivision describes how a manufacturer applies for, generates, calcu lates, and uses GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits.102 (g)(6)(C)1. This subdivision allows a manufacturer to apply to ARB’s Executive Officer to be eligible to generate GHG

- ZEV over

- compliance credits, no later than May 1, 2018.

(g)(6)(C)1.a. This subdivision disqualifies a manufacturer with an y outstanding 2017 and previous model year debits from compliance with the GHG fleet standards, according to sections 1961.1 and 1961.3.

(g)(6)(C)1.b. This subdivision disqualifies a manufacturer with any outstanding 2017 and previous model year debits f rom compliance with the ZEV regulations, according to sections 1962.1.

(g)(6)(C)1.c. This subdivision requires a manufacturer to submit documentation of its projected product plan to show systematic over compliance by at least 2.0 gCO 2 /mi of its section 1961.3 requirements for 2018 through 2021 model year, and commitment to do so in each year.

(g)(6)(C)2. This subdivision describes how a manufacturer is to calculate its over compliance with section 1961.3, which will be based on the previous model year.

(g)(6)(C)2.a. This subdivision requires that a manufacturer must over comply with section 1961.3 by at least 2.0 gCO 2 /mi and describes the equation used for calculating GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits for use towards meeting a manufacturer’s ZEV requi rement.

(g)(6)(C)2.b. This subdivision prohibits the use of multipliers earned under subdivision 1961.3(b)(9) to calculate a manufacturer’s GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits.

(g)(6)(C)2.c. This subdivis ion prohibits the use of banked gCO 2 /mi cre dits to be used in the GHG

- ZEV over compliance credit calculation.

(g)(6)(C)3. The purpose of this subdivision to limit the way GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits may be used to meet a manufacturer’s requirement in model years 2018 through 2021, as well a s the limits on how the GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits may be used towards meeting the minimum portion of a manufacturer’s requirement that must be met with ZEVs. This subdivision also prohibits a manufacturer from banking these credits for use in subsequent model years, and requires a manufacturer to remove the gCO 2 /mi used to calculate the GHG

- ZEV ove r compliances credits from its GHG compliance bank, and cannot bank for future compliance toward 1961.3.

(g)(6)(C)4. This subdivision describes wh at is required of a manufacturer when submitting GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits.103 (g)(6)(C)4.a. This subdivision provides that a manufactur er who is granted the ability to generate GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits and fails to over

- comply by at least 2. 0 gCO 2 /mi will be subject to the full ZEV requirements for the model year and future model year, and will no longer be eligible to receive GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits.

(g)(7) This subdivision describes the requirement and time limit to fulfill a Z EV deficit, as well as the penalties a manufacturer would be subject to if the manufacturer failed to make up a ZEV deficit.

(g)(7)(A) This subdivision describes the amount of time

– one year

– a manufacturer has to fulfill a ZEV obligation deficit, an d that only credits from ZEVs may be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s deficit.

(g)(8) This subdivision describes the penalties for failure to comply with the ZEV regulation, and the equation used to calculate a manufacturer’s penalty because a manufactu rer incurs a penalty if out of co mpliance with the regulation.

(h) This subdivision describes the documents used to certify and determine compliance with the ZEV regulation.

(h)(1) This subdivision names the test procedures used for certification to determine compliance with the ZEV regulation: “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2018 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck and Medium

- Duty Vehicle C lasses.”

(h)(2) This subdivision names the test procedure s for determining compliance with NEV requirements.

(i) This subdivision holds the definitions for section 1962.2.

(i)(1) This subdivision defines “auxiliary power unit” because range extended BEV s are equipped with an auxiliary power unit

.
(i)(2) This subdivision defines “charge depletion range actual” because a TZEVs charge depletion range actual is used to calculate its zero emission VMT allowance.

(i)(3) This subdivision defines “discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits” because manufacturers are allowed to use discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits in meeting a portion of their overall requirement.

(i)(4) This subdivisio n defines “energy storage device” because a TZEV’s extended warranty covers the vehicle’s energy storage device.104 (i)(5) This subdivision defines “hydrogen fuel cell vehicle” because manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation with hy drogen fuel cell vehicles, and these vehicles are eligible for subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(E).

(i)(6) This subdivision defines “hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicle” because manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation with hydrog en internal combustion engine vehicles.

(i)(7) This subdivision defines “majority ownership situations” because manufacturers are to aggregate their sales with ano ther manufacturer for determination of size definition in majority ownership situations.

(i)(8) This subdivision defines “manufacturer US PC and LDT Sales” because manufacturer’s US PC and LDT sales are used to calculate a manufacturer GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits.

(i)(9) This subdivision defines “neighborhood electric vehicles” becaus e manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation with neighborhood electric vehicle s.

(i)(10) This subdivision defines “placed in service” because in order for hydrogen FCV s to be eligible for subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(E)

, the vehicles m ust be placed in service.

(i)(11) This subdivision defines “proportional value” because this value is used to calculate the ratio applied to credits earned in Section 177 ZEV states for subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(E).

(i)(11) This subdivision defines “ra nge extended battery electric vehicle” because manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation with range extended BEV s.

(i)(12) This subdivision defines “section 177 state” because the federal Clean Air Act allows other states to adopt this ZEV regulation and the term is used throughout subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(E) .

(i)(13) This subdivision defines “transitional zero emission vehicle” because manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation with transitional zero emissi on vehicles.

(i)(14) This subdivision defines “zero emission vehicle” because manufacturers are required to comply with the regulation with zero emission vehicles.

(i)(15) This subdivision defines “zero emission vehicle fuel” because this phrase is used in the definition for transitional zero emission vehicle.105 (j) This subdivision lists the abbreviations used throughout section 1962.2.

(k) This subdivision ensures that each section of 1962.2 is severable, meaning that if a section is to be deem ed unenforceable, the remainder of the section remains in full force and effect.

(l) This subdivision requires that records for the vehicles subject to the ZEV regulation be subject to public disclosure.

(l)(1) This subdivision requires that a manufacturer’s annual production data and credits per ZEVs and TZEV produces are subject to public disclosure.

(l)(2) This subdivision outlines the details for a manufacturer’s annual credit balance.

(l)(2)(A) This subdivision requires individual ZE V credit balances from each vehicle category be subject to public disclosure.

(l)(2)(B) This subdivision requires credits earned for vehicles placed in advanced demonstration programs be subject to public disclosure.

(l)(2)(C) This subdivision require s credits earned for vehicles placed in transportation systems be subject to public disclosure.

(l)(2)(D) This subdivision requires credits earned, including credits purchased or traded with another party, including the parties themselves be subject to
p ublic disclosure.

List of Changes to “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2018 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid Electric Vehicles in the Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicle Classes”

Th is test procedure is included by reference in section 1962.2, and contains an exact copy of the regulatory text, including the amendments being proposed in section 1962.1 in Section C. Sections A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L are identical to those i n the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2009 through 2017 Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid Electric Vehicles in the Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicle Classes,” as amended in this rulemaking.

§1 962.3 Electric Vehicle Charging Requirements

(a) This subdivision describes the vehicles subject to the requirements of section 1962.3. This subdivision is being amended to include range extended BEV s,106 to make this section applicable to NEV s starting in model year 2014, to delete the requirement that only ZEVs earning more th an one credit must comply with these requirements, and to remove hybrids only capable of Level 1 charging from the requirement, because these vehicles are not anticipate d in the future.

(b)(1) This subsection specifies the definitions applicable to section 1962.3. This subdivision is being amended to include the definitions from 1962.2 because this part of the CCR holds requirements for 2018 and subsequent model yea rs.

(b)(2) This subsection defines Level 1 charging. This subdivision is being deleted because vehicles only capable of Level 1 charge are not anticipated in the future.

(c)(1) This subdivision specifies the requirements for an applicable vehicle’s o n board charger. This subdivision is being clarified to reflect the original intent that a vehicle’s charging port and system is also required to meet the specific AC Level 1 and Lev el 2 charging contained in Society of Automotive Engineers J1772, JAN2010

, titled “SAE Electric Vehicle and Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler”. This sub division has also been clarified from 3.3 kilovolt amps to kW s to be more precise, and an alternative is being added to allow vehicles with smaller battery packs to comply with the section 1962.3 requirements if the vehicle is able to fully charge in less than 4 hours.

Health & Safety Code sections 38562 and 43018.5 are being added as references to reflect the contribution of those sections towards the GHG emission reductions referenced in sections 38562 and 43018.5.107 10 REFERENCES

ANL, 2010. Argonne National Laboratory. D.J.Santini et al, EVS

- 25, Nov 5

- 9 2010. “Mo deling of Manufacturing Costs of Lithium

- Ion Batteries for HEVs, PHEVs, and EVs.”

ARB, 2008. California Air Resources Board. March 27, 2008 Board Hearing Transcript. http://www.arb.ca.gov /board/mt/2008/mt032708.txt

ARB 2009a. California Air Resources Board. May 11, 2009 Update. “Climate Change Scoping Plan” http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf

ARB, 2009b. California Air Resources Board. November 25, 2009. “White Paper: Summary of Staff’s Preliminary Assessment of the Need for Revisions to the Zero Emission Vehicle Regul ation

- Attachment B: 2050 Greenhouse Gas Analysis” http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009zevreview/attachment_b_2050 ghg.pdf

A RB, 2009c . California Air Resou rces Board. December 9, 2009. Resolution 09

- 66. http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009zevreview/res09_66.pdf

ARB, 2009 d . California Air Resources Board. “White Paper: Summary of Staff’s Preliminary Assessment of the Need for Revisions to the Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation,” http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009zevreview/

ARB. 2010. California Air Resources Board. October 28, 2010. “Rulemaking To Consider The Adoption Of Proposed Amendments To The Regulation To Reduce Emissions Of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides Of Nitrogen And Other Criteria Pollutants From In

- Use On

- Road D iesel

- Fueled Vehicles, The Heavy

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Measure, And The Regulation To Control Emissions From In

- Use On

- Road Diesel

- Fueled Heavy

- Duty Drayage Trucks At Ports And Intermodal Rail Yard Facilities, Appendix J” http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/truckbus10/correctedappj.pdf

.
ARB, 2011a. California Air Resources Board. Commitment Letter. July 28, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/letters/carb

- commitment

- ltr.pdf

.

ARB 2011 b . California Air Resources Board. 2011. EMFAC 2011. http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm

Auto blog green , 2010. AutoBlogGreen.com. Eric Loveday. “ Mercedes

- Benz prices B

Class F

- Cell lease at $849 a month ” http://www.green.autoblog.com/2010/11/22/mercedes

- benz

- prices

- b

- class

- f

- cell

lease

- at

- 849

- a

- month/108 BMW, 2011a. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG . Press Release, Februa ry 10, 2011. “BMW ActiveE Electric Vehicle” https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/pressclub/p/us/pressDetail.html?outputCh a nnelId=9&id=T0097313EN_US&left_menu_item=node__2253

BMW, 2011b. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG . Press Release, July 29, 2011. “World premiere of the BMW i3 Concept and BMW i8 Concept” https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/pressclub/p/us/pressDetail.html?outputCh annelId=9&id=T0118603EN_US&left_menu_item=node__6729

BMW, 2011c. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG . 2011. “BMW i3” http://www.bmw

- i

usa.com/en_us/bmw

- i3/

BYD, 2010. Build Your Dreams. Press Release, December 14, 2010. “BYD to supply 50 e6 models to California” http://bydit.com/doce/news/press/1367.html

Bloomberg, 2010. Sookyung Seo, Bloomberg.com. December 18, 2010. “Hyundai Targets Commercial Production of Fuel

- Cell Cars in 2015” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010

- 12

- 19/hyundai

- targets

- commercial

production

- of

- fuel

- cell

- cars

- in

- 2015.html

Brookings, 2011. The Brookings Institution. M. Muro, J. Rothwell, and D. Saha. “Sizing the Clean Economy: A National and Regional Green Jobs Report”

BusinessTimes, 2011. San Francisco Business Times, September 12, 2011. “Coda to assemble electric cars in Benicia” http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2011/09/12/coda

- to

- assemble

evs

- in

- benicia.html

CCST, 2011. California Council on Science and Technology, Ma y 2011. “California’s Energy Future: The View to 2050.”

CaFCP, 2009. California Fuel Cell Partnership. CaFCP Action Plan, February 2009. “Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle and Station Deployment Plan: A Strategy for Meeting the Challenge Ahead” http://www.cafcp.org/sites/files/Action%20Plan%20FINAL.pdf

Carnegie, 2011. Carnegie Endowment, 2011. “Road To Recovery

– Transforming America’s Transportation” http://carnegieendowment.org/files/road_to_recovery.pdf

Chrysler, 2010. Chrysler Group LLC. Press Release, March 22, 2010. “Chrysler Group LLC to Develop New Fiat 500 Electric Vehic le for the United States” http://media.chrysler.com/newsrelease.do?id=9673&mid=&searchresult

Citi, 2011. Citi Investment Research & Analysis. February 23, 2011 “ Electric Ve hicles: Perspectives on a Growing Investment Theme ”109 CNRA, 2009. California Natural Resources Agency. 2009. “ 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy ” h ttp://www.energy.ca.gov/2011publications/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 007/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 007

- SD.pdf

Coulomb, 2011. Coulomb ChargePoint America. Website. http://chargepointamerica.com/ . Accessed September 20, 2011

DOE, 2008. United States Department of Energy. Vision Model, 2008. http://www.transportation.anl.gov/modeling_simulation/VISION/

DTI, 2010. Directed Technologies Inc. , 2010 U.S. DO E Merit Review. June 7

- 11, 2010. “Mass Production Cost Estimation for Automotive Fuel Cell Systems”.

ECOtality, 2011. ECOtality . “Quarterly Report: Second Quarter 2011” http://www.theevproject.com/downloads/documents/Q2%20EVP%20INL%20Report.p df

.
EPA, 2010 a . United States Environmental Protection Agency, National Highway Safety and Traffic Administration and California Air Resources Board. September 2010. “ Interim Joint Technical Assessment Report: Light

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standard s and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards for Model Years 2017

- 2025”

EPA. 2010b. United States Environmental Protection Agency. June 2010. “Quantitative Health Risk Assessment for Particulate Matter” http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/data/PM_RA_FINAL_June_2010. pdf

Fisker, 2011. Fisker Automotive. Press Release, October 18, 2011. “Fisker Automotive Re cords First Sales of its Karma Sedan” http://media.fiskerautomotive.com/global/en

us/Media/Pr essRelease.aspx?mediaid=557&title=fisker

- automotive

- records

- first

sales

- of

- its

- karma

- sedan

Ford, 2011a. Ford Motor Company. Press Release, January 10, 2011. “Ford supercharges electric vehicle plan, unveiling new C

- MAX Energi and C

- MAX Hybrid products” http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=33792

Ford, 2011b. Ford Motor Company. Press Release, June 9, 2011. “Ford to Triple Production Capacity of Electrified Vehicles in North America by 2013, Led by C

- MAX Hybrid, C

- MAX Energi” http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=34759

GM, 2011a. General Motors Company. Press Release, August 17, 2011. “Electric Concept Car Comes to Life as Cadillac ELR” http://media.gm.com /content/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/ne ws/us/en/2011/Aug/0817_cadillac110 GM, 2011b. General Motors Company. Press Release, October 12, 2011. “Spark Joins Chevrolet’s U.S. Small Car Lineup in 2012” http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/n ews/us/en/2011/Oct/1012_SparkMCE

Green Car Congress, 2011a. Green Car Congress.com, July 18, 2 01.1 “GE Energy partners with Lowe’s to provide EV chargers for home and commercial use; Siemens Energy providing chargers to Town of Cary, NC” http://www.greencarcongress.com /2011/07/gesiemens

- 20110718.html Accessed September 9, 2011.

Green Car Congress, 2011b. Green Car Congress.com, January 13, 2011 “Ford developed home charging station for the Focus with Leviton” http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/01/ford

- 20110113.html

Greene, 2011. David Greene, Transportation Research Part D, 2011. “What is greener than a VMT tax? The case for an indexed energy user fee to finance US surface transportation”

Honda, 2011. Honda Motor Company, LTD. Press Release, November 17, 2010. “World Debut of Honda Fit EV Concept Electric Vehicle and Plug

- in Hybrid Platform at Los Angeles Auto Show” http://www.hondanews.com/channels/honda

- automobiles

concepts/releases/honda

- at

- the

- los

- angeles

- auto

- show

- fact

- sheet

ICCT, 2011a. The International Council on Clean Transportation. “Vehicle Elect rification Policy Study

– Task 2 Report: Metrics” , February 2011

ICCT, 2011 b . International Council on Clean Transportation, April 2011 Update. “Global Light

- Duty Vehicles: Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards”

IEA, 2011. International Energy Agency, June 2011. “Technology Roadmap

– Electric and Plug

- in Hybrid Electric Vehicles”

Lotus, 2010. Lotus Engineering. James Turner, et al

. “The Lotus Range Extender Engine.” SAE Int J Engines 3:318

- 351

McKinsey, 2010. McKin sey & Company, 2010. “ The Role of BEVs, PHEVs, and FCEVs: A portfolio of power

- trains for Europe .”

Mercedes , 2011. Mercedes

- Benz. Press Release, April 12, 2011. “Daimler and Bosch to establish joint venture for electric motors” http://media.daimler.com/dcmedia/0

- 921

- 656186

- 1

- 1382859

- 1

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 1

- 12759

- 614216

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0

- 0.html?TS=1319729886930111 Motor Trend , 2011. Motor Trend.com

. Michael Floyd. July 12, 2011. “Next

- Gen Mitsubishi Outlander to Be Brand’s First Plug

- In Hybrid” http://wot.motortrend.com/nex t

- gen

- mitsubishi

- outlander

- to

- be

- brands

- first

plug

- in

- hybrid

- 95745.html

NAS, 2011. National Academy of Sciences. 2010. Committee on the Assessment of Technologies for Improving Light

- Duty Vehicle Fuel Economy; National Research Council “Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies Light Duty Vehicles”.

NREL, 2011a . National Renewable Energy Laboratory. February 15, 2011 “Role of Fuel Carbon Intensity in Achieving 2050 GHG Reduction Goals within the LDV Sector.”

NREL, 2011 b . National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Neubauer

, J. and A. Pesaran. June 2011. “The ability of battery second use strategies to impact plug

- in electric vehicle prices and serve utility energy storage applications. ”

Nissan, 2011. Press Release, July 19,2011. “ Nissan To Launch All

- Electric Leaf As Upgraded 2012 Model In New U.S. Markets” http://www.nissannews.com/pressrelease/2682/185/nissan

- launch

- all

electric

- lea f

- upgraded

- 2012

- model . Accessed October 15, 2011.

PRTM, 2011. PRTM and World Bank, April 2011 “The China New Energy Vehicles Program

– Challenges and Opportunities”.

PluginCars, 2011. Plugi nC ars.com. Zach McDonald. February 9, 2011. “Ford Pushes Key Marketing Message: Lower Maintenance Costs.” http://www.plugincars.com/ford

- pushes

- key

- mark eting

- message

- electric

cars

- lower

- maintenance

- costs

- 106793.html Accessed September 26, 2011.

PopularMechanics, 2011. Basem Wasef, Popular Mechanics.com. September 30, 2011. “2012 Coda Sedan Test Drive.” http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/reviews/drives/2012

- coda

- sedan

- test

drive . Accessed October 15, 2011.

Rocky Mountain Institute, 2009. Rocky Mountain Institute, February 24, 2009. “Project Get Ready: H elping Communities Become Electrified Vehicle Pioneers”

Roland Berger, 2010a. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants “P owertrain 2020: Li

- Ion Batteries

– The Next Bubble Ahead ”

RolandBerger, 2010b. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants in collaboration with Rocky Mountain Institute, 2010. “ PEV Readiness Study .”112 Roland Berger, 2011. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants. “Automotive Landscape 2025: Opportunities and Challenges Ahead” SB 375, 2008. Ste inberg. September 30, 2008. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07

- 08/bill/sen/sb_0351

- 0400/sb_375_bill_20080930_chaptered.pdf Accessed September 7, 2 011.

Tesla , 2011. Tesla Motors. Webpage. “Model S Facts”. http://www.teslamotors.com/models/facts

Toyota, 2011 a

. Toyota Motor Company. January 13, 2011 “Japanese Companies Eye Smooth Domestic Launch of FCVs” http :// www 2. toyota

. co

. jp / en / news /11/01/0113. html

Toyota , 2011 b. Toyota Motor Company. Press Release, September 16, 2011. “2012 Toyota Prius PHV Media Preview

– Bob Carter” http://pressroom.toyota.com/releases/2012+toyota+prius +phv+preview.htm

Toyota , 2011c. Toyota Motor Company. Press Release, July 19, 2011. “Toyota RAV4 EV Coming to Market in 2012” http://pressroom.toyota.com/releases/toyota+rav4+ev+coming+to+market+in+2 012.htm

Toyota , 2011d. Toyota Motor Company. Press Release, May 10, 2011. “Toyota Announces Opening of First Pipeline

- Fed Hydrogen Station in the United States” http://pressroom.toyota.com/releases/toyota+hydrogen+fueling+station+may+ 2011.htm

UC Berkeley, 2008. University of California, Berkeley. November 2008. “ California Climate Risk and Response ”

UC Berkeley, 2011. University of California, Berkeley. B.Williams and T.Lipman. April 2011. “ Analysis of the combined vehicle and post vehicle use value of lithium ion plug

- in vehicle propulsion batteries.” (Draft Final)

UC Davis, 2010. University of California, Davis. J.Axsen and K.Kurani. July 2010. “Reflexive Layers of Influence (RFI): A model of social influence, vehicle purchase behavior, and pro

- societal values .”

UC Davis, 2011a. University of California, Davis. Chris Y ang. June 23, 2011. “Fuel Electricity and Plug

- in Electric Vehicles in an LCFS.”

UC Davis, 2011b. University of California, Davis. David Bunch and David Greene, February 2011. “Potential Design, Implementation, and Benefits of a Feebate Program for N ew Passenger Vehicles in California: Final Report.”113 UC Davis, 2011c. University of California, Davis. T.Turrentine et al. Mary 2011. “The UC Davis MINI E Consumer Study .”

USA TODAY, 2010. Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY. March 18, 2010. “GM vows production

- ready hydrogen fuel cell by 2015” http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2010/03/gm

- vows

pr oduction

- ready

- hydrogen

- fuel

- cell

- by

- 2015/1 . Accessed November 5, 2011

Volkswagen , 2011. Volkswagon Group. Press Release, September 13, 2011. “AN UP!DATE TO THE NEW VOLKSWAGEN SMALL CAR: THE WORLD PREMIER OF SIX CONCEPT CARS, ALL RELATED TO THE UP!” http://media.vw.com/pressrelease/909/138/up

- date

- new

- volkswagen

- small

- car

world

- premier

White House, 2011. United States White House. Press Release. July 29, 2011. “President Obama Announces Historic 54.5 MPG Fuel Efficiency Standards.” http://www.whitehouse.gov/ the

- press

- office/2011/07/29/president

- obama

announces

- historic

- 545

- mpg

- fuel

- efficiency

- standard . Accessed September 9, 2011

Documents Incorporated By Reference in §1962.1 , 1962.2, and the incorporated test procedures, and 1962.3, Title 13, California Code of Regulations

SAE J2841: “Utility Factor Definitions for Plug

- In Hybrid Electric Vehicles Using Travel Survey Data” (March 2009)

SAE J1772: “SAE Electric Vehicle and Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Conductive C harge Coupler” (January 2010)

SAE J2572: “Recommended Practice for Measuring Fuel Consumption and Range of Fuel Cell an d Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles Fue led by Compressed Gaseous Hydrogen” (October 2008)

ETA

- NTP002: “Implementation of SAE Standard J1666 M ay 93: Electric Vehicle Acceleration, Gradeability, and Deceleration Test Procedure” (February 2008)

ETA

- NTP004: “Electric Vehicle Constant Speed Range Tests” (February 2008)

Spreadsheets Used for Tables and Figures On October 11, 2009, AB 1085 was signed into law and became effective on January 1, 2010. The legislation was subsequently amended by SB 855, which was signed into law and became effective on October 19, 2010, and is intended to provide all of the information relied on by ARB staff in pro posing the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation, including all information related to, but not limited to, air emissions, public health impacts, and economic impacts. The information will be posted on the following114 website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/clean_cars/clean_cars_ab1085/clean_cars_ab 1085.htm

### APPENDIX A

- 1



## PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation: 2009 through 2017 Model Years

Title 13, California Code of RegulationsThis Page Left Intentionally Blank§1962.1 A

- 1

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Appendix A

- 1 PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Amend section 1962.1, title 13, California Code of Regulation (CCR), to read as follows:

[ No te: Set forth below are the 2012 amendments to the California zero emission vehicle (ZEV) regulation. The text of the amendments is shown in underline to indicate additions and strikeou t to indicate deletions, compared to the preexisting regulatory language. ]

§ 1962

. 1 Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards for 200 9 and Subsequent through 2017 Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

Duty Vehicles.

(a) **ZEV Emission Standard.** The Executive Officer shall certify new 200 9 and subsequent through 2017 model year passenger cars, light

- duty trucks and medium

- duty vehicles as ZEVs if the vehicles produce zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant) under a ny and all possible operational modes and conditions.

(b) **Percentage ZEV Requirements.**

(1) **General Percentage ZEV Requirement.**

(A) **Basic Requirement.** The minimum percentage ZEV requirement for each manufacturer is listed in the table below as the percentage of the PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s to the extent required by section subdivision (b)(1)(C), produced by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that must be ZEVs, subject to the conditions in this section subdivision 1962. 1 (b). The ZE V requirement will be based on the annual NMOG production report for the appropriate model year.

Model Years Minimum ZEV Requirement 2009 through 2011 11 % 2012 through 2014 12 % 2015 through 2017 14 % 2018 and subsequent 16 %

(B) **Calculating the Number of Vehicles to Which the Percentage ZEV**  **Requirement is Applied**

. For purposes of calculating a manuf acturer’s requirement in subdivision 1962.1(b)(1) for model years 2009 through 2017 , a manufacturer may use a three year average method or same mode l year method , as described below in sections 1. and 2 . A manufacturer may switch methods on an annual basis. This production averaging is used to determine ZEV requirements specified in s ubdivision 1962.1 (b)(1)(A) only, and has no effect on a manufactu rer’s size determination, specified in section 1900. I n applying the ZEV requirement, a PC, LDT1, or LDT2, that is produced§1962.1 A

- 1

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 by one manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer A), but is marketed in California by another manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer B) under the other manufacturer’s (Manufacturer B) nameplate, shall be treated as having been produced by the marketing manufacturer (Manufacturer B).

1. For the 2009 through 2011 model years, a manufacturer’s production volume of PCs and LDT1s

, and LDT2s as applicabl e, produced and delivered for sale in California will be based on th e three

- year average of the manufacturer’s volume of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s as applicable, produced and delivered for sale in California in the 2003 through 2005 model years. As an alte rnative to the three

- year averaging of prior year production described above, a manufacturer may elect to base its ZEV obligation on the number of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s, as applicable, produced by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California th at same model year.

2. For 2012 and subsequent through 2017 model years, a manufacturer’s production volume for the given model year will be based on the three

year average of the manufacturer’s volume of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s, as applicable, produce d and delivered for sale in California in the prior fourth, fifth and sixth model year ( for example, 2013 model year ZEV requirements will be based on California production volume of PCs and LDT 1 s, and LDT2s as applicable, for the 2007 to 2009 model years

, and 2014 model year ZEV requirements will be based on California production volume of PCs and LDTs, for the 2008 to 2010 model years ). This production averaging is used to determine ZEV requirements only, and has no effect on a manufacturer’s size determ ination. As an alternative to the three

- year averaging of prior year production described above, a manufacturer may elect to base its ZEV obligation on the number of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s , as applicable

, produced by the manufacturer and delivered for s ale in California that same model
year. For 2012 and subsequent model years, a A manufacturer may, on an annual basis, select either the three

- year averag e or the same model

- year calculation method. In applying the ZEV requirement, a PC, LDT1, or LDT2 as applicable

, that is produced by one manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer A)

, but is marketed in California by another manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer B) under the other manufacturer’s (Manufacturer B) nameplate, shall be treated as having been produced by th e marketing manufacturer (Manufacturer B)

.
(C) **Phase**

**- in of ZEV Requirements for LDT2s** 

. Beginning with the ZEV requirements for the 200 9 model year, a manufacturer’s LDT2 production shall be included in determining the manufacturer’s overall ZEV requireme nt under section subdivision (b)(1)(A) in the increasing percentages shown in the table below.

2009 2010 2011 2012+ 51% 68% 85% 100%

(D) **Exclusion of ZEVs in Determining a Manufacturer’s Sales Volume.**  In calculating

, for purposes of sections subdivisio ns 1962. 1 (b)(1)(B) and§1962.1 A

- 1

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 1962.1 (b)(1)(C)

, the volume of PCs, LDT1s

, and LDT2s that a manufacturer has produced and delivered for sale in California, the manufacturer shall exclude the number of ZEVs produced by the manufacturer, or by a subsidiary in which t hat the manufacturer has a greater than 50 percent ownership interest, and delivered for sale in California.

(2) **Requirements for Large Volume**  **Manufacturers.**

(A) **Primary Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers through Model Year 2011** 

.

In the 2009 thro ugh 2011 model years, a manufacturer must meet at least 2 2.5 percent of its ZEV requirement with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated by such vehicles, and at least another 2 2.5 percent with ZEVs, AT PZEVs, or credits generated by such vehicles. The remainder of the manufacturer’s ZEV requirement may be met using PZEVs or credits generated by such vehicles.

(B) **Alternative Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturer s**  **through Model Year 2011**

**.**

1

. **Minimum Floor for Production of Type III ZEVs**

.

a. **[ Reserved**  **]**

**.**

b. **Requirement f**  **or the 2009**

**- 2011 Model Years.**  A manufacturer electing the alternative compliance requirements during model years 2009 through 2011 must produce ZEV credits equal to 0.8 2 percent of the manufacturer ’ s average annual California sales of PCs and LDT1s , and LDT2s, as applicable, over the three year period from model years 2003 through 2005

, though th r ough production , delivery for sale, and placement in service of ZEVs, other than NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs , using the credit substitution ratios for eac h ZEV Type compared to a Type III prescribed in the table below

, or submit an equivalent number of credits generated by such vehicles.

ZEV Types Credit Substitution Ratio Compared To A Type III ZEV Type I 2 Type I.5 1.6 Type II 1.33 Type IV 0.8 Type V 0.57

i. Manufacturers may use credits generated by 1997

- 2003 model year ZEVs that qualify for an extended service multiplier under section subdivision 1962 .1 (f) for a year during calendar years 2009

- 2011, provided that 33 years of such a multiplier w ill equal 4 ZEV credits

.§1962.1 A

- 1

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 c. **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**

d. **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**

e. **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**

f. **Exclusion of Additional Credits for Transportation Systems.** Any additional credits for transportation systems generated in accordance with section subdivision 1962.1 (g)(5) sh all not be counted towards compliance with this section subdivision 1962.1 (b)(2)(B)1. b

.

g. **Carry**

**- over of Excess Credits** 

. ZEV c redits generated from

e xcess production in model years 2005 through 2008 may be carr ie d forward and applied to the 2009 through 2 011 minimum floor requirement specified in section subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B)1.b. provided that the value of these carryover credits shall be based on the model year in which the credits are used

. Beginning with the 2012 model year , these credits may no l onger be used to meet the ZEV requirement specified in subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B)1.b. ; they may be used as Enhanced AT PZEV TZEV , AT PZEV, or PZEV credits. ZEV credits earned in model year 2009 and subsequent through 2011 would be allowed to be carried for ward for t wo years for application to the ZEV requirement. For example, ZEV credit earned in the 2010 model
year would retain full flexibility through the 201 2 model year . Starting 2013 model year

, at which time that credit could only be used as Enhanced AT PZEV TZEV , AT PZEV, or PZEV credits , and could not be used to satisfy the ZEV credit obligation, which may only be satisfied with credit generated from ZEVs.

h. **Failure to Meet Requirement for Production of**  **ZEVs**

. A manufacturer that, after electing the alternative requirements in section subdivision 1962.1 (b)(2)(B) for any model year from 200 9 through 201 1 , fails to meet the requirement in section subdivision 1962.1 (b)(2)(B)1. b . by the end of the 2011 model year , shall be treated as subject to the prim ary requirements in section subdivision 1962.1 (b)(2)(A) for the 2009 through 2011 model years

.

i. **Rounding Convention.** The number of ZEVs needed for a manufacturer under section subdivision 1962.1 (b)(2)(B)1. b. shall be rounded to the nearest whole number

.

2. **Compliance w**  **ith Percentage ZEV Requirements.** In the 200 9 through 20 11 model years, a manufacturer electing the alternative compliance requirements in a given model year must meet at least 45 percent of its ZEV requirement for that model year with ZE Vs, AT PZEVs

, or Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs

, or credits generated from such vehicles. ZEV credits generated for compliance with the alternative requirements during any given model year will be applied to the 45 percent which may be met with ZEVs, AT PZEVs, En hanced AT PZEVs TZEVs

, or credits§1962.1 A

- 1

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 generated from such vehicles , but not PZEVs

. The remainder of the manufacturer’s ZEV requirement may be met using PZEVs or credits generated from such vehicles.

3. **Sunset of Alternative Requirements after**  **the 201 1**  **Model Year.**  The alternative requirements in section subdivision 1962.1 (b)(2)(B) are not available after the 201 1 model year.

(C) **Election of the Primary or Alternative Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers**  **for the**  **2009 through**  **2011 Model Years**

. A manu facturer shall be subject to the primary ZEV requirements for the 200 9 model year unless it notifies the Executive Officer in writing prior to the start of the 200 9 model year that it is electing to be subject to the alternative compliance requirements for that model year. Thereafter, a manufacturer shall be subject to the same compliance option as applied in the previous model year unless it notifies the Executive Officer in writing prior to the start of a new model year that it is electing to switch to t he other compliance option for that new model year. However, a manufacturer that has previously elected the primary ZEV requirements for one or more of the 2009 through 2011 model years may prior to the end of the 2011 model year elect the alternative com pliance requirements for the 2009 through 2011 model years upon a demonstration that it has complied with all of the applicable requirements for that period in section subdivision 1962.1 (b)(2)(B)1. b

.§1962.1 A

- 1

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (D) **Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in Mod el Year**  **s 2012**  **through 2017**

**.**

1. **2012 through**  **2014 Requirements.** On an annual basis, a A manufacturer must meet the total ZEV obligation with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated by such vehicles

, excluding credits generated by NEV s and Type 0 ZEV s equal to at l east 0 .79% of its annual sales , using either production volume determination method described in section subdivision 1962.1(b)(1)(B). No more than 50% of the total

o bligation may be met with credits generated from PZEVs. No more than 75% of the total obli gation may be met with credits generated from AT PZEVs. No more than 93. 4 % may be met with Enhanced AT PZEVs credits generated from TZEVs , Type 0 ZEV s, and NEVs

, as limited in section subdivision 1962.1 (g)(6). The entire requirement obligation may be met solely with credits generated from ZEV s.

2. **2015 through 2017 Requirements**

**.** On an annual basis, a A manufacturer must meet the total ZEV obligation with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated by such vehicles, excluding credits generated by NEV s and Type 0 ZEV s , eq ual to at least 3% of its annual sales, using either production volume determination method described in section subdivision 1962.1(b)(1)(B). No more than 42.8% of the total

o bligation may be met with credits generated from PZEVs. No more than 57.1 % of th e total obligation may be met with credits generated from AT PZEVs. No more than 78.5 % may be met with Enhanced AT PZEVs credits generated from TZEVs , Type 0 ZEV s, and NEVs, as limited in section subdivision 1962.1 (g)(6). The entire requirement obligation may be met solely with credits generated from ZEVs.

3. The following table enumerates a manufacturer’s annual percentage obligation for the 2012 though 2017 model years if the manufacturer produce s the minimum number of credits required to meet its ZEV obligation and the maximum percentage for the Enhanced AT PZEV TZEV , AT PZEV, and PZEV categories

.

Model Years Total ZEV Percent Requirement Minimum ZEV floor Enhanced AT PZEVs

TZEVs

, Type 0s, or NEVs AT PZEVs PZEVs

2012

– 2014 12 0.79 2.21 3.0 6.0

20 15

– 2017 14 3.0 3.0 2.0 6.0§1962.1 A

- 1

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 4. **Use of Additional Credits for Transportation Systems.**  Any additional credits for transportation systems generated from ZEVs in accordance with section subdivision 1962.1(g)(5) may be used to meet up to one tenth of the portion of the ZEV obligation which must be met with ZEVs, specified in section subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(D).

(E) **[R eserved**  **]**

**. Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in**  **Model Year 2018 and Subsequent.**

In the 2018 and subsequent model years, a manu facturer must meet a ZEV total percent requirement of 16 percent. The maximum portion of a

man ufacturer’s percentage ZEV requirement that may be satisfied by PZEVs that are
not E nhanced AT PZEVs or AT PZEVs, or credits generated by such vehicles, is limit ed to 6 percent of the manufacturer’s applicable California PC, LDT1, and LDT2 production volume; E nhanced AT PZEVs and AT PZEVs or credits generated by such vehicles may be used either alone or in combination, to meet up to one

- half of the manufacturer’s remaining ZEV requirement.

(3) **Requirements for Intermediate Volume Manufacturers**

. In For 200 9 and through 2017 subsequent model years, an intermediate volume manufacturer may meet its ZEV requirement with up to 100 percent P ZEV s or credits generated by such vehicles. For 2015 through 2017 model years, t he overall credit percentage requirement for an intermediate volume manufacturer will be 12% in stead of 14%.

(4) **Requirements for Small Volume Manufacturers and Independent Low Volume Manufacturers** 

. A small volume manufacturer or an independent low volume manufacturer is not required to meet the percentage ZEV requirements. However, a small volume manufacturer or an independent low volume manufacturer may earn and market credits for the ZEVs

, TZEVs, AT PZEVs, or PZEVs it produces and delivers for sale in California.

(5) **Counting ZEVs and PZEVs in Fleet Average NMOG Calculations**

. For the purposes of calculating a manufacturer’s fleet average NMOG value and NMOG credits under sections 1961(b) and (c) , a vehicle certified as a ZEV is counted as one ZEV, and a PZEV is counted as one SULEV certified to the 150,000 mile standards regardless of any ZEV or PZEV multipliers. **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**

(6) **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**
(7) **Changes in Small Volume, Independent Low Volume , and**  **Intermediate Volume Manufacturer Status.**

(A) **Increases in California Production Volume**

. In 2009 and subsequent through 2017 model years, if a small volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 4,500 units of new PCs, LDTs, an d MDVs based§1962.1 A

- 1

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years, or if an independent low volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 10,000 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MD Vs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years, the manufacturer shall no longer be treated as a small volume, or independent low volume manufacturer, as applicable, and shall compl y with the ZEV requirements for intermediate volume manufacturers, as applicable, beginning with the sixth model year after the last of the three consecutive model years.

If an intermediate volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceed s 60,000 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years (i.e., total production vo lume exceeds 180,000 vehicles in a three

- year period) , the manufactur er shall no longer be treated as an intermediate volume manufacturer and shall, beginning with the sixth model year after the last of the three consecutive model years , or in model year 2018 (whichever occurs first)

, comply with all ZEV requirements for LV Ms.

Requirements will begin in the fourth model year , or in model year 2018 (whichever occurs first) rather than the sixth model year when a manufacturer ceases to be a small or intermediate independent low volume manufacturer in 2003 or subsequent years due to the aggregation requirements in majority ownership situations, except that if the majority ownership in the manufacturer was acquired prior to the 2001 model year, the manufacturer must comply with the stepped

- up ZEV requirements starting in the 201 0 model year. Requirements will begin in the fourth model year, or in model year 2018 (whichever occurs first) rather than the sixth model year when a manufacturer ceases to be an intermediate volume manufacturer in 2003 or subsequent years due to the agg regation requirements in majority ownership situation.

(B) **Decreases in California Production Volume**

. If a manufacturer’s average California production volume falls below 4,500, 10,000

, or 60,000 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs, as applicable, based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years, the manufacturer shall be treated as a small volume, independent low volume, or intermediate volume manufacturer, as applicable, and shall be su bject to the requirements for a small volume, independent low volume, or intermediate volume manufacturer beginning with the next model year.

(C) **Calculating California Production Volume in Change of Ownership Situations.**  Where a manufacturer experienc es a change in ownership in a particular model year, the change will affect application of the aggregation requirements on the manufacturer starting with the next model year. When a manufacturer is simultaneously producing two model years of vehicles at t he time of a change of ownership

, the basis of d etermining next model year must be the earlier model year. The manufacturer’s small , independent low, or intermediate volume§1962.1 A

- 1

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 manufacturer status for the next model year shall be based on the average Californ ia production volume in the three previous consecutive model years of those manufacturers whose production volumes must be aggregated for that next model year. For example, where a change of ownership during the 2010 calendar year occurs and the manufactu rer is producing both 2010 and 2011 model year vehicles results in a requirement that the production volume of Manufacturer A be aggregated with the production volume of Manufacturer B, Manufacturer A’s status for the 2011 model year will be based on the p roduction volumes of Manufacturers A and B in the 20 08

- 20 10 model years. Where the production volume of Manufacturer A must be aggregated with the production volumes of Manufacturers B and C for the 2010 model year, and during that model year a change in ownership eliminates the requirement that Manufacturer B’s production volume be aggregated with Manufacturer A’s, Manufacturer A’s status for the 20 11 model year will be based on the production volumes of Manufacturers A and C in the 20 08

- 20 10 model years. In either case, the lead time provisions in section subdivisions 1962.1 (b)( 7 )(A) and (B) will apply.

(c) **Partial ZEV Allowance Vehicles (PZEVs)**

.
(1) **Introduction.** This section subdivision 1962.1 (c) sets forth the criteria for identifying vehicles deli vered for sale in California as PZEVs. The PZEV is a vehicle that cannot be certified as a ZEV but qualifies for a PZEV allowance of at least 0.2.

(2) **Baseline PZEV Allowance**

. In order for a vehicle to be eligible to receive a PZEV allowance, the manuf acturer must demonstrate compliance with all of the following requirements. A qualifying vehicle will receive a baseline PZEV allowance of 0.2.

(A) **SULEV Standards.** For 2009 through 2014 model years, C c ertify the vehicle to the 150,000

- mile SULEV exhaus t emission standards for PCs and LDTs in section subdivision 1961(a)(1). Bi

- fuel, fuel

- flexible and dual

- fuel vehicles must certify to the applicable 150,000

- mile SULEV exhaust emission standards when operating on both fuels

. For 20 15 through 2017 model y ears, certify the vehicle to the 150,000

- mile SULEV 20 or 30 exhaust emission stand ards for PCs and LDTs in subdivision 1961.2(a)(1). Bi

- fuel, fuel flexible and dual

- fuel vehicles must certify to the applicable 150,000

- mile SULEV 20 or 30 exhaust emission standards when operating on both fuels ;

(B) **Evaporative Emissions.** For 2009 through 2014 model years, C c ertify the vehicle to the evaporative emission standards in section subdivision 1976(b)(1)(E) (zero

- fuel evaporative emissions standards) . For 2015 th rough 2017 model years, certify the vehicle to the evaporative emission standards in s ubdivision 1976(b)(1)(G) ;

(C) **OBD.** Certify that the vehicle will meet the applicable on

- board diagnostic requirements in section s 1968.1 or 1968.2, as applicable, for 1 50,000 miles; and§1962.1 A

- 1

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (D) **Extended Warranty**

. Extend the performance and defects warranty period set forth in section subdivision 2037(b)(2) and 2038(b)( 2 ) to 15 years or 150,000 miles, whichever occurs first except that t he time period is to be 10 years for a

zero emission energy storage device used for traction power (such as a battery, ultracapacitor, or other electric storage device )

.
(3) **Zero**

**- Emission VMT PZEV Allowance** 

.
(A) **Calculation of Zero**

**- Emission VMT Allowance** 

. A vehicle that meets the requirem ents of section subdivision 1962 .1 (c)(2) and has zero

- e mission vehicle miles traveled ( “VMT”) capability will generate an additional zero emission VMT PZEV allowance calculated as follows:

Range Zero

- emission VMT Allowance

EAER u < 10 miles 0.0

EAER u ≥ 10 miles to 40 miles
and
R cda = 10 miles to 40 miles EAER u x (1

– UF Rcd a ) / 1 1.028

R cda EAER u > 40 miles EAER u 40 / 29.63 (EAER u40 ) x [1

– (UF 40 *R cda /EAER u )] / 11.028 Where,
UF 40 = utility factor at 40 miles
EAER u40 = 40 miles

A vehicl e cannot generate more than 1.39 zero

- emission VMT PZEV allowance s

. The urban equivalent all

- electric range (EAER u ) and urban charge depletion range actual (R cd a ) shall be determined in accordance with section F.12 and F.5.5, respectively, of the “California Exhaust Emissio n Standards and Test Procedures for 2009 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles , and Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck and Medium Duty Vehicle Classes ,” incorporated by reference in section 1962 .1 (h ). The u tility f actor (UF) based on the charge depletion range actual (urban cycle) (R cd a ) shall be determined according to Section 4.5.2 Equation 5 and the “Fleet UF” Utility Factor Equation Coefficients in Section 4.5.2, Table 3 of SAE J 2841 March 2009

.
(B) **Alternative Pro cedures.**  As an alternative to determining the

zero

- emission VMT allowance in accordance with the preceding section 1962 .1 (c)(3)(A), a manufacturer may submit for Executive Officer approval an§1962.1 A

- 1

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 alternative procedure for determining the zero

- emission VMT pot ential of the vehicle as a percent of total VMT, along with an engineering evaluation that adequately substantiates the zero

- emission VMT determination. For example, an alternative procedure may provide that a vehicle with zero

- emissions of one regulated pollutant (e.g.

, NOx) and not another (e.g.

, NMOG) will qualify for a zero

- emission VMT allowance of 1.5.

(C) **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**
(4) **PZEV Allowance for Advanced ZEV Componentry**

. A vehicle that meets the requirements of section subdivision 1962 .1 (c)(2) may qu alify for an advanced componentry PZEV allowance as provided in this section 1962 .1 (c)(4).

(A) **Use of High Pressure Gaseous Fuel or Hydrogen Storage System** 

. A vehicle equipped with a high pressure gaseous fuel storage system capable of refueling at 3600 pounds per square inch or more and operating exclusively on this gaseous fuel shall qualify for an advanced componentry PZEV allowance of 0.2. A vehicle capable of operating exclusively on hydrogen stored in a high pressure system capable of refueling at 5000 pounds per square inch or more, stored in nongaseous form , or at cryogenic temperatures , shall instead qualify for an advanced componentry PZEV allowance of 0.3.

(B) **Use of a Qualifying HEV Electric Drive System.**

1. **Classification of HEVs.** HEVs qu alifying for additional advanced componentry PZEV allowance or allowances that may be used in the AT PZEV category are classified in one of five four types of HEVs based on the criteria in the following table.§1962.1 A

- 1

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Characteristics Typ e C Type D Type E Type F Type G

Electric Drive System Peak Power Output ≥ 10 kW ≥ 10 kW ≥ 50 kW Zero Emission VMT allowance; ≥ 10 mile all

- electric range ( UDDS drive cycle) range Zero

- Emission VMT allowance; ≥ 10 mile all

- electric range ( US06 drive cycle)
range Traction Drive System Voltage < 60 Volt

s ≥ 60 Volts ≥ 60 volts ≥ 60 volts ≥ 60 volts

Traction Drive Boost Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Regenerative Braking Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Idle Start/Stop Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

2. **[R eserved**  **]**

3. **[R eserved**  **]**

4. **[R eserved**  **] Type C H**  **EVs.** A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type C HEV, and that is equipped with an advanced traction energy storage system

– such as lithium ion batteries, nickel metal

- hydride batteries, ultracapacitors, or other similar systems

– with a design lifetime of at least 10 years, qualifies for an additional advanced componentry allowance of 0.2 in the 2009 through 2011 model years, 0.15 in the 2012 through 2014 model y ears, and 0.1 in the 2015 and subsequent model years.

5. **Type D HEVs.** A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type D HEV qualifies for an additional advanced comp onentry allowance of 0.4 in the 200 9 through 2011 model years, 0.35 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.25 in the 2015 and subsequent model years th r ough 2017 model years

.

6. **Type E HEVs.** A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the reasonabl e satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type E HEV qualifies for an additional advanced componentry allowance of 0.5 in the 200 9 through 2011 model years, 0.45 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.35 in the 2015 and s ubsequent through 2017 model years.§1962.1 A

- 1

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 7. **Type F HEVs.** A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type F HEV, including achieving 10 miles or more of all

- electric UDDS ran ge, qualifies for an additional advanced componentry allowance of 0. 72 in the 2009 through 2011 model years, 0. 67 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0. 57 in the 2015 and subsequent through 2017 model years.

8. **Type G HEVs.** A PZEV that the manufact urer demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type G HEV, including achieving 10 miles or more of all

- electric US06 range, qualifies for an additional advanced componentry allowance of 0. 95 in the 2009 through 2011 model years, 0. 9 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0. 8 in the 2015 and subsequent through 2017 model years.

9. **Severability.** In the event that all or part of section subdivision 1962.1 (c)(4)(B)1

. - 8 . is found invalid, the remai nder of section 1962.1 , including the remainder of section 1962.1 (c)(4)(B)1.

- 8 . if any, remains in full force and effect.

(5) **PZEV Allowance for Low Fuel**

**- Cycle Emissions** 

. A vehicle that makes exclusive use of fuel(s) with very low fuel

- cycle emissions shall receive a PZEV allowance of 0.3

. In order to receive the PZEV low fuel

- cycle emissions allowance, a manufacturer must demonstrate to the Executive Officer, using peer

- reviewed studies or other relevant information, that NMOG emissions associated wi th the fuel(s) used by the vehicle (on a grams/mile basis) are lower than or equal to 0.01 grams/mile. Fuel

cycle emissions must be calculated based on near

- term production methods and infrastructure assumptions, and the uncertainty in the results must be quantified

.
(6) **Calculation of P**  **ZEV Allowance.**

(A) **Calculation of Combined P**  **ZEV Allowance for a Vehicle**

. The combined PZEV allowance for a qualifying vehicle in a particular model year is the sum of the PZEV allowances listed in this section subdivisio n 1962.1 (c)(6), multiplied by any PZEV introduction phase

- in multiplier listed in section subdivision 1962.1 (c)(7), subject to the caps in section subdivision 1962.1 (c)(6)(B).

1. **Baseline PZEV Allowance.** The baseline PZEV allowance of 0.2 for vehicles meet ing the criteria in section subdivision 1962.1 (c)(2);

2. **Zero**

**- Emission VMT PZEV Allowance.**  The zero

- emission VMT PZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with section subdivision 1962.1 (c)(3);

3. **Advanced Componentry PZEV Allowance.** The advanced ZEV componentry P ZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with section subdivision 1962.1 (c)(4); and§1962.1 A

- 1

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 4. **Fuel**

**- Cycle Emissions PZEV Allowance.**  The fuel

- cycle emissions P ZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with section subdivision 1962.1 ( c)(5).

(B) **Caps on the Value of an AT PZEV Allowance.**

1. **Cap for 2009**  **and Subsequent through 2017**  **Model**

**- Year**  **Vehicles.** The maximum value an AT PZEV may earn before phase

- in multipliers, including the baseline PZEV allowance, is 3.0.

2. **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**
(7) **PZEV Multipliers.**

(A) **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**
(B) **Introduction Phase**

**- In Multiplier for PZEVs That Earn a Zero** 

**- Emission VMT Allowance** 

. Each 2009 through 2011 model year PZEV that earns a

zero emission VMT allowance under section 1962.1 (c)(3) and is sold to a Calif ornia motorist or is leased for three or more years to a California motorist who is given the option to purchase or re

- lease the vehicle for two years or more at the end of the first lease term, qualifies for a phase

- in multiplier of 1.25

. This s ubdivisio n 1962.1 (c)(7)(B) multiplier will no longer be available after model year 2011.

(d) **Qualification for ZEV Multipliers and Credits**

.
(1) **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**
(2) **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**
(3) **[R eserved**  **]**

**.** (4) **[R eserved**  **]**

**.**
(5) **ZEV Credits for**  **2009 and Subsequent**  **through 2017**  **Model Year s**  **ZEVs**

**.**
(A) **ZEV Tiers for Credit Calculations** 

. ZEV c C redits from a particular ZEV are based on the assignment of a given ZEV into one of the following eight ZEV tiers:§1962.1 A

- 1

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ZEV Tier UDDS ZEV Range (miles) Fast Refueling Capability

NEV No mi nimum N/A Type 0 < 50 N/A Type I ≥ 50, <75 N/A Type I.5 ≥ 75, <100 N/A Type II ≥ 100 N/A

Type III ≥ 10 0 Must be capable of replacing 95 miles (UDDS ZEV range) in ≤ 10 minutes per section 1962.1(d)(5)(B)

≥ 200 N/A

Type IV ≥ 200 Must be capable of replacing 190 miles (UDDS ZEV range) in ≤ 15 minutes per section 1962.1(d)(5)(B)

Type V ≥ 300 Must be capable of replacing 285 miles (UDDS ZEV range) in ≤ 15 minutes per section 1962.1(d)(5)(B)

Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles are defined in subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(G) and (i)(10).

(B) **Fast Refueling.** The “fast refueling capability” requirement for a 2009 and subsequent through 2017 model year Type III

, IV , or V ZEV in section subdivision 1962(d)(5)(A) will be considered met if the Type III ZEV has the capability to accumulate at le ast 95 miles of UDDS range in 10 minutes or less and the Type IV or V ZEV has the capability to accumulate at least 190 or 285 miles

, respectively

, in 15 minutes or less

. For ZEVs that utilize more than one ZEV fuel, such as plug

- in fuel cell vehicles, th e Executive Officer may choose to waive these section subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(B) fast refueling requirements and base the amount of credit earned on UDDS ZEV range , as specified in section subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(A)

.
( C ) **ZEV Credits for 200**  **9 and Subseque**  **nt through 2017**  **Model Year**  **ZEVs.** A 200 9 and subsequent through 2017 model

- year ZEV , including a Type I.5x and Type IIx , other than a NEV or Type 0 , earns 1 ZEV credit when it is produced and delivered for sale in California. A 200 9 and subsequent through 20 17 model

- year ZEV earns additional credits based on the earliest year in which the ZEV is placed in service in California (not earlier than the ZEV’s model year). The vehicle must be delivered for sale and placed in service in the same state (i.e Californ ia) in order to earn the total credit amount

. The following table identifies the total credits that a ZEV in each of the eight ZEV tiers will earn, including the credit not contingent on placement in service, if it§1962.1 A

- 1

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 is placed in service in the specified c a lendar year or by June 30 after the end of the specified calendar year. A vehicle is not eligible to receive credits if it is placed in service after December 31, five calendar years after the model year. For example, if a vehicle is produced in 2012, bu t does not get placed until January 1, 2018, the vehicle would no longer be eligible for ZEV credits.



### Total Credit Earned by ZEV Type and Model Year for Production and Delivery for Sale and for Placement

Tier Calendar Year in Which ZEV is Placed in Service

2009

- 201 7 1 2012

- 2017 201 8 +

NEV 0.30 0.30

Type 0 1 1

Type I 2 2

Type I.5 2.5 2.5

Type I.5x n/a 2.5

Type II 3 3

Type IIx n/a 3

Type III 4 3 4

Type IV 5 3 5

Type V 7 3 2012

- 2014: 7 2015

- 2017: 9

( D ) **Multiplier for Certain ZEVs.**  2009 th rough 2011 model

- year ZEV s, excluding NEVs or Type 0 ZEVs, shall qualify for a multiplier of 1.25 if it is either sold to a motorist or is leased for three or more years to a motorist who is given the option to purchase or re

- lease the vehicle for two year s or more at the end of the first lease term. This subdivision 1962.1 (d)(5)(D) m ultiplier will no longer be available after model year 2011.

( E ) **Counting Specifie**  **d ZEV**  **s Placed in a Section 177 State**  **and in California** 

**.** 1. Provisions for 2009 Model Year.§1962.1 A

- 1

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 a

. Manufacturers with a ZEV requirement producing ZEVs, excluding NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, that are either certified to the California ZEV standards or approved as part of an advanced technology demonstration program and are placed in service in a secti on 177 state, may be counted towards compliance with the California percentage ZEV requirements in section subdivision 1962.1(b), including the requirements in section subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B), as if they were delivered for sale and placed in service in C alifornia.

b. Manufacturers with a ZEV requirement producing ZEVs, excluding NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs

, that are certified to the California ZEV standards or approved as part of an advanced technology demonstration program and are placed in service in Califo rnia may be counted towards the percentage ZEV requirements of any section 177 state, including requirements based on section subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B).

2

. **Provisions for 2010 through 2017 Model Years.** Manufacturers with a ZEV requirement producing Sp ecified model year ZEVs , including Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles , excluding NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, that are either certified to the California ZEV standards applicable for the ZEV’s model year or approved as part of an advanced technology demonstration pr ogram and are placed in service in California or in a section 177 state may be counted towards compliance in California and in all section 177 states, with the percentage ZEV requirements in section subdivision 1962.1(b), provided that the credits are multi plied by the ratio of a n LVM’s manufacturer’s applicable production volume for a model year, as specified in section subdivision 1962.1(b)(1)(B), in the state receiving credit to the LVM’s manufacturer’s applicable production volume (hereafter, “proportional value”), as specified in section 1962.1(b)(1)(B), for the same model year in California. Credits generated in a section 177 state will be earned at the proportional value in the section 177 state, and earned in California at the full value specified in s ection subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(C). However, credits generated by 2010 and 2011 model

- year vehicles produced, delivered for sale, and placed in service or as part of an advanced technology demonstration program in California to meet the any section 177 sta te’s requirements that implement section subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B) are exempt from proportional value, with the number of credits exempted from proportional value allowed being limited to the number of credits needed to satisfy a manufacturer’s section 17 7 state’s requirements that implement section subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B)1.b. The table below specifies the qualifying model years for each ZEV type that may be counted towards compliance in all section 177 states.

**Vehicle Type Model Years:**  Type I, I .5, or II ZEV 2009

– 2014 2017 Type III, IV, or V ZEV 2009

– 2017 Type I.5x or Type IIx 2012

– 2017§1962.1 A

- 1

- 18
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (F) **NEVs**

**.** Beginning in 2010 model year, t o be eligible for the credit amount in section subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(C)

, NEVs must meet the following

s pecifications and requirements in this section subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(F) :

1. **Specifications**

. A 2010 through 2017 and subsequent model year NEV earns credit when it meet s all the following specifications:

a. **Acceleration.** The vehicle has a 0

- 20 mph a cceleration of 6.0 seconds or less when operating with a payload of 332 pounds and starting with the battery at a 50% state of charge.

b. **Top Speed.** The vehicle has a minimum top speed of 20 mph when operating with a payload of 332 pounds and starting wi th the battery at a 50% state of charge. The vehicle’s top speed shall not exceed 25 mph when tested in accordance with 49 CFR 571.500 (68 FR 43972, July 25, 2003).

c. **Constant Speed Range.** The vehicle has a minimum 25

- mile range when operating at const ant top speed with a payload of 332 pounds and starting with the battery at 100% state of charge.

2

. **Battery Requirement**

. A 2010 through 2017 and subsequent model year NEV must be equipped with one or more sealed, maintenance

- free batteries.

3

. **Warranty Requirement** 

. A 2010 through 2017 and subsequent model year NEV drive train, including battery packs, must be cover e d for a period of at least 24 months. A t least The first 6 months of the first 12 months of the NEV warranty period must be covered by a full warranty; the remainder of the first 12 months and all of the second 12 months of the remaining warranty period may be optional extended warranties (available for purchase) and may be prorated. If the extended warranty is prorated, the percentage of the battery pack's original value to be covered or refunded must be at least as high as the percentage of the prorated coverage period still remaining. For the purpose of this computation, the age of the battery pack must be expressed in intervals no larg er than three months. Alternatively, a manufacturer may cover 50 percent of the original value of the battery pack for the full period of the extended warranty.

4. Prior to allowance approval, t he Executive Officer may request that the manufacturer prov ide copies of representative vehicle and battery warranties

.

5. **NEV Charging Requirements.**  Model year 2014 through 2017 NEVs must mee t charging connection standard portion of the requirements specified in

s ubdivision 1962.3(c)(2).§1962.1 A

- 1

- 19
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (G) **Type I.5x and Type IIx**  **Vehicles**

**.** Beginning in 2012 model year,
to be eligible for the credit amount in subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(C), Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles must meet the following specifications and requirements:

1. **PZEV Requirements.** Type I.5x and Type II x vehicles must meet all PZEV requirements, specified in subdivision 1962.1(c)(2)(A) through (D).

2. **Type G Requirements.** Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles must meet the requirements for Type G advanced componentry allowance, specified in subdivision 19 62.1(c)(4)(B).

3. **APU Operation.** The vehicle’s UDDS range after the APU first starts and enters “charge sustaining hybrid operation” must be less than or equal to the vehicle’s UDDS all

- electric test range prior to APU start. The vehicle’s APU cannot sta rt under any user

- sele ctable driving mode unless the energy storage system used for traction power is fully depleted.

4

. **Minimum Zero Emission Range Requirements.**

Vehicle Category Zero Emission UDDS Range Type I.5x ≥ 75 miles, < 100 miles Type IIx ≥ 100 miles

(e) **[ R**  **eserved ]** 

**.**
(f) **Extended Service Multiplier for 1997** 

**- 2003 Model**  **Year ZEVs and PZEVs With**  ≥ **10 Mile Zero**

**- Emission Range.**  Except in the case of a NEV, an additional ZEV or PZEV multiplier will be earned by the manufacturer of a 1997 through 2003 model year ZEV, or PZEV with ≥ 10 mile zero

- emission range for each full year it is registered for operation on public roads in California beyond its first three years of service, in the 2009 through 2011 calenda r year s . For additional years of service starting earlier than April 24, 2003, the manufacturer will receive 0.1 times the ZEV credit that would be earned by the vehicle if it were leased or sold new in that year, including multipliers, on a year

- by

- year basis beginning in the fourth year after the vehicle is initially placed in service. For additional years of service starting April 24, 2003 or later, the manufacturer will receive 0.2 times the ZEV credit that would be earned by the vehicle if it were l eased or sold new in that year, including multipliers,
on a year

- by

- year basis beginning in the fourth year after the vehicle is initially placed in service. The extended service multiplier is reported and earned in the year following each continuous year of service. Additional credit cannot be earned after model year 2011.

(g) **Generation and Use of ZEV**  **Credits; Calculation of Penalties**

(1) **Introduction.** A manufacturer that produces and delivers for sale in California ZEVs or PZEVs in a given model y ear exceeding the manufacturer’s ZEV§1962.1 A

- 1

- 20
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 requirement set forth in section subdivision 1962.1 (b) shall earn ZEV credits in accordance with this section subdivision 1962.1 (g).

(2) **ZEV Credit Calculations.** 

(A) **Credits from ZEVs.** For model years 2009 through 201 4

, T t he amount of g/mi ZEV credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from ZEVs shall be expressed in units of g/mi NMOG, and shall be equal to the number of credits from ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California that the manufacturer a pplies towards meeting the ZEV requirements for the model year subtracted from the number of ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer in the model year and then multiplied by the NMOG fleet average requirement for PCs and LDT1 s , or LDT2s as applicable, for that model year. For model years 201 5 through 2017, the amount of credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from ZEVs sh all be expressed in units of credits.

(B) **Credits from PZEVs.** For model years 2009 through 201 4

, T t he amount of g/mi ZEV credits from PZEVs earned by a manufacturer in a given model year shall be expressed in units of g/mi NMOG, and shall be equal to the total number of PZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California that the manufacturer a pplies towards meeting its ZEV requirement for the model year subtracted from the total number of PZEV allowances from PZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer in the model year and then multiplied by the NMOG fleet average

r equirement for PCs and LDT1s

, or LDT2s as applicable, for that model year. For model years 201 5 through 2017, the amount of credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from P ZEVs sh all be expressed in units of credits.

(C) **Separate Credit Acco unts.**  The number of credits from a manufacturer’s [i] ZEVs, [ii] Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles

, [ ii iii ] Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , [ iii iv ] AT PZEVs, [ i v] all other PZEVs, and [v i ] NEVs shall each be maintained separately.

( D) Rounding Credits. For model year 2012 through 2014, ZEV credits and debits shall be rounded to the nearest 1/1000 th only on the final credit and debit totals using the conventional rounding method. For model year 2015 through 2017, ZEV credits and debits shall be rounded to the near est 1/100 th only on the final credit and debit totals using the conventional rounding method.

( E ) **Converting g/mi NMOG**  **ZEV Credits to ZEV Credits.** After model year 201 4 compliance, all manufacturer ZEV, Type I.5x and Type IIx, TZEV, AT PZEV, PZEV, and N EV accounts will be converted from g/mi NMOG to credits. Each g/mi NMOG account balance will be divided by 0. 0 35. Starting in model year 201 5

, credits will no longer be expressed in ter ms of g/mi credits, but only as credits.

( F ) **Converting PZEV and AT PZEV Credits**  **after Model Year 2017**

**.** After model year 2017 compliance, a manufacturer’s PZEV and AT PZEV credit§1962.1 A

- 1

- 21
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 accounts will be converted to be used for compliance with requirements specified in subdivision 1962.2(b). For LVMs, PZEV accounts will be dis counted 93.25% , and AT PZEV accounts will be discounted 75%. For IVMs, PZEV accounts and AT PZEV accounts will be discounted 75%. This will be a one time calculation after model year 2017 compliance is complete.

(3) **ZEV Credits for MDVs and LDTs Othe r Than LDT1s** 

. ZEVs and PZEVs classified as MDVs or as LDTs other than LDT1s may be counted toward the ZEV requirement for PCs

, LDT1s and LDT2s as applicable , and included in the calculation of ZEV credits as specified in this section subdivision 1962.1 (g) if the manufacturer so designates.

(4) **ZEV Credits for Advanced Technology Demonstration Programs.**

(A) **T ZEVs.**  In model years For 2009 through 201 4 model years

, ZEVs and Enhanced AT PZEVs

, excluding NEV s , TZEVs placed in a California advanced technolog y demonstration program for a period of two or more years, may earn ZEV credits even if it is not “delivered for sale ” or registered with the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). To earn such credits, the manufacturer must demonstrate to the rea sonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer that the vehicles will be regularly used in applications appropriate to evaluate issues related to safety, infrastructure, fuel specifications or public education, and that for 50 percent or more of the first t wo year s of placement the vehicle will be operated in California. Such a vehicle is eligible to receive the same allowances and credits that it would have earned if placed in service. To determine vehicle credit, the model year designation for a demonstr ation vehicle shall be consistent with the model year designation for conventional vehicles placed in the same timeframe. Manufacturers may earn credit for as many as 25 vehicles per model, per ZEV state, per year under this section subdivision 1962.1(g)( 4 ). A manufacturer’s vehicles in excess of the 25

- vehicle cap will not be eligible for advanced technology demonstration program credits.

(B) **ZEVs.** In model years 2009 through 2017, ZEVs , including Type I.5x and IIx vehicles , excluding NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, placed in a California advanced technology demonstration program for a period of two or more years, may earn ZEV credits even if it is not “delivered for sale” or registered with the California DMV. To earn such credits, the manufacturer must demons trate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer that the vehicles will be regularly used in applications appropriate to evaluate issues related to safety, infrastructure, fuel specifications or public education, and that for 50 percent or mor e of the first two years of placement the vehicle will be operated in California. Such a vehicle is eligible to receive the same allowances and credits that it would have earned if placed in service. To determine vehicle credit, the model year designatio n for a demonstration vehicle shall be consistent with the model year designation for conventional vehicles placed in the same timeframe. Manufacturers may earn credit for as many as 25 vehicles per model, per ZEV state, per year under this subdivision 19 62.1(g)(4). A manufacturer’s§1962.1 A

- 1

- 22
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 vehicles in excess of the 25

- vehicle cap will not be eligible for advanced technology demonstration program credits.

(5) **ZEV Credits for Transportation Systems.**

(A) **General**

. In model years 2009 and subsequent through 201 7 , a ZEV placed , for two or more years, as part of a transportation system may earn additional ZEV credits, which may be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category, except as provided in subdivision (d)(5)(E)2. and as prov ided in section subdivision (g)(5)(C) below

. In model years 2009 through 2011, a n Enhanced AT PZEV TZEV , AT PZEV or PZEV placed as part of a transportation system may earn additional ZEV credits, which may be used in the same manner as other credits earne d by vehicles of that category, except as provided in section subdivision (g)(5)(C) below. A NEV is not eligible to earn credit for transportation systems. To earn such credits, the manufacturer must demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Execu tive Officer that the vehicle will be used as a p art of a project that uses an innovative transportation system as described in section subdivision (g)(5)(B) below.

(B) **Credits Earned**

. In order to earn additional credit under this section (g)(5), a proje ct must at a minimum demonstrate [i] shared use of ZEVs, Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles

, Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEV

, AT PZEVs

, or PZEVs, and [ii] the application of “intelligent” new technologies such as reservation management, card systems, depot management, location management, charge billing and real

- time wireless information systems. If, in addition to factors [i] and [ii] above, a project also features linkage to transit, the project may receive further additional credit. For ZEVs only, not including NEV s, a project that features linkage to transit, such as dedicated parking and charging facilities at transit stations, but does not demonstrate shared use or the application of intelligent new technologies, may also receive additional credit for linkage to transit. The maximum credit awarded per vehicle shall be determined by the Executive Officer, based upon an application submitted by the manufacturer and, if appropriate, the project manager. The maximum credit awarded shall not exceed the following:§1962.1 A

- 1

- 23
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Ty pe of Vehicle Model Year Shared Use, Intelligence Linkage to Transit
PZEV through 2011 2 1
AT PZEV through 2011 4 2
Enhanced AT PZEV
TZEV 2009 through 2011 4 2

ZEV 2009 through 2011 6 3
Enhanced AT PZEV
TZEV 2012 and subsequent through 2017 1 0.5 1 0.5

ZEV and Type I.5x and Type

IIx vehicles 2012 and subsequent through 2017 2 0.75 1 0.75

(C) **Cap on Use of Transportation System**  **Credits**

.

1. **ZEVs**

. Credits earned or allocated by ZEVs or Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles pursuant to this section subdivision (g)(5), not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year , and may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation which must be m et with ZEVs, as specified in section subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(D)3

.

2. **Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs** 

. Credits earned or allocated by Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs pursuant to this section subdivision (g)(5), not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year, but may only be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category.

3. **AT PZEVs**

. Credits earned or allocated by AT PZEVs pursuant to th is section subdivision (g)(5), not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- twentieth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year, but may only be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category.

4. **PZEVs**

. Credits earned or allocated by PZEVs pursuant to this section subdivision (g)(5), not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- fiftieth of the manufacturer’s ZEV obligation i n any given model year, but may only be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category.

(D) **Allocation of Transportation System**  **Credits**

. Credits shall be assigned by the Executive Officer to the project manager or, in the ab sence of a separate project manager, to the vehicle manufacturers upon demonstration that a§1962.1 A

- 1

- 24
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 vehicle has been placed in a project for the time specified in subdivision 1962.1(g)(5)(A) . Credits shall be allocated to vehicle manufacturers by the Executive Of ficer in accordance with a recommendation submitted in writing by the project manager and signed by all manufacturers participating in the project, and need not be allocated in direct proportion to the number of vehicles placed. Credits will no longer be allocated for vehicles placed in transportation systems after 2017 model year.

(6) **Use of ZEV Credits** 

. For model years 2009 through 2014

, A a manufacturer may meet the ZEV requirements in any given model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a com mensurate amount of g/mi ZEV credits, consistent with section subdivision 1962.1 (b). For model years 201 5 through 2017, a manufacturer may meet the ZEV requirements in any given model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a commensurate amount of ZEV credits, consistent with subdivision 1962.1(b). Credits in each of the categories may be used to meet the requirement for that category as well as the requirements for lesser credit earning ZEV categories, but shall not be used to meet the requirement fo r a greater credit earning ZEV category. For example, credits produced from Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs may be used to comply with AT PZEV requirements, but not with the portion that must be satisfied with ZEVs. These credits may be earned previously by the m anufacturer or acquired from another party

.
(A) **NEVs.** C redits earned from NEVs offered for sale or placed in service in model years 2001 through 2005 cannot be used to satisfy more than the percentage limits described in the following table :

**Model Year**  **s ZEV Obligation that:**  **Percent age**  **limit for NEVs**  **allowed to meet each Obligation:** 

2009

–

2011 Must be met with ZEVs 50 %

2009 May be met with AT PZEVs but not PZEVs 75 %

2010

–

2011 50 %

2009

–

2011 May be met with PZEVs No Limit

2012

– 2014 2017 Must be met with ZEVs 0 %
May be met with Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs and AT PZEVs 50 %

May be met with PZEVs No Limit§1962.1 A

- 1

- 25
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Additionally, credits earned from NEVs offered for sale or placed in service in model years 2006 through 2017 or later can be used to meet the pe rcentage limits described in the following table:

**Model Years**  **ZEV Obligation that: Percent**  **age Limit for**  **NEVs allowed to meet each Obligation:** 

2009

- 2011 May be met through compliance with Primary Requirements No Limit

May be met through compliance wit h Alternative Requ irements, and must be met with ZEVs 0 %

May be met through compliance Alternative Requirements, and may be met with AT PZEVs or PZEVs No Limit

20 12

– 2014 201 7 Must be met with ZEVs 0 %
May b e met with Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs

, AT PZEVs

, or PZEVs No Limit

This limitation applies to NEV credits earned by the same manufacturer or earned by another manufacturer and acquired.

(B) **Carry forward provisions for LVMs for 2009** 

**- 2011 Model Years** 

. ZEV c C redits from ZEVs, excluding credits gene rated from NEVs generated from excess production in model years 2009 through 201 1 model years and subsequent

, including those acquired from another party, may be carried forward and applied to the ZEV minimum floor requirement specified in section subdivisio ns 1962.1(b)(2)(B)1.b. and (b)(2)(D) for two subsequent model years. Beginning with the third subsequent model year, those earned ZEV credits may no longer be used to satisfy the manufacturer’s percentage ZEV obligation that may only be satisfied by credi ts from ZEVs, but may be used to satisfy the manufacturer’s percentage ZEV obligation that may be satisfied by credits from Enhanced AT PZEV s TZEVs , AT PZEV s , or PZEV s

. For example, ZEV credit earned in 2010 would retain full flexibility through 201 2 , afte r which time that credit could only be used as Enhanced AT PZEV TZEV , AT PZEV, or PZEV credits.

(C) **Carry forward provisions for manufacturers other than LVMs**  **for 2009**

**- 2011 Model Years** 

. ZEV c C redits generate d from ZEVs, excluding credits generated from NEVs

, from 2009 through 201 1 and subsequent model year production by manufacturers that are not LVMs may be carried forward by the manufacturer producing the ZEV credit until the manufacturer becomes subject to the LVM requirements

, after the transition per iod permitted in section subdivision 1962.1(b)(7)(A)

.§1962.1 A

- 1

- 26
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 When subject to the LVM requirements, a manufacturer must comply with the provisions of section subdivision 1962.1(g)( 6 )(B).

ZEV c Credits traded by a manufactu rer other than a LVM to any other manufac turer, including a LVM, are subject to section subdivision 1962.1(g)( 6 )(B) , beginning in the model year in which they were produced (e.g.

, a 2009 model year ZEV credit traded in calendar year 2010 can only be applied towards the portion of the manufacturer’ s requirement that must be met w ith ZEVs through model year 2011; beginning in model year 2012 , the credit can only be applied to the portion of the manufacturer’s

re quirement that may be met with E nhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , AT PZEVs, or PZEVs).

(D) **Type I .5x and Type IIx**  **Vehicles**

**.** Credits earned from Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles offered for sale or placed in service may meet up to 50% of the portion of a manufacturer’s requirement that must be met with credits from ZEVs.

(7) **Requirement to Make Up a Z EV Deficit** 

.
(A) **General.** A manufacturer that produces and delivers for sale in California fewer ZEVs than required in a given model year shall make up the deficit by the end of the third model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a commensur ate

am ount of g/mi ZEV credits generated by ZEVs , for model year 2009 through 201 4 , an d the commensurate amount of credits generated by ZEVs for model year 201 5 through 20 17

. The amount of g/mi ZEV credits required to be submitted shall be calculated by [i] add ing the number of credits from ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year to the number of allowances from partial ZEV allowance vehicles produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for
t he model year (for a LVM , not to exceed that permitted under section subdivision 1962.1 (b)(2)), [ii] subtracting that total from the number of ZEV s credits required to be produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year, and , for model year 2009 through 201 4 compliance, [iii] multiplying the resulting value by the fleet average requirements for PCs and LDT1s for the model year in which the deficit is incurred. C redits earned by delivery for sale of Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles

, TZEV, NEV, AT PZEV, and PZEV are not allowed to be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s ZEV deficit; only credits from ZEVs may be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s ZEV deficit.

(8) **Penalty for Failure to Meet ZEV Requirements.** Any manufacturer tha t fails to produce and deliver for sale in California the required number of ZEVs and submit an appropriate amount of g/mi ZEV credits

, for model years 2009 through 201 4

, and credits for model years 201 5 through 2017

, and does not make up ZEV deficits with in the specified time allowed by section subdivision 1962.1(g)(7)(A) shall be subject to the Health and Safety Code section 43211 civil penalty applicable to a manufacturer that sells a new motor vehicle that does not meet the applicable emission standards adopted by the state board. The cause of action shall be deemed to accrue when the ZEV deficits are not balanced by the end of the specified time allowed by section subdivision 1962.1(g)(7)(A). For the purposes of Health and Safety Code§1962.1 A

- 1

- 27
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 section 43211, the number of vehicles not meeting the state board’s standards shall be equal to the manufacturer’s credit deficit, rounded to the to the nearest 1/1000 th for model years 2009 through 2014 and rounded to the nearest 1/100 th for model years 2015 through 2017

, calculated according to the following equation s , provided that the percentage of a LVM’s manufacturer’s ZEV requirement for a given model year that may be satisfied with PZEV allowance vehicles or credit from such vehicles may not exceed the percentages p ermitted under section subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(A) 1962.1(b)(2) :

For 2009 through 201 4 model years: (No. of ZEVs credits required to be produced and delivered for sale in California generated for the model year)

– ( No. of ZEVs produced and delivered for sal e in California for the model year)

– (No. of ZEV allowances from partial ZEV allowance vehicles produced and delivered for sale in California for the model year)

- [( Amount of ZEV credits submitted for compliance for the model year) / (the fleet average r equirement for PCs and LDT1s for the model year) ]

For 201 5 through 2017 model years : (No. of credits required to be generated for t he model year)

– (Amount of credits submitted for compliance for the model year)

(h) **Test Procedures**

.
(1) **Deter mining Compliance** 

. The certification requirements and test procedures for determining compliance with this section 1962.1 are set forth in "California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2009 and Subsequent through 2017 Model Zero

- Emission Ve hicles and Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck and Medium

- Duty Vehicle Classes," adopted by the state board on [insert date here] , and last amended [insert date here] , which is incorporated herein by reference.

(2) **NEV Compl iance.**  The test procedures for determining compliance with section subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(F)1. are set forth in ETA

- NTP002 ( revision 3) “Implementation of SAE Standard J1666 May 93: Electric Vehicle Acceleration, Gradeability, and Deceleration Test Proce dure” adopted on D ecember 1, 2004, and ETA

- NTP004 (revision 2) “Electric Vehicle Constant Speed Range Tests” adopted on Decemb er 1, 2004.

(i) **ZEV**

**- Specific Definitions.**  The following definitions apply to this section 1962.1

.
(1) “Advanced technology PZ EV” or “AT PZEV” means any PZEV with an allowance greater than 0.2 before application of the PZEV early introduction phase

- in multiplier

.§1962.1 A

- 1

- 28
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (2) “Auxiliary power unit” or “APU” means any device that provides electrical or mechanical energy, meeting the req uirements of subdivision 1962.1(c)(2), to a Type I.5x or Type IIx vehicle , after the zero emission range has been fully depleted. A fuel fired heater does not qualify under this definition for an APU.

( 2 3 ) “Battery electric vehicle” means any vehicle that operates solely by use of a battery or battery pack, or that is powered primarily through the use of an electric battery or battery pack but uses a flywheel or capacitor that stores energy produced by the electric motor or through regenerative braking to assist in vehicle operation.

( 3 4 ) “Charge depletion range actual ” or “ R cd a ” means the distance achieved by a hybrid electric vehicle on the urban driving cycle at the point when the zero emission energy storage device is depleted of off

- vehicle char ge and regenerative braking derived energy.

( 4 5 ) “Electric drive system” means an electric motor and associated power electronics which provide acceleration torque to the drive wheels sometime during normal vehicle operation. This does not include compon ents that could act as a motor, but are configured to act only as a generator or engine starter in a particular vehicle application.

( 5 6 ) “Enhanced AT PZEV” means any model year 2009 through 2011 P ZEV that has an allowance of 1.0 or greater per vehicle without multipli ers and makes use of a ZEV fuel. Enhanced AT PZEV means Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle.

( 6 7 ) “Neighborhood electric vehicle ” or “NEV ” means a motor vehicle that meets the definition of Low

- Speed Vehicle either in section 385.5 of th e Vehicle Code or in 49 CFR 571.500 (as it existed on July 1, 2000), and is certified to zero

- emission vehicle standards.

( 7 8 ) “Placed in service” means having been sold or leased to an end

- user and not to a dealer or other distribution chain entity, a nd having been individually registered for on

- road use by the California Department of Motor Vehicles DMV

.
(9) “Proportional value” means the ratio of a manufacturer’s California applicable sales volume to the manufacturer’s Section 177 state applicable sales volume. In any given model year, the same applicable sale volume calculation method must be used to calculate proportional value.

(10) “Range Extended Battery Electric Vehicle” means a vehicle powered predominantly by a zero emission energy sto rage device, able to drive the vehicle for more than 75 all

- electric miles, and also equipped with a backup APU, which does not operate until the energy storage device is fully depleted, and meeting requirements in subdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(G),§1962.1 A

- 1

- 29
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ( 8 11 ) “R egenerative braking” means the partial recovery of the energy normally dissipated into friction braking that is returned as electrical current to an energy storage device.

(9 1 2 ) “Section 177 state” means a state that is administering the California ZEV requirements pursuant to section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7507)

.
(1 3 ) “Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle” means a PZEV that has an allowance of 1.0 or greater, and makes use of a ZEV fuel.

( 10 1 4 ) “Type 0, I, I.5, II, III

, IV , a nd V ZEV ” all have the meanings set forth in section 1962.1 (d)(5)(A).

( 11 1 5 ) “ZEV fuel” means a fuel that provides traction energy in on

- road ZEVs. Examples of current technology ZEV fuels include electricity, hydrogen, and compressed air.

(j) **Abb reviations.**  The following abbreviations are used in this section 1962.1 :

“AER” means all

- electric range

. “APU” means auxiliary power unit. “AT PZEV” means a dvanced technology partial zero

- emission vehicle. “CFR” means Code of Federal Regulations. “DMV ” means the California Department of Motor Vehicles. “EAER” means equivalent all electric range. “EAER u 40 ” means the equivalent all

- electric range that a 40 mile R cda plug

- in hybrid electric vehicle achieves. “FR” means Federal Register. “HEV” means hybri d

- electric vehicle. “LDT” means light

- duty truck. “LDT1” means a light

- truck with a loaded vehicle weight of 0

- 3750 pounds. “LDT2” means a “LEV II” light

- duty truck with a loaded vehicle weight of 3751 pounds to a gross vehicle weight of 8500 pounds, or a “LEV I” light

- duty truck with a loaded vehicle weight of 3751

- 5750 pounds. “LVM” means large volume manufacturer. “MDV” means medium

- duty vehicle. “Non

- Methane Organic Gases” or “NMOG” means the total mass of oxygenated and non

- oxygenated hydrocarbon emis sions.

“ NEV” means neighborhood electric vehicle. “NOx” means oxides of nitrogen. “PC” means passenger car. “PZEV” means partial allowance zero

- emission vehicle, any vehicle that is delivered for sale in California and that qualifies for a partial ZEV allo wance of at least 0.2. “R cd a ” means charge depletion actual range (urban Cycle)

.§1962.1 A

- 1

- 30
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 “SAE” means Society of Automotive Engineers. “SULEV” means super

- ultra

- low

- emission

- vehicle. “TZEV” means transitional zero emission vehicle. “Type I.5x” means range extended 75 mile to 100 mile all electric range battery electric vehicle. “Type IIx” means range extended 100 mile or greater all electric range battery electric vehicle. “UDDS” means urban dynamometer driving cycle

. “UF” means utility factor. “US06” means the US06 Supplemental Federal Test Procedure “VMT” means vehicle miles traveled. “ZEV” means zero

- emission vehicle.

(k) **Severability.** Each provision of this section is severable, and in the event that any provision of this section is held to be invalid, the remainder of this article remains in full force and effect.

(l) **Public Disclosure.** Records in the Board’s possession for the vehicles subject to the requirements of section 1962.1 shall be subject to disclosure as public records as follows:

(1) Each manufacturer’s annual production data and the corresponding credits per vehicle earned for ZEVs (including ZEV type), Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , AT P Z EVs, and PZEVs for the 2009 through 2017 and subsequent model years; and

(2) Each manufacturer’s a nnu al c redit balances for 2010 through 2017 and subsequent years for:

(A) Each type of vehicle: ZEVs (minus NEVs), Type I.5x, and Type IIx vehicle s, NEVs, Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , AT P Z EVs, and PZEVs; and

(B) Advanced technology demonstration programs; and

(C) Transporta tion systems; and

(D) Credits earned under section subdivision 1962 .1 (d)(5)(C) , including credits acquired from , or transferred to another party.

Note: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code. Refe rence: Sections 38562, 39002, 39003, 39667, 43000, 43009.5, 43013, 43018, 43018.5, 43100, 43101, 43101.5, 43102, 43104, 43105, 43106, 4320 4, 43205, 43206

, and 43205.5, Health and Safety Code.Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 APPENDIX A

- 2

California Environmental Protection Agency AIR RESOURCES BOARD



### PROPOSED

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR 200 9 THROUGH 2017 MODEL ZERO

- EMISSION VEHICLES AND HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES, IN THE PASSENGER C AR, LIGHT

- DUTY TRUCK AND MEDIUM

- DUTY VEHICLE CLASSES

Adopted: December 17, 2008 Amended: Dec ember 2 , 2009 Amended: [insert date]

Existing intervening text that is not amended is indicated by “* * * *”. Page numbers in
t he table of cont ents will be amended in the final complete version of these test procedures

.

[ Note: Set forth below are the 2012 amendments to the California zero emission vehicle (ZEV) regulation. The text of the amendments is shown in underline to indicate addition s and strikeout to indicate deletions, compared to the preexisting regulatory language. ]Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 NOTE: This document is incorporated by reference in section 1962 .1 , title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR). Additional requirements necessary to complete a n application for certification of zero

- emission vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles are contained in other documents that are designed to be used in conjunction with this document. These other documents include:

1. “California Exhaust Emission Stand ards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles” (incorporated by reference in section 1961(d), title 13, CCR);

2. “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 a nd Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” (incorporated by reference in section 1976(c), title 13, CCR);

3. “California Refueling Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” (incorporated by reference in section 1978(b), title 13, CCR);

4. OBD II (section 1968, et seq. title 13, CCR, as applicable);

5

. “California Environmental Performance Label Specifications for 2009 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Passenger Vehicles” (inco rporated by reference in 1965, title 13, CCR);

6

. Warranty Requirements (sections 2037 and 2038, title 13, CCR);

7

. “Specifications for Fill Pipes and Openings of Motor Vehicle Fuel Tanks” (incorporated by reference in section 2235, title 13, CCR);

8

. Guidelines for Certification of Federally Certified Light

- Duty Motor Vehicles for Sale in California (incorporated by section 1960.5, title 13, CCR); and

9

. “California Non

- Methane Organic Gas Test Procedures,” (incorporated by reference in section 1961(d ), title 13, CCR).Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page No.

A. Applicability

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 1 B. Definitions and Terminology.

................................ ................................ ............... 1 1. Definitions.

................................ ................................ ................................ . 1 2. Terminology.

................................ ................................ .............................. 5 C. Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards.

................................ ................................ ...... 1 D. Certification Requirements

. ................................ ................................ ................. 1 1. Durability and Emission Testing Requirements.

................................ ........ 1 2. Information Requirements: Application for Certification.

............................ 1 3. ZEV Reporting Requirements.

................................ ................................ ... 3 E. Determination of NEV Acceleration, Top Speed, and Constant Speed Range 1 E F. Test Procedures for 2012 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles (including Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles) and All 2012 and Subsequent Model Hybrid

- Electric Vehicles, Except Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ....... 1

1. Electric Dynamometer.

................................ ................................ .............. 1 2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- In Period.

................................ ......................... 1 3. All

- Electric Range Test

................................ ................................ .............. 1 4. Determination of Batter y Specific Energy for ZEVs.

................................ .. 4 5. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater for Vehicles Other Than ZEVs.

................................ ................................ ................................ 4 6. Urban

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 5 7. Highway Emission Test Provision s

................................ .......................... 11 8. SFTP Emission Test Provisions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 13 9. State

- of

- Charge Net Change T olerances

................................ ................ 18 F G. Test Procedures for 2012 and Subsequent Model Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ...................... 1

1. Electric Dynamometer.

................................ ................................ .............. 1 2. Vehicle and Batter y Break

- In Period.

................................ ......................... 1 3. General Testing Requirements.

................................ ................................ . 1 4. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater.

.......................... 2 5. Urban Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 2 6. Highway Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 11 7. SFTP Emission Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid El ectric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ..................... 16 8. 50 o F and 20 o F Test Provision for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ..................... 21Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 50 o F testing shall be conducted pursuant to section F G.5 with the modifications in Part II, Section C of the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light Duty Trucks, and Medium Duty Vehicles” and the additional following revisions.

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 21 9. Additional Provisions.

................................ ................................ .............. 22 10. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances.

................................ ............... 23 11. Calculations

– Equivalent All

- Electric Range for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ............................ 25 G H. Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Exhaust Emission Test Sequence.

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 1 H I. Examples of Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Terminology.

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 1 I J. Test Procedures for 2009 through 2011 Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid

- Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ...................... 1 K. Advanced Technology Demonstration Program data requirements.

.................. 2 1. Project Description

................................ ................................ ........................... 2 2. Vehicle data

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 2 3. Vehicle specifications

................................ ................................ ....................... 2 L. Fast refueling capability

................................ ................................ .......................... 1A

- 2

- A

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR

20 0 9 THROUGH 2017 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL ZERO

- EMISSION VEHICLES AND HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES, IN THE PASSENGER CAR, LIGHT

- DUTY TRUCK AND MEDIUM

- DUTY VEHICLE CLASSES

A. Applicability

The emission standards and test procedures in this document are applicabl e to 200 9 through 2017 and subsequent model

- year zero

- emission passenger cars, light

duty trucks

, and medium

- duty vehicles, and 20 09 through 2017 and subsequent model

year hybrid electric passenger cars, light

- duty trucks

, and medium

- duty vehicles. The
gen eral procedures and requirements necessary to certify a vehicle for sale in California are contained in the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicles” (hereinafter “LDV/MDV TPs”), and apply except as amended herein.A

- 2

- B

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 B. Definitions and Terminology

.

1. Definitions

.
In addition to the following, these test procedures incorporate by reference the definitions and abbreviations set forth in the Title 4 0 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §86.1803

- 01, the definitions and abbreviations set forth in the LDV/MDV TPs, and the definitions set forth in section 1900, title 13, CCR.

“Advanced technology PZEV” or “AT PZEV” means any PZEV with an allowance greater than 0.2 before application of the PZEV early introduction phase

- in multiplier. “All

- Electric Range” means the total miles driven electrically (with the engine off) before the engine turns on for the first time, after the battery has been fully charged. For a blended off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle, the equivalent all

electric range shall be considered the “all

- electric range” of the vehicle. “All

- Electric Range Test” means a test sequence used to determine the range of an electric veh icle or of a hybrid electric vehicle without the use of its auxiliary power unit. The All

- Electric Range Test cycle consists of the Highway Fuel Economy Schedule and the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (see section E of these test procedures). “Alterna te C ontinuous Urban T est S chedule” means a series of the following sequence: UDDS, 10 minute key

- off hot soak, UDDS, and 10

- 20 minute key

- off hot soak. This alternate procedure may be substituted for the Continuous Urban Test Schedule when the Continuous Urban Test Schedule cannot be performed. “Alternate C ontinuous H ighway T est S chedule” means a series of the following sequence: HFEDS, 15 second key

- on pause, HFEDS, and 10

- 20 minute key

off hot soak or a 15 second key

- on pause . This alternate procedure ma y be substituted for the Continuous Highway Test Schedule when the Continuous Highway Test Schedule cannot be performed. “Auxiliary power unit” or “APU” means a device that converts consumable fuel energy into mechanical or electrical energy. Some example s of auxiliary power units are internal combustion engines, gas turbines, or fuel cells. For the purposes of range extended battery electric vehicles, auxiliary power unit means any device that provides electrical or mechanical energy, meeting the require ments of subdivision C.3.2, to a Type I.5x or Type IIx vehicle , after the zero emission range has been fully depleted. A fuel fired heater does not qualify under this definition for an APU. “Battery electric vehicle” or “BEV” means any vehicle that op erates solely by use of a battery or battery pack, or that is powered primarily through the use of an electric battery or battery pack but uses a flywheel or capacitor that stores energy produced by the electric motor or through regenerative braking to ass ist in vehicle operation. “Battery or Battery pack” means any electrical energy storage device consisting of any number of individual battery modules or cells that is used to propel aA

- 2

- B

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 battery electric or hybrid electric vehicle. These terms may also gene rically refer to capacitor and flywheel energy storage devices in the context of hybrid electric vehicles. “Battery state

- of

- charge” means the quantity of electrical energy remaining in the battery relative to the maximum rated capacity of the battery expr essed in percent. “Blended off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle” means an off

vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle that uses the engine to supplement battery/electric motor power during charge depleting operation. “Blended operation mode” means an operating mode in which the energy storage state

- of

- charge decreases, on average, while the vehicle is driven and the engine is used occasionally to support power requests. “Charge

- depleting net energy consumption” means the net electrical energy, E cd , measured in watt

- hours consumed by vehicle over the charge depleting cycle range, R cdc . E cd can be expressed as AC or DC watt hours, where appropriate. “Charge

- depleting (CD) mode” means an operating mode in which the energy storage state

- of

- charge (SOC) may fluctuate but, on average, decreases while the vehicle is driven. Hybrid electric vehicles are required to be classified as either charge

sustaining or charge

- depleting over each driving cycle (i.e. UDDS, HFEDS, US06, or SC03). “Charge de pleting actual range or R cda ” means the distance traveled on the Urban Charge Depleting Test Procedure at which the state

- of

- charge is first equal to the average state

- of

- charge of the two consecutive UDDS used to end the Urban Charge Depleting Test Proced ure. This range must be reported to the nearest 0.1 miles. (See section F.11.9.) “Charge depleting actual range, highway or R cdah ” means the distance traveled on the Highway Charge Depleting Test Procedure at which the state

- of

- charge is first equal to th e average state

- of

- charge of the HFEDS used to end the Highway Charge Depleting Test Procedure. This range must be reported to the nearest 0.1 miles. “Charge depleting cycle range or R cdc ” means the distance traveled on the Urban or Highway Charge Deple ting Procedure up to the test cycle prior to where the
state

- of

- charge is above the lower bound state

- of

- charge tolerance for one test cycle. This range will appear as the sum of a discrete number of test cycle distances. This range shall be reported to t he nearest 0.1 miles. (See section F.11.8.) “Charge

- sustaining net energy consumption” means the net electrical energy, Ecs, measured in watt

- hours consumed by vehicle during charge sustaining operation. For charge sustaining operation, this number shoul d be ~ 0. “Charge

- sustaining (CS) mode” means an operating mode in which the energy storage SOC may fluctuate but, on average, is maintained at a certain level while the vehicle is driven. Hybrid electric vehicles are required to be classified as either ch arge

sustaining or charge

- depleting over each driving cycle (i.e. UDDS, HFEDS, US06, or SC03). “Consumable fuel” means any solid, liquid, or gaseous matter that releases energy when consumed by an auxiliary power unit. “Continuous Urban Test Schedule” me ans a repeated series comprised of an Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedules (UDDS), 40 CFR, Part 86, Appendix I, which is incorporated herein by reference; each test is followed by a 10 minute key

- off soakA

- 2

- B

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 period. “Continuous Highway Test Schedule” means a r epeated series comprised of four consecutive key

- on Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedules (HFEDS) with a 15 second key

- on pause in

- between each HFEDS. If this schedule cannot be performed continuously, a key

- off soak up to 30 minutes is permitted after e very fourth HFEDS. “Continuous US06 Test Schedule” means a repeated series of US06 driving schedules (US06) with a key

- on idle period of not less than one minute and not greater than two minutes between each US06. “Electric drive system” means an electric motor and associated power electronics

, which provide acceleration torque to the drive wheels sometime during normal vehicle operation. This does not include components that could act as a motor, but are configured to act only as a generator or engine star ter in a particular vehicle application. “Electric range fraction” means the fraction of electrical energy derived from off

- vehicle charging and regenerative braking energy relative to total traction energy used over the charge depletion range on a specifi ed drive cycle. “Enhanced AT PZEV” means any model year 2009 through 2011 PZEV that has an allowance of 1.0 or greater per vehicle without multipliers and makes use of a ZEV fuel. Enhanced AT PZEV means Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle. “Equivalent all

- electric range” means the portion of the total charge depleting range attributable to the use of electricity from the battery over the charge depleting range test. “Fuel cell vehicle” or “FCV” means any vehicle that receives propulsion solely from an onboa rd fuel cell power system. “Fuel

- fired heater” means a fuel burning device that creates heat for the purpose of warming the passenger compartment of a vehicle but does not contribute to the propulsion of the vehicle. “Grid

- connected hybrid electric vehicl e” means a hybrid electric vehicle that has the capacity for the battery to be recharged from an off

- board source of electricity and has some all

- electric range. “Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule” or “HFEDS” means highway fuel economy driving schedule . See 40 CFR Part 600 §600.109(b). “Hybrid electric vehicle” or “HEV” means any vehicle that can draw propulsion energy from both of the following on

- vehicle sources of stored energy: 1) a consumable fuel and 2) an energy storage device such as a battery , capacitor, or flywheel. “Hybrid fuel cell vehicle” or “HFCV” means any vehicle that receives propulsion energy from both an onboard fuel cell power system and either a battery or a capacitor. “Neighborhood Electric Vehicle” or “NEV ” means a motor vehicle that meets the definition of “low

- speed vehicle” either in section 385.5 of the Vehicle Code or in 49 CFR § 571.500 (July 1, 2000), and is certified to zero

- emission vehicle standards. “NIST” means the National Institute of Standards and Technology. “Off

- v ehicle charge capable” means having the capability to charge a battery from an off

- vehicle electric energy source that cannot be connected or coupled to theA

- 2

- B

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 vehicle in any manner while the vehicle is being driven. A grid

- connected hybrid electric vehicle is one example of an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle. “Placed in service” means having been sold or leased to an end

- user and not just to a dealer or other distribution chain entity, and having been individually registered for on

- road us e by the California Department of Motor Vehicles. “Proportional value” means the ratio of a manufacturer’s California applicable sales volume to the manufacturer’s Section 177 state applicable sales volume. In any given model year, the same applicable sal e volume calculation method must be used to calculate proportional value. “PZEV” means any vehicle that is delivered for sale in California and that qualifies for a partial ZEV allowance of at least 0.2. “Range Extended Battery Electric Vehicle” means a vehicle powered predominantly by a zero emission energy storage device, able to drive the vehicle for more than 75 all

- electric miles, and also equipped with a backup APU, which does not operate until the energy storage device is fully depleted, and meetin g requirements in subdivision C.4.5(g), “Regenerative braking” means the partial recovery of the energy normally dissipated into friction braking that is returned as electrical current to an energy storage device. “SAE J2572” means the “Recommended Practic e for Measuring Fuel Consumption and Range of Fuel Cell and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles Fuelled by Compressed Gaseous Hydrogen

, ” as published by the Society of Automotive Engineers in October , 2008. “Section 177 State” means a state that is administering the California ZEV requirements pursuant to section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7507). “SC03” means the U.S. EPA SC03 driving schedule representing vehicle operation with air conditioning, as set forth in Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 86. “SOC N et Change Tolerance” means the state

- of

- charge net change tolerance that is applied to the SOC Criterion for charge

- sustaining hybrid electric vehicles when validating an emission test. See section E.9 and F.10 of these procedures for tolerance specificat ions. “SOC Criterion” means the state

- of

- charge criterion that is applied to a charge

sustaining hybrid electric vehicle to validate an emission test. The SOC Criterion requires that no net change in battery energy occurs over a given test cycle, i.e. the final battery state

- of

- charge that is recorded at the end of the emission test must be equivalent to the initial battery state

- of

- charge that is set at the beginning of the emission test. The SOC Net Change Tolerance shall be applied to the SOC Criterion

. “Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle” means a PZEV that has an allowance of 1.0 or greater, and makes use of a ZEV fuel. “Type 0, I, I.5, II, III
, IV , and V ZEV” all have the meanings set forth in section C.4.4(a). “Type I.5x” means range extended 75 mile to 100 mile all electric range battery electric vehicle. “Type IIx” means range extended 100 mile or greater all electric range battery electric vehicle.A

- 2

- B

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 “US06” means the US06 driving schedule for aggressive driving as set forth in Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 86. “UDDS” means urban dynamometer driving schedule as set forth Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 86. “Zero

- emission vehicle” or “ ZEV” means any vehicle certified to zero

- emission standards. “Zero

- emission Vehicle Miles Traveled” or zero emission VMT” means the vehicle miles traveled with zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant). “ZEV fuel” means a fuel that provides traction energy in on

- road ZEVs. Examples of current technology ZEV fuels include electricity, hydrogen, and compressed air.

2. Terminology.

Abbreviation Units Charge Depleting Actual Range (urban cycle) R cda mi Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range R cdcs mi Charge Depleting Net Energy Consumption E cd wh Charge Depleting CO 2 Produced M cd g/mi Charge Sustaining CO 2 Produced M cs g/mi Highway Charge Depleting Actual Range R cdah mi Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range R cdch mi Highway Electric Range Fraction ERF h % Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range EAER h mi Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption EAEREC h wh/mi

Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range R cdcu mi Urban Electric Range Fraction ERF u % Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range EAER u mi Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range scaled to 40 mi limit EAER u40 mi

Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption EAEREC u wh/miA

- 2

- C

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 C. Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards.

1. ZEV Emission Standard. The Executive Officer shall certify new 2009 and subsequent through 2017 model year passenger cars, light

- duty trucks and medium

- dut y vehicles as ZEVs if the vehicles produce zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant) under any and all possible operational modes and conditions.

2. Percentage ZEV Requirements

2.1 General Percentage ZEV Requirement.

( a) Basic Requirement. The minimum percentage ZEV requirement for each manufacturer is listed in the table below as the percentage of the PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s to the extent required by section subdivision C.2.2(c), produced by the manufacturer and deliv ered for sale in California that must be ZEVs, subject to the conditions in section subdivision C.2.2. The ZEV requirement will be based on the annual NMOG production report for the appropriate model year.

Model Years Minimum ZEV Requirement
2009 thro ugh 2011 11 % 2012 through 2014 12 % 2015 through 2017 14 % 2018 and subsequent 16 %

(b) Calculating the Number of Vehicles to Which the Percentage ZEV Requirement is Applied. For purposes of calculating a manufacturer’s requirement in subdivision C.2.1 for model years 2009 through 2017, a manufacturer may use a three year average method or same model year method, as described below in sections 1. and 2. A manufacturer may switch methods on an annual basis. This production averaging is used to det ermine ZEV requirements specified in subdivision C.2.1(a) only, and has no effect on a manufacturer’s size determination, specified in section 1900. For example, in applying the ZEV requirement, a PC, LDT1, or LDT2, that is produced by one manufacturer (e .g., Manufacturer A), but is marketed in California by another manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer B) under the other manufacturer’s (Manufacturer B) nameplate, shall be treated as having been produced by the marketing manufacturer (Manufacturer B).

(1) For the 2009 through 2011 model years, a manufacturer’s production volume of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s as applicable, produced and delivered for sale in California will be based on the three

- year average of the manufacturer’s volume of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s as applicable, produced and delivered for sale in California in the 2003 through 2005 model years. As an alternative to the three

- year averaging of prior year production described above, a manufacturer may elect to base its ZEV obligation on the number of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s, as applicable, produced byA

- 2

- C

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that same model year.

(2) For 2012 and subsequent through 2017 model years, a manufacturer’s production volume for the given model year will be b ased on the three

- year average of the manufacturer’s volume of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s, as applicable, produced and delivered for sale in California in the prior fourth, fifth and sixth model year (for example, 2013 model year ZEV requirements will be bas ed on California production volume of PCs and LDT 1 s, and LDT2s as applicable, for the 2007 to 2009 model years , and 2014 model year ZEV requirements will be based on California production volume of PCs and LDTs, for the 2008 to 2010 model years ). This pro duction averaging is used to determine ZEV requirements only, and has no effect on a manufacturer’s size determination. As an alternative to the three

- year averaging of prior year production described above, a manufacturer may elect to base its ZEV obliga tion on the number of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s, as applicable, produced by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that same model year. For 2012 and subsequent model
years, a A manufacturer may, on an annual basis, select either the three

- y ear average or the same model

- year calculation method. In applying the ZEV requirement, a PC, LDT1, or LDT2 as applicable, that is produced by one manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer A), but is marketed in California by another manufacturer (e.g., Manufactur er B) under the other manufacturer’s (Manufacturer B) nameplate, shall be treated as having been produced by the marketing manufacturer (Manufacturer B).

(c) Phase

- in of ZEV Requirements for LDT2s. Beginning with the ZEV requirements for the 2009 model y ear, a manufacturer’s LDT2 production shall be included in determining the manufacturer’s overall ZEV requirement under section subdivision C.2.1(a) in the increasing percentages shown in the table below.

2009 2010 2011 2012+ 51% 68% 85% 100%

(d) Excl usion of ZEVs in Determining a Manufacturer’s Sales Volume. In calculating for purposes of section subdivision C.2.1(b) and (c) the volume of PCs, LDT1s and LDT2s that a manufacturer has produced and delivered for sale in California, the manufacturer shall exclude the number of ZEVs produced by the manufacturer, or by a subsidiary in which that the manufacturer has a greater than 50 percent ownership interest, and delivered for sale in California.

2.2 Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers.

(a) Prim ary Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers through Model Year 2011 . In the 2009 through 2011 model years, a manufacturer must meet at least 22.5 percent of its ZEV requirement with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated by such vehicles, and at least another 22.5 percent with ZEVs, AT PZEVs, or credits generated by such vehicles. The remainder of the manufacturer’s ZEV requirement may be met using PZEVs or credits generated by such vehicles.A

- 2

- C

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (b) Alternative Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers.

(1) Minimum Floor for Production of Type III ZEVs.

(A) [R eserved ]

(B) Requirement For the 2009

- 2011 Model Years. A manufacturer electing the alternative compliance requirements during model years 2009 through 2011 must produce ZEV credits equal to 0.82 percent of the manufacturer’s average annual California sales of PCs and LDT1s, and LDT2s, as applicable, over the three year period from model years 2003 through 2005, though through production, delivery for sale, and placement in service of ZEVs, other th an NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, using credit ratios for each ZEV Type compared to a Type III prescribed in the table below, or submit an equivalent number of credits generated by such vehicles.

ZEV Types Credit Substitution Ratio Type I 2 Type I.5 1.6 Type II 1.33 Type IV 0.8 Type V 0.57

(i) Manufacturers may use credits generated by 1997

- 2003 model

- year ZEVs that qualify for an extended service multiplier under section subdivision C.6 for a year primarily during calendar years 2009

- 2011, provided that 33 years of such a multiplier will equal 4 ZEV credits.

(C) [Reserved]

(D) [Reserved]

(E) [Reserved]

(F) Exclusion of Additional Credits for Transportation Systems. Any additional credits for transportation systems generated in accordance with secti on subdivision C.7.5 shall not be counted towards compliance with this section subdivision C.2.2(b)(1)(B).

(G) Carry

- over of Excess Credits. ZEV credits generated from excess production in model years 2005 through 2008 may be carried forward and applied to the 2009 through 2011 minimum floor requirement specified in section subdivision C.2.2(b)(1)(B) provided that the value of these carryover credits shall be based on the model year in which the credits are used

. Beginning with the 2012 model year, these

cr edits may no longer be used to meet the ZEV requirement , specified in subdivisionA

- 2

- C

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 C.2.2(b)(1)(B) ; they may be used as Enhanced AT PZEV, AT PZEV, or PZEV credits. ZEV credits earned in model year 2009 and subsequent through 2011 would be allowed to be carr ied forward for two years for application to the ZEV requirement. For example, ZEV credit earned in the 2010 model year would retain full flexibility through the 2012 model year . Starting 2013 model year

, at which time that credit could only be used as E nhanced AT PZEV TZEV , AT PZEV, or PZEV credits, and could not be used to satisfy the ZEV credit obligation, which may only be satisfied with credit generated from ZEVs.

.
(H) Failure to Meet Requirement for Production of ZEVs. A manufacturer that, after electing the alternative requirements in section subdivision C.2.2(b) for any model year from 2009 through 2011, fails to meet the requirement in section subdivision C.2.2(b)(1)(B) by the end of the 2011 model year, shall be treated as subject to the primar y requirements in section subdivision C.2.1(a) for the 2009 through 2011 model
years.

(I) Rounding Convention. The number of ZEVs needed for a manufacturer under section subdivision C.2.2(b)(1)(B) shall be rounded to the nearest whole number.

(2) Compli ance With Percentage ZEV Requirements. In the 2009 through 2011 model years, a manufacturer electing the alternative compliance requirements in a given model year must meet at least 45 percent of its ZEV requirement for that model year with ZEVs, AT PZEVs

, or Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , or credits generated from such vehicles. ZEV credits generated for compliance with the alternative requirements during any given model year will be applied to the 45 percent which may be met with ZEVs, AT PZEVs, Enhanced AT PZ EVs TZEVs

, or credits generated from such vehicles, but not PZEVs. The remainder of the manufacturer’s ZEV requirement may be met using PZEVs or credits generated from such vehicles.

(3) Sunset of Alternative Requirements After the 2011 Model Year. The alternative requirements in section subdivision C.2.2(b) are not available after the 2011 model year.

(c) Election of the Primary or Alternative Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers. A manufacturer shall be subject to the primary ZEV requirements for the 2009 model year unless it notifies the Executive Officer in writing prior to the start of the 2009 model year that it is electing to be subject to the alternative compliance requirements for that model year. Thereafter, a manufacturer shall be su bject to the same compliance option as applied in the previous model year unless it notifies the Executive Officer in writing prior to the start of a new model year that it is electing to switch to the other compliance option for that new model year. Howe ver, a manufacturer that has previously elected the primary ZEV requirements for one or more of the 2009 through 2011 model years may prior to the end of the 2011 model year elect the alternative compliance requirements for the 2009 through 2011 model year sA

- 2

- C

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 upon a demonstration that it has complied with all of the applicable requirements for that period in section subdivision C.2.2(b)(1)(B).

(d) Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in Model Years 2012 through 2017.

(1) 2012 through 2014 Require ments. On an annual basis, a A manufacturer must meet the total ZEV obligation with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated by such vehicles, excluding credits generated by NEV s and Type 0 ZEVs, equal to at least 0.79% of its annual sales, using either production vo lume determination method described in section subdivision C.2.1(b) No more than 50% of the total obligation may be met with credits generated from PZEVs , No more than 75% of the total obligation may be met with credits generated from AT PZEVs . No more t han 93.4% may be met with Enhanced AT PZEVs, Type 0 ZEVs, and NEVs, other than limits described in section subdivision C.7.6. The entire requirement obligation may be met solely with credits generated from ZEVs.

(2) 2015 through 2017 Requirements. On an annual basis, a A manufacturer must meet its ZEV obligation with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated by such vehicles, excluding credits generated by NEV s and Type 0 ZEVs, equal to at least 3% of its annual sales, using either production volume determination meth od described in section subdivision C.2.1(b). No more than 42.8% of the total obligation may be met with credits generated from PZEVs

. No more than 57.1% of the total obligation may be met with credits generated from AT PZEVs . No more than 78.5% may be m et with Enhanced AT PZEVs credits generated from TZEVs , Type 0 ZEVs, and NEVs, other than limits described in section subdivision C.7.6. The entire requirement obligation may be met solely with credits generated from ZEVs.

(3) The following table enumerat es a manufacturer’s annual percentage obligation for the 2012 though 2017 model years if the manufacturer produces the minimum number of credits required to meet its ZEV obligation and the maximum percentage for the Enhanced AT PZEV, AT PZEV, and PZEV cate gories.

Years Total ZEV Percent Requirement Minimum ZEV floor Enhanced AT PZEVs

TZEVs

, Type 0s,or NEVs AT PZEVs PZEVs

2012

– 2014 12 0..79 2.21 3.0 6.0

2015

– 2017 14 3.0 3.0 2.0 6.0

(4) Use of Additional Credits for Transportation Systems. Any ad ditional credits for transportation systems generated from ZEVs in accordance with section subdivision C.7.5 may be used to meet up to one tenth of the portion of the ZEV obligation which must be met with ZEVs, specified in section subdivision C.2.2(d)(1).A

- 2

- C

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (e) [Reserved] Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in Model Year 2018 and Subsequent. In the 2018 and subsequent model years, a manufacturer must meet a ZEV total percent requirement of 16 percent. The maximum portion of a manufacturer’s percen tage ZEV requirement that may be satisfied by PZEVs that are not Enhanced AT PZEVs or AT PZEVs, or credits generated by such vehicles, is limited to 6 percent of the manufacturer’s applicable California PC, LDT1, and LDT2 production volume; Enhanced AT PZE Vs and AT PZEVs or credits generated by such vehicles may be used either alone or in combination, to meet up to one

- half of the manufacturer’s remaining ZEV requirement.

2.3 Requirements for Intermediate Volume Manufacturers. In For 2009 and through 2017 subsequent model years, an intermediate volume manufacturer may meet its ZEV requirement with up to 100 percent PZEVs or credits generated by such vehicles. For 2015 through 2017 model years, the overall credit percentage requirement for an intermediate v olume manufacturer will be 12% instead of 14%.

2.4 Requirements for Small Volume Manufacturers and Independent Low Volume Manufacturers. A small volume manufacturer or an independent low volume manufacturer is not required to meet the percentage ZEV r equirements. However, a small volume manufacturer or an independent low volume manufacturer may earn and market credits for the ZEVs , TZEVs, AT PZEVs, or PZEVs it produces and delivers for sale in California.

2.5 **[Reserved]** Counting ZEVs and PZEVs in Fle et Average NMOG Calculations . For purposes of calculating a manufacturer’s fleet average NMOG value and NMOG credits under sections 1961(b) and (c), title 13, CCR, a vehicle certified as a ZEV is counted as one ZEV, and a PZEV is counted as one SULEV cert ified to the 150,000 mile standards, regardless of any ZEV or PZEV multipliers.

2.6 **[Reserved]**

2.7 Changes in Small Volume, Independent Low Volume, and Intermediate Volume Manufacturer Status.

(a) Increases in California Production Volume. In 2009 and subsequent through 2017 model years, if a small volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 4,500 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consec utive model years, or if an independent low volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 10,000 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutiv e model years, the manufacturer shall no longer be treated as a small volume, or independent low volume manufacturer, as applicable, and shall comply with the ZEV requirements for intermediate volume manufacturers, as applicable, beginning with the sixth m odel year after the last of the three consecutive model years.A

- 2

- C

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 If an intermediate volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 60,000 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years (i.e., total production volume exceeds 180,000 vehicles in a three year period), the manufacturer shall no longer be treated as an intermediate volume manufacturer and shall, beginning with the sixth mod el year after the last of the three consecutive model years, or in model year 2018 (whichever occurs first), comply with all ZEV requirements for large volume manufacturers

Requirements will begin in the fourth model year rather than the sixth model year when a manufacturer ceases to be a small or intermediate independent low volume manufacturer in 2003 or subsequent years due to the aggregation requirements in majority ownership situations, except that if the majority ownership in the manufacturer

was ac quired prior to the 2001 model year, the manufacturer must comply with the stepped

- up ZEV requirements starting in the 2010 model year. Requirements will begin in the fourth model year, or in model year 2018 (whichever occurs first) rather than the sixth model year when a manufacturer ceases to be an intermediate volume manufacturer in 2003 or subsequent years due to the aggregation requirements in majority ownership situation.

(b) Decreases in California Production Volume. If a manufacturer’s average California production volume falls below 4,500, 10,000 or 60,000 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs, as applicable, based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years, the manufacturer shall be treated as a small volume, independent low volume, or intermediate volume manufacturer, as applicable, and shall be subject to the requirements for a small volume, independent low volume, or intermediate volume manufacturer beginning with the next mode l year.

(c) Calculating California Production Volume in Change of Ownership Situations. Where a manufacturer experiences a change in ownership in a particular model year, the change will affect application of the aggregation requirements on the manufac turer starting with the next model year. When a manufacturer is simultaneously producing two model years of vehicles at the time of a change of ownership, the basis of determining next model year must be the earlier model year. The manufacturer’s small

o r intermediate volume manufacturer status for the next model year shall be based on the average California production volume in the three previous consecutive model years of those manufacturers whose production volumes must be aggregated for that next mode l year. For example, where a change of ownership during the 2010 calendar year occurs and the manufacturer is producing both 2010 and 2011 model year vehicles results in a requirement that the production volume of Manufacturer A be aggregated with the pro duction volume of Manufacturer B, Manufacturer A’s status for the 2011 model year will be based on the production volumes of Manufacturers A and B in the 2008

- 2010 model years. Where the production volume of Manufacturer A must beA

- 2

- C

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 aggregated with the prod uction volumes of Manufacturers B and C for the 2010 model year, and during that model year a change in ownership eliminates the requirement that Manufacturer B’s production volume be aggregated with Manufacturer A’s, Manufacturer A’s status for the 2011 m odel year will be based on the production volumes of Manufacturers A and C in the 2008

- 2010 model years. In either case, the lead time provisions in section subdivisions C2.7(a) and (b) will apply.

3. Partial ZEV Allowance Vehicles (PZEVs).

3.1 Introduct ion

. This section subdivisions C.3 sets forth the criteria for identifying vehicles delivered for sale in California as PZEVs. A PZEV is a vehicle that cannot be certified as a ZEV but qualifies for a PZEV allowance of at least 0.2.

3.2 Baseline PZEV Al lowance

. In order for a vehicle to be eligible to receive a PZEV allowance, the manufacturer must demonstrate compliance with all of the following requirements. A qualifying vehicle will receive a baseline PZEV allowance of 0.2.

(a) SULEV Standards. F or 2009 through 2014 model years, C c ertify the vehicle to the 150,000

- mile SULEV exhaust emission standards for PCs and LDTs in section subdivision 1961(a)(1), title 13, CCR. Bi

- fuel, fuel

- flexible and dual

- fuel vehicles must certify to the applicable 150, 000

- mile SULEV exhaust emission standards when operating on both fuels

. For 2015 through 2017 model years, certify the vehicle to the 150,000

- mile SULEV 20 or 30 exhaust emission standards for PCs and LDTs in subdivision 1961.2(a)(1). Bi

- fuel, fuel flexi ble and dual

- fuel vehicles must certify to the applicable 150,000

- mile SULEV 20 or 30 exhaust emission standards when operating on both fuels ;

(b) Evaporative Emissions. Certify the vehicle to the evaporative emission standards in section subdivision 1976( b)(1)(E), title 13, CCR ( zero

- fuel evaporative emissions standards ) . For 2015 through 2017 model years, certify the vehicle to the evaporative emission standards in subdivision 1976(b)(1)(G) ;

(c) OBD. Certify that the vehicle will meet the applicable on

- board diagnostic requirements in sections 1968.1 or 1968.2, title 13, CCR, as applicable, for 150,000 miles; and

(d) Extended Warranty. Extend the performance and defects warranty period set forth in section s subdivision s 2037(b)(2) and 2038(b)(2) to 15 years or 150,000 miles, whichever occurs first, except that the time period is to be 10 years for a zero emission energy storage device used for traction power (such as a battery, ultracapacitor, or other electric storage device).

3.3 Zero

- Emission VMT PZEV Allowance

.A

- 2

- C

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (a) Calculation of Zero Emission VMT Allowance. A vehicle that meets the requirements of section subdivision C.3.2 and has zero

- emission vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) capability will generate an additional zero emission VMT PZEV allowanc e, calculated as follows:

Range Zero

- emission VMT Allowance

EAER u < 10 miles 0.0

EAER u ≥ 10 miles to 40 miles
and
R cda = 10 miles to 40 miles EAER u x (1

– UF Rcda )/11.028

R cda EAER u > 40 miles EAER u40 / 29.63 (EAER u40 ) x [1

– (UF 40 *R cda /EAER u )]/ 11.028 Where,
UF 40 = utility factor at 40 miles
EAER u40 = 40 miles

A vehicle cannot generate mo re than 1.39 zero

- emission VMT PZEV allowance.

The urban equivalent all

- electric range (EAER u ) and charge depleting actual range (urban cycle) (R cda ) shall be determined in accordance with sections F.11 and F.5. 4

, respectively, of these test procedures. The u tility Factor (UF) based on the charge depleting actual range (urban cycle) (R cda ) shall be determined according to Section 4.5.2 Equation 5 and the “Fleet UF” Utility Factor Equation Coefficients in Section 4.5.2, Table 3 of SAE J 2841 March 2009.

( b) Alternative Procedures. As an alternative to determining the zero

emission VMT allowance in accordance with the preceding section C.3.3(a), a manufacturer may submit for Executive Officer approval an alternative procedure for determining the zero

- emiss ion VMT potential of the vehicle as a percent of total VMT, along with an engineering evaluation that adequately substantiates the zero

- emission VMT determination. For example, an alternative procedure may provide that a vehicle with zero

- emissions of one regulated pollutant (e.g., NOx) and not another (e.g., NMOG) will qualify for a zero

- emission VMT allowance of 1.5.

(c) [RESERVED].

3.4 PZEV Allowance for Advanced ZEV Componentry . A vehicle that meets the requirements of section subdivision C.3.2 may qualify for an advanced componentry PZEV allowance as provided in this section 3.4.A

- 2

- C

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (a) Use of High Pressure Gaseous Fuel or Hydrogen Storage System. A vehicle equipped with a high pressure gaseous fuel storage system capable of refueling at 3600 pounds per square inch or more and operating exclusively on this gaseous fuel shall qualify for an advanced componentry PZEV allowance of 0.2. A vehicle capable of operating exclusively on hydrogen stored in a high pressure system capable of refueling at 5000 pounds per square inch or more, stored in nongaseous form, or at cryogenic temperatures, shall instead qualify for an advanced componentry PZEV allowance of 0.3.

(b) Use of a Qualifying HEV Electric Drive System

(1) Classification of HEVs. HEVs qualify ing for additional advanced componentry PZEV allowance or allowances that may be used in the AT PZEV category are classified in one of five four types of HEVs based on the criteria in the following table.

Characteristics Type C Type D Type E Type F Typ e G

Electric Drive System Peak Power Output ≥ 10 kW ≥ 10 kW ≥ 50 kW Zero Emission VMT allowance; ≥ 10 mile all

- electric range ( UDDS drive cycle) range Zero

- Emission VMT allowance; ≥ 10 mile all

- electric range ( US06 drive cycle) range

Traction Drive System Voltage < 60 Volts ≥ 60 Volts ≥ 60 volts ≥ 60 volts ≥ 60 volts

Traction Drive Boost Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Regenerative Braking Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Idle Start/Stop Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

(2) [R eserved ].

(3) [R eserved ].

(4) [R eserved ]. Type C HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type C HEV, and that is equipped with an advanced traction energy storage system

– such as lithium ion batteries, nickel metal

- hydride batteries, ultracapacitors, or o ther similarA

- 2

- C

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 systems

– with a design lifetime of at least 10 years, qualifies for an additional advanced componentry allowance of 0.2 in the 2009 through 2011 model years, 0.15 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.1 in the 2015 and subsequent model years.

(5) Type D HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type D HEV qualifies for an additional advanced componentry allowance of 0.4 in the 2009 through 20 11 model years, 0.35 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.25 in the 2015 and subsequent model years through 2017 model years

.
(6) Type E HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets a ll of the criteria for a Type E HEV qualifies for an additional advanced componentry allowance of 0.5 in the 2009 through 2011 model years, 0.45 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.35 in the 2015 and subsequent model years through 2017 model years

.
(7) Type F HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type F HEV, including achieving 10 miles or more of all

- electric UDDS range, qualifies for an additional ad vanced componentry allowance of 0.72 in the 2009 through 2011 model years, 0.67 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.57 in the 2015 and subsequent model years through 2017 model years

.
(8) Type G HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to t he reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer meets all of the criteria for a Type G HEV, including achieving 10 miles or more of all

- electric US06 range, qualifies for an additional advanced componentry allowance of 0.95 in the 2009 through 2011 mod el years, 0. 8 9 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0. 7 8 in the 2015 and subsequent model years through 2017 model years

.
(9) Severability. In the event that all or part of section subdivision C.3.4(b)(1)

- (8) is found invalid, the remainder of these s tandards and test procedures , including the remainder of section C.3.4(b)(1)

- (8), remains in full force and effect.

3.5 PZEV Allowance for Low Fuel

- Cycle Emissions. A vehicle that makes exclusive use of fuel(s) with very low fuel

- cycle emissions shall re ceive a PZEV allowance of 0.3. In order to receive the PZEV low fuel

- cycle emissions allowance, a manufacturer must demonstrate to the Executive Officer, using peer

- reviewed studies or other relevant information, that NMOG emissions associated with the fu el(s) used by the vehicle (on a grams/mile basis) are lower than or equal to 0.01 grams/mile. Fuel

cycle emissions must be calculated based on near

- term production methods and infrastructure assumptions, and the uncertainty in the results must be quantifi ed.

3.6 Calculation of PZEV Allowance.A

- 2

- C

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (a) Calculation of Combined PZEV Allowance for a Vehicle . The combined PZEV allowance for a qualifying vehicle in a particular model year is the sum of the PZEV allowances listed in this section subdivision C.3.6, multip lied by any PZEV introduction phase

- in multiplier listed in section subdivision C.3.7, subject to the cap in section subdivision C.3.6(b).

(1) Baseline PZEV Allowance. The baseline PZEV allowance of 0.2 for vehicles meeting the criteria in section subdivis ion C.3.2;

(2) Zero Emission VMT PZEV Allowance. The zero

- emission VMT PZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with section subdivision C.3.3.;

(3) Advanced ZEV Componentry PZEV Allowance. The advanced ZEV componentry PZEV allowance, if any, de termined in accordance with section subdivision C.3.4; and

(4) Fuel

- cycle Emissions PZEV Allowance. The fuel

- cycle emissions PZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with section subdivision C.3.5.

(b) Caps on the Value of an AT PZEV Allowance.

(1) Cap for 2009 and Subsequent through 2017 Model

- Year Vehicles. The maximum value an AT PZEV may earn before phase

- in multipliers, including the baseline PZEV allowance, is 3.0.

(2) [R eserved ].

3.7 PZEV Multipliers

(a) [R eserved ].

(b) Introductio n Phase

- In Multiplier for PZEVs That Earn a Zero Emission VMT Allowance . Each 2009 through 2011 model year PZEV that earns a zero

emission VMT allowance under section C.3.3 and is sold to a California motorist or is leased for three or more years to a Ca lifornia motorist who is given the option to purchase or re

- lease the vehicle for two years or more at the end of the first lease term, qualifies for a phase

- in multiplier of 1.25. This subdivision C.3.7(b) multiplier will no longer be available after mode l year 2011.

4. Qualification for ZEV Multipliers and Credits.

4.1 [R eserved ].

4.2 [R eserved ].A

- 2

- C

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 4.3 [R eserved ].

4.4 ZEV Credits for 2009 through 2017 and Subsequent Model Years ZEVs

.
(a) ZEV Tiers for Credit Calculations

. ZEV c C redits from a pa rticular ZEV are based on the assignment of a given ZEV into one of the following eight ZEV tiers: ZEV Tier UDDS ZEV Range (miles) Fast Refueling Capability

NEV No minimum N/A Type 0 < 50 N/A Type I ≥ 50, <75 N/A Type I.5 ≥ 75, <100 N/A Type II ≥ 1 00 N/A

Type III ≥ 10 0 Must be capable of replacing 95 miles (UDDS ZEV range) in ≤ 10 minutes per section C.4.4(b)

≥ 200 N/A

Type IV ≥ 200 Must be capable of replacing 190 miles (UDDS ZEV range) in ≤ 15 minutes per section C.4.4(b)

Type V ≥ 300 Mu st be capable of replacing 285 miles (UDDS ZEV range) in ≤ 15 minutes per section C.4.4(b)

Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles are defined in subdivision C.4.5(g) and C.9.10.

(b) Fast Refueling . The “fast refueling capability” requirement for a 2009 and

su bsequent through 2017 model year Type III, IV, or V ZEV in section subdivision C.4.4.(a) will be considered met if the Type III ZEV has the capability to accumulate at least 95 miles of UDDS range in 10 minutes or less and the Type IV or V ZEV has the capabi lity to accumulate at least 190 or 285 miles, respectively, in 15 minutes or less. For ZEVs that utilize more than one ZEV fuel, such as plug

- in fuel cell vehicles, the Executive Officer may choose to waive these section subdivision C.4.4.(b) fast fueling requirements and base the amount of credit earned on UDDS ZEV range, as specified in section subdivision C.4.4.(a).

(c) ZEV Credits for 2009 and Subsequent through 2017 Model

- Year ZEVs. A 2009 and subsequent through 2017 model

- year ZEV, other than a NEV o r Type 0, earnsA

- 2

- C

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 1 ZEV credit when it is produced and delivered for sale in California. A 2009 and subsequent through 2017 model

- year ZEV earns additional credits based on the earliest year in which the ZEV is placed in service (not earlier than the ZEV’s m odel year). The vehicle must be delivered for sale and placed in service in the same state (i.e California) in order to earn the total credit amount

. The following table identifies the total credits that a ZEV in each of the eight ZEV tiers will earn, in cluding the credit not contingent on placement in service, if it is placed in service in the specified calendar year or by June 30 after the end of the specified calendar year. A vehicle is not eligible to receive credits if it is placed in service after December 31, five calendar years after the model year. For example, if a vehicle is produced in 2012, but does not get placed until January 1, 2018, the vehicle would no longer be eligible for ZEV credits.



### Total Credit Earned by ZEV Type and Model Ye ar for Production and Delivery for Sale and for Placement

Tier Calendar Year in Which ZEV is Placed in Service

2009

- 201 7 1 2012

- 2017 2018+

NEV 0.30 0.30

Type 0 1 1

Type I 2 2

Type I.5 2.5 2.5

Type I.5x n/a 2.5

Type II 3 3

Type IIx n/a 3

Type I II 4 3 4

Type IV 5 3 5

Type V 7 3 2012

- 2014: 7 2015

- 2017: 9

(d) Multiplier for Certain ZEVs

**.** 2009 through 2011 model

- year ZEVs, excluding NEVs or Type 0 ZEVs, shall qualify for a multiplier of 1.25 if it is either sold to a motorist or is leased for thr ee or more years to a motorist who is given the option to purchase or re

- lease the vehicle for two years or more at the end of the first lease term. This subdivision C.4.4 (d) multiplier will no longer be available after model year 2011.A

- 2

- C

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (e) Counting Spe cified ZEVs Placed in a Section 177 State and in California.

(1) Provisions for 2009 Model Year.

(A) Manufacturers with a ZEV requirement producing ZEVs, excluding NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, that are either certified to the California ZEV standards or approv ed as part of an advanced technology demonstration program and are placed in service in a section 177 state, may be counted towards compliance with the California percentage ZEV requirements in section subdivision C.2, including the requirements in section s ubdivision C.2.2(b), as if they were delivered for sale and placed in service in California.

(B) Manufacturers with a ZEV requirement producing ZEVs , excluding NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs that are certified to the California ZEV standards or approved as part of an advanced technology demonstration program and are placed in service in California may be counted towards the percentage ZEV requirements of any section 177 state, including requirements based on section subdivision C.2.2(B).

(2) Provisions for 201 0 and Subsequent Model Years. Manufacturers with a ZEV requirement producing Specified model year ZEVs , including Type I.5xs and Type IIxs , excluding NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, that are either certified to the California ZEV standards applicable for the ZEV’s model year or approved as part of an advanced technology demonstration program and are placed in service in California or in a section 177 state may be counted towards compliance in California and in all section 177 states, with the percentage ZEV requirem ents in section subdivision C.2, provided that the credits are multiplied by the ratio of a n LVM’s manufacturer’s applicable production volume for a model year, as specified in section subdivision C.2.1(b) in the state receiving credit to the LVM’s manufacture r’s applicable production volume (hereafter, “proportional value”), as specified in section subdivision C.2.1(b) for the same model year in California. Credits generated in a section 177 state will be earned at the proportional value in the section 177 sta te, and earned in California at the full value specified in section subdivision C.4.5(d) However, credits generated by 2010 and 2011 model

- year vehicles produced, delivered for sale, and placed in service, or as part of an advanced technology demonstration program in California to meet the any section 177 state’s requirements that implement section subdivision C.2.2(b) requirements are exempt from proportional value, with the maximum number of credits allowed to be counted towards compliance in a section 177 state being limited to the number of credits needed to satisfy a manufacturer’s section 177 state’s requirements to implement section subdivision C.2.2(b)(1)(B). The table below specifies the qualifying model years for each ZEV type that may be counted to wards compliance in all section 177 states.A

- 2

- C

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Vehicle Type Model Years: Type I, I.5, or II ZEV 2009

– 2014 2017 Type III, IV, or V ZEV 2009

– 2017 Type I.5x or Type IIx 2012

– 2017

(f) NEV Test Procedures. Beginning in 2010 model year, to be eligi ble for the credit amount in section subdivision C.4.4.(c), NEVs must meet the following specifications and requirements in this section subdivision C.4.4(f):

(1) Specifications. A 2010 through 2017 and subsequent model

- year NEV, earns credit when it mee ts all the following specifications:

(A) Acceleration. The vehicle has a 0

- 20 mph acceleration of 6.0 seconds or less when operating with a payload of 332 pounds and starting with the battery at a 50% state of charge.

(B) Top Speed. The vehicle has a minimum top speed of 20 mph when operating with a payload of 332 pounds and starting with the battery at a 50% state of charge. The vehicle’s top speed shall not exceed 25 mph when tested in accordance with 49 CFR 571.500 (68 FR 43972, July 25, 2003 ).

(C) Constant Speed Range. The vehicle has a minimum 25 mile range when operating at constant top speed with a payload of 332 pounds and starting with the battery at 100% state of charge.

(2) Battery Requirement . A qualifying NEV must be equippe d with sealed, maintenance

- free batteries.

(3) Warranty Requirement

. A 2010 through 2017 and subsequent model year NEV drive train, including battery packs, must be covered for a period of at least 24 months. At least The first 6 months of the first 12 months of the NEV warranty period must be covered by a full warranty; the remainder of the first 12 months and all of the second 12 months of the remaining warranty period may be optional extended warranties (available for purchase) and may be prorated. If the extended warranty is prorated, the percentage of the battery pack's original value to be covered or refunded must be at least as high as the percentage of the prorated coverage period still remaining. For the purpose of this computation, the age of the battery pack must be expressed in intervals no larger than three months. Alternatively, a manufacturer may cover 50 percent of the original value of the battery pack for the full period of the extended warranty.

(4) Prior to allowance approval, the Executive Officer may request that the manufacturer provide copies of representative vehicle and battery warranties.A

- 2

- C

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (5) NEV Charging Requirements. Model year 2014 through 2017 NEVs must meet charging connection standard portion of the requirements spec ified in subdivision 1962.3(c)(2).

(g) Type I.5x and Type IIx Vehicles. Beginning in 2012 model year, to be eligible for the credit amount in subdivision C.4.4(c) , Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles must meet the following specifications and requirements:

( 1 ) PZEV Requirements. Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles must meet all PZEV requirements, specified in subdivision C.3.2 (a) through (d)

.
( 2) Type G Requirements. Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles must meet the requirements for Type G advanced compone ntry allowance, specified in subdivision C.3.4(b)

.
(3) APU Operation. The vehicle’s UDDS range after the APU first starts and enters “charge sustaining hybrid operation” must be less than or equal to the vehicle’s UDDS all

- electric test range prior to AP U start. The vehicle’s APU cannot start under
any user

- selectable driving mode unless the energy storage system used for traction
power is fully depleted.

( 4 ) Minimum Zero Emission Range Requirements.

Vehicle Category Zero Emission UDDS Range Type I. 5x ≥ 75 miles, < 100 miles Type IIx ≥ 100 miles

5. [Reserved]

6. **Extended Service Multiplier for 1997**

**- 2003 Model** 

**- Year ZEVs and**  **PZEVs With** ≥ **10 Mile Zero Emission Range.** Except in the case of a NEV, an additional ZEV or PZEV multiplier will be earned by the manufacturer of a 1997 through 2003 model

- year ZEV, or PZEV with ≥ 10 mile zero emission range for each full year it is registered for operation on public roads in California beyond its first three years of service, in the 2009 through 2011 calendar ye ars. For additional years of service starting earlier than April 24, 2003, the manufacturer will receive 0.1 times the ZEV credit that would be earned by the vehicle if it were leased or sold new in that year, including multipliers, on a year

- by

- year bas is beginning in the fourth year after the vehicle is initially placed in service. For additional years of service starting April 24, 2003 or later, the manufacturer will receive 0.2 times the ZEV credit that would be earned by the vehicle if it were lease d or sold new in that year, including multipliers,
on a year

- by

- year basis beginning in the fourth year after the vehicle is initially placed in service. The extended service multiplier is reported and earned in the year following each continuous year of service. Additional credit cannot be earned after model year 2011.A

- 2

- C

- 18
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 7. Generation and Use of ZEV Credits; Calculation of Penalties

7.1 Introduction. A manufacturer that produces and delivers for sale in California ZEVs or PZEVs in a given model year e xceeding the manufacturer’s ZEV requirement set forth in section subdivision C.2 shall earn ZEV credits in accordance with this section subdivision C.7.

7.2 ZEV Credit Calculations.

(a) Credits from ZEVs

. For model years 2009 through 2014, T t he amount of g/mi ZEV credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from ZEVs shall be expressed in units of g/mi NMOG, and shall be equal to the number of credits from ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California that the manufacturer applies towards me eting the ZEV requirements for the model year subtracted from the number of ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer in the model year and then multiplied by the NMOG fleet average requirement for PCs and LDT1s

, or LDT2s as ap plicable, for that model year. For model years 2015 through 2017, the amount of credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from ZEVs shall be expressed in units of credits.

(b) Credits from PZEVs. For model years 2009 through 2014, T t he amoun t of g/mi ZEV credits from PZEVs earned by a manufacturer in a given model year shall be expressed in units of g/mi NMOG, and shall be equal to the total number of PZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California that the manufacturer applies towards

me eting its ZEV requirement for the model year subtracted from the total number of PZEV allowances from PZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer in the model year and then multiplied by the NMOG fleet average requirement for PC s and LDT1s , or LDT2s as applicable, for that model year. For model years 2015 through 2017, the amount of credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from PZEVs shall be expressed in units of credits.

(c) Separate Credit Accounts. The number of credits from a manufacturer’s [i] ZEVs, [ii] Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles

, [ ii iii ] Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , [ iii iv ] AT PZEVs, [ i v] all other PZEVs, and [v i ] NEVs shall each be maintained separately.

(d) Rounding Credits. For model year 2012 through 2014, ZEV credits and debits shall be rounded to the nearest 1/1000 th only on the final credit and debit totals using the conventional rounding method. For model year 2015 through 2017, ZEV credits and debits shall be rounded to the nearest 1/100 th only on the final credit and debit totals using the conventional rounding method.

(e) Converting g/mi NMOG ZEV Credit to ZEV Credits

**.** After model year 2014 compliance, all manufacturer ZEV, Type I.5x and Type IIx, TZEV, AT PZEV, PZEV, and NEV accounts will be converted from g/mi NMOG to credits. Each g/mi NMOG account balance will be divided by 0.035. Starting in model year 2015, credits will no longer be expressed in terms of g/mi credits, but only as credits.A

- 2

- C

- 19
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (f) Converting PZEV and AT PZEV Credits after Model Year 2017. After model year 2017 compliance, a manufacturer’s PZEV and AT PZEV credit accounts will be converted to be used for compliance with requirements specified in subdivision C.2

. For LVMs, PZEV accounts will be discounted 93.25%, and AT PZE V accounts will be discounted 75%. For IVMs, PZEV accounts and AT PZEV accounts will be discounted 75%. This will be a one time calculation after model year 2017 compliance is complete.

7.3 ZEV Credits for MDVs and LDTs Other Than LDT1s . ZEVs and PZEVs classified as MDVs or as LDTs other than LDT1s may be counted toward the ZEV requirement for PCs, LDT1s and LDT2s as applicable, and included in the calculation of ZEV credits as specified in this section subdivision C.4 if the manufacturer so designa tes.

7.4 ZEV Credits for Advanced Technology Demonstration Programs

.
(a) TZEVs. In model years For 2009 through 201 4 model years

, ZEVs and Enhanced AT PZEVs, excluding NEVs, TZEVs placed in a California advanced technology demonstration program for a p eriod of two or more years, may earn ZEV credits even if it is not “delivered for sale” or registered with the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). To earn such credits, the manufacturer must demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Exe cutive Officer that the vehicles will be regularly used in applications appropriate to evaluate issues related to safety, infrastructure, fuel specifications or public education, and that for 50 percent or more of the first two years of placement the vehic le will be operated in California. Such a vehicle is eligible to receive the same allowances and credits that it would have earned if placed in service. To determine vehicle credit, the model

- year designation for a demonstration vehicle shall be consiste nt with the model

- year designation for conventional vehicles placed in the same timeframe. Manufacturers may earn credit for as many as 25 vehicles per model, per ZEV state, per year under this section C.7.4. A manufacturer’s vehicles in excess of the 25

- vehicle cap will not be eligible for advanced technology demonstration program credits.

(b) ZEVs. In model years 2009 through 2017, ZEVs , including Type I.5x and IIx vehicle s , excluding NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, placed in a California advanced technology dem onstration program for a period of two or more years, may earn ZEV credits even if it is not “delivered for sale” or registered with the California DMV. To earn such credits, the manufacturer must demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executiv e Officer that the vehicles will be regularly used in applications appropriate to evaluate issues related to safety, infrastructure, fuel specifications or public education, and that for 50 percent or more of the first two years of placement the vehicle wi ll be operated in California. Such a vehicle is eligible to receive the same allowances and credits that it would have earned if placed in service. To determine vehicle credit, the model year designation for a demonstration vehicle shall be consistent wi th the model year designation for conventional vehicles placed in the same timeframe. Manufacturers may earn credit for as many as 25 vehicles per model, perA

- 2

- C

- 20
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ZEV state, per year under this subdivision C.7.4 . A manufacturer’s vehicles in excess of the 25

- vehicle cap will not be eligible for advanced technology demonstration program credits.

7.5 ZEV Credits for Transportation Systems

.
(a) General. In model years 2009 and subsequent through 2017 , a ZEV placed, for two or more years, as part of a transpor tation system may earn additional ZEV credits, which may be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category, except as provided in subdivision C.4.5(e)(2) and as provided in section subdivision C.7.5(c) below. In model years 20 09 through 2011, an Enhanced AT PZEV TZEV , AT PZEV or PZEV placed as part of a transportation system may earn additional ZEV credits, which may be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category, except as provided in section su bdivision C.7.5(c) below. A NEV is not eligible to earn credit for transportation systems. To earn such credits, the manufacturer must demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer that the vehicle will be used as a part of a projec t that uses an innovative transportation system as described in section subdivision C.7.5(b) below.

(b) Credits Earned. In order to earn additional credit under this section C.7.5, a project must at a minimum demonstrate [i] shared use of ZEVs Type I.5x a nd Type IIx vehicle s, Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEV

, AT PZEVs or PZEVs, and [ii] the application of “intelligent” new technologies such as reservation management, card systems, depot management, location management, charge billing and real

- time wireless informatio n systems. If, in addition to factors [i] and [ii] above, a project also features linkage to transit, the project may receive further additional credit. For ZEVs only, not including NEVs, a project that features linkage to transit, such as dedicated park ing and charging facilities at transit stations, but does not demonstrate shared use or the application of intelligent new technologies, may also receive additional credit for linkage to transit. The maximum credit awarded per vehicle shall be determined by the Executive Officer, based upon an application submitted by the manufacturer and, if appropriate, the project manager. The maximum credit awarded shall not exceed the following:A

- 2

- C

- 21
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Type of Vehicle Model Year Shared Use, Intelligence Linkage to Transit
PZEV through 2011 2 1
AT PZEV through 2011 4 2
Enhanced AT PZEV 2009 through 2011 4 2

ZEV 2009 through 2011 6 3
Enhanced AT PZEV
TZEV 2012 and subsequent throug h 2017 1 0.5 1 0.5

ZEV and Type I.5x and Type

IIx vehicle s 2012 and subsequent throug h 2017 2 0.75 1 0.75

(c) Cap on Use of Credits.

(1) ZEVs. Credits earned or allocated by ZEVs ZEVs or Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles pursuant to this section subdivision C.7.5, not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year, and may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation which must be met with ZEVs, as specified in section subdivision C.2.2(d)(3).

(2) Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs

. Credits earned or allocated by Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs pursuant to this section subdivision C.7.5, not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year, but may only be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category.

(3) AT PZEVs. Credits earned or allocated by AT PZEVs pursuant to this section subdivision C.7.5, not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be

us ed to satisfy up to one

- twentieth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year, but may only be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category.

(4) PZEVs. Credits earned or allocated by PZEVs pursuant to this

s ection subdivision C.7.5, not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- fiftieth of the manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year, but may only be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehi cles of that category.

(d) Allocation of Transportation System Credits. Credits shall be assigned by the Executive Officer to the project manager or, in the absence of a separate projectA

- 2

- C

- 22
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 manager, to the vehicle manufacturers upon demonstration that a veh icle has been placed in a project for the time specified in subdivision C.7.5(a)

. Credits shall be allocated to vehicle manufacturers by the Executive Officer in accordance with a recommendation submitted in writing by the project manager and signed by al l manufacturers participating in the project, and need not be allocated in direct proportion to the number of vehicles placed. Credits will no longer be allocated for vehicles placed in transportation systems after 2017 model year.

7.6 Use of ZEV Cre dits

. For model years 2009 through 2014, A a manufacturer may meet the ZEV requirements in any given model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a commensurate amount of g/mi ZEV credits, consistent with section subdivision C.2. For model years 2015 through 2017, a manufacturer may meet the ZEV requirements in any given model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a commensurate amount of ZEV credits, consistent with subdivision C.2

. Credits in each of the categories may be used to meet the requ irement for that category as well as the requirements for lesser credit earning ZEV categories, but shall not be used to meet the requirement for a greater credit earning ZEV category. For example, credits produced from Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs may be used to comply with AT PZEV requirements, but not with the portion that must be satisfied by ZEVs. These credits may be earned previously by the manufacturer or acquired from another party.

(a) NEVs. Credits earned from NEVs offered for sale or placed in ser vice in model years 2001 through 2005 cannot be used to satisfy more than the percentage limits described in the following table:

Model Years ZEV Obligation that: Percent limit for NEVs allowed to meet each Obligation:

2009

–

2011 Must be met with ZEVs 5 0%

2009 May be met with AT PZEVs but not PZEVs 75%

2010

–

2011 50%

2009

–

2011 May be met with PZEVs No Limit

2012

– 2014 2017 Must be met with ZEVs 0%
May be met with Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs and AT PZEVs 50%

May be met with PZEVs No Limit

Additio nally, credits earned from NEVs offered for sale or placed in service in model years 2006 through 2017 or later can be used to meet the percentage limits describedA

- 2

- C

- 23
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 in the following table:

Model Years ZEV Obligation that: Percent Limit for NEVs allowed to meet each Obligation:

2009

- 2011 May be met through compliance with Primary Requirements No Limit

May be met through compliance with Alternative Requirements, and must be met with ZEVs 0%

May be met through compliance Alternative Requirements, and m ay be met with AT PZEVs or PZEVs No Limit

2012

– 2014 2017 Must be met with ZEVs 0%
May be met with Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , AT PZEVs, or PZEVs No Limit

This limitation applies to credits earned by the same manufacturer or earned by another manufacturer and acquired.

(b) Carry forward provisions for Large Volume Manufacturers for 2009

- 2011 Model Years

. ZEV c C redits from ZEVs, excluding credits generated from NEVs generated from excess production in model years 2009 through 2011 model years and subseq uent , including those acquired from another party, may be carried forward and applied to the ZEV minimum floor requirement specified in section subdivisions C.2.2(b)(1)(B) and (d) for two subsequent model years. Beginning with the third subsequent model ye ar, those earned ZEV credits may no longer be used to satisfy the manufacturer’s percentage ZEV obligation that may only be satisfied by credits from ZEVs, but may be used to satisfy the manufacturer’s percentage ZEV obligation that may be satisfied by cre dits from Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , AT PZEVs, or PZEVs. For example, ZEV credit earned in 2010 would retain full flexibility through 2012, after which time that credit could only be used as Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , AT PZEV, or PZEV credits.

(c) Carry for ward provisions for manufacturers other than Large Volume Manufacturers for 2009

- 2011 Model Years

. ZEV c Credits generated from ZEVs, excluding credits generated from NEVs, from 2009 through 2011 and subsequent model year production by manufacturers that ar e not large volume manufacturers may be carried forward by the manufacturer producing the ZEV credit until the manufacturer becomes subject to the large volume manufacturer requirements, after the transition period permitted in section subdivision C.2.7(a). When subject to the large volume manufacturer requirements, a manufacturer must comply with the provisions ofA

- 2

- C

- 24
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 section subdivision C.7.6(b).

ZEV c Credits traded by a manufacturer other than a large volume manufacturer to any other manufacturer, includin g a large volume manufacturer, are subject to section subdivision C.7.6(b), beginning in the model year in which they were produced (e.g., a 2009 model year ZEV credit traded in calendar year 2010 can only be applied towards the portion of the manufacturer’ s requirement that must be met with ZEVs through model year 2011; beginning in model year 2012, the credit can only be applied to the portion of the manufacturer’s requirement that may be met with Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , AT PZEVs, or PZEVs).

(d) Type I .5x and Type IIx vehicles. Credits earned from Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles offered for sale or placed in service may meet up to 50% of the portion of a manufacturer’s requirement that must be met with credits from ZEVs.

7.7 Requirement to Make Up a ZEV Deficit

. (a) General

. A manufacturer that produces and delivers for sale in California fewer ZEVs than required in a given model year shall make up the deficit by the end of the third model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a commensurate amount of g/mi ZEV credits generated by ZEVs, for model year 2009 through 2014, and the commensurate amount of credits generated by ZEVs for model year 2015 through 2017 . The amount of g/mi ZEV credits required to be submitted shall be calculated by [i] a dding the number of credits from ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year to the number of ZEV allowances from partial ZEV allowance vehicles produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year (for a large volume manufacturer, not to exceed that permitted under section subdivision C.2.1), [ii] subtracting that total from the number of ZEVs credits required to be produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year, and , for model year 2009 through 2014 compliance, [iii] multiplying the resulting value by the fleet average requirements for PCs and LDT1s for the model year in which the deficit is incurred. C redits earned by delivery for sale of Ty pe I.5x and Type IIx vehicles

, TZEV, NEV, AT PZEV, and PZEV are not allowed to be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s ZEV deficit; only credits from ZEVs may be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s ZEV deficit.

7.8 **Penalty for Failure to Meet ZEV Requirements.** Any manufacturer that fails to produce and deliver for sale in California the required number of ZEVs and submit an appropriate amount of g/mi ZEV credits, for model years 2009 through 2014, and credits for model years 2015 through 2017 , and does not make up ZEV deficits within the specified time allowed by section subdivision C.7.7(a) shall be subject to the Health and Safety Code section 43211 civil penalty applicable to a manufacturer that sells a new motor vehicle that does not meet the applicable emiss ion standards adopted by the state board. The cause of action shall be deemed to accrue when the ZEV deficits are not balanced by the end of the specified time allowed by section subdivision C.7.7(a). For the purposes of Health and Safety Code sectionA

- 2

- C

- 25
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 432 11, the number of vehicles not meeting the state board’s standards shall be the number of vehicles not meeting the state board’s standards shall be equal to the manufacturer’s credit deficit, rounded to the to the nearest 1/1000 th for model years 2009 thr ough 2014 and rounded to the nearest 1/100 th for model years 2015 through 2017

, calculated according to the following equation, provided that the percentage of a large volume manufacturer’s ZEV requirement for a given model year that may be satisfied with PZEV allowance vehicles or credits from such vehicles may not exceed the percentages permitted under section subdivision C.2.1(a):

For 2009 through 2014 model years: (No. of ZEVs credits required to be produced and delivered for sale in California generate d for the model year)

– ( No. of ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California for the model year)

– (No. of ZEV allowances from partial ZEV allowance vehicles produced and delivered for sale in California for the model year)

- [( Amount of ZEV credits submitted for compliance for the model year) / (the fleet average requirement for PCs and LDT1s for the model year) ]

For 2015 through 2017 model years: (No. of credits required to be generated for the model year)

– (Amount of credits submitted for complia nce for the model year)

8. Severability. Each provision of these standards and test procedures is severable, and in the event that any provision of these standards and test procedures is held to be invalid, the remainder of the standards and test procedu res remains in full force and effect.

9. Public Disclosure. Records in the Board’s possession for the vehicles subject to the requirements of section C shall be subject to disclosure as public records as follows:

(a) Each manufacturer’s annual produ ction data and the corresponding credits per vehicle earned for ZEVs (including ZEV type), Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs

, AT PZEVs, and PZEVs for the 2009 through 2017 and subsequent model years; and

(b) Each manufacturer’s annual credit balances for 2010 throug h 2017 and subsequent years for:

(1) Each type of vehicle: ZEVs (minus NEVs), Type I.5x, and Type IIx vehicle s, NEVs, Enhanced AT PZEVs TZEVs , AT PZEVs, and PZEVs; and

(2) Advanced technology demonstration programs; and

(3) Transportation systems; and

(4) Credits earned under section C.4.4(c), including credits acquired from, or transferred to another party.A

- 2

- D

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 D. Certification Requirements

.

1. Durability and Emission Testing Requirements. All ZEVs , excluding Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles, are exe mpt from all mileage and service accumulation, durability

- data vehicle, and emission

- data vehicle testing requirements.

2. Information Requirements: Application for Certification. Except as noted below, the Part I (40 CFR §86.1843

- 01(c)) certification application shall include the following:

2.1 Identification and description of the vehicle(s) covered by the application.

2.2 Identification of the vehicle weight category to which the vehicle is certifying: PC, LDT 0

- 3750 lbs. LVW, LDT 3751

- 5750 lbs. LV W, LDT 3751 lbs. LVW

- 8500 lbs. GVW, or MDV (state test weight range), and the curb weight and gross vehicle weight rating of the vehicle.

2.3 Identification and description of the propulsion system for the vehicle.

2.4 Identification and description of the climate control system used on the vehicle.

2.5 Projected number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale in California, and projected California sales.

2.6 Identification of the energy usage in kilowatt

- hours per mile from: (a) the battery outpu t (DC energy) (to be submitted with the Part II certification application (40 CFR §86.1843

- 01(d)); (b) the point when electricity is introduced from the electrical outlet (AC energy); and (c) the operating range in miles of the vehicle when tested in

acco rdance with the All

- Electric Range Test set forth in section E, below. For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles certifying to section F , the manufacturer shall prov i de the energy usage in kilowatt hours per mile from the Urban Eq uivalent Al l

Electric Range and the Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range.

2.7 For those vehicles that use fuel

- fired heaters, the manufacturer shall provide: (a) a description of the control system logic of the fuel

- fired heater, including an evaluation of the co nditions under which the fuel

- fired heater can be operated and an evaluation of the possible operational modes and conditions under which evaporative emissions can exist;A

- 2

- D

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (b) the exhaust emissions value per mile produced by the auxiliary fuel

- fired heater operated between 68 o F and 86 o F; and (c) the test plan which describes the procedure used to determine the mass emissions of the fuel

- fired heater.

2.8 All information necessary for proper and safe operation of the vehicle, including information on th e safe handling of the battery system, emergency procedures to follow in the event of battery leakage or other malfunctions that may affect the safety of the vehicle operator or laboratory personnel.

2.9 Method for determining battery state

- of

- charge, b attery charging capacity and recharging procedures, and any other relevant information as determined by the Executive Officer.

2.10 Battery specific energy data and calculations as specified in section E.4 of these procedures including the weight of the b attery system and the three hour discharge rate (C/3) energy capacity.

2.11 Vehicle and battery break

- in period , and the method used to determine them, as specified in section s E.2 and F.2 of these test procedures.

2.12 Labeling shall conform with the re quirements specified in section 1965, title 13, CCR and the “California Environmental Performance Label Specifications for 2009 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

Duty Passenger Vehicles” (incorporated by reference ther ein)

.

2.13 For a ZEV, extended range HEV or PZEV that qualifies to receive one or more multipliers under sections C.3

- C.7, the manufacturer shall provide all information relevant to the vehicle’s qualification for, and the estimated value of, the mu ltiplier(s). The Executive Officer may request additional information needed to appropriately characterize the vehicle. Based on the submitted information and other relevant data, the Executive Officer shall assign to the vehicle the highest multiplier(s ) for which the manufacturer has demonstrated the vehicle qualifies at that time.

2.14 When a manufacturer plans to require any scheduled maintenance for a PZEV before 150,000 miles, the manufacturer must submit information demonstrating the need for each scheduled maintenance item before 150,000 miles, including actual in

- use data, engineering evaluation of the durability of the part, or other relevant information. The manufacturer may require such maintenance for a PZEV only upon the Executive Officer’s determination, prior to certification, the manufacturer has demonstrated the need for the scheduled maintenance; this determination may not unreasonably be denied.

2.15 For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles certifying to section F , the manufacturer shall provide the Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range, the Urban Charge Depleting Actual Range, the Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining UrbanA

- 2

- D

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Range, the Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range, the Highway Charge Depleting Actual Range, the Char ge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Highway Range, the Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range, the Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range , the Urban Electric Range Fraction, and the Highway Electric Range Fraction

.

3. ZEV Reporting Requirements. In order to ve rify the status of each manufacturer’s compliance with the ZEV requirements for a given calendar year, each manufacturer shall submit a report to the Executive Officer at least annually, by May 1 of the calendar year following the close of the model year, that identifies the necessary delivery and placement data of all vehicles generating ZEV credits or allowances, and all transfers and acquisitions of ZEV credits. The manufacturer may update the report by September 1 to cover activities occurring between April 1 and June 30. If a manufacturer updates their annual California production numbers in their ZEV report, the annual NMOG production must also be updated.A

- 2

- E

- 1
Date of Release: Dec ember 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 E. Determination of NEV Acceleration, Top Speed, and Constant Speed Range

The acceleration and constant speed range for a NEV shall be determined as specified in “Implementation of SAE Standard J1666 May 93: Electric Vehicle Acceleration, Gradeability, and Deceleration Test Procedure,” ETA

- NTP002 Revision 3, February 1, 2008 , and “Electric Veh icle Constant Speed Range Tests,” ETA

- NTP004 Revision 3, February 1, 2008.A

- 2

- F

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 E F

. Test Procedures for 201 2 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles (including Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles ) and All 201 2 and Subsequent Model Hybrid

- Ele ctric Vehicles , Except Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
The “as adopted or amended dates” of the 40 CFR Part 86 regulations referenced by this document are the dates identified in the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Pro cedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicles

. ” Unless otherwise noted, these requirements shall apply to all ZEVs (including fuel cell vehicle s and hybrid fuel cell vehicles ) and all HEVs

, except off

- veh icle charge capable HEVs

. A manufacturer may elect to certify a 2009, 2010, or 2011 model

- year zero

- emission vehicle or hybrid electric vehicle, except an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle, using this section E.

1. Electric Dynamometer. All ZEVs and HEVs must be tested using a 48

- inch single roll electric dynamometer meeting the requirements of 40 CFR Subpart B, §86.108

- 00(b)(2) [October 22, 1996]

.

2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- In Period. A manufacturer shall use good engineering judg ment in determining the proper stabilized emissions mileage test point and report same according to the requirements of section D.2.11 above.

3. All

- Electric Range Test for Zero

- Emission Vehicles (including Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicl es)

. All 201 2 and subsequent ZEVs shall be subject to the All

- Electric Range Test specified below for the purpose of determining the energy efficiency and operating range of the ZEV

.

3.1 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range for Z ero - E mission V ehicl e s.

3.1.1 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range for Battery E lectric Vehicles.

(a) Cold soak . The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 ° F (20 ° C) and not more than 86 ° F (30 ° C) for 12 to 36 hours. During this time, the v ehicle’s battery shall be charged to a full state

- of

- charge. Charge time shall not exceed soak time.

( b ) At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through successive Urban Dynamometer Driv ing Schedules (UDDS), 40 CFR, Part 86, Appendix I [July 13, 2005] , which is incorporated herein by reference. A 10

- minute soak shall follow each UDDS.A

- 2

- F

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ( c ) For vehicles with a maximum speed greater than or equal to the maximum speed on the UDDS, this tes t sequence shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to maintain either the speed or time tolerances in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00 (b)(1) and (2) [October 22, 1996] , or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e .g. excessively high battery temperature, abnorm ally low battery voltage, etc.

( d ) For vehicles with a maximum speed less tha n the maximum speed on the UDDS , the vehicle shall be operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) when the vehicle ca nnot achieve the speed trace within the speed and time tolerances specified in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00(b)(1) and (2) [October 22, 1996] . The test shall be terminated when the vehicle speed when operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) falls below 95 percent of the maximum speed initially achieved on the UDDS or when the battery state

- of

- charge is depleted to the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. exces sively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc., whichever occurs first.

3.1.2 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range for Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles

.
(a) The urban all

- electric range for a fuel cell vehicle and a hybrid fuel cell vehicle shall be determined in accordance with SAE J2572. As an option, a manufacturer may elect to determine the urban all

- electric range for a fuel cell vehicle or a hybrid fuel cell vehicle in accordance with section F E .3.1.1 abo ve.

3. 2 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range for Z ero - E mission V ehicles and Range for Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles

.

3. 2.1 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range for Battery E lectric Vehicles.

(a) Cold soak . The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 ° F (20 ° C) and not more than 86 ° F (30 ° C) for 12 to 36 hours. During this time, the vehicle’s battery shall be charged to a full state

- of

- charge. Charge time shall not exceed soak time.

( b ) At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be either placed or pushed onto a dynamometer and operated through Continuous Highway Test Schedules of the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule ( HFEDS )

.
( c ) For vehicles with a maximum speed greater than or equal to the maximum speed on the HFEDS, this test sequence shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to maintain either the speed or time tolerances in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00 (b)(1) and (2) [October 22, 1996] , or the manufacturer determines that the test should beA

- 2

- F

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnorm ally low battery voltage, etc.

( d ) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than the maximum spe ed on the HFEDS , the vehicle shall be operated at maximum a vailable power (or full throttle) when the vehicle cannot achieve the speed trace within the speed and time tolerances specified in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00(b)(1) and (2) [October 22, 1996] . The test shall be terminated when the vehicle speed when operated at ma ximum available power (or full throttle) falls below 95 percent of the maximum speed initially achieved on the HFEDS or when the battery state

- of

- charge is depleted to the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer determines that the te st should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc., whichever occurs first.

( e ) NEVs are exempt from the all

- electric range highway test.

3. 2. 2 Determination of Highway All

- Electr ic Range for Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles

.
(a) The highway all

- electric range for a fuel cell vehicle and a hybrid fuel cell vehicle shall be determined in accordance with SAE J2572. As an option, a manufacturer may elect to determin e the highway all

- electric range for a fuel cell vehicle or a hybrid fuel cell vehicle in accordance with section E F .3.2.1 above.

3. 3 Recording requirements.

For all battery electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles, except off

vehicle charge cap able hybrid electric vehicles : Once the vehicle is no longer able to maintain the speed and time requirements specified in E F .3.1 or E F .3.2 above, the vehicle shall be brought to an immediate stop and the following data shall be recorded:

(a) mileage acc umulated during the All

- Electric Range Test; (b) Net DC energy from the battery that was expended during the All

Electric Range Test (may be reported as the total DC battery energy output and the total DC battery energy input during the All

- Electric Range Test); (c) AC energy required to fully charge the battery after the All

- Electric Range Test from the point where electricity is introduced from the electric outlet to the battery charger; (d) DC energy required to fully charge the battery after the All

- Ele ctric Range Test from the point where electricity is introduced from the battery charger to the battery ; and (e) Measured AC and DC watt hours and amp hours shall be reported to the nearest hundredths of a kilowatt hour and tenths of an amp hour.A

- 2

- F

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Battery charging shall begin within 1 hour after terminating the All

- Electric Range Test.

3. 4 Regenerative braking . Regenerative braking systems may be utilized during the range test. The braking level, if adjustable, shall be set according to the manufacturer’ s specifications for normal driving conditions prior to the commencement of the test. The driving schedule speed and time tolerances specified in E F .3.1 or E F .3.2 shall not be exceeded due to the operation of the regenerative braking system.

3. 5 Measurem ent Accuracy

. For battery electric vehicles, t he overall error in voltage and current recording instruments shall be NIST traceable and accurate to ± 1% of the maximum value of the variable (AC/DC volts and amps) being measured. Suggested equipment: amp me ter/power meter capable of sampling voltage and
current . Voltage and current shall be sampled at a minimum rate of 20 hz.

3. 6 Watt Hour Calculation for Battery Electric Vehicles

.
DC energy (watt

- hours) shall be calculated as follows

DC energ y = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt
Where v = vehicle DC main battery pack voltage i = vehicle DC main battery pack current

AC energy (in watt

- hours) shall be calculated as follows
AC energy = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt in watt

- hours Where v = AC instantaneous voltage i = AC ins tantaneous current

3.7 Charger Requirements for Battery Electric Vehicles.

The standard charging apparatus (or equivalent) normally furnished with or specified for the vehicle shall be used for charging during vehicle testing.

4. Determination of Batter y Specific Energy for ZEVs

.
Determine the specific energy of batteries used to power a ZEV in accordance with the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium’s Electric Vehicle Battery Procedure Manual (January 1996), Procedure No. 2, “Constant Current Discharge Tes t Series,” using the C/3 rate. The weight calculation must reflect a completely functional battery system as defined in the Appendix of the Manual, including pack(s), required support ancillaries (e.g., thermal management), and electronic controller.

5. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater for Vehicles Other Than ZEVs

.A

- 2

- F

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 The exhaust emissions result of the fuel

- fired heater shall be determined by operating at a maximum heating capacity with a cold start between 68 o F and 86 o F for a perio d of 20 minutes and dividing the grams of emissions by 20. The resulting grams per minute shall be multiplied by 3.0 minutes per mile to obtain a grams per mile value.

6. Urban Emission Test Provisions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fu el Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
Alternative procedures may be used if shown to yield equivalent results and if approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.

6.1 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” with the following supplemental requirements:

6.1. 1 For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activa tion of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the preconditioning drive.

6.1. 2 For hy brid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the UDDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxi liary power unit when operating in urban driving conditions.

6.1. 3 After setting battery state

- of

- charge, the hybrid electric vehicle shall be pushed or towed to a work area for the initial fuel drain and fill according to section III. D.1. 4 . of the “Calif ornia Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles

. ”

6.1. 4 Following the initial fuel drain and fill, the vehicle shall complete an initial soak period of a minimum of 6 hours. After completing the soak period, the vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on a dynamometer and preconditioned. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manuallyA

- 2

- F

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throu ghout the preconditioning drive.

6.1. 5 Within five minutes of completing preconditioning drive, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle does not allow manual activ ation of the auxiliary power unit and is charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, then set battery state

- of

- charge to a level such that the SOC c riterion in section F G .10 would be satisfied for the dynamometer procedure (section E F

. 6.2 of these procedures). If of f

- vehicle charging is required to increase battery state

- of

- charge for proper setting, off

- vehicle charging shall occur during the second soak period of 12 to 36 hour s

.
(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle does not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and is charge

- depleting over the UDDS, then no battery state

- of

- charge adjustment is permissible.

(iii) If the hybrid electric vehicle does allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, then set battery state

- of

- charge to manufacturer

re commended level for activating the auxiliary power unit when the hybrid electric vehicle is operating in urban driving conditions.

6.2 Urban Dynamometer Procedure for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Ca pable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.135

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions

. References to §86.110

- 94 shall mean §86.110

- 94 as last amended June 30, 1995.

6.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a)

.

Overview

. T he dynamometer run shall consist of two tests, a “cold” start test, after a second fuel drain and fill and a 12 to 36 hour soak period performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Sub sequent Model Motor Vehicles” and a “hot” start test following the “cold” start test by 10 minutes. Vehicle startup (with all accessories turned off), operation over the UDDS and vehicle shutdown make a complete cold start test. Vehicle startup and opera tion over the UDDS and vehicle shutdown make a complete hot start test.

For all UDDS tests, t he exhaust emissions are diluted with ambient air in the dilution tunnel as shown in Figure B94

- 5 and Figure B94

- 6A

- 2

- F

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (§86.110

- 94)

. As an alternative, the bag mini

- diluter may be used in

- lieu of the constant volume sampling (CVS) method for exhaust emission measurement as described below. A dilution tunnel is not required for testing vehicles waived from the requirement to measure particulates. F our particulate sa mples are collected on filters for weighing; the first sample plus backup is collected during the cold start test (including shutdown); the second sample plus backup is collected during the hot start test (including shutdown). Part 1065 of the CFR may be used as an optional particulate sampling method. Continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis during each test. For hybrid electric vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles that are not “off

- vehicle charge capable,” and are equipped with petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units (optional for natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum
gas

- fueled

, and alcohol

- fueled diesel

- cycle vehicles), THC is sampled and analyzed continuously pursuant to the provisions of §86.110

- 94 . Parallel samples of the dilution air are similarly analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with n atural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled

, and alcohol

- fueled auxiliary power units, bag samples are collected and analyzed for THC (if not sampled continuously), CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with alcohol

- fueled auxiliary pow er units, alcohol and formaldehyde samples are taken for both exhaust emissions and dilution air (a single dilution air formaldehyde sample, covering the total test period may be collected). Par allel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, C O 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

6.2.2 Subparagraphs (b) through (c)

. [No change.]

6.2. 3 S ubparagraph (d). [No change.]

6.2.4 Subparagraphs (e) through (g)

. [No change.]

6.2. 5 Amend subparagraph (h): T he driving distance, as measured by counting the number of dynamomete r roll or shaft revolutions, shall be determined for the cold start test and hot start test. The revolutions shall be measured on the same roll or shaft used for measuring the vehicle’s speed.

6.2.6 Subparagraph (i)

. [No change.]A

- 2

- F

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 6.3 Urban Dynamometer Test Run, Gaseous and Particulate Emissions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles , Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.137

- 96 [March 24, 1993] with the following revis ions:

6.3.1 Amend subparagraph (a): General

. T he dynamometer run shall consist of two tests, a “ cold ” start test, after a second fuel drain and fill and a 12 to 36 hour soak period performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emis sion Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” and a “ hot ” start test following the cold start test by 10 minutes. The complete dynamometer test consists of a cold start drive of 7.5 miles (12.1 km) and a hot start drive of 7.5 miles (12.1 km). The vehicle shall be stored prior to the emission test in such a manner that precipitation (e.g., rain or dew) does not occur on the vehicle. The vehicle is allowed to stand on the dynamometer during the 10 minute time period betw een each test.

6.3.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

6.3.2 .1 Amend subparagraph (b)(9): Start the gas flow measuring device, position the sample selector valves to direct the sample flow into the exhaust sample bag, the alcohol exhaust sample, the fo rmaldehyde exhaust sample, the dilution air sample bag, the alcohol dilution air sample and the formaldehyde dilution air sample (turn on the petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle THC analyzer system integrator, mark the recorder chart, start particulate sample pu mp No. 1, and record both gas meter or flow measurement instrument readings, if applicable), and turn the key on. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be activated at the beginning of and opera ted throughout the UDDS.

6.3. 2 .2 Delete subparagraph (b) (13).

6.3. 2. 3 Amend subparagraph (b) (14): T urn the vehicle off 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration (at 1,369 seconds).

6.3. 2. 4 Amend subparagraph (b) (15): Five seconds after the vehi cle is shutdown, simultaneously turn off gas flow measuring device No. 1 and if applicable, turn off the hydrocarbon integrator No. 1, mark the hydrocarbon recorder chart, turn off the No. 1 particulate sample pump and close the valves isolating particulat e filter No. 1, and position the sample selector valves to the “standby” position. Record the measured roll or shaft revolutions (both gas meter or flow measurement instrumentation readings), and reset the counter. As soon as possible, transfer the exhau st and dilution air samples to the analytical system andA

- 2

- F

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 process the samples pursuant to §86.140, obtaining a stabilized reading of the exhaust bag sample on all analyzers within 20 minutes of the end of the sample collection phase of the test. Obtain alc ohol and formaldehyde sample analyses, if applicable, within 24 hours of the end of the sample period. (If it is not possible to perform analysis on the alcohol and formaldehyde samples within 24 hours, the samples should be stored in a dark cold (4  C to 10  C) e nvironme nt until a na lys is . The s a mple s s hould be analyzed within fourteen days.) If applicable, carefully remove both pairs of particulate sample filters from their respective holders, and place each in a separate petri dish, and cover.

6.3. 2.5 Am end subparagraph (b) (18): Repeat the steps in paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(17) of this section for the hot start test. The step in paragraph (b)(9) of this section shall begin between 9 and 11 minutes after the end of the sample period for the cold star t test.

6.3. 2.6 Delete subparagraph (b) (19).

6.3. 2.7 Delete subparagraph (b) (20).

6.3. 2.8 Amend subparagraph (b) (21): As soon as possible, and in no case longer than one hour after the end of the hot start phase of the test, transfer the four partic ulate filters to the weighing chamber for post

- test conditioning, if applicable. For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and are charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, a valid test shall satisfy the SOC

c rite rion in section F G .10

.

6.3. 2.9 Amend subparagraph (b) (24): Vehicles to be tested for evaporative emissions will proceed pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles

. ”

6.4 C alculations

- Exhaust Emissions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.144

- 94 [July 13, 2005] with the following revisions:

6.4.1 A mend subparagraph (a): For light

- duty vehicles and light duty trucks:

Y wm = 0.43 *        

c c D Y + 0.57 *        

h h D YA

- 2

- F

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Where: (1) Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, T HCE, NMOG , NMHCE, CH 4 , NO x , or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. (2) Y c = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start test, in grams per test. (3) Y h = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start test, in grams per test. (4) D c = The measured dri ving distance from the cold start test, in miles. (5) D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in miles.

6.4.2 S ubparagraphs (b) through (e). [No change.]

6.5 Calculations

- Particulate Emissions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, E xcept Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.145

- 82 [November 2, 1982] with the following revisions

. References to §86.110

- 94 shall mean §86.110

- 94 as last amended June 30 , 1995.

6.5.1 A mend subparagraph (a): The final reported test results for the mass particulate (M p ) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

M p = 0.43 *        

c pc D M + 0.57 *        

h ph D M

Where: (1) M pc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start test, in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determination.) (2) M ph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start test, in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determination.) (3) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in miles. (4) D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in miles.

6.5.2 S ubparagraph (b). [No change.]A

- 2

- F

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 7. Highway Emission Test Provisions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicle s , Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §600.111

- 08 [December 27, 2006] with the following revisions

.

7 .1 Subparagraph (a)

. [ n ot a pplicable

- delete ]

7

. 2 Amend su bparagraph (b) as follows:

7 .2.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): The highway fuel economy test is designated to simulate non

- metropolitan driving with an average speed of 48.6 mph and a maximum speed of 60 mph. The cycle is 10.2 miles long with 0.2 stop per mile and consists of warmed

- up vehicle operation on a chassis dynamometer through a specified driving cycle. A proportional part of the diluted exhaust emission is collected continuously for subsequent analysis of THC, CO, CO 2 , and NO x using a constant vo lume (variable dilution) sampler. Diesel dilute exhaust is continuously analyzed for hydrocarbons using a heated sample line and analyzer. Alcohol and formaldehyde samples are collected and individually analyzed for alcohol

- fueled vehicles.

7 .2. 2 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(i): T he dynamometer procedure shall consist of two cycles of the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule (§600.109(b)) separated by 15 seconds of idle. The first cycle of the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule is driven to preconditi on the test vehicle and the second is driven for the fuel economy measurement.

7

. 2

. 3 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(iii) : O nly one exhaust sample and one background sample shall be collected and analyzed for THC (except diesel hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO 2 , and NO x . Alcohol and formaldehyde samples (exhaust and dilution air) are collected and analyzed for alcohol

- fueled vehicles.

7

. 2. 4 Add subparagraph (b)(7)(v) : For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the HFEDS preconditioning cycle. For hybrid electr ic vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.A

- 2

- F

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the HFEDs, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary pow er unit when operating in highway driving conditions.

7

. 2. 5 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(v) : O perate the vehicle over one HFEDS preconditioning cycle according to the dynamometer driving schedule specified in § 600.109

- 08 (b) [December 27, 2006] . If the auxi liary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the HFEDS preconditioning cycle.

7

. 2. 6 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(vi) : W hen the vehicle reaches zero speed at the end of the HFEDS preconditioning cycle, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare for the HFEDS emission measurement cycle of the test. Reset and enable the roll revolution counter. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall ap ply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, the vehicle shall be momentarily turned off for 5 seconds and turned back on during the idle period. The b attery state

- of

- charge shall be recorded after the hybrid electric vehicle has fully turned on.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the HFEDS, the vehicle shal l remain turned on during the idle period.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

7

. 2. 7 Add subpa ragraph (b)(9)(viii) : At the conclusion of the HFEDS emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS , record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC

c riterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (b)(9)(vi) and (b)(9)(vii) . A total of three highway emission t ests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the HFEDS, the emission test is completed.A

- 2

- F

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the emission test is completed.

7 .2. 8 Delete subparagraph (b)(10).

7

. 3 Delete subparagraphs ( c ) through (e).

8. SFTP Emission Test Provisions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.

8 .1 US06 Vehicle Preconditioning

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions

.

8 .1.1 Subparagraphs (a) through (m). [N o change.]

8 .1. 2 Amend subparagraph (n): Aggressive Driving Test (US06) Preconditioning.

8 .1.2.1 Amend subparagraph (1) as follows: If the US06 test follows the exhaust emission urban, highway, or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer

. For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary
power u nit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at according to the following conditions:

If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the US06, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 preconditioning cycle.

If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the US06, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the

manu facturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 preconditioning cycle.

8 .1.2.1. 1 Subparagraphs (i) th rough (iv)

. [No change.]

8 .1.2.2 Subparagraph (2)

. [No change.]A

- 2

- F

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 8 .1.3 Subparagraph (o). [No change.]

8.2 US06 Emission Test

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159

- 0 8 [December 27, 2006] with the following revisions

.

8.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview . The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 600 second test on the US06 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (g), of this part. The hybrid electric vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00, to bring i t to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 1 to 2 minute idle period that proceeds directly into the US06 driving schedule during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provisions of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For hybrid electric vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , C H 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of §86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . The US06 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emissions and shall meet the state

- of

- charge net tolerances as calculated in section E F

. 9

.

8 .2.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

8.2.2.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position the test v ehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

8 .2.3 Subparagraph (c). [No change.]

8 .2. 4 Amend subparagraph (d): Practice runs over the prescribed driving schedule may be performed at test point to permit sampling system adjustment.

8 .2.5 Subparagraph (e). [No change.]

8 .2. 6 Amend subparagraph (f) as follows.

8 .2. 6 .1 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(i): Immediately after completion of the US06 preconditioning cycle, idle the vehicle. The idle period is not to be less than one minute or not greater than two min utes

. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:A

- 2

- F

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the US06, the vehicle shall be momentarily turn ed off for 5 seconds and turned back on during the idle period. The battery state

- of

- charge shall be recorded after the hybrid electric vehicle has fully turned on.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manual ly activated and are charge

- depleting over the US06, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the idle period.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the

au xiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

8 .2. 6 .2 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(ix): At the conclusion of the US06 emission test , one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and are charge

- sustaining over the US06, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC c riterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i) without the
pre conditioning cycle . A total of three US06 emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- deple ting over the US06, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

8

. 3 SC03 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions

.

8 .3.1 Subparagraphs (a) through (n). [No change.]

8 .3. 2 Amend subparagraph (o): Air Conditioning Test (SC03) Preconditioni ng

.

8 .3.2.1 Amend subparagraph (1) as follows: If the SC03 test follows the exhaust emission FTP or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuelA

- 2

- F

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii ) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer

. For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the follo wing conditions:

If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the SC03, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operate d throughout the SC03 preconditioning cycle.

If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the SC03, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in high way driving conditions. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 preconditioning cycle.

8.3.2.1.1 Subparagraphs (i) and (ii). [No change.]

8 .3.2.2 Subparagraphs (2) through (3). [No ch ange.]

8 .4 SC03 Emission Test

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.160

- 00 [December 8, 2005] with the following revisions

.

8 .4.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview . The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 594 second test on the SC03 driv ing schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (h), of this part. The hybrid electric vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00 of this subpart, to bring the vehicle to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 10 minute vehicle soak (vehicle turned off) that proceeds directly into the SC03 driving schedule, during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. The entire test, including the SC03 preconditioning cycl e, vehicle soak, and SC03 emission test, is either conducted in an environmental test facility or under test conditions that simulate testing in an environmental test cell (see § 86.162

- 0 0 (a) for a discussion of simulation procedure approvals). The enviro nmental test facility must be capable of providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of: 95 o F air temperature, 100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m 2 , and vehic le cooling air flow proportional to vehicle speed. Section 86.161

- 00 discusses the minimum facility requirements and corresponding control tolerances for air conditioning ambient test conditions. The vehicle’s air conditioner is operated or appropriately simulated for the duration of the test procedure (except for the 10 minute vehicleA

- 2

- F

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 soak), including the preconditioning. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provisions of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For hybrid ele ctric vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously accord ing to the provisions of §86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . The SC03 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emissions and shall meet the state

- of

- charge net tolerances as ca lculated in section E F. 9

.

8.4.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

8 .4.2 .1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

8.4.3 Amend subparagraph (c) as follows.

8 .4.3 .1 Amend subparagraph (c)(9): Start vehicl e (with air conditioning system also running ). If the auxiliary power unit of the hybrid electric vehicle is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 emi ssion test. Fifteen seconds after the vehicle starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.

8.4.4 Amend subparagraph (d) as follows.

8 .4. 4 .1 Amend subparagraph (d)(10): At the conclusion of the SC03 emission test, one of the f ollowing conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the SC03, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC c riterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then turn off the cooling fan(s), allow the vehicle to soak in the ambient conditions of paragraph (c)(5) of this section for 10 ± 1 minutes, and repeat the dynamometer test run from subparagraph ( d). Up to three SC03 emission tests shall be attempted to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the SC03, turn off the vehicle two seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off the vehicle two seconds after the end of the last deceleration.A

- 2

- F

- 18
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 8.4.5 Subparagraph (e) . [No change

. ]

9. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles , Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.

9 .1 For hybrid electric vehicles that use a battery as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(Amp

- hr final ) max = (Amp

- hr initial ) + 0.01        

∗ ∗
∗

1 K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

(Amp

- hr final ) m in = (Amp

- hr initial )

- 0.01        

∗ ∗
∗

1 K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

Where: (Amp

- hr final ) max = Maximum allowed Amp

- hr stored in batt ery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Battery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total ma ss of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. Th is value shall b e submitted for testing purposes , and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board

.

9 .2 For hybrid electric vehicles that use a capacitor as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(V final ) max = 

# ( )

C m NHV V fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗
∗ + 2 01

. 0 2

(V f inal ) min = 

# ( )

C m NHV V fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗

∗

− 2 01

. 0 2

Where: (V final ) max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test (V final ) min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the testA

- 2

- F

- 19
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 V 2

initial = The square of the capacitor voltage st ored at the beginning of

the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg C = Rated capacitance of the capacitor, in Farads

9 .3 For hybrid electric vehicles that use an electro

- me chanical flywheel as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(rpm final ) max = 

# ( )

3 2 2 01

. 0 K I m NHV rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗ ∗

∗ +

(rpm final ) min = 

# ( )

3 2 2 01

. 0 K I m NHV rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗ ∗

∗

−

Where: (rpm final ) max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the test (rpm final ) min = The minimum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the test

rpm 2 initial = The squared flywheel rotational speed at the beginning of the

test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fu el, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K 3 = Conversion factor,
2 2 2

sec 3600 4

rpm

− π

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg

- m 2A

- 2

- G

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 F G

. Test Procedures for 201 2 and Subsequent Model Off

- Vehicle Charge C apab le Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

The “as adopted or amended dates” of the 40 CFR Part 86 regulations referenced by this document are the dates identified in the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicles

, ” unless otherwise noted. A manufacturer may elect to certify a 2009, 2010, or 2011 model

- year off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle using this section F G

.

1. Electric Dynamometer.

All o ff

- vehicle charge capable HEVs must be tested using a 48

- inch single roll electric dynamometer meeting the requirements of 40 CFR Subpart B, §86.108

- 00(b)(2) [October 22, 1996].

2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- In Period.

A manufacturer shall use good en gineering judgment in determining the proper stabilized emissions mileage test point and report same according to the requirements of section D.2.11 above.

3. General Test ing Requirements

.

3. 1 Recording requirements.

For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles : The following data shall be recorded for all tests and for each individual test cycle therein , except for the 20 o F and 50 o F tests, conducted in accordance with section F G .8 :

(a) mileage accumulated during the All

- Electric Range portion of the test, where applicable; (b) Net DC energy from the battery that was expended during the test (may be reported as the total DC battery energy output and the total DC battery energy input); (c) AC energy required to fully charge the battery a fter a charge depleting or charge sustaining test from the point where electricity is introduced from the electric outlet to the battery charger; (d) DC energy required to fully charge the battery after a charge depleting or charge sustaining test from the point where electricity is introduced from the battery charger to the battery ; (e) Net DC amp

- hrs from the battery that was expended during the test (may be reported as the total DC amp

- hrs output and the total DC amp

- hrs input) ; and (f) Measured AC and D C watt hours and amp hours shall be reported to the nearest hundredths of a kilowatt hour and tenths of an amp hour.A

- 2

- G

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 3. 2 Regenerative braking . Regenerative braking systems may be utilized during the range test. The braking level, if adjustable, shall b e set according to the manufacturer’s specifications for normal driving conditions prior to the commencement of the test. The driving schedule speed and time tolerances specified in this section F G shall not be exceeded due to the operation of the regener ative braking system.

3. 3 Measurement Accuracy . The overall error in voltage and current recording instruments shall be NIST traceable and accurate to ± 1% of the maximum value of the variable (AC/DC volts and amps) being measured. Suggested equipment:

am p meter/power meter capable of sampling voltage and current . Voltage and current shall be sampled at a minimum rate of 20 hz.

3. 4 Watt Hour Calculation.

DC energy (watt hours) shall be calculated as follows
DC energy = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt
Where v = vehicle DC main battery pack voltage i = vehicle DC main battery pack current

AC energy (in watt

- hours) shall be calculated as follows
AC energy = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt in watt

- hours Where v = AC instantaneous voltage i = AC instantaneous current

3.5 Charger Req uirements

The standard charging apparatus (or equivalent) normally furnished with or specified for the vehicle shall be used for charging during vehicle testing.

4

. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater

.

The exhaust emissions result of the fuel

- fired heater shall be determined by operating at a maximum heating capacity with a cold start between 68 o F and 86 o F for a period of 20 minutes and dividing the grams of emissions by 20. The resulting grams per minute shall be multiplied by 3.0 m inutes per mile to obtain a grams per mile value.

5

. Urban Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

Alternative procedures may be used if shown to yield equivalent results and if approved in advance by the Executive Offi cer of the Air Resources Board.A

- 2

- G

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 The criteria certification emissions for the Urban test shall be the worst case emissions of NM OG , CO, NOx, and PM from either the charge depleting or charge sustaining tests. The sum of NMOG + NOx emissions shall consti tute the worst case for the urban charge sustaining or charge depleting modes of operation.

V ehicles with more than one mode of operation of the auxiliary power unit (e.g., economy mode, performance mode, etc.) for a given charge depleting or charge
susta ining test cycle must be tested in the mode(s) which represents the worst case emissions of the auxiliary power unit. Confirmatory testing may also be performed in any mode of operation to ensure compliance with emission standards.

5 .1 Vehicle Precondi tioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” with the following supplemental requirements:

5 .1. 1 For vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the preconditioning drive.

5 .1. 2 For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

5 .1. 3 After setting battery state

- of

- charge, the vehicle shall be pushed or towed to a work area for the initial fuel drain and fill according to section III.D.1. 4 of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.”

5 .1. 4 Following the initial fuel drain and fill, the vehicle shall complete an initial soak period of a minimum of 6 hours.

5.1.5 After completing the soak period, the vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on a dynamometer and preconditioned.

5.1. 6 If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the preconditioning drive.

5.1. 7 For the charge depleting range test and the charge sustaining emission test, the preconditioning cycle shall be the UDDS. The vehicle must be in cha rge sustaining operation during the preconditioning drive. To determine charge sustaining operation, the vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in sectionA

- 2

- G

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 F G .10 from the start to the end of the two consecutive UDDSs. As an option, charge sustaining operatio n can be achieved for a single UDDS if data is provided showing that charge sustaining operation can consistently be maintained over one UDDS. The vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in section F G .10 from the start to the end of a single UDDS. Alternativ e procedures may be used to determine charge sustain operation for the precondition drive if the alternate procedure demonstrates charge sustaining operation based on section F G .10 and is approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Bo ard.

5.1.8 A fuel drain and fill shall be performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.”

5.1.9 The vehicle shall be soaked for 12

- 36 hours. Durin g this soak period, canister preconditioning shall be performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.”

5.1.10 For the urban charge depleting range t est, the highway charge depleting range test, and the cold start US06 range test, charge the vehicle to full
state

- of

- charge as specified by the vehicle manufacturer. The vehicle must be turned off during charging and charge time shall not exceed soak tim e.

5 .2 Urban Dynamometer Procedure for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.135

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions . References to §86.110

- 94 shall mean §86.110

- 94 as last amended J une 30, 1995.

5 .2.1 Amend subparagraph (a).

Overview . The charge depleting range test dynamometer run shall consist of a series of charge depleting UDDSs , each followed by a 10 minute key

- off hot soak period until charge sustaining operation is achieve d for two consecutive UDDSs. To determine charge sustaining operation, the vehicle
must meet the SOC criterion in section F G .10 from the start of the first UDDS until the end of the second UDDS. As an option, charge sustaining operation may be achieved f or a single UDDS if data is provided showing that charge sustaining operation can consistently be maintained over one UDDS

. To determine charge sustaining operation, in this case, the vehicle shall meet SOC criterion in section F G .10 from the start to the end of a single UDDS. Emissions are measured for all UDDSs when the auxiliary power unit is operating.A

- 2

- G

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 T he vehicle shall be turned off and stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 ° F (20 ° C) and not more than 86 ° F (30 ° C) for 12 to 36 hours. At the end of this cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer.

The charge sustaining emission test dynamometer run shall consist of two consecutive UDDSs with a 10 minute key

- off hot soak in between. Vehicle emissions shal l be measured over two UDDSs during charge sustaining operation, and t he vehicle must meet the SOC criteri on in section F G

. 10 from the start of the first UDDS until the end of the second UDDS

.

V ehicle charging shall be initiated within three hour s after either the charge depleting range test or the charge sustaining emission test pursuant to section F G .5.4.2 or F G .5.4.3 , as applicable . During charging, all requirements in section F G .3 must be met, and energy consumption shall be calculated pursuant to t he requirements in section F G .11.7.

For all exhaust emission tests, the exhaust emissions are diluted with ambient air in the dilution tunnel as shown in Figure B94

- 5 and Figure B94

- 6 (§86.110

- 94 )

. As an alternative, the bag mini

- diluter may be used in

- lieu of the constant volume sampling (CVS) method for exhaust emission measurement as described below. A dilution tunnel is not required for testing vehicles waived from the requirement to measure particulates. For UDDSs, p articulate samples are collecte d on filters for weighing during each UDDS . Each sample plus backup is collected during each UDDS (including shutdown). Part 1065 of the CFR may be used as an optional particulate sampling method. Continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis during each UDDS . For vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units (optio nal for natural
gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled, and alcohol

- fueled diesel

- cycle vehicles), THC is sampled and analyzed continuously pursuant to the provisions of §86.110

- 94 . Parallel samples of the dilution air are similarly analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled, and alcohol

- fueled auxiliary power units, bag samples are collected and analyzed for THC (if not sampled continuously), CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with al cohol

- fueled auxiliary power units, alcohol and formaldehyde samples are taken for both exhaust emissions and dilution air (a single dilution air formaldehyde sample, covering the total test period may be collected). Parallel bag samples of dilution air a re analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

5 .2.2 Subparagraphs (b) through (c). [No change.]

5 .2.3 S ubparagraph (d). [No change.]A

- 2

- G

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 5 .2.4 Subparagraphs (e) through (g). [No change.]

5 .2.5 Amend subparagraph (h): The driving distance, as measured by

c ounting the number of dynamometer roll or shaft revolutions, shall be determined for all charge depleting and exhaust emission tests. The revolutions shall be measured on the same roll or shaft used for measuring the vehicle’s speed.

5 .2.6 Subparagraph ( i). [No change.]

5 .3 Urban Dynamometer Test Run, Gaseous and Particulate Emissions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.137

- 96 [March 24, 1993] with the following revisions:

5 .3.1 Amend subpara graph (a): General . The dynamometer run shall consist of a series of UDDSs, after a second fuel drain and fill and a 12 to 36 hour soak period performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.” The vehicle shall be stored prior to the emission test in such a manner that precipitation (e.g., rain or dew) does not occur on the vehicle. The vehicle is allowed to stand on the dynamometer during the 10 minu te time period between each UDDS

.

5.3.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

5 .3.2 .1 Amend subparagraph (b)(9): Start the gas flow measuring device, direct the sample flow into the exhaust sample bag, the alcohol exhaust sample, the formaldehyde exhaust sample, the dilution air sample bag, the alcohol dilution air sample and the formaldehyde dilution air sample, and turn the key on. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be activated at the begin ning of and operated throughout the UDDS.

5 .3. 2.2 Delete subparagraph (b)(13).

5 .3. 2.3 Subparagraph (b)(14). [No change.]

5 .3. 2.4 Amend subparagraph (b)(15): Five seconds after the vehicle is shutdown, simultaneously turn off the gas flow measuring device and particulate sample pump. Record the measured roll or shaft revolutions (both gas meter or flow measurement instrumentation readings), and reset the counter. As soon as possible, transfer the exhaust and dilution air samples to the analytical system and process the samples pursuant to §86.140, obtaining a stabilized readingA

- 2

- G

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 of the exhaust bag sample on all analyzers within 20 minutes of the end of the sample collection phase of the UDDS . Obtain alcohol and formaldehyde sample analyses, if appl icable, within 24 hours of the end of the sample period. (If it is not possible to perform analysis on the alcohol and formaldehyde samples within 24 hours, the samples should be stored in a dark cold (4  C to 10C) e nvironme nt until a na lys is . The s a mple s should be analyzed within fourteen days.) If applicable, carefully remove both pairs of particulate sample filters from their respective holders, and place each in a separate petri dish, and cover.

5 .3

. 2.5 Amend subparagraph (b)(18): Repeat the steps in paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(17) of this section for the hot start UDDS . The step s in paragraph (b)(9) of this section shall begin between 9 and 11 minutes after the end of the sample period for the cold start UDDS

.

5 .3. 2.6 Delete subparagraph (b)(19).

5 .3. 2.7 Delete subparagraph (b)(20).

5 .3. 2.8 Amend subparagraph (b)(21): As soon as possible, transfer the particulate filters to the weighing chamber for post

- test conditioning, if applicable. For vehicles undergoing a cold start charge sustaining test, a valid test shall satisfy the SOC c riterion in section F G .10

.

5 .3. 2.9 Amend subparagraph (b)(24): Vehicles to be tested for evaporative emissions will proceed pursuant to the “California Eva porative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.”

5.4 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range and Urban Equivalent All

Electric Range for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

5.4.1 The Urba n All

- Electric Range shall be shall be defined as the distance that the vehicle is driven from the start of Urban Charge Depleting Range Test until the internal combustion engine first starts.

5.4. 2 Urban Charge Depleting Range Test.

(i) Vehicle preco nditioning

. T he vehicle shall be preconditioned according to F G .5.1.

(i i ) Dynamometer run

. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through the Continuous Urban Test Schedule until the S O C Net ChangeA

- 2

- G

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Tolerances (specified in section F G

. 10 of these test procedures) that indicate charge sustaining operation are met for two consecutive UDDSs

, or a single UDDS if data is provided showing that charge sustaining operation can consistently be m aintained in one UDDS

. If there are no charge depleting hot start cycles, then use the next hot start cycle (after the cold start cycle) in the test sequence for the purpose of determining hot start emissions. For this case (no charge depleting hot start cycle), the manufacturer may optionally add one additional hot start cycle.

The Alternative Continuous Urban Test Schedule may be substituted for the Continuous Urban Test Schedule if the test facility is unable to perform the Continuous Urban Test Sch edule. Refer to sections F G .5.5, F G .5.6, and F G .1 1 , for calculations of urban exhaust emission s , urban particulate emissions, and equivalent all

- electric range, respectively. Emissions are measured for all test cycles when the auxiliary power unit is
ope rating. For each test cycle for which emissions were not measured, the manufacturer must validate that the auxiliary power unit did not turn on at any time during the test cycle.

( ii i ) Vehicle charging after testing. V e hicle c harg ing shall begin with in three hours after either the charge d epl e ting range test or the char ge sustain ing emission test

, and the vehicle shall be charged to the manufacturer specified full state

- of

- charge. During charging, all applicable requirements in F G .3 must be met

, and energy consumption shall be calculate d pursuant t o the requirements in section F G

. 11

. 7

.

5.4. 3 Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test. The Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test is conducted cold, and after charge sustaining operation has been reached, o r an optional charge sustaining test mode has been activated, and no subsequent charge has been performed.

(i) Vehicle p reconditioning

. If the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test is performed within 36 hours after the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test

, the vehicle shall be precondition ed pursuant to section F G .5.1.9 . If the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test is performed more than 36 hours after the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test, the vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section F G .5.1

, e xcept for vehicle charging

. S ections F G .5.1.1 through F G .5.1.4 may be omitted if previously performed.A

- 2

- G

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (ii) Dynamometer run. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer , and two UDDSs shall be perform ed during charge sustaining operation, each separated by a 10 minute key

- off hot soak period. The vehicle must meet the SOC criteri on in section F G

. 10 from the start of the first UDDS until the end of the second UDDS . If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stopped, the vehicle cold soak shall be conducted again , and the dynamometer test run shall be conducted again

.
( iii ) Vehicle charging after testing. If the vehicle was not charge d after the Urban C harge D epleting R ange T est, then veh icle charging shall begin within three hour s after the Urban C harge S ustaining E mission T est and the vehicle shall be charged to the manufacturer specified full state

- of

- charge

. During charging, all requirements in F G .3 must be met, and energy consumptio n shall be calculated pursuant to the requirements in section F G .11.7.

5.5 Calculations

- Urban Exhaust Emissions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.144

- 94 [July 13, 2005] with the following revisions:

5.5.1 A mend subparagraph (a):

Gaseous Emissions

– Urban Charge Depleting Range Test.

For light

- duty vehicles and light duty trucks:

Y wm =        

Σ

Σ
∗ +        

∗

n n

c c D Y

D Y 57

. 0 43

. 0

Where: Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE , NM OG , NMHCE, CH 4 , NOx, or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. Y c = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS , in grams per test. D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS , in miles.

n = n umber of hot start UDDSs in Charge Dep leting operation If there are no charge depleting hot start cycles, then use the next hot start cycle (after the cold start cycle) in the test sequence for the purpose of determining hot start emissions. For this case (no charge depleting hot start cycle) , the manufacturer may optionally add one additional hot start cycle for an n=2.A

- 2

- G

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Gaseous Emissions

– Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test.

For light

- duty vehicles and light

- duty trucks:

Y wm = 0.43 *        

c c D Y + 0.57 *        

h h D Y

Where: Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE, NM OG , NMHCE, CH 4 , NO x , or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. Y c = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS , in grams per test

. Y h = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start UDDS , in grams per test. D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS , in miles. D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS , in miles.

5.5.2 S ubparagraphs (b) through (e). [No change.]

5.6 Calculations

- Urban Particulate Emissions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.145

- 82 [November 2, 1982] with the following revisions . References to §86.110

- 94 shall m ean §86.110

- 94 as last amended June 30, 1995.

5.6.1 Amend subparagraph (a):

Particulate Emissions

– Urban Charge Depleting Range Test.

The final reported test results for the mass particulate (M p ) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

M p = 0.43 *        

c pc D M + 0.57 *        

Σ

Σ

n pn D M

Where: M pc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start UDDS , in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determination.) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS

, in miles.A

- 2

- G

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 n = number of hot start UDDSs in Charge Depleting operation If there are no charge depleting hot start cycles, then use the next hot start cycle (after the cold start cycle) in the test sequence for the purpose of determining hot start emissions. For this case (no charge depleting hot start cycle), the manufacturer may optionally add one additional hot start cycle for an n=2.

Particulate Emissions

– Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test.

The final reported test results for the mass particulate (M p ) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

M p = 0.43 *        

c pc D M + 0.57 *        

h ph D M

Where: M pc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start UDDS , in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 9 4 for determination.) M ph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start UDDS , in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determination.) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS , in miles. D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS , in miles.

5.6.2 S ubparagraph (b). [No change.]

5.6. 3 Equivalent All

- Electric Range shall be calculated in accordance with section F G

. 1 1 of these test procedures.

6

. Highway Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybr id Electric Vehicles.

Vehicles with more than one mode of operation of the auxiliary power unit (e.g., economy mode, performance mode, etc.) for a given charge depleting or charge sustaining test cycle must be tested in the mode(s) which represents the wo rst case emissions of the auxiliary power unit. Confirmatory testing may also be performed in any mode of operation to ensure compliance with emission standards.

The third emission test HFEDS of the Highway Charge Sustaining Test shall be used to calcul ate highway NOx emissions and must be within the SOC criterion in section F G

. 10

. As an option, the manufacturer may perform the Highway Charge Sustaining Test with two emission test HFEDS s provided that the second HFEDS meets the SOC criterion in section F G .10. In this case, the second HFEDS shall be used to calculate emissions.A

- 2

- G

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Highway NOx emissions may be determined from the HFEDS in the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test that demonstrates charge sustaining operation.

6.1 Vehicle Preconditioning

.

I f the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test is performed within 36 hours after completion of either the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test or the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test, the vehicle shall be precondition ed pursuant to sections F G .5.1. 9 through F G .5.1.10, without canister preconditioning . If the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test is performed more than 36 hours after completion of either the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test or the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test, the vehicle shall be pr econdition ed pursuant to section F G .5.1, without canister preconditioning

. S ections F G .5.1.1 through F G .5.1.4 may be omitted if previously performed.

If the Highway Charge Sustaining Emission Test is performed within 36 hours after completion of either t he Urban Charge Depleting Range Test, the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test

, or the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test, the vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section F G .5.1 .9 without canister preconditioning

. If the Highway Charge Sustainin g Emissions Test is performed more than 36 hours after completion of either the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test, the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test

, or the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test, the vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to sectio n F G .5.1 without canister precondition and vehicle charging

. S ections F G .5.1.1 through F G .5.1.4 may be omitted if previously perfo r med

.

6

. 2 Highway Dynamometer Procedure for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant t o 40 CFR §600.111

- 08 [December 27, 2006] with the following revisions. T his section F G .6

. 2 shall apply during both charge sustaining and charge depleting operation.

6

. 2 .1 Subparagraph (a). [n/a]

6

. 2

. 2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows:

6

. 2

. 2.1 Amend s ubparagraph (b)(2): The highway fuel economy test is designated to simulate non

- metropolitan driving with an average speed of 48.6 mph and a maximum speed of 60 mph. The cycle is 10.2 miles long with 0.2 stop per mile and consists of warmed

- up vehicle op eration on a chassis dynamometer through a specified driving cycle. A proportional part of the diluted exhaust emission is collected continuously for subsequent analysis of THC, CO, CO 2 , and NO x using a constant volume (variable dilution) sampler. Diesel dilute exhaust is continuously analyzed for hydrocarbons using a heated sample lineA

- 2

- G

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 and analyzer. Alcohol and formaldehyde samples are collected and individually analyzed for alcohol

- fueled vehicles.

6

. 2

. 2.2 R eplace subparagraph (b)(6) with: Cold soak: The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 o F (20 o C) and not more than 86 o F (30 o C) for 12 to 36 hours. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer.

6

. 2

. 2.3 Amend subparagraph (b )(7)(i): T he Highway Charge Sustaining Emission Test is conducted cold, and after charge sustaining operation has been reached, or an optional charge sustaining test mode has been activated, and no subsequent charge has been performed.

At the end of t he cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer. A cold start HFEDS followed by t h ree emission measurement HFEDSs

, separated by a 15 second key

- on hot soak period

, shall be perform ed

. The vehicle must meet the SOC criteri on in section F G

. 10 for the th i r d emission
measurement HFEDS

. As an option the manufacturer may perform two emission measurement HFEDSs in lieu of three emission measurement HFEDSs, if the SOC criterion is satisfied for the second emission measurement HFEDS

. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stop ped

, and the procedure shall be repeated starting at section F G .6.2.2.2.

6

. 2

. 2

. 4 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(iii): O ne exhaust sample and one background sample per each HFED S shall be collec ted and analyzed for THC (except diesel hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO 2 , and NO x . Alcohol and formaldehyde samples (exhaust and dilution air) are collected and analyzed for alcohol

- fueled vehicles.

6

. 2

. 2. 5 Add subparagraph (b)(7)(v ): For vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the HFED S preconditioning cycle. For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

6

. 2

. 2. 6 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(v): O perate the vehicle over the
cont inuous highway test schedule, consisting of repeated HFEDSs according to the dynamometer driving schedule specified in §600.109

- 08(b) [December 27, 2006]. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the HFEDS preconditioning cycle.

6

. 2

. 2. 7 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(vi): W hen the vehicle reaches zero speed between each HFEDS, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare for theA

- 2

- G

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 HFEDS emission measurement cycle of the test. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:

( a ) For vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the idle period.

( b ) For vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

6

. 2

. 2. 8 Add subparagraph (b)(9)(viii): At the conclusion of the HFEDS emission test, the following condition s shall apply: For vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

sustaining over the HFEDS, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC c riterion in section F .10 is satis fied. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then repeat the dynamometer test run from subparagraph (b)(9)(vi) and (b)(9)(vii)

. Up to three highway emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

6

. 2

. 2. 9 Delete subparagraph (b)(10).

6

. 2 .3 Delete subparagraphs (c) through (e).

6

. 3 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range and Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

6. 3 .1 The Highway All

- Electric Range shall be defined as the dista nce that the vehicle is driven from the start of test until the internal combustion engine starts.

6.3.2 Highway Charge Depleting Range Test.

(i) Vehicle preconditioning. The vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section F G

. 6 .1.A

- 2

- G

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (ii) Dynamom eter run. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through the Continuous Highway Test Schedule until the State

– of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances (specified in section F G

. 10 of these test
pro cedures) that indicate charge sustaining operation is met for one HFEDS

. The Alternative Continuous Highway Test Schedule may be substituted for the Continuous Highway Test Schedule if the test facility is unable to perform the Continuous Highway Test Sch edule. Refer to section F G .1 1 , for calculations of highway exhaust emissions and equivalent all

- electric range, respectively. Emissions are measured for all test cycles when the auxiliary power unit is operating. For each test cycle for which emissions were not measured, the manufacturer must validate that the auxiliary power unit did not turn on at any time during the test cycle.

( iii ) Vehicle charging after testing. Vehicle charging shall

begin within three hours after the Highway Charge Depleting R ange Test and the vehicle shall be charged to the manufacturer specified full state

of

- charge. During charging, all applicable requirements in section F G .3 must be met, and energy consumption shall be calculated according to the requirements in section F G

. 11.7. If the manufacturer provides supplemental data demonstrating that the energy required to charge the vehicle from highway charge sustaining operation to full charge is equivalent (within ± 1% of the AC energy) to the energy required to charge the veh icle from urban charge sustaining operation to full charge, then the energy required to charge the vehicle from urban charge sustaining operation to full charge may be used to determine highway energy consumption pursuant to section F G .11.7. Data shall b e approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.

6. 3

. 3 Highway Charge Sustaining Emission Test. The Highway Charge Sustaining Emission Test is conducted cold, and after charge sustaining operation has been reached, or an optiona l charge sustaining test mode has been activated, and no subsequent charge has been performed:

(i) Vehicle preconditioning. The vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section F G .6.1.

(ii) Dynamometer run. At the end of the cold soak period, th e vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer

. A cold start HFEDS followed by three emission measurement HFEDSs

, separated by a 15 second key

- on hot soak period

, shall be perform ed . The vehicle
must meet the SOC criteri on in section F G

. 10 for t he th i r d emission
measurement HFEDS

. As an option, the manufacturer may perform two emission measurement HFEDSs in lieu of three emission measurement HFEDSs

, if the SOC criterion is satisfied for the second HFEDS. If theA

- 2

- G

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 SOC c riterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stop ped

, and the procedure shall be repeated starting at section F G .6.3.3.

6. 3

. 4 Equivalent All

- Electric Range shall be calculated in accordance with section F G .1 1 of these test procedures.

7

. SFTP Emission Test Provisions for Off

- Vehi cle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

V ehicles with more than one mode of operation of the auxiliary power unit (e.g., economy mode, performance mode, etc.) for a given charge depleting or charge sustaining test cycle must be tested in the mode(s) which represents the worst case emissions of the auxiliary power unit. Confirmatory testing may also be performed in any mode of operation to ensure compliance with emission standards.

7 .1 US06 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CF R §86.132

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions. T his section F G .1 shall apply during charge sustaining operation or at an optional charge sustaining test mode that has been activated, if no subsequent charge has been performed

.

7 .1.1 Subpar agraphs (a) through (m). [No change.]

7 .1.2 Amend subparagraph (n) Aggressive Driving Test (US06) Preconditioning . as follows :

7.1.2.1 Amend subparagraph (1) as follows: If the US06 test follows the exhaust emission urban, highway, or evaporative tes ting, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer. For vehicles that allow man ual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer , and t he auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 preconditioning cycle.

7.1.2.1.1 Subparagraphs (i) through (iv). [No change.]

7 .1.2.2 Subparagraph (2). [No change.]

7 .1.3 Subparagraph (o). [No change.]A

- 2

- G

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 7 .2 US06 Emission Test

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159

- 0 8 [December 27, 2006] with the following revisions. T his section 7 .2 shall apply during charge sustaining operation or at an optional charge sustaining test mode that has been activated, if no subsequent charge has been performed

.

7 .2.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview . The dynamometer opera tion consists of a single, 600 second test on the US06 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (g), of this part. The vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00, to bring it to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This precondit ioning is followed by a 1 to 2 minute idle period that proceeds directly into the US06 driving schedule during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow th e provisions of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of §86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . The US06 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emissions and shall m eet the
state

- of

- charge net tolerances as calculated in section F G

. 10

.

7 .2.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

7 .2.2.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

7 .2.3 Subparagraph (c). [No change.]

7 .2. 4 A mend subparagraph (d): Practice runs over the prescribed driving schedule may be performed at test point to permit sampling system adjustment.

7 .2.5 Subparagraph (e). [No change.]

7 .2.6 Amend subparagraph (f) as follows.

7 .2.6.1 Amend subparagraph (f) (2)(i): Immediately after completion of the preconditioning cycle, idle the vehicle. The idle period is not to be less than one minute or not greater than two minutes . During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For vehicle s that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain on during the idle period.A

- 2

- G

- 18
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (ii) For vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxilia ry power unit operating during the idle period.

7 .2.6.2 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(ix): At the completion of the test US06 cycle

, determine if the SOC c riterion in section F G .10 is satisfied . If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then repeat the dynamom eter test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i)

, without the
pre conditioning cycle

. Up to three US06 emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC c riterion. The idle period between multiple test cycles shall not to be less than one minute and not greater than two minutes. For the final test cycle, turn off the vehicle two seconds after the end of the last deceleration. During the idle period between multiple test cycles, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For vehicles that do not allow th e auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain on during the idle period.

(ii) For vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operat ing during the idle period.

7 .3 SC03 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions. T his section 7 .3 shall apply during charge sustaining operation or at an optional charge sustain ing test mode that has been activated, if no subsequent charge has been performed

.

7 .3.1 Subparagraphs (a) through (n). [No change.]

7 .3.2 Amend subparagraph (o): Air Conditioning Test (SC03) Preconditioning

.

7 .3.2.1 Amend subparagraph (1) as follows: If the SC03 test follows the exhaust emission urban, highway, or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehic le may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer. For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer , and t he auxiliary power unit shall be manual ly activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 preconditioning cycle.A

- 2

- G

- 19
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 7 .3.2.1.1 S ubparagraph s (i) and (ii). [No change.]

7 .3.2.2 Subparagraphs (2) through (3). [No change.]

7 .4 SC03 Emission Test

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.160

- 00 [December 8, 2005] with the following revisions. T his section 7 .4 shall apply during charge sustaining operation or at an optional charge sustaining test mode that has been activated, if no subsequent charge has been performed

. References to §86.162

- 03 shall mean §86.162

- 03 as adopt ed October 22, 1996.

7 .4.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview . The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 594 second test on the SC03 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (h), of this p art. The vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00 of this subpart, to bring the vehicle to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 10 minute vehicle soak (vehicle turned off) that proceeds directly into the SC03 driving schedule, during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. The entire test, including the SC03 preconditioning cycle, vehicle soak, and SC03 emission test, is either conducted in an environmental t est facility or under test conditions that simulate testing in an environmental test cell (see §86.162

- 0 3 (a) for a discussion of simulation procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of providing the following nominal ambient t est conditions of: 95 o F air temperature, 100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m 2 , and vehicle cooling air flow proportional to vehicle speed. Section 86.161

- 00 discusses th e minimum facility requirements and corresponding control tolerances for air conditioning ambient test conditions. The vehicle’s air conditioner is operated or appropriately simulated for the duration of the test procedure (except for the 10 minute vehicl e soak), including the preconditioning. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provisions of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of §86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . The SC03 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emission s and shall meet the
state

- of

- charge net tolerances as calculated in section F G .10

.

7.4.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

7 .4.2 .1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.A

- 2

- G

- 20
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 7.4.3 Amend subparagraph (c) as follows.

7 .4.3. 1 Amend subparagraph (c)(9): Start vehicle (with air conditioning system also running ). If the auxiliary power unit of the vehicle is capable of being man ually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 emission test. Fifteen seconds after the vehicle starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.

7.4.4 Amen d subparagraph (d) as follows.

7 .4.4 .1 Amend subparagraph (d)(10): At the conclusion of the SC03 emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are cha rge

- sustaining over the SC03 test

, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC c riterion in section F G .10 is satisfied

. If the SOC criterion is not satisfied , then turn off the engine and the cooling fan(s), allow the vehicle to soak in th e ambient conditions of paragraph (c)(5) of this section for 10 ± 1 minutes, and repeat the dynamometer test run from subparagraph (d). Up to three SC03 emission tests shall be attempted to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

(ii) For vehicles that allow the aux iliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off the vehicle two seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

7.4.5 Subparagraph (e). [No change.]

7 .5 Optional Cold Start US06 Range Test.

7.5.1 Cold soak and vehicle charging. The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 o F (20 o C) and not more than 86 o F (30 o C) for 12 to 36 hours. During this time, the vehicle battery shall be charged to a full state

- of

- charge. The vehicle must be turned off during charging. Charge time shall not exceed soak time.

7.5.2 At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer, and shall be driven on a continuous US06 test cycle until either:

(a) the auxiliary power unit starts, orA

- 2

- G

- 21
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (b) the vehicle can no long er meet the speed trace limits of the US06 driving schedule as specified in CFR 86 Appendix I to within 2 mph higher than the highest point on the trace within 1 second for the upper limit or within 2 mph lower than the lowest point on the trace within 1

s econd for the lower limit.

When either of these conditions is met

, the test shall be ended. The range for this test, in miles, shall be the distant driven from the start of the test to when condition (a) or (b) is met. Emission sampling is not required for this test.

8. 50 o F and 20 o F Test Provision for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

50 o F testing shall be conducted pursuant to section F G .5 with the modifications in Part II, Section C of the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light Duty Trucks, and Medium Duty Vehicles” and the additional following revisions.

20 o F testing shall be conducted pursuant to section F G .5 and shall includ e the temperature provisi ons in 40 CFR Part 86 Subpart C

- Emission Regulations for 1994 and Later Model Year Gasoline

- Fueled New Light

- Duty Vehicles, New Light

- Duty Trucks and New Medium

- Duty Passenger Vehicles; Cold Temperature Test Procedures.

For 50 o F and 20 o F charge deple ting testing, vehicle charging

, prior to emissions testing

, shall be performed during the soak period at 50 o F and 20 o F, respectively.

8.1 To satisfy test requirements for the 50 o F emission test, the vehicle shall be tested in the worst case ( NMOG + NOx) of the urban charge depleting range test or urban charge sustaining emission test as defined in section F G .5. To satisfy test requirements for the 20 o F emission test, the vehicle shall be tested in the worst case (CO) of the urban charge depleting range test or urban charge sustaining emission test as defined in section F G .5. For the 20 o F and 50 o F emission tests, the vehicle is not required to meet SOC net tolerances.

8.2 If the worst case for emissions is charge sustaining operation , the vehicle shall be preconditioned

, and one of the following t wo emission test options must be performed

.
(i) A three phase test that includes phase one as the first 505 seconds of the UDDS, phase two as 506 seconds to the end of the UDDS, a 10 minute key

- off soak period, and phase three the first 505 seconds of the UDDS. The first two phases test shall be counted as the first UDDS and the second and third phases will constitute the second UDDS. Emission weighting is as follows:A

- 2

- G

- 22
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Y wm =        

+ + ∗ +        

+ + ∗

3 2 3 2

2 1 2 1 57

. 0 43

. 0 D D Y Y

D D Y Y

Where: Y w m = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH 4 , NO x , or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. Y 1 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase one of the three phase test. Y 2 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase two of the three phase test. Y 3 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase three of the three phase test. D 1 = The measured driving distance from phase one of the three phase tests, in miles. D 2 = The measured driving distance from phase two of the three phase tes ts, in miles. D 3 = The measured driving distance from phase three of the three phase tests, in miles.

(ii) A two phase test that includes phase one as a UDDS, a 10 minute key

off soak period, and phase two as a UDDS. Emission weighting for the four phas e test will follow the procedure outlined in section F G .5.5.1.

8. 3 If measurement of worst case emissions requires the urban charge depleting range test to be performed , the vehicle shall be preconditioned and fully charged. The continuous urban test sc hedule shall then be performed. The UDDS, in which the auxiliary power unit first starts, shall be the cold UD D S. Emissions shall be sampled according to one of the options in section F G .8.2. For the three phase test option, if the auxiliary power unit starts in phase two of the UDDS, phase one emissions are considered zero for emission calculation purposes. Emissions are weighted according to section F G .8.2.

9

. Additional Provisions.

9 .1 Confirmatory testing may be performed on all tests to establis h if higher emissions occur at different states

- of

- charge in charge depleting mode. This is to ensure that cold start and other emissions standards are not exceeded at other operating SOCs.

9 .2 Confirmatory testing may be performed on the US06 test or the manufacturer may provide data to show that potential cold start off

- cycle emissions are controlled to the extent that they are controlled for the UDDS.

9 .3 Confirmatory testing may be performed on vehicles equipped with an optional charge sustainin g operation mode selector with selector set to simulate chargeA

- 2

- G

- 23
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 sustaining operation or in actual charge sustaining operation in accordance with section F of these test procedures

.

9

. 4 For an example of an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehic le with all

- electric range and blended operation that has charge depleting actual range and charge depleting cycle range, please see section H I , Figure 1.

9

. 5 For an example of charge depleting to charge sustaining range with and without transitional rang e and end of test conditions, please see section H I , Figure 2.

9. 6 When deter mining t he SOC t olerance durin g testing, the current drive cycle may be aborted if the SOC tolerance is met for pr e vi ous drive cycle.

9.7 If the manufacturer determines there i s insufficient fuel to run the subsequent test, the manufacturer may perform a fuel drain and fill or add fuel pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles. ”

10

. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances

.

10 .1 For vehicles that use a battery as an energy storage device, the following
state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(Amp

- hr final ) max = (Amp

- hr initial ) + 0.01        

∗ ∗
∗

1 K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

(Amp

- hr fin al ) min = (Amp

- hr initial )

- 0.01        

∗ ∗
∗

1 K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

Where: (Amp

- hr final ) max = Maximum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Batt ery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that correspon ds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. This value shall be submitted for testing purposes, and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board.A

- 2

- G

- 24
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 An alternate state

- of

- charge net tolerance may be used if shown t o be technically necessary and if approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.

10 .2 For vehicles that use a capacitor as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(V final ) max = 

# ( )

C m NHV V fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗

∗ + 2 01

. 0 2

(V final ) min = 

# ( )

C m NHV V fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗

∗

− 2 01

. 0 2

Where: (V final ) max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test (V final ) min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test
V 2

initial = The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning
of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg C = Rated capacitance of the capacitor, in Farads

10 .3 For vehicles that use a n electro

- mechanical flywheel as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(rpm final ) max = 

# ( )

3 2 2 01

. 0 K I m NHV rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗ ∗

∗ +

(rpm final ) min = 

# ( )

3 2 2 01

. 0 K I m NHV rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗ ∗

∗

−

Where: (rpm final ) max = Th e maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the test (rpm final ) min = The minimum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the test

rpm 2 initial = The squared flywheel rotational speed at the beginning
of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kgA

- 2

- G

- 25
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 K 3 = Conversion factor,
2 2 2

sec 3600 4

rpm

− π

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg

- m 2

1 1

. Calculations

– Equivalent All

- Electric Range for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

1 1 .1 Charge Depleting CO 2 Produced means the cumulative tailpipe CO 2 emissions produced, M cd , in grams per mile during the charge depleting cycle range.

M cd = Σ Y i

where: Y i = T he sum of the CO 2 gra ms per mile in the charge depleting mode from each test cycle (UDDS or HFEDS) i = N umber (UDDS or HFEDS) of the test over the charge depleting cycle range, R cdc

1 1 .2 Charge Sustaining CO 2 Produced

- urban mea ns the cumulative tailpipe CO 2 emissions produced, M cs , in grams per mile, during the cold start charge sustaining urban test.

M cs = 

## ( )      

− ∗ +

c c cdcu h c D D R Y Y

where: R cdc u = Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range , in miles D c = The measured driving distance fr om the cold start UDDS , in miles Y c = Grams per mile CO 2 emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS Y h = Gram s per mile CO 2 emissions as calculated from the hot start UDDSA

- 2

- G

- 26
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 1 1 .3 Charge Sustaining CO 2 Produced

- highway means the grams per mile tailpi pe CO 2 emissions produced, M cs , during the cold start charge sustaining highway
test.

M cs = h
h cdch Y D R
∗        

where: R cdc h = Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range , in miles D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start HFEDS , in miles Y h = Gram s per mile emissions as calculated from the hot start HFEDS

1 1 .4 Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range (EAER u ) shall be calculated as follows:

EAER u = cdcu

cs cd cs R M M M
∗        

−

where: M cs is as defined in F G .11.2

. M cd is as defined in F G .11.1, usin g the UDDS test cycle

.

1 1 .5 Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range (EAER h ) shall be calculated as follows:

EAER h = cdch

cs cd cs R M M M
∗      

−

where: M cs is as defined in F G .11.3

. M cd is as defined in F G .11.1, using the HFEDS test cycle

. R cdch is as define d in F G .11.3

1 1 .6 Electric Range Fraction (%).

The Electric Range Fraction means fraction of the total miles driven electrically (with the engine off) for blended operation hybrid electric vehicles.

The Urban Electric Range Fraction (ERF u ) is calcul ated as follows:A

- 2

- G

- 27
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ERF u (%) = 100 ∗        

cda u R EAER

The Highway Electric Range Fraction (ERF h ) is calculated as follows:

ERF h (%) = 100 ∗        

cdah h R EAER

1 1 .7 Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption.

The Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Rang e Energy Consumption (EAEREC u ) shall be calculated as follows:

E A EREC u (wh/mi) =

u cd EAER

E

where: E cd = Total electrical energy used to fully charge the vehicle battery from an external power source after the charge de pleting test has been completed . This shall be calculated for both AC and DC energy.

The Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption (EAEREC h ) shall be calculated as follows:

EAEREC h (wh/mi) =

h cd EAER

E

where: E cd = Total electrical energy used to fully charge the vehicle battery from an external power source after the charge depleting test has been completed . This shall be calculated for both AC and DC energy.

1 1 .8 The Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range , R cdcu , (see section H for an illustra tion of R cdcu ) shall be defined as the distance traveled on the Urban Charge Depleting Procedure up to the UDDS prior to where the state

- of

- charge is above the lower bound state

- of

- charge tolerance for one test cycle given by:

(Amp

- hr final ) min = (Amp

- hr i nitial )

– 0.01 *        

∗ ∗

1

K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

Where:A

- 2

- G

- 28
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the
test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Battery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Jo ules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. This value shall be submitte d for testing purposes, and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board.

1 1 .9 The Charge Depleting Actual Range , R cda , shall be defined as the range at which the state

- of

- charge is first equal to the average state

- of

- charge of the one o r two UDDSs used to end the Urban Charge Depleting Test. This range must be reported to the nearest 0.1 miles. For an illustration of R cda see section H I

.

1 1 .10 The Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Urban Range shall be defined as the distance drive n in miles from the start of the Urban Charge Depleting Test through the UDDS preceding the one or two UDDSs used to end the Urban Charge Depleting Test

.

1 1 .11 The Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range , R cdch , shall be defined as the sum of the distance tr aveled on the Highway Charge Depleting Test up to the HFEDS prior to where the state

- of

- charge is above the lower bound state

- of

- charge tolerance for one test cycle given by:

(Amp

- hr final ) min = (Amp

- hr initial )

– 0.01 *        

∗ ∗

1

K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

Where: (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the
test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Battery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test , in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. This value shall be submitted for testing purposes, and it shall be subject to confirm ation by the Air Resources Board.

1 1 .1 2 The Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Highway Range shall be defined as the distance driven in miles from the start of the Highway Charge Depleting Test through the HFEDS preceding the final HFEDS.A

- 2

- G

- 29
Date of Release: December 7 , 20 11 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 11.13 The U rban Equivalent All Electric Range for vehicles with an urban charge depleting actual range greater than 40 miles, EAER u40 , is determined through the following equation:

EAER u40 (miles) =       ×
100 40 mi ERF

uA

- 2

- H

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 G H

. Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid El ectric Vehicle Exhaust Emission Test Sequence.

[This page left intentionally blank for formatting purposes.]A

- 2

- H

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 

## Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable HEV Exhaust Emissions Test Sequence
* Equivalent to within ± 1% of AC energy used to charge battery to full state o f charge

12

– 36 hour cold soak, canister preconditioning

12

– 36 hour cold soak

Highway Cold Start Charge Sustaining Emission Test

US06 Charge Sustaining Emission Test

SC03 Charge Sustaining Emission Test Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test

Highway Charge Depleting Range Test

Urban Charge Depleting Range Test 12

– 36 hour cold soak, charge, canister preconditioning Drain & Fuel Vehicle Preconditioning: 1 CS UDDS minimum Cold Soak 6 hours Drain & Fuel Start

Is CS E cd Equivalent* to Urban CD range test ?

N

Y Charge and record e nergy

Discharge 12

– 36 hour cold soak , charge and record energyA

- 2

- I

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 201 1 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 H I

. Examples of Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Terminology

.
[This page left intentionally blank for formatting purposes.]A

- 2

- I

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 201 1 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2



## SOC C harge Depleting Cycle Range, R cdc 

### = 22.5 mi

Charge Sustaining Operation

UDDS 1

- 1% Fuel Energy Used for Lower Boundary (Cycles 4

- 5) UDDS 2 UDDS 3 UDDS 4 UDDS 5 +1% Fuel Energy Used for Upper Boundary (Cycles 4

- 5) 

### End of Test 

## Example of an Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable HEV with AER and Blended Operation Undergoing the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test

Charge Depleting Actual Range,

R cda 

### = 18 mi Avg SOC for CS Operation (Cycles 4

- 5)



### AER = 10 mi

EAER = 13.7 mi Engine Start



### Figure 1A

- 2

- I

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 201 1 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 SOC Ch arge Depleting Cycle Range Charge Sustaining Operation

Cycle 1 Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range

- 1% Fuel Energy Used
Lower Boundary Used for R cdc Determination (Cycle 5)

Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7  +1% Fuel Energy Used for
R cdc Determination (Cycle 5) End of Test SOC Charge Depleting Cycle Range Charge Sustaining Operation

Cycle 1

Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range

- 1% Fuel Energy Used for Lower B oundary (Cycles 5

- 6)

Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 C ycle 5 Cycle 6 +1% Fuel Energy Used for Upper Boundary (Cycles 5

- 6) End of Test



### Example of Urban End of Test Conditions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable HEV with Transitional Range

+1% Fuel Energy Used for Upper Boundary (Cycle 6

- 7)

- 1% Fuel Energ y Used for Lower Boundary (Cycle 6

- 7) 

### Example of Urban End of Test Conditions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable HEV

Transitional Range



### Figure 2A

- 2

- J

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 I J

. Test Procedures for 20 09 through 201 1 Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid

- Electric Vehicles.

The “as adopted or amended dates” of the 40 CFR Part 86 regulations referenced by this document are the dates identified in the “California Exhau st Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicles.”

1. Electric Dynamometer. All ZEVs must be tested using a 48

- inch single roll electric dynamometer meeting the requirement s of 40 CFR Subpart B, §86.108

- 00(b)(2).

2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- In Period. A manufacturer shall use good engineering judgment in determining the proper stabilized emissions mileage test point and report same according to the requirements of secti on D.2.11 above.

3. All

- Electric Range Test. All 2009 through 2011 ZEVs and only off

vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles shall be subject to the All

- Electric Range Test specified below for the purpose of determining the energy efficiency an d operating range of a ZEV or of an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle operating without the use of its auxiliary power unit. For hybrid electric vehicles, the manufacturer may elect to conduct the All

- Electric Range Test prior to vehicle preconditioning in the exhaust and evaporative emission test sequence specified in the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”.

3.1 Cold soak . The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 ° F (20 ° C) and not more than 86 ° F (30 ° C) for 12 to 36 hours. During this time, the vehicle’s battery shall be charged to a full state

- of

- charge.

3.2 Driving schedule.

3.2.1 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range.

(a) A t the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed, either driven or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through successive Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedules (UDDS), 40 CFR, Part 86, Appendix I, which is incorporated herein by reference. A 10

- minute soak shall follow each UDDS cycle.

(b) For vehicles with a maximum speed greater than or equal to the maximum speed on the UDDS cycle, this test sequence shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to maintain either the speed or t ime tolerances in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00 (b)(1) and (2), or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc. For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles, this determination shall be performed without the use of the auxiliary power unit.A

- 2

- J

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (c) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than the maximum speed on the UDDS cycle, the vehicle shall be operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) when the vehicle cannot achieve the speed trace within the speed and time tolerances specified in 40 CFR § 86.115

- 00(b)(1) and (2). The test shall be terminated when the vehicle speed when operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) f alls below 95 percent of the maximum speed initially achieved on the UDDS cycle or when the battery state

- of

- charge is depleted to the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety re asons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc., whichever occurs first. For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles, this determination shall be performed without the use of the auxiliary power unit.

3. 2.2 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range.

(a) At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed, either driven or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through two successive Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedules (HFEDS), 40 CFR, Part 600, Appendix I, which is incorporated herein by reference. There shall be a 15 second zero speed with key on and brake depressed between two cycles and a 10

- minute soak following the two HFEDS cycles.

(b) For vehicles with a maximum speed greater than or equal to the maximum speed on the HFEDS cycle, this test sequence shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to maintain either the speed or time tolerances in 40 CFR § 86.115

- 00 (b)(1) and (2), or the manufacturer determines that the te st should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc. For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles, this determination is optional and shall be performed without the use of t he auxiliary power unit.

(c) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than the maximum speed on the HFEDS cycle, the vehicle shall be operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) when the vehicle cannot achieve the speed trace within the speed an d time tolerances specified in 40 CFR § 86.115

- 00(b)(1) and (2). The test shall be terminated when the vehicle speed when operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) falls below 95 percent of the maximum speed initially achieved on the HFEDS cy cle or when the battery state

- of

- charge is depleted to the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery vol tage, etc., whichever occurs first. For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles, this determination shall be performed without the use of the auxiliary power unit.

(d) NEVs are exempt from the highway all

- electric range test.A

- 2

- J

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 3.2.3 Recordin g requirements. Once the vehicle is no longer able to maintain the speed and time requirements specified in (2) above, or once the auxiliary power unit turns on, in the case of an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle, the vehicle shall be br ought to an immediate stop and the following data recorded:

(a) mileage accumulated during the All

- Electric Range Test; (b) Net DC energy from the battery that was expended during the All

- Electric Range Test (may be reported as the total DC battery energy output and the total DC battery energy input during the All

- Electric Range Test); (c) AC energy required to fully charge the battery after the All

- Electric Range Test from the point where electricity is introduced from the electric outlet to the battery

c harger; and (d) DC energy required to fully charge the battery after the All

- Electric Range Test from the point where electricity is introduced from the battery charger to the battery.

Battery charging shall begin within 1 hour after terminating the All

- E lectric Range Test.

3.2.4 Regenerative braking . Regenerative braking systems may be utilized during the range test. The braking level, if adjustable, shall be set according to the manufacturer’s specifications prior to the commencement of the test. The driving schedule speed and time tolerances specified in (2) shall not be exceeded due to the operation of the regenerative braking system.

4. Determination of Battery Specific Energy for ZEVs

.
Determine the specific energy of batteries used to power a Z EV in accordance with the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium’s Electric Vehicle Battery Procedure Manual (January 1996), Procedure No. 2, “Constant Current Discharge Test Series,” using the C/3 rate. The weight calculation must reflect a completely function al battery system as defined in the Appendix of the Manual, including pack(s), required support ancillaries (e.g., thermal management), and electronic controller.

5. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater for Vehicles Other Than ZEVs

.

T he exhaust emissions result of the fuel

- fired heater shall be determined by operating at a maximum heating capacity with a cold start between 68 o F and 86 o F for a period of 20 minutes and dividing the grams of emissions by 20. The resulting grams per minut e shall be multiplied by 3.0 minutes per mile for a grams per mile value.A

- 2

- J

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 6. Hybrid Electric Vehicle FTP Emission Test Provisions

.
Alternative procedures may be used if shown to yield equivalent results and if approved in advance by the Executive Offic er of the Air Resources Board.

6.1 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” with the following supplemental requirements:

6.1.1 Battery state

- of

- charge shall be set prior to initial fuel drain and fill before vehicle preconditioning.

6.1.2 For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level t hat causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the preconditioning drive.

6.1.3 For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, ba ttery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

(ii ) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the UDDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in urban driving conditions.

6.1.4 After setting b attery state

- of

- charge, the hybrid electric vehicle shall be pushed or towed to a work area for fuel drain and fill according to sections D.1.1. and D.1.2. of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”.

6.1.5 Following fuel drain and fill, the vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on a dynamometer and preconditioned. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually a ctivated at the beginning of and operated throughout the preconditioning drive.

6.1.6 Within five minutes of completing preconditioning drive, battery state

- of

charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:A

- 2

- J

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (i) If the hybr id electric vehicle does not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and is charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, then set battery state

- of

- charge to a level such that the SOC Criterion (see section B., Definitions, of these procedures) would be sat isfied for the dynamometer procedure (section 6.2 of these procedures). If off

- vehicle charging is required to increase battery state

- of

- charge for proper setting, off

- vehicle charging shall occur during 12 to 36 hour soak period.

(ii) If the hybrid elec tric vehicle does not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and is charge

- depleting over the UDDS, then no battery state

- of

- charge adjustment is permissible.

(iii) If the hybrid electric vehicle does allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, then set battery state

- of

- charge to manufacturer recommended level for activating the auxiliary power unit when the hybrid electric vehicle is operating in urban driving conditions.

6.2 Dynamometer Procedure

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.135

- 00 with the following revisions:

6.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview. The dynamometer run consists of two tests, a “cold” start test, after a minimum 12

- hour and a maximum 36

- hour soak pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporati ve Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”

, and a “hot” start test following the “cold” start test by 10 minutes. Vehicle startup (with all accessories turned off), operation over the UDDS and vehicle shutdown make a complete cold start test. Vehicle startup and operation over the UDDS and vehicle shutdown make a complete hot start test. The exhaust emissions are diluted with ambient air in the dilution tunnel as shown in Figure B94

- 5 and Figure B94

- 6. A dilu tion tunnel is not required for testing vehicles waived from the requirement to measure particulates. Four particulate samples are collected on filters for weighing; the first sample plus backup is collected during the cold start test (including shutdown ); the second sample plus backup is collected during the hot start test (including shutdown). Continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis during each test. For hybrid electric vehicles with gasoline

- fueled, natural gas

- fueled and liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units (optiona l for natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled and methanol

- fueled diesel

- cycle vehicles), THC is sampled and analyzed continuously pursuant to the provisions of § 86.110. Parallel samples of the dilution air are similarly analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled andA

- 2

- J

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 methanol

- fueled auxiliary power units, bag samples are collected and analyzed for THC (if not sampled continuously), CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybr id electric vehicles with methanol

- fueled auxiliary power units, methanol and formaldehyde samples are taken for both exhaust emissions and dilution air (a single dilution air formaldehyde sample, covering the total test period may be collected). Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

6.2.2 S ubparagraph (d). [No change.]

6.2.3 Amend subparagraph (h): The driving distance, as measured by counting the number of dynamometer roll or shaft revolutions, shall be dete rmined for the cold start test and hot start test. The revolutions shall be measured on the same roll or shaft used for measuring the vehicle’s speed.

6.3 Dynamometer Test Run, Gaseous and Particulate Emissions

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.13 7

- 96 with the following revisions:

6.3.1 Amend subparagraph (a): General. The dynamometer run consists of two tests, a cold start test, after a minimum 12

- hour and a maximum 36

- hour soak pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” and a hot start test following the cold start test by 10 minutes. The vehicle shall be stored prior to the emission test in such a manner that precipitation (e.g., rain or dew) d oes not occur on the vehicle. The complete dynamometer test consists of a cold start drive of 7.5 miles (12.1 km) and a hot start drive of 7.5 miles (12.1 km). The vehicle is allowed to stand on the dynamometer during the 10 minute time period between th e cold and hot start
tests.

6.3.2 Amend subparagraph (b)(9): Start the gas flow measuring device, position the sample selector valves to direct the sample flow into the exhaust sample bag, the methanol exhaust sample, the formaldehyde exhaust sample, the dilution air sample bag, the methanol dilution air sample and the formaldehyde dilution air sample (turn on the petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle THC analyzer system integrator, mark the recorder chart, start particulate sample pump No. 1, and record both gas meter or flow measurement instrument readings, if applicable), and turn the key on. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the UDDS.

6.3 .2 Delete subparagraph (13).A

- 2

- J

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 6.3.3 Amend subparagraph (14): Turn the vehicle off 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration (at 1,369 seconds).

6.3.4 Amend subparagraph (15): Five seconds after the vehicle is shutdown, simultaneously turn off gas flow measuring device No. 1 and if applicable, turn off the hydrocarbon integrator No. 1, mark the hydrocarbon recorder chart, turn off the No. 1 particulate sample pump and close the valves isolating particulate filter No. 1, and position the sample sele ctor valves to the “standby” position. Record the measured roll or shaft revolutions (both gas meter or flow measurement instrumentation readings), and reset the counter. As soon as possible, transfer the exhaust and dilution air samples to the analytica l system and process the samples pursuant to § 86.140, obtaining a stabilized reading of the exhaust bag sample on all analyzers within 20 minutes of the end of the sample collection phase of the test. Obtain methanol and formaldehyde sample analyses, if applicable, within 24 hours of the end of the sample period. (If it is not possible to perform analysis on the methanol and formaldehyde samples within 24 hours, the samples should be stored in a dark cold (4  C to 10  C) e nvironme nt until a na lys is . The s a mples should be analyzed within fourteen days.) If applicable, carefully remove both pairs of particulate sample filters from their respective holders, and place each in a separate petri dish, and

cover.

6.3.3 Amend subparagraph (18): Repeat the steps i n paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(17) of this section for the hot start test. The step in paragraph (b)(9) of this section shall begin between 9 and 11 minutes after the end of the sample period for the cold start test.

6.3.4 Delete subparagraph (19).

6.3 .5 Delete subparagraph (20).

6.3.6 Amend subparagraph (21): As soon as possible, and in no case longer than one hour after the end of the hot start phase of the test, transfer the four particulate filters to the weighing chamber for post

- test conditionin g, if applicable. For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and are charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, a valid test shall satisfy the SOC Criterion (see Definitions, section B of these procedures).

6.3.7 A mend subparagraph (24): Vehicles to be tested for evaporative emissions will proceed pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”.

6.4 Calculations

- Exhaust EmissionsA

- 2

- J

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.144

- 94 with the following revisions:

6.4.1 Amend subparagraph (a): For light

- duty vehicles and light duty trucks:

Y wm = 0.43 * Y c + 0.57 * Y h D c D h

Where: (1) Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE, NMHC, NMHCE, CH 4 , NO x , or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. (2) Y c = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start test, in grams per test. (3) Y h = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start test, in grams per test. (4) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in miles. (5) D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in miles.

6.5 Calculations

- Particulate Emissions

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.145

- 82 with the following revisions:

6.5.1 Amend subparagraph (a): The final reported test results for the mass particulate (M p ) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

M p = 0.43 * M pc + 0.57 *M ph D c D h

W here: (1) M pc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start test, in grams per vehicle mile. (See § 86.110

- 94 for determination.) (2) M ph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start test, in grams per vehicle mile. (See § 86.110

- 94 for det ermination.) (3) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in miles. (4) D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in miles.

7. Hybrid Electric Vehicle Highway Emission Test ProvisionsA

- 2

- J

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 To be conducted pursuant to 4 0 CFR § 600.111

- 93 with the following revisions:

7.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): The highway fuel economy test is designated to simulate non

- metropolitan driving with an average speed of 48.6 mph and a maximum speed of 60 mph. The cycle is 10.2 miles lon g with 0.2 stop per mile and consists of warmed

- up vehicle operation on a chassis dynamometer through a specified driving cycle. A proportional part of the diluted exhaust emission is collected continuously for subsequent analysis of THC, CO, CO 2 , and NO x using a constant volume (variable dilution) sampler. Diesel dilute exhaust is continuously analyzed for hydrocarbons using a heated sample line and analyzer. Methanol and formaldehyde samples are collected and individually analyzed for methanol

- fueled v ehicles.

7.2 Amend subparagraph (f)(3): Only one exhaust sample and one background sample are collected and analyzed for THC (except diesel hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO 2 , and NO x . Methanol and formaldehyde samples (exhaust and dilution air) are collected and analyzed for methanol

- fueled vehicles.

7.3 Add subparagraph (f)(5): Battery state

- of

- charge shall be set prior to performing the HFEDS preconditioning cycle. For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activatio n of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the HFEDS preconditioning cycle. For hybri d electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, battery s tate

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the HFEDs, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxil iary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions.

7.4 Amend subparagraph (h)(5): Operate the vehicle over one HFEDS preconditioning cycle according to the dynamometer driving schedule specified in  600.109(b). If the a uxilia ry powe r unit is ca pa ble of be ing ma nua lly a ctiva te d, the auxiliary power unit s hall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the HFEDS preconditioning cycle.

7.5 Amend subparagraph (h)(6): When the vehicle reaches zero speed at the end of the HFEDS preconditioning cycle, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare for theA

- 2

- J

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 HFEDS emission measurement cycle of the test. Reset and enable the roll revolution counter. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be m anually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, the vehicle shall be momentarily turned off for 5 seconds and turned back on during the idle period. The battery state

- of

- charge shall be recorded after the hybrid electric vehicle has fully turn ed on.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the HFEDS, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the idle period.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

7.6 Add subparagraph (h)(9): At the conclusion of the HFEDS emission test, one of the following conditi ons shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC Criterion (see Definitions, section B of these procedures) is satisfied. If the SOC Criterion is not satisfied, then repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (h)(6). A total of three highway emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC Criterion. Manufacturers may elect to repe at dynamometer test run from subparagraph (h)(6) if battery energy level increased significantly relative to the initial battery state

- of

- charge set at the beginning of the HFEDS emission test.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxi liary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the HFEDS, the emission test is completed.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the emission test is completed.

8. Hybrid Electric Vehicle SFTP Emission Test Provisions

8.1 US06 Vehicle Preconditioning

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.132

- 00 with the following revisions:

8.1.1 Amend subparagraph (n): Aggressive Driving Test (US06) Preconditioning. (1) If the US06 test follows the exhaust emission FTP orA

- 2

- J

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer provided that battery state

- of

- charge has not been set; otherwise, if battery state

- of

- charge is set prior to securing vehicle on dynamometer, vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on dynamometer. Battery state

- of

- charg e shall be set prior to performing the US06 preconditioning cycle. For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to ope rate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the US06 preconditioning drive. For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the US06, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activa ted at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 preconditioning cycle.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the US06, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the aux iliary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 preconditioning cycle.

8.1.2 Delete subparagraphs (n)(1)(i) and (n)(1)(ii).A

- 2

- J

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 8.2 US0 6 Emission Test

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159

- 00 with the following revisions:

8.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview. The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 600 second test on the US06 driving schedule, as described in appendix I , paragraph (g), of this part. The hybrid electric vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with § 86.132

- 00, to bring it to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 1 to 2 minute idle period that proceeds directly into the US06 driving schedule during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provisions of § 86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For hybrid electric vehicles with gasoline

- fueled Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of § 86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

8.2.2 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position (vehicle shall be pushed or towed if battery state

- of

- charge is se t prior to securing to dynamometer otherwise vehicle may be driven as well) the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

8.2.3 Amend subparagraph (d): Practice runs over the prescribed driving schedule may be performed at test point, provided that b attery state

- of

- charge setting is conducted after practice and an emission sample is not taken, for the purpose of finding the appropriate throttle action to maintain the proper speed

time relationship, or to permit sampling system adjustment.

8.2.4 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(i): Immediately after completion of the US06 preconditioning cycle, idle the vehicle. The idle period is not to be less than one minute or not greater than two minutes. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall a pply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the US06, the vehicle shall be momentarily turned off for 5 seconds and turned back on during the idle period. The b attery state

- of

- charge shall be recorded after the hybrid electric vehicle has fully turned on.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the US06, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the idle period.A

- 2

- J

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

8.2.5 Amend subp aragraph (f)(2)(ix): At the conclusion of the US06 emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and are charge

- sustaining over the US06, recor d the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC Criterion (see Definitions, section B of these procedures) is satisfied. If the SOC Criterion is not satisfied, then repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i). A total of three US06 emis sion tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC Criterion. Manufacturers may elect to repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i) if battery energy level increased significantly relative to the initial battery state

- of

- charge set at the beginni ng of US06 emission test.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the US06, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

(iii) For hybrid el ectric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

8.3 SC03 Vehicle Preconditioning

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132

- 00 with the following revisions:

8.3.1 Amend subparagraph (o): Air Conditioning Test (SC03) Preconditioning. (1) If the SC03 test follows the exhaust emission FTP or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer provided that battery state

- of

- charge has not been set; otherwise, if battery state

- of

- charge is set prior to securing vehicle on dy namometer, vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on dynamometer. Battery state

- of

- charge shall be set prior to performing the SC03 preconditioning cycle. For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power uni t, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the SC03 preconditioning drive. For hybrid electricA

- 2

- J

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 vehicles that allo w manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the SC03, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 preconditioning cycle.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the SC03, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated througho ut the SC03 preconditioning cycle.

8.3.2 Delete subparagraphs (o)(1)(i) and (o)(1)(ii).

8.4 SC03 Emission Test

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.160

- 00 with the following revisions:

8.4.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview. The dynamometer
oper ation consists of a single, 594 second test on the SC03 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (h), of this part. The hybrid electric vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00 of this subpart, to bring the vehicle to a warme d

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 10 minute vehicle soak (vehicle turned off) that proceeds directly into the SC03 driving schedule, during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysi s. The entire test, including the SC03 preconditioning cycle, vehicle soak, and SC03 emission test, is either conducted in an environmental test facility or under test conditions that simulates testing in an environmental test cell (see Sec. 86.162

- 00 (a) for a discussion of simulation procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of: 95 o F air temperature, 100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relat ive humidity), a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m 2 , and vehicle cooling air flow proportional to vehicle speed. Section 86.161

- 00 discusses the minimum facility requirements and corresponding control tolerances for air conditioning ambient test condit ions. The vehicle’s air conditioner is operated or appropriately simulated for the duration of the test procedure (except for the 10 minute vehicle soak), including the preconditioning. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provision s of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For hybrid electric vehicles with gasoline

- fueled Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with pe troleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliaryA

- 2

- J

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of § 86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

8.4.2 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Positi on (vehicle shall be pushed or towed if battery state

- of

- charge is set prior to securing to dynamometer otherwise vehicle may be driven as well) the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

8.4.3 Amend subparagraph (c)(9): Start vehicle (with air co nditioning system also running). If the auxiliary power unit of the hybrid electric vehicle is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 emission test. F ifteen seconds after the vehicle starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.

8.4.4 Amend subparagraph (c)(12): Turn the vehicle off 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

8.4.5 Amend subparagraph (d)(7): Start ve hicle (with air conditioning system also running). If the auxiliary power unit of the hybrid electric vehicle is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 emission test. Fifteen seconds after the vehicle starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.

8.4.6 Amend subparagraph (d)(10): At the conclusion of the SC03 emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) Fo r hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the SC03, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC Criterion (see Definitions, section B of these procedures) is satisfied. If the SOC Criterion is not satisfied, then turn off cooling fan(s), allow vehicle to soak in the ambient conditions of paragraph (c)(5) of this section for 10 ± 1 minutes, and repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (d). A total of thr ee SC03 emission tests shall be attempted to satisfy the SOC Criterion. Manufacturers may elect to repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (d) following a 10 ± 1 minute soak in the ambient conditions of paragraph (c)(5) of this section if battery en ergy level increased significantly relative to the initial battery state

- of

- charge set at the beginning of SC03 emission test.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting o ver the SC03, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.A

- 2

- J

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

9. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances

9.1 For hybrid electric vehicles that use a battery as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(Amp

- hr final ) max = (Amp

- hr initial ) + 0.01 * (NHV fuel * m fuel ) (V system * K 1 )

(Amp

- hr final ) min = (Amp

- hr initial )

– 0.01 * ) K (V ) m NVH (

1 system fuel

fuel

∗ ∗

Where:

(Amp

- hr final ) max = Maximum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Battery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. This value shall be submitted for testing purposes, and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board.

9.2 For hybrid electric vehicles that use a capacitor as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(V final ) max = C m NHV V fuel fuel
initial ) 2 ( 01

. 0 ) ( 2 ∗ ∗
∗ +

(V final ) min = C m NHV V fuel fuel
initial ) 2 ( 01

. 0 ) ( 2 ∗ ∗
∗

−A

- 2

- J

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Where: (V final )

max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test (V final ) min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test (V init ial ) 2

= The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg C = Rated capacitance of the capacitor, in FaradsA

- 2

- J

- 18
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 9.3 For hybrid electric vehicles that use an electro

- mechanical flywheel as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(rpm final ) max = ) K 1 ( ) m NVH 2 ( 01

. 0 ) rpm (

3 fuel fuel 2
initial ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ +

(rpm final ) min = ) K 1 ( ) m NVH 2 ( 01

. 0 ) rpm (

3 fuel fuel 2
initial ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗

−

Where: (rpm final ) max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the
test (rpm final ) min = The minimum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the
test (rpm initial ) 2

= The squared flywheel rotational speed at the beginnin g of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 3 = Conversion factor, 4  2 /(3600 sec 2

- rpm 2 ) I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg

- m 2A

- 2

- K

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for C onsideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 K . Advanced Technology Demonstration Program data requirements.

A vehicle placed in a California advanced technology demonstration program may earn ZEV credits even if it is not “delivered for sale” in accordance with the ZEV regulation section 1962.1(g)(4). Approval by the AR B’s Executive Officer is required for Advanced Technology Demonstration Program credits. The following data shall be provided in order to evaluate applications for an Executive Order:

1. Project Description (a) General description (b) Goal (c) Specific objectives (e .g. durability tests, customer marketability) (d) Location (include state, city, and agency/organization)

2. Vehicle data (a) Model (b) Model year (c) Date placed in program (d) Vehicle Identification Number (VIN)

3. Vehicle specifications (a) Passenger car (PC) or light duty t ruck (LDT) (b) Curb weight

– pounds (lbs) (c) Payload (lbs) (d) City/highway range

– miles (mi) (e) Estimated fuel economy or EPA fuel economy city/highway

– miles per gallon (mpg) (f) Fuel type (g) Refueling time (h) Electric motor output

– kilowatts (kW) (i) Hybrid energy storage; type , capacity and peak power (j) For Fuel Cell Vehicles (FCVs), fuel cell stack: type, peak output, manufacturer and estimated design life.A

- 2

- L

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 L. Fast refueling capability

The “fast refueling capability” criterion for a 2009 through 2017 model

- year Type III, IV and V ZEV in CCR, Title 13, Section 1962.1(d)(5)(A), “ZEV Tiers for Credit Calculations,” will be considered met for a particular ZEV if the manufacturer declares that this ZEV can be fast refueled at an “ideal” or prototype refueling or charging station and provides the documentation described below.

The fast refueling description shall include (but not necessarily be limited to): (a) Tank or battery specifications (b) Ambient and tank conditions prior to the qualifying fill/charge (c) Plot or table of kilograms (kg) (or kilowatt

- hour (kw

- hr)) versus time for this “ideal” fill or charge (d) A general description of the fill or charge type.

### APPENDIX A

- 3



## PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation: 2018 and Subsequent Model Years

Title 13, California Code of RegulationsThis Page Left Intentionally BlankProposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Appendix A

- 3 PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Adopt section 1962.2

, title 13, California Code of Regulation (CCR), to read as follows:

[ Note: Set forth below are the 2012 amendments to the California zero emission vehicle (ZEV) regulation. This is a newly adopted regulation, shown without underline as permitted by Califo rnia Code of Regulations, title 1, section 8. ]

§ 1962

. 2 Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards for 2018 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles.

(a) **ZEV Emission Standard.** The Executi ve Officer shall certify new 2018 and subsequent model year passenger cars, light

- duty trucks

, and medium

- duty vehicles as ZEVs , vehicle s that produce zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant) or greenhouse gas under any possible operational modes or

c onditions.

(b) **Percentage ZEV Requirements.**

(1) **General ZEV**  **Credit Percentage Requirement.** 

(A) **Basic Requirement.** The minimum ZEV credit percentage requirement for each manufacturer is listed in the table below as the percentage of the PCs and LDTs, produced by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that must be ZEVs, subject t o the conditions in this subdivision 1962. 2 (b). The ZEV requirement will be based on the annual NMOG production report for the appropriate model year.

M odel Year Credit Percentage Requirement 2018 4.5% 2019 7 .0 % 2020 9.5% 2021 12 .0 % 2022 1 4 .5% 2023 17 .0 % 20 24 19.5% 2025 and s ubsequent 22 .0 %

(B) **Calculating the Number of Vehicles to Which the Percentage ZEV Requirement is Applied** 

. For 2018 and subsequent model years, a manufacturer’s production volume for the given model year will be based on the three

- year average of the manufacturer’s volume of PCs and LDT s, produced and delivered for sale in California in the prior second

, third , and fourth model year [for example, 2019 model year ZEV requirements will be b ased on Californ ia production volume average of PCs and LDTs for the 20 1 5 to 201 7 model years]. This production averaging is used toProposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 determine ZEV requirements only, and has no effect on a manufacturer’s size determination (eg. three

- y ear average calculat ion method)

. In applying the ZEV requirement, a PC or LDT

, that is produced by one manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer A)

, but is marketed in California by another manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer B) under the other manufacturer’s (Manufacturer B) nameplate, shall be treated as having been produced by the marketing manufacturer ( i.e., Manufacturer B)

.

1. **[R eserved**  **]**

2. **[R eserved**  **]**

3. A manufacturer may apply to the Executive Officer to be permitted to base its ZEV obl igation on the number of PCs and LDT s, pr oduced by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that same model year (ie, same model

- year calculation method) as an alternative to the three

- year averaging of prior
year production described above , for up to two model years, total, between model year 2018 and model year 2025 . For the same model

- year calculation method to be allowed, a manufacturer’s application to the Executive Officer must show that their volume of PCs and LDTs produced and delivered for sale in California has decreased by 40 percent from the previous year due to circumstances that were unforeseeable and beyond their control

.
(C) **[R eserved**  **]**

(D) **Exclusion of ZEVs in Determining a Manufacturer’s Sales**  **Volume**

**.** In calculating a manufacturer’s applicable sales, using eith er method described in subdivision 1962. 2 (b)(1)(B)

, a manufacturer shall excl ude the number of N EVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer itself , or by a subsidiary in which the manufacturer has more than 33.4% percent ownership interest.

(2) **Requirements for Large Volume**  **Manufacturers.**

(A) **[R eserved**  **]**

(B) **[R eserved**  **]**

(C) **[R eserved**  **]**

(D) **[R eserved**  **]**

(E) **Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in 2018 and**  **through 2025 Model Year**  **s**

**.** LVMs must produce credits from ZEVs eq ual to minimum ZEV floor percentage requirement, as enumerated below. Manufacturers may fulfill the remaining ZEV requirement with credits from TZEVs, as enumerated below.Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Model Years Total ZEV Percent Requirement Minimum ZEV floor TZEVs

2018 4 .5 % 2 .0 % 2.5 %
2019 7 .0 % 4 .0 % 3 .0 %
2020 9.5 % 6 .0 % 3.5 %
2021 12 .0 % 8 .0 % 4 .0 %
2022 14 .5 % 10 .0 % 4. 5 %
2023 17 .0 % 12 .0 % 5 .0 %
2024 19.5 % 14 .0 % 5 .5 %
2025 2 2 .0 % 16 .0 % 6 .0 %

(F) **Requirem ents for Large Volume Manufacturers in Model Year**  **2026 and Subsequent.** In 2026 and subsequent model years, a manufacturer must meet a total ZEV credit percentage of 22 %. The maximum portion of a manufacturer’s credit percentage requirement that may be sa tisfied by TZEV credits is limited to 6 % of the manufacturer’s applicable California PC and LDT production volume. ZEV credits
must satisfy the remainder of the manufacturer’s r equirement.

(3) **Requirements for Intermediate Volume Manufacturers**

. For 201 8 and subsequent model years, an intermediate volume manufacturer may meet all of its ZEV credit percentage requirement , under subdivision 1962.2(b), with credits from T ZEV.

(4) **Requirements for Small Volume Manufacturers**

. A small volume manufacturer i s not required to meet the ZEV credit percentage requirements. Howev er, a small volume manufacturer may earn , bank, market, and trade credits for the ZEVs and TZEVs it produces and delivers for sale in California.

(5) **[R eserved**  **]**

(6) **[R eserved**  **]**

(7) **C hanges in Small Volume**  **and Intermediate Volume Manufacturer Status.** 

(A) **Increases in California Production Volume**

. In 2018 and subsequent model years, if a small volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 4,500 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years (i.e., total production volume exceeds 13,5 00 vehicles in a three

- year period) , for three consecutive averages , the manufa cturer shall no longe r be treated as a small volume manufacturer

, and must comply with the ZEV requirements for intermediate volume manufacturers beginning with the next model year after the last model year of the third consecutive average. For example, i f ( a small volume)Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Manufacturer A exceed s 4,500 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs for their 2018

– 2020, 2019

– 2021, and 2020

– 2022 model year average s , Manufacturer A would be subject to intermediate volume requirements starting in 2023 model year.

If an intermediat e volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 2 0,000 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years (i.e., total production vo lu me exceeds 60 ,000 vehicles in a three

- year period) , f or three consecutive averages , the manufacturer shall no longer be treated as an intermediate volume manufacturer and shall comply with the ZEV requirements for large volume manufacturers beginning with the next model year after the last model year of the third consecutive average. For example, if ( an intermediate volume) Manufacturer B exceeds 20,000 PCs , LDTs, and MDVs for its 2018

– 2020 , 2019

– 2021, and 2020

– 2022 average, Manufacturer B would be s ubject to large volume manufacturer requirements starting in 2023 model year.

Any new requirement described in the this subdivision will begin with the next model year after the last model year of the third consecutive average when a manufacturer ceases t o be a small or intermediate volume manufacturer in 2018 or subsequent years due to the aggregation requirements in majority ownership situations

.
(B) **Decreases in California Production Volume**

. If a manufacturer’s average California production volume fa lls below 4,500 or 2 0,000 units of new PCs, LDT 1 and 2 s, and MDVs

, based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years , for three consecutive
averages , the manufacturer shall be treated as a small volume or intermediate volume manufacturer, as applicable, and shall be subject to the requirements for a small volume or intermediate volume manufacturer beginning with the next model year. For example, if Manufacturer C falls below 20,000 PCs, L DTs, and MDVs for its 2019

– 2021 , 2020

– 2022, and 2021

– 2023 average s , Manufacturer C would be subject to IVM requirements starting in 2024 model year.

(C) **Calculating California Production Volume in Change of Ownership Situations.**  Where a manufacture r experiences a change in ownership in a particular model year, the change will affect application of the aggregation requirements on the manufacturer starting with the next model year. When a manufacturer is simultaneously producing two model years of ve hicles at the time of a change of ownership, the basis of determining next model year must be the earlier model year. The manufacturer’s small or intermediate volume manufacturer status for the next model year shall be based on the average California prod uction volume in the three previous consecutive model years of those manufacturers whose production volumes must be aggregated for that next model year. For example, where a change of ownership during the 201 9 calendar year occurs and the manufacturer is producing both 201 9 and 2020 model year vehicles results in a requirement that the production volume of Manufacturer A be aggregated with the production volume of Manufacturer B, Manufacturer A’s status for the 2020 model year will be based on the producti onProposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 volumes of Manufacturers A and B in the 20 17

– 20 1 9 model years. Where the production volume of Manufacturer A must be aggregated with the production volumes of Manufacturers B and C for the 201 9 model year, and during that model year a change in owner ship eliminates the requirement that Manufacturer B’s production volume be aggregated with Manufacturer A’s, Manufacturer A’s status for the 20 20 model year will be based on the production volumes of Manufacturers A and C in the 20 17

– 20 19 model years. I n either case, the lead time provisions in subdivision s 1962.2 (b)( 7 )(A) and (B) will apply.

(c) Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles (TZEV).

(1) **Introduction.** This subdivision 1962.2 (c) sets forth the criteria for identifying vehicles delivered for sal e in California as T ZEVs.

(2) **TZEV Requirements**

. In order for a vehic le to be eligible to receive a ZEV allowance, the manufacturer must demonstrate compliance with all of the following require ments:

(A) **SULEV Standards.** C ertify the vehicle to the 150,000

- mile SULEV 20 or 30 exhaust emission standards for PCs and LDTs in s ubdivision 1961.2(a)(1). Bi

- fuel, fuel flexible and dual

- fuel vehicles must certify to the applicable 150,000

- mile SULEV 20 or 30 exhaust emission standards when operating on both fuels;

(B) **Evaporative Emissions.** C ertify the vehicle to the evaporative emission standards in subdivision 1976(b)(1)(G) ;

(C) **OBD.** Certify that the vehicle will meet the applicable on

- board diagnostic requirements in section s 1968.1 or 1968.2, as appl icable, for 150,000 miles; and

(D) **Extended Warranty**

. Extend the performance and defects warranty period set forth in su b divisions 2037(b)(2) and 2038(b)( 2 ) to 15 years or 150,000 miles, whichever occurs first except that t he time period is to be 10 year s for a

zero emission energy storage device used for traction power (such as a battery, ultracapacitor, or other electric storage device )

.
(3) **Allowances for TZEVs**

( A ) **Zero Emission Vehicle Miles Traveled TZEV Allowance Calculation** 

. A vehicle that me ets the requirements of subdivision 1962 .2 (c)(2) and has zero

- emission vehicle miles traveled ( VMT ) , as d efined by and calculated by the

“ California Exhaust Emission Standards And Test Procedures For 2018 And Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles And Hyb rid Electric Vehicles, In The Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck And Medium

- Duty Vehicle Classes ”, incorporated byProposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 reference, and measured as all electric R cda capability will generate an allowance according to the following equation:

UDDS Test Cycle Range ( R cda ) Allowance

<10 all electric miles 0.0

≥ 10 all electric miles TZEV Credit = [(0.01) * R cda + 0.3] >80 miles (credit cap) 1.3

1. Allowance for US06 Capability. TZEVs with US06 all electric range capability (R cda ) of at least 10 miles shall earn an additional 0.2 allowance . US06 test cycle range capability shall be determined in accordance with section E.8 of the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for the 2018 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles, and Hybrid Electric Vehicles in the Passenger Car, Light

- Duty T ruck, and Medium Duty Vehicle Classes,” incorporated by reference in subdivision 1962.2(h).

(B) **[Reserved]**

(C ) **[Reserved]**

(D) **[Reserved]**

(E ) **Credit for Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles.**  A hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicle tha t meets the requirements of subdivision 1962 .2 (c)(2) and has a total range of at least 250 UDDS miles will earn an allowance of 0.75, which may be in addition to allowances earned in subdivis ion 1962.2(c)(3)(A )

, and subject to an overall credit cap of 1. 25

(d) **Qualification for Credits From ZEVs** 

.
(1) **[Reserved]**

(2) **[Reserved]**

(3) **[Reserved]**

(4) **[Reserved]**

(5) **Credits for 20**  **18 and Subsequent Model Year**  **ZEV s** 

**.**
(A) **ZEV Credit**  **Calculations**

. Credits from a ZEV delivered for sale are based on the ZEV’ s UDDS all electric range , determined in accordance with the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for the 2018 andProposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles, and Hybrid Electric Vehicles in the Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck, and Medium Duty Vehicle Classes,” incorporated by reference , using the following equation :

ZEV Credit = (0.01) * (UDDS range) + 0.5

1. A ZEV with less than 50 miles UDDS range will receive zero credits.

2. Credits earned under this provision 1962.2(d)(5)( A) are be capped at 4 credits per ZEV.

( B) **[Reserved]**

(C ) **[Reserved]**

(D) **[Reserved]**

( E ) **Counting Specifie**  **d ZEV**  **s Placed in**  **Service in**  **a Section 177 State**  **and in California**

**.** Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles that are certified to the California ZEV standards applicable for the ZEV’s model year

, delivered for sale and placed in service in California or in a section 177 state

, may be counted towards compliance in Californi a and in all section 177 states with the percentage ZE V requirements in subd ivision 1962.2 (b). T he credits earned are multiplied by the ratio of a manufacturer’s applicable production volume for a model year, as specified in subdivision 1962. 2 (b)(1)(B), in the state receiving credit to the manufacturer’s applicable production volu me a s specified in subdivision 1962. 2 (b)(1)(B), for the same model year in California (he reafter, “proportional value”) . Credits generated from ZEV placement in a section 177 state will be earned at the proportional value in the section 177 state, and

earn ed in California at the full v alue specified in subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(A)

.
(F ) **NEVs**

**.** NEVs must meet the following t o be eligible for 0. 15 credits :

1. **Specifications**

. A NEV earns credit when it meet s all the following specifications:

a. **Accelera tion.**  The vehicle has a 0

- 20 mph acceleration of 6.0 seconds or less when operating with a payload of at least 332 pounds and starting with the battery at a 50% state of charge.

b. **Top Speed.** The vehicle has a minimum top speed of 20 mph when operating with a payload of at least 332 pounds and starting with the battery at a 50% state of charge. The vehicle’s top speed shall not exceed 25 mph when tested in accordance with 49 CFR 571.500 (68 FR 43972, July 25, 2003).Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 c. **Constant Speed Range.** The vehicl e has a minimum 25

- mile range when operating at constant top speed with a payload of least 332 pounds and starting with the battery at 100% state of charge.

2

. **Battery Requirement**

. A NEV must be equipped with one or more sealed, maintenance

- free batterie s.

3

. **Warranty Requirement**

. A NEV drive train, including battery packs, must be cover e d for a period of at least 24 months. The first 6 months of the NEV warranty period must be covered by a full warranty; the remain ing warranty period may be optional extended warranties (available for purchase) and may be prorated. If the extended warranty is prorated, the percentage of the battery pack's original value to be covered or refunded must be at least as high as the percentage of the prorated coverage perio d still remaining. For the purpose of this computation, the age of the battery pack must be expressed in intervals no larger than three months. Alternatively, a manufacturer may cover 50 percent of the original value of the battery pack for the full peri od of the extended warranty.

Prior to credit approval, t he Executive Officer may request that the manufacturer provide copies of representative vehicle and battery warranties

.

4

. **NEV Charging**  **Requirements.** A NEV must meet charging requirements speci fic in subdivision 1962.3(c)(2).

(G ) **BEVx.** A BEVx must meet the following in order to receive credit, based on its all electric UDDS Range , through subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(A):

1. **Emissions Requirements.** BEVxs must meet all TZEV requirements, speci fied in subdivision 1962.2(c)(2)(A) through (D).

2. **APU Operation.** The vehicle’s UDDS range after the APU first starts and enters “charge sustaining hybrid operation” must be less than or equal to the vehicle’s UDDS all

- electric test range prior to A PU start. The vehicle’s APU cannot start under any user

- selectable driving mode unless the energy storage system used for traction power is fully depleted.

3

. **Minimum Zero Emission Range Requirements.** BEVxs must have a minimum of 80 miles UDDS all elec tric range.

(e ) **[Reserved]**

(f ) **[Reserved]**Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (g) **Generation and Use of Credits; Calculation of Penalties** 

(1) **Introduction.** A manufacturer that produces and delivers for sale in Californ ia ZEVs or T ZEVs in a given model year exceeding the manufacture r’s ZEV requirement set forth in subdivision 1962.2 (b) shall earn ZEV credits in accordance with this subdivision 1962.2 (g).

(2) **ZEV Credit Calculations.**

(A) **Credits from ZEVs.** The amount of credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from ZE Vs shall be expressed in units of credits

, and shall be equal to the number of credits from ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California that the manufacturer applies towards meeting the ZEV requirements for the model year subtracted from the number of ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer in the model year

.
(B) **Credits from T ZEVs.**  The amount of credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from T ZEVs shall be expressed in units of credits, and shall b e equ al to the total number of T ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California that the manufacturer applies towards meeting its ZEV requirement for the model year subtr acted from the total number of ZE V allowances from T ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer in the model year

.
( C ) **Separate Credit Accounts.** C redits from a manufacturer’s ZEVs, BEVxs, TZEVs, and NEVs shall each be maintained in separate accounts

.
(D) Rounding Credits. ZEV credits and debits shall be rounded to the
nearest 1/100 th only on the final credit and debit totals using the conventional rounding method.

(3) **ZEV Credits for MDVs**

. Credits from ZEVs and T ZEVs classified as MDVs

, may be counted toward the ZEV requirement for PCs and LDT s , and included in the calculation of ZEV credits as specified in this subdivision 1962.2 (g) if the manufacturer so specifies

.
(4) **ZEV Credits for Advanced Technology Demonstration Programs.**

(A) **[Reserved]**

(B) **ZEVs**

**.** ZEVs , including BEVxs , excluding NEVs, placed in a small or intermediate volume manufacturer’s California advanced technology demonstration program for a period of two or more years, may earn ZEV credits even if the vehicle is not “delivered for sale” or registered with the California DMV. To earn such credits, the manufacturer must demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer that the vehicles will be regularly used in applications appropriate to evaluate issuesProposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 related to safety, infrastructure, fuel specifications or public edu cation, and that for 50 percent or more of the first two years of placement the vehicle will be operated in California. Such a vehicle is eligible to receive the same credit that it would have earned if delivered for sale, and for fuel cell vehicles, plac ed in service. To determine vehicle credit, the model year designation for a demonstration vehicle shall be consistent with the model year designation for conventional vehicles placed in the same timeframe. Manufacturers may earn credit for up to 25 vehi cles per model, per section 177 state , per year under this subdivision 1962. 2 (g)(4). A manufacturer’s vehicles in excess of the 25

- vehicle cap will not be eligible for advanced technology demonstration program credits.

(5) **ZEV Credits for Transportation S ystems.** 

(A) **[Reserved]**

(B) **[Reserved]**

(C) **Cap on Use of Transportation System**  **Credits**

.

1. **ZEVs**

. Transportation system c redits earned or allocated by ZEVs or BEVxs pursuant to subdivision 1962.1 (g)(5), not including any credits earned by the vehi cle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year , and may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation which must be met with ZEVs , as specified in subdivision 1962.2(b)( 2)(E)

. Manufacturers may not use transportation system credits earned by ZEVs to comply with requirements specified in subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(F)

2. **TZEVs**

. Transportation system c redits earned or allocated by TZEVs pursuant to subdivision 1962.1 (g)(5), not including all credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year, but may only be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category. Manufa cturers may not use transportation system credits earned by TZEVs to comply with requirements specified in subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(F)

(6) **Use of ZEV Credits** 

. A manufacturer may meet the ZEV requirements in

a given model year by submitting to the Executi ve Office r a commensurate amount of ZEV credits, consistent with subdivision 1962.2 (b). Credits in each of the categories may be used to meet the requirement for that category as well as the requirements for lesser credit earning ZEV categories, but shall not be used to meet the requirement for a greater credit earning ZEV category , except for discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credit s . For example, credits produced from TZEVs may be used to comply with the portion of the requirement that may be met with credits from TZEV , but not with the portion that must be satisfied with credits from ZEVs. These credits may be earned previously by the manufacturer or acquired from another party.Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (A) **Use of Discounted PZEV and AT PZEV Credits and NEV**  **Credits**

**.** For model years 2018 through 202 5 , discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits

, and NEV credits may be used to satisfy up to one

- quarter of the portion of a manufacturer’s requirement that can be met with credits from TZEVs. Intermediate volume manufacturers may fulfill th eir entire requirement with discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits, and NEV credits in model years 2018 and 2019. These credits may be earned previously by the manufacturer or acquired from another party

. Discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits may no longer be used after model year 2025 compliance.

(B) **Use of BEVx Credits.** BEVx credits may be used to satisfy up to 50% of the portion of a manufacturer’s requirement that must be met with ZEV credits.

(C ) **GHG**

**- ZEV Over Compliance Credits.** 

1. Application. M anufacturers may apply to the Executive Officer, no later than May 1, 2018, to be eligible for this subdivision 1962.2(g)(6)(C ), based on the following qualifications:

a. A manufacturer must hav e no model year 2017 compliance debits and no outstanding de bits from all previous model year compliance with section s 1961. 1 and 1961.3

, and

b. A manufacturer must have no model year 2017 compliance debits and no outstanding debits from all previous model year compliance with section 1962.1 , and

c. A manufactur er must submit documentation of its projected product plans to show over compliance with the manufacturer’s section 1961.3 requirements by at least 2 .0 gCO 2 /mile in each model year through the entire 2018 through 2021 model year period , and its commitment to do so in each year

.

2. Credit Generation and Calculation

. Manufacturers must calculate their over compliance with section 1961.3 requirements for model years 2018 through 2021 based on compliance with the previous model year standard. For example, to generate credits for this subdivision 196 2.2(g)(6)(C ) for model year 2018

, manufacturers would calculate credits based on model year 201 7 compliance with section 1961.3.

a

. At least 2.0 gCO 2 /mile over compliance with section 1961.3 is required in eac h year and t he following equation must be used to calculate the amount of ZEV credits earned for purposes of this subdivision 1962. 2 (g)(6)(C ) , and :Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 [(Manufacturer US PC and LDT Sales) x ( gCO 2 /mile below manufacturer GHG standard for a given model year)] / (Manufacturer GHG standard for a given model year)

b. Credits earned under section 1961.3(b)(9) may not be i ncluded in the calculation of g CO 2 /mile credits for use in the above equation in subdivision a.

c

. Banked gCO 2 /mile credits earned under sections 1961.1 and 1961.3 from previous model years or from other manufacturers may not be included in the calculation of gCO 2 /mile credits for use in the above equation in subdivision a.

3. Use of GHG

- ZEV Over Compliance Credits. A manufacturer
may use no m ore than the percentage enumerated in the table below to meet either the total ZEV requirement nor the portion of their ZEV requirement that must be met with ZEV credits, with credits earned under this subdivision 1962.2(g)(6)(C ).

Credits earned in any given model year under this subdivision 1962.2(g)(6 )(C ) may only be used in the applicable model year and may not be used in any other model year.

gCO 2 /mile c redits used to calculate GHG

- ZEV over compliance credits under this provisi on must also be removed from the manufacturer’s GHG compliance bank, and cannot be banked for future compliance toward 1961.3.

4. Reporting Requirements. Annually, manufacturers are required to submit calculations of credits for this subdivision 1962.2(g)(6)(C ) for the model year, any remaining credits/debits from previous model years under 1961.3 , and projected credits/debits for future years through 2021 under 19 61.3 and this subdivision 1962.2 (g)(6)(C )

.

a. If a manufacturer , w ho has been granted the ability to generate credits under this subdivision 1962.2(g)(6)(C), fails to over comply by at least 2.0 gCO 2 /mile in any one year, the manufacturer will be subject to the full ZEV requirements for the model year and future model ye ars, and will not be able to earn credits for any other model year under this subdivision 1962.2(g)(6)( C )

( 7 ) **Requirement to Make Up a ZEV Deficit**

.
(A) **General.** A manufacturer that produces and delivers for sale in California fewer ZEVs than required i n a given model yea r shall make up the deficit by the next model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a commensur ate amount of ZEV credits. The amount of ZEV credits required to be submitted shall be calculated by 2018 2019 2020 2021 50% 50% 40% 30%Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 [i] adding the number of credits f rom ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year to the number of credits from TZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year (for a LVM

, not to exceed that permitted under subdivision 1962. 2 (b)(2)), and [ii] subtracting that total from the number of credits required to be produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year

. BEVx, TZEV, NEV, or converted AT PZEV and PZEV credits are not allowed to be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s ZEV deficit; only credits from ZEVs may be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s ZEV deficit.

(8) **Penalty for Failure to Meet ZEV Requirements.** Any manufacturer that fails to produce and deliver for sale in Cali fornia the required number of ZEVs and submi t an appropriate amount of credits and does not make up ZEV deficits within the specifie d time allowed by subdivision 1962.2 (g)(7)(A) shall be subject to the Health and Safety Code section 43211 civil penalty app licable to a manufacturer that sells a new motor vehicle that does not meet the applicable emission standards adopted by the state board. The cause of action shall be deemed to accrue when the ZEV deficit is not balanced by the end of the specified time a llowed by subdivision 1962. 2 (g)(7)(A). For the purposes of Health and Safety Code section 43211, the number of vehicles not meeting the state board’s standards shall be equal to the manufacturer’s credit deficit, rounded to the nearest 1/100 th , calculated according to the following equation, provided that the percentage of a manufacturer’s ZEV requirement for a given model year that may be satisfied with TZEVs or credit from such vehicles may not exceed the percentages permitted under subdivision 1962. 2 (b) (2):

(No. of ZEV credits required to be generated for the model year)

– (Amount of credits submitted for compliance for the model year)

(h) **Test Procedures**

.
(1) **Determining Compliance**

. The certification requirements and test procedures for det ermining compliance with this section 1962. 2 are set forth in "California Exhaust Emission Standa rds and Test Procedures for 2018 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the Passenger Car, Light

- Duty Truck and Medium

- Du ty Vehicle Classes," adopted by the state board on [insert date here] , and last amended [insert date here] , which is incorporated herein by reference.

(2) **NEV Compliance.** The test procedures for determining compliance with subdivision 1962.2 (d)(5)(F)1. are set forth in ETA

- NTP002 ( revision 3) “Implementation of SAE Standard J1666 May 93: Electric Vehicle Acceleration, Gradeability, and Deceleration Test Procedure” adopted on D ecember 1, 2004, and ETA

- NTP004 (revision 2) “Electric Vehicle Constant Spe ed Range Tests” adopted on February 1, 2008 Decemb er 1, 2004

.Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (i) **ZEV**

**- Specific Definitions.**  The following definitions apply to this section 1962. 2

.
(1) “Auxiliary power unit” or “APU” means any device that provides electrical or mechanical energy, me eting the requirements of subdivision 1962.2(c)(2), to a BEVx, after the zero emission range has been fully depleted. A fuel fired heater does not qualify under this definition for an APU.

( 2 ) “Charge depletion range actual ” or “R cda ” means the dista nce achieved by a hybrid electric vehicle on the urban driving cycle at the point when the zero emission energy storage device is depleted of off

- vehicle charge and regenerative braking derived energy.

(3 ) “Discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits” means credi ts earned under section 1962 and 1962.1 by delivery for sale of PZEVs and AT PZEVs, discounted according to subdivision 1962.1 (g)(2)(F).

(4 ) “ Ener gy storage device” mean s a storage device able to provide the minimum power and energy storage capability to enable engine stop/start capability, traction boost, regenerative braking, and (nominal) charge sustaining mode driving capability. In the case of TZEVs , a minimum range threshold relative to certified, new

vehicle range capability is not specified or req uired.

(5 ) “Hydrogen fuel cell vehicle ” means a ZEV that is fueled primarily by hydrogen , but may also have off

- vehicle charge capability

.
( 6 ) “Hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicle” means a TZEV that is fueled exclusively by hydrogen.

( 7 ) “Majority ownership s ituations” means when one manufacturer owns another manufacturer more than 33.4%, for determination of size under CCR Section 1900.

(8 ) “Manufacturer US PC and LDT Sales” means a manufacturer’s total passenger car and light duty truck (up to 8,500 pounds loaded vehicle weight) sales sold in the United States of America in a given model year

.
( 9 ) “Neighborhood electric vehicle ” or “NEV” means a motor vehicle that meets the definition of Low

- Speed Vehicle either in section 385.5 of the Vehicle Code or in 49 CFR 571.500 (as it existed on July 1, 2000), and is certified to zero

- emission vehicle standards.

(1 0 ) “Placed in service” means having been sold or leased to an end

- user and not to a dealer or other distribution cha in entity, and having been individually registered for on

- road use by the California DMV

.Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (11) “Proportional value” means the ratio of a manufacturer’s California applicable sales volume to the manufacturer’s Section 177 state applicable sales vome. I n any given model year, the same applicable sales volume calculation method must be used to calculate proportional value.

(1 2 ) “Range Extended Battery Electric Vehicle” or “BEVx” means a vehicle powered predominantly by a zero emission energy storage device, able to drive the vehicle for more than 75 all

- electric miles, and also equipped with a backup APU, which does not operate until the energy storage device is fully depleted, and meeting requirements in subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)( G ).

(13 ) “Section 177 state” means a state that is administering the California ZEV requirements pursuant to section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7507)

.
(14 ) “Transitional zero emission v ehicle” or “TZEV” means a vehicle that meet the all criteria of su bdivision 1962.2(c)(2) and qualifies for an allowance in subdivision 1962.2(c)(3)(D) or (E).

(1 5 ) “Zero emission vehicle” or “ZEV” means a vehicle that produce s zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant) or greenhouse gas under any possible operational modes or conditions.

( 1 6 ) “Z ero emission vehicle fuel” means a fuel that provides traction energy in

on

- road ZEVs. Examples of current technology ZEV fuels include electricity, hydrogen, and compressed air.

(j) **Abbreviations.** The following abbreviations are used in this section 1962. 2 :

“AER” means all

- electric range. “APU” means auxiliary power unit. “AT PZEV” means advanced technology partial zero

- emission vehicle. “BEVx” means range extended battery electr ic vehicle. “CFR” means Code of Federal Regulations. “CO 2 ” means carbon dioxide

. “DMV” means the California Department of Motor Vehicles. “EAER” means equivalent all electric range. “EAER u40 ” means the equivalent all

- electric range that a 40 mile R cda plug

- in hybrid electric vehicle achieves. “FR” means Federal Register. “g” means grams. “HEV” means hybrid

- electric vehicle. “LDT” means light

- duty truck. “LDT1” means a light

- truck with a loaded vehicle weight of 0

- 3750 pounds.Proposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 “LDT2” means a “LEV II” ligh t

- duty truck with a loaded vehicle weight of 3751 pounds to a gross vehicle weight of 8500 pounds, or a “LEV I” light

- duty truck with a loaded vehicle weight of 3751

- 5750 pounds. “LVM” means large volume manufacturer. “MDV” means medium

- duty vehicle. “NMOG ” means non

- methane organic gases, or the total mass of oxygenated and non

- oxygenated hydrocarbon emissions.

“ NEV” means neighborhood electric vehicle. “NOx” means oxides of nitrogen. “PC” means passenger car. “PZEV” m eans partial allowance zero

- emission v ehicle “R cd a ” means charge depletion actual range (urban Cycle)

. “SAE” means Society of Automotive Engineers. “SULEV” means super

- ultra

- low

- emission

- vehicle. “TZEV” means transitional zero emission vehicle. “UDDS” means urban dynamometer driving cycle

. “UF ” means utility factor. “US” means United States of America. “US06” means the US06 Supplemental Federal Test Procedure “VMT” means vehicle miles traveled. “ZEV” means zero

- emission vehicle.

(k) **Severability.** Each provision of this section is severable , and in the event that any provision of this section is held to be invalid, the remainder of this article remains in full force and effect.

(l) **Public Disclosure.** Records in the Board’s possession for the vehicles subject to the requirements of sectio n 1962. 2 shall be subject to disclosure as public records as follows:

(1) Each manufacturer’s annual production data and the corresponding credits per vehicle earned for ZEVs and TZEVs for the 2018 and subsequent model years; and

(2) Each manufacturer ’s a nnual c redit balances for 2018 and subsequent years for:

(A) Each type of vehicle: ZEV (minus NEV ), BEVx, NEV

, TZEV , and discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits ; and

(B) Advanced technology demonstration programs; and

(C) Transportation systems; andProposed §1962.2 A

- 3

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (D) Credits earned un der section 1962 .2 (d)(5)(A ) , including credits acquired from , or transferred to another party , and the parties themselves

.

Note: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 3 8562, 39002, 39003, 39667, 43000, 43009.5, 43013, 43018 , 43018.5

, 43100, 43101, 43101.5, 43102, 43104, 43105, 43106, 43107, 43204, and 43205.5, Health and Safety Code.Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 

### APPENDIX A

- 4

PROPOSED

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR 2018 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL ZERO

- EMISSION VEHICLES AND HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES, IN THE PASSENGER CAR, LIGHT

- DUTY TRUCK AND MEDIUM

- DUTY VEHICLE CLASSES

Adopted: [insert date here]

[ Note: Set forth below are the 2012 amendments to the California zero emission vehicle (ZEV) regulation

. This is a newly adopted test procedure

, shown without underline as permitted by California Code of Regulations, title 1, section 8. ]Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 NOTE: This document is incorporated by reference in section 1962

. 2 , title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR). Additional requirements necessary to complet e an application for certification of zero

- emission vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles are contained in other documents that are designed to be used in conjunction with this document. These other documents include:

1. “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles” (incorporated by reference in section 1961(d), title 13, CCR);

2. “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2 001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” (incorporated by reference in section 1976(c), title 13, CCR);

3. “California Refueling Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” (incorporated by reference in section 1978(b), title 13, CCR);

4. OBD II (section 1968, et seq. title 13, CCR, as applicable);

5

. “California Environmental Performance Label Specifications for 2009 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Passenger Vehicle s” (incorporated by reference in 1965, title 13, CCR);

6

. Warranty Requirements (sections 2037 and 2038, title 13, CCR);

7

. “Specifications for Fill Pipes and Openings of Motor Vehicle Fuel Tanks” (incorporated by reference in section 2235, title 13, CCR );

8

. Guidelines for Certification of Federally Certified Light

- Duty Motor Vehicles for Sale in California (incorporated by section 1960.5, title 13, CCR); and

9

. “California Non

- Methane Organic Gas Test Procedures,” (incorporated by reference in sectio n 1961(d), title 13, CCR).Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page No.

A. Applicability

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 1 B. Definitions and Terminology.

................................ ................................ ............... 1 1. Definitions.

................................ ................................ ................................ . 1 2. Terminology.

................................ ................................ .............................. 5 C. Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards.

................................ ................................ ...... 6 D. Certification Requirements

. ................................ ................................ ................. 1 1. Durability and Emission Testing Requirements.

................................ ........ 1 2. Information Requirements: Application for Ce rtification.

............................ 1 3. ZEV Reporting Requirements.

................................ ................................ ... 3 E. Determination of N EV Acceleration, Top Speed, and Constant Speed Range 1 E F. Test Procedures for 2012 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles (including Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles) and All 2012 and Subsequent Model Hybrid

- Electric Vehicles, Except Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ....... 1

1. Electric D ynamometer.

................................ ................................ ............... 1 2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- In Period.

................................ ......................... 1 3. All

- Electr ic Range Test

................................ ................................ .............. 1 4. Determination of Battery Specific Energy for ZEVs.

................................ .. 4 5. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater for Vehicles Other Than ZEVs.

................................ ................................ ................................ 4 6. Urba n

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 5 7. Highway Emission Test Provisions

................................ .......................... 11 8. SFTP Emission Test Provi sions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 13 9. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances

................................ ................. 18 F G. Test Procedures for 2012 and Subsequent Model Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ...................... 1

1. Electric Dynamometer.

................................ ................................ ............... 1 2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- In Period.

................................ ......................... 1 3. General Testing Requirements.

................................ ................................ . 1 4. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater.

........................... 2 5. Urban Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 2 6. Highway Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 11 7. SFTP Emission Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Cap able Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ..................... 15 8. 50 o F and 20 o F Test Provision for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ..................... 20 9. Additional Provisions.

................................ ................................ ............... 22Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 10. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances.

................................ ................ 23 11. Calculations

– Equivalent All

- Electric Range for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

................................ ............................ 25 G H. Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Exhaust Emission Test Sequence.

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 1 H I. Examp les of Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Terminology.

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 1 I J. Test Procedures for 2009 through 2011 Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid

- Electri c Vehicles.

................................ ................................ ...................... 1 K. Advanced Technology Demonstration Program data requirements.

.................. 2 1. Project Description

................................ ................................ ........................... 2 2. Vehicle data

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 2 3. Vehicle specifications

................................ ................................ ....................... 2 4. Fast refueling capability

................................ .... Error! Bookmark not defined.A

- 4

- A

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27

, 201 2

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR 2018 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL ZERO

- EMISSION VEHICLES AND HYBRID ELECTRIC VEHICLES, IN THE PASSENGER CAR, LIGHT

- DUTY TRUCK AND MEDIUM

- DUTY VEHICLE CLASSES

A. Applicability

The emission standards and test procedures in this document are applicable to 2018 and subsequent model

- year zero

- emission passenger cars, light

- duty trucks

, and medium

- duty vehicles, and 2018 and subsequent model

- year hybrid electric passenger cars, light

- duty trucks

, and medium

- duty vehicles. The general procedures and requirements necessa ry to certify a vehicle for sale in California are contained in the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicles” (hereinafter “LDV/MDV TPs”), and apply except as amended herein.A

- 4

- B

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 B. Definitions and Terminology

.

1. Definitions

.
In addition to the following, these test procedures incorporate by reference the definitions and abbreviations set forth in the Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §86.1803

- 01, the definitions and abbreviations set forth in the LDV/MDV TPs, and the definitions set forth in section 190 0, title 13, CCR.

“Advanced technology PZEV” or “AT PZEV” means any PZEV with an allowance greater than 0.2 before application of the PZEV early introduction phase

- in multiplier. “All

- Electric Range” or “AER” means the total miles driven electrically (with the engine off) before the engine turns on for the first time, after the battery has been fully charged. “All

- Electric Range (AER) Test” means a test sequence used to determine the range of an electric veh icle or of a hybrid electric vehicle without the use of its auxiliary power unit. The All

- Electric Range Test cycle consists of the Highway Fuel Economy Schedule and the Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (see section E of these test procedures). “Alterna te C ontinuous Urban T est S chedule” means a series of the following sequence: UDDS, 10 minute key

- off hot soak, UDDS, and 10

- 20 minute key

- off hot soak. This alternate procedure may be substituted for the Continuous Urban Test Schedule when the Continuous Urban Test Schedule cannot be performed. “Alternate C ontinuous H ighway T est S chedule” means a series of the following sequence: HFEDS, 15 second key

- on pause, HFEDS, and 10

- 20 minute key

off hot soak or a 15 second key

- on pause . This alternate procedure ma y be substituted for the Continuous Highway Test Schedule when the Continuous Highway Test Schedule cannot be performed. “Auxiliary power unit” or “APU” means a device that converts consumable fuel energy into mechanical or electrical energy. Some examples of auxiliary power units are internal combustion engines, gas turbines, or fuel cells. For the purposes of range extended battery electric vehicles, auxiliary power unit means any device that provides electrical or mechanical energy, meeting the requi rements of subdivision C.3.2, to a BEV x, after the zero emission range has been fully depleted. A fuel fired heater does not qualify under this definiti on for an APU. “Battery electric vehicle” or “BEV” means any vehicle that operates solely by use of a battery or battery pack, or that is powered primarily through the use of an electric battery or battery pack but uses a flywheel or capacitor that stor es energy produced by the electric motor or through regenerative braking to assist in vehicle operation. “Battery or Battery pack” means any electrical energy storage device consisting of any number of individual battery modules or cells that is used to p ropel a battery electric or hybrid electric vehicle. These terms may also generically refer to capacitor and flywheel energy storage devices in the context of hybrid electric vehicles.A

- 4

- B

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 “Battery state

- of

- charge” means the quantity of electrical energy remaining in the battery relative to the maximum rated capacity of the battery expressed in percent. “Blended off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle” means an off

vehicle charge capable hybrid electric v ehicle that uses the engine to supplement battery/electric motor power during charge depleting operation. “Blended operation mode” means an operating mode in which the energy storage state

- of

- charge decreases, on average, while the vehicle is driven and th e engine is used occasionally to support power requests. “Charge

- depleting net energy consumption” means the net electrical energy, E cd , measured in watt

- hours consumed by vehicle over the charge depleting cycle range, R cdc . E cd can be expressed as AC or DC watt hours, where appropriate. “Charge

- depleting (CD) mode” means an operating mode in which the energy storage state

- of

- charge (SOC) may fluctuate but, on average, decreases while the vehicle is driven. Hybrid electric vehicles are required to be clas sified as either charge

sustaining or charge

- depleting over each driving cycle (i.e. UDDS, HFEDS, US06, or SC03). “Charge depleting actual range ” or “ R cda ” means the distance traveled on the Urban Charge Depleting Test Procedure at which the state

- of

- charge is first equal to the average state

- of

- charge of the two consecutive UDDS used to end the Urban Charge Depleting Test Procedure. This range must be repor ted to the nearest 0.1 miles. (See section F.11.9.) “Charge depleting actual range, highway ” or “ R cdah ” means the distance traveled on the Highway Charge Depleting Test Procedure at which the state

- of

- charge is first equal to the average state

- of

- charge o f the HFEDS used to end the Highway Charge Depleting Test Procedure. This range must be reported to the nearest 0.1 miles. “Charge depleting cycle range ” or “ R cdc ” means the distance traveled on the Urban or Highway Charge Depleting Procedure up to the test cycle prior to where the
state

- of

- charge is above the lower bound state

- of

- charge tolerance for one test cycle. This range will appear as the sum of a discrete number of test cycle distances. This range shall be reported to the nearest 0.1 miles. (S ee section F.11.8.) “Charge

- sustaining net energy consumption” means the net electrical energy, Ecs, measured in watt

- hours consumed by vehicle during charge sustaining operation. For charge sustaining operation, this number should be ~ 0. “Charge

- sustain ing (CS) mode” means an operating mode in which the energy storage SOC may fluctuate but, on average, is maintained at a certain level while the vehicle is driven. Hybrid electric vehicles are required to be classified as either charge

sustaining or charge

- depleting over each driving cycle (i.e. UDDS, HFEDS, US06, or SC03). “Consumable fuel” means any solid, liquid, or gaseous matter that releases energy when consumed by an auxiliary power unit. “Continuous Urban Test Schedule” means a repeated series com prised of an Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedules (UDDS), 40 CFR, Part 86, Appendix I, which is incorporated herein by reference; each test is followed by a 10 minute key

- off soak period. “Continuous Highway Test Schedule” means a repeated series comprised ofA

- 4

- B

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 four consecutive key

- on Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedules (HFEDS) with a 15 second key

- on pause in

- between each HFEDS. If this schedule cannot be performed continuously, a key

- off soak up to 30 minutes is permitted after every fourth HFEDS. “Conti nuous US06 Test Schedule” means a repeated series of US06 driving schedules (US06) with a key

- on idle period of not less than one minute and not greater than two minutes between each US06. “Electric drive system” means an electric motor and associated powe r electronics, which provide acceleration torque to the drive wheels sometime during normal vehicle operation. This does not include components that could act as a motor, but are configured to act only as a generator or engine starter in a particular vehic le application. “Electric range fraction” means the fraction of electrical energy derived from off

- vehicle charging and regenerative braking energy relative to total traction energy used over the charge depletion range on a specified drive cycle. “Enhanced AT PZEV” means any model year 2009 through 2011 PZEV that has an allowance of 1.0 or greater per vehicle without multipliers and makes use of a ZEV fuel. Enhanced AT PZEV means Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle. “Equivalent all

- electric range” or “EAER” means the portion of the total charge depleting range attributable to the use of electricity from the battery over the charge depleting range test. “Fuel cell vehicle” or “FCV” means any vehicle that receives propulsion solely from an onboard fuel cell po wer system. “Fuel

- fired heater” means a fuel burning device that creates heat for the purpose of warming the passenger compartment of a vehicle but does not contribute to the propulsion of the vehicle. “Grid

- connected hybrid electric vehicle” means a hybr id electric vehicle that has the capacity for the battery to be recharged from an off

- board source of electricity and has some all

- electric range. “Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule” or “HFEDS” means highway fuel economy driving schedule. See 40 CFR P art 600 §600.109(b). “Hybrid electric vehicle” or “HEV” means any vehicle that can draw propulsion energy from both of the following on

- vehicle sources of stored energy: 1) a consumable fuel and 2) an energy storage device such as a battery, capacitor, or flywheel. “Hybrid fuel cell vehicle” or “HFCV” means any vehicle that receives propulsion energy from both an onboard fuel cell power system and either a battery or a capacitor. “Majority ownership situations” means when one manufacturer owns another manufacturer more than 33.4%, for determination of size under CCR Section 1900. “Manufacturer US PC and LDT Sales” means a manufacturer’s total passenger car and light duty truck (up to 8,500 pounds loaded vehicl e weight) sales sold in the United States of America in a given model year. “Neighborhood Electric Vehicle” or “NEV ” means a motor vehicle that meets the definition of “low

- speed vehicle” either in section 385.5 of the Vehicle Code or in 49 CFR §571.500 (J uly 1, 2000), and is certified to zero

- emission vehicle standards. “NIST” means the National Institute of Standards and Technology.A

- 4

- B

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 “Off

- vehicle charge capable” means having the capability to charge a battery from an off

- vehicle electric energy source that cannot be connected or coupled to the vehicle in any manner while the vehicle is being driven. A grid

- connected hybrid electric vehicle is one example of an o ff

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle. “Placed in service” means having been sold or leased to an end

- user and not just to a dealer or other distribution chain entity, and having been individually registered for on

- road use by the California De partment of Motor Vehicles. “Proportional value” means the ratio of a manufacturer’s California applicable sales volume to the manufacturer’s Section 177 state applicable sales volume. In any given model year, the same applicable sale volume calculation m ethod must be used to calculate proportional value.

“ Partial Zero Emission Vehicle” or “ PZEV” means any vehicle that is delivered for sale in California and that qualifies for a partial ZEV allowance of at least 0.2 , under section 1962.1

. “Range Extended Battery Electric Vehicle” or “BEVx” means a vehicle powered predominantly by a zero emission energy storage device, able to drive the vehicle for more than 75 all

- electric miles, and also equipped with a backup APU, which does not operate until the energy storage device is fully depleted, and meeting
req uirements in subdivision C.4.5(g ), “Regenerative braking” means the partial recovery of the energy normally dissipated into friction braking that is returned as electrical current to an energy storage devic e. “SAE J2572” means the “Recommended Practice for Measuring Fuel Consumption and Range of Fuel Cell and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles Fuelled by Compressed Gaseous Hydrogen

, ” as published by the Society of Automotive Engineers in October , 2008. “Section 177 S tate” means a state that is administering the California ZEV requirements pursuant to section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7507). “SC03” means the U.S. EPA SC03 driving schedule representing vehicle operation with air conditioning, as set forth in Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 86. “S tate of Charge (S OC ) Net Change Tolerance” means the state

- of

- charge net change tolerance that is applied to the SOC Criterion for charge

- sustaining hybrid electric vehicles when validating an emission test. See section E.9 and F.10 of these procedures for tolerance specifications. “S tate of Char ge (S OC ) Criterion” means the state

- of

- charge criterion that is applied to a charge

- sustaining hybrid electric vehicle to validate an emission test. The SOC Criterion requires that no net change in battery energy occurs over a given test cycle, i.e. the f inal battery state

- of

- charge that is recorded at the end of the emission test must be equivalent to the initial battery state

- of

- charge that is set at the beginning of the emission test. The SOC Net Change Tolerance shall be applied to the SOC Criterion. “Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle” or “TZEV” means a PZEV that has an allowance of 1.0 or greater, and makes use of a ZEV fuel. “US06” means the US06 driving schedule for aggressive driving as set forth in Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 86.A

- 4

- B

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 “UDDS” means urban dynamometer driving schedule as set forth Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 86. “Zero

- emission vehicle” or “ ZEV” means a vehicle that produce s zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant) or greenhouse gas under any possible oper ational modes or conditions. “Zero

- emission Vehicle Miles Traveled” or “ zero emission VMT” means the vehicle miles traveled with zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant). “ZEV fuel” means a fuel that provides traction energy in on

- road ZEVs. Examples of current technology ZEV fuels include electricity, hydrogen, and compressed air.

2. Terminology.

Abbreviation Units Charge Depleting Actual Range (urban cycle) R cda mi Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range R cdcs mi Charge Depleting Net Energy Consumption E cd wh Charge Depleting CO 2 Produced M cd g/mi Charge Sustaining CO 2 Produced M cs g/mi Highway Charge Depleting Actual Range R cdah mi Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range R cdch mi Highway Electric Range Fraction ERF h % Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range EAER h mi Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption EAEREC h wh/mi

Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range R cdcu mi Urban Electric Range Fraction ERF u % Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range EAER u mi Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range scaled to 40 mi limit EAER u40 mi

Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption EAEREC u wh/miA

- 4

- C

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 C. Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards.

1. ZEV Emission Standard. The Executive Officer shall certify new 2018 and subsequent passenger cars, light

- duty trucks and medium

- duty vehicles as ZEVs if the vehicles produce zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant) under any and all possible oper ational modes and conditions.

2. Percentage ZEV Requirements

2.1 General Percentage ZEV Requirement.

(a) Basic Requirement. The minimum percentage ZEV requirement for each manufacturer is listed in the table below as the percentage of the PCs and LD T1s, and LDT2s to the extent required by subdivision C.2.2(c), produced by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that must be ZEVs, subject to the conditions in subdivision C.2.2. The ZEV requirement will be based on the annual NMOG produc tion report for the appropriate model year.

Model Year Credit Percentage Requirement 2018 4.5% 2019 7.0% 2020 9.5% 2021 12.0% 2022 14.5% 2023 17.0% 2024 19.5% 2025 and subsequent 22.0%

(b) Calculating the Number of Vehicles to Which the Percentage ZEV Requirement is Applied. For 2018 and subsequent model years, a manufacturer’s production volume for the given model year will be based on the three

- year average of the manufacturer’s volume of PCs and LDTs, produced and delivered for sale in California in the prior second, third, and fourth model year [for example, 2019 model year ZEV requirements will be based on California production volume average of PCs and LDTs for the 2015 to 2017 model years]. This production averaging is used to determine ZEV requirements only, and has no effect on a manufacturer’s size determination (eg. three

- year average calculation method). In applying the ZEV requirement, a PC or LDT, that is produced by one manufacturer (e.g., Manufacturer A), but is marketed in California by another manufacturer (e.g., Manufac turer B) under the other manufacturer’s (Manufacturer B) nameplate, shall be treated as having been produced by the marketing manufacturer (i.e., Manufacturer B). ( 1) [Reserved]

(2) [Reserved]

(3) A manufacturer may apply to the Executive Officer to be permittedA

- 4

- C

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 to base its ZEV obl igation on the number of PCs and LDT s, produced by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that same model year (ie, same model

year calculation method) as an alternative to t he three

- year averaging of prior year production described above, for up to two model years, total, between model year 2018 and model year 2025. For the same model

- year calculation method to be allowed, a manufacturer’s application to the Executive Office r must show that their volume of PCs and LDTs produced and delivered for sale in California has decreased by 40 percent from the previous year due to circumstances that were unforeseeable and beyond their control.

(c) [R eserved ]

(d) Exclusion of ZEV s in Determining a Manufacturer’s Sales Volume. In calculating a manufacturer’s applicable sales, using either method described in subdivision C.2.1(b)

, a manufacturer shall excl ude the number of NEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the m anufacturer itself , or by a subsidiary in which the manufacturer has more than 33.4% percent ownership interest.

2.2 Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers.

(a) [R eserved ]

(b) [R eserved ]

(c) [R eserved ]

(d) [R eserved ]

(e) Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in 2018 and through 2025 Model Years. LVMs must produce credits from ZEVs equal to minimum ZEV floor percentage requirement, as enumerated below. Manufacturers may fulfill the remaining ZEV requirement with credits from TZEVs, as en umerated below.

Model Years Total ZEV Percent Requirement Minimum ZEV floor TZEVs

2018 4.5% 2.0% 2.5%
2019 7.0% 4.0% 3.0%
2020 9.5% 6.0% 3.5%
2021 12.0% 8.0% 4.0%
2022 14.5% 10.0% 4.5%
2023 17.0% 12.0% 5.0%
2024 19.5% 14.0% 5.5%
2025 22.0% 16.0% 6.0%A

- 4

- C

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (f) Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in Model Year 2026 and Subsequent. In 2026 and subsequent model years, a manufacturer must meet a total ZEV credit percentage of 22%. The maximum portion of a manufacturer’s credit percentage requirement that may be satisfied by TZEV credits is limited to 6% of the manufacturer’s applicable California PC and LDT production volume. ZEV credits must satisfy the remaind er of the manufacturer’s requirement.

2.3 Requirements for Intermediate Volume Manufacturers. For 2018 and subsequent model years, an intermediate volume manufacturer may meet all of its ZEV credit percentage requirement, under subdivision C.2, with cred its from TZEV.

2.4 Requirements for Small Volume Manufacturers and Independent Low Volume Manufacturers. A small volume manufacturer is not required to meet the ZEV credit percentage requirements. However, a small volume manufacturer may earn, bank, ma rket, and trade credits for the ZEVs and TZEVs it produces and delivers for sale in California.

2.5 **[Reserved]**

2.6 **[Reserved]**

2.7 Changes in Small Volume, Independent Low Volume, and Intermediate Volume Manufacturer Status.

(a) Increases in California Production Volume. In 2018 and subsequent model years, if a small volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 4,500 units of new PCs, LDTs, and MDVs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years (i.e., total production volume exceeds 13,500 vehicles in a three

- year period), for three consecutive averages, the manufacturer shall no longer be treated as a small volume manufacturer, and must comply with the ZEV requirements for intermediate volume manufacturers beginning with the next model year after the last model year of the third consecutive average. For example, if (a small volume) Manufacturer A exceeds 4,500 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs for their 2018

– 20 20, 2019

– 2021, and 2020

– 2022 model year averages, Manufacturer A would be subject to intermediate volume requirements starting in 2023 model year.

If an intermediate volume manufacturer’s average California production volume exceeds 20,000 units of ne w PCs, LDTs, and MDVs based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years (i.e., total production volume exceeds 60,000 vehicles in a three

- year period), for three consecutive averages, the manufacturer shall no longer be treated as an intermediate volume manufacturer and shall comply with the ZEV requirements for large volume manufacturers beginning with the next model year after the last modelA

- 4

- C

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 year of the third consecutive average. For ex ample, if (an intermediate volume) Manufacturer B exceeds 20,000 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs for its 2018

– 2020, 2019

– 2021, and 2020

– 2022 average, Manufacturer B would be subject to large volume manufacturer requirements starting in 2023 model year.

Any new requirement described in the this subdivision will begin with the next model year after the last model year of the third consecutive average when a manufacturer ceases to be a small or intermediate volume manufacturer in 2018 or subsequent years due to the aggregation requirements in majority ownership situations.

(b) Decreases in California Production Volume. If a manufacturer’s average California production volume falls below 4,500 or 20,000 units of new PCs, LDT1 and 2s, and MDVs, based on the average number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale for the three previous consecutive model years, for three consecutive averages, the manufacturer shall be treated as a small volume or intermediate volume manufacturer, as applicable, and shall be subject to the requirements for a small volume or intermediate volume manufacturer beginning with the next model year. For example, if Manufacturer C falls below 20,000 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs for its 2019

– 2021, 2020

– 2022, and 2021

– 2023 averages, Manufacturer C would be subject to IVM requirements starting in 2024 model year.

(c) Calculating California Production Volume in Change of Ownership Situations. Where a manufacturer experiences a change in ownership in a particular model year, the change will affect application of the aggregation requirements on the manufacturer starting with the next model year. When a manufacturer is simultaneously producing two model years of vehicles at the time of a change of ownership, the basis of determining next model year must be the earlier model year. The manufacturer’s small or intermediate volume manufacturer status for the next model year shall be based on the average California production volume in the three previous consecutive model years of those manufacturers who se production volumes must be aggregated for that next model year. For example, where a change of ownership during the 2019 calendar year occurs and the manufacturer is producing both 2019 and 2020 model year vehicles results in a requirement that the pro duction volume of Manufacturer A be aggregated with the production volume of Manufacturer B, Manufacturer A’s status for the 2020 model year will be based on the production volumes of Manufacturers A and B in the 2017

– 2019 model years. Where the product ion volume of Manufacturer A must be aggregated with the production volumes of Manufacturers B and C for the 2019 model year, and during that model year a change in ownership eliminates the requirement that Manufacturer B’s production volume be aggregated with Manufacturer A’s, Manufacturer A’s status for the 2020 model year will be based on the production volumes of Manufacturers A and C in the 2017

– 2019 model years. In either case, the lead time provisions in subdivisions 1962.2(b)(7)(A) and (B) will a pply.A

- 4

- C

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 3. Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles (TZEV).

3.1 Introduction

. This subdivision C.3 sets forth the criteria for identifying vehicles deliv ered for sale in California as T ZEVs.

3.2 TZEV Requirements

. In order for a vehicle to be eligible to receive a ZEV allowance, the manufacturer must demonstrate compliance with all of the following requirements:

(a) SULEV Standards. Certify the vehicle to the 150,000

- mile SULEV 20 or 30 exhaust emission standards for PCs and LDTs in subdivision 1961.2(a)(1). Bi

- fuel, fuel flexible and dual

- fuel vehicles must certify to the applicable 150,000

- mile SULEV 20 or 30 exhaust emission stand ards when operating on both fuels;

(b) Evaporative Emissions. Certify the vehicle to the evaporative emission standards in subdivision 1976(b)(1)(G) ;

(c) OBD. Certify that the vehicle will meet the applicable on

- board diagnostic requirements in sections 1968.1 or 1968.2, as applicable, for 150,000 miles; and

(d) Extended Warranty. Extend the performance and defects warranty period set forth in subdivisions 2037(b)(2) and 2038(b)(2) to 15 years or 150,000 miles, whichever occurs first, except that the t ime period is to be 10 years for a zero emission energy storage device used for traction power (such as a battery, ultracapacitor, or other electric storage device).

3.3 Allowances for TZEV s

.
(a) Zero Emission Vehicle Miles Traveled TZEV Allowance Calculation. A vehicle that meets the requirements of subdivision C.3.2 and has zero

- emission vehicle miles traveled (VMT), as d efined by and calculated by this test procedure and measured

as all electric R cda capability will generate allowance according to the following equation:

UDDS Test Cycle Range (R cda ) Allowance

<10 all electric miles 0.0

≥ 10 miles range TZEV Credit = [(0.01) * R cda + 0.3] >80 miles (credit cap) 1.3

(1) Allowance for US06 Capability. TZEVs with US06 all electric range capability (R cda ) of at least 10 miles shall earn an additional 0.2 allowance

. US06 test cycle range capability shall be determined in accordance with section E.8 of these test procedures.A

- 4

- C

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (B) [Reserved]

(C) [Reserved]

(D) [Reserved]

(e) Credit Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles. A hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicle that meets the requirements of subdivision C.3.2 and has a total range of at least 250 UDDS miles will earn an allowance of 0.75, which may be in addition to allowances earned in subdivision C.3.3(a), and subject to an overall credit cap of 1.25

4. Qualification for Credits From ZEVs.

4.1 **[Reserved]**

4.2 **[Reserved]**

4.3 **[Reserved]**

4.4 **[Reserved]**

4. 5 C redits for 2018 and Subsequent Model Years.

(a) ZEV Credit Calculations

. Credits from a ZEV delivered for sale are based on the ZEV’s UDDS all electric range, de termined in accordance with these test procedures using the following equation:

ZEV Credit = (0.01) * (UDDS range) + 0.5

(1) A ZEV with less than 50 miles UDDS range will receive zero credits.

(2) Credits earned under this provision C.4.5(a) are be capped at 4 credits per ZEV.

(b) [Reserved]

(c ) [Reserved]

(d ) [Reserved]

(e) Counting Specified ZEVs Placed in Service in a Section 177 State and in California. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles that are certified to the California ZEV standards applicable for the ZEV’s model year, delivered for sale and placed in service in California or in a section 177 state, may be counted towards compliance in CaliforniaA

- 4

- C

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 and in all section 177 states with the percentage ZEV requirements in subdivision C.2. The credits earned are multiplied by the ratio of a manufacturer’s applicable production volu me for a model year, as specified in subdivision C.2.1(b), in the state receiving credit to the manufacturer’s applicable production volume as specified in subdivision C.2.1(b), for the same model year in California(hereafter, “proportional value”). Credi ts generated from ZEV placement in a section 177 state will be earned at the proportional value in the section 177 state, and earned in California at the full value specified in subdivision C.4.5(a).

(f ) NEVs

. NEVs must meet the following to be eligible for 0.15 credits:

(1) Specifications. A NEV earns credit when it meets all the following specifications:

(A) Acceleration. The vehicle has a 0

- 20 mph acceleration of 6.0 seconds or less when operating with a payload of 332 pounds and starting with the b attery at a 50% state of charge.

(B) Top Speed. The vehicle has a minimum top speed of 20 mph when operating with a payload of 332 pounds and starting with the battery at a 50% state of charge. The vehicle’s top speed shall not exceed 25 mph when t ested in accordance with 49 CFR 571.500 (68 FR 43972, July 25, 2003).

(C) Constant Speed Range. The vehicle has a minimum 25 mile range when operating at constant top speed with a payload of 332 pounds and starting with the battery at 100% state of charge.

(2) Battery Requirement . A qualifying NEV must be equipped with sealed, maintenance

- free batteries.

(3) Warranty Requirement

. A NEV drive train, including battery packs, must be covered for a period of at least 24 months. The first 6 months of the NEV warranty period must be covered by a full warranty; the remaining warranty period may be optional extended warranties (available for purchase) and may be prorated. If the extended warranty is prorated, the percentage of the battery pack's origi nal value to be covered or refunded must be at least as high as the percentage of the prorated coverage period still remaining. For the purpose of this computation, the age of the battery pack must be expressed in intervals no larger than three months. A lternatively, a manufacturer may cover 50 percent of the original value of the battery pack for the full period of the extended warranty.

Prior to allowance approval, the Executive Officer may request that the manufacturer provide copies of representative vehicle and battery warranties.

(5) NEV Charging Requirements

. A NEV must meet charging connection standard portion of the requirements specified in subdivision 1962.3(c)(2).A

- 4

- C

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (g) BEVx

. A BEVx must meet the following in order to receiv e credit, based on its zero emission UDDS range, through subdivision C.4.5(a):

( 1 ) Emissions Requirements. BEVxs must meet all TZEV requirements, specified in subdivision C.3.2 (a) through (d).

(2) APU Operation. The vehicle’s UDDS range after the APU first starts and enters “charge sustaining hybrid operation” must be less than or equal to the vehicle’s UDDS all

- electric test range prior to APU start. The vehicle’s APU cannot start under
any user

- selectable drivin g mode unless the energy storage system used for traction
power is fully depleted.

(3) Minimum Zero Emission Range Requirements. BEVxs must have a minimum of 80 miles UDDS zero emission range.

5. [Reserved]

6. [Reserved]

7. Generation and Use of Z EV Credits; Calculation of Penalties

7.1 Introduction. A manufacturer that produces and delivers for sale in California ZEVs or TZEVs in a given model year exceeding the manufacturer’s ZEV requirement set forth in subdivision C.2 shall earn ZEV credits in accordance with this subdivision C.2.

7.2 ZEV Credit Calculations.

(a) Credits from ZEVs

. The amount of credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from ZEVs shall be expressed in units of credits, and shall be equal to the number of credits from ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California that the manufacturer applies towards meeting the ZEV requirements for the model year subtracted from the number of ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer in the model year.

(b) Credits from T ZEVs. The amount of credits earned by a manufacturer in a given model year from TZEVs shall be expressed in units of credits, and shall be equal to the total number of TZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California that the manufacturer applies towards meeting its ZEV requirement for the model year subtracted from the total number of ZEV allowances from TZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer in the model year.

(c) Separate Credit Accounts. Credits from a manufacturer’s ZEVs, BEVxs, TZEVs, and NEVs shall each be maintained in separ ate accounts.A

- 4

- C

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (d) Rounding Credits. ZEV credits and debits shall be rounded to the nearest 1/100 th only on the final credit and debit totals using the conventional rounding method.

7.3 ZEV Credits for MDVs and LDTs Other Than LDT1s

. Credits from ZEVs and TZEVs classified as MDVs, may be counted toward the ZEV requirement for PCs and LDTs, and included in the calculation of ZEV credits as specified in this subdivision C.7 if the manufacturer so specifies.

7.4 ZEV Credits for Advanced Technology Demonst ration Programs

.
(a) [Reserved]

(b) ZEVs. ZEVs, including BEVxs, excluding NEVs, placed in a small or intermediate volume manufacturer’s California advanced technology demonstration program for a period of two or more years, may earn ZEV credits even if the vehicle is not “delivered for sale” or r egistered with the California DMV. To earn such credits, the manufacturer must demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive Officer that the vehicles will be regularly used in applications appropriate to evaluate issues related to safety, i nfrastructure, fuel specifications or public education, and that for 50 percent or more of the first two years of placement the vehicle will be operated in California. Such a vehicle is eligible to receive the same credit that it would have earned if deli vered for sale, and for fuel cell vehicles, placed in service. To determine vehicle credit, the model year designation for a demonstration vehicle shall be consistent with the model year designation for conventional vehicles placed in the same timeframe. Manufacturers may earn credit for up to 25 vehicles per model, per section 177 state, per year under this

7.5 ZEV Credits for Transportation Systems

.
(a) [Reserved]

(b) [Reserved]

(c) Cap on Use of Transportation System Credits.

(1) ZEVs. Transpor tation system credits earned or allocated by ZEVs or BEVxs pursuant to subdivision 1962.1 (g)(5), not including any credits earned by the vehicle itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation in any given model year, an d may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV obligation which must be met with ZEVs, as specified in subdivision C.2.2(e). Manufacturers may not use transportation system credits earned by ZEVs to comply with requirements specified in subdivision C.4.5(f).

(2) TZEVs

. Transportation system credits earned or allocated by TZEVs pursuant to subdivision 1962.1(g)(5), not including all credits earned by the vehicleA

- 4

- C

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 itself, may be used to satisfy up to one

- tenth of a manufacturer’s ZEV oblig ation in any given model year, but may only be used in the same manner as other credits earned by vehicles of that category. Manufacturers may not use transportation system credits earned by TZEVs to comply with requirements specified in subdivision C.4.5 (f).

7.6 Use of ZEV Credits

. A manufacturer may meet the ZEV requirements in a given model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a commensurate amount of ZEV credits, consistent with subdivision C.2. Credits in each of the categories may be used to meet the requirement for that category as well as the requirements for lesser credit earning ZEV categories, but shall not be used to meet the requirement for a greater credit earning ZEV category, except for discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits. For ex ample, credits produced from TZEVs may be used to comply with the portion of the requirement that may be met with credits from TZEV, but not with the portion that must be satisfied with credits from ZEVs. These credits may be earned previously by the manu facturer or acquired from another party.

(a) Use of Discounted PZEV and AT PZEV Credits and NEV Credits For model years 2018 through 2025, discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits, and NEV credits may be used to satisfy up to one

- quarter of the portion of a ma nufacturer’s requirement that can be met with credits from TZEVs. Intermediate volume manufacturers may fulfill their entire requirement with discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits, and NEV credits in model years 2018 and 2019. These credits may be earned
p reviously by the manufacturer or acquired from another party. Discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits may no longer be used after model year 2025 compliance.

(b) Use of BEVx Credits. BEVx credits may be used to satisfy up to 50% of the portion of a manufacturer’s requirement that must be met with ZEV credits.

(c) GHG

- ZEV Over Compliance Credits.

(1) Application

. Manufacturers may apply to the Executive Officer, no later than M ay 1, 2018, to be eligible for this subdivision C.7.6(c) , based on the following qualifications:

(A) A manufacturer must have no model year 2017 compliance debits and no outstanding debits from all previous model year compliance with sections 1961.1 and 1 961.3, and

(B) A manufacturer must have no model year 2017 compliance debits and no outstanding debits from all previous model year compliance with section 1962.1, and

(C) A manufacturer must submit documentation of its projected product plans to show o ver compliance with the manufacturer’s section 1961.3 requirements by at least 2.0 gCO 2 /mile in eachA

- 4

- C

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 model year through the entire 2018 through 2021 model year period.

(2) Credit Generation and Calculation. Manufacturers must calculate their over compliance with section 1961.3 requirements for model years 2018 through 2021 based on compliance with the previous model year standard. For example, to generate credits for this subdivision C.7.6(c) for model yea r 2018, manufacturers would calculate credits based on model year 2017 compliance with section 1961.3.

(A) At least 2.0 gCO 2 /mile over compliance with section 1961.3 is required in each year and the following equation must be used to calculate the amoun t of ZEV credits earned for purposes of this subdivision C.7.6(c) :

[(Manufacturer US PC and LDT Sales) x (gCO 2 /mile below manufacturer GHG standard for a given model year)] / (Manufacturer GHG standard for a given model year)

(B) Credits earned under sec tion 1961.3(b)(9) may not be i ncluded in the calculation of g CO 2 /mile credits for use in the above equation in subdivision (A).

(C) Banked gCO 2 /mile credits earned under 1961.1 and 1961.3 from previous model years or from other manufacturers may not be included in the calculation of gCO 2 /mile credits for use in the above equation in subdivision (A).

(3) Use of GHG

- ZEV Over Compliance Credits . A manufacturer may use no more than the percentage enumerated in the table below to meet either the total ZEV requirement nor the portion of their ZEV requirement that must be met with ZEV credits, with credits earned under this subdivision C.7.6(c)

.

Credits earned in any given model year under this subdivision C.7.6(c) may only be used in the applicable model year and may not be used in any other model year.

Credits calculated under this provision must also be removed from the GHG compliance bank, and cannot be banked for future compliance toward 1961.3.

4. Reporting Requirements. Annually, manufacturers are required to submit calculations of credits for this subdivision C.7.6(c) for the model year, any remaining credits/debits from previous model years under 1961.3, and projected credits/debits for future y ears through 2021 under 1961.3 and this subdivision C.7.6(c)

.

a. If a manufacturer , who has been granted the ability to generate credits under this subdivision C.7.6(c), fails to over comply by at least 2.0 2018 2019 2020 2021 50% 50% 40% 30%A

- 4

- C

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 gCO 2 /mile in any one year, the manufacturer will be subject to the full ZEV requirements for the model year and future model years, and will not be able to earn credits for any other model year under this subdivision C.7.6(c).

7.7 Requirement to Make Up a ZEV Deficit

. (a) General

. A manufacturer t hat produces and delivers for sale in California fewer ZEVs than required in a given model year shall make up the deficit by the next model year by submitting to the Executive Officer a commensurate amount of ZEV credits. The amount of ZEV credits require d to be submitted shall be calculated by [i] adding the number of credits from ZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model year to the number of credits from TZEVs produced and delivered for sale in California by th e manufacturer for the model year (for a LVM, not to exceed that permitted under subdivision C.2.2), and [ii] subtracting that total from the number of credits required to be produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for the model y ear. BEVx, TZEV, NEV, or converted AT PZEV and PZEV credits are not allowed to be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s ZEV deficit; only credits from ZEVs may be used to fulfill a manufacturer’s ZEV deficit.

7.8 **Penalty for Failure to Meet ZEV Requirements.** Any manufacturer that fails to produce and deliver for sale in California the required number of ZEVs and submit an appropriate amount of credits and does not make up ZEV deficits within the specified time allowed by subdivision C.7.7(a) shall be subject to the Health and Safety Code section 43211 civil penalty applicable to a manufacturer that sells a new motor vehicle that does not meet the applicable emission standards adopted by the state board. The cause of action shall be deemed to accrue when the ZEV deficit is not balanced by the end of the specified time allowed by subdivision 1962.2(g)(7)(A). For the purposes of Health and Safety Code section 43211, the number of vehicles not meeting the state board’s standards shall be equal to the manufacture r’s credit deficit, rounded to the
nearest 1/100 th , calculated according to the following equation, provided that the percentage of a manufacturer’s ZEV requirement for a given model year that may be satisfied with TZEVs or credit from such vehicles may no t exceed the percentages permitted under subdivision C.2.2::

(No. of ZEV credits required to be generated for the model year)

– (Amount of credits submitted for compliance for the model year)

8. Severability. Each provision of these standards and test p rocedures is severable, and in the event that any provision of these standards and test procedures is held to be invalid, the remainder of the standards and test procedures remains in full force and effect.

9. Public Disclosure. Records in the Board’s possession for the vehicles subject to the requirements of section C shall be subject to disclosure as public records as follows:A

- 4

- C

- 18
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (a) Each manufacturer’s annual production data and the corresponding credits per vehicle earned for ZEVs (including ZEV type), TZEVs, AT PZEVs, and PZEVs for the 2018 and subsequent model years; and

(b) Each manufacturer’s annual credit balances for 2018 and subsequent years for:

(1) Each type of vehicle: ZEVs (minus NEVs), BEVx, NEV

, TZEV

, and discounted AT PZEV and PZEV credits ; and

(2) Advanced technology demonstration programs; and

(3) Transportation systems; and

(4) Credits earned under section C.4.4(c), including credits acquired from, or transferred to another party , and the parties themselves

.A

- 4

- D

- 1
Date of Release: December 7

, 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 D. Certification Requirements

.

1. Durability and Emission Testing Requirements. All ZEVs , excluding Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles, are exempt from all mileage and service accumulation, durability

- data vehicle, and emission

- data vehicle testing requirements.

2. Information Requirements: Application for Certification. Except as noted below, the Part I (40 CFR §86.1843

- 01(c)) certification application shall include the following:

2.1 Identification and description of the vehicle(s) covered by the application.

2.2 Identification of the vehicle weight category to which the vehicle is certifying: PC, LD T 0

- 3750 lbs. LVW, LDT 3751

- 5750 lbs. LVW, LDT 3751 lbs. LVW

- 8500 lbs. GVW, or MDV (state test weight range), and the curb weight and gross vehicle weight rating of the vehicle.

2.3 Identification and description of the propulsion system for the vehicle

.

2.4 Identification and description of the climate control system used on the vehicle.

2.5 Projected number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale in California, and projected California sales.

2.6 Identification of the energy usage in kilowatt

- hours per mile from: (a) the battery output (DC energy) (to be submitted with the Part II certification application (40 CFR §86.1843

- 01(d)); (b) the point when electricity is introduced from the electrical outlet (AC energy); and (c) the operating range in miles of the vehicle when tested in accordance with the All

- Electric Range Test set forth in section E, below. For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles certifying to section F , the manufacturer shall prov i de the energy usage in kilowatt hours per mile from the Urban Eq uivalent All

Electric Range and the Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range.

2.7 For those vehicles that use fuel

- fired heaters, the manufacturer shall provide: (a) a description of the control system logic of the fuel

- fire d heater, including an evaluation of the conditions under which the fuel

- fired heater can be operated and an evaluation of the possible operational modes and conditions under which evaporative emissions can exist;A

- 4

- D

- 2
Date of Release: December 7

, 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (b) the exhaust emissions value per mile produced by the auxiliary fuel

- fired heater operated between 68 o F and 86 o F; and (c) the test plan which describes the procedure used to determine the mass emissions of the fuel

- fired heater.

2.8 All information necessary for proper and safe operation of the vehicle, including information on the safe handling of the battery system, emergency procedures to follow in the event of battery leakage or other malfunctions that may affect the safety of the vehicle operator or laboratory personnel.

2.9 Method for determining battery state

- of

- charge, battery charging capacity and recharging procedures, and any other relevant information as determined by the Executive Officer.

2.10 Battery specific energy data and calculations as specified in section E.4 of these procedures including the weight of the battery system and the three hour discharge rate (C/3) energy capacity.

2.11 Vehicle and battery break

- in period , and the method used to determine them, as s pecified in section s E.2 and F.2 of these test procedures.

2.12 Labeling shall conform with the requirements specified in section 1965, title 13, CCR and the “California Environmental Performance Label Specifications for 2009 and Subsequent Model Year Pas senger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

Duty Passenger Vehicles” (incorporated by reference therein)

.

2.13 For a ZEV, extended range HEV or PZEV that qualifies to receive one or more multipliers under sections C.3

- C.7, the manufacturer shall provide all information relevant to the vehicle’s qualification for, and the estimated value of, the multiplier(s). The Executive Officer may request additional information needed to appropriately characterize the vehicle. Based on the submitted informat ion and other relevant data, the Executive Officer shall assign to the vehicle the highest multiplier(s) for which the manufacturer has demonstrated the vehicle qualifies at that time.

2.14 When a manufacturer plans to require any scheduled mainte nance for a PZEV before 150,000 miles, the manufacturer must submit information demonstrating the need for each scheduled maintenance item before 150,000 miles, including actual in

- use data, engineering evaluation of the durability of the part, or other re levant information. The manufacturer may require such maintenance for a PZEV only upon the Executive Officer’s determination, prior to certification, the manufacturer has demonstrated the need for the scheduled maintenance; this determination may not

unre asonably be denied.

2.15 For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles certifying to section F , the manufacturer shall provide the Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range, the Urban Charge Depleting Actual Range, the Charge Depleting to Charge Sustai ning UrbanA

- 4

- D

- 3
Date of Release: December 7

, 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Range, the Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range, the Highway Charge Depleting Actual Range, the Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Highway Range, the Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range, the Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range , the Urban El ectric Range Fraction, and the Highway Electric Range Fraction

.

3. ZEV Reporting Requirements. In order to verify the status of each manufacturer’s compliance with the ZEV requirements for a given calendar year, each manufacturer shall submit a report to the Executive Officer at least annually, by May 1 of the calendar year following the close of the model year, that identifies the necessary delivery and placement data of all vehicles generating ZEV credits or allowances, and all transfers and acquisitions of ZEV credits. The manufacturer may update the report by September 1 to cover activities oc curring between April 1 and June 30. If a manufacturer updates their annual California production numbers in their ZEV report, the annual NMOG production must also be updated.A

- 4

- E

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 E. Determination of NEV Acceleration, Top Speed, and Constant Sp eed Range

The acceleration and constant speed range for a NEV shall be determined as specified in “Implementation of SAE Standard J1666 May 93: Electric Vehicle Acceleration, Gradeability, and Deceleration Test Procedure,” ETA

- NTP002 Revision 3, December 2004, and “Electric Vehicle Constant Speed Range Tests,” ETA

- NTP004 Revision 3, February 1, 2008.A

- 4

- F

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 F

. Test Procedures for 201 2 and Subsequent Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles (including Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles ) and All 201 2 and Subsequent Model Hybrid

- Electric Vehicles , Except Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
The “as adopted or amended dates” of the 40 CFR Part 86 regulations referenced by this document are the dates identified in the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicles

. ” Unless otherwise noted, these requirements shall apply to all ZEVs (including fuel cell vehicle s and hybr id fuel cell vehicles ) and all HEVs

, except off

- vehicle charge capable HEVs

. A manufacturer may elect to certify a 2009, 2010, or 2011 model

- year zero

- emission vehicle or hybrid electric vehicle, except an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle, using this section E.

1. Electric Dynamometer. All ZEVs and HEVs must be tested using a 48

- inch single roll electric dynamometer meeting the requirements of 40 CFR Subpart B, §86.108

- 00(b)(2) [October 22, 1996]

.

2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- I n Period. A manufacturer shall use good engineering judgment in determining the proper stabilized emissions mileage test point and report same according to the requirements of section D.2.11 above.

3. All

- Electric Range Test for Zero

- Emission Vehicles (including Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles)

. All 201 2 and subsequent ZEVs shall be subject to the All

- Electric Range Test specified below for the purpose of determining the energy efficiency and operating range of the ZEV

.

3.1 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range for Z ero - E mission V ehicle s.

3.1.1 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range for Battery E lectric Vehicles.

(a) Cold soak . The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 ° F (20 ° C) and not more than 86 ° F (30 ° C) for 12 to 36 hours. During this time, the vehicle’s battery shall be charged to a full state

- of

- charge. Charge time shall not exceed soak time.

( b ) At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed,
onto a dynamometer and operated through successive Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedules (UDDS), 40 CFR, Part 86, Appendix I [July 13, 2005] , which is incorporated herein by reference. A 10

- minute soak shall follow each UDDS.A

- 4

- F

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ( c ) For vehicles with a maximum spee d greater than or equal to the maximum speed on the UDDS, this test sequence shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to maintain either the speed or time tolerances in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00 (b)(1) and (2) [October 22, 1996] , or the manufacturer d etermines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnorm ally low battery voltage, etc.

( d ) For vehicles with a maximum speed less tha n the maximum speed on the UDDS , the vehicle shall be operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) when the vehicle cannot achieve the speed trace within the speed and time tolerances specified in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00(b)(1) and (2) [October 22, 1996] . The test shall be terminated when the vehicle speed when o perated at maximum available power (or full throttle) falls below 95 percent of the maximum speed initially achieved on the UDDS or when the battery state

- of

- charge is depleted to the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc., whichever occurs first.

3.1.2 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range for Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles

.
(a) The urban all

- electric range for a fuel cell vehicle and a hybrid fuel cell vehicle shall be determined in accordance with SAE J2572. As an option, a manufacturer may elect to determine the urban all

- electric range for a fuel cell vehicle or a hybrid fuel cell vehi cle in accordance with section F .3.1.1 above.

3. 2 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range for Z ero - E mission V ehicles and Range for Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles

.

3. 2.1 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range for Battery E lectric Vehicles.

(a) Cold soak . The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 ° F (20 ° C) and not more than 86 ° F (30 ° C) for 12 to 36 hours. During this time, the vehicle’s battery shall be charged to a full state

- of

- charge. Charge time shall not exceed soak time.

( b ) At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be either placed or pushed onto a dynamometer and operated through Continuous Highway Test Schedules of the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule ( HFEDS )

.
( c ) For vehicles with a maximum speed greater than or equal to the maximum speed on the HFEDS, this test sequence shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to maintain either the speed or ti me tolerances in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00 (b)(1) and (2) [October 22, 1996] , or the manufacturer determines that the test should beA

- 4

- F

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnorm ally low battery voltage, etc.

( d ) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than the maximum spe ed on the HFEDS , the vehicle shall be operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) when the vehicle cannot achieve the speed trace within the speed and time tolerances specified in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00(b )(1) and (2) [October 22, 1996] . The test shall be terminated when the vehicle speed when operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) falls below 95 percent of the maximum speed initially achieved on the HFEDS or when the battery state

- of

- charg e is depleted to the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc., whichever occurs first.

( e ) NEVs are exempt from the all

- electric range highway test.

3. 2. 2 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range for Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles

.
(a) The highway all

- electric range for a fuel cell vehicle and a hybrid fuel cell vehicle shall be determined in accordance with SAE J2572. As an option, a manufacturer may elect to determine the highway all

- electric range for a fuel cell vehicle or a hybrid fuel cell vehicle in accordance with section F .3.2.1 a bove.

3. 3 Recording requirements.

For all battery electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles, except off

vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles : Once the vehicle is no longer able to maintain the speed and time requirements specified in F .3.1 or F .3.2 above, the vehicle shall be brought to an immediate stop and the following data shall be recorded:

(a) mileage accumulated during the All

- Electric Range Test; (b) Net DC energy from the battery that was expended during the All

Electric Rang e Test (may be reported as the total DC battery energy output and the total DC battery energy input during the All

- Electric Range Test); (c) AC energy required to fully charge the battery after the All

- Electric Range Test from the point where electricity i s introduced from the electric outlet to the battery charger; (d) DC energy required to fully charge the battery after the All

- Electric Range Test from the point where electricity is introduced from the battery charger to the battery ; and (e) Measured AC a nd DC watt hours and amp hours shall be reported to the nearest hundredths of a kilowatt hour and tenths of an amp hour.A

- 4

- F

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Battery charging shall begin within 1 hour after terminating the All

- Electric Range Test.

3. 4 Regenerative braking . Regenerative braking systems may be utilized during the range test. The braking level, if adjustable, shall be set according to the manufacturer’s specifications for normal driving conditions prior to the commencement of the test. The driving schedule speed and time tolerances specified in F .3.1 or F .3.2 shall not be exceeded due to the operation of the regenerative braking system.

3. 5 Measurement Accuracy

. For battery electric vehicles, t he overall error in voltage and current recording instruments s hall be NIST traceable and accurate to ± 1% of the maximum value of the variable (AC/DC volts and amps) being measured. Suggested equipment: amp meter/power meter capable of sampling voltage and
current . Voltage and current shall be sampled at a minimum r ate of 20 hz.

3. 6 Watt Hour Calculation for Battery Electric Vehicles

.
DC energy (watt

- hours) shall be calculated as follows
DC energy = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt
Where v = vehicle DC main battery pack voltage i = vehicle DC main battery pack current

AC energy (in watt

- hours) shall be calculated as follows
AC energy = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt in watt

- hours Where v = AC instantaneous voltage i = AC instantaneous current

3.7 Charger Requirements for Battery Electric Vehicles.

The standard charging apparatus (or equivalent) normally furnished with or specified for the vehicle shall be used for charging during vehicle testing.

4. Determination of Battery Specific Energy for ZEVs

.
Determine the specific energy of batteries used to power a ZEV in accordance with th e U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium’s Electric Vehicle Battery Procedure Manual (January 1996), Procedure No. 2, “Constant Current Discharge Test Series,” using the C/3 rate. The weight calculation must reflect a completely functional battery system as def ined in the Appendix of the Manual, including pack(s), required support ancillaries (e.g., thermal management), and electronic controller.

5. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater for Vehicles Other Than ZEVs

.A

- 4

- F

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 The exhaust emissions res ult of the fuel

- fired heater shall be determined by operating at a maximum heating capacity with a cold start between 68 o F and 86 o F for a period of 20 minutes and dividing the grams of emissions by 20. The resulting grams per minute shall be multiplied by 3.0 minutes per mile to obtain a grams per mile value.

6. Urban Emission Test Provisions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Exc ept Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
Alternative procedures may be used if shown to yield equivalent results and if approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.

6.1 Vehicle Pre conditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” with the following supplemental requirements:

6.1. 1 For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the preconditioning drive.

6.1. 2 For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the UDDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activa ting the auxiliary power unit when operating in urban driving conditions.

6.1. 3 After setting battery state

- of

- charge, the hybrid electric vehicle shall be pushed or towed to a work area for the initial fuel drain and fill according to section III. D.1. 4

. of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles

. ”

6.1. 4 Following the initial fuel drain and fill, the vehicle shall complete an initial soak period of a minimum of 6 hours. After complet ing the soak period, the vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on a dynamometer and preconditioned. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated,A

- 4

- F

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and

o perated throughout the preconditioning drive.

6.1. 5 Within five minutes of completing preconditioning drive, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle does not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and is charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, then set battery state

- of

- charge to a level such that the SOC c riterion in section G .10 would be satisfied for the dynamometer procedure (section F

. 6.2 of these procedur es). If off

- vehicle charging is required to increase battery
state

- of

- charge for proper setting, off

- vehicle charging shall occur during the second soak period of 12 to 36 hour s

.
(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle does not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and is charge

- depleting over the UDDS, then no battery state

- of

- charge adjustment is permissible.

(iii) If the hybrid electric vehicle does allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, then set battery state

- of

- charge to manu facturer recommended level for activating the auxiliary power unit when the hybrid electric vehicle is operating in urban driving conditions.

6.2 Urban Dynamometer Procedure for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.135

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions

. References to §86.110

- 94 shall mean §86.110

- 94 as last amended June 30, 1995.

6.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a)

.

Overview

. T he dynamometer run shall consist of two tests, a “cold” start test, after a second fuel drain and fill and a 12 to 36 hour soak period performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” and a “hot” start test following the “cold” start test by 10 minutes. Vehicle startup (with all accessories turn ed off), operation over the UDDS and vehicle shutdown make a complete cold start test. Vehicle startup and operation over the UDDS and vehicle shutdown make a complete hot start test.

For all UDDS tests, t he exhaust emissions are diluted with ambient ai r in the dilution tunnel as shown in Figure B94

- 5 and Figure B94

- 6A

- 4

- F

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (§86.110

- 94)

. As an alternative, the bag mini

- diluter may be used in

- lieu of the constant volume sampling (CVS) method for exhaust emission measurement as described below. A dilution tunn el is not required for testing vehicles waived from the requirement to measure particulates. F our particulate samples are collected on filters for weighing; the first sample plus backup is collected during the cold start test (including shutdown); the sec ond sample plus backup is collected during the hot start test (including shutdown). Part 1065 of the CFR may be used as an optional particulate sampling method. Continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis during each t est. For hybrid electric vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles that are not “off

- vehicle charge capable,” and are equipped with pet roleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units (optional for natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled

, and alcohol

- fueled diesel

- cycle vehicles), THC is sampled and analyzed continuously pursuant to the provisions of §86.110

- 94 . Parallel samples of the dilution air are similarly analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum
gas

- fueled

, and alcohol

- fueled auxiliary power units, bag samples are collected and analyzed for TH C (if not sampled continuously), CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with alcohol

- fueled auxiliary power units, alcohol and formaldehyde samples are taken for both exhaust emissions and dilution air (a single dilution air formaldehyde sampl e, covering the total test period may be collected). Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

6.2.2 Subparagraphs (b) through (c)

. [No change.]

6.2. 3 S ubparagraph (d). [No change.]

6.2.4 Subparagraphs (e) through (g)

. [No change.]

6.2. 5 Amend subparagraph (h): T he driving distance, as measured by counting the number of dynamometer roll or shaft revolutions, shall be determined for the cold start test and hot start test. The revolutions shall be measured on the sam e roll or shaft used for measuring the vehicle’s speed.

6.2.6 Subparagraph (i)

. [No change.]A

- 4

- F

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 6.3 Urban Dynamometer Test Run, Gaseous and Particulate Emissions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles , Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.137

- 96 [March 24, 1993] with the following revisions:

6.3.1 Amend subparagraph (a): General

. T he dynamometer run shall consist of two tests, a “ cold ” start test, after a second fuel drain and fill and a 12 to 36 hour soak period performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” and a “ hot ” start test following the cold start test by 10 minutes. The complete dynamometer test consists of a cold start drive of 7.5 miles (12.1 km) and a hot start drive of 7.5 miles (12.1 km). The vehicle shall be stored prior to the emission test in such a ma nner that precipitation (e.g., rain or dew) does not occur on the vehicle. The vehicle is allowed to stand on the dynamometer during the 10 minute time period between each test.

6.3.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

6.3.2 .1 Amend subparagraph (b)(9): Start the gas flow measuring device, position the sample selector valves to direct the sample flow into the exhaust sample bag, the alcohol exhaust sample, the formaldehyde exhaust sample, the dilution air sample bag, the alcohol dilution air sample and the formaldehyde dilution air sample (turn on the petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle THC analyzer system integrator, mark the recorder chart, start particulate sample pump No. 1, and record both gas meter or flow measurement instrument readings, if applicable), and turn the key on. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the UDDS.

6.3. 2 .2 Delete subparagraph (b) (13).

6.3. 2. 3 Amend subparagraph ( b) (14): T urn the vehicle off 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration (at 1,369 seconds).

6.3. 2. 4 Amend subparagraph (b) (15): Five seconds after the vehicle is shutdown, simultaneously turn off gas flow measuring device No. 1 and if applicable, turn off the hydrocarbon integrator No. 1, mark the hydrocarbon recorder chart, turn off the No. 1 particulate sample pump and close the valves isolating particulate filter No. 1, and position the sample selector valves to the “standby” position. Record t he measured roll or shaft revolutions (both gas meter or flow measurement instrumentation readings), and reset the counter. As soon as possible, transfer the exhaust and dilution air samples to the analytical system andA

- 4

- F

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 process the samples pursuant to §86 .140, obtaining a stabilized reading of the exhaust bag sample on all analyzers within 20 minutes of the end of the sample collection phase of the test. Obtain alcohol and formaldehyde sample analyses, if applicable, within 24 hours of the end of the samp le period. (If it is not possible to perform analysis on the alcohol and formaldehyde samples within 24 hours, the samples should be stored in a dark cold (4  C to 10C) e nvironme nt until a na lys is . The s a mple s should be analyzed within fourteen days.) If applicable, carefully remove both pairs of particulate sample filters from their respective holders, and place each in a separate petri dish, and cover.

6.3. 2.5 Amend subparagraph (b) (18): Repeat the steps in paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(17) of this sec tion for the hot start test. The step in paragraph (b)(9) of this section shall begin between 9 and 11 minutes after the end of the sample period for the cold start test.

6.3. 2.6 Delete subparagraph (b) (19).

6.3. 2.7 Delete subparagraph (b) (20).

6.3. 2.8 Amend subparagraph (b) (21): As soon as possible, and in no case longer than one hour after the end of the hot start phase of the test, transfer the four particulate filters to the weighing chamber for post

- test conditioning, if applicable. For hybri d electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and are charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, a valid test shall satisfy the SOC

c riterion in section G .10

.

6.3. 2.9 Amend subparagraph (b) (24): Vehicles to be tested for evaporative emissions will proceed pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles

. ”

6.4 Calculations

- Exhaust Emissions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fuel Cel l Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.144

- 94 [July 13, 2005] with the following revisions:

6.4.1 A mend subparagraph (a): For light

- duty vehicles and light duty trucks:

Y wm = 0.43 *        

c c D Y + 0.57 *        

h h D YA

- 4

- F

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Where: (1) Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE, NMOG , NMHCE, CH 4 , NO x , or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. (2) Y c = Mass emissions a s calculated from the cold start test, in grams per test. (3) Y h = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start test, in grams per test. (4) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in miles. (5) D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in miles.

6.4.2 S ubparagraphs (b) through (e). [No change.]

6.5 Calculations

- Particulate Emissions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.145

- 82 [November 2, 1982] with the following revisions

. References to §86.110

- 94 shall mean §86.110

- 94 as last amended June 30, 1995.

6.5.1 A mend subparagraph (a): The final repor ted test results for the mass particulate (M p ) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

M p = 0.43 *        

c pc D M + 0.57 *        

h ph D M

Where: (1) M pc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start test, in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determination.) (2) M ph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start test, in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determination.) (3) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in miles. (4) D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in miles.

6.5.2 S ubparagraph (b). [No change.]A

- 4

- F

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 7. Highway Emission Test Provisions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §600.111

- 08 [December 27, 2006] with the following revisions

.

7 .1 Subparagraph (a)

. [ n ot a pplicable

- delete ]

7

. 2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows:

7 .2.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): The highway fuel economy test is designated to simulate non

- metropolitan driving with an average speed of 48.6 mph and a maximum speed of 60 mph. The cycle is 10.2 miles long with 0.2 stop per mile and consists of warmed

- up vehicle operation on a chassis dynamometer through a specified driving cycle. A proportional part of the diluted exhaust emission is collected continuously for subsequent analysis of THC, CO, CO 2 , and NO x using a constant volume (variable dilution) sampler. Diesel dilute exhaust is continuously analyzed for hydrocarbons using a heated sample line and analyzer. Alcohol and formaldehyde samples are collected and individually analyzed for alcohol

- fueled vehicles.

7 .2. 2 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(i): T he dynamometer procedure shall consist of two cycles of the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule (§600.109(b)) separated by 15 seconds of idle. The first cycle of the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule is driven to precondition the test vehicle and the second is driven for the fuel economy measurement.

7

. 2

. 3 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(iii) : O nly one exhaust sample and one background sample shall be collected and analyzed for THC (except diesel hydrocar bons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO 2 , and NO x . Alcohol and formaldehyde samples (exhaust and dilution air) are collected and analyzed for alcohol

- fueled vehicles.

7

. 2. 4 Add subparagraph (b)(7)(v) : For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the HFEDS preconditioning c ycle. For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.A

- 4

- F

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the HFEDs, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for acti vating the auxiliary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions.

7

. 2. 5 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(v) : O perate the vehicle over one HFEDS preconditioning cycle according to the dynamometer driving schedule specified in § 600.109

- 08 (b) [December 27, 2006] . If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the HFEDS preconditioning cycle.

7

. 2. 6 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(vi) : W hen t he vehicle reaches zero speed at the end of the HFEDS preconditioning cycle, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare for the HFEDS emission measurement cycle of the test. Reset and enable the roll revolution counter. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, the vehicle shall be momentarily turned off for 5 seconds and turned back on d uring the idle period. The battery state

- of

- charge shall be recorded after the hybrid electric vehicle has fully turned on.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting ove r the HFEDS, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the idle period.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

7

. 2. 7 Add subparagraph (b)(9)(viii) : At the conclusion of the HFEDS emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC

c riterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC c riter ion is not satisfied, then repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (b)(9)(vi) and (b)(9)(vii) . A total of three highway emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the HFEDS, the emission test is completed.A

- 4

- F

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the emission test is completed.

7 .2. 8 Delete su bparagraph (b)(10).

7

. 3 Delete subparagraphs ( c ) through (e).

8. SFTP Emission Test Provisions for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles
, Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.

8 .1 US06 Vehicle Preconditioning

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions

.

8 .1.1 Subparagraphs (a) through (m). [No change.]

8 .1. 2 Amend subparagraph (n): Aggressive Driving Test (US06) Preconditioning.

8 .1.2.1 Amend subparagraph (1) as follows: If the US06 test follows the exhaust emission urban, highway, or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer

. For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at according to the following conditions:

If the hybri d electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the US06, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 precondi tioning cycle.

If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the US06, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions. The a uxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 preconditioning cycle.

8 .1.2.1. 1 Subparagraphs (i) through (iv)

. [No change.]

8 .1.2.2 Subparagraph (2)

. [No change.]A

- 4

- F

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 8 .1.3 Subparagraph (o). [No change.]

8.2 US06 Emission Test

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159

- 0 8 [December 27, 2006] with the following revisions

.

8.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview . The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 600 second test on the US06 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (g), of this part. The hybrid electric vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00, to bring it to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 1 to 2 minute i dle period that proceeds directly into the US06 driving schedule during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provisions of §86.136

- 90 (engine star ting and restarting). For hybrid electric vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sam pled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of §86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . The US06 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emissions and shall meet the state

- of

- charge net tolerances as calculated in section F

. 9

.

8 .2.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

8.2.2.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

8 .2.3 Subparagraph (c). [No change.]

8 .2. 4 Amend subparagraph (d): Practice runs over the prescribed driving schedule may be performed at test point to permit sampling system adjustment.

8 .2.5 Subparagraph (e). [No change.]

8 .2. 6 Amend subparagraph (f) as follows.

8 .2. 6 .1 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(i): Immediately after completion of the US06 preconditioning cycle, idle the vehicle. The idle period is not to be less than one minute or not greater than two minutes

. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:A

- 4

- F

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the US06, the vehicle shall be momentarily turned off for 5 seconds and turned back on during the idle period. The battery state

- o f

- charge shall be recorded after the hybrid electric vehicle has fully turned on.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the US06, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the idle period.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

8 .2. 6 .2 Amend subparagraph (f) (2)(ix): At the conclusion of the US06 emission test , one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and are charge

- sustaining over the US06, record the batter y state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC c riterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i) without the
pre conditioning cycle . A total of three US06 emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the US06, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

8 .3 SC03 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.1 32

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions

.

8 .3.1 Subparagraphs (a) through (n). [No change.]

8 .3. 2 Amend subparagraph (o): Air Conditioning Test (SC03) Preconditioning

.

8 .3.2.1 Amend subparagraph (1) as follows: If the SC03 test follows the exhaust emission FTP or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuelA

- 4

- F

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be push ed or driven onto the test dynamometer

. For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the SC03, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 preconditioning cycle.

If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the SC03, battery
state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 preconditioning cycle.

8.3.2.1.1 Subparagraphs (i) and (ii). [No change.]

8 .3.2.2 Subparagraphs (2) through (3). [No change.]

8 .4 SC03 Emission Test

.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.160

- 00 [December 8, 2005] with the following revisions

.

8 .4.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview . The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 594 second test on the SC03 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (h), of this part. The hybrid electric vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00 of this subpart, to bring the vehicle to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 10 minute vehicle soak (vehicle turn ed off) that proceeds directly into the SC03 driving schedule, during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. The entire test, including the SC03 preconditioning cycle, vehicle soak, and SC03 emission test, i s either conducted in an environmental test facility or under test conditions that simulate testing in an environmental test cell (see § 86.162

- 0 0 (a) for a discussion of simulation procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of: 95 o F air temperature, 100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent r elative humidity), a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m 2 , and vehicle cooling air flow proportional to vehicle speed. Section 86.161

- 00 discusses the minimum facility requirements and corresponding control tolerances for air conditioning ambient
test co nditions. The vehicle’s air conditioner is operated or appropriately simulated for the duration of the test procedure (except for the 10 minute vehicleA

- 4

- F

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 soak), including the preconditioning. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provi sions of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For hybrid electric vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with diesel

- cycle a uxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of §86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . The SC03 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calcul ate emissions and shall meet the state

- of

- charge net tolerances as calculated in section E F. 9

.

8.4.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

8 .4.2 .1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

8.4.3 Amend subparagr aph (c) as follows.

8 .4.3 .1 Amend subparagraph (c)(9): Start vehicle (with air conditioning system also running ). If the auxiliary power unit of the hybrid electric vehicle is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manual ly activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 emission test. Fifteen seconds after the vehicle starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.

8.4.4 Amend subparagraph (d) as follows.

8 .4. 4 .1 Amend subparagraph (d)(10): At the conclusion of the SC03 emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the SC03, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC c riterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then turn off the cooling fan(s), allow the vehicle to soak in the ambient conditions of paragraph (c)(5) of th is section for 10 ± 1 minutes, and repeat the dynamometer test run from subparagraph (d). Up to three SC03 emission tests shall be attempted to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to b e manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the SC03, turn off the vehicle two seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off the vehicle two seconds after the end of the last deceleration.A

- 4

- F

- 18
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 8.4.5 Subparagraph (e) . [No change

. ]

9. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances for All Hybrid Electric Vehicles , Except Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles and Off

- Vehicle Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

.

9 .1 For hybrid electric vehicles that use a battery as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(Amp

- hr final ) max = (Amp

- hr initial ) + 0.01        

∗ ∗
∗

1 K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

(Amp

- hr final ) m in = (Amp

- hr initial )

- 0.01        

∗ ∗
∗

1 K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

Where: (Amp

- hr final ) max = Maximum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the
test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Battery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. Th is value shall b e submitted for testing purposes , and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board

.

9 .2 For hybrid electric vehicles that use a capacitor as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(V final ) max = 

# ( )

C m NHV V fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗
∗ + 2 01

. 0 2

(V final ) min = 

# ( )

C m NHV V fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗

∗

− 2 01

. 0 2

Where: (V final ) max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test (V final ) min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the testA

- 4

- F

- 19
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 V 2

initial = The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning of
the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg C = Rated capacitance of the capacitor, in Farads

9 .3 For hybrid electric vehicles that use an electro

- mechanical flywheel as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(rpm final ) max = 

# ( )

3 2 2 01

. 0 K I m NHV rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗ ∗

∗ +

(rpm final ) min = 

# ( )

3 2 2 01

. 0 K I m NHV rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗ ∗

∗

−

Where: (rpm final ) max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the test (rpm final ) min = The minimum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the test

rpm 2 initial = The squared flywheel rotational speed at the beginning of the

test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K 3 = Conversion factor,
2 2 2

sec 3600 4

rpm

− π

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg

- m 2A

- 4

- G

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 G

. Test Procedures for 201 2 and Subsequent Model Off

- Vehicle Charge C apable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

The “as adopted or amended dates” of the 40 CFR Part 86 regulations referenced by this document are the dates identified in the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicles

, ” unless otherwise noted. A manufacturer may elect to certify a 2009, 2010, or 2011 model

- year off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle using this section G

.

1. Electric Dynamometer.

All off

- vehicle charge capable HEVs must be tested using a 48

- inch single roll electric dynamometer meeting the requirements of 40 CFR Subpart B, §86.108

- 00(b)(2) [October 22, 1996].

2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- In Period.

A manufacturer shall use good engineering judgment in determining the proper stabilized emissions mileage test point and report same according to the requirements of section D.2.11 above.

3. General Test ing Requirements

.

3. 1 Recording requirements.

For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles : The following data shall be recorded for all tests and for each individual test cycle therein , except for the 20 o F and 50 o F tests, conducted in accordance with section G .8 :

(a) mileage accumulate d during the All

- Electric Range portion of the test, where applicable; (b) Net DC energy from the battery that was expended during the test (may be reported as the total DC battery energy output and the total DC battery energy input); (c) AC energy require d to fully charge the battery after a charge depleting or charge sustaining test from the point where electricity is introduced from the electric outlet to the battery charger; (d) DC energy required to fully charge the battery after a charge depleting or charge sustaining test from the point where electricity is introduced from the battery charger to the battery ; (e) Net DC amp

- hrs from the battery that was expended during the test (may be reported as the total DC amp

- hrs output and the total DC amp

- hrs in put) ; and (f) Measured AC and DC watt hours and amp hours shall be reported to the nearest hundredths of a kilowatt hour and tenths of an amp hour.A

- 4

- G

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 3. 2 Regenerative braking . Regenerative braking systems may be utilized during the range test. The braking level, if adjustable, shall be set according to the manufacturer’s specifications for normal driving conditions prior to the commencement of the test. The driving schedule speed and time tolerances specified in this section G shall not be exceeded due to the operation of the regenerative braking system.

3. 3 Measurement Accuracy . The overall error in voltage and current recording instruments shall be NIST traceable and accurate to ± 1% of the maximum value of the variable (AC/DC volts and amps) being measured. Suggested equipment: amp meter/power meter capable of sampling voltage and current . Voltage and current shall be sampled at a minimum rate of 20 hz.

3. 4 Watt Hour Calculation.

DC energy (watt hours) shall be calculated as follows
DC energy = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt
Where v = vehicle DC main battery pack voltage i = vehicle DC main battery pack current

AC energy (in watt

- hours) shall be calculated as follows

AC en ergy = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt in watt

- hours Where v = AC instantaneous voltage i = AC instantaneous current

3.5 Charger Requirements

The standard charging apparatus (or equivalent) normally furnished with or specified for the vehicle shall be used for charging during vehicle testing.

4

. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater

.

The exhaust emissions result of the fuel

- fired heater shall be determined by operating at a maximum heating capacity with a cold start between 68 o F and 86 o F for a period of 20 minutes and dividing the grams of emissions by 20. The resulting grams per minute shall be multiplied by 3.0 minutes per mile to obtain a grams per mile value.

5

. Urban Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

Alternative procedures may be used if shown to yield equivalent results and if approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.A

- 4

- G

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 The criteria certification emissions for the Urban test shall be the wors t case emissions of NM OG , CO, NOx, and PM from either the charge depleting or charge sustaining tests. The sum of NMOG + NOx emissions shall constitute the worst case for the urban charge sustaining or charge depleting modes of operation.

V ehicles with m ore than one mode of operation of the auxiliary power unit (e.g., economy mode, performance mode, etc.) for a given charge depleting or charge sustaining test cycle must be tested in the mode(s) which represents the worst case emissions of the auxiliary po wer unit. Confirmatory testing may also be performed in any mode of operation to ensure compliance with emission standards.

5 .1 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” with the following supplemental requirements:

5 .1. 1 For vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the preconditioning drive.

5 .1. 2 For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

5 .1. 3 After setting battery state

- of

- charge, the vehicle shall be pushed or towed to a work area for the initial fuel drain and fill according to section III.D.1. 4 of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures fo r 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.”

5 .1. 4 Following the initial fuel drain and fill, the vehicle shall complete an initial soak period of a minimum of 6 hours.

5.1.5 After completing the soak period, the vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on a dynamometer and preconditioned.

5.1. 6 If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the preconditioning drive.

5.1. 7 Fo r the charge depleting range test and the charge sustaining emission test, the preconditioning cycle shall be the UDDS. The vehicle must be in charge sustaining operation during the preconditioning drive. To determine charge sustaining operation, the veh icle must meet the SOC criterion in section F G .10 from the start to the end of the two consecutive UDDSs. As anA

- 4

- G

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 option, charge sustaining operation can be achieved for a single UDDS if data is provided showing that charge sustaining operation can consiste ntly be maintained over one UDDS. The vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in section F G .10 from the start to the end of a single UDDS. Alternative procedures may be used to determine charge sustain operation for the precondition drive if the alternate procedure demonstrates charge sustaining operation based on section F G .10 and is approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.

5.1.8 A fuel drain and fill shall be performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.”

5.1.9 The vehicle shall be soaked for 12

- 36 hours. During this soak period, canister preconditioning shall be performed pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.”

5.1.10 For the urban charge depleting range test, the highway charge depleting range test, and the cold start US06 range test, charge the vehicle to full
state

- of

- charge as specified by the vehicle manufacturer. The vehicle must be turned of f during charging and charge time shall not exceed soak time.

5 .2 Urban Dynamometer Procedure for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.135

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions . Refer ences to §86.110

- 94 shall mean §86.110

- 94 as last amended June 30, 1995.

5 .2.1 Amend subparagraph (a).

Overview . The charge depleting range test dynamometer run shall consist of a series of charge depleting UDDSs , each followed by a 10 minute key

- off hot soak period until charge sustaining operation is achieved for two consecutive UDDSs. To determine charge sustaining operation, the vehicle must
meet the SOC criterion in section F G .10 from the start of the first UDDS until the end of the second UDDS. As an option, charge sustaining operation may be achieved f or a single UDDS if data is provided showing that charge sustaining operation can consistently be maintained over one UDDS

. To determine charge sustaining operation, in this case, the vehicle sha ll meet SOC criterion in section F G .10 from the start to the end of a single UDDS. Emissions are measured for all UDDSs when the auxiliary power unit is operating.

T he vehicle shall be turned off and stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 ° F (20 ° C) and not more than 86 ° F (30 ° C) for 12 to 36 hours. At the endA

- 4

- G

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 of this cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer.

The charge sustaining emission test dynamometer run shall consist of two consecutive UDDSs with a 10 minute key

- off hot soak in between. Vehicle emissions shall be measured over two UDDSs during charge sustaining operation, and t he vehicle must meet the SOC criteri on in section F G

. 10 from the start of the first UDDS until the end of the second UDDS

.

V ehicle charging shall be initiated within three hour s after either the charge depleting range test or the charge sustaining emission test pursuant to section G .5.4.2 or G .5.4.3 , as applicable . During charging, all requirements in section G .3 must be met, and energy consumption shall be calculated pursuant to the requirements in section G .11.7.

For all exhaust emission tests, the exhaust emissions are diluted with ambient air in the dilution tunnel as shown in Figure B94

- 5 and Figure B94

- 6 (§86.110

- 94 )

. As an alternative, the bag mini

- diluter may be used in

- lieu of the constant volume sampling (CVS) method for exhaust emission measurement as described below. A dilution tunnel is not required for testing vehicles waived from the requirement to measure par ticulates. For UDDSs, p articulate samples are collected on filters for weighing during each UDDS . Each sample plus backup is collected during each UDDS (including shutdown). Part 1065 of the CFR may be used as an optional particulate sampling method. C ontinuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis during each UDDS . For vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with pet roleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units (optional for natural
gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled, and alcohol

- fueled diesel

- cycle vehicles), THC is sampled and analyzed continuously pursuant to the provisions of §86.110

- 94 . Parallel sampl es of the dilution air are similarly analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled, and alcohol

- fueled auxiliary power units, bag samples are collected and analyzed for THC (if not sampled con tinuously), CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with alcohol

- fueled auxiliary power units, alcohol and formaldehyde samples are taken for both exhaust emissions and dilution air (a single dilution air formaldehyde sample, covering the total test period may be collected). Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

5 .2.2 Subparagraphs (b) through (c). [No change.]

5 .2.3 S ubparagraph (d). [No change.]

5 .2.4 Subparagraphs (e) through (g). [No change.]A

- 4

- G

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 5 .2.5 Amend subparagraph (h): The driving distance, as measured by counting the number of dynamometer roll or shaft revolutions, shall be determined for all charge depleting and exhaust emission tests. The revolutions shall be measured on the same roll or shaf t used for measuring the vehicle’s speed.

5 .2.6 Subparagraph (i). [No change.]

5 .3 Urban Dynamometer Test Run, Gaseous and Particulate Emissions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.137

- 96 [Mar ch 24, 1993] with the following revisions:

5 .3.1 Amend subparagraph (a): General . The dynamometer run shall consist of a series of UDDSs, after a second fuel drain and fill and a 12 to 36 hour soak period performed pursuant to the provisions of the “Cal ifornia Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.” The vehicle shall be stored prior to the emission test in such a manner that precipitation (e.g., rain or dew) does not occur on the vehicle. The ve hicle is allowed to stand on the dynamometer during the 10 minute time period between each UDDS

.

5.3.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

5 .3.2 .1 Amend subparagraph (b)(9): Start the gas flow measuring device, direct the sample flow into the exhaust sample bag, the alcohol exhaust sample, the formaldehyde exhaust sample, the dilution air sample bag, the alcohol dilution air sample and the formaldehyde dilution air sample, and turn the key on. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually ac tivated, the auxiliary power unit shall be activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the UDDS.

5 .3. 2.2 Delete subparagraph (b)(13).

5 .3. 2.3 Subparagraph (b)(14). [No change.]

5 .3. 2.4 Amend subparagraph (b)(15): Five seconds after the ve hicle is shutdown, simultaneously turn off the gas flow measuring device and particulate sample pump. Record the measured roll or shaft revolutions (both gas meter or flow measurement instrumentation readings), and reset the counter. As soon as possible, transfer the exhaust and dilution air samples to the analytical system and process the samples pursuant to §86.140, obtaining a stabilized reading of the exhaust bag sample on all analyzers within 20 minutes of the end of the sample collection phase of th e UDDS . Obtain alcohol andA

- 4

- G

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 formaldehyde sample analyses, if applicable, within 24 hours of the end of the sample period. (If it is not possible to perform analysis on the alcohol and formaldehyde samples within 24 hours, the samples should be stored in a dark cold (4  C to 10C) e nvironme nt until a na lys is . The sa mple s should be analyzed within fourteen days.) If applicable, carefully remove both pairs of particulate sample filters from their respective holders, and place each in a separate petri dish, an d cover.

5 .3. 2.5 Amend subparagraph (b)(18): Repeat the steps in paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(17) of this section for the hot start UDDS . The step s in paragraph (b)(9) of this section shall begin between 9 and 11 minutes after the end of the sample pe riod for the cold start UDDS

.

5 .3. 2.6 Delete subparagraph (b)(19).

5 .3. 2.7 Delete subparagraph (b)(20).

5 .3. 2.8 Amend subparagraph (b)(21): As soon as possible, transfer the particulate filters to the weighing chamber for post

- test conditioning, if applicable. For vehicles undergoing a cold start charge sustaining test, a valid test shall satisfy the SOC c riterion in section F G .10

.

5 .3. 2.9 Amend subparagraph (b)(24): Vehicles to be tested for evaporative emissions will proce ed pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles.”

5.4 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range and Urban Equivalent All

Electric Range for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

5.4.1 The Urban All

- Electric Range shall be shall be defined as the distance that the vehicle is driven from the start of Urban Charge Depleting Range Test until the internal combustion engine first starts.

5.4. 2 Urban Charge Depleting Range Test.

(i) Vehicle preconditioning

. T he vehicle shall be preconditioned according to G .5.1.

(i i ) Dynamometer run

. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through the Continuous Urban Test Schedule until the S O C Net Change Tolerances (specified in section F G

. 10 of these test procedures) that indicate charge sustaining operation are met for two consecutive UDDSs

,A

- 4

- G

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 or a single UDDS if data is provided showing that charge sustaining operation can consistently be maintained in one UDDS

. If there are no charge depleting hot start cycles, then use the next hot start cycle (after the cold start cycle) in the test sequence for the purpose of determining hot start emissions. Fo r this case (no charge depleting hot start cycle), the manufacturer may optionally add one additional hot start cycle.

The Alternative Continuous Urban Test Schedule may be substituted for the Continuous Urban Test Schedule if the test facility is unable to perform the Continuous Urban Test Schedule. Refer to sections G .5.5, G .5.6, and G .1 1 , for calculations of urban exhaust emission s , urban particulate emissions, and equivalent all

- electric range, respectively. Emissions are measured for all test cycles when the auxiliary power unit is operating. For each test cycle for which emissions were not measured, the manufacturer must validate that the auxiliary power unit did not turn on at any time during the test cycle.

( ii i ) Vehicle charging after testing. V e hicle c harg ing shall begin within three hours after either the charge d epl e ting range test or the char ge sustain ing emission test

, and the vehicle shall be charged to the manufacturer specified full state

- of

- charge. During charging, all applicable requirements in G .3 must be met

, and energy consumption shall be calculate d pursuant t o the requirements in section G

. 11

. 7

.

5.4. 3 Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test. The Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test is conducted cold, and after charge sustaining operation has been reached, or an optional charge sustaining test mode has been activated, and no subsequent charge has been performed.

(i) Vehicle p reconditioning

. If the Urban Charge Sustaining Emis sion Test is performed within 36 hours after the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test, the vehicle shall be precondition ed pursuant to section F G .5.1.9 . If the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test is performed more than 36 hours after the Urban Charge Deple ting Range Test, the vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section G .5.1 , except for vehicle charging

. S ections G .5.1.1 through G .5.1.4 may be omitted if previously performed.

(ii) Dynamometer run. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer , and two UDDSs shall be perform ed during charge sustaining operation, each separated by a 10 minute key

- off hot soak period. The vehicle must meet the SOC criteri on in section G

. 10 from the start of the first UDDS until the end of the second UDDS . If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stopped, the vehicle cold soak shall be conducted again , and the dynamometer test run shall be conducted again

.A

- 4

- G

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ( iii ) Vehicle charging after testing. If th e vehicle was not charge d after the Urban C harge D epleting R ange T est, then vehicle charging shall begin within three hour s after the Urban C harge S ustaining E mission T est and the vehicle shall be charged to the manufacturer specified full state

- of

- charge

. During charging, all requirements in G .3 must be met, and energy consumption shall be calculated pursuant to the requirements in section G .11.7.

5.5 Calculations

- Urban Exhaust Emissions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.144

- 94 [July 13, 2005] with the following revisions:

5.5.1 A mend subparagraph (a):

Gaseous Emissions

– Urban Charge Depleting Range Test.

For light

- duty vehicles and light duty trucks:

Y wm =        

Σ

Σ
∗ +        

∗

n n

c c D Y

D Y 57

. 0 43

. 0

Where: Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE, NM OG , NMHCE, CH 4 , NOx, or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. Y c = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS , in grams per test. D c = The measured driving distance fr om the cold start UDDS , in miles.

n = n umber of hot start UDDSs in Charge Depleting operation If there are no charge depleting hot start cycles, then use the next hot start cycle (after the cold start cycle) in the test sequence for the purpose of determining hot start emissions. For this case (no charge depleting hot start cycle), the manufacturer may optionally add one additional hot start cycle for an n=2.

Gaseous Emissions

– Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test.

For light

- duty vehicles and light

- duty trucks:

Y wm = 0.43 *        

c c D Y + 0.57 *        

h h D YA

- 4

- G

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Where: Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE, NM OG , NMHCE, CH 4 , NO x , o r CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. Y c = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS , in grams per test. Y h = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start UDDS , in grams per test. D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS , in miles. D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS , in miles.

5.5.2 S ubparagraphs (b) through (e). [No change.]

5.6 Calculations

- Urban Particulate Emissions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted p ursuant to 40 CFR §86.145

- 82 [November 2, 1982] with the following revisions . References to §86.110

- 94 shall mean §86.110

- 94 as last amended June 30, 1995.

5.6.1 Amend subparagraph (a):

Particulate Emissions

– Urban Charge Depleting Range Test.

The final reported test results for the mass particulate (M p ) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

M p = 0.43 *        

c pc D M + 0.57 *        

Σ

Σ

n pn D M

Where: M pc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start UDDS , in
grams per v ehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determination.) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS , in miles.

n = number of hot start UDDSs in Charge Depleting operation If there are no charge depleting hot start cycles, then use the next hot s tart cycle (after the cold start cycle) in the test sequence for the purpose of determining hot start emissions. For this case (no charge depleting hot start cycle), the manufacturer may optionally add one additional hot start cycle for an n=2.

Particula te Emissions

– Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test.A

- 4

- G

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 The final reported test results for the mass particulate (M p ) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

M p = 0.43 *        

c pc D M + 0.57 *        

h ph D M

Where: M pc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start UDDS , in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determination.) M ph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start UDDS , in grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110

- 94 for determinat ion.) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS , in miles. D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS , in miles.

5.6.2 S ubparagraph (b). [No change.]

5.6. 3 Equivalent All

- Electric Range shall be calculated in accordance with section G

. 1 1 of these test procedures.

6

. Highway Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

Vehicles with more than one mode of operation of the auxiliary power unit (e.g., economy mode, performance mode, etc.) for a given charge depleting or charge sustaining test cycle must be tested in the mode(s) which represents the worst case emissions of t he auxiliary power unit. Confirmatory testing may also be performed in any mode of operation to ensure compliance with emission standards.

The third emission test HFEDS of the Highway Charge Sustaining Test shall be used to calculate highway NOx emissions and must be within the SOC criterion in section G

. 10

. As an option, the manufacturer may perform the Highway Charge Sustaining Test with two emission test HFEDS s provided that the second HFEDS meets the SOC criterion in section G .10. In this ca se, the second HFEDS shall be used to calculate emissions.

Highway NOx emissions may be determined from the HFEDS in the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test that demonstrates charge sustaining operation.

6.1 Vehicle Preconditioning

.A

- 4

- G

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 If the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test is performed within 36 hours after completion of either the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test or the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test, the vehicle shall be precondition ed pursuant to sections G .5.1. 9 through G .5.1.10, witho ut canister preconditioning . If the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test is performed more than 36 hours after completion of either the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test or the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test, the vehicle shall be precondition ed purs uant to section G .5.1, without canister preconditioning

. S ections G .5.1.1 through G .5.1.4 may be omitted if previously performed.

If the Highway Charge Sustaining Emission Test is performed within 36 hours after completion of either the Urban Charge Depl eting Range Test, the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test

, or the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test, the vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section G .5.1 .9 without canister preconditioning . If the Highway Charge Sustaining Emissions Test is performed more than 36 hours after completion of either the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test, the Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test

, or the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test, the vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section G .5.1 without cani ster precondition and vehicle charging

. S ections G .5.1.1 through G .5.1.4 may be omitted if previously perfo r med

.

6

. 2 Highway Dynamometer Procedure for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §600.111

- 08 [December 27, 2006] with the following revisions. T his section G .6

. 2 shall apply during both charge sustaining and charge depleting operation.

6

. 2 .1 Subparagraph (a). [n/a]

6

. 2

. 2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows:

6

. 2

. 2.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): The highway fuel economy test is designated to simulate non

- metropolitan driving with an average speed of 48.6 mph and a maximum speed of 60 mph. The cycle is 10.2 miles long with 0.2 stop per mile and consists of warmed

- up vehicle operation on a chassis dynamometer through a specified driving cycle. A proportional part of the diluted exhaust emission is collected continuously for subsequent analysis of THC, CO, CO 2 , and NO x using a constant volume (variable dilution) sampler. Diesel dilute exhaust is co ntinuously analyzed for hydrocarbons using a heated sample line and analyzer. Alcohol and formaldehyde samples are collected and individually analyzed for alcohol

- fueled vehicles.

6

. 2

. 2.2 R eplace subparagraph (b)(6) with: Cold soak: The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 o F (20 o C) and notA

- 4

- G

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 more than 86 o F (30 o C) for 12 to 36 hours. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer.

6

. 2

. 2.3 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(i): T he Highway Charge Sustaining Emission Test is conducted cold, and after charge sustaining operation has been reached, or an optional charge sustaining test mode has been activated, and no subsequent charge has been performed.

At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer. A cold start HFEDS followed by t h ree emission measurement HFEDSs

, separated by a 15 second key

- on hot soak period

, shall be perform ed

. The vehicle must meet the SOC criteri on in section G

. 10 for the th i r d emission
measurement HFEDS

. As an option the manufacturer may perform two emission measurement HFEDSs in lieu of three emission measurement HFEDSs, if the SOC criterion is satisfied for the second emission measurement HFEDS. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stop ped

, and the procedure shall be repeated starting at section G .6.2.2.2.

6

. 2

. 2

. 4 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(iii): O ne exhaust sample and one background sample per each HFED S shall be collected and analyzed for THC (except diesel hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO 2 , and NO x . Alcohol and formaldehyde samples (exhaust and dilution air) are collected and analyzed for alcohol

- fueled vehicles.

6

. 2

. 2. 5 Add subpa ragraph (b)(7)(v): For vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the HFEDS preconditioning cycle. For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

6

. 2

. 2. 6 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(v): O perate the vehicle over the continuous highway test schedule, consisting of repeated HFEDSs according to the dynamometer driving schedule specified in §600.109

- 08(b) [December 27, 2006]. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliar y power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the HFEDS preconditioning cycle.

6

. 2

. 2. 7 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(vi): W hen the vehicle reaches zero speed between each HFEDS, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare fo r the HFEDS emission measurement cycle of the test. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:A

- 4

- G

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ( a ) For vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the i dle period.

( b ) For vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

6

. 2

. 2. 8 Add subparagraph (b)(9)(viii): At the conclusion of the HFEDS emission test, the following condition s shall apply: For vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

sustaining over the HFEDS, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC c riterion in section F .10 is satisfied. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then repeat the dynamometer test run from subparagraph (b)(9)(vi) and (b)(9)(vii)

. Up to three highway emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

6

. 2

. 2. 9 Delete subparagraph (b)(10).

6

. 2 .3 Delete subparagraphs (c) through (e).

6

. 3 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range and Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

6. 3 .1 The Highway All

- Electric Range shall be defined as the distance that the vehicle is driven from the start of test until the internal combustion engine
starts.

6.3.2 Highway Charge Depleting Range Test.

(i) Vehicle preconditioning. The vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section G

. 6 .1.

(ii) Dynamometer run. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through the Continuous Highway Test Schedule until the State

– of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances (specified in section G

. 10 of these test procedures) tha t indicate charge sustaining operation is met for one HFEDS

. The Alternative Continuous Highway Test Schedule may be substituted for the Continuous Highway Test Schedule if the test facility is unable to perform the Continuous Highway Test Schedule. Refe r to section G .1 1 , for calculations of highway exhaust emissions and equivalent all

- electric range, respectively. Emissions are measured for all test cycles when the auxiliary power unit is operating. For each test cycle for which emissions were not mea sured, the manufacturer must validate that the auxiliary power unit did not turn on at any time during the test cycle.A

- 4

- G

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 ( iii ) Vehicle charging after testing. Vehicle charging shall begin within three hours after the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test and the vehicle shall be charged to the manufacturer specified full state

of

- charge. During charging, all applicable requirements in section G .3 must be met, and energy consumption shall be calculated according to the requirements in section G .11.7. If the manufacturer provides supplemental data demonstrating that the energy required to charge the vehicle from highway charge sustaining operatio n to full charge is equivalent (within ± 1% of the AC energy) to the energy required to charge the vehicle from urban charge sustaining operation to full charge, then the energy required to charge the vehicle from urban charge sustaining operation to full charge may be used to determine highway energy consumption pursuant to section G .11.7. Data shall be approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.

6. 3

. 3 Highway Charge Sustaining Emission Test. The Highway Charge Sustaining E mission Test is conducted cold, and after charge sustaining operation has been reached, or an optional charge sustaining test mode has been activated, and no subsequent charge has been performed:

(i) Vehicle preconditioning. The vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to section G .6.1.

(ii) Dynamometer run. At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer

. A cold start HFEDS followed by three emission measurement HFEDSs

, sep arated by a 15 second key

- on hot soak period

, shall be perform ed . The vehicle
must meet the SOC criteri on in section G

. 10 for the th i r d emission
measurement HFEDS

. As an option, the manufacturer may perform two emission measurement HFEDSs in lieu of three emission measurement HFEDSs

, if the SOC criterion is satisfied for the second HFEDS. If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stop ped

, and the procedure shall be repeated starting at section G .6.3.3.

6. 3

. 4 Equivalent All

- Electric Range shall be calculated in accordance with section G .1 1 of these test procedures.

7

. SFTP Emission Test Provisions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

V ehicles with more than one mode of operation of the auxiliary power unit (e.g., economy mode, performance mode, etc.) for a given charge depleting or charge sustaining test cycle must be tested in the mode(s) which represents the worst case emissions of the auxiliary power unit. Confirmatory testing may also be performed in any mode of operation to ensure compliance with emission standards.A

- 4

- G

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 7 .1 US06 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions. T his section G .1 shall apply during charge sustaining operation or at an optional charge sustaining test mode that has been activated, if no subsequent charge has been performed

.

7 .1.1 Subparagraphs (a) through (m). [No change.]

7 .1.2 Amend subparagraph (n) Aggressive Driving Test (US06) Preconditioning . as follows :

7.1.2.1 Amend subparagraph (1) as follows: If the US06 test follows the exhaust emission urban, highway, or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer. For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer , and t he auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 preconditioning cycle.

7.1.2.1.1 Subparagraphs (i) through (iv). [No change.]

7 .1.2.2 Subparagraph (2). [No change.]

7 .1.3 Subparagraph (o). [No change.]

7 .2 US06 Emission Test

.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159

- 0 8 [December 27, 2006] with the following revisions. T his section 7 .2 shall apply during charge sustaining operation or at an optional charge sustaining test mode that has been activated, if no subsequent charge has been performed

.

7 .2.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview . The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 600 second test on the US06 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (g), of this part. The vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00, to bring it to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 1 to 2 minute idle period that proceeds directly into the US06 driving schedule during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are c ollected for analysis. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provisions of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the compositeA

- 4

- G

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of §86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . The US06 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emissions and shall meet the
state

- of

- charge net tolerances as calculated in section G

. 10

.

7 .2.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

7 .2.2.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

7 .2.3 Subparagraph (c). [No change.]

7 .2. 4 Amend subparagraph (d): Practice runs over the prescribed driving schedule may be performed at test point to permit sampling system adjustment.

7 .2.5 Subparagraph (e). [No change.]

7 .2.6 Amend subparagraph (f) as follows.

7 .2.6.1 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(i): Immediately after completion of the preconditioning cycle, idle the vehicle. The idle period is not to be less than one minute or not greater than two minutes . Dur ing the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain on during the idle period.

(ii) For vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

7 .2.6.2 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(ix): At the completion of the test US06 cycle

, determine if the SOC c riterion in section G .10 is satisfied . If the SOC c riterion is not satisfied, then repeat the dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i)

, without the
pre conditioning cycle

. Up to three US06 emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC c riterion. The idle period between multiple test cycles shall not to be less than one minute and not greater than two minutes. For the final test cycle, turn off the vehicle two seconds after the end of the last deceleration. During the idle period between multiple test cycles, one of the following conditions shall apply:A

- 4

- G

- 18
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (i) For vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain on during the idle period.

(ii) For vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually a ctivated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

7 .3 SC03 Vehicle Preconditioning

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132

- 00 [October 22, 1996] with the following revisions. T his section 7 .3 shall apply during charge sustaining operation or at an optional charge sustaining test mode that has been activated, if no subsequent charge has been performed

.

7 .3.1 Subparagraphs (a) through (n). [No change.]

7 .3.2 Amend subparagraph (o): Air Con ditioning Test (SC03) Preconditioning

.

7 .3.2.1 Amend subparagraph (1) as follows: If the SC03 test follows the exhaust emission urban, highway, or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer. For vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowe st level allowed by the manufacturer , and t he auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 preconditioning cycle.

7 .3.2.1.1 S ubparagraph s (i) and (ii). [No change.]

7 .3.2.2 Subparagraphs (2) through (3). [No change.]

7 .4 SC03 Emission Test

.
To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.160

- 00 [December 8, 2005] with the following revisions. T his section 7 .4 shall apply during charge sustaining operation or at an optional charge sustaining test mode that has been activated, if no subsequent charge has been performed

. References to §86.162

- 03 shall mean §86.162

- 03 as adopt ed October 22, 1996.

7 .4.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview . The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 594 second test on the SC03 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (h), of this part. The vehicle is preconditionedA

- 4

- G

- 19
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 in accordance with §86.132

- 00 of this subpart, to bring the vehicle to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 10 minute vehicle soak (vehicle turned off) that proceeds directly into the SC03 driving schedule, during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. The entire test, including the SC03 preconditioning cycle, vehicle soak, and SC03 emission test, is either conducted in an environmental test facility or under test conditions that simulate testing in an environmental test cell (see §86.162

- 0 3 ( a) for a discussion of simulation procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of: 95 o F air temperature, 100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent rel ative humidity), a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m 2 , and vehicle cooling air flow proportional to vehicle speed. Section 86.161

- 00 discusses the minimum facility requirements and corresponding control tolerances for air conditioning ambient test cond itions. The vehicle’s air conditioner is operated or appropriately simulated for the duration of the test procedure (except for the 10 minute vehicle soak), including the preconditioning. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provisi ons of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For vehicles with Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For vehicles with diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampl ed and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of §86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . The SC03 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emission s and shall meet the

s tate

- of

- charge net tolerances as calculated in section G .10

.

7.4.2 Amend subparagraph (b) as follows.

7 .4.2 .1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

7.4.3 Amend subparagraph (c) as follows.

7 .4.3. 1 Amend subparagraph (c)(9): Start vehicle (with air conditioning system also running ). If the auxiliary power unit of the vehicle is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throu ghout the SC03 emission test. Fifteen seconds after the vehicle starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.

7.4.4 Amend subparagraph (d) as follows.

7 .4.4 .1 Amend subparagraph (d)(10): At the conclusion of the SC03 emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:A

- 4

- G

- 20
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (i) For vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the SC03 test

, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC c riterion in s ection G .10 is satisfied

. If the SOC criterion is not satisfied , then turn off the engine and the cooling fan(s), allow the vehicle to soak in the ambient conditions of paragraph (c)(5) of this section for 10 ± 1 minutes, and repeat the dynamometer test run from subparagraph (d). Up to three SC03 emission tests shall be attempted to satisfy the SOC c riterion.

(ii) For vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off the vehicle two seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

7.4.5 Subparagraph (e). [No change.]

7 .5 Optional Cold Start US06 Range Test.

7.5.1 Cold soak and vehicle charging. The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 o F (20 o C) and not more than 86 o F (30 o C) for 12 to 36 hours. During this time, the vehicle battery shall be charged to a full state

- of

- charge. The vehicle must be turned off during charging. Charge time shall not exceed soak time.

7.5.2 At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed or pushed onto a dynamometer, and shall be driven on a continuous US06 test cycle until either:

(a) the auxiliary power unit starts, or (b) the vehicle can no longer meet the speed trace limits of the US06 driving schedule as specified in CFR 86 Appendix I to within 2 mph higher than the highest point on the trace within 1 second for the upper limit or within 2 mph lower than the lowest point on the trace within 1 second for the lower limit.

When either of these conditions is met

, the test shall be ended. The range for this test, in miles, shall be the distant driven from the start of the test to when condition (a) or (b) is met. Emission sampling is not required for this test.

8. 50 o F and 20 o F Test Provision for Off

- Vehicle Cha rge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

50 o F testing shall be conducted pursuant to section F G .5 with the modifications in Part II, Section C of the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light Duty Trucks, and Medium Duty Vehicles” and the additional following revisions.A

- 4

- G

- 21
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 20 o F testing shall be conducted pursuant to section G .5 and shall includ e the temperature provisions in 40 CFR Part 86 Subpart C

- Emission Regulations for 1994 and Later Model Year Gasoline

- Fueled New Light

- Duty Vehicles, New Light

- Duty Trucks and New Medium

- Duty Passenger Vehicles; Cold Temperature Test Pro cedures.

For 50 o F and 20 o F charge depleting testing, vehicle charging

, prior to emissions testing

, shall be performed during the soak period at 50 o F and 20 o F, respectively.

8.1 To satisfy test requirements for the 50 o F emission test, the vehicle shal l be tested in the worst case ( NMOG + NOx) of the urban charge depleting range test or urban charge sustaining emission test as defined in section F G .5. To satisfy test requirements for the 20 o F emission test, the vehicle shall be tested in the worst case (CO) of the urban charge depleting range test or urban charge sustaining emission test as defined in section F G .5. For the 20 o F and 50 o F emission tests, the vehicle is not required to meet SOC net tolerances.

8.2 If the worst case for emissions is charge sustaining operation , the vehicle shall be preconditioned

, and one of the following t wo emission test options must be performed

.
(i) A three phase test that includes phase one as the first 505 seconds of the UDDS, phase two as 506 seconds to the end of the UDDS, a 10 minute key

- off soak period, and phase three the first 505 seconds of the UDDS. The first two phases test shall be counted as the first UDDS and the second and third phases will constitute the second UDDS. Emission weighting is as follows:

Y wm =        

+ + ∗ +        

+ + ∗

3 2 3 2

2 1 2 1 57

. 0 43

. 0 D D Y Y

D D Y Y

Where: Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH 4 , NO x , or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. Y 1 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase one of the three phase test. Y 2 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase two of the three phase test. Y 3 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase three of the three phase test. D 1 = The measured driving distance from phase one of the three phase tests, in miles. D 2 = The measured driving distance from phase two of the three phase tests, in miles. D 3 = The measured driving distance from phase three of the three phase tests, in miles.A

- 4

- G

- 22
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (ii) A two phase test that includes phase one as a UDDS, a 10 minute key

off soak period, and phase two as a UDDS. Emission weighting for the four phase test will follow the procedure outlined in section G .5.5.1.

8. 3 If measurement of worst case emiss ions requires the urban charge depleting range test to be performed , the vehicle shall be preconditioned and fully charged. The continuous urban test schedule shall then be performed. The UDDS, in which the auxiliary power unit first starts, shall be the cold UD D S. Emissions shall be sampled according to one of the options in section G .8.2. For the three phase test option, if the auxiliary power unit starts in phase two of the UDDS, phase one emissions are considered zero for emission calculation purpos es. Emissions are weighted according to section G .8.2.

9

. Additional Provisions.

9 .1 Confirmatory testing may be performed on all tests to establish if higher emissions occur at different states

- of

- charge in charge depleting mode. This is to ensure that cold start and other emissions standards are not exceeded at other operating SOCs.

9 .2 Confirmatory testing may be performed on the US06 test or the manufacturer may provide data to show that pot ential cold start off

- cycle emissions are controlled to the extent that they are controlled for the UDDS.

9 .3 Confirmatory testing may be performed on vehicles equipped with an optional charge sustaining operation mode selector with selector set to simu late charge sustaining operation or in actual charge sustaining operation in accordance with section F of these test procedures

.

9

. 4 For an example of an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle with all

- electric range and blended operation th at has charge depleting actual range and charge depleting cycle range, please see section I , Figure 1.

9

. 5 For an example of charge depleting to charge sustaining range with and without transitional range and end of test conditions, please see section I

, Figure 2.

9. 6 When deter mining t he SOC t olerance durin g testing, the current drive cycle may be aborted if the SOC tolerance is met for pr e vi ous drive cycle.

9.7 If the manufacturer determines there is insufficient fuel to run the subsequent test, the manufacturer may perform a fuel drain and fill or add fuel pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles. ”A

- 4

- G

- 23
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 10

. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances

.

10 .1 Fo r vehicles that use a battery as an energy storage device, the following
state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(Amp

- hr final ) max = (Amp

- hr initial ) + 0.01        

∗ ∗
∗

1 K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

(Amp

- hr final ) min = (Amp

- hr initial )

- 0.01        

∗ ∗
∗

1 K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

Where: (Amp

- hr final ) max = Maximum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Battery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the
test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. This value shall be submitted for testing purposes, and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board.

An alternate state

- of

- charge net tolerance may be used if shown to be technically necessary and if approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.

10 .2 For vehicles that use a capacitor as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(V final ) max = 

# ( )

C m NHV V fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗

∗ + 2 01

. 0 2

(V final ) min = 

# ( )

C m NHV V fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗

∗

− 2 01

. 0 2

Where:A

- 4

- G

- 24
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (V final ) max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the
test (V final ) min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the
test
V 2

initial = The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning
of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed durin g test, in kg C = Rated capacitance of the capacitor, in Farads

10 .3 For vehicles that use an electro

- mechanical flywheel as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(rpm final ) max = 

# ( )

3 2 2 01

. 0 K I m NHV rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗ ∗

∗ +

(rpm final ) min = 

# ( )

3 2 2 01

. 0 K I m NHV rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗ ∗ ∗

∗

−

Where: (rpm final ) max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the test (rpm final ) min = The minimum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the test

rpm 2 initial = The squared flywheel rotational speed at the beginning of

the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K 3 = Conversion factor,
2 2 2

sec 3600 4

rpm

− π

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg

- m 2A

- 4

- G

- 25
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 1 1

. Calculations

– Equivalent All

- Electric Range for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

1 1 .1 Charge Depleting CO 2 Produced means the cumulative tailpipe CO 2 emissions produced, M cd , in grams per mile during the charge depleting cycle range.

M cd = Σ Y i

where: Y i = T he sum of the CO 2 gra ms per mile in the charge depleting mode from each test cycle (UDDS or HFEDS) i = N umber (UDDS or HFEDS) of the test over the charge depleting cycle range, R cdc

1 1 .2 Charge Sustaining CO 2 Produced

- urban means the cumulative tailpipe CO 2 emissions produced, M cs , in grams per mile, during the cold start charge sustaining urban test.

M cs = 

## ( )      

− ∗ +

c c cdcu h c D D R Y Y

where: R cdc u = Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range , in miles D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS , in miles Y c = Grams per mile CO 2 emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS Y h = Gram s per mile CO 2 emissions as calculated from the hot start UDDS

1 1 .3 Cha rge Sustaining CO 2 Produced

- highway means the grams per mile tailpipe CO 2 emissions produced, M cs , during the cold start charge sustaining highway
test.

M cs = h
h cdch Y D R
∗        

where: R cdc h = Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range , in miles D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start HFEDS , in miles Y h = Gram s per mile emissions as calculated from the hot start HFEDSA

- 4

- G

- 26
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 1 1 .4 Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range (EAER u ) shall be calculated as follows:

EAER u = cdcu

cs cd cs R M M M
∗        

−

where: M cs is as defined in G .11.2

. M cd is as defined in G .11.1, using the UDDS test cycle

.

1 1 .5 Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range (EAER h ) shall be calculated as follows:

EAER h = cdch

cs cd cs R M M M
∗      

−

where: M cs is as defined in G .11.3

. M cd is as defined in G .11.1, using the HFEDS test cycle

. R cdch is as defined in G .11.3

1 1 .6 Electric Range Fraction (%).

The Electric Range Fraction means fraction of the total miles driven electrically (with the engine off) for blended operation hybrid elect ric vehicles.

The Urban Electric Range Fraction (ERF u ) is calculated as follows:

ERF u (%) = 100 ∗        

cda u R EAER

The Highway Electric Range Fraction (ERF h ) is calculated as follows:

ERF h (%) = 100 ∗        

cdah h R EAERA

- 4

- G

- 2 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 1 1 .7 Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption.

The Urban Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption (EAEREC u ) shall be calculated as follows:

E A EREC u (wh/mi) =

u cd EAER

E

where: E cd = Total electrical energy used to fully charge the vehicle battery from an external power source after the charge de pleting test has been completed . This shall be calculated for both AC and DC energy.

The Highway Equivalent All

- Electric Range Energy Consumption (EAEREC h ) shall be calculated as follows:

EAEREC h (wh/mi) =

h cd EAER

E

where: E cd = Total electrical energy used to fully charge the vehicle battery from an external power source after the charge depleting test has been completed . This shall be calculated for both AC and DC energy.

1 1 .8 The Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range , R cdcu , (see section H for an illustration of R cdcu ) shall be defined as the distance traveled on the Urban Charge Depleting Procedure up to the UDDS prior to where the state

- of

- charge is above the lower bound state

- of

- charge tolerance for one test cycle given by:

(Amp

- hr final ) min = (Amp

- hr initial )

– 0.01 *        

∗ ∗

1

K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

Where: (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the
test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Batter y Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. This value shall be submitted for testing purposes, and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board.A

- 4

- G

- 28
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 1 1 .9 The Charge Depleting Actual Range , R cda , shall be defined as the range at which the state

- of

- charge is first equal to the average state

- of

- charge of the one or two UDDSs used to end the Urban Charge Depleting Test. This range must be reported to the nearest 0.1 miles. For a n illustration of R cda see section I

.

1 1 .10 The Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Urban Range shall be defined as the distance driven in miles from the start of the Urban Charge Depleting Test through the UDDS preceding the one or two UDDSs used to end the Urban Charge Depleting Test

.

1 1 .11 The Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range , R cdch , shall be defined as the sum of the distance traveled on the Highway Charge Depleting Test up to the HFEDS prior to where the state

- of

- charge is above the lower bou nd state

- of

- charge tolerance for one test cycle given by:

(Amp

- hr final ) min = (Amp

- hr initial )

– 0.01 *        

∗ ∗

1

K V m NHV

system fuel

fuel

Where: (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the
test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Battery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. This value shall be submitted for testing purposes, and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board.

1 1 .1 2 The Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Highway Range shall b e defined as the distance driven in miles from the start of the Highway Charge Depleting Test through the HFEDS preceding the final HFEDS.

11.13 The Urban Equivalent All Electric Range for vehicles with an urban charge depleting actual range greater than 40 miles, EAER u40 , is determined through the following equation:

EAER u40 (miles) =       ×
100 40 mi ERF

uA

- 4

- G

- 29
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 12. The Calculations of the Combined Green House Gas Regulatory Rating of Off

- vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles

12.1 The combined Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions value is determined by the following equation. GHG PHEV, combined = 0.55 * ( GHG urban ) + 0.45 * ( GHG highway ) (Eq. 1)

12.2 The urban GHG emissions value for off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles is calculated u sing the following equations. 12.2.1 The urban GHG emissions value is determined by the following equation. 

## ∑ ∑ ∑

= = = − + ∗

− + = urban urban urban N

i urban cs i upstream N

i i N

i i AC cd

i i CD
i urban Y UF G UF GHG D Y UF GHG

1 . 1 1 . . . ) ( * )) ( 1 ( ) ( ) ( * ) (

(Eq. 2)

Where,

GHG urban = Rated urban GHG emissions for PHEV, in gCO 2 e/mile i = Number of charge

- depleting urban test cycle N urban = Total number of urban test cycles in charge depleting to charge sustaining range ( R cdtcs ) UF i = Utility factor for urban test cycle i Y

CD.i = Mass emissions of CO 2 in grams per vehicle mile, for th e “ i ”th test in the charge depleting test D .i = Distance of the “ i ”th urban test cycle, in miles.
GHG cd.AC.i = Rated GHG emissions for test cycle i , in gCO 2 e/mile Y

cs.urban = Weighted mass emissions of CO 2 in grams/mi of the charge sustaining test. G upstream = Gasoline upstream factor = 0.25 * GHG target .

12.2.2 The Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range ( R cdtcs ) is th e total number of cycles driven at least partially in charge depleting mode times the cycle distance. Cycles meets charge susta ining criterion are not included in the R cdtcs . The R cdtcs includes the transitional cycle, where the vehicle may have operated in both depleting and sustaining modes.

12.2.3 The utility factors for urban and highway cycles are provided in the following table.A

- 4

- G

- 30
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Utility factors for each PHEV drive cycle test with charge

- depletion operation

Test cycle

number Test cycle utility factor

Urban, UF i Highway, UF j 1 0.176 0.233 2 0.141 0.172 3 0.112 0.127 4 0.091 0.095
5 0.074 0.071 6 0.059 0.054
7 0.049 0.041 8 0.039 0.032 9 0.033 0.025 10 0.027 0.020 11 0.023 0.017 12 0.019 0.013

12.2.4 This charge

- depleting GHG rate from electricity use in each test cycle is defined by the following equation:

GHG cd.AC.i = GHG grid * E cd.AC.i (Eq. 3)
Where,
GHG cd.AC.i = Rated GHG emissions for charge

- depleting PHEV, in gCO 2 e/mile E cd.AC.i = Urban or highway charge depleting electricity use, in kWh/mile GHG grid = Lifecycle California electricity GHG intensity, 270 gCO 2 e/kWh

12.2.5 The urban or highway charge depleting electricity use is defined by the following formula:

total AC cd N

i i DC cd i DC cd i AC cd 

### E

E E E

. .

1 . . . .

. . 

### * 

# ∑

= 

### = (Eq. 4)

Where,

N = Total number of test cycles in the charge depleting to charge sustaining range (R cdtcs ) of the urban or highway charge depleting test. E cd.AC.i = AC kWh consumed in the “i”th cycle of the charge depleting
test. E cd.DC.i = Depleted DC energy for the “i”th cycle in the charge depleting test. It is defined in section F.3.4 of these test procedures. E cd.AC.total = Charge

- depleting net AC energy consumption is determined according to section F.3.4 of these test procedures.A

- 4

- G

- 31
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 12.2.6 The Y cs.urban , which is the weighted CO 2 mass emissions of the charge

- sustaining test, is determined by the following equation, which can be found in section F.5.5 of these test procedures.

H H

C C Urban CS D Y

D Y Y * 57

. 0 * 43

. 0

. + = (Eq. 5)

Where,

Y

CS.Urban = Weighted mass emissions of CO 2 in grams/mi of th e charge sustaining test. Y

C = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS, in grams per cycle. Y

H = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start UDDS, in grams per cycle. D C = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in

m iles. D H = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS, in miles.

12.3 The highway GHG emissions value for off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles is calculated using the following equation. 

## ∑ ∑ ∑

= = = − + ∗

− + = highway highway highwayn N

j highway cs j upstream N

j i N

j j AC cd j j CD j highway Y UF G UF GHG D Y UF GHG

1 . 1 1 . . . ) ( * )) ( 1 ( ) ( ) ( * } (

(Eq. 7)
Where,
GHG highway = Rated highway GHG emissions for PHEV, in gCO 2 e/mile j = Number of charge

- depleting highway test cycle N highway = Total number of highway test cycles in charge depleting to charge sustaining range ( R cdtcs ) UF j = Utility factor for highway test cycle j (see Table 1) Y

CD.j = Mass emissions of CO 2 in grams per vehicle mile, for the “j”th test in the charge depleting test D

j = Distance of the HFEDS cycle, in miles.
GHG cd.AC.j = Rated GHG emissions for test cycle j , in gCO 2 e/mile (see Eq. 3) Y

cs.highway = Mass emissions of CO 2 in grams/mi of the highway charge sustaining emission test, which can be found in section F.6.3.3 of these test procedures. G upstream = Gasoline upstream factor 0.25 * GHG targetA

- 4

- H

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 H

. Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Exhaust Emission Test Sequence.

[This page left intentionally blank for formatting purposes.]A

- 4

- H

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 

## Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable HEV Exhaust Emissions Test Sequence
* Equivalent to within ± 1% of AC energy used to charge battery to full state of charge

12

– 36 hour cold soak, canister preconditioning

12

– 36 hour cold soak

Highway Cold Start Charge Sustaining Emission Test

US06 Charge Sustaining Emission Test

SC03 Charge Sustaining Emission Test Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test

Highway Charge Depleting Range Test

Urban Charge Depleting Range Test 12

– 36 hour cold soak, charge, canister preconditioning Drain & Fuel Vehicle Preconditioning: 1 CS UDDS minimum Cold Soak 6 hours Drain & Fuel Start

Is CS E cd Equivalent* to Urban CD range test ?

N

Y Charge and record energy

Discharge 12

– 36 hour cold soak, charge and record energyA

- 4

- I

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 I

. Examples of Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Terminology

.
[This page left intentionally blank for formatting purposes.]A

- 4

- I

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2



## SOC Charge Depleting Cycle Range, R cdc 

### = 22.5 mi

Charge Sustaining Operation

UDDS 1

- 1% Fuel Energy Used for Lower Boundary (Cycles 4

- 5) UDDS 2 UDDS 3 UDDS 4 UDDS 5 +1% Fuel Energy Used for Upper Boundary (Cycles 4

- 5) 

### End of Test 

## Example of an Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable HEV with AER and Blended Operation Undergoing the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test

Charge Depleting Actual Range,

R cda 

### = 18 mi Avg SOC for CS Operation (Cycles 4

- 5)



### AER = 10 mi

EAER = 13.7 mi Engine Start



### Figure 1A

- 4

- I

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 SOC Charge Depleting Cycle Range Charge Sustaining Operation

Cycle 1 Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range

- 1% Fuel Energy Used Lower Boundary Used for R cdc Determination (Cycle 5)

Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle Cycle 6 Cycle 7  +1% Fuel Energy Used for
R cdc Determination (Cycle 5) End of Test SOC Charge Depleting Cycle Range Charge Sustaining Operation

Cycle 1

Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range

- 1% Fuel Energy Used for Lower B oundary (Cycles 5

- 6)

Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle Cycle 6 +1% Fuel Energy Used for Upper Boundary (Cycles 5

- 6) End of Test



### Example of Urban End of Test Conditions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable HEV with Transitional Range

+1% Fuel Energy Used for Upper Boundary (Cycle 6

- 7)

- 1% Fuel Energy Used for Lower Boundary (Cycle 6

- 7) 

### Example of Urban End of Test Conditions for Off

- Vehicle Charge Capable HEV

Transitional Range



### FigureA

- 4

- J

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 J

. Test Procedures for 20 09 through 201 1 Model Zero

- Emission Vehicles and Hybrid

- Electric Vehicles.

The “as adopted or amended dates” of the 40 CFR Part 86 regulations referenced by this document are the dates identified in the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks and Medium

- Duty Vehicles.”

1. Electric Dynamometer. All ZEVs must be tested using a 48

- inch single roll electric dynamometer meeting the requirements of 40 CFR Subpart B, §86.108

- 00(b)(2).

2. Vehicle and Battery Break

- In Period. A manufacturer shall use good engineering judgment i n determining the proper stabilized emissions mileage test point and report same according to the requirements of section D.2.11 above.

3. All

- Electric Range Test. All 2009 through 2011 ZEVs and only off

vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles shall be subject to the All

- Electric Range Test specified below for the purpose of determining the energy efficiency and operating range of a ZEV or of an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle operating without the use of its auxiliary power u nit. For hybrid electric vehicles, the manufacturer may elect to conduct the All

- Electric Range Test prior to vehicle preconditioning in the exhaust and evaporative emission test sequence specified in the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Tes t Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”.

3.1 Cold soak . The vehicle shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68 ° F (20 ° C) and not more than 86 ° F (30 ° C) for 12 to 36 hours. During this time, the vehicle’s battery shall be charged to a full state

- of

- charge.

3.2 Driving schedule.

3.2.1 Determination of Urban All

- Electric Range.

(a) At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed, either driven or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through successi ve Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedules (UDDS), 40 CFR, Part 86, Appendix I, which is incorporated herein by reference. A 10

- minute soak shall follow each UDDS cycle.

(b) For vehicles with a maximum speed greater than or equal to the maximum speed on the UDDS cycle, this test sequence shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to maintain either the speed or time tolerances in 40 CFR §86.115

- 00 (b)(1) and (2), or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety

reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc. For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles, this determination shall be performed without the use of the auxiliary power unit.A

- 4

- J

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (c) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than the maximum speed on the UDDS cycle, the vehicle shall be operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) when the vehicle cannot achieve the speed trace within the speed and time tolerances specified in 40 CFR § 86.115

- 00(b)(1) and (2). The test shall be terminated when the vehicle speed when operated at maximum available power (or full throttle) falls below 95 percent of the maximum speed initially achieved on the UDDS cycle or when the battery state

- of

- charge is depleted to the lo west level allowed by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc., whichever occurs first. For off

- vehicle charge c apable hybrid electric vehicles, this determination shall be performed without the use of the auxiliary power unit.

3.2.2 Determination of Highway All

- Electric Range.

(a) At the end of the cold soak period, the vehicle shall be placed, either driven

or pushed, onto a dynamometer and operated through two successive Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedules (HFEDS), 40 CFR, Part 600, Appendix I, which is incorporated herein by reference. There shall be a 15 second zero speed with key on and brake depressed b etween two cycles and a 10

- minute soak following the two HFEDS cycles.

(b) For vehicles with a maximum speed greater than or equal to the maximum speed on the HFEDS cycle, this test sequence shall be repeated until the vehicle is no longer able to mainta in either the speed or time tolerances in 40 CFR § 86.115

- 00 (b)(1) and (2), or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc. For off

- vehi cle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles, this determination is optional and shall be performed without the use of the auxiliary power unit.

(c) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than the maximum speed on the HFEDS cycle, the vehicle shall be ope rated at maximum available power (or full throttle) when the vehicle cannot achieve the speed trace within the speed and time tolerances specified in 40 CFR § 86.115

- 00(b)(1) and (2). The test shall be terminated when the vehicle speed when operated at ma ximum available power (or full throttle) falls below 95 percent of the maximum speed initially achieved on the HFEDS cycle or when the battery state

- of

- charge is depleted to the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer, or the manufacturer determines that the test should be terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low battery voltage, etc., whichever occurs first. For off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles, this determination shall be performed witho ut the use of the auxiliary power unit.

(d) NEVs are exempt from the highway all

- electric range test.

3.2.3 Recording requirements. Once the vehicle is no longer able to maintain the speed and time requirements specified in (2) above, or once the auxil iary power unitA

- 4

- J

- 3
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 turns on, in the case of an off

- vehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicle, the vehicle shall be brought to an immediate stop and the following data recorded:

(a) mileage accumulated during the All

- Electric Range Test; (b) Net DC energ y from the battery that was expended during the All

- Electric Range Test (may be reported as the total DC battery energy output and the total DC battery energy input during the All

- Electric Range Test); (c) AC energy required to fully charge the battery after the All

- Electric Range Test from the point where electricity is introduced from the electric outlet to the battery charger; and (d) DC energy required to fully charge the battery after the All

- Electric Range Test from the point where electricity is i ntroduced from the battery charger to the battery.

Battery charging shall begin within 1 hour after terminating the All

- Electric Range Test.

3.2.4 Regenerative braking . Regenerative braking systems may be utilized during the range test. The braking level, if adjustable, shall be set according to the manufacturer’s specifications prior to the commencement of the test. The driving schedule speed and time tolerances specified in (2) shall not be exceeded due to the operation of the regenerative braking system.

4. Determination of Battery Specific Energy for ZEVs

.
Determine the specific energy of batteries used to power a ZEV in accordance with the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium’s Electric Vehicle Battery Procedure Manual (January 1996), Procedure No . 2, “Constant Current Discharge Test Series,” using the C/3 rate. The weight calculation must reflect a completely functional battery system as defined in the Appendix of the Manual, including pack(s), required support ancillaries (e.g., thermal manageme nt), and electronic controller.

5. Determination of the Emissions of the Fuel

- fired Heater for Vehicles Other Than ZEVs

.

The exhaust emissions result of the fuel

- fired heater shall be determined by operating at a maximum heating capacity with a cold sta rt between 68 o F and 86 o F for a period of 20 minutes and dividing the grams of emissions by 20. The resulting grams per minute shall be multiplied by 3.0 minutes per mile for a grams per mile value.

6. Hybrid Electric Vehicle FTP Emission Test Provision s

.
Alternative procedures may be used if shown to yield equivalent results and if approved in advance by the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board.

6.1 Vehicle Preconditioning

.A

- 4

- J

- 4
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 To be conducted pursuant to the “California Evaporative Emission Stan dards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” with the following supplemental requirements:

6.1.1 Battery state

- of

- charge shall be set prior to initial fuel drain and fill before vehicle preconditioning.

6.1.2 For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of tim e during the preconditioning drive.

6.1.3 For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric ve hicle is charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the UDDS, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recomm ended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in urban driving conditions.

6.1.4 After setting battery state

- of

- charge, the hybrid electric vehicle shall be pushed or towed to a work area for fuel drain and fill accordin g to sections D.1.1. and D.1.2. of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”.

6.1.5 Following fuel drain and fill, the vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on a dynamometer a nd preconditioned. If the auxiliary power unit is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the preconditioning drive.

6.1.6 Within five minutes of completing pre conditioning drive, battery state

- of

charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle does not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and is charge

- sustaining over the UDDS, the n set battery state

- of

- charge to a level such that the SOC Criterion (see section B., Definitions, of these procedures) would be satisfied for the dynamometer procedure (section 6.2 of these procedures). If off

- vehicle charging is required to increase bat tery state

- of

- charge for proper setting, off

- vehicle charging shall occur during 12 to 36 hour soak period.A

- 4

- J

- 5
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle does not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and is charge

- depleting over the UDDS, then no bat tery state

- of

- charge adjustment is permissible.

(iii) If the hybrid electric vehicle does allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, then set battery state

- of

- charge to manufacturer recommended level for activating the auxiliary power unit when the hybrid electric vehicle is operating in urban driving conditions.

6.2 Dynamometer Procedure

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.135

- 00 with the following revisions:

6.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview. The dynamometer run consists of two tests, a “cold” start test, after a minimum 12

- hour and a maximum 36

- hour soak pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”

, and a “hot” start test following the “cold” start test by 10 minutes. Vehicle startup (with all accessories turned off), operation over the UDDS and vehicle shutdown make a complete cold start test. Vehicle startup and operation over the UDDS and vehicle shutdown make a complete hot sta rt test. The exhaust emissions are diluted with ambient air in the dilution tunnel as shown in Figure B94

- 5 and Figure B94

- 6. A dilution tunnel is not required for testing vehicles waived from the requirement to measure particulates. Four particulate

s amples are collected on filters for weighing; the first sample plus backup is collected during the cold start test (including shutdown); the second sample plus backup is collected during the hot start test (including shutdown). Continuous proportional sam ples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis during each test. For hybrid electric vehicles with gasoline

- fueled, natural gas

- fueled and liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are a nalyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units (optional for natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled and methanol

- fueled diesel

- cycle vehicles), THC is sampled and an alyzed continuously pursuant to the provisions of § 86.110. Parallel samples of the dilution air are similarly analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with natural gas

- fueled, liquefied petroleum gas

- fueled and methanol

- fuele d auxiliary power units, bag samples are collected and analyzed for THC (if not sampled continuously), CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with methanol

- fueled auxiliary power units, methanol and formaldehyde samples are taken for both exha ust emissions and dilution air (a single dilution air formaldehyde sample, covering the total test period may be collected). Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .A

- 4

- J

- 6
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 6.2.2 S ubparagraph (d). [No change.]

6.2.3 Ame nd subparagraph (h): The driving distance, as measured by counting the number of dynamometer roll or shaft revolutions, shall be determined for the cold start test and hot start test. The revolutions shall be measured on the same roll or shaft used for m easuring the vehicle’s speed.

6.3 Dynamometer Test Run, Gaseous and Particulate Emissions

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.137

- 96 with the following revisions:

6.3.1 Amend subparagraph (a): General. The dynamometer run consists of two tests, a cold start test, after a minimum 12

- hour and a maximum 36

- hour soak pursuant to the provisions of the “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles” and a hot start test following the cold start test by 10 minutes. The vehicle shall be stored prior to the emission test in such a manner that precipitation (e.g., rain or dew) does not occur on the vehicle. The complete dynamometer test consists of a cold start drive of 7.5 miles (12.1 km) and a h ot start drive of 7.5 miles (12.1 km). The vehicle is allowed to stand on the dynamometer during the 10 minute time period between the cold and hot start tests.

6.3.2 Amend subparagraph (b)(9): Start the gas flow measuring device, position the sample se lector valves to direct the sample flow into the exhaust sample bag, the methanol exhaust sample, the formaldehyde exhaust sample, the dilution air sample bag, the methanol dilution air sample and the formaldehyde dilution air sample (turn on the petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle THC analyzer system integrator, mark the recorder chart, start particulate sample pump No. 1, and record both gas meter or flow measurement instrument readings, if applicable), and turn the key on. If the auxiliary power unit is capab le of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the UDDS.

6.3.2 Delete subparagraph (13).

6.3.3 Amend subparagraph (14): Turn the vehicle off 2 seconds after the end of the last dec eleration (at 1,369 seconds).

6.3.4 Amend subparagraph (15): Five seconds after the vehicle is shutdown, simultaneously turn off gas flow measuring device No. 1 and if applicable, turn off the hydrocarbon integrator No. 1, mark the hydrocarbon recorder c hart, turn off the No. 1 particulate sample pump and close the valves isolating particulate filter No. 1, and position the sample selector valves to the “standby” position. Record the measured roll or shaft revolutions (both gas meterA

- 4

- J

- 7
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 or flow measurement instrumentation readings), and reset the counter. As soon as possible, transfer the exhaust and dilution air samples to the analytical system and process the samples pursuant to § 86.140, obtaining a stabilized reading of the exhaust bag sample on all ana lyzers within 20 minutes of the end of the sample collection phase of the test. Obtain methanol and formaldehyde sample analyses, if applicable, within 24 hours of the end of the sample period. (If it is not possible to perform analysis on the methanol a nd formaldehyde samples within 24 hours, the samples should be stored in a dark cold (4  C to 10C) environment until analysis. The samples should be analyzed within fourteen days.) If applicable, carefully remove both pairs of particulate sample filters from their respective holders, and place each in a separate petri dish, and cover.

6.3.3 Amend subparagraph (18): Repeat the steps in paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(17) of this section for the hot start test. The step in paragraph (b)(9) of this section shall begin between 9 and 11 minutes after the end of the sample period for the cold start test.

6.3.4 Delete subparagraph (19).

6.3.5 Delete subparagraph (20).

6.3.6 Amend subparagraph (21): As soon as possible, and in no case longer than one hour aft er the end of the hot start phase of the test, transfer the four particulate filters to the weighing chamber for post

- test conditioning, if applicable. For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit and are ch arge

- sustaining over the UDDS, a valid test shall satisfy the SOC Criterion (see Definitions, section B of these procedures).

6.3.7 Amend subparagraph (24): Vehicles to be tested for evaporative emissions will proceed pursuant to the “California Evaporat ive Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”.

6.4 Calculations

- Exhaust Emissions

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.144

- 94 with the following revisions:

6.4.1 Amend subparagraph (a): For light

- duty vehi cles and light duty trucks:

Y wm = 0.43 * Y c + 0.57 * Y h D c D h

Where:A

- 4

- J

- 8
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (1) Y wm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, THCE, NMHC, NMHCE, CH 4 , NO x , or CO 2 , in grams per vehicle mile. (2) Y c = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start test, in grams per test. (3) Y h = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start test, in grams per test. (4) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in miles. (5) D h = The measur ed driving distance from the hot start test, in miles.

6.5 Calculations

- Particulate Emissions

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.145

- 82 with the following revisions:

6.5.1 Amend subparagraph (a): The final reported test results for the mass parti culate (M p ) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

M p = 0.43 * M pc + 0.57 *M ph D c D h

Where: (1) M pc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start test, in grams per vehicle mile. (See § 86.110

- 94 for determination.) (2) M ph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start test, in grams per vehicle mile. (See § 86.110

- 94 for determination.) (3) D c = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in miles. (4) D h = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in miles.

7. Hybrid Electric Vehicle Highway Emission Test Provisions

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 600.1 11

- 93 with the following revisions:

7.1 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): The highway fuel economy test is designated to simulate non

- metropolitan driving with an average speed of 48.6 mph and a maximum speed of 60 mph. The cycle is 10.2 miles long with 0.2 st op per mile and consists of warmed

- up vehicle operation on a chassis dynamometer through a specified driving cycle. A proportional part of the diluted exhaust emission is collected continuously for subsequent analysis of THC, CO, CO 2 , and NO x using a cons tant volume (variable dilution) sampler. Diesel dilute exhaust is continuously analyzed forA

- 4

- J

- 9
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 hydrocarbons using a heated sample line and analyzer. Methanol and formaldehyde samples are collected and individually analyzed for methanol

- fueled vehicles.

7.2 Amend subparagraph (f)(3): Only one exhaust sample and one background sample are collected and analyzed for THC (except diesel hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO 2 , and NO x . Methanol and formaldehyde samples (exhaust and dilution air) are collected and analyzed for methanol

- fueled vehicles.

7.3 Add subparagraph (f)(5): Battery state

- of

- charge shall be set prior to performing the HFEDS preconditioning cycle. For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxi liary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the HFEDS preconditioning cycle. For hybrid electric ve hicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, battery state

- of

- charg e shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the HFEDs, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power un it when operating in highway driving conditions.

7.4 Amend subparagraph (h)(5): Operate the vehicle over one HFEDS preconditioning cycle according to the dynamometer driving schedule specified in  600.109(b). If the a uxilia ry powe r unit is ca pa ble of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the HFEDS preconditioning cycle.

7.5 Amend subparagraph (h)(6): When the vehicle reaches zero speed at the end of the HFEDS precond itioning cycle, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare for the HFEDS emission measurement cycle of the test. Reset and enable the roll revolution counter. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicle s that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, the vehicle shall be momentarily turned off for 5 seconds and turned back on during the idle period. The battery state

- of

- charge shall be recor ded after the hybrid electric vehicle has fully turned on.A

- 4

- J

- 10
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 (ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the HFEDS, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the idle pe riod.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain turned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

7.6 Add subparagraph (h)(9): At the conclusion of t he HFEDS emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the HFEDS, record the battery state

- of

- charge to deter mine if the SOC Criterion (see Definitions, section B of these procedures) is satisfied. If the SOC Criterion is not satisfied, then repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (h)(6). A total of three highway emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC Criterion. Manufacturers may elect to repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (h)(6) if battery energy level increased significantly relative to the initial battery state

- of

- charge set at the beginning of the HFEDS emission test.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the HFEDS, the emission test is completed.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually ac tivated, the emission test is completed.

8. Hybrid Electric Vehicle SFTP Emission Test Provisions

8.1 US06 Vehicle Preconditioning

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.132

- 00 with the following revisions:

8.1.1 Amend subparagraph (n): Aggressive Driving Test (US06) Preconditioning. (1) If the US06 test follows the exhaust emission FTP or evaporative testing, the refueling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the t ank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer provided that battery state

- of

- charge has not been set; otherwise, if battery state

- of

- charge is set prior to securing vehicle on dynamomete r, vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on dynamometer. Battery state

- of

- charge shall be set prior to performing the US06 preconditioning cycle. For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, batte ry state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electricA

- 4

- J

- 11
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative amount of time during the US06 preconditioning drive. For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the US06, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the low est level allowed by the manufacturer. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the US06 preconditioning cycle.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the US06, battery state

- o f

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the U S06 preconditioning cycle.

8.1.2 Delete subparagraphs (n)(1)(i) and (n)(1)(ii).

8.2 US06 Emission Test

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159

- 00 with the following revisions:

8.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview. The dynamometer operation consi sts of a single, 600 second test on the US06 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (g), of this part. The hybrid electric vehicle is preconditioned in accordance with § 86.132

- 00, to bring it to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This pr econditioning is followed by a 1 to 2 minute idle period that proceeds directly into the US06 driving schedule during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. If engine stalling should occur during testing, fo llow the provisions of § 86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For hybrid electric vehicles with gasoline

- fueled Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electr ic vehicles with petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of § 86.110. Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

8.2.2 Amend subparag raph (b)(2): Position (vehicle shall be pushed or towed if battery state

- of

- charge is set prior to securing to dynamometer otherwise vehicle may be driven as well) the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

8.2.3 Amend subparagraph (d): Practice runs over the prescribed driving schedule may be performed at test point, provided that battery state

- of

- charge setting is conducted after practice and an emission sample is not taken, for theA

- 4

- J

- 12
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 purpose of finding the appropriate throttle action to maintain the proper speed

time relationship, or to permit sampling system adjustment.

8.2.4 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(i): Immediately after completion of the US06 preconditioning cycle, idle the vehicle. The idle period is not to be less than one minute or not g reater than two minutes. During the idle period, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over the US06, the vehicle shall be momentarily turned off for 5 seconds and turned back on during the idle period. The battery state

- of

- charge shall be recorded after the hybrid electric vehicle has fully turned on.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary
powe r unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the US06, the vehicle shall remain turned on during the idle period.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, the vehicle shall remain tu rned on with the auxiliary power unit operating during the idle period.

8.2.5 Amend subparagraph (f)(2)(ix): At the conclusion of the US06 emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow man ual activation of the auxiliary power unit and are charge

- sustaining over the US06, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC Criterion (see Definitions, section B of these procedures) is satisfied. If the SOC Criterion is not satisfied, then repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i). A total of three US06 emission tests shall be allowed to satisfy the SOC Criterion. Manufacturers may elect to repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i) if battery energy level i ncreased significantly relative to the initial battery state

- of

- charge set at the beginning of US06 emission test.

(ii) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the US06 , turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

8.3 SC03 Vehicle Pre conditioningA

- 4

- J

- 13
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132

- 00 with the following revisions:

8.3.1 Amend subparagraph (o): Air Conditioning Test (SC03) Preconditioning. (1) If the SC03 test follows the exhaust emission FTP or evaporative testing, the refu eling step may be deleted and the vehicle may be preconditioned using the fuel remaining in the tank (see paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section). The test vehicle may be pushed or driven onto the test dynamometer provided that battery state

- of

- charge has n ot been set; otherwise, if battery state

- of

- charge is set prior to securing vehicle on dynamometer, vehicle shall be pushed or towed into position on dynamometer. Battery state

- of

- charge shall be set prior to performing the SC03 preconditioning cycle. Fo r hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative

amou nt of time during the SC03 preconditioning drive. For hybrid electric vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state

- of

charge shall be set at a level that satisfies one of the following conditions:

(i) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- sustaining over the SC03, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the lowest level allowed by the manufacturer. The auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 preconditi oning cycle.

(ii) If the hybrid electric vehicle is charge

- depleting over the SC03, battery state

- of

- charge shall be set at the level recommended by the manufacturer for activating the auxiliary power unit when operating in highway driving conditions. Th e auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 preconditioning cycle.

8.3.2 Delete subparagraphs (o)(1)(i) and (o)(1)(ii).

8.4 SC03 Emission Test

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR § 86.160

- 00 wit h the following revisions:

8.4.1 Amend subparagraph (a): Overview. The dynamometer operation consists of a single, 594 second test on the SC03 driving schedule, as described in appendix I, paragraph (h), of this part. The hybrid electric vehicle is
p reconditioned in accordance with §86.132

- 00 of this subpart, to bring the vehicle to a warmed

- up stabilized condition. This preconditioning is followed by a 10 minute vehicle soak (vehicle turned off) that proceeds directly into the SC03 driving schedule, during which continuous proportional samples of gaseous emissions are collected for analysis. The entire test, including the SC03A

- 4

- J

- 14
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 preconditioning cycle, vehicle soak, and SC03 emission test, is either conducted in an environmental test facility or under test conditions that simulates testing in an environmental test cell (see Sec. 86.162

- 00 (a) for a discussion of simulation procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of : 95 o F air temperature, 100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m 2 , and vehicle cooling air flow proportional to vehicle speed. Section 86.161

- 00 discusses the minimum facilit y requirements and corresponding control tolerances for air conditioning ambient test conditions. The vehicle’s air conditioner is operated or appropriately simulated for the duration of the test procedure (except for the 10 minute vehicle soak), includin g the preconditioning. If engine stalling should occur during testing, follow the provisions of §86.136

- 90 (engine starting and restarting). For hybrid electric vehicles with gasoline

- fueled Otto

- cycle auxiliary power units, the composite samples collect ed in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x . For hybrid electric vehicles with petroleum

- fueled diesel

- cycle auxiliary power units, THC is sampled and analyzed continuously according to the provisions of § 86.110. Parallel bag samples of diluti on air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO 2 , CH 4 and NO x .

8.4.2 Amend subparagraph (b)(2): Position (vehicle shall be pushed or towed if battery state

- of

- charge is set prior to securing to dynamometer otherwise vehicle may be driven as well) the test vehicle on the dynamometer and restrain.

8.4.3 Amend subparagraph (c)(9): Start vehicle (with air conditioning system also running). If the auxiliary power unit of the hybrid electric vehicle is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 emission test. Fifteen seconds after the vehicle starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.

8.4.4 Amend subparagraph (c)(12): Turn the vehicle off 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

8.4.5 Amend subparagraph (d)(7): Start vehicle (with air conditioning system also running). If the auxiliary power unit of the hybrid electric vehicle is capable of being manually activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 emission test. Fifteen seconds after the vehicle starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.

8.4.6 Amend subparagraph (d)(10): At the conclusion of the SC03 emission test, one of the following conditions shall apply:

(i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- sustaining over theA

- 4

- J

- 15
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 SC03, record the battery state

- of

- charge to determine if the SOC Criterion (see Definitions, section B of these procedures) is satisfied. If the SOC Criterion is not satisfied, then turn off cooling fan(s), allow vehicle to soak in the ambient conditions of paragraph (c)(5) of this section for 10 ± 1 minutes, and repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (d). A total of three SC03 emission tests shall be attempted to satisfy the SOC Criterion. Manufacturers may elect to repeat dynamometer test run fr om subparagraph (d) following a 10 ± 1 minute soak in the ambient conditions of paragraph (c)(5) of this section if battery energy level increased significantly relative to the initial battery state

- of

- charge set at the beginning of SC03 emission test.

(i i) For hybrid electric vehicles that do not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are charge

- depleting over the SC03, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

(iii) For hybrid electric vehicles that allow th e auxiliary power unit to be manually activated, turn off vehicle 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.

9. State

- of

- Charge Net Change Tolerances

9.1 For hybrid electric vehicles that use a battery as an energy storage device, the following st ate

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(Amp

- hr final ) max = (Amp

- hr initial ) + 0.01 * (NHV fuel * m fuel ) (V system * K 1 )

(Amp

- hr final ) min = (Amp

- hr initial )

– 0.01 * ) K (V ) m NVH (

1 system fuel

fuel

∗ ∗

Where:

(Amp

- hr final ) max = Maximum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the test (Amp

- hr final ) min = Minimum allowed Amp

- hr stored in battery at the end of the
test (Amp

- hr initial ) = Battery Amp

- hr stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 1 = Conversion factor, 3600 s econds/hour V system = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. ThisA

- 4

- J

- 16
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 value shall be submitted for testing purposes, and it shall be subject to confirmation by the Air Resources Board.

9.2 For hybrid electric vehicles that use a capacitor as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(V final ) max = C m NHV V fuel fuel
initial ) 2 ( 01

. 0 ) ( 2 ∗ ∗
∗ +

(V final ) min = C m NHV V fuel fuel
initial ) 2 ( 01

. 0 ) ( 2 ∗ ∗
∗

−

Where: (V final )

max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test (V final ) min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test (V initial ) 2

= The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg C = Rated capacitance of the capacitor, in FaradsA

- 4

- J

- 17
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 9.3 For hybrid electric vehicles that use an electro

- mechanical flywheel as an energy storage device, the following state

- of

- charge net change tolerance shall apply:

(rpm final ) max = ) K 1 ( ) m NVH 2 ( 01

. 0 ) rpm (

3 fuel fuel 2
initial ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ +

(rpm final ) min = ) K 1 ( ) m NVH 2 ( 01

. 0 ) rpm (

3 fuel fuel 2
initial ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗

−

Where: (rpm final ) max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the
test (rpm final ) min = The minimum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the
test (rpm initial ) 2

= The squared flywheel rotational speed at the beginning of the test NHV fuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

m fuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg K 3 = Conversion factor, 4  2 /(3600 sec 2

- rpm 2 ) I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg

- m 2A

- 4

- K

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 K . Advanced Technology Demonstration Program data requirements.

A vehicle placed in a California advanced technology demonstration program may earn ZEV credits even if it is not “delivered for sale” in accordance with the ZEV regulation section C.7.4 . Approval by the ARB’s Executive Officer is required for Advanced Technology Demonstration Program credits. The following data shall be provided in order to evaluate applications for an Executive Order:

1. Project Description (a) General description (b) Goal (c) S pecific objectives (e.g. durability tests, customer marketability) (d) Location (include state, city, and agency/organization)

2. Vehicle data (a) Model (b) Model year (c) Date placed in program (d) Vehicle Identification Number (VIN)

3. Vehicle specifications (a) Passenger car (PC) or light duty truck (LDT) (b) Curb weight

– pounds (lbs) (c) Payload (lbs) (d) City/highway range

– miles (mi) (e) Estimated fuel economy or EPA fuel economy city/highway

– miles per gallon (mpg) (f) Fuel type (g) Refueling time (h) Electric motor output

– kilowatts (kW) (i) Hybrid energy storage; type, capacity and peak power (j) For Battery Electric Vehicles and hybrids

– fuel fired heater (yes/no) (k) For Fuel Cell Vehicles (FCVs), fuel cell stack: type, peak output, manufacturer and estimated design life.

### APPENDIX A

- 5



## PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation: Electric Vehicle Charging Requirements

Title 13, California Code of RegulationsThis Page Left Intentionally Blank§1962.3 A

- 5

- 1
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Appendix A

- 5 PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Amend and Re number section 1962. 2 , title 13, California Code of Regulation (CCR), to read as follows:

[ Note: Set forth below are the 2012 amendments to the electric vehicle charging requirements . The text of the amendments is shown in underline to indicate additions and strikeout to indicate deletions, compared to the preexisting regulatory language. ]

§ 1962. 2. 3. Electric Vehicle Charging Requirements

(a) Applicability

. This section applies to (1) all battery electric vehicles

, range extended battery electric vehi cles, except for model year 2006 through 2013 neighborhood electric vehicles, that qualify for 1.0 or greater ZEV credit under section 1962 .1 and 1962.2

, and (2) all hybrid electric vehicles that are capable of being recharged by a battery charger that tra nsfers energy from the electricity grid to the vehicle for purposes of recharging the vehicle traction battery , other than battery electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles that are only capable of Level 1 charging

.
(b) Definitions

. (1) The definitio ns in section 1962 .1 and 1962.2 apply to this section.

(2) "Level 1 charging" means a charging method that allows an electric vehicle or hybrid electric vehicle to be charged by having its charger connected to the most common grounded receptacle (NEMA 5

- 15 R). A vehicle that is only capable of Level 1 charging is one that is charged by

an on

- board or off

- board charger capable of accepting energy from the existing AC supply network. The maximum power is 12 amps, with a branch circuit rating of 15 amps, and co ntinuous power of 1.44 kilowatts.

(c) Requirements

. (1) Beginning with the 2006 model year, all vehicles identified in subsection (a) must be equipped with a conductive charger inlet port and charging system which meets all the specifications applicable to AC Level 1 and Level 2 charging contained in Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice SAE J1772 REV NOV 2001 JAN2010 , SAE Electric Vehicle and Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler, which is incorpor ated herein by reference. All such vehicles must be equipped with an on

- board charger with a minimum output of 3.3 kilovolt amps. kilowatts, or, sufficient power to enable a complete charge in less than 4 hours

.§1962.3 A

- 5

- 2
Date of Release: December 7 , 2011 Scheduled for Consideration: January 26

- 27 , 201 2 Note: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 3960 1, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39003, 39667, 43000, 43009.5, 43013, 43018, 43100, 43101, 43101.5, 43102, 43104, 43105, 43106, 43107, 43204 and 43205.5, Health and Safety Code. Authority cited: Se ctions 39600, 39601, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 38562, 39002, 39003, 39667, 43000, 43009.5, 43013, 43018, 43018.5, 43100, 43101, 43101.5, 43102, 43104, 43105, 43106, 43107, 43204 and 43205.5, Health an d Safety Code.

# APPENDIX B

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FOR THE ADVANCED CLEAN CARS PROGRAM

# APPENDIX B

Draft Environmental Analysis

prepared for the

Advanced Clean Cars Program

Analyzing Amendments to California’s Low

- Emission Vehicle Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas ( LEV III), Zero Emission Vehicle ( ZEV), and Clean Fuels Outlet ( CFO) Regulations



## California Air Resources Board

1001 I Street Sacramento, California, 95812

Date of Release: December 7 , 20 1 1Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents Draft Environmental Analysis

i 

## Table of Contents

ES. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

................................ ................................ ...................... 1

A. OVERVIEW OF ADVANCED CLEAN CARS PROGRAM

............................. 1 1. California’s Advanced Clean Cars Program and Its Economic Benefits

................................ ................................ .............................. 1 2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Goals

................................ .................... 3 3. Criteria Emission Standards

................................ .............................. 4 4. Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards

................................ ............... 4 5. Phasing In Maximum Feasible and Cost

- Effective Technologies

................................ ................................ ..................... 5

B. Environmental Impacts

................................ ................................ .................. 6 1. C riteria Emissions Reductions

................................ ........................... 6 2. GHG Emission Reductions

................................ ................................ 7 3. Other Environmental Impacts

................................ ............................ 7

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BAC KGROUND

................................ .............................. 9

A. ARB’s Certified Regulatory Program and Environmentally Mandated Projects under the California Environmental Quality Act

.............................. 10 1. CEQA Requirements Under ARB’s Certified Regulatory Program

................................ ................................ ........................... 10 2. Public Review Process for the EA

................................ ................... 11

B. Project Background

................................ ................................ ...................... 12 1. Previous Rulemakings

................................ ................................ ..... 12 2. A RB Nexus with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

........................ 21

D. ACC Program Objec tives

................................ ................................ ............. 22

E. Scope of Analysis and Assumptions

................................ ............................ 23 1. Environmental Checklist

................................ ................................ .. 25 2. Basis for Environmental Impact Analysis and Significance Determinations

................................ ................................ ................. 25

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

................................ ................................ ................. 29

A. Amendments to the Low

- Emission Vehicle and Greenhouse Gas Regulation (LEV III)

................................ ................................ ...................... 29 1. Amendments to the California Evaporative Emission Regulations

................................ ................................ ...................... 30 2. Manufacturer Size Definition

................................ ............................ 31 3. Amendments to the Environmental Performance Label

................... 31Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents Draft Environmental Analysis

ii 4. Amendments to the On

- Board Diagnostic System Requirements

................................ ................................ .................. 31 5. Amendments to the Specifications for California Certification Fuel Regulation

................................ ................................ ................ 32

B. Amendments to the Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation (ZEV)

..................... 33

C. Amendments to the Clean Fuels Outlet Regulation (CFO)

.......................... 33

D. The “Project” as Three Combined Regulatory Amendment Packages.

........ 35

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTIN G

................................ ................................ ............ 37

A. Aesthetics

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 37 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 37 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 37

B. Agricultural and Forest Resources

................................ ............................... 39 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 39 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 39

C. Air Quality

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 42 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 42 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 53

D. Greenhouse Gases

................................ ................................ ...................... 55 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 55 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 61

E. Biological Resources

................................ ................................ ................... 66 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 66 2. Reg ulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 67

F. Cultural Resources

................................ ................................ ...................... 71 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 71 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 73

G. Geo logy and Soils

................................ ................................ ........................ 76 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 76 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 77

H. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

................................ ............................... 79 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 79 2. Regulatory Setting

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

I. Hydrology and Water Quality

................................ ................................ ....... 83 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 83 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 86

J. Land Use and Planning

................................ ................................ ................ 89 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 89 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 90Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents Draft Environmental Analysis

iii K. Mineral Resources

................................ ................................ ....................... 92 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 92 2. Reg ulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ........... 94

L. Noise

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 95 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ .......... 95 2. Regulatory Setting

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

M. Employment, Population, and Housing

................................ ...................... 102 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ ........ 102 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ......... 103

N. Public Services

................................ ................................ .......................... 104 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ ........ 104 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ......... 106

O. Recreation

................................ ................................ ................................ . 107 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ ........ 107 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ......... 107

P. Transportation and Traffic

................................ ................................ .......... 108 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ ........ 108 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ......... 109

Q. Utilities and Service Systems

................................ ................................ ..... 110 1. Existing Conditions

................................ ................................ ........ 110 2. Regulatory Setting

................................ ................................ ......... 112

4.0 REGULATED COMMUNITY COMPLIANCE RESPONSES

............................ 115

A. Low

- Emission Vehicle and Greenhouse Gas Regulat ion (LEV III)

............ 115 1. Fleet Mix

................................ ................................ ........................ 115 2. Technol ogy Improvements

................................ ............................. 117 3. California Evaporative Emission Regulations

................................ 120 4. Manufacturer Size Definition

................................ .......................... 120 5. Amendments to the Environmental Performance Label

................. 120 6. Amendments to the On

- Board Diagnostic System Requirements

................................ ................................ ................ 121 7. Amendments to the Specifications for California Certification Fuel Regulation

................................ ................................ .............. 121

B. Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation (ZEV)

................................ ................... 121 1. Fleet Mix

................................ ................................ ........................ 121 2. Battery Production

................................ ................................ ......... 122 3. Lithium Demand

................................ ................................ ............. 123 4. Bat tery Disposal, Recycling, and Exchange

................................ .. 124 5. Plug Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

................................ . 125 6. Electricity Demand

................................ ................................ ......... 126 7. Fuel Cell Production

................................ ................................ ...... 126 8. Platinum Demand

................................ ................................ .......... 126Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents Draft Environmental Analysis

iv 9. Fuel Cell Disposal, Recycling, and Exchange

................................ 127 10. Hydrogen Fueling Infra structure

................................ .................... 129

C. Clean Fuels Outlets (Upper Bound Scenario)

................................ ............ 129 1. Triggering of the Clean Fuels Outlet Requirements

....................... 129 2. New Hydrogen Fueling Stations

................................ .................... 131 3. Locations of Hydrogen Fuel Outlets

................................ ............... 133 4. Construction of Hydrogen Fueling Facilities

................................ ... 133 5. Hydrogen Station Operations

................................ ......................... 134 6. Hydrogen Supply

................................ ................................ ........... 134 7. H ydrogen Production Plants

................................ .......................... 135

D. Consumer Response Effects

................................ ................................ ..... 136 1. Fleet Turnover and Emissions

................................ ....................... 136 2. Impacts on Vehicle Sales, Fleet Size and Average Age

................ 136 3. Vehicle Miles Travelled and Rebound

................................ ........... 137

5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION

................................ .......................... 139

A. Aesthetics

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 139 1. Scenic Vistas, Scenic Resources, Visual Character, Light and Glare

................................ ................................ .............................. 139

B. Agriculture and Forestry Resources

................................ ........................... 141 1. Farmland, Z oning for Agricultural Use or Williamson Act Contract, Forest Land and Timberland

................................ .......... 141

C. Air Quality

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 141 1. Air Quality Plan, Air Quality Standards and Violations, Cumulative Criteria Pollutants, and Sensitive Receptors

............... 141 2. Odors

................................ ................................ ............................. 148

D. Greenhouse Gase s

................................ ................................ .................... 149 1. Greenhouse Gases; Plan, Policy, or Regulation

............................ 149

E. Biological Resources

................................ ................................ ................. 149 1. Candidate, Sensitive, or Special Status Species; Riparian Habitat or Sensitive Natural Community; Wetlands; Movement, Local Policies and Ordinances; Plans

................................ ............ 149

F. Cultural Resources

................................ ................................ .................... 152 1. Historic Resources, Archaeological Resources, Paleontological Resources, Unique Geologic Features, Human Remains

................................ ................................ ............ 152

G. Geology and Soils

................................ ................................ ...................... 155 1. Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death; Unstable Geologic Unit or Soil; Expansi ve Soil

................................ ................................ ............... 155 2. Substantial Soil Erosion or the Loss of Topsoil

.............................. 156 3. Septic Tanks or Alternative Waste Water Disposal Systems

......... 156Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents Draft Environmental Analysis

v H

. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

................................ ............................. 158 1. Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials

........ 158 2. Upset and Accident Conditions

................................ ...................... 158 3. Hazardous Emissions, Materials, or Substances Near Scho ols, Hazardous Material Site, Airport Land Use Plan, Private Airstrip, Emergency Response Plan or Emergency Evacuation Plan, Wildland Fires

................................ .................... 159

I. Hydrology and Water Quality

................................ ................................ ..... 161 1. Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements; Groundwater Supplies or Groundwater Recharge; Runoff Water

................................ ................................ ............................. 161 2. Drainage Patterns; Flood Hazards; Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow

................................ ................................ ......................... 161

J. Land Use Planning

................................ ................................ ..................... 162 1. Divide an Established Community, Land Use Plan, Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Conservation Plan

........................... 162

K. Mineral R esources

................................ ................................ ..................... 163 1. Availability of a Known Mineral Resource or Recovery Site

.......... 163

L. Noise

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 163 1. Noise Levels in Excess of Standards, Excessive Groundborne vibration or Groundb orne Noise Levels, Substantial Increases in Ambient Noise Levels

................................ ................................ 163 2. People Residing or Working in the Area to Excessive Airpo rt

Related Noise Levels

................................ ................................ ..... 165

M. Population and Housing

................................ ................................ ............. 167 1. Population Growth, Displace Housing or People

........................... 167

N. Public Services

................................ ................................ .......................... 168 1. Response Time for Fire Protection, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, and Other Facilities

................................ .............. 168

O. Recreation

................................ ................................ ................................ . 168 1. Regional Parks or Other Recreational Facilities

............................ 168

P. Transportation/Traffic

................................ ................................ ................. 169 1. Performance of Circulation System; Congestion Management Programs ; Air Traffic Patterns; Hazards; Emergency Access, Policies, Plans and Programs

................................ ........................ 169

Q. Utilities and Service Systems

................................ ................................ ..... 171 1. Water Supply, Wastewater Treatment, and Storm Water, and Solid Waste Infrastructure

................................ .............................. 171Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents Draft Environmental Analysis

vi 6.0 CUMULATIVE AND GROWT H

- INDUCING IMPACTS

................................ .... 175

A. Aesthetics

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 176

B. Agriculture and Forestry Resources

................................ ........................... 176

C. Air Quality

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 177

D. Greenhouse Gases

................................ ................................ .................... 177

E. Biological Resources

................................ ................................ ................. 177

F. Cultural Resource s

................................ ................................ .................... 178

G. Geology and Soils

................................ ................................ ...................... 179

H

. H azards and Hazardous Materials

................................ ............................. 179

I. Hydrology and Water Quali ty

................................ ................................ ..... 180

J. Land Use Planning

................................ ................................ ..................... 180

K. M ineral Resources

................................ ................................ ..................... 180

L. Noise

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 181

M. Population and Housing

................................ ................................ ............. 181

N. Public Services

................................ ................................ .......................... 181

O. Recreation

................................ ................................ ................................ . 182

P. Transportat ion/Traffic

................................ ................................ ................. 182

Q. Utilities and Service Systems

................................ ................................ ..... 182

R. Growth

- Inducing Impacts

................................ ................................ ........... 183

7.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSI S

................................ ................................ ........... 185

A. No Project Alternative

................................ ................................ ................ 185 1. Description of the No Project Alternative

................................ ....... 185 2. Consistency with Project Objectives

................................ .............. 1 85 3. Environmental Impacts

................................ ................................ .. 187

B. More Stringent Emissions Standards in the Low

- Emissions Vehicle and Zero Emission Vehicle Regulations

................................ .................... 188 1. Description of the Alternative

................................ ......................... 188 2. Consistency with Project Objectives

................................ .............. 188 3. Environmental Impacts

................................ ................................ .. 192

C. Less Stringent Emissions Standards in the Low

- Emissions Vehicle and Zero Emission Vehicle Regulations

................................ .................... 192 1. Description of th e Alternative

................................ ......................... 192 2. Consistency with Project Objectives

................................ .............. 193 3. Environmental Impacts

................................ ................................ .. 194Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents Draft Environmental Analysis

vii D. A Clean Fuels Outlet Regulation Based on a Memorandum of Agreement with Major Refiners and Importers of Gasoline

........................ 195 1. Descrip tion of the Alternative

................................ ......................... 195 2. Consistency with Project Objectives

................................ .............. 195 3. Environmental Impacts

................................ ................................ .. 196

E. Alternatives Considered but Rejected as Infeasible

................................ ... 196 1. Feebate Regulation

................................ ................................ ....... 196 2. Targeting High

- Emitting Vehicles in the Existing Fleet

.................. 197 3. Battery Electric Vehicles or Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles Only

...... 197

8.0 MANDATORY FINDINGS O F SIGNIFICANCE

................................ ................ 199

A. Mandatory Findings of Significance

................................ ........................... 199 1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat for a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self

- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a p lant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

................................ ................................ ..................... 199 2. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?

................................ ............................ 201 3. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

................................ ................................ ....................... 201

9.0 REFERENCES

................................ ................................ ................................ . 203

10.0 LIST OF FIGURES

................................ ................................ ........................... 215

11.0 LIST OF TABLES

................................ ................................ ............................ 217

12.0 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVI ATIONS

................................ ............................. 219

ATTACHMENT 1. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL IST

................................ .............. 229

A. Aesthetics

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 229

B. Agriculture and Forest Resources

................................ .............................. 230

C. Air Quality

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 231

D. Greenhous e Gas Emissions

................................ ................................ ...... 232

E. Biological Resources

................................ ................................ ................. 233Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents Draft Environmental Analysis

viii F. Cultural Resources

................................ ................................ .................... 234

G. Geology and Soils

................................ ................................ ...................... 235

H. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

................................ ............................. 236

I. Hydrology and Water Quality

................................ ................................ ..... 237

J. Land Use and Planning

................................ ................................ .............. 238

K. Mineral Resources

................................ ................................ ..................... 239

L. Noise

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 240

M. Population and Housing

................................ ................................ ............. 241

N. Public Services

................................ ................................ .......................... 242

O. Recreation

................................ ................................ ................................ . 243

P. Transportation/Traffic

................................ ................................ ................. 244

Q. Utilities and Service Systems

................................ ................................ ..... 245

R. Mandatory Findings of Significance

................................ ........................... 246Advanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary Draft Environmental Analysis

1 

### ES

. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document is an Environmental Analysis (EA) that evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposed Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) Program. The proposed ACC Program represents a new approach to controlling emissions from passenger vehic les, i.e., passenger cars (PCs), light

- duty trucks (LDTs), and medium

- duty vehicles (MDVs)

, by combining the control of smog and soot “criteria” air pollutants and their precursors, toxic air contaminants, and greenhouse gases (GHGs) into a coordinated reg ulatory package. Thus, t he EA structure and analysis recognize the interdependent technologies that manufacturers would apply to passenger motor vehicle s to respond to the coordinated regulatory program as a whole , along with the resultant environmental i mpacts

.


### A. OVERVIEW OF ADVANCED CLEAN CARS PROGRAM

Despite significant progress in reducing smog

- forming and particulate matter emissions from the passenger vehicle fleet, California needs further reductions to meet health

based, State and federal ambient air quality standards. In addition, climate change continues to pose a serious threat to the economic well

- being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California.

To address the challenge presented by climate cha nge and to meet the State ’s goal of an 80 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2050, as expressed in Executive Order S

3

- 05, vehicular GHG emissions must be drastically reduced. This 40

- year outlook is a far longer time horizon than those employed by the federal agencies under the Clean Air Act (CAA) , or federal agency requirements to develop corporate average fuel
economy ( CAFE) standards. Policies developed under this longer timeframe deliver a continuous message to both the manufacturers and consumers that California is committed to significant changes to clean up the cars and lights trucks we drive.

Over the past three years California has worked with federal agencies to ensure that stringent criteria pollutant and GHG standards for light

- and mediu m

- duty vehicles, if adopted, will help achieve the dramatic reductions that meet California’s needs. Together

, these standards will provide consumers with the next generation of vehicles, designed to reduce multiple pollutants, while preserving vehicle ch oice and saving
money.

1. California’s Advanced Clean Cars Program and Its Economic Benefits

Continuing its leadership role in developing innovative and ground

- breaking emission control programs, Air Resources Board ( ARB) staff has developed the ACC Prog ram . It is a pioneering approach consisting of a “package‟ of regulations that, although separately constructed

, reflect prior practice and achieve synergy by addressing both ambient air quality needs and climate change in a coordinated manner

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary Draft Environmental Analysis

2 Th e ACC Pr ogram combines three programs to control smog

- forming, particulate
matter

, TAC, and GHG emissions in a single coordinated package of requirements for model years 2015 through 2025. One goal is to promote the development of environmentally superior cars that will continue to deliver the performance
, utility, and safety vehicle owners have come to expect. The three programs involve amendments to existing regulations for Low

- Emission Vehicles ( LEV III), Zero Emission Vehicles ( ZEV), and Clean Fuels Outlets ( CFO). To achieve further criteria emission reductions from the passenger vehicle fleet, staff is proposing several amendments representing a significant strengthening of the existing LEV program. The LEV amendments include improvements to consumer labe ling

, patterned on California’s revolutionary environmental performance label ( EPL)

, to provide important emissions information in a graphical, easy

- to

- understand format. The ZEV program will act to focus vehicle technology development by requiring manufa cturers to produce increasing numbers of ZEVs and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles in the 2018

- 2025 model years. Proposed amendments to the CFO regulation that will assure ultra

- clean fuels, such as hydrogen, are available to meet vehicle demands resultin g from the projected increase in number of ZEVs operating in the State

. The proposed ACC Program is intended to generate economic benefits for California. The State is a clear leader in innovation and venture capital investment, which will benefit from t he ACC package. California received over half of all clean

- tech venture capital investments in the U.S. in the last quarter and is well poised to continue to serve as an economic hub for technology and job creation related to clean vehicles in the coming years. These regulations, especially the ZEV rules, are creating the jobs of the 21 st century now in California.

Three innovative automakers have opened businesses in California, and are pushing the market forward, creating jobs in the process. Tesla M otors has resurrected auto manufacturing in California by purchasing and retooling the former NUMMI plant in Fremont, California to produce its Model S sedan. Operation of the Tesla facility is expected to create about 1,000 manufacturing jobs. CODA Auto motive opened its new global headquarters in Los Angeles, which will allow the company to grow significantly in coming years. The company also has an assembly plant in Benicia, California, where final assembly of its sedan occurs. Southern California is also home to the global headquarters of ZEV producer, Fisker Automotive, as well as engineering and design facilities for many larger automakers and their clean cars programs.

In addition to job

- forming benefits through the automakers, additional economic benefit can be derived from other employment generation and from the effects of the ACC Program on reduced fuel and vehicle operating costs for consumers. The job and economic center of the plug

- in electric vehicle charging sector is in California, which is expected to produce additional jobs in the State

. In the tradition of California’s innovation

- driven economy, these companies are helping to develop the early market for ZEVs with novel financing and charging options. Fuel cost savings and other vehic le operating cost savings will materialize for the California consumer as a result of the ACC Program. Cost savings increase consumer purchasing power over time byAdvanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary Draft Environmental Analysis

3 returning funds to them for other economic purposes. The resulting effect can be an

overa ll increase in economic output and job creation in the State . As the vehicle fleet and fuels industry respond to the new standards, economic modeling suggests an increasing ly positive economic impact to the State , leading to thousands of additional jobs t his decade, and tens of thousands in the next.

2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Goals

Recognizing the increasing threat of climate change to the well

- being of Californians and the environment, in 2002 the Legislature adopted and the Governor signed AB 1493 ( C hapter 200, Statutes 2002, Pavley). AB 1493 directed ARB to adopt the maximum feasible and cost

- effective reductions in GHG emissions from light

- duty vehicles. Vehicle GHG emissions included carbon dioxide ( CO 2 ), methane ( CH 4 ), and nitrous oxide ( N 2 O) that are emitted from the tailpipe, as well as emissions of HFC134a, the refrigerant then used in most vehicle air conditioning systems.

As directed by AB 1493, ARB adopted what is commonly called the Pavley regulations, the first in the nation to req uire significant reductions of GHGs from motor vehicles. These regulations, covering the 2009

- 2016 and later model years, call for a 17 percent overall reduction in GHG emissions from the light

- duty fleet by 2020 and a 25 percent overall reduction by 20 30. They also formed the foundation for the federal GHG and fuel economy programs for light

- duty vehicles for 2012

- 2016 model years.

After the Board adopted the Pavley regulations, the Legislature adopted and the Governor signed AB 32, the California Glo bal Warming Solutions Act ( Chapter 488, Statutes 2006, Nuñez/Pavley.) AB 32 charges ARB with the responsibility of monitoring and regulating GHG emissions in the State . AB 32 also directed ARB to prepare a Scoping Plan outlining the State ’s strategy to a chieve the maximum feasible and cost

effective reductions in furtherance of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Measure T1 of the Scoping Plan anticipates an additional 3.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent ( MMT CO 2 e) reduction f rom the passenger vehicle fleet by 2020 beyond the reductions from the 2009

- 2016 AB 1493 standards.

Although originally part of the LEV program, ARB established the ZEV program as a stand

- alone regulation in 1999, in recognition of the increasing matur ity of zero emission technologies and the critical role they can play in achieving California’s air quality standards and GHG reduction goals. Since then, the program has been modified several times to address the pace of development of zero emission tech nologies. At its March 2008 hearing, the Board directed staff to redesign the 2015 and later model year ZEV program by strengthening the requirement and focusing primarily on zero emission technologies, i.e., battery electric vehicles ( BEV), hydrogen fuel cell vehicles ( HFCV), and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles, to ensure that these low GHG technology vehicles transition from the demonstration phase to full commercialization in a reasonable timeframe to meet long

- term emission reduction goals.Advanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary Draft Environmental Analysis

4 Beyond 2 025, the driving force for lowering GHG emissions in California will be climate change. To meet the State ’s 80 percent GHG reduction goal by 2050, the new vehicle feet will need to be primarily composed of advanced technology vehicles by 2035 to have near ly an entire advanced technology fleet by 2050, including both new and used vehicles. Accordingly, the ACC Program coordinates the goals of the LEV, ZEV, and CFO programs to lay the foundation for the commercialization and support of these ultra

- clean veh icles.

3. Criteria Emission Standards

To achieve further criteria emission reductions from the passenger vehicle fleet, ARB staff is proposing several amendments representing a significant strengthening of the LEV program. The major elements of the propo sed LEV III program are:

• A reduction of fleet average emissions of new PCs, LDTs, and medium

- duty passenger vehicles ( MDPVs) to super ultra

- low

- emission vehicle ( SULEV) levels by 2025.

• The replacement of separate NMOG and oxides of nitrogen ( NO x ) standa rds with combined NMOG plus NO x standards. The combined ROG and NOx standard will decline (e.g., from 0.100 for passenger cars and light

- duty trucks and 0.119 for light

- duty trucks and medium

- duty passenger vehicles in 2015 to 0.030 for all vehicle catego ries by 2030 )

.

• More stringent particulate matter (PM) standards for light

- and medium

- duty vehicles.

• An increase of full useful life durability requirements from 120,000 miles to 150,000 miles, which guarantees vehicles operate longer at these extremely low emission particulate levels.

• A backstop to assure continued production of super ultra

- low

- emissio n vehicles after PZEVs as a category is moved from the ZEV to the LEV program in 2018.

• Zero fuel evaporative emission standards for PCs and LDTs, and more stringent evaporative standards for MDVs.

4. Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards

For the 2017

- 20 25 model year standards, ARB proposes to use the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( U.S. EPA) approach and adopt separate standards for CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O. The proposed GHG emission standards would reduce new passenger vehicles carbon dioxide ( CO 2 ) em issions from their model year 2016 levels by approximately 34 percent by model year 2025, from about 251 to about 166 grams of CO 2 per mile ( gCO 2 /mile), based on the projected mix of vehicles sold in California. The basic structure of the standards includ es two categories, passengerAdvanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary Draft Environmental Analysis

5 cars and light

- duty trucks that are consistent with federal categories for light

- duty vehicles. The standard targets would reduce car CO 2 emissions by about 36 percent and truck CO 2 emissions by about 32 percent from model yea r 2016 through 2025.

The CH 4 and N 2 O standards will reflect the same stringency as the original GHG standards. The net result is, like the current 2009

- 2016 California GHG standards, the proposed 2017

- 2025 standards account for all major sources of vehicle GHG emissions, including upstream emissions associated with vehicle fuels. In addition, California is pro posing to align its vehicle air conditioning system requirements with federal requirements.

5. Phasing In Maximum Feasible and Cost

- Effective Technologies

Vehicle manufacturers need sufficient lead time to implement new technologies across their vehicle lines both from a feasibility and cost

- effectiveness standpoint. Manufacturers will be resource challenged over the next 15 years as they strive to develop and implement technologies ranging from advanced gasoline and diesel engines to electric and fuel cell vehicles, while at the same time lowering criteria emissions of their combustion engines. The phase

- in of the ACC Program requirements recognizes this by providing manufacturers with significant lead time and considerable compliance flexibility.

Th e technology for controlling vehicle emissions is well understood and manufacturers have a wide range of emission control technologies available to achieve “near

- zero

- at

the

- tailpipe” ( SULEV) emissions. Many of these technologies are already being used
to day on vehicles meeting LEV II requirements, and staff anticipates that with ongoing improvements to the effectiveness of these technologies, particularly catalyst technology, manufacturers will be able to meet the proposed requirements for smog forming em issions under the LEV III element of the ACC package. For some vehicles, specifically the heavier vehicles with larger displacement engines, additional emission control componentry, such as secondary air and hydrocarbon absorbers may be required to achiev e the proposed emission levels.

The proposed GHG standards are also predicated on many existing and emerging technologies that increase engine and transmission efficiency, reduce vehicle energy loads, improve auxiliary and accessory efficiency, and recog nize increasingly electrified vehicle subsystems with hybrid and electric drivetrains. Many technologies reduce both criteria emissions and GHGs, with this synergy enhancing technologies, cost effectiveness and demonstrating the importance of California a nalyzing the passenger vehicle fleet program as a whole.

Previous rulemakings ( i.e., California’s 2009

- 2016 and federal 2012

- 2016 standards) established an original technical basis for the proposed GHG standards. This rulemaking builds on this exist ing technical foundation with new technical data and the understanding of evolving state

- of

- the

- art engine, transmission, hybrid, and electric

drive technologies. As part of this effort, and without conceding any of California’sAdvanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary Draft Environmental Analysis

6 separate authority, staff has been working with the U.S. EPA and the National Highway Tra ffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA) since early last year to develop a unified national GHG program for motor vehicles beyond 2016. Importantly, while California proposes accepting national pro gram compliance at manufacturers’ option, California is doing so because it believes the proposed standards are stringent enough to meet State GHG emission reduction goals.



### B. Environmental Impacts

The EA presents a programmatic evaluation of a full ran ge of environmental impact topics related to implementation the proposed ACC Program. The EA discusses both beneficial and adverse effects on the environment as a result of the projected compliance responses to the proposed regulatory amendments, such as changes in State ’s vehicle fleet mix, uses of different technologies, construction of fuel outlets and relevant manufacturing facilities, and resulting reductions of pollutant emissions. A summary of key findings is presented below.

1. Criteria Emissions Reductions

Reduction of criteria air pollutant emissions is a substantial, beneficial, environmental impact of implementing the ACC Program. Table ES

- 1 provides the emission benefits for calendar years 2023, 2025, 2035, and 2040 for the criteria pollutant s, reactive organic gas ( ROG), oxides of nitrogen ( NO X ), and particulate matter ( PM 2.5 ) respectively. Emission benefits are fully realized in the 2035

- 2040 timeframe when nearly all vehicles operating in the fleet are expected to be compliant with the p roposed ACC standards. By 2035, state wide ROG emissions would be reduced by an additional 34 percent, NOx emissions by an additional 3 7 percent, and PM 2.5 emissions by 1 0 percent from the baseline.

Table ES

- 1 State wide Emission Benefits of the ACC Pro gram: Reactive Organic Gas ( ROG), Oxides of Nitrogen ( NO X ) and Particulate Matter ( PM 2.5 )

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed Regulation Benefits Percent Reduction

State wide ROG ( tons/day)

2023 189.6 182.9 6.6 3 %

2025 175.5 164.4 4 11.1 6 %

2035 141.1 93.6 47.4 34 %

State wide NO X ( tons/day)

2023 201.3 18 5.6 1 5 .7 8 %

2025 183. 6 16 1.2 2 2.4 12%

2035 136.8 8 6.4 50.4 3 7 %

State wide PM 2.5 ( tons/day)

2023 2 6.7 2 6.0 0. 6 2 %Advanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary Draft Environmental Analysis

7 Table ES

- 1 State wide Emission Benefits of the ACC Pro gram: Reactive Organic Gas ( ROG), Oxides of Nitrogen ( NO X ) and Particulate Matter ( PM 2.5 )

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed Regulation Benefits Percent Reduction

2025 2 7.2 2 6.3 0.9 3 %

2035 29.7 2 6.8 2.9 1 0 %

2. GHG Emission Reductions

Reduction of GHG emissions is another substantial, beneficial, environmental impact of implementing the proposed ACC Program, including reductions in CAPs, GHG, and TACs. Table ES

- 2 provides the emission benefits for calendar years 2020, 2025, 2035, and 2050 for GHG. By 2025, CO 2 equivalent emissions would be reduced by almost 14 Million Metric Tons (MMT) per year, which is 12 percent from baseline levels. Carbon dioxide equivalent is a standardized meas ure ment unit used to compare the emissions from various GHGs based upon their global warming potential

. The reduction increases in 2035 to 3 2 MMT/Year, a 27 percent reduction from baseline levels. By 2050, the proposed regulation will reduce emissions by more than 4 2 MMT/Year, a reduction of 33 percent from baseline levels. Viewed cumulatively over the life of the regulation (2017

- 2050), the proposed ACC program would reduce emissions by more than 8 7 0 MMT CO 2 e

.

Table ES

- 2 State wide GHG Emission Benefits of the ACC Program ( with Rebound)

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed Regulation Benefits Percent Reduction

State wide GHG Emissions ( tons/day)

2020 111.2 108.1 3.1 3%

2025 109.9 96.3 13.7 12%

2035 114.8 83.2 31.5 27%

2050 131.0 88.3 42.7 33%

3. Other Environmental Impacts

In addition to the analysis of changes in air pollutant emissions, the EA evaluates the potential direct and indirect environmental effects of implementation of the proposed ACC Program in relation to a full spectrum of other environmental resources topics. The primary sources of t hese impacts are the compliance responses to the proposed regulatory amendments that cause changes in the physical environment. Potential changes to the physical environment would result primarily from landscape disturbanceAdvanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary Draft Environmental Analysis

8 occurring from constructi ng and operating fueling fac ilities required for compliance with the proposed CFO regulation amendments or battery manufacturing facilities expected
to be needed to achieve compliance with the proposed ZEV regulation amendments.

The EA examined all the environ mental topics presented in the environmental checklist contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. When potentially significant environmental impacts are identified, feasible mitigation measures have been presented to substantially reduce the effects. ARB does not, however, possess the authority to require project

- specific mitigation measures for facilities approved by other land use or permitting agencies. Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and programmatic analysis does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potenti ally significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigation significance conclusions ( i.e., tending to

over state impacts) and, for CEQA compliance purposes, discloses that potentially significant impacts related to the development of fueling stations and new or modified manufacturing facilities may be significant and unavoidable. ARB expects, however, that as the proposed ACC Program is carried out, these significant impacts can and should be resolved and reduced to insignificance by other government agencies, in accordance with their authorities and project review procedures.

Among the range of environmental issues addressed in the EA, the following topics contained potentially significant environmental effects that may be unavoidable: aesthetics, biology, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards ( accidental releases), hydrology and water quality, noise, traffic ( construction), and utilities. Only less

- than

significant environmental effects would occur re lated to the following topics: agriculture and forest resources, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, and recreation. As noted previously, substantial beneficial environmental effects would result from implementation of the p roposed ACC Program related to air quality and GHG emissions.Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

9 

### 1

. 0 INTRODUCTION AND BAC KGROUND

This document is an Environmental Analysis ( EA) that provides an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the proposed Advanced Clean Cars ( ACC) Program

. The proposed ACC Program represents a new approach to controlling emissions from passenger vehicles ( i

. e

. , passenger cars [PC], light

- duty trucks [LDT1 and LDT2], a nd medium

- duty vehicles [MDV]) by combining the control of smog

- causing, toxic air contaminants ( TAC s ), criteria air pollutants and precursors ( CAPs) and greenhouse gas ( GHGs) into a single coordinated regulatory package

. The proposed ACC Program consists of amendments to the following regulations:

• Low

- Emission Vehicle Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas ( LEV III),

• Zero Emission Vehicle ( ZEV), and

• Clean Fuels Outlet ( CFO)

. The p roposed California Evaporative Emission Regulations ; Manufacturer Size Definition Changes; Environmental Performance Label ( EPL); O n

- Board Diagnostic System Requirement for Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles and Engines; and the E10 Certification Fuel are part of LEV III

. Additional details about the proposed amendments to these regulations are provided in Chapter III ( Project Description)

. Three separate Regulatory Notices and Staff Reports ( Initial State ment of Reasons) h ave been prepared for these proposed LEV III, ZEV, and CFO amendments and will be presented to the Board with a single coordinated analysis of emissions and the associated environmental impacts and benefits as presented in this EA

. If adopted, the proposed regulatory amendments would integrate the r equirements for reducing CAPs and GHGs from cars and light

- duty trucks for model years 201 5

- 2025 in California

. These requirements would apply to the vehicle types listed in Table 1

- 1

. For the purposes of this environmental impact analysis, these vehicl e classes are collectively referred to as “light

- and medium

- duty vehicles

. ”

A description of the background, standards

, and requirements of the existing LEV I and II , ZEV, and CFO regulations , along with detailed information about the proposed amendments, is also provided in the respective Staff Report s

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

10 Table 1

- 1

. Vehicle Types Subject to the Advanced Clean Cars Program

Vehicle Type Example Models
Passenger Cars ( all weights) Honda Fit, Ford Fusion, Chrysler 300, Chrysler Sebring, Chevrolet Malibu, Toyota Camry, Dodge Avenger
Light

- Duty Trucks
Light

- Duty Truck 1 ( 0

- 3,750 lb LVW) Ford Ranger, Ford Escape, Toyota RAV4, Jeep Compass, Hyundai Tucson, Mitsubishi Outlander, Nissan Rogue
Light

- Duty Truck 2 ( 3,751 lb LVW

– 8,500 lb GVWR) Ford F150, Chevrolet Tahoe, Dodge Caravan

Medium

- Duty Vehicles ( 8,501

– 14,000 lb GVWR) Ford F250 and F350 Ford Club Wagon, Chevrolet 2500 and 3500 Silverado, GMC 2500 and 3500 Sierra, and Savana and Express Vans, Chrysler 2500 a nd 3500 Ram Trucks

Notes: There are several classifications for vehicles based on weight

. Different measures of weight are considered

. Curb weight is defined as the actual weight of the vehicle without carrying any load

. Loaded vehicle weight ( LVW) is defined as the curb weight plus 300 pounds ( lb)

. Gross vehicle weight rating ( GVWR) is the maximum, designed loaded weight of the vehicle

. This means the curb weight of the vehicle plus a full payload

.



### A

. ARB’s Certified Regulatory Program and Environmentally Mandated Projects under the California Environmental Quality Act

1

. CEQA Requirements Under ARB’s Certified Regulatory Program

The California Air Resources Board ( ARB or t he Board) is the lead agency for the proposed ACC Program and has prepared this EA pursuant to its California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) Certified Regulatory Program

. Public Resources Code ( PRC) S ection 2 1080

. 5 allows public agencies with regulatory programs to prepare a plan or other written document in lieu of an environmental impact report or negative declaration once the Secretary of the Resources Agency has certified the regulatory program

. ARB’s regulatory program was certified by the Secretary of the Resources Agency ( California Code of Regulation [ CCR ]

, T itle 14, hereafter “CEQA Guidelines” S ection 1 525 1 [ d ] )

. As required by ARB’s Certified Regulatory Program, and the policy and substantive requirements of CEQA, ARB has prepared this EA to assess the potential for significant adverse and beneficial environmental impacts associated with the proposed action and to provide a succinct analysis of those impacts ( CCR, T itle 17, S ection 6 0005 [ a ] and [ b ] )

. The resource areas from the CEQA Guidelines Environmental Checklist ( Appendix G) were used as a framework for assessing potentially significant impacts

. In accordance with ARB’s Certified Regulatory Program

, for proposed regulations this EA is included in the package prepared for the rulemaking ( CCR, Title 17, S ection 6 00 05)

. ARB has determined that adoption and implementation of the proposed ACC Program is a “project” as defined by CEQA

. CEQA Guidelines ( CCR, Title 14, S ection 1 5378 [ a ] ) defines a project as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting i n eitherAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

11 a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and that is

... an activity directly undertaken by any public agency

. ” Although the policy aspects and regulation amendments of the proposed ACC Program do not directly change the physical environment, the proposed ACC Program qualifies as a project under CEQA because it has the potential to result in a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment from complia nce responses to the regulations

. Furthermore, the requirements of PRC S ection 2 1159 appl y when ARB adopts a rule or regulation requiring the installation of pollution control equipment, or a performance standard or treatment requirement

. For such proje cts, the CEQA Guidelines ( CCR, Title 14, S ection 1 5187 ) require ARB to conduct “an environmental analysis of the reasonably foreseeable methods by which compliance with that rule or regulation will be achieved

. ” The analysis shall include reasonably fores eeable environmental impacts of the methods of compliance, reasonably foreseeable feasible mitigation measures related to significant impacts, and reasonably foreseeable alternative means of compliance that would avoid or eliminate significant impacts

. Th e analysis should not engage in speculation and the detail of a project

- level analysis is not required

.

2

. Public Review Process for the EA

In accordance with CCR, T itle 17, S ections 60005 and 60007 and consistent with ARB’s commitment to public review a nd input on regulatory actions, this EA is subject to a public review process through the posting of a Staff Report

. The Staff Report, including this EA, is being posted for a public review period that begins on December 12 , 2011 and ends at the close of the hearing on this item at the Board’s regularly scheduled hearing set for January 26 , 2012

. This period complies with regulatory requirements for a minimum 45

- day public review.

To conclude the public review period, the Board will hold a hearing on the proposed regulations

. At the hearing, the Board will consider the Staff Report, including the EA and public comments received during the review period

. The Board may accept, modify, or reject the staff recommendation for the proposed ACC Program

. If modifications are requested, staff will address the changes and release the revised package , or relevant parts thereof, for one or more additional 15

- day review and comment periods

. At the conclusion of review ( s), staff will compile all comments and
respo nses, including any comments on the EA

. The comments and written responses to comments, including environmental comments, will be incorporated into the Final State ment of Reasons ( F SO R) for the regulation

.

When t he F SO R and full regulatory package are c ompleted

, including all public comments and responses to comments, they will be reviewed for final consideration and action at a subsequent Board meeting prior to transmittal to the Executive Officer and forward ing to the Office of Administrative Law for p rocessing

. However, because the U

. S

. Environmental Protection Agency ( U.S. E PA) is concurrently working on a National Program and this program may influence ARB’s decision

, the conclusion ofAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

12 ARB’s consideration of the proposed ACC Program in California may be affected by the progress and outcome of relevant federal rulemakings announced for completion in 2012

. Consequently, the Board may reserve its final action on this proposed regulation, including consideration of the EA and written responses to envi ronmental comments, until after the federal rulemakings are substantially complete

. If the regulation s are adopted, a Notice of Decision will be posted on ARB’s website and filed with the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency for public inspection

.


### B

. Project Background

1

. Previous Rulemakings

Light

- and medium

- duty vehicles are major contributor s to emissions of CAPs and GHGs in California

, and further reductions are needed for California to achieve mandated national and State ambient air quality standards for CAPs

. GHG emission reductions are also needed from these vehicles to help meet the mandate established by Assembly Bill ( AB ) 32 , Statutes of 2006

. AB 32 calls for the reduc tion in state wide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020

. Additionally, former Governor Schwarzenegger’s Executive Order S

- 3

- 05 requires further reductions of state wide GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050

. Finally, AB 1493 ( Chap. 200, Statutes of 2002) requires GHG emission reductions from California’s passenger fleet.

Traditionally, CAP s from these vehicles have been controlled by two regulatory
programs : 1) the LEV regulations designed to maximize emission reductions from light

and medium

- duty vehicles and 2) ZEV regulations designed to encourage the development of very clean

, advanced vehicle technologies

. While operating essentially as separate regulations, significant synergies exist between the LEV and ZEV regulations, as well as between these vehicle programs and the CFO fuels program

. The previous LEV, ZEV, and CFO rulemakings are discussed in greater detail below

.

a

. Low

- Emission Vehicle Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas ( LEV III)

**i**

**. Criteria Pollutants**  The LEV regulation was first adopted in 1990 and is now commonly referred to as LEV I

. LEV I phased in a set of fleet

- average emission standards for CAPs emitted by light

- duty vehicles for model years 1994

- 2003 , including PCs, LDTs, and MDVs

. In 1999, ARB adopted a set of amendments to the LEV I regulation, k nown as LEV II

. LEV II established a set of emission standards for model years 2004

- 2010 that were generally more stringent than the standards under LEV I and required the then increasingly popular class of sport utility vehicles ( SUVs) to meet the same e mission standards as passenger cars

. The standards established by LEV II are in effect today

. The requirements of LEV I and LEV II are included in CCR, Title 13, S ectionsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

13 1960

- 1962, respectively

. LEV

- certified vehicles must also meet the evaporative standards in CCR

, T itle 13, S ection 1 976 ( b)

. The CAPs regulated under LEV II include non

- methane organic gas ( NMOG), carbon monoxide ( CO ), oxides of nitrogen ( NO X ), particulate matter, and non

- methane hydrocarbons ( NMHC)

. F ormaldehyde , which is a TAC, is also regulated. LEV II addresses both exhaust emissions from vehicle tailpipes and evaporative emissions, which occur when fuel contained in the vehicle’s fuel system evaporates and escape s into the surrounding air

. LEV II also includ es tailpipe emission standards for particulate matter generated by motor vehicles

. LEV II also amended the test procedures required for manufacturers to demonstrate compliance . T he California Supplemental Federal Test Procedure ( SFTP) that address ed emiss ions resulting from aggressive operation, typified by high speeds and hard accelerations, and from air conditioner ( AC) use was also adopted.

LEV II contains two major elements

. One element consists of emission standard tiers to which various vehicle cl asses must certify

. The other element consists of fleet

- average emission standards

. Fleet

- average emission standards apply to the average emission rates of the various vehicle models marketed by a manufacturer, weighted by the number of vehicles sold or leased by the manufacturer in each vehicle class

. Both the vehicle emission standards and fleet

- average emission standards of LEV II became increasingly stringent for later model years from 2004 to 2010

. In meeting the fleet

- average standards, manufactu rers may certify their vehicles to any of the applicable emission standards as long as the fleet

- average emissions of their new vehicles meet the fleet

- average emission requirements for that model year

. This flexibility enables a manufacturer to sell some higher

- emitting vehicle models as long as enough lower

- emitting vehicle models are sold to achieve the applicable fleet

- average emission standards for the particular vehicle type and model year

. Generally, the fleet

average emission standards differ acco rding to the vehicle type ( e

. g

. , PC, LDT1, LDT2) and weight class ( e

. g

. , 0

- 3,750 lb LVW, 3,750 lb LVW

- 8,500 lb GVWR) and are more stringent for each newer model year vehicle

. MDVs are also provided a tier of emission standards, but instead of a fleet

- average requirement, they must certify an increasing percentage of their MDVs to more stringent emission tiers

. The different types of vehicles subject to LEV II include PC and LDT1, and LDT2 and the fleet

- average emission standards are expressed in units of grams per mile ( g / mi)

. The emission standards under LEV II also account for the “durability basis” of each vehicle type to address the fact that vehicles tend to generate higher emis sions as they
age

. For instance, a fleet of light

- duty vehicles with a GVWR less than 8,501 lb was required to meet an intermediate full useful life standard during the first 50,000 miles of the vehicle’s life and slightly less stringent full useful life standard before it reaches 120,000 miles

. Manufacturers are also subject to in

- use emission verification of their vehicles; those vehicles failing to meet the certified emission standards are subject to recall by the manufacturer for corrective action

. M anufacturers are also required to warrant the performance of all emission control systems

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

14 The emission standards of LEV II are sophisticated in a number of ways to meet two basic objectives

. One objective is to establish standards that achieve the maxima lly feasible emission reductions based on the state of motor vehicle technologies at the time

. The other objective is to maintain competitive parity among the different vehicle manufacturers while allowing them to be responsive to market demands

. For thi s reason, some of the requirements under LEV II are different for small

- , intermediate

and large

- volume manufacturers

. Compliance with LEV II also involves different tiers of vehicle emissions performance, including LEVs, Ultra

- Low

- Emission Vehicles ( ULE Vs), and Super

- Ultra

- Low

- Emission Vehicles ( SULEVs)

. In complying with LEV II, each manufacturer earns emission credits if it over

- compl ies with the fleet

- average standards and emission debits if it fail s to meet the fleet

- average standard

. Any credits accrued by the manufacturer can be banked for future use, used to offset any debits accrued by the manufacturer, or sold to another manufacturer

. If a manufacturer has not earned sufficient credits to offset any accrued debits, it may purchase credits

, if available from another willing manufacturer, or be subject to fiscal penalties

. The emission standards that apply to model year 2010 also apply to all subsequent newer model years, and therefore, are in effect at the time of writing this EA

. All emissi on standards were and are equivalent to, or more stringent than, comparable emission standards established by U.S. E PA

.

**ii**

**. Greenhouse Gas**  **es** In 200 5 , requirements to reduce GHG emissions from all PCs, LDTs, and medium

- duty passenger vehicles ( MDPVs) were incorporated into the LEV II regulation

. These additional requirements, generally known as the Pavley regulations ( AB 1493), apply to model years 2009

- 2016 and

, thus, continue to be phased in at the time of writing this EA

. These are also fleet

- average standards and are expressed in units of g / mi of carbon dioxide equivalent ( CO 2 e )

. Expressing emissions in CO 2 e takes the contributions of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent , recognizing the varying glo bal warming potential ( GWP) of different GHGs.

. The specific GHG emission standards incorporated into LEV II are found in CCR, Title 13, S ection 1 961

. 1

. The Pavley r egulation s takes into consideration that A C refrigerant leakage ( i.e., direct emissions) and fuel use to power AC system usage ( i.e., indirect emissions) increase GHG emissions

. The rule provides credits as incentives to improve the leak

- tightness and efficiency of AC systems

. Direct emissions of refrigerant contribute sub stantially to GHG emissions because of the high GWP of the refrigerant

. The predominant refrigerant currently in use, hydrofluorocarbon

- 134a ( HFC

- 134a, also referred to as R

- 134a, 1,1,1,2

- tetrafluoroethane), is a potent GHG with a GWP of 1,430 ( IPCC 2007 b ) ( i.e., 1430 times as heat

- trapping by weight as CO 2 )

. It can slowly leak out of the AC system in a manner that may occur in any closed high

- pressure system, such as permeation through hoses and seepage through fittings, connections, and seals

. Larger l oss may occur during accidents, maintenance and servicing, and vehicle disposal at the end ofAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

15 useful life

. The Pavley regulation s grant direct AC credit of up to 6 g/mi of CO 2 e , if the manufacturer can demonstrate that the AC system meets a suite of low

- leak requirements

. These requirements include use of fitting technologies less prone to leakage and misassembling, low permeability hoses, and multiple lips to seal the shaft for a belt

- driven compressor

. A greater credit of up to 9 g/mi of CO 2 e can be granted

, if the AC is manufactured to use an alternative refrigerant with a low GWP

. Indirect emissions occur because use of an AC system in a vehicle adds a load to the engine, resulting in increased tailpipe emissions or, in the case of plug

- in electric vehicles, decreased all

- electric range

. The Pavley r egulation s grant indirect AC credits of up to 9 g/mi of CO 2 e for systems with single

- evaporator configuration and up to 11 g/mi of CO 2 e for systems with a dual

- evaporator co nfiguration, if the manufacturer can demonstrate that the AC system meets specific efficiency requirements

. To receive credits the AC system must have management of outside and recirculated air; be optimized for efficiency by utilizing state

- of

- the

- art, h igh efficiency evaporators, condensers, and other components; and have an externally controlled compressor that adjusts evaporative temperature to minimize the necessity of reheating cold air to satisfy occupant comfort

. If all of these criteria are met, manufacturers are awarded credits that are prorated based on the size of the compressor

. The Pavley r egulation s also provides credits for the sale of alternatively fueled ( e

. g

. , E85 ) vehicles to the extent shown to be running on that fuel

.

The GHG requirements under the LEV regulation also form the basis for federal GHG requirements for model years 2012

- 2016

, which were finalized by U.S. E PA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA) in April, 2010 ( 75 Fed

. Reg

. 25324 [May 7, 20 10])

.

U.S. E PA similarly provides indirect AC credits in its rule for model years 2012

- 2016, although the maximum number of credits is 5

. 7 g / mi due to a different methodology used to calculate indirect emissions

. Because federal GHG requirements are sub stantially equivalent to the GHG reductions beyond those expected from the original Pavley regulation s , California has agreed to allow compliance with the federal regulation for model years 2012

- 2016 to be deemed compliance with the Pavley regulation s ( C CR

, Title 13, S ection 1 961

. 1 [ a ] )

. This

, in turn

, allows vehicle manufacturers to meet a single set of national GHG standards while achieving the reductions envisioned by the Pavley regulation s

. A broader discussion about the nexus between ARB’s efforts and those of federal agencies is discussed later in this chapter

.

**iii**

**. California Evaporative Emission Regulations**  Evaporative emissions consist of fuel hydrocarbon vapors from a motor vehicle that are released into the atmosphere

. Evaporative emissions are classified into three types: running loss, hot soak, and diurnal

. Running loss emissions occur during vehicle operation, originating from various sources within the fuel system and from fuel vapor overflow of the on

- board carbon canister

. Hot soak emis sions occur immediately after the termination of engine operation, when latent engine heat vaporizes residual fuel inAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

16 the engine system

. Diurnal emissions are caused by daily cycling of ambient temperatures when a vehicle is parked, where ambient temperat ure increases result in fuel tank vapor generation

. Another type of emissions, refueling emissions, occurs during refueling of the vehicle when the entering liquid fuel volumetrically displaces the fuel vapors in the fuel tank.

One main source of vehicula r evaporative emissions is the carbon canister, where excess vapors in the fuel tank are routed for storage instead of being released into the atmosphere

. In many evaporative emission systems, the canister also captures fuel tank vapor emissions during re fueling as part of onboard refueling vapor recovery ( ORVR.) The carbon canister is regenerated during vehicle operation when the fuel vapors stored in the canister are purged into the engine’s intake system and subsequently burned in the combustion proces s

. Substantial evaporative emission losses from the canister occur when the generated fuel tank vapors routed to the canister are greater than its storage capacity, and thus, breakthrough of vapors from the canister occurs

. In addition, small evaporative losses from the canister, called bleed emissions, result when hydrocarbon emissions escape the canister because of diffusion of adsorbed hydrocarbons as the vehicle rests over a period of time

. Another main source of evaporative emissions is through perm eation of fuel in elastomeric hoses, joints, and valves

, as well as plastic fuel tanks.

Compliance with the current evaporative emission regulations, adopted as part of the LEV II Program, is based on meeting three separate certification s related to whole

vehicle emission standards

. Specifically, these include the running loss emission standard, the three

- day diurnal plus high

- temperature hot soak ( three

- day) emission standard, and the two

- day diurnal plus moderate

- temperature hot soak ( two

- day) emission s tandard

. The running loss emission standard ensures evaporative emission control during vehicle driving

. The three

- day emission standard ensures that the evaporative system can control evaporative emissions for three consecutive hot summer days

. The two

- day emission standard ensures an effective purging strategy of the vehicle carbon canister.

**iv**

**. Manufacturer Size Definition Changes**  A manufacturer’s California sales volume plays an important role in determining a manufacturer’s treatment under various light

- duty vehicle regulations. Size is based on a manufacturer’s average PC, LDT, and MDV sales in California, and on the percentage amount that one manufacturer owns of another manufacturer. Two changes that affect the size definitions of manufacturers include : 1) s taff proposes to decrease the intermediate volume manufacturer ( IVM) ( i.e., large volume manufacturer [ LVM ] threshold fro m 60,000 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs on average in California to 20,000 on
average ) , and 2) staff proposes that two manufacturers’ sales will be aggregated for determination of size if one manufacturer owns greater than 33.4 percent of another manufacturer. The effect of these changes is all current IVMs, except Volvo, Subaru, Jaguar/Land Rover and Mitsubishi

, would be expected to become LVMs in 2018, and meet the full ZEV requirements starting that year. This proposed change is needed to assure that major manu facturers compete on a level playing field.Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

17 **v**

**. Environmental Performance Label Regulation**  The EPL is a vehicle label showing the model’s rating for GHG emissions ( Global Warming Score) and CAP emissions ( Smog Score)

. It is currently required on all new vehicles manufactured after January 1, 2009 and sold in California

. The EPL is the result of AB 1229 ( Nation), Statutes of 2005, and EPL requirements are found in CCR, Title 13

, S ection 1 965

. The EPL’s appearance is shown in Figure 1

- 1

.

Figure 1

- 1

. En vironmental Performance Label

Source: ARB 2011 a

. Since 1978, California’s Smog Index Label has helped consumers assess the relative smog emissions from new cars

. The current EPL regulation requires that both a Smog Score and Global Warming Score be posted on all new cars sold in California

. The Smog Score is a simple rating that helps customers understand the level of CAP emissions generated by each particular vehicle model

. The Global Warming Score provides a simple way for customers to understand the levels of GHGs emitted by each vehicle model

. Both scores are based on a scale of 1

- 10 with 10 being the cleanest and 5 representing the score for the average new light

- or medium

- duty vehicle

. In May 2011, U.S. E PA and NHTSA finalized a new Fuel Ec onomy and Environment Label that is required on all new cars starting with model year 2013

. However, the use of this new label is allowed earlier on a voluntary basis

. The new Federal Fuel Economy and Environment Label is a redesign of the current fuel e conomy label found on all vehicles and will now include a Greenhouse Gas and Fuel Economy Rating that ranges from 1 to 10 with 10 being best and a Smog Rating, also from 1 to 10 with 10 being cleanest

. The label’s graphical representations are similar to and patterned onAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

18 the Global Warming and Smog Scores on California’s EPL shown above

. The Fuel Economy and Environment Label is shown in Figure 1

- 2

. Figure 1

- 2

. Fuel Economy and Environmental Label

S ource: DOT and U.S. E PA 2011

. Details about the specific amendments proposed to EPL are presented in Chapter III ( Project Description) Section A.1. d

.

**vi. On** 

**- Board**  **Diagnostic System**  **Requirement** Second generation on

- board diagnostics ( OBD II) systems, which have been required on all 1996 and newer vehicles, consist mainly of software designed into the vehicle’s

on

- board computer to detect emission control system malfunctions as they occur by monitoring virtually every component and system that can cause an increase in emissions

. When an emission

- related malfunction is detected, the OBD II system alerts the vehicle owner by illuminating a warning light on the instrument panel

. By alerting the owner of malfunctions as they occur, repairs can be sought promptly, which results in fewer e missions from the vehicle

. Additionally, the OBD II system stores important information including identification of the faulty component or system and the nature of the fault, which would allow for quick diagnosis and proper repair of the problem by techn icians

. This helps owners achieve less expensive repairs and promotes repairs done correctly the first time

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

19 Since originally adopted in 1989, the regulation has been updated regular ly , with the last major update to the regulation occurring in 2006

, as well as updates to the medium

duty diesel requirements occurring in 2009

. Staff was not scheduled to go to the Board this year to update the OBD II regulation; however, manufacturers recently approached ARB staff and requested regulation changes that they indicated were needed immediately to ensure compliance when they certify their 2013 model year vehicles

. Interested m anufacturers and ARB staff held discussions about the proposal, , including a meeting on July 27, 2011

. In response to the manufactur ers’ requests, staff is proposing changes to the OBD II regulation, C CR, Title 13, S ection 1 968.2

. The proposed amendments to the OBD II regulation consist of relaxation of a few requirements ( e.g., delays to the required start dates) and clarifications

.

**v**

**ii E** 

**- 10 Certification Fuel**  The California certification fuel used for testing exhaust and evaporative emissions on passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, and medium

- duty vehicles currently contains the oxygenate methyl tertiary butyl ether ( MTBE) in the qua ntity of 10.8 to 11.2 volume percent ( equivalent to 2.0 percent by weight)

. MTBE was banned for use in California gasoline starting December 31, 2003

. As a result of the ban of MTBE, ethanol became the prevalent oxygenate used in California gasoline

. Af ter the ban, refiners began adding approximately 5.7 volume percent ethanol to gasoline, which is equivalent to 2.0 weight percent

. California gasoline contained 5.7 percent ethanol until the end of 2009

. In 2010, California refiners transitioned to prod ucing gasoline containing 10 percent by volume ethanol ( E10)

. As part of the proposed A CC p rogram, staff is proposing to amend certification test fuel specifications by eliminating requited testing with MTBE and requiring 10 percent ethanol by volume ins tead, as discussed in S ection 5 of the P roject Description

. This proposed modification would better align the specifications of certification test fuel with the properties of in

- use fuel

. For evaporative emission testing, phase

- in of the ethanol

containing certification test fuel is proposed to occur at the same model year percentages being proposed for the LEV III FTP 150,000

- mile durability requirements applicable to the light

- duty fleet

.

b

. Zero Emission Vehicle Regulati on ( ZEV) ARB first adopted the ZEV requirement in 1990 as part of the LEV regulation discussed above and has since modified the ZEV regulation several times

. The ZEV mandate provides more reasonable assurance that ZEVs will be produced in high enough volu mes to provide a launch of the technology in the marketplace

. The regulation includes specific regulatory mechanisms to reduce the risk of early ZEV market failure

. Under the existing ZEV regulation, manufacturers are required to produce a number of ZEV and ZEV

- enabling technologies each year

. The types of technologies manufacturers produce to comply with the regulation are listed in Table 1

- 2

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

20 Table 1

- 2

. Zero Emission Vehicle Types and Technologies

Vehicle Type Technical Description Credit Amount Ve hicle Examples

ZEV Zero tailpipe emissions ( i

. e

. , no tailpipe): battery electric vehicles

( BEV), and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles ( FCV)

. 1

. 0

- 7

. 0 Nissan Leaf, Honda FCX Clarity

Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles ( TZEV) Vehicles certified to PZEV standards that also run on ZEV fuels for at least 10 miles ( e

. g

. plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles or

hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicle) 1

. 0

- 2

. 5 GM Volt

Advanced Technology Partial Zero Emission

Vehicle ( AT PZEV) Vehicles certified to PZEV standards and employing ZEV

enabling technologies ( e

. g

. hybrids or compressed natural gas vehicles) 0

. 5

– 0

. 7 Toyota Prius

Partial Zero Emission Vehicle ( PZEV) Conventional gasoline vehicles certified to the most stringent tail pipe emission standards, zero evaporative emissions, and extended warranty

. 0

. 2 Ford Focus PZEV

The ZEV regulation is based on a credit mechanism that affords manufacturers flexibility to produce various types of vehicle technologies

. Credits are given to vehicles based on zero emission range, refueling capabilities, hybridization, and emissions performance

. The credit amounts are also summarized in Table 1

- 2

. The vehicle types that earn credits to comply with the ZEV regulation also help manufacturers attain the fleet

- average emission standards established by the existing LEV regulation ( and the proposed LEV III regulation)

. ZEV requirements are included in CCR, Title 13, S ection 1 962

. 1

. Details about the specific amendments proposed to the ZEV regulation are presented in Chapter III ( Project Description)

.

c

. Clean Fuels Outlet Regulation ( CFO)
The CFO regulation was originally developed in 1990 to apply to all alternative fuel vehicles ( AFVs) that, when operated on a designated clean fuel, would achieve LEV emission standards

. Types of designated clean fuels include natural gas, ethanol, methanol, and hydrogen

. Electricity is specifically excluded from the definition of a designated clean fuel because of its non

- liquid form and uniqu e distribution and market characteristics that are unlike other fuels under this regulation

. In essence, once theAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

21 projected numbers of AFVs that use a specific clean fuel reach 20,000, the larger

owner / lessors of gasoline retail outlets, i

. e

. , gas stations, would be required to equip a specified number of their outlets with that alternative fuel

. When the CFO regulation was written, it was projected that AFVs would be needed in the S tate ’s vehicle fleet to meet CAP emission standards; however, the need for AFVs to enter the fleet was negated by the innovation and introduction of cleaner

- burning fuels and more advanced emission control technologies for conventional fuel vehicles ( i

. e

. , gasoline and diesel) that met LEV II standards

. During developm ent of the original CFO regulation, ARB projected that most early AFVs would be flex or dual

- fueled vehicles that could also operate on gasoline and this projection was confirmed by manufacturers’ response

. This assumption served as the basis for setting the initial trigger at 20,000 AFVs

. Market

- based analyses were used to determine that fuel providers could feasibly produce and sell alternative fuels at this market volume

. California surpassed the 20,000 AFV trigger level for E

- 85 flex

- fuel vehicles in mid

- 2000, but due in part to concerns over life

- cycle emissions from substantially increased ethanol production and distribution , the regulation was never activated

. Today, the use of ethanol

- gasoline blends is promoted through the federal Renewable Fuel s Standard ( RFS), which applies to liquid fuels only, and California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard ( LCFS)

. RFS and LCFS both place the responsibility on oil companies and fuel distributors to increase the amount of biofuels and other low

- carbon fuels dispens ed for transportation

. Thus, the CFO regulation compliments the ZEV regulation, because it ensures the availability of alternative fuels as AFVs are produced and sold in California

. The CFO regulation is included in CCR, Title 13 , S ections 2300

- 2318

. Deta ils about the proposed version of the CFO regulation are presented in Chapter III ( Project Description)

.

2

. ARB Nexus with the U.S. E nvironmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

There are currently no comparable feder al CAP emission standards for 2015 and subsequent model passenger vehicles as stringent as this proposed California rule. However, U.S. EPA has indicated that it expects to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for their “Tier 3” next generation of CAP emission standards in January 2012, which will apply to 2017 and subsequent model year vehicles. Staff expects the Tier 3 program to be comparable to the California proposed rule in the applicable timeframe. This national rule is expected to be fina lized in late

- 2012.

With regard to GHGs, U.S. E PA and NHTSA have been working together under the federal Clean Air Act and the Energy I ndependence and Security Act of 2007 to develop a coordinated national program of harmonized regulations to reduce emissions and improve fuel e fficiency

. The agencies issued a Final Rulemaking establishing standards for 2012

- 2016 model year vehicles on April 1, 2010 ( U.S. E PA 20 10c )

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

22 The federal agencies are now developing a rulemaking to set standards for model yea r 2017

- 2025 PC and LDT ( U.S. E PA 2011 a ), which is consistent with the Presidential Memorandum regarding fuel efficiency standards ( The White House Office of the Press Secretary 201 0 )

. There are currently no comparable federal GHG emission standards that are as stringent as the proposed standards for 2017 and subsequent model passenger

v ehicles. (The current federal GHG emission standards for the 2016 and subsequent model years are comparable to those applicable in California in the 2016 model year). However, on November 16, 2011, an NPRM was issued by U

. S

. EPA and NHTSA for a joint rulemaking that proposes a coordinated federal GHG emission reduction and fuel economy program for light

- duty vehicles, beginning in the 2017 model year. This national r ule is expected to be finalized by the end of July 2012. There are no significant differences between the proposed California GHG regulations and those presented in the NPRM. Furthermore, staff does not expect there to be any significant differences betw een the proposed California GHG regulations and those in U

. S

. EPA’s Final Rule.



### D

. ACC Program Objectives

Recognizing the need to attain national and State ambient air quality standards for CAPs, as well as the requirements of AB 1493 and AB 32 and the role of clean car standards in contributing to GHG emission reductions, the following project objectives are presented for the proposed ACC Program:

**1**

**. Ensure all Californians can live, work, and play in a healthful**  **environment free from harmful exposure t o air pollution** 

– to protect and preserve public health and well

- being, and prevent irritation to the senses, interference with visibility, and damage to vegetation and property ( Health and Safety Code [HSC]

, Section 4 3000 [ b ] ) in recognition that the emiss ion of air pollutants from motor vehicles is the primary cause of air pollution i n many parts of the S tate ( HSC

, S ection 4 3000 [ a ] );

**2**

**. Achieve the maximum emissions reduction possible from motor**  **vehicles**

– to attain the national and State ambient air quali ty standards for CAPs ( HSC

, S ection s 43000.5 [b] and 43018 [a] );

**3**

**. Establish a uniform set of vehicle emission standards** 

– to provide clarity to vehicle manufacturers about the emission

- related requirements by integrating them into a single

, coordinated package ( HSC

, S ection 4 3000 [c] );

**4**

**. Reduce dependence on petroleum as**  **an energy resource**

– to reduce the S tate ’s reliance on petroleum and support the use of diversified fuels in the S tate ’s passenger vehicle fleet

. In addition, petroleum u se as an energy resource contributes substantially to the following public health and environmental problems: air pollution, acid rain, global warming, and theAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

23 degradation of California’s marine environment and fisheries ( PRC

, S ection s 25000

. 5 [b] and [c] );

**5**

**. Decrease GHG emissions in support of**  **state wide GHG reduction goals** 

– to adopt “clean car standards,” as identified in the Scoping Plan, which was developed for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions in California, as directed by AB 32, Statutes of 20 06

. As described in the Scoping Plan recommendations, “these types of compliance options will be key in ensuring that we are able to meet our reduction targets in a cost

- effective manner” and “will play a central role in helping California meet its 2020 r eduction requirements” and “ figure prominently in California’s efforts beyond 2020

. ” More specifically, ARB has determined that the proposed ACC Program would need to achieve a reduction of at least 3

. 8 MMT CO 2 e , as described in the Scoping Plan

. Impleme ntation of the proposed ACC Program would also provide further GHG reductions pursuant to AB 1493 ( Pavley regulation s ) ( Chap

. 200, Stat ute s of 2002)

. Finally, i mplementation of the proposed ACC Program would also be a key measure to help California reduce GHGs to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 to further reduce the threat of climate change, which is a goal identified in former Governor Schwarzenegger’s Exec utive Order S

- 3

- 05 to minimize climate change impacts and achieve climate stabilization ;

**6**

**. Ensure emission reductions** 

– to ensure that emission reductions are real, permanent, quantifiable, verifiable and enforceable, as identified in the Scoping Plan ( HSC

, S ection 3 8562 [d] );

**7**

**. Improved automotive technologies and fueling infrastructure** 

– to guide the acceleration of the development of environmentally superior passenger vehicles that will continue to deliver performance, utility, and safety demanded by the market, and to promote an infrastructure that is supportive of AFVs; and

**8**

**. Spur**  **economic activity**

– to incentivize innovation that will transition California’s economy into greater use of clean and sustainable technologies and to promote increased economic and employment benefits that will accompany this transition ( AB 1493 Section 1 [ g] ; HSC

, S ection 3 8501 [e] )

.


### E

. Scope of Analysis and Assumptions

The degree of specificity required in a CEQA document corresponds to the degree of specificity inherent in the underlying activity it evaluates

. The environmental analysis for broad progra ms cannot be as detail ed as for specific projects ( CCR, Title 14

, S ection 1 5146)

. For example, the assessment of a construction project would naturally be more detailed than for the adoption of a plan, because the construction effects can be predicted wit h a greater degree of accuracy ( CCR

, Section 1 5146 [ a ] )

. This analysis addresses a broad regulatory program, affecting state wide sales of millions of newAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

24 passenger vehicles , from between six and 14 years from now, so a general level of detail is appropriate

. The EA provides a good

- faith effort to evaluate significant adverse impacts and beneficial impacts of the regulatory program and contains as much information as is currently available, without being speculative

. The scope of analysis in thi s environmental analysis is intended to help focus public review and to encourage that questions and comments are appropriate and meaningful

. This analysis specifically focuses on potential significant, adverse and beneficial impacts on the physical envir onment resulting from compliance responses to the proposed changes to the existing State regulations regarding emissions from new light

and medium

- duty vehicles sold in California

, and from actions and infrastructure necessary to provide alternative vehic le fuels

. The analysis of potential significant, adverse environmental impacts from the proposed ACC Program is based on the following assumptions:

1. This analysis addresses the potential significant, adverse environmental impacts resulting from implementi ng the regulatory amendments of the proposed ACC Program compared to the existing regulations concerning emissions standards for light

- and medium

- duty vehicles, the availability of alternative fuels, and other applicable existing regulations

.

2. The enviro nmental baseline is defined by existing vehicle and related fuel emissions programs, policies, and regulations

. The existing regulatory condition includes the existing LEV regulation ( LEV II), including the GHG requirements that are part of LEV II ( known as the Pavley regulation s ), the EPL regulation, and the existing ZEV regulation, as well as other relevant, previous California rulemakings, such as the LCFS and all comparable federal regulations

.

3. The analysis of environmental impacts and determinations of significance are based on a comparison of the reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance related to the proposed amendments under the ACC Program with the current methods of compliance related to the existing State and federal regulatory framework

.

4. The analysis in this EA addresses environmental impacts both within the State of California and outside the S tate to the extent they are reasonably foreseeable and do not require speculation

.

5. The level of detail of impact analysis is necessarily and appropriately general, because the nature of the proposed ACC Program is programmatic and specific infrastructure and facility development projects will not occur solely from approval of this program

. Specific projects implementing the proposed ACC Progra m will undergo their normally required environmental review and compliance
processes. In addition, performance standards generally, and the proposed fleetwide CAPs and GHG emissions standards in the LEV III program inAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

25 particular, allow a wide variation in compliance responses, which will vary even further by manufacturer due to their differing baseline fleet characteristics that the analysis must necessarily project four to five model years into the future.

6. Because of the state wide reach of the proposed AC C Program and the longer

term future horizon of the achievement of a state wide fleet that is lower in both CAP and GHG emissions, the programmatic impact analysis applies generally across a broad geography, rather than at site

- or project

- specific location s

. However, impact analyses do examine regional ( e.g., air basin) and local issues, where feasible and appropriate

. As a result, the character of the impact conclusions in the resource

- oriented sections of Chapter 5 , Impact Analysis and Mitigation, are g enerally cumulative, considering the potential effects of the full range of reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance, along with expected background growth in California and the U.S., as appropriate

. Chapter 8 provides a summary of potential cumulativ e impacts of the proposed ACC Program in conjunction with other reasonably foreseeable future air quality
programs ( see “complementary measures” discussion below)

.

1

. Environmental Checklist

An environmental checklist was used to identify and evaluate potential impacts of the proposed ACC Program as contained in Attachment 1

. Further discussion is presented in Chapter 5 , Impact Analysis, regarding the impacts of the proposed ACC Program, and potential mitigation strategies that can be implemented to lessen any identified potential significant advers e impacts

.

2

. Basis for Environmental Impact Analysis and Significance Determinations

The policy and direction of the existing LEV II ( including the Pavley regulation s that address GHG standards), ZEV, and CFO regulations established by previous rulemakings define the current requirements for compliance with emission standards for passenger vehicles in California

. In addition, it is impo rtant to note that other existing measures are in place to reduce GHGs, as described in the Scoping Plan , to the extent they have been Board

- adopted

. These are called “ reference measures” because they are already in effect and because they help define the existing baseline of GHG emissions in California

. CEQA requires that the baseline for determining the significance of environmental impacts is normally the existing physical conditions at the time the environmental review is initiated ( CEQA Guidelines

, CCR, Title 14, S ection 1 5125 [ a ] )

. Therefore, the significance determinations reflected in the EA are based on changes from existing physical conditions, in keeping with CEQA requirements

. In the context of regulatory programs, impacts on the physical en vironment are the result of compliance responses to regulations

. Compliance responses to the existingAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

26 LEV II, ZEV, and CFO regulations are already in place and underway

. The environmental effects of proposed amendments to regulations that reduce CAP and / or GHG emissions from light

- and medium

- duty vehicles would build upon the compliance responses to these existing regulations

. Approval and implementation of the proposed ACC Program would result in the amendment of existing emission requirements and alternative fuel availability requirements for light

- and medium

- duty vehicles to a more stringent set of standards and requirements ; in response, compliance methods would also change

. Comparison of reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance in response to the proposed regulatory amendments with the current and likely compliance responses to the existing standards and requirements a nd other reference measures is the approach used to estimate the potential environmental effects attribu table to the proposed ACC Program

. That is, the approach compares one set of projections ( 2017

– 2025) with compliance responses as of 2016.

Other re asonably foreseeable actions are approved or proposed to take place in the time frame of the proposed ACC Program

, but are not yet in effect

. These are referred to as “complementary measures” ( e.g., Environmental Standards for Hydrogen Production [ require s GHG reductions and use of renewables in accordance with SB 1505 ])

. They help define the future, cumulative scenario of reasonably foreseeable compliance measures

. The complementary measures are designed to reduce CAPs and GHG s by increasing the efficie ncy with which California uses all forms of energy and by reducing dependence on the fossil fuels

.

a

. Adverse Environmental Impacts The analysis of adverse effects on the environment and significance determinations for those effects in the EA reflect the programmatic nature of the analysis of the reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance by vehicle manufacturers, hydrogen fuel producers, fuel retailers, and battery recyclers, as well as consumers

. These compliance responses are described in greater detail in Chapter 4

. Thus, the EA analysis addresses broadly defined types of impacts without the ability to determine the specific project or vehicle locations, facility size and character, or site

- spec ific environmental characteristics affected by the facilities

. Environmental impacts may be determined to be potentially significant, because of the inherent uncertainties about the relationship between future infrastructure and vehicle design and environ mentally sensitive resources or conditions

. This is a conservative approach ( i

. e

. , tending to over state environmental impacts), in light of these uncertainties, to satisfy the good

- faith, full

disclosure intent of CEQA

. When specific projects are propose d and subjected to project

- level environmental review, it is expected that many of the impacts recognized as potentially significant in this EA and not already mitigated or avoided with this proposed Board approval can later be avoided or reduced to a less

- than

- significant level

. Another inherent uncertainty in the EA analysis is the degree of implementation of mitigation for potentially significant impacts

. While ARB is responsible for adopting the regulatory amendments that comprise the proposed ACC Pr ogram, it does not have authority over the proposal, approval, or implementation of infrastructure andAdvanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

27 development projects

. Also, because the vehicle standards are nearly all performance

based and not prescriptive, the ACC program is generally not mandat ing any particular technology ( ies) on any particular vehicles. ARB also has no control over which vehicles or with which technology ( ies) would be purchased and operated in which areas of the S tate

. Other agencies are responsible for the environmental ana lyses of proposed facilities and infrastructure ( e

. g

. , alternative fueling stations, manufacturing facilities, and battery recycling outlets), definition and adoption of project

- specific feasible mitigation, and monitoring of mitigation implementation

. Fo r example, local cities or counties must approve proposals to construct fueling stations

. Additionally, S tate and / or federal permits may be needed for specific environmental resource impacts, such as take of endangered species, filling of wetlands, and streambed alteration

. Because ARB is not responsible for implementation of specific infrastructure projects ( such as fueling stations), the programmatic analysis does not allow for a precise description of the details of project

- specific mitigation

. As a result, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts

. Consequently, the EA takes the conservative approach in its post

mitigation significance conclusions ( i

. e

. , tending t o over state the risk that feasible mitigation may not be sufficient) and discloses, for CEQA compliance purposes, that potentially significant environmental impacts may be unavoidable, where appropriate

. It is expected that facility and infrastructure pro jects would be able to feasibly avoid or mitigate to a less

- than

- significant level many of these potentially significant impacts as an outcome of their project

- specific environmental review processes

.

b

. Beneficial Effects to the Environment Where applic able, this EA also acknowledges various beneficial effects in each resource area that may result from ARB’s adoption and implementation of the proposed ACC Program, consistent with ARB’s Certified Regulatory Program requirements ( CCR, T itle 17, Section 6 0005[b])

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background Draft Environmental Analysis

28 This page intentionally left blank.Draft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description Environmental Analysis

29 

### 2

. 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed Advanced Clean Cars ( ACC) Program consists of amendments to existing regulations to provide a comprehensive approach to further reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors ( CAPs) and greenhouse gases ( GHGs) from light

- and medium

- duty vehicles in California

. To xic air contaminants ( TACs) generally decrease in tandem with these

. Accordingly, the proposed ACC Program would include more stringent emission standards for CAPs and GHGs, requirements for vehicle manufacturers to increase the proportion of zero emissio n vehicles ( ZEVs) ( e

. g

. , hydrogen fuel cell vehicles [FCVs], battery electric vehicles [BEVs] sold in California )

, requirements for increased availability of alternative fuel stations to support the resultant increase in ZEVs, and changes to the types of e missions information that must be posted on new cars

. The major components of the proposed ACC Program are discussed in greater detail below

. As discussed further in Section E of this chapter, for CEQA purposes the “project” is the collective set of proposed regulatory amendments that would affect manufacturer design of vehicles and the fueling of a segment thereof to meet these ARB regulations

, while also meeting other regulatory requirements

.


### A

. Amendments to the Low

- Emission Vehicle and Greenhouse Gas Regulation ( LEV III)

The proposed amendments to the Low

- Emission Vehicle and Greenhouse Gas regulation ( LEV III) would revise and update the standards currently in place under LEV II, which was summarized earlier in Chapter 1

. LEV III would consist of a set of more stringent emission standards for the various light

- and medium

- duty vehicle classes and more stringent fleet average emission standards starting with model year 2015 and becoming more stringent through model year 2025

. Like the existing LEV II regulation, LEV III would continue to address exhaust emissions of formaldehyde, non

- methane organic gas ( NMOG), carbon monoxide ( CO ), oxides of nitrogen ( NO X ), particulate matter, and evaporative emissions of hydrocarbons ( HC)

. In addition to establi shing emission standards that are more stringent than current requirements, LEV III would also generally include the following changes regarding CAPs :

• LEV III would replace the separate standards for NMOG and NO X with a combined standard that is based on the sum of these two pollutants

.

• LEV III also would increase the “durability basis” from 120,000 miles to 150,000 miles

. The extended durability basis would ensure the effectiveness of a vehicle’s emissions control systems over the assumed operational life of the vehicle

.

• LEV III would extend applicability of the California Supplemental Federal Test Procedure ( SFTP) to medium

- duty and alternative

- fueled vehicles, and include two options for complying with the SFTP. The SFTP is designed to specifically address off

- cycle emissions, which are those not normally accounted for in on

-Draft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description Environmental Analysis

30 road driving cycles used for vehicle certification, resulting from aggressive operation, typified by high speeds and hard accelerations, and from air conditioner use. LEV III would also extend SFTP applicability throughout the full useful life of affected vehicles. SFTP II would also require standards for controlling exhaust emissions of particulate matter during off

- cycle driving.

• LEV III w ould extend the zero fuel evaporative emissions standards to all vehicles subject to evaporative emission requirements and provide two options by which manufacturers could comply with these standards. The evaporative emissions standards would be fully pha sed in by model year 2022.

• The proposed LEV III regulation would also include more stringent standards for GHG emissions from light

- duty vehicles for model years 2017

- 2025

. As part of this proposal, ARB i s working with the U.S. E nvironmental Protection A gency ( U.S. E PA) and the National Highway Traffic S afety Administration ( NHTSA) in their develop ment of a national regulation that would require reductions in vehicle GHG emissions and consequent improvements in fuel efficiency that would also

serve California’s needs to reduce GHG emissions

. As part of LEV III, ARB proposes to continue awarding credits to manufacturers that utilize air conditioning ( AC) system technologies that reduce direct emissions ( from refrigerant leakage) and indirect emissio ns ( from usage), but amend the credit formulas used as part of California’s 2009

- 2016 model years

- GHG standards ( i

. e

. , Pavley regulation s ) so that they align with U.S. E PA’s methodology for 2017

- 2025 model years

. Rather than specifying the suite of techno logies that must be used by the manufacturer to receive credits, as currently required by the Pavley regulation s , ARB proposes to adopt U.S. E PA’s approach to award credits based on the individual technologies employed

. Thus, direct credit would be given for the reduction of direct refrigerant emissions achieved through improvement of refrigerant containment and / or use of a refrigerant with a global warming potential ( GWP) less than or equal to 150

. Indirect credit would be given for the reduction of indi rect emissions achieved through use of efficiency improvement technologies listed on a menu; however, the total credit would be capped to account for synergistic effects of the various efficiency improvement technologies for AC systems

. Overall, the goal of the proposed LEV III regulation is to make the emissions requirements for light

- and medium duty vehicles sold in California generally consistent with requirements of the Tier 3 emission standards proposed by U.S. E PA, and consistent with the federal GHG standards and consequent fuel efficiency standards for motor vehicles

.

1. Amendments to the California Evaporative Emission Regulations

To maintain continuity of vehicles certified to the zero evaporative emission sta ndards and to expand the use of existing zero evaporative technology to the remaining vehicle classes, staff proposes to require new passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, medium

- dutyDraft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description Environmental Analysis

31 vehicles, and heavy

- duty vehicles that are gasoline

- fueled, liquefied petrol eum gas

fueled, and alcohol

- fueled, to comply with the zero evaporative emission standards

. This would require amending CCR, Title 13, Section 1 976 and the incorporated “California Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles”

. The proposed lower evaporative emission standards are equivalent in stringency to the current optional LEV II zero evaporative emission standards

.

2

. Manufacturer Size Definition

To retain a level competitiveness, staff propose two changes to the size definitions of manufacturers:

1) Decrease the intermediate volume manufacturer ( IVM) ( i.e., large volume manufacturer [LVM] threshold from 60,000 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs on average in Calif ornia to 20,000 on average); and

2) Aggregation of two manufacturers’ sales for determination of size if one manufacturer owns greater than 33.4 percent of another manufacturer.

3

. Amendments to the Environmental Performance Label

Some changes would also be made regarding the existing California Environmental Performance Label ( EPL) regulation, which is described in Chapter 1

, Section C .1.d

. More specifically, compliance by manufacturers with the Federal Fuel Economy and Environment Label, as finalized in May 2011, would be deemed compliant with California EPL requirements

. This would allow for one label depicting relative vehicle CAP and GHG emissions nationwide, incorporating both the substance and style of California’s existing EPL

.

4

. Amendments to t he On

- Board Diagnostic System Requirements

The proposed amendments to the OBD II regulation would consist of relaxations to a few requirements ( e.g., delays to the required start dates) and clarifications

. The proposed relaxations would include the follow ing:

• Delaying the start date for manufacturers to monitor the ability of a catalyst to generate a desired feedgas to promote better performance in a downstream after

- treatment component ( e.g., generate nitrogen dioxide for higher NOx conversion efficiency in a selective catalytic reduction [ SCR ] system) from the 2010 model year to the 2015 model year for light

- duty vehicles and from the 2013 model year to the 2015 model year for medium

- duty vehicles.

• Delaying the start date for manufacturers to monitor the non

- methane hydrocarbon ( NMHC) conversion capability of catalyzed particulate matter ( PM) filters from the 2010 model year to the 2015 model year for light

- duty vehicles and from the 2013 model year to the 2015 model year for medium

- duty vehicles.Draft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description Environmental Analysis

32 • Extendin g the allowance for a deficiency by an additional model year for manufacturers unable to meet the requirement to detect malfunctions of the PM filter when the filtering capability degrades to a level such that tailpipe emissions exceed the more stringent 2 013 model year thresholds.

• Delaying the start date for manufacturers to monitor the tolerance compensation features of the fuel control system components on diesel vehicles from the 2013 model year to the 2015 model year.

While ARB staff believes all the r equirements mentioned above are technically feasible for manufacturers to meet ( and hence, are being delayed, not eliminated), circumstances

, such as delays in technology development

, have prevented manufacturers from implementing the requirements within t he required deadlines ( e.g., delay in the development of the PM sensor ). Additionally, manufacturers have requested that ARB staff propose clarifications to a few requirements in the current OBD II regulations, including those that address hybrid vehicles

. The OBD II requirements include software in the car computer that verifies if the diagnostics are running frequently enough

. ARB staff is proposing to update these requirements to clarify how to track such data for hybrids and especially plug

- in hybrid vehicles that can have all or some portion of driving trips where the engine emission controls are never even operated due to battery / electric vehicle operation

. ARB staff has already discussed the proposed amendments with hybrid manufacturers and have come to an agreement regarding these changes, which would only consist of minor software revisions

. Similar changes are also being proposed to account for the erasi ng of fault information in hybrids, which would also only also consist of minor software revisions

.

5

. Amendments to the Specifications for California Certification Fuel Regulation

Since MTBE was banned for use in California gasoline starting December 31, 2003

, ethanol became the prevalent oxygenate used in California gasoline

. California gasoline contained 5.7 percent ethanol until the end of 2009

. In 2010, California refiners transitioned to producing gasoline containing 10 percent by volume ethanol

. C urrently, all gasoline in California contains 10 percent ethanol and will continue to contain 10 percent ethanol for the foreseeable future

. While the type of oxygenate and oxygenate amount have changed in in

- use California gasoline ( i.e., fuel used by Ca lifornia consumers) , the certification fuel used for emission testing has not , and is no longer representative of in

- use fuel

. T he certification fuel in California is being updated to reflect the in

- use fuel

. Staff is proposing to amend existing regulati ons to require use of a certification fuel that contains 10 percent ethanol ( E10 fuel)

. Staff is proposing that the E10 certification fuel to be required beginning 2014, and is also proposing that the E10 certification fuel would be available for optional use upon the Office of Administrative Law's filing of the LEV III rulemaking with the Secretary of State

.Draft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description Environmental Analysis

33 

### B

. Amendments to the Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation ( ZEV)

The proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation focus on technologies that help meet long

- term CAP and GHG reduction goals, including having more battery electric vehicles ( BEVs ) and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles ( PHEVs) in the state wide vehicle fleet, simplifying the ZEV regulation where needed, and increasing requirements for 2018 model ye ar and beyond

. A brief description of the current ZEV regulation is provided in Chapter 1 and the amount of ZEV credits that manufacturers currently

earn ed by various vehicle classes is summarized in Table 1

- 2

. The proposed amendments are divided into t wo timeframes: model years 2012 through 2017, and 2018 and subsequent model years

. For 2012 through 2017, limited amendments are proposed to allow manufacturers to indefinitely bank ZEV credits for use in later years, and to increase the number of credits earned by long

- range ( 3 0 0 mile or more) fuel cell vehicles ( FCVs )

. For 2018 and subsequent model years, the ZEV requirements would be increased, so that by 2025, 15 percent of a manufacturer’s new vehicle sales would be required to be ZEVs ( e

. g

. , BEVs and FCVs) and Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles ( TZEVs) ( e

. g

. , PHEVs)

. In addition to increasing the requirement, the proposed amendments would modify the amount and calculation of credits for ZEVs and TZEVs

. Manufacturer’s size definition requi rements would also be amended, so that 97 percent of manufacturers would be required to fully comply with the regulation

. The amendments would also modify the “carry

- back” provision, so that manufacturers would be allowed to carry a deficit in their requi red ZEV credits for only one year, before being subject to penalties

. Overall, these amendments would result in a greater proportion of ZEVs in the
state wide light

- and medium duty vehicle fleet

.


### C

. Amendments to the Clean Fuels Outlet Regulation ( CFO)

As explained in Chapter 1

, the Clean Fuels Outlets ( CFO) regulation was initially developed and approved in 1990 and updated by the Board in 2000, but never activated

. As part of the proposed ACC Program, ARB would amend the CFO regulation with updated re quirements

. The requirements would account for the types of alternatively fueled vehicle ( AFV) technologies feasible at this time, particularly those that are most effective at reducing CAPs and GHGs

. With the proposed changes, the CFO regulation would apply only to fuels for ZEVs, specifically hydrogen FCVs, and it would not address natural gas

- , ethanol

- , or methanol

- fueled vehicles like the previously drafted regulation

. The CFO regulation would require major refiners and importers of gasoline, inste ad of owners / lessors of gasoline retail outlets, to build new hydrogen fueling stations based on the projected number of hydrogen FCVs operating in the S tate

. More specifically, major refiners and importers would be required to build retail hydrogen fueling stations when projections indicate there would be 20,000 or more FCVs operating within the S tate

. The amendments would add an additional trigger to build ou tlets of 10,000 vehicles thatDraft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description Environmental Analysis

34 woul d be applied within a specific air basin

. Projections would be based on records provided by the Department of Motor Vehicles, and sale and lease forecasts from vehicle manufacturers

. Consistent with the current CFO regu lation, t he number of FCVs that are as part of an organization’s fleet operation would be discounted by 75 percent before they are included in the total tally for the 10,000 and 20,000 trigger levels

. This is because a n organization operating an FCV fleet ( e

. g

. , a private company, government agency, or university campus) would be anticipated to have its own private hydrogen fueling station and would be less dependent on publicly available fueling stations

. However, the regulation would provide for an adju stment to the fleet discount factor based on the availability of fuel for that fleet

. The proposed regulation would also require vehicle manufacturers to provide ZEV production plans to ARB three years in advance ( instead of two years) and to specify wher e vehicles would be deployed

. These changes were designed to provide the refiners and importers with additional time to locate and build stations

. Once the trigger number of vehicles is reached , ARB would determine how many new fueling stations would be needed to support these vehicles, and then allocate the responsibility of establishing new stations among the major refiners and importers of gasoline based on their annual share of gasoline supplied to California

. Once notified of their obligation, resp onsible parties would have approximately 2 .5 years to meet their requirements

. ARB would inform major refiners and importers of gasoline of the geographic areas where stations are needed to ensure that fueling stations would be constructed in locations th at would be adequately accessible by the general public, but the major refiners and importers of gasoline would be responsible for identifying exact station locations

. The protocol used to determine station locations would account for the need to provide adequate station coverage in the areas where FCVs are being marketed, leased

, and sold

. Requirements to build new hydrogen fueling stations would sunset when the number of hydrogen fueling stations state wide represents five percent of the total number of retail fuel outlets; however, major refiners and importers of gasoline would be required to continue operating and maintaining the hydrogen fueling stations that they previously built

. The regulation would also include additional requirements regarding BEVs and BEV

charging infrastructure

. It would require ARB to assess the battery

- charging infrastructure needs of BEVs within a specified period after the regulation is adopted

. The purpose of ARB’s assessment would be to determine where BEV drivers are charging their cars ( e

. g

. , at home, at workplaces, or at public charging locations), charging frequency, and under what conditions and locations would additional public charging st ations be needed to adequately support BEV activity

. Following its assessment, ARB would make recommendations regarding public battery

- charging infrastructure

. The proposed amendments to the CFO regulation would complement the ZEV regulation, because th ey ensure the availability of hydrogen to FCVs as they areDraft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description Environmental Analysis

35 produced and sold in California

. The amended CFO regulation would also ensure vehicle manufacturers and consumers that FCV ownership is a real and viable option for passenger transportation in Cal ifornia

. Finally, the amendments would require ARB staff to monitor BEV deployment in an effort to have battery

- charging opportunities keep pace with needs

.


### D

. The “ Project” as Three Combined Regulatory Amendment Packages

.

T he “ project ,” as defined by CEQ A, undergoing environmental review in this EA is the combined set of amendments to the LEV, ZEV, and CFO regulations

. The amendments to these three regulations are analyzed as one project

, because the regulations are related and compliance response s by ve hicle manufacturers and fuel providers would have a combined effect on the state wide vehicle fleet, the ways light

- and medium

- duty vehicles are sold and leased, and the availability and use of alternative fuels

. This is necessary to provide a comprehensive review of the combined, or cumulative, effect of these regulatory amendments

.Draft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description Environmental Analysis

36 This page intentionally left blank.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

37 

### 3

. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTIN G

Existing physical conditions and the current regulatory framework relevant to each environmental topic are presented in this section. Refer to Chapter 4 for the analysis of environmental impacts and description of mitigation measures, if needed.



### A

. Aesthetics

1

. Existing Conditions

California, by virtue of its size, setting, and topographic and climatic variation, exhibits tremendous scenic diversity

. The varied landscape ranges from coastal to desert and valley to mountain

. Innumerable natural f eatures and settings combine to produce scenic resources that are treasured by residents and visitors alike

. Visibility is a factor that affects the ability to view and appreciate the aesthetic values in these features and settings and visibility is dire ctly affected by the presence of airborne visibility

- reducing particles

. Visibility

- reducing particles consist of suspended particulate matter, which is a complex mixture of tiny particles that consists of dry solid fragments, solid cores with liquid coat ings, and small droplets of liquid

. These particles vary greatly in shape, size and chemical composition, and can be made up of many different materials such as metals, soot, soil, dust, and salt ( ARB 2009 a )

.

2

. Regulatory Setting

Applicable laws and re gulations associated with aesthetics and scenic resources are discussed in Table 3

. A

- 1

.

Table 3

. A

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Aesthetic Resources Applicable Regulation Description
Federal
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 ( FLPMA) FLPMA is the enabling legislation establishing the Bureau of Land Management’s responsibilities for lands under its jurisdiction. Section 1 02 ( a) of the FLPMA state s that “

. . . . the public lands be managed in a manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archeological values ...

. “ Section 1 03 ( c) identifies “scenic values” as one of the resources for which public land should be managed

. Bureau of Land Management Contrast Rating System The contrast rating system is a systematic process used by BLM to analyze visual impacts of proposed projects and activities

. It is primarily intended to assist BLM personnel in the resolution of visual impact asses sment

. Safe, Accoun table , Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users This Act includes numerous provisions for improvements and changes to the implementation of transportation enhancement activities, which are funded by a ten percent set aside of Surface Transportation Program funds that are earmarked for transportation enhancement projects

. This Act includes a list of qualifying transportation enhancement activities which include several items supportive of visualAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

38 Table 3

. A

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Aesthetic Resources Applicable Regulation Description quality enh ancement such as acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites, scenic or historic highway programs, landscaping or other scenic beautification, and control and removal of outdoor advertising, among others

. Transportation enhancement activi ties are not required to have a direct link to surface transportation, and they are sufficiently qualified if they merely relate to surface transportation.
National Historic Preservation Act ( NHPA) Under regulations of the NHPA, visual impacts to a listed or eligible National Register property that may diminish the integrity of the property’s “setting

. . . [or]

. . . feeling” in a way that affects the property’s eligibility for listing, may result in a potentially significant adverse effect

. “Example s of adverse effects

. . . include

. . . : Introduction of visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity of the property’s significant historic features

. ” ( 36 CFR Part 800

. 5

. )
State Ambient Air Quality Standard for Visibility

- Reducing Particles Extinction coefficient ( measure of absorption of light in a medium) of 0

. 23 per kilometer

— visibility of ten miles or more ( 0

. 07

— 30 miles or more for Lake Tahoe) due to particles when relative humidity is less than 70 perce nt

. ( Method: Beta Attenuation and Transmittance through Filter Tape

. ) This value is not to be exceeded ( ARB 2010)

. California Streets and Highways Code, Sections 260 through 263

– Scenic Highways The State Scenic Highway Program promotes protection of designated State scenic highways through certification and adoption of local scenic corridor protection programs that conform with requirements of the California Scenic Highway Program

. Local County and City Controls Most local planning guidelines to preserve and enhance the visual quality and aesthetic resources of urban and natural areas are established in the jurisdiction’s General Plan

. The value attributed to a visual resource generally is based on the characteristics and distinctiveness of the resource and the number of persons who view it

. Vistas of undisturbed natural areas, unique or unusual features forming an important or dominant portion of a viewshed, and distant vistas offering relief from less attractive nearby features are frequently considered to be scenic resources

. In some instances, a case

- by

- case determination of scenic value may be needed, but often there is agreement within the relevant community about which features are valued as scen ic resources

. In addition to federal and State designations, counties and cities have their own scenic highway designations, which are intended to preserve and enhance existing scenic resources

. Criteria for designation are commonly included in the conse rvation / open space element of the city or County General Plan

. Cities and counties can use open space easements as a mechanism to preserve scenic resources, if they have adopted open

space plans, as provided by the Open Space Easement Act of 1974 and codified in California Government Code ( Section 5 1070 et seq

. ) Accor ding to the Act, a city or c ounty may acquire or approve an open

space easement through a variety of means, including use of public
money

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

39 

### B

. Agricultural and Forest Resources

1

. Existing Conditions

Based on the value of agricultural products sold, California is the largest agricultural producer among all state s in the U.S. California produces nearly half of the nation’s grown fruits, nuts, and vege table s and is the nation’s leading dairy state

. Cali fornia’s agricultural abundance includes more than 400 commodities, many of which are produced solely in California

. ( CDFA 2010a)

. Of California’s approximately 100 million acres of land, 43 million acres are used for agriculture ( CDFA 2010b)

. Of this l and area

, 16 million acres are grazing land and 27 million acres are cropland

. Approximately 9 million acres of irrigated land, or one

- third of the S tate ’s cropland, is considered to be prime, unique, or of state wide importance

. Although California remains the nation’s top agricultural producer, it has experienced significant farmland loss as a result of urbanization

. The California Department of Food and Agriculture estimates that about 3

. 4 million acres of land in California’s agricultural countie s are now urbanized

. Development consumes approximately 40,000 acres of agricultural land in California per year ( CDFA 2010b)

. Other causes of agricultural land loss include the removal of agriculture for environmental purposes ( such as the creation

or e nlargement of wildlife refuges) and withdrawals due to water shortages ( CDFA 2010b)

. California contains over 33 million acres of forests comprising a broad range of tree species, tree sizes, and levels of canopy closure ( USFS 2008, p

. 124)

. Conifer fore sts and woodlands cover over 19 million acres and are most extensive in the Sierra, Modoc, and Klamath / North Coast bioregions of the S tate

. Hardwood forests and oak woodlands cover over 13 million acres and extend mostly along the perimeter of the Sacrame nto and San Joaquin Valleys and throughout the coastal ranges ( USFS 2008,
p

. 128)

. The most productive timber growing portion of California’s forests are approximately 19 million acres of public and private timberland

— that is, land capable of growing mor e than 20 cubic feet of wood per acre per year and statutorily available for timber management ( USFS 2008, p

. 127)

. In the case of public ownerships ( 53 percent of timberlands), many lands capable of timber production have been administratively withdrawn over the past two decades for a variety of purposes and have been directed to primary uses other than timber production

. California has 9 million acres of privately owned timberland, of which 5

. 4 million acres are classified as timberland production zone where long

- term tax and regulatory structures favor timber production over potential conversion to other uses ( USFS 2008, p

. 127)

.

2

. Regulatory Setting

Table 3

. B

- 1 below provides a general description of applicable laws and regulations that
may pertain to agriculture and forest resources and the Proposed ACC Program

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

40 Table 3

. B

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Agriculture and Forest Resources

Applicable Regulation Description

Federal
Farmland Protection Policy Act The Farmland Protection Policy Act ( FPPA) directs Federal agencies to consider the effects of Federal programs or activities on farmland, and ensure that such programs, to the extent practicable, are compatible with S tate , local, and private farmland prote ction programs and policies

. The rating process established under the FPPA was developed to help assess options for land use on an evaluation of productivity weighed against commitment to urban development

. National Forest Management Act of 1976 The National Forest Management Act ( NFMA) is the primary statute governing the administration of national forests

. The act requires the Secretary of Agriculture to assess forest lands, develop a management program based on multiple

- use, sustained

- yield pr inciples, and implement a resource management plan for each unit of the National Forest System

. Goal 4 of the U.S. Forest Service’s National Strategic Plan for the National Forests state s that the nation’s forests and grasslands play a significant role in meeting America’s need for producing and transmitting energy

. Unless otherwise restricted, National Forest Service lands are available for energy exploration, development, and infrastructure ( e.g., well sites, pipelines, and transmission lines)

. However , the emphasis on non

- recreational special uses, such as utility corridors, is to authorize the special uses only when they cannot be reasonably accommodated on non

- National Forest Service lands

. State

The California Land Conservation Act, also known as the Williamson Act ( Govt

. Code, § 51200) The California Department of Conservation’s Division of Land Resource Protection administers the Williamson Act program, which permits property tax adjustments f or landowners who contract with a city or county to keep their land in agricultural production or approved open space uses for at least 10 years

. Lands covered by Williamson Act contracts are assessed on the basis of their agricultural value instead of th eir potential market value under nonagricultural uses

. In return for the preferential tax rate, the landowner is required to contractually agree to not develop the land for a period of at least 10 years

. Williamson Act contracts are renewed annually for 10 years unless a party to the contract files for nonrenewal

. The filing of a non

renewal application by a landowner ends the automatic annual extension of a contract and starts a 9

- year phase

- out of the contract

. During the phase

out period, the land re mains restricted to agricultural and open

- space uses, but property taxes gradually return to levels associated with the market value of the land

. At the end of the 9

- year non

- renewal process, the contract expires and the owner’s uses of the land are restr icted only by applicable local zoning

. The Williamson Act defines compatible use of contracted lands as any use determined by the county or city administering the agricultural preserve to be compatible with the agricultural, recreational,
or open space us e of land within the preserve and subject to contract ( Government Code, Section 5 1202[e])

. However, uses deemed compatible by a county or city government must be consistent with the principles of compatibility set forth in Government Code, Section 5 1238

. 1

. Approximately 16 million acres of farmland ( about 50 percent of the State ’s total farmland) are enrolled in the program

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

41 Table 3

. B

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Agriculture and Forest Resources

Applicable Regulation Description

California Farmland Conservancy Program ( Public Resources Code, §10200) The program provides grant funding for agricultural conservation
easements

. Although the easements are always written to reflect the benefits of multiple resource values, there is a provision in the CFCP statute that prevents easements funded under the program from restricting husbandry practices

. This pr ovision could prevent restricting those practices to benefit other natural resources

. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program ( FMMP) ( Gov

. Code §65570, PRC §612)

. For this program, the California Department of Conservation assesses the location, qual ity, and quantity of agricultural lands and conversion of these lands over time

. Agricultural designations include the categories of Prime Farmland, Farmland of State wide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, Grazing Land, Urban and B uilt

- Up Land, and Other Land

. State Lands Commission Significant Lands Inventory The State Lands Commission is responsible for managing lands owned by the S tate , including lands that the S tate has received from the federal government

. These lands total more than four million acres and include tide and submerged lands, swamp and overflow lands, the beds of navigable waterways, and S tate S chool L ands

. The State Lands Commission has a legal responsibility for, and a strong interest in, protecting the ecol ogical and Public Trust values associated with the State ’s sovereign lands, including the use of these lands for habitat preservation, open space and recreation

. Scoping Plan projects located within these lands would be subject to the State Lands Commission permitting process

. Local
Open Space Element State law requires each city and county to adopt a general plan containing at least seven mandatory elements including an open space element

. The open space element identifies open space resources in the community and strategies for protection and preservation of these resources

. Agricultural and forested lands are among the land use types identified as open space in general plans

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

42 

### C

. Air Quality

1

. Existing Conditions

The effects of the proposed ACC Program are evaluated in detail as contained in each respective Staff Report and are summarized in th is EA

. This evaluation is extensive because benefitting air quality conditions in California is both one of the primary ob jectives of the proposed ACC Program and the agency’s environmental protection mandate

. This environmental setting discussion provides an overview of how air quality is regulated in California and the state of existing air quality conditions

. Though the G HG environmental setting is presented separately in Section D below, it is important to note that mobile source control programs address CAPs and TACs, and in the case of GHGs, it’s in part to reduce temperature that exacerbates smog and causes PM from wildfires.

a

. California’s Criteria Air Pollutant and Toxics Regulatory Programs The federal, S tate , and local governments all share responsibility for reducing air pollution

. ARB is California’s lead air agency and controls emissions from mobile sources, fuels, and consumer products, as well as air toxics

. ARB al so coordinates local and regional emission reduction measures and plans that meet federal and S tate air quality limits

. At the federal level, the U.S. E PA has oversight of State programs

. In addition, U.S. E PA alone establish es emission standards for cer tain mobile sources such as ships, trains, and airplanes

. Two criteria air pollutants and their precursors, ( CAPs) are of most health concern in California ( i.e., ozone and particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less [PM 2.5 ])

. The health risk from diesel particulate matter is the largest air toxics risk, both regionally and at locations such as ports and rail yards

. ARB actions are lowering these health risks, and substantial new emission reductions in both CAPs and diesel p articulate matter will occur between now and 2020.

Ozone, a major component of “smog”, is not directly emitted as a pollutant, but is formed in the atmosphere when reactive organic gases ( ROG) and oxides of nitrogen ( NO X ) emissions react in the presence of sunlight

. Ozone concentrations often peak downwind of the emission sources, which contributes to the regional nature of ozone air pollution.

PM 2.5 is a mixture of pollutants generated by a variety of sources

. PM 2.5 can either be emitted directly into the air in forms such as soot and smoke, or it can be formed in the atmosphere from the reactions of pollutants including NO X , oxides of sulfur ( SO X ), ROG, and ammonia

. While the impacts of directly emitted PM 2.5 may b e seen near sources of air pollution, PM 2.5 that is formed in the atmosphere has a regional impact similar to ozone.

California’s mature air quality program leads the nation in terms of stringency of required emission controls, not only for mobile sources but also for stationary sources

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

43 Reducing emissions from combustion sources is at the core of California’s program to meet air quality standards for ozone and PM 2.5

. California’s climate and CAP programs are complementary, and the AB 32 regulations ARB i s adopting will provide co

- benefits that will be incorporated into future air quality plans for ozone and PM 2.5

.

b

. Ambient Air Quality Standards and the State Implementation Plan CAPs are the most prevalent air pollutants known to be deleterious to hu man health and extensive health

- effects criteria documents are available

. The federal Clean Air Act ( CAA ) required the U.S. EPA to establish national ambient air quality standards ( NAAQS)

. The California Clean Air Act ( CCAA ) , which was adopted in 1988, r equired the ARB to establish California ambient air quality standards ( CAAQS)

. In addition to CAPs, ARB has established CAAQS for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility

- reducing particulate matter

. In most cases the CAAQS are more str ingent than the NAAQS

. Differences in the standards are generally explained by the health effects studies considered during the standard setting process and the interpretation of the studies

. The NAAQS and CAAQS are presented in Table 3

. C

- 1

.

Table 3

. C

- 1

. Ambient Air Quality Standards and Designations

Pollutant Averaging Time California National Standards 1

Standards 2,3 Primary 3, 4 Secondary 3,6

Ozone 1

- hour 0

. 09 ppm ( 180 μ g / m 3 )

– 6 Same as Primary Standard 8

- hour 0

. 070 ppm ( 137 μ g / m 3 ) 0

. 075 ppm ( 147 μ g / m 3 )

Carbon Monoxide ( CO) 1

- hour 20 ppm ( 23 mg / m 3 ) 35 ppm ( 40 mg / m 3 )

– 8

- hour 9 ppm ( 10 mg / m 3 ) 9 ppm ( 10 mg / m 3 )
Nitrogen Dioxide ( NO 2 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean 0

. 030 ppm ( 56 μ g / m 3 ) 0

. 053 ppm ( 100 μ g / m 3 ) Same as Primary Standard

1

- hour 0

. 18 ppm ( 338 μ g / m 3 ) 0.100 ppm ( 188
μ g / m 3 )

Sulfur Dioxide ( SO 2 ) 24

- hour 0

. 04 ppm ( 105 μ g / m 3 )

–

3

- hour

– – 0

. 5 ppm ( 1300 μ g / m 3 )

1

- hour 0

. 25 ppm ( 655 μ g / m 3 ) 0.075 ppm ( 196
μ g / m 3 ) –

Respirable Particulate Matter ( PM 10 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 μ g / m 3

– 6 Same as Primary Standard

24

- hour 50 μ g / m 3 150 μ g / m 3Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

44 Table 3

. C

- 1

. Ambient Air Quality Standards and Designations

Pollutant Averaging Time California National Standards 1

Standards 2,3 Primary 3, 4 Secondary 3,6

Fine Particulate Matter ( PM 2.5 ) Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 μ g / m 3 15 μ g / m 3 Same as Primary Standard

24

- hour

– 35 μ g / m 3

Lead 10 30

- day Average 1

. 5 μ g / m 3

– –

Calendar Quarter – 1

. 5 μ g / m 3 Same as Primary Standard Rolling 3

- Month Avg

. – 0

. 15 μ g / m 3

Sulfates 24

- hour 25 μ g / m 3

No National Standards Hydrogen Sulfide 1

- hour 0

. 03 ppm ( 42 μ g / m 3 )

Vinyl Chloride 7 24

- hour 0

. 01 ppm ( 26 μ g / m 3 )

Visibility

Reducing Particle Matter 8

- hour Extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer

— visibility of 10 miles or

more ( 0.07

— 30 miles or

more for Lake Tahoe) because of particles when

the relative humidity is less than 70%. U

1 National standards ( other than ozone, PM, and those based on annual averages or annual arithmetic means) are not to be

exceeded more than once a year. The ozone standard is attained when the fourth highest 8

- hour concentration in a year, averaged over 3 years, is equal to or less than the standard. The PM 10 24

- hour stand ard is attained when 99 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard. The PM 2.5 24

- hour standard is attained when 98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less tha n the standard. Contact the U.S. EPA for further clarification and current federal policies. 2 California standards for ozone, CO ( except Lake Tahoe), SO 2 ( 1

- and 24

- hour), NO 2 , PM, and visibility

- reducing particles are

values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. CAAQS are listed in the Table of Standards CCR, Title 17, Section 70200. 3 Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated [i.e., parts per million ( ppm) or micrograms per cubic meter

( μg/ m 3 )]. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr. Most measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure o f 760 torr; ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas. 4 National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public hea lth. 5 National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated

adverse effects of a pollutant. 6 The 1

- hour ozone NAAQS was revoked on June 15, 2005. The annual PM 10 NAAQS was revoked in October 2006.
7 ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as toxic air contaminants with no threshold of exposure for adverse health effects

determined. These actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants. Source: ARB 2010Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

45 Federal clean air laws require areas with unhealthy levels of CAPs ( i.e., ozone, carbon monoxide [ CO ] , nitrogen dioxide [ NO 2 ] , sulfur dioxide [ SO 2 ] , particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less [ PM 10 ] , PM 2.5 , and lead ) to develop plans, known as State Implementation Plans ( SIPs)

. SIPs are comprehensive plans that describe how an area will attain national ambient air quality standards ( NAAQS)

. The 1990 amendments to the federal CAA set deadlines for attai nment based on the severity of an area's air pollution problem

. The SIP is a compilation of new and previously submitted plans, programs ( such as monitoring, modeling, permitting, etc

. ), district rules, S tate regulations and federal controls

. Many of Cali fornia's SIPs rely on the same core set of control strategies, including emission standards for cars and heavy trucks, fuel regulations and limits on emissions from consumer products

. State law makes ARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIP

. Local air districts and other agencies, such as the Bureau of Automotive Repair and the Department of Pesticide Regulation, prepare SIP elements and submit them to ARB for review and approval

. ARB forwards SIP revisions to the U.S. E PA for approval and publication in the Federal Register

. The Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Chapter I, Part 52, Subpart F, Section 5 2

. 220 lists all of the items which are included in the California SIP

. At any one time, several California measures have been submitte d to U.S. EPA for their approval into the SIP ( ARB 2009 b )

.

c

. Air Districts The CCAA requires that all local air districts in the S tate endeavor to achieve and maintain the CAAQS by the earliest practical date

. The A ct specifies that local air districts should focus particular attention on reducing the emissions from transportation operations and area

- wide emission sources, and provides districts with the authority to regulate indirect sources

. There are 35 air pollution control distri cts or air quality management districts ( together, referred to as air districts) across California

. Air districts attain and maintain air quality conditions in their respective jurisdictions through a comprehensive program of planning, regulation, enforce ment, technical innovation, and promotion of the understanding of air quality issues

. The clean air strategy implemented by air districts includes the preparation of plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adoption and enforcement of ru les and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, and issuance of permits for stationary sources of air pollution

. Air districts also inspect stationary sources of air pollution and respond to citizen complaints, monitor ambient air quality and met eorological conditions, and implement programs and regulations required by the CAA, and the CCAA , primarily on stationary sources

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

46 d

. Clean Vehicle and Diesel Risk Reduction Programs

**i**

**. Criteria Air Pollutant Control Programs**  Over the last several decades

, California has dramatically tightened emission standards for on

- road and off

- road mobile sources and the fuels that power them

. California’s emission control program for on

- road motor vehicles is the strongest in the world

. New cars are now 99 p ercent cleaner than their uncontrolled counterparts prior to the mid

1960s

. Trucks are now 90 percent cleaner than before the mid

- 1960s , and will be 98 percent cleaner by 2010

. ARB rules adopted as part of the Diesel Emission Reduction Program and Goods Movement Program are primarily toxics control measures ( e.g., California has identified diesel PM as a TAC, but also achieve significant CAP emission reductions

. Working in concert with the U.S. E PA, standards for goods movement sources have also been tightened dramatically

. By requiring low

- sulfur fuel, SO X emissions from ship auxiliary engines will be cut 96 percent from before the mid

- 2000s by 2010

. New locomotive engines are now 50 to 60 percent cleaner than before the mid

- 2000s

. Harbor craft emi ssion standards were cut roughly in half from before the mid

- 2000s

. New cargo handling equipment will be 95 percent cleaner by 2011 than before the mid

2000s

.

California has also profoundly lowered emission standards for off

- road sources, from lawn and g arden equipment, to recreational vehicles and boats, to construction equipment and other large off

- road sources

. From 2010 through 2014, these new off

road sources will be manufactured to operate with 80

- 98 percent fewer emissions than their uncontrolled counterparts

. ARB has worked closely with U.S. E PA to regulate large diesel, gasoline and liquid petroleum gas equipment , over which authority is split between California and the federal government

, and by 2014, new large off

- road equipment will be 98 percent cleaner

. ARB has also made great strides in reducing emissions from the smaller engines under concurrent State control, like those used in lawn mowers, jet skis, recreational vehicles, and boats

. From 2010 to 2015, these new off

- road sources will be manufactured with 82

- 90 percent lower emission level s than their uncontrolled counterparts

. Adopted regulations have made significant strides in reducing emissions from those mobile sources already in use ( i.e., the legacy fleet ) by keeping existing ve hicles cleaner longer, getting cleaner technology on older vehicles and equipment, and replacing older dirtier vehicles and equipment with cleaner ones

. Whereas new engine emissions have been regulated for a long time, most of the in

- use control programs have just begun to apply and have an impact

. Many programs and rules are currently in place to reduce emissions from the mobile

source legacy fleets

. The Smog Check Program ensures that passenger vehicles stayAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

47 clean as they age and on

- board diagnostic systems identify emission control problems

. Heavy

- duty truck inspection programs help control smoke emissions and detect emission control mal

- maintenance an d tampering

. ARB has adopted well over 20 regulations in the last eight years

. ARB’s landmark regulations adopted in 2007 and 2008 will accelerate replacement of higher

- emitting heavy

- duty trucks, buses and construction equipment

. Recently adopted regul ations have required use of cleaner fuels, greatly reducing emissions from ships and harbor craft

. ARB has adopted public and private fleet rules that require local governments and private companies to incorporate the cleanest vehicles and equipment into their fleets

. T esting procedures and verification requirements for current emission control technology have been strengthened

. In addition, other operational and emission control technology requirements that help reduce emissions from existing vehicle an d equipment have been put into place

. Incentive programs have worked hand

- in

- hand with regulations, providing added emissions benefits

. California is currently investing up to $140 million per year to clean up older, higher

- emitting sources through the Ca rl Moyer Program

. The Smog Check Breathe Easier Campaign pays motorists $1,000 to permanently retire their high polluting vehicles

. Also, California Proposition 1B, also known as the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, was on the November 7, 2006 ballot in California as a legislatively

- referred bond act, where it was approved. Proposition 1B authorized the State of California to sell $19.925 billion of general obligation bonds to fund transportation project s "to relieve congestion, improve the movement of goods, improve air quality, and enhance the safety and security of the transportation system." L ocal governments use special vehicle registration fees to fund projects that further reduce emissions from mot or vehicles

. In 2007 the Board adopted a new state wide strategy for reducing emissions that contribute to high ozone and PM 2.5 levels

. The 2007 State Strategy, together with local control strategies, is designed to allow California to meet the U.S. EPA’s national ambient air quality standards for ozone and PM 2.5

. As of April, 2010, ARB had adopted twelve regulations to reduce CAP emissions and fulfill commitments made in the 2007 State Strategy

. Some of the rulemakings were technical corrections to existing rules or deadline modifications, and did not further reduce emissions

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

48 The adopted rules are shown in Table 3

. C

- 2

.

Table 3

. C

- 2

. Rules Adopted Pursuant to the 2007 State Strategy

ARB Rules Adoption Date
Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks June 2007 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program

– Phase 3 June 2007

Cleaner In

- use Off

- Road Equipment July 2007
Light

- Duty Vehicle Catalyst Replacement October 2007
Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft November 2007

Port Truck Modernization December 2007 / December 2008 Ship Auxiliary Engines ( Cold Ironing) December 2007

Consumer Products June 2008 / November 2008 Clean Fuel Requirements for Ship Main Engines July 2008
Spark

- Ignition Marine Engine and Boat Regulations July 2008

Por table Outdoor Marine Tanks Evaporative Emission Standards ( partial) September 2008

Large Spark

- Ignited Engines, Rule Amendment November 2008

Small Off

- Road Engine Regulation November 2008

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks December 2008 Gasoline Dispensing Facility Hoses May 2009
Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program ( Car Scrap) June 2009

Consumer Products September 2009

Por table Equipment January 2010

Commercial Harbor Craft June 2010 Stationary Compression Ignition Engines October 2010

Consumer Products November 2010
Transport Refrigeration Units November 2010

In

- Use Off

- Road Diesel

- Fueled Fleets December 2010
Truck and Bus Regulation December 2010

Ocean

- Going Vessels June 2011
Transport Refrigeration Units October 2011

California Reformulated Gasoline October 2011

The SIP and State wide Strategy are focused on areas with pollution levels that exceed national air quality standards for ozone and PM 2.5

. However , most of the control measures adopted pursuant to the State wide Strategy will reduce emissions, and improve air quality, throughout the State

. These controls also fulfill commitments made in ARB’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan ( ARB 2000) and Goods Movement EmissionAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

49 Reduction Plan ( Business, Transportation and Housing Agency and California Environmental Protection Agency 2007 ), and help all areas make progress towards attaining California’s more protective S tate ambient air quality standards

.

**ii**

**. Diesel Ri**  **sk Reduction Plan** In September 2000, ARB adopted an aggressive plan to require cleaner diesel fuel and cleaner diesel engines and vehicles

. The Diesel Risk Reduction Plan targets reductions of diesel emissions from year

- 2000 levels by 75 percent by 2010 a nd 85 percent by 2020

. Since the adoption of the Diesel Risk Reduction Plan, some of the strategies in place today that are reducing diesel PM include:

• Cleaner diesel fuel

. The sulfur level in California diesel fuel was lowered to less than 15 parts per million in July 2006

. ARB’s fuel regulation applies to fuels for

on

- road, off

- road, and stationary engines, while the federal low sulfur diesel rule applies only to on

- road vehicles

.

• Cleaner new diesel engines

. In 2001, ARB adopted new PM and NO X emissio n standards to clean up new on

- road diesel engines that power big

- rig trucks, trash trucks, delivery vans, and other large vehicles

. The new PM standard is a 90 percent reduction from the previous PM standard

.

• Cleaner in

- use diesel engines

. ARB has adopted regulations aimed at reducing PM and other pollutants from in

- use diesel engines through engine replacement

, retrofit with verified diesel emission control system to the existing engine

, vehicle replacement with an alternative

- fueled vehicl e or a vehicle with a new and cleaner diesel engine

, and operational modifications including reduced operating time or reduced idling

.

**iii**

**. Goods Movement Action Plan**  Air pollution from international trade and all goods movement in California is a major public health concern at both regional and community levels

. Goods movement is now the dominant contributor to transportation emissions in the State

. In April 2006, ARB approved the Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement in California to

re duce the emissions and health risk in communities near ports, rail yards, and high

traffic corridors

. The plan will reduce emissions of diesel PM , the NO X and SO X that contribute to fine particles, and, to a lesser extent, the ROG that mixes with NO X in t he atmosphere to form regional ozone

. The plan envisions emission reductions at each step in the goods movement path

, from ship to shore to truck or locomotive to the final destination

.

e

. Stationary Source Regulatory Program
Basic elements of the feder al CAA include stationary source emissions standards and permits

. The ARB does not have authority to issue permits directly to stationary sources of air pollution

. Primary responsibility for permitting all sources, except vehicular sources, rests with th e local and regional air districts

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

50 f

. Air Toxics Programs Air quality regulations also focus on TACs, or in federal parlance hazardous air pollutants ( HAPs)

. In general, for those TACs that may cause cancer, there is no concentration that does not present some risk

. In other words, there is no threshold level below which adverse health impacts may not be expected to occur

. This contrasts with the CAPs for which accep table levels of exposure can be determined and for which the NAAQS and CAAQS have been established ( Table 3

. C

- 1)

. Instead, the U.S. EPA and ARB regulate HAPs and TACs, respectively, through statutes and regulations that generally require the use of the maximum or best available control technology for toxics ( MACT and BACT) to limit emi ssions

. These, in conjunction with additional rules set forth by air districts, establish the regulatory framework for TACs

.

**i**

**. Federal Hazardous Air Pollutant Programs**  The U.S. EPA has programs for identifying and regulating HAPs

. Title III of the CAA directed the U.S. EPA to promulgate national emissions standards for HAPs ( NESHAP)

. The NESHAP may differ for major sources than for area sources of HAPs

. Major sources are defined as stationary sources with potential to emit more than 10 tons per
year ( TPY) of any HAP or more than 25 TPY of any combination of HAPs; all other sources are considered area sources

. The CAA also required the U.S. EPA to promulgate vehicle or fuel standards containing reasonable requirements that control toxic emissions, at a minimum applying to benzene and formaldehyde

. Performance criteria were established to limit mobile

source emissions of toxics, including benzene, formaldehyde, and 1

- 3

- butadiene

. In addition, Section 2 19 required the use of reformulated gasoline in s elected areas with the most severe ozone nonattainment conditions to further reduce mobile

- source emissions

.

ii

. State and Local Toxic Air Contaminant Programs TACs in California are primarily regulated through the Tanner Air Toxics Act ( AB 1807

, Statutes of 1983 ) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act ( AB 2588 , Statutes of 1987 )

. AB 1807 sets forth a formal procedure for ARB to designate substances as TACs

. This includes research, public participation, and scientific peer

re view before ARB can designate a substance as a TAC

. To date, ARB has identified over 21 TACs, and adopted the U.S. EPA ’s list of HAPs as TACs

. Most recently, diesel PM was added to the ARB list of TACs

. Existing sources of TACs also include mobile source s ( i

. e

. , diesel

- fueled internal combustion engines) on nearby roadways

. According to the ARB, on

- road diesel

- fueled vehicles contribute approximately 24 percent of the state wide total of TAC emissions, with an additional 71 percent attributed to other mob ile sources such as construction, mining, and agricultural equipment, and transport refrigeration units

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

51 g

. Air Quality Conditions As a result of the emission reduction regulations and programs described above, California has made significant progress in reducing public exposure to unhealthy levels of air pollution, and ambient concentrations are now significantly lower than they were 20 years ago

. However, at the same time, the targets for defining clean air have become more stringent

. As a result, des pite continuing improvements in air quality, more areas violate the new standards

. Changes to the national ozone standards provide an illustration of this situation

. To keep pace with the current science, U.S. E PA periodically reviews the NAAQS and revi ses them as needed to reflect the most recent health information

. U.S. E PA initially established the federal ozone standard as a 1

- hour standard to protect against short

term exposure impacts

. In the late 1990s, the 1

- hour standard was replaced with an 8

- hour standard to protect against long

- term exposure impacts

. More recent health studies indicate the need for an even more health protective standard, and U.S. E PA is currently considering an even lower level for the 8

- hour standard

.

Table 3

. C

- 3 shows how various areas of California compare under the original 1

- hour and current 8

- hour national ozone standards in 1990 and 2009

.

Table 3

. C

- 3

. Compliance with Federal Ozone Air Quality Standards in California’s Major Urban Areas

AREA 1

- Hour Ozone Standard ( 0

. 12 ppm) 8

- Hour Ozone Standard ( 0

. 08 ppm)

Area Met Standard in 1990 Area Met Standard in 2009 Area Met Standard in 1990 Area Met Standard in 2009
Monterey Bay Area    

Sacramento Metro Area 
San Diego 
San Francisco Bay Area  
San Joaquin Valley
San Luis Obispo County*  

Santa Barbara County  

South Coast
Ventura County 

Notes: * Available data show no violation of standard at San Luis Obispo sites, but the current high concentration site was not yet operating

. Therefore, is very likely the area violated both standards in 1990

. Sacramento has attained the 1

- hour standard, based on 2009 data, but U.S. EPA has not yet formally made the announcement

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

52 **i**

**. Ozone**  **Trends** California’s highest ozone concentrations are now close to half of what they were in 1990

. In the South Coast Air Basin, the most populous California air basin, concentrations have decreased approximately 35 percent since 1990, and today nearly hal f ( 45 percent) the population ( more than 6 million people) live in areas where ozone air quality meets the federal standard

. Other portions of the South Coast Air Basin also show substantial improvement

. The areas, and population, experiencing the highes t ozone levels have decreased in size dramatically, and residents of the air basin experience those elevated levels on fewer days

. Since 1990, the annual number of days that exceed the federal ozone standard have been cut nearly in half

. Generally, the g reatest improvements have occurred in areas that had the largest number of unhealthy days in 1990

. Air quality in California’s inland areas continues to remain a significant challenge, and progress in the San Joaquin Valley has been slower than in other pa rts of California

. However, although concentrations in the San Joaquin Valley have seen only a modest decrease, the frequency of exposure to unhealthy air has decreased significantly since 1990, with the average number of days exceeding the federal 8

- hour ozone standard declining by 22 percent

. In the San Francisco Bay Area ozone concentrations were only slightly higher than the federal standard in 1990 and have decreased approximately 11 percent since then

. Ozone concentrations in the region are now bel ow the federal 1

- hour standard

.

**ii**

**. PM**  **2.5 Trends**  While PM 2.5 concentrations have only been measured for approximately ten years, significant progress has already occurred in this short time period

. Annual average PM 2.5 concentrations have declined by at least 20 percent since 2002 throughout much of California

. Similar progress has been seen in reducing daily ( 24

- hour) concentrations

. As with ozone, some of the most significant progress has occurred in the coastal areas.

In the South Coast Air Basin, both annual average and daily PM 2.5 concentrations have decreased by 30 to 50 percent since 2001

. In addition, the number of days above the federal 24

- hour PM 2.5 standard has decreased over 80 percent, dropping from 120 days in 2001 to less than 20 days today.

The San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin met the federal annual average PM 2.5 standard in 2001, and PM 2.5 concentrations have decreased nearly 30 percent since then

. Daily concentrations are only slightly above the federal standard and occur in only a small region in the East Bay

. We continue to face significant challenges to improving PM 2.5 levels in the San Joaquin Valley

. Nevertheless, annual average concentrations have decreased approximately 10 percent since 2001 and the most recent year’s data shows that values continue to decrease

. While the Bakersfield region in the southern end of the San Joaquin ValleyAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

53 experiences the highest levels of PM 2.5 , other monitors throughout the San Joaquin Valley are only reaching values at or near the federal st andard

.

**iii**

**. Toxic**  **Air Contaminant Trends** ARB maintains a state wide air quality monitoring network for TACs that currently includes 17 monitoring stations measuring ambient concentrations of over 60 substances

. Nine individual air toxics, including diesel PM , account for the majority of the potential health risk in California

. Exposure to diesel PM is the largest health concern, accounting for approximately 80 percent of the state wide risk

. Unlike other air
tox ics, there is currently no method for directly monitoring diesel PM concentrations in the ambient air

. However, diesel PM concentrations can be estimated from levels of other co

- pollutants such as NO X and elemental carbon

. Over the last 20 years,
concent rations of these indicators have decreased substantially

. As a result of controls on motor vehicles, fuels, stationary sources, and consumer products, the public’s exposure to other air toxics has also decreased dramatically

. Between the early 1990’s and today, the decrease in s tate wide average health risk ranged from approximately 20 percent for formaldehyde, to approximately 90 percent for perchloroethylene

. Air toxics associated with motor vehicles and their fuels such as 1,3

- butadiene and benzene have also seen significant decreases of 80 to 85 percent as a result of ARB’s mobile source control program

. In aggregate, the estimated cancer risk from air toxics has been reduced by approximately 60 percent since the early 1990s

. It is important to note, h owever, that the routine air toxics monitoring network is designed to reflect regional exposures

. Although ongoing control programs have been effective in reducing regional levels, there may still be situations of localized toxics exposure due to proximit y to individual sources

. Specialized monitoring studies are often needed to better characterize these localized impacts, which often have very steep gradients that drop off quickly farther from the source

. Thus, conducting monitoring to capture these gra dients is generally resource intensive

.

2. Regulatory Setting

Table 3. C

- 4 below provides a general description of applicable laws and regulations that may pertain to air quality and the Proposed ACC Program

. See Table 3.D

- 1 for discussion of GHG

- related laws and regulations. Though these are not directly related to CAPs, those identified in Table 3.D

- X regulate GHGs that contribute to global warming, which in turn impacts compliance with the CAAQS and NAAQS ( e.g., climate penalty, where rising temperatures increase ground level ozone and airborne health

damaging particles, despite the reductions achieved by programs targeting smog

forming emissions from cars, trucks and industrial sources )

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

54 Table 3.C

- 4

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Air Quality

Regulation Description

Federal

Clean Air Act ( 40 CFR ) The Clean Air Act, which was last amended in 1990, requires U.S. EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS) for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment

. The Clean Air Act established two types of NAAQS

. Primary standards set limits to protect public health, including the health of "sensitive" populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly

. Secondary standards set l imits to protect public welfare, including protection against decreased visibility, damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings

. U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards ( OAQPS) has set NAAQS for six principal pollutants, which are ca lled "criteria" pollutants

. Title III of the CAA directed the EPA to promulgate national emissions standards for HAPs ( NESHAP). The CAA also required the EPA to promulgate vehicle or fuel standards containing reasonable requirements that control toxic emi ssions, at a minimum to benzene and formaldehyde. Performance criteria were established to limit mobile

- source emissions of toxics, including benzene, formaldehyde, and 1

- 3

- butadiene. In addition, Section 2 19 required the use of reformulated gasoline in se lected areas with the most severe ozone nonattainment conditions to further reduce mobile

- source emissions.
Other Applicable Federal

- Level Regulations This includes all other applicable regulations at the federal level for portions of the project area th at are outside of the U.S. ( e.g., Canada)

. State

CCR ( Titles 13 and 17) ARB is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of S tate and local air pollution control programs in California and for implementing the California Clean Air Act ( CCAA). The CCAA, which was adopted in 1988, required the ARB to establish California ambient air quality standards ( CAAQS).

Other Applicable State

- Level Regulations This includes all other applicable regulations at the S tate level for portions of the project area that are outside of Cal ifornia ( e.g., AB 1807 and AB 2588 )

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

55 

### D

. Greenhouse Gases

1

. Existing Conditions

a

. Existing Climate Climate is the accumulation of daily and seasonal weather events over a long period of time, whereas weather is defined as the condition of the atmosphere at any particular time and place ( Ahrens 2003)

. Like its topography, California's climate is varied and tends toward extremes

. Generally there are two seasons in California : 1) a long, dry summer, with low humidity and cool evenings and 2) a mild, rainy winter, except in the high mountains, where four seasons prevail and snow lasts from November to Apri l

. The one climatic constant for the S tate is summer drought

. California has four main climatic regions

. Mild summers and winters prevail in central coastal areas, where temperatures are more equable than virtually anywhere else in the U.S. For example, differences between average summer and winter temperatures between San Francisco and Monterey for example are seldom more than 10°F ( 6°C)

. During the summer there are heavy fogs in San Francisco and all along the coast

. Mountainous regions are characteri zed by milder summers and colder winters, with markedly low temperatures at high elevations

. The Central Valley has hot summers and cool winters, while the Imperial Valley and eastern deserts are marked by very hot, dry summers, with temperatures frequent ly exceeding 100°F ( 38°C)

. Average annual temperatures for the S tate range from 47°F ( 8°C) in the Sierra Nevada to 73°F ( 23°C) in the Imperial Valley

. The highest temperature ever recorded in the U.S. was 134° ( 57°C), registered in Death Valley on 10 July 1913

. Death Valley has the hottest average summer temperature in the Western Hemisphere, at 98°F ( 37°C)

. The S tate 's lowest temperature was

- 45°F (

- 43°C), recorded on 20 January 1937 at Boca, near the Nevada border

. Among the major population centers, L os Angeles has an average annual temperature of 63°F ( 17°C), with an average January minimum of 48°F ( 9°C) and an average July maximum of 75°F ( 24°C)

. San Francisco has an annual average of 57°F ( 14°C), with a January average minimum of 42°F ( 6°C) and a July average maximum of 72°F ( 22°C)

. The annual average in San Diego is 64°F ( 18°C), the January average minimum 49°F ( 9°C), and the July average maximum 76°F ( 24°C)

. Sacramento's annual average temperature is 61°F ( 16°C), with January minimum s averaging 38°F ( 3°C) and July maximums of 93°F ( 34°C)

. Annual precipitation varies from only 2 in ( 5 cm) in the Imperial Valley to 68 in ( 173 cm) at Blue Canyon, near Lake Tahoe

. San Francisco had an average annual precipitation ( 1971

– 2000) of 20 in ( 51 cm), Sacramento 17

. 9 in ( 45

. 5 cm), Los Angeles 13

. 2 in ( 33

. 5 cm), and San Diego 10

. 8 in ( 27

. 4 cm)

. The largest one

- month snowfall ever recorded in the US

, 390 in ( 991 cm)

, fell in Alpine County in January 1911

. Snow averages between 300 and 400 in ( 760 to 1,020 cm) annually in the high elevations of the Sierra Nevada, but is rare in the Central Valley and coastal lowlands

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

56 Sacramento has the greatest percentage ( 73 percent) of possible annual sunshine among the S tate 's largest cities; Los Angeles has 72 percent and San Francisco 71 percent

. San Francisco is the windiest, with an average annual wind speed of 11 mph ( 18 km / hr)

. Tropical rainstorms occur often in California during the winter

.

b. Attributing Climate Change―The Physical Scientific Basis Climate change is a long

- term shift in the climate of a specific location, region or planet. The shift is measured by changes in features associated with average weather, such as temperature, wind patterns, and precipitation. According to the Intergovern mental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC), a scientific body established by the World Meteorological Organization ( WMO) and by the United Nations Environment Programme ( UNEP), available scientific evidence supports the conclusion that most of the increased ave rage global temperatures since the mid

- 20th century is very likely due to human

- induced increases in GHG concentrations. GHGs, which are emitted from both natural and anthropogenic sources, include water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, halo carbons, and ozone. These gases play a role in the “greenhouse effect” that helps regulate the temperature of the earth.

The current post

‐ industrial warming trend differs alarmingly from past changes in the Earth’s climate because GHG emissions are high er and warming is occurring faster than at any other time on record within the past 650,000 years. Historical long

‐ term as well as decadal and inter

‐ annual fluctuations in the Earth’s climate resulted from natural processes such as plate tectonics, the Ea rth’s rotational orbit in space, solar radiation variability, and volcanism. The current trend derives from an added factor: human activities, which have greatly intensified the natural greenhouse effect, causing global warming. GHG emissions from human activities that contribute to climate change include the burning of fossil fuels ( such as coal, oil and natural gas), cutting down trees ( deforestation) and developing land ( land

- use changes). The burning of fossil fuels emits GHGs into the atmosphere, wh ile deforestation and land

- use changes remove trees and other kinds of vegetation that store ( “sequester”) carbon dioxide. Emissions of GHGs due to human activities have increased globally since pre

- industrial times, with an increase of 70 percent between 1970 and 2004 ( IPCC 2007 b ).

A growing recognition of the wide

- ranging impacts of climate change has fueled efforts over the past several years to reduce GHG emissions. In 1997, Kyoto Protocol set legally binding emissions targets for industrialized cou ntries, and created innovative mechanisms to assist these countries in meeting these targets. The Kyoto Protocol took effect in 2004, after 55 parties to the Convention had ratified it ( Department of Environment 2010 ). Six major GHGs have been the focus of efforts to reduce emissions: CO 2 , methane ( CH 4 ), nitrous oxide ( N 2 O), hydrofluorocarbons ( HFCs), perfluorocarbons ( PFCs) and sulfur hexafluoride ( SF 6 ). They are regulated under the Kyoto Protocol.

The “ global warming potential” ( GWP) metric is used to convert all GHGs into “CO 2 ‐ equivalent” units. Importantly, metrics such as GWP have been used as an exchange rate in multi

‐ gas emissions policies and frameworks. Each gas’s GWP is definedAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

57 relative to CO 2

. For example, N 2 O’s GWP is 310, meaning a unit m ass of N 2 O warms the atmosphere 310 times more than a unit mass of CO 2

. SF 6 and PFCs have extremely long atmospheric lifetimes, resulting in their essentially irreversible accumulation in the atmosphere once emitted. However, in terms of quantity of emis sions, CO 2 dominates world and U.S. GHG emissions.

Because the major GHGs have longer lives, they build up in the atmosphere so that past, present and future emissions ultimately contribute to total atmospheric concentrations. Thus, while reducing emissio ns of conventional air pollutants decreases their concentrations in the atmosphere in a relatively short time, atmospheric concentrations of the major GHGs can only be gradually reduced over years and decades. More specifically, the rate of emission of CO 2 currently greatly exceeds its rate of removal, and the slow and incomplete removal implies that small to moderate reductions in its emissions would not result in stabilization of CO 2 concentrations, but rather would only reduce the rate of its growth in coming decades. Many of the same activities that emit conventional air pollutants also emit GHGs ( e.g., the burning of fossil fuels to produce electricity, heat or drive engines and the burning of biomass). Some conventional air pollutants also have gree nhouse effects, for example, soot/black carbon and tropospheric ozone.

In recent years there has been increased attention in the particle research community about the potential of black carbon ( BC) to cause global warming. The major anthropogenic sources of BC are fossil fuels and biofuels ( biomass burning for domestic energy). The ability of BC to absorb light energy and its role in key atmospheric processes link it to a range of climate impacts, including increased temperatures, accelerated ice and snow melt, and disruptions to precipitation patterns. It has been proposed that light absorbing particles in the atmosphere act as a GHG whose net forcing is warming only second to CO 2 ( Ramanathan and Carmichael 2008). This estimate of the forcing due to BC is larger than most prior estimates including those of the IPCC 4 th assessment report ( IPCC 2007 c ).

Global warming is no longer a matter of the future or of places far away

. Rather, climate change is already evident in California, and it is happening no w

. Climate change is a critical issue facing California’s citizens, ecosystems, and economic vitality

. Sea levels have risen by as much as seven inches along the California coast over the last century, increasing erosion and pressure on the S tate ’s infrastructure, water supplies, and natural resources

. The S tate has also seen increased average temperatures, more extreme hot days, fewer cold nights, a lengthening of the growing season, shifts in the water cycle with less winter precipitation falling as snow, and both snowmelt and rainwater running off sooner in the year

. These climate driven changes affect resources critical to the health and prosperity of California

. For example, forest wild

- land fires are becoming more frequent and intense due to dry seasons that start earlier and end later

. Agriculture is especially vulnerable to altered temperature and rainfall patterns, and new pest problems

. The S tate ’s water supply, already stressed under current demands and expected population growth, will shrink under even the most conservative projected climate change scenario Almost half a million Californians,Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

58 many without the means to adjust to expected impacts, will be at risk from sea level rise along Bay and coastal areas

. California’s infrastructu re is already stressed and will face additional burdens from climate risks

. And as the Central Valley becomes more urbanized, more people will be at risk from intense heat waves ( CEC 2009)

. Borrowing from recent findings by the IPCC, the projected clima te change

- related exposures are likely to affect the health status of people, particularly those with low adaptive capacity, increased deaths, disease and injury due to heat waves, floods, storms, fires and droughts ( IPCC 2007 a )

. In California, low socioe conomic status and minority communities are potentially more vulnerable to health impacts associated with increasing temperatures due to less access to cooling centers, air conditioning, and limited access to health care

. In some instances, limited abilit y to speak and/or understand English will make it difficult for certain environmental groups to learn about the most up

- to

- date information on extreme heat events, their impacts, and adaptive strategies

. The economic impacts of a warming world will also b e felt by all, but especially by low income communities, as the price of energy and food ( and possibly health care) increase due to a changing climate

. In summary, extreme events from heat waves to floods to droughts to wildfires and bad air quality epis odes are likely to become more frequent in the future and pose serious challenges to Californians

. The diversity and size of California’s agricultural sector creates unique challenges in its responses to climate changes, as they will affect crop productiv ity that could lead to large losses

. California’s water and hydropower energy resources are also vulnerable to climate change

. Without changes in operating rules for the water system in California the reliability of water supply will be severely affected

. By end of this century electricity demand would increase by 20 to 50 percent even in the low or medium IPCC GHG emission scenarios

. These changes represent substantial impacts to California’s residents and an added considerable stress to the electricit y generating sector

. California is one of the few hot spots for biodiversity in the world and new studies, which complementing early studies, suggest that climate change can severely reduce biodiversity in California or at least eliminate important endemi c species. Economic evaluations of potential impacts due to climate change show that climate change could impose substantial costs to Californians in the order of tens of billions of dollars per year.

California is exemplary in the nation for its commitme nt to S tate

‐ funded climate change research, its efforts to understand the climate risks it faces, and its wide range of efforts to confront the challenge. Abundant scientific evidence now shows that climate change is not just a future problem, but is alre ady observable now, with measurable impacts for the S tate ’s citizens, natural resources, and economic sectors. California’s position as a national leader of S tate

‐ sponsored climate change research provides us a unique perspective on how best to manage for the effects of climate change. California must pursue a dual approach to managing its climate risks ( e.g., reducing GHGs, mitigation, minimizing the impacts of climate change, and adaptation) with the overall goal of ensuring public safety and welfare, c ontinued economic vitality of the S tate ’s climate

sensitive sectors.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

59 Climate change is a global problem. GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and toxic air contaminants ( TACs), which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Whe reas pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes ( about 1 day), GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes ( 1 year to several thousand years). GHGs persist in the atmosphere for long enough time periods to be dispersed around the globe. Although the exact lifetime of any particular GHG molecule is dependent on multiple variables and cannot be pinpointed, it is understood that more CO 2 is emitted into the atmosphere than is sequestered by ocean uptake, vegetati on, and other forms of sequestration. Of the total annual human

- caused CO 2 emissions, approximately 54 percent is sequestered through ocean uptake, uptake by northern hemisphere forest regrowth, and other terrestrial sinks within a year, whereas the remai ning 46 percent of human

- caused CO 2 emissions remains stored in the atmosphere ( Seinfeld and Pandis 1998).

Similarly, impacts of GHGs are borne globally, as opposed to localized air quality effects of criteria air pollutants and TACs. The quantity of GHGs that it takes to ultimately result in climate change is not precisely known; suffice it to say, the quantity is enormous, and no single project alone would measurably contribute to a noticeable incremental change in the global average temperature, or to g lobal, local, or micro climate. From the standpoint of CEQA, GHG impacts to global climate change are inherently cumulative.

c

. Attributing Climate Change―Greenhouse Gas Emission Sources Emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change are attrib u table in large part to human activities associated with the transportation, industrial / manufacturing, utility, residential, commercial and agricultural sectors. In California, the transportation sector is the largest emitter of GHGs, followed by electric ity generation. Emissions of CO 2 are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. CH 4 , a highly potent GHG, resulting primarily from off

- gassing ( the release of chemicals from nonmetallic substances under ambient or greater pressure conditions), is largely asso ciated with agricultural practices and landfills. N 2 O is also largely attributable to agricultural practices and soil management. CO 2 sinks, or reservoirs, include vegetation and the ocean, which both absorb CO 2 through sequestration and dissolution, res pectively, two of the most common processes of CO 2 sequestration.

California is the 12th to 16th largest emitter of CO 2 in the world ( CEC 2006 a ). California produced 484 million gross metric tons of CO 2 equivalent ( CO 2 e) in 2004 ( ARB 2009c ). CO 2 e is a me asurement used to account for the fact that different GHGs have different potential to retain infrared radiation in the atmosphere and contribute to the greenhouse effect ( i.e., global warming potential [GWP]). The GWP is dependent on the lifetime, or
pe rsistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. For example, as described in Appendix C, “Calculation References,” of the General Reporting Protocol of the California Climate Action Registry ( CCAR 2009), 1 ton of CH 4 has the same contribution to the gre enhouse effect as approximately 21 tons of CO 2 . Therefore, CH 4 is a much more potent GHG than CO 2 . Expressing emissions in CO 2 e takes the contributions ofAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

60 all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the eff ect that would occur if only CO 2 were being emitted.

The California GHG inventory compiles state wide anthropogenic GHG emissions and sinks. It includes estimates for CO 2 , CH 4 , N 2 O, SF 6 , nitrogen trifluoride ( NF 3 ), HFCs, and PFCs. The current inventory covers years 2000 to 2008 ( ARB 2009c ).Combustion of fossil fuel in the transportation sector was the single largest source of California’s GHG emissions, accounting for 36 percent of total GHG emissions in the S tat e

. This sector was followed by the electric power sector ( including both in

- state and out

- of

- state sources) ( 24 percent) and the industrial sector ( 21 percent )

.

d

. Adaptation to Climate Change According to the IPCC, which was established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme, global average temperature is expected to increase by 3

– 7°F by the end of the century, depending on future GHG emission scenarios ( IPCC 2007 d )

. Resource areas other than air q uality and global average temperature could be indirectly affected by the accumulation of GHG emissions

. For example, an increase in the global average temperature is expected to result in a decreased volume of precipitation falling as snow in California and an overall reduction in snowpack in the Sierra Nevada

. Snowpack in the Sierra Nevada provides both water supply ( runoff) and storage ( within the snowpack before melting), which is a major source of supply for the S tate ( including the project site)

. A ccording to the California Energy Commission ( CEC 2006 b ), the snowpack portion of the water supply could potentially decline by 30

– 90 percent by the end of the 21st century

. A study cited in a report by the California Department of Water Resources ( DWR) projects that approximately 50 percent of the state wide snowpack will be lost by the end of the century ( Knowles and Cayan 2002)

. Although current forecasts are uncertain, it is evident that this phenomenon could lead to significant challenges in securing an adequate water supply for a growing population

. An increase in precipitation falling as rain rather than snow also could lead to increased potential for floods because water that would normally be held in the Sierra Nevada until spring could flow into the Central Valley concurrently with winter storm events

. This scenario would place more pressure on California’s levee / flood control system ( DWR 2006)

. Another outcome of global climate change is sea level rise

. Sea level rose approximately 7 inches during the last century and it is predicted to rise an additional 7

– 22 inches by 2100, depending on the future levels of GHG emissions ( IPCC 2007 d )

. If this occurs, resultant effects could include increased coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion ( especiall y a concern in the low

- lying Sacramento

– San Joaquin River Delta, where pumps delivering po table water could be threatened), and disruption of wetlands ( CEC 2006 b )

. As the existing climate throughout California changes over time, the ranges of various plan t and wildlife species could shift or be reduced, depending on the favored temperature and moisture regimes of each species

. In the worst cases, some species would become extinct or be extirpated from the S tate

, if sui table conditions are no longer availa ble

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

61 2

. Regulatory Setting

Table 3

. D

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Greenhouse Gases

Federal

Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule On September 22, 2009, U.S. EPA issued a final rule for mandatory reporting of GHGs from large GHG emissions sources in the United State s. In general, this national reporting requirement will provide U.S. EPA with accurate and timely GHG emissions data fr om facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO 2 per year. This publically available data will allow the reporters to track their own emissions, compare them to similar facilities, and aid in identifying cost effective opportunities to reduce emi ssions in the future. Reporting is at the facility level, except that certain suppliers of fossil fuels and industrial greenhouse gases along with vehicle and engine manufacturers will report at the corporate level. An estimated 85 percent of the total U .S. GHG emissions, from approximately 10,000 facilities, are covered by this final rule.
National Program to Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Improve Fuel Economy for Cars and Trucks On September 15, 2009, U.S. E PA and the Department of Transportation’s N ational Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA) proposed a new national program that would reduce GHG emissions and improve fuel e fficiency for all new cars and trucks sold in the United State s . U.S. E PA proposed the first

- ever national GHG emission s standards under the CAA, and NHTSA proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy ( CAFE) standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act

. This proposed national program would allow automobile manufacturers to build a single light

- duty national fleet tha t satisfies all requirements under both Federal programs and the standards of California and other state s

. The President requested that U.S. E PA and NHTSA, on behalf of the Department of Transportation, develop, through notice and comment rulemaking, a co ordinated National Program under the Clean Air Act ( CAA) and the Energy Policy and Conservation Act ( EPCA), as amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act ( EISA), to reduce fuel consumption by and GHG emissions of light

duty vehicles for model year s 2017

- 2025

.

U.S. E PA and NHTSA are developing the proposal based on extensive technical analyses, an examination of the factors required under the respective statutes and on discussions with individual motor vehicle manufacturers and other stakeholders

. The National Program would apply to passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, and medium

- duty passenger vehicles ( light

- duty vehicles) built in those model years ( 76 FR 48758)

.
The first part of this program ( i.e., 2012

- 2016) is implemented. The next part ( i .e., 2017

- 2025) is currently in process for which ARB is proposed to accept compliance thereof as also being acceptable for California compliance, similar to what was done for the first part .Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

62 Table 3

. D

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Greenhouse Gases

Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings On December 7, 2009, U.S. E PA adopted its Proposed Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under the CAA ( Endangerment Finding)

. The Endangerment Finding is based on Section 2 02 ( a) of the CAA, which state s that the Administrator ( of U.S. EPA ) should regulate and develop standards for “emission[s] of air pollution from any class of classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in [its] judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to en danger public health or welfare.” The rule addresses Section 202 ( a) in two distinct findings. The first addresses whether or not the concentrations of the six key GHGs ( i.e., carbon dioxide [CO 2 ], methane [CH 4 ], nitrous oxide [N 2 O], hydrofluorocarbons [HF Cs], perfluorocarbons [PFCs], and sulfur hexafluoride [SF 6 ]) in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. The second addresses whether or not the combined emissions of GHGs from new motor vehicles and motor v ehicle engines contribute to atmospheric concentrations of GHGs and therefore the threat of climate change

. The Administrator found that atmospheric concentrations of GHGs endanger the public health and welfare within the meaning of Section 2 02 ( a) of the C AA

. The evidence supporting this finding consists of human activity resulting in “high atmospheric levels” of GHG emissions, which are very likely responsible for increases in average temperatures and other climatic changes

. Furthermore, the observed and projected results of climate change ( e

. g

. , higher likelihood of heat waves, wild fires, droughts, sea level rise, higher intensity storms) are a threat to the public health and welfare

. Therefore, GHGs were found to endanger the public health and welfare of current and future generations

. The Administrator also found that GHG emissions from new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines are contributing to air pollution, which is endangering public health and welfare . U.S. E PA’s final findings respond to t he 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision that GHGs fit within the CAA definition of air pollutants

. The findings do not in and of themselves impose any emission reduction requirements but rather allow U.S. E PA to finalize the GHG standards proposed earlier in 2009 for new light

- duty vehicles as part of the joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation

. State

Executive Order S

- 3

- 05 Executive Order S

- 3

- 05, which was signed by former Governor Schwarzenegger in 2005, proclaims that California is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change

. It declares that increased temperatures could reduce the Sierra’s snowpack, further exacerbate California’s air quality problems, and potentially cause a rise in sea levels

. To combat those concerns, the Execu tive Order established total greenhouse gas emission targets

. Specifically, emissions are to be reduced to the 2000 level by 2010, the 1990 level by 2020, and to 80 percent below the 1990 level by 2050

. The Executive Order directed the Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency ( CalEPA) to coordinate a multi

agency effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the targetAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

63 Table 3

. D

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Greenhouse Gases

levels

. The Secretary will also submit biannual reports to the
gover nor and S tate legislature describing: progress made toward reaching the emission targets; impacts of global warming on California’s resources; and mitigation and adaptation plans to combat these impacts

. To comply with the Executive Order, the Secretary o f the CalEPA created the California Climate Action Team ( CCAT) made up of members from various S tate agencies and commission

. CCAT released its first report in March 2006

. The report proposed to achieve the targets by building on voluntary actions of Cal ifornia businesses, local government and community actions, as well as through S tate incentive and regulatory programs

. Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act

, Statutes of 2006 In September 2006, former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006

. AB 32 establishes regulatory, reporting, and market mechanisms to achieve quantifiable reductions in GHG emissions and a cap on
state wide GHG emissions

. AB 32 requires that state wide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020

. This reduction will be accomplished through an enforceable state wide cap on GHG emissions that will be phased in starting in 2012

. To effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directs ARB to develop and implement regulations to reduce state wide GHG emissions from substantial stationary and mobile source categories. AB 32 requires that ARB adopt a quantified cap on GHG emissions representing 1990 emissions levels and disclose how it arrives at the ca p; institute a schedule to meet the emissions cap; and develop tracking, reporting, and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that the S tate achieves the reductions in GHG emissions necessary to meet the cap

. AB 32 also includes guidance to institute emissions reductions in an economically efficient manner and conditions to ensure that businesses and consumers are not unfairly affected by the reductions

. Assembly Bill 1493, Statutes of 2002 In September 2004, ARB approved regulations to reduce GHG emissions fr om new motor vehicles. The Board took this action pursuant to Chapter 200, Statutes of 2002 ( AB 1493, Pavley regulations) which directed the Board to adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost effective reduction in greenhouse gas emissi ons from motor vehicles. The regulations, which took effect in 2006 following an opportunity for legislative review, apply to new passenger vehicles and light duty trucks beginning with the 2009 model year.

Executive Order S

- 1

- 07 Executive Order S

- 1

- 07, which was signed by former Governor Schwarzenegger in 2007, proclaims that the transportation sector is the main source of GHG emissions in California, at over 40 percent of state wide emissions

. It establishes a goal that the carbon intensity of transport ation fuels sold in California should be reduced by a minimum of 10 percent by 2020

. This order also directed ARB to determine if this Low Carbon Fuel Standard could be adopted as a discrete early action measure after meeting the mandates in AB 32

. ARB a dopted the LCFS on April 23, 2009

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

64 Table 3

. D

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Greenhouse Gases

Senate Bill 1368 , Statutes of 2006 SB 1368 is the companion bill of AB 32 and was signed by former Governor Schwarzenegger in September 2006

. SB 1368 requires the California Public Utilities Commission ( PUC) to establish a GHG emission performance standard for baseload generation from investor owned utilities by February 1, 2007

. The CEC must establish a similar standard for local publicly owned utilities by June 30, 2007

. These standards cannot exceed the gree nhouse gas emission rate from a baseload combined

- cycle natural gas fired plant

. The legislation further requires that all electricity provided to California, including imported electricity, must be generated from plants that meet the standards set by the PUC and CEC

. Senate Bill 1078 , Statutes of 2002, Senate Bill 107 , Statutes of 2006, and Executive Order S

- 14

- 08 SB 1078 ( Chapter 516, Statutes of 2002) requires retail sellers of electricity, including investor

- owned utilities and community choice aggregators, to provide at least 20 percent of their supply from renewable sources by 2017

. SB 107 ( Chapter 464, Statutes of 2006) changed the target date to 2010

. In November 2008 , former Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S

- 14

- 08, which
exp ands the S tate 's Renewable Energy Standard to 33 percent renewable power by 2020

. Senate Bill 97 , Statutes of 2007 As directed by SB 97, the Natural Resources Agency adopted Amendments to the CEQA Guidelines for greenhouse gas emissions on December 30, 20 09

. On February 16, 2010, the Office of Administrative Law approved the Amendments, and filed them with the Secretary of State for inclusion in the California Code of Regulations

. The Amendments became effective on March 18, 2010

. Senate Bill 375 , Statu tes of 2008 SB 375, signed in September 2008, aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation

. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations ( MPOs) to adopt a Sustainable Communiti es Strategy ( SCS) or Alternative Planning Strategy ( APS), which will prescribe land use allocation in that MPO’s Regional Transportation Plan ( RTP)

. ARB, in consultation with MPOs, will provide each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035

. These reduction targets will be updated every 8 years, but can be updated every 4 years if advancements in emissions technologies affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets

. CARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO’s SCS or APS for consistency with its assigned targets

. If MPOs do not meet the GHG reduction targets, transportation projects would not be eligible for funding programmed after January 1, 2012

. This bill also extends the minimum time period for the Regional Housing Needs Allocation ( RNHA) cycle from 5 years to 8 years for local governments located within an MPO that meets certain requirements

. City or County land use policies ( including General Plans ) are not required to be consistent with the RTP ( and associated SCS or APS)

. However, new provisions of CEQA would incentivize qualified projects that are consistent with an approved SCS or APS, categorized as “transit priority projects

. ”Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

65 Table 3

. D

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Greenhouse Gases

Executive Orde r S

- 13

- 08 Sea level rise is a foreseeable indirect environmental impact associated with climate change, largely attribu table to thermal expansion of the oceans and melting polar ice

. As discussed above in the environmental setting ( subheading “Adaptation to Climate Change”), sea level rise presents impacts to California associated with coastal erosion, water supply, water quality, saline

- sensitive species and habitat, land use compatibility, and flooding . Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Execu tive Order S

- 13

- 08 on November 14, 2008

. This executive order directed the California Natural Resources Agency ( CNRA) to develop the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy ( CNRA 2009), which summarizes the best known science on climate change impacts in seven distinct
sectors

— public health, biodiversity and habitat, ocean and coastal resources, water management, agriculture, forestry, and transportation and energy infrastructure

— and provides recommendations on how to manage against those threats

. Thi s executive order also directed OPR, in cooperation with the CNRA, to provide land use planning guidance related to sea level rise and other climate change impacts by May 30, 2009, which is also provided in the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy ( CNRA 2009) and OPR continues to further refine land use planning guidance related to climate change impacts

.

Executive Order S

- 13

- 08 also directed CNRA to convene an independent panel to complete the first California Sea Level Rise Assessment Report

. T his report is to be completed no later than December 1, 2010

. The report is intended to provide information on the following:

1. Relative sea level rise projections specific to California, taking into account issues such as coastal erosion rates, tidal impacts, El Niño and La Niña events, storm surge, and land subsidence rates; 2. The range of uncertainty in selected sea level rise pr ojections; 3. A synthesis of existing information on projected sea level rise impacts to S tate infrastructure ( such as roads, public facilities and beaches), natural areas, and coastal and marine ecosystems; and 4. discussion of future research needs regarding sea level rise for California

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

66 

### E

. Biological Resources

1

. Existing Conditions

California is one of the most biologically diverse areas in the world

. Its varied topography and climate have given rise to a remarkable diversity of habitats and a correspondingly diverse array of both plant and animal species

. California has more species than any other state in the U.S. and also has the greatest number of endemic species, those that occur nowhere else in the world ( DFG 2007, p

. 11)

.

California contains examples of most of the major biomes in North America, including grassland, shrubland, deciduous forest, coniferous forest, alpine tundra, mountains, deserts, temperate rainforest, marine, estuarine, and freshwater habitats

. Each of these biomes contains many different types of plant communities, such as redwood forests, vernal pool wetlands, or blue oak woodlands

. Altogether, the State supports 81 types of forests, 107 types of shrub lands, and 52 types of plant communities dominated by herbaceo us plants, in addition to 27 other types of vegetation ( Sawyer and Keeler

- Wolf 1995, vegetation series table s)

. Some parts of the State are particularly rich in plant species diversity

. Areas with the greatest number of plant species are the Klamath and inner North Coast ranges, the high Sierra Nevada, the San Diego region, and the San Bernardino Mountains

. Other regions with considerable plant diversity are the outer North and Central Coast Ranges, the Cascade Range, the Sierra Nevada foothills, and th e western transverse Range ( DFG 2007, p

. 13)

. California has a great number of animal species, representing large portions of wildlife species nationwide

. The State ’s diverse natural communities provide a wide variety of habitat conditions for wildlife

. The State ’s wildlife species include 84 species of reptiles ( 30 percent of the total number found in the U

. S.); 51 species of amphibians ( 22 percent of U.S. species); 67 species of freshwater fish ( 8 percent of U.S. species); 433 species of birds ( 47 perc ent of U.S. species); and 197 mammal species ( 47 percent of U.S. species)

. Seventeen species of mammals, 17 species of amphibians, and 20 species of freshwater fish live here and nowhere else ( DFG 2007, p

. 13)

. Animal species are not equally distributed across the State

. Some of California’s natural communities are particularly rich in wildlife species, supporting hundreds of species each

. Twenty

- four habitats

— including valley foothill riparian, mixed conifer, freshwater wetlands, mixed chaparral, and grasslands in the State

— support more than 150 terrestrial animal species each

. Oak woodlands also are among the most biological diverse communities in the State , supporting 5,000 species of insects, more than 330 species of amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, and several thousand plant species ( DFG 2007, p

. 14)

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

67 2

. Regulatory Setting

Biological resources in California are protected and / or regulated by a varie ty of federal, State , and local laws and policies

. Key regulations and polices applicable to the proposed ACC Program are summarized in Table 3

. E

- 1

.

Table 3

. E

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Biological Resources

Applicable Law Description

Federal
Federal Endangered Species Act Designates and provides for protection of threatened and endangered plant and animal species, and their critical habitat

. Migratory Bird Treaty Act Makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird ( or any part of such migratory nongame bird) as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act

. Clean Water Act Requires the permitting and monitoring of all discharges to surface water bodies

. Section 4 04 requires a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engine ers ( USACE) for a discharge from dredged or fill materials into Waters of the U

. S

. , including wetlands

. Section 4 01 requires a permit from a regional water quality control board ( RWQCB) for the discharge of pollutants

. By federal law, every applicant for a federal permit or license for an activity that may result in a discharge into a California water body, including wetlands, must request State certification that the proposed activity would not violate State and federal water quality standards

. Rivers a nd Harbors Act of 1899 Requires permit or letter of permission from USACE prior to any work being completed within navigable waters

. U.S. E nvironmental Protection Agency ( U

. S EPA) Section 4 04 ( b) ( 1) Guidelines Requires the USACE to analyze alternatives in a sequential approach such that the USACE must first consider avoidance and minimization of impacts to the extent practicable to determine whether a proposed discharge can be authorized

. California Desert Conservation Area Plan ( CDCA) Comprises one of two national conservation areas established by Congress at the time of the passage of the Federal Land and Policy Management Act ( FL PM A)

. FL PM A outlines how BLM would manage public lands

. Congress specifically provided guidance for the management of the CDCA and directed the development of the 1980 CDCA Plan

. Federal Noxious Weed Act of 1974 ( P

. L

. 93

- 629) ( 7 U

. S

. C

. 2801 et
seq

. ; 88 Stat

. 2148) Establishes a federal program to control the spread of noxious weeds

. Authority is given to the Secretary of Agriculture to designate plants as noxious weeds by regulation, and the movement of all such weeds in inter state or foreign commerce was prohibited except under permit

. Executive Order 13112, “Invasive Species,” February 3, 1999 Federal agencies are mand ated to take actions to prevent the introduction of invasive species, provide for their control, and minimize the economic, ecological, and human health impacts that invasive species cause

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

68 Table 3

. E

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Biological Resources

Applicable Law Description
Executive Order 11988, “Floodplain Management,” May 24, 1977 Req uires federal agencies to avoid to the extent possible the long and short

- term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of flood plains and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative

. Executive Order 11990, “Protection of Wetlands,” May 24, 1977 Requires all federal agencies to consider wetland protection as an important part of their policies and take action to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands

. Executive Order 13186, “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds,” January 10, 2001 Requires that each federal agency taking actions that have, or are likely to have, a measurable negative effect on migratory bird populations develop and implement a Memorandum of Understanding ( MOU) with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) that shall promote the conservation of migratory bird populations

. Wil d Free

- Roaming Horses and Burros Act Provides for the protection of wild free

- roaming horses and burros

. Directs BLM and the U.S. Forest Service ( USFS) to manage wild horses and burros on lands under their jurisdiction

. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection A ct Declares it is illegal to take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell or purchase or barter, transport, export or import a bald or golden eagle, alive or dead, or any part, nest or egg of these eagles unless authorized

. Active nest sites are also protected from disturbance during the breeding season

. BLM Manual 6840

— Special Status Species Management ( BLM 2001), Establishes special status species policy on BLM land for plant and animal species and the habitats on which they depend

. The pol icy refers species designated by the BLM State Director as sensitive

. Listed Species Recovery Plans and Ecosystem Management Strategies Provides guidance for the conservation and management of sufficient habitat to maintain viable populations of listed species and ecosystems

. Relevant examples include, but are not limited to, the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan, Flat

- tailed Horned Lizard Rangewide Management Strategy; Amargosa Vole Recovery Plan, Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, California

. State
California Endangered Species Act of 1984 ( Fish and Game Code, sections 2050 through 2098) Protects California’s rare, threatened, and endangered species

.

Porter

- Cologne Water Quality Control Act Requires that each of the nine RWQCBs prepare and periodically update basin plans for water quality control

. Each basin plan sets forth water quality standards for surface water and groundwater and actions to control nonpoint and point sources of pollution to achieve and maintain these stand ards

. Z'berg

- Nejedly Forest Practice Act Ensures that logging on timberland is performed in a manner that will preserve and protect fish, wildlife, forests and streams, enforced by CAL FIRE

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

69 Table 3

. E

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Biological Resources

Applicable Law Description

California Forest Practice Rules 2010 State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection has authority delegated by legislature to adopt forest practice and fire protection regulations on nonfederal lands

. These regulations carry out California legislature’s mandates to protect and enhance the State ’s un ique forest and wildland resources

. Wetlands Preservation ( Keene

Nejedly California Wetlands Preservation Act) ( Public Resources Code, Section 5 810 et seq

. ) California has established a successful program of regional, cooperative efforts to protect, acqui re, restore, preserve, and manage wetlands

. These programs include, but are not limited to, the Central Valley Habitat Joint Venture, the San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, the Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project, and the Inter

- Mountain West Joint Venture

. California Wilderness Preservation System ( Public Resources Code, Section 5 093

. 30 et seq

. ) Establishes a California wilderness preservation system that consists of State

- owned areas to be administered for the use and enjoyment of the people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, provide for the protection of such areas, preserve their wilderness character, and provide for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjo yment as wilderness

. Significant Natural Areas ( Fish and Game Code section 1 930 et seq

. ) Designates certain areas such as refuges, natural sloughs, riparian areas, and vernal pools as significant wildlife habitat

. Protection of Birds and Nests ( Fish and Game Code section 3 503 and 3503

. 5) Protects California’s birds by making it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird

. Raptors ( e

. g

. , hawks and owls) are specifically protected

. Migratory Birds ( Fish and Game Code sect ion 3 513) Protects California’s migratory birds by making it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or any part of such migratory nongame birds

. Fur

- bearing Mammals ( Fish and Game Code sections 4000 and 4002) Lists fur

- bearing mammals which require a permit for take

.

Fully Protected Species ( Fish and Game Code Sections 3511,4700, 5050, and 5515) Identifies several amphibian, reptile, fish, bird and mammal species which are Fully Protect ed

. The California Department of Fish and Game ( CDFG) cannot issue a take permit), except for take related to scientific research

. California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA Guidelines , CCR, Title 14, S ection 1 5380) CEQA defines rare species more broad ly than the definitions for species listed under the State and federal Endangered Species Acts

. Under section 1 5830, species not protected through State or federal listing but nonetheless demonstrable as “endangered” or “rare” under CEQA should also recei ve consideration in environmental analyses

. Included in this category are many plants considered rare by the California Native Plant Society ( CNPS) and some animals on the CDFG’s Special Animals List

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

70 Table 3

. E

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Biological Resources

Applicable Law Description

Oak Woodlands ( California Public Resources Code Secti on 2 1083

. 4) Requires counties to determine if a project within their jurisdiction may result in conversion of oak woodlands that would have a significant adverse effect on the environment

. If the lead agency determines that a project would result in a sig nificant adverse effect on oak woodlands, mitigation measures to reduce the significant adverse effect of converting oak woodlands to other land uses are required

. Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement ( Fish and Game Code sections 1600 et seq

. ) Regulates activities that may divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow or the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake in California designated by CDFG in which there is at any time an existing fish or wildlife resource or from which these

r esources derive benefit

. Impacts to vegetation and wildlife resulting from disturbances to waterways are also reviewed and regulated during the permitting process

. California Desert Native Plants Act of 1981 ( Food and Agricultural Code section 8 0001 et seq

. and California Fish and Game Code sections 1925

- 1926) Protects non

- listed California desert native plants from unlawful harvesting on both public and private lands in Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego c ounties

. Unless issued a valid permit, wood receipt, tag, and seal by the commissioner or sheriff, harvesting, transporting, selling, or possessing specific desert plants is prohibited

. Food and Agriculture Code, S ection 4 03 The California Department of Food and Agriculture is designated to prevent the introduction and spread of injurious insect or animal pests, plant diseases, and noxious weeds

. Noxious Weeds ( Title 3, C alifornia Code of Regulations, S ection 4 500) List of plant species that are conside red noxious weeds

.

Regional and Local
Regional Habitat Conservation Plans and Natural Communities Conservation Plan ( HCP/NCCP) HCPs and NCCPs establish a coordinated process for permitting and mitigating the incidental take of endangered species and conserving natural resources

. Approved HCPs and NCCPs potentially relevant to proposed ACC Program include, but are not limited to, the Western Riverside County HCP; Lower Colorado River Multi

- Species Conservation Plan; Coachella Valley Multi

Species HCP; Orange County Central/Coastal NCCP/HCP; Kern Water Bank HCP; Southeastern Lincoln County, NV HCP; and the Mojave and Colorado Desert regions and Solano Multispecies Habitat Conservation Plan.
Various City and County General Plans General plans typically designate areas for land usages, guiding where new growth and development should occur while providing a plan for the comprehensive and long

- range management, preservation, and conservation of and natural resources and
open

- space lands.

Various Local Ordinances Local ordinances provide regulations for proposed projects for activities such as grading plans, erosion control, tree removal, protection of sensitive biological resources and open space.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

71 

### F

. Cultural Resources

1

. Existing Conditions

Cultural resources include archaeological sites of prehistoric or historic origin, built or architectural resources older than 50 years, traditional or ethnographic resources, and fossil deposits of paleontological importance

.

All areas within California have the potential for yielding as yet undiscovered archaeological and paleontological resources and undocumented human remains not interred in cemeteries or marked formal burials

. These resources have the potential to contribute to our knowledge of the fossil re cord or local, regional, or national prehistory or history

. Archaeological resources include both prehistoric and historic remains of human activity

. Built environment resources include an array of historic buildings, structures, and objects serving as a physical connection to America’s past

. Traditional or ethnographic cultural resources may include Native American sacred sites and traditional resources of any ethnic community that are important for maintaining the cultural traditions of any group

. “His torical resources” is a term with defined statutory meaning and includes any prehistoric or historic archaeological site, district, built environment resource, or traditional cultural resource recognized as historically or culturally significant ( PRC Secti on 2 1084 .1; 14 CCR Section 1 5064.5[ a ] )

. Paleontological resources, including mineralized, partially mineralized, or unmineralized bones and teeth, soft tissues, shells, wood, leaf impressions, footprints, burrows, and microscopic remains, are more than 5 ,000 years old and occur mainly in Pleistocene or older sedimentary rock units

. California was occupied by different prehistoric cultures dating to at least 12,000 years
ago

. Evidence for the presence of humans prior to about 8,000 years ago during the Paleoindian Period is relatively sparse and scattered throughout the State

. With climate changes and the drying of pluvial lakes, subsistence during the Early and Middle Archaic Periods shifted to an increased emphasis on plant resources, evidenced by an abundance of milling implements in archaeological sites dating between 8,000 and 3,000 years ago

. After approximately 3,000 years ago, during the Upper Archaic and Late Prehistoric Periods, the complexity of the prehistoric archaeological record reflects increases in specialized adaptations to locally available resources such as acorns and salmon, permanently occupied settlements, and the expansion of regional populations and trade networks, as well as the development of social stratification and craft
spe cialization

. At the time of European contact, California was the home of approximately 310,000 indigenous people with a complex of cultures distinguished by linguistic affiliation and territorial boundaries

. Distinct native Californian cultural groups s poke approximately 74 languages

. At least 70 groups, with even more subgroups, inhabited the vast landsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

72 within the State

. In general, these mainly sedentary, complex hunter

- gatherer groups shared similar subsistence practices ( hunting, fishing, and colle cting plant foods), settlement patterns, technology, material culture, social organization, and religious beliefs

. They situated permanent villages along the coast, interior waterways, and near lakes and wetlands

. Population density among these groups va ried, depending mainly on availability and dependability of local resources, with the highest density of people occurring in the Santa Barbara Channel area and the least in the State ’s desert region

. The effect of Spanish settlement and establishment of missions in California marks the beginning of a devastating disruption of native culture, with forced population movements, loss of land and territory ( including traditional hunting and gathering locales), enslavement, and decline in population numbers fro m disease, malnutrition, starvation, and violence

. California’s native population was reduced to about 100,000 people by 1850; by 1900, there were only 20,000

-- less than seven percent of the pre

contact number ( Smithsonian Institution 1978)

. Existing res ervations were created in California by the federal government beginning in 1858 but encompass only a fraction of native lands

. Many California groups continue to await federal tribal status recognition

. In 1848, shortly after California became a territor y of the U

. S

. , gold was discovered at Sutter’s Mill

. The resulting Gold Rush era influenced the history of the State and the nation

. Thousands of people flocked to the gold fields along the Sierra foothills, and in 1850 California became the 31st State

. After the completion of the transcontinental railroad in 1869, settlers and immigrants continued to pour into the State

. Settlement of the American West was also encouraged by passage of the Swampland Acts of the mid 1800s

- early 1900s and the Homestead Act of 1862, among others

. The multi

- ethnic character of the State today is one result of the Gold Rush, plus later waves of migration

. Buildings and structures in today’s urban cores, rural landscapes, coastlines, deserts, forests, and parks, as well a s historic archaeological sites, reflect the importance of mining, the growth of agriculture, ranching and transportation networks, and the economic development of industries based on the State ’s wealth of natural resources, such as lumber, minerals, fish, and petroleum deposits, that contributed to the State ’s economy and its continuing growth and development

. Architectural resources also reflect the development in California in the mid

- to late

- 1900s of the defense, aerospace, communication and tourism i ndustries

. Significant no nrenewable vertebrate or invertebrate fossils or unique geologic units have been documented throughout the State and are likely present in many out

- of

- state

areas

. Because the majority of California was underwater until the Tertia ry Period, marine fossils older than 65 million years are not common and are exposed mainly in the mountains along the border with Nevada, the Klamath Mountains, Jurassic shales, sandstones and limestones along the edges of the Central Valley, and portions of the Coast and Transverse Ranges, and the Peninsular Ranges

. As a result of changes in sea level and increases in tectonic activity during the Tertiary, marine as well as terrestrial fossils may be found scattered about the State , particularly along th e coast, edges of the Central Valley, northeastern plateau, and southeastern deserts

. Tertiary marine fossils have been found, for example, under the streets of Los Angeles duringAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

73 storm drain and subway construction

. Dating between 1

. 8 million and 11,000 years ago, Pleistocene continental sedimentary rock units are found throughout the State and have yielded a variety of plant and vertebrate fossils

. Pleistocene fossil localities include large lake deposits, such as Lake Manix in the Mojave Desert, marin e terrace deposits along the coast, particularly the southern coast, and the La Brea Tar Pits, a well

- known locality in Los Angeles that has produced a variety of extinct terrestrial fauna dating to the last Ice Age

. Extinct Pleistocene fossils, including mammoths, have also been found during development projects near Sacramento, in Livermore, in southern California, and on the Channel Islands

. Holocene

- age deposits ( less than 11,000 years old), such as those that blanket the majority of the Central Valle y floor, are geologically immature and generally unlikely to contain fossils

. One exception is the Lake Cahuilla deposits in today’s Colorado Desert that have yielded freshwater fossils and small terrestrial vertebrates and date between 270 and at least 6 ,000 years ago

.

2

. Regulatory Setting

Applicable laws and regulations associated with cultural resources are discussed in Table 3

. F

- 1

.

Table 3

. F

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Cultural Resources Applicable Regulation Description
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act ( NHPA) of 1966 Requires federal agencies to consider the preservation of historic and prehistoric resources

. The Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to expand and maintain a National Register of Historic Places ( NRHP), and it establishes an Advisory Council on Historic Preservation ( A CH P) as an independent federal entity

. Section 1 06 of the Act requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and afford the A CH P a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking prior to licensing or approving the expenditure of funds on any undertaking that may affect properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the NRHP

. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Requires federal agencies to foster environmental quality and preservation

. Section 1 01 ( b) ( 4) declares that one objective of the national environmental policy is to “preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage

.. . . ” For any major federal actions significantly affecting environmental quality, federal agencies must prepare, and make available for public comment, an environmental impact state ment ( EIS)

. Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 ( NRPA) ( 16 USC 47 0aa

470II) Requires a permit for any excavation or removal of archaeological resources from public lands or Indian lands

. The statute provides both civil and criminal penalties for violation of permit requirements and for excavation or removal of protecte d resources without a permit

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

74 Table 3

. F

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Cultural Resources Applicable Regulation Description Advisory Council Regulation, Protection of Historic Properties ( 36 CFR 800) Establishes procedures for compliance with Section 1 06 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966

. These regulations define the Criteria of Adverse Effect, define the role of State Historic Preservation Officer ( SHPO) in the Section 1 06 review process, set forth documentation requirements, and describe procedures to be followed if significant historic p roperties are discovered during implementation of an undertaking

. Prehistoric and historic resources deemed significant ( i

. e

. , eligible for listing in the NRHP, per 36 CFR 60

. 4) must be considered in project planning and construction

. The responsible fed eral agency must submit any proposed undertaking that may affect NRHP

- eligible properties to the SHPO for review and comment prior to project approval

. National Park Service Regulations, National Register of Historic Places ( NRHP) ( 36 CFR 60) Sets forth p rocedures for nominating properties to the NRHP, and present the criteria to be applied in evaluating the eligibility of historic and prehistoric resources for listing in the NRHP

.
Archaeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of the Interior's Standar ds and Guidelines ( FR 190:44716

– 44742) Non

- regulatory technical advice about the identification, evaluation, documentation, study, and other treatment of cultural resources

. No table in these Guidelines are the “Standards for Archaeological Documentation” ( p

. 44734) and “Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology” ( pp

. 44740

– 44741)

. American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 The American Indian Religious Freedom Act pledges to protect and preserve the traditional religious rights of Ameri can Indians, Aleuts, Eskimos, and Native Hawaiians

. Before the act was passed, certain U.S. federal laws interfered with the traditional religious practices of many American Indians

. The Act establishes a national policy that traditional Native American practices and beliefs, sites ( and right of access to those sites), and the use of sacred objects shall be protected and preserved

. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 ( NAGPRA) ( PL 101

– 601) Vests ownership or control of certain human remains and cultural items, excavated or discovered on federal or tribal lands, in designated Native American tribes, organizations, or groups

. The Act further: requires notification of the appropriate Secretary or other head of any federal
agency upon the discovery of Native American cultural items on federal or tribal lands; proscribes trafficking in Native American human remains and cultural items; requires federal agencies and museums to compile an inventory of Native American human remains and associated funerary objects, and to notify affected Indian tribes of this inventory; and provides for the repatriation of Native American human remains and specified objects possessed or controlled by federal agencies or museums

. Department of Transportat ion Act of 1966, Section 4 ( f) Section 4 ( f) of the Act requires a comprehensive evaluation of all environmental impacts resulting from federal

- aid transportation projects administered by the Federal Highway Administration ( FHA), Federal Transit Administrati on ( FTA), and Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA) that involve the use

— or interference with use

— of several types of land: public park lands, recreation areas, and publicly or privately owned historic properties of federal, state , or local significance

. The Section 4 ( f) evaluation must be sufficiently detailed to permit the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to determine that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land, in which case the project must include all possible planning to minimize harm to any park, recreation, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site that would result from the use of such lands

. If there is a feasible and prudent alternative, a proposed project using Section 4 ( f) lands cannot be approved by the Sec retary

. DetailedAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

75 Table 3

. F

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Cultural Resources Applicable Regulation Description inventories of the locations and likely impacts on resources that fall into the Section 4 ( f) category are required in project

- level environmental
assessments

. State
California Health and Safety Code Section a nd California Public Resources Code, Section Disturbance of human remains without the authority of law is a felony ( California Health and Safety Code, Section 7 052)

. According to State law ( California Health and Safety Code, Section 7 050

. 5, California Public Resources Code, Section 5 097

. 98), if human remains are discovered or recognized in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until 1) the coroner of the county has been informed and has determined that no investigation of the cause of death is required; 2)and if the remains are of Native American origin, and if the descendants from the deceased Na tive Americans have made a recommendation to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work for means of treating or disposing of with appropriate dignity the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Cod e Section 5 097

. 98; or the Native American Heritage Comm i ssion was unable to identify a descendent or the descendent failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the C ommission

. According to the California Health and Safety Code , six or more human burials at one location constitute a cemetery ( Section 8 100), and disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony ( Section 7 052)

. Section 7 050

. 5 requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered hu man remains until the coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American

. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner must contact the Native American Heritage Commission , who has jurisdiction over Native America n remains ( California Health and Safety Code, 7052

. 5c; Public Resources Code, Section 5 097

. 98)

. Local City / County General Plans Policies, goals, and implementation measures in county or city general plans may contain measures applicable to cultural and paleontological

resources

. In addition to the enactment of local and regional preservation ordinances, CEQA requires that resources included in local registers be considered ( pursuant to section 5 020

. 1 ( k) of the Public Resources Code)

. Therefore, local county and municipal policies, procedures, and zoning ordinances must be considered in the context of project

- specific undertakings

. Cultural resources are generally discussed in either the Open Space Element or the Conservation Element of the General Pla n

. Many local municipalities include cultural resources preservation elements in their general plans that include some mechanism pertaining to cultural resources in those communities

. In general, the sections pertaining to archaeological and historical properties are put in place to afford the cultural resources a measure of local protection

. The policies outlined in the individual general plans should be consulted prior to any undertaking or project

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

76 Table 3

. F

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Cultural Resources Applicable Regulation Description Cooperative Agreements Among Agencies Cooperative agreements among land managing agencies ( BLM, National Park Service, U.S. Forest Services, California State Parks, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of Defense, to name a few) the SHPO and A CH P may exist and will need to be complied with on specific projects

. In addition, certain agencies have existing Programmatic Agreements ( PA) requiring permits ( CPUC, BLM) to complete archaeological investigations and employ the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards and Guidelines ( 36 CFR 61)

.



### G

. Geology and Soils

1

. Existing Conditions

a

. Soils California has a diverse, complex and seismically active geology that includes a vast array of landforms

. Soils in California are as diverse as its geology, and are described and characterized individually and collectively with other soils, and their various compatible uses in soil surveys published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture

. Soils are fundamental and largely non

- renewable resources that are the basis for high

- level sustained yields of agricultural commodities, forest products, and provide support to the wide variety of ecological communities throughout the State

.

b

. Geology California’s geologic history is associated with major episode s of tectonic activity including intrusive and extrusive volcanic activity, folding and faulting, and mountain building

. The most recent period of mountain building is still going on, and practically all of the current landforms and geographic features ar e very young in geologic terms, only a few million years old

. Rocks older than 600 million years, those of the Precambrian Era, are rare in California

. The oldest rocks, which are more than 1,000 million years old, are located in the eastern deserts and t he eastern Transverse Ranges ( San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains)

. The distribution of rocks of these ages suggests that the west coast of the North American Continent was well to the east of all but the southern end of what is now California

. All of these very old formations have been extensively metamorphosed and, therefore, it is difficult to determine the conditions that existed when they were originally formed

. Some of the oldest rocks ( around 1,800 million years old) are located in the
mounta ins around Death Valley and are much like the rocks exposed in the inner gorge of the Grand Canyon

. Metamorphic rocks around 1,000 million years old are located in the San Gabriel Mountains and the Orocopia Mountains east of the Salton Sea

. During the Pa leozoic Era, beginning around 400 million years ago ( mya), tectonic forces began the process of mountain building and appears to mark the first time the coast moved west into most of what is now California, and the ancestral Sierra Nevada mountainsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

77 were em placed

. During the Mesozoic Era between 245 to 65 mya, mountain building continued and the beginnings of the Coast Ranges were formed

. The Cenozoic Era, between 65 mya and the present, was marked with continued uplift, erosion and deposition

. The Pacific plate became completely overridden by the North American plate forming the San Andreas Fault system, and in turn other faults

. Volcanic activity became widespread in the Sierra Nevada and Mojave Desert regions, and a number of deep marine basins formed a long the central and southern California
coast

. About 5 mya, mountain building accelerated resulting in the uplifting of most of the modern mountain ranges, including the Sierra Nevada and the large fault

- block ranges to the east, the Coast Ranges, the Tr ansverse Ranges, and the Peninsular Ranges

. This was followed by Pleistocene glaciations in the Sierra Nevada and, to a minor extent, in the San Bernardino Mountains; recent volcanic eruptions in the Mojave Desert and Great Basin regions; and the widespre ad volcanic activity that created the southern Cascade volcanoes ( Mt

. Shasta and Mt

. Lassen) and the lava flows of the Modoc Plateau region

.

2

. Regulatory Setting

Applicable laws and regulations associated with soils, geology, and mineral resources are discussed in Table 3

. G

- 1

.

Table 3

. G

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Geology and Soils

Federal

Clean Water Act This law was enacted to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters by regulating point and nonpoint pollution sources, providing assistance to publicly owned treatment works for the improvement of wastewater treatment, and maintaining the integrity of wetlands

. This includes the creation of a system that requires state s to establish discharge standards specific to water bodies ( National Pollution Discharge Elimination System [ NPDES ] ), which regulates storm water discharge from construction sites throu gh the implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP)

. In California, the State ’s NPDES permit program is implemented and administered by the local Regional Water Quality Control Boards

. Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act and National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Act This Act established the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program to reduce the risks to life and property from future earthquakes

. This program was significantly amended in November 1990 by the National Earth quake Hazards Reduction Program Act by refining the description of agency responsibilities, program goals and objectives

. State
Alquist

- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, Public Resources Code ( PRC), Section 2 621

– 2630

. The Alquist

- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 ( formerly the Special Studies Zoning Act) regulates development and construction of buildings intended for human occupancy to avoid the hazard of surface fault rupture

. This act mitigates against surf ace fault rupture of known active faults beneath occupied structures, and requires disclosure to potential buyers of existing real e state and a 50

- foot setback for new occupied buildings

. This act groups faults into categories of active, potentially activ e, and inactive

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

78 Table 3

. G

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Geology and Soils

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, PRC Section 2 690

– 2699

. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act ( the Act) of 1990 ( Public Resources Code, Chapter 7

. 8, Division 2) directs the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology ( now called California Geological Survey) to delineate Seismic Hazard Zones

. The purpose of the Act is to reduce the threat to public health and safety and to minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards

. These include areas identified that are subject to the effects of strong ground shaking, such as liquefaction, landslides, tsunamis, and seiches

. Cities, counties, and state agencies are directed to use seismic hazard zone maps developed by CGS in their land

- use plann ing and permitting
processes

. The Act requires that site

- specific geotechnical investigations be performed prior to permitting most urban development projects within seismic hazard zones

. California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, PRC Sec tion 3 106

. Public Resources Code Section 3 106 mandates the supervision of drilling, operation, maintenance, and abandonment of oil wells for the purpose of preventing: damage to life, health, property, and natural resources; damage to underground and surfa ce waters sui table for irrigation or domestic use; loss of oil, gas, or reservoir energy; and damage to oil and gas deposits by infiltrating water and other causes

. In addition, the California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources ( DOGGR) regulate drilling, production, injection, and gas storage operations in accordance with California Code of Regulations ( CCR) Title 14, Chapter 4, Subchapter 1

. Landslide Hazard Identification Program, PRC Section 2 687 ( a) The Landslide Hazard Identificatio n Program requires the State Geologist to prepare maps of landslide hazards within urbanizing areas

. According to Public Resources Code Section 2 687 ( a), public agencies are encouraged to use these maps for land use planning and for decisions regarding bui lding, grading, and development permits

. California Building Standards Code ( CBSC) ( CCR Title 24) California’s minimum standards for structural design and construction are given in the California Building Standards Code ( CBSC) ( CCR Title 24)

. The CBSC is based on the Uniform Building Code ( International Code Council 1997), which is used widely throughout United State s ( generally adopted on a state

- by

- state or district

- by

- district basis) and has been modified for California conditions with numerous, more detailed or more stringent regulations

. The CBSC provides standards for various aspects of construction, including ( i

. e

. , not limited to) excavation, gradi ng, and earthwork construction; fills and embankments; expansive soils; foundation investigations; and liquefaction potential and soil strength loss

. In accordance with California law, proponents of specific projects would be required to comply with all p rovisions of the CBSC for certain aspects of design and construction

. Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria The California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans) has Seismic Design Criteria ( SDC), which is an encyclopedia of new and currently practiced seism ic design and analysis methodologies for the design of new bridges in California

. The SDC adopts a performance

- based approach specifying minimum levels of structural system performance, component performance, analysis, and design practices for ordinary st andard bridges

. The SDC has been developed with input from the Caltrans Offices of Structure Design, Earthquake Engineering and Design Support, and Materials and Foundations

. Memo 20

- 1 outlines the bridge category and classification, seismic performance criteria, seismic design philosophy and approach, seismic demands and capacities on structural components and seismic design practices that collectively make up Caltrans’ seismic design methodology

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

79 Table 3

. G

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Geology and Soils

Local

Geotechnical Investigation Local jurisdictions typically regulate construction activities through a process that may require the preparation of a site

- specific geotechnical investigation

. The purpose of a site

- specific geotechnical investigation is to provide a geologic basis for the development of ap propriate construction design

. Geotechnical investigations typically assess bedrock and Quaternary geology, geologic structure, soils, and the previous history of excavation and fill placement

. Proponents of specific projects that require design of earth works and foundations for proposed structures will need to prepare geotechnical investigations on the physical properties of soil and rock at the site prior to project design

. Local Grading and Erosion Control Ordinances Many counties and cities have grading and erosion control ordinances

. These ordinances are intended to control erosion and sedimentation caused by construction activities

. A grading permit is typically required for construction

related projects

. As part of the permit, project applic ants usually must submit a grading and erosion control plan, vicinity and site maps, and other supplemental information

. Standard conditions in the grading permit include a description of BMPs similar to those contained in a SWPPP

. County General Plans ( and EIR) Some county General Plans provide a regulatory framework to address potential environmental impacts that may result from a proposed project

. These include the General Plans for Solano, San Luis Obispo, Los Angeles, Kern, San Bernardino, Riverside , and Imperial counties

.



### H

. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

1

. Existing Conditions

Hazardous materials are substances with physical and chemical properties that could pose a substantial present or future hazard to human health or the environment when improperly handled, disposed, or otherwise managed

. Hazardous materials are grouped into four categories based on their characteristics : toxic ( causes human health effects), igni table ( has the ability to burn), corrosive ( causes severe burns or damage to materials) and reactive ( causes explosions or generates toxic gases)

. A hazardous waste is any hazardous material that is finished with its intended use and is discarded

. This may include items, such as spent fuels, industrial solvents and chemicals, pro cess water, and other spent materials ( i

. e

. , some types of batteries and fuel cells)

. California ’s h azardous w aste regulations provides the following means to determine whether or not a waste is hazardous: ( 1) a list of criteria ( toxic, igni table , corrosive and reactive) that a waste may exhibit; ( 2) a list of those wastes that are subject to regulation ( RCRA and mercury

- containing); and ( 3) a list of chemical names and

common names that are presumed to be hazardous in California

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

80 2

. Regulator y Setting

Table 3

. H

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Federal

Clean Air Act ( CAA) Act ( 42 USC Section 9601 et seq.) The Clean Air Act is the law that defines U.S. EPA's responsibilities for protecting and improving the nation's air quality and the stratospheric ozone layer

. The last major change in the law, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, was enacted by Congress in 1990

. Legislation passed since then has made several minor changes

. The Clean Air Act, like ot her laws enacted by Congress, was incorporated into the United State s Code as Title 42, Chapter 85

. The House of Representatives maintains a current version of the U.S. Code, which includes Clean Air Act changes enacted since 1990

. Clean Water Act ( CWA) ( 40CFR 112) The 1972 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act ( known as the Clean Water Act or CWA) provide the statutory basis for the NPDES permit program and the basic structure for regulating the discharge of pollutants from point sou rces to waters of the United State s

. Section 402 of the CWA specifically required U.S. EPA to develop and implement the NPDES program

. Safe Drinking Water Act ( SDWA) The Safe Drinking Water Act ( SDWA) is the main federal law that ensures the quality of Americans' drinking water

. Under SDWA, U.S. EPA sets standards for drinking water quality and oversees the state s, localities, and water suppliers who implement those standards

. SDWA was originally passed by Congress in 1974 to protect public health by regulating the nation's public drinking water supply

. The law was amended in 1986 and 1996 and requires many actions to protect drinking water and its sources: rivers, lakes, reservoirs, springs, and ground water wells

. SDWA does not regulate private wel ls which serve fewer than 25 individuals.

Federal Hazardous Materials Regulations ( FHMR) Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 100

- 180 The regulations establish criteria for the safe transport of hazardous materials

. Compliance is mandatory for in tra state and inter state transportation.

Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) 15 U.S.C

. Section 2601 et
seq. The Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) of 1976 provides U.S. EPA with authority to require reporting, record

- keeping and testing requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures

. TSCA addresses the production, importation, use, and disposal of specific chemicals including polychlorinated biphenyls ( PCBs), asbestos, radon and lead

- based paint.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

81 Table 3

. H

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA) 42 U.S.C

. Section 6901 et seq.

Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR) The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA) of 1976 gives U.S. EPA the authority to control hazardous waste from the "cradle

- to

grave." This includes th e generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste

. RCRA also set forth a framework for the management of non

- hazardous solid wastes

. The 1986 amendments to RCRA enabled U.S. EPA to address environmental problems that could result from underground tanks storing petroleum and other hazardous substances

. HSWA

- the Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments

- are the 1984 amendments to RCRA that focused on waste minimization and phasing out land disposal of hazardous waste as well as corrective action for releases

. Some of the other mandates of this law include increased enforcement authority for U.S. EPA , more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program.

Federal regulations adopted by U.S. EPA are found in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations ( 40 CFR).
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ( CERCLA) The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ( C ERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980

. This law created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries and provided broad Federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous sub stances that may endanger public health or the environment

. CERCLA also enabled the revision of the National Contingency Plan ( NCP)

. The NCP provided the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substan ces, pollutants, or contaminants

. The NCP also established the NPL

. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act ( SARA) of 1986 reauthorized CERCLA to continue cleanup activities around the country

. Several site

- specific amendments, definitions clar ifications, and technical requirements were added to the legislation, including additional enforcement authorities

. Also, Title III of SARA authorized the Emergency Planning and Community Right

- to

- Know Act ( EPCRA).

E mergency Planning and Community Right

- to

- Know Act ( EPCRA) ( 42 USC Section 9601 et seq.) The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act ( SARA) of 1986 created EPCRA ( 40 CFR Parts 350

- 372), also known as SARA Title III, a statute designed to improve community access to information about chemic al hazards and to facilitate the development of chemical emergency response plans by state /tribe and local governments

. EPCRA required the establishment of state /tribe emergency response commissions ( SERCs/TERCs), responsible for coordinating certain

emer gency response activities and for appointing local emergency planning committees ( LEPCs)

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

82 Table 3

. H

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hazards and Hazardous Materials

State

Various California Air Pollution Control Laws ( i.e., Bluebook) I ncludes all relevant Health and Safety Code sections of law, plus those air pollution

- related statutes from other California codes, and the California Code of Regulations ( CCR) Titles 13 & 17 sections that pertain to ARB's air management program.

Hazardous Materials Transportation

California Vehicle Code Sections 31301

- 31309 Regulations pertaining to the safe transport of hazardous materials are in California Vehicle Code Sections 31301

- 31309

. All motor carriers and drivers involved in transporta tion of hazardous materials must comply with the requirements contained in federal and state regulations, and must apply for and obtain a hazardous materials transportation license from the California Highway Patrol ( CH P)

. A driver is required to obtain a hazardous materials endorsement issued by the driver's country or state of domicile to operate any commercial vehicle carrying hazardous materials

. The driver is required to display placards or markings while hauling hazardous waste, unless the driver is exempt from the endorsement requirements

. A driver who is a California resident is required to obtain an endorsement from CH P

. Hazardous Waste Control Law California Health & Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5

CCR, Division 4.5, Title 22 California requirements and statutory responsibilities in managing hazardous waste in California

– this includes the generation, transportation, storage, treatment, recycling, and disposal of hazardous waste

. The statute and regulation are implemented by Cal / EPA DTSC. CalARP Program

CCR, Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 4.5, Sections 2735

- 2785 The purpose of the CalARP program is to prevent accidental releases of substances that can cause serious harm to the public and the environment, to minimize the damage if re leases do occur, and to satisfy community right

- to

- know laws

. This is accomplished by requiring businesses that handle more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance listed in the regulations to develop a Risk Management Plan ( RMP)

. An RMP is a detailed engineering analysis of the potential accident factors present at a business and the mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce this accident potential.

Hazardous Material Business Plan & Area Plan Program Health and Safety Code Secti ons 25500

– 25520

CCR, Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 3 & 4 The business and area plans program, relating to the handling and release or threatened release of hazardous materials, was established in California to protect the public health and safety and the environment

. Basic information on the location, type, quantity, and the health risks of hazardous materials handled, used, stored, or disposed of in the State , which could be accidently released into the environment, is not now available to firefighters, health officials, planners, public safety officers, health care providers, regulatory agencies, and other interested persons

. The information provided by business and area plans is necessary in order to prevent or mitigate the damage to the health and safety of persons and the environment from the release or threatened release of hazardous materials into the workplace and environment.

CUPAs use information collected from the Business Plan and California Accidental Release Prevention ( CalARP) programs to identify hazardous materials in their communities

. This informationAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

83 Table 3

. H

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hazards and Hazardous Materials

provides the basis for the Area Plan and is used to determine the appropriate level of emergency planning necessary to respond to a release

. Unified Program Adminis tration Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.11, Sections 25404

- 25404.8 CCR

, Title 27, Division 1, Subdivision 4, Chapter 1, Sections 15100

- 15620 A CUPA is a Certified Unified Program Agency, which is authorized by the Secretary of Cal / EPA to carry out seve ral of the hazardous
waste / hazardous materials regulatory pr ograms administered by the State in a coordinated and consistent manner

. The 6 hazardous waste and materials program elements covered by the CUPA include:

1) Hazardous Waste Generators 2) Underground Tanks ( UST) 3) Above Ground Tanks ( AST) 4) Accidental Release Program ( CalARP ) 5) Hazardous Material Release Response Plans & Spill Notification ( Community Right

- to

- Know ) 6) Hazardous Materials Management Plans & Inventory Reporting

The intent of the CUPA is to simplify the hazardous materials regulatory environment and provide a single point of contact for businesses to address inspection, permitting, billing, and enforcement issues.

Various Local Ordinances Various ordinances and codes may be adopted at th e local level to provide stricter requirements in the management of hazardous materials and waste activities within the jurisdiction.



### I

. Hydrology and Water Quality

1

. Existing Conditions

a

. Water Supply California experiences a Mediterranean climate with cool, wet winters and warm, dry

summers

. Most precipitation ( i

. e

. , rain and snow) and peak stream runoff events occur primarily during October through April, and the most extreme events usually occur between November and March

. Precipitation rates vary greatly across the State from northern to southern regions, and the State contains many desert regions where annual total precipitation is very low ( i

. e

. , less than about 6 inches)

. In mountainous areas, snowmelt can provide moderate to high runoff r ates in the April to July period, and snowmelt generally contributes substantially to the seasonal and annual volume of water that is available for storage in reservoirs and sustained stream flows into the later summer months

. Many rivers are controlled by dams, reservoirs, and levees for a variety of purposes, including but not limited to, flood control, hydroelectric power generation, water storage and transport for municipal / domestic and agricultural water supply, recreation, and fishAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

84 and wildlife uses

. Most of the major rivers on the west side of the Sierra Nevada Mountains are controlled, to some degree, by large dams, reservoirs, and diversions and water conveyance canals

. Smaller reservoirs are common at other locations throughout the State

. Sier ra Nevada Mountain runoff to the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River ( i

. e

. , approximately 25 million acre

- feet [MAF] in above normal water year types) provides much of the surface water used in the State and managed and conveyed in State Water Project ( SWP) and Central Valley Project ( CVP) facilities operated by the California Department of Water Resources ( DWR) and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation ( U.S. BR), respectively ( DWR 2011; USBR 2011 b )

. Water from the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River flows into the Sacramento

- San Joaquin Delta ( Delta), where both the SWP and CVP operate pumps to export water to the southern portion of the State

. California also conveys a substantial quantity of water from the Colorado River for agricultural uses in the Imperial Valley and Coachella Valley, and municipal uses in the Los Angeles region

. Several large reservoirs are located in the Los Angeles and San Diego areas to store imported Delta and Colorado River water

. California contains vast quantities of groundwater in alluvial aquifers that cover approximately 40 percent of the land surface

. Several large groundwater recharge and conjunctive use projects are part of the SWP / CVP operations to provide short

- term and long

- term sub

- surface storage of surplus surface wat er for later withdrawal for municipal / agricultural uses

. Groundwater pumping that exceeds the natural recharge can lead to “overdrafting”, which refers to long

- term drawdown of groundwater table elevations

. Both groundwater and surface water are used ex tensively in California for agricultural, municipal, and industrial water supplies

. Current annual municipal and industrial water use for the California population of approximately 35 million residents ranges from 10

- 12 MAF, with demands being lower in dr ought years when higher levels of conservation

occur

. Approximately 35 MAF is used for agricultural production

. In years with average available surface water supply, groundwater meets about 30 percent of California’s urban and agricultural demand, increa sing in drought years to about 40 percent or

more

. While water supplies typically have been sufficient to meet demands, significant water supply and water quality challenges exist at local levels, particularly during extreme drought year types when conser vation and cutbacks for agriculture have occurred and the SWP / CVP operations are stressed to meet competing water demands and environmental requirements in the major rivers and Delta

.

b

. Water Quality The water quality of surface waters and groundwater varies throughout California

. Potential surface sources of water quality impairments include point sources ( direct discharges to water bodies) and dispersed non

- point sources ( e

. g

. , stormwater runoff)

. Continuous point

- source discharges such as domestic wastewater treatment plants can be a source of elevated levels of organic carbon, nutrients ( i

. e

. , nitrogen and phosphorus), salinity, or trace metals and organic compounds relative to natural background water concentrations

. Potential domestic wastewater discharges of pharmaceutical and other personal care products have been identified as potentiallyAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

85 contributing endocrine disrupting compounds ( EDCs) and related adverse long

- term toxic effects to aquatic organisms

. Urban stormwater runoff from residential, commercial, and industrial land uses can mobilize and convey trash, oils, grease, trace metals ( e

. g

. , copper and zinc) to drainage systems and natural receiving water bodies

. Stormwater runoff from re sidential and agricultural areas can also contain sediment, pesticides, herbicides, nutrients ( e

. g

. , fertilizers), and pathogens ( e

. g

. , bacteria and viruses from fecal wastes of pets and livestock)

. Contaminants of concern that remain in the environment f or an extended period after deposition with little degradation include synthetic organic compounds such as chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides ( e

. g

. , dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane [DDT]), which largely have not been produced or used in California since th e late 1970’s, polychlorinated biphenyl compounds ( PCBs), and dioxin and furan compounds

. Improperly managed construction activities

- related erosion and stormwater runoff can contribute sediment

. Primary water quality issues vary around the State dependin g on the location and type of water resources present in an area, the size and extent of the watershed and regional water resources, the location of the water body with respect to potential pollutant sources, seasonal and climatic factors, and many other i nteracting physical, chemical, and biological processes

. The State Water Resources Control Board ( SWRCB) conducts monitoring of surface waters through the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program ( SWAMP), in which the collected data is used in part to sup port water quality assessments by each Regional Water Quality Control Board for the Clean Water Act ( CWA) Section 3 05 ( b) reporting process, which mandates the State to identify and prioritize funding efforts for protection, cleanup, and monitoring programs

. The most
recent Section 3 05 ( b) report released in 2002 identified that of the 32,536 miles of rivers / streams assessed, 27,449 were impaired for one or more beneficial uses, as was 361,128 of 576,013 acres of lakes / reservoirs assessed ( SWRCB 2003)

.

Gro undwater quality may be adversely affected by all of the sources contributing to surface water impairment discussed above, particularly in alluvial aquifers that are recharged directly through by infiltration and percolation of surface water

. Direct input s of wastes to groundwater include sub

- surface sources such as inadequately contained solid waste landfills, failing residential and commercial septic system leachfields, and leaking underground storage tanks that contain fuels, oils, or other industrial c hemicals

. The level of the major dissolved minerals ( e

. g

. , calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, sulfate, chloride), or salinity, is an important groundwater quality parameter for drinking water acceptability, agricultural use ( i

. e

. , crop tolerance), and aquatic biota

. Total dissolved solids ( TDS) concentrations that exceed about 500 milligrams per liter ( mg / L) reflect generally low salinity, whereas water with TDS levels above about 2,500
mg / L are undesirable for drinking and have severe limitations for agricultural irrigation

. Salinity can be naturally high, such as coastal aquifers affected by seawater intrusion or in arid lands where eons of evaporative concentration and locations of prehistoric seas have raised salinity levels

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

86 2

. Regulatory Set ting

Table 3

. I

- 1 below provides a general description of applicable laws and regulations that may pertain to the Proposed ACC Program as it relates to hydrology, water quality, and water supply

.

Table 3

. I

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hydrology, Water Quality, and Supply

Applicable Regulation Description

Federal

National Flood Insurance Program Designated floodplain mapping program, flooding and flood hazard reduction implementation, and federal subsidized flood insurance for residential and commercial property

. Administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA)

. Executive Order 11988 Requires actions to be taken for federal activities to reduce the risks of flood losses, restore and preserve floodplains, and mini mize flooding impacts to human health and safety

. Clean Water Act ( CWA) Administered primarily by the U.S. E nvironmental Protection Agency ( U.S. E PA)

. Pertains to water quality standards, state responsibilities, and discharges of waste to waters of the United State s

. Sections 303, 401, 402, and 404

. CWA Section 3 03 Defines water quality standards consisting of: 1) designated beneficial uses of a water, 2) the water quality criteria ( or “objectives” in California) necessary to support the uses, and 3) an antidegradation policy that protects existing uses and high water quality

. Section 3 03 ( d) requires
state s to identify water quality impairments where conventional control methods will no t achieve compliance with the standards, and establish Total Maximum Daily Load ( TMDL) programs to achieve compliance

. CWA Section 4 01 State certification system for federal actions which may impose conditions on a project to ensure compliance with water quality standards

. CWA Section 4 02 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permit program to control discharges of pollutants from point sources and nonpoint source stormwater

. Section 4 02 mandates permits for municipal stormwater dischar ges, which are regulated under the NPDES General Permit for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems ( MS4) ( MS4 Permit)

. Several of the cities and counties issue their own NPDES municipal stormwater permits for the regulations of stormwater discharges

. The se permits require that controls are implemented to reduce the discharge of pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent possible, including management practices, control techniques, system design and engineering methods, and other

measures as appropriate

. As part of permit compliance, these permit holders have created Stormwater Management Plans for their respective locations

. These plans outline the requirements for municipal operations, industrial and commercial businesses, construction si tes, and planning and land development

. These requirements may include multiple measures to control pollutants in stormwater discharge

. During implementation of specific projects, applicants will be required to followAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

87 Table 3

. I

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hydrology, Water Quality, and Supply

Applicable Regulation Description the guidance contained in the Stormw ater Management Plans as defined by the permit holder in that location

. CWA Section 4 04 Permit system for dredging or filling activity in waters of the U

. S

. , including wetlands, and administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

. National Toxics Rule and California Toxics Rule Applicable receiving water quality criteria promulgated by U.S. E PA for priority toxic pollutants consisting generally of trace metals, synthetic organic compounds, and pesticides

. State
California Water Rights The State Water Resources Control Board ( SWRCB) administers review, assessment, and approval of appropriative ( or priority) surface water rights permits / licenses for diversion and storage for beneficial use

. Riparian water rights apply to the land and allow divers ion of natural flows for beneficial uses without a permit, but users must share the resources equitably during drought

. Groundwater management planning is a function of local government

. Groundwater use by overlying property owners is not formally regulated, except in cases where the groundwater basin supplies are limited and uses have been adjudicated, or through appropriative procedures for groundwater transfers

. Public Trust Doctrine Body of common law that requires the State to consider additio nal terms and conditions when issuing or reconsidering appropriative water rights to balance the use of the water for many beneficial uses irrespective of the water rights that have been established

. Public trust resources have traditionally included navi gation, commerce, and fishing and have expanded over the years to include protection of fish and wildlife, and preservation goals for scientific study, scenic qualities, and open

- space

uses

. Porter

- Cologne Water Quality Control Act and California Water Code ( Title 23) The SWRCB is responsible for state wide water quality policy development and exercises the powers delegated to the State by the federal government under the CWA

. Nine Regional Wa ter Quality Control Boards ( Regional Water Boards) adopt and implement water quality control plans ( Basin Plans) which designate beneficial uses of surface waters and groundwater aquifers, and establish numeric and narrative water quality objectives for be neficial use protection

. Regional Water Boards issue waste discharge requirements ( WDRs) for discharge activities to water and land, require monitoring and maintain reporting programs, and implement enforcement and compliance policies and procedures

. Ot her state agencies with jurisdiction in water quality regulation in California include the Department of Public Health ( drinking water regulations), Department of Pesticide Regulation, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Department of Fish and Game, an d the Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

88 Table 3

. I

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hydrology, Water Quality, and Supply

Applicable Regulation Description
Policy for Implementation of Toxics Standards for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California Commonly referred to as the State Implementation Policy ( or SIP), the SIP provi des implementation procedures for discharges of toxic pollutants to receiving waters

.

Thermal Plan The Water Quality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal and Inter state Water and Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California was adopted by t he SWRCB in 1972 and amended in 1975

. The Thermal Plan restricts discharges of thermal waste or elevated temperature waste to waters of the state

. Generally, the Thermal Plan prohibits discharges from increasing ambient temperatures by more than 1oF over more than 25 percent of a stream cross section, increasing ambient temperatures by more than 4oF in any location, and prohibits discharge of waste that exceeds more than 20oF above the ambient temperature

. State wide NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Associated with Land Disturbance and Construction Activity ( Order No

. 2009

- 0009

- DWQ, NPDES No

. CAR000002) NPDES permit for stormwater and non

- storm discharges from construction activity that disturbs greater than one acre

. The general construction permit requires the preparation of a storm water pollution prevention plan ( SWPPP) that identifies best management practices ( BMPs) to be implemented to control pollution of storm water runoff

. The permit specifies mini mum construction BMPs based on a risk

- level determination of the potential of the project site to contribute to erosion and sediment transport and sensitivity of receiving waters to sediment

. While small amounts of construction

- related dewatering are cov ered under the General Construction Permit, the RWQCB has also adopted a General Order for Dewatering and Other Low Threat Discharges to Surface Waters ( General Dewatering Permit)

. This permit applies to various categories of dewatering activities and may apply to some construction sites, if construction of specific projects required dewatering in greater quantities than that allowed by the General Construction Permit and discharged the effluent to surface waters

. The General Dewatering Permit contains wa ste discharge limitations and prohibitions similar to those in the General Construction Permit

. State wide NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater Associated with Industrial Facilities ( Order No

. 97

- 003

- DWQ, NPDES No

. CAS000001) NPDES permit for stormwater and non

- storm discharges from types of industrial sites based on the Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC)

. The general industrial permit requires the preparation of a SWPPP that identifies potential onsite pollutants, BMPs to be implemented, and inspection / monitoring

.

Local
Water Agencies Water agencies enter into contracts or agreements with the federal and
state governments to protect the water supply and to ensure the lands within the agency have a dependable supply of sui table quality water to meet present and future needs

. Floodplain Management General Plans guide County land use decisions, and require the identification of water resource protection goals, objectives, and policies

. Floodplain management is addressed through ordinances, land use planning, and development design review and approval

. Local actionsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

89 Table 3

. I

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hydrology, Water Quality, and Supply

Applicable Regulation Description
may be coordinated with FEMA for the National Flood Insurance Program

. Typical provisions address floodplain use restrictions, flood protection requirement, allowable alteration of floodplains and stream channels, control of fill and grading activities in floodplains, and prevention of flood diversi ons where flows would increase flood hazards in other areas

. Drainage, Grading, and Erosion Control Ordinances Counties regulate building activity under the federal Uniform Building Code, local ordinances, and related development design review, approval, and permitting

. Local ordinances are common for water quality protection addressing drainage, stormwater management, land grading, and erosion and sedimentation control

. Environmental Health The Regional Water Boards generally delegate permit authority to County health departments to regulate the construction and operation / maintenance of on

- site sewage disposal systems ( e

. g

. , septic systems and leachfields, cesspools)

.



### J

. Land Use and Planning

1

. Existing Conditions

The manner in which physical landscapes are used or developed is commonly referred to as land use

. Local government s possess the basic legal authority to control land use, which is part of the police powers to protect community health, safety, and welfare conferred to state governments under the U. S. Constitution and , in turn, delegated by the state to local governments. Cities and counties are the primary entities that determine the types of land use changes that can occur for specific purposes within their jurisdiction

, as well as development standards for structures and other development on the land

. In incorporated areas, land use decisions are made by the city

. In unincorporated areas, land use decisions are made by the county

. Sometimes other public agencies have l and use authority, either by virtue of land ownership by agencies with sovereignty over local government

, such as state or federal land management agencies, or because of other state or federal laws, such as the California Coastal Commission in the coastal zone or the State Lands Commission in submerged and other land held in trust for the public

.
In California, the State Planning and Zoning Law ( California Government Code section 6 5000 et seq

. ) provides the primary legal framework that cities and countie s must follow in land use planning and controls

. Planned land uses are designated in the city or county General Plan , which serves as the comprehensive master plan for the community . Also, city and county land use and other related resource policies are defined in the General Plan. The primary land use regulatory tool provided by the California Planning and Zoning Law is the zoning ordinance adopted by each city andAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

90 county. Planning and Zoning Law requirements are discussed in the regulatory setting below

. When approving land use development, cities and counties must comply with the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA), which requires that the y consider the significant environmental impacts of their actions and the adoption of all feasible mi tigation measures to substantially reduce significant impacts, in the event a project causes significant or potentially significant effects on the environment. In some cases, building permits may be ministerial, and therefore exempt from CEQA, but most la nd use development approval actions by cities and counties require CEQA compliance.

2

. Regulatory Setting

Table 3

. J

- 1 below provides a general description of applicable laws and regulations that may pertain to land use planning and the Proposed ACC Progr am

.

Table 3

. J

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Land Use Planning

Applicable Regulation Description

Federal
Federal Land Policy Management Act The Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 ( FL PM A) is the principal law governing how the BLM manages public lands

. FL PM A requires the BLM to manage public land resources for multiple use and sustained yield for both present and future generations

. Under FL PM A, the BLM is authorized to grant right

- of

- ways ( ROWs) for generation, transmission, and distribution of electrical energy

. Although local agencies do not have jurisdiction over the federal lands managed by the BLM, under FL PM A and the BLM regulations at 43 CFR Part 1600, the BLM must coordinate its planning efforts with state and local plann ing initiatives

.

FL PM A defines an Area of Critical Environmental Concern ( ACEC) as an area within the public lands where special management attention is required ( when such areas are developed or used or where no development is required) to protect and prevent irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, or scenic values, fish and wildlife resources, or other natural systems or processes, or to protect life and safety from natural hazards

. The BLM identifies, evaluates, and designates ACECs throu gh its resource management planning process

. Allowable management practices and uses, mitigation, and use limitations, if any, are described in the planning document and the concurrent or subsequent ACEC Management Plan

. ACECs are considered land use aut horization avoidance areas because they are known to contain resource values that could result in denial of applications for land uses that cannot be designed to be compatible with management objectives and prescriptions for the ACEC

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

91 Table 3

. J

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Land Use Planning

Applicable Regulation Description

U.S. Bureau of Land Management Resource Management Plans Established by FL PM A, Resource Management Plans are designed to protect present and future land uses and to identify management practices needed to achieve desired conditions within the management area covered by the Resource Management Plans

. Management direction is set forth in the Resource Management Plans in the form of goals, objectives, standards, and guidelines

. These, in turn, direct management actions, activities, and uses that affect land management, an d water, recreation, visual, natural, and cultural resources

. State

State Planning and Zoning Law California Government Code section 6 5300 et seq

. establishes the obligation of cities and counties to adopt and implement general plans

. The general plan is a comprehensive, long

- term, and general document that describes plans for the physical development of the city or county

. The general plan addresses a broad range of topics, including, at a minimum, land use, circulation, housing, conservation, op en space, noise, and safety

. In addressing these topics, the general plan identifies the goals, objectives, policies, principles, standards, and plan proposals that support the city or county’s vision for the area

. The general plan is also a long

- range d ocument that typically addresses the physical character of an area over a 20

- year period

. Although the general plan serves as a blueprint for future development and identifies the overall vision for the planning area, it remains general enough to allow fo r flexibility in the approach taken to achieve the plan’s goals

. Subdivision Map Act ( Government Code section 6 6410 et seq

. ) In general, land cannot be divided in California without local government approval

. The primary goals of the Subdivision Map Ac t are: ( a) to encourage orderly community development by providing for the regulation and control of the design and improvements of the subdivision with a proper consideration of its relation to adjoining areas; ( b) to ensure that the areas within the subdivision that are dedicated for public purposes will be properly improved by the subdivider so that they will not become an undue burden on the community; and ( c) to protect the public and individual transferees fr om fraud and exploitation

. ( 61 Ops

. Cal

. Atty

. Gen

. 299, 301 [ 1978 ] ; 77 Ops

. Cal

. Atty

. Gen

. 185 [ 1994 ] )

. Dividing land for sale, lease or financing is regulated by local ordinances based on the state Subdivision Map Act ( Government Code section 6 6410 et seq

. )

. Local

General Plans The most comprehensive land use planning is provided by city and county general plans, which local governments are required by State law to prepare as a guide for future development

. The general plan contains goals and policies concerning topics that are mandated by State law or which the jurisdiction has chosen to include

. Required topics are: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety

. Other topics that local governments frequently choose to address are public facilities, parks and recreation, community design, or growth management, among others

. City and county general plans must be consistent with each other

. County general plans must cover areas not included by city general plans ( i

. e

. , unincorporated areas)

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

92 Table 3

. J

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Land Use Planning

Applicable Regulation Description
Specific and Community Plans A city or county may also provide land use planning by developing community or specific plans for smaller, more specific areas within their jurisdiction

. These more localized plans provide for focused guidance for developing a specific area, with development standards tailored to the area, as well as systematic implementation of the general plan

. Specific and community pl ans are required to be consistent with the city or county’s general plan

. Zoning The city or county zoning code is the set of detailed requirements that implement the general plan policies at the level of the individual parcel

. The zoning code presents s tandards for different uses and identifies which uses are allowed in the various zoning districts of the jurisdiction

. Since 1971, State law has required the city or county zoning code to be consistent with the jurisdiction’s general plan, except in chart er cities

. Housing Element Law State law requires each city and county to adopt a general plan containing at least seven mandatory elements including housing

. Unlike the other general plan elements, the housing element, required to be updated every fi ve to six years, is subject to detailed statutory requirements and mandatory review by a State agency, the California Department of Housing and Community Development ( Department)

. Housing elements have been mandatory portions of local general plans since 1969

. This reflects the statutory recognition that housing is a matter of state wide importance and cooperation between government and the private sector is critical to attainment of the State 's housing goals

. The availability of an adequate supply of hou sing affordable to workers, families, and seniors is critical to the State ’s long

- term economic competitiveness and the quality of life for all Californians

.



### K

. Mineral Resources

1

. Existing Conditions

Mineral resources are all the physical materials that are extracted from the earth for

use

. Modern society is dependent on a huge amount and variety of mineral resources

. Mineral resources are classified as metallic or non

- metallic

. As measured by consumption, the most important metallic resources ar e iron aluminum, copper, zinc and lead

. The most important nonmetallic resources include crushed stone, sand and gravel, cement, clays, salt and phosphate

. Mineral reserves are known deposits of minerals that can be legally mined economically using exist ing technology

.

T he California Geological Survey ( CGS), formerly the California Division of Mines and Geology, classifies the regional significance of mineral resources in accordance with the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 and assis ts the CGS in the designation of lands containing significant aggregate resources

. Mineral Resource Zones ( MRZs) have been designated to indicate the significance of mineral deposits

. The MRZ categories follow:Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

93 • MRZ

- 1: Areas where adequate information ind icates that no significant mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their
presence

.

• MRZ

- 2: Areas where adequate information indicates significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high li kelihood exists for their presence

.

• MRZ

- 3: Areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data

.

• MRZ

- 4: Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ

. Lithium and platinum are discussed below, as such relate to the proposed ACC Program.

a

. Lithium Mining

**i. Basic Processes**  Lithium is an elemental metal that is necessary component of lithium

- ion batteries. More vehicle manufacturers are considering the use of lithium

- ion batteries in their battery electric vehicle ( BEV) and hybrid plug

- in vehicle models instead of nickel

- meta l hydride batteries ( USGS 2011).

Lithium production comes from deposits in which the lithium has been concentrated above background crustal abundance by natural processes. Lithium deposits are found in brine, which is extracted from wells that penetrate l ithium

- bearing zones of sediment ( e.g., aquifers) and pumped into shallow evaporation ponds, where it is evaporated under controlled conditions that eliminate deleterious elements and compounds, principally magnesium and sulfate ( Gruber et al. 201 1 ).

**ii. N**  **umber of Facilities in California** There are no lithium mines in California. The only commercial lithium brine operation in the U.S. is operated by American Lithium Minerals, Inc. in western Nevada ( American Lithium Inc. 2010; USGS 2011). Other nations tha t are substantial lithium producers include Chile, Argentina, Canada, Bolivia, and China.

a

. Platinum Mining

**i**

**. Basic Processes**  Platinum is a vital component of proton exchange membrane fuel cells, which is the leading type of fuel cell that would be used in fuel cell vehicles ( FCVs). The mining of platinum starts with finding an ore body containing ( PGM), usually associated with copper and nickel ores. The ore is attained through a combination of digging, drilling, and blasting, and then hauled by a haul d ump vehicle to a refining facility.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

94 **ii**

**. Number of Facilities in California**  There are no platinum mines in California. The only primary platinum

- group metal ( PGM) mines in the U.S. are the Stillwater and East Boulder Mines in Montana ( USGS 2011). Small qu antities of PGMs were also recovered as byproducts of copper refining. South Africa, Russia, and Canada are the world’s leading producers of platinum.

2

. Regulatory Setting

Applicable laws and regulations associated with mineral resources are discussed in Table 3.K

- 1

.

Table 3.K

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Mineral Resources

Federal
Mining and Mineral Policy Act The Mining and Mineral Act of 1970 declared that the Federal Government policy is to encourage private enterprise in the development of a sound and s table domestic mineral industry, domestic mineral deposits, minerals research, and methods for reclamation in the minerals industry

. State Surface Mining and Reclamation Act ( SMARA) The intent of SMARA of 1975 is to promote production and conservation of mineral resources, minimize environmental effects of mining, and to assure that mined lands will be reclaimed to conditions sui table for alternative uses

. An important part of the SMARA legislation requires the State Geologist to class ify land according to the presence or absence of significant mineral deposits

. Local jurisdictions are given the authority to permit or restrict mining operations, adhering to the SMARA legislation

. Classification of an area using Mineral Resource Zones ( MRZ) to designate lands that contain mineral deposits are designed to protect mineral deposits from encroaching urbanization and land uses that are incompatible with mining

. The MRZ classifications reflect varying degrees of mineral significance, determi ned by available knowledge of the presence or absence of mineral deposits as well as the economic potential of the deposits

. California Building Standards Code ( CBSC) ( CCR Title 24) California’s minimum standards for structural design and construction are given in the California Building Standards Code ( CBSC) ( CCR Title 24)

. The CBSC is based on the Uniform Building Code ( International Code Council 1997), which is used widely through out United State s ( generally adopted on a state

- by

state or district

- by

- district basis) and has been modified for California conditions with numerous, more detailed or more stringent regulations

. The CBSC provides standards for various aspects of
construc tion, including ( i

. e

. , not limited to) excavation, grading, and earthwork construction; fills and embankments; expansive soils; foundation investigations; and liquefaction potential and soil strength loss

. In accordance with California law, proponents of specific projects would be required to comply with all provisions of the CBSC for certain aspects of design and construction

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

95 Table 3.K

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Mineral Resources

Local Local Grading and Erosion Control Ordinances Many counties and cities have grading and erosion control ordinances

. These ordinances are intended to control erosion and sedimentation caused by construction activities

. A grading permit is typically required for construction

- related projects

. As part of the permit, project applicants usually must submit a grading and erosion control plan, vicinity and site maps, and other supplemental information

. Standard conditions in the grading permit include a description of BMPs similar to those contained in a SWPPP

. County General Plans ( and EIR) Some county General Plans provide a r egulatory framework to address potential environmental impacts that may result from a proposed project



### L

. Noise

1

. Existing Conditions

a

. Acoustic Fundamentals Acoustics is the scientific study that evaluates perception, propagation, absorption, and reflection of sound waves

. Sound is a mechanical form of radiant energy, transmitted by a pressure wave through a solid, liquid, or gaseous medium

. Sound that is loud, disagreeable, unexpected, or unwanted is generally defined as noise; consequently, the perception of sound is subjective in nature, and can vary substantially from person to
person

. A sound wave is initiated in a medium by a vibrating object ( e

. g

. , vocal chords, the string of a guitar, the diaphragm of a radio speaker)

. The wave consists of minute variations in pressure, oscillating above and below the ambient atmospheric pressure

. The number of pressure variation cycles occurring per second is referred to as the frequency of the sound wave and is expressed in hertz

. Directly measuring s ound pressure fluctuations would require the use of a very large and cumbersome range of numbers

. To avoid this and have a more useable numbering system, the decibel ( dB) scale was introduced

. A sound level expressed in decibels is the logarithmic ratio of two like pressure quantities, with one pressure quantity being a reference sound pressure

. For sound pressure in air the standard reference quantity is generally considered to be 20 micropascals, which directly corresponds to the threshold of human hea ring

. The use of the decibel is a convenient way to handle the million

- fold range of sound pressures to which the human ear is sensitive

. A decibel is logarithmic; it does not follow normal algebraic methods and cannot be directly added

. For example, a 65 dB source of sound, such as a truck, when joined by another 65 dB source results in a sound amplitude of 68 dB, not 130 dB ( i

. e

. , doubling the source strength increases the sound pressure by 3 dB)

. A sound level increase of 10 dBAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

96 corresponds to 10 time s the acoustical energy, and an increase of 20 dB equates to a 100

- fold increase in acoustical energy

. The loudness of sound perceived by the human ear depends primarily on the overall sound pressure level and frequency content of the sound source

. The hu man ear is not equally sensitive to loudness at all frequencies in the audible spectrum

. To better relate overall sound levels and loudness to human perception, frequency

- dependent weighting networks were developed

. The standard weighting netwo rks are id entified as A through E

. There is a strong correlation between the way humans perceive sound and A

- weighted sound levels ( dBA)

. For this reason the dBA can be used to predict community response to noise from the environment, including noise from transpor tation and stationary sources

. Sound levels expressed as dB in this environmental analysis are A

- weighted sound levels, unless noted otherwise

. Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources ( transportation noise sources)

, such as automobiles, trucks, and airplanes and stationary sources ( nontransportation noise sources)

, such as construction sites, machinery, and commercial and industrial operations

. As acoustic energy spreads through the atmosphere from the source to the receive r, noise levels attenuate ( decrease) depending on ground absorption characteristics, atmospheric conditions, and the presence of physical barriers ( walls, building façades, berms)

. Noise generated from mobile sources generally attenuate at a rate of 4

. 5 dB per doubling of distance

. Stationary noise sources spread with more spherical dispersion patterns that attenuate at a rate of 6 to 7

. 5 dB per doubling of distance

. Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, turbulence, temperature gradients, and humidi ty may additionally alter the propagation of noise and affect levels at a receiver

. Furthermore, the presence of a large object ( e

. g

. , barrier, topographic features, and intervening building façades) between the source and the receptor can provide signifi cant attenuation of noise levels at the receiver

. The amount of noise level reduction or “shielding” provided by a barrier primarily depends on the size of the barrier, the location of the barrier in relation to the source and receivers, and the frequency spectra of the noise

. Natural barriers such as berms, hills, or dense woods, and human

- made features such as buildings and walls may be used as noise barriers

.

b

. Noise Descriptors The intensity of environmental noise fluctuates over time, and several different descriptors of time

- averaged noise levels are used

. The selection of a proper noise descriptor for a specific source depends on the spatial and temporal distribution, duration, and fluctuation of both the noise source and the environment

. The n oise descriptors most often used to describe environmental noise are defined below.

• Equivalent Noise Level ( L eq ): The energy mea n ( average) noise level

.

• Maximum Noise Level ( L max ): The highest A / B / C weighted integrated noise level occurring during a specific period of time

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

97 • Minimum Noise Level ( L min ): The lowest A / B / C weighted integrated noise level during a specific period of time

.

• Day

- Night Noise Level ( L dn ): The 24

- hour Leq with a 10

- dB “penalty” applied during nighttime noise

- sensitive hours, 10 p

. m

. through 7 a

. m

.

• Community Noise Equivalent Level ( CNEL): Similar to the Ldn described above, but with an additional 5

- dB “penalty” for the noise

- sensitive hours between 7 p

. m

. to 10 p

. m

. , which are typically reserved for relaxation, conversation, re ading, and watching television

. Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the all

- encompassing noise level associated with a given noise environment

. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient n oise level is the L eq descriptor listed above, which corresponds to a steady

- state A

- weighted sound level containing the same total energy as a time

- varying signal over a given time period ( usually one hour)

. The Leq is the foundation of the composite noi se descriptors such as L dn and CNEL, as defined above, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise

.

c

. Effects of Noise on Humans Excessive and chronic exposure to elevated noise levels can result in auditory and non

auditory effects on humans

. Auditory effects of noise on people are those related to temporary or permanent hearing loss caused by loud noises

. Non

- auditory effects of exposure to elevated noise levels are those related to behavioral and physiological effects

. The non

- auditory behavioral effects of noise on humans are associated primarily with the subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction, which lead to interference with activities such as communications, sleep, and learning

. The

non

- auditory physi ological health effects of noise on humans have been the subject of considerable research attempting to discover correlations between exposure to elevated noise levels and health problems, such as hypertension and cardiovascular disease

. The mass of resea rch infers that noise

- related health issues are predominantly the result of behavioral stressors and not a direct noise

- induced response

. The extent to which noise contributes to non

- auditory health effects remains a subject of considerable research, with no definitive conclusions

. The degree to which noise results in annoyance and interference is highly subjective and may be influenced by several non

- acoustic factors

. The number and effect of these

non

- acoustic environmental and physical factors vary dep ending on individual characteristics of the noise environment such as sensitivity, level of activity, location, time of day, and length of exposure

. One key aspect in the prediction of human response to new noise environments is the individual level of ad aptation to an existing noise environment

. The greater the change in the noise levels that are attributed to a new noise source, relative to the environment an individual has become accustom to, the less tolerable the new noise source will be perceived

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

98 W ith respect to how humans perceive and react to changes in noise levels, a 1 dB increase is imperceptible, a 3 dB increase is barely perceptible, a 6 dB increase is clearly noticeable, and a 10 dB increase is subjectively perceived as approximately twice a s loud ( Egan 1988)

. These subjective reactions to changes in noise levels was developed on the basis of test subjects’ reactions to changes in the levels of steady

state pure tones or broad

- band noise and to changes in levels of a given noise source

. It is probably most applicable to noise levels in the range of 50 to 70 dB, as this is the usual range of voice and interior noise levels

. For these reasons, a noise level increase of 3 dB or more is typically considered substantial in terms of the degradati on of the existing noise environment

.

d

. Vibration Vibration is the periodic o scillation of a medium or object with respect to a given reference point

. Sources of vibration include natural phenomena ( e

. g

. , earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, lan dslides) and those introduced by human activity ( e

. g

. , explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment)

. Vibration sources may be continuous, ( e

. g

. , operating factory machinery or transient in nature, explosions)

. Vibration levels can be d epicted in terms of amplitude and frequency, relative to displacement, velocity, or acceleration

. Vibration amplitudes are commonly expressed in peak particle velocity ( PPV) or root

mean

- square ( RMS) vibration velocity

. PPV is defined as the maximum insta ntaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal

. PPV is typically used in the monitoring of transient and impact vibration and has been found to correlate well to the stresses experienced by buildings ( Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2006, C alifornia Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2004)

. PPV and RMS vibration velocity are normally described in inches per second ( in / sec)

. Although PPV is appropriate for evaluating the potential for building damage, it is not always sui table for evaluating human response

. The response of the human body to vibration relates well to average vibration amplitude; therefore, vibration impacts on humans are evaluated in terms of RMS vibration velocity

. Similar to airborne sound, vibration velocit y can be expressed in decibel notation as vibration decibels ( VdB)

. The logarithmic nature of the decibel serves to compress the broad range of numbers required to describe vibration

. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible groundborne vibration include co nstruction equipment, steel

- wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads

. Although the effects of vibration may be imperceptible at low levels, effects may result in detec table vibrations and slight damage to nearby structures at moderate and high levels, r espectively

. At the highest levels of vibration, damage to structures is primarily architectural ( e

. g

. , loosening and cracking of plaster or stucco coatings) and rarely results in damage to structural components

. The range of vibration that is relevant t o this analysis occurs from approximately 50 VdB, which is the typical background vibration

- velocity level, to 100 VdB, which is the general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings ( FTA 2006)

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

99 e

. Existing Sources and Sensitive Land Us es The existing noise environment in most urban areas of California area is primarily influenced by transportation noise from vehicle traffic on the roadway systems ( e

. g

. , highways, freeways, primary arterials, and major local streets) and non

- transportati on noise from commercial and industrial operations

. Other noise sources that contribute to the existing noise environment include passenger and freight on

- line railroad operations and ground rapid transit systems; commercial, general aviation, heliport, a nd military airport operations ( e

. g

. , jet engine test stands, ground facilities and maintenance) and overflights; and to a much lesser extent construction sites, schools ( i

. e

. , play fields), residential and recreational areas ( e

. g

. , landscape maintenance a ctivities, dogs barking, people talking), agricultural activities, and others

. Those noted above are also considered sources of vibration in the project area

. With regards to the affected entities, existing noise conditions vary depending on location, but are typically characterized as noisy urban industrial areas including such noise sources as stationary machinery, transportation ( e

. g

. , surface vehicles, heavy

- duty diesel trucks, construction eq uipment), and other industrial

- related activities

. Table 3.L

- 1 shows typical ambient noise levels based on population density

.

Table 3.L

- 1

. Population Density and Associated Ambient Noise Levels

dBA, L dn
Rural 40

- 50

Suburban

Quiet suburban residential or small town 45

- 50

Normal suburban residential 50

- 55

Urban

Normal urban residential 60
Noisy urban residential 65
Very noise urban residential 70
Downtown, major metropolis 75

- 80 Under flight path at major airport, 1⁄2 to 1 mile from runway 78

- 85 Adjoining freeway or near a major airport 80

- 90

Notes: A

- Weighted Decibel ( dBA)

. An overall frequency

- weighted sound level in decibels which approximates the frequency response of the human ear

. Day

- Night Level ( Ldn)

. Sources: Cowan, James P

. 19 9 4

Noise

- sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health

- related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose

. Residential dwel lings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels

. Additional land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are also generally c onsidered sensitive to increases inAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

100 exterior noise levels

. Places of worship and transit lodging, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise

- sensitive

.

Those noted above are also considered vibration

- sensiti ve land uses in addition to commercial and industrial buildings where vibration would interfere with operations within the building, including levels that may be well below those associated with human
annoyance

. Equipment such as electron microscopes and high

- resolution lithographic equipment can be very sensitive to vibration, and even normal optical microscopes will sometimes be difficult to use when vibration is well below the human annoyance level

. Manufacturing of computer chips is an example of a vi bration

- sensitive process

. This category does not include most computer installations or telephone switching equipment because most such equipment is designed to operate in typical building environments where the equipment may experience occasional shock from bumping and continuous background vibration caused by other equipment ( FTA 2006)

.

2

. Regulatory Setting

The following provides a brief description of the Federal and State noise regulations that could be applicable to the ACC Program

. Local regulations may also apply; howev er, because the specific siting of new hydrogen fueling stations automotive production facilities is not known at this time it would be speculative to present a discussion of applicable local regulations

.

Table 3.L

- 2

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for No ise Resources

Regulation Description

Federal

Federal Noise Control Act ( 1972) ( U.S. E nvironmental Protection Agency [ U.S. EPA ]), 40 CFR 201

- 211 This act established a requirement that all federal agencies administer their programs to promote an environment free of noise that jeopardizes public health or welfare

. U.S. EPA was given the responsibility for providing information to the public regarding identifiable effects of noise on public health or welfare, publishing information on the levels of environmental noise that will protect the public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety, coordinating federal research and activities related to noise control, and establishing federal noise emission standards for selected products distribut ed in inter state commerce

. This act also directed that all federal agencies comply with applicable federal, state

, inter state , and local noise control regulations

. Quiet Communities Act ( 1978) This act promotes the development of effective State and local noise control programs, to provide funds for noise research, and to produce and disseminate educational materials to the public on the harmful effects of noise and ways to effectively control it

. 24 CFR, Part 51B ( U.S. Department of Housing and Urba n Development [HUD]) This regulation established standards for HUD

- assisted projects and actions, requirements, and guidelines on noise abatement and control

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

101 Table 3.L

- 2

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for No ise Resources

Regulation Description

Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA) Order 1050

. 1D This order contains policies and procedures for considering environmental impacts

. 14 CFR, Part 150 ( FAA) These address airport noise compatibility planning and include a system for measuring airport noise impacts and present guidelines for identifying incompatible land uses

. All land uses are c onsidered compatible with noise levels of less than 65 dBA L dn
. At higher noise levels, selected land uses are also deemed accep table

, depending on the nature of the use and the degree of structural noise attenuation provided

. International Standards and Recommended Practices ( International Civil Aviation Organization) This contains policies and procedures for considering environmental impacts ( e

. g

. , aircraft noise emission standards and atmospheric sound attenuation factors)

.

32 CFR, Part 256 ( Department of Defense Air Installations Compatible Use Zones [AICUZ] Program) AICUZ plans prepared for individual airfields are primarily intended as recommendations to local communities regarding the importance of maintaining land uses which are compatible with the noise and safety impacts of military aircraft operations

. 23 CFR, Part 772, Federal Highway Administration ( FHWA) standards, policies, and procedures These provide procedures for noise studies and noise abatement
measures to help protect the public health and welfare, to supply noise abatement criteria, and to establish requirements for information to be given to local officials for use in the planning and design of highways

. 29 CFR, Part 1910, Section 1 910

. 95 ( U.S. Depart ment of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA]) This regulation established a standard for noise exposure in the workplace

.

Federal Transit Administration ( FTA) Guidance ( 2006) This guidance presents procedures for predicting and ass essing noise and vibration impacts of proposed mass transit projects

. All types of bus and rail projects are covered

. Procedures for assessing noise and vibration impacts are provided for different stages of project development, from early planning befor e mode and alignment have been selected through preliminary engineering and final design

. Both for noise and vibration, there are three levels of analysis described

. The framework acts as a screening process, reserving detailed analysis for projects with the greatest potential for impacts while allowing a simpler process for projects with little or no effects

. This guidance contains noise and vibration impact criteria that are used to assess the magnitude of predicted impacts

. A range of mitigation is d escribed for dealing with adverse noise and vibration impacts

. 49 CFR 210 ( Federal Rail Administration [FRA] Railroad Noise Emission Compliance Standards) and FRA Guidance ( 2005) This section a nd guidance provides contains criteria and procedures for use in analyzing the potential noise and vibration impacts of various types of high

- speed fixed guideway transportation systems

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

102 Table 3.L

- 2

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for No ise Resources

Regulation Description

State

California Public Utilities Code ( CPUC) Section 2 1670 The State Aeronautics Act of the CPUC establishes state wide requirements for airport land use compatibility planning and requires nearly every county to create an Airport Land Use Commission ( ALUC) or other alternative

. Section 5 000 et seq

. ( CCR, Title 21, Division 2

. 5, Chapter 6), California Airport Noise Regulations promulgated in accordance with the State Aeronautics Act In Section 5 006, the regulations state that: “The level of noise
accep table to a reasonable person residing in the vicinity of an airport is estab lished as a CNEL value of 65 dBA for purposes of these regulations

. This criterion level has been chosen for reasonable persons residing in urban residential areas where houses are of typical California construction and may have windows partially open

. I t has been selected with reference to speech, sleep and community reaction

. California Streets and Highways Code Section 2 16 ( Freeway Noise in Classrooms) This section, known as the Control of Freeway Noise in School Classrooms, requires that, in general , Caltrans abate noise from freeways to specified levels when the noise exceeds specified levels in school classrooms

California Government Code Section 6 5302 ( Provision of Noise Contour Maps) This section r equires Caltrans to provide cities and counties with noise contour maps along State highways

.

Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Regulations These establish standards governing interior noise levels that apply to all new single

- family and multi

- family r esidential units in California

. These standards require that acoustical studies be performed before construction at building locations where the existing L dn exceeds 60 dBA

. Such acoustical studies are required to establish mitigation that will limit max imum L dn levels to 45 dBA in any habi table room

.



### M

. Employment, Population, and Housing

1

. Existing Conditions

The employed civilian labor force, unemployment rates, employment opportunities, and population estimates and projections for cities, counties, and state s are collected every ten years by the U.S. Census Bureau ( Census)

. The California Employment Developm ent Department ( EDD) collects statistics specific to California annually

. Population data for the State of California is collected during the ten year census cycles conducted by the United State s Census Bureau. The 2010 Census shows California’s total po pulation at 37,253,956 individuals. Minors ( 9,295,040 individuals, under age 18) account for approximately 25 percent of the population, while adults ( 27,958,916 individuals, over age 18) account for approximately 75 percent of the population. Senior citiz ens ( 4,246,514 individuals, over age 65) account for approximately 15 percent of the adult population or 11 percent of the State ’s total population ( U.S. Census Bureau 2010).Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

103 The State of California, Department of Finance ( DOF) provides population project ions after each ten year census cycle once the Census Bureau releases its Modified Age, Race, and Sex data. For the 2010 Census this data is not expected to be available until 2012. The current DOF projections are based on the 2000 Census and provide popul ation projects in ten year increments through 2050. These projections show California’s rate of population growth is expected to decline over time, as follows ( DOF 2007):

• From 2000 to 2010: Population growth of approximately 14.7 percent ( to 39,135,676)

• F rom 2010 to 2020: Population growth of approximately 12.8 percent ( to 44,135,923)

• From 2020 to 2030: Population growth of approximately 11.6 percent ( to 49,240,891)

• From 2030 to 2040: Population growth of approximately 10.1 percent ( to 54,226,115)

• From 204 0 to 2050: Population growth of approximately 9.7 percent ( to 59,507,876)

Based on the 2010 Census, the actual rate of growth from 2000 to 2010 was approximately 9.2 percent , from 34,105,437 ( DOF 2007) to 37,253,956 ( U.S. Census Bureau 2010).

Current and projected employment data for the State of California is estimated by the State of California Employment Development Department ( EDD). Total civilian employment in the State in during 2010 was 15,963,300 individuals ( EDD 2011b). The EDD produces short

- term ( two year) projections of employment annually and long

- term ( ten year) projections of employment every two years. The current short

- term ( 2010

- 2012) projections estimate that California’s total occupational employmen t is expected to grow by 3.3 percent during that time ( a net increase of 523,600 new jobs) and will reach 16.3 million jobs by the third quarter of 2012 ( EDD 2011a). The long

- term projections ( 2008

- 2018) estimate that California’s occupational employment i s expected to add over 1.6 million jobs during that decade to reach approximately 18.6 million jobs by 2018 ( EDD 2010).

2

. Regulatory Setting

Federal and state laws do not control population and employment. See housing

- related regulations in Section J , L and Use and Planning.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

104 

### N

. Public Services

1

. Existing Conditions

a

. Law Enforcement
The U.S. E nvironmental Protection Agency ( U.S. EPA) is an agency of the federal government of the United State s charged with protecting human health and the environment , by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress

. The Environmental Protection Agency's Criminal Investigation Division ( U.S. EPA CID) primary mission is the enforcement of the United State s' environmental laws as well as any other federal law in accordance with the guidelines established by the Attorney General of the United State s ( 18 U

. S

. C

. 3063)

. These environmental laws include those specifically related to air, water and land resourc es

.

State wide law enforcement service is provided by the California Highway Patrol ( CH P)

. The CH P is responsible for protecting State resources and providing crime prevention services and traffic enforcement along the State ’s highways and byways

.

Enforcem ent of environmental laws in California is the responsibility of the AG’s Office and Cal/EPA. The Attorney General represents the people of California in civil and criminal matters before trial courts, appellate courts and the supreme courts of California and the United State s. In regards to environmental issues, the Attorney General enforces laws that safeguard the environment and natural resources in the State . Recent actions by the Attorney General related to air quality and climate change issues include : legally defending the State 's clean cars law against multiple challenges, filing numerous actions against the Bush Administration regarding regulation of global warming pollution, working with local governments to ensure that land use planning
processes take account of global warming, promoting renewable energy and enhanced energy efficiency in California, and working with other State leaders and agencies to implement AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 ( DOJ 2011).

The California Environmenta l Protection Agency ( Cal/EPA) was created in 1991 by Governor's Executive Order. Cal/EPA’s mission is to restore, protect and enhance the environment, to ensure public health, environmental quality and economic vitality ( Cal/EPA 2011a). The Cal/EPA is comp rised of various boards, departments and offices, including: Air Resources Board, Department of Pesticide Regulation, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, and State Water Resources Control Board ( includi ng the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards) ( Cal/EPA 2011b).Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

105 California's environmental laws are enforced by State and local agencies, each charged with enforcing the laws governing a specific media such as air, water, hazardous waste, solid waste, and pesticides ( Cal/EPA 2011c). Enforcement agencies for these media are as follows:

• Air: Air Resources Board ( part of Cal/EPA) and Local Air Districts.

• Water: State Water Resources Control Board ( part of Cal/EPA), Regional Water Quality Control Boards ( part of Cal/EPA), local waste water officials, and the California Department of Public Health.

• Hazardous Waste: Department of Toxic Substances Control ( part of Cal/EPA) and Certified Unified Program Agencies ( CUPA).

• Carcinogens/Reproductive Toxins: Prop. 6 5 through the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment ( part of Cal/EPA).

• Pesticides: Department of Pesticide Regulation ( part of Cal/EPA) and County Agricultural Commissioners

Community law enforcement service is provided by local police and sher iff agencies ( i

. e

. , cities and counties , respectively ) to prevent crime, respond to emergency incidents, and provide traffic enforcement on local roadways

.

b

. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Response Services
The United State s Forest Service is a n agency of the United State s Department of Agriculture that administers the nation's 155 national forests and 20 national grasslands, which encompass 193 million acres ( 780,000 km 2 ) , including fire protection and response services

. Major divisions of the agency include the National Forest System, State and Private Forestry, and the Research and Development branch

. The Fire and Aviation Management part of the US Forest Service works to advance technologies in fire management and suppression, maintain and improve the extremely efficient mobilization and tracking systems in place, and reach out in support of our Federal, State , and International fire partners

.

State

- level fire protection and emergency response service is provided by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection ( CAL FIRE) , primarily in rural areas of the State

. CAL FIRE is an emergency response and resource protection department

. CAL FIRE protects lives, property and natural resources from fire, responds to emergencies of all types, and protects and preserves timberlands, wildlands, and urban forests

.

Local and urban fire protection service is provided by local fire districts and / or local agencies ( e

. g

. , fire departments of cities and counties)

. In addition to providing fire

r esponse services most fire agencies also provide emergency medical response services ( i

. e

. , ambulance services) within their service areas

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

106 c

. Schools Education is primarily a state and local responsibility in the United State s

. State s and communities , as well as public and private organizations, establish schools, develop curricula, and determine requirements for enrollment and graduation ( U.S. Department of Education 2010 )

. State wide, the regulation of education for youth is provided by the Californ ia Department of Education

. The State Board of Education ( SBE) is the governing and policy

- making body of the California Department of Education

. The SBE sets K

- 12 education policy in the areas of standards, instructional materials, assessment, and accou ntability ( California State Board of Education 2010)

. Locally, school districts are responsible for the management and development of elementary, middle, and high

- school facilities

. Throughout California there are 1,039 school districts

.

2

. Regulatory Setting

Key regulations and polices applicable to l aw enforcement, fire protection and emergency medical response services, and schools for the proposed ACC Program are summarized in Table 3.N

- 1

.

Table 3.N

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations fo r Public Services

Regulation Description

Federal None applicable

. American with Disabilities Act Guidelines to ensure that facilities are accessible to individuals with disabilities

. Implements requirements for the design and construction of buildings

. State

State Fire Responsibility Areas Areas delineated by the State of California, Department of Forestry and Fire Protection ( CAL FIRE) for which the State assumes primary financial responsibility for protecting natural resources from damages of fire

. Local jurisdictions are required to adopt minimum recommended requirements for road design, road identification, emergency fire suppression and fuel breaks and greenbelts

. All projects within or adjacent to a State Fire Responsibility Area must meet these requirements

. State School Funding Education Code Section 1 7620 authorizes school districts to levy a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement for any development project for the construction or reconstruction of school facilities

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

107 

### O

. Recreation

1

. Existing Conditions

Recreational resources and facilities are provided and managed at federal, state , and local levels

. The federal government manages a diverse array of recreational facilities and resources in California that include national parks and monuments, national forests and grasslands, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas, lakes and lands managed by different agencies in the federal government, wild and scenic rivers, and back country b yways, national trials, and marine reserves and estuaries

. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) manages the wildlife and fisheries resources and their habitats

. Each federal agency’s programs include recreation components

.

California has over 275 S tate beaches and parks, recreation areas, wildlife areas, historic parks, and museums, and has authority over fishing and hunting activities, habitat restoration and protection in the State

. General plans for State parks, recreation

areas , and beaches are publicly available

. T he California Outdoor Recreation Plan and associated research provide policy guidance to all public agencies

– federal, state

, local, and special districts that oversee outdoor recreation on lands, facilities and services throughout California Agencies and departments that have involvement in recreational activities include Boating and Waterways, Fish and Game, Tahoe Regional Planning Association, various conservancies, and others ( California State Parks 2008,
p

. 3)

. Recreational lands and facilities are also managed by regional and local park and recreation agencies and open space districts

. City and c ounty General Plans contain recreation elements that provide framework for planning agencies to consider when project s are developed and implemented

.

2

. Regulatory Setting

The following provides a brief description of the Federal and State regulations that could be applicable to a new or renovated vehicle production facilities or fueling stations

. Local regulations may also apply; however, because the specific siting of new is not known at this time it would be speculative to present a discussion of applicable local regulations

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

108 Table 3.O

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Recreation

Law or Regulation Description

Federal
Federal Land Policy and Management Act ( FL PM A), 1976

– 43 CFR 1600 Establishes public land policy; guidelines for administration; and provides for the “multiple use” management, protection, development, and enhancement of public lands

. "Multiple use" management, defined as "management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people" with recreation identified as o ne of the resource values ( FL PM A 2001)

. State None applicable

Local General plans for cities and counties contain designations for recreational areas

. These are policy documents with planned land use maps and related information that are designed to give long

range guidance to those local officials making decisions affecting the growth and resources of their jurisdictions

. Because of the number and variety of general plans and related local plans, they are not listed individually

.



### P

. Transportation and Traffic

1

. Existing Conditions

Existing roadway systems in the project area generally consist of highways, freeways, arterials, local streets, and intersections / ramps

. The existing average annual daily traffic ( AADT) volumes on the ro adway segments that comprise these systems vary considerably ( i

. e

. , from hundreds to hundreds of thousands)

. The level of service ( LOS), a scale used to determine the operating quality of a roadway segment or inter section b ased on volume

- to

- capacity ratio ( V / C) or average delay, also vary from LOS A, the best and smoothest operating conditions, to LOS F, most congested operating conditions

. Other roadway and traffic volume characteristics such as roadway length, number of lanes and facility type ( e

. g

. , tw o

- lane freeway), right

- of

- way width and pavement width, terrain classification ( e

. g

. , flat), percent of heavy

- duty truck traffic, and accident rates ( e

. g

. , number of accidents per million vehicle miles traveled) also vary substantially depending on the loc ation

. In addition to the roadway systems, circulation networks provide additional transportation opportunities and include mass transit, airports, and non

- motorized travel ( e

. g

. , pedestrian and bicycle paths)

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

109 2

. Regulatory Setting

Key regulations and polices applicable to utilities for the proposed ACC Program are summarized in Table 3.P

- 1

. See Table 3.D

- 1 for a description of SB 375.

Table 3.P

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Transportation and Traffic

Regulation Description

Federal

40 CFR, Part 77 ( Federal Aviation Administration) Requires a determination of no hazard to air navigation for structures that will be more than 200 feet above ground level

. State

California Vehicle Code ( VC) Sections 353; 2500

- 2505; 31303

- 31309; 32000

- 32053; 32100

- 32109; 31600

- 31620; California Health and Safety Code Section 2 5160 et seq

. These regulate the highway transport of hazardous materials

.

VC Sections 13369; 15275 and 15278 These address the licensing of drivers and the classification of licenses required for the operation of particular types of vehicles and also requires certificates permitting operation of vehicles transporting hazardous materials

. VC Sections 35100 et seq

. ; 35250 et seq

. ; 35400 et seq

. These specify limits for vehicle width, height, and length

.

VC Section 3 5780 This requires permits for any load exceeding Caltrans weight, length, or width standards on public roadways

. California Streets and Highways Code Section 1 17, 660

- 672 This requires permits for any load exceeding Caltrans weight, length, or width standards on County roads

. California Streets and Highways Code Sections 117, 660

- 670, 1450, 1460 et seq

. , and 1480 et
seq

. These regulate permits from Caltrans for any roadway encroachment from facilities that require construction, maintenance, or repairs on or across State highways and County roads

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

110 

### Q

. Utilities and Service Systems

1

. Existing Conditions

a

. Water Supply and Distribution
The principal water su pply facilities in California are operated by the USBR and DWR

. The USBR is a federal agency and it is the largest wholesaler of water in the U.S. and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power ( USBR 201 1a )

. In California, the Mid

- Pacific Region of the USBR is responsible for the management of the Central Valley Project ( CVP)

. The CVP serves farms, homes, and industry in California's Central Valley as well as the major urban centers in the San Francisco Bay Area

. The CVP consists of 20 dams and reservoirs, 11 power plants, and 500 miles of major canals and reaches from the Cascade Mountains near Redding in the north to the Tehachapi Mountains near Bakersfield in the south

. In addition to delivering water for municipal and industrial uses and the environment, the CVP produces electric power and provides flood protection, navigation, recreation, and water quality benefits ( USBR 201 1b )

.

DWR is a State agency that is responsible for managing and implementing the State Water Project ( SWP)

. The SWP is a water storage and delivery system of reservoirs, aqueducts, power plants and pumping plants

. Its main purpose is to store water and distribute it to 29 urban and agricultural water suppliers in Northern California, the San Francisco Bay Area, the San J oaquin Valley, the Central Coast, and Southern California ( DWR 2010)

.
Local water districts, irrigation districts, special districts, and jurisdictions ( e

. g

. , cities and counties) manage and regulate the availability of water supplies and the treatment a nd delivery of water to individual projects

. Depending on their location and the source of their supplies, these agencies may use groundwater, surface water through specific water entitlements, or surface water delivered through the CVP or SWP

. In some

r emote areas not served by a water supply agency, individual developments may need to rely upon the underlying groundwater basin for their water supply

. In these cases, the project would be required to secure a permit from the local land use authority and seek approval for development of the groundwater well ( s)

.

b

. Wastewater Collection and Treatment
The California State Water Resources Control Board ( SWRCB) is the State agency responsible for the regulation of wastewater discharges to surface waters and groundwater via land discharge

. The SWRCB and nine regional water quality control boards ( RWQCB) are responsible for development and enforcement of water quality objectives and implementation plans that protect the beneficial uses of the federal and State waters ( SWRCB 2010)

. The State water board also administer s water rights in California

. The RWQCB’s are responsible for issuing permits or other discharge requirements to individual wastewater dischargers and for ensuring that they are meeting the requi rements of the permit through monitoring and other controls

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

111 Wastewater collection, treatment, and discharge service for developed and metropolitan areas is typically provided by local wastewater service districts or agencies that may or may not be opera ted by the local jurisdiction ( e

. g

. , city or county)

. These agencies are required to secure treatment and discharge permits for the operation of a wastewater facility from the RWQCB

. Wastewater is typically collected from a specific development and conveyed through a series of large pipelines to the treatment facility where it is treated to permitted levels and discharged to surface waters or the land

. In areas that are remote or that are not served by an individual wastewater service provider, devel opments would be required to install an individual septic tank or other on

site wastewater treatment system

. These facilities would need to be approved by the local land use authority and the RWQCB

.

c

. Electricity and Natural Gas
The California Publi c Utilities Commission ( CPUC ) regulates investor

- owned electric and natural gas companies located within California

. The CPUC's Energy Division develops and administers energy policy and programs and monitors compliance with the adopted regulations

. One

- third of California’s electricity and natural gas is provided by one of three companies: Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas and Electric Company ( CPUC 2010).

Locally, energy service is provided by a public or privat e utility

. New development projects would need to coordinate with the local service provider to ensure adequate capacity is available to serve the development

.

d

. Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
State wide, the California Department of Resources Rec ycling and Recovery ( CAL Recycle), which is a department of the California Natural Resources Agency ( CNRA), is responsible for the regulation of the disposal and recycling of all solid waste generated in California

. Cal Recycle acts as an enforcement agen cy in the approval and regulation of solid waste disposal and recycling facilities

. Local agencies can create local enforcement agencies ( LEA) and

, once approved by Cal Recycle

, they can serve as the enforcement agency for landfills and recycling faciliti es with their jurisdictions ( Cal Recycle 201 1 )

. Local agencies or private companies own and operate landfill facilities and solid waste is typically hauled to these facilities by private or public haulers

. Individual projects would need to coordinate with the local service provider and landfill to determine if adequate capacity exists to serve the project

. At this time, propulsion batteries are replaced at authorized original equipment manufacturer ( OEM) service centers if needed. However, vehicle m anufacturers differ in how they are addressing the need to properly handle or dispose of propulsion batteries after they reach the end of their useful life ( e.g., recycling programs, switchable battery). Vehicle manufacturers have not provided specific information about how batteries would be handled after their “second life.” A study at the NationalAdvanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

112 Renewable Energy Laboratory concludes that if second uses for batteries are determined not to be economical then recycling them would be the next economical ly superior option ( Neubauer and Pesaran 2011).

Federal and state agencies also regulate and/or research how automotive propulsion batteries should be handled at the end of their useful life. Regulations under the federal Resource Conservation and Recov ery Act ( RCRA) nickel

- metal hydride batteries and lithium

- ion batteries are classified as non

- hazardous waste and are not required to be recycled. Per RCRA hazardous waste listings & criteria ( 40 CFR 261.4, Exclusions), fully spent consumer lithium batter ies are neither toxic nor reactive and are considered

non

- hazardous ( NEMA 2001).

California’s hazardous waste management regulations classify all types of batteries, including nickel

- metal hydride and lithium

- ion batteries, as hazardous waste when discar ded and must be managed accordingly. More specifically, facilities that treat, store, dispose and recycle batteries in California are also regulated under California’s hazardous waste generator laws and regulations for Universal Waste ( CCR, Title 22, Sect ion 6 6261.9). These facilities are regulated and inspected by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control ( DTSC), which is authorized by U.S. EPA to administer its own hazardous waste program for California. The local Certified Unified Program Agency ( CUPA) is given authority to enforce hazardous waste management laws and regulations at the local level by the Secretary of Cal/EPA. Generators of universal wastes must recycle their waste by relinquishing it to the following: ( 1) a universal wast e handler ( e.g.; household hazardous waste facility, a ‘Take

- it

- Back Partner’ such as retailers or manufacturers); ( 2) a universal waste transporter; or ( 3) a destination facility ( facility permitted by DTSC to treat, store, dispose or recycle).

2

. Regul atory Setting

Key regulations and polices applicable to utilities for the proposed ACC Program are summarized in Table 3.Q

- 1

.

Table 3.Q

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Public Services

Regulation Description

Federal None applicable

. State

California Public Utilities Commission, Section 9 5

- 08

- 038 This section c ontains the rules for planning and construction of new transmission facilities, distribution facilities, and substations

. The CPUC requires permits for the construction of certain pow er line facilities or substations if the voltages would exceed certain thresholds

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

113 Table 3.Q

- 1

. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Public Services

Regulation Description

Section 2 1151

. 9 of the Public Resources Code / Section 1 0910 et seq

. of the Water Code Required the preparation of a water supply assessment ( WSA) for large developments

. These assessments are prepared by public water agencies responsible for providing service and address whether there are adequate existing and projected future water supplies to serve the proposed project

. All projects that meet the qualifications for p reparing a WSA must identify the water supplies and quantities that would serve the project as well as project the total water demand for the service area ( including the project’s water demands) by source in 5

- year increments over a 20

- year period

. This i nformation must include data for a normal, single

- dray, and multiple

- dry years

. The WSA is required to be approved by the water service agency before the project can be implemented

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting Draft Environmental Analysis

114 This page intentionally left blank.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

115 

### 4

. 0 REGULATED COMMUNITY COMPLIANCE RESPONSES

For LEV III and ZEV, the regulated community would be automobile manufacturers . F or CFO, the regulated community would be major refineries an d gasoline importers, which would be required to establish the required minimum number of CFO outlets

. For the ACC program as a whole, f uel producers ( e.g., hydrogen), electricity generators, and mining would also be affected indirectly.

Compliance responses are activities undertaken by regulated communities to comply with regulations

. Compliance activities would change in response to regulatory amendments included in the proposed Advanced Clean Cars ( ACC) Program

. This Environmental Ana lysis ( EA) presents a programmatic evaluation that describes reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the change in compliance responses by regulated communities

. The analysis considers reasonable, potential compliance responses, but do es not speculate as to all of the conceivable iterations of compliance responses that could occur within the passenger vehicle fleet or at the site

or project

- specific level

. It is not possible to know with a reasonable level of certainty the specific a ctions that would be selected by regulated communities to comply with the regulatory changes under the proposed ACC Program

. Individual vehicle manufacturers or major refiners and importers of gasoline could choose other compliance responses that result i n different project impacts

. For the purposes of this EA, the least expensive compliance responses are generally expected to be implemented by covered industries as a whole, although the responses of individual regulated communities within affected indust ries may differ depending on relative compliance costs and other factors

. The following compliance responses have been identified as reasonably foreseeable actions and provide the basis for a reasoned, good

- faith assessment of potential, significant envi ronmental impacts of the regulatory amendments under the proposed ACC Program

. The compliance responses associated with each component of the proposed ACC Program are discussed separately below

.


### A

. Low

- Emission Vehicle and Greenhouse Gas Regulation ( L EV III)

1

. Fleet Mix

The proposed LEV III requirements, particularly the fleet average standards, would affect the mix of vehicle models and types that manufacturers would sell and lease in California

. Table 4

- 1 summarizes projections by ARB staff about how a full

- line manufacturer ( i

. e

. , a company that markets both passenger cars and light

- duty trucks) could meet the LEV III fleet average emission standards for ozone precursors ( e.g., NMOG and NO X ). It is important to note that Table 4

- 1 provides an example of how a manufacturer could comply with the ozone precursor standards, but LEV III also addresses CAPs and GHGs, as discussed below.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

116 Table 4

- 1

. Projected Sales Mix of Light

- Duty Vehicles to Achieve Compliance with LEV III Emission Standards

Year Passenger Cars Fleet Average Standard for Mix

of NMOG+NO X Emissions

( g / mile) LEV 160 ULEV 125 ULEV 70 ULEV 50 SULEV 30 SULEV 20 PZEV PHEV BEV FCV

2015 5% 62% 8 % 0% 0% 0% 21% 2% 1% 0% 0. 1 0 0

2016 3% 50 % 2 3 % 0% 0% 0% 21% 2% 1% 0% 0.09 1

2017 3% 38% 35% 0% 0% 0% 21% 2% 1% 0% 0.084

2018 0% 25 % 4 7% 0% 21% 0% 0% 6 % 1% 0% 0.07 2

2019 0% 14% 55 % 0% 21% 0% 0% 7 % 3 % 1 % 0.06 4

2020 0% 2% 59% 0 % 21% 5% 0% 8 % 4 % 1 % 0.05 4

2021 0% 0% 31 % 28 % 21% 5% 0% 9 % 5 % 2 % 0.04 6

2022 0% 0% 6 % 4 5% 21% 10% 0% 10 % 5 % 2 % 0.0 38

2023 0% 0% 5% 32% 33 % 10% 0% 11 % 6 % 3 % 0.03 5

2024 0% 0% 3% 15% 4 0% 20% 0% 13 % 6 % 3 % 0.0 29

2025 0% 0% 0% 0% 55 % 20% 0% 14 % 6 % 4 % 0.02 5

Year Light

- Duty Truck 1 ( 0

- 3,750 lb LVW) Fleet Average Standard for Mix

of NMOG+NO X Emissions

( g/mile) LEV 160 ULEV 125 ULEV 70 ULEV 50 SULEV 30 SULEV 20 PZEV PHEV BEV FCV

2015 3% 69% 7% 0% 0% 0% 21% 0% 0% 0% 0.102

2016 3% 52% 24% 0% 0% 0% 21% 0% 0% 0% 0.093

2017 0% 44% 35% 0% 0% 0% 21% 0% 0% 0% 0.086

2018 0% 32% 47% 0% 21% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.079

2019 0% 20% 59% 0% 21% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.072

2020 0% 6% 68 % 0 % 21% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.06 2

2021 0% 0% 55 % 19 % 21% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.0 55

2022 0% 0% 1 1 % 5 8 % 21% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.045

2023 0% 0% 0% 51% 39% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.039

2024 0% 0% 0% 33% 47% 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.035

2025 0% 0% 0% 0% 80% 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.028Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

117 Table 4

- 1

. Projected Sales Mix of Light

- Duty Vehicles to Achieve Compliance with LEV III Emission Standards

Year Light

- Duty Truck 2 ( 3,751 lb LVW

– 8,500 lb GVWR) Fleet Average Standard for Mix

of NMOG+NO X Emissions

( g/mile) LEV ULEV ULEV 70 ULEV 50 SULEV 30 SULEV 20 PZEV PHEV BEV FCV

2015 5% 81% 14% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.119

2016 5% 76% 19% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.116

2017 5% 53% 42% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.104

2018 5% 5 3 % 4 2 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.10 4

2019 5% 4 2 % 53 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0. 098

2020 5% 3 6 % 5 9 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.09 5

2021 4% 24 % 72 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.08 7

2022 4% 24 % 4 5 % 27 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.0 81

2023 4% 5% 45 % 30 % 16 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.06 4

2024 3% 0% 20 % 50% 27 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.0 52

2025 2% 0% 0% 25 % 72 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.03 8

Notes: These projections reflect a reasonably representative approach for compliance with the LEV III requirements. Other compliance scenarios that would achieve the fleet average emission standards of the LEV III amendments are conceivable. ARB’ s projec tions are specifically based on how vehicle manufacturers would be expected to respond to the amended standards for criteria air pollutants and precursors of LEV III and do not reflect the amendments to greenhouse gas (GHG) standards of LEV III. These pr ojections do not account for any potential changes in consumer preference regarding the class of vehicles consumers choose to purchase. Consumer preferences can change according to a number of factors, including changes in fuel costs. LEV = Low

- Emission Vehicle; LEV160 = certified to 0.160 g/mi NMOG plus NOx ; ULEV125 = certified to 0.125 g/mi NMOG plus NOx; ULEV = Ultra

- Low

- Emission Vehicle; ULEV 70 = certified to 0.070 g/mi NMOG plus NOx; ULEV 50 = certified to 0.050 g/mi NMOG plus NOx; SULEV 30 = cert ified to 0.030 g/mi NMOG plus NOx; SULEV 20 = certified to 0.020 g/mi NMOG plus NOx; PZEV = Partial Zero Emission Vehicle; PHEV = Plug

- in Hybrid Electric Vehicle; BEV = Battery Electric Vehicle; FCV = Fuel Cell Vehicle. Source: ARB (available in the Staff Report, Section II.A.2)

As shown in Table 4

- 1, a greater proportion of the vehicle fleet would consist of vehicles from the more stringent emission performance classes ( i

. e

. , ULEV 50, SULEV 30, and SULEV 20) in order for manufacturers to comply with the increasingly stringent fleet

average emission standards proposed by the amendments

. Thus, because compliance would be based on this proportion shift n o changes in the amount of overall vehicle manufacturing or deliveries would be expected.

2

. Technolo gy Improvements

To meet the requirements for criteria air pollutant and precursor ( CAP) emissions of the proposed ACC Program, manufacturers would be expected to reduce CAPs using a range of technologies

. Other s pecific technolog y improvements could inclu de load reductions and accessory improvements employed to r educe GHG emissions. Improvements in aerodynamics that reduc e drag coefficients include installation of skirts, air dams, underbody covers, and application of more aerodynamic side viewAdvanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

118 mirrors. I n addition to the standard aerodynamic treatments, a second level of aerodynamic technologies could include active grille shutters, rear visors, and larger under body panels. Additional actions to reduce em issions may include installation of low drag brakes that reduce sliding friction of disc brake pads on rotors, and installation of front or secondary axle disconnects for four

- wheel drive vehicles that reduce energy loss. Improvements to the powertrain ( engines a nd transmissions) and vehicle improvements related to aerodynamics, low rolling resistance tires, auxiliary improvements, mass reduction, electric drive and hybrid systems are further discussed in the LEV III Staff Report, and in the following discussion.

a

. Engine Improvements and Emission Control Systems Manufacturers would be expected to continue to improve valve timing, cylinder deactivation, turbocharging, gasoline direct injection and other systems that would reduce GHG emissions. T o reduce CAPs, m anufacturers would be expected to improve current emission control system technologies across their light

- and medium

duty vehicle fleet

. Based on past compliance with previous versions of the LEV regulation ( i

. e

. , LEV I and LEV II), these improved emission control systems would be expected to include more efficient catalysts, secondary air injection, hydrocarbon adsorbers, and improved evaporative emission control systems

. Similarly, it is expected that the technologies necessary to meet the proposed LEV III evaporative emission standards would generally be the same as the technologies currently used to meet the existing optional zero evaporative standards

. Because the types of technologies used currently would also be employed to meet t he amended regulations, no substantial change in the manufacturing of emissions control equipment would be expected

. These zero evaporative technologies consist of a hydrocarbon scrubber, air intake system element, and additional use of low / no permeation materials

. The hydrocarbon scrubber and the air intake system element both generally consist of activated carbon, which acts to store fuel vapors

. Steel would likely be used as no

permeation material, while various polymer materials, such as ethyl vinyl alcohol and fluorinated polymers, would be used as low

- permeation materials

. ARB staff expects that, for a limited number of vehicle models, a vapor blocking valve would be used to seal vapors in the fuel tank

.

b

. Improved Transmission Efficiency

In r esponse to current and proposed regulations requiring reductions in GHG emissions from motor vehicle s , manufacturers are incorporating improved transmissions on their vehicles

. The transmission types involved include conventional automatic transmissions with up to 8 or 9 speeds; dual clutch automated manual transmissions that offer the efficiency of a manual transmission, but shift gears automatically; and continuously variable t ransmissions ( CVTs) that can change seamlessly through an infinite number of effective gear ratios between maximum and minimum values ( SAE 2011 a )

. Transmission types installed in vehi cles to comply with the proposed GHG emissions reductions would be similar to existing technology and equipment, so substantial changes in manufacturing requirements would not be expected ; however, the volumeAdvanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

119 manufactured could change , but would not be ant icipated to result in a substantial increase in manufacturing capacity

.

c

. Improved Air Conditioning Systems The predominant refrigerant currently used in new vehicles is hydrofluorocarbon

- 134a ( HFC

- 134a), which has a relatively high GWP of 1,430 ( U.S. E PA 2010 a )

. Though the current Pavley regulation s ( which is part of the LEV II regulation) includes a credit incentive for using refrigerants with a GWP of 150 or less, an industry

- wide replacement of HFC

- 134a with such low GWP refrigerants, most likely 2 ,3,3,3

- tetrafluoropropene ( commonly known as HFO

- 1234yf), is would not anticipated to occur until model year 2017 when availability of the new refrigerant increases and its costs decrease ( U.S. E PA 2010 a )

. It is anticipated that auto manufacturers would work with suppliers of air conditioning ( AC) systems to adapt to using HFO

- 1234yf

. Such adaptations would likely include the addition of an internal heat exchanger to maintain AC efficiency

. Some modifications at vehicle assembly plants would also be ne eded to accommodate the mild flammability of HFO

- 1234yf

. By the time LEVIII would go into effect, manufacturers would be familiar with these changes from complying with low

- GWP requirements established by the European Commission that start with model year 2011 ( U.S. E PA 2010 a )

. In addition, the AC service industry would be expected to purchase new machinery and tools for refrigerant recovery, recycling, and recharging and train and certify technicians on proper handling of new refrigerant ( Cancel, 2011)

. Moreover, chemical manufacturers would need to develop new procedures and construct new facilities to produce the new refrigerant ( Honeywell and DuPont, 2010)

. Again, these types of changes are currently in process to serve the European market, so a su bstantial increase in manufacturing capacity would not be expected

. Additionally, in response to current and proposed regulations requiring reductions in GHG emissions from motor vehicles, manufacturers are incorporating improved AC efficiency technologie s in their vehicles. Because the AC hardware installed in vehicles to comply with the proposed GHG emissions reductions would be similar to existing technology and equipment, no substantial changes in manufacturing requirements would be expected.

d

. Lighter Materials Vehicle manufacturers are increasingly seeking to reduce the weight of their vehicles, without compromising vehicle safety, to both reduce emissions and increase fuel efficiency

. Typically, for every 10 percent reduction in vehicle weig ht a 6 to7 percent reduction in GHG emissions is achieved ( Cheah 2007)

. These weight reductions are being achieved through the use of improved vehicle design and lightweight materials, such as high

- strength steel, aluminum, magnesium, plastics and carbon composites ( polycarbonate)

. These materials are already incorporated on vehicles today and would be expected to be increasingly used in future vehicle designs . However, such an increase would not be anticipated to result in a substantial increase in manu facturing capacity , mining, or transportation

. Existing plants would be retooled for manufacturingAdvanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

120 these lighter

- weight materials

. It is expected that more weight reduction would be achieved in heavier vehicle models, as opposed to smaller models, which a lready achieve most of the weight reductions possible without compromising safety or performance

. Thus, the weight reductions would not be expected to alter vehicle safety

.

e

. Low

- Rolling Resistance Tires One of the technologies under development to reduce vehicle emissions and increase fuel efficiency is the development of low

- rolling resistance tires

. Rolling resistance is primarily due to deformation of the tire sidewall

, which generates heat representing lost
energy

. It is estimated that 5 to15 percent of light

- duty fuel consumption is used to overcome rolling resistance in passenger cars ( U.S. Department of Energy 2011)

. While considerable improvements have been made in reducing the rolling resistance of vehicle tires, tire manufacturers have i ndicated that further reductions in rolling resistance are possible, i

. e

. , up to 50 percent

. For most passenger vehicles, a 10 percent reduction in rolling resistance will have the practical effect of reducing emission by about 1 to 2 percent ( TRB 2006)

. These reductions in rolling resistance would be expected through improved tire designs and materials, such as silicon oxide, a principal component of sand and glass

. Low

- rolling resistance tires are currently standard equipment on the Chevrolet Volt and Toyota Prius

. ARB modeled all vehicles using low rolling resistance tires by 2025.

3

. California Evaporative Emission Regulations

The proposed amendments include vehicles certification requirements from zero evaporative emission standards

. Manufacturers would comply with these regulations through testing

. The equipment needed for compliance would not be anticipated to differ substantially from that which is currently used.

4. Manufacturer Size Definition

Two proposed amendments would affe ct the size definitions of manufacturers. First, staff propose to decrease the intermediate volume manufacturer ( IVM) ( i.e., large volume manufacturer [ LVM ] threshold from 60,000 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs on average in California to 20,000 on average ) . Staff a lso propose that two manufacturers’ sales be aggregated for determination of size if one manufacturer owns greater than 33.4 percent of another manufacturer, assuring a level playing field. All current IVMs, except Volvo, Subaru, Jaguar/Land Rover and Mi tsubishi, would be expected to become LVMs in 2018, and meet the full ZEV requirements starting that year. This is definition change and would not be anticipated to result in any physical changes.

5. Amendments to the Environmental Performance Label

M anuf acturer compliance with the Federal Fuel Economy and Environment Label would be deemed compliant with the California Environmental Performance Label

. Thus, vehicles would have one single label that would display its Smog Score and Global Warming Score

. T his would save manufacturers from having to print two separateAdvanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

121 labels as well as from having to report two separate scores for both the state and federal labels

. Reducing the number of labels is preferable to manufacturers because it reduces confusion by consumers who may not easily understand the difference between the two labels, particularly customers in other state s who currently are seeing a California

- based label on their cars

. In response to this regulation, manufacture r s would only present the fed eral label on the vehicles they market , reducing the resources needed to make, print on, and dispose of, a second label.

6

. Amendments to the On

- Board Diagnostic System Requirements

The proposed amendments to the OBD II regulation would consist of clarifi cations and relaxations, which include delays to the required start dates of a few OBD II monitoring requirements

. Manufacturers would be expected to take advantage of the delays to improve their system strategies and develop robust monitors to meet the requirements

.

7

. Amendments to the Specifications for California Certification Fuel Regulation

The proposed E10 Certification Fuel changes apply only to on

- road vehicles, excluding

on

- road motorcycles

. The California certification exhaust test fuel specif ications for the spark

- ignition, off

- road categories ( small off

- road engines, large spark

- ignition engines, recreational marine spark

- ignition engines, and off

- highway recreational vehicles) w ould not change when a new E10

- based certification test fuel is adopted under the LEVIII regulatory proposal.



### B

. Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation ( ZEV)

1

. Fleet Mix

The requirements of the ZEV regulation as proposed for amendment under the ACC Program are designed to allow vehicle manufacturers to comply with these

r equirements in a variety of ways

. While the proposed amendments to the ZEV regulation would require manufacturers to earn a minimum proportion of the required ZEV credits with actual ZEVs ( i

. e

. , battery electric vehicles [BEVs] or hydrogen fuel cell vehic les [FCV]), credits can also be earned from Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles ( TZEVs) ( i

. e

. , plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles)

. Compliance by manufacturers with the ZEV regulation as proposed for amendment would increase the number of ZEVs and TZEVs be ing sold and leased in California , as compared with the current regulation

. Table 4

- 2 summarizes this projected increase

. The ZEV regulation would include flexibilities that allow manufacturers to earn ZEV credits in any number of ways

. ZEVs and TZEVs would earn different amounts of credits, based on the vehicle’s zero emission range, and in some case, the vehicle’s
power

. The proposed ZEV regulation would provide different flexibilities for large

- and intermediate

- volume vehicle manufacturers in meeti ng the requirements

. Large

- volume manufacturers include companies that sell or lease more than 20,000 vehicles per yearAdvanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

122 in California and intermediate volume manufacturers are companies that sell more than 4,500 vehicles per year

. Large volume manufactur er’s account for approximately 97 percent of California’s light

- duty vehicle sales, must produce a minimum amount of credits from ZEVs, and are allowed to earn the rest of their requirement with credits from TZEVs

. Intermediate volume manufacturers may fu lfill their entire requirement with credits from TZEVs

. However, any size manufacturer could, in theory, fulfill its entire requirement with ZEVs

. Some manufacturers are more focused on fulfilling their ZEV requirements with BEV technologies, while other s are more interested in developing FCV s

. Because FCVs have a greater driving range than BEVs, FCVs earn more credit than BEVs

. Also, the all

- electric driving range of TZEVs varies from 10 to over 40 miles; the amount of credit each TZEV earns is linked to its all

- electric range

. Due to these uncertainties and historic banked credits from over compliance in the ZEV regulation from earlier years, ARB staff developed a “likely compliance scenario,” summarized in Table 4

- 2 , which takes into consideration pa st over

- compliance with regulatory requirements, information from vehicle manufacturers, and projected market trends

.

Table 4

- 2

. Projected Numbers of Zero Emission Vehicle Types Sold or Leased in California by Type and by Year

ZEV Type 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

BEV 13,900 27,300 37,700 46,300 52,600 59,500 64,200 65,000

FCVs 2,900 6,200 10,600 15,400 21,600 27,800 35,200 43,600

TZEV 61,300 75,300 89,100 101,900 116,300 131,200 146,900 161,700

Total 78,100 108,800 137,400 163,600 190,500 218,500 246,300 270,700

Notes: ZEV = Zero Emission Vehicle ( i

. e

. , battery electric vehicles and fuel cell vehicles); TZEV = Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles ( i

. e

. , plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles with an electric power range of 20 miles); BEV = Battery Electric Vehicle; FCV = Fuel Cell Vehicle ( hydrogen)

. Source: ARB’s projections of a “likely compliance scenario” are based on past over

- compliance with regulatory requirements, information from vehicle manufacturers, and projected market trends

. More detailed are provided in the Staff Report

.

2

. Battery Production

The increase in BEVs and TZEVs ( e.g

. PHEVs ) produced by manufacturers to meet requirem ents of the amended ZEV regulation would be accompanied by an increase in the production of propulsion batteries

. Current BEV and TZEV battery technology involves use of nickel

- metal or lithium

- ion propulsion batteries

.

Table 4

- 3 shows ARB’s estimates o f the amount of propulsion batteries that would be produced by vehicle manufacturers to meet the proposed requirements of the ZEV regulation

. The projected quantities listed in Table 4

- 3 represent the amount of battery capacity, which is the amount of ene rgy stored in a battery

. Battery capacity is used to express the projected increase in propulsion batteries because the amount of battery capacity installed in each vehicle would vary according to its size and desired range

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

123 Table 4

- 3

. Projected Annual Increase in Battery Production ( MW

- hr)

Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Capacity of Propulsion Batteries 108 541 838 1,172 1,459 1,755 2,008 2,182

Notes: MW

- hr =megawatt hours = 1,000,000 watts Source: Projections estimated by ARB 2011 b

It is expected that the longevity of batteries would be sufficient to serve their function during the full operational life of the vehicle

. For instance, the nickel

- metal hydride battery included in the 2011 Toyota Prius ( non

- plug

- in) is designed to last the life of the car or approximately 180,000 miles ( Toyota Prius Battery 2011)

. Because the number of BEVs and TZEVs produced would generally be offset by a corresponding decrease in production of internal combustion engi ne

- based vehicles, a net increase in vehicle production facilities would not be anticipated

. As the demand for propulsion batteries increases, however, new manufacturing facilities may need to be constructed and / or existing plants would be retooled to inc rease production

. Some vehicle manufacturers would produce the batteries used in their cars while others would purchase the batteries from suppliers

. Lithium

- ion batteries require higher quality

control than nickel

- metal batteries, often including clean

- room production facilities, which may necessitate the building of new production facilities

.

3

. Lithium Demand

More vehicle manufacturers are considering the use of lithium

- ion batteries in their BEV and TZEV models instead of nickel

- metal hydride batt eries ( USGS 2011)

. Lithium is a favorable material, because it is the lightest of all metals and an excellent conductor of electricity ( Gruber et al

. 201 1 )

. Lithium

- ion batteries are advantageous, because they have no memory effect, little discharge, and no scheduled cycling is required to prolong their useful life ( Notter et al

. 2010 )

. Memory effect is an alleged effect observed in nickel cadmium rechargeab le batteries that causes them to hold less charge. It describes one very specific situation in which certain NiCd batteries gradually lose their maximum energy capacity if they are repeatedly recharged after being only partially discharged. The battery app ears to "remember" the smaller capacity

. In addition, for production volumes greater than 300,000 units per year, lithium

- ion batteries are projected to be less expensive to produce than nickel

- metal hydride batteries ( Snyder, Yang, and Miller 2009)

. A s tudy performed at the University of Michigan’s Center for Sustainable Systems concluded that the world supply of lithium is sufficient to support lithium demand, even with rapid and widespread adoption of electric vehicles ( Gruber et al

. 2011 )

. USGS has i dentified the world supply of economically recoverable lithium to 33 million metric tons ( USGS 2011) whereas the highest demand scenario evaluated by Gruber et al

. ( 2011) would not exceed 20 million metric tons for the period 2010 to 2100

. Recycled lithi um content has been historically insignificant but has increased steadily due to the growth in the consumption of lithium batteries ( USGS 2011)

. One U.S.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

124 company has recycled lithium metal and lithium

- ion batteries since 1992 at its facility in British Co lumbia and in 2009, the U.S. Department of Energy awarded $ 9

. 5 million to a company to construct an advanced lithium battery recycling facility in Ohio ( Toxco Inc

. 2009; USGS 2011)

.

4

. Battery Disposal, Recycling, and Exchange

At this time, PHEV and BE V propulsion batteries are replaced at authorized original equipment manufacturer ( OEM) service centers if needed

. However, vehicle manufacturers differ in how they are addressing the need to properly handle or dispose of propulsion batteries after they r each the end of their useful life in the PHEVs and BEVs they power

. Toyota has a battery recycling program, in which dealerships will provide a $150 recycle fee to dismantlers that turn in used high

- voltage Toyota batteries ( Toyota Motor Corporation 2011 a; Toyota Motor Corporation 2011 b)

. Both General Motors and Nissan have made arrangements with power companies to develop new ways of using old batteries, including storage of solar or wind energy during peak generating times for later use ( renewable powe r management), backup power management, and peak price arbitrage ( St

. John 2010; Recycling International 2011; Nissan Motor Co., Ltd

. 2011)

. This approach acknowledges that a large amount of energy remains stored even in partially discharged batteries

. S econdary uses for advanced batteries are also being investigated at a number of research institutions ( NREL 2011 ; Neubauer and Pesaran 2011; Williams 2011)

. An electric taxi battery switchable battery project is underway in Japan and will be developed in San Francisco ( Better Place 2010 )

. However, no vehicle manufacturer has yet announced plans to produce a switchable battery electric vehicle

. Moreover, vehicle manufacturers have not provided information about how batteries would be handled after their “ second life.” A study at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory concludes that if second uses for batteries are determined not to be economical then recycling them would be the next economically superior option ( Neubauer and Pesaran 2011)

.

Federal and state agencies also regulate and / or research how automotive propulsion batteries should be handled at the end of their useful life

. Regulations under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA) nickel

- metal hydride batteries and lithium

- ion batteries are classified as non

- hazardous waste and are not required to be recycled

. Per RCRA hazardous waste listings & criteria ( 40 CFR 261

. 4, Exclusions), fully spent consumer lithium batteries are neither toxic nor reactive and are considered

non

- haz ardous ( NEMA 2001)

. Lithium is not included on the list of metals that the Occupational Safety & Health Administration considers to be toxic ( OSHA 2011), nor does it exhibit any one of the hazardous characteristics according to U.S. E PA’s Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure

. While there is no lithium metal present in a fully spent lithium

- ion battery, the larger lithium

- ion battery cells used for automotive propulsion reach the end of their useful life before they are completely spent

.

No netheless, U.S. EPA does recognize that lithium

- ion batteries used for vehicle propulsion are a new and emerging technology and are being studied further

. U.S. EPA formed the Lithium

- ion Batteries and Nanotechnology Partnership in June 2009 toAdvanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

125 conduct a s creening

- level life cycle assessment of current and emerging lithium

- ion batteries and battery components ( e

. g

. , battery anodes made from single

- wall carbon nanotubes) used in TZEVs, ATZEVs, and BEVs ( U.S. E PA 2010 b )

. Members of the partnership include ba ttery manufacturers, research institutions, battery recycling companies, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory, and the Environmental Defense Fund

. The Partnership is examining the potential environmental impacts of lithium

- ion batte ries, including the extraction and acquisition of raw materials, materials processing, product manufacturing, produce use, and final disposal or disposition

. The partnership will also determine whether lithium

- ion battery systems present environmentally p referable options to existing systems such as the use of lead

- acid batteries in internal combustion systems

. California’s hazardous waste management regulations classify all types of batteries

, including nickel

- metal hydride and lithium

- ion batteries, as hazardous waste when discarded and must be managed accordingly

. More specifically, facilities that treat, store, dispose and recycle batteries in California are also regulated under California’s hazardous waste generator laws and regulations for Universa l Waste ( CCR, Title 22

, S ection 6 6261

. 9)

. These facilities are regulated and inspected by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control ( DTSC), which is authorized by U.S. EPA to administer its own hazardous waste program for California

. T he local Certified Unified Program Agency ( CUPA) is given authority to enforce hazardous waste management laws and regulations at the local level by the Secretary of Cal / EPA

. Generators of universal wastes must recycle their waste by relinquishing it to t he following: ( 1) a universal waste handler ( e

. g

. ; household hazardous waste facility, a ‘Take

- it

- Back Partner’ such as retailers or manufacturers); ( 2) a universal waste transporter; or ( 3) a destination facility ( facility permitted by DTSC to treat, sto re, dispose or recycle)

.

5

. Plug Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

Based on the data summarized in Table 4

- 2, there would be approximately 367,000 BEVs and 883,000 TZEVs operating in California in 2025

. This growth in plug electric vehicles would be accompanied by increased demand for electric charging infrastructure

. Virtually all plug electric vehicles require at least one readily available charging station at their “home” location and national travel survey data indicate that vehicles spend 66 percent of their time parked at this their “home” location ( EPRI 2011)

. Thus, it is anticipated that plug electric vehicles, both BEVs and PHEVs, would primarily be charged in residential areas during hours between late afternoon and early morning

. A su rvey conducted by EPRI and Southern California Edison about consumer’s perceptions of plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles found that 95 percent of respondents would prefer to charge their electric vehicle at home ( EPRI and SCE 2010)

. Nonetheless, some vehicl e charging at workplaces and public settings may occur if electric vehicle supply equipment is available

. Approximately 1,300 public charging stations are currently being upgraded to the current plug standard and federal programs are funding the installat ion of close to 2,000 additional public charging stations in California

. ( California Plug

- in Vehicle Collaborative, 2010)Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

126 6

. Electricity Demand

The charging of BEVs and TZEVs has the potential for both positive and negative

e ffects to the electric grid. The timing of charging is a key determining factor. For residential charging, the general case is that the vehicle will begin charging after it arrives at home and is plugged in. National Personal Transportation Survey data indicate that the peak arrive time is 5

- 6 p

. m

. ; however, only about 12 percent of vehicles arrive home during this hour, leading to a distribution of charging onset times. This results in an effective peak charging load of about 700 watts per vehicle. Thus, while residential c harging power levels vary from about 1.4 to 7.7 kW, the average effect of a single vehicle on the electric system is far lower. There are significant efforts underway to alter the load shape generated by vehicle charging, whether by use of electricity pri cing incentives, actively managed or smart charging, or onboard programming of charging times. These would have the effect of moving the load off the peak. At a system level, due to diversity, the electricity demand of these types of vehicles is relative ly low, resulting in minimal effects to utility generation and transmission assets, particularly in the near term. According to the Electric Power Research Institute, the potential stresses on the electric grid can be avoided through asset management,
sys tem design practices, and managed charging to shift a significant amount of the load away from system peak (Electric Power Research Institute 2011)

.

7

. Fuel Cell Production

The increase in FCVs produced by manufacturers to meet requirements of the

amen ded ZEV regulation would be accompanied by an increase in the production of hydrogen fuel cells

. As the demand for automotive fuel cells increases, new manufacturing facilities may need to be constructed and / or existing plants would be retooled to increas e production

. Some vehicle manufacturers would produce fuel cells in their own facilities cars while others would purchase the fuel cells from suppliers

. However, because the number of FCVs produced would generally be offset by a corresponding decrease i n production of internal combustion engine

- based vehicles, a net increase in vehicle production facilities would not be anticipated

.

8

. Platinum Demand

Platinum is a vital component of proton exchange membrane fuel cells, which is the leading type of f uel cell that would be used in FCVs

. The proton exchange membrane fuel cell’s primary advantages include low operating temperature ( approximately 80 degrees Celsius), high electric current densities, fast start capability, no corrosive fluid spillage haza rd, low weight, small size, and potentiall y low

- cost to manufacture ( Spiegel 2004)

. Platinum serves as the catalyst that splits hydrogen into ions and electrical
current ( Bourzac 2008)

. Thus, increased production and sales of FCVs would be accompanied by an increase in demand for platinum and platinum

- group metals

. However, the leading demand sector for platinum

- group metals is currently catalysts to decrease emissions of CAPs in both light

- and heavy

- duty vehicles ( USGS 2011)

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

127 9

. Fuel Cell Disposal, Recycling, and Exchange

Fuel cells for hybrid vehicles are manufactured once for each vehicle, and are designed to last for the lifetime of the vehicle, which is somewhere between 150,000 and 200,000 miles, or 15 to 20 years ( HybridCars.com 2011)

. Replacement costs for spent fuel cells remains largely unknown because they are seldom replaced; however, there are some anecdotal reports of total battery replacements costing about $3,000 ( HybridCars.com 2006a )

. Eventually the batteries will no longer h old a significant charge and will need to be properly managed at the end of their life. Once the vehicle battery can no longer be used for its intended purpose, it becomes a waste. In California, all types of batteries are considered to be a hazardous wa ste and are managed under the Universal Waste Rule, unless determined they do not exhibit a characteristic of a hazardous waste. The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s ( DTSC) Universal Factsheet noted that, “Universal waste batteries include recharg eable nickel

- cadmium batteries, silver button batteries, mercury batteries, small sealed lead acid batteries ( burglar alarm and emergency light batteries), most alkaline batteries, carbon

- zinc batteries, and any other batteries that exhibit a characteristi c of a hazardous waste.” DTSC had earlier noted on their website ( since removed) that ‘Per this definition, hybrid electric vehicle batteries may also be considered Universal Wastes

-- check with the manufacturer of the vehicle for further information abo ut the composition of such batteries’ ( DTSC 2010)

. While battery toxicity may be a concern, today's hybrids use nickel

– metal hydride ( NiMH) batteries or Lithium

- Ion batteries, which are not environmentally problematic, as are the rechargeable nickel cadm ium or non

- rechargeable metallic lithium batteries. Some manufacturers will recycle spent batteries reducing the need for disposal the potential for toxic hazards ( HybridCars.com 2006b) . Lithium

- Ion cells contain no heavy metals, nor any toxic materials ( TeslaMotors.com 2008) . Unlike caustic lead acid car batteries, advanced Lithium

- Ion batteries do not use harmful acids or metals, such as lead, to store electrical power. Lithium

- Ion batteries use copper, cobalt, iron and nickel, and are considered safe for landfill disposal and incinerators ( HybridCars.com 2009) ; however, it is currently illegal in most state s to dispose of any Lithium

- Ion batteries as municipal or household waste. Lithium is fairly valuable, as are the other materials involved, and th ere is economic incentive to reuse the components.

Manufacturers are currently working on battery recycling infrastructure, and are committed to supporting a responsible disposal and recycling infrastructure for spent batteries, and there are plans to co nstruct America's first recycling facility for Lithium

- Ion vehicle batteries via a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. To encourage recycling, two automobile manufacturers place decals with a toll

- free number on their hybrid battery packs. One offe rs a $200 incentive to ensure that every battery comes back to the company, and has a comprehensive battery recycling program in place and has been recycling nickel

- metal hydride batteries since 1998. The other manufacturer collects the batteries and tran sfers them to a preferred recycler to follow their prescribed process: disassembling and sorting the materials; shredding the plastic material;Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

128 recovering and processing the metal; and neutralizing the alkaline material before sending it any waste material to a landfill ( HybridCars.com 2006b)

. Batteries that power hybrid vehicles will be recycled at recycling facilities, where they will be transformed into valuable scrap commodities like cobalt, copper, nickel and lithium carbonate, which can then be used to more efficiently produce another battery. At the battery recycling plants, the recycling process begins with manually sorting the batteries according to their chemistries ( may also be done prior to arrival)

. NiCd, NiMH, Lithium

- Ion and lead acid are often placed in designated boxes at the collection point. Then combustible materials, such as plastics and insulation, are removed using a gas

fired thermal oxidizer. Gases from the thermal oxidizer are sent to the plant’s scrubber where they are neutrali zed to remove pollutants. The process leaves the clean, naked cells, which contain valuable metal content. The cells are then chopped into small pieces, which are heated until the metal liquefies. Non

- metallic substances are burned off; leaving a black sla g on top that is removed with a slag arm. The different alloys settle according to their weights and are skimmed off ( Buchmann 2001)

. There is one battery recycling facility in Lancaster, California that collects spent batteries and recycles them. A non

- profit corporation was founded to promote the collection and recycling of rechargeable batteries in North America, and there are several facilities in the United State s that recycle spent batteries. Europe and Asia are also active in recycling spent batt eries and have developed technology to retrieve cobalt and other precious metals from spent Lithium Ion batteries. Lithium can be re

- used repeatedly, reducing the concern of potential shortages in the future.

The Society of Automotive Engineers formed a Co mmittee for Fuel Cell Standards that has published “Recommended Practice to Design for Recycling Proton Exchange Membrane ( PEM) Fuel Cell Systems”. This publication provides guidance about which advises manufacturers to consider environmental impacts and recommended practices when producing recyclable fuel cells for automotive use. More specifically, the report explains ways fuel cell design can account for the need to disassemble and recycle the product at the end of its useful life.

Carbon nanotubes c ould replace expensive platinum catalysts and help finally make fuel cells economical

. The California Department of Toxics Substances Control is currently reviewing waste issues associated with nanotechnologies, including carbon nanotubes which are used i n fuel cells ( Kang 2010).

Used fuel cells are classified as ig ni table hazardous waste under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

. The Society of Automotive Engineers formed a Committee for Fuel Cell Standards that has published “Recommended Practice to Design for Recycling Proton Exchange Membrane ( PEM) Fuel Cell Systems”

. This publication advises manufacturers to consider environmental impacts and recommended practices when producing recyclable fuel cells for automotive use

. More specifically, the report explains ways fuelAdvanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

129 cell design can account for the need to disassemble and recycle the product at the end of its useful life ( SAE 2011b)

.

10

. Hydrogen Fueling Infrastructure

The number of FCVs entering the vehicle fleet is particularly important, because it serves as the trigger that activates the CFO regulation, which is described below in Chapter II, Section C

. Deta il about the entry of FCVs into the state wide fleet, associated demand for hydrogen fueling stations, and the construction and operation of hydrogen fueling stations is included in the discussion of Clean Fuels Outlets in Section C below.



### C

. Clean Fuels Outlets

1

. Triggering of the Clean Fuels Outlet Requirements

Under the Clean Fuels Outlet ( CFO) regulation, requirements for new hydrogen fuel outlets would be activated when Department of Motor Vehicles records and automaker forecasts indicate that, in three years, the total number of FCVs in an air basin would meet or exceed the regional trigger level of 10,000 FCVs. It is more likely that the CFO regulation would initially be triggered by the air basin

- wide trigger level of 10,000 FCVs rather than th e state wide trigger level of 20,000 FCVs because of the spatial distribution of residential and vehicle population across the State

. Because the ZEV regulation would be flexible in that manufacturers could fulfill their requirements by marketing hydrogen FCVs, as well as other types of vehicles, it cannot be determined ahead of time exactly when the CFO regulation would be activated by the regional or state wide trigger levels. Nonetheless, ARB staff developed a range of compliance scenarios based on conf idential surveys of vehicle manufacturers. At one of the fastest rates, the state wide vehicle fleet could consist of up to 53,000 FCVs fleet during the 2015

- 2017 timeframe. At the slowest entry rate the state wide fleet would not include 20,000 FCVs until 2020 with the10

, 000 unit trigger level possibly being reached in an air basin in 2018. These two scenarios named fast entry (Upper Bound) and slow entry (Lower Bound) respectively, are discussed in greater detail below.

a. Fast

- Entry of Fuel Cell Vehicles into the Vehicle Fleet

In early 2011, ARB, the California Energy Commission, and the California Fuel Cell Partnership conducted a confidential survey of vehicle manufacturers on FCV production and rollout plans, including vehicle numbers and deployment regions ( CEC 201 1 , p. 56). Automakers were asked to assume that hydrogen fueling infrastructure would be in

- place ahead of FCV rollouts. This assumption allowed each manufacturer to base its estimates on the status of its F CV technology development and its ability to achieve production numbers necessary to reach an economy of scale suitable for commercialization, including production facilities and supply chains. The results of this survey, which reflect a fast

- entry of FCV s into the fleet, are summarized in Table 4

- 4

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

130 Table 4

- 4

. Projected Number of Fuel Cell Vehicles Entering the Vehicle Fleet by Year for the Upper Bound Scenario

Region 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

- 2017

California State wide 253 312 430 1,389 53,000

South Coast Air Basin 197 240 347 1,161 34,230

Notes: Projections of FCVs are based on a confidential survey of vehicle manufacturers conducted by the California Energy Commission and The California Fuel Cell Partnership and, thus, do not consider over

- compliance with the proposed ZEV regulation by veh icle manufacturers. The South Coast Air Basin consists of all of Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardin o counties and is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Source: CEC 201 1 , p.56.

While the air basins where new FCVs would be sold or leased are not specified by the ZEV regulation, it is anticipated that most of the early FCVs would be sold or leased for operation in the South Coast Air Basin where several hydrogen stations are or will soon be operational. According to the FCV projections for the Upper Bound scenario, the regional trigger of 10,000 FCVs could be activated within the South Coast Air Basin as early as 2015, as shown in Table 4

- 5, with the state wide trigger of 20,000 FCVs activated shortly thereafter.

b. Slow

- Entry of Fuel Cell Vehicles into the Vehicle Fleet ( Lower Bound Scenario) To develop a compliance scenario in which FCVs would enter the vehicle fleet at a slow pace, ARB assumed manufacturers would sell or lease a mix of BEVs, FCVs, and PHEVs to meet the proposed ZEV regulation requirement to have the state wide fleet be 16 percent ZEVs by 2025. This scenario may also be referred to as a Lower Bound compliance scenario. Table 4

- 5 shows the number and mix of BEVs and FCVs that could enter the state wide vehicle fleet under a minimum compliance scenario. This set of projections is based on the ZEV “likely compliance scenario” summarized on Table 4

- 2. Table 4

- 5 also shows how the cumulative number of FCV w ould grow over ime.

Table 4

- 5

. Projected Number of Fuel Cell Vehicles Entering the Vehicle Fleet by Vehicle Type and Year for a Lower Bound Scenario

ZEV Type 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

BEVs

— 14,000 27,000 38,000 46,000 53,000 60,000 64,000 65,000

FCVs

— 3,000 6,000 11,000 15,000 22,000 28,000 35,000 44,000

Combined

— 17,000 33,500 49,000 61,000 75,000 88,000 99,000 109,000

Cumulative FCVs 10,500 13,500 19,500 30,500 45,500 67,500 95,500 130,500 174,000

Notes: Cumulative totals do not reflect fleet turnover, which is the rate at which consumers purchase new vehicles to replace old

ones. ZEV = Zero Emission Vehicle; BEV = Battery Electric Vehicle; FCV = Fuel Cell Vehicle. Source: ARB’s projections of a “likely compliance scenario” are based on past over

- compliance with regulatory requirements, information from vehicle manufacturers, and projected market trends. More detailed are provided in the Staff Report,Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

131 According to the projections for the Lower Bound scenario, the regional CFO trigger of 10,000 ZEVs would be activated in 2018 assuming 75 percent of the total FCVs are placed in one air basin ( which will most likely be the South Coast air basin), and the
state wide trigger of 20,000 ZEVs would be activated in 2020.

2. New Hydrogen Fueling Stations

The CFO regulation would be activated once the air basin

- wide trigger level of 10,000 FCVs is expected to be met. ARB would then calculate the volume of hydrogen fuel the FCV fleet would demand, subtract the fuel availab ility at the time, and determine the additional number of hydrogen fuel stations needed to meet the projected demand. The requirement to build new stations would then be allocated to the major refiners and importers of gasoline based on their annual share of the gasoline market. Figure 4

- 1 illustrates each refiner/importer’s share of the total gasoline produced or imported into California in 2010 and Table 4

- 6 summarizes how the required new stations could be divided among each refiner/importer once the t rigger level of 10,000 FCVs is reached in an air basin.

Figure 4

- 1

. Market Share of Major Refiners and Importers of Gasoline ( 2010)

Source: BOE 2010Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

132 Table 4

- 6

. Projected Allocation of New Hydrogen Fuel Stations

Projected Hydrogen Vehicle Fleet in a Single Air Basin ( FCVs) 10,200
Hydrogen Fuel Market

Demand, annual ( kg/yr) 3,000,000

Pre

- Existing Supply, annual ( kg/yr) 1,700,000
Deficit, annual ( kg/yr) 1,300,000 Deficit, average daily ( kg/day) 3,560
Activated CFO Requirements and Market Share

2010 Market Share ( %) Hydrogen Fuel ( kg/day) Stations

Total 100% 3,560 9

BP 22% 783 2

Chevron 20% 712 2

Tesoro 15% 534 1 ConnocoPhillips 15% 534 1

Valero 13% 463 1
Equilon ( Shell) 8% 284 1

ExxonMobil 7% 249 1

Notes: The information presented in this table represents a hypothetical scenario only. Values in the table reflect how the requirements to build new hydrogen fuel stations would be allocated based on total demand ( using EMFAC VMT data and a fleet

average fuel economy of 67 mi/kg), pre

- existing supply, and the market share of various refiners and importers of gasoline under the fast

- entry scenario of FCVs entering the vehicle fleet in the South Coast Air Basin. The total number of new hydrogen fuel stations required would also vary according the proportion of new FCVs that are part of an organization’s fleet and have thei r own privately operated fueling station. FCV = Fuel Cell Vehicle; kg/yr = kilograms per year; kg/day = kilograms per day Source: Sample calculations provided by ARB.

As shown in the example in Table 4

- 6 , a minimum of nine new hydrogen stations would be required in the South Coast Air Basin when the trigger level of 10,000 FCVs is reached in the air basin. Based on the Upper Bound scenario presented in Table 4

- 6

, this trigger level and associated allotment of new hydrogen fuel stations could occur as early as 2015.

Starting in 2016 in the Upper Bound Scenario, the number of vehicles state wide w ould exceed the 20,000 state wide trigger requiring the construction of 39 additional stations.

Under the Lower Bound compliance scenario the regional trigger would be reached in the South Coast Air Basin requiring five new hydrogen stations in 2018 and ni ne additional stations in 2019. By 2020, 26 new stations would be required state wide.

Once notified of their obligation, responsible parties would have approximately 2

- 1/2 years to meet fulfill their respective allocation requirements.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

133 3. Locations of Hydrogen Fuel Outlets

When ARB assigns the allocations for new hydrogen fuel outlets, ARB would also inform refiners/importers of the general geographic areas where stations would be most useful to and valued by FCV drivers, but each refiner/importer would be responsible for selecting specific station locations.

While vehicle deployment projections are greatest in the South Coast Air Basin, significant vehicle deployments are also planned for the San Francisco Bay Area ( California Fuel Cell Partnership 20 09). However, once FCVs reach commercial viability and technology acceptance becomes widespread, the market would dictate where new FCVs are placed. As explained in Chapter II, Section C , it would be dependent u pon manufacturers to identify new geographi c market sectors and convey this information to ARB in their annual FCV projections.

It is anticipated that new individual hydrogen fueling facilities would be constructed at existing public retail gasoline service stations that are already managed by th e retail branches of the respective refiners/importers of gasoline. These locations would also likely be in urban areas where they are positioned to serve the most drivers. Thus, it is unlikely that new hydrogen fuel outlets would be located at greenfiel d sites ( land not previously developed), and that they would be built in locations consistent with local zoning.

4. Construction of Hydrogen Fueling Facilities

Building a new hydrogen fueling facility would typically take place at an existing retail
ga s station. The facilities and equipment required for hydrogen fueling could fit within the available square footage of larger gas station sites ( i.e., within the same footprint of a carwash). Development of a new facility would include obtaining the stan dard design and building approvals and permits from the City, County and State authorities having jurisdiction. For the equipment area, construction would typically include minor trenching and filling for utilities and pouring concrete foundations for wal ls and equipment pads. Major equipment present at the station would include hydrogen storage tanks that hold either liquid or compressed gas, a hydrogen compression system, a refrigeration/cooling unit, safety monitors and sensors, and a system control
pa nel. The hydrogen dispenser would typically be added to the end of an existing fueling island. However, in some cases, a gasoline dispenser may be removed and replaced with a hydrogen dispenser, or a separate stand

- alone hydrogen dispensing island with o r without a canopy may be added to the station. Although there is no standard station size, small volume hydrogen stations ( 100

- 250 kg/day dispensing capacity) today typically require approximately 700

- 800 square feet of surface area for equipment.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

134 5. Hydrogen Station Operations

Like at a gasoline station, a FCV pulls up to a hydrogen dispenser that is designed and built to appear like a gasoline dispenser. The dispenser nozzle looks similar to a nozzle on a natural gas or propane dispenser. The nozz le locks on to the receptacle on the vehicle and, when the seal is tight, gaseous hydrogen fuel flows into the tank. Depending on the vehicle and tank size, a full fill, from empty can take from 3 to 5 minutes ( California Fuel Cell Partnership 2011 ). Hyd rogen fuel dispensers, depending on station design, can typically fuel four to eight vehicles per hour. Implementation of CFO would require that compliant stations satisfy the fueling protocol for light duty hydrogen powered vehicles specified in SAE TIR J2601 ( SAE 2010)

. Like gasoline stations, most hydrogen stations have their onsite fuel supply delivered by a tanker truck. Gaseous hydrogen is stored in banks of long narrow tanks secured to a truck trailer bed ( referred to as a tube trailer), and liquid hydrogen is stored in large above

- ground tanks. The liquid hydrogen vaporizes at ambient temperature to a
gaseous state and is compressed before dispensing into the FCV. Hydrogen stored in
gaseous state usually undergoes additional compression before di spensing. Hydrogen delivery frequency depends on the amount stored at each station, state of the hydrogen stored ( gaseous or liquid) and demand for hydrogen at the station In the early years when there are relatively few FCVs, deliveries of hydr o gen in a gaseous state would occur no more than once a week, and liquid deliveries would occur approximately once per month. Deliveries of gaseous hydrogen involve replacing an empty tube trailer with a full one, a process that takes less than one hour. Deliver y of liquid hydrogen involves the transfer of liquid hydrogen from the tanker truck to the station’s storage tank, a process that would typically require approximately 2 hours.

Some stations produce hydrogen onsite through electrolysis or steam methane

r eformation ( SMR). An electrolyzer uses electrical power to separate water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. A SMR generates steam, and uses it to separate the hydrogen from the natural gas molecule. The hydrogen is then purified, stored and then
compr essed for dispensing. Maintenance of the station consists of regular safety checking of hoses, nozzles and related equipment, calibration of sensors and dispensers , compressor repairs, valve/solenoid checks and normal lubrication.

6. Hydrogen Supply

Usi ng the fast

- rate scenario for FCVs entering the vehicle fleet, the total hydrogen demand when the 10,000 FCV trigger is activated in the South Coast Air Basin could represent 1.1 percent of the hydrogen supply in that area. Under the same fast

- entry

scena rio, total state wide demand in 2020 would represent 3.9 percent of the merchant hydrogen supply, and in 2024 ( when the regulation sunsets), it could represent 9.2 percent.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

135 Using the more conservative slow

- rate scenario for FCVs entering the vehicle fleet, the total state wide hydrogen demand in 2020 could represent 1 percent of the merchant hydrogen supply, and in 2028, it would represent 9 percent.

7. Hydrogen Production P lants

Recently, California has favored hydrogen fueling stations using delivered hydrogen with central production over stations that produce hydrogen on site ( CEC 201 1 ). As demand increases, however, on

- site reformation may begin to compete on a cost basi s with delivered hydrogen. For delivered gaseous hydrogen, modifications of the central plants may be necessary to further purify the hydrogen so that it meets the purity standards required for fuel cell vehicles. Hydrogen as a transportation fuel requir es higher purity levels than hydrogen for industrial uses because fuel cells stack membranes are sensitive to impurities ( CEC 201 1 ). Plant modifications are also necessary so that purified hydrogen can be compressed and dispensed into delivery trailers. The construction work associated with these plant modifications would have to satisfy State and local requirements for permitting, hazardous materials, and other resource areas, which are typically handled by local agencies. Additional land may be require d to install the equipment, which may or may not fit within the hydrogen plant’s existing fence line. Any earthwork activities that could generate dust would have to be conducted in accordance with local ordinances regarding dust and earthwork. Emissions associated with the operation of the hydrogen purification and compression equipment would be subject to the authority of the local air pollution control district. Any release of combustible gases could be vented through the facility’s existing flare
sys tem. Hazardous wastes, such as lubrication oil waste and catalyst waste associated with the purification equipment, would be generated in small quantities. Existing hydrogen production facilities would manage additional hazardous wastes associated with t he new operations according to their existing hazardous waste permits.

It is important to note that, once the state wide demand for hydrogen reaches 3.5 million kilograms per year, the California standards for hydrogen production will be in place, which r equire that 33 percent of the hydrogen that is produced for transportation be made from eligible renewable resources ( California Public Utilities Code Section 3 99.12). This requirement will eventually present a business case for the construction of new hy drogen plants that produce hydrogen from renewable resources such as biogas or biomass. Recently, the world’s first combined heat, hydrogen, and electric power system using biogas from the Orange County Sanitation District’s wastewater treatment plant sta rted in Fountain Valley, CA. This tri

- generation system provides transportation

- grade hydrogen to the public ( approximately 25

- 50 fuel cell electric vehicle fill

- ups per day), 250 kW of electric power to the wastewater treatment plant, and heat that is al so used by the plant ( HTAC 2011). ARB anticipates that as costs come down, more tri

- generation plants could be constructed at wastewater treatment plants to meet increased demand for transportation

- grade hydrogen made from eligible renewable resources. T hese tri

- generation plants may require additional footprint beyond the plant’s existing property line.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

136 

### D. Consumer Response Effects

1. Fleet Turnover and Emissions

ARB’s proposed ACC P rogram would increase new vehicle prices, starting with model
year 2015. Regardless of an increase in price, it is likely that many of the technologies employed by manufacturers that lower GHG emissions and implemented to comply with the regulation ( including the production of ZEVs) would result in vehicles with lower

o perating costs than comparable pre

- regulation vehicles. Changes in vehicle prices and other attributes may affect consumer purchase decisions. For example, not all consumers would be willing to pay more for the vehicle that they might have otherwise
purc hased, and some consumers may purchase a used vehicle instead of a new vehicle that would be in accordance with their respective budgets. Others may wait until the following year, or respond in some other way. Still other consumers may be willing to
pay the additional upfront cost for greater future reductions in operating cost, in which case the vehicle would be more attractive. Such decision changes, referred to as consumer response, can affect the California vehicle fleet mix and possibly emissions. Due to the concurrent tightening of criteria pollutant standards, even if there is a consumer response to potential price increases and changes in operating costs, the ACC program would continue to have a positive effect on tailpipe criteria pollutant emis sions.

Consumer responses that result in increase d traffic and vehicle miles travelled ( VMT) have been factored into the emissions analysis, and are discussed in Chapter V of the LEV III Staff Report.

2. Impacts on Vehicle Sales, Fleet Size and Average Age

The impacts of the proposed regulation were assessed by forecasting a baseline future fleet mix that assumes that, absent the proposed amendments, vehicle prices and operating costs change only in response to the existing National Program requirements for model year 2012

- 2016. This baseline then is compared to a regulatory scenario that takes into account the estimated price and operating cost changes resulting from the proposed Advanced Clean Cars Program.

The LEV III Staff Report data reflect the differences in sales, fleet mix, and average age of the fleet between the baseline and regulation scenarios. Initially, there would be a negligible decrease in sales due to compliance with the criteria pollutant standards, wh ile there is no concurrent reduction in operating costs resulting from these proposed amendments. However, once the GHG standards begin to phase in during model year 2017, the reduced operating costs of new vehicles makes them more attractive to

consumers and total sales would be expected to increase. Sales continue to grow over the baseline until the standards have been fully phased

- in model year 2025. After this point, new vehicles no longer offer any significant advantage in operating costs over used vehicles that become increasingly available on the market. Thus, the change in sales begins to decline, though these levels still represent a relative increase overAdvanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

137 baseline totals. As a result of these increased sales, the fleet continues to grow slowly with time, making the regulation scenario fleet generally larger in all years compared to the baseline fleet. These sales increases also contribute to decreasing the average age of the fleet, implying that households are not holding onto their older vehi cles longer.

3

. Vehicle Miles Travelled and Rebound

The rebound effect refers to an economic theory suggesting consumers would drive more if the vehicles they use are cheaper to operate. This is potentially relevant because many of the emissions control technologies that reduce GHG emissions also serve to lower vehicle operating costs. T he proposed changes of the ACC program would also result in light

- duty vehicles having lower operating costs on a cost

- per

- mile basis. Staff at ARB examined the extent t o which VMT levels in California may increase due to the incremental reduction in operating costs associated with implementation of the proposed regulatory changes under the proposed ACC Program.

The incremental increase in VMT due to rebound effects of the proposed ACC Program was estimated by ARB staff using an econometric model developed by Hymel, Small, and Van Dender ( 2010). The model estimates the elasticity of VMT with respect to operating costs while considering other factors such as income and c ongestion. ARB staff then calculated projections (e.g., likely outcomes) of future rebound effect. Based on these projected response levels, the actual expected changes in VMT were calculated using the projected operating cost reductions that would resul t from the proposed ACC Program. ( See the LEV III Staff Report for additional details on projection methodology.) Likewise, increases in VMT due to rebound would occur in the baseline as a result of both State and national vehicle emission standards tha t are already in place for model years 2012

- 2016

. These changes in VMT are reflected and accounted for in the emission inventories and estimated emission reductions in Section V of the LEV III Staff Report. Staff assumed that the same VMT changes would a pply to all vehicle technology types.Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

138 This page intentionally left blank.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

139 

### 5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel ce lls. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Thus, the impact discussio n below focuses on these particular responses by the regulated community. All other regulated community compliance responses would not be anticipated to result in any physical changes and; thus, would result in no impacts.



### A. Aesthetics

1. Scenic Vistas , Scenic Resources , Visual Character, Light and Glare

As discussed in Chapter 4 , Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in are as with consistent zoning.

However, there is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, especially in regards to new manufacturing plants for producing propulsion batteries and fuel cells and in relation to th e location of viewers. Construction and operation of these, though likely to occur in areas with consistent zoning, could introduce or increase the presence of artificial elements ( e.g., heavy

- duty equipment, removal of existing vegetation, buildings) in areas with national, State , or county designated scenic vistas and/or scenic resources visible from State scenic highways. The visual impact of such development would depend on several variables, including size of facilities, viewing distance, angle of v iew, visual absorption capacities, and the structure placement in the landscape. In addition, operation may introduce substantial sources of nighttime lighting for safety and security purposes. As a result, this impact would be potentially significant.

This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

Mitigation Measure A.1. The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable laws and regulations that provide protection of aesthetic resources. ARB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified facilities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under CEQA. The jurisdictionAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

140 with primary permitting authority o ver a proposed action is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Project

specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental review by agencies with project

- approval auth ority. Recognized practices routinely required to avoid and/or minimize impacts to aesthetic resources include:

• Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance response to the ACC regulations would coordinate with local land use agenc ies to seek entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body shall certify that the environmental document was prepared in compliance with ap plicable regulations and approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental review, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environmental document to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts o f the project.

• The project proponent would color and finish the surfaces of all project structures and buildings visible to the public to ensure that they: ( 1) minimize visual intrusion and contrast by blending with the landscape; ( 2) minimize glare; and ( 3) comply with local design policies and ordinances. The project proponent would submit a surface treatment plan to the lead agency for review and approval.

• To the extent feasible, the sites selected for use as construction staging and laydown areas w ould be areas that are already disturbed and/or are in locations of low visual sensitivity. Where possible, construction staging and laydown areas for equipment, personal vehicles, and material storage would be sited to take advantage of natural screening opportunities provided by existing topography and vegetation.

• All construction, operation

, and maintenance areas would be kept clean and tidy

, including the revegetating and regarding disturbed soil, and storage would be screened from view and/or are generally not visible to the general public.

• S iting projects and their associated elements next to prominent landscape features or in a setting for observation from national historic sites, national trails, and cultural resources would be avoided to the gr eatest extent.

• T he project proponent would contact the lead agency to discuss the documentation required in the lighting mitigation plan

, submit to the lead agency for review and approval a plan that describes the measures to be used and that demonstrates that the requirements of this condition will be satisfied , and notify the lead agency that the lighting has been completed and is ready for inspection.

Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and thatAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

141 the programmatic analysis does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigation significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA c ompliance purposes, that the potentially significant impact regarding aesthetics resulting from the construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant and unavoidable.



### B. Agriculture and Forestry Resources

1. Farmland, Zoning for Agricultural Use or Williamson Act Contract, Forest Land and Timberland

As discussed in Chapter 4 , Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufa cturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations would also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants.

There is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, especially in regards to new manufacturing plants for producing propulsion batteries and fuel cells; however, these would likely occur within existing facility footprints or in areas with c onsistent zoning. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to result in the conversion of farmland, conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, conflict with existing zoning for ( or cau se rezoning of) forest land or timberland, the loss of forest land ( or conversion of forest land to non

- forest use), or involve other changes resulting in conversion of farmland or forest land to non

- agricultural use or non

- forest use, respectively. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation No mitigation is required.



### C. Air Quality

1. Air Quality Plan, Air Quality Standards and Violations, Cumulative Criteria Pollutants, and Sensitive Receptors

a. Construction Impacts
As discu ssed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fue ling stations c ould also be constructed along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. Construction

- related activities , if they occur, would be anticipated to result in an increase in CAPs and TACs ( e.g., use of heavy

- duty construction e quipment). All projects, no matter their size or type would be required toAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

142 seek local land use approvals prior to their implementation. Part of the land use entitlement process requires that each of these projects undergo environmental review consistent w ith California environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA) and other applicable local requirements ( e.g., local air district rules and regulations). This environmental review process would assess whether project implementation would result in short

- ter m construction air quality impacts.

At this time, the specific location, type, and number of construction activities is not known and would be dependent upon a variety of factors that are not within the control of ARB. Nonetheless, the analysis provided herein provides a reasonable accounting of the types of environmental impacts that would occur with implementation of the proposed ACC Program as discussed below for short

- term construction emissions. Further, subsequent environmental review would be condu cted at such time that an individual project is proposed and land use entitlements are sought.

During the construction phase, CAPs and TACs could be generated from a variety of activities and emission sources. These emissions would be temporary and occur intermittently depending on the intensity of construction on a given day. Site grading and excavation activities would generate fugitive PM dust emissions, which is the primary pollutant of concern during construction. Fugitive PM dust emissions ( includin g PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) vary as a function of parameters such as soil silt content and moisture, wind speed, acreage of disturbance area, and the intensity of activity performed with construction equipment. Exhaust emissions from off

- road construction equipment, material delivery trips, and construction worker

- commute trips could also contribute to short

- term increases in PM emissions, but to a lesser extent. Exhaust emissions from construction

- related mobile sources also include ROG and NO x emissions. These emis sion types and associated levels fluctuate greatly depending on the particular type, number, and duration of usage for the varying equipment.

The site preparation phase typically generates the most substantial emission levels because of the on

- site equipm ent and ground

- disturbing activities associated with grading, compacting, and excavation. Site preparation equipment and activities typically include backhoes, bulldozers, loaders, and excavation equipment ( e.g., graders and scrapers). Although detailed co nstruction specific information is not available at this time, based on the types of activities that could be conducted it would be expected that the primary sources of construction

- related emissions include soil disturbance

- and equipment

- related activiti es ( e.g., use of backhoes, bulldozers, excavators, and other related equipment). Based on typical emission rates and default parameters for above mentioned equipment and activities, construction activities could result in hundreds of pounds of daily NO x an d PM, which may exceed general mass emissions limits depending on the exact location of generation. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could generate levels that conflict with applicable air quality plans, violate or contribute substantially to an existing or projected violation, result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in non

- attainment areas, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. As a result, this short

- term impact would be potentially significant.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

143 This impact would be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

b. Operational Impacts Appendix T of the LEV III Staff Report provides a baseline for analysis for CAPs and GHGs, and the emissions impacts of the proposed rulemaking. This chapter began with a statistic that there are currently roughly 25 million cars operating in California, and that by 2 035 more than 30 million cars will be operating in California. Prior to the establishment of ARB in 1968 photochemical smog pollution was a major health concern that caused major acute health impacts to Californians. Much of this smog was formed by autom obile emissions. Over the next 40 years the ARB adopted the most stringent automobile emissions standards in the Country, including requiring use of the catalytic converter that revolutionized emissions control and dramatically reduced emissions from auto mobiles. Those regulations, in conjunction with regional programs to reduce emissions from refineries, power plants, and other stationary sources, led to a major improvement in air quality. In 1980, the South Coast Air Basin experienced widespread ozone levels which exceeded air quality standard for 179 days per year. In 2010 that number was reduced to 63 days per year, and those violations occurred in a much smaller portion of the Air Basin. During this same period, peak ozone concentrations in Souther n California dropped more than 60percent

- from 273 parts per billion ( ppb) to 112 ppb. Similar air quality improvements were seen in many other regions of California.

Despite these major improvements air quality both the greater Los Angeles region and the San Joaquin Valley are classified by the U.S. EPA as “extreme” ozone non

attainment areas. This is the highest federal non

- attainment classification, and these two areas of California are the only two areas of the nation granted this designation. Bri nging these regions into attainment requires more significant emission controls than anywhere else in the United State s.

In 2007, California adopted State Implementation Plans ( SIPs) to chart the course to attainment of the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone stan dard. To achieve the 1997 ozone standard by the attainment date in 2023, NO x emissions in the greater Los Angeles region must be reduced by two thirds, even after considering all of the regulations in place today, with the most significant share of needed emission reductions will come from long

- term advanced clean air technologies. In the San Joaquin Valley, the SIP identified the need to reduce NOx emissions by 80 tons/day in 2023 through the use of long

- term and advanced technology strategies. To put t his in context, this is equivalent to eliminating the NOx emissions from all on

- road vehicles operating in these regions.

Despite the dramatic emission reductions and air quality improvements achieved to date, most urban areas of California, including So uthern California, the Bay Area, and the Central Valley continue to exceed the federal ozone standard . The ARB, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District are beginning to evaluate the emiss ion reductions needed to attain the more health

- protective ozone standard U.S. EPA established in 2008. In order to meet theseAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

144 challenges, air quality and land

- use agencies in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley must actively pursue a coordinated strat egy that results in the widespread use of zero emission technologies on transportation networks designed to reduce smog forming emissions from single occupant vehicle use.

The proposed ACC Program would reduce emissions from conventional gasoline vehicle s to incredibly low levels. Over a typical vehicle’s 15 year lifetime ACC compliant cars would emit less than a pound of particulate matter, and less than 10 pounds of smog forming pollutants. The proposed regulation would also continue ARB’s commitment to zero emission technologies, requiring roughly 6percent of vehicles sold in California to be true zero emission vehicles. Through that mandate, ZEV technologies will continue to improve and expand into wider applications, making them a viable option for many consumers in California. The proposed ACC regulation achieves maximum feasible emission reductions from automobiles and places the State on a continuing path to ultimately meet national ambient air quality standards.

In 2006 the legislature adopte d Assembly Bill 32 which outlined California’s major initiatives to reduce GHG emissions, and set an emissions reduction target of meeting 1990 emissions levels by 2020, which is a reduction of roughly 30percent. In 2005 then Governor Schwarzenegger estab lished an emissions reduction target of achieving an 80 percent reduction in 1990 GHG emissions levels by 2050. In December 2008 the Board adopted ARB’s Scoping Plan which outlined the initiatives that will be implemented to reach the 2020 GHG emissions t arget. The proposed ACC regulation is a major component of the Scoping Plan.

In addition to meeting ozone air quality standards, achieving an 80 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2050 will also require widespread electrification of transportation

n etworks in California. The proposed ACC regulation and associated ZEV mandate continues ARB’s path towards meeting long

- term GHG emissions goals.

Overall, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would result in an emissions benefit as compared to curr ent regulations. Table 5

- 1 , Table 5

- 2 , and 5

- 3 provide the emission benefits for calendar years 2023, 2025, 2035, and 2040 for ROG, NO x , and particulate matter ( PM 2.5 ) respectively. Emission benefits are fully realized in the 2035

- 2040 timeframe when nea rly all vehicles operating in the fleet are expected to be compliant with the proposed A CC Program. By 2035 ROG state wide emissions would be reduced by an additional 34 percent, NO x emissions by an additional 3 7 percent, and PM 2.5 emissions by 1 0 percent.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

145 Table 5

- 1

. State wide and Regional Emission Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car Program: Reactive Organic Gas ( ROG)

State wide ROG ( tons/day)

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline with Rebound Proposed Regulation with Rebound Benefits Percent Reduction

2023 189.6 182.9 6.6 3%

2025 175.5 164.4 11.1 6%

2035 141.1 93.6 47.4 34%

Table 5

- 2

. State wide Emissions Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car Program: Oxides of Nitrogen ( NO x )

State wide NOX ( tons/day)

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline with Rebound Proposed Regulation with Rebound Benefits Percent Reduction

2023 201.3 185.6 15.7 8%

2025 183.6 161.2 22.4 12%

2035 136.8 86.4 50.4 37%

Table 5

- 3

. State wide and Regional Emissions Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car Program: Particulate Matter ( PM 2.5 )

State wide PM2.5 ( tons/day)

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline with Rebound Proposed Regulation with Rebound Benefits Percent Reduction

2023 26.7 26.0 0.6 2%

2025 27.2 26.3 0.9 3%

2035 29.7 26.8 2.9 10%

In all calendar years between 2015 and 2030, all CAP emissions remain lower for the proposed ACC program than the baseline even when accounting for any possible increases due to changes in consumer purchasing patterns. The results without consumer response are analogous to the emissions benefits described in Section V

- D of the LEV III Staff Report. 1 These curves (dashed lines, open markers) reflect the

1 The CARBITS population reflects only twenty vintages of light

- duty vehicle s in any calendar year which represents a subset of the EMFAC population used for the emission reductions presented in Section V

- D. The emissions estimates from the two models are therefore not necessarily expected to match exactly,Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

146 changes only from improvements in tailpipe emi ssion rates and assume there are no changes in fleet composition, though do account for any emissions increases due to the rebound effect.

Changes in the fleet size and average age would also affect CAPs. ARB staff used the fleet composition generated by CARBITS in a modified emissions inventory tool to estimate the changes in CAP emissions shown in Figure 5

- 1. An additional change due to a different fleet mix yields the results with consumer response (solid line, closed markers). In this case, the dist ribution of vehicles not only includes a greater proportion of newer vehicles, but also more vehicles in total. Total emissions are a function of both the vehicle emission rates and the number of miles that vehicles are driven. While newer vehicles will have lower emission rates, separate from the expected increase in VMT due to the rebound effect resulting from the lower operating costs, vehicles also tend to be driven more intensively in their younger years. Thus, having a greater proportion of newer v ehicles and a larger total fleet size would generate additional VMT as an artifact of the modeling methodology. As a result, consumer responses to new vehicle offerings could reduce some of the expected emission reductions of PM 2.5 (circles) as a result o f an increase in VMT. However these same forces could further enhance emission reductions of ROG (triangles) and have essentially no effect on NO x (squares). For all pollutants the proposed ACC Program would continue to produce net benefits when allowing for changes in fleet composition.

In the event that total fleetwide VMT is solely a function of the rebound effect, renormalizing VMT to account only for those effects but maintaining the changes in fleet composition would result in similar changes to the percent reductions without consume r response. Appendix S contains a detailed discussion on the relationship between fleet turnover, fuel price and emission reductions and indicates that although the magnitude of emission reductions could vary, the Program would result in an overall net em ission reduction. (See Appendix T of the LEV III Staff Report for emission calculation methodologies and Appendix S of the LEV III Staff Report for more detailed emission results related to economic factors.)

Overall, staff believes that consumer response to new vehicle offerings would not negate any of the positive effects on criteria pollutant emissions that are expected to result from the proposed Advanced Clean Cars P rogram, including resultant upstream emission reductions (as discussed in Section V of the LEV III Staff Report).

however the CARBITS su bset covers an overwhelming majority of vehicles in the on

- road fleet and their associated VMT.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

147 Figure 5

- 1

. Advanced Clean Cars, Changes in ROG, NO x , and PM 2.5 Emissions due to Consumer Response ( percent)

Mitigation Measure C.1. ( Construction) The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable laws and regulations that provide protection of air quality resources. ARB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified facil ities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under C EQA. The jurisdiction with primary permitting authority over a proposed action is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Project

specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the e nvironmental review by agencies with project

- approval authority. Recognized practices routinely required to avoid and/or minimize impacts to air resources include:

• Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance response to the ACC re gulations would coordinate with local land use agencies to seek 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0% 45.0% 50.0%

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030Percent Reduction NOx: w/o Consumer Response NOx: w/ Consumer Response

ROG: w/o Consumer Response ROG: w/ Consumer Response

Total PM2.5: w/o Consumer Response Total PM2.5: w/ Consumer ResponseAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

148 entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body shall certify that the envir onmental document was prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental review, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environmental document to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the project.

• Specifically, apply for, secure, and comply with all appropriate air quality permits for project construction and operations from the local agencies with air quality jurisdiction and from other applicable agencies, if appropriate, prior to construction mobilization.

• Compliance with the CAA and the CCAA ( e.g., NSR and BACT criteria if applicable).

• Comply with local plans, policies, ordinances, rules, and regulations regarding air quality

- related emissions and associated exposure ( e.g., construction

- related fugitive PM dust regulations, indirect source review, and payment into offsite mitigation funds).

• For projects located in PM nonattainment areas, prepare and comply with a dust abatement plan that addresses emissions of fugitive dust during construction and operation of the project.

The proponents and local land use agencies can and should be the parties responsible for the project approval and implementation , its mitigation. ARB is not a land use agency and would not be responsible for ensuring that this mitigation is implemented. However, because of above mitigation are required by law, implementation would reduce this impact to a less

- than

- significant level.

2. Odors

There is uncerta inty as to the exact locations of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells, new hydrogen fueling stations, and modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. However, these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning and would not include activities or processes that are associated with major odor sources ( e.g., landfills). Additionally, new people would not be located near existing odor sources because im plementation of the proposed ACC Program would not include the development of sensitive uses ( e.g., residences). Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

149 Mitigation No mitigation is required.



### D

. Greenhouse Gases

1. Greenhouse Gases; Plan, Policy, or Regulation

As mentioned above in the air quality discussion, t he proposed ACC Program w ould result in an emissions benefit as compared to current regulations. Table 5

- 4 shows the GHG emission benefits in 2020, 2025, 2035, and 2050. By 2025, CO 2 equivalent emissions would be reduced by almost 14 MMT/yr, which is 12 percent from baseline lev els. The reduction increases in 2035 to 3 2 MMT/Year, a 27 percent reduction from baseline levels. By 2050

, the proposed regulation will reduce emissions by more than 4 2 MMT/ yr , a reduction of 33 percent from baseline levels. Viewed cumulatively over the life of the regulation ( 2017

- 2050), the proposed ACC Program would reduce emissions by more than 8 7 0 MMT CO 2 e

. With respect to energy, it is also important to note that energy consumption associated with implementation of the proposed ACC Program would displace gasoline (a higher carbon transportation fuel) resulting in additional benefits.

Table 5

- 4

. CO 2 - Equivalent ( CO 2 e) Emission Benefits from Advanced Clean Car Regulations

State wide CO 2 e Emissions ( Million Metric Tons / Year)

Calendar

Year Adjusted Baseline with Rebound Proposed Regulation with Rebound Benefits Percent Reduction

2020 111.2 108.1 3.1 3%
2025 109.9 96.3 13.7 12%
2035 114.8 83.2 31.5 27%
2050 131.0 88.3 42.7 33%

Mitigation No mitigation is required.



### E

. Biological Resources

1. Candidate, Sensitive, or Special Status Species; Riparian Habitat or Sensitive Natural Community; Wetlands; Movement, Local Policies and Ordinances; Plans

As discussed in Chapter 4 , Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsionAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

150 batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fuelin g stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning.

However, there is uncertainty as to the exact loca tions of these new plants, stations, and modifications, especially in regards to new manufacturing plants for producing propulsion batteries and fuel cells and in relation to the location of biological resources. Construction of new plants could require d isturbance of undeveloped area, such as clearing of vegetation, earth movement and grading, trenching for utility lines, erection of new buildings, and paving of parking lots, delivery areas, and roadways. These activities would have the potential to adve rsely affect biological resources ( e.g., species, habitat) that may reside or be present in those areas. Because there are biological species that occur, or even thrive, in developed settings, resources could also be adversely affected by the installation of hydrogen fuel dispensing units at existing gasoline service stations and modifications to existing hydrogen production plants within existing footprints, or at other sites in areas with consistent zoning.

Long

- term operation of new plants, stations, and modifications would often include the presence of humans; movement of automobiles, trucks and heavy equipment; and operation of stationary equipment. This environment would not be conducive to biological resources located on

- site or nearby. The biolo gical resources that could be affected by construction and operation associated with implementation of the proposed ACC Program, would depend on the specific location of each facility and its environmental setting. Harmful effects could include modificati ons to existing habitat; including removal, degradation, and fragmentation of riparian systems, wetlands, or other sensitive natural wildlife habitat and plan communities; interference with wildlife movement or wildlife nursery sites; loss of special

- statu s species; and/or conflicts with the provisions of adopted habitat conservation plans, natural community conservation plans, or other conservation plans or policies to protect natural resources. Consequently, this impact would be potentially significant.

This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

Mitigation Measure E .1. The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is no t limited to, applicable laws and regulations that provide protection of biological resources. ARB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified facilities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. Th e ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under CEQA. The jurisdiction with primary permitting authority over a proposed action is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Project

specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental review by agencies with project

- approval au thority. Recognized practices that are routinely required to avoid and/or minimize impacts to biological resources include:Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

151 • Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance response to the ACC regulations would coordinate with local la nd use agencies to seek entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body would certify that the environmental document was prepared in compli ance with applicable regulations and would approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental review, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environmental document to reduce or substantially lessen the envir onmental impacts of the project. The definition of actions required to mitigate potentially significant biological impacts may include the following; however, any mitigation specifically required for a new or modified facility would be determined by the l ocal lead agency.

• Preparation of a biological inventory of site resources by a qualified biologist prior to ground disturbance or construction. If protected species or their habitats are present, comply with applicable federal and State endangered speci es acts and regulations. Ensure that important fish or wildlife movement corridors or nursery sites are not impeded by project activities.

• Preparation of a wetland survey of onsite resources. Establish setbacks and prohibit disturbance of riparian habita ts, streams, intermittent and ephemeral drainages, and other wetlands. Wetland delineation is required by Section 3 030 ( d) of the Clean Water Act and is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

• Prohibit construction activities during the rainy sea son with requirements for seasonal weatherization and implementation of erosion prevention practices.

• Prohibit construction activities in the vicinity of raptor nests during nesting season or establish protective buffers and provide monitoring as needed to ensure that project activity does not cause an active nest to fail.

• Preparation of site design and development plans that avoid or minimize disturbance of habitat and wildlife resources, and prevents stormwater discharge that could contribute to sedimenta tion and degradation of local waterways. Depending on disturbance size and location, a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) construction permit may be required from the California State Water Resources Control Board.

• Plant replacement t rees and establish permanently protection suitable habitat at ratios considered acceptable to comply with “no net loss” requirements.

Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and thatAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

152 the programmatic analysis does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigation significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA c ompliance purposes, that the potentially significant impact regarding biological resources r esulting from the construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant and unavoidable.



### F

. Cultural Resources

1. Historic Resour ces, Archaeological Resources, Paleontological Resources, Unique Geologic Features, Human Remains

As discussed in Chapter 4 , Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likel y occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning.

However, there is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, especially in regards to new manufacturing plants for producing propulsion ba tteries and fuel cells and in relation to the location of cultural resources.

The long

- term operation of new plants, stations, and modifications would not include any ground disturbance or demolition activities, which are the primary detriments to histor ical, archaeological, and paleontological resources. However, construction of new plants could require disturbance of undeveloped area, such as clearing of vegetation, earth movement and grading, trenching for utility lines, erection of new buildings, and paving of parking lots, delivery areas, and roadways. Demolition of existing structures may also occur before the construction of new buildings and structures. The cultural resources that could potentially be affected by ground disturbance activities co uld include, but are not limited to, prehistoric and historical archaeological sites, paleontological resources, historic buildings, structures, or archaeological sites associated with agriculture and mining, and heritage landscapes. Properties important to Native American communities and other ethnic groups, including tangible properties possessing intangible traditional cultural values, also may exist. Historic buildings and structures may also be adversely affected by demolition

- related activities. Su ch resources may occur individually, in groupings of modest size, or in districts. Because culturally sensitive resources can also be located in developed settings, historic, archeological, and paleontological resources, and places important to Native Ame rican communities, could also be adversely affected by the installation of hydrogen fuel dispensing units at existing gasoline service stations and modifications to existing hydrogen production plants within existing footprints, or at other sites in areas with consistent zoning. As a result, this impact would be potentially significant.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

153 This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

Mitigation Measure F .1. The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable laws and regulations that provide protection of cultural resources. ARB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation relate d to new or modified facilities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qual ify as a “project” under CEQA. The jurisdiction with primary permitting authority over a proposed action is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Project

specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental review by agencies with project

- approval authority. Recognized practices that are routinely required to avoid and/or minimize impacts to cultural resources include:

• Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance response to the ACC regulations would coordinate with local land use agencies to seek entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requireme nts ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body would certify that the environmental document was prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and would approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental rev iew, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environmental document to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the project. The definition of actions required to mitigate potentially significant cultural impacts may include the following; however, any mitigation specifically required for a new or modified facility would be determined by the local lead agency.

• Retain the services of cultural resources specialists with training and background that conforms to the U.S . Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards, as published in Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, part 61 ( 36 CFR Part 61).

• Seek guidance from the State and federal lead agencies, as appropriate, for coordination of Nation

- to

- Nation c onsultations with the Native American Tribes.

• Consult with lead agencies early in the planning process to identify the potential presence of cultural properties. The agencies will provide the project developers with specific instruction on policies for co mpliance with the various laws and regulations governing cultural resources management, including coordination with regulatory agencies and Native American Tribes.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

154 • Define the area of potential effect ( APE) for each project, which is the area within which p roject construction and operation may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties. The APE should include a reasonable construction buffer zone and laydown areas, access roads, and borrow areas, as well as a rea sonable assessment of areas subject to effects from visual, auditory, or atmospheric impacts, or impacts from increased access.

• Retain the services of a paleontological resources specialist with training and background that conforms with the minimum qualif ications for a vertebrate paleontologist as described in Measures for Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Non

- Renewable Paleontologic Resources: Standard Procedures ( Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 1995).

• Conduct initial scoping assessment s to determine whether proposed construction activities would disturb formations that may contain important paleontological resources. Whenever possible potential impacts to paleontological resources should be avoided by moving the site of construction or removing or reducing the need for surface disturbance. The scoping assessment should be conducted by the qualified paleontological resources specialist in accordance with applicable agency requirements.

• The project proponent’s qualified paleontological r esources specialist would determine whether paleontological resources would likely be disturbed in a project area on the basis of the sedimentary context of the area and a records search for past paleontological finds in the area. The assessment may sugge st areas of high known potential for containing resources. If the assessment is inconclusive a surface survey is recommended to determine the fossiliferous potential and extent of the pertinent sedimentary units within the project site. If the site conta ins areas of high potential for significant paleontological resources and avoidance is not possible, prepare a paleontological resources management and mitigation plan that addresses the following steps:

 a preliminary survey ( if not conducted earlier) and surface salvage prior to construction;

 physical and administrative protective measures and protocols such as halting work, to be implemented in the event of fossil discoveries;

 monitoring and salvage during excavation;

 specimen preparation;

 identification, cataloging, curation and storage; and

 a final report of the findings and their significance.

 Choose sites that avoid areas of special scientific value.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

155 Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and that the programmatic analysis does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potenti ally significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigation significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA compliance purposes, that the potentially significant impact regarding cultural resources resulting from the construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant and unavoidable.



### G

. Geology and Soils

1. Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death; Unstable Geologic Unit or Soil; Expansive Soil

As discussed in Chapter 4 , Regulated Commu nity Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants.

New manufacturing plants and new hydrogen fueling stations could be located in a variety of relatively high

- risk geologic and soil conditions that are consi dered to be potentially hazardous. For instance, the seismic conditions at the site of a new plant
t hat may have high to extremely high seismic

- related fault rupture and ground shaking potential associated with earthquake activity. New facilities could a lso be subject to seismic

- related ground failure, including liquefaction and landslides.

New facilities could be located in a variety of geologic, soil, and slope conditions with varying amounts of vegetation that would be susceptible to soil erosion. S trong ground shaking could also trigger landslides in areas where the natural slope is naturally unstable or is over

- steepened by the construction of access roads and structures.

New facilities could also be constructed in locations that would expose facil ities and structures to expansive soil conditions. Expansive soils, those with high

- plasticity clay content, can cause structural failure of the foundations and footings. The presence of expansive soils as defined in Table 18

- 1

- B of the Uniform Building Code ( 1994) could create substantial risks to life or property. The potential for expansive soils is not well documented in all areas. Therefore, development of new manufacturing plants and new hydrogen fueling stations are potentially susceptible to the presence of expansive soils particularly in areas of fine

- grained sediment accumulation typically associated with playas, valley bottoms, and local low

- lying areas.

The specific design details, siting locations, seismic hazards, and geologic, slope, and

s oil conditions for a particular manufacturing plant or hydrogen fueling station are not known at this time and would be analyzed on a site

- specific basis at the project level.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

156 Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, development of these facilities could expose people and structures to relatively high levels of risk associated with strong seismic ground shaking, including liquefaction and landslides, and instability. These geologic, seismic, and soil

- related conditions could result in damage to structure s, related utility lines, and access roads, blocking access and posing safety hazards to people. As a result, this impact would be potentially significant.

This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB

.

2. Substantial Soil Erosion or the Loss of Topsoil

New plants, stations, and modifications could be located in a variety of geologic, soil, and slope conditions with varying amounts of vegetation that would be susceptible to both soil erosion and loss of topsoil during construction. The level of susceptib ility varies by location. However, the specific design details, siting locations, and soil erosion hazards for particular manufacturing plants and hydrogen fueling stations are not known at this time and would be analyzed on a site

- specific basis at the p roject level. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the potential soil erosion hazard impacts would be considered potentially significant.

This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented b y local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

3. Septic Tanks or Alternative Waste Water Disposal Systems

New manufacturing plants would not be anticipated to require the installation or use of septic tanks or alternative waste water dis posal systems. Industrial land uses, manufacturing processes in particular, would require more advanced treatment systems that would likely be served by centralized wastewater treatment plants. New hydrogen fueling stations and modifications would not ge nerate waste water and, thus, would not require new waste water treatment disposal systems. In addition, although there is uncertainty as to the exact locations of new plants, stations, and modifications, these would likely occur within existing footprint s or in areas with consistent zoning. Consequently, if new hydrogen fueling stations or modification were to result in waste water generation, it could likely be served by an existing waste water treatment plant located in the surrounding urban areas. Th erefore, the impacts related to adequately supporting septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure G.1 and G .2. The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable l aws and regulations that provide protection of geology and soils. ARB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified facilities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such mea sures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New orAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

157 modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under CEQA. The jurisdiction with primary permitting authority over a proposed action is th e Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA stat utes. Project

specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental review by agencies with project

- approval authority. Recognized practice s that are routinely required to avoid and/or minimize impacts to geology and soils include:

• Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance response to the ACC regulations would coordinate with local land use agencies to seek entitlem ents for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body would certify that the environmental document was prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and would approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental review, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environmental document to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the project. The definition of actions required to mitigate potentially significant geology and soil impacts may include the following; however, any mitigation specifically required for a new or modified facility would be determined by the local lead agency.

• Prior to the issuance of any development permits, proponents of new manufacturing plants and hydrogen fueling stations would prepare a geotechnical investigation/study, which would include an evaluation of the depth to the water table, liquefaction potential, ph ysical properties of subsurface soils including shrink

- swell potential ( expansion), soil resistivity, slope stability, minerals resources and the presence of hazardous materials.

• Proponents of new manufacturing plants and hydrogen fueling stations would
pr ovide a complete site grading plan, and drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan with applications to applicable lead agencies. Proponents would avoid locating facilities on steep slopes, in alluvial fans and other areas prone to landslides or flash f loods, or with gullies or washes, as much as possible.

Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and that the programmatic analysi s does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- miti gation significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA compliance purposes, that the potentially significant impact to geology and soils resulting from the construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant and unavoid able.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

158 

### H

. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

1. Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials

As discussed in Chapter 4 , Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and
ope ration of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning.

The long

- term operation of new plants, stations, and modifications would result in the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials ( i.e., propulsion batteries, f uel cells, and hydrogen). However, as discussed in Chapter 5, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State and local laws. In addition, al though there is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning where hazardous materials are currently in use. As a result, thi s impact would be less than significant.

2. Upset and Accident Conditions

Implementation of the proposed ACC Program would result in mass reductions in regards to the heavier vehicle classes. There are recent studies that analyze the relationship betwee n vehicle weight, size ( wheelbase, track width, and their product, footprint), and safety, for individual vehicle makes and models. Based on these studies, the principal difference between the heavier vehicles, especially truck

- based LTVs, and the lighter vehicles, especially passenger cars, is that mass reduction has a different effect in collisions with another car or LTV. When two vehicles of unequal mass collide, the delta V is higher in the lighter vehicle, in the same proportion as the mass ratio. As a result, the fatality risk is also higher. Removing some mass from the heavy vehicle reduces delta V in the lighter vehicle, where fatality risk is high, resulting in a large benefit, offset by a small penalty because delta V increases in the heavy vehic le, where fatality risk is low

– addi ng up to a net societal benefit . It is also important to note that once differences in vehicles, drivers and crash times/locations are accounted for, there is essentially no correlation between vehicle mass and US fatality risk per VMT ( Wenzel 2011).

Also, with regards to battery fires and/or explosions, there are existing propulsion battery system safety documents that define evaluation methods and make recommendations for battery system performance. The SAE Standard defines a minimum set of acceptable safety criteria for a lithium

- bas ed rechargeable battery system to be considered for use in a vehicle propulsion application as an energy storage system connected to a high voltage power train. The purpose of the SAE Standard is to assure that a battery pack can safely be integrated into an electric orAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

159 hybrid vehicle. Specifically, it is designed to assure that a single point fault will not result in fire, explosion, battery enclosure rupture or high voltage hazard.

However, c onstruction activities would use heavy

- duty equipment requiring periodic refueling and lubricating. Large pieces of construction equipment ( e.g., backhoes, graders) are typically fueled and maintained at the construction site as they are not designed for use on public roadways. Thus, such maintenance uses a service vehicle that mobilizes to the location of the construction equipment. It is during the transfer of fuel that the potential for an accidental release is most likely. Although precautions would be taken to ensure that any spilled fuel is properly contained and disposed, and such spills are typically minor and localized to the immediate area of the fueling ( or maintenance), the potential still remains for a significant release of hazardous materials into the environment. Consequently, the project could crea te a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant. This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

3. Hazardous Emissions, Materials, or Substances Near Schools, Hazardous Material Site, Airpo rt Land Use Plan, Private Airstrip, Emergency Response Plan or Emergency Evacuation Plan, Wildland Fires

As discussed above, although there is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning where hazardous materials are currently in use. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to result in locating new plants, stations, or modifications near schoo ls, public ( or public use) airports, private airstrips, or wildlands; or on sites included on a list of hazardous materials sites or impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. In addition, as no ted above, the handling of hazards materials would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State and local laws. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure H.2. The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable laws and regulations in regards to hazards. A RB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified facilities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under CEQA. The jurisdiction with primary permitting authority over a proposed acti on is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Project

- specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental review by agenciesAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

160 with project

- approval authority. Recognized practices that are routinely required to avoid upset and accident

- related i mpacts include:

• Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance response to the ACC regulations would coordinate with local land use agencies to seek entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requireme nts ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body would certify that the environmental document was prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and would approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental rev iew, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environmental document to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the project. The definition of actions required to mitigate potentially significant upset and accident

- r elated hazard impacts may include the following; however, any mitigation specifically required for a new or modified facility would be determined by the local lead agency.

• Handling of potentially hazardous materials/wastes should be performed under the d irection of a licensed professional with the necessary experience and knowledge to oversee the proper identification, characterization, handling and disposal or recycling of the materials generated as a result of the project. As wastes are generated, they would be placed, at the direction of the licensed professional, in designated areas that offer secure, secondary containment and/or protection from stormwater runoff. Other forms of containment may include placing waste on plastic sheeting ( and/or coveri ng with same) or in steel bins or other suitable containers pending profiling and disposal or recycling.

• The temporary storage and handling of potentially hazardous materials/wastes should be in areas away from sensitive receptors such as schools or resi dential areas. These areas should be secured with chain

- link fencing or similar barrier with controlled access to restrict casual contact from non

- Project personnel. All project personnel that may come into contact with potentially hazardous materials/wa stes will have the appropriate health and safety training commensurate with the anticipated level of exposure.

Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and that the programmatic analysis does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts. Consequently, t his EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigation significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA compliance purposes, that the potentially significant impact regarding upset and accident

- related hazards resulting from the construction and oper ation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant and unavoidable.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

161 

### I. Hydrology and Water Quality

1. Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements; Groundwater Supplies or Groundwater Recharge; Runoff Water

As discussed in Ch apter 4 , Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning.

The long

- term operation of new plants, stat ions, and modifications would be required to comply with applicable erosion, water quality standards, and waste discharge requirements ( e.g., NPDES, SWPPP). With respect to depleting groundwater supplies, impairing quality, and runoff issues, n ew faciliti es would not be anticipated to result in substantial demands due to the nature of associated activities

. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.

2

. Drainage Patterns; Flood Hazards; Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations would also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning.

New plants, stations, and modifications could be loc ated in a variety of conditions with regards to altering drainage patters, flooding, and inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. The level of susceptibility varies by location. However, the specific design details, siting locations, and associated hydrology and water quality issues are not known at this time and would be analyzed on a site

- specific basis at the project level. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the se potential hydrology and water qual ity

related impacts would be considered potentially significant.

This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

Mitigation Measu re I .2. The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable laws and regulations in regards to hydrology and water quality . A RB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified faci lities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under CEQA. The jurisdiction withAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

162 primary permitting authority over a proposed action is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Project

specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental review by agencies with project

- approval authority. Recognized practices that are routinely required to avoid and/or mitigate hydrology and water quality

- related impacts include:

• Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a comp liance response to the ACC regulations would coordinate with local land use agencies to seek entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body would certify that the environmental document was prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and would approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental review, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in t he environmental document to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the project. The definition of actions required to mitigate potentially significant hydrology and water quality impacts may include the following; however, any mitiga tion specifically required for a new or modified facility would be determined by the local lead agency.

Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for indi vidual projects, and that the programmatic analysis does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts. Consequently, this E A takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigation significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA compliance purposes, that the potentially significant impact regarding hydrology and water quality resulting from the construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant and unavoidable.



### J. Land Use Planning

1. Divide an Established Community, Land Use Plan, Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Conservation Plan

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compl iance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be co nstructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to d ivide an established community or conflict with a land use or conservation plan. This impact would be less than significant.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

163 Mitigation No mitigation is required.



### K. Mineral Resources

1. Availability of a Known Mineral Resource or Recovery Site

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel ce lls. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning where original permitting an d analyses considered these issues. In addition, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not significantly deplete the supply of lithium or platinum and both are currently used in auto manufacturing processes. As a result, this impact would be l ess than significant.

Mitigation No mitigation is required.



### L. Noise

1. Noise Levels in Excess of Standards, Excessive Groundborne vibration or Groundborne Noise Levels, Substantial Increases in Ambient Noise Levels

Construction noise levels in the vi cinity of new plants, stations, and modifications would fluctuate depending on the particular type, number, size, and duration of usage for the varying equipment. The effects of construction noise largely depend on the type of construction activities occu rring on any given day, noise levels generated by those activities, distances to noise sensitive receptors, and the existing ambient noise environment in the receptor’s vicinity. Construction generally occurs in several discrete stages, each phase requiri ng a specific complement of equipment with varying equipment type, quantity, and intensity. These variations in the operational characteristics of the equipment change the effect they have on the noise environment of the project site and in the surroundin g community for the duration of the construction
process.

To assess noise levels associated with the various equipment types and operations, construction equipment can be considered to operate in two modes, mobile and stationary. Mobile equipment sources move around a construction site performing tasks in a recurring manner ( e.g., loaders, graders, dozers). Stationary equipment operates in a given location for an extended period of time to perform continuous or periodic operations. Operational characteri stics of heavy construction equipment areAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

164 additionally typified by short periods of full

- power operation followed by extended periods of operation at lower power, idling, or powered

- off conditions.

Additionally when construction

- related noise levels are being evaluated, activities that occur during the more noise

- sensitive evening and nighttime hours are of increased concern. Because exterior ambient noise levels typically decrease during the late evening and nighttime hours as traffic volumes and commer cial activities decrease, construction activities performed during these more noise

- sensitive periods of the day can result in increased annoyance and potential sleep disruption for occupants of nearby residential uses.

The site preparation phase typically generates the most substantial noise levels because of the on

- site equipment associated with grading, compacting, and excavation, which uses the noisiest types of construction equipment. Site preparation equipment and activities include backhoes, bulldoz ers, loaders, and excavation equipment ( e.g., graders and scrapers). Construction of large structural elements and mechanical systems could require the use of a crane for placement and assembly tasks, which may also generate noise levels. Although a deta iled construction equipment list is not currently available, based on this project type it is expected that the primary sources of noise would include backhoes, bulldozers, and excavators. Noise emission levels from typical types of construction equipment can range from approximately 74 to 94 dBA at 50 feet.

Based on this information and accounting for typical usage factors of individual pieces of equipment and activity types, on

- site construction could result in hourly average noise levels of 87 dBA L eq at 50 feet and maximum noise levels of 90 dBA L max at 50 feet from the simultaneous operation of heavy

- duty equipment and blasting activities, if deemed necessary. Based on these and general attenuation rates, exterior noise levels at noise

- sensitive rec eptors located within thousands of feet from project sites could exceed typical standards ( e.g., 50/60 dBA L eq /L max during the daytime hours and 40/50 dBA L eq /L max during the nighttime hours).

Additionally, construction activities may result in varying d egrees of temporary groundborne noise and vibration, depending on the specifi c construction equipment used and activities involved. Groundborne noise and vibration levels caused by various types of construction equipment and activities ( e.g., bulldozers, blasting) range from 58

- 109 VdB and from 0.003 to 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet. Similar to the above discussion, although a detailed construction equipment list is not currently available, based on this project type it is expected that the primary sources of groundborne vibration and noise would include bulldozers and trucks. According to FTA, levels associated with the use of a large bulldozer and trucks are 0.089 and 0.076 in/sec PPV ( 87 and 86 VdB) at 25 feet, respectively. With respect to the preventi on of structural damage, construction

- related activities would not exceed recommended levels ( e.g., 0.2 in/sec PPV). However, based on FTA’s recommended procedure for applying a propagation adjustment to these reference levels, bulldozing and truck activi ties couldAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

165 exceed recommended levels with respect to the prevention of human disturbance ( e.g., 80 VdB) within 275 feet.

With respect to operational

- related transportation activities, new plants, stations, and modifications would not be anticipated to re sult in a doubling of ADT volumes on affected roadway segments ( e.g., the amount associated with a substantial traffic noise increase as discussed above). However, new plants, stations, and modifications, could introduce new on

- site stationary noise sourc es ( e.g., pumps, motors, compressors, fans, generators, and other equipment). Noise levels associated with these types of sources vary greatly, but would generally range from 70 dBA L eq to 80 dBA L max at 50 feet. Based on these and general attenuation ra tes, exterior noise levels at noise

sensitive receptors located within hundreds of feet from the location of the project sites could exceed typical standards ( e.g., 50/60 dBA L eq /L max during the daytime hours and 40/50 dBA L eq /L max during the nighttime hours). Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the generation of short

- term construction noise and long

term stationary noise levels in excess of applicable standards or that result in a substantial increase in ambient levels at nearby sensitive receptors, and exposure to excessive vibration levels. As a result, this impact would be potentially significant.

This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be i mplemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

2. People Residing or Working in the Area to Excessive Airport

- Related Noise Levels

As discussed above, although there is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to result in locating new plants, stations, or modifications nea r existing public ( or public use) airports or private airstrips. In addition, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not result in any housing placement or substantial increases in airport

- activities. As a result, this impact would be less tha n significant.

Mitigation Measure L.1.

The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable laws and regulations that pertain to noise. ARB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified facilities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under CEQA. The jurisdiction with primary permitting authority over a proposed action is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Project

- specific impacts and mitigation would be ident ified during the environmental review by agencies with project

- approval authority. Recognized practices that are routinely required to avoid and/or minimize noise include:Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

166 • Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance response to th e ACC regulations would coordinate with local land use agencies to seek entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body would certify that t he environmental document was prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and would approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental review, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environmental docu ment to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the project. The definition of actions required to mitigate potentially significant noise impacts may include the following; however, any mitigation specifically required for a new or mod ified facility would be determined by the local lead agency.

• Ensure noise

- generating construction activities ( including truck deliveries, pile driving and blasting) are limited to the least noise

- sensitive times of day ( e.g., weekdays during the daytime hours) for projects near sensitive receptors.

• Consider use of noise barriers, such as berms, to limit ambient noise at property lines, especially where sensitive receptors may be present.

• Ensure all project equipment has sound

- control devices no less effective than those provided on the original equipment.

• All construction equipment used would be adequately muffled and maintained.

• Consider use of battery powered forklifts and other faci lity vehicles.

• Ensure all stationary construction equipment ( i.e., compressors and generators) is located as far as practicable from nearby sensitive receptors or shielded.

• Properly maintain mufflers, brakes and all loose items on construction and operat ional

- related vehicles to minimize noise and ensure safe operations. Keep truck operations to the quietest operating speeds. Advise about downshifting and vehicle operations in sensitive communities to keep truck noise to a minimum.

• Use noise controls on standard construction equipment; shield impact tools.

• Consider use of flashing lights instead of audible back

- up alarms on mobile equipment.

• Install mufflers on air coolers and exhaust stacks of all diesel and gas

- driven engines.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

167 • Equip all emergency pre ssure relief valves and steam blow

- down lines with silencers to limit noise levels.

• Contain facilities within buildings or other types of effective noise enclosures.

• Employ engineering controls, including sound

- insulated equipment and control rooms, to red uce the average noise level in normal work areas.

Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and that the programmatic analysis does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigation significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA compliance purposes, that the potentially significant impact regarding noise resulting from the construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant and unavoidable.



### M. P opulation and Housing

1. Population Growth, Displace Housing or People

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plant s that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. Construction activities would be anticipated to require relatively small crews as new plants, stations, and modifications would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. In addition, demand for these crews would be temporary ( e.g., 6

- 12 months per project). Theref ore, it would be anticipated that the need for a substantial amount of construction worker migration would not occur and that a sufficient construction employment base would likely be available. Furthermore, it would not be anticipated that a substantial amount of new personnel would be needed to operate the facilities and that sufficient employment base would likely be available because these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation No mitigation is required.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

168 

### N. Public Services

1. Response Time for Fire Protection, Police Protection, Schools, Parks, and Other Facilities

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, impleme ntation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated a long with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. Construction activities would be anticipated to require relatively small crews as new plants, stations, and modifications would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consis tent zoning. In addition, demand for these crews would be temporary ( e.g., 6

- 12 months per project). Therefore, it would be anticipated that the need for a substantial amount of construction worker migration would not occur and that a sufficient construc tion employment base would likely be available. Furthermore, it wou ld not be anticipated that a substantial amount of new personnel would be needed to operate the facilities and that sufficient employment base would likely be available because these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not require new additional housing or land use types that do not currently exist in the area; therefore, not affecting the provis ion of public services. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation No mitigation is required.



### O. Recreation

1. Regional Parks or Other Recreational Facilities

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and
ope rated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. Construction activities would be anticipated to require relatively small crews as new plants, stations, and modifications would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. In addition, demand for these crews would be temporary ( e.g., 6

- 12 months per project). Therefore, it would be anticipated that the need for a substantial amount of construction worker migration would not occur and that a sufficient c onstruction employment base would likely be available. Furthermore, it would not be anticipated that a substantial amount of new personnel would be needed to operate the facilities and that sufficient employment base would likely be available because thes e would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such thatAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

169 substantial physical deterioration would occur. In addition, new ( or expansion of) recreational

- related facilities would not occur; therefore, not physically affecting the environment. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation No mitigation is required.



### P. Transportation/Traffic

1. Performance of Circulation System; Congestion Management Programs; Air Traffic Patterns; Hazards; Emergency Access, Policies, Plans and Programs

a. Construction Impacts Although detailed information about specific construction activities is not currently available, new plants, stations and modifications would be anticipated to result in short

term construction traffic ( primarily motorized) from worker commute

- and material delivery

- related trips. The amount of construction activity would fluctuate depending on the particular type, number, and duration of usage for the varying equipment, and the phase of construction. T hese variations would affect the amount of project

- generated traffic for both worker commute trips and material deliveries. Depending on the amount of trip generation and the location of new facilities, implementation could conflict with applicable progra ms, plans, ordinances, or policies ( e.g., performance standards, congestion management); and/or result in hazardous design features and emergency access issues from road closures, detours, and obstruction of emergency vehicle movement, especially due to pr oject

- generated heavy

- duty truck trips. As a result, this impact would be potentially significant.

This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the a uthority of the ARB.

b. Operational Impacts With respect to operational

- related activities, it would not be anticipated that a substantial amount of new personnel would be needed to operate the facilities and that sufficient employment base would likely be available because these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. In addition, as discussed in Chapter 4 , Regulated Community Compliance Responses, deliveries associated with long

- term operational activities ( e.g., hydrogen deliveries) would not be anticipated to result in a substantial number of new trips ( or associated VMT). Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to result in substantial traffic volumes on local roadways and; th erefore, would not generate long

- term operational traffic that conflicts with applicable programs, plans, ordinances, or policies; result in a change in air traffic patterns; substantially increase hazards due to design features; or result in inadequate em ergency access. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

170 Mitigation Measure P.1. ( Construction) The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable laws and regulations in regards to transportation. ARB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified facilities that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or perm itting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under CEQA. The jurisdiction with primary permitting authority over a proposed action is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for complian ce with CEQA statutes. Project

- specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental review by agencies with project

- approval authority. Recognized practices that are routinely required to avoid and/or minimize construction traffic impacts include:

• Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance response to the ACC regulations would coordinate with local land use agencies to seek entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmenta l review requirements ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body would certify that the environmental document was prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and would approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental review, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environmental document to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the project. The definition of actions required to mitigate potentially significant tr affic impacts may include the following; however, any mitigation specifically required for a new or modified facility would be determined by the local lead agency.

• Minimize the number and length of access, internal, service and maintenance roads and use existing roads when feasible.

• Provide for safe ingress and egress to/from the proposed project site. Identify road design requirements for any proposed roads, and related road improvements.

• If new roads are necessary prepare a road siting plan and consult standards contained in federal, State , or local requirements. The plans should include design and construction protocols to ensure roads will meet the appropriate standards and be no larger than necessary to accommodate their intended functions ( e.g., tr affic volume and weight of vehicles). Access roads should be located to avoid or minimize impacts to washes and stream crossings, follow natural contours and minimize side

- hill cuts. Roads internal to a project site should be designed to minimize ground disturbance. Excessive grades on roads, road embankments, ditches, and drainages should be avoided, especially in areas with erodible soils.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

171 • Prepare a Construction Traffic Control Plan and a Traffic Management Plan.

Because the authority to determine pr oject

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and that the programmatic analysis does not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigation significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA compliance purposes, that the potentia lly significant impact regarding traffic resulting from the construction of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant and unavoidable.



### Q. Utilities and Service Systems

1. Water Supply, Wastewater Treatment, and Storm Water, and Solid Waste Infrastructure

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batte ries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations c ould also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants.

As discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, new hydrogen fueling stations would likely be located in urban areas consistent with local zoning. These locations would likely be served by utility and service systems that are already in place at the time the stations are built. Such systems would include water supply service prov iders, centralized wastewater treatment systems, storm water drainage infrastructure, and solid waste service providers and related infrastructure. Additionally, the demand for these utilities and services from hydrogen fueling stations would be minimal a nd not be unlike the demand from existing gasoline service stations. For these reasons, demand for these utilities and services would not be expected to exceed the capacity of the local providers or necessitate an increase in service capacities and associ ated infrastructure and, therefore, would not result associated environmental impacts.

New manufacturing plants, however, could generate substantial increases in the demand for water supply, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, and solid waste

ser vices in their local areas. These new facilities, no matter their size and location would be required to seek local land use approvals prior to their development. Part of the land use entitlement process for facilities proposed in California requires tha t each of these projects undergo environmental review consistent with the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. It is assumed that facilities proposed in other
state s would be subject to comparable federal, state , and/or local environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA) and that the environmental review process would assess whether adequate utilities and services ( i.e., wastewater services, water supplyAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

172 services, solid waste facilities) would be available and whether the project would resu lt in the need to expand or construct new facilities to serve the project. Through the environmental review process, utility and service demands would be calculated, agencies would provide input on available service capacity and the potential need for

ser vice

- related infrastructure including expansions to waste water treatment plants, new water supply entitlements and infrastructure, storm water infrastructure, and solid waste handling capacity [e.g., landfills]). Resulting environmental impacts would als o be determined through this process.

At this time, the specific location, type, and number of new manufacturing plants developed is not known and would be dependent upon a variety of market factors that are not within the control of ARB including: econo mic costs, product demands, environmental constraints, and other market constraints. Thus, the specific impacts from new manufacturing plants on utility and service systems cannot be identified with any certainty, and individual plants could potentially r esult in significant environmental impacts for which it is unknown whether mitigation would be available to reduce the impacts to a less

- than

- significant level. Thus, for purposes of this analysis, this impact is considered potentially significant.

This impact could be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level by mitigation that can and should be implemented by local lead agencies, but is beyond the authority of the ARB.

Mitigation Measure Q.1. The Regulatory Setting in Chapter 3 includes, but is not limited to, applicable laws and regulations that related to utilities and service systems. ARB does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation related to new or modified faciliti es that would be approved by local jurisdictions. The ability to require such measures is under the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or modified facilities in California would qualify as a “project” under CEQA . The jurisdiction with primary permitting authority over a proposed action is the Lead Agency, which is required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Project

specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the envi ronmental review by agencies with project

- approval authority. Recognized practices that are routinely required to avoid and/or minimize utility and service

- related impacts include:

• Proponents of new or modified facilities constructed as a compliance respo nse to the ACC regulations would coordinate with local land use agencies to seek entitlements for development including the completion of all necessary environmental review requirements ( e.g., CEQA). The local land use agency or governing body would certi fy that the environmental document was prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and would approve the project for development.

• Based on the results of the environmental review, proponents would implement all mitigation identified in the environme ntal document to reduce or substantially lessen the environmental impacts of the project. The definition of actionsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

173 required to mitigate potentially significant utility or service

- related impacts may include the following; however, any mitigation specific ally required for a new or modified facility would be determined by the local lead agency.

 Comply with local plans and policies regarding the provision of water supply, wastewater treatment, and storm water drainage utilities, and solid waste services.

 W here an on

- site wastewater system is proposed, submit a permit application to the appropriate local jurisdiction and include the application with applications to appropriate lead agencies.

 Where appropriate, prepare a Water Supply Assessment ( WSA) consiste nt with the requirements of Section 2 1151.9 of the Public Resources Code/ Section 1 0910 et seq. of the Water Code. The WSA would be approved by the local water agency/purveyor prior construction of the project.

 Comply with local plans and policies regard ing the provision of wastewater treatment services.

Because the authority to determine project

- level impacts and require project

- level mitigation lies with the land use and/or permitting agency for individual projects, and that the programmatic analysis do es not allow project

- specific details of mitigation, there is inherent uncertainty in the degree of mitigation ultimately implemented to reduce the potentially significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes the conservative approach in its post

- mitigati on significance conclusion and discloses, for CEQA compliance purposes, that the potentially significant impact to utilities and service systems resulting from the construction and operation of new plants and modifications to existing plants may be signifi cant and unavoidable.Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

174 This page intentionally left blank.Advanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

175 

### 6.0 CUMULATIVE AND GROWT H

- INDUCING IMPACTS

Cumulative impacts are impacts on the environment that result from the incremental impacts of a proposed project when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions ( CEQA Guidelines , CCR, Title 14, Section 15355[b]). Such impacts can result from individually minor

, but collectively significant actions taking place over time. CEQA Guidelines , CCR, Title 14, Section 15130 state s that the discussion of cumulative impacts need not provide as much detail as the discussion of effects at tributable to the project alone.

Recognizing the programmatic nature of the EA , cumulative impacts for resource topics are disclosed in general qualitative terms as they pertain to reasonably foreseeable compliance responses . The State CEQA Guidelines r equire that cumulative impacts be addressed when the cumulative impacts are expected to be significant and when the project’s incremental contribution to the effect is cumulatively considerable ( CEQA Guidelines , CCR, Title 14, Section 15130[a]). Where a l ead agency is examining a project with an incremental effect that is not “cumulatively considerable,” a lead agency need not consider that effect significant, but must briefly describe its basis for concluding that the incremental effect is not cumulativel y considerable. EIRs must consider "other projects creating related impacts." ( CEQA Guidelines, CCR, Title 14, Section 15130 [ a ][ 1 ] ). CEQA Guidelines , CCR, Title 14, Section 15355 ( b) requires an analysis of "other closely related past, present, and reaso nably foreseeable probable future projects". ARB is, accordingly, considering in the cumulative impacts analysis of other projects that, like the proposed ACC Program , are designed to reduce annual emissions of CAPs and GHGs, and not simply every project that emits CAPs or GHGs. This approach is "guided by the standards of practica lity and reasonableness" ( CEQA Guidelines, CCR, Title 14, 15130[ b ] ) and serves the purposes of the cumulative impacts analysis, which is to provide "a context for considering wh ether the incremental effects of the project at issue are considerable" when judged "against the backdrop of the environmental effects of other projects." ( CBE v. Cal. Res. Agency [ 2002 ] 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 119).

The level of detail in this section has be en guided by what is practical and reasonable, and contains the following elements:

• An analysis of related future projects or planned regulatory programs that would affect resources in the project area similar to those affected by the proposed project;

• A summary of the expected environmental effects to be produced by those reasonably foreseeable future projects with specific reference to additional information stating where that information is available; and

• A reasonable analysis of the cumulative impacts of the relevant projects. An environmental document must examine reasonable feasible options for mitigating or avoiding the project’s contribution to any significant cumulative effects.Advanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

176 Due to the state wide reach of the proposed ACC Program and the longer

- term future horizon for the reduction achievements, the impact analysis is inherently cumulative in nature, rather than site or project specific. As a result the character of impact conclusions in the resource

- oriented sections of Chapter 5 are cumulative, considering the potential effects of the full range of reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance, along with expected background growth in California, as appropriate.

This section evaluates the cumulative and growth

- inducing im pacts associ ated with implementation of the proposed ACC Program and the potential contribution of the program to those impacts. The impact assessment discusses each resource topic evaluated in this EA

.


### A. Aesthetics

There is uncertainty as to the exact locations of new plants, stations, and modifications, especially in regards to new manufacturing plants for producing propulsion batteries and fuel cells and in relation to the location of viewers. Construction and operation of these, though likely to occur in areas with consistent zoning, could introduce or increase the presence of artificial elements (e.g., heavy

- duty equipment, removal of existing vegetation, buildings) in areas with national, state , or county designated scenic vistas and/or scenic resources visib le from State scenic highways. The visual impact of such development would depend on several variables, including size of facilities, viewing distance, angle of view, visual absorption capacities, and the structure placement in the landscape. Operation m ay introduce substantial sources of nighttime lighting for safety and security purposes. Implementation of Mitigation Measure A.1. would not reduce these impacts to a less

- than

- significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considera ble contribution to a cumulative aesthetics

- related impact.



### B. Agriculture and Forestry Resources

Implementation of the proposed ACC Program could result in the construction and operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of pro pulsion batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations would also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. There is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modi fications, especially in regards to new manufacturing plants for producing propulsion batteries and fuel cells; however, these would likely occur within existing facility footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to result in the conversion of farmland, conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, conflict with existing zoning for (or cause rezoning of) forest land or timberland, the loss of f orest land (or conversion of forest land to non

- forest use), or involve other changes resulting in conversion of farmland or forest land to non

- agricultural use or non

- forest use, respectively. Thus, the proposed ACC Program would not result in a consider able contribution to a cumulative agriculture

- related impact.Advanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

177 

### C. Air Quality

A majority of California is designated as a nonattainment area for ozone and PM 10 , and to a lesser degree for PM 2.5 , and areas with high levels of TACs. As described in above in Chapter 5, future projects associated with implementation of proposed ACC Program and other cumulative development projects would be required to seek local land use approvals prior to their implementation. Part of the land use entitlement process require s that each of these projects undergo environmental review and through this process, air quality levels and associated exposure of sensitive receptors would be calculated and resulting impacts would be determined. With respect to long

- term operational emis sions, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would result in a beneficial impact.

However, depending on the specific location, type, and number, construction activities could generate short

- term emissions that conflict with applicable air quality pl ans, or violate or contribute substantially to an existing or projected violation. Additionally, implementation could also result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Implementation of Mitigation Measure C.1. (Co nstruction) would reduce these impacts to a less

- than

- significant level. Thus, all potentially significant air quality impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed ACC Program would be reduced to a less

- than

- significant level with mitigation and would not result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative air quality impact.



### D. Greenhouse Gases

The proposed ACC Program would result in an emissions benefit as compared to current regulations. Table 5

- 4 shows the GHG emission benefits in 202 0, 2025, 2035, and 2050. By 2025, CO 2 equivalent emissions would be reduced by almost 14 MMT/yr, which is 12 percent from baseline levels. The reduction increases in 2035 to 3 2 MMT/Year, a 27 percent reduction from baseline levels. By 2050, the proposed regulation will reduce emissions by more than 4 2 MMT/yr, a reduction of 33 percent from baseline levels. Viewed cumulatively over the life of the regulation (2017

- 2050), the proposed ACC Program would reduce emissions by more than 8 7 0 MMT CO 2 e. Thus, the proposed ACC Program would not result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative GHG

- related impact.



### E. Biological Resources

There is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, especially in regards to n ew manufacturing plants for producing propulsion batteries and fuel cells and in relation to the location of biological resources. Construction of new plants could require disturbance of undeveloped area, such as clearing of vegetation, earth movement and grading, trenching for utility lines, erection of new buildings, and paving of parking lots, delivery areas, and roadways. These activities would have the potential to adversely affect biological resources (e.g., species, habitat) that may reside or be p resent in those areas. Because there are biologicalAdvanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

178 species that occur, or even thrive, in developed settings, resources could also be adversely affected by the installation of hydrogen fuel dispensing units at existing gasoline service stations and modif ications to existing hydrogen production plants within existing footprints, or at other sites in areas with consistent zoning. Long

- term operation of new plants, stations, and modifications would often include the presence of humans; movement of automobil es, trucks and heavy equipment; and operation of stationary equipment. This environment would not be conducive to biological resources located

on

- site or nearby.

The biological resources that could be affected by construction and operation associated wi th implementation of the proposed ACC Program, would depend on the specific location of each facility and its environmental setting. Harmful effects could include modifications to existing habitat; including removal, degradation, and fragmentation of ripa rian systems, wetlands, or other sensitive natural wildlife habitat and plan communities; interference with wildlife movement or wildlife nursery sites; loss of special

- status species; and/or conflicts with the provisions of adopted habitat conservation pl ans, natural community conservation plans, or other conservation plans or policies to protect natural resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure E.1. would not reduce these impacts to a less

- than

- significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program cou ld result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative biolog y

- related impact.



### F. Cultural Resources

There is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, especially in regards to new manufacturing plants for producing propulsion batteries and fuel cells and in relation to the location of cultural resources. The long

- term operation of new plants, stations, and modifications would not include any ground disturbance or demolition activities, which are the primar y detriments to historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources. However, construction of new plants could require disturbance of undeveloped area, such as clearing of vegetation, earth movement and grading, trenching for utility lines, erection of new buildings, and paving of parking lots, delivery areas, and roadways. Demolition of existing structures may also occur before the construction of new buildings and structures. The cultural resources that could potentially be affected by ground dis turbance activities could include, but are not limited to, prehistoric and historical archaeological sites, paleontological resources, historic buildings, structures, or archaeological sites associated with agriculture and mining, and heritage landscapes. Properties important to Native American communities and other ethnic groups, including tangible properties possessing intangible traditional cultural values, also may exist. Historic buildings and structures may also be adversely affected by demolition

- r elated activities. Such resources may occur individually, in groupings of modest size, or in districts. Because culturally sensitive resources can also be located in developed settings, historic, archeological, and paleontological resources, and places i mportant to Native American communities, could also be adversely affected by the installation of hydrogen fuel dispensing units at existing gasoline service stations and modifications to existingAdvanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

179 hydrogen production plants within existing footprints, or at other sites in areas with consistent zoning. Implementation of Mitigation Measure F.1. would not reduce these impacts to a less

- than

- significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative cultural r esource

- related impact.



### G. Geology and Soils

As discussed in Chapter 5, new manufacturing plants would not be anticipated to require the installation or use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems, but rather likely be served by central ized wastewater treatment plants. New hydrogen fueling stations and modifications would not generate waste water and, thus, would not require new waste water treatment disposal systems. However, new manufacturing plants and new hydrogen fueling stations could be located in a variety of relatively high

- risk geologic and soil conditions that are considered to be potentially hazardous. New facilities could be located in a variety of geologic, soil, and slope conditions with varying amounts of vegetation tha t would be susceptible to soil erosion and the loss of topsoil during construction. New facilities could also be constructed in locations that would expose facilities and structures to expansive soil conditions. D evelopment of these facilities could expo se people and structures to relatively high levels of risk associated with strong seismic ground shaking, including liquefaction and landslides, and instability; or result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. These geologic, seismic, and so il

- related conditions could result in damage to structures, related utility lines, and access roads, blocking access and posing safety hazards to people. Implementation of Mitigation Measure G.1. and G.2. would not reduce these impacts to a less

- than

- sign ificant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative geology and soils

- related impact.



### H

. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

As discussed in Chapter 5, the long

- term operation of new plants, stations, and modifications would result in the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials (i.e., propulsion batteries, fuel cells, and hydrogen); however, such would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State and local laws. Implementati on of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to result in locating new plants, stations, or modifications near schools, public (or public use) airports, private airstrips, or wildlands; or on sites included on a list of hazardous materials sites or impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. In addition, as noted above, the handling of hazards materials would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State and local laws; and, although there is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning where hazardous materials are currently in use. Implementation of the proposed ACC Program would result in mass reductions in regards to the heavier vehicle classes. When two vehicles of unequal mass collide, the delta V is higher in the lighter vehicle, in the same proportion as the mass ratio. As a result, the fat ality risk isAdvanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

180 also higher. Removing some mass from the heavy vehicle reduces delta V in the lighter vehicle, where fatality risk is high, resulting in a large benefit, offset by a small penalty because delta V increases in the heavy vehicle, where fatality risk is low

– adding up to a net societal benefit. It is also important to note that once differences in vehicles, drivers and crash times/locations are accounted for, there is essentially no correlation between vehicle mass and US fatality risk per VMT ( Wenzel 2011). Also, with regards to battery fires and/or explosions, there are existing propulsion battery system safety documents that define evaluation methods and make recommendations for battery system performance. However, the project could create a s ignificant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment primarily related to construction activities as discussed in Chapter 5. Imple mentation of Mitigation Measure H.2. would not reduce these impacts to a less

- than

- significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative hazards

- related impact.



### I. Hydrology and Water Quality

The lon g

- term operation of new plants, stations, and modifications would be required to comply with applicable erosion, water quality standards, and waste discharge requirements (e.g., NPDES, SWPPP). With respect to depleting groundwater supplies, impairing qual ity, and runoff issues, new facilities would not be anticipated to result in substantial demands due to the nature of associated activities. However, n ew plants, stations, and modifications could be located in a variety of conditions with regards to alter ing drainage patters, flooding, and inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Implementation of Mitigation Measure I.2. would not reduce these impacts to a less

than

- significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considerable contrib ution to a cumulative hydrology and water quality

- related impact.



### J. Land Use Planning

New hydrogen fueling stations would also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to divide an established community or conflict with a land use or conservation plan. Thus, the proposed ACC Program would

no t result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative land use planning

- related impact.



### K. Mineral Resources

New hydrogen fueling stations would also be constructed and operated along with modifications to existing hydrogen production plants. These woul d likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning where original permitting and analyses considered these issues. In addition, as discussed in Chapter 4, Regulated Community Compliance Responses, implementation of the proposed A CC ProgramAdvanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

181 would not significantly deplete the supply of lithium or platinum and both are currently used in auto manufacturing processes. Thus, the proposed ACC Program would not result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative mineral resources

- rela ted impact.



### L. Noise

As discussed above, although there is uncertainty as to the exact locations of these new plants, stations, and modifications, these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Thus, implementatio n of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to result in locating new plants, stations, or modifications near existing public (or public use) airports or private airstrips. In addition, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not resu lt in any housing placement or substantial increases in airport

- activities. With respect to operational

- related transportation activities, new plants, stations, and modifications would not be anticipated to result in a doubling of ADT volumes on affected roadway segments (e.g., the amount associated with a substantial traffic noise increase as discussed above). However, the construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications, could introduce new on

- site construction

- and stationary

- sour ce noise (e.g., heavy

- duty construction equipment, pumps, motors, compressors, fans, generators, and other equipment) levels in excess of applicable standards or that result in a substantial increase in ambient levels at nearby sensitive receptors, and exp osure to excessive vibration levels. Implementation of Mitigation Measure L.1. would not reduce these impacts to a less

- than

- significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative noise

- related impac t.



### M. Population and Housing

Construction activities would be anticipated to require relatively small crews as new plants, stations, and modifications would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. In addition, demand fo r these crews would be temporary (e.g., 6

- 12 months per project). Therefore, it would be anticipated that the need for a substantial amount of construction worker migration would not occur and that a sufficient construction employment base would likely be available. Furthermore, it would not be anticipated that a substantial amount of new personnel would be needed to operate the facilities and that sufficient employment base would likely be available because these would likely occur within existing footpr ints or in areas with consistent zoning. Thus, the proposed ACC Program would not result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative population and housing

- related impact.



### N. Public Services

Construction activities would be anticipated to require relat ively small crews as new plants, stations, and modifications would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. In addition, demand for these crews would be temporary (e.g., 6

- 12 months per project). Therefore, it would be anticipated that the need for a substantial amount of construction worker migration would not occur and that aAdvanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

182 sufficient construction employment base would likely be available. Furthermore, it would not be anticipated that a substantial amount of new per sonnel would be needed to operate the facilities and that sufficient employment base would likely be available because these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. Implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not require new additional housing or land use types that do not currently exist in the area; therefore, not affecting the provision of public services. Thus, the proposed ACC Program would not result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative popula tion and public services

- related impact.



### O. Recreation

As discussed above, it would be anticipated that the need for a substantial amount of construction worker migration would not occur and that a substantial amount of new personnel would not be needed to operate the facilities. Thus, implementation of the proposed ACC Program would not be anticipated to increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration would occur. In addition, new (or expansion of) recreational

related facilities would not occur; therefore, not physically affecting the environment. Thus, the proposed ACC Program would not result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative recreation

- related imp act.



### P. Transportation/Traffic

With respect to operational

- related activities, it would not be anticipated that a substantial amount of new personnel would be needed to operate the facilities and that sufficient employment base would likely be available be cause these would likely occur within existing footprints or in areas with consistent zoning. In addition, deliveries associated with long

- term operational activities (e.g., hydrogen deliveries) would not be anticipated to result in a substantial number o f new trips (or associated VMT). However, depending on the amount of trip generation associated with construction activities and the location of new facilities, implementation could conflict with applicable programs, plans, ordinances, or policies (e.g., performance standards, congestion management); and/or result in hazardous design features and emergency access issues from road closures, detours, and obstruction of emergency vehicle movement, especially due to project

- generated heavy

- duty truck trips. I mplementation of Mitigation Measure P.1. would not reduce these impacts to a less

- than

- significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative transportation/traffic

- related impact.



### Q. Utilities and S ervice Systems

New hydrogen fueling stations would likely be located in urban areas consistent with local zoning. These locations would likely be served by utility and service systems that are already in place at the time the stations are built and the de mand would be minimal and not be unlike the demand from existing gasoline service stations. Thus, such would not be expected to exceed the capacity of the local providers or necessitate an increaseAdvanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

183 in service capacities and associated infrastructure. How ever, new manufacturing plants could generate substantial increases in the demand for water supply, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, and solid waste services in their local areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Q.1. would not reduce these impacts to a less

than

- significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considerable contribution to a cumulative utilities and service systems

- related impact.



### R

. Growth

- Inducing Impacts

The proposed ACC Program would not directly res ult in any growth in population or housing. I mplementation would support job formation in the affected industries (e.g., manufacturing associated with batteries, advanced clean cars, and material and technology improvements)

. The job formation would supp ort improved employment in the State , which may indirectly encourage population growth. Any growth would occur over the long

- term period of the ACC Program’s regulations, which could be accommodated within the normal planning process in California communi ties, including environmental review. California is renowned for its environmentally progressive laws and regulations, and the proposed ACC Program would contribute to California’s effort to improve public health, contribute towards healthy lifestyles and improved quality of life.Advanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

184 This page intentionally left blank.Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

185 

### 7.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSI S

Under ARB’s CEQA certified regulatory program, an environmental analysis shall address “feasible alternatives to the proposed action [that] would substantially reduce any significant adverse impact identified” ( CCR, Title 17, Section 6 0005[b]). Additional ly, any ARB action or proposal for which significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified shall not be approved or adopted as proposed, if there are “feasible alternatives available [that] would substantially reduce such adverse impact” ( CCR, Title 17, Section 6 0006). CEQA Guidelines, CCR, Title 14, Section 1 5126.6 ( a) also indicates the need for an evaluation of “a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or the location of the project, [that] would feasibly attain most of the basic project objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the signifi cant effects, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.”

The purpose of the alternatives analysis is to determine whether or not a variation of the proposed project would reduce or eliminate significant project impacts, within the framework of achieving the basic project objectives. The proposed ACC Program could be designed differently, which provide s opportunities to define alternatives for the EA analysis. Options for the emission requirements under the LEV regulation, vehicle requirements under the ZEV regulation, and provisions of the CFO regulation are discussed below. No alternatives are discussed for the EPL , on

- board diagnostics

, or certification fuel component s of the LEV regulation

, because the proposed amendments
to th ose parts by this regulatory package would not result in any significant impacts to the environment.



### A. No Project Alternative

1. Description of the No Project Alternative

CEQA requires a specific alternative of “No Project” to be evaluated. Under the No Project Alternative, amendments would not occur to the existing LEV ( including EPL)

, ZEV, and CFO regulations. Thus, the emission requirements for CAPs in place for model year 2010, the final year of implementation of the existing LEV II regulation,

wo uld remain in effect for subsequent model years. The existing requirements of the ZEV regulation would continue without the additional requirement that manufacturers earn a minimum proportion of the required credits by selling AT PZEVs, TZEVs, and PZEVs. The EPL regulation would continue to be required on new cars. In addition, the Pavley regulations would also continue at 2016 model year standard level s.

2. Consistency with Project Objectives

The No Project Alternative would fail to achieve the project objectives listed in Chapter 1

, Section C , because enhancements to programs for CAP and GHG reductions necessary to achieve air quality standards and GHG requirements and targets would
not occur.Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

186 Under the No Project Alternative, ARB would continue to implement other existing programs and regulations intended to reduce emissions of CAPs and GHGs in California, but without the proposed ACC Program. Vehicle emissions of CAPs and GHGs would continue to decrease as the vehicle fleet turns over under the e xisting LEV and ZEV regulations. This is because, typically, almost all of the State ’s fleet of light

and medium

- duty vehicles turns over in an approximately 15

- year cycle. Thus, because 2010 is the last model year addressed by the existing LEV regulati on, the vehicle fleet would continue to become incrementally cleaner and more efficient until approximately 2025. After that complete turnover cycle, the emissions efficiency of the vehicle fleet would not improve with subsequent fleet turnover

, because n ew vehicles would no longer be cleaner than the older vehicles they replace. The No Project Alternative would not fulfill the requirement of HSC Section 4 3018 ( a), which requires ARB to reduce vehicle emissions of CAPs to the maxim um extent feasible. Furt her, the No Project Alternative would not help attain the California and national ambient air quality standards and it would fail to ensure all Californians live, work, and play in a healthful environment free from harmful exposure to air pollution.

The No Project Alternative would also fail to fulfill either the AB 1493 mandate to achieve maximum feasible GHG reductions or the AB 32 mandate to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. ARB has identified that an additional reduction of 3.8 MMT CO 2 e would be needed from light

- and medium

- duty vehicles to achieve the goals of AB 32, which would be in addition to compliance with the existing LEV and ZEV regulations ( ARB 2011 b ). ARB would attempt to develop and implement other regulations or programs t o achieve a reduction a minimum of 3.8 MMT CO 2 e ; however, it is too speculative at this time to determine whether this reduction could be achieved or when a new regulation would be able to go into effect. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that this reduction would not likely be achieved by 2020 with a new regulation or program and California would not achieve the AB 32 mandate.

In addition, implementation of the No Project Alternative would prevent ARB from coordinating with the national Tier 3 stand ards for CAP emissions that are currently being developed by U.S. EPA

, as well as efforts by U.S. EPA and NHTSA to develop GHG standards for light

- duty vehicles. For instance, the credit formula that applies to GHG standards for air conditioning systems u nder the existing Pavley regulation would not align with U.S. EPA’s methodology for model years 2017

– 2025. Such inconsistencies between the State and federal requirements would likely result in compliance difficulty and confusion for manufacturers. In a ddition, Board approval of a “No Project” Alternative would threaten California’s nation

- leading role in forcing new motor vehicle technology, making it more likely that U.S. EPA and NHTSA could finalize weaker standards than they have proposed

, and con seq uently, would prevent California from achieving needed emission reductions.

Without regulatory requirements, development and use of ZEVs would not increase fast enough to meet ARB’s air quality standards and GHG reduction targets

. It is unlikely that vehi cle manufacturers would increase production of BEVs or hydrogen FCVs above existing levels in response to market demand alone. E conomies of scale in productionAdvanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

187 costs would not be realized unless manufacturers commit to producing larger volumes of these al ternative vehicles . C onsumers would be expected to hesitate to purchase BEVs and FCVs because of doubts about sufficient availability of charging and fueling stations. L eft unchanged

, t he existing CFO regulation would not require the installation of hydr ogen fueling infrastructure until the projected number of vehicles reaches 20,000 FCVs. Once activated, the existing regulation only requires a few oil companies and convenience store and supermarket chains to build the stations, leaving several large oil companies that own smaller numbers of gasoline stations ( or no stations) out of the requirement in the early years. Also, with a 20,000 vehicle trigger, hydrogen fueling infrastructure would not be sufficient to support the FCV market before the trigger is reached

, making it unlikely that the cumulative total of FCVs in the State would ever reach 20,000 vehicles . Thus, it is uncertain whether any entities would build new hydrogen fueling facilities if vehicle manufacturers do not increase production of h ydrogen FCVs. Similarly, it is unlikely that vehicle manufacturers would commit to increasing production of FCVs without having a high level of confidence that the fueling infrastructure would be in place to support the FCVs.

In addition, the EPL would no t be changed to be consistent with the federal Fuel Economy and Environment label. Cars sold and leased in California would be required to have both the California EPL and the federal Fuel Economy and Environment label, which would supply different sets o f information to consumers and could result in buyer confusion.

In summary, the No Project Alternative would neither meet the objectives of the project, nor create an environmentally advantageous outcome.

3. Environmental Impacts

There would be no new environmental impacts under the No Project Alternative

, because compliance responses by vehicle manufacturers and refiners and importers of gasoline would be the same as under the existing regulatory environment.

Because the emission standards under the LEV regulation and the proportion of ZEVs would not change and because the vehicle manufacturing industry has already met these requirements for its 2010 and 2011 vehicle models with existing production facilities, it is anticipated that the No Project Alt ernative would not result in the development of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion batteries or fuel cells, or the modification or expansion of existing production facilities. The proportion of ZEVs and ZEV credit

- qua lifying vehicles in the state wide vehicle fleet would likely not increase and, therefore, new hydrogen fueling stations would not be developed under the existing CFO regulation. Thus, no environmental impacts related to new or expanded facilities would oc cur under the No Project Alternative

. Beneficial impacts resulting from the proposed ACC Program would not occur under the No Project Alternative. This would include reduction of CAPs and GHG beyond what is required under existing regulations and reduc tion in dependence on conventional petroleum fuels. In addition to failing to meet project objectives, this would put the NoAdvanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

188 Project Alternative at a substantial environmental disadvantage, compared to the proposed ACC Program.



### B. More Stringent Emission s Standards in the Low

- Emission

Vehicle and Zero Emission Vehicle Regulations

1. Description of the Alternative

This alternative is referred to as the More Stringent Alternative. It would amend the existing LEV regulation to have more stringent emissio n standards for light

- and medium

- duty vehicles for both CAPs and GHGs than the proposed amendments to the ACC Program. More specifically, the standards under this alternative would be more stringent for each model year than those in the proposed ACC Prog ram. While the overall strictness of the standards would increase annually with this alternative, many attributes would be similar to the proposed ACC Program. This includes replacement of separate standards for NMOG and NO x with a combined standard that would be based on the sum of these two pollutants. A more robust Federal Test Procedure for measuring emissions would still be required and the “durability basis” would still be extended to 150,000 miles to ensure the effectiveness of a vehicle’s emissio ns control systems over the operational life of the vehicle. Also, the California Supplemental Federal Test Procedure ( SFTP) would still be extended to more medium

- duty vehicles the SFTP ( known as SFTP II) and would include standards for exhaust emissions of particulate matter. In addition, evaporative emission standards would still be extended to more vehicle types and to vehicles fueled by gasoline that contains higher percentages of ethanol or other biofuels.

This alternative would amend the ZEV regulation to require manufacturers to earn more ZEV credits than would be required under the proposed ACC Program for model years 2015 to 2025. Amendments to the CFO regulation would be the same as under the proposed project.

2. Consistency with Project Objectives

Because manufacturers would have less time , compared to the proposed ACC Program, to develop more cost

- effective innovations that could achieve the more stringent emission standards under this alternative, the production costs of building vehicles that meet these standards would likely be higher and would be passed on to the consumer at the point of sale. Manufacturers have indicated that a more stringent set of standards within this timeframe would be proh ibitively expensive

, because time is needed to design the necessary innovations and establish production lines. The incremental increase in cost borne by consumers would be greater than under the proposed ACC Program and could result in slower turnover of the state wide fleet. Thus, the emissions reductions realized by requiring lower

- emission vehicles would be offset to some degree by the slowdown in vehicle turnover. While overall emissions reductions from the state wide fleet would still be achieved, du e to potential fleet turnover delays it is not certain that this alternative would reduce vehicle CAP emissionsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

189 to the maxim um extent feasible, as required by HSC Section 4 3018 ( a). The emissions reduction that would occur would nonetheless help air basins throughout California attain the California and national ambient air quality standards.

For these same reasons, it is also not certain that this alternative would achieve a reduction of 3.8 MMT CO 2 e by 2020 that has been identified by ARB in the adopted Scoping Plan as the reduction needed from an ACC Program ( ARB 2011 b ). Thus, California’s ability to achieve additional reductions in furtherance of AB 1493 and to attain the GHG reduction goal of AB 32 could be affected, particularly if ARB cannot develo p other programs or regulations to reduce GHG emissions in time.

This alternative would achieve the objective to establish a uniform set of vehicle emission standards in California, and would ensure that some emission reductions would occur. In addition, the state wide fleet of light

- and medium

- duty vehicles would become more fuel efficient and, thus, help the State become less dependent on petroleum as an energy source. However, the degree of this effect is unknown in light of the expected delay in the vehicle fleet turnover, as discussed above

. More specifically, as described Appendix T ( LEV III Mobile Source Emissions Inventory Technical Support Document), ARB staff analyzed an alternative scenario that would have accelerated fleet average emission s tandards by three years to 2022. To reflect the accelerated regulatory scenario, staff assessed the population fraction by technology group and vehicle class that would be sold in each calendar year, by emissions process ( e.g., exhaust and evaporative emis sions). Tables 2

- 27 through 2

- 30 of Appendix T provide, for the accelerated CAPs regulatory scenario, population splits by technology group for each regulated vehicle class. From this analysis, ARB found that an acceleration of three years would provide v ery small additional emission benefits relative to the proposed ACC program scenario, as shown in Figures 7

- 1 through 7

- 4 below.

The proposed ACC Program includes new future

- year GHG emission standards that reduce emissions as cleaner vehicles penetrate into the fleet. Because the standards are a fleet mix by calendar year, fleets have the option to comply with them in different
way s , and the penetration of ZEV vehicles is one of many ways in which the standards could be met. As a result, ARB staff mode led GHG benefits of the combined program and did not evaluate the tailpipe emission benefits of ZEV apart from the other components of the proposed ACC Program.

As part of this analysis, ARB staff evaluated a more aggressive option, which is consistent wi th this alternative. Under this more aggressive scenario, emissions would be reduced by 3 percent per year between 2016 and 2025. Using the proposed phase

in schedule for the regulation, ARB staff estimated the percent reduction in CO 2 emission rates by m odel year for those vehicles subject to the proposed ACC Program. Table 2

- 35 of Appendix T shows the more stringent alternative GHG standard for new vehicles in California. Figure 7

- 1 through 7

- 3 show the proposed ACC Program scenario along with the more s tringent alternative (i.e., dashed line).Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

190 Figure 7

- 1

. ROG Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated Scenarios

Figure 7

- 2

. NO x Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated ScenariosAdvanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

191 Figure 7

- 3

. CO Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerate d Scenarios

Figure 7

- 4

. State wide CO 2 e Emissions Proposed vs Alternative Greenhouse Gas Regulatory Scenarios ( with Rebound)Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

192 3. Environmental Impacts

The types of impacts under the More Stringent Alternative would be the same as the proposed amendments to the ACC Program, including potentially significant adverse impacts related to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, transportation/traffic, and utilities and service systems. However, because many of the adverse environmental e ffects would be associated with the development of new or modified manufacturing plants and/or new hydr ogen fueling stations, these impacts from compliance responses under the More Stringent Alternative may occur slower as discussed above, but could be greater after complete implementation, than under the proposed ACC Program. This is because the More Stri ngent Alternative would result in greater penetration of ZEVs and ZEV credit

- qualifying vehicles into the state wide vehicle fleet and manufacturers may produce and sell more BEVs and hydrogen FCVs, which earn the highest credit value, to achieve the more r equirements of a more stringent ZEV regulation. The More Stringent Alternative could result in more or larger manufacturing plants being constructed, or more intense modifications or expansions to existing plants, and an associated increase in the potenti al or intensity of those significant adverse impacts identified for the proposed ACC Program in Chapter 6, Impact Analysis and Mitigation. The increase in hydrogen FCVs in the vehicle fleet would then trigger requirements for major refiners and importers of gasoline to build hydrogen fueling stations ( i.e., a trigger of 10,000 vehicles within an air basin and 20,000 vehicles state wide). Moreover, the types of environmental impacts associated with the production, distribution, and sale of hydrogen would be the same as for the proposed project with the exception that more hydrogen production and distribution activity and hydrogen fuel outlets would occur. Assuming the trigger level for building required hydrogen fueling stations would occur earlier in time, the impact associated with construction and operation of these stations may be experienced earlier as well.

Beneficial air quality, GHG, and energy effects would be anticipated to be greater overall, but could occur at a slower pace.



### C. Less Stringent Emissions Standards in the Low

- Emission

Vehicle and Zero Emission Vehicle Regulations

1. Description of the Alternative

This alternative is referred to as the Less Stringent Alternative

. It would amend the existing LEV regulation to include less string ent emission standards for light

- and medium

- duty vehicles for both CAPs and GHGs. More specifically, the standards under this alternative would be less stringent for each model year than those in the proposed ACC Program. This alternative would also ame nd the ZEV regulation to require manufacturers to earn fewer ZEV credits than would be required under the proposed amendments to the ACC Program. Under this alternative the set of emission standards and ZEV credit requirements that would be phased in for m odel years 2015

– 2025 would also be less stringent than the proposed ACC Program.Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

193 Some attributes of this alternative would be similar to the proposed project, including the replacement of separate standards for NMOG and NO x with a combined standard that that is based on the sum of these two pollutants. A more robust Federal Test Procedure for measuring emissions would also be required and the “durability basis” would be extended to 150,000 miles to ensure the effectiveness o f a vehicle’s emissions control systems over the operational life of the vehicle. Also, the SFTP would be extended to medium

- duty vehicles the SFTP ( known as SFTP II) and would include standards for exhaust emissions of particulate matter. Evaporative em ission standards would be extended to more vehicle types and vehicles fueled by gasoline that contains higher percentages of ethanol or other biofuels. Amendments to the CFO regulation would be the same as under the proposed ACC Program.

2. Consisten cy with Project Objectives

Emissions generated by the state wide fleet of light

- and medium

- duty vehicles would decrease because the LEV standards under this alternative would be more stringent than the existing LEV regulation standards and the ZEV requirem ents would be increased from the current ZEV regulation. However, the emissions reduction achieved under this alternative would not be as great as the reductions that would be achieved under the proposed ACC Program. Also, the emissions reduction would n ot be the maxim um feasible reduction that is mandated by HSC Section 4 3018 ( a). Thus, this alternative would limit the ability of various air districts throughout the State to attain the State and national ambient air quality standards in their respective air basins.

Similarly, the state wide fleet of light

- and medium

- duty vehicles would become more GHG

- efficient, which would help the State attain its GHG reduction goals; however, the extent of the reduction would be less than the 3.8 MMT CO 2 e by 2020 tha t is identified by ARB as the reduction needed from a ACC Program as identified in ARB’s adopted Scoping Plan ( ARB 2011 b ). Thus, this could prevent California from achieving the GHG reduction goal of AB 32, particularly if ARB cannot develop other program s or regulations to reduce GHG emissions. In addition, this alternative would not meet the maximum feasible emission reductions in furtherance of AB 1493.

In addition, the state wide fleet of light

- and medium

- duty vehicles would become more fuel efficient and, thus, help the State become less dependent on petroleum as an energy source, but not to the extent that it would under the proposed ACC Program.

This alternative would achieve the objective to establish a set of vehicle emissions standards in California and would ensure that some emission reductions would occur.

As described above, the proposed ACC Program includes new future year GHG emission st andards that reduce emissions as cleaner vehicles penetrate into the fleet. Because the standards are a fleet mix by calendar year, fleets have the option to comply with them in different way, and the penetration of ZEV vehicles is one of manyAdvanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

194 ways in whi ch the standards could be met. As a result, ARB staff modeled GHG benefits of the combined program and did not evaluate the tailpipe emission benefits of ZEV apart from the other components of the proposed ACC Program.

As part of this analysis, ARB staff evaluated a less aggressive option, which is consistent with this alternative. Under this less aggressive scenario, emissions would not be reduced by 3 percent per year between 2016 and 2025. Using the proposed phase

- in schedule for the regulation, ARB s taff estimated the percent reduction in CO 2 emission rates by model year for those vehicles subject to the proposed ACC Program. Table 2

- 34 of Appendix T shows the L ess S tringent A lternative GHG standard for new vehicles in California.

3. Environmental Impacts

The types of impacts under the Less Stringent Alternative would be the same as the proposed amendments to the ACC Program, including potentially significant adverse impacts related to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology an d soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, transportation/traffic, and utilities and service systems. However, because many of the adverse environmental affects would be associated with the development of new or modified manufacturing plants and/or new hydrogen fueling stations, the degree of these impacts from these compliance responses under the Less Stringent Alternative may be less, or occur later in time, than under the proposed ACC Program. This is largely because the Less Stringent Alternativ e would result in slower penetration of ZEVs and ZEV credit

- qualifying vehicles into the state wide vehicle fleet and associated production by manufacturers. Nonetheless, this could result in the construction of new manufacturing plants, or modifications o r expansions to existing plants, and the same associated impacts identified for the proposed ACC Program in Chapter 5 , Impact Analysis and Mitigation. The penetration of hydrogen FCVs in the vehicle fleet would trigger requirements for major refiners and importers of gasoline to build hydrogen fueling stations ( i.e., a trigger of 10,000 vehicles within an air basin and 20,000 vehicles state wide). Moreover, the types of environmental impacts associated with the production, distribution, and sale of hydroge n would be the same as for the proposed project with the exception that less hydrogen production and distribution activity would occur and fewer hydrogen fuel outlets would be constructed. Assuming the trigger level for building required hydrogen fueling stations would occur later in time, the impact associated with construction and operation of these stations may be experienced later as well.

Beneficial air quality, GHG, and energy effects would be anticipated to be less than those that would occur with implementation of the proposed ACC program.Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

195 

### D. A Clean Fuels Outlet Regulation Based on a Memorandum of Agreement with Major Refiners and Importers of Gasoline

1. Description of the Alternative

This alternative is referred to as the Memorandum of Agre ement (MOA) Alternative. Under th e alternative, the obligations of the CFO regulation would be based on a n MOA between ARB, major refiners and importers of gasoline, gasoline station owners, hydrogen fuel providers, vehicle manufacturers, and other govern ment entities rather than a codified regulation. The MOA would describe a multilateral agreement among these parties that outlines the criteria that determine the timing and responsibility of constructing new hydrogen fueling stations at various locations in California. Vehicle manufacturers would commit to providing sales forecasts about the number and locations of hydrogen FCVs they anticipate selling or leasing in the State . The MOA would have the binding power of a contract and be legally enforceable

. All other changes to the LEV and ZEV regulations and the EPL would be the same as the proposed ACC Program.

2. Consistency with Project Objectives

Under the MOA Alternative, it is assumed that the requirements for major refiners and importers of ga soline to establish new hydrogen fueling stations outlined in the MOA would be set by agreement, but not more strictly bound by regulation, increasing the potential for varying levels of commitment. This is typically true of MOAs for multiple reasons incl uding that each party to the agreement may interject its own unique stipulations

. It is not clear whether a party to the MOA would face penalties if it failed to fulfill the MOA. This could ultimately result in fewer hydrogen fueling stations being
const ructed in California under an agreement than if the CFO requirements were codified in regulation . Thus, there may not be a sufficient availability of hydrogen fuel for hydrogen fuel vehicles produced and sold by automobile manufacturers to fulfill the
req uirements of the ZEV regulation. This could ultimately affect California’s ability to achieve the maximum emissions reduction possible from motor vehicles as required by HSC Section 4 3018 ( a) and to help local air basins attain the California and national ambient air quality standards. It could also hinder California’s ability to achieve a reduction of 3.8 MMT CO 2 e by 2020 that ARB identified as the reduction needed from an ACC Program to support the adopted Scoping Plan and achieve AB 32 goals ( ARB 2011 b ) , and to further AB 1493 reductions

. I t is too speculative to determine whether ARB would be able to develop and implement other programs or regulations that would achieve this reduction in time Limited availability of hydrogen fuels stations would also

a dversely affect the objective of reducing California’s dependence on petroleum because a sufficient number and variety of fuel options would not be available to

consumers.Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

196 3. Environmental Impacts

The types of impacts under the MO A Alternative would be the same as the proposed amendments to the ACC Program, including potentially significant adverse impacts related to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, tran sportation/traffic, and utilities and service systems. However, because many of the adverse environmental affects would be associated with the development of new or modified manufacturing plants and/or new hydrogen fueling stations, the degree of these im pacts from these compliance responses under the MO A Alternative may be similar to or less than the proposed ACC Program

, depending on the degree of commitment to the agreement . Nonetheless, this could result in the construction of new manufacturing plants , or modifications or expansions to existing plants, and the same associated impacts identified for the proposed ACC Program in Chapter 5 , Impact Analysis and Mitigation. The penetration of hydrogen FCVs in the vehicle fleet would then trigger requirement s for major refiners and importers of gasoline to build hydrogen fueling stations ( i.e., a trigger of 10,000 vehicles within an air basin and 20,000 vehicles state wide). Moreover, the types of environmental impacts associated with the production, distribu tion, and sale of hydrogen would be the same as for the proposed project with the exception that less hydrogen production and distribution activity would occur and fewer hydrogen fuel outlets would be constructed. Assuming the trigger level for building r equired hydrogen fueling stations would occur later in time, the impact associated with construction and operation of these stations may be experienced later as well.

Beneficial air quality, GHG, and energy effe cts would be anticipated to be similar to
t hose that would occur with implementation of the proposed ACC program.



### E. Alternatives Considered but Rejected as Infeasible

1. Feebate Regulation

A feebate regulation is a new car pricing scheme where consumers who purchase high

emitting vehicles would pa y an extra fee that would be used to fund rebates to consumers who purchase low

- emitting vehicles. ARB has sponsored research on the potential benefits of a feebate regulation for new vehicles and eliminated it as an option for a number of reasons ( ITS 20 11). First, given the aggressive performance standards proposed for new vehicles, the additional emission reductions achieved from increased sales of low

- emitting vehicles that could result from a feebate regulation would likely be minimal

, because the sa le of low

- emitting vehicles would be partially offset by the sale of high

- emitting vehicles. Manufacturers already need to install all available, cost

effective emission

- reducing technology , as well as adopt their own internal pricing strategies to comply with the existing LEV standards. A feebate regulation would replace this internal pricing strategy and would only induce substantial, additional emissions reductions if fees and rebates were very high, leading to greater economic impacts on consumers.Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

197 In terms of implementation, maintaining a revenue

- neutral regulation would likely be a significant challenge given that vehicle purchase behavior would vary based on current economic conditions, but fee and rebate levels would need to be set in advance. M ore importantly, ARB may not have the legal authority to pursue feebates and could face challenges similar to pursuing a carbon fee or tax. In addition to legal opposition, there may be public opposition because some consumers would have to pay more for n ew vehicles. The administration of a feebate regulation would require ARB to collect revenues and then disperse funds. ARB may need additional authority from the Legislature to both disperse funds and collect feebate revenues. Consequently, in light of the legal and administrative challenges for minimal emissions reductions, ARB did not pursue the further evaluation of this alternative.

2. Targeting High

- Emitting Vehicles in the Existing Fleet

ARB considered a regulation that would specifically target high

- emitting vehicles in the existing vehicle fleet and would require that they install add

- on emission controls to control CAPs. However, this type of regulation would not be cost

- effective and would be difficult to enforce. In addition, there is a ran ge of technological difficulties associated with after

- market equipment and aftermarket technologies generally are not as cost effective at reducing emissions as emission control systems integrated in a vehicle design without compromising driving performan ce, ease of use, and/or safety. This approach would not fulfill the requirement of HSC, Section 43018 ( a), which requires ARB to reduce vehicle emissions of CAPs to the maximally extent feasible.

3. Battery Electric Vehicles or Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles Only

ARB considered requiring all light

- and medium

- duty vehicles to be BEVs or hydrogen FCVs. Market studies by manufacturers have shown that the market for BEVs and hydrogen FCVs is limited to approximately 30 percent of the light

- and medium

- duty vehic le fleet.Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis Draft Environmental Analysis

198 This page intentionally left blank.Advanced Clean Cars Program Mandatory Findings Draft Environmental Analysis of Significance

199 

### 8

. 0 MANDATORY FINDINGS O F SIGNIFICANCE

Consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines , CCR, Title 14, Section 15065 and Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, Section 18, this EA addresses the mandatory findings of significance for a project.



### A. Mandatory Findings of Significance

1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat for a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self

- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

Under CCR, Title 14, Section 15065(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, a finding of significance is required if a project “has the potentia l to substantially degrade the quality of the environment.” In practice, this is the same standard as a significant effect on the environment, which is defined in CCR, Title 14, Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines as “a substantial or potentially substant ial adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance.” As with all of the environmental effects an d issue areas, the precise nature and magnitude of impacts would depend on the types of projects associated with implementation of the proposed ACC Program , their locations, their aerial extent, and a variety of site

- specific factors that are not known at this time but that would be addressed by environmental reviews at the project

- specific level. All of these issues would be addressed through project

- specific environmental reviews that would be conducted by local land use agencies or other regulatory bodie s at such time the projects are proposed for implementation. ARB would not be the agency responsible for conducting the project

specific environmental review because it is not the agency with authority for making land use decisions.

This EA , in its entire ty, addresses and discloses potential environmental effects associated with construction and operation of the proposed ACC Program , including direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts in the following resource areas:

• Aesthetics

• Agriculture and Forestry Resources

• Air Quality

• Greenhouse Gas EmissionsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Mandatory Findings Draft Environmental Analysis of Significance

2 00 • Biological Resources

• Cultural Resources

• Geology and Soils

• Hazards and Hazardous Materials

• Hydrology and Water Quality

• Land Use and Planning

• Mineral Resources

• Noise

• Population and Housing

• Public Services

• Recreation

• Transportation/Traffic

• Utilities and Service Systems

As described in Chapter 5, this EA discloses potential environmental impacts, the level of significance prior to mitigation, mitigation measures, and the level of significance after the incorp oration of mitigation measures.

a. Impacts on Species
Under CCR, Title 14, Section 15065(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment where there is substantial evidence that the p roject has the potential to (1) substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; (2) cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self

- sustaining levels; or (3) substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rar e, or threatened species. Chapter 5 , “Biological Resources,” of this EA addresses impacts related to the reduction of the fish or wildlife habitat, the reduction of fish or wildlife populations, and the reduction or restriction of the range of special

- stat us species.

b. Impacts on Historical Resources CCR, Title 14, Section 15065(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines state s that a lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment where there is substantial evidence that the pro ject has the potential to eliminate important examples of a major period of California history or prehistory. CCR, Title 14, Section 15065(a)(1)Advanced Clean Cars Program Mandatory Findings Draft Environmental Analysis of Significance

201 amplifies Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21001(c) requiring that major periods of California history are p reserved for future generations. It also reflects the provisions of PRC Section 21084.1 requiring a finding of significance for substantial adverse changes to historical resources. CCR, Title 14, Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines establishes standards for determining the significance of impacts to historical resources and archaeological sites that are a historical resource. Chapter 5 , “Cultural Resources,” of this EA addresses impacts related to California history and prehistory, historic resources, ar chaeological resources, and paleontological resources.

In addition, as with all of the environmental effects and issue areas, the precise nature and magnitude of impacts would depend on the types of projects authorized, their locations, their aerial exten t, and a variety of site

- specific factors that are not known at this time but that would be addressed by environmental reviews at the project

- specific level.

2. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?

As required by CCR, Title 14, Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment where there is substantial evidence that the project has potential environmental effects that are individually limited, but cumul atively considerable. As defined in CCR, Title 14, Section 15065(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, cumulatively considerable means “that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past project s, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” Cumulative impacts are addressed for each of the environmental topics listed above and are provided in Chapter 6 , “Cumulative and Growth

- Inducing Impacts,” of this EA

.

3

. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Consistent with CCR, Title 14, Section 15065(a)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency shall find that a project ma y have a significant effect on the environment where there is substantial evidence that the project has the potential to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Under this standard, a change to the physical environ ment that might otherwise be minor must be treated as significant if people would be significant affected. This factor relates to adverse changes to the environment of human beings generally, and not to effects on particular individuals. While changes to t he environment that could indirectly affect human beings would be represented by all of the designated CEQA issue areas, those that could directly affect human beings include air quality, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and wa ter quality, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation/traffic, and utilities, which are addressed in Chapter 5 of this EA

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Mandatory Findings Draft Environmental Analysis of Significance

202 This page intentionally blank

.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

203 

### 9

. 0 REFERENCES

Ahrens, C. Donald. 2003. Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate and the Environment. Seventh Edition. Published by Thomson Brooks/Cole.

American Lithium Inc. 2010. Website. Ava ilable: <http://www.americanlithium.com/>. Accessed October, 2011.

Association of Electrical and Medical Imaging Equipment Manufacturers ( NEMA). 2001. Spent Consumer Lithium Batteries and the Environment. March 2001. Available: <http://www.nema.org/gov/en v_conscious_design/drybat/upload/SpentConsumer _Lithium_Batteries_and_the_Environment.doc>. Accessed October 6, 2011.

Better Place. 2010. Better Place to Bring Electric Taxi Program to the San Francisco Bay Area. Better Place website press release. Available: <http://www. betterplace.com/the

- company

- pressroom

- pressreleases

- detail/index/id/better

place

- to

- bring

- electric

- taxi

- program

- to

- the

- san

- francisco

- bay

- area>

BOE. 2010. Motor Vehicle Fuel Distributions Report, January

– December 2010.

Bourzac, Katherine. 2008. Platinum

- free Fuel Cell, Technology Review . Published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. December 16, 2008. Available: <http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21838/>. Accessed October 5, 201 1.

Buchmann, Isidor. 2001. Recycling Your Battery . Website article, published in April 2001. Available: <http://www.buchmann.ca/Article16

- Page1.asp>

Bureau of Land Management. 2001. BLM Manual 6840: Special Status Species Management. Available: < http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ca/ pdf/pdfs/pa_pdfs/biology_pdfs.Par.9d22a8ee.File.dat/6840_ManualFinal.pdf>

Business, Transportation and Housing Agency and California Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Goods Movement Action Plan. January 2 007. Available: <http://www.arb.ca.gov/gmp/docs/gmap

- 1

- 11

- 07.pdf>

California Air Resources Board. 2000. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel

- Fueled Engines and Vehicles. September 2000. Available: <http://www.arb.ca.gov/di esel/documents/rrpapp.htm>.

California Air Resources Board. 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan

. Prepared by the California Air Resources Board for the State of California . December 2008. Available: < http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_

sco ping_plan.pdf >
California Air Resources Board. 2009a. Visibility

- Reducing Particles ( web page). Available: <http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/vrp

- 1/vrp

- 1.htm>. Last reviewed November 24, 2009. Accessed October 10, 2011.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

204 California Air Resources Board. 2009b. State Implementation Plan Background ( web page). Available: <http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/background.htm>. Last reviewed April, 2009. Accessed October 12, 2011.

California Air Resources Board. 2009c. Greenhous e Gas Inventory Data: 2000 to 2008. Available: < http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm >. Updated May 12, 2010.

California Air Resources Board. 2010. Ambient Air Quality Standards . September 8, 2010. Available: <http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs /aaqs2.pdf>. Last updated September 8, 2010. Accessed October 10, 2011.

California Air Resources Board. 2011 a . Environmental Performance Label. Available: <http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/labeling/labeling.htm>. Last reviewed July 21, 2011. Accessed August 3 0, 2011.

California Air Resources Board. 2011b. Status of Scoping Plan Recommended Measures. Available: < http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/status_of_scoping_ plan_measures.pdf >. Last reviewed August 30, 2011

. California Climate Action Registry ( CCAR) . 2 009. California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol, Version 3.1. Los Angeles, CA. Available: <http://www.climateregistry.org/resources/docs/protocols/grp/GRP_3.1_January2 009.pdf>. January 2009. Accessed September 25, 2011.

California Depart ment of Food and Agriculture. 2010a. California Agricultural Highlights 2010. Available: <www.cdfa.ca.gov/statistics/files/AgHighlightsBrochure10.pdf>

California Department of Food and Agriculture. 2010b. Agricultural Land Loss & Conservation. Available: < www.cdfa.ca.gov/agvision/docs/Agricultural_Loss_ and_Conservation.pdf >
California Department of Justice ( DOJ) , Office of the Attorney General. 2011. Attorney General’s Global Warming website. Available: <http://ag.ca.gov/globalwarming/ index.php>. Accessed November 18, 2 011.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle )

. 2011. CalRecycle website: Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) Central . Available:

< http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LEA/ >. Last updated November 18, 2011

. California Departm ent of Toxic Substances Control ( DTSC). 2010. Universal Waste website. Available: <http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/HazardousWaste/UniversalWaste/ index.cfm>

California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans). 2004. Transportation

- and Construction

- Induced Vibration Guidance Manual

.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

205 California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2006. Progress on Incorporating Climate Change into Management of California’s Water Resources. July 2006. Available: < http://baydeltaoffice.water.ca.gov/climatechange/DWRClimate ChangeJuly0 6.pdf#pagemode=bookmarks&page=1 >
California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2010. Website: State Water Project. Available: < http://www.water.ca.gov/about/swp.cfm >. Accessed October 5, 2010.

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) . 2011. California State Water Project Overview. Available: <http://www.water.ca.gov/swp/>. Accessed October 11, 2011.

California Energy Commission (CEC) . 2006 a

. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 to 2004. ( Staff Final Report). Publ ication CEC

- 600

- 2006

- 013

- SF. Accessed September 25, 2011.

California Energy Commission (CEC) . 2006 b

. Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California. Publication CEC

- 500

- 2006

- 077. July 2006. Available: <http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CE C

- 500

- 2006

- 077/CEC

- 500

- 2006

- 077.PDF>. Accessed September 25, 2011.

California Energy Commission (CEC) . 2009. The Future is Now: An Update on Climate Change Science Impacts and Response Options for California. Publication # CEC

- 500

- 2008

- 071. May 5, 2009. Pr epared by Susan Moser, Guido Franco, Sarah Pittiglio, Wendy Chou, and Dan Cayan for the California Energy Commission Public Interest Energy Research ( PIER) Program. Available: <http://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC

- 500

- 2008

- 071/CEC

- 500

- 2008

- 071.PDF >
California Energy Commission (CEC) . 2011. 2011

‐ 2012 Investment Plan for the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program. CEC

‐ 600

‐ 2011

‐ 006

‐ CTD. May 2011. Available: < http://www.energy.ca.gov/2011 publications/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 006/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 006

- CTD.pdf >
California Environmental Protection Agency ( Cal/EPA). 2011a. California EPA website: About Cal/EPA. Available: < http://www.calepa.ca.gov/About/>. Accessed November 18, 2011.

California Environmental Protection Agency ( Cal/EPA). 2011b. C alifornia EPA website: Cal/EPA Boards, Departments, and Offices. Available: < http://www.calepa.ca. gov/CalEPA/default.htm>. Accessed November 19, 2011.

California Environmental Protection Agency ( Cal/EPA). 2011c. California EPA website: “Who Enforeces California’s Environmental Laws?” Available: < http://www.cal epa.ca.gov/Enforcement/WhoEnforces.htm>. Accessed November 18, 2011.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

206 California Fuel Cell Partnership. 2009. Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle a nd Station Deployment Plan: A Strategy for Meeting the Challenge Ahead ( Action Plan). February, 2009.

California Fuel Cell Partnership. 2011. Frequently Asked Questions. Available: <http://cafcp.org/sites/files/20101210_factbooklet%28ONLINE%29.pdf>. Acces sed August 26, 2011.

California Natural Resources Agency ( CNRA). 2009. California Climate Adaptation Strategy: A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to Executive Order S

- 13

- 2008. Available: <http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009 publications/CNRA

- 1000

- 2009

- 027/CNRA

- 1000

- 2009

- 027

- F.PDF>

California Plug

- in Vehicle Collaborative. 2010. Taking Charge: Establishing California Leadership in the Plug

- in Electric Vehicle Marketplace. Published December 2010.

California Public Utility Comm ission (CPUC)

. 2010. California’s Electricity Options and Challenges Report to Governor Gray Davis. Available: < http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/ published/report/gov_report.htm >. A ccessed May 3, 2010

.
California State Board of Education. 2010. Website. Available : < http://www.cde.ca.gov/ be/ > . Accessed May 14, 2010.

California State Parks. 2008. California Outdoor Recreation Plan. Available: <http:// parks.ca.gov/pages/795/files/2009

- 2014%20corp.pdf>

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2003. 2002 California 305(b) Report on Water Quality. August 2003. Available: < http://www.swrcb.ca. gov/water_issues/programs/peer_review/docs/dfg_suction_dredging/03_Ch4_2 WQTOX_references_Feb2011/426_SWRCB_2003.pdf >

California State Water Resources Control Board (S WRCB). 2010. Website: About Us. Available: < http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/about_us/water_boards_structure/ > Accessed October 5, 2010.

Cancel, Yaidi. 2011. Section 609: Overview & Next Steps. Presentation to MACS Convention and Tradeshow, Orlando, FL. January 29, 2011.

CDFA. See California Department of Food and Agriculture.

CEC. See California Energy Commission.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

207 Cheah, Lynette; Christopher Evans; Anup Bandivadekar, John Heywood. 2007. Factor of Two: Halving the Fuel Consumption of New U.S. Automobiles by 2035. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Laboratory for Energy and Environment, Cambridge, MA. Publication No. LFEE 2007

- 04 RP. October 2007. Available: <http://web.mit.edu/sloan

- auto

- lab/research/beforeh2/files/cheah_factorTwo. pdf>. Accessed August 24, 2011

. Cowan, James P. 1994. Handbook of Environmental Acoustics. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Department of Environment ( DoE). 2010. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and Kyoto Protocol. Available: <http://www.doe

- bd.org/ UNFCCC.pdf >
Department of Fish and Game ( DFG). 2007. California Wildlife: Conservation Challenges . Prepared by UC Davis Wildlife Health Center for the California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. Available: <http://www.dfg. ca.gov/wildlife/WAP/docs/report /full

- report.pdf>

DOT. See U.S. Department of Energy.

Egan, M. David. 1988. Architectural Acoustics . McGraw

- Hill Publishing. March 1, 1988.

Electric Power Research Institute and Southern California Edison. 2010. Characterizing Consumers’ Interest in and Infrastructure Expectations for Electric Vehicles: Research Design and Survey Results

.

Electric Power Research Institute. 2011. Transportation Electrification: A Technology Overview. July 2011. 1021334 Final Report.

EPRI. See Electric Power Research Inst itute.

Federal Transit Administration ( FTA). 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment . Available: <http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/FTA_Noise_and_ Vibration_Manual.pdf>

Gruber, Paul W.; Pablo A. Medina; Gregory A. Keoleian, Stephen E. Kesler; M ark P. Everson; and Timothy J. Wallington. 2011. Global Lithium Availability: A Constraint for Electric Vehicles? Journal of Industrial Ecology.

Honeywell and DuPont. 2010. Honeywell and DuPont Announce Joint Venture to Manufacture New Automotive Refrig erant. Press Release, May 20, 2010. Available: <http://www51.honeywell.com/honeywell/news

- events/press

- releases

details/10_ 0520_Honeywell_Dupont.html>

HybridCars.com. 2006a. Behind the Hidden Costs of Hybrids. Website article, published September 28, 2006. Available: <http://www.hybridcars.com/economics/hidden

costs.html>. Accessed November 8, 2011.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

208 HybridCars.com. 2006b. Hybrid Battery Toxicity. Website article, published April 8, 2006. Available: <http://www .hybridcars.com/battery

- toxicity.html>

HybridCars.com. 2009. Birth of Industry to Recycle Lithium Auto Batteries. Website article, published August 28, 2009. Available: <http://www.hybridcars.com/ environment/birth

- industry

- recycle

- lithium

- auto

- batteries

- 2 6047.html>

HybridCars.com. 2011. Hybrid Cars website: Frequently Asked Questions. Available: <http://www.hybridcars.com/cars.html#battery>. Accessed November 8, 2011

. Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Committee of the U.S. Department of Energy ( HTA C). 2011. 2011 Annual Report, Draft Notes.

Hymel, K., K. Small, and K. Van Dender. 2010. Induced Demand and Rebound Effects in Road Transport. Transportation Research B, 44 ( 10): 1220

- 1241. Available: <http://www.socsci.uci.edu/~ksmall/Rebound_congestion_27 .pdf >.

Institute of Transportation Studies ( ITS). 2011. Potential Design, Implementation, and Benefits of a Feebate Program for New Passenger Vehicles in California ( Final Report) . February 2011.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC). 2007a. Cl imate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( Summary for Policymakers)

. Prepared by M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds. Cambridge University Press. Available: < http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment

- report/ar4/wg2/ar4

- wg2

- spm.pdf>

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC). 2007b. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Co ntribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

. Direct Global Warming Potentials. Geneva, Switzerland. February 2007. Available: <http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2

- 10

- 2 .html>.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC). 2007c. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( Summary for Policymakers). G eneva, Switzerland. Available: <http://www.ipcc. ch/pdf/assessment

- report/ar4/wg1/ar4

- wg1

- spm.pdf>Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

209 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( IPCC). 2007d. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Ass essment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ( Frequently Asked Questions) . Prepared by Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller ( eds.). Cambridge University Press. Available: < http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment

- report/ar4/wg1 /ar4

- wg1

- faqs.pdf>

IPCC. See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Kang, Hai

- Kong. 2010. Analysis of the California Nanoindustry Focused on Carbon Nanotubes and TiO 2 Nanomaterials. September 2010. Ava ilable: <http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/TechnologyDevelopment/Nanotechnology/upload/Analys is_of_CNT_TiO2_in_California.pdf >. Accessed October 7, 2011.

Knowles, Noah; and Daniel R. Cayan. 2002. Potential effects of global warming on the Sacramento/San Joaquin wat ershed and the San Francisco estuary

. Geophysical Research Letters, V ol . 29, N o . 18, 1891, doi:10.1029/2001GL014339, 2002 . Published September 28, 2002.

National Renewable Energy Laboratory ( NREL). 2011. NREL Team Investigates Secondary Uses for Electric D rive Vehicle Batteries. News Release NR

- 1411, 2011. Available: <http://www.nrel.gov/news/press/2011/959.html>. Accessed October 20, 2011.

NEMA. See Association of Electrical and Medical Imaging Equipment Manufacturers.

Neubauer, Jeremy; and Ahmad Pesaran. 2011. The ability of battery second use strategies to impact plug

- in electric vehicle prices and serve utility energy storage applications. Journal of Power Sources 196 ( 2011), p. 10351

– 10358.

Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. 2011. Nissan website: Answers about Nissan LEAF environmental impact . Available: < http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf

- electric

car/faq/list/environment#/leaf

- electric

- car/faq/list/environment >. Accessed November 29, 2011.

Notter, Dominic A.; Marcel Gauch; Rolf Widmer; Patrick Wäger; Anna Stamp; R ainer Zah; and Hans

- Jörg Althaus. 2010. Contribution of Li

- Ion Batteries to the Environmental Impact of Electric Vehicles. Environmental Science and Technology, 44:6550

- 6556. Available: <http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ es903729a>.

Occupational Safety & Health Administration. 2011. Toxic Metals. Available: <http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/metalsheavy/index.html >. Accessed October 6, 2011.

OSHA. See Occupational Safety & Health Administration.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

210 Ramanathan, V. and Carmichael, G. 2008. Global and regional climate changes due to black carbon. Nature Geoscience 156, 221

- 227.

Recycling International. 2011. Nissan looks to maximize battery reuse value. July 14, 2011. Available: <http://recyclinginternational.com/recycling

- news/3764/e

- waste

and

- batteries/japan/nissan

- l ooks

- maximise

- battery

- reuse

- value>. Accessed October 3, 2011.

SAE. See Society of Automotive Engineers.

Sawyer, J.O. and T. Keeler

- Wolf. 1995 . A Manual of California Vegetation . On

- line version. Available: <http://davisherb.ucdavis.edu/cnpsActiveServer/i ntro.html > and <http://davisherb.ucdavis.edu/cnpsActiveServer/qryhstseries.html>

.
SCE. See Southern California Edison.

Seinfeld, John H.; and Spyros N. Pandis. 1998. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics: From Air Pollution to Climate Change. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Smithsonian Institution ( Edited by Robert F. Heizer). 1978. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8: California

. Snyder, Kent A.; Xiao Guang Yang; Ted J. Miller. 2009. Hybrid Vehicle Battery Technology

- The Transition From NiMH To L i

- Ion. Society of Automotive Engineers International technical paper 2009

- 01

- 1385. April 20, 2009.

Society of Automotive Engineers ( SAE). 2010. SAE TIR J2601: Fueling Protocols for Light Duty Gaseous Hydrogen Surface Vehicles. Summary Available: <http://w ww.fuelcellstandards.com/2.1.7.2.htm>

Society of Automotive Engineers ( SAE). 2011a. Experts at SAE Congress predict technically rich future for transmission technologies . Article by Bill Murray in Automotive Engineering International Magazine. April 12, 20 11. Available: <http://www.sae.org/mags/aei/9685>. Accessed September 25, 2011.

Society of Automotive Engineers ( SAE). 2011b. Recommended Practice to Design for Recycling Proton Exchange Membrane ( PEM) Fuel Cell Systems . September 2011.

Society of Vertebra te Paleontology. 1995. Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Nonrenewable Paleontological Resources: Standard Guidelines. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology News Bulletin. v. 163, p. 22

- 27.

Spiegel, R.J. 2004. Platinum and Fuel Cells. Transportat ion Research, Part D 9 ( 2004) p. 357

- 371.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

211 St. John, Jeff. 2010. GM, ABB Seek Chevy Volt Battery Afterlife in Grid. September 21, 2010. Available: <http://gigaom.com/cleantech/gm

- abb

- seek

- chevy

- volt

- battery

afterlife

- in

- grid/>. Accessed October 4, 2011.

Sta te of California, Department of Finance ( DOF). 2007. Population Projections for California and Its Counties 2000

- 2050. Sacrament o , California. July 2007. Available: <http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/projections/p

1/>. Accessed November 18, 2011.

State of California, Employment Development Department ( EDD). 2010. California Occupational Projections 2008

- 2018. Published July 2010. Available: <http://www.calmis.ca.gov/file/occproj/cal$occnarr.pdf>. Accessed November 18, 2011.

State of Calif ornia, Employment Development Department ( EDD). 2011a. California Occupational Employment Projections 2010

- 2012. Published June 23, 2011. Available: <http://www.calmis.ca.gov/file/occproj/cal$occnarr

- 2010

- 2012.pdf>. Accessed November 18, 2011.

State of Cal ifornia, Employment Development Department ( EDD). 2011b. Industry Employment and Labor Force

– by Annual Average. Published September 16, 2011. Available: <http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/?pageid=166>

TeslaMotors.com. 2008. Mythbusters Part 3: Recycl ing our Non

- Toxic Battery Packs. Website article, published March 11, 2008 by Kurt Kelty. Available: <http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/mythbusters

- part

- 3

- recycling

- our

- non

- toxic

battery

- packs>

The White House Office of the Press Secretary. 2010. Presidential Memorandum Regarding Fuel Efficiency Standards. May 21, 2010. Available at: <http://www.whitehouse.gov/the

- press

- office/presidential

- memorandum

regarding

- fuel

- efficiency

- standards>. Accessed August 19, 2011.

Toxco, Inc. 2009. Toxco Inc. is Awa rded 9.5 Million from DOE to Support U.S. Lithium Battery Recycling. August 11, 2009.

Toyota Motor Corporation. 2011a. Toyota Warranty Policy and Procedures, Policy 9.10

- Recovery and Shipment of Hybrid Vehicle High

- Voltage ( HV) NIMH Batteries. Available : <http://www.sueschauls.com/HV_Battry_recovery___shipping_TOY .pdf>. Accessed October 3, 2011.

Toyota Motor Corporation. 2011b. Hybrid Vehicle Battery Recycling System. Available: <http://www.toyota

- global.com/sustainability/environmental_responsibility/ automobile_recycling/establishment_of_a_recycling_system.html>. Accessed October 4, 2011.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

212 Toyota Prius Battery. 2011. Toyota Prius Battery Frequently Asked Questions ( FAQ). Available: <http://www.toyotapriusbattery.com/faq.html>. Accessed October 6, 201 1.

Transportation Research Board. 2006. Tires and Passenger Vehicle Fuel Economy. Special Report 286. Washington, D.C. p. 133.

TRB. See Transportation Research Board.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 2011a. Website: About Us. Available: < http://www.usbr. gov/main/about/ >. Accessed November 30, 2011.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 2011 b

. Central Valley Project

– General Description

. Available: <http://www.usbr.gov/projects/Project.jsp?proj_Name=Central+Valley+Project>. Last updated: Apr 21, 2011. Accessed O ctober 11, 2011.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2010. U.S. Census Bureau website: 2010 Census Interactive Population Search, California. Available: <http://2010.census.gov/2010census/ popmap/ipmtext.php?fl=06>. Accessed November 18, 2011.

U.S. Department of Educati on. 2010. Website: The Federal Role in Education

. Available: < http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html >Accessed October 15, 2010.

U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011. Learn about the New Label. Available: <http:/ /www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/label/>. Last modified September 9, 2011. Accessed September 12, 2011.

U.S. Department of Energy. 2011. Alternative & Advanced Vehicles

– Low Rolling Resistance Tires. Available: <http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/vehicles/ fuel_ec onomy_tires_light.html>. Accessed August 24, 2011. Content Last Updated: 01/12/2011.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010a. Transitioning to Low

- GWP Alternatives in MVACs. EPA

- 430

- F

- 10

- 041. October 2010. Available: <http://www.epa.gov/ ozone/downloa ds/EPA_HFC_MVAC.pdf>. Accessed August 24, 2011.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010b. Lithium

- ion Batteries and Nanotechnology Partnership. Design for the Environment Program and the Office of Research and Development. EPA document #744

- F09

- 001. Feb ruary 2010. Available: <http://epa.gov/dfe/pubs/projects/lbnp/lithium

- ion_nanotechnology

factsheet.pdf >. Accessed October 6, 2011.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010c. Final Rulemaking to Establish Light

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standa rds and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. Regulatory Impact Analysis. Available: http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420r10009.pdf.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

213 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011a . EPA and NHTSA, in Coordination with California, Announce Plans t o Propose Greenhouse Gas and Fuel Economy Standards for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. Regulatory Announcement EPA

- 420

- F

- 11

- 027. July 2011. Available: <http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ climate/420f11027.pdf>

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2011b. Transport ation and Climate

– Regulations and Standards. Available: <http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/ regulations.htm#1

- 1>. Last updated August 12, 2011.

U.S. EPA. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

U.S. Forest Service ( Prepared by G.A. Christensen, S.J. Ca mpbell, J.S. Fried, tech. eds.). 2008. California’s Forest Resources, 2001

– 2005: Five

- Year Forest Inventory and Analysis Report . Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW

- GTR

- 763. Portland, OR. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 183 p. Available: <http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/31452>. Accessed October 11, 2011.

U.S. Geological Survey. 2011. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2011. Reston, VA. Available: <http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2011/mcs2011.pdf>. Accessed O ctober 4, 2011.

USBR. See U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

USGS. See U.S. Geological Survey.

Wenzel, Tom. 2011. Assessment of NHTSA’s Report “Relationships Between Fatality Risk, Mass, and Footprint in Model Year 2000

- 2007 Passenger Cars and LTVs”

. Draft Final report prepared for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, US Department of Energy. November 2011.

Williams, Brett. 2011. Analysis and Optimization of the Combined Vehicle

- and Post

Vehicle

- Use Value of Lithium

- Ion Plug

- In

- Hybrid Propulsion Batteries. Transportation Sustainability Research Center, Second Life Workshop. March 7, 2011. Berkeley, CA.Advanced Clean Cars Program References Draft Environmental Analysis

214 This page intentionally blank

.Advanced Clean Cars Program List of Figures Draft Environmental Analysis

215 

### 1 0

. 0 LIST OF FIGURE S

Figure 1

- 1. Environmental Performance Label

................................ ....................... 17
Figure 1

- 2. Fuel Economy and Environmental Label

................................ ............. 18
Figure 4

- 1. Market Share of Major Refiners and Importers of Gasoline (2010)

................................ ................................ ................................ 131
Figure 5

- 1. Advanced Clean Cars, Changes in ROG, NO x , and PM 2.5 Emissions due to Consumer Response (percent)

............................. 147
Figure 7

- 1. ROG Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated
Scenarios

................................ ................................ ........................... 190
Figure 7

- 2. NO x Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated
Scenarios

................................ ................................ ........................... 190
Figure 7

- 3. CO Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated
Scenarios

................................ ................................ ........................... 191
Figure 7

- 4. State wide CO 2 e Emissions Proposed vs Alternative Greenhouse Gas Regulatory Scenarios (with Rebound)

................... 191Advanced Clean Cars Program List of Figures Draft Environmental Analysis

216 This page intentionally blank

.Advanced Clean Cars Program List of Tables Draft Environmental Analysis

217 

### 1 1

. 0 LIST OF TABLE S

Table ES

- 1 State wide Emission Benefits of the ACC Program: Reactive Organic Gas (ROG), Oxides of Nitrogen (NO X ) and Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 )

................................ ............................... 6

Table ES

- 2 State wide GHG Emission Benefits of the ACC Program (with Rebound)

................................ ................................ ...................... 7

Table 1

- 1. Vehicle Types Subject to the Advanced Clean Cars Program

................................ ................................ ............................... 10

Table 1

- 2. Zero Emission Vehicle Types and Technologies

................................ . 20

Table 3.A

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Aesthetic Resources

................. 37

Table 3.B

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Agriculture and
Forest Resources

................................ ................................ ................ 40

Table 3.C

- 1. Ambient Air Quality Standards and Designations

................................ 43

Table 3.C

- 2. Rules Adopted Pursuant to the 2007 State Strategy

........................... 48

Table 3.C

- 3. Compliance with Fed eral Ozone Air Quality Standards in California’s Major Urban Areas

................................ ............................ 51

Table 3.C

- 4. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Air Quality

................................ . 54

Table 3.D

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Greenhouse Gases

................... 61

Table 3.E

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Biological Resources

................. 67

Table 3.F

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Cultural Resources

................... 73

Table 3.G

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Geology and Soils

..................... 77

Table 3.H

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hazards and
Hazardous Materials

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

Table 3.I

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Hydrology, Water Quality, and Supply

................................ ................................ .............. 86

Table 3.J

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Land Use Planning

................... 90

Table 3.K

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Mineral Resources

.................... 94

Table 3.L

- 1. Population Density and Associated Ambient Noise Levels

.................. 99

Table 3.L

- 2. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Noise Resources

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

Table 3.N

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Public Services

....................... 106

Table 3.O

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Recreation

............................... 108Advanced Clean Cars Program List of Tables Draft Environmental Analysis

218 Table 3.P

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Transportation and
Traffic

................................ ................................ ................................ . 109

Table 3.Q

- 1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Public Services

....................... 112

Table 4

- 1. Projected Sales Mix of Light

- Duty Vehicles to Achieve Compliance with LEV III Emission Standards

................................ .... 116

Table 4

- 2. Projected Numbers of Zero Emission Vehicle Types Sold or Leased in California by Type and by Year

................................ ..... 122

Table 4

- 3. Projected Annual Increase in Battery Production (MW

- hr)

................ 123

Table 4

- 4

. Projected Number of Fuel Cell Vehicles Entering the Vehicle Fleet by Year for the Upper Bound Scenario

........................ 130

Table 4

- 5

. Projected Number of Fuel Cell Vehicles Entering the Vehicle Fleet by Vehicle Type and Year for a Lower
Bound Scenario

................................ ................................ ................. 130

Table 4

- 6

. Projected Allocation of New Hydrogen Fuel Stations

......................... 132

Table 5

- 1. State wide and Regional Emissi on Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car Program: Reactive Organic Gas (ROG)

................................ ................................ ................................ 145

Table 5

- 2. State wide Emissions Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car Program: Oxides of Nitrogen (NO x )

................................ .................. 145

Table 5

- 3. State wide and Regional Emissions Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car Program: Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 )

................ 145

Table 5

- 4. CO 2 - Equivalent (CO 2 e) Emission Benefits from Advanced Clean Car Regulations

................................ ...................... 149Advanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

219 

### 1 2

. 0 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVI ATIONS

AADT average annual daily traffic

AB Assembly Bill

AC air conditioning

ACC Advanced Clean Cars

ACEC Area of Critical Environmental Concern

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

AFV alternatively fueled vehicle

AICUZ Department of Defense Air Installations Compatible Use Zones

ALUC Airport Land Use Commission

APS Alternative Planning St rategy

ARB or Board California Air Recourses Board

AST Above Ground Tanks

BC black carbon

BEV battery electric vehicle

BMPs best management practices

CAA Clean Air Act

CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy

CAL FIRE California, Department of Forestry and Fire Protection

CAL Recycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery

CalARP California Accidental Release Prevention

CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency

Caltrans California Department of Transportation

CAP criteria air pollutant and precursorAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

220 CBSC California Building Standards Code

CCAR California Climate Action Registry

CCAT California Climate Action Team

CCR California Code of Regulations

CDFG California Department of Fish and Game

Census U.S. Census Bureau

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CFO Clean Fuels Outlets

CGS California Geological Survey

CH 4 methane

CHP California Highway Patrol

CN California Natural Resources Agency

CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level

CNPS California Native Plant Society

CNRA California Natural Resources Agency

CO carbon monoxide

CO 2 carbon dioxide

CO 2 e carbon dioxide equivalent

CPUC California Public Utilities Code

CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency

CVP Central Valley Project

CVTs continuously variable transmissionsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

221 CWA Clean Water Act

dB decibel

dBA A

- Weighted Decibel

Delta Sacramento

- San Joaquin Delta

DFG Department of Fish and Game

DoE Department of Environment

DOF State of California, Department of Finance

DOGGR California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources

DOJ California Department of Justice

DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control

DWR California Department of Water Resources

E10 10 percent by volume ethanol

E10 fuel fuel that contains 10 percent ethanol

EA Environmental Analysis

EDCs endocrine disrupting compounds

EDD California Employment Development Department

EIS environmental impact state ment

EISA Energy Independence and Security Act

EPCA Energy Policy and Conservation Act

EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right

- to

- Know Act

EPL California Environmental Performance Label

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FCVs fuel cell vehicles

FEMA Federal Emergency Management AgencyAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

222 FHA Federal Highway Administration

FHMR Federal Hazardous Materials Regulations

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FLPMA Federal Land and Policy Management Act

FRA Federal Rail Administration

FSOR Final State ment of Reasons

FTA Federal Transit Administration

g/mi grams per mile

gCO 2 /mile grams of CO 2 per mile

GHGs greenhouse gas

GWP global warming potential

HAPs hazardous air pollutants

HC hydrocarbons

HC particulate matter, and evaporative emissions of hydrocarbons

HFCs hydrofluorocarbons

HFCV hydrogen fuel cell vehicles

HSC Health and Safety Code

HTAC Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technical Advisory Committee of the U.S. Department of Energy

HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

HV High

- Voltage

in/sec inches per second

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

ITS Institute of Transportation StudiesAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

223 IVM intermediate volume manufacturer

kg/day kilograms per day

kg/yr kilograms per year

LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard

L dn Day

- Night Noise Level

LDTs light

- duty trucks

LEA local enforcement agencies

LEPCs local emergency planning committees

L eq Equivalent Noise Level

LEV II LEV regulation

LEV III Low

- Emission Vehicle and Greenhouse Gas Regulation

L max Maximum Noise Level

L min Minimum Noise Level

LOS level of service

LVM large volume manufacturer

MACT and BACT maximum or best available control technology for toxics

MDPVs medium

- duty passenger vehicles

MDV medium

- duty vehicles

mg/L milligrams per liter

MMT Million Metric Tons

MMTCO 2 e million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

MOA Memorandum of Agreement

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MPOs Metropolitan Planning OrganizationsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

224 MRZs Mineral Resource Zones

MS4 Permit General Permit for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems Permit

MTBE methyl tertiary butyl ether

mya million years ago

N 2 O nitrous oxide

NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990

NEMA Association of Electrical and Medical Imaging Equipment Manufacturers

NESHAP national emissions standards for HAPs

NF 3 nitrogen trifluoride

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

NiMH nickel

– metal hydride

NMHC non

- methane hydrocarbon

NMOG non

- methane organic gas

NO X oxides of nitrogen

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

OEM original equipment manufacturer

ORVR onboard refueling vapor recovery

OSHA U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

225 PA Programmatic Agreements

PCBs polychlorinated biphenyl compounds

PCs passenger cars

PEM Proton Exchange Membrane

PFCs perfluorocarbons

PGM platinum

- group metal

PHEVs plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles

PIER Public Interest Energy Research

PM particulate matter

polycarbonate plastics and carbon composites

ppb parts per billion

PPV peak particle velocity

PRC Public Resources Code

PUC California Public Utilities Commission

PZEV Partial Zero Emission Vehicle

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

RFS Renewable Fuels Standard

RMP Risk Management Plan

RMS root

- mean

- square

RNHA Regional Housing Needs Allocation

ROG reactive organic gas

ROWs right

- of

- ways

RTP Regional Transportation Plan

RWQCB regional water quality control boardAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

226 SAE Society of Automotive Engineers

SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

SBE State Board of Education

SCR selective catalytic reduction

SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy

SDC Seismic Design Criteria

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SERCs/TERCs state /tribe emergency response commissions

SF 6 sulfur hexafluoride

SFTP California Supplemental Federal Test Procedure

SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer

SIC Standard Industrial Classification

SIPs State Implementation Plans

SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act

SMR steam methane reformation

SULEVs Super

- Ultra

- Low

- Emission Vehicles

SUVs sport utility vehicles

SWAMP Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program

SWP State Water Project

SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan

SWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board

TACs toxic air contaminants

TDS Total dissolved solids

TMDL Total Maximum Daily LoadAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

227 TPY tons per year

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act

TZEV Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles

U.S. BR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation

U.S. EPA U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

ULEVs Ultra

- Low

- Emission Vehicles

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

USFS U.S. Forest Service

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

UST Underground Tanks

V/C volume

- to

- capacity ratio

VC California Vehicle Code

VdB vibration decibels

VMT vehicle miles travelled

WDRs waste discharge requirements

WMO World Meteorological Organization

WSA water supply assessment

ZEV Zero Emission VehicleAdvanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations Environmental Analysis

228 This page intentionally blank

.Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

229 

### ATTACHMENT 1. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL IST

Refer to Chapter 5.0, Impact Analysis and Mitigation, for a full discussion of the envir onmental issues.



### A. Aesthetics

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Aesthetics. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

230 

### B. Agriculture and Forest Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant wit h Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Agriculture and Forest Resources.
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997, as updated) prepared by the California Department of Con servation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State ’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest P rotocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of State wide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non

agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 [ g ] ), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104 [ g ] )? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non

- forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to

non

- agricultural use or conversion of forest land
to non

- forest use?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

231 

### C. Air Quality

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Air Quality.
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied on to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non

- attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

232 

### D. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

233 

### E. Biological Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Biological Resources. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special

status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected w etlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopt ed Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

234 

### F. Cultural Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Cultural Resources. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of forma l cemeteries?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

235 

### G. G eology and Soils

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Geology and Soils. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist

- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to California Geological Survey Spec ial Publication 42.) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic

- related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on

or off

- site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18

- 1

- B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers a re not available for the disposal of waste water?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

236 

### H. Hazards and Hazardous Materials

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one

- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazar d for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an a dopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

237 

### I. Hydrology and Water Quality

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of
pre

- existi ng nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a strea m or river, in a manner which would result in substantial on

- or off

- site erosion or siltation? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in on

- or off

- site flooding? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100

- year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place wi thin a 100

- year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

238 

### J. Land Use and Planning

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Land Use and Planning. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

239 

### K

. Mineral Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Mineral Resources. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State ? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

240 

### L. Noise

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Noise. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, State , or federal standards? b) Exposure of persons to or generati on of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

241 

### M. Population and Housing

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Population and Housing. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing homes, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

242 

### N. Public Services

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Public Services. Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or o ther performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection?

Schools?

Parks? Other public facilities?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

243 

### O. Rec r eation

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Recreation. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

244 

### P. Transportation/Traffic

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Transportation/Traffic. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non

- motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle
pa ths, and mass transit? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Construction Impacts Operational Impacts f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Construction Impacts Operational ImpactsAdvanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

245 

### Q. Utilities and Service Systems

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the c onstruction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause signific ant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determinat ion by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, State , and local statutes and regulat ions related to solid waste?Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

246 

### R. Mandatory Findings of Significance

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant

Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact /No Impact Beneficial Impact

Mandatory Findings of Significance. a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self

- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past project s, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083, 21083.5. Reference: Government Code Sections 65088.4. Public Resources Code Sections 21080, 21083.5, 21095; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.Appendix C

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS INPUTSC

- 1 APPENDIX C Economic Analysis Inputs

The following appendix provides additional information on the assumptions used in the staff’s economic analysis , found in the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR) . Additional informatio n is provided regarding electricity and hydrogen fuel prices, electric charging equipm ent costs, purchase incentives, and gasoline fuel tax revenue losses.

Impact to Manufacturers

- Infrastructure Inputs

Electricity Rates Assumed electricity rates for battery electric vehicles (BEV) and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) were used for determining consumer payback periods in Table 5.4, Section 5.4. A number of factors will have impacts on future electricity rates, some of which are vehicle owner specific depending on how and when they charge. These factors include increa sed power production costs due to the state’s 33

- percent Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) by 2020, time

- of

- use (TOU) rates that offer low
super

- off

- peak rates coupled with high on

- peak rates, increased local distribution costs as more electric vehicles c harge from the grid, and infrequent fast charging at a premium price. Table C

. 1 below summarizes various electric rate programs and projections for reference purposes.

Table C.1 : Sample electric rate programs or projections ( 2009$ ) (California except where noted ) $/kWh Average residential retail rate in California (2010) 0.127 Projected residential retail rate under 33% RPS (2020) 1 0.17 AEO 2010

- 2035 reference electric rate 0.10 Ave. transportation electric rate (CEC IEPR 2011 fuel prices) 0.126 Experimental EV TOU for SDG&E (super off

- peak /off

- peak /on

- peak) 2 0.08/0.18/0.29

kWh: kilowatt hour AEO: Annual Energy Outlook CEC IEPR: California Energy Commission Integrated Energy Policy Report SDG& E: San Diego Gas and Electric

For this analysis, a fixed electric rate of $0.15/kWh was assumed for 2017 and beyond. This simplified scenario value is a balance between potential rate increases from carbon and renewables policies, but also expected off

- p eak charging with lower TOU rates. Estimating a more accurate average electric rate for BEV and PHEV drivers is not realistic, given the number of uncertainties that could have large effects on the price. Future driver charging trends will be important to study, which will affect average electric rates depending on the time of day charging occurs, and whether it is a residential or public charge location. Additionally, the future use of sub (or separate) meters for

1 E3, 2010. Energy & Environmental Economics (E3), prepared for CPUC, October 2010. “Greenhouse Gas Modeling of California’s Electricity Sector to 2020: Updated results of the GHG Calculator.”
2 CPUC, 2010. California Public Utilities Commission. June 24, 2010. Resolution E

- 4334.C

- 2 residential dedicated charging circuits will have a large impact on the price. In California household , e lectricity rates increase with electricity u se

. T he addition of an electric car to the household electricity load will push the usage into the highest tiers, raising the rates to the maximu m level. So, if a separate meter and account is allowed, the car can be disassociated with the house and the household is not penalized for including the car in the household load.

Electric Vehicle Service Equipment ( EVSE ) Equipment T he purchase and in stallation of residential electric vehicle chargers, commonly referred to as electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE) , was included in the incremental vehicle prices for BEVs and PHEVs (Table 5 .1 , ZEV ISOR)

. 3

, 4 However, the following tables provide details of these assumptions. Table C.2 below provides details of the residential EVSE level assumed for the varying technology types. Generally, advanced vehicles with smaller battery packs (e.g. PHEV with 20 mile s electric range ) can be accommodated with Level 1 (L1) home charging, whereas BEVs will need to more heavily rely on home Level 2 (L2) charging.

Table C.2 : Charging type by vehicle technology and class

PHEV20 PHEV40 BEV75 BEV100 BEV150 Subcompact 100% L1 25% L1, 75% L2 100% L2 100% L2 100% L2 Compact 100% L1 10% L1, 90% L2 100% L2 100% L2 100% L2 Midsize 100% L1 100% L2 100% L2 100% L2 100% L2 Small truck 100% L1 100% L2 100% L2 100% L2 100% L2

Table C .3 below shows the cost assumptions used in this analysis, drawn from the joint analysis with the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ( NHTSA ) . The costs below account for charging technology cost reductio ns over time, fixed labor rates for electrical contractors, and a varying level of home installations depending on how large the battery pack is in the vehicle. Level 1 residential chargers were assumed to be $30 in 2025, and Level 2 chargers were assumed to be $202 in 2025.

3 DOE, 2011a. United States Department of Energy. Fact Sheet. 2011. “ Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment Permitting ”
4 DOE, 2011b. United States Department of Energy Clean Cities. Fact Sheet. April 2011. “ Plug

- in Electric Vehicle Fact Sheet ”C

- 3 Table C .3 : Residential EVSE Cost Assumptions , 2009$ Cost type Technology Vehicle Class 2020 2025 Direct manufacturing cost (DMC) PHEV20 charger All 38 30 PHEV40 charger Subcompact 199 159 Compact 231 185 Midsize, small truck 252 202

BEV charger All 252 202 Indirect costs (IC) PHEV20 charger All 18 10 PHEV40 charger Subcompact 92 55 Compact 107 64 Midsize, small truck 117 70

BEV charger All 117 70 Total costs PHEV20 charger All 55 41 PHEV40 charger Subcompact 291 214 Compact 338 249 Midsize, small truck 369 272

BEV charger All 369 272 Labor All All 1009 1009

Although electric sub

- meters are not required for homeowners to charge a BEV or a PHEV , and costs for such were not considered in this analysis, they will be necessary for homeowners to take advantage of electric vehicle

- specific TOU electric rates in the future

. Additionally, f uture vehicles may have this sub

- meter capability built into the vehicle’s computer and communication with electric utilities. With today’s homeowner costs for sub

- meters, the cost break

- even period could be substantial as the electric vehicle specific TO U rate may not be much lower than the whole house TOU rate.

Hydrogen Pricing Assumed hydrogen prices for fuel cell vehicles ( FCV ) were used for determining consumer payback p eriods in Table 5.6, Section 5.3.1

. It is difficult to project the price of hydr ogen for transportation, particularly in the next few years when a network of distribution stations is first being formed. Academic and federal national laboratory analysis largely focuses on relatively large stations operating at high throughput utilizat ion. A supporting factor that will contain costs for early networks, however, is that hydrogen production will predominantly come from existing centralized industrial facilities. In order to perform the economic analyses for the Low Emission Vehicle ( LEV )

, the ZEV , and the Clean Fuels Outlet ( CFO ) regulations, staff assumed a linear decreasing pr ice scenario as shown in Table C.4

. For further details on how s taff estimated the hydrogen fuel price, r efer to the CFO ISOR , Section 5 and Appendix E

.

Table C.4

. Delivered Hy drogen Price Scenario by Year

- (2009 $ )

Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Price, $/kg $13 $12 $11 $10 $9 $8 $7 $6C

- 4 Although the information in Table C.4 was developed for the economic analyses, it is by no means intended to serve as a pricing schedule for retail hydrogen.

In addition to electricity and hydrogen fuel prices, detailed estimates of future gasoline prices were assumed. Table C.5 below shows a sample of gasoline prices used to calculate the impact to the consu mer.

Table C.5. Select Retail Gasoline Fuel Prices (2009 dollars per gallon)*

Year Price

2011 $3.68

2015 $4.06

2020 $4.06

2025 $4.02

2030 $4.17

Average of high and low cases, converted from 2010 dollars using Consumer Price Index adjustment factor.

* CEC, 2011. California Energy Commission. Draft Staff Report, August 2011.

“ Transportation Energy Forecasts and Analyses for the 2011 Integrated E nergy Policy Report ” http://www.energy.ca.gov/2011publications/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 007/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 007

- SD.pdf Details of these values, and their information sources, can be found in the LEV III ISOR Section VII

- B

.
Impacts to Individuals

– Incentive Considerations

As referred to in Section 5. 3 , Potential Impacts to Individuals, vehicle and equipment purchase incentives can have a positive impact on consumers’ purchase decisions for advanced vehicles and fuels. Although this incentive information was not directly included in the staff analysis, as incentives are expected to have expired soon after 2015, it is provided here as background information.

Many advanced vehicles have temporary government incentives designed to help increase demand and use. Table C

. 6 shows the most relevant federal and state incentives that exist for purchasing electric vehicles. There are a number of additional incentives at the state and local level, primarily for charging equipment subsidies, but are too numerous to list here. The C alifornia Energy Commission’s Assembly Bill 118 program funds are partly used for residential vehicle charging equipment, and the South Coast and Bay Area Air Quality Management Districts have substantial regional funds available.C

- 5 Tabl e C

. 6 : Current Incentive Programs at the Federal and State Level Incentive Program Description Yrs Effective Federal vehicle tax credit, PEVs $7,500 for BEVs; $4,500

- $7500 for PHEVs; Max 200,000 vehicles per manufacturer 2009

-

Federal vehicle tax credit, FCVs $4,000 for FCVs 2009

- 2014

California vehicle rebate $2,500 for ZEVs (BEV or FCV); $ 2,000 for PHEV 2010

- 2015

A list of all the incentive programs, with cross

- references by technology and/or fuel type, can be found at www.DriveClean.ca.gov

. By 2015, t he majority of existing incentives wi ll not be available . Net consumer calculations shown here did not assume any incentives in the 2020 through 2025 period.

Impacts to Local and State Agencies

– Fuel Tax Revenue Considerations

As noted in Section 5. 6

, gasoline tax revenues will be impacted by vehicle fleets that become more efficient and transition to non

- gasoline or diesel fuels. G asoline tax revenue has not been rising with increased transportation infrastructure costs , and as a result, revenue generation is no longer keeping pace with expenditures . The primary reason is the existing tax rates have not changed for many years and a re not indexed to inflation. However, a secondary reason is the vehicle fleet is becoming more efficient. The new national fleet standard will compound this challenge. A third issue with the
current tax structure , though minor in scale, is that hydrogen and transportation electricity are not taxed for these transportation infrastructure costs.

Although this challenge is not a result of the LEV III and ZEV r egulations, the scale of the problem is large enough to warrant highlighting in this analysis. Table C. 7 below shows the fuel tax losses over the years of the LEV III regulation (2017

- 2025 ) given today’s taxation structure (Federal and California)

.

Table C. 7 : Lost fuel tax revenue from entire LEV III fleet displacing gasoline usage in California ( 2 017

- 2025 , 2009$ ) 1, 2

G asoline displaced ( million gallons) 5, 960 Total tax revenue loss ($ millions) $ 3, 980

1. Gasoline taxation includes three components:

• $0.184 /gallon federal fuel tax

• $0.357 /gallon state excise tax

• Variable state sales tax. This includes $0.055 prepaid sales tax/gallon + 2.25% sales tax on the retail (untaxed) price of fuel. 2. References: i. API, 2011. American Petroleum Institute, as published on CaliforniaGasPrices.com. Webpage. “USA Tax Map” May 2011 http://www.californiagasprices.com/USA_Tax_Map.aspx . Accessed November 7, 2011. ii. BOE, 2011. State of California Board of Equalization. Website. Fuel Tax Swap Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) http://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/gasswapfaq.htm#1 Accessed November 7, 2011.C

- 6 T his loss in fuel tax revenue directly affects budgets for transportation infrastructure and system improvements, including road improvements, subsidies for mass transit, and

non

- vehicle modes (bicycle routes, etc) . The estimates in Table C. 7 assume all fe deral fuel taxes collected from California fuel sales ultimately return to California through the state dispersements. Historically, California has not received its proportional share (less than 100% returned).C

- 7 REFERENCES

Appendix C

API, 2011. Ameri can Petroleum Institute, as published on CaliforniaGasPrices.com. Webpage. “USA Tax Map” May 2011 http://www.californiagasprices.com/USA_Tax_Map.aspx . Accessed November 7, 2011.

BOE, 2011. State of California Board of Equalization. Website. Fuel Tax Swap Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) http://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/gasswapfaq.htm#1 Accessed November 7, 2011.

C EC, 2011. California Energy Commission. Draft Staff Report, August 2011. “Transportation Energy Forecasts and Analyses for the 2011 Integrated Energy Policy Report” http://www.energy.ca.gov/2011publications/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 007/CEC

- 600

- 2011

- 007

- SD.pdf

CPUC, 2010. California Public Utilities Commission. June 24, 2010. Resolution E

4334.

DOE, 2011a. United States Department of Energy. Fact Sheet. 2011. “ E lectric Vehicle Charging Equipment Permitting ”

DOE, 2011b. United States Department of Energy Clean Cities. Fact Sheet. April 2011.

“ Plug

- in Electric Vehicle Fact Sheet ”

E3, 2010. Energy & Environmental Economics (E3), prepared for CPUC, October 2010. “Greenhouse Gas Modeling of California’s Electricity Sector to 2020: Updated results of the GHG Calculator.”