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 for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012
ES-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 resulted 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 quickly 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 commercialize 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 hearing, the Board directed staff to redesign the 2015 and 

subsequent model year requirements for the ZEV regulation. It directed staff to 

strengthen the regulation 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 undertook 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 markets 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 

findings at the December 2009 Board hearing. 

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 reduction in state-wide 

GHG emissions to 80-percent below 1990 levels by 2050
ES-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 

Advanced 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 current ZEV regulation through 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 vehicles 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 “travel provision” 

for BEVs through 2017). 

B. Adjust Credits and Allowances: Increase credits for Type V (300 mile FCV) 

ZEVs 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 power 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) 

commercialization 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 ZEVs and TZEVs to over 15 percent of new sales by 

2025. This will ensure production volumes are at a level sufficient to bring 
ES-3

battery and fuel cell technology down the cost curve and reduce incremental ZEV 

prices. 

B. Focus Regulation on ZEVs and Transitional 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 model 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 light 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 

meet 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 the vehicle’s zero-emission range capability, and ability to 

perform 10 miles on the more aggressive US06 drive schedule. In addition to 

simplifying the program, reducing the spread of credits makes the technologies 

more evenly treated and reduces the variation 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 

polices are in place in states that have adopted the California ZEV regulation. 

This will allow FCV technology to continue to mature, and provide time for 
ES-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 Model 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 (highend estimate). 

The proposed amendments will also result in an emissions 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 2025

Annual California Sales

Model Year

17%

14%

11%

9%

6%

3%

% of 2025 Sales

15.4% of 2025

New Sales

FCVs

BEVs

TZEVs
ES-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 Advanced 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 cars 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 and 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 amendments 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 proposed 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 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES (OVERALL SUMMARY)................................................. 2

1.2 AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE IN CALIFORNIA................................................. 3

1.3 ZEV PROGRAM HISTORY ...................................................................................... 5

1.4 2008 AMENDMENTS AND 2009 TECHNOLOGY REVIEW............................................. 6

1.5 THE CURRENT PROGRAM...................................................................................... 8

2 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS....................................................... 13

2.1 PART I: MODEL YEAR 2012 THROUGH 2017 AMENDMENTS.................................... 13

2.2 PART II: 2018 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL YEAR AMENDMENTS ............................... 25

3 EFFECT OF PROPOSED CHANGES................................................................... 44

3.1 OVERALL EFFECTS OF MANUFACTURER’S BANKED ZEV CREDITS .......................... 44

3.2 EFFECTS OF PROPOSED CHANGES: 2009 THROUGH 2017 MODEL YEARS .............. 46

3.3 EFFECTS OF PROPOSED CHANGES: 2018 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL YEARS........... 46

3.4 EFFECTS OF PROPOSED CHANGES: TRAVEL PROVISION ........................................ 51

4 REGULATORY ALTERNATIVES.......................................................................... 53

4.1 ALTERNATIVE A: LOWER ZEV REQUIREMENTS...................................................... 53

4.2 ALTERNATIVE B: HIGHER ZEV REQUIREMENTS..................................................... 54

4.3 ALTERNATIVE C: DO NOT AMEND PROGRAM......................................................... 54

5 ECONOMIC IMPACTS .......................................................................................... 55

5.1 LEGAL REQUIREMENT ......................................................................................... 55

5.2 DIRECTLY AFFECTED BUSINESSES....................................................................... 55

5.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO INDIVIDUALS (CAR BUYERS) ............................................. 64

5.4 POTENTIAL IMPACT ON BUSINESS COMPETITIVENESS ............................................ 68

5.5 POTENTIAL IMPACT ON BUSINESS CREATION, ELIMINATION OR EXPANSION ............. 68

5.6 POTENTIAL COSTS TO LOCAL AND STATE AGENCIES ............................................. 70

6 EMISSIONS AND HEALTH IMPACTS.................................................................. 72

6.1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ......................................................... 73

6.2 IMPACTS TO MINORITY AND LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES ........................................ 73

6.3 HEALTH IMPACTS................................................................................................ 74

6.4 EMISSIONS IMPACTS ........................................................................................... 75

7 COST-EFFECTIVENESS ...................................................................................... 80

8 SUMMARY AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION ................................................... 81

9 SUMMARY AND RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED REGULATIONS ..................... 83

10 REFERENCES................................................................................................. 107
APPENDIX 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 Vehicles 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 Bill

ACC............. Advanced Clean Car

APU............. Auxiliary Power Unit

ARB ............ California Air Resources Board

AT PZEV .... Advanced Technology Partial Zero Emission Allowance Vehicle, typically 

a non-plug in hybrid such as the Prius

BEV............. Battery Electric Vehicle

BEVx ........... Range Extended Battery Electric Vehicle

CAFE........... Corporate Average Fuel Economy

CEC............. California Energy Commission 

CEQA.......... California Environmental Quality Act

CO2 ............. 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 ............. grams per mile

gCO2/mi ...... grams carbon dioxide per mile

GHG............ Greenhouse Gas

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.............. Intermediate Vehicle Manufacturer

kW............... Kilowatt

LCFS........... Low Carbon Fuel Standard

LDT ............. Light- 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 years
LEV III ......... Third generation Low Emission Vehicle program (criteria pollutant and 

greenhouse gas emission fleet standards), proposed as part of the 

Advanced Clean Cars rulemaking package in 2012, and generally 

applicable to 2015 and subsequent model years for Criteria Pollutants, 

and applicable to 2017 and subsequent 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, typically, a conventional 

gasoline, diesel, or natural gas vehicle that meets the most stringent 

standards for smog-forming emissions

Rcda ............. 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 States Department of Energy

U.S. DOT..... United States Department of Transportation

U.S. EPA..... United States Environmental Protection Agency

VAC............. Volts Alternative Current
VMT ............ Vehicle Miles Traveled

WTW ........... Well-To-Wheel (emissions)

ZEV ............ Zero Emission Vehicle
1

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 five 

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 remains 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. Healthbased 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 pressure 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 emission levels that 

seemed impossible when the ZEV program was adopted in 1990. The relative 

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 

percent of total emissions. State 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 

technologies 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 of 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 further 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 

regulation along with staff proposed amendments to the Low Emission Vehicle 

(LEV III) Criteria Pollutant 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 public 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 workshops 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 14500 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 California’s long term GHG and criteria pollutant targets,

● Push technology to higher 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, 

amending 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 guarantee 
3

achieving our air quality or 2050 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 electrification of the LDV 

fleet.3,4,5

 Staff’s proposal helps to get California’s fleet on an appropriate trajectory 

toward meeting this long term GHG goal, while offering compliance flexibility and not 

placing unnecessary and burdensome requirements on those manufacturers 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 

PHEV6 credit calculation 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 manufacturer 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 technologies 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 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 

year7

. 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 the 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. 

Staff 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 were 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” ozone non-attainment areas. This is the 

most severe federal non-attainment classification, and these two areas of California 

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 

attainment 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 regulations 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 achieved to 

date, most urban areas of California, including Southern California, and the Central 

Valley continue to exceed the federal ozone standard8

. ARB, the South Coast Air 

Quality Management District, and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 

are beginning to evaluate the emission reductions needed to attain the more healthprotective 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 

Valley are actively pursuing 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 threat 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 that SIPs will be due to U.S. EPA by 2015 with attainment required in the 

2031/32 timeframe.

9 CNRA, 2009. California Natural Resources 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.pdf
5

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 1007 (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, however, 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 advanced 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 analysis12 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 electric vehicle 

(PHEV) – need to be encouraged and promoted through regulatory and nonregulatory 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 (MOA)

with vehicle manufacturers to place, in California, roughly 1,800 advanced-BEVs 

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 needed for begin early commercial production. 

Contrary to expectations, advanced battery costs remained too high for commercial 

viability. Notwithstanding these costs, several manufacturers continued to place a 

modest number of BEVs beyond the MOA volumes. These vehicles earned ZEV 

credits that have been used for compliance with the regulation. 

Manufacturers began to look seriously at hydrogen FCVs in the late 1990’s as an 

alternative to BEVs. 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_2050ghg.pdf
6

The Partnership demonstrates vehicle technology while exploring the paths to 

commercialization, including the development of public hydrogen fueling infrastructure. 

Changes to the ZEV regulation in 2003 provided new incentives for FCVs, resolved 

legal challenges, and addressed the state of technology at that time. 

1.4 2008 Amendments and 2009 Technology Review

The Board adopted Resolution 08-24 at the March 2008 hearing, 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 ensure California as the central 

location for advanced, low GHG technology 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 GHG reduction goals in the LDV subsector13

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 model14, 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 PCs 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 CO2 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 approximately 87 percent of on-road PCs 

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 high-volume (100,000s) ZEV market needs 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 amendments 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 achieve 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 09-6615, reaffirming its direction to meet 

California’s long term air quality and climate change reduction goals through 

commercialization 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 emission regulations to GHG 

emission reductions and criteria pollutants;

• Focus on transforming California’s light-duty fleet and commercializing lowcarbon emitting technologies, 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.pdf
8

for model year 2017 through 2025 LDVs. The Joint Technical Assessment Report 

(TAR) was released in September 2010. 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 future 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 advanced 

technologies...”16 Manufacturers confirmed in meetings leading up to the release of 

the TAR, their commitment 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, pp.2-5)

1.5 The Current Program

Table 1.1 below specifies large volume manufacturer credit obligations for 2012 

through 2014 and 2015 through 2017model years.

 16 EPA, 2010. 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 Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards for Model Years 

2017-2025” (p. vii)
9

Table 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 

“Enhanced 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 vehicle sales expected from each vehicle 

category due to compliance with the regulations.

The four categories of vehicles used to meet the ZEV regulation are ZEVs, TZEVs 

(formerly “Enhanced 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 fully in compliance, with nearly 5,600 ZEVs demonstrated, and over

1,700,000 PZEVs and 350,000 AT PZEVs commercially introduced, resulting in 

significant emissions reductions. Examples of PZEVs 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 NEVs.

Manufacturer Compliance Status and Near Term Production Plans

All manufacturers have complied with ZEV regulation requirements. For the 2012 

model year, six large volume manufacturers (LVM) are required to comply with the 

entire regulation, meaning these manufacturers must produce pure ZEVs: Chrysler, 

Ford Motor Company, General Motors, Honda, Nissan, and Toyota. 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 amendments provided greater flexibility in the regulation for model years 

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, 

Mercedes 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://www2.toyota.co.jp/en/news/11/01/0113.html
11

worldwide developments help to bring vehicle costs down, advancing FCVs closer 

towards commercialization.

Hydrogen infrastructure technology is advancing and station performance is 

improving. 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 with 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 environmental 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, 2011b

RAV-4 EV BEV 2012 Toyota, 2011c Scion iQ-EV BEV 2012

(unknown) FCV 2015 Toyota, 2011d

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 products within the next one to three years, and five manufacturers will 

commercially introduce FCVs by 2015. 
13

2 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

In response to the Board’s direction in 2008 and in 2009, and in consideration of the 

issues related to technology commercialization and new proposed GHG and criteria 

pollutant standards, staff proposes amendments to the program that strengthen and 

simplify the regulation. The amendments are spilt into two parts: Model year 2012 

through 2017 (Part I), and model years 2018 and beyond (Part II). The amendments 

identified in this section represent the most significant changes being proposed in each 

“Part.” Additional minor proposed amendments and concurrent rationale 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 Amendments

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” in this proposal). The 

proposed vehicle is closer to a BEV than to a PHEV: a vehicle with primarily zeroemission operation equipped with a small non-ZEV fuel auxiliary power unit (APU) for 

limited range extension. Manufacturers proposing this type of vehicle 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 greater. This vehicle has

substantially more range than currently announced PHEVs, with electric range 

comparable to full function BEVs and will probably require 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 market for current technology BEVs might be limited. The proposed 

vehicle has the potential to expand the BEV market beyond current market estimates 

by giving interested BEV customers an extra measure of confidence about range, and 

if successful, would add substantial 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. 

Staff 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 

operating cost would be offset by relatively low-cost electricity. In addition to potential 

for emerging alternative fuel use, there is an opportunity to explore engine 
14

technologies that are advantageous but otherwise unsuitable for application in 

conventional vehicles. 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 specialized 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 design 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 drivers 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, manufacturers 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 treat this emerging class of BEVxs 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 vehicles 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 Engines 

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 2017

Advanced Demonstrations

Currently, up to 2520 ZEVs or TZEVs21 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 vehicles 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 regulation sunsets advanced 

demonstration credits after model year 2014. 

Even though some manufacturers have seemingly commercialized ZEVs, many 

manufacturers are still in the research and development phase for zero emission 

technologies. Staff is proposing to extend advanced 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 proposal to amend the 

definition for LVMs which causes 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 vehicles in service. 

Travel Provision

Section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act22 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 regulation: 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 Section 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 Section 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 have 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 7507
16

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 change 

this provision. This means that manufacturers that choose to comply in California 

using TZEVs may not use those credits for compliance in the Section 177 ZEV states. 

Currently the Travel Provision sunsets after model year 2014 for Type I, Type I.5, and 

Type II ZEVs, which are typically BEVs. Staff proposes to extend this provision 

through model year 2017 for these three ZEV types. California markets have matured 

and are well prepared for increased sales requirements. However, markets in Section 

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 

clarification. 

2.1.3 Increase Incentives for Fuel Cell Vehicles: Model Years 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 

regulation 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 further production obligation in the 

Section 177 ZEV states because the travel provision applies to FCVs.

Due to staff’s proposed extension of the travel provision for BEVs for model years 

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 FCVs in this timeframe. 

California is investing heavily to create a publically accessible hydrogen fueling 

infrastructure which is a necessary prerequisite to manufacturers introducing to the 

market FCVs. 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 credit 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 mile range fast-refueling capable FCVs. Currently, Type V ZEVs 

earn seven credits each. Staff proposes to increase the credit value to nine credits. 

This would be three times the amount a Type II ZEV (a 100 mile BEV) would earn in 

this time frame. Proponents of this change have requested significantly greater credit. 

However, staff believes the proposed credit level appropriately recognizes and 

provides an incentive for the technology without greatly reducing the number of 

vehicles produced in this timeframe 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 

obligation. Table 2.1 below shows an IVM’s credit requirement, and what this means 

in terms of a percentage of its annual vehicle sales being PZEVs.

Table 2.1: Current IVM Requirement 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 amendments 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 example, if a manufacturer earns three ZEV 
18

credits from placing a Type II ZEV24 in model year 2010, the 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 remove this provision, and allow ZEV credits to be banked and used 

to meet the full requirement in all future model 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 years 2018 

through 2025, it is unlikely that manufacturers will be able to bank large volumes of 

credits for later use. Also, some manufacturers will likely need banked credits to 

assist with compliance in later years. Lastly, this proposed amendment simplifies the 

regulation in 2018 and subsequent model years. 

2.1.6 Minor Amendments

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 procedure 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. Staff is proposing to correct inconsistencies in the 

zero-emission 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.htm
19

Table 2.2: Proposed Regulatory Language – Zero Emission VMT Allowance

2.1.6.1 Range Zero-emission VMT Allowance

EAERu < 10 miles 0.0

EAERu ≥10 miles to 40 

miles

and

Rcda ≥ 10 miles to 40 miles

EAERu x (1 – UFRcda)/11.028

Rcda EAERu > 40 miles

EAERu40/ 29.63 

(EAERu40) x [1 – (UF40*Rcda/EAERu)]/

11.028

Where,

UF40= utility factor at 40 miles

EAERu40= 40 miles

*EAER means equivalent all electric range.

*Rcda 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. Within 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 HICE 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 

past 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 qualifying 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 Transportation 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 technologies, 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 

consumer hands 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 other than vehicle placement is key to ensuring 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 following table 2.3 enumerates the adjusted credit 

volumes for model year 2012 through 2017. 

Table 2.3: Proposed Transportation System Amendments 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 37526. 

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 incentives for vehicle purchase might have the same effect as 

earning ZEV credits. Currently, most parties earning transportation system credits are 

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 TZEVs, will work similarly to car sharing 

programs earning ZEV credits. This policy shift is reflected in the recently approved 

spending plan for the AB 118 Clean 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 account balances starting for 2015 model year 

compliance. NMOG values are used in ZEV banking to offer an incentive for early 

vehicle placement, because grams 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 bank balances after model year 

2014 compliance by the lowest NMOG value, 0.035, to convert the credits from g/mi

NMOG to straight ZEV credits. This will enable all banking in 2015 and subsequent 

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 certification 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 

standards, 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-charged electric vehicles. This requirement ensures 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 direct current (DC) fast charge. 
22

Several unanticipated changes in BEV and PHEV designs have occurred since the 

Board adopted infrastructure requirements in 2001. Low-range BEVs and PHEVs with

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 current (VAC) should be encouraged; it enhances the overall compatibility 

of low-range BEVs that 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. Staff proposes to delete the exception for BEVs that only charge at 120 VAC 

and instead allow for lower power on-board chargers on these low-range BEVs, as 

long as an optional minimum charge 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 customers, 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 gridcharged electric vehicles. 

Modifications for NEVs

NEVs are simple, low cost, speed limited (25 miles 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 NEV 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 the 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 section 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 

production; 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 1962.1, title 13, CCR to reflect this intent, and proposes the following 

equations in Table 2.6 to 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 increase 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 

year 2019. 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 2018 

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 under 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. This 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 proposed 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 provision to specify 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. 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 “delivered 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, staff 

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 ZEVs 
25

offered to consumers are moderately current 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 compliance 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 compliance 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 Amendments

2.2.1 Amend Manufacturer Size Definitions

A manufacturer’s California sales volume plays an important role in determining a 

manufacturer’s treatment under various LDV regulations. Size is based on a 

manufacturer’s average PC, LDT, and medium duty vehicle (MDV) sales in California. 

Table 2.7 lists the current manufacturer size 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 

manufacturers (SVM) and independent low volume manufacturers (ILVM) are not 
26

required to comply with the ZEV regulation, but may generate, trade, and sell ZEV 

credits. Table 2.8 below lists current LVMs and IVMs, along with an 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 hearing, the Board did not adopt staff’s proposal to extend the 

transition time for an IVM becoming an LVM from six years to twelve years. Board 

members questioned the differing treatment of the two sizes of manufacturers, 

concluding 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 LVM and IVM 

definitions and ownership. Under the light-duty GHG regulations, two manufacturers

are to aggregate their sales when one manufacturer owns more than 10 percent of 

another manufacturer. Under the ZEV regulation, two manufacturers are to aggregate 

their sales for size determination when one manufacturer owns greater than 50

percent of another manufacturer. Another discrepancy between the two regulations is 

lead time for manufacturers changing sizes. A manufacturer who has moved from 

IVM status to 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 treatment 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 

 27ARB, 2008. California Air Resources Board. March 27, 2008 Board Hearing Transcript. 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/board/mt/2008/mt032708.txt
27

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 fleet 

regulations with the ZEV regulations, 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. 

Lastly, staff proposes new lead time provisions 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 requirement the first model 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 manufacturer 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, 

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 manufacturers compete on a level playing field, 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 along 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 term 
28

plans to sell PZEVs and AT PZEVs (namely conventional HEVs 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 commercialization 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 commercial 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 successful 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 volumes of PZEV and 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 program’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 – Annual 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 2025
30

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 of 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 rather than LDTs, in order to reduce costs, 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 

suggests 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 expensive 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 scale. 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 timebased 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) increases 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 that 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 future 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, staff is proposing to reduce the sales volume which separates an 

IVM from 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 manufacturers? 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 years, staff 

considered 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 sales, and worldwide sales. However, 

most have displayed ZEV or TZEVs 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 smaller research, development, and demonstration (RD&D)
34

budgets. Therefore, staff 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 requirements by producing only TZEVs (e.g. PHEVs). By 

comparison, a LVM that choses to produce TZEVs must also produce specified 

numbers of ZEVs. Further flexibilities for IVMs will be discussed throughout the 

following subsections.

2.2.5 Excess PZEV and AT PZEV Credits Treatment

Staff’s proposal to remove new production of PZEVs and AT PZEVs as compliance 

options for the ZEV program for model years 2018 and beyond will likely leave 

manufacturers with banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits. Manufacturers’ 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 manufacturers to 

place vehicles in order to comply with the regulation rather than use banked credits, 

staff believes it is appropriate to limit the use of banked ZEV credits in 2018 and 

subsequent model years. Staff proposes to first discount the banked PZEV and AT 

PZEV credits, then cap their use at 25 percent of a manufacturer’s portion of its overall 

ZEV requirement that 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 year 2017 compliance may be found in Table 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 for 25 percent of the portion of a 

manufacturer’s ZEV requirement 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 these smaller

manufacturers 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. Therefore, all PZEV, AT PZEV, and 

NEV credits would be under the same cap in 2018 and subsequent model years. The 

proposed allowed percentages are enumerated in Table 2.12 below.

Table 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 2025
35

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 ensure 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 subsequent model years. Below, Table 2.13 shows credit 

levels currently in the regulation for 2018 and subsequent model years.

Table 2.13: Current 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 amending the current crediting system. 

Credit factors such as a vehicle’s physical size, weight, a manufacturer’s monetary 

investment in the vehicle technology, refueling capabilities, refueling access, long term 

vehicle cost potential, GHG well-to-wheel (WTW) performance, as well as others were 
36

considered and discussed at a May 2010 workshop. In the spirit of simplicity, many 

factors were discarded 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 engineering, or the manufacturer would have no control over the 

amount of credit earned. Staff considered including a vehicle’s size in 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 generally be on larger platforms, 

which reduced the need to credit the vehicle’s footprint as well as its range. 

For the reasons stated above, and 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 minimum 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.

Figure 7: Proposed ZEV Credits As Compared to Current ZEV Credits

(2018 and Subsequent Model Years)

Essentially, 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 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Credit 

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 Credits
37

NEVs in 2018 and later model years, staff proposes to reduce NEV credits by 

50percent 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 will be 

allowed to meet up to 50 percent of the portion of their requirement that must be met 

with pure ZEVs with credits from BEVxs. 

2.2.7 TZEV Treatment and Credits

AT PZEVs were included as a compliance option in the ZEV regulation to accelerate 

the development and manufacturing capacity of the component technologies 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 

technologies have improved at a faster pace than normal market 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 resulting component costs are decreasing. 

The emphasis of the AT PZEV compliance option within the ZEV regulation was the 

initial introduction of these component technologies into production vehicles. TZEVs 

will encourage further evolution of these ZEV 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 reduction 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 capability. 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 

(Rcda) Credit

<10 miles 0.0

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

>80 miles (credit cap) 1.3

TZEVs with at 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 - PHEVs
38

Staff also proposes a fixed allowance for HICE vehicles of 0.75. HICE vehicles that 

also have all-electric 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 regulatory structure. A key 

example of such a development is the range-extended BEV explained earlier in this 

staff report: a BEV with an APU range extender. This is particularly challenging when 

many of these vehicles are only just now being announced or introduced 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 BEVx user-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 Section 177 ZEV states. “Several states mentioned activities they have 

underway to develop the infrastructure needed to support electrified vehicles.” (EPA,

2010, pp.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 believes 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/pressrelease/2682/185/nissan-launch-all-electric-leaf-upgraded2012-model. 
39

perspective, staff believes it is not appropriate to extend the travel provision for BEV 

credits 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 FCVs until 

there are clear plans for sufficient hydrogen infrastructure in Section 177 ZEV states 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 PCs 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 commitment to a one-national GHG tailpipe standard. 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-compliance 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 allow a manufacturer that complies with its national light-duty fleet 

GHG standard to use those over-compliance credits to offset a portion of its ZEV 

requirement in 2018 through 2021 model years. Table 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. Manufacturers 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/presidentobama-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 (CAFE) 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 per mile (gCO2/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, staff

proposes that manufacturers 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 two preconditions 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 model 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 intent 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 gCO2/mile in each model year 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 ZEV-GHG over-compliance credits be based 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. Annually, manufacturers 

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 at a minimum, the manufacturer must over-comply 
41

by at least 2 gCO2/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 additional incentive multipliers greater than 1.0 

(i.e. truck technology credit multipliers), and

2. Banked GHG gCO2/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 manufacturer will also not 

be allowed to include the multiplier received for advanced electric drive vehicle 

technologies in their ZEV-GHG over-compliance calculation. 

Staff proposes the following equation be used to calculate a manufacturer’s ZEV-GHG 

over-compliance credits for use in California and Section 177 ZEV states: 

ZEV Credit Calculation (for given model year):

Manufacturers will be required to remove the gCO2/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 Amendments

Counting ZEVs in Applicable Sales Volume

Each model year, manufacturers calculate their applicable vehicle sales volume to

which their 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 generating 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) * (gCO2/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 NEVs 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 applied 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 causes uncertainty for ARB when trying 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 proposes 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, 2017, 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 requirement. 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 model 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 

continues to benefit from a bad year for four years, as it is included into its previous 

second, third, and fourth year average.

Amendments to Carry Back Provision

Currently, manufacturers are allowed to carry a ZEV credit deficit for up to three model 

years. For example, a manufacturer who does not meet its ZEV requirement in model 

year 2016 would not be subject to penalties for non-compliance until after model year 
43

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 manufacturers 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 shorten a 

manufacturer’s allowed deficit to one year. This means, for example, a manufacturer 

could fail to submit the required amount of ZEV credits in 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 ZEVs, 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 credit 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 will no longer be 

necessary for BEVs in 2018 and subsequent model years 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 California. 

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

 34 CCR 1962.1(h)(7) states “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 impacts of the proposed 

changes. Staff is proposing limited amendments to the 2012 through 2017 timeframe

which have little impact on the numbers of vehicles produced in compliance with 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 banks 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 0.000 108.493
45

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 

defines 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 model years. 

This could incentivize manufacturers 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 subsequent 

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 increase 

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 by 
46

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 analysis 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 years 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 

Requirement

Differential

Annual Credit 

Percentage 14% 12% 2% less per year

Annual Percentage of 

IVM Sales That Are PZEV 70% 60% 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 demonstration (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 

explained above, LVMs must comply with a minimum amount of credit from producing 

ZEVs. 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 credits if desired. Due to these uncertainties, and the 

wide array of ZEVs and TZEVs that could be produced to comply with staff’s proposed

ZEV requirements, staff developed a likely compliance scenario to be used for its 

analyses. 

 35 Confidential information, regarding historical credit usage patterns, was used to determine the effects of 

manufacturer’s banked credits.
47

First, staff made the broad assumption that LVMs would fulfill their obligation with the 

maximum allowed percentage of TZEV credits. 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 announced 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 the 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 

number of vehicles, a credit per vehicle must be assumed. Staff assumed all FCVs 

produced would have a 350 mile range, earning 4 credits each, and all BEVs 

produced would, on average, have a 100 mile range, earning 1.5 credits each. 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 number of analyses were run to determine the effect 

of staff’s proposed amendments.

3.3.1 Manufacturer Size Definition Amendments

Staff’s proposed amendments to manufacturer size definitions will affect most IVMs, 

bringing nearly 97% of manufacturers’ 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 amendments
48

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 fleet. In 2025, 

if all IVMs take advantage of the flexibilities provided, over 30 percent of their annual 

sales will be TZEVs. 

3.3.2 ZEV 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, shows 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 

Sales
49

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) 201136.

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

TOTAL

FCVs

2,900 6,200 10,600 15,400 21,600 27,800 35,200 43,600 163,300

BEVs

13,900 27,300 37,700 46,300 52,600 59,500 64,200 65,400 366,900

TZEVs

61,300 75,300 89,100 101,900 116,300 131,200 146,900 161,700 883,700

Total 

Vehicles

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 each technology stated in Table 3.6. LVMs 

 36 ARB 2011b. California Air Resources Board. Emission Inventory Model, EMFAC 2011. 

http://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 2025

Annual California Sales

Model Year

17%

14%

11%

9%

6%

3%

% of 2025 Sales

15.4% of 2025

FCVs

BEVs

TZEVs
50

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 Banked PZEV and AT PZEV Credits

Staff is proposing to allow manufacturers to use PZEV and AT PZEV credits banked 

up to 2017 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 through 2025 model year ZEV requirements 

that could be met with historical banked PZEV and AT PZEV credits, and NEV credits.

Figure 10: Impact of Banked PZEV AT PZEV Credits, and NEV Credits

(2018 through 2025 Model Years)

If all manufacturers 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 2025

Annual 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 hash marked area in Figure 11 represents 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 provision. 

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 vehicles 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 must 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 California and in 

the Section 177 ZEV states. 

 -

 20,000

 40,000

 60,000

 80,000

 100,000

 120,000

 140,000

 160,000

 180,000

2018 2019 2020 2021

Total ZEV (BEV, FCV, TZEV) Sales

Total ZEVs and TZEVs

No Manufacturers 

Take Option

All Manufacturers 

Take Option
52

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 

volumes 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 four 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 costs 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

Alternative A combines aspects 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 be 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 

commercialization 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. While 

lower numbers 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. Although 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 

states. Staff modified the manufacturer’s original proposal to reflect a one-third reduction in vehicle requirements in 

California as well as the Section 177 ZEV states 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 reductions. 

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 requirement 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 produce more ZEVs in the Section 177 ZEV 

states, 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 consistent with achieving a 

commercial market for ZEVs or TZEVs. 
55

5 ECONOMIC IMPACTS

This section discusses the economic impacts of the ZEV requirements on regulated 

manufacturers inside and outside California, individual consumers, and local and State 

government. 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 costs (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 

would see when purchasing a ZEV (assuming 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 the 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 school 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 Businesses 

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 could be subject to this regulation in the future. Three 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 LDV 
56

market, 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 proposed 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 model 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. 

Technology 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 PCs, manufacturers’ compliance strategies for the ZEV 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, manufacturers 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 limited 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 additional 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 depending 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 to 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 batteries). 

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 compared 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, CO2 emissions 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 regulations 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 compared 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 advanced 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 years. 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 Section III-A-4.3. 
58

cell systems39 for midsized platforms. Because, as shown in the table below, 

incremental system costs decrease with increased volume, staff’s proposal will 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 over 

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 cost 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 years. 

It is also important to point out that the incremental system costs of FCVs 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 compliance 

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, as 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 shows 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 affect 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 better 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 the 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., engineering, 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 H2) 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., without 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 incremental 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 comparison, 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 

baseline 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 H2) 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 H2) 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 H2) 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 H2 for FCV 3 EPA and NHTSA designation for a PHEV is a “range extended electric vehicle” or REEV. 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 components 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. The 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 points 

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 13: BEV Component Costs and ICE Comparisons (2009$) *

*Component costs reflect subcompact 100 mile BEV

Figure 14: FCV Component Costs and ICE Comparisons (2009$)*

*Component costs reflect mid-size 350 mile FCV
62

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 current ZEV requirements. Table 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. 

The 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 various 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, and therefore have a 

higher incremental price per vehicle. 

Staff 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 standards. 

5.2.6 Incremental Price Increase in the Context of Advanced Clean Cars

The ZEV regulation must be considered in conjunction with the proposed LEV III 

amendments. Vehicles produced as a result of the ZEV regulation are part of a 
63

manufacturer’s light-duty fleet and are therefore included when calculating fleet 

averages for compliance with the LEV III GHG amendments. Because 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 with the LEV

III GHG 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 standards 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 15 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 overall 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 15: 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 current 
64

requirements for the ZEV regulation remained unchanged. This cumulative ZEV 

incremental technology cost is equivalent 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 15, the difference between LEV III 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 produces 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 technology - Incremental compliance cost from proposed ZEV 

amendments to current ZEV program $10.5 billion

Incremental 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 analysis, staff estimated incremental prices for each model year of 

the regulation and compared them to 2016 baseline vehicle technology. Determining 

incremental prices is important to evaluate the potential upper bounds impact to 

individual consumers, and is later coupled with operating cost savings to determine 

payback periods.

Staff’s proposed amendments will likely decrease the per-vehicle initial cost to 

consumers compared to the existing regulation because of the impact of higher 

production volume reducing incremental costs, but costs will remain $7,500 to $14,500 

higher than the 2016 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 Payback42

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 5.743, 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 Paybacka (2009$)

Technology Packageb Incremental 

Vehicle Price in 

2025c

Lifetime 

Consumer 

Savingsd

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 incremental 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 Average car lifetime in California is 14 years, 186,000 miles; Future fuel savings discounted by 5%.

Fuel prices from CEC (e.g., for 2025, gasoline = $4.02/gal); electricity = $0.15/kWh; Hydrogen = $6/kg

ARB estimates the median life in California for PCs is 14 years, or approximately 

186,000 miles. For two vehicle types shown, the consumer payback occurs within the

median life of the vehicle. The “consumer 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 discussed 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, the 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 

subsection 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 proposed 
66

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 

Berger44,45 and the International Energy Agency’s recent EV Roadmap46. 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 incentives 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 vehicle 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 gCO2/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 have 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 value – Depending on policy 

decisions by ARB and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), LCFS 

credit value for electricity may be returned to electricity providers and ultimately 

ZEV drivers. A recent research study identified the potential revenue 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 CO2 equivalent) to $300 per vehicle 

 44 Roland Berger, 2010a. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants “Powertrain 2020: Li-Ion Batteries – 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 Emissions 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-lowermaintenance-costs-106793.html Accessed September 26, 2011.
67

per year (at $100 per tonne CO2 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 taxes 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-based tax, which would treat all fuels equally, or may become an 

energy-based tax which would favor alternative 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 could create a permanent cost offset for efficient 

advanced vehicles without relying on government funds.

• Battery grid services - For BEVs and PHEVs, there may be additional revenue 

opportunities in the future for battery second-life usage54,55 and vehicle-to-grid 

services. However, these factors are speculative at this point and would 

require a number of barriers to be addressed. California stakeholders, such as 

the CEC, CPUC, and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), are studying 

these concepts.

• Non-Monetary Factors affecting Purchase Behavior – It is important to note that 

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 and 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” purchasing 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 California, 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. Pesaran. 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. “ Analysis 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 Business Competitiveness 

Automobile manufacturing in California represents a small fraction of the 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 Impact 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 likely 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 analysis 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. Specifically, 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 percent 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 creation 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 California 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 model 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. Muro, 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 for 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 

experienced 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 Infrastructure 

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 

companies 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 distribute 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 partnerships 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 chargers 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.html
70

Staff’s proposal will also create a demand for hydrogen fueling stations63. Several 

companies are already active in developing these stations, including Air Products, 

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 provides 

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 proposed 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 fuel 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 electricity sold for vehicles. Between 2017 and 2025, 

if gasoline taxation rates remain the same, California fuel tax revenue losses would be 

approximately $3.8 billion64, only a small portion of which would be associated with the 

ZEV population. These state revenue 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 California 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 manufacturers 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 EMISSIONS 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 in Section V of the LEV ISOR. For the purposes 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 criteria 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 updated 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 impacts from Alternative C (existing 

regulation) are shown. 

As stated in Section 1, climate change poses a serious threat to the economic wellbeing, public health, natural resources, and environment of California. According to 

staff’s 2009 analysis, ZEVs are 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 after considering all of the regulations 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. This implies ZEVs are needed as a critical 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 program 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 associated 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 Reports 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 associated 

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 Notice 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 to 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) on 

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 justice 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 follows:

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 

Fresno, 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 community 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 dialogue 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 LDTs.

6.3 Health Impacts

Staff estimates that, statewide, implementation of the ACC regulations from 2010 

through 2025 will eliminate approximately 1,400 tons of PM2.5 and 40,000 tons of 

NOX emissions from passenger vehicles. The estimate of the reduction of premature 

deaths associated with these emission reductions for both primary PM and secondary 
75

PM (produced in the atmosphere from the precursor NOX) are between 330 and 530. 

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 emitting 

technologies, even on a WTW basis. WTW emissions include upstream emissions 

from fuel production and vehicle 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 16: WTW NOx emissions comparison

 76 In developing this new analysis, it was not accurate to compare this to the ZEV emissions impacts 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 

basin emission inventory.
76

Figure 17: WTW PM emissions comparison

Figure 18: WTW ROG emissions comparison

*ROG means reactive organic gas
77

Figure 19: 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 fleet are 

expected to be compliant with the proposed standards. By 2035 reactive organic gas 

(ROG) emissions would be reduced by an additional 34 percent, and NOx emissions,

by an additional 37 percent, compared to 2035 without the proposed ACC rules. 

Under 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 

regulation 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 account 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

imported 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. Hydrogen 

production will predominantly occur from existing centralized hydrogen facilities 

already operating 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 facilities 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 this analysis.
79

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, emissions 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 renewable 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 program would provide major reductions in GHG emissions. By 

2025, CO2 emissions would be reduced by almost 14 million metric tonnes (MMT) per 

year, which is 12 percent from baseline levels. In reduction increases in 2035 to 32

MMT which is a 27 percent reduction from baseline levels. By 2050, the proposed 

regulation will reduce emissions by more than 42MMT 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 determining 

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 under 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 for 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 demand 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. Reducing 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 renewable 

resources such as solar, wind, or hydropower, 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 value 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 used 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 CO2 reduced in 2025 and $320 

savings per ton CO2 reduced in 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 this transformative 

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 through 2025 model year timeframe, vehicle costs will decrease due increased 

production volumes driving down battery and fuel cell costs, 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 overcompliance with GHG fleet standard

Add New Vehicle Add range extended BEVs as compliance 

option
82

Staff recommends that the Board amend sections 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 the 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 discussed 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 proposed 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 procedures applied to 2009 and 

subsequent model years. Section 1962.1 and its incorporated test procedures now

apply to 2009 through 2017 model years, and a new section (section 1962.2) and its 

incorporated test procedures 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 subdivision 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 modified 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 indicates the number of vehicles 

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 this 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 their 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 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)2. The purpose of this subdivision is to describe the ZEV 

requirements for LVMs for model years 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 systems 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 systems.

(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. This 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 ILVMs 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 ILVMs are able to 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 given 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, the 
85

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 

2018 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 

requirements 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 requirements 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 year 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 for NMOG + NOx. 

Staff will also be proposing new emission certification categories that go beyond 

SULEV 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 2009 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 requirement 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. Option 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 standard 

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 must be certified to LEV III 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 emission VMT allowance. The table within this 

subdivision is being corrected to resolve inconsistencies in the zero emission VMT 

allowance equation. The language has also been clarified 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 Equation 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 have 

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 qualify. 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 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. 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 allowances 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 higher voltage Type D 

because AT PZEVs need to make use of systems that more closely represent those 

that are needed for ZEVs, and no manufacturers have certified, 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 Type 
87

I.5x and Type IIx vehicles (range extended BEVs), vehicles are referenced in two 

other places in section 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 delivered 

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 FCVs, earn 9 credits each in the 

2015 through 2017 timeframe. This modification gives FCVs additional incentives as 

compared to BEVs, 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 subdivision 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 sale and placed in service in a Section 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 vehicles through 2017 model year, rather than just 2014 model 

year. California markets have matured and are well prepared for increased sales 

requirements. However, markets in Section 177 ZEV states need additional time to 
88

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 qualify 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 standard 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 BEVs equipped 

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 Type 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 ensure 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 range 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 80 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 of 
89

g/mi NMOG. After model year 2015, the language is being modified to reflect 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 differences 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 dividing 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 credits for use after model year 2017. Due to staff’s 

proposed change no longer allowing 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 requiring 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 manufacturers 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 demonstration 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 model year, and 

continuing for ZEVs through model year 2017. New text in subdivision (B) is 

duplicative, only extending the availability of advanced demonstration credits for 
90

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 guidelines for manufacturers placing ZEV program vehicles 

into transportation systems. This subdivision is being amended to explicitly restrict 

manufacturers 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, not 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 vehicles 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 credits 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 subdivision 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 transportation 

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 necessary to 

continue these car sharing 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, staff 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 separate 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 subdivision 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 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)(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 subdivision 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 

use 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 

through 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 amended 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 equation 

for calculating the resulting ZEV penalty. This subdivision is being amended to 
92

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 BEVs are equipped 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 due 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 nomenclature 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 renumbered 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 used 

throughout section 1962.1. New 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. 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. 

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. 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 procedures 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 procedures

applied to 2009 and subsequent model years. Section 1962.1 and its incorporated 

test procedure now apply to 2009 through 2017 model years, and a new section 

(section 1962.2) and its incorporated test procedures apply to 2018 and subsequent 

model years. Language is being changed throughout the test procedures to clarify the 

applicable model 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 that 

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 BEVs. 

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 nomenclature 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 Vehicle 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 not 
95

exempt from such requirements because these vehicles have tailpipe and evaporative 

emissions. 

Section 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 emissions 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 charge 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 the “Charge-Depleting to ChargeSustaining 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 subsections 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 calculate 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 CO2 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 Technology Demonstration Program Data Requirements

This new subdivision is being added to specify what is required of manufacturers to 

submit to ARB’s Executive Officer for approval of credits earned in an advanced 

technology demonstration program, according 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 is 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 placed 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 

applicable. 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 fast 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 Subsequent 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 subdivision 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 that 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 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 its control. A manufacturer 

may only elect this option for 2 years. 

(b)(1)(D) The purpose of this subdivision is to exclude NEVs produced 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 NEVs 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 that 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 introduces 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 describes 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 equations 
99

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 

vehicles 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 various 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 FCVs 

delivered for sale and placed in service in California to be counted toward meeting the

manufacturer’s requirement in the Section 177 ZEV states that have adopted the ZEV 

regulation. This is due to hydrogen FCVs being dependent on hydrogen 

infrastructure, which is less robust in the Section 177 ZEV states. 

(d)(5)(F) This subdivision describes how NEVs are eligible to receive 0.15 

credits. 

(d)(5)(F)1. This subdivision describes the technical specifications that NEVs 

must meet in order to receive credit. These specifications guarantee only the most 

advanced NEVs are eligible to receive credit. 

(d)(5)(F)1.a. This subdivision describes the acceleration requirements 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 subdivision 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 ensure 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 subdivision 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 manufacturer 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 maintain 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 subdivision 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 MDVs 

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 credits 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 subdivision 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 limits 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 credits 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 year 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, calculates, 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 any 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 from 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

gCO2/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 gCO2/mi and describes the equation used for 

calculating GHG-ZEV over compliance credits for use towards meeting a 

manufacturer’s ZEV requirement. 

(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 subdivision prohibits the use of banked gCO2/mi credits 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 as 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 gCO2/mi used to calculate the GHG-ZEV over 

compliances credits from its GHG compliance bank, and cannot bank for future 

compliance toward 1961.3. 

(g)(6)(C)4. This subdivision describes what is required of a manufacturer 

when submitting GHG-ZEV over compliance credits. 
103

(g)(6)(C)4.a. This subdivision provides that a manufacturer who is granted the 

ability to generate GHG-ZEV over compliance credits and fails to over-comply by at 

least 2.0 gCO2/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 ZEV 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, and 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 manufacturer incurs a penalty if out of compliance 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 Classes.”

(h)(2) This subdivision names the test procedures 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 BEVs 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 subdivision 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 hydrogen 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 

hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicles.

(i)(7) This subdivision defines “majority ownership situations” because 

manufacturers are to aggregate their sales with another 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” because 

manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation with neighborhood 

electric vehicles.

(i)(10) This subdivision defines “placed in service” because in order for 

hydrogen FCVs to be eligible for subdivision 1962.2(d)(5)(E), the vehicles must 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 “range extended battery electric vehicle” 

because manufacturers are allowed to meet a portion of their obligation with range 

extended BEVs.

(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 emission 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 deemed 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 ZEV 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 requires 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 

public 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”

This 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 

in 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. 

§1962.3 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 BEVs, 
106

to make this section applicable to NEVs starting in model year 2014, to delete the 

requirement that only ZEVs earning more than 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 anticipated 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 years.

(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 on 

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 Level 2 charging contained in Society of Automotive Engineers J1772, JAN2010, 

titled “SAE Electric Vehicle and Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge 

Coupler”. This subdivision has also been clarified from 3.3 kilovolt amps to kWs 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. 

“Modeling 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 Regulation - Attachment B: 2050 Greenhouse Gas 

Analysis” http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009zevreview/attachment_b_2050

ghg.pdf

ARB, 2009c. California Air Resources Board. December 9, 2009. Resolution 09-

66. http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009zevreview/res09_66.pdf

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/

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 Diesel-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 2011b. California Air Resources Board. 2011. EMFAC 

2011. http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm

Autobloggreen, 2010. AutoBlogGreen.com. Eric Loveday. “Mercedes-Benz prices BClass F-Cell lease at $849 a month”

http://www.green.autoblog.com/2010/11/22/mercedes-benz-prices-b-class-f-celllease-at-849-a-month/
108

BMW, 2011a. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG. Press Release, February 10, 2011. 

“BMW ActiveE Electric 

Vehicle” https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/pressclub/p/us/pressDetail.html?outputCha

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-iusa.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-commercialproduction-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-assembleevs-in-benicia.html

CCST, 2011. California Council on Science and Technology, May 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 Vehicle for the United 

States” http://media.chrysler.com/newsrelease.do?id=9673&mid=&searchresult

Citi, 2011. Citi Investment Research & Analysis. February 23, 2011 “Electric Vehicles: 

Perspectives on a Growing Investment Theme”
109

CNRA, 2009. California Natural Resources Agency. 2009. “2009 California Climate 

Adaptation Strategy” http://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. DOE 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, 2010a. 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 Standards 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 Records First Sales of its Karma Sedan” 

http://media.fiskerautomotive.com/global/enus/Media/PressRelease.aspx?mediaid=557&title=fisker-automotive-records-firstsales-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_cadillac
110

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, 201.1 “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-automobilesconcepts/releases/honda-at-the-los-angeles-auto-show-fact-sheet

ICCT, 2011a. The International Council on Clean Transportation. “Vehicle 

Electrification Policy Study – Task 2 Report: Metrics” , February 2011

ICCT, 2011b. 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. McKinsey & 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=1319729886930
111

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/next-gen-mitsubishi-outlander-to-be-brands-firstplug-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, 2011b. 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-allelectric-leaf-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. PluginCars.com. Zach McDonald. February 9, 2011. “Ford 

Pushes Key Marketing Message: Lower Maintenance 

Costs.” http://www.plugincars.com/ford-pushes-key-marketing-message-electriccars-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-testdrive. Accessed October 15, 2011.

Rocky Mountain Institute, 2009. Rocky Mountain Institute, February 24, 2009. “Project 

Get Ready: Helping Communities Become Electrified Vehicle Pioneers” 

Roland Berger, 2010a. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants “Powertrain 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. 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.

Tesla, 2011. Tesla Motors. Webpage. “Model S 

Facts”. http://www.teslamotors.com/models/facts

Toyota, 2011a. Toyota Motor Company. January 13, 2011 “Japanese Companies 

Eye Smooth Domestic Launch of 

FCVs” http://www2.toyota.co.jp/en/news/11/01/0113.html

Toyota, 2011b. 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 Yang. 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 New 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-vowsproduction-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-carworld-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-obamaannounces-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 

Charge Coupler” (January 2010)

SAE J2572: “Recommended Practice for Measuring Fuel Consumption and 

Range of Fuel Cell and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles Fueled by 

Compressed Gaseous Hydrogen” (October 2008)

ETA-NTP002: “Implementation of SAE Standard J1666 May 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 proposing 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 

following 
114

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 Regulations
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
§1962.1

A-1-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Appendix A-1

PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Amend section 1962.1, 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. The text of the amendments is shown in underline to indicate 

additions and strikeout to indicate deletions, compared to the preexisting regulatory 

language.]

§ 1962.1 Zero-Emission Vehicle Standards for 2009 and Subsequentthrough 

2017 Model Year Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and MediumDuty Vehicles.

(a) ZEV Emission Standard. The Executive Officer shall certify new 2009

and subsequentthrough 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 any 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 sectionsubdivision (b)(1)(C), produced by the 

manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that must be ZEVs, subject to the 

conditions in this sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b). The ZEV 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 manufacturer’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 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 determine ZEV requirements specified in subdivision 1962.1 

(b)(1)(A) only, and has no effect on a manufacturer’s size determination, specified in 

section 1900. In 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, 2012

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 by the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that same 

model year. 

2. For 2012 and subsequentthrough 2017 model years, a 

manufacturer’s production volume for the given model year will be based on the threeyear 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 based on 

California production volume of PCs and LDT1s, 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 determination. 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 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-year 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., Manufacturer 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 year, a manufacturer’s LDT2 production shall be 

included in determining the manufacturer’s overall ZEV requirement under 

sectionsubdivision (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 sectionssubdivisions 1962.1(b)(1)(B) and 
§1962.1

A-1-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 that 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 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.

(B) Alternative Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers 

through Model Year 2011.

1. Minimum Floor for Production of Type III ZEVs.

a. [Reserved]. 

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, thoughthrough production, delivery 

for sale, and placement in service of ZEVs, other than NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, using 

the credit substitution 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

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 sectionsubdivision

1962.1(f) for a year during calendar years 2009-2011, provided that 33 years of such a 

multiplier will equal 4 ZEV credits. 
§1962.1

A-1-4

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

c. [Reserved]. 

d. [Reserved]. 

e. [Reserved].

f. Exclusion of Additional Credits for Transportation Systems.

Any additional credits for transportation systems generated in accordance with 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(g)(5) shall not be counted towards compliance with this 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(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 

sectionsubdivision 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 longer be used to meet the ZEV requirement

specified in subdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B)1.b.; they may be used as Enhanced AT 

PZEVTZEV, AT PZEV, or PZEV credits. ZEV credits earned in model year 2009 and 

subsequentthrough 2011 would be allowed to be carried 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 Enhanced AT PZEVTZEV, 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 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B) for any model year from 2009 through 2011, fails to 

meet the requirement in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B)1.b. by the end of the 2011 

model year, shall be treated as subject to the primary requirements in 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(A) for the 2009 through 2011 model years.

i. Rounding Convention. The number of ZEVs needed for a 

manufacturer under sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B)1.b. shall be rounded to the 

nearest whole number.

2. Compliance 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 PZEVsTZEVs, 

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 PZEVsTZEVs, or credits 
§1962.1

A-1-5

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B) are not available 

after the 2011 model year.

(C) Election of the Primary or Alternative Requirements for Large 

Volume Manufacturers for the 2009 through 2011 Model Years. 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 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 the 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 compliance 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 sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B)1.b.
§1962.1

A-1-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(D) Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in Model Years

2012 through 2017.

1. 2012 through 2014 Requirements. On an annual basis, aA

manufacturer must meet the total ZEV obligation with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated 

by such vehicles, excluding credits generated by NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs equal to at 

least 0.79% of its annual sales, using either production volume determination method 

described in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(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 than 

93.4% may be met with Enhanced AT PZEVs credits generated from TZEVs, Type 0

ZEVs, and NEVs, as limited in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(g)(6). The entire requirement

obligation may be met solely with credits generated from ZEVs.

2. 2015 through 2017 Requirements. On an annual basis, aA

manufacturer must meet the total ZEV obligation with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated 

by such vehicles, excluding credits generated by NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, equal to at 

least 3% of its annual sales, using either production volume determination method 

described in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(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 met with Enhanced AT PZEVs credits generated from TZEVs, Type 0

ZEVs, and NEVs, as limited in sectionsubdivision 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

produces the minimum number of credits required to meet its ZEV obligation and the 

maximum percentage for the Enhanced AT PZEVTZEV, 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

2015 – 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, 2012

4. Use of Additional Credits for Transportation Systems. Any 

additional credits for transportation systems generated from ZEVs in accordance with 

sectionsubdivision 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 sectionsubdivision

1962.1(b)(2)(D).

(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 percentage 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 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 2009

and through 2017subsequent 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 volume manufacturer will be 12% instead 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. [Reserved].

(6) [Reserved].

(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 
§1962.1

A-1-8

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 

MDVs 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 

comply 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 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 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 LVMs.

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 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 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, independent low, or intermediate volume 
§1962.1

A-1-9

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 model 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 

production 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 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 2011 model 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 

sectionsubdivisions 1962.1(b)(7)(A) and (B) will apply.

(c) Partial ZEV Allowance Vehicles (PZEVs).

(1) Introduction. This sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c) sets forth the criteria for 

identifying vehicles delivered 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 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. For 2009 through 2014 model years, Ccertify 

the vehicle to the 150,000-mile SULEV exhaust emission standards for PCs and LDTs 

in sectionsubdivision 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 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 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, 

Ccertify the vehicle to the evaporative emission standards in sectionsubdivision

1976(b)(1)(E) (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, as applicable, for 150,000 miles; 

and
§1962.1

A-1-10

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(D) Extended Warranty. Extend the performance and defects 

warranty period set forth in sectionsubdivision 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) Zero-Emission VMT PZEV Allowance.

(A) Calculation of Zero -Emission VMT Allowance. A vehicle that 

meets the requirements of sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c)(2) and has zero-emission 

vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) capability will generate an additional zero emission VMT 

PZEV allowance calculated as follows:

Range Zero-emission VMT Allowance

EAERu < 10 miles 0.0

EAERu ≥10 miles to 40 miles

and

Rcda = 10 miles to 40 miles

EAERu x (1 – UFRcda)/11.028

Rcda EAERu > 40 miles

EAERu40/ 29.63

(EAERu40) x [1 – (UF40*Rcda/EAERu)]/

11.028

Where,

UF40= utility factor at 40 miles

EAERu40= 40 miles

A vehicle cannot generate more than 1.39 zero-emission VMT PZEV 

allowances.

The urban equivalent all-electric range (EAERu) and urban charge 

depletion range actual (Rcda) shall be determined in accordance with section F.12 and 

F.5.5, respectively, of the “California Exhaust Emission 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 utility factor (UF) based on the 

charge depletion range actual (urban cycle) (Rcda) 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 J2841 March 2009.

(B) Alternative Procedures. 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, 2012

alternative procedure for determining the zero-emission 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]. 

(4) PZEV Allowance for Advanced ZEV Componentry. A vehicle that 

meets the requirements of sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c)(2) may qualify 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 qualifying for additional advanced 

componentry PZEV allowance or allowances that may be used in the AT PZEV 

category are classified in one of fivefour 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, 2012

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. [Reserved]

3. [Reserved]

4. [Reserved]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 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 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 2011 model years, 0.35 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.25 in the 

2015 and subsequent model yearsthrough 2017 model years.

6. Type E HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the 

reasonable 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 2009

through 2011 model years, 0.45 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.35 in the 

2015 and subsequentthrough 2017 model years.
§1962.1

A-1-13

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 

subsequentthrough 2017 model years.

8. Type G HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer 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 

subsequentthrough 2017 model years. 

9. Severability. In the event that all or part of 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c)(4)(B)1. - 8. is found invalid, the remainder 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 with the fuel(s) used by 

the vehicle (on a grams/mile basis) are lower than or equal to 0.01 grams/mile. Fuelcycle 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 PZEV Allowance.

(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 sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c)(6), multiplied by any 

PZEV introduction phase-in multiplier listed in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c)(7), subject 

to the caps in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c)(6)(B).

1. Baseline PZEV Allowance. The baseline PZEV allowance of 0.2 

for vehicles meeting the criteria in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c)(2);

2. Zero-Emission VMT PZEV Allowance. The zero-emission VMT 

PZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with sectionsubdivision 1962.1(c)(3);

3. Advanced Componentry PZEV Allowance. The advanced ZEV 

componentry PZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with sectionsubdivision

1962.1(c)(4); and
§1962.1

A-1-14

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

4. Fuel-Cycle Emissions PZEV Allowance. The fuel-cycle 

emissions PZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with sectionsubdivision

1962.1(c)(5).

(B) Caps on the Value of an AT PZEV Allowance.

1. Cap for 2009 and Subsequentthrough 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. [Reserved].

(7) PZEV Multipliers.

(A) [Reserved].

(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 California 

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 subdivision 1962.1 (c)(7)(B) 

multiplier will no longer be available after model year 2011.

(d) Qualification for ZEV Multipliers and Credits.

(1) [Reserved].

(2) [Reserved]. 

(3) [Reserved].

(4) [Reserved]. 

(5) ZEV Credits for 2009 and Subsequentthrough 2017 Model Years

ZEVs.

(A) ZEV Tiers for Credit Calculations. ZEV cCredits 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, 2012

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 ≥ 100 N/A

Type III ≥ 100 

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 subsequentthrough 2017 model year Type III, IV, or V ZEV in 

sectionsubdivision 1962(d)(5)(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 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, the Executive Officer may choose to waive these 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(B) fast refueling requirements and base the amount of 

credit earned on UDDS ZEV range, as specified in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(A).

(C) ZEV Credits for 2009 and Subsequentthrough 2017 Model Year 

ZEVs. A 2009 and subsequentthrough 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 2009 and subsequentthrough 2017 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 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, 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, 2012

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 Year for 

Production and Delivery for Sale and for Placement

Tier Calendar Year in Which ZEV is Placed in Service

2009-20171 2012 - 20172018+

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 34

Type IV 5 35

Type V 7 32012-2014: 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 three 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 1962.1 (d)(5)(D) multiplier will no longer be available after 

model year 2011.

(E) Counting Specified ZEVs 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, 2012

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 section 177 state, may be counted towards compliance with the California 

percentage ZEV requirements in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b), including the 

requirements in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(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 sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(B).

2. Provisions for 2010 through 2017 Model Years. Manufacturers 

with a ZEV requirement producing Specified 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 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 requirements in sectionsubdivision

1962.1(b), provided that the credits are multiplied by the ratio of an LVM’s

manufacturer’s applicable production volume for a model year, as specified in 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(1)(B), in the state receiving credit to the 

LVM’smanufacturer’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 sectionsubdivision

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 state’s 

requirements that implement sectionsubdivision 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 177 

state’s requirements that implement sectionsubdivision 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 – 20142017

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, 2012

(F) NEVs. Beginning in 2010 model year, to be eligible for the credit 

amount in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(C), NEVs must meet the following 

specifications and requirements in this sectionsubdivision 1962.1(d)(5)(F):

1. Specifications. A 2010 through 2017 and subsequent model year 

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 

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 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 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.

5. NEV Charging Requirements. Model year 2014 through 2017

NEVs must meet charging connection standard portion of the requirements specified in 

subdivision 1962.3(c)(2).
§1962.1

A-1-19

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 IIx 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 

1962.1(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 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

(e) [Reserved].

(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 calendar years. 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 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. 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 year exceeding the manufacturer’s ZEV 
§1962.1

A-1-20

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

requirement set forth in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b) shall earn ZEV credits in 

accordance with this sectionsubdivision 1962.1(g).

(2) ZEV Credit Calculations.

(A) Credits from ZEVs. For model years 2009 through 2014, Tthe 

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 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 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 ZEVs shall be 

expressed in units of credits.

(B) Credits from PZEVs. For model years 2009 through 2014, Tthe

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 applies 

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 

requirement for PCs 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, [iiiii] Enhanced AT 

PZEVsTZEVs, [iiiiv] AT PZEVs, [iv] all other PZEVs, and [vi] 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 1/1000th 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 1/100th 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 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.

(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, 2012

accounts will be converted to be used for compliance with requirements specified in 

subdivision 1962.2(b). For LVMs, PZEV accounts will be discounted 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 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 sectionsubdivision 1962.1(g) if the manufacturer so 

designates.

(4) ZEV Credits for Advanced Technology Demonstration Programs. 

(A) TZEVs. In model years For 2009 through 2014 model years, ZEVs 

and Enhanced AT PZEVs, excluding NEVs, TZEVs 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 Department 

of Motor Vehicles (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, infrastructure, 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 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 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 sectionsubdivision 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 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, infrastructure, 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 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 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 1962.1(g)(4). A manufacturer’s 
§1962.1

A-1-22

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 2017, 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 

provided in sectionsubdivision (g)(5)(C) below . In model years 2009 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 

sectionsubdivision (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 Executive Officer that the vehicle will be used as a p

art of a project that uses an innovative transportation system as described in 

sectionsubdivision (g)(5)(B) below.

(B) Credits Earned. In order to earn additional credit under this 

section (g)(5), a project must at a minimum demonstrate [i] shared use of ZEVs, 

Type I.5x and Type IIx vehicles, Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEV, 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 NEVs, 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, 2012

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

TZEV

2009 through 2011 4 2

ZEV 2009 through 2011 6 3

Enhanced AT 

PZEV

TZEV

2012 and 

subsequentthrough 

2017

10.5 10.5

ZEV and Type 

I.5x and Type 

IIx vehicles

2012 and 

subsequentthrough 

2017

20.75 10.75

(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 sectionsubdivision (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 met with ZEVs, as specified in 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(2)(D)3.

2. Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs. Credits earned or allocated by 

Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs pursuant to this sectionsubdivision (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 

this sectionsubdivision (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 

sectionsubdivision (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 in 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 absence 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, 2012

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 

Officer 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, Aa

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 

sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b). 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 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 for a greater credit earning ZEV category. For example, 

credits produced from Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs 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 manufacturer or acquired from another party.

(A) NEVs. Credits 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 

Years ZEV Obligation that:

Percentage 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 –

20142017

Must be met with ZEVs 0%

May be met with Enhanced AT 

PZEVsTZEVs 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, 2012

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 percentage limits described 

in the following table:

Model 

Years ZEV Obligation that:

Percentage 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 may be met with AT 

PZEVs or PZEVs

No Limit

2012 –

20142017

Must be met with ZEVs 0%

May be met with Enhanced AT 

PZEVsTZEVs, 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 cCredits from ZEVs, excluding credits generated from NEVs generated from 

excess production in model years 2009 through 2011 model yearsand subsequent, 

including those acquired from another party, may be carried forward and applied to the 

ZEV minimum floor requirement specified in sectionsubdivisions 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 credits from 

ZEVs, but may be used to satisfy the manufacturer’s percentage ZEV obligation that 

may be satisfied by credits from Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs, 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 PZEVTZEV, AT PZEV, or 

PZEV credits.

(C) Carry forward provisions for manufacturers other than LVMs

for 2009-2011 Model Years. ZEV cCredits generated from ZEVs, excluding credits 

generated from NEVs, from 2009 through 2011and 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 period permitted in sectionsubdivision 1962.1(b)(7)(A). 
§1962.1

A-1-26

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

When subject to the LVM requirements, a manufacturer must comply with the 

provisions of sectionsubdivision 1962.1(g)(6)(B). 

ZEV cCredits traded by a manufacturer other than a LVM to any other manufacturer, 

including a LVM, are subject to sectionsubdivision 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 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 PZEVsTZEVs, 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 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] 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 allowances from partial ZEV 

allowance vehicles produced and delivered for sale in California by the manufacturer for 

the model year (for a LVM, not to exceed that permitted under sectionsubdivision

1962.1(b)(2)), [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. Credits 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 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 sectionsubdivision 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 

sectionsubdivision 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, 2012

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 1/1000th for 

model years 2009 through 2014 and rounded to the nearest 1/100th for model years 

2015 through 2017, calculated according to the following equations, 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 permitted under sectionsubdivision

1962.1(b)(2)(A)1962.1(b)(2):

For 2009 through 2014 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 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 compliance for the model year)

(h) Test Procedures. 

 (1) Determining 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 

Subsequentthrough 2017 Model Zero-Emission Vehicles 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 Compliance. The test procedures for determining compliance with

sectionsubdivision 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 Procedure” adopted on December 1, 2004, and 

ETA-NTP004 (revision 2) “Electric Vehicle Constant Speed Range Tests” adopted on 

December 1,2004. 

(i) ZEV-Specific Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section 

1962.1.

(1) “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.
§1962.1

A-1-28

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(2) “Auxiliary power unit” or “APU” means any device that provides electrical 

or mechanical energy, meeting the requirements 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. 

(23) “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. 

(34) “Charge depletion range actual” or “Rcda” 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 charge and regenerative braking 

derived energy.

(45) “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 starter in a particular vehicle 

application.

(56) “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.

(67) “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.

(78) “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 VehiclesDMV.

(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 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 1962.1(d)(5)(G), 
§1962.1

A-1-29

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(811) “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. 

(912) “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).

(13) “Transitional Zero Emission Vehicle” means a PZEV that has an 

allowance of 1.0 or greater, and makes use of a ZEV fuel.

(1014)“Type 0, I, I.5, II, III, IV, and V ZEV” all have the meanings set forth in 

section 1962.1(d)(5)(A). 

(1115)“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) Abbreviations. The following abbreviations are used in this section 

1962.1:

“AER” means all-electric range.

“APU” means auxiliary power unit.

“AT PZEV” means advanced 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.

“EAERu40” means the equivalent all-electric range that a 40 mile Rcda plug-in 

hybrid electric vehicle achieves. 

“FR” means Federal Register.

“HEV” means hybrid-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 emissions.

“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 allowance of at 

least 0.2.

“Rcda” means charge depletion actual range (urban Cycle).
§1962.1

A-1-30

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

“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 PZEVs, and PZEVs for the 2009 through 2017and subsequent model 

years; and

(2) Each manufacturer’s annual credit balances for 2010 through 2017 and 

subsequent years for:

(A) Each type of vehicle: ZEVs (minus NEVs), Type I.5x, and Type IIx

vehicles, NEVs, Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs, AT PZEVs, and 

PZEVs; and

(B) Advanced technology demonstration programs; and

(C) Transportation systems; and

(D) Credits earned under sectionsubdivision 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. Reference: Sections 38562, 39002, 39003, 39667, 43000, 43009.5, 43013, 43018, 43018.5,

43100, 43101, 43101.5, 43102, 43104, 43105, 43106, 43204, 43205, 43206, and 43205.5, Health and 

Safety Code.
Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

APPENDIX A-2

California Environmental Protection Agency

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

PROPOSED 

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR

2009 THROUGH 2017 MODEL ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLES AND HYBRID 

ELECTRIC VEHICLES, IN THE PASSENGER CAR, LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK AND 

MEDIUM-DUTY VEHICLE CLASSES

Adopted: December 17, 2008

Amended: December 2, 2009

Amended: [insert date]

Existing intervening text that is not amended is indicated by “* * * *”. Page numbers in 

the table of contents 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 

additions and strikeout to indicate deletions, compared to the preexisting regulatory 

language.]
Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

NOTE: This document is incorporated by reference in section 1962.1, title 13, 

California Code of Regulations (CCR). Additional requirements necessary to 

complete 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 2001 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 Vehicles” (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 section 1961(d), title 13, CCR).
Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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

EF. 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 Battery 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 Provisions .......................................................... 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 Tolerances ................................................ 18

FG. 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 Capable Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles. ..................................................................................... 16

8. 50oF and 20oF Test Provision for Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles. ..................................................................................... 21
Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

50 o

F testing shall be conducted pursuant to section FG.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

GH. Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Exhaust Emission Test 

Sequence. .............................................................................................................. 1

HI. Examples of Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle 

Terminology........................................................................................................... 1

IJ. 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.......................................................................................... 1
A-2-A-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR

2009 THROUGH 2017AND 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 

2009 through 2017 and subsequent model-year zero-emission passenger cars, lightduty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles, and 2009 through 2017 and subsequent modelyear hybrid electric passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles. The 

general 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, 2012

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 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 allelectric 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 vehicle 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).

“Alternate Continuous Urban Test Schedule” 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 Continuous Highway Test Schedule” means a series of the 

following sequence: HFEDS, 15 second key-on pause, HFEDS, and 10-20 minute keyoff hot soak or a 15 second key-on pause. This alternate procedure may 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 requirements 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 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.

“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 a 
A-2-B-2

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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.

“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 offvehicle 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, 

Ecd, measured in watt-hours consumed by vehicle over the charge depleting cycle 

range, Rcdc. Ecd 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 chargesustaining or charge-depleting over each driving cycle (i.e. UDDS, HFEDS, US06, or 

SC03).

“Charge depleting actual range or Rcda” 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 reported to the nearest 0.1 

miles. (See section F.11.9.)

“Charge depleting actual range, highway or Rcdah” 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 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 Rcdc” 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. (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 should 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 chargesustaining 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 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 soak 
A-2-B-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

period.

“Continuous Highway Test Schedule” means a repeated 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 every 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 starter 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 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” 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 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 vehicle” 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-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 
A-2-B-4

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 use 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 sale 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 meeting 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 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 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 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.

“SOC Criterion” means the state-of-charge criterion that is applied to a chargesustaining 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, 2012

“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) Rcda mi

Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range Rcdcs mi

Charge Depleting Net Energy Consumption Ecd wh

Charge Depleting CO2 Produced Mcd g/mi

Charge Sustaining CO2 Produced Mcs g/mi

Highway Charge Depleting Actual Range Rcdah mi

Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range Rcdch mi

Highway Electric Range Fraction ERFh %

Highway Equivalent All-Electric Range EAERh mi

Highway Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy 

Consumption

EAERECh wh/mi

Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range Rcdcu mi

Urban Electric Range Fraction ERFu %

Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range EAERu mi

Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range scaled to 40 mi 

limit

EAERu40 mi

Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy 

Consumption

EAERECu wh/mi
A-2-C-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

C. Zero-Emission Vehicle Standards.

1. ZEV Emission Standard. The Executive Officer shall certify new 2009 

and subsequentthrough 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 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 sectionsubdivision C.2.2(c), produced by the 

manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that must be ZEVs, subject to the 

conditions in sectionsubdivision 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 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 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 determine 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 by 
A-2-C-2

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

the manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that same model year. 

(2) For 2012 and subsequentthrough 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, 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 based on California production volume of 

PCs and LDT1s, 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 

determination. 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 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-year 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., Manufacturer 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 year, a manufacturer’s LDT2 production shall be 

included in determining the manufacturer’s overall ZEV requirement under 

sectionsubdivision C.2.1(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 sectionsubdivision 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) Primary 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, 2012

(b) Alternative Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers.

(1) Minimum Floor for Production of Type III ZEVs.

(A) [Reserved]

(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, thoughthrough production, delivery for 

sale, and placement in service of ZEVs, other than 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 sectionsubdivision 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 sectionsubdivision

C.7.5 shall not be counted towards compliance with this sectionsubdivision

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 sectionsubdivision

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 

credits may no longer be used to meet the ZEV requirement, specified in subdivision 
A-2-C-4

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 carried 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 Enhanced AT PZEVTZEV, 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 sectionsubdivision C.2.2(b) for any 

model year from 2009 through 2011, fails to meet the requirement in sectionsubdivision

C.2.2(b)(1)(B) by the end of the 2011 model year, shall be treated as subject to the 

primary requirements in sectionsubdivision C.2.1(a) for the 2009 through 2011 model 

years. 

(I) Rounding Convention. The number of ZEVs needed for a manufacturer 

under sectionsubdivision C.2.2(b)(1)(B) shall be rounded to the nearest whole number.

(2) Compliance 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 PZEVsTZEVs, 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 PZEVsTZEVs, 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 sectionsubdivision 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 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 the 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 compliance requirements for the 2009 through 2011 model years 
A-2-C-5

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

upon a demonstration that it has complied with all of the applicable requirements for 

that period in sectionsubdivision C.2.2(b)(1)(B).

(d) Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers in Model Years 2012 

through 2017.

(1) 2012 through 2014 Requirements. On an annual basis, aA manufacturer 

must meet the total ZEV obligation with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated by such 

vehicles, excluding credits generated by NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, equal to at least 

0.79% of its annual sales, using either production volume determination method 

described in sectionsubdivision 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 than 93.4% may be met 

with Enhanced AT PZEVs, Type 0 ZEVs, and NEVs, other than limits described in 

sectionsubdivision 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, aA manufacturer 

must meet its ZEV obligation with ZEVs or ZEV credits generated by such vehicles, 

excluding credits generated by NEVs and Type 0 ZEVs, equal to at least 3% of its 

annual sales, using either production volume determination method described in 

sectionsubdivision 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 met with 

Enhanced AT PZEVs credits generated from TZEVs, Type 0 ZEVs, and NEVs, other 

than limits described in sectionsubdivision C.7.6. 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 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 categories.

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 additional 

credits for transportation systems generated from ZEVs in accordance with 

sectionsubdivision 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 sectionsubdivision C.2.2(d)(1).
A-2-C-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 percentage 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 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.

2.3 Requirements for Intermediate Volume Manufacturers. In For 2009 

and through 2017subsequent 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 volume 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 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.

2.5 [Reserved] Counting ZEVs and PZEVs in Fleet 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 certified 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 consecutive 

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 

consecutive 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 model 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, 2012

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 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 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 acquired 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 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 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 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 production 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 be 
A-2-C-8

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 2011 model 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 sectionsubdivisions C2.7(a) and (b) will apply.

3. Partial ZEV Allowance Vehicles (PZEVs).

3.1 Introduction. This sectionsubdivisions 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 Allowance. 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. For 2009 through 2014 model years, Ccertify the 

vehicle to the 150,000-mile SULEV exhaust emission standards for PCs and LDTs in 

sectionsubdivision 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 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. Certify the vehicle to the evaporative emission 

standards in sectionsubdivision 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 sectionssubdivisions 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, 2012

(a) Calculation of Zero Emission VMT Allowance. A vehicle that meets the 

requirements of sectionsubdivision C.3.2 and has zero-emission vehicle miles traveled 

(“VMT”) capability will generate an additional zero emission VMT PZEV allowance, 

calculated as follows:

Range Zero-emission VMT Allowance

EAERu < 10 miles 0.0

EAERu ≥10 miles to 40 miles

and

Rcda = 10 miles to 40 miles

EAERu x (1 – UFRcda)/11.028

Rcda EAERu > 40 miles

EAERu40/ 29.63 

(EAERu40) x [1 –

(UF40*Rcda/EAERu)]/

11.028

Where,

UF40= utility factor at 40 miles

EAERu40= 40 miles

A vehicle cannot generate more than 1.39 zero-emission VMT PZEV 

allowance.

The urban equivalent all-electric range (EAERu) and charge depleting actual range 

(urban cycle) (Rcda) shall be determined in accordance with sections F.11 and F.5.4, 

respectively, of these test procedures. The utility Factor (UF) based on the charge 

depleting actual range (urban cycle) (Rcda) 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 J2841 March 2009.

(b) Alternative Procedures. As an alternative to determining the zeroemission 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-emission 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 sectionsubdivision 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, 2012

(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 qualifying for additional advanced 

componentry PZEV allowance or allowances that may be used in the AT PZEV 

category are classified in one of fivefour types of HEVs based on the criteria in the 

following table. 

Characteristics Type 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 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) [Reserved]. 

(3) [Reserved]. 

(4) [Reserved].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 other similar 
A-2-C-11

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 2011 model years, 0.35 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.25 in the 

2015 and subsequent model yearsthrough 2017 model years.

(6) Type E HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer demonstrates to the 

reasonable 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 2009 

through 2011 model years, 0.45 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.35 in the 

2015 and subsequent model yearsthrough 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 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 model yearsthrough 2017 model years.

(8) Type G HEVs. A PZEV that the manufacturer 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, 0.89 in the 2012 through 2014 model years, and 0.78 in the 2015 and 

subsequent model yearsthrough 2017 model years.

(9) Severability. In the event that all or part of sectionsubdivision C.3.4(b)(1)-

(8) is found invalid, the remainder of these standards 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 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 with the fuel(s) used by 

the vehicle (on a grams/mile basis) are lower than or equal to 0.01 grams/mile. Fuelcycle emissions must be calculated based on near-term production methods and 

infrastructure assumptions, and the uncertainty in the results must be quantified.

3.6 Calculation of PZEV Allowance.
A-2-C-12

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 sectionsubdivision C.3.6, multiplied by any PZEV 

introduction phase-in multiplier listed in sectionsubdivision C.3.7, subject to the cap in 

sectionsubdivision C.3.6(b).

(1) Baseline PZEV Allowance. The baseline PZEV allowance of 0.2 for 

vehicles meeting the criteria in sectionsubdivision C.3.2;

(2) Zero Emission VMT PZEV Allowance. The zero-emission VMT PZEV 

allowance, if any, determined in accordance with sectionsubdivision C.3.3.;

(3) Advanced ZEV Componentry PZEV Allowance. The advanced ZEV 

componentry PZEV allowance, if any, determined in accordance with sectionsubdivision

C.3.4; and

(4) Fuel-cycle Emissions PZEV Allowance. The fuel-cycle emissions PZEV 

allowance, if any, determined in accordance with sectionsubdivision 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) [Reserved].

3.7 PZEV Multipliers

(a) [Reserved].

(b) Introduction Phase-In Multiplier for PZEVs That Earn a Zero Emission 

VMT Allowance. Each 2009 through 2011 model year PZEV that earns a zeroemission VMT allowance under section C.3.3 and is sold to a California 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 subdivision C.3.7(b) multiplier will no 

longer be available after model year 2011.

4. Qualification for ZEV Multipliers and Credits.

4.1 [Reserved]. 

4.2 [Reserved]. 
A-2-C-13

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

4.3 [Reserved]. 

4.4 ZEV Credits for 2009 through 2017and Subsequent Model Years

ZEVs.

(a) ZEV Tiers for Credit Calculations. ZEV cCredits from a particular 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 ≥ 100 N/A

Type III

≥ 100

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 

Must 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 

subsequentthrough 2017 model year Type III, IV, or V ZEV in sectionsubdivision 

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 

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, the 

Executive Officer may choose to waive these sectionsubdivision C.4.4.(b) fast fueling 

requirements and base the amount of credit earned on UDDS ZEV range, as specified 

in sectionsubdivision C.4.4.(a). 

(c) ZEV Credits for 2009 and Subsequent through 2017 Model-Year ZEVs. A 

2009 and subsequentthrough 2017 model-year ZEV, other than a NEV or Type 0, earns 
A-2-C-14

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

1 ZEV credit when it is produced and delivered for sale in California. A 2009 and 

subsequentthrough 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 model 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, including 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 Year for 

Production and Delivery for Sale and for Placement

Tier Calendar Year in Which ZEV is Placed in Service

2009-20171 2012 - 20172018+

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 34

Type IV 5 35

Type V 7 32012-2014: 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 three 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, 2012

(e) Counting Specified 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 approved 

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 sectionsubdivision C.2, including the requirements in 

sectionsubdivision 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 sectionsubdivision C.2.2(B).

(2) Provisions for 2010 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 requirements in sectionsubdivision C.2, provided 

that the credits are multiplied by the ratio of an LVM’smanufacturer’s applicable 

production volume for a model year, as specified in sectionsubdivision C.2.1(b) in the 

state receiving credit to the LVM’smanufacturer’s applicable production volume 

(hereafter, “proportional value”), as specified in sectionsubdivision 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 state, and earned in California at the full value 

specified in sectionsubdivision 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 sectionsubdivision 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 sectionsubdivision C.2.2(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.

 
A-2-C-16

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Vehicle Type Model Years:

Type I, I.5, or II ZEV 2009 – 20142017

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 eligible for the 

credit amount in sectionsubdivision C.4.4.(c), NEVs must meet the following 

specifications and requirements in this sectionsubdivision C.4.4(f):

(1) Specifications. A 2010 through 2017 and subsequent model-year 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 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 equipped 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, 2012

(5) NEV Charging Requirements. Model year 2014 through 2017 NEVs must 

meet charging connection standard portion of the requirements specified 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 componentry 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 APU 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 years. 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 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. 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, 2012

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 exceeding the manufacturer’s ZEV 

requirement set forth in sectionsubdivision C.2 shall earn ZEV credits in accordance 

with this sectionsubdivision C.7.

7.2 ZEV Credit Calculations.

(a) Credits from ZEVs. For model years 2009 through 2014, Tthe 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 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 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 ZEVs shall be 

expressed in units of credits.

(b) Credits from PZEVs. For model years 2009 through 2014, Tthe 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 applies 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 

requirement for PCs 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, [iiiii] Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs, [iiiiv] AT 

PZEVs, [iv] all other PZEVs, and [vi] 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 1/1000th 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 1/100th 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, 2012

(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 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. 

 

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 sectionsubdivision C.4 if the manufacturer so 

designates.

7.4 ZEV Credits for Advanced Technology Demonstration Programs. 

(a) TZEVs. In model years For 2009 through 2014 model years, ZEVs and

Enhanced AT PZEVs, excluding NEVs, TZEVs 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 Department 

of Motor Vehicles (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, infrastructure, 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 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 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 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 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, infrastructure, 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 

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 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 
A-2-C-20

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 C.4.5(e)(2) and as provided 

in sectionsubdivision C.7.5(c) below. In model years 2009 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 sectionsubdivision 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 project that uses an innovative transportation 

system as described in sectionsubdivision 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 and Type IIx

vehicles, Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEV, 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 

NEVs, 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:
A-2-C-21

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 

subsequentthroug

h 2017

10.5 10.5

ZEV and Type 

I.5x and Type 

IIx vehicles

2012 and 

subsequentthroug

h 2017

20.75 10.75

(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 sectionsubdivision 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 

sectionsubdivision C.2.2(d)(3).

(2) Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs. Credits earned or allocated by Enhanced 

AT PZEVsTZEVs pursuant to this sectionsubdivision 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 

sectionsubdivision C.7.5, 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 

sectionsubdivision 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 

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 absence of a separate project 
A-2-C-22

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

manager, to the vehicle manufacturers upon demonstration that a vehicle 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 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. 

7.6 Use of ZEV Credits. For model years 2009 through 2014, Aa

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 

sectionsubdivision 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 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. For example, credits produced 

from Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs 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 service 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 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 –

20142017

Must be met with ZEVs 0%

May be met with Enhanced AT 

PZEVsTZEVs and AT PZEVs 50%

May be met with PZEVs No Limit

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 percentage limits described 
A-2-C-23

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 may be met with AT 

PZEVs or PZEVs

No Limit

2012 –

20142017

Must be met with ZEVs 0%

May be met with Enhanced AT 

PZEVsTZEVs, 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 cCredits from ZEVs, excluding credits generated from NEVs 

generated from excess production in model years 2009 through 2011 model yearsand 

subsequent, including those acquired from another party, may be carried forward and 

applied to the ZEV minimum floor requirement specified in sectionsubdivisions

C.2.2(b)(1)(B) and (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 credits from 

ZEVs, but may be used to satisfy the manufacturer’s percentage ZEV obligation that 

may be satisfied by credits from Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs, 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 PZEVsTZEVs, AT PZEV, or 

PZEV credits. 

(c) Carry forward provisions for manufacturers other than Large Volume 

Manufacturers for 2009-2011 Model Years. ZEV cCredits generated from ZEVs, 

excluding credits generated from NEVs, from 2009 through 2011and subsequent model 

year production by manufacturers that are 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 sectionsubdivision C.2.7(a). When subject to the large volume 

manufacturer requirements, a manufacturer must comply with the provisions of 
A-2-C-24

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

sectionsubdivision C.7.6(b). 

ZEV cCredits traded by a manufacturer other than a large volume manufacturer to any 

other manufacturer, including a large volume manufacturer, are subject to 

sectionsubdivision 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 

PZEVsTZEVs, 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] 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 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 sectionsubdivision 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. Credits 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.

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 sectionsubdivision 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 deficits are not balanced by the end of the specified time allowed by 

sectionsubdivision C.7.7(a). For the purposes of Health and Safety Code section 
A-2-C-25

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

43211, 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 1/1000th for model years 

2009 through 2014 and rounded to the nearest 1/100th 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 sectionsubdivision C.2.1(a):

For 2009 through 2014 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 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 compliance 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 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) Each manufacturer’s annual production 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 2017and subsequent model years; and

(b) Each manufacturer’s annual credit balances for 2010 through 2017 and 

subsequent years for:

(1) Each type of vehicle: ZEVs (minus NEVs), Type I.5x, and Type IIx

vehicles, NEVs, Enhanced AT PZEVsTZEVs, 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, 2012

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, LDT 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 provide the energy 

usage in kilowatt hours per mile from the Urban Equivalent AllElectric 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 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-2-D-2

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(b) the exhaust emissions value per mile produced by the auxiliary 

fuel-fired heater operated between 68oF and 86oF; 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 specified in sections 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 Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and MediumDuty 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 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 Urban
A-2-D-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 

Electric 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 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: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 Vehicle 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, 2012

EF. 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.

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 vehicles and hybrid 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-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. All-Electric Range Test for Zero-Emission Vehicles (including Fuel 

Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles). All 2012 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 Zero-Emission 

Vehicles.

3.1.1 Determination of Urban All-Electric Range for Battery Electric

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-2-F-2

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(c) For vehicles with a maximum speed 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 determines that the test should be 

terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally 

low battery voltage, etc. 

(d) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than 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 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. 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 vehicle in accordance with section FE.3.1.1 above.

3.2 Determination of Highway All-Electric Range for Zero-Emission 

Vehicles and Range for Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles.

3.2.1 Determination of Highway All-Electric Range for Battery Electric

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 be 
A-2-F-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally 

low battery voltage, etc. 

(d) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than the maximum speed 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-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. 

(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 EF.3.2.1 above.

3.3 Recording requirements. 

For all battery electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles, except offvehicle charge capable hybrid electric vehicles: Once the vehicle is no longer 

able to maintain the speed and time requirements specified in EF.3.1 or EF.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 AllElectric 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-Electric 

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, 2012

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 EF.3.1 or 

EF.3.2 shall not be exceeded due to the operation of the regenerative braking system.

3.5 Measurement Accuracy. For battery electric vehicles, 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.

3.6 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 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 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, 2012

The exhaust emissions result of the fuel-fired heater shall be determined by 

operating at a maximum heating capacity with a cold start between 68oF and 86oF 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, 

Except 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 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 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 activating 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 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 manually 
A-2-F-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

activated, the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of 

and operated 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 criterion in section 

FG.10 would be satisfied for the dynamometer procedure (section EF.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 the second soak period of 12 to 36 hours.

(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 

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. The 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 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. 

For all UDDS tests, the exhaust emissions are diluted with ambient 

air in the dilution tunnel as shown in Figure B94-5 and Figure B94-6
A-2-F-7

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(§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. 

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). 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, CO2, 

CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4

and NOx. 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 THC (if not sampled 

continuously), CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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 sample, covering the total test period may be collected). 

Parallel bag samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4

and NOx.

6.2.2 Subparagraphs (b) through (c). [No change.]

6.2.3 Subparagraph (d). [No change.]

6.2.4 Subparagraphs (e) through (g). [No change.]

6.2.5 Amend 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 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, 2012

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. The 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 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 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): Turn 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 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 
A-2-F-9

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 Amend 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 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 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 in section FG.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 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 Amend subparagraph (a): For light-duty vehicles and light duty 

trucks:

Ywm = 0.43 * 















c

c

D

Y + 0.57 * 















h

h

D

Y

 
A-2-F-10

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Where:

(1) Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, 

CO, THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per vehicle 

mile.

(2) Yc = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start test, in 

grams per test.

(3) Yh = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start test, in 

grams per test.

(4) Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in 

miles.

(5) Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in 

miles.

6.4.2 Subparagraphs (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 Amend subparagraph (a): The final reported test results for the 

mass particulate (Mp) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

Mp = 0.43 * 















c

pc

D

M

+ 0.57 * 















h

ph

D

M

 

Where:

(1) Mpc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start test, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

(2) Mph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start test, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

(3) Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in 

miles.

(4) Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in 

miles.

6.5.2 Subparagraph (b). [No change.] 
A-2-F-11

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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). [not applicable - 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, 

CO2, and NOx 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): The 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): Only one exhaust sample and one 

background sample shall be collected and analyzed for THC (except diesel 

hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO2, and NOx. 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 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-2-F-12

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 unit when operating in 

highway driving conditions.

7.2.5 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(v): Operate 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): When 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 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 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 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.

7.2.7 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 

criterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC criterion 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 criterion. 

(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, 2012

(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). [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 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 

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 US06 

preconditioning cycle.

8.1.2.1.1 Subparagraphs (i) through (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, 2012

8.1.3 Subparagraph (o). [No change.]

8.2 US06 Emission Test.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159-08 [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 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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 EF.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-2-F-15

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 

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 battery state-of-charge to determine if the SOC criterion 

in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC criterion is not satisfied, then 

repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i) without the 

preconditioning cycle. A total of three US06 emission tests shall be 

allowed to satisfy the SOC criterion. 

(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 §86.132-00 [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) 

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 fuel 
A-2-F-16

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 

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 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 §86.162-00 (a) for a discussion of simulation 

procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of 

providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of: 95o

F air temperature, 

100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), 

a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m2, 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 conditions. The vehicle’s air conditioner is operated or appropriately

simulated for the duration of the test procedure (except for the 10 minute vehicle 
A-2-F-17

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

soak), including 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 Otto-cycle auxiliary power units, the composite 

samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. The 

SC03 cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emissions 

and shall meet the state-of-charge net tolerances as calculated in section EF. 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 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 (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 criterion

in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC criterion 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 criterion. 

(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, 2012

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-hrfinal)max = (Amp-hrinitial) + 0.01 















∗

∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel 

(Amp-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) - 0.01 















∗

∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel 

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)max = Maximum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of 

the test

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of 

the test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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:

(Vfinal)max = 

( )

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

∗ ∗

+ ∗

2

0.01 2

(Vfinal)min = 

( )

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

∗ ∗ − ∗2

0.01 2

Where:

(Vfinal)max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test

(Vfinal)min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test
A-2-F-19

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

V 2

initial = The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning of 

the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = 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:

(rpmfinal)max = 

( )

3

2 2

0.01

I K

NHV m

rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗

+ ∗

(rpmfinal)min = ( )

3

2 2

0.01

I K

NHV m

rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗ − ∗

Where:

(rpmfinal)max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of 

the test

(rpmfinal)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

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K3 = Conversion factor, 2 2

2

3600sec

4

− rpm

π

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg-m2
A-2-G-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

FG. Test Procedures for 2012 and Subsequent Model 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. A manufacturer 

may elect to certify a 2009, 2010, or 2011 model-year off-vehicle charge capable hybrid 

electric vehicle using this section FG.

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 Testing 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 20o

F and 50oF tests, conducted in accordance with section FG.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 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 

input); 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-2-G-2

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 FG

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 energy = ∫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 68o

F and 86oF 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-2-G-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

The criteria certification emissions for the Urban test shall be the worst case 

emissions of NMOG, 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.

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 the auxiliary power 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 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 charge sustaining operation during the preconditioning drive. To determine 

charge sustaining operation, the vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in section 
A-2-G-4

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

FG.10 from the start to the end of the two consecutive UDDSs. As an option, 

charge sustaining operation 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 

FG.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 

FG.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 off 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. References 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 FG.10 from the start of the first UDDS 

until the end of the second UDDS. As an option, charge sustaining operation 

may be achieved for 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 FG.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, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

The 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 shall be measured over two UDDSs during charge sustaining 

operation, and the vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in section FG.10 from 

the start of the first UDDS until the end of the second UDDS. 

Vehicle charging shall be initiated within three hours after either the charge 

depleting range test or the charge sustaining emission test pursuant to section 

FG.5.4.2 or FG.5.4.3, as applicable. During charging, all requirements in section 

FG.3 must be met, and energy consumption shall be calculated pursuant to the 

requirements in section FG.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, particulate 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. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. For vehicles 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4

and NOx. 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, CO2, 

CH4 and NOx.

5.2.2 Subparagraphs (b) through (c). [No change.]

5.2.3 Subparagraph (d). [No change.]
A-2-G-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

5.2.4 Subparagraphs (e) through (g). [No change.]

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 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 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 “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 

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 activated, 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 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 reading 
A-2-G-7

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 

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 steps 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 criterion in

section FG.10.

5.3.2.9 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.” 

5.4 Determination of Urban All-Electric Range and Urban Equivalent AllElectric 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. The vehicle shall be 

preconditioned according to FG.5.1. 

(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 Urban Test Schedule until the SOC Net Change 
A-2-G-8

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Tolerances (specified in section FG.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 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. 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 Schedule. Refer to sections FG.5.5, 

FG.5.6, and FG.11, for calculations of urban exhaust emissions, 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. 

(iii) Vehicle charging after testing. Vehicle charging shall 

begin within three hours after either the charge depleting range test or the 

charge sustaining emission test, and the vehicle shall be charged to the 

manufacturer specified full state-of-charge. During charging, all

applicable requirements in FG.3 must be met, and energy consumption 

shall be calculated pursuant to the requirements in section FG.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 preconditioning. If the Urban Charge Sustaining 

Emission Test is performed within 36 hours after the Urban Charge 

Depleting Range Test, the vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to 

section FG.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 FG.5.1, 

except for vehicle charging. Sections FG.5.1.1 through FG.5.1.4 may be 

omitted if previously performed.
A-2-G-9

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 performed during charge sustaining operation, each separated by 

a 10 minute key-off hot soak period. The vehicle must meet the SOC 

criterion in section FG.10 from the start of the first UDDS until the end of 

the second UDDS. If the SOC criterion 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 

charged after the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test, then vehicle 

charging shall begin within three hours after the Urban Charge Sustaining 

Emission Test and the vehicle shall be charged to the manufacturer 

specified full state-of-charge. During charging, all requirements in FG.3 

must be met, and energy consumption shall be calculated pursuant to the 

requirements in section FG.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 Amend subparagraph (a):

Gaseous Emissions – Urban Charge Depleting Range Test.

For light-duty vehicles and light duty trucks:

Ywm = 















Σ

Σ

+ ∗ 















∗

n

n

c

c

D

Y

D

Y 0.43 0.57

Where:

Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, 

THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per vehicle 

mile.

Yc = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS, in grams 

per test. 

Dc = 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 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, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Gaseous Emissions – Urban Charge Sustaining Emission Test.

For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks: 

Ywm = 0.43 * 















c

c

D

Y + 0.57 * 















h

h

D

Y

 

Where:

Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, 

THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per vehicle 

mile.

Yc = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS, in grams 

per test.

Yh = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start UDDS, in grams 

per test.

Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in 

miles.

Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS, in miles.

5.5.2 Subparagraphs (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 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 (Mp) in grams/mile 

shall be computed as follows:

Mp = 0.43 * 















c

pc

D

M

+ 0.57 * 















Σ

Σ

n

pn

D

M

Where:

Mpc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start UDDS, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in 

miles.
A-2-G-11

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 (Mp) in grams/mile 

shall be computed as follows:

Mp = 0.43 * 















c

pc

D

M

+ 0.57 * 















h

ph

D

M

 

Where:

Mpc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start UDDS, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

Mph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start UDDS, in grams 

per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in 

miles.

Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS, in miles.

5.6.2 Subparagraph (b). [No change.] 

5.6.3 Equivalent All-Electric Range shall be calculated in accordance 

with section FG.11 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 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 calculate highway NOx emissions and must be within the SOC criterion in 

section FG.10. As an option, the manufacturer may perform the Highway Charge 

Sustaining Test with two emission test HFEDSs provided that the second HFEDS 

meets the SOC criterion in section FG.10. In this case, the second HFEDS shall be 

used to calculate emissions.
A-2-G-12

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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.

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 preconditioned pursuant to sections 

FG.5.1.9 through FG.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 preconditioned pursuant to section FG.5.1, without canister

preconditioning. Sections FG.5.1.1 through FG.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 Depleting Range Test, the Urban Charge 

Sustaining Emission Test, or the Highway Charge Depleting Range Test, the vehicle 

shall be preconditioned pursuant to section FG.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 FG.5.1 without canister precondition and 

vehicle charging. Sections FG.5.1.1 through FG.5.1.4 may be omitted if previously 

performed.

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. This section FG.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, 

CO2, and NOx using a constant volume (variable dilution) sampler. Diesel dilute 

exhaust is continuously analyzed for hydrocarbons using a heated sample line 
A-2-G-13

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

and analyzer. Alcohol and formaldehyde samples are collected and individually 

analyzed for alcohol-fueled vehicles.

6.2.2.2 Replace subparagraph (b)(6) with: Cold soak: The vehicle 

shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68oF (20oC) and not 

more than 86oF (30oC) 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): The 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 three emission measurement

HFEDSs, separated by a 15 second key-on hot soak period, shall be performed. 

The vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in section FG.10 for the third 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 criterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stopped, and the 

procedure shall be repeated starting at section FG.6.2.2.2.

6.2.2.4 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(iii): One exhaust sample and 

one background sample per each HFEDS shall be collected and analyzed for 

THC (except diesel hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO2, 

and NOx. 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 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): Operate 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 

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): When the vehicle reaches 

zero speed between each HFEDS, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare for the 
A-2-G-14

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 conditions shall apply: For vehicles that do 

not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are chargesustaining over the HFEDS, record the battery state-of-charge to determine if the 

SOC criterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC criterion 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 criterion. 

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 FG.6.1. 
A-2-G-15

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 FG.10 of these test 

procedures) 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 Schedule. Refer to 

section FG.11, 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 Range Test 

and the vehicle shall be charged to the manufacturer specified full stateof-charge. During charging, all applicable requirements in section FG.3 

must be met, and energy consumption shall be calculated according to 

the requirements in section FG.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 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 FG.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 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 preconditioning. The vehicle shall be 

preconditioned pursuant to section FG.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, separated by 

a 15 second key-on hot soak period, shall be performed. The vehicle 

must meet the SOC criterion in section FG.10 for the third 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 
A-2-G-16

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

SOC criterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stopped, and the procedure 

shall be repeated starting at section FG.6.3.3.

6.3.4 Equivalent All-Electric Range shall be calculated in accordance 

with section FG.11 of these test procedures.

7. SFTP Emission 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 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 CFR §86.132-00 [October 22, 1996] with 

the following revisions. This section FG.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 the 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, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

7.2 US06 Emission Test.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159-08 [December 27, 2006] 

with the following revisions. This 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 collected 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 composite 

samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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 FG.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. During 

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.
A-2-G-18

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 criterion in section FG.10 is 

satisfied. If the SOC criterion is not satisfied, then repeat the

dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i), without the 

preconditioning cycle. Up to three US06 emission tests shall be allowed

to satisfy the SOC criterion. 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 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.

7.3 SC03 Vehicle Preconditioning.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132-00 [October 22, 1996] with 

the following revisions. This 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 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 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 the auxiliary power unit shall be manually 

activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 

preconditioning cycle.
A-2-G-19

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

7.3.2.1.1 Subparagraphs (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. This 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 adopted 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 

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 test facility or under test conditions that simulate testing in 

an environmental test cell (see §86.162-03 (a) for a discussion of simulation 

procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of 

providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of: 95o

F air temperature, 

100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), 

a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m2, 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 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), 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. The SC03 cycle after the 

preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emissions and shall meet the 

state-of-charge net tolerances as calculated in section FG.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, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 throughout 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:

(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 criterion in section 

FG.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 criterion. 

(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 68o

F (20oC) and not more than 86oF 

(30o

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
A-2-G-21

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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. 50o

F and 20oF Test Provision for Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles. 

50 o

F testing shall be conducted pursuant to section FG.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 oF testing shall be conducted pursuant to section FG.5 and shall include 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 

Procedures.

For 50 o

F and 20 oF charge depleting testing, vehicle charging, prior to emissions 

testing, shall be performed during the soak period at 50 o

F and 20 oF, respectively.

8.1 To satisfy test requirements for the 50o

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 FG.5. To satisfy test 

requirements for the 20oF 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 FG.5. For the 20o

F and 50oF 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 two 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, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Ywm = 















+

+

+ ∗ 















+

+

∗

2 3

2 3

1 2

1 2 0.43 0.57

D D

Y Y

D D

Y Y

Where:

Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, 

THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per 

vehicle mile.

Y1 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase one of the three 

phase test. 

Y2 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase two of the three 

phase test. 

Y3 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase three of the three 

phase test. 

D1 = The measured driving distance from phase one of the three 

phase tests, in miles. 

D2 = The measured driving distance from phase two of the three 

phase tests, in miles. 

D3 = 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 keyoff soak period, and phase two as a UDDS. Emission weighting for the four 

phase test will follow the procedure outlined in section FG.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 schedule shall then be performed. The UDDS, in 

which the auxiliary power unit first starts, shall be the cold UDDS. Emissions shall be 

sampled according to one of the options in section FG.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 FG.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 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 sustaining operation mode selector with selector set to simulate charge 
A-2-G-23

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 that has charge depleting actual range and 

charge depleting cycle range, please see section HI, 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 HI, Figure 2.

9.6 When determining the SOC tolerance during testing, the current drive 

cycle may be aborted if the SOC tolerance is met for previous 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.”

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-hrfinal)max = (Amp-hrinitial) + 0.01 















∗

∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel 

(Amp-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) - 0.01 















∗

∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel 

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)max = Maximum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end 

of the test

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end 

of the test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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-2-G-24

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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:

(Vfinal)max = 

( )

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

∗ ∗

+ ∗

2

0.01 2

(Vfinal)min = 

( )

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

∗ ∗ − ∗2

0.01 2

Where:

(Vfinal)max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test

(Vfinal)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

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during 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:

(rpmfinal)max = 

( )

3

2 2

0.01

I K

NHV m

rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗

+ ∗

(rpmfinal)min = 

( )

3

2 2

0.01

I K

NHV m

rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗ − ∗

Where:

(rpmfinal)max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the 

end of the test

(rpmfinal)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

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg
A-2-G-25

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

K3 = Conversion factor, 2 2

2

3600sec

4

− rpm

π

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg-m2

11. Calculations – Equivalent All-Electric Range for Off-Vehicle Charge 

Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

11.1 Charge Depleting CO2 Produced means the cumulative tailpipe CO2

emissions produced, Mcd, in grams per mile during the charge depleting cycle range. 

Mcd = Σ Yi

where:

Yi = The sum of the CO2 grams per mile in the charge depleting mode 

from each test cycle (UDDS or HFEDS) 

i = Number (UDDS or HFEDS) of the test over the charge depleting 

cycle range, Rcdc

11.2 Charge Sustaining CO2 Produced - urban means the cumulative tailpipe 

CO2 emissions produced, Mcs, in grams per mile, during the cold start charge 

sustaining urban test.

Mcs = ( )





 



 − + ∗

c

cdcu c

c h D

R D

Y Y

where:

Rcdcu = Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range, in miles

Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in 

miles

Yc = Grams per mile CO2 emissions as calculated from the cold start 

UDDS

Yh = Grams per mile CO2 emissions as calculated from the hot start 

UDDS
A-2-G-26

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

11.3 Charge Sustaining CO2 Produced - highway means the grams per mile 

tailpipe CO2 emissions produced, Mcs, during the cold start charge sustaining highway 

test.

Mcs = h

h

cdch Y

D

R

∗















where:

Rcdch = Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range, in miles

Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start HFEDS, in 

miles

Yh = Grams per mile emissions as calculated from the hot start 

HFEDS

11.4 Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range (EAERu) shall be calculated as 

follows: 

EAERu = cdcu

cs

cs cd R

M

M M

∗













 −

where:

Mcs is as defined in FG.11.2.

Mcd is as defined in FG.11.1, using the UDDS test cycle.

11.5 Highway Equivalent All-Electric Range (EAERh) shall be calculated as 

follows:

EAERh = cdch

cs

cs cd R

M

M M

∗



 



 −

where:

Mcs is as defined in FG.11.3.

Mcd is as defined in FG.11.1, using the HFEDS test cycle.

Rcdch is as defined in FG.11.3 

11.6 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 (ERFu) is calculated as follows:
A-2-G-27

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

ERFu (%) = ∗100 















cda

u

R

EAER

The Highway Electric Range Fraction (ERFh) is calculated as follows:

ERFh (%) = ∗100 















cdah

h

R

EAER

11.7 Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy Consumption.

The Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy Consumption 

(EAERECu) shall be calculated as follows:

EAERECu (wh/mi) = 

u

cd

EAER

E

where:

Ecd = 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.

The Highway Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy Consumption 

(EAERECh) shall be calculated as follows:

EAERECh (wh/mi) = 

h

cd

EAER

E

where:

Ecd = 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.

11.8 The Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range, Rcdcu, (see section H for an 

illustration of Rcdcu) 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-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) – 0.01 * 















∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel

Where:
A-2-G-28

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of the 

test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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.

11.9 The Charge Depleting Actual Range, Rcda, 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 an illustration of Rcda see section HI.

11.10 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.

11.11 The Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range, Rcdch, 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 bound state-of-charge 

tolerance for one test cycle given by:

(Amp-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) – 0.01 * 















∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of the 

test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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.

11.12 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, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

11.13 The Urban Equivalent All Electric Range for vehicles with an urban charge 

depleting actual range greater than 40 miles, EAERu40, is determined through the 

following equation:

EAERu40 (miles) = 



 



 ×

100

ERF 40mi u
A-2-H-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

GH. Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric 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, 2012

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 Ecd Equivalent* to Urban CD range test ?

N

Y Charge and record energy

Discharge

12 – 36 hour cold soak, charge 

and record energy
A-2-I-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

HI. 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, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

SOC

Charge Depleting

Cycle Range,

Rcdc = 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,

Rcda = 18 mi Avg SOC for CS Operation

(Cycles 4-5)

AER = 10 mi

EAER = 13.7 mi

Engine 

Start

Figure 1
A-2-I-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

SOC

Charge Depleting

Cycle Range

Charge

Sustaining

Operation

Cycle 1

Charge Depleting to Charge 

Sustaining Range

-1% Fuel Energy Used

Lower Boundary Used 

for Rcdc Determination 

(Cycle 5)

Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 5 Cycle 6 Cycle 7

+1% Fuel Energy Used for 

Rcdc 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 Boundary 

(Cycles 5-6)

Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle 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 Energy 

Used for Lower 

Boundary (Cycle 6-7)

Example of Urban End of Test Conditions for Off-Vehicle Charge Capable HEV 

Transitional

Range

Figure 2
A-2-J-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

IJ. Test Procedures for 2009 through 2011 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 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. All 2009 through 2011 ZEVs and only offvehicle 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 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) At 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 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-2-J-2

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 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 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 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 

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 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 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 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, 2012

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 auxiliary power unit 

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 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; 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-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 management), 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 start between 68o

F and 86oF 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. 
A-2-J-4

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 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 time 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 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 battery 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 activated at the 

beginning of and operated throughout the preconditioning drive.

6.1.6 Within five minutes of completing preconditioning drive, battery state-ofcharge 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, 2012

(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 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 battery state-of-charge for proper setting, 

off-vehicle charging shall occur during 12 to 36 hour soak period.

(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 

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 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 dilution 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, CO2, CH4 and 

NOx. 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 analyzed 

continuously pursuant to the provisions of § 86.110. Parallel samples of the 

dilution air are similarly analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. For hybrid 

electric vehicles with natural gas-fueled, liquefied petroleum gas-fueled and 
A-2-J-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

methanol-fueled auxiliary power units, bag samples are collected and analyzed 

for THC (if not sampled continuously), CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. For hybrid 

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, CO2, 

CH4 and NOx.

6.2.2 Subparagraph (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 

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.

6.3 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 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 the 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, 2012

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 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 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 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 amples 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 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 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 Amend 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 Emissions
A-2-J-8

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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:

Ywm = 0.43 * Yc + 0.57 * Yh

 Dc Dh

Where:

(1) Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, 

CO, THCE, NMHC, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per vehicle 

mile.

(2) Yc = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start test, in 

grams per test.

(3) Yh = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start test, in 

grams per test.

(4) Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in 

miles.

(5) Dh = 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 (Mp) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

Mp = 0.43 * Mpc + 0.57 *Mph

 Dc Dh

Where:

(1) Mpc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start test, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See § 86.110-94 for determination.)

(2) Mph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start test, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See § 86.110-94 for determination.)

(3) Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in 

miles.

(4) Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in 

miles.

7. Hybrid Electric Vehicle Highway Emission Test Provisions
A-2-J-9

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

To be conducted pursuant to 40 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 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, CO2, and NOx 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 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, CO2, and NOx . 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 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 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.

(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 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 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 preconditioning cycle, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare for the 
A-2-J-10

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 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 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 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 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 or 
A-2-J-11

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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-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, 

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 US06 preconditioning drive. For hybrid electric 

vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state-ofcharge 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 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-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 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, 2012

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 

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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and 

NOx.

8.2.2 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.

8.2.3 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 the 

purpose of finding the appropriate throttle action to maintain the proper speedtime 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 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 

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, 2012

(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 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 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 

increased 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 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 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. 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 SC03 preconditioning drive. For hybrid electric 
A-2-J-14

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state-ofcharge 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 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 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 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 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: 95o

F air temperature, 

100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), 

a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m2

, 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 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), including 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 collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and 

NOx. For hybrid electric vehicles with petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle auxiliary 
A-2-J-15

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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, CO2, CH4 and NOx.

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 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 three 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 energy 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 over 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, 2012

(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-hrfinal)max = (Amp-hrinitial) + 0.01 * (NHVfuel * mfuel)

 (Vsystem * K1)

(Amp-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) – 0.01 * 

(V K )

(NVH m )

system 1

fuel fuel

∗

∗

 

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)max = Maximum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of 

the test

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of 

the test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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:

(Vfinal)max = 

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

(2 ) ( ) 0.01 2

∗ ∗

+ ∗

(Vfinal)min = 

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

(2 ) ( ) 0.01 2

∗ ∗ − ∗
A-2-J-17

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Where:

(Vfinal)max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test

(Vfinal)min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test

(Vinitial)

2 = The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning of 

the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

C = Rated capacitance of the capacitor, in Farads
A-2-J-18

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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:

(rpmfinal)max = 

(1 K )

(2 NVH m ) (rpm ) 0.01

3

2 fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗

+ ∗

(rpmfinal)min = 

(1 K )

(2 NVH m ) (rpm ) 0.01

3

2 fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗ − ∗

Where:

(rpmfinal)max= The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the 

test

(rpmfinal)min = The minimum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the 

test

(rpminitial)

2 = The squared flywheel rotational speed at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K3 = Conversion factor, 42

/(3600 sec2-rpm2)

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg-m2
A-2-K-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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) 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 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 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, 2012

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 Regulations
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 California 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 Executive Officer shall certify new 2018

and subsequent model year passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty 

vehicles as ZEVs, vehicles that produce zero exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant 

(or precursor pollutant) or greenhouse gas under any possible operational modes or 

conditions. 

(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 to 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. 

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 
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-2

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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., 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. [Reserved]

2. [Reserved]

3. A manufacturer may apply to the Executive Officer to be permitted 

to base its ZEV obligation on the number of PCs and LDTs, produced 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) [Reserved]

(D) Exclusion of ZEVs in Determining a Manufacturer’s Sales 

Volume. In calculating a manufacturer’s applicable sales, using either method 

described in subdivision 1962.2(b)(1)(B), a manufacturer shall exclude the number of 

NEVs 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) [Reserved]

(B) [Reserved]

(C) [Reserved]

(D) [Reserved]

(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 enumerated below. 
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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%

(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 remainder of the manufacturer’s requirement.

(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 1962.2(b), with credits from TZEV.

(4) Requirements for Small Volume Manufacturers. A small volume 

manufacturer is not required to meet the ZEV credit percentage requirements. 

However, 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) [Reserved]

(6) [Reserved]

(7) Changes 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 13,500 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) 
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-4

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Manufacturer A exceeds 4,500 PCs, LDTs, and MDVs for their 2018 – 2020, 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 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 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 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 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 whose 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 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 production 
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-5

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

volumes of Manufacturers A and B in the 2017 – 2019 model years. Where the 

production 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 apply.

(c) Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles (TZEV).

(1) Introduction. This subdivision 1962.2(c) sets forth the criteria for 

identifying vehicles delivered for sale in California as TZEVs. 

(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 standards 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 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) Allowances for TZEVs

(A) Zero Emission Vehicle Miles Traveled TZEV Allowance 

Calculation. A vehicle that meets the requirements of subdivision 1962.2(c)(2) and 

has zero-emission vehicle miles traveled (VMT), as defined by and calculated by the 

“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”, incorporated by 
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

reference, and measured as all electric Rcda capability will generate an allowance

according to the following equation:

UDDS Test Cycle Range 

(Rcda) Allowance 

<10 all electric miles 0.0

≥10 all electric miles TZEV Credit = [(0.01) * Rcda + 0.3]

>80 miles (credit cap) 1.3

1. Allowance for US06 Capability. TZEVs with US06 all electric

range capability (Rcda) 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 Truck, 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 that 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 subdivision 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 2018 and Subsequent Model Year ZEVs.

(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 and 
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-7

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 

California and in all section 177 states with the percentage ZEV requirements in 

subdivision 1962.2(b). The 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 

volume as specified in subdivision 1962.2(b)(1)(B), for the same model year in 

California(hereafter, “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 

earned in California at the full value specified in subdivision 1962.2(d)(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 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, 2012

c. Constant Speed Range. The vehicle 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 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 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.

Prior to credit approval, the 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 specific 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, specified 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 APU 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 electric range. 

(e) [Reserved]

(f) [Reserved]
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-9

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(g) Generation and Use of Credits; Calculation of Penalties

(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 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 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 TZEVs. 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 separate accounts.

(D) Rounding Credits. ZEV credits and debits shall be rounded to the 

nearest 1/100th only on the final credit and debit totals using the conventional rounding 

method.

(3) ZEV Credits for MDVs. 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 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 issues 
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-10

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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, 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 subdivision1962.2(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 Systems. 

(A) [Reserved]

(B) [Reserved]

(C) Cap on Use of Transportation System Credits. 

1. ZEVs. Transportation 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, 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 credits 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. Manufacturers 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 Executive Officer 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

credits. 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, 2012

(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 

manufacturer’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 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. Manufacturers 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 have no model year 2017 compliance 

debits and no outstanding debits from all previous model year 

compliance with sections 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 manufacturer 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 gCO2/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 1962.2(g)(6)(C) for model year 2018, 

manufacturers would calculate credits based on model year 2017 compliance with 

section 1961.3. 

a. At least 2.0 gCO2/mile over compliance with section 1961.3 

is required in each year and the 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, 2012

[(Manufacturer US PC and LDT Sales) x (gCO2/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 

included in the calculation of gCO2/mile credits for use in the above 

equation in subdivision a.

c. Banked gCO2/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 gCO2/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 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. 

gCO2/mile credits used to calculate GHG-ZEV over compliance credits under this 

provision 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 1961.3 and this subdivision 

1962.2(g)(6)(C). 

a. If a manufacturer, who 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 gCO2/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 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 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 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, 2012

[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 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 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 1962.2(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 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 manufacturer’s credit deficit, 

rounded to the nearest 1/100th, 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 determining compliance with this section 1962.2 are set forth in 

"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 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 December 1, 2004, and ETA-NTP004

(revision 2) “Electric Vehicle Constant Speed Range Tests” adopted on February 1, 

2008 December 1, 2004. 
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-14

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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, meeting 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 “Rcda” 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 charge and regenerative braking 

derived energy.

(3) “Discounted PZEV and AT PZEV credits” means credits 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) “Energy storage device” means 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, newvehicle range capability is not specified or required.

(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 situations” 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.

(10) “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 DMV.
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-15

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(11) “Proportional value” means the ratio of a manufacturer’s California 

applicable sales volume to the manufacturer’s Section 177 state applicable sales vome. 

In any given model year, the same applicable sales volume calculation method must be 

used to calculate proportional value. 

(12) “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 vehicle” or “TZEV” means a vehicle that meet 

the all criteria of subdivision 1962.2(c)(2) and qualifies for an allowance in subdivision 

1962.2(c)(3)(D) or (E). 

(15) “Zero emission vehicle” or “ZEV” means a vehicle that produces zero 

exhaust emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant) or greenhouse gas 

under any possible operational modes or conditions. 

(16) “Zero 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 electric vehicle.

“CFR” means Code of Federal Regulations.

“CO2” means carbon dioxide.

“DMV” means the California Department of Motor Vehicles.

“EAER” means equivalent all electric range.

“EAERu40” means the equivalent all-electric range that a 40 mile Rcda 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, 2012

“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.

“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” means partial allowance zero-emission vehicle

“Rcda” 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 section 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 annual credit 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; and
Proposed §1962.2

A-3-17

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(D) Credits earned under 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 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 and Safety 

Code.
Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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, 2012

NOTE: This document is incorporated by reference in section 1962.2, title 13, 

California Code of Regulations (CCR). Additional requirements necessary to 

complete 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 2001 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 Vehicles” (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 section 1961(d), title 13, CCR).
Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 Certification. ............................ 1

3. ZEV Reporting Requirements.................................................................... 3

E. Determination of NEV Acceleration, Top Speed, and Constant Speed Range 1

EF. 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 Battery 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 Provisions .......................................................... 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 Tolerances................................................. 18

FG. 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 Capable Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles. ..................................................................................... 15

8. 50oF and 20oF Test Provision for Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles. ..................................................................................... 20

9. Additional Provisions................................................................................ 22
Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

10. State-of-Charge Net Change Tolerances................................................. 23

11. Calculations – Equivalent All-Electric Range for Off-Vehicle Charge 

Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles............................................................. 25

GH. Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle Exhaust Emission Test 

Sequence. .............................................................................................................. 1

HI. Examples of Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicle 

Terminology........................................................................................................... 1

IJ. 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

4. Fast refueling capability.................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
A-4-A-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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-4-B-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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” 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 vehicle 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).

“Alternate Continuous Urban Test Schedule” 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 Continuous Highway Test Schedule” means a series of the 

following sequence: HFEDS, 15 second key-on pause, HFEDS, and 10-20 minute keyoff hot soak or a 15 second key-on pause. This alternate procedure may 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 requirements of subdivision 

C.3.2, 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. 

“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 stores 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 propel 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, 2012

“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 offvehicle 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, 

Ecd, measured in watt-hours consumed by vehicle over the charge depleting cycle 

range, Rcdc. Ecd 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 chargesustaining or charge-depleting over each driving cycle (i.e. UDDS, HFEDS, US06, or 

SC03).

“Charge depleting actual range” or “Rcda” 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 reported to the nearest 0.1 miles. (See 

section F.11.9.)

“Charge depleting actual range, highway” or “Rcdah” 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 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 “Rcdc” 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. (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 should 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 chargesustaining 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 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 soak 

period.

“Continuous Highway Test Schedule” means a repeated series comprised of 
A-4-B-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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.

“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 starter 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 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 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 vehicle” 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.

“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 vehicle 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 (July 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, 2012

“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 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 use 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 sale volume calculation method 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 

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 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 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.

“State of Charge (SOC) 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.

“State of Charge (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” 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, 2012

“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 produces zero exhaust 

emissions of any criteria pollutant (or precursor pollutant) or greenhouse gas under any 

possible operational 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) Rcda mi

Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range Rcdcs mi

Charge Depleting Net Energy Consumption Ecd wh

Charge Depleting CO2 Produced Mcd g/mi

Charge Sustaining CO2 Produced Mcs g/mi

Highway Charge Depleting Actual Range Rcdah mi

Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range Rcdch mi

Highway Electric Range Fraction ERFh %

Highway Equivalent All-Electric Range EAERh mi

Highway Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy 

Consumption

EAERECh wh/mi

Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range Rcdcu mi

Urban Electric Range Fraction ERFu %

Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range EAERu mi

Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range scaled to 40 mi 

limit

EAERu40 mi

Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy 

Consumption

EAERECu wh/mi
A-4-C-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 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 production 

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., 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) [Reserved]

(2) [Reserved]

(3) A manufacturer may apply to the Executive Officer to be permitted 
A-4-C-7

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

to base its ZEV obligation on the number of PCs and LDTs, produced by the 

manufacturer and delivered for sale in California that same model year (ie, same modelyear 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) [Reserved]

(d) Exclusion of ZEVs 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 exclude the number of NEVs 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. 

2.2 Requirements for Large Volume Manufacturers.

(a) [Reserved]

(b) [Reserved]

(c) [Reserved]

(d) [Reserved]

(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 enumerated 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, 2012

(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 remainder 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 credits 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, market, 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 – 2020, 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 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 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 model 
A-4-C-9

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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 whose 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 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 production volumes of Manufacturers A and B 

in the 2017 – 2019 model years. Where the production 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 apply.
A-4-C-10

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

3. Transitional Zero Emission Vehicles (TZEV).

3.1 Introduction. This subdivision C.3 sets forth the criteria for identifying 

vehicles delivered for sale in California as TZEVs. 

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 standards 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 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 Allowances for TZEVs.

 (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 defined by and calculated by this test procedure and measured 

as all electric Rcda capability will generate allowance according to the following equation:

UDDS Test Cycle Range 

(Rcda) Allowance 

<10 all electric miles 0.0

≥10 miles range TZEV Credit = [(0.01) * Rcda + 0.3]

>80 miles (credit cap) 1.3

(1) Allowance for US06 Capability. TZEVs with US06 all electric range 

capability (Rcda) 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, 2012

(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 Credits 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, determined 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 California 
A-4-C-12

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 

volume 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”). Credits 

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 

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 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 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.

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, 2012

(g) BEVx. A BEVx must meet the following in order to receive 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 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 zero emission range. 

5. [Reserved] 

6. [Reserved]

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 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 TZEVs. 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 separate accounts.
A-4-C-14

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(d) Rounding Credits. ZEV credits and debits shall be rounded to the nearest 

1/100th 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 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 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 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, 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. Transportation 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, 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 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 vehicle 
A-4-C-15

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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. 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 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.

(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 manufacturer’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 

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. Manufacturers may apply to the Executive Officer, no later 

than May 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 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 manufacturer 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 gCO2/mile in each 
A-4-C-16

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 year 2018, manufacturers would calculate 

credits based on model year 2017 compliance with section 1961.3. 

(A) At least 2.0 gCO2/mile over compliance with section 1961.3 

is required in each year and the following equation must be used to 

calculate the amount of ZEV credits earned for purposes of this 

subdivision C.7.6(c):

[(Manufacturer US PC and LDT Sales) x (gCO2/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 

included in the calculation of gCO2/mile credits for use in the above 

equation in subdivision (A).

(C) Banked gCO2/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 gCO2/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 years 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, 2012

gCO2/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 that 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 required 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 the 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 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.

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 manufacturer’s credit deficit, rounded to the 

nearest 1/100th, 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 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 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 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, 2012

(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, 2012

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, LDT 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 provide the energy 

usage in kilowatt hours per mile from the Urban Equivalent AllElectric 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 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, 2012

(b) the exhaust emissions value per mile produced by the auxiliary 

fuel-fired heater operated between 68oF and 86oF; 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 specified in sections 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 Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and MediumDuty 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 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 Urban
A-4-D-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 

Electric 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 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-4-E-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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, 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, 2012

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.

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 vehicles and hybrid 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-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. All-Electric Range Test for Zero-Emission Vehicles (including Fuel 

Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles). All 2012 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 Zero-Emission 

Vehicles.

3.1.1 Determination of Urban All-Electric Range for Battery Electric

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, 2012

(c) For vehicles with a maximum speed 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 determines that the test should be 

terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low 

battery voltage, etc. 

(d) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than 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 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. 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 vehicle in accordance with section F.3.1.1 above.

3.2 Determination of Highway All-Electric Range for Zero-Emission 

Vehicles and Range for Fuel Cell Vehicles and Hybrid Fuel Cell Vehicles.

3.2.1 Determination of Highway All-Electric Range for Battery Electric

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 be 
A-4-F-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

terminated for safety reasons, e.g. excessively high battery temperature, abnormally low 

battery voltage, etc. 

(d) For vehicles with a maximum speed less than the maximum speed 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-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. 

(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 above.

3.3 Recording requirements. 

For all battery electric vehicles and hybrid electric vehicles, except offvehicle 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 AllElectric 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-Electric 

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-4-F-4

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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, 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.

3.6 Watt Hour Calculation for Battery Electric Vehicles.

DC energy (watt-hours) shall be calculated as follows

DC energy = ∫v(t) *i(t) dt

Wherev = 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

Wherev = 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 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 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, 2012

The exhaust emissions result of the fuel-fired heater shall be determined by 

operating at a maximum heating capacity with a cold start between 68oF and 86oF 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, 

Except 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 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 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 activating 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 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 manually activated, 
A-4-F-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

the auxiliary power unit shall be manually activated at the beginning of and 

operated 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 criterion in section 

G.10 would be satisfied for the dynamometer procedure (section F.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

the second soak period of 12 to 36 hours.

(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 

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. The 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 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. 

For all UDDS tests, the exhaust emissions are diluted with ambient 

air in the dilution tunnel as shown in Figure B94-5 and Figure B94-6
A-4-F-7

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(§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. 

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). 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 

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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 

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 THC (if not sampled continuously), CO, CO2, 

CH4 and NOx. 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 

sample, covering the total test period may be collected). Parallel bag 

samples of dilution air are analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx.

6.2.2 Subparagraphs (b) through (c). [No change.]

6.2.3 Subparagraph (d). [No change.]

6.2.4 Subparagraphs (e) through (g). [No change.]

6.2.5 Amend 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 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, 2012

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. The 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 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 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): Turn 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 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 
A-4-F-9

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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.

6.3.2.5 Amend 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 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 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 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 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 Amend subparagraph (a): For light-duty vehicles and light duty 

trucks:

Ywm = 0.43 * 















c

c

D

Y + 0.57 * 















h

h

D

Y

 
A-4-F-10

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Where:

(1) Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, 

CO, THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per vehicle 

mile.

(2) Yc = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start test, in 

grams per test.

(3) Yh = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start test, in 

grams per test.

(4) Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in 

miles.

(5) Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in 

miles.

6.4.2 Subparagraphs (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 Amend subparagraph (a): The final reported test results for the 

mass particulate (Mp) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

Mp = 0.43 * 















c

pc

D

M

+ 0.57 * 















h

ph

D

M

 

Where:

(1) Mpc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start test, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

(2) Mph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start test, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

(3) Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in 

miles.

(4) Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start test, in 

miles.

6.5.2 Subparagraph (b). [No change.] 
A-4-F-11

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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). [not applicable - 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, 

CO2, and NOx 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): The 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): Only one exhaust sample and one 

background sample shall be collected and analyzed for THC (except diesel 

hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO2, and NOx. 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 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, 2012

(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 unit when operating in 

highway driving conditions.

7.2.5 Amend subparagraph (b)(9)(v): Operate 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): When 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 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 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 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.

7.2.7 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 

criterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC criterion 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 criterion. 

(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, 2012

(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). [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 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 

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 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, 2012

8.1.3 Subparagraph (o). [No change.]

8.2 US06 Emission Test.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.159-08 [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 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, 2012

(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 

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 battery state-of-charge to determine if the SOC criterion 

in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC criterion is not satisfied, then 

repeat dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i) without the 

preconditioning cycle. A total of three US06 emission tests shall be 

allowed to satisfy the SOC criterion. 

(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 §86.132-00 [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) 

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 fuel 
A-4-F-16

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 

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 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 §86.162-00 (a) for a discussion of simulation 

procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of 

providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of: 95o

F air temperature, 

100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), 

a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m2, 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 conditions. The vehicle’s air conditioner is operated or appropriately 

simulated for the duration of the test procedure (except for the 10 minute vehicle 
A-4-F-17

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

soak), including 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 Otto-cycle auxiliary power units, the composite 

samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. The SC03 

cycle after the preconditioning cycle shall be used to calculate emissions and 

shall meet the state-of-charge net tolerances as calculated in section EF. 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 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 (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 criterion

in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC criterion 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 criterion. 

(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-4-F-18

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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-hrfinal)max = (Amp-hrinitial) + 0.01 















∗

∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel 

(Amp-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) - 0.01 















∗

∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel 

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)max = Maximum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of 

the test

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of the 

test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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:

(Vfinal)max = 

( )

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

∗ ∗

+ ∗

2

0.01 2

(Vfinal)min = 

( )

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

∗ ∗ − ∗2

0.01 2

Where:

(Vfinal)max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test

(Vfinal)min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test
A-4-F-19

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

V 2

initial = The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning of 

the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = 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:

(rpmfinal)max = 

( )

3

2 2

0.01

I K

NHV m

rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗

+ ∗

(rpmfinal)min = ( )

3

2 2

0.01

I K

NHV m

rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗ − ∗

Where:

(rpmfinal)max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of 

the test

(rpmfinal)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

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K3 = Conversion factor, 2 2

2

3600sec

4

− rpm

π

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg-m2
A-4-G-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

G. Test Procedures for 2012 and Subsequent Model 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. 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 Testing 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 20o

F and 50oF tests, conducted in accordance with section 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 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 

input); 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, 2012

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

Wherev = 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

Wherev = 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 68o

F and 86oF 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, 2012

The criteria certification emissions for the Urban test shall be the worst case 

emissions of NMOG, 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.

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 the auxiliary power 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 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 charge sustaining operation during the preconditioning drive. To determine 

charge sustaining operation, the vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in 

section FG.10 from the start to the end of the two consecutive UDDSs. As an 
A-4-G-4

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

option, charge sustaining operation 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 FG.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 FG.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 off 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. References 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 FG.10 from the start of the first UDDS until the 

end of the second UDDS. As an option, charge sustaining operation may be 

achieved for 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 FG.10 from the start to the end of a single UDDS. Emissions are 

measured for all UDDSs when the auxiliary power unit is operating.

The 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 
A-4-G-5

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 the vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in section FG.10 from the 

start of the first UDDS until the end of the second UDDS. 

Vehicle charging shall be initiated within three hours 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 particulates. For UDDSs, particulate 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. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. For vehicles 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and 

NOx. 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, CO2, 

CH4 and NOx.

5.2.2 Subparagraphs (b) through (c). [No change.]

5.2.3 Subparagraph (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, 2012

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 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 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 “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 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 activated, 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 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 reading 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 
A-4-G-7

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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, 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 steps 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 criterion in

section FG.10.

5.3.2.9 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.” 

5.4 Determination of Urban All-Electric Range and Urban Equivalent AllElectric 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. The vehicle shall be 

preconditioned according to G.5.1. 

(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 Urban Test Schedule until the SOC Net Change 

Tolerances (specified in section FG.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, 2012

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. 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 Schedule. Refer to sections G.5.5, G.5.6, and 

G.11, for calculations of urban exhaust emissions, 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. 

(iii) Vehicle charging after testing. Vehicle charging shall 

begin within three hours after either the charge depleting range test or the 

charge sustaining 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 

calculated pursuant to 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 preconditioning. If the Urban Charge Sustaining 

Emission Test is performed within 36 hours after the Urban Charge 

Depleting Range Test, the vehicle shall be preconditioned pursuant to 

section FG.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 G.5.1, except 

for vehicle charging. Sections 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 performed during charge sustaining operation, each separated by 

a 10 minute key-off hot soak period. The vehicle must meet the SOC 

criterion in section G.10 from the start of the first UDDS until the end of the 

second UDDS. If the SOC criterion 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, 2012

(iii) Vehicle charging after testing. If the vehicle was not 

charged after the Urban Charge Depleting Range Test, then vehicle 

charging shall begin within three hours after the Urban Charge Sustaining 

Emission Test 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 Amend subparagraph (a):

Gaseous Emissions – Urban Charge Depleting Range Test.

For light-duty vehicles and light duty trucks:

Ywm = 















Σ

Σ

+ ∗ 















∗

n

n

c

c

D

Y

D

Y 0.43 0.57

Where:

Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, 

THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per vehicle 

mile.

Yc = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS, in grams 

per test. 

Dc = 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 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: 

Ywm = 0.43 * 















c

c

D

Y + 0.57 * 















h

h

D

Y
A-4-G-10

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

 

Where:

Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, 

THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per vehicle 

mile.

Yc = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS, in grams 

per test.

Yh = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start UDDS, in grams 

per test.

Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in

miles.

Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS, in miles.

5.5.2 Subparagraphs (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 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 (Mp) in grams/mile 

shall be computed as follows:

Mp = 0.43 * 















c

pc

D

M

+ 0.57 * 















Σ

Σ

n

pn

D

M

Where:

Mpc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start UDDS, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

Dc = 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 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.
A-4-G-11

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

The final reported test results for the mass particulate (Mp) in grams/mile 

shall be computed as follows:

Mp = 0.43 * 















c

pc

D

M

+ 0.57 * 















h

ph

D

M

 

Where:

Mpc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start UDDS, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

Mph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start UDDS, in grams 

per vehicle mile. (See §86.110-94 for determination.)

Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in 

miles.

Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start UDDS, in miles.

5.6.2 Subparagraph (b). [No change.] 

5.6.3 Equivalent All-Electric Range shall be calculated in accordance 

with section G.11 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 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 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 HFEDSs provided that the second HFEDS meets 

the SOC criterion in section G.10. In this case, 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, 2012

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 preconditioned pursuant to sections 

G.5.1.9 through 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 preconditioned pursuant to section G.5.1, without canister

preconditioning. Sections 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 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.5.1.9 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 canister precondition and 

vehicle charging. Sections G.5.1.1 through G.5.1.4 may be omitted if previously 

performed.

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. This 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, 

CO2, and NOx 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.

6.2.2.2 Replace subparagraph (b)(6) with: Cold soak: The vehicle 

shall be stored at an ambient temperature not less than 68oF (20oC) and not 
A-4-G-13

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

more than 86oF (30oC) 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): The 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 three emission measurement

HFEDSs, separated by a 15 second key-on hot soak period, shall be performed. 

The vehicle must meet the SOC criterion in section G.10 for the third 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 criterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stopped, and the procedure shall 

be repeated starting at section G.6.2.2.2.

6.2.2.4 Amend subparagraph (b)(7)(iii): One exhaust sample and 

one background sample per each HFEDS shall be collected and analyzed for 

THC (except diesel hydrocarbons which are analyzed continuously), CO, CO2, 

and NOx. 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 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): Operate 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 

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): When the vehicle reaches 

zero speed between each HFEDS, the driver has 17 seconds to prepare for 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, 2012

(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 conditions shall apply: For vehicles that do 

not allow the auxiliary power unit to be manually activated and are chargesustaining over the HFEDS, record the battery state-of-charge to determine if the 

SOC criterion in section F.10 is satisfied. If the SOC criterion 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 criterion. 

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) 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 Schedule. Refer to 

section G.11, 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.
A-4-G-15

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(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 stateof-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 operation 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 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 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, separated by 

a 15 second key-on hot soak period, shall be performed. The vehicle 

must meet the SOC criterion in section G.10 for the third 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 criterion is not satisfied, the test shall be stopped, 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.11 of these test procedures.

7. SFTP Emission 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 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, 2012

7.1 US06 Vehicle Preconditioning.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132-00 [October 22, 1996] with 

the following revisions. This 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 the 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 §86.159-08 [December 27, 2006] 

with the following revisions. This 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 collected 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 composite 
A-4-G-17

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

samples collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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. During 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 criterion in section G.10 is 

satisfied. If the SOC criterion is not satisfied, then repeat the

dynamometer test run from subparagraph (f)(2)(i), without the 

preconditioning cycle. Up to three US06 emission tests shall be allowed

to satisfy the SOC criterion. 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, 2012

(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.

7.3 SC03 Vehicle Preconditioning.

To be conducted pursuant to 40 CFR §86.132-00 [October 22, 1996] with 

the following revisions. This 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 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 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 the auxiliary power unit shall be manually 

activated at the beginning of and operated throughout the SC03 

preconditioning cycle.

7.3.2.1.1 Subparagraphs (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. This 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 adopted 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 preconditioned 
A-4-G-19

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 §86.162-03 (a) for a discussion of simulation 

procedure approvals). The environmental test facility must be capable of 

providing the following nominal ambient test conditions of: 95oF air temperature, 

100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), 

a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m2

, 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 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), 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. The SC03 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.

7.4.2 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 throughout 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, 2012

(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 criterion in section 

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 criterion. 

(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 68o

F (20oC) and not more than 86oF 

(30oC) 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. 50o

F and 20oF Test Provision for Off-Vehicle Charge Capable Hybrid 

Electric Vehicles. 

50 oF testing shall be conducted pursuant to section FG.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, 2012

20 oF testing shall be conducted pursuant to section G.5 and shall include 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 

Procedures.

For 50 o

F and 20 oF charge depleting testing, vehicle charging, prior to emissions 

testing, shall be performed during the soak period at 50 oF and 20 oF, respectively.

8.1 To satisfy test requirements for the 50oF 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 FG.5. To satisfy test 

requirements for the 20oF 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 FG.5. For the 20oF and 50oF 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 two 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:

Ywm = 















+

+

+ ∗ 















+

+

∗

2 3

2 3

1 2

1 2 0.43 0.57

D D

Y Y

D D

Y Y

Where:

Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, CO, 

THCE, NMOG, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per 

vehicle mile.

Y1 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase one of the three 

phase test. 

Y2 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase two of the three 

phase test. 

Y3 = Mass emissions as calculated from phase three of the three 

phase test. 

D1 = The measured driving distance from phase one of the three 

phase tests, in miles. 

D2 = The measured driving distance from phase two of the three 

phase tests, in miles. 

D3 = 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, 2012

(ii) A two phase test that includes phase one as a UDDS, a 10 minute keyoff 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 emissions 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 UDDS. 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 purposes. 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 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 sustaining operation mode selector with selector set to simulate 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 that 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 determining the SOC tolerance during testing, the current drive 

cycle may be aborted if the SOC tolerance is met for previous 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, 2012

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-hrfinal)max = (Amp-hrinitial) + 0.01 















∗

∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel 

(Amp-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) - 0.01 















∗

∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel 

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)max = Maximum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end 

of the test

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end 

of the test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the 

test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in 

Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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:

(Vfinal)max = 

( )

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

∗ ∗

+ ∗

2

0.01 2

(Vfinal)min = 

( )

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

∗ ∗ − ∗2

0.01 2

Where:
A-4-G-24

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(Vfinal)max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the 

test

(Vfinal)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

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during 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:

(rpmfinal)max = 

( )

3

2 2

0.01

I K

NHV m

rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗

+ ∗

(rpmfinal)min = 

( )

3

2 2

0.01

I K

NHV m

rpm fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗ − ∗

Where:

(rpmfinal)max = The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the 

end of the test

(rpmfinal)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

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K3 = Conversion factor, 2 2

2

3600sec

4

− rpm

π

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg-m2
A-4-G-25

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

11. Calculations – Equivalent All-Electric Range for Off-Vehicle Charge 

Capable Hybrid Electric Vehicles.

11.1 Charge Depleting CO2 Produced means the cumulative tailpipe CO2

emissions produced, Mcd, in grams per mile during the charge depleting cycle range. 

Mcd = Σ Yi

where:

Yi = The sum of the CO2 grams per mile in the charge depleting mode 

from each test cycle (UDDS or HFEDS) 

i = Number (UDDS or HFEDS) of the test over the charge depleting 

cycle range, Rcdc

11.2 Charge Sustaining CO2 Produced - urban means the cumulative tailpipe 

CO2 emissions produced, Mcs, in grams per mile, during the cold start charge sustaining 

urban test.

Mcs = ( )





 



 − + ∗

c

cdcu c

c h D

R D

Y Y

where:

Rcdcu = Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range, in miles

Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in 

miles

Yc = Grams per mile CO2 emissions as calculated from the cold start 

UDDS

Yh = Grams per mile CO2 emissions as calculated from the hot start 

UDDS

11.3 Charge Sustaining CO2 Produced - highway means the grams per mile 

tailpipe CO2 emissions produced, Mcs, during the cold start charge sustaining highway 

test.

Mcs = h

h

cdch Y

D

R

∗















where:

Rcdch = Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range, in miles

Dh = The measured driving distance from the hot start HFEDS, in 

miles

Yh = Grams per mile emissions as calculated from the hot start 

HFEDS
A-4-G-26

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

11.4 Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range (EAERu) shall be calculated as 

follows: 

EAERu = cdcu

cs

cs cd R

M

M M

∗













 −

where:

Mcs is as defined in G.11.2.

Mcd is as defined in G.11.1, using the UDDS test cycle.

11.5 Highway Equivalent All-Electric Range (EAERh) shall be calculated as 

follows:

EAERh = cdch

cs

cs cd R

M

M M

∗



 



 −

where:

Mcs is as defined in G.11.3.

Mcd is as defined in G.11.1, using the HFEDS test cycle.

Rcdch is as defined in G.11.3 

11.6 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 (ERFu) is calculated as follows:

ERFu (%) = ∗100 















cda

u

R

EAER

The Highway Electric Range Fraction (ERFh) is calculated as follows:

ERFh (%) = ∗100 















cdah

h

R

EAER
A-4-G-27

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

11.7 Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy Consumption.

The Urban Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy Consumption 

(EAERECu) shall be calculated as follows:

EAERECu (wh/mi) = 

u

cd

EAER

E

where:

Ecd = 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.

The Highway Equivalent All-Electric Range Energy Consumption 

(EAERECh) shall be calculated as follows:

EAERECh (wh/mi) = 

h

cd

EAER

E

where:

Ecd = 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.

11.8 The Urban Charge Depleting Cycle Range, Rcdcu, (see section H for an 

illustration of Rcdcu) 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-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) – 0.01 * 















∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of the 

test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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, 2012

11.9 The Charge Depleting Actual Range, Rcda, 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 an illustration of Rcda see section I.

11.10 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.

11.11 The Highway Charge Depleting Cycle Range, Rcdch, 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 bound state-of-charge 

tolerance for one test cycle given by:

(Amp-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) – 0.01 * 















∗

∗

V K1

NHV m

system

fuel fuel

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of the 

test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = 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.

11.12 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.

11.13 The Urban Equivalent All Electric Range for vehicles with an urban charge 

depleting actual range greater than 40 miles, EAERu40, is determined through the 

following equation:

EAERu40 (miles) = 



 



 ×

100

ERF 40mi u
A-4-G-29

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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.

GHGPHEV, combined = 0.55 * (GHGurban) + 0.45 * (GHGhighway) (Eq. 1)

12.2 The urban GHG emissions value for off-vehicle charge capable hybrid 

electric vehicles is calculated using the following equations.

12.2.1 The urban GHG emissions value is determined by the following 

equation.

∑ ∑ ∑ = = =

= + − ∗ + − urban urban Nurban

i

upstream i cs urban

N

i

i

N

i

cd AC i

i

CD i

urban i GHG UF G UF Y

D

Y GHG UF 1

.

1 1

. .

. ( ) *( ) ( ) (1 ( )) *( )

(Eq. 2)

Where,

GHGurban = Rated urban GHG emissions for PHEV, in gCO2e/mile

i = Number of charge-depleting urban test cycle 

Nurban = Total number of urban test cycles in charge depleting to charge sustaining 

range (Rcdtcs)

UFi = Utility factor for urban test cycle i

YCD.i = Mass emissions of CO2 in grams per vehicle mile, for the “i”th test 

in the charge depleting test

D.i = Distance of the “i”th urban test cycle, in miles.

GHGcd.AC.i = Rated GHG emissions for test cycle i, in gCO2e/mile 

Ycs.urban = Weighted mass emissions of CO2 in grams/mi of the charge sustaining test.

Gupstream = Gasoline upstream factor = 0.25 * GHGtarget. 

12.2.2 The Charge Depleting to Charge Sustaining Range (Rcdtcs) is the 

total number of cycles driven at least partially in charge depleting mode times the 

cycle distance. Cycles meets charge sustaining criterion are not included in the 

Rcdtcs. The Rcdtcs 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, 2012

Utility factors for each PHEV drive cycle test with charge-depletion operation

Test cycle 

number

Test cycle utility factor

Urban, UFi Highway, UFj

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:

GHGcd.AC.i = GHGgrid * Ecd.AC.i (Eq. 3)

Where,

GHGcd.AC.i = Rated GHG emissions for charge-depleting PHEV, in gCO2e/mile

Ecd.AC.i = Urban or highway charge depleting electricity use, in kWh/mile

GHGgrid = Lifecycle California electricity GHG intensity, 270 gCO2e/kWh

12.2.5 The urban or highway charge depleting electricity use is defined by the following 

formula:

N cd AC total

i

cd DC i

cd DC i

cd AC i E

E

E E . .

1

. .

. .

. . *

∑=

= (Eq. 4)

Where,

N = Total number of test cycles in the charge depleting to charge 

sustaining range (Rcdtcs) of the urban or highway charge 

depleting test.

Ecd.AC.i = AC kWh consumed in the “i”th cycle of the charge depleting 

test.

Ecd.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.

Ecd.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, 2012

12.2.6 The Ycs.urban , which is the weighted CO2 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

CS Urban D

Y

D

Y Y . = 0.43* + 0.57* (Eq. 5)

Where,

YCS.Urban = Weighted mass emissions of CO2 in grams/mi of the charge 

sustaining test.

YC = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start UDDS, in grams 

per cycle.

YH = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start UDDS, in grams 

per cycle.

DC = The measured driving distance from the cold start UDDS, in 

miles.

DH = 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.

∑ ∑ ∑ = = =

= + − ∗ + −

highwayn highway Nhighway

j

upstream j cs highway

N

j

i

N

j

cd AC j

j

CD j

highway j GHG UF G UF Y

D

Y

GHG UF 1

.

1 1

. .

. ( }*( ) ( ) (1 ( )) *( )

(Eq. 7)

Where,

GHGhighway= Rated highway GHG emissions for PHEV, in gCO2e/mile

j = Number of charge-depleting highway test cycle 

Nhighway = Total number of highway test cycles in charge depleting to charge sustaining 

range (Rcdtcs)

UFj = Utility factor for highway test cycle j (see Table 1)

YCD.j = Mass emissions of CO2 in grams per vehicle mile, for the “j”th test in the charge 

depleting test

Dj = Distance of the HFEDS cycle, in miles.

GHGcd.AC.j = Rated GHG emissions for test cycle j, in gCO2e/mile (see Eq. 3)

Ycs.highway= Mass emissions of CO2 in grams/mi of the highway charge sustaining emission 

test, which can be found in section F.6.3.3 of these test procedures.

Gupstream = Gasoline upstream factor 0.25 * GHGtarget
A-4-H-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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, 2012

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 Ecd Equivalent* to Urban CD range test ?

N

Y Charge and record energy

Discharge

12 – 36 hour cold soak, charge 

and record energy
A-4-I-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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, 2012

SOC

Charge Depleting

Cycle Range,

Rcdc = 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,

Rcda = 18 mi Avg SOC for CS Operation

(Cycles 4-5)

AER = 10 mi

EAER = 13.7 mi

Engine 

Start

Figure 1
A-4-I-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

SOC

Charge Depleting

Cycle Range

Charge

Sustaining

Operation

Cycle 1

Charge Depleting to Charge 

Sustaining Range

-1% Fuel Energy Used

Lower Boundary Used 

for Rcdc Determination 

(Cycle 5)

Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Cycle 4 Cycle Cycle 6 Cycle 7

+1% Fuel Energy Used for 

Rcdc 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 Boundary 

(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

Figure 
A-4-J-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

J. Test Procedures for 2009 through 2011 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 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. All 2009 through 2011 ZEVs and only offvehicle 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 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) At 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 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, 2012

(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 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 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 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 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 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 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 without 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 auxiliary power unit 
A-4-J-3

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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; 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-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 management), 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 start between 68o

F and 86oF 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 Provisions.

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, 2012

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 that causes the hybrid 

electric vehicle to operate the auxiliary power unit for the maximum possible cumulative 

amount of time during the preconditioning drive.

6.1.3 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 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 battery 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 activated at the 

beginning of and operated throughout the preconditioning drive.

6.1.6 Within five minutes of completing preconditioning drive, battery state-ofcharge 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 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 battery 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, 2012

(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 

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 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 dilution 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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 analyzed 

continuously pursuant to the provisions of § 86.110. Parallel samples of the 

dilution air are similarly analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. For hybrid 

electric vehicles with natural gas-fueled, liquefied petroleum gas-fueled and 

methanol-fueled auxiliary power units, bag samples are collected and analyzed 

for THC (if not sampled continuously), CO, CO2, CH4 and NOx. For hybrid 

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, CO2, 

CH4 and NOx.
A-4-J-6

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

6.2.2 Subparagraph (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 

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.

6.3 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 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 the 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).

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 selector valves to the 

“standby” position. Record the measured roll or shaft revolutions (both gas meter 
A-4-J-7

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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) 

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 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 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 Amend 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 Emissions

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:

Ywm = 0.43 * Yc + 0.57 * Yh

 Dc Dh

Where:
A-4-J-8

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

(1) Ywm = Weighted mass emissions of each pollutant, i.e., THC, 

CO, THCE, NMHC, NMHCE, CH4, NOx, or CO2, in grams per vehicle 

mile.

(2) Yc = Mass emissions as calculated from the cold start test, in 

grams per test.

(3) Yh = Mass emissions as calculated from the hot start test, in 

grams per test.

(4) Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in 

miles.

(5) Dh = 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 (Mp) in grams/mile shall be computed as follows:

Mp = 0.43 * Mpc + 0.57 *Mph

 Dc Dh

Where:

(1) Mpc = Mass of particulate determined from the cold start test, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See § 86.110-94 for determination.)

(2) Mph = Mass of particulate determined from the hot start test, in 

grams per vehicle mile. (See § 86.110-94 for determination.)

(3) Dc = The measured driving distance from the cold start test, in 

miles.

(4) Dh = 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 § 600.111-93 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 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, CO2, and NOx using a constant 

volume (variable dilution) sampler. Diesel dilute exhaust is continuously analyzed for 
A-4-J-9

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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, CO2, and NOx . 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 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 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.

(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 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 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 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 during the idle 

period. The battery state-of-charge shall be recorded 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, 2012

(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 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 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 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 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 dynamometer, 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, 

battery state-of-charge shall be set at a level that causes the hybrid electric 
A-4-J-11

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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-ofcharge 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 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-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 US06 

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 

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, CO2, CH4 and NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx.

8.2.2 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.

8.2.3 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 the 
A-4-J-12

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

purpose of finding the appropriate throttle action to maintain the proper speedtime 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 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 

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.

8.2.5 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 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 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 

increased 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 Preconditioning
A-4-J-13

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 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. 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 SC03 preconditioning drive. For hybrid electric 

vehicles that allow manual activation of the auxiliary power unit, battery state-ofcharge 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 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 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 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 
A-4-J-14

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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: 95oF air temperature, 

100 grains of water/pound of dry air (approximately 40 percent relative humidity), 

a solar heat load intensity of 850 W/m2

, 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 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), including 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 collected in bags are analyzed for THC, CO, CO2, CH4 and 

NOx. 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, CO2, CH4 and NOx.

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 the 
A-4-J-15

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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 from 

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.

(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 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.

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-hrfinal)max = (Amp-hrinitial) + 0.01 * (NHVfuel * mfuel)

 (Vsystem * K1)

(Amp-hrfinal)min = (Amp-hrinitial) – 0.01 * 

(V K )

(NVH m )

system 1

fuel fuel

∗

∗

 

Where:

(Amp-hrfinal)max = Maximum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of 

the test

(Amp-hrfinal)min = Minimum allowed Amp-hr stored in battery at the end of the 

test

(Amp-hrinitial) = Battery Amp-hr stored at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K1 = Conversion factor, 3600 seconds/hour

Vsystem = Open circuit voltage (OCV) that corresponds to the SOC of 

the target SOC during charge sustaining operation. This 
A-4-J-16

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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:

(Vfinal)max = 

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

(2 ) ( ) 0.01 2∗ ∗

+ ∗

(Vfinal)min = 

C

NHV m

V fuel fuel

initial

(2 ) ( ) 0.01 2∗ ∗ − ∗

Where:

(Vfinal)max = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test

(Vfinal)min = The stored capacitor voltage allowed at the end of the test

(Vinitial)

2 = The square of the capacitor voltage stored at the beginning of 

the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

C = Rated capacitance of the capacitor, in Farads
A-4-J-17

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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:

(rpmfinal)max = 

(1 K )

(2 NVH m ) (rpm ) 0.01

3

2 fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗

+ ∗

(rpmfinal)min = 

(1 K )

(2 NVH m ) (rpm ) 0.01

3

2 fuel fuel

initial ∗

∗ ∗ − ∗

Where:

(rpmfinal)max= The maximum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the 

test

(rpmfinal)min = The minimum flywheel rotational speed allowed at the end of the 

test

(rpminitial)

2 = The squared flywheel rotational speed at the beginning of the test

NHVfuel = Net heating value of consumable fuel, in Joules/kg

mfuel = Total mass of fuel consumed during test, in kg

K3 = Conversion factor, 42

/(3600 sec2-rpm2)

I = Rated moment of inertia of the flywheel, in kg-m2
A-4-K-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

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) 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 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 Regulations
This Page Left Intentionally Blank
§1962.3

A-5-1

Date of Release: December 7, 2011

Scheduled for Consideration: January 26-27, 2012

Appendix A-5

PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Amend and Renumber 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 vehicles, except for model year 2006 through 2013 

neighborhood electric vehicles, that qualify for 1.0 or greater ZEV credit under 

section 1962.1and 1962.2, and (2) all hybrid electric vehicles that are capable of 

being recharged by a battery charger that transfers 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 definitions 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 5-15R). 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 continuous 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 incorporated 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, 2012

Note: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 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: Sections 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 and 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, 2011

Advanced 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. Criteria Emissions Reductions........................................................... 6

2. GHG Emission Reductions ................................................................ 7

3. Other Environmental Impacts ............................................................ 7

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .............................................................. 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. ARB Nexus with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ........................ 21

D. ACC Program Objectives............................................................................. 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................... 31
Advanced 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 SETTING............................................................................ 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. Regulatory Setting ........................................................................... 67

F. Cultural Resources ...................................................................................... 71

1. Existing Conditions .......................................................................... 71

2. Regulatory Setting ........................................................................... 73

G. Geology 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 ........................................................................... 90
Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents

Draft Environmental Analysis

iii

K. Mineral Resources....................................................................................... 92

1. Existing Conditions .......................................................................... 92

2. Regulatory 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 Regulation (LEV III) ............ 115

1. Fleet Mix ........................................................................................ 115

2. Technology 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. Battery Disposal, Recycling, and Exchange .................................. 124

5. Plug Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure................................. 125

6. Electricity Demand......................................................................... 126

7. Fuel Cell Production ...................................................................... 126

8. Platinum Demand .......................................................................... 126
Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents

Draft Environmental Analysis

iv

9. Fuel Cell Disposal, Recycling, and Exchange................................ 127

10. Hydrogen Fueling Infrastructure .................................................... 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. Hydrogen 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, Zoning 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 Gases.................................................................................... 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; 

Expansive Soil ............................................................................... 155

2. Substantial Soil Erosion or the Loss of Topsoil.............................. 156

3. Septic Tanks or Alternative Waste Water Disposal Systems......... 156
Advanced 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 

Schools, 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 Resources..................................................................................... 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 Groundborne Noise Levels, Substantial Increases 

in Ambient Noise Levels ................................................................ 163

2. People Residing or Working in the Area to Excessive AirportRelated 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.............................................................. 171
Advanced Clean Cars Program Table of Contents

Draft Environmental Analysis

vi

6.0 CUMULATIVE AND GROWTH-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 Resources .................................................................................... 178

G. Geology and Soils...................................................................................... 179

H. Hazards and Hazardous Materials............................................................. 179

I. Hydrology and Water Quality..................................................................... 180

J. Land Use Planning..................................................................................... 180

K. Mineral Resources..................................................................................... 180

L. Noise.......................................................................................................... 181

M. Population and Housing............................................................................. 181

N. Public Services .......................................................................................... 181

O. Recreation ................................................................................................. 182

P. Transportation/Traffic................................................................................. 182

Q. Utilities and Service Systems..................................................................... 182

R. Growth-Inducing Impacts ........................................................................... 183

7.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS........................................................................... 185

A. No Project Alternative ................................................................................ 185

1. Description of the No Project Alternative ....................................... 185

2. Consistency with Project Objectives .............................................. 185

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 the Alternative......................................................... 192

2. Consistency with Project Objectives .............................................. 193

3. Environmental Impacts .................................................................. 194
Advanced 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. Description 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 OF 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 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?..................................................................................... 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 ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................. 219

ATTACHMENT 1. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST.............................................. 229

A. Aesthetics .................................................................................................. 229

B. Agriculture and Forest Resources.............................................................. 230

C. Air Quality .................................................................................................. 231

D. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...................................................................... 232

E. Biological Resources ................................................................................. 233
Advanced 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 ........................................................... 246
Advanced 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 vehicles, 

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 regulatory 

package. Thus, the EA structure and analysis recognize the interdependent 

technologies that manufacturers would apply to passenger motor vehicles to respond to 

the coordinated regulatory program as a whole, along with the resultant environmental 

impacts.

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 healthbased, 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 change and to meet the State’s goal of 

an 80 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2050, as expressed in Executive Order S3-05, 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 medium-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 choice 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 Program. 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

The ACC Program 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 labeling, 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 manufacturers 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 resulting 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 the 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 

21st century now in California. 

Three innovative automakers have opened businesses in California, and are pushing 

the market forward, creating jobs in the process. Tesla Motors 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 Automotive 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 vehicle 

operating cost savings will materialize for the California consumer as a result of the 

ACC Program. Cost savings increase consumer purchasing power over time by 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Analysis

3

returning funds to them for other economic purposes. The resulting effect can be an 

overall 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 

increasingly positive economic impact to the State, leading to thousands of additional 

jobs this 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 (Chapter 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 (CO2), methane (CH4), and 

nitrous oxide (N2O) 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 require 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 2030. 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 Global 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 achieve the maximum feasible and costeffective 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 CO2e) reduction from 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 maturity 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 technologies. 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 2025, 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 nearly 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 vehicles.

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 proposed 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 (NOx) standards with 

combined NMOG plus NOx 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 categories 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-emission 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 - 2025 model year standards, ARB proposes to use the 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) approach and adopt separate 

standards for CO2, CH4, and N2O. The proposed GHG emission standards would 

reduce new passenger vehicles carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from their model year 

2016 levels by approximately 34 percent by model year 2025, from about 251 to about 

166 grams of CO2 per mile (gCO2/mile), based on the projected mix of vehicles sold in 

California. The basic structure of the standards includes two categories, passenger 
Advanced 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 CO2 emissions by about 36 percent 

and truck CO2 emissions by about 32 percent from model year 2016 through 2025. 

The CH4 and N2O 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 proposing 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. 

The technology for controlling vehicle emissions is well understood and manufacturers 

have a wide range of emission control technologies available to achieve “near-zero-atthe-tailpipe” (SULEV) emissions. Many of these technologies are already being used 

today 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 emissions 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 achieve 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 recognize 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 analyzing 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 existing technical foundation with new technical data and the 

understanding of evolving state-of-the-art engine, transmission, hybrid, and electricdrive technologies. As part of this effort, and without conceding any of California’s 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Analysis

6

separate authority, staff has been working with the U.S. EPA and the National Highway 

Traffic 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 program 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 range 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 pollutants, reactive 

organic gas (ROG), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and particulate matter (PM2.5) 

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 proposed 

ACC standards. By 2035, statewide ROG emissions would be reduced by an additional 

34 percent, NOx emissions by an additional 37 percent, and PM2.5 emissions by 10

percent from the baseline. 

Table ES-1 Statewide Emission Benefits of the ACC Program: Reactive Organic 

Gas (ROG), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) and Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed 

Regulation Benefits Percent Reduction

Statewide ROG (tons/day) 

2023 189.6 182.9 6.6 3% 

2025 175.5 164.44 11.1 6% 

2035 141.1 93.6 47.4 34% 

Statewide NOX (tons/day) 

2023 201.3 185.6 15.7 8% 

2025 183.6 161.2 22.4 12% 

2035 136.8 86.4 50.4 37% 

Statewide PM2.5 (tons/day) 

2023 26.7 26.0 0.6 2% 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Analysis

7

Table ES-1 Statewide Emission Benefits of the ACC Program: Reactive Organic 

Gas (ROG), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) and Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed 

Regulation Benefits Percent Reduction

2025 27.2 26.3 0.9 3% 

2035 29.7 26.8 2.9 10%

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, CO2 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 measurement unit used to compare the emissions 

from various GHGs based upon their global warming potential. The reduction increases 

in 2035 to 32 MMT/Year, a 27 percent reduction from baseline levels. By 2050, the 

proposed regulation will reduce emissions by more than 42 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 870 

MMT CO2e. 

Table ES-2 Statewide GHG Emission Benefits of the ACC Program (with 

Rebound)

Calendar Year Adjusted Baseline Proposed 

Regulation Benefits Percent Reduction

Statewide 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 these 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 disturbance 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Analysis

8

occurring from constructing and operating fueling facilities 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 environmental 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 potentially significant impacts. Consequently, this EA takes 

the conservative approach in its post-mitigation significance conclusions (i.e., tending to 

overstate 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-thansignificant environmental effects would occur related 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 proposed ACC Program related to air 

quality and GHG emissions. 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background

Draft Environmental Analysis

9

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

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], and 

medium-duty vehicles [MDV]) by combining the control of smog-causing, toxic air 

contaminants (TACs), 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 proposed California Evaporative Emission Regulations; Manufacturer Size 

Definition Changes; Environmental Performance Label (EPL); On-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 Statement of Reasons) have 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 requirements for 

reducing CAPs and GHGs from cars and light-duty trucks for model years 2015- 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 vehicle 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 Reports.
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 and 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 the 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) 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 was certified by the Secretary of the 

Resources Agency (California Code of Regulation [CCR], Title 14, hereafter “CEQA 

Guidelines” Section 15251[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, Title 

17, Section 60005[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, Section 60005). 

ARB has determined that adoption and implementation of the proposed ACC Program 

is a “project” as defined by CEQA. CEQA Guidelines (CCR, Title 14, Section 15378[a])

defines a project as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either 
Advanced 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 compliance 

responses to the regulations. 

Furthermore, the requirements of PRC Section 21159 apply when ARB adopts a rule or 

regulation requiring the installation of pollution control equipment, or a performance 

standard or treatment requirement. For such projects, the CEQA Guidelines (CCR, Title 

14, Section 15187) 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 foreseeable 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. The 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, Title 17, Sections 60005 and 60007 and consistent with ARB’s 

commitment to public review and 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 

responses, including any comments on the EA. The comments and written responses 

to comments, including environmental comments, will be incorporated into the Final 

Statement of Reasons (FSOR) for the regulation. 

When the FSOR and full regulatory package are completed, 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 

forwarding to the Office of Administrative Law for processing. However, because the 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is concurrently working on a 

National Program and this program may influence ARB’s decision, the conclusion of 
Advanced 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 environmental comments, 

until after the federal rulemakings are substantially complete.

If the regulations 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 contributors 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 reduction in statewide 

GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Additionally, former Governor 

Schwarzenegger’s Executive Order S-3-05 requires further reductions of statewide 

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, CAPs from these vehicles have been controlled by two regulatory 

programs: 1) the LEV regulations designed to maximize emission reductions from lightand 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, known 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 emission 

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, Sections 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background

Draft Environmental Analysis

13

1960 - 1962, respectively. LEV-certified vehicles must also meet the evaporative 

standards in CCR, Title 13, Section 1976(b). 

The CAPs regulated under LEV II include non-methane organic gas (NMOG), carbon 

monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), particulate matter, and non-methane 

hydrocarbons (NMHC). Formaldehyde, 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 escapes

into the surrounding air. LEV II also includes tailpipe emission standards for particulate 

matter generated by motor vehicles. LEV II also amended the test procedures required 

for manufacturers to demonstrate compliance. The California Supplemental Federal 

Test Procedure (SFTP) that addressed emissions 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 classes 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, manufacturers 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 fleetaverage emission standards differ according 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 emissions 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. Manufacturers 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 maximally 

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 this 

reason, some of the requirements under LEV II are different for small-, intermediateand large-volume manufacturers. Compliance with LEV II also involves different tiers of 

vehicle emissions performance, including LEVs, Ultra-Low-Emission Vehicles (ULEVs), 

and Super-Ultra-Low-Emission Vehicles (SULEVs). In complying with LEV II, each 

manufacturer earns emission credits if it over-complies with the fleet-average standards 

and emission debits if it fails 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 

emission standards were and are equivalent to, or more stringent than, comparable 

emission standards established by U.S. EPA. 

ii. Greenhouse Gases

In 2005, 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 (CO2e). Expressing emissions in CO2e takes the 

contributions of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a 

single unit equivalent, recognizing the varying global warming potential (GWP) of 

different GHGs. . The specific GHG emission standards incorporated into LEV II are 

found in CCR, Title 13, Section 1961.1. 

The Pavley regulations takes into consideration that AC 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 substantially 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 2007b) (i.e., 1430 times 

as heat-trapping by weight as CO2). 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 loss may 

occur during accidents, maintenance and servicing, and vehicle disposal at the end of 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background

Draft Environmental Analysis

15

useful life. The Pavley regulations grant direct AC credit of up to 6 g/mi of CO2e, 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 CO2e 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 regulations grant indirect AC credits 

of up to 9 g/mi of CO2e for systems with single-evaporator configuration and up to 11 

g/mi of CO2e for systems with a dual-evaporator configuration, 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, high 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 regulations 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. EPA and the 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in April, 2010 (75 Fed. Reg. 

25324 [May 7, 2010]). 

U.S. EPA 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 

substantially equivalent to the GHG reductions beyond those expected from the original 

Pavley regulations, California has agreed to allow compliance with the federal regulation 

for model years 2012-2016 to be deemed compliance with the Pavley regulations (CCR, 

Title 13, Section 1961.1[a]). This, in turn, allows vehicle manufacturers to meet a single 

set of national GHG standards while achieving the reductions envisioned by the Pavley 

regulations. 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 emissions occur immediately after 

the termination of engine operation, when latent engine heat vaporizes residual fuel in 
Advanced 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 temperature 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 vehicular 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 refueling 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 process. 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 permeation 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 certifications related to wholevehicle 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 standard. 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) staff proposes 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), 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 manufacturers 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, Section 1965. The EPL’s appearance is shown in Figure 1-1. 

Figure 1-1. Environmental Performance Label

Source: ARB 2011a.

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. EPA and NHTSA finalized a new Fuel Economy 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 economy 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 on 
Advanced 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

Source: DOT and U.S. EPA 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 emissions 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 

technicians. 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 regularly, with the 

last major update to the regulation occurring in 2006, as well as updates to the mediumduty 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 manufacturers and ARB staff held discussions about the proposal,, including 

a meeting on July 27, 2011. In response to the manufacturers’ requests, staff is 

proposing changes to the OBD II regulation, CCR, Title 13, Section 1968.2. 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. 

vii 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 quantity 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. After 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 producing gasoline containing 10 percent by 

volume ethanol (E10). 

As part of the proposed ACC program, staff is proposing to amend certification test fuel 

specifications by eliminating requited testing with MTBE and requiring 10 percent 

ethanol by volume instead, as discussed in Section 5 of the Project 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 ethanolcontaining 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 Regulation (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 

volumes 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 Vehicle 

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 ZEVenabling 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 

tailpipe 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, Section 1962.1. 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 unique distribution and market 

characteristics that are unlike other fuels under this regulation. In essence, once the 
Advanced 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 State’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 development 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 Fuels 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 dispensed 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, Sections 2300-2318. Details about the 

proposed version of the CFO regulation are presented in Chapter III (Project 

Description). 

2. ARB Nexus with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration

There are currently no comparable federal 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 finalized in late-2012. 

With regard to GHGs, U.S. EPA and NHTSA have been working together under the 

federal Clean Air Act and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to develop 

a coordinated national program of harmonized regulations to reduce emissions and 

improve fuel efficiency. The agencies issued a Final Rulemaking establishing standards 

for 2012-2016 model year vehicles on April 1, 2010 (U.S. EPA 2010c). 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background

Draft Environmental Analysis

22

The federal agencies are now developing a rulemaking to set standards for model year 

2017-2025 PC and LDT (U.S. EPA 2011a), which is consistent with the Presidential 

Memorandum regarding fuel efficiency standards (The White House Office of the Press 

Secretary 2010). 

There are currently no comparable federal GHG emission standards that are as 

stringent as the proposed standards for 2017 and subsequent model passenger 

vehicles. (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 rule 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 between 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 to 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 43000[b]) in recognition that the emission of 

air pollutants from motor vehicles is the primary cause of air pollution in many 

parts of the State (HSC, Section 43000[a]);

2. Achieve the maximum emissions reduction possible from motor 

vehicles – to attain the national and State ambient air quality standards for 

CAPs (HSC, Sections 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, Section 43000[c]); 

4. Reduce dependence on petroleum as an energy resource – to reduce the 

State’s reliance on petroleum and support the use of diversified fuels in the 

State’s passenger vehicle fleet. In addition, petroleum use as an energy 

resource contributes substantially to the following public health and 

environmental problems: air pollution, acid rain, global warming, and the 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background

Draft Environmental Analysis

23

degradation of California’s marine environment and fisheries (PRC, Sections

25000.5[b] and [c]); 

5. Decrease GHG emissions in support of statewide 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 2006. 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 reduction 

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 CO2e, as described in 

the Scoping Plan. Implementation of the proposed ACC Program would also 

provide further GHG reductions pursuant to AB 1493 (Pavley regulations) 

(Chap. 200, Statutes of 2002). Finally, implementation 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 

Executive 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, Section 38562[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, Section 38501[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 programs cannot be as detailed as for specific projects (CCR, Title 14, Section 

15146). 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 with a greater degree of accuracy (CCR, Section 15146 [a]). This analysis 

addresses a broad regulatory program, affecting statewide sales of millions of new 
Advanced 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 this 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 environment resulting from compliance responses to the 

proposed changes to the existing State regulations regarding emissions from new lightand medium-duty vehicles sold in California, and from actions and infrastructure 

necessary to provide alternative vehicle 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 implementing 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 environmental 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 regulations), 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 State 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 Program 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 in 
Advanced 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 statewide reach of the proposed ACC Program and the longerterm future horizon of the achievement of a statewide 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 locations. 

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 generally 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 cumulative 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 adverse impacts. 

2. Basis for Environmental Impact Analysis and Significance 

Determinations

The policy and direction of the existing LEV II (including the Pavley regulations 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 important 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, Section 15125[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 environment are the 

result of compliance responses to regulations. Compliance responses to the existing 
Advanced 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 and other reference 

measures is the approach used to estimate the potential environmental effects 

attributable to the proposed ACC Program. That is, the approach compares one set of 

projections (2017 – 2025) with compliance responses as of 2016. 

Other reasonably 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 [requires 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 GHGs by increasing the efficiency 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-specific 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 environmentally sensitive 

resources or conditions. This is a conservative approach (i.e., tending to overstate

environmental impacts), in light of these uncertainties, to satisfy the good-faith, fulldisclosure intent of CEQA. When specific projects are proposed 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 Program, it does not have 

authority over the proposal, approval, or implementation of infrastructure and 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Introduction and Background

Draft Environmental Analysis

27

development projects. Also, because the vehicle standards are nearly all performancebased and not prescriptive, the ACC program is generally not mandating 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 

State. Other agencies are responsible for the environmental analyses 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. For example, local cities or counties must 

approve proposals to construct fueling stations. Additionally, State 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 postmitigation significance conclusions (i.e., tending to overstate 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 projects 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 applicable, 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, 

Title 17, Section 60005[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. Toxic 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 emission 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 emissions 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 (NOX), particulate 

matter, and evaporative emissions of hydrocarbons (HC). In addition to establishing 

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 NOX 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 would 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 phased 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 is working with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(U.S. EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 

their development 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 emissions (from usage), but amend the credit formulas 

used as part of California’s 2009-2016 model years-GHG standards (i.e., Pavley 

regulations) so that they align with U.S. EPA’s methodology for 2017-2025 model years. 

Rather than specifying the suite of technologies that must be used by the manufacturer 

to receive credits, as currently required by the Pavley regulations, ARB proposes to 

adopt U.S. EPA’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 indirect 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. EPA, 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 standards 

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-duty 
Draft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description

Environmental Analysis

31

vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicles that are gasoline-fueled, liquefied petroleum gasfueled, and alcohol-fueled, to comply with the zero evaporative emission standards. 

This would require amending CCR, Title 13, Section 1976 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 

California 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 the 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 following:

• 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

• Extending 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 2013 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 requirements 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 the 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 erasing 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. 

Currently, 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 

California consumers), the certification fuel used for emission testing has not, and is no 

longer representative of in-use fuel. The certification fuel in California is being updated 

to reflect the in-use fuel. Staff is proposing to amend existing regulations 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 statewide vehicle 

fleet, simplifying the ZEV regulation where needed, and increasing requirements for 

2018 model year and beyond. A brief description of the current ZEV regulation is 

provided in Chapter 1 and the amount of ZEV credits that manufacturers currently 

earned by various vehicle classes is summarized in Table 1-2. 

The proposed amendments are divided into two 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 (300 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 requirements 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 required ZEV credits for only one year, before being subject to penalties. 

Overall, these amendments would result in a greater proportion of ZEVs in the 

statewide 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 requirements. 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, instead of owners/lessors of 

gasoline retail outlets, to build new hydrogen fueling stations based on the projected 

number of hydrogen FCVs operating in the State. 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 State. The 

amendments would add an additional trigger to build outlets of 10,000 vehicles that 
Draft Advanced Clean Cars Program Project Description

Environmental Analysis

34

would 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 regulation, the 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 an 

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 adjustment 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 where 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, responsible 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 that 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 statewide 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 BEVcharging 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 stations 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 they ensure the availability of hydrogen to FCVs as they are 
Draft 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 California. 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.

The “project,” as defined by CEQA, 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 responses by vehicle manufacturers and fuel providers would 

have a combined effect on the statewide 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 SETTING

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 features 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 directly 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 coatings, 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 2009a). 

2. Regulatory Setting

Applicable laws and regulations 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 102 (a) of the FLPMA states 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 103 (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 assessment.

Safe, Accountable, 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 visual 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting

Draft Environmental Analysis

38

Table 3.A-1. Applicable Laws and Regulations for Aesthetic Resources

Applicable Regulation Description

quality enhancement 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 

activities 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. “Examples 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 percent. (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 scenic 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 conservation/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 openspace plans, as provided by the Open Space Easement Act of 1974 

and codified in California Government Code (Section 51070 et seq.) 

According to the Act, a city or county may acquire or approve an openspace 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 states in the U.S. California produces nearly half of the nation’s 

grown fruits, nuts, and vegetables and is the nation’s leading dairy state. California’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 land 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 State’s cropland, is considered to be 

prime, unique, or of statewide 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 

counties 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 enlargement 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 forests 

and woodlands cover over 19 million acres and are most extensive in the Sierra, 

Modoc, and Klamath/North Coast bioregions of the State. Hardwood forests and oak 

woodlands cover over 13 million acres and extend mostly along the perimeter of the 

Sacramento 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 more 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 

State, local, and private farmland protection 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 principles, 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 states 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 for 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 their 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 nonrenewal application by a landowner ends the automatic annual extension of 

a contract and starts a 9-year phase-out of the contract. During the phaseout period, the land remains 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 restricted 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 use of land within the preserve and subject to contract 

(Government Code, Section 51202[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 51238.1. 

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 provision 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, quality, and quantity of agricultural lands and conversion of these 

lands over time. Agricultural designations include the categories of Prime 

Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland 

of Local Importance, Grazing Land, Urban and Built-Up Land, and Other 

Land. 

State Lands Commission 

Significant Lands Inventory

The State Lands Commission is responsible for managing lands owned by 

the State, including lands that the State 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 State School Lands. The State Lands Commission has a 

legal responsibility for, and a strong interest in, protecting the ecological 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 this EA. This evaluation is extensive 

because benefitting air quality conditions in California is both one of the primary 

objectives 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 

GHG 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, State, 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 also coordinates 

local and regional emission reduction measures and plans that meet federal and State

air quality limits. At the federal level, the U.S. EPA has oversight of State programs. In 

addition, U.S. EPA alone establishes emission standards for certain 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 [PM2.5]). 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 particulate 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 

(NOX) 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.

PM2.5 is a mixture of pollutants generated by a variety of sources. PM2.5 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 NOX, oxides of sulfur (SOX), 

ROG, and ammonia. While the impacts of directly emitted PM2.5 may be seen near 

sources of air pollution, PM2.5 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 PM2.5. California’s climate and CAP programs 

are complementary, and the AB 32 regulations ARB is adopting will provide co-benefits 

that will be incorporated into future air quality plans for ozone and PM2.5. 

b. Ambient Air Quality Standards and the State Implementation Plan

CAPs are the most prevalent air pollutants known to be deleterious to human 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, required 

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 stringent 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 μg/m3) –6

Same as Primary 

8-hour 0.070 ppm (137 μg/m3) Standard 0.075 ppm

(147 μg/m3)

Carbon 

Monoxide 

(CO)

1-hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm

(40 mg/m3) –

8-hour 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm

(10 mg/m3)

Nitrogen 

Dioxide (NO2)

Annual 

Arithmetic 

Mean

0.030 ppm (56 μg/m3) 0.053 ppm

(100 μg/m3

) Same as Primary 

Standard

1-hour 0.18 ppm (338 μg/m3) 0.100 ppm (188

μg/m3)

Sulfur Dioxide 

(SO2)

24-hour 0.04 ppm (105 μg/m3) –

3-hour – – 0.5 ppm

(1300 μg/m3)

1-hour 0.25 ppm (655 μg/m3) 0.075 ppm (196 

μg/m3) –

Respirable 

Particulate 

Matter (PM10)

Annual 

Arithmetic 

Mean

20 μg/m3 –6

Same as Primary 

Standard

24-hour 50 μg/m3 150 μg/m3
Advanced 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 (PM2.5)

Annual 

Arithmetic 

Mean

12 μg/m3 15 μg/m3

Same as Primary 

Standard

24-hour – 35 μg/m3

Lead10 30-day 

Average 1.5 μg/m3 – –

Calendar 

Quarter – 1.5 μg/m3

Same as Primary 

Rolling 3- Standard

Month Avg. – 0.15 μg/m3

Sulfates 24-hour 25 μg/m3

No

National

Standards

Hydrogen 

Sulfide 1-hour 0.03 ppm (42 μg/m3

)

Vinyl 

Chloride7 24-hour 0.01 ppm (26 μg/m3

)

VisibilityReducing 

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 PM10 24-hour standard is attained when 99 percent of the 

daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard. The PM2.5 24-hour standard is attained 

when 98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard. Contact the U.S. 

EPA for further clarification and current federal policies.

2 California standards for ozone, CO (except Lake Tahoe), SO2 (1- and 24-hour), NO2, 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/m3

)]. 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 of 

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 health.

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 PM10 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 2010
Advanced 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 [NO2], sulfur dioxide [SO2], particulate matter with an 

aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less [PM10], PM2.5, 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 attainment 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, State regulations and federal 

controls. Many of California'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. EPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register. The Code of 

Federal Regulations Title 40, Chapter I, Part 52, Subpart F, Section 52.220 lists all of 

the items which are included in the California SIP. At any one time, several California

measures have been submitted to U.S. EPA for their approval into the SIP 

(ARB 2009b). 

c. Air Districts

The CCAA requires that all local air districts in the State endeavor to achieve and 

maintain the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. The Act 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 districts 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, enforcement, 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 rules 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 meteorological 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 percent cleaner than their uncontrolled counterparts prior to the mid1960s. 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. EPA, standards for goods movement sources have 

also been tightened dramatically. By requiring low-sulfur fuel, SOX 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 emission 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 mid2000s.

California has also profoundly lowered emission standards for off-road sources, from 

lawn and garden equipment, to recreational vehicles and boats, to construction 

equipment and other large off-road sources. From 2010 through 2014, these new offroad sources will be manufactured to operate with 80-98 percent fewer emissions than 

their uncontrolled counterparts. 

ARB has worked closely with U.S. EPA 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 levels 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 vehicles 

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 mobilesource legacy fleets. The Smog Check Program ensures that passenger vehicles stay 
Advanced 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 and 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 regulations 

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. Testing 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 and 

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 Carl 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 projects "to relieve congestion, improve 

the movement of goods, improve air quality, and enhance the safety and security of the 

transportation system." Local governments use special vehicle registration fees to fund 

projects that further reduce emissions from motor vehicles.

In 2007 the Board adopted a new statewide strategy for reducing emissions that 

contribute to high ozone and PM2.5 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 PM2.5. 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

Portable 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

Portable 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 Statewide Strategy are focused on areas with pollution levels that exceed 

national air quality standards for ozone and PM2.5. However, most of the control 

measures adopted pursuant to the Statewide 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 Emission 
Advanced 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 State ambient air quality standards.

ii. Diesel Risk 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 and 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 NOX emission 

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 vehicle 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 

reduce the emissions and health risk in communities near ports, rail yards, and hightraffic corridors. The plan will reduce emissions of diesel PM, the NOX and SOX that 

contribute to fine particles, and, to a lesser extent, the ROG that mixes with NOX in the 

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 federal 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 the 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 acceptable 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 emissions. 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 mobilesource emissions of toxics, including benzene, formaldehyde, and 1-3-butadiene. In 

addition, Section 219 required the use of reformulated gasoline in selected 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 

review 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 sources (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 statewide total of TAC emissions, 

with an additional 71 percent attributed to other mobile 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, despite 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. EPA periodically reviews the NAAQS and 

revises them as needed to reflect the most recent health information. U.S. EPA initially 

established the federal ozone standard as a 1-hour standard to protect against shortterm 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. EPA 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 

half (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 highest 

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 greatest 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 parts 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 

below the federal 1-hour standard. 

ii. PM2.5 Trends

While PM2.5 concentrations have only been measured for approximately ten years, 

significant progress has already occurred in this short time period. Annual average 

PM2.5 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 PM2.5 concentrations have 

decreased by 30 to 50 percent since 2001. In addition, the number of days above the 

federal 24-hour PM2.5 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 PM2.5 standard 

in 2001, and PM2.5 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 PM2.5 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 Valley 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting

Draft Environmental Analysis

53

experiences the highest levels of PM2.5, other monitors throughout the San Joaquin 

Valley are only reaching values at or near the federal standard. 

iii. Toxic Air Contaminant Trends

ARB maintains a statewide 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 statewide risk. Unlike other air 

toxics, 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 NOX and elemental carbon. Over the last 20 years, 

concentrations 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 statewide 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, however, 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 proximity 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 gradients 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 healthdamaging particles, despite the reductions achieved by programs targeting smogforming 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 

limits 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 called "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 emissions, 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 219 required the use of 

reformulated gasoline in selected 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 that 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 State

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 State level for 

portions of the project area that are outside of California (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 April. 

The one climatic constant for the State 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 characterized 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 frequently exceeding 100°F (38°C).

Average annual temperatures for the State 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 

State's lowest temperature was -45°F (-43°C), recorded on 20 January 1937 at Boca, 

near the Nevada border.

Among the major population centers, Los 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 minimums 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 State'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 Intergovernmental 

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 average 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, halocarbons, 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 higher 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 Earth’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, while 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 2007b). 

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 countries, 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: CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), 

perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). They are regulated under the 

Kyoto Protocol.

The “global warming potential” (GWP) metric is used to convert all GHGs into “CO2‐

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 defined 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting

Draft Environmental Analysis

57

relative to CO2. For example, N2O’s GWP is 310, meaning a unit mass of N2O warms 

the atmosphere 310 times more than a unit mass of CO2. SF6 and PFCs have 

extremely long atmospheric lifetimes, resulting in their essentially irreversible 

accumulation in the atmosphere once emitted. However, in terms of quantity of 

emissions, CO2 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 emissions 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 CO2 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 CO2 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 greenhouse 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 CO2 (Ramanathan and Carmichael 2008). This 

estimate of the forcing due to BC is larger than most prior estimates including those of 

the IPCC 4th assessment report (IPCC 2007c). 

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 now. 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 State’s infrastructure, water 

supplies, and natural resources. The State 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 State’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 infrastructure 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 climate 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 2007a). In California, low socioeconomic 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 ability 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 be 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 episodes 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 

productivity 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 electricity 

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 endemic 

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 commitment to State‐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 already observable now, with measurable impacts for 

the State’s citizens, natural resources, and economic sectors. California’s position as a 

national leader of State‐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, continued economic vitality of the State’s climatesensitive 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. Whereas 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 CO2 is emitted into the atmosphere than is sequestered by ocean uptake, 

vegetation, and other forms of sequestration. Of the total annual human-caused CO2

emissions, approximately 54 percent is sequestered through ocean uptake, uptake by 

northern hemisphere forest regrowth, and other terrestrial sinks within a year, whereas 

the remaining 46 percent of human-caused CO2 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 global, 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 attributable 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 electricity generation. Emissions of CO2 are 

byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. CH4, a highly potent GHG, resulting primarily from 

off-gassing (the release of chemicals from nonmetallic substances under ambient or 

greater pressure conditions), is largely associated with agricultural practices and 

landfills. N2O is also largely attributable to agricultural practices and soil management. 

CO2 sinks, or reservoirs, include vegetation and the ocean, which both absorb CO2

through sequestration and dissolution, respectively, two of the most common processes 

of CO2 sequestration.

California is the 12th to 16th largest emitter of CO2 in the world (CEC 2006a). California 

produced 484 million gross metric tons of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) in 2004 (ARB 2009c). 

CO2e is a measurement 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 

persistence, 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 CH4 has the same contribution 

to the greenhouse effect as approximately 21 tons of CO2. Therefore, CH4 is a much 

more potent GHG than CO2. Expressing emissions in CO2e takes the contributions of 
Advanced 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 effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted.

The California GHG inventory compiles statewide anthropogenic GHG emissions and 

sinks. It includes estimates for CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), 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 State. 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 2007d). Resource areas other than air quality 

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 State (including the project site). 

According to the California Energy Commission (CEC 2006b), 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 statewide 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 2007d). If 

this occurs, resultant effects could include increased coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion 

(especially a concern in the low-lying Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, where 

pumps delivering potable water could be threatened), and disruption of wetlands (CEC 

2006b). As the existing climate throughout California changes over time, the ranges of 

various plant 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 State, if suitable conditions are no 

longer available.
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 

States. In general, this national reporting requirement will provide 

U.S. EPA with accurate and timely GHG emissions data from 

facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2 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 emissions 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. EPA and the Department of 

Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

(NHTSA) proposed a new national program that would reduce GHG 

emissions and improve fuel efficiency for all new cars and trucks 

sold in the United States. U.S. EPA proposed the first-ever national 

GHG emissions 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 that satisfies all requirements under both 

Federal programs and the standards of California and other states. 

The President requested that U.S. EPA and NHTSA, on behalf of 

the Department of Transportation, develop, through notice and 

comment rulemaking, a coordinated 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 lightduty vehicles for model years 2017-2025.

U.S. EPA 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. EPA adopted its Proposed 

Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse 

Gases under the CAA (Endangerment Finding). The Endangerment 

Finding is based on Section 202(a) of the CAA, which states 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 endanger 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 [CO2], methane [CH4], nitrous oxide [N2O], 

hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs], perfluorocarbons [PFCs], and sulfur 

hexafluoride [SF6]) 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 vehicle 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 202(a) of the CAA. 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. EPA’s final 

findings respond to the 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. EPA 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 Executive 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 multiagency effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the target 
Advanced 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 

governor and State 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 of the CalEPA created the California Climate Action Team 

(CCAT) made up of members from various State agencies and 

commission. CCAT released its first report in March 2006. The 

report proposed to achieve the targets by building on voluntary 

actions of California businesses, local government and community 

actions, as well as through State 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 

statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG 

emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. This reduction will be 

accomplished through an enforceable statewide 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 statewide 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 cap; institute a schedule to meet the emissions cap; and 

develop tracking, reporting, and enforcement mechanisms to ensure 

that the State 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 from 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 emissions 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 statewide emissions. It establishes a goal that the carbon 

intensity of transportation 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 adopted 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 greenhouse 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 

expands the State'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, 2009. 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, Statutes 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 Communities 

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 Order S-13-08 Sea level rise is a foreseeable indirect environmental impact 

associated with climate change, largely attributable 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 Executive 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. This 

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. This 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 projections; 

3. A synthesis of existing information on projected sea level rise 

impacts to State 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 

herbaceous plants, in addition to 27 other types of vegetation (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 

1995, vegetation series tables). 

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 the 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 percent 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 variety 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 404 requires a permit from the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for a discharge from 

dredged or fill materials into Waters of the U.S., including 

wetlands. Section 401 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 and Harbors Act of 1899 Requires permit or letter of permission from USACE prior to any 

work being completed within navigable waters.

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (U.S EPA) Section 404 (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 (FLPMA). FLPMA 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 interstate or foreign commerce 

was prohibited except under permit.

Executive Order 13112, “Invasive 

Species,” February 3, 1999

Federal agencies are mandated 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

Requires 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.

Wild 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 

Act

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 

policy 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 standards. 

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 unique forest and wildland resources.

Wetlands Preservation (KeeneNejedly California Wetlands 

Preservation Act) (Public Resources 

Code, Section 5810 et seq.)

California has established a successful program of regional, 

cooperative efforts to protect, acquire, 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 5093.30 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 enjoyment as wilderness.

Significant Natural Areas (Fish and 

Game Code section 1930 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 3503 

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 section 3513)

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 Protected. 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,

Section 15380)

CEQA defines rare species more broadly than the definitions for 

species listed under the State and federal Endangered Species 

Acts. Under section 15830, species not protected through State

or federal listing but nonetheless demonstrable as “endangered” 

or “rare” under CEQA should also receive 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 Section 21083.4)

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 significant 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 

resources 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 80001 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 counties. 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, Section 

403 

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, California 

Code of Regulations, Section 4500)

List of plant species that are considered 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 MultiSpecies 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 record 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. “Historical 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 Section 21084.1; 14 CCR Section 15064.5[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 

specialization. 

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 spoke approximately 74 

languages. At least 70 groups, with even more subgroups, inhabited the vast lands 
Advanced 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 collecting 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 varied, 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 from 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 precontact number (Smithsonian Institution 1978). Existing reservations 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 territory 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 as 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 industries.

Significant nonrenewable 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 Tertiary 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 the 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 during 
Advanced 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, marine 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 Valley 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 (ACHP) as an 

independent federal entity. Section 106 of the Act requires federal 

agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic 

properties and afford the ACHP 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 101(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 statement (EIS).

Archaeological Resources 

Protection Act of 1979 

(NRPA) (16 USC 470aa470II)

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 protected 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 106 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 106 review process, set forth documentation 

requirements, and describe procedures to be followed if significant 

historic properties 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 federal 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 procedures 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 Standards 

and Guidelines 

(FR 190:44716–44742)

Non-regulatory technical advice about the identification, evaluation, 

documentation, study, and other treatment of cultural resources. Notable

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 American 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 

Transportation 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 Administration (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 Secretary. Detailed 
Advanced 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 and 

California Public 

Resources Code, Section 

Disturbance of human remains without the authority of law is a felony 

(California Health and Safety Code, Section 7052). According to State

law (California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, California Public 

Resources Code, Section 5097.98), 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 Native 

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 Code Section 5097.98; or the 

Native American Heritage Commission was unable to identify a 

descendent or the descendent failed to make a recommendation within 

24 hours after being notified by the Commission. 

According to the California Health and Safety Code, six or more human 

burials at one location constitute a cemetery (Section 8100), and 

disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052). 

Section 7050.5 requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the 

vicinity of discovered human 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 

American remains (California Health and Safety Code, 7052.5c; Public 

Resources Code, Section 5097.98). 

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 5020.1(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 Plan. 

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 

ACHP 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 episodes 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 are 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 the 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 

mountains 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 Paleozoic 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 mountains 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting

Draft Environmental Analysis

77

were emplaced. 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 along 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 Transverse 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 widespread 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 states to establish discharge 

standards specific to water bodies (National Pollution Discharge Elimination 

System [NPDES]), which regulates storm water discharge from construction sites 

through 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 Earthquake 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 

2621–2630. 

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 surface fault rupture of known active faults beneath occupied 

structures, and requires disclosure to potential buyers of existing real estate and a 

50-foot setback for new occupied buildings. This act groups faults into categories 

of active, potentially active, 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 2690–2699.

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 planning 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 

Section 3106.

Public Resources Code Section 3106 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 surface waters suitable 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 2687(a)

The Landslide Hazard Identification Program requires the State Geologist to 

prepare maps of landslide hazards within urbanizing areas. According to Public 

Resources Code Section 2687(a), public agencies are encouraged to use these 

maps for land use planning and for decisions regarding building, 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 States (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, 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.

Caltrans Seismic 

Design Criteria

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has Seismic Design 

Criteria (SDC), which is an encyclopedia of new and currently practiced seismic 

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 standard 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 appropriate 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 earthworks 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 constructionrelated 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 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), ignitable (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, process 

water, and other spent materials (i.e., some types of batteries and fuel cells). 

California’s hazardous waste regulations provides the following means to determine 

whether or not a waste is hazardous: (1) a list of criteria (toxic, ignitable, 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. Regulatory 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 other laws enacted by Congress, was incorporated into the 

United States 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 sources to waters of the United 

States. 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 states, 

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 wells 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 intrastate and interstate

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-tograve." This includes the 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 (CERCLA), 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 substances 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 substances, 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 clarifications, 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).

Emergency 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 chemical 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 

emergency 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)

Includes 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 transportation 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 (CHP). 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 CHP.

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 releases 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 Sections 

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 information 
Advanced 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 Administration

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 several of the hazardous 

waste/hazardous materials regulatory programs 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 the 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 rates 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 fish 
Advanced 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. Sierra 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 2011b). 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 water 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 extensively 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 drought 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, increasing 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 conservation 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 potentially 
Advanced 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 residential 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 for 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 the 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 depending 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 interacting 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 support water quality 

assessments by each Regional Water Quality Control Board for the Clean Water Act 

(CWA) Section 305(b) reporting process, which mandates the State to identify and 

prioritize funding efforts for protection, cleanup, and monitoring programs. The most 

recent Section 305(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). 

Groundwater 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 inputs 

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 chemicals. 

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 Setting

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 minimize flooding 

impacts to human health and safety.

Clean Water Act (CWA) Administered primarily by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(U.S. EPA). Pertains to water quality standards, state responsibilities, 

and discharges of waste to waters of the United States. Sections 303, 

401, 402, and 404.

CWA Section 303 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 303(d) requires 

states to identify water quality impairments where conventional control 

methods will not achieve compliance with the standards, and establish 

Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) programs to achieve compliance.

CWA Section 401 State certification system for federal actions which may impose 

conditions on a project to ensure compliance with water quality 

standards.

CWA Section 402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit 

program to control discharges of pollutants from point sources and 

nonpoint source stormwater. Section 402 mandates permits for 

municipal stormwater discharges, 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. These 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 sites, 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 follow 
Advanced 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 Stormwater Management Plans as defined 

by the permit holder in that location. 

CWA Section 404 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. EPA 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 diversion 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 additional 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 navigation, 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 statewide water quality policy 

development and exercises the powers delegated to the State by the 

federal government under the CWA. Nine Regional Water 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 beneficial 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. 

Other 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, and 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 provides 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 Interstate Water and Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California was 

adopted by the 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.

Statewide 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 minimum 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 covered 

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 waste discharge limitations and prohibitions 

similar to those in the General Construction Permit.

Statewide 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 suitable 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 actions 
Advanced 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 diversions 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 governments 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 land 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 

65000 et seq.) provides the primary legal framework that cities and counties 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 and 
Advanced 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 they consider the

significant environmental impacts of their actions and the adoption of all feasible 

mitigation 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 land 

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 Program. 

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 (FLPMA) is the principal 

law governing how the BLM manages public lands. FLPMA requires the 

BLM to manage public land resources for multiple use and sustained yield 

for both present and future generations. Under FLPMA, 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 FLPMA and 

the BLM regulations at 43 CFR Part 1600, the BLM must coordinate its 

planning efforts with state and local planning initiatives.

 

FLPMA 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 through 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 authorization 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 FLPMA, 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, and water, recreation, 

visual, natural, and cultural resources. 

State

State Planning and Zoning 

Law

California Government Code section 65300 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, open 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 

document 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 for flexibility in the approach taken to 

achieve the plan’s goals. 

Subdivision Map Act 

(Government Code section 

66410 et seq.)

In general, land cannot be divided in California without local government 

approval. The primary goals of the Subdivision Map Act 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 

from 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 66410 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 plans 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 standards 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 charter 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 

five 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 statewide 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 housing 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 are 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 existing technology. 

The 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 assists 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 indicates 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 likelihood 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-metal 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 lithium-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. 2011).

ii. Number 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 that 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 dump 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 quantities 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 stable 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 suitable for alternative uses. An important part of the 

SMARA legislation requires the State Geologist to classify 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, determined 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 throughout United States (generally adopted on a state-bystate 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, 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 regulatory 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 sound 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 hearing. 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 dB 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Environmental Setting

Draft Environmental Analysis

96

corresponds to 10 times 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 human 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 networks are identified 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 transportation 

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 receiver, 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 

humidity 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 

significant 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 noise 

descriptors most often used to describe environmental noise are defined below.

• Equivalent Noise Level (Leq): The energy mean (average) noise level. 

• Maximum Noise Level (Lmax): 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 (Lmin): The lowest A/B/C weighted integrated noise level 

during a specific period of time.

• Day-Night Noise Level (Ldn): 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, reading, 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 noise level is the Leq 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 noise descriptors such as Ldn 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 nonauditory 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 physiological 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 research 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 depending 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 adaptation 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

With 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 as 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 steadystate 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 degradation of the 

existing noise environment.

d. Vibration

Vibration is the periodic oscillation 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, landslides) 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 depicted in terms of amplitude and frequency, relative to 

displacement, velocity, or acceleration.

Vibration amplitudes are commonly expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or rootmean-square (RMS) vibration velocity. PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous 

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, California 

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 suitable 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 velocity 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 construction 

equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. Although the effects of 

vibration may be imperceptible at low levels, effects may result in detectable vibrations 

and slight damage to nearby structures at moderate and high levels, respectively. 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 to 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 Uses

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-transportation 

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, and 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 activities, 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 equipment), 

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, Ldn

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. 1994

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 dwellings 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 considered sensitive to increases in 
Advanced 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-sensitive 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 vibration-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; however, 

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 Noise Resources

Regulation Description

Federal

Federal Noise Control Act (1972) 

(U.S. Environmental 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 distributed in interstate commerce. This act also directed 

that all federal agencies comply with applicable federal, state, 

interstate, 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 Urban 

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 Noise 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 considered 

compatible with noise levels of less than 65 dBA Ldn. At higher 

noise levels, selected land uses are also deemed acceptable, 

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 

1910.95 (U.S. Department 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 assessing 

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 before 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 described 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 and 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 Noise Resources

Regulation Description

State

California Public Utilities Code 

(CPUC) Section 21670

The State Aeronautics Act of the CPUC establishes statewide 

requirements for airport land use compatibility planning and requires 

nearly every county to create an Airport Land Use Commission 

(ALUC) or other alternative. 

Section 5000 et seq. (CCR, Title 

21, Division 2.5, Chapter 6), 

California Airport Noise 

Regulations promulgated in 

accordance with the State

Aeronautics Act 

In Section 5006, the regulations state that: “The level of noise 

acceptable to a reasonable person residing in the vicinity of an 

airport is established 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. It has been selected with reference to speech, sleep 

and community reaction.

California Streets and Highways 

Code Section 216 (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 65302 (Provision of Noise 

Contour Maps)

This section requires 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 residential units in California. 

These standards require that acoustical studies be performed before 

construction at building locations where the existing Ldn exceeds 60 

dBA. Such acoustical studies are required to establish mitigation 

that will limit maximum Ldn levels to 45 dBA in any habitable 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 states are collected every 

ten years by the U.S. Census Bureau (Census). The California Employment 

Development 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 States Census Bureau. The 2010 Census shows California’s 

total population 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 

citizens (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 projections 

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 

population 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)

• From 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 2040 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 employment 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 is 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, Land 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. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is an agency of the federal 

government of the United States 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 States' environmental laws as well as 

any other federal law in accordance with the guidelines established by the Attorney 

General of the United States (18 U.S.C. 3063). These environmental laws include 

those specifically related to air, water and land resources.

Statewide law enforcement service is provided by the California Highway Patrol (CHP). 

The CHP is responsible for protecting State resources and providing crime prevention 

services and traffic enforcement along the State’s highways and byways.

Enforcement 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 States. 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 Environmental 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 comprised 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 (including 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. 65 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 sheriff 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 States Forest Service is an agency of the United States Department of 

Agriculture that administers the nation's 155 national forests and 20 national grasslands, 

which encompass 193 million acres (780,000 km2

), 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 

response 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 States. States 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). Statewide, the regulation of education for youth is provided by the 

California 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 accountability (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 law 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 for 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 17620 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 

byways, 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 State 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. The 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 county General Plans contain 

recreation elements that provide framework for planning agencies to consider when 

projects 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 (FLPMA), 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 one of the resource values 

(FLPMA 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 longrange 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 roadway 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 

intersection based 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., two-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 location. 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 

25160 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 35780 This requires permits for any load exceeding Caltrans weight, 

length, or width standards on public roadways.

California Streets and Highways 

Code Section 117, 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 supply 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 2011a). 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 

2011b).

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 Joaquin 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 and 

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 

remote 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 administers 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 requirements 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 operated 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, developments would be required to install an individual septic tank or other onsite 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 Public 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 private 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 

Statewide, the California Department of Resources Recycling 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 agency 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 facilities with their jurisdictions 

(Cal Recycle 2011). 

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 manufacturers 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 National 
Advanced 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 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-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 

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 Universal Waste (CCR, Title 22, 

Section 66261.9). 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 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, store, dispose or recycle).

2. Regulatory 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 95-08-038

This section contains the rules for planning and construction of new 

transmission facilities, distribution facilities, and substations. The 

CPUC requires permits for the construction of certain power 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 21151.9 of the Public 

Resources Code/ Section 10910 

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 preparing 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 information 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. For 

CFO, the regulated community would be major refineries and gasoline importers, which 

would be required to establish the required minimum number of CFO outlets. For the 

ACC program as a whole, fuel 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 Analysis (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 does not speculate as to all of the conceivable iterations of 

compliance responses that could occur within the passenger vehicle fleet or at the siteor project-specific level. 

It is not possible to know with a reasonable level of certainty the specific actions 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 in 

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 industries 

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 environmental 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 (LEV 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 NOX). 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+NOX

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% 0.100

2016 3% 50% 23% 0% 0% 0% 21% 2% 1% 0% 0.091

2017 3% 38% 35% 0% 0% 0% 21% 2% 1% 0% 0.084

2018 0% 25% 47% 0% 21% 0% 0% 6% 1% 0% 0.072

2019 0% 14% 55% 0% 21% 0% 0% 7% 3% 1% 0.064

2020 0% 2% 59% 0% 21% 5% 0% 8% 4% 1% 0.054

2021 0% 0% 31% 28% 21% 5% 0% 9% 5% 2% 0.046

2022 0% 0% 6% 45% 21% 10% 0% 10% 5% 2% 0.038

2023 0% 0% 5% 32% 33% 10% 0% 11% 6% 3% 0.035

2024 0% 0% 3% 15% 40% 20% 0% 13% 6% 3% 0.029

2025 0% 0% 0% 0% 55% 20% 0% 14% 6% 4% 0.025

Year

Light-Duty Truck 1 (0-3,750 lb LVW) Fleet Average 

Standard for Mix 

of NMOG+NOX

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% 0.062

2021 0% 0% 55% 19% 21% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.055

2022 0% 0% 11% 58% 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% 0.028
Advanced 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+NOX

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% 53% 42% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.104

2019 5% 42% 53% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.098

2020 5% 36% 59% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.095

2021 4% 24% 72% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.087

2022 4% 24% 45% 27% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.081

2023 4% 5% 45% 30% 16% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.064

2024 3% 0% 20% 50% 27% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.052

2025 2% 0% 0% 25% 72% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.038

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 

projections 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 projections 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 = certified 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 fleetaverage emission standards proposed by the amendments. Thus, because compliance 

would be based on this proportion shift no changes in the amount of overall vehicle 

manufacturing or deliveries would be expected. 

2. Technology 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 specific technology improvements could include load 

reductions and accessory improvements employed to reduce GHG emissions. 

Improvements in aerodynamics that reduce drag coefficients include installation of

skirts, air dams, underbody covers, and application of more aerodynamic side view 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community 

Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

118

mirrors. In 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 emissions 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 and 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. To reduce CAPs, manufacturers would be expected to 

improve current emission control system technologies across their light- and mediumduty 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 the 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 nopermeation 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 response to current and proposed regulations requiring reductions in GHG emissions 

from motor vehicles, 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 transmissions (CVTs) that can change seamlessly through an infinite number of 

effective gear ratios between maximum and minimum values (SAE 2011a). 

Transmission types installed in vehicles 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 volume 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community 

Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

119

manufactured could change, but would not be anticipated 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. EPA 2010a). Though the 

current Pavley regulations (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. 

EPA 2010a). 

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 needed 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. EPA 2010a). 

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 substantial 

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 technologies 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 weight 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 manufacturing 

capacity, mining, or transportation. Existing plants would be retooled for manufacturing 
Advanced 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 already 

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 indicated 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 affect 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 also 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 Mitsubishi, 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

Manufacturer 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. This would save manufacturers from having to print two separate 
Advanced 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 states who currently are seeing 

a California-based label on their cars. In response to this regulation, manufacturers 

would only present the federal 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 clarifications 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 specifications 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) would 

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 

requirements 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 

vehicles [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 being 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 meeting the requirements. Large-volume 

manufacturers include companies that sell or lease more than 20,000 vehicles per year 
Advanced 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 manufacturer’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 fulfill 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 others are more interested in 

developing FCVs. 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 past 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 

requirements 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 of 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 energy 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 2011b

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 engine-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 increase 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 qualitycontrol 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 batteries (USGS 2011). Lithium is a 

favorable material, because it is the lightest of all metals and an excellent conductor of 

electricity (Gruber et al. 2011). 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 rechargeable 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 appears 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 study 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 identified 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 lithium 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 Columbia 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 BEV 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 reach 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 2011a; Toyota Motor Corporation 2011b). 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 power 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. Secondary 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-hazardous (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. EPA’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. 

Nonetheless, 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 to 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Regulated Community 

Draft Environmental Analysis Compliance Response

125

conduct a screening-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. EPA 2010b). Members of the 

partnership include battery 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 batteries, 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 preferable 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 Universal Waste (CCR, Title 22, 

Section 66261.9). 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 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, store, 

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 survey 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 vehicle 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 installation 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 

effects 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 charging 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 

pricing 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 

relatively 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, 

system 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 

amended 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 increase 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 in 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 fuel 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 hazard, low weight, small size, and potentially 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 hold 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 waste 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 rechargeable 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 characteristic 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 about 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 cadmium 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 states to dispose of any Lithium-Ion batteries as 

municipal or household waste. Lithium is fairly valuable, as are the other materials 

involved, and there 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 construct 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 offers 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 transfers 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 gasfired thermal oxidizer. Gases from the thermal oxidizer are sent to the plant’s scrubber 

where they are neutralized 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 slag 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 States that recycle spent batteries. Europe and Asia are 

also active in recycling spent batteries 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 Committee 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 could 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 in fuel cells (Kang 2010).

Used fuel cells are classified as ignitable 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 fuel 
Advanced 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. Detail about the entry of FCVs into the statewide 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 the statewide 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 statewide trigger levels. Nonetheless, ARB staff developed a range of 

compliance scenarios based on confidential surveys of vehicle manufacturers. At one 

of the fastest rates, the statewide vehicle fleet could consist of up to 53,000 FCVs fleet 

during the 2015-2017 timeframe. At the slowest entry rate the statewide 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 

2011, 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 FCV 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 FCVs 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 Statewide 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 vehicle manufacturers. 

The South Coast Air Basin consists of all of Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino 

counties and is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Source: CEC 2011, 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 statewide 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 statewide 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 statewide 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 would 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 

statewide 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 availability 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 trigger 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 2010 
Advanced 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 fleetaverage 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 their 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 statewide would 

exceed the 20,000 statewide 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 nine 

additional stations in 2019. By 2020, 26 new stations would be required statewide.

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 2009). 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 upon manufacturers to identify new geographic 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 the 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 greenfield 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 

gas 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 standard 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 walls 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 

panel. 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 or 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 nozzle 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). Hydrogen 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 dispensing. 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 hydrogen 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. Delivery 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 

reformation (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 

compressed 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

Using 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 

scenario, total statewide 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 statewide hydrogen demand in 2020 could represent 1 percent of the merchant 

hydrogen supply, and in 2028, it would represent 9 percent.

7. Hydrogen Production Plants

Recently, California has favored hydrogen fueling stations using delivered hydrogen 

with central production over stations that produce hydrogen on site (CEC 2011). As 

demand increases, however, on-site reformation may begin to compete on a cost basis 

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 requires 

higher purity levels than hydrogen for industrial uses because fuel cells stack 

membranes are sensitive to impurities (CEC 2011). 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 

required 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 

system. 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 the new operations according to their existing hazardous waste permits. 

It is important to note that, once the statewide demand for hydrogen reaches 3.5 million 

kilograms per year, the California standards for hydrogen production will be in place, 

which require that 33 percent of the hydrogen that is produced for transportation be 

made from eligible renewable resources (California Public Utilities Code Section 

399.12). This requirement will eventually present a business case for the construction 

of new hydrogen 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 started 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 also 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. These 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 Program 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 

operating 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 

purchased, 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 

emissions.

Consumer responses that result in increased 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, 

while 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 over 
Advanced 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 vehicles 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. The 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 to 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 congestion. 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 result 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 that 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 apply 

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 cells. New hydrogen fueling stations could 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 discussion 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 could 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 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 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 view, 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 jurisdiction 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis 

Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

140

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. Projectspecific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental review by 

agencies with project-approval authority. 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 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 shall certify that the environmental 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. 

• 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 would 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.

• Siting 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 greatest extent.

• The 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 that 
Advanced 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 compliance 

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 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. 

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 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 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 discussed 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 fueling stations could 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 equipment). All projects, no matter their size or type would be required to 
Advanced 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 with 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-term 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 conducted 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 (including 

PM10 and PM2.5) 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 NOx emissions. These 

emission 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 equipment 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 construction 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 activities (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 NOx and 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 2035 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 automobile 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 automobiles. 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 Southern 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 nonattainment 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. 

Bringing these regions into attainment requires more significant emission controls than 

anywhere else in the United States. 

In 2007, California adopted State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to chart the course to 

attainment of the 1997 federal 8-hour ozone standard. To achieve the 1997 ozone 

standard by the attainment date in 2023, NOx 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 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 achieved to 

date, most urban areas of California, including Southern 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 emission reductions needed to attain the more 

health-protective ozone standard U.S. EPA established in 2008. In order to meet these 
Advanced 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 strategy 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 

vehicles 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 adopted 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 established 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 target. 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 

networks 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 current regulations. Table 5-1, Table 5-2, and 5-3 provide the 

emission benefits for calendar years 2023, 2025, 2035, and 2040 for ROG, NOx, and 

particulate matter (PM2.5) 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 proposed ACC Program. By 2035 ROG statewide emissions would 

be reduced by an additional 34 percent, NOx emissions by an additional 37 percent, 

and PM2.5 emissions by 10 percent. 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis 

Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

145

Table 5-1. Statewide and Regional Emission Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car 

Program: Reactive Organic Gas (ROG)

Statewide 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. Statewide Emissions Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car Program: 

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)

Statewide 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. Statewide and Regional Emissions Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car 

Program: Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

Statewide 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 vehicles 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 emission 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 distribution 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 vehicles 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 PM2.5 

(circles) as a result of an increase in VMT. However these same forces could further 

enhance emission reductions of ROG (triangles) and have essentially no effect on NOx

(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 consumer 

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 emission 

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 Program, including resultant upstream 

emission reductions (as discussed in Section V of the LEV III Staff Report).

 

however the CARBITS subset 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, NOx, and 

PM2.5 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 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. Projectspecific impacts and mitigation would be identified during the environmental 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 regulations 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 2030

Percent 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 Response
Advanced 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 environmental 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 uncertainty 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 implementation 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, the proposed ACC Program would 

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, CO2 equivalent 

emissions would be reduced by almost 14 MMT/yr, which is 12 percent from baseline 

levels. The reduction increases in 2035 to 32 MMT/Year, a 27 percent reduction from 

baseline levels. By 2050, the proposed regulation will reduce emissions by more than 

42 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 870 MMT CO2e. 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. CO2-Equivalent (CO2e) Emission Benefits from 

Advanced Clean Car Regulations

Statewide CO2e 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 propulsion 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis 

Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

150

batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations could 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 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 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 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 biological 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 modifications 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-status 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 not 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. 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. Projectspecific 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 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 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 the environmental document to reduce or substantially 

lessen the environmental 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 local 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 species 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 habitats, streams, intermittent and ephemeral 

drainages, and other wetlands. Wetland delineation is required by Section 

3030(d) of the Clean Water Act and is administered by the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers.

• Prohibit construction activities during the rainy season 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 sedimentation 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 trees 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 that 
Advanced 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 compliance 

purposes, that the potentially significant impact regarding biological resources resulting 

from the construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be 

significant and unavoidable.

F. Cultural Resources

1. Historic Resources, 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 could 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 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 primary 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 disturbance 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-related 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 important 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 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 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. Projectspecific 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 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 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 consultations 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 compliance 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 project 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 reasonable 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 qualifications 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 assessments 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 resources 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 suggest 

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 contains 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 

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 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 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 could 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 considered to be 

potentially hazardous. For instance, the seismic conditions at the site of a new plant 

that may have high to extremely high seismic-related fault rupture and ground shaking 

potential associated with earthquake activity. New facilities could also 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. Strong 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 facilities 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 

soil 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 structures, 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 susceptibility 

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 project 

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 by 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 disposal 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 generate 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 footprints 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. Therefore, 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 laws 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 measures is under 

the purview of jurisdictions with local land use and/or permitting authority. New or 
Advanced 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 the Lead Agency, which is 

required to review the proposed action for compliance with CEQA statutes. Projectspecific 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 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 

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 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, physical 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 

provide 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 floods, 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 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 to geology and soils resulting from the 

construction and operation of new plants, stations, and modifications may be significant 

and unavoidable.
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 

operation of new manufacturing plants that specialize in the production of propulsion 

batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations could 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, 

fuel 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, 

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. As a result, this 

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 between 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 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. The SAE Standard defines a 

minimum set of acceptable safety criteria for a lithium-based 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 or 
Advanced 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, construction 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 create 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, Airport 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 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. 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. 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 identified during the environmental review by agencies 
Advanced 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 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 

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 upset and accident-related 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 direction 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 covering 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 residential 

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/wastes 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, this 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 operation 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 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 could 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 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, new facilities 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 located 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, these potential hydrology and water qualityrelated 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 Measure 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. 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 
Advanced 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. Projectspecific 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 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 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 hydrology and water quality impacts 

may include the following; however, any mitigation 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 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 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 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 could 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. 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 cells. New hydrogen fueling stations could 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 and 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 less 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 vicinity 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 occurring 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 requiring 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 surrounding 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 characteristics of heavy construction equipment are 
Advanced 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 commercial 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, bulldozers, 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 detailed 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 Leq at 50 feet and maximum noise levels of 90 dBA Lmax 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 receptors located within thousands of feet from project sites could 

exceed typical standards (e.g., 50/60 dBA Leq/Lmax during the daytime hours and 40/50 

dBA Leq/Lmax during the nighttime hours). 

Additionally, construction activities may result in varying degrees of temporary 

groundborne noise and vibration, depending on the specific 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 prevention 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 activities could 
Advanced 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 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, new plants, stations, and modifications, could 

introduce new on-site stationary noise sources (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 Leq to 80 dBA Lmax at 50 

feet. Based on these and general attenuation rates, exterior noise levels at noisesensitive receptors located within hundreds of feet from the location of the project sites 

could exceed typical standards (e.g., 50/60 dBA Leq/Lmax during the daytime hours and 

40/50 dBA Leq/Lmax during the nighttime hours). Thus, implementation of the proposed 

ACC Program could result in the generation of short-term construction noise and longterm 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 implemented 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 near 

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 than 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 identified 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 

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 the environmental document 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 modified 

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 facility 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 

operational-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 pressure 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 reduce 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. Population 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 plants that specialize in the production of propulsion 

batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations could 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). 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 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, 

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 could 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). 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 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. 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 could 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). 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 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 that 
Advanced 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 shortterm 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. These 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 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. 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.

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; therefore, 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 emergency 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 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 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 

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 traffic 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., traffic 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 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 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 

batteries and fuel cells. New hydrogen fueling stations could 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 providers, 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 and 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 associated 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 

services 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 that 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 

states 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 supply 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Impact Analysis 

Draft Environmental Analysis and Mitigation

172

services, solid waste facilities) would be available and whether the project would result 

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 

service-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 also 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: economic 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 result 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 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. Projectspecific 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 utility and service-related 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 

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 
Advanced 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 specifically 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.

 Where 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) 

consistent with the requirements of Section 21151.9 of the Public 

Resources Code/ Section 10910 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 regarding 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 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 to utilities and service systems resulting 

from the construction and operation of new plants and modifications to existing plants 

may be significant 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 GROWTH-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 states that the 

discussion of cumulative impacts need not provide as much detail as the discussion of 

effects attributable 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 require 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 lead 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 cumulatively 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 reasonably 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 practicality 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 whether 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 been 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 statewide 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 impacts associated 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 visible 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 may 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 considerable 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 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 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 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. Thus, the proposed 

ACC Program would not result in a considerable 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 PM10, and 

to a lesser degree for PM2.5, 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 

requires 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 emissions, 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 plans, 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. (Construction) 

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 2020, 2025, 2035, 

and 2050. By 2025, CO2 equivalent emissions would be reduced by almost 14 MMT/yr, 

which is 12 percent from baseline levels. The reduction increases in 2035 to 32

MMT/Year, a 27 percent reduction from baseline levels. By 2050, the proposed

regulation will reduce emissions by more than 42 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 870 MMT CO2e. 

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 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 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 present in those areas. Because there are biological 
Advanced 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 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 biological 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 modifications 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-status 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. Implementation of Mitigation Measure E.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 biology-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 primary 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 disturbance 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-related 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 important 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 existing 
Advanced 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 resource-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 centralized 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 that 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. 

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; or result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. 

These geologic, seismic, and soil-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-significant 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. Implementation 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 fatality risk is 
Advanced 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 significant 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. Implementation 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 long-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 quality, and runoff issues, new facilities would not be anticipated to result in 

substantial demands due to the nature of associated activities. However, new plants, 

stations, and modifications could be located in a variety of conditions with regards to 

altering drainage patters, flooding, and inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. 

Implementation of Mitigation Measure I.2. would not reduce these impacts to a lessthan-significant level. Thus, the proposed ACC Program could result in a considerable 

contribution 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 

not 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 would 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 ACC Program 
Advanced 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-related 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, implementation 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 result 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- source 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 exposure 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 impact.

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 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 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. 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 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 
Advanced 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 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 provision of public services. Thus, the proposed ACC Program would not result in a 

considerable contribution to a cumulative population 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) recreationalrelated 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 impact.

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 because 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 of 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. Implementation 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 Service 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 demand 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 increase 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Cumulative and Growth 

Draft Environmental Analysis Inducing Impacts

183

in service capacities and associated infrastructure. However, 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 lessthan-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 result in any growth in population or 

housing. Implementation 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 support 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 communities, 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 ANALYSIS

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 60005[b]). 

Additionally, 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 60006). CEQA Guidelines, CCR, Title 14, Section 15126.6(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 significant 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 provides 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 components of the LEV regulation, because the proposed amendments 

to those 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, 

would 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 levels. 

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 existing LEV 

and ZEV regulations. This is because, typically, almost all of the State’s fleet of lightand medium-duty vehicles turns over in an approximately 15-year cycle. Thus, because 

2010 is the last model year addressed by the existing LEV regulation, 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 new vehicles would no 

longer be cleaner than the older vehicles they replace. The No Project Alternative 

would not fulfill the requirement of HSC Section 43018(a), which requires ARB to 

reduce vehicle emissions of CAPs to the maximum extent feasible. Further, 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 CO2e 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 2011b). ARB would attempt to develop and implement other 

regulations or programs to achieve a reduction a minimum of 3.8 MMT CO2e; 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 standards 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 under 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 addition, 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 consequently, 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 vehicle manufacturers would increase production of BEVs or hydrogen FCVs above 

existing levels in response to market demand alone. Economies of scale in production 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis

Draft Environmental Analysis

187

costs would not be realized unless manufacturers commit to producing larger volumes 

of these alternative vehicles. Consumers would be expected to hesitate to purchase 

BEVs and FCVs because of doubts about sufficient availability of charging and fueling 

stations. Left unchanged, the existing CFO regulation would not require the installation 

of hydrogen 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 

hydrogen 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 not 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 of 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 Alternative 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-qualifying vehicles in the statewide 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 occur 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 reduction in dependence on conventional 

petroleum fuels. In addition to failing to meet project objectives, this would put the No 
Advanced 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 Emissions Standards in the Low-EmissionVehicle 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 emission 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 Program. 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 NOx 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 emissions 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 prohibitively 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 statewide 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 statewide fleet would still be achieved, due to potential fleet 

turnover delays it is not certain that this alternative would reduce vehicle CAP emissions 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis

Draft Environmental Analysis

189

to the maximum extent feasible, as required by HSC Section 43018(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 CO2e by 2020 that has been identified by ARB in the adopted

Scoping Plan as the reduction needed from an ACC Program (ARB 2011b). 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 

develop 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 statewide 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 standards 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 emissions). 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 very 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 

ways, and the penetration of ZEV vehicles is one of many ways in which 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 more aggressive option, which is 

consistent with this alternative. Under this more aggressive scenario, emissions would 

be reduced by 3 percent per year between 2016 and 2025. Using the proposed phasein schedule for the regulation, ARB staff estimated the percent reduction in CO2 

emission rates by model 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 stringent 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. NOx Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated Scenarios
Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis

Draft Environmental Analysis

191

Figure 7-3. CO Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated Scenarios

Figure 7-4. Statewide CO2e 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 effects would 

be associated with the development of new or modified manufacturing plants and/or 

new hydrogen 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 Stringent Alternative would result in greater penetration of ZEVs and 

ZEV credit-qualifying vehicles into the statewide vehicle fleet and manufacturers may 

produce and sell more BEVs and hydrogen FCVs, which earn the highest credit value, 

to achieve the more requirements 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 potential 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 statewide). 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-EmissionVehicle 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 stringent 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 amend 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 model 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 NOx 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 of 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 emission 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. Consistency with Project Objectives

Emissions generated by the statewide 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 requirements 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 not be the 

maximum feasible reduction that is mandated by HSC Section 43018(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 statewide 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 CO2e by 2020 that is identified 

by ARB as the reduction needed from a ACC Program as identified in ARB’s adopted 

Scoping Plan (ARB 2011b). Thus, this could prevent California from achieving the GHG 

reduction goal of AB 32, particularly if ARB cannot develop other programs 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 statewide 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 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, and the penetration of ZEV vehicles is one of many 
Advanced Clean Cars Program Alternatives Analysis

Draft Environmental Analysis

194

ways in which 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 staff estimated the percent reduction in CO2 

emission rates by model year for those vehicles subject to the proposed ACC Program. 

Table 2-34 of Appendix T shows the Less Stringent Alternative 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 and 

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 

Alternative would result in slower penetration of ZEVs and ZEV credit-qualifying 

vehicles into the statewide vehicle fleet and associated production by manufacturers. 

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 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 statewide). 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 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 Agreement (MOA) Alternative. 

Under the alternative, the obligations of the CFO regulation would be based on an MOA 

between ARB, major refiners and importers of gasoline, gasoline station owners, 

hydrogen fuel providers, vehicle manufacturers, and other government 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 gasoline 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 including 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 

constructed 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 

requirements 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 43018(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 CO2e 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 

2011b), and to further AB 1493 reductions. It 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 

adversely 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 MOA 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 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 MOA 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 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 statewide). 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 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 similar to

those 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 highemitting vehicles would pay 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 2011). 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 sale of low-emitting vehicles would be partially offset by the sale 

of high-emitting vehicles. Manufacturers already need to install all available, costeffective 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. More 

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 new 

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 range 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 performance, 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 

vehicle 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 OF 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 potential 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 substantial 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 and 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 bodies at such time the projects are proposed for 

implementation. ARB would not be the agency responsible for conducting the projectspecific environmental review because it is not the agency with authority for making 

land use decisions.

This EA, in its entirety, 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 Emissions
Advanced Clean Cars Program Mandatory Findings 

Draft Environmental Analysis of Significance

200

• 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 incorporation 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 project 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, rare, 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-status 

species. 

b. Impacts on Historical Resources

CCR, Title 14, Section 15065(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines states that 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 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 preserved 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, archaeological 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 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.

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 cumulatively 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 projects, 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 may 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 environment 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 the 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 water 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. Available: <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/env_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/betterplace-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, 2011.

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 2007. 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/diesel/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_

scoping_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. Greenhouse 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. 2011a. Environmental Performance Label. Available: 

<http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/labeling/labeling.htm>. Last reviewed July 21, 

2011. Accessed August 30, 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). 2009. 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 Department 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, 2011.

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 Department 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

ChangeJuly06.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). 2006a. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas 

Emissions and Sinks: 1990 to 2004. (Staff Final Report). Publication CEC-600-

2006-013-SF. Accessed September 25, 2011. 

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2006b. Our Changing Climate: Assessing the 

Risks to California. Publication CEC-500-2006-077. July 2006. Available: 

<http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-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. Prepared 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. California 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 and 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>. 

Accessed 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 Commission (CPUC). 2010. California’s Electricity Options and 

Challenges Report to Governor Gray Davis. Available: <http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/

published/report/gov_report.htm>. Accessed 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 (SWRCB). 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 Institute.

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; Mark 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 Refrigerant. Press Release, May 20, 2010. 

Available: <http://www51.honeywell.com/honeywell/news-events/press-releasesdetails/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/hiddencosts.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-26047.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 (HTAC). 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. Climate 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, Contribution 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). Geneva, 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 

Assessment 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 TiO2 Nanomaterials. September 2010. Available: 

<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 watershed and the San Francisco estuary. 

Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 29, No. 18, 1891, 

doi:10.1029/2001GL014339, 2002. Published September 28, 2002.

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). 2011. NREL Team Investigates 

Secondary Uses for Electric Drive 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-electriccar/faq/list/environment#/leaf-electric-car/faq/list/environment >. Accessed 

November 29, 2011.

Notter, Dominic A.; Marcel Gauch; Rolf Widmer; Patrick Wäger; Anna Stamp; Rainer 

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-wasteand-batteries/japan/nissan-looks-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/intro.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 Li-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://www.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, 2011. 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 Vertebrate 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. Transportation 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-batteryafterlife-in-grid/>. Accessed October 4, 2011.

State of California, Department of Finance (DOF). 2007. Population Projections for 

California and Its Counties 2000-2050. Sacramento, California. July 2007. 

Available: <http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/projections/p1/>. 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 California, 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 California, 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: Recycling 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-toxicbattery-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-memorandumregarding-fuel-efficiency-standards>. Accessed August 19, 2011.

Toxco, Inc. 2009. Toxco Inc. is Awarded 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, 

2011.

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. 2011b. Central Valley Project – General Description. 

Available: 

<http://www.usbr.gov/projects/Project.jsp?proj_Name=Central+Valley+Project>. 

Last updated: Apr 21, 2011. Accessed October 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 Education. 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_economy_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/downloads/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. February 2010. 

Available: <http://epa.gov/dfe/pubs/projects/lbnp/lithium-ion_nanotechnologyfactsheet.pdf >. Accessed October 6, 2011.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010c. Final Rulemaking to Establish Light-Duty 

Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards 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 to 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. Transportation 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. Campbell, 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 October 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 PostVehicle-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

10.0 LIST OF FIGURES

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, NOx, and PM2.5 

Emissions due to Consumer Response (percent) ............................. 147

Figure 7-1. ROG Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated 

Scenarios........................................................................................... 190

Figure 7-2. NOx Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated 

Scenarios........................................................................................... 190

Figure 7-3. CO Emissions: Baseline, Proposed, and Accelerated 

Scenarios........................................................................................... 191

Figure 7-4. Statewide CO2e Emissions Proposed vs Alternative 

Greenhouse Gas Regulatory Scenarios (with Rebound)................... 191
Advanced 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

11.0 LIST OF TABLES

Table ES-1 Statewide Emission Benefits of the ACC Program: 

Reactive Organic Gas (ROG), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) 

and Particulate Matter (PM2.5) ............................................................... 6

Table ES-2 Statewide 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 Federal 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............................... 108
Advanced 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. Statewide and Regional Emission Benefits of the 

Advanced Clean Car Program: Reactive Organic Gas 

(ROG) ................................................................................................ 145

Table 5-2. Statewide Emissions Benefits of the Advanced Clean Car 

Program: Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) .................................................. 145

Table 5-3. Statewide and Regional Emissions Benefits of the 

Advanced Clean Car Program: Particulate Matter (PM2.5)................ 145

Table 5-4. CO2-Equivalent (CO2e) Emission Benefits from 

Advanced Clean Car Regulations...................................................... 149
Advanced Clean Cars Program Acronyms and Abbreviations

Environmental Analysis

219

12.0 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

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 Strategy 

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 precursor 
Advanced 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 

CH4 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 

CO2 carbon dioxide 

CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent 

CPUC California Public Utilities Code 

CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency 

CVP Central Valley Project 

CVTs continuously variable transmissions 
Advanced 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 statement 

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 Agency 
Advanced 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 Statement of Reasons 

FTA Federal Transit Administration 

g/mi grams per mile 

gCO2/mile grams of CO2 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 Studies 
Advanced 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 

Ldn Day-Night Noise Level 

LDTs light-duty trucks 

LEA local enforcement agencies 

LEPCs local emergency planning committees 

Leq Equivalent Noise Level 

LEV II LEV regulation 

LEV III Low-Emission Vehicle and Greenhouse Gas Regulation 

Lmax Maximum Noise Level 

Lmin 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 

MMTCO2e million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 

MOA Memorandum of Agreement 

MOU Memorandum of Understanding 

MPOs Metropolitan Planning Organizations 
Advanced 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 

N2O 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 

NF3 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 

NOX 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 

Administration 
Advanced 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 board 
Advanced 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 

SF6 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 Load 
Advanced 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 Vehicle 
Advanced 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 CHECKLIST

Refer to Chapter 5.0, Impact Analysis and Mitigation, for a full discussion of the environmental 

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 

with 

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 Conservation 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 Protocols adopted by 

the California Air Resources Board.

Would the project:

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or 

Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), 

as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the 

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of 

the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural 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 specialstatus 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 wetlands 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 adopted 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 formal cemeteries?
Advanced Clean Cars Program Attachment1. 

Environmental Analysis Environmental Checklist

235

G. Geology 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 Special 

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 onor 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 are 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 hazard 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 adopted 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-existing 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 stream 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 within 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 generation 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 other 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. Recreation

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 

paths, 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 Impacts
Advanced 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 construction 

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 significant 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 determination 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 regulations 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 

projects, 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 INPUTS
C-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 information is provided regarding electricity and hydrogen 

fuel prices, electric charging equipment 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 increased 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 charge 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-peak 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, electricity rates increase with electricity use. The addition of an electric car to 

the household electricity load will push the usage into the highest tiers, raising the rates 

to the maximum 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

The purchase and installation 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 miles 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 

reductions 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, future 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 TOU 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 periods in Table 5.6, Section 5.3.1. It is difficult to project the price of 

hydrogen 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 

utilization. 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 price scenario as shown in Table C.4. For further details on how staff 

estimated the hydrogen fuel price, refer to the CFO ISOR, Section 5 and Appendix E.

Table C.4. Delivered Hydrogen Price Scenario by Year - (2009 $)

Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Price, $/kg $13 $12 $11 $10 $9 $8 $7 $6
C-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 consumer.

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 Energy 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 California 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

Table 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, the majority of existing incentives will 

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. Gasoline 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 are 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 regulations, 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 (2017-2025, 2009$)

1, 2

Gasoline 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

This 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 federal 

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. 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.

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. 

CEC, 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 E4334.

DOE, 2011a. United States Department of Energy. Fact Sheet. 2011. “Electric 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.”