+(,121/,1(

Citation: 59 Fed. Reg. 16262 1994 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Tue Sep 27 16:38:57 2011

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance

 of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license

 agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from 

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 86, 88, and 600

[AMS-FRL-4831-61

RIN 2060-AC64

Control of Air Pollution From New

Motor Vehicles and New Motor Vehicle

Engines; Refueling Emission

Regulations for Light-Duty Vehicles

and Light-Duty Trucks

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document contains

EPA's final rule implementing the

control of vehicle refueling emissions

through the use of vehicle-based

systems. It applies to light-duty vehicles

and light-duty trucks. The rule applies

to all fuels used by a vehicle, and

includes special provisions for vehicles/

fuels judged to be inherently low in

refueling emissions. For light-duty

vehicles, the requirements begin in the

1998 model year, and phase in over

three model years. In the 1998 model

year, 40 percent of each manufacturer's

light-duty vehicles must meet the

requirements. This increases to 80

percent in the 1999 model year and rises

to 100 percent in model years 2000 and

later. A special provision for phase-in is

also included for small volume

manufacturers of light-duty vehicles. '

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

a gross vehicle weight rating of 0-6000

lbs, the requirement begins in model

year 2001 and phases-in over three

model years at the same rate as applied

to light-duty vehicles. For light-duty

trucks with a gross vehicle weight- rating

of 6001-8500 lbs, the requirement

commences in model year 2004 and

phases-in over three model years at the

same rate as light-duty vehicles. The

rule does not apply to heavy-duty

vehicles.

This rule also establishes certification

requirements covering test procedures

for integrated and non-integrated

control system designs, a refueling

emission standard of 0.20 g/gallon and

other related certification requirements

and provisions. Finally, the rule

contains enforcement provisions related

to liability, Selective Enforcement

Auditing and nonconformance

penalties.

EFFECTIVE DATES: Thig final rule is

effective on May 6, 1994.

The new information collection

requirements contained in 40 CFR parts

86 and 88 applying to 1998 and later

model year vehicles have not been

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) and are not effective

until OMB has approved them. EPA will

publish a technical amendment in the

Federal Register once the information

collection requirements are approved.

ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this

final rule are contained in Public Docket

No. A-87-11, located in the Air and

Radiation Docket and Information

Center of the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW.,

Washington, DC, 20460 and is available

for public review in room M-1500.

Relevant materials may also be found in

Public Docket No. A-84-07, established

in support of EPA's assessment of air

pollution regulatory strategies for the

gasoline marketing industry. The

dockets may be inspected from 8 a.m. to

4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except

for government holidays. Under 40 CFR

part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged

by EPA for copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James G. Bryson, U.S.' EPA (RDSD-12),

Special Regulatory Projects Branch,

2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI

48105, Telephone: (313) 741-7828.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background

II. Description of the Rule

A. Applicability

1. Application of the Refueling Emission

Standard to LDVs

2. Extension of the ORVR Requirement to

LDTs

3.,Heavy Duty Vehicles

4. Applicability to California Vehicles

5. Fuels Covered

B. Implementation

1. Leadtime, Effective Model Year and

Phase-in Requirements

2. Small Volume Manufacturers

3. Inclusion of Inherently Low Refueling

Emission Vehicles

C. Refueling Emission Test Procedures and

Standard

1. Refueling Emissions Test

2. Integrated System Preconditioning

3. Non-Integrated System Preconditioning

4. Seal Test

5. Cap Removal Emissions

6. Spitback Test

7. Nozzle Geometry Standards

8. Level of the Standard

D. Safety of ORVR Systems

1. Background

2. Test Procedure/Safety

3. DOT Consultation

4. EPA Assessment

5. Safety Reviews

6. Alternative Control Technologies

E. Certification Provisions

1. General

2. Fees

3. Fuel Economy

F. Onboard Diagnostics Requirements

G. Enforcement and In-Use Performance

1. Liability Periods

2. Selective Enforcement Audit Testing

3. Nonconformance Penalties (NCPs)

4. In-Use Performance

II1. Public Participation

IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis

A. Environmental Impact

B. Costs of Control

C. Cost Effectiveness

D. Other Benefits

E. Benefit-Cost Ratio

V. Consultation with DOT

VI. Judicial Review

VII. Statutory Authority

VIII. Executive Order 12866

IX Compliance With the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

X. Information Collection Requirements

List of Key Acronyms

AA Attainment Area

AAMA American Automobile

Manufacturers Association

AIAM Association of International

Automobile Manufacturers

CAA Clean Air Act

CAAA CAA Amendments

DoT Department of Transportation

FMVSS Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standards

GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating

HDV Heavy-Duty Vehicle

LDV Light-Duty Vehicle

LDT Light-Duty Truck

LLDT Light LDT

HLDT Heavy LDT

NAA Non-Attainment Area

NCP Nonconformance Penalty

NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

NPV Net Present Value

ORVR Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery

RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis

RPE Retail Price Equivalent

RVP Reid Vapor Pressure

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

I. Background

On August 19, 1987, EPA published

in the Federal Register a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the

control of vehicle refueling emissions

(52 FR 31162). The proposal described

the need for these controls as well as the

conclusions of an EPA study of gasoline

marketing emissions comparing the

relative merits of the two available

control technologies: Systems

incorporated into the gasoline

dispensing pump system design (known

as Stage II vapor recovery) and systems

incorporated into the design of the

vehicle (known as onboard refueling

vapor recovery (ORVR)) (see Public

Docket A-84-07). Based on this study,

along with EPA's analysis and response

to public comments published in

documents separate from the NPRM

(Evaluation of Air Pollution Regulatory

Strategies for Gasoline Marketing

Industry-Response to Public

Comments (II-A-20), Draft*Reeulatory

Impact Analysis: Proposed Refueling

Emission Regulations for GasolineFueled Motor Vehicles, Vols. I arid II)
Federal Register /Vol. 59, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 6, 1994 /Rules and Regulations

(II-A-18, 19), and technical support

documents related to ORVR test

procedure (II-A-08) and ORVR vehicle

safety (II-A-17), EPA proposed to

require refueling emission control

through ORVR systems. The above

mentioned studies are available in

public docket A-87-11. All future

references of this nature can be found at

the cited location in public docket A87-11 unless otherwise indicated.

Subsequent to the publication of the

NPRM, EPA held a public hearing in

October 1987, followed by an extensive

public comment period which closed in

February 1988. Comments were

analyzed by EPA and key issues were

assessed. As a result, EPA determined

that the final rulemaking should be

delayed pending the resolution of safety

concerns expressed by both the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA) (part of the Department of

Transportation (DoT)) and a number of

the commenters. The final rule was

further delayed when it became evident

that Congress would address issues

concerning refueling controls in the

1990 Clean Air Act Amendments

(CAAA).

The 1990 Amendments revised

section 202(a)(6) of the CAA to read as

follows:

Within 1 year after the date of the

enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990, the Administrator shall, after

consultation with the Secretary of

Transportation regarding the safety of

vehicle-based ('onboard') systems for the

control of vehicle refueling emissions,

promulgate standards under this section

requiring that new light-duty vehicles

manufactured beginning in the fourth model

year after the model year in which the

standards are promulgated and thereafter

shall be equipped with such systems.

Subsequent to the enactment of the

CAAA, EPA continued its consultation

with DOT/NHTSA related to the

potential safety concerns regarding the

implementation of vehicle-based

refueling emission controls. In July

1991, NHTSA completed an updated

safety study entitled "An Assessment of

the Safety on Onboard Refueling Vapor

Recovery Systems". On September 3,

1991, EPA published an additional

Federal Register notice (56 FR 43682)

releasing the NHTSA report for public

review and seeking further comment on

key issues involved with ORVR

controls, most notably on circumstances

that had changed since the publication

of the NPRM. The notice also described

and sought comment on a document

entitled "Summary of Changed

Circumstances", which discussed

statutory changes, technology

development, and potential

modifications to the refueling test

procedure.

EPA held a public hearing on

September 26 and 27, 1991, and public

comments were received for 30 days

thereafter. After reviewing these

comments, EPA continued its

consultation with NHTSA. Based on the

outcome of the consultation, EPA

determined that ORVR controls should

not be required at that time. The Agency

took this step because it concluded,

after consultation with NHTSA and after

considering the conclusions of NHTSA's

safety study, that ORVR controls posed "unreasonable" safety risks relative to

Stage II systems. A Federal Register

notice detailing the decision and the

supporting rationale was published on

April 1.5, 1992 (57 FR 13220).

EPA's action was challenged by

representatives of the petroleum

refining, gasoline marketing,

environmental and consumer auto

safety communities. They argued 1hat

section 202(a)(6) of the CAA created a

non-discretionary duty to promulgate

ORVR standards for LDVs. The court

agreed, holding that EPA had no choice

but to promulgate such standards, and

that the entire safety analysis in the

April 15, 1992 notice was flawed •

because of the comparison with Stage II

technology, a comparison not allowed

by the text of the statute. NRDC v. EPA,

983 F. 2d 259, 261, 269-71 (D.C. Cir.

1993). The court stated further, in dicta,

that the record did not establish that all

ORVR systems present inherent and

unreasonable safety risks. Id. at 261,

270. The court set aside the April 15,

1992 Agency action, and ordered EPA to

promulgate regulations requiring

vehicle-based refueling controls on

LDVs in accordance with the CAA.

The petitioners further moved the

court for an order requiring EPA to issue

ORVR requirements by a particular date.

Before the court ruled, EPA and the

petitioners entered into a settlement

agreement whereby the Agency agreed

to promulgate such rules by January 22,

1994 (58 FR 33813, June 21, 1993).

Subsequent to the court's decision, -

EPA published two Federal Register

notices (May 27, 1993, 58 FR 30731 and

June 17, 1993, 58 FR 33418) seeking

public comment on the key issues that

had changed since the last public

comment period. EPA also held a public

hearing on these issues on July 22, 1993,

and solicited comments for 30 days

thereafter. EPA has analyzed these

additional comments, and has revised

its proposed regulations accordingly. To

support this rule, two key documents, a

Final Regulatory Impact Analysis and a

Summary and Analysis of Comments

have been completed and are available

for review in the public docket.

The remainder of the document is

divided into sections. Section II

describes the various aspects of the rule

as listed in the Table of Contents above,

and provides rationale for the

approaches being implemented. Section

III describes the long and extended

public participation in the rulemaking

process and previous study. Section IV

f~ummarizes the Regulatory Impact

Analysis. Finally, sections V through X

describe various aspects of the rule with

regard to compliance with various

administrative requirements such as the

Regulatory Flexibility Act and the

Paperwork Reduction Act.

II. Description of the Rule

A. Applicability

1. Application of the Refueling Emission

Standard to LDVs

Section 202(a)(6) of the ct mandates

that EPA promulgate requirements for

new light-duty vehicles, (LDVs) to be

equipped with ORVR systems. In the

August 1987 NPRM, EPA proposed that

ORVR requirements apply to LDVs and,

in this rule, is finalizing that LDV

portion of the original NPRM, consistent

with the statutory requirements. The

model year, phase-in, certification and

other requirements for LDVs are

discussed in sections B through F,

below.

2. Extension of the ORVR Requirement

to LDTs

Under the authority provided in

Section 202(a)(1) of the.Clean Air Act

(CAA), EPA is applying the ORVR

requirement to light-duty trucks (LDTs).

EPA is finalizing portions of that

proposal in today's rules. Each

manufacturer's LDTs will have to meet

the refueling emission requirements

under the phase-in schedule and

compliance program for trucks

described in the Implementation section

below.

In reaching this decision, EPA has

conducted a detailed analysis of the

need for and desirability of extending

the requirement beyond the LDV class.

The analysis is detailed in the

supporting Regulatory Impact Analysis

(RIA) available in the public docket. The

key points are summarized below.

First, the rule affects pollutants which

"cause or contribute to air pollution

which may reasonably be anticipated to

endanger public health or welfare"

(Section 202(a)(1)). Hydrocarbons, as

ozone precursors, have long been an

essential object of emission control

strategies (both vehicles and nonvehicles). Ambient ozone is an irritant

16263
16264 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

that adversely affects pulmonary

membranes, lung tissues, and lung

functions, and is also associated with

adverse ecological effects. Refueling

emissions also contain benzene, a Group

A human carcinogen. The gasoline

vapors themselves also adversely affect

public health and welfare.

Second, and perhaps most

compelling, is the large amount of

refueling emissions which arise from

these LDTs. In 1990, trucks represented

about 33 percent of the gasoline used by

highway motor vehicles. Using

American Automobile Manufacturers

Association (AAMA) figures, retail truck

sales have increased at a compound

annual rate of 4-5 percent over the past

ten years, and this growth is projected

to continue well into the next century.

This increase in sales and market

fraction has led to an increase in the

gasoline used by trucks. The fraction of

gasoline used by LDTs is projected to

increase to 37 percent by 2000 and

continue at that level or higher in the

future. Thus, the percentage of the

refueling emissions inventory

attributable to LDTs is large and is

expected to increase in the future.

Another way to look at the magnitude

of the emissions from LDTs is the

equivalent gram per mile (g/mi)

emission rate attributable to their

uncontrolled refueling emissions. As

shown in the RIA, taking into account

Phase II RVP control and the RVP effects

of reformulated gasoline, the nationwide

uncontrolled refueling emission rate

during the ozone'season for LDTs is

about 0.22 g/mi. These are large

emission rates in contrast to those

controlled by other strategies being

implemented under the 1990 CAAA and

being considered by the states in their

State Implementation Plans. A good

example is the. Clean-Fuel Fleet

requirements under section 246 of the

CAA and the Low Emission Vehicle

program being implemented in

California and perhaps in other states.

In these cases' the equivalent emission

reductions are in the range of 0.12 to

0.18 g/mile.

Third, EPA believes that ORVR

controls are technologically feasible for

LDTs. Reports and other materials

submitted to the docket over the past

several years as well as comments by

the regulated industry indicate that

prototype ORVR systems have been

installed on a number of passenger cars

and light trucks (IV-A-06, IV-D-682,

680, 682,685,688, 864,701,712,718,

719, 720, 721, IV-E-50, 73). As is now

the case with evaporative control

systems, we anticipate that the control

technology used for LDT ORVR systems

will be very similar to that applied to

LDVs. Although there are some

differences between LDV and LDT fuel

systems (e.g., tank size in some larger

LDTs), the general fuel system concepts,

designs, and configurations are very

similar. In addition, vehicles in both

classes must meet the recently

promulgated enhanced evaporative

emission control requirements

beginning in the 1996 model year. As

with LDVs, EPA anticipates that the

same evaporative emission control

technology can be applied to control

refueling emissions in LDTs. To ensure

that the enhanced evaporative control

system canister and purge system can be

applied to ORVR controls, EPA is

applying the same refueling emission

test procedure approach to LDTs as is

being applied to LDVs. The only

significant design difference will be the

need for some form of a fillneck seal.

However, with the anticipated liquid

seal approach this requires at most a

minor fillneck modification and does

not involve new hardware.

While there are vehicle-to-vehicle

differences in fuel system designs, these

affect both the evaporative and refueling

emission rates for a given vehicle/fuel

system design. To EPA's knowledge

there is nothing unique about the design

or function of LDT fuel systems relative

to LDVs which would suggest that the

test procedure approach being applied

to LDVs would not be equally effective

for LDTs in accomplishing the goal of

allowing the widespread use of

integrated enhanced evaporative/

refueling emission control systems.

Although uncertainty has been

expressed, no commenter provided data

or even a substantiated argument to

support the view that the test procedure

modifications would not be equally

effective in facilitating LDT use of

integrated enhanced evaporative/

refueling control systems. In fact, testing

conducted by the Coordinating Research

Council (CRC-APRAC Project VE-6)

(IV-D-565) and EPA (II-A-06) indicate

no significant difference between LDV

and LDT uncontrolled refueling

emission rates. As is the case for LDVs,

the refueling test procedure approach

described above should allow the

widespread use of integrated refueling/

evaporative control systems for LDTs.

Thus, since there is no problem with

applying enhanced evaporative control

systems to LDTs, there should be no

problem with integrated evaporative/

refueling control systems.

The benefits of applying the ORVR

requirements to LDTs exceed the costs

of the requirement. Since EPA believes,

and the manufacturers' comments

indicate, that most vehicles will use an

integrated evaporative/refueling control

system, the incremental costs of LDT

ORVR controls are relatively small. As

detailed in the RIA, EPA's cost is

comprised of added hardware (mostly

an improved vent/rollover valve and

larger diameter vapor line) and short

term development costs (for emissions

and safety certification, facility

modification hardware/tooling

modifications, and systems engineering)

minus the fuel recovery credit. The size

of the fuel recovery credit depends on

the amount of vapor captured. This in

turn depends on the fuel used, the

emissions rate (g/gal), and the presence

or absence of Stage II vapor recovery.

Taking all of these factors into account,

and assuming Stage II controls in most

of the ozone NAAs, the cost estimate for

LDTs/HDVs are shown below in Table

1.

TABLE 1.-ESTIMATED PER-VEHICLE COSTS OF ORVR SYSTEMS IN LDTs

Vehicle group Hardware Develop Operating cost Short term Long term

($/vehicle) ($/vehicle) (NPV) net cost net cost

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

For vehicles operating in

nonattainment areas (NAAs), the

recovery credits are smaller and the

short and long term net costs increase

by about $3 per vehicle over those in the

table above.

As was discussed above, LDTs

represent over 33 percent of the nation's

gasoline consumption. With the test

procedure and control system approach

mentioned above, EPA expects that the

in-use control efficiency of.LDT ORVR

systems will exceed 95 percent.

Incremental to Stage II controls, LDT

ORVR controls would provide a

nationwide average annual emission

reduction of 115,000 tons between 1998

and 2020. Reductions in NAAs with
Federal Register I Vol. 59, No. 66 I Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16265

Stage II controls are large as well. With

no Stage I phase-out, the average

annual emission reduction in the NAAs

is 31,000 tons. If Stage II is phased out

when ORVR is in widespread use

(2010), the average annual emission

reduction in the NAAs attributable to

LDT controls increases to 68,000 tons.

These incremental reductions in NAAs

are large relative to the other control

options available.

As is discussed below, reductions in

refueling emissions have value in all

areas of the country. However, the main

focus of the ORVR requirement is to

provide ozone NAAs additional

reductions to assist them in complying

or maintaining compliance with the

ozone standard. Thus, the important

areas to consider are those which are

not now in compliance with the ozone

standard. At present there are 54

marginal or worse ozone NA areas,

which represent about 54.9 percent of

the nationwide highway gasoline

consumption. Of these 54 areas, about

43 now have, or are expected to have,

Stage II vapor recovery systems in place.

Since ORVR controls are required on all

LDVs, and Stage II vapor recovery is (or

will be) in place in most moderate or

worse ozone NAAs, the key comparison

to be made is (1) retaining Stage II

controls in the moderate or worse ozone

NAAs solely for the purpose of

controlling LDT/HDV refueling

emissions, versus (2) requiring ORVR

controls for LDTs and possibly HDVs,

assuming the Stage II control that is or

will be in place. This comparison

provides a worst case perspective on the

LDT/HDV cost effectiveness, since

benefits outside NAAs are ignored and

planned Stage II is assumed to continue

after the ORVR requirement is

promulgated.

As is described in the RIA, EPA has

conducted the analysis for both the

Stage 11 retention and ORVR options.

The cost effectiveness of retaining Stage

11 solely for the purpose of controlling

LDT/HDV refueling emissions is about

$3400 per ton. The cost effectiveness of

the LDT ORVR controls incremental to

the Stage II now in place is about $200

per ton if Stage II is phased out when

ORVR control is in widespread use

(2010) and only about $700 per ton if

Stage II is never phased out. Under

either scenario the cost effectiveness of

the ORVR option is attractive. Thus,

even with the Stage II controls, it is

more cost effective to require ORVR

contrbls on LDTs than to retain Stage I

solely for controlling LDT/HDV

refueling emissions.

In addition to the VOC emission

reduction benefits cited above, LDT

ORVR controls have other benefits.

These benefits have not been considered

in the calculations above, but would'

further enhance the attractiveness of

LDT ORVR. LDT ORVR controls would

result in an average annual fuel savings

equivalent to about 31 million gallons of

gasoline per year between the period

1998 and 2020 assuming no Stage II

phase-out, and about 43 million gallons

per year if Stage II is phased out. In

addition, there will be health benefits as

a result of reductions in air toxic

emissions. Best estimates are the

avoidance of 2-3 cancer incidences per

year as a result of lower refueling

benzene emissions. Additional cancer

avoidances are possible depending on

the assumption regarding the

toxicological impact of the remainder of

the constituents of the gasoline vapor.

Reductions in potential non-cancer

health effects and welfare benefits such

as reduced crop and material damage

due to ozone would occur as well. In summary, EPA has decided to

implement ORVR controls for LDTs for

several reasons: Their contribution to

the VOC inventory is significant and

there is a need for additional VOC

reductions to address air quality

concerns, the control is technologicallyfeasible and inexpensive, there are

additional valuable benefits, and, as

discussed in the RIA, the cost

effectiveness is very attractive,

especially when compared to other

programs being implemented and under

consideration. The analysis shows that

the cost effectiveness of implementing

ORVR controls for LDTs is superior to

retaining Stage I controls for the same

purpose. The overall benefit to cost ratio

for LDT ORVR is about 1.5. If the

application of ORVR controls to LDVs

and LDTs allows phaseout of Stage II

controls in the future, the cost savings

attributable to Stage 11 operations/

maintenance which would no longer

occur would make the average annual

costs of ORVR controls negative (an

average annual savings of over $40

million). Based on the cost effectiveness

analysis and benefit-cost ratio, one

could also justify implementing LDT

ORVR controls incremental to Stage I1

controls. However, the long-term

retention of Stage II would seem

problematic since it would be needed

only for heavy-duty vehicles.

3, Heavy Duty Vehicles

In the NPRM, EPA proposed to

require ORVR controls for all HDVs.

However, as discussed below, this

requirement is not being finalized in

this rulemaking.

Information available to EPA

indicates that an HDV ORVR system

would be conceptually similar to those

applied LDVs and LDTs and the initial

costs should be relatively small.

However, motor vehicle manufacturers

have argued that the design and

production of ORVR systems for HDVs

would be considerably more difficult

than for.LDVs and LDTs. Commenters

have maintained that the technological

step from light-duty technology is

greatest with regard to HDVs which

have the largest fuel tanks and different

fuel/vapor system component designs

and configurations than many smaller

LDTs. Comments regarding incomplete

HDVs expressed concern that secondary

manufacturers would improperly

modify or incorrectly complete the

vehicle fuel system (which is usually

not fully installed for incomplete HDVs)

and perhaps affect the proper function

of the manufacturer-provided ORVR

system. Concern was also expressed that

secondary manufacturers might not

have the expertise to correctly install

the ORVR systems in all cases. In each

case the primary manufacturer may

have legal liability for potential

problems. It is also worth noting that

many HDVs are also produced by the

primary manufacturer as an incomplete

HDVs, perhaps compounding the

concern.

EPA recognizes the manufacturers'

strong concerns about ORVR

implementation issues that are unique

to HDVs, and agrees that in many cases

the application of ORVR controls to

HDVs would be more difficult than for

LDTs. Oftentimes the fuel and vapor

control systems are differently

configured than those on LDTs and the

fuel tanks are larger and of different

design. The large number of commercial

applications for HDVs leads to a larger

number of unique body/chassis designs

(e.g., 12 passenger vans, crew cabs, long

bed pick-ups, dual wheel axle trucks)

and thus a larger number of different

fuel system configurations. Another

significant difference is that the engine

in the HDV would be certified separate

from the ORVR system and thus there

are additional challenges in matching

the canister purge provided by the

engine with the needs of each ORVR

system. The manufacturers' comments

discussed above lay out the special

concerns for incomplete HDVs,

including potential legal liabilities for

the primary manufacturer. Finally, it

should be noted that unlike LDVs and

LDTs EPA is not aware of any prototype

ORVR-equipped HDVs.

Given these concerns, the effort

needed to implement LDV'and LDT

ORVR systems, the relatively small

number of gasoline-fueled HDVs, and

the fact that the application of ORVR

' standards to HDVs is discretionary, EPA
16266 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

is not finalizing the portion of the

NPRM which applies to HDVs.

Even without implementing HDV

ORVR requirements at this time, the

ORVR program still provides significant

benefits. When viewed as a percentage

of sales, ORVR still applies to 91

percent of all gasoline-fueled trucks and

97 percent of all gasoline-fueled

vehicles. Similarly, control is still

achieved over 86 percent of all gasolinefueled truck refueling emissions and 94

percent of all gasoline vehicle refueling

emissions. Thus, EPA's final decision

that ORVR requirements are not

required for these vehicles does not

significantly reduce the effectiveness of

the ORVR program.

4. Applicability to California Vehicles

As discussed further in the summary

and analysis of comments, today's final

rule implements a federal standard

applicable to all vehicles sold in the

United States. Based on the language in

section 202(a)(6) of the Act, EPA

considers refueling emissions control to

be an evaporative standard. Although

California has motor vehicle standards

in place for model year 1998 and

beyond, including evaporative emission

standards, to date EPA has issued no

section 209(b) waivers which consider a

federal ORVR refueling program when

evaluating the protectiveness, in the

aggregate, of those standards. However,

EPA interprets section 209(b)(3) to

provide that once a section 209(b)

waiver is granted, compliance with the

state program is deemed compliance

with the federal program standards. (See

42 FR 3193, January 17, 1977). To the

extent that a new federal standard is

established subsequent to a waiver, such

standard will be considered in a waiver

reconsideration or.future waiver request

consideration. EPA is making no finding

at this time how stringency, in the

ORVR context, may be considered in a

waiver proceeding, should one occur. (It

should be noted that EPA in this notice

is restating its consistent interpretation

for the convenience of rulemaking

participants, and does not intend to

reopen for reconsideration the issue of

the effect of existing section 209(b)

waivers on post-waiver regulations.) The California Air Resources Board

(CARB) staff has held'one workshop to

discuss the proper application of

refueling control (November 2, 1993).

CARB is considering three courses of

action: adopting the federal ORVR rule,

adopting a California-specific ORVR

rule, test, or standard, or maintaining

that California's current motor vehicle

program, taken in the aggregate, is at

least as stringent as the federal program"

notwithstanding the lack of ORVR

controls. If California submits a waiver

request for its evaporative emission

control program applicable to model

year 1998 or thereafter, which does not

include federal ORVR requirements,

EPA will decide at that time whether

California's motor vehicle program is at

least as protective as the federal

program.

5. Fuels Covered

In the September 1991 and May 1993

notices, EPA specifically solicited

comments on applying the ORVR

requirements to highway motor vehicles

powered by fuels other than gasoline.

Consistent with EPA policy on fuel

neutrality and establishing a consistent

set of requirements for all fuels, today's

rule requires that LDVs and LDTs

operating on any fuels be capable of

meeting the refueling emission standard

described below. It applies to vehicles

certified under both 40 CFR part 86 and

40 CFR part 88. Although many

commenters stated that the refueling

standard should not apply to vehicles

operating on diesel fuels, the section

202(a)(6) requirement by its terms

applies to all LDVs regardless of the

type of fuel used. (In contrast, section

202(k) requires evaporative emission

controls only for "gasoline-fueled motor

vehicles".) However, EPA has attempted

to tailor the refueling emission

certification requirements to the fuel

used.

Manufacturers of vehicles capable of

operating on gasoline, alcohol, or - gasoline/alcohol blends must show that

these vehicles comply when refueled

with such fuels through testing as

described later in this preamble. This

requirement applies to dedicated neat

alcohol fuel vehicles and vehicles using

alcohol blends. Bi-fuel or dual-fuel

vehicles must meet the requirements on

both fuels. Flexible-fueled vehicles must

meet the requirements on all fuel

combinations. At the present time the

only alcohol fuel affected is methanol.

However, a waiver of emission testing

requirements is available for those

vehicles/fuels which are considered to

be inherently low in refueling

emissions. EPA believes that a general

engineering evaluation approach is

acceptable for diesel vehicles and diesel

fuels for several reasons. Diesel fuel

today has a Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)

of less than one pound per square inch

(psi) (7 kPa) and diesel engines today do

not raise the temperature of fuel in their ' tanks substantially more than do

gasoline engines (less than 130 OF under

most conditions). For these reasons, the

vapor space over the fuel in diesel tanks

has a very low concentration of fuel

vapor compared to that in gasoline tanks

and thus displacement refueling

emissions are low. EPA thus expects

diesel fuel vehicles to meet the refueling

emission standard without a control

system.

Under this approach, the vehicle

manufacturer's certification application

must include a statement that there is

nothing about the vehicle, its fuel

system, or fuel that is counter to EPA's

assessment as discussed above, and the

manufacturer's certification that the

vehicle meets the refueling emission

standard (even without a control

system).

EPA retains the opportunity to test

vehicles to ensure that they comply

with the emission standard during

certification confirmatory testing,

Selective Enforcement Audits, and inuse testing. EPA also retains the right to

retract the engineering evaluation

option for diesel vehicles if the RVP of

in-use diesel fuel increases or is

expected to increase beyond I psi (7

kPa) or a significant increase in fuel

tank temperatures is expected.

Since exhaust and evaporative

emission requirements now exist for all

new methanol-fueled (neat and blend)

vehicles, these shall be required to

comply with the ORVR standards under

the same phase-in schedule as gasolinefueled vehicles. EPA expects that these

vehicles will use a technology similar to

that used to comply with the

evaporative emission requirement.

The refueling control requirement

will be applied to other dedicated, dualfuel, bi-fuel, and flexible-fuel vehicles

using other fuels (e.g., dedicated and

hybrid electric vehicles, ethanol and

ethanol blends, compressed and liquid

natural gas, liquified petroleum gas) as

regulations covering these fuels are

implemented in the future. Lead time,

safety, and other factors will be

considered in the course of these

actions. Full testing and engineering

evaluation certification options will be

considered.

B. Implementation

1. Leadtime, Effective Model Year and

Phase-in Requirements

Section 202(a)(6) of the Act specifies

a four model year lead time before

ORVR requirements are to become

effective for LDVs ("vehicles

manufactured beginning in the fourth

model year after the model year in

which the standards are promulgated").

After this four-year lead time, a threeyear phase-in period begins, during

which 40 percent, 80 percent, and 100

percent, respectively, of each

manufacturer's sales of new LDVs will

need to meet the ORVR requirements.
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday. April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16267

Today's action is occurring early in the

1994 model year. Thus, ORVR

requirements for LDVs will become

effective with the 1998 model year. At

least 40 percent of each manufacturer's

LDV sales will need to meet ORVR

requirements in model year 1998, 80

percent for model year'1999, and 100

percent for model years 2000 and later.

Since the application of ORVR

requirements to LDTs is under the

general authority in section 202(a)(1),

the specific lead time and phase-in

requirements of section 202(a)(6) do not.

automatically apply. Rather, the

standard "shall take effect after such

period as the Administrator finds

necessary to permit the development

and application of the requisite

technology, giving appropriate

consideration to the cost of compliance

"(Section 202(a)(2)).

As discussed elsewhere in this

preamble, EPA believes that the nature

of ORVR technology for LDTs will be

very similar to that for LDVs and that

the cost of controls, incremental to the

cost of enhanced evaporative emission

controls, is minimal. EPA also does not

believe that ORVR controls for LDTs

present different safety issues than . canisters on LDVs where there is now

general consensus that there are no unreasonable risks. We therefore believe

that the lead time required for

developing these systems could be

similar regardless of vehicle class.

While several commenters requested a

delay in the LDT ORVR requirement,

commenters did not indicate that it was

not technically feasible to develop

ORVR controls for LDTs during this

timeframe. However, comments from

the vehicle manufacturers did express a

concern that resource and facility

constraints would make simultaneous

development of ORVR systems for LDVs

and all trucks problematic. They have

also indicated that design, development

and some in-use experience with ORVR

systems on passenger cars would be

helpful in the design of LDT systems.

EPA has concluded that the resource

and facility concerns expressed by the

manufacturers and the desirability for

in-use experience with ORVR systems

can be balanced against the need for

emission reductions by beginning the

phase-in of ORVR requirements for

LDTs after the program for LDVs has

been fully implemented. In the mid-tolate 1990's gasoline-powered vehicle

manufacturers will need to respond to

new evaporative emission requirements,

cold CO exhaust emission standards,

and California and Clean Fuel Fleet

exhaust emission standards among

others. Most of these requirements

apply to all three vehicle classes and

entail several hundred vehicle/engine

families. Under the statutory

requirement the manufacturers will

need to comply with LDV ORVR

requirements in the same timeframe.

And while complying with the

enhanced evaporative and ORVR

requirements simultaneously using an

integrated control system reduces the

burden relative to separate approaches

for LDTs, a delay for LDTs is not

unreasonable given the already existing

requirements. This trade-off is also

acceptable in the short-term since Stage

II refueling controls are or will be in

place in many ozone NAAs. However,

for the reasons discussed above, EPA

believes that ORVR controls are the

preferred long term approach for control

of refueling emissions from LDTs.

Therefore, the requirements

promulgated today for LDTs will be

implemented in two stages. The first

stage will cover LDTs with a GVWR of

6,000 or less (LLDT), thle second will

cover LDTs with a GVWR of 6,001 to

8,500 lbs GVWR (HLDT). LLDTs

represent about 70 percent of LDT sales.

HLDTs represent the remaining 30

percent. For LLDTs, the ORVR

requirement will begin implementation

in the 2001 model year and will phase

in over three model years according to

the same percentages as LDVs. For

HLDTs, the ORVR requirement will

begin implementation n the 2004

model year and will phase in over three

model years according to the same

percentages as LDVs (40/80/100). This

schedule will permit the development

and application of cost-effective,

-conomically achievable technology, as

required by section 202(a)(2) and will

still allow consideration of the Stage II

phaseout provisions of section. 202(a)(6)

of the CAA in the long term.

Provisions of 40 CFR 86.085-1(b)

permit manufacturers to certify HDVs

with a GVWR of 8,501-10,000 lbs

GVWR as LDTs. This option will remain

in effect for refueling controls. HDVs

certified under this option would be

treated as HLDTs for purposes leadtime,

phase-in and sales compliance

determination.

EPA does not view the provisions of

section 202(a)(3) as applying to

refueling controls, as that provision was

probably intended to apply only to

exhaust emission standards, as did its

predecessor provision. However, even if

it did apply, this section would provide

for at least four years of leadtime. Since

EPA is allowing this much leadtime for

HLDTs anyway, designating section

202(a)(2) or 202(a)(3) as authority for

HDV leadtime has no practical

-significance here.,

2. Small Volume Manufacturers

Today's rule includes a short-term

provision for small Volume light-duty

vehicle manufacturers. Several small

volume manufacturers commented that,

as a practical matter, they cannot phase

in their compliance due to their small

size and limited product lines. Small

volume manufacturers also claimed that

they sometimes rely on control

technology developed by larger

manufacturers to develop their

compliance strategies, and this would

not be possible if they must comply at

essentially the 100 percent of sales level

before the larger manufacturers. R&D

cost concerns were cited as obstacles as

well.

EPA believes that these comments

state valid concerns. As is described in

three recent Federal Register notices,

EPA has allowed small volume

manufacturers to delay compliance to

the last model year of the phase-in: in

the Tier I exhaust emission standard

rule (June 5, 1991, 56 FR 25724), the

cold CO exhaust emissions rule (July 17,

1992, 57 FR 31888), and the enhanced

evaporative emission standards rule

(March 24, 1993, 58 FR 16003), and has

decided to allow the same

accommodation for the ORVR

requirement for light-duty vehicles. This

provision is included, not only for the

reasons raised by the' manufacturers, but

also because it would be inconsistent to

face'ORVR compliance before

evaporative emission compliance when

the comments indicate that most

manufacturers plan to use integrated

refueling/evaporative control systems

and these are desirable for both cost and

safety reasons. In addition, requiring

phased compliance for these

manufacturers effectively denies them

the opportunity Congress intended to

phase in the control technology. (Cf.

State of Ohio v. EPA, 997 F. 2d 1520,

1535 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (de minimis

exception toi seemingly literal statutory

language can be allowed where failure

to allow the exception frustrates a

Congressional goal or leads to absurd

results)). Thus, small volume

manufacturers of light-duty vehicles, as

defined in 40 CFR part 86, may delay

compliance to model year 2000 (i.e., the

third model year of the phase-in), but

must comply with 100 percent of sales

in that and subsequent model years.

Because of the additional leadtime EPA

is affording to LDTs, the Agency is not

implementing, this small-volume.

manufacturer provision for these

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

3. Inclusion of Inherently Low Refueling C. Refueling Emission Test Procedures

Emission Vehicles and Standard

As was discussed in the May 1993

notice, vehicles meeting the refueling

emission standard because they are

inherently low in refueling vapor

emissions (those certified without a

control system using the engineering

evaluation option), and thus are waived

from testing, cannot be counted in either

the vehicles complying or base sales

figures in determining compliance with

the sales requirements of the statute.

Compliance for these vehicles is to be

calculated separately.

This final rule includes test

procedures for the measurement of

refueling emissions and a corresponding

emissions standard by which to judge

the adequacy of ORVR control system

designs. The test procedures

accommodate integrated system designs,

which control both refueling and

evaporative emissions with a common

vapor storage unit, as well as nonintegrated system designs, which do not

share vapor storage units.

The test procedures for these two

types of control systems, although

different in some ways (explained

below), involve the same basic steps:

Load the storage canister with

hydrocarbon vapor, drive the vehicle to

provide opportunity for canister purge,

and refuel the vehicle while measuring

emissions (see Figures I and 2). The

first two steps together are referred to as

the preconditioning phase and are

discussed in detail further on in this

section.

BILLING CODE 6560-60-P
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6. 1994 / Rules and Reulatinn 2

Figure 1 supplemental

"-'12-36 hours

1 hour MAX optional seal test (EPA only)

---or

Bench purge Additic

1200 bed volumes

at.8 cfm

I

continue supplemental

evap test

hot soak test --

2-diurnal test -------------

1 6-24 hours

Refueling test

Fuel to at least 95%

4-10 gpm, 67 F ± 1.5F

ORVR Test for

Integrated Systems

166

1R2R
16270 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

Figure 2

ORVR Test for

Non-Integrated

Systems

l1-hurs,

optional seal

test (EPA only) Fuel drain & 40% till

I ICanister preconditioning

I [2 g breakthru w/butane

I Fuel to 95% full

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

LJ

1 hour MAX

partial refueling option

(EPA only)

Ddivedown

Repeated UDDS's as

specified by EPA

(10 to 85% of tankful) r6-24 hoursE

1-6 hours

u I-..3 I II

J Refueling lost

Fuel to at least 95%

4-1o gpm, 67 F + 1.5 F

BIWNG CODE 560,-P-C
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

1. Refueling Emissions Test

The procedure for the refueling step is

common to both integrated and nonintegrated systems. It involves

disconnecting the vapor line from the

fuel tank to the canister, draining the

fuel tank, refueling with test fuel to 10

percent of the nominal tank capacity,

soaking the vehicle for 6 to 24 hours at

80±3 °F (26.7±1.7 °C), reconnecting the

vapor line, and fueling the vehicle with

test fuel at 67±1.5 °F (19.4±0.8 'C in a

sealed enclosure (SHED) while

measuring emissions. Fueling is

performed at a rate of 4 to 10 gallons per

minute (15.1 to 37.9 liters per minute)

and is terminated at the first automatic

shutoff that occurs after a quantity of

fuel has been pumped equal to at least

85 percent of the nominal tank capacity.

One of the key issues raised in the

July 1993 hearing and the subsequent

comment period concerned the test

temperature specifications for the

dispensed fuel and the residual in-tank

fuel, both of which have a major impact

on the refueling vapor generation and

therefore on ORVR system designs.

Hearing participants discussed the

merits of setting the test dispensed fuel

temperature at 67 °F (19.4 °C) while

maintaining the residual in-tank fueltemperature specification of 80 °F (26.7

*C. Previous proposals had included a

dispensed fuel temperature

specification of 81-84 °F (27.2-28.9 °C.

Comments were received on both

sides of this issue. The manufacturers

supported the test temperature

specifications discussed at the July 1993

hearing. They believed these

specifications would enable the

canisters planned for meeting the

enhanced evaporative emission

requirements to also capture refueling

emissions and would facilitate the use

of liquid seals as an option to

mechanical seals in the fillneck.

Manufacturers commented that this

would provide much needed design

flexibility and alleviate their safety

concerns. The American Petroleum

Institute (API) and the Natural

Resources Defense Council (NRDC) -

supported the 81*-84 OF dispensed

temperature range proposed earlier.

They expressed concern that 67 OF is not

representative of actual dispensed fuel

temperatures on high ozone days and'

therefore might lead to a situation where

the test procedure does not adequately

represent in-use conditions with the

result that refueling emissions are

controlled inadequately in use.

EPA's goal in establishing test

parameters is to ensure that the

combination of test conditions results in

designs that will achieve a very high

level of control in use. Therefore, the

representativeness of any one test

parameter, such as dispensed fuel

temperature, is of less concern than the

net effect of the total test. For example,

in-use RVPs in many parts of the nation

during the summer months are-lower

than that specified in the test. What is

important is the combined effects of the

key parameters during an in-use

refueling event. EPA's analysis of in-use

effectiveness described in the

Regulatory Impact Analysis and

Summary and Analysis of Comments

indicates that these test conditions will

yield designs that achieve in-use control

in excess of 95 percent during the ozone

season in the NAAs (even assuming the

accuracy of data showing that one

region of the country has dispensed fuel

temperatures within or exceeding the

81*-84 OF range, a potentially

questionable assumption, as explained

in the next paragraph). Based on this

analysis and the manufacturers'

comments, EPA has concluded that the

test specifications being finalized in this

action are appropriate.

The dispense d gasoline temperature

parameter discussed in the NPRM was

derived using limited survey

information on in-use refueling events.

The 810-84 OF dispensed temperature

value in the NPRM was driven by

refueling events in the Southeastern

U.S. These dispensed fuel temperature

values are seven or more degrees higher

than any other region of the country.

There is no obvious technical reason

why the Southeastern U.S. values were

so much higher than those found in

other regions of the country. Thus, there

is some possibility that they may be

unrepresentative, in which case the

67 OF temperature used in the refueling

test is even more representative. (EPA is

not completely disavowing the

Southeastern U.S dispensed fuel data,

since it is the only data available to EPA

at this time. The Summary and Analysis

of Comments contains an analysis of the

sensitivity of the in-use effectiveness of

the ORVR requirement to this dispensed

temperature value.)

2. Integrated System Preconditioning

The nature of integrated systems

allows for a corresponding integration of

ORVR and evaporative emission

preconditioning procedures. This

integration is desirable because of

potential test resource savings. A major

revision of the evaporative emission test

procedure was completed recently and

will be implemented beginning in the

1996 model year (58 FR 16002, March

24, 1993).

EPA proposed three integrated system

preconditioning options for the

refueling test in the May 1993 Federal

Register notice. Option A places the

refueling test after the exhaust

emissions portion of the supplemental

evaporative emissions test procedure.

Option B places the refueling test after

the running loss portion of the

evaporative emissions test sequence. As

a logical extension to this option, EPA

also proposed Option B1, which adds

more driving to Option A in order to

allow for more purging of the canister,

similar to Option B, while avoiding the

complexities of the Option B running

loss procedure.

EPA has selected Option B1, based on

the above-described advantages and the

support for this choice expressed by

commenters. This procedure follows the

supplemental evaporative emission test

preconditioning procedure, involving an

initial fuel tank drain and fill with

certification test fuel to 40 percent full,

a 12 to 36 hour soak at 680 to 86 OF (20'

to 30 °C), a preconditioning drive over

one Urban Dynamometer Driving

Schedule (UDDS) cycle, another fuel

tank drain and fill to 40 percent, a

canister preconditioning step detailed

below, and then the exhaust emissions

test. At this point the refueling test

departs from the evaporative test

sequence. Instead, additional driving is

conducted to provide more opportunity

for canister purge. This driving consists

of a UDDS cycle followed by two New

York City Cycles (NYCC) and- then by

another UDDS. This driving schedule

corresponds to the driving specified for

the evaporative running loss test,

though not at the same high

temperatures. After the driving, the

above-described refueling procedure is

conducted,

The canister is preconditioned by

loading it with a 50/50 mixture of

butane and nitrogen, at a rate of 40

grams of butane per hour, until 2 grams

of hydrocarbons are emitted from the

canister (referred to as the 2-gram

breakthrough point). Alternatively, the

canister can be loaded to this point with

gasoline vapors by conducting repeated

diurnal heat builds. All detailed aspects

of the supplemental evaporative

emissioitest procedure, up through the

exhaust emission test, apply to

integrated ORVR system testing as well

(58 FR 16002, March 24, 1993). The

three test sequences (full 3-diurnal

evaporative, supplemeital evaporative,

and refueling) may be performed in any

order and exhaust emissions

measurements from any of the three

may be considered valid. If either

evaporative emission sequence has been

conducted before the refueling test, the

fuel tank drain and fill and vehicle soak

that precede the one UDDS

16271
16272 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

preconditioning drive in the refueling

test sequence may be skipped.

3. Non-Integrated System

Preconditioning

Non-integrated ORVR systems store

only refueling vapors and therefore

warrant a preconditioning drivedown of

85 percent of the fuel tank capacity

before being subjected to the 85 percent

refueling event. This driving consists of

repeated UDDS cycles, either on atrack

or on a dynamometer, until a volume of

fuel equal to 85 percent of the fuel tank

nominal capacity has been consumed.

During the actual refueling test, the

vehicle will be filled to at least 95

percent of tank capacity, as is the case

for the integrated system. If

manufacturers exercise the option to do

less driving in certification testing, EPA

may perform subsequent confirmatory

and in-use testing using the same

reduced driving schedule.

At its discretion, EPA may test nonintegrated systems with a partial

refueling test procedure. This procedure

helps to ensure control in those in-use

refueling events in which less than a

tankful of fuel is pumped. Because the

non-integrated system test allows a

nearly complete drivedown of the fuel

tank capacity, thus enabling purge

design strategies that inappropriately

minimize purge during -the exhaust

emissions test, EPA considers the partial

refueling test necessary. It also allows

EPA to assess the basic question of

whether the system has the capacity to

handle a partial fill, a common refueling

event in use.

In this partial fill test,.following the

loading of the canister with butane and

fueling of the vehicle to 95 percent of

the fuel tank capacity, the vehicle will

be driven some integer number of UDDS

cycles such that some amount of fuel

between 10 and 85 percent of the fuel

tank capacity is consumed. After a one

to six hour soak, the vehicle will be

subjected to the refueling emissions

measurement test with no intervening

drain and fill. The fuel pumped in the

test will be a metered amount,

corresponding to-the amount consumed

in the drive. This amount will be based

on the vehicle's fuel economy, as

determined at certification.

4. Seal Test

Also at its discretion, EPA may

perform a seal test of integrated and

non-integrated designs, aimed at

verifying the integrity of fillpipe seals

and vapor lines. This test eliminates

consideration of potential canister,

emissions by thoroughly bench purging

the canister prior to the refueling event.

The canister preconditioning and

preparatory driving are therefore

likewise eliminated, although EPA may

perform the test procedure up through

the exhaust emission test (in order to

obtain this measurement) and then

conduct the bench purge and refueling

test. Failure of the seal test would be

considered equivalent to failing the full

refueling emissions test and the same

standard would apply to both.

5. Cap Removal Emissions

In the May 1993 Notice, EPA

requested comment on including a test

to measure and control the "puff loss"

emissions from a pressurized fuel tank

when the fuel cap is removed for

refueling.

In addition to refueling emissions,

vehicles can have emissions when the

fuel cap is removed from a pressurized

fuel tank before the refueling event.

Although these emissions potentially

warrant control, EPA does fiot view

them as "refueling" emissions for

purposes of section 202(a)(6), since they

precede a refueling and are more akin to

evaporative emissions. EPA in fact

proposed, but did not finalize, such a

cap-off test in the evaporative emissions

NPRM (55 FR 1914, January 19, 1990)

rather than in the ORVR NPRM. Thus

Congress would not have been

considering such emissions when it

enacted the 95 percent minimum

control standard in section 202(a)(6) in

the 1990 CAAAs.

Manufacturers commented that the

puff loss test would provide no

additional control over that achieved by

the refueling test and the evaporative

emissions rule requirement that tanks

pressurized to over 10" (25 cm) H20 be

vented to the canister upon cap

removal. EPA disagrees with this

assessment. The refueling test does not

measure emissions from cap removal

directly after vehicle operation. The

evaporative emissions requirement

allows for-the venting of tank pressures

under 10" H20 to the atmosphere. These

emissions can be appreciable. General

Motors (GM) calculated that the puff

loss from venting a 10 percent full, 20

gallon (76 liter) tank at 10" H20 would

be about 3 grams. EPA agrees with this

estimate but disagrees with the

contention that this is minor, given that

this same vehicle would only be

allowed to emit a little over 3 grams

during the refueling test.

GM also argued that the execution of

a cap-off test involving a warm-up drive

followed immediately by a cap-off step

in a SHED would be complex and

formidable. EPA agrees with GM's

contentions that hot soak emissions

could confuse the puff loss

measurement and that the time required

to move a vehicle from a dynamometer

cell to a SHED and remove the cap

would be overly long compared to the

actual in-use event, which typically

involves less than a minute from key-off

to cap-off. These two concerns would

affect the measured emissions in

opposite directions and would make it

difficult to ascertain a puff loss emission

corresponding to the in-use event.

EPA remains concerned about puff

loss emissions, particularly considering

that the new evaporative emission

control requirements may prompt

manufacturers to'rely more heavily on

pressurized tank designs in the future.

However, EPA believes it necessary to

defer action on this issue so that an

effective test procedure can be

developed, involving more complete

public participation. Therefore, EPA is

leaving this portion of the rulemaking

open for now and intends to take up this

issue as part of the planned further

action on pressurized designs

announced in the evaporative emissions

control final rule (58 FR 16012).

However, it should be noted that the

enhanced evaporative emissions rule

will require controls for systems whose

pressure exceeds 10 inches H20, and

thus control is already in place for these

extreme situations.

6. Spitback Test

EPA believes, and manufacturers'

comments indicate, that vehicles would

not be expected to comply with the

refueling emission standard if they

emitted significant spitback emissions

during the refueling test. Fuel spilled on

the side of the vehicle or in the SHED

when the fuel nozzle shuts off will

evaporate and be included as part' of the

refueling emissions. In recognition of

this effect, this final rule also waives the

spitback testing requirement for vehicles

being certified to meet the ORVR

requirements. Similar to the provision

for "inherently low refueling emission

vehicles" discussed above,

manufacturers can, at their option,

certify as part of the certification

application, that they agree with EPA's

assessment regarding the effect of

spitback emissions on the ability to pass

the refueling emission standard and that

their vehicle passes the spitback test

standard. Of course, manufacturers may

elect to comply with the spitback test in

lieu of using this waiver option.

Compliance with the spitback

standard is still required, and EPA is

retaining the spitback test and standard

promulgated in the enhanced

evaporative emissions control rule (58

FR 16002, March 24, 1993). EPA may

conduct or require manufacturers to

conduct the spitback test to demonstrate
Federal Regiser I Vot 59, No. 66. 1 Wednesday, April 6, 1994 [ Rules and' Regulations 16273

compliance should concerns over

vehicle spitback arise.

7. Nozzle Geometry Standards

In the NPRM, EPA asked for comment

on the need for fuel nozzle geometry

standards as part of an ORVR program,

and suggested thatauto makers and

nozzle manufacturers undertake a

voluntary initiative to develop national

consensus standards in this area. This

initiative is being undertaken under the

auspices of the Society of Automotive

Engineers (SAE). An SAE technical

committee, comprised of auto maker,

fuel nozzle manufacturer, and other

representatives, is considering revisions

to SAE standard J285 "Gasoline

Dispenser Nozzle Spouts".

It is important that nozzles used in

the design and testing of ORVRequipped vehicles be similar to those

found in use. Should this committee

reach consensus on fuel nozzle

geometry specifications, EPA will use a

nozzle meeting this standard in all

refueling emissions compliance testing,

if the nozzle manufacturers agree to

adopt these specifications for future

retail and commercial fuel nozzles and

the auto manufacturers design their

ORVR systems to accommodate a nozzle

with this geometry. If no standard is

developed for nozzle geometry or if the

above agreements cannot be reached,

EPA will use any commercially

available nozzle in its testing.

8. Level of the Standard

This final rule adopts a refueling test

standard of 0.20 grams of hydocarbon

emissions per gallon (g/gal) of fuel

pumped (0.053 g/liter. This standard

applies to all vehicle classes covered by

this rule and covers the full useful life.

Setting the standard at this level ensures

that the standard that meets the

statutory requirement to provide a

minimum emission capture efficiency of

95 percent, as discussed below.

The August 1987 NPRM included a

proposed refueling emission standard of

0.10 g/gal (0.026 g/liter) of fuel pumped,

which at that time represented about a

98 percent emissions reduction from

uncontrolled levels. Subsequently, the

1990 CAAA called for a refueling

emission standard representing at least

a 95 percent reduction over

uncontrolled levels. EPA determined

that this reduction corresponds to a

standard of about 0.25 g/gal (0.066 g/

liter) and requested comment in the

May 1993 notice on the setting of a

standard in the 0.10 to 0.25 g/gal range.

Manufacturers supported a standard

of 0.20 g/gal, arguing that this standard

would satisfy the CAA minimum

requirement while providing for full

useful life compliance and design

flexibility, API and other commenters

felt that a standard providing a 98

percent level of control is justified based

on demonstrated and cost effective

technology.

After analyzing the comments and the

rojected in-use emission impacts, EPA

as selected a standard of 0.20 g/gal.

This standard was chosen because it

meets or exceeds the statutory minimum

requirement and, since It is

representative of most refueling

situations reasonably likely to occur (Cf

Edison Electric Institute v. EPA, 2F.3J

438, 446-47 (D.C. Cir. 1993)). At the

same time, it meets the manufacturers'

need for adequate design margin and

flexibility. As is discussed in the

Summary and Analysis of Comments,

the nature of the canister-based control

technology is such that setting the

standard at a lower level would not be

expected to achieve additional emission

reductions in use. Systems will need to

be designed for essentially zero

emissions, with the standard providing

an allowance for vehicle and test

variability. It may also enhance the use

of liquid fillneck seals which are

projected to have lower costs, good inuse performance, and present no safety

concerns.

D. Safety of ORVR Systems

1. Background

Section 202(a)(6) of the 1990 CAA

Amendments (as well as its predecessor

provision) requires EPA to consult with

the Secretary of Transportation

regarding the safety of vehicle-based

(ORVR) systems for the control of

vehicle refueling emissions. EPA began

this consultation in the Spring of 1986,

prior to the NPRM, and the consultation

has continued throughout the various

stages of this rulemaking. DoT was

represented by NHTSA throughout this

process. A record of this consultation

and the various analyses conducted by

EPA and NHTSA to assess the safety

issue is -available in the public docket

and is discussed in the April 15, 1992

Federal Register notice regarding ORVR

controls (57 FR 13220). Early in the

consultation process, NHTSA raised

concerns about the safety of ORVR

canister systems, and throughout the

various stages of the rulemaking, safety

has been a central issue in the public

comments and in the deliberations on

the ORVR rulemaking. Unresolved

concerns regarding the safety of ORVR

canister systems (at least relative to

Stage II systems) delayed promulgation

of the NPRM prior to the 1990 CAAAs

and, in April 1992, led EPA to decide

not to require ORVR controls at that

time. Given the concerns raised about

vehicle safety, it Is important to address

the potential safety concerns as part of

the implementation of the ORVR

requirement.

2. Test Procedure/Safety

The safety comments regarding ORVR

canister systems focused primarily on

the concern that ORVR systems would

increase fuel system complexity and

that this would create vehicle safety

risks. Many manufacturers' comments

on the NPRM indicated that the test

procedure, as proposed in 1987, would

force the use of non-integrated

(separate) systems for refueling and

evaporative emissions control. They

characterized these systems as making

the fuel vapor control system more

complex than current evaporative

control systems, thus creating the

potential for a safety risk.

As noted earlier, the DC Circuit held

that the consultation requirement in

section 202(a)(6) does not alter EPA's

duty to issue ORVR requirements. After

the decision was issued and after

publication of EPA's May 27, 1993

Federal Register notice (58 FR 30731),

EPA held technical discussions with

representatives of AAMA regarding the

ORVR test procedure (See items IV-E101,102,105,106 in the public docket for

this rulemaking). The purpose of these

discussions was to identify potential

changes to the ORVR test procedure

which, if enacted, would facilitate the

use of an Integrated evaporative/

refueling control system approach with

a liquid seal in the fillneck. (As was

discussed above, in March 1993, EPA

published a final rule requiring

enhanced evaporative controls on

gasoline-powered LDVs, LDTs, and

HDVs. The enhanced evaporative

rerquirements will lead to an increase in

the size of the canister used to capture

evaporative emissions, an upgrade in

the purge system capabilities, as well as

other system changes and

improvements.) An integrated system

approach would allow manufacturers to

make use of the upgraded evaporative

control hardware (common carbon

canister, purge system, vapor hoses,

etc.) as part of their ORVR control

strategy and thus address both system

complexity and cost issues. This

approach would be used in lieu of the

non-integrated control system

approaches which were characterized as

being complex and potentially less safe.

ORVR test procedure changes which

would ease the use of integrated

evaporative/refueling control systems

with liquid fillneck seal approaches

were identified. EPA explained this

option at the July 22, 1993 public
16274 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

hearing and requested additional public

comment.

Auto manufacturer comments

supported this approach. For example,

Chrysler Corporation's comments

indicated:

"Chrysler believes that the proposed

AAMA revisions to the test procedure and

the 0.20 g/gal. standard will allow Chrysler

to design safe, efficient ORVR systems."

Ford Motor Company's comments stated:

"Ford recommends that EPA adopt the test

procedure changes and standards outlined by

AAMA at the Hearing on July 22, 1993, and

contained in the attached comments. These

changes should allow for the design and

development of a canister-based, integrated

refueling and evaporative emissions system

which is less complex than a nonintegrated

system and which addresses the safety issues

raised in previous rulemakings. These

procedural changes along with others

identified in the comments should allow

EPA. in consultation with NHTSA, tofind

that integrated systems do not present an unreasonable risk to automotive safety."

General Motors expressed similar views:

"The ORVR test procedure changes described in these comments are critical to

permitting manufacturers to develop ORVR

systems for passenger cars that minimize or eliminate any adverse impact upon motor

vehicle safety."

And, in summary, an October 13, 1993

AAMA letter to NHTSA stated that:

"We believe this procedure will allow the use of an integrated ORVRlevaporative

emissions system including a common carbon canister. An integrated ORVR/

evaporative emissions system will allow

manufacturers to design and build safe,

efficient ORVR systems."

Comments by other manufacturers

also supported this position.

Accordingly, this rule enacts the test

procedure option identified above. It is

supported by AAMA, the Association of

International Automobile Manufacturers

(AIAM), and the individual

manufacturers and, according to their

comments, minimizes their

longstanding vehicle safety concerns.

3. DOT Consultation

In response to the changed

circumstances since it's prior safety

analysis, DoT/NHTSA undertook an

independent assessment of vehicle

safety concerns associated with ORVR

systems. In November 1993, NHTSA

completed a study entitled "An

Assessment of Onboard Refueling Vapor

Recovery System Safety". This

document reexamined the conclusions

raised in their July 1991 study, upon

which EPA relied heavily on its April

1992 decision not to require ORVR

controls.

In this recent study, NHTSA revisited

the principal findings of its July 1991

report to consider the positive safety

impacts of the test procedure changes

and other changed circumstances. The

NHTSA report, which is available in the

public docket, reached the following

general conclusion regarding ORVR

safety:

"Basically, there were three principal areas of concern pointed out in the July 1991

report: the increased size of vapor canisters

to hold the fuel vapors, the mechanical

complexity of the ORVR system, and the

ability of the ORVR system to safely manage

and purge the increased volume of vapors.

As discussed above, technical

developments, and test procedure and

regulatory changes that have occurred since

the July 1991 safety assessment, have had the

net effect of reducing the safety concerns raised in the July 1991 report. The majority

of vehicle manufacturers have stated that it

is now possible to design safe ORVR systems

that will function properly under all

operating conditions. However, there still

remains some small unquantifiable increase

in safety risk due to the addition of the ORVR

systems. This risk is unquantifiable since

there are no data upon which to base a numerical estimate."

Thus, NHTSA views the changed

circumstances, including the final test

procedure and the use of integrated

systems, as addressing many of their

previous concerns. They also

acknowledge that absent actual data

they cannot determine the level of risk,

and thus conclude that risks are

unquantifiable. While the NHTSA

report contained a brief assessment as to

why trucks might be different than cars

and stated that truck prototype systems

and field tests for truck ORVR systems

would be beneficial, no special safety

risks were cited for using ORVR

canisters to control LDT/HDV refueling

emissions.

4. EPA Assessment

EPA is withdrawing its April, 1992

finding that ORVR canisters pose

unreasonable safety risks. First, that

determination was based on an

improper comparison with Stage II

controls. NRDC v. Reilly, 983 F. 2d at

271. Considered on their own, ORVR

canisters do not appear to pose

significant safety risks. Indeed, as the

Agency noted in 1987, this appears to be

particularly true for integrated

evaporative/refueling control systemswhich now appear to be the preferred

control system.

Second, EPA is swayed because

NHTSA has reviewed the safety of

ORVR systems in light of recent

developments and subsequently has

withdrawn most of the adverse

conclusions in the 1991 report. NHTSA

also indicates (1993 Report pp. 17-24)

that some of its remaining concerns can

be addressed by choosing proper

designs for canister systems. As noted

above, EPA has taken NHTSA's views

strongly into account throughout the

course of this rulemaking, and

accordingly is influenced by NHTSA's

more positive outlook on ORVR canister

safety.

The record further indicates that

installation of ORVR canisters can have

some positive impacts on safety. See

EPA's "Summary and Analysis of

Comments on the Potential Safety.

Implications of ORVR Systems" (IV-H04). Safety benefits include removal of

the external fuel vapor vent line from

the fillneck of these vehicles, the

expected move of the canister from the

engine compartment to the rear of the

vehicle, the resultant shortening of the

vapor vent line, and the capture of fuel

vapor previously vented at the service

station during refueling. All of these

actions directionally reduce the risk of

vehicle fires in crash and non-crash

situations.

In sum, given that the manufacturers

indicate that integrated evaporative/

refueling control systems minimize their

safety concerns, NHTSA's significant

reduction in concerns, EPA's •

longstanding view of the safety of

integrated refueling/evaporative control

systems and the safety benefits of ORVR

controls, EPA has decided to withdraw

its.April 15, 1992 finding (57 FR 13230-

13231). Specifically, EPA concludes that

onboard canister controls do not pose an

unreasonable risk to public safety.

ORVR canister systems are not

inherently unsafe.

Several commenters expressed

concern about applying the ORVR

requirement to trucks and incomplete

vehicles (i.e., those produced by

secondary manufacturers). However, for

the most part, EPA does not believe the

technical circumstances here to be

substantially different than for LDVs.

All trucks, including those produced by

secondary manufacturers, are subject to

the enhanced evaporative emission

requirements and will have to upgrade

their control systems in response to

these new requirements. Also, the

ORVR test procedure for these vehicles,

as for LDVs, would facilitate the use of

integrated evaporative/ refueling control

systems. Potential safety concerns of

vehicles completed by secondary

manufacturers should not be

substantially different for integrated

enhanced evaporative/refueling control

systems than they are for enhanced

evaporative control systems alone. This

is especially the case for those

incomplete vehicles delivered to the

secondary manufacturer with a

complete fuel system as are most
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16275

incomplete LDTs. Also, the potential

safety benefits of ORVR systems would

accrue to trucks and secondary

manufacturer vehicles as well as to

LDVs. Thus, EPA believes the safety

concerns, if any, to be similar to those

for LDVs. In fact, while the

manufacturers opposed extending the

ORVR requirement to trucks on several

grounds, none indicated that safe truck

ORVR systems were not possible.

In any event, EPA's decision not to

finalize ORVR requirements for HDVs

(both complete and incomplete HDVs)

at this time and to delay LDT

implementation for three years or more

should minimize any remaining safety

concerns about ORVRsystems for trucks

(IV-H-23).

5. Safety Reviews

Nonetheless, EPA is very sensitive to

the uncertainties expressed by NHTSA,

and plans a program to implement its

authority to ensure-safe systems.

Sections 202(a)(4) and 206(a)(3)(A). (B)

of the CAA give EPA broad authority to

address the safety of emission control

systems. Section 202(a)(4) reads:

Effective with respect to vehicles and

engines manufactured after model year 1978, no emission control device, system, or

element of design shall be used in a new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine

for purposes of complying with standards

prescribed under this subsection if such

device. system, or element of design will cause or contribute to an unreasonable risk

to public health, welfare, or safety in its

operation or function.

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

(A) A certificate of conformity may be

issued under this section only if the

Administrator determines that the

manufacturer (or in the case of a vehicle or

engine for import, any person) has

established to the satisfaction of the

Administrator that any emission control - device, system, or element of design installed

on, or incorporated in, such vehicle or engine

conforms to applicable requirements of

section 202(a)(4).

(B) The Administrator may conduct such

tests and may require the manufacturer (or

any such person) to conduct such tests and

provide such information as is necessary to

carry out subparagraph (A) of this

paragraph. * * *

This authority has been implemented

for more than ten years. The Code of

Federal Regulations § 86.084-5(b)

requires that any system installed on a

new motor vehicle to enable such a

vehicle to conform to standards shall

not in its operation, function, or

malfunction result in any unsafe

condition endangering the motor

vehicle, its occupants, or persons or

property in close proximity to the

vehicle. Furthermore, § 86.091-23(d)

requires that manufacturers certify that

the vehicles for which emission

certification is requested conform to the

requirements of § 86.084-5(b). The

manufacturer must also agree to provide

descriptions of the tests conducted, the

results of such tests, and other

information upon which that

determination is based. Presently this

safety certification is submitted in the

application for certification which

manufacturers must submit for every

vehicle model they plan to produce for

commerce in the United States. EPA

intends to use this authority and the

approach described above to implement

the ORVR requirement. See also NRDC

v. Reilly, 983 F.2d at 267 (ultimate issue

of safety is to be addressed at

certification).

The ultimate responsibility for ORVR

system safety (both design and

performance in use) rests with the

manufacturers. As part of the

application for certification,

manufacturers will be required to make

the declarations prescribed-in § 86.091-

23 (d). During review of the certification

application, EPA will study the design

of the vehicle's ORVR system, its onvehicle configuration and operation,

and will consult directly with NHTSA

on these applications. Special

consideration will be given to the

potential concerns raised in the course

of the rulemaking process such as

component locations, materials used in

the components, and connections

between components. For canister-based

systems, items of special interest will

include canister location and shell

construction, canister/vapor hose access

for I/M testing, vapor hose routing and

wall thickness, integrity of connections,

and proximity of potential ignition

sources. In addition, manufacturers will

want to consider concerns raised in past

NHTSA safety assessments. The

November 1993 NHTSA report makes it

clear that proper design is critical in

system safety performance.

As was mentioned above, EPA could

ask for any or all of the information,

supporting the manufacturer's safety

assessment and EPA will consider all

information presented by the

manufacturer in this assessment

whether it is based on testing,

engineering analysis, or some other

source. As is present practice, EPA

expects that manufacturers will conduct

engineering risk assessments and

component, system, and vehicle tests to

assess the safety of various ORVR

system designs and on-vehicle

configurations and make any

modifications or devise and implement

the engineering solutions needed to

address potential problems.

ORVR-equipped vehicles would have

to meet the applicable FMVSSs,

including FMVSS 301 related to Fuel

System Integrity. As noted above,

NHTSA is considering amending the

latter to address ORVR system safety.

However, section 206(a)(3)(B) of the

CAA provides EPA with broad latitude

to require manufacturers to conduct

tests or provide other information as

may be needed to determine if an ORVR

system meets the vehicle safety

requirements prescribed in section

202(a)(4).

In the May 27, 1993 Federal Register

notice, EPA asked for comment on

whether any specific tests or other

information should berequired up front

as part of the certification process and,

if so, what information and in what

form would be most appropriate. No

commenter provided input on this point

and, given the resolution of the safety

issue, EPA has decided not to require

any specific information at this time.

In the same notice, EPA also asked

comment from auto manufacturers and

other interested parties on the

desirability of developing a process,

after promulgation of the final rule,

through which there could be a dialogue

with EPA and NHTSA on design

questions related to the in-use safety of

ORVR systems. Manufacturers'

comments indicated that resolution of

the safety issue as part of the rule was

most important, and they expressed

little interest in establishing a dialogue

at this time. EPA remains willing to

work with the auto manufacturers in

this area at any time in the future.

Although ultimate safety

determinations must await the

certification process, EPA wishes to

repeat that it knows of nothing that

would preclude the certification of

properly designed ORVR canister

systems on LDVs and LDTs. EPA

stresses that it has never determined for

purposes of certification under section

206 that any specific ORVR system

(including ORVR canisters) would

present an unreasonable risk to public

safety within the meaning of section

202(a)(4), 58 FR 30740-30741.

Consequently, the potential existence of

means other than canisters to control

refueling emissions should not preclude

certification of properly-designed

canister-based control systems.

6. Alternative Control Technologies

As part of the technical analysis

supporting the NPRM, EPA indicated

that control technologies such as

collapsible fuel bladders and cloth

impregnated with activated carbon

absorbers were potential alternatives to

carbon canisters. As part of the
16276 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

technology assessment for this final

rule, EPA reviewed the record of the

rule to see what options had been put

forth and to assess what progress had

been made in applying these

technologies to vehicle fuel systems.

The collective determination from the

review was that, in some cases, parties

have pursued development of these

technologies for other applications, such

as aircraft fuel systems and chemical

protection suits, but that less overall

progress has been made in applying

these technologies to automotive

applications. In some cases no progress

was made, and the technical feasibility

of these designs therefore remains

problematic. In one case commercial

development was dependent on

industry or government support. While

EPA cannot arbitrarily lreclude the use

of any control system design approach,

EPA concludes that such alternatives

are not generally likely to be available

for production application in the time

frame when manufacturers must begin

to install ORVR systems on their " vehicles. The potential existence of

these alternative control approaches

does not preclude certification of

properly designed canister-based ORVR

controls.

E. Certification Provisions

1. General

Today's action modifies the

certification process by adding the

requirement for demonstrating.

compliance with refueling emission

standards according to the prescribed

phase-in schedule. This action is

expected to have no direct impact on

manufacturers' fuel economy programs.

The following paragraphs summarize

EPA's certification and fuel economy

requirements with regard to ORVR

controls.

The regulations promulgated in this

action provide new definitions for

refueling families and refueling

emission control systems. For LDVs and

LDTs, manufacturers will normally

perform a refueling test on one

emission-data vehicle per refueling

emission control system and submit this

test data (low altitude data) to EPA for

possible confirmatory testing. Data

submitted to EPA should include the

exhaust emissions data from the exhaust

emissions test which is contained in the.

refueling test sequence. The data should

demonstrate compliance with all

applicable emission standards.

Manufacturers may submit high altitude

test data to EPA for possible

confirmatory testing, or provide a

statement in the application for

certification that vehicles will comply

with applicable emission standards at

high altitude. Note that this action

requires manufacturers to perform

exhaust and evaporative emission tests

using pre-loaded canisters. Also note

that vehicles inherently low in refueling

emissions can be certified using an

engineering evaluation approved by the

Administrator in lieu of testing.

After the testing has been completed,

manufacturers typically submit to EPA

an application for certification,

containing information about the

vehicles intended for production,

emission test data used to support

certification, statements of compliance

with emission standards and device

safety, and other information required

by EPA. This action will require

manufacturers to provide refueling

information in their application for

certification. To determine compliance

with applicable emission standards, this

action requires the refueling emission

test data to be adjusted by an additive

deterioration factor, developed by the

manufacturer using good engineering

judgement to assure that vehicles will

comply in actual use for the useful life

of the vehicle/engine. Should EPA have

any concerns about the safety of the

ORVR refueling system used by the

manufacturer, certification may be

delayed or denied, under section

202(a)(4) and 206(a)(3) of the CAA. This

should not happen, however, with

properly designed systems.

2. Fees

EPA-incurred costs associated with

the certification program can be

recovered in the Motor Vehicle and

Engine Compliance Program (MVECP)

fee program (see 40 CFR part 86, subpart

J). Today's action is likely to increase

the amount of the MVECP fee which is

collected during the certification

process since the Agency's burden is

expected to increase. As discussed in

the Fee Updating Procedure section of

the Fees final rule, (57 FR 30049, July

7, 1992), EPA will periodically review

its fees. During that fee updating

process, the Agency intends to assess

the additional burden incurred due to

this action, and if, as a result of the

review, EPA determines that there has

'been a significant change in the MVECP

costs, a proposal to revise the fee

schedule will be published in the

Federal Register. Thus, manufacturers

will be provided with sufficient notice

and comment period prior to any

changes in the amount of the fee

collected.

3. Fuel Economy

This action does not have any direct

impact on fuel economy labeling,

Corp.Qrate Average Fuel Economy .

(CAFE), or gas guzzler data submission

requirements. Because the changes to

the test procedure promulgated in this

action may affect fuel economy

measurements,I EPA will not require

use of the new procedure for fuel

economy testing. Therefore, to generate

city fuel economy values, manufacturers

may use the previously established

Federal Test Procedure or may

optionally use the pre-loaded canister

test procedures established in this

action (which are essentially the same

test procedures established in the

enhanced evaporative emission final

rule, ref. 58 FR 16002, March 24, 1993).

EPA will normally use the same

procedure for confirmatory testing as

used by the manufacturer.

F. Onboard Diagnostics Requirements

Today's action extends the existing

provisions for onboard diagnostic (OBD)

systems to ORVR equipment. (The final

rule for the existing program was

published February 19, 1993, 58 FR

9468). ORVR systems are very similar to

evaporative systems and this action

requires.that the OBD performance

requirements which currently apply to

evaporative systems apply on LDVs and

LDTs also to ORVR systems, both

integrated and non-integrated.

As with the current OBD program for

evaporative-only systems, OBD

monitoring of the ORVR system is not

mandatory. However, the same

approach to in-use testing will be used.

That is, any in-use vehicle with

evaporative emissions of 30 g/test or

higher measured over the first 24 hours

of the three-day diurnal from the revised

evaporative test procedure will be

flagged for further evaluation. That

evaluation will consist of making any

necessary repairs to ensure system

integrity, and then making a 0.04 inch

(1 mm) orifice anywhere within the

system. To demonstrate compliance,

operating the vehicle in this condition

over the full FTP must cause the

malfunction indicator light (MIL) to

illuminate. A failure of the OBD system

to signal a problem could contribute to

a decision to initiate a recall action.

While a system operating in such a

manner (i.e., without the MIL going on)

may not detect a malfunction related

solely to refueling events, EPA

I The fuel economy measurements may be

affected because vehicles will now be tested with

pre-loaded evaporative/onboard canisters. Purging

these canisters during the city and highway tests

could affect the air/fuel ratio of the engine which.

in turn. could affect the measured fuel economy

values for the test vehicle. EPA expects the effect

to be minimal, although it is possible that measureo

fuel economy values could change for some

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

nevertheless believes that such a system

will be sufficient if it detects general

problems with vapor and purge system

integrity.

For integrated ORVR systems,

manufacturers can use the same OBD

systems they use to nonitor evaporative

systems. For non-integrated systems,

both the evaporative and refueling sides

of the system will need to be monitored.

It should be possible for the same

technology to be used for both

monitoring tasks in most cases. For

example, a strategy that uses engine

vacuum to draw a certain minimum

level of vacuum or uses a small pump

to generate a positive pressure in the

entire vapor system could include a

non-integrated ORVR canister in the

monitoring as well. For both integrated

and non-integrated systems, EPA

believes this approach will result in an

adequate level of certainty that key

potential malfunctions in ORVR systems

will be identified and repaired. Since a

0.04 inch orifice would emit only about

3 grams of hydrocarbon vapor in a

normal refueling event, this approach

will assure a high level of in-use

control.

G. Enforcement and In-Use Performance

1. Liability Periods

In accordance with the CAAA of

1990, ORVR controls for new LDVs

must have useful lives of 10 years or

100,000 miles (160,000 km) or the

equivalent, with recall testing allowed

up to 7 years or 75,000 miles (120,000

kin) or the equivalent, whichever occurs

first (CAA section 202(d)(1); 42 U.S.C.

7521(d)(1)). LDTs with loaded vehicle

weight up to 3,750 pounds (1,700 kg)

have the same useful life requirement as

LDVs. All other LDTs have a useful life

requirement of 11 years or 120,000

miles (190,000 kin) or the equivalent,

whichever occurs first. Pursuant to

section 207(i), expected designs for

ORVR controls are not "specified major

emission control components," because

they cost less than $200. Therefore,

unless more expensive components are

utilized, manufacturers need only

warrant them for 2 years or 24,000 miles

(39,000 km) or the equivalent,

whichever occurs first. If, at some time

in the future, the Administrator should

determine that the ORVR controls are

"specified major emission control

components," manufacturers must

warrant them for 8 years or 80,000 miles

(130,000 km) or the equivalent,

whichever occurs first (CAA section

207(i)(2); 42 U.S.C. 7541(i)(2)).

2. Selective Enforcement Audit Testing

Pursuant to CAA section 206(b), the

Administrator is authorized to test new

motor vehicles in order to determine

whether vehicles being manufactured

do in fact conform to the regulations

with respect to which a certificate of

conformity was issued. Therefore, LDVs

and LDTs that are certified to meet the

refueling emission standard are subject

to this standard in a Selective

Enforcement Audit (SEA).

In the 1987 NPRM, EPA discussed

two testing.issues which resulted from

performing the refueling test on newly

built motor vehicles. The first issue

regarded the possible influence of new

vehicle background evaporative

emissions (i.e., hydrocarbon emissions

from such things as the fresh paint on

a new vehicle which has not fully

cured) on refueling emission

measurements. Historically, EPA has

not conducted SEA testing for

evaporative emissions due to the

relatively large non-fuel background

emissions emitted from newly built

vehicles. However, EPA expected that

background emissions would not

significantly affect refueling emission

measurements because the actual time

for background evaporative losses to

occur would be very short (refueling

emission measurements have a duration

of less than five minutes). Also,

refueling measurements would be taken

at an ambient temperature of

approximately 800 F, so fuel and nonfuel evaporative emissions would not be

increased by heating of the tank, engine,

or other subsystems, as would occur

during the usual evaporative emissions

test. However, to address any concerns

over the effects of background

emissions, EPA* proposed an additional

SEA testing procedure where

background emissions would be

measured and then subtracted from the

refueling emissions measurement. This

additional procedure would be used if

manufacturers provided evidence that

newly built vehicle background

emissions would significantly exceed

in-use vehicle background emissions,

which were intended to be included in

the refueling standard.

Because manufacturers' comments

raised concerns about conducting the

refueling test without measuring for

background emissions, and about the

extra time needed for the measurement,

this final rule will include the new

vehicle background emissions

measurement proposed in the 1987

NPRM as an optional procedure..

However, this decision must be made

before SEA testing is conducted. It will

apply to all vehicles tested. EPA realizes

that when this background procedure is

performed, in-use background

emissions, which are included in the

refueling standard, will also be

subtracted from the refueling

measurement. At this time, EPA has no

way of separating new vehicle

background emissions from in-use

background emissions. For purposes of

SEA testing only, both may therefore be

subtracted off. Background emissions

from the refueling measurements during

in-use testing will not be subtracted

since the standard includes

measurement of such emissions and

there is no concern regarding the higher

background emissions from new

vehicles. Additionally, upon approval

by EPA, a manufacturer may develop

and use its own background emissions

measurement procedure for use during

SEA testing. Revisions to 40 CFR part

86, subpart G, § 86.608 (for LDVs) and

to subpart K, § 86.1008 (for LDTs)

incorporate this additional procedure.

The second issue pertained to the

unstabilized condition of the vapor

storage canister(s) prior to SEA testing.

In the NPRM, EPA proposed that the

canisters of SEA vehicles be stabilized

through a bench procedure, prior to

refueling emissions testing, to help

account for any large differences that

may exist between an unused canister

and a broken-in (aged) canister.

Most manufacturers commented that

artificially aging canisters prior to

emissions testing using either the

procedure in the 1987 proposal or the

evaporative emissions rulemaking is

inconsistent with SEA testing and that

performing the aging process would

significantly add to the time needed to

complete testing. This would make it

difficult to conduct the correct number

of tests per twenty-four hour period as

proposed by § 86.608(g) for LDVs and

§ 86.1008(g)(3) for LDTs. Additionally,

several manufacturers indicated that if

their vehicles were to .undergo the entire

refueling test procedure (with all of the

necessary preconditioning drivedowns), the vehicles may accumulate

too many miles to be sold as new.

EPA agrees that the proposed benchaging procedure, as well as the updated

procedure, adds significant time to SEA

testing and, therefore, this final rule

does not include an artificial aging

procedure. EPA would have preferred to

include an aged canister in the SEA test

requirement, but at this point sees no

practical way to incorporate the aged

canister requirement and also address

the manufacturers' concerns.

Manufacturers are required to perform

the complete refueling test.with new

canisters for both integrated and nonintegrated designs. However, ff
16278 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

manufacturers still have concerns about

conducting the required number of tests

per twenty-four hour period or

accumulating too much mileage, they

may, upon EPA approval, perform the

seal test described in Section C above,

for either integrated or non-integrated

designs, during an SEA. The seal test is

aimed at verifying the integrity of

fillpipe seals and vapor lines and

eliminates consideration of potential

canister emissions by thoroughly bench

purging the canister prior to the

refueling event. The canister

preconditioning and preparatory driving

are also eliminated, allowing

manufacturers to complete testing

without the additional mileage

accumulation associated with the full

test. Finally, the same 0.20 g/gal

standard would apply and failure of the

seal test would be considered equivalent

to failing the full'refueling emissions

test.

During an SEA, manufacturers will

test selected SEA vehicles until a pass

or fail decision has been reached for

both the exhaust emission test and the

refueling test. The 0.20 g/gal.refueling

standard is subject to 40 percent

Acceptable Quality Level, which is the

same criteria used for exhaust

emissions.

3. Nonconformance Penalties (NCPs)

In the regulations governing NCPs (40

CFR 86.1103-87), EPA specifies the

criteria which must be met before an

NCP will be made available for a new

emission standard applicable to any

subclass of heavy-duty vehicles (i.e.,

vehicles with a GVWR in excess of 6000

lbs, including the LDTs with a GVWR

between 6,001 and 8,500 lbs. which are

covered in this regulation (HLDTs)). As

described in those regulations, an NCP

may be established for a new emission

standard if substantial work will be

required to meet the new standard and

a technological laggard is likely to exist.

Substantial work means the application

of technology not previously used in a

vehicle class or.subclass or the

significant modification of existing

technology or design parameters. . While ORVR systems have not been

used to control refueling emissions on

HLDTs and HDVs, EPA does not believe

that an ORVR requirement constitutes

substantial work as defined in the NCP

regulations nor does EPA believe that a

technological laggard will exist in the

vehicle groups. The ORVR system is

expected to be a minor extension of

existing evaporative emission control

technology rather than the application

of new technology or the- significant

modification of existing technology or

design. EPA expects manufacturers

would use activated carbon for storage

of refueling vapors and air stripping for

regeneration, just as are now used in

evaporative emission control systems on

LDTs and heavy-duty gasoline vehicles.

The purge systems will essentially be

the same as those used for evaporative

controls.

While there may be some subjective

disagreement on whether "substantial

work" will be involved in meeting the

standard, EPA believes all the

manufacturers of HLDTs will be able to

comply with the standard and that no

technological laggard will exist. EPA

recognizes that effort will be required to

equip the HLDTs with ORVR systems,

but the control technology required is

well defined and available to all affected

manufacturers. Furthermore, this

regulation provides a generous leadtime

and control is phased in over a threemodel-year period. Both of these factors

will provide relief to any manufacturer

who is having difficulty. In addition, the

adopted test procedures address the

manufacturers' technical concerns and

should negate the need for an NCP for

any manufacturer.

The regulations also permit

consideration of NCPs for other

emission standards, for which NCPs are

not already provided, if the standards

become more difficult to meet as a result

of a new standard. However, as the test

procedure is structured, EPA does not

believe that manufacturers will

encounter significant additional

difficulty in maintaining compliance

with exhaust or evaporative emission

standards as a result of the ORVR

requirement.

In sum, "substantial work" will not be

required and no technological laggards

are expected. Therefore, EPA will not

make NCPs available for refueling

exhaust or evaporative emission

standards.

4. In-Use Performance

As in the case of other evaporative

emissions, the control of refueling

emissions is highly dependent on

vehicle operating and environmental

factors such as vehicle speed and

ambient temperature. EPA recognizes, -

therefore, that simply passing a test

procedure cannot always ensure vehicle

designs that achieve good control in use.

EPA expects that manufacturers will

design vehicles that pass the test and

perform well in use. However, in order

to best achieve-the statutory goal of a

high degree of control efficiency, the

Agency will, if necessary, make full use

of existing regulations against defeat

devices. Thus, EPA may deny

certification upon determination that a

particular refueling emission control

system design constitutes a defeat

device (40 CFR 86.094-16).2 EPA could

also invoke the defeat device regulations

in the course or on the basis of the

results of selective enforcement audit

(SEA) and recall testing.

The following discussion, while not

necessarily all-inclusive, provides

examples of potential defeat devices

related to compliance with refueling

emission standards. EPA's main concern

is that some purge strategies used to

pass emission tests may be ineffective

over a wide range of in-use driving

patterns. For integrated systems, this

concern will be addressed in the

Agency's evaluation of evaporative

system purge strategies during the

certification process, as discussed in the

evaporative emissions final rule (58 FR

at 16007). The Agency will extend this

evaluation to non-integrated refueling

system purge strategies as well.

This evaluation is intended to identify

vehicle designs that, though capable of

passing emission tests, may not function

effectively in use. These would include

non-integrated system designs that

purge well during the prolonged warmvehicle driving allowed in the refueling

test drivedown, but not in the driving

patterns involving frequent cold starts

often encountered in use.

EPA also will consider to be defeat

devices those designs that .purge at

substantially higher rates during highspeed operation than during low-speed

operation, such that they primarily

depend on the high-speed purge to pass

emission tests. Even if such designs do

pass the test, they may produce high

refueling emissions if they purge

substantially less during typical nonfreeway urban driving than during the

refueling test drivedown. Also, designs

that shut purge off at any time for other

than safety reasons would be closely

examined by EPA for possible

classification as defeat devices.

III. Public Participation

ORVR controls have been under

consideration by EPA since the CAAAs

of 1977. The public process, which first

began in 1978, has proceeded through

various stages over the past 15 years.

In response to the provisions of

section 202(a)(6) of the 1977 CAAAs,

EPA initiated a public processin 1978

to receive comments on the feasibility

and desirability of implementing ORVR

controls. In 1980; EPA published a

technical report which tentatively

concluded that ORVR controls were

feasible for LDVs. However, no action

2 "Prohibition of Use of Emission Control Defeat

Devices," MSPC Advisory Circular No. 24,

December 11. 1972.
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 86 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16279

was taken at the time due to concerns

over economic difficulties in the auto

industry.

EPA reinstituted its assessment of

ORVR controls in 1983 as part of a

broad assessment of the strategies

available to control efiissions in the

gasoline marketing industry. As part of

this study, in August 1984, EPA

published an extensive analysis of the

options available to control refueling

emissions including ORVR controls.

Supporting documentation for this

analysis are in public docket A-84-07,

along with the public comments

received on the "Gasoline Marketing

Study".

After receiving comments on the

study, EPA prepared an in-depth

analysis of the comments, developed

further work on several key issues

related to ORVR controls, and

conducted enhanced assessments of the

options under consideration. This

resulted in a draft Regulatory Impact

Analysis, Response to Public

Comments, and related analysis and

documentation related-to ORVR

controls. This information is also in

public docket A-84-07. A public

meeting regarding the ORVR test

procedure was also held during this

time frame.

The results of EPA's study of emission

control options for the gasoline

marketing industry culminated in an

August 1987 proposal to require ORVR

controls on gasoline-powered LDVs,

LDTs, and HDVs. A public hearing was

held in October 1987 and the comment

period closed in February 1988.

Information supporting the NPRM and

comments on the proposal are in public

docket A-87-11. However, due initially

to safety concerns raised by some

commenters and later to pending

revisions to the CAA, EPA deferred

action on finalizing the ORVR rule.

The 1990 CAAAs contained

provisions requiring an integrated

program of LDV ORVR and Stage II

controls. In response to the ORVR

provisions, on September 3, 1991 (56 FR

43682), EPA published a Federal

Register notice seeking further comment

on the NPRM and the safety issues

related to ORVR controls including a

safety assessment prepared by the DoT.

A public hearing was held to receive

comment on these issues on September

26, 27, 1991. The comment period

closed in late October 1991. These

comments and related materials are in

public docket A-87-11. On April 15, 1992, EPA published a Federal Register

notice (57 FR 13220) announcing its

decision not to proceed with

implementing ORVR controls at that

time, based on safety concerns raised by

DoT.

Subsequently, a panel of the DC

Circuit overturned EPA's 1992 action.

EPA then published another Federal

Register notice (May 27, 1993, 58 FR

30731) raising issues for public

comment and allowing approximately

90 days for comment. Another public

hearing seeking comment on the NPRM

and other changed circumstances was

also held. This hearing was held on July

22, 1993 and comments closed 30 days

later. These comments are in public

docket A-87-11 as are EPA materials in

support of the notice.

During the years in. which ORVR has

been under consideration, there have

been at least five formal opportunities

for oral and/or written public comment.

In addition, numerous other public

interactions have occurred on this

matter and have been documented and

placed in the docket for public review.

Over the fifteen years of the ORVR

public process, EPA has received

hundreds of written comments ,regarding this requirement. However,

many of the past comments have

essentially been addressed by changed

circumstances or other developments.

Major issues such as fuel volatility and

improved vehicle evaporative emission

controls have now been decided by

regulation, and the control of refueling

emissions using Stage II equipment was

addressed by the 1990 CAAAs. Also,

many previous comments in areas such

as ORVR costs and test procedures were

factored into subsequent analyses and

notices, making only the most recent set

of comments applicable.

The public docket contains a

Summary and Analysis of Comments

document which addresses still-relevant

issues raised by the commenters. It

generally does not address past

comments on issues which have been

resolved by related statutory or

regulatory action or through subsequent

published analyses or Federal Register

notices. Also, it does not address

comments which were received at one

point but later negated by subsequent

comments due to further developments

and changed circumstances. The

Summary and Analysis of Comments

focuses primarily on comments received

in response to the June 1993 Federal

Register notice and unresolved

comments from both the August 1987

NPRM and September 1991 Federal

Register notices.

IV. Regulatory Impact Analysis

As part of the assessment and

decision making process regarding

ORVR controls, EPA has prepared an indepth Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA).

This RIA is available in the public

docket. The RIA assesses the

environmental impact, costs, and cost

effectiveness of ORVR controls, as well

as other associated benefits, for the

combined LDV and LDT program

described above for a number of

scenarios. It also includes a sensitivity

analysis for several key parameters. It

should be noted that the RIA was

completed prior to EPA's decision to

delay the requirements for LDTs and to

exclude HDVs. These controls were

included in the analysis and were

assumed to begin in 1998. EPA expects

that inclusion of these items in the

analysis has no significant effect on the

results and does not affect the

conclusions which are based on the

analysis. The major findings of the RIA

for LDV and LDT ORVR controls are

presented below.

Before discussing these key findings,

it is important to note that EPA analysis

has assumed that ORVR controls will

apply nationwide to all vehicle classes.

However, the scenarios analyzed focus

not only on the overall nationwide

control program, but also on the control

in the ozone NAAs. Furthermore, since

Stage II controls are in place or expected

in most of the ozone NAAs, the

incremental impacts of ORVR controls

relative to Stage II are assessed as well.

A., Environmental Impact

While refueling emissions control has

value whenever it occurs, it is most

critical during the ozone season. The

five month ozone season refueling

emission inventory is about 200,000

tons per ypar; when annualized, this

value increases to approximately

475,000 tons per year. Refueling

emissions vary directly with fuel use

and fuel RVP/temper.atures.

Approximately 52 percent of refueling

emissions occur in AAs and 48 percent

occur in NAAs. Of this 48 percent,

about 33 percent currently are, or are

expected to be, subject to Stage II

control equipment. The percentage of

gasoline consumption in the NAAs and

covered by Stage II is slightly higher (55

and 44 percent respectively) than the

contribution to the refueling emission

inventory, primarily due to RVP

controls.

The emission reductions achieved by

ORVR controls depend on the in-use

efficiency of the control system and the

area in which the control is applied.

Based on the stringency of the test

procedure the full life useful life

certification.requirement, and the

salutary effect of Inspection/

Maintenance (I/M) programs and

onboard diagnostics, EPA expects very

high in-use efficiency from ORVR
16280 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

systems. In the ozone NAAs, where RVP

control and basic and enhanced I/M are

prevalent, EPA expects in-use efficiency

of over 95 percent, with a somewhat

lower value in attainment areas due to

lack of RVP control and I/M. In the

ozone NAAs, EPA expects in-use

efficiency of approximately 97 percent.

The in-use efficiency in attainment

areas (which would lack RVP control

and enhanced I/M) is somewhat less,

and in some cases is predicted to be less

than 95 percent. The Agency notes,

however, that this prediction is skewed

because data for the southeast U.S.

indicate that average dispensed fuel

temperature in that region is seven

fahrenheit degrees higher than

anywhere else in the country. EPA is

basing its predictions on this

information because it is the only

available data. However, the Agency

knows of no reason why dispensed fuel

temperatures should be so much higher

in this region. If the same range of

dispensed fuel temperatures were used

for the southeast region as for the

southwest U.S., the in-use efficiency of

properly operating systems in all areas

would be predicted to average 95

percent.

The benefits vary over time and with

the scenario analyzed. Benefits vary

over time because of the phase-in of the

ORVR requirement and the need for

fleet turnover to occur before full

implementation of ORVR-equipped

vehicles occurs. The key variable with

regard to scenarios is the presence and

possible phase-out of Stage II controls.

ORVR benefits in NAAs include control

over service stations in NAAs without

Stage II, control at service stations

which now receive waivers, and control

over vapors missed by Stage II

equipment.

For the rulemaking as a whole,

neglecting the presence of Stage II

controls, LDV/LDT ORVR would

achieve average annual emission

reductions of over 420,000 tons per

year. With Stage II phaseout when

ORVR and Stage.II would cover the

same percent of fuel in use, the average

annual emission reduction is about

378,000 tons. Even if Stage II controls

are retained, an incremental benefit of

285,000 tons occurs nationwide. Of

these reductions, approximately 20

percent occur in.NA areas, with the

overall percentage in NAAs increasing

substantially if Stage II is phased out.

B. Costs of Control

ORVR costs of control are comprised

of control system hardware costs plus

short term (five year) costs for research,

development, and testing (R,D,& T)

minus fuel vapor recovery credits. Costs

were derived incremental to the effects

of enhanced evaporative emissions and

RVP control, with the assumption that

most vehicles would use integrated

evaporative/refueling control systems

with liquid seals in the fillneck. The

retail price equivalent (RPE) for

hardware and R,D,& T costs range from

$6-8 for LDVs and LDTs.

Even these small costs are somewhat

offset by ORVR fuel recovery credits.

The level of the ORVR recovery credit

depends on whether Stage II equipment

is used when refueling. For the

nationwide case, which involves Stage

II and non-Stage II areas, the NPV of the

recovery credit ranges from $2-$4 pervehicle for LDVs and LDTs. Accounting

for these recovery credits, both short

and long term net costs are under $5 for

LDVs and LDTs.

EPA assessed the net costs of LDV and

LDT ORVR controls for three scenarios.

The first (baseline) scenario neglected

the presence of Stage II controls, the

second accounted for Stage II controls

with phaseout in 2010, and the third

included Stage II with no phaseout. In

each case, the ORVR hardware and

R,D,& T costs are the same, but the

recovery credit varies. In the first case

the average annual cost is about - $6

million over the period 1998-2020.

With Stage II present and phasing out in

2010, the average annual costs is $2

million. With no phase out average

annual costs increase to $27 million

over the period 1998 to 2020. The 1998

NPV costs (discounted at 7 percent to

1998) for the same three scenarios are

$102 million, $264 million, and $435

million, respectively. In the cases where

costs are negative, it is because the

value of the recovery credits exceeds the

hardware and R, D, & 't costs.

C. Cost Effectiveness

Using the net present value of the

costs and emission reduction benefits,

EPA has calculated the cost

effectiveness of LDV/LDT ORVR

controls for the three scenarios

mentioned above. For the first case

where Stage II controls are neglected,

the cost effectiveness is about $35 per

ton. In the second case where Stage II

control is considered, but phased out in

2010, the cost effectiveness is about

$100 per ton. In the final case where

Stage II is not phased out, the cost

effectiveness is about $210 per ton.

When all costs are included in the

calculations but only NAA emission

reductions are credited, the cost,

effectiveness values change. For the first

case discussed above, cost effectiveness

value is $70 per ton. In the second and

third scenarios, the cost effectiveness

would increase to about $250 and $775

per ton, respectively.

D. Other Benefits

In addition to the VOC emission

reduction benefits cited above, LDV/

LDT ORVR controls have other benefits.

ORVR controls would result in an

average energy savings equivalent to 78

million gallons of gasoline per year

between the period 1998 and 2020

assuming no Stage II phaseout and"

about 108 million gallons per year if

Stage II is phased out. In addition, there

will be health benefits as a result of

reductions in air toxic emissions. Best

estimates are the avoidance of about 5-

6 cancer incidences per year as-a result

of lower refueling benzene emissions.

Additional cancer avoidances are

possible depending on the assumption

regarding the toxicological impact of the

remainder of the constituents of the

gasoline vapor. Reductions in potential

non-cancer health effects and welfare

benefits such as reduced crop and

material damage due to ozone would

occur as welL

E. Benefit-Cost Ratio

Comparing the average annual cost

and emission reduction benefits shown

in the tables presented in the RIA, if

even a minimal dollar value of $500 per

ton is ascribed to the health and

environmental benefits, the dollar

benefits of LDV/LDT ORVR controls

exceed the costs. The benefit to cost

ratio for NA areas ranges from 1.3 for

the scenario where Stage H is retained

to 32 if Stage II is phased out. If Stage

II operating costs which are no longer

incurred after Stage II phaseout are

considered,. there is an annual average

monetary savings of about $40 million

since the costs of operating the Stage II

control technology are eliminated.

V. Consultation With DOT

As required by section 202(a)(6) of the

Clean Air Act, EPA has consulted at

length with the Department of

Transportation before promulgating this

rule. Interagency review documents are

contained in section IV-H of this

rulemaking's docket. In addition, the

docket contains a November 1993 DOT/

NHTSA report entitled "An Assessment

of Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery

System Safety" providedto EPA by

DOT/NHTSA as part of the consultation

process.

VI. Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, EPA hereby finds that these

regulations are of national applicability.

Accordingly, judicial review of this

action is available only by filing a
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations "16281

petition for review in the United States

Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit within 60 days of

publication. Under section 307(b)(2) of

the Act, the requirements which are the

subject of today's notice may not be

challenged later in judicial proceedings

brought by EPA to enforce these

requirements.

VII. Statutory Authority

The statutory authority for this

proposal is provided by sections 202(a)

(1) and (2), 202(a)(6), 206, and 301(a) of

the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(1) and (2),

7521(a)(6), 7525, and 7601(a).

VIII. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993) the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is "significant" and therefore

subject to OMB review and the

requirements of the Executive Order.

The Order defines "significant

regulatory action" as one that is likely

to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect

in a material way the economy,.a sector of

the economy, productivity, competition, jobs,

the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

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

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan

programs or the rights and obligations of

recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the President's

priorities, or he principles set forth in the

Executive Order.

These final regulations have been

reviewed in accordance with Executive

Order 12866. Under the terms of the

Order the Administrator has assessed

the potential costs and benefits of this

regulatory action.

Pursuant to the terms of Executive

Order 12866, it has been determined

that this rule is a "significant regulatory

action" because this rule has an effect

on the long-term implications of

stationary and mobile source controls

and requires interagency consultations.

The-average annual cost is about $27

million over the period 1998 to 2020,

assuming no Stage II phaseout. If Stage

II is phased out, recovery credits for

ORVR systems increase to the point that

average annual costs are only about $2

million (ignoring the savings in Stage II

maintenance). As such, this action was

submitted to OMB for review. Changes

made in response to 0MB suggestions or

recommendations will be documented

in the public record.

IX. Compliance With the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5

U.S.C. 601-602, requires that Federal

agencies examine the impacts of their

regulations on small entities. Under 5

U.S.C. 604(a), whenever an agency is

required to publish a rulemaking, it

.Must prepare and make available for

public comment a regulatory flexibility

analysis (RFA). Such an analysis is not

required if the head of an agency

certifies that a rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities,

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

The requirements for ORVR systems

in this regulation apply to motor vehicle

manufacturers. Small LDV

manufacturers have been granted a

delayed phase-in of the ORVR

requirement and LDT manufacturers

have a longer leadtime than originally

proposed. Therefore, I certify that this

rule will not have a significant adverse

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

X. Information Collection Requirements

Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection

requirements in this rule will be

submitted for approval to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) under

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq. An Information Collection

Request document has been prepared by

EPA (ICR #783.32) and a copy may be

obtained from Sandy Farmer,

Information Policy Branch; EPA, 401 M

'Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 or

by calling 202-260-2740. These

requirements are not effective until

OMB approves them and a technical

amendment to that effect is published in

the Federal Register.

This collection of information has an

estimated annual reporting and

recordkeeping burden averaging 334

hours per response, These estimates

include time for reviewing instructions,

searching existing data sources,

gathering and maintaining the data

needed, and completing and reviewing

the collection of information.

Send comments regarding the burden

estimate or any other aspect of this

collection of information, including

suggestions for reducing this burden to

Chief, Information Policy Branch; EPA;

401 M Street, SW (Mail Code 2136);

Washington, DC 20460; and to the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Washington, DC 20503, marked

"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA."

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 86

Administrative practice and

procedures, Confidential business

information, Labeling, Motor vehicle

pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

40 CFR Part 88

Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 600

Administrative practice and

procedure, Electric power, Fuel

economy, Labeling, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: January 24, 1994.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, parts 86, 88, and 600 of title

40 of the Code of Federal Regulations

are amended as follows:

PART 86-CONTROL OF AIR

POLLUTION FROM NEW AND IN-USE

MOTOR VEHICLES AND NEW AND INUSE MOTOR VEHICLE ENGINES:

CERTIFICATION AND TEST

PROCEDURES

1. The authority citation for part 86

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 202, 203, 205, 207, 208,

215, 216, and 301(a), Clean Air Act, as'

amended (42 U.S.C. 7521, 7522, 7524. 7525,

7541, 7542, 7549, 7550, 7552, and 7601(a)).

Subpart A-[Amended]

2. A new § 86.001-2 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-2 Definitions.

The definitions of § 86.098-2

continue to apply to 1998 and later

model year vehicles. The definitions

listed in this section apply beginning

with the 2001 model year.

Useful life means:

(1) For light-duty vehicles, and for

light light-duty trucks not subject to the

Tier 0 standards of § 86.094-9(a),

intermediate useful life and/or full

useful life. Intermediate useful life is a

period of use of 5 years or 50,000 miles,

whichever occurs first. Full useful life is

a period of use of 10 years or 100,000

miles, whichever occurs first; except as

otherwise noted in § 86.094-9. The

useful life of evaporative and/or

refueling emission control systems on

the portion of these vehicles subject to

the evaporative emission test

requirements of § 86.130-96, and/or the

refueling emission test requirements of

§ 86.151-2001, is defined as a period of
16282 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

use of 10 years or 100,000 miles,

whichever occurs first.

•(2) For light light-duty trucks subject

to the Tier 0 standards of § 86.094-9(a),

and for heavy light-duty truck engine

families, intermediate and/or full useful

life. Intermediate useful life is a period

of use of 5 years or 50,000 miles,

whichever occurs first. Full useful life is

a period of use of 11 years or 120,000

miles, whichever occurs first. The

useful life of evaporative emission and/

or refueling control systems on the

portion of these vehicles subject to the

evaporative emission test requirements

of § 86.130-96, and/or the refueling

emission test requirements of § 86.151-

2001, is also defined as a period of 11

years or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs first.

(3) For an Otto-cycle heavy-duty

engine family:

(i) For hydrocarbon and carbon

monoxide standards, a period of use of

8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first

occurs.

(ii) For the oxides of nitrogen

standard, a period of use of 10 years or

110,000 miles, whichever first occurs. (iii) For the portion of evaporative

emission control systems subject to the

evaporative emission test requirements

of § 86.1230-96, a period of use of 10

years or 110,000 miles, whichever

occurs first.

(4) For a diesel heavy-duty engine

family:

(i) For light heavy-duty diesel

engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon

monoxide, and particulate standards, a

period of use of 8 years or 110,000

miles, whichever first occurs. (ii) For light heavy-duty diesel

engines, for the oxides of nitrogen

standard, a period of use of 10 years or

110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(iii) For medium heavy-duty diesel

engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon

monoxide, and particulate standards, a

period of use of 8 years or 185,000

miles, whichever first occurs. (iv) For medium heavy-duty diesel

engines, for the oxides of nitrogen

standard, a period of use of 10 years or

185,000 miles, whichever first occurs. (v) For heavy heavy-duty diesel

engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon

monoxide, and particulate standards, a

period of use of 8 years or 290,000

miles, whichever first occurs, except as

provided in paragraph (4)(vii) of this

definition.

(vi) For heavy heavy-duty diesel

engines, for the oxides of nitrogen

standard, a period of use of 10 years or

290,000 miles, whichever first occurs. (vii) For heavy heavy-duty diesel

engines used in urban buses, for the

particulate standard, a period of use of

10 years or 290,000 miles, whichever

first occurs.

3. A new § 86.001-9 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-9 Emission standards for 2001

and later model year light-duty trucks.

Section 86.001-9 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.096-9 or § 86.097-9. Where a

paragraph in § 86.096-9 or § 86.097-9 is

identical and applicable to § 86.001-9,

this may be indicated by specifying the

corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.096-9." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see §86.097-9.".

(a) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.097-9.

(b) introductory text through (b)(5)

[Reserved]. For guidance see. § 86.096-9.

(b)(6) Vehicles certified to the

refueling standards set forth in

paragraph (d) of this section are not

required to demonstrate compliance

with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback

standards contained in § 86.096-9

(b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii): Provided, that

they meet the requirements of § 86.001-

28(o.

(c) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.097-9.

(d) Refueling emissions from 2001

and later model year gasoline-fueled

and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle- and

petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled

diesel-cycle-light duty trucks of 6,000

pounds or less GVW shall not exceed

the following standards. The standards

apply equally to certification and in-use

vehicles.

(1) Standards-(i) Hydrocarbons (for

gasoline-fueled Otto-cycle and

petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles).

0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per

liter) of fuel dispensed.

(ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon

Equivalent (for methanol-fueled

vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053

gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.

(2)(i) The standards set forth in

paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this

section refer to a sample of refueling

emissions collected under the

conditions as set forth in subpart B of

this part and measured in accordance

with those procedures.

. (ii) For vehicles powered by

petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines,

the provisions set forth in paragraph

(d)(1)(i) of this section may be waived:

Provided, that the manufacturer

complies with the provisions of

§ 86.001-28(o of this subpart.

(3) A minimum of the percentage

shown in Table AOl-09 of a

manufacturer's sales of the applicable

model year's gasoline- and methanolfueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled

and methanol-fueled diesel-cycle lightduty trucks of 6,000 pounds or less

GVW shall be tested under the

procedures in subpart B of this part

indicated for 2001 and later model

years, and shall not exceed the

standards described in paragraph (d)(1)

of this section. Vehicles certified in

accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of

this section, as determined by the

provisions of § 86.001-28(g), shall not

be counted in the calculation of the

percentage of compliance.

TABLE A01-09.-IMPLEMENTATION

SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK

REFUELING EMISSION TESTING

Model year Sales

percentage

2001 ........................................ 40

2002 ..................................... . 80

2003 and subsequent ............... 100

(e) through (f) [Reserved]

(g) through (k) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.097-9.

4. A new § 86.001-21 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-21 Application for certification.

Section 86.001-21 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-21 or § 86.096-21. Where a

paragraph in § 86.094-21 or § 86.096-21

is identical and applicable to § 86.001-

21, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance gee

§ 86.094-21." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-21.".

(a) through (b)(3) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-21.

(b)(4)(i) For light-duty vehicles and

light-duty trucks, a description of the

test procedures to be used to establish

the evaporative emission and/or

refueling emission deterioration factors,

as appropriate, required to be

determined and supplied in § 86.001-

23(b)(2).

(b)(4)(ii) through (b)(5)(iv) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.094-21.

(b)(5)(v) For light-duty vehicles and

applicable light-duty trucks with nonintegrated refueling emission control

systems, the number of continuous

UDDS cycles, determined from the fuel

economy on the UDDS applicable to the

test vehicle of that evaporative/

refueling emission family-emission

control system combination, required to

use a volume of fuel equal to 85% of

fuel tank volume.

(b)(6) through (8) [Reseirved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-21.

(b)(9) For each light-duty vehicle,

light-duty truck, evaporative/refueling

emission family or heavy-duty vehicle
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16283

.evaporative emission family, a

description of any unique procedures

required to perform evaporative and/or

refueling emission tests, as applicable,

(including canister working capacity,

canister bed volume, and fuel

temperature profile for the running loss

test) for all vehicles in that evaporative

and/or evaporative/refueling emission

family, and a description of the method

used to develop those unique

procedures.

(10) For each light-duty vehicle or

applicable light-duty truck evaporative/

refueling emission family, or each

heavy-duty vehicle evaporative

emission family:

(i) Canister working capacity,

according to the procedures specified in

§ 86.132-96(h)(1)(iv);

(ii) Canister bed volume; and

(iii) Fuel temperature profile for the

running loss test, according to the

procedures specified in § 86.129-94(d).

(c) through (i) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-21.

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

see. §86.096-21.

5. A new § 86.001-22 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-22 Approval of application for

certification; test fleet selections;

determinations o parameters subject to

adjustment for certification and Selective

Enforcement Audit, adequacy of limits, and

physically adjustable ranges.

Section 86.001-22 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-22. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.094-22 is identical and applicable

to § 86.001-22, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-22.".

(a) through (c) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-22.

(d) Approval of test procedures. (1)

The Administrator does not approve the

test procedures for establishing the

evaporative or refueling emission

deterioration factors for light-duty

vehicles and light-duty trucks. The

manufacturer shall submit the

procedures as required in § 86.098-

21(b)(4)(i) prior to the Administrator's

selection of the test fleet under

§ 86.098-24(b)(1), and if such

procedures will involve testing of

durability data vehicles selected by the

Administrator or elected by the

manufacturer under § 86.098-24(c)(1),

prior to initiation of such testing.

(d)(2) through (g) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-22.

6. A new § 86.001-23 is added to

subpart A to read as follows: .

§86.001-23 Required data.

Section 86.001-23 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.095-23 or § 86.098-23. Where a

paragraph in § 86.095-23 or § 86.098-23

is identical and applicable to § 86.001-

23, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the.

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.095-23." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.098-23.".

(a) through (b)(1) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23.

(b)(2) For light-duty vehicles and

light-duty trucks, the manufacturer shall

submit evaporative emission and/or

refueling emission deterioration factors

for each evaporative/refueling emission

family-emission control system

combination and all test data that are

derived from testing described under

§ 86.001-21(b)(4)(i) designed and

conducted in accordance with good

engineering practice to assure that the

vehicles covered by a certificate issued

under § 86.001-30 will meet the

evaporative and/or refueling emission

standards in § 86.099-8 or § 86.001-9,

as appropriate, for the useful life of the

vehicle.

(b)(3) through (b)(4)(ii) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23.

(b)(4)(iii) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.098-23.

(c) through (e)(1) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23.

(e)(2) For evaporative and refueling

emission durability, or light-duty truck

or heavy-duty engine exhaust emission

durability, a statement of compliance

with paragraph (b)(2) of this section or

§ 86.095-23 (b)(1)(ii), (b)(3) or (b)(4) (i)

and (ii) or § 86.098-23 (b)(4)(iii), as

applicable.

(3] For certification of vehicles with

non-integrated refueling systems, a

statement that the drivedown used to

purge the refueling canister was the

same as desqribed in the manufacturers'

applicotion for certification.

Furthermore, a description of the

procedures used to determine the

number of equivalent UDDS miles

required to purge the refueling canisters,

as determined by the provisions of

§ 86.098-21(b)(5)(v) and subpart B.

Furthermore, a written statement to the

Administrator that all data, analyses,

test procedures, evaluations and other

documents, on which the above

statement is based, are available to the

Administrator upon request.

(f) through (1) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23.

(m) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.098.23.

7. A new § 86.001--24 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-24. Test vehicles and engines.

Section 86.001-24 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.096-24 or § 86.098-24. Where a

paragraph in § 86.096-24 or § 86.098-24

is identical and applicable to § 86.001-

24, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.096-24." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.098-24.".

(a) introductory text through (a)(4)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-

24.

(a)(5) through (a)(7) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.098-24.

(a)(8) through (b)(1)(vi) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.096-24.

(b)(1)(vii)(A) through (b)(1)(viii)(A}

(Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-

24.

(b}(viii)(B) through (e) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-24.

(f) Carryover and carryacross of

durability and emission data. In lieu of

testing an emission-data or durability

vehicle (or engine) selected under

§ 86.096-24 (b) or (c), and submitting

data therefor, a manufacturer may, with

the prior written approval of the

Administrator, submit exhaust emission

data, evaporative emission data and/or

refueling emission data, as applicable,

on a similar vehicle (or engine) for

which certification has been obtained or

for which all applicable data required

under § 86.098-23 has previously been

submitted.

(g) through (h) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-24.

8. A new § 86.001-25 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.001-25 Maintenance.

Section 86.001-25 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-25 or § 86.098-25. Where a

paragraph in § 86.094-25 or § 86.098-25

is identical and applicable to § 86.001-

25, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-25." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.098-25.".

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

§ 86.094-25.

(a)(2) Maintenance performed on

vehicles, engines, subsystems, or

components used to determine exhaust,

evaporative or refueling emission

deterioration factors, as appropriate,'is

classified as either emission-related or

non-emission-related and each of these

can be classified as either scheduled or

unscheduled. Further, some emissionrelated maintenance is also classified as

critical emission-related maintenance.
16284 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations "

(b) Introductory text through

(b)(3)(vi)(D) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-25.

(b)(3)(vi)(E) through (b)(3)(vi)(J)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-

25.

(b)(3)(vii) through (b)(6)(i)(E)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

25.

(b)(6)(i)(F) Evaporative and refueling

emission control system components

(excluding canister air filter).

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

guidance see § 86.094-25.

9. A new § 86.001-26 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-26 Mileage and service.

accumulation; emission measurements.

Section 86.001-26 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-26, § 86.095-26, § 86.096-26 or

§ 86.098-26. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.094-26, § 86.095-26, § 86.096-26 or

§ 86.098-26 is identical and applicable

to § 86.001-26, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-26." or

"[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

26."or "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.096-26." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.098-26.".

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

see § 86.094-26.

(a)(3) introductory text through

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

§ 86.098-26.

(a)(3)(i)(B) through (a)(3)(ii)(B)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

26.

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

see § 86.098-26.

(a)(3)(ii)(D) through (b)(2)(iii)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

26.

(b)(2)(iv) Service or mileage

accumulation which may be part of the

test procedures used by the

manufacturer to establish evaporative

and/or refueling emission deterioration

factors.

(b)(3) through (b)(4)(i)(B) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.094-26.

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

or refueling emission tests for emissiondala vehicle(s) selected for testing under

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

§ 86.098-24 (b)(1)(vii) shall be

conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile

minimum) at which the engine-system

combination is stabilized for emission

testing or at 6,436 kilometer (4,000 mile)

test point under low-altitude conditions.

(b)(4)(i)(D) through (b)(4)(ii)(B)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

26.

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

or refueling emission tests for emission

data vehicle(s) selected for testing under

§ 86.094-24(b)(1) (ii), (iii), and (iv) shall

be conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile

minimum) at which the engine-system

combination is stabilized for emission

testing or at the 6,436 kilometer (4,000

mile) test point under low-altitude

conditions.

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

see § 86.095-26.

(b)(4)(iii) [Reserved]

(b)(iv) through (c)(3) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-26.

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

§ 86.096-26.

(d) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-26. 10. A new § 86.001-28 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-28 Compliance with emission

standards.

Section 86.001-28 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§§ 86.094-28 and 86.098-28. Where a

paragraph in § 86.094-28 or § 86.098-28

is identical and applicable to § 86.001-

28, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-28." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.098-28.".

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

§ 86.094-28.

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

§ 86.098-28.

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

§ 86.094-28.

(a)(4) introductory text through

(a)(4)(i) introductory text [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.098-28.

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

For guidance see § 86.094-28.

(a)(4)(i) (C) through (D) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.098-28.

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

see § 86.094-28.

(a)(4)(ii) (B) through (C) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.098-28.

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

§ 86.098-28.

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

§ 86.094-28.

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

§ 86.098-28.

(a) (5) and (6) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-28.

(a)(7) introductory text through

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

§ 86.098-28.

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

§ 86.094-28.

(1)(1) Paragraph (b) of this section

applies to light-duty trucks.

(2) Each exhaust, evaporative and

refueling emission standard (and family

emission limits, as appropriate) of

§ 86.001-9 applies to the emissions of

vehicles for the appropriate useful life

as defined in §§ 86.098-2 and 86.001-9.

(b)(3) through (b)(6) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-28.

(b)(7)(i) Paragraph (b)(7) of this

section describes the procedure for

determining compliance of a new

vehicle with evaporative emission

standards. The procedure described

here shall be used for all vehicles in

applicable model years.

(ii) The manufacturer shall determine,

based on testing described in § 86.001-

21(b)(4)(i)(A), and supply an

evaporative emission deterioration

factor for each evaporative/refueling

emission family-emission control

system combination. The factor shall be

calculated by subtracting the emission

level at the selected test point from the

emission level at the useful life point.

(iii) The official evaporative emission

test results for each evaporative/

refueling emission-data vehicle at the

selected test point shall be adjusted by

the addition of the appropriate

deteriofation factor. However, if the

deterioration factor supplied by the

manufacturer is less than zero, it shall

be zero for the purposes of this

paragraph. (iv) The emission value to compare

with the standards shall be the adjusted

emission value of paragraph (b)(7)(iii) of

this section rounded to two significant

figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-

67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in

§ 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii))for each

evaporative emission-data vehicle.

(8)(i) Paragraph (b)(8) of this section

describes the procedure for determining

compliance of a new vehicle with

refueling emission standards. The

procedure described here shall be used

for all applicable vehicles in the

applicable model years.

(i) The manufacturer shall determine,

based on testing described in § 86.098-

21(b)(4)(i)(B), and supply a refueling

emission deterioration factor for each

evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combination.

The factor shall be calculated by

subtracting the emission level at the

selected test point from the emission

level at the useful life point. (iii) The official refueling emission

test results for each evaporative/

refueling emission-data vehicle at the

selected test point shall be adjusted by

the addition of the appropriate

deterioration factor. However, if the

deterioration factor supplied by the

manufacturer is less than zero, it shall

be zero for the purposes of this

paragraph.

(iv) The emission value to compare

with the standards shall be the adjusted

emission value of paragraph (b)(8)(iii) of

this section rounded to two significant

figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations - 16285

67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in

§ 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) for each

evaporative emission-data vehicle.

(9) Every test vehicle of an engine

family must comply with all applicable

standards (and family emission limits, as appropriate), as determined in

paragraphs (b)(4)(iv), (b)(7)(iv) and

(b)(8)(iv) of this section, before any

vehicle in that family will be certified.

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

guidance see § 86.094-28.

(e) [Reserved]

(f) Fuel dispensing spitback testing

waiver. (1) Vehicles certified to the

refueling emission standards set forth in

§§ 86.098-8, 86.099-8 and 86.001-9 are not required to demonstrate compliance

with the fuel dispensing spitback

standards contained in these sections:

Provided, that-

(i) The manufacturer certifies that the

vehicle inherently meets the Dispensing

Spitback Standard as part of compliance

with the refueling emission standard.

(ii) This certification is provided in

writing and applies to the full useful life

of the vehicle.

-(2) EPA retains the authority to

require testing to enforce compliance

and to prevent non-compliance with the

Fuel Dispensing Spitback Standard.

(g) Inherently low refueling emission

testing waiver. (1) Vehicles using fuels/

fuel systems inherently low in refueling

emissions are not required to conduct

testing to demonstrate compliance with

the refueling emission standards set

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

(i) This provision is only available for

petroleum diesel fuel. It is only

available if the Reid Vapor Pressure of

in-use diesel fuel is equal to or less than

1 psi (7 Kpa) and for diesel vehicles

whose fuel tank temperatures do not

exceed 130 *F (54 °C); and

(ii) To certify using this provision the

manufacturer must attest to the

following evaluation: "Due to the low

vapor pressure of diesel fuel and the

vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon

vapor concentrations are low and the

vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon

refueling emission standard without a

control system."

(2) The certification required in

paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section must

be provided in writing and must apply

for the full useful life of the vehicle.

(3) EPA reserves the authority to

require testing to enfoice compliance

and to prevent noncompliance with the

refueling emission standard.

(4) Vehicles certified to the refueling

emission standard under this provision

shall not be counted in the sales

percentage compliance determinations

for the 2001, 2002 and subsequent

model years.

11. A new § 86.001-30 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

9 86.001-30 * Certification.

Section 86.001-30 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-30, § 86.095-30 or § 86.098-30.

Where a paragraph in § 86.094-30,

§ 86.095-30 or § 86.098-30 is identical

and applicable to § 86.001-30, this may

be indicated by specifying the

corresponding paragraph and the

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

guidance see § 86.095-30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-

30.".

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(a)(3)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see 9 86.098-30.

(a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iiiJ introductory text through

(a)(4)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-30.

(a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.095-30. (a)(4)(iv)(A)' through (a)(12)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

30.

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

(a)(14) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-30.

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

guidance see § 86.096-30.

(a)(19) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-30.

(a)(20) For all light-duty trucks

certified to refueling emission standards

under § 86.001-9, the provisions of

paragraphs (a)(20) (i) through (iii) this

section apply.

(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer

complying with all provisions of

§ 86.001-9 both during and after model

year production.

(ii) Failure to meet the required

implementation schedule sales

percentages as specified in § 86.001-9

will be considered to be a failure to

satisfy the conditions upon which the

certificate(s) was issued and the

individual vehicles sold in violation of

the implementation schedule shall not

be covered by the certificate.

(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the

burden of establishing to the satisfaction

of the Administrator that the conditions

upon which the certificate was issued were satisfied.

(b)(1) introductory text through

(b)(1)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-30.

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

see § 86.094-30.

(b)(1)(ii)(B) The emission data

vehicle(s) selected under § 86.001-

24(b)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent all

vehicles of the same evaporative/

refueling control system within the

evaporative/refueling family.,

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

see § 86.094-30.

0b)(1)(ii)(D) The emission-data

vehicle(s) selected under § 86.098-

24(b)(1)(viii) shall represent all vehicles

of the same evaporative/refueling

control system within the evaporative/

refueling emission family, as applicable.

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

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

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(b)(4)(ii) introductory text [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.098-30.

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

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

For guidance see § 86.098-30.

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(f) introductory text through (f)(3)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

30.

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

12. A new § 86.001-35 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.001-35 Labeling.

Section 86.001-35 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.095-35, § 86.096-35 and § 86.098-

'35. Where a paragraph in § 86.095-35;

§ 86.096-35 or § 86.098-35 is identical

and applicable to § 86.001-35, this may

be indicated by specifying the'

corresponding paragraph and the

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

guidance see § 86.096-35. or "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-

28.".

(a) introductory text through

(a)(1)(iii)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(C) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(D) through (L) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.095-35.

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

see § 86.098-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-35.

(a)(2) heading through (a)(2)(iii)(B)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

35.

(a)(2)(iii)(C) Engine displacement (in

cubic inches or liters), engine family

identification and evaporative/refueling

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

(a)(2)(iii)(D) through (a)(2)(iii)(E)

[Reserved]. For guidance see 5 86.095-

35.

(a)(2)(iii)(F) [Reserved)

(a)(2)(iii)(G) through (a)(2)(iii)(K)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

35.

(a)(2)(iii)(L) [Reserved].

(a)(2)(iii)(M) through (a)(2)(iii)(N)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

35.,

(a)(2)(iii) (0) through (P) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.096-35.

(a)(3) heading through (a)(4)(iii](F)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

,35.

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

see § 86.096-35.

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

guidance see § 86.095-35.

13. A new § 86.004-9 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.004-9 Emission standards for 2004

and later model year light-duty trucks.

Section 86.004-9 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.096-9 or § 86.097-9. Where a

paragraph in § 86.096-9 or § 86.097-9 is

identical and applicable to § 86.004-9,

this may be indicated by specifying the

corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.096-9." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.097-9.".

(a) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.097-9.

(b) introductory text through (b)(5)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-9.

(b)(6) Vehicles certified to the

refueling standards set forth in

paragraph (d) of this section are not

required to demonstrate compliance

with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback

standards contained in § 86.096-9

(b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii): Provided, that.

they meet the requirements of 5 86.001-

28(f).

(c) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.097-9.

(d) Refueling emissions from 2004

and later model year gasoline-fueled

and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and

petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled

diesel-cycle light duty trucks shall not

exceed the following standards. The

standards apply equally to certification

and in-use vehicles.

(1) Standards--(i) Hydrocarbons (for

gasoline-fueled Otto-cycle and

petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles).

0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per

liter) of fuel dispensed.

(ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon

Equivalent (for methanol-fueled

vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053

gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.

(2)(i) The standards set forth in

paragraphs (d)(1) (i) and (ii) of this

section refer to a sample of refueling

emissions collected under the

conditions as set forth in subpart B of

this part and measured in accordance

with those procedures.

(ii) For vehicles powered by

petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines,

the provisions set forth in paragraph

(d)(1)(i) of this section may be waived:

Provided, that the manufacturer

complies with the provisions of

§ 86.001-28(f) of this subpart.

(iii) Heavy-duty vehicles certified as

light-duty trucks under the provisions of

§ 86.085-1 shall comply with the

provisions of paragraphs (d)(1) (i) and

(ii) of this section.

(3)(i) All light-duty trucks of a GVWR

equal to 6,000 pounds or less (100%)

must meet the refueling emission

standard.

(ii) A minimum of the percentage

shown in Table A04-09 of a

manufacturer's sales of the applicable

model year's gasoline- and methanolfueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled

and methaiol-fueled diesel-cycle lightduty trucks of 6,001 to 8,500 pounds

GVW shall be tested under the

procedures in subpart B of this part

indicated for 2004 and later model

years, and shall not exceed the

standards described in paragraph (dl(1)

of this section. Vehicles certified in

accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of

this section, as determined by the

provisions of § 86.001-28(g), shall not

be counted in the calculation of the

percentage of compliance.

TABLE A04-09.-IMPLEMENTATION

SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK

REFUELING EMISSION TESTING

Model year .Sales percentage

2004 ........ ............. 40

2005 ......... ............. . 80

2006 and subsequent ............... 100

(e) through (f). [Reserved]

(g) through (k) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.097-9.

14. A new § 86.004-28 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

S 86.004-28 Compliance with emission

standards.

Section 86.004-28 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§§ 86.094-28 and 86.098-28. Where a

paragraph in § 86.094-28 or § 86.098-28

is identical and applicable to § 86.001-'

28, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-28." or "[Reserved). For

guidance see § 86.098-28.".

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

§ 86.094-28.

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

§ 86.098-28.

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

5 86.094-28.

(a)(4) introductory text through (a)(4(i)

introductory text [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86:098-28. "

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

For guidance see § 86.094-28.

(a) (5) and (6) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-28.

(a)(7) introductory text through

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

§ 86.098-28.

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

§ 86.094-28.

(b)(1) Paragraph (b) of this section

applies to light-duty trucks.

(2) Eath exhaust, evaporative and

refueling emission standard (and family

emission limits, as appropriate) of

§ 86.004-9 applies to the emissions of

vehicles for the appropriate useful life

as defined in §§ 86.098-2 and 86.001-9.

(b)(3) through (b)(6) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-28.

(b)(7)(i) Paragraph (b)(7) of this

section describes the procedure for

determining compliance of a new

vehicle with evaporative emission

standards. The procedure described

here shall be used for all vehicles in

applicable model years.

(ii) The manufacturer shall determine,

based on testing described in § 86.001-

21(b)(4)(i)(A), and supply an

evaporative emission deterioration

factor for each evaporative/refueling

emission family-emission control

system combination. The factor shall be

calculated by subtracting the emission

level at the selected test point from the

emission level at the useful life point.

(iii) The official evaporative emission

test results for each evaporative/

refueling emission-data vehicle at the

selected test point shall be adjusted by

the addition of the appropriate

deterioration factor. However, if the

deterioration factor supplied by the

manufacturer is less than zero, it shall

be zero for the purposes of this

,paragraph.

(iv) The emission value to compare

with the standards shall be the adjusted

emission value of paragraph (b)(7)(iii) of

this section rounded to two significant figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-

67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in

§ 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) for each

evaporative emission-data vehicle.

(8)(i) Paragraph (b)(8) of this section

describes the procedure for determining

compliance of a new vehicle with

refueling emission standards. The

procedure described here shall be used
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16287

for all applcable vehicles in the

applicable model years. (ii) The manufacturer shall determine,

based on testing described in § 86.098-

21(b)(4)(i)(B), and supply a refueling emission deterioration factor for each

evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combination.

The factor shall be calculated by subtracting the emission level at the

selected test point from the emission

level at the useful life point. (iii) The official refueling emission

test results for each evaporative/

refueling emission-data vehicle at the

selected test point shall be adjusted by the addition of the appropriate

deterioration factor. However, if the

deterioration factor supplied by the

manufacturer is less than zero, it shall

be zero for the purposes-of this

paragraph. (iv) The emission value to compare

with the standards shall be the adjusted emission value of paragraph (b)(8)(iii) of

this section rounded to two significant

figures in accordance with ASTM E 29-

67 (reapproved 1980) (as referenced in

§ 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) for each

evaporative emission-data vehicle.

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

as appropriate), as determined in

§ 86.094-28(b)(4)(iv) and paragraphs (b)(7)(iv) and (b)(8)(iv) of this section,

before any vehicle in that family will be

certified.

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

guidance see § 86.094-28.

(e) [Reserved] (f) Fuel dispensing spitback testing

waiver. (1) Vehicles certified to the

refueling emission standards set forth in

§§ 86.099-8, 86.001-9 and 86.004-9 are

not required to demonstrate compliance

with-the fuel dispensing spitback standards contained in these sections:

Provided, that-

(i) The manufacturer certifies that the

vehicle inherently meets the Dispensing Spitback Standard as part of compliance with the refueling emission standard;

and

(ii) This certification is provided in

writing and applies to the full useful life

of the vehicle.

(2) EPA retains the authority to

require testing to enforce compliance and to prevent non-compliance with the

Fuel Dispensing Spitback Standard.

(g) Inherently low refueling emission

testing waiver. (1) Vehicles using fuels/

fuel systems inherently low in refueling emissions are not required to conduct

testing to demonstrate compliance with

the refueling emission standards set

forth in §§ 86.099-8, 86.001-9 or

86.004-9: Provided, that-

(i) This provision is only available for

petroleum diesel fuel. It is only

available if the Reid Vapor Pressure of

in-use diesel fuel is equal to or less than

1 psi (7 kPa) and for diesel vehicles

whose fuel tank temperatures do not

exceed 13 OF (54 OC), and

(ii) To certify using this provision the

manufacturer must attest to the

following evaluation: "Due to the low

vapor pressure of diesel fuel and the

vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon

vapor concentrations are low and the

vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon

refueling emission standard without a control system."

(2) The certification required in

paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section must

be provided in'writing and must apply

for the full useful life of the vehicle.

(3) EPA reserves the authority to

require testing to enforce compliance

and to prevent noncompliance with the

refueling emission standard.

(4) Vehicles certified to the refueling

emission standard under this provision

shall not be counted in the sales

percentage compliance determinations

for the 2004, 2005 and subsequent

model years.

15. A new § 86.004-30 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.004-30 Certification.

Section 86.004-30 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§§ 86.094-30, 86.095-30, 86.096-30,

86.098-30 or 86.001-30. Where a

paragraph in § 86.094-30, § 86.095-30, § 86.096-30, § 86.098-30 or § 86.001-30

is identical and applicable to § 86.004-

30, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

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

guidance see § 86.095-30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-

30." or "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.098-30." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.001-30.".

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(a)(3)(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-30.

(a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iii) introductory text through

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

see § 86.094-30. -

(a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iv)(A) through (a)(12)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

30.

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

(a)(14) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-30.

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

guidance see § 86.096-30.

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

§ 86.098-30.

(a)(20) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.001-30.

(a)(21) For all light-duty trucks

certified to refueling emission standards

under § 86.004-9, the provisions of

paragraphs (a)(21) (i) through (iii) of this

section apply.

(i) All certificates issued are

conditional upon the manufacturer

complying with all provisions of

§ 86.004-9 both during and after model

year production.

(ii) Failure to meet the required

implementation schedule sales

percentages as specified in § 86.004-9

will be considered to be a failure to

satisfy the conditions upon which the

certificate(s) was issued and the

individual vehicles sold in violation of

the implementation schedule shall not

be covered by the certificate.

(iii).The manufacturer shall bear the

burden of establishing to the satisfaction

of the Administrator that the conditions

upon which the certificate was issued were satisfied.

(b)(1) introductory text through

(b)(1)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For giidance see § 86.094-30.

(b)(1)(ii)(B) The emission data

vehicle(s) selected under § 86.001-

24(b)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent all

vehicles of the same evaporative/

refueling control system within the

evaporative/refueling family.

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

see § 86.094-30.

(b)(1)(ii)(D) The emission-data

vehicle(s) selected under § 86.098-

24(b)(1)(viii) shall represent all vehicles

of the same evaporative/refueling

control system within the evaporative/

refueling emission family, as applicable.

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

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

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(b)(4)(ii) introductory text [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.098-30.

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

(b)(4)(ii)(B) through (b)(4)(iv)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.098-

30.

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(f) introductory text through (f)(3)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

30.

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

16. Section 86.098-2 of subpart A is

revised to read as follows:
16288 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

§86.098-2 Definitions.

The definitions of § 86.096-2

continue to apply to 1996 and later

model year vehicles. The definitions

listed in this section apply beginning

with the 1998 model year.

Dispensed fuel temperature means the

temperature (deg.F or deg.C may be

used) of the fuel being dispensed into

the tank of the test vehicle during a

refueling test.

Evaporative/refueling emission

control system means a unique

combination within an evaporative/

refueling family of canister adsorptive

material, purge system configuration,

purge strategy, and other parameters

determined by the Administrator to

affect evaporative and refueling

emission control system durability or

deterioration factors.

Evaporative/refueling emission family

means the basic classification unit of a

manufacturers' product line used for the

purpose of evaporative and refueling

emissions test fleet selection and

determined in accordance with

§ 86.098-24.

Integrated refueling emission control

system means a system where vapors

resulting from refueling are stored in a

common vapor storage unit(s) with

other evaporative emissions of the

vehicle and are purged through a

common purge system. • Non-integrated refueling emission

control system means a system where

fuel vapors from refueling are stored in

a vapor storage unit assigned solely to

the function of storing refueling vapors. . Refueling emissions means

evaporative emissions that emanate

from a motor vehicle fuel tank(s) during

a refueling operation.

Refueling emissions canister(s) means

any vapor storage unit(s) that is exposed

to the vapors generated during refueling.

Resting losses means evaporative

emissions that may occur continuously,

that are not diurnal emissions, hot soak

emissions, refueling emissions, running

losses, or spitback emissions.

Useful life means: (1) For light-duty vehicles, and for

light light-duty trucks not subject to the

Tier 0 standards of § 86.094-9(a),

intermediate useful life and/or full

useful life. Intermediate useful life is a

period of use of 5 years or 50,000 miles,

whichever occurs first. Full useful life is

a period of use of 10 years or 100,000

miles, whichever occurs first, except as

otherwise noted in § 86.094-9. The

useful life of evaporative and/or

refueling emission control systems on

the portion of these vehicles subject to

the evaporative emission test

requirements of § 86.130-96, and/or the

refueling emission test requirements of

§ 86.151-98, is defined as a period of

use of 10 years or 100,000 miles,

whichever occurs first.

(2) For light light-duty trucks subject,

to the Tier 0 standards of § 86.094-9(a),

and for heavy light-duty truck engine

families, intermediate and/or full useful

life. Intermediate useful life is a period

of use of 5 years or 5%,000 miles,

whichever occurs first. Full useful life is

a period of use of 11 years or 120,000

miles, whichever occurs first. The

useful life of evaporative emission

control systems on the portion of these

vehicles subject to the evaporative

emission test requirements of § 86.130-

96 is also defined as a period of 11 years

or 120,000 miles, whichever occurs first.

(3) For an Otto-cycle heavy-duty

engine family:

(i) For hydrocarbon and carbon

monoxide standards, a period of use of

8 years or 110,000 miles, whichever first

occurs.

(ii) For the oxides of nitrogen

standard, a-period of use of 10 years or

110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(iii) For the portion of evaporative

emission control systems subject to the

evaporative emission test requirements

of § 86.1230-96, a period of use of 10

years or 110,000 miles, whichever

occurs first.

(4) For a diesel heavy-duty engine

family:

(i) For light heavy-duty diesel

engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon

monoxide, and particulate standards, a

period of use of 8 years or 110,000

miles, whichever first occurs.

(ii) For light heavy-duty diesel

engines, for the oxides of nitrogen

standard, a period of use of 10 years or

110,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(iii) For medium heavy-duty diesel

engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon

monoxide, and particulate standards, a

period of use of 8 years or,185,000

miles, whichever first occurs.

(iv) For medium heavy-duty diesel

engines, for the oxides of nitrogen

standard, a period of use of 10 years or

185,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(v) For heavy heavy-duty diesel

engines, for hydrocarbon, carbon

monoxide, and particulate standards, a

period of use of 8 years or 290,000

miles, whichever first occurs, except as

provided in paragraph (3)(vii) of this

definition.

(vi) For heavy heavy-duty diesel

engines, for the oxides of nitrogen

standard, a period of use of 10 years or

290,000 miles, whichever first occurs.

(vii) For heavy heavy-duty diesel

engines used in urban buses, for the

particulate standard, a period of use of

10 years or 290,000 miles, whichever

first occurs.

17. A new § 86.098-3 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.098-3 Abbreviations.

(a) The abbreviations in § 86.094-3

continue to apply to 1996 and later

model year vehicles. The abbreviations

in this section apply beginning with the

1998 model year.

(b) The abbreviations in this section

apply to this subpart, and also to,

subparts B, E, F, G, K, M, N, and P of

this part, and have the following

meanings:

TD-dispensed fuel temperature

18. A new § 86.098-7 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.098-7 Maintenance of records;

submittal of Information; right of entry.

Section 86.098-7 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

those specified in §§ 86.091-7, 86.094-

7 and 86.096-7.- Where a paragraph in

§ 86.091-7, § 86.094-7 or § 86.096-7 is

identical and applicable to § 86.098-7,

this may be indicated by specifying the

corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.091-7." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-7." or

"[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-

7.".

(a) Introductory text through (a)(2)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.091-7.

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

§ 86.094-7.

(b) through (c)(2) [Reserved]. For'

guidance see § 86.091-7..

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

§ 86,094-7.

(c)(4) through (d)(1)(v) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.091-7.

(d)(1)(vi) through (d)(2)(iv) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.094-7.

(d)(3) through (g) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.091-7.

(h)(6) Voiding a certificate. (i) EPA

may void ab initio a certificate for a

vehicle certified to Tier 0 certification

standards or to the respective

evaporative and/or refueling test

procedure and accompanying

evaporative and/or refueling standards

as set forth or otherwise referenced in

§§ 86.098-8, 86.098-9, or 86.098-10 for

which the manufacturer fails to retain

the records required in this section or to

provide such information to the

Administrator upon request.

(h)(6)(ii) to (h)(7)(vi) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-7.

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

family.

19. A new § 86.098-8 is added to

subpart A, to read as follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16289

§86.098-8 Emission standards for 1998

and later model year light-duty vehicles.

Section 86.098-8 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.096--8. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.096-8 is identical and applicable to

§ 86.098-8, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "LReservedl. For

guidance see §86.096-8."

(a) through (b)(5) [Reserved). For

guidance see §86.096-8.

(b)(61 Vehicles certified to the

refueling standards set forth in

paragraph (d) of this section are not

required to demonstrate compliance

with the fuel dispensing spitback

standards contained in § 86.096-8

(b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2}(iii): Provided, that

they meet the requirements of § 86.098-

28(fl.

(c) [Reservedi. For guidance see

§ 86.096-8.

(d) Refueling emissions from 1998

and later model year gasoline-fueled

and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and

petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled

diesel-cycle light-duty vehicles shall not

exceed the following standards- The

standards apply equally to certification

and in-use vehicles.

(1) Standards-(i) I-fydrocarbons (for

gasoline-fueled Otto-cycle and

petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle vehicles).

0.20 gram per gallon (0.053 gram per

liter) of fuel dispensed.

(ii) Organic material hydrocarbon

equivalent (for methanol-fueled

vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053

gram per liter] of fuel dispensed.

(2)(i) The standards set forth in

paragraphs (d)(il (i) and (ii) of this

section refer to a sample of refueling

emissions collected under the

conditions set forth in subpart B of this

part and measured in accordance with

those procedures.

(ii) For vehicles powered by

petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines,

the provisions set forth in paragraph

(d)(1) of this section maybe waived:

Provided, that the manufacturer

complies with the provisions of

§ 86.098-28(g. " - (3)(i) A minimum of the percentage

shown in Table A98-08 of a

manufacturer's sales of the applicable

model year's gasoline- and methanolfueled Otto-cycle and petroleum-fueled

* and methanol-fueled diesel-cycle lightduty vehicles shall be tested under the

procedures in subpart B of this part

indicated for 1998 and later model

years, and shall not exceed the

standards described in paragraph (d)(1)

of this section.. Vehicles certified in

accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of

this section, as determined by the

provisions of § 86.098--28g), shall not

be counted in the calculation of the

percentage of compliance.

TABLE A98-0&-MPLEMENTATION

SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE REFUELING EMISSION TESTING

Model year Sales. percentage

1998 ...................................... . 40

1999 ........... ...... 80

2000 and subsequent 100

(ii) Small volume manufacturers, as

defined in § 86.094-14(b) (1) and (2), are

exempt from the implementation

schedule of Table A98-08 of this section

for model years 1998 and 1999. For

small volume manufacturers, the

standards of paragraph (d) of this

section, and the associated test

procedures, shall not apply until model

year 2000. when 100 percent

compliance with the standards of this

section is required. This exemption does

not apply to small volume engine

families as defined in § 86.094-14b)(5).

(e) through (f} [Reservedi

(g) through (k) (Reserved. For

guidance see § 86.096-8.

20. A new §86.098-14 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.098-14 Small-volume manufacturers

certification procedures.

Section 86.098-14 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§§ 86.094-14 or 86.095-14. Where a

paragraph in § 86.094-14 or § 86.095-14

is identical and applicable to § 86.098-

14, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved. For guidance see

§ 86.094-14." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-14.".

(a) through (c)(7)(i}[C)(3) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.094-14.

(c)(7)(i)(C)(4) For light-duty vehicle.

light-duty truck, and heavy-duty vehicle

evaporative and/or refueling emissions

(as applicable) and for light-duty truck,

and heavy-duty engine exhaust

emissions, deterioration factors shall be

determined in accordance with

§ 86.098-24.

(c)(7)(ii) through (c)(11)(ii)(B)

introductory text [Reservedl. For

guidance see § 86.094-14.

(c){tl)(ii)(B)(1) Engine evaporative!

refueling family names and vehicle (or engine) configurations.

()(}ii}(BI(2} through

(c)(11)(ii)(B)(15) [Reserved. For

guidance see § 86.094-14.

(c){11)(ii)(B)(16) through

(c)(11)(ii)(B)(181 (Reservedl. For

guidance see § 86.095-14.

(c)(11)(ii)(B)(19) For each light-duty

vehicle, light-duty truck, or heavy-duty

vehicle evaporative/refueling emission

family, a description of any unique

procedures required to perform

evaporative and/or refueling emission

tests (as applicable) (including canister

working capacity, canister bed volume,

and fuel temperature profile for the

running loss test) for all vehicles in that

evaporative/refueling emission family,

and a description of the method used to

develop those unique procedures.

(20) For each light-duty vehicle, lightduty truck, or heavy-duty vehicle

evaporativelrefueling emission family:

(i) Canister working capacity,

according to the procedures specified in

§ 86.13Z-96(h)(1)(iv);

(i Canister bed volume; and

(iii) Fuel temperature profile for the

running loss test, according to the

procedures specified in § 86.129-94(d).

(c)(11)(ii)(C) through (c)(11)(ii)(D)(S}

[Reserved). For guidance see § 86.095-

14.

(c)(11)(ii)(D)(6) [Reserved).

(c)(11)(ii)(D)(7) through (c)(15)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

14.

21. A new § 86.098-17 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.098-17 Emission control diagnostic system for 1998 and later light-duty vehicles and light-duty truck&

Section 86.098-17 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-17. Where a paragraph in,

§ 86.094-17 is identical and applicable

to § 86.098-17, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reservedl. For

guidance see § 86.094-17."

(a) introductory text through (a)(31

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

17.

(a)C4) Any other deterioration or

malfunction within the powertrain

which occurs in actual use and which

results in an exhaust emission increase

of greater than 0,2 gfmi HC, 1.7 g/mi

CO, or 0.5 g/mi NOx. or any vapor leak

in the evaporative and/or refueling

system which results in an evaporative

emissions increase of greater than 30.0

g/test measured over the first 24 hours

of the diurnal portion of the revised

evaporative emissions test procedure, in

accordance with test procedures set

forth in subpart B of this part, for

vehicles certified to that test procedure.

(b)(1) The electronic evaporative and/

or refueling emission purge control, if

equipped, and all emission-related

powertrain components connected to a

computer shall, at a minimum, be

monitored for circuit continuity. All

components required by these

regulations to be monitored shall be

evaluated periodically, but no less
16290 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

frequently than once per Urban

Dynamometer Driving Schedule as'

defined in 40 CFR part 86, appendix I,

paragraph (a), or similar trip.

(b)(2) through (j) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-17T.

22. A new § 86.098-21 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.098-21 Application for certification.

Section 86.098-21 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-21 or § 86.096-21. Where a

paragraph in § 86.094-21 or § 86.096-21

is identical and applicable to § 86.098-

21, this may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-21." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-21.".

(a) through (b)(3) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-21.

(b)(4)(i) For light-duty vehicles and

light-duty trucks, a description of the

test procedures to be used to establish

the evaporative emission and/or

refueling emission deterioration factors

(as applicable) required to be

determined and supplied in § 86.098-

23(b)(2).

(b)(4)(ii) through (iv) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-21.

(b)(5)(v) For light-duty vehicles with

non-integrated refueling emission

control systems, the number of

continuous UDDS cycles, determined

from the fuel economy on the UDDS

applicable to the test vehicle of that

evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combination,

required to use a volume of fuel equal

to 85% of fuel tank volume.

(b)(6) through (8) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-21.

(b)(9) For each light-duty vehicle,

light-duty truck, or heavy-duty vehicle

evaporative/refueling emission family, a

description of any unique procedures

required to perform evaporative and/or

refueling emission tests (as applicable)

(including canister working capacity,

canister bed volume, and fuel

temperature profile for the running loss

test) for all vehicles in that evaporative/

refueling emission family, and a

description of the method used to

develop those unique procedures.

(10) For each light-duty vehicle, lightduty truck, or heavy-duty vehicle

evaporative/refueling emission family:

(i) Canister working capacity,

according to the procedures specified in

§ 86.132-96(h)(1)(iv);

(ii) Canister bed volume; and

(iii) Fuel temperature profile for the

running loss test, according to the

procedures specified in § 86.129-94(d).

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

see § 86.094-21.

(e) For vehicles equipped with

gasoline-fueled or methanol-fueled

heavy-duty engines, the manufacturer

shall specify a maximum nominal fuel

tank capacity for each evaporative/

refueling emission family-emission

control system combination.

(f) through (i) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-21.

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

see § 86.096-21.

23. A new § 86.098-22 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.098-22 Approval of application for

certification; test fleet selections; determinations of parameters subject to

adjustment for certification and Selective

Enforcement Audit, adequacy of limits, and

physically adjustable ranges.

Section 86.098-22 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-22. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.094-22 is identical and applicable

to § 86.098-22, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-22."

(a) through (c) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-22.

(d) Approval of test procedures. (1)

The Administrator does not approve the

test procedures for establishing the

evaporative and/or refueling emission

deterioration factors for light-duty

vehicles and light-duty trucks. The

manufacturer shall submit the

procedures as required in § 86.098-

21(b)(4)(i) prior to the Administrator's

selection of the test fleet under

§ 86.098-24(b) (1), and if such

procedures will involve testing of

durability data vehicles selected by the

Administrator or elected by the

manufacturer under § 86.098-24(c)(1),

prior to initiation of such testing.

(d)(2) through (g) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-22.

24. Section 86.098-23 of subpart A is

amended by revising the introductory

text and paragraphs (a) through (1) to

read as follows:

§ 86.098-23 Required data.

Section 86.098-23 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from.

§ 86.095-23. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.095-23 is identical and applicable

to § 86.098-23, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23."

(a) through (b)(1)(ii) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23.

(b)(2) For light-duty vehicles and

light-duty trucks, the manufacturer shall

submit evaporative emission and/or

refueling emission deterioration factors

for each evaporative/refueling emission

family-emission control system

combination and all test data that are

derived from testing described under

§ 86.098-21(b)(4)(i) designed and

conducted in accordance with good

engineering practice to assure that the

vehicles covered by a certificate issued

under § 86.098-30 will meet the

evaporative and/or refueling emission

standards in § 86.098-8 or § 86.098-9,

as appropriate, for the useful life of the

vehicle.

(b)(3) through (b)(4)(iij [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23.

(b)(4)(iii) For petroleum-fueled dieselcycle vehicles certifying under the

waiver provisions of §-86.098-28, the

certifications and representations

specified in § 86.098-28.

(c) through (e)(1) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23.

(e)(2) For evaporative and refueling

emission durability, or light-duty truck

or heavy-duty engine exhaust emission

durability, a statement of compliance

with paragraph (b)(2) or (b)(4)(iii) of this

section or § 86.095-23 (b)(1)(ii), (b)(3)

(b)(4)(i) or (b)(4)(ii), as applicable.

(3) For certification of vehicles with

non-integrated refueling systems, a

statement that the drivedown used to

purge the refueling canister was the

same as described in the manufacturers'

application for certification.

Furthermore, a description of the

procedures used to determine the

number of equivalent UDDS miles

required to purge the refueling canisters,

as determined by the provisions of

§ 86.098-21(b)(5)(v) and subpart B of

this part. Furthermore, a written

statement to the Administrator that all

data, analyses, test procedures,.

evaluations and other documents, on

which the above statement isbased, are

available to the Administrator upon

request.

(f) through (1) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-23. * * * * *

25. A new § 86.098-24 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.098-24 Test vehicles and engines.

Section 86.098-24 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.096-24. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.096-24 is identical and applicable

to § 86.098-24, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-24."

(a) introductory text through (a)(4)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-

24.

(a)(5) The gasoline-fueled and

methanol-fueled light-duty vehicles and

light-duty trucks covered by an

application for certification will be

divided into groupings which are
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16291

expected to have similar evaporative

and/or refueling emission

characteristics (as applicable)

throughout their useful life. Each group

of vehicles with similar evaporative

and/or refueling emission

characteristics shall be defined as a

separate evaporative/refueling emission

family.

(a)(6) For gasoline-fueled or methanolfueled light-duty vehicles and light-duty

trucks to be' classed in the same

evaporative/refueling emission family,

vehicles must be similar with respect to

the items listed in paragraphs (a)(6) (i)

through (xii) of this section.

(i) Type of vapor storage device (e.g.,

canister, air cleaner, crankcase).

(ii) Basic canister design.

(A) Working capacity--grams

adsorption within a log. range.

(B) System configuration-number of

canisters and method of connection (i.e.,

series, parallel).

(C) Canister geometry, construction

and materials.

(iii) Fuel system.

(iv) Type of refueling emission control

system-non-integrated or integrated

with the evaporative control system.

Further, if the system is non-integrated,

whether or not any other evaporative

emissions, e.g. diurnal or hot soak

emissions, are captured in the same

storage device as the refueling

emissions.

(v) Fillpipe seal mechanismmechanical, liquid trap, other.

(vi) Fill limiter system.

(vii) Vapor control system or method

of controlling vapor flow through the

vapor line to the canister.

(viii) Vapor/liquid separator usage.

(ix) Purge system (valve, purge

strategy and calibrations).

(x) Vapor hose diameter and material.

(xi) Canister location (front, rear, midvehicle).

(xii) Onboard diagnostic hardware

and calibrations.

(a)(7) Where vehicles are of a type

which cannot be divided into

evaporative/refueling emission families

based on the criteria listed above (such

as non-canister control system

approaches), the Administrator will

establish families for those vehicles

based upon the features most related to

their evaporative and/or refueling

emission characteristics.

(a)(8) through. (b}(1)vi) tReservedl.

For guidance see §86.096-24.

(b)(l)(vii)(A) Vehicles of each

evaporative/refueling emission family

will be divided into evaporative/

refueling emission control systems

(B) The Administrator will select the

vehicle expected to exhibit the highest

evaporative and/or refueling emissions,

from within each evaporative/refueling

family to be certified, from among the

vehicles represented by the exhaust

emission-data selections for the engine

family, unless evaporative and/or

refueling testing has already been

completed on the vehicle expected to

exhibit the highest evaporative and/or

refueling emissions for the evaporative/

refueling family as part of another

engine family's" testing.

(C) If the vehicles selected in

accordance with paragraph (b}{1)(vii)(B)

of this section do not represent each

evaporative/refueling emission control

system then the Administrator will

select the highest expected evaporative/

refueling emission vehicle from within

the unrepresented evaporative/refueling

system.

(viii) For high-altitude evaporative

and/or refueling emission compliance

for each evaporative/refueling emission

family, the manufacturer shall follow

one of the following procedures:

(A) The manufacturer will select for

testing under high-altitude conditions

the one nonexempt vehicle previously

selected under paragraph (b)(l)(vii)(B)

or (b)(1}{vii)(Cl of this section which is

expected to have the highest level of

evaporative and/or refueling emissions

when operated at high altitude; or

(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.096-24.

(b)(ix) through (e)(2) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-24.

(f) Carryover and carryacross of

durability and emission data. In lieu of

testing an emission-data or durability

vehicle (or enginel selected under

paragraph (b)(1) (vii) through (viii) of

this section and § 86.096-24 (b)(1) (i)

through (viil and (b)(2) through (c), and

submitting data therefor, a manufacturer

may, with the prior written approval of

the Administrator, submit exhaust

emission data, evaporative emission

data and/or refueling emission data, as

applicable on a similar vehicle (or

engine) for which certification has been

obtained or for which all applicable data

required under § 86.098-23 has

previously been submitted.

(g) through (h) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-24.

26. A new § 86.098-25 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.098-25 Maintenance.

Section 86.098-25 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-25. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.094-25 is identical and, applicable

to § 86.098-25, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-25."

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

§ 86.094-25.

(a)(2) Maintenance performed on

vehicles, engines, subsystems, or

components used to determine exhaust.

evaporative or refueling emission

deterioration factors is classified as

either emission- related or nonemission-related and each of these. can

be classified as either scheduled or

unscheduled. Further, some emissionrelated maintenance is also classified as

critical emission-related maintenance.

(b) Introductory text through

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

see § 86.094-25.

(b)}3)(vi)(E) Evaporative and/or

refueling emission canister(s).

(F) Turbochargers.

(G) Carburetors.

(H) Superchargers.

(I) EGR System including all related

filters and control valves.

(J) Mechanical fillpipe seals.

(b)(3)(vii) through (b)(6)(i)(E)

[Reservedl. For guidance see § 86.094-

25.

(b)(6)(i)(F) Evaporative and refueling

emission control system components

(excluding canister air filter).

(b)(6)(i)(G) through (h) [Reservedi. For

guidance see § 86.094-25.

27. A new § 86.098-26 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.098-26 Mileage and service

accumulation; emission measurements.

Section 86.098-26 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-26, § 86.095-26 or § 86.096-26.

Where a paragraph in § 86.094-26,

§ 86.095-26 or § 86.096-26 is identical

and applicable to § 86.098-26, this may

be indicated by specifying the

corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reseryed), For guidance see

§ 86.094-26." or "[Reserved. For

guidance see § 86.095-26." or

"[Reservedl. For guidance see § 86.096-

26.".

(a)(l) and (2) [Reservedl. For guidance

see § 86.094-26.

(a)(3) Emission data vehicles. Unless

otherwise provided for in § 86.098-

23(a), emission-data vehicles shall be

operated and tested as described in

paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and (ii)(C) of this

section and § 86.094-26 (a)(3)(ii)(A), (B)

and (D).

(i) Otto-cycle. (A) The manufacturer

shall determine, for each engine family,

the mileage at which the engine-system

combination is stabilized for emissiondata testing, The manufacturer shall

maintain, and'provide to the

Administrator if requested, a record of

the rationale used in making this

determination. The manufacturer may

elect to accumulate 4,000 miles on each
16292 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

test vehicle within an engine family

without making a determination. The

manufacturer must accumulate a

minimum of 2,000 miles (3,219

kilometers) on each test vehicle within

an engine family. All test vehicle

mileage must be accurately determined,

recorded, and reported to the - Administrator. Any vehicle used to

represent emission-data vehicle

selections under § 86.098-24(b)(1) shall

be equipped with an engine and

emission control system that has

accumulated the mileage the

manufacturer chose to accumulate on

the test vehicle. Fuel economy data

generated from certification vehicles

selected in accordance with § 86.098-

24(b)(1) with engine-system

combinations that have accumulated

more than 10,000 kilometers (6,200

miles) shall be factored in accordance

with 40 CFR 600.006-87(c). Complete

exhaust, evaporative and refueling (if

required) emission tests shall be,

conducted for each emission-data

vehicle selection under § 86.098-

24(b)(1). The Administrator may

determine under § 86.094-24(f) that no testing is required.

(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-26.

(C) Exhaust, evaporative and refueling

emissions-tests for emission-data

vehicle(s) selected for testing under

§ 86.096-24(b)(1) (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv) or § 86.098-24(b)(1)(vii)(B) shall be

conducted at the mileage (2,000 mile

minimum) at which the engine-system

combination is stabilized for emission

testing under low-altitude conditions.

(a)(3)(i)(B) through (a)(3)(ii)(B)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

26.

(a)(3)(ii)(C) Exhaust, evaporative and

refueling emissions tests (as required)

for emission-data vehicle(s) selected for

testing under § 86.096-24(b)(1) (i), (ii),

(iii), or (iv), or § 86.098-24 b)(1)(vii)(B)

shall be conducted at the mileage (2,000

mile minimum) at which the enginesystem combination is stabilized for

emission testing under low-altitude

conditions.

(a)(3)(ii)(D) through (b)(4)(i)(C)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

26.

(b)(4)(i)(D) through (b)(4)(ii)(D)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

26.

(b)(4)(iii) [Reserved].

(b)(4)(iv) through (c)(3) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.094-26.

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

§ 86.096-26.

(d) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-26.

28. A new § 86.098-28 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.098-28 Compliance with emission

standards.

Section 86.098-28 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-28. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.094-28 is identical and applicable

to § 86.098-28, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-28. " • (a)(1) Paragraph (a) of this section

applies to light-duty vehicles.

(2) Each exhaust, evaporative and

refueling emission standard (and family

particulate emission limits, as appropriate) of § 86.098-8 applies to the

emissions of vehicles for the appropriate

useful life as defined in §§ 86.098-2 and

.86.098-8.

(3) [Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-28.

(4) The procedure for determining

compliance of a new motor vehicle with

exhaust, evaporative and/or refueling

emission standards (or family

particulate emission limit, as

appropriate) is as described in

paragraphs (a)(4)(i) introductory text,

(a)(4)(i)(C), (a)(4)(ii)(B) and (C),

(a)(4)(iii), (a)(4)(v), (f) and (g) of this

section and, § 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(A) and

(B), (a)(4)(ii)(A), (a)(4)(iv)) except where

specified by paragraph (a)(7) of this

section for the Production AMA

Durability Program.

(i) Separate emission deterioration

factors shall be determined from the

exhaust emission results of the

durability-data vehicle(s) for each

engine-system combination. Separate.

evaporative and/or refueling emission

deterioration factors shall be determined

for each evaporative/refueling emission

family-emission control system

combination from the testing conducted

by the manufacturer (gasoline-fueled

and methanol-fueled vehicles only).

Separate refueling emission

deterioration factors shall be determined

for each evaporative/refueling emission

family-emission control system

combination from the testing conducted

by the manufacturer (petroleum-fueled

diesel cycle vehicles not certified under

the provisions of paragraph (g) of this

section only).

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

For guidance see § 86.094-28.

(a)(4)(i)(C) Evaporative deterioration

factor determination. An evaporative

emissions deterioration factor (gasolinefueled and methanol-fueled vehicles

only) shall be determined from the

testing conducted as described in

Section 86.094-21(b)(4) (i) (A), and in

accordance with paragraphs (a)(4)(i)(C)

(1) and (2) of this section, for each

evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combination to

indicate the evaporative emission level

at the applicable useful life relative to

the evaporative emission level at 4,000

miles as follows:

(1) Factor = Evaporative emission

level at the useful life mileage for that

standard minus the evaporative

emission level at 4,000 miles.

(2) The factor shall be established to

a minimum of two places to the right of

the decimal.

(D) A refueling emissions

deterioration factor (gasoline-fueled,

methanol-fueled and petroleum-fueled

diesel-cycle vehicles not certified under

the provisions of paragraph (g) of this

section) shall be determined from

testing conducted and described in

§ 86.098-21(b)(4)(i)(B) for each

evaporative/refueling emission familyemission control system combinationto

indicate the refueling emission level at

the applicable usefule life relative to the

refueling emission level at 4,000 miles

as follows: 1 (1) Factor = Refueling emission level

at the useful life mileage for that

standard minus the refueling emission

level at 4,000 miles.

(2) The factor shall be established to

a minimum of two places to the right of

the decimal.

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

see § 86.094-28.

(a)(4)(ii)(B) The official evaporative emission test results (gasoline-fueled

and methanol-fueled vehicles only) for

each evaporative emission-data vehicle

at the selected test point shall be

adjusted by addition of the appropriate

deterioration factor: Provided, that if a

deterioration factor as computed in

paragraph (a)(4)(i)(C) of this section is

less than zero, that deterioration factor

shall be zero for the purposes of this

paragraph.

(C]The official refueling emission test

results (gasoline-fueled, methanolfueled, and petroleum-fueled diesel

cycle vehicles not certified under the

provisions of paragraph (g) of this

section) for each refueling emission-data

vehicle at the selected test point shall be

adjusted by addition of the appropriate

deterioration factor: Provided, that if a deterioration factor as computed in

paragraph (a)(4)(i)(D) of this section is

less than zero, that deterioration factor

shall be zero for purposes of this paragraph- (Pi) The-emissions to compare with

the standard (or the family particulate

emission limit, as appropriate) shall be

the adjusted emissions of paragraphs

(a)(4)(ii) (B) and (C) of this section and

§ 86.094-28 (a)(4)(ii)(A) for each

emission-data vehicle. Before any

emission value is compared with the

standard (or the family particulate
Federat Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16293

emission limit, as appropriate), it shall

be rounded, in accordance with ASTM

E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as

referenced in § 86.094-

28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)), to two significant

figures. The rounded emission values

may not exceed the standard (or the

family particulate emission limit, as

appropriate).

(iv) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-28.

(v) Every test vehicle of an

evaporative/refueling emission family

must comply with the evaporative and]/

or refueling emission standards, as

determined in paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of

this section, before any vehicle in that

family may be certified.

(a)(5) through (a)(6) [Reserved]. For.

guidance see § 86.094-28.

(a)(7) The procedure to determine the

compliance of new motor vehicles in

the Production AMA Durability Program

described in § 86.094-13 is the same as

described in paragraphs (a)(4)(iii) and

(v) of this section and § 86.094-28

(a)(4)(iv). For the engine families that

are included in the'Production AMA

Durability Program, the exhaust

emission deterioration factors used to

determine compliance shall be thosethat the Administrator has approved

under § 86.094-13. The evaporative

emission deterioration factor for each

evaporative /refueling emission family

shall be determined and applied "

according to paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(B) of

this section. The refueling emission

deterioration factor for each

evaporative/refueling emission family

shall be determined and applied

according to paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) of

this section. The procedures to

determine the minimum exhaust

emission deterioration factors required

under § 86.094-13(d) are as described in

paragraph (a)(7)(i) of this section and

§ 86.094-28 (a)(7)(ii).

(i) Separate deterioration factors shall

be determined from the exhaust

emission results of the durability data

vehicles for each emission standard

applicable under § 86.098-8, for each

engine family group. The evaporative

and/or refueling emission deterioration

factors for each evaporative/refueling

family will be determined and applied

in accordance withparagraph (a)(4) of

this section.

(a)(7)(ii) through (d) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-28.

(e) [Reserved] '

(f) Fuel dispensing spitback testing

waiver. (1) Vehicles certified to the

refueling emission standards set forth in

§ 86.098-8 are not required to

demonstrate compliance with the fuel

dispensing spitback standard contained

in that section: Provided, that-

(i) The manufacturer certifies that the

vehicle inherently meets the Dispensing

Spitback Standard as part of compliance

with the refueling emission standard;

and

(ii) This certification is provided in

writing and applies to the full useful life

of the vehicle.

(2) EPA retains the authority to

require testing to enforce compliance

and to prevent non-compliance with the

Fuel Dispensing Spitback Standard.

(g) Inherently low refueling emission

testing waiver. (1) Vehicles using fuels/

fuel systems inherently low in refueling

emissions are not required to conduct

testing to demonstrate compliance with

the refueling emission standards set

forth in § 86.098-8: Provided, that-

(i) This provision is only available for

petroleum diesel fuel. It is only

available if the Reid Vapor Pressure of

in-use diesel fuel is equal to or less than

1 psi (7 kPa) and for diesel vehicles

whose fuel tank temperatures do not

exceed 130 °F (54 'C); and

(ii) To certify using this provision the

manufacturer must attest to the

following evaluation: "Due to the low

vapor pressure of diesel fuel and the

vehicle tank temperatures, hydrocarbon

vapor concentrations are low and the

vehicle meets the 0.20 grams/gallon

refueling emission standard without a

control system."

(2) The certification required in

paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section must

be provided in writing and must apply

for the full useful life of the vehicle.

(3) EPA reserves the authority to

require testing to enforce compliance

and to prevent noncompliance with the

refueling emission standard.

(4) Vehicles certified to the refueling

emission standard under this provision

shall not be counted in the sales

percentage compliance determinations

for the 1988, 1989 and subsequent

model years.

29. A new § 86.098-30 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§86.098-30 Certification.

Section 86.098-30 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.094-30, § 86.095-30 or § 86.096-30.

Where a paragraph in § 86.094-30,

§ 86.095-30 or § 86.096-30 is identical

and applicable to § 86.098-30. This may

be indicated by specifying the

corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-30." or "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.095-30." or

"[Reseived]. For guidance see § 86.096-

30.". (a)(1).and (a)(2) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(a)(3)(i) One such certificate will be

issued for each engine family. For

gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled

light-duty vehicles and light duty-trucks

and petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle lightduty vehicles and light duty-trucks not

certified under § 86.098-28(g), one such

certificate will be issued for each engine

family-evaporative/refueling emission

family combination. Each certificate

will certify compliance with no more

than one set of in-use and certification

standards (or family emission limits, as

appropriate).

(a)(3)(ii) through (a)(4)(ii) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iii) introductory text through

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

see § 86.094-30.

(a)(4)(iv) introductory text [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.095-30.

(a)(4)(iv)(A) through (a)(12)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.094-

30.

(a)(13) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.095-30.

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

§ 86.094-30.

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

guidance see § 86.096-30.

(a)(19) For all light-duty vehicles

certified to refueling emission standards

under § 86.098-8, the provisions of

paragraphs (a)(19) (i) through (iii) of this

section apply.

(i) All certificates issued are

conditional upon the manufacturer

complying with all provisions of

§ 86.098-8, both during and after model

year production.

(ii) Failure to meet the required

implementation schedule sales

percentages as specified in § 86.094-8

be considered to be a failure to satisfy

the conditions upon which the

certificate(s) was issued and the

vehicles sold in violation of the

implementation schedule shall not be

covered by the certificate.

(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the

burden of establishing to the satisfaction

of the Administrator that the conditions

upon which the certificate was issued

were satisfied.

(b)(1) introductory text through

(b)(1)(i)(B) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.094-30.

(b)(1)(i)(C) The emission-data

vehicle(s) selected under § 86.098-

24(b)(1)(vii) (A) and (B) shall represent

all vehicles of the same evaporative/

refueling control system within the

evaporative /refueling family.

(b)(1)(ii) through (b)(1)(iv) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.094-30.

(b)(2) The Administrator will proceed

as in paragraph (a) of this section with

respect to the vehicles (or engines)

belonging to an engine family or engine
16294 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

family-evaporative/refueling emission

family combination .(as applicable), all

of which comply with all applicable

standards (or family emission limits, as

appropriate).

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(b)(4)(ii) Remove the vehicle

configuration (or evaporative/refueling

vehicle configuration, as applicable)

which failed, from his application: (b)(4)(ii)(A) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.094-30.

(b){4)(ii)(B) If the failed vehicle was

tested for compliance with one or more

of the exhaust, evaporative and

refueling emission standards: The

Administrator may select, in place of

the failed vehicle, in accordance with

the selection criteria employed in

selecting the failed vehicle, a new

emission data vehicle which will be

tested for compliance with all of the

applicable emission standards. If one

vehicle cannot be selected in

accordance with the selection criteria

employed in selecting the failed vehicle,

then two or more vehicles may be

selected (e.g., one vehicle to satisfy the

exhaust emission vehicle selection

criteria and one vehicle to satisfy the

evaporative and refueling emission

vehicle selection criteria). The vehicle

selected to satisfy the exhaust emission

vehicle selection criteria will be tested

for compliance with exhaust emission

standards (or family emission limits, as

appropriate) only. The vehicle selected

to satisfy the evaporative and/or

refueling emission Vehicle selection

criteria will be tested for compliance

with exhaust, evaporative and/or

refueling emission standards; or

(iii) Remove the vehicle configuration

(or evaporative/refueling vehicle

configuration, as applicable) which

failed from the application and add a

vehicle configuration(s) (or evaporative/

refueling vehicle configuration(s), as

applicable) not previously listed. The

Administrator may require, if

applicable, that the failed vehicle be

modified to the new engine code (or

evaporative/refueling emission code, as

applicable) and demonstrate by testing

that it meets applicable standards (or

family emission limits, as appropriate)

for which it was originally tested. In

addition, the Administrator may select,

in accordance with the vehicle selection

criteria given in § 86.001-24(b). a new

emission data vehicle or vehicles. The

vehicles selected to satisfy the exhaust

emission vehicle selection criteria will

be tested for compliance with exhaust

emission standards (or family emission

limits, as appropriate) only. The

vehicles selected to satisfy the

evaporative emission vehicle selection

criteria will be tested for compliance

with all of the applicable emission ,

standards (or family emission limits, as

appropriate); or

(iv) Correct a component or system

malfunction and show that with a

correctly functioning system or

component the failed vehicle meets

applicable standards (or family emission

limits, as appropriate) for which it was

originally tested. The Administrator

may require a new emission data

vehicle, of identical vehicle

configuration (or evaporative/refueling

vehicle configuration, as applicable) to,

the failed vehicle, to be operated and

tested for compliance with the

applicable standards (or family emission

limits, as appropriate) for which the

failed vehicle was originally tested.

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

guidance see § 86.094-30.

(f) introductorytext through (f0(3)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

30.

(f)(4) The electronic evaporative and/

or refueling purge control device (if

equipped) or any emission-related

powertrain component connected to a

computer is electrically disconnected.

30. A new § 86.098-35 is added to

subpart A to read as follows:

§ 86.098-35 Labeling.

Section 86.098-35 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§§ 86.095-35 and 86.096-35. Where a

paragraph in § 86.095-35 or § 86.096-35

is identical and applicable to § 86.098-.

35, this-may be indicated by specifying

the corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.095-35.'" or '[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096-35.".

(a) introductory text through

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

see § 86.095-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(C) Engine displacement (in

cubic inches or liters), engine family

identification and evaporative/refueling

family Identification.

(a})1)(iii)(D) through (L) [Reserved].

For guidance see § 86.095-35.

(a)(1)(iii)(M) For model year 1998

light-duty vehicles, a clear indication of

which test procedure was used to certify

the evaporative/refueling family, e.g.,

"Evaporative /refueling Family xx

(§ 86.130-96 procedures)" or

"Evaporative /refueling Family xx

(§ 86.130-78 procedures)." (a)(1)(iii)(N) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.096-35. .(a)(2) heading through (a)(2)(iii)(K)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

35.

(a)(2)(iii)(L) [Reserved].

(a)(2)(iii)(M) through (a)(2)(iii)(N)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

35.

(a)(2)(iii)(O) through (a)(2)(iii)(P)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.096-

35.

(a)(3) heading through (a)(4)(iii)(F)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 86.095-

35.

(a)(4)(iii)(G) [Reserved]. For guidance

see § 86.096-35.

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

guidance see § 86.095-35.

31. Section 86.099-8 of subpart A is

amended by adding paragraphs (b)(5)

and (6), revising paragraph (c), adding

paragraph (d), and revising paragraphs

(e) through (k) to read as follows:

§88.099- Emission standards for 1999

and later model year light-duty vehicles.

Sb)* * *

(5) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§86.096-8.

(b)(6) Vehicles certified to the

refueling standards set forth in

paragraph (d) of this section are not

required to demonstrate compliance

with the Fuel Dispensing Spitback

standards contained in paragraphs

(b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)(iii) of this section:

Provided, that they meet the

requirements of § 86.098-28(f).

(c) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.096-8.

(d) Refueling emissions from 1999

and later model year gasoline-fueled

and methanol-fueled Otto-cycle and

petroleum-fueled and methanol-fueled

diesel-cycle light duty vehicles shall not

exceed the following standards. The

standards apply equally to certification

and in-use vehicles.

(1) Standards--(i) Hydrocarbois (for

gasoline-fueled Otto gallon (0.053 gram

per liter) of fuel dispensed.

(ii) Organic Material Hydrocarbon

Equivalent (for methanol-fueled

vehicles). 0.20 gram per gallon (0.053

gram per liter) of fuel dispensed.

(2)(i) The standards set forth in

paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this

section refer to a sample of refueling

emissions collected under the

conditions set forth in subpart B of this

part and measured in accordance with

those procedures.

(ii) For vehicles powered by

petroleum-fueled diesel-cycle engines,

the provisions set forth in paragraph

(d)(1)(i) of this section may be waived:

Provided, that the manufacturer

complies with the provisions of

§ 86.098-28(f) of this subpart.

(3)(i) A minimum of the percentage

shown in Table A99-08 of a

manufacturer's sales of the applicable

model year's gasoline- andmethanolfueled Otto-cycle and petroleum. and

methanol-fueled diesel cycle light-duty

vehicles shall be tested under the
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16295

procedures in subpart B of this part

indicated for 1998 and later model

years, and shall not exceed the

standards described in paragraph (d)(1)

of this section. Vehicles certified in

accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of

this section, as determined by the

provisions of § 86:098-28(g), shall not

be counted in the calculation of the

percentage of compliance.

TABLE A99-08. IMPLEMENTATION

SCHEDULE FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE REFUELING EMISSION TESTING

Sales Model year percentage

1999 ..................................... .. 80

2000 and sub sequent ............... 100

(ii) Small volume manufacturers, as

defined in § 86.094-14(b) (1) and (2), are

exempt from the implementation

schedule of Table A99-08 of this section

for model year 1999. For small volunme

manufacturers, the standards of

paragraph (d) of this section, and the

associated test procedures, shall not

apply until model year 2000, when 100

percent compliance with the standards

of this section is required. This

exemption does not apply to small

volume engine families as defined in

§ 86.094-14(b)(5).

(e) through (f) [Reserved]

(g) through (k) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.096--8.

Subpart B---[Amended]

1. Section 86.101 of subpart B is

amended by adding a new paragraph

(a)(3) to read as follows:

§86.101 General applicability.

(a) * * *

(3) Sections 86.150-98 through

86.156-98 describe the refueling test

procedures for light-duty vehicles and

light-duty trucks and apply for 1998 and

later model years.

2. Section 86.105 of subpart B is

amended by revising paragraph(b) to

read as follows:

§86.105 Introduction; structure of subpart. R * * * *

(b) Three topics are addressed in this

subpart. Sections 86.106-82 through

86.115-78 set forth specifications and

equipment requirements; §§ 86.116-82

through 86.126-90 discuss calibration

methods and frequency; test procedures

* and data requirements are listed (in

approximate order of performance) in

§§ 86.127-82 through 86.156-98.

3. A new § 86.107-98 is added to

subpart B to read as follows:

§86.107-98 Sampling and analytical

system.

Section 86.107-98 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.107-96. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.107-96 is identical and applicable

to § 86.107-98, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.107-96." Where a

corresponding paragraph of §86.107-96

is not applicable, this is indicated by the

statement "[Reserved]."

(a)(1) through (a)(3) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.107-96.

(a)(4) Refueling emissions test. The

requirements detailed in § 86.107-90

(a)(1) shall apply. Alternatively, an

enclosure meeting the specifications

detailed in § 86.107-96 (a)(1), (2), or (3)

may be used if approved in advance by

the Administrator. In addition, the

enclosure shall have one or more access

ports leading to flexible, automatic

sealing boots, in the wall(s) of the

enclosure. The function of the access

port(s) and boots shall be to allow

fueling of the test vehicle from a fuel

nozzle and hose located outside of the

enclosure, with only the spout of the

nozzle passing through the automatic

sealing opening of the boot during

fueling. There shall be no loss in the gas

tightness of the enclosure at the opening

of the boot either when the nozzle is

inserted or when the nozzle is not

inserted.

(b) through (d) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.107-96.

(e) Temperature recording system. (1)

For all emission testing. A strip chart

potentiometric recorder, an on-line

computer system, or other suitable

means shall be used to record enclosure

ambient temperature during all

evaporative emission test segments, as

well as vehicle fuel tank temperature

during the running loss test. The

recording system shall record each

temperature at least once every minute..

The recording system shall be capable of

resolving time to ±15s and capable of

resolving temperature to ±0.75 OF

(±0.42 0C). The recorder (data processor)

shall have a time accuracy of ±15s and

a precision of ±15s. Two ambient

temperature sensors, connected to

provide one average output, shall be

located 3 feet above the floor lt the

approximate mid-length of each side

wall of the enclosure and within 3 to 12

inches of each side wall. Manufacturers

shall arrange that vehicles furnished for

testing at Federal certification facilities

be equipped with iron-constantan Type

J thermocouples for measurement of fuel

tank temperature. Vehicles shall be

equipped with 2 temperature sensors

installed to provide an average liquid

fuel temperature. The temperature sensors shall be placed to measure the

temperature, at the mid-volume of the

liquid fuel at a fill level of 40 percent

of nominal tank capacity. In-tank

temperature sensors are not required for

the supplemental two-diurnal test

sequence specified in § 86.130-96 or for

the refueling test specified in § 86.151-

98.

(2) Refueling emission testing only. In

addition to the enclosure ambient

temperature recording system described

in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, strip

chart recorder(s) or automatic data

processor shall be used to record vehicle

soak area ambient temperature and

dispensed fuel temperature at the nozzle

during the test. The temperature

recorder(s) or data processor shall

record each temperature at least once

every 20 seconds (the soak area ambient

temperature recorder may be a

continuous recording system). The

recording system shall be capable of

resolving time. to ±15s and be capable of

resolving temperature to ±0.75 'F

(0.42 C).

(f) through (h)(3) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.107-96.

(h)(4) Refueling emission test. Blowers

or fans must have a capacity of 0.8±0.2

•cfm per cubic foot of the nominal

enclosure volume. Circulated air shall

not be aimed directly at the vehicle.

(5) Spilled fuel mixing blower;

refueling emission test. An explosionproof blower of 100-200 ft3/min (2.8-

5.7 m3/min) capacity is required to

enhance mixing of vapors from spilled

fuel through the enclosure atmosphere

during tests. The discharge from this

blower shall be'directed toward the

region of the enclosure floor where fuel

spillage during fueling may occur.

(i) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.107-96.

(j) Refueling equipment. The refueling

equipment shall consist of a fuel

delivery system with temperature

control equipment, fuel flow safety

switch, dispensing pump, hose, nozzle

and a meter to measure the dispensed

fuel volume. The dispensing nozzle

shall be a commercial model, not

equipped with vapor recovery

hardware. A fuel recirculation system

may be utilized to avoid trapping of

unheated fuel in the hose. The fuel

delivery system must be capable of

delivering fuel at 67±1.5 *F (19.4±0.8 0

C)

and a constant flow rate between 4.2

and 9.8 gal/min (15.9 and 37.1 liter/

min) with a tolerance of ±0.3 gal/min

(±1.1 liter/min) during the refueling

emissions measurement phase of the

test. The accuracy of the meter for

measuring the dispensed fuel volume

shall be ±2 percent at the test flow rate.
16296 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 /Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulatiofis

4. Section 86.115-78 of sub part B is

amended by revising paragraphs

(b)(3)(ii) and (b)(5) to read as follows:

§86.115-78 EPA urban dynamometer

driving schedules. * * * * *

(b)*

(3)* * *

(ii) When conducted to meet the

requirements of § 86.129-94 or

§ 86.153-98(d), up to three additional

occurrences of speed variations greater

than the tolerance are acceptable,

provided they occur for less than 15

seconds on any occasion, and are clearly

documented as to the time and speed at

that point of the driving schedule. * * * * *

(5) When conducted to meet the

requirements of § 86.129-94, 86.132-96,

86.146-96, or 86.153-98(d), the speed

tolerance shall be as specified above,

except that the upper and lower limits

shall be 4 mph (6.4 km/h). * * * * *

5. Section 86.132-96 of subpart B is

amended by revising paragraphs (h)

introductory text. (j) introductory text.

(j)(1)(i) and (j)(1)(viii) to read as follows:

§ 86.132-6 Vehicle preconditioning. * * * * *

(h) During the soak period for the

three-diurnal test sequence described in

§ 86.130-96, evaporative canisters, if the

vehicle is so equipped, shall be

preconditioned according to the

following procedure. For vehicles with

multiple canisters, each canister shall be

preconditioned separately. In addition,

for model year 1998 and later vehicles

equipped with refueling canisters, these

canisters shall be preconditioned for the

three-diurnal test sequence according to

the procedure in § 86.132-96 (j)(1). If a

vehicle is designed to actively control

evaporative or refueling emissioh

without a canister, the manufacturer

shall devise an appropriate

preconditioning procedure subject to

he approval of the Administrator. * * * * *

(j) For the supplemental two-diurnal

test sequence described in § 86.130-96,

one of the following methods shall be

used to precondition evaporative

canisters during the soak period

specified in paragraph (g) of this

section. For vehicles with multiple

canisters, each canister shall be

preconditioned separately. In addition,

for model year 1998 and later vehicles

equipped with refueling canisters, these

canisters shall be preconditioned for the

supplemental two-diurnal test sequence

according to the procedure in paragraph

(j)(1) of this section. Canister emissions

are measured to determine

breakthrough. Breakthrough is here

defined as the point at which the

cumulative quantity of hydrocarbons

emitted is equal to 2 grams. (1) * * *

(i) Prepare the evaporative/refueling

emission canister for the canister

loading operation. The canister shall not

be removed from the vehicle, unless

access to the canister in its normal

location is so restricted that purging and

loading can only reasonably be

accomplished by removing the canister

from the vehicle. Special care shall be

taken during this step to avoid damage

to the components and the integrity of

the fuel system. * * * * *.-

(viii) Reconnect the evaporative/

refueling emission canister and restore

the vehicle to its normal operating

condition.

* * * * *

6. A new § 86.150-98 is added to

subpart B to read as follows:

§8.150-08 Overview refueling test.

(a) The refueling emissions test

procedure described in this and

subsequent sections is used to

determine the conformity of vehicles

with the refueling emissions standards

set forth in subpart A of this part for

light-duty, vehicles and light-duty

trucks. The refueling emissions test

procedure may be performed as an

individual test or in combination with

the evaporative and exhaust emissions

test sequences of § 86.130-96.

(b) The refueling emissions test is

designed to measure hydrocarbon

emissions resulting from the generation

or displacement of fuel tank vapor - during vehicle refueling. The refueling

emissions shall be measured by the

enclosure technique.

(c) All emission control systems

installed on or incorporated in a new

motor vehicle shall be functioning

during all procedures in this subpart

except:

(1) In cases of component malfunction

or failure; and

(2) during certain specified fuel drain

and fill operations, at which times the

refueling emission control canister is

disconnected. Maintenance to correct

component malfunction or failure shall

be authorized in accordance with

§ 86.098-25.

7. A new section 86.151-98 is added

to subpart B to read as follows:

§ 86.151-98 General requirements;' refueling tesL

(a) The refueling emissions procedure,

shown in.Figure B98-12, starts with the

stabilizing of the vehicle and the

loading of the refueling emissions

canister(s) to breakthrough, and

continues with the vehicle drive for

purging of the canister, followed by the

refueling emissions measurement. The

test is conducted following §§ 86.152-

98 through 86.154-98 in order.

(b) Ambient temperature levels

encountered by the test vehicle

throughout the test sequence shall not

be less than 68 OF (20 °C) nor more than

86 OF (30 0C).

(c) The vehicle shall be approximately

level during all phases of the test

sequence to prevent abnormal fuel

distribution.

BILLING CODE 6560-60-P
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

optional seal test (EPA only)

i- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I,

I

I,

t

or

F si c urge

I.

partial refueling option

(EPA only)

Drivedown

Repeated UDDSs as

specified by EPA

(0to 85% of tankful)

1-6 hours

I

I.

6-24 hours

Figure B98-12: Refueling Test Sequence

BILUNG CODE 6560-C0-C

12-36 hours

I hour MAX

16297
16298 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

8. A new § 86.152-98 is added to

subpart B to read as follows:

§86.152-98 Vehicle preparation; refueling

test.

(a) Provide additional fittings and

adapters, as required, to accommodate a

fuel drain at the lowest point possible

in the tank(s) as installed on the vehicle.

The canister shall not be removed from

the vehicle, unless access to the canister

in its normal location is so restricted

that purging and loading can only

reasonably be accomplished by

removing the canister from the vehicle.

Special care shall be taken during this

step to avoid damage to the components

and the integrity of the fuel system.

(b) Provide valving or other means to

allow the venting of the refueling vapor

line to the atmosphere rather than to the

refueling emissions canister(s) when

required by this test procedure.

(c) For preconditioning that involves

loading the vapor collection canister(s)

with butane, provide valving or other

means as necessary to allow loading of

the canister(s).

.9. A new § 86.153-98 is added to

subpart B to read as follows:

§88.153-98 Vehicle and canister

preconditioning; refueling test.

(a) Vehicle and canister

preconditioning. Vehicles and vapor

storage canisters shall be

preconditioned in accordance with the

preconditioning procedures for the

supplemental two-diurnal evaporative

emissions test specified in § 86.132-96

(a) through (j). For vehicles equipped

with non-integrated refueling emission

control systems, the canister must be

loaded using the method involving

butane loading to breakthrough (see

§ 86.132-96 (j)(1)). If the refueling test

procedure is started within 24 hours of

the completion of an evaporative

emission test on the same vehicle at the

same ambient conditions, the fuel tank

drain and fill and minimum soak period

requirement described in § 86.132-96

(b) and (c) may be omitted from the

refueling test procedure.

(b) Seal test. The Administrator may

choose to omit certain canister load and

purge steps, and replace them with a

bench purge of the refueling canister(s),

in order to verify the adequacy of

refueling emission control system seals.

Failure of this seal test shall constitute

a failure of the refueling emission

control test. For integrated systems, this

bench purge may be performed after the

exhaust testing in order to obtain

exhaust emission test results. Nonintegrated system seal testing shall be

performed using paragraph (b)(1) of this

section.

(1) Without the exhaust emission test.

The Administrator may conduct the

canister preconditioning by purging the

canister(s) with at least 1200 canister

bed volumes of ambient air (with

humidity controlled to 50±25 grains of

water vapor per pound of dry air)

maintained at a nominal flow rate of 0.8

cfm directly following the

preconditioning drive described in

§ 86.132-96 (c) through (e). In this case,

the canister loading procedures and the

vehicle driving procedures described in

§ 86.132-96 (f) through (j) and in

paragraphs (c) through (d) of this section

shall be omitted,' and the 10 minute and

60 minute time requirements of

paragraph (e) of this section shall apply

to time after completion of the bench

purge. In the case of multiple refueling

canisters, each canister shall be purged

separately.

(2) With the exhaust emission test.

The Administrator may conduct the

canister preconditioning by purging the

canister(s)- directly after the exhaust test

(see paragraph (c)(1) of this section).

The canister shall be purged with at

least 1200 canister bed volumes of

ambient air (with humidity controlled to

50±25 grains of water vapor per pound

of dry air) maintained at a nominal flow

rate of 0.8 cfm. In this case, the vehicle

driving procedures described in

paragraphs (c)(2) through (d) of this

section shall be omitted, and the 10

minute and 60 minute time

requirements of paragraph (e) of this

section shall apply to time after

completion of the bench purge. In the

case of multiple refueling canisters,

each canister shall be purged separately.

(c) Canister purging; integrated

systems (1) Vehicles to be tested for

exhaust emissions only shall be

processed according to §§ 86.135-94

through 86.137-96. Vehicles to be tested

for refueling emissions shall be

processed in accordance with the

procedures in §§ 86.135-94 through

86.137-96, followed by the procedures

outlined in paragraph (c)(2) of this

section.

(2) To provide additional opportunity

for canister purge, conduct additional

driving on a dynamometer, within one

hour of completion of the hot start

exhaust test, by operating the test

vehicle through one UDDS, a 2 minute

idle, two NYCCs, another 2 minute idle,

another UDDS, then another 2 minute

idle (see § 86.115-78 and Appendix I of

this part). Fifteen seconds after the

engine starts, place the transmission in

gear. Twenty seconds after the engine

starts, begin the initial vehicle

acceleration of the driving schedule.

The transmission shall be operated

according to the specifications of

§ 86.128-79 during the driving cycles. A

cooling fan(s) shall be positioned as

described in § 86.135-94(b).

(d) Canister purging; non-integated

systems. Within one hour of completion

of canister loading to breakthrough, the

fuel tank(s) shall be further filled to 95

percent of nominal tank capacity

determined to the nearest one-tenth of a

U.S. gallon (0.38 liter) with the fuel

specified in § 86.113-94. During this

fueling operation, the refueling

emissions canister(s) shall be

disconnected. Following completion of

refueling, the refueling emissions

canister(s) shall be reconnected. Special

care shall be taken during this step to

avoid damage to the components and

the integrity of the fuel system. Vehicle

driving to purge the refueling canister(s)

shall be performed using either the

chassis dynamometer procedure or the

test track procedure, as described in

-paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of this

section. The Administrator may choose

to shorten the vehicle driving for a

partial refueling test as described in

paragraph (d)(3) of this section. For

vehicles equipped with dual fuel tanks,

the required volume of fuel shall be

driven out of one tank, the second tank

shall be selected as the fuel source, and

the required volume of fuel shall be

driven out of the second tank.

(1) Chassis dynamometer procedure.

(i) Vehicle driving on a chassis

dynamometer shall consist of repeated

drives with the UDDS until 85 percent

of fuel tank capacity has been

consumed. Driving in testing performed

by manufacturers may be terminated

before 85 percent of the fuel tank

capacity has been consumed, provided

that driving is not terminated partway

through a UDDS cycle. Driving in

testing performed by the Administrator

may be terminated after the same

number of UDDS cycles as driven in the

manufacturer's certification testing.

(ii) Except with the advance approval

of the Administrator, the number of

UDDSs required to consume 85 percent

of tank fuel capacity (total capacity of

both tanks when the vehicle is equipped

with dual fuel tanks) shall be

determined from the fuel economy on

the UDDS applicable to the test vehicle

and from the number of gallons to the

nearest 0.1 gallon (0.38 liter) that

constitutes 85 percent of tank volume. If

this "fuel consumed point" occurs

partway through a UDDS cycle, the

cycle shall be completed in its entirety.

(iii) For vehicles equipped with dual

fuel tanks, fuel switching from the first

tank to the second tank shall occur at

the 10 percent volume of the first tank

regardless of the point in the UDDS

cycle at which this occurs.
Federal Register I Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994"/ Rules and Regulations 16299

(iv) If necessary to accommodate work

schedules, the engine may be turned off

and the vehicle parked on the

dynamometer. The vehicle may be

parked off of the dynamometer to

facilitate maintenance or repairs if required. re)During the driving on the

dynamometer, a cooling fan(s) shall be

positioned as described in § 86.135-

94(b).

(2). Test track procedure. (i) Vehicle

dri ving on a test track shall consist of

repeated drives with the UDDS until 85

percent of. fuel tank capacity has been

consumed. Driving performed by

manufacturers may be terminated before

85 percent of the fuel tank capacity has

been consumed, provided that driving is

not terminated partway through a UDDS

cycle. Driving performed by theAdministrator may be terminated after

the same number of UDDS cycles as

driven in the manufacturer's

certification testing.

(ii) If the distance from the emission

laboratory to the test track is less than

5 miles (8.05 kin) the vehicle may be

driven to the test track at a speed not to

exceed 25 mph. If the distance is greater

than 5 miles (8.05 km) the vehicle shall

be moved to the test track with theengine off.

(iiij Except with the advance approval

of the Administrator, the number of

4JDDSs required to consume 85 percent

of tank fuel capacity (total capacity of

both tanks when the vehicle is equipped

with dual fuel tanks) shall be

determined from the fuel economy on

the UDDS applicable to the test vehicle

and from the number of gallons to the

nearest 0.1 gallon (0.38 liter) that

constitutes 85 percent of tank volume. If

this "fuel consumed point" occurs

partway through a UDDS cycle, the

cycle shall-be completed in its entirety.

(iv) The vehicle shall be driven at a

speed not to exceed 25 mph from the

test track to the- laboratory provided the

distance from the test track to the

laboratory does not exceed 5 miles (8.05

km). If the distance from the test track

to the emission laboratory is greater

than 5 miles (8.05 kin) the vehicle shall

be moved from the test track with the

engine off.

(v) For vehicles equipped with dual

fuel tanks, fuel switching from the first

tank to the second tank shall occur at

the 10 percent volume of the first tank

regardless of the point in the UDDS

cycle at which this occurs. (vi) If necessary to accommodate work

schedules, the engine may be turned off

and the vehicle parked on the test track.

The vehicle may be parked off of the test

track to facilitate maintenance or repairs

if required. If the vehicle is moved from

the test track, it shall be returned to the

track with the engine off when mileage

accumulation is to be resumed.

(3) Drive schedule for partial refueling

test. The Administrator may conduct a

partial refueling test involving a

shortening of the drive procedures

described in paragraphs (d) (1) and. 2)

of this section and a modified soak and

refueling procedure as described in

paragraph (e) of this section and

§ 86.154-98(e)(7)(i). The drive shall be

performed as described in paragraph (d)

(1) or (2) of this section except that the

drive shall be terminated when at least

10 percent but no more than 85 percent

of the fuel tank nominal capacity has

been consumed and not partway

through a UDDS cycle. The amount of

fuel consumed in the drive shall be

determined by multiplying the number

of UDDSs driven by the mileage

accumulated per UDDS and dividing by

the fuel economy for the UDDS

applicable to the test vehicle.

(e) Vehicle cool down-(1) Partial

refueling test. If the Administrator is

conducting the non-integrated system

partial refueling test, after the driving

procedure specified in paragraph (d)(3)

of this section, the vehicle shall be

parked (without starting the engine) and

soaked at 80±3 °F (27±1.7 'C) for a

minimum of 1 hour and a maximum of

6 hours.

(2) For all other refueling emission

tests. Within 10 minutes of completion

of refueling emissions canister

stabilization (see paragraph (c) or (d) of

this section), the refueling emissions

canister(s) shall be disconnected.

Within 60 minutes of completion of

refueling emissions canister

stabilization (see paragraph (c) or (d) of

this section), the vehicle fuel tank(s)

shall be drained, the fuel tank(s) fueled

to 10 percent of nominal tank capacity

determined to the nearest one-tenth of a

U.S. gallon (0.38 liter) with the specified

fuel, and the vehicle parked (without

starting the engine) and soaked at 80±3

IF (27±1.7 °C) for a minimum of 6 hours

and a maximum of 24 hours.

10. A new § 86.154;-98 is added to

subpart B to read as follows:

§ 86.154-98 Measurement procedure; refueling test.

(a) The refueling test measurement

procedure described in this section

immediately follows the vehicle and

canister preconditioning described in

§ 86.153-98..

(b) The refueling emission enclosure

shall be purged for several minutes

immediately prior to the test. Warning:

If at any time the concentration of

hydrocarbons, of methanol, or of

methanol and hydrocarbons exceeds

15,000 ppm C, the enclosure should be

immediately purged. This concentration

provides a 4:1 safety factor against the

lean flammability limit.

(c)(1) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon

analyzer, and additional analyzer, if

needed, shall be zeroed and spanned

immediately prior to the test.

(2) For methanol-fueled vehicles only,

impingers charged with known volumes

of pure deionized water shall be placed

in the methanol sampling system. . (d) If not already on, the enclosure

mixing fan and the spilled fuel mixing

blower shall be turned on at this time:

(e) The refueling emission

measurement portion of the refueling

test shall be performed as follows:

(1) The line from the fuel tank(s) to

the refueling emissions canister(s) shall

be connected.

(2) The test vehicle, with the engine

shut off, shall be moved into the

enclosure. The test vehicle windows

and luggage compartment shall be

opened if not already open.

(3) An electrical ground shall be

attached to the vehicle. The enclosure

door shall be closed and sealed. The FID

(or HFID) trace shall be allowed to

stabilize.

(4) The dispensed fuel temperature

recording system shall be started.

(5)(i) Within 10 minutes of closing

and sealing the doors, analyze enclosure

atmosphere for hydrocarbons and

record. This is the initial (time=0

minutes) hydrocarbon concentration,

CHc, required in § 86.143-96.

(ii) For methanol-fueled vehicles only,

measure the initial concentration of

methanol as described in § 86.133-

96(i)(61.

(6) Within one minute of obtaining

the initial FID (or HFID) reading, and

methanol reading if applicable, the fuel

nozzle shall be inserted into the filler

neck of the test vehicle, to its maximum

penetration, and the refueling operation

shall be started. The plane of the

nozzle's handle shall be approximately

perpendicular to the floor of the

laboratory. The fuel shall be dispensed

at a temperature of 67±1.5 °F (19.4±0.8 0

C) and at a dispensing rate of 9.8±0.3

gal/min (37.1±1.1 liter/min). In-testing

conducted by the Administrator, a lower

dispensing rate (no lower than 4.0 gal/

min (15.1 liter/min)) may be used. - (7)(i) Partial refueling test. If the

Administrator conducts the nonintegrated system partial refueling test,

the fuel flow shall continue until the

amount of fuel pumped is equal to the

fuel consumed during the driving, as

determined in accordance with

§ 86.153-98(d)(3). The final volume of

fuel dispensed must be within one-tenth

of a U.S. gallon (0.38 liter) of the
16300 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

targeted amount' If automatic nozzle

shut-off occurs prior to this point, the

nozzle shall be reactivated within 15

seconds and fuel dispensing continued

as needed. A minimum of 3 seconds

shall elapse between any automatic

shutoff and subsequent resumption of

dispensing.

(ii) For all other refueling tests. The

fuel flow shall continue until the

refueling nozzle automatic shut-off is

activated.The amount of fuel dispensed

must be at least 85 percent of nominal

fuel tank volume, determined to the

nearest one-tenth of a U.S. gallon (0.38

liter). If automatic nozzle shut-off occurs

prior to this point, the nozzle shall be

reactivated within 15 seconds and fuel

dispensing continued as needed. A

minimum of 3 seconds shall elapse

between any automatic shutoff and

subsequent resumption of dispensing.

Dispensing may not be manually

terminated, unless the test vehicle has

already clearly failed the test.

(8)(i) The final reading of the

evaporative enclosure FID analyzer shall

be taken 60±5 seconds following the

final shut-off of fuel flow. This is the

final hydrocarbon concentration, Ccr,

required in § 86.143-96. The elapsed

time, in minutes; between the initial

and final FID (or HFID) readings shall be

recorded.

(ii) For methanol-fueled vehicles only.

Measure the final concentration of

methanol as described in.§ 86.133-

96(m)(2).

(9) For vehicles equipped with more

than one fuel tank, the procedures

described in this section shall be

performed for each fuel tank.

11. A new § 86.155-98 is added to

subpart B to read as follows:

§86.155-98 Records required; refueling

test.

The following information shall be

recorded with respect to each test:

(a) Test number.

(b) System or device tested (brief

description).

(c) Date and time of day.

(d) Instrument operated.

(e) Operator.

(f) Vehicle: ID number, manufacturer,

model year, engine family, evaporative/

refueling emission family, refueling

emission control system, refueling

emissions canister continuous drive

purge miles and number of UDDSs

driven for non-integrated systems, fuel

system (including fuel tank(s) capacity

and location), basic engine description

(including displacement, number of

cylinders, turbocharger (if used), and

catalyst usage), engine code, and

odometer reading.

(g) All pertinent instrument

information including nozzle and fuel

delivery system description. As an

alternative, a reference to a vehicle test

cell number may be used, with advance

approval of the Administrator, provided

test cell calibration records show the

pertinent instrument information.

(h) Recorder charts: Identify zero,

span, and enclosure gas sample traces.

(i) Enclosure barometric pressure and

ambient temperature: a central

laboratory barometer may be used,

provided that individual test cell

barometric pressures are shown to be

within ±0.1 percent of the barometric

pressure at the central barometer

location.

(j) Temperatures: Soak area;

dispensed fuel, initial and final.

(k) Fuel dispensing rate(s).

(1) Dispensed fuel volume.

(m) For methanol-fueled vehicles:

(1) Volume of sample passed through

the methanol sampling system and the

volume of deionized water in each

impinger.

(2) The methanol coricentration in the

reference sample and the peak area from

the GC analysis of the reference sample.

(3) The peak area of the GC analyses

of the test samples (methanol).

(n) All additional information

necessary for the calculations. specified

in § 86.156-98.

12. A new § 86.156-98 is added to

subpart B to read as follows:

§86.156-98 Calculations; refueling test.

(a) The calculation of the net

hydrocarbon mass change and methanol

mass change (if applicable) in the

enclosure is used to determine refueling'

mass emissions. The mass is calculated

from initial and final hydrocarbon and

methanol (if applicable) concentrations

in ppm carbon, initial and final

enclosure ambient temperatures, initial

and final barometric pressures, and net

enclosure volume using the equations of

§ 86.143-96. For vehicles with multiple

tanks, the results for each tank shall be

calculated and ihen summed to

determine overall refueling emissions.

(b) The final results for comparison

with the refueling control emission

standard shall be computed by dividing

the total refueling mass emissions by the

total gallons of fuel dispensed in the

refueling test (see § 86.154-98(e)(7)(ii)).

(c) The results of all emission tests

shall be rounded, in accordance with

ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as

referenced in § 86.094-

28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)) to the number of

decimal places contained in the

applicable emission standard expressed

to one additional significant figure.

Subpart G-[Amended]

1. A new § 86.602-98 is added to

subpart G to read as follows:

§ 86.602-98 Definitions.

Section 86.602-98 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86;602-84. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.602-84 is identical and applicable

to § 86.602-98, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.602-84." Where a

corresponding paragraph of § 86.602-84

is not applicable, this is indicated by the

statement [Reserved].".

(a) through (b)(2) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.602-84.

(b)(3)(i) Configuration, when used for

LDV exhaust emissions testing, means a

subclassification of an engine-system

combination on the basis of engine

code, inertia weight class, transmission

type and gear ratios, axle ratio, and

other parameters which may be

designated by the Administrator.

(ii) Configuration, when used for LDV

refueling emissions testing, means a

subclassification of an evaporative/

refueling emission family on the basis of

evaporative and refueling control

system and other parameters which may

be designated by the Administrator.

(4) Test sample means the collection

of vehicles of the same configuration

which have been drawn from the

population of vehicles of that

configuration and which will receive

emission testing.

(b)(5) through (b)(8) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.602-8-4.

2. A new § 86.603-98 is added to

subpart G to read as follows:

§ 86.603-98 Test orders.

Section 86.603-98 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.603-88. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.603-88 is identical and applicable

to § 86.603-98, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.603-88." Where a

corresponding paragraph of § 86.603-88

is not applicable, this is indicated by the

statement "[Reserved].".

(a) through (c) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.603-88.

(d) A manufacturer may indicate

preferred assembly plants for the

various engine families and evaporative/

refueling families produced by the

manufacturer for selection of vehicles in

response to a test order. This shall be

accomplished by submitting a list of

engine families with the associated

evaporative/refueling families, and the

corresponding assembly plants from
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

which the manufacturer desires to have

vehicles selected, to the Administrator.

In order that a manufacturer's preferred

location for issuance of a test order for

a configuration of a particular engine

family and/or evaporative/refueling

family be considered, the list must be

submitted prior to issuance of the test

order. Notwithstanding the fact that a

manufacturer has submitted the above

list, the Administrator may, upon

making the determination that evidence

exists indicating noncompliance at

other than the manufacturer's preferred

plant, order selection at such other plant

where vehicles of the configuration

specified in the test order are

assembled. (e) [Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.603-88.

3. A new § 86.605-98 is added to

subpart G read as follows:

§86.605-8 Maintenance of records; submittal of Information.

Section 86.605-98 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 86.605--88. Where a paragraph in

§ 86.605-88 is identical and applicable

to § 86.605-98, this may be indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.605-88." Where a

corresponding paragraph of § 86.605-88

is not applicable, this is indicated by the

statement "[Reserved].".

(a) through (a)(1)(i)(D) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.605-88.

(E) Refueling Enclosure (Refueling

SHED).

(1) Total internal volume.

(2) Capacity of mixing blower.

(3) Location of refueling access ports.

(4) Enclosure barometric pressure and

ambient temperature. (5) Soak area temperature records.

(F) Fuel Dispenser for Refueling.

(1) Fuel dispensing rate.

(2) Manufacturer and model of fuel

nozzle.

(3) Dispensed fuel temperature.

(4) Dispensed fuel volume.

(a)(1)(ii) through (e) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.605-88.

4. A new § 86.608-98 is added to

subpart G to read as follows:

§86.608-98 Test procedures.

(a) The prescribed test procedures are

the Federal Test Procedure, including

the refueling test procedure or the fuel

spitback test, whichever is applicable,

as described in subpart B of this part,

the cold temperature CO test procedure

as described in subpart C of this part,

and the Certification Short Test as

described in subpart 0 of this part. For

purposes of Selective Enforcement

Audit Testing, the manufacturer shall

not be required to perform any of the

test procedures in subpart B of this part

relating to evaporative emission testing,

other than refueling emissions testing,

except as specified in paragraph (a)(2) of

this section.

(1) The Administrator may omit any

of the testing procedures described in

paragraph (a) of this section and may

select and prescribe the sequence of any

CSTs. Further, the Administrator may,

on the basis of a written application by

a manufacturer, approve optional test

procedures other than those in subparts

B, C, and 0 of this part for any motor

vehicle which is not susceptible to

satisfactory testing using the procedures

in subparts B, C, and 0 of this part.

(2) The following exceptions to the

test procedures in subpart B of this part

are applicable to Selective Enforcement

Audit testing: (i) For mileage accumulation, the

manufacturer may use test fuel meeting

the specifications for mileage and

service accumulation fuels of § 86.113-

94. Otherwise, the manufacturer may

use fuels other than those specified in

this section only with the advance

approval of the Administrator.

(ii) The manufacturer may measure

the temperature of the test fuel at other

than the approximate mid-volume of the

fuel tank, as specified in § 86.131-96(a)

with only a single temperature sensor,

and may drain the test fuel from other

than the lowest point of the tank, as

specified in § 86.131-96(b) and

§ 86.152-98(a), provided an equivalent

method is used. Equivalency

documentation shall be maintained by

the manufacturer and shall be made

available upon request. (iii) The manufacturer may perform

additional preconditioning on SEA test

vehicles other than the preconditioning

specified in § 86.132-98 only if the

additional preconditioning had been

performed on certification test vehicles

of the same configuration.

(iv) If the Administrator elects to use

the evaporative/refueling canister

preconditioning procedure described in

§ 86.132-96(k), the manufacturer shall

perform the heat build procedure 11 to

34 h6urs following vehicle

preconditioning rather than according to

the time period specified in § 86.133-

90(a). All references to an evaporative

emission enclosure and analyzing for

HC during the heat build can be

ignored. (v) The manufacturer may substitute

slave tires for the drive wheel tires on

the vehicle as specified in paragraph

§ 86.135-90(e): Provided, that the slave

tires are the same size.

(vi) If the Administrator elects to use

the evaporative/re fueling canister

.preconditioning procedure described in

§ 86.132-96(k), the cold start exhaust

emission test described in § 86.137-96

shall follow the heat build procedure

described in § 86.133-90 by not more

than one hour.

(vii) In performing exhaust sample

analysis under § 86.140-94.

(A) When testing diesel vehicles, or

methanol-fueled Otto-cycle vehicles, the

manufacturer shall allow a minimum of

20 minutes warm-up for the HC

analyzer, and for diesel vehicles, a

minimum of two hours warm-up for the

CO, CO 2, and NOx analyzers. (Power is

normally left on infrared and

chemiluminescent analyzers. When not

in use, the chopper motors of the

infrared analyzers are turned off and the

phototube high voltage supply to the

chemiluminescent analyzers is placed

in the standby position.)

(B) The manufacturer shall exercise

care to prevent moisture from

condensing in the sample collection

bags. (viii) The manufacturer need not

comply with § 86.142-90 or § 86.155-

98, since the records required therein

are provided under other provisions of

this subpart G.

(ix) If a manufacturer elects to

perform the background determination

procedure described in paragraph

(a)(2)(xi) of this section in addition to

performing the refueling emissions test

procedure, the elapsed time between the

initial and final FID readings shall be

recorded, rounded to the nearest second

rather than minute as described in

§ 86.154-98(e)(8). In addition, the

vehicle soak described in § 86.153-98(e)

shall be conducted with the windows

and luggage compartment of the vehicle

open.

(x) The Administrator may elect to

perform a seal test, described in

§ 86.153-98(b), of both integrated and

non-integrated systems instead of the

full refueling test. When testing nonintegrated systems, an manufacturer

may conduct the canister purge

described in § 86.153-98(b)(1) directly

following the preconditioning drive

described in § 86.132-96(e) or directly

following the exhaust emissions test

described in § 86.137-96.

(xi) In addition to the refueling test,

a manufacturer may elect to perform the

following background emissions

determination immediately prior to the

refueling measurement procedure

described in § 86.154-98, provided EPA

is notified of this decision prior to the

start of testing in an SEA.

(A) The SHED shall be purged for

several minutes immediately prior to

the background determination. Warning:

If at any time the concentration of

16301
16302 Federal Register I Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

hydrocarbons, of methanol, or of

methanol and hydrocarbons exceeds

15,000 ppm C, the enclosure should be

immediately purged. This concentration

provides a 4:1 safety factor against the

lean flammability limit.

(B) The FID for HFID) hydrocarbon

analyzer shall be zeroed and spanned

immediately prior to the background

determination. If not already on, the

enclosure mixing fan and the spilled

fuel mixing blower shall be turned on at

this time.

(C) Place the vehicle in the SHED. The

ambient temperature level encountered

by the test vehicle during the entire

background emissions determination

shall be 80 *F ±3 'F. The windows and

luggage.compartment of the vehicle

must be open and the gas' cap must be

secured.

(D) Seal the SHED. Inmediately

analyze the ambient concentration of

hydrocarbons in the SHED and record.

This is the initial background

hydrocarbon concentration.

(E) Soak the vehicle for ten minutes

±1 minute.

(F) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon

analyzer shall be zeroed and spanned

immediately prior to the end of the

background determination. (G fAnalyze the ambient

concentration of hydrocarbons in the

SHED and record. This is the final

background hydrocarbon concentration.

(H) The total hydrocarbon mass

emitted during the background

determination is calculated according to

§ 86.156-98. To obtain a per-minute

background emission rate, divide the

total hydrocarbon mass calculated in

this paragraph by the duration of the

soak, rounded to the nearest second,

described in paragraph (a)(2)(xi)(G) of

this section.

(I) The background emission rate is

multiplied by the duration of the

refueling measurement obtained in

paragraph (a)(2)(ix) of this section. This

number is then subtracted from the total

grams of emissions calculated for the

refueling test according to § 86.156-

98(a) to obtain the adjusted value for

total refueling emissions. The final

resuits for comparison with the

refueling emission standard shall be

computed by dividing the adjusted

value for total refueling mass emissions

by the total gallons of fuel dispensed in

the refueling test as described in

§ 86.156-98(b).

(xii) In addition to the requirements of

subpart B of this part, the manufacturer

shall prepare gasoline-fueled and

methanol-fueled vehicles as follows

prior to emission testing: (A) The manufacturer shall inspect

the fuel system to ensure the absence of

any leaks of liquid or vapor to the

atmosphere by applying a pressure of

14.5±0.5 inches of water (3.6±0.1 kPa) to

the fuel system allowing the pressure to

stabilize and isolating the fuel system

from the pressure source. Following

isolation of the fuel system, pressure

must not drop more than 2.0 inches of

water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If

required, the manufacturer shall

perform corrbctive action in accordance

with paragraph (d) of this section and

report this action in accordance with

§ 86.609-98(d).

(B) When performing this pressure

check, the manufacturer shall exercise

care to neither purge nor load the

evaporative or refueling emission

control systems.

(C) The manufacturer may not modify

the test vehicle's evaporative or

refueling emission control systems by

component addition, deletion, or

ubstitution, except to comply with

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section if

approved in advance by the

Administrator.

(3) The following exceptions to the

test procedures in subpart C of this part

are applicable to Selective Enforcement

Audit testing:

(i) The manufacturer may measure the

temperature of the test fuel at other than

the approximate mid-volume of the fuel

tank, as specified in § 86.131-90(a), and

may drain the test fuel from other than

the lowest point of the fuel tank as

specified in § 86.131-0(b), provided an

equivalent method is used. Equivalency

documentation shall be maintained by

the manufacturer and shall be made

available to the Administrator upon

request.

(ii) In performing exhaust sample

analysis under § 86.140-94, the

manufacturer shall exercise care to

prevent moisture from condensing in

the sample collection bags.

(iii) The manufacturer need not

comply with § 86.142-90 since the

records required therein are provided

under other provisions of this subpart G.

(iv) In addition to the requirements of

subpart C of this part, the manufacturer

shall prepare gasoline-fueled vehicles as

follows prior to exhaust emission

testing:

(A) The manufacturer shall inspect

the fuel system to ensure the absence of

any leaks of liquid or vapor to the

atmosphere by applying a pressure of

14.5±0.5 inches of water (3.6±0.1 Kpa)

to the fuel system allowing the pressure

to stabilize and isolating the fuel system

from the pressure source. Following

isolation of the fuel system, pressure

must not drop more than 2.0 inches of

water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If

required, the manufacturer shall

perform corrective action in accordance

with paragraph (d) of this section and

report this action in accordance with

§ 86.609-98(d).

(B) When performing this pressure

check, the manufacturer shall exercise

care to neither purge nor load the

evaporative or refueling emission

control system.

(C) The manufacturer shall not modify

the test vehicle's evaporative or

refueling emission control system by

component addition, deletion, or

substitution, except if approved in

advance by theAdministrator, to

comply with paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this

section.

(4) The exceptions to the test

procedures in subpart 0 of this part

applicable to Selective Enforcement

Audit testing are listed in paragraphs

(a)(4) (i) and (ii) of this section.

(i) The manufacturer need not comply

with § 86.1442, since the records

required therein are provided under

provisions of this subpart G.

(ii) In addition to the requirements of

subpart 0 of this part, the manufacturer

must prepare vehicles as in paragraphs

(a)(4)(ii) (A) through (C),of this section

prior to exhaust emission testing.

(A) The manufacturer must inspect

the fuel system to insure the absence of

any leaks of liquid or vapor to the

atmosphere by applying a pressure of

14.5±0.5 inches of water (3.6±0.1 Kpa)

to the fuel system, allowing the pressure

to stabilize, and isolating the fuel

system from the pressure source.

_Pressure must not drop more than 2.0

inches of water (0.5 Kpa) in five

minutes. If required, the manufacturer

performs corrective action in

accordance with paragraph (d) of this

section and must report this action in

accordance with § 86.609-98(d).

(B) When performing this pressure

check, the manufacturer must exercise

care to neither purge nor load the

evaporative or refueling emission

control system.

(C) The manufacturer may not modify

the test vehicle's evaporative or

refueling emission control system by

component addition, deletion, or

substitution.

(b)(1) The manufacturer shall not

adjust, repair, prepare, or modify the

vehicles selected for testing and shall

not perform any emission tests on

vehicles selected for testing pursuant to

the test order unless this adjustment

repair, preparation, modification, and/or

tests are documented in the

manufacturer's vehicle assembly and

inspection procedures and are actually

performed or unless these adjustments

-and/or tests are reqtuired or permitted
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16303

under this subpart or are approved in

advance by the Administrator.

(2) For 1981 and later model years the

Administrator may adjust or cause to be

'adjusted any engine or vehicle

parameter which the Administrator has

determined to be subject to adjustment

for new vehicle compliance testing (e.g.,

for certification or Selective

Enforcement'Audit testing) in

accordance with § 86.081-22(c)(1), to

any setting within the physically

adjustable range of that parameter, as

determined by the Administrator in

accordance with § 86.081-22(e)(3)(ii),

prior to the performance of any tests.

However, if the idle speed parameter is

one which the Administrator has

determined to be subject to adjustment,

the Administrator shall not adjust it to

a setting which causes a lower engine

idle speed than will be possible within

the physically adjustable 'range of the

idle speed parameter on the vehicle

when it has accumulated 4,000 miles,

all other parameters being adjusted

identically.for the purpose of

comparison. The Administrator, in

making or specifying such adjustments,

will consider the effect of the deviation

from the manufacturer's recommended

setting on emissions performance

characteristics as well as the likelihood

that similar settings will occur on in-use

light-duty vehicles or light-duty trucks.

In determining likelihood, the

Administrator will consider factors such

as, but not limited to, the effect of the

adjustment on vehicle performance

characteristics and surveillance

information from -similar in-use

vehicles.

(c) Prior to performing emission

testing pursuant to paragraph (a) of this

section on an SEA test vehicle, the

manufacturer may accumulate on each

vehicle a number of miles equal to the

greater of 4,000 miles, or the number of

miles the manufacturer accumulated

during certification on the emissiondata vehicle corresponding to the

configuration specified in the test order.

(1) Mileage accumulation must be

performed in any manner using good

engineering judgment to obtain

emission results representative of

normal production vehicles. This

mileage accumulation must be

consistent with the new vehicle breakin instructions contained in the

applicable vehicle owner's manual, if

a'i) The manufacturer shall

accumulate mileage at a minimum rate

of 300 miles per vehicle during each 24-

hour period, unless otherwise provided

by the Administrator.

(i) The first 24-hour period for

mileage accumulation shall begin as

soon as authorized vehicle checks,

inspections and preparations are

completed on each vehicle.,

(ii) The minimum mileage

accumulation rate does not apply on

weekends or holidays.

(iii) If the manufacturer's mileage

accumulation target is less than the

minimum rate specified (300 miles per

day), then the minimum daily

accumulation rate shall be equal to the

manufacturer's mileage accumulation

target.

(3) Mileage accumulation shall be

completed on a sufficient number-of test

vehicles during consecutive 24-hour

periods to assure that the number of

vehicles tested per day fulfills the

requirements of paragraph (g) of this

section.

(d) The manufacturer shall not

perform any maintenance on test

vehicles after selection for testing nor

shall the Administrator allow deletion

of any test Vehicle from the test

sequence, unless requested by the

manufacturer and approved by the

Administrator before any test vehicle

maintenance of deletion.

(e) The manufacturer will be allowed

24 hours to ship test vehicles from the

assembly plant or storage facility to the

test facility if the test facility is not

located at the plant or storage facility or

in close proximity to the plant or storage

facility: Except, that the Administrator

may approve more time based upon a

request by the manufacturer

accompanied by a satisfactory

justification.

(f) If a vehicle cannot complete the

mileage accumulation or emission tests

because of vehicle malfunction, the

manufacturer may request the

Administrator to authorize the repair of

that vehicle or its deletion from the test

sequence.

(g) Whenever the manufacturer

conducts testing pursuant to a test order

issued under this subpart, the

manufacturer.shall notify the

Administrator within one working day

of receipt of the test order, which test

facility will be used to comply with the

test order and the number of available

test cells at that facility. If no test cells

are available at the desired facility, the

manufacturer must provide alternate

testing capability satisfactory to the

Administrator.

(1) The manufacturer shall perform a

combination of tests pursuant to

paragraph (a) of this section so that a

minimum of four tests are performed

per 24 hour period, including voided

tests, for each available test cell.

(2) The Administrator may approve a

longer period based upon a request by

a manufacturer accompanied by

satisfactory justification.

(h) The manufacturer shall perform

test vehicle selection, preparation,

mileage accumulation, shipping, and

testing in such a manner as to assure

that the audit is performed in an

expeditious manner.

(i) The manufacturer may retest any

test vehicle after a fail decision has been

reached in accordance with § 86.610-

98(d) based on the first test on each

vehicle; except that the Administrator

may approve retests at other times

during the audit based upon a request

by the manufacturer accompanied by a

satisfactory justification. The

manufacturer may test each vehicle a total of three times. The manufacturer

shall test each vehicle the same number

of times. The manufacturer may

accumulate additional mileage on test

vehicles before conducting retests,

subject to the provisions of paragraph

(c) of this section.

5. A new § 86.609-98 is added to

subpart G to read as follows:

§86.609-98 Calculation and reporting of

test results.

(a) Initial test results are calculated

following the test procedures specified

in § 86.608-98(a). Round the initial test

results to the number of decimal places

contained in the applicable emission

standard expressed to one additional

significant figure. Rounding is done in

accordance with ASTM E 29-67,

(reapproved 1980) (as referenced in

§ 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii).

(b) Final test results for each test

vehicle are calculated by summing the

initial test results derived in paragraph

(a) of this section for each test-vehicle,

dividing by the number of times that

specific test has been conducted on the

vehicle, and roundingto the same

number of decimal places contained in

the applicable standard expressed to

one additional significant figure.

Rounding is done in accordance with

ASTM E 29-67, (reapproved 1980) (as

referenced in § 86.094-28

(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii). '

(c) Final deteriorated test results.

(1) For each test vehicle. The final

deteriorated test results for each lightduty vehicle tested for exhaust

emissions and/or refueling emissions

according to subpart B or subpart C of

this part are calculated by multiplying

or adding the final test results by the

appropriate deterioration factor derived

from the certification process for the

engine or evaporative/refueling family

and model year to which the selected

configuration belongs and rounding tu

the same number of decimal places

contained in the applicable emission
16304 Federal Register I Vol. 59. No. 66 /-Wednesday, April 6, 1994'1 Rules and Regulations

standard. Rounding is done in

accordance with ASTM E 29-67,

(reapproved 1980) (as referenced in

§ 86.094-28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii). For the

purpose of this paragraph, if a

multiplicative deterioration factor as

computed during the certification

process is less than one, that

deterioration factor shall be one. If an

additive deterioration factor as

computed during the certification

process is less than zero, that

deterioration factor will be zero.

(2) Exceptions. There are no

deterioration factors for light-duty vehicle emissions obtained during

testing in accordance, with subpart 0 of

this part or with § 86.146-96.

Accordingly, for the CST and the fuel

dispensing spitbackAtest the term "final

deteriorated test results" means the final

test results derived in paragraph (b) of

this section for each test vehicle,

rounded to the same number of decimal

places contained in the applicable

emission standard. Rounding Is done in

accordance with ASTM E 29-67,

(reapproved 1980) (as referenced in

§ 86.094-28 (a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(h.

(d) Within five working days after

completion of testing of all vehicles

pursuant to a test order, the

manufacturer shall submit to the

Administrator a report which includes

the following information:

(1) The location and description of the

manufacturer's emission test facilities

which were utilized to conduct testing

reported pursuant to this section.

(2) The applicable standards against

which the vehicles were tested.

(3) Deterioration factors for the

selected configuration. (4) A description of the vehicle

selection method used.

(5) For each test conducted.

(i) Test vehicle description including:

(A) Configuration, engine family, and

refueling family identification.

(B) Year, make, build date, and model

of vehicle.

(C) Vehicle Identification Number.

(D) Miles accumulated on vehicle.

(ii) Location where mileage

accumulation was conducted and

description of accumulation schedule.

(iii) Test number, date initial test

results, final results and final

deteriorated test results for all valid and

invalid exhaust emission tests, and the

reason for invalidation.

(iv) A complete description of any

modification, repair, preparation,

maintenance and/or testing which was

performed on the test vehicle and:

(A) Has not been reported pursuant to

any other paragraph of this'subpart; and

(B) Will not be performed on all other

production vehicles.

(v) Carbon dioxide emission values

for all valid and invalid exhaust

emission tests.

(vi) Where a vehicle was deleted from

the test sequence by authorization of the

Administrator, the reason for the

deletion.

(vii) Any other information the

Administrator may request relevant to

the determination as to whether the new

motor vehicles being manufactured by

the manufacturer do in fact conform

with the regulations with respect to

which the certificate of conformity was

issued.

(6) The following statement and

endorsement:

This report is submitted pursuant to

sections 206 and 208 of the Clean Air Act.

This Selective Enforcement Audit was

conducted in complete conformance with all

applicable regulations under 40 CFR part 86

and the conditions of the test order. No

emission related change(s) to production

processes or quality control procedures for

the vehicle configuration tested have been

made between receipt of this test order and

conclusion of the audit. All data and

information reported herein is, to the best of

(Company Name)

knowledge, true and accurate. I am aware of

the penalties associated with violations of the

Clean Air Act and the regulations thereunder.

(Authorized Company Representative)

6. A new § 86.610-98 is added to

subpart G to read as follows:

§ 86.610--98 Compliance with acceptable quality level and passing and falling criteria

for Selective Enforcement Audits

(a) The prescribed acceptable quality

level is 40 percent.

(b) A failed vehicle is one whose final

deteriorated test results pursuant to

§ 86.609-98(c) exceed at least one of the

applicable emission standards

associated with the test procedures

pursuant to § 86.608-98(a).

(c)(1) Pass/fail criteria. The

manufacturer shall test vehicles

comprising the test sample until a pass

decision is reached for all of the

pollutants associated with all of the test

procedures pursuant to § 86.608-98(a)

or a fail decision is reached for one of

these pollutants. A pass decision is

reached when the cumulative number of

failed vehicles, as defined in paragraph

(b) of this section, for each pollutant is

less than or equal to the fail decision

number appropriate to the cumulative

number of vehicles tested. A fail

decision is reached when the

cumulative number of failed vehicles for

one pollutant is greater than or equal to

the fail decision number appropriate to

the cumulative number of vehicles

tested. The pass and fail decision

numbers associated with the cumulative

number of vehicles tested are

determined by use of the tables in

appendix XI of this part appropriate for

the annual projected sales as made by

the manufacturer in its report submitted

under § 600.207-80(a)(2) of this chapter

(Automobile Fuel Economy

Regulations). In the tables in appendix

XI of this part, sampling plan "stage"

refers to the cumulative number of

vehicles tested. Once a pass decision

has been made for a particular pollutant

associated with a particular test

procedure pursuant to § 86.608-98(a),

the number of vehicles whose final

deteriorated test results exceed the

emission standard for that pollutant

may not be considered any further for

purposes of the audit.

(2) CST criteria only. For CST testing

pursuant to subpart 0, a pass or fail

decision is determined according to the

pass/fail criteria described in paragraph

(c)(1) of this section, except that for each

vehicle, the CST in its entirety is

considered one pollutant.

(d) Passing or failing of an SEA audit

occurs when the decision is made on

the last vehicle required to make a

decision under paragraph (c) of this

section.

(e) The Administrator may terminate

testing earlier than required in

paragraph (c) of this section.

Subpart K-Amended]

1. A new § 86.1002-2001 is added to

subpart K to read as follows:

§ 86.1002-2001 Definitions.

(a) The definitions in this section

apply to this subpart.

(b) As used in this subpart, all terms

not defined in this section have the

meaning given them in the Act.

(1) Acceptable quality level (AQL)

means the maximum percentage of

failing engines or vehicles, that for

purposes of sampling inspection, can be

consjdered satisfactory as a process

average.

(2) Compliance level means an

emission level determined during a

Production Compliance Audit pursuant

to subpart L of this part.

(3) Configuration means a

subclassification, if any, of a heavy-duty

engine family -for which a separate

projected sales figure is listed in the

manufacturer's Application for

Certification and which can be

described on the basis of emission

control system, governed speed, injector

size, engine calibration and other

parameters which may be designated by

the Administrator, or forlight-duty

trucks a subclassification of a light-duty
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16305

truck engine family/emission control

system combination on the basis of

engine code, inertia weight class,

transmission type and gear ratios, axle

ratio, and other parameters which may

be designated by the Administrator and/

or a subclassification of a light-duty

truck evaporative/refueling emission

family/emission control system.

(4) Test sample means the collection

of vehicles or engines of the same

configuration which have been drawn

from the population of vehicles or

engines of that configuration and which

will receive emission. testing.

(5) Inspection criteria means the pass

and fail numbers associated with a

particular sampling plan.

(6) Test engine means an engine in a

test sample.

(7) Test vehicle means a vehicle in a

test sample.

2. A new § 86.1003-2001 is added to

subpart K to read as follows:

§88.1003-2001 Test orders.

Section 86.1003-2001 includes text

that specifies requirements that differ

from .§ 86.1003-88. Where a paragraph

in § 86.1003-88 is identical and

applicable to § 86.1003-2001, this may

be indicated by specifying the

corresponding paragraph and the

statement "[Reserved]. For guidance see

§ 86.1003-88." Where a corresponding

paragraph of § 86.1003-88 is not

applicable, this is indicated by the

statement "[Reserved].".

(a) through (c)(1)(ii) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.1003-88.

(c){1)(iii) Heavy-duty vehicle

manufacturers will be required to select

a minimum of four vehicles per day

unless an alternate selection procedure

is approved pursuant to § 86.1007-84(a)

or unless total production of the

specified configuration is less than four

vehicles per day. If total production of

the specified configuration is less than

four vehicles per day, the manufacturer

will select the actual number of vehicles

produced per day.

(2) The test order may include

alternative configurations to be selected

for testing in the event that engines or

vehicles of the specified configuration

aye not available for testing because

1hose engines or vehicles are not being

msnufactured during the specified time,

or not being stored at the specified

..sembly plant or associated storage Gacilities.

(3) If the specified configuration is not

)eing manufactured at a rate of at least

our'vehicles per day, in the case of

ight-duty truck manufacturers, two

ieavy-duty engines or heavy-duty

'ehicles, in the case of heavy-duty

'chicle and heavy-duty engine

manufacturers specified in § 86.1008-

2001(g)(I), or one engine or heavy-duty

vehicle per day, in the case of heavyduty vehicle or engine manufacturers

spocified in § 86.100&-2001(g)(2), over

the expected duration of the audit, the

Assistant Administrator or a designated

representative may select engines or

vehicles of an alternate configuration for

testing.

.(4) In addition, the test order may

include other directions or information

essential to the administration of the

requiired testing.

Id) A manufacturer may submit a list

of engine families and, if applicable,

evaporative/refueling families and the

corresponding assembly plants or

associated storage facilities from which

the manufacturer prefers to have

engines or vehicles selected for testing

in response to a test order. In order that

a manufacturer's preferred location be

considered for inclusion in a test order

for a configuration of a particular engine

family and/or evaporative/refueling

family, the list must be submitted prior

to issuance of the test order.

Notwithstanding the fact that a

manufacturer has submitted the above

list, the Administrator may, upon

making the determination that evidence

exists indicating noncompliance at

other than the manufacturer's preferred

plant, order testing at such other plant

where vehicles of the configuration

specified in the test order are

assembled.

(e) Upon receipt of a test order, a

manufacturer shall proceed in

accordance with the provisions of this

subpart.

(W)(i) During a given model year, the

Administrator shall not issue to a

manufacturer more Selective

Enforcement Auditing (SEA) test orders

than the annual limit determined by the

following:

(i) For manufacturers of heavy-dutyengines or vehicles, either gasolinefueled or diesel, the number determined

by dividing the projected sales bound

for the United States market for that

year, as made by the manufacturer in its

Application for Certification, by 30,000

and rounded to the nearest whole

number, unless the projected sales are

less than 15,O00, in which case the

number is one;

(fl(1)(ii) through (f)(3) [Reserved]. For

guidance see § 86.1003-88.

3..A new § 86.1008-2001 is added to

subpart K to read as follows:

§ 86.1008-2001 Test procedures. (a)(1)(i) For heavy-duty engines, the

prescribed test procedure is the Federal

Test Procedure as described in subparts

N, I, and P of this part. The

Administrator, may on the basis of a

written application by a manufacturer,

approve optional test procedures other

than those in subparts N, I, and P of this

part for any heavy-duty vehicle which is

not susceptible to satisfactory testing

using the procedures in subparts N, I,

and P of this part.

(ii) For heavy-duty vehicles the

prescribed test procedures are the Fuel

Dispensing Spitback Test as described

in § 86.,1246-96 (for HDVs with a GVW

of less than 14,000 pounds (6,400

kilograms)); this test for fuel spitback is

conducted as a stand alone test, thus all

references to the test sequence described

in figure M96-1 of subpart M of this

part can be ignored. Further, the

Administrator may, on the basis of a

written application by a manufacturer,

approve optional test procedures other

than those in subpart M of this part for

any heavy-duty vehicle which is not

susceptible to satisfactory testing using

the procedures In subpart M of this part.

For light-duty trucks, the

prescribed test procedures are the

Federal Test Procedure, including the

refueling test procedure or the fuel

spitback test, whichever is applicable,

as described in subpart B of this part,

the idle test procedure as described in

subpart P of this part, the cold

temperature CO test procedure as

described in subpart C of this part, and

the Certification Short Test as described

in subpart 0 of this part. For purposes

of Selective Enforcement Audit Testing,

the manufacturer shall not be required

to perform any of the test procedures in

subpart B of this part relating to

evaporative emission testing, other than

refueling emissions testing, except as

specified in paragraph (a)(3) of this

section. The Administrator may select

and prescribe the sequence of any CSTs.

Further, the Administrator may, on the

basis of a written application by a

manufacturer, approve optional test

procedures other than those in subparts

B, C, P, and 0 of this part for any motor

vehicle which is not susceptible to

satisfactory testing using the procedures

in subparts B, C, P, and 0 of this part.

(3) When testing light-duty trucks, the

following exceptions to the test

procedures in subpart B of this part are

applicable to Selective Enforcement

Audit testing:

(i) For mileage accumulation, the

manufacturer may use test fuel meeting

the specifications for mileage and

service accumulation fuels of § 86.113-

94. Otherwise, the manufacturer may

use fuels other than those specified in

this section only with the advance

approval of the Administrator.

(it) The manufacturer may measure

the temperature of the test fuel at other
16306 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

than the approximate mid-volume of the

fuel tank, as specified in § 86.131-96(a)

with only a single temperature sensor,

and may drain the test fuel from other

than the lowest point of the tank, ,as

specified in § 86.131-96(b) and

§ 86.152-98(a), provided an equivalent

method is used. Equivalency

documentation shall be maintained by

the manufacturer and shall be made

available upon request.

(iii) The manufacturer may perform

additional preconditioning on SEA test

vehicles other than the preconditioning

specified in § 86.132-96 only'in the

additional preconditioning had been

performed on certification test vehicles

of the same configuration.

(iv) If the Administrator elects to use

the evaporative/refueling canister

preconditioning procedure described in

§ 86.132-96(k), the manufacturer shall

perform the heat build procedure 11 to

34 hours following vehicle

preconditioning rather than according to

the time period specified in § 86.133-

90(a). All references to an evaporative

emission enclosure and analyzing for

HC during the heat build can be

ignored.

(v) The manufacturer may substitute

slave tires for the drive wheel tires on

the vehicle as specified in paragraph

§ 86.135-90(e): Provided, that the slave

tires are the same size.

(vi) If the Administrator elects to use

the evaporative/refueling canister

preconditioning procedure described in

§ 86.132-96(k), the cold start exhaust

emission test described in § 86.137-96

shall follow the heat build procedure

described in § 86.133-90 by not more

than one hour.

(vii) In performing exhaust sample

analysis under § 86.140-94.

(A) When testing diesel vehicles, or

methanol-fueled Otto-cycle vehicles, the

manufacturer shall-allow a minimum of

20 minutes warm-up for the HC

analyzer, and for diesel vehicles, a

minimum of two hours warm-up for the

CO, CO2, and NO, analyzers. (Power is

normally left on infrared and

chemiluminescent analyzers. When not

in use, the chopper motors of the

infrared analyzers are turned off and the

phototube high voltage supply to the

chemiluminescent analyzers is placed

in the standby position.)

(B) The manufacturer shall exercise

care to prevent moisture from

condensing in the sample collection

bags.

(viii) The manufacturer need not

comply with § 86.142-90 or § 86.155-

98, since the records required therein

are provided under other provisions of

this subpart K.

(ix) If a manufacturer elects to

perform the background determination

procedure described in paragraph

(a)(3)(xi) of this section in addition to

performing the refueling emissions test

procedure, the elapsed time between the

initial and final FID readings shall be

recorded, rounded to the nearest second

rather than minute as described in

§ 86.154-98(e)(8). In addition, the

Vehicle soak described in § 86.153-98(e)

shall be conducted with the windows

and luggage compartment of the vehicle

open.

(x) The Administrator may elect to

perform a seal test, described in

§ 86.153-98(b), of both integrated and

non4ntegrated systems instead of the

full refueling test. When testing nonintegrated systems, a manufacturer may

conduct the canister purge described in

§ 86.153-98(b)(1) directly following the

preconditioning drive described in

§ 86.132-96(e) or directly following the

exhaust emissions test described in

§ 86.137-96.

(xi) In addition to the refueling test,

a manufacturer may elect to perform the

following background emissions

determination immediately prior to the

refueling measurement procedure

described in § 86.154-98, provided EPA

is notified of this decision prior to the

start of testing in an SEA.

(A) The SHED shall be purged for

several minutes immediately prior to

the background determination. Warning:

If at any time the concentration of

hydrocarbons, of methanol, or of

methanol and hydrocarbons exceeds

15,000 ppm C, the enclosure should be

immediately purged. This concentration

provides a 4:1 safety factor against the

lean flammability limit.

(B) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon

analyzer shall be zeroed and spanned

immediately prior to the background

determination. If not already on, the

enclosure mixing fan and the spilled

fuel mixing blower shall be turned on at

this time.

(C) Place the vehicle in the SHED. The

ambient temperature level encountered

by the test vehicle during the entire

background emissions determination

shall be 80 'F ±3 *F. The windows and

luggage compartment of the vehicle

must be open and the gas cap must be

secured.

(D) Seal the SHED. Immediately

analyze the ambient concentration of

hydrocarbons in the SHED and record.

This is the initial background

hydrocarbon concentration.

(E) Soak the vehicle for ten minutes

±1 minute.

(F) The FID (or HFID) hydrocarbon

analyzer shall be zeroed and spanned

immediately prior to the end of the

background determination.

(G) Analyze the ambient

concentration of hydrocarbons in the

SHED and record. This is the final

backg round hydrocarbon concentration.

(H) The total hydrocarbon mass

emitted during the background

determination is calculated according to

§ 86.156-98. To obtain a per-minute

background emission rate, divide the

total hydrocarbon mass calculated in

this paragraph by the duration of the

soak, rounded to the nearest second,

described in paragraph (a)(3)(xi)(G) of

this section.

(I) The background emission rate is

multiplied by the duration of the

refueling measurement obtained in

paragraph (a)(3)(ix) of this section. This

number is then subtracted from the total

grams of emissions calculated for the

refueling test according to § 86.156-

98(a) to obtain the adjusted value for

total refueling emissions. The final

results for comparison with the

refueling emission standard shall be

computed by dividing the adjusted

value for total refueling mass emissions

by the total gallons of fuel dispensed in

the refueling test as described in

§ 86.156-98(b).

(xii) In addition to the requirements of

subpart B of this part, the manufacturer

shall prepare gasoline-fueled and

methanol-fueled vehicles as follows

prior to emission testing: (A) The manufacturer shall inspect

the fuel system to ensure the absence of

any leaks of liquid or vapor to the

atmosphere by applying a pressure of

14.5±0.5 inches of water (3.6±0.1 Kpa)

to the fuel system allowing the pressure

to stabilize and isolating the fuel system

from the pressure source. Following

isolation of the fuel system, pressure

must not drop more than 2.0 inches of

water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If

required, the manufacturer shall

perform corrective action in accordance

with paragraph (d) of this section and

report this action in accordance with

§ 86.1009-2001(d).

(B) When performing this pressure

check, the manufacturer shall exercise

care to neither purge nor load the

evaporative or refueling emission

control systems. (C) The manufacturer may not modify

the test vehicle's evaporative or

refueling emission control systems by

component addition, deletion, or

substitution, except to comply with

paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section if

approved in advance by the

Administrator.

(4) When testing light-duty trucks, the

following exceptions to the test

procedures in subpart C of this part are
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16307

applicable to Selective Enforcement

Audit testing:

(i) The manufacturer may measure the

temperature of the test fuel at other than

the approximate mid-volume of the fuel

tank, as specified in § 86.131-90(a), and

may drain the test fuel from other than

the lowest point of the fuel tank as

specified in § 86.131-90(b), provided an

equivalent method is used. Equivalency

documentation shall be maintained by

the manufacturer and shall be made

available to the Administrator upon

request.

(ii) In performing exhaust sample

analysis under § 86.140-94, the

manufacturer shall exercise care to

prevent moisture from condensing in

the sample collection bags.

(iii) The manufacturer need not

comply with § 86.142-90 since the

records required therein are provided

under other provisions of this subpart K. (iv) In addition to the requirements of

subpart C of this part, the manufacturer

shall prepare gasoline-fueled vehicles as

follows prior to exhaust emission

testing:

(A) The manufacturer shall inspect

the fuel system to ensure the absence of

any leaks of liquid or vapor to the

atmosphere by applying a pressure of

14.5±0.5 inches of water (3.6±0.1 Kpa)

to the fuel system allowing the pressure

to stabilize and isolating the fuel system

from the pressure source. Following

isolation of the fuel system, pressure

must not drop more than 2.0 inches of

water (0.5 Kpa) in five minutes. If

required, the manufacturer shall

perform corrective action in accordance.

with paragraph (d) of this section and

report this action in accordance with

§ 86.1009-2001(d).

(B) When performing this pressure

check, the manufacturer shall exercise

care to neither purge nor load the

evaporative or refueling emission

control system.

(C) The manufacturer shall not modify

the test vehicle's evaporative or

refueling emission control system by

component addition, deletion, or

substitution, except if approved in

advance by the Administrator, to

comply with paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this

section.

(5) When testing light-duty trucks, the

exceptions to the test procedures in

subpart 0 of this part applicable to

Selective Enforcement Audit testing are

listed in paragraphs (a)(5) (i) and (ii) of

tbis section.

(i) The manufacturer need not comply

with § 86.1442, since the records

required therein are provided under

provisions of this subpart K.

(iO In addition to the requirements of

qubpart 0 of this part, the manufacturer

must prepare vehicles as in paragraphs

(a)(5)(if) (A) through (C) of this section

prior to exhaust emission testing.

(A) The manufacturer must inspect

the fuel system to insure the absence of

any leaks of liquid or vapor to the

atmosphere by applying a pressure of

14.5±0.5 inches of water (3.6±0.1 Kpa)

to the fuel system, allowing the pressure

to stabilize, and isolating the fuel

system from the pressure source.

Pressure must not drop more than 2.0

inches of water (0.5 Kpa) in five

minutes. If required, the manufacturer

performs corrective action in

accordance with this section and must

report this action in accordance with

§ 86.1009-2001.

(B) When performing this pressure

check, the manufacturer must exercise

care to neither purge nor load the

evaporative or refueling emission

control system.

(C) The manufacturer may not modify

the test vehicle's evaporative or

refueling emission control system by

component addition, deletion, or

substitution.

(b)(1) The manufacturer shall not

adjust, repair, prepare, or modify the

vehicles selected for testing and shall

not perform any emission tests on

vehicles selected for testing pursuant to

the test order unless this adjustment

repair, preparation, modification,. and/or

tests are documented in the

manufacturer's vehicle assembly and

inspection procedures and are actually

performed or unless these adjustments

and/or tests are required or permitted

under this subpart or are approved in

advance by the Administrator.

(2) For 1984 and later model years the

Administrator may adjust or cause to be

adjusted any engine or vehicle

parameter which the Administrator has

determined to be subject to adjustment

for certification, Selective Enforcement

Audit testing, and Production

Compliance Audit testing in accordance

with § 86.096-22(c)(1), to any setting

within the physically adjustable range

of that parameter, as determined by the

Administrator in accordance with

§ 86.090-22(e)(3)(ii), prior to the

performance of any tests. However, if

the idle speed parameter is one which

the Administrator has determined to be

subject to adjustment, the Administrator

shall not adjust it to a setting which

causes a lower engine idle speed than

will be possible within the physically

adjustable range of the idle speed

parameter if the manufacturer had

accumulated 125 hours of service on the

engine or 4,000 miles on the vehicle

under paragraph (c) of this section, all

other parameters being identically

adjusted for the purpose of comparison.

The manufacturer may be requested to

supply information to establish such an

alternative minimum idle speed. The

Administrator, in making or specifying

such adjustments, will consider the

effect of the deviation fromthe

manufacturer's recommended setting on

emissions performance characteristics

as well as the likelihood that similar

settings will occur on in-use heavy-duty

engines or light-duty trucks. In

determining likelihood, the

Administrator will consider factors such

as, but not limited to, the effect of the

adjustment on engine or vehicle

performance characteristics and

surveillance information from similar

in-use vehicles.

(c) Prior to performing emission

testing on an SEA test engine, the

manufacturer may accumulate on each

engine a number of hours of service

equal to the greater of 125 hours or the

number of hours the manufacturer

accumulated during certification on the

emission-data engine corresponding to

the configuration specified in the test

order. Prior to performing emission

testing on an SEA test vehicle, the

manufacturer may accumulate on each

vehicle a number of miles equal to the

greater of 4,000 miles, or the number of

miles the manufacturer accumulated

during certification on the emissiondata vehicle corresponding to the

configuration specified in the test order.

(1) Service or mileage accumulation

must be performed in a manner using

good engineering judgment to obtain

emission results representative of

normal production vehicles. This

service or mileage accumulation must

be consistent with the new vehicle

break-in instructions contained in the

applicable vehicle owner's manual, if

any.

(2) The manufacturer shall

accumulate service at a minimum rate of

16 hours per engine or mileage at a

minimum rate of 300 miles per vehicle

during each 24-hour period, unless

other-wise provided by the

Administrator.

(i) The first 24-hour period for service

or mileage accumulation shall begin as

soon as authorization checks,

inspections and preparations are

completed on each engine or vehicle.

(ii) The minimum service or mileage

accumulation rate does not apply on

weekends or holidays.

(ii) If the manufacturer's service or

mileage accumulation target is less than

the minimum rate specified (16 hours or

300 miles per day), then the minimum

daily accumulation rate shall be equal to

the manufacturer's service or mileage

accumulation target,
16308 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

(3) Service or mileage accumulation

shall be completed on a sufficient

number of test engines or vehicles

during consecutive 24-hour periods to

assure that the number of engines or

vehicles tested per day fulfills the

requirements of paragraph (g) of this

section.

(d) The manufacturer shall not

perform any maintenance on test

vehicles or engines after selection for

testing, nor shall the Administrator

allow deletion of any test vehicle or

engine from the test sequence, unless

requested by the manufacturer, and

approved by the Administrator before

any test vehicle or engine maintenance

or deletion.

(e) The manufacturer shall

expeditiously ship test engines or

vehicles from the point of selection to

the test facility. If the test facility is not

located at or in close proximity to the

point of selection, the manufacturer

shall assure that the test engines or

vehicles arrive at the test facility within

24 hours of selection: Except, that the

Administrator may approve more time

based upon a request by the

manufacturer accompanied by a

satisfactory justification.

(fl If an engine or vehicle cannot

complete the service or mileage

accumulation or emission test because

of a malfunction, the manufacturer may

request that the Administrator authorize

the repair of that engine or vehicle or its

deletion from the test sequence.

(g) Whenever the manufacturer

conducts testing pursuant to a test order

issued under this subpart, the

manufacturer shall notify the

Administrator within one working day

of receipt of the test order, which test

facility will be used to comply with the

test order and the number of available

test cells at that facility. If no test cells

are available at the desired facility, the

manufacturer must provide alternate

testing capability satisfactory to the

Administrator.

(1) Heavy-duty engine manufacturers

with projected sales for the United

States market for that year of 30,000 or

greater shall complete emission testing

at their facility on a minimum of two

engines per 24-hour period, including

each voided test and each diesel engine

smoke test.

(2) Heavy-duty engine manufacturers

with projected sales for the United

States market for that year of less than

30,000 shall complete emission testing

at their facility on a minimum of one

engine per 24-hour period, including

each voided test and each diesel engine

Smoke test.

(3) Light-duty truck and heavy-duty

vehicle manufacturers shall perform a

combination of tests pursuant to

paragraph (a) of this section so that a

minimum of four tests are performed

per 24 hour period, including voided

tests, for each available test cell.

(4) The Administrator may approve a

longer period based upon a request by

a manufacturer accompanied by

satisfactory justification.

(h) The manufacturer shall perform

test engine or vehicle selection,

shipping, preparation, service or

mileage accumulation, and testing in

such a manner as to assure that the

audit is performed in an expeditious

manner.

(i) The manufacturer may retest any

test vehicle or engine after a fail

decision has been reached in

accordance with § 86.1010-2001(d)

based on the first test on each vehicle

or engine; except that the Administrator

may approve retests at other times

during the audit based upon a request

by the manufacturer accompanied by a

satisfactory justification. The

manufacturer may test each vehicle or

engine a total of three times. The

manufacturer shall test each vehicle or

engine the same number of times. The

manufacturer may accumulate

additional service or mileage before

conducting retests, subject to the

provisions of paragraph (c) of this

section.

4. A new § 86.1009-2001 is added to

subpart K to read as follows:

§86.1009-2001 Calculation and reporting

of test results.

(a) Initial test results are calculated

following the Federal Test Procedure

specified in § 86.1008-2001(a).

Rounding is done in accordance with

ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as

referenced in § 86.094-28

(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii) to the number of

decimal places contained in the

applicable emission standard expressed

to one additional significant figure.

(b) Final test results are calculated by

summing the initial test results derived

in paragraph (a) of this section for each

test vehicle or engine, dividing by the

number of times that specific test has

been conducted on the vehicle or

engine, and rounding to the same

number of decimal places contained in

the applicable standard expressed to

one additional significant figure.

Rounding is done in accordance with

ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as

referenced in § 86.094-

28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)).

(c) Final deteriorated test results. (1)

The final deteriorated test results for

each light-duty truck, heavy-duty

engine, or heavy-duty vehicle tested

according to subpart B, C, D, I, M, N, or

P of this part are calculated by

multiplying or adding the final test

results by the appropriate deterioration

factor derived from the certification

process for the engine or evaporative/

refueling family and model year to

which the selected configuration

belongs. For the purpose of this

paragraph, if a multiplicative

deterioration factor as computed during

the certification process is less than one.

that deterioration factor shall be one. If

an additive deterioration factor as

computed during the certification

process is less than zero, that

deterioration factor will be zero.

(2) Exceptions. There are no

deterioration factors for light-duty truck

emissions obtained during testing in

accordance with subpart 0 of this part

or with § 86.146-96. Accordingly, for

the CST and the fuel dispensing

spitback test the term "final deteriorated

test results" means the final test results

derived in paragraph (b) of this section

for each test vehicle.

(3) The final deteriorated test results

obtained in paragraph (c) (1) and (2) of

this section are rounded to the same

number of decimal places contained in

the applicable emission standard.

Rounding is done in accordance with

ASTM E 29-67 (reapproved 1980) (as

referenced in § 86.094-

28(a)(4)(i)(B)(2)(ii)).

(d) Within five working days after

completion of testing of all engines or

vehicles pursuant to a test order, the

manufacturer shall submit to the

Administrator a report which includes

the following information:

(1) The location and description of the

manufacturer's emission test facilities

which were utilized to conduct testing

reported pursuant to this section.

(2) The applicable standards or

compliance levels against which the

engines or vehicles were tested.

(3) Deterioration factors for the

selected configuration.

(4) A description of the engine or

vehicle and any emission-related

component selection method used.

(5) For each test conducted.

(i) Test engine or vehicle description

including:

(A) Configuration, engine family, and

evaporative/refueling family

identification.

(B) Year, make, build date, and model

of vehicle.

(C) Vehicle Identification Number.

(D) Miles accumulated on vehicle.

(ii) Location where mileage

accumulation was conducted and

description of accumulation schedule.

(iii) Test number, date initial test

results, final results and final

deteriorated test results for all valid and
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 6, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 16309

invalid exhaust emission tests, and the

reason for invalidation, if applicable.

(iv) A complete description of any

modification, repair, preparation,

maintenance and/or testing which was

performed on the test engine or vehicle

and has not been reported pursuant to

any other paragraph of this subpart and

will not be performed on all other

production engines or vehicles.

(v) Where an engine or vehicle was

deleted from the test sequence by

authorization of the Administrator, the

reason for the deletion.

(vi) For all valid and invalid exhaust

emission tests, carbon dioxide emission

values for LDTs and brake-specific fuel

consumption values for HDEs.

(vii) Any other information the

Administrator may request relevant to

the determination as to whether the new

motor vehicles being manufactured by

the manufacturer do in fact conform

with the regulations with respect to

which the certificate of conformity was

issued.

(6) The following statement and

endorsement:

This report is submitted pursuant to

sections 206 and 208 of the Clean Air Act.

This Selective Enforcement Audit was conducted in complete conformance with all

applicable regulations under 40 CFR part 86

and the conditions of the test order. No

emission related change(s) to production

processes or quality control procedures for

the engine or vehicle configuration tested

have been made between receipt of this test

order and conclusion of the audit. All data

and information reported herein is, to the

best of

(Company Name)

knowledge, true and accurate. I am aware of

the penalties associated with violations of the

Clean Air Act and the regulations thereunder.

(Authorized Company Representative)

5. A new § 86.1010-2001 is added to

subpart K to read as follows:

§ 86.1010-2001 Compliance with

acceptable quality level and passing and

falling criteria for Selective Enforcement

Audits.

(a) The prescribed acceptable quality

level is 40 percent. (b) A failed vehicle or engine is one

whose final deteriorated test results

pursuant to § 86.1009-2001(c) exceed at

least one of the applicable emission

3tandards associated with the test

procedures pursuant to § 86.1008-

001(a).

(c)(1) Pass/fail criteria. The

nanufacturer shall test light-duty

trucks, heavy-duty engines, or heavyduty vehicles comprising the test

sample until a pass decision is reached

for all of the pollutants associated with

all of the test procedures pursuant to

§ 86.1008-2001(a) or a fail decision is

reached for one of these pollutants. A

pass decision is reached when the

cumulative number of failed vehicles or

engines, as defined in paragraph (b) of'

thig section, for each pollutant is less

than or equal to the fail decision

number appropriate to the cumulative

number of vehicles tested. A fail

decision is reached when the

cumulative number of failed vehicles or

engines for one pollutant is greater than

or equal to the fail decision number

appropriate to the cumulative number of

vehicles tested. The pass and fail

decision numbers associated with the

cumulative number of vehicles tested

are determined by use of the tables in

.appendix X of this part appropriate to

the projected sales as made by the

heavy-duty engine or heavy-duty

vehicle manufacturer in its Application

for Certification, or as made by the lightduty truck manufacturer in its report

submitted under § 600,207-80(a)(2) of

this chapter (Automobile Fuel Economy

Regulations). In the tables in appendix

X of this part, sampling plan "stage"

refers to the cumulative number of

vehicles or engines tested. Once a pass

decision has been made for a particular

pollutant associated with a particular

test procedure pursuant to § 86.1008-

2001(a), the number of vehicles or

engines whose final deteriorated test

results exceed the emission standard for

that pollutant may not be considered

any further for purposes of the audit.

(2) CST criteria only. For CST testing

pursuant to subpart 0, a pass or fail

decision is determined according to the

pass/fail criteria described in paragraph

(c)(1) of this section, except that for each

vehicle, the CST in its entirety is

considered one pollutant.

(d) Passing or failing of an SEA audit

occurs when the decision is made on

the last vehicle or engine required. to

make a decision under paragraph (c) of

this section.

(e) The Administrator may terminate

testing earlier than required in

paragraph (c) of this section.

PART 88--CLEAN-FUEL VEHICLES

1. The authority citation for part 88

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7410, 7418, 7581,

7582, 7583, 7584, 7586, 7588, 7589, and

7601(a).

2. A new § 88.311-98 is added to

subpart C, to read as follows:

§88.311-98 Emissions standards for

Inherently Low-Emission Vehicles.

Section 88.311-98 includes text that

specifies requirements that differ from

§ 88.311-93. Where a paragraph in

§ 88.3 11-93 is identical and applicable

to § 88.311-98, this maybe indicated by

specifying the corresponding paragraph

and the statement "[Reserved]. For

guidance see § 88.311-93."

(a) heading through (a)(1)(ii)

[Reserved]. For guidance see § 88.311-

93.

(iii) The vehicle must meet other

special requirements applicable to

conventional or clean-fuel vehicles and

their fuels as described in any other

regulations in 40 CFR chapter I,

subchapter C, including 40 CFR parts 86'

and 88 (e.g., onboard refueling

provisions).

(b) through (e) [Reserved). For

guidance see § 88.311-93.

PART 600-FUEL ECONOMY OF

MOTOR VEHICLES

1. The authority citation for part 600

continues to read as follows:

Authority: Title III of the Energy Policy

and Conservation Act of 1975, Pub. L. 94-

163, 89 Stat. 871, Title IV of the National

Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978, Pub.

L. 95-619, 92 Stat. 3206, Section 371 of the

North American Free Trade Agreement

Implementation Act of 1993, Pub. L. 103-

182, 107 Stat. 2057.

2. Section 600.111-80 in subpart B is

amended by revising paragraph (a) to

read as follows:

§600.111-80 Test procedures.

(a) The test procedures to be followed

for generation of the city fuel economy

data are those prescribed in §§,86.127-

94 through 86.138-78 of this chapter, as

applicable. (The evaporative and

refueling loss portions of the test

procedure may be omitted unless

specifically required by the

Administrator.)

[FR Doc. 94-4752 Filed 4-5-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-0-P