State of California AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Notice of Public Availability of Modified Text and Availability of Additional Documents

PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER TECHNICAL STATUS AND PROPOSED REVISIONS TO ON

- BOARD DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS FOR HEAVY

- DUTY E NGINES, PASSENGER CARS, LIGHT

- DUTY TRUCKS, MEDIUM

DUTY VEHICLES AND ENGINES

Public Hearing Date: August 23, 2012 Public Availability Date: January 4, 2013 Deadline for Public Comment: January 25 , 2013

At its August 23, 2012 public hearing, the Air Re sources Board ( ARB or Board ) approved for adoption amendments with modifications to the California Code of Regulations

, title 13 , section s 1968.2, 1968.5, 1971.1, and 1971.5

. Upon becoming operative, the amendments would update the on

- board diagnostic (OB D II) requirements for light

- duty and medium

- duty vehicles and engines and the heavy

- duty

on

- board diagnostic (HD OBD) requirements for heavy

- duty vehicles and engines, as well as the associated enforcement requirements.

At the hearing, the Board adopte d Resolution 12

- 29 in which it approv ed for adoption amendments to sections 1968.2, 1968.5, 1971.1, and 1971.5
, as modified by staff’s suggested modifications presented to the Board at the August 23, 2012 hearing

. The modifications were made in response t o comments received since the Staff Report was published on July 5, 2012, as part of the 45

- day notice. These modifications include changes to the required monitoring conditions for the diesel misfire monitor requirements in the HD OBD and OBD II regulati ons, clarifications to the readiness status and test results requirements in the HD OBD regulation, deletion of the service information requirements in the HD OBD regulation, and various changes to correct errors and improve clarity. The resolution and all other regulatory documents for this rulemaking are available online at the following ARB web site :

http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/hdobd12/hdobd12.htm

In accordance with the Government Code, section 11346.8, the Board directed the Executive Officer to adopt the approved amendments after making them available to the public for comment for a period of at least fifteen days. The Board further provided that the Executive Officer shall consider such written comments as may be submitted during this period, s hall make such modifications as may be appropriate in light of the comments received, and shall present the regulations to the Board for further consideration if warranted.2 Modifications to the proposed text are set forth in Attachment A to this notice

, which contains relev ant portions of sections 1971.1, 1968.2 , 1971.5, and 1968.5 affected by the modifications being proposed with this notice . For section s 1971.1, 1971.5, and 1968.5, the amendments proposed with the 45

- day notice are shown in single und erline to indicate additions and single strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text, while amendments proposed with this 15

- day notice are shown in double underline to indicate additions and double strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text. For section 1968.2, t he amendments that were approved by the Board at the January 26

- 27, 2012 board hearing are shown in single underline to indicate additions and single strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing reg ulatory text. These amendments were formally approved by the Office of Administrative Law on August 7, 2012, and became operative on that date . The amendments proposed with the 45

- day notice are shown in double underline to indicate additions and double strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text , while n ew amendments proposed with this 15

- day notice are shown in **bold italic double underline**  to indicate additions and **bold italic double strikeout** to indicate deletions from the existin g regulatory text.

Summary of Proposed Modifications

Modifications to HD OBD Regulation (section 1971.1)

1. Section 1971.1(c): A s part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed a new definition of “alternate phase

- in” that is similar to that currently provided in the OBD II regulation and would provide manufacturers with compliance flexibility in meeting some regulation requirements with prescribed phase

- in schedules. As part of this 15

- day notice, staff corrected a mistake in the example calculation in the la st paragraph of the definition that referred to “2013” ; the amendment h a s been corrected to indicate “2016”.

Additionally, a s part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed modifications to the definition of “ diagnostic or emission critical” electronic contr ol unit to clarify which control units would fall under this definition and thus would be required to report a calibration identification number (CAL ID) and calibration verification number (CVN) combination. With the advent of more and more electronic co ntrollers or ‘smart’ sensors that have integrated controllers on vehicles, the existing definition resulted in many modules with relatively minor roles in the OBD system having to support CAL ID and CVN. To better realign the requirements to the original intent of having this apply only to the controllers with the most critical OBD content, the proposal in the 45

- day notice attempted to increase the amount of OBD content in a controller that would trigger the need for CAL ID and CVN. However, m anufacturer s have expressed concern that some elements of the proposed definition would increase the number of controllers subject to the requirement

, including those that had relatively minor roles

, and that some language in the definition was too broad to interpret consistently. After discussions with manufacturers, staff has revised the3 definition to address both of these concerns. The latest revision does increase the amount of OBD content for most controllers before CAL ID and CVN would be required while still providing assurance that the controllers with the most critical OBD content will have CAL ID and CVN. The revision more directly targets inclusion of controllers that are at higher risk for being modified or tampered by including controllers that are repr ogrammable and have material OBD content

.
Finally, in the 45

- day notice, staff proposed for the purposes of HD OBD compliance the addition of a definition of “emission standard” that differs from the definition of that term as set forth in Health and Saf ety Code section 39027. Health and Safety Code sections 39010 and 39601(b) authorizes the use of such revised definitions in ARB

- adopted regulations for the purpose of conforming definitions to federal laws, rules and regulations. The definition proposed in the 45

- day notice conforms to the federal definition of that term as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Engine Manufacturers Association v. South Coast Air Quality Management District (2004) 541 U.S. 246, 253, 124 S.Ct. 1756, 1762. The proposed definition makes it clear that OBD systems, in general, and OBD design

- feature requirements of sections 1971.1 and 1968.2, specifically, are emission standards. Health and Safety Code section 39010 further provides that the definitions set forth in the He alth and Safety Code govern the construction of Division 26 of the Health and Safety Code, including and until ARB revises those definitions in its regulations. The revised definition of emission standard would thus govern the construction of that term as used in the Division 26. To make this clear, staff is proposing that the definition be further modified to specifically reference that the definition not only applies to OBD compliance but also to the remedies provided in the Health and Safety Code for

n oncompliance

2. Section 1971.1 ( e )( 1.4.2 )( D ): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed modifications to the freeze frame requirements for engines using the International Organization for S tandard ization ( ISO ) 15765

- 4 protocol to require storage of freeze frame conditions when storing pending fault code s under section 1971.1 ( d)(2.2.1)(D)(iii)

. In making this change, staff mistakenly did not align the proposed amendments with the freeze frame requirements under the diesel fuel system monitor section , which currently allows storage of freeze frame conditions in conjunction with storage of a confirmed fault code . Modifications are being proposed to address this error

.

3. Section 1971.1(e)(2.3.3)(A): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed that manufactu rers begin to phase

- in monitors starting in the 2016 model year to detect a misfire fault when the percentage of misfire exceeds a certain level and to continuously monitor for diesel misfire under nearly all positive torque conditions up to 75 percent of the maximum engine speed and load

. Further, the 45

- day proposed modifications included a phase

- in starting in the 2019 model year to expand the monitoring to all positive torque engine speed and load conditions up to 100 percent of the maximum rated engin e speed and load

. Manufacturers have commented that4 it would be more consistent with terminology of the heavy

- duty industry to limit monitoring to under 75 percent of the peak torque instead of 75 percent of the maximum load, and that it would also be ben eficial during the initial phase

- in starting in 2016 to limit monitoring to above a minimum torque condition because they anticipate robust detection of misfire at the lower torque ranges will be difficult

. In response, s taff is proposing to modify sectio n 1971.1(e)(2.3.3)(A)(i) for the initial phase

- in to require manufacturers to continuously monitor for diesel misfire under positive torque conditions between 20 and 75 percent of peak torque and up to 75 percent of the maximum engine speed. T he proposed inclusion of the minimum torque enablement criterion would effectively cover a limited disablement area of very low torque and high engine speed conditions , which was initially proposed as part of the 45

- day notice

, making the initial proposal unnecessary

. S taff is consequently proposing to delete th e originally proposed disablement area from section 1971.1(e)(2.3.3)(A)(i)

. For the final phase

- in to full

- range misfire monitors beginning in 2019, staff mistakenly forgot to add the limited disablement area that is necessary to avoid false detections

. S taff is now proposing to add this disablement allowance to section 1971.1(e)(2.3.3)(A)(ii).

4. Section 1971.1(e)(2.3.3)(C): In response to requests from industry wanting more specific language regarding diesel m isfire monitor disablement , staff is proposing new language similar to the language currently in the gasoline misfire monitoring section , which allow s manufacturers to disable diesel misfire monitoring or use an alternate malfunction criteria during certai n conditions. The proposed language specifies that disablement may be approved under conditions such as rough road, fuel cut, and when intrusive diagnostics or infrequent regeneration events may significantly affect engine stability

.

5. Section 1971.1(e)( 2.4.2)(B)(i): As with proposed modification 2

. a bove, as part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed modifications to the freeze frame requirements for engines using the ISO 15765

- 4 protocol to require storage of freeze frame conditions when storing pending fault code s under section 1971.1 ( d)(2.2.1)(D)(iii)

. In making this change, staff again mistakenly did not align these amendments with the freeze frame requirements under the diesel misfire monitor section

. Modifications are now being proposed to address this.

6. Section s 1971.1(e)(5.2.3)(B) , (e)(8.2.4)(A)(iii), (e)(8.2.4)(B), and (g)(3.2.2)(F)(ii) : As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed language allowing manufacturers to be exempt from specific monitor ing requirements if certain conditions are met rel ated to the “applicable full useful life standard

. ” Manufacturers have indicated that there is only one set of applicable standards for heavy

- duty engines, and thus the term “full useful life” is not necessary and may cause confusion . Staff therefore is proposing to delete the phrase “full useful life” from these sections. Further, staff is proposing modifications to improve the clarity and address confusion about the criteria manufacturers have to meet to be exempt from monitoring. Specifically, the
pr oposed modifications would make clearer that exemption is only allowed if (1) no5 fault can cause emissions to increase by 15 percent or more of the applicable standard, and (2) no fault can cause emissions to exceed the applicable standard.

7. Section 19 71.1 (g)(5.7): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed language that would allow manufacturers to request Executive Officer approval to be exempt from monitoring a component if a failure only affects emissions or other diagnostics when the ambient temperat ure is below 20 degrees Fahrenheit. There has been some confusion about the language, and staff believes additional modifications are needed to ensure consistent interpretation and implementation by manufacturers

. Specifically, staff is proposing to dele te the requirement that manufacturers request Executive Officer approval and provide supporting data for such exemptions. Instead, manufacturers would be required to provide supporting data only when staff reasonably believes a manufacturer has inappropri ate ly determined that a component falls under the exemption criteria. Staff additionally proposed that manufacturers provide more details about the supporting data ; specifically the Executive Officer would be able to request emission data for any reasonab le driving condition above 20 degrees Fahrenheit.

8. Section 1971.1(g)(5.8): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed a new definition of “alternate phase

- in” and new prescribed phase

- in schedules for requirements under the oxides of nitrogen ( NOx ) cat al yst and NOx and particulate matter ( PM )

sensor monitoring requirements

. However, as proposed, t he alternate phase

- in calculation methodology under the “alternate phase

- in” definition was difficult to directly apply to the required phase

- in s for the monito rs listed above . The referenced phase

- ins are more complicated than typical phase

- ins because they include a partial phase

- in requiring less than 100 percent of the vehicles to meet an interim

, less stringent malfunction threshold in the first few years a nd then a second phase

- in to meet the final malfunction threshold. Specifically, the first phase

- in requires a minimum of 20 and 50 percent of diesel engines to compl y with an interim threshold of +0.3 g/bhp

- hr NOx in the 2014 and 2015 model years, respec tively. The second phase

- in requires 100 percent compliance to a final threshold of +0.2 g/bhp

- hr NOx in the 2016 model year. To provide additional flexibility to manufacturers, the proposed regulatory language allows engines phased

- in during the 2014 or 2015 model years to the interim threshold of +0.3 g/bhp

- hr NOx to be carried over into the 2016 model year and not required to meet the final +0.2 g/bhp

hr NOx threshold until the 2017 model year , which further complicates the second phase

- in

. Given the additional complexities of these two overlapping phase

- ins, additional clarifying language is being proposed so manufacturers will have clear direction as to how to apply the alternate phase

- in calculations for these specific monitors. Specifically , staff is proposing language ( new ly proposed section 1971.1 (g)(5.8.3) ) that would allow manufacturers to use, with Executive Officer approval, a manufacturer

- defined phase

- in that would provide an equivalent compliance volume of engines meeting the requirement a s the prescribed phase

- in for these monitors

. The manufacturer

- defined phase

- in would be approved provided the calculated compliance volume met or exceeded the required phase

- in6 compliance volume and the manufacturer met several criteria specifically iden tified in the proposed language regarding which engines to include and exclude from the calculation of the equivalent compliance volume.

For the first phase

- in at the interim threshold of +0.3 g/bhp

- hr NOx, the language clarifies that the compliance vol ume for the required phase

- in is calculated with 20 and 50 percent in the 2014 and 2015 model years, respectively, and engines meeting this threshold no earlier than the 2013 model year would be counted towards meeting the requirements. Also consistent wi th the methodology of typica l alternate phase

- ins, all manufacturer

- defined phase

- ins would need to result in “ full ” compliance (i.e., 50 percent at +0.3 g/bhp

- hr ) no later than the 2017 model year

, and for those manufacturer

- defined phase

- ins that result in less than 50 percent of the diesel engines complying in the 201 6 model year, engines not meeting the +0.3 g/bhp

- hr threshold in the 2015 and 2016 model years would need to be subtracted from the compliance volume calculation. Lastly, because engines

me et ing the final +0.2 g/bhp

- hr threshold are meeting a more stringent threshold than engines meeting the interim +0.3 g/bhp

- hr threshold

, the language would clarify that engines meeting the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr threshold during the 2013 through 2017 model years wo uld also be deemed as complying with the +0.3 g/bhp

- hr threshold and would not be counted against the manufacturer.

For the second phase

- in at the final threshold of +0.2 g/bhp

- hr NOx, the language clarifies that this is considered a second stand

- alon e phase

- in for which the compliance volume is calculated with 100 percent in the 2016 model year for the required phase

- in. As such, engines meeting the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr threshold no earlier than the 2015 model year would be counted towards meeting the secon d phase

- in and all engines would need to comply with the threshold by the 2018 model year

. Further , for manufacturer

- defined phase

- ins that do result in some engines not complying in the 2017 model year, those engines not meeting the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr thresho ld in the 2016 and 2017 model years would be subtracted from the compliance volume calculation. And lastly, to address the additional flexibility mentioned above in which engines previously certified in the 2014 or 2015 model years to the interim +0.3 g/b hp

- hr threshold are allowed to be carried over into the 2016 model year and not certified to the final +0.2 g/bhp

- hr threshold until the 2017 model year, the language clarifies that all 2016 model year engines using this carry

over provision would also be deemed as complying with the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr final threshold and would not be counted against the manufacturer.

9. Section 1971.1(h)(4.1.1) and (h)(4.1.3)(B): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed changes to the readiness status requirements, including identifying specific monitored component/systems for which the readiness status shall always indicate “complete” and identifying the specific monitors that are required to be included in the readiness status for other monitored component/system s

. Addition ally, staff proposed that for the diesel misfire monitor, the readiness status would indicate “complete” if the idle

- only misfire monitor (i.e., the monitor that meets7 section 1971.1(e)(2.2.1)) has fully executed. Manufacturers, however, have indicated th at they may not have a separate monitor for the idle

- only monitoring requirement

. I nstead

, they may use the continuous misfire monitor that run s during all required driving conditions, including idle. Monitored component/systems that only have continuous monitors are generally required to have their readiness status always indicate “complete” since the monitors should run all the time . Thus, staff is proposing to require manufacturers with a separate monitor designed to detect misfires identified in sect ion 1971.1(e)(2.2.1) to set the diesel misfire readiness status to “complete” if this separate monitor has fully executed, while manufacturers without a separate monitor would be required to always set the diesel misfire readiness status to “complete” sinc e they would only have the continuous misfire monitor

.

10. Section 1971.1(h)(4.5.5): This section covers test results requirements, specifically requiring test results and limits to report values of zero after the OBD system fault memory is cleared. Manufact urers have indicated that the requirements are not aligned with the current specifications in Society of Automotive Engineers ( SAE ) J1939

- 73 , which require test results and limits to report specific non

- zero values that correspond to “test not complete” af ter the fault memory is cleared . T hus, for the 2010 through 2015 model years, staff is proposing that manufacturers be allowed to have the test results and limits report either values of zero as originally specified in the regulation or the specific non

- z ero values corresponding to “test not complete” in accordance with SAE J1939

- 73 . Further, staff is proposing that 2016 and subsequent model year engines be required to align with SAE J1939

- 73 and only report the specific non

- zero values for test results a nd limits corresponding to “test not complete

. ”

11. Section 1971.1(h)(6): This section covers the service inform ation requirements for HD OBD. At the time this section was first adopted in 2005, there were no separate service information requirements specifi c to heavy

- duty engines. Since then, the Board has adopted a separate ARB regulation (California Code of Regulations, title 13 , section 1969) that prescribes service information requirements for heavy

- duty engines. Thus, staff is proposing to delete the service information requirements under section 1971.1(h)(6).

12. Section 1971.1(i)(3.1.2): The HD OBD regulation requires manufacturers to perform demonstration testing on monitors to ensure they are able to detect faults before the required emission thresh olds are exceeded. As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed changes to require manufacturers to detect diesel misfire when the percentage of misfire exceeds a certain percentage instead of when specific emission thresholds are exceeded

. With this cha nge, staff also proposed to exempt manufacturers from performing demonstration testing on the diesel misfire monitor. In making this latter change, s taff

, however

, mistakenly overlooked proposed section 1971.1(e)(2.2.5) , which would allow manufacturers to use an alternative malfunction criterion that would be calibrated to an emission level if emissions are below a8 certain emission threshold. To correct this oversight, staff is proposing that manufacturers be required to perform demonstration test ing on t he diesel misfire monitor if it is calibrated using the alternative emission threshold of section 1971.1(e)(2.2.5).

13. Section 1971.1(k)(4): This section covers the carryover provisions for deficiencies that allow deficiencies to be carried over if manufactu rers have met certain criteria

. Manufacturers may carry over deficiencies in such cases for a maximum of two model years from the first year the deficiency was originally granted , unless hardware changes are needed, in which case the deficiency can be car ried over for a maximum of three model years. Manufacturers have expressed concern that they have not been able to correct some deficiencies that were first granted in the 2010 or 2011 model years in time for the 2013 or 2014 model year and they will be p rohibited from carrying those deficiencies over to those model years

. To address this, staff recognizes that in many cases, manufacturers have been making a good faith effort to bring the ir systems into full compliance but that the workload of addressing all of the identified deficiencies on their first

- ever OBD systems at the same time they are expanding implementation from one engine family in 2010 to all engine families in 2013 has been taxing

. Thus, staff is proposing to allow manufacturers to request Executive Officer approval to carryover deficiencies first granted in the 2010 model year up through the 2013 model year if no hardware changes are needed and through the 2014 model year if hardware changes are needed

. For deficiencies first granted in 2 011, manufacturers would be allowed to carryover deficiencies through the 2014 model year.

Modifications to OBD II Regulation (section 1968.2)

14. Section 1968.2(c): See discussion of further modifications to the definition of “emission standard,” at 1 . above, which applies equally to the proposed modifications to the same term in the OBD II regulation.

15. Sectio ns 1968.2 ( e )( 15

. 4

. 3 ) , (f)(1.2.2)(A)(ii), (f)(2.2.2)(A)(ii), (f)(4.2.1)(A)(ii), (f)(5.2.1)(A)(i)b., (f)(5.2.1)(B)(i)b., (f)(5.2.2)(A)(ii), (f)(6.2 .1)(A)(ii), (f)(7.2.1)(A)(ii), (f)(8.2.1)(A)(ii) , (f)(9.2.2)(A)(ii), (f)(12.2.2)(B)(i), (f)(13.2.1)(B), (f)(15.4.3), and (f)(17.1.3) : As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed a new definition fo r “emission standard” to clarify that the OBD regulations include emission standards, and proposed new definitions for “exhaust emission standards” and “tailpipe emission standards” to identify respective subcategor ies of the new definition of “emission standard” that had previously merely been identified in the regulation as emission standard s . Staff

, however

, mistakenly failed to make specific all of the previous general references to emission standard s to align those references with the new subcategory definitions

. It is now proposing to specifically identify the appropriate subcategory references.9 16. Sections 1968.2(f)(1.2.3)(B), (f)(9.2.4)(A), and (f)(15.2.2)(F)(ii): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed language allowing manufacturers to be exempt from specific monitoring requirements if certain con ditions are met. Staff is proposing modifications to improve the clarity and address confusion about the criteria manufacturers have to meet to be exempt from monitoring. Specifically, the proposed modifications would make it clearer that exemption is al lowed if (1) no fault can cause emissions to increase by 15 percent or more of the applicable full useful life standard, and (2) no fault can cause emissions to exceed the applicable full useful life standard.

17. Section 1968.2(f)(2.3): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed a change to the HD OBD regulation to only require the NOx converting catalyst reductant delivery performance monitor to run once per trip instead of continuously , since the original requirement was found to be inappropriate and too stringent . Staff mistakenly did not include this change in the OBD II regulation for medium

- duty diesels ; it is now proposing the same change to the OBD II regulation.

18. Section 1968.2 (f)(3.3.3)(B): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed modificati ons requiring manufacturers to phase

- in monitors starting in the 2016 model year for medium

- duty diesel vehicles to detect a misfire fault when the percentage of misfire exceeds a certain level and to continuously monitor for diesel misfire under nearly al l positive torque conditions up to 75 percent of the maximum engine speed and load. Further, the 45

- day proposed modifications included a phase

- in starting in the 2019 model year to expand the monitoring to all positive torque engine speed and load condit ions (up to 100 percent of the maximum rated engine speed and load). Manufacturers have commented that it would be more consistent with terminology in the heavy

- duty industry to limit monitoring to under 75 percent of the peak torque instead of 75 percent of the maximum load. Staff is thus proposing to modify section 1968.2(f)(3.3.3)(B)(i) for the initial phase

- in starting in 2016 to require manufacturers to continuously monitor for diesel misfire under positive torque conditions up to 75 percent of the p eak torque with engine speed below 75 percent of the maximum speed. Additionally, s taff has found that the limited low torque and high engine speed disablement area allowed under section 1968.2(f)(3.3.3)(B)(i) would be necessary both during the 2016 phase

- in and for the final phase

- in starting in 2019 when the monitors are enabled under all positive torque engine speed and load conditions, and is proposing to add this disablement allowance to section 1968.2(f)(3.3.3)(B)(ii).

19. Section 1968.2( f)(3.3.3)(D): In response to requests from industry wanting more specific language regarding diesel misfire monitor disablement, staff is proposing new language similar to the language currently in the gasoline misfire monitoring section , which allow s manufacturers to d isable diesel misfire monitoring or use an alternate malfunction criteria during certain conditions. The proposed language specifies that disablement may be approved under conditions, such as rough road,10 fuel cut, and when intrusive diagnostics or infre quent regeneration events may significantly affect engine stability.

20. Section 1968.2(f)(5.3.1) (A) : As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed to require manufacturers to track and report the in

- use monitoring performance data of the diesel NOx sensor mon itoring capability monitor on 2016 and subsequent model year “medium

- duty vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard. ” Staff mistakenly meant to require this on all medium

- duty vehicles and is proposing to delete the phrase “ce rtified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard” from this section.

21. Section 1968.2(f)(6.2.6): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed to allow manufacturers to be exempt from monitoring the diesel exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) catalyst if a fault of the catalyst could not cause a measurable emission impact on the criteria pollutants in the HD OBD regulation. Staff mistakenly did not include this change in the OBD II regulation ; it is proposing to allow this same exemption criteri on in t he OBD II regulation.

22. Section 1968.2( f)(9.2.4)(B): As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed to require manufacturers to monitor the catalyzed PM filter for proper feedgas generation starting with the 2016 model year in the HD OBD regulation. Staff m istakenly did not include this change in the OBD II regulation and is proposing to require 2016 and subsequent model year medium

- duty vehicles to monitor the catalyzed PM filter for proper feedgas generation.

23. Section 1968.2(h)(4.3): The OBD II regulation requires manufacturers to perform demonstration testing on monitors to ensure they are able to detect faults before the required emission thresholds are exceeded. As part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed changes to require manufacturers to detect dies el misfire on medium

- duty vehicles when the percentage of misfire exceeds a certain percentage instead of when specific emission thresholds are exceeded

. With this change, staff also proposed changes to the demonstration testing requirements for diesel mi sfire monitoring which would specifically require testing only for those vehicles with misfire monitors calibrated to an emission malfunction threshold (i.e., those meeting section 1968.2 (f)(3.2.2)(A)(i)). Staff

, however

, mistakenly overlooked proposed

se ction 1968.2(f)(3.2.5) , which would allow manufacturers to use an alternative malfunction criterion that would be calibrated to an emission level if emissions are below a certain emission threshold. To correct this oversight, staff is proposing that manuf acturers be required to perform demonstration testing on the diesel misfire monitor if it is subject to section 1968.2(f)(3.2.2)(A)(i) or calibrated using the alternative emission threshold of section 1968.2(f)(3.2.5).11 Modifications to HD OBD and OBD II Enforcement Regulation s (section s 1971.5 and 1968. 5 )

24. Sections 1971.5(a)(3) and 1968.5(a)(3), definitions of “Nonconforming OBD System”: The HD OBD and OBD II enforcement regulations respectively establish procedures to ensure that vehicles and engines cer tified for sale in California are equipped with OBD systems that properly function and meet the purposes and respective requirements of sections 1971.1 and 1968.2, and that OBD systems that fail to meet those requirements are nonconforming and subject to r emedial action, including recall. In the 45

- day notice, ARB staff proposed

, for the purposes of OBD compliance

, that a specific definition of “emission standard” ( different from the definition set forth in Health and Safety Code section 39027 ) be added to the HD OBD and OBD II regulations. (See discussion in 1. above regarding rationale for amended definition of “emission standard” and Initial Statement of Reasons: Staff Report issued with 45

- day notice, at pages 8 and 18.) ARB staff is now proposing tha t the definition s of “nonconforming OBD system” in the associated enforcement regulations be modified to reference this new emission standard definition. Specifically, that a nonconforming OBD system is an OBD system on a production engine /vehicle that ha s been determined not to meet the emission standard s of sections 1971.1 and 1968. 2

. Additionally, for purposes of clarity, the reference in the definitions to tailpipe emission standards has been replaced with the term “exhaust emission standards,” a term that is more generally used but has the same meaning

.

Other Minor Modifications

25. In addition to the modifications described above, staff is proposing various nonsubstantive modifications to the regulatory text in sections 1971.1 and 1968.2 to improve c larity and to correct errors that have found by staff and industry.

Additional Document(s) Added to the Record

In the interest of completeness, staff has also added to the rulemaking record and invites comments on Attachment B, “A dditional S upporting D oc uments and I nformation ” and Attachment C, “S&P 500 Index: Annual Returns.” The se document s are also available at the following website:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/hdobd12/hdobd12.htm

Written comments will only be accepted on the modifications and document identified in this notice and may be submitted by postal mail or electronic mail submittal as follows:

Postal mail: Clerk of the Board, Air Resources Board 1001 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814 Electronic submittal: http://www.arb.ca.g ov/lispub/comm/bclist.php12 Please note that under the California Public Records Act (Gov

. Code § 6250 et seq.), your written and verbal comments, attachments, and associated contact information (e.g., your address, phone, email, etc.) become part of the pu blic record and can be released to the public upon request.

In order to be considered by the Executive Officer, comments must be directed to ARB in one of the two forms described above and r eceived by ARB by 5:00 p.m.

, on the deadline date for public co mment listed at the beginning of this notice. Only comments relating to the above

- described modifications to the text of the regulations shall be considered by the Executive Officer.

If you need this document in an alternate format or another language, p lease contact the Clerk of the Board at (916) 322

- 5594 or by facsimile at (916) 322

- 3928 no later than five (5) business days from the release date of this notice. TTY/TDD/Speech to Speech users may dial 711 f or the California Relay Service.

Si necesit a este documento en un formato alterno u otro idioma, por favor llame a la oficina de l Secretario del Consejo de Recursos Atmosféricos a l (916) 322

- 5594 o envíe

un fax a l (916) 322

- 3928 no menos de cinco (5) días laborales a partir de la fecha del l anzamie nto de este aviso. Para el Servicio Telefónico de California para Personas con Problemas Auditivos, ó de teléfonos TDD pueden marcar al 711.

Attach ments

The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate acti on to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand an d cut your energy costs, see ARB’s w ebsite at www.arb.ca.gov

.Attachment A

PROPOSED 15

- DAY MODIFIED REGULATION ORDER

Amend section 1971.1, title 13, California Code of Regulations, to read as follows:

Note : The amendments proposed with the 45

- day notice are shown in single u nderline to indicate additions and sin gle s trikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text , while amendments proposed with this 15

- day notice are shown in double underline to indicate additions and double strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text . Vari ous portions of the regulations that are not modified by the proposed amendments are omitted from the text shown and indicated by “ * * * * ”.

§1971.1. On

- Board Diagnostic System Requirements

-- 2010 and Subsequent Model

- Year Heavy

- Duty Engines

(c) Def initions

. * * * * “Alternate phase

- in”, as allowed in section (g)(5.8), is a phase

- in schedule that achieves equivalent compliance volume by the end of the last year of a scheduled phase

- in provided in this regulation. The compliance volume is the number calculated by multiplying the percent of engines (based on the manufacturer’s projected sales volume of all engines unless specifically stated otherwise in section (e), (f), or (g) ) meeting the new requirements per year by the number of years i mplemented prior to and including the last year of the scheduled phase

- in and then summing these yearly results to determine a cumulative total (e.g., a three year, 20/50/100 percent scheduled phase

- in would be calculated as (20*3 years) + (50*2 years) + ( 100*1 year) = 260; a two

- year 20/50 percent scheduled phase

- in would be calculated as (20*2 years) + (50*1 year) = 90). Manufacturers are allowed to include engines introduced before the first year of the scheduled phase

- in (e.g., in the previous example, 10 percent introduced one year before the scheduled phase

- in begins would be calculated as (10*4 years) and added to the cumulative total). However, manufacturers are only allowed to include engines introduced up to one model year before the first year o f the scheduled phase

- in. The Executive Officer shall consider acceptable any alternate phase

- in that results in an equal or larger cumulative total by the end of the last year of the scheduled phase

- in and ensures that all engines subject to the phase

- in will comply with the respective requirements no later than two model years following the last year of the scheduled phase

- in. For alternate phase

- in schedules resulting in all engines complying one model year following the last year of the scheduled phase

- in, the compliance volume shall be calculated as described directly above. For example, a 20/50/100 percent scheduled phase

- in during the 2016

- 2018 model years would have a cumulative total of 260. If the manufacturer’s planned alternate phase

- in schedu le is 40/50/80/100 percent during the 2016

- 2019 model years, the final2 compliance volume calculation would be (40*3 years) + (50*2 years) + (80*1 year) = 300, which is greater than 260 and therefore would be acceptable as an alternate phase

- in schedule. Fo r alternate phase

- in schedules resulting in all engines complying two model years following the last year of the scheduled phase

- in, the compliance volume calculation shall be calculated as described directly above and shall also include a negative calcula tion for engines not complying until one or two model years following the last year of the scheduled phase

- in. The negative calculation shall be calculated by multiplying the percent of engines not meeting the new requirements in the final year of the pha se

- in by negative one and the percent of engines not meeting the new requirements in the one year after the final year of the phase

- in by negative two. For example, if 10 percent of a manufacturer’s engines did not comply by the final year of the schedule d phase

- in and 5 percent did not comply by the end of the first year after the final year of the scheduled phase

- in, the negative calculation result would be (10*(

- 1 years)) + (5*(

- 2 years))

= - 20. The final compliance volume calculation is the sum of the original compliance volume calculation and the negative calculation. For example, a 20/50/100 percent scheduled phase

- in during the 2016

- 2018 model years would have a cumulative total of 260. If a manufacturer’s planned alternate phase

- in schedule is 40 /70/80/90/100 percent during the 2013 2016

- 2020 model years, the final compliance volume calculation would be (40*3 years) + (70*2 years) + (80*1 year) + (20*(

- 1 year)) + (10*(

- 2 years)) = 300, which is greater than 260 and therefore would be acceptable as an alternate phase

- in schedule. * * * * “Diagnostic or emission critical” electronic control unit refers to the engine control unit and any other on

- board electronic powertrain control unit containing software that: (1) determines the commande d value(s) for any of the following: (a) Fuel injection quantity (b) Fuel injection timing and/or valve timing (c) NOx catalyst reductant (e.g., urea) injection quantity; or (2) is used to control or determine the measured value of an exhaust gas sensor

su bject to monitoring in section (e)(9) or (f)(8) (e.g., NOx or PM sensor module); or ( 3 1 ) has primary control over any of the monitors required by sections (e)(1) through (f)(9), (g)(1) through (g)(2), and (g)(4)

, but does not include circuit or out

- of

- rang e fault monitor s required by sections (e)(9.2.1)(A)(ii), (e)(9.2.1)(B)(ii), (e)(9.2.2)(B), (e)(9.2.4)(B), (f)(8.2.1)(B), (f)(8.2.2)(B), (f)(8.2.2)(D), (f)(8.2.3)(A), (f)(8.2.3)(B), and (g)(1.1.2) ; or ( 2 4 2 ) excluding except for anti

- lock brake system (ABS ) control units or stability/traction control units, : (a) has primary control over the any rationality fault diagnostic s or functional check for more than two four of the input components or more than two output components required to be monitored by sect ion (g)(3)

. ; or3 (b) for 2016 and subsequent model year engines, is field reprogrammable and has primary control over any rationality fault diagnostic or function check for any input or output component required to be monitored by section (g)(3). For purpo ses of criteria ( 3 1 ) and ( 4 2 ) above, “primary control” over a monitor means the control unit does any of the following: (a) determines if any enable conditions are satisfied; (b) calculates all or part of the diagnostic decision the value or statistic or

m etric by which pass or fail decisions are made (e.g., the comparison of a component’s measured or calculated level of performance to a fault threshold) that represents the component/system’s level of performance ; or (c) makes or processes pass or fail deci sions (e.g., debounces diagnostic decision statistics or commands MIL illumination or fault code storage) . Further, f F or purposes of criteri a on ( 4 2 2 ) (a) above, all glow plugs in an engine shall be considered “one” output component in lieu of each glow plu g being considered a separate component. Additionally, for purposes of criterion (2)(b) above, “field reprogrammable” means a control unit that is capable of supporting a manufacturer service procedure intended to be executed in a dealership or other vehi cle service environment that results in the downloading of new software and/or calibration data into the control unit. * * * * “Emission standard,” as it applies to OBD compliance and the remedies provided for in the Health and Safety Code for noncompliance , relates to the emission characteristics of a motor vehicle and engine and means: (1) a numerical limit on the amount of a given pollutant that a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine may emit into the atmosphere; or (2) a requirement that a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine be equipped with a certain type of pollution

- control device or some other design feature related to the control of emissions. * * * *

(d) General Requirements. Section (d) sets forth the general requiremen ts of the OBD system. Specific performance requirements for components and systems that shall be monitored are set forth in sections (e) through (g) below. The OBD system is required to detect all malfunctions specified in sections (e) through (g). Howe ver, except as specified elsewhere, the OBD system is not required to use a unique monitor to detect each malfunction specified. * * * * (2) MIL and Fault Code Requirements. * * * * (2.2) MIL Illumination and Fault Code Storage Prot ocol. (2.2.1) For vehicles using the ISO 15765

- 4 protocol for the standardized functions required in section (h): * * * * (D) Storage and erasure of freeze frame conditions. * * * *4 (ii) The storage and erasure of For 2010 through 2 015 model year engines, the OBD system shall store and erase freeze frame conditions shall be done in conjunction with the storage and erasure of either pending or confirmed fault codes as required elsewhere in section (d)(2.2). (iii) For 2016 and subseque nt model year engines, except as provided for in section (d)(2.2.1)(D)(iv), the OBD system shall store freeze frame conditions in conjunction with the storage of a pending fault code. a. If the pending fault code is erased in the next driving cycle in w hich monitoring occurs and a malfunction is not detected (as described in section (d)(2.2.1)(B)), the OBD system may erase the corresponding freeze frame conditions. b. If the pending fault code matures to a confirmed fault code (as described in section (d)(2.2.1)(B)), the OBD system shall either retain the currently stored freeze frame conditions or replace the stored freeze frame conditions with freeze frame conditions regarding the confirmed fault code. The OBD system shall erase the freeze frame inf ormation in conjunction with the erasure of the confirmed fault code (as described under section (d)(2.3.1)(B)). * * * * (2.2.2) For vehicles using the SAE J1939 protocol for the standardized functions required in section (h): * * * * (D) Storage and erasure of freeze frame conditions. (i) The OBD system shall store and erase “freeze frame” conditions (as defined in section (h)(4.3)) present at the time a malfunction is detected. (ii) The OBD system shall store freeze frame conditions in co njunction with the storage of a pending fault code. (iii) If the pending fault code is erased in the next driving cycle in which monitoring occurs and a malfunction is not detected (as described under section (d)(2.2.2)(B)), the OBD system may erase the
correspo nding freeze frame conditions. (iv) If the pending fault code matures to a MIL

- on fault code (as described under section (d)(2.2.2)(B)), the OBD system shall either retain the currently stored freeze frame conditions or replace the stored freeze frame condition s with freeze frame conditions regarding the MIL

- on fault code. The OBD system shall erase the freeze frame information in conjunction with the erasure of the previously MIL

- on fault code (as described under section (d)(2.3.2)(C)). * * * * (e) Monitoring Requirements for Diesel/Compression

- Ignition Engines. (1) Fuel System Monitoring * * * * (1.4) MIL Illumination and Fault Code Storage:5 * * * * (1.4.2) Additionally, for malfunctions identified in section (e)(1.2.1) (i. e., fuel pressure control) on all 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles engines : * * * * (D) Storage of freeze frame conditions. (i) For 2013 through 2015 model year engines, a A manufacturer shall store and erase freeze frame conditions eithe r in conjunction with storing and erasing a pending fault code or in conjunction with storing and erasing a confirmed/MIL

- on fault code. For 201 6 and subsequent model year engines, a manufacturer shall store freeze frame conditions in conjunction with sto ring and erasing a pending fault code in accordance with section (d)(2.2.1)(D)(iii) or (d)(2.2.2)(D)

. (ii) If freeze frame conditions are stored for a malfunction other than misfire (see section (e)(2)) or fuel system malfunction when a fault code is store d as specified in section (e)(1.4.2) above, the stored freeze frame information shall be replaced with freeze frame information regarding the fuel system malfunction. * * * * (2) Misfire Monitoring * * * * (2.2) Malfunction Criteria : (2.2.1) The OBD system shall detect a misfire malfunction when one or more cylinders are continuously misfiring. (2.2.2) Additionally, for 2013 and subsequent through 2015 model year engines equipped with sensors that can detect combustion or combustion q uality (e.g., for use in homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) control systems) and for 20 percent of 2016 model year diesel engines, 50 percent of 2017 model year diesel engines, and 100 percent of 2018 model year diesel engines (percentage based on the manufacturer’s projected California sales volume of all diesel engines subject to this regulation) , the OBD system shall detect a misfire malfunction when the percentage of misfire is equal to or exceeds five percent causing the engine’s NMHC, CO, or NOx emissions to exceed 2.0 times the applicable standards or the engine’s PM emissions to exceed the applicable standard plus 0.02 g/bhp

- hr

. * * * * (2.2.5) Upon request by the manufacturer and upon determining that the manufacturer has sub mitted data and/or engineering evaluation that support the request, the Executive Officer shall revise the percentage of misfire malfunction criteria in section (e)(2.2.2) upward to exclude detection of misfire that cannot cause the engine’s NMHC, CO, and NOx emissions to exceed 2.0 times the applicable standards and the engine’s PM emissions to exceed the applicable standard plus 0.02 g/bhp

- hr. * * * *6 (2.3) Monitoring Conditions: (2.3.1) Except as provided in section (e)(2.3.2), T t he OBD sy stem shall monitor for misfire s identified in section (e)(2.2.1) during engine idle conditions at least once per driving cycle in which the monitoring conditions for misfire are met. A manufacturer shall submit monitoring conditions to the Executive Offic er for approval. The Executive Officer shall approve manufacturer

- defined monitoring conditions that are determined (based on manufacturer

- submitted data and/or other engineering documentation) to: (i) be technically necessary to ensure robust detection o f malfunctions (e.g., avoid false passes and false detection of malfunctions), (ii) require no more than 1000 cumulative engine revolutions, and (iii) do not require any single continuous idle operation of more than 15 seconds to make a determination that a malfunction is present (e.g., a decision can be made with data gathered during several idle operations of 15 seconds or less); or satisfy the requirements of (d)(3.1) with alternative engine operating conditions. (2.3.2) Manufacturers may request Executi ve Officer approval to use alternate monitoring conditions (e.g., off

- idle) in lieu of the monitoring conditions specified in section (e)(2.3.1) . The Executive Officer shall approve alternate monitoring conditions that are determined (based on manufacture r

- submitted data and/or other engineering documentation) to ensure equivalent robust detection of malfunctions and equivalent timeliness in detection of malfunctions. (2.3.3) Additionally, f F or misfires identified in section (e)(2.2.2) 2013 and subsequen t model year engines equipped with sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality : (A) The OBD system shall continuously monitor for misfire under the following conditions: (i) For 2013 through 2018 model year engines and 2019 and subsequent mod el year engines that are not included in the phase

- in specified in section (e)(2.3.3)(A)(ii), all under positive torque conditions between 20 percent and 75 percent of peak torque with engine speed s up to 75 percent of the maximum

- rated engine speed and e n gine load up to 75 percent maximum

- rated and load conditions except within the following range

. : the engine operating region bound by the positive torque line (i.e., engine load with transmission in neutral) and the two following engine

- operating points: engine speed of 50 percent of maximum

- rated engine speed with the engine load at the positive torque line, and 75 percent of the maximum

- rated engine speed with the engine load 5 percent above the positive torque line

. (ii) For 20 percent of 2019 model yea r diesel engines, 50 percent of 2020 model year diesel engines, and 100 percent of 2021 model year diesel engines (percentage based on the manufacturer’s projected California sales volume of all diesel engines subject to this regulation) , under all positiv e torque engine speed and load conditions except within the7 following range: the engine operating region bound by the positive torque line (i.e., engine torque with transmission in neutral) and the two following points: engine speed of 50 percent of maxim um

- rated engine speed with the engine torque at the positive torque line, and 100 percent of the maximum

- rated engine speed with the engine torque at 10 percent of peak torque above the positive torque line

. * * * * (C) A manufacturer may reque st Executive Officer approval to disable misfire monitoring or employ an alternate malfunction criterion when misfire cannot be distinguished from other effects

. Upon determining that the manufacturer has presented documentation that demonstrates the disa blement interval or period of use of an alternate malfunction criterion is limited only to that necessary for avoiding false detection, the Executive Officer shall approve the disablement or use of the alternate malfunction criterion . Such disablements ma y include but are not limited to events involving: (i) rough road

, (ii) fuel cut, (iii) gear changes for manual transmission vehicles, (iv) traction control or other vehicle stability control activation such as anti

lock braking or other engine torque mod ifications to enhance vehicle stability, (v) off

- board control or intrusive activation of vehicle components or diagnostics during service or assembly plant testing, (vi) intrusive diagnostics during portions that can significantly affect engine stability, or (vii) infrequent regeneration events during portions that can significantly affect engine stability

. * * * * (2.4) MIL Illumination and Fault Code Storage: * * * * (2.4.2) Additionally, for 2013 and subsequent model year engine s misfires identified in section (e)(2.2.2) equipped with sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality : * * * * (B) Storage of freeze frame conditions. (i) For 2013 through 2015 model year engines, t T he OBD system shall store and era se freeze frame conditions either in conjunction with storing and erasing a pending fault code or in conjunction with storing a confirmed/MIL

- on fault code and erasing a confirmed/previously MIL

on fault code. For 201 6 and subsequent model year engines, a manufacturer shall store freeze frame conditions in conjunction with storing and erasing a pending fault code in accordance with section (d)(2.2.1)(D)(iii) or (d)(2.2.2)(D)

.8 (ii) If freeze frame conditions are stored for a malfunction other than a misfir e malfunction when a fault code is stored as specified in section (e)(2.4.2), the stored freeze frame information shall be replaced with freeze frame information regarding the misfire malfunction. * * * * (5) Non

- Methane Hydrocarbon (NMHC) Conv erting Catalyst Monitoring * * * * (5.2) Malfunction Criteria: * * * * (5.2.3) Other Aftertreatment Assistance Functions: * * * * (B) For 2013 2015 and subsequent model year engines, for catalysts used to generate a feed gas constituency to assist SCR systems (e.g., to increase NO 2 concentration upstream of an SCR system), the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when the catalyst is unable to generate the necessary feedgas constituents for proper SCR system operation. C atalysts are exempt from feedgas generation this monitoring if both of the fol lowing criteria are satisfied: (1) no malfunction of the catalyst’s feedgas generation ability can cause emissions to (1) increase by 15 percent or more of the applicable full us eful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle; or and (2) no malfunction of the catalyst’s fee dgas generation ability can cause emissions to exceed the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission tes t cycle

. * * * * (6) Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Converting Catalyst Monitoring * * * * (6.2) Malfunction Criteria: For purposes of section (e)(6), each catalyst in a series configuration that converts NOx shall be monitored either ind ividually or in combination with others. (6.2.1) Conversion Efficiency: * * * * (B) For all 2013 model year engines and 2014 and 2015 model year engines that are not included in the phase

- in specified in section (e)(6.2.1)(C): (i) The OBD sy stem shall detect a catalyst malfunction when the catalyst conversion capability decreases to the point that would cause an engine's emissions to exceed the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.4 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.6 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard. (ii) If no failure or deterioration of the catalyst system NOx conversion capability could result in an engine’s NO x or NMHC emissions exceeding the applicable malfunction criteria of section (e)(6.2.1)(B)(i),9 the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when the catalyst has no detectable amount of NOx or NMHC conversion capability. (C) For at least 20 percent of 2014 mo del year diesel engines and at least 50 percent of 2015 model year diesel engines (percentage based on the manufacturer’s projected California sales volume of all diesel engines subject to this regulation): (i) The OBD system shall detect a catalyst malfu nction when the catalyst conversion capability decreases to the point that would cause an engine's emissions to exceed the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0 .2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard. (ii) If no failure or deterioration of the catalyst system NOx conversion capability could result in an engine’s NOx or NMHC emissions exceeding the applicable malfunction criteria of section (e)(6.2.1)(C)(i), the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when the catalyst has no detectable amount of NOx or NMHC conversion capability. (B) (D) Except as provided for below in section (e)(6.2.1)(E), F f or 2013 2016 and subsequent model year engines: (i) The OBD system shall detect a catalyst malfunction when the catalyst conversion capability decreases to the point that would cause an engine's emissions to exceed the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/b hp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard. (ii) If no failure or deterioration of the catalyst system N Ox conversion capability could result in an engine’s NOx or NMHC emissions exceeding the applicable malfunction criteria of section (e)(6.2.1)( B D )(i), the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when the catalyst has no detectable amount of NOx or NMHC conve rsion capability. (E) In lieu of using the malfunction criteria in section (e)(6.2.1)(D), a manufacturer may continue to use the malfunction criteria in section (e)(6.2.1)(C) for any 2016 model year engine that was previously certified in the 2014 or 2015 model year to the malfunction criteria in section (e)(6.2.1)(C) and carried over to the 2016 model year. (6.2.2) Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) or Other Active/Intrusive Reductant Injection System Performance: (A) Reductant Delivery Performance:

* * * * (ii) For all 2013 model year engines and 2014 and 2015 model year engines that are not included in the phase

- in specified in section (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iii):10 a. The OBD system shall detect a malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the system to properly regulate reductant delivery (e.g., urea injection, separate injector fuel injection, post injection of fuel, air assisted injection/mixing) that would cause an engine's emissions to exceed the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.4 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.6 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard. b. If no failure or deterioration of the SCR system c ould result in an engine’s NOx or NMHC emissions exceeding the applicable malfunction criteria of section (e)(6.2.2)(A)(ii)a., the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when the system has reached its control limits such that it is no longer able to delive r the desired quantity of reductant. (iii) For at least 20 percent of all 2014 model year diesel engines and at least 50 percent of all 2015 model year diesel engines (percentage based on the manufacturer’s projected California sales volume of all diesel e ngines subject to this regulation) :
a. The OBD system shall detect a malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the system to properly regulate reductant delivery (e.g., urea injection, separate injector fuel injection, post injection of fuel, a ir assisted injection/mixing) that would cause an engine's emissions to exceed the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applica ble cycle emission test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard. b. If no failure or deterioration of the SCR system could result in an engine’s NOx or NMHC emissions exceeding the applicable malfunction criteria of section (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iii)a., the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when the system has reached its control limits such that it is no longer able to deliver the desired quantity of reductant. (ii) (iv) Except as provided for below in section (e)(6.2.2)(A)(v), F f or 2013 2016 and subsequent model year engines, the OBD system shall detect a system malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the system to properly regulate reductant delivery (e.g., urea injection, separate injector fuel injection, post injection of fuel, air assisted i njection/mixing) that would cause an engine’s emissions to exceed the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emi ssion test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard. If no failure or deterioration of the SCR system could result in an engine’s NOx or NMHC11 emissions exceeding the applicable malfunction criteria above, the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when th e system has reached its control limits such that it is no longer able to deliver the desired quantity of reductant. (v) In lieu of using the malfunction criteria in section (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iv), a manufacturer may continue to use the malfunction criteria in section (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iii) for any 2016 model year engine that was previously certified in the 2014 or 2015 model year to the malfunction criteria in section (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iii) and carried over to the 2016 model year. * * * * (8) Particulate M atter (PM) Filter Monitoring * * * * (8.2) Malfunction Criteria: * * * * (8.2.4) Catalyzed PM Filter: (A) NMHC conversion: For 2013 2015 and subsequent model year engines

, for with catalyzed PM filters that convert NMHC emissions

, : (i) t T he OBD system shall monitor the catalyst function of the PM filter and detect a malfunction when the NMHC conversion capability decreases to the point that NMHC emissions exceed 2.0 times the applicable standards. (ii) If no failure or deteriorat ion of the NMHC conversion capability could result in an engine’s NMHC emissions exceeding 2.0 times the applicable standards, the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when the system has no detectable amount of NMHC conversion capability. (iii) Catalyzed PM filters are exempt from NMHC conversion capability this monitoring if both of the following criteria are satisfied: (1) no malfunction of the catalyzed PM filter’s NMHC conversion capability can cause emissions to (1) increase by 15 percent or more of t he applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle; or and (2) no malfunction of the catalyzed PM filter’s NMHC conversion capability can cause emissions to exceed the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle

. (B) Feedgas generation: For 2016 and subsequent model year engines with catalyzed PM filters used to generate a feedgas constituency to assist SCR systems (e.g., to increase NO 2 concentration upstream of an SCR syst em), the OBD system shall detect a malfunction when the system is unable to generate the necessary feedgas constituents for proper SCR system operation. Catalyzed PM filters are exempt from feedgas generation this monitoring if both of the following crite ria are satisfied: (1)

no malfunction of the catalyzed PM filter’s feedgas generation ability can cause emissions to (1) increase by 15 percent or more of the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle; or and ( 2) no malfunction of the catalyzed PM filter’s feedgas12 generation ability c an cause emissions to exceed the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle

. * * * * (9) Exhaust Gas Sensor Monitoring * * * * (9.2) Malfunction Criteria:

* * * * (9.2.2) NOx and PM sensors: (A) Sensor performance faults: * * * * (ii) For all 2013 model year engines and 2014 and 2015 model year engines that are not included in the phase

- in specified in section (e)(9.2.2)(A)(iii), the OBD system shall detect a malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the sensor voltage, resistance, impedance, current, response rate, amplitude, offset, or other characteristic(s) that would cause an engine's NOx emissions to exceed the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.4 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.6 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or cause an engine's PM emissions to exceed (whichever is higher): 0.03 g/bhp

- hr as measured from an applicable cycle emission test (i.e., FTP or SET); or any of the applicable standards by more than 0.02 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.03 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust e mission standard is 0.01 g/bhp

- hr). (iii) For at least 20 percent of 2014 model year diesel engines and at least 50 percent of 2015 model year diesel engines (percentage based on the manufacturer’s projected California sales volume of all diesel engines su bject to this regulation), the OBD system shall detect a malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the sensor voltage, resistance, impedance, current, response rate, amplitude, offset, or other characteristic(s) that would cause an engine's NOx emissions to exceed the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or cause an engine's PM emissions t o exceed (whichever is higher): 0.03 g/bhp

- hr as measured from an applicable cycle emission test (i.e., FTP or SET); or any of the applicable standards by more than 0.02 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.03 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standa rd is 0.01 g/bhp

hr). (ii) (iv) Except as provided for below in section (e)(9.2.2)(A)(v), F f or 2013 2016 and subsequent model year engines, the OBD system shall detect a malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the sensor voltage, resistance, im pedance, current, response rate, amplitude,13 offset, or other characteristic(s) that would cause an engine's NOx emissions to exceed any of the applicable NOx standards by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust e mission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test (i.e., FTP or SET), cause an engine’s NMHC emissions to exceed 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard, or cause an engine's PM emissions to exceed (whichever is higher): 0 .03 g/bhp

- hr as measured from an applicable cycle emission test (i.e., FTP or SET); or any of the applicable standards by more than 0.02 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.03 g/bhp

- hr if the exhaust emission standard is 0.01 g/bhp

- hr). (v) In lieu of using the malfunction criteria in section (e)(9.2.2)(A)(iv), a manufacturer may continue to use the malfunction criteria in section (e)(9.2.2)(A)(iii) for any 2016 model year engine that was previously certified in the 2014 or 2015 model year to the ma lfunction criteria in section (e)(9.2.2)(A)(iii) and carried over to the 2016 model year. * * * * (g) Monitoring Requirements For All Engines. (1) Engine Cooling System Monitoring * * * * (1.3) Monitoring Conditions: (1.3.1) Thermo stat * * * * (D) Manufacturers may request Executive Officer approval to suspend or disable thermostat monitoring if the vehicle is subjected to conditions which could lead to false diagnosis (e.g., vehicle operation at idle for more than 50 p ercent of the warm

- up time, hot restart conditions engine block heater operation ). In general, the Executive Officer shall not approve disablement of the monitor on engine starts where the ECT at engine start is more than 35 degrees Fahrenheit lower than the thermostat malfunction threshold temperature determined under section (g)(1.2.1)(A). The Executive Officer shall approve the request upon determining that the manufacturer has provided data and/or engineering analysis that demonstrate the need for the request. With respect to disablement on driving cycles solely due to warm ECT at engine start conditions, the manufacturer shall disable the monitor during driving cycles where the ECT at engine start is within 35 degrees Fahrenheit of the thermostat mal function threshold temperature determined under section (g)(1.2.1)(A) (e.g., if the malfunction threshold temperature is 160 degrees Fahrenheit, the monitor shall be disabled if the ECT at engine start is between above 125 and 160 degrees Fahrenheit). * * * * (3) Comprehensive Component Monitoring * * * * (3.2) Malfunction Criteria:14 * * * * (3.2.2) Output Components/Systems: * * * * (F) For 2013 2015 and subsequent model year engines that utilize fuel control system components (e.g., injectors, fuel pump) that have tolerance compensation features implemented in hardware or software during production or repair procedures (e.g., individually coded injectors for flow characteristics that are programmed into an ele ctronic control unit to compensate for injector to injector tolerances, fuel pumps that use in

- line resistors to correct for differences in fuel pump volume output), the components shall be monitored to ensure the proper compensation is being used. (i) E xcept as provided in section (g)(3.2.2)(F)(ii) below, T t he system shall detect a fault if the compensation being used by the control system does not match the compensation designated for the installed component (e.g., the flow characteristic coding designa ted on a specific injector does not match the compensation being used by the fuel control system for that injector). If a manufacturer demonstrates that a single component (e.g., injector) using the wrong compensation cannot cause a measurable increase in emissions during any reasonable driving condition, the manufacturer shall detect a malfunction for the minimum number of components using the wrong compensation needed to cause an emission increase. Further, the stored fault code shall identify the speci fic component that does not match the compensation. (ii) Monitoring of the fuel control system components under section (g)(3.2.2)(F)(i) is not required if the manufacturer demonstrates that both of the following criteria are satisfied : (1) no fault of th e components’ tolerance compensation features (e.g., wrong compensation being used) could cause emissions to (1) increase by 15 percent or more of the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle; or and (2) no fa ult of the components’ tolerance compensation features c an cause emissions to exceed the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle. For purposes of determining if the emission criteria above are met, the manuf acturers shall request Executive Officer approval of the test plan for which the emission impact will be determined. The test plan shall include the combination of failed components and the degree of mismatch (e.g., wrong compensation) used as well as the test procedure and emission test cycles used to demonstrate the emission impact, including the necessary preconditioning cycles used by the system to correct or adapt for any mismatch and mitigate the emission impact. Executive Officer approval shall be granted upon determining that the manufacturer has submitted data and/or engineering analysis that15 demonstrate that the conditions necessary for the system to correct or adapt will readily occur in a timely manner during in

- use operation and that the test conditions represent worst case emissions from typical in

use service actions when considering the distribution and variance of the compensation values and parts (e.g., replacement of one or more plus

- one

- sigma injectors with minus

- one

- sigma injectors with out updating of the compensation value). * * * * (5) Exceptions to Monitoring Requirements * * * * (5.7) A manufacturer may request Executive Officer approval to be exempt from monitoring a component if both of The OBD system is not required to monitor an electronic powertrain component/system if the following criteria are met when the ambient temperature is above 20 degrees Fahrenheit: (1) a malfunction of the component does not affect emissions during any reasonable driving con dition, and (2) a malfunction of the component does not affect the diagnostic strategy for any other monitored component or system

, . and (3) t T he ambient temperature shall be is determined based on a temperature sensor monitored by the OBD system (e.g., IAT sensor). The manufacturer shall determine whether a component/system meets these criteria. If the Executive Officer reasonably believes that a manufacturer has incorrectly determined that a component/system meets these criteria, the Executive Officer shall require the manufacturer to provide emission and/or other diagnostic data showing that the component/system, when malfunctioning and installed in a suitable test vehicle, does not have an effect on emissions or other diagnostic strategies. The Exec utive Officer may request emission data for any reasonable driving condition at ambient temperatures above 20 degrees Fahrenheit. The Executive Officer shall approve the request upon determining that the manufacturer has submitted data and/or engineering evaluation that support these criteria. (5.8) Whenever the requirements in section (e ) , (f)

, or ( f g ) of this regulation require a manufacturer to meet a specific phase

- in schedule

, : manufacturers may use an alternate phase

- in schedule in lieu of the req uired phase

- in schedule if the alternate phase

- in schedule provides for equivalent compliance volume as defined in section (c) except as specifically noted for the phase

- in for the PM filter monitor in section (e)(8.2.1) (5.8.1) Except as provided for in section (g)(5.8.3) below for the diesel NOx converting catalyst and NOx and PM sensor phase

- ins and in section (e)(8.2.1) for the PM filter monitor phase

- in

, M m anufacturers may use an alternate phase

- in schedule in lieu of the required phase

- in schedule s et forth in sections (e) , (f), or ( g ) if the alternate phase

- in schedule provides for equivalent compliance volume as defined in section (c) except as specifically noted for the phase

- in for the PM filter monitor in section (e)(8.2.1)

.16 (5.8.2) Small volume manufacturers may use an alternate phase

- in schedule in accordance with section (g)(5.8.1) in lieu of the required phase

- in schedule or may use a different schedule as follows: (A) For the diesel misfire monitor phase

- in schedule in section (e)(2.2.2), t he manufacturer may meet the requirement on all engines by the 2018 model year in lieu of meeting the specific phase

- in requirements for the 2016 and 2017 model years

. (B) For the diesel misfire monitor phase

- in schedule in section (e)(2.3.3), the manufact urer may meet the monitoring conditions requirements of section (e)(2.3.3)(A)(i) on all engines subject to (e)(2.2.2) through the 2020 model year and the monitoring conditions requirements of section (e)(2.3.3)(A)(ii) on all 2021 and subsequent model year engines in lieu of the specific phase

- in requirements in section (e)(2.3.3)(A) for the 2019 and 2020 model years

. (C) For the diesel NOx converting catalyst monitor phase

- in schedules in section (e)(6), the manufacturer may use the malfunction criteria in sections (e)(6.2.1)(B) and (e)(6.2.2)(A)(ii) for all 2014 and 2015 model year engines in lieu of the malfunction criteria and required phase

- in schedule in sections (e)(6.2.1)(C) and (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iii). (D) For the diesel PM filter monitor phase

- in schedul e in section (e)(8), the manufacturer may use the malfunction criteria in section (e)(8.2.1)(B) for all 2014 and 2015 model year engines in lieu of the malfunction criteria and required phase

- in schedule in section (e)(8.2.1)(C). (E) For the diesel NOx sen sor phase

- in schedules in section (e)(9), the manufacturer may use the malfunction criteria in section (e)(9.2.2)(A)(ii) for all 2014 and 2015 model year engines in lieu of the malfunction criteria and required phase

- in schedule in section (e)(9.2.2)(A)(ii i)

. (5.8.3) In lieu of meeting the diesel NOx converting catalyst and NOx and PM sensor phase

- in s set forth in sections (e)(6.2.1), (e)(6.2.2), and (e)(9.2.2), a manufacturer may request Executive Officer approval to use a manufacturer

- defined phase

- in for each requirement. The Executive Officer shall approve the manufacturer

- defined phase

- in if it meets the following criteria: (A) For the requirements in sections (e)(6.2.1)(C), (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iii), and (e)(9.2.2)(A)(iii) (i.e., requiring a NOx threshold of +0.3 g/bhp

- hr): (i) The phase

- in shall provide for a compliance volume of engines certified to the +0.3 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold that is equivalent to the volume of the required phase

- in set forth in each of the above

referenced section s (i.e., the phase

- in of 20 percent of 2014 model year diesel engines and 50 percent of 2015 model year diesel engines). The compliance volume shall be calculated in accordance with the calculation methodology in the definition of “alternate phase

in” in section (c) (i.e., (2 0*2 years) + (50*1 year) = 90 for the required phase

- in). T he compliance volume shall be considered equivalent if the calculated total is equal to or greater than 90.17 (ii) T he calculated compliance volume for the manufacturer

- defined phase

- in may not incl ude engines meeting the +0.3 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold requirement earlier than the 2013 model year

. (iii) For the 2013 through 2017 model years, engines meeting the requirements in sections (e)(6.2.1)(D), (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iv), and (e)(9.2.2)(A)(iv) (i.e., req uiring a NOx threshold of +0.2 g/bhp

- hr) shall also be considered as meeting the +0.3 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold requirement and included in the calculated compliance volume and shall not be subtracted from the calculated compliance volume

. (iv) For the 2016 m odel year, i f the proposed phase

- in results in a combined percentage of engines meeting the +0.3 g/bhp

- hr and the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr threshold s being less than 50 percent of all diesel engines

, the manufacturer shall subtract those engine s that do not meet the above threshold s in both the 2015 and 2016 model years from the required percentage of 50 percent when calculating the compliance volume according to the calculation methodology in the definition of “alternate phase

- in” section (c). (v) All engines shall meet either the +0.3 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold or the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold no later than the 2017 model year. (B) For the requirements in sections (e)(6.2.1)(D), (e)(6.2.2)(A)(iv), and (e)(9.2.2)(A)(iv) (i.e

. , requiring a NOx threshold of +0.2 g/bhp

- hr): (i) The phase

- in shall provide for a compliance volume of engines certified to the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold that is equivalent to the volume of the required phase

- in set forth in each of the above

referenced section s (i.e., 100 percent of 2016 m odel year diesel engines). The compliance volume shall be calculated in accordance with the calculation methodology in the definition of “alternate phase

in” in section (c) (i.e., (100*1 year) = 100 for the required phase

- in). T he compliance volume shall be considered equivalent if the calculated total is equal to or greater than 100. (ii) T he calculated compliance volume for the manufacturer

- defined phase

- in shall not include engines meeting the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold requirement earlier than the 20 15 model year

. ( iii ) For the 2016 model year only , engines meeting the NOx threshold of +0.3 g/bhp

- hr and carried over from the 2014 or 2015 model year per sections (e)(6.2.1)(E), (e)(6.2.2)(A)(v), and (e)(9.2.2)(A)(v) shall also be considered as meeting t he +0.2 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold requirement and included in the calculated compliance volume and shall not be subtracted from the calculated compliance volume

. ( i v) If the phase

- in includes engines that do not meet the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold in the 201 7 model year, the manufacturer shall subtract those engines that do not meet the threshold in the 2016 and 2017 model years (except as allowed for the 2016 model year in section (g)(5.8.3)(B)(iii) above) from the required percentage of 100 percent18 when cal culating the compliance volume according to the calculation methodology in the definition of “alternate phase

- in” section (c). (v) All engines shall meet the +0.2 g/bhp

- hr NOx threshold no later than the 2018 model year. * * * * (h) Standar dization Requirements. * * * * (4) Required Emission Related Functions: The following standardized functions shall be implemented in accordance with the specifications in SAE J1979 or SAE J1939 to allow for access to the required information by a scan tool meeting SAE J1978 specifications or designed to communicate with an SAE J1939 network: (4.1) Readiness Status: In accordance with SAE J1979/J1939

- 73 specifications, the OBD system shall indicate “complete” or “not complete” since the fault

me mory was last cleared for each of the installed monitored components and systems identified in sections (e)(1) through (f)(9), and (g)(3) except (e)(11) and (f)(4). The readiness status for all components or systems identified in (f)(2) and (g)(3) shall a lways indicate “complete”. The readiness status for all other components or systems shall immediately indicate “complete” upon the respective monitor(s) (except those monitors specified under section (h)(4.1.4) below) determining that the component or sys tem is not malfunctioning. The readiness status for a component or system shall also indicate “complete” if after the requisite number of decisions necessary for determining MIL status has been fully executed, the monitor indicates a malfunction for the c omponent or system. The readiness status for each of the monitored components or systems shall indicate “not complete” whenever fault memory has been cleared or erased by a means other than that allowed in section (d)(2). Normal vehicle shut down (i.e., key off, engine off) may not cause the readiness status to indicate “not complete”. (4.1.1) Subject to Executive Officer approval, a manufacturer may request that the readiness status for a monitor be set to indicate “complete” without monitoring having be en completed if monitoring is disabled for a multiple number of driving cycles due to the continued presence of extreme operating conditions (e.g., cold ambient temperatures, high altitudes). Executive Officer approval shall be based on the conditions for monitoring system disablement and the number of driving cycles specified without completion of monitoring before readiness is indicated as “complete”. The readiness status for the following component/system readiness bits shall always indicate “complete”: (A) Diesel misfire (section (e)(2) ) for engines with out a separate monitor designed to detect misfires identified in section (e)(2.2.1) and subject to the monitoring conditions of section s (e)(2.3. 1) and (e)(2.3.2) ; ( A B ) Gasoline misfire (section (f)(2)) ; and ( B C ) Diesel and gasoline comprehensive component (section (g)(3))

. * * * *19 (4.1.3) For 2016 and subsequent model year engines, for components and systems not listed in section (h)(4.1.1) above, the readiness status for each component/syst em readiness bit listed below shall immediately indicate “complete” if any of the following conditions occur: (1) all the respective supported monitors listed below for each component/system have fully executed and determined that the component or system i s not malfunctioning, or (2) at least one of the monitors listed below for each component/system has determined that the component or system is malfunctioning after the requisite number of decisions necessary for determining the MIL status have been fully executed, regardless of whether or not the other monitors listed have been fully executed: (A) Diesel Fuel System: sections (e)(1.2.1), (e)(1.2.2), and (e)(1.2.3) (B) Diesel Misfire: section (e)(2.2.1) for engines with a separate monitor designed to detect misfires identified in section (e)(2.2.1) and subject to the monitoring conditions of section s (e) (2.3.1) and (e)(2.3.2) * * * * (4.2) Data Stream: The following signals shall be made available on demand through the standardized data link conn ector in accordance with SAE J1979/J1939 specifications. The actual signal value shall always be used instead of a default or limp home value. * * * * (4.2.2) For all diesel engines: * * * * (E) For 2013 and subsequent model year engines, normalized trigger for PM filter regeneration (SPN 54 5 6 6 defined by SAE J1939 for 2016 and subsequent model year engines) , PM filter regeneration status (SPN 3700 defined by SAE J1939 for 2016 and subsequent model year engines) ; and * * * * (4.5) Test Results: * * * * (4.5.5) If the OBD system fault memory is cleared

, : (A) For vehicles using the ISO 15765

- 4 protocol for the standardized functions required in section (h), all test results shall report values of zero for the test result and test limits. The test results shall be updated once the applicable monitor has run and has valid test results and limits to report. (B) For vehicles using the SAE J1939 protocol for the standardized functions required in section (h): (i) F or 2010 through 2015 model year engines, all test results shall either (a) report values of zero for the test results and test limits, or (b) report values corresponding to ‘test not complete’ in accordance with SAE J1939

- 73 specifications. The test resul ts shall be updated once the applicable monitor has run and has valid test results and limits to report. (ii) For 2016 and subsequent model year engines, all test results shall

r eport values corresponding to ‘test not complete’ in accordance with20 SAE J1939

- 73 specifications. The test results shall be updated once the applicable monitor has run and has valid test results and limits to report. * * * * (6) Service Information: (6.1) Engine manufacturers shall provide the aftermarket service and re pair industry emission

- related service information as set forth in sections (h)(6.3) through (6.5). (6.2) The Executive Officer shall waive the requirements of sections (h)(6.3) through (6.5) upon determining that ARB or U.S. EPA has adopted a service info rmation regulation or rule that is in effect and operative and requires engine manufacturers to provide emission

- related service information: (A) of comparable or greater scope than required under these provisions; (B) in an easily accessible format and in a timeframe that is equivalent to or exceeds the timeframes set forth below; and (C) at fair and reasonable cost. (6.3) Manufacturers shall make readily available, at a fair and reasonable price to the automotive repair industry, vehicle repair procedures which allow effective emission

- related diagnosis and repairs to be performed using only the SAE J1978/J1939 generic scan tool and commonly available, non

- microprocessor based tools. (6.4) As an alternative to publishing repair procedures required under se ction (h)(6.3), a manufacturer may publish repair procedures referencing the use of manufacturer

- specific or enhanced equipment provided the manufacturer meets one of the following conditions: (6.4.1) makes available to the aftermarket scan tool industry the information needed to manufacture scan tools to perform the same emission

- related diagnosis and repair procedures (excluding any reprogramming) in a comparable manner as the manufacturer

- specific diagnostic scan tool, or (6.4.2) makes available for pur chase, at a fair and reasonable price to the automotive repair industry, a manufacturer

- specific or enhanced tool to perform the emission

- related diagnosis and repair procedures (excluding any reprogramming). (6.5) Manufacturers shall make available: (6.5. 1) Information to utilize the test results reported as required in section (h)(4.5). The information must include a description of the test and test result, typical passing and failing values, associated fault codes with the test result, and scaling, unit s, and conversion factors necessary to convert the results to engineering units. (6.5.2) A generic description of each of the diagnostics used to meet the requirements of this regulation. The generic description must include a text description of how the diagnostic is performed, typical enable conditions, typical malfunction thresholds, typical monitoring time, fault codes associated with the diagnostic, and test results (section (h)(4.5)) associated with the diagnostic. Vehicles that have diagnostics not21 adequately represented by the typical values identified above shall be specifically identified along with the appropriate typical values. (6.5.3) Information necessary to execute each of the diagnostics used to meet the requirements of sections (e)(1) thr ough (f)(9). The information must include either a description of sample driving patterns designed to be operated in

- use or a written description of the conditions the vehicle needs to operate in to execute each of the diagnostics necessary to change the readiness status from “not complete” to “complete” for all monitors. The information shall be able to be used to exercise all necessary monitors in a single driving cycle as well as be able to be used to exercise the monitors to individually change the re adiness status for each specific monitor from “not complete” to “complete”. * * * * (i) Monitoring System Demonstration Requirements for Certification. * * * * (3) Required Testing: Except as provided below, the manufacturer shall p erform single

- fault testing based on the applicable test with the following components/systems set at their malfunction criteria limits as determined by the manufacturer for meeting the requirements of sections (e), (f), and (g) or sections (d)(7.1.2) and (d)(7.2.3) for extrapolated OBD systems. (3.1) Required testing for Diesel/Compression Ignition Engines: * * * * (3.1.2) Misfire Monitoring: For 2010 through 2012 model year engines, a For 2013 model year engines subject to section (e)(2.2.5), the manufacturer shall perform a test at the malfunction limit specified in section (e)(2.2.5). A misfire demonstration test is not required for diesel engines not subject to section (e)(2.2.5)

. For 2013 and subsequent model year engines, the manufactur er shall perform a test at the malfunction criteria limit specified in section (e)(2.2.2). * * * * (j) Certification Documentation. * * * * (2) The following information shall be submitted as part of the certification application. Except as provided below for demonstration data, the Executive Officer will not issue an Executive Order certifying the covered engines without the information having been provided. The information must include: * * * * (2.19) A list of the t est results required to be made available under section ( g h )(4.5) and the corresponding diagnostic(s) noted by fault code for each test result. * * * * (k) Deficiencies. * * * *22 (4) Manufacturers must re

- apply for Executive Officer approval of a deficiency each model year. In considering the request to carry

- over a deficiency, the Executive Officer shall consider the factors identified in section (k)(1) including the manufacturer’s progress towards correcting the deficiency. Except as provided for in section s (k)(4.1) and (k)(4.2) below, t T he Executive Officer may not allow manufacturers to carry over monitoring system deficiencies for more than two model years unless it can be demonstrated that substantial engine hardware modificat ions and additional lead time beyond two years would be necessary to correct the deficiency, in which case the Executive Officer shall allow the deficiency to be carried over for three model years. (4.1) For deficiencies first granted in the 2010 model yea r, the Executive Officer may allow manufacturers to carry over the deficiency into the 2013 model year unless it can be demonstrated that substantial engine hardware modifications and additional lead time beyond the 2013 model year would be necessary to co rrect the deficiency, in which case the Executive Officer shall allow the deficiency to be carried over into the 2014 model year. (4.2) For deficiencies first granted in the 2011 model year, the Executive Officer may allow manufacturers to carry over the deficiency into the 2014 model year. * * * *23 Amend section 1968.2, title 13, California Code of Regulations , to read as follows:

Note: The amendments that were approved by the Board at the January 2 6

- 2 7 , 2012 board hearing are shown i n single underline to indicate additions and single strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text

. These amendments were formally approved by the Office of Administrative Law on August 7, 2012, and became operative on August 7, 2012

. T h e amendments proposed with the 45

- day notice are shown in double underline to indicate additions and double strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text. New amendments proposed with this 15

- day notice are shown in **bold italic doubl**  **e underline** to indicate additions and **bold i talic double strikeout**  to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text. Various portions of the regulations that are not modified by the proposed amendments are omitted from the text shown and indicated by “ * * * * ”.

§ 1968.2. Malfunction and Diagnostic System Requirements

-- 2004 and Subsequent Model

- Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles and Engines

(c) Definitions. * * * *

“ Emission standard ,” as it applie s to OBD compliance **and the remedies provided for in the Health and Safety Code for noncompliance**  , relates to the emission characteristics of a motor vehicle and engine and means: (1) a numerical limit on the amount of a given pollutant that a motor vehicl e or motor vehicle engine may emit into the atmosphere; or (2) a requirement that a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine be equipped with a certain type of pollution

- control device or some other design feature related to the control of emissions. * * * *

(e) Monitoring Requirements for Gasoline/Spark

- Ignited Engines. * * * * (15) Comprehensive Component Monitoring * * * * (15.4) MIL Illumination and Fault Code Storage: * * * * (15.4.3) For purposes of det ermining the emission increase in section (e)(15.4.2)(A), the manufacturer shall request Executive Officer approval of the test cycle/vehicle operating conditions for which the emission increase will be determined. Executive Officer approval shall be gran ted upon determining that the manufacturer has submitted data and/or engineering evaluation that demonstrate that the testing conditions24 represent in

- use driving conditions where emissions are likely to be most affected by the malfunctioning component. Fo r purposes of determining whether the specified percentages in section (e)(15.4.2)(A) are exceeded, if the approved testing conditions are comprised of an emission test cycle with an **exhaust** emission standard, the measured increase shall be compared to a p ercentage of the **exhaust** emission standard (e.g., if the increase is equal to or more than 15 percent of the **exhaust** emission standard for that test cycle). If the approved testing conditions are comprised of a test cycle or vehicle operating condition th at does not have

an **exhaust** emission standard, the measured increase shall be calculated as a percentage of the baseline test (e.g., if the increase from a back

- to

back test sequence between normal and malfunctioning condition is equal to or more than 15 p ercent of the baseline test results from the normal condition). * * * * (f) Monitoring Requirements for Diesel/Compression

- Ignition Engines. (1) Non

- Methane Hydrocarbon (NMHC) Converting Catalyst Monitoring * * * * (1.2) Malfunc tion Criteria: * * * * (1.2.2) Conversion Efficiency: (A) The OBD II system shall detect an NMHC catalyst malfunction when the catalyst conversion capability decreases to the point that emissions exceed: * * * * (ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard:

a. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC standards for 2007 through 2012 model year vehicles; and b. 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standards or the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

hr) for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles. * * * * (1.2.3) Other Aftertreatment Assistance Functions. Additionally, for 2010 and subsequent model year vehicles, the catalyst(s) shall be monitored for other aftertreatment assistance functions: * * * * (B) For 201 0 5 and subsequent model year passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, and MDPVs certified to a chassis dyna mometer tailpipe emission standard and 201 3 5 and subsequent model year medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard, for catalysts used to generate a feedgas constituency to assist SCR systems (e.g., to increase NO 2 concentration upstream of an SCR system), the OBD II system shall detect a malfunction when the catalyst is25 unable to generate the necessary feedgas constituents for proper SCR system operation. Catalysts are exempt from **feedgas generation this**  monitoring if **both of the fo llowing criteria are satisfied:**  **(1)** no malfunction of the catalyst’s feedgas generation ability can cause emissions to **(1)** increase by 15 percent or more of the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an appl icable emission test cycle;

**or and**  (2) **no malfunction of the catalyst’s feedgas generation ability can cause emissions to**  exceed the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle

. * * * *

(2) Oxide s of Nitrogen (NOx) Converting Catalyst Monitoring * * * * (2.2) Malfunction Criteria: * * * * (2.2.2) Conversion Efficiency: (A) The OBD II system shall detect a NOx catalyst malfunction when the catalyst conversion capability decr eases to the point that NOx or NMHC emissions exceed: * * * * (ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard:

a. the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.5 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause N Ox emissions to exceed 0.7 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 3.5 times the applicable NMHC standard for 2007 through 2009 model year vehicles; b. the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.4 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.6 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.5 times the applicable NMHC standard for 2010 through 2012 model year vehicle s; and

c. the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard for 2013 through 2015 model year vehicles; and

c d

. the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard for 2013 2016 and subsequent model year vehicles. * * * * (2.2.3) Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) or Other Active/Intrusive Reductant Injection System Performance:26 (A) Reductant Delivery Performan ce: (i) For 2007 and subsequent model year vehicles, the OBD II system shall detect a system malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the system to properly regulate reductant delivery (e.g., urea injection, separate injector fuel injection, po st injection of fuel, air assisted injection/mixing) that would cause a vehicle’s NOx or NMHC emissions to exceed the applicable emission levels specified in sections (f)(2.2.2)(A). (ii) If no failure or deterioration of the reductant delivery system could result in a vehicle’s NOx or NMHC emissions exceeding the applicable malfunction criteria specified in section (f)(2.2.3)(A)(i), the OBD II system shall detect a malfunction when the system has reached its control limits such that it is no longer able to deliver the desired quantity of reductant. * * * * ( 2. 3 ) Monitoring Conditions : (2.3.1) Manufacturers shall define the monitoring conditions for malfunctions identified in sections (f)(2.2.2)

, **(f)(2.2.3)(A),** and (f)(2.2.3)(C) (i.e., catalyst

e fficiency, **reductant delivery performance, and** improper reductant) in accordance with sections (d)(3.1) and (d)(3.2) (i.e., minimum ratio requirements). For purposes of tracking and reporting as required in section (d)(3.2.2), all monitors used to detect malfunctions identified in section (f)(2.2.2) shall be tracked separately but reported as a single set of values as specified in section (d)(5.2.2). (2.3.2) Except as provided for in section (f)(2.3.3), the OBD II system shall monitor continuously for malf unctions identified in section **s** (f)(2.2.3) **(A),** (B)
**,** and (D) ( **e.g. i.e.** 

, **SCR performance,** insufficient reductant, feedback control). (2.3.3) Manufacturers may request Executive Officer approval to temporarily disable continuous monitoring under conditions te chnically necessary to ensure robust detection of malfunctions and to avoid false passes and false indications of malfunctions. The Executive Officer shall approve the request upon determining that the manufacturer has submitted data and/or an engineering evaluation which demonstrate that a properly operating system cannot be distinguished from a malfunctioning system and that the disablement interval is limited only to that which is technically necessary. * * * * (3) Misfire Monitoring * * * * (3.2) Malfunction Criteria: (3.2.1) The OBD II system shall detect a misfire malfunction when one or more cylinders are continuously misfiring. (3.2.2) Additionally, for **all combustion sensor or combustion quality sensor**

  ** equipped (e.g., for u** **se in homogeneous charge compression ignition control systems)**  2010 and subsequent model year vehicles passenger27 cars, light

- duty trucks, and MDPVs certified to a chassis dynamometer tailpipe emission standard

, **for all combustion sensor or combustion**  **quali ty sensor** 

**- equipped**  **and** 2010 through 2015 model year medium

duty vehicles **equipped with sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality (**  **e.g., for use in homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) control systems)** 

, and for 20 percent of 2016 mo del year, 50 percent of 2017 model year, and 100 percent of 2018 model year medium

- duty vehicles ( percentage based on the manufacturer’s projected California sales volume for all medium

- duty diesel vehicles ) : (A) The OBD II system shall detect a misfire ma lfunction that would cause a vehicle’s NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emissions to exceed as follows : (i) For passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, and MDPVs certified to a chassis dynamometer tailpipe emission standard, the OBD II system shall detect a misfire malfunc tion that would cause a vehicle’s NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emissions to exceed 1.5 times any of the applicable FTP standards. (ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard, the OBD II system shall detect a misfire malfunction when the percentage of misfire is equal to or exceeds five percent 2.0 times any of the applicable NMHC, CO, and NOx standards or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test

. * * * * (3.2.5) Upon request by the manufacturer and upon determining that the manufacturer has submitted data and/or engineering evaluation which support the request, the Executive Officer shall revise the percentage of misfire malfunction criteria in section (f)(3.2.2) (A)(ii) upward to exclude detection of misfire that cannot cause the vehicle’s NMHC, CO, and NOx emissions to exceed 2.0 times the applicable standards and the vehicle’s PM emissions to exceed 0.03 g/bhp

- hr as measured from an applicable cycle emission tes t. * * * * (3.3) Monitoring Conditions: * * * * (3.3.3) Additionally, f F or misfires identified in section (f)(3.2.2) 2010 and subsequent model year vehicles subject to (f)(3.2.2) , the OBD II system shall monitor for misfire as fol lows : (A) For passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, and MDPVs certified to a chassis dynamometer tailpipe emission standard, T t he OBD II system shall continuously monitor for misfire under all positive torque engine speeds and load conditions. (B) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard , the OBD II system shall continuously monitor for misfire under the following conditions:28 (i) For 2010 through 2018 model year vehicles and 2019 and subsequent

m odel year vehicles that are not included in the phase

- in specified in section (f)(3.3.3)(B)(ii)

, under positive torque conditions **up to 75**  **percent of peak torque** with engine speed up to 75 percent of the maximum

**- rated**  engine speed **and engine load up to 75 p ercent**  **maximum**

**- rated load**  except within the following range: the engine operating region bound by the positive torque line (i.e., engine **load torque**  with transmission in neutral) and the two following **engine**

  ** operating** points: engine speed of 50 percent of maximum

**- rated**  engine speed with the engine **load torque**  at the positive torque line, and 75 percent of the maximum

**- rated**  engine speed with the engine **load torque**  **at** 5 percent **of peak torque** above the positive torque line

. (ii) For 20 percent of 2019 model year, 50 percent of 2020 model year, and 100 percent of 2021 model year medium

- duty vehicles ( percentage based on the manufacturer’s projected California sales volume for all medium

- duty diesel vehicles ) , under all positive torque engine speed **and load** con ditions **except within the following range: the engine operating region bound by the positive torque**  **line (i.e., engine load with transmission in neutral) and the two following points: engine**  **speed of 50 percent of maximum engine**  **speed with the engine torq ue at the positive torque line,**  **and 100 percent of the maximum**  **engine speed with the engine torque at**  **10 percent**  **of peak torque above the positive torque line** 

. * * * * **(D) A manufacturer may request**  **Executive Officer approval to disable misfire**  **monitoring or employ an alternate malfunction criterion when misfire cannot be distinguished from other effects.**  **Upon determining that the manufacturer has presented documentation that**  **demonstrates the disablement interval or period of use of an alternat**  **e malfunction criterion is limited only to that necessary for avoiding false detection, the Executive Officer shall approve the**  **disablement or use of the alternate malfunction criterion. Such disablements may include but are not limited to events involvin**  **g: (i)**  **rough road, (ii)**  **fuel cut, (iii)**  **gear changes for manual transmission vehicles, (iv)**  **traction control or other vehicle stability control activation such as anti** 

**- lock braking or other engine torque modifications to**  **enhance vehicle stability, (v)**  **off**

**- board control or intrusive activation of vehicle components or**  **diagnostics during service or assembly plant testing, (vi)**  **intrusive diagnostics during portions that can significantly affect engine stability**  **, or**29 **(vii) infrequent regeneration events during por**  **tions that can significantly affect engine stability** 

**.** * * * * ( 4 ) Fuel System Monitoring * * * * (4.2) Malfunction Criteria: (4.2.1) Fuel system pressure control: (A) The OBD II system shall detect a malfunction of the fuel system p ressure control system (e.g., fuel, hydraulic fluid) prior to any failure or deterioration that would cause a vehicle’s NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emissions to exceed: * * * * (ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dyn amometer tailpipe emission standard:

a. 1.5 times any of the applicable NMHC, CO, and NOx standards or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2007 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpi pe NOx emission standard of greater than 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx; b. 2.5 times any of the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2007 through 2012 model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less th an or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx; and

c. 2.0 times any of the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as meas ured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx; * * * * (5) Exhaust Gas Sensor Monitoring * * * * (5.2) Malfunction Criteria: (5.2.1) Air

- Fuel Ratio Sensors: (A) For sensors located upstream of the exhaust aftertreatment: (i) Sensor performance faults: The OB D II system shall detect a malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the sensor voltage, resistance, impedance, current, response rate, amplitude, offset, or30 other characteristic(s) that would cause a vehicle’s NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emissions to exceed: * * * * b. For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard: 1. 1.5 times the applicable NMHC, CO, and NOx standards or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emissi on test for 2007 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of greater than 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx; 2. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2007 through 2012 model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx; and 3. 2.0 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions t o exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an e ngine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx. * * * * (B) For sensors located downstream of the exhaust aftertreatment: (i) Sensor performance faults: The OBD II system shall detect a malfunction p rior to any failure or deterioration of the sensor voltage, resistance, impedance, current, response rate, amplitude, offset, or other characteristic(s) that would cause a vehicle’s NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emissions to exceed: * * * * b. For mediu m

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard: 1. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.5 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.7 g/bhp

- hr if th e **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.05 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2007 through 2009 model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NO x emission standard of greater than 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx;31 2. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- h r) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.05 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2007 through 2012 model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx; and 3. 2.0 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applic able cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx. * * * * (5.2.2) NOx and PM sensors: (A) Sensor performance faults: The OBD II system shall detect a malfunction prior to any failure or deterioration of the sensor voltage, resistance, impedance, current, response rate, amplitude, offset, or other

c haracteristic(s) that would cause a vehicle’s emissions to exceed: * * * *

(ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard:

a. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.5 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.7 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 0.05 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2007 through 2009 model year vehicles; b. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.4 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.6 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

hr) as measur ed from an applicable cycle emission test or 0.05 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2010 through 2012 model year vehicles; and

c. 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 through 2015 model year vehicles; and32 c d

. 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emiss ion test or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 2016 and subsequent model year vehicles. * * * * (5.3) Monitoring Conditions: (5.3.1) Exhaust Gas Sensors (A) Manufacturers shall define the monitoring con ditions for malfunctions identified in sections (f)(5.2.1)(A)(i), (5.2.1)(B)(i), and (5.2.2)(A) , and (5.2.2)(D) (e.g., sensor performance faults) in accordance with sections (d)(3.1) and (d)(3.2) (i.e., minimum ratio requirements). For all 2010 and subseq uent model year vehicles, for purposes of tracking and reporting as required in section (d)(3.2.2), all monitors used to detect malfunctions identified in sections (f)(5.2.1)(A)(i), (5.2.1)(B)(i), and (5.2.2)(A)

, and for 2016 and subsequent model year medi um

- duty vehicles **certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard**  , section ( f )( 5 .2.2)(D) shall be tracked separately but reported as a single set of values as specified in section (d)(5.2.2). * * * * (6) Exhaust Gas Recirculation ( EGR) System Monitoring * * * * (6.2) Malfunction Criteria: (6.2.1) Low Flow: (A) The OBD II system shall detect a malfunction of the EGR system at or prior to a decrease from the manufacturer's specified EGR flow rate that would cause a vehicle ’s NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emissions to exceed: * * * * (ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard:

a. 1.5 times the applicable FTP standards for 2004 through 2006 model year vehi cles; b. 1.5 times the applicable NMHC, CO, and NOx standards or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2007 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of greater th an 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx;

c. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2007 through 2012 model year vehicles certified to33 an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx; and d. 2.0 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx. * * * * (6.2.6) EGR Cataly st Performance: For catalysts located in the EGR system **on 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles**  and used to convert constituents to reduce emissions or protect or extend the durability of other emission

- related components (e.g., to reduce fouling of an EGR cooler or valve)

, : **(A) For 2004 through 2012 model year vehicles, the catalyst shall be**  **monitored in accordance with the other emission control or source system monitoring requirements under section (f)(16).**  **( B** 

**) For 2013 and subsequent model year vehi**  **cles, e**  **xcept as provided**  **for in section (f)(6.2.6)( C** 

**) below,** the OBD II system shall detect a malfunction when the catalyst has no detectable amount of constituent (e.g., hydrocarbons, soluble organic fractions) oxidation. **For 2004 through 2012 model year**  **vehicles, the catalyst shall be monitored in accordance with the other emission control or source system**  **monitoring requirements under section (f)(16). (** 

**C**

**) Monitoring of the catalyst**  **is not required if there is no measurable**

**emission impact on the criteri a pollutants (i.e., NMHC, CO, NOx, and**  **PM) during any reasonable driving condition in which the catalyst is most likely to affect criteria pollutants.**  * * * * (7) Boost Pressure Control System Monitoring * * * * (7.2) Malfunction Cr iteria: (7.2.1) Underboost: (A) The OBD II system shall detect a malfunction of the boost pressure control system at or prior to a decrease from the manufacturer's commanded or expected boost pressure that would cause a vehicle’s NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emiss ions to exceed: * * * * (ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard:

a. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g. , cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard34 is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2010 through 2012 model year vehic les; and b. 2.0 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emissi on test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles. * * * * (8) NOx Adsorber Monitoring * * * * (8.2) Malfunction Criteria: (8.2.1) NOx adsorber capability: (A ) The OBD II system shall detect a NOx adsorber system malfunction when the NOx adsorber system capability decreases to the point that would cause a vehicle's NOx or NMHC emissions to exceed: * * * * (ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDP Vs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard:

a. the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.5 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.7 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable c ycle emission test or 3.5 times the applicable NMHC standard for 2007 through 2009 model year vehicles; b. the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.5 times the applicable NMHC standard for 2010 through 2012 model year vehicles; and

c. the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if t he **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test or 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standard for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles. * * * * (9) Particulate Matter (PM) Filter Monitoring * * * * (9.2) Malfunction Criteria: * * * * (9.2.2) Frequent Regeneration: (A) For 2010 and subsequent model year vehicles, the OBD II system shall detect a malfunction when PM filter regeneration occurs more frequently than (i.e ., occurs more often than) the manufacturer’s specified35 regeneration frequency such that it would cause a vehicle's emissions to exceed: * * * * (ii) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emissio n standard:

a. 2.5 times the applicable NMHC standards or the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emissio n test for 2010 through 2012 model year vehicles; and b. 2.0 times the applicable NMHC standards or the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles. * * * * (9.2.4) **Catalyzed PM Filter: (A)**  NMHC conversion: For 201 0 5 and subsequent model year passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, and MD PVs certified to a chassis dynamometer tailpipe emission standard and 201 3 5 and subsequent model year medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard with catalyzed PM filters that convert NMHC emissions , the OBD II system shall monitor the catalyst function of the PM filter and detect a malfunction when the NMHC conversion capability decreases to the point that NMHC emissions exceed the applicable emission levels specified in section (f)(9.2.2)(A). If n o failure or deterioration of the NMHC conversion capability could result in a vehicle’s NMHC emissions exceeding these emission levels, the OBD II system shall detect a malfunction when the system has no detectable amount of NMHC conversion capability. P M filters are exempt from **NMHC conversion capability this**  monitoring if **both of the fol lowing**  **criteria are satisfied: (1)**  no malfunction of the PM filter’s NMHC conversion capability can cause emissions to **(1)** increase by 15 percent or more of the applicab le full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle; **or and**  (2) **no malfunction of the PM filter’s NMHC conversion capability can cause emissions to**  exceed the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable

e mission test cycle

. **(B) Feedgas generation: For 2016 and subsequent model year**  **medium**

  ** duty vehicles** **with catalyzed PM filters used to generate a feedgas constituency to assist SCR systems (e.g., to increase NO**  **2 concentration upstream of an SCR system), the**  **OBD II**  **system shall detect a malfunction when the system is unable to generate the**  **necessary feedgas constituents for proper SCR system operation. Catalyzed PM filters**  **are exempt from this**  **monitoring if both of the** 36 **fol lowing criteria are satisfied:**  **(1) n**  **o malfunction of the catalyzed PM**  **filter’s feedgas generation a bility can cause emissions to**  **increase by 15 percent or more of the applicable full useful life standard as**  **measured from an applicable emission test cycle; and**  **(2) no**  **malfunction of the cataly zed PM filter’s feedgas generation ability**  **can cause emissions to exceed the applicable full useful life**  **standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle**

**.** * * * * (12) Cold Start Emission Reduction Strategy Monitoring * * * * (12.2) Malfunction Criteria: The OBD II system shall, to the extent feasible, detect a malfunction if either of the following occurs: * * * * ( 12.2.2 ) Any failure or deterioration of the cold start emission reduction control strategy that would cause a vehicle’s NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emissions to exceed: * * * * (B) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard: (i) 2.0 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the appli cable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle em ission test for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles. * * * * (13) Variable Valve Timing And/Or Control (VVT) System Monitoring * * * * (13.2) Malfunction Criteria: (13.2.1) Target Error: The OBD II system shall detect a malfunct ion prior to any failure or deterioration in the capability of the VVT system to achieve the commanded valve timing and/or control within a crank angle or lift tolerance that would cause a vehicle's NMHC, CO, NOx, or PM emissions to exceed: * * * *

(B) For medium

- duty vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard: (i) 1.5 times the applicable NMHC, CO, and NOx standards or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2006 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of greater than 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx; (ii) 2.5 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.3 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx e missions to37 exceed 0.5 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2006 through 2012 model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx ; and (iii) 2.0 times the applicable NMHC or CO standards, the applicable NOx standard by more than 0.2 g/bhp

- hr (e.g., cause NOx emissions to exceed 0.4 g/b hp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.2 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test, or 0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test for 2013 and subsequent model year vehicles certified to an engine dynamomete r tailpipe NOx emission standard of less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp

- hr NOx. * * * * (15) Comprehensive Component Monitoring * * * * (15.2) Malfunction Criteria: * * * * (15.2.2) Output Components/Systems: * * * * (F) For 2013 2015 and subsequent model year vehicles that utilize fuel control system components (e.g., injectors, fuel pump) that have tolerance compensation features implemented in hardware or software during production or repair procedures (e.g., individually coded injectors for flow characteristics that are programmed into an electronic control unit to compensate for injector to injector tolerances, fuel pumps that use in

- line resistors to correct for differences in fuel pump volume output), the

c omponents shall be monitored to ensure the proper compensation is being used. (i) The system shall detect a fault if the compensation being used by the control system does not match the compensation designated for the installed component (e.g., the flow characteristic coding designated on a specific injector does not match the compensation being used by the fuel control system for that injector). If a manufacturer demonstrates that a single component (e.g., injector) using the wrong compensation cannot c ause a measurable increase in emissions during any reasonable driving condition, the manufacturer shall detect a malfunction for the minimum number of components using the wrong compensation needed to cause an emission increase. Further, the stored fault code shall identify the specific component that does not match the compensation. (ii) Monitoring of the fuel control system components under section (f)(15.2.2)(F)(i) is not required if the manufacturer demonstrates that **both of the following criteria are satisfied: (1)**  no fault of the38 components’ tolerance compensation features (e.g., wrong compensation being used) could cause emissions to **(1)** increase by 15 percent or more of the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emissio n test cycle; **or and**  (2) **no fault of the components’ tolerance compensation features could cause**  **emissions to** exceed the applicable full useful life standard as measured from an applicable emission test cycle. For purposes of determining if the emission c riteria above are met, the manufacturers shall request Executive Officer approval of the test plan for which the emission impact will be determined. The test plan shall include the combination of failed components and the degree of mismatch (e.g., wrong c ompensation) used as well as the test procedure and emission test cycles used to demonstrate the emission impact, including the necessary preconditioning cycles used by the system to correct or adapt for any mismatch and mitigate the emission impact. Exec utive Officer approval shall be granted upon determining that the manufacturer has submitted data and/or engineering analysis that demonstrate that the conditions necessary for the system to correct or adapt will readily occur in a timely manner during in

- use operation and that the test conditions represent worst case emissions from typical in

use service actions when considering the distribution and variance of the compensation values and parts (e.g., replacement of one or more plus

- one

- sigma injectors wit h minus

- one

- sigma injectors without updating of the compensation value)

. * * * * (15.4) MIL Illumination and Fault Code Storage: * * * * (15.4.3) For purposes of determining the emission increase in section (f)(15.4.2)(A), the manuf acturer shall request Executive Officer approval of the test cycle/vehicle operating conditions for which the emission increase will be determined. Executive Officer approval shall be granted upon determining that the manufacturer has submitted data and/o r engineering evaluation that demonstrate that the testing conditions represent in

- use driving conditions where emissions are likely to be most affected by the malfunctioning component. For purposes of determining whether the specified percentages in sect ion (f)(15.4.2)(A) are exceeded, if the approved testing conditions are comprised of an emission test cycle with

an **exhaust** emission standard, the measured increase shall be compared to a percentage of the **exhaust** emission standard (e.g., if the increase i s equal to or more than 15 percent of the **exhaust** emission standard for that test cycle). If the approved testing conditions are comprised of a test cycle or vehicle operating condition that does not have an **exhaust** emission standard, the measured increas e shall be calculated as a percentage of the baseline test (e.g., if the increase from a back

- to

- back test sequence between normal and malfunctioning condition is equal to or39 more than 15 percent of the baseline test results from the normal condition). * * * * (17) Exceptions to Monitoring Requirements (17.1) Except as provided in sections (f)(17.1.1) through (17.1.4) below, upon request of a manufacturer or upon the best engineering judgment of ARB, the Executive Officer may revise the emi ssion threshold for a malfunction on any diagnostic required in section (f) for medium

- duty vehicles if the most reliable monitoring method developed requires a higher threshold to prevent significant errors of commission in detecting false indications of a malfunction. Additionally, except as specified in section (f) (9.2.1)(A)(iii)

, for 2007 through 2009 2013 model year light

- duty vehicles and 2007 through 2012 2013 2015 model year medium

- duty vehicles, the Executive Officer may revise the PM filter malfun ction criteria of section (f)(9.2.1) to exclude detection of specific failure modes (e.g., combined failure of partially melted and partially cracked substrates) if the most reliable monitoring method developed requires the exclusion of specific failure mo des to prevent significant errors of commission in detecting false indications of a malfunction. * * * * (17.1.3) For medium

- duty diesel vehicles (including MDPVs) certified to an engine dynamometer tailpipe emission standard, the Executive O fficer shall approve a malfunction criteria of “the applicable PM standard plus 0.02 g/bhp

- hr PM (e.g., unable to maintain PM emissions at or below 0.03 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.01 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emissi on test” in lieu of “0.03 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test” wherever required in section (f). The Executive Officer shall also approve a malfunction criteria of “the applicable PM standard plus 0.04 g/bhp

- hr PM (e.g., unable to maintain PM emissions at or below 0.05 g/bhp

- hr if the **exhaust** emission standard is 0.01 g/bhp

- hr) as measured from an applicable cycle emission test” in lieu of “0.05 g/bhp

- hr PM as measured from an applicable cycle emission test” wherever required in section (f). * * * * (h) Monitoring System Demonstration Requirements For Certification * * * * (4) Required Testing for Diesel/Compression

- ignition vehicles: Except as provided below, the manufacturer shall perform single

- fault tes ting based on the applicable test with the following components/systems set at their malfunction criteria limits as determined by the manufacturer for meeting the requirements of section (f). * * * * (4.3) Misfire Monitoring: For 2010 and subse quent model year vehicles subject to section (f)(3.2.2 ) (A)(i) **or (f)(3.2.5)** , the manufacturer shall perform a test at the malfunction criteria limit specified in section (f)(3.2.2 ) **(A)(i ) or (f)(3.2.5)**  . A misfire monitor demonstration test is not required for vehicles not subject to40 section (f)(3.2.2 ) (A)(i) **and not subject to section**  **(f)(3.2.5)**

. * * * *41 Amend section 1971.5, title 13, California Code of Regulations, to read as follows:

Note : The amendments proposed with the 45

- day notice are shown in single underline to indicate additions and single strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text, while amendments proposed with this 15

- day notice are shown in double underline to indicate additions and double strikeout to indi cate deletions from the existing regulatory text . Various portions of the regulations that are not modified by the proposed amendments are omitted from the text shown and indicated by “ * * * * ”.

§1971.5. Enforcement of Malfunction and Diagnostic Syst em Requirements for 2010 and Subsequent Model

- Year Heavy

- Duty Engines.

(a) General. * * * *

(3) Definitions. The definitions applicable to these rules include those set forth in Health and Safety Code section 39010 et seq. and in Cal. Code Re gs., title 13, section 1900(b) and section 1971.1(c), which are incorporated by reference herein. The following definitions are specifically applicable to section 1971.5 and take precedence over any contrary definitions. * * * *

“ Nonconformin g OBD System ” means an OBD system on a production engine that has been determined not to comply with the emission standards as defined in requirements of Cal. Code Regs., title 13, section 1971.1 (c),

. For purposes of section 1971.5, an engine class shall be considered nonconforming irrespective of whether engines in the engine class, on average, meet other applicable tailpipe or evaporative emission standards (e.g., exhaust emission standards defined in Cal. Code Regs., title 13, section 1956.8, evaporativ e emission standards defined in Cal. Code Regs., title 13, section 1976)

. * * * *42 Amend section 1968.5, title 13, California Code of Regulations, to read as follows:

Note : The amendments proposed with the 45

- day notice are shown in single u nderline to indicate additions and single strikeout to indicate deletions from the existing regulatory text, while amendments proposed with this 15

- day notice are shown in double underline to indicate additions and double strikeout to indicate deletions fr om the existing regulatory text . Various portions of the regulations that are not modified by the proposed amendments are omitted from the text shown and indicated by “ * * * * ”.

§1968.5. Enforcement of Malfunction and Diagnostic System Requirements f or 2004 and Subsequent Model

- Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles and Engines.

(a) General * * * * (3) Definitions. The definitions applicable to these rules include those set forth in Health and Safety Code sectio n 39010 et seq. and in title 13, CCR sections 1900(b) and 1968.2(c), which are incorporated by reference herein. The following definitions are specifically applicable to section 1968.5 and take precedence over any contrary definitions. * * * * “Nonconforming OBD II System” means an OBD II system on a production vehicle that has been determined not to comply with the emission standards as defined in requirements of title 13, CCR section 1968.2 (c), . For purposes of section 1968.5, a motor vehic le class shall be considered nonconforming irrespective of whether vehicles in the motor vehicle class, on average, meet other applicable tailpipe or evaporative emission standards (e.g., exhaust emission standards defined in title 13, CCR section 1960.1

, evaporative emission standards defined in title 13, CCR section 1976)

. * * * *ATTACHMENT B

ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION

The following additional supporting documents and information are available for public comments during the supplemental public comment period for the 2012 rulemaking approving the r evisions to on

- board diagnostic system requirements for heavy

- duty engines, passenger cars, light

- duty trucks, medium

- duty vehicles and engines regulations.

Additional Rationale for Definition of “Alternate Phase

- In”

In the 45

- day notice, staff proposed in the amendments to the HD OBD regulation a new definition of “alternate phase

- in” that is similar to that currently provided in the OBD II regulation and would provide manufacturers with compliance flexibility in meeting some regulation requirements with prescribed phase

- in schedules. The HD OBD regulation previously did not include any prescribed phase

- in schedules and, thus, there was no need for alternate phase

- in schedules. However, as part of the 45

- day notice, staff proposed several phase

- in sched ules for several different requirements and included a new definition for “alternate phase

- in” that would provide the same flexibility as currently exists under the OBD II regulation.

Additional Information on Costs

Staff is also providing more information concerning the costs attributed to the proposed amendments. In the Initial Statement of Reasons: S taff R eport (Staff Report) for the present amendments , staff described the incremental costs that manufacturers would incu r under the amendments for heavy

- duty diesel engines. Specifically, the Staff R eport indicated that the proposed amendments would result in some added costs for heavy

- duty diesel engines attributable to the more comprehensive diesel misfire monitoring req uirements that begin in the 2016 model year. As stated, the reporting requirements for these amendments

, when fully phased

- in

, would result in costs of up to $30,000 annually . On a per vehicle basis, a large manufacturer is estimated to have an increment al retail cost of less than $0.56 per vehicle. Subsequent to the release of the Staff Report, staff adjusted the cost analysis to allow for a six percent cost of capital recovery for truck builders. This adjustment results in an incremental retail cost o f $0.59 per vehicle, a $0.03 increase from the cost initially reported (i.e., less than 0.01 percent increase in the retail price of a typical heavy duty vehicle).

S taff ’s analysis took the national sales numbers for the top nine engine manufacturers and determined a composite manufacturer average value of 72,440 engines that will be annually produced and sold nationwide . This number was rounded to 72,000 for the analysis. Staff then estimated the incremental costs for an engine manufacturer with sales of 72,000 engines. Staff further assumed the hypothetical engine manufacturer would have three engine families that would require separate misfire monitoring data to be generated . It then calculated the total costs for such a manufacturer using estimatedtesting cost information obtained from emission test laboratories and heavy

- duty engine manufacturers. The data generation and associated reporting costs for the updated misfire monitoring requirements was estimated to cost $10,000 per engine family for a total cost of $30,000 for a typical large manufacturer.

The Staff Report did not address how the incremental costs of $0.5 9 per vehicle (previously $0.56 per vehicle as described above) were calculated. The incremental costs were obtained by adding t he testing and reporting costs over four years for all eleven heavy

- duty diesel engine manufacturers (from the 2016 model year through the 2019 model year) and dividing the costs by the estimated number of heavy

- duty diesel engines that are projected to be produced for sale nationwide over the same time period by all eleven manufacturers. Nationwide volumes were used instead of California

- only volumes because it is assumed (and consistent with past practice) that manufacturers will make one engine for the entire nation to comply with both the U.S. EPA and ARB HD OBD requirements. The total costs consist of the total number of engine families estimated to be tested by manufacturers multiplied by $10,000 per engine family. A total of 99 engine families are projected to be tested over the four years at a total cost of $990,000. The total number of heavy

- duty diesel engines was obtained by multiplying the projected nationwide sales of 2012 model year diesel engines (479,000) by four (years) . The incremental costs were then adjusted with a six percent profit margin each for the engine manufacturer , truck builder, and dealer (assuming trucks are in the dealership for three months) to calculate the total incremental costs for consumers (i.e., new heavy

- duty vehi cle purchasers).

In the S taff R eport, staff also estimated the incremental costs that heavy

- duty alternate

fueled engine manufacturers would incur due to the proposed amendment to move up the start date for full OBD systems on heavy

- duty alternate

- fueled engines by two years (from the 2020 to the 2018 model year). Since the amendment would require these manufacturers to implement OBD systems two years earl ier than previously required, the majority of costs were already accounted for in the 2009 HD OBD biennial review rulemaking. The only additional costs would be those costs incurred for the proposed misfire monitoring requirement amendments described abov e and the time value of money cost that is incurred due to using money two years earlier instead of earning investment returns. Specifically, this would cover the earlier hiring of additional staff or purchasing of equipment needed for compliance and incl ude some annual costs for recalibration within this earlier compliance timeframe . Also, since the alternate

- fueled engines will have OBD systems on them two years earlier, buyers of such engines in these two years will see an incremental price increase th at otherwise would not have occurred until later. From staff’s analysis, the incremental retail cost to buyers of these engines/vehicles for these two years has been estimated to range from $21 per vehicle to $207 per vehicle, depending on the size of the manufacturer. Subsequent to the release of the Staff Report, staff adjusted the incremental costs to include a six percent profit margin for truck builders and dealers. As such, the incremental retail cost to buyers of these vehicles for the two years h as been adjusted to range from $23 per vehicle to $228 per vehicle (less than a 1.0 percent increase in the retail price of the vehicle)

.The Staff Report did not provide an explanation as to how the incremental costs of $2 3 per vehicle to $2 28 per vehicl e were calculated. The incremental cost for heavy

- duty alternate

- fueled vehicles was determined separately for small and large manufacturers because the resources and production volume of these two industry segments are significantly different. Similar t o heavy

- duty diesel engine manufacturers, the misfire monitoring amendments will add testing and reporting costs for alternate

- fueled engine manufacturers

. Staff assumed th at heavy

- duty alternate

- fueled engine manufacturers would have one engine family th at would require misfire monitoring data to be generated. This will result in estimated costs of $10,000 per manufacturer annually. The incremental costs per vehicle were then obtained by dividing the testing and reporting costs by the assumed production volumes for a typical large and small heavy

duty alternate

- fueled engine manufacturer. For these calculations, a typical large manufacturer was assumed to produce 5,000 engines nationwide per year and a typical small manufacturer was assumed to produce 5 00 engines nationwide per year

. These costs are expected to be passed on to consumers (new heavy

- duty engine/vehicle purchasers) so a six percent profit margin for engine builders, truck builders, and dealers were each applied to the reporting costs. As a result, the total incremental retail cost for the misfire monitoring amendment is estimated at $2.38 per vehicle for a large alternate

- fueled engine manufacturer and $ 23.82 per vehicle for a small alternate

- fueled engine manufacturer.

To evaluate the time value money cost for the two year earlier implementation of HD OBD for heavy

- duty alternate

- fueled vehicles, staff estimated the time value of money cost to be 13.75 percent over the two years. Although current rates of return in inve stments have been near zero in recent years, staff assumed an annualized return rate of 6.65 percent. This annualized return rate was used based on the average annualized returns on the Standard and Po o r ’ s (S&P) 500 Index from 2003 through 2011 (5.92 perc ent) plus a 25 percent margin to arrive at the 6.65 percent rate. Applying the 6.65 percent annual rate of return over two years results in an overall return rate of 13.75 percent assuming all moneys are reinvested and interest rate is compounded annually. Staff then applied 13.75 percent to the overall incremental costs calculated in the 2009 cost analys is, giving an adjust ed incremental cost of $18. 19 per vehicle. This cost is a conservative value considering that the 2009 cost estimates included algorithm development and calibration costs to implement all OBD diagnostics while alternate

- fuel ed engines are expected to be d erived from existing diesel or gasoline

- fueled heavy

- duty engines that already have base algorithms and calibrations and would only require a portion of the algorithm development and calibration costs

. Heavy

- duty alternate

- fuel ed engine manufacturers will likely only need to recalibrate a few of the major monitors such as fuel system, catalyst, and EGR and develop a few comprehensive component monitors for added components related to the fuel conversion. By adding the $2. 38 per vehicle reporting costs to the $18. 19 per vehicle cost and applying a six percent profit margin for truck builders and another six percent profit margin for dealers , a total incremental cost of $2 3 is obtained for large heavy

- duty alternate

- fueled engine manufacturers.For small he avy

- duty alternate

- fueled engine manufacturers, a similar approach was used to calculate the incremental costs. A typical small manufacturer is estimated to produce 500 engines per year which is a factor of ten less than a typical large manufacturer. Ass uming the scaling of the volume also affects costs in a similar manner, the cost determined above for large alternate

- fueled engine manufacturers results in an incremental cost of $ 181.90 per vehicle for small volume manufacturers

. To obtain the total inc remental cost for small heavy

- duty alternate

- fueled engine manufacturers of $2 28 per vehicle, the $2 3

. 82 per vehicle reporting cost was added to the $ 181.90 cost after a six percent profit margin was applied to account for truck builder and dealer profits

. A summary table of the incremental consumer costs for alternate

- fueled vehicles is shown in T able 1 below. The cost numbers for the 2009 analysis below were presented in the 2009 HD OBD S taff R eport.

Table 1: Incremental Consumer Cost of Heavy

- Duty Die sel Vehicles
2009 Analysis 2012 Analysis

1971.1 Costs 1971.5 Costs Total HD OBD Costs Total Large Alt Fuels HD OBD Costs Total Small Alt Fuels

Costs ( dollars) ( dollars) ( dollars) ( dollars) ( dollars)

Variable costs Component $37.18 $0.00 $37.18 $5.12 $51.20 Assembly $0.68 $0.00 $0.68 $0.09 $0.90 Warranty $1.64 $0.00 $1.64 $0.23 $2.30 Shipping $1.20 $0.00 $1.20 $0.17 $1.70 Support costs Research $22.49 $0.00 $22.49 $3.09 $30.90 Engineering Support $0.14 $0.06 $0.20 $0.03 $0.30 Legal $0.35 $0.00 $0.35 $0.05 $0.50

Administrative $2.08 $0.31 $2.39 $0.33 $3.30

Investment Mach ine & equipment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 recovery costs Assembly plant changes $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Development/Testing $57.34 $1.22 $58.56 $8.05 $80.50 Engine manufacturer profit (a) $7.39 $0.10 $7.49 $1.03 $10.30 Truck Builder profit (a) $1.09 $10.91 Dealer profit (a) $1.16 $11.57 Misfire Monitor

costs(a)(b) $2.38 $23.82
Total cost $130.49 $1.69 $132.18 $22.82 $228.20

(a) Profit was calculated at 6% of the total incremental costs. (b) Engine manufacturer profit, truck builder profit, and dealer profit were all applied.Market Commentary 11612 October, 2012 Data:

Part 1: SUMMARY RETURNS & RANK Last Month -3.3% Rank: 19 out of 23 Last Year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.7% Rank: 4 out of 23 Last 5 Years -8.9% Rank: 12 out of 23 Last 10 Years . . . . . . . . . . . . 59.4% Rank: 17 out of 23 S&P 500 Index: Annual Returns

Year Percent Year Percent Year Percent Year Percent

1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 16.3 11.8 -6.6 45.0 26.4 2.6 -14.3 38.1 8.5 -3.0 23.1 -11.8 18.9 13.0 9.1 -13.1 20.1
7.7 -11.4 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 0.1 10.8 15.6 -17.4 -29.7 31.5 19.1 -11.5

1.1 12.3 25.8 -9.7 14.8 17.3 1.4 26.3 14.6 2.0 12.4 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 27.3 -6.6 26.3 4.5 7.1 -1.5 34.1 20.3 31.0 26.7 19.5 -10.1 -13.0 -23.4 26.4 9.0 3.0 13.6 3.5 2008 2009 2010 2011 -38.5 23.5 12.8 0.0

The annual gain or loss in the S&P 500 Stock index from 1951 to present. Dividends are not included. Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index - 58 Year Graph 

### S&P 500 Stock Market Index Historical Graph

1/1950 1/1960 1/1970 1/1980 1/1990 1/2000 1/2010 1/2020 The above graph plots the monthly close for the Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index in logarithmic scale. Updated Friday, November 2, 2012. Click the links below for the forecast and other links related to this stock index. 100 1000 10000

10

S&P 500 Index Forecast Do w Jones Multi-I ndex Charts & Analysis 10 Year Chart - S & P 500 Chart 60 Year Graph - S&P 500 Index

Stock Market Performance Ranking: S&P 500 Index A bout Us

Forecasts, charts and analysis

Interest Rate Forecast Stock M arket Forecast Real Estate Forecast Exchange Rate Forecast Econo mic Forecast

M arket Trend Analysis S&P 500 Stock Market Index Historical Graph http://www.forecast-chart.com/historical-sp-500.html

1 of 3 11/6/2012 10:00 A MReturns for the Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index is shown above for four time periods. For example: the change in the Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index was -3.3% in the last month. With that return, the S&P 500 Index was ranked 19th out of the 23 indexes reviewed in this site for that time period. Dividends are not included.

Part 2: HISTORICAL HIGHLIGHTS The performance ranking of the S&P 500 Index relative to the other 23 stock indexes covered in this site is detailed below. Four different time periods are reviewed. The Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index is compared to foreign and domestic, large cap and small cap indexes. Each paragraph identifies the top and bottom performers as well as the average and median market performance for the indexes during in each time period.

Last Month: During October of 2012, the S&P 500 had a rank of 19 with a return of -3.34%. The top ranked index during October was the Hang Seng Index, with a return of 3.00%. The worst performing index during that period was the NASDAQ 100 Index with a return of -5.83%. The median return for all stock market indexes during October was -1.86%. The average return for the indexes during the month was -1.76%.

Last Year: During the last 12 months, the S&P 500 had a rank of 4 with a return of 13%. The top ranked index during the last year was the DAX Stock Index, with a return of 18%. The worst performing index during that period was the Nikkei 225 Index with a return of -1%. The median return for the indexes during this period was 10%. The average return for all stock market indexes over the year was 9%.

Last 5 Years: Over the 5 years ended October of 2012, the S&P 500 had a rank of 12 with a return of -9%. The top ranked index during the 5 year period was the Mexico IPC Index, with a return of 30%. The worst performing index during that period was the Nikkei 225 Index with a return of -45%. The median return for all stock market indexes during this time period was -9%. The average return for the indexes over the 5 years was -9%.

Last 10 Years: During the 10 years ended October of 2012, the S&P 500 had a rank of 17 with a return of 59%. The top ranked index during the period was the Mexico IPC Index, with a return of 587%. The worst performing index during the 10 year time period was the Nikkei 225 Index with a return of -5%. The median return for the indexes during the last 10 years was 89%. The average return for all stock market indexes over that time frame was 108%.

Table: In this site, you may view the returns for all 23 indexes over all 4 time periods in one convenient table. Click the Market Trend Analysis link under the chart (above). The table of contents for Forecast-Chart.com's Market Trend Analysis will open. Click the link to the Stock Index Return Scoreboard in the table of
contents.

All calculations are based on the monthly market close for each index, excluding dividends. Like Send 293 people like this. S&P 500 Stock Market Index Historical Graph http://www.forecast-chart.com/historical-sp-500.html

2 of 3 11/6/2012 10:00 A M_____________________________________________________________ Report a Problem with this Page Contact U s Privacy Policy Terms of Use /Disclosure SignalTrend Inc. 2008 - 2012, All Rights Reserved S&P 500 Stock Market Index Historical Graph http://www.forecast-chart.com/historical-sp-500.html

3 of 3 11/6/2012 10:00 A M