p. 1 

# OAR Box 1190 Prepped by Candice Davis

Document

Number: 

# 31 ) IV-A-0 2 Docket Number: 

# A-90-2 8

Printed 5/5/2008 9:13:50 AM

Sheet 31 of 106- -•.• - 

### 7' v

### ; P. 2

, 4 . 

# California' s On-Boar d Diagnosti cI I 'Requirements Hearing o n Request forWaive ro

f Preemptio

n An n Arbor , M

I October17,199 5P. 3 num.Miieniyon s uauiorniaMJ I Resourcesooar o rax; le'itfja/a-oos: * voice : i » lb ) 3«3<otu o 10 : Min

e lem s rage^ou s 1 nursoay,uctooe ru , l»i » D:«e:»ur M


# California' s On-Boar d Diagnosti c I I Requirement s Hearing o

n Request forWaive ro

f Preemption An n Arbor , M

I October17,199 5


# Outlin e Waive r Issues Descriptio n o

f OB D I I Evaluatio n o

f Issue s

- Protectivenes s

- Compelling Need

- Consistency wit

hfedera l requirement s

- Feasibilit y Summar yP. 4 i r\e*uui-e * OUOJ U P«A . \p .Of 91 3«o» vuit-c . yo IO J diao w>u.miK « i«li » royegui wniui»i_oy , w-wu w»* , .:»; » a.w,__r. m



### faiiv@i rissy^ s ° Descriptio n o f OB D I I ° Evaluatio n o f Issue s

- Protectivenes s

- Compelling Need

- Consistency wit

hfedera l requirement s

- Feasibilit y 

### ° Summar

y


# Federa l Clea n Ai rAet 0 

### S 209(a ) Preempt s stat e ne wmoto rvehicl e standard s • S 209(b ) Direct s EP

At o waiv e preemptio n fo rCaliforni a standard s unles s EP Amake s on e o f thre e specifie d finding s

____ _P. 5

. MiiCMLywn » WOIIIWHIIO/M I r\o»uuii*« a DUAI U r<« . ^ o to y ao-ow wVUILC . loioja.a^Oi M iw.ivun c ICIII ; 1 , - 

## Firs

t § 209(b) Findin g

- Protectiveness - EP Aca n den ya waive ri f i t find s Californi a ha s bee n arbitrar y an d capriciou s i n determinin g ou r standard s are , i n th e aggregate , a s protectiv e of th e publi chealt h an d welfar e a s applicabl e federa l standard s



## Protectivenes s Fo rwaiver s o f enforcemen t provisions , th e onl y relevan t inquir

yis : "[A]r e the procedure s s o la

x tha t the y threaten the validit y o f California' s determination tha t it s standard s ar e a s protectiv e o

f publi c healt

handwelfar

e a s applicabl e federa

l standards. " MEMA V . EP

A (1979 )P. 6

rrom : Alie n Lyon s uaworniaMJ i resource s Doar o rax : IOIBJD/D-OOSU * voice ; IOIOJ;»;>-OOI M ly.wim e win*



### Secon d § 209(b ) Findin g Compellin g & Extraordinar y Condition s EP A ca n den y a waive r i f Californi a doe s no t nee d th e standard s t o meet compellin g an d extraordinar y condition s



## Third § 209(b ) Findin g

- Consistenc

y - EP A ca n den y a waive r i f th e Californi a standard s an d accompanyin g enforcemen t procedures are inconsisten t wit h § 202(a )P. 7

num . Mie n iyun * v.<_uoniia>M i resource s Doar a ra_ . toiojojo-ow a voice , loiojoja-oo* * IU.WIIK C ieni »

I -



## Tes t Proce d

Federa l an d Stat e Tes

t Procedure s shoul d no t preclud e meetin g bot h sets o f requirements wit h th e sam e test vehicl e



## iT.si5tencyr1_.ead § 202(a) : Federa l emissio n standard s mus t take effec

t afte rth e perio d necessar yt o permitdevelopmen t an d applicatio n ofth e requisit e technology , givin g appropriate consideratio n to th e cost o f complianceno m Miie n Lyon » ^aiiiorniaMi r resource s Doar o rax : toiojojo-oos a voice , toioja/doo ^ lO.miR e iem » rayc * «i ^ utui»uay , w^-iuue . »._. , U M «*.*(.,#« ) t

n



### EPA' s consideratio n i s limite d t o th e thre e issue s i n statut e

, "Th e lawmake s i t clea rtha t th e waive r

request s canno t b e denie d unles s th e specifi cfinding s designate d ir i th e statut e ca n properl yb e made. " = = Administrato rWillia m Rukelshaus , 197 1

E P Amus t giv e substantia l deferenc e • ~ ' • to"California'spolicyjudgments
" Th e structur e an d histor yo f th e Californi a waive rprovisio n clearl y indicat e a Congressiona l inten t an d a n EP Apractic e o f leavin g th e decisio n o n ambiguou s an d contro versia l publi cpolicy.t o California' s judgment. " -• - Administrato rRussel l Train , 197 5

i 

### i , mmmmMmm^yA^u^t^^mk^ammtmmmmmmmmmuaamtMmmmtmummmaamtmt^^u^KKtmmtAiMLUMi.P. 9

rrom . Alie n Lyon s cainorni a «i r Kejourco s boai o cax : (»IBJ»/»«O» » voice : I B IB) s/o-ott wIO.MIK O lerri s rageooij o inuikoay , utiuue i K , i« » a.a^.iar m

"Eve n o n th e issu e o f technologica l feasibility , I woul d fee l constraine d t o approv e a Californi a approac h t o th e proble m whic h I migh t als o fee l unabl e t o adop t at th e Federa l leve l i n m ycapacitya s a regulator . Th e whol e approac h o f th e Clea n Ai rAc t i s t o forc e developmen t o f ne w type s o f emissio n contro l technolog ywher e tha t i s neede d by compellin g th e industr

yt o 'catc h up ' t o som e degre e wit h newl y promulgate d standards . Suc h a n approac h t o automotiv e emissio n contro l migh t b e attende d wit h costs , i n th e shap e o f a reduce d product offering , o rpric e o rfue l econom ypenalties/an d byrisk s tha t a wide r numbe ro f vehicl e classe s ma yno t b e abl e t o complet e thei r developmen t wor k

i n time . Sinc e a balancin g o f thes e risk s an d cost s agains t th e potentia l benefit s fro m reduce d emission s i s a centra l policydecisio n fo ran yregulator yagency.. . I believ e I a m require d t o giv e verysubstantia l deferenc e t o California' s judgmen t o n tha t score. " Administrato rRussel l Train , 197 5



### Th e burde n i s o n th e opponent s

i waive r "Th e languag e ofth e statut e an d its legislative histor yindicat e that California' s regulations , an d California' s determinatio n that theycompl ywit h th e statute , whe n presente d to th e Administrato rar e presume d t o satisf

yth e waive rrequirements an d that th e burde n o

f provin g otherwis e i s o n whoeve r attack s them. "

- - U.S . Federa l Cour

t o f Appeal s i n MEM Av . EP A(1979 )

________•!P.1 0

rrom : Alie n Lyon s Californi a Ai r Kesourca s boar d i>_t:iB'iB)o/&<oo£tt » voice : loioiafo-OM j lo.Min e tern s r«ne5«i* ( "W.M, , wvwue i •. , iM * . 

# Outlin e Waive rIssue s Descriptio n of OB D I I Requirement s Evaluatio n of Issue s

- Protectivenes s

- Compelling Need

- Consistency wit

hFedera l Requirement s

- Feasibilit y 

### Summar y



## On-Board Diagnostics Purpose Reductio n o f in-us e emission s fro m vehicle s wit h emission-relate d malfunction sp.1 1

riwin . mie n _.yun » uamoiluaHi l r\«*ouico_ . ooai u r«* . \p\0)^i^oo^s voice , ^IO^JS-OO M IU . mine teni aray e IVUI M inui»uay , uv.wve i i* . I« J -.w,« 4 i m



## On-Board Diagnostics Concep t Emission-relate d function s monitored b y on-board compute r Vehicl e Operato r alerte d to malfunctio n Diagnosti c informatio n store d to hel p technician s fi x detecte d proble m


## Firs t Generatio n OB D OBD I Waive r grante d June , 198 6 Monitorin g Requirements Fuel Syste m EG RSyste m Electroni c Input

ComponentsP.1 2

. iwio y*.--w « y^c. l oioH<j^>w g iu . ttim e iem » rag e H o i o o inursoay , uciooe i .*_., iw a o:94.W 9 r w


# OB D I I Requirements Adopte d i n 198 9 fo r 199 4 an d Late r Model s Improvement s upo n OB D I

- Scope o f requirement s expanded

- Malfunction Criteri aEnhanced


# Scop e o f OB D I I Monitorin g Requirements Catalyst H C Conversio n Capabilit y Catalyst Auxiliar

y Heatin g Syste m Performance Engin e Misfir

e Detectio n Evaporativ

e Syste m Lea k

Detectio n Exhaus t Ga s Recirculatio n Performance Fue l Syste m Performance Oxyge n Senso r Performance Secondar

y Ai r Syste m Performance Electroni c Input /

Outpu t Componen t Functio n Standardize d Acces s to Diagnosti c Informatio nP.1 3 _.,•_,.,,.. . ' " num . *iieinyuh * w—iioinidMi i r\esou(ce & ooat o ra* . IOIOJOJ0409 9 voice , t o iojojo-oo* > lu.mm e iem » ratf e i

_vi- wuiuiauoy , u.w« i >.. , 

# OB D I I Malfunctio n Criteri a

•Genera l Requiremen t Malfunction s causin g emission s t o excee d 1. 5 time s applicabl e standard s ar e t o b e detecte d • Exception s Evaporativ e Svste m Lea k Detectio n Syste m mus t detect leaks greate rtha n a 0.04 0 inc h hol e (0.02 0 inche s beginnin g wit h 200 0 mode l year ) Functiona l Check s Inpu t components : prope rsignal s t o EC U Outpu t components : respons e t o compute rcommand s


# OB D I I Regulator

y Histor y Regulatio n originall y adopte d September , 198 9 Staf f Directe d to presen t periodi c updates o n manufacturers ' progress an d to propos e modification s to regulatio n a s necessar

y_P.1_4 _

-•ri.n. I-UIBI I _.yun a -.oiuuimaMI I rvebuuite * DOdi u ra* . 4010, 1 OJO-OO » voice , IOIO/OJO-OO M lO.Mm e tern s rag e u o i . » 1 nursaay , uciooe ru t i-»» » »:»» : i b r M



# ptembe r199 1 Up d Catalys t Monitoring : Stead y Stat e H C efficienc y monitorin g replaced : 

### LowEmissio n Vehicles : Monitorin g o

f fron t catalys

t fo r 50-60 % FT P H C efficienc y 

### Non-Lo wEmissio n Vehicles : H C emission s monitored fo r 1. 5 XST D increase ove r 4 Kvalue . 

# ptembe r199 1 Updat e ° Emp©F®Hw<B sysfci mDissil k dl@fc@eftii©in

i Applicabl e to 199 6 an d late r model s complyin g wit h hig h tem p evaporativ e test procedures ° Hosflr ©

D<g_(g(gi_i®

n i Misfir e ove r ful l operatin g rang e delaye d unti l 199 7 Detectio n o

f misfir e onl y durin g FT P condition s fo r 199 4 throug h 199 6 vehicles

^ _ n

_ ii_______m

_•_ _ __u._i__i_i__________ . I I I Hill l I I_ I ll__ii i __nlil i i__m J -_______________^

_P.1 5 nom./uienuyon s uainorniaMirResourcesooai o ran:I»IOJ»/»-O<K( » voice:(bio)9j»*«* » io:Min e lam s ragei4oij » Inursoay,uctooe i iz , ia » »:oo:»«ri» i



# Jun e 199 3 Hearin g Deficienc yprovision s adopte d i n respons e t o petitio n b

yFord Moto r Compan y



# Decembe r 1994 Updat

e Lo wEmissio n Vehicl e Catalys t Monitorin g

- Fron t catalys t monitoring requirement s revisedto allo w fo r syste mbase ddetermination

- Phase-i n from199 8 t

o 2000 model yea

r (AAM A suggeste dphase-i n percentage s adopted)

- Interimmalfunction criteri aadoptedto allo w fo r reasonabl e phase-i n

L_ >P.1 6

i win . Miieut.yvii » ^amwuiiaMi i rve*uui(-e

_oum u ra* . \p .0) 3/9-009 9 voice . (

Q I0 > OOOO M i V . min e l em * ray e i ww i w ^ mui»uay , vwwue i i_. , U M W.WW.A O r m


# Decembe r 1994 Updat

e Misfire Detectio n

- Ful l rang e misfir

e detection delayedwit

h phas e in from1997 through2000 model yea r

- Highspeed , ligh

t loa ddisablemen

t regio n adopted



# Decembe r -1994-tlpdate

-
•Evaporative Lea k

Detectio n

- Detection o

f 0.020 inchleak s require d

- Phase-i n from2000 to 200 2 model yea r


### • Deficienc

yprovision s extende d throug h 200 0 mode l yea rP . 1 7

riom . Hite n Lyon s uaiilorniaMj f resource s DOU O raa ; loio/a/a-oo wvoice ; leiejo/a-oe* * IOIMIK B tern s . rag e 1 0 o i o a inursoay , ucioue i i* . I»K > o-oj.w_.r m 

# Outlin e Waive rIssue s Descriptio n of OB D I I Requirement s Evaluatio n o

f Issue s

- Protectivenes s
- Compellin g Nee d

- Feasibilit

y Summar y



## Issues •I s protectivenes s determinatio n arbitrar y an d capricious ? •Are standard s no

t neede d t

o meet compellin g an d extraordinar y conditions ? •Are standard s an d enforcemen t procedures inconsisten t wit h § 202(a) ?.£..1 8

nwia.Miiein.yon k

uamornidM H resource s ooar o rax . toio/o.o<oo» 9 voice . (oio>o/o-oc- wlo.mm e tern s r ay e n w i ^ wntuityaji , WWMWC I >_ , IM V W.W * - ^ 

# Protective m Protectivenes s has bee n establishe d regardles s o f whethe rOB D I I i s considere d a n enforcemen t provisio n o ra ne wstandar d



# Protective^ or a D D


### ° Th e ARB , i n adoptin g th e OB D I I regulation , ha s expressl yfoun d tha t th e requirement s wil l no t undermin e th e protectivenes s ofth e Californi a vehicl e emission s program . ° OB D I I wil l provid e fo rgreate remissio n reduction s fro m moto rvehicle s throug h th e promp t repai ro f emission-relate d malfunction s

_*____ _ . .._!___J_ . .I , l__Hii_iik_iiii__iiiimi___ii.ii

_i-_-_-_----__________ , P . 1 9

r i om . Miie d _.yon b v#«inoiiuttMi i r\e»ouice k DO«U U rd* . \o

IO J 0J3«e9_ > vwice . IOIOJOJO-OOI M i w . mute i eiu a •"w - •*-*.._ - .,,»,»--,, , --.-_- . .. , ... . . ._ . .. .


## Protectivenes s OB D I I a s a Ne

wStandard OB D i l requirements are mor e stringen t tha n federa l OB D requirements

- OB D II requirement s ar

e mor e comprehensive

- Malfunction threshold s ar e mor e stringent , particularly fo

r low emission vehicle s



### Secon d § 209(b ) Findin g Compellin g & Extraordinar y Condition s Issue : D o compellin g an d extraordinar y condition s continu e to justif y California' s nee d fo r it

s ow n moto r vehicl e contro l program ? Whethe r an ygive n standar d i s necessar y to addres s th e nee d i s no t a n issu eP.2 0

noni.MiieiiLyon s uaiuuirtidHi i resource s Doar a rat ; ioio>o.o«o » voice . (Oiojojo-och M io . wni\ e iem » ray e i_ > w i «* w iii-tt»way , 

# Nee d Becaus e of it s uniqu e geographica l an d »e ran d conc e vehicles , Californi a continue s t o h wors t ai rqualityi n th e ?e th e



## Tes t Procedur

e Federa l an d stat e tes t procedure s d o no t preclud e meetin g bot h set s o f requirement s wit h th e sam e tes t vehicl e

l-i l
_____ _P.2 1

rroni ; Miie n Lyon s uajnorni a ai r resource s ooar o rax : ieid)»i&-©oy » voice ; ieiejo.»-ot> M IO:MH_ B tern s rage<uoi* o inursuay , wciwuo i i_. , iw o s.w.wr m


## Consistenc y On e syste m wil l satisf

y bot h Californi a an d federa l requirement s fo r non-lo wemissio n vehicle s

- Californi aOB D II system s acceptedfederall y through 199 8

- Federa l OB D system s acceptedi n Californi aafte r 199 8



## Consistency : Leadtim e § 202(a) : Federa l emissio n standard s mus t tak e effec t afte r th e perio d necessar y t o permi t developmen t an d applicatio n ofth e requisite technology , givin g appropriate consideratio n to th e cos t o f complianc eP.2 2 uuihstuww u rat . piUjvUMM J vuiwc . IOIO/^IU«O< M w . IVIIA C I eni » rdye^ioi^ u inuisudy , utiooe i i_. , 199 0 o.os.oor m 

# Technologica l Feasibility 0 

### Technolog yi s presentl yavailabl e fo rman y monitorin g requirement s 0 

### Significan t lea d tim e ha s bee n provide d an d remain s fo rothe rrequirement s 0 

### Th e regulation s an d directive s fro m th e Board hav e provided , an d wil l continu e t o provid e fo r complianc e flexibilit yan d "safetyvalves "



# Tec 1 

# lica l Feasi l 0 

### NRD C an d Internationa l Harveste rcases : greate rdiscretio n fo rCaliforni a standard s 0 

### Appropriat e t o project futur e advance s i n technology ; no t limite d t o existin g technolog y 0 

### Significanc e of substantia l leadtim e an d abilityt o reevaluat e progres s

__ •_______________________________________________________P.2 3

-m-.--y.-y — - - • . •-, —•• - - r . . , - • rrom : Alle

n Lyon s California Ai r Kesource

s Boar d fsx : l81B)i?»-669 » voice : (blB)b/»*b* j io:Min e i em s rage_coi. » inuikuoy , uwa u n., IS M o.w.*-r m


# "Safet y Valves " "Consideration s o

f fairnes s wil l suppor t comprehensive an d firm , eve n drastic , regulations , provide d a "safet y valve " i s als o provide d - ordinaril y a provisio n fo r waiver , exceptio n o r adjustment,... " Internationa l HarvesterV . EP A (1973 )



# OB D I I Safet

y Valve s Deficiency provision s throug h th e 200 0 mode l yea r Specifi c provision s fo r consideratio n b y th e Executive Office r (e.g. , sectio n (b)(3.3.3) ) Periodi c review

s o f manufacturers ' progres s. «nct i wywn » womwiiuaM M r\e»wuice » ooai u r** . \o iojo;o-w» ? voice , p iojojo-oo* a i o . mine i em * P.24 _ rag e 400 1 J O inuisaay , wciooe i i_ , 199 9 o.vi.nri *


# current OBDI I minnitm 

## (demonstratio n o

f curren t technology)
° Most 199 6 model s hav e alre a receive d OB D I I certificatio n approva l fro m AR B

° Onl yon e mode l (extremel ylo w volume ) i s subject t o fine s fo rexces s deficiencie s


# 199 6 Hond a LE V

° 199 6 Mode l Yea rLE V Civi crecentl y announce d ° Successfull ycalibrate d t o mee t 1. 5 X St d malfunctio n threshold s (use s interi m catalys t monitorin g malfunctio n threshold )P.2 5 •I B m n I\B»UUI-_ » Dwai

w r«_* . \p .of

w * v-ww ^ vwt»-o. ^ IP /

a * 9-OO M I W

. wiih « leni b rage_: 4 o rJ O inursoay , uctooe r.4.. 133 0 o:ui:4 o rwi 

# Lo wEmissio n Vehicl e Catalyst Monitorin g Requirement : Detect catalys t syste m deterioratio n before emission s excee d 1. 5 time s H C standard Requiremen t phase-i n

- 199 8 - 3 0 % o

f low emissio

n vehicle s

- 199 9 - 60 %

- 2000-100 % Manufacturer

s ma y choos e portio n o

f catalys t syste m to monito r provided correlatio n wit h emission s ca n be mad e


# Feasibilit y Usin g Oxyge n Storag e Metho d Fron t portio n o

f catalys t syste m monitored (overal l syste m performance inferred )

Dua l Oxyge n Sensors 

# __l^^j_____

^ 

# __Z______^Or^C > ooo o Fron t Catalys t Downstrea

mCatalys tP.2 6

num . Miie n Lyon * waiiiurnidMi i r\e*ouice » DOAI U rd* . ioio)oto-oo9 9 voice . IOIOJO*O-OO* > tw.min e lein * raycAOwi« wiiiwiawoy , wvwwe i »_. , >**•* «.«*..*-_ . .. . 

# 199 6 Example s Fron t Catalyst Monitorin g For d - T-Bird * Mitsubishi - Sw__mit*/Mirage*/Expo * Mazd a- Protege* , Millenia Nissa n - Altima * Subar u - Legacy * Toyot a- Camry* , GS30 0 * TLEVs 

# Catalyst Monitorin g Manufacturer s shoul d b e abl e to meet 199 8 phase-i n percentag e wit h TLEV s 1995/9 6 productio n vehicle s establis h feasibilit y fo r TLEV sP.2 7

riuin.Miieii_.yun h u-uiiornittMi r ne t ou r ces ooar o ru . IOIOJOOOO M voice , IOIOJOO-OOO O io:miH e tern s rage^ooi winur&aay , uciuoe i u, 199 9 o.w. wr m


## Leadtim e
•4 year s o

f leadtim e give n to meet 199 9 phase-i n percentag e
•Th e OB D I I regulatio n ha s specifie d fron t catalyst monitorin g o n lo wemissio n vehicle s since 199 1


## Technologica l Feasibilit

y Significant Leadtim e
•NRD C Cas e

- Have theoretica

l objection s been answered ?

- Have the majo

r step s neededto refin e the technology bee

n identified ?

- Have plausibl e reason s bee n offere d fo r believing step s ca

n b e completed in time ?P.2 8

-IB M _.ywii a ^OIIIUMIIOMI I rve»wuii.e a DUOI U ra* . \p io / o*9-ow s vwit c 4 0 IO J =»*0-<XK> Wlu.nrim e lein * rag e ^. t o i J O inuisody , uciwue t i_, t is » O.WO.A S r m 

# ARB' s Prototyp

e ULE V 199 0 Buic k

LeSabr e - 3. 8 Lite r V 6 Equippe d wit h smal l volum e EH C + Ligh t Of f Catalys t Ahea d of OE M Catalys t Baselin e H C Emissions : 0.03 5 g/m i NMH C

Oxyge n Senso r Measurements

Normall y Performin g Catalys t (H C Emission s 0.03 5 g/mi )

Front senso r

o 0 0 0 0 O

O 0 0 

## 3

• t i n

0 0 T ^D 0 0 •< r r 0 0 ^ r 0 0 0 0 •^ r o\ 0 0 ^ r Tim e (sees )P.2 9

twin , mie n Lywu s ^ainuilliaMI I rve»vulie » OVdl u ra* . t o IOJ3J3<OCKK f VOICe . \p

I0J3J9-0O M io : MIKG i em s KageiBorj s inursaay,ucioos r u,iss s o:uo:uor M

1 T 0 ) O ) 

### | 0. 8 + Simulate d Deteriorate d Catalys t (H C emission s 0.06 0 g/mi )

Front senso r

— Rea r senso r

O ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0

<3- 0 0 

# s

•<f r m 0 0 -< * v o 0 0 T T r - 0 0 •< t 0 0 0 0 T T ON 0 0 T f Tim e (sees)


# Misfir e Detectio n Ful l rang e misfir

e detectio n phase-in : -1997-50 % -1998-75 % -1999-90 % -2000-100 % 

### Manufacturer s appea r capabl e o f meetin g requirement s wit h existin g crankshaf t spee d technolog y o r b

y phasing-i n hig h dat a rat e technolog y Alternat e technologie s als o sho wpromise fo r mor e difficul t engines Pressur e Sensors Torque Sensorsrrom : Alie n Lyon s uaworm a Ai r Resource s Boar d rax : idiojo/o-ow a voice : (oio > o r o-ot^wio;wui\ e tern s roy o MUI« M 

# ) Detecti © ° Th e OB D I I regulatio n permit s acceptanc e o f strategie s wit h mino rdetectio n limitation s Sectio n (b)(3.3.3) :

.. . [W]it h Executiv e Office rapproval , th e manufacture rma

ydisabl e misfir e monitorin g whe n misfir e canno t b e distinguishe d fro m othe reffect s (e.g. , roug h roads , transmissio n shifts , etc. ) whe n usin g th e bes t availabl e monitorin g technology. "



# i Dete c Lea d
° Misfir e detectio n regardles s o f operatin g condition s wa s par

t of OB D I I regulatio n a s adopte d i n 198 9 ° Th e AR B ha s twic e modifie d requirement s t o facilitat e complianc e ° "Safetyvalve " i n plac e fo rnea rter m feasibilit y issue s

•_H__ H

____ _P.3 1

nuiii.Miie n Lyon s ^auiorni a Mi rresource s ooar o rax : (Big) 0/0.009: * voice : i,eiejo/o.oa M io:MiK e tern s KageJUori d I nursoay , uctooe r "U , u«* o o:uo:^jr M



# Evaporativ

e Syste m Lea k Detectio n Curren t Requirement : Detectio n of 0.04 0 inc h leaks Future Requirement : Detectio n o f 0.02 0 inc h leaks Phas e I n -2000-50 % -2001-75 % -2002-100 %


# Eva p Lea k

Detectio n Example s o f Curren t Vehicle s Meetin g 0.04 0 Inc h Lea k Detectio n Requirements : Nissa n Maxim a Mazd a Proteg e G M S/ T Truc k Mercede s S42 0P.3 2

_»• * *

« • IIO^M I r\c»wwi-c » DWCU Wro* . \oioi »'»-w9 9 vune . 1010/OJOOO^ > 1 w , miit e leill b rdyeo i w i o o muikuoy , i_>ciwue t IA , 199 0 o.wo.oorw i 

# Evaporativ

e Syste m Lea k Detectio n •AR B dat a indicate 0.02 0 inc h leak s ca n b e detecte d wit h presen t vacuum-base d technolog y
•Pressure-base d technologies appea r eve n mor

e capabl e

For dF15 0 - Phas e I

I - 60 % Fill - Fuel Tem

p 7 1 -8 8 F

o 

## a c 3 > N o Lea k 0.02 0 in Lea k 0.04 0 i n Lea k 3 0 - 4 0 5 0 Tim e (s )P.3 3

nom.Miie n Lyon s caaiiorni a Ai r resource s eoar o rax : ^010/0/0-009 9 voice ; 1,010)0/0-00* ) 10 : Min e tern s rag e o z oio o inursoay , ucioue i »_. , 199 9 o.w.jvr w 

# Lead 0 

### Manufacturers hav e 5 years leadtim e t o improv e vacuu m base d system s o r phase-i n pressure base d monitorin g strategies , o ra n alternat e technolog y
° Manufacturer

s have alread yconfirme d tha t 0.02 0 inc h detectio n requiremen t i s feasibl e wit h pressur e base d strateg y

Waive rIssue s Descriptio n o f LE V Progra m Evaluatio n o f Issue s

- Protectivenes s

- Compellin g Nee d

- Feasibility SymminfijUir y

______ _P.3 4

riwiii.Miinii-.ywu k

^amuiniaMi i r\e»uuite » ©w_j u ra* . \p.of O f 0-009 9 voice , ^

o 10 / 3/3«o< M tw.min e iein » rdys^wi* * i uut_way , w m


## Summar y Californi a OB D I I regulatio n satisfie s waive r requirement s

- Protectivenes s - clearl

y establishe d

- Compelling need- unquestionabl e

- Technologica

l Feasibilit y - demonstratedfeasible withi n leadtim e given . Feasibilit

y base don manufacturer s curren t systems , andtestin g o

f prototyp e vehicle s 

### AR B remain s committe d t o workin g wit h industr ya s OB D I I implementatio n continue s (199 6 revie walread yplanned )



## Nee d fo r Promp

t Actio n b y EP A OB D I I system s are alread y i n productio n