State of California
AIR RESOURCES BOARD



### STAFF REPORT: INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR
RULEMAKING

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS TO NEW PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLE
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION STANDARDS FOR MODEL YEARS
2012-2016 TO PERMIT COMPLIANCE BASED ON FEDERAL
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION STANDARDS

Date of Release: January 7, 2010 Scheduled for Consideration: February 25, 2010

This report has been reviewed by the staff of the C alifornia Air Resources Board and approved for publication. Approval does not signif y that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Air Resources Board, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.2 

### State of California
AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Rulemaking

PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
NEW PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSION STANDARDS FOR MODEL YEARS 2012-2016 TO PER MIT
COMPLIANCE BASED ON FEDERAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION
STANDARDS

Date of Release: January 7, 2010 Scheduled for Consideration: February 25, 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND..................... .............................................. 2 II. DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC PROBLEM, ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCUMSTANCE PROPOSAL IS INTENDED TO ADDRESS; PROPO SED
SOLUTIONS AND RATIONALE FOR EACH REGULATORY PROVISI ON..... 3
III. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION................. ........................................... 4 IV. AIR QUALITY, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND ECONOMIC IMPACT S ................... 7
A. Air Quality

................................................... ................................................... .... 7
B. Economic Impact

................................................... .......................................... 9
C. Alternatives

................................................... ................................................... 10
V. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ...........................

................................................... .... 11
VI. LIST OF APPENDICES .............................

................................................... .............. 11
VII. REFERENCES....................................

................................................... ....................... 12

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Climate change is critically important to Californi a. If left unchecked, its far-reaching consequences will dramatically affect many aspects of our lives including public health, the economy, and the environment. In 2002, in response to the threat of global warming, California adopted AB 1493 (Pavley (Chap. 200, Stats.2002)), which directed the Air Resources Board (ARB) to develop r egulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the new passenger veh icle fleet (passenger vehicles are responsible for approximately 30 perce nt of the total greenhouse gas emissions in California).3

In September 2004, the ARB adopted regulations (kno wn as the “Pavley regulations”) requiring significant reductions in g reenhouse gas emissions from passenger cars and light-duty trucks (i.e., vehicle s less than 8,500 lbs. gross vehicle weight) and sport utility vehicles (i.e., medium-du ty passenger vehicles). These requirements went into effect with the 2009 model y ear, and become increasingly stringent through 2016, at which time emissions fro m the new vehicle fleet will be reduced by 30 percent..

The Pavley regulations reduce greenhouse gas emissi ons from new passenger vehicles by requiring that each year between 2009 a nd 2016, manufacturers meet separate, increasingly stringent fleet average gree nhouse gas levels based on the size of the vehicles – a numerically lower level fo r passenger cars and the smallest of the light-duty trucks (PC + LDT1), and a higher level for larger light-duty trucks and medium-duty passenger vehicles (LDT2 + MDPV). The greenhouse gas emissions included within the scope of the Pavley r egulations include carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), and nitrous oxide (N 2 O). In addition, a manufacturer may earn credits toward complying with the requirements by equipping vehicles with an advanced “low-leak” air conditioning system or one that uses a refrigerant with a lower global-warming potential than HFC-134a, which is used today.

To demonstrate compliance with the fleet average gr eenhouse gas requirements, a manufacturer must first group the vehicles in its f leet based on similarities, such as engine, transmission type, or weight, that impact g reenhouse gas emissions. A manufacturer must then conduct testing to determine the greenhouse gas emissions from each group of vehicles. Using these data, and applying any emission credits that may be earned for vehicles equipped with advan ced air conditioning systems, the average grams per mile of “CO 2 –equivalent” emissions is calculated for each vehicle group. A manufacturer must then calculate its overall fleet average greenhouse gas level by calculating the sales–weigh ted average CO 2 –equivalent
emissions from its PC + LDT1 fleet and from its LDT 2 + MDPV fleet. Manufacturers are required to submit emission testing data and sa les data in sufficient detail to allow staff to verify a manufacturer’s fleet averag e greenhouse gas levels for each model year.

II. DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC PROBLEM, ADMINISTRATIVE C IRCUMSTANCE PROPOSAL IS INTENDED TO ADDRESS; PROPOSED SOLUTIONS AND
RATIONALE FOR EACH REGULATORY PROVISION

Since Board approval in 2004, motor vehicle manufac turers and their trade associations have challenged the Pavley regulations in numerous federal and state court proceedings and have opposed California’s req uest to U.S. EPA (or EPA) for a required waiver of preemption under the federal Cle an Air Act to allow California to enforce its adopted standards.

On May 19, 2009, challenging parties, automakers, C alifornia, and the federal government committed to a series of actions that wo uld resolve these current and potential future disputes over the standards throug h model year 2016. In summary, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U . S. Department of4

Transportation committed to adopt a federal program to reduce greenhouse gases and improve fuel economy, respectively, from passen ger vehicles, to achieve equivalent or greater greenhouse gas benefits as th e Pavley regulations for the 2012–2016 model years. (The Notice of Proposed Rul emaking (NPRM) on the national program was issued on September 28, 2009. 74 Fed.Reg. 49454 (September 28, 2009).) Manufacturers committed to u ltimately drop current, and forego similar future legal challenges for the 2009 through 2016 model years, including challenging a waiver subsequently granted by EPA on June 30, 2009. 74 Fed.Reg. 32744 (July 8, 2009). For its part, Cali fornia committed to: (1) revise its
standards to allow manufacturers to demonstrate com pliance with the fleet average greenhouse gas emission standard by “pooling” Calif ornia and Section 177 State vehicle sales; (2) revise its regulations for 2012 through 2016 model year vehicles such that compliance with equivalent EPA-adopted gr eenhouse gas standards would serve as compliance with California’s standar ds; and (3) revise its standards as necessary to allow manufacturers to use emission data from the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program to de monstrate compliance with the Pavley regulations. Regulatory changes that im plement the first and third commitments made by California were approved by the Board at a public hearing on September 24, 2009. The current proposed amendment s to California’s passenger motor vehicle regulations, which are discussed in g reater detail below, address the second commitment made by California.

III. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTION

California committed to accept national program com pliance for model years 2012 through 2016 with the understanding that it would p rovide equivalent or better overall greenhouse gas reductions nationwide than Californi a’s program (which has been adopted by 13 other states and the District of Colu mbia) standing alone. Consistent with this understanding, ARB submitted comments to EPA on the NPRM that express concerns that the proposed National Program might not meet these expectations. Specifically, two issues need to be addressed by U.S. EPA in the Final Rule to ensure California’s continued support for the National Program. These concerns are discussed in greater detail below. It should also be noted that adoption of this proposal does not eliminate the re porting requirements for California that have already been adopted by the Board prior t o this hearing. Specifically, a manufacturer will still be required to submit emiss ion testing data and sales data for
California each of the Section 177 states in suffic ient detail to allow staff to verify the manufacturer’s average greenhouse gas levels for ea ch model year.

In this rulemaking, staff is proposing adoption of the proposed national passenger motor vehicle greenhouse gas regulations for the 20 12 through 2016 model years, as an alternative compliance option to the Pavley r egulations, on the assumption
that U.S. EPA will address ARB’s concerns in the Fi nal Rule for the National Program, due to be released in March, 2010. Upon r elease of the Final Rule, Board staff will issue 15-day changes, which will finaliz e California’s adoption of this rule. If
U.S. EPA does not address ARB’s concerns in their F inal Rule, staff will return to the Board to ask direction as to how to proceed.5

Issues of Concern with the Proposed National Greenh ouse Gas Program

U.S. EPA Must Maintain the Stringency of the Greenh ouse Gas Standards Proposed in the NPRM in the Final Rule

As previously mentioned, back in May, when Californ ia made a commitment to allow manufacturers to demonstrate compliance wi th the Pavley regulations for the 2012 through 2016 model years b y demonstrating compliance with a national greenhouse gas program, it was with the full expectation that the emission benefits of our progr am would be maintained. This was part of the commitment made by EPA to Cali fornia, otherwise, we would not have agreed to accept the National Progra m. The greenhouse gas emission standards currently contained in the NPRM are consistent with our understanding. Thus it is critical to the agreemen t that EPA upholds its commitment to California and does not weaken the pr oposed standards and the program’s reduction in GHG emissions in the Fin al Rule.

National Advanced Technology Vehicle Credit Provisi ons for Electric Vehicles, Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles, and Fue l Cell Vehicles

EPA believes that electric vehicles (EVs), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), and fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) have the pot ential to reduce greenhouse gases more significantly than any commer cially-available technologies, and ARB fully agrees with this. EPA is, therefore, proposing that additional credits be given to these advanced technologies in the 2012 through 2016 model years, in order to encourage the ir development.

These advanced technology credits would take the fo rm of multipliers in the range of 1.2 to 2.0, allowing an EV, PHEV, or FCV t o count as more than one vehicle during the calculation of a manufacturer’s fleet average CO 2 level to determine compliance with the applicable footprint- based standard. These multipliers would not be applied when calculating t he actual footprint-based
CO 2 standard to which a manufacturer must comply. (Fo otprint is determined by multiplying the vehicle’s wheelbase by the vehic le’s average track width. The greenhouse gas standards being proposed by EPA are expressed as mathematical functions that depend on vehicle footp rint.)

In addition, EPA is proposing to assign a value of zero grams per mile of CO 2 for EVs and for the electric portion of PHEV operat ion, when including these vehicles in a manufacturer’s average. EPA acknowl edges that there are upstream CO 2 emissions from electricity generation, which are p roduced during EV and PHEV charging. Similarly there are u pstream emissions from hydrogen production for FCVs. However, EPA feels t hat the significant greenhouse gas emission reductions that may be achi eved from this technology outweighs the dis-benefits of ignoring t hese emissions within this
timeframe.

Staff agrees with EPA’s goal of encouraging the ear ly development and production of advanced technology vehicles. Howeve r, staff believes that the6

approach proposed by EPA could allow manufacturers to earn unreasonably high numbers of credits, thereby potentially reduci ng the overall GHG reductions achieved by the national program and del aying the implementation of improved greenhouse gas technologies on conventi onal vehicles.

Consequently, staff believes that EPA’s Final Rule must strike a better balance between advanced vehicle development and pr otecting greenhouse gas reductions by assigning average lifecycle emiss ions to these vehicles, and restricting credits to EVs and FCVs only.

Other Issues

Other issues of concern to ARB include our belief t hat it is important that EPA’s Final Rule include a backstop measure to guar antee that emission reductions are achieved, regardless of any unforese en changes in the fleet mix. Also, ARB does not support the provisions for allowing manufacturers to earn early credits prior to implementation of the N ational Program that are currently proposed in the NPRM unless such credits are accrued by exceeding California’s requirements in California a nd the Section 177 states. Restricting a manufacturer’s ability to earn early credits in this way will assure that credits earned in the early years do not provi de a windfall for vehicle
manufacturers and that the emission reductions envi sioned for the National Program are realized. We expect that EPA will care fully consider California’s concerns when they finalize their greenhouse gas ru lemaking.

Offsetting Greenhouse Gas Debits from the Californi a Program

Staff does not anticipate that any manufacturer wil l accumulate compliance debits from California’s greenhouse gas regulations in the 2009 and 2010 model years, and for most manufacturers, none will be incurred in th e 2011 model year either. However, in the unlikely event that debits are incu rred they must be equalized within the five model years provided in the regulation, at which time we expect all or most manufacturers to participating in the federal progr am with its own scheme for the generation of credits and debits. In order to ensu re that debits incurred in the 2009 through 2011 model years are equalized, staff is pr oposing that a manufacturer be required to either carry a zero greenhouse gas debi t balance at the end of the 2011 model year or submit a plan for offsetting any gree nhouse debits incurred in California, the Section 177 states, and the Distric t of Columbia using credits earned under the National greenhouse gas program before it may opt into the federal program. Upon approval of the plan by the Executiv e Officer, the manufacturer will be allowed to opt into the National greenhouse gas program.7 IV. AIR QUALITY, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND ECONOMIC IMPACT S

A. Air Quality

While the proposed national passenger motor vehicle greenhouse gas standards are of equal stringency to the Pavley regulations in th e 2016 model year, they are less stringent than the Pavley standards in the 2011 thr ough 2015 model years. Consequently, allowing manufacturers to comply with the Pavley regulations in the 2012 through 2015 model years by demonstrating comp liance with the national regulations in these model years will result in sli ghtly less reduction in greenhouse gas reductions within California and the individual states that have adopted California’s program. However, staff believes that nationwide, greenhouse gas emission reductions from the proposed national GHG program – assuming California’s comments on the proposed rulemaking ar e affirmatively addressed – will be greater than if the Pavley program were implemen ted without the national GHG program. This occurs because although the proposed national standards are less stringent than California’s in model years 2012 thr ough 2015, the national standards apply to more than twice as many vehicles than are subject to the Pavley regulations.

Staff calculated the comparative GHG benefits of th e Pavley rules and the federal program in calendar years 2016 and 2020 relative to a baseline year of 2002. ARB’s approach was to employ GHG emissions rates th at are the basis of California’s Pavley regulation and the proposed fed eral program. For the federal program, staff used the values from table 1.D.2-5, “Projected Fleet-wide Emission Levels Under the Proposed Footprint-Based Standards (g/mi),” in the NPRM. 74 FR at 49470 (September 28, 2009). This table lists th e projected national fleet emission levels taking into account the impact of credits av ailable under the national program for flex-fuel vehicles and the temporary lead time allowance standards. The
estimated federal GHG emission rates could then be compared to those established by California’s Pavley rules for new vehicles sold between 2012 and 2016. The effectiveness of the Pavley and the federal program was determined by calculating the percent reduction in GHGs achieved for each new model year relative to the
2002 baseline.

ARB staff then calculated the tons of greenhouse ga ses reduced in California under the proposed federal program compared to those that occur under the Pavley rules by applying the new vehicle model year-specific GHG reductions to CO 2 tons per day emission estimates output from the EMFAC on-roa d emissions inventory model. The EMFAC model reflects the current and projected vehicle fleet in California, based on data from the Department of Motor Vehicles , the Smog Check inspection and maintenance program, and local and regional tra nsportation planning agencies.
The emission rates in the EMFAC model are derived f rom testing of in-use vehicles. Documentation and downloadable copies of the EMFAC model are available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/latest_version.ht m

.

To develop estimates of GHG reductions for the othe r 49 states, staff scaled California ton reductions from EMFAC using state-sp ecific motor vehicle gasoline consumption data as a surrogate. For the federal f leet mix, staff used the fleet mix8

shown for model years 2012-2016 in the spreadsheet EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0472- 0085 from the Public Docket for the national progra m. Table 1 compares the annual benefits of the Pavley program in California and Ca lifornia and the 177 states with the proposed national GHG program in these states f or model years 2016 and 2020.

Table 2 compares the annual benefits of the Pavley program in California, California and the 177 states, and national fuel economy requi rements for 2012 through 2016 in the rest of the states with the proposed nationa l GHG program applied nationwide for model years 2016 and 2020. The national fuel e conomy requirements were derived from projecting a linear increase in fuel e conomy from 2011 to 2020 in order to meet the 35 miles per gallon requirement of H.R. 6, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.

Table 3 compares the cumulative benefits of the Pav ley program in California and California and the 177 states with the proposed nat ional GHG program in these states for model years 2016 and 2020.

Table 4 compares the cumulative benefits of the Pav ley program in California, California and the 177 states, and national fuel ec onomy requirements for 2012 through 2016 in the rest of the states with the pro posed national GHG program applied nationwide for model years 2016 and 2020. The national fuel economy requirements were derived from projecting a linear increase in fuel economy from 2011 to 2020 in order to meet the 35 miles per gall on requirement of H.R. 6, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.

As expected, due to the slightly relaxed federal st andards for model years 2012- 2015, the benefits of the proposed national program are slightly lower in California and the other states that have adopted the Pavley p rogram. However, as shown in Tables 2 and 4, when the proposed national GHG stan dards are applied nationwide, greater reductions are achieved.

Table 1 – Annual Greenhouse Gases Reduced (MMT a )

California and 177 States

Region Year Scenario 1
CA + 13 177 States Pavley Standard Scenario 2

Proposed National GHG
Standard

2016 15 12 California 2020 26 23

2016 45 36 California and 13
177 States b 2020 79 68

a Million Metric Tons

b Includes states that have adopted California’s sta ndards (Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Or egon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia).9 Table 2 – Annual Greenhouse Gases Reduced (MMT a )

Nationwide

Region Year Scenario 1 CA + 13 177 States:Pavley
Standard
Other States: National Fuel Economy Program Scenario 2 Proposed National GHG
Standard

2016 81 103 Nationwide 2020 155 197

a Million Metric Tons

Table 3 – Cumulative Greenhouse Gases Reduced (MMT a )

California and 177 States

Region Year Scenario 1
CA + 13 177 States: Pavley Standard Scenario 2

Proposed National GHG
Standard

2016 44 33 California 2020 132 109

2016 133 99 California and 13
177 States b 2020 401 325

a Million Metric Tons

b Includes states that have adopted California’s sta ndards (Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Or egon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia).

Table 4 – Cumulative Greenhouse Gases Reduced (MMT a )
Nationwide

Region Year Scenario 1 CA + 13 177 States:Pavley
Standard
Other States: National Fuel Economy Program Scenario 2 Proposed National GHG
Standard

2016 241 286 Nationwide 2020 793 941

a Million Metric Tons

B. Economic Impact

There are no additional costs due to this amendment. The propos ed amendments will provide the approximately thirty vehicle manuf acturers subject to the Pavley regulations with an optional method for complying w ith them. Staff expects that the proposed amendments could reduce the cost of compli ance for vehicle
manufacturers that choose to meet the alternative r equirements. A manufacturer may also choose to comply with the regulations as t hey currently are written, in which case there would still be no economic impact from these amendments on that
manufacturer.10

There will be no fiscal impacts to the State from t he proposed amendments, either in terms of tax revenue or personnel requirements. Th ese amendments are not expected to change vehicle prices in a way that wou ld alter vehicle purchase decisions. The inclusion of alternative compliance options does not substantially
increase the volume of data to review or the enforc ement burden to the ARB that would justify hiring additional staff.

C. Alternatives



### 1. Evaluation of alternatives considered and reasons f or rejecting them

Staff considered the following regulatory alternati ve to the proposed amendments.

Do not amend current Pavley regulations. This alternative would require vehicle manufacturers to produce lower emitting vehicles fo r California and its partner states, and could result in different, higher emitt ing vehicles being sold in the remaining states, depending on if or how the final EPA standards are adopted.

This alternative was rejected because California co mmitted to making the proposed amendments as part of the commitments made by Calif ornia, the federal government, and other parties on May 19, 2009, as d iscussed in Section II. These
commitments were based on the belief that the natio nal program would result in greater nationwide GHG emission reductions, and pos sibly lower compliance costs to vehicle manufacturers due to a single nationwide regulation.



### 2. Description of reasonable alternatives considered t hat would lessen impact on small business

No alternatives were considered to lessen the impac t on small business, because small businesses will not be impacted by these prop osed amendments.



### 3. Evidence relied upon to support initial determinati on in the notice that the regulation will not have a signific ant adverse economic impact on business

The proposed amendments will not significantly affe ct businesses, since vehicle purchase price and model availability will not be a dversely impacted. Vehicle manufacturers will not be required to expend any mo ney to comply with the new requirements. Rather, this proposal could save the m money.



### 4. Justification for adoption of regulations different from federal regulations contained in the Code of Federal Regula tions

The proposed amendments do not adopt regulations th at are substantively different than federal regulations. Climate change threatens California’s public health , water resources, agricultural industry, ecology, and econ omy. Due to these and other threats, AB 1493 (Chapter 200, Statutes of 2002 (Pa vley)) specifically directed the Air Resources Board to adopt regulations to control greenhouse gas emissions from11

motor vehicles. At that time, there were no federa l regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from passenger vehicles. In September, 2004, the ARB approved the nation’s first passenger vehicle green house gas regulations (Pavley regulations). While as discussed above EPA has pro posed a National greenhouse gas program there currently is no federal GHG emiss ion standard for motor vehicles.

These proposed amendments do not replace California ’s own passenger motor vehicle greenhouse gas regulations. (Historically, California has maintained a separate and distinct program for controlling emiss ions from motor vehicles, which is consistent with the intent of Congress in their ado ption of the Clean Air Act.) Rather, these proposed amendments will allow a manufacturer to demonstrate compliance with our greenhouse gas regulations in the 2012 thr ough 2016 model years by demonstrating compliance with the national passenge r motor vehicle greenhouse gas regulations. (The final rule for the national program is expected to be released in March, 2010.) For any manufacturer that elects to comply with the national program within this timeframe, there are no substan tive differences between the California requirements and the National Program. For any manufacturer that elects to comply with the original Pavley regulations with in this timeframe, the proposed
amendments will have no effect.

V. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

"Environmental Justice" is defined as the fair trea tment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the developme nt, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies (Government Code §65040.12(c).

Staff does not believe that this proposal will have any adverse environmental justice impacts because the stringency of California’s pass enger vehicle greenhouse gas requirements is not affected by the proposed change s to the regulations. Furthermore, since the criteria pollutant regulatio ns must still be met on an individual state-by-state basis, there will be no increase in criteria pollutants in California due to mix shifting of vehicles between California and other states.

VI. LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: Proposed Regulation Order

Appendix B: Proposed Amendments to the California Exhaust Emis sion Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model P assenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles12 VII. REFERENCES

1. Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Letter fro m The Honorable David McCurdy, President and Chief Executive Officer, to The Honorable Ray LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Tran sportation and The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United St ates Environmental Protection Agency, May 18, 2009

2. American Honda Motor Company, Inc., Letter from John Mendel, Executive Vice President, Automobile Sales, American Honda Mo tor Company, Inc., to The Honorable Ray LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportation and The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, A dministrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, May 17, 200 9

3. Behrentz, E., Ling, R., Rieger, P., and Winer, A .M. Measurements of nitrous oxide emissions from light-duty motor vehicles: a p ilot study. Submitted to Journal of Atmospheric Environment, April 2004

4. BMW, Letter from Dr.-Ing. Norbert Reithofer, Cha irman of the Board of Management, BMW, to The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency and The Hono rable Ray LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportati on, May 18, 2009

5. California Air Resources Board, Letter from Mary D. Nichols, Chairman, to The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, Unite d States Environmental Protection Agency and The Honorable Ray LaHood, Sec retary, United States Department of Transportation, May 18, 2009

6. California Air Resources Board (CARB), Letter fr om Mary D. Nichols, Chairman, to a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov , CARB’s comments on the “Proposed Rulemaking to Establish Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhou se Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standa rds; 74 Fed. Reg. 49454 (September 28, 2009); EPA Docket ID No. EPA-H Q-OAR-2009-0472,” November 25, 2009

7. Chrysler LLC, Letter from Robert L. Nardelli, Ch airman and Chief Executive Officer, Chrysler LLC to The Honorable Ray LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportation and The Honorab le Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United States Environmental Protecti on Agency, May 17, 2009

8. Daimler AG, Letter from Dr. Dieter Zetsche, Chai rman of the Board of Management of Daimler AG and Head of Mercedes-Benz Cars, and Dr. Thomas Weber, Member of the Board of Management, Gr oup Research & Mercedes-Benz Cars Development, to The Honorable Ra y LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportati on and The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United States Envir onmental Protection Agency, May 18, 200913

9. EMFAC, 2007. Version 2.3, http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/latest_version.ht m

.

10. Federal Register , Volume 74, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 8, 2009 / No tice, Environmental Protection Agency, “California State Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Standards; Notice of Decision Granting a Wa iver of Clean Air Act Preemption for California’s 2009 and Subsequent Mod el Year Greenhouse
Gas Emission Standards for New Motor Vehicles.”

11. Federal Register , Volume 74, No. 186 / Monday, September 28, 2009 / Proposed Rules, Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Transportation, “Proposed Rulemaking to Establish L ight-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Ave rage Fuel Economy
Standards.”

12. Ford Motor Company, Letter from Alan R. Mulally , President and Chief Executive Officer, Ford Motor Company, to The Honor able Ray LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportati on and The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United States Envir onmental Protection Agency, May 17, 2009

13. General Motors Corporation, Letter from Frederi ck A. Henderson, Chief Executive Officer, General Motors Corporation, to T he Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency and The Honorable Ray LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportation, May 17, 2009

14. Mazda North American Operations, Letter from Ji m O’Sullivan, President and Chief Executive Officer, Mazda North American Opera tions, to The Honorable Ray LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportation and The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United St ates Environmental Protection Agency, May 18, 2009

15. State of California, Air Resources Board, “Init ial Statement of Reasons for proposed Rulemaking, Public Hearing to Consider Ado ption of Regulations to
Control Greenhouse Gas Emissions Form Motor Vehicle s,” August 6, 2004

16. State of California, Air Resources Board, sprea dsheet “California_Benefits_SC1.xls”

17. State of California, Air Resources Board, sprea dsheet “California_Benefits_SC2.xls”

18. State of California, Air Resources Board, sprea dsheet
“CO 2 _Emission_Rate_SC1.xls”

19. State of California, Air Resources Board, sprea dsheet
“CO 2 _Emission_Rate_SC2.xls”14

20. State of California, Air Resources Board, sprea dsheet “EPA-HQ-OAR- (National Fleet).xls”

21. State of California, Air Resources Board, sprea dsheet “state-by-state Benefits_SC1(Annual_and_Cumulative).xls”

22. State of California, Air Resources Board, sprea dsheet “state-by-state Benefits_SC2(Annual_and_Cumulative).xls”

23. State of California, Letter from Governor Arnol d Schwarzenegger to The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United St ates Environmental Protection Agency and The Honorable Ray LaHood, Sec retary, United States Department of Transportation, May 18, 2009

24. State of California, Office of the Attorney Gen eral, Letter from Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, State of California, to The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency and The Honorable Ray LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportation, May 18, 2009

25. Toyota Motor Sales, Letter from James E. Lentz, President, Toyota Motor Sales, to The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administra tor, United States Environmental Protection Agency and The Honorable R ay LaHood, Secretary, United States Department of Transportati on, May 17, 2009

26. Volkswagen Group of America, Letter from Stefan Jacoby, President and Chief Executive Officer, Volkswagen Group of Americ a, to The Honorable Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, United States Envir onmental Protection Agency and The Honorable Ray LaHood, Secretary, Uni ted States Department of Transportation, May 17, 2009.1

Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice Ver sion Date of Hearing: February 25-26, 2010 

### Appendix A

PROPOSED REGULATION ORDER

Set forth below are the proposed amendments to titl e 13 of the California Code of Regulations. Amendments proposed and subject to co mment in this rulemaking are
shown in underline to indicate additions and strikeou t to indicate deletions. Because there are three other pending ARB rulemakings that also amend the incorporated test procedures, the amendments proposed herein identify these other pending amendments as follows: 1)amendments to these regula tions that were adopted by ARB on December 2, 2009 as part of the “Rulemaking to C onsider Plug-In Hybrid Electric
Vehicle Test Procedure Amendments and Aftermarket P arts Certification Requirements Adoption”, which have not yet been approved by the Office of Administrative Law, are
indicated in SMALL CAPITAL DOTTED UNDERLINE to indicate additions and SMALL CAPITAL

DOUBLE STRIKEOUT to indicate deletions. That rulemaking was sent t o California’s Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for approval on Decembe r 3, 2009. OAL has until January 15, 2010 to make a determination; 2) amendments to these regulations that were approved by the Board in September 2009 as part of the “Rulemaking to Consider Proposed Amendments to New Passenger Motor Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission
Standards” are shown in italics with bold underline, but not bold text to indicate
additions and italics double strikeout to indicate deletions; and 3) those approved by th e Board in November 2009 as part of the “Rulemaking t o Consider the Repeal of the 2007 Amendments to California’s Emission Warranty I nformation Reporting (EWIR) and Recall Regulations and Emission Test Procedures and Readopt the Prior EWIR Regulations and Emission Test Procedures” are shown in italics with dashed
underline and bold text to indicate additions and bold italics double strikeout to
indicate deletions.

Subsections for which no changes are proposed in th is rulemaking are indicated with [No change] or “* * * *”.

Amend the following Sections of Title 13, Californi a Code of Regulations, to read:

§ 1961. Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Proced ures - 2004 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty
Vehicles.

Introduction. [No change.]

Sections (a) through (c)

. [No change.]

(d) Test Procedures. The certification requirements and test procedur es for determining compliance with the emission standards in this section are set forth in the
“California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Pro cedures for 2001 and2

Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice Ver sion Date of Hearing: February 25-26, 2010 Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles,”
as amended M AY 2, 200 8 D ECEMBER 2, 2009 [insert date of the September 2009 greenhouse gas amendment for this rulemaking] [insert date of the November 2009 EWIR amendment for this rulemaking] [insert date of this rulemaking] , and the “California Non-Methane Organic Gas Test Procedures ,” as amended July 30, 2002, which are incorporated herein by reference. In the case of hybrid electric vehicles and on-board fuel-fired heaters, the certification requ irements and test procedures for determining compliance with the emission standards in this section are set forth in the
“California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Pro cedures for 2005 AND S UBSEQUENT THROUGH 2008 Model Zero-Emission Vehicles, and 2001 AND S UBSEQUENT THROUGH 2008 Model Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the Passenger C ar, Light-Duty Truck and Medium-Duty Vehicle Classes,” incorporated by reference in
section 1962 AND THE “C ALIFORNIA E XHAUST E MISSION S TANDARDS AND T EST P ROCEDURES FOR 2009 AND S UBSEQUENT M ODEL Z ERO -E MISSION V EHICLES AND H YBRID E LECTRIC V EHICLES

, IN THE P ASSENGER C AR

, L IGHT -D UTY T RUCK AND M EDIUM -D UTY V EHICLE C LASSES ,” INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE IN SECTION 1962.1

.

(e) Abbreviations. [No change.]

Note: Authority cited: Sections 39500, 39600, 396 01, 43013, 43018, 43101, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39003, 39667, 43000, 43009.5, 43013, 43018, 43100, 43101, 43101.5, 43102, 43104, 43105, 43106, 43204, and 43205, Health and Safety Code.

§ 1961.1. Greenhouse Gas Exhaust Emission Standard s and Test Procedures - 2009 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Dut y Trucks, and MediumDuty Vehicles.

(a) Greenhouse Gas Emission Requirements. The greenhouse gas emission levels from new 2009 and subsequent model year pass enger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles shall not exceed the following requirements. Light-duty trucks from 3751 lbs. LVW – 8500 lbs. GV W that are certified to the Option 1 LEV II NOx Standard in section 1961(a)(1) are exemp t from these greenhouse gas emission requirements, however, passenger cars, lig ht-duty trucks 0-3750 lbs. LVW, and medium-duty passenger vehicles are not eligible for this exemption.

(1) Fleet Average Greenhouse Gas Requirements for Passe nger Cars, LightDuty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Passenger Vehicles.

(A)(i) The fleet average greenhouse gas exhaust mass emis sion values from passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium- duty passenger vehicles that are produced and delivered for sale in California each model year by a large volume
manufacturer shall not exceed:3

Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice Ver sion Date of Hearing: February 25-26, 2010 FLEET AVERAGE GREENHOUSE GAS
EXHAUST MASS EMISSION REQUIREMENTS FORPASSENGER CAR, LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK, AND MEDIUMDUTY PASSENGER VEHICLE WEIGHT CLASSES 1
(4,000 mile Durability Vehicle Basis) Fleet Average Greenhouse Gas Emissions

(grams per mile CO 2 -equivalent) Model Year

All PCs;

LDTs 0-3750 lbs.
LVW LDTs

3751 lbs. LVW - 8500 lbs. GVW; MDPVs

2009 323 439

2010 301 420

2011 267 390

2012 233 361

2013 227 355

2014 222 350

2015 213 341

2016+ 205 332

1 Each manufacturer shall demonstrate compliance wit h these values in accordance with section 1961.1(a)(1)(B).

1. For each model year, a manufacturer must demonst rate compliance with the fleet average requirements in t his section 1961.1(a)(1)(A) based on one of two options applicable throughout the model year, either:

Option 1: the total number of passenger cars, light -duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles that are certified t o the California exhaust emission standards in this section 1961.1, and are produced and delivered for sale in California;

or Option 2: the total number of passenger cars, light -duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles that are certified t o the California exhaust emission standards in this section 1961.1, and are produced and delivered for sale in California, the District of Columbia, and all states that have adopted California’s greenhouse gas emission standards for that model year pursuant to Section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7507).

a. For the 2009 and 2010 model years, a manufacture r that selects compliance Option 2 must notify the Executive Offic er of that selection, in writing, within 30 days of the effective date of the amendments to this section (a)(1)(A)1 or must comply with Option 1.4

Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice Ver sion Date of Hearing: February 25-26, 2010

b. For the 2011 and later model years, a manufactu rer that selects compliance Option 2 must notify the Executive Offic er of that selection, in writing, prior to the start of the applicable model year or must c omply with Option 1.

c. When a manufacturer is demonstrating complianc e using Option 2 for a given model year, the term “in California” as used in subsections 1961.1(a)(1)(B)3. and 1961.1(b) means California, the District of Col umbia, and all states that have adopted California’s greenhouse gas emission standa rds for that model year pursuant to Section 177 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S .C. § 7507).

d. A manufacturer that selects compliance Option 2 must provide to the Executive Officer separate values for the numbe r of vehicles produced and
delivered for sale in the District of Columbia and for each individual state within the

average.

(A)(ii) For the 2012 through 2016 model years, a ma nufacturer may elect to demonstrate compliance with this section 1961.1 by demonstrating compliance with the National greenhouse gas program as follows:

a. A manufacturer that selects compliance with thi s option 1961.1(a)(1)(A)(ii) must notify the Executive Offic er of that selection, in writing, prior to the start of the applicable model year or must comp ly with 1961.1(a)(1)(A)(i).

b. The manufacturer must submit to ARB a copy of th e official report that it submitted to EPA as required under 40 CFR § 86-1865-12 for demonstrating compliance with the National greenhouse gas program and the official EPA determination of compliance. These must be submitt ed no later than May 1 of the calendar year following the close of the model year , for each model year that a manufacturer selects compliance with this option 19 61.1(a)(1)(A)(ii). and

c. If a manufacturer has outstanding greenhouse gas debits at the end of the 2011 model year, as calculated in accord ance with 1961.1(b), the
manufacturer must submit to the Executive Officer a plan for offsetting all outstanding greenhouse gas debits by using greenhouse gas credi ts earned under the National greenhouse gas program. Upon approval by the Execu tive Officer, the manufacturer may demonstrate compliance with this section 1961.1 by demonstrating compliance with the National greenhouse gas program.

Sections (a)(1)(B) through (d)

. [No change.]

(e) Definitions Specific to this Section . The following definitions apply to this
section 1961.1:

(1) “A/C Direct Emissions” means any refrigerant r eleased from a motor vehicle's air conditioning system. (2) “A/C Indirect Emissions” means any increase in motor vehicle exhaust
CO 2 emissions that can be attributed to the operation of the air conditioning system.5

Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice Ver sion Date of Hearing: February 25-26, 2010 (3) “GHG Vehicle Test Group” means vehicles that h ave an identical test group, vehicle make and model, transmission class a nd driveline, aspiration method (e.g., naturally aspirated, turbocharged), camshaft configuration, valvetrain configuration, and inertia weight class. (4) “Greenhouse Gas” means the following gases: ca rbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and hydrofluorocarbons. (5) “Grid-Connected Hybrid Electric Vehicle” means a hybrid electric vehicle that has the capacity for the battery to be recharg ed from an off-board source of electricity and has some all-electric range. (6)“GWP” means the 100-year global warming potentia l specified in IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 2000: E missions Scenarios. N. Nakicenovic et. al. editors, Special Report of Work ing Group III of the IPCC, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, ISBN 0-521-80493-0. (7) “National greenhouse gas program” means the na tional program that applies to new 2012 through 2016 model year passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and mediumduty passenger vehicles as promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on March XX, 2010 [Insert Reference in Federal Regi ster for Final GHG Rule], as incorporated in and amended by the "California Exha ust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles.” (8 7 ) “Normal Operation” of an air conditioning system means typical everyday use of the A/C system to cool a vehicle. “Normal O peration” does not include car accidents, dismantling of an air conditioning syste m, or any other non-typical events. (9 8 ) “Optional GHG Test Vehicle Configuration” means a ny GHG vehicle configuration that is selected for testing by the m anufacturer as allowed by section
G.2.3 of the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles,” other than the worst-case configuration. (10 9 ) “Renewable Energy Resource” means a facility that meets all of the
criteria set forth in Public Resources Code section 25741(a), except that the facility is not required to be located in California or near th e border of California. (11 0 ) “Variable Displacement Compressor” means a compr essor in which the mass flow rate of refrigerant is adjusted independ ently of compressor speed by the control system in response to cooling load demand. (12 1 ) “Variable Speed Compressor” means a compressor in which the mass flow rate of refrigerant can be adjusted by control of the compressor input shaft speed, independent of vehicle engine speed. For example, a variable speed compressor can have electric drive, hydraulic drive, or mechanical drive through a variable speed
transmission. (13 2 ) “Worst-Case” means the vehicle configuration with in each test group that is expected to have the highest CO 2 -equivalent value, as calculated in section 1961.1(a)(1)(B)1.

Sections (f) and (g). [No change.]6

Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice Ver sion Date of Hearing: February 25-26, 2010 Note: Authority cited: Sections 39500, 39600, 396 01, 43013, 43018, 43018.5, 43101, 43104 and 43105, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39003, 39667, 43000, 43009.5, 43013, 43018, 43018.5, 43100, 43101, 43101.5, 43102 , 43104, 43105, 43106, 43204, 43205, and 43211, Health and Safety Code.Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 1 

### Appendix B

California Environmental Protection Agency

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROC EDURES FOR 2001 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL PASSENGER CARS, LIGHT-DUTY TRUCKS, AND MEDIUM-DUTY VEHICLES

Adopted: August 5, 1999 Amended: December 27, 2000 Amended: July 30, 2002 Amended: September 5, 2003 (corrected February 20, 2004) Amended: May 28, 2004 Amended: August 4, 2005 Amended: June 22, 2006 Amended: October 17, 2007 Amended: May 2, 2008

A MENDED : D ECEMBER 2, 2009 Amended: [Insert Date of Sept 2009 GHG Amendments] Amended: [Insert Date of Nov 2009 Warranty Amendmen ts] Amended: [Insert Date of Feb 2010 GHG Amendments]

Note: The proposed amendments to this document are shown in single underline to indicate

additions and s trikeout to indicate deletions compared to the test procedu res as last amended May 2, 2008. Because there are three other pending ARB rulemakings that also amend the incorporated test procedures, the amendments propos ed herein identify these other pending amendments as follows: 1)amendments to these regula tions that were adopted by ARB on December 2, 2009 as part of the “Rulemaking to Cons ider Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Test

Procedure Amendments and Aftermarket Parts Certific ation Requirements Adoption”, which have not yet been approved by the Office of Adminis trative Law, are indicated in SMALL CAPITAL

DOTTED UNDERLINE to indicate additions and SMALL CAPITAL DOUBLE STRIKEOUT to indicate deletions. That rulemaking was sent to California’ s Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for approval on December 3, 2009. OAL has until Januar y 15, 2010 to make a determination; 2) amendments to these regulations that were approved by the Board in September 2009 as part of the “Rulemaking to Consider Proposed Amendments to New Passenger Motor VehicleDate of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 2 Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards” are shown in italics with bold underline, but not bold text

to indicate additions and italics double strikeout to indicate deletions; and 3) those approved by the Board in November 2009 as part of the “Rulemaki ng to Consider the Repeal of the 2007 Amendments to California’s Emission Warranty Inform ation Reporting (EWIR) and Recall Regulations and Emission Test Procedures and Readop t the Prior EWIR Regulations and

Emission Test Procedures” are shown in italics with dashed underline and bold text to indicate

additions and bold italics double strikeout to indicate deletions. Section numbering changes from these three other rulemakings are not indicate d in this document. [n/a] indicated provisions of the proposed federal rule (74 Fed.Reg. 49454 (Se ptember 28, 2009)) that do not apply in California and are not proposed for incorporation. [No change] indicates proposed federal provisions that are also proposed for incorporation herein without change. Existing intervening text that is not amended in this rulemaking is indi cated by “* * * *”.Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 3 Amend “CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TE ST PROCEDURES FOR 2001 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL PASSENGER CARS, LIGHT -DUTY TRUCKS AND MEDIUM-DUTY VEHICLES, “ as incorporated by refe rence in Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Section 1961(d) to read:

* * * *

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROC EDURES

FOR 2001 AND SUBSEQUENT MODEL PASSENGER CARS, LIGHT-DUTY TRUCKS AND MEDIUM-DUTY V EHICLES

The provisions of Subparts B, C, and S, Part 86, T itle 40, Code of Federal Regulations, as adopted or amended on May 4, 1999 or as last amende d on such other date set forth next to the 40 CFR Part 86 section title listed below, and to t he extent they pertain to exhaust emission standards and test procedures, are hereby adopted a s the “California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2001 and Subsequent Model P assenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles,” with the following exception s and additions.

PART I: GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR CERTIFICATION AND IN -USE

VERIFICATION OF EMISSIONS

A. General Applicability

1. §86.1801 Applicability.

* * * *

1.2 §86.1801-12. [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule]. Amend as follows:

1.2.1 Amend subparagraph (a) as follows: Except as otherwise indicated, the provisions of this subpart apply to new passenger c ars, light-duty trucks, and mediumduty vehicles, including multi-fueled, alternative fueled, hybrid electric, plug-in hybrid electric, and electric vehicles. In cases where a provision applies only to a certain vehicle group based on its model year, vehicle class, motor fuel, engine type, or other distinguishing characteristics, the limited applica bility is cited in the appropriate section of this subpart. 1.2.2 Subparagraph (b) Aftermarket conversions . [n/a] 1.2.3 Amend subparagraph (c) Optional Applicability as follows: (a) Amend subparagraph (c)(1) as follows: A manufac turer must certify any heavy-duty complete Otto-cycle vehicle of 14,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) or less in accordance with the medium-duty chassis-standards of Section E.1 of these test proc edures. A manufacturer must certify all heavy-duty diesel engines or vehicles o f 14,000 pounds GVWR or lessDate of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 4

to the medium-duty engine standards in title 13, CC R, section 1956.8(g) or (h). A manufacturer may request to certify heavy-duty comp lete diesel vehicles to the chassis-standards in Section E.1 of these test proc edures; heavy-duty engine or heavy-duty vehicle provisions of 40 CFR Part 86 sub part A do not apply to such a vehicle or engine. (b) Subparagraph (c)(2) [No change.] (c) Subparagraph (c)(3) [No change.] (d) Subparagraph (c)(4) [n/a; aftermarket conversi ons] (e) Subparagraph (c)(5) [n/a] 1.2.4 Amend subparagraph (d) as follows: Small vol ume manufacturers. Special certification procedures are available for any manufacturer whose projected or actual combined California sales of passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-duty vehicles, heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty engine s in its product line are fewer than 4,500 units based on the average number of vehicles sold for the three previous consecutive model years for which a manufacturer se eks certification. For manufacturers certifying for the first time in California, model- year production volume shall be based on projected California sales. The small-volume manuf acturer's light- and medium-duty vehicle and truck certification procedures are desc ribed in 40 CFR §86.1838, as modified in Section G.12 of these test procedures. 1.2.5 Subparagraph (e). [n/a; NLEVs.] 1.2.6 Subparagraph (f) [n/a; Tier 2 phase-in provis ions] 1.2.7 Subparagraph (g) [n/a; Tier 2 phase-in provis ions] 1.2.8 Subparagraph (h) [No change.] 1.2.9 Subparagraph (i) [No change, except that this subparagraph shall only apply to vehicles certifying to the National greenh ouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years, in accordance with section E of t hese test procedures.] 1.2.10 Subparagraph (j) [No change, except that thi s subparagraph shall only apply to vehicles certifying to the National greenh ouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years, in accordance with section E of t hese test procedures.]

* * * *

B. Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations

1. §86.1803 Definitions.

* * * *

1.2 §86.1803-01. [Insert Federal Register for the N ational Greenhouse Gas Final Rule]. [No change, except as otherwise noted below .] The version of §86.1803-01 as incorporated by this section B.1.2 shall only apply to vehicles certifying to the National greenhouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 mo del years, in accordance with section E of these test procedures.Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 5 2. California Definitions.

* * * *

“National greenhouse gas program” or “National greenhouse gas final rule” means the national program that applies to new 2012 throu gh 2016 model year passenger cars, lightduty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles ado pted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on March XX, 2010 [Insert Federal Register f or the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule], as incorporated in and amended by these test procedures.

* * * *

C. General Requirements for Certification

1. §86.1805 Useful Life.

* * * *

1.3 §86.1805-12. [Insert Federal Register for the N ational Greenhouse Gas Final Rule]. [No change, except that this section §86.1805-12 shall only apply to vehicles certifying to the National greenhouse gas program f or the 2012 through 2016 model years, in accordance with section E of these test p rocedures.]

2. §86.1806 On-Board Diagnostics.

2.1 §86.1806-01; §86.1806-05. Delete.

* * * *

5. §86.1809 Prohibition of Defeat Devices.

* * * *

5.2 §86-1809-10. [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule]. [No change except that requirements applica ble to the Air Conditioning Idle Test shall only apply to vehicles certifying to the Nati onal greenhouse gas program, and subparagraph (e) shall apply to vehicles subject to the California TLEV, LEV, ULEV and SULEV standards.]

D. §86.1810 General standards; increase in emissio ns; unsafe conditions; waivers

* * * *Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 6 3. §86.1810-09. February 26, 2007 [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . [No change, except that the amendments to §86.18 10-01 set forth in D.1 and D.2 shall also apply.]

E. California Exhaust Emission Standards.

Delete 40 CFR §§86.1811 through 86.1819, except tha t for model years 2012 through 2016, a manufacturer may demonstrate compliance wit h the requirements of sections E.2.5 and E.3.2 by demonstrating compliance with §86.1818.12 [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule]

.

* * * *

2. Emission Standards Phase-In Requirements for Man ufacturers

* * * *

2.5 Fleet Average Greenhouse Gas Requirements for P assenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Passenger Vehicles.

2.5.1(i) The fleet average greenhouse gas exhaust mass emiss ion values from passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium- duty passenger vehicles that are produced and delivered for sale in California each model year by a large volume

manufacturer shall not exceed:Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 7 FLEET AVERAGE GREENHOUSE GAS EXHAUST MASS EMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR PASSENGER CAR, LIGHT-DUTY TRUCK, AND MEDIUM-DUTY

PASSENGER VEHICLE WEIGHT CLASSES 1
(4,000 mile Durability Vehicle Basis) Fleet Average Greenhouse Gas Emissions (grams per mile CO 2 -equivalent) Model Year

All PCs;

LDTs 0-3750 lbs. LVW LDTs

3751 lbs. LVW - 8500 lbs.
GVW; MDPVs

2009 323 439

2010 301 420

2011 267 390

2012 233 361

2013 227 355

2014 222 350

2015 213 341

2016+ 205 332

1 Each manufacturer shall demonstrate compliance wit h these values in accordance with Section E.2.5.2.

2.5.1.1 For each model year, a manufacturer must de monstrate compliance with the fleet average requirements in t his section E.2.5.1 based on one of two options applicable throughout the model year , either: Option 1: the total number of passenger cars, light -duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles that are certified t o the California exhaust emission standards in section 1961.1, title 13, CCR , and are produced and delivered for sale in California; or Option 2: the total number of passenger cars, light -duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles that are certified t o the California exhaust emission standards in section 1961.1, title 13, CCR , and are produced and delivered for sale in California, the District of C olumbia, and all states that have adopted California’s greenhouse gas emission standa rds for that model year pursuant to Section 177 of the federal Clean Air Ac t (42 U.S.C. § 7507). 2.5.1.1.1 For the 2009 and 2010 model years, a manu facturer that selects compliance Option 2 must notify the Executi ve Officer of that selection in writing within 30 days of the effective date of the amendments to this section 2.5.1.1. or must comply with Option 1. 2.5.1.1.2 For the 2011 and later model years, a man ufacturer that selects compliance Option 2 must notify the Executi ve Officer of that selection in writing prior to the start of the applicable model year or must comply with Option 1.Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 8

2.5.1.1.3 When a manufacturer is demonstrating comp liance using Option 2 for a given model year, the term “in Calif ornia” as used in subsections E.2.5.2.3 and E.3.2 means California, the District of Columbia, and all states that have adopted California’s greenhouse gas emission s tandards for that model year pursuant to Section 177 of the federal Clean Air Ac t (42 U.S.C. § 7507). 2.5.1.1.4 A manufacturer that selects compliance Op tion 2 must provide to the Executive Officer separate values fo r the number of vehicles produced and delivered for sale in the District of Columbia and for each individual state within the average.

2.5.1(ii) For the 2012 through 2016 model years, a manufacturer may elect to demonstrate compliance with this section E.2.5 b y demonstrating compliance with the National greenhouse gas program as follows:

(a) A manufacturer that selects compliance with thi s option E.2.5.1(ii) must notify the Executive Officer of that selection, in writing, prior to the start of the applicable model year or must comply with E.2.5.1(i ). (b) The manufacturer must submit to ARB a copy of the official report that it submitted to EPA as required under 40 CFR §86-1865-12 for demonstrating compliance with the National greenhouse gas program and the of ficial EPA determination of compliance. These must be submitted no later than May 1 of the calendar year following the close of the model year, for each model year th at a manufacturer selects compliance with this option E.2.5.1(ii). and (c) If a manufacturer has outstanding greenhouse ga s debits at the end of the 2011 model year, as calculated in accordance with E .3.2, the manufacturer must submit to the Executive Officer a plan for offsetting all out standing greenhouse gas debits by using greenhouse gas credits earned under the National gr eenhouse gas program. Upon approval by the Executive Officer, the manufacturer may demonstrate compliance with this section E.2.5 by demonstrating compliance with the National greenhouse gas

program.

* * * *

F. Requirements and Procedures for Durability Demon stration

* * * *

4.2 §86.1823-08 January 17, 2006 [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . [No change, except that the amendments to §86.18 23-01 set forth in F.4.1 shall apply , and subparagraph (m) applies only to vehicles cer tifying to the National greenhouse gas program .]Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 9 * * * *

G. Procedures for Demonstration of Compliance with Emission Standards

1. §86.1827 Test Group Determination.

1.1 §86.1827-01. October 6, 2000 February 26, 2007 [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . [No change, except that subparagraphs (a)(5) and (f) shall only apply to vehicles certifying to the National greenhouse gas program .]

* * * *

3. §86.1829 Durability data and emission data testi ng requirements; waivers.

3.1 §86.1829-01. December 8, 2005 February 26, 2007 [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . Amend as follows: 3.1.1 Delete (b)(1)(ii) and replace with: For Otto -cycle vehicles or hybrid vehicles that use Otto-cycle engines, evidence shal l be supplied showing that the air/fuel metering system or secondary air injection system i s capable of providing sufficient oxygen to theoretically allow enough oxidation to a ttain the CO emission standards at barometric pressures equivalent to those expected a t altitudes ranging from sea level to an elevation of 6000 feet. For fuel injected vehicles or hybrid electric vehicles that use fuelinjected engines, compliance may be demonstrated up on a showing by the manufacturer that the fuel injection system distributes fuel bas ed on mass air flow, rather than volume flow, and is therefore self-compensating. All subm itted test proposals will be evaluated on their acceptability by the Executive Officer. A s an alternative to the demonstration described above, a manufacturer may demonstrate com pliance by testing California vehicle configurations as part of its federal high altitude certification requirements. Engine families that meet all the applicable Califo rnia low altitude emission standards

when tested at the EPA test elevation are deemed to be in compliance. The SFTP standards do not apply to testing at high altitude. 3.1.2 (b)(1)(iii)(E) [No change, except that refere nces to Tier 2 or interim nonTier 2 vehicles shall mean California LEVs, ULEVs o r SULEVs.] 3.1.3 Amend (b)(1)(iii)(G) as follows: For the 201 2 model year only, in lieu of testing a vehicle for N 2 O emissions, a manufacturer may provide a statement in its application for certification that such vehicles comply with the ap plicable standards. Such a statement must be based on previous emission tests, development tests , or other appropriate information and good engineering judgment. This subparagraph (b)(1)(iii )(G) only applies to vehicles certifying to the National greenhouse gas program.

3.1.4 3 Amend (b)(4)(i) as follows: All 2001 and subseque nt model-year emission-data vehicles shall be required to be tail -pipe tested at 4,000 miles or at the mileage at which the vehicle is stabilized as deter mined in §86.1827-01 and demonstrate compliance with the California Inspection and Maint enance (“I/M”) emission standardsDate of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 10 as specified in the “Mandatory Exhaust Emissions In spection Standards and Test Procedures,” title 16, California Code of Regulatio ns, Section 3340.42. A manufacturer shall have the option of using the I/M test procedu res in place at the time of certification or, if the I/M test procedures have been amended wi thin two years of the time of certification, a manufacturer may use the preceding procedures. Test vehicles shall undergo preconditioning procedures prior to the tai l-pipe test, which consist of idle conditions for a minimum period of ten minutes afte r the thermostat is open. Preconditioning and test procedures shall be conduc ted at an ambient temperature from

68 o to 86 o F. The manufacturer shall, in accordance with goo d engineering practices, attest that such test vehicles will meet the requir ements of this section when preconditioned and tested at ambient temperatures f rom 35 o to 68 o F.

3.1.5 4 Amend (b)(4)(ii) as follows: In lieu of testing v ehicles according to the provisions of §86.1829(b)(4)(i), a manufacturer may provide a statement in its application for certification that, based on the manufacturer's engineering evaluation of such I/M testing as the manufacturer deems appropriate, all light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks comply with the I/M emission standards.

3.1.6 5 Delete (b)(5). Idle CO Testing.

* * * *

H. Certification, Information and Reporting Require ments.

1. §86.1841 Compliance with emission standards for the purpose of certification

* * * *

1.2 For 2012 through 2016 model year vehicles certi fying to the National greenhouse gas program, §86.1841-01 [Insert Federal Register f or the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] shall apply. Changes specified under section H.1.1 shall also apply for this section H.1.2.

1.3 2 Scope of Certification . Certification, if granted, is effective only for the vehicle/test group described in the original manufa cturer's certification application. Modifications by a secondary manufacturer to vehicl es/engines shall be deemed not to increase

emissions above the standards under which those veh icles/engines were certified and to be within the original certification if such modifications do not: (1) increase vehicle weight more than 10 percent above the curb weight, increase frontal area more than 10 percent, or result in a combination increase of weight plus frontal area of more than 14 percent; or (2) include changes in axle ratio, tire size, or tire type resulting in changes in the drive train ratio of more than 5 percent; or (3) include any modification to the e mission control system. No originally certified vehicle/engine which is modified by a secondary man ufacturer in a manner described in items (1) through (3) of the preceding sentence may be sold t o an ultimate purchaser, offered or delivered for sale to an ultimate purchaser, or registered in California unless the modified vehicle/engine is certified by the state board in accordance with app licable test procedures to meet emission standards for the model year for which the vehicle/ engine was originally certified. For theDate of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 11 purposes of this subsection, “secondary manufacture r” means any person, other than the original manufacturer, who modifies a new motor vehicle prio r to sale to the ultimate purchaser.

1.4 3 SFTP. For vehicles certified to the SFTP standards in Sec tion E.1.2.2, full and intermediate useful life shall mean 4,000 miles.

1.5 4 Certification of a Federal Vehicle in California. Whenever a manufacturer federally-certifies a 2004 or subsequent model-yearpassenger car, light-duty truck or mediumduty vehicle model to the standards for a particula r emissions bin that are more stringent than the standards for an applicable California vehicle emis sions category, the equivalent California model may only be certified to (i) the California s tandards for a vehicle emissions category that are at least as stringent as the standards for the corresponding federal emissions bin, or (ii) the

exhaust emission standards to which the federal mod el is certified. However, where the federal exhaust emission standards for the particular emiss ions bin and the California standards for a vehicle emissions category are equally stringent, t he California model may only be certified to

either the California standards for that vehicle em issions category or more stringent California

standards. The federal emission bins are those con tained Tables S04-1 and S04-2 of 40 CFR section 86.1811-04(c) as adopted February 10, 2000. A California vehicle model is to be treated as equivalent to a federal vehicle model if all of the following characteristics are identical:

(a) Vehicle make and model; (b) Cylinder block configuration (e.g., L-6, V-8); (c) Displacement; (d) Combustion cycle; (e) Transmission class; (f) Aspiration method (e.g., naturally aspirated, t urbocharged); and (g) Fuel (e.g., gasoline, natural gas, methanol). The comparative stringency of the standards for the federal exhaust emissions bin and for the California vehicle emissions category shall be base d on a comparison of the sum of the 100,000, 120,000, or 150,000 mile standards for NMOG and NOx

.

1.5 4 .1 If a federally-certified vehicle model is certif ied in California in accordance with subparagraph 1.4, the model shall b e subject to the federal requirements for exhaust emissions, SFTP emissions, cold CO emis sions and highway NOx. The vehicle model shall be subject to all other Califor nia requirements including evaporative emissions, OBD II, greenhouse gas emissions, and em issions warranty, except that a 2004 or earlier model-year vehicle in the federal heavy light-duty truck or medium-duty passenger vehicle classes may at the manufacturer's option be subject to the federal requirements for evaporative emissions and OBD II.

1.5 4 .2 Prior to certification of a 2004 or subsequent m odel-year vehicle, a

manufacturer must submit information sufficient to enable the Executive Officer to determine whether there is a federally-certified ve hicle model for that model year that is equivalent to the California vehicle model based on the criteria listed in subparagraph 1.4.

1.5 4 .3 If the Executive Officer determines that there i s a federally-certified vehicle model for that model year that is equivalen t to the California vehicle model, the following information shall be submitted with the P art I or Part II Application for

Certification as set forth below:Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 12

(a) Part I Application for Certification: (i) Evid ence of federal certification including, but not limited to, federa l certification exhaust emission levels and compliance with federal SFTP, cold CO an d highway NOx emission levels; and (ii) evidence of compliance with Califo rnia evaporative emission requirements, California OBD II requirements, and C alifornia greenhouse gas requirements or, where permitted under Section 1.4. 1 for a 2004 or earlier modelyear vehicle, evidence of federal certification eva porative emission levels and compliance with federal OBD II requirements. (b) Part II Application for Certification: evidenc e of a warranty on emission-related parts in accordance with sections 2035 et seq., title 13 CCR as they apply to vehicles certified under the primary California standard.

1.5 4 .4 For purposes of meeting the California NMOG flee t average phase-in requirements or for determining vehicle equivalent credits, the applicable California NMOG value for passenger cars and light-duty trucks or vehicle equivalent credits for medium-duty vehicles shall be determined as follows :

(a) The sum of the federal full useful life (100,0 00, 120,000 or 150,000) NMOG and NOx value shall be compared with the next less stringent California full useful life NMOG plus NOx value to determine w hich emission category (e.g., LEV, ULEV or SULEV) is to be used for the fl eet average value or vehicle equivalent credit calculation. (b) For passenger cars and light-duty trucks, once the equivalent California emission category is determined (e.g., w hether the vehicle is considered a LEV, ULEV or SULEV), the applicable NMOG value to be used in the fleet average calculation is set forth in the table in se ction E.2.1.2 of these test procedures for passenger cars and light-duty trucks . For example, if the full useful life (120,000 miles) NMOG plus NOx standard to which the federal vehicle is certified is 0.110 grams per mile, that vehicle would be considered a LEV II ULEV for fleet average purposes because the combine d LEV full useful life NMOG plus NOx value is 0.125 and is the next less s tringent emission category. The applicable emission standard to be used in the fleet average calculation would therefore be 0.040 grams per mile.

1.5 4 .5 The vehicle shall be subject to the federal in-u se requirements and the emission standard applicable for in-use compliance purposes shall be the federal standard to which the vehicle was federally-certified.

1.5 .6 The tune up label shall meet the federal require ments applicable to such a

vehicle with an additional sentence which reads: “ This vehicle conforms to federal regulations and is certified for sale in California .” The value used in the smog index label shall be the California emission category to which the vehicle was deemed certified for fleet average NMOG purposes.

1.5 .7 The requirements in Section H.1.4 do not apply i n the case of a federallycertified vehicle model that is only marketed to fl eet operators for applications that are subject to clean fuel fleet requirements establishe d pursuant to section 246 of the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. sec. 7586). In addition, the Executive Officer shall excludeDate of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 13 from the requirements a federally-certified vehicle model where the manufacturer

demonstrates to the Executive Officer's reasonable satisfaction that the model will primarily be sold or leased to clean fuel fleet ope rators for such applications, and that

other sales or leases of the model will be incident al to marketing to those clean fuel fleet
operators.
1.5 4 .8 A manufacturer may certify a passenger car, ligh t-duty truck or mediumduty vehicle to federal exhaust emission standards pursuant to Section H.1.4 prior to the 2004 model year.

* * * *

4.5 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Requirements. (a) For the purpose of demonstrating compliance wit h greenhouse gas requirements, the manufacturer shall provide by May 1 of the calendar year following the close of the model year:

(i) A manufacturer that demonstrates compliance und er section E.2.5.2.1.1, Option A, must submit a comprehensive list of all emission test results, including the test vehicle description and identification number, CO 2 , CH 4 , and N

2 O emission data, the data and/or justifications use d to determine the “worst case” greenhouse gas test vehicle configurat ion, as required by G.2.3 4 .2, for each greenhouse gas vehicle test group. A manu facturer that demonstrates compliance under section E.2.5.2.1.1, Option B, mus t submit a comprehensive list of all emission test results used to calculate its Corporate Average Fuel Economy, including the test vehicle description and identifi cation number, for each subconfiguration and the number of vehicles produce d and delivered for sale under Option 1 or Option 2 in section E.2.5.1.1, as applicable, that are represented by the subconfiguration. A manufacture r must not submit any emission test results from vehicles tested, or calc ulated results, as part of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Program, unless thos e results have been judged acceptable by the U.S. Environmental Protect ion Agency, in accordance with §600.007-08. A manufacturer that submits data from the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Program must clearly indicate whether the data is derived from vehicle testing or whether it is calculated. A man ufacturer that elects to use CAFE Program emissions data to demonstrate complian ce with the greenhouse requirements must use all of the data that is used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to determine a manufacturer’s cor porate average fuel economy for the applicable model year, and may fore go testing of the “worstcase” configuration;

* * * *

(b) For the 2012 through 2016 model years, a manufa cturer that elects to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of sec tions E.2.5 and E.3.2 byDate of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 14 demonstrating compliance with the National greenhou se gas program must submit all

data to the Executive Officer in accordance with th e reporting requirements as required under 40 CFR §86.1865-12.

(b c ) All data submitted in accordance with this sectio n H.4.5, must be submitted electronically and organized in a format specified by the Executive Officer to clearly demonstrate compliance with the fleet avera ge greenhouse gas exhaust emission requirements in section E.2.5 or §86.1865-12, as applicable

.

I. In-Use Compliance Requirements and Procedures

1. §86.1845 Manufacturer in-use verification testin g requirements.

* * * *

1.2 §86.1845-04. December 8, 2005 December 28, 2006 [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . Amend as follows:

* * * *

1.5 Greenhouse Gas Requirements. For the 2009 through 2011 model years, t T he manufacturer in-use verification testing requirements shall not apply to the greenho use gas emission requirements set forth in Section E.2.5 of these test procedures. For the 20 12 through 2016 model years, the manufacturer in-use verification testing requirements shall appl y to a manufacturer that certifies its California fleet under the National greenhouse gas program.

2. §86.1846 Manufacturer in-use confirmatory testin g requirements. 2.1 §86.1846-01 July 12, 2001 December 28, 2006 [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . [No Change.]

* * * *

2.4 Greenhouse Gas Requirements. For the 2009 through 2011 model years, t T he manufacturer in-use compliance testing requirements shall not apply to the greenho use gas emission requirements set forth in Section E.2.5 of these test procedures. For the 20 12 through 2016 model years, the manufacturer in-use compliance testing requirements shall apply to a manufacturer that certifies its California fleet under the National greenhouse gas program.

* * * *Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 15 J. Procedural Requirements

1. §86.1848-01 Certification. October 6, 2000. [N o change.] 2. §86.1848-10 Certification. February 26, 2007. [No change.] 3. §86.1848-10 Certification. [Insert Federal Regi ster for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule]. [No change, except that this vers ion of §86.1848-10 shall only apply to vehicles certifying under the National gre enhouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years .]

4 3 . §86.1849-01 Right of entry. [No change.]

5 4 . §86.1850-01 Denial, Suspension or Revocation of C ertificate of Conformity. [No change.]

6 5 . §86.1851 Application of good engineering judgment to manufacturers' decisions. [No change.]

7 6 . §86.1852 Waivers for good in-use emission perform ance. [No change.]

8 7 . §86.1853 Certification hearings. [No change.] 9. §86.1854-12 Prohibited acts. [Insert Federal Re gister for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule]. [No change.]

10 8 . §§86.1855 4 - 86.1859. [Reserved]

11 9 . §86.1860-04 How to comply with the Tier 2 and int erim Tier 2 fleet average NOx standards. [n/a]

12 0. §86.1861-04 How do the Tier 2 and interim Tier 2 N Ox averaging, banking and trading programs work? [n/a]

13 1 . §86.1862-04 Maintenance of records and submittal of information relevant to compliance with fleet average NOx standards. [n/a ]

14 2 . §86.1863-07 Optional Chassis Certification for Di esel Vehicles. January 18,

2001 June 17, 2003 . [No change] 15. §86.1865-12 How to comply with the fleet averag e CO 2 standards. [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule ]

. [No change, except that this section shall only apply to vehicles certifyin g under the National greenhouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years .] 16. §86.1866-12 CO 2 fleet average credit programs. [Insert Federal Re gister for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . [No change, except that this section shall only apply to vehicles certifying under the Nationa l greenhouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years .] 17. §86.1867-12 Optional early CO 2 credit programs. [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . [No change, except that this section shall only apply to vehicles certifying under the Nationa l greenhouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years .]Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 16 PART II: CALIFORNIA EXHAUST AND PARTICULATE EMISSIO N TEST

PROCEDURES FOR PASSENGER CARS, LIGHT-DUTY TRUCKS AN D

MEDIUM-DUTY VEHICLES

This part describes the equipment required and the procedures necessary to perform gaseous and particulate exhaust emission tests (40 CFR Part 86, Subpart B); cold temperature test procedures (40 CFR Part 86, Subpart C); the Ca lifornia 50 o F test procedure; the development of reactivity adjustment factors; and the supplemen tal federal test procedure (40 CFR Part 86, Subpart B) on passenger cars, light-duty trucks and medium-duty vehicles.

A. 40 CFR Part 86, Subpart B - Emission Regulations for 1977 and Later Model Year New Light-Duty Vehicles and New Light-Duty Trucks; Test Procedures.

* * * *

100.2 Equipment and Facility Requirements.

* * * *

86.111-94 Exhaust gas analytical-system. September 30, 1994 [Insert Federal Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule ]

.

* * * *

100.5 Test Procedures and Data Requirements.

86.127-00 Test procedures; overview. May 4, 1999 [Insert Federal Register for the National

Greenhouse Gas Final Rule]

.

* * * *

100.5.3 California Vehicle Preconditioning Require ments.

* * * *

86.135-00 Dynamometer procedure. [Insert Federal R egister for the National Greenhouse

Gas Final Rule] [No change.]

* * * *

100.5.4 Calculations; exhaust emissions.

* * * *Date of Release: January 7, 2010; 45-Day Notice ver sion

Hearing Date: February 25-26, 2010 17 86.165-12 Air Conditioning idle test procedure. [I nsert Federal Register for the National

Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . [No change, except that this section shall only apply to vehicles certifying under the National greenhous e gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years .] 86.166-12 Method for calculating emissions due to a ir conditioning leakage. [Insert Federal

Register for the National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule ] . [No change, except that this section shall only apply to vehicles certifyin g under the National greenhouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years .]

86.167-12 N 2 O measurement devices. [Insert Federal Register fo r the National Greenhouse

Gas Final Rule] . [No change, except that this section shall only apply to vehicles certifying under the National greenhouse gas progra m for the 2012 through 2016 model years .]

86.168-12 Interference verification for N 2 O analyzers. [Insert Federal Register for the

National Greenhouse Gas Final Rule] . [No change, except that this section shall only apply to vehicles certifying under the Nationa l greenhouse gas program for the 2012 through 2016 model years .]

* * * *