[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 111 (Friday, June 8, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30830-30853]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14471]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 86

[FRL-6992-7]
RIN 2060-AG13


Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles and New Motor 
Vehicle Engines; Revisions to Regulations Requiring Availability of 
Information for use of On-Board Diagnostic Systems and Emission-Related 
Repairs on 1994 and Later ModelYear Light-Duty Vehicles and Light-Duty 
Trucks and 2005 and Later Model Year Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Engines 
Weighing 14,000 Pounds Gross Vehicle Weight or Less

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Today's action proposes modifications to EPA's Service 
Information regulations for light-duty vehicles and trucks, including 
requiring vehicle manufacturers to; make full text emissions-related 
service information and training information available via the World 
Wide Web; provide equipment and tool companies with information that 
allows them to develop equipment with pass-through reprogramming 
capabilities; make available enhanced diagnostic information to 
aftermarket scan tool manufacturers; make available manufacturer-
specific diagnostic tools for sale to interested parties; and make 
available additional OBD technical information that manufacturers must 
provide. In addition, today's proposal requests comment on extending 
the availability of emission-related service information to heavy-duty 
engines and vehicles weighing 14,000 pounds or less beginning in the 
2005 model year.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 7, 2001. A public 
hearing will be held on July 25, 2001. Requests to present oral 
testimony must be received on or before July 2, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be submitted to Holly Pugliese, Certification 
and Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 
Traverwood, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105.
    The public hearing will be held at the Holiday Inn North Campus, 
3600 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI. The hearing will begin at 10:00 a.m. 
and continue until all testimony has been presented.
    Materials relevant to this rulemaking are contained in EPA Air 
Docket No. A-2000-49. The docket is located at The Air Docket, 401 M. 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460, and may be viewed in room M1500 
between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. The telephone 
number is (202) 260-7548 and the facsimile number is (202) 260-4400. A 
reasonable fee may be charged by EPA for copying docket material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Holly Pugliese, Certification and 
Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 
Traverwood, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105, Telephone 734-214-4288, Internet 
e-mail ``<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#38484d5f54515d4b5d165057545441785d4859165f574e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dcaca9bbb0b5b9afb9f2b4b3b0b0a59cb9acbdf2bbb3aa">[email protected]</span></a>,'' or Christine Mikolajczyk, 734-214-
4403, Internet e-mail ``mikolajczyk. christine@ epamail.epa.gov.''

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities

    Entities potentially regulated by this action are those which 
manufacturer new motor vehicles and engines. Regulated categories 
include:

[[Page 30831]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            NAICS      SIC
                Category                    Codes     Codes       Examples of potentially  regulated entities
                                             (1)       (2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry................................    336111      3711  Motor Vehicle Manufacturers.
                                            336112
                                            336120
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (1) North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
 (2) Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities EPA is now aware could potentially 
be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the 
table could also be regulated. To determine whether your product is 
regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the 
applicability criteria in Sec. 86.099-17 of title 40 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability 
of this action to a particular product, consult the person listed in 
the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Obtaining Rulemaking Documents Through the Internet

    The preamble, regulatory language and regulatory support document 
are also available electronically from the EPA Internet Web site. This 
service is free of charge, except for any cost you already incur for 
Internet connectivity. The official EPA version is made available on 
the day of publication on the primary Web site listed below. The EPA 
Office of Transportation and Air Quality also publishes these notices 
on the secondary Web site listed below.

(1) http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/ (either select desired 
date or use Search feature)
(2) http://www.epa.gov/OTAQ/ (look in ``What's New'' or under the 
specific rulemaking topic)

    Please note that due to differences between the software used to 
develop the document and the software into which the document may be 
downloaded, changes in format, page length, etc. may occur.

Table of Contents

I. What is the Important Background Information for this Proposal?
II. What are the Details of This Proposal?
    A. How Do Vehicle Manufacturers Disseminate Information Under 
This Proposed Rulemaking?
    B. What Provisions are Proposed for Service Information for 
Third Party Information Providers?
    C. What Requirements Are Proposed for the Availability of 
Training Information?
    D. What Requirements Are Proposed for Reprogramming?
    E. What Requirements Are Proposed for the Availability of 
Enhanced Information for Diagnostic Scan Tools and OEM-Specific 
Diagnostic Scan Tools?
    F. What are the Cost Provisions Proposed for Service 
Information?
    G. Which Reference Materials are Proposed for Incorporation by 
Reference?
    H. What Requirements Are Proposed for Heavy-Duty Service 
Information?
    I. Are Formats for Service Information Proposed?
III. What is the Cost of this Proposal?
IV. What are the Opportunities for Public Participation?
    A. Comments and the Public Docket
    B. Public Hearing
V. What are the Administrative Requirements for this Proposal
    A. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis
    B. Impact on Small Entities
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    H. Executive Order 13045: Children's Health Protection

I. What Is the Important Background Information for This Proposal?

    Section 202(m)(5) of the CAA directs EPA to promulgate regulations 
requiring vehicle manufacturers to provide to:

    Any person engaged in the repairing or servicing of motor 
vehicles or motor vehicle engines, and the Administrator for use by 
any such persons, * * * any and all information needed to make use 
of the [vehicle's] emission control diagnostic system * * * and such 
other information including instructions for making emission-related 
diagnoses and repairs.

    Such requirements are subject to the requirements of section 208(c) 
regarding protection of trade secrets; however, no such information may 
be withheld under section 208(c) if that information is provided 
(directly or indirectly) by the manufacturer to its franchised dealers 
or other persons engaged in the repair, diagnosing or servicing of 
motor vehicles.
    On August 9, 1995, EPA published a final rulemaking (60 FR 40474) 
which set forth the Agency's service information regulations. These 
regulations, in part, required each Original Equipment Manufacturer 
(OEM) to do the following: (1) List all of its emission-related service 
and repair information on a Web site called FedWorld (including the 
cost of each item and where it could be purchased); (2) either provide 
enhanced information to equipment and tool companies or make its OEM-
specific diagnostic tool available for purchase by aftermarket 
technicians, and (3) make reprogramming capability available to 
independent service and repair professionals if its franchised 
dealerships had such capability. These requirements were intended to 
ensure that aftermarket service and repair facilities have access to 
the same emission-related service information, in the same or similar 
manner, as that provided by vehicle manufacturers to their franchised 
dealerships.
    In order to meet Congress' intent that consumers have freedom of 
choice in where to have their vehicles serviced, it is essential for 
independent technicians to have access to timely and accurate emission-
related service and repair information. Industry estimates indicate 
that independent technicians perform up to 80% of all vehicle service 
and repairs. Further, independent technicians perform more repairs on 
older vehicles (which are more likely than newer vehicles to have 
higher emissions) than technicians in franchised dealerships. These 
conclusions are the result of statistics issued from the Motor and 
Equipment Manufacturers Association (Automotive Industry Status Report, 
1999. EPA Air Docket A-2000-49, item II-F-05) that (1) the level of 
excess emissions increases as a vehicle's mileage increases, and (2) 
the percentage of non-dealer repairs increased and dealer repairs 
decreased as a vehicle's mileage increased and warranty coverage is no 
longer an issue.
    In addition, OEM comments submitted during the comment period for 
the prior service information proposal (56 FR 48278, September 24, 
1991) spoke to the integral role aftermarket technicians play in 
servicing the approximately 200 million vehicles in use. Many OEMs 
indicated that the number of service bays in their franchised 
dealerships are inadequate to service their fleets of vehicles and that

[[Page 30832]]

they depend on aftermarket technicians to provide service for their 
customers' vehicles, especially for those vehicles out of warranty. 
This further highlights the need for independent technicians to have 
access to timely and appropriate emission-related repair and service 
information.
    Since 1995, the Agency has gained experience in the implementation 
of the service information requirements. Additionally, changing 
technology has made it necessary to revisit the current requirements to 
take advantage of advanced technology.

II. What Are the Details of This Proposal?

A. How Would Vehicle Manufacturers Disseminate Information Under This 
Proposed Rulemaking?

    In the prior service information proposal (56 FR 48272, September 
24, 1991), we proposed the dissemination of the required information by 
electronic format. However, after extensive comments from the 
automotive industry and our concerns at that time about the capability 
of the World Wide Web to handle the information and its limited use by 
the general public, we elected to use NTIS' FedWorld as the means of 
making information available. Rather than being a full text data base, 
the FedWorld data base is best characterized as a card catalog of 
required information, i.e., it lists the title, price, and purchasing 
instructions for each item.
    As we have implemented the 1995 requirements, a variety of issues 
have been raised about the effectiveness of the information 
distribution requirements. First, several issues have been raised 
related to the effectiveness of FedWorld in making the required 
information available in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Input 
from both OEMs and aftermarket technicians indicates that it is often 
difficult to find specific items in the FedWorld data base. This is due 
to various factors, including the lack of common terminology among OEMs 
for the same or similar items and the failure of OEMs to provide 
descriptions of each item, e.g., documents are often listed by part 
number with no indication of what they contain. Additionally, EPA has 
been made aware that the information listed in FedWorld often was not 
available to be shipped from an OEM's designated distributor within one 
business day of an order being placed, as required by the regulations. 
OEMs have also complained about the administrative costs they were 
charged by NTIS and the lack of technicians accessing the data base.
    EPA agrees that there appears to be a limited number of technicians 
accessing the FedWorld database. We believe this is due to a variety of 
factors, including the following: (1) A lack of awareness about its 
existence; (2) the model years applicable to the information listed are 
just now coming out of the original manufacturer warranty; and (3) the 
inability to receive the information in a timely manner. Based on 
recent communications to the Agency, it appears that technicians are 
beginning to use FedWorld as the models contained in the database are 
appearing in larger numbers at aftermarket repair facilities. However, 
the database is still cumbersome to search and does not result in the 
information being provided in a timely manner. Finally, over the past 
year, several OEMs have sought the Agency's opinion as to whether they 
could opt-out of the FedWorld requirement if they made available the 
required information on their own Internet sites.
    As a result of these requests and the issues cited above, we 
concluded that changes to the existing regulations are necessary to 
ensure that emission-related service and repair information is 
available in a timely manner to all persons who service and repair 
motor vehicles.
    Therefore, today's rulemaking proposes that within 6 months of 
publication of the Final Rule, each OEM shall launch individual World 
Wide Web Internet sites and up-load on its Web site the full text of 
all emission-related service and repair documents,\1\ in English, for 
all OBD equipped 1996 and later model year vehicles. We are aware that 
OEMs may be at different points in their Web site development. We are 
also aware that some OEM information for 1996 through 2000 model years 
may not be readily converted for use on the World Wide Web and the cost 
of doing so may be prohibitive. Therefore, EPA requests comment on the 
need for a short phase-in period for making available full-text service 
information as required in this proposal for 1996 through 2000 model 
year vehicles. Additionally, we are aware that service information for 
the 1994 and 1995 model years poses even greater technological 
challenges for conversion to full-text for use on the World Wide Web. 
For example, several OEMs have indicated to us that their service 
manuals and technical service bulletins for some of these model years 
are no longer available to them in electronic format. As a result, 
large volumes of information would need to be electronically scanned 
and converted for Web-based access. Therefore, we will propose 
alternative requirements for these two model years. For a discussion of 
service information requirements for 1994 and 1995 model years, please 
see section II(A)(2). OEMs will not be required to simultaneously 
maintain their indexes on the FedWorld database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This requirement does not apply to indirect information. 
Indirect information means any information that is not specifically 
contained in the service literature, but is contained in items such 
as tools or equipment provided to franchised dealerships (or 
others).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OEMs may choose to have a third party (e.g., FedWorld, an 
information intermediary, or another entity) establish and maintain 
their full-text Web sites. However, OEMs would remain responsible for 
ensuring accuracy and completeness of information as well as compliance 
with the regulations.
1. Required Information
    In the original Service Information requirements finalized in 
August of 1995 (60 FR 40475), we required manufacturers to make 
available ``any and all'' information needed by the aftermarket to make 
use of the OBD system and such other information, including 
instructions for making emission-related repairs, excluding trade 
secrets. The 1995 regulations defined emission-related information as 
including, but not limited to, any information regarding any system, 
component or part of a vehicle that controls emissions and any system, 
component and/or part associated with the powertrain system, including, 
but not limited to, the engine, the fuel system and ignition system. 
The existing regulations also require that information must be provided 
for any system, component or part that is likely to affect emissions, 
such as transmission systems.
    Specifically, EPA required an index of emissions-related documents 
available for ordering to be up-loaded on the FedWorld database. The 
required information included, but was not limited to, manuals, 
technical service bulletins (TSBs), diagrams, charts, training 
materials (instructor manuals), and videos.
    While we believe that the definition of ``emissions-related'' as 
described above is fairly comprehensive, we have received input from 
aftermarket technicians suggesting that there is additional information 
needed by the aftermarket to diagnose and complete emissions-related 
repairs that is not readily available across all

[[Page 30833]]

manufacturers. To address these concerns we are providing additional 
clarification and examples of the types of information that we believe 
is consistent with the statutory intent to provide ``any and all'' 
information needed to make use of the OBD system. These examples, which 
include pages from several OEM service manuals and a generic logic flow 
diagram for a repair procedure, can be found in EPA Air Docket A-2000-
49 items II-F-02, and II-F-04. To the extent that manufacturers do not 
already make this information available to their dealerships, we are 
proposing that this information be developed for both their dealerships 
and aftermarket service providers. We also believe that the level of 
information being sought by the aftermarket and proposed in today's 
action is not proprietary and should therefore be included in the scope 
of the required information. This belief is based in part upon the 
increasing number of manufacturers who are voluntarily providing a 
wider scope of OBD information to aftermarket service providers without 
any expressed concerns to EPA regarding the release of proprietary 
information. To further ensure manufacturers that we do not intend to 
require proprietary information, we have provided specific examples of 
the increased level of information that is currently being made 
available by some manufacturers that we believe should be consistently 
required from all manufacturers to ensure the diagnosis and repair of 
OBD equipped vehicles.
    We are proposing that manufacturers make available in full-text on 
their respective Web sites OBD system operational information which 
describes functional characteristics of the OBD system and emission-
related components necessary to accurately diagnose and repair 
emissions-related problems. In particular, aftermarket and dealership 
service providers have indicated that OBD system operational 
information such as generic drive cycles, component operating ranges 
and system logic flow diagrams are valuable pieces of information 
needed for accurate diagnosis and repair of emissions-related problems. 
We also believe that this type of information will be needed for use in 
Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) programs. Currently some I/M programs 
have voluntarily incorporated checks of the OBD system into their 
programs. Additionally, within the next one to two years, EPA will 
require a check of the OBD system in Inspection and Maintenance 
programs. EPA has been working with the voluntary I/M programs and they 
have expressed the need for information such as generic drive cycles to 
assist them in successfully implementing OBD checks into their 
programs.
    As an example of the type of general OBD information that EPA 
believes is required to make emission-related repairs, and thus is 
proposing to require OEMs to make available, the most recent Advanced 
Engine Performance Specialist Test (L1) Preparation Guide developed by 
the organization Automotive Service Excellence (ASE) includes a 
reference booklet that has been placed in EPA Air Docket A-2000-49, 
item II-F-01. The ASE L1 Preparation Guide provides generic examples of 
various operating parameters for OBD components and sensors (e.g. a 
properly functioning engine coolant temperature sensor will show values 
ranging from -40  deg.F to 248 deg.F). This information is provided for 
those taking the test as an example of a diagnostic procedure a 
technician would utilize when servicing an emissions-related problem. 
We believe that the ASE L1 Preparation Guide is an effective example of 
the types of information we believe should be more readily available 
for all OEMs. To further analyze the availability of this level of 
service information, we conducted a literature search of a variety of 
service manuals from a cross-section of manufacturers. We looked at 
service manuals ranging from model years 1996-2000 for randomly chosen 
diagnostic trouble code PX300 (random misfire). A search of the service 
manuals was conducted to evaluate if information such as component 
operating ranges, logic flow diagrams, or generic drive cycles was 
available to assist technicians in trouble-shooting this particular 
code. Our research indicated that this type of information is not 
consistently made available by all manufacturers. Our analysis is 
contained in EPA Air Docket A-2000-49, item II-B-01, ``Technical 
Memorandum from Shannon Elliot to Holly Pugliese and Arvon Mitcham, 
March 10, 2000''.
    We are aware of at least one manufacturer who makes this 
information available only via their manufacturer-specific diagnostic 
scan tool. For manufacturers who currently utilize this approach, we 
propose that this information also be included in full-text on their 
respective Web site(s). For manufacturers who make this information 
available in publications other than service manuals (e.g., training 
materials) that are not otherwise subject to the proposed full-text 
requirements, we propose that this information be readily accessible in 
full text on manufacturer Web sites as well. For all manufacturers, 
this information should be formatted and appear in a clear, consistent, 
and readily accessible manner (e.g., tables or logic flow diagrams). 
Although the information should be as vehicle specific as possible, we 
understand that a manufacturer's system may be consistent across 
vehicle lines and, therefore, the information may be consolidated to 
make it as generic as is appropriate.
    Additionally, vehicle systems are evolving in such a way that there 
is an increased likelihood of all vehicle systems, including the anti-
theft system, affecting the electronic control unit (ECU). Therefore, 
we believe it is necessary and appropriate to ensure that information 
reflecting and affecting these inter-relationships is also provided to 
the aftermarket.
    With today's action, we propose that the full-text documents to be 
up-loaded and available for viewing on OEM Web sites include, but not 
be limited to, the following items:
    (a) Manuals, technical service bulletins (TSBs), diagrams, charts, 
training materials (see Section IIB for further detail) and videos.
    (b) OBD system operational information that describes functional 
characteristics of the OBD system and emission-related components. OBD 
system operational information includes, but is not limited to, OBD 
generic drive cycle information, component operating ranges, and system 
logic flow diagrams. OEMs are not required to provide algorithms, look-
up tables, or any values associated with look-up tables.
    In addition, it is proposed that OEMs provide emission-related 
diagnostic procedures on their respective Web sites and that access to 
these procedures not require connection to the vehicle to access this 
information.
    (c) Documents such as component and subsystem manuals provided to 
OEMs or franchised dealerships by suppliers or other parties that have 
agreements with OEMs. We understand that OEMs are increasingly using 
third party contractors and suppliers to design and develop parts and 
other vehicle subsystems. We believe that this information is critical 
for the diagnosis and service of emissions-related problems and needs 
to be made available to aftermarket service providers. Thus, the fact 
that information is not provided directly by an OEM to its franchised 
dealerships should not preclude the OEM from making non-propriety 
service and repair

[[Page 30834]]

information available to the aftermarket. EPA believes that it is 
appropriate for this information to be made available on OEM Web sites 
but also requests comment on alternative mechanisms for making this 
information available to the aftermarket.
    (d) Any information on other systems that can directly effect the 
emission system within a multiplexed system (including how information 
is sent between emission-related system modules and other modules on a 
multiplexed bus),
    (e) Any information regarding any system, component, or part of a 
vehicle monitored by the OBD system that could in a failure mode cause 
the OBD system to illuminate the malfunction indicator light (MIL).
    (f) Any other information relevant to the diagnosis and completion 
of an emissions-related repair. This information includes, but is not 
limited to, information needed to start the vehicle when the vehicle is 
equipped with an anti-theft or similar system that disables the engine. 
This information also includes any manufacturer-specific emissions-
related diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) and any related service 
bulletins, trouble shooting guides, and/or repair procedures associated 
with these manufacturer-specific DTCs.
    With regard to anti-theft systems, it appears that some OEMs have 
incorporated systems into their vehicles which, when the ECU is 
replaced or reprogrammed as part of an emissions-related repair, 
prevent the vehicles from being started without the use of an OEM-
specific tool and codes. Additionally, some OEMs have incorporated 
anti-theft systems into their vehicles that disable the engine when the 
vehicle is brought in for service. In both of these instances, an 
aftermarket service provider would not be able to complete the repair 
for the customer without otherwise having to take the vehicle to a 
dealership to complete the repair. We believe that an emissions-related 
repair cannot be considered complete if the owner is not able to drive 
the vehicle away from the repair shop. Therefore, we are proposing that 
OEMs make this information directly available to the aftermarket.
    EPA appreciates that vehicle manufacturers spend considerable 
resources to prevent vehicle theft and we do not want to jeopardize 
this security by allowing illegal disablement of the vehicle security 
system. Given the sensitive nature of the anti-theft system 
information, we believe it is reasonable to allow manufacturers some 
additional lead-time to incorporate additional appropriate security 
measures as needed by each OEM. EPA requests comment on this issue.
    Information for making emission-related repairs does not include 
information used to design and manufacture parts, but may include 
manufacturer changes to internal calibrations. However, a manufacturer 
need only provide such information to the extent it has provided such 
information to its dealerships.
    Finally, we believe that manufacturers are accountable for the 
accuracy of their service information, for both their dealerships and 
the aftermarket repair industry. Moving toward Internet-based delivery 
of service information should increase the ability of OEMs to more 
quickly respond to errors in their service information and provide 
updates to the required information for all interested parties in a 
timely manner.
2. Pre-1996 Model Years
    The primary focus of this proposal is on service information for 
vehicles equipped with complete OBD systems , i.e. 1996 and newer model 
year vehicles. However, we believe that it is important for aftermarket 
service providers to have access to service information for older 
models as well, particularly since the aftermarket services a majority 
of older vehicles. To address this need, EPA is proposing that OEMs 
either continue to maintain their databases of information on FedWorld 
or transfer information from FedWorld onto their Web sites and continue 
to make information available for sale as it currently is in FedWorld 
for 1994 and 1995 model year vehicles. Alternatively, OEMs could elect 
to provide full text information on their Web site for vehicles for 
model years 1994 and 1995.
3. Other Media
    Currently, OEMs can choose to simultaneously provide information 
through a variety of media, such as print or CDs. However, EPA will not 
propose to require OEMs to maintain multi-media formats with this rule. 
Some manufacturers have expressed an interest in moving away from print 
and other media in the future and are concerned about having to 
maintain multiple media formats to meet the EPA requirements. We 
believe that it is reasonable for manufacturers who wish to do so to 
provide service information to the aftermarket via the Internet only 
and are not proposing to require manufacturers to make available 
information in multiple media formats.
    However, we are also sensitive to the fact that a majority of 
repairs performed by the aftermarket are on older vehicles. 
Additionally, the useful lives of vehicles continue to increase. Thus, 
aftermarket service providers need access to service information for a 
wide range of model years. In Section II(A)(5), we discuss our proposal 
that OEMs maintain the required information in full-text available on 
their Web 2001model years to address this issue. We are requesting 
comment on this proposed length of time and are also requesting comment 
on the mechanisms that would be used by the aftermarket to obtain 
information that is no longer available in full-text format from OEM 
Web sites.
4. Small Volume Provisions
    Because of the small U.S. sales volumes of some OEMs and the 
relatively small demand for the service information for these 
manufacturers, EPA believes it is appropriate to propose some 
flexibility for small volume manufacturers. It is proposed that OEMs 
with annual sales of less than five thousand vehicles be given 12 
months after the effective date of the final rule to comply with the 
Web site requirements. We also propose that OEMs be exempt from the 
Internet requirements if they modify or manufacture less than one 
thousand vehicles annually, provided they present to the Administrator 
and obtain approval for an alternative method by which emission-related 
information can be obtained.
5. Timeliness and Maintenance of Information
    We believe that for information to be effective, it must be 
provided in a timely manner. For aftermarket technicians this means 
having access to needed information when the vehicle is brought in for 
service. In the past, OEMs have argued that the aftermarket service 
industry seldom perform emission-related service during the first two 
or three years of ownership (during the 24,000 or 36,000 mile warranty 
period), and therefore don't need to have immediate access to new model 
service information. However, we believe that aftermarket service 
providers have, at least, a limited need for service information for 
new vehicles. Dealership service may not always be convenient for a 
customer and there are customers who prefer aftermarket service even 
though a vehicle is still under warranty. Further, EPA believes that it 
does not place undue burden on the OEMs to provide information that is 
already being made available to the dealerships. To ensure that 
aftermarket technicians have the required information when needed, we 
propose that OEMs upload the required information on their Web site 
within

[[Page 30835]]

three months of model introduction. After this three month period, we 
propose that the required information for each model be available and 
updated on the OEM Web site at the same time it is available by any 
means to their dealers.
    EPA is also proposing that, beginning with the 1996 model year, 
manufacturers maintain the required information in full text for at 
least 15 years after model introduction. After this fifteen-year 
period, we propose that manufacturers can archive the required service 
information, but that it must be made available upon request, in a 
format of the manufacturer's choice (e.g., CD-ROM). We are proposing 
this requirement to account for the increasing useful life of vehicles 
and the fact that the aftermarket services a majority of older vehicles 
as discussed above. However, we also believe it is not necessary to 
over-burden OEM Web servers with service information that is still 
needed by the aftermarket, but not on as regular a basis as service 
information for newer models. Therefore, we believe it is appropriate 
to allow some flexibility for the distribution of service information 
for older vehicles. We request comment on the proposed length of time 
that manufacturers will be required to maintain full text information 
on their Web sites.
6. Accessibility and Performance Requirements
    (a) Accessibility Requirements. We propose that each OEM Web site 
allow end-users to search its database of emission-related service 
information by various topics. These topics include, but are not 
limited to, model, model year, key words and phrases, diagnostic 
procedures, scheduled maintenance, and vehicle identification number 
(VIN). Additionally, we propose that manufacturers must provide 
information to allow for readily identifying the latest calibration. 
Further, while the VIN may be offered as one means of conducting a 
search, OEMs may not require the use of a VIN to initially access the 
data base. We further propose that the use of proprietary hardware, 
software, viewers, browsers and formats for accessing information be 
prohibited. In other words, manufacturers must develop their service 
information, and provide access to it, in such a way that it can be 
viewed using software such as Adobe Acrobat Reader that is readily 
available to Internet users. The manufacturer's Home Page must be 
accessible to anyone and contain instructions on how to access the 
information. Instructions should include, but not be limited to, 
minimum hardware and non-proprietary software needed by the end-user 
and associated costs for accessing and purchasing information.
    Finally, we propose that OEMs not limit the modem speed by which 
aftermarket service providers can access OEM Web sites. In other words, 
OEMs may not limit access to modem speeds of 28k or 56k. As more and 
more computer users invest in digital subscriber lines (DSL) and cable 
modems to access the Internet, we are concerned that limiting access at 
these relatively slower speeds will impact the ability to access 
information from OEM Web sites in a timely manner.
    Feedback from aftermarket service providers has indicated that 
there are three primary ways to generally categorize the aftermarket. 
First, many aftermarket shops service a wide variety of makes, models, 
and model years and are likely to rely on consolidated information such 
as Mitchell or All Data and do not generally need access to 
manufacturer-specific information on a daily basis. There are also 
aftermarket shops who specialize by categories such as European or 
Asian makes and models. There are also shops that further specialize by 
a specific manufacturer. Additionally, other parties such as 
Inspection/Maintenance lanes and do-it-yourself mechanics may be 
interested in accessing OEM Web sites. Because of the potential for a 
wide variety of OEM Web site usage, we are proposing that manufacturers 
develop a three-tiered approach for the access to and cost structure of 
their Web-based service information to provide maximum flexibility and 
access to aftermarket service providers. We propose that these options 
include, but not be limited to short-term, mid-term, and long-term 
access to the required information.
    (1) Short-Term Access. We propose that manufacturers provide short 
term access for a set price. Under this scenario, manufacturers would 
set up a short time frame of approximately 24 hours whereby an 
aftermarket service provider would be able to access that OEM's Web 
site, search for the piece of information they need, and purchase, 
download and/or print it for a set fee. EPA believes that a reasonable 
fee for short term access can be as little as $0, but should be no 
greater than $20.
    (2) Mid-term Access. We are proposing that manufacturers provide 
mid term access for a set price. Under this scenario, aftermarket 
service providers would be able to access to the OEM Web site for a 30 
day time frame and purchase, download and/or print information under 
this option for a set fee. EPA believes that a reasonable fee for mid 
term access can be as little as $0, but no greater than $300.
    (3) Long-term Access. We are proposing that manufacturers provide 
long term access for a set price. Under this scenario, aftermarket 
service providers would have access to the OEM Web site for a 365 day 
time frame, including the ability to purchase, download and/or print 
the information for a set fee. EPA believes that a reasonable fee for 
long term access can be as little as $0, but no greater than $2500.
    We believe that establishing this tiered approach will serve as a 
reference point for manufacturers to develop and implement access to 
their Web sites that allow maximum flexibility for aftermarket service 
providers, and others who engage in the service and diagnosis of 
vehicles given the varying needs for access to manufacturer specific 
information. Additionally, EPA is significantly concerned that some 
OEMs will develop pricing structures for access to their sites in such 
a way that will prevent the purchase of information. Because of this 
concern and to help reduce the possibility that inappropriate pricing 
will occur, we believe that it is appropriate for EPA to establish 
specific pricing parameters that each manufacturer must follow when 
determining access fees for the three tiers described above. In 
determining the pricing parameters described above, we took into 
consideration feedback we have received thus far from some aftermarket 
service providers on what they believe the appropriate pricing 
parameters are for each of the three tiers. We also took into 
consideration other factors such as the current cost to the aftermarket 
for purchasing information from OEMs and the potential costs to OEMs 
for developing, implementing, and maintaining OEM Web sites. We have 
not received specific feedback from a majority of manufacturers on 
their intended pricing structures, mainly due to the fact that most 
manufacturers are still in the development stages of their sites and 
are not in a position to comment on the issue at this time. We 
understand that the cost of service information is a significant issue 
for both the OEMs and aftermarket service providers. To this extent, we 
request comment on this proposed tiered structure, the pricing 
parameters established by EPA for each of the tiers, and what other 
factors should be considered by EPA when evaluating whether 
manufacturers are making their information available via the Internet 
at

[[Page 30836]]

a reasonable cost. For a more complete discussion of cost for all of 
the provisions contained in today's proposal, see Section II(F).
    (b) Performance Requirements. The availability of service 
information also relies heavily on the ability of OEM Web sites to 
perform in such a way that service information can be delivered via the 
Internet to potentially thousands of users at any given time without 
significant delay. This is particularly important given the complexity 
of the service information being transmitted (e.g., wiring diagrams, 
electrical circuit diagrams, etc). The transmission of information via 
the Internet depends on a complex array of server, database, network, 
and other Web-based infrastructures that impact a Web site's ability to 
transmit at maximum efficiency. While manufacturers cannot be held 
accountable for issues such as end-user hardware and software or the 
type of connectivity utilized by the end-user, (e.g., standard modem, 
cable modem, or digital subscriber line), we believe it is necessary 
for manufacturers to measure the parameters that are within their 
control.
    To this end, we are proposing that manufacturers submit to the 
Administrator on an annual basis a report that provides detailed, 
monthly measurements of the OEM's Web site. Each OEM report is to be 
submitted to the Administrator beginning one year after the required 
launch date of manufacturers' Web sites (i.e., one year and 6 months 
after the final rule is issued), or upon request by the Administrator. 
The parameters to be measured include, but are not limited to, the 
following:
    (1) Total successful requests (measured in number of files 
including graphic interchange formats (GIFs) and joint photographic 
expert group (JPEG) images, i.e. electronic images such as wiring or 
other diagrams or pictures). This is defined as the total successful 
request counts of all the files which have been requested, including 
pages, graphics, etc.
    (2) Average successful requests per day (measured in number of 
files). This is defined as reports of the average successful requests 
per day of all files which have been requested, including pages, 
graphics, etc.
    (3) Total successful requests for pages [report on number of pages 
(including graphic interchange formats (GIFs) and joint photographic 
expert group (JPEG) images, i.e. electronic images such as wiring or 
other diagrams or pictures). This is defined as the total successful 
requests counts all the documents that were returned or where the 
document was requested but was not needed because it had not been 
recently modified and the user could use a cached copy.
    (4) Total failed requests (measured in number of files). This is 
defined as the total failed request counts of all the files which were 
requested but failed requests because they could not be found or were 
read-protected. This includes pages, graphics, etc.
    (5) Total redirected requests (measured in number of files). This 
is defined as redirected requests that indicate that the user was 
directed to a different file instead.
    (6) Number of distinct files requested (measured in number of 
files). This is defined as the number of different file types that were 
requested (i.e., html, pdf, txt).
    (7) Number of distinct hosts served (measured in number of files). 
This is defined as reports on the number of different computers where 
requests have come from.
    (8) Corrupt logfile lines (measured in number of lines). This is 
defined as the lines in the logfile that were unreadable by the 
computer.
    (9) Total data transferred (measured in bytes). This is defined as 
the total amount of data transferred from one place to another.
    (10) Average data transferred per day (measured in bytes). This is 
defined as the average amount of data transferred per day from one 
place to another.
    (11) Daily Summary (measured in number of files/pages by day of 
week). This is defined as the total number of requests in each day of 
the week, over the time period given at the very top of the report.
    (12) Daily Report (measured in number of files/pages by day of 
month). This is defined as how many requests there were in each day of 
a specific month.
    (13) Hourly Summary (measured in number of files/pages by hour of 
day). This is defined as the total number of requests for each hour of 
the day, over a specific time period.
    (14) Request Report (measured in number of files/pages by 
individual URL). This is defined as which files were downloaded.
    (15) Referrer Report (measured in number of files/pages by 
individual referring URL). This is defined as which pages linked to 
your files.
    (16) Browser Summary (measured in number of files/pages by browser 
type, i.e., Netscape, Internet Explorer). This is defined as the 
versions of browsers by vendor.
    (17) Browser Report (measured in number of files/pages by browser 
type, i.e., Mozilla 4.0). This is defined as a list of the detailed 
versions of browsers used.
    This list will be periodically reviewed by the Administrator to 
address changes in technology and any potential compliance issues.
    Manufacturers would have the option of conducting their own 
performance measurements or contracting with companies who specialize 
in Internet performance measurement (e.g. Keynote Systems, Inc.). 
However, we intend to work with OEMs to develop a standard format that 
all manufacturers would use to submit the required information to the 
Administrator and issue the required format via a manufacturer guidance 
letter.
    We believe that manufacturers are likely to evaluate at least some 
aspects of the performance of their Web sites regardless of any 
requirement do so. As a result, we believe that this requirement places 
minimal burden on OEMs to meet the proposed requirements for 
performance evaluation. The proposed requirements to assess Web site 
performance serve to outline a consistent level of information to be 
provided to the Administrator to assist in evaluating compliance with 
Internet-based access to service information.
7. Hyperlinking
    To facilitate the search for emission-related information on the 
Internet, we propose that OEMs allow direct simple hyperlinking to 
their Web sites from government Web sites and from all automotive-
related Web sites, such as aftermarket service providers, educational 
institutions, and automotive associations. For example, an association 
such as the Service Technician's Society (STS) may want to have a 
section of their Web site that will allow an aftermarket technician to 
access a complete listing of all the OEM Service Information Web sites. 
Hyperlinking will allow individuals to connect directly to the OEM Web 
home page of their choice directly from the STS Web site.
8. Administrator Access to OEM Web Sites
    The Administrator shall have access to each OEM Web site at no 
charge to the Agency. The Administrator shall have access to to the 
site, reports, records and other information as provided by sections 
114 and 208 of the Clean Air Act and other provisions of law.

[[Page 30837]]

B. What Provisions Are Proposed for Service Information for Third Party 
Information Providers?

    Currently, many aftermarket service and repair facilities depend on 
consolidated service information purchased from third party providers 
such and Mitchell and All-Data. These companies primarily consolidate 
and repackage OEM service manuals and technical service bulletins 
(TSBs) for purchase by the aftermarket. Currently, OEMs often provide 
their service manuals and TSBs to these third parties in hardcopy. 
Given the trend in the electronic exchange of information, we believe 
that it is reasonable for OEMs to provide information electronically to 
third party providers. While we are proposing to require that OEMs 
provide full-text access to their information via the Internet for 
aftermarket service providers and that this is the same information 
needed by third party information intermediaries, we do not believe 
that it is a practical option for these third party information 
providers to download this information directly from the OEM Web sites. 
There are numerous manufacturers with tens of thousands of pages of 
service information. For third parties to access service information 
directly from the each OEM Web site could result in unreasonably long 
Internet connectivity times for third party service providers. More 
importantly, we are concerned that third party access directly from the 
OEM Web sites could impact the overall performance of those sites given 
the large volumes of information that would be accessed by third party 
information providers. We believe that this could impede the ability of 
aftermarket service providers to access the relatively smaller bits of 
information they need to diagnose and repair vehicles. Finally, 
manufacturers will already have developed this information in 
electronic format for uploading onto their individual Web sites and we 
are not proposing to require manufacturers to develop special formats 
to meet this proposed requirement. Because of these factors, we believe 
it does not place undue burden on OEMs to provide the information 
required by this regulation in electronic formats directly to third 
party service information providers, rather than utilizing individual 
OEM Web sites to access the required information. To this end, we 
propose that OEMs provide information directly to third party 
information intermediaries with all emission-related information in 
electronic format in English that utilizes nonproprietary software. In 
the alternate, OEMs may provide access to third party information 
intermediaries to a Web site other than the Web site provided for 
aftermarket service providers to meet this proposed provision if they 
choose. OEMs are not responsible for the accuracy of the information 
distributed by third parties. However, it is proposed that where OEMs 
charge information intermediaries for information, whether through 
licensing agreements or other arrangements, OEMs be responsible for 
inaccuracies contained in the information they provide to third party 
consolidators. We propose that manufacturers begin providing their 
information electronically directly to third party service providers 
with whom they license this material beginning with the 2002 model 
year.
    We propose this requirement because, in spite of recent trends of 
moving toward electronic access to information, we believe that there 
is likely to be a market for third party service information providers, 
particularly for aftermarket service providers who service numerous 
makes, models, and model years. This proposed requirement does not 
apply to the 1996 through 2001 model years because service information 
for these model years has already been supplied by manufacturers to 
third party service providers.

C. What Requirements Are Proposed for the Availability of Training 
Information?

    In our 1995 Final Rule on Service Information, manufacturers were 
required to make available to the aftermarket ``any and all'' 
information needed to make use of the OBD system, including any 
instructions, for emission-related repairs. All training materials 
(including notices of OEM sponsored classroom training) were also to be 
made available for purchase from FedWorld at the same time this 
information was made available to dealerships. OEMs supported a 
provision that would require them to make available the training 
material they provided to their dealerships, but indicated they could 
not offer classroom training to the aftermarket because of limited 
classroom space and other resource limitations. Likewise, the 
aftermarket indicated that sending their technicians to offsite 
training would also be very resource intensive in terms of training 
cost, loss of technician work time, and potential loss of business. EPA 
agreed that it would be overly burdensome to require manufacturers to 
open their classrooms and instead finalized provisions that required 
the availability of training information through the medium of their 
choice (e.g. printed manuals, videotapes, CDs, etc.) and made available 
for purchase from FedWorld.
    Since that time, EPA has been in discussions with the aftermarket 
indicate that complex OBD technology requires an even greater access to 
OEM-specific training than is available to the aftermarket today. A 
recent survey conducted by the Service Technicians Society, (EPA Air-
2000-49, item II-F-03) indicates that one of the greatest concerns of 
the aftermarket remains the availability of OEM-specific training and 
repair information. Aftermarket service providers generally believe 
that OEM-specific training provides a more comprehensive level of 
critical information that is necessary to perform some of the most 
complex emission-related repairs as compared to some of the generic 
training that is currently available to the aftermarket.
    Additionally, we have become aware that several of the larger 
manufacturers are revising the mechanisms used to deliver training to 
their franchised dealerships. In particular, some manufacturers are 
moving toward consolidating their training facilities and beginning to 
offer training courses to the dealerships via satellite and the World 
Wide Web. Computer and satellite technologies are also becoming more 
accessible and affordable for aftermarket service providers and the 
general public. We believe that these trends, which are likely to 
continue, provide an opportunity for aftermarket technicians to have 
access to OEM-specific training that may be delivered via the Internet 
and satellite without placing burden on OEMs to provide training 
directly to the aftermarket. In other words, we believe that technology 
is evolving in such a way that will allow aftermarket shops to receive 
OEM training directly from Internet sources or via satellite downlinks 
right on their own personal computers and/or from satellite 
transmissions.
    In today's action, we propose to expand the training information 
availability requirements to include any training courses offered by 
OEMs to their franchised dealerships via satellite, Internet, Extranet, 
or other means that contain, in whole or part, emission-related 
information. To achieve this, we are proposing two provisions: (1) 
availability of OEM training material for purchase from OEM Web sites, 
and (2) availability of OEM Internet and satellite training materials 
for third party re-packaging and re-distribution.

[[Page 30838]]

1. OEM Training Material for Purchase on OEM Web Sites
    We are proposing that OEMs make available for purchase on their Web 
sites the following items: training manuals, training videos, and 
interactive, multimedia CD's or similar training tools available to 
franchised dealerships. Additionally, we are proposing that OEMs who 
transmit emissions-related training via satellite or the Internet must 
tape these transmissions and make them available for purchase on their 
Web sites within 30 days after the first transmission to franchised 
dealerships. It is proposed that all of the items included in this 
provision be shipped within 24 hours of the order being placed and are 
to be made available at a reasonable price as described in Section 
II(F). We also request comment on a provision that would require OEMs 
to tape the emissions-related class room training provided to 
dealerships and making those tapes available for sale on OEM Web sites.
    We propose that these requirements apply for 1996 and later model 
year vehicles starting 6 months following the effective date of the 
Final Rule. For subsequent model years, it is proposed that the 
required information be made available for purchase within three months 
of model introduction, and then be made available at the same time it 
is made available to franchised dealerships.
2. Third Party Access to OEM Training Material
    OEMs have expressed that the current state of Internet and 
satellite technologies and aftermarket demand for direct access via 
satellite or the Internet do not support a need for providing direct 
access of these training courses to the aftermarket in these formats. 
We recognize that there is some uncertainty with the technology as it 
exists today, but we believe, contrary to arguments made by OEMs, that 
computer hardware and software technology is evolving in such a way 
that advanced technologies such as cable modems, digital subscriber 
lines (DSL) and streaming video will become increasingly prevalent and 
affordable within the next 2-5 years. Additionally, the equipment 
needed to access satellite transmissions is also becoming increasingly 
affordable. We believe it is realistic that access to training for the 
aftermarket and other information directly on the Internet or via 
satellite is an attainable goal and will go a long way to meeting some 
of the concerns of the aftermarket on their ability to acquire 
training, OEM or otherwise. OEMs have also argued that it is 
unreasonable that OEMs be burdened with providing training directly to 
aftermarket service providers. While we recognize that advances in 
Internet and satellite technology will reduce some of the 
administrative issues that OEMs would face in delivering training to 
the aftermarket, it may still be a burden for OEMs themselves to 
deliver automotive training courses (e.g., Chrysler's OBDII Student 
Workbook and General Motors' OBDII manuals) to the aftermarket. 
Therefore, we are also proposing that OEMs make available to entities 
who develop or deliver training all emissions-related training courses 
transmitted via satellite or Internet training courses offered to 
franchised dealerships. This type of training information can then be 
repackaged and made available for transmission to the aftermarket by 
third party training providers at a later date or as market forces 
demand. OEMs may not charge unreasonable up-front fees to third party 
training providers for this access, but they may require a royalty, 
percentage or other arranged fee based on a per-use or enrollment/
subscription basis.
    While we are not requiring third party training entities to deliver 
training to the aftermarket in any format, there is a large market of 
third party training providers who currently provide both generic and 
some OEM-specific training to the automotive aftermarket in a variety 
of formats including training manuals, CDs and class room training. We 
are also specifically aware of several training providers who have 
developed, or in are in the process of developing, Web-based training 
programs for aftermarket service providers. To this end, we believe 
that requiring direct access to OEM Internet and satellite 
transmissions for third party training providers is simply expanding 
upon the training delivery mechanisms that can be utilized to deliver 
training to the aftermarket. To the extent that OEMs expand their usage 
of the Internet and/or satellite technology to deliver OEM-specific 
training to their franchised dealerships, we believe this proposed 
provision will increase the availability of OEM-specific training to 
aftermarket service providers.
    EPA proposes that this requirement be effective for 1996 and later 
model year vehicles starting 6 months following the effective date of 
the Final Rule.

D. What Requirements Are Proposed for Reprogramming?

    Under the existing service information regulations, if their 
franchised dealerships have the ability to reprogram the electronic 
control unit (ECU), OEMs are required to provide reprogramming 
capability to the aftermarket. The existing regulations allow OEMs to 
meet this requirement by providing information to equipment and tool 
companies that allows them to incorporate reprogramming into their 
tools or by making available to the aftermarket the manufacturer-
specific reprogramming system or tool that performs reprogramming 
events. All but one manufacturer has satisfied this requirement through 
the latter option.
    As a result, aftermarket shops that want to provide reprogramming 
services to their customers and that service multiple makes of vehicles 
have been faced with costly and time consuming barriers to performing 
reprogramming services for their customers. Because manufacturers have 
opted to meet the current requirement by making their OEM-specific 
reprogramming tools available for sale, an aftermarket service provider 
who wishes to perform reprogramming events has to purchase a different 
reprogramming tool or system for each vehicle manufacturer. This has 
imposed significant costs on aftermarket shops. Several manufacturers 
incorporate reprogramming capabilities into their manufacturer specific 
diagnostic scan tool. An aftermarket technician who otherwise uses a 
generic diagnostic scan tool, which ranges in cost from approximately 
$300 to $3000, to perform most diagnoses and repair would need to 
purchase multiple manufacturer-specific diagnostic scan tools or 
systems, which generally range in cost from $1600 to several thousand 
dollars each, not including the cost of purchasing the re-calibration 
or re-programming event itself or the software and software updates 
needed to use the diagnostic scan tool. For example, an aftermarket 
shop who wanted to perform reprogramming events just for Ford, GM and 
Chrysler would have to purchase 3 separate OEM-specific diagnostic 
tools that would cost a total of approximately $6000 to $10,000. 
Additionally, EPA is aware of at least three larger manufacturers who 
intend to move toward reprogrammable OBD computers within the next few 
model years. This trend underscores the need to work with manufacturers 
and aftermarket scan tool companies to develop cost effective 
reprogramming alternatives for aftermarket repair facilities. As a 
point of comparison, we estimate that diagnostic scan tools capable of 
reprogramming multiple makes and models will cost approximately $1500 
to $2500.
    Aftermarket shops who want to perform this advanced diagnostic

[[Page 30839]]

service for their customers short of investing in multiple 
manufacturer-specific diagnostic scan tools must then rely on a 
dealership to perform this service. This option can impose significant 
burden on aftermarket service providers and consumers in several ways. 
First, the service provider must purchase the service from the 
dealership with dealer mark-up, which could result in potentially 
higher cost for the consumer who chooses to have service performed by 
aftermarket shops. Second, having to bring a vehicle in need of a 
reprogramming event to a dealership can add significant additional time 
needed to complete an emissions-related repair. There is no guarantee 
that the dealership will be willing to perform this service for the 
aftermarket in a timely fashion and we have received complaints from 
aftermarket service providers indicating that they have had to wait 
days, or even weeks, to have reprogramming service provided by a 
dealership. We believe that these factors place the aftermarket in a 
non-competitive position in the marketplace for performing 
reprogramming services, which ultimately impacts a consumer's freedom 
of choice for who services their vehicle.
    At the time the 1995 regulations were being developed, OEMs 
expressed concern that making reprogramming capabilities widely 
available to the aftermarket would result in a significant increase in 
tampering or misuse of calibrations and re-calibrations. Though neither 
EPA nor the OEMs could substantiate how much of a problem this would 
be, we believed a cautious approach regarding misuse of this new 
technology was appropriate at that time. We therefore finalized a 
provision that allowed manufacturers the options described above.
    Since that time, neither EPA nor the manufacturers have been made 
aware of significant instances of the misuse of the information needed 
to develop aftermarket scan tools with reprogramming capabilities, or 
misuse of the actual calibrations or re-calibrations themselves. We are 
also not aware of any confidentiality issues encountered by the one 
manufacturer who makes their information available to the aftermarket 
scan tool company that develops their aftermarket reprogramming tool. 
Further, we are not aware of any confidentiality issues regarding the 
information that manufacturers do provide to aftermarket scan tool 
companies to develop generic aftermarket diagnostic tools. We are aware 
that individual manufacturers currently have confidentiality agreements 
in place with individual aftermarket scan tool companies to protect any 
information provided to scan tool companies by OEMs and that 
information can be labeled as confidential business information by the 
OEM. Under these confidentiality agreements, OEMs have recourse to 
revoke or pursue other legal remedies for violations of these 
agreements. We are not aware of any such instances and believe that 
requirements proposed today will not impact the ability of OEMs to 
retain control of any information they label as confidential. 
Additionally, none of the information required by aftermarket scan tool 
companies to incorporate reprogramming capabilities into aftermarket 
scan tools reveals calibration or re-calibration specifications. 
Finally, technology known as pass-through reprogramming has evolved in 
such a way that allow for increased protection of calibrations and re-
calibrations that the OEMs make available for the completion of 
reprogramming events. The manufacturer calibration software remains 
resident and accessible through the manufacturers Web site as opposed 
to the current CD-ROM distribution to the aftermarket. This allows the 
OEM more control of distribution and better tracking of distribution. 
In addition, the pass-through device does not have hardware interface 
or additional ports for software re-direction similar to an OEM or 
aftermarket scan tool which are currently used to transfer data between 
the PC and the vehicle ECU. An aftermarket diagnostic scan tool with 
pass-through reprogramming capability that can reprogram multiple 
manufacturers is expected to cost approximately $1500-$2500.
    Taking into consideration all of these factors, we believe that it 
is necessary to propose changes for access to reprogramming 
capabilities in this proposed rulemaking. In order to make 
reprogramming capabilities available to the aftermarket for the 
broadest range of model years possible, we are proposing a two-tiered 
approach. First, for MY1994 through MY2002 OBD equipped vehicles with 
reprogramming capability, we are proposing that manufacturers make 
available all emissions-related reprogramming information to 
aftermarket tool and equipment companies in a similar manner to the 
information that manufacturers currently make available for enhanced 
diagnostics. This would include the following information necessary for 
programming the Electronic Control Unit (ECU):
    (a) the physical hardware requirements including communication 
network specifications for reprogramming events or tools (e.g., system 
voltage requirements, cable terminals/pins, connections such as RS232 
or USB, wires, etc.),
    (b) ECU data communication including message format and data 
encoding (e.g., serial data protocols, transmission speed or baud rate, 
bit timing requirements, etc.),
    (c) information on the application physical interface (API) or 
layers (descriptions for procedures such as connection, initialization, 
performing and verifying programming/download, and termination),
    (d) vehicle application information or any other related service 
information (which interfaces or combination of interfaces are used on 
each vehicle system for each make/model year) such as special pins and 
voltages for reprogramming events or additional vehicle connectors that 
require enablement and specifications for the enablement. This is not a 
new information requirement for the vehicle manufacturers. This is the 
same information that is currently used to produce the same diagnostic 
functionality in dealership scan tool equipment. See EPA Air Docket #A-
2000-49, item II-F-06 for complete New Product Information Guidelines 
(NPIG) developed by the Equipment and Tool Institute.
    We believe that the information being proposed does not require 
manufacturers to make any hardware or software changes. Rather, 
manufacturers must only make the information available to aftermarket 
tool and equipment companies. We are proposing that this information be 
made available within 6 months of publication of the Final Rule. After 
that, this information shall be released when it is first provided to 
franchised dealerships.
    Second, for MY2003 and later OBD equipped vehicles with 
reprogramming capabilities, we are proposing that manufacturers comply 
with SAE Standardized Practice J2534 for ``pass-through 
reprogramming.'' Pass-through reprogramming is a process that allows 
the programming or reprogramming of a vehicle's computer without 
revealing proprietary information to the end user. EPA has seen 
multiple demonstrations of this technology and is aware that several 
large manufacturers use this process for dealership reprogramming. In 
light of the success of pass-through reprogramming and the cost burden 
associated with the purchase of multiple tools under the existing 
regulations, we

[[Page 30840]]

believe that the aftermarket should not be required to use OEM-specific 
tools for emission-related reprogramming. Additionally, SAE J2534 was 
developed with extensive cooperation between the OEMs and aftermarket 
tool and equipment companies. We believe that this standardized 
practice addresses a vast majority of the technological issues raised 
by both parties and will ultimately provide a cost-effective means for 
aftermarket reprogramming while still protecting the proprietary 
information of the OEMs. This SAE Standard Practice is proposed to be 
Incorporated by Reference in Section II(G). SAE J2534 is currently 
undergoing final review and approval. A draft of J2534 is available for 
inspection in EPA Air Docket A-2000-49. While it has not been finalized 
in time for this proposal, we believe it will finalized in time for the 
final rule. Upon final approval of this standard, EPA will issue a 
notice of document availability at which time the finalized version 
will be placed in EPA Air Docket A-2000-49 for inspection. The final 
version of J2534 will also be available directly from the Society of 
Automotive Engineers (SAE).
    We are aware that some manufacturers use manufacturer specific 
diagnostic link connectors for reprogramming that are placed in 
locations other than those which are currently required by SAE Standard 
Practice J1962. To standardize reprogramming capability for the 
aftermarket, we also propose that manufacturers must comply with SAE 
Standard Practice J1962, ``Diagnostic Link Connector'' for the purposes 
of pass-through reprogramming, beginning with the 2003 model year. 
J1962 has already been approved for Incorporation by Reference in EPA's 
On-Board Diagnostic regulations (58 FR 9468). EPA requests comment on 
the lead-time necessary for manufacturers to comply with this proposed 
requirement.
    We also propose that manufacturers make available the necessary OEM 
software applications needed to initiate pass-through reprogramming 
events to the aftermarket at a reasonable cost. Initiation software can 
be described as the transport method used to transmit the OEM 
calibrations from storage to the pass-through device. In other words, 
the initiation software serves as a mechanism to transmit calibrations 
from where they are stored (Internet, BBS, or CD-ROM) to the ECU.
    Manufacturers must also make available the necessary calibrations 
or reprogramming events via CD-ROM, diskette, or the Internet. We also 
propose that this be stand-alone software that can be run on a standard 
PC and must use a WIN-32 operating system. In other words, EPA expects 
that manufacturers will not simply bundle the pass-through 
reprogramming software with other OEM software, re-package this OEM-
specific software as an aftermarket version and charge a price that is 
not reasonable for the aftermarket.
    Finally, we propose that manufacturers continue to make 
reprogramming services available to aftermarket service providers in a 
timely manner and a reasonable cost via their dealerships. We propose 
this provision to ensure wide-spread availability of reprogramming 
capability for aftermarket service providers.

E. What Requirements Are Proposed for the Availability of Enhanced 
Information for Scan Tools and OEM-Specific Diagnostic Scan Tools?

    The service information regulation published August 9, 1995 (60 FR 
40474) required OEMs to make certain generic service information 
available to tool manufacturers. Enhanced service information was also 
required to be made available. However, OEMs had the option of either 
making their OEM enhanced diagnostic tools available for sale to 
independent technicians at a reasonable cost or making available to 
aftermarket tool and equipment companies the information needed to 
develop and manufacture enhanced aftermarket diagnostic tools. This 
requirement did not achieve the CAA directive to make available all 
information needed to make use of the emission control diagnostic 
system to any person engaged in repairing or servicing of motor 
vehicles or motor vehicle engines for several reasons.
    First, because many manufacturers opted not to provide enhanced 
information to the equipment and tool companies, the aftermarket tools 
that are manufactured and sold often do not provide the comprehensive 
information needed by aftermarket technicians to perform more advanced 
emissions-related repairs. We believe that aftermarket shops who 
service numerous makes and models are placed at a competitive 
disadvantage regarding the level of service they can provide for their 
customers. Second, aftermarket service providers who wish to perform 
more advanced diagnoses and repairs must purchase an enhanced 
diagnostic tool for the majority of OEMs in order to be able to perform 
advanced OBD diagnoses. OEM-specific diagnostic scan tools range in 
cost from $1600 to approximately $5000. We are also aware of at least 
one OEM who makes their OEM-specific diagnostic tool available for sale 
for approximately $20,000. With the average cost of approximately 
$3000, aftermarket shops who want to be reasonably equipped to provide 
advanced diagnostic and repair services for the 6 or 7 largest 
manufacturers would have to invest tens of thousands of dollars in 
diagnostic equipment on top of the several thousands of dollars per 
year that aftermarket shops must invest each year for service 
information. On the other hand, OEM dealerships generally serve just 
one manufacturer and can make relatively smaller investments in tools 
and equipment. We believe that this is cost prohibitive and creates a 
substantial competitive disadvantage for independent shops who 
generally run much smaller businesses than OEM dealerships. We also 
believe that the large investments that need to be made in OEM-specific 
tools prevents independent shops from performing services that dealers 
are able to perform, placing them at a competitive disadvantage in the 
level of services they can provide, ultimately making it difficult for 
some aftermarket service providers to even stay in business.
    Ultimately, we believe that the option most manufacturers have 
chosen under the existing requirements results in customers being 
denied freedom to choose where to have their vehicles serviced. To 
eliminate these inequities and to ensure that all aftermarket service 
providers have access to the diagnostic tools essential for the 
diagnosis and repair of OBD systems, we propose two requirements. 
First, we propose that manufacturers provide generic and enhanced 
information as described below to aftermarket tool and equipment 
companies to develop aftermarket diagnostic scan tools. Second, we 
propose that OEMs make available for sale their manufacturer-specific 
diagnostic scan tools at a fair and reasonable price.
    (1) Description of Enhanced Diagnostic Information. We propose to 
require an increased level of enhanced information to be made available 
to aftermarket tool and equipment companies to develop more functional 
aftermarket diagnostic scan tools.
    We propose that within 30 days of publication of the final rule 
OEMs make available to companies who develop aftermarket scan tools all 
generic and enhanced service information for MY 1996 and later needed 
to manufacture diagnostic tools that can be used by aftermarket 
technicians to diagnose, service and repair emission-related components 
and systems. Enhanced information is defined as information that is 
necessary to implement an on-

[[Page 30841]]

board diagnostic service interface. In general it encompasses 
information that describes each of the various diagnostic communication 
interfaces (communication protocol, message, timing and any information 
which identifies which interface is applicable to each particular my/
model/engine combination). This information must cover both generic and 
enhanced information. Enhanced information includes, but is not limited 
to:
    (a) All serial data stream information
    (b) Bi-directional controls (e.g., operation of actuators, 
initiation of self-checks, etc.) Including any safety precautions 
necessary prior to invoking the controls.
    (c) descriptions of non-proprietary logic and performance limits 
and specifications used in the OEM specific tools to perform diagnostic 
routines or sub-routines (E.g., injector or cylinder balance tests, 
etc.)
    (d) the physical hardware requirements for reprogramming events or 
tools (e.g. system voltage requirements, cable terminals/pins, 
connections such as RS232 or USB, wires, etc.);
    (e) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) data communication (e.g. serial 
data protocols, transmission speed or baud rate, bit timing 
requirements, etc);
    (f) information on the application physical interface (API) or 
layers (i.e., processing algorithms or software design descriptions for 
procedures such as connection, initialization, performing and verifying 
programming/download, and termination);
    (g) vehicle application information or any other related service 
information such as special pins and voltages for reprogramming events 
or additional vehicle connectors that require enablement and 
specifications for the enablement;
    In addition, we propose that manufacturers provide information that 
describes which interfaces or combination of interfaces, from each of 
the categories in the sections above are used on each vehicle. This may 
be organized by application, system or a combination of both provided 
the information identifies which interfaces are used on each vehicle's 
system/model/model year. Manufacturers may use the New Product 
Information Guideline (NPIG) created by the Equipment and Tool 
Institute (ETI) to meet this requirement or provide a substitute matrix 
approved by the Administrator. The NPIG is a standard format already 
used by a majority of manufacturers when submitting information to ETI. 
An example of the NPIG is available in EPA Air Docket A-2000-49, item 
II-F-06. OEMs are not required to release the underlying computer codes 
that make up calibrations and recalibrations.
    (2) Distribution of Enhanced Diagnostic Information. Currently, all 
but one of the manufacturers who make available scan tool information 
use the Equipment and Tool Institute (ETI) as the primary distribution 
mechanism for scan tool information. In particular, ETI maintains the 
``TEK-NET Library'', which is administered through a secure Web site 
that ETI has developed to gather and re-distribute diagnostic scan tool 
information to its member companies as agreed through licensing and 
other contractual arrangements. This arrangement has been developed 
independently between the OEMs, ETI, and ETI member companies (e.g. 
Snap-On, SPX, etc) and has been in use for several years. However, 
since the 1995 regulations were finalized, we have become aware of 
several instances where manufacturers have submitted the information 
required by the regulations to ETI and/or their member companies in 
either unmanageable formats (e.g. reams of paper) or in languages other 
than English. These inconsistencies can affect the ability of 
aftermarket scan tool companies to provide timely updates and/or 
introduce new products to aftermarket service providers. Because 
aftermarket service providers rely heavily on the diagnostic scan tools 
they purchase from ETI member companies to diagnose and repair 
emissions-related problems, we believe it is imperative that the 
required information be provided to ETI and/or their member companies 
in a timely and manageable manner. Therefore, we propose that the 
required information be provided to aftermarket tool and equipment 
companies in English via the Internet to a secure Web site as arranged 
through necessary licensing, contractual, and confidentiality 
agreements between the OEMs, ETI, and/or their member companies. We 
propose that this information be uploaded in electronic format using 
common document formats such as MicroSoft Excel, Adobe Acrobat, 
MicroSoft Word, etc as preferred by the manufacturer. At this time, we 
believe that ETI's TEK-NET library meets the intent of this proposed 
requirement and we encourage manufacturers to continue the on-going, 
cooperative relationship. We also propose that the Administrator have 
free unrestricted access to this Web site in order to assist EPA in the 
verification that all required information is being made available as 
required by these regulations.
    Finally, ETI must provide information to aftermarket scan tool 
companies who are not members of ETI involved in the manufacture and 
sale of scan tool type devices for use on vehicles sold in the United 
States if the non-members have arranged for the appropriate licensing, 
contractual and confidentiality agreements with the OEMs and ETI.
    (3) Availability of Manufacturer-Specific Diagnostic Scan Tools.
    The current regulations give manufacturers the option of either 
making information available to aftermarket diagnostic tool companies 
so that they can develop generic aftermarket diagnostic scan tools or 
making available for sale their OEM-specific diagnostic scan tools. As 
discussed above, a majority of manufacturers already make their OEM-
specific tools available for sale rather than making available 
information available for the development of generic aftermarket tools. 
While we are proposing to require that all OEMs provide an increased 
level of information for the development of more sophisticated generic 
aftermarket scan tools, we believe there will continue to be a demand 
for OEM-specific tools as well. For example, we are aware that many 
aftermarket shops specialize in European or Asian models or exclusively 
in one manufacturer such as BMW or Mercedes-Benz. These aftermarket 
shops are likely to make the investment in manufacturer-specific 
diagnostic tools even though they are priced higher than generic 
diagnostic tools in order to provide more specialized services for 
their customers. In order to ensure that OEM-specific tools continue to 
be available to aftermarket service providers, we propose that vehicle 
manufacturers make available for sale their own manufacturer-specific 
diagnostic tools. OEMs may elect to develop different versions of one 
or more of their diagnostic tools, but emission-related service 
information must be made available to the aftermarket. In addition to 
making their diagnostic tools available for sale, OEMs must provide 
support for those tools or have a third party do so. If a third party 
does so, the OEM is responsible for availability and accuracy. We 
propose that OEMs make their OEM-specific tools available for sale to 
the aftermarket at a reasonable cost. With a few exceptions, we believe 
that most manufacturers who currently make their OEM-specific tools 
available meet the intent of reasonable cost. We expect that the cost 
of OEM-specific

[[Page 30842]]

tools should not change significantly as a result of this proposed 
provision.
    (4) Decontenting of OEM-specific Tools. Some OEM-specific 
diagnostic tools contain information that is not emission-related. If 
OEMs decide to delete the non-emission related information 
(``decontent'') from the tool before offering it for sale to the 
aftermarket, we expect that the cost of the tool will be adjusted to 
reflect its decreased value. It is proposed that the emission-related 
information in the tool be identical to that contained in the tool 
offered to the dealers. In such cases, it is proposed that OEMs obtain 
approval from the Administrator following demonstration that the 
emission-related functions of the dealer tool and the decontented tool 
are the same.
    (5) Availability of Special Tools. Some manufacturers currently 
require the use of a special tool to extinguish the MIL. It is our 
understanding that these tools are not always available to the 
aftermarket. To address this issue, EPA is proposing that OEMs be 
precluded from using such systems beginning with model year 2002. For 
model years 1994-2001, today's rulemaking proposes that OEMs who 
require such tools to extinguish the MIL make the necessary information 
available to equipment and tool companies to design a comparable 
generic tool. It is proposed that this information be made available no 
later than 3 months following the effective date of the Final Rule.

F. What Are the Cost Provisions Proposed for Service Information?

    As discussed in the 1995 Service Information regulations, we 
believe that cost is an integral factor influencing the availability of 
service information. At that time, we were concerned that manufacturers 
could have priced their service information and OEM-specific diagnostic 
scan tools in such a way that would preclude their purchase and 
subsequent use, therefore rendering the information and/or tools 
unavailable. While we believe that a majority of manufacturers have 
made a good faith attempt to meet the ``reasonable cost'' provisions 
finalized in 1995, we believe it is necessary to revisit the issue of 
cost of service information and diagnostic scan tools and the Agency's 
position on this issue. Additionally, full-text access to information 
via the Internet introduces additional parameters that must be 
evaluated in order to ensure that the information required by these 
regulations can be considered available. As a result, we are proposing 
revisions to the regulations governing ``reasonable cost'' to reflect 
the proposed move from FedWorld to the World Wide Web.
    The 1995 regulations establish parameters for OEMs on what factors 
should be considered by manufacturers when developing the pricing 
structures for the required information. We also received substantive 
comments from OEMs and aftermarket service providers on what those 
factors should be and incorporated many of them into the 1995 final 
rule. As a result, we required manufacturers to make emission-related 
service information available at a reasonable cost. Reasonable cost was 
described as a fair and reasonable price taking into consideration 
factors such as the cost to the manufacturer of preparing and/or 
providing the information, the type of information, the format in which 
it is provided, the price charged by other manufacturers for similar 
information, the differences that exist among manufacturers (e.g. the 
size of the manufacturer), the quantity of material contained in a 
publication, the detail of the information, the cost of the information 
prior to finalization of the 1995 rule, volume discounts and inflation. 
One of the factors that was finalized as a reference point for 
evaluating the cost of service information allows OEMs to recover the 
costs incurred for preparing and/or providing the information. Since 
manufacturers will be moving to the World Wide Web as a primary means 
of distribution for their information, we propose that one of the 
factors to be considered in determining whether the price charged for 
the access to the information on the World Wide Web is reasonable is 
the cost incurred by OEMs for developing their Web sites. Section 
II(6)(a) also discusses some of the feedback we have received from the 
aftermarket on what some aftermarket service providers consider as 
reasonable costs for access to information on OEM Web sites. We solicit 
comment on the general pricing structure as it is discussed in this 
section.
    While we have discussed some specific aspects of the cost of 
service information for Web access to the required information, we 
expect that all of the information and diagnostic scan tools covered by 
this proposal to be made available at a reasonable cost in such a 
manner that ensures its availability. Manufacturers who develop pricing 
structures for the required information in a manner that renders it 
unavailable to the aftermarket will be considered in violation of the 
regulations and subject to fines of $25,000 per day per violation.

G. Which Reference Materials Are Proposed for Incorporation by 
Reference?

    Also being proposed is the adoption of SAE Recommended Practice 
J1930, ``Electrical/Electronic Systems Diagnostic Terms, Definitions, 
Abbreviations, and Acronyms.'' This standardized procedure was proposed 
in the September 1991 (56 FR 48272) proposal, but was not finalized due 
to a variety of issues on the standardization of the electronic format 
of service information. It is proposed that manufacturers comply with 
J1930 beginning with the 2003 model year. EPA believes that most 
manufacturers have already adopted J1930 in the development of their 
service information. However, the Agency believes that it is important 
for all manufacturers to adopt J1930 definitions and terminology given 
the increasing complexity and volume of service information. Therefore, 
the Agency is proposing to require that all manufacturers comply with 
J1930 beginning with the 2003 model year.
    Today's action also proposes the incorporation of SAE Recommended 
Practice J2284, ``High Speed CAN (HSC) for Vehicle Applications at 500 
KBPS.'' This recommended practice was finalized in February of 1999 and 
defines a level of standardization in the implementation of a 500 KBPS 
vehicle communication network using the Controller Area Network (CAN) 
protocol. It is proposed that manufacturers comply with J2284 beginning 
with the 2003 model year. EPA also believes that most manufacturers are 
moving toward the adoption of J2284 with model year 2003 and that there 
will be little objection from the manufacturers on this requirement.
    As discussed above in section II(D), we are also proposing to 
Incorporate by Reference SAE Recommended Practice J2534 and SAE 
Recommended Practice J1962. All of these items with the exception of 
J2534 are available for inspection in EPA Air Docket A-2000-49. SAE 
J2534 will be made available for inspection in the docket once it has 
been finalized. A draft of SAE J2534 has been placed in EPA Air Docket 
A-2000-49 for inspection. All SAE recommended practices can be obtained 
from the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, 
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, or at www.sae.org.

[[Page 30843]]

H. What Are the Proposed Requirements for Heavy-duty Service 
Information?

    Section 202(m)(5) of the Clean Air Act applies service information 
availability requirements to all motor vehicles equipped with emission-
control diagnostic systems, including heavy-duty vehicles and engines. 
We are proposing that all of the requirements proposed today apply to 
manufacturers of all heavy-duty vehicles and engines weighing 14,000 
pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW) and lower beginning in model year 
2005, which is the first year that such engines and vehicles are 
subject to OBD requirements. Today's proposal applies only to engines 
and vehicles subject to the OBD requirements during the phase-in of 
those requirements. EPA is proposing the same requirements for these 
engines and vehicles as it is proposing for light-duty vehicles and 
trucks. However, we recognize that certain aspects of these proposed 
regulations may need to be reviewed to ensure that they accurately 
reflect how the aftermarket service industry can be best assured of 
receiving the information necessary to make use of the OBD system and 
to make emissions-related diagnosis and repairs. We request comment on 
the appropriateness of the proposed requirements for this sector.

I. Are Formats for Service Information Proposed?

    The Agency is not proposing any requirements that specify the 
format that manufacturers must use to organize or display the required 
information on their Web sites. In particular, we are not requiring 
manufacturers to comply with SAE Standardized Practice J2008 
``Recommended Organization of Service Information''. In the August 1995 
final rule, the Agency could not finalize the incorporation of J2008 
because the standard had not yet been finalized. At that time, the 
Agency was optimistic that J2008 would be finalized in time to allow 
manufacturers to adopt it voluntarily or give EPA the option of 
incorporating it into the service information requirements. However, 
J2008 was not finalized until October of 1998. By that time, several 
large OEMs were well into the development of their Web sites and some 
manufacturers were already conducting pilots within their dealerships. 
While the Agency is supportive of providing information in formats that 
are user-friendly and readily accessible to the end-user, we are 
reluctant to implement requirements that would require manufacturers to 
redesign existing service information that has already been developed. 
The Agency has put forth minimum performance requirements that we 
believe will allow us to monitor manufacturer Web site performance 
while allowing manufacturers maximum flexibility and creativity in the 
development of their service information for access on the Internet. 
Finally, we believe that the learning curve for aftermarket service 
industry will level off relatively quickly given the ever increasing 
dependence on computers and the Internet to conduct business. EPA 
requests comment on the need for J2008 or another format for service 
information.

III. What Is the Cost of This Proposal?

    This proposed rulemaking alters existing provisions by revising the 
current service information regulations. The provisions proposed in 
today's rulemaking require OEMs to make available information and tools 
that have already been developed for use by their dealerships. 
Therefore, EPA believes that the changes proposed today put little or 
no new additional requirements on OEMs beyond administrative costs for 
providing access to existing information and tools, which are 
recoverable to the OEM as discussed above in IIF.

IV. What Are the Opportunities for Public Participation?

A. Comments and the Public Docket

    EPA welcomes comments on all aspects of this proposed rulemaking. 
Commenters are especially encouraged to give suggestions for changing 
any aspects of the proposal. All comments, with the exception of 
proprietary information should be addressed to the EPA Air Docket 
Section, Docket No. A-2000-49 (see ADDRESSES).
    Commenters who wish to submit proprietary information for 
consideration should clearly separate such information from other 
comments by 1) labeling proprietary information ``Confidential Business 
Information'' and 2) sending proprietary information directly to the 
contact person listed (see FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) and not to the 
public docket. This will help insure that proprietary information is 
not inadvertently placed in the docket. If a commenter wants EPA to use 
a submission labeled as confidential business information as part of 
the basis for the final rule, then a nonconfidential version of the 
document, which summarizes the key data or information, should be sent 
to the docket.
    Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed 
by EPA only to the extent allowed and by the procedures set forth in 40 
CFR Part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the submission 
when EPA receives it, the submission may be made available to the 
public without notifying the commenters.

B. Public Hearing

    Anyone wishing to present testimony about this proposal at the 
public hearing (see DATES) should, if possible, notify the contact 
person (see For Further Information Contact) at least seven days prior 
to the day of the hearing. The contact person should be given an 
estimate of the time required for the presentation of testimony and 
notification of any need for audio/visual equipment. Testimony will be 
scheduled on a first come, first serve basis. A sign-up sheet will be 
available at the registration table the morning of the hearing for 
scheduling those who have not notified the contact earlier. This 
testimony will be scheduled on a first come, first serve basis to 
follow the previously scheduled testimony.
    EPA requests that approximately 50 copies of the statement or 
material to be presented be brought to the hearing for distribution to 
the audience. In addition, EPA would find it helpful to receive an 
advanced copy of any statement or material to be presented at the 
hearing at least one week before the scheduled hearing date. This is to 
give EPA staff adequate time to review such material before the 
hearing. Such advanced copies should be submitted to the contact person 
listed.
    The official records of the hearing will be kept open for 30 days 
following the hearing to allow submission of rebuttal and supplementary 
testimony. All such submittals should be directed to the Air Docket 
Section, Docket No. A-2000-49 (see ADDRESSES). The hearing will be 
conducted informally, and technical rules of evidence will not apply. A 
written transcript of the hearing will be placed in the above docket 
for review. Anyone desiring to purchase a copy of the transcript should 
make individual arrangements with the court reporter recording the 
proceedings.

V. What Are the Administrative Requirements for This Proposal?

A. Administrative Designation and Regulatory Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 October 4, 1993), EPA must 
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and 
therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and 
the requirements of this Executive Order. The Order defines

[[Page 30844]]

a ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in 
a rule that may:

    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, Local, or Tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of 
recipients thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    EPA has determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not 
subject to OMB review.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, generally 
requires federal agencies to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis 
of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements 
unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and 
small governmental jurisdictions. This proposed rule would not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because 
the regulated entities impacted by this rulemaking would not be 
considered small entities.
    Therefore, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have 
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An 
Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA 
(ICR No. 0783.41) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail 
at Collection Strategies Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(2822); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b0d6d1c2ddd5c29ec3d1ded4c9f08cd190d8c2d5d68d" http: epamail.epa.gov">epamail.epa.gov</a>">farmer.sandy@epamail.epa.gov</a>, or by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy may 
also be downloaded off the internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. 
    EPA is proposing that manufacturers subject to the proposed 
requirements for Web based delivery of service information be required 
to submit to the Administrator on an annual basis an electronic report 
that contains measurements of the various performance parameters as 
outlined in Section II(A)(6) of this preamble. The information proposed 
to be collected will allow the Agency to assess compliance with the 
regulations.
    It is estimated that the cost of collecting this information will 
be $250 per month, or $3000 per year for each of the approximately 45 
manufacturers subject to this proposed information collection 
requirements. Initial start-up costs are expected to be approximately 
$1000 with approximately $100-$200 per year for maintenance. The 400 
burden hours are estimated to cost $11,628.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.
    Comments are requested on the Agency's need for this information, 
the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested 
methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of 
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the 
Director, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (2822); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; and 
to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 
Management and Budget, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 20503, marked 
``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.'' Include the ICR number in any 
correspondence. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the 
ICR between 30 and 60 days after June 8, 2001, a comment to OMB is best 
assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by July 9, 2001. 
The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on the 
information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory action on state, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures by state, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before promulgation an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted.
    Before we establish any regulatory requirement that may 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal 
governments, we must develop, under section 203 of the UMRA, a small 
government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially 
affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small 
governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of 
our regulatory proposals with significant federal intergovernmental 
mandates. The plan must also provide for informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    EPA believes this proposed rule contains no federal mandates for 
state, local, or tribal governments. Nor does this rule have federal 
mandates that may result in the expenditures of $100 million or more in 
any year by the private sector as defined by the provisions of Title II 
of the UMRA. Nothing in the proposed rule would

[[Page 30845]]

significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This proposed rule will impose no direct compliance costs on 
states. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local 
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule 
from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications. It will not 
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the 
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. 
The requirements proposed by this action impact private sector 
businesses, particularly the automotive and engine manufacturing 
industries. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272), directs 
the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory 
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, business practices, etc.) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standard bodies. The NTTAA requires EPA to provide 
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This proposed rule incorporates by reference technical standards 
adopted by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). We believe these 
standards are well accepted by industry.
    EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking 
and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially 
applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such 
standards should be used in this regulation.

H. Executive Order 13045: Children's Health Protection

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies 
to any rule that: (1) is determined to be economically significant as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    EPA believes this proposed rule is not subject to the Executive 
Order because it is not an economically significant regulatory action 
as defined by Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Gasoline, Incorporation by reference, Motor 
vehicles, Motor vehicle pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: May 30, 2001.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 86--CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM NEW AND IN-USE MOTOR 
VEHICLES AND NEW AND IN-USE MOTOR VEHICLE ENGINES: CERTIFICATION 
AND TEST PROCEDURES

    1. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    2. Section 86.094-38 is proposed to be amended by adding paragraph 
(g)(21) to read as follows:


Sec. 86.094-38  Maintenance instructions.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (21) In lieu of meeting the requirements of paragraphs (g)(5) 
through (g)(9) of this section, manufacturers may upload the required 
information in full text on its manufacturer-specific Web site as 
required in Sec. 86.096-38(g)(3). In the alternative, manufacturers may 
upload an index of the required information on its Web site consistent 
with paragraphs (g)(5), (g)(6), and (g)(9) of this section.
    3. Section 86.096-38 is proposed to be added to subpart A to read 
as follows:


Sec. 86.096-38  Maintenance instructions.

    (a)-(f) [Reserved]
    (g) Emission control diagnostic service information.
    (1) Manufacturers are subject to the provisions of this paragraph 
(g) beginning in the 1996 model year for manufacturers of light-duty 
vehicles and light-duty trucks, and beginning in the 2005 model year 
for manufacturers of heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty engines 
weighing 14,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW) and less that are 
subject to the OBD requirements of this part.
    (2) General requirements. (i) Manufacturers shall furnish or cause 
to be furnished to any person engaged in the repairing or servicing of 
motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines, or the Administrator upon 
request, any and all information needed to make use of the on-board 
diagnostic system and such other information, including instructions 
for making emission-related diagnosis and repairs, including but not 
limited to service manuals, technical service bulletins, recall service 
information, data stream information, bi-directional control 
information, and

[[Page 30846]]

training information, unless such information is protected by section 
208(c) as a trade secret. No such information may be withheld under 
section 208(c) of the Act if that information is provided (directly or 
indirectly) by the manufacturer to franchised dealers or other persons 
engaged in the repair, diagnosing, or servicing of motor vehicles or 
motor vehicle engines.
    (ii) Definitions. The following definitions apply for this 
paragraph (g).
    (A) Aftermarket service provider means any individual or business 
engaged in the diagnosis, service, and repair of a motor vehicle or 
engine who is not directly affiliated with a manufacturer or 
manufacturer franchised dealership.
    (B) Bi-directional control means the capability of a diagnostic 
tool to send messages on the data bus that temporarily overrides the 
module's control over a sensor or actuator and gives control to the 
diagnostic tool operator. Bi-directional controls do not create 
permanent changes to engine or component calibrations.
    (C) Data stream information means information (i.e., messages and 
parameters) originated within the vehicle by a module or intelligent 
sensors (i.e., a sensor that contains and is controlled by its own 
module) and transmitted between a network of modules and/or intelligent 
sensors connected in parallel with either one or two communication 
wires. The information is broadcast over the communication wires for 
use by other modules (e.g., chassis, transmission, etc.) to conduct 
normal vehicle operation or for use by diagnostic tools. Data stream 
information does not include engine calibration related information.
    (D) Emissions-related information means any information related to 
the diagnosis, service, and repair of emissions-related components.
    (E) Emissions-related training information means any information 
related training or instruction for the purpose of the diagnosis, 
service, and repair of emissions-related components. Emissions-related 
information includes, but is not limited to:
    (1) Manuals, including subsystem and component manuals, technical 
service bulletins (TSBs), recall service information, diagrams, charts, 
and training materials;
    (2) OBD system operational information that describes functional 
characteristics of the OBD system and emission-related components. OBD 
system operational information includes, but is not limited to, OBD 
generic drive cycle information, component operating ranges, and system 
logic flow diagrams. Algorithms, look-up tables, or any values 
associated with look-up tables are not required to be made available;
    (3) Emission-related diagnostic procedures. Manufacturers who 
utilize their manufacturer-specific scan tool to provide emissions-
related diagnostic procedures cannot require connection to the vehicle 
to access this information. Additionally, manufacturers shall also make 
any emissions-related diagnostic procedures incorporated into their 
manufacturer-specific scan tools available to aftermarket service 
providers on their respective manufacturer Web sites;
    (4) Any information on other systems that can directly effect the 
emission system within a multiplexed system (including how information 
is sent between emission-related system modules and other modules on a 
multiplexed bus);
    (5) Any information regarding any system, component, or part of a 
vehicle monitored by the OBD system that could in a failure mode cause 
the OBD system to illuminate the malfunction indicator light (MIL);
    (6) Information needed to start the vehicle when the vehicle is 
equipped with an anti-theft system or other systems that disables the 
engine and prevents it from starting after the completion of an 
emissions-related repair; and
    (7) Manufacturer-specific emissions-related diagnostic trouble 
codes (DTCs) and any related service bulletins, trouble shooting 
guides, and/or repair procedures associated with these manufacturer-
specific DTCs.
    (F) Enhanced service and repair information means information which 
is specific for an original equipment manufacturer's brand of tools and 
equipment.
    (G) Generic service and repair information means information which 
is not specific for an original equipment manufacturer's brand of tools 
and equipment.
    (H) Indirect information means any information that is not 
specifically contained in the service literature, but is contained in 
items such as tools or equipment provided to franchised dealers (or 
others).
    (I) Intermediary means any individual or entity, other than an 
original equipment manufacturer, which provides service or equipment to 
aftermarket service providers.
    (J) Manufacturer franchised dealership means any service provider 
with which an manufacturer has a direct business relationship.
    (K) Third party information provider means any individual or 
entity, other than an original equipment manufacturer, who consolidates 
manufacturer service information and makes this information available 
to aftermarket service providers.
    (L) Third party training provider means any individual or entity, 
other than an original equipment manufacturer who develops and/or 
delivers instructional and educational material for automotive training 
courses.
    (3) Information dissemination. By [date six months after the 
effective date of the final rule], each manufacturer shall provide or 
cause to be provided a manufacturer-specific World Wide Web site 
available to the persons specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this 
section and to any other interested parties containing in the 
information specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this section for 1996 
and later model year vehicles which have been offered for sale; this 
requirement does not apply to indirect information, including the 
information specified in paragraphs (g)(11) through (g)(15) of this 
section. Each manufacturer Web site shall:
    (i) Provide access in full-text to all of the information specified 
in paragraph (g)(5) of this section.
    (ii) Be updated at the same time as dealership World Wide Web 
sites, but in no instance less than 14 days after new information or 
changes to existing information have been changed or updated on the 
manufacturer's dealership site.
    (iii) Provide users with a description of the minimum computer 
hardware and software needed by the user to access that manufacturer's 
information (e.g., computer processor speed and operating system 
software). This description shall appear when users first log-on to the 
home page of the manufacturer's Web site.
    (iv) Provide Short-Term (<ls-thn-eq>24 hours), Mid-Term (30 day 
period), and Long-Term (365 day period) Web site subscription options 
to any person specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this section at a fair 
and reasonable cost as specified in paragraph (g)(6) of this section 
for each of the options. Reasonable cost shall not exceed $20 for 
short-term access, $300 for mid-term access, and $2500 for long-term 
access in year 2001 dollars.
    (v) Allow the user to search the manufacturer Web site by various 
topics including but not limited to model, model year, key words or 
phrases, vehicle identification number (VIN),

[[Page 30847]]

etc., while allowing ready identification of the latest vehicle 
calibration.
    (vi) Provide accessibility using common, readily available software 
and shall not require the use of proprietary software, hardware, 
viewers, or browsers. manufacturers shall also provide hyperlinks to 
any plug-ins, viewers or browsers (e.g. Adobe Acrobat or Netscape) 
needed to access the manufacturer Web site.
    (vii) Allow simple hyper-linking to the manufacturer Web site from 
Government Web sites and automotive-related Web sites.
    (viii) Allow access to the manufacturer Web sites with no limits on 
the modem speed by which aftermarket service providers or other 
interested parties can connect to the manufacturer Web site.
    (4) Small volume provisions for information dissemination. (i) 
Manufacturers with annual sales of less than 5,000 vehicles shall have 
until [12 months after the effective date of the final rule] to launch 
their individual Web sites as required by paragraph (g)(2) of this 
section.
    (ii) Manufacturers with annual sales of less than 1,000 vehicles 
may, in lieu of meeting the requirement of paragraph (g)(3) of this 
section, request the Administrator to approve an alternative method by 
which the required emissions-related information can be obtained by the 
persons specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this section.
    (5) Required information. All information relevant to the diagnosis 
and completion of emissions-related repairs shall be posted on 
manufacturer Web sites excluding indirect information specified in 
paragraphs (g)(11) through (g)(15) of this section. The required 
information includes, but is not limited to:
    (i) Manuals, including subsystem and component manuals, technical 
service bulletins (TSBs), recall service information, diagrams, charts, 
and training materials;
    (ii) OBD system operational information that describes functional 
characteristics of the OBD system and emission-related components; OBD 
system operational information includes, but is not limited to, OBD 
generic drive cycle information, component operating ranges, and system 
logic flow diagrams. Algorithms, look-up tables, or any values 
associated with look-up tables are not required to be made available;
    (iii) Emission-related diagnostic procedures; manufacturers who 
utilize their manufacturer-specific scan tool to provide emissions-
related diagnostic procedures cannot require connection to the vehicle 
to access this information and shall make such information available to 
aftermarket service providers on their respective manufacturer Web 
sites;
    (iv) Any information on other systems that can directly effect the 
emission system within a multiplexed system (including how information 
is sent between emission-related system modules and other modules on a 
multiplexed bus);
    (v) Any information regarding any system, component, or part of a 
vehicle monitored by the OBD system that could in a failure mode cause 
the OBD system to illuminate the malfunction indicator light (MIL); and
    (vi) Information needed to start the vehicle when the vehicle is 
equipped with an anti-theft system or other systems that disables the 
engine and prevents it from starting after the completion of an 
emissions-related repair.
    (6) Cost of required information. All information required to be 
made available by this section shall be made available at a fair and 
reasonable price to any person engaged in the repairing or servicing of 
motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines. In determining whether a price 
is fair and reasonable, consideration may be given to relevant factors, 
including, but not limited to, the cost to the manufacturer of 
preparing and/or providing the information, the type of information, 
the format in which it is provided, the price charged by other 
manufacturers for similar information, the differences that exist among 
manufacturers (e.g., the size of the manufacturer), the quantity of 
material contained in a publication, the level of detail of the 
information, the cost of the information prior to [effective date of 
this paragraph], volume discounts, and inflation.
    (7) Unavailable information. Any information which is not provided 
at a fair and reasonable price shall be considered unavailable, in 
violation of this paragraph (g) and section 202(m)(5) of the Clean Air 
Act.
    (8) Third party information providers. By [date 6 months after 
publication of the final rule], manufacturers shall, for model year 
2002 and later vehicles and engines, provide the required emissions-
related information as specified in paragraph (g)(5) of this section.
    (i) Directly to third-party information providers as defined in 
paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section in electronic format such as 
diskette or CD-ROM using non-proprietary software, in English; or
    (ii) Indirectly via a Web site other than that required by 
paragraph (g)(3) of this section for aftermarket service providers.
    (9) Required emissions-related training information. By [date 6 
months after publication of final rule], for emissions-related training 
information, manufacturers shall:
    (i) Provide on the manufacturer Web site an index of all emissions-
related training information available for purchase by aftermarket 
service providers for 1994 and newer vehicles. The index shall describe 
the title of the course or instructional session, the cost of the video 
tape or duplicate, and information on how to order the item(s) from the 
manufacturer Web site.
    (ii) Video tape or otherwise duplicate any emissions-related 
training courses and instructional sessions that are made available to 
manufacturer dealerships via satellite or the World Wide Web and make 
these items available for purchase as described in paragraph (g)(3) of 
this section. Additionally, manufacturers shall tape or otherwise 
duplicate any emissions-related class-room training courses made 
available to manufacturer franchised dealerships and make those 
duplicates available for sale at a fair and reasonable price on the 
manufacturers Web site.
    (iii) Provide access to third party training providers as defined 
in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section all emission-related training 
courses transmitted via satellite or Internet offered to their 
franchised dealerships
    (10) Timeliness and maintenance of information dissemination. 
Manufacturers must make the information required under paragraphs 
(g)(5) and (g)(8) of this section available to any person engaged in 
the repairing or servicing of motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines 
on their Web site within three months of model introduction. After this 
three month period, the information must be available and updated on 
the manufacturer Web site at the same time that the information is made 
available and updated to manufacturer franchised dealerships, except as 
otherwise specified in this section. Beginning with the 1996 model 
year, manufacturers must maintain the required information on their Web 
sites in full-text as defined in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section 
for a minimum of 15 years after model introduction. Subsequent to this 
fifteen year period, manufacturers may archive the information in the 
manufacturer's format of choice and provide an index of the archived 
information on the manufacturer Web site and how it can be obtained by 
interested parties. Archived information must be made

[[Page 30848]]

available on demand and at a fair and reasonable price.
    (11) Reprogramming Information. (i) For model years 1996 and later, 
manufacturers shall make available to the persons specified in 
paragraph (g)(1) of this section all emissions-related recalibration or 
reprogramming events (including driveability reprogramming events that 
may affect emissions) in the format of their choice at the same time 
they are made available to dealerships.
    (ii) For model years 1996 and later manufacturers shall be 
responsible for ensuring that persons specified in paragraph (g)(1) of 
this section shall have access to reprogramming services via 
manufacturer dealerships at a fair and reasonable cost and in a timely 
manner.
    (iii) For model years 1996 and later manufacturers shall provide 
persons specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this section with an efficient 
and cost-effective method for identifying whether the calibrations on 
vehicles are the latest to be issued.
    (iv) For all 2003 and later OBD vehicles equipped with 
reprogramming capability, manufacturers shall comply with SAE J2534.
    (v) For model years 2003 and later, manufacturers shall comply with 
SAE Standardized Practice J1962, ``Diagnostic Link Connector'' for the 
purposes of pass-through reprogramming.
    (vi) For model years 2003 and later, manufacturers shall make 
available to aftermarket service providers the necessary manufacturer 
specific software applications needed to initiate pass-through 
reprogramming. This software shall be able to run on a standard 
personal computer that utilizes standard operating systems.
    (vii) Compliance with SAE J2534 is not mandatory for model years 
prior to 2003, provided that the manufacturer makes available to 
aftermarket scan tool manufacturers by [date 6 months after the 
effective date of the final rule] the following information necessary 
for reprogramming the Electronic Control Unit (ECU):
    (A) The physical hardware requirements for reprogramming events or 
tools (e.g. system voltage requirements, cable terminals/pins, 
connections such as RS232 or USB, wires, etc.).
    (B) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) data communication (e.g. serial 
data protocols, transmission speed or baud rate, bit timing 
requirements, etc).
    (C) Information on the application physical interface (API) or 
layers (descriptions for procedures such as connection, initialization, 
performing and verifying programming/download, and termination).
    (D) Vehicle application information or any other related service 
information such as special pins and voltages for reprogramming events 
or additional vehicle connectors that require enablement and 
specifications for the enablement.
    (12) Generic and enhanced information for scan tools. By [date 30 
days after the effective date of the final rule], vehicle manufacturers 
shall make available to equipment and tool companies all generic and 
enhanced service information including bi-directional control and data 
stream information as defined in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section. 
This requirement applies for 1996 and later model year vehicles.
    (i) The information required by this paragraph shall be transmitted 
electronically to the aftermarket tool and equipment companies in 
English to a secure World Wide Web site. This site shall be agreed upon 
between manufacturers and aftermarket tool and equipment companies. The 
information required by this paragraph (g)(12) shall be provided using 
common document formats.
    (ii) In addition to the generic and enhanced defined in paragraph 
(g)(2)(ii) of this section, vehicle manufacturers shall also make 
available the following information necessary for developing generic 
diagnostic scan tools:
    (A) The physical hardware requirements for data communication (e.g. 
system voltage requirements, cable terminals/pins, connections such as 
RS232 or USB, wires, etc.)
    (B) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) data communication (e.g. serial 
data protocols, transmission speed or baud rate, bit timing 
requirements, etc),
    (C) Information on the application physical interface (API) or 
layers (i.e., processing algorithms or software design descriptions for 
procedures such as connection, initialization, performing and verifying 
programming/download, and termination),
    (D) Vehicle application information or any other related service 
information such as special pins and voltages for reprogramming events 
or additional vehicle connectors that require enablement and 
specifications for the enablement.
    (E) The necessary calibrations via CD-ROM, diskette, or the 
Internet.
    (F) Information that describes which interfaces, or combinations of 
interfaces, from each of the categories as described in paragraphs 
(g)(12)(ii)(A) through (E) of this section.
    (13) Availability of vehicle manufacturer-specific scan tools. 
Manufacturers shall make available for sale to the persons specified in 
paragraph (g)(2) of this section their own manufacturer-specific 
diagnostic tools at a fair and reasonable cost. Manufacturers who 
develop different versions of one or more of their diagnostic tools 
that are used in whole or in part for emission-related diagnosis and 
repair shall insure that all emission-related diagnosis and repair 
information is available for sale to the aftermarket at a fair and 
reasonable cost. Manufacturers shall provide technical support to 
aftermarket service providers for the tools described in this section, 
either themselves or through a third-party of their choice.
    (14) Changing content of manufacturer-specific scan tools. 
Manufacturers who opt to remove non-emissions related content from 
their manufacturer-specific scan tools and sell them to the persons 
specified in paragraph (g)(2) of this section shall adjust the cost of 
the tool accordingly lower to reflect the decreased value of the scan 
tool. All emissions-related content that remains in the manufacturer-
specific tool shall be identical to the information that is contained 
in the complete version of the manufacturer specific tool.
    (15) Special tools. (i) Manufacturers who have developed special 
tools to extinguish the malfunction indicator light (MIL) for Model 
Years 1994 through 2001 shall make available the necessary information 
available to equipment and tool companies to design a comparable 
generic tool. This information shall be made available to equipment and 
tool companies no later than [date 90 days following the effective date 
of the Final Rule].
    (ii) Manufacturers are prohibited from requiring special tools to 
extinguish the malfunction indicator light (MIL) beginning with Model 
Year 2002.
    (16) Reference materials. Manufacturers shall conform with the 
following Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards. Copies of 
these documents may be obtained from SAE 400 Commonwealth Drive, 
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, or at www.sae.org. The following documents 
are Incorporated by Reference.
    (i) For Web-based delivery of service information, vehicles 
manufacturers shall comply with SAE Recommended Practice 
J1930,''Electrical/Electronic Systems Diagnostic Terms, Definitions, 
Abbreviations, and Acronyms.'' (May 1988). This recommended practice 
standardizes various terms, abbreviations, and acronyms associated

[[Page 30849]]

with On-board diagnostics. Vehicle manufacturers shall comply with 
J1930 beginning with Model Year 2003.
    (ii) For OBD vehicle communications, vehicle manufacturers shall 
comply with SAE Recommended Practice J2284, ``High Speed CAN (HSC) for 
Vehicle Applications at 500 KBPS.'' (February 1999). This recommended 
practice defines a level of standardization in the implementation of a 
500 KBPS vehicle communication network using the Controller Area 
Network (CAN) protocol. Vehicle manufacturers shall comply with J2284 
beginning with Model Year 2003.
    (iii) For pass-through reprogamming capabilities, vehicle 
manufacturers shall comply with SAE Recommended Practice J1962 (FEB 
98), ``Diagnostic Connector''. This recommended practice specifies the 
boundaries within the passenger compartment where vehicle manufacturers 
may place the OBD diagnostic link connector. Vehicle manufacturers 
shall comply with J1962 beginning with model year 2003.
    (iv) For pass-through reprogramming capabilities, vehicle 
manufacturers shall comply with SAE Recommended Practice J2534 (DEC 
00), ``Specifications for Pass-Through Reprogramming.'' This 
recommended practice provides technical specifications and information 
that vehicle manufacturers must supply to aftermarket tool and 
equipment companies to develop aftermarket pass-through reprogramming 
tools. Vehicle manufacturers shall comply with J2534 beginning with 
model year 2003.
    (17) Reporting Requirements. Manufacturers shall provide to the 
Administrator reports on an annual basis and upon request of the 
Administrator, that describe the performance of their individual Web 
sites. These annual reports shall be submitted to the Administrator 
electronically utilizing non-proprietary software in the format as 
agreed to by the Administrator and the manufacturers. These annual 
reports shall include, at a minimum, monthly measurements of the 
following parameters:
    (i) Total successful requests. This is measured in number of files 
(including graphic interchange formats (GIFs) and joint photographic 
expert group (JPEG) images, i.e. electronic images such as wiring or 
other diagrams or pictures). This is defined as the total successful 
requests counts all the files which have been requested, including 
pages, graphics, etc.
    (ii) Average successful requests per day (measured in number of 
files). This is defined as reports of the average successful requests 
per day of all files which have been requested, including pages, 
graphics, etc.
    (iii) Total successful requests for pages [report on number of 
pages (including graphic interchange formats (GIFs) and joint 
photographic expert group (JPEG) images, i.e. electronic images such as 
wiring or other diagrams or pictures). This is defined as the total 
successful requests counts all the documents that were returned or 
where the document was requested but was not needed because it had not 
been recently modified and the user could use a cached copy.
    (iv) Total failed requests (measured in number of files). This is 
defined as the total failed requests counts all the files which were 
requested but failed requests because they could not be found or is 
read-protected. This includes pages, graphics, etc.
    (v) Total redirected requests (measured in number of files). This 
is defined as redirected requests that indicate that the user was 
directed to a different file instead.
    (vi) Number of distinct files requested (measured in number of 
files). This is defined as the number of different file types that were 
requested (i.e html, pdf, txt).
    (vii) Number of distinct hosts served (measured in number of 
files). This is defined as reports on the number of different computers 
where requests have come from.
    (viii) Corrupt logfile lines (measured in number of lines). This is 
defined as the lines in the logfile that were unreadable by the 
computer.
    (ix) Total data transferred (measured in bytes). This is defined as 
the total amount of data transferred from one place to another.
    (x) Average data transferred per day (measured in bytes). This is 
defined as the average amount of data transferred per day from one 
place to another.
    (xi) Daily Summary (measured in number of files/pages by day of 
week). This is defined as the total number of requests in each day of 
the week, over the time period given at the very top of the report.
    (xii) Daily Report (measured in number of files/pages by day of 
month). This is defined as how many requests there were in each day of 
a specific month.
    (xiii) Hourly Summary (measured in number of files/pages by hour of 
day). This is defined as the total number of requests for each hour of 
the day, over a specific time period.
    (xiv) Request Report (measured in number of files/pages by 
individual URL). This is defined as which files were downloaded.
    (xv) Referrer Report (measured in number of files/pages by 
individual referring URL). This is defined as which pages linked to 
your files.
    (xvi) Browser Summary (measured in number of files/pages by browser 
type, i.e., Netscape, Internet Explorer). This is defined as the 
versions of browsers by vendor.
    (xvii) Browser Report (measured in number of files/pages by browser 
type, i.e., Mozilla 4.0). This is defined as a list of the detailed 
versions of browsers used.
    (18) Prohibited Acts, Liability and Remedies. (i) It is a 
prohibited act for any person to fail to promptly provide or cause a 
failure to promptly provide information as required by this paragraph 
(g), or to otherwise fail to comply or cause a failure to comply with 
any provision of this paragraph (g).
    (ii) Any person who fails or causes the failure to comply with any 
provision of this paragraph (g) is liable for a violation of that 
provision. A corporation is presumed liable for any violations of this 
subpart that are committed by any of its subsidiaries, affiliates or 
parents that are substantially owned by it or substantially under its 
control.
    (iii) Any person who violates a provision of this paragraph (g) 
shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $27,500 per day 
for each violation. In addition, such person shall be liable for all 
other remedies set forth in Title II of the Clean Air Act, remedies 
pertaining to provisions of Title II of the Clean Air Act, or other 
applicable provisions of law.
    4. Section. 86.1808-01 is proposed to be amended by revising 
paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec. 86.1808-01  Maintenance instructions.

* * * * *
    (f) Emission control diagnostic service information.
    (1) Manufacturers are subject to the provisions of this paragraph 
(f) beginning in the 2001 model year for manufacturers of light-duty 
vehicles and light-duty trucks, and beginning in the 2005 model year 
for manufacturers of heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty engines 
weighing 14,000 pounds gross vehicle weight (GVW) and less that are 
subject to the OBD requirements of this part.
    (2) General requirements. (i) Manufacturers shall furnish or cause 
to be furnished to any person engaged in the repairing or servicing of 
motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines, or the Administrator upon 
request, any and all information needed to make use of the on-board 
diagnostic system and such other information, including

[[Page 30850]]

instructions for making emission-related diagnosis and repairs, 
including but not limited to service manuals, technical service 
bulletins, recall service information, data stream information, bi-
directional control information, and training information, unless such 
information is protected by section 208(c) as a trade secret. No such 
information may be withheld under section 208(c) of the Act if that 
information is provided (directly or indirectly) by the manufacturer to 
franchised dealers or other persons engaged in the repair, diagnosing, 
or servicing of motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines.
    (ii) Definitions. The following definitions apply for this 
paragraph (f):
    (A) Aftermarket service provider means any individual or business 
engaged in the diagnosis, service, and repair of a motor vehicle or 
engine who is not directly affiliated with a manufacturer or 
manufacturer franchised dealership.
    (B) Bi-directional control means the capability of a diagnostic 
tool to send messages on the data bus that temporarily overrides the 
module's control over a sensor or actuator and gives control to the 
diagnostic tool operator. Bi-directional controls do not create 
permanent changes to engine or component calibrations.
    (C) Data stream information means information (i.e., messages and 
parameters) originated within the vehicle by a module or intelligent 
sensors (i.e., a sensor that contains and is controlled by its own 
module) and transmitted between a network of modules and/or intelligent 
sensors connected in parallel with either one or two communication 
wires. The information is broadcast over the communication wires for 
use by other modules (e.g., chassis, transmission, etc.) to conduct 
normal vehicle operation or for use by diagnostic tools. Data stream 
information does not include engine calibration related information.
    (D) Emissions-related information means any information related to 
the diagnosis, service, and repair of emissions-related components.
    (E) Emissions-related training information means any information 
related training or instruction for the purpose of the diagnosis, 
service, and repair of emissions-related components. Emissions-related 
information includes, but is not limited to:
    (1) Manuals, including subsystem and component manuals, technical 
service bulletins (TSBs), recall service information, diagrams, charts, 
and training materials;
    (2) OBD system operational information that describes functional 
characteristics of the OBD system and emission-related components. OBD 
system operational information includes, but is not limited to, OBD 
generic drive cycle information, component operating ranges, and system 
logic flow diagrams. Algorithms, look-up tables, or any values 
associated with look-up tables are not required to be made available;
    (3) Emission-related diagnostic procedures. Manufacturers who 
utilize their manufacturer-specific scan tool to provide emissions-
related diagnostic procedures cannot require connection to the vehicle 
to access this information. Additionally, manufacturers shall also make 
any emissions-related diagnostic procedures incorporated into their 
manufacturer-specific scan tools available to aftermarket service 
providers on their respective manufacturer Web sites;
    (4) Any information on other systems that can directly effect the 
emission system within a multiplexed system (including how information 
is sent between emission-related system modules and other modules on a 
multiplexed bus);
    (5) Any information regarding any system, component, or part of a 
vehicle monitored by the OBD system that could in a failure mode cause 
the OBD system to illuminate the malfunction indicator light (MIL);
    (6) Information needed to start the vehicle when the vehicle is 
equipped with an anti-theft system or other systems that disables the 
engine and prevents it from starting after the completion of an 
emissions-related repair; and
    (7) Manufacturer-specific emissions-related diagnostic trouble 
codes (DTCs) and any related service bulletins, trouble shooting 
guides, and/or repair procedures associated with these manufacturer-
specific DTCs.
    (F) Enhanced service and repair information means information which 
is specific for an original equipment manufacturer's brand of tools and 
equipment.
    (G) Generic service and repair information means information which 
is not specific for an original equipment manufacturer's brand of tools 
and equipment.
    (H) Indirect information means any information that is not 
specifically contained in the service literature, but is contained in 
items such as tools or equipment provided to franchised dealers (or 
others).
    (I) Intermediary means any individual or entity, other than an 
original equipment manufacturer, which provides service or equipment to 
aftermarket service providers.
    (J) Manufacturer franchised dealership means any service provider 
with which an manufacturer has a direct business relationship.
    (K) Third party information provider means any individual or 
entity, other than an original equipment manufacturer, who consolidates 
manufacturer service information and makes this information available 
to aftermarket service providers.
    (L) Third party training provider means any individual or entity, 
other than an original equipment manufacturer who develops and/or 
delivers instructional and educational material for automotive training 
courses.
    (3) Information dissemination. By [date six months after the 
effective date of the final rule], each manufacturer shall provide or 
cause to be provided a manufacturer-specific World Wide Web site 
available to the persons specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this 
section and to any other interested parties containing in the 
information specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section for 2001 
and later model year vehicles which have been offered for sale; this 
requirement does not apply to indirect information, including the 
information specified in paragraphs (f)(11) through (f)(15) of this 
section. Each manufacturer Web site shall:
    (i) Provide access in full-text to all of the information specified 
in paragraph (f)(5) of this section.
    (ii) Be updated at the same time as dealership World Wide Web 
sites, but in no instance less than 14 days after new information or 
changes to existing information have been changed or updated on the 
manufacturer's dealership site.
    (iii) Provide users with a description of the minimum computer 
hardware and software needed by the user to access that manufacturer's 
information (e.g., computer processor speed and operating system 
software). This description shall appear when users first log-on to the 
home page of the manufacturer's Web site.
    (iv) Provide Short-Term(<ls-thn-eq> 24 hours), Mid-Term (30 day 
period), and Long-Term (365 day period) Web site subscription options 
to any person specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this section at a fair 
and reasonable cost as specified in paragraph (f)(6) of this section 
for each of the options. Reasonable cost shall not exceed $20 for 
short-term access, $300 for mid-term access, and $2500 for long-term 
access in year 2001 dollars.

[[Page 30851]]

    (v) Allow the user to search the manufacturer Web site by various 
topics including but not limited to model, model year, key words or 
phrases, vehicle identification number (VIN), etc., while allowing 
ready identification of the latest vehicle calibration.
    (vi) Provide accessibility using common, readily available software 
and shall not require the use of proprietary software, hardware, 
viewers, or browsers. manufacturers shall also provide hyperlinks to 
any plug-ins, viewers or browsers (e.g. Adobe Acrobat or Netscape) 
needed to access the manufacturer Web site.
    (vii) Allow simple hyper-linking to the manufacturer Web site from 
Government Web sites and automotive-related Web sites.
    (viii) Allow access to the manufacturer Web sites with no limits on 
the modem speed by which aftermarket service providers or other 
interested parties can connect to the manufacturer Web site.
    (4) Small volume provisions for information dissemination. (i) 
Manufacturers with annual sales of less than 5,000 vehicles shall have 
until [12 months after the effective date of the final rule] to launch 
their individual Web sites as required by paragraph (f)(2) of this 
section.
    (ii) Manufacturers with annual sales of less than 1,000 vehicles 
may, in lieu of meeting the requirement of paragraph (f)(3) of this 
section, request the Administrator to approve an alternative method by 
which the required emissions-related information can be obtained by the 
persons specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
    (5) Required information. All information relevant to the diagnosis 
and completion of emissions-related repairs shall be posted on 
manufacturer Web sites excluding indirect information specified in 
paragraphs (f)(11) through (f)(15) of this section. The required 
information includes, but is not limited to:
    (i) Manuals, including subsystem and component manuals, technical 
service bulletins (TSBs), recall service information, diagrams, charts, 
and training materials;
    (ii) OBD system operational information that describes functional 
characteristics of the OBD system and emission-related components; OBD 
system operational information includes, but is not limited to, OBD 
generic drive cycle information, component operating ranges, and system 
logic flow diagrams. Algorithms, look-up tables, or any values 
associated with look-up tables are not required to be made available;
    (iii) Emission-related diagnostic procedures; manufacturers who 
utilize their manufacturer-specific scan tool to provide emissions-
related diagnostic procedures cannot require connection to the vehicle 
to access this information and shall make such information available to 
aftermarket service providers on their respective manufacturer Web 
sites;
    (iv) Any information on other systems that can directly effect the 
emission system within a multiplexed system (including how information 
is sent between emission-related system modules and other modules on a 
multiplexed bus);
    (v) Any information regarding any system, component, or part of a 
vehicle monitored by the OBD system that could in a failure mode cause 
the OBD system to illuminate the malfunction indicator light (MIL); and
    (vi) Information needed to start the vehicle when the vehicle is 
equipped with an anti-theft system or other systems that disables the 
engine and prevents it from starting after the completion of an 
emissions-related repair.
    (6) Cost of required information. All information required to be 
made available by this section shall be made available at a fair and 
reasonable price to any person engaged in the repairing or servicing of 
motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines. In determining whether a price 
is fair and reasonable, consideration may be given to relevant factors, 
including, but not limited to, the cost to the manufacturer of 
preparing and/or providing the information, the type of information, 
the format in which it is provided, the price charged by other 
manufacturers for similar information, the differences that exist among 
manufacturers (e.g., the size of the manufacturer), the quantity of 
material contained in a publication, the level of detail of the 
information, the cost of the information prior to [effective date of 
the final rule], volume discounts, and inflation.
    (7) Unavailable information. Any information which is not provided 
at a fair and reasonable price shall be considered unavailable, in 
violation of this paragraph (f) and section 202(m)(5) of the Clean Air 
Act.
    (8) Third party information providers. By [date 6 months after 
publication of the final rule], manufacturers shall, for model year 
2002 and later vehicles and engines, provide the required emissions-
related information as specified in paragraph (f)(5) of this section.
    (i) Directly to third-party information providers as defined in 
paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section in electronic format such as 
diskette or CD-ROM using non-proprietary software, in English; or
    (ii) Indirectly via a Web site other than that required by 
paragraph (f)(3) of this section for aftermarket service providers.
    (9) Required emissions-related training information. By [date 6 
months after publication of the final rule], for emissions-related 
training information, manufacturers shall:
    (i) Provide on the manufacturer Web site an index of all emissions-
related training information available for purchase by aftermarket 
service providers for 1994 and newer vehicles. The index shall describe 
the title of the course or instructional session, the cost of the video 
tape or duplicate, and information on how to order the item(s) from the 
manufacturer Web site.
    (ii) Video tape or otherwise duplicate any emissions-related 
training courses and instructional sessions that are made available to 
manufacturer dealerships via satellite or the World Wide Web and make 
these items available for purchase as described in paragraph (f)(3) of 
this section. Additionally, manufacturers shall tape or otherwise 
duplicate any emissions-related class-room training courses made 
available to manufacturer franchised dealerships and make those 
duplicates available for sale at a fair and reasonable price on the 
manufacturers Web site.
    (iii) Provide access to third party training providers as defined 
in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section all emission-related training 
courses transmitted via satellite or Internet offered to their 
franchised dealerships
    (10) Timeliness and maintenance of information dissemination. 
Manufacturers must make the information required under paragraphs 
(f)(5) and (f)(8) of this section available to any person engaged in 
the repairing or servicing of motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines 
on their Web site within three months of model introduction. After this 
three month period, the information must be available and updated on 
the manufacturer Web site at the same time that the information is made 
available and updated to manufacturer franchised dealerships, except as 
otherwise specified in this section. Beginning with the l996 model 
year, manufacturers must maintain the required information on their Web 
sites in full-text as defined in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) for a minimum of 
15 years after model introduction. Subsequent to this fifteen year 
period, manufacturers may archive the information in the manufacturer's 
format of choice and provide an index of the archived

[[Page 30852]]

information on the manufacturer Web site and how it can be obtained by 
interested parties. Archived information must be made available on 
demand and at a fair and reasonable price.
    (11) Reprogramming Information. (i) For model years 2001 and later, 
manufacturers shall make available to the persons specified in 
paragraph (f)(1) of this section all emissions-related recalibration or 
reprogramming events (including driveability reprogramming events that 
may affect emissions) in the format of their choice at the same time 
they are made available to dealerships.
    (ii) For model years 2001 and later manufacturers shall be 
responsible for ensuring that persons specified in paragraph (f)(1) of 
this section shall have access to reprogramming services via 
manufacturer dealerships at a fair and reasonable cost and in a timely 
manner.
    (iii) For model years 2001 and later manufacturers shall provide 
persons specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this section with an efficient 
and cost-effective method for identifying whether the calibrations on 
vehicles are the latest to be issued.
    (iv) For all 2003 and later OBD vehicles equipped with 
reprogramming capability, manufacturers shall comply with SAE J2534.
    (v) For model years 2003 and later, manufacturers shall comply with 
SAE Standardized Practice J1962, ``Diagnostic Link Connector'' for the 
purposes of pass-through reprogramming.
    (vi) For model years 2003 and later, manufacturers shall make 
available to aftermarket service providers the necessary manufacturer 
specific software applications needed to initiate pass-through 
reprogramming. This software shall be able to run on a standard 
personal computer that utilizes standard operating systems.
    (vii) Compliance with SAE J2534 is not mandatory for model years 
prior to 2003, provided that the manufacturer makes available to 
aftermarket scan tool manufacturers by [date 6 months after the 
effective date of the final rule] the following information necessary 
for reprogramming the Electronic Control Unit (ECU):
    (A) The physical hardware requirements for reprogramming events or 
tools (e.g. system voltage requirements, cable terminals/pins, 
connections such as RS232 or USB, wires, etc.).
    (B) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) data communication (e.g. serial 
data protocols, transmission speed or baud rate, bit timing 
requirements, etc).
    (C) Information on the application physical interface (API) or 
layers (descriptions for procedures such as connection, initialization, 
performing and verifying programming/download, and termination).
    (D) Vehicle application information or any other related service 
information such as special pins and voltages for reprogramming events 
or additional vehicle connectors that require enablement and 
specifications for the enablement.
    (12) Generic and enhanced information for scan tools. By [date 30 
days after the effective date of the final rule], vehicle manufacturers 
shall make available to equipment and tool companies all generic and 
enhanced service information including bi-directional control and data 
stream information as defined in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section. 
This requirement applies for 2001 and later model year vehicles.
    (i) The information required by this paragraph shall be transmitted 
electronically to the aftermarket tool and equipment companies in 
English to a secure World Wide Web site. This site shall be agreed upon 
between manufacturers and aftermarket tool and equipment companies. The 
information required by this paragraph (f)(12) shall be provided using 
common document formats.
    (ii) In addition to the generic and enhanced defined in paragraph 
(f)(2)(ii) of this section, vehicle manufacturers shall also make 
available the following information necessary for developing generic 
diagnostic scan tools:
    (A) The physical hardware requirements for data communication (e.g. 
system voltage requirements, cable terminals/pins, connections such as 
RS232 or USB, wires, etc.)
    (B) Electronic Control Unit (ECU) data communication (e.g. serial 
data protocols, transmission speed or baud rate, bit timing 
requirements, etc),
    (C) Information on the application physical interface (API) or 
layers (i.e., processing algorithms or software design descriptions for 
procedures such as connection, initialization, performing and verifying 
programming/download, and termination),
    (D) Vehicle application information or any other related service 
information such as special pins and voltages for reprogramming events 
or additional vehicle connectors that require enablement and 
specifications for the enablement.
    (E) The necessary calibrations via CD-ROM, diskette, or the 
Internet.
    (F) Information that describes which interfaces, or combinations of 
interfaces, from each of the categories as described in paragraphs 
(f)(12)(ii)(A) through (E) of this section.
    (13) Availability of vehicle manufacturer-specific scan tools. 
Manufacturers shall make available for sale to the persons specified in 
paragraph (f)(2) of this section their own manufacturer-specific 
diagnostic tools at a fair and reasonable cost. Manufacturers who 
develop different versions of one or more of their diagnostic tools 
that are used in whole or in part for emission-related diagnosis and 
repair shall insure that all emission-related diagnosis and repair 
information is available for sale to the aftermarket at a fair and 
reasonable cost. Manufacturers shall provide technical support to 
aftermarket service providers for the tools described in this section, 
either themselves or through a third-party of their choice.
    (14) Changing content of manufacturer-specific scan tools. 
Manufacturers who opt to remove non-emissions related content from 
their manufacturer-specific scan tools and sell them to the persons 
specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this section shall adjust the cost of 
the tool accordingly lower to reflect the decreased value of the scan 
tool. All emissions-related content that remains in the manufacturer-
specific tool shall be identical to the information that is contained 
in the complete version of the manufacturer specific tool.
    (15) Special tools. (i) Manufacturers who have developed special 
tools to extinguish the malfunction indicator light (MIL) for Model 
Years 1994 through 2001 shall make available the necessary information 
available to equipment and tool companies to design a comparable 
generic tool. This information shall be made available to equipment and 
tool companies no later than [date 90 days following the effective date 
of the Final Rule].
    (ii) Manufacturers are prohibited from requiring special tools to 
extinguish the malfunction indicator light (MIL) beginning with Model 
Year 2002.
    (16) Reference materials. Manufacturers shall conform with the 
following Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards. Copies of 
these documents may be obtained from SAE 400 Commonwealth Drive, 
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, or at www.sae.org. The following documents 
are Incorporated by Reference.
    (i) For Web-based delivery of service information, vehicles 
manufacturers shall comply with SAE Recommended Practice 
J1930,''Electrical/Electronic Systems Diagnostic Terms, Definitions, 
Abbreviations, and Acronyms.'' (May

[[Page 30853]]

1988). This recommended practice standardizes various terms, 
abbreviations, and acronyms associated with On-board diagnostics. 
Vehicle manufacturers shall comply with J1930 beginning with Model Year 
2003.
    (ii) For OBD vehicle communications, vehicle manufacturers shall 
comply with SAE Recommended Practice J2284, ``High Speed CAN (HSC) for 
Vehicle Applications at 500 KBPS.'' (February 1999). This recommended 
practice defines a level of standardization in the implementation of a 
500 KBPS vehicle communication network using the Controller Area 
Network (CAN) protocol. Vehicle manufacturers shall comply with J2284 
beginning with Model Year 2003.
    (iii) For pass-through reprogramming capabilities, vehicle 
manufacturers shall comply with SAE Recommended Practice J1962 (FEB 
98), ``Diagnostic Connector''. This recommended practice specifies the 
boundaries within the passenger compartment where vehicle manufacturers 
may place the OBD diagnostic link connector. Vehicle manufacturers 
shall comply with J1962 beginning with model year 2003.
    (iv) For pass-through reprogramming capabilities, vehicle 
manufacturers shall comply with SAE Recommended Practice J2534 (DEC 
00), ``Specifications for Pass-Through Reprogramming.'' This 
recommended practice provides technical specifications and information 
that vehicle manufacturers must supply to aftermarket tool and 
equipment companies to develop aftermarket pass-through reprogramming 
tools. Vehicle manufacturers shall comply with J2534 beginning with 
model year 2003.
    (17) Reporting Requirements. Manufacturers shall provide to the 
Administrator reports on an annual basis and upon request of the 
Administrator, that describe the performance of their individual Web 
sites. These annual reports shall be submitted to the Administrator 
electronically utilizing non-proprietary software in the format as 
agreed to by the Administrator and the manufacturers. These annual 
reports shall include, at a minimum, monthly measurements of the 
following parameters:
    (i) Total successful requests. This is measured in number of files 
(including graphic interchange formats (GIFs) and joint photographic 
expert group (JPEG) images, i.e. electronic images such as wiring or 
other diagrams or pictures). This is defined as the total successful 
requests counts all the files which have been requested, including 
pages, graphics, etc.
    (ii) Average successful requests per day (measured in number of 
files). This is defined as reports of the average successful requests 
per day of all files which have been requested, including pages, 
graphics, etc.
    (iii) Total successful requests for pages [report on number of 
pages (including graphic interchange formats (GIFs) and joint 
photographic expert group (JPEG) images, i.e. electronic images such as 
wiring or other diagrams or pictures). This is defined as the total 
successful requests counts all the documents that were returned or 
where the document was requested but was not needed because it had not 
been recently modified and the user could use a cached copy.
    (iv) Total failed requests (measured in number of files). This is 
defined as the total failed requests counts all the files which were 
requested but failed requests because they could not be found or is 
read-protected. This includes pages, graphics, etc.
    (v) Total redirected requests (measured in number of files). This 
is defined as redirected requests that indicate that the user was 
directed to a different file instead.
    (vi) Number of distinct files requested (measured in number of 
files). This is defined as the number of different file types that were 
requested (i.e., html, pdf, txt).
    (vii) Number of distinct hosts served (measured in number of 
files). This is defined as reports on the number of different computers 
where requests have come from.
    (viii) Corrupt logfile lines (measured in number of lines). This is 
defined as the lines in the logfile that were unreadable by the 
computer.
    (ix) Total data transferred (measured in bytes). This is defined as 
the total amount of data transferred from one place to another.
    (x) Average data transferred per day (measured in bytes). This is 
defined as the average amount of data transferred per day from one 
place to another.
    (xi) Daily Summary (measured in number of files/pages by day of 
week). This is defined as the total number of requests in each day of 
the week, over the time period given at the very top of the report.
    (xii) Daily Report (measured in number of files/pages by day of 
month). This is defined as how many requests there were in each day of 
a specific month.
    (xiii) Hourly Summary (measured in number of files/pages by hour of 
day). This is defined as the total number of requests for each hour of 
the day, over a specific time period.
    (xiv) Request Report (measured in number of files/pages by 
individual URL). This is defined as which files were downloaded.
    (xv) Referrer Report (measured in number of files/pages by 
individual referring URL). This is defined as which pages linked to 
your files.
    (xvi) Browser Summary (measured in number of files/pages by browser 
type, i.e., Netscape, Internet Explorer). This is defined as the 
versions of browsers by vendor.
    (xvii) Browser Report (measured in number of files/pages by browser 
type, i.e., Mozilla 4.0). This is defined as a list of the detailed 
versions of browsers used.
    (18) Prohibited Acts, Liability and Remedies. (i) It is a 
prohibited act for any person to fail to promptly provide or cause a 
failure to promptly provide information as required by this paragraph 
(f) or to otherwise fail to comply or cause a failure to comply with 
any provision of this paragraph (f).
    (ii) Any person who fails or causes the failure to comply with any 
provision of this subsection is liable for a violation of that 
provision. A corporation is presumed liable for any violations of this 
subpart that are committed by any of its subsidiaries, affiliates or 
parents that are substantially owned by it or substantially under its 
control.
    (iii) Any person who violates a provision in this paragraph (f) 
shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $27,500 per day 
for each violation. In addition, such person shall be liable for all 
other remedies set forth in Title II of the Clean Air Act, remedies 
pertaining to provisions of Title II of the Clean Air Act, or other 
applicable provisions of law.

[FR Doc. 01-14471 Filed 6-7-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>