[Federal Register: February 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 35)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 8309-8428]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24fe09-27]
[[Page 8309]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 86, 89, et al.
Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Motor Vehicle
Engines; Final Rule
[[Page 8310]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 86, 89, 90, 1027, 1033, 1042, 1048, 1054, 1060, 1065,
and 1068
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047; FRL-8750-3]
RIN 2060-AL92
Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Motor
Vehicle Engines; Regulations Requiring Onboard Diagnostic Systems on
2010 and Later Heavy-Duty Engines Used in Highway Applications Over
14,000 Pounds; Revisions to Onboard Diagnostic Requirements for Diesel
Highway Heavy-Duty Vehicles Under 14,000 Pounds
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In 2001, EPA finalized a new, major program for highway heavy-
duty engines. That program, the Clean Diesel Trucks and Buses program,
will result in the introduction of advanced emissions control systems
such as catalyzed diesel particulate filters (DPF) and catalysts
capable of reducing harmful nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions.
This final rule will require that these advanced emissions control
systems be monitored for malfunctions via an onboard diagnostic system
(OBD), similar to those systems that have been required on passenger
cars since the mid-1990s. This final rule will require manufacturers to
install OBD systems that monitor the functioning of emission control
components and alert the vehicle operator to any detected need for
emission related repair. This final rule will also require that
manufacturers make available to the service and repair industry
information necessary to perform repair and maintenance service on OBD
systems and other emission related engine components. Lastly, this
final rule revises certain existing OBD requirements for diesel engines
used in heavy-duty vehicles under 14,000 pounds.
DATES: This rule is effective on April 27, 2009. The incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this regulation is approved
by the Director of the Federal Register as of April 27, 2009.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047. All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will
be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Air
Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Sherwood, U.S. EPA, National
Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, Assessment and Standards
Division, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone (734)
214-4405, fax (734) 214-4816, e-mail sherwood.todd@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities
This action will affect you if you produce or import new heavy-duty
engines which are intended for use in highway vehicles such as trucks
and buses, or produce or import such highway vehicles, or convert
heavy-duty vehicles or heavy-duty engines used in highway vehicles to
use alternative fuels.
The following table gives some examples of entities that may have
to follow the regulations. But because these are only examples, you
should carefully examine the regulations in 40 CFR part 86. If you have
questions, call the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of
NAICS codes SIC codes potentially
Category \a\ \b\ regulated
entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..................... 336111 3711 Motor Vehicle
336112 Manufacturers;
336120 Engine and
Truck
Manufacturers.
Industry..................... 811112 7533 Commercial
Importers of
Vehicles and
Vehicle
Components.
811198 7549
541514 8742
Industry..................... 336111 3592 Alternative
fuel vehicle
converters.
336312 3714
422720 5172
454312 5984
811198 7549
541514 8742
541690 8931
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification Systems (NAICS).
\b\ Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system code.
Outline of This Preamble
I. Overview
A. Background
B. What Is EPA Requiring?
1. OBD Requirements for Engines Used in Highway Vehicles Over
14,000 Pounds GVWR
2. Requirements That Service Information be Made Available
3. OBD Requirements for Diesel Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Engines
Used in Vehicles Under 14,000 Pounds
4. Technical Amendments for Other Programs
C. Why Is EPA Promulgating These Requirements?
1. Highway Engines and Vehicles Contribute to Serious Air
Pollution Problems
2. Emissions Control of Highway Engines and Vehicles Depends on
Properly Operating Emissions Control Systems
3. Basis for Action Under the Clean Air Act
4. The Importance of a Nationwide HDOBD Program
5. Worldwide Harmonized OBD (WWH-OBD)
II. How Have the Proposed OBD Requirements Changed for This Final
Rule and When Will They be Implemented?
[[Page 8311]]
A. General OBD System Requirements
1. The OBD System
2. Malfunction Indicator Light (MIL) and Diagnostic Trouble
Codes (DTC)
3. Monitoring Conditions
4. Determining the Proper OBD Malfunction Criteria
5. Demonstrating Compliance With CARB Requirements
6. Temporary Provisions To Address Hardship Due To Unusual
Circumstances
B. Monitoring Requirements and Timelines for Diesel-Fueled/
Compression-Ignition Engines
1. Fuel System Monitoring
2. Engine Misfire Monitoring
3. Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) System Monitoring
4. Turbo Boost Control System Monitoring
5. Non-Methane Hydrocarbon (NMHC) Converting Catalyst Monitoring
6. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and Lean NOX
Catalyst Monitoring
7. NOX Adsorber System Monitoring
8. Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) System Monitoring
9. Exhaust Gas Sensor Monitoring
C. Monitoring Requirements and Timelines for Gasoline/Spark-
Ignition Engines
D. Monitoring Requirements and Timelines for Other Diesel and
Gasoline Systems
1. Variable Valve Timing and/or Control (VVT) System Monitoring
2. Engine Cooling System Monitoring
3. Crankcase Ventilation System Monitoring
4. Comprehensive Component Monitors
5. Other Emissions Control System Monitoring
6. Exceptions to Monitoring Requirements
E. A Standardized Method To Measure Real World Monitoring
Performance
1. Description of Software Counters To Track Real World
Performance
2. Performance Tracking Requirements
F. Standardization Requirements
1. Reference Documents
2. Diagnostic Connector Requirements
3. Communications to a Scan Tool
4. Required Emissions Related Functions
5. In-Use Performance Ratio Tracking Requirements
6. Exceptions to Standardization Requirements
G. Implementation Schedule, In-Use Liability, and In-Use
Enforcement
1. Implementation Schedule and In-Use Liability Provisions
2. In-Use Enforcement
H. Changes to the Existing 8,500 to 14,000 Pound Diesel OBD
Requirements
1. NOX Aftertreatment Monitoring
2. Diesel Particulate Filter System Monitoring
3. NMHC Converting Catalyst Monitoring
4. Other Monitors
5. CARB OBDII Compliance Option and Deficiencies
III. How Have the Service Information Availability Requirements
Changed for This Final Rule?
A. What is the Important Background Information for the
Provision Being Finalized for Service Information Availability?
B. What Provisions are Being Finalized for Service Information
Availability?
1. What Information is the OEM Required To Make Available?
2. What are the Requirements for Web-Based Delivery of the
Required Information?
3. What are the Requirements for Service Information for Third
Party Information Providers?
4. What are the Requirements for the Availability of Training
Information?
5. What are the Requirements for Recalibration of Vehicles?
6. What are the Requirements for the Availability of Enhanced
Information for Scan Tools for Equipment and Tool Companies?
7. What are the Requirements for the Availability of OEM-
Specific Diagnostic Scan Tools and Other Special Tools?
8. Which Reference Materials are Being Incorporated by
Reference?
IV. What are the Emissions Reductions Associated with the OBD
Requirements?
V. What are the Costs Associated With the OBD Requirements?
A. Variable Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000
Pounds
B. Fixed Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000 Pounds
C. Total Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000 Pounds
D. Costs for Diesel Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Engines Used in
Heavy-Duty Vehicles Under 14,000 Pounds
VI. What are the Updated Annual Costs and Costs per Ton Associated
With the 2007/2010 Heavy-Duty Highway Program?
A. Updated 2007 Heavy-Duty Highway Rule Costs Including OBD
B. Updated 2007 Heavy-Duty Highway Rule Costs per Ton Including
OBD
VII. How Have the Proposed Requirements for Engine Manufacturers
Changed for This Final Rule?
A. Documentation Requirements
B. Catalyst Aging Procedures
C. Demonstration Testing
1. Selection of Test Engines
2. Required Testing
3. Testing Protocol
4. Evaluation Protocol
5. Confirmatory Testing
D. Deficiencies
E. Production Evaluation Testing
1. Verification of Standardization Requirements
2. Verification of Monitoring Requirements
3. Verification of In-Use Monitoring Performance Ratios
VIII. What are the Issues Concerning Inspection and Maintenance
Programs?
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act
X. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
I. Overview
A. Background
Section 202(m) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7521(m), directs EPA to
promulgate regulations requiring 1994 and later model year light-duty
vehicles (LDVs) and light-duty trucks (LDTs) to contain an OBD system
that monitors emission-related components for malfunctions or
deterioration ``which could cause or result in failure of the vehicles
to comply with emission standards established'' for such vehicles.
Section 202(m) also states that, ``The Administrator may, in the
Administrator's discretion, promulgate regulations requiring
manufacturers to install such onboard diagnostic systems on heavy-duty
vehicles and engines.''
On February 19, 1993, we published a final rule requiring
manufacturers of light-duty applications to install such OBD systems on
their vehicles beginning with the 1994 model year (58 FR 9468). The OBD
systems must monitor emission control components for any malfunction or
deterioration that could cause emissions to exceed certain emission
thresholds. The regulation also required that the driver be notified of
any need for repair via a dashboard light, or malfunction indicator
light (MIL), when the diagnostic system detected a problem. We also
allowed optional compliance with California's second phase OBD
requirements, referred to as OBDII (13 CCR 1968.1), for purposes of
satisfying the EPA OBD requirements. Since publishing the 1993 OBD
final rule, EPA has made several revisions to the OBD requirements,
most of which served to align the EPA OBD requirements with revisions
to the California OBDII requirements (13 CCR 1968.2).
On August 9, 1995, EPA published a final rulemaking that set forth
service information regulations for light-duty vehicles and light-duty
trucks (60 FR 40474). 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
[[Page 8312]]
(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 are
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 OEMs to their franchised
dealerships. These service information availability requirements have
been revised since that first final rule in response to changing
technology among other reasons. (68 FR 38428)
In October of 2000, we published a final rule requiring OBD systems
on heavy-duty vehicles and engines up to 14,000 pounds GVWR (65 FR
59896). In that rule, we expressed our intention of developing OBD
requirements in a future rule for vehicles and engines used in vehicles
over 14,000 pounds. We expressed this same intention in our 2007HD
highway final rule (66 FR 5002) which established new heavy-duty
highway emissions standards for 2007 and later model year engines. In
June of 2003, we published a final rule extending service information
availability requirements to heavy-duty vehicles and engines weighing
up to 14,000 pounds GVWR. We declined extending these requirements to
engines above 14,000 pounds GVWR at least until such engines are
subject to OBD requirements.
On January 18, 2001, EPA established a comprehensive national
control program--the Clean Diesel Truck and Bus program--that regulates
the heavy-duty vehicle and its fuel as a single system. (66 FR 5002) As
part of this program, new emission standards will begin to take effect
in model year 2007 and will apply to heavy-duty highway engines and
vehicles. These standards are based on the use of high-efficiency
catalytic exhaust emission control devices or comparably effective
advanced technologies. Because these devices are damaged by sulfur, the
regulation also requires the level of sulfur in highway diesel fuel be
reduced by 97 percent.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note that the 2007HD highway rule contained new emissions
standards for gasoline engines as well as diesel engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 24, 2007, we proposed new OBD requirements for highway
engines used in vehicles greater than 14,000 pounds (72 FR 3200).
Today's action finalizes those proposed requirements. Today's action
also requires new availability requirements for emission-related
service information, also proposed in the January 24, 2007 action, that
will make this information more widely available to the industry
servicing vehicles over 14,000 pounds.
B. What Is EPA Requiring?
1. OBD Requirements for Engines Used in Highway Vehicles Over 14,000
Pounds GVWR
We believe that OBD requirements should be extended to include over
14,000 pound heavy-duty vehicles and engines for many reasons. In the
past, heavy-duty diesel engines have relied primarily on in-cylinder
modifications to meet emission standards. For example, emission
standards have been met through changes in fuel timing, piston design,
combustion chamber design, charge air cooling, use of four valves per
cylinder rather than two valves, and piston ring pack design and
location improvements. In contrast, the 2004 and 2007 emission
standards represent a different sort of technological challenge that
are being met with the addition of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR)
systems and the addition of exhaust aftertreatment devices such as
diesel particulate filters (DPF), sometimes called PM traps, and
NOX catalysts. Such ``add on'' devices can experience
deterioration and malfunction that, unlike the engine design elements
listed earlier, may go unnoticed by the driver. Because deterioration
and malfunction of these devices can go unnoticed by the driver, and
because their primary purpose is emissions control, and because the
level of emission control is on the order of 50 to 99 percent, some
form of diagnosis and malfunction detection is crucial. We believe that
such detection can be effectively achieved by employing a well designed
OBD system.
The same is true for gasoline heavy-duty vehicles and engines.
While emission control is managed with both engine design elements and
aftertreatment devices, the catalytic converter is the primary emission
control feature accounting for over 95 percent of the emission control.
We believe that monitoring the emission control system for proper
operation is critical to ensure that new vehicles and engines certified
to the very low emission standards set in recent years continue to meet
those standards throughout their full useful life.
Further, the industry trend is clearly toward increasing use of
computer and electronic controls for both engine and powertrain
management, and for emission control. In fact, the heavy-duty industry
has already gone a long way, absent any government regulation, to
standardize computer communication protocols.\2\ Computer and
electronic control systems, as opposed to mechanical systems, provide
improvements in many areas including, but not limited to, improved
precision and control, reduced weight, and lower cost. However,
electronic and computer controls also create increased difficulty in
diagnosing and repairing the malfunctions that inevitably occur in any
engine or powertrain system. Today's OBD requirements will build on the
efforts already undertaken by the industry to ensure that key emissions
related components will be monitored in future heavy-duty vehicles and
engines and that the diagnosis and repair of those components will be
as efficient and cost effective as possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See ``On-Board Diagnostics, A Heavy Duty Perspective,'' SAE
951947; ``Recommended Practice for a Serial Control and
Communications Vehicle Network,'' SAE J1939 which may be obtained
from Society of Automotive Engineers International, 400 Commonwealth
Dr., Warrendale, PA, 15096-0001; and ``Road Vehicles-Diagnostics on
Controller Area Network (CAN)--Part 4: Requirements for emission-
related systems,'' ISO 15765-4:2001 which may be obtained from the
International Organization for Standardization, Case Postale 56, CH-
1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, heavy-duty engines and, in particular, diesel engines tend
to have very long useful lives. With age comes deterioration and a
tendency toward increasing emissions. With the OBD systems we are
requiring, we expect that these engines will continue to be properly
maintained and therefore will continue to emit at low emissions levels
even after accumulating hundreds of thousands and even a million miles.
For the reasons laid out above, most manufacturers of vehicles,
trucks, and engines have incorporated some type of OBD system into
their products that are capable of identifying when certain types of
malfunctions occur, and in what systems. In the heavy-duty industry,
those OBD systems traditionally have been geared toward detecting
malfunctions causing drivability and/or fuel economy related problems.
Without specific requirements for manufacturers to include OBD
mechanisms to detect emission-related problems, those types of
malfunctions that could result in high emissions without a
corresponding adverse drivability or fuel economy impact could go
unnoticed by both the driver and the repair technician. The resulting
increase in emissions and detrimental impact on air quality could
[[Page 8313]]
be avoided by incorporating an OBD system capable of detecting emission
control system malfunctions.
2. Requirements That Service Information Be Made Available
We are requiring that makers of engines that go into vehicles over
14,000 pounds make available to any person engaged in repair or service
all information necessary to make use of the OBD systems and for making
emission-related repairs, including any emissions-related information
that is provided by the OEM to franchised dealers. This information
includes, but is not limited to, manuals, technical service bulletins
(TSBs), a general description of the operation of each OBD monitor,
etc. We discuss the new requirements further in section III of this
preamble.
The new requirements are similar to those required currently for
all 1996 and newer light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks and 2005
and newer heavy-duty applications up to 14,000 pounds. See section III
for a complete discussion of the new service information provisions.
Note that information for making emission-related repairs does not
include information used to design and manufacture parts, but it may
include OEM changes to internal calibrations and other indirect
information, as discussed in section III.
3. OBD Requirements for Diesel Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Engines Used in
Vehicles Under 14,000 Pounds
We are also making some changes to the existing diesel OBD
requirements for heavy-duty applications under 14,000 pounds (i.e.,
8,500 to 14,000 pounds). Some of these changes are being made for
immediate implementation to relax some of the requirements that we
currently have in place for 8,500 to 14,000 pound applications that
cannot be met by diesels without granting widespread deficiencies to
industry. Other changes are being made for the 2010 and later model
years since they represent an increase in the stringency of our current
OBD requirements and, therefore, some leadtime is necessary for
manufacturers to comply. All of the changes being made for 8,500 to
14,000 pound diesel applications will result in OBD emissions
thresholds identical, for all practical purposes, to the OBD thresholds
for over 14,000 pound applications.
4. Technical Amendments for Other Programs
We are finalizing a variety of technical amendments in this final
rule. Most of these changes involve minor adjustments or corrections to
the regulations we adopted on October 8, 2008 (73 FR 59034) and on June
30, 2008 (73 FR 37096). See the memorandum in the docket entitled
``Technical Amendments to EPA Regulations'' for a description of these
changes.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Document ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0057. Also see
Document ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0058.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Why Is EPA Promulgating These Requirements?
1. Highway Engines and Vehicles Contribute to Serious Air Pollution
Problems
The pollution emitted by heavy-duty highway engines contributes
greatly to our nation's continuing air quality problems. Our 2007HD
highway rule was designed to address these serious air quality
problems. These problems include premature mortality, aggravation of
respiratory and cardiovascular disease, aggravation of existing asthma,
acute respiratory symptoms, chronic bronchitis, and decreased lung
function. Numerous studies also link diesel exhaust to increased
incidence of lung cancer. We believe that exposure to diesel exhaust is
likely to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation and that this cancer
hazard exists for occupational and environmental levels of exposure.
Our 2007HD highway rule regulates the heavy-duty vehicle and its
fuel as a single system. As part of this program, new emission
standards began to take effect in model year 2007 and are phased-in
through model year 2010, and will apply to heavy-duty highway engines
and vehicles. These standards are based on the use of high-efficiency
catalytic exhaust emission control devices or comparably effective
advanced technologies and a cap on the allowable sulfur content in both
diesel fuel and gasoline.
In the 2007HD highway final rule, we estimated that, by 2007,
heavy-duty trucks and buses would account for about 28 percent of
nitrogen oxides emissions and 20 percent of particulate matter
emissions from mobile sources. In some urban areas, the contribution is
even greater. The 2007HD highway program will reduce particulate matter
and oxides of nitrogen emissions from heavy-duty engines by 90 percent
and 95 percent below current standard levels, respectively. In order to
meet these more stringent standards for diesel engines, the program
calls for a 97 percent reduction in the sulfur content of diesel fuel.
As a result, diesel vehicles will achieve gasoline-like exhaust
emission levels. We have also established more stringent standards for
heavy-duty gasoline vehicles, based in part on the use of the low
sulfur gasoline that will be available when the standards go into
effect.
2. Emissions Control of Highway Engines and Vehicles Depends on
Properly Operating Emissions Control Systems
The emissions reductions and resulting health and welfare benefits
of the 2007HD highway program will be dramatic when fully implemented.
By 2030, the program will reduce annual emissions of nitrogen oxides,
nonmethane hydrocarbons, and particulate matter by a projected 2.6
million, 115,000 and 109,000 tons, respectively. However, to realize
those large emission reductions and health benefits, the emission
control systems on heavy-duty highway engines and vehicles must
continue to provide the 90 to 95 percent emission control effectiveness
throughout their operating life. Today's OBD requirements, in
conjunction with/support of EPA's existing compliance programs, will
help to ensure that emission control systems continue to operate
properly by detecting when those systems malfunction, by then notifying
the driver that a problem exists that requires service and, lastly, by
informing the service technician what the problem is so that it can be
properly repaired.
3. Basis for Action Under the Clean Air Act
Section 202(m) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7521(m), directs EPA to
promulgate regulations requiring 1994 and later model year light-duty
vehicles (LDVs) and light-duty trucks (LDTs) to contain an OBD system
that monitors emission-related components for malfunctions or
deterioration ``which could cause or result in failure of the vehicles
to comply with emission standards established'' for such vehicles.
Section 202(m) also states that, ``The Administrator may, in the
Administrator's discretion, promulgate regulations requiring
manufacturers to install such onboard diagnostic systems on heavy-duty
vehicles and engines.''
Section 202(m)(5) of the CAA states that the Administrator shall
require manufacturers to, ``provide promptly to any person engaged in
the repairing or servicing of motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines *
* * with any and all information needed to make use of the emission
control diagnostics system prescribed under this subsection and such
other information including
[[Page 8314]]
instructions for making emission related diagnosis and repairs.''
4. The Importance of a Nationwide HDOBD Program
In 2005, the California Air Resources Board put into place HDOBD
requirements.\4\ More recently, we granted a waiver from federal
preemption to the State of California that allows them to implement the
HDOBD program (73 FR 52042). Given the nature of the heavy-duty
trucking industry in the United States and the importance of the free
and open movement of goods across state borders, we believe that a
consistent nationwide HDOBD program is a desirable outcome. We have
worked closely with California on our proposal and with both California
and industry stakeholders on this final rule, in an effort to develop a
consistent set of HDOBD requirements. As a result, the program we are
finalizing today is consistent with the California program in almost
all important aspects. We believe that, while minor differences exist
in the requirements we are promulgating today and the California
requirements, we will end up with OBD systems that will be compliant
with both our federal program and the California program. Promulgating
and implementing this final rule is an important step in our efforts
working with the California Air Resources Board to develop a consistent
national program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 13 CCR 1971.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Worldwide Harmonized OBD (WWH-OBD)
The Worldwide Harmonized OBD effort (WWH-OBD) is part of the United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe. We discussed this effort in
detail in our proposal. In line with what we said in our proposal,
while the WWH-OBD global technical regulation (gtr) is consistent with
many of the specific requirements of our final rule, it is not
currently as comprehensive (e.g., it does not contain the same level of
detail with respect to certification requirements and enforcement
provisions). For that reason, at this time, we do not believe that the
gtr could fully replace what is in our final rule. It is important to
note that California had HDOBD requirements in place prior to the WWH-
OBD gtr being adopted as a final document. The California HDOBD
requirements were analogous to the WWH-OBD requirements, but were not
identical. At industry's request, we have patterned both our proposal
and final rule after the California regulation. Note that we have an
obligation to one day propose the gtr for consideration as a U.S.
regulation, and it is our expectation that working together with
industry and other stakeholders we will determine the appropriate
process and requirements to incorporate the WWH-OBD requirements into
our regulatory structure.
II. How Have the Proposed OBD Requirements Been Changed for This Final
Rule and When Will They Be Implemented?
The following subsections describe how we have changed the proposed
OBD monitoring requirements in this final rule. We also describe the
timelines for their implementation. The requirements are indicative of
our goal for the program which is a set of OBD monitors that provide
robust diagnosis of the emission control system. Our intention is to
provide industry sufficient time and experience with satisfying the
demands of the OBD program. While their engines already incorporate OBD
systems, those systems are generally less comprehensive and do not
monitor the emission control system in the ways we are requiring.
Additionally, the OBD requirements represent a new set of technological
requirements and a new set of certification requirements for the
industry in addition to the 2007HD highway program and the challenging
emission standards for PM and NOX and other pollutants to be
implemented in 2010. As a result, we believe the monitoring
requirements and timelines outlined in this section appropriately weigh
the need for OBD monitors on the emission control system and the need
to gain experience with not only those monitors but also the newly or
recently added emission control hardware.
The changes we have made to the proposed requirements are the
result of comments received on our proposal and meetings with
stakeholders held in the time between proposal and final rule. The
changes are also the result of our collaboration with CARB staff. For a
detailed summary and analysis of the comments we received, and the
rationale behind the changes made for this final rule, refer to the
Summary and Analysis document contained in the docket for this rule.
In general, the remainder of this preamble--in particular, sections
II.B through II.H--presents the changes made to the final OBD
requirements relative to the proposed OBD requirements. As such, we do
not restate details of the proposed requirements unless it is necessary
to do so for clarity. Of interest to readers when comparing the final
OBD regulatory text to the proposed OBD regulatory text is that we have
moved all of the requirements for over 14,000 pound OBD into Sec.
86.010-18. Where certain requirements are not applicable until 2013 or
2016, etc., the regulatory text in Sec. 86.010-18 makes that clear. In
our proposal, we had separated out the requirements for model year 2013
into Sec. 86.013-18 and those for 2016 into Sec. 86.016-18 and those
for 2019 into Sec. 86.019-18. This created some confusion and we
decided that it would be easier to read the regulations if we
restructured things such that all the requirements appear in one
section. We have done so in the final rule and have placed all
requirements for over 14,000 pound OBD in Sec. 86.010-18. This is also
true for OBD requirements on heavy-duty engines under 14,000 pounds
where we have moved proposed provisions for model years 2010 through
2012 and 2013 and later from proposed Sec. Sec. 86.010-17 and 86.013-
17, respectively to final Sec. 86.007-17 with appropriate mention of
when requirements apply to specific model years. The same holds true
for proposed Sec. Sec. 86.1806-07, 86.1806-10, and 86.1806-13, for OBD
systems on under 14,000 pound vehicles, where all final OBD
requirements can be found in Sec. 86.1806-05 with appropriate mention
of when requirements apply to specific model years.
The remainder of Section II below highlights the changes made to
our proposed requirements relative to the final rule. The reader is
directed to the more detailed discussion that follows and/or is found
in our Summary and Analysis of Comments document contained in the
docket. However, Table II-1 provides a brief summary of the changes
made although this tabular summary is not meant to provide a thorough
explanation of each change. For a thorough explanation, refer to the
more detailed discussion below and/or the Summary and Analysis of
Comments.
[[Page 8315]]
Table II-1--Summary of Changes in the Final Regulations Relative to the
Proposed Regulations
[Please refer to the text for acronym definitions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discussed in
Change preamble section Regulatory cite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Restructuring--Sec. Sec. II Introduction... All >14,000 pound
86.013-18, 86.016-18, 86.019-18 OBD text now in
have been moved into Sec. Sec. 86.010-18.
86.010-18 with appropriate date
qualifiers.
Allow EPA to certify systems II.A.5............ Sec. 86.010-
demonstrated to comply with 18(a)(5).
CARB HDOBD (13 CCR 1971.1).
Changed MIL location requirement *................. Sec. 86.010-
to read ``primary driver's 18(b)(1)(i).
side'' rather than ``driver's
side'' to accommodate vehicles
with both left and right side
steering.
Slight change to erasure of II.A.2............ Sec. 86.010-
pending DTC upon storage of MIL- 18(b)(2)(ii).
on DTC.
Change to the permanent DTC II.F.4............ Sec. 86.010-
erasure provisions. 18(b)(3)(iii)(A)-
(D).
Minor revisions, for clarity, to *................. Sec. 86.010-
the general provisions 18(c)(3).
governing monitoring conditions.
Added clarifying text to general *................. Sec. 86.010-
provisions governing in-use 18(d).
performance tracking.
Revision to trip definition, in II.E.1............ Sec. 86.010-
the context of rate based 18(d)(4)(ii)(B).
monitoring, for denominator
incrementing on diesel engines.
Change to idle definition in II.E.2............ Sec. 86.010-
specifications for incrementing 18(d)(4)(ii)(C).
the denominator (from vehicle
speed <=1 mph to ``engine speed
less than or equal to 200 rpm
above normal warmed up idle or
vehicle speed <=1 mph'').
Added text stating that monitors II.A.4............ Sec. 86.010-
must run over test that gives 18(f)(1)(i).
the most robust monitor rather
than most stringent monitor.
Added text to identify in *................. Sec. 86.010-
certification documentation 18(f)(1)(ii).
which test cycle would provide
the most stringent and/or the
most robust monitor.
Added text stating that OBD- II.A.4............ Sec. 86.010-
specific IRAFs need not be 18(f)(2).
included in OBD threshold
determinations.
Revision to NOX malfunction II.B.6; II.B.7; Sec. 86.010-
thresholds for NOX catalyst II.B.9 (and shown 18(g), Table 1.
systems and NOX sensors (2010- in Table II.B-1.
2012 only).
Added provision to diesel fuel II.B.1............ Sec. 86.010-
system pressure, timing, and 18(g)(1)(ii)(A)-(
quantity malfunction criteria C).
allowing unit injector systems
to conduct functional checks
during model years 2010 to 2012.
Added new paragraph allowing II.B.1............ Sec. 86.010-
diesel unit injector systems to 18(g)(1)(ii)(D).
combine into one malfunction
the three separate malfunction
criteria of pressure, timing,
and quantity.
Minor changes to diesel fuel II.B.1............ Sec. 86.010-
system monitoring conditions 18(g)(1)(iii)(A)
consistent with changes to & (B).
malfunction criteria.
Diesel engine misfire II.B.2............ Sec. 86.010-
malfunction criteria for 18(g)(2)(ii)(A).
multiple continuous misfire
changed from ``more than one
cylinder'' to ``more than one
or more than one but less than
half (if approved)''.
Minor change to diesel EGR II.B.3............ Sec. 86.010-
monitoring conditions (i.e., a 18(g)(3)(iii)(D).
change to the proposed
monitoring conditions) which
allows for temporary disables
of ``continuous monitoring''.
Diesel turbo boost malfunction II.B.4............ Sec. 86.010-
criteria changed to note ``for 18(g)(4)(ii)(A)-(
engines so equipped'' where C).
appropriate.
Added a new diesel turbo boost II.B.4............ Sec. 86.010-
monitoring condition that 18(g)(4)(iii)(D).
allows for temporary disables
of ``continuous monitoring''.
Removed text noting that NMHC II.B.8............ Sec. 86.010-
conversion over a DPF is 18(g)(5)(i).
required under paragraph (g)(8)
and added clarifying text that
monitoring of NMHC conversion
over a DPF is not required.
Removal of malfunction II.B.5............ Sec. 86.010-
thresholds from diesel NMHC 18(g)(5)(ii)(A).
catalyst malfunction criteria.
Added ``delta temperature within II.B.5............ Sec. 86.010-
time period'' provision to 18(g)(5)(ii)(B).
diesel NMHC aftertreatment
assistance malfunction criteria.
Removal of proper feedgas II.B.5............ Sec. 86.010-
generation malfunction criteria 18(g)(5)(ii)(B).
for diesel NMHC catalysts.
Added provision to forego II.B.5............ Sec. 86.010-
monitoring of diesel NMHC 18(g)(5)(ii)(B).
catalysts located downstream of
a DPF provided their
malfunction will not result in
failure of the NMHC emission
standard.
Change to the DPF malfunction II.B.8............ Sec. 86.010-
criteria--addition of an 18(g)(8)(ii)(A).
optional malfunction criteria
for DPF filtering performance
for model years 2010 to 2012.
Change to the DPF malfunction II.B.8............ Sec. 86.010-
criteria--removal of NMHC 18(g)(8)(ii)(D)**
conversion monitoring. .
Added new monitoring conditions II.B.8............ Sec. 86.010-
applicable to those systems 18(g)(8)(iii).
using the optional DPF
malfunction criteria of Sec.
86.010-18(g)(8)(ii)(A).
Added provision that allows II.C.............. Sec. 86.010-
Administrator to approve 18(h)(2)(iii)(D).
limited misfire monitor
disablement for gasoline
engines.
Added provision that allows II.C.............. Sec. 86.010-
misfire monitor disables for 18(h)(2)(iii)(E).
gasoline engines with >8
cylinders.
Added phrase allowing lower II.D.2............ Sec. 86.010-
thermostat regulating 18(i)(1)(ii)(A).
temperature requirement for
ambient temperatures between 20-
50 degrees F.
Added phrase ``With *................. Sec. 86.010-
Administrator approval'' to the 18(i)(1)(ii)(B).
provision allowing alternative
thermostat malfunction criteria.
Change to the comprehensive II.D.4............ Sec. 86.010-
component monitoring 18(i)(3)(i)(A).
requirements such that
components must be monitored if
their malfunction can cause
emissions to exceed standards
rather than affect emissions
during any reasonable driving
condition.
Change to diesel engine glow II.D.4............ Sec. 86.010-
plug malfunction criteria for 18(i)(3)(iii)(D).
2010-2012.
Added provision stating that II.A.2............ Sec. 86.010-
monitoring of wait-to-start 18(i)(3)(iii)(E).
lamp and MIL circuit is not
required for systems using
light-emitting diodes versus
incandescent bulbs.
[[Page 8316]]
Removed introductory text to the *................. Sec. 86.010-
standardization requirements 18(k)(1).
(done to provide greater
clarity).
Removal of SAE J2534 from the *................. Sec. 86.010-
OBD section (it remains in the 18(k)(1)(i)(H)**.
Service Information
Availability requirements of
Sec. 86.010-38(j)).
Added text allowing the II.F.2............ Sec. 86.010-
Administrator to approve 18(k)(2)(i).
alternative DLC locations.
Added text allowing data link *................. Sec. 86.010-
signals to report an error 18(k)(4)(ii).
state or other predefined
status indicator if they are
defined for those signals in
the SAE J1979/J1939
specifications.
Added the phrase ``to the extent *................. Sec. 86.010-
possible'' to the provision to 18(k)(4)(iv)(B).
use separate DTCs for out-of-
range and circuit checks.
Added provision to allow for II.F.4............ Sec. 86.010-
multiple CAL IDs with 18(k)(4)(vi).
Administrator approval provided
CAL IDs response is in order of
highest to lowest priority.
Added provision to require II.F.4............ Sec. 86.010-
multiple CVNs if using multiple 18(k)(4)(vii)(A).
CAL IDs as allowed under newly
added provision in (k)(4)(vi).
Added provision allowing, for *................. Sec. 86.010-
2010-2012, a default value for 18(k)(4)(vii)(A).
the CVN for systems that are
not field programmable.
Revised CVN calculation *................. Sec. 86.010-
requirement from ``once per 18(k)(4)(vii)(C).
drive cycle'' to ``once per
ignition cycle''.
Change to idle definition in II.F.4; II.F.5.... Sec. 86.010-
engine run-time tracking (from 18(k)(6)(i)(B).
vehicle speed <=1 mph to
``engine speed less than or
equal to 200 rpm above normal
warmed-up idle or vehicle speed
<=1 mph'').
Added new certification *................. Sec. 86.010-
demonstration provisions for 18(l)(3)(i)(H).
systems using the optional DPF
monitoring provisions.
Added new documentation II.A.5............ Sec. 86.010-
provisions for systems meeting 18(m)(3).
Sec. 86.010-18 with a system
designed to CARB 13 CCR 1971.1.
Added a provision that allows II.G.1............ Sec. 86.010-
Administrator to approve 18(o)(1)(i).
alternative engine ratings as
parent ratings in 2010-2012.
Added a provision that allows II.G.1............ Sec. 86.010-
Administrator to approve 18(o)(2)(ii)(B).
alternative engine ratings as
parent ratings in 2010-2012.
Added text to make clear that *................. Sec. 86.010-
for all engine ratings in years 18(p)(4)(i).
2019+, the certification
emissions thresholds apply in-
use (provides clarification, no
change to original intent).
Revised 2007-2009 and 2010-2012 Table II.H-2...... Sec. 86.007-
engine certification NOX 17(b) & Sec.
thresholds from FEL+0.5 to 86.007-30(f).
FEL+0.6 (for 8500-14K pound
diesel engines).
Added definition of ``engine and *................. Sec. 86.010-2.
engine system'' applicable to
OBD.
Moved definition of ``OBD *................. Sec. 86.010-2.
group'' from Sec. 86.013-2 to
Sec. 86.010-2.
Added ``delta temperature within II.H.3............ Sec. 86.007-
time period'' provision to NMHC 17(b) & Sec.
malfunction description for 86.007-30(f).
engine certifications.
Removed 2010-2012 & 2013+ engine Table II.H-2...... Sec. 86.007-
certification NMHC thresholds 17(b) & Sec.
for DPFs (8500-14K pound diesel 86.007-30(f).
engines).
Change to the DPF malfunction II.H.2............ Sec. 86.007-
criteria--addition of an 17(b) & Sec.
optional malfunction criteria 86.007-30(f).
for DPF filtering performance.
Sec. 86.013-17 moved to Sec. II.A.............. Sec. 86.007-
86.007-17 with appropriate date 17(b).
qualifiers (8500-14K pound
diesel engines; no content
change, just formatting).
Sec. 86.013-30 moved to Sec. II.A.............. Sec. 86.007-
86.007-30 with appropriate date 30(f).
qualifiers (8500-14K pound
diesel engines; no content
change, just formatting).
Revised 2007-2009 vehicle Table II.H-2...... Sec. 86.1806-
certification NOX thresholds 05(n) & (o).
from 3x to 4x the standard
(8500-14K pound diesel
vehicles).
Revised 2010-2012 vehicle Table II.H-2...... Sec. 86.1806-
certification NOX thresholds 05(n) & (o).
for NOX catalysts and NOX
sensors from +0.3 to +0.6 (8500-
14K pound diesel vehicles).
Added ``delta temperature within II.H.3............ Sec. 86.1806-
time period'' provision to NMHC 05(n) & (o).
malfunction description for
vehicle certifications.
Removed 2010-2012 & 2013+ Table II.H-2...... Sec. 86.1806-
vehicle certification NMHC 05(n) & (o).
thresholds for DPFs (8500-14K
pound diesel vehicles).
Added the phrase ``and *................. Sec. 86.1863-07.
superseding sections'' to the
provision for optional chassis
certification of diesel
vehicles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Items not discussed in the preamble since we consider them to be very
minor.
** This is the applicable citation for the proposed regulatory text, but
this paragraph contains different text (due to renumbering) or has
been removed in the final regulatory text.
A. General OBD System Requirements
1. The OBD System
The OBD system must be designed to operate for the actual life of
the engine in which it is installed. Further, the OBD system cannot be
programmed or otherwise designed to deactivate based on age and/or
mileage of the vehicle during the actual life of the engine. This
requirement does not alter existing law and enforcement practice
regarding a manufacturer's liability for an engine beyond its
regulatory useful life, except where an engine has been programmed or
otherwise designed so that an OBD system deactivates based on age and/
or mileage of the engine.
In addition, computer coded engine operating parameters cannot be
changeable without the use of specialized tools and procedures (e.g.
soldered or potted computer
[[Page 8317]]
components or sealed (or soldered) computer enclosures). Upon
Administrator approval, certain product lines may be exempted from this
requirement if those product lines can be shown to not need such
protections. In making the approval decision, the Administrator will
consider such things as the current availability of performance chips,
performance capability of the engine, and sales volume.
2. Malfunction Indicator Light (MIL) and Diagnostic Trouble Codes (DTC)
Consistent with our proposal, the final rule requires that upon
detecting a malfunction within the emission control system,\5\ the OBD
system must make some indication to the driver so that the driver can
take action to get the problem repaired. A dashboard malfunction
indicator light (MIL) must be illuminated to inform the driver that a
problem exists that needs attention. Upon illumination of the MIL, a
diagnostic trouble code (DTC) must be stored in the engine's computer
that identifies the detected malfunction. This DTC can then be read by
a service technician to assist in making the necessary repair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ What constitutes a ``malfunction'' for over 14,000 pound
applications under today's action is covered in section II.B for
diesel engines, section II.C for gasoline engines, and section II.D
for all engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the MIL is meant to inform the driver of a detected
malfunction, we are requiring that the MIL be located on the driver's
side instrument panel and be of sufficient illumination and location to
be readily visible under all lighting conditions. We are requiring that
the MIL be amber (yellow) in color when illuminated because yellow is
synonymous with the notion of a ``cautionary warning''; the use of red
for the MIL will be strictly prohibited because red signifies
``danger'' which is not the proper message for malfunctions detected
according to today's rule. Further, we are requiring that, when
illuminated, the MIL display the International Standards Organization
(ISO) engine symbol shown in Table II.A-1 because this symbol has
become accepted after more than 10 years of light-duty OBD as a
communicator of engine and emissions system related problems. We are
also requiring that there be only one MIL used to indicate all
malfunctions detected by the OBD system on a single vehicle. We believe
this is important to avoid confusion over multiple lights and,
potentially, multiple interpretations of those lights.
Generally, a manufacturer would be allowed sufficient time to be
certain that a malfunction truly exists before illuminating the MIL. No
one benefits if the MIL illuminates spuriously when a real malfunction
does not exist. Thus, for most OBD monitoring strategies, manufacturers
will not be required to illuminate the MIL until a malfunction clearly
exists which will be considered to be the case when the same problem
has occurred on two sequential driving cycles.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Generally, a ``driving cycle'' or ``drive cycle'' consists
of engine startup and engine shutoff or consists of four hours of
continuous engine operation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24FE09.000
To keep this clear in the onboard computer, we are requiring that
the OBD system make certain distinctions between the problems it has
detected, and that the system maintain a strict logic for diagnostic
trouble code (DTC) storage/erasure and for MIL illumination/
extinguishment. Whenever the enable criteria for a given monitor are
met, we would expect that monitor to run. For continuous monitors, this
would be during essentially all engine operation.\7\ For non-continuous
monitors, it would be during only a subset of engine operation.\8\ In
general, we are requiring that non-continuous monitors make a
diagnostic decision just once per drive cycle that contains operation
satisfying the enable criteria for the given monitor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ A ``continuous'' monitor--if used in the context of
monitoring conditions for circuit continuity, lack of circuit
continuity, circuit faults, and out-of-range values--means sampling
at a rate no less than two samples per second. If a computer input
component is sampled less frequently for engine control purposes,
the signal of the component may instead be evaluated each time
sampling occurs.
\8\ A ``non-continuous'' monitor being a monitor that runs only
when a limited set of operating conditions occurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When a problem is first detected, we are requiring that a
``pending'' DTC be stored. If, during the subsequent drive cycle that
contains operation satisfying the enable criteria for the given
monitor, a problem in the components/system is not again detected, the
OBD system would declare that a malfunction does not exist and would,
therefore, erase the pending DTC. However, if, during the subsequent
drive cycle that contains operation satisfying the enable criteria for
the given monitor, a problem in the component/system is again detected,
a malfunction has been confirmed and, hence, a ``confirmed'' or ``MIL-
on'' DTC would be stored.\9\ Upon storage of a MIL-on DTC, the pending
DTC would either remain stored or be erased, depending on what the
manufacturer determines to be the most effective approach. Consistent
with the proposal, the final rule does not stipulate which
communication protocol be used. Upon storage of the MIL-on DTC, the MIL
must be illuminated.\10\ Also at this time, a ``permanent'' DTC would
be stored (see section II.F.4 for more details regarding permanent
DTCs).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Different industry standards organizations--the Society of
Automotive Engineers (SAE) and the International Standards
Organization (ISO)--use different terminology to refer to a ``MIL-
on'' DTC. For clarity, we use the term ``MIL-on'' DTC throughout
this preamble to convey the concept and not any requirement that
standard making bodies use the term in their standards.
\10\ Throughout this final rule, we refer to MIL illumination to
mean a steady, continuous illumination during engine operation
unless stated otherwise. This contrasts with the MIL illumination
logic used by many engine manufacturers today by which the MIL would
illuminate upon detection of a malfunction but would remain
illuminated only while the malfunction was actually occurring. Under
this latter logic, an intermittent malfunction or one that occurs
under only limited operating conditions may result in a MIL that
illuminates, extinguishes, illuminates, etc., as operating
conditions change.
\11\ A permanent DTC must be stored in a manner such that
electrical disconnections do not result in their erasure (i.e., they
must be stored in non-volatile random access memory (NVRAM)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we proposed, we are requiring that, after three subsequent drive
cycles that contain operation satisfying the enable criteria for the
given monitor without any recurrence of the previously detected
malfunction, the MIL should be extinguished (unless there are other
MIL-on DTCs stored for which the MIL must also be illuminated), the
permanent DTC should be erased, but a ``previous-MIL-
[[Page 8318]]
on'' DTC should remain stored.\12\ We are requiring that the previous-
MIL-on DTC remain stored for 40 engine warmup cycles after which time,
provided the identified malfunction has not been detected again and the
MIL is presently not illuminated for that malfunction, the previous-
MIL-on DTC can be erased.\13\ However, if an illuminated MIL is not
extinguished, or if a MIL-on DTC is not erased, by the OBD system
itself but is instead erased via scan tool or battery disconnect (which
would erase all non-permanent, volatile memory), the permanent DTC must
remain stored. This way, permanent DTCs can only be erased by the OBD
system itself and cannot be erased through human interaction with the
system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ This general ``three trip'' condition for extinguishing the
MIL is true for all but two diesel systems/monitors--the misfire
monitor and the SCR system--and three gasoline systems/monitors--the
fuel system, the misfire monitor, and the evaporative system--which
have further conditions on extinguishing the MIL. This is discussed
in more detail in sections II.B and II.C.
\13\ For simplicity, the discussion here refers to ``previous-
MIL-on'' DTCs only. The ISO 15765 standard and the SAE J1939
standard use different terms to refer to the concept of a previous-
MIL-on DTC. Our intent is to present the concept of our proposal in
this preamble and not to specify the terminology used by these
standard making bodies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As proposed, we are allowing the manufacturer, upon Administrator
approval, to use alternative statistical MIL illumination and DTC
storage protocols to those described above (i.e., alternatives to the
``first trip--pending DTC, second strip--MIL-on DTC logic). The
Administrator will consider whether the manufacturer provided data and/
or engineering evaluation adequately demonstrates that the alternative
protocols can evaluate system performance and detect malfunctions in a
manner that is equally effective and timely. Alternative strategies
requiring, on average, more than six driving cycles for MIL
illumination would probably not be accepted.
As proposed, upon storage of either a pending DTC and/or a MIL-on
DTC, we are requiring that the computer store a set of ``freeze frame''
data. These freeze frame data will provide a snap shot of engine
operating conditions present at the time the malfunction occurred and
was detected. This information serves the repair technician in
diagnosing the problem and conducting the proper repair. The freeze
frame data should be stored upon storage of a pending DTC. If the
pending DTC matures to a MIL-on DTC, the manufacturer can choose to
update the freeze frame data or retain the freeze frame stored in
conjunction with the pending DTC. Likewise, any freeze frame stored in
conjunction with any pending or MIL-on DTC should be erased upon
erasure of the DTC. Further information concerning the freeze frame
requirement and the data required in the freeze frame is presented in
section II.F.4, below.
As proposed, we are also requiring that the OBD system illuminate
the MIL and store a MIL-on DTC to inform the vehicle operator whenever
the engine enters a mode of operation that can affect the performance
of the OBD system. If such a mode of operation is recoverable (i.e.,
operation automatically returns to normal at the beginning of the
following ignition cycle \14\), then in lieu of illuminating the MIL
when the mode of operation is entered, the OBD system may wait to
illuminate the MIL and store the MIL-on DTC if the mode of operation is
again entered before the end of the next ignition cycle. We are
requiring this because many operating strategies are designed such that
they continue automatically through to the next key-off. Regardless,
upon the next key-on, the engine control would start off in ``normal''
operating mode and would return to the ``abnormal'' operating mode only
if the condition causing the abnormal mode was again encountered. In
such cases, we are allowing that the MIL be illuminated during the
second consecutive drive cycle during which such an ``abnormal'' mode
is engaged.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ ``Ignition Cycle'' means a drive cycle that begins with
engine start and includes an engine speed that exceeds 50 to 150
rotations per minute (rpm) below the normal, warmed-up idle speed
(as determined in the drive position for vehicles equipped with an
automatic transmission) for at least two seconds plus or minus one
second.
\15\ Note that we use the term ``abnormal'' to refer to an
operating mode that the engine is designed to enter upon determining
that ``normal'' operation cannot be maintained. Therefore, the term
``abnormal'' is somewhat of a misnomer since the engine is doing
what it has been designed to do. Nonetheless, the abnormal operating
mode is clearly not the operating mode the manufacturer has intended
for optimal operation. Such operating modes are sometimes referred
to as ``default'' operating modes or ``limp-home'' operating modes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether or not the ``abnormal'' mode of operation is recoverable,
in this context, has nothing to do with whether the detected
malfunction goes away or stays. Instead, it depends solely on whether
or not the engine, by design, will stay in abnormal operating mode on
the next key-on. We are requiring this MIL logic because often the
diagnostic (i.e., monitor) that caused the engine to enter abnormal
mode cannot run again once the engine is in the abnormal mode. So, if
the MIL logic associated with abnormal mode activation was always a
two-trip diagnostic, abnormal mode activation would set a pending DTC
on the first trip and, since the system would then be stuck in that
abnormal operating mode and would never be able to run the diagnostic
again, the pending DTC could never mature to a MIL-on DTC nor
illuminate the MIL. Hence, the MIL must illuminate upon the first entry
into such an abnormal operating mode. If such a mode is recoverable,
the engine will start at the next key-on in ``normal'' mode allowing
the monitor to run again and, assuming another detection of the
condition, the system would set a MIL-on DTC and illuminate the MIL.
As proposed, the OBD system need not store a DTC nor illuminate the
MIL upon abnormal mode operation if other telltale conditions would
result in immediate action by the driver. Such telltale conditions
would be, for example, an overt indication like a red engine shut-down
warning light. The OBD system also need not store a DTC nor illuminate
the MIL upon abnormal mode operation if the mode is indeed an auxiliary
emission control device (AECD) approved by the Administrator.
There may be malfunctions of the MIL itself that would prevent it
from illuminating. A repair technician--or possibly an I/M inspector--
would still be able to determine the status of the MIL (i.e., commanded
``on'' or ``off'') by reading electronic information available through
a scan tool, but there would be no indication to the driver of an
emissions-related malfunction should one occur. Unidentified
malfunctions may cause excess emissions to be emitted from the vehicle
and may even cause subsequent deterioration or failure of other
components or systems without the driver's knowledge. In order to
prevent this, the manufacturer must ensure that the MIL is functioning
properly. For this reason and consistent with our proposal, we are
requiring two checks of the functionality of the MIL itself. First, the
MIL will be required to illuminate for a minimum of five seconds when
the vehicle is in the key-on, engine-off position. This allows an
interested party to check the MIL's functionality simply by turning the
key to the key-on position. While the MIL would be physically
illuminated during this functional check, the data stream value for the
MIL command status would be required to indicate ``off'' during this
check unless, of course, the MIL was currently being commanded ``on''
for a detected malfunction. This functional check of the MIL is not
required during vehicle operation in the key-on, engine-off position
subsequent to the initial engine cranking of an ignition cycle (e.g.,
due to an engine
[[Page 8319]]
stall or other non-commanded engine shutoff).
The second functional check of the MIL is a circuit continuity
check of the electrical circuit that is used to illuminate the MIL to
verify that the circuit is not shorted or open (e.g., a burned out
bulb). While there would not be an ability to illuminate the MIL when
such a malfunction is detected, the electronically readable MIL command
status in the onboard computer would be changed from commanded ``off''
to ``on''. This would allow the truck owner or fleet maintenance staff
to quickly determine whether an extinguished MIL means ``no
malfunctions'' or ``broken MIL.'' It would also serve, should it become
of interest in the future, complete automation of the I/M process by
eliminating the need for inspectors to input manually the results of
their visual inspections. Feedback from passenger car I/M programs
indicates that the current visual bulb check performed by inspectors is
subject to error and results in numerous vehicles being falsely failed
or passed. By requiring monitoring of the circuit itself, the entire
pass/fail criteria of an I/M program could be determined by the
electronic information available through a scan tool, thus better
facilitating quick and effective inspections and minimizing the chance
for manually-entered errors. Unlike our proposal, the final rule does
not require this circuit continuity check of the MIL circuit for
systems that employ light emitting diode (LED) MILs.\16\ These systems
are very robust and circuit checks are very difficult and, we believe,
unnecessary. We do not want to discourage their use or encourage use of
bulb-based MILs over LED MILs via our OBD requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See proposed Sec. 86.010-18(i)(3)(iii)(E) and compare to
the final Sec. 86.010-18(i)(3)(iii)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As proposed, the MIL may be used to indicate readiness status in a
standardized format (see Section II.F) in the key-on, engine-off
position. Readiness status is a term used in light-duty OBD that refers
to a vehicle's readiness for I/M inspection. For a subset of monitors--
those that are non-continuous monitors for which an emissions threshold
exists (see sections II.B and II.C for more on emissions thresholds)--a
readiness status indicator must be stored in memory to indicate whether
or not that particular monitor has run enough times to make a
diagnostic decision. Until the monitor has run sufficient times, the
readiness status would indicate ``not ready''. Upon running sufficient
times, the readiness status would indicate ``ready.'' This serves to
protect against drivers disconnecting their battery just prior to the
I/M inspection so as to erase any MIL-on DTCs. Such an action would
simultaneously set all readiness status indicators to ``not ready''
resulting in a notice to return to the inspection site at a future
date. Readiness indicators also help repair technicians because, after
completing a repair, they can operate the vehicle until the readiness
status indicates ``ready'' and, provided no DTCs are stored, know that
the repair has been successful. We are requiring that HDOBD systems
follow this same readiness status logic as used for years in light-duty
OBD both to assist repair technicians and to facilitate potential
future HDOBD I/M programs.
We are also allowing the manufacturer, upon Administrator approval,
to use the MIL to indicate which, if any, DTCs are currently stored
(e.g., to ``blink'' the stored codes). The Administrator will approve
the request if the manufacturer can demonstrate that the method used to
indicate the DTCs will not be unintentionally activated during any
inspection test or during routine driver operation.
3. Monitoring Conditions
a. Background
Given that the intent of the OBD requirements is to monitor the
emission control system for proper operation, it is logical that the
OBD monitors be designed such that they monitor the emission control
system during typical driving conditions. While many OBD monitors would
be designed such that they are continuously making decisions about the
operational status of the engine, many--and arguably the most
critical--monitors are not so designed. For example, an OBD monitor
whose function is to monitor the active fuel injection system of a
NOX adsorber or a DPF cannot be continuously monitoring that
function since that function occurs on an infrequent basis. This OBD
monitor presumably would be expected to ``run,'' or evaluate the active
injection system, during an actual fuel injection event.
For this reason, manufacturers are allowed to determine the most
appropriate times to run their non-continuous OBD monitors. This way,
they are able to make an OBD evaluation either at the operating
condition when an emission control system is active and its operational
status can best be evaluated, and/or at the operating condition when
the most accurate evaluation can be made (e.g., highly transient
conditions or extreme conditions can make evaluation difficult).
Importantly, manufacturers are prohibited from using a monitoring
strategy that is so restrictive such that it rarely or never runs. To
help protect against monitors that rarely run, we are requiring an
``in-use monitor performance ratio'' requirement which is detailed in
section II.E.
The set of operating conditions that must be met so that an OBD
monitor can run are called the ``enable criteria'' for that given
monitor. These enable criteria are often different for different
monitors and may well be different for different types of engines. A
large diesel engine intended for use in a Class 8 truck would be
expected to see long periods of relatively steady-state operation while
a smaller engine intended for use in an urban delivery truck would be
expected to see a lot of transient operation. Manufacturers will need
to balance between a rather loose set of enable criteria for their
engines and vehicles given the very broad range of operation HD highway
engines see and a tight set of enable criteria given the desire for
greater monitor accuracy.
b. General Monitoring Conditions
i. Monitoring Conditions for All Engines
As guidance to manufacturers, we are providing the following
criteria to assist manufacturers in developing their OBD enable
criteria. These criteria will be used by the Agency during our OBD
certification approval process to ensure that monitors run on a
frequent basis during real world driving conditions. These criteria
will be:
The monitors should run during conditions that are
technically necessary to ensure robust detection of malfunctions (e.g.,
to avoid false passes and false indications of malfunctions);
The monitor enable criteria should ensure monitoring will
occur during normal vehicle operation; and,
Monitoring should occur during at least one test used by
EPA for emissions verification--either the HD Federal Test Procedure
(FTP) transient cycle, or the Supplementary Emissions Test (SET).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 40 CFR part 86, subpart N for details of EPA's test
procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in more detail in sections II.B through II.D, we are
requiring that manufacturers define the monitoring conditions, subject
to Administrator approval, for detecting the malfunctions required by
this rule. The Administrator would determine if the monitoring
conditions proposed by the manufacturer for each monitor abide by the
above criteria.
In general, except as noted in sections II.B through II.D, the
regulation requires
[[Page 8320]]
each monitor to run at least once per driving cycle in which the
applicable monitoring conditions are met. It also requires certain
monitors to run continuously throughout the driving cycle. These
include a few threshold monitors (e.g., fuel system monitor) and most
circuit continuity monitors. While a basic definition of a driving
cycle (e.g., from ignition key-on and engine startup to engine shutoff)
has been sufficient for passenger cars, the driving habits of many
types of vehicles in the heavy-duty industry dictate an alternate
definition. Specifically, many heavy-duty operators will start the
engine and leave it running for an entire day or, in some cases, even
longer. As such, any period of continuous engine-on operation of four
hours will be considered a complete driving cycle. A new driving cycle
would begin following such a four hour period, regardless of whether or
not the engine had been shut down. Thus, the ``clock'' for monitors
that are required to run once per driving cycle would be reset to run
again (in the same key-on engine start or trip) once the engine has
been operated beyond four hours continuously. This would avoid an
unnecessary delay in detection of malfunctions simply because the
heavy-duty vehicle operator has elected to leave the vehicle running
continuously for an entire day or days at a time.
Consistent with our proposal, manufacturers may request
Administrator approval to define monitoring conditions that are not
encountered during the FTP cycle. In evaluating the manufacturer's
request, the Administrator will consider the degree to which the
requirement to run during the FTP cycle restricts in-use monitoring,
the technical necessity for defining monitoring conditions that are not
encountered during the FTP cycle, data and/or an engineering evaluation
submitted by the manufacturer which demonstrate that the component/
system does not normally function, or monitoring is otherwise not
feasible, during the FTP cycle, and, where applicable, the ability of
the manufacturer to demonstrate that the monitoring conditions will
satisfy the minimum acceptable in-use monitor performance ratio
requirement as defined below.
ii. In-Use Performance Tracking Monitoring Conditions
In addition to the general monitoring conditions above, and
consistent with our proposal, we are requiring manufacturers to
implement software algorithms in the OBD system to individually track
and report in-use performance of the following monitors in the
standardized format specified in section II.E:
Diesel NMHC converting catalyst(s)
Diesel NOX converting catalyst(s)
Gasoline catalyst(s)
Exhaust gas sensor(s)
Gasoline evaporative system
Exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system
Variable valve timing (VVT) system
Gasoline secondary air system
Diesel particulate filter system
Diesel boost pressure control system
Diesel NOX adsorber(s)
The OBD system is not required to track and report in-use
performance for monitors other than those specifically identified
above.
iii. In-Use Performance Ratio Requirement
We are also requiring manufacturers to define, for all 2013 and
subsequent model year engines, monitoring conditions that, in addition
to meeting the general monitoring conditions, ensure that certain
monitors yield an in-use performance ratio (which monitors and the
details that define the performance ratio are defined in section II.E)
that meets or exceeds the minimum acceptable in-use monitor performance
ratio for in-use vehicles. As proposed, we are requiring a minimum
acceptable in-use monitor performance ratio of 0.100 for all monitors
specifically required to track in-use performance. This means that the
monitors listed in section II.A.3.ii above must run and make valid
diagnostic decisions during 10 percent of the vehicle's trips. We
intend to work with industry during the initial years of implementation
to gather data on in-use performance ratios and may revise this ratio
as appropriate depending on what we learn.
Note that manufacturers may not use the calculated ratio (or any
element thereof), or any other indication of monitor frequency, as a
monitoring condition for a monitor. For example, the manufacturer would
not be allowed to use a low ratio to enable more frequent monitoring
through diagnostic executive priority or modification of other
monitoring conditions, or to use a high ratio to enable less frequent
monitoring.
4. Determining the Proper OBD Malfunction Criteria
For determining the malfunction criteria for monitors associated
with an emissions threshold (see sections II.B and II.C for more on
emissions thresholds), we are requiring manufacturers to determine the
appropriate emissions test cycle during which their monitors will run.
Unlike our proposal, we have removed the requirement that the
manufacturer choose the cycle over which the most stringent monitor
would result.\18\ We have made this change to provide manufacturers the
flexibility to develop robust monitors that meet all applicable
requirements of the rule rather than requiring the most stringent
monitor with disregard for its robustness. That said, the Administrator
retains the right to challenge the manufacturer's choice of cycles.
While we do not necessarily anticipate challenging a manufacturer's
determination of which test cycle to use, the final regulations make
clear that the manufacturer should be prepared, perhaps with test data,
to justify their determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See proposed Sec. 86.010(f)(1)(i) and compare to final
Sec. 86.010-18(f)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are eliminating our requirement that, for engines equipped with
emission controls that experience infrequent regeneration events (e.g.,
a DPF and/or a NOX adsorber), a manufacturer must adjust the
emission test results for monitors that are required to indicate a
malfunction before emissions exceed a certain emission threshold.\19\
For each such monitor, the manufacturer need not adjust the emission
result as done in accordance with the provisions of section 86.004-
28(i) with the component for which the malfunction criteria are being
established having been deteriorated to the malfunction threshold. As
proposed, the adjusted emission value would have to have been used for
purposes of determining whether or not the applicable emission
threshold is exceeded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See proposed Sec. 86.010-18(f)(2) and compare to final
Sec. 86.010-18(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we noted in our proposal, we believe that this adjustment
process for monitors of systems that experience infrequent regeneration
events makes sense and will result in robust monitors, we also believe
that it could prove to be overly burdensome for manufacturers. For
example, a NOX adsorber threshold being evaluated by running
an FTP using a ``threshold'' part (i.e., a NOX adsorber
deteriorated such that tailpipe emissions are at the applicable
thresholds) may be considered acceptable provided the NOX
adsorber does not regenerate during the test, but it may be considered
unacceptable if the NOX adsorber does happen to regenerate
during the test. This could happen because emissions would be expected
to increase slightly during the regeneration event thereby causing
emissions to be
[[Page 8321]]
slightly above the applicable threshold. This would require the
manufacturer to recalibrate the NOX adsorber monitor to
detect at a lower level of deterioration to ensure that a regeneration
event would not cause an exceedance of the threshold during an
emissions test. After such a recalibration, the emissions occurring
during the regeneration event would be lower than before because the
new ``threshold'' NOX adsorber would have a slightly higher
conversion efficiency. We are concerned that manufacturers may find
themselves in a difficult iterative process calibrating such monitors
that, in the end, will not be correspondingly more effective. We
discuss this in more detail in our Summary and Analysis of Comments
document contained in the docket for this rule.
5. Demonstrating Compliance With CARB Requirements
We did not propose that manufacturers be given the opportunity to
demonstrate compliance with CARB OBD requirements for the purpose of
satisfying federal OBD. We have long had such a provision in our OBD
requirements for under 14,000 pound applications. For the final rule,
we have included such a provision but want to make clear that this
provision should not be interpreted as meaning that a CARB approval
equates to an EPA approval.\20\ We believe that CARB OBD requirements
will be as stringent if not more so than EPA OBD requirements. As such,
should a manufacturer demonstrate, and the Administrator determine,
that an OBD system complies with the CARB requirements, it would be
acceptable for EPA certification. We believe this will lead to an
eventual national program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Sec. 86.010-18(a)(5) which is new in the final
regulations. Also see Sec. 86.010-18(m)(3) which is new in the
final regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Temporary Provisions To Address Hardship Due to Unusual
Circumstances
We have added a new ``temporary hardship'' provision for the final
rule.\21\ Under this new provision, EPA may allow a manufacturer to
sell non-compliant engines for a short time period provided the
Administrator determines that the non-compliance is for reasons outside
the manufacturer's control. Examples of such reasons may be fires in
manufacturer or supplier plants, or ``acts of God'' such as floods,
tornados, or hurricanes that have created unforeseen delays in a
manufacturer's ability to comply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See final Sec. 86.010-18(a)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This provision is meant to be used for only a limited time (e.g.,
one to three months) and permission to use the provision would not be
granted for the purpose of delaying implementation for a model year.
Further, the provision includes in it an expectation that non-
compliances would be corrected as quickly as possible, and we would
require that the manufacturer submit a plan detailing how the non-
compliances will be corrected. The plan must be submitted in
conjunction with any requests to make use of this provision and would
be subject to Administrator approval. Note also that we fully intend to
enforce the manufacturer's plan to ensure that any engines sold as non-
compliant would be corrected.
B. Monitoring Requirements and Timelines for Diesel-Fueled/Compression-
Ignition Engines
Table II.B-1 summarizes the diesel fueled compression ignition
emissions thresholds at which point a component or system has failed to
the point of requiring an illuminated MIL and a stored DTC. Some of
these thresholds--specifically, the NOX aftertreatment and
NOX sensor thresholds for 2010 through 2012--differ from
what was proposed. The differences serve to make the OBD threshold less
stringent than proposed for the purpose of matching thresholds with
technological capabilities.\22\ We have also eliminated the NMHC
catalyst thresholds. We discuss the reasons for these changes in brief
in the sections that follow and in more detail in our Summary and
Analysis of Comments document contained in the docket for this rule.
More detail regarding the final monitoring requirements, implementation
schedules, and liabilities can be found in the sections that follow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See proposed Sec. 86.010-18(g), Table 1, and compare to
final Sec. 86.010-18(g), Table 1.
Table II.B-1--Emissions Thresholds for Diesel Fueled CI Engines Over 14,000 Pounds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component/monitor MY NMHC CO NOX PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX catalyst system............................ 2010-2012 ........... ........... +0.6 ...........
2013+ ........... ........... +0.3 ...........
DPF system..................................... 2010-2012 2.5x ........... ........... 0.05/+0.04
2013+ 2x ........... ........... 0.05/+0.04
Air-fuel ratio sensors upstream................ 2010-2012 2.5x 2.5x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
2013+ 2x 2x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
Air-fuel ratio sensors downstream.............. 2010-2012 2.5x ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
2013+ 2x ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
NOX sensors.................................... 2010-2012 ........... ........... +0.6 0.05/+0.04
2013+ ........... ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
``Other monitors'' with emissions thresholds 2010-2012 2.5x 2.5x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
(see section II.B)............................
2013+ 2x 2x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: MY = Model Year; 2.5x means a multiple of 2.5 times the applicable emissions standard or family emissions
limit (FEL); +0.3 means the standard or FEL plus 0.3; 0.05/+0.04 means an absolute level of 0.05 or an
additive level of the standard or FEL plus 0.04, whichever level is higher; not all monitors have emissions
thresholds but instead rely on functionality and rationality checks as described in section II.D.4.
There are exceptions to the emissions thresholds shown in Table
II.B-1 whereby a manufacturer can demonstrate that emissions do not
exceed the threshold even when the component or system is non-
functional at which point a functional check would be allowed.
Note that, in general, the monitoring strategies designed to meet
the requirements should not involve the alteration of the engine
control system or the emissions control system such that tailpipe
emissions would increase. We do not want emissions to increase, even
for short durations, for the sole purpose of monitoring the systems
intended to control emissions. The Administrator will consider such
monitoring strategies on a case-by-case
[[Page 8322]]
basis taking into consideration the emissions impact and duration of
the monitoring event. However, much effort has been expended in recent
years to minimize engine operation that results in increased emissions
and we encourage manufacturers to develop monitoring strategies that do
not require alteration of the basic control system.
The remaining discussion in Section II.B focuses solely on changes
made to the monitoring requirements for the final rule relative to the
proposed rule. We have not restated the rationale for each monitor, the
monitoring requirements, or the expected monitoring strategies, etc.
For such discussion, we refer the reader to our proposal (72 FR 3200).
1. Fuel System Monitoring
We proposed that fuel system malfunctions related to injection
pressure, injection timing, injection quantity, and feedback control be
individually detected prior to emissions exceeding the thresholds for
``other monitors.'' Further, we proposed that pressure and feedback
related malfunctions be monitored continuously and that quantity and
timing related malfunctions be monitored once per trip. For the final
rule, we are requiring fuel system monitoring for CI engines be
consistent with our proposal with a few exceptions.
We have added a new combined monitor option for fuel injection
systems. Under this option, the three discrete malfunction criteria for
unit injector systems (pressure, quantity, and timing) may be combined
into one malfunction. The two discrete malfunction criteria for common
rail systems (quantity and timing) may be combined into one
malfunction. If choosing the combined monitoring option on either type
system, the manufacturer must demonstrate with data that the combined
monitoring strategy can detect a component failure by some combination
of the individual monitors, a rationality check between the discrete
monitors or the downstream effect of the failed component. For
threshold monitoring, the manufacturer is expected to demonstrate with
data that the combined monitor correctly detects the operating
conditions of the fuel injector and indicates the component malfunction
prior to exceeding the threshold level required by the regulation. The
intent of the combined monitor is to effectively detect and indicate
fuel system injector malfunctions although the direct cause of the
failure (quantity, timing and/or pressure) is unknown.
For unit injector fuel systems, the final rule allows the fuel
system pressure control, injection quantity, and injection pressure to
be monitored using functional checks in lieu of monitoring for
conditions that would cause emissions to exceed the OBD thresholds for
model years 2010 through 2012. Threshold monitoring on unit injector
fuel system injection pressure, quantity and timing will be required
for model year 2013 and beyond. For common rail systems, the regulation
remains unchanged with threshold detection required for fuel system
pressure control, injection quantity, and injection pressure for model
years 2010 and beyond.
Regarding monitoring conditions, the final rule remains unchanged
on common rail systems from the proposal of once per drive cycle for
injection pressure and quantity for model years 2010 to 2012 in
addition to constant fuel pressure monitoring. On 2013 and later common
rail fuel systems, we are requiring continuous monitoring of pressure
control and, in a change from our proposal, injector quantity and
injector timing monitoring must be done when conditions are met (rather
than once per trip). On unit injector systems for model years 2010 to
2012, the monitors for fuel system pressure control, injection
quantity, and injection timing are required once per drive cycle. For
model years 2013 and beyond, unit injector systems are required to
monitor pressure, injector quantity and injector timing when conditions
are met.
We are making these fuel injection system monitoring changes
because of the system monitoring capability differences between unit
injector and common rail systems, while maintaining the intent of
malfunction monitoring to indicate a failed component. We believe that
the monitoring strategies manufacturers are expected to use in the
interim time frame and future system design will result in robust
monitoring of the fuel system without sacrificing malfunction
detection. The fuel system strategies based on hardware diverge in
model years 2010 to 2012 to account for the monitoring capabilities but
again converge in model years 2013 for as much commonality as possible.
We discuss our rationale in more detail in our Summary and Analysis
document contained in the docket for this rule.
2. Engine Misfire Monitoring
We proposed that, for 2010-2012, a continuous engine misfire be
detected during engine idle. For 2013 and later, we proposed that
engines equipped with combustion sensors monitor continuously for
misfire during the full operating range and detect a malfunction prior
to emissions exceeding the thresholds for ``other monitors.''
For the final rule, we have made only one change to the misfire
monitoring requirements for CI engines. In the proposal, we stated
that, if more than one cylinder is misfiring continuously, a separate
DTC must be stored indicating that multiple cylinders are misfiring. In
the final rule, we state that, if more than one cylinder is misfiring
continuously or if more than one but less than half of the cylinders is
misfiring continuously, a separate DTC must be stored indicating that
multiple cylinders are misfiring.\23\ To make use of this additional
provision, the manufacturer must receive Administrator approval. We are
making this change because we believe that, for some systems, a
perfectly acceptable monitor can be developed without sacrificing
malfunction detection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Sec. 86.010-18(g)(2)(ii)(A) for diesel-fueled engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) System Monitoring
We proposed that malfunctions of the EGR system related to low
flow, high flow, slow response, feedback control, and cooler
performance be detected prior to emissions exceeding the thresholds for
``other monitors.'' Further, we proposed that flow and feedback related
malfunctions be monitored continuously, response related malfunctions
be monitored whenever conditions were met, and that cooler malfunctions
be monitored once per trip.
For the final rule, we have not made any changes to the EGR
requirements except to provide more clarity to the provisions allowing
for temporary disablement of continuous monitoring.\24\ This new
provision allows the OBD system, with approval, to disable temporarily
the EGR system monitor(s) under specific ambient conditions (e.g., when
freezing may affect performance of the system) or during specific
operating conditions (e.g., transients, extreme low or high flow
conditions). Even then, the system must still maintain comprehensive
component monitoring as required by the comprehensive component
monitoring requirements.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Sec. 86.010-18(g)(3)(iii)(D) for diesel-fueled
engines.
\25\ See Sec. 86.010-18(i)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8323]]
4. Turbo Boost Control System Monitoring
We proposed that malfunctions of the boost control system related
to underboost, overboost, variable geometry slow response, feedback
control, and undercooling be detected prior to emissions exceeding the
thresholds for ``other monitors.'' Further, we proposed that
underboost, overboost, and feedback related malfunctions be monitored
continuously, that slow response related malfunctions be monitored
whenever conditions were met, and that undercooling related
malfunctions be monitored once per trip.
One change we have made to the turbo boost control system
monitoring requirements for the final rule is to add the phrase, ``on
engines so equipped'' or equivalent.\26\ We have added this phrase to
clarify that, for engines that do not control the turbo boost control
system as suggested by the proposed requirements the provision would
not apply or would apply differently. For example, our proposal
required that the OBD system detect when the turbo boost control system
was unable to achieve the commanded boost. However, some manufacturers
use a system that does not in fact command a particular boost pressure
(i.e., it is not a closed loop feedback system). For such systems, the
final rule makes clear that the system must detect when the turbo boost
control system is unable to achieve the commanded boost, or the
expected boost for systems that do not control boost pressure. The
change does not impact the intent behind the proposed requirements and
only serves to provide clarity to manufacturers. We discuss our
rationale in more detail in our Summary and Analysis document contained
in the docket for this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Sec. 86.010-18(g)(4)(ii) for diesel-fueled engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have also made a minor change to the turbo boost monitoring
conditions. We have added a provision that provides clarity to the
requirement to monitor continuously certain parameters. This provision
does not change the intent of the proposed requirement, but only serves
to provide clarity to the requirement.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Sec. 86.010-18(g)(4)(iii)(D) for diesel-fueled
engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Non-Methane Hydrocarbon (NMHC) Converting Catalyst Monitoring
We proposed that malfunctions related to NMHC conversion efficiency
be detected prior to emissions exceeding the thresholds for ``NMHC
catalyst.'' We also proposed that, should the NMHC converting catalyst
be used to assist other aftertreatment devices, that malfunctions be
detected if that assistance is no longer occurring. Further, we
proposed that conversion efficiency and aftertreatment assistance be
monitoring once per trip.
For the final rule, we have eliminated the OBD thresholds
associated with monitoring of NMHC converting catalysts (e.g., the
diesel oxidation catalyst, or DOC). We have also eliminated the need to
monitor the NMHC converting catalyst's ability to generate the proper
feedgas for other aftertreatment devices. We have maintained, as was
proposed, the requirements to monitor for some level of NMHC conversion
and for the ability to generate and sustain the necessary exotherm for
catalysts used as part of the regeneration strategy of other
aftertreatment devices.\28\ As part of this latter requirement, we have
added a provision requiring the OBD system to detect when the NMHC
converting catalyst is unable to generate a 100 degree Celsius
temperature rise, or to achieve the necessary regeneration temperature,
within 60 seconds of initiating a forced regeneration event. Further,
the OBD system must detect the inability to sustain the necessary
regeneration temperature for the duration of the regeneration event. We
have also added a provision that the regeneration system be shut down
(i.e., the forced regeneration must be aborted) in the event that the
regeneration temperature cannot be attained or sustained. The
manufacturer would be allowed to define the monitoring conditions for
this monitor to ensure that a robust monitoring event would be
possible. This requirement is meant to ensure that NMHC emissions will
not be excessive during a prolonged and unsuccessful attempt at
generating an exotherm for regeneration. As an alternative, the
manufacturer may submit, for Administrator approval, their NMHC
catalyst exotherm monitor strategy and, if equivalent in effectiveness,
could use that strategy instead of the criteria described here. Lastly,
we have added a provision whereby a manufacturer can ``test out'' of
monitoring a NMHC catalyst located downstream of a DPF provided its
failure will not cause NMHC emissions to exceed the applicable NMHC
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Sec. 86.010-18(g)(5) for the final NMHC catalyst
requirements for diesel-fueled engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have made these changes for the final rule because we have been
convinced by manufacturers that there exists no robust method of
detecting loss of NMHC conversion at the levels required for threshold
monitoring. We believe that the primary function of the NMHC catalyst
will be exotherm generation which is a monitoring requirement we have
maintained and broadened. Further, we believe that the exotherm monitor
will also serve to provide the detection of lost NMHC conversion and
will do so in a more timely fashion than a direct monitoring of NMHC
conversion via exhaust gas sensors since those sensors appear unlikely
to be able to detect NMHC conversion loss until it is completely lost.
Similar arguments exist for eliminating the feedgas monitoring
requirement--we know of no robust method to detect this loss given
today's sensor technology. We discuss our rationale in more detail in
our Summary and Analysis document contained in the docket for this
rule.
6. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and Lean NOX Catalyst
Monitoring
We proposed that malfunctions related to conversion efficiency,
active/intrusive reductant delivery, active/intrusive reductant
quantity, active/intrusive reductant quality, and feedback control be
detected prior to emissions exceeding the thresholds for
``NOX catalyst system.'' Further, we proposed that
conversion efficiency and reductant quality be monitored once per trip
and that reductant delivery, quantity, and feedback control be
monitored continuously.
We have made no changes to the SCR and/or lean NOX
catalyst monitoring requirements relative to our proposal except that
we have increased the NOX threshold at which malfunctions
must be detected. We proposed a threshold of the NOX FEL+0.3
g/bhp-hr and are finalizing a threshold of the NOX FEL+0.6
g/bhp-hr. This revised threshold applies only to model years 2010
through 2012. As proposed, the threshold for model years 2013 and later
remains the NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr. We have made this change
because the state of NOX sensor technology expected for the
2010 model year is not sufficient for the proposed threshold. We expect
that to improve for model years 2013 and later.\29\ We discuss our
rationale in more detail in our Summary and Analysis document contained
in the docket for this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Please refer to our Final Technical Support Document
contained in the docket for this rule (EPA420-R-08-019, Document ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0056) which contains our latest
understanding of NOX sensor technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8324]]
7. NOX Adsorber System Monitoring
We proposed that malfunctions related to adsorber system
capability, active/intrusive reductant delivery, and feedback control
be detected prior to emissions exceeding the thresholds for
``NOX catalyst system.'' Further, we proposed that adsorber
capability be monitored once per trip and that reductant delivery and
feedback control be monitored continuously.
For the final rule, we have changed nothing with respect to the
NOX adsorber monitoring requirements with the exception of
revising the NOX threshold for model years 2010 through 2012
to the NOX FEL+0.6 from the NOX FEL+0.3. We have
made this change for the same reasons noted above for SCR monitoring.
We discuss our rationale in more detail in our Summary and Analysis
document contained in the docket for this rule.
8. Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) System Monitoring
We proposed that malfunctions related to the DPF filtering
performance, regeneration frequency, regeneration completion, NMHC
conversion, active/intrusive reductant injection, and feedback control
be detected prior to emissions exceeding the thresholds for ``DPF
system.'' We also proposed that a missing DPF substrate be detected.
Further, we proposed that all of these functions be monitored whenever
conditions were met.
For the final rule, we have made two changes to the requirements
for monitoring the DPF system. The first change is that we have added
to the DPF filtering performance monitoring requirement an optional
requirement whereby the OBD system can conduct, in effect, a functional
check of the DPF. A system using this approach would be required to
detect a change in the pressure drop across the DPF relative to the
nominal pressure drop across a clean filter and a properly working
device.\30\ In effect, if the DPF substrate has been compromised, the
failure must be detected if it results in a decrease in the expected
pressure drop equal to or greater than a defined level, or detectable
change in pressure drop, relative to a clean filter.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Sec. 86.010-18(g)(8)(ii)(A) for diesel-fueled engines.
\31\ The detectable change in pressure drop is defined as 0.5
times the observed pressure drop on a nominal, clean filter when
operating the engine at the 50% speed, 50% load operating point (as
specified in test cycle and procedures for the supplemental
emissions test (SET) in Sec. 86.1360-2007.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We believe that such a requirement is, in effect, the same as a
threshold requirement for most DPF systems to be certified in the 2010
through 2012 timeframe. Those systems are expected to use a delta
pressure approach to DPF monitoring and we expect that manufacturers
will design that monitor to detect the smallest hole feasible which, we
believe, will result in a decrease in the expected pressure drop
somewhere around the level we are requiring. Manufacturers would then
determine the emissions impact associated with that hole and hope that
it meets our threshold requirement. If it did not, we would probably
certify the system with a deficiency presuming the manufacturer had
made a good faith effort at compliance and the monitor met our
deficiency requirements.\32\ We would not want to refuse to certify it
since it would be doing the maximum that the delta pressure approach
could feasibly do. We would prefer to certify such a system to the
decrease in pressure drop requirement without the deficiency than to
certify it to a threshold with a deficiency. In the end, the same
monitor is being approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Sec. 86.010-18(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another change we have made is to eliminate the NMHC conversion
monitoring over DPFs that have some NMHC conversion capacity.\33\ We
have eliminated this requirement for the same reasons as noted above
for NMHC converting catalyst monitors. Note that we have retained an
NMHC threshold for the DPF, but it is referenced in conjunction with
the DPF regeneration frequency monitor consistent with our proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See proposed Sec. 86.010-18(g)(8)(ii)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, we have included some new monitoring requirements for those
systems certified to our optional backpressure loss provision.\34\ An
important element of these new monitoring conditions is the distinction
between conditions used for malfunction determinations versus
subsequent passing determinations. The new provisions allow for a
malfunction determination during any successful monitoring event.
However, subsequent monitoring events are limited to operation
following a successful DPF regeneration. This is to ensure that a
confirmed leak will not ``fill up'' with PM and begin to look like an
acceptable DPF. If monitoring events were allowed to occur as the leak
filled up, the OBD system may inadvertently determine that the DPF
substrate was not compromised. Limiting subsequent monitoring events
(i.e., those following a malfunction determination) to operation
following a complete regeneration of the DPF will ensure that no PM has
filled up the crack or hole.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Sec. 86.010-18(g)(8)(iii) for diesel-fueled engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We discuss all of these changes in more detail in our Summary and
Analysis of Comments document contained in the docket for this rule.
9. Exhaust Gas Sensor Monitoring
We proposed that malfunctions related to sensor performance be
detected prior to emissions exceeding the applicable thresholds. We
also proposed that malfunctions related to circuit integrity, feedback
functions, monitoring functions, and heater performance and circuit
integrity be detected prior to those functions being lost. Further, we
proposed that sensor and heater performance be monitored once per trip,
that monitoring functionality be monitored whenever conditions were
met, and that circuit integrity and feedback functionality be monitored
continuously.
For the final rule, we have changed nothing with respect to the
exhaust gas sensor monitoring requirements with the exception of
revising the NOX sensor monitor NOX threshold for
model years 2010 through 2012 to the NOX FEL+0.6 from the
NOX FEL+0.3. We have made this change for the same reasons
noted above for the NOX aftertreatment monitoring
requirements. We discuss our rationale in more detail in our Summary
and Analysis document contained in the docket for this rule.
C. Monitoring Requirements and Timelines for Gasoline/Spark-Ignition
Engines
Table II.C-1 summarizes the gasoline fueled spark ignition
emissions thresholds at which point a component or system has failed to
the point of requiring an illuminated MIL and a stored DTC.
[[Page 8325]]
Table II.C-1--Emissions Thresholds for Gasoline Fueled SI Engines over 14,000 Pounds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component/monitor MY NMHC CO NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catalytic converter system........... 2010+ 1.75x............................ ........... 1.75x
``Other monitors'' with emissions 2010+ 1.5x............................. 1.5x 1.5x
thresholds (see section II.C).
Evaporative emissions control system. 2010+ 0.150 inch leak .................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: MY=Model Year; 1.75x means a multiple of 1.75 times the applicable emissions standard; not all monitors
have emissions thresholds but instead rely on functionality and rationality checks as described in section
II.D.4. The evaporative emissions control system threshold is not, technically, an emissions threshold but
rather a leak size that must be detected; nonetheless, for ease we refer to this as the threshold.
Everything shown in Table II.C-1 is unchanged from our proposal. In
fact, we have made only one change in our requirements specific to
gasoline engines relative to our proposal.\35\ That change is being
made in response to requests from industry that would allow for
Administrator approval of misfire monitoring disablement under certain
conditions on engines with more than eight cylinders and/or in
situations where the manufacturer can demonstrate that the best
available monitoring strategy is not able to detect the misfire
condition. The change we are making for our final rule is meant to
align our disablement allowance, with approval, with similar allowances
made in the California regulation.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ There are some changes discussed in section II.D that
pertain to both gasoline and diesel applications.
\36\ See CCR 1971.1(f)(2.3.4)(D) and CCR 1971.1(f)(2.3.5) and
compare to Sec. 86.010-18(h)(2)(iii)(D) and Sec.
86.010(h)(2)(iii)(E), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As proposed, there remain exceptions to the emissions thresholds
shown in Table II.C-1 whereby a manufacturer can demonstrate that
emissions do not exceed the threshold even when the component or system
is non-functional at which point a functional check would be allowed.
Additionally, consistent with our proposal, the final gasoline
monitoring requirements for engines over 14,000 pounds mirror those
that are already in place for gasoline engines used in vehicles under
14,000 pounds. The HD gasoline industry--General Motors and Ford, as of
today\37\--have told us that their preference is to use essentially the
same OBD system on their engines used in both under and over 14,000
pound vehicles.\38\ In general, we agree with the HD gasoline industry
on this issue for three reasons:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ This is true according to our certification database for
the 2004, 2005, and 2006 model years. Other manufacturers certify
engines that use the Otto cycle, but those engines do not burn
gasoline and instead burn various alternative fuels.
\38\ ``EMA Comments on Proposed HDOBD Requirements for HDGE,''
bullet items 3 and 4; April 28, 2005, Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-
2005-0047-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The engines used in vehicles above and below 14,000 pounds
are the same which makes it easy for industry to use the same OBD
monitors;
The existing OBD requirements for engines used in vehicles
below 14,000 pounds have proven effective; and
The industry members have more than 10 years experience
complying with the OBD requirements for engines used in vehicles below
14,000 pounds.
As a result, our final requirements should allow for OBD system
consistency in vehicles under and over 14,000 pounds rather than
mirroring the HD diesel requirements discussed in section II.B.
Nonetheless, the final requirements are for engine-based OBD monitors
only rather than monitors for the entire powertrain (which would
include the transmission). We are doing this for the same reasons as
done for the diesel OBD requirements in that certification of gasoline
applications over 14,000 pounds, like their diesel counterparts, is
done on an engine basis and not a vehicle basis.
D. Monitoring Requirements and Timelines for Other Diesel and Gasoline
Systems
1. Variable Valve Timing and/or Control (VVT) System Monitoring
We proposed that VVT system malfunctions related to achieving the
commanded valve timing and/or control within a crank angle and/or lift
tolerance and slow system response be detected prior to emissions
exceeding the thresholds for ``other monitors.'' Further, we proposed
that these malfunctions be monitored whenever conditions were met
rather than once per trip.
The final requirements for VVT system monitoring are identical to
the proposed requirements.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See Sec. 86.010-18(g)(10) for diesel-fueled engines and
Sec. 86.010-18(h)(9) for gasoline-fueled engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Engine Cooling System Monitoring
We proposed that cooling system malfunctions related to proper
thermostat function and engine coolant temperature (ECT) sensor
readings be detected. Further, we proposed that malfunctions tied to
the thermostat be monitored once per trip and that most ECT
malfunctions be monitored once per trip except that circuit
malfunctions must be monitored continuously.
For the final rule, we have changed the requirement surrounding the
need to detect when the coolant temperature does not warm up to within
20 degrees F of the nominal thermostat regulating temperature. This
change allows the OBD system to use a lower temperature (lower than 20
degrees below the nominal regulating temperature) provided the ambient
temperature is between 20 degrees F and 50 degrees F. To do so, the
manufacturer must present data justifying the new temperature to be
reached at the lower ambient temperatures.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See Sec. 86.010-18(i)(1) for the final cooling system
monitoring requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Crankcase Ventilation System Monitoring
We proposed that the OBD system monitor the CV system on engines so
equipped for system integrity. For diesel engines, we proposed that the
manufacturer submit a plan for Administrator approval prior to OBD
certification that describes the monitoring strategy, malfunction
criteria, and monitoring conditions for CV system monitoring. Further,
we proposed that the manufacturer may forego monitoring for a
disconnection between the crankcase and the CV valve provided the CV
system is designed such that it uses tubing connections between the CV
valve and the crankcase that are resistant to failure. We also proposed
that the manufacturer may forego monitoring for a disconnection between
the CV valve and the intake manifold provided the CV system is designed
such that any disconnection either causes the engine to stall
immediately during idle operation, or is unlikely to occur due to a CV
system design that is integral to the induction system (e.g., machined
passages rather than tubing or hoses).
The final requirements for crankcase ventilation system monitoring
are
[[Page 8326]]
identical to the proposed requirements.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See Sec. 86.010-18(i)(2) for the final CV system
monitoring requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Comprehensive Component Monitors
We proposed that, in general, the OBD system must detect a
malfunction of any electronic engine component or system that either
provides input to or receives commands from the onboard computer(s).
Further, we proposed that malfunctions related to circuit continuity
and/or out-of-range values be monitored continuously and that
malfunctions related to input data rationality and/or output component
functional response be monitored whenever conditions were met.
For the final rule, we have made several changes to the proposed
requirements for comprehensive component monitoring. The first of those
changes is to revise the provisions concerning the emission effect that
determines what must be monitored as a comprehensive component. In the
proposed rule, we provided a general set of parameters that fit within
the comprehensive component concept. For example, components that
provide input to or received commands from the engine computer along
with specific examples of such components.\42\ We then stated that any
such component that could effect emissions over any reasonable driving
condition must be monitored. For the final rule, we have changed these
emission impacts slightly by stating that any such component that could
cause emissions to exceed emissions standards must be monitored.\43\ We
have made this change because we believe it to be consistent with the
Clean Air Act which states that OBD systems should monitor components
that could cause or result in failure of the vehicles to comply with
emission standards established for such vehicles (see Section I.C.3
above).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See proposed and/or final Sec. 86.010-18(i)(3)(i).
\43\ See final Sec. 86.010-18(i)(3)(i)(A) and compare to
proposed Sec. 86.010-18(i)(3)(i)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second change we have made to the comprehensive component
monitoring requirements is the change to the MIL circuit check and the
wait-to-start lamp circuit check. These changes were discussed in
Section II.A.2 above.
We have also changed the requirements for monitoring of glow plugs
in the 2010 through 2012 model years. During those model years, glow
plugs must be monitored for circuit checks only. For model years 2013
and later, we have not made any changes to our proposal (functional
checks must be done).\44\ We are making this change for the 2010
through 2012 model years because we do not believe that the time
available for 2010 implementation is sufficient for all manufacturers
to make the changes necessary to conduct functional checks, but we
believe that such checks are important and should be done for 2013 and
later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See Sec. 86.010-18(i)(3)(iii)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Other Emissions Control System Monitoring
We proposed monitoring of other emission control systems that are
not otherwise specifically addressed and that the manufacturer submit a
plan for Administrator approval of the monitoring strategy, malfunction
criteria, and monitoring conditions prior to introduction on a
production engine.
The final requirements for other emission control system monitoring
are identical to the proposed requirements.
6. Exceptions to Monitoring Requirements
We proposed that certain monitors could be disabled under specific
conditions related generally to ambient conditions. Further, we
proposed that most such disablements be approved by the Administrator.
The final requirements for exceptions to monitoring are identical
to the proposed requirements.
E. A Standardized Method To Measure Real World Monitoring Performance
As was noted in section II.A.3, manufacturers determine the most
appropriate times to run the non-continuous OBD monitors. This way,
they are able to make their OBD evaluation either at the operating
condition when an emissions control system is active and its
operational status can best be evaluated, and/or at the operating
condition when the most accurate evaluation can be made (e.g., highly
transient conditions or extreme conditions can make evaluation
difficult). Importantly, manufacturers are prohibited from using a
monitoring strategy that is so restrictive such that it rarely or never
runs. To help protect against monitors that rarely run, we proposed an
``in-use monitor performance ratio'' requirement. The final rule
contains the same requirement without changes.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ This requirement can be found in Sec. 86.010-18(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The set of operating conditions that must be met so that an OBD
monitor can run are called the ``enable criteria'' for that given
monitor. These enable criteria are often different for different
monitors and may well be different for different types of engines. A
large diesel engine intended for use in a Class 8 truck would be
expected to see long periods of relatively steady-state operation while
a smaller engine intended for use in an urban delivery truck would be
expected to see a lot of transient operation. Manufacturers will need
to balance between a rather loose set of enable criteria for their
engines and vehicles given the very broad range of operation HD highway
engines see and a tight set of enable criteria given the desire for
greater monitor accuracy. Manufacturers would be required to design
these enable criteria so that the monitor:
Is robust (i.e., accurate at making pass/fail decisions);
Runs frequently in the real world; and
In general, also runs during the FTP heavy-duty transient
cycle.
If designed incorrectly, these enable criteria may be either too
broad and result in inaccurate monitors, or overly restrictive thereby
preventing the monitor from executing frequently in the real world.
Since the primary purpose of an OBD system is to monitor for and
detect emission-related malfunctions while the engine is operating in
the real world, a standardized methodology for quantifying real world
performance would be beneficial to both EPA and manufacturers.
Generally, in determining whether a manufacturer's monitoring
conditions are sufficient, a manufacturer would discuss the proposed
monitoring conditions with EPA staff. The finalized conditions would be
included in the certification applications and submitted to EPA staff
who would review the conditions and make determinations on a case-by-
case basis based on the engineering judgment of the staff. In cases
where we are concerned that the documented conditions may not be met
during reasonable in-use driving conditions, we would most likely ask
the manufacturer for data or other engineering analyses used by the
manufacturer to determine that the conditions would occur in-use. In
requiring a standardized methodology for quantifying real world
performance, we believe this review process can be done more
efficiently than would occur otherwise. Furthermore, it would serve to
ensure that all manufacturers are held to the same standard for real
world performance. Lastly, we want review procedures that will ensure
that monitors operate properly and frequently in the field.
[[Page 8327]]
Therefore, manufacturers will be required to use a standardized
method for determining real world monitoring performance and will be
liable if monitoring occurs less frequently than a minimum acceptable
level, expressed as minimum acceptable in-use performance ratio.\46\ We
are also requiring that manufacturers implement software in the onboard
computer to track how often several of the major monitors (e.g.,
catalyst, EGR, CDPF, other diesel aftertreatment devices) execute
during real world driving. The onboard computer must keep track of how
many times each of these monitors has executed and how much the engine
has been operated. By measuring both of these values, the ratio of
monitor operation relative to engine operation can be calculated to
determine monitoring frequency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ This minimum acceptable ratio applies in model years 2013
and later, as was proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The minimum acceptable frequency requirement will apply to many but
not all of the OBD monitors. We are requiring that monitors operate
either continuously, once per drive cycle, or, in a few cases, multiple
times per drive cycle (i.e., whenever the proper monitoring conditions
are present). For components or systems that are more likely to
experience intermittent failures or failures that can routinely happen
in distinct portions of an engine's operating range (e.g., only at high
engine speed and load, only when the engine is cold or hot), monitors
are required to operate continuously. Examples of continuous monitors
include most electrical/circuit continuity monitors. For components or
systems that are less likely to experience intermittent failures or
failures that only occur in specific vehicle operating regions or for
components or systems where accurate monitoring can only be performed
under limited operating conditions, monitors would be required to run
once per drive cycle. Examples of once per drive cycle monitors
typically include gasoline catalyst monitors, evaporative system leak
detection monitors, and output comprehensive component functional
monitors. For components or systems that are routinely used to perform
functions that are crucial to maintaining low emissions but may still
require monitoring under fairly limited conditions, monitors are
required to run each and every time the manufacturer-defined enable
conditions are present. Examples of multiple times per drive cycle
monitors typically include input comprehensive component rationality
monitors and some exhaust aftertreatment monitors.
Monitors required to run continuously, by definition, would always
be running thereby making a minimum frequency requirement moot. The new
frequency requirement essentially applies only to those monitors that
are designated as once per drive cycle or multiple times per drive
cycle monitors. For all of these monitors, manufacturers are required
to define monitoring conditions that ensure adequate frequency in-use.
Specifically, the monitors need to run often enough so that the
measured monitor frequency on in-use engines will exceed the minimum
acceptable frequency. However, even though the minimum frequency
requirement applies to nearly all once per drive cycle and multiple
times per drive cycle monitors, manufacturers are only required to
implement software to track and report the in-use frequency for a few
of the major monitors. These few monitors generally represent the major
emissions control components and the ones with the most limited enable
criteria.
We believe that OBD monitors should run frequently to ensure early
detection of emissions-related malfunctions and, consequently, to
maintain low emissions. Allowing malfunctions to continue undetected
and unrepaired for long periods of time allows emissions to increase
unnecessarily. Frequent monitoring can also help to ensure detection of
intermittent emissions-related malfunctions (i.e., those that are not
continuously present but occur sporadically for days and even weeks at
a time). The nature of mechanical and electrical systems is that
intermittent malfunctions can and do occur. The less frequent the
monitoring, the less likely these malfunctions will be detected and
repaired. Additionally, for both intermittent and continuous
malfunctions, earlier detection is equivalent to preventative
maintenance in that the original malfunction can be detected and
repaired prior to it causing subsequent damage to other components.
This can help vehicle operators avoid more costly repairs that could
have resulted had the first malfunction gone undetected.
Infrequent monitoring can also have an impact on the service and
repair industry. Specifically, monitors that have unreasonable or
overly restrictive enable conditions could hinder vehicle repair
services. In general, upon completing an OBD-related repair to an
engine, a technician will attempt to verify that the repair has indeed
fixed the problem. Ideally, a technician will operate the vehicle in a
manner that will exercise the appropriate OBD monitor and allow the OBD
system to confirm that the malfunction is no longer present. This
affords a technician the highest level of assurance that the repair was
indeed successful. However, OBD monitors that operate infrequently are
difficult to exercise and, therefore, technicians may not be able (or
may not be likely) to perform such post-repair evaluations. Despite the
service information availability requirements we are promulgating--
requirements that manufacturers make all of their service and repair
information available to all technicians, including the information
necessary to exercise OBD monitors--technicians would still find it
difficult to exercise monitors that require infrequently encountered
engine operating conditions (e.g., abnormally steady constant speed
operation for an extended period of time). Additionally, to execute OBD
monitors in an expeditious manner or to execute monitors that would
require unusual or infrequently encountered conditions, technicians may
be required to operate the vehicle in an unsafe manner (e.g., at
freeway speeds on residential streets or during heavy traffic). If
unsuccessful in executing these monitors, technicians may even take
shortcuts in attempting to validate the repair while maintaining a
reasonable cost for customers. These shortcuts would likely not be as
thorough in verifying repairs and could increase the chance that
improperly repaired engines would be returned to the vehicle owner or
additional repairs would be performed just to ensure the problem is
fixed. In the end, monitors that operate less frequently can result in
unnecessary costs and inconvenience to both vehicle owners and
technicians.
1. Description of Software Counters To Track Real World Performance
As stated above, manufacturers are required to track monitor
performance by comparing the number of monitoring events (i.e., how
often each monitor has run) to the number of driving events (i.e., how
often has the vehicle been operated). Our final rule contains this
requirement as did our proposal. In general, we have not changed the
requirements associated with determination of this minimum performance
ratio. However, we have made some minor changes.
The first of these is the way in which the denominator of the ratio
is determined for diesel engines. The ratio
[[Page 8328]]
of these two numbers would give an indication of how often the monitor
is operating relative to vehicle operation. In equation form, this can
be stated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24FE09.007
Specifically, we have changed the denominator provisions which
stated that the denominator would be incremented if, on a single key
start, the following criteria were satisfied while ambient temperature
remained above 20 degrees Fahrenheit and altitude remained below 8,000
feet:
Minimum engine run time of 10 minutes;
Minimum of 5 minutes, cumulatively, of operation at
vehicle speeds greater than 25 miles-per-hour for gasoline engines or
calculated load greater than 15 percent for diesel engines; and
At least one continuous idle for a minimum of 30 seconds
encountered.
For the final rule, the second bullet has been changed to read:
Minimum of 5 minutes, cumulatively, of operation at
vehicle speeds greater than 25 miles-per-hour for gasoline engines or
engine speeds greater than 1,150 rotations per minute (RPM) for diesel
engines. We are also allowing diesel engines to employ the gasoline
criteria for the years 2010 through 2012 but not thereafter.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Sec. 86.010-18(d)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have made this change because we believe that the 1,150 RPM
criterion is a better measure of work than the 15% load criterion. The
purpose of the time at load (i.e., 5 minutes of engine load above 15%)
was to have criteria that would represent that an engine had been doing
work for at least 5 minutes (300 seconds). After consideration, we have
decided that engine speed above 1,150 RPM for 5 minutes is a better
measure of engine work.
2. Performance Tracking Requirements
a. In-Use Monitoring Performance Ratio Definition
For monitors required to meet the in-use performance tracking
requirements,\48\ we are requiring that the incrementing of numerators
and denominators and the calculation of the in-use performance ratio be
done in accordance with the following specifications. These
specifications have not changed from the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ These monitors, as presented in section II.A.3 (also see
86.010-18(e)(1)), are, for diesel engines: The NMHC catalyst, the
CDPF system, the NOX adsorber system, the NOX
converting catalyst system, and the boost system; and, for gasoline
engines: The catalyst, the evaporative system, and the secondary air
system; and, for all engines, the exhaust gas sensors, the EGR
system, and the VVT system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The numerator(s) are defined as a measure of the number of times a
vehicle has been operated such that all monitoring conditions necessary
for a specific monitor to detect a malfunction have been encountered.
Except for systems using alternative statistical MIL illumination
protocols, the numerator is to be incremented by an integer of one. The
numerator(s) may not be incremented more than once per drive cycle. The
numerator(s) for a specific monitor would be incremented within 10
seconds if and only if the following criteria are satisfied on a single
drive cycle:
Every monitoring condition necessary for the monitor of
the specific component to detect a malfunction and store a pending DTC
has been satisfied, including enable criteria, presence or absence of
related DTCs, sufficient length of monitoring time, and diagnostic
executive priority assignments (e.g., diagnostic ``A'' must execute
prior to diagnostic ``B''). For the purpose of incrementing the
numerator, satisfying all the monitoring conditions necessary for a
monitor to determine that the component is passing may not, by itself,
be sufficient to meet this criteria.
For monitors that require multiple stages or events in a
single drive cycle to detect a malfunction, every monitoring condition
necessary for all events to have completed must be satisfied.
For monitors that require intrusive operation of
components to detect a malfunction, a manufacturer would be required to
request Administrator approval of the strategy used to determine that,
had a malfunction been present, the monitor would have detected the
malfunction. Administrator approval of the request would be based on
the equivalence of the strategy to actual intrusive operation and the
ability of the strategy to determine accurately if every monitoring
condition was satisfied as necessary for the intrusive event to occur.
For the secondary air system monitor, the three criteria
above are satisfied during normal operation of the secondary air
system. Monitoring during intrusive operation of the secondary air
system later in the same drive cycle solely for the purpose of
monitoring may not, by itself, be sufficient to meet these criteria.
The third bullet item above requires explanation. There may be
monitors designed to use what could be termed a two stage or two step
process. The first step is usually a passive and/or short evaluation
that can be used to ``pass'' a properly working component where
``pass'' refers to evaluating the component and determining that it is
not malfunctioning. The second step is usually an intrusive and/or
longer evaluation that is necessary to ``fail'' a malfunctioning
component or ``pass'' a component nearing the point of failure. An
example of such an approach might be an evaporative leak detection
monitor that uses an intrusive vacuum pull-down/bleed-up evaluation
during highway cruise conditions. If the evaporative system is sealed
tight, the monitor ``passes'' and is done with testing for the given
drive cycle. If the monitor senses a leak close to the required
detection limit, the monitor does not ``pass'' and an internal flag is
stored that will trigger the second stage of the test during the next
cold start when a more accurate evaluation can be conducted. On the
next cold start, provided the internal flag is set, an intrusive vacuum
pull-down/bleed up monitor might be conducted during engine idle a very
short time after the cold start. This second evaluation stage, being at
idle and cold, gives a more accurate indication of the evaporative
system's integrity and provides for a more accurate decision regarding
the presence and size of a leak.
In this example, the second stage of this monitor would run less
frequently in real use than the first stage since it is activated only
on those occasions where the first stage suggests that a leak may be
present (which most cars will not have). The rate-based tracking
requirements are meant to give a measure of how often a monitor could
detect a malfunction. To know the right answer, we need to know how
often the first stage is running and could ``fail'', thus triggering
the second stage, and then how often the second stage is completing. If
we track only the first stage, we would get a false indication of
[[Page 8329]]
how often the monitor could really detect a leak. But, if we track only
the second stage, most cars would never increment the counter since
most cars do not have leaks and would not trigger stage two.
In considering this, we see two possible solutions: (1) Always
activate the second stage evaluation in which case there would be an
intrusive monitor being performed that does not really need to be
performed; or, (2) implement a ``ghost'' monitor that pretends that the
first stage evaluation triggers the second stage evaluation and then
also looks for when the second stage evaluation could have completed
had it been necessary. The third bullet item in the list above requires
that, if a manufacturer intends to implement a two stage monitor and
intends to implement such a ``ghost'' monitor as described here for
rate based tracking, great care must be taken to ensure that it is
being done correctly and properly.
For monitors that can generate results in a ``gray zone'' or ``non-
detection zone'' (i.e., results that indicate neither a passing system
nor a malfunctioning system) or in a ``non-decision zone'' (e.g.,
monitors that increment and decrement counters until a pass or fail
threshold is reached), the manufacturer is responsible for incrementing
the numerator appropriately. In general, the numerator should not be
incremented when the monitor indicates a result in the ``non-detection
zone'' or prior to the monitor reaching a decision. When necessary, the
manufacturer will be expected to have data and/or engineering analyses
demonstrating the expected frequency of results in the ``non-detection
zone'' and the ability of the monitor to determine accurately, had an
actual malfunction been present, whether or not the monitor would have
detected a malfunction instead of a result in the ``non-detection
zone.'' \49\
For monitors that run or complete their evaluation with the engine
off, the numerator must be incremented either within 10 seconds of the
monitor completing its evaluation in the engine off state, or during
the first 10 seconds of engine start on the subsequent drive cycle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See 86.010-18(d)(3)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturers using alternative statistical MIL illumination
protocols for any of the monitors that require a numerator would be
required to increment the numerator(s) appropriately. The manufacturer
may be required to provide supporting data and/or engineering analyses
demonstrating both the equivalence of their incrementing approach to
the incrementing specified above for monitors using the standard MIL
illumination protocol, and the overall equivalence of their
incrementing approach in determining that the minimum acceptable in-use
performance ratio has been satisfied.
Regarding the denominator(s), defined as a measure of the number of
times a vehicle has been operated, we are requiring that it also be
incremented by an integer of one.\50\ The denominator(s) may not be
incremented more than once per drive cycle. The general denominator and
the denominators for each monitor would be incremented within 10
seconds if and only if the following criteria are satisfied on a single
drive cycle during which ambient temperature remained at or above 20
degrees Fahrenheit and altitude remained below 8,000 feet:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See 86.010-18(d)(4) for details on the denominator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative time since the start of the drive cycle is
greater than or equal to 600 seconds (10 minutes);
Cumulative gasoline engine operation at or above 25 miles
per hour or diesel engine operation at or above 1,150 RPM, either of
which occurs for greater than or equal to 300 seconds (5 minutes); and
Continuous engine operation at idle (e.g., accelerator
pedal released by the driver, engine speed less than or equal to 200
rpm above normal warmed-up idle or vehicle speed less than or equal to
one mile per hour) for greater than or equal to 30 seconds.
In addition to the requirements above, the evaporative system
monitor denominator(s) must be incremented if and only if:
Cumulative time since the start of the drive cycle is
greater than or equal to 600 seconds (10 minutes) while at an ambient
temperature of greater than or equal to 40 degrees Fahrenheit but less
than or equal to 95 degrees Fahrenheit; and
Engine cold start occurs with engine coolant temperature
at engine start greater than or equal to 40 degrees Fahrenheit but less
than or equal to 95 degrees Fahrenheit and less than or equal to 12
degrees Fahrenheit higher than ambient temperature at engine start.
In addition to the requirements above, the denominator(s) for the
following monitors must be incremented if and only if the component or
strategy is commanded ``on'' for a time greater than or equal to 10
seconds:
Gasoline secondary air system;
Cold start emission reduction strategy;
Components or systems that operate only at engine start-up
(e.g., glow plugs, intake air heaters) and are subject to monitoring
under ``other emission control systems'' or comprehensive component
output components.
For purposes of determining this commanded ``on'' time, the OBD
system may not include time during intrusive operation of any of the
components or strategies later in the same drive cycle solely for the
purposes of monitoring.
In addition to the requirements above, the denominator(s) for the
monitors of the following output components (except those operated only
at engine start-up as outlined above) must be incremented if and only
if the component is commanded to function (e.g., commanded ``on'',
``open'', ``closed'', ``locked'') two or more times during the drive
cycle or for a time greater than or equal to 10 seconds, whichever
occurs first:
Variable valve timing and/or control system
``Other emission control systems''
Comprehensive component (output component only, e.g.,
turbocharger waste-gates, variable length manifold runners)
For monitors of the following components, the manufacturer may use
alternative or additional criteria to that set forth above for
incrementing the denominator. To do so, the manufacturer would need to
be able to demonstrate that the criteria would be equivalent to the
criteria outlined above at measuring the frequency of monitor operation
relative to the amount of engine operation:
Engine cooling system input components
``Other emission control systems''
Comprehensive component input components that require
extended monitoring evaluation (e.g., stuck fuel level sensor
rationality), and temperature sensor rationality monitors
DPF regeneration frequency
For monitors of the following components or other emission controls
that experience infrequent regeneration events, the manufacturer may
use alternative or additional criteria to that set forth above for
incrementing the denominator. To do so, the manufacturer would need to
ensure that the criteria would be equivalent to the criteria outlined
above at measuring the frequency of monitor operation relative to the
amount of engine operation:
NMHC converting catalysts
Diesel particulate filters
For hybrid engine systems, engines that employ alternative engine
start hardware or strategies (e.g., integrated starter and generators),
or alternative
[[Page 8330]]
fueled engines (e.g., dedicated, bi-fuel, or dual-fuel applications),
the manufacturer may request Administrator approval to use alternative
criteria to that set forth above for incrementing the denominator. In
general, approval would not be given for alternative criteria that only
employ engine shut off at or near idle/vehicle stationary conditions.
Approval of the alternative criteria would be based on the equivalence
of the alternative criteria at determining the amount of engine
operation relative to the measure of conventional engine operation in
accordance with the criteria above.
The numerators and denominators may need to be disabled at some
times.\51\ To do this, within 10 seconds of a malfunction being
detected (i.e., a pending, MIL-on, or active DTC being stored) that
disables a monitor required to meet the performance tracking
requirements,\52\ the OBD system must disable further incrementing of
the corresponding numerator and denominator for each monitor that is
disabled. When the malfunction is no longer detected (e.g., the pending
DTC is erased through self-clearing or through a scan tool command),
incrementing of all corresponding numerators and denominators should
resume within 10 seconds. Also, within 10 seconds of the start of a
power takeoff unit (PTO) that disables a monitor required to meet the
performance tracking requirements, the OBD system should disable
further incrementing of the corresponding numerator and denominator for
each monitor that is disabled. When the PTO operation ends,
incrementing of all corresponding numerators and denominators should
resume within 10 seconds. The OBD system must disable further
incrementing of all numerators and denominators within 10 seconds if a
malfunction has been detected in any component used to determine if:
Vehicle speed/calculated load; ambient temperature; elevation; idle
operation; engine cold start; or, time of operation has been satisfied,
and the corresponding pending DTC has been stored. Incrementing of all
numerators and denominators should resume within 10 seconds when the
malfunction is no longer present (e.g., pending DTC erased through
self-clearing or by a scan tool command).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See 86.010-18(d)(5).
\52\ These monitors, as presented in section II.A.3, are, for
diesel engines: the NMHC catalyst, the CDPF system, the
NOX adsorber system, the NOX converting
catalyst system, and the boost system; and, for gasoline engines:
the catalyst, the evaporative system, and the secondary air system;
and, for all engines, the exhaust gas sensors, the EGR system, and
the VVT system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The in-use performance monitoring ratio itself is defined as the
numerator for the given monitor divided by the denominator for that
monitor.
b. Standardized Tracking and Reporting of Monitor Performance
Consistent with our proposal, we are requiring that the OBD system
separately report an in-use monitor performance numerator and
denominator for each of the following components: \53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See Sec. 86.010-18(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For diesel engines: NMHC catalyst bank 1, NMHC catalyst
bank 2, NOX catalyst bank 1, NOX catalyst bank 2,
exhaust gas sensor bank 1, exhaust gas sensor bank 2, EGR/VVT system,
DPF system, turbo boost control system, and the NOX
adsorber. The OBD system must also report a general denominator and an
ignition cycle counter in the standardized format discussed below and
in section II.F.5.
For gasoline engines: catalyst bank 1, catalyst bank 2,
oxygen sensor bank 1, oxygen sensor bank 2, evaporative leak detection
system, EGR/VVT system, and secondary air system. The OBD system must
also report a general denominator and an ignition cycle counter in the
standardized format specified below and in section II.F.5.
The OBD system will be required to report a separate numerator for
each of the components listed in the above bullet lists. For specific
components or systems that have multiple monitors that are required to
be reported--e.g., exhaust gas sensor bank 1 may have multiple monitors
for sensor response or other sensor characteristics--the OBD system
should separately track numerators and denominators for each of the
specific monitors and report only the corresponding numerator and
denominator for the specific monitor that has the lowest numerical
ratio. If two or more specific monitors have identical ratios, the
corresponding numerator and denominator for the specific monitor that
has the highest denominator should be reported for the specific
component. The numerator(s) must be reported as discussed in section
II.F.5.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See Sec. 86.010-18(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OBD system will also be required to report a separate
denominator for each of the components listed in the above bullet
lists. The denominator(s) must be reported as discussed in section
II.F.5.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ See Sec. 86.010-18(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, for the in-use performance ratio, determining which
corresponding numerator and denominator to report as required for
specific components or systems that have multiple monitors that are
required to be reported--e.g., exhaust gas sensor bank 1 may have
multiple monitors for sensor response or other sensor characteristics--
the ratio should be calculated as discussed in section II.F.5.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See Sec. 86.010-18(e)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ignition cycle counter is defined as a counter that indicates
the number of ignition cycles a vehicle has experienced. The ignition
cycle counter must also be reported as discussed in section II.F.5.\57\
The ignition cycle counter, when incremented, should be incremented by
an integer of one. The ignition cycle counter may not be incremented
more than once per ignition cycle. The ignition cycle counter should be
incremented within 10 seconds if and only if the engine exceeds an
engine speed of 50 to 150 rpm below the normal, warmed-up idle speed
(as determined in the drive position for vehicles equipped with an
automatic transmission) for at least two seconds plus or minus one
second. The OBD system should disable further incrementing of the
ignition cycle counter within 10 seconds if a malfunction has been
detected in any component used to determine if engine speed or time of
operation has been satisfied and the corresponding pending DTC has been
stored. The ignition cycle counter may not be disabled from
incrementing for any other condition. Incrementing of the ignition
cycle counter should resume within 10 seconds after the malfunction is
no longer present (e.g., pending DTC erased through self-clearing or by
a scan tool command).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ See Sec. 86.010-18(e)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Standardization Requirements
Consistent with our proposal, the final regulation includes
requirements for manufacturers to standardize certain features of the
OBD system.\58\ Effective standardization assists all repair
technicians in diagnosing and repairing malfunctions by providing equal
access to essential repair information, and requires structuring the
information in a common format from manufacturer to manufacturer.
Additionally, the standardization will help to facilitate the potential
use of OBD checks in heavy-duty inspection and maintenance programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See Sec. 86.010-18(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The features that will be standardized include:
[[Page 8331]]
The diagnostic connector, the computer communication
protocol (beginning in model year 2013 as we proposed);
The hardware and software specifications for tools used by
service technicians;
The information communicated by the onboard computer and
the methods for accessing that information;
The numeric designation of the DTCs stored when a
malfunction is detected; and
The terminology used by manufacturers in their service
manuals.
Also consistent with our proposal, only a certain minimum set of
emissions-related information must be made available through the
standardized format, protocol, and connector. We are not limiting
engine manufacturers as to what protocol they use for engine control,
communication between onboard computers, or communication to
manufacturer-specific scan tools or test equipment. Further, we are not
prohibiting engine manufacturers from equipping the vehicle with
additional diagnostic connectors or protocols as required by other
suppliers or purchasers. For example, fleets that use data logging or
other equipment that requires the use of SAE J1587 communication and
connectors could still be installed and supported by the engine and
vehicle manufacturers. The OBD rules only require that engine
manufacturers also equip their vehicles with a specific connector and
communication protocol that meet the standardized requirements to
communicate a minimum set of emissions-related diagnostic, service and,
potentially, inspection information.
1. Reference Documents
We are requiring that OBD systems comply with the provisions laid
out in certain Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and/or
International Organization of Standards (ISO) documents that are
incorporated by reference (IBR) into federal regulation. Details
regarding these SAE and ISO documents can be found in Sec. 86.1(b) and
in Sec. 86.010-18(k).
Notably, we are requiring that OBD systems on engines placed in
over 14,000 pound vehicles use either the SAE J1939 or the ISO 15765-
4:2005(E) communication protocols. Note that some manufacturers have
expressed interest in the ISO 27145 standard. As of this writing, that
standard is not available. Should it become available in time for model
year 2013 and later implementation, we will consider allowing that
standard and may issue a technical amendment, direct final rule, or
proposed rule to address it.
2. Diagnostic Connector Requirements
We have made no substantive changes relative to our proposal with
respect to the diagnostic data link connector. The one change we have
made is simply to allow the Administrator to approve alternative
locations for the connector. We have made this change to accommodate
certain applications such as buses in which the required location would
not work well. Note that the requirements for model years 2013 and
later now appear in Sec. 86.010-18 rather than Sec. 86.013-18 as in
our proposal.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ See proposed Sec. Sec. 86.010-18(k)(2) and 86.013-18(k)(2)
and compare to final Sec. 86.010-18(k)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Communications to a Scan Tool
In light-duty OBD, manufacturers are allowed to use one of four
protocols for communication between a generic scan tool and the
vehicle's onboard computer. A generic scan tool automatically cycles
through each of the allowable protocols until it hits upon the proper
one with which to establish communication with the particular onboard
computer. While this has generally worked successfully in the field,
some communication problems have arisen.
In an effort to address these problems, CARB has made recent
changes to their light-duty OBDII regulation that require all light-
duty vehicle manufacturers to use only one communication protocol by
the 2008 model year. In making these changes, CARB staff argued that
their experience with standardization under the OBD II regulation
showed that having a single set of standards used by all vehicles would
be desirable. CARB staff argued that a single protocol offers a
tremendous benefit to both scan tool designers and service technicians.
Scan tool designers could focus on added feature content and could
expend much less time and money validating basic functionality of their
product on all the various permutations of protocol interpretations
that are implemented. In turn, technicians would likely get a scan tool
that works properly on all vehicles without the need for repeated
software updates that incorporate ``work-arounds'' or other patches to
fix bugs or adapt the tool to accommodate slight variances in how the
multiple protocols interact with each other or are implemented by
various manufacturers. Further, a single protocol should also be
beneficial to fleet operators that use add-on equipment such as data
loggers, and for vehicle manufacturers that integrate parts from
various engine and component suppliers all of which must work together.
Based on our similar experiences at the federal level with
communication protocols giving rise to service and inspection/
maintenance program issues, we initially wanted to propose a single
communication protocol for engines used in over 14,000 pound vehicles.
However, the affected industry has been divided over which single
protocol should be required and has strongly argued for more than one
protocol to be allowed. Therefore, for vehicles with diesel engines, we
proposed and are allowing manufacturers use either the standards set
forth in SAE J1939, or those set forth in the 500 kbps baud rate
version of ISO 15765. For vehicles with gasoline engines, we are
requiring that manufacturers use the 500 kbps baud rate version of ISO
15765.\60\ Manufacturers would be required to use only one standard to
meet all the standardization requirements on a single vehicle; that is,
a vehicle must use only one protocol for all OBD modules on the
vehicle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See Sec. 86.010-18(k)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, some manufacturers have expressed interest in the
ISO 27145 standard. That standard is being developed as part of the
Worldwide Harmonized Heavy-duty OBD global technical regulation (WWH-
OBD).\61\ As of this writing, that ISO standard is not available.
Should it become available in time for model year 2013 and later
implementation, we will consider allowing that standard and may issue a
technical amendment, direct final rule, or proposed rule to address it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ Global Technical Regulation Number 5: Technical
Requirements for On-board Diagnostic Systems for Road Vehicles; ECE/
TRANS/180/Add.5; 23 January 2007, see http://www.unece.org/trans/
main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29gen/wp29glob_registry.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Required Emissions Related Functions
We have made only a few changes in the final rule relative to our
proposal. We believe that all of these changes are minor and serve to
ease the burden on manufacturers without sacrificing our OBD program.
The first change is that made to the permanent DTC erasure
provisions.\62\ The final provisions provide more clarity and
flexibility to manufacturers in cases where stored DTC information has
been erased via scan tool or battery disconnect. These changes are
consistent with changes made to CARB's OBDII regulation in 2007 and
changes we believe CARB will make when revising their HDOBD regulation
(expected in 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ See proposed Sec. 86.010-18(b)(3)(iii) and compare to the
final Sec. 86.010-18(b)(3)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8332]]
We have also made a slight change to the definition of idle where
we require that the OBD system track engine run-time and track the
amount of time operating in idle mode. The provision removes the phrase
``vehicle speed less than 1 mph'' and replaces it with ``engine speed
less than or equal to 200 rpm above normal warmed-up idle or vehicle
speed less than 1 mph.'' We have made this change to be consistent with
industry request, and because we believe it does not sacrifice our
intent in any way.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ See proposed Sec. 86.010-18(k)(6)(i)(B) and compare to
final Sec. 86.010-18(k)(6)(i)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have also made minor changes to the CAL ID and CVN
requirements.\64\ These changes allow for multiple CAL IDs per
diagnostic or emission critical control unit. Our proposal allowed for
only one. We would prefer that there be only one for the sake of
minimizing confusion. Manufacturers would be required to get
Administrator approval to use multiple CAL IDs and would also be
required to communicate these to the scan tool in order of priority
which should minimize if not eliminate possible confusion. We have made
a corresponding change to the CVN requirements for systems using the
multiple CAL ID provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ See proposed Sec. 86.010-18(k)(4)(vi) and (k)(4)(vii)(A)
and compare to final Sec. 86.010-18(k)(4)(vi) and (k)(4)(vii)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. In-Use Performance Ratio Tracking Requirements
To separately report an in-use performance ratio for each
applicable monitor as discussed in sections II.B through II.D, we
proposed that manufacturers be required to implement software
algorithms to report a numerator and denominator in a standardized
format. We have made no changes to those requirements in the final
rule, with the exception of the minor change to the definition of idle
from ``vehicle speed less than one mile per hour'' to ``engine speed
less than or equal to 200 rpm above normal warmed-up idle and vehicle
speed less than or equal to one mile per hour.'' \65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ See final Sec. Sec. 86.010-18(k)(5) and 86.010-18(k)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Exceptions to Standardization Requirements
For alternative-fueled engines derived from a diesel-cycle engine,
we are allowing the standardized requirements discussed in this section
that are applicable to diesel engines rather than meeting the
requirements applicable to gasoline engines.
G. Implementation Schedule, In-Use Liability, and In-Use Enforcement
1. Implementation Schedule and In-Use Liability Provisions
Table II.G-1 summarizes the implementation schedule for the OBD
monitoring requirements, the certification requirements, and the in-use
liabilities. This implementation schedule is identical to the proposed
schedule. More detail regarding the implementation schedule and
liabilities can be found in the sections that follow.
Table II.G-1--OBD Certification Requirements and In-Use Liability for Diesel Fueled and Gasoline Fueled Engines
Over 14,000 Pounds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model year Applicability Certification requirement In-use liability
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010-2012.................. Parent rating within 1 Full liability to Full liability to 2x
compliant engine thresholds according to thresholds.\c\
family.\a\ certification
demonstration
procedures.\b\
Child ratings within the Certification Liability to monitor and
compliant engine family. documentation only (i.e., detect as noted in
no certification certification
demonstration); no documentation.
liability to thresholds.
All other engine families None...................... None.
and ratings.
2013-2015.................. Parent rating from 2010- Full liability to Full liability to 2x
2012 and parent rating thresholds according to thresholds.
within 1-2 additional certification
engine families. demonstration procedures.
Child ratings from 2010- Full liability to Full liability to 2x
2012 and parent ratings thresholds but thresholds.
from any remaining engine certification
families or OBD groups.\d\ documentation only.
Additional engine ratings.. Certification Liability to monitor and
documentation only; no detect as noted in
liability to thresholds. certification
documentation.
2016-2018.................. One rating from 1-3 engine Full liability to Full liability to
families and/or OBD groups. thresholds according to thresholds.
certification
demonstration procedures.
Remaining ratings.......... Full liability to Full liability to 2x
thresholds but thresholds.
certification
documentation only.
2019+...................... One rating from 1-3 engine Full liability to Full liability to
families and/or OBD groups. thresholds according to thresholds.
certification
demonstration procedures.
Remaining ratings.......... Full liability to Full liability to
thresholds but thresholds.
certification
documentation only.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: (a) Parent and child ratings are defined in section II.G; which rating(s) serves as the parent rating and
which engine families must comply is not left to the manufacturer, as discussed in section II.G. (b) The
certification demonstration procedures and the certification documentation requirements are discussed in
section VII. (c) Where in-use liability to thresholds and 2x thresholds is noted, manufacturer liability to
monitor and detect as noted in their certification documentation is implied. (d) OBD groups are groupings of
engine families that use similar OBD strategies and/or similar emissions control systems, as described in the
text.
As we proposed, for the 2010 through 2012 model years,
manufacturers are required to implement OBD on one engine family. All
other 2010 through 2012 engine families are not subject to any OBD
requirements unless otherwise required to do so (e.g., to demonstrate
that SCR equipped vehicles will not be operated without urea). For
2013, manufacturers are required to implement OBD on all engine
families.
We are setting this implementation schedule for several reasons.
First, industry has made credible arguments that their resources are
stretched to the limit developing and testing strategies for compliance
with the 2007/2010 heavy-duty highway emissions standards. We do not
want to jeopardize their success toward that goal by being too
aggressive with our OBD program.
[[Page 8333]]
Second, OBD is a complex and difficult regulation with which to comply.
We believe that our implementation schedule would give industry the
opportunity to introduce OBD systems on a limited number of engines
giving them and us very valuable learning experience. Should mistakes
or errors in regulatory interpretation occur, the ramifications would
be limited to only a subset of the new vehicle fleet rather than the
entire new vehicle fleet. Lastly, the OBD requirements and the
production vehicle evaluation provisions (discussed in Section VII),
reflect 10 to 20 years of learning by EPA, CARB, and industry
(primarily the light-duty gasoline industry) as to what works and what
does not work. This is, perhaps, especially true for those OBD elements
that involve the interface between the OBD system and service and I/M
inspection personnel. Gasoline manufacturers have had the ability to
evolve their OBD systems along with this learning process. However,
diesel engine manufacturers have not really been involved in this
learning process and, as a result, 100 percent implementation in 2010
would be analogous to implementing 10 to 20 years of OBD learning in
one implementation step. We believe that implementing slowly rather
than one big step will benefit everyone involved.
Table II.G-1 makes reference to ``parent'' and ``child'' ratings.
In general, engine manufacturers certify an engine family that consists
of several ratings having slightly different horsepower and/or torque
characteristics but no differences large enough to require a different
engine family designation. For emissions certification, the parent
rating--i.e., the rating for which emissions data are submitted to EPA
for the purpose of demonstrating emissions compliance--is defined as
the ``worst case'' rating. This worst case rating is the rating
considered as having the worst emissions performance and, therefore,
its compliance demonstrates that all other ratings within the family
must comply. For OBD purposes, we want to limit the burden on
industry--hence the requirement for only one compliant engine family in
2010--yet maximize the impact of the OBD system. Therefore, for model
years 2010 through 2012, we are defining the OBD parent rating as the
rating having the highest weighted projected sales within the engine
family having the highest weighted projected sales, with sales being
weighted by the useful life of the engine rating. We have added a new
provision that allows the Administrator to approve an alternative
rating as the parent rating than that described by this text and this
represents a slight departure from the proposal.\66\ Table II.G-2
presents a hypothetical example for how this would work absent
Administrator approval to do otherwise. Using this approach, the OBD
compliant engine family in 2010 would be the engine family projected to
produce the most in-use emissions (based on sales weighted by expected
miles driven). Likewise, the fully liable parent OBD rating would be
the rating within that family projected to produce the most in-use
emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ See Sec. 86.010-18(o)(1)(i) and (o)(2)(ii)(B) to see this
new provision.
Table II.G-2--Hypothetical Example of How the OBD Parent and Child Ratings Would Be Determined
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OBD weighting-- OBD weighting--
Projected Certified engine rating engine family
OBD group Engine family Rating sales useful life \a\ (billions) \b\ (billions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I...................................................... A 1 10,000 285,000 2.85 14.25
2 40,000 285,000 11.4 ..............
B 1 10,000 435,000 4.35 21.60
2 20,000 435,000 8.70 ..............
3 30,000 285,000 8.55 ..............
II..................................................... C 1 20,000 110,000 2.20 7.70
2 50,000 110,000 5.50 ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: (a) For engine family A, rating 1, 10,000 x 285,000/1 billion = 2.85. (b) For engine family A, 2.85 + 11.4 = 14.25.
In the example shown in Table II.G-2, the compliant engine family
in 2010 would be engine family B and the parent OBD rating within that
family would be rating 2. The other OBD compliant ratings within engine
family B would be dubbed the ``child'' ratings. For model years 2013
through 2015, the parent ratings would be those ratings having the
highest weighted projected sales within each of the one to three engine
families having the highest weighted projected sales, with sales being
weighted by the useful life of the engine rating. In the example shown
in Table II.G-2, the parent ratings would be rating 2 of engine family
A, rating 2 of engine family B, and rating 2 of engine family C (Note
that this is only for illustration purposes since the regulations would
not require that a manufacturer with only three engine families have
three parent ratings and instead would require only one).
The manufacturer does not need to submit test data demonstrating
compliance with the emissions thresholds for the child ratings. We
would fully expect these child ratings to use OBD calibrations--i.e.,
malfunction trigger points--that are identical or nearly so to those
used on the parent rating. However, we would allow manufacturers to
revise the calibrations on their child ratings where necessary so as to
avoid unnecessary or inappropriate MIL illumination. Such revisions to
OBD calibrations have been termed ``extrapolated'' OBD calibrations
and/or systems. The revisions to the calibrations on child ratings and
the rationale for them will need to be very clearly described in the
certification documentation.
For the 2013 and later model years, we are requiring that
manufacturers certify one to three parent ratings. The actual number of
parent ratings would depend upon the manufacturer's fleet and would be
based on both the emissions control system architectures present in
their fleet and the similarities/differences of the engine families in
their fleet. For example, a manufacturer that uses a DPF with
NOX adsorber on each of the engines would have only one
system architecture. Another manufacturer that uses a DPF with
NOX adsorber on some engines and a DPF with SCR on others
would have
[[Page 8334]]
at least two architectures. We expect that manufacturers will group
similar architectures and similar engine families into so called ``OBD
groups.'' These OBD groups would consist of a combination of engines,
engine families, or engine ratings that use the same OBD strategies and
similar calibrations. The manufacturer will be required to submit
details regarding their OBD groups as part of their certification
documentation that shows the engine families and engine ratings within
each OBD group for the coming model year. While a manufacturer may end
up with more than three OBD groups, we do not intend to require a
parent rating for more than three OBD groups. Therefore, in the example
shown in Table II.G-2, rather than submitting test data for the three
parent ratings as suggested above, the OBD grouping would result in the
parent ratings being rating 2 of engine family B and rating 2 of engine
family C. These parents would represent OBD groups I and II, and the
manufacturer's product line. For 2013 through 2015, we will allow the
2010 parent to again act as a parent rating and, provided no
significant changes had been made to the engine or its emissions
control system, complete carryover would be possible. However, for
model years 2016 and beyond, we would work closely with CARB staff and
the manufacturer to determine the parent ratings so that the same
ratings are not acting as the parents every year. In other words, our
definitions for the OBD parent ratings as discussed here apply only
during the years 2010 through 2012 and again for the years 2013 through
2015.
Also consistent with our proposal are the relaxations for in-use
liability during the 2010 through 2018 model years. The first such
relaxation is higher interim in-use compliance standards for those OBD
monitors calibrated to specific emissions thresholds. For the 2010
through 2015 model years, an OBD monitor on an in-use engine will not
be considered non-compliant (i.e., subject to enforcement action)
unless emissions exceed twice the OBD threshold without detection of a
malfunction. For example, for an EGR monitor on an engine with a
NOX FEL of 0.2 g/bhp-hr and an OBD threshold of 0.5 g/bhp-hr
(i.e., the NOX FEL+0.3), a manufacturer would not be subject
to enforcement action unless emissions exceed 1.0 g/bhp-hr
NOX without a malfunction being detected. For the model
years 2016 through 2018, parent ratings will be liable to the
certification emissions thresholds, but child ratings and other ratings
would be liable to twice the certification thresholds. Beginning in the
2019 model year, all families and all ratings would be liable to the
certification thresholds.
The second in-use relaxation is a limitation in the number of
engines that will be liable for in-use compliance with the OBD
emissions thresholds. Consistent with our proposal, for 2010 through
2012, we are requiring that manufacturers be fully liable in-use to
twice the thresholds for only the OBD parent rating. The child ratings
within the compliant engine family would have liability for monitoring
in the manner described in the certification documentation, but would
not have liability for detecting a malfunction at the specified
emissions thresholds. For example, a child rating's DPF monitor
designed to operate under conditions X, Y, and Z and calibrated to
detect a backpressure within the range A to B would be expected to do
exactly that during in-use operation. However, if the tailpipe
emissions of the child engine were to exceed the applicable OBD in-use
thresholds (i.e., 2x the certification thresholds during 2010-2015),
despite having a backpressure within range A to B under conditions X,
Y, and Z, there would be no in-use OBD failure nor cause for
enforcement action. In fact, we would expect the OBD monitor to
determine that the DPF was functioning properly since its backpressure
was in the acceptable range. For model years 2013 through 2015, this
same in-use relaxation will apply to those engine families that do not
lie within an engine family for which a parent rating has been
certified. For 2016 and later model years, all engines will have some
in-use liability to thresholds, either the certification thresholds or
twice those thresholds.
These in-use relaxations are meant to provide ample time for
manufacturers to gain experience without an excessive level of risk for
mistakes. They also allow manufacturers to fine-tune their calibration
techniques over a six to ten year period.
We are also requiring a specific implementation schedule for the
standardization requirements discussed in section II.F. We initially
intended to require that any compliant OBD engine family would be
required to implement all of the standardization requirements. However,
we became concerned that, during model years 2010 through 2012, we
could have a situation where OBD compliant engines from manufacturer A
might be competing against non-OBD engines from manufacturer B for
sales in the same truck. In such a case, the truck builder would be
placed in a difficult position of needing to design their truck to
accommodate OBD compliant engines--along with a standardized MIL, a
specific diagnostic connector location specification, etc.--and non-OBD
engines. After consideration of this almost certain outcome, we decided
to limit the standardization requirements that must be met during the
2010 through 2012 model years. Beginning in 2013, all engines will be
OBD compliant and this would become a moot issue. Table II.G-3 shows
the implementation schedule for standardization requirements.
Table II.G-3--OBD Standardization Requirements for Diesel Fueled and
Gasoline Fueled Engines Over 14,000 Pounds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Waived
Model year Applicability standardization standardization
features features
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010-2012............ Parent and Emissions Standardized
Child ratings related connector
within 1 functions (II.F.2).
compliant (II.F.4) Dedicated
engine family except for the (i.e.,
\a\. requirement to regulated OBD-
make the data only) MIL.
available in a Communication
standardized protocols
format or in (II.F.3).
accordance Emissions
with SAE J1979/ related
1939 functions
specifications (II.F.4) with
. MIL respect to the
activation and requirement to
deactivation.\ make the data
b\ Performance available in a
tracking--calc standardized
ulation of format or in
numerators, accordance
denominators, with SAE J1979/
ratios. 1939
specifications
.
Other engine None........... All.
families.
2013+................ All engine All............ None.
families and
ratings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: \a\ Parent and child ratings are defined in section II.G; which
rating serves as the parent rating and which engine families must
comply is not left to the manufacturer, as discussed in section II.G.
\b\ There would be no requirement for a dedicated MIL and no
requirement to use a specific MIL symbol, only that a MIL be used and
that it use the specified activation/deactivation logic.
[[Page 8335]]
2. In-Use Enforcement
When conducting our in-use enforcement investigations into OBD
systems, we intend to use all tools we have available to analyze the
effectiveness and compliance of the system. These tools may include on-
vehicle emission testing systems such as the portable emissions
measurement systems (PEMS). We may also use scan tools and data loggers
to analyze the data stream information to compare real world operation
to the documentation provided at certification.
Importantly, we do not intend to pursue enforcement action against
a manufacturer for not detecting a failure mode that could not have
been reasonably predicted or otherwise detected using monitoring
methods known at the time of certification. For example, we are
imposing a challenging set of requirements for monitoring of DPF
systems. As of today, engine manufacturers are reasonably confident in
their ability to detect certain DPF failure modes at or near the final
thresholds--e.g., a leaking DPF resulting from a cracked substrate--but
are not confident in their ability to detect some other DPF failure
modes--e.g., a leaking DPF resulting from a partially melted substrate.
If a partially melted substrate indeed cannot be detected and this is
known during the certification process, we cannot expect such a failure
to be detected on an in-use vehicle.\67\ This provision is consistent
with our proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ See, for example, Sec. 86.010-18(p)(1)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also want to make it clear who would be the responsible party
should we pursue any in-use enforcement action with respect to OBD. We
are very familiar with the heavy-duty industry and its tendency toward
separate engine and component suppliers. This contrasts with the light-
duty industry which tends toward a more vertically integrated
structure. The non-vertically integrated nature of the heavy-duty
industry can present unique difficulties for OBD implementation and for
OBD enforcement. With the complexity of OBD systems, especially those
meeting today's requirements, we expect the interactions between the
various parties involved--engine manufacturer, transmission
manufacturer, vehicle manufacturer, etc.--to be further complicated.
Nonetheless, in the end the vast majority of the OBD requirements apply
directly to the engine and its associated emission controls, and the
engine manufacturer will have complete responsibility to ensure that
the OBD system performs properly in-use. Given the central role the
engine and engine control unit plays in the OBD system, we are
requiring that the party certifying the engine and OBD system
(typically, the engine manufacturer) be the responsible party for in-
use compliance and enforcement actions. In this role, the certifying
party will be our sole point of contact for potential noncompliances
identified during in-use or enforcement testing. We will leave it to
the engine manufacturer to determine the ultimate party responsible for
the potential noncompliance (e.g., the engine manufacturer, the vehicle
manufacturer, or some other supplier). In cases where remedial action
such as an engine recall would be required, the certifying party would
take on the responsibility of arranging to bring the engines or OBD
systems back into compliance. Given that heavy-duty engines are already
subject to various emission requirements including engine emission
standards, labels, and certification, engine manufacturers currently
impose restrictions via signed agreements with engine purchasers to
ensure that their engines do not deviate from their certified
configuration when installed. We expect the OBD system's installation
to be part of such agreements in the future.
H. Changes to the Existing 8,500 to 14,000 Pound Diesel OBD
Requirements
We are also making final certain changes to our OBD requirements
for diesel engines used in heavy-duty vehicles under 14,000 pounds (see
40 CFR 86.007-17 for engine-based requirements and 40 CFR 86.1806-05
for vehicle or chassis-based requirements). Table II.H-1 summarizes the
changes to under 14,000 pound heavy-duty diesel vehicle emissions
thresholds at which point a component or system has failed to the point
of requiring an illuminated MIL and a stored DTC. Table II.H-2
summarizes the changes for diesel engines used in heavy-duty
applications under 14,000 pounds. The changes are meant to maintain
consistency with the diesel OBD requirements for over 14,000 pound
applications.
Table II.H-1--New and/or Changes to Existing, Emissions Thresholds for Diesel Fueled CI Heavy-Duty Vehicles
Under 14,000 Pounds (g/mi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component/monitor MY NMHC CO NOX PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMHC catalyst system........................... 2010-2012 2.5x ........... ........... ...........
2013+ 2x ........... ........... ...........
NOX catalyst system............................ 2007-2009 ........... ........... 4x ...........
2010-2012 ........... ........... +0.6 ...........
2013+ ........... ........... +0.3 ...........
DPF system..................................... 2010-2012 ........... ........... ........... 4x
2013+ ........... ........... ........... +0.04
Air-fuel ratio sensors upstream................ 2007-2009 2.5x 2.5x 3x 4x
2010-2012 2.5x 2.5x +0.3 +0.02
2013+ 2x 2x +0.3 +0.02
Air-fuel ratio sensors downstream.............. 2007-2009 2.5x ........... 3x 4x
2010-2012 2.5x ........... +0.3 4x
2013+ 2x ........... +0.3 +0.04
NOX sensors.................................... 2007-2009 ........... ........... 4x 5x
2010-2012 ........... ........... +0.6 4x
2013+ ........... ........... +0.3 +0.04
``Other monitors'' with emissions thresholds... 2007-2009 2.5x 2.5x 3x 4x
2010-2012 2.5x 2.5x +0.3 4x
2013+ 2x 2x +0.3 +0.02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: MY=Model Year; 2.5x means a multiple of 2.5 times the applicable emissions standard; +0.3 means the
standard plus 0.3; not all monitors have emissions thresholds but instead rely on functionality and
rationality checks as described in section II.D.4.
[[Page 8336]]
Table II.H-2--New and/or Changes to Existing, Emissions Thresholds for Diesel Fueled CI Engines Used in Heavy-
Duty Vehicles Under 14,000 Pounds (g/bhp-hr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component/monitor MY Std/FEL NMHC CO NOX PM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMHC catalyst system.............. 2010-2012 All 2.5x ........... ........... ...........
2013+ All 2x ........... ........... ...........
NOX catalyst system............... 2007-2009 >0.5 NOX ........... ........... 1.75x ...........
2007-2009 <=0.5 NOX ........... ........... +0.6 ...........
2010-2012 All ........... ........... +0.6 ...........
2013+ All ........... ........... +0.3 ...........
DPF system........................ 2010-2012 All ........... ........... ........... 0.05/+0.04
2013+ All ........... ........... ........... 0.05/+0.04
Air-fuel ratio sensors upstream... 2007-2009 >0.5 NOX 2.5x 2.5x 1.75x 0.05/+0.04
2007-2009 <=0.5 NOX 2.5x 2.5x +0.5 0.05/+0.04
2010-2012 All 2.5x 2.5x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
2013+ All 2x 2x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
Air-fuel ratio sensors downstream. 2007-2009 >0.5 NOX 2.5x ........... 1.75x 0.05/+0.04
2007-2009 <=0.5 NOX 2.5x ........... +0.5 0.05/+0.04
2010-2012 All 2.5x ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
2013+ All 2x ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
NOX sensors....................... 2007-2009 >0.5 NOX ........... ........... 1.75x 0.05/+0.04
2007-2009 <=0.5 NOX ........... ........... +0.6 0.05/+0.04
2010-2012 All ........... ........... +0.6 0.05/+0.04
2013+ All ........... ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
``Other monitors'' with emissions 2007-2009 >0.5 NOX 2.5x 2.5x 1.75x 0.05/+0.04
thresholds.......................
2007-2009 <=0.5 NOX 2.5x 2.5x +0.5 0.05/+0.04
2010-2012 All 2.5x 2.5x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
2013+ All 2x 2x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: MY=Model Year; 2.5x means a multiple of 2.5 times the applicable emissions standard or family emissions
limit (FEL); +0.3 means the standard or FEL plus 0.3; 0.05/+0.04 means an absolute level of 0.05 or an
additive level of the standard or FEL plus 0.04, whichever level is higher; not all monitors have emissions
thresholds but instead rely on functionality and rationality checks as described in section II.D.4.
1. NOX Aftertreatment Monitoring
We are requiring that the 8,500 to 14,000 pound NOX
aftertreatment monitoring requirements mirror those for engines used in
vehicles over 14,000 pounds. The current regulations require detection
of a NOX catalyst malfunction before emissions exceed 1.5x
the emissions standards. We do not believe that such a tight threshold
level is appropriate for diesel SCR and lean NOX catalyst
systems. The final thresholds are less stringent than proposed until
the 2013 model year where they are consistent with our proposal. We
have made the thresholds less stringent for the same reasons as
discussed in section II.B. The required monitoring conditions with
respect to performance tracking (discussed in section II.B.6.c) would
not apply for under 14,000 pound heavy-duty applications since we do
not have performance tracking requirements for under 14,000 pound
applications. We are proposing this change for the 2007 model year.
2. Diesel Particulate Filter System Monitoring
We are requiring that the 8,500 to 14,000 pound DPF monitoring
requirements mirror those discussed in section II.B.8. Our current
regulations require detection of a catastrophic failure only. The
proposed monitoring requirements contained emissions thresholds like
those proposed for over 14,000 pound OBD. The final PM thresholds
remain unchanged from the proposal. We have eliminated the proposed
NMHC thresholds for the same reasons we have eliminated the requirement
to monitor NMHC conversion of the DPF in the over 14,000 pound
applications. The required monitoring conditions with respect to
performance tracking (discussed in section II.B.8.c) would not apply
for under 14,000 pound heavy-duty applications since we do not have
performance tracking requirements for under 14,000 pound applications.
We are requiring no new DPF monitoring requirements in the 2007 to 2009
model years because there is not sufficient lead time for manufacturers
to develop a new monitor. The new, more stringent monitoring
requirements would begin in the 2010 model year. Also, for 2010 through
2012, we are providing the option to monitor and detect a decrease in
the expected pressure drop across the DPF, consistent with the
provisions for over 14,000 pound applications. This option is being
made available only to the engine certified systems since the
requirement is based on the engine certification procedure.
3. NMHC Converting Catalyst Monitoring
The final requirements for NMHC converting catalyst monitoring are
identical to those we proposed. However, we have added the option to
monitor the ability of the NMHC catalyst to generate a 100 degree C
temperature rise, or to reach the necessary regeneration temperature,
within 60 seconds of initiating a regeneration event. We have added
other criteria for this optional monitoring approach to ensure that the
necessary regeneration temperature is being sustained and that the
regeneration attempt be aborted should the regeneration temperature not
be reached or sustained properly. This makes the 8,500 to 14,000 pound
provisions consistent with the over 14,000 pound provisions.
4. Other Monitors
The final requirements for ``other monitors'' are identical to
those we proposed, except that we have revised the NOX
sensor monitor NOX threshold to +0.6 to be consistent with
changes made for other monitors discussed above.
5. CARB OBDII Compliance Option and Deficiencies
We are also making final the proposed changes to our deficiency
provisions for vehicles and engines meant for vehicles under 14,000
pounds. We have included specific mention of air-fuel ratio sensors and
NOX sensors where we had long referred only to oxygen
sensors. We
[[Page 8337]]
have also updated the referenced CARB OBDII document that can be used
to satisfy the federal OBD requirements.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ See 13 CCR 1968.2, approved November 9, 2007, Docket
ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0045.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. How Have the Service Information Availability Requirements Changed
for This Final Rule?
A. What is the Important Background Information for the Provision Being
Finalized for Service Information Availability?
Section 202(m)(5) of the CAA directs EPA to promulgate regulations
requiring OEMs 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 regulations 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 June 27, 2003 EPA published a final rulemaking (68 FR 38428)
which set forth the Agency's service information regulations for light-
and heavy-duty vehicles and engines below 14,000 pounds GVWR. These
regulations, in part, required each covered Original Equipment
Manufacturer (OEM) to do the following: (1) OEMs must make full text
emissions-related service information available via the World Wide Web.
(2) OEMs must provide equipment and tool companies with information
that allows them to develop pass-through recalibration tools. (3) OEMs
must make available enhanced diagnostic information to equipment and
tool manufacturers and to make available OEM-specific diagnostic tools
for sale. These requirements were finalized 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
OEMs to their franchised dealerships.
In the NPRM, we proposed several provisions related to the
availability of service information. We proposed to require that each
heavy-duty Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) do the following: (1)
Make full text emissions-related service information available via the
World Wide Web; (2) provide equipment and tool companies with
information that allows them to develop pass-through reprogramming
tools; (3) make available enhanced diagnostic information to equipment
and tool manufacturers and to make available OEM-specific diagnostic
tools for sale; (4) make available emissions-related training
information. EPA has carefully considered the comments we have received
on our proposed requirements. The service information provisions
finalized in today's action provide maximum flexibility to engine
manufacturers while still meeting the intent of the Clean Air Act to
ensure fair and reasonable access by aftermarket service providers to
service information and tools needed to service and repairs emissions-
related problems on heavy-duty engines.
B. What Provisions are Being Finalized for Service Information
Availability?
1. What Information is the OEM Required to Make Available?
Today's action requires OEMs to make available to any person
engaged in the repairing or servicing of heavy-duty motor vehicles or
motor vehicle engines above 14,000 pounds all information necessary to
make use of the OBD systems and any information for making emission-
related repairs, including any emissions-related information that is
provided by the OEM to franchised dealers, beginning generally with
MY2010, though for the provisions related to scan tool availability, we
are allowing manufacturers until MY2013 to comply. This information
includes, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Manuals, technical service bulletins (TSBs), diagrams, and
charts (the provisions for training materials, including videos and
other media are discussed in Sections III.A.3 and III.A.4 below).
(2) A general description of the operation of each monitor,
including a description of the parameter that is being monitored.
(3) A listing of all typical OBD diagnostic trouble codes
associated with each monitor.
(4) A description of the typical enabling conditions for each
monitor to execute during vehicle operation, including, but not limited
to, minimum and maximum intake air and engine coolant temperature,
vehicle speed range, and time after engine startup. A listing and
description of all existing monitor-specific drive cycle information
for those vehicles that perform misfire, fuel system, and comprehensive
component monitoring.
(5) A listing of each monitor sequence, execution frequency and
typical duration.
(6) A listing of typical malfunction thresholds for each monitor.
(7) For OBD parameters that deviate from the typical parameters,
the OBD description shall indicate the deviation for the vehicles it
applies to and provide a separate listing of the typical values for
those vehicles.
(8) Identification and scaling information necessary to interpret
and understand data available to a generic scan tool through Diagnostic
Message 8 pursuant to SAE Recommended Practice J1939-73 (revised
September 2006).
(9) Any information related to the service, repair, installation or
replacement of parts or systems developed by third party (Tier 1)
suppliers for OEMs, to the extent they are made available to franchise
dealerships.
(10) 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),
(11) 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).
(12) 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
described below in paragraph (13). This information also includes any
OEM-specific emissions-related diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) and any
related service bulletins, trouble shooting guides, and/or repair
procedures associated with these OEM-specific DTCs.
(13) Information regarding how to obtain the information needed to
perform reinitialization of any computer or anti-theft system following
an emissions-related repair. OEMs are not required to make this
information available on the OEM's Web site unless they choose to do
so. However, the OEM's Web site shall contain information on alternate
means for obtaining the information and/or ability to perform
reintialization. Beginning with the 2013 model year, we require that
all OEM systems will be designed in such a way that no special tools or
[[Page 8338]]
processes will be necessary to perform reinitialization.
2. What are the Requirements for Web-based Delivery of the Required
Information?
a. OEM Web Sites
Today's action finalizes a provision that requires OEMs to make
available in full-text all of the information outlined above, on
individual OEM Web sites. The only exceptions to the full-text
requirements are training information, anti-theft information, and
indirect information. Provisions for the availability of training
information are discussed in Section III.B.4 of this document. Today's
action requires that each OEM launch their individual Web sites with
the required information by July 1, 2010 for all 2010 and later model
year vehicles.
b. Timeliness and Maintenance of Information on OEM Web Sites
Today's action finalizes a provision that requires OEMs to make
available the required information on their Web site within six months
of model introduction. After this six month period, the required
information for each model must 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 finalizing a provision that, beginning with the 2010
model year, OEMs maintain the required information in full text for at
least 15 years after model introduction. After this fifteen-year
period, OEMs can archive the required service information, but it must
be made available upon request, in a format of the OEM's choice (e.g.,
CD-ROM).
c. Accessibility, Reporting and Performance Requirements for OEM Web
Sites
Performance reports that adequately demonstrate that their
individual Web sites meets the requirements outlined in Sec. 86.010-
38(j)(18) will be submitted to the Administrator annually or upon
request by the Administrator. These reports shall also indicate the
performance and effectiveness of the Web sites by using commonly used
Internet statistics (e.g., successful requests, frequency of use,
number of subscriptions purchased, etc.) EPA will issue additional
direction in the form of official manufacturer guidance to further
specify the process for submitting reports to the Administrator. In
addition, EPA is finalizing a provision that requires OEMs to launch
Web sites that meet the following performance criteria:
(1) OEM Web sites shall possess, sufficient server capacity to
allow ready access by all users and have sufficient downloading
capacity to assure that all users may obtain needed information without
undue delay;
(2) Any reported broken Web links shall be corrected or deleted
weekly.
(3) Web site navigation does not require a user to return to the
OEM home page or a search engine in order to access a different portion
of the site.
(4) Any manufacturer-specific acronym or abbreviation shall be
defined in a glossary webpage which, at a minimum, is hyperlinked by
each webpage that uses such acronyms and abbreviations. OEMs may
request Administrator approval to use alternate methods to define such
acronyms and abbreviations. The Administrator shall approve such
methods if the motor vehicle manufacturer adequately demonstrates that
the method provides equivalent or better ease-of-use to the website
user.
(5) Indicates the minimum hardware and software specifications
required for satisfactory access to the Web site(s).
d. Structure and Cost of OEM Web Sites
OEMs must implement Web sites that offer a range of time periods
for on-line access and/or the amount of information purchased.
For any time ranges approved by the Administrator, OEMs must make
their entire site accessible for the respective period of time and
price. In other words, an OEM may not limit any or all ranges to just
one make or one model.
Prior to the official launch of OEM Web sites, each OEM will also
be required to present to the Administrator a specific outline of what
will be charged for access to each of the tiers. OEMs must justify
these charges, and submit to the Administrator information on the
following parameters, which include but are not limited to, the
following:
(1) The price the manufacturer currently charges their branded
dealers for service information. At a minimum, this must include the
direct price charged that is identified exclusively as being for
service information, not including any payment that is incorporated in
other fees paid by a dealer, such as franchise fees. In addition, we
are requiring that the OEM must describe the information that is
provided to dealers, including the nature of the information (e.g., the
complete service manual), etc.; whether dealers have the option of
purchasing less than all of the available information, or if purchase
of all information is mandatory; the number of branded dealers who
currently pay for this service information; and whether this
information is made available to any persons at a reduced or no cost,
and if so, identification of these persons and the reason they receive
the information at a reduced cost.
(2) The price the manufacturer currently charges persons other than
branded dealers for service information. The OEM must describe the
information that is provided, including the nature of the information
(e.g., the complete service manual, emissions control service manual),
etc.; and the number of persons other than branded dealers to whom the
information is supplied.
(3) The estimated number of persons to whom the manufacturer would
be expected to provide the service information following implementation
of today's requirements.
A complete list of the criteria for establishing reasonable cost
can be found in the regulatory language for this final rule.\69\ We are
also finalizing a provision that, subsequent to the launch of the OEM
Web sites, OEMs would be required to notify the Administrator upon the
increase in price of any one or all of their approved time ranges of
twenty percent or more accounting for inflation or that sets the charge
for end-user access over the established price guidelines discussed
above, including a justification based on the criteria for reasonable
cost as established by this regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ See Sec. 86.010-38(j)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Hyperlinking to and From OEM Web Sites
Today's action finalizes a provision that requires OEMs to 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.
f. Administrator Access to OEM Web Sites
Today's action finalizes a provision that requires that the
Administrator shall have access to each OEM Web site at no charge to
the Agency. The Administrator shall have access 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.
g. Other Media
We are finalizing a provision that require OEMs to make available
for ordering the required information in some format approved by the
[[Page 8339]]
Administrator directly from their Web site after the full-text window
of 15 years has expired. OEMs shall index their available information
with a title that adequately describes the contents of the document to
which it refers. In the alternate, OEMs may allow for the ordering of
information directly from their Web site, or from a Web site
hyperlinked to the OEM Web site. OEMs are required to list a phone
number and address where aftermarket service providers can call or
write to obtain the desired information. OEMs must also provide the
price of each item listed, as well as the price of items ordered on a
subscription basis. To the extent that any additional information is
added or changed for these model years, OEMs shall update the index as
appropriate. OEMs will be responsible for ensuring that their
information distributors do so within three business day of receiving
the order.
h. Small Volume Provisions for OEM Web Sites
Manufacturers with total annual sales of less than 5,000 engines
shall have until July 1, 2011 to launch their individual Web sites as
discussed in Section III.B.2. Manufacturers with total annual sales of
less than 1,000 engines may, in lieu of meeting the requirement for
web-based delivery of service information, request the Administrator to
approve an alternative method by which the required emissions-related
information can be obtained.
These small-volume flexibilities are limited to the distribution
and availability of service information via the World Wide Web under
Sec. 86.010-38 (j)(4) of the regulations. All OEMs, regardless of
volume, must comply with all other provisions as finalized in this
rulemaking.
3. What are the Requirements for Service Information for Third Party
Information Providers?
Today's action finalizes a provision that will require OEMs who
currently have, or in the future engage in, licensing or business
arrangements with third party information providers, as defined in the
regulations, to provide information to those parties in an electronic
format in English that utilizes non-proprietary software. Any OEM
licensing or business arrangements with third party information
providers are subject to fair and reasonable cost requirements. We
expect that OEMs will develop pricing structures for access to this
information that make it affordable to any third party information
providers with which they do business. This provision takes effect
January 1, 2011 and will apply for model year 2010 and later engines.
4. What are the Requirements for the Availability of Training
Information?
Today's action finalizes two provisions for access to OEM training
on OEM Web sites. First, OEMs will be required to 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. Second, we are finalizing a
provision requiring OEMs who transmit emissions-related training via
satellite or the Internet to tape these transmissions and make them
available for purchase on their Web sites within 30 days after the
first transmission to franchised dealerships. Manufacturers shall not
be required to duplicate transmitted emissions-related training courses
if anyone engaged in the repairing or servicing of heavy-duty engines
has the opportunity to receive the Internet or satellite transmission,
even if there is a cost associated with the equipment required to
receive the transmission. Further, all of the items included in this
provision must be shipped within 3 business days of the order being
placed and are to be made available at a reasonable price. These
requirements apply for 2010 and later model year vehicles beginning
July 1, 2010. For subsequent model years, the required information must
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.
5. What are the Requirements for Recalibration of Vehicles?
Today's action finalizes two options for pass-thru recalibration.
We are finalizing a provision that heavy-duty OEMs must comply with SAE
J2534-1 (Revised December 2004) beginning with the 2013 model year. In
the alternative, heavy-duty OEMs may comply with the Technology and
Maintenance Council's Recommended Practice RP1210B,
``WindowsTM Communication API,'' (Revised June 2007)
beginning in the 2013 model year. We are also finalizing a provision
that will require that recalibration information be made available
within 3 months of vehicle introduction for new models.
6. What are the Requirements for the Availability of Enhanced
Information for Scan Tools for Equipment and Tool Companies?
a. Description of Information That Must Be Provided
Today's action finalizes a provision that requires OEMs to make
available to equipment and tool companies all generic and enhanced
information, including bi-directional control and data stream
information. In addition, OEMs must make available the following
information.
(i) The physical hardware requirements for data communication
(e.g., system voltage requirements, cable terminals/pins, connections
such as RS232 or USB, wires, etc.).
(ii) ECU data communication (e.g., serial data protocols,
transmission speed or baud rate, bit timing requirements, etc.).
(iii) Information on the application physical interface (API) or
layers (i.e., processing algorithms or software design descriptions for
procedures such as connection, initialization, and termination).
(iv) Vehicle application information or any other related service
information such as special pins and voltages or additional vehicle
connectors that require enablement and specifications for the
enablement.
(v) Information that describes which interfaces, or combinations of
interfaces, from each of the categories as described in Sec. 86.010-
38(j)(14)(ii)(A) through (D) of the regulatory language.
Manufacturers are not required to make available to equipment and
tool companies any information related to reconfiguration capabilities
or any other information that would make permanent changes to existing
engine configurations.
The requirements to release the information to equipment and tool
companies takes effect on July 1, 2013 [for model year 2013 engines],
and within 3 months of model introduction for all new model years.
b. Distribution of Enhanced Diagnostic Information
Today's action finalizes a provision that will require the above
information for generic and enhanced diagnostic information be provided
to aftermarket tool and equipment companies with whom appropriate
licensing, contractual, and confidentiality agreements have been
arranged. This information shall be made available in electronic format
using common document formats such as Microsoft Excel, Adobe Acrobat,
Microsoft Word,
[[Page 8340]]
etc. Further, any OEM licensing or business arrangements with equipment
and tool companies are subject to a fair and reasonable cost
determination.
7. What are the Requirements for the Availability of OEM-Specific
Diagnostic Scan Tools and Other Special Tools?
a. Availability of OEM-Specific Diagnostic Scan Tools
Today's action finalizes a provision that OEMs must make available
for sale to interested parties the same OEM-specific scan tools that
are available to franchised dealerships, except as discussed below.
These tools shall be made available at a fair and reasonable price.
These tools shall also be made available in a timely fashion either
through the OEM Web site or through an OEM-designated intermediary.
Upon Administrator approval, manufacturers will not be required to
make available manufacturer-specific tools with reconfiguration
capabilities if they can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Administrator that these tools are not essential to the completion of
an emissions-related repair, such as recalibration. In addition, as a
condition of purchase, manufacturers may request that the purchaser
take all necessary training offered by the engine manufacturer,
provided that those training requirements are outlined in Sec. 86.010-
38(j)(15) of the regulations.
8. Which Reference Materials are Being Incorporated by Reference?
We are requiring that service information requirements comply with
the provisions laid out in certain Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE) and/or Truck Maintenance Council (TMC) documents that are
incorporated by reference (IBR) into federal regulation. Details
regarding these SAE and TMC documents can be found in Sec. 86.1(b) and
in Sec. 86.010-38(j).
IV. What Are the Emissions Reductions Associated With the OBD
Requirements?
In the 2007HD highway rule, we estimated the emissions reductions
we expected to occur as a result of the emissions standards being made
final in the rule. Since the OBD requirements contained in today's rule
are considered by EPA to be an important element of the 2007HD highway
program and its ultimate success, rather than a new element being
included as an addition to that program, we are not estimating
emissions reductions associated with OBD. Instead, we consider the new
2007/2010 tailpipe emissions standards and fuel standards to be the
drivers of emissions reductions and HDOBD to be part of the assurance
we all have that those emissions reductions are indeed realized.
Therefore, this analysis presents the emissions reductions estimated
for the 2007HD highway program. Inherent in those estimates is an
understanding that, while emissions control systems sometimes
malfunction, they presumably are repaired in a timely manner. Today's
OBD requirements would provide substantial tools to assure that our
presumption will be realized by helping to ensure that emission control
systems continue to operate properly throughout their life. We believe
that the OBD requirements will lead to more repairs of malfunctioning
or deteriorating emission control systems, and may also lead to
emission control systems that are more robust throughout the life of
the engine and less likely to trigger illumination of MILs. The
requirements would therefore provide greater assurance that the
emission reductions expected from the Clean Diesel Trucks and Buses
program will actually occur. Viewed from another perspective, while the
OBD requirements will not increase the emission reductions that we
estimated for the 2007HD highway rule, they would be expected to lead
to actual emission reductions in-use compared with a program with no
OBD system.
The costs associated with HDOBD were not fully estimated in the
2007HD highway rule. Those costs are more fully considered in section V
of this preamble. These newly developed HDOBD costs are added to those
costs estimated for the 2007/2010 standards and a new set of costs for
those standards are presented in section VI. Section VI also calculates
a new set of costs per ton associated with the 2007/2010 standards
which include the previously estimated costs and emissions reductions
for the 2007/2010 standards and the newly estimated costs associated
with today's HDOBD rule.
Here we present the emission benefits we anticipate from heavy-duty
vehicles as a result of our 2007/2010 NOX, PM, and NMHC
emission standards for heavy-duty engines. The graphs and tables that
follow illustrate the Agency's projection of future emissions from
heavy-duty vehicles for each pollutant. The baseline case represents
future emissions from heavy-duty vehicles at present standards
(including the MY2004 standards). The controlled case represents the
future emissions from heavy-duty vehicles once the new 2007/2010
standards are implemented. A detailed analysis of the emissions
reductions associated with the 2007/2010 HD highway standards is
contained in the Regulatory Impact Analysis for that final rule.\70\
The results of that analysis are presented in Table IV.A-1 and in
Figures IV.A-1 through IV.A-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ Regulatory Impact Analysis: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle
Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements;
EPA420-R-00-026; December 2000.
Table IV.A-1--Annual Emissions Reductions Associated With the 2007HD
Highway Program
[Thousand short tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year NOX PM NMHC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007............................. 58 11 2
2010............................. 419 36 21
2015............................. 1,260 61 54
2020............................. 1,820 82 83
2030............................. 2,570 109 115
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8341]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24FE09.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24FE09.002
[[Page 8342]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24FE09.008
There were additional estimated emissions reductions associated
with the 2007HD highway rule--namely CO, SOx, and air
toxics. We have not presented those additional emissions reductions
here since, while HDOBD will identify malfunctions and hasten their
repair with the result of reducing all emissions constituents, these
additional emissions are not those specifically targeted by OBD
systems.
V. What Are the Costs Associated With the OBD Requirements?
The costs estimated for the final OBD requirements are identical to
those estimated for the proposed OBD requirements with three notable
exceptions. First, we have included costs for aging limit parts to
their OBD thresholds. We inadvertently did not include those costs in
the draft analysis. Discussion of this can be found in the Summary and
Analysis of Comments document in Section VI.B. These newly added costs
are also presented in detail in Section 3.1.2.b of the final technical
support document.\71\ Both of these documents can be found in the
docket for this rule. Second, while in the proposal we estimated lower
warranty costs beginning in 2013, we have delayed that until 2016 in
the final rule. This is discussed in Section VI.A of the Summary and
Analysis of Comments document and in Section 3.1.1 of the final
technical support document. Third, we have adjusted all costs to 2007
dollars--the draft analysis used 2004 dollars--by using the Consumer
Price Index. As a result, all costs presented here are slightly higher
than in the draft analysis although we have not changed the analysis
with the exception of this adjustment for inflation and, as mentioned
previously, the addition of costs for aging of limit parts and delay of
lower warranty costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ Final Technical Support Document, HDOBD final rule, EPA420-
R-08-019, Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0056.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we present the updated tables that appeared in our preamble to
the proposed regulations.\72\ Please refer to the final technical
support document contained in the docket for the details of the
analysis behind these cost estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ See 72 FR 3273, Section VI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Variable Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000 Pounds
The variable costs we have estimated represent those costs
associated with various sensors that we believe will be added to the
engine to provide the required OBD monitoring capability. For the 2010
model year, we believe that upgraded computers and the new sensors
needed for OBD would result in costs to the buyer of $43 and $53 for
diesel and gasoline engines, respectively. For the 2013 model year, we
have included costs associated with the dedicated MIL and its wiring
resulting in a hardware cost to the buyer of $60 and $70 for both
diesel and gasoline engines, respectively. In 2016, these costs become
$57 and $66 for diesel and gasoline, respectively, due to a reduction
in warranty costs. By multiplying these costs per engine by the
projected annual sales we get annual costs of around $45-55 million for
diesel engines and $3-4 million for gasoline engines, depending on
sales. The 30-year net present value of the annual variable costs would
be $737 million and $391 million at a three percent and a seven percent
discount rate, respectively. These costs are summarized in Table V.A-1.
[[Page 8343]]
Table V.A-1--OBD Variable Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000
Pounds
[All costs in $millions except per engine costs; 2007 dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diesel Gasoline Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per engine (2010-2012)...... $43 $53 n/a
Cost per engine (2013-2015)...... 60 70 n/a
Cost per engine (2016+).......... 57 66 n/a
Annual Variable Costs in 2010 \a\ 15 1 $16
Annual Variable Costs in 2013 \a\ 44 3 47
Annual Variable Costs in 2016 \a\ 43 3 47
Annual Variable Costs in 2030 \a\ 53 4 57
30 year NPV at a 3% discount rate 686 51 737
30 year NPV at a 7% discount rate 364 27 391
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Annual variable costs increase as projected sales increase.
B. Fixed Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000 Pounds
We have estimated fixed costs for research and development (R&D),
certification, and production evaluation testing. The R&D costs include
the costs to develop the computer algorithms required to diagnose
engine and emission control systems, and the costs for applying the
developed algorithms to each engine family and to each variant within
each engine family. R&D costs also include the testing time and effort
needed to develop and apply the OBD algorithms. The certification costs
include the costs associated with testing of durability engines (i.e.,
the OBD parent engines), the costs associated with generating the
``limit'' parts that are required to demonstrate OBD detection at or
near the applicable emissions thresholds, and the costs associated with
generating the necessary certification documentation. Production
evaluation testing costs included the costs associated with the three
types of production testing: Standardization features, monitor
function, and performance ratios.
Table V.B-1 summarizes the R&D, certification, and production
evaluation testing costs that we have estimated. The R&D costs we have
estimated were totaled and then spread over the four year period prior
to implementation of the requirements for which the R&D is conducted.
By 2013, all of the R&D work would be completed in advance of 100
percent compliance in 2013; hence, R&D costs are zero by 2013.
Certification costs are higher in 2013 than in 2010 because 2010
requires one engine family to comply while 2013 requires all engine
families to comply. The 30 year net present value of the annual fixed
costs would be $475 million and $352 million at a three percent and a
seven percent discount rate, respectively.
Table VI.B-1--OBD Fixed Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000 Pounds
[All costs in $millions; 2007 dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diesel Gasoline
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certification & Certification Total
R&D PE testing Subtotal R&D & PE testing Subtotal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual OBD Fixed Costs in given years
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010................................ $56 $0.2 $56 $1.0 <$0.1 $1.0 $57
2013................................ 0 0.4 0.4 0 <0.1 <0.1 0.4
2030................................ 0 35 35 0 <0.1 <0.1 35
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 year NPV at the given discount rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3%.................................. 287 176 463 11.1 0.4 11.4 475
7%.................................. 243 99.6 342 9.7 0.2 9.9 352
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Total Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000 Pounds
The total OBD costs for engines used in vehicles over 14,000 pounds
are summarized in Table V.C-1. As shown in the table, the 30 year net
present value cost is estimated at $1.2 billion and $743 million at a
three percent and a seven percent discount rate, respectively. These
costs are much lower than the 30 year net present value costs estimated
for gasoline and diesel engines meeting the 2007HD highway emissions
standards which were $30 billion and $18 billion at a three percent and
a seven percent discount rate, respectively (in 2007 dollars).
Including the cost for the diesel fuel changes resulted in 30 year net
present value costs for that rule of $88 billion and $53 billion at a
three percent and a seven percent discount rate, respectively (in 2007
dollars). See section VI for more details regarding the cost estimates
from the 2007HD highway final rule.
[[Page 8344]]
Table V.C-1--OBD Total Costs for Engines Used in Vehicles Over 14,000
Pounds
[All costs in $millions; 2007 dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diesel Gasoline Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual OBD Total Costs in given years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010............................. $71 $2 $67
2013............................. 44 3 47
2030............................. 89 4 93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 year NPV at the given discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3%............................... 1,150 63 1,212
7%............................... 706 37 743
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Costs for Diesel Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Engines Used in Heavy-Duty
Vehicles Under 14,000 Pounds
The total OBD costs for 8,500 to 14,000 pound diesel applications
are summarized in Table V.D-1. As shown in the table, the 30 year net
present value cost is estimated at $16 million and $12 million at a
three percent and a seven percent discount rate, respectively. These
costs represent the incremental costs of the additional OBD
requirements, as compared to our current OBD requirements, for 8,500 to
14,000 pound diesel applications and do not represent the total costs
for 8,500 to 14,000 pound diesel OBD. We are making no changes to the
8,500 to 14,000 pound gasoline requirements so, therefore, have
estimated no costs for gasoline vehicles. Details behind these
estimated costs can be found in the final technical support document
contained in the docket for this rule.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ Final Technical Support Document, HDOBD final rule, EPA420-
R-08-019, Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0056.
Table V.D-1--Total OBD Costs for 8,500 to 14,000 Pound Diesel
Applications
[All costs in $millions; 2007 dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diesel Gasoline Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual OBD Total Costs in given years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010........................... $0.1 $0 $0.1
2013........................... 0 0 0
2030........................... 2 0 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 year NPV at the given discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3%............................. 16 0 16
7%............................. 12 0 12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. What are the Updated Annual Costs and Costs per Ton Associated With
the 2007/2010 Heavy-Duty Highway Program?
In the 2007HD highway rule, we estimated the costs we expected to
occur as a result of the emissions standards being made final in that
rule. As noted in section IV, we consider the OBD requirements
contained in today's rule to be an important element of the 2007HD
highway program and its ultimate success and not a new element being
included as an addition to that program. In fact, without the OBD
requirements we would not expect the emissions reductions associated
with the 2007/2010 standards to be fully realized because emissions
control systems cannot be expected to operate without some need for
repair which, absent OBD, may well never be done. However, as noted in
section V, because we did not include an OBD program in the 2007HD
highway program, we did not estimate OBD related costs at that time. We
have now done so and those costs are presented in section V.
Here we present the OBD costs as part of the greater 2007HD highway
program. To do this, we present both the costs developed for that
program and the additional OBD costs presented in section V. We also
calculate a new set of costs per ton associated with the 2007/2010
standards which include the previously estimated costs and emissions
reductions for the 2007/2010 standards and the newly estimated costs
associated with today's HDOBD rule.
Note that the costs estimates associated with the 2007HD highway
program were done using 1999 dollars. We have adjusted those costs to
2007 dollars using the Consumer Price Index.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ http://www.bls.gov/cpi; U.S. city average, all items, not
seasonally adjusted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Updated 2007 Heavy-Duty Highway Rule Costs Including OBD
Table VI.A-1 shows the 2007HD highway program costs along with the
estimated OBD related costs.
[[Page 8345]]
Table VI.A-1--Updated 2007HD Highway Program Costs Including New OBD-Related Costs Net Present Value of Annual
Costs for the Years 2006-2035
[All costs in $millions; 2007 dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 HD highway final rule
---------------------------------------------------- Updated
Gasoline Final HD total
Discount rate Diesel engine & Diesel fuel Original OBD program
engine vehicle costs total costs costs
costs costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3%................................ $29,500 $1,880 $56,240 $87,600 $1,230 $88,900
7%................................ 17,900 1,090 33,560 52,500 755 53,300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Updated 2007 Heavy-Duty Highway Rule Costs per Ton Including OBD
Table VI.B-1 shows the 2007HD highway program costs per ton of
pollutant reduced. These numbers are from the 2007HD highway final
rule--updated to 2007 dollars--which contains the details regarding the
split between NOX+NMHC and PM related costs.
Table VI.B-1--Original 2007HD Highway Program Costs, Emissions Reductions, and $/ton Reduced Net Present Values
Are for Annual Costs for the Years 2006-2035
[Monetary values in 2007 dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 year NPV 30 year NPV
Discount rate Pollutant cost reduction $/ton
($billions) (million tons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3%..................................... NOX+NMHC.................. 68.0 30.6 $2,220
PM........................ 19.9 1.4 14,750
7%..................................... NOX+NMHC.................. 43.4 16.2 2,680
PM........................ 12.8 0.8 17,090
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table VI.B-2 shows the updated 2007HD highway program costs per ton
of pollutant reduced once the new OBD costs have been included. For the
split between NOX+NMHC and PM related OBD costs, we have
used a 50/50 allocation. As shown in Table VI.B-2, the OBD costs
associated with the final OBD requirements have little impact on the
overall costs and costs per ton of emissions reduced within the context
of the 2007HD highway program.
Table VI.B-2--Updated 2007HD Highway Program Costs, Emissions Reductions, and $/ton Reduced Including OBD
Related Costs Net Present Values Are for Annual Costs for the Years 2006-2035
[Monetary values in 2007 dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 year NPV 30 year NPV
Discount rate Pollutant cost reduction $/ton
($billions) (million tons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3%..................................... NOX+NMHC.................. 68.6 30.6 $2,240
PM........................ 20.5 1.4 15,210
7%..................................... NOX+NMHC.................. 43.8 16.2 2,700
PM........................ 13.2 0.8 17,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. How Have the Proposed Requirements for Engine Manufacturers
Changed for This Final Rule?
A. Documentation Requirements
The OBD system certification requirements require manufacturers to
submit OBD system documentation that represents each engine family. The
certification documentation must contain all of the information needed
to determine if the OBD system meets the OBD requirements. The
regulation lists the information that is required as part of the
certification package. If any of the information in the certification
package is the same for all of a manufacturer's engine families (e.g.,
the OBD system general description), the manufacturer is required to
submit one set of documents each model year for such items that cover
all of its engine families.
While the majority of the OBD requirements apply to the engine and
are incorporated by design into the engine control module by the engine
manufacturer, a portion of the OBD requirements would apply to the
vehicle and not be self-contained within the engine. Examples include
the requirements to have a MIL in the instrument cluster and a
diagnostic connector in the cab compartment. As is currently done by
the engine manufacturers, a build specification is provided to vehicle
manufacturers detailing mechanical and electrical specifications that
must be adhered to for proper installation and use of the engine (and
to maintain compliance with emissions standards). We expect engine
manufacturers will continue to follow this practice so that the vehicle
manufacturer would be able to maintain compliance with the OBD
regulations. Installation specifications would be expected to include
instructions regarding the location, color, and display icon of the MIL
(as well as electrical connections to ensure proper illumination),
location and type of
[[Page 8346]]
diagnostic connector, and electronic VIN access. During the
certification process, in addition to submitting the details of all of
the diagnostic strategies and other information required, engine
manufacturers are required to submit a copy of the OBD-relevant
installation specifications provided to vehicle manufacturers and a
description of the method used by the engine manufacturer to ensure
vehicle manufacturers adhere to the provided installation
specifications (e.g., required audit procedures or signed agreements to
adhere to the requirements). We are requiring that this information be
submitted to us to provide a reasonable level of verification that the
OBD requirements will indeed be satisfied. In summary, engine
manufacturers are responsible for submitting a certification package
that includes:
A detailed description of all OBD monitors, including
monitors on signals or messages coming from other modules upon which
the engine control unit relies to perform other OBD monitors; and,
A copy of the OBD-relevant installation specifications
provided to vehicle manufacturers/chassis builders and the method used
to reasonably ensure compliance with those specifications.
As was discussed in the context of our implementation schedule (see
section II.G.1), the regulations would allow engine manufacturers to
establish OBD groups consisting of more than one engine family with
each having similar OBD systems. The manufacturer could then submit
only one set of representative OBD information from each OBD group. We
anticipate that the representative information would normally consist
of an application from a single representative engine rating within
each OBD group. In selecting the engine ratings to represent each OBD
group, consideration should be given to the exhaust emission control
components for all engine families and ratings within an OBD group. For
example, if one engine family within an OBD group has additional
emission control devices relative to another family in the group (e.g.,
the first family has a DPF+SCR while the second has only a DPF), the
representative rating should probably come from the first engine
family. Manufacturers seeking to consolidate several engine families
into one OBD group would be required to get approval of the grouping
prior to submitting the information for certification.
Two of the most important parts of the certification package would
be the OBD system description and summary table. The OBD system
description would include a complete written description for each
monitoring strategy outlining every step in the decision-making process
of the monitor, including a general explanation of the monitoring
conditions and malfunction criteria. This description should include
graphs, diagrams, and/or other data that would help our compliance
staff understand how each monitor works and interacts. The OBD summary
table would include specific parameter values. This table would provide
a summary of the OBD system specifications, including: the component/
system, the DTC identifying each related malfunction, the monitoring
strategy, the parameter used to detect a malfunction and the
malfunction criteria limits against which the parameter is evaluated,
any secondary parameter values and the operating conditions needed to
run the monitor, the time required to execute and complete a monitoring
event for both a pass decision and a fail decision, and the criteria or
procedure for illuminating the MIL. In these tables, manufacturers are
required to use a common set of engineering units to simplify and
expedite the review process.
We are also requiring that the manufacturer submit a logic
flowchart for each monitor that would illustrate the step-by-step
decision process for determining malfunctions. Additionally, we would
need any data that supports the criteria used to determine malfunctions
that cause emissions to exceed the specified malfunction thresholds
(see Tables II.B-1 and II.C-1). The manufacturer would have to include
data that demonstrates the probability of misfire detection by the
misfire monitor over the full engine speed and load operating range
(for gasoline engines only) or the capability of the misfire monitor to
correctly identify a ``one cylinder out'' misfire for each cylinder
(for diesel engines only), a description of all the parameters and
conditions necessary to begin closed-loop fuel control operation (for
gasoline engines only), closed-loop EGR control (for diesel engines
only), closed-loop fuel pressure control (for diesel engines only), and
closed-loop boost control (for diesel engines only). We also need a
listing of all electronic powertrain input and output signals
(including those not monitored by the OBD system) that identifies which
signals are monitored by the OBD system, and the emission data from the
OBD demonstration testing (as described below). Lastly, the
manufacturer will be expected to provide any other OBD-related
information necessary to determine the OBD compliance status of the
manufacturer's product line.
The only change to the final documentation requirements relative to
the proposed requirements is a new provision applicable to those OBD
systems designed to the CARB HDOBD requirements. Any such system must
have detailed documentation describing how the system meets the full
intent behind the requirements of Sec. 86.010-18.\75\ It will not be
sufficient for a manufacturer to submit OBD documentation and a
statement that it is a California HDOBD system or even a California
approved OBD system. The certification documentation must include
details about how the system compares to the requirements of Sec.
86.010-18 to ensure that we can be comfortable approving that system
for certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ See section 86.010-18(m)(3) which is new in the final
regulations. Also see Sec. 86.010-18(a)(5) which is new in the
final regulations. Also see section II.A.5, above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Catalyst Aging Procedures
For purposes of determining the catalyst malfunction criteria for
diesel NMHC converting catalysts, SCR catalysts, and lean
NOX catalysts, and for gasoline catalysts (i.e., for
generating OBD threshold parts, or limit parts), where those catalysts
are monitored individually, the manufacturer must use a catalyst
deteriorated to the malfunction criteria using methods established by
the manufacturer to represent real world catalyst deterioration under
normal and malfunctioning engine operating conditions. For purposes of
determining the catalyst malfunction criteria for diesel NMHC
converting catalysts, SCR catalysts, and lean NOX catalysts,
and for gasoline catalysts, where those catalysts are monitored in
combination with other catalysts, the manufacturer must submit their
catalyst system aging and monitoring plan to the Administrator as part
of their certification documentation package. The plan must include the
description, emission control purpose, and location of each component,
the monitoring strategy for each component and/or combination of
components, and the method for determining the applicable malfunction
criteria including the deterioration/aging process.
C. Demonstration Testing
While the certification documentation requirements discussed above
require manufacturers to submit technical details of each monitor
(e.g., how each
[[Page 8347]]
monitor worked, when the monitor would run), we still need some
assurance that the manufacturer's OBD monitors are indeed calibrated
correctly and are able to detect a malfunction before an emissions
threshold is exceeded. Thus, we are requiring that manufacturers
conduct certification demonstration testing of the major monitors to
verify the malfunction threshold values. This testing will be required
on one to three demonstration engines per year. Before receiving a
certificate of compliance, the manufacturer must submit documentation
and emissions data demonstrating that the major OBD monitors are able
to detect a malfunction when emissions exceed the emissions thresholds.
On each demonstration engine, this testing would consist of the
following two elements:
Testing the OBD system with ``threshold'' components
(i.e., components that are deteriorated or malfunctioning right at the
threshold required for MIL illumination); and,
Testing the OBD system with ``worst case'' components.
This element of the demonstration test must be done for the DPF and any
NOX aftertreatment system only.
By testing with both threshold components (i.e., the best
performing malfunctioning components) and with worst case components
(i.e., the worst performing malfunctioning components), we will be
better able to verify that the OBD system should perform as expected
regardless of the level of deterioration of the component. This could
become increasingly important with new technology aftertreatment
devices that could be subject to complete failure (such as DPFs) or
even to tampering by vehicle operators looking to improve fuel economy
or vehicle performance. We believe that, given the likely combinations
of emissions control hardware, a diesel engine manufacturer would
likely need to conduct 8 to 10 emissions tests per demonstration engine
to satisfy these requirements and a gasoline engine manufacturer would
likely need to conduct five to seven emissions tests per demonstration
engine.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ For diesel engines these would include: The fuel system;
misfire (HCCI engines); EGR, turbo boost control, DPF,
NOX adsorber or SCR system, NMHC catalyst, exhaust gas
sensors, VVT, and possible other emissions controls (see section
II.D.5). For gasoline engines these would include: The fuel system,
misfire, EGR, cold start strategy, secondary air system, catalyst,
exhaust gas sensors, VVT, and possible other emissions controls (see
section II.D.5). Some of these may require more than one emissions
test while others may not require any due to the use of a functional
monitor rather than an emissions threshold monitor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Selection of Test Engines
To minimize the test burden on manufacturers, we are requiring that
this testing be done on only one to three demonstration engines per
year per manufacturer rather than requiring that all engines be tested.
Such an approach should still allow us to be reasonably sure that
manufacturers have calibrated their OBD systems correctly on all of
their engines. This also spreads the test burden over several years and
allows manufacturers to better utilize their test cell resources. This
approach is consistent with our approach to demonstration testing to
existing emissions standards where a parent engine is chosen to
represent each engine family and emissions test data for only that
parent engine are submitted to EPA.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ For over 14,000 pound OBD, we have a different definition
of a ``parent'' engine than is used for emissions certification.
This is discussed at length in section II.G.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The number of demonstration engines manufacturers must test will be
aligned with the phase-in of OBD in the 2010 and 2013 model years and
based on the year and the total number of engine families the
manufacturer will be certifying for that model year. Specifically, for
the 2010 model year when a manufacturer is only required to implement
OBD on a single engine family, demonstration testing will be required
on only one engine (a single engine rating within the one engine
family). This will be the OBD parent rating as discussed in section
II.G. For the 2013 model year, manufacturers will be required to
conduct demonstration testing on one to three engines per year (i.e.,
one to three OBD parent ratings). The number of parent ratings would be
chosen depending on the total number of engine families certified by
the manufacturer. A manufacturer certifying one to five engine families
in the given year would be required to test one demonstration engine. A
manufacturer certifying six to ten engine families in the given year
would be required to test two demonstration engines, and a manufacturer
certifying more than ten engine families in the given year will be
required to test three demonstration engines. For the 2016 and
subsequent model years, we intend to work closely with CARB staff and
the manufacturer to determine the parent ratings so that the same
ratings are not acting as the parents every year. In other words, our
definitions for the OBD parent ratings as discussed here apply only
during the years 2010 through 2012 and again for the years 2013 through
2015.
Given the difficulty and expense in removing an in-use engine from
a vehicle for engine dynamometer testing, this demonstration testing
will likely represent nearly all of the OBD emission testing that would
ever be done on these engines. Requiring a manufacturer who is fully
equipped to do such testing, and already has the engines on engine
dynamometers for emission testing, to test one to three engines per
year would be a minimal testing burden that provides invaluable and, in
a practical sense, otherwise unobtainable proof of compliance with the
OBD emissions thresholds.
Regarding the selection of which engine ratings will have to be
demonstrated, manufacturers are required to submit descriptions of all
engine families and ratings planned for the upcoming model year. We
will review the information and make the selection(s) in consultation
with CARB staff and the manufacturer. For each engine family and
rating, the information submitted by the manufacturer will need to
identify engine model(s), power ratings, applicable emissions standards
or family emissions limits, emissions controls on the engine, and
projected engine sales volume. Factors that would be used in selecting
the one to three engine ratings for demonstration testing include, but
are not limited to, new versus old/carryover engines, emissions control
system design, possible transition point to more stringent emissions
standards and/or OBD emissions thresholds, and projected sales volume.
2. Required Testing
Regarding the actual testing, the manufacturer will be required to
perform ``single fault'' testing using the applicable test procedure
and with the appropriate components/systems set at the manufacturer
defined malfunction criteria limits for the following monitors:
For diesel engines: Fuel system; misfire; EGR; turbo boost
control; NMHC catalyst; SCR catalyst/NOX catalyst/adsorber;
DPF; exhaust gas sensors; VVT; and any other monitor that would fall
within the discussion of section II.D.5.
For gasoline engines: Fuel system; misfire; EGR; cold
start strategy; secondary air; catalyst; exhaust gas sensors; VVT; and
any other monitor that would fall within the discussion of section
II.D.5.
Such ``single fault'' testing requires that, when performing a test
for a
[[Page 8348]]
specific parameter, that parameter must be operating at the malfunction
criteria limit while all other parameters would be operating within
normal characteristics (unless the malfunction prohibits some other
parameter from operating within its normal characteristics). Also, the
manufacturer will be allowed to use computer modifications to cause the
specific parameter to operate at the malfunction limit provided the
manufacturer can demonstrate that the computer modifications produce
test results equivalent to an induced hardware malfunction. Lastly, for
each of these testing requirements, wherever the manufacturer has
established that only a functional check is required because no failure
or deterioration of the specific tested component/system can result in
an engine's emissions exceeding the applicable emissions thresholds,
the manufacturer will not be required to perform a demonstration test.
In such cases, the manufacturer can simply provide the data and/or
engineering analysis used to determine that only a functional test of
the component/system is required.
Manufacturers that are required to submit data from more than one
engine rating will be granted some flexibility by allowing the data to
be collected under less rigorous testing requirements than the official
FTP or SET certification test. That is, for the possible second and
third engine ratings required for demonstration testing, manufacturers
will be allowed to submit data using internal sign-off test procedures
that are representative of the official FTP or SET in lieu of running
the official test. Commonly used procedures include the use of engine
emissions test cells with less rigorous quality control procedures than
those required for the FTP or SET or the use of forced cool-downs to
minimize time between tests. Manufacturers will still be liable for
meeting the OBD emissions thresholds on FTPs and/or SETs conducted in
full accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations. Nonetheless, this
latitude will allow them to use some short-cut methods that they have
developed to assure themselves that the system is calibrated to the
correct level without incurring the additional testing cost and burden
of running the official FTP or SET on every demonstration engine.
For the demonstration engine(s), a manufacturer will be required to
use an engine(s) aged for a minimum of 125 hours plus exhaust
aftertreatment devices aged in a manner representative of full useful
life. We are allowing for rapid aging using a process approved by the
Administrator. Manufacturers would be expected to use, subject to
approval, an aging process that ensures that deterioration of the
exhaust aftertreatment devices is stabilized sufficiently such that it
properly represents the performance of the devices at the applicable
point in their useful life. Note that, should the 2010 model year
engine be carried over for 2013 model year certification (which we
fully expect most manufacturers to do), we would not require any new
demonstration aging or testing.
3. Testing Protocol
We have made no changes in the final rule relative to the proposal
as regards testing protocol. We are allowing the manufacturer to use
any applicable test cycle for preconditioning test engines prior to
conducting each of the emissions tests discussed above. Additional
preconditioning can be done if the manufacturer can provide data and/or
engineering analyses that demonstrate that additional preconditioning
is necessary.
The manufacturer will then set the system or component of interest
at the criteria limit(s) prior to conducting the applicable
preconditioning cycle(s). If more than one preconditioning cycle is
being used, the manufacturer may adjust the system or component of
interest prior to conducting the subsequent preconditioning cycle.
However, the manufacturer may not replace, modify, or adjust the system
or component of interest following the last preconditioning cycle.
After preconditioning, the test engine will be operated over the
applicable test cycle to allow for the initial detection of the tested
system or component malfunction. This test cycle may be omitted from
the testing protocol if it is unnecessary. If required by the
designated monitoring strategy, a cold soak may be performed prior to
conducting this test cycle. The test engine will then be operated over
the applicable exhaust emission test.
A manufacturer required to test more than one test engine may use
internal calibration sign-off test procedures (e.g., forced cool downs,
less frequently calibrated emission analyzers) instead of official test
procedures to obtain this emissions test data for all but one of the
required test engines. However, the manufacturer should use sound
engineering judgment to ensure that the data generated using such
alternative test/sign-off procedures are good data because
manufacturers would still be responsible for meeting the malfunction
criteria when emissions tests are performed in accordance with official
test procedures.
Manufacturers will be allowed to use alternative testing protocols,
even chassis testing, for demonstration of MIL illumination if the
engine dynamometer emissions test cycle does not allow all of a
monitor's enable conditions to be satisfied. A manufacturer wanting to
do so will be required to demonstrate the technical necessity for using
their alternative test cycle and that using it demonstrates that the
MIL will illuminate during in-use operation with the malfunctioning
component.
4. Evaluation Protocol
We have made no changes in the final rule relative to the proposal
as regards evaluation protocol. For all demonstration tests on parent
engines, we will expect the MIL to activate upon detecting the
malfunctioning system or component, and that it will occur before the
end of the first engine start portion of the emissions test. If the MIL
activates prior to emissions exceeding the applicable malfunction
criteria, no further demonstration will be required. With respect to
the misfire monitor demonstration test, if the manufacturer has elected
to use the minimum misfire malfunction criterion of one percent (as is
allowed), then no further demonstration would be required provided the
MIL illuminates during a test with an implanted misfire of one percent.
If the MIL does not activate when the system or component being
tested is set at its malfunction criteria limits, then the criteria
limits or the OBD system would not be considered acceptable. Retesting
would be required with more tightly controlled criteria limits (i.e.,
recalibrated limits) and/or another suitable system or component that
would result in MIL activation. If the criteria limits are
recalibrated, the manufacturer would be required to confirm that the
systems and components that were tested prior to recalibration would
still function properly and as required.
5. Confirmatory Testing
We have made no changes in the final rule relative to the proposal
as regards confirmatory testing. We may choose to confirmatory test a
demonstration engine to verify the emissions test data submitted by the
manufacturer. Any such confirmatory testing would be limited to the
engine rating represented by the demonstration engine(s) (i.e., the
parent engine(s)). To do so, we, or our designee, would install
appropriately deteriorated or malfunctioning components (or simulate a
deteriorated or malfunctioning component) in an
[[Page 8349]]
otherwise properly functioning engine of the same engine family and
rating as the demonstration engine. Such confirmatory testing would be
done on those OBD monitors for which demonstration testing had been
conducted as described in this section. The manufacturer would be
required to make available, upon Administrator request, a test engine
and all test equipment--e.g., malfunction simulators, deteriorated
components--necessary to duplicate the manufacturer's testing. As with
our emission certification program, any failure to pass confirmatory
testing means that no certificate would be issued until the cause of
the noncompliance is fixed.
D. Deficiencies
Our under 14,000 pound OBD requirements have contained a deficiency
provision for years. The OBD deficiency provision was first introduced
on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15242), and was revised on December 22, 1998
(63 FR 70681). Consistent with that provision, we proposed and are
finalizing a deficiency provision for over 14,000 pound OBD. We believe
that, like has occurred and even still occurs with under 14,000 pound
OBD, some manufacturers will encounter unforeseen and generally last
minute problems with some of their OBD monitoring strategies despite
having made a good faith effort to comply with the requirements.
Therefore, we are providing a provision that would permit certification
of an over 14,000 pound OBD system with ``deficiencies'' in cases where
a good faith effort to fully comply has been demonstrated. In making
deficiency determinations, we will consider the extent to which the OBD
requirements have been satisfied overall based on our review of the
certification application, the relative performance of the given OBD
system compared to systems that truly are fully compliant with the OBD
requirements, and a demonstrated good-faith effort on the part of the
manufacturer to both meet the requirements in full and come into full
compliance as expeditiously as possible.
We believe that having the deficiency provision is important
because it facilitates OBD implementation by allowing for certification
of an engine despite having a relatively minor shortfall. Note that we
do not expect to certify engines with OBD systems that have more than
one deficiency, or to allow carryover of any deficiency to the
following model year unless it can be demonstrated that correction of
the deficiency requires hardware and/or software modifications that
cannot be accomplished in the time available, as determined by the
Administrator.\78\ Nonetheless, we recognize that there may be
situations where more than one deficiency is necessary and appropriate,
or where carry-over of a deficiency or deficiencies for more than one
year is necessary and appropriate. In such situations, more than one
deficiency, or carry-over for more than one year, may be approved,
provided the manufacturer has demonstrated an acceptable level of
effort toward full OBD compliance. Most importantly, the deficiency
provisions cannot be used as a means to avoid compliance or delay
implementation of any OBD monitors or as a means to compromise the
overall effectiveness of the OBD program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ The CARB HDOBD rulemaking has a provision to charge fees
associated with OBD deficiencies 13 CCR 1971.1(k)(3), Docket
ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0006. We have never had and will
continue not to have any such fee provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There has often been some confusion by manufacturers regarding what
CARB has termed ``retroactive'' deficiencies. The CARB rule states
that, ``During the first 6 months after commencement of normal
production, manufacturers may request that the Executive Officer grant
a deficiency and amend an engine's certification to conform to the
granting of the deficiencies for each aspect of the monitoring system:
(a) Identified by the manufacturer (during testing required by section
(l)(2) or any other testing) to be functioning different than the
certified system or otherwise not meeting the requirements of any
aspect of section 1971.1; and (b) reported to the Executive Officer.''
\79\ We have never had and did not propose any such retroactive
deficiency provision. We have regulations in place that govern
situations, whether they be detected by EPA or by the manufacturer,
where in-use vehicles or engines are determined to be functioning
differently than the certified system.\80\ We refer to these
regulations as our defect reporting requirements and manufacturers are
required to comply with these regulations, even for situations deemed
by CARB to be ``retroactive'' deficiencies, unless the defect is
corrected prior to the sale of engines to an ultimate purchaser. In
other words, a retroactive deficiency granted by the Executive Officer
does not preclude a manufacturer from complying with our defect
reporting requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ See 13 CCR 1971.1(k)(6), Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-
2005-0047-0006.
\80\ See 40 CFR 85.1903.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Production Evaluation Testing
We have made no changes in the final rule relative to the proposal
as regards production evaluation testing. The OBD system is a complex
software and hardware system, so there are many opportunities for
unintended interactions that can result in certain elements of the
system not working as intended. We have seen many such mistakes in the
under 14,000 pound arena ranging from OBD systems that are unable to
communicate any information to a scan tool to monitors that are unable
to store a DTC and illuminate the MIL. While over 14,000 pound heavy-
duty vehicles are very different from light-duty vehicles in terms of
emission controls and OBD monitoring strategies, among other things,
these types of problems do not depend on these differences and, as
such, are as likely to occur with over 14,000 pound OBD as they are
with under 14,000 pound OBD. Additionally, we believe that there is
great value in having manufacturers self-test actual production end
products that operate on the road, as opposed to pre-production
products, where errors can be found in individual subsystems that may
work fine by themselves but not when integrated into a complete product
(e.g., due to mistakes like improper wiring).
Therefore, we are requiring that manufacturers self-test a small
fraction of their product line to verify compliance with the OBD
requirements. The test requirements are divided into three distinct
sections with each section representing a test for a different portion
of the OBD requirements. These three sections being: compliance with
the applicable SAE and/or ISO standardization requirements; compliance
with the monitoring requirements for proper DTC storage and MIL
illumination; and, compliance with the in-use monitoring performance
ratios.
1. Verification of Standardization Requirements
An essential part of the OBD system is the requirement for
standardization. The standardization requirements include items as
simple as the location and shape of the diagnostic connector (where
technicians can ``plug in'' a scan tool to the onboard computer) to
more complex subjects concerning the manner and format in which DTC
information is accessed by technicians via a ``generic'' scan tool.
Manufacturers must meet these standardization requirements to
facilitate the success of the OBD program because they ensure
consistent access by all repair
[[Page 8350]]
technicians to the stored information in the onboard computer. The need
for consistency is even greater when considering the potential use of
OBD system checks in inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs for
heavy-duty. Such OBD based I/M checks would benefit from having access
to the diagnostic information in the onboard computer via a single
``generic'' scan tool instead of individual tools for every make and
model of truck that might be inspected. For OBD based inspections to
work effectively and efficiently, all engines/vehicles must be designed
and built to meet all of the applicable standardization requirements.
While we anticipate that the vast majority of vehicles would comply
with all of the standardization requirements, some problems involving
the communication between vehicles and ``generic'' scan tools are
likely to occur in the field. The cause of such problems could range
from differing interpretations of the existing standardization
requirements to possible oversights by design engineers or hardware
inconsistencies or even last-minute production changes on the assembly
line.
To minimize the chance for such problems on future over 14,000
pound trucks, we are requiring that engine manufacturers test a sample
of production vehicles from the assembly line to verify that the
vehicles have indeed been designed and built to the required
specifications for communication with a ``generic'' scan tool. We are
requiring that manufacturers test complete vehicles to ensure that they
comply with some of the basic ``generic'' scan tool standardization
requirements, including those that are essential for proper inspection
in an I/M setting. Ideally, manufacturers would test one vehicle for
each truck and engine model combination that is introduced into
commerce. However, for a large engine manufacturer, this can be in the
neighborhood of 5,000 to 10,000 unique combinations making it
unreasonable to require testing of every combination. Therefore, we are
requiring that manufacturers test 10 such combinations per engine
family. Given that a typical engine family has roughly five different
engine ratings, this works out to testing only around two vehicles per
engine rating.
More specifically, manufacturers must test one vehicle per software
``version'' released by the manufacturer. With proper demonstration,
manufacturers will be allowed to group different calibrations together
to be demonstrated by a common vehicle. Prior to acquiring these data,
the engine manufacturer must submit for approval a test plan verifying
that the vehicles scheduled for testing will be representative of all
vehicle configurations (e.g., each engine control module variant
coupled with and without the other available vehicle components that
could affect scan tool communication such as automatic transmission or
hybrid powertrain control modules). The plan must include details on
all the different applications and configurations that will be tested.
As noted, manufacturers will be required to conduct this testing on
actual production vehicles, not stand-alone engines. This is important
since controllers that work properly in a stand alone setting (e.g.,
the engine before it is installed in a vehicle) may have interaction
problems when installed and attempting to communicate with other
vehicle controllers (e.g., the transmission controller). In such a
case, separate testing of the controllers would be blind to the
problem. Since heavy-duty engine manufacturers are expected to sell the
same engine (with the same calibration) to various vehicle
manufacturers who would put them in different final products (e.g.,
with different transmission control modules), the same communication
problem would be expected in each final product.
This testing should occur soon enough in the production cycle to
provide manufacturers with early feedback regarding the existence of
any problems and time to resolve the problem prior to the entire model
year's products being introduced into the field. We are requiring that
the testing be done and the data submitted to us within either three
months of the start of normal engine production or one month of the
start of vehicle production, whichever is later.
To be sure that all manufacturers are testing vehicles to the same
level of stringency, we are requiring that engine manufacturers submit
documentation outlining the testing equipment and methods they intend
to use to perform this testing. We anticipate that engine manufacturers
and scan tool manufacturers will probably develop a common piece of
hardware and software that could be used by all engine manufacturers at
the end of the vehicle assembly line to meet this requirement. Two
different projects (SAE J1699 and LOC3T) have developed such equipment
in response to California OBD II requirements.\81\ The equipment is
currently being used to test 2005 and 2006 model year vehicles under
14,000 pounds. We believe that similar equipment could be developed for
vehicles over 14,000 pounds in time for the 2013 model year. Ideally,
the equipment and the test procedure would verify each and every
requirement of the communication specifications including the various
physical layers, message structure, response times, and message
content. Presumably, any such verification equipment would not replace
the function of existing ``generic'' scan tools used by repair
technicians or I/M inspectors. The equipment would likely be custom-
designed and be used for the express purpose of this assembly line
testing (i.e., it would not include all of the necessary diagnostic
features needed by repair technicians).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ 13 CCR 1968.2, August 11, 2006, Docket ID EPA-HQ-
OAR-2005-0047-0005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Verification of Monitoring Requirements
As noted above, the OBD system is a complex software and hardware
system, so there are many opportunities for unintended interactions
that can result in certain elements of the system not working as
intended. The causes of possible problems vary from simple typing
errors in the software code to component supplier hardware changes late
in development or just prior to start of production. Given the
complexity of OBD monitors and their associated algorithms, there can
be thousands of lines of software code required to meet the diagnostic
requirements. Implementing that code without interfering with the
software code required for normal operation is and will be a very
difficult task with many opportunities for human error. We expect that
manufacturers will conduct some validation testing on end products to
ensure that there are no problems that would be noticed by the vehicle
operator. We believe that manufacturers should include in such
verification testing an evaluation of the OBD system (e.g., does the
MIL illuminate as intended in response to a malfunction?).
Therefore, we are requiring that engine manufacturers perform a
thorough level of validation testing on at least one production vehicle
and up to two more production engines per model year. The production
vehicles/engines required for testing would have to be equipped with/be
from the same engine families and ratings as used for the certification
demonstration testing described in section VII.C. If a manufacturer
demonstrated one, two, or three engines for certification, then at
least one production vehicle and perhaps an additional one to two
[[Page 8351]]
engines would have to be tested, respectively. We will work with the
manufacturer and CARB staff to determine the actual vehicles and
engines to test.
The testing itself will consist of implanting or simulating
malfunctions to verify that virtually every single engine-related OBD
monitor on the vehicle correctly identifies the malfunction, stores an
appropriate DTC, and illuminates the MIL. Manufacturers will not be
required to conduct any emissions testing. Instead, for those
malfunctions designed against an emissions threshold, the manufacturer
would simply implant or simulate a malfunction and verify detection,
DTC storage, and MIL illumination. Actual ``threshold'' parts will not
be needed for such testing. Implanted malfunctions could use severely
deteriorated parts if desired by the manufacturer since the point of
the testing is to verify detection, DTC storage, and MIL illumination.
Upon submitting the data to the Administrator, the manufacturer will be
required to also provide a description of the testing and the methods
used to implant or simulate each malfunction. Note that testing of
specific monitors will not be required if the manufacturer can show
that no possible test exists that could be done on that monitor without
causing physical damage to the production vehicle. We are requiring
that the testing be completed and reported to us within six months
after the manufacturer begins normal engine production. This should
provide early feedback on the performance of every monitor on the
vehicle prior to too many entering production. Upon good cause, we may
extend the time period for testing.
Note that, in their HDOBD rule,\82\ CARB allows, as an incentive to
perform a thorough validation test, a manufacturer to request that any
problem discovered during this self-test be treated as a
``retroactive'' deficiency. As discussed in section VII.D, we do not
have a provision for retroactive deficiencies. Importantly, a
retroactive deficiency granted by the Executive Officer does not
preclude a manufacturer from complying with our defect reporting
requirements. This issue was discussed in more detail in section VII.D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ 13 CCR 1971.1, Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-
0006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Verification of In-Use Monitoring Performance Ratios
We are requiring that manufacturers track the performance of
several of the most important monitors on the engine to determine how
often they are monitoring during in-use operation. These requirements
are discussed in more detail in section II.E. To summarize that
discussion, monitors are expected to execute in the real world and meet
a minimum acceptable performance level determined as the ratio of the
number of good monitoring events to the number of actual trips. The
ratio required is 10 percent, meaning that monitors should execute
during at least 10 percent of the trips taken by the engine/vehicle.
Monitors that perform below the minimum ratio will be subject to
remedial action and possibly recall. However, the minimum ratio is not
effective until the 2013 and later model years. For the 2010 through
2012 model year engines certified to today's OBD requirements, we are
requiring that the data be collected even though the minimum ratio is
not yet effective. The data gathered on these engines will help to
determine whether the 10 percent ratio is appropriate for all
applications and, if not, we intend to propose a change to the
requirement to reflect that learning.
We are requiring that the engine manufacturer gather these data on
production vehicles rather than engines. Since not every vehicle can be
evaluated, we are requiring that manufacturers generate groups of
engine/vehicle combinations to ensure adequate representation of the
fleet. Specifically, manufacturers will be required to separate
production vehicles into monitoring performance groups based on the
following criteria and submit performance ratio data representative of
each group:
Emission control system architecture type--All engines
that use the same or similar emissions control system architecture and
associated monitoring system would be in the same emission architecture
category. By architecture we mean engines with EGR + DPF + SCR, or EGR
+ DPF + NOX Adsorber, or EGR + DPF-only, etc.
Application type--Within an emission architecture
category, engines would be separated by vehicle application. The
separate application categories would be based on three
classifications: engines intended primarily for line-haul chassis
applications, engines intended primarily for urban delivery chassis
applications, and all other engines.
We are requiring that these data be submitted to us within 12
months of the production vehicles entering the market. Upon submitting
the collected data to us, the manufacturer must also provide a detailed
description of how the data were gathered, how vehicles were grouped to
represent sales of their engines, and the number of engines tested per
monitoring performance group. Manufacturers will be required to submit
performance ratio data from a sample of at least 15 vehicles per
monitoring performance group. For example, a manufacturer with two
emission control system architectures sold into each of the line-haul,
urban delivery, and ``other'' groupings, will be required to submit
data on up to 90 vehicles (i.e., 2 x 3 x 15). We are requiring that
these data be collected every year. Some manufacturers may find it
easiest to collect data from vehicles that come in to its authorized
repair facilities for routine maintenance or warranty work during the
time period required, while others may find it more advantageous to
hire a contractor to collect the data. Upon good cause, we may extend
the time period for testing.
As stated before, the data collected under this program are
intended primarily to provide an early indication that the systems are
working as intended in the field, to provide information to ``fine-
tune'' the requirement to track the performance of monitors, and to
provide data to be used to develop a more appropriate minimum ratio for
future regulatory revisions. The data are not intended to substitute
for testing that we would perform for enforcement reasons to determine
if a manufacturer is complying with the minimum acceptable performance
ratios. In fact, the data collected would not likely meet all the
required elements for testing to make an official determination that
the system is noncompliant. As such, we believe the testing will be of
most value to manufacturers since monitor performance problems can be
corrected prior to EPA conducting a full enforcement action that could
result in a recall.
VIII. What Are the Issues Concerning Inspection and Maintenance
Programs?
In the preamble to our proposal, we included a discussion of issues
surrounding potential future HDOBD-based I/M programs. However, while
we sought comment on these issues, we did not make any formal proposals
regarding HDOBD-based I/M. We received a fair amount of comment and
have summarized those comments in the Summary and Analysis document
contained in the docket for this rule.\83\ We are taking no final
action regarding HDOBD-based I/M at this time. We refer
[[Page 8352]]
the reader to the proposal for our discussion of the issues, and our
Summary and Analysis document for a summary of the comments we
received.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ Summary and Analysis of Comments document, HDOBD final
rule, EPA420-R-08-018, Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0055.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is, therefore, not subject to review under the EO.
EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs associated with
this action. This analysis is contained in the technical support
document.\84\ A copy of the analysis is available in the docket and was
summarized in section V of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ Final Technical Support Document, HDOBD final rule, EPA420-
R-08-019, Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0047-0056.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements for this action 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. The
Information Collection Request (ICR) document prepared by EPA has been
assigned EPA ICR number 1684.13. Under Title II of the Clean Air Act
(42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.; CAA), EPA is charged with issuing certificates
of conformity for those engines that comply with applicable emission
standards. Such a certificate must be issued before engines may be
legally introduced into commerce. EPA uses certification information to
verify that the proper engine prototypes have been selected and that
the necessary testing has been performed to assure that each engine
complies with emission standards. In addition, EPA also has the
authority under Title II of the Clean Air to ensure compliance by
require in-use testing of vehicles and engines. EPA is requiring
additional information at the time of certification to ensure that the
on-board diagnostic (OBD) requirements are being met. EPA is also
requiring that manufacturers conduct and report the results of in-use
testing of the OBD systems to demonstrate that they are performing
properly. Therefore, EPA is requiring 207 hours of annual burden per
each of the 12 respondents to conduct the OBD certification,
compliance, and in-use testing requirements required by this action.
EPA estimates that the total of the of the 2484 hours of annual cost
burden will be $16,018 per respondent for a total annual industry cost
burden for the 12 respondents of $1,236,481.
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; technology and systems
for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize 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 in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this action on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small businesses defined by
the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 DFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of this action on small
entities, I certify that this final action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action
will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action places
new requirements on manufacturers of large engines meant for highway
use. These are large manufacturers. This action also changes existing
requirements on manufacturers of passenger car and smaller heavy-duty
engines meant for highway use. These changes place no meaningful new
requirements on those manufacturers.
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 actions 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 to state, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more for
any single year. Before promulgating a 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 to 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 that is
not the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an
explanation of why such an alternative was not adopted.
Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirement that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed 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 EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
This rule contains no federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable
duties on any of these entities. Nothing in the rule would
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. We have determined
that this rule does not contain a federal
[[Page 8353]]
mandate that may result in estimated expenditures of more than $100
million to the private sector in any single year. Therefore, this
action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the
UMRA. Further, this action is also not subject to the requirements of
section 203 of UMRA.
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 action does not have federalism implications. It will not 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action places new requirements
on manufacturers of large engines meant for highway use and changes
existing requirements on manufacturers of passenger car and smaller
heavy-duty engines meant for highway use. These changes do not affect
States or the relationship between the national government and the
States. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
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 9, 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.'' This action does not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. This action
does not uniquely affect the communities of American Indian tribal
governments since the motor vehicle requirements for private businesses
in this action would have national applicability. Furthermore, this
action does not impose any direct compliance costs on these communities
and no circumstances specific to such communities exist that would
cause an impact on these communities beyond those discussed in the
other sections of this document. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
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.
This action is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not
an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive
Order 12866, and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Section 12(d) of Public Law 104-113, directs EPA
to use voluntary consensus standards 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, and
business practices) developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through
OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This final rule references technical standards. The technical
standards are listed in Sec. 86.1 of the regulatory text, and
directions for how they may be obtained are provided in Sec. 86.1.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income population. This action applies to all newly produced engines
nationwide once implemented without regard for where those engines are
ultimately used. EPA believes that all segments of society will benefit
equally as a result of today's action and that no one will suffer
adverse human health or environmental effects.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A Major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective April 27, 2009.
[[Page 8354]]
X. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
Statutory authority for today's final rule is found in the Clean
Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., in particular, sections 202 and 206 of
the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7521, 7525. This rule is being promulgated under the
administrative and procedural provisions of Clean Air Act section
307(d), 42 U.S.C. 7607(d).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 86
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle pollution.
40 CFR Part 89
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle
pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research, Vessels,
Warranty.
40 CFR Part 90
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Imports, Labeling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Research, Warranty.
40 CFR Part 1027
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 1033
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Incorporation by reference,
Labeling, Penalties, Railroads, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 1042
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Confidential business information, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Labeling, Penalties, Vessels, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Warranties.
40 CFR Parts 1048, 1054, and 1060
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Confidential business information, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Labeling, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Warranties.
40 CFR Part 1065
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Research.
40 CFR Part 1068
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Imports, Incorporation by reference,
Motor vehicle pollution, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Warranties.
Dated: December 4, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40 chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 86--CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY VEHICLES
AND ENGINES
0
1. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
0
2. Section 86.1 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 86.1 Reference materials.
(a) The documents in paragraph (b) of this section have been
incorporated by reference into this part with the approval of the
Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51. To enforce any edition other than that specified in this section, a
notice of change must be published in the Federal Register and the
material must be available to the public. All approved material is
available for inspection at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to http://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_ locations.html.
Also, the material is available for inspection at the Air Docket, EPA/
DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.
The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Air Docket is 202-566-1742. Copies are also available from the sources
listed below.
(b) The following paragraphs set forth the material that has been
incorporated by reference in this part.
(1) ASTM material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, or by calling 610-832-9585, or at http://
www.astm.org.
(i) ASTM D 975-04c, Standard Specification for Diesel Fuel Oils,
IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.1910, 86.213-11.
(ii) ASTM D1945-91, Standard Test Method for Analysis of Natural
Gas by Gas Chromatography, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.113-94,
86.513-94, 86.1213-94, 86.1313-94.
(iii) ASTM D2163-91, Standard Test Method for Analysis of Liquefied
Petroleum (LP) Gases and Propane Concentrates by Gas Chromatography,
IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.113-94, 86.1213-94, 86.1313-94.
(iv) ASTM D2986-95a, Reapproved 1999, Standard Practice for
Evaluation of Air Assay Media by the Monodisperse DOP (Dioctyl
Phthalate) Smoke Test, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.1310-2007.
(v) ASTM D5186-91, Standard Test Method for Determination of
Aromatic Content of Diesel Fuels by Supercritical Fluid Chromatography,
IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.113-07, 86.1313-91, 86.1313-94, 86.1313-
98, 1313-2007.
(vi) ASTM E29-67, Reapproved 1980, Standard Recommended Practice
for Indicating Which Places of Figures Are To Be Considered Significant
in Specified Limiting Values, IBR approved for Sec. 86.1105-87.
(vii) ASTM E29-90, Standard Practice for Using Significant Digits
in Test Data to Determine Conformance with Specifications, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec. 86.609-84, 86.609-96, 86.609-97, 86.609-98, 86.1009-84,
86.1009-96, 86.1442, 86.1708-99, 86.1709-99, 86.1710-99, 86.1728-99.
(viii) ASTM E29-93a, Standard Practice for Using Significant Digits
in Test Data to Determine Conformance with Specifications, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec. 86.098-15, 86.004-15, 86.007-11, 86.007-15, 86.1803-01,
86.1823-01, 86.1824-01, 86.1825-01, 86.1837-01.
(ix) ASTM F1471-93, Standard Test Method for Air Cleaning
Performance of a High-Efficiency Particulate Air-Filter System, IBR
approved Sec. 86.1310-2007.
(2) SAE material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
Society of Automotive Engineers International, 400 Commonwealth Dr.,
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, or by calling 724-776-4841, or at http://
www.sae.org.
(i) SAE J1151, December 1991, Methane Measurement Using Gas
Chromatography, 1994 SAE Handbook--SAE International Cooperative
Engineering Program, Volume 1: Materials, Fuels, Emissions, and Noise;
Section 13 and page 170
[[Page 8355]]
(13.170), IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.111-94; 86.1311-94.
(ii) SAE J1349, June 1990, Engine Power Test Code--Spark Ignition
and Compression Ignition, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.094-8, 86.096-
8.
(iii) SAE J1850, July 1995, Class B Data Communication Network
Interface, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.099-17, 86.1806-01.
(iv) SAE J1850, Revised May 2001, Class B Data Communication
Network Interface, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17,
86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(v) SAE J1877, July 1994, Recommended Practice for Bar-Coded
Vehicle Identification Number Label, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
86.095-35, 86.1806-01.
(vi) SAE J1892, October 1993, Recommended Practice for Bar-Coded
Vehicle Emission Configuration Label, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
86.095-35, 86.1806-01.
(vii) SAE J1930, Revised May 1998, Electrical/Electronic Systems
Diagnostic Terms, Definitions, Abbreviations, and Acronyms, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.096-38, 86.004-38, 86.007-38, 86.010-38,
86.1808-01, 86.1808-07.
(viii) SAE J1930, Revised April 2002, Electrical/Electronic Systems
Diagnostic Terms, Definitions, Abbreviations, and Acronyms--Equivalent
to ISO/TR 15031-2: April 30, 2002, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-
17, 86.007-17, 86.010-18, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(ix) SAE J1937, November 1989, Engine Testing with Low Temperature
Charge Air Cooler Systems in a Dynamometer Test Cell, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 86.1330-84, 86.1330-90.
(x) SAE J1939, Revised October 2007, Recommended Practice for a
Serial Control and Communications Vehicle Network, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 86.010-18.
(xi) SAE J1939-11, December 1994, Physical Layer--250K bits/s,
Shielded Twisted Pair, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.1806-
05.
(xii) SAE J1939-11, Revised October 1999, Physical Layer--250K
bits/s, Shielded Twisted Pair, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17,
86.007-17, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(xiii) SAE J1939-13, July 1999, Off-Board Diagnostic Connector, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(xiv) SAE J1939-13, Revised March 2004, Off-Board Diagnostic
Connector, IBR approved for Sec. 86.010-18.
(xv) SAE J1939-21, July 1994, Data Link Layer, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.1806-05.
(xvi) SAE J1939-21, Revised April 2001, Data Link Layer, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(xvii) SAE J1939-31, Revised December 1997, Network Layer, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(xviii) SAE J1939-71, May 1996, Vehicle Application Layer, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.1806-05.
(xix) SAE J1939-71, Revised August 2002, Vehicle Application
Layer--J1939-71 (through 1999), IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17,
86.007-17, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(xx) SAE J1939-71, Revised January 2008, Vehicle Application Layer
(Through February 2007), IBR approved for Sec. 86.010-38.
(xxi) SAE J1939-73, February 1996, Application Layer--Diagnostics,
IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.1806-05.
(xxii) SAE J1939-73, Revised June 2001, Application Layer--
Diagnostics, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.1806-
04, 86.1806-05.
(xxiii) SAE J1939-73, Revised September 2006, Application Layer--
Diagnostics, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.010-18, 86.010-38.
(xxiv) SAE J1939-81, July 1997, Recommended Practice for Serial
Control and Communications Vehicle Network Part 81--Network Management,
IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-
05.
(xxv) SAE J1939-81, Revised May 2003, Network Management, IBR
approved for Sec. 86.010-38.
(xxvi) SAE J1962, January 1995, Diagnostic Connector, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec. 86.099-17, 86.1806-01.
(xxvii) SAE J1962, Revised April 2002, Diagnostic Connector
Equivalent to ISO/DIS 15031-3; December 14, 2001, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.010-18, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(xxviii) SAE J1978, Revised April 2002, OBD II Scan Tool--
Equivalent to ISO/DIS 15031-4; December 14, 2001, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.010-18, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(xxix) SAE J1979, July 1996, E/E Diagnostic Test Modes, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.099-17, 86.1806-01.
(xxx) SAE J1979, Revised September 1997, E/E Diagnostic Test Modes,
IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.096-38, 86.004-38, 86.007-38, 86.010-38,
86.1808-01, 86.1808-07.
(xxxi) SAE J1979, Revised April 2002, E/E Diagnostic Test Modes--
Equivalent to ISO/DIS 15031-5; April 30, 2002, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 86.099-17, 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.1806-01, 86.1806-04,
86.1806-05.
(xxxii) SAE J1979, Revised May 2007, (R) E/E Diagnostic Test Modes,
IBR approved for Sec. 86.010-18, 86.010-38.
(xxxiii) SAE J2012, July 1996, Recommended Practice for Diagnostic
Trouble Code Definitions, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.099-17,
86.1806-01.
(xxxiv) SAE J2012, Revised April 2002, (R) Diagnostic Trouble Code
Definitions Equivalent to ISO/DIS 15031-6: April 30, 2002, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.010-18, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(xxxv) SAE J2284-3, May 2001, High Speed CAN (HSC) for Vehicle
Applications at 500 KBPS, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.096-38,
86.004-38, 86.007-38, 86.010-38, 86.1808-01, 86.1808-07.
(xxxvi) SAE J2403, Revised August 2007, Medium/Heavy-Duty E/E
Systems Diagnosis Nomenclature--Truck and Bus, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 86.007-17, 86.010-18, 86.010-38, 86.1806-05.
(xxxvii) SAE J2534, February 2002, Recommended Practice for Pass-
Thru Vehicle Programming, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.096-38,
86.004-38, 86.007-38, 86.010-38, 86.1808-01, 86.1808-07.
(xxxviii) SAE J2534-1, Revised December 2004, (R) Recommended
Practice for Pass-Thru Vehicle Programming, IBR approved for Sec.
86.010-38.
(3) ANSI material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
the American National Standards Institute, 25 W 43rd Street, 4th Floor,
New York, NY 10036, or by calling 212-642-4900, or at http://
www.ansi.org.
(i) ANSI/AGA NGV1-1994, Standard for Compressed Natural Gas Vehicle
(NGV) Fueling Connection Devices, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.001-9,
86.004-9, 86.098-8, 86.099-8, 86.099-9, 86.1810-01.
(ii) [Reserved]
(4) California regulatory requirements. Copies of these materials
may be obtained from U.S. EPA, see paragraph (a) of this section, or
from the California Air Resources Board by calling 916-322-2884, or at
http://www.arb.ca.gov.
(i) California Regulatory Requirements Applicable to the ``LEV II''
Program, including:
(A) California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for
2003 and Subsequent Model Zero-Emission Vehicles and 2001 and
Subsequent Model Hybrid Electric Vehicles, in the Passenger Car, Light-
duty Truck and Medium-duty Vehicle Classes, August 5, 1999, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.1806-01, 86.1811-04, 86.1844-01.
(B) California Non-Methane Organic Gas Test Procedures, August 5,
1999, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.1803-01, 86.1810-01, 86.1811-04.
(ii) California Regulatory Requirements Applicable to the National
Low Emission Vehicle
[[Page 8356]]
Program, October 1996, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.113-04, 86.612-
97, 86.1012-97, 86.1702-99, 86.1708-99, 86.1709-99, 86.1717-99,
86.1735-99, 86.1771-99, 86.1775-99, 86.1776-99, 86.1777-99, Appendix
XVI, Appendix XVII.
(iii) California Regulatory Requirements known as On-board
Diagnostics II (OBD-II), Approved on April 21, 2003, Title 13,
California Code Regulations, Section 1968.2, Malfunction and Diagnostic
System Requirements for 2004 and Subsequent Model-Year Passenger Cars,
Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles and Engines (OBD-II), IBR
approved for Sec. 86.1806-05.
(iv) California Regulatory Requirements known as On-board
Diagnostics II (OBD-II), Approved on November 9, 2007, Title 13,
California Code Regulations, Section 1968.2, Malfunction and Diagnostic
System Requirements for 2004 and Subsequent Model-Year Passenger Cars,
Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles and Engines (OBD-II), IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.007-17, 86.1806-05.
(5) ISO material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
the International Organization for Standardization, Case Postale 56,
CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, or by calling 41-22-749-01-11, or at
http://www.iso.org.
(i) ISO 9141-2, February 1, 1994, Road vehicles--Diagnostic
systems--Part 2: CARB requirements for interchange of digital
information, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.099-17, 86.005-17, 86.007-
17, 86.1806-01, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(ii) ISO 14230-4:2000(E), June 1, 2000, Road vehicles--Diagnostic
systems--KWP 2000 requirements for Emission-related systems, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 86.099-17, 86.005-17, 86.007-17, 86.1806-01,
86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(iii) ISO 15765-4.3:2001, December 14, 2001, Road Vehicles--
Diagnostics on Controller Area Networks (CAN)--Part 4: Requirements for
emissions-related systems, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.005-17,
86.007-17, 86.1806-04, 86.1806-05.
(iv) ISO 15765-4:2005(E), January 15, 2005, Road Vehicles--
Diagnostics on Controller Area Networks (CAN)--Part 4: Requirements for
emissions-related systems, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 86.007-17,
86.010-18, 86.1806-05.
(6) NIST material. NIST publications are sold by the Government
Printing Office (GPO) and by the National Technical Information Service
(NTIS). To purchase a NIST publication you must have the order number.
Order numbers are available from the NIST Public Inquiries Unit at
(301) 975-NIST. Mailing address: NIST Public Inquiries, NIST, 100
Bureau Drive, Stop 3460, Gaithersburg, Md., 20899-3460. If you have a
GPO stock number, you can purchase printed copies of NIST publications
from GPO. Orders should be sent to the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325. For more
information, or to place an order, call (202) 512-1800, fax: (202) 512-
2250. More information can also be found at http://www.nist.gov.
(i) NIST Special Publication 811, 1995 Edition, Guide for the Use
of the International System of Units (SI), IBR approved for Sec.
86.1901.
(ii) [Reserved]
(7) Truck and Maintenance Council material. Copies of these
materials may be obtained from the Truck and Maintenance Council, 950
North Glebe Road, Suite 210, Arlington, VA 22203-4181, or by calling
703-838-1754.
(i) TMC RP 1210B, Revised June 2007, WINDOWSTM
COMMUNICATION API, IBR approved for Sec. 86.010-38.
(ii) [Reserved]
0
3. Section 86.007-17 is added to Subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 86.007-17 On-board Diagnostics for engines used in applications
less than or equal to 14,000 pounds GVWR.
(a) General.
(1) All heavy-duty engines intended for use in a heavy-duty vehicle
weighing 14,000 pounds GVWR or less must be equipped with an on-board
diagnostic (OBD) system capable of monitoring all emission-related
engine systems or components during the applicable useful life. Heavy-
duty engines intended for use in a heavy-duty vehicle weighing 14,000
pounds GVWR or less must meet the OBD requirements of this section
according to the phase-in schedule in paragraph (k) of this section.
All monitored systems and components must be evaluated periodically,
but no less frequently than once per applicable certification test
cycle as defined in Appendix I, paragraph (f), of this part, or similar
trip as approved by the Administrator.
(2) An OBD system demonstrated to fully meet the requirements in
Sec. 86.1806-05 may be used to meet the requirements of this section,
provided that the Administrator finds that a manufacturer's decision to
use the flexibility in this paragraph (a)(2) is based on good
engineering judgment.
(b) Malfunction descriptions. The OBD system must detect and
identify malfunctions in all monitored emission-related engine systems
or components according to the following malfunction definitions as
measured and calculated in accordance with test procedures set forth in
subpart N of this part (engine-based test procedures) excluding the
test procedure referred to as the ``Supplemental emission test; test
cycle and procedures'' contained in Sec. 86.1360, and excluding the
test procedure referred to as the ``Not-To-Exceed Test Procedure''
contained in Sec. 86.1370, and excluding the test procedure referred
to as the ``Load Response Test'' contained in Sec. 86.1380.
(1) Catalysts and particulate filters.
(i) Otto-cycle. Catalyst deterioration or malfunction before it
results in an increase in NMHC (or NOX+NMHC, as applicable)
emissions 1.5 times the NMHC (or NOX+NMHC, as applicable)
standard or family emission limit (FEL), as compared to the NMHC (or
NOX+NMHC, as applicable) emission level measured using a
representative 4000 mile catalyst system.
(ii) Diesel.
(A) If equipped, reduction catalyst deterioration or malfunction
before it results in exhaust NOX emissions exceeding, for
model years 2007 through 2012, either 1.75 times the applicable
NOX standard for engines certified to a NOX
family emission limit (FEL) greater than 0.50 g/bhp-hr, or the
applicable NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines certified to a
NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr and, for model
years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr.
If equipped, diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) deterioration or
malfunction before it results in exhaust NMHC emissions exceeding, for
model years 2010 through 2012, 2.5 times the applicable NMHC standard
and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the applicable NMHC
standard. These catalyst monitoring requirements need not be done if
the manufacturer can demonstrate that deterioration or malfunction of
the system will not result in exceedance of the threshold. As an
alternative, oxidation catalyst deterioration or malfunction before it
results in an inability to achieve a temperature rise of 100 degrees C,
or to reach the necessary diesel particulate filter (DPF) regeneration
temperature, within 60 seconds of initiating an active DPF
regeneration. Further, oxidation catalyst deterioration or malfunction
when the DOC is unable to sustain the necessary regeneration
temperature for the duration of the regeneration event. The OBD or
control system must abort the regeneration if the regeneration
temperature has not been reached within five minutes of initiating an
active regeneration event, and if the regeneration temperature cannot
be sustained for the duration of the regeneration event.
[[Page 8357]]
(B) If equipped with a DPF for model years 2007 through 2009,
catastrophic failure of the device must be detected. Any DFP whose
complete failure results in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the
applicable standard or FEL for NMHC (or NOX+NMHC, as
applicable) or PM must be monitored for such catastrophic failure. This
monitoring need not be done if the manufacturer can demonstrate that a
catastrophic failure of the system will not result in exceedance of the
threshold. If equipped with a DPF for model years 2010 and later, DPF
deterioration or malfunction before it results in exhaust emissions
exceeding the applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM,
whichever is higher. As an alternative to this requirement for 2010
through 2012, the OBD system can be designed to detect a malfunction
based on a detectable decrease in the expected pressure drop across the
DPF for a period of 5 seconds or more, whenever the engine is speed is
greater than or equal to 50% (as defined in Sec. 1065.610, Eq.
1065.610-3) and engine load, or torque, is greater than or equal to 50%
of the maximum available at that speed under standard emission test
conditions. For purposes of this paragraph, the detectable change in
pressure drop is defined by operating the engine at its 50% speed and
50% load point under standard emission test conditions, observing the
pressure drop on a clean DPF, and multiplying the observed pressure
drop by 0.5. The detectable change in pressure drop shall be reported
in units of kilopascals (kPa). At time of certification, manufacturers
shall provide the detectable change in pressure drop value along with
OBD engine data parameters recorded at the following nine engine speed/
load operating points with a clean DPF: 50% speed, 50% load; 50% speed,
75% load, 50% speed, 100% load; 75% speed, 50% load; 75% speed, 75%
load; 75% speed, 100% load; 100% speed, 50% load; 100% speed, 75% load;
and 100% speed, 100% load. The OBD engine data pararmeters to be
reported are described in Sec. 86.010-18(k)(4)(ii) and shall include
the following: engine speed; calculated load; air flow rate from mass
air flow sensor (if so equipped); fuel rate; and DPF delta pressure. On
all engines so equipped, catastrophic failure of the particulate trap
must also be detected. In addition, the absence of the particulate trap
or the trapping substrate must be detected.
(2) Engine misfire.
(i) Otto-cycle. Engine misfire resulting in exhaust emissions
exceeding 1.5 times the applicable standard or FEL for NMHC,
NOX (or NOX+NMHC, as applicable) or CO; and any
misfire capable of damaging the catalytic converter.
(ii) Diesel. Lack of cylinder combustion must be detected.
(3) Exhaust gas sensors.
(i) Oxygen sensors and air-fuel ratio sensors downstream of
aftertreatment devices.
(A) Otto-cycle. If equipped, sensor deterioration or malfunction
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable
standard or FEL for NMHC, NOX or CO.
(B) Diesel. If equipped, sensor deterioration or malfunction
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding any of the following levels:
The applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM, whichever is
higher; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 1.75 times the
applicable NOX standard for engines certified to a
NOX FEL greater than 0.50 g/bhp-hr, or, the applicable
NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines certified to a
NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr and, for model
years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr;
or, for model years 2010 through 2012, 2.5 times the applicable NMHC
standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the applicable
NMHC standard.
(ii) Oxygen sensors and air-fuel ratio sensors upstream of
aftertreatment devices.
(A) Otto-cycle. If equipped, sensor deterioration or malfunction
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable
standard or FEL for NMHC, NOX or CO.
(B) Diesel. If equipped, sensor deterioration or malfunction
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding any of the following levels:
for model years 2007 through 2009, the applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr
or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM, whichever is higher and, for model years 2010 and
later, the applicable PM FEL+0.02 g/bhp-hr or 0.03 g/bhp-hr PM,
whichever is higher; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 1.75 times
the applicable NOX standard for engines certified to a
NOX FEL greater than 0.50 g/bhp-hr, or the applicable
NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines certified to a
NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr and, for model
years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr ;
or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 2.5 times the applicable NMHC
standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the applicable
NMHC standard; or, for 2007 through 2012, 2.5 times the applicable CO
standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the applicable CO
standard.
(iii) NOX sensors.
(A) Otto-cycle. If equipped, sensor deterioration or malfunction
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable
standard or FEL for NMHC, NOX or CO.
(B) Diesel. If equipped, sensor deterioration or malfunction
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding any of the following levels:
the applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM, whichever is
higher; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 1.75 times the
applicable NOX standard for engines certified to a
NOX FEL greater than 0.50 g/bhp-hr; or, the applicable
NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines certified to a
NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr and, for model
years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr.
(4) Evaporative leaks. If equipped, any vapor leak in the
evaporative and/or refueling system (excluding the tubing and
connections between the purge valve and the intake manifold) greater
than or equal in magnitude to a leak caused by a 0.040 inch diameter
orifice; an absence of evaporative purge air flow from the complete
evaporative emission control system. Where fuel tank capacity is
greater than 25 gallons, the Administrator may, following a request
from the manufacturer, revise the size of the orifice to the smallest
orifice feasible, based on test data, if the most reliable monitoring
method available cannot reliably detect a system leak equal to a 0.040
inch diameter orifice.
(5) Other emission control systems and components.
(i) Otto-cycle. Any deterioration or malfunction occurring in an
engine system or component directly intended to control emissions,
including but not necessarily limited to, the exhaust gas recirculation
(EGR) system, if equipped, the secondary air system, if equipped, and
the fuel control system, singularly resulting in exhaust emissions
exceeding 1.5 times the applicable emission standard or FEL for NMHC,
NOX or CO. For engines equipped with a secondary air system,
a functional check, as described in paragraph (b)(6) of this section,
may satisfy the requirements of this paragraph (b)(5) provided the
manufacturer can demonstrate that deterioration of the flow
distribution system is unlikely. This demonstration is subject to
Administrator approval and, if the demonstration and associated
functional check are approved, the diagnostic system must indicate a
malfunction when some degree of secondary airflow is not detectable in
the exhaust system during the check. For engines equipped with positive
crankcase ventilation (PCV), monitoring of the PCV system is
[[Page 8358]]
not necessary provided the manufacturer can demonstrate to the
Administrator's satisfaction that the PCV system is unlikely to fail.
(ii) Diesel. Any deterioration or malfunction occurring in an
engine system or component directly intended to control emissions,
including but not necessarily limited to, the exhaust gas recirculation
(EGR) system, if equipped, and the fuel control system, singularly
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding any of the following levels:
for model years 2007 through 2009, the applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr
or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM, whichever is higher and, for model years 2010 and
later, the applicable PM FEL+0.02 g/bhp-hr or 0.03 g/bhp-hr PM,
whichever is higher; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 1.75 times
the applicable NOX standard for engines certified to a
NOX FEL greater than 0.50 g/bhp-hr or the applicable
NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines certified to a
NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr and, for model
years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr;
or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 2.5 times the applicable NMHC
standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the applicable
NMHC standard; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 2.5 times the
applicable CO standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the
applicable CO standard. A functional check, as described in paragraph
(b)(6) of this section, may satisfy the requirements of this paragraph
(b)(5) provided the manufacturer can demonstrate that a malfunction
would not cause emissions to exceed the applicable levels. This
demonstration is subject to Administrator approval. For engines
equipped with crankcase ventilation (CV), monitoring of the CV system
is not necessary provided the manufacturer can demonstrate to the
Administrator's satisfaction that the CV system is unlikely to fail.
(6) Other emission-related engine components. Any other
deterioration or malfunction occurring in an electronic emission-
related engine system or component not otherwise described above that
either provides input to or receives commands from the on-board
computer and has a measurable impact on emissions; monitoring of
components required by this paragraph (b)(6) must be satisfied by
employing electrical circuit continuity checks and rationality checks
for computer input components (input values within manufacturer
specified ranges based on other available operating parameters), and
functionality checks for computer output components (proper functional
response to computer commands) except that the Administrator may waive
such a rationality or functionality check where the manufacturer has
demonstrated infeasibility. Malfunctions are defined as a failure of
the system or component to meet the electrical circuit continuity
checks or the rationality or functionality checks.
(7) Performance of OBD functions. Any sensor or other component
deterioration or malfunction which renders that sensor or component
incapable of performing its function as part of the OBD system must be
detected and identified on engines so equipped.
(c) Malfunction indicator light (MIL). The OBD system must
incorporate a malfunction indicator light (MIL) readily visible to the
vehicle operator. When illuminated, the MIL must display ``Check
Engine,'' ``Service Engine Soon,'' a universally recognizable engine
symbol, or a similar phrase or symbol approved by the Administrator.
More than one general purpose malfunction indicator light for emission-
related problems should not be used; separate specific purpose warning
lights (e.g., brake system, fasten seat belt, oil pressure, etc.) are
permitted. The use of red for the OBD-related malfunction indicator
light is prohibited.
(d) MIL illumination.
(1) The MIL must illuminate and remain illuminated when any of the
conditions specified in paragraph (b) of this section are detected and
verified, or whenever the engine control enters a default or secondary
mode of operation considered abnormal for the given engine operating
conditions. The MIL must blink once per second under any period of
operation during which engine misfire is occurring and catalyst damage
is imminent. If such misfire is detected again during the following
driving cycle (i.e., operation consisting of, at a minimum, engine
start-up and engine shut-off) or the next driving cycle in which
similar conditions are encountered, the MIL must maintain a steady
illumination when the misfire is not occurring and then remain
illuminated until the MIL extinguishing criteria of this section are
satisfied. The MIL must also illuminate when the vehicle's ignition is
in the ``key-on'' position before engine starting or cranking and
extinguish after engine starting if no malfunction has previously been
detected. If a fuel system or engine misfire malfunction has previously
been detected, the MIL may be extinguished if the malfunction does not
reoccur during three subsequent sequential trips during which similar
conditions are encountered and no new malfunctions have been detected.
Similar conditions are defined as engine speed within 375 rpm, engine
load within 20 percent, and engine warm-up status equivalent to that
under which the malfunction was first detected. If any malfunction
other than a fuel system or engine misfire malfunction has been
detected, the MIL may be extinguished if the malfunction does not
reoccur during three subsequent sequential trips during which the
monitoring system responsible for illuminating the MIL functions
without detecting the malfunction, and no new malfunctions have been
detected. Upon Administrator approval, statistical MIL illumination
protocols may be employed, provided they result in comparable
timeliness in detecting a malfunction and evaluating system
performance, i.e., three to six driving cycles would be considered
acceptable.
(2) Drive cycle or driving cycle, in the context of this Sec.
86.007-17 and for model years 2010 and later, a drive cycle means
operation that consists of engine startup and engine shutoff and
includes the period of engine off time up to the next engine startup.
For vehicles that employ engine shutoff strategies (e.g., engine
shutoff at idle), the manufacturer may use an alternative definition
for drive cycle (e.g., key-on followed by key-off). Any alternative
definition must be based on equivalence to engine startup and engine
shutoff signaling the beginning and ending of a single driving event
for a conventional vehicle. For applications that span 14,000 pounds
GVWR, the manufacturer may use the drive cycle definition of Sec.
86.010-18 in lieu of the definition in this paragraph.
(e) Storing of computer codes. The OBD system shall record and
store in computer memory diagnostic trouble codes and diagnostic
readiness codes indicating the status of the emission control system.
These codes shall be available through the standardized data link
connector per specifications as referenced in paragraph (h) of this
section.
(1) A diagnostic trouble code must be stored for any detected and
verified malfunction causing MIL illumination. The stored diagnostic
trouble code must identify the malfunctioning system or component as
uniquely as possible. At the manufacturer's discretion, a diagnostic
trouble code may be stored for conditions not causing MIL illumination.
Regardless, a separate code should be stored indicating the expected
MIL illumination status (i.e., MIL commanded ``ON,'' MIL commanded
``OFF'').
[[Continued on page 8359]]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
]
[[pp. 8359-8408]] Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Motor
Vehicle Engines; Regulations Requiring Onboard Diagnostic Systems on
2010 and Later Heavy-Duty Engines Used in Highway Applications Over
14,000 Pounds; Revisions to Onboard Diagnostic Requirements f[[Page 8359]]
[[Continued from page 8358]]
[[Page 8359]]
(2) For a single misfiring cylinder, the diagnostic trouble code(s)
must uniquely identify the cylinder, unless the manufacturer submits
data and/or engineering evaluations which adequately demonstrate that
the misfiring cylinder cannot be reliably identified under certain
operating conditions. For diesel engines only, the specific cylinder
for which combustion cannot be detected need not be identified if new
hardware would be required to do so. The diagnostic trouble code must
identify multiple misfiring cylinder conditions; under multiple misfire
conditions, the misfiring cylinders need not be uniquely identified if
a distinct multiple misfire diagnostic trouble code is stored.
(3) The diagnostic system may erase a diagnostic trouble code if
the same code is not re-registered in at least 40 engine warm-up
cycles, and the malfunction indicator light is not illuminated for that
code.
(4) Separate status codes, or readiness codes, must be stored in
computer memory to identify correctly functioning emission control
systems and those emission control systems which require further engine
operation to complete proper diagnostic evaluation. A readiness code
need not be stored for those monitors that can be considered
continuously operating monitors (e.g., misfire monitor, fuel system
monitor, etc.). Readiness codes should never be set to ``not ready''
status upon key-on or key-off; intentional setting of readiness codes
to ``not ready'' status via service procedures must apply to all such
codes, rather than applying to individual codes. Subject to
Administrator approval, if monitoring is disabled for a multiple number
of driving cycles (i.e., more than one) due to the continued presence
of extreme operating conditions (e.g., ambient temperatures below
40[deg]F, or altitudes above 8000 feet), readiness for the subject
monitoring system may be set to ``ready'' status without monitoring
having been completed. Administrator approval shall be based on the
conditions for monitoring system disablement, and the number of driving
cycles specified without completion of monitoring before readiness is
indicated.
(f) Available diagnostic data.
(1) Upon determination of the first malfunction of any component or
system, ``freeze frame'' engine conditions present at the time must be
stored in computer memory. Should a subsequent fuel system or misfire
malfunction occur, any previously stored freeze frame conditions must
be replaced by the fuel system or misfire conditions (whichever occurs
first). Stored engine conditions must include, but are not limited to:
engine speed, open or closed loop operation, fuel system commands,
coolant temperature, calculated load value, fuel pressure, vehicle
speed, air flow rate, and intake manifold pressure if the information
needed to determine these conditions is available to the computer. For
freeze frame storage, the manufacturer must include the most
appropriate set of conditions to facilitate effective repairs. If the
diagnostic trouble code causing the conditions to be stored is erased
in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section, the stored engine
conditions may also be erased.
(2) The following data in addition to the required freeze frame
information must be made available on demand through the serial port on
the standardized data link connector, if the information is available
to the on-board computer or can be determined using information
available to the on-board computer: Diagnostic trouble codes, engine
coolant temperature, fuel control system status (closed loop, open
loop, other), fuel trim, ignition timing advance, intake air
temperature, manifold air pressure, air flow rate, engine RPM, throttle
position sensor output value, secondary air status (upstream,
downstream, or atmosphere), calculated load value, vehicle speed, and
fuel pressure. The signals must be provided in standard units based on
SAE specifications as referenced in paragraph (h) of this section.
Actual signals must be clearly identified separately from default value
or limp home signals.
(3) For all OBD systems for which specific on-board evaluation
tests are conducted (catalyst, oxygen sensor, etc.), the results of the
most recent test performed by the vehicle, and the limits to which the
system is compared must be available through the standardized data link
connector per the appropriate standardized specifications as referenced
in paragraph (h) of this section.
(4) Access to the data required to be made available under this
section shall be unrestricted and shall not require any access codes or
devices that are only available from the manufacturer.
(g) Exceptions. The OBD system is not required to evaluate systems
or components during malfunction conditions if such evaluation would
result in a risk to safety or failure of systems or components.
Additionally, the OBD system is not required to evaluate systems or
components during operation of a power take-off unit such as a dump
bed, snow plow blade, or aerial bucket, etc.
(h) Reference materials. The following documents are incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 86.1. Anyone may inspect copies at the U.S. EPA
or at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at U.S. EPA, NARA, or
the standard making bodies directly, refer to Sec. 86.1.
(1) SAE material.
(i) SAE J1850, Revised May 2001, shall be used as the on-board to
off-board communications protocol. All emission related messages sent
to the scan tool over a J1850 data link shall use the Cyclic Redundancy
Check and the three byte header, and shall not use inter-byte
separation or check sums.
(ii) SAE J1979, Revised April 2002. Basic diagnostic data (as
specified in Sec. 86.007-17(e) and (f)) shall be provided in the
format and units in this industry standard.
(iii) SAE J2012, Revised April 2002. Diagnostic trouble codes shall
be consistent with this industry standard.
(iv) SAE J1962, Revised April 2002. The connection interface
between the OBD system and test equipment and diagnostic tools shall
meet the functional requirements of this industry standard.
(v) SAE J1930, Revised April 2002; or, SAE J2403, Revised August
2007. All acronyms, definitions and abbreviations shall be formatted
according to one or the other of these industry standards.
(vi) SAE J1978, Revised April 2002. All equipment used to
interface, extract and display OBD-related information shall meet this
industry standard.
(vii) As an alternative to the above standards, heavy-duty vehicles
may conform to the specifications of these SAE standards: SAE J1939-11,
Revised October 1999; SAE J1939-13, July 1999; SAE J1939-21, Revised
April 2001; SAE J1939-31, Revised December 1997; SAE J1939-71, Revised
August 2002; SAE J1939-73, Revised June 2001; SAE J1939-81, July 1997.
(2) ISO materials.
(i) ISO 9141-2, February 1, 1994. This industry standard may be
used as an alternative to SAE J1850 (as specified in paragraph
(h)(1)(i) of this section) as the on-board to off-board communications
protocol.
(ii) ISO 14230-4:2000(E), June 1, 2000. This industry standard may
be used as an alternative to SAE J1850 (as specified in paragraph
(h)(1)(i) of this section) as the on-board to off-board communications
protocol.
(iii) ISO 15765-4.3:2001, December 14, 2001. This industry standard
may be
[[Page 8360]]
used as an alternative to SAE J1850 (as specified in paragraph
(h)(1)(i) of this section) as the on-board to off-board communications
protocol.
(iv) ISO 15765-4:2005(E), January 15, 2005. Beginning with the 2008
model year and beyond, this industry standard shall be the only
acceptable protocol used for standardized on-board to off-board
communications for vehicles below 8500 pounds. For vehicles 8500 to
14000 pounds, either this ISO industry standard or the SAE standards
listed in paragraph (h)(1)(vii) of this section shall be the only
acceptable protocols used for standardized on-board to off-board
communications.
(i) Deficiencies and alternative fueled engines. Upon application
by the manufacturer, the Administrator may accept an OBD system as
compliant even though specific requirements are not fully met. Such
compliances without meeting specific requirements, or deficiencies,
will be granted only if compliance would be infeasible or unreasonable
considering such factors as, but not limited to: technical feasibility
of the given monitor and lead time and production cycles including
phase-in or phase-out of engines or vehicle designs and programmed
upgrades of computers. Unmet requirements should not be carried over
from the previous model year except where unreasonable hardware or
software modifications would be necessary to correct the deficiency,
and the manufacturer has demonstrated an acceptable level of effort
toward compliance as determined by the Administrator. Furthermore, EPA
will not accept any deficiency requests that include the complete lack
of a major diagnostic monitor (``major'' diagnostic monitors being
those for exhaust aftertreatment devices, oxygen sensor, air-fuel ratio
sensor, NOX sensor, engine misfire, evaporative leaks, and
diesel EGR, if equipped), with the possible exception of the special
provisions for alternative fueled engines. For alternative fueled
heavy-duty engines (e.g., natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas,
methanol, ethanol), manufacturers may request the Administrator to
waive specific monitoring requirements of this section for which
monitoring may not be reliable with respect to the use of the
alternative fuel. At a minimum, alternative fuel engines must be
equipped with an OBD system meeting OBD requirements to the extent
feasible as approved by the Administrator.
(j) California OBDII compliance option. For heavy-duty engines used
in applications weighing 14,000 pounds GVWR or less, demonstration of
compliance with California OBD II requirements (Title 13 California
Code of Regulations Sec. 1968.2 (13 CCR 1968.2)), as modified and
approved on November 9, 2007 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
86.1), shall satisfy the requirements of this section, except that
compliance with 13 CCR 1968.2(e)(4.2.2)(C), pertaining to 0.02 inch
evaporative leak detection, and 13 CCR 1968.2(d)(1.4), pertaining to
tampering protection, are not required to satisfy the requirements of
this section. Also, the deficiency provisions of 13 CCR 1968.2(k) do
not apply. The deficiency provisions of paragraph (i) of this section
and the evaporative leak detection requirement of paragraph (b)(4) of
this section apply to manufacturers selecting this paragraph (j) for
demonstrating compliance. In addition, demonstration of compliance with
13 CCR 1968.2(e)(15.2.1)(C), to the extent it applies to the
verification of proper alignment between the camshaft and crankshaft,
applies only to vehicles equipped with variable valve timing.
(k) Phase-in for heavy-duty engines. Manufacturers of heavy-duty
engines intended for use in a heavy-duty vehicle weighing 14,000 pounds
GVWR must comply with the OBD requirements in this section according to
the following phase-in schedule, based on the percentage of projected
engine sales within each category. The 2007 requirements in the
following phase-in schedule apply to all heavy-duty engines intended
for use in a heavy-duty vehicle weighing 14,000 pounds GVWR or less.
For the purposes of calculating compliance with the phase-in provisions
of this paragraph (k), heavy-duty engines may be combined with heavy-
duty vehicles subject to the phase-in requirements of paragraph Sec.
86.1806-05(l). The OBD Compliance phase-in table follows:
OBD Compliance Phase-In for Heavy-Duty Engines Intended for Use in a Heavy-Duty Vehicle Weighing 14,000 Pounds
GVWR or Less
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otto-cycle phase-in based on Diesel phase-in based on projected
Model year projected sales sales
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 MY................................ 80% compliance; alternative 100% compliance.
fuel waivers available.
2008+ MY 100% compliance............... 100% compliance................ 100% compliance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4. Section 86.007-30 is added to Subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 86.007-30 Certification.
(a)(1)(i) If, after a review of the test reports and data submitted
by the manufacturer, data derived from any inspection carried out under
Sec. 86.091-7(c) and any other pertinent data or information, the
Administrator determines that a test vehicle(s) (or test engine(s))
meets the requirements of the Act and of this subpart, he will issue a
certificate of conformity with respect to such vehicle(s) (or
engine(s)) except in cases covered by paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) and (c) of
this section.
(ii) Gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled heavy-duty vehicles. If,
after a review of the statement(s) of compliance submitted by the
manufacturer under Sec. 86.094-23(b)(4) and any other pertinent data
or information, the Administrator determines that the requirements of
the Act and this subpart have been met, he will issue one certificate
of conformity per manufacturer with respect to the evaporative emission
family(ies) covered by paragraph (c) of this section.
(2) Such certificate will be issued for such period not to exceed
one model year as the Administrator may determine and upon such terms
as he may deem necessary or appropriate to assure that any new motor
vehicle (or new motor vehicle engine) covered by the certificate will
meet the requirements of the Act and of this part.
(3)(i) One such certificate will be issued for each engine family.
For gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled light-duty vehicles and light-
duty trucks, and petroleum-fueled diesel cycle light-duty vehicles and
light-duty trucks not certified under Sec. 86.098-28(g), one such
certificate will be issued for each engine family-evaporative/refueling
emission family combination. Each certificate will certify compliance
with no more than one set of in-use and certification standards (or
family emission limits, as appropriate).
(ii) For gasoline-fueled and methanol fueled heavy-duty vehicles,
one such certificate will be issued for each
[[Page 8361]]
manufacturer and will certify compliance for those vehicles previously
identified in that manufacturer's statement(s) of compliance as
required in Sec. 86.098-23(b)(4)(i) and (ii).
(iii) For diesel light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks, or
diesel HDEs, included in the applicable particulate averaging program,
the manufacturer may at any time during production elect to change the
level of any family particulate emission limit by demonstrating
compliance with the new limit as described in Sec. 86.094-28(a)(6),
Sec. 86.094-28(b)(5)(i), or Sec. 86.004-28(c)(5)(i). New certificates
issued under this paragraph will be applicable only for vehicles (or
engines) produced subsequent to the date of issuance.
(iv) For light-duty trucks or HDEs included in the applicable
NOX averaging program, the manufacturer may at any time
during production elect to change the level of any family
NOX emission limit by demonstrating compliance with the new
limit as described in Sec. 86.094-28(b)(5)(ii) or Sec. 86.004-
28(c)(5)(ii). New certificates issued under this paragraph will be
applicable only for vehicles (or engines) produced subsequent to the
day of issue.
(4)(i) For exempt light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks under
the provisions of Sec. 86.094-8(j) or Sec. 86.094-9(j), an adjustment
or modification performed in accordance with instructions provided by
the manufacturer for the altitude where the vehicle is principally used
will not be considered a violation of section 203(a)(3) of the Clean
Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7522(a)(3)).
(ii) A violation of section 203(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (42
U.S.C. 7522(a)(1)) occurs when a manufacturer sells or delivers to an
ultimate purchaser any light-duty vehicle or light-duty truck, subject
to the regulations under the Act, under any of the conditions specified
in paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section.
(A) When a light-duty vehicle or light-duty truck is exempted from
meeting high-altitude requirements as provided in Sec. 86.090-8(h) or
Sec. 86.094-9(h):
(1) At a designated high-altitude location, unless such
manufacturer has reason to believe that such vehicle will not be sold
to an ultimate purchaser for principal use at a designated high-
altitude location; or
(2) At a location other than a designated high-altitude location,
when such manufacturer has reason to believe that such motor vehicle
will be sold to an ultimate purchaser for principal use at a designated
high-altitude location.
(B) When a light-duty vehicle or light-duty truck is exempted from
meeting low-altitude requirements as provided in Sec. 86.094-8(i) or
Sec. 86.094-9(i):
(1) At a designated low-altitude location, unless such manufacturer
has reason to believe that such vehicle will not be sold to an ultimate
purchaser for principal use at a designated low-altitude location; or
(2) At a location other than a designated low-altitude location,
when such manufacturer has reason to believe that such motor vehicle
will be sold to an ultimate purchaser for principal use at a designated
low-altitude location.
(iii) A manufacturer shall be deemed to have reason to believe that
a light-duty vehicle that has been exempted from compliance with
emission standards at high-altitude, or a light-duty truck which is not
configured to meet high-altitude requirements, will not be sold to an
ultimate purchaser for principal use at a designated high-altitude
location if the manufacturer has informed its dealers and field
representatives about the terms of these high-altitude regulations, has
not caused the improper sale itself, and has taken reasonable action
which shall include, but not be limited to, either paragraph
(a)(4)(iii) (A) or (B), and paragraph (a)(4)(iii)(C) of this section:
(A) Requiring dealers in designated high-altitude locations to
submit written statements to the manufacturer signed by the ultimate
purchaser that a vehicle which is not configured to meet high-altitude
requirements will not be used principally at a designated high-altitude
location; requiring dealers in counties contiguous to designated high-
altitude locations to submit written statements to the manufacturer,
signed by the ultimate purchaser who represents to the dealer in the
normal course of business that he or she resides in a designated high-
altitude location, that a vehicle which is not configured to meet high-
altitude requirements will not be used principally at a designated
high-altitude location; and for each sale or delivery of fleets of ten
or more such vehicles in a high-altitude location or in counties
contiguous to high-altitude locations, requiring either the selling
dealer or the delivering dealer to submit written statements to the
manufacturer, signed by the ultimate purchaser who represents to the
dealer in the normal course of business that he or she resides in a
designated high-altitude location, that a vehicle which is not
configured to meet high-altitude requirements will not be used
principally at a designated high-altitude location. In addition, the
manufacturer will make available to EPA, upon reasonable written
request (but not more frequently than quarterly, unless EPA has
demonstrated that it has substantial reason to believe that an
improperly configured vehicle has been sold), sales, warranty, or other
information pertaining to sales of vehicles by the dealers described
above maintained by the manufacturer in the normal course of business
relating to the altitude configuration of vehicles and the locations of
ultimate purchasers; or
(B) Implementing a system which monitors factory orders of low-
altitude vehicles by high-altitude dealers, or through other means,
identifies dealers that may have sold or delivered a vehicle not
configured to meet the high-altitude requirements to an ultimate
purchaser for principal use at a designated high-altitude location; and
making such information available to EPA upon reasonable written
request (but not more frequently than quarterly, unless EPA has
demonstrated that it has substantial reason to believe that an
improperly configured vehicle has been sold); and
(C) Within a reasonable time after receiving written notice from
EPA or a State or local government agency that a dealer may have
improperly sold or delivered a vehicle not configured to meet the high-
altitude requirements to an ultimate purchaser residing in a designated
high-altitude location, or based on information obtained pursuant to
paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of this section that a dealer may have improperly
sold or delivered a significant number of such vehicles to ultimate
purchasers so residing, reminding the dealer in writing of the
requirements of these regulations, and, where appropriate, warning the
dealer that sale by the dealer of vehicles not configured to meet high-
altitude requirements may be contrary to the terms of its franchise
agreement with the manufacturer and the dealer certification
requirements of Sec. 85.2108 of this chapter.
(iv) A manufacturer shall be deemed to have reason to believe that
a light-duty vehicle or light-duty truck which has been exempted from
compliance with emission standards at low altitude, as provided in
Sec. 86.094-8(i) or Sec. 86.094-9(i), will not be sold to an ultimate
purchaser for principal use at a designated low-altitude location if
the manufacturer has informed its dealers and field representatives
about the terms of the high-altitude regulations, has not caused the
improper sale itself, and has taken reasonable action which shall
include, but not be limited to either Sec. 86.094-30(a)(4)(iv)(A) or
(B) and Sec. 86.094-30(a)(4)(iv)(C):
(A) Requiring dealers in designated low-altitude locations to
submit written
[[Page 8362]]
statements to the manufacturer signed by the ultimate purchaser that a
vehicle which is not configured to meet low-altitude requirements will
not be used principally at a designated low-altitude location;
requiring dealers in counties contiguous to designated low-altitude
locations to submit written statements to the manufacturer, signed by
the ultimate purchaser who represents to the dealer in the normal
course of business that he or she resides in a designated low-altitude
location, that a vehicle which is not configured to meet low-altitude
requirements will not be used principally at a designated low-altitude
location; and for each sale or delivery of fleets of ten or more such
vehicles in a low-altitude location or in counties contiguous to low-
altitude locations, requiring either the selling dealer or the
delivering dealer to submit written statements to the manufacturer,
signed by the ultimate purchaser who represents to the dealer in the
normal course of business that he or she resides in a designated low-
altitude location, that a vehicle which is not configured to meet low-
altitude requirements will not be used principally at a designated
high-altitude location. In addition, the manufacturer will make
available to EPA, upon reasonable written request (but not more
frequently than quarterly, unless EPA has demonstrated that it has
substantial reason to believe that an improperly configured vehicle has
been sold), sales, warranty, or other information pertaining to sales
of vehicles by the dealers described above maintained by the
manufacturer in the normal course of business relating to the altitude
configuration of vehicles and the locations of ultimate purchasers; or
(B) Implementing a system which monitors factory orders of high-
altitude vehicles by low-altitude dealers, or through other means,
identifies dealers that may have sold or delivered a vehicle not
configured to meet the low-altitude requirements to an ultimate
purchaser for principal use at a designated low-altitude location; and
making such information available to EPA upon reasonable written
request (but not more frequently than quarterly, unless EPA has
demonstrated that it has substantial reason to believe that an
improperly configured vehicle has been sold); and
(C) Within a reasonable time after receiving written notice from
EPA or a state or local government agency that a dealer may have
improperly sold or delivered a vehicle not configured to meet the low-
altitude requirements to an ultimate purchaser residing in a designated
low-altitude location, or based on information obtained pursuant to
paragraph (a)(4)(iv) of this section that a dealer may have improperly
sold or delivered a significant number of such vehicles to ultimate
purchasers so residing, reminding the dealer in writing of the
requirements of these regulations, and, where appropriate, warning the
dealer that sale by the dealer of vehicles not configured to meet low-
altitude requirements may be contrary to the terms of its franchise
agreement with the manufacturer and the dealer certification
requirements of Sec. 85.2108 of this chapter.
(5)(i) For the purpose of paragraph (a) of this section, a
``designated high-altitude location'' is any county which has
substantially all of its area located above 1,219 meters (4,000 feet)
and:
(A) Requested and extension past the attainment date of December
31, 1982, for compliance with either the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for carbon monoxide or ozone, as indicated in part 52
(Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans) of this title; or
(B) Is in the same state as a county designated as a high-altitude
location according to paragraph (a)(5)(i)(A) of this section.
(ii) The designated high-altitude locations defined in paragraph
(a)(5)(i) of this section are listed below:
State of Colorado
Adams
Alamosa
Arapahoe
Archuleta
Boulder
Chaffee
Cheyenne
Clear Creek
Conejos
Costilla
Crowley
Custer
Delta
Denver
Dolores
Douglas
Eagle
Elbert
El Paso
Fremont
Garfield
Gilpin
Grand
Gunnison
Hinsdale
Huerfano
Jackson
Jefferson
Kit Carson
Lake
La Plata
Larimer
Las Animas
Lincoln
Mesa
Mineral
Moffat
Montezuma
Montrose
Morgan
Otero
Ouray
Park
Pitkin
Pueblo
Rio Blanco
Rio Grande
Routt
Saguache
San Juan
San Miguel
Summit
Teller
Washington
Weld
State of Nevada
Carson City
Douglas
Elko
Esmeralda
Eureka
Humboldt
Lander
Lincoln
Lyon
Mineral
Nye
Pershing
Storey
Washoe
White Pine
State of New Mexico
Bernalillo
Catron
Colfax
Curry
De Baca
Grant
Guadalupe
Harding
Hidalgo
Lincoln
Los Alamos
Luna
McKinley
Mora
Otero
Rio Arriba
Roosevelt
Sandoval
San Juan
San Miguel Santa Fe
Sierra
Socorro
Taos
Torrance
Union
Valencia
State of Utah
Beaver
[[Page 8363]]
Box Elder
Cache
Carbon
Daggett
Davis
Duchesne
Emery
Garfield
Grand
Iron
Juab
Kane
Millard
Morgan
Piute
Rich
Salt Lake
San Juan
Sanpete
Sevier
Summit
Tooele
Uintah
Utah
Wasatch
Wayne
Weber
(iii) For the purpose of paragraph (a) of this section, a
``designated low-altitude location'' is any county which has
substantially all of its area located below 1,219 meters (4,000 feet).
(iv) The designated low-altitude locations so defined include all
counties in the United States which are not listed in either paragraph
(a)(5)(ii) of this section or in the list below:
State of Arizona
Apache
Cochise
Coconino
Navajo
Yavapai
State of Idaho
Bannock
Bear Lake
Bingham
Blaine
Bonneville
Butte
Camas
Caribou
Cassia
Clark
Custer
Franklin
Fremont
Jefferson
Lemhi
Madison
Minidoka
Oneida
Power
Treton
Valley
State of Montana
Beaverhead
Deer Lodge
Gallatin
Jefferson
Judith Basin
Madison
Meagher
Park
Powell
Silver Bow
Wheatland
State of Nebraska
Banner
Cheyenne
Kimball
Sioux
State of Oregon
Harney
Klamath
Lake
State of Texas
Jeff Davis
Hudspeth
Parmer
State of Wyoming
Albany
Campbell
Carbon
Converse
Fremont
Goshen
Hot Springs
Johnson
Laramie
Lincoln
Natrona
Niobrara
Park
Platte
Sublette
Sweetwater
Teton
Uinta
Washakie
Weston
(6) Catalyst-equipped vehicles, otherwise covered by a certificate,
which are driven outside the United States, Canada, and Mexico will be
presumed to have been operated on leaded gasoline resulting in
deactivation of the catalysts. If these vehicles are imported or
offered for importation without retrofit of the catalyst, they will be
considered not to be within the coverage of the certificate unless
included in a catalyst control program operated by a manufacturer or a
United States Government agency and approved by the Administrator.
(7) For incomplete light-duty trucks, a certificate covers only
those new motor vehicles which, when completed by having the primary
load-carrying device or container attached, conform to the maximum curb
weight and frontal area limitations described in the application for
certification as required in Sec. 86.094-21(d).
(8) For heavy-duty engines, a certificate covers only those new
motor vehicle engines installed in heavy-duty vehicles which conform to
the minimum gross vehicle weight rating, curb weight, or frontal area
limitations for heavyduty vehicles described in Sec. 86.082-2.
(9) For incomplete gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled heavy-duty
vehicles a certificate covers only those new motor vehicles which, when
completed, conform to the nominal maximum fuel tank capacity
limitations as described in the application for certification as
required in Sec. 86.094-21(e).
(10)(i) For diesel-cycle light-duty vehicle and diesel-cycle light-
duty truck families which are included in a particulate averaging
program, the manufacturer's production-weighted average of the
particulate emission limits of all engine families in a participating
class or classes shall not exceed the applicable diesel-cycle
particulate standard, or the composite particulate standard defined in
Sec. 86.090-2 as appropriate, at the end of the model year, as
determined in accordance with this part. The certificate shall be void
ab initio for those vehicles causing the production-weighted family
emission limit (FEL) to exceed the particulate standard.
(ii) For all heavy-duty diesel-cycle engines which are included in
the particulate ABT programs under Sec. 86.098-15 or superseding ABT
sections as applicable, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(10)(ii)(A)-(C)
of this section apply.
(A) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with the provisions of Sec. 86.098-15 or superseding ABT
sections as applicable and the ABT related provisions of other
applicable sections, both during and after the model year production.
(B) Failure to comply with all provisions of Sec. 86.098-15 or
superseding ABT sections as applicable will be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate was
issued, and the certificate may be deemed void ab initio.
(C) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied or excused.
(11)(i) For light-duty truck families which are included in a
NOX averaging program, the manufacturer's production-
weighted average of the NOX
[[Page 8364]]
emission limits of all such engine families shall not exceed the
applicable NOX emission standard, or the composite
NOX emission standard defined in Sec. 86.088-2, as
appropriate, at the end of the model year, as determined in accordance
with this part. The certificate shall be void ab initio for those
vehicles causing the production-weighted FEL to exceed the
NOX standard.
(ii) For all HDEs which are included in the NOX plus
NMHC ABT programs contained in Sec. 86.098-15, or superseding ABT
sections as applicable, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(11)(ii) (A)-
(C) of this section apply.
(A) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with the provisions of Sec. 86.098-15 or superseding ABT
sections as applicable and the ABT related provisions of other
applicable sections, both during and after the model year production.
(B) Failure to comply with all provisions of Sec. 86.098-15 or
superseding ABT sections as applicable will be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate was
issued, and the certificate may be deemed void ab initio.
(C) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied or excused.
(12) For all light-duty vehicles certified to standards under Sec.
86.094-8 or to which standards under Sec. 86.708-94 are applicable,
the provisions of paragraphs (a)(12)(i) through (iii) of this section
apply.
(13) For all light-duty trucks certified to Tier 0 standards under
Sec. 86.094-9 and to which standards under Sec. 86.709-94 are
applicable:
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with all provisions of Sec. Sec. 86.094-9 and 86.709-94 both
during and after model year production.
(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales
percentages as specified in Sec. Sec. 86.094-9 and 86.709-94 will be
considered to be a failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the
certificate(s) was issued and the individual vehicles sold in violation
of the implementation schedule shall not be covered by the certificate.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied.
(14) For all light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks certified
with an Alternative Service Accumulation Durability Program under Sec.
86.094-13(e), paragraphs (a)(14)(i) through (iii) of this section
apply.
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
performing the in-use verification program pursuant to the agreement
described in Sec. 86.094-13(e)(8).
(ii) Failure to fully comply with all the terms of the in-use
verification program pursuant to the agreement described in Sec.
86.094-13(e)(8) will be considered a failure to satisfy the conditions
upon which the certificate was issued. A vehicle or truck will be
considered to be covered by the certificate only if the manufacturer
fulfills the conditions upon which the certificate is issued.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied.
(15) For all light-duty vehicles certified to evaporative test
procedures and accompanying standards specified under Sec. 86.096-8:
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.096-8 both during and after
model year production.
(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.096-8 will be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate was issued
and the vehicles sold in violation of the implementation schedule shall
not be covered by the certificate.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied.
(16) For all light-duty trucks certified to evaporative test
procedures and accompanying standards specified under Sec. 86.096-9:
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.096-9 both during and after
model year production.
(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.096-9 will be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate was issued
and the vehicles sold in violation of the implementation schedule shall
not be covered by the certificate.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied.
(17) For all heavy-duty vehicles certified to evaporative test
procedures and accompanying standards specified under Sec. 86.096-10:
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.096-10 both during and after
model year production.
(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.096-10 will be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate was issued
and the vehicles sold in violation of the implementation schedule shall
not be covered by the certificate.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied.
(18) For all heavy-duty vehicles certified to evaporative test
procedures and accompanying standards specified under Sec. 86.098-11:
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.098-11 both during and after
model year production.
(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.098-11 will be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate was issued
and the vehicles sold in violation of the implementation schedule shall
not be covered by the certificate.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied.
(19) For all light-duty vehicles certified to refueling emission
standards under Sec. 86.098-8, the provisions of paragraphs (a)(19)
(i) through (iii) of this section apply.
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.098-8, both during and after
model year production.
(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.094-8 be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was
issued and the vehicles sold in violation of the implementation
schedule shall not be covered by the certificate.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction
[[Page 8365]]
of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the certificate was
issued were satisfied.
(20) For all light-duty trucks certified to refueling emission
standards under Sec. 86.001-9, the provisions of paragraphs
(a)(20)(i)-(iii) this section apply.
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.001-9 both during and after
model year production.
(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.001-9 will be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was
issued and the individual vehicles sold in violation of the
implementation schedule shall not be covered by the certificate.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied.
(21) For all light-duty trucks certified to refueling emission
standards under Sec. 86.004-9, the provisions of paragraphs
(a)(21)(i)-(iii) of this section apply.
(i) All certificates issued are conditional upon the manufacturer
complying with all provisions of Sec. 86.004-9 both during and after
model year production.
(ii) Failure to meet the required implementation schedule sales
percentages as specified in Sec. 86.004-9 will be considered to be a
failure to satisfy the conditions upon which the certificate(s) was
issued and the individual vehicles sold in violation of the
implementation schedule shall not be covered by the certificate.
(iii) The manufacturer shall bear the burden of establishing to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the conditions upon which the
certificate was issued were satisfied.
(b)(1) The Administrator will determine whether a vehicle (or
engine) covered by the application complies with applicable standards
(or family emission limits, as appropriate) by observing the following
relationships: in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section:
(i) Light-duty vehicles.
(A) The durability data vehicle(s) selected under Sec. 86.094-
24(c)(1)(i) shall represent all vehicles of the same engine system
combination.
(B) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under Sec. 86.094-
24(b)(1) (ii) through (iv) shall represent all vehicles of the same
engine-system combination as applicable.
(C) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under Sec. 86.094-
24(b)(1)(vii)(A) and (B) shall represent all vehicles of the same
evaporative control system within the evaporative family.
(ii) Light-duty trucks.
(A) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under Sec. 86.094-
24(b)(1)(ii), shall represent all vehicles of the same engine-system
combination as applicable.
(B) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under Sec. 86.001-
24(b)(vii)(A) and (B) shall represent all vehicles of the same
evaporative/refueling control system within the evaporative/refueling
family.
(C) The emission data vehicle(s) selected under Sec.
86.09424(b)(1)(v) shall represent all vehicles of the same engine
system combination as applicable.
(D) The emission-data vehicle(s) selected under Sec. 86.098-
24(b)(1)(viii) shall represent all vehicles of the same evaporative/
refueling control system within the evaporative/refueling emission
family, as applicable.
(iii) Heavy-duty engines.
(A) An Otto-cycle emission data test engine selected under Sec.
86.094-24(b)(2)(iv) shall represent all engines in the same family of
the same engine displacement-exhaust emission control system
combination.
(B) An Otto-cycle emission data test engine selected under Sec.
86.094-24(b)(2)(iii) shall represent all engines in the same engine
family of the same engine displacement-exhaust emission control system
combination.
(C) A diesel emission data test engine selected under Sec. 86.094-
24(b)(3)(ii) shall represent all engines in the same engine-system
combination.
(D) A diesel emission data test engine selected under Sec. 86.094-
24(b)(3)(iii) shall represent all engines of that emission control
system at the rated fuel delivery of the test engine.
(iv) Gasoline-fueled and methanol-fueled heavy-duty vehicles. A
statement of compliance submitted under Sec. 86.094-23(b)(4)(i) or
(ii) shall represent all vehicles in the same evaporative emission
family-evaporative emission control system combination.
(2) The Administrator will proceed as in paragraph (a) of this
section with respect to the vehicles (or engines) belonging to an
engine family or engine family-evaporative/refueling emission family
combination (as applicable), all of which comply with all applicable
standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate).
(3) If after a review of the test reports and data submitted by the
manufacturer, data derived from any additional testing conducted
pursuant to Sec. 86.091-29, data or information derived from any
inspection carried out under Sec. 86.094-7(d) or any other pertinent
data or information, the Administrator determines that one or more test
vehicles (or test engines) of the certification test fleet do not meet
applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate), he
will notify the manufacturer in writing, setting forth the basis for
his determination. Within 30 days following receipt of the
notification, the manufacturer may request a hearing on the
Administrator's determination. The request shall be in writing, signed
by an authorized representative of the manufacturer and shall include a
statement specifying the manufacturer's objections to the
Administrator's determination and data in support of such objections.
If, after a review of the request and supporting data, the
Administrator finds that the request raises a substantial factual
issue, he shall provide the manufacturer a hearing in accordance with
Sec. 86.078-6 with respect to such issue.
(4) For light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks the manufacturer
may, at its option, proceed with any of the following alternatives with
respect to an emission data vehicle determined not in compliance with
all applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate)
for which it was tested:
(i) Request a hearing under Sec. 86.078-6; or
(ii) Remove the vehicle configuration (or evaporative/refueling
vehicle configuration, as applicable) which failed, from his
application:
(A) If the failed vehicle was tested for compliance with exhaust
emission standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate) only:
The Administrator may select, in place of the failed vehicle, in
accordance with the selection criteria employed in selecting the failed
vehicle, a new emission data vehicle to be tested for exhaust emission
compliance only; or
(B) If the failed vehicle was tested for compliance with one or
more of the exhaust, evaporative and refueling emission standards: The
Administrator may select, in place of the failed vehicle, in accordance
with the selection criteria employed in selecting the failed vehicle, a
new emission data vehicle which will be tested for compliance with all
of the applicable emission standards. If one vehicle cannot be selected
in accordance with the selection criteria employed in selecting the
failed vehicle, then two or more vehicles may be selected (e.g., one
vehicle to satisfy the exhaust emission vehicle selection criteria and
one vehicle to satisfy the evaporative and refueling emission vehicle
selection criteria). The vehicle selected to satisfy
[[Page 8366]]
the exhaust emission vehicle selection criteria will be tested for
compliance with exhaust emission standards (or family emission limits,
as appropriate) only. The vehicle selected to satisfy the evaporative
and/or refueling emission vehicle selection criteria will be tested for
compliance with exhaust, evaporative and/or refueling emission
standards; or
(iii) Remove the vehicle configuration (or evaporative/refueling
vehicle configuration, as applicable) which failed from the application
and add a vehicle configuration(s) (or evaporative/refueling vehicle
configuration(s), as applicable) not previously listed. The
Administrator may require, if applicable, that the failed vehicle be
modified to the new engine code (or evaporative/refueling emission
code, as applicable) and demonstrate by testing that it meets
applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate) for
which it was originally tested. In addition, the Administrator may
select, in accordance with the vehicle selection criteria given in
Sec. 86.001-24(b), a new emission data vehicle or vehicles. The
vehicles selected to satisfy the exhaust emission vehicle selection
criteria will be tested for compliance with exhaust emission standards
(or family emission limits, as appropriate) only. The vehicles selected
to satisfy the evaporative emission vehicle selection criteria will be
tested for compliance with all of the applicable emission standards (or
family emission limits, as appropriate); or
(iv) Correct a component or system malfunction and show that with a
correctly functioning system or component the failed vehicle meets
applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate) for
which it was originally tested. The Administrator may require a new
emission data vehicle, of identical vehicle configuration (or
evaporative/refueling vehicle configuration, as applicable) to the
failed vehicle, to be operated and tested for compliance with the
applicable standards (or family emission limits, as appropriate) for
which the failed vehicle was originally tested.
(5) For heavy-duty engines the manufacturer may, at his option,
proceed with any of the following alternatives with respect to any
engine family represented by a test engine(s) determined not in
compliance with applicable standards (or family emission limit, as
appropriate):
(i) Request a hearing under Sec. 86.078-6; or
(ii) Delete from the application for certification the engines
represented by the failing test engine. (Engines so deleted may be
included in a later request for certification under Sec. 86.079-32.)
The Administrator may then select in place of each failing engine an
alternate engine chosen in accordance with selection criteria employed
in selecting the engine that failed; or
(iii) Modify the test engine and demonstrate by testing that it
meets applicable standards. Another engine which is in all material
respect the same as the first engine, as modified, may then be operated
and tested in accordance with applicable test procedures.
(6) If the manufacturer does not request a hearing or present the
required data under paragraphs (b)(4) or (5) of this section (as
applicable) of this section, the Administrator will deny certification.
(c)(1) Notwithstanding the fact that any certification vehicle(s)
(or certification engine(s)) may comply with other provisions of this
subpart, the Administrator may withhold or deny the issuance of a
certificate of conformity (or suspend or revoke any such certificate
which has been issued) with respect to any such vehicle(s) (or
engine(s)) if:
(i) The manufacturer submits false or incomplete information in his
application for certification thereof;
(ii) The manufacturer renders inaccurate any test data which he
submits pertaining thereto or otherwise circumvents the intent of the
Act, or of this part with respect to such vehicle (or engine);
(iii) Any EPA Enforcement Officer is denied access on the terms
specified in Sec. 86.091-7(d) to any facility or portion thereof which
contains any of the following:
(A) The vehicle (or engine);
(B) Any components used or considered for use in its modification
or buildup into a certification vehicle (or certification engine);
(C) Any production vehicle (or production engine) which is or will
be claimed by the manufacturer to be covered by the certificate;
(D) Any step in the construction of a vehicle (or engine) described
in paragraph (c)(iii)(C) of this section;
(E) Any records, documents, reports, or histories required by this
part to be kept concerning any of the above; or
(iv) Any EPA Enforcement Officer is denied ``reasonable
assistance'' (as defined in Sec. 86.091-7(d) in examining any of the
items listed in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section.
(2) The sanctions of withholding, denying, revoking, or suspending
of a certificate may be imposed for the reasons in paragraphs
(c)(1)(i), (ii), (iii), or (iv) of this section only when the
infraction is substantial.
(3) In any case in which a manufacturer knowingly submits false or
inaccurate information or knowingly renders inaccurate or invalid any
test data or commits any other fraudulent acts and such acts contribute
substantially to the Administrator's decision to issue a certificate of
conformity, the Administrator may deem such certificate void ab initio.
(4) In any case in which certification of a vehicle (or engine) is
proposed to be withheld, denied, revoked, or suspended under paragraph
(c)(1)(iii) or (iv) of this section, and in which the Administrator has
presented to the manufacturer involved reasonable evidence that a
violation of Sec. 86.091-7(d) in fact occurred, the manufacturer, if
he wishes to contend that, even though the violation occurred, the
vehicle (or engine) in question was not involved in the violation to a
degree that would warrant withholding, denial, revocation, or
suspension of certification under either paragraph (c)(1)(iii) or (iv)
of this section, shall have the burden of establishing that contention
to the satisfaction of the Administrator.
(5) Any revocation or suspension of certification under paragraph
(c)(1) of this section shall:
(i) Be made only after the manufacturer concerned has been offered
an opportunity for a hearing conducted in accordance with Sec. 86.078-
6 hereof; and
(ii) Extend no further than to forbid the introduction into
commerce of vehicles (or engines) previously covered by the
certification which are still in the hands of the manufacturer, except
in cases of such fraud or other misconduct as makes the certification
invalid ab initio.
(6) The manufacturer may request in the form and manner specified
in paragraph (b)(3) of this section that any determination made by the
Administrator under paragraph (c)(1) of this section to withhold or
deny certification be reviewed in a hearing conducted in accordance
with Sec. 86.078-6. If the Administrator finds, after a review of the
request and supporting data, that the request raises a substantial
factual issue, he will grant the request with respect to such issue.
(d)(1) For light-duty vehicles. Notwithstanding the fact that any
vehicle configuration or engine family may be covered by a valid
outstanding certificate of conformity, the Administrator may suspend
such outstanding certificate of conformity in whole or in part with
respect to such
[[Page 8367]]
vehicle configuration or engine family if:
(i) The manufacturer refuses to comply with the provisions of a
test order issued by the Administrator pursuant to Sec. 86.603; or
(ii) The manufacturer refuses to comply with any of the
requirements of Sec. 86.603; or
(iii) The manufacturer submits false or incomplete information in
any report or information provided pursuant to the requirements of
Sec. 86.609; or
(iv) The manufacturer renders inaccurate any test data which he
submits pursuant to Sec. 86.609; or
(v) Any EPA Enforcement Officer is denied the opportunity to
conduct activities related to entry and access as authorized in Sec.
86.606 of this part and in a warrant or court order presented to the
manufacturer or the party in charge of a facility in question; or
(vi) EPA Enforcement Officers are unable to conduct activities
related to entry and access or to obtain ``reasonable assistance'' as
authorized in Sec. 86.606 of this part because a manufacturer has
located its facility in a foreign jurisdiction where local law
prohibits those activities; or
(vii) The manufacturer refuses to or in fact does not comply with
Sec. 86.604(a), Sec. 86.605, Sec. 86.607, Sec. 86.608, or Sec.
86.610.
(2) The sanction of suspending a certificate may not be imposed for
the reasons in paragraph (d)(1)(i), (ii), or (vii) of this section
where the refusal is caused by conditions and circumstances outside the
control of the manufacturer which render it impossible to comply with
those requirements.
(3) The sanction of suspending a certificate may be imposed for the
reasons in paragraph (d)(1)(iii), (iv), or (v) of this section only
when the infraction is substantial.
(4) In any case in which a manufacturer knowingly submitted false
or inaccurate information or knowingly rendered inaccurate any test
data or committed any other fraudulent acts, and such acts contributed
substantially to the Administrator's original decision not to suspend
or revoke a certificate of conformity in whole or in part, the
Administrator may deem such certificate void from the date of such
fraudulent act.
(5) In any case in which certification of a vehicle is proposed to
be suspended under paragraph (d)(1)(v) of this section and in which the
Administrator has presented to the manufacturer involved reasonable
evidence that a violation of Sec. 86.606 in fact occurred, if the
manufacturer wishes to contend that, although the violation occurred,
the vehicle configuration or engine family in question was not involved
in the violation to a degree that would warrant suspension of
certification under paragraph (d)(1)(v) of this section, the
manufacturer shall have the burden of establishing the contention to
the satisfaction of the Administrator.
(6) Any suspension of certification under paragraph (d)(1) of this
section shall:
(i) Be made only after the manufacturer concerned has been offered
an opportunity for a hearing conducted in accordance with Sec. 86.614;
and
(ii) Not apply to vehicles no longer in the hands of the
manufacturer.
(7) Any voiding of a certificate of conformity under paragraph
(d)(4) of this section will be made only after the manufacturer
concerned has been offered an opportunity for a hearing conducted in
accordance with Sec. 86.614.
(8) Any voiding of the certificate under Sec. 86.091-30(a)(10)
will be made only after the manufacturer concerned has been offered an
opportunity for a hearing conducted in accordance with Sec. 86.614.
(e) For light-duty trucks and heavy-duty engines.
(1) Notwithstanding the fact that any vehicle configuration or
engine family may be covered by a valid outstanding certificate of
conformity, the Administrator may suspend such outstanding certificate
of conformity in whole or in part with respect to such vehicle or
engine configuration or engine family if:
(i) The manufacturer refuses to comply with the provisions of a
test order issued by the Administrator pursuant to Sec. 86.1003; or
(ii) The manufacturer refuses to comply with any of the
requirements of Sec. 86.1003; or
(iii) The manufacturer submits false or incomplete information in
any report or information provided pursuant to the requirements of
Sec. 86.1009; or
(iv) The manufacturer renders inaccurate any test data submitted
pursuant to Sec. 86.1009; or
(v) Any EPA Enforcement Officer is denied the opportunity to
conduct activities related to entry and access as authorized in Sec.
86.1006 of this part and in a warrant or court order presented to the
manufacturer or the party in charge of a facility in question; or
(vi) EPA Enforcement Officers are unable to conduct activities
related to entry and access as authorized in Sec. 86.1006 of this part
because a manufacturer has located a facility in a foreign jurisdiction
where local law prohibits those activities; or
(vii) The manufacturer refuses to or in fact does not comply with
the requirements of Sec. Sec. 86.1004(a), 86.1005, 86.1007, 86.1008,
86.1010, 86.1011, or 86.1013.
(2) The sanction of suspending a certificate may not be imposed for
the reasons in paragraph (e)(1) (i), (ii), or (vii) of this section
where such refusal or denial is caused by conditions and circumstances
outside the control of the manufacturer which renders it impossible to
comply with those requirements. Such conditions and circumstances shall
include, but are not limited to, any uncontrollable factors which
result in the temporary unavailability of equipment and personnel
needed to conduct the required tests, such as equipment breakdown or
failure or illness of personnel, but shall not include failure of the
manufacturers to adequately plan for and provide the equipment and
personnel needed to conduct the tests. The manufacturer will bear the
burden of establishing the presence of the conditions and circumstances
required by this paragraph.
(3) The sanction of suspending a certificate may be imposed for the
reasons outlined in paragraph (e)(1)(iii), (iv), or (v) of this section
only when the infraction is substantial.
(4) In any case in which a manufacturer knowingly submitted false
or inaccurate information or knowingly rendered inaccurate any test
data or committed any other fraudulent acts, and such acts contributed
substantially to the Administrator's original decision not to suspend
or revoke a certificate of conformity in whole or in part, the
Administrator may deem such certificate void from the date of such
fraudulent act.
(5) In any case in which certification of a light-duty truck or
heavy-duty engine is proposed to be suspended under paragraph (e)(1)(v)
of this section and in which the Administrator has presented to the
manufacturer involved reasonable evidence that a violation of Sec.
86.1006 in fact occurred, if the manufacturer wishes to contend that,
although the violation occurred, the vehicle or engine configuration or
engine family in question was not involved in the violation to a degree
that would warrant suspension of certification under paragraph
(e)(1)(v) of this section, he shall have the burden of establishing
that contention to the satisfaction of the Administrator.
(6) Any suspension of certification under paragraph (e)(1) of this
section shall:
(i) Be made only after the manufacturer concerned has been
[[Page 8368]]
offered an opportunity for a hearing conducted in accordance with Sec.
86.1014; and
(ii) Not apply to vehicles or engines no longer in the hands of the
manufacturer.
(7) Any voiding of a certificate of conformity under paragraph
(e)(4) of this section shall be made only after the manufacturer
concerned has been offered an opportunity for a hearing conducted in
accordance with Sec. 86.1014.
(8) Any voiding of the certificate under paragraph (a) (10) or (11)
of this section will be made only after the manufacturer concerned has
been offered an opportunity for a hearing conducted in accordance with
Sec. 86.1014.
(f) For engine families required to have an OBD system and meant
for applications less than or equal to 14,000 pounds, certification
will not be granted if, for any test vehicle approved by the
Administrator in consultation with the manufacturer, the malfunction
indicator light does not illuminate under any of the following
circumstances, unless the manufacturer can demonstrate that any
identified OBD problems discovered during the Administrator's
evaluation will be corrected on production vehicles.
(1)(i) Otto-cycle. A catalyst is replaced with a deteriorated or
defective catalyst, or an electronic simulation of such, resulting in
an increase of 1.5 times the NMHC+NOX standard or FEL above
the NMHC+NOX emission level measured using a representative
4000 mile catalyst system.
(ii) Diesel.
(A) If monitored for emissions performance--a reduction catalyst is
replaced with a deteriorated or defective catalyst, or an electronic
simulation of such, resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding, for model
years 2007 through 2012, 1.75 times the applicable NOX
standard for engines certified to a NOX FEL greater than
0.50 g/bhp-hr, or the applicable NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for
engines certified to a NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/
bhp-hr and, for model years 2013 and later, the applicable
NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr. Also if monitored for emissions
performance--an oxidation catalyst is replaced with a deteriorated or
defective catalyst, or an electronic simulation of such, resulting in
exhaust NMHC emissions exceeding, for model years 2007 through 2012,
2.5 times the applicable NMHC standard and, for model years 2013 and
later, 2 times the applicable NMHC standard. If monitored for exotherm
performance, an oxidation catalsyt is replaced with a deteriorated or
defective catalyst, or an electronic simulation of such, resulting in
an inability to achieve a 100 degree C temperature rise, or the
necessary regeneration temperature, within 60 seconds of initiating a
DPF regeneration.
(B) If monitored for performance--a diesel particulate filter (DPF)
is replaced with a DPF that has catastrophically failed, or an
electronic simulation of such; or, for model years 2010 and later, a
DPF is replaced with a deteriorated or defective DPF, or an electronic
simulation of such, resulting in either exhaust PM emissions exceeding
the applicable FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM, whichever is
higher. If monitored for a decrease in the expected pressure drop
according to the alternative monitoring provision of Sec. 86.007-
17(b)(1)(ii)(B), the OBD system fails to detect any of the pressure
drop values across the DPF provided by the manufacturer at each of the
nine engine speed/load operating points regardless of how those
pressure drops are generated.
(2)(i) Otto-cycle. An engine misfire condition is induced resulting
in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable standards or
FEL for NMHC+NOX or CO.
(ii) Diesel. An engine misfire condition is induced and is not
detected.
(3) Exhaust gas sensors.
(i) Oxygen sensors and air-fuel ratio sensors downstream of
aftertreatment devices.
(A) Otto-cycle. If so equipped, any oxygen sensor or air-fuel ratio
sensor located downstream of aftertreatment devices is replaced with a
deteriorated or defective sensor, or an electronic simulation of such,
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable
standard or FEL for NMHC, NOX or CO.
(B) Diesel. If so equipped, any oxygen sensor or air-fuel ratio
sensor located downstream of aftertreatment devices is replaced with a
deteriorated or defective sensor, or an electronic simulation of such,
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding any of the following levels:
The applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM, whichever is
higher; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 1.75 times the
applicable NOX standard for engines certified to a
NOX FEL greater than 0.50 g/bhp-hr, or the applicable
NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines certified to a
NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr and, for model
years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr;
or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 2.5 times the applicable NMHC
standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the applicable
NMHC standard.
(ii) Oxygen sensors and air-fuel ratio sensors upstream of
aftertreatment devices.
(A) Otto-cycle. If so equipped, any oxygen sensor or air-fuel ratio
sensor located upstream of aftertreatment devices is replaced with a
deteriorated or defective sensor, or an electronic simulation of such,
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times the applicable
standard or FEL for NMHC, NOX or CO.
(B) Diesel. If so equipped, any oxygen sensor or air-fuel ratio
sensor located upstream of aftertreatment devices is replaced with a
deteriorated or defective sensor, or an electronic simulation of such,
resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding any of the following levels:
For model years 2007 through 2012, the applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr
or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM, whichever is higher and, for model years 2013 and
later, the applicable PM FEL+0.02 g/bhp-hr or 0.03 g/bhp-hr PM,
whichever is higher; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 1.75 times
the applicable NOX standard for engines certified to a
NOX FEL greater than 0.50 g/bhp-hr, or the applicable
NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines certified to a
NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr and, for model
years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr;
or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 2.5 times the applicable NMHC
standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the applicable
NMHC standard; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 2.5 times the
applicable CO standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times the
applicable CO standard.
(iii) NOX sensors.
(A) Otto-cycle. If so equipped, any NOX sensor is
replaced with a deteriorated or defective sensor, or an electronic
simulation of such, resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times
the applicable standard or FEL for NMHC, NOX or CO.
(B) Diesel. If so equipped, any NOX sensor is replaced
with a deteriorated or defective sensor, or an electronic simulation of
such, resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding any of the following
levels: The applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/bhp-hr or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM,
whichever is higher; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 1.75 times
the applicable NOX standard for engines certified to a
NOX FEL greater than 0.50 g/bhp-hr, or the applicable
NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines certified to a
NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr and, for model
years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr.
(4) If so equipped and for Otto-cycle engines, a vapor leak is
introduced in
[[Page 8369]]
the evaporative and/or refueling system (excluding the tubing and
connections between the purge valve and the intake manifold) greater
than or equal in magnitude to a leak caused by a 0.040 inch diameter
orifice, or the evaporative purge air flow is blocked or otherwise
eliminated from the complete evaporative emission control system.
(5)(i) Otto-cycle. A malfunction condition is induced in any
emission-related engine system or component, including but not
necessarily limited to, the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system, if
equipped, the secondary air system, if equipped, and the fuel control
system, singularly resulting in exhaust emissions exceeding 1.5 times
the applicable emission standard or FEL for NMHC, NOX, or
CO.
(ii) Diesel. A malfunction condition is induced in any emission-
related engine system or component, including but not necessarily
limited to, the exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) system, if equipped,
and the fuel control system, singularly resulting in exhaust emissions
exceeding any of the following levels: The applicable PM FEL+0.04 g/
bhp-hr or 0.05 g/bhp-hr PM, whichever is higher; or, for model years
2007 through 2012, 1.75 times the applicable NOX standard
for engines certified to a NOX FEL greater than 0.50 g/bhp-
hr, or the applicable NOX FEL+0.6 g/bhp-hr for engines
certified to a NOX FEL less than or equal to 0.50 g/bhp-hr
and, for model years 2013 and later, the applicable NOX
FEL+0.3 g/bhp-hr; or, for model years 2007 through 2012, 2.5 times the
applicable NMHC standard and, for model years 2013 and later, 2 times
the applicable NMHC standard; or, for model years 2007 through 2012,
2.5 times the applicable CO standard and, for model years 2013 and
later, 2 times the applicable CO standard.
(6) A malfunction condition is induced in an electronic emission-
related engine system or component not otherwise described above that
either provides input to or receives commands from the on-board
computer resulting in a measurable impact on emissions.
0
5. Section 86.010-2 is added to Subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 86.010-2 Definitions.
The definitions of Sec. 86.004-2 continue to apply to 2004 and
later model year vehicles. The definitions listed in this section apply
beginning with the 2010 model year.
DTC means diagnostic trouble code.
Engine or engine system as used in Sec. Sec. 86.007-17, 86.007-30,
86.010-18, and 86.010-38 means the engine, fuel system, induction
system, aftertreatment system, and everything that makes up the system
for which an engine manufacturer has received a certificate of
conformity.
Engine start as used in Sec. 86.010-18 means the point when the
engine reaches a speed 150 rpm below the normal, warmed-up idle speed
(as determined in the drive position for vehicles equipped with an
automatic transmission). For hybrid vehicles or for engines employing
alternative engine start hardware or strategies (e.g., integrated
starter and generators.), the manufacturer may use an alternative
definition for engine start (e.g., key-on) provided the alternative
definition is based on equivalence to an engine start for a
conventional vehicle.
Functional check, in the context of onboard diagnostics, means
verifying that a component and/or system that receives information from
a control computer responds properly to a command from the control
computer.
Ignition cycle as used in Sec. 86.010-18 means a cycle that begins
with engine start, meets the engine start definition for at least two
seconds plus or minus one second, and ends with engine shutoff.
Limp-home operation as used in Sec. 86.010-18 means an operating
mode that an engine is designed to enter upon determining that normal
operation cannot be maintained. In general, limp-home operation implies
that a component or system is not operating properly or is believed to
be not operating properly.
Malfunction means the conditions have been met that require the
activation of an OBD malfunction indicator light and storage of a DTC.
MIL-on DTC means the diagnostic trouble code stored when an OBD
system has detected and confirmed that a malfunction exists (e.g.,
typically on the second drive cycle during which a given OBD monitor
has evaluated a system or component). Industry standards may refer to
this as a confirmed or an active DTC.
Onboard Diagnostics (OBD) group means a combination of engines,
engine families, or engine ratings that use the same OBD strategies and
similar calibrations.
Pending DTC means the diagnostic trouble code stored upon the
detection of a potential malfunction.
Permanent DTC means a DTC that corresponds to a MIL-on DTC and is
stored in non-volatile random access memory (NVRAM). A permanent DTC
can only be erased by the OBD system itself and cannot be erased
through human interaction with the OBD system or any onboard computer.
Potential malfunction means that conditions have been detected that
meet the OBD malfunction criteria but for which more drive cycles are
allowed to provide further evaluation prior to confirming that a
malfunction exists.
Previous-MIL-on DTC means a DTC that corresponds to a MIL-on DTC
but is distinguished by representing a malfunction that the OBD system
has determined no longer exists but for which insufficient operation
has occurred to satisfy the DTC erasure provisions.
Rationality check, in the context of onboard diagnostics, means
verifying that a component that provides input to a control computer
provides an accurate input to the control computer while in the range
of normal operation and when compared to all other available
information.
Similar conditions, in the context of onboard diagnostics, means
engine conditions having an engine speed within 375 rpm, load
conditions within 20 percent, and the same warm up status (i.e., cold
or hot). The manufacturer may use other definitions of similar
conditions based on comparable timeliness and reliability in detecting
similar engine operation.
0
6. Section 86.010-18 is added to Subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 86.010-18 On-board Diagnostics for engines used in applications
greater than 14,000 pounds GVWR.
(a) General. According to the implementation schedule shown in
paragraph (o) of this section, heavy-duty engines intended for use in a
heavy-duty vehicle weighing more than 14,000 pounds GVWR must be
equipped with an on-board diagnostic (OBD) system capable of monitoring
all emission-related engine systems or components during the life of
the engine. The OBD system is required to detect all malfunctions
specified in paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this Sec. 86.010-18
although the OBD system is not required to use a unique monitor to
detect each of those malfunctions.
(1) When the OBD system detects a malfunction, it must store a
pending, a MIL-on, or a previous-MIL-on diagnostic trouble code (DTC)
in the onboard computer's memory. A malfunction indicator light (MIL)
must also be activated as specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) Data link connector.
(i) For model years 2010 through 2012, the OBD system must be
equipped with a data link connector to provide access to the stored
DTCs as specified in paragraph (k)(2) of this section.
[[Page 8370]]
(ii) For model years 2013 and later, the OBD system must be
equipped with a standardized data link connector to provide access to
the stored DTCs as specified in paragraph (k)(2) of this section.
(3) The OBD system cannot be programmed or otherwise designed to
deactivate based on age and/or mileage. This requirement does not alter
existing law and enforcement practice regarding a manufacturer's
liability for an engine beyond its regulatory useful life, except where
an engine has been programmed or otherwise designed so that an OBD
system deactivates based on age and/or mileage of the engine.
(4) Drive cycle or driving cycle, in the context of this Sec.
86.010-18, means operation that meets any of the conditions of
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (a)(4)(iv) of this section. Further, for
OBD monitors that run during engine-off conditions, the period of
engine-off time following engine shutoff and up to the next engine
start may be considered part of the drive cycle for the conditions of
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) and (a)(4)(iv) of this section. For engines/
vehicles that employ engine shutoff OBD monitoring strategies that do
not require the vehicle operator to restart the engine to continue
vehicle operation (e.g., a hybrid bus with engine shutoff at idle), the
manufacturer may use an alternative definition for drive cycle (e.g.,
key-on followed by key-off). Any alternative definition must be based
on equivalence to engine startup and engine shutoff signaling the
beginning and ending of a single driving event for a conventional
vehicle. For engines that are not likely to be routinely operated for
long continuous periods of time, a manufacturer may also request
approval to use an alternative definition for drive cycle (e.g., solely
based on engine start and engine shutoff without regard to four hours
of continuous engine-on time). Administrator approval of the
alternative definition will be based on manufacturer-submitted data
and/or information demonstrating the typical usage, operating habits,
and/or driving patterns of these vehicles.
(i) Begins with engine start and ends with engine shutoff;
(ii) Begins with engine start and ends after four hours of
continuous engine-on operation;
(iii) Begins at the end of the previous four hours of continuous
engine-on operation and ends after four hours of continuous engine-on
operation; or
(iv) Begins at the end of the previous four hours of continuous
engine-on operation and ends with engine shutoff.
(5) As an alternative to demonstrating compliance with the
provisions of paragraphs (b) through (l) of this Sec. 86.010-18, a
manufacturer may demonstrate how the OBD system they have designed to
comply with California OBD requirements for engines used in
applications greater than 14,000 pounds also complies with the intent
of the provisions of paragraphs (b) through (l) of this section. To
make use of this alternative, the manufacturer must demonstrate to the
Administrator how the OBD system they intend to certify meets the
intent behind all of the requirements of this section, where applicable
(e.g., paragraph (h) of this section would not apply for a diesel
fueled/CI engine). Furthermore, if making use of this alternative, the
manufacturer must comply with the specific certification documentation
requirements of paragraph (m)(3) of this section.
(6) Temporary provisions to address hardship due to unusual
circumstances.
(i) After considering the unusual circumstances, the Administrator
may permit the manufacturer to introduce into U.S. commerce engines
that do not comply with this Sec. 86.010-18 for a limited time if all
the following conditions apply:
(A) Unusual circumstances that are clearly outside the
manufacturer's control prevent compliance with the requirements of this
Sec. 86.010-18.
(B) The manufacturer exercised prudent planning and was not able to
avoid the violation and has taken all reasonable steps to minimize the
extent of the nonconformity.
(C) No other allowances are available under the regulations in this
chapter to avoid the impending violation.
(ii) To apply for an exemption, the manufacturer must send to the
Administrator a written request as soon as possible before being in
violation. In the request, the manufacturer must show that all the
conditions and requirements of paragraph (a)(6)(i) of this section are
met.
(iii) The request must also include a plan showing how all the
applicable requirements will be met as quickly as possible.
(iv) The manufacturer shall give the Administrator other relevant
information upon request.
(v) The Administrator may include additional conditions on an
approval granted under the provisions of this paragraph (a)(6),
including provisions that may require field repair at the
manufacturer's expense to correct the noncompliance.
(vi) Engines sold as non-compliant under this temporary hardship
provision must display ``non-OBD'' in the data stream as required under
paragraph (k)(4)(ii) of this section. Upon correcting the
noncompliance, the data stream value must be updated accordingly.
(b) Malfunction indicator light (MIL) and Diagnostic Trouble Codes
(DTC). The OBD system must incorporate a malfunction indicator light
(MIL) or equivalent and must store specific types of diagnostic trouble
codes (DTC). Unless otherwise specified, all provisions of this
paragraph (b) apply for 2010 and later model years.
(1) MIL specifications.
(i) For model years 2013 and later, the MIL must be located on the
primary driver's side instrument panel and be of sufficient
illumination and location to be readily visible under all lighting
conditions. The MIL must be amber (yellow) in color; the use of red for
the OBD-related MIL is prohibited. More than one general purpose
malfunction indicator light for emission-related problems shall not be
used; separate specific purpose warning lights (e.g., brake system,
fasten seat belt, oil pressure, etc.) are permitted. When activated,
the MIL shall display the International Standards Organization (ISO)
engine symbol.
(ii) The OBD system must activate the MIL when the ignition is in
the key-on/engine-off position before engine cranking to indicate that
the MIL is functional. The MIL shall be activated continuously during
this functional check for a minimum of 5 seconds. During this MIL key-
on functional check, the data stream value (see paragraph (k)(4)(ii) of
this section) for MIL status must indicate ``commanded off'' unless the
OBD system has detected a malfunction and has stored a MIL-on DTC. This
MIL key-on functional check is not required during vehicle operation in
the key-on/engine-off position subsequent to the initial engine
cranking of an ignition cycle (e.g., due to an engine stall or other
non-commanded engine shutoff).
(iii) As an option, the MIL may be used to indicate readiness
status (see paragraph (k)(4)(i) of this section) in a standardized
format in the key-on/engine-off position.
(iv) A manufacturer may also use the MIL to indicate which, if any,
DTCs are currently stored (e.g., to ``blink'' the stored DTCs). Such
use must not activate unintentionally during routine driver operation.
(v) For model years 2013 and later, the MIL required by this
paragraph (b) must not be used in any other way than is specified in
this section.
[[Page 8371]]
(2) MIL activation and DTC storage protocol.
(i) Within 10 seconds of detecting a potential malfunction, the OBD
system must store a pending DTC that identifies the potential
malfunction.
(ii) If the potential malfunction is again detected before the end
of the next drive cycle during which monitoring occurs (i.e., the
potential malfunction has been confirmed as a malfunction), then within
10 seconds of such detection the OBD system must activate the MIL
continuously and store a MIL-on DTC (systems using the SAE J1939
standard protocol specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this section may
either erase or retain the pending DTC in conjunction with storing the
MIL-on DTC). If the potential malfunction is not detected before the
end of the next drive cycle during which monitoring occurs (i.e., there
is no indication of the malfunction at any time during the drive
cycle), the corresponding pending DTC should be erased at the end of
the drive cycle. Similarly, if a malfunction is detected for the first
time and confirmed on a given drive cycle without need for further
evaluation, then within 10 seconds of such detection the OBD system
must activate the MIL continuously and store a MIL-on DTC (again,
systems using the SAE J1939 standard protocol specified in paragraph
(k)(1) of this section may optionally store a pending DTC in
conjunction with storing the MIL-on DTC).
(iii) A manufacturer may request Administrator approval to employ
alternative statistical MIL activation and DTC storage protocols to
those specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(ii) of this section.
Approval will depend upon the manufacturer providing data and/or
engineering evaluations that demonstrate that the alternative protocols
can evaluate system performance and detect malfunctions in a manner
that is equally effective and timely. Strategies requiring on average
more than six drive cycles for MIL activation will not be accepted.
(iv) The OBD system must store a ``freeze frame'' of the operating
conditions (as defined in paragraph (k)(4)(iii) of this section)
present upon detecting a malfunction or a potential malfunction. In the
event that a pending DTC has matured to a MIL-on DTC, the manufacturer
shall either retain the currently stored freeze frame conditions or
replace the stored freeze frame with freeze frame conditions regarding
the MIL-on DTC. Any freeze frame stored in conjunction with any pending
DTC or MIL-on DTC should be erased upon erasure of the corresponding
DTC.
(v) If the engine enters a limp-home mode of operation that can
affect emissions or the performance of the OBD system, or in the event
of a malfunction of an onboard computer(s) itself that can affect the
performance of the OBD system, the OBD system must activate the MIL and
store a MIL-on DTC within 10 seconds to inform the vehicle operator. If
the limp-home mode of operation is recoverable (i.e., operation
automatically returns to normal at the beginning of the following
ignition cycle), the OBD system may wait to activate the MIL and store
the MIL-on DTC if the limp-home mode of operation is again entered
before the end of the next ignition cycle rather than activating the
MIL within 10 seconds on the first drive cycle during which the limp-
home mode of operation is entered.
(vi) Before the end of an ignition cycle, the OBD system must store
a permanent DTC(s) that corresponds to any stored MIL-on DTC(s).
(3) MIL deactivation and DTC erasure protocol.
(i) Deactivating the MIL. Except as otherwise provided for in
paragraphs (g)(2)(iv)(E) and (g)(6)(iv)(B) of this section for diesel
misfire malfunctions and empty reductant tanks, and paragraphs
(h)(1)(iv)(F), (h)(2)(viii), and (h)(7)(iv)(B) of this section for
gasoline fuel system, misfire, and evaporative system malfunctions,
once the MIL has been activated, it may be deactivated after three
subsequent sequential drive cycles during which the monitoring system
responsible for activating the MIL functions and the previously
detected malfunction is no longer present and provided no other
malfunction has been detected that would independently activate the MIL
according to the requirements outlined in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section.
(ii) Erasing a MIL-on DTC. The OBD system may erase a MIL-on DTC if
the identified malfunction has not again been detected in at least 40
engine warm up cycles and the MIL is presently not activated for that
malfunction. The OBD system may also erase a MIL-on DTC upon
deactivating the MIL according to paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section
provided a previous-MIL-on DTC is stored upon erasure of the MIL-on
DTC. The OBD system may erase a previous-MIL-on DTC if the identified
malfunction has not again been detected in at least 40 engine warm up
cycles and the MIL is presently not activated for that malfunction.
(iii) Erasing a permanent DTC. The OBD system can erase a permanent
DTC only if:
(A) The OBD system itself determines that the malfunction that
caused the corresponding permanent DTC to be stored is no longer
present and is not commanding activation of the MIL, concurrent with
the requirements of paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section which, for
purposes of this paragraph (b)(3)(iii), shall apply to all monitors.
(B) All externally erasable DTC information stored in the onboard
computer has been erased (i.e., through the use of a scan tool or
battery disconnect) and the monitor of the malfunction that caused the
permanent DTC to be stored is subject to the minimum ratio requirements
of paragraph (d) of this section, the OBD system shall erase the
permanent DTC at the end of a drive cycle if the monitor has run and
made one or more determinations during a drive cycle that the
malfunction of the component or the system is not present and has not
made any determinations within the same drive cycle that the
malfunction is present.
(C) (1) All externally erasable DTC information stored in the
onboard computer has been erased (i.e., through the use of a scan tool
or battery disconnect) and the monitor of the malfunction that caused
the permanent DTC to be stored is not subject to the minimum ratio
requirements of paragraph (d) of this section, the OBD system shall
erase the permanent DTC at the end of a drive cycle provided the
following two criteria have independently been satisfied:
(i) The monitor has run and made one or more determinations during
a drive cycle that the malfunction is no longer present and has not
made any determinations within the same drive cycle that the
malfunction is present; and,
(ii) The monitor does not detect a malfunction on a drive cycle and
the criteria of paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this section has been met.
(2) These two separate criteria may be met on the same or different
drive cycles provided the monitor never detects a malfunction during
either drive cycle, and if criteria (b)(3)(iii)(C)(1)(i) happens first
then no malfunction may be detected before criteria
(b)(3)(iii)(C)(1)(ii) occurs. If a malfunction occurs after criteria
(b)(3)(iii)(C)(1)(i) then criteria (b)(3)(iii)(C)(1)(i) must be
satisfied again. For the second criterion, the manufacturer must
exclude any temperature and/or elevation provisions of paragraph
(d)(4)(ii) of this section. For this paragraph (b)(3)(iii)(C), monitors
required to use ``similar conditions'' as defined in Sec. 86.010-2 to
[[Page 8372]]
store and erase pending and MIL-on DTCs cannot require that the similar
conditions be met prior to erasure of the permanent DTC.
(D) The Administrator shall allow monitors subject to paragraph
(b)(3)(iii)(B) of this section to use the criteria of paragraph
(b)(3)(iii)(C) of this section in lieu of paragraph (b)(3)(iii)(B).
Further, manufacturers may request Administrator approval to use
alternative criteria to erase the permanent DTC. The Administrator
shall approve alternate criteria that will not likely require driving
conditions that are longer and more difficult to meet than those
required under paragraph (b)(3)(iii)(C) of this section and do not
require access to enhanced scan tools to determine conditions necessary
to erase the permanent DTC.
(4) Exceptions to MIL and DTC requirements.
(i) If a limp-home mode of operation causes a overt indication
(e.g., activation of a red engine shut-down warning light) such that
the driver is certain to respond and have the problem corrected, a
manufacturer may choose not to activate the MIL as required by
paragraph (b)(2)(v) of this section. Additionally, if an auxiliary
emission control device has been properly activated as approved by the
Administrator, a manufacturer may choose not to activate the MIL.
(ii) For gasoline engines, a manufacturer may choose to meet the
MIL and DTC requirements in Sec. 86.007-17 in lieu of meeting the
requirements of paragraph (b) of this Sec. 86.010-18.
(c) Monitoring conditions. The OBD system must monitor and detect
the malfunctions specified in paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this
section under the following general monitoring conditions. The more
specific monitoring conditions of paragraph (d) of this section are
sometimes required according to the provisions of paragraphs (g), (h),
and (i) of this section.
(1) As specifically provided for in paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of
this section, the monitoring conditions for detecting malfunctions must
be technically necessary to ensure robust detection of malfunctions
(e.g., avoid false passes and false indications of malfunctions);
designed to ensure monitoring will occur under conditions that may
reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal vehicle operation
and normal vehicle use; and, designed to ensure monitoring will occur
during the FTP transient test cycle contained in Appendix I paragraph
(f), of this part, or similar drive cycle as approved by the
Administrator.
(2) Monitoring must occur at least once per drive cycle in which
the monitoring conditions are met.
(3) Manufacturers may define monitoring conditions that are not
encountered during the FTP cycle as required in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section. In doing so, the manufacturer would be expected to
consider the degree to which the requirement to run during the FTP
transient cycle restricts monitoring during in-use operation, the
technical necessity for defining monitoring conditions that are not
encountered during the FTP cycle, whether monitoring is otherwise not
feasible during the FTP cycle, and/or the ability to demonstrate that
the monitoring conditions satisfy the minimum acceptable in-use monitor
performance ratio requirement as defined in paragraph (d) of this
section.
(d) In-use performance tracking. As specifically required in
paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this section, the OBD system must
monitor and detect the malfunctions specified in paragraphs (g), (h),
and (i) of this section according to the criteria of this paragraph
(d). The OBD system is not required to track and report in-use
performance for monitors other than those specifically identified in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section, but all monitors on applicable model
year engines are still required to meet the in-use performance ratio as
specified in paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section.
(1) The manufacturer must implement software algorithms in the OBD
system to individually track and report the in-use performance of the
following monitors, if equipped, in the standardized format specified
in paragraph (e) of this section: NMHC converting catalyst (paragraph
(g)(5) of this section); NOX converting catalyst (paragraph
(g)(6) of this section); gasoline catalyst (paragraph (h)(6) of this
section); exhaust gas sensor (paragraph (g)(9) of this section) or
paragraph(h)(8) of this section); evaporative system (paragraph (h)(7)
of this section); EGR system (paragraph (g)(3) of this section or
(h)(3) of this section); VVT system (paragraph (g)(10) of this section
or (h)(9) of this section); secondary air system (paragraph (h)(5) of
this section); DPF system (paragraph (g)(8) of this section); boost
pressure control system (paragraph (g)(4) of this section); and,
NOX adsorber system (paragraph (g)(7) of this section).
(i) The manufacturer shall not use the calculated ratio specified
in paragraph (d)(2) of this section or any other indication of monitor
frequency as a monitoring condition for a monitor (e.g., using a low
ratio to enable more frequent monitoring through diagnostic executive
priority or modification of other monitoring conditions, or using a
high ratio to enable less frequent monitoring).
(ii) For model years 2013 and later, manufacturers must define
monitoring conditions that, in addition to meeting the criteria in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (d)(1) of this section, ensure that the monitor
yields an in-use performance ratio (as defined in paragraph (d)(2) of
this section) that meets or exceeds the minimum acceptable in-use
monitor performance ratio of 0.100 for all monitors specifically
required in paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) of this section to meet the
monitoring condition requirements of this paragraph (d).
(iii) If the most reliable monitoring method developed requires a
lower ratio for a specific monitor than that specified in paragraph
(d)(1)(ii) of this section, the Administrator may lower the minimum
acceptable in-use monitoring performance ratio.
(2) In-use performance ratio definition. For monitors required to
meet the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section, the performance
ratio must be calculated in accordance with the specifications of this
paragraph (d)(2).
(i) The numerator of the performance ratio is defined as the number
of times a vehicle has been operated such that all monitoring
conditions have been encountered that are necessary for the specific
monitor to detect a malfunction.
(ii) The denominator is defined as the number of times a vehicle
has been operated in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (d)(4)
of this section.
(iii) The performance ratio is defined as the numerator divided by
the denominator.
(3) Specifications for incrementing the numerator.
(i) Except as provided for in paragraph (d)(3)(v) of this section,
the numerator, when incremented, must be incremented by an integer of
one. The numerator shall not be incremented more than once per drive
cycle.
(ii) The numerator for a specific monitor must be incremented
within 10 seconds if and only if the following criteria are satisfied
on a single drive cycle:
(A) Every monitoring condition has been satisfied that is necessary
for the specific monitor to detect a malfunction and store a pending
DTC, including applicable enable criteria, presence or absence of
related DTCs, sufficient length of monitoring time, and diagnostic
executive priority assignments (e.g., diagnostic ``A'' must execute
prior to diagnostic ``B''). For the
[[Page 8373]]
purpose of incrementing the numerator, satisfying all the monitoring
conditions necessary for a monitor to determine that the monitor is not
malfunctioning shall not, by itself, be sufficient to meet this
criteria.
(B) For monitors that require multiple stages or events in a single
drive cycle to detect a malfunction, every monitoring condition
necessary for all events to complete must be satisfied.
(C) For monitors that require intrusive operation of components to
detect a malfunction, a manufacturer must request approval of the
strategy used to determine that, had a malfunction been present, the
monitor would have detected the malfunction. Administrator approval of
the request will be based on the equivalence of the strategy to actual
intrusive operation and the ability of the strategy to determine
accurately if every monitoring condition was satisfied that was
necessary for the intrusive event to occur.
(D) For the secondary air system monitor, the criteria in
paragraphs (d)(3)(ii)(A) through (d)(3)(ii)(C) of this section are
satisfied during normal operation of the secondary air system.
Monitoring during intrusive operation of the secondary air system later
in the same drive cycle for the sole purpose of monitoring shall not,
by itself, be sufficient to meet these criteria.
(iii) For monitors that can generate results in a ``gray zone'' or
``non-detection zone'' (i.e., monitor results that indicate neither a
properly operating system nor a malfunctioning system) or in a ``non-
decision zone'' (e.g., monitors that increment and decrement counters
until a pass or fail threshold is reached), the numerator, in general,
shall not be incremented when the monitor indicates a result in the
``non-detection zone'' or prior to the monitor reaching a complete
decision. When necessary, the Administrator will consider data and/or
engineering analyses submitted by the manufacturer demonstrating the
expected frequency of results in the ``non-detection zone'' and the
ability of the monitor to determine accurately, had an actual
malfunction been present, whether or not the monitor would have
detected a malfunction instead of a result in the ``non-detection
zone.''
(iv) For monitors that run or complete their evaluation with the
engine off, the numerator must be incremented either within 10 seconds
of the monitor completing its evaluation in the engine off state, or
during the first 10 seconds of engine start on the subsequent drive
cycle.
(v) Manufacturers that use alternative statistical MIL activation
protocols as allowed in paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section for any
of the monitors requiring a numerator, are required to increment the
numerator(s) appropriately. The manufacturer may be required to provide
supporting data and/or engineering analyses demonstrating both the
equivalence of their incrementing approach to the incrementing
specified in this paragraph (d)(3) for monitors using the standard MIL
activation protocol, and the overall equivalence of the incrementing
approach in determining that the minimum acceptable in-use performance
ratio of paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section, if applicable, has been
satisfied.
(4) Specifications for incrementing the denominator.
(i) The denominator, when incremented, must be incremented by an
integer of one. The denominator shall not be incremented more than once
per drive cycle.
(ii) The denominator for each monitor must be incremented within 10
seconds if and only if the following criteria are satisfied on a single
drive cycle:
(A) Cumulative time since the start of the drive cycle is greater
than or equal to 600 seconds while at an elevation of less than 8,000
feet (2,400 meters) above sea level and at an ambient temperature of
greater than or equal to 20 degrees Fahrenheit (-7 C);
(B) Cumulative gasoline engine operation at or above 25 miles per
hour or diesel engine operation at or above 1,150 rotations per minute
(diesel engines may use the gasoline criterion for 2010 through 2012
model years), either of which occurs for greater than or equal to 300
seconds while at an elevation of less than 8,000 feet (2,400 meters)
above sea level and at an ambient temperature of greater than or equal
to 20 degrees Fahrenheit (-7 C); and,
(C) Continuous engine operation at idle (e.g., accelerator pedal
released by driver and engine speed less than or equal to 200 rpm above
normal warmed-up idle (as determined in the drive position for vehicles
equipped with an automatic transmission) or vehicle speed less than or
equal to one mile per hour) for greater than or equal to 30 seconds
while at an elevation of less than 8,000 feet (2,400 meters) above sea
level and at an ambient temperature of greater than or equal to 20
degrees Fahrenheit (-7 C).
(iii) In addition to the requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of
this section, the evaporative system monitor denominator(s) may be
incremented if and only if:
(A) Cumulative time since the start of the drive cycle is greater
than or equal to 600 seconds while at an ambient temperature of greater
than or equal to 40 degrees Fahrenheit (4 C) but less than or equal to
95 degrees Fahrenheit (35 C); and,
(B) Engine cold start occurs with the engine coolant temperature
greater than or equal to 40 degrees Fahrenheit (4 C) but less than or
equal to 95 degrees Fahrenheit (35 C) and less than or equal to 12
degrees Fahrenheit (7 C) higher than the ambient temperature.
(iv) In addition to the requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of
this section, the denominator(s) for the following monitors may be
incremented if and only if the component or strategy is commanded
``on'' for a cumulative time greater than or equal to 10 seconds. For
purposes of determining this commanded ``on'' time, the OBD system
shall not include time during intrusive operation of any of the
components or strategies that occurs later in the same drive cycle for
the sole purpose of monitoring.
(A) Secondary air system (paragraph (h)(5) of this section).
(B) Cold start emission reduction strategy (paragraph (h)(4) of
this section).
(C) Components or systems that operate only at engine start-up
(e.g., glow plugs, intake air heaters) and are subject to monitoring
under ``other emission control systems'' (paragraph (i)(4) of this
section) or comprehensive component output components (paragraph
(i)(3)(iii) of this section).
(v) In addition to the requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this
section, the denominator(s) for the following monitors of output
components (except those operated only at engine start-up and subject
to the requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(iv) of this section, may be
incremented if and only if the component is commanded to function
(e.g., commanded ``on'', ``opened'', ``closed'', ``locked'') on two or
more occasions during the drive cycle or for a cumulative time greater
than or equal to 10 seconds, whichever occurs first:
(A) Variable valve timing and/or control system (paragraph (g)(10)
of this section or (h)(9) of this section).
(B) ``Other emission control systems'' (paragraph (i)(4) of this
section).
(C) Comprehensive component output component (paragraph (i)(3) of
this section) (e.g., turbocharger waste-gates, variable length manifold
runners).
(vi) For monitors of the following components, the manufacturer may
use alternative or additional criteria for incrementing the denominator
to that set forth in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this
[[Page 8374]]
section. To do so, the alternative criteria must be based on
equivalence to the criteria of paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this section in
measuring the frequency of monitor operation relative to the amount of
engine operation:
(A) Engine cooling system input components (paragraph (i)(1) of
this section).
(B) ``Other emission control systems'' (paragraph (i)(4) of this
section).
(C) Comprehensive component input components that require extended
monitoring evaluation (paragraph (i)(3) of this section) (e.g., stuck
fuel level sensor rationality).
(D) Comprehensive component input component temperature sensor
rationality monitors (paragraph (i)(3) of this section) (e.g., intake
air temperature sensor, ambient temperature sensor, fuel temperature
sensor).
(E) Diesel particulate filter (DPF) frequent regeneration
(paragraph (g)(8)(ii)(B) of this section).
(vii) For monitors of the following components or other emission
controls that experience infrequent regeneration events, the
manufacturer may use alternative or additional criteria for
incrementing the denominator to that set forth in paragraph (d)(4)(ii)
of this section. To do so, the alternative criteria must be based on
equivalence to the criteria of paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this section in
measuring the frequency of monitor operation relative to the amount of
engine operation:
(A) NMHC converting catalyst (paragraph (g)(5) of this section).
(B) Diesel particulate filter (DPF) (paragraphs (g)(8)(ii)(A) and
(g)(8)(ii)(D) of this section).
(viii) In addition to the requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of
this section, the denominator(s) for the following monitors shall be
incremented if and only if a regeneration event is commanded for a time
greater than or equal to 10 seconds:
(A) DPF incomplete regeneration (paragraph (g)(8)(ii)(C) of this
section).
(B) DPF active/intrusive injection (paragraph (g)(8)(ii)(E) of this
section).
(ix) For hybrids that employ alternative engine start hardware or
strategies (e.g., integrated starter and generators), or alternative
fuel vehicles (e.g., dedicated, bi-fuel, or dual-fuel applications),
the manufacturer may use alternative criteria for incrementing the
denominator to that set forth in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this section.
In general, the Administrator will not approve alternative criteria for
those hybrids that employ engine shut off only at or near idle and/or
vehicle stop conditions. To use alternative criteria, the alternative
criteria must be based on the equivalence to the criteria of paragraph
(d)(4)(ii) of this section in measuring the amount of vehicle operation
relative to the measure of conventional vehicle operation.
(5) Disablement of numerators and denominators.
(i) Within 10 seconds of detecting a malfunction (i.e., a pending
or a MIL-on DTC has been stored) that disables a monitor for which the
monitoring conditions in paragraph (d) of this section must be met, the
OBD system must stop incrementing the numerator and denominator for any
monitor that may be disabled as a consequence of the detected
malfunction. Within 10 seconds of the time at which the malfunction is
no longer being detected (e.g., the pending DTC is erased through OBD
system self-clearing or through a scan tool command), incrementing of
all applicable numerators and denominators must resume.
(ii) Within 10 seconds of the start of a power take-off unit (e.g.,
dump bed, snow plow blade, or aerial bucket, etc.) that disables a
monitor for which the monitoring conditions in paragraph (d) of this
section must be met, the OBD system must stop incrementing the
numerator and denominator for any monitor that may be disabled as a
consequence of power take-off operation. Within 10 seconds of the time
at which the power take-off operation ends, incrementing of all
applicable numerators and denominators must resume.
(iii) Within 10 seconds of detecting a malfunction (i.e., a pending
or a MIL-on DTC has been stored) of any component used to determine if
the criteria of paragraphs (d)(4)(ii) and (d)(4)(iii) of this section
are satisfied, the OBD system must stop incrementing all applicable
numerators and denominators. Within 10 seconds of the time at which the
malfunction is no longer being detected (e.g., the pending DTC is
erased through OBD system self-clearing or through a scan tool
command), incrementing of all applicable numerators and denominators
must resume.
(e) Standardized tracking and reporting of in-use monitor
performance.
(1) General. For monitors required to track and report in-use
monitor performance according to paragraph (d) of this section, the
performance data must be tracked and reported in accordance with the
specifications in paragraphs (d)(2), (e), and (k)(5) of this section.
The OBD system must separately report an in-use monitor performance
numerator and denominator for each of the following components:
(i) For diesel engines, NMHC catalyst bank 1, NMHC catalyst bank 2,
NOX catalyst bank 1, NOX catalyst bank 2, exhaust
gas sensor bank 1, exhaust gas sensor bank 2, EGR/VVT system, DPF,
boost pressure control system, and NOX adsorber. The OBD
system must also report a general denominator and an ignition cycle
counter in the standardized format specified in paragraphs (e)(5),
(e)(6), and (k)(5) of this section.
(ii) For gasoline engines, catalyst bank 1, catalyst bank 2,
exhaust gas sensor bank 1, exhaust gas sensor bank 2, evaporative leak
detection system, EGR/VVT system, and secondary air system. The OBD
system must also report a general denominator and an ignition cycle
counter in the standardized format specified in paragraphs (e)(5),
(e)(6), and (k)(5) of this section.
(iii) For specific components or systems that have multiple
monitors that are required to be reported under paragraphs (g) and (h)
of this section (e.g., exhaust gas sensor bank 1 may have multiple
monitors for sensor response or other sensor characteristics), the OBD
system must separately track numerators and denominators for each of
the specific monitors and report only the corresponding numerator and
denominator for the specific monitor that has the lowest numerical
ratio. If two or more specific monitors have identical ratios, the
corresponding numerator and denominator for the specific monitor that
has the highest denominator must be reported for the specific
component.
(2) Numerator.
(i) The OBD system must report a separate numerator for each of the
applicable components listed in paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
(ii) The numerator(s) must be reported in accordance with the
specifications in paragraph (k)(5)(ii) of this section.
(3) Denominator.
(i) The OBD system must report a separate denominator for each of
the applicable components listed in paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
(ii) The denominator(s) must be reported in accordance with the
specifications in paragraph (k)(5)(ii) of this section.
(4) Monitor performance ratio. For purposes of determining which
corresponding numerator and denominator to report as required in
paragraph (e)(1)(iii) of this section, the ratio must be calculated in
accordance with the specifications in paragraph (k)(5)(iii) of this
section.
(5) Ignition cycle counter.
[[Page 8375]]
(i) The ignition cycle counter is defined as a counter that
indicates the number of ignition cycles a vehicle has experienced
according to the specifications of paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(B) of this
section. The ignition cycle counter must be reported in accordance with
the specifications in paragraph (k)(5)(ii) of this section.
(ii) The ignition cycle counter must be incremented as follows:
(A) The ignition cycle counter, when incremented, must be
incremented by an integer of one. The ignition cycle counter shall not
be incremented more than once per ignition cycle.
(B) The ignition cycle counter must be incremented within 10
seconds if and only if the engine exceeds an engine speed of 50 to 150
rpm below the normal, warmed-up idle speed (as determined in the drive
position for engines paired with an automatic transmission) for at
least two seconds plus or minus one second.
(iii) Within 10 seconds of detecting a malfunction (i.e., a pending
or a MIL-on DTC has been stored) of any component used to determine if
the criteria in paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(B) of this section are satisfied
(i.e., engine speed or time of operation), the OBD system must stop
incrementing the ignition cycle counter. Incrementing of the ignition
cycle counter shall not be stopped for any other condition. Within 10
seconds of the time at which the malfunction is no longer being
detected (e.g., the pending DTC is erased through OBD system self-
clearing or through a scan tool command), incrementing of the ignition
cycle counter must resume.
(6) General denominator.
(i) The general denominator is defined as a measure of the number
of times an engine has been operated according to the specifications of
paragraph (e)(6)(ii)(B) of this section. The general denominator must
be reported in accordance with the specifications in paragraph
(k)(5)(ii) of this section.
(ii) The general denominator must be incremented as follows:
(A) The general denominator, when incremented, must be incremented
by an integer of one. The general denominator shall not be incremented
more than once per drive cycle.
(B) The general denominator must be incremented within 10 seconds
if and only if the criteria identified in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this
section are satisfied on a single drive cycle.
(C) Within 10 seconds of detecting a malfunction (i.e., a pending
or a MIL-on DTC has been stored) of any component used to determine if
the criteria in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this section are satisfied
(i.e., vehicle speed/load, ambient temperature, elevation, idle
operation, or time of operation), the OBD system must stop incrementing
the general denominator. Incrementing of the general denominator shall
not be stopped for any other condition (e.g., the disablement criteria
in paragraphs (d)(5)(i) and (d)(5)(ii) of this section shall not
disable the general denominator). Within 10 seconds of the time at
which the malfunction is no longer being detected (e.g., the pending
DTC is erased through OBD system self-clearing or through a scan tool
command), incrementing of the general denominator must resume.
(f) Malfunction criteria determination.
(1) In determining the malfunction criteria for the diesel engine
monitors required under paragraphs (g) and (i) of this section that are
required to indicate a malfunction before emissions exceed an emission
threshold based on any applicable standard, the manufacturer must:
(i) Use the emission test cycle and standard (i.e., the transient
FTP or the supplemental emissions test (SET)) determined by the
manufacturer to provide the most effective monitoring conditions and
robust monitor provided all other applicable requirements of this
section are met.
(ii) Identify in the certification documentation required under
paragraph (m) of this section, the test cycle and standard determined
by the manufacturer to be the most stringent for each applicable
monitor and the most effective and robust for each applicable monitor.
(iii) If the Administrator reasonably believes that a manufacturer
has determined incorrectly the test cycle and standard that is most
stringent or effective, the manufacturer must be able to provide
emission data and/or engineering analysis supporting their choice of
test cycle and standard.
(2) On engines equipped with emission controls that experience
infrequent regeneration events, a manufacturer need not adjust the
emission test results that are used to determine the malfunction
criteria for monitors that are required to indicate a malfunction
before emissions exceed a certain emission threshold. For each such
monitor, should the manufacturer choose to adjust the emission test
results, the manufacturer must adjust the emission result as done in
accordance with the provisions of Sec. 86.004-28(i) with the component
for which the malfunction criteria are being established having been
deteriorated to the malfunction threshold. The adjusted emission value
must be used for purposes of determining whether or not the applicable
emission threshold is exceeded.
(i) For purposes of this paragraph (f)(2), regeneration means an
event, by design, during which emissions levels change while the
emission control performance is being restored.
(ii) For purposes of this paragraph (f)(2), infrequent means having
an expected frequency of less than once per transient FTP cycle.
(3) For gasoline engines, rather than meeting the malfunction
criteria specified under paragraphs (h) and (i) of this section, the
manufacturer may request approval to use an OBD system certified to the
requirements of Sec. 86.007-17. To do so, the manufacturer must
demonstrate use of good engineering judgment in determining equivalent
malfunction detection criteria to those required in this section.
(g) OBD monitoring requirements for diesel-fueled/compression-
ignition engines. The following table shows the thresholds at which
point certain components or systems, as specified in this paragraph
(g), are considered malfunctioning.
Table 1--OBD Emissions Thresholds for Diesel-Fueled/Compression-Ignition Engines Meant for Placement in
Applications Greater Than 14,000 Pounds GVWR (g/bhp-hr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.
Component 86.010-18 NMHC CO NOX PM
reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model years 2010-2012:
NOX aftertreatment system.................. (g)(6) ........... ........... +0.6
(g)(7)
Diesel particulate filter (DPF) system..... (g)(8) 2.5x ........... ........... 0.05/+0.04
Air-fuel ratio sensors upstream of (g)(9) 2.5x 2.5x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
aftertreat ment devices...................
[[Page 8376]]
Air-fuel ratio sensors downstream of (g)(9) 2.5x ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
aftertreatment devices....................
NOX sensors................................ (g)(9) ........... ........... +0.6 0.05/+0.04
``Other monitors'' with emissions (g)(1) 2.5x 2.5x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
thresholds................................ (g)(3)
(g)(4)
(g)(10)
Model years 2013 and later:
NOX aftertreatment system.................. (g)(6) ........... ........... +0.3
(g)(7)
Diesel particulate filter (DPF) system..... (g)(8) 2x ........... ........... 0.05/+0.04
Air-fuel ratio sensors upstream of (g)(9) 2x 2x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
aftertreatment devices....................
Air-fuel ratio sensors downstream of (g)(9) 2x ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
aftertreatment devices....................
NOX sensors................................ (g)(9) ........... ........... +0.3 0.05/+0.04
``Other monitors'' with emissions (g)(1) 2x 2x +0.3 0.03/+0.02
thresholds................................ (g)(2)
(g)(3)
(g)(4)
(g)(10)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: FEL = Family Emissions Limit; 2.5x std means a multiple of 2.5 times the applicable emissions standard;
+0.3 means the standard or FEL plus 0.3; 0.05/+0.04 means an absolute level of 0.05 or an additive level of
the standard or FEL plus 0.04, whichever level is higher; these emissions thresholds apply to the monitoring
requirements of paragraph (g) of this Sec. 86.010-18.
(1) Fuel system monitoring.
(i) General. The OBD system must monitor the fuel delivery system
to verify that it is functioning properly. The individual electronic
components (e.g., actuators, valves, sensors, pumps) that are used in
the fuel system and are not specifically addressed in this paragraph
(g)(1) must be monitored in accordance with the requirements of
paragraph (i)(3) of this section.
(ii) Fuel system malfunction criteria.
(A) Fuel system pressure control. The OBD system must monitor the
fuel system's ability to control to the desired fuel pressure. This
monitoring must be done continuously unless new hardware has to be
added, in which case the monitoring must be done at least once per
drive cycle. The OBD system must detect a malfunction of the fuel
system's pressure control system when the pressure control system is
unable to maintain an engine's emissions at or below the emissions
thresholds for ``other monitors'' as shown in Table 1 of this paragraph
(g). For engines in which no failure or deterioration of the fuel
system pressure control could result in an engine's emissions exceeding
the applicable emissions thresholds, the OBD system must detect a
malfunction when the system has reached its control limits such that
the commanded fuel system pressure cannot be delivered. For model year
2010 to 2012 engines with a unit injector fuel system, this requirement
may be met by conducting a functional check of the fuel system pressure
control in lieu of monitoring for conditions that could cause an
engine's emissions to exceed the applicable emissions thresholds.
(B) Fuel system injection quantity. The OBD system must detect a
malfunction of the fuel injection system when the system is unable to
deliver the commanded quantity of fuel necessary to maintain an
engine's emissions at or below the emissions thresholds for ``other
monitors'' as shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). For engines in
which no failure or deterioration of the fuel injection quantity could
result in an engine's emissions exceeding the applicable emissions
thresholds, the OBD system must detect a malfunction when the system
has reached its control limits such that the commanded fuel quantity
cannot be delivered. For model year 2010 to 2012 engines with a unit
injector fuel system, this requirement may be met by conducting a
functional check of the fuel system injection quantity in lieu of
monitoring for conditions that could cause an engine's emissions to
exceed the applicable emissions thresholds.
(C) Fuel system injection timing. The OBD system must detect a
malfunction of the fuel injection system when the system is unable to
deliver fuel at the proper crank angle/timing (e.g., injection timing
too advanced or too retarded) necessary to maintain an engine's
emissions at or below the emissions thresholds for ``other monitors''
as shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). For engines in which no
failure or deterioration of the fuel injection timing could result in
an engine's emissions exceeding the applicable emissions thresholds,
the OBD system must detect a malfunction when the system has reached
its control limits such that the commanded fuel injection timing cannot
be achieved. For model year 2010 to 2012 engines with a unit injector
fuel system, this requirement may be met by conducting a functional
check of the fuel system injection timing in lieu of monitoring for
conditions that could cause an engine's emissions to exceed the
applicable emissions thresholds.
(D) Combined Monitoring. For engines with a unit injector fuel
system, the manufacturer may request Administrator approval to combine
the malfunction criteria of paragraphs (g)(1)(ii)(A) through
(g)(1)(ii)(C) of this section into one malfunction provided the
manufacturer can demonstrate that the combined malfunction will satisfy
the intent of each separate malfunction criteria. For engines with a
common rail fuel system, the manufacturer may request Administrator
approval to combine the malfunction criteria of paragraphs
(g)(1)(ii)(B) through (g)(1)(ii)(C) of this section into one
malfunction provided the manufacturer can demonstrate that the combined
malfunction will satisfy the intent of each separate malfunction
criteria.
(E) Fuel system feedback control. See paragraph (i)(6) of this
section.
(iii) Fuel system monitoring conditions.
(A) With the exceptions noted in this paragraph for unit injector
systems, the OBD system must monitor continuously for malfunctions
identified in paragraphs (g)(1)(ii)(A) and (g)(1)(ii)(E) of this
section. For 2010 through 2012
[[Page 8377]]
unit injector systems, where functional monitoring is done in lieu of
emission threshold monitoring for malfunctions identified in paragraph
(g)(1)(ii)(A) of this section, the manufacturer must define the
monitoring conditions in accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this
section. For 2013 and later unit injector systems, the manufacturer
must define the monitoring conditions for malfunctions identified in
paragraph (g)(1)(ii)(A) of this section in accordance with paragraphs
(c) and (d) of this section, with the exception that monitoring must
occur every time the monitoring conditions are met during the drive
cycle rather than once per drive cycle as required in paragraph (c)(2)
of this section.
(B) For 2010 through 2012, the manufacturer must define the
monitoring conditions for malfunctions identified in paragraphs
(g)(1)(ii)(B), (g)(1)(ii)(C), and (g)(1)(ii)(D) of this section in
accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section. For 2013 and
later, the manufacturer must define the monitoring conditions in
accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, with the
exception that monitoring must occur every time the monitoring
conditions are met during the drive cycle rather than once per drive
cycle as required in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(iv) Fuel system MIL activation and DTC storage. The MIL must
activate and DTCs must be stored according to the provisions of
paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) Engine misfire monitoring.
(i) General. The OBD system must monitor the engine for misfire
causing excess emissions.
(ii) Engine misfire malfunction criteria.
(A) The OBD system must be capable of detecting misfire occurring
in one or more cylinders. To the extent possible without adding
hardware for this specific purpose, the OBD system must also identify
the specific misfiring cylinder. If more than one cylinder is misfiring
continuously, or if more than one but less than half of the cylinders
are misfiring continuously (if the manufacturer can demonstrate the
robustness of their monitor to the approval of the Administrator), a
separate DTC must be stored indicating that multiple cylinders are
misfiring. When identifying multiple cylinder misfire, the OBD system
is not required to identify individually through separate DTCs each of
the continuously misfiring cylinders.
(B) For model years 2013 and later, on engines equipped with
sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality (e.g., for use
in engines with homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) control
systems), the OBD system must detect a misfire malfunction causing
emissions to exceed the applicable thresholds for ``other monitors''
shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). To determine what level of
misfire would cause emissions to exceed the applicable emissions
thresholds, the manufacturer must determine the percentage of misfire
evaluated in 1,000 revolution increments that would cause emissions
from an emission durability demonstration engine to exceed the
emissions thresholds if the percentage of misfire were present from the
beginning of the test. To establish this percentage of misfire, the
manufacturer must use misfire events occurring at equally spaced,
complete engine cycle intervals, across randomly selected cylinders
throughout each 1,000-revolution increment. If this percentage of
misfire is determined to be lower than one percent, the manufacturer
may set the malfunction criteria at one percent. Any misfire
malfunction must be detected if the percentage of misfire established
via this testing is exceeded regardless of the pattern of misfire
events (e.g., random, equally spaced, continuous). The manufacturer may
employ other revolution increments besides the 1,000 revolution
increment. To do so, the manufacturer must demonstrate that the
strategy is equally effective and timely in detecting misfire.
(iii) Engine misfire monitoring conditions.
(A) The OBD system must monitor for engine misfire during engine
idle conditions at least once per drive cycle in which the monitoring
conditions for misfire are met. The manufacturer must be able to
demonstrate via engineering analysis and/or data that the self-defined
monitoring conditions: are technically necessary to ensure robust
detection of malfunctions (e.g., avoid false passes and false detection
of malfunctions); require no more than 1000 cumulative engine
revolutions; and, do not require any single continuous idle operation
of more than 15 seconds to make a determination that a malfunction is
present (e.g., a decision can be made with data gathered during several
idle operations of 15 seconds or less); or, satisfy the requirements of
paragraph (c) of this section with alternative engine operating
conditions.
(B) Manufacturers may employ alternative monitoring conditions
(e.g., off-idle) provided the manufacturer is able to demonstrate that
the alternative monitoring ensure equivalent robust detection of
malfunctions and equivalent timeliness in detection of malfunctions.
(C) For model years 2013 and later, on engines equipped with
sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality the OBD system
must monitor continuously for engine misfire under all positive torque
engine speed and load conditions. If a monitoring system cannot detect
all misfire patterns under all required engine speed and load
conditions, the manufacturer may request that the Administrator approve
the monitoring system nonetheless. In evaluating the manufacturer's
request, the Administrator will consider the following factors: the
magnitude of the region(s) in which misfire detection is limited; the
degree to which misfire detection is limited in the region(s) (i.e.,
the probability of detection of misfire events); the frequency with
which said region(s) are expected to be encountered in-use; the type of
misfire patterns for which misfire detection is troublesome; and
demonstration that the monitoring technology employed is not inherently
incapable of detecting misfire under required conditions (i.e.,
compliance can be achieved on other engines). The evaluation will be
based on the following misfire patterns: equally spaced misfire
occurring on randomly selected cylinders; single cylinder continuous
misfire; and, paired cylinder (cylinders firing at the same crank
angle) continuous misfire.
(iv) Engine misfire MIL activation and DTC storage.
(A) General requirements for MIL activation and DTC storage are set
forth in paragraph (b) of this section.
(B) For model years 2013 and later, on engines equipped with
sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality, upon
detection of the percentage of misfire specified in paragraph
(g)(2)(ii)(B) of this section, the following criteria shall apply for
MIL activation and DTC storage: A pending DTC must be stored no later
than after the fourth exceedance of the percentage of misfire specified
in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section during a single drive cycle; if
a pending fault code has been stored, the OBD system must activate the
MIL and store a MIL-on DTC within 10 seconds if the percentage of
misfire specified in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this section is again
exceeded four times during the drive cycle immediately following
storage of the pending DTC, regardless of the conditions encountered
during the drive cycle, or on the next drive cycle in which similar
conditions are encountered to those that were occurring when the
pending DTC was stored. Similar conditions means an
[[Page 8378]]
engine speed within 375 rpm, engine load within 20 percent, and the
same warm up status (i.e., cold or hot). The Administrator may approve
other definitions of similar conditions based on comparable timeliness
and reliability in detecting similar engine operation. The pending DTC
may be erased at the end of the next drive cycle in which similar
conditions are encountered to those that were occurring when the
pending DTC was stored provided the specified percentage of misfire was
not again exceeded. The pending DTC may also be erased if similar
conditions are not encountered during the 80 drive cycles immediately
following initial detection of the malfunction.
(C) For model years 2013 and later, on engines equipped with
sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality, the OBD
system must store and erase freeze frame conditions either in
conjunction with storing and erasing a pending DTC or in conjunction
with storing and erasing a MIL-on DTC. If freeze frame conditions are
stored for a malfunction other than a misfire malfunction when a DTC is
stored as specified in paragraph (g)(2)(iv)(B) of this section, the
stored freeze frame information must be replaced with the freeze frame
information regarding the misfire malfunction.
(D) For model years 2013 and later, on engines equipped with
sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality, upon
detection of misfire according to paragraph (g)(2)(iv)(B) of this
section, the OBD system must also store the following engine
conditions: engine speed, load, and warm up status of the first misfire
event that resulted in the storage of the pending DTC.
(E) For model years 2013 and later, on engines equipped with
sensors that can detect combustion or combustion quality, the MIL may
be deactivated after three sequential drive cycles in which similar
conditions have been encountered without an exceedance of the specified
percentage of misfire.
(3) EGR system monitoring.
(i) General. The OBD system must monitor the EGR system on engines
so equipped for low flow rate, high flow rate, and slow response
malfunctions. For engines equipped with EGR coolers (e.g., heat
exchangers), the OBD system must monitor the cooler for insufficient
cooling malfunctions. The individual electronic components (e.g.,
actuators, valves, sensors) that are used in the EGR system must be
monitored in accordance with the comprehensive component requirements
in paragraph (i)(3) of this section.
(ii) EGR system malfunction criteria.
(A) EGR low flow. The OBD system must detect a malfunction of the
EGR system prior to a decrease from the manufacturer's specified EGR
flow rate that would cause an engine's emissions to exceed the
emissions thresholds for ``other monitors'' as shown in Table 1 of this
paragraph (g). For engines in which no failure or deterioration of the
EGR system that causes a decrease in flow could result in an engine's
emissions exceeding the applicable emissions thresholds, the OBD system
must detect a malfunction when the system has reached its control
limits such that it cannot increase EGR flow to achieve the commanded
flow rate.
(B) EGR high flow. The OBD system must detect a malfunction of the
EGR system, including a leaking EGR valve (i.e., exhaust gas flowing
through the valve when the valve is commanded closed) prior to an
increase from the manufacturer's specified EGR flow rate that would
cause an engine's emissions to exceed the emissions thresholds for
``other monitors'' as shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). For
engines in which no failure or deterioration of the EGR system that
causes an increase in flow could result in an engine's emissions
exceeding the applicable emissions thresholds, the OBD system must
detect a malfunction when the system has reached its control limits
such that it cannot reduce EGR flow to achieve the commanded flow rate.
(C) EGR slow response. The OBD system must detect a malfunction of
the EGR system prior to any failure or deterioration in the capability
of the EGR system to achieve the commanded flow rate within a
manufacturer-specified time that would cause an engine's emissions to
exceed the emissions thresholds for ``other monitors'' as shown in
Table 1 of this paragraph (g). The OBD system must monitor both the
capability of the EGR system to respond to a commanded increase in flow
and the capability of the EGR system to respond to a commanded decrease
in flow.
(D) EGR system feedback control. See paragraph (i)(6) of this
section.
(E) EGR cooler performance. The OBD system must detect a
malfunction of the EGR cooler prior to a reduction from the
manufacturer's specified cooling performance that would cause an
engine's emissions to exceed the emissions thresholds for ``other
monitors'' as shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). For engines in
which no failure or deterioration of the EGR cooler could result in an
engine's emissions exceeding the applicable emissions thresholds, the
OBD system must detect a malfunction when the system has no detectable
amount of EGR cooling.
(iii) EGR system monitoring conditions.
(A) The OBD system must monitor continuously for malfunctions
identified in paragraphs (g)(3)(ii)(A), (g)(3)(ii)(B), and
(g)(3)(ii)(D) of this section.
(B) The manufacturer must define the monitoring conditions for
malfunctions identified in paragraph (g)(3)(ii)(C) of this section in
accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, with the
exception that monitoring must occur every time the monitoring
conditions are met during the drive cycle rather than once per drive
cycle as required in paragraph (c)(2) of this section. For purposes of
tracking and reporting as required in paragraph (d)(1) of this section,
all monitors used to detect malfunctions identified in paragraph
(g)(3)(ii)(C) of this section must be tracked separately but reported
as a single set of values as specified in paragraph (e)(1)(iii) of this
section.
(C) The manufacturer must define the monitoring conditions for
malfunctions identified in paragraph (g)(3)(ii)(E) of this section in
accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section. For purposes of
tracking and reporting as required in paragraph (d)(1) of this section,
all monitors used to detect malfunctions identified in paragraph
(g)(3)(ii)(E) of this section must be tracked separately but reported
as a single set of values as specified in paragraph (e)(1)(iii) of this
section.
(D) The manufacturer may request Administrator approval to disable
temporarily the EGR system monitor(s) under specific ambient conditions
(e.g., when freezing may affect performance of the system) or during
specific operating conditions (e.g., transients, extreme low or high
flow conditions). The manufacturer must be able to demonstrate via data
or engineering analysis that a reliable system monitor cannot be run
when these conditions exist because it cannot robustly distinguish
between a malfunctioning system and a properly operating system. The
manufacturer is still required to maintain comprehensive component
monitoring as required in paragraph (i)(3) of this section.
(iv) EGR system MIL activation and DTC storage. The MIL must
activate and DTCs must be stored according to the provisions of
paragraph (b) of this section.
(4) Turbo boost control system monitoring.
(i) General. The OBD system must monitor the boost pressure control
system (e.g., turbocharger) on engines so
[[Page 8379]]
equipped for under and over boost malfunctions. For engines equipped
with variable geometry turbochargers (VGT), the OBD system must monitor
the VGT system for slow response malfunctions. For engines equipped
with charge air cooler systems, the OBD system must monitor the charge
air cooler system for cooling system performance malfunctions. The
individual electronic components (e.g., actuators, valves, sensors)
that are used in the boost pressure control system must be monitored in
accordance with the comprehensive component requirements in paragraph
(i)(3) of this section.
(ii) Turbo boost control system malfunction criteria.
(A) Turbo underboost. The OBD system must detect a malfunction of
the boost pressure control system prior to a decrease from the
manufacturer's commanded boost pressure, or expected boost pressure on
engines not equipped with a boost pressure control system, that would
cause an engine's emissions to exceed the emissions thresholds for
``other monitors'' as shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). For
engines in which no failure or deterioration of the boost pressure
control system that causes a decrease in boost could result in an
engine's emissions exceeding the applicable emissions thresholds, the
OBD system must detect a malfunction when the system has reached its
control limits such that it cannot increase boost to achieve the
commanded boost pressure.
(B) Turbo overboost. The OBD system must detect a malfunction of
the boost pressure control system on engines so equipped prior to an
increase from the manufacturer's commanded boost pressure that would
cause an engine's emissions to exceed the emissions thresholds for
``other monitors'' as shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). For
engines in which no failure or deterioration of the boost pressure
control system that causes an increase in boost could result in an
engine's emissions exceeding the applicable emissions thresholds, the
OBD system must detect a malfunction when the system has reached its
control limits such that it cannot decrease boost to achieve the
commanded boost pressure.
(C) VGT slow response. The OBD system must detect a malfunction
prior to any failure or deterioration in the capability of the VGT
system on engines so equipped to achieve the commanded turbocharger
geometry within a manufacturer-specified time that would cause an
engine's emissions to exceed the emissions thresholds for ``other
monitors'' as shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). For engines in
which no failure or deterioration of the VGT system response could
result in an engine's emissions exceeding the applicable emissions
thresholds, the OBD system must detect a malfunction of the VGT system
when proper functional response of the system to computer commands does
not occur.
(D) Turbo boost feedback control. See paragraph (i)(6)of this
section.
(E) Charge air undercooling. The OBD system must detect a
malfunction of the charge air cooling system prior to a decrease from
the manufacturer's specified cooling rate that would cause an engine's
emissions to exceed the emissions thresholds for ``other monitors'' as
shown in Table 1 of this paragraph (g). For engines in which no failure
or deterioration of the charge air cooling system that causes a
decrease in cooling performance could result in an engine's emissions
exceeding the applicable emissions thresholds, the OBD system must
detect a malfunction when the system has no detectable amount of charge
air cooling.
(iii) Turbo boost monitoring conditions.
(A) The OBD system must monitor continuously for malfunctions
identified in paragraphs (g)(4)(ii)(A), (g)(4)(ii)(B), and
(g)(4)(ii)(D) of this section.
(B) The manufacturer must define the monitoring conditions for
malfunctions identified in paragraph (g)(4)(ii)(C) of this section in
accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, with the
exception that monitoring must occur every time the monitoring
conditions are met during the drive cycle rather than once per drive
cycle as required in paragraph (c)(2) of this section. For purposes of
tracking and reporting as required in paragraph (d)(1) of this section,
all monitors used to detect malfunctions identified in paragraph
(g)(4)(ii)(C) of this section must be tracked separately but reported
as a single set of values as specified in paragraph (e)(1)(iii) of this
section.
(C) The manufacturer must define the monitoring conditions for
malfunctions identified in paragraph (g)(4)(ii)(E) of this section in
accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section. For purposes of
tracking and reporting as required in paragraph (d)(1) of this section,
all monitors used to detect malfunctions identified in paragraph
(g)(4)(ii)(E) of this section must be tracked separately but reported
as a single set of values as specified in paragraph (e)(1)(iii) of this
section.
(D) The manufacturer may request Administrator approval to disable
temporarily the turbo boost system monitor(s) during specific operating
conditions (e.g., transients, extreme low or high flow conditions). The
manufacturer must be able to demonstrate via data or engineering
analysis that a reliable system monitor cannot be run when these
conditions exist because it cannot robustly distinguish between a
malfunctioning system and a properly operating system. The manufacturer
is still required to maintain comprehensive component monitoring as
required in paragraph (i)(3) of this section.
(iv) Turbo boost system MIL activation and DTC storage. The MIL
must activate and DTCs must be stored according to the provisions of
paragraph (b) of this section.
(5) NMHC converting catalyst monitoring.
(i) General. The OBD system must monitor the NMHC converting
catalyst(s) for proper NMHC conversion capability. For purposes of this
paragraph (g)(5), each catalyst that converts NMHC must be monitored
either individually or in combination with others. For purposes of this
paragraph (g)(5), NMHC conversion that may occur over the DPF or other
aftertreatment devices is not included.
(ii) NMHC converting catalyst malfunction criteria.
(A) NMHC converting catalyst conversion efficiency. The OBD system
must detect a malfunction when the catalyst has no detectable amount of
NMHC conversion capability.
(B) NMHC converting catalyst aftertreatment assistance functions.
For catalysts used to generate an exotherm to assist DPF regeneration,
the OBD system must detect a malfunction when the catalyst is unable to
generate a sufficient exotherm to achieve DPF regeneration. In meeting
this requirement, the OBD system must detect a malfunction when the DOC
is unable to generate a temperature rise of 100 degrees C, or to reach
the necessary DPF regeneration temperature, within 60 seconds of
initiating an active DPF regeneration. Further, the OBD system must
detect a malfunction when the DOC is unable to sustain the necessary
regeneration temperature for the duration of the regeneration event.
The OBD or control system must abort the regeneration if the
regeneration temperature has not been reached within five minutes of
initiating an active regeneration event, or if the regeneration
temperature cannot be sustained for the duration of the regeneration
event. As an alternative to these specific malfunction criteria, the
manufacturer may employ different criteria. To do so, the manufacturer
[[Page 8380]]
must submit a description with supporting data, subject to
Administrator approval, of their DPF regeneration monitoring strategy.
The Administrator will consider the strategy's equivalence to the
specific criteria stated in this paragraph when considering the
request. Also as an alternative to these specific malfunction criteria,
the manufacturer may employ an OBD monitor that detects a cata