905279003C
Do not WEED. This document
should be retained in the EPA
Region 5 Library Collection.
EVALUATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE
EMISSIONS INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE
PROGRAMS FOR MICHIGAN
VOLUME I
Pacific Environmental Services, INC.
-------
DISCLAIMER
This air pollution report is issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region V to assist state and local air pollution control agencies
in carrying out their program activities. Copies of this report may be
obtained, for nominal cost, from the National Technical Information
Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
This report has been reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region V Air Programs Branch and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify, that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement
and recommendations for use.
Region V Publication No. EPA-905/2-79-003A-003B
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 ADMINISTRATIVE OPTION 4
2.1 Administrative Options Defined 5
2.2 Background Information of Present I/M Programs 6
2.3 Organization Comparisons 11
3 BENEFITS AND COST OF I/M PROGRAM 14
3.1 Emission Reduction Benefits 14
3.1.1 Appendix N - Emission Reductions Achievable Through Inspec-
tion and Maintenance of Light-Duty Vehicles, Motorcycles, and
Light-Duty Trucks 15
3.2 Other I/M Benefits 18
3.2.1 Fuel Savings 18
3.2.2 Performance and Increased Vehicle Life 22
3.2.3 Warranty Benefits 22
3.3 Costs of An I/M Program 24
3.3.1 Implementation, Capital, and Operating Cost 24
3.3.2 Consumer Inspection Fee 25
3.3.3 Repair Costs 25
4 TEST MODES DEFINITION 30
4.1 Federal Test Procedure 30
4.2 Diagnostic Inspection Test Mode 33
4.3 Idle Inspection Test Mode 33
4.4 Loaded Test 37
4.5 Transient-Mode Inspection and Test 39
4.6 Engine Parameter/Device Inspection 39
4.7 Associated Programs 41
4.7.1 Safety Inspection 41
4.7.2 Noise Inspection 44
4.7.3 Safety and Noise Integrated with Exhaust Emission Testing . . 49
5 GENERAL DEFINITIONS 53
6 REFERENCES 59
APPENDICES
A Emission Credits Given in the Code of Federal
Regulations 61
B Short Test Emission Standards as Related to FTP 69
C Loaded-Mode Truth Chart and Diagnostic Procedures 88
D Emissions-Related Parts List 87
E Noise Testing 93
-------
Figure
2-1
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Functional Administrative Chart.
LIST
0 F
TABLES
Table
2-1 Existing I/M Programs
2-2 Typical I/M Problems, Solutions and Achievements
3-1 First Year of Program Credits
3-2 Subsequent Years Program Credits
3-3 Mechanic Training First Year Credits
3-4 Mechanic Training Subsequent Year Credits
3-5 Light-Duty Vehicle Exhaust Emission Reduction From I/M Programs
as of December 31, 1987
3-6 Average Repair Cost by Vehicle Model-Year
3-7 Arizona - December 1977 Report ,
3-8 Average Repair Cost for Failed Vehicles
4-1 Vehicle Exhaust Emission Standards .
4-2 Diagnostic Analysis Report .
4-3 Malfunction Truth Table ,
4-4 Functional Test Parameters and Emissions Relationships . . . . ,
4-5 Summary of NHTSA, MVMA, ANSI and Michigan Safety Standards
For Vehicles Under 10,000 ,
4-6 Proposed Noise Emission Standards
7
9
19
19
20
20
21
27
28
28
31
34
37
40
42
47
ill
-------
Section 1
INTRODUCTION
Recent studies conducted by government agencies, independent laboratories,
and the automotive industry have confirmed that pollutant emissions from auto-
mobiles can be reduced by proper vehicle maintenance and repair. These studies
conclude that a vehicle emission inspection/maintenance (I/M) program that
identifies those vehicles requiring maintenance/repair, and that requires the
offending vehicles to be repaired, will reduce the amounts of carbon monoxide
(CO) and oxidants in the ambient air.
The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1977 include specific provisions
that require the establishment of I/M programs. According to the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA), by January 1979 each state must submit revisions
to its State Implementation Plan (SIP) which specify methods to achieve the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). These methods include control
of stationary sources of air pollution, and various transportation control
measures, whose objective is to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) thereby
reducing pollution from mobile sources. If, in these revisions, the state
cannot demonstrate that the NAAQS will be attained by 1982, an extension to
1987 must be requested, and several provisions must be met. One provision
is the establishment of a specific schedule for the implementation of an I/M
program. Since it is doubtful that the NAAQS can be attained in the State of
Michigan through other measures, an I/M program will probably be required.
The objectives of this study are to define and evaluate alternative approaches
for a vehicle I/M program for the State of Michigan. The Michigan Department of
Transportation has outlined a study program to provide information on the tech-
nical and economic feasibility, and the benefits of a mandatory I/M program.
-------
This study consists of six major tasks which are described as follows:
1} definition and review of alternative administrative I/M approaches and
alternative test modes, 2) overall evaluation of alternative I/M programs,
3) detailed review of alternative I/M evaluation results, 4) identification of
candidate I/M options for further study, 5) development of Task 2 program
plan, and 6) final report preparation. These six tasks have been separated
into two volumes.
This volume documents Task 1 wherein: (a) ownership/operation options,
and (b) test modes for I/M programs are defined and reviewed:
(a) Ownership/Operations
• State-owned/operated centralized facilities
• Contractor-owned/operated centralized facilities
• Privately-owned/operated decentralized facilities
• Statistical sampling of vehicle population
(b) Test Modes
• Idle Mode - engine at idle, transmission in neutral, exhaust
gas analyzed
• Loaded Mode - transmission in gear, engine loaded at one or
more speeds, exhaust gas analyzed
• Engine Parameter/Device Inspection - the engine idle rpm and
basic timing compared to manufacturer's specifications - positive
crankcase ventilation valve (PCV), exhaust gas recirculation
valve (EGR), etc., tested for proper performance - no exhaust
gas analysis made
• Safety and noise inspections integrated with the above
This volume defines and reviews alternative administrative approaches and
test mode options for an I/M program. It focuses on: 1) the administrative
options; 2) U.S. EPA requirements for an I/M program; 3) the test mode configura-
tions; and 4) special related topics in the Appendix.
-------
Section 2 reviews the administrative options:
• State-owned/operated centralized facilities
• Contractor-owned/operated centralized facilities
• Privately-owned/operated decentralized facilities
• Statistical sampling of vehicle population
Section 3 presents benefit and cost information of an I/M program, and
Appendix "N" (Appendix A of this report) requirements.
Section 4 discusses the test modes: 1) idle-mode, 2) loaded-mode, and
3) engine parameter/device inspection, and additional related modes, the
Federal Test Procedure (FTP) and the Diagnostic Test Regime. This section
also reviews the State of Michigan Safety and Noise Testing Program as it
might be integrated with emission testing.
Section 5 is a glossary of technical terms used in discussing I/M programs.
Section 6 contains the references, and the Appendices discussed:
• Appendix N credits (Ref. 3)
• Short-test emissions standards as related to the FTP
• Loaded-mode truth chart and diagnostic procedures
• Emissions-related parts list
• Noise testing
The information in this volume will serve as the foundation for the
Task 2 evaluation.
-------
Section 2
ADMINISTRATIVE OPTIONS
This section reviews the alternative I/M ownership/operation configura-
tions for the State of Michigan, and provides information that will allow a
comparison of the administrative options:
• State-owned/operated centralized facilities
• Contractor-owned/operated centralized facilities
• Privately-owned/operated decentralized facilities
• Statistical sampling of vehicle population
This information has been compiled from past and present I/M programs, and
is organized into three subsections:
• Administrative options defined - provides working definitions for
each administrative option
• Review of background information - provides an analysis of each
option utilizing past and present I/M programs
• Functional comparisons between administrative options - provides a
table of organization for each option by identifying ancillary
organizations and their related support services.
-------
2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE OPTIONS DEFINED
The four administrative options characterize the operational format of
the inspection phase of I/M.* These administrative options are:
• State-owned/operated centralized facilities - A designated public
authority assumes complete managerial and operational control of
publicly-owned test facilities.
• Contractor-owned/operated centralized facilities - A corporation,
selected through competitive bidding, assumes operational responsi-
bility for inspection. The contractor and not the State assumes
financial responsibility for constructing and operating test centers.
Administrative control is still the responsibility of a public
authority.
• Privately-owned/operated decentralized facilities - A public
authority certifies and licenses qualified establishments (e.g.,
independent service garages and dealerships) to perform inspections.
Managerial and operational authority is provided by each respective
establishment. However, the State regulates and oversees the program
to ensure that I/M requirements and provisions are met. This system
provides a network of decentralized inspection and repair facilities
which are certified and controlled by the State.
• Random sampling of vehicle population - Statistical sampling relat-
ing to an I/M program is the process of collecting I/M data (such
as emission, costs, benefits, repair, etc.), to provide a basis for
trend characteristics.
The collection of such data on a certain number of vehicles from a
specific vehicle population is called a sample of the data of the
population, while the process (whereby the sample is selected) is
called sampling. The nature of the sampling process is very likely
*Service garages, dealerships, and independents comprising the repair industry
will provide the requisite maintenance for failed vehicles identified by the
inspection phase.
-------
to determine the success or failure of the deduction arrived at from
the data.
It is necessary that the method of choosing the sample will ensure
the sample will contain the same proportion of age/type/size/make/etc.,
characteristics of vehicles as contained in the total population.
To achieve these objectives, a random sampling technique must be
introduced. A "roulette wheel" selection of the area population could
be programmed to provide for such a random selection.
A program to test a statistical sample of vehicles is an alternative
to mandatory testing of all vehicles. It could be operated by either
the State or a contractor, but is not an acceptable method to the EPA.
Conceptually, the selection of a specific administrative option would not
have an impact on emission reduction, except in the case of a statistical
sample operation, which would be less effective. However, the specific adminis-
trative option chosen will have a substantial affect on capital and operational
expenditures, quality assurance, and enforcement. These issues are discussed
using information from I/M programs presently operating in other states.
2.2
BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF PRESENT I/M PROGRAMS
Information on I/M programs operating in other states is summarized in
Table 2-1. The programs are classified as State-operated, contractor-operated,
or private-garage operated. For each program, detailed information such as
responsible agency, number of vehicles tested, stringency factors, test mode
used, facility site, and estimated cost data (i.e.; capital, operation, and
inspection cost) is provided.
Government I/M programs can be divided into State-operated, county-operated,
or municipality-operated programs. State-operated I/M programs exist in New
-------
1
o
Q
eu
S
V.
H
C5
j2
w
t>4
w
H
X
M
rH
. 3 _•
i3 >
MM '
5" In •
en M
a.
£ oT
3 2
O »3
M J
I? M
> £
M
*1 CJ
s- a
z "*
S
^
a
j
g
0,
>«
s;
S
8
Ci
CM
5T
-3
g
c
•H
O JJ
^ ijj ui
v> CD «>
(•1
n (N
• CN
""* fN
— In
r- 0)0^
^ W ^-4
£ ^ ""*
O M
i/1 X -H
• r^ O
u> 2
~4 rH
m
1*1 p*
CO
1 1
fl) (U
•3 m T3 O
^^
01 ^
to > rO
! 91
O 4)
cn m —4
• in .2
m « — -
o.'>
S a) e
a a a
CO T)
10 S
U .3_ 13
' 3 3
31 u
3 o o
cs h &
Z O
.
Z
a
CJ
Jj
a «
O 1Q
•
M
9
*o
3
O
C
in
w
o
2
>
^j
4J
*w
y
^n
«•
0)
c
i
*
z
0)
2
0]
3
o
o
(M
— t
«
^
c
C)
u
0
o
0.
~4
y
»4
2
2
C2
x
CU
CO
CO
o
1
Qt
^t
«4
^
u
5
0
y
<
•^
Jj
a
c
o
c
^4
U
W IB •
CO . 01
CJ M 44
S t: u
18 « a
14 i4 J«
DI 1) O
Q > -4
U 0 -J
a. o co
r*.
i
in
*
-^
.^
r»
^4
^«
a
CN
&
in
a
g
a>
in
4) I*)
5 o
M r*l
•Jl
C
JJ —4
2< 3
0) W
a J
o 3
01 CJ
O •
—4 >
5 M
ta 0
0 (0
c o
••4 -H
-t -C
^ o
§ "to
• 4J
<*t !jt e
(*> C GJ
v> -H E
1 -c -tJ
O 3 M
O ^-* 3
. o i-i
O S 15
in -* --4 «j
«• v> —
*
X
0
u
&
s* ^
p-
o m en
• - v>
^.^
^*
r*
en
•-4
in
• r*»
o -*
w- O
U)
C
0
•H
T? +J
M V nj
•H tfl JJ
C tn
o o
-4 w
J TJ
>
f*l ^ la
(N Qd
n - >. a
18 cfl U M
u ^ u
O 0 O
-4 3 JJ Q
* U O in
M _i g .
-3 ^
• • 14 c a
JJ M Q 13 a
3T en o m 3 a)
a E « s o
.C -4 Li
• JJ • o • 3
-H ,-Q 2* .£ Q< m
i4 O 1] 1) a «
U fl fl 01 >i
fl 0 -H -H J4 C
C O & JJ fl W 0
O 'H C "D ifl
M i4 'O 3 <3 -H •
•H fl C O > U O
L( 2 fl w 33 "** ' CJ
< z
C£
g
6 Ed U
1 li
z — <
3 £s
• •
M
4J
CO
8
w
»*4 ^ fl
O 13 -OJ
•M >
4J -H
u a, j-.
fl 1^ W
1 CJ M
^•fc
{•*.
0
o
_;
01
5) -O
31 cy
18 -U
&4 18
u s. «
CU O M
JJ 1
18 CU <9
> w 31
•*4 10 «
U 4J CU
a. en M
CN 5
51+0
g
CU
•o o
M n
CO
>
q
o
o
in
i
10
18
c- _
o -3
jj
a u
sa
=
a> ia
0 "ca
CH
|^
3
O "
,
-^
JJ
M
3
£
i>4
fl
,
JJ
3
Cfi
CO
-.
o
JJ
0]
JJ
CO
0
u
CO
•3
1
o
—4
W
13
>,
18
3
U
18
u
0
«
18
•O
Jl
O
fl j
= ^
id
ki
CP
0
u
c.
cr.
c
jj
CO
a
s
3
CO
CO
^4
I
CU
IM
u
•^
j:
«
>
14
o
JJ
i
z
"3
0
a
M
3
JJ
id
^4
CO
•H
Oi
5
c
0
tjl
0>
u
o
o
&
Jj
0
JJ
Jj
W
0
9
o:
s
1
O
«^
01
CO
..J.
Q
U
>,
JJ
..4
—4
fl
O*
^8
e
o
<**4
5
^
S
w
O
Is
° s
13 s-
a >8
JJ 3
18 -
05 T
O
JJ
u
a
ia
M
CO
c
0
01
1
J4
*
3
g
*s)
«
j—
0
N
-H
^
^j
.
c
o
3
n
JJ
i
s
o
CO
01
~s
CO
CO
s
3*
1
4}
3
&-
1
(ft
0
•H
JJ
u
V
s
C
VI
CO
a
U
ki
TJ
3
y
QJ •
0}
0 = 3
3 p^ (jj
U ^ i-i
3; a>
w ^ -3
3 ^
A *" T3
M ,8
- C 3
B3-H
N U -J
••4 U -H
-It! 3
O* JJ
'JJ 01
3 £ 0
•8 -J
5) u
JJ 31 0
18 0 01
cn s. <
o •a
"7'7
J3 j3
• rH O
01 O O
cu m in
OWA
.-4
CU > >
1V« ^
O CU CU
JJ -H ~4
3 o a
= "2 'S
uj CU CU
0 > >
C JJ JJ
CU 3 3
s a a
jj i i
k4 JJ X
18 X >
a 31 nj
CU -H it
a J =
i i i
> t^ >
ES§
«
3
jj
•H
C
— »
JJ
a
4t
-------
Jersey and Oregon. The New Jersey program, using an idle test, inspects
4 million light-duty vehicles per year, at 38 safety inspection stations. This
requires a $2.5 million capital cost and $1.33 million annual operating cost.
The Oregon program, which uses leased facilities, required a $0.38 million
capital investment and $2.22 million yearly operating costs.
Municipally-operated programs are operating in Cincinnati, Ohio, and
Chicago, Illinois. These programs inspect 0.2 to 1.0 million vehicles annually.
Cincinnati has only one station (four-lane capacity) but intends to expand the
program in the future. Chicago presently operates five test stations and six
mobile test units. Capital and operating costs vary with the number of test
stations, mobile units, and stringency factor (pass/fail emission parameters).
The only I/M program owned and operated by a contractor is located in
Arizona (Maricopa and Pima Counties). The 12 test stations annually process
an estimated 1.1 million vehicles using an idle-mode test with a 30 percent
stringency factor. Capital costs are estimated at $10 million with annual
operating costs approaching $4 million.
California conducted a 2-year pilot program (Ref. 4), operated by State
personnel. At the completion of this program, California requested competitive
bids from private contractors. A contractor will operate 17 test facilities.
The capital costs are estimated to be $14 million, and the annual operating
costs are estimated to be $22 million (Ref. 5).
Nevada and Rhode Island are the only states that have private-garage
operated I/M programs at this time. Rhode Island has an extensive program
testing 0.5 million vehicles at 923 certified garages. In Nevada, 218 garages
are licensed. As expected, the capital cost expenditure for Rhode Island is
quite large ($1 million) compared to Nevada ($170,000). The Rhode Island
inspection fee is $2. The Nevada average-cost-per-vehicle ranges from $8.50
to $17, which includes the cost for vehicle adjustments when required.
Implementation problems, and their subsequent solutions, are shown in
Table 2-2. The consensus is that inadequate enforcement, mechanics training,
low efficiency, and adverse public reaction, are problem-areas that deserve
8
-------
a
j
n-Going
Utilizing
O
i Longest
iram
rages Now
n a1 V
o
o"
<*1
f-1
w
•n
V
?s
32
Z U
V £
a. *«
G »
o fl
JJ ""
« o*
*•• s
» •*
•3,?
32
«
.3
CO
W *J
a a
- 3
3 fl
j U
Z —
ti n
W -U 4->
0 •* C
•i. i -J
(0 S
o ° 1
•H yi 3
4-1 S W
a 3 1
0) fl -I
fi5
« 0
3} .* fl
> U 2.
i a n
CM J O
nspection
Analyzers
Garage Re
*> « a
» ^ ,fl
3 « U
J3 S
X U W
u
IX
"9
— :
£i£
1
0*
—4
H*
a 2
?2
3 a
°3
§K
-4 V
4J U
•35
.NO 1*0
.Refal
4»
tf)
fM
0)
3}
iJ
ffl
OS
--t 0)
M M
— 3
•4
a *t
W fl
J'SI
b £
^
U
0
c
0
JJ
3
•3 *
o r*
:s
«
u 13
fl C
s fl
u s*
en ^-
r
0) S
JJ I-*
u
Jfl
W 3
D C
J <
-4 C
•1 <
^
* =
•n si
1!
Is
jj
0 0>
9) C
l>
M H
•o
1)
a
fl
n a
W W
D U
» 07
a
C 0)
0 2
*4 V
JJ >
O --4
It
n v
c >•-
M «W
U
-4
fl S
-4 fl
C 1-4
c a*
O 0
— < u
2 a.
eptance ii
u
u
<
4)
0»
fl
3|
V Cl
•« fl
fl U
^ S
M C
1
fl
n
-^
3
DO
V
U
3
0«
U
s
a
^t
u
>• c
•
k4 4J
W C »
tO -«
M h4 •
g.jl«
W Hi &
IX
a*
0
z
J TJ
C C
V fl
T3
U 0
d -2
0 U
JJ >w (D
|i*
O*
t)
3J
fl
U
fr
>,
4)
jj
fl
1
M
03
0
•H
fl
"u
£
2
nels Cstat
anufactur-
= I
So
°s
5*
U 5
3.*
»
C -e
1 1
i en
CJ ^
.5
« -H
0 *
•** c
23
-d
1 S
8 S
V
ased Enfor
Mandatory
0) U
u o
p
*O U
(U +J
i4 U
S 1
ca n
4* £
CT> M
U
* =
o a
«* u
0 >
n* TJ
C ""
fl n
P5
0
tfl -^
ta jz
a
Emission
el
£ T3
3i O
-H £
"" a
a« -u
53
U «W
fl 0
at
v ca
a 3
i
o
fl
3
C
S
0
Jj
3
4
31
Condition
d. Govt. a
« 0
» ti.
u
H -*
oj
0)
u
"a
>
i
U
3
e
O
01
u
c
V
w
0
01
u
V
w
3
JJ
ly Auto-
rogram
-4 Oi
First Fu
spection
CQ Z
o ts
•H (U
JJ -U
5 3
X S
X
1 U
- o
|3
§2
cn
at
- 31
Q
C
o
c
Jj
M Imp lumen
nal Area
5 J
13
0)
C
•H
4J
C
O
O
O i
!&
I 01
-------
•o
Cd
3
VI
z
o
o
to
,
o
u
a
3
jj
a
•*4
b*
a
c
o
•H
•U
*
0)
to
fl
V
u
g
l-t
5
z
w
s.
«
ED
U
19
jj
C
2
2
Q.
•o
0)
u
s.
o
u
1
—
w
a
D
a
1
.^
o
c
a
u
s
0
M
a.
D*
?
V
o*
•Jl
a
c
0)
u
fl
3
C
w
s
fl
r-
03
S *J
•** O
u c
^ a
0 fl^
-* a QB
O C 0
is°
S 4J Ml
S3 i
tn —
§»» 5
. " *
I
a
I
s
jj
u
V
0}
01
c
"
c*
•^
-H
fl
M
fr-
0
'JJ
^
It
fl
3 -t
3* fl
01 i
S ^
£ z
j
jj
fl
c
M
a
IQ
M
0
a.
01
c
5
fl
w
t<
0
1
u
(U
z
c
"3
c
o
'
3)
Q
S
0
c
u
9
2
3-
•o
s
a
a
1
1
rnor
1
£
fl
u
0
kl
a<
en
o
c
u
o
z
t
3)
M
ca
CO
§>
•H
kl JJ
s-3
«I
j: «
4J
3 >
•H
S- -u
8 3
1
S
o<
c
o
c
i
JJ
c
-Jj
o
q
•o
OJ
fl
.2
OJ
ijj g)
fl 0
§ s*
w x
^
u
a
o c
y 5)
at **
a* v
ui afi
H* ca
fl
CO S "5
Q <£ V C
J= i a) O
O « D -H
C JJ JJ
U W JJ JJ
ca ui •** en
1 Q,
53
fi a
CJ U
Is
j« a t4
§i§
M 2 a
10
-------
special attention. In most cases, when adequate mechanics training and public
relations programs have been included in the program, the problems are
minimized or resolved.
2.3 ORGANIZATION COMPARISONS
A functional block diagram shown in Figure 2-1, rather than a table of organ-
ization, identifies support services needed for an I/M program.
A State agency coordinates the efforts of all organizations involved in
the program. Other responsibilities of the State agency include quality control
and operational guidance of the inspection centers.
The three administrative approaches (State, contractor, and private garage)
differ only in the operational format of the total I/M framework. For example,
a contractor-owned/operated program (Figure 2-la) could be responsible for its
own in-house quality control program. The State would continue to provide
independent quality control checks of each test station.
A decentralized (private garage) system would require State quality control
checks and a State licensing and certification program for emission test facil-
ities and mechanics.
In addition to the administrative quality control staff, the quality control
section would require field personnel to operate the mobile quality audit unit
and the correlation vehicle. Each test station would be periodically checked
by these units. The mobile unit would check the instrumentation, and the
correlation vehicle would test the total operating system of the inspection
facilities.
Referee stations would be fixed facilities to provide the following services:
• Investigate consumer complaints
• Provide diagnostic capability for determining repair effectiveness
• Provide a waiver of further repair actions
• Information and direction to upgrade equipment and procedures.
11
-------
-:
x
|
H4
U
M
P-t
C_|
v3
M
Z
rn
SERVICE
h
SUPPOR
O
z
TRAIN
1
[THENT p
1
3
< j
* §
< u
i
c
c
a
a
[
|
:
a
N-
a
a
'
5
«
r
»
c
k
1
'
i
«
i
i
i
9
4
7
*
\
:
j CJ
•4 H4
3 U
il
>
•*
5 2
il
—
••••
I
o
s
5
S
RGGIST
1 RECORD!
g
« r
*3 <
a 5
j.
» <
COMPIJl
REFERK
tc/
[CATION
2 j*
ill
A*
Ul
z
"*
(<
T
Z -J)
|S8
U 8 M
^
X
1
C
o
Z
s3
Jl r>
B p
1
Id
S-
6-
n
EM is:; i
|
OPERAT
*• C
2 i
Ol U
f
•^•M
_
— -
—
s
&•
s
STATK
I
§
srioiiin
T.VI3MHO
u >
i 1
1 2
2 «
FIELD
PEBATIONS
O
Ul
M
4 to
chart
(U
>
4J
«3
U
4J
•H
C
•H
*a
r-l
•H
4-1
O
EM
rH
1
fa
12
-------
U B
0. £.
O n
Si
i. <
•u
H
Ed1
•Si-
\\
£-) Ed
"C O
if
1 _______
OJ
w
•H
T3
(tj
3
8
1
D OPGKATI
a
M
NISTKATOR
1
RATED
u
o
g
i
""
EKATIONAL
NTKOL
0 O
•*•*••
e
i
U OS
U Cil
0. r*
(N
NiiPECTION
ENTER
Bfl -i3
5 u
H
CN
M
3
Cn
•H
I
S""
a £•
ds
2 o
is
p en
M ^
*
r
•MM
«
N
11
q 5
a s
E 2
s
z
o
H4
CO
e
4J
tn
"a;
cn
its
&
••MM
CM
§
&"
"^
TJ
0)
N
r-l
fl S
••••.1
-*
I
s
en
-P 4J
c cn
OJ >!
o tn
0)
t3 T3
0)
0 0)
4-J 4J
U 03
(13 -H
^ C
JJ -M
c e
0 T3
O (T3
•••Mi
I-! n
M S
^ Z
3.8
_-••
P_
ca
w
•Jl
II
^ ,>i
U -U
a; G
H 3
4-1 O
Q) O
t-l
sl
m
C
n
•H
ifl
O
•H
•H
T3
O
2
^3
(N
_
si
Cd U
h- 3.
i. O
u;
13
-------
Section 3
BENEFIT AND COST OF I/M PROGRAM
I/M program benefits can include fuel savings, improved vehicle performance,
increased vehicle life, and the primary objective of I/M programs, the reduction
of pollutant emissions. Costs of an I/M program include capital costs of the
test facilities, operating costs of the test facilities, program administration,
and failed vehicle repair costs. Capital and operating costs are offset by
an inspection fee paid by the vehicle owner. Repair costs are normally paid
by the vehicle owner, but are shared by vehicle manufacturers when emission-
related parts fail, and are replaced under warranty.
3.1 EMISSION REDUCTION BENEFITS
I/M programs will reduce pollutant emission from automotive vehicles by
requiring repair of those vehicles which fail to meet the emission standards.
The benefits are reduced atmospheric pollutants, and compliance with the
Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA).
Automobiles emit three major polluting gases: hydrocarbons (HC), carbon
monoxide (CO), and oxides of nitrogen (NO ). CO is a colorless, odorless gas
produced by the incomplete burning of fossil fuels. When breathed, CO reduces
the oxygen available to the brain and body cells and puts an extra burden on
the heart and lungs.
HC and NO interact in the presence of sunlight to form photochemical
X
oxidants (smog). Ozone (0 ) , the main constituent of photochemical smog, causes
irritation to the eyes and mucous membranes, and aggravates existing respiratory
illnesses.
14
-------
3.1.1 Appendix N - Emission Reductions Achievable Through Inspection and
Maintenance of Light-Duty Vehicles, Motorcycles, and Light-Duty
Trucks
Appendix N is part of the Federal Regulations, and is published in Part 51,
Chapter 40, Code of Federal Regulations. A revision to Appendix N has been pro-
posed by the U.S. EPA (Federal Register, May 2, 1977), and is expected to be
promulgated in 1979. The revised Appendix N is included as Appendix A to this
report.
Appendix N defines minimum requirements for an I/M program to be adopted
by a State, and states that:
"Basic program requirements. There are two basic types of operation which
may be utilized for an I/M program, namely a centralized inspection
system (government or contractor-operated) and a decentralized inspection
system (private commercial garages). In order to obtain full emission
reduction benefits for either a centralized or decentralized inspection
system, certain minimum requirements are established, which if not met,
will result in assessed emission reduction lower that those listed in
Tables 1 through 5 of this Appendix.
"a. Program requirements—Minimum for all programs.
i. Provisions for regular periodic inspection (at least annually)
of all vehicles for which emissions reductions are claimed.
ii. Provisions to ensure that failed vehicles receive the mainte-
nance necessary to achieve compliance with the inspection
standards. The basic method is to require that failing vehi-
cles pass a retest following maintenance.
iii. Provisions for quality control. The reliability of the inspec-
tion system and equipment accuracy must be ensured. This will
include routine maintenance, calibration and inspection of all
I/M equipment, and routine auditing of inspection results.
"b. Minimum decentralized program requirements. In order to receive the
basic emission reduction benefits for a decentralized I/M program,
the following requirements must be included in addition to provisions
listed in Section 5(a).
i. Provisions for the licensing of inspection facilities which
insure that the facility has obtained, prior to licensing,
analytical instrumentation which has been approved for use by
the appropriate governing agency. A representative of the
facility must have received instructions in the proper use of
the instruments and in vehicle testing methods. The facility
must agree to maintain records, to collect signatures of opera-
tors whose vehicles have passed inspection, and to submit to
inspection of the facility.
15
-------
ii. Records required to be maintained should include the descrip-
tion (make, year, license number, etc.) of each vehicle inspected,
and its emissions test results. Records must also be maintained
on the calibration of testing equipment.
iii. Copies of these inspection records should be submitted on a
periodic basis to the governing agency for auditing.
iv. The governing agency should inspect each facility at least once
every 90 days to check the facilities' records, check the
calibration of the testing equipment and observe that proper
test procedures are followed.
v. The governing agency should have an effective program of
unannounced/unscheduled inspections both as a routine measure
and as a complaint investigation measure. It is also recommended
that such inspections be used to check the correlation of
instrument readings among inspection facilities."
Emission reductions attainable through in I/M program are documented in
Appendix N. In the revised Appendix N, I/M effectiveness is given as a function
of the levels of technology employed to: reduce pollutant emissions in vehicles;
the stringency of the emissions standards; the number of years the program
has been in force; and the adequacy of mechanic training. Other factors used
to calculate program effectiveness are: the number of vehicles in each age
group (model-year); and the average number of miles each age group is driven
annually.
Credits are used to determine effectiveness. The units of credits are HC% and
C0%, and represent the approximate amounts of HC and CO emission reductions
accomplished by the program. The number of credits per program vary with:
the stringency of the program; the age of the program; the adequacy of the
mechanics training; and the number of Technology I and Technology II vehicles
in the program.
Two levels of emission control technology are used to classify light-
duty vehicles, and to determine credits. All light-duty vehicles built prior
to model-year 1975 are Technology I vehicles. All 1975 and subsequent model-
year light-duty vehicles are classified as Technology II vehicles. The
general use of catalytic converters in 1975 and newer vehicles is a prime
difference between Technology I and Technology II vehicles.
16
-------
The stringency of an I/M program is measured by the stringency factor
which is defined in Appendix N as follows:
"Stringency factor is a measure of the rigor of a program based on the
estimated fraction of the vehicle population whose emissions would
exceed cutpoints for either or both carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons
were no improvements in maintenance habits or quality of maintenance
to take place as a result of the program."
The stringency of the emissions standards has a direct relationship with
the effectiveness of an I/M program. High stringency factors provide more
credits than lower stringency factors since more vehicles will fail the test
because of lower cutpoints required by higher stringency factors. These lower
cutpoints (lower percentages of CO and HC in the exhaust for pass/fail points)
also require that the failed vehicles be adjusted and/or repaired to provide
lower emissions to pass the retest. Since more vehicles will fail high strin-
gency tests, and the failed vehicles must pass the retest at low emission levels,
the emissions reduction is greater than provided by lower stringency factors.
Stringency factors greater than 0.50 are not used because they may be
counterproductive. This is due to the poor correlation between the short-
cycle tests used in I/M programs, and the FTP used to certify vehicles. The
short-cycle tests with high cutpoints are effective in predicting high FTP
emitters, but are not consistent predictors when stringency factors higher than
0.50 are used. If stringency factors greater than 0.50 are used, some of
erroneously failed vehicles, could produce high levels of HC and CO after
repair. An analysis of data presented in Appendix B supports this possibility.
The stringency factor and the fraction of inspected vehicles failed (fail-
ure rate) may be nearly the same the first year the I/M program is in force,
but they may differ due to quality of maintenance provided to the vehicle popu-
lation, and the validity of the cutpoints used. In subsequent years of testing,
the fail rate can be lower than the stringency factor if vehicle maintenance
and repair meet high standards.
17
-------
For any inspection year, Appendix N provides first-year credits (CO and
HC reduction in percent) for all model-year vehicles inspected as a function
of stringency. The credits for Technology I vehicles and Technology II are
different for every stringency factor except the HC% for stringency factor
0.30 as shown in Table 3-1. Those vehicle classes which have been inspected
two or more times, gain additional credits up to the maximum for eight or more
inspections, as shown in Table 3-2. Subsequent-year credits are the same for
Technology I and Technology II vehicles.
When mechanics training is a part of the program, additional credits may
be added. As with the basic credits, first-year credits are applied to all
vehicles inspected, and subsequent-year inspection credits are additive.
Different percentages are shown for Technology I and Technology II, and all
mechanics training credits are a function of the stringency factor. The U.S.
EPA determines what percentage of the maximum credits shown in Tables 3-3
and 3-4 can be used.
An example of the reductions in CO and HC emissions that could be achieved
for calendar year 1987, as a function of I/M program starting date and strin-
gency factor used, is shown in Table 3-5.
3.2 OTHER I/M BENEFITS
3.2.1 Fuel Savings
There are fuel savings for owners of vehicles that have been repaired to
meet the emission levels mandated by an I/M program. The reduction of CO and
HC in the exhaust emission is due (in part) to more complete combustion of the
fuel by the engine (particularly in Technology I vehicles), resulting in
improved mileage because more useful energy is extracted from a given amount
of fuel. The fleet wide fuel savings are a function of many variable. The
stringency factor, the number of miles traveled, the number of vehicles
inspected, and the improvement in fuel consumption for failed vehicles after
repair are particularly important. They are related to the fleet fuel saving
in the following manner:
18
-------
Table 3-1. FIRST YEAR OF PROGRAM CREDITS
PERCENT
FACTOR
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
HC
Tech-
nology
I
1
5
7
10
11
Tech-
nology
II
1
3
9
16
24
CO
Tech-
nology
I
3
8
13
19
22
Tech-
nology
II
8
20
28
3-3
37
Table 3-2. SUBSEQUENT YEARS PROGRAM CREDIT
ADDITIVE CREDIT
NUMBER OF
INSPECTIONS
2
3
4
5
6
7
3 or more
KC
(%)
7
14
20
25
30
33
36
CO
(%)
a
15
19
23
27
30
35
19
-------
Table 3-3. MECHANIC TRAINING FIRST YEAR CREDITS
STRINGENCY
FACTOR
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
TECHNOLOGY I
HC
1%!
1
3
4
6
7
CO
ill
5
7
9
3
7
TECHNOLOGY II
HC
3
5
4
1
1
CO
7
10
10
7
5
Table 3-4. MECHANIC TRAINING SUBSEQUENT YEAR CREDITS
TECHNOLOGY I
STRINGENCY
FACTOR
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
HC
3
4
6
5
3
NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS
CO
3
3
5
5
2
3 or more
HC
15
10
9
5
3
CO
18
15
9
5
2
STRINGENCY
FACTOR
TECHNOLOGY II
NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS - 2 OR MOKE
HC
CO
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
10
3
2
1
1
4
2
1
3
1
20
-------
TABLE 3-5. LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE EXHAUST EMISSION REDUCTIONS
FROM INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1987
BASIC PROGRAM W/MECHANICS TRAINING5'b
STRINGENCY STARTING CO HC CO HC
FACTOR % DATE0 (%) (%) (%) (%)
10 07/01/80 . 22.7 26.0 46.8 42.5
07/01/81 21.5 24.7 46.0 42.3
07/01/82 19.6 22.6 43.2 39.0
12/31/82 18.3 20.8 41.6 37.3
20 07/01/80 29.3 30.4 54.2 49.0
07/01/81 27.9 28.7 52.0 47.2
07/01/82 25.9 25.7 50.2 45.3
12/31/82 24.5 23.9 48.8 43.6
30 07/01/80 34.0 33.6 57.7 52.1
07/01/81 32.3 32.6 56.3 50.9
07/01/82 30.4 30.0 54.5 49.3
12/31/82 28.6 27.5 53.2 47.6
40 07/01/80 38.2 35.7 61.1 57.7
07/01/81 36.6 34.2 59.8 54.3
07/01/82 34.3 31.8 57.9 53.1
12/31/82 32.8 30.0 56.5 51.2
50 07/01/80 41.4 36.8 62.5 57.2
07/01/81 40.0 35.5 61.1 56.1
07/01/82 37.9 32.9 59.3 54.3
12/31/82 35.5 31.0 57.9 52.8
NOTE: Policy guidance regarding the utilization of
of I/M credits is due in November 1978.
a
Assumptions:
1. All model years are included in the program.
2. Nationwide averages of vehicle mix by model year plus
distribution of vehicle miles traveled by model year
are assumed.
Utilization of all or part of this credit can be made with USEPA
approval.
Mandatory repair for failed vehicles is initiated on this date.
Ref: "Motor Vehucle Emission Inspection/ Maintenance Information
Kit," EPA-460/3-78-013
21
-------
F « V x T x F (P - F . )
s m v s ca cb
where:
F » Fuel saved per year (gallons)
., •, ^. , / Miles
V = Average miles per vehicle year („--•.—:— )
m * e * Vehicle Year
T = Total number of vehicles inspected (Vehicles)
Sf = Stringency factor (No Units)
- ^ . • .Gallons.
F = Average fuel consumption after repair ( . )
_ _ _ . . _ . .Gallons,
F = Average fuel consumption before repair (rrrr )
Results of preliminary studies indicate that fuel economy can be increased
from 3.0 to 3.8 percent (Ref. 5). Other reports indicate fuel savings from
0 to 12 percent. The amount of fuel savings depends on the nature of the
vehicle population and the I/M program (Ref. 6,7,8). The methodology for
calculating fleet wide fuel savings is expanded and applied in Volume II,
Section 2.
3.2.2 Performance and Increased Vehicle Life
Although studies to date have not been conclusive, it seems reasonable to
assume that a properly maintained vehicle will experience less wear than if it
is not maintained to manufacturer's specifications. If this relationship is
true, an I/M program will have a positive effect on vehicle life, and emissions
will be reduced to its minimum pollution capability after it is repaired to
the manufacturer's specifications.
3.2.3 Warranty Benefits
The emission control system performance warranty, contained in Section 207
of the Clean Air Act, may provide possible benefit to motor vehicle owners
under an I/M program. Section 207 of the Clean Air Act mandates a new vehicle
and engine emission warranty that includes a general defects warranty in 207(a),
22
-------
a performance warranty in 207(b)*, and an enforcement and recall provision in
207(c). Section 207(a) has generally been interpreted to require manufacturers
to warrant vehicles or engines to be free from defects in materials and work-
manship that will cause them to violate applicable regulations, including
applicable emissions standards.
An applicable list of emissions control items is presented in Appendix D.
It is assumed that failure of these items would degrade the emissions performance
of a vehicle. Section 207(b), which specifies a performance warranty generally
provided for in 2,07 (a) , cannot be implemented at the Federal level until the
administrator promulgates a correlatable short emissions test on which the
performance warranty can be based. When the EPA determines that a short test
is available which is "reasonably capable of being correlated" with the official
certification test, manufacturers will be liable to correct vehicles which fail
such a test regardless of whether any specific part defects have been identified.
Manufacturers argue that the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 showed that
Congress intended to limit the 207(b) performance warranty to "hang-on" com-
ponents only (e.g.; air pump, catalyst, EGR valve). Congress has diminished
the scope of the 207(b) warranty to some extent and its interpretation needs
clarification.
It is assumed that the 207(b) warranty presently applies only to "hang-on"
components after 24,000 vehicle miles. Before the 24,000-mile point has been
reached, however, 207 (b) applies to a broader range of emissions-related com-
ponents. This range is, as yet, undefined, since the EPA has failed to
promulgate a specific list.
Congress did not amend the scope of the 207(a) defects warranty. It still
applies to a broader range of emissions-related components (as yet undefined on
a Federal level) for the full useful life period of 50,000 miles. The warranty,
however, has limits with respect to abuse, neglect or improper maintenance.
*Performance warranty means a warranty that a vehicle's emission will not exceed
the certification emission standards for its useful life, as evidenced by a
correlatable short test.
23
-------
In 1977, the State of California completed a surveillance test program on
1975 and 1976 model-year vehicles.(Ref. 7). These vehicles were testing using:
• FTP 75 test used in new car certification
• Federal Highway Fuel Economy Test (HFET)
• Loaded-mode test
• Acceleration/deceleration driving sequence EPA modal test
• Sealed housing evaporative determination (SHED) test
Only 9 percent of the failed vehicles were failed due to defective com-
ponents . These defective components may not have been covered by warranty
because of:
• Lack of maintenance
• Abuse of vehicle
• Other noncovered reason
It is obvious that the subject of warranty repair work performed requires
further study.
3.3 COSTS OF AN I/M PROGRAM
I/M program costs vary substantially depending on the type of administra-
tion, the type of test, the stringency factor, and the local economic conditions
(e.g.; labor rates, land cost, etc.). The costs of an I/M program include
implementation, capital, and operating costs. To the vehicle owner, there are
inspection fees and repair costs. This subsection presents information on
costs of existing I/M programs.
3.3.1 Implementation, Capital and Operating Costs
Capital costs for an I/M program include all the costs accrued to provide
the test facilities. These include; construction costs; land costs; test
equipment costs; other equipment costs (tools, desks, chairs, etc.).
24
-------
Implementation cost includes all cost to develop the operational details of
the program, such as procedures and training plans to make the inspection
facilities ready for operation.
Operating costs include: costs of hiring and training personnel; salary
costs (wages and benefits); utility costs (gas, electricity, water, telephone);
taxes (property, payroll, supplies, etc.); costs of consumable supplies (paper,
calibration gases, etc.); cost to repair and maintain facilities and equipment;
travel and transportation costs; demurage costs for calibration gas bottles;
cost of mechanic training program; and interest costs on money borrowed for
capital expenditures. Operating costs include all costs of those items required
to provide continuing operation of the facilities.
Costs of existing I/M programs were presented in Table 2-1. In the New
Jersey State-operated program, the capital cost per inspection lane was $36,800;
the average operating cost was $19,600 per lane per year. The New Jersey
program also includes safety inspection. The State of Oregon had a lower
capital cost by leasing the test facilities. Total capital costs for the test
equipment and mobile vans was $380,000. The operating cost was $2.22 million
for biannual inspection of approximately 0.5 million vehicles.
3.3.2 Consumer Inspection Fee
Vehicle owners pay an inspection fee in most states. This fee offsets
the capital and operating costs of the program. The inspection fees for
existing I/M programs range from $3.50 to $12. (In Nevada, the fee includes
the cost of vehicle adjustments (when required) and varies from $10 to $33.)
3.3.3 Repair Costs
In addition to the emission inspection fee, the consumer absorbs the cost
of repair if the vehicle fails the emission test. Several studies have dealt
with the vehicle repair costs that result from failure of an exhaust emission
25
-------
inspection. Repair costs depend primarily on the scope of engine adjustments
and/or tune-up required to pass the retest, level of mechanics training, the
usefulness of the repair instructions given to mechanics, the general condition
of the vehicle, and the technology employed in the vehicle (Technology I or
Technology II). Detailed maintenance procedures have been prepared to aid
mechanics to diagnose engine malfunctions. Unnecessary repairs can be
drastically reduced when mechanics are instructed in proper engine diagnostics.
Major report conclusions relating to repair costs for vehicles failing
emission inspection criteria are:
1. Olson Laboratories, The Short-Cycle Project; Effectiveness of
Short Emission Inspection Tests in Reducing Emissions Through
Maintenance (1973) (Ref. 10)
The average repair cost for servicing vehicles that failed an idle
test was $29.13 when diagnostic information was provided for the
mechanics diagnostic routine. In contrast, the average repair cost
for servicing vehicles that failed the loaded test without diagnostic
information provided to the mechanic was $35.20.
An approximate average unnecessary cost of $10 was incurred in
repairing failed vehicles based upon a review of actual repairs
accomplished versus the repairs indicated by the diagnostic
information.
An approximate average unnecessary cost of $4 was incurred in
repairing failed vehicles after a more thorough training of repair
shop mechanics was completed.
2. Elston and Cooperthwait, New Jersey's Auto Emission Inspection
Program: An Assessment of One Year's Mandatory Operation (June
1975) Ref. 11)
During the first year of mandoatory I/M 80 percent of all failed
vehicles in New Jersey required only idle adjustments or minor
26
-------
tune-ups. The average repair cost for all failed vehicles was
less than $40. Repair cost ranges were idle adjustment, $0 to
$10; minor tune-up, $13 to $40; major tune-up, $30 to $100; engine
overhaul, over $100.
3. Scott Research Laboratories, Inc., Exhaust Emission and Test
Evaluation of the State of California Roadside Idle Emission
Inspection Program and State of California Evaluation of Mandatory
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs (Ref. 12)
In this study, approximately 100 vehicles failed to pass inspection
requirements; subsequently, they were directed to 34 different
Class A repair stations located in the San Bernardino and Riverside
areas of California. The average repair costs by model-year are
shown in Table 3-6.
TABLE 3-6. AVERAGE REPAIR COST BY VEHICLE MODEL-YEAR
Model-Year Vehicles Repaired Repair Cost
1966 10 $29.39
1967 13 37.89
1968 13 42.10
1969 14 37.72
1970 24 21.23
1971 16 32.49
1972 8 33.47
1973 2 26.10
1975a 33 53.00
a
Riverside data - range $8 to $175 (Ref. 2) .
Technology I vehicles manufactured in 1967 through 1969 had com-
paratively high average repair bills. In contrast, late-model
Technology I vehicles (1970 to 1973) were slightly lower. Tech-
nology II vehicles (1974 model-year only) had a higher average
cost than any Technology I vehicles.
27
-------
4. State of Arizona, Arizona Vehicular Emissions Inspection Program
Operation 1977
In this report, repair costs were listed by type of repair facility
and by two vehicle categories—vehicles manufactured without any
exhaust emissions controls (model-years 1964-1967) and vehicles
with exhaust emissions controls (1968-1977 model-years). No
distinction between Technology I and Technology II for the second
category vehicles was made. The costs are shown in Table 3-7.
TABLE 3-7. ARIZONA - DECEMBER 1977 REPORT (Ref. 13)
Type Facility 1964-1967 1968-1977 1964-1977
Franchised Dealers $41.25 $26.82 $27.97
Service Stations 23.06 19.81 21.14
Merchandisers 15.53 20.29 19.43
Tune-up Specialists 36.19 22.86 24.72
Independent Garages 21.33 27.46 26.79
"Do-It-Yourselfers" 14.27 20.61 19.08
Dealerships, as indicated in this survey, have the highest average
repair costs.
5. Clean Air Research Company, An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of
Automobile Engine Adjustments to Reduce Exhaust Emissions (Ref. 14)
The average cost to repair 300 vehicles was $27.47 per vehicle for
both controlled (Technology I), and uncontrolled vehicles,
representing the 1957 to 1970 California vehicle population.
6. Additional Repair Cost Studies - Additional repair cost studies are
presented in Table 3-8.
TABLE 3-8. AVERAGE REPAIR COST FOR FAILED VEHICLES
Stringency
Idle Loaded Factor
California Study (Ref. 5) $21 $23 35%
Northrop (Ref. 9) 34 30 50
EPA (Ref. 15) 26 28 50
Olson (Ref. 16) 26 - 50
28
-------
Both the idle and loaded emission inspection programs can be performed on
a cost/benefit basis if the cost of I/M is measured against the amount of
emission reduction and fuel savings achieved. For most owners of failed
vehicles, the cost of repair is well within acceptable limits. For the very
small percentage of vehicles that would require a major tune-up or an engine
overhaul to meet established emission criteria, states can set a ceiling on
the maximum dollar amount that would be required to be paid for emissions-
related adjustments.
Repair Cost Ceilings, from a California study (Ref. 5), examines the
effect on I/M program benefits (improved fuel economy, reduced CO and HC
emissions), when the failed vehicles with the highest costs-to-repair are
exempted from repair. This table indicates that some failed vehicles can be
exempt from repair without producing a mathematical significant reduction in
program benefits. For example, when idle tests were used, there was no signif-
icant increase in benefits derived from repairing those vehicles with repair
costs over $100. When a loaded test was used, the cost was $120. This data
indicates that exceptional economic hardships on vehicle owners can be eliminated
by exempting those vehicles from repair when repair costs exceed the established
maximum without significantly reducing the program benefits. The increase in
public acceptance of an I/M program that provides for exemption based on
repair cost ceilings should be weighted against any decrease in program benefits
that would result from exemptions.
29
-------
Section 4
TEST MODES DEFINITION
In reviewing the emission test modes, safety and noise will be integrated
into each. The short test modes are:
• Idle
• Loaded
• Functional
4.1 FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE
The Federal Test Procedure (FTP) is used to ensure that all vehicles
meet the emission requirements promulgated for their model-year as defined in
Table 4-1. The FTP provides the most reliable measure of exhaust gas emissions,
and is used by the Federal government as a baseline emission test. The FTP
requires a preconditioning period called a cold soak, that requires the vehicle
to remain inoperative for at least 12 hours prior to the emission test. The
test is performed on a chassis dynamometer which provides road-load and inertia
simulation. The dynamometer must also measure the distance traveled during
the test. The vehicle is operated over a driving schedule (simulating a
typical urban route) requires approximately 41 minutes to complete. The
driving schedule has three distinct phases: cold transient; cold stabilized;
and hot transient. Exhaust gas samples are collected in bags for each phase
of the driving schedule by a constant volume sampler (CVS).
Each sample is analyzed for hydrocarbons (EC) , carbon monoxide (CO),
carbon dioxide (CO ) and oxides of nitrogen (NO ).
30
-------
TABLE 4-1. VEHICLE EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS
(LOW-ALTITUDE, NONCALIFORNIA EMISSION STANDARDS)
1. LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES
Model Year
Pre-1968
1968-1969
1970-1971
1972
1973-1974
1975-1973
1977-1979
1980
1981+
Hydrocarbons
no standard
*410 ppm mole volume
*350 ppm mole volume
*275 ppm mole volume
V 2.2 gm/mi
2/ 3.4 gm/mi
3.4 gm/mi
3/1.5 gm/mi
1.5 gm/mi
0.41 gm/mi
0.41 gm/mi
Carbon Monoxide Oxides of Nitrogen
no standard
*2.3% mole volume
*2.0% mole volume
*1.5% mole volume
23 gm/mi
39 gm/mi
39 gm/mi
15 gm/mi
15 gm/mi
7.0 gm/mi
3.4 gm/mi
no standard
no standard
no standard
no standard
no standard
no standard
3 gm/mi
3 gm/mi
2.0 gm/mi
2.0 gm/mi
1.0 gm/mi
*Emission standard varied with vehicle's engine displacement; using 7-mode
driving cycle test
I/ Using 7-mode test
2/ Using 1972 FTP
3/ Using 1975 FTP
2. LIGHT-DUTY TRUCKS (LPT)
a. LDTs less than 6,000 pounds curb weight:
Model Year Hydrocarbons Carbon Monoxide
Pre-1975
1975-1978
1979-1982
1983-1984**
1985+**
Hydrocarbons
gm/mi
gm/mi
Oxides of Nitrogen
gm/mi
SAME STANDARDS AS LDVs (AUTOMOBILES)
2.0 20 3.1
1.7 17.9 2.3
0.99 9.4 2.3
0.99 9.4 1.5
b. LDTs between 6,001 and 8,500 pounds:
Model Year Hydrocarbons Carbon Monoxide
Pre-1979
1979-1982
1983-1984**
1985+**
Hydrocarbons
gm/mi
gm/mi
Oxides of Nitrogen
gm/mi
SAME STANDARDS AS HEAVY-DUTY GAS VEHICLES
1.7 17.9 2.3
0.99 9.4 2.3
0.99 9.4 1.4
**Predicted standards
31
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4-1. (continued)
3. HEAVY-DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLES
Model Year
Standards
Pre-1970
1970-1973
1974-1978
no standards
1983-1984
1985+
CO
HC
NO
I/ COJ
2/ HC plus NO
I/ CO
4/ HC
5/ HC + NO
CO*
HC
NO
X
1.5% mole volume
275 ppm mole volume
no standard
40 grams per bhp-hr
16 grams per bhp-hr
25 gm/bhp-hr
1.5 gm/bhp-hr
10 gm/bhp-hr
29.7 gm/mi*
2.85 gm/mi*
5.35 gm/mi
I/ g/mi equivalent standard is 159 gm/mi Co
2/ g/mi equivalent standard is 12.4 gm/mi HC and 15.3 g/mi NO
3_/ g/mi equivalent standard is 140 gm/mi CO
4_/ g/mi equivalent standard is 3.2 gm/mi HC
5_/ g/mi equivalent standard is 13.3 gm/mi NO
4. HEAVY-DUTY DIESEL VEHICLES
Model Year Carbon Monoxide Hydrocarbons plux Oxides of Nitrogen
Pre-1973
1973
1974-1978
1979-1982
1983+*
no standard
1.5%
40 g/bhp-hr
25 g/bhp-hr
no standard
no standard
16 g/bhp-hr
1.5 gm /bhp HC and lOg NO
SAME AS GASOLINE HDV's
or: 5g HC + NO
x x
5. MOTORCYCLES
Model Year
Pre-1978
1980-1982
1980
1983*
1985*
Hydrocarbons
no standard
5-15 gm/km
5 gm/km
0.97 gm/km
0.97 gm/km
Carbon Monoxide
no standard
17 gm/km
12 gm/km
12 gm/km
12 gm/km
Oxides of Nitrogen
no standard
no standard
no standard
no standard
0.14 g/km
*Predicted standards
32
-------
Alternative test procedures should be evaluated on their ability to
cc rrelate with the FTP. Appendix B contains data that correlates the idle-
and load-mode test procedures for light-duty vehicles (LDV). While the FTP
reads in grams-per-mile, the idle- and loaded-mode short tests used in I/M
programs provide readings in parts-per-million (ppm) mode volume.
4.2 DIAGNOSTIC INSPECTION TEST MODE
The most sophisticated inspection and test concept involves a chassis
dynamometer, an oscilloscope, and other engine analysis equipment operated by
a skilled diagnostician, following a well-developed procedure, who can analyze
faulty engine operation and specify the necessary repair(s) (Ref. 17). A
chassis dynamometer is used to simulate road-load at idle, full throttle,
cruise, and a transient deceleration mode. During each of the operating
modes, the exhaust is analyzed for HC. CO is measured in all modes except
deceleration. Vehicles exceeding the established limits are diagnosed using
the oscilloscope. The patterns displayed for common malfunctions are illus-
trated, and serve as a diagnostic aid.
The test procedure includes engine-load modes that stress certain emission-
critical components. Components that fail during the stress conditions may
be marginal under normal operating conditions. Replacement of these marginal
components may preclude subsequent failure and resultant high exhaust emissions.
The diagnostic test identify specific component failures and direct the
vehicle owner to accomplish specific repairs. This technique could reduce
the owner's repair costs. A sample of a typical diagnostic analysis report is
shown in Table 4-2.
| 4.3 IDLE INSPECTION TEST MODE
Although various emissions studies indicate very low correlation between
the idle-mode test and the FTP, the idle-mode test does identify FTP high
I emitters.
33
-------
TABLE 4-2. DIAGNOS1IC ANALYSIS REPORT
(KEF. 3)
s
u
Function
Air Cleaner
Heat Riser
Garb. Choke Action
Rhythm Test
PCV Valv« Action
Air Injection Pump
Air Injection Check Valves
Gulp Valve
Emission System Hose Cond.
Polarity
Cap
Rotor
Condenser
Coil
Idle Speed
Sp*^ .,__ _„ A-ctugl , . ,
Dwell
Sp*
-------
Recent studies by some automobile clubs, the California Air Resources
Board (ARB) and the State of New Jersey, indicate that the emission measure-
ment at idle engine speed is capable of identifying high emitters of HC and
CO (Ref. 18}. However, NO cannot be successfully measured at idle, since
X
it occurs under loaded conditions (low and/or high cruise-open-throttle
operation).
In the idle inspection test, the engine is run until proper operating
temperature is reached. While the engine is operating at idle, a sample of
the exhaust is analyzed for HC and CO concentrations, and the results recorded.
If the vehicle does not pass the established emission limits, it will be
required to be repaired.
The term "two-speed idle" is frequently used to describe this test since
the vehicle is also operated at higher rpm (2,500) as part of the inspection
test cycle. Vehicle system malfunctions which result in high emissions at
idle rpm, frequently contribute to high emissions over a typical load/speed
range as measured by the standard Federal test. However, the sensitivity of
idle testing can be improved by performing additional testing at higher engine
speeds. The loads during higher rpm operations, provide an opportunity to
measure effectiveness of off-idle carburetor circuits and to detect additional
malfunctions that can contribute to high emissions. During the idle test
procedure, engine operations and emission measurements are accomplished at
2,500 rpm, prior to performing idle measurements. This sequence provides the
opportunity for engine temperature stabilization.
A description of a typical idle test sequence, and diagnostic information
when the vehicle fails is:
A. Pre-Test
Prepare vehicle and equipment for test:
1. Test Equipment - Service, warm up, and calibrate EC/CO test
equipment per manufacturer's specifications
35
-------
2. Test Vehicle - Verify engine is at normal operating temperature
(warm up as required)
3. Hook-Up - Insert probe in exhaust pipe (driver's side, if dual
exhaust), hook up tachometer per manufacturer's instructions
B. Test
Perform HC/CO and rpm measurements and compare to idle test standards:
1. High-Idle - Operate engine in neutral at 2,500 rpm and record
HC/CO measurements.
2. Low-Idle rpm - Operate engine at low idle rpm and record HC/CO
measurements. If the vehicle is equipped with an automatic
transmission, it is placed in drive during the low-idle
portion of the test to duplicate its use during normal driving.
C. Diagnostic Information
High HC - High HC is caused by misfires due to ignition misfires,
advanced ignition timing, exhaust valve leakage, and/or over-lean
mixtures.
High CO - High CO is caused by overrich air/fuel ratios which are
caused by abnormally restricted air cleaner, stuck or partially-
closed choke or carburetor idle circuit failure.
Rough or erratic idle can be caused by PCV valve malfunction,
Idle HC/CO failure/malfunction truth table (Table 4-3) can be used
as a guide to identifying failures.
36
-------
TABLE 4-3. MALFUNCTION TRUTH TABLE
HC CO
Malfunction High Very High High Very High Rough Idle
PCV Valve Dirty/Restricted X X
Air Cleaner Dirty/Restricted X X
Choke Stuck Partially Closed X
Carburetor Idle Circuit Malfunction XX X
Intake Manifold Leak XX X
Ignition Timing Advanced X
Leaky Exhaust Valves XX X
Ignition System Misfire XX X
Source: Northrop Study (Ref. 19)
4.4 LOADED TEST
The loaded test is performed on a chassis dynamometer at vehicle speeds
and road load that are calculated to expose engine faults. The operational
speeds are idle, low-cruise, and high-cruise. After vehicle pretest activities
are performed, the vehicle is positioned on the dynamometer and emission test
equipment attached. The initial test is at high-cruise conditions. The
driver accelerates to a speed and load range of 44 to 50 mph and 21 to 30
horsepower (hp), depending upon vehicle weight. The load is applied to simulate
actual road-load conditions. During this period, the engine temperature is
stabilized. High-cruise emission measurements are performed, and the vehicle
speed and load is reduced to 22 to 30 mph and 6 to 12 hp depending again upon
vehicle weight. After measurement, the vehicle is returned to idle for final
measurements prior to post-test operations.
Those operating modes that expose these engine faults are high-cruise,
low-cruise, and idle (Ref. 20). For each of these modes, different failure
limits are established for HC, CO, and NO concentrations. By referring to a
X
logic diagram called a "truth" chart, corresponding probable engine malfunc-
tions and adjustments are denoted as an aid to the repair technician.
37
-------
A description of a typical loaded test sequence with diagnostic informa-
tion derived from testing when the vehicle fails is:
A. Pre-Test
Prepare vehicle and equipment for test:
1. Test Equipment - Calibrate HC/CO/NO test equipment per manu-
facturer 's specification
2. Test Vehicle - Verify engine is at normal operating temperature
3. Hook-Up - Position vehicle on dynamometer, adjust controls for
proper dynamometer load setting, and insert probe in exhaust
tail pipe
B. Test
Perform HC/CO/NO measurements and compare to test standards:
X
1. High-Cruise - Operate vehicle at speed and load appropriate for
test vehicle weight. Record HC/CO/NO measurement
2. Low-Cruise - Operate vehicle at speed and load appropriate for
test vehicle weight. Record HC/CO/NO measurements
3. Idle - Operate engine with transmission in neutral in manual
shift vehicle; drive in automatic transmission vehicles at idle
rpm and record HC/CO/NO measurements
C. Diagnostic Information
Diagnostic information is derived from a diagnostic truth chart. An
example of a truth chart and it's use is included in Appendix C.
38
-------
4.5 TRANSIENT-MODE INSPECTION AND TEST (ALTERNATIVE LOADED-MODE)
A transient-mode driving pattern, frequently used for emission testing,
consists of a nine-mode cycle called the Federal short-cycle test. This short
cycle consists of specific changes in vehicle speed, and acceleration/deceleration
rates, over a time period of 125 seconds. The vehicle is positioned on the
dynamometer and driven through this cycle. The dynamometer must be calibrated
to apply top road-load and inertial-load specified for the weight of the
vehicle. This cycle is more representative of emission levels produced on the
road, and requires all the equipment used in the FTP.
4.6 ENGINE PARAMETER/DEVICE INSPECTION
For this approach, vehicles are subjected to a sequence of inspections
that determine the mechanical functional condition of various emissions-
related vehicle systems. Components and/or operating parameters with measure-
ments outside of accepted tolerances, are required to be replaced or adjusted
to specification. Table 4-4 presents test parameters and their emission
relationships. This approach does not actually measure emission levels,
although emission measurememts may be made to evaluate the state of certain
vehicle systems (e.g., measurement of idle CO concentration to evaluate proper
idle air/fuel ratio adjustment).
39
-------
Table 4-4. ENGINE PARAMETER/DEVICE TEST AND EMISSION RELATIONSHIPS
EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM
1. Carburetor System
a. Choke
b. Metering rod
c. Power valve
d. Idle adjustment
e. Float and valve
INDICATION OF
Adjustment
Adjustment
For ruptured diaphragm
Fuel mixture
Float level
f. Vacuum break valve Ruptured diaphragm or
loose vacuum hose
2. Ignition System
a. Spark plugs
b. Wires
c. Cap
d. Rotor
e. Vacuum advanced
f. El Mag trigger
g. Timing
3. Thermal Air Inlet
4. Heat Riser
5. PCV Components
6. EGR Components
7. EVAP Components
Electrode deterioration
Cable deterioration
Terminal corrosion or
erosion
Terminal corrosion or
erosion
Ruptured diaphragm or
loose vacuum
Deter ioration
Adjustment
Ruptured diaphragm or
loose vacuum hose
Stuck
Clogged
Stuck
Clogged
8. Air Injection System Broken hose or fault air
9. Spark Delay Valves
10. Three-Way Catalyst
11. Reduction Catalyst
12. Oxidation Catalyst
pump
Stuck
High ppm HC
0_ emissions status
0 emissions status'
POLLUTANT EMISSION
RELATION
H£
x
X
X
X
X
X
CO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NO
X
X
In lieu of 0 emissions status, a gas sample would have to be checked before and
after the catalyst. Visual inspection could be made for a general status; dis-
coloration of the stainless steel case is indicative of higher temperature
effects and possible malfunction.
40
-------
4.7 ASSOCIATED PROGRAMS
There are several associated programs that may be efficiently integrated
with I/M. These programs are categorized as follows: Safety Inspection,
Noise Inspection, Safety and Noise Integrated with I/M. The Safety and Noise
Inspection paragraphs discuss the benefits derived from these inspections and
the current developments in inspection techniques.
4.7.1 Safety Inspection
The vehicle-in-use (VIU) standards and periodic motor vehicle inspection
programs presently operating emphasize safety-related components. There is a
general belief that vehicles in good operating condition are less likely to be
involved in accidents. Periodic motor vehicle inspection is recognized as a
factor in reducing automobile accidents. Organizations that have a significant
role in developing safety-related VIU inspection standards include:
• For Vehicles Under 10,000 Pounds — The National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), the Motor Vehicle Manufacturers
Association (MVMA), and the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) .
• For Motorcycles — The ANSI and the Motorcycle Industry Council.
In addition to these organizations, state and local governments with
periodic motor vehicle inspection programs also have a limited role in develop-
ing safety-related inspection standards. States that have adopted standards
and methods have chosen those initially promulgated by the NHTSA and/or the
cognizant industry associations in most cases.
A comparison of the Federal VIU Standards (Part 570) developed by the
NHTSA with' those developed by MVMA, ANSI, and Michigan for vehicles under
10,000 pounds, is presented in Table 4-5 (Ref. 20,21,22,23, and communications
from the State of Michigan).
41
-------
Table 4-5. SUMMARY OF NHTSA, MVMA, AT3I AND MICHIGAN
SAFETY STANDARDS FOR VEHICLES UNDER 10,000 POUNDS
AUTOMOTIVE
SYSTEM NHTSA (Part 570)
Service Brake X
Power Brake X
Steering X
Suspension X
Tires X
Wheel Assembly X
Lighting
Electrical
Horn
Glazing
Mirrors
Windshield
Wipers
Washers
Body/Sheet Metal
Exhaust
Fuel
Emissions
ORGANIZATION
MVMA ANSI (D7.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1-1973)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Michigan"
X
X
X
X
1»
xb
X
X
xc
X
X
X
d
X
Source -.
3.
4.
All lights.
J.D. Flora, R.F. Corn, R.C. Copp, Highway Safety Research
Institute, The University of Michigan, Report
UM-HSRl-76-9-2. Evaluation of the Michigan trial substitute
vehicle inspection program, ASG 1976.
J.D. Flora, R.F. Corn, R.C. Copp, Highway Safety Research
Institute, May 1976 (Report UN-HSRl-76-9-1.
J.D. Flora et al, UM-HSR1-77-57 Ltd-August 1977.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Evaluation of Diagnostic
Analysis and Test Equipment for Small Automotive Repair
Establishments, July 1978.
"Safety and vision impaired.
Smoke testing only.
42
-------
The State of Michigan conducted a 2-year study to evaluate the effects of
the Michigan check lane inspection system as defined in References 21, 22, 23.
The Michigan trial substitute vehicle inspection program required that a 6 to
15 percent statistical sample receive the safety inspection as noted in
Table 4-5. The safety inspection was performed as follows:
O Vision Defects - Visual inspection for glass (safety glass, windows
cracked or chipped, operating windshield wipers and washers, and
condition of mirrors.
• Lighting Defects - Headlight aiming and output, high-beam indicator
lights, tail lights, stop lights, and license plate lights.
• Exhaust Defects - Noise and excessive smoke.
• Control Defects - Steering, the foot and parking brake fay the wheel-
pull method, and by the moving/stopping test method. Tread depth,
tire condition, and tire pressure.
• Miscellaneous Defects - Horns, licenses and registrations, and
seat belts.
The conclusions and recommendations are:
9 The primary purpose of the vehicle safety study was to estimate the
effect of a 15-percent check-lane inspection program and to compare
this with the estimated effect of a periodic (annual) motor vehicle
inspection program. It was concluded that the increase in the rate
of inspection from a level of about 5 percent (Statewide) to a level
of 15 percent did not change the overall rate of failure of the
inspection.
® The sampling check to simulate a periodic motor vehicle inspection
indicated that the simulated periodic motor vehicle inspection
group did not experience a significant improvement rate from one
year to the next. It was concluded that operating the check lanes
43
-------
with an inspector to select vehicles for test was successful due to
his ability to visually select vehicles that appeared to have defects.
Thus, it was not a random sample, but a select sample check.
» The comparison of the moving/stopping test with the wheel-pull brake
inspection indicated that the moving/stopping test more accurately
determined the car's braking capability. It is also quicker and
easier to perform and was recommended for adoption as the inspection
procedure for checking brakes.
9 Drivers in Jackson County showed a greater knowledge and awareness
of the check lane inspection than did those in Monroe County. This
coincided with a more intensive information campaign in Jackson
County. It was recommended that the public information campaign be
continued.
As shown in Table 4-5, the standards developed by NHTSA, MVMA, and ANSI
are similar to those in Michigan. The greatest difference is that the NHTSA
VIU standards prescribe tests for only those systems which have been shown to
be major causal or contributing factors to accidents (i.e.; brakes, steering
and alignment, suspension, tires, and wheel assemblies), while ANSI, MVMA, and
Michigan also include standards for automotive systems that have less direct
causal relationships to accidents (e.g., glazing and lighting).
4.7.2 Noise Inspection
4.7.2.1 Contribution of Surface Transportation to Urban Noise
A variety of noise studies have shown that surface transportation composed
of automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, etc., is the major component of general
urban noise. Automobiles and trucks contribute about equally to the total
amount of noise in urban and rural areas, particularly near major highways.
Individual trucks generate more sound than automobiles, but automobiles tend
to make up the difference by outnumbering trucks.
44
-------
The basic noise sources for automobiles and trucks are the same, but they
do not have the same relative importance for these two vehicle types under
the same driving conditions. The noise sources are:
Engine^
exhaust noise
inlet noise
radiation from engine casing
-due to combustion
-due to valves
-fan and other ancillary equipment
Running Gear and Accessories
drive train
tires
Aerodynamics
air flow over wheel wells and other surfaces
irregularities
SHED vorticity from the vehicle
boundary layer turbulence
Considering all of these sources, the most definitive work on noise
levels has been done on the engine itself. However, it is known that other
individual sources (such as the fan and tires) can be strong contributors to
the radiated noise. In most cases, tire noise and aerodynamic noise become
important in the same speed range. It may not always be possible to separate
these two sources from each other.
4.7.2.2 Passenger Car Noise Sources
For passenger cars, the evidence shows that a rank order of noise sources
would be as follows:
LOW-SPEED (URBAN) HIGH-SPEED (FREEWAY)
engine exhaust tires
cooling fan aerodynamic noise
engine casing radiation engine noise
45
-------
4.7.2.3 Truck Noise
Existing data indicates that motorcycles and trucks generally are noisier
than passenger cars. A well-muffled truck is only about 10 dB noisier than a
passenger car, where trucks with straight exhaust can be as much as 20 to
25 dB noisier. In general, noise of motorcycles is also due to inadequate
muffling on some models. These sources can be reduced to acceptable levels
with adequate muffling.
4.7.2.4 Promulgated Noise Regulation
Medium and Heavy-Duty Trucks - On October 30, 1974, notice was published
in the Federal Register (39 FR 38338) that the EPA was proposing noise emission
standards for new medium and heavy trucks. The purpose of this notice was to
establish final noise emission standards for new medium and heavy trucks by
establishing a new Part 205 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
This final rule-making is promulgated pursuant to Sections 6, 10, 11, and 13,
of the Noise Control Act of 1972; 86 Stat. 1234; Public Law 92-574 (the Noise
Control Act).
Standard and Effective Date - The regulation establishes standards and
enforcement procedures for noise emissions resulting from the operation of
newly manufactured medium and heavy trucks over 10,000 pounds gross vehicle
weight rating (GVWR). The standard (specified A-weighted) sound pressure
level is measured at a distance of 50 feet (15.24 meters) from the longitud-
inal centerline of the truck, using fast meter responses. The standard measure-
ment procedure used to obtain the data is presented in more detail in S205.54
of the Code of Federal Regulations.
The standard and effective dates are:
Sound Level Decibel A-weighted (dBA) Effective Date
83 January 1, 1978
80 January 1, 1982
(Reserved) January 1, 1985
46
-------
The enforcement procedures include production verification, selective
enforcement auditing procedures, warranty, compliance labeling and anti-
tampering provisions.
Motorcycles - On May 28, 1975, the EPA identified motorcycles as a major
source of noise. In accordance with the requrement of the Noise Control Act,
this notice proposes to add two new subparts to Part 205 of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations establishing noise emission regulations for new
motorcycles and new motorcycle replacement exhaust systems. Compliance with
the proposed standards is expected to cause an average 5 db reduction in new
street motorcycle sound levels by 1985, and a 2-to-9 db reduction in sound
levels of new off-road motorcycles. Proposed noise standards for motorcycle
replacement exhaust systems are anticipated to cause significant reductions in
motorcycle noise impact by eliminating the availability of ineffective motor-
cycle replacement exhaust systems. Under the provisions of the Noise Control
Act, regulation of motorcycle operation after the time of sale is reserved for
State and local authorities.
Standards - The proposed noise emission standards and effective dates for
street and off-road motorcycles are presented in Table 4-6.
Table 4-6. PROPOSED NOISE EMISSION STANDARDS
Sound Level
EFFECTIVE DATE (dBA)
Street motorcycles:
January 1, 1980 83
January 1, 1982 80
January 1, 1985 78
Moped-type street motorcycles:
January 1, 1980 70
Off-road motorcycles, engine displacement
170 cc and below:
January 1, 1980 83
January 1, 1982 80
January 1, 1985 78
Off-road motorcycles, engine displacement
more than 170 cc:
January 1, 1980 86
January 1, 1983 82
47
-------
It was proposed that all motorcycles manufactured after the effective
dates would be required to meet the above values. To assure compliance with
"not-to-exceed" standards, it is expected that manufacturers will produce
motorcycles that will be several decibels below the specified limits for noise.
There are no promulgated or proposed regulations on light-duty vehicles
by the Federal government. However, the EPA is studying the feasibility
of such promulgation. These noise standards promulgated by the EPA will
preempt all state noise standards for new vehicles.
The State of Michigan has established the following drive-by and stationary
noise levels (Ref. 24) .
"Sec. 707c. (1) After April 1, 1978, a motor vehicle shall not be operated
or driven on a highway or street if the motor vehicle produces total noise
exceeding 1 of the following limits at a distance of 50 feet except as provided
in subdivisions (b)(iii) and (c)(iii):
(a) A motor vehicle with a registered weight of 8,500 pounds or more,
singly or towing a semitrailer, pole trailer, or trailer or a combination of
those trailers:
(i) Ninety DBA if the maximum lawful speed on the highway or street is
treater than 35 miles per hour.
(ii) Eight-six DBA if the maximum lawful speed on the highway or street
is not more than 35 miles per hour.
(iii) Eighty-eight DBA under stationary run-up test.
(b) A motorcycle or a moped as defined by section 32b:
(i) Eighty-six DBA if the maximum lawful speed on the highway or street
is greater than 35 miles per hour.
(ii) Eighty-two DBA if the maximum lawful speed on the highway or street
is not more than 35 miles per hour.
(iii) Ninety-five DBA under stationary run-up test at 75 inches.
(c) A motor vehicle or a combination of vehicles towed by a motor vehicle
not covered in subdivision (a) or (b):
(i) Eighty-two DBA if the maximum lawful speed on the highway or street
is greater than 35 miles per hour.
(ii) Seventy-six DBA if the maximum lawful speed on the highway or street
is not more than 35 miles per hour.
(iii) Ninety-five DBA under stationary run-up test 20 inches from the end
of the tailpipe."
48
-------
4.7.2.5 Stationary Vehicle Noise Acceleration Test (Ref. 25)
Common vehicle pass-by noise test procedures specify a measurement dis-
tance of 15m (50 feet) which necessitates a large hard testing site and low
ambient noise levels. For inclusion into the I/M program, it is desirable to
test vehicle noise at a shorter distance, and in a stationary mode, to have
the results closely correlated with the pass-by test at 15m (50 feet).
Previous studies have shown weak correlation among noise measurements
made at various microphone distances ranging from 5m (15 feet) to 30m (100
feet) when the microphone is at a fixed height aboveground. There are methods
to improve the correlation by preserving the acoustic interference pattern at
various measurement distances through adjusting the microphone height. Then
the noise levels follow closely the spherical spreading law, and correlation
is improved. Noise testing at shorter distance, therefore, is possible.
Simple stationary tests correlatable with the Federal pass-by procedures are
required in order to be integrated into an I/M program. Reference 25 notes
that stationary tests can be devised without using external loading; e.g.,
dynamometers, because the instantaneous vehicle noise is dependent mostly on
the engine power (throttle setting) and the engine speed. An example is given
in Reference 26 where a 15m (50 feet) pass-by motorcycle test is transformed
into a 3m (10 feet) stationary test. Experiments performed at Sandusky, Ohio
and in California showed good correlation between the two procedures.
The stationary noise test could be integrated in the inspection process
as a screening for noise enforcement of in-use vehicles. Appendix E reviews
noise testing.
4.7.3 Safety and Noise Integrated with Exhaust Emission Testing
A description of an idle-mode emission test, integrated with the vehicle
si^tionary engine acceleration noise test, and the Michigan safety inspection
as described previously, is as follows:
A. Pretest
Prepare the vehicle and equipment for emission testing, perform
visual safety checks and vehicle noise acceleration test.
49
-------
1. Vehicle Identification/External Visual Safety Checks - Record
vehicle ID, check windshield, mirrors, and tires (bulge, breaks,
and tread).
2. Test Equipment/Internal Visual Safety Checks - Service, warm
up, and calibrate HC/CO/NO test equipment per manufacturer's
X
specifications. Perform safety check of wipers, washers,
horn, steering and lights (e.g.; headlights, tail lights,
directional signals, etc.).
3. Test Vehicle/Exhaust System Check - Verify engine is at normal
operating temperature and check exhaust system for smoke.
4. Hook-Up/Noise Test - Hook up tachometer per manufacturer's
instructions and perform vehicle noise acceleration test.
Insert probe in exhaust pipe (driver's side, if dual exhaust).
B. Test
Perform EC/CO and rpm measurements and compare to idle test standards.
1. 2,500 rpm - Operate engine in neutral at 2,500 rpm, record
HC/CO measurements.
2- Idle rpm - Operate engine at idle rpm (in drive if automatic
transmission), record HC/CO measurements.
C. Post-Test
Remove emission test equipment, perform brake safety checks, and
prepare diagnostic information.
1. Test Equipment - Post calibration check of HC/CO on test equip-
ment, and remove exhaust pipe probe.
2. Brake Check - Perform Michigan moving foot brake and parking
brake safety checks.
50
-------
3. Diagnostic Information - Derive diagnostic information from
malfunction truth table (see Appendix C).
4. Vehicle Checkout - Certify passed vehicles, supply diagnostic
report to failed vehicle operator.
The following is a description of a loaded-mode emission test integrated
with the vehicle noise acceleration test and the Michigan safety inspection.
A. Pretest
Prepare the vehicle and equipment for emission testing, perform
visual safety checks and vehicle noise acceleration test.
1. Vehicle Identification/Exhaust Visual Safety Checks - Record
vehicle ID, check windshield, mirrors, and tires (bulge, breaks
and tread).
2. Test Equipment/Internal Visual Safety Checks - Service, warm up
and calibrate HC/CO/NO test equipment per manufacturer's
X
specification. Perform safety check of wipers, washers, horn,
steering and lights (e.g.; headlights, tail lights, directional
signals, etc.).
3. Test Vehicle/Exhaust System Check - Verify engine is at normal
operating temperature and check exhaust system for smoke.
4. Hook-Up/Noise Test - Position vehicle on dynamometer, identify
proper load settings, and hook up tachometer per manufacturer's
instructions. Perform loaded vehicle noise acceleration test.
Insert probe in exhaust pipe (driver's side if dual exhaust).
B. Test
Perform HC/CO/NO measurements and compare to test standards.
X
51
-------
1. High Cruise - Operate vehicle to a speed and load range of 44
to 50 mph and 21 to 30 hp, depending on vehicle weight.
Record HC/CO measurement.
2. Low Cruise - Operate vehicle at 22 to 30 mph and 6 to 12 hp,
depending upon vehicle weight. Record HC/CO/NO measurements.
3. Idle - Operate engine at idle rpm and record HC/CO/NO
measurements.
C. Post Test
Remove test equipment, perform brake safety check and prepare
diagnostic information.
1. Test Equipment - Post calibrate check of HC/CO/NO on test
X
equipment. Remove exhaust pipe probe.
2. Brake Check - Remove vehicle from dynamometer and perform
moving/stoping foot brake safety test and parking brake safety
check.
3. Diagnostic Information - Derive diagnostic information from a
malfunction truth table (see Appendix C).
s,
4. Vehicle Checkout - Certify passed vehicles or supply diagnostic
report to owners of failed vehicles.
52
-------
Section 5
GENERAL DEFINITIONS
These definitions are commonly us«d in inspection and emissions testing
procedures and I/M programs.
accuracy: The degree by which an instrument is able to determine the true
concentration of a pollutant in the exhaust gas sampled.
air contaminants; Any fumes, smoke, particulate matter, vapor gas, or any
combination, but excluding water vapor or steam condensate.
air-fuel ratio: The expression of the proportional mixture by weight of air
to gasoline created by the carburetor. Usually expressed as a numerical
relationship such as 14:1, 13:1, etc.
ambient air: The surrounding or outside air.
analyzer: An instrument which samples and determines the concentration of a
particular gas of interest.
calibration gases: A blend of hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide gases at known
concentrations using nitrogen as the inert carrier gas.
carbon monoxide: A nonirritating, colorless, odorless, but nonetheless toxic
gas which has the molecular form of CO.
catalytic converter: Device to reduce automobile emissions by converting CO
and HC emissions to harmless carbon dioxide and water.
53
-------
certificate of compliance: A document which is issued upon completion of
inspection which records the results and serves as proof for vehicle
owner.
certified mechanic: An individual certified by the State or I/M program
office, to install, repair and adjust motor vehicle engine emissions-
related components and pollution control devices so that the motor vehicle
meets emissions standards.
certified station: A private facility certified by the State or I/M program
office, to install, repair and adjust motor vehicle engine emissions-
related components and pollution control devices so that the vehicle meets
applicable emissions standards.
chassis dynamometer: A test instrument equipped with two parallel rollers that
support the rear wheels of a motor vehicle. When positioned on the
dynamometer the vehicle may be "driven" to simulate the road operation.
A power absorption unit is connected to the rollers to simulate the
loading from the various sources of fluid and mechanical friction present
during road operation. Weights can also be coupled to the rollers to
simulate the inertial effects of vehicle mass during acceleration and
deceleration.
crankcase emissions: The products of combustion emitted into the ambient air
from the engine crankcase ventilation system.
cut point: A threshold value of measured tail pipe pollutant emission concen-
tration above which a vehicle will fail an emissions inspection.
degradation: An increase in emissions due to normal wear of engine system.
deterioration: A synonym for degradation indicating an increase in emission
levels due to wear.
54
-------
drift: The amount of analyzer meter reading change over a period of time.
Zero drift refers to change of zero reading when a zero gas is flowing
through the analyzer. Span drift refers to a change in reading of an
analyzer meter when a calibration gas of known concentration is flowing
through the analyzer.
emission inspection program: An inspection and maintenance program in which
each vehicle is subjected to a test of its emissions under specified
conditions. The emission levels are compared with a standard established
for the vehicle class. If the emissions are higher than the standard, the
vehicle fails and must be adjusted or repaired to bring its emissions to
within the standards.
engine family: The basic classification unit of a manufacturer's product line
used for the purpose of test-fleet selection.
engine-system combination: Both an engine family-exhaust emission control
system and a fuel evaporative emission control system.
exhaust emissions: The gases emitted into the ambient air from any opening
downstream of the exhaust ports of an engine.
exhaust gas analyzers: Instruments that can determine the amounts of one or
more gas(es) in the exhaust of a motor vehicle.
failure rate: The percentage of vehicles tested that fails inspection.
fleet operator: The owner of a fleet of a designated number of vehicles.
fleet owner authorized stations: Stations operated by a fleet owner under
certified authority to perform vehicle emissions inspection and limited to
his fleet only.
fuel system: Combination of fuel tank, feeder lines, fuel pump, and evaporative
emissions control system.
55
-------
gross vehicle weight: The manufacturer's gross weight rating for the individual
vehicle.
hang-up: HC which clings to the surface of the sampling and analyzer system in
contract with the gas sample stream which causes an erroneous indication
of HC in the measured value.
heavy-duty vehicle: Any motor vehicle designed for highway use having a gross
vehicle weight of more than 8,500 pounds.
hydrocarbons: An organic compound whose molecular composition consists of
atoms of hydrogen and carbon only. Gasoline is composed of various
hydrocarbons.
idle test: An emission inspection program which measures the exhaust emission
from a motor vehicle operating at idle. (No motion of the rear wheels.)
A vehicle whereby the automatic transmission may be in "drive" with brakes
applied or in neutral gear.
independent contractor: Any person, business firm, partnership, or corporation
with whom the State may enter into an agreement providing for the con-
struction, equipment, maintenance, personnel, management and/or operation
of official inspection stations.
inspection and maintenance program: A program to reduce emissions from in-use
vehicles through identifying vehicles that need emissions control-related
maintenance and requiring that maintenance be performed. Abbreviated as
I/M program.
inspection station: A facility used for inspecting or testing motor vehicles
and pollution control devices for compliance with applicable regulations.
inspector: An individual who inspects motor vehicles and pollution control
devices for compliance with applicable regulations.
56
-------
light-duty vehicle: A motor vehicle designed for highway use and less than
6,001 pounds gross vehicle weight. Further distinctions are sometimes
made between light-duty automobiles and light-duty trucks such as pickup
trucks.
loaded mode test: An emission inspection program which measures the exhaust
emissions from a motor vehicle operating under simulated road load on a
chassis dynamometer.
medium-duty vehicle: A motor vehicle designed for highway use with a gross
vehicle weight between 6,000 and 8,500 pounds.
model-year of vehicle: The production period of new vehicle designated by the
calendar year in which such period ends.
motor vehicle: Any self-propelled vehicle which is designed primarily for
travel on public right-of-way streets and is used to transport persons
and/or property.
output rate: The number of vehicles that can be processed at a test lane per
unit time. The longest work station test time defines the output rate.
oxides of nitrogen: Any molecule containing nitrogen and oxygen only. For air
pollution purposes, only nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO ) .
pollution control device: Equipment designed for installation on a motor
vehicle to reduce pollutants emitted from the vehicle, or an engine
modification resulting in pollutant reduction.
positive crankcase ventilation: A system designed to return blowby gases from
the crankcase of the engine to the intake manifold to burn them in the
engine. Blowby gas is unburned fuel/air mixture that leaks past the
piston rings into the crankcase during the compression and ignition cycles
of the engine. Without positive crankcase ventilation, these gases which
are rich in hydrocarbons escape to the atmosphere.
57
-------
prescribed inspection procedure: Approved procedure for identifying vehicles
that need emissions control-related maintenance.
quality: The results of engineering and manufacturing that determine the
degree to which the product meets design specifications.
registered owner: An individual, firm, corporation, or association whose name
appears in the files of the Department of State as the owner of the vehicle.
repeatability: The instrument's capability to provide the same value for
successive measures of the same sample.
response time: The period of time required by an instrument to provide a read-
out after a step-change in gas concentration level initiated at the tail
pipe sample probe.
smoke: Small gasborne and airborne particles, exclusive of water vapor,
resulting from insufficient combustion in sufficient number to be visible.
stringency factor: A design or theoretical failure rate.
tampering: The alteration, modification, or disconnection of emission control
devices.
vehicle dealer: An individual, firm, corporation or association who is licensed
to sell motor vehicles.
vehicle emissions standard: A specific emission limit allowed for a class of
vehicles. The standard is normally expressed in terms of maximum allow-
able concentrations of pollutants (e.g., parts per million). However, a
standard could also be expressed in terms of mass emissions per unit of
time or distance traveled (e.g., grams per mile).
58
-------
Section 6
REFE5ENCES
1. Second Report of the Secretary of HEW to the Congress of the U.S. in
compliance with PL 90-148, the Air Quality Act of 1967, dated January
1969.
2. Kincannon, B.F. and A.H. Castaline. "Information Documents on Automobile
Emissions Inspection and Maintenance Programs Final Report," EPA, Report
400/278001, February 1978.
3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Appendix N Emission Reduction
Achievable Through Inspection and Maintenance of Light-Duty Vehicles,
Motorcycles, and Light- and Heavy-Duty Trucks. Proposed Rule. Federal
Register, 24(84): 22177-22183. Monday, May 2, 1977.
4. Olson Laboratories, Inc. (SCI) - Effectiveness of Short-Emission Inspec-
tion Tests in Reducing Emissions Through Maintenance, July 31, 1972.
5. state of California, Air Resources Board, Evaluation of Mandatory Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance Programs, dated August 2, 1976.
6. Gafford, R. and Carlson, R. "Evaluation of Restorative Maintenance on
1975 and 1976 Light-Duty Vehicles." EPA 460/376032, May 1977.
7. California Report VE-7i-026, "756-1975-1976 Model Year Surveillance Test
Program Report," March 1978 - California Air Resources Board, El Monte,
California Unit.
8. Transportation Energy Conservation Book, 2nd edition.
9. California Air Resources Board, Technical Advisory Committee, Emission
Control of Used Cars; Available options: Their Effectiveness, Cost and
Feasibility. June 1971.
10. Olson Laboratories, "The Short-Cycle Project, Effectiveness of Short
Emission Inspection Tests in Reducing Emissions Through Maintenance"
1973.
11. Elston and Cooperthwait, "New Jersey's Auto Emission Inspection Program,
An Assessment of One Year's Mandatory Operations", June 1975.
12. Scott Research Laboratories, Inc., "Exhaust Emissions and Test Evaluation
of the State of California Roadside Idle Emission Inspection Program",
1975.
13. State of Arizona, "Arizona Vehicular Emissions Inspection Program Operation
1977", April 1978.
14. Clean Air Research Company, "An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Auto-
mobile Engine Adjustments to Reduce Exhaust Emissions".
59
-------
15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency "Control Strategies for In-Use
Vehicle", November 1972.
16. Olson Laboratories, "Vehicle Emission Testing Program, Concept and Criteria
Phase, City of Chicago", February 1973.
17. Cline, E. L., and Tinkham, L., A Realistic Vehicle Emission Inspection
System, Clayton Manufacturing Company, El Monte, California, APCA
Paper 68152.
18. DeGiorgio, J., Modern Automotive Diagnosis and Evaluation, published by
Palan Graphics, Inc., Newport Beach, California, 1967.
19. Northrop Corporation "Mandatory Vehicle Emission Inspection and Mainte-
nance", V.5, 1971.
20. A Report to Congress, Evaluation of Diagnostic Analysis and Test Equipment
for Small Automotive Repair Establishments, U.S. Department of Trans-
portation, dated July 1978.
21. Flora, J. D., et al, Evaluation of the Michigan Trial Substitute Vehicle
Inspection Program, Highway Safety Research Institute, The University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Paper UMHSRI7691, dated May 1976.
22. Flora, J. D., et al, Evaluation of the Michigan Trial Substitute Vehicle
Inspection Program, Highway Safety Research Institute, The University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, dated August 1976.
23. Flora, J. D., et al, Evaluation of the Michigan Trial Substitute Vehicle
Inspection Program, Highway Safety Research Institute, The University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Paper No. VMHSRI7757, dated August 1977.
24. Allen, Plawecki, Ilentel, Bursly, Kammer, Enrolled Senate Bill No. 360,
State of Michigan, 39th Legislature, Regular Session of 1978.
25. Part 205 - Transportation Equipment Noise Emission Controls, Title 40,
Chapter 1, dated October 30, 1974 and May 28, 1975, Sections 6, 10, 11,
and 13 of the Noise Control Act of 1972; 86 Stat. 1234, Public Law 92574
(The Act).
26. Chang, Mason, Simplified Outdoor Noise Testing Methods Inter-Noise 78,
p. 827832, San Francisco, (published in May 1978).
27. U.S. EPA Evaluation of Restorative Maintenance on 1975 and 1976 Light-
Duty Vehicles in Detroit, Michigan.
28. Williams, M.E., "Computer Simulation of Emission Inspection Procedures",
Society of Automotive Engineers, June 1976.
60
-------
Appendix A
EMISSION CREDITS GIVEN IN THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
Proposed Appendix N - Emission Reductions Achievable Through
Inspection and Maintenance of Light-Duty Vehicles, Motorcycles
and Ligh- and Heavy-Duty Trucks.
61
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[m.TCt-ti
AfVOIDCC *—EMISSION REDUCTIONS
ACMICVABU THROUGH INSPECTION
AND MAINTENANCE OF UGHT DUTY
VEHICLES, MOTORCYCLES, AND LIGHT
AND HEAVY DUTY TRUCKS
AGENCY: *"*U""*TTifTi*tl Protection
Agency.
JUCTION: Proposed role.
BUUMARY: This Appendix presents es-
timates of potffn*^0^ •fTtiani/mji reduction
benefits which, to the judgment of the
Administrator, are likely to be achievable
through the application of a properly
'-^--•-•—-• —* managed
standards, the length of program opera-
•tion. mft4 ****/ adequacy of mechanic
training. Basic program requirements are
outlined for both the centralized and
decentralized program concept. Attach-
ment 1 provides a i\i*'*m*inr< of the mo-
deling techniques utilized to generate the
emission reduction estimates, while At-
tachment 2 provides computational ex-
amples ffiustrattng the usage of Appen-
•dixN.
FOR i»UHTUrw INFORMATION CON-
TACT:
• John O. £ldlnger. Director, Offlce of
Transportation and Land Use Policy
, reductions available through
atroflt programs, formerly contained in
Appendix y, have been deleted. Inspec-
tion/Maintenance P"lii f*rri effectiveness
to given as a function of the level of
the stringency of
Appendix, are baaed on tmaincal data. How-
ever, lack of das "Of several areaa aai aeeea-
(itated extrapolation of empirical data uaing
I~~**"TC taennlquw baaed on aound enxl*
acering judgment. A description of t&eae'
modeling tecnniquea la contained In Attach-
ment 1. Aa new data hernme available, or
a* predicted extrapolation* change, tola
Appendix will be revised and amended
accordingly. '
flcreral definition* have been modified to
reflect tnelr Intended meaning. Mart Impor-
tant, -Initial failure rate" nan been redefined
ae a "rtrlntency factor.** Hopefully, thla new
definition wUl dispel past mljapprahenelon
concerning the "initial failure rate" concept.
In addition, the Idle teat hat been nightly
redefined to reflect actual idle emission teat-
ing currently being used.
The minimum requirements of an I/M
program are defined. Those programs which
are contemplating the use of a prtTmta garage
I/M program ahould note the ipeclai require-
ments necessary to obtain the basic emtsslnn
reduction credits.
emission reductions for light duty vehicles
are ntlmated not only for the flirt y«ar of
an I/M program but also (or subsequent years
since modeling has shown that the reduction
benefits can increase with time. Additional
emission reductions are estimated for those
programs w&tch include twiee-e-year Inspec-
tion and special mechanic training. Estimate*
of emission reductions resulting from I/M
programs for light-duty trucks, heary-duty
tracts, and motorcycle* are also given.
Certification data and recent surveillance
data Indicate that I/M effectiveness may be
greater (especially for carbon monoxide) for
catalyst equipped In-use rehlcles "<«" tor
pre-catalyst vehicles. By the time many I/M
programs are fully Implemented, catalyvt-
equlpped Tehlelea will dominate the vehicle
mix. Estimates are therefore given tor the ef-
fectiveness of I/M on such vehicles, despite
the limited data baae at the present time.
Tables 1 through S summarize the emis-
sion reductions obtainable from I/M pro-
62
-------
Tie actual benent frf^tlimt by say •. Tfnf y«er program credits. The foDow- TAILX 4.—.Veeiojuc training ruftuirueaf
»or region Impt-mtntliaf a weU-dssig_ed tag flm year eredlts are appUcahle to beta ytor crtdtit *
program may txoeed the emlalnns reduo* idle and
tftoas 1 tatted, fturtt i**f|M» • reductions* "
e*-r. would hare to be shown through aa TA~U l.—F\ni y*or «/ program ertdtlt
adequate eoure. lurreUlance ttudy.
i flejuuaone. a. "Cutpolaf laeans th. HC taf^M -<, ^..^atj No_«eer<
!**•! of «mi-rtn-s which d.ltcrltntTi«t«s bo- »mn__|.
the*, rehiclee requlrlag tmlssion--*- teMr T-*. T>ea-
lasad mairrt-n-nn. tad those th-t do ao*. ""per setaejr astogy »g«7 —- HC C8 —55
tt. -Federal T*st PTooed-W fTCT)—A »*- * ° * a (peraest) Cp«ro_B>
queac. of testtag -tUlaed Mr th. Agency «•
Tenlcl* exhaust .emissions of«r » 4.M 1 I t a aaaatta
typical urban drtTtnc cyd*. •» $2uS .39 4 a to u
«. -HeaTy-duty vehleto* aaean* ** ta* 'Ji 10 is 3 S .to » « t *
purpose of th_» Appeadtx. a gasoUn* fueled !A u M a xr *£><««
motor rehlcle who*. OTW is frsatsr thaa _______________________________ .-»•»•»
preynm cmfit. Th*
• *—
to T<&ici« which
o». U»p«toi br tlMlMC JQtet,
to
lat«rna« of lonra- «J»*n on.
ralenrtir year of latereet. Th. credit Is then
vtrrmc* -"'-- '•"" twa ia-oM T»- ***** *° tb* ^PPnprlkU flnrt j«»r credit ^j, «ter* TfcbU 4 cr«Ut» an appUobU to
t«oielM that OMd nxl*- *<»**• Cndlti *n applicabU to both t*cH- reticle which bar* Qad«r_oaa aora thaa
«»aC7 !•"« «a«. to th« iefl. «ad toadtd on* ia^Mcaoa by th« b««lnaln« of th* eal«n-
*•*•» *»* ** ail ttzturtocj {actor profram*. dar JMJ> of latcran. For a model r»ar group
of neJetaa. U» appropriate o-wtlt !• M-
urt UM teehnolocr
h< im&b>r of
hm-r» ineunvd by tb*
of th. ca*n** ^« cf mt-r^. and th.
«rte««ey factor of th. VX procram. Th.
QVW U MM pound* or lam « . r a credit la th«a addad to th. tppropriat. tort
h. "Load «mtt«1nn« twf or "lomdad tmV » - U J* yor m^.>M<«. traiaiac <=**» (T»bl« I) aad
a t«t pweadar. for wapUac ohaiut h • g S th* malt la addad to ta. bade cndlt eal-
S S caiat^fromT^.landZCr^ar.ap.
S aa pUcabl. to both th. VdJ. and th. loadad t«t.
————— laipaettoa/malatoaao. approach., ar.
maniac tb. Mhiei. and ma««nr1tn 4. a«m* €nm«*t 7/JT jaoyrum ff*n>»tractar*d aad -^—•———--—-—---—-————— taeee Uailted data. Ko data oa the detertora-
managed programs of • iaspeetloa/Btalate* ————— aan gf trucks with or wtthont I/M are irall-
nanee and accompanying mechanic training. »Tae "adequacy* of a TrmTuTilff training able. The assumption utilized to develop
See Attachment 1 and 3 for a deecrlptSon at program will, for th. present, be determined Table 1 is that the areraf* yearly effectlre*
the derl-aaaa of thee. credits and for oom- on a ease-by-eaae basil, auldellnes will b. ness i* one-balf of the initial benefit achiriwd
pnTetlimel oamplee of th. as. ot th* tables. • taaed la th. future If found to be fee-tbla. as a resalt of a tune-op.
' 63 ' ' '•
-------
I. Ba*** *ro«rem riq,aa-e»mta. Tban an *, ,mitlrm*l Tvi**r« Tnilnlnu reduction*, mapfatlmi mf ermattoa wffl beeon* •vail-
tw» beat* type. *f aptratlnn valea may b* a.Ul* •»• toaaleel test***. Although Idle aad abl* M current inilTaee an completed.
mimed lor aa I/M program, namely a aacv loaded %»tlTH 4* lot —Tinirllj fan *> 4.
r (system (government or motally taetuatv* eet of vehlclee, latest avail- oriented program, that employ approach**
otractor operated) and a decenttallaed la- able data indicate no overall difference la HC other thaa emftawaa testing may be capable
teoam. system (private commercial ca- aad CO amlasioa reductlona between th* two of achieving emlastfm reduction, for la-BH
rages). .TA order to obtain fan emtaslnn teat*. Tie available date da indicate that th* motor vehicle*. Such approach**, including
- benefit* for either a eentrallaed loaded taat eaa b* more •ffecttve la reducing mandatory ™.i™t-~.~T procedure* aad tn-
iUsad laepeetioa system, eertala emlailnn. taaa the IdJ* teat, bet only tt ma- (to* parameter tnsoectlcn, will b* acceptable
requirement, an established, chanlcs an extensively drained ia th* proper only IX rameiaat data, an provided to Justify
which If not mat. wm result ta aaaeeeed «mia- ua* of loaded t**t diagnostic laf ormatloo. J?or th* amlasioa reduction* estimated.
•dwettaoa lower thaa the** llrted ia tola re aeon, ao ^v««*i»"«i credit ia gtrea, far e. Prooram sttcratsaiui. Alternations to
I ttrouga t of this Appendix. loaded mod* testln*> The loaded —"—^-i program design during th* course of aa I/M
a. rroaraa reo^rirrnnefi Minimum' far test do**, however, have th* potential to program will be evaluated on a ea*e-by-eaa*
ftll p*tOCr*UD**W ^MaWQXV Cati4*V*M O*f BttTOCCll fP^^Tl **^*****1lf*frtW b**VCaaV 0tlC& a%Iw4TZt*itiOlU ZELtCilt S&CllX(tet
i. Pretiaiotia far regular periodic mspee- airHailnn* aad eaa thenfon b* » valuable change from an Idle taat. afUr several year*
ttoa (at !*a*t annually) of all vehicles for 'strategy ta ana* whan then U a defined of us*, to a loaded tact; change from »"""-J
wblfih *mi«*inn* reductlona an fflalnwl JTOx problem. toapectlon. after irveral years of nee, to a
U. Ptovttloae to ansun that failed veal- b. Tmyertug tutfmetion. M^IM~~.I aa- —~"—'"-' laspeetloa.
•am* receive ta* in«lnt*nervre> n*c*saary to aual ndueaona la emissions eaa b* achieved f. Cutpotnt oortariotu. far a given atrta-
•chlav* eomnllanee with the laipeetiexi from a program of ^^T^"4"! iaapeettea. la fiacy factor (which la baaed on both ayuro-
ataadard*. ^A* baalc method te to noulr* ^.>IJ«T%^%^ wt^b ecalsaioa. laspecclon. Ta* «"»^^*7ns aad carboa monoxide), iadlvldushl
that falling vehicle* peas a roteat following amount of nductloa credited will be a tune- eutpdat* for hydrocarbons aad eazbon mnn-
TnftTHrr^'Tf'^ t*"n of th* sophistication *"•< complexity of oxide can be varied la a theoretically infinite
ill. Provl*lon* - for quality control. Tie the tampertng inspection aad th* training of number of wmys. Th* reductlona given la this
reliability of th* toepectton aystam and th* iaipecton. To obtala thsai reductions Appendix msiiTne that then ia a parUcuUr
•qurpmant aeeuracy anut b* ensured. This then must b* Inspection aad "»-'"*«~""«- nlatlonshlp between hydrocarbon and car-
will mclad* routine "•n*'"**''""'*. eallbra- for tampering along with «*"««-*~« I/M, Aay boa monoxide eutpoiats. This nlatlonshlp,
ttoa aad inspection of aU I/M equipment, plan* for tampering laspeetloa should b* re- though considerably more complex thaa
and mil tin* auditing of Inspection nsum. n*wed with JC>A ia advance la order to sett- mentioned here, eaa be generally stated a*.
b. jfiatmitai fearntralCtail jxmiiaiii re- mat* the potential benefit*. for Technology I vehicle*, two carbon mon-
kt>. la order to receive, th* basic e. Added beixjttj tovret rnrrt-mmrt pro- oxide failure* for each hydrocarbon failure.
redaction beaefita for a dseeatral- pram. It ia poaiobl* that well *—lp"~< aad •&ar pollution problem may csfl for I/M cut-
1. PrarUoa* for taa llrenrtnt of lacpec- rate* aad otber facton may be different for point* taat result in lubrtantial derlatlona
ttan ft^H^1— wblea laeur* that ta* faculty fpeetfle geograpale *r«*4 or becauae tbe aerr- tram ta* BC/CO relatloaablp* Implicit ta
aa* obtalaed. prior to Ueaaatac. aaalytlcal Joe laduatty la doing a better job »a«"i ectl- ' tbla Appendix. At tbe atatt't or local, anal
Jactrameatatloa wbleb baa he.adedtba«a **»"»««'ni «aaa»t«l ta tal* a«rtlaa »re alao
aMtaoda.ta*faemtyau>rt agree to-malatala *o^ irowuiL^ ^row^bTBerf e^d. applicable to blga a:t«ad. area* and for T»-
raaorda. to eoUeet atgaaenre. of operator* Se^wttTofwSi a^gnnTwo^d^Qw 1Vel- «l«iPP«» f or «e la California. _
wboae Mblelea ban pa***d iaapeeUon. aad ,2iJ^4 JLT» npdatfS SuatoTn! *• O***" »' "<*rc«*«. It baa not been
to mbmit to taapectfea at ta* faculty. 4oeSm^a*d?fori^^^™be^Be^»jaI *howa **** ""^tatianre directed at reduo-
U. Becord. required to. be maintain** abSeacinSuroe WiSllaao.^^ler!eaa U>« HC and CO emliilon* baa a Ugalacant
abould Include tae 4«*srtpt4aa (maka. year, d^rmlne three key niece* of Information- ^P*6* « ««• * nitrogen (JTOs) emto-
d tta amiaalona test remit*. Sec-
orda mt»t alao be malnlalnert oa the eauhra-
SB. Oopta. of taeee laapeettaa neerda
•aould b* fobmtttad oa a pertodle baala to
e«ad a
control «*rat*gy to reduce KOx emla-
facility at laaat once enry M day* to aluu>c* bothaflnt year emlaaloTraU and _-
ea«dt tae fadlltle*' reoordm, check the call- tbTSetlme datertonSoa^^i Saeak ^"P*110* program eaa reduce SOt emU-
bratton of the taatlag equipment aad ob- More* (urrelUaace prognia need* to be can- •tonB- _
•err* that proper teat procedure* an fol- folly A^£~^ to adAquataly rraloat* benefit* Air*c»»aarr 1
50 *"*L _ . . , . . attnbatabJe to I/M, state* an *aoour*«ed to
T. Tae foreraiag ageacy ihoold ban aa ,^1^ ,00^, sar^tUanee rtudy dadga* with
affacttre program of unaanooncad/uaaeaed-
•Btod la«o«raon* both a. a rootla* mearan
MMMaaampIalatlawtlcktloamaanre.lt
ki alao recommended that *aca iaipectlea*
V* vm£ to check the oamlattoa of laatrm-
aocxariozf or TXK mctrunow MOOD.
efflcee before beelaalM lucn
uaaae» ff^fl program, ba.
Ugalacaat atf
nre will remit
equity benefit*. lacreaaed ftreun beaeflta an
emi^oa reduction, from la- ^r. „ .omew^t umtrt la It. abUlty to
•pectloa/TnalTit.nanee program.. Ia tddltloa. ^tlmaw th-ee futon benefit. quaatttatlTely.
_. - ~~.* •** **• ?«»•»* «"=* ^A la lookmr at the proaca wa* oaed to derlrt the animate* of
aad program aeana for ta* eraluataaa of poestoujty & ^,0^ ^aoyt m«p#etlon tact, to benefit presented to Appendix jr. Two troupe
emtaiVin radnettea. Ihoold be nrtewed ia determine both percent anUssloa nducttoa of vehicle* wen eonildered. aad the** group*
adranc* by XPA. T3w a9Bree *Bmfllaace pro- dae to Inspection and maintenance, aad of vehicle, are designated a* Technology I
gram *-- tn-l"-*- aa aaieasaMat of **"'•* **~i emlaalon deterloratioa af Tahlcles over time, aad Tecaaology Q. Technology I vehicle, la-
detertoratloa at the ootJon af a state. Wtta- *l1* *&ui*T to nee abort test* to determine elude all light-duty vehicle* manufactured
— I^-ir^.-l"^^-.—.-.^;.--^ J>«re*at etnladon raduetlon. do* to malata- prior to the 1975 model year that were de-
oat raeh aa aaaeaameat. the aarampaoa win f^^^ ^^ j.p.j^ ^p^ ^ correlation of alcaed to meet pre-1975 exhau« emlaslon
b* mad* that av*ra«* yearly effeetlTenee* la the abort testwtth the Federal- Tart Prooa- standards. Technology n vahlcles taclode all
half of the '•"«»*>' benefit fooad. dun. Additional •ouroe surveUlaace Imple- post-ir?* light-duty vehleles **»* were da-
64
-------
algaad to mart ta* man rtrtngeot 1971 aad duTerant modal year vehidea. aad It la poa- Ta* FTP detortaratJoa rat* (r~"~
latar emtartnn rtaadardB. SemplM of raaiclM Mbla taa* taaa* abaoluto numerical dlffar> kllomrtar/yMr) la aavumad ao* to b* af-
of ta* two technology Imla wan tapat to *OOM will nault to "banant (or paroanUg*) factod by ta* exiataaea of aa I/I* program.
ta* modal, aad wan takaa a* mjiemitillra dttenaoM M wan. Bowevtr. If aa I/U program la ~r^~^"TrnV
of Tacaaotogy Z aad Tacaaology n vehldM Xtrunpttoiu. Th* flrrt year Appendix IT ta* datarlantloa procM* la not contlnuoua
oa a nettonwtd* baata. FlMM not*: an com- benefit*, aad todlnotly ta* baaaflt* for each beceuae dateclanttoa 1* totaxroptad by an-
putation* ta Attaehmaaa 1 aad 3 an baaad cubeequent Inspection year, wan d*tarmla*d aual Idl* tart .».t^~.^ Inspection*. H a T»-
upoo ta* m*trlc tyctam. by analyzing ta* emlaalona partormane* of aid* fall* ta* Idl* tact, Ito -"•<—«-i» an e*-
X. Jaaertpgoa) of M* rimultttom modal of one-year-oel can wlta aad without Z/1C named to b* nduoad rta ».<^*-..~~ «
tlU iiupaetioii/aMMteMMc* proees*. Ta* W Separate benefit* wan calculated tar ta* npair to mart taa pn-drtarmiaad Idl* tort
a* cumntly uuouairad to ta* modal Technology I aad Taeaaology a eajM. T*ea- standard*. Ta* FT* .~«—^~. M aaaumad
of ta* foUowtog event*: aology I flrrt year benefit* wan Umi oa to b* nducad oomapoadlagly. a* deter-
•— • — from aHattac amlialnna date oa 180 1973-T4 modala tortad mined by regression
tata* FT -nxmiaaioe Factor Program, Taea- tag aa I/U npair. ta* datartoraUaa ,
BO aad OO aology Q flrrt yaar benefit* war* baaad oa continue* under taa aarumptiaa taat a v»-
i uatag ta* ma tort to detect alga FT* amiMtan* data, oa art 197S modala taatad ta hide1* yMriy rate of datarioratloa (iavxm)
am (ITOz emlarlrm* ar* InalgnTHUmiit a* to* FT T4 *-"—*— Factor Program. Th*M la unaffected by ta* npair taat occurred.
idl*. aad ttiaufnr* an not considered ta ta* vehidM wan takaa to b* npnMatottr* of Ta* Impllcatioa la taat ta* tobanat «mle-
modal). thai aataonvld* mix of low altitude aoa- alona characteristic* of a vehicle cannot b*
». Maintenance or rapalr (nralttaf ta lowar Callforaaa oa*-y*ar-old Taeaaology I aad Improved via repair. H a reticle r-i—i th*
emlMlon levels). tt a vehld* fall* ta* laap«o Technology n vehicle*, respectively, to torma tdl* tMt. Ita amlaaloaa an laft unchanged
ttoa. of Tnllmf* and malata&aAO* characteristic*, for taa calculation of taa average -mA*i""l
Bach vehicle uadarfOM this aaqueae* of A* Appaadiz IT benefit aumb*n todleata, I/U levels (cm/tan) foUowtog the round of I/U.
rrenta throughout Ita useful Ufa. walea la benefits dutar by technology level, at l*art for Th* deterioration pree*** th*a ~?q«q»>«a
assumed to b* nln* yean, or approximately OO. uata th* aaaet annual laapaetlon occur*.
100.000 kilometers. Wtta ngard to different flrrt yaar emlartrm Ta* Idl* tort datarioratloa rat* par y*ar
Ta* m~*t^ compatn* average FTP emlaalon* !•*•»• that all modal yaar rabid**, ngardlaaa (pareaat OO or ppm HC> la alao assumed to
ta ta* C*M wh«n an I/U program la nnan °* •*•. oMala taa aam* flrrt yaar baaaata, b* ooactaat or«r ttm* for each nhlcl*. Idl*
Uoaal. with —p^—<"~ ta ta* -ir-r whan ao Tbi* laiiinipMnn la baaad upon th* pnmlM tort datatloratioa ratM an datarmtaad from
I/U program adcta. Baaaflt la ~'-"i«>~| M that, for punUa aoeeptanc* raaaoai. th* ant FTP deterioration rataa uatag the following
the pareeat raduetloa to FTP amlaaiona from T**r paaa/tall cutpouvSt would dtSar wttt rationale: Th* effeetlnaMi of I/U to ndua»
th* arang* ler»l ta ta* ao I/U eaaa. FTP •*» * toodai y*ar ao that aa rehlelM would tag to-ua* Teatel* •»««-'""- aa meaaured
—IM<^_ larala art «a*d to maaaur* x-"-ftt atpartaaea ««"«-» failure rate*. Uatltad daaa over th* FTP mrian* **i-t ta* abort toat
^^~. th* FTP drlTtog cycle la iMumed to b* todleato that uadar thia pnmla*. benefit* (oa uaed to ta* inspection Laa* b* aa accurat*
npnaantattT* of natel* oparatlaa to urbaa • pare*ata«*-wlM baala) an UnUlar. pndlotor of FTP paaaag* or failure. Oa* way
ana*. Two typM of benefit eaa b* computed: /MM* t, THilarlna datarlorattoa. to aaaun thia la to define th* Idl* deterlora-
(1) th* average baaaflt over a Tehlete* Ufa. Concept. «»^—««• detarleratioa U ta* «on rat* m. term* of th* FTP detariaratloa
aad (3) the benefit to a particular year of a pmnai whereby rablel* omfaUnn rate* m- rate. Currently to the modal th* aarumpttoa
Tehlclat Ufa. Both typM of benefit an oa- eneae orar ttme from th* leveU at which th* » a*d* that FTP amladon* eaa be quaa-
peadeat upoa th* renlcle'* lerel of Tffi1~n<-m Tmnlela* wan Intended to emit whea a*w. tttatlTciy predicted from Idl* tart amiaatoaa.
control tocaaology in-1 th* number of Imai *—«—'— detarto»»Uon lnrlTVl«« eaaage* ta *od Tie* raraa. Th* 141* deterioration rate
th* Teaiei* haa been robjeetad to a manda- ^-.<~<>~. du* to normal WMT of engia*/ tor » (i*aa vaaiet* la determined from taa
tory toapaetioa program. The ararag* benefit amiaatoa- oontpol component* aa wen a* RP detertoraaoa rat* aad a ngneatoa n-
for a population of rewclM to a jlTen ealaa- change* ta ^BJ^^^M du* to tampering or Uttonahlp. Baaad en date over a limited
dar yaar la computed from th* Individual PIT »~>n*~«-»««» • mttaac* raag«, taa ralaaonaaip* an aarcmied
tocaaology lerel Tehicl* benefit* jlTen to Ap- Atrumptloiu. Ta* detarioratiaa ratM uaed *° *>• todaoaadaat of milage «ad matot*-
peadlz H, which an of th* eeeoad type. Ta* ta ta* modal an expnaaed M a parcamtog* »*»«• •*";*••_ ^_ . _^^_^_
calculation methodology 1> rtlacTneed to a of low mo^r, avarag* FTP raluM par year. lm* *• aur* *••* P^B/faa tutpulaU.
later lecOon of thia Appendix. Theee paroaatog* ratM an aeeumed to b* Conorpt. Ta* purpoee of aa iaapaetloa/
/ante* a^aeMny ottmeted l/X beiM^t. Ben- equal for all TaaldM of a gtrea tachaology maJtotaoaae* program U to reduce the emla-
eat due to I/U depend* upoa ta* ie«iimp larrat. and an -rm.-*-"* over *'«~- apedflcally. atoaa of to-uw rehlclM aa maaaured ova?
tiona uaed to Implement th* -"»"t***~a of th* rate* wen takaa to b* IS pareaat per ta* FTP. A abort omlatiooa tart proeedun
ta* I/U PIIUBM. that la. the aerumptlona year for BO aad 15 percent per year for OO i» Intended to provide a practical mat nod
•urrouadlag ta* tan* avaati Identified for Technology I rehlclM: a percent par (La. quick aad toexpeaalv*) for '
above. HeraiiM the cumatly avallsbla date yaar for BO and 14 percent per year for OO ai«a FTP emitting Tehiclee, The benefit i
an limited, aaeumpaoa* wen mad* ngard- for tacbaology U realclea. Theee ratea an dated with as I/U program la dependent
tog aom* of th* IMBM that logically affect na«tr| on data from SPA* FT Tl through oa th* methodology uaed to determine ta*
benefit. Th* model reflect* than aaaumpttoae, FT "74 Zauaaloa Factor Program* aad repre- aaort tart paaa/fail outpoint for each pollut-
vmch wen baaed oa eagtoeertog judgment, aent veaiel* deterioration uadar typical owner ant from year to year. The mettod of de-
Tb» lauM aad.aaramptlona an rllenieaeil ^..i^>-»-^~, practice*. For a given poUu- tormtolag '•"'*<^' ibort tort eutpotota
below. taat aad vehicle, th* modal eonalden th* van*d to pncttce from iTtHrnlnt ~
l**u» 1. **•'—<"- !*vala of veblelM at flrrt FTP rat* of deterioration par year (gram*/ that an make/model apeelflc to
kilometer/year) to be eonataat over Urn*, oa* Mt of cutpotota for all light duty
th* flrrt aad •ubaa- Thua. deterioration la modeled M a linear C!M with *mular emlaeloa control
i le expected to depend pbenomeaoa. Ta* gram*/xllaa»rtar/year aology- The poaalblltty of rhanglng abort tart
oa th* emuauoa lewto of veoielM at thetrfirrt Tal'»e la -nlr-ilft*i-l a* th* overall detarlora- cutpclna to reflect vehlel* «ge la alao aa
toapecUoa. Then an two way. to which dlf- ««» rate, (m percent) multiplied by th* to- Important eoocideration.
ferencee to the flrrt year eauanoa level* could dividual -realcle'i flrrt-year emlMlnn level. Amm-ptton*. The BC aad CO cntpoiate
produce •••^•x—'-t dlffenacM to benefit. Tana, each vehicle la oonalfiend to be^ aa en waleh the Appendix IT benefit* an bMed
Ftrrt. It la poaatbl* that for vehlelae of a given tohennUy low or htgn emitter with reepeet m technology level (pedfie. Tbua. all veal-
a(« there wui b* difference* la ta* dl*tnou- to each pollutant; Tealclaa which have low olea of a given eouaaton control technology
ttoa af emlaeioa leveU at first Inapeetioa emlMlnna wnea new will continue to Have ({or example, eataly*t-«o^iipped can) are
from -rm technology level to -~-«rrr for «x- relatively low tmleilnn* M they aecumuLata aaaumed to have th* aam* eutpotota. Cat-
ample, It might b* th* caee that for on* tech- mileage. Tmleelone of vehielM to th* no I/U potnt* for ta* ant yeer of the ilamlated
aology level veAiel** hai* *ith*r vary low °*** *r* ••"niert to deteriorate throughout I/M program wen art by flrrt •pedfytag a
or very *'tH »inl**1nn* at flist toapeetioa. their oaeful Ufa onttl they rMi:h the averag* lalagency factor ind thea analyztac appro-
whenaa for ""*>*•* technology level rehlclM leveU of pre-controUed eaa at Ifll^XW kilom- priat* KPA •mlaaion factor data on one-feer-
h*>v* emiaaioBB waleh an clumped cloeely etan (10OUXXI mile*), old vealdea which were i««iim«rl to be repre-
together around aoma average vatoa. Thia Significant percentage of eatalytie eon- Matative of the nationwide mix of one-rear-
atuattoa could paaalhly nault to more baa*, vertar fallan may occur with Increasing ve- old vehldM. The uujyua reeulted to the
fit for the flrrt technology level caee, even If hide ag* aad If rach a ittuatioa doe* occur, determination of Idl* tMt paM/fail cixpoiate
the aim* percentage of vehldM of each tech- th* emlMloa ratM will toeraaa* iharply to for BC aad O which oomeponded to th*
aology level wen to fall aa Inspection, tfao* later yean; that la, a oourtaat detariaratloa apectfled *«rlng«ncy factor (ranging from
falluna to th* flrrt technology level cea* rate uaumpttoa win not be valid. Bowever. 10 percent to 50 percent). For esavmpla. IT
could revolt to blgfer drop* to —*—*~rp the iurv*lllanoe date currently, available to a 30 percent itrlngeney factor wa* cpedfied.
pereeatagewlae. Second, within a technology ZPA do not eover mileage raagM ecteoetv* taen BO and OO Idle tee* eutpotota wen de-
level, diffenet —•'—*~* level* at the time of enough to ertimate th* frequency aad effect termtoed *o that »pprozlmately M pereeat
Z/U implemaatettoa wffl aataraQy exirt a» of rach fmllure*. of all vehidM would fail me Idl* tort at
65
-------
typically In effect prior to
Turhinl* tralnmc voold resort to ta* rtdoo-. ld> tost ts q**4 fca t2e mtpeettoa tea*. U»-
ttan of emUitnTit of tailed Tsblcle* to tb* Bed analysis ostoc tb* -*-..ii..*i~i model ia-
RV standards. As la tb* be** ease, tb* model •Hn*— rtiir^hsessflle -using tb* Idl* tart and
seen sis* taat tf a vealcto flUJs for on* pot- a, Joadad 'tort ar* T*T*"hl* sine* tb* two
Ta*r«I«tlT*-sttlnt*ncy Sectors for HC sad lataat oaly. tb* otber pollutant wOi also b* torts ar* equally able to identify blob FT?
OO «•*• determined by aanmtta*; tbat a oar reduced to tn* TTf standard a aa error of emitters.
anlttlB*; at twtos tb* HC PTP standard 1* emlasfcm ouuuiied. Tb* ant year credit* la- - . Aarxaeoaanrr 1
equaOy-flkely to.be failed a* a ear vaica dlcate a d*p*ad*acy on strtnjracy factor.
to cmtttDC a« ttrtoe tb* OO FTP standard. Mr oatalyrt rabJclas, ta* tendency la for toe-
Tbl» aesosBptten to only one of aa ttflnlto cbaatt traialar to bs>v* tb* larrset affect oa
smnber of »»ys tlu* rstottt* 9O and OO programs vttb ftUactney factors of 30 and
•ftt£08BB6T fB%tft H ri ^TMlVt *M Wl^&tVat fta> VO pflnSafStk* 72l2*l 2ll l^M>t01XI*2kI*> •^•CaVU*M Vl^
t». Tor «gampl*. staee more AQCa* uniil •»* eo tn* pareeat of oars faUed and tb* d»- tion to HC and CO emissions'rrooT
at hnprorement to tbe'TTP lerels of ]*v«U expected la tte abeeaee of I/M. To
1 aad a o* AppuuUx W proVW*
.
•Md unbtoot OO itaadattU. » etr M tvie* r»p«lr«l tvbleU* raralfiac tern tb« a»- dvMraia* UM paroatt ndu«tloa la HC «nd
1»« HC JTP «ml*rtoa tUniUnl ooold b» one- ebaala tmtaiac pnsgr»m: IT only 10 pccetat OO «oaia^OM ror % (trva atfaadcr r«v. tb*
•td«t«d •40*117 Ukalr to fl»U «* t aw wbieb <" *O a»r» m UUwl lnia*nr. tbn 0017 10 .Append!* 9 amb«n mart b* appl^d to
to •* tow ttBM «» 00 7TT t*uSxt4L Tt* P*e«nt of »U CM «n npfttnd *o tb«t •*«& tb* murlo to qu««Uon. Th« icwuno i*
twalt of «M «»i«btte« arttartao vbleb VM *» »PP»"O«T Hgntflrmnt iaerHkMd ndoetloa •p»rta«1 m dctmtlalaff tb* foUowtnj for
ti tb»t «t ililin*> j tfrtlM b*lov *°* to TnorttT Of vtbicte «*mp«n^l by tb« t»ct tbat » food p«peant»«» L TU» e>I«adv T~r. y. la wfilcb an I/M
to **Wbut«d to ti*t*i OO M P«wit ar» Ial]«l of «^b model r«r (<-13 tbragb f) oon-
of 40 pamat tad abor», BO JM tb« «TP «taad»rd« In jmy*m art appna- Ucaiutmy to tb« total T»blcl» popuUtloa
tbaa «-13
modi
by
«aeb nvxM wr jroop of
aimptlaa.
eotaolat
ooDttatM to b»
CO.
abor*. altbough !«•
_ * vsbJel**.
for
pro- ' Zb* ealouisilon of am lesion induction In
fcllafraais for a firen poUutaat (BC or CO)
t k perf orasd a*
f
an **** waiea
data from ta* 1973 aad 191 XPA
oo* Pracram (TOC?) programs todl-
. «»• to maebanlc tr»inta«
**"
two. tb* lattlM tracer factor If. a. tb.
*lcaifleaat
'^'^ * —*» *"» « * «>-*«•
of » (Jr«n aed«J y«*r Bowww. • rood •romata of tb* ttvorMoer *otr»«n i» la •«•«>, ew b* utd tu d^r«Bi*»loB«.D«p«dlny tai tb. f*aiele. d.tertorat* ^IbW tb*
oa tb* l*^«l of »«r»to. ladMtry tralnln* . hfl* crwter tb* t/U bwMflt.
•Bitelon* oottld b* T«iue*d ^»t to tb* eat- Auwmottoiu. Tor tb* tM*. ea*t b*n*fit» ftrp:
point*, or wall balov tb* eatpolnta, pot*n- rina la Appuidlz N. laap«etloai an mod*l.d _ // J-, \
ttally nniltlac la different boicdu to air to tak* plae* aaanaCy. A/OH«<^.I b*n*ats fl,-100 ZJ(/( 2_i « ^ Appendix JT. jj oo^y u^ percent reduction Is of latcnct.
aui*d raWcl*. euct}y to tb* Idl* tort flat- ""f. *• Sbort tort pmeedur* na»d la tb* j«tb*r uiao tb* Hloeram*. tb* ToUowln* al-
potat*. TlMa tb* aqolTBieat 7T? >rr«U ar* Tn*v>.iirti»i ian*. taraattT* calculation of £> eaa b* ua*d:
aotDptrtad aa tbat tb* awn** OYbaa ben*- Conerp*. Blae* tb* latent of aa I/M pro- .
at* oaa b* calculated. Tb* »od«l aeatanee pma 1* to ndve* tb. «mto«tone of ln- tart praoadur* vboe* ratal la could b* need .-,
«*a. Tb* aodel alaa MT-nTnrt tbat a Tealcl* to aocoraUly predict rTP emlailnn levels. 2~i ^i"^tf''
wbieb fails for oae poUataat only vta bate Tram a practical ttaadpotnt, tb* abort test »-»-l3
ta* otaer pollsOnt «mlat1oo« lowered to tbe procedure mojrt b* quic*. iaezpenslTe, and vber* b, e. and m, ore defined as abort, and p
.yTP etfornleat Idl* itaadard la case* wber* appUeabl*. to Tealeiet la a varawd-ap is tbe fraction of Teblele* on tbe road tn
^Bors of tr" ***"•' occurred. an^rfi»<>.^ ^^n^., -j^u ( «&ieb are of mod*! 7**z t.
Additional benefit is predicted If aMebaaic Aifumptiofu. Benefiti presented la Appea- Tb* caJcuJation of tbe loanaAo'i reduced
trmiatac Is ta effect. Tb* model aseumet tbat dlz X ar* hmtl on tb* aenunptton tbat tbe emission fsctor ((nuns/kilometer) la calen-
66 '
-------
dar year f M a reault of I/it ft performed a* «?.*•>«•*•»»« Mar davta) tar r*Uolei of aaaal BO: Jtr»*
. , V^ ». i ^aa»BBBiBBaBBBiBBBBB»»a*»«"BBBB»a»eieBBBBBB»BBaB»BB.^i^^»«B^*eB»^B«^i^-»^-i,^^^BB,M^ t) 9C47Y/*CVC1O1V O/ (TCVMevrlO JUT I/f UOteTm eTev"1
for a apeelfle polltttaat 1. aompoted aa 8mj)U ^^ aattoawlde mtr of raalcle. by
louow: ]•„ , a_, j^, ^a,, , ^ !.« a<« aad ararafa 7ST. M cirea la AP-ta, aa>
.........._. ^ ^^ ttarlajaacy
la
i oaa year old or older •
i by ***^ aad of *»aj*fti1ar year UWO. '
1 Ul
Use
ebaneterlatlai of im aad later model
oakaovB. it
imfnl Hfc irf t T»
wffl »• th. MM M tart d.taraUM4 tor
197S aodcl y«v TVfildw by ta» A(«aey*c
I TIM txaiflt anatMH la Ttblai 1 tbno«& 4
. .«i.™T
SVOMI W(M« -— w— i- amlBixv ind/ar t mm I iniTnal (j»«tt««aO tor prettsxt •• I»TO-~ .t»oo«l«. namely.
nra«n,i. trr pmtoot BC uad 1J8 (BL/toa^rr- OO.
{ddUifrloc ttu uenaoiocr Imi npraMBtid br nhiela i Problem J. O«tarmla« ta« peroMt rxtae-
•( nxxid T»« < •»! «1» maolMr at IjupKdoa* whk*
ll.
'
^2°? S^0*^ T!^.tht«<±SSi "S-^^ » «" Sl :«» ** »J "•*» of B. for BC aad CO.
year of Satareiv aad areragv xuonecen p^ im x 77 < v* • IS) aV3 1OX4 ^
traraled by each model year rtalele for tae — — —————————
refarrlaf table 1 wolca prortde* aaaonirid* ______________________ I >+^> *a. i a^,, a^ ,
aattmata* of number of rebielei by reaiele
by re- CO:
• tv
.._ . , « ». . ua .. .n
IWIM a *ad S prorld*. for inu.tr»«T« ttaa la .nt^oa., S«, for HO *ad CO to ;^I « tj a» :ifl? :S ii
oaiy. cmiapl* naJadoa faeton for crj ^77 ,— ,,~*~t ^^t tn» Uupwtiaa* u* "£ -- » }•* »-J •** -2 ^S
~ 13M. .._ a Li !>.< .US . • X9I
th»* ta tAKput* m»-h»nta ia« --- M
~t
rf
of
---
HC iaw_ M LI 14.4 OH i.O 1W
"
_ .
Suppl«tn«n« «. ttmlalac profrmm !• la «ff«et. 3o.__: « 19 14." iwr .
m. WU-. Only «- bw., a«ab«. wffl diff« to -O- « r* »• .»
I out, i. Tut aattoowida mix of T»M- nflact tbo pruaom of «s ulaqna.** progrma
pomat «trta(*acy factor «M tmplomaaWd la d«t*fl tn« e»lrnl«tlna of bota fluam'»u» taA SC:
FroMcm ----- - - " H*1
In -r4—"i™* for BC aad CO la CT1977. Ne- Daeoav (par-
aavomlac taat tbe I/M taapecooaa are aa- '
tola affect. sw«uu« ,,„ , ^r <^t 4(ml , j^,
M in aaecs. 1BM n ^t ^ ^ at ^^
Jloltiram. -fte pereeat raductloo, »V. eaa S'ZZ 3 Si a.* .JOT Za u.»
be -xun+tnm*, formula; «;.-_ „• JJ JJ 4« t^ LJ «._ « gl- g-J Jg «•» -.1
TT w» * u* «•» -K" -2 »•«• SlTZZ u x» a.J .«a» a_i eix
Tp i_ ,*_ ...- .«_. i»*.._ » ».» a.1 .15; t» ».«> coiat*— H «.» u.* .«• a-i *i
. £-,. «».<»n.<"w.iyw.i wrt:::_: «i *« *.* .us rw •.» UB.IZ: « »< iii ;«7 Si ait
j-n^a ^VIMI. HOUIX. « *T n.i .o»» ».• cai .—j « «,* ixi .DM ia.r «.4
X100' WO « 4,1 la.* .OM Let i.» SSlZZ e» «.* «.» .Oej O.J la.*
un. tt 4.* u.i .an 11* «.A igao «j 0.1 *.» .ett r.i 11.*
a-T= S tS SI :S h2 iS "-1-1- • V »* -«_ii ii
. rMiiC « *•! aXa .19 «.» T.« • M.a- ffitr
67
-------
s-
'
,
00. tit* toOoviar ftwsul*
•», •*,>., product
M.T 31*
!«.« X4.1 .110
111* «.» .107
si
coi»4_».4
tebtw
-------
Appendix B
SHORT TEST EMISSIONS STANDARDS AS RELATED TO
THE FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURES (FTP)
69
-------
Appendix B
SHORT TEST EMISSIONS STANDARDS AS RELATED
TO" THE FEDERAL TEST PROCEDURE (FTP)
B.I SHORT TEST CORRELATION
The correlation attributes between short test programs and FTP tests for
noted gaseous emissions for model year 1975 are presented in Figures B-l,
B-2, B-3, B-4, B-5, and B-6. In setting pass/fail limits in a mandatory
inspection program using modal testing, it is required to set concentration
standards that relate in a logical manner to the Federal Constant Volume
Sampling (CVS) test procedure.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report "Evaluation of Restora-
tive Maintenance on 1975 and 1976 Light-duty Vehicles in Detroit, Michigan"
(Ref. 27) presented emission test results for individual vehicles for test
types noted in Table B-l. This data is plotted in the graphs as noted above
for idle and loaded mode. The data, along with its statistical analysis,
indicates a low level of correlation. Superimposed on the graph is a Federal
Test Procedure to short test procedure regression relationship established by
the EPA (Ref. 28). To establish a. starting point for any one level of-gr/mile
as required by the Federal registration, read the FTP Reading and project this
to regression line. Proceed to read the corresponding ppm reading. This is
a starting point to establish the promulgated regulation ppm reading under
Michigan law for a short-test operation. It is evident that this is a very
rough approximation because of the lack of correlation of data points as
plotted with respect to FTP test requirements.
70
-------
tlj
OS
2
O
O
X
Ml
f-
OB
Fig. B-l
HC Emissions
Idle Mode
3 3P OL£ t AVEWGE HCH t LOW
> PFM hC
Ul
CO
2
O
x *
O
z
Fig. s-2
NO Emissions
s\
Idle Mode
100 200
2 SP DtE TEST MOX ( PPM )
71
-------
2 *
fc
Fig. s-3~
HC Emissions
Key Mode
JOO
AVERAGE KEYMC06 HC ( PPM )
i
Fig. s-4
NO Emissions
Key Mode
AVERAOs
too 1000 1100 woo laoa
H3 JC ( PPM")
72
-------
8
fc
Fig. B-S
CO Emissions
Idle Mode
so
2 9> CLE TEST CO ( PCT )
a to
o
O
U so
Fig. B-6
CO Emissions
Key Mode
AVEBAGE KEYUCCE CO ( PCT )
73
-------
Table B-l. TEST TYPES
TEST
1975 FTP
HWY FET
FED SCY
NY/NJ
KEY MODE
TWO-SPEED
IDLE TEST
FED THREE-
MODE
EMISSIONS
READINGS
GMS/Mile
SMS/Mile
GMS/Mile
GMS/Mile
Concentration
ppm/pct
Concentration
ppm/pct
Concentration
ppm/pct
TEST PROCEDURE CHARACTERISTICS
Defined in sections 85.076-14 through 85.075.24
of Federal Register Vol. 37, No. 221
Defined driving cycle of 10.2 miles and 765
second duration
Driving cycle of 125 second duration and .7536
miles in length and 9 modes
Driving cycle of 75 seconds duration and .2792
miles in length consisting of 7 mode
3 Steady-state operating conditions high-speed,
low speed and idle plus presoak
Nonloaded test having two speeds: idle and
2,250 rpm
Similar to Key Mode with dynamometer loads
simulating the average power as required on the
FTP under NADA weight class
74
-------
Table B-2 presents correlation coefficient for short-test emission measure-
ment procedures on a. California 1972 Idle Inspection Fleet Test Program.
B.2 IDLE TEST CORRELATION AND COMMISSION ERRORS
Until there is a sufficient data base that describes the operational
characteristics of emission control systems, it is not possible to determine
with certainty the adequacy of various emission test procedures in identifying
malfunctions of those systems. The relative importance of identifying various
types of malfunctions cannot be determined until operating experience with
substantial numbers of new and future emission control systems has been gained.
However, some conclusions can be drawn, based on the general characteristics
of various test procedures.
The Federal Certification Test Procedure (FTP) is considered the standard
for measuring vehicle emissions because it is representative of vehicle opera-
tion in urban areas. The idle-mode emission test, as compared with the FTP,
provides for testing a limited number of operating conditions.
The idle-mode test for emission testing is unable to diagnose malfunctions
of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) systems which are currently used by most
automobile manufacturers to ensure compliance with the 1973 Federal NO
x
emission standards. When the EGR valve is functioning properly, there is no
recirculation of the exhaust gas during idle operation so the system provides
no reduction of idle NO emissions. A malfunction of the EGR system causing
an increase in NO emission during loaded operating modes would not result in
X
a concurrent increase in idle-mode emissions. The malfunction would remain
undetected by an idle test measurement.
A loaded-emission test includes a wide range of operating conditions and
would be generally useful in testing future vehicles. However, all current
short emission tests are hampered by their inability to measure cold-start
emissions, which is important for vehicles equippped with a catalytic or
thermal reactor emission control systems.
75
-------
cx
M
o.
cu
ro
LU CU
os:
S. S.
o cu
i- O.
J_
LU «/»
ro O
TJ
C
ro
01
o T
CM
CM
«3
<*>
CM
r*1
GO
CM
CM
CO
CM
ro
VO
LO
CM
•— CM
CO CM
CM
*
CM
03
CM
I
cn
cu
ro
LU
o •—
I—• >
01 CX
01 LU
•-• 01
LU LU
CX
I— o
CX O
o «-•
s: 01
01 01
LU
CX CX
CO CD
U. LU
CX
Lu
CM
LU
O
O
o
i
H-
LU
uu
LU
—I
O
CX
O
CU
i-
o
U
r— LO
• •
O O
CM
O
CO
•
o
O •—
r+~ as
CM
03
CT>
•
O
n
cn
*
o
cn
o
CM
O
o
CO
CO CO
• •
o o
pv. cn r—
LO 1-^ CO
o o o
o
LD
LO
O
VI
to
1/1
ra
a>
OJ
U U
•f— *^
s- s_
-M -M
I 1
"a "o
cx
CX
O
cu
•o
OJ
U
o
s^
Q_
^j
to
cu
o^
multiple regression)
*^^
O
•o
O
S
^1^
cu
ixi
to
10
CU
cr>
CU
"3
cu
T3
CU
ra
-M
01
^If
•^
rO
CU
01
cu
•a
Q
^*
CU
f—
-a
>— •
O)
> 1 »
c
o
tr)
1/1
CU
cn
cu
cu
f~»
c.
•f^
•^
OJ
S
>^
CJ
^.
in
cu
s_
CT
CU
•
*J
3
E
to
a
T3
a
s:
cu
rO
^)
01
-^
ro
CU
^j
O1
SJ
-a
o
•^*
a
!—
T3
76
-------
The evaluation of alternative inspection procedures must also consider
•their relationship to enforcing the warranty provisions set forth in Section 207
of the Clean Air Act. That section authorizes the EPA to establish regulations
requiring automobile manufacturers to warrant the emission control performance
of every new motor vehicle for the vehicle's useful life. To implement this
provision, Section 207 requires that there be available short-test procedures
which aciieve adequate correlation with the FTP. While the definition of
adequate correlation is yet to be established, it is clear that those short
tests which achieve the highest degree of correlation will most likely satisfy
the requirements for adequate correlation. Correlation analyses have consis-
tently shown that for current vehicles, the dynamic (loaded) tests, as a
general category, achieve significantly higher correlation with the FTP than
do the idle-mode tests. States are not required to consider the feasibility
of enforcing the warrantly provisions in the design of their transportation
control plans.
The selection of an individual inspection test requires the development
of criteria for determining what degree of correlation is adequate to satisfy
the warranty provisions. The following analysis provides a qualitative means
of making such a determination.
For illustrative purposes, it is assumed that the points marked"a" in
Figure B-7 represent the Federal emission standard for all the vehicles in a
sample fleet. The points marked "b," "c," "d," and "e," represent hypotheti-
cal cut points for a state inspection program. A higher cut point results in
a lower rejection rate and, thereby, reduces the fleet emission reduction
potential of the program. Any vehicle which is above the inspection cut point,
and is to the left of point "a," is defined as an error of commission. There
vehicles are erroneously identified as excessive emitters. Any vehicle which
fails the inspection criteria and is to the right of point"a" is a valid
failure.
The feasibility of enforcing the warranty will be determined by the
frequency of commission errors among the vehicles which fail the short test.
The probability of a commission error can be reduced by raising the inspection
77
-------
1
•f
1
1
f '
1
1
1
1
I
1*
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
*
t I »
1 *
1
• .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1 s?
\ 1 I
.I**' 1
•
• 1 ' 1
1
. '
1 1
* *' •!
! l
. ; ,
i* ' •
* i
i
i
i . «. . . i
. i
i •. . • i
i
i t .
i
l 1 .
• - i
l . l
1
1 i
i
! • l
1
1 ' T
1 ' ' .
» • •
1 I '
1 i . 1
l II*
** t
i i i
*
i i i
i i i
i i *
I ' ! 1
' 1 *.. '
1 1 1
! ! 1
' 1 '.
f
1 1 i
i I 1
i S3 ^3 y
i
i . • —
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
^••M
1^
I
r
•
1 *
i
l .
i 9
•
*
I
• *
1 —
f '
4 ^
1 ' .
• t *
[ •
f
1 .' . • • • .
'• T-
i • •
*
1 • '
» •
1
I . % ..
, • ^
• *
i* :•
i • :
i *
f !
«•
c
2
0
O
O
O
03
2
—
O
•-O
0
**
0
^4
w
«
u
^*
Ito
O
0
u
e
o
—*
Q
*^*
O
u
*s
ec
f-
z
•^
b:
es
"fr.
S
—
•*" LU
z Q
2 1
>••• ••
< ^J
u -J
N^ ^3
tlm •"*
•* LSI
5 5S
VI C.
< —4 U_
r, 5 wi
C 3
u LU <-n
'— o a:
— LU
X =>
O
Z LU
O -J
>-
o
a H-
as
-------
test failure criteria. At any cut point, a commission error is still defined
as any failed vehicle to the left of point "a." A trade-off exists
between the feasibility of enforcing the warranty and the fleet emission
reduction achieved by the inspection strategy. The degree of correlation
between the two test procedures is a measure of the extent to which the short-
test failure criteria must be raised to reduce the errors of commission to an
acceptable level.
Table B-3 presents the results of applying this type of analysis for the
idle-mode test procedure. The rejection rate, the frequency of commission
errors, and the fleet emission reductions are shown for selected short test
cut points.
Table B-3. ERRORS OP COMMISSION FOR IDLE-MODE SHORT-TEST PROCEDURES
FREQUENCY OF
FLEET EMISSION
COMMISSION ERRORS REDUCTION AFTER
TEST TYPE
Idle Mode Test
(Cc-rr. Coef. - 0.375)
REJECTION
RATE %
50
40
30
20
10
5
% OF FAILED
VEHICLES
43
40
30
30
27
14
MAINTENANCE
(CO Emissions) %
17
15
10
12
3
4
Source: Ref. 5
The results of this analysis are not intended to provide sufficient
information to determine the failure criteria which should be used in a state
program. The test fleet used to demonstrate this analysis was composed of the
total model-year mix of the 1972 California vehicle population. The individual
failure criteria would have to be determined for each model-year such that the
commission errors were reduced to an acceptable level. However, Table B-3 does
demonstrate the impact of the trade-off between commission errors and the
fleet emission reduction potential for idle-mode test.
79
-------
Appendix C
LOADED-MODE TRUTH CHART AND DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURES
80
-------
Appendix C
LOADED-MODE TRUTH CHART AND DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURES
C.I TRUTH CHART USAGE
The truth chart (Table C-l) shows failure patterns resulting from various
types of malfunction or maladjustment. Also shown on the truth chart is a
general description of the probable cause of failure and diagnostic code for
each failure pattern.
The test results of failed vehicles are compared with the truth chart to
determine the correct failure pattern. The inspector then determines the
general cause of failure and refers to the appropriate diagnostic procedures,
as indicated by the diagnostic code, for a more detailed analysis of the
problem.
Example: A vehicle fails HC and CO in the idle-mode. The inspector uses
the truth chart and finds the correct failure pattern. The probable cause of
failure, in this case, is the idle air/fuel mixture is too rich, the diagnostic
code is 1. This portion of the diagnostic truth table is shown below.
DIAGNOSTIC
IDLE LOW HIGH COMMENTS/PROBABLE CAUSE OF FAILURE CODE
CO
HC (F") """" Idle air/fuel mixture rich
The inspector refers to diagnostic procedure 1 and finds that a rich
air/fuel mixture at idle may be caused by one or more of the following:
81
-------
Table C-l. DIAGNOSTIC TRUTH CHART
CO
HC
TEST MODE
Idle Low High COMMENTS/PROBABLE CAUSE OF FAILURE
a b
NO F F Faulty ignition advance and/or EGR.
X
0
Idle air/fuel mixture rich.
DIAGNOSTIC
CODE
HC F
CO N/L
HC emission fluctuate.
CO emission normal or low.
Idle air/fuel mixture lean.
CO
F
F
Faulty carburetion or air induction
system.
HC
F
F
F
F
Faulty spark plug(s), spark plug
wire(s), or ignition components.
HC
CO
F
F
F
F
Faulty exhaust valve action and/or faulty
rings.
1971 through 1974 modal LDV.
31975 and later model LDV.
F = Mode must fail.
(F}= Mode may also fail.
82
-------
• Faulty idle mixture adjustment
• PDV restriction
• Faulty air injection system (if equipped)
• Clogged carburetor idle air-bleed passages.
In addition, diagnostic procedures for determining which of the above
case causing the failure are listed. The diagnostic procedures are to be
completed in the order shown. This will help to insure that the simplest,
quickest and least costly repair will be found to resolve the problem. The
repairs are then performed per the manufacturer's specifications.
Diagnostic Procedure 1 - Idle A/F Mixture Rich
The following procedures are to be completed in the order shown. Refer
to service manuals for specific repair information.
Diagnosis
Rich A/F mixture at only idle can be caused by PCV restriction, faulty
idle mixture adjustment, air inspection (if equipped), or clogged carburetor
idle air-bleed passages. Rich idle A/F mixture causes failing CO and high,
possible failing HC emission at idle. Since this malfunction occurs only at
idle, the air cleaner, carburetor choke, and carburetor mainsystems are
satisfactory.
A. Carburetor Idle Adjustment - Make a gross adjustment of idle mixture
to determine whether CO can be brought within the specification. If
CO can be corrected by adjustment, complete the final adjustments.
If not, continue with diagnosis.
B- PCV System - Test PCV valve by disconnecting tube to crankcase and
feeling for vacuum ahead of the valve at idle. Replace valve if
vacuum cannot be detected. Check all components for free flow.
Listen for clicking of valve to changes in vacuum.
83
-------
C. Air Injection System (if equipped) - Disconnect from air injection
pump. Feel for pressure and flow. If no flow can be detected,
service pump.
D. Clogged Idle Air-Bleed Passages - If CO cannot be corrected by one
of the above, carburetor must be rebuilt.
Diagnostic Procedure 2 - Idle A/F Mixture Lean
Diagnosis
Lean idle A/F mixture can be caused by excessive air leaking into the
engine at idle or too lean an idle screw adjustment. Lean A/F mixture results
in normal or low CO emissions (may be less than 1 percent) and high fluctuating
HC emissions. High HC emissions can also be caused by grossly advanced
ignition timing.
A. Gross Lean Adjustment of Idle Mixture - If idle CO emissions are
less than 0.5 percent, richen idle mixture to determine if HC emis-
sions can be brought within specification. If they can, then perform
ADJUSTMENT.
B. Vacuum Leak - Inspect for vacuum leaks in the induction system by
spraying a heavy hydrocarbon onto the carburetor body and intake
manifold. Idle speed will increase and engine idle will smooth out
if vacuum leaks are present. Check for loose or missing vacuum
hoses. Check PCV ventilation valve to determine if it is stuck in
full flow position.
C. Ignition Timing - Check timing and advance with timing light. Check
dwell with oscilloscope.
Diagnostic Procedure 3 - Faulty Carburetion
Diagnosis
84
-------
Faulty carburetion results in excessive carbon monoxide emissions during
low and high cruise and may contribute to excessive idle emissions. Faulty
carburetion causes excessive quantities to fuel to be supplied to the engine.
It may also be due to problems with the air induction system rather than the
carburetor itself.
A. Air Cleaner - Inspect air cleaner element. Replace if CO emissions
at 2,500 rpm with and without air cleaner element installed change
more than 1 percent CO.
B. Carburetor Choke - Check to ensure that the choke is not stuck
partially closed. Repair or adjust if not fully open at normal
engine temperature.
C. Carburetor Main System - With air cleaner removed and choke open,
measure CO emissions at 2,500 rpm. Carburetor main system is satis-
factory if CO emissions decrease to less than one half of idle CO
emission level.
D. Fuel Pump Pressure - Check for excess fuel pressure. If excess
pressure is present, check for restricted fuel return line and pump
bypass valve.
Diagnostic Procedure 4 - Faulty Spark Plug, Spark Plug Wire, or Ignition
Components
Diagnosis
Spark plug, spark plug wire or ignition component failures resulted in
secondary ignition misfire in at least one cylinder producing very high HC
emissions during low and high cruise and may contribute to high idle emissions
A. Conduct an ignition system diagnosis. Check for erroded plugs,
incorrect gap, disconnected or open wires, crossfire, distributor
cap and rotor condition.
85
-------
B. Conduct a diagnosis of the following components to determine where
the expected fault is occurring; coil, condenser, distributor advance
mechanisms, electronic ignition components.
Diagnostic Procedure 5 - Faulty Sxhaust Valve Action/Bad Rings
Diagnosis
Faulty exhaust valve action and/or bad rings result in producing high HC
and CO emissoins in low and/or high cruise. This condition may also cause
high HC and/or CO emissions in the idle-mode.
A. Conduct, a compression check to determine if the valve(s) are seating.
The compression check should show no more than 20 percent variation
from highest to lowest cylinder and be within the manufacturer's
recommended specification.
B. If the compression check is not satisfactory, perform a cylinder
leak down test to determine whether the rings or valves are at
fault.
Diagnostic Procedure 6 - Faulty Ignition Advance and/or EGR
Diagnosis
On NO system equipped vehicles, either original equipment or retrofit
X
equipment, the ignition advance is modified to inhibit NO formation. Many
X
vehicles also employ exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) . These systems may
malfunction resulting in excessive NO emissions during the low or high cruise.
X
A. Determine whether emission failure is due to NO system malfunction.
Repair or replace the system according to applicable service proce-
dures. Check for-plugged EGR valves or disconnected hoses.
B. Check for vacuum or mechanical advance malfunction, incorrect basic
timing or dwell. Repair and adjustment of the timing malfunction
may correct the NO failure.
x
86
-------
Appendix D
SWISSIONS-RELATED PARTS LIST
87
-------
Appendix D'
EMISSIONS-RELATED PARTS LIST
The following list of components are examples of emissions-related parts.
I. CARBORETION AND AIR INDUCTION SYSTEM
A. Air Induction System:
1. Temperature sensor elements
2. Vacuum motor for air control
3. Hot air duct and stove
4. Air filter housing and element
B. Emissions Calibrated Carburetors:
1. Metering jets
2. Metering rods
3. Needle and seat
4. Power valve
5. Float circuit
6. Vacuum break
7. Choke mechanism
3. Throttle control solenoid
9. Deceleration valve
10. Dashpot
11. Idle stop solenoid, anti-dieseling assembly
12. Accelerating pump
13. Altitude compensator
C. Mechanical Fuel Injection:
1. Pressure regulator
2. Fuel injection pump
3. Fuel injectors
4. Throttle-position compensator
5. Engine speed compensator
5. Engine temperature compensator
7. Altitude cut-off valve
8. Deceleration cut-off valve
9. Cold-start valve
88
-------
D. Continuous Fuel Injection:
1. Fuel pump
2. Pressure accumulator
3. Fuel filter
4. Fuel distributor
5. Fuel injectors
6. Air-flow sensor
7. Throttle-position compensator
8. Warm-running compensator
9. Pneumatic overrun compensator
10. Cold-start valve
E. Electronic Fuel Injection:
1. Pressure regulator
2. Fuel distribution manifold
3. Fuel injectors
4. Electronic control unit
5. Engine speed sensor
6. Engine temperature sensor
7. Throttle-position sensor
8. Altitude/manifold-pressure sensor
9. Cold-start valve
F. Air Fuel Ratio Control:
1. Frequency valve
2. Oxygen sensor
3. Electronic control unit
G. Intake Manifold
II. IGNITION SYSTEM
A. Distributor:
1. Cam
2. Points
3. Rotor
4. Condenser
5. Distributor cap
6. Breaker plate
7. Electronic components (breakerless or electronic system)
3. Spark Advance/Retard Systems:
1. Centrifugal advance mechanism:
a. weights
b. springs
89
-------
2. Vacuum advance unit
3. Transmission controlled spark systems:
a. Vacuum solenoid
b. Transmission switch
c. Temperature switches
d. Time delay
e. CEC valve
f. Reversing relay
4. Electronic spark control systems:
a. Computer circuitry
b. Speed sensor
c. Temperature switches
d. Vacuum switching valve
5. Orifice spark advance control systems:
a. Vacuum by-pass valve
b. OSAC (orifice spark advance control) valve
c. Temperature control switch
d. Distributor vacuum control valve
6. Speed controlled spark systems:
a. Vacuum solenoid
b. Speed sensor and control switch
c. Thermal vacuum switch
C. Spark Plugs
D. Ignition Coil
E. Ignition Wires
III. MECHANICAL COMPONENTS
A. Valve Train:
1. Intake valves
2. Exhaust valves
3. Valve guides
4. Valve springs
5. Valve seats
6. Camshaft
B. Combustion Chamber:
1. Cylinder head or rotor housing*
2. Piston or rotor
*Rotary (Wankel) engines only
90
-------
IV. EVAPORATIVE CONTROL SYSTEM
A. Vapor Storage Canister and Filter
B. Vapor Liquid Separator
C. Filler Cap
D. Fuel Tank
V. POSITIVE CRANKCASE VENTILATION SYSTEM
A. PCV Valve
B. Oil Filler Cap
C. Manifold PCV Connection Assembly
VI. EXHAUST GAS RECIRCULATION SYSTEM
A. EGR Valve:
1. Valve body and carburetor spacer
2. Internal passages and exhaust gas orifices
3. Driving Mode Sensors:
1. Speed sensors
2. Solenoid vacuum valve
3. Electronic amplifier
4. Temperature-controlled vacuum valve
5. Vacuum reducing valve
6. EGR coolant override valve
7. Backpressure transducer
3. Vacuum amplifier
9. Delay valves
VII. AIR INJECTION SYSTEM
A. Air Supply Assembly:
1. Pump
2. Pressure relief valve
3. Pressure-setting plug
4. Pulsed air system
B. Distribution Assembly:
1. Diverter, relief, bypass, or gulp valve
2. Check or anti-backfire valve
91
-------
3. Deceleration control part
4. Plow control valve
5. Distribution manifold
6. Air switching valve
C. Temperature sensor
VIII. CATALYST, THERMAL REACTOR, AND EXHAUST SYSTEM
A. Catalytic Converter:
1. Constricted fuel filler neck
2. Catalyst beads (pellet type converter)
3. Ceramic support and monolith coating (monolith type converter)
4. Converter body and internal supports
5. Exhaust manifold
B. Thermal Reactor:
1. Reactor casing and lining
2. Exhaust manifold and exhaust port liner
C. Exhaust System:
1. Manifold
2. Exhaust port liners
3. Double walled portion of exhaust system
4. Heat riser valve and control assembly
92
-------
Appendix E
NOISE TESTING
93
-------
Appendix E
NOISE TESTING
E.I INTRODUCTION
To control the vehicle noise emission, effective state and local noise
regulations for vehicles-in-use (VIU) are required. Table E-l shows that
Michigan, among a few other leading states, already has noise standards for
VIU.
v
A good noise regulation for VIU alone will not control the noise environ-
ment. Its success depends on a good enforcement program. At the heart of a
solid enforcement program for VIU is a simple and reliable vehicle noise test
that can be included in the regular state I/M inspection procedure, so far,
Michigan, Minnesota, Colorado, and California are the only states that are
aware of this and are considering its incorporation.
The ideal test needs to be simple in its requirements for test time,
skill, site, and equipment. Most of the time, passby test methods are used as
the ultimate standards because of the belief that passby represents the common
vehicle operating modes. EPA promulgated noise standards are all based on
vehicle passby tests. These tests are not simple by any of the criteria
mentioned above.
Most of the stationary tests are substantially simpler but not very
useful. This is because their results correlate poorly with those of the
tests adopted by the EPA standards which preempt all state and local standards
94
-------
Table E-l. IN-USE SOUND LEVEL LIMITS
STATE
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
ON-ROAD
MOTOR
VEHICLES
•w
-
-
-
Yes
Yes
Yes
-
Yes
-
Yes
Yes, for
passenger
motor
vehicles
-
Yes
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yes
Yes
-
-
-
Yes , for
over, 10,000
Ib.
Yes
-
-
-
Yes, for
ON-ROAD
MOTORCYCLES
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
OFF-ROAD OFF-ROAD
MOTORCYCLES VEHICLES
No
No
No
No
Yes Yes
Yes Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes, on public
land
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes Yes
No Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes Yes
No
No
No No
SNOW- MOTOR-
MOBILES BOATS
^ —
-
Yes
-
Yes Yes
Yes
Yes
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yes
-
-
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
- -
-
Yes
Yes
-
Yes
Yes Yes
Yes
- -
Yes No
over, 10,000
Ib.
95
-------
Table E-l. IN-USE SOUND LEVEL LIMITS (Continued)
STATE
ON-ROAD
MOTOR
VEHICLES
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
S. Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Yes
Yes
Yes
ON-ROAD
MOTORCYCLES
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
OFF-ROAD
MOTORCYCLES
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
OFF-ROAD
VEHICLES
SNOW-
MOBILES
MOTOR-
BOATS
Yes - Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
96
-------
for new vehicle noise. However, some efforts in developing simpler and corre-
latable stationary tests have been made and deserve some attention. These
will be discussed later.
E.2 NOISE TEST PROCEDURES
There are numerous noise test procedures proposed or in effect for passen-
ger cars, light trucks, vans, and motorcycles. Most of them require open-
field testing. These outdoor testing procedures can be classified into the
following categories:
• Accelerated Passby Noise Tests - These test standards usually
require low speed acceleration of vehicles at fixed throttle in such
a manner that a specific engine speed called the closing rpm is
reached in the end zone of a prescribed vehicle path. Once the
closing rpm is reached, the throttle is closed. The maximum noise
level observed by a microphone 1.2m above the ground and 15m (7.5m
in Europe) from the vehicle path is recorded as the noise level of
the vehicle.
This type of test is usually employed for vehicle noise certifica-
tion or regulatory purposes. The established tasks can be endorsed
by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards, the California
Highway Patrol procedures, and the International Organization for
Standards (ISO) Recommendation R362.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has also proposed acceler-
ated passby noise tests for motorcycles and light vehicles (Ref. 25
and 26). Reference 26 proposed a complicated test which requires
both specified acceleration and speed be reached in a narrow end-
zone on the vehicle path.
• Constant Speed Passby Noise Tests - This type of test is designed
mainly for roadside enforcement purpose. California Highway Patrol
97
-------
has looked into this type of test. Boulder and Colorado Springs,
Colorado, and Minnesota Authorities have developed improved versions
where even a single highway patrol car can be used to monitor and
pursue high noise emitters. Reference IS also suggested a constant
speed passby test. These tests do not correlate well with the EPA
tests.
• Stationary Engine Acceleration Noise Tests - The U.S. Department of
Transportation has adopted a stationary engine acceleration test in
Reference 25; for interstate motor carriers. Chang (Ref. 26) has
studied the engine operation theories and their applications in
transforming accelerated passby noise tests into highly correlatable
and much simpler stationary engine acceleration tests. One such
transformation has been proven so successful that the stationary
engine acceleration test is included for consideration in the EPA's
proposed motorcycle noise emission regulations.
• Stationary Constant Engine Speed Noise Test - The Swiss stationary
test, the International Organization of Standards, and the Motor-
cycle Industrial Council proposed stationary vehicle noise test
methods have been known for some time. These tests are simpler to
perform than the passby tests but were not designed to correlate
with U.S. EPA tests.
Other procedures have been developed for use in inspection facilities
such as the noise tunnels in Richmond, British Columbia but the results do not
correlate directly with U.S. Federal primary passby test standard.
E.3 NOISE TEST FACILITY AND EQUIPMENT
The requirements on noise testing facilities, acoustic instrumentation,
and auxiliary equipment are different for each type of testing.
98
-------
For outdoor noise testing, a large open plane about 90m by 75m free of
large reflecting surfaces is usually required for a 15m microphone distance
test. The measurement zone should be a hard flat surface such as a concrete
or sealed asphalt pad. The ambient noise level should be 10 dB less than the
vehicle noise level.
These requirements are difficult to meet in a populous urban environment
having no large vacant lots and high ambient noise levels. Recently, Chang
(Ref. 26) has developed the acoustic similarity theory which has been success-
fully applied to reduce the noise measurement distance for motorcycles by
fivefold. Accordingly, the area requirement of the open plane is reduced by
25 times. This may be a solution to the problems in selecting urban testing
facilities.
For the indoor-type of testing, the acoustic environment of the enclosure
is of importance in determining the number of microphones required. The
facility should have adequate ventilation systems to handle the vehicle exhaust
for safety reasons.
Usually ANSI Type 1 sound level meters are specified in prevailing vehicle
noise standards. ANSI Type 2 sound level meters are less expensive and are
accepted in OSHA and local noise regulations. Other factors should include
the instrument ruggedness and its ability to interface with a computer.
Most established test procedures specify the use of wind speed, barometric
pressure, temperature, and humidity gauges. Some also require the connection
of tachometer, accelerometer, and ignition disable device to the vehicle. The
benefit of including this equipment in an inspection noise test procedure
should be carefully reviewed as should the associated costs and other problems
(e.g., possible tampering charges on attaching tachometers to private vehicles).
99
-------
E.4 STATIONARY ENGINE ACCELERATION NOISE TEST
Most vehicle passby noise test procedures specify a measurement distance
of 15m (50 feet) which requires a large hard testing plane and low ambient
noise levels. For inclusion into the I/M program it is desirable to test
vehicle noise at a shorter distance in the stationary mode and have the results
correlate with the passby tests at 15m.
Previous studies have shown weak correlation among noise measurements
made at various microphone distances ranging from 5m to 30m when the micro-
phone is at a fixed height above ground. Reference 26 discusses methods to
improve the correlation by preserving the acoustic interference pattern at
various measurement distance by adjusting the microphone heights. Then the
noise levels closely follow the spherical spreading law and tests at short
distances with high correlation are possible. Simple stationary tests correla-
table with the Federal passby procedures can be devised without using tedious
external loads; e.g., dynamometers. This is because the instantaneous vehicle
noise is dependent primarily on the engine power (throttle setting) and the
engine speed.
An example is given in Reference 26 where a 15m passby motorcycle test is
transformed into a 3m stationary test. Experiments performed at Sandusky,
Ohio and California showed near perfect correlation (97 percent) between the
two procedures.
The stationary noise test would serve within the noise-I/M integrated
testing as a screening for noise enforcement of in-use vehicles.
Further simplification is possible in eliminating the use of tachometers
as reported in Reference 26. If that simplification is successful, we would
have an ideal candidate for inclusion of the noise test in the state I/M
program.
100
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO, 2.
EPA-905/2-79-003A & 003B
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Evaluation of Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection/
Maintenance Program for Michigan.
7. AUTHOR(S)
Gunderson, J., Randall, J., Pan, G. , Vodonick, E.,
Bhatia, V. Saricks, C.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Pacific Environmental Services, Inc. and
2716 Ocean Park Blvd., Suite 3010 Systems Control, Inc.
Santa Monica, California 90405 421 E. Cerritos Ave.
Anaheim, Ca. 92805
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region V
230 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
5. REPORT DATE
October 15, 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
§68-02-2536
Task Order #7
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The State of Michigan, pursuant to the Clean Air Act as amended (1977), is re-
quired to consider an Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) program for part or all the State
because the five-county Detroit metropolitan area, at least, is expected to be unable
to meet applicable air quality standards prior to the 1982 deadline. This study evalu-
ates a range of possible I/M program configurations to assist in the identification
of a short list of alternatives that would be appropriate in Michigan.
The findings of this study are presented in two volumes. Volume I explores a
broad range of I/M options while Volume II performs a comprehensive evaluation of
costs and benefits for a matrix of 24 program configurations differentiated by
administrative mode, inspection procedure and scope. As a result of the comparative
analysis, a short list of candidate options is proposed for further study.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS ~~
a. DESCRIPTORS
Mobile Source Emissions
Inspection/Maintenance Program
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/
Unclassified
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page J
Unclassified
c. COSATI Field/Group
21. NO. OF PAGES
473
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220—1 (Rev. 4—77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. REPORT NUMBER
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.
2. LEAVE BLANK
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.
5. REPORT DATE
Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e.g., date of issue, date of
approval, date of preparation, etc.).
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.
7. AUTHOR(S)
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe, etc.). List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
zation.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Insert appropriate code.
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented'at conference of.
To be published in, Supersedes, Supplements, etc.
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report. If the report contains a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.
(b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c) COSATI FIELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-
jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human
endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
the primary posting(s).
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release Unlimited." Cite any availability to
the public, with address and price.
19. &20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.
21. NUMBER OF PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any.
22. PRICE
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
.t.
EPA Form 2220-1 (Re». 4-77) (Sever*.),*
------- |