-------
EPA 460/3-82-013
A STUDY OF EMISSIONS FROM
LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES IN LOS ANGELES:
IN-USE FEASIBILITY PROGRAM
by
Robert A. Cassidy
Automotive Environmental Systems
Division of Clayton Manufacturing Company
7300 Bolsa Avenue
Westminster, California 92683
CONTRACT NO. 68-03-3023, YEAR 2
OCTOBER 1982
Prepared for
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Water Management
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Emission Control Technology Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to
report technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies
are available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and non-profit organizations - in limited quantities - from the
EPA Library, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105; or, for a fee,
from the National Technical Information Service, 585 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, Virginia 22161.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency
by Automotive Environmental Systems, Westminster, California , in fulfill-
ment of Contract No. 68-03-3023, Year 2, modifications five and six. The
contents of this report are reproduced herein as received from Automotive
Environmental Systems. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed
are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Environmental
Protection Agency. Mention of company or product names is not to be con-
sidered as an endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
ii
-------
ABSTRACT
This report presents the procedures used in a feasibility study to
test properly maintained vehicles which had accumulated between 40,000 and
50,000 miles. The test fleet consisted of California certified 1979 auto-
mobiles obtained through random selection from private owners in Los
Angeles and Orange County areas. The testing was conducted between May and
October of 1982.
All eligible vehicles were randomized to provide a list of random
candidate vehicles with assigned order. Proceeding in order, each candi-
date vehicle was screened until an acceptable one was located which became
a test vehicle.
Each test vehicle received an incoming inspection and repair of
minor disablements prior to testing. The test consisted of a diurnal heat
build, less emissions, followed by the 1978 Federal Test Procedure.
Vehicles failing the 1979 California standards received a tune-up, main-
tenance, and repair of malfunctions prior to a retest.
The project screened 3194 candidate vehicles which resulted in 60
original sample vehicles and 38 expanded sample vehicles for a total of 98
test vehicles. 74 of the 98 vehicles failed the emission standards and
received a tune-up and second test.
iii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Automotive Environmental Systems, a Division of Clayton Manufactur-
ing Company, wishes to extend its appreciation and special thanks to Mr.
John Shelton, Project Officer, for providing counsel, technical guidance,
and understanding throughout the program.
We also wish to recognize the assistance of the manufacturers of
the automobiles which were tested in this project.
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract „ ill
Acknowledgements ....... ... v
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Vehicle Procurement 5
2.1 Eligible Vehicle List 5
2.2 Eligible Vehicle Randomization 5
2.3 Candidate Vehicle Screening .... 7
2.3.1 Certified Mailing 8
2.3.2 First Class Mailing 8
2.3.3 Telephone Contact 8
2.3.4 Questionnaire 13
2.4 Vehicle Check-In Procedures ... 14
2.4.1 Incentives for Participation 14
2.5 Elimination Criteria and Summary ........ 14
3.0 Inspection and Maintenance 21
3.1 Emission Component Inspection 21
3.2 M-l Restorative Maintenance 21
3.3 M-2 Restorative Maintenance 22
4.0 Facilities and Equipment ....... 25
4.1 Test Location 25
4.2 Constant Volume Sampler 25
4.3 Emission Analysis Console 25
4.3.1 Laboratory Standard Calibration and Working Gases . 26
4.4 Sealed Housing for Evaporative Determination (SHED) ... 27
4.5 Chassis Dynamometer 27
4.6 Data Acquisition System 28
4.7 Driver's Aid 28
4.8 Miscellaneous Equipment 28
vii
-------
5.0 Equipment Qualification, Calibration and Crosscheck 31
5.1 Constant Volume Sampler 31
5.2 Dilute Exhaust Analysis Console 32
5.2.1 Daily Qualification Checks 32
5.3 SHED 33
5.4 ECE-50 Chassis Dynamometer 34
5.5 Data Acquisition System 34
5.6 Miscellaneous Equipment 34
6.0 Test Procedures 35
6.1 Vehicle Preparation 35
6.1.1 Driveability Evaluation 35
6.2 Equipment Preparation 35
6.3 Federal Test Procedure 36
7.0 Quality Assurance and Data Handling 37
7.1 Quality Assurance Responsibilities 37
7.1.1 Weekly Curve Checks 38
7.1.2 Weekly Equivalency Checks 39
7.1.3 Test Packet Inspection 39
7.2 Data Handling 40
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - Program Flow Chart 3
Exhibit 2 - Vehicle Matrix 6
Exhibit 3 - Procurement Flow Chart 9
Exhibit 4 - Control Sheet 10
Exhibit 5 - Summary of the In-Use Feasibility Program Procurement
Activities 17
Exhibit 6 - Summary of Reasons for Rejection of Eligible Candidate
Vehicles 18
APPENDIX A - Telephone Questionnaire 41
viii
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
This report discusses the program that was implemented with modifi-
cations Five (5) and Six (6) to contract 68-03-3023. The program was a
feasibility study on securing and emission testing properly maintained
vehicles which had accumulated between 40,000 and 50,000 miles. The test
fleet consisted of 1979 model year automobiles obtained through random
selection from private owners in Los Angeles and Orange County.
The sequence of events, as shown in Exhibit 1, started with the
procurement effort to locate acceptable vehicles, this included an on-site
inspection of the candidate vehicles. Once accepted as a test vehicle, a
functional check of the emission systems was completed and disablements
were remedied. Next, the vehicle received a 1978 Federal Test Procedure
(FTP), exhaust emissions only, preceded by a preconditioning diurnal heat
build. If the vehicle failed the 1979 California exhaust emission stan-
dards it received maintenance and repair of malfunctions followed by a
second test.
This report will address major aspects of the program including
vehicle procurement, inspection and maintenance, laboratory test equipment,
laboratory test procedures and quality assurance.
-------
PROGRAM FLOW CHART
SECURE ELIGIBLE
VEHICLE LIST
RANDOMIZE ELIGIBLE
VEHICLE LIST
COMPLETE MAILINGS
AND SCREEN CANDIDATES
IN SEQUENCE, SCHEDULE
FIRST ACCEPTABLE VEHICLE
FOR TEST
ON-SITE VEHICLE
INSPECTION AND TEST
DRIVE
EMISSION COMPONENT INSPECTION
M-l RESORATIVE MAINTENANCE:
REPAIR DISABLEMENTS
FTP
03 TEST
PASS
CALIFORNIA
STDS?
NO
YES
M-2 RESTORATIVE MAINTENANCE:
TUNE-UP
MAINTENANCE
REPAIR MALFUNCTIONS
RETURN VEHICLE
TO OWNER
FTP
04 TEST
2028A
EXHIBIT 1
3
-------
SECTION 2
VEHICLE PROCUREMENT
2.1 Eligible Vehicle List
The eligible vehicle list consisted of a registration list which
was purchased from an outside marketing company. The project specified a
test vehicle matrix designating the model year, manufacturer, engine size
and vehicle model. Additionally, all vehicles were to be presently owned
by the original owner. In general, all registrations were screened accord-
ing to this criteria prior to delivery from the marketing company. The
project matrix is included as Exhibit 2.
The scope of the project was to complete this matrix of 60
vehicles with a secondary goal of duplicating the matrix as contract funds
allowed. The second matrix was filled with 38 vehicles which were a cross
section of vehicle types. The contract also specified that no additional
procurement .mailings be completed to fill the second matrix. Therefore,
some of the vehicles in the second matrix technically failed one of the
screening criteria. Typically, these failures were minor mechanical
failures which had not been repaired according to program guidelines e.g.,
(meater core not dealer replaced).
Please note that the cell designation on Exhibit 2 defines a ran-
domized group of identical candidates as supplied by the vendor, and the
number of eligible registrations purchased was a function of the number of
test vehicles required. Furthermore, cell 107 combines two matrix selec-
tions because the marketing company was unable to distinguish between a 260
and 305 V-8 engine in their coding system.
2.2 Eligible Vehicle Randomization
Within each matrix cell the listing of eligible vehicles were
assigned identification numbers which were randomized according to Appendix
10 of the contract Scope of Work. An AESi computer routine randomized the
list and then printed out a sequential list of the eligible vehicles. This
randomized and sequence identified list became the Candidate Vehicle List.
This randomizing process from Appendix 10 is printed below.
-------
VEHICLE MATRIX
In-Use Feasibility Study
Test Fleet Breakdown
1979 Model Year
CY1 CID Cell
Number of
Eligible
Vehicles
Numbers Assigned ///Vehicle Model
GM
4
4
8
8
8
8
8
98
151
305
305
305
305
305
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
615
205
410
205
152
205
2050
20206 thru 20820
6
6
260
231
231
231
108
109
110
615
541
205
Ford
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
8
8
8
4
140
140
140
140
171
200
250
302
302
302
98
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
410
205
205
410
205
205
205
205
205
205
205
Chrysler
4
4
8
8
98
105
318
318
301
302
303
304
410
205
205
39
318
305
205
8,932
20821
21026
21436
21641
21793
21998
21025
21435
21640
21792
21997
24047
24048
24663
25204
24662
25203
25408
25409 thru 25818
25819 26023
26024 26228
26229 26638
26639 26843
20001 20205
26844 27048
27049
27254
27459
27664
27869
28279
28484
28689
28728
27253
27458
27663
27868
28278
28483
28688
28727
28932
EXHIBIT 2
6
4-Chevette
1-Monza/Starfire/Sunbird
3-Camaro/Firebird
2-Impala/Capri
1-Nova/Phoenix
2-Malibu/Lemans
7-Monte Carlo/two-door
Century/Regal/Grand
Prix/Cutlass
5-Cutlass/Monte
Carlo/two-door
Century/Regal/
Grand Prix
4-Regal/Cutlass, Monte
Carlo/two-door
Century/Grand Prix
4-Malibu/Lemans
2-Monza/Starfire/
Sunbird/Skyhawk
2-Mustang
1-Fairmont/Zephyr
2-Capri
3-Bobeat/Pinto
1-Mustang
%-Fairmont/Zephyr
1-Monarch/
Granada/Versailles
2-Mustang
1-Fairmont/Zephyr
1-Granada/Monarch
1-Fiesta
3-Colt/Champ
2-Omni/Horizon
1-Aspen
1-St. Regis/
Newport/New Yorker
1-LeBaron/Diplomat/
Volare
60
-------
"The "List of Eligible Vehicles" shall be numbered 1 thru N con-
secutively, where N is the total number of vehicles contained in
the "List of Eligible Vehicles." A random number q is selected
with the same number of digits as N. If q is less than or equal
to N the vehicle is placed first on the "List of Candidate Vehi-
cles." If q is greater than N, the number is skipped and the next
random number is selected until a candidate is chosen. If one
random number appears more than once, it is ignored after it is
used the first time. The procedure continues until a sufficient
number of candidates are seleted for a particular test vehicle
group. To illustrate this procedure; suppose there are 8,592
eligible vehicles. Assume the first four digit random numbers
generated are 8268, 5011, 9857, 2532, 0455, 6976, For
the first random number, 8268, car number 8268 on the "List of
Eligible Vehicles" is placed first on the "List of Candidate Vehi-
cles." The next random number is 5011 is placed second the the
"List of Candidate Vehicles." The next random number is 9857.
Since 9857 is greater than 8592, it is ignored. The next random
number is 2532, so car number 2532 becomes the third member of the
"List of Candidate Vehicles," and so forth."
2.3 Candidate Vehicle Screening
The overall screening process applied to each candidate vehicle
included a rigorous attempt.to contact each candidate through a certified
mailing, a first class mailing and "up to ten" telephone calls. After con-
tacting, the acceptability of each vehicle was carefully explored with a
telephone questionnaire provided by EPA . Exhibit 3 provides a flow chart
of the process.
All of the actions involving this contacting and screening process
were compiled in a Log Book which consisted of a Control Sheet, Exhibit 4,
for each Candidate Vehicle. The control sheet is a record of dates and
activities for the mailings and phone attempts with a summary of the ques-
tionnaire if it was completed.
AESi coded all telephone attempts as to type, these could be a
solicitation to test the vehicle, a call to complete the questionnaire, or
a call to schedule the vehicle for test. Additionally, a subjective esti-
mate of the participant's reaction to being contacted was recorded. The
response category indicates the inclination of the candidate to participate
in the program at the time of contact.
The coding for these three categories is listed below.
TYPES: SOLICITATION
QUESTIONNAIRE
SCHEDULE
-------
PARTICIPANT REACTION:
1. Extremely helpful and friendly
2. Moderately helpful
3. Responds with no bias
4. Shows annoyance at call
5. Very angry
RESPONSE: + Positive, willing to participate
- Negative, not willing to participate
? Undecided
2.3.1 Certified Mailing
The initial contacts with the candidate vehicle list were made
with a certified first class letter. The process was to multiply the
number of required vehicles by 75 to obtain the quantity of the first mail-
ing since 75 was found to produce one acceptable test vehicle. If these
75X did not produce the required number of vehicles, additional sequence
numbers were prepared for mailing. This continued until an acceptable veh-
icle was located or until the Candidate List was depleted. Only in cell
#304 was the Candidate List depleted before locating a test vehicle. EPA
authorized substituting a vehicle from Cell #305 in its place.
2.3.2 First Class Mailing
If a period of 7-10 days elapsed with no response following the
certified mailing the candidate address was verified and a first class let-
ter was mailed.
2.3.3 Telephone Contact
For each candidate, regardless of response to the initial mailing,
an attempt to contact them by telephone was completed.
Usually, it was easy to contact those individuals who indicated a
positive response, that is, a desire to have their vehicle tested, as these
people provided phone numbers. The negative response candidates often
posed difficulties in locating the individuals since thejfc were reluctant to
provide information, and if contacted were sometimes annoyed. In both
cases, if contact was made, AESi attempted to complete the telephone
questionnaire on the vehicle.
If contact was not able to be made, and no new address or phone
number was determined, a minimum of 10 phone calls were placed before
eliminating the candidate. These calls were spaced throughout the day and
evening and on weekends.
-------
PROCUREMENT FLOW CHART
/List of Eligible^
\^ Vehicles )
/Candidate^
\^ Vehicles/
Initial Mailing
(Certified)
Positive Response
No Response,
Returned Unopened
Check for
Correct
Name § Address
Correction
Negat ive
Response
OK
First Class
Mailing
Positive
Detailed Screening
•1
Fail
Bring in
Vehicle
For Tenta-
tive Test
^Eliminate)
1| No Response
Negative
[Eliminate)
Positive
Call Person
4 Times/Day
Negative
Check Phone
Number
New Number
"(Eliminate)
OK
(Eliminate)
EXHIBIT 3
9
-------
OMB NO. 2000-0027
CONTROL SHEET
GM FORD CHRYSLER
SEQUENCE NO.
PHONE: HOME ( )
WORK ( )
BEST TIME
BEST TIME
CERTIFIED MAILING
DATE MAILED
DATE REPLY CARD RECEIVED
RESPONSE
COMMENTS:
1. WAS A CERTIFIED MAILING SENT?
2. WAS A REPLY CARD RETURNED?
3. WAS A POSITIVE RESPONSE INDICATED?
4. WAS A NEGATIVE RESPONSE INDICATED?
5. WAS PARTICIPANT UNDECIDED?
6. LETTER RETURNED UNOPENED.
N
N
N
N
N
N
FIRST CLASS MAILING
DATE MAILED
DATE REPLY CARD RECEIVED
RESPONSE
COMMENTS:
7. WAS A FIRST CLASS MAILING SENT?
8. WAS A REPLY CARD RETURNED?
9. WAS A POSITIVE RESPONSE INDICATED?
10. WAS A NEGATIVE RESPONSE INDICATED?
11. WAS THE PARTICIPANT UNDECIDED?
12. LETTER RETURNED UNOPENED.
N
N
N
N I
N
N
TELEPHONE
DATE CALLED TIME
TYPE
PARTICIPANT REACTION
RESPONSE
COMMENTS
INITM
13- HOW MANY CALLS WERE COMPLETED SOLICITATIONS?
14. WAS A POSITIVE RESPONSE INDICATED?
15. WAS A NEGATIVE RESPONSE INDICATED?
16. WAS THE PARTICIPANT UNDECIDED?
Y N
Y N
Y N
SUMMARY OF PHONE QUESTIONNAIRE
17. WAS A QUESTIONNAIRE COMPLETED?
18. DID THE VEHICLE MEET THE QUALIFICATION CRITERIA?
IF NO, WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR REJECTION?
19. WAS THE VEHICLE DELIVERED TO AESi FOR TEST?
20. WAS THE VEHICLE ACCEPTED FOR TEST ONCE AT AESi?
IF NO, WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR REJECTION?
21. WAS THE VEHICLE TESTED?
A - M
N - Q
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
EXHIBIT 4
10
-------
)ATE
kLLED
TIME
TYPE
*
PARTICIPANT REACTION
RESPONSE
!
COMMENTS
INITIALS
•
11
-------
2.3.4. Questionnaire
The EPA questionnaire is included as Appendix A of this report.
In summary, the questionnaire explores the following areas of vehicle
condition and history.
Reference
Questionnaire
A. Model Year 1979 Matrix
Make/Model/Engine Size Matrix
Original Purchaser 1,2,3
B. Favorable Mail or Phone Response
C. Correct Mileage (40,000-50,000) 5
D. Not used in unusual manner. 6,7,8,9,20,22,23
E. Not used leaded gas. 15
F. No overheating problems. 18
G. Not involved in accident. 19
H. No add-on AC 22
I. No vehicle modifications 23
J. Properly maintained 26,27,28,29,30
K. Dealer maintained 33
L. No misadjustments, disablements 34
It should be noted that this screening process generated three
classes of candidate vehicles which are described below:
1. Vehicles failed the questionnaire and were rejected for
testing.
2. Vehicle passed the questionnaire and were brought in for
test. The owners had evidence of proper maintenance.
3. Vehicles passed the questionnaire and were brought in for
test. The owners thought that the vehicles were properly
maintained, but had no evidence of proper maintenance; this
was not cause for rejection.
13
-------
2.4 Vehicle Check-In Procedures
In -all cases, test vehicles were delivered to AESi by the
participant. Several additional screening tasks were completed at this
time. First, the questionnaire was reviewed with the participant to verify
all responses and the participant was asked to sign the cover page.
Further screening consisted of checking the lead content of a fuel sample
and a short test drive. Lead content over 0.05 g/gal caused a vehicle to
be rejected while obvious transmission, engine or braking problems on the
test drive disqualified a vehicle. Further visual inspection was made for
evidence of improper maintenance or tampering. With the questionnaire,
test drive and lead test indicating an acceptable vehicle, AESi tentatively
accepted the vehicle for test subject to one more .inspection which was to
be carried out by the Inspection and Maintenance (I&M) group.
Usually within a few hours of securing the test vehicle, I&M would
perform a more detailed inspection of the underhood emission components for
evidence of major disablements which would disqualify the vehicle from test.
Prior to this final inspection, Procurement had completed a Test
Agreement, Vehicle Exchange Agreement, and Saving Bond Application.
2.4.1 Incentives for Participation
The owners of a suitable test vehicle were provided the following
incentives for their participation:
A $100 U.S. Saving Bond. Bonds were mailed
to participants within two weeks following
the test on their vehicle.
The use of a late-model, fully insured loaner
automobile during the time their vehicle was
undergoing testing.
Tune-up as required.
The owner's automobile was returned with a
full tank of fuel.
2.5 Elimination Criteria and Summary
Vehicles from the Candidate Vehicle List were eliminated
sequentially until an acceptable test vehicle was located. In summary, the
candidates were eliminated for the following reasons.
1) Unable to contact the candidate by certified mail, first class
mail or telephone.
14
-------
2) Two statements by the candidate that they did not want to
participate. Usually this was a negative indicator on the
reply card and a follow-up telephone call.
3) Met a rejection criteria in the Telephone Questionnaire.
4) Failed the lead test.
5) Failed the underhood tampering inspection.
6) Failed the road test.
7) Unable to supply the vehicle within 10 days of AESi's request
to test the vehicle.
The following tables, Exhibits 5 and 6, summarize the project in
terms of procurement activity and reasons for rejection.
15
-------
Summary of the In-Use Feasibility Program
Procurement Activities
GM FORD CHRY
MAIL SOLICITATIONS
Certified
# Sent
MAIL SOLICITATIONS
First Class
* Sent
TELEPHONE SOLICITATIONS
# of Telephone Calls Completed Positive -
To: .Negative
Undecided -
* np PpspnvsRS PFCF.TVFP Ortifi
-------
Summary
of
Reasons for Rejection
of
Eligible Candidate Vehicles
Reasons for Rejection*
GM FORD CHRY,
STAGE 1 - INITIAL SCREENING
REFERENCE
ELIGIBLE - BUT NOT INTERESTED
A. No longer owns vehicle.
B. Is not 1979 model year
Make/Model/Engine Size Desired.
C. Not original purchaser.
D. Incorrect mileage (not
between 40,000-50,000).
E. Used in unusual manner.
F. Used leaded gas.
Catalytic Converter Replaced
G. Had (has) overheating problems.
H. Was involved in accident
Reply Card
Sample Matrix
Reply Card
*Q1,2,3
Q5
Q6, 7,8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Q15
Q16
Q18
Q19
I. Equipped with add-on AC. Q22m
J. Has vehicle modifications.
K. Not properly maintained .
L. Not Dealer maintained.
M. Misadjustments, or disablements.
Q23
Q26,27,28,29,30
Q33
Q34
11
43
64
22
443
1
0
0
13
2
0
0
27
31
1
4
89
29
25
433
3
0
7
1
2
0
0
5
12
0
1
17
10
7
225
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
6
.17
0
* - The first reason for rejection shall be recorded
*Q - Questionnaire Question Number
EXHIBIT 6
18
-------
STAGE II - DELIVER VEHICLE TO ASEi
GM FORD CHRY
REFERENCE
N. Unfavorable verification of all
information relayed on the questionnaire.
Appendix 10
STAGE III - PREPARE FOR TESTING
0. Unsatisfactory Test Drive.
P. Unsatisfactory Component
Inspection (Disablement)
Q. Failed Lead Tests.
Appendix 10
Appendix 10
Q34
Appendix 10
0
0
2
4
4
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
EXHIBIT 6 CONTINUED
19
-------
SECTION 3
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE
3.1 Emission Component Inspection
As shown in Exhibit 1, the Emission Component Inspection occured
prior to any testing or alteration of the vehicle. The results of this
inspection were recorded on appropriate forms with written descriptions of
all disablements or maladjustments.
Major disablements (e.g. system removed) caused rejection of the
vehicle. Minor disablements such as misrouted or plugged vacuum lines were
noted and recorded under the heading "As Received".
This inspection determined the operational status of each
component in the emission control system which included the following broad
topics; induction system, fuel system (carburetor and choke), ignition
system, EGR system, air injection system, PCV- system, exhaust system,
evaporative system, engine assembly, and three-way catalyst system. The
tolerances and method's of inspection were obtained from manufacturer's shop
manuals and engine compartment emission data stickers. Verbal instructions
from manufacturer representatives were utilized only when supported by
published information.
3.2 M-l Restorative Maintenance
Based upon the findings of the emission component inspection,
specific actions were taken to restore malperforming systems prior to any
CVS testing. The actions taken may be considered in terms of three types
of malperformance which are disablements, maladjustments, and
malfunctions. The following items received repairs as required.
Disablements (incorrect component or system disconnected):
- reroute misrouted vacuum lines.
- replace non-OEM equivalent spark plugs
- unplug blocked vacuum lines
replace non-OEM PCV valve, EGR valve
21
-------
Maladjustments:
- adjust idle mixture if adjustment plugs have been removed, or,
if equipped with limiter caps, adjust within the range of the
controls.
set idle RPM, timing, dwell, and choke rod adjustment if
outside of EPA tolerance range.
Malfunctions:
- repair exhaust system leaks
- replace spark plugs and secondary wiring as required to obtain
proper firing voltage.
Any changes made to the vehicle from its "As Received" condition
was noted as "Repairs completed prior to Test 03".
3.3 M-2 Restorative Maintenance
Following the first CVS test, extensive maintenance and repair was
performed on any vehicle which exceeded the 1979 California exhaust
emission standards. These tasks are listed below under three categories.
30,000 Mile Maintenance
The following items were changed or serviced as required according
to manufacturers specifications:
- carburetor choke and hoses
EFE System
- carburetor bolt torque
- vacuum advance and hoses
- fuel filter replaced
- PCV valve replaced, service hoses
- oxygen sensor changed
- idle stop solenoid serviced
air cleaner element replacement
carburetor vacuum break check
22
-------
ECS system, filter replacement
- fuel line check
- engine valve clearance
Tune-Up;
change oil and filter
- change spark plugs
set timing, dwell, idle RPM, and choke adjustments to
specification.
- set idle mixture to specification.
Malfunctions;
- all emission system malfunctions were remedied except those
which required the following actions:
1) carburetor replacement
2) internal engine component replacement
3.) catalyst replacement
23
-------
SECTION 4
FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
4.1 Test Location
All tests were performed at AESi's test facility at 7300 Bolsa
Avenue in Westminster, California. The facility is located approximately
25 miles south of downtown Los Angeles at an elevation of 45 feet above sea
level.
The test facility environment, including test and vehicle soak
areas, was maintained at the required ambient temperature for all phases of
testing. The vehicle soak area is located inside the same building as the
test area and both are free from precipitation.
4.2 Constant Volume Sampler
A positive displacement pump type constant volume sampler (CVS)
built by AESi was used in this program. This CVS meets or exceeds all
specifications defined in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Part
86, Subparts A and B (40 CFR Part 86). The system contains six bags
switched by computer in sample/background pairs for all dilute exhaust
sample testing.
All plumbing in the sampling, analytical and calibration systems
is either stainless steel or teflon. This includes all sample, calibration
and zero gas lines and the valves and regulators for NO gases. Leak-tight
stainless steel convoluted tubing is used between the CVS and the vehicle
tail pipe for exhaust gas sampling. An appropriate leak-tight boot was
used to connect the tail pipe to the convoluted tubing. A stainless steel
heat exchanger with a temperature controlled cold water inlet was used to
provide essentially a constant exhaust gas temperature through the entire
test.
4.3 Emission Analysis Console
An AESi exhaust gas analytical system meeting or exceeding the
specifications of 40 CFR Part 86, was used for dilute gas measurements.
Similar laboratory type instrumentation, with additional ranges, was
available for analysis of raw NO, C02, HC, and CO gas. The consoles
contain the following instrument types and ranges:
25
-------
Analyzer
Bendix Model 8501-5C NDIR
(Lo CO - Dilute Exhaust)
Beckman 315B NDIR
(Hi CO - Dilute Exhaust)
Beckman 315B NDIR
(C02 - Dilute Exhaust)
Beckman 315B NDIR
(C02 - Raw Exhaust)
Ranges
0-100, 0-500 ppm
(11 1/4" Cell Length)
0-.3% (5 1/4" Cell Length)
0-3% (1.8" Cell Length)
0-2.5%, 0-4%
(1/8" Cell Length)
0-15%
(1/8" Cell Length)
Beckman 400 FID
(Lo HC - Dilute Exhaust)
Beckman 400 FID
(Hi HC - Dilute Exhaust)
Teco 10AR Chemiluminescent
(NOx - Dilute Exhaust)
Teco 10AR Chemiluminescent
(NO - Raw Exhaust)
Chrysler Model III Garage
(HC - Raw Exhaust)
(CO - Raw Exhaust)
0-50, 0-100, 0-300 ppm Carbon
0-1,000, 0-3,000 ppm Carbon
0-100, 0-250, 0-1,000, 0-2,500
ppm
.0-100, 0-1,000,
0-4,000 ppm
0-300, 0-2,000 ppm
Hexane Equivalent
0.5%, 0-10%
0-2,500,
4.3.1 Laboratory Standard Calibration & Working Gases
Laboratory standard calibration gases, previously approved by EPA,
were used for defining instrument calibration cu%ves and assigning
concentration values for the working gases. Each cylinder of standard gas
and each working gas cylinder was equipped with its own pressure
regulator. All gases were plumbed to a quick-disconnect panel for ease in
selecting the gas desired during calibration and testing.
Calibration gases for each range of the HC and NOx analyzers were
chosen such that three points were used across the curve (zero and approxi-
mately 45% and 90% of full scale concentration). CO and C02 calibration
points were at zero and approximately 15, 30, 45, 60, 75 and 90 percent of
full scale. All span gases were 80-100 percent of full scale.
26
-------
The diluents used in the calibration and working gases are:
HC, ppmC Propane in HC free air
NOx, ppm In zero grade nitrogen
CO, mole % In zero grade nitrogen
C02, mole % In zero grade nitrogen
4.4 Sealed Housing for Evaporative Determinations (SHED)
Evaporative emissions tests were performed using an AESi SHED and
its associated operator console. The SHED meets all requirements in
"Evaporative Emission Regulations for Light-Duty Vehicles and Trucks" as
described in Federal Register 164, dated Monday, August 23, 1976. The
console includes a Beckman 400 FID analyzer with ranges of 0-100, 0-300,
0-1000 and 0-3000 ppmC; a Linear Instruments chart recorder for analyzer
output; a Leeds and Northrup SPEEDOMAX multipoint temperature recorder; and
a variable voltage source and heating element (blanket) for applying heat
to the vehicle gas tank for the diurnal heat build. A cooling package was
installed to ensure operation of the SHED within the temperature range of
68°F to 86°F.
4.5 Chassis Dynamometer
The chassis dynamometer was equipped to simulate vehicle inertia
and road load horsepower as required in 40 CFR Part 86.
The dynamometer used was a Clayton ECE-50 with RLPC, remote
controlled lift, 17 1/4 inch roll center spacing, 89 inch overall roll
length and 4000 Ib axle weight capacity. Direct drive variable inertia
loading weights were employed, with 125 pound increments from 1000 through
8875 Ibs.
A speed meter which indicates mi/hr was used to monitor the speed
of the dynamometer roll. The rear dynamometer roll was equipped with a
tachometer generator which provides the speed signal during testing. The
meter response was linear with speed and the accuracy was within +2.0 km/hr
(+1.2 mph) over the range of 0-95 km/hr (0-59 mph). The dynamometer was
equipped to measure actual distance traveled for each segment of the FTP
testing sequence.
The power absorption unit was monitored by a power meter accurate
and readable to +0.25 hp (.187 kw) over the range of intended use.
27
-------
4.6 Data Acquisition System
Data was obtained from the analyzers, CVS and dynamometer via an
AESi Data Acquisition Control Computer (DACC). The Data General NOVA
computer was also used for generation of driver traces for the various
driving schedules, for sample bag management and for calculation and
presentation of the emission test results. The data was printed by a Data
General Dasher printer immediately following sample analysis.
The output from the analyzers was also wired to the inputs of two
Hewlett-Packard Model 7130A two-pen recorders. One recorder was used for
dilute HC and NOx and one for dilute CO and C02-
4.7 Driver's Aid
An AESi-designed two-pen Hewlett-Packard Model 7130A Driver's Aid
(speed vs time recorder) and Clayton speed/power meters were employed to
permanently record the driver's performance during the test. The Hewlett-
Packard Recorder was mounted in the Driver's Aid box. The box itself was
situated on a 4-piece moveable boom so that it could be easily moved when
testing vehicles with front wheel drive. The driving trace was generated
by the NOVA computer on this recorder in agreement with the specifications
of 40 CFR Part 86.
4.8 Miscellaneous Equipment
Miscellaneous equipment used in conjunction with the major items
of equipment included the following:
Two Teco Model 100 NOx Generators. The generator
in the raw gas analysis bench was not used since
only NO is reported.
One Rustrak Chart Recording Psychrometer, Model
2133B with continuous recording of wet/dry bulb
temperatures.
One Rustrak Chart Recorder, Model AD 101-462-2A
for continuous recording of CVS temperature.
One Weathermeasure M701 continuous recording temp-
erature recorder for soak area temperature.
One Princo mercurial Barometer.
One Meriam 50 MC2-4SF Laminar Flow Element for CVS
calibration.
28
-------
One Sartorius Model 2257 Balance used for weighing
the propane cylinders for propane recovery tests.
One Strobotach for dynamometer speed calibration.
Horiba GSM and MEXA 300A garage analyzers were
used for inspection by the mechanic.
29
-------
SECTION 5
EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION, CALIBRATION AND CROSSCHECK
This section describes the qualification, calibration, and
crosscheck procedures utilized by AESi and verified by EPA technical
personnel to ensure that valid test data were generated throughout the test
program. Initial qualification included complete demonstration of
individual instrument calibration, stability, response time, zero air and
nitrogen purity, CVS calibration, dynamometer calibration, and inspection
of all daily, weekly and monthly logs.
5.1 Constant Volume Sampler
The CVS was calibrated with a laminar flow element (Meriam Model
50-MC 2-45F) using the basic procedures specified in the Federal Register.
CVS air flow, measured using the laminar flow element on the inlet side of
the mass pump (CVS blower), was controlled by throttling. Air flow rates
were measured at five incremental changes in pump differential pressure on
each side of the normal operating point. Flow rates at a total of at least
ten points were measured. The nominal air flow of the CVS is 345 cfm.
Auxiliary devices employed in the calibration included a mercury barometer
to measure absolute ambient pressure, a close tolerance mercury thermometer
to measure pump inlet air temperature, a U-tube water manometer to measure
the pressure drop across the pump and the pump inlet pressure, and a close
tolerance inclined water manometer to measure the pressure drop across the
laminar flow element. Once this calibration was completed, data from these
devices were computer processed and the mid-range blower operating point
was determined. Propane recovery tests using instrument grade propane were
made after the calibration to confirm its accuracy. A copy of the
calibration data was provided to the EPA Project Officer as a part of the
qualification data package.
Calibration of the laminar flow element (LFE) was traceable to the
National Bureau of Standards, and a certified copy of the LFE calibration
curve was furnished to the Project Officer at the time of Laboratory
Qualification.
Daily propane recovery tests were made to confirm continued
calibration of the CVS system. The measured propane mass recovered by the
CVS had to be within +2.0 percent of the injected mass of up to 20 grams of
instrument grade propane as determined gravimetrically. The recovered
amount of propane was measured on the 0-300 ppmC FID range. A Rustrak
chart recorder was used to continuously record CVS temperature during these
tests.
31
-------
5.2 Dilute Exhaust Analysis Console
Complete calibrations of the mass emission analysis console
instruments were performed initially and checked each week thereafter until
testing was completed. Calibration curves for the mass emission analysis
console CO, C02, HC and NOx instruments were established using the gases
previously identified. The CO and C02 instruments were calibrated at
seven somewhat evenly spaced points (zero and six upscale points) across
each operating range. Calibration of the HC and NOx instruments was
performed at three somewhat evenly spaced points (zero and two upscale
points) across each operating range. Calibration of these instruments was
established and maintained within one percent of full scale for each range,
respectively, or five percent of the measured value, whichever was
smaller. A computer program provided by the EPA was used in the generation
of the calibration curves.
In connection with each test, the CVS sample bags were purged with
nitrogen, evacuated and leak-checked. These operations were performed in a
bag evacuate, N£ purge, evacuate and leak-check sequence by means of a
manual push-button selection of solenoids located within the CVS. A leak
in the system was indicated by a non-zero flow in the flow meters on the
operator's console.
Other activities included setting zero and span points immediately
prior to exhaust sample analysis and zero and span point verifications
immediately following exhaust sample analysis. Strip chart recorders were
operated throughout the zero and span set-point calibration, sample
analysis and zero and span verification sequence. Verification tolerances
were maintained within +1 deflection from the set-point for the range in
use. Converter efficiency of the NOx converter was maintained above 90
percent. The noise level of analyzer outputs as indicated on the strip
chart was maintained within +0.5 percent of full scale for the range used
during both calibration and analysis.
5.2.1 Daily Qualification Checks
Daily qualification checks included:
Leak-check of each instrument as well%s the sys-
tem.
Recording of zero, gain and tune, as applicable,
for each instrument.
Hang-up and leak-checks for background and sample
bags and sample line.
NOx analyzer vacuum and converter efficiency
checks.
32
-------
Propane recovery tests to ensure proper FID opera-
tion as-well as verification of the CVS calibra-
tion.
Recording of FID fuel and air pressure.
Recording of cylinder number, concentration, de-
flection, cylinder pressure for each working gas.
In addition to the above daily checks, weekly calibration curve
checks were mad for each range of each instrument.
Appropriate calibrations, leak-checks, etc., were also made
whenever maintenance was performed which could change instrument or system
operation.
5.3 SHED
The volume of the SHED used was determined by physical
measurement. Calibration of thermocouples used in the SHED was verified by
an ASTM thermometer as was the temperature recording instrument.
Calibration curves were generated for each range of the Beckman 400 FID
used in the analytical console. These curves were verified weekly.
For initial calibration, the FID was zeroed on zero grade
prepurified air and calibrated at two upscale points (i.e. 45% and 90% of
full scale) on each of the ranges used. The same hydrocarbon gas standards
previously described were employed for this calibration. Curve fit
tolerances and verification frequency were the same as those applied to the
dilute emission analysis console instruments.
The SHED was subjected to a background hydrocarbon check, a
calibration check and a retention check prior to testing the first vehicle.
The background emissions check was performed by sealing the
enclosure and allowing it to remain sealed for a period of four hours.
Initial and final hydrocarbon readings were taken. The background emission
rate was acceptable when it was less than the maximum increase of 0.4 grams
for the four hours, as defined in 41 Federal Register 164, dated Monday,
August 23, 1976.
The SHED was calibrated by first purging with fresh air and then
sealing the enclosure. Approximately 4 grams of instrument grade propane
was injected into the enclosure after the enclosure was sealed. The mixing
fans were operating during this injection. After five minutes of mixing,
the stabilized hydrocarbon level of the enclosure was measured and the mass
calculated. The quantity of the calculated recovery was within +2% of the
injected amount.
33
-------
The propane retention (leak) check was performed following the
calibration. In this check the SHED was allowed to remain sealed for a
minimum of four hours with the mixing blowers operating. At the end of
this period the hydrocarbon level of the enclosure was measured and the
mass calculated. For this check, the hydrocarbon level was within +4% of
the initial reading as calculated. The SHED calibration and retention
tests were performed monthly thereafter.
5.4 ECE-50 Chassis Dynamometer
Dynamometer speed was verified initially and bi-weekly with a
Strobotach. Road load force was determined using calibrated weights.
Coastdowns were performed initially and bi-weekly thereafter to verify the
road load force versus inertia weight relationships as given in 40 CFR Part
86.
5.5 Data Acquisition System
The data acquisition system was verified by performing manual
checks of equipment performance and hand calculations from strip chart data
and comparing these with the data provided by the DACC. This activity is
verified by a Quality Assurance inspection for each test. A
reasonableness check was performed for each critical data element. Any
suspect data was verified by strip chart or calculation. Any data found to
be in error was independently recalculated wherever possible or the test
was rejected.
5.6 Miscellaneous Equipment
All miscellaneous equipment was calibrated or verified according
to manufacturer's recommended practices. The CVS laminar flow element and
barometers were calibrated by Meriam Instruments Company.
34
-------
SECTION 6
TEST PROCEDURES
6.1 Vehicle Preparation
With reference again to Exhibit 1, the vehicle received an
emission component inspection followed by repairs made prior to CVS
testing. Before testing, the levels of engine oil, transmission fluid, and
coolant were checked and the vehicle's fuel tank was drained and refueled
with appropriate test fuel to 40% of tank capacity. All vehicles were
prepared for the conditioning duirnal heat build by fitting the gas tank
with a type J thermocouple by soldering it to the side of the tank at the
approximate mid-point of the 40% fuel volume.
As preconditioning to purge the fuel system and warm up the
vehicle prior to cold soak, all vehicles were driven for 7.5 miles on the
AESi city street preconditioning route.
After the preconditioning run, the vehicle was driven into the
soak area for the required 12 to 36 hour soak at temperatures between
68°F and 86°F.
6.1. 1. Driveability Evaluation
An evaluation of the driveability of each vehicle was performed
prior to and during each FTP. The evaluation is essentially the same as
that performed on previous EPA light duty vehicle projects.
6.2 Equipment Preparation
Prior to the first test of the day and following any shut-down,
equipment which had been idle or in a stand-by condition was activated to
begin warm-up. This included the CVS water heater and mass pump and each
of the analytical instruments. Following the warm-up of the respective
instruments, efficiency of the NOx instrument thermal converter was checked
and the propane recovery test involving the CVS sample system and the FID
hydrocarbon instrument was conducted. Subsequent to these checks, analyzer
outputs as indicated by the strip chart recorders and the DACC computer and
printer, were checked for correlation by calibrating at zero and five
volts. Prior to the first exhaust emissions test of the day or following
any two hour shut-down, the dynamometer was warmed-up. The prescribed 15
minutes of 30 mile per hour operation of the dynamometer was the warm-up
35
-------
procedure followed. Following warm-up, the speed calibration of the
dynamometer, driver's aid recorder and associated indicating devices were
also checked and calibrated as necessary.
Prior to each test, all charts were properly stamped to show the
vehicle number, run number, date and persons involved in the test.
6.3 Federal Test Procedure
The Federal Test Procedure as described in 40 CFR Part 86 was per-
formed on all vehicles in both the first and second tests. Although no
emission levels were measured, each vehicle received a diurnal heat build
as preconditioning to the FTP exhaust test. The exhaust emission portion
of the Federal Test Procedure is comprised of cold transient, cold
stabilized and hot transient phases. The cold transient portion is 505
seconds long, covering a distance of 3.59 miles with an average speed of
25.6 mph. The cold stabilized portion is 869 seconds in length, 3.91 miles
in distance and a 16.2 mph average speed. The hot transient portion is
identical to the cold transient portion except that it is'preceded by a 10
minute soak. The evaporative emissions testing consisted of the SHED
technique as described in 41 Federal Register 164, dated Monday, August 23,
1976 less emissions and hot soak.
The cold soak period used for the test vehicles was 12 to 36
hours. The starting procedures and shift points used for the test vehicles
were as recommended by each manufacturer in owner's manuals.
36
-------
SECTION 7
QUALITY ASSURANCE AND DATA HANDLING
AESi has established a comprehensive review system of all data to
guarantee the accuracy of the results. This quality assurance program
extends through laboratory qualification, establishing test parameters,
emission test data and I&M data. This section presents the procedures as
they were applied to the project and then discusses the data handling
required for the project.
7.1 Quality Assurance Responsibilities
'1. Ensure that daily calibrations have been performed prior to
the first test of the day. Plot PRT results and report
unusual trends. Report errors in daily checks to Lab
Supervisor.
2. Inspect all test packet materials for proper test conditions,
procedures and results reporting and ensure that the data are
complete.
3. Work with the Project Engineer in the resolution of all
rejected tests and make the Project Engineer aware of the
quantity and reasons for all aborted tests.
4. Work with the Project Engineer in establishment of test data
requirements and any special forms needed.
5. Maintain logs of all tests received by Q.A. and the
disposition of these tests.
6. Prepare all data processing inputs and oversee the data
processing operations necessary to satisfy contract
requirements.
7. Ensure that data are submitted to the customer in a timely
manner.
8. Act as interface with major contract principals in providing
weekly status reports when necessary.
37
-------
9. Ensure that all contract required calibrations are
accomplished and provide any necessary forms at least 24
hours in advance of the required calibration.
10. Perform a weekly equivalency check on the Testing Laboratory.
11. Maintain master DACC curve table notebook. Have the Lab
printout all tables monthly and rectify any errors found.
12. Keep an action file of incomplete Malfunction Reports and
purge when completed report is received, trace tardy
reports. Compare Malfunction Reports with Maintenance Log.
13. To act as custodian of all test and calibration data
collected as a result of lab operations.
14. Update Q.A. Manual and Procurement notebook as required for
contractual procedures or changes.
7.1.1 Weekly Curve Checks (WCC)
1. Check WCC forms and make sure all deflections are within
their existing limits, if not, note this on the WCC forms.
2. Check strip charts and compare them to WCC forms, i.e
concentrations, cylinder numbers, deflections.
3. If there are any changes complete the following:
a. Run new curves (if applicable).
b. Submit new curve to Lab for update into DACC table (s).
c. New DACC curve table(s) must be printed, checked and
initialed.
d. Update master curve book and make one copy for EPA.
e. Update any new working gas changes^to the master span
sheets. Double check.
f. Update master weekly curve check forms. Double check.
g. Supply Lab with new span sheets ASAP (before next test).
h. File all obsolete curves and forms.
i. Make copies of WCC and span sheets for EPA.
4. Ensure all forms are updated for next week's check.
38
-------
7.1.2 Weekly Equivalency Checks
1. Verify wet and dry bulb readings with DACC using the sling
psychrometer.
2. Verify CVS temperature reading using DACC, pyrometer gauge
and Rustrak as compared to each other.
3. Verify soak temperature chart with ASTM thermometer (minimum
1 hour stabilization).
4. Verify barometer readings on the DACC and 7-day recorder
against the mercury barometer.
5. Attach WB/DB/CVS strip charts to Weekly Equivalency form.
6. If any item is found to be out of calibration, immediately
shut down laboratory until it is corrected. When corrected,
perform an additional equivalency check to insure item was
corrected.
7. Report cal gas cylinders with less than 300 pounds pressure
to Department Manager.
7.1.3 Test Packet Inspection
1. Check outside front of packet.
a. Inertia weight
b. Actual and indicated horsepower
c. Fuel tank capacity
d. Shift points (may be in packet)
e. All pertinent information on packet
2. Check outside back of packet
a. Cold Soak time
b. Mileage and dates
3. Check contents of packet
a. Driveability form
b. Starting Procedures and Shift Points
c. Drivers trace
39
-------
d. Analyzer Strip charts
e. WB/DB/CVS temp traces
f. Computer sheet
g. Evaporative strip charts and forms
7.2 Data Handling
For this project, EPA supplied data forms which were completed for
each test vehicle. The forms required recording all pertinent test
parameters, vehicle parameters, I&M observations and repairs, and emission
test data.
This data was recorded either directly on the EPA data forms or
transcribed from AESi generated test documents.
40
-------
APPENDIX A
TELEPHONE QUESTIONNAIRE
41
-------
TELEPHONE QUESTIONNAIRE
VEHICLE CONTROL NUMBER DATE
Page 1 of 12
OMB No. 2000-0027
ADMINISTERED BY_
OWNER'S NAME
STREET ADDRESS
CITY STATE ZIP
(CALL NUMBER BELOW THAT IS MARKED WITH AN "X")
TELEPHONE (Home) ( ) (Business) ( )_
BEST TIME TO CALL
"WE ARE AUTHORIZED BY FEDERAL LAW TO
COLLECT THIS INFORMATION. WHILE YOU
ARE NOT REQUIRED TO RESPOND, YOUR
COOPERATION IS NEEDED TO MAKE THE
RESULTS OF THIS INVESTIGATION VALID."
You have been selected from a list of 8,932 vehicle owners
living in the L.A. and ORANGE COUNTIES area to participate in a study of
tailpipe pollutants being conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
EPA is authorized by law to conduct this study and to offer incentives to
you for your cooperation should you decide to participate. Your participation
in this program is strictly voluntary and none of this information will be
used against you in any way.
Your cooperation will help EPA's efforts to control air pollution due to
car exhausts.
These are the conditions of the program:
- we ask that you bring your car into our testing facility where you
will receive a late model rental car which will have a full tank of
gas and unlimited mileage. This vehicle is yours to use without
charge for the duration of the testing, which takes approximately ten
(10) working days. During this time, we will be performing a series
of tests on your car to measure tailpipe pollutants.
43
-------
Page 2 of 12
Control #
- at the time the vehicle is delivered to us for testing, you will be
required to sign a paper stating that the answers to the questions you
will be asked are true and accurate to the best of your personal
knowledge and belief. Again, none of this information will be used
against you in any way.
The incentives which are awarded are as follows:
- If a full test program has been completed on your car, a full tank of
gas and a $100 U.S. Savings Bond will be awarded.
- If your vehicle is rejected after being in the laboratory for two
days, a full tank of gas and $100 U.S. Savings Bond will be awarded.
The maintenance performed on your car will depend on program
requirements.
Are you willing to participate? YES I | NO I I
If you are not, may we ask why not?
IF RESPONSE IS POSITIVE;
For the purpose of this study, I am going to ask you some questions about
your car's maintenance and usage history. Again, I remind you that none of
this information will be used against you in any way. You should answer these
questions to the best of your knowledge and indicate when you are not sure of
something.
44
-------
Page 3 of 12
Control #
1. What is the model year, transmission type, vehicle identification number and
engine family? The engine family can be found on a decal located under the
hood in the engine compartment.
MODEL VEHICLE ID NO.
MODEL YEAR ENGINE FAMILY
TRANSMISSION: AUTOMATIC | | AIR CONDITIONED: YES | I NO I I
MANUAL I I
2. (a) Are you the original purchaser of the vehicle? YES I I NO I I
IF THE ANSWER IF NO, COMPLETE 2b.
(b) Was your vehicle privately owned prior to your purchase? YES | I NO
ELIMINATE IF ANSWER IS YES
3. Was the vehicle utilized as a demonstrator or owned by a company prior to
your purchase?
YES 1 I NO | I
IF THE ANSWER IS YES, ELIMINATE VEHICLE.
4. When and where did you purchase the car?
WHEN WHERE
5. (a) What is the approximate odometer reading?_
ELIMINATE IF NOT BETWEEN 40,000 AND 50,000 MILES
(b) Has the odometer ever not functioned properly?
YES I I NO I I
ELIMINATE IF THERE IS A HIGH PROBABILITY THAT THE VEHICLES MILEAGE IS
NOT BETWEEN 40,000 AND 50,000 MILES.
45
-------
Page 4 of 12
Control #
HAVE YOU EVER USED YOUR CAR FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES?
YES NO
6. As a taxi?
7. As a commercial delivery vehicle?
8. To race in competitive speed events?
ELIMINATE IF RESPONSE TO 6 THROUGH 8 IS YES.
9. To pull trailers?
OFTEN | | SOMETIMES I I . NEVER I I
Weight, type
ELIMINATE IF RESPONSE TO 9 IS OFTEN. IF RESPONSE IS SOMETIME, PROCEED
TO 10.
10. Has the vehicle been modified to permit trailer towing? YES | | NO I
ELIMINATE IF TRAILER LOAD WAS EVER GREATER THAN MANUFACTURERS RECOMMENDED
LIMITES.
11. Have you operated your car in severe dust conditions? YES I \ NO
*
ELIMINATE FOR POSITIVE RESPONSE
12. What percent of the time would you estimate you drive on unpaved roads?
Percent of time ^^^ None I I
ELIMINATE IF OVER 5%
13. What percent of your driving is done in:
City %
Highway % 46
-------
Page 5 of 12
Control #
14. Have you operated your car on gasohol or an ethanol fuel blend?
N0 I I YES | I If yes, what % of the time?
When was the most recent time?
15. This vehicle requires the use of unleaded fuel-
(a) Have you operated your car on leaded gasoline?
Never I I seldom I I often I I always I I
ELIMINATE IF RESPONSE IS OTHER THAN NEVER, THEN GO TO 15(b).
IF RESPONSE IS NEVER, GO TO 15(c).
(b) Why did you switch to leaded gasoline?
cost savings I I availability I I other I I
(c) Has the fuel pipe restrictor been removed from your car?
YES II NO I I
ELIMINATE FOR POSITIVE RESPONSE
16. Have there been any problems with the catalytic converter?
YES I I NO 1
If yes, describe
17. Have you ever operated your car so as to cause it to idle for extended
periods of time? (i.e., for more than 15 minutes)
NO | | YES I I APPROX. NO. OF TIMES
18. (a) Has your car ever overheated? YES II NO I
^ no. of times
(b) How long was it driven in an overheated condition?_
(c) How did you know it was overheated?
(d) What did you do?
IF RESPONSE IS POSITIVE: ELIMINATE IF VEHICLE HAS OVERHEATED MORE THAN ONCE.
IF VEHICLE HAS OVERHEATED ONCE ELIMINATE IF RESPONSE TO (b) IS MORE THAN
THREE MILES.
47
-------
Page 6 of 12
Control
19. Has your vehicle even been involved in an accident? YES II NO I I
If answer is yes, indicate what type of damage and the extent of damage to
the engine, carburetor, drive train, cooling system, fuel tank, ignition
system, emission control system or exhaust system.
ELIMINATE IF THERE WAS DEFINITE DAMAGE TO ENGINE, CARBURETOR, DRIVE TRAIN,
COOLING SYSTEM, FUEL TANK, IGNITION SYSTEM, EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM, OR
EXHAUST SYSTEM.
THE REMAINING QUESTIONS WILL DEAL WITH THE MAINTENANCE HISTORY OF YOUR VEHICLE.
20. Have you kept records of the maintenance and repairs performed on your
vehicle?
YES | | NO | |
21. Would you allow them to be reviewed and duplicated?
YES | | NO | I
22. (a) Is your car equipped with non-factory installed air-conditioning?
YES | I NO I I
(b) If yes, was it installed at a dealership?
*
YES | I NO | I
ELIMINATE IF RESPONSE TO 22(b) IS NEGATIVE.
23. Have any of the following special devices been installed on your vehicle
other than standard parts made by the vehicle manufacturer?
(a) exhaust headers
(b) camshaft equipment
(c) ignition equipment
(d) carburetor components
48
-------
Page 7 of 12
Control #
Question 23 Continued
(e) fuel tank
(f) other (describe)
ELIMINATE IF ANY ANSWER TO (a), (b), (c), OR (d), IS POSITIVE,
24. Have you ever used synthetic oil in your car?
YES | | NO I I
25. How may oil, and oil filter changes have you had? If filter change was
performed indicate by check mark in provided space.
DATE
MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
DATE
MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
DATE
MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
DATE
MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
OIL CHANGE I | DATE
OIL FILTER I | MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
OIL CHANGE I | DATE
OIL FILTER I | MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
OIL CHANGE I I DATE
OIL FILTER I | MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
OIL CHANGE I I DATE
OIL FILTER I | MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
OIL CHANGE | I
OIL FILTER 1 1
OIL CHANGE | I
OIL FILTER | |
OIL CHANGE | I
OIL FILTER I i
OIL CHANGE | I
OIL FILTER I |
49
-------
Page 8 of 12
Control #
26. Were the oil and oil filter changed during the first m months and 8,500 - 12,000
miles after purchasing the car? (See EPA criteria for number of months and
mileage.) (See question 25 to verify this answer.)
YES | | NO | |
ELIMINATE FOR NEGATIVE RESPONSE
27. What was the longest period of months and mileage your car has gone between
oil changes? (See question 25 to verify or calculate this answer.)
MONTHS MILEAGE
ELIMINATE IF EITHER MORE THAN THE NUMBER OR MONTHS OF MILES SPECIFIED BY EPA.
28. What is the longest period of months and mileage your car has gone between
oil filter changes? (See question 25 to verify or calculate this answer.)
MONTHS • MILEAGE
ELIMINATE IF EITHER MORE THAN THE NUMBER OF MONTHS OR MILES SPECIFIED BY EPA.
29. What was the approximate date of your last oil and oil filter change? (See
question 25 to verify)
OIL CHANGE: DATA MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
OIL FILTER CHANGE: DATE MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY
30. How may times has your vehicle received a routine tune-up maintenance, such
as ignition (or spark) timing adjustment, carburetor adjustment and spark
plug replacement? If possible, please state what was performed during the
tune-up.
DATE | | IGNITION TIMING | | CARBURETOR ADJUSTMENT
MILEAGE I | SPARK PLUG REPLACEMENT
PERFORMED BY
50
-------
Page 9 of 12
Control #
Question 30 Continued
DATE I I IGNITION TIMING | | CARBURETOR ADJUSTMENT
MILEAGE | | SPARK PLUG REPLACEMENT
PERFORMED BY
DATE I I IGNITION TIMING | I CARBURETOR ADJUSTMENT
MILEAGE _| | SPARK PLUG REPLACEMENT
PERFORMED BY
DATE | | IGNITION TIMING I | CARBURETOR ADJUSTMENT
MILEAGE | | SPARK PLUG REPLACEMENT
PERFORMED BY
ELIMINATE IF NOT TUNED-UP IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURERS' RECOMMENDATIONS.
31. What other scheduled maintenance has been performed?
DATE MILEAGE
PERFORMED BY_
DESCRIPTION
32. What is the largest amount of money you have spent for repairs to your
car?
dollars
do not know
WHAT_
WHY
WHEN_
WHERE
51
-------
Page 10 of 12
Control #
33. (a) Has any unscheduled maintenance (i.e., maintenance to correct a
problem) been performed on your vehicle in the following area?
YES NO
ENGINE
•CARBURETOR
DRIVE TRAIN
EXHAUST SYSTEM
IGNITION SYSTEM
COOLING SYSTEM
FUEL TANK
EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM
(b) If the answer to any of the above items is yes, please describe
what, why, when, where.
WHAT
WHY
WHEN
WHERE-
ELIMINATE IF UNSCHEDULED MAINTENANCE PERFORMED BY OTHER THAN DEALERSHIP.
•
34. To the best of your knowledge, have any vehicle settings been misadjusted
or have the emission control system components been altered, modified or
disconnected?
YES | | NO | I
If yes, explain what, when, where.
WHAT
WHEN
WHERE
ELIMINATE IF EMISSION SYSTEM COMPONENTS HAVE BEEN ALTERED OR MODIFIED.
52
-------
Page 11 of 12
Control #"
35. (a) Have you observed any of the following performance problems?
NEVER OCCASIONALLY FREQUENTLY
HARD STARTING _
POOR COLD PERFORMANCE
POOR ACCELERATION
HESITATION _
STALLING _ _ _ _
BACKFIRE _
ENGINE KNOCK _ _ _
Any other performance problems?
(b) What was done to eliminate the peformance problem(s)? What, when,
and where
WHAT
WHEN
WHERE
WHAT_
WHEN
WHERE
(c) Did the answer to 35(a) problems you mentioned occur:
I | When you first purchased the car
I | With normal use but prior to any maintenance performed on your
car
I I After maintenance by
(d) Do you still experience performance problems?
Described
53
-------
Page 12 of 12
Control #
Question 35 Continued
(e) Would you say the general performance of your vehicle at the present
time is:
I I Better than when you purchased it
I I Worse than when you purchased it
I I About the same as when you purchased it
36. (a) Has your vehicle been involved in a recall?
I I no
I I yes, approximate date
Describe the recall
(b) Did you take your car to a dealership for the recall repair?
yes II no I I
37. Has you car been equipped with rust proofing or undercoating?
I | no | I yes If yes, when and by whom
38. Has your vehicle received body or glass repairs or been partially or
totally repainted?
I I no || yes If yes: When__
Described
39. Has your vehicle been equipped with interior or exterior modifications
such as special seats, upholstery or a vinyl roof which were not factory
installed?
no | | yes If yes, described
I have read and agree that the answers to these questions are true and accurate
to the best of my personal knowledge.
54 Signature
Date
------- |