Report No.  EPA 460/3-88-009
Analytical Support for
Emission Factors Development
and Air Quality Assessment

Work Assignment No. 0-01:
Analysis of California
I/M Review Committee Data
Task 2 Report
Analysis of the Incremental Effect
of the 2500 RPM Test Mode
on FTP Emissions Reductions

prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
September 30, 1988
prepared by:

Sierra Research, Inc.
1521 I Street
Sacramento, California 95814
(916)444-6666

-------
          EPA 460/3-88-009
       ANALYTICAL SUPPORT FOR
    EMISSION FACTORS DEVELOPMENT
     AND AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT

    EPA Contract No. 68-03-3474

     Work Assignment No.  0-01:
       Analysis of California
     I/M Review Committee Data

           Task 2 Report:
 Analysis of the Incremental Effect
     of the 2500 RPM Test Mode
    on FTP Emissions Reductions
           prepared for:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
         September 30, 1988
            prepared by:

          Thomas C. Austin
         Thomas R. Carlson
        Kathryn A. Gianolini

       Sierra Research, Inc.
           1521 I Street
        Sacramento, CA 95814
           (916) 444-6666

-------
                       ANALYTICAL SUPPORT FOR
                    EMISSION FACTORS DEVELOPMENT
                     AND AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT

                           Task 2 Report:
                 Analysis of the Incremental Effect
                     of the 2500 RPM Test Mode
                    on FTP Emissions Reductions
                         Table of Contents



                                                                 page

1.   Summary 	    1



2.   Introduction and Methodology 	    9



3.   Results 	   15

-------
                             1.  SUMMARY
Under the California vehicle inspection and maintenance program ("Smog




Check"), a 2500 rpm test mode is used in conjunction with an idle




emissions test and an underhood inspection for visually identifiable




defects.  Concerns have been raised about the ability of the 2500 rpm




test to correctly identify vehicles that would fail the Federal Test




Procedure (FTP).  Foremost among these concerns is that evaporative




emission control systems may purge during the test, causing exhaust




emission concentrations to temporarily exceed the I/M cutpoints.









Analysis of data from the recently completed California I/M Evaluation




Program indicates that the use of the 2500 rpm test is contributing to




the emission reductions achieved under the Smog Check program.  FTP




emission reductions achieved on vehicles that only fail the 2500 rpm




test are slightly less than for idle test failures, but significant




emission reductions are still being achieved.









Based on the California data, it does not appear that the 2500 rpm




test is causing any significant number of "false" failures.  However,




the vehicles selected for the testing program were obtained from a




screening facility where I/M testing was performed shortly after the
                                  1-

-------
                              Figure 1
                       Failure Rates for 1980
               and Later Model Undercover Vehicles
                    at Smog Check Station
                          62.0
                                                   55.6
                                    "267B"
                           Idle Failure

                           2500 Only

                           Underhood Only
                                                              |i|| Overall
            California Standards
207(b) Standards
vehicles drove into the facility.   This may not represent the typical

preconditioning that exists at official I/M stations,  especially in

programs where vehicles must sometimes wait to be tested in a queue of

parked vehicles.



Figure 1 illustrates the incremental  effect of the 2500 rpm test mode

on the Smog Check program failure  rate.  The failure rates shown in

the figure are calculated from test results on a sample of 1980 and

later model vehicles that should have failed the official Smog Check

test based on screening tests conducted by the California Air
                                 -2-

-------
Resources Board (ARE).  As the figure shows, 16.3% of the vehicles

failed only the 2500 rpm test.  Because only 62.0% of the vehicles

failed at the first Smog Check station they were taken to, those which

failed only the 2500 rpm test make up about 26% of the total number of

failed vehicles.   (38.0% of the vehicles did not fail because they

either contained underhood defects that were not identified or because

of inconsistent tailpipe emission test results between the ARB
                                          •fc
screening test and the Smog Check station. )



Figure 1 also indicates how the use of the federal 207(b) cutpoints

would have affected the test results.  Because of the less stringent

idle standards, the overall failure rate drops from 62.0% to 55.6%.

The 2500 rpm-only  failure rate increases from 16.3% to 17.4% because

some vehicles which fail both the California idle cutpoints and the

2500 rpm cutpoints fail only the 2500 rpm cutpoints when the federal

idle standards are used.



Figure 2 illustrates the effect of the 2500 rpm test mode on excess

emissions identified.  ("Excess emissions" are defined as emissions

above the FTP standards that each vehicle was certified to meet.)  As

the figure shows,  the addition of the 2500 rpm test increases the

percent of excess  emissions identified by approximately 19% for HC,

21% for CO and 8%  for NOx.
* As explained in Section 2, some  of  the vehicles  that  failed a
screening test but passed at the Smog Check station were  included  in
the sample after weighting factors had been applied.
                                   3-

-------
                                     Figure  2

                          Excess Emissions Identified
                           at Smog Check Station #1
                Idle Failures
2500 RPM Only     Idle or 2500
       Failure Mode
Overall
1980 and Later Model
Undercover Vehicles That
Should Have Failed.
     Table 1 indicates that  there  were real  benefits  associated with the

     use of the 2500 rpm mode  to fail  vehicles.   As  the table shows,  the

     percentage reduction in FTP emissions achieved  as the result of

     repairs performed at Smog Check stations was nearly as large for

     vehicles that failed only the 2500 rpm  test as  it was for vehicles

     that failed the idle test (irrespective of  2500  rpm test results).

     However, the average emissions of the vehicles  that failed only the

     2500 rpm test were slightly lower than  those of the vehicles that

     failed the idle test.
                                                                           Hydrocarbons

                                                                           Carbon
                                                                           Monoxide
                                                                           Oxides of
                                                                           Nitrogen
                                       -4-

-------
                               Table 1

                   FTP Emission Reductions Achieved
                    as a Function of Failure Mode
Failure Mode
Idle Failure


2500-Only
Failure


Condition
Before Repair
After Repair
Change
Before Repair
After Repair
Change
Hydrocarbons
2.20 g/mi
1.50 g/mi
32.0%
1.57 g/mi
1.10 g/mi
-29.7%
Carbon
Monoxide
35.4 g/mi
22.6 g/mi
-36.1%
28.3 g/mi
22.4 g/mi
-20.9%
Oxides of
Nitrogen
1.17 g/mi
1.23 g/mi
+5.1%
1.06 g/mi
1.11 g/mi
+4.9%
One of the concerns expressed by vehicle manufacturers about the 2500

rpm test is that  it can cause vehicles that have no defects to fail an

I/M program.  This is clearly a problem where "pattern failures" occur

as the result of  catalyst protection schemes that cause partial

deactivation of the emission control system under extended idle or

immediately following a restart.  However, many of these pattern

failure problems  can be eliminated through modification of the

preconditioning procedures that are used in I/M programs.  (The

restart procedure can be eliminated for some vehicles and the

pass/fail decision can be based on the lowest emission level achieved

during the sampling period.)  Although California has not yet

implemented a set of optimized preconditioning routines, analysis of

the California I/M Evaluation Program data indicates that "false"

failures have not been a significant problem.
                                 -5-

-------
                                    Figure 3

                      Errors of Commission and Omission
                          at Smog Check Station #1
     CD
     QC
     LU
                                                                           Idle Failures

                                                                           Idle or 2500
                                                                           Failures
                   Errors of Commission        Errors of Omission
                                   Type of Error
1980 and Later Model
Undercover Vehicles That
Should Have Failed.
     Figure 3 shows the error of commission rates (vehicles that fail I/M

     but pass FTP) and error of omission rates (vehicles that pass I/M but

     fail FTP) that occurred for vehicles that should have failed the I/M
                                                    *
     test based on screening tests conducted by ARB.    As the figure shows,
     * It should be emphasized that the error of omission and commission
     rates illustrated in the figure is for a sample of vehicles that
     already failed a screening test.   The error of commission rate for the
     fleet is expected to be higher because there are many marginal FTP
     failures that cannot be detected by a no-load tailpipe test and an
     underhood inspection.  The error of omission rate for the fleet is
     more difficult to project.

                                      -6-

-------
less than 1% of the sample failed the I/M emission tests but passed




the FTP.  In contrast, 45.5% of the vehicles failed the FTP but did




not fail either the idle or the 2500 rpm test.  (Note that the overall




error of omission rate was somewhat lower due to the fact that some




vehicles failed the I/M test due only to underhood inspection




results.)  The figure also indicates that the error of commission rate




would have increased from 45.5% to 61.7% without the 2500 rpm test




mode.









Although the analysis seems to indicate that there are significant




benefits associated with the 2500 rpm test in California I/M program,




it should be noted that California enforces a 9.0 psi Reid Vapor




Pressure standard for gasoline.  Higher volatility fuels used in other




states would be expected to increase "false failures" caused by




evaporative system purging during the 2500 rpm test.  Further study




may be required to determine whether adequate preconditioning can be




done to eliminate false failures when high volatility fuel is used.









Vehicle manufacturers who were asked to provide information on the




extent to which evaporative emission control system designs and purge




schedules may be affecting 2500 rpm failures did not provide




sufficient information for a detailed analysis of purging effects.




Ford did not provide detailed information, but reported that 2500 rpm




testing would cause the purge ports to be exposed.  GM also reported




that purging would occur during the 2500 rpm test mode.  However, one




manufacturer (Nissan) reported that purge flow does not occur under




2500 rpm operation in park or neutral gear.   (EPA indicates that  this
                                   7-

-------
is inconsistent with information reported to EPA by Nissan.)  Analysis




of 2500 rpm failure rates for GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, and




Nissan vehicles indicated that Nissan was the only manufacturer with




no significant 2500 rpm-only failures.  None of 31 Nissan vehicles in




the undercover car sample failed only the 2500 rpm test.  All other




manufacturers experienced 2500 rpm-only failure rates ranging from




11.1-16.7%.









It should be pointed out that the overall program benefits associated




with 2500 rpm testing  do not indicate a lack of problems with the




test.  The  limited information obtained regarding evaporative purging




schedules indicates that purging could contribute to false failures.




Information EPA has assembled on other types of pattern failures




clearly  indicates that there are a  number of individual vehicle models




for which high 2500 rpm emissions frequently occur when there are no




defects  present.  However,  our analysis does show that, at least in




California, there is a very small percentage of vehicles failing only




the 2500 rpm test that are  capable  of passing the FTP standards.

                                  -8-

-------
                   2.  INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY
Under a contract with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

for "Analytical Support for Emission Factors Development and Air

Quality Assessment," Sierra Research, Inc. (Sierra) performs a variety

of Work Assignments for the Emission Control Technology Division

(ECTD) of EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions Laboratory in Ann Arbor,

Michigan.  Work Assignment 0-01 directed Sierra to analyze California

I/M data for the ECTD Technical Support Staff (TSS) .   Task number 2 of

that Work Assignment required further evaluation of the effects the

the 2500 RPM test mode has on the program.



The direction provided by TSS was as follows:

        The contractor shall analyze the Review Committee's ARE data
        for the incremental effect of the 2500 rpm mode on failure
        rate, excess emissions identified, errors of omission and
        commission, inconsistent emission test results, and
        unsuccessful repair rate.  The contractor shall perform the
        analysis for both California and Federal (207(b)) cutpoints.
        The contractor shall address whether or not there are
        technology, manufacturer, or other patterns to the occurrence
        of 2500 rpm failures.  Included shall be an assessment of
        whether evaporative system purge contributes to observed high
        2500-rpm failure rates, through design features such as lack
        of purge at idle, small fuel tank capacity, geometry of the
        exhaust system and exposure to the fuel tank, or other
        relevant factors.
                                  -9-

-------
Background




Under the California I/M Evaluation Program, "undercover" vehicles




obtained from the general population were given laboratory tests at




ARB's El Monte laboratory prior to being sent to a randomly selected




Smog Check station.  All of  the undercover vehicles failed an




inspection given by ARB technicians at the "screening facilities" that




were established on a temporary basis in various locations throughout




the South Coast Air Basin.   Based on the screening test, these




vehicles should have failed  a properly conducted inspection at a Smog




Check station.









Vehicles which either failed or received pre-inspection maintenance at




the first Smog Check station to which they were taken were referred to




as "F sample" vehicles.  The emission reductions achieved through




repair of these vehicles were determined by further testing at the ARB




laboratory.








Under the California I/M program, both tailpipe emission concentration




measurements and underhood inspections for visual defects are




included.  For 1980 and later models only, a vehicle must pass




hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide standards at both idle and 2500 rpm no




load (with the transmission  in park or neutral).  (Emission cutpoints




for older vehicles apply only to the idle test mode.)  Table 2 shows




the cutpoints that are used  for 1980 and later model vehicles under




the California program.  As  the table shows, the cutpoints that apply




to the 2500 rpm test mode are equal to the 207(b) cutpoints of 220 ppm




HC and 1.2% CO.  The idle emission cutpoints are technology specific.
                                  -10-

-------
                               Table 2

                     Tailpipe Emission Standards
                for the California Smog Check Program
Category/Description


15  '80+, NO CAT

16  '80+, OX CAT, w/o AIR

17  '80+, OX CAT, w/  AIR

18  '80+, 3WY CAT
Idle HC
(ppm)
150
150
150
100
Idle CO
(%)
2.5
2.5
1.2
1.2
2500 HC
(ppm)
220
220
220
220
2500 CO
(%)
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
Non-catalyst vehicles (of which there are almost none) and oxidation

catalyst vehicles not equipped with air injection are tested against a

less stringent CO cutpoint of 2.5%, while all other types of vehicles

must meet the 1.2% cutpoint that applies under 207(b).  However,  all

vehicles must meet significantly more stringent HC cutpoints than

those that apply under 207(b).  Three-way catalyst equipped vehicles

must meet a 100 ppm cutpoint at idle while other vehicles must meet a

150 ppm cutpoint.



All of the test data compiled during the testing of the undercover

vehicles were used by Sierra to estimate the benefits of the current

Smog Check program.  The same database has been used to provide more

detailed analyses requested by TSS.
                                 -11-

-------
Methodology





In order to provide the information TSS was seeking, the undercover




car sample had to be divided into several different categories.  To




determine the effect of the 2500 rpm test, vehicles that failed only




the 2500 rpm test were isolated from the rest of the sample.  In




addition, vehicles were also segregated based on whether they would




have failed the 207(b) idle cutpoints.  Within each of the vehicle




groupings based on I/M emission measurements, the sample was also




segregated by technology type and make (manufacturer).









A variety of computations were performed for each of the categories




into which the vehicles were divided.  These included overall failure




rate and failure mode  [for both California and 207(b) standards],




changes in FTP emissions associated with the repair of failed




vehicles, error of commission and omission rates, percent of excess




emissions identified, and the percent of "unsuccessful" repairs.









In the analysis conducted for the draft version of this report, a




group of 65 vehicles referred to as the "X-sample" were excluded from




the analysis.  These vehicles were originally deleted from the sample




because they passed the I/M test at the ARB laboratory, even though




they failed at the "screening facility".  EPA speculated that these




vehicles may have been "pattern failure" vehicles that only passed at




the ARB laboratory because of differences in preconditioning.  If this




was the case, inclusion of these vehicles would reduce the apparent




benefits of the 2500 rpm test mode in identifying excess emissions and




errors of commission would be expected to increase.
                                  -12-

-------
Further analysis by Sierra indicated that 17 of the 65 vehicles were

(incorrect) underhood-only failures at the screening facility.   These

seventeen vehicles did not fail the tailpipe test, so they were not

pattern failures.  All the remaining 48 vehicles in the X-sample

passed the tailpipe test at Smog Check station 1.  43 of the 48 were
                             •&
1980 or later model vehicles.



Given the observed pattern of failures for the X-sample, Sierra does

not believe it  is appropriate to include the 43 tailpipe failure

vehicles in the  sample with equal weighting.  In fact, an argument

could be made that they should not be included at all because the way

vehicles were preconditioned at the screening facility does not

represent the Smog Check station environment.  (Routine analysis of

Smog Check station data indicates that it is common for mechanics to

run repeated "initial" tests on failing vehicles until they pass.)

In this analysis, however, the 1980 and later model X-sample vehicles

with tailpipe failures were included in the sample with a one-third
* As might be  expected,  the  FTP  emission characteristics of  the 43
1980 and later model X-sample  vehicles  were  different  from the other
vehicles that  failed at  the  screening facility:
Sample
X- Sample
Others
HC
0.68
1.46
-- grams/mij.e -•
CO
9.57
24.30
NOx
0.79
1.34
In addition,  the  failure  characteristics of the X-Sample  vehicles were
significantly  different.  While 14.4% of the other vehicles  were 2500
rpm-only failures,  the  2500-only failure rate for the X-Sample  was
53.5%.
                                   13-

-------
weighting factor to account for the fact that they failed at one-third




of the test sites.  This increase the total sample of 1980 and later




models from 243 to 286.









Sierra and its subcontractor Radian attempted to obtain information




from vehicle manufacturers regarding the extent to which evaporative




emission control system designs and purge  schedules may be affecting




2500 rpm failures; however, the results did not provide sufficient




information for a detailed analysis of purging effects.  The plan had




been to further segregate the undercover vehicles by evaporative




system design characteristics before computing I/M statistics and FTP




emission results.  Unfortunately,  little detailed information was




supplied by manufacturers.  Ford  did not provide detailed information,




but reported that 2500 rpm testing would cause the purge ports to be




exposed.  GM also reported that purging would occur during the 2500




rpm test mode.  However, one manufacturer  (Nissan) reported  that purge




flow does not occur under 2500 rpm operation in park or neutral gear.
 All  of the  analyses conducted are summarized in the following section




 of the report.

                                  -14-

-------
                              3.  RESULTS
Table 3 presents  the  results  of the basic  analysis of how the 2500 rpm

test mode affected the  I/M test results.   The  table also shows how the

use of federal 207(b) standards would have affected the results.

(Data shown in the table  for  "all vehicles" were presented earlier in

Figure 1.)   It should  be noted that the "sample size" column in the

table relects a 3.0 multiplier  applied  to  all  vehicles that were not
                                  Table  3

                    Failure  Rates  for  1980 and Later Model
                            Undercover Vehicles

                                         Failure Rates  (%)
                         California  Cutpoints      Federal 207(b) Cutpoints
  Sample      Sample        2500  Idle or               2500 Idle or
  Group	    Size   Idle  Only  2500   Overall   Idle  Only  2500  Overall
All Vehicles

No Catalyst
CARB/OXD
CARB/OXD/AIR
CARB/3WAY
CARB/3CL
CARB/3CL/OXD
FI/3CL

Chrysler
Ford
GM
Honda
Nissan
Toyota
772
35.2  16.3  51.6   62.0
26.6  17.4  43.9
31
65
231
95
96
134
22
36
29
23
64
32
.6
.9
.4
.2
.6
.1
9
21
18
16
1
17
.7
.5
.2
.8
.0
.9
32.
58.
47.
40.
65.
50.
3
5
6
0
6
0
41.
76.
63.
55.
75.
50.
9
9
2
8
0
0
55.6
18
49
179
49
30
319
128
16.
6.
38.
42.
56.
31.
46.
7
1
0
9
7
7
1
33.3
14.3
15.1
14.3
3.3
23.5
2.3
50.0
20.4
53.1
57.1
60.0
55.2
48.4
66
38
56
75
80
68
53
.7
.8
.4
.5
.0
.3
.1
33.
12.
34.
42.
30.
22.
23.
3
2
1
9
0
6
4
16.7
8.2
15.1
14.3
13.3
27.0
2.3
50.0
20.4
49.2
57.1
43.3
49.5
25.8
66.7
38.8
54.2
75.5
63.3
63.6
32.8
19.4
32.3
18.6
25.3
37.5
20.2
9.7
26.2
18.6
13.7
4.2
25.4
29.0
58.5
37.2
39.0
41.7
45.5
38.7
76.9
51.5
54.7
63.5
45.5
                                  -15-

-------
in the "X-Sample".   (The actual number of vehicles was 286.  The 772




number is derrived from 243 vehicles being multiplied by 3.0 and 43




X-Sample vehicles being added.)









It also should be noted that  the  sum of the vehicles in each




technology group does not equal the total sample size.  Several




vehicles were coded  as 3-way  catalyst, closed-loop vehicles without




oxygen sensors.  Vehicles with this inconsistent combination of




descriptors were not included in  the technology specific analysis.









The table shows eight different failure rates for several different




vehicle groupings.   Four of the failure rates are associated with the




California standards and four are associated with the federal 207(b)




standards.  Under the column  entitled "Idle" is the percentage of




vehicles that failed the idle test irrespective of any other test




results (i.e., 2500  rpm failure or underhood).  Under the column




entitled "2500 Only" is the percentage of vehicles that failed the




2500 rpm test but not the idle test nor the underhood inspection.




Under the column entitled "Idle or 2500" is the percentage of vehicles




that failed any of the tailpipe cutpoints.  Under the column entitled




"Overall" is the percentage of vehicles that failed for any reason,




including underhood  failures.









As the table shows,  62.0% of  the  1980 and later model undercover




vehicles failed the  California emission standards when they were taken




to the first Smog Check station.   Of the 38.0% that did not fail, most




contained underhood  defects that  were not identified.  As covered in
                                  -16-

-------
our Task 5 report under this work assignment  ("Analytical Support for




Emission Factors Development and Air Quality Assessment, Analysis of




California I/M Review Committee Data, Task 5 Report: Analysis of




Inspection Inconsistencies Between Different I/M Test Sites," Sierra




Research, Inc., September 30, 1988.), some of the vehicles also passed




at the Smog Check station because of inconsistent tailpipe emission




test results between the screening facility and the Smog Check




station.









Table 3 also indicates that the 2500 rpm test mode increased the




failure rate by 16.3% from what it would have been with only the idle




standards.  Without the 2500 rpm test,  the tailpipe failure rate would




have been reduced from 62.0% to 45.7%.  In addition, the table shows




that the substitution of the federal 207(b) standards would have




reduced the overall failure rate from 62.0% to 55.6%.  Note that the




drop in failure rate occurs within the  "Idle" category.  Because of




the less stringent federal idle standards, the 2500 rpm-only failure




rate increases from 16.3% to 17.4%.  (Some vehicles which fail both




the California idle cutpoints and the 2500 rpm cutpoints fail only the




2500 rpm cutpoints when the federal idle standards are used.  However,




for two categories  [no catalyst and oxidation catalyst-only] the




federal CO idle standard is more stringent than California's,




resulting in a higher idle failure rate.)









Table 3 also shows that the 2500 rpm-only failure rates for GM, Ford,




Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, and Nissan vehicles  indicate that Nissan is




the only manufacturer with no significant 2500 rpm-only failures.
                                  -17-

-------
None of 31 Nissan vehicles  in  the undercover car sample failed only




the 2500 rpm test.  All other  manufacturers experienced 2500 rpm-only




failure rates ranging from  9.7-21.5%.  Although these results are not




conclusive, it is interesting  that  the only manufacturer who reported




no evaporative purging under 2500 rpm conditions had the lowest 2500




rpm-only failure rate.









Table 4 shows the error of  commission (false failure) and error of




omission (false pass) rates for  the undercover cars using both the




California and federal 207(b)  cutpoints.  As was shown earlier in




Figure 3, there has been no significant problem with errors of




commission if an error of commission is defined as an I/M test failure




of a vehicle that will pass the  FTP standards it was certified to




meet.  As the table shows,  only  25  of 763 tests (3.3%) passed the FTP




standards when tested at the ARB laboratory.  However, the error of




commission rate was computed to  be  only 0.4% based on tailpipe test




results.  This is because only one  of the seven vehicles that could




pass the FTP failed a tailpipe test.  The other six contained




underhood defects that were a  legitimate reason for failure whether or




not the FTP standards were  exceeded.









Based on tailpipe test results only, overall error of omission rates




were 45.5% for the California  standards and 53.0% for the federal




207(b) standards when the 2500 rpm  test mode was included.  (This




error of omission rate is reduced somewhat by the failure of vehicles




based only on underhood inspection  results.)  As indicated in Table 4,




the elimination of the 2500 rpm  test and the use of the federal 207 (b)
                                  -18-

-------
                                  Table 4

                Undercover Car Commission and Omission Rates
                          1980 and Later Vehicles

                        1/M Stringency:  California
  Sanrole
All Vehicles   763

No Catalyst     18
CARB/OXD        49
CARB/OXD/AIR   176
CARB/3WAY       46
CARB/3CL        30
CARB/3CL/OXD   319
FI/3CL         125

Chrysler        31
Ford            62
GM             228
Honda           95
Nissan          96
Toyota         131
   Commission Rates (%)
Passing     Idle or
  FTP   Idle  2500  Diff
25
0
3
3
0
7
11
1
0
0
7
6
7
5
0.7
_
0.0
0.0
-
13.3
0.0
0.8
_
-
0.0
0.0
4.2
0.8
— — • • .
0.9
_
0.0
0.0
-
13.3
0.6
0.8

-
0.4
0.0
4.2
1.5
— 	 —
0.2
_
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
0.6
0.0
_
-
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.8
    Omission Rates  (%)
Failing      Idle or
  FTP   Idle  2500.  Diff.
738
18
46
173
46
23
308
124
31
62
221
89
89
126
61.7
83.3
87.8
59.7
54.4
33.3
64.9
52.8
77.4
61.3
67.1
70.5
32.3
64.1
45.5
50.0
73.5
44.3
39.1
30.0
42.0
50.4
67.7
38.7
49.1
53.7
31.3
46.6
16.2
33.3
14.3
15.3
15.2
3.3
22.9
2.4
9.7
22.6
18.0
16.8
1.0
17.6
  Sample
All Vehicles   763

No Catalyst     18
CARB/OXD        49
CARB/OXD/AIR   176
CARB/3WAY       46
CARB/3CL        30
CARB/3CL/OXD   319
FI/3CL         125

Chrysler        31
Ford            62
GM             228
Honda           95
Nissan          96
Toyota         131
I/M Stringency: Federal 207 (b)
Commission Rates (%) Omission Rates (%)
Passing Idle+ Failing Idle+
FTP
25
0
3
3
0
7
11
1
0
0
7
6
7
5
Idle
0

0
0
0
10
0
0


0
0
3
0
.4
.
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0

_
.0
.0
.1
.0
2500
0

0
0
0
10
0
0


0
0
3
0
.7
_
.0
.0
.0
.0
.6
.0
.

.4
.0
.1
.8
Diff.
0.
_
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
_
-
0.
0.
0.
0.
3

0
0
0
0
6
0


4
0
0
8
FTP
738
18
46
173
46
23
308
124
31
62
221
89
89
126
Id
70
66
81
63
54
56
74
75
80
66
78
68
58
75
le
.3
.7
.6
.6
.3
.7
.0
.2
.7
.1
.1
.4
.3
.6
2500
53.0
50.0
73.5
48.3
39.1
43.3
47.7
72.8
71.0
38.7
59.7
54.7
54.2
50.4
Diff.
17.3
16.7
8.2
15.4
15.2
13.4
26.3
2.4
9.7
27.4
18.4
13.7
4.2
25.2
                                  -19-

-------
outpoints would have  increased the  error  of omission rate from 45.5%

to  70.3%.   Considering  the relatively small sample sizes  for

technology  groupings  and individual manufacturers,  there  do not appear

to  be major differences between the different groupings.




Table 5 presents  the  percent  of excess emissions  (emissions in excess

of  the FTP  standards) that were identified by the various combinations

of  test mode and  cutpoint stringency.   As shown earlier  in Figure 2,

Grout)
All Vehicles
No Catalyst
CARB/CXD
CARB/CKD/AIR
CARB/3WAY
CARB/3CL
CARB/3CL/CKD
FI/3CL
Chrysler
Ford
GM
Honda
Nissan
Toyota
Sample
Size
763
18
49
176
46
30
319
125
31
62
228
95
96
131

HC
61.9
19.2
26.1
71.0
74.6
88.9
48.9
74.2
9.1
68.9
40.1
37.8
90.6
61.4
Idle
CO
58.7
12.6
31.9
63.4
73.9
94.8
39.3
79.0
4.1
69.9
32.0
19.1
97.0
60.4

NOx
29.7
22.2
1.1
23.2
68.7
0.0
27.1
41.0
31.3
19.7
27.5
18.9
39.8
36.5
                                       Table 5

                         Excess Emissions Identified by Short Tests
                                  Undercover Car Data
                                 1980 and Later Vehicles

                               I/M Stringency:  California
                                        Excess Emissions Identified (Z)
                                         2500 Only           Idle+2500
                                       HC    CO   NOx     HC   CO  NOx
18.7
43.9
20.6
16.8
5.6
8.2
30.8
0.2
51.6
8.6
31.7
29.0
0.4
25.6
21.1
54.6
37.1
21.8
5.0
0.2
36.6
0.2
58.2
8.4
32.0
44.3
0.0
30.8
8.2
34.5
9.2
10.8
12.1
53.5
7.5
2.7
0.0
23.9
5.7
12.4
0.0
4.7
80.
63.
46,
88.
80.
97.
79.
74.
60.
77,
71.
66.
91.
87.
.6
.1
,7
.5
.3
.1
,6
.4
,6
.4
.9
,7
,0
.0
79
67
68
85
79
95
75
79
62
78
64
63
97
91
.8
.2
.9
.2
.0
.0
.8
.2
.3
.3
.0
.4
.0
.2
37
56
10
34
80
53
34
43
31
43
33
31
39
41
.9
.7
.2
.0
.8
.5
.7
.8
.3
.6
.2
.3
.8
.2
Overall
HC CO NOx
87,
80.
46.
89.
86.
100.
87.
85.
70.
83.
88.
77,
92.
87.
.3
.9
.7
0
'.5
,0
,8
.6
.0
.0
.3
,8
.0
.0
89.
87.
68,
85.
89.
100.
39.
95.
69.
88
91,
81.
97.
91.
.9
.6
.9
.2
.6
,0
.8
.2
.1
.4
.4
.1
.4
.2
53.
100.
42.
47.
80.
83,
58.
44
52,
56
51.
54,
51,
41
.8
.0
.2
.9
,8
,7
.1
.0
.9
.1
.9
.6
.9
.2

Grouu
All Vehicles
No Catalyst
CARB/OXD
CARB/CKD/AIR
CARB/3WAY
CARB/3CL
CARB/3CL/OXD
FI/3CL
Chrysler
Ford
GM
Honda
Nissan
Toyota
Sample
Size
763
18
49
176
46
30
319
125
31
62
228
95
96
131

HC
57.9
27.7
43.1
67.4
74.6
78.1
44.2
67.7
7.2
67.8
36.0
40.9
84.7
44.3
Idle
CO
56.3
25.8
65.9
57.8
73.9
86.6
37.8
76.2
3.1
68.7
32.2
21.3
92.2
48.0

NOx
20.4
22.1
2.8
15.9
68.7
0.0
21.0
16.6
30.2
18.0
17.0
18.9
12.7
31.6
                                    I/M Stringency:  Federal 207(b)
                                        Excess Emissions Identified (Z)
                                         2500 Only           Idle+2500
                                       HC    CO   NOx      HC   CO  NOx
                                      35.3
                                       3.5
                                      20.9
                                       5.6
                                      18.0
                                       3.0
                                       0.2

                                      51.6
                                       9.6
                                      35.0
                                      25.1
                                       3.3
                                      41.2
                                           25.6   8.4
41.5
 3.0
27.0
 5.0
 6.7
45.8
 0.2

58.2
 9.6
40.7
42.1
 1.8
43.7
34.5
 7.5
10.5
12.1
53.5
 8.3
 2.7

 0.0
25.6
 5.8
11.8
 0.0
 6.6
                                                        79.5  81.9 28.8
63.1
46.7
88.3
80.3
96.1
80.2
67.9
67.2
68.9
84.8
79.0
93.4
83.5
76.4
56.7
10.2
26.4
80.8
53.5
29.3
19.4
58.8
77.4
71.0
66.0
88.0
85.5
61.3
78.3
72.8
63.4
94.0
91.7
30.2
43.6
22.8
30.7
12.7
38.3
Overall
J3£_
84.8
80.9
46.7
88.8
86.5
99.0
84.2
79.8
68.2
83.0
82.1
77.0
90.3
85.5
CO
88.3
87.6
68.9
84.8
89.6
98.4
86.9
93.4
68.1
88.4
86.9
81.1
96.2
91.7
NOx
47.4
100.0
42.2
47.6
80.8
83.7
54.8
19.6
51.8
56.1
41.5
54.0
47.9
38.3
                                      -20-

-------
the inclusion of the 2500 rpm test mode increased the percent of




excess emissions identified from 61.9% to 80.6% for HC, from 58.7% to




79.9% for CO, and from 29.7% to 37.9% for NOx.  The underhood




inspection failures further increased the excess emissions




identification rate.  Considering sample sizes, there are no major




differences between the manufacturer and technology groupings.









Table 6 is a repeat of Table 1 from the summary.  The table shows that




there were additional emission reductions achieved with the use of the




2500 rpm mode to fail vehicles .  The percentage reduction in FTP




emissions achieved as the result of repairs performed at Smog Check




stations was nearly as large for vehicles that failed only the 2500




rpm test as  it was for vehicles which failed  the idle test




(irrespective of 2500 rpm test results).  Since the vehicles were




repaired based on their test results relative to the California I/M




stringency (rather than to the federal) , the  reductions in FTP




emissions could only be calculated relative to the California I/M




cutpoints.   HC reductions after repair were about 30% for both 2500




rpm-only and idle failures.  CO reductions after repair for idle




failures were 36.1% compared to 20.9% for 2500 rpm-only failures.




Both groups  experienced slight NOx increases  of about 5%.  The table




also indicates that the average emissions of  the vehicles that failed




only the 2500 rpm test were slightly lower than those of the vehicles




that failed  the idle test.  The grams per mile emission reductions




associated with the repair of 2500 rpm-only failures are therefore




less than for idle failures.
                                  -21

-------
                               Table 6
                   FTP Emission Reductions Achieved
                    as a Function of Failure Mode
Failure Mode
Idle Failure


2500-Only
Failure


Condition
Before Repair
After Repair
Change
Before Repair
After Repair
Change
Hydrocarbons
2.20 g/mi
1.50 g/mi
-32.0%
1.57 g/mi
1.10 g/mi
-29.7%
Carbon
Monoxide
35.4 g/mi
22.6 g/mi
-36.1%
28.3 g/mi
22.4 g/mi
-20.9%
Oxides of
Nitrogen
1.17 g/mi
1.23 g/mi
+5.1%
1.06 g/mi
1.11 g/mi
+4.9%
Finally,- Table 7 shows the unsuccessful repair  (waiver) rates as a

function of failure mode.  The values in the table are the percentage

of vehicles failing each individual test mode/cutpoint stringency

combination that did not pass the after repair  I/M test and received a

waiver.  There is a lower waiver rate for 2500  rpm-only failures.

This indicates that there is no greater problem getting vehicles that

only fail the 2500 rpm test to pass an after repair test.
                                  -22-

-------
   Sample
   Group
All Vehicles

No Catalyst
CARB/OXD
CARB/OXD/AIR
CARB/3WAY
CARB/3CL
CARB/3CL/OXD
FI/3CL
                                  Table 7

                       Unsuccessful I/M Repair Rates
                for 1980 and Later Model Undercover Vehicles
Sample
 Size

 154
        Unsuccessful Repair Rates (%)
 California Cutpoints          Federal Cutpoints
        2500    Idle or              2500    Idle or
Idle    Only     2500       Idle     Only     2500
30.4   17.6
26.6
36.9
17.6
30.3
4
8
32
13
6
68
23
100.0
0.0
14.3
42.9
25.0
35.7
35.3
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

20.0

100.0
0.0
10.3
37.5
25.0
29.2
33.3
100.0
50.0
20.0
42.9
33.3
38.1
50.0
100.0

0.0
0.0

17.4
100.0
100.0
33.3
14.8
37.5
33.3
27.7
54.5
                                  tt' ft ff
                                  -23-

-------