EPA420-R-93-018
Guidance for the Implementation of
Accelerated Retirement of Vehicles Programs
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Mobile Sources
February 1993
-------
I. Forward
The Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, mandates market-based
approaches in certain Federal programs and encourages the use of
such approaches at the Federal, State, and local levels, as well
as by individual sources, to facilitate the attainment of
required emission reduction milestones and goals of Title I of
the Clean Air Act Amendments. In response to the Act, the Agency
has proposed and issued rules and guidance that incorporate the
use of market-based measures in Federal program areas such as
acid rain reduction and clean fuel fleet vehicle purchases.
To facilitate the development of market-based programs that
go beyond such Federal programs, the Agency is developing
comprehensive rules and guidance for States and individual
sources to follow in designing and adopting market-based programs
in State Implementation Plans (SIP's). The pending Economic
Incentive Program (EIP) Rule draws upon the general principles
found in the 1986 Emission Trading Policy Statement (see 51 FR
43631 December 4, 1986), while providing a broad framework for
the development and use of a wide variety of market-based control
strategies. For States to take credit in their SIP's for
emission reductions based upon such strategies, reductions must
be quantifiable, enforceable, surplus to other Federal and State
requirements, permanent within the timeframe specified by the
program, and consistent with all other statutory and Federal
regulatory requirements. The proposed EIP Rule is applicable to
all types of sources, including stationary and mobile sources,
and defines general regulatory elements (e.g., program baseline,
auditing procedures, enforcement requirements) that should be
included in the design of market-based control strategies.
In addition to this broadly applicable general rule, the
Agency is also developing a more narrowly focused document
entitled, "Guidance on the Generation of Mobile Source Emission
Reduction Credits," specifically for the development of market-
based programs involving emission reduction credits generated
from mobile sources. Such mobile source emission reduction
credits (MERC's) can be generated from surplus emission
reductions over and above Federal mobile source program
requirements and can potentially be used to substitute for
stationary source emission reduction requirements. The general
guidance on the generation of MERC's mentioned above addresses
issues unique to emission reduction credits generated by mobile
sources, including the calculation of emissions baselines for
participating sources, the projection of future emissions levels,
and the time-averaging of emission reduction credits that vary
over time.
To exemplify how MERC's can be generated from a specific
category of mobile sources, the following guidance addresses
accelerated retirement of vehicles programs (also known as
scrappage programs), and illustrates how the purchase of
vehicles, and their removal from use, can generate emission
-------
credits. While market-based mobile source programs must be
consistent with the EIP Rule and the Guidance on the Generation
of Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits, EPA does not intend
to limit flexibility and innovation beyond the requirements found
in these documents.
The following guidance is intended to assist program
sponsors in the design of scrappage programs, not to limit
initiative, creativity, or flexibility in developing a program
which best meets the sponsors' needs within the limits of good
environmental policy. The examples that are used in this
guidance to illustrate a methodology for calculating benefits and
an administrative framework for such a program are not
exhaustive. EPA encourages potential sponsors to maximize the
cost-effectiveness of scrappage programs, for example, by
targeting them towards vehicles which have already been
identified as high emitters (see Section VIII-C) or by targeting
the retirement bounty at vehicles equipped with the very oldest
emission control technology (pre-1975 model year).
II. Introduction
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 define "programs to
encourage the voluntary removal from use and the marketplace of
pre-1980 model year light duty vehicles and pre-1980 model light
duty trucks" as a transportation control measure in Section
108(f). A scrappage program as described in EPA's recent
information document1, could be such a measure. Additionally,
scrappage programs offer a cost-effective alternative to more
expensive and difficult stationary source emission control
measures. A scrappage program has the potential to create
additional flexibility, for governments and industry alike, by
allowing the generation of emission reduction credits from
existing mobile sources that could be traded to stationary
sources.
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to
States that are interested in developing criteria and procedures
for the implementation and administration of scrappage programs.
It discusses scrappage programs and specifies a base methodology
for the calculation of MERCs from such programs. It also
discusses some areas of uncertainty that program variations may
amplify, and for which the Agency seeks additional information
for the purpose of developing future guidance.
The document is divided into nine sections. Section III
contains background information to provide the context from which
this guidance should be viewed. Section IV discusses
requirements that must be included in scrappage programs in order
See Transportation Control Measure Information Documents, Accelerated Retirement of Vehicles, U.S. EPA, Office of Mobile Sources, March 1992
-------
for credits to be calculated from the methodology described in
this document. Section V provides the base methodology for the
calculation of MERCs, that if followed, would be readily
acceptable to EPA. Section VI provides an example illustrating
how to calculate MERCs using the base methodology. Section VII
discusses some areas of uncertainty which may affect the emission
reductions that are actually achieved. Section VIII describes
program variations, which, if developed and addressed properly,
could increase emission reductions and improve cost-
effectiveness. Finally, Section IX defines the applicability of
generated emission credits.
This document is an addendum to EPA's general guidance
document, "Guidance on the Generation of Mobile Source Emission
Reduction Credits." The requirements, discussions and examples
are related only to the generation of emission reduction credits
from scrappage programs. Guidance related to the use of emission
reduction credits can be found in the general guidance document.
III. Background
Old automobiles with no or few emission controls are
typically a source of high emissions. Newer vehicles possessing
emission controls which have been tampered with, maintained
improperly, have failed, or have otherwise been rendered
ineffective are also significant contributors of emissions.
While normal attrition of the fleet solves some of this emissions
problem, some high emitting vehicles remain in operation and
contribute to the problem for long periods of time. It is these
vehicles which scrappage programs seek to remove from the fleet
by providing an incentive for owners to retire these vehicles
sooner than they would have in the absence of the program.
A State or local government can design a scrappage program
as a SIP measure or, in conjunction with a private company, as a
program to generate emission credits to satisfy existing or new
source-specific requirements. Scrappage programs can be designed
as either emission-limiting or market-response programs. An
emission-limiting program would directly specify a level of
emission reduction to be achieved (e.g., scrap vehicles until the
desired reduction is achieved). In contrast, a market-response
program would create an incentive to reduce emissions without
directly stating a specific emission reduction target (e.g.,.set
a price for certain vehicles and scrap those that respond). The
proposed EIP rule provides guidance for both types of programs.
While the potential for variations such as those described
in Section VIII exist, programs will basically work in the
following way. A State or local government or company would
advertise for the purchase of certain vehicles. Owners would
then voluntarily sell their vehicles to the sponsor of the
program and the vehicles would be removed from the fleet. The
-------
sponsor would receive an emission credit for each car removed
from operation equivalent to the difference between the emissions
from the retired vehicle and the emissions from the replacement
vehicle.
Although this guidance generally addresses light-duty
vehicles, EPA recognizes that old light-duty trucks were also
built without emission control equipment, and that the
introduction of emission control components lagged behind those
for cars. EPA encourages States to consider the application of
this guidance to programs that include trucks.
As indicated above, scrappage programs must follow a number
of general requirements that are detailed within other guidance
and rules. The next section provides additional specific
guidance relevant to scrappage programs.
IV. Requirements for Scrappage Programs
In order to ensure that scrappage programs yield the
expected levels of emission reductions, minimum safeguards should
be provided in order to receive tradeable credit. EPA therefore
requires the following program design elements in scrappage
programs as a condition to using the methodology contained in
this document. If these elements are not present, EPA will
consider the program particulars on a case by case basis, due to
greater uncertainty of emission reduction claims.
1. Twelve month registration requirement
To ensure that vehicles are not imported into the area for
the sole purpose of being sold in the program, eligible vehicles
must have been registered by the owner at an address within the
nonattainment area continuously for at least the previous twelve
months prior to the date the vehicle is purchased by the program.
2. Vehicle must be operable and driven to site
Scrappage programs should seek to remove those high emitting
vehicles which would have been operated in future years and not
to attract vehicles which are inoperable or have little remaining
useful life. Eligible vehicles are required to be operable and
driven to the intake site to increase the probability that the
scrappage program will attract in-use vehicles. In addition,
they must undergo a physical inspection designed to assure that
major body components have not been removed and that the vehicle
could be readily used for normal transportation purposes.
-------
3. Owner must be present and possess a valid title
The owner of the vehicle or his or her legal representative,
or in the case of corporate owned vehicles, a certified agent,
must be present to ensure proper passage of title, and verify the
owner's intention to retire the vehicle. Since these vehicles
will either be destroyed or dismantled for partial recycling,
they cannot be returned to the owner if a mistake is made. The
identification of the person delivering the vehicle, the Vehicle
Identification Number (VIN) and the validity of the vehicle title
must be verified.
4. Owner must have a valid I/M certificate (where
applicable)
As a further assurance that the vehicle being retired is an
in-use vehicle, scrappage programs must require the owners to
present the I/M certificate (or waiver certificate if the car
received a waiver) obtained from the previously required testing
period (where I/M is applicable).
5. Environmentally Safe Disposal
A scrappage program will generate solid, liquid, and gaseous
waste which must be disposed of or recycled in an environmentally
sound manner. EPA requires that all retired vehicles be scrapped
by facilities which are licensed and approved to dispose of all
the types of waste created by the scrappage of vehicles or
recycling of vehicle parts, where licensing requirements apply.
In areas where such licensing requirements are not in place,
programs must adhere to all applicable Federal, State, and local
recordkeeping procedures and laws for disposal of vehicles.
Where legal requirements are not in effect, all prudent
environmental safeguards should be strictly followed to ensure
that scrappage of vehicles does not result in environmental
degradation.
EPA is considering whether to issue supplemental guidelines
that States should follow to ensure that vehicles are disposed of
or parts are recycled in an environmentally sound manner. The
supplemental guidelines would include criteria for materials
disposition that disposal facilities should be required to meet
whether licensed or not. EPA is interested in receiving comments
regarding what criteria might be included in those guidelines.
Anyone wishing to submit comments on the criteria should send
them in writing to: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Transportation Section, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105.
The overall environmental and economic impact should be
examined by program sponsors when considering the method of
-------
vehicle disposal to be used. For non-emissions related parts,
program sponsors may wish to make use of the broader
environmental benefits of the automotive dismantling and
recycling industry when economically feasible. The recycling of
a vehicle's major body components and other non-emissions related
parts could be allowed where proper safeguards are implemented to
assure that emissions related parts are effectively destroyed.
6. Emission Estimates
The estimates used in the base methodology for calculating
MERCs, described in Section V, come from the latest MOBILE model
released by EPA2. The most recent version of the model must be
used for program evaluations begun three months or more after the
release of an updated model.
As an alternative to the MOBILE model's average emissions
approach, program sponsors may choose to use actual tested
emission levels as the basis for emission estimates. For the
purpose of quantifying those emission levels, a transient mass
exhaust emissions test, and if desired, an evaporative emissions
test procedure3 should be used. If this approach is used, other
program design elements will be required to guard against the
possibility of tampering to increase emissions and the resulting
credits. This issue is discussed more fully in Sections VII and
VIII.
7. Minimum data gathering requirements for programs
over 2500 vehicles
Sponsors which retire more than 2500 vehicles within any
twelve month period are subject to a minimum data gathering
requirement. Sponsors must collect emissions data, using EPA's
I/M240 mass emission test and evaporative purge and pressure
tests, from a random sample of a statistically significant number
of participating vehicles. Sponsors must also collect
information on annual VMT, expected remaining useful life, and
model year of replacement vehicle. The information will be
provided to EPA for evaluation of program emission estimates and
for the purpose of improving future guidance on emission
reduction estimates for scrappage programs.
For California programs, the requirements of this section may be applied to the EMFAC model if currently accepted by EPA for use in SIP submittals.
If exhaust and evaporative emissions tests other than the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) are used, proof of correlation to the FTP must be submitted and approved by the EPA. The I/M240 is one such acceptable
exhaust emissions test.
-------
8. State Responsibility
States allowing MERCs for retirement programs are
responsible for assuring that programs are implemented in
accordance with this guidance. Since these programs have the
potential to change fleet emissions characteristics, MERCs
claimed for these programs must be properly accounted for in
applicable State Implementation Plans. Baseline emissions
projections must be adjusted to assure that double counting of
the emission reductions has not occurred.
V. Base Methodology for Calculating MERCs
The base methodology, consisting of the eight basic steps
described below, is designed to ensure that emission reduction
credits can be reasonably determined without emission testing.
The estimates of emission levels described in steps 5 and 6 are
based on local fleet and ambient characteristics entered into
EPA's MOBILE model. However, the use of emission tests, as
described in Sections VII and VIII, to establish vehicle emission
levels could be used as an alternative.
1. Determine or estimate the number of vehicles to be
retired, by model year.
When the scrappage program has been executed, or partially
executed, the number of vehicles retired by model year can be
determined by simple counting. The following paragraphs address
a situation in which an advance estimate of credit is desired or
required4.
A model year distribution for a scrappage program reflecting
the model year distribution of eligible vehicles in the local
area is required for accurate estimates of emission reductions.
The first step is to estimate the model year distribution of
vehicles expected to participate in the program. Determining
this distribution requires information about the distribution of
the eligible fleet. The eligible fleet is defined as the subset
of model year vehicles from the area fleet that could potentially
participate. The most reliable source of this information is
actual vehicle registration data that can generally be obtained
from a State's Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) or equivalent
agency.
The incentive offered to entice owners of old vehicles to
participate, relative to the market value of the various model
years and makes, will affect the actual distribution of
Advance estimates may be desired in order to evaluate program cost-effectiveness or to predict emission reductions for a State Implementation Plan. EPA does not intend to issue tradeable credits based upon
predicted emission reductions from proposed future scrappage programs.
-------
participating vehicles. Program sponsors must assure that
incentives are sufficient to attract a level of participation
that reflects the distribution estimates made in the analysis.
If alternative incentives are offered, sponsors should modify the
model year distribution accordingly.
Determining the number and model year of vehicles which will
be retired depends on several factors, including the amount of
money or other incentive which will be offered for each retired
vehicle, the number of eligible vehicles that exist in the fleet,
the method of advertising, and the convenience of the scrappage
site to various groups of owners. Some insight on appropriate
incentives and number of vehicles may be gleaned from a used car
market value reference such as a "blue book," or a local
newspaper's classified advertisements, and State DMV statistics
2. Estimate changes in fleet size
Determining the effect the program will have on the size of
the fleet is important because fleet size affects evaporative
emission totals, independent of vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Scrappage programs cause a portion of the fleet to be retired
from use faster than it would have been without a program. While
the drivers' need to travel may not have changed, vehicle
replacement is uncertain. Some vehicles will be replaced, some
of the owners may now choose to drive another car that they own
more than before, and some may utilize alternative modes of
transportation.
This methodology has made assumptions that total fleet VMT
will remain the same before and after the program and that the
VMT from the scrapped vehicles is redistributed to the remaining
fleet in proportion to the travel fractions that exist for the
entire fleet. These assumptions are discussed below in part (3)
of this section. These assumptions imply that there would
necessarily be fewer vehicles in the fleet, at least immediately
after the program. This can be conceptualized by thinking of
lower VMT vehicles being replaced by higher VMT vehicles, but
holding total VMT constant. The result is fewer total cars.
With time, fleet size is likely to return to a "natural" level,
through increased new car purchases and slower retirement of
existing vehicles.
Fewer but higher VMT vehicles, on average, would have lower
diurnal evaporative emissions per mile of travel. Without
adjusting mileage accumulation rates in the MOBILE model, this
discrepancy cannot be addressed satisfactorily. The net effect
on emission calculations is minor, and the effect on fleet size
is likely to be only temporary. These considerations warrant
taking the more conservative and simplified approach of ignoring
the potential change in the total number of vehicles in the
fleet.
-------
3. Estimate changes in VMT
Two basic estimates need to be made: 1) What is the effect
on total VMT in the area when older vehicles are scrapped; and 2)
How are the VMT, which were attributed to the retired vehicles,
redistributed in the remaining fleet? Estimates of these changes
in VMT in the area as a result of the program are important
because VMT affects numerous critical internal calculations and
inputs to the MOBILE model. For instance, the MOBILE model
assigns the number of trips made by vehicles based upon VMT. The
number of trips is important within the MOBILE model since a
significant portion of a trip's emissions is generated when a
trip begins and the engine is cold.
It is reasonable to assume that scrappage programs will not
change total VMT significantly because people's transportation
needs will not necessarily change. However, data suggest that
within the national fleet, newer vehicles travel farther than
older vehicles5. Since the post-program fleet will be somewhat
newer, it could be argued that there may be slightly more VMT.
EPA believes that for most programs, any increase in total area
VMT will be insignificant and that the methodology should assume
that total VMT remains the same before and after the program. In
effect, EPA is assuming that newer cars are used more because
drivers with larger VMT needs can afford and choose the greater
reliability, comfort, and fuel economy of newer cars. Their VMT
needs are, however, basically fixed. EPA believes that this is a
more reasonable assumption than an assumption that the driving
performance of a newer car unleashes some previously pent up
desire or need to travel.
Inherent in the determination of the change in VMT is the
estimation of the redistribution of VMT from the retired
vehicles. This estimation is difficult, and empirical data are
scarce. States should assume that the VMT of the retired
vehicles are absorbed by the remaining fleet in the same
proportion that exists for the total fleet in the MOBILE model.
If, for example, ten percent of the total fleet VMT are assigned
to 1989 model year vehicles, then ten percent of the VMT of the
retired vehicles are assigned to 1989 model year vehicles in the
remaining fleet.
4. Estimate the expected years of remaining life for the
retired vehicles.
The expected remaining useful life of any given group of
vehicles will vary by geographic location. Differing estimates
may be used if supported by accurate local or regional data on
U.S. Department of Energy, Fuel Purchasing Patterns and Vehicle Use Trends from the NPD Research Gasoline Diary DataBase: October 1983 - September 1984 Data Display, January 1988.
-------
remaining useful life, or by projections from related data
sources.
Regardless of geographic location, annual VMT and the number
of vehicles which "naturally" survive from any given starting
group of vehicles decrease each year. Therefore, a program which
scrapped typical vehicles from this fleet segment would earn the
most credit in the first few years and earn smaller amounts of
credit over time. A few vehicles in a group of scrapped vehicles
could, in the absence of a scrappage program, continue to operate
substantially longer than the average vehicle of that vintage.
However, EPA anticipates that there is a possibility that the
vehicles attracted by a scrappage program will not be typical or
representative of the fleet. Instead, scrapped vehicles may be
mechanically worse than average and may have shorter useful lives
than others their age. Also, when some cars of a certain model
year are removed from service through a scrappage program, the
market value of the others in that age group will increase, which
will tend to reduce their "natural" scrappage rate.
However, EPA remains open to the possibility that an area
and program-specific remaining life assumption could be assumed
for any group of scrapped vehicles if supporting information or
program design elements were present. EPA will consider
remaining life assumptions based upon such information including,
but not limited to, data gathered from previous program studies,
professional independent mechanical condition assessments, or
information on the correlation between vehicle procurement
incentives and the mechanical condition of participating
vehicles.
Where such regional or local data, or other supporting
program information or design elements are not present, three
years of remaining useful life, estimated by EPA from national
data on 1979 and earlier model year vehicles, should be used.
EPA has evaluated the effect of age on useful life and remaining
VMT based on national fleet data from the 1984 National Purchase
Diary (adjusted to reflect FHWA 1990 total VMT estimates)6 and
from the Transportation Energy Data Book7. Our analysis
indicates that if a vehicle were to travel at its age-specific
VMT accumulation rate for three years, then it would accumulate
all of the expected remaining VMT for an average vehicle of that
vintage. EPA believes that this three year limitation is a
reasonable policy choice on how long credit should be granted.
EPA analysis of the same data indicates that the 1979 and
earlier model year segment of the fleet has an average annual
retirement rate of about 20% (the average vehicle in this segment
has a 20% chance of being retired in a given year). Therefore,
U.S. Department of Transportation, FHWA, Highway Statistics, 1991
U.S. Department of Energy, Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 11, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, January 1991.
-------
within this three year window, the number of vehicles affected by
the accelerated retirement event must be reduced by 20% per year.
Likewise, where local or regional remaining life estimates are
used, a comparable age-specific retirement rate derived from
local or regional scrappage/survival statistics must be used to
reduce the affected number of vehicles.
The calculation of a declining number of vehicles in the
scrapped fleet and the truncation of emission credit at three
years are policy choices to set a national default value for
these parameters in the example program described in this
guidance. These choices are made in light of the uncertainties
and the possibility of biased recruitment in scrappage programs
in cases where the data described above to support alternative
estimates are unavailable or unreliable. They are not meant to
establish precedents for remaining life estimates for scrappage
programs which use vehicle specific data to estimate remaining
useful life or other programs which might need such estimates in
order to calculate benefits.
5. Estimate the average emission rate per year from the
retired vehicles.
Estimates of the average emissions from the retired vehicles
are calculated by the MOBILE model for each calender year, taking
into account local characteristics such as model year mix,
ambient temperature, fuel, average speeds, and any local control
program. The MOBILE model should be run with a zero value
entered for the registration distribution and mileage
accumulation inputs for the non-retired model years. The average
grams per mile will be indicated at the bottom of the column
labeled FER on the MOBILE "By Model Year" output table.
6. Estimate the average emission rate per year from the
replacement vehicles.
A determination of the emission characteristic of the
replacement vehicles for each calender year is also needed.
Consistent with the assumption about the redistribution of
scrapped vehicle VMT, the replacement vehicle is assumed to be
the average vehicle in the entire fleet, including older vehicles
which were not scrapped. As in part (5), estimates of the
average emissions from the entire post-program fleet are based on
the local characteristics and are calculated by the MOBILE model.
To estimate the average emissions of the replacement vehicles,
the MOBILE model should be run for all model years. The average
grams per mile will be indicated in the column labeled FER on the
MOBILE "By Model Year" output table. It is optional whether to
adjust age distribution at this step to account for the removal
of some vehicles, since the effect may be too small to appear in
the significant digits of the output.
-------
7. Calculate the average yearly emissions benefit for each
retired vehicle
The average yearly benefit of the program for each vehicle
retired from the fleet is the difference between the average
emission rate of the scrapped vehicles and the average emission
rate of the replacement vehicles, multiplied by the average
annual VMT of the scrapped vehicles. The average annual VMT of
scrapped vehicles is the average annual mileage accumulation
taken from the MOBILE model, for the model years of the vehicles
being scrapped. Model years can be treated individually, or
aggregated by the number of vehicles scrapped from each. This
annual VMT value will decrease in accordance with the MOBILE
model, for each successive year of the creditable three year
period.
8. Calculate the total emission reduction in tons per year
removed by the program.
To calculate the tons removed by the program, multiply the
average yearly emissions benefit of each retired vehicle by the
number of vehicles retired by the program and convert to tons.
This calculation is done for each of the three creditable years
As mentioned in part (4) of this section, the methodology assumes
an annual "normal" retirement rate. The total number of vehicles
represented in years two and three reflect this reduction. Since
the MOBILE model reports emission levels in grams per mile per
vehicle, the values need to be converted to tons.
VI. Example
The example used to illustrate the methodology is
hypothetical and does not represent an Agency position on
appropriate program size or design. The values used in the
calculations are based upon data representing national fleet
averages and may not be representative of any particular urban
area.
Table 1 provides an estimate of the emission reductions that
could be realized from a program operating in 1993, in which
10,000 pre-1980 model vehicles are retired.
-------
Table 1.
Program to Retire 10,000 Vehicles in 1993
Year Emission Reduction (tons)
1993
1994
1995
Total
VOC
343
272
216
831
NOx
115
91
72
278
CO
2600
2085
1657
6342
Avg/Yr 277 93 2114
All of the emission estimates were made using the mobile
source emissions model, MOBILE4.1. Baseline and post-program
scenarios use national average default values to describe the
vehicle fleet, standard speeds, and typical summer temperatures.
The scenarios assume a low altitude area with an ASTM class "C"
fuel. The area is also assumed to have an existing "basic"
Inspection/Maintenance program with an idle test covering all
model years of vehicles.
A step by step description of the base methodology and how
it was applied to the example follows and is shown in Table 2.
1. Estimate the model years and number of vehicles to be
retired.
For this example, the model year distribution of the
participating vehicles is assumed to be identical to that of the
eligible fleet and is based upon national fleet model year
distribution from the MOBILE4.1 model. It is assumed that 10,000
pre-1980 model year vehicles are scrapped on January 1, 1993.
2. Estimate changes in fleet size.
For this example, it is assumed the total number of vehicles
-------
in the fleet remains the same as before the program was
implemented.
3. Estimate changes in VMT.
EPA's approach keeps total VMT the same before and after the
program. The values are determined by the annual mileage
accumulation in the MOBILE model and are supported by data
reported by Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the Transportation
Energy Data Book: Edition 11, and also by data collected by
UNOCAL during the demonstration program in Los Angeles during the
summer of 1990. The average VMT per year per retired vehicle is
5182 miles in year 1, 4920 miles in year 2, and 4680 miles in
year 3.
4. Estimate the expected number of years of use remaining for
the retired vehicles.
The expected number of years of use remaining in the retired
vehicles is three years.
5. Estimate the average emissions per year from the retired
vehicles.
The average emissions from the retired vehicle were
estimated by EPA's mobile source emissions model, MOBILE4.1,
using national average characteristics for climate, geography,
local control program, and vehicle fleet (altitude, fuel, I/M
program, fleet, travel fraction, etc.). The MOBILE model was
then run for three successive years, 1993, 1994, 1995. The
average emissions were determined by running the model with zero
registrations and zero mileage accumulation for 1980 and newer
model years. The average grams per mile are indicated at the
bottom of the column labeled FER on the MOBILE4.1 output
table(See attachments 1, 2 and 3).
The emission levels for the retired vehicles in each of the
three years were as follows: 8.87 g/mile in 1993, 9.06 g/mile in
1994, and 9.26 g/mile in 1995.
6. Estimate the average emissions per year from the replacement
vehicles.
The estimates of the average emissions from the entire post-
program fleet were based on the same national average
characteristics mentioned in step (5). To estimate the average
emissions of the replacement vehicles the MOBILE model should be
run for all model years for 1993, 1994 and 1995. The average
grams per mile will be indicated in the column labeled FER on the
MOBILE4.1 output table(see attachments 4,5 and 6).
The emission levels for the replacement vehicles in each of
-------
the three years were as follows: 2.20 g/mile in 1993, 2.09 g/mile
in 1994, and 2.00 g/mile in 1995.
7. Calculate the average yearly emissions benefit for each
retired vehicle.
Subtract the result of step 6 from the result of step 5 and
multiply by the average VMT per scrapped vehicle, determined in
step 3, for each calender year. The results are 34564
grams/vehicle in 1993, 34292 grams/vehicle in 1994, and 33977
grams/vehicle in 1995.
8. Calculate the total emission reduction in tons per year
removed by the program
Multiply the average emissions benefit for each retired
vehicle by the effective number of vehicles retired, and
convert to tons for each calender year. To determine the
effective number of vehicles for each year, reduce the
number of scrapped vehicles by the "normal" retirement rate.
For this example, the national rate of decline of 20% per
year will be assumed, starting immediately after the
scrappage event. Averaged over each of the three years, the
effective number of vehicles for each year is 9000, 7200,
and 5760 respectively.
-------
Table 2.
Hydrocarbon Emission Reduction
Example: 10,000 pre-1980 model year vehicles scrapped on 1/1/93
HC/retired vehicle (g/mile)
HC/replacement vehicle (g/mile)
HC reduction/vehicle (g/mile)
VMT/year/retired vehicle
Grams/vehicle/year
Effective number of vehicles*
Conversion (grams to tons) x
Tons per year
1993
8.87
- 2 .20
= 6.67
x 5182
= 34564
x 9000
.000001102
343
1994
9.06
2.09
6.97
4920
34292
1995
9.26
2.00
7.26
4680
33977
5760
_tt_
216
(*) The analysis assumes that all of the retired vehicles would
have been scrapped within 3 years. This method assumes a 20%
scrappage rate per year for three years, and provides for no
reduction credit beyond the three year remaining life assumption.
VII. Areas of Uncertainty
Because there is a good correlation between the age of the
vehicle and the level of emissions, the base methodology will be
sufficient for estimating emission reductions from age-based
programs. The base methodology was developed from empirical data
and from careful consideration of areas of uncertainty. EPA
recognizes that future scrappage programs offer the opportunity
to gather better data and has set minimum data gathering
requirements for sponsors that retire more than 2,500 vehicles
within a twelve month period (see Section III-7). EPA encourages
all program sponsors, regardless of size, to address the areas of
uncertainty outlined below in their program designs and to gather
data which can be used to update future guidance8. For now, EPA
will consider alternatives to the assumptions for base
methodology where there are sufficient supporting data and
Recent work, related to the Environmental Defense Fund/General Motors scrappage proposal described later in this document, provides information on VMT and remaining life, aggregated by regions of the U.S.
-------
information.
1. Tailpipe and evaporative emissions
Testing a vehicle's actual tailpipe emissions using a
transient mass emissions test procedure may provide more accurate
emissions reduction estimates, but if used to screen out clean
cars or to quantify the credit for specific cars, it may also be
an incentive to tamper with the vehicle to increase its emissions
and credit value. EPA encourages the testing of participating
vehicles to gather information on their actual emissions, but the
test results should enter into a calculation of credits only if
the vehicle owner and the scrappage sponsor are kept ignorant of
the results, or if an EDF/GM-type approach to measurement pooling
(see Below) is used. Simpler idle-type tests should not be used
as a screen.
Evaporative emissions cannot practically be measured in a
scrappage program, but physical inspection using pressure and
purge tests is possible and allows a rough estimate of
evaporative emission levels. Similar considerations apply as for
tailpipe emissions.
Vehicles which are due for testing as part of a State I/M
program raise additional concerns. If the vehicle is in a test
failing condition at the time it enters a scrappage program,
exhaust and evaporative emissions tests may yield emission
estimates that are unrepresentative of that vehicle for future
years, since required I/M repairs would likely reduce its
emissions. Conversely, a vehicle with relatively low emissions
at the time of scrappage, could have suffered a malfunction and
produced higher emissions in the future. Section VIII-C
discusses an appropriate approach for adjusting tested emission
levels in areas that have I/M programs in operation. However,
States may choose to allow only age-based average emission
estimates for vehicles which are shortly due for their I/M test.
2. VMT Determination
The VMT of both the scrapped and replacement vehicles is
critical to the calculation of the MERC, but due to the lack of
available data, the base methodology uses age-based averages.
EPA believes that, where actual data are unavailable, an estimate
based on the MOBILE model is appropriate. EPA encourages data
gathering to help clarify the actual annual VMT of scrapped
vehicles and replacement vehicles. The Agency understands of
course, that the data will be indirect in nature since, once
scrapped, it is impossible to tell how any specific vehicle would
have been kept and used.
-------
3. Replacement Vehicle Determination
How the VMT of a scrapped vehicles is redistributed to the
model years in the remaining fleet is necessary to calculate
emission reductions. However, it is very difficult to pre-
determine what type of vehicle, if any, will be used to replace
the scrapped vehicle. The assumption made by EPA in the base
methodology is derived from the data gathered from the Unocal
study9. EPA encourages the sponsors of scrappage programs to
gather information on the redistribution of VMT from scrapped
vehicles. However, in light of the complexities of frequent and
ongoing vehicle transfers, it will be difficult to be sure what
vehicle(s) has actually been the supplier of replacement VMT.
4. Remaining life of scrapped vehicles
EPA limits the length of time emission reductions are
creditable, based, in part, upon expected VMT within the
remaining life of the average scrapped vehicle (see Section V.).
The actual remaining life of participating vehicles may be
influenced by program design. For instance, programs may attract
a disproportionate number of vehicles which would have been
retired soon on their own anyway. Programs offering very low
incentives for vehicles would encourage the retirement of
vehicles with little remaining life. While EPA will not require
programs to offer a minimum incentive per vehicle, EPA encourages
program sponsors to offer incentives that will attract a true
cross section of vehicles within each age group, rather than just
those with low market value or remaining useful life. Likewise,
if people are aware that a scrappage program will be regularly
repeated, there may be an incentive for them to hold on to their
older vehicles longer since they can sell them to the program
instead of selling or retiring them when they otherwise would
have done. EPA encourages the gathering of data on the expected
remaining life of participating vehicles and its relationship to
the value of incentives or other program design elements.
VIII. Program Variations
Basic scrappage programs can be varied by changing the focus
of vehicle selection from general model year eligibility to
emissions level eligibility. EPA encourages scrappage programs
to focus on high emitters and recognizes that there are many
possible program variations that could assist in that regard.
Some may require alternative assumptions or other modifications
to the basic methodology for the calculation of emission
reductions.
Fairbank,. Bregman and Maullin, "Final Summary Report of the Results of the Unocal SCRAP Program Post-Participation Survey," January, 1991
-------
Program sponsors should give careful consideration to the
effect that variations may have on effectiveness. Program
variations require careful design and implementation in order to
prevent fraud and misuse, and to decrease the effects of
uncertainty. Some examples of possible variation are described
below. These variations should be viewed only as points for
discussion and should not substitute for local selection of
program variations.
A. EDF/GM Test and Pool Approach
A scrappage program design proposal from the Environmental
Defense Fund (EDF) and General Motors Corporation (GM) addresses
some of the areas of uncertainty and is conducive to
establishment of an ongoing program10. The EDF/GM design targets
high-emitting vehicles regardless of age, awards emission
reduction credits on the basis of emissions testing for each
scrapped vehicle and creates an emissions reduction "pool" for
the purpose of nullifying the incentive to tamper with individual
vehicles. Under the program, vehicles are purchased for a
negotiated amount reflecting the local market price for emission
reduction credits in the area and generic information about the
emissions and expected remaining life of the specific vehicle
model and vintage. Presumably, in an active, ongoing program,
private parties would accumulate and circulate such information,
just as the retail market for used cars has created a "Blue
Book," recording generic information about the transportation
value of vehicles. Following purchase, the buyer would present
the vehicle to an independent testing center where the emissions
would be measured. The emission results, factored by projected
annual VMT and remaining life, would be included in pools of the
emission results of all cars purchased by scrappage sponsors in
the area. Emission values would be reduced to reflect the
emissions from replacement vehicles. Such pools would be created
for each year of expected remaining life.
As an added assurance that the program provides net emission
reductions, each year's emissions pool would be discounted by
10%. The remainder of the annualized emissions pool would be
distributed in the form of transferable MERCs, to each scrappage
sponsor on a pro-rata basis reflecting the sponsor's share of all
scrapped vehicles whose emissions were included in the pool.
To bolster the pooling approach for minimizing the incentive
for sponsors to tamper with vehicles to increase their emissions,
local regulatory authorities would adopt an oversight procedure.
By selling a "control" vehicle with known emissions to a
scrappage sponsor and obtaining the emission test results from
the independent test facility, tampering could be detected.
Stiff penalties for tampering, including disqualifying the
A copy of the EDF/GM white paper detailing the program is available from EDF. Those interested in obtaining a copy should contact EDF at their Washington, D.C. office.
-------
sponsor from future scrappage programs and disallowing MERCs
already generated by the sponsor would nullify the incentive to
tamper, while also ensuring that any tampering already committed
would not have an adverse effect on air quality.
B. Scrappage and Remote Sensing
Programs that use a remote sensing device (RSD) to target
vehicles for participation in a scrappage program may reduce some
of the uncertainty found in programs with eligibility based only
on age and improve cost-effectiveness. Specifically, RSD may
increase program cost-effectiveness by identifying older cars
that are higher emitters than the average car of their age, and
it may reduce credit overestimation by identifying vehicles which
are actually in active service and not just being stored or used
very infrequently. Scrapping only vehicles identified by on-road
remote sensing should, therefore, produce more emission
reductions per scrapped vehicle. EPA encourages consideration of
this approach. However, if the emission estimates used for
calculating the MERCs are to be increased over those predicted by
the MOBILE model, transient mass emissions testing is required to
determine how much larger the increases should be. Special
program design elements should also be included to guard against
intentional tampering for the purpose of increasing emissions and
the resulting credits. An EDF/GM-type measuring approach is one
solution. Interested parties should contact EPA to discuss any
other ideas they may have.
C. Scrappage and I/M Programs
Adding a vehicle scrappage option to an I/M program is
another way to improve program benefit and/or reduce costs. I/M
programs require vehicles to pass an emissions test in order to
be registered or licensed for operation. If a vehicle does not
pass the test, owners are required to make repairs up to a
certain dollar amount. If, after making the repairs, the vehicle
still cannot pass the test, the owner may receive a waiver which
allows the vehicle to be licensed for use until the next
scheduled test.
Vehicles that fail an I/M test, and which have not yet been
successfully repaired, or are known to need repairs costing
greater than a predetermined amount, would become eligible for a
scrappage program. Depending upon the estimated cost of repair,
emission reduction credits would be based upon either the
vehicles' emission levels from an I/M240 test, or emission
estimates from the MOBILE model.
For example, vehicles requiring less than $300 in repairs
would be assigned the MOBILE estimate of emission levels for the
appropriate model year. Vehicles requiring $300-$450 in repairs
would be assigned an emission level that is less than the initial
-------
I/M240 test results, to reflect the repairs and the post-repair
emission levels it would likely have reached in absence of the
scrappage option. This post-repair emission level is derived
from the TECH511 relationship between initial test emission
levels and post-repair test emission levels. Vehicles requiring
in excess of $450 would be assigned emission levels based upon
their initial I/M transient test. It should be noted that
serviceability and repair costs are difficult to predict without
professional diagnosis. Furthermore, a conflict of interest
could occur if the diagnosis were performed by someone whose
judgment may be influenced by the sponsor of the scrappage
program. Therefore, it is reasonable to require proof of an
independent professional diagnosis that supports the cost
estimate.
Scrappage program designs that incorporate an I/M element in
this way will not only have greater assurance that they are
retiring high emitting vehicles, but could possibly offer lower
incentives since the vehicle owner is faced with immediate repair
costs if the vehicle is not scrapped. EPA encourages this
approach as a way to increase assurance of an environmental
benefit, as a way of lowering incentives, and as an
environmentally sound option to issuing a waiver to a high
emitting vehicle. As with the EDF/GM approach and the remote
sensing approach described above, special program features to
guard against cheating or fraud would be required.
IX. Applicability of Credits
A program can be designed to produce emission reductions for
a short-term or long-term period. A program could be conceived,
which operates continuously or intermittently over the course of
the attainment period, to produce essentially permanent emission
reductions. Retired vehicles are assumed to have a finite
remaining life that takes into account normal fleet turnover.
Emission reduction credits will be applicable for future years in
which the vehicle would have been in operation in absence of the
program. In the example program, the retired vehicles are
assumed to have a maximum remaining life expectancy of three
years. Therefore, credit for the emission reductions are
applicable for only three years. If a program sponsor desires
emission reduction credits for use in additional future years,
the retirement program will need to operate in additional future
years and scrap more vehicles.
Any long-term or repeated scrappage program proposal raises
issues concerning when a tradeable credit is actually created and
granted, and how follow-through on the scrappage plan can be
TECH5 is an EPA model that is used to predict the effect that I/M programs have on emission levels of passenger vehicles. A description of the Tech5 model can be found in the Technical Support Document for
the I/M rule, "I/M Costs, Benefits, and Impacts", November 1992.
-------
ensured if the credit is granted and used by another source
before the scrappage event on which it is based is completed. In
general, credit generation and trading should not result in a
shift in enforcement liability to a party against which
enforcement is more difficult. Readers should refer to the
general guidance, to which this document is an addendum, for
guidance on these issues.
-------
1BTEST2.INP : Basic I/M (only 1969-1979 model years)
OModel
Year
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
TF
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
2372
1798
1258
1278
0887
0610
0433
0341
0259
0184
0579
Miles
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
129594 .
135705.
141485.
146952 .
152125.
157017.
161645.
166023 .
170164 .
174081.
177787.
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
3
3
3
4
5
5
8
8
8
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
738
809
874
927
981
783
443
527
206
391
201
Tamper
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .936
1.039
1.083
1 .201
1 .239
0.184
0.187
0 .063
0 .030
0.031
0.000
SALHCF
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 980
0.980
0.980
0. 984
0. 984
0.981
0.981
0. 986
0. 986
0.987
0.985
Evapor
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
1 .087
1.127
2 .513
2 .582
2 .652
2 .725
2 .804
2 .884
4 .515
3 .872
3 .968
HC
Refuel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
255
259
280
294
325
359
359
353
356
344
344
Light Duty Gas
Jan 1, 1993
Runnin Restin
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
861
861
861
861
861
861
867
872
668
668
668
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
236
249
264
279
295
312
329
348
368
389
411
Vehicle
PER
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
1 .665
1.303
1.104
1 .158
0 .823
0.557
0.428
0 .340
0 .389
0.268
0.838
5S
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
47
48
49
50
51
49
60
62
71
74
66
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
105
090
226
094
051
747
301
996
720
914
107
Tamper
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
12 . 022
13.103
13.867
15. 810
16 . 947
5.217
5.316
1. 803
0. 899
0.913
0.000
CO
SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
980
980
980
986
986
981
981
982
980
979
979
PER
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
13 . 747
10.784
7.781
8 .306
5. 951
3.287
2.787
2 . 173
1. 841
1.364
3.750
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
321
370
416
680
698
873
891
873
873
873
873
NOX
Tamper SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
649
675
676
791
793
260
232
000
000
000
000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
996
996
996
009
009
006
006
008
004
004
002
PER
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 702
0.546
0.388
0.448
0.313
0.192
0.136
0. 133
0. 101
0.071
0.225
2.146 0.294 0.944 0.281
.873
61.771
3 .254
-------
1BTEST3.INP : Basic I/M (only 1970-1979 model years)
OModel
Year
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
TF
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
2338
1650
1679
1167
0804
0570
0449
0340
0242
0762
Miles
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
135705.
141485.
146952 .
152125.
157017.
161645.
166023 .
170164.
174081.
177787.
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
3
3
4
5
5
5
8
8
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
797
855
920
962
007
443
533
626
391
571
Tamper
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
938
039
083
201
239
184
187
063
030
000
SALHCF
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.980
0. 980
0. 980
0.984
0.984
0. 981
0. 981
0.986
0.986
0. 987
Evapor
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
1.127
1 .169
2 .582
2 .652
2 .725
2 .800
2 .880
2 .963
4 .665
3 .968
HC
Refuel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
255
259
280
294
325
359
359
353
356
344
Light Duty Gas
Jan 1, 1994
Runnin Restin
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.861
0 .861
0 .861
0.861
0.861
0 .861
0 .867
0.872
1.668
1 .668
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
249
264
279
295
312
329
348
368
389
411
Vehicle
PER
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
1.668
1 .212
1 .495
1.071
0.754
0 .562
0 .452
0.346
0.372
1 .132
5S
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
47
48
49
50
51
60
63
64
75
77
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
668
443
558
411
275
819
206
950
033
024
Tamper
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
12.050
13 . 103
13 . 867
15.810
16.947
5.217
5.316
1.803
0.899
0. 000
CO
SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
980
980
980
986
986
981
981
982
980
979
PER
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
13.684
9. 950
10.435
7.621
5.407
3 . 688
3 . 020
2.230
1.798
5. 751
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
370
416
460
698
716
891
908
873
873
873
NOX
Tamper SALHCF
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.649
0. 675
0. 676
0.791
0.793
0.260
0.232
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
996
996
996
009
009
006
006
008
004
004
PER
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.703
0. 508
0. 525
0.411
0.285
0. 180
0. 142
0.133
0.094
0.296
2.223 0.293 0.943 0.296 9.064
63.584
3.277
-------
1BTEST4.INP : Basic I/M (only 1971-1979 model years)
OModel
Year
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
TF
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
2136
2191
1526
1052
0747
0588
0446
0316
0998
Miles
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
141485.
146952 .
152125.
157017.
161645.
166023 .
170164.
174081.
177787.
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
5
8
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
842
894
955
987
080
533
632
723
571
Tamper
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .938
1 .039
1.083
1.201
1 .239
0 .184
0.187
0.063
0 .000
SALHCF
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 980
0. 980
0.980
0.984
0. 984
0. 981
0.981
0.986
0. 986
Evapor
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
1 .169
1 .212
2 .652
2 .725
2 .799
2 .875
2 .958
3 .043
4 .754
HC
Refuel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
255
259
280
294
325
359
359
353
356
Light Duty Gas
Jan 1, 1995
Runnin Restin
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .861
0 .861
0.861
0.861
0 .861
0 .861
0.867
0.872
1 .668
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
264
279
295
312
329
348
368
389
411
Vehicle
PER
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
1 .545
1 .631
1.377
0.978
0 .787
0 .591
0.457
0.328
1 .561
5S
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
48
48
49
50
64
63
65
68
77
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
095
843
862
620
580
731
269
072
265
Tamper
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
12 . 050
13 . 103
13.867
15.810
16 . 947
5.217
5.316
1.803
0. 000
CO
SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
980
980
980
986
986
981
981
982
980
PER
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
12 . 588
13 .302
9.531
6.892
6 . 007
3 . 978
3.085
2.170
7. 559
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
416
460
501
716
732
908
924
873
873
NOX
Tamper SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
649
675
676
791
793
260
232
000
000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
996
996
996
009
009
006
006
008
004
PER
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0. 652
0. 684
0.483
0.372
0.266
0. 187
0.141
0.123
0.388
2.287 0.293 0.942 0.310 9.255
65.112
3.299
-------
1BTEST1.INP : Basic I/M (all model years)
OModel
Year
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
TF
0237
1133
1126
1053
1021
0931
0835
0574
0482
0461
0426
0424
0345
0261
0164
0124
0087
0088
0061
0042
0030
0024
0018
0013
0040
Miles
1640.
9816 .
22403.
34309.
45572 .
56225.
66303.
75837.
84854 .
93384 .
101452.
109084.
116304 .
123133 .
129594.
135705.
141485.
146952 .
152125.
157017.
161645.
166023 .
170164.
174081.
177787.
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
3
3
3
3
3
4
5
5
8
8
8
235
269
304
337
381
438
496
535
583
658
672
049
149
960
738
809
874
927
981
783
443
527
206
391
201
Tamper
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
001
005
Oil
015
019
023
027
031
036
039
146
200
208
725
936
039
083
201
239
184
187
063
030
031
000
SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
975
975
975
975
975
975
976
981
981
977
976
977
977
977
980
980
980
984
984
981
981
986
986
987
985
Evapor
0 .162
0 .162
0.170
0.204
0 .248
0 .289
0.358
0.436
0 .572
0 .688
0.844
1.023
1 .073
1 .047
1.087
1.127
2 .513
2 .582
2 .652
2 .725
2 .804
2 .884
4 .515
3 .872
3 .968
HC
Refuel
0. 189
0. 189
0.189
0.186
0. 184
0. 181
0.183
0.185
0. 191
0. 196
0.199
0.199
0.207
0.221
0.255
0.259
0.280
0.294
0.325
0.359
0.359
0.353
0.356
0.344
0.344
Light Duty Gas
Jan 1, 1993
Runnin Restin
0 .312
0 .312
0.312
0.336
0 .349
0 .388
0.432
0.476
0 .575
0 .672
0.769
0.848
0 .861
0 .861
0.861
0.861
0 .861
0 .861
0.861
0.861
0 .867
0 .872
1.668
1.668
1 .668
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
076
077
089
092
099
113
122
149
160
177
184
195
211
223
236
249
264
279
295
312
329
348
368
389
411
Vehicle
PER
0 .023
0 .114
0.120
0.122
0 .130
0 .132
0.134
0.103
0 .102
0 .111
0.119
0.148
0 .127
0 .104
0.115
0.090
0 .076
0 .080
0.057
0.038
0 .030
0 .024
0.027
0.018
0 .058
5S
BEF4
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
7
8
10
10
16
18
9
47
48
49
50
51
49
60
62
71
74
66
850
408
964
521
361
420
350
861
567
147
146
817
576
331
105
090
226
094
051
747
301
996
720
914
107
Tamper
0. 009
0. 038
0.079
0.109
0. 133
0. 155
0.174
0.209
0.262
0.279
1.684
2.395
2 . 663
9. 131
12.022
13.103
13 . 867
15. 810
16.947
5.217
5.316
1. 803
0.899
0.913
0. 000
CO
SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
971
971
971
971
972
971
972
976
977
975
974
976
976
976
980
980
980
986
986
981
981
982
980
979
979
PER
0. 066
0.379
0.442
0.474
0. 545
0. 595
0.610
0.452
0.416
0.469
0.491
0.795
0. 714
0.470
0.949
0.744
0. 537
0. 573
0.411
0.227
0. 192
0. 150
0.127
0.094
0.259
BEF4
0 .507
0 .527
0.553
0.581
0 .618
0 .640
0.708
0.756
1 .024
1 .123
1.163
1.441
1 .460
2 .396
2 .321
2 .370
2 .416
2 .680
2 .698
2 .873
2 .891
3 .873
3 .873
3 .873
3 .873
NOX
Tamper SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
002
004
007
010
013
016
018
021
024
026
112
141
145
864
649
675
676
791
793
260
232
000
000
000
000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
984
984
984
985
985
985
986
987
989
989
991
994
994
994
996
996
996
009
009
006
006
008
004
004
002
PER
0. 012
0. 059
0.062
0.061
0. 063
0. 060
0.060
0.044
0. 050
0. 052
0.054
0.067
0. 055
0. 085
0.048
0.038
0. 027
0. 031
0.022
0.013
0. 009
0. 009
0.007
0.005
0. 016
0.521 0.197 0.493 0.134 2.202
11.183
1.009
-------
1BTEST1.INP : Basic I/M (all model years)
OModel
Year
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
TF
0237
1131
1124
1051
1019
0930
0836
0573
0484
0464
0427
0435
0348
0256
0160
0122
0086
0088
0061
0042
0030
0024
0018
0013
0040
Miles
1640.
9816 .
22403.
34309.
45572 .
56225.
66303.
75837.
84854 .
93384 .
101452.
109084.
116304 .
123133 .
129594.
135705.
141485.
146952 .
152125.
157017.
161645.
166023 .
170164.
174081.
177787.
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
3
3
3
3
4
5
5
5
8
8
235
269
303
336
369
426
488
546
581
626
702
709
099
199
979
797
855
920
962
007
443
533
626
391
571
Tamper
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
001
005
Oil
015
019
023
027
030
034
039
042
159
214
223
751
938
039
083
201
239
184
187
063
030
000
SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
975
975
975
975
975
975
975
976
981
981
977
976
977
977
977
980
980
980
984
984
981
981
986
986
987
Evapor
0 .162
0 .162
0.171
0.200
0 .224
0 .290
0.330
0.431
0 .547
0 .666
0.826
1.010
1 .065
1 .109
1.087
1.127
1 .169
2 .582
2 .652
2 .725
2 .800
2 .880
2 .963
4 .665
3 .968
HC
Refuel
0. 189
0. 189
0.189
0.189
0. 186
0. 184
0.181
0.183
0. 185
0. 191
0.196
0.199
0. 199
0.207
0.221
0.255
0.259
0.280
0.294
0.325
0.359
0.359
0.353
0.356
0.344
Light Duty Gas
Jan 1, 1994
Runnin Restin
0 .312
0 .312
0.312
0.336
0 .349
0 .388
0.432
0.476
0 .575
0 .672
0.769
0.848
0 .861
0 .861
0.861
0.861
0 .861
0 .861
0.861
0.861
0 .861
0 .867
0.872
1.668
1 .668
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
076
077
081
094
098
104
119
129
158
170
187
195
206
223
236
249
264
279
295
312
329
348
368
389
411
Vehicle
PER
0 .023
0 .114
0.119
0.122
0 .126
0 .131
0.131
0.102
0 .100
0 .109
0.116
0.135
0 .126
0 .097
0.065
0.087
0 .063
0 .078
0.056
0.039
0 .029
0 .024
0.018
0.019
0 .059
5S
BEF4
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
9
10
10
17
19
9
47
48
49
50
51
60
63
64
75
77
850
408
935
467
014
010
137
097
537
200
834
709
634
402
423
668
443
558
411
275
819
206
950
033
024
Tamper
0. 009
0. 038
0.079
0.109
0. 133
0. 155
0.174
0.192
0.226
0.279
0.296
1.861
2 . 596
2 . 878
9.569
12.050
13 . 103
13 . 867
15.810
16.947
5.217
5.316
1.803
0.899
0. 000
CO
SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
971
971
971
971
971
972
971
972
976
977
975
974
976
976
976
980
980
980
986
986
981
981
982
980
979
PER
0. 066
0.379
0.438
0.467
0. 509
0. 557
0.594
0.462
0.414
0.430
0.464
0.532
0. 688
0. 557
0.296
0.717
0. 521
0. 546
0.399
0.283
0. 193
0. 158
0.117
0.094
0.301
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
507
527
557
582
609
651
675
746
790
061
163
203
494
507
442
370
416
460
698
716
891
908
873
873
873
NOX
Tamper SALHCF
0. 002
0. 004
0.007
0.010
0. 013
0. 016
0.018
0.021
0. 024
0. 026
0.028
0.120
0. 148
0. 151
0.887
0.649
0. 675
0. 676
0.791
0.793
0.260
0.232
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
984
984
984
984
985
985
985
986
987
989
989
991
994
994
994
996
996
996
009
009
006
006
008
004
004
PER
0. 012
0. 059
0.062
0.061
0. 062
0. 061
0.057
0.043
0. 039
0. 050
0.050
0.057
0. 057
0. 042
0.053
0.037
0. 027
0. 027
0.022
0.015
0. 009
0. 007
0.007
0.005
0. 016
0.500 0.195 0.492 0.131 2.090
10.182
0.938
-------
1BTEST1.INP : Basic I/M (all model years)
OModel
Year
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
TF
0237
1130
1123
1049
1017
0928
0835
0574
0484
0467
0430
0436
0357
0259
0157
0119
0085
0087
0061
0042
0030
0023
0018
0013
0040
Miles
1640.
9816 .
22403.
34309.
45572 .
56225.
66303.
75837.
84854 .
93384 .
101452.
109084.
116304 .
123133 .
129594.
135705.
141485.
146952 .
152125.
157017.
161645.
166023 .
170164.
174081.
177787.
BEF4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
5
8
235
269
303
334
367
411
473
538
594
625
666
743
745
147
246
994
842
894
955
987
080
533
632
723
571
Tamper
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
001
005
Oil
015
019
023
027
030
034
037
042
045
172
226
236
752
938
039
083
201
239
184
187
063
000
SALHCF
0. 975
0. 975
0.975
0.975
0. 975
0. 975
0.975
0.975
0. 976
0. 981
0.981
0.977
0. 976
0. 977
0.977
0.977
0. 980
0. 980
0.980
0.984
0. 984
0. 981
0.981
0.986
0. 986
Evapor
0 .162
0 .162
0.171
0.202
0 .219
0 .267
0.331
0.403
0 .543
0 .643
0.806
0.994
1 .053
1 .101
1.147
1.127
1 .169
1 .212
2 .652
2 .725
2 .799
2 .875
2 .958
3 .043
4 .754
HC
Refuel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
189
189
189
189
189
186
184
181
183
185
191
196
199
199
207
221
255
259
280
294
325
359
359
353
356
Light Duty Gas
Jan 1, 1995
Runnin Restin
0 .312
0 .312
0.312
0.336
0 .349
0 .388
0.432
0.476
0 .575
0 .672
0.769
0.848
0 .861
0 .861
0.861
0.861
0 .861
0 .861
0.861
0.861
0 .861
0 .861
0.867
0.872
1 .668
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
076
077
081
086
100
103
110
126
137
167
179
197
206
218
236
249
264
279
295
312
329
348
368
389
411
Vehicle
PER
0 .023
0 .114
0.119
0.121
0 .125
0 .127
0.129
0.100
0 .099
0 .108
0.114
0.131
0 .115
0 .096
0.061
0.050
0 .062
0 .065
0.055
0.039
0 .031
0 .024
0.018
0.013
0 .062
5S
BEF4
2
3
3
4
4
5
6
7
8
9
9
11
11
18
20
9
48
48
49
50
64
63
65
68
77
850
408
935
422
940
578
654
859
810
179
793
486
245
415
169
505
095
843
862
620
580
731
269
072
265
Tamper
0. 009
0. 038
0.079
0.109
0. 133
0. 155
0.174
0.192
0.209
0.243
0.296
0.313
2 . 039
2 . 786
3.081
9.597
12 . 050
13 . 103
13.867
15.810
16 . 947
5.217
5.316
1.803
0. 000
CO
SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
971
971
971
971
971
971
972
971
972
976
977
975
974
976
976
976
980
980
980
986
986
981
981
982
980
PER
0. 066
0.378
0.438
0.462
0. 501
0. 517
0.554
0.449
0.424
0.429
0.424
0.501
0.462
0. 536
0.356
0.223
0. 502
0. 531
0.380
0.275
0.240
0. 159
0.123
0.087
0.302
BEF4
0 .507
0 .527
0.557
0.586
0 .609
0 .636
0.683
0.708
0 .781
0 .823
1.095
1.201
1 .240
1 .544
1.552
2 .486
2 .416
2 .460
2 .501
2 .716
2 .732
2 .908
2 .924
3 .873
3 .873
NOX
Tamper SALHCF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
002
004
007
010
013
016
018
021
023
026
028
031
127
155
158
889
649
675
676
791
793
260
232
000
000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
984
984
984
984
984
985
985
985
986
987
989
989
991
994
994
994
996
996
996
009
009
006
006
008
004
PER
0. 012
0. 059
0.062
0.062
0. 062
0. 060
0.058
0.041
0. 038
0. 039
0.048
0.053
0. 048
0. 044
0.027
0.040
0. 026
0. 027
0.019
0.015
0. Oil
0. 007
0.006
0.005
0. 015
0.483 0.193 0.492 0.127 2.001
9.317
0.884
------- |