Inspection/Maintenance Program RequirementOn-Board Diagnostic Checks

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 85

[FRL-5270-5]

Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirement--On-Board Diagnostic

Checks

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice proposes revisions to the motor vehicle

Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Program Requirements. The proposed

revisions include additions and modifications regarding requirements

that I/M inspectors check the on-board diagnostic system as part of the

overall inspection. This rule proposes the minimum requirements for

inspecting vehicles equipped with on-board diagnostic systems as part

of the inspections required in basic and enhanced Inspection/

Maintenance programs.

DATES: Written comments on this proposal must be received no later than

September 18, 1995.

The Agency will hold a public hearing on this proposed amendment if

one is requested on or before September 5, 1995.

If a public hearing is held, comments must be received within 30

days after the hearing.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit written comments (in duplicate

if possible) to Public Docket No. A-94-21. It is requested that a

duplicate copy be submitted to Eugene J. Tierney at the address in the

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below. The docket is located at

the Air Docket, Room M-1500 (6102), Waterside Mall, 401 M. Street S.W.,

Washington, DC 20460. The docket may be inspected between 8:00 a.m. and

4:00 p.m. on weekdays. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying

docket material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene J. Tierney, Office of Mobile

Sources, National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth

Road, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105. Telephone (313) 668-4456.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Contents

II. Summary of Proposal

III. Authority

IV. Background of Proposed Rule

V. Discussion of Major Issues

A. Components of the OBD Inspection

1. Test Procedure

2. Anti-Tampering Provisions

B. Standards for Failure of the OBD Inspection

C. OBD Component of the Performance Standard

D. Administrative Program Requirements

1. Data Collection and Analysis

E. State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions

F. Implementation Deadlines

VI. Economic Costs and Benefits

VII. Public Participation

A. Comments and the Public Docket

B. Public Hearing

VIII. Administrative Requirements

A. Administrative Designation

B. Reporting and Record Keeping Requirement

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

II. Summary of Proposal

Motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs are an

integral part of the effort to reduce mobile source air pollution.

Despite being subject to the most rigorous vehicle pollution control

program in the world, vehicles in the United States still create a

substantial amount of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides,

and other air pollutants. One reason for this is the fact that the

number of vehicle miles traveled on U.S. roads has doubled in the last

two decades to 2 trillion miles per year, partially offsetting the

technological progress in vehicle emission control made during that

time. Projections of continued growth in vehicle travel necessitate

continued emission-reduction efforts so that air quality goals may be

achieved.

Under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the Act), 42 U.S.C.

7401 et. seq., the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is

pursuing a three-point strategy for reducing emissions from

transportation sources. The first two points involve the development

and commercialization of cleaner vehicles and cleaner fuels. The third

point focuses on in-use control to ensure that cars in customer use are

properly maintained. I/M programs are intended to address this third

point. The Act was prescriptive with respect to certain aspects of the

I/M program design. In particular, section 202(m)(3) of the Act directs

EPA to require on-board diagnostic (OBD) system checks as a component

of I/M programs. In addition, section 182(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act

requires that states revise their I/M programs within two years after

promulgation of regulations under section 202(m)(3) to meet the

requirements of those regulations.

EPA is proposing today to establish requirements for the inspection

of on-board diagnostic systems as part of I/M programs. The purpose of

this notice is to propose amendments to those sections of the

Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements in Subpart S, 40 CFR Part

51 (November 5, 1992) that were reserved for OBD requirements and

elsewhere, as needed. Specifically, the reserved sections to be

modified include Sec. 51.351(c), Sec. 51.352(c), Sec. 51.357(a)(12),

Sec. 51.357(b)(4), and Sec. 51.358(b)(4) of Part 51. This notice also

proposes additions to sections of Subpart S pertaining to data

collection and analysis as well as implementation deadlines.

Specifically, these sections include Sec. 51.365, Sec. 51.366, and

Sec. 51.373. Finally, this notice proposes additions to Subpart W of 40

CFR Part 85 pertaining to test procedures, test equipment, and

standards for failure for purposes of the emission control system

performance warranty. These Subpart W changes will provide vehicles

subject to the OBD test with emission control performance warranty

coverage for OBD test failures.

III. Authority

Authority for the actions proposed in this notice is granted to EPA

by sections 182(a)(2)(B)(ii), 182(c)(3), 202(m)(3),

[[Page 43093]]

207(b), and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as amended, 42 U.S.C.

7511a(a)(2)(B)(ii), 7511a(c)(3), 7521(m)(3), 7541(b), and 7601(a).

IV. Background of Proposed Rule

During the last two decades, there have been considerable emission

control development efforts on the part of both vehicle manufacturers

and the federal government. As a result, passenger cars and light-duty

trucks produced in recent years emit significantly lower emissions than

their predecessors, provided that they are properly operating.

A large body of evidence, however, demonstrates that current

generation vehicles are not all operating properly during actual use.

Moreover, they are often used under different temperature and driving

conditions than are encountered in emission certification tests, and

may emit significantly greater emissions when operating at those

temperatures and conditions. As manufacturers have achieved significant

reductions in the emissions of properly functioning, new vehicles, the

lack of equivalent control over malfunctions and during non-standard

conditions has become increasingly evident. Emission-related

malfunctions do not always cause an outward indication of a problem

(e.g., poor driveability or decreased fuel economy) and thus are

sometimes difficult to detect and repair.

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, signed into law on November

15, 1990, reflect a recognition of the problems encountered in

identifying malfunctioning vehicles and contain several provisions

aimed at reducing them. One of these is the requirement for

incorporation and inspection of on-board diagnostic systems (OBD) in

new vehicles. Section 207 of these amendments added paragraph (m) to

section 202 of the Act, directing the EPA to promulgate regulations

requiring the installation and inspection of OBD systems.

Section 202(m)(1) of the Act requires OBD systems to monitor

emission-related components for malfunctions or deterioration which

render vehicles incapable of complying with the emission standards

established for such vehicles. On February 19, 1993, EPA promulgated

requirements for OBD systems (hereafter, OBD rules) on 1994 and later

model year light duty vehicles and light duty trucks (58 FR 9468,

February 19, 1993). These regulations (40 CFR 86.094-17) require all

vehicle manufacturers to install equipment and establish operating

parameters for the purpose of detecting malfunctions or deterioration

in performance that would be expected to cause a vehicle to fail

federal emission standards. Specifically, the on-board diagnostic

system must be capable of identifying catalyst deterioration, engine

misfire, oxygen sensor deterioration, and any other deterioration or

malfunction within the powertrain which could cause emission increases

greater than or exceeding the threshold levels established in

Sec. 86.094-17.

A malfunction indicator light (MIL) located in the dashboard of the

vehicle is required to be illuminated when the OBD system detects

malfunctions. The purpose of the MIL is to inform the vehicle operator

of the need for service when the vehicle is operating under potentially

high emitting conditions. Once illuminated to indicate a malfunction,

the MIL must remain illuminated during all periods of engine operation

until the trouble codes stored in the on-board computer are cleared by

a service technician or after repeated reevaluation by the OBD system

fails to detect a reoccurrence of the problem. The regulations allow

the OBD system to extinguish the MIL after three subsequent driving

cycles of similar operation in which a system fault does not reoccur.

Similar operating conditions are defined as being within ten (10)

percent of the load condition and 375 rpm with the same engine warm-up

status which existed when the malfunction was first determined (40 CFR

86.094-17).

Codes indicating the likely problem will be stored in the vehicle's

on-board computer for ready access by technicians, enabling proper

diagnosis and repair. Section 202(m)(4) of the Act requires that OBD

system information be unrestricted and accessible to anyone via

standardized connectors without requiring access codes or any device

only available from the manufacturer. Further, the OBD system

information must be usable without need for any unique decoding

information or device. In accordance with this mandate, the OBD rules

require codes to be standardized to follow the diagnostic trouble code

definitions established in Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) J2012,

published in March 1992. EPA allows the computer-stored fault codes to

be cleared after forty (40) engine warm-up cycles if the same fault is

not reregistered. Anyone desiring more detailed information on the OBD

system should refer to the OBD rules and the preamble promulgated on

February 19, 1993, (58 FR 9468).

The Act also revised and strengthened EPA's authority to prescribe

vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs for ozone

nonattainment areas. Section 182 of the Act requires EPA to review,

revise, and republish I/M program requirements, taking into

consideration investigations and audits of I/M programs, and the I/M

requirements established in the Act.

One of these program requirements is inspection of vehicle OBD

systems. The Act requires that OBD inspections be incorporated into all

basic and enhanced I/M programs once vehicles with mandated OBD systems

become part of the fleet. Section 182(c)(3)(vii) requires that I/M

programs include ``inspection of emission control diagnostic systems

and the maintenance or repair of malfunctions or systems deterioration

identified by or affecting such diagnostic systems.'' Sections

182(a)(2) and 202(m)(3) require states to amend I/M program

implementation plans to incorporate the inspection of on-board

diagnostic systems within two years after promulgation of regulations

requiring such inspection.

EPA's initial rule implementing section 182's I/M requirements (the

I/M rule) was promulgated on November 5, 1992. It establishes

performance standards and other requirements for basic and enhanced

vehicle I/M programs. Several sections of the I/M rule were reserved

for OBD requirements, since the OBD rules had not yet been promulgated.

This proposed rule addresses those sections of the I/M rule reserved

for OBD requirements.

OBD systems will allow an inspector to scan for stored malfunction

codes at the time of the periodic I/M test by simply attaching a

computerized scan tool to the standardized plug provided on all OBD

equipped vehicles. The presence of one or more emissions-related codes

in a vehicle's OBD system will indicate current or recent existence of

a malfunction with the potential to cause high emissions. Furthermore,

current emissions problems are also indicated if the MIL is commanded

to be illuminated by the OBD system. Thus, EPA proposes that if the MIL

is commanded to be illuminated and an emissions-related code is

present, the vehicle shall fail the OBD inspection and be required to

obtain the repairs indicated by the malfunction code.

On-board diagnostic system inspections are intended to improve the

accuracy of I/M programs, thus enhancing air quality benefits. The

short emission tests used in I/M programs allow some vehicles that need

repair to nevertheless ``pass'' the test. In addition, visual

inspections of emission control devices can only determine presence and

possibly proper connection but do not necessarily establish that the

devices are functioning properly.

[[Page 43094]]

Interrogation of the OBD system provides another means of identifying

vehicles in need of repair. It also enables more accurate and efficient

repairs by identifying vehicle components responsible for emission

increases.

A vehicle's failure to pass an approved I/M test may provide the

basis for a warranty claim under the Act. Section 207(b) of the Act

requires vehicle manufacturers to bear the cost of repairing a failing

vehicle such that it passes the I/M test, if: (1) Such vehicle is

maintained and operated in accordance with manufacturer instructions;

(2) the vehicle fails the test during the appropriate warranty period;

and (3) if such nonconformity results in the owner having to bear any

penalty or other sanction under state or Federal law. Section 207(b)

establishes a mechanism to provide emission control performance

warranty coverage for motor vehicles subject to such tests under the

circumstance enumerated in the previous sentence (40 CFR Part 85,

Subpart V). Section 207(b) requires the Administrator to establish, by

regulation, I/M short test procedures to be used for determining

whether in-use vehicles comply with Federal emission standards if the

Administrator determines that the following three conditions have been

met: (1) The short test methods and procedures are ``available'' (i.e.,

that the necessary equipment may be readily obtained and that the

procedure is reasonably expected to serve its function); (2) the

procedures are consistent with good engineering practices; and (3) the

results are reasonably capable of being correlated with tests conducted

under Sec. 206(a)(1), the tests used to certify new vehicles.

The OBD inspection meets these three conditions. Therefore, the Act

requires promulgation of regulations to implement the performance

warranty for vehicles that fail the OBD inspection. EPA is therefore

proposing to incorporate the OBD test procedures, equipment, and

standards for failure into its emission warranty short test

regulations, Subpart W of Part 85 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal

Regulations, in order to extend warranty coverage to failure of the OBD

test.

OBD equipped vehicles will not constitute a significant portion of

the fleet for several years and existing I/M tests will be identifying

malfunctioning vehicles during that time. Therefore, EPA does not

attribute substantial air quality benefits to OBD until the year 2005.

At this point, EPA believes it is too early to determine whether

existing or newly established I/M test procedures may be replaced by

OBD or how long it will take to refine the OBD technology to the point

where it could substitute for other I/M test procedures. The Agency

plans to evaluate the effectiveness of OBD checks to determine whether

they can substitute for all or some of the I/M tests otherwise being

performed on OBD equipped vehicles. Nevertheless, as long as a

significant fraction of the fleet is not OBD equipped, the high-

technology I/M tests established in the federal I/M rule will continue

to be needed.

V. Discussion of Major Issues

A. Components of the OBD Inspection

1. Test Procedure

When a vehicle arrives at the I/M lane, the inspector must

determine whether that vehicle is equipped with an OBD system

consistent with Sec. 86.094-17 in order to determine whether an OBD

check will be performed during the inspection. In accordance with

section 202(m) of the Act, case-by-case waivers are available to any

manufacturer that is unable to meet these requirements in 1994 or 1995

model years. Thus, the OBD inspection will apply to all 1996 and later

light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks. Subpart S requires the

inspector to determine the model year of the vehicle when inputting

other vehicle identification parameters.

After establishing that the vehicle is subject to OBD system

requirements, the inspector will perform several steps to complete the

test. First, the inspector must locate the vehicle connector (the data

link connector) and attach the inspection computer to it. The OBD rules

require that the vehicle connector's location, accessibility, design,

and function be consistent with SAE J1962 ``Diagnostic Connector,''

published in June 1992.

The connector is required to be located in the passenger

compartment in the area bounded by the driver's end of the instrument

panel to 300 mm beyond the vehicle centerline. It is to be attached to

the instrument panel and accessible from the driver's seat.

The vehicle connector is required to be readily accessible. Removal

of the instrument panel cover, connector cover, or any other barriers

must not require the use of a tool. The vehicle connector should allow

the inspector to employ a one-handed/blind insertion of the mating test

equipment connector.

After the test system is connected to the vehicle, EPA proposes

that the test system employ the procedure for retrieving codes

specified in SAE J1979 ``E/E Diagnostic Test Modes,'' (DEC91), cited in

the OBD rules. This involves two steps. Initially, the test system

should send to the OBD computer a request to retrieve and record

whether the MIL is commanded to be illuminated. Following this, the

test equipment should send a request to retrieve and record the

specific codes that are stored.

EPA proposes that the State establish in its test procedure the

condition the vehicle shall be in during the OBD inspection: ``key-on/

engine-off'' (KOEO) or ``key-on/engine-running'' (KOER). This must be

clearly specified in the State's test procedure to allow for

consistency among all State test sites.

Finally, this proposal does not specify whether the OBD inspection

should take place before or after the other I/M tests. EPA is allowing

the states to determine the placement of the OBD test within the I/M

lane. In addition, EPA is seeking comments on the feasibility of

conducting OBD inspections while the IM240 test is being conducted, and

thus seeks information on manufacturer specifications for accessing OBD

systems. Individuals with information relevant to this inquiry are

requested to submit such information during the public comment period.

2. Anti-Tampering Provisions

In addition to providing data pertaining to stored OBD codes, the

information provided by the test equipment's initial request provides a

safeguard against any tampering with the OBD system immediately prior

to the test. The OBD rules require that a readiness code be stored in

the on-board computer to indicate when the diagnostic system has

completed all monitoring checks and determined that all monitored

systems are functioning properly. This will enable I/M inspectors to be

certain that malfunction codes have not merely been cleared, without

actual repair of the malfunction, since the last OBD check of the

vehicle's emission-related control systems. If the vehicle's OBD system

indicates that the on-board diagnostic evaluation of any module is

incomplete, EPA proposes that the information contained in the OBD

system be considered void and the driver instructed to return after the

vehicle has been run long enough to allow the test cycle of all

supported modules to be completed.

B. Standards for Failure of the OBD Inspection

Inspection of the OBD system requires the presence of a properly

functioning vehicle connector. Therefore, if the inspector has

determined that the

[[Page 43095]]

vehicle is subject to OBD inspections but the vehicle connector is

missing or has been tampered with, EPA proposes that the vehicle shall

fail the inspection.

Section 202(m)(4) of the CAAA requires that OBD system information

be unrestricted and accessible via standardized connectors and not

dependent on access codes or any device provided only by the

manufacturer. The information obtained from the OBD system must be

usable without need for any unique decoding information or device.

To satisfy these mandates, EPA requires manufacturers to conform to

uniform industry standards adopted through the Society of Automotive

Engineers (SAE). The OBD rules require that diagnostic trouble codes be

consistent with SAE J2012 ``Recommended Format and Messages for

Diagnostic Trouble Code Definitions,'' published in March 1992.

The standardization of diagnostic codes allows failing codes to be

specifically identified in this proposal. EPA has developed a list of

all emission-related powertrain diagnostic trouble codes which will

result in failure of the OBD test if present when the MIL is commanded

to be illuminated. Thus, EPA is proposing that the vehicle shall fail

inspection if the vehicle's MIL is commanded to be illuminated as a

result of a failure related to the emission control system. Emission-

related failures are determined by the presence of an emission-related

trouble code.

Trouble codes may be present due to temporary, reversible

conditions. As discussed above, EPA regulations require trouble codes

to continue to be stored, once registered, unless 40 engine warm-ups

occur without the fault of being redetected, while the regulations

allow the MIL to be extinguished after three driving cycles of similar

operation in which the fault does not reoccur. EPA is proposing to

limit the potential for false I/M failures by proposing that vehicles

fail the OBD inspection only if both (1) emission-related failure codes

are present and (2) the MIL is commanded to be illuminated.

Furthermore, if the MIL is commanded to be illuminated, EPA

proposes that the inspector visually inspect the MIL. EPA proposes that

the vehicle also fail the OBD inspection if the MIL is commanded to be

illuminated and is not illuminated.

Note that the list generated for the purpose of this rule does not

define what constitutes ``emission-related'' for the purpose of any

other regulation. This list defines what constitutes I/M failures.

EPA's proposed list of codes resulting in I/M failure includes all

codes related to fuel and air metering, the ignition system or misfire,

auxiliary emission controls, and the computer and output circuits. Some

of the codes related to the transmission are also included. For

example, power steering codes are included because power steering

affects fuel and air management during certain vehicle operations, such

as turning right or left. However, codes pertaining to air conditioning

and cruise control are not included.

The OBD rule in Sec. 86.094-17(h)(2) specifically requires fault

codes to be consistent with SAE J2012, Part C, of March 1992. However,

the proposed list of codes was generated using the March 1994 version

of J2012. This version is currently on the ballot for SAE approval. If

it is not approved, the final rule will use the March 1992 version.

SAE is likely to continue to update J2012, primarily in response to

changes in automotive technology and industry needs. Therefore, EPA

shall make revisions to this rule as SAE J2012 is revised. As the list

of diagnostic trouble code definitions is updated by SAE and EPA

through rulemaking, EPA expects states to revise the list of codes used

to determine vehicle pass/fail status.

C. OBD Component of the Performance Standard

Since OBD inspections are an element of the I/M performance

standard as established in the rule promulgated on November 5, 1992 and

a specifically required component of the program, OBD inspections do

not generate emission reduction surpluses relative to the performance

standard, i.e., they are not substitutes for achieving required

emissions reductions but rather required supplements. However, while

including OBD inspections does not generate additional credit toward

the I/M performance standard, it may generate additional benefit. The

actual magnitude of benefits were estimated in the OBD rule itself (58

FR 9482-9483). EPA will be assessing the contribution the OBD

inspection actually makes once testing starts and will revise future

revisions of the MOBILE emissions model to account for these benefits.

Due to the timing of this requirement, OBD checks will play no

significant role in attaining 15% reductions by 1996.

D. Administrative Program Requirements

1. Data Collection and Analysis

The proposed regulations included in today's action set out

specific requirements for data collection and analysis to include

information which will enable an analysis of OBD's role in the I/M

program.

Inconsistent data collection has often hampered analysis of program

operation: some programs have been unable to calculate basic statistics

such as the number of vehicles tested and failed because of incomplete

data collection. Even in programs where data collection has occurred,

data analysis has not been used extensively in program evaluation.

Subpart S establishes specific data collection requirements for I/M

programs. This action proposes additional data collection and analysis

requirements for vehicles subject to OBD inspection. This will allow

the results of the OBD check to be compared with those of the emission

test. Specifically, these data include the number of vehicles that fail

the OBD test and pass the emission test and the number of vehicles

which pass the OBD test and fail the emission test. This action also

proposes that the number of vehicles which have consistent test results

(i.e., fail or pass both tests) be reported.

EPA is also proposing the collection and analysis of data

pertaining to the MIL. Specifically, these data include the number of

vehicles whose MIL is commanded to be illuminated but who have no codes

stored and the number of vehicles whose MIL is not commanded to be

illuminated but who have codes stored. This action also proposes that

data collection include the number of vehicles whose MIL is commanded

to be illuminated and who have OBD codes stored, and the number of

vehicles whose MIL is not commanded to be illuminated and who have no

OBD codes stored.

OBD inspections can be viewed as a supplement to the inspection

regime which improves its effectiveness in finding high emitting

vehicles, but also as a possible long-term replacement to the other

tests for identifying high emitting vehicles. The analysis of the

estimated emission reductions associated with OBD assumes that OBD will

ultimately identify and cause to be repaired those vehicles in all I/M

areas which are capable of being identified by an enhanced I/M test,

specifically the IM240, purge and pressure tests. This will be verified

by data collection and analysis during the initial years of OBD

implementation. Thus, this information is essential to evaluating the

present and future role of IM240, purge, pressure, and OBD tests in I/M

programs.

E. State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions

Section 202(m)(3) of the Act requires states to amend I/M program

[[Page 43096]]

implementation plans to incorporate the inspection of on-board

diagnostic systems within two years after promulgation of regulations

requiring such inspection. Thus, in order to be considered complete and

fully approvable, I/M SIP submittals must include OBD inspections

within two years after final promulgation of this rule.

F. Implementation Deadlines

The incorporation of OBD inspections into both basic and enhanced

I/M programs should be implemented as expeditiously as possible. This

action proposes that OBD requirements for I/M programs be fully

implemented with respect to all administrative details by January 1,

1998. However, there will be some variation depending upon model year

coverage of the local I/M program.

VI. Economic Costs and Benefits

Code inspections will not add significantly to the time or cost for

an inspection due to the rapid connection and data transfer

capabilities which have been developed by industry and are required by

EPA's OBD rule. Each I/M lane will need to purchase the equipment

necessary for OBD interrogation. However, this equipment is relatively

inexpensive and these costs may be distributed over thousands of tests.

For enhanced I/M programs, the capital and maintenance costs associated

with conducting OBD tests have been calculated to be $0.05 per test.

The OBD cost for basic centralized I/M programs is only $0.025 per test

due to the higher volume of cars that can be inspected in these lanes.

The total cost of incorporating OBD inspections into enhanced and basic

centralized programs nationwide has been calculated to be about $1.7

million.

Very few states continue to operate decentralized test-and-repair

I/M programs. Assuming that 1200 tests will be conducted with every

scan tool, the incorporation of OBD inspections into test-and-repair

programs has been calculated to be about $2 million. Thus, the total

cost of incorporating OBD inspections into all I/M programs is $3.7

million.

In addition to improving the identification of high emitting

vehicles in an I/M program, OBD systems will also be of great utility

in the repair of vehicles which fail the inspection, including the

exhaust emission test. OBD will speed identification of the responsible

component, and help avoid trial and error replacement of components.

In addition to providing information about malfunctions which

result in excess emissions, OBD code inspections will provide

information about other faulty vehicle components. EPA recommends that

this information be provided to the vehicle owner even if the vehicle

passes the OBD test, enabling the owner to more efficiently repair any

malfunctioning components.

VII. Public Participation

A. Comments and the Public Docket

EPA desires full public participation in arriving at final

decisions in this Rulemaking action. EPA solicits comments on all

aspects of this proposal from all interested parties. Wherever

applicable, full supporting data and detailed analysis should also be

submitted to allow EPA to make maximum use of the comments. All

comments should be directed to the Air Docket, Docket No. A-94-21.

Commenters are especially encouraged to provide information on

manufacturer specifications for accessing OBD systems. Commenters who

wish to submit proprietary information for consideration should clearly

separate such information from other comments by--

Labeling proprietary information ``Confidential Business

Information'' and

Sending proprietary information directly to the contact

person listed (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) and not to the

public docket.

This will help insure that proprietary information is not

inadvertently placed in the docket. If a commenter wants EPA to use a

submission labeled as confidential business information as part of the

basis of the final rule, then a nonconfidential version of the

document, which summarizes the key data or information, should be sent

to the docket.

Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed

by EPA only to the extent allowed and by the procedures set forth in 40

CFR Part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the submission

when it is received by EPA, the submission may be made available to the

public without notifying the commenters.

B. Public Hearing

Anyone wishing to present testimony about this proposal at the

public hearing (see DATES) should, if possible, notify the contact

person (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least seven days prior

to the day of the hearing. The contact person should be given an

estimate of the time required for the presentation of testimony and

notification of any need for audio/visual equipment. A sign-up sheet

will be available at the registration table the morning of the hearing

for scheduling those who have not notified the contact earlier. This

testimony will be scheduled on a first-come, first-serve basis to

follow the previously scheduled testimony.

EPA requests that approximately 50 copies of the statement or

material to be presented be brought to the hearing for distribution to

the audience. In addition, EPA would find it helpful to receive an

advance copy of any statement or material to be presented at the

hearing at least one week before the scheduled hearing date. This is to

give EPA staff adequate time to review such material before the

hearing. Such advance copies should be submitted to the contact person

listed.

The official records of the hearing will be kept open for 30 days

following the hearing to allow submission of rebuttal and supplementary

testimony. All such submittals should be directed to the Air Docket,

Docket No. A-94-21 (see ADDRESSES).

The hearing will be conducted informally, and technical rules of

evidence will not apply. A written transcript of the hearing will be

placed in the above docket for review. Anyone desiring to purchase a

copy of the transcript should make individual arrangements with the

court reporter recording the proceeding.

VIII. Administrative Requirements

A. Administrative Designation

Under Executive Order 12866 [58 Federal Register 51,735 (October 4,

1993)], the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is

``significant'' and therefore subject to OMB review and the

requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant

regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public

health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an

action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,

user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients

thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in

the Executive Order.

[[Page 43097]]

It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant

regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is

therefore not subject to OMB review. Any impacts associated with these

requirements do not exceed the impacts that were dealt with in the I/M

requirements published in the Federal Register on November 5, 1992 (57

FR 52950). This regulation is not expected to be controversial. This

regulation does not raise any of the issues associated with

``significant regulatory actions.'' It does not create an annual effect

on the economy of $100 million or more or otherwise adversely affect

the economy or the environment. The total cost of incorporating OBD

inspections into all I/M programs nationwide has been calculated to be

less than $4 million. It is not inconsistent with nor does it interfere

with actions by other agencies. It does not alter budgetary impacts of

entitlements or other programs, and it does not raise any new or

unusual legal or policy issues. Accordingly, it is appropriate to

consider this a ``non-significant'' or ``minor'' rule action and it

should be exempt from OMB review.

B. Reporting and Record Keeping Requirement

This proposal only marginally increases the existing burden through

the addition of requirements to electronically capture and store one

additional data element (existing diagnostic trouble codes) and to

provide EPA with eight additional summary statistics based on this

information. The existing collection has been approved (OMB no. 2060-

0252) through February 28, 1996. This additional burden will not be

imposed until after the current Information Collection Request has been

renewed. When the current Information Collection Request is renewed,

any modifications necessary to incorporate OBD inspection data

collection will be made. These few additional elements will not add a

measurable amount to the existing estimated burden of 85 hours.

Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of

this collection information, including suggestions for reducing this

burden to Chief, Information Policy Branch, EPA, 401 M. Street S.W.

(Mail Code 2136), Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,

Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.'' The

final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on the

information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5

U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator certifies that this proposal will not

have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small

entities and, therefore, is not subject to the requirement of a

Regulatory Impact Analysis. A small entity may include a small

government entity or jurisdiction. A small government jurisdiction is

defined as ``governments of cities, counties, towns, townships,

villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of

less than 50,000.'' This certification is based on the fact that the I/

M areas impacted by the proposed rulemaking do not meet the definition

of a small government jurisdiction, that is, ``governments of cities,

counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special

districts, with a population of less than 50,000.''

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations,

Lead, Motor vehicle pollution, Nitrogen oxide, Ozone, Particulate

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,

Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 85

Confidential business information, Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle

pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research,

Warranties.

Dated: July 25, 1995.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, parts 51 and 85 of title

40 of the Code of Federal Regulations are proposed to be amended to

read as follows:

PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401(a)(2), 7475(e), 7502 (a) and (b),

7503, 7601(a)(1) and 7602. Q04

2. Section 51.351 is proposed to be amended by adding text to

paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec. 51.351 Enhanced I/M performance standard.

* * * * *

(c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). The performance standard shall

include inspection of all 1996 and newer light duty vehicles and light

duty trucks equipped with certified on-board diagnostic systems

pursuant to 40 CFR 86.094-17, and repair of malfunctions or system

deterioration identified by or affecting OBD systems as specified in 40

CFR 51.357.

* * * * *

3. Section 51.352 is proposed to be amended by adding text to

paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec. 51.352 Basic I/M performance standard.

* * * * *

(c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). The performance standard shall

include inspection of all 1996 and newer light duty vehicles and light

duty trucks equipped with certified OBD systems pursuant to 40 CFR

86.094-17, and repair of malfunctions or system deterioration

identified by or affecting OBD systems as specified in 40 CFR 51.357.

* * * * *

4. Section 51.357 is proposed to be amended by adding text to

paragraphs (a)(12) and (b)(4) to read as follows:

Sec. 51.357 Test Procedures and Standards.

(a) * * *

(12) On-board diagnostic checks. Inspection of the on-board

diagnostic system shall be according to the procedure described in 40

CFR 85.2223, at a minimum.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) On-board diagnostics test standards. Vehicles shall fail if the

vehicle connector has been tampered with, or if the malfunction

indicator light is commanded to be illuminated and any of the

diagnostic trouble codes listed in 40 CFR 85.2207 are present, at a

minimum.

* * * * *

5. Section 51.358 is proposed to be amended by adding text to

paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:

Sec. 51.358 Test Equipment.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) On-board diagnostic test equipment requirements. The test

equipment used to perform on-board diagnostic inspections shall

function as specified in 40 CFR 85.2231.

* * * * *

6. Section 51.365 is proposed to be amended by adding (a)(25) as

follows:

Sec. 51.365 Data collection.

(a) * * *

[[Page 43098]]

(25) Results of the on-board diagnostic check expressed as a pass

or fail along with the diagnostic trouble codes revealed.

* * * * *

7. Section 51.366 is proposed to be amended by adding (a)(2)(xi)

through (xviii) to read as follows:

Sec. 51.366 Data Analysis and Reporting.

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(xi) Passing the on-board diagnostic check and failing the I/M

emission tests.

(xii) Failing the on-board diagnostic check and passing the I/M

emission tests.

(xiii) Passing both the on-board diagnostic check and I/M emission

tests.

(xiv) Failing both the on-board diagnostic check and I/M emission

tests.

(xv) MIL is commanded on and no codes are stored.

(xvi) MIL is not commanded on and codes are stored.

(xvii) MIL is commanded on and codes are stored.

(xviii) MIL is not commanded on and codes are not stored.

* * * * *

8. Section 51.372 is proposed to be amended by revising paragraph

(b)(3) to read as follows:

Sec. 51.372 State implementation plan submissions.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(3) States shall revise SIPs as EPA develops further regulations.

Revisions to incorporate on-board diagnostic checks in the I/M program

shall be submitted by (two years after publication of final rule).

* * * * *

9. Section 51.373 is proposed to be amended by adding paragraph (f)

as follows:

Sec. 51.373 Implementation Deadlines.

* * * * *

(f) On-board diagnostic checks shall be implemented as part of I/M

programs by January 1, 1998.

PART 85--CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTOR

VEHICLE ENGINES

10. The authority citation for part 85 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7507, 7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 7542, 7543,

7547, 7601(a), unless otherwise noted.

11-12. A new Sec. 85.2207 is proposed to be added to subpart W to

read as follows:

Sec. 85.2207 On-Board Diagnostics Test Standards.

(a) A vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostics test if it is a

1996 or newer vehicle and the vehicle connector is missing or has been

tampered with.

(b) A vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostics test if the

malfunction indicator light is commanded to be illuminated and it is

not illuminated.

(c) A vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostics test if the

malfunction indicator light is commanded to be illuminated and any of

the following OBD codes, as defined by SAE J2012 ``Recommended Format

and Messages for Diagnostic Trouble Code Definitions,'' (MAR94) Part C,

are present (where X refers to any digit). Copies of SAE J2012 may be

obtained from the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400

Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001:

(1) Any PX1XX Fuel and Air Metering codes.

(2) Any PX2XX Fuel and Air Metering codes.

(3) Any PX3XX Ignition System or Misfire codes.

(4) Any PX4XX Auxiliary Emission Controls codes.

(5) P0500 Vehicle Speed Sensor Malfunction.

(6) P0501 Vehicle Speed Sensor Range/Malfunction.

(7) P0502 Vehicle Speed Sensor Circuit Low Input.

(8) P0503 Vehicle Speed Sensor Intermittent/Erratic/High.

(9) P0505 Idle Control System Malfunction.

(10) P0506 Idle Control System RPM Lower Than Expected.

(11) P0507 Idle Control System RPM Higher Than Expected.

(12) P0510 Closed Throttle Position Switch Malfunction.

(13) P0550 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Malfunction.

(14) P0551 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Malfunction.

(15) P0552 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Low Input.

(16) P0553 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Intermittent.

(17) P0554 Power Steering Pressure Sensor Circuit Intermittent.

(18) P0560 System Voltage Malfunction.

(19) P0561 System Voltage Unstable.

(20) P0562 System Voltage Low.

(21) P0563 System Voltage High.

(22) Any PX6XX Computer and Output Circuits codes.

(23) P0703 Brake Switch Input Malfunction.

(24) P0705 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit Malfunction (PRNDL

Input).

(25) P0706 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit. Range/Performance.

(26) P0707 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit Low Input.

(27) P0708 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit High Input.

(28) P0709 Transmission Range Sensor Circuit Intermittent.

(29) P0719 Torque Converter/Brake Switch ``B'' Circuit Low.

(30) P0720 Output Speed Sensor Circuit Malfunction.

(31) P0721 Output Speed Sensor Circuit Range/Performance.

(32) P0722 Output Speed Sensor Circuit No Signal.

(33) P0723 Output Speed Sensor Circuit Intermittent.

(34) P0724 Torque Converter/Brake Switch ``B'' Circuit High.

(35) P0725 Engine Speed Input Circuit Malfunction.

(36) P0726 Engine Speed Input Circuit Range/Performance.

(37) P0727 Engine Speed Input Circuit No Signal.

(38) P0728 Engine Speed Input Circuit Intermittent.

(39) P0740 Torque Converter Clutch System Malfunction.

(40) P0741 Torque Converter System Performance or Stuck Off.

(41) P0742 Torque Converter Clutch System Stuck On.

(42) P0743 Torque Converter Clutch System Electrical.

(43) P0744 Torque Converter Clutch Circuit Intermittent.

(d) The list of codes shall be updated with future revisions of

this rule, in conjunction with changes to 40 CFR 86.094-17(h) (3).

13. A new Sec. 85.2223 is proposed to be added to subpart W to read

as follows:

Sec. 85.2223 On-Board Diagnostic Test Procedures.

(a) The test sequence for the inspection of on-board diagnostic

systems on 1996 and newer light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks

shall consist of the following steps:

(1) The on-board diagnostic inspection shall be conducted either

with key-on/engine-off or key-on/engine-running.

(2) The inspector shall locate the vehicle connector and plug the

test system into the connector.

(3) The test system shall send a Mode $01, PID $01 request to

determine the evaluation status of the vehicle's on-board diagnostic

system. The vehicle shall be automatically rejected from testing if

Data B, Data C, and Data D indicate that the evaluation is not complete

for any module supported by on-board diagnostic evaluation. The

customer shall be instructed to return

[[Page 43099]]

after the vehicle has been run long enough to allow the testing of all

supported modules to be completed. If Data B, Data C, and Data D again

indicate that the vehicle should be rejected when it returns, the

vehicle shall be failed.

(4) If Data B, Data C, and Data D indicate that the vehicle's on-

board diagnostic evaluation is complete, the test system shall

determine the status of the MIL illumination bit and record status

information in the vehicle test record.

(i) If the malfunction indicator light bit is commanded to be

illuminated and any of the codes listed at 40 CFR 85.2207(c) are

present, the test system shall retrieve and record the codes in the

vehicle test record. The vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostic

inspection.

(ii) If the malfunction indicator light bit is not commanded to be

illuminated and any of the codes listed at 40 CFR 85.2207(c) are

present, the test system shall retrieve and record the codes in the

vehicle test record. The vehicle shall pass the on-board diagnostic

inspection.

(iii) If the malfunction indicator light bit is commanded to be

illuminated, the inspector shall inspect the MIL to determine if it is

illuminated. The status of the MIL shall be recorded in the vehicle

test record. If the MIL is commanded to be illuminated but is not, the

vehicle shall fail the on-board diagnostic inspection.

(5) The motorist shall be provided with the on-board diagnostic

test results, including the codes retrieved, the status of the MIL

illumination command, and the pass or fail result.

14. A new Sec. 85.2231 is proposed to be added to subpart W to read

as follows:

Sec. 85.2231 On-board diagnostic test equipment requirements.

(a) The test system interface to the vehicle shall include a plug

that conforms to SAE J1962 ``Diagnostic Connector.''

(b) The test system shall meet all vehicle electrical/electronic

compatibility requirements for ``OBD II Scan Tools'' as specified in

SAE J1978 and J2201, including the length of the electrical cable

between the vehicle and the test system.

(c) The test system shall be capable of performing all

communication functions as specified in SAE J1978, J1979, and J2205.

Specifically, the system shall be capable of checking for the systems

supported by the on-board diagnostic system and the evaluation status

of supported systems (test complete/test not complete) in Mode $01 PID

$01, as well as be able to request the codes, as specified in SAE

J1979. In addition, the system shall have the capability to include bi-

directional communication, when such features are available, and allow

for non-intrusive pressure and purge checks. Copies of all of the SAE

documents cited above may be obtained from the Society of Automotive

Engineers, Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001.

(d) The test system shall automatically make a pass, fail, or

reject decision, as specified in the test procedure in 40 CFR

85.2223(a).

[FR Doc. 95-20539 Filed 8-17-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P