CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
State Building Auditorium
Room 1138
107 S. Broadway
Los Angeles, CA
December 14, 1989
9:30 a.m.
AGENDA
Page
89-20-1 Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to 001
Regulations Regarding the Emission Control
System Warranty Requirements for 1979 and
Subsequent Model Motor Vehicles and Engines,
and Adoption of Regulations Regarding the Use
of Common Nomenclature for Certification and
Service Documents.
89=20-2 Progress Report on the Staff's Proposed ---
Regulatory Approach for Low-Emission Vehicles,
Clean Fuels, and New Gasoline Specifications.
89-20-3 Public Hearing to Consider the Adoption of a 095
Regulation Which Identifies the Areas in Which
Transported Air Pollutants Contribute to Violations
of the State Ambient Air Quality Standard for
Ozone and the Areas of Origin of the Pollutants.
89-20-4 Consideration of Research Proposals: 206
Proposal Number 1721-152, entitled, "Determination
of Emissions from Open Burning of Agricultural and
Forestry Wastes - Phase II," submitted by the
University of California, Davis, for a total amount
not to exceed $281,692.
Proposal Number 1720-152, entitled, "Chemical Analysis
of Aromatics in Diesel Fuels," submitted by the
Southwest Research Institute, for a total amount not to
exceed $118,986.
Proposal Number 1722-152, entitled, "Determination of
Key Organic Compounds Present in the Particulate Matter
Emissions from Air Pollution Sources," by the
California Institute of Technology, for a total amount
not to exceed $298,904.
Proposal Number 1724-152, entitled "Effects of Carbon
Monoxide and High Altitude on Fetal Cardiac and
Neurological Development," submitted by Loma Linda
University, for a total amount not to exceed $238,388.
Closed Session
Litigation -- Authorized by Govt. Code Section 11126
(q) (1); Citizens for a Better Environment v.
Deukmejian, et al., and Sierra Club v. Metropolitan
Transportation Commission, et al.
If the Board is unable to complete consideration of these items
on December 14, 1989, it may continue its consideration on
December 15, 1989 at 8:30 a.m. at the same location
SUMMARY
ITEM #89-20-1
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO REGULATIONS REGARDING
THE EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM WARRANTY REQUIREMENTS FOR 1979 AND
SUBSEQUENT MODEL MOTOR VEHICLES AND ENGINES, AND ADOPTION OF
REGULATIONS REGARDING THE USE OF COMMON NOMENCLATURE FOR
CERTIFICATION AND SERVICE DOCUMENTS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the Board amend the warranty
regulations for 1979 and subsequent model motor vehicles and
engines to implement recent legislative changes and to enhance
the Board's emissions warranty program. The staff also
recommends that the Board adopt a new regulation requiring the
use of standardized nomenclature for motor vehicle service and
certification documents.
DISCUSSION
Senate Bill (SB) 1997, enacted in 1988, made substantial changes
to the emission warranty requirements for 1990 and subsequent
model passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty
vehicles. The changes were further clarified by legislation
enacted in 1989 (SB 1276). The warranty legislation necessitates
revisions to the Board's warranty regulations.
Defects warranty. Prior to SB 1997, manufacturers were required
to provide what was often known as an emission "defects
warranty." The statute referred to a warranty that the vehicle
is free from defects in workmanship or materials that cause it to
fail to conform with applicable requirements over a specified
period. The defects warranty period for light- and medium-duty
vehicles was 5 years or 50,000 miles, whichever first occurs,
except that specified fuel metering and ignition system
components only had to be warranted for 2 years/24,000 miles.
There was no extended defects warranty or performance warranty.
For 1990 and newer light- and medium-duty vehicles, SB 1997
changed the defects warranty period to 3 years/50,000 miles, and
the staff proposal reflects this change. Since newer passenger
cars on average accumulate about 45,000 miles during their first
three years, staff expects that a small reduction in warranty
coverage will result from the change from five to three years.
Overall, this small loss in warranty coverage will be more than
offset by the elimination of the two year/24,000 mile provision
and the other expansions in warranty coverage described below.
The regulations now provide that the defects warranty applies to
parts contained on a emissions-related parts list incorporated in
the regulations. The proposal will delete the reference to the
parts list and replace it with the concept of an all-inclusive
warranty in which any part that affects emissions is covered.
The legislative background associated with the enactment of SB
1997 indicated an intent that reference to the parts list be
deleted in favor of a broader "bumper-to-bumper" warranty for
emission-related parts.
Extended Defects Warranty. SB 1997 requires that 1990 and newer
light- and medium-duty vehicle manufacturers provide a new
extended defects warranty of 7 years/70,000 miles for emission-related
parts that cost more than $300 to replace. This warranty
is intended to cover critical emission control components such as
the catalyst, on-board computer, and possibly the fuel injection
system. The proposed gegulations reflect the new requirement.
During the certification process, each manufacturer would develop
a list of emission-related components costing more than $300 to
replace. The extended warranty coverage would be applicable to
any diagnosis, repari, or replacement, as necessary, of the
listed emission-related components. The $300 cost limit would be
revised annually by the Executive Officer to reflect changes in
the Consumer Price Index.
Performance Warranty. SB 1997 also requires that 1990 and newer
light- and medium-duty vehicles be covered by a new 3 year/50,000
mile "performance warranty" under which the manufacturer warrants
that the vehicle will pass the Smog Check. The proposed
regulations also reflect this requirement. If a vehicle fails
the Smog Check, the manufacturer would have to make it pass, at
no cost to the owner, unless the manufacturer demonstrates that
the failure is directly caused by abuse, neglect or improper
aintenance. Portions of the federal performance warranty
regulations pertaining to the owner's compliance with the
manufacturer's instructions for proper use and maintenance, and
warranty claims procedures, would be incorpoated with appropriate
modifications reflecting differences in the federal and
California warranty requirements.
Required Warranty Statement. The staff is proposing a
requirement that manufacturers of 1991 and newer vehicles include
in their warranty booklet a standardized statement that clearly
explains the vehicle owners' rights and responsibilities
regarding the emission control system warranty. The
manufacturer's detailed warranty statement would follow this
specified statement. The requirement would apply to vehicles
produced more than 30 days after the effective date.
Restructuring the warranty regulations. The staff is proposing
that the warranty regulations be restructured to clarify existing
requirements and incorporate the SB 1997 requirements. These
changes affect all model year vehicles which currently are
subject to warranty requirements.
Common Nomenclature Requirement. Finally, the staff is proposing
the use of standardized nomenclature for motor vehicle service
and certification documents. The proposal would require
manufacturers to use standard terms for emission control
components in documents used by dealerships, vehicle owners,
independent mechanics, and government agencies. Standardizing
the terminology should reduce misdiagnosis and improper repairs.
The requirement would apply to all documents printed or reprinted
by a manufacturer starting with the 1993 model year.
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS OF PROPOSED ACTION
Although the emission impact associated with the new warranty
requirements and the proposed regulations cannot be quantified,
the staff anticipates they will result in an overall emissions
decrease. Emission benefits will be realized from the
performance warranty as manufacturers will design vehicles to
maintain emissions compliance in-use since they must pass the
Smog Check. There will also be an emission benefit associated
with the extended warranty, since the expensive, emission
critical components will continue to operate as designed or be
repaired for seven years.
The proposed regulations are estimated to result in a negligible
cost increase to manufacturers.
ITEM 89-20-2
Progress Report on Low-Emission Vehicles/Clean Fuels and New
Gasoline Specifications (non-regulatory).
RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the Board endorse the staff's continued
development of regulations requiring the sale of transitional
low-emission, low-emission, and ultra-low-emission vehicles and
the sale of clean fuels that allow the low emissions to be
achieved.
The staff also recommends that the Board concur with the staff's
intent to propose new specifications for the composition of
gasoline.
INTRODUCTION
This is a progress report on the development of proposals by the
Air Resources Board staff for the introduction of vehicles
meeting new, lower emission standards ("low-emission vehicles"),
for the introduction of new, cleaner-burning fuels ("clean
fuels"), and for new compositional specifications on conventional
gasoline. The report emphasizes the basic concepts and general
structure of the regulatory program that the staff envisions.
The package of regulations implementing this program will be
developed and presented to the Board for consideration by
September 1990.
The proposal for clean fuels and low-emission vehicles is being
designed to fulfill the intent of the recommendations of the AB
234 Advisory Board on Air Quality and Fuels. The program is also
being designed to meet the commitment the Board made when
adopting the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan. The
proposal is consistent with requirements of the California Clean
Air Act and the air toxics control program. The proposal also
meets the requirements of AB 4392, which requires the expeditious
control of toxic air contaminants from motor vehicles.
The staff is also evaluating what effects the use of clean fuels
would have on global-warming emissions, in consideration of the
Air Resources Board's policy to reduce these emissions.
DISCUSSION
The staff proposal is comprised of: 1) the near-term
implementation of new specifications for gasoline, and 2)
standards for low-emission vehicles and clean fuels, to be
implemented gradually over the longer term.
The staff intends to propose new specifications for the
composition of gasoline. They would include, at a minimum:
- a limit on the benzene content and, possibly, a limit
on the aromatic content;
- a lower limit on the Reid vapor pressure 9 a measure of
the gasoline's tendency to evaporate); and
- a requirement for deposit-control additives.
These regulations would go into effect within a few years and
remain in effect for as long as gasoline is used in the state.
The longer-term program would require the phase-in of light-duty
vehicles meeting new, lower emission standards. The proposed new
emission standards would go beyond the recently adopted 0.25
gram/mile standard for non-methane hydrocarbons, both by lowering
the standards and by adjusting it according to the ozone-forming
potential of emissions from different fuels. There would also be
new standards for emissions of CO NOx, benzene, and formaldehyde.
In 1994, up to 10 percent of each vehicle manufacturer's sales
would be required to meet transitional low-emission vehicle, or
TLEV, standards. In 1997, one-fourth of each manufacturer's
sales would be required to meet low-emission vehicle, or LEV
standards (which would be more stringent than for TLEVs). A
smaller fraction would have to meet ultra-low-emission vehicle,
or ULEV, standards (which would be even more stringent) beginning
in 1995. The LEV and ULEV sales requirements would increase in
subsequent years and, by the year 2000, all new vehicles sold
would be either LEVs or ULEVs.
Fuels cleaner than conventional gasoline may very well be needed
in order for vehicles to meet the new emission standards. To
assure that the clean fuels are available for the lower emitting
vehicles to use, fuel suppliers would be required to sell a
certain amount of clean fuel each year. This amount would be
proportional to the number of TLEVs, LEVs, and ULEVs on the road
in that year that require the use of clean fuel. A clean fuel is
any fuel meeting the new, lower emission standards in specified
test vehicles.
The regulations would also allow for the buying and selling of
credits for excess sales of clean vehicles and clean fuels. This
would provide flexibility for the industries and could encourage
the production of especially clean vehicles and fuels.
EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSAL
No regulations are being proposed for hearing now, and no action
by the Board is requested at this time beyond concurrence with
the approach that the staff is taking. If regulations
incorporating the current proposals are eventually adopted, there
will be significant new requirements for the motor vehicle
industry and the state's fuel suppliers. Emissions of ozone
precursors and toxic air contaminants would be reduced
substantially over time. The reductions would aid in the efforts
to achieve the ambient ozone standards in non-attainment areas
and to reduce the public's overall exposure to toxic air
contaminants.
ITEM #89-20-3
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE IDENTIFICATION OF AREAS IN WHICH
TRANSPORTED AIR POLLUTANTS CONTRIBUTE TO VIOLATIONS OF THE STATE
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD FOR OZONE AND THE AREAS OF ORIGIN OF
THE POLLUTANTS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff proposes that the Board amend Title 17, California Code
of Regulations, by adding Section 70500 to add provisions
identifying transport couples (contributors and receptors) as
described in the following table of transport identifications:
AREAS IMPACTED BY TRANSPORT: AREAS OF ORIGIN OF TRANSPORT:
1. North Central Coast A.B. San Francisco Bay Area A.B.
2. South Central Coast A.B. South Coast A.B.
California Coastal Waters
3. South Coast A.B. South Central Coast A.B.
4. San Diego A.B. South Coast A.B.
5. Upper Sacramento Valley Broader Sacramento Area
6. Broader Sacramento Area San Francisco Bay Area A.B.
San Joaquin Valley A.B.
7. San Joaquin Valley A.B. San Francisco Bay Area A.B.
Broader Sacramento Area
AREAS IMPACTED BY TRANSPORT: AREAS OF ORIGIN OF TRANSPORT:
8. Great Basin Valleys A.B. Undetermined
9. Southeast Desert A.B. South Coast A.B.
San Joaquin Valley A.B.
DISCUSSION
The California Clean Air Act of 1988 established requirements
concerning plans and control measures to attain and maintain the
state ambient air quality standards. One of these requirements
is for the Board, based on a preponderance of available evidence,
to identify each air pollution control district in which
transported air pollutants from upwind areas outside the district
cause or contribute to a violation of the state ambient air
quality standard for ozone, as well as the district of origin of
the transported pollutants. The Act also requires that
information needed to make more accurate determination of
transport be identified and prioritized.
The proposed transport origins and receptors are listed as
transport couples in the table above. All areas identified are
air basins except as otherwise specifically described and
defined. The regulation includes definitions of California
Coastal Waters, Upper Sacramento Valley and the Broader
Sacramento Area. Any district which is a receptor or contributor
of transported air pollutants, as determined under Health and
Safety Code Section 39610(a), must prepare and submit a plan for
attaining and maintaining specified state ambient air quality
standards, including the ozone standard, to the state board not
later than June 30, 1991. Ultimately, upwind areas are
responsible for the effect of pollutants transported to downwind
areas.
Further more, once the Board has adopted the proposed regulation,
the Act also requires the ARB to assess the transport couples
identified in the proposed table above. Specifically, the ARB
must assess the quantity of material transported and its relative
contribution to downwind ozone violation as well as establish
mitigation requirements commensurate with the level of
contribution. A report on the assessment of the proposed
transport couples is expected to be presented to the Board next
summer. The staff will bring this matter back before the Board
in three years as required by law, or possibly sooner if new data
become available that warrant earlier reconsideration.
Several air quality studies currently underway or planned for the
near future will shed additional light on the transport of
pollutants in some of California's air basins. Information is so
scarce in some areas of the state that further research efforts
will be necessary to identify other potential transport routes.
The report's recommendations for further research are presented
in the following table:
Ozone Nonattainment Areas Transport Possibly Originates
Possibly Impacted by Transport: from the Following Areas:
1. Upper Sacramento Valley San Francisco Bay Area A.B.
2. Broader Sacramento Area Upper Sacramento Valley
3. South Coast A.B. Outer Continental Shelf
Southeast Desert A.B.
4. San Diego A.B. Mexico
Outer Continental Shelf
5. San Francisco Bay Area A.B. Broader Sacramento Area
Outer Continental Shelf
6. Mountain Counties A.B. San Francisco Bay Area
Upper Sacramento Valley A.B.
7. Southeast Desert A.B. San Diego A.B.
Mexico
8. Great Basin Valleys A.B. South Coast A.B.
San Joaquin Valley A.B.
Mountain Counties A.B.
9. San Joaquin Valley A.B. North Central Coast A.B.
10. North Central Coast A.B. Outer Continental Shelf
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS OF PROPOSED BOARD ACTION
The staff believes that there are no significant environmental or
cost impacts or issues of controversy regarding the proposed
adoption of this amendment. In preparing the proposal, the staff
held a public consultation meeting to discuss transport
identifications.