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.