 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
| Copyright © 2012. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 17
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation
Motor vehicle emissions are a major source of air pollutants, and significant
efforts over the past 3 ~ years have been directed at reducing these emissions.
As required by the Clean Air Act Amen~nents of ~ 990 (CAAA90), regulatory
agencies, particularly the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), are
pursuing multiple strategies to reduce emissions from mobile sources. These
strategies include implementing vehicle-emissions inspection and maintenance
(~/M) programs, setting tighter new vehicle tailpipe and evaporative emissions
standards, and promoting alternative and reformulated fuels. This report fo-
cuses on vehicle-emissions I/M programs, which are designed to identify vehi-
cles that have higher than allowable emissions and to try to ensure that they
are repaired or removed from the fleet. I/M programs attempt to control emis-
sions throughout a vehicle's lifetime by ensuring that the emissions-control
system is maintained and repaired when needed. As such, I/M programs can
improve overall air quality.
THE COMMITTEE'S CHARGE AND HOW IT ORIGINATED
In its fiscal ~ 998 appropriations for EPA, the U. S. Congress called for the
National Research Council (NRC) to assess the effectiveness of r/M pro-
grams for reducing mobile-source emissions. The study is fended in two
phases. The first phase, whichis the subjectofthis report, was charged to use
available information to assess general relationships between motor vehicle
17
OCR for page 18
18 Evaluating Vehicle Emissions I/M Programs
emissions characterized through I/M programs and emissions estimated by
other methods. Also in phase I, the study is charged to develop criteria and
methodologies for evaluating the design, implementation, and effectiveness of
specific federal and state I/M programs. Phase 2 will evaluate several types
of I/M programs.
Specifically, phase ~ ofthe study, the subject ofthis report, is charged with
the following:
~ . Describe the significance of emissions from motor vehicles subject to
I/M programs relative to other emissions sources. The committee will assess
the magnitude of emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic com-
pounds (VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and particulate matter (PM) from
motor vehicles that exceed certified levels.
2. Compare motor vehicle emissions in areas with and without I/M pro-
grams. The committee will compare motor vehicle emissions estimated from
I/M programs with emissions estimated from other sources of data. (This will
address the validity of using I/M program data to characterize fleet emissions
levels.) The analysis will consider the merits and limitations of various ap-
proaches used to estimate fleet emissions.
3. Identify criteria for the evaluation of I/M programs, including equip-
ment needs, program costs, repair effectiveness, program effectiveness for
vehicle categories, and effects of human behavior (such as vehicle tampering
and I/M avoidance due to cost, inconvenience, program perceptions, and
nonresponse to on-board diagnostic (OBD) indicator lights).
4. Develop methodologies for evaluating I/M programs based on the
work described in items ~ -3. The methodologies should be applicable to exist-
ing programs as well as programs to be implemented in the near future that will
use OBD checks.
Make recommendations for improving I/M programs.
Identify research needs.
COMMITTEE'S RESPONSE TO THE
CHARGE REPORT CONTENTS
This report documents the committee ' s response to the charge described
above. The report consists of seven chapters and a summary. The committee
found it useful to review passenger-car and light-truck emissions, the emissions
OCR for page 19
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation 19
typically targeted by I/M programs, within the context of overall mobile-source
and anthropogenic emissions. We also found it useful to review regulations
covering motor vehicle emissions, especially/hose pertaining to I/M programs.
These topics are discussed in Chapter ~ ofthe report. We considered it impor-
tant to farther describe vehicle emissions control technologies and I/M testing
techniques and to discuss how I/M has affected vehicle emissions. Chapters
2 and 3 examine these subjects. Chapter 4 discusses emerging testing tech-
niques that may be incorporated into future I/M programs. Chapter 5 exam-
ines the modeling used for simulating end predicting emissions reductions from
I/M programs. Chapters 6 and 7 examine criteria and methods for evaluating
I/M programs. Chapter 6 discusses evaluation methods for estimating
emissions-reduction benefits due to I/M programs. Chapter 7 covers other
criteria important for evaluating I/M programs, including costs and enforce-
ment issues. The committee's findings and recommendations are presented
in the Summary ofthe report. We begin with discussions of vehicle emissions
and regulations pertaining to emissions standards and I/M programs.
AIR POLLUTANTS EMITTED BY MOBILE SOURCES
The air pollutants that are directly associated with mobile sources include
CO, PM, VOCs or hydrocarbons (HC),~ and NOx~the sum of NO andiron.
Mobile sources also contribute to ground-level ozone as HC, CO, and NOX
emitted by vehicles react in the presence of sunlight to form ozone.
Figures I-1 through 1-3 present estimates of the contribution of mobile
sources to national annual emissions of CO, NOX, and VOCs based on model-
ing results (EPA 2000a). Although these data give a general indication ofthe
magnitude of mobile emissions compared with other major sources (fuel com-
bustion in the figures refers to stationary sources), these emissions inventory
estimates are lower than those estimated from on-road vehicle studies and
The terms VOCs and HC are used in this report to denote organic compounds
that are emitted as vapors under typical atmospheric conditions. Unless quoting an
emissions inventory source or a regulation that uses another term, the report uses the
term HC exclusively. Appendix B describes the differences among the terms used to
refer to HC.
OCR for page 20
20 Evaluating Vehicle Emissions I/M Programs
Note: Some fluctuations in the years before 1970 are the result of different methodologies.
FIGURE 1-1 Trends in nationwide CO emissions, 1940-1998. Some fluctuations in the
years before 1970 result Tom the use of different methods. Source: EPA 2000a.
ambient measurements in urban areas, especially for HC and CO (IngalIs et
al. 1989; Pierson et al. 1990; Fujita et al. 1992; Singer and Harley 1996; Gertler
et al. 1997; Watson et al. 2001~.
The mobile emissions reportedin Figures I-l through I -3 are categorized
into on-road and non-road emissions; on-road emissions refer to both light-duty
vehicles (LDVs) and heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs). The differentiation be-
tween LDVs and HDVs historically has been 8,500 pounds gross vehicle
weight (the weight of the vehicle plus the weight of the rated load-hauling
capacity). LDVs are fueled primarily by gasoline, and HDVs use both diesel
fuel and gasoline. The heavier HDVs, however (those with gross vehicle
weights Heater than 26,000 pounds), are fueled almost exclusively with diesel
fuel. Although these heavy HDVs make up about ~ % of the total number of
vehicles, they represent about 5% of total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and
about ~ 4°/O of total fuel consumption (Davis ~ 999~. Heavy HDVs are also an
important source of PM and NOX emissions (EPA ~ 99Sa). Non-road emis-
sions come from a wide variety of vehicles, including construction, logging,
OCR for page 21
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation 21
.......... ... . ~iii~ i i i i ,,,,,,,,,,, . i ..i ............
Note: Some fluctuations in the years before 1970 are the result of different methodologies.
FIGURE 1-2 Trends in nationwide NOxemissions, 1940-1998. Some fluctuations in the
years before 1970 result from the use of different methods. Source: EPA 2000a.
mining, and farm equipment; lawn and garden equipment; marine vessels;
recreational vehicles; industrial, light commercial, and airport services; locomo-
tives; and aircraft.
In WAS, or-road end non-road mobile sources were est~matedto contribute
over 75°/0 of CO emissions nationwide (about 70,000 thousand short tons),
about 50°/0 of the NOx (about ~ 3,000 thousand short tons), and 40°/0 of the
VOCs (about 7,800 thousand short tons) (EPA 2000a).2 The remaining emis-
sions came pnmanly from stationary source fuel combustion and industnal
processes. The role of mobile-source emissions as a source of PM is not well
understood. Emissions inventories indicate that mobile-source exhaust is a
Mobile-source emissions are estimated with the MOBILE and NONROAD
models, which are reviewed in NRC (2000~. To the extent that these emissions are
projected using these models, they are subject to the types of uncertainties discussed
in that report.
OCR for page 22
22
hi:
Evaluating Vehicle Emissions I/M Programs
1.~0 4~5 ~~D i9~5 1960 1~S i~0 1~
Note: Some fluctuations in the years before 1970 are the result of different methodologies.
FIGURE 1-3 Trends in nationwide VOC emissions, 1940-1998. Some fluctuations in
the years before 1970 result from the use of different methods. Source: EPA 2000a.
Source: EPA 2000a.
relatively minor source of PM~o (atmospheric PM < ~ 0 Em in aerodynamic
diameter) and sulfur dioxicle. Mobile-source contribution to fine particles (~2.5
Em in aerodynamic diameter and referred to as PM2 s) is an area of continuing
study. Recent studies reported higher than expected PM2 5 emissions from
LDVs at higher elevations (Fujita et al. 1998; Lawson and Smith 1998; Watson
et al. ~ 998; Cadle et al. ~ 999a,b; Yanowitz et al. ~ 9994. Understanding these
contributions is important as increased emphasis is now being placed on i ine
PM (PM2 s) because of its potential effect on human health (Dockery et al.
~ 993~. A substantial fraction of PM2 s consists of secondary particles con-
verted from gaseous pollutants by atmospheric processes (NRC 1998~.
Within urban areas, mobile sources contribute an even greater fraction of
air pollutant emissions than suggested by the national data shown in Figures ~ - l
through ~ -3 . For example, emissions from mobile sources (both on-road and
non-road) contribute 50% oftotal HC, 89°/O of NOx, and94% of CO emissions
in the South Coast Air Basin (which encompasses Los Angeles and Orange
OCR for page 23
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation 23
Counties end the urbanized portions of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties
in California) (TMRC 2000~. On the basis of its models, EPA suggests that
vehicles typically contribute between 35% and 70% of HC end NOx emissions,
and 90°/O or more of CO emissions in cities with high levels of air pollution
(EPA 1993a). However, as described previously andin NRC (2000), on-road
vehicle emissions studies and comparisons of ambient data with emissions
inventories have shown that mobile-source emissions are significantly higher
than estimated by the models.
VEHICLE TYPES AND STANDARDS
Vehicle Types
Mobile-source emissions can be categorized by the type of vehicle and
engine system generating the emissions and by the type of fuel used. Table ~ -
~ (Sawyer et al. 2000) summarizes vehicle types, engines, and fuels that are
commonly used. A single vehicle type may use any of several engines (e.g.,
a light-duty on-road vehicle might use a spark-ignition or compression-ignition
engine, hybrid gasoline-electric, or electric engine) and any of several fuel
types (e.g., gasoline, diesel, or liquefied petroleum gas). Most vehicle usage
is associated with gasoline-powered, spark-ign~tion, light-duty on-road vehicles.
Ofthe approx~mately200 million vehicles reg~steredin the United States, about
two-thirds are light-duty, gasoline-powered passenger cars. There are also
approximately 57 million light-duty trucks and 9 million heavy-duty trucks and
buses in the current vehicle fleet (Sawyer et al. 2000~.
As a rough guide to the significance of these vehicle categories, national
emissions inventories for ~ 998 indicate that gasoline-powered vehicles ac-
counted for 65% and 95% of on-road NOX and VOC emissions, respectively,
with diesel trucks and buses contributing the remaining 35% of NOX and 5%
of VOCs (EPA 2000a). Figure I-4 presents estimates of emissions by fuel
type for on-road vehicles. Gasoline-powereU vehicles dominate VOC and CO
emissions, and vehicles that operate on diesel fuel represent a significant frac-
tion of NOX and direct PM emissions. As noteipreviously, however, mobile-
source emissions have been underestimated and are subject to considerable
uncertainty.
I/M programs in the United States have been designed primarily for
gasoline-powered, spark-ignition, light-duty on-road vehicles, although smaller
OCR for page 24
24 Evaluating Vehicle Emissions I/M Programs
TABLE I-l Mobile-Source Vehicles, elm., ~~ ~~
Vehicles
Light-duty on-road
Heavy-duty on-road
Heavy-duty off-road
Light-duty off-road
Aircraft
Ships
Locomotives
Engines
Fuels
Spark ignition
Compression ignition
Gas turbine
Electric
Steam turbine (marine)
Gasoline
Diesel
Jet fuel
Residual fuel oil
Liquefied petroleum gas
Natural gas
Electricity
Alcohols
Note: These sources are listed in approximate order of their use; boldface indicates the
most important sources of HC and NOX.
Source: Adapted from Sawyer et al. 2000.
and newer programs have been introduced for HDVs in a few areas, such as
California, Colorado, and several East Coast states. Therefore, most of this
report focuses on LDV emissions, even though they are not the only important
category of mobile-source emissions.
I/M programs for HDVs represent an issue of increasing interest. Be-
cause these vehicles are significant sources of PM and NOX emissions and
they have not been subjected to extensive I/M programs, significant emissions
reduction opportunities may exist. Currently, 1 ~ states have testing programs
for assessing smoke emissions from heavy-duty diesel vehicles.
OCR for page 25
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation 25
OXIDES OF NITROGEN
7~7R
5089
VOLATILE ORGANIC CARBON
5104
PARTICULATE MATTER (PM-~)
CARBON ~ONOXIOE
SULFUR DiOXIOE
PARTICULATE MATER (PM-2.5)
GAS
Dl:ESEL
~3
FIGURE 1-4 Estimated emissions by fuel type from the on-road motor vehicle fleet in
the United States. Emissions are shown in thousands of tons. Source: EPA 2000a.
Vehicle Exhaust Emissions Standards
Over the past 3 decades, efforts to reduce emissions from mobile sources
have focused on reducing exhaust and non-tailpipe emissions from on-road
OCR for page 26
26 Evaluating Vehicle Em
issior~s I/M Programs
vehicles, specifically passenger cars and light-duty trucks. Passenger cars, as
the name implies, refer to personal vehicles used primarily to transport people.
For a given model year, a single set of emissions standards applies to all pas-
senger cars (except for California, which has separate standards) regardless
of size, passenger occupancy, oruse. Except for the firsts years of regulation
968- ~ 969), emissions have been regulated on a grams per mile basis. For
1968-1969, the standards were specified on a concentration basis, 275 parts
per million (ppm) for total HC ant! ~ .5% for CO. This form of the standard
allowed larger vehicles (with higher exhaust flow) to produce more emissions
by mass than smaller models. The test procedure and the standards were
revised for 1970-1972 to include an estimate for the exhaust volumetric flow
based on the weight ofthe vehicle and a calculation ofthe mass of emissions
produced per mile traveled. The test procedure and standards were modified
again for model year ~ 972 and later vehicles to utilize a constant volume sam-
pler (CVS) technique, which allowed a more accurate estimate ofthe vehicle
mass emissions. New vehicles are certified by a chassis dynamometer test,
such as the Federal Test Procedure (FTP).3
Table ~ -2 displays historical categories of standards (in grams per mile) for
passenger cars for up to 50,000 miles and from 50,001 to 100,000 miles.4
Table ~ -3 summarizes some ofthe majormilestones forthese standards. The
first federal emissions standards began with ~ 968 model-year vehicles and
controlled engine ("crankcase") and tailpipe emissions of HC and CO. The
~ 970 Clean Air Act Amendments required that HC, CO, and NOX be Towered
as soon as possible by at least 90%. Originally, the emissions standards were
set at 0.4 I ,3.4, and 0.4 grams per mile (g/mi) for HC, CO, and NOX respec-
tively, to be implemented starting with the ~ 975 model year. These standards
were slightly modified and delayed, however, and were not fully implemented
until the Clean Air Act Amendments of ~ 990 (CAAA90), which produced the
Tier ~ emissions standards beginning with the ~ 994 model year. The final fed-
3In a chassis dynamometer test, the whole vehicle is mounted on a dynamometer
for testing. In contrast, in an engine dynamometer test only the engine, not the whole
vehicle, is mounted on a dynamometer. The FTP was designed as a standardized test
for measuring the emissions from new vehicles.
Manufacturers are allowed to certify compliance using low-mileage cars and an
agreed-upon deterioration assumption. They are not required to recall and test in-
service vehicles. (Vehicles may be recalled if emissions control systems are found to
be faulty.)
OCR for page 27
Motor Vehicle Emissions arid Regulation 2 7
TABLE I-2 Passenger-Car Exhaust Gaseous Emissions Standards (all
values in grams per mile except as noted)
50,000 miles
100,000 miles
HC CO NOx NMHCa CO NOx
.
Model Year
Precontrolb 10.6 84.0 4.1
1968-1969 275 ppm 1.5%
1970- 1971 4.1 34.0 —
1972 3.4 39.0
1973 3.4 39.0 3.0
1975-1976 1.5 15.0 3.1
1977-1979 1.5 15.0 2.0
1980 0.41 7.0 2.0
Category
Tier 0 (1981-1993) 0.41 3.4 1.0
Tier 1 (beginning with 0.41 3.4 0.4 0.31 4.2 0.6
model year 1994) (0.25)a
NLEV (beginning with — 0.09 4.2 0.3
model year 1999)
Tier 2 Default set in
CAAA90 (beginning with
model year 2004)
Tier 2 Current proposed
standards (beginning with
model year 2004)
Emissions standards were originally written for total HC and later for nonmethane HC
(NMHC, shown in parentheses in the second column). Appendix B describes the
differences among the terms used to refer to gaseous organic compounds. This report,
unless otherwise noted, refers to the general class of gaseous organic compounds as
HC.
bStandards adjusted to current test procedure methods.
CThe proposed Tier 2 standards are a corporate average standard with a focus on NOX
emissions. This allows NMHC and CO emissions standards to "float," in that fleet
emissions rates depend on the mix of vehicles used to meet the NOX standard. The
emissions standards shown for NMHC and CO are those that would result given the
mix assumed in the Notice of Final Rulemaking (EPA l 999a) to meet the NOX standard.
Sources: Chrysler Corporation 1998; EPA 1998b, l 999a; Davis 2000.
0.125
1.7 0.2
>O.O9c >4.2c 0.07
OCR for page 35
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation 35
Although a small population of vehicles is responsible for a large fraction
of each category of exhaust emissions, the same vehicles are not necessanly
super emitters in all emissions categories. Sawyer et al. (2000) conclude that
although "there is significant overlap in the subset ofthe vehicle fleet that are
high emitters of CO and HC...the NOX high emitters comprise a different,
mostly disjoint set of vehicles from the CO and HC gross polluters." Figure
-8 shows this relationship developed from roadside pullover tests in California.
An important implication ofthe skewness of emissions distributions is that
emissions targeted by I/M programs (those above the I/M cutpoints9) are
concentrated in a small group of vehicles. For example, in the California I/M
pilot study cited above, the data in Figure 1-9 have been used to demonstrate
that about 75% of the excess aggregated CO, HC, and NOX emissions were
produced by only 10% ofthe fleet. Excess emissions are defined here as the
difference between a vehicle's current emissions rate and two times its certifi-
cation standard. Aggregate excess emissions are determined by summing
~ ~ /7(CO) + NOX+ HC). This equation for aggregating excess emissions from
multiple pollutants is described by the California Inspection and Maintenance
Review Committee (IMRC ~ 993~. It should be noted that there is no standard
definition of excess emissions or of how excess emissions relate to the amount
of emissions that are "repairable."
This concentration of excess emissions is also shown in the data from the
~ 999 California roadside survey, which purled over 8,443 vehicles. The rank-
orderedexcess CO, HC, end NOx emissions are shownin Figure 1-10, which
indicates that only 5% ofthe fleetproduces 76%, 83%, and 85% ofthe excess
CO, HC, and NOX emissions, respectively. These results, however, might have
been influenced by the methodology used to gather the test data. In an attempt
to determine acceleration-simulation-mode fleet emissions rates with 95%
confidence and a relatively small variance, a sampling method was used to
ensure that a large proportion ofthe data collected are from older-model-year
vehicles. Older vehicles have higher emissions and thus were selected more
frequently for testing in this study. If new vehicles were adequately repre-
sented in this data set, the degree of skewness would be even larger.
Skewness is not limited to exhaust emissions. 1: iquid gasoline leaks are
present in a small, but significant, fraction of current in-use vehicles. Recent
investigations have indicated that although the frequency of liquid leaks is low,
9Cutpoints are emissions levels that are used in an I/M program to determine
whether a vehicle passes or fails.
OCR for page 36
36 Evaluating Vehicle Emissions I/M Programs
HI
/ 2.4%
(I 6.1% \~/
Cam
-
0.2%~
78.0%
40.2%
-
\NO
8.3% /
FIGURE 1-8 Degree of overlap among the highest 10% of emitters of CO, HC, and NOX
in the LDV fleet. This figure shows the number of vehicles in each category. The
figure is based on results of ASM 2525 emissions tests (controlled load) administered
on 12,977 vehicles in California random roadside inspections tested June 9, 1998, until
October 29, 1999. Sizes of the smaller overlapping areas are not drawn to scale. Of the
vehicles tested, 78% did not fall in the top 10% for CO, HC, or NOx Source: Diagram
prepared by Gregory S. Noblet, University of California, Berkeley.
the gasoline lost becomes a significant contributor to the HC emissions inven-
tory. A recent Coordinating Research Council/American Petroleum Institute
leak study (McClement et al. ~ 997) examined ~ ,000 vehicles 500 in Arizona
and 500 in Ohio curing the fall of 1997. Halfthe vehicles selected were 1991
end order; the other halfwere 1992 end newer. Vehicles were recruited from
I/M lanes and given a physical inspection next to the I/M lane. Twenty-two
significant leaks were found in the older sample (4.4%~. No significant leaks
were found in the newer vehicles. Significant leaks were defined as expected
to have "immediate, measurable reduction in whole gasoline emissions if re-
paired." Another study recruited ~ 5 1 vehicles ~ ~ 971 -1 99 ~ model year) from
an Arizona I/M lane during the summer of 1996 and measured the 24-hour
diurnal emissions (Haskew and Liberty 1999~. This study included only vehi-
cles from model-year 1991 and older. Liquid leaks were identified in 32 ofthe
vehicles tested (21%~; 5 ofthem had significantleaks of greater then 50 g/day.
The skewness of non-tailpipe emissions is also described by Pierson et al.
(1999~.
OCR for page 37
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation 3 7
100 -
v,
._ 80 ~
v:
cat
.s
v'
can
can
o
TO
Ox
40
20
O
0 20 40 60 80 100
% of Fleet Ranked Dirty to Clean
% of Total
FIGURE 1-9 Aggregated excess FTP CO, HC NOX emissions from the California I/M
pilot study rank-ordered from Lightest to lowest emitters. Excess emissions for each
pollutant are aggregated using the equation (1/7(CO) + NOx + HC).
OVERVIEW OF VEHICLE I/M PROGRAMS
Over the past 30 years, a range of I/M programs have been created to
reduce vehicle emissions. Vehicle I/M programs were identified as an option
for improving air quality in the ~ 970 Clean Air Act, and the first T/M program
was implemented in New Jersey in ~ 974. In that program, exhaust emissions
at idle conditions were tested for light-duty, gasoline-powered vehicles manu-
factured dunog or after 1968. The 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments man-
dated the use of I/M for areas with Tong-ter~n air-quaTity problems, and, in
law- ~
·° 80
.
l
can
c' 40 .
x
~ 20- ;
lo
_
~ _
.
.
. :
.
7 _
.
. ~
·
~ ~ _
10 20 30 40 50 60 7C,
% of neet Ranked Dirty to Clean
~ ~ of CO % of HC - % of NOx
FIGURE 1-10 Excess emissions based on the California roadside pullover study.
OCR for page 38
38 Evaluating Vehicle Emissions I/M Programs
~ 978, EPA issued guidance for I/M programs, including minimum emissions
reduction requirements, administrative requirements, and implementation
schedules. This guidance was broad, and, consequently, a variety of state
programs emerged.
The CAAA90 was much more prescriptive about I/M, and EPA was
required to develop enforceable guidance for "basic" and "enhanced" I/M
programs. Basic programs were required for areas in moderate nonattainment
of NAAQS, and enhanced programs were required for serious, severe, and
extreme nonattainment regions. is The CAAA90 further mandated that en-
hanced T/M programs be annual (unless biennial programs were proven to be
equally effective), centralized (unless decentralized was shown to be equally
effective, and enforced through registration denial (unIess a preexisting
enforcement mechanism was shown to be more effective). The CAAA90
also required the use of on-road testing and the biennial assessment of I/M
program effectiveness. However, the assessment requirement has not been
enforced.
In ~ 992, EPA published its rule (EPA ~ 992a) requiring enhanced I/M
programs in response to the CAAA90. The rule required specific tailpipe,
evaporative, and visual inspections of vehicles, including use of the IM240
emissions test for model-years ~ 986 and newer. The IM240 test, which is
described in Chapter 3, is a 240-second test simulating actual driving with the
engine in gear. The ~ 992 T/M rule also specified guidelines that required en-
hanced EM programs to collect TM240 emissions tests on a random sample of
0. ~ % of the fleet. In addition, programs were supposed to perform on-road
testingofan additional 0.5% ofthe fleet using either remote sensing orroad-
side pull-overs. It should be noted that EPA never described how these data
would be used, and the agency has not enforced these requirements.
Implementation ofthe model I/M program was projected to achieve reduc-
tions of 28% in HC, 3 ~ % in CO, and 9% in NOX for enhanced I/M regions,
compared with emissions in the absence of an I/M program, by the year 2000
i°Nonattainment areas are areas violating federal air-quality standards for the
criteriapollutants: sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide,
ozone, and lead.
VIA centralized network consists of a relatively small number of stations that
perform emissions tests only. A decentralized testing network consists of a larger
number of low-volume stations that do both emissions testing and vehicle repairs.
These networks are described in more detail in Chapter 3.
OCR for page 39
Motor Vehicle Emissions arid Regulation 39
(EPA 2000b). Basic [/M programs were projected to give emissions reduc-
tions of 5% in HC and ~ 6% in CO (EPA 2000b). These estimates were made
based on emissions simulations for average national conditions using EPA's
Mobile Source Emissions Factor (MOBILE) mode. Chapter 5 contains a
discussion of the use of MOBILE for estimating I/M emissions reductions.
The enhanced I/M rule included a 50% credit discount for I/M programs
with decentralized vehicle testing, based on EPA's observations ofthe degree
of improper testing found in such programs (EPA ~ 993c). This discount was
incorporated into the ~ 992 rule and addressed the implicit requirement in the
CAAA90 that EPA distinguish between the relative effectiveness of central-
ized versus decentralized programs. The discount for decentralized programs
evolved into a major area of contention between EPA and states, including
California (IMRC 1995a,b).
The National Highway Systems Designation Act of ~ 995 included a provi-
sion allowing decentralized I/M programs to claim ~ 00°/O of the emissions-
reduction credits afforded a similar centralized program. States were required
to provide a good faith estimate of program effectiveness, which was to be
substantiated with an evaluation using program data ~ ~ months after program
approval. This ~ 8-month demonstration is based on criteria developed by the
Environmental Council of States and is separate from the biennial evaluation
requirement.
Recent regulations have provided for more flexibility in I/M program de-
sign and evaluation from those set out by the CAAA90 and the ~ 992 rule.
EPA ~ ~ 99Sc) removed the requirement that evaluation be based on IM240 or
other mass emissions transient test data. It called for evaluation to be based
on "sound" methodologies; some of which have been discussed in further
guidance memoranda (EPA ~ 998d,2000b). EPA ~ ~ 999c) proposed rule revi-
sions to the motor vehicle T/M program requirements to incorporate recent
policy decisions and statutory requirements. This proposed rule would provide
states additional flexibility to tailor their I/M programs to better meet current
and fixture needs. Among these is the need to maximize program efi iciency
i2The MOBILE model is used to estimate vehicle emissions and the effectiveness
of control strategies such as I/M, reformulated fuels, and emissions standards. The
MOBILE estimates are critical as they quantify the emissions-reduction benefits that
a state can claim for their I/M program. The benefit estimated in the 1992 rule were
made using version 4.1 of MOBILE using 1992 national default assumptions for vehicle
fleet characteristics and other factors.
OCR for page 40
40 Evaluating Vehicle Emissions I/M Programs
.
and customer convenience by capitalizing on newer vehicle testing options,
such as OBD system testing and remote sensing. EPA (2000c) recently
released a notice of proposed rule-making concerning the use of OBD in I/M.
It proposes to provide states the flexibility to replace traditional I/M tests with
OBD checks for cars equipped with OBDTI (1996 model year and newer).
This rule was finalized April 5, 2001 (EPA 2001~.
More than 30 states now operate I/M programs. Table I-4 summarizes
some of these programs. Each program has distinct rules, test types, and
frequencies of operation. Program effectiveness data, collected in response
to the mandate for biennial evaluations, are beginning to emerge. Chapter 3
discusses a selection of state-sponsored and independent evaluations. As data
on program effectiveness have become available, comparisons have been
made between the emissions reductions initially projected for I/M programs
and the emissions reductions suggested by the program evaluation data. These
comparisons are critically important, given the significant role of I/M programs
in developing state implementation plans (SIPs).~3 Moreover, evidence thus
far suggests that actual emissions reductions attributable to I/M programs are
considerably less, at least for exhaust emissions, than those credited to states
on the basis of modeling using EPA's mobile-source emissions model MO-
BlI-E. }4
.
EVOLVING ISSUES AFFECTING I/M IN THE FUTURE
Surrounding all these issues is yet another consideration involving the
nature of current testing protocols and improvements in late-mode] vehicle
emissions-controltechnolog~es. For thelate-modelvehiclefleet,current testing
programs are not inspection and maintenance programs but rather inspection
and repair programs. The distinction is substantive and points out a very
~ m p o r t a n t t e c h n o ~ o g ~ c a ~ ~ e v e ~ o p m e n t . W i t h r e g a r ~ t o e m i s s i o n s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ,
the emissions controls in current cars (including those dating back to the intro-
duction of computer-controlled filet injection and emissions control—most of
subregions in nonattainment of NAAQS must develop a SIP detailing how they will
come into compliance. Included in SIPs are estimates of the emissions benefits from
an array of control programs, including I/M programs.
~4Emissions-reduction credits in SIPs are developed from modeling using
MOBILE, not measurements. In California, the EMFAC model is used for SIP devel-
opment.
OCR for page 41
41
. au O ~ ~
m ~ `= ~
~ C;,
._
V,
o
~4
a'
C)
V:
o
cn
o
. ~
Ct
Ct
For
1
Ct
· _
o
CD
Ct
Ct
U.
o
En'
Em
~ ~ ~ ?
5 ~ X
O t— ~ · ~
~ 0 ~ O ° at O I,
'_' ~ ~ ~ O
~ ~ ~ ~ of
of ~ ~ ON
~ _ _1 ~ t_ _
Cal
Ct
-
o
C)
._ C'
I.
.=
At · Ct
.>
i_
Ct
o
Ct V]
~ En
ct Y
;> V
E~
C~= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ =g
~ 00 ~ + + ~ + X + X + X X ~
c~~ ,= =~ a~ ~ GN ~ C7N ~ ~ ~ —
V ~ V ~ V ~ V ~ V
V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V
C: _ ~ SC=~= o5=
_ _ _ _ _
Ct _ Ct C~ Ct Ct _
.g ~ ·g ·g ·g ·g
m <: m m m ~ m v ·¢
~O ~O
ON ~v O~ ~v
o
a~ c~D ~ ~ ~ C) ct
~ ~ U~ C~:l <~s (t Ce
Z ~ ~ ~ ~ C: C:
_ h ~ ~U ~ =- ~ ° ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ° _ E
C~
.= ~ ~ ~ ~ o o
_ o ~ ~ ~ ~ _ oo
~ o ~ ° ° ° ° ~ o
V CN CM ~ ~ CM
~q .= X ~ V ~ ° ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V o
o ~= ~ o =- U ~o ~ ~ ~ O
5 ~ E .m E · o c
OCR for page 42
42
x
q
Fin
¢
En
_ ~ .o ~
~ ~ Ct
~ on
m
~ C`:
. ~ ~
~ V)
Cal
Cal
o
·~ ~
· ~
=.e
Ct
o
Ce U]
Cal
Cal
U.
·_ ~
~ V
Cal
.
o
v
o
Z ~
O
O ~
— >
0 0 0
~ ~ ~ _
·= 00
01)
O
O ~
OXx + +X
¢ v ~ ~ v
>~> >- >-
vVv VV VV
~ Ct
-3v ~
'e cd
.—~ ·—
m m
C) ~ V, C)
cn ~ ~> ct
C: ~ ~ V
Q~ ~ eC ~ =~ ~ =- ce
~ _ _
O O O
O ~ ~
~ a., ~ — V
+ ~ V' 0 C) Z ~ ~c-4 ~
O O
~V ~ ~
;~¢ O
C\S ~ ^= 0 =- ~ ^=
O O =.~ (~
v V ~ ~ ~ a v
Ct
o
; -
00
._
au
Ct
._
OX
Ct
V
V
O
C~
U.
a
._
Ct
~q
t~O
C)
au
._
o
v
._
v
~0
Ct U
U. ~
a.,
._
O ~
V ~
Ct _4
o
U.
ct
cn
E~
o
e
~s
e
o
o
- ~
u, ·c
e
u,
s~ ~
o ct
~ c':
X 3
Ct:
~ o
o N
.c
O ~
C<: ·—
3
3
:> o
Q
Ct ~
o
U,
. ~
<~, O
~ C~
_~ U
. _
~ ~V
. -
·- Cd
O
O
V:
-
Ct
-
.=
OCR for page 43
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation 43
the fleet) are relatively maintenance-free. If a late-model car has excessive
emissions, it is often the result of a system component failure. The component
would have to be replaced, as opposed to undergoing maintenance in the tradi-
tional sense of carburetor or other engine function adjustments.
An increase in vehicle durability, including durability of emissions-control
components, has accompanied these and other technological improvements.
According to Davis (2000) the average age of in-use passenger cars has in-
creased from a mean age of 5.6 years in ~ 970 to 8.8 years in ~ 998. Addition-
ally, the average lifetime of a 1990 model-year passenger car is 2.7 years
longer (14.0 years) than that of a ~ 970 model-year car. These trends have
resulted in a large change in the percentage of older vehicles in the fleet. In
~ 970, the percentage of vehicles ~ 5 years and older was only 2.9%; in ~ 998,
the percentage had risen to 13.2%.
These changes in the nature of vehicle technology, durability, and vehicle
lifetimes have implications for future I/M programs. The increased durability
and lack of need for periodic maintenance in the sense of engine "tuning"
should allow for reducing the testing burden through an increased use of clean
screening of vehicles or increases in model-year exemptions. is Technological
innovations in OBD systems might greatly speed up the inspection process, and
eventually make the remote monitoring and reporting of vehicle emissions a
reality. Indications are that the new technology vehicles are cleaner, and capa-
ble of remaining cleaner for a longer period of time. The possible need for
high-cost repairs towards the end of vehicle life remains. Older vehicles prob-
ably will still tend to be owned by people in Tower-income groups who are least
able to afford repairs. Thus, behavioral and economic issues might continue
to play important roles in maintaining Tow emissions throughout vehicle life-
times.
Emerging air-quaTity issues also have implications for the future of emis-
signs testing programs. For example, the South Coast Air Quality Manage-
ment District (2000) recently reported that mobile-source emissions are the
most significant contributor to human exposure to air toxic s. Increased under-
standing ofthe effects of air tonics end PM, as well as the implementation of
stricter standards for ozone and PM, might place new demands on future
vehicle I/M programs.
i5Clean screening is a method for exempting vehicles from regularly scheduled
inspections through low-emitter profiles or remote sensing. Both are discussed in
Chapter 4.
OCR for page 44
44 Evaluating Vehicle Emissions I/M Programs
SUMMARY
Chapter ~ ofthis reportbegan with a statement ofthe committee's charge,
how the charge originated, and the committee's response to the charge. It then
describes the air pollutants associated with motor vehicle use and characteris-
tics ofthese pollutant emissions. This includes a categorization of emissions
by vehicle type, exhaust standards, evaporative standards, emissions distribu-
tions, a brief overview of existing T/M programs, and an assessment of future
I/M issues.
Motor vehicles represent a significant fraction of overall emissions, espe-
cially in urban areas, and a relatively small fraction of on-road vehicles are
responsible for a large fraction ofthe emissions. Typical numbers reported in
the literature (usually obtained from measurements of in-use vehicles) suggest
that for any given pollutant, 50-60% of LDV exhaust emissions are produced
by about ~ 0% of the highest-polluting LDVs. The skewness of excess emis-
sions is even greater, with 5% of vehicles producing 75% or greater of excess
emissions. Identifying and repairing high-emitting vehicles clearly has the
potential to reduce mobile-source emissions. Vehicle I/M programs provide
the primary method for obtaining these reductions.
Despite their widespread use in air-quality management, a number of
concerns are associated with I/M programs. As data on program effective-
ness have become available, comparisons have been made between the emis-
sions reductions initially proj ected with MOB lLE and those estimated by pro-
gram evaluation data. These comparisons are critically important given I/M
programs' significant role in SIPs. Evidence thus far suggests that actual
emissions reductions attributable to I/M programs are considerably less than
those credited to states on the basis of simulations using MOBILE (emissions-
reduction credits in SIPs are developed from simulations using MOBILE, not
measurements). This evidence has raised questions about the effectiveness
of I/M as a strategy for improving air quality. Additionally, the proposed rule
for implementing the enhanced I/M program also created controversy by
mandating the use ofthe TM240 test at centralized facilities and discounting by
50°/O the emissions-reduction benefits for programs that relied on decentralized
tests. These issues were at the forefront during a 1995 hearing ofthe House
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation on the effectiveness of vehicle
I/M programs and how the MOBILE model credits these programs (U.S.
Congress ~ 995~. They also prompted Congress to request the NRC study
reported here.
OCR for page 45
Motor Vehicle Emissions and Regulation 45
An important consideration for the late model vehicle fleet discussed in this
chapter is that current testing programs are not I/M programs but rather in-
spection end repair programs. With regard to emissions characteristics, cur-
rent cars (including those dating back to the introduction of computer-con-
trolled fuel injection and emissions control, as discussed in Chapter 2) are
essentially maintenance-free. If a late-mode! car has excessive emissions,
then a system component has failed and must be replaced. Maintenance in the
traditional sense of carburetor or other engine injunction adjustment, for exam-
ple, no longer applies.
Changes in the nature of vehicle technology, durability, and lifetimes have
serious implications for future I/M programs. These implications are discussed
throughout this report and are a focus of the second phase of this study. In-
creased durability and the lack of need for periodic maintenance should reduce
the testing burden throughincreased use of clean screening of vehicles. Tech-
nological innovations in OBD systems might speed up the inspection process
and perhaps eventually make the remote monitoring or reporting of vehicle
emissions characteristics a reality. New technology vehicles are cleaner and
capable of remaining cleaner for a longer period oftime; however, the technol-
ogy is so new that it remains to be seen what their emissions and repair re-
quirements will be at the end of their useful lives.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
motor vehicle
