alternative durability process that has been demonstrated to meet the
durability objective. If the data set used in the analysis contains
less than 20 pieces of data, the Administrator may reduce the degree of
adjustment required to account for uncertainty in the data.

E. Evaporative and Refueling Durability

    EPA is finalizing provisions that require manufacturers determine
the evaporative/refueling deterioration using either whole vehicle
durability or bench aging methods or a combination of the two methods.
    Whole Vehicle Evaporative/Refueling Durability. Manufacturers may
conduct evaporative and/or refueling durability program by running the
DDV on the SRC or an approved alternative road cycle and conducting the
applicable test at each testing point. Manufacturers may combine
exhaust and evaporative/refueling whole vehicle durability
demonstrations.
    Bench-Aging Evaporative/Refueling Durability. Manufacturers may use
bench procedures designed, using good engineering judgement, to
evaluate the following potential causes of evaporative emission
deterioration and achieve the durability objective:
    (1) Cycling of canister loading due to diurnal and refueling
events,
    (2) Use of various commercially available fuels, including the Tier
2 requirement to include alcohol fuel;
    (3) Vibration of components;
    (4) Deterioration of hoses, etc. due to environmental conditions;
and
    (5) Deterioration of fuel cap due to wear.
    Manufacturers will determine evaporative and refueling DFs using
good engineering judgement without the need for prior EPA approval.

F. Compliance Date and Carryover of Existing Durability Data

    Manufacturers must meet the requirements of today's action
beginning with the 2008 model year.

    EPA is not making any changes to the carryover provisions in the
current regulations (ref. 40 CFR 86.1839-01). These provisions allow
manufacturers to use durability data that was previously generated and
used to support certification provided that the data ``represent a
worst case or equivalent rate of deterioration''. Beginning in the 2008
model year, if a manufacturer can meet these requirements, it may use
existing durability data (i.e., DFs or aged hardware) to support
certification.
    The manufacturer may not, however, continue to use CAP 2000
durability processes to generate new data starting with the 2008 model
year. When the proposed rule becomes effective in the 2008 model year,
manufacturers must use durability procedures that have been approved
under the new rules to generate new durability demonstrations.

G. Miscellaneous Regulatory Amendments and Corrections

    1. With the addition of the new durability regulations (sections
86.1823-08, 86.1824-08, and 86.1825-08), the regulatory references in a
number of other sections of subpart S of part 86 have been updated
accordingly.
    2. Section 1864 of subpart S is being moved to section 1801. This
section describes the applicability of subpart S to heavy-duty
vehicles, and is more appropriately located in the Applicability
section of the regulations.
    3. An outdated address in section 1817-05 has been corrected.
    4. A typographical error in section 1830-01(c) has been corrected.
    5. Two corrections are being made to section 86.1806-05, on-board
diagnostics. First, in a previous regulatory action, this section was
amended to add provisions for diesel vehicles and HDVs and MDPVs. In
doing this, an inadvertent error was made in paragraph (a)(3). The
provision allowing compliance with 86.004-17, in lieu of 1806-05,
should be limited to apply only to MDPVs and HDVs. The language has
been revised accordingly. Second, in the original CAP 2000 regulation,
there is an incorrect reference to section 86.094-17(e) and (f). The
correct reference is 1806-05(e) and (f).

IV. What Are the Economic and Environmental Impacts?

A. Economic Impacts

1. Comparison to CAP 2000 Economic Impacts
    In considering the economic and environmental impacts of today's
proposal, we used the CAP 2000 regulations as a comparison benchmark.
In those regulations, EPA estimated that there would be an average
annual net savings to the automotive industry of about $55 million. The
analysis performed to reach that conclusion was part of the record for
the CAP 2000 regulation, and was not contested.
    In today's final rulemaking, one of our goals was to retain those
savings. In the CAP 2000 cost analysis, about half of the total
estimated annual savings was attributed to the durability component of
the regulations. The elements of CAP 2000 durability which provided the
most significant savings are:
    a. Reduced number of durability data vehicles (DDVs). The creation
of the ``durability group'' under CAP 2000 allowed manufacturers to
significantly reduce the number of required durability demonstrations.
The savings that are claimed in the CAP 2000 rule resulting from the
``durability group'' provision come from requiring physically fewer
DDVs, fewer durability tests, and less reporting (e.g. instead of
having to report 912 durability tests, there would only be 620 tests).
The ``durability group'' concept was not part of the Ethyl v. EPA
litigation, nor was it mentioned in the Court's opinion on this case.
Thus EPA is not modifying the ``durability group'' regulations in
today's final rule.
    In fact, it is possible that today's final rule could actually
slightly reduce some costs to the industry, in that manufacturers using
one of the EPA-prescribed durability processes (either whole-vehicle or
bench) would no longer have to provide a description of their
durability process (which was required under CAP 2000, and would
continue to be required for manufacturers using customized procedures
under today's final rule).
    b. Reduced burden-hours per DDV. In addition to fewer DDVs, in the
CAP 2000 rulemaking, EPA also slightly reduced the estimated number of
burden-hours required per DDV. As above, this element was not affected
by the Court mandate, and is not impacted by today's final rule.
2. Economic Impact of Today's Rule
    Today's final rule prescribes two methods for determining the
emission deterioration of vehicles over their useful life periods--the
whole-vehicle procedure or the bench-aging procedure. Details of how to
perform these procedures are prescribed in the proposed regulations.
Because these procedures are similar in nature to those approved by EPA
under the CAP 2000 regulations, the added burden for manufacturers
utilizing them will be minimal.\25\ The costs involved with either of
these processes (equipment costs, vehicle costs, testing costs, labor
costs, etc.) are fairly fixed. Manufacturers using one of the
prescribed methods will not be required to make major changes to or add
any new equipment, test any additional vehicles with any additional
frequency, or to increase the amount of labor. We expect that
manufacturers who, under the old CAP 2000 regulations, used a bench-
aging (or whole-vehicle) process will continue to use a bench-aging (or
whole-vehicle) process--the only difference is that now that process is
codified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Added burden will be in the form of the one-time
reprogramming of automated driving or bench-aging devices with the
new driving/aging cycle, and other minor equipment adjustments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final regulations also include the option for manufacturers to
use customized or alternative procedures, with EPA approval. The
approval requires the manufacturer to submit an analysis of about 20
in-use emission tests. Most manufacturers will be able to utilize in-
use data and analyses that they have previously collected from other
sources (such as the CAP 2000 in-use verification data). Some
manufacturers may need to augment this data by running a few additional
tests, but this would be a small, one-time cost. EPA estimates that
this small added cost is more than offset by the fact that once
approved, manufacturers will be able to use their durability programs
without the need to make any changes to those programs.
    As discussed above, EPA is issuing a separate Supplemental Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking which addresses component durability. Any costs
associated with that proposal will be addressed in that notice.

B. Environmental Impacts

    In the CAP 2000 rule, no quantifiable environmental benefits were
projected. Intangible benefits were possible due to the In-Use
Verification Program (IUVP) element of the CAP 2000 rule--manufacturers
would be able to use the in-use data from this program to identify and
fix in-use compliance problems and to make improvements upon their
certification durability processes. This intangible benefit is not
changed in today's final rule--the in-use verification program is not
affected by the Court mandate, and no changes to this program are being
proposed. EPA is modifying an existing CAP 2000 provision whereby
manufacturers utilize the IUVP data to assess the ability of the
durability program to

predict in-use compliance. The modification includes more explicit
instructions as to what the manufacturer is required to assess and when
corrective action is required (see section III C.). This proposed
provision will have the effect of improving the predictive qualities of
the durability process, but again, with intangible environmental
benefits.

VI. What Are the Statutory and Executive Order Reviews for This
Proposed Rule?

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 October 4, 1993), EPA must
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
the requirements of this Executive Order. The Order defines a
``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.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, OMB has notified
EPA that it considers this a ``significant regulatory action'' within
the meaning of the Executive Order. OMB has waived review of this
action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq. However, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations (64 FR 23906) under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB
control number 2060-0104, EPA ICR number 0783.44. A copy of the OMB
approved Information Collection Requests (ICR) may be obtained from
Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460 or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administrations' regulations at 13 CFR 121.201;
(2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city,
county, town, school district or special district with a population of
less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-
profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
A small business that manufacturers automobiles has a NAIC code of
336111. Based on Small Business Administration size standards, a small
business for this NAIC code is defined as a manufacturer having less
than 1000 employees. The requirements are only applicable to
manufacturers of motor vehicles, a group which does not contain a
substantial number of small entities. Out of a total of approximately
80 automotive manufacturers subject to today's proposal, EPA estimates
that approximately 15-20 of these could be classified as small entities
based on SBA size standards. EPA's CAP 2000 compliance regulations
include numerous regulatory relief provisions for such small entities.
Those provisions remain in effect and are not impacted by today's final
rule.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory action on state, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and proposed rules with ``Federal mandates''
that may result in expenditures by state, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year. Before promulgation an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The
provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an
alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the proposed
rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted.
    Before we establish any regulatory requirement that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, we must develop, under section 203 of the UMRA, a small
government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small
governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of
our regulatory proposals with significant federal intergovernmental
mandates. The plan must also provide for informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
    EPA believes this final rule contains no Federal mandates for
state, local, or tribal governments. Nor does this rule have federal
mandates that may result in the expenditures of $100 million or more in
any year by the private sector as defined by the provisions of Title II

of the UMRA. Nothing in the final rule would significantly or uniquely
affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This final rule will impose no direct compliance costs on states.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
The requirements of this action impact private sector businesses,
particularly the automotive and engine manufacturing industries. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Children's Health Protection

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be economically significant as
defined under E.O. 13045 and (2) concerns an environmental health or
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the Agency.
    EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as applying only to those regulatory
actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to
influence the regulation. This final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045
because it is based on technology performance and not on health or
safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272), directs
the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, business practices, etc.) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standard bodies. The NTTAA requires EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This final rule does not involve consideration of any new technical
standards. The durability test procedures that EPA is adopting are
unique and have not been previously published in the public domain.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to Congress and the comptroller General of the United
States. We will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until
60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 86

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Motor vehicle
pollution, Confidential business information, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 29, 2005.
Stephen Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, The Environmental Protection
Agency title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 86--CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY VEHICLES
AND ENGINES

0
1. The authority citation for part 86 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart S--General Compliance Provisions for Control of Air
Pollution From New and In-Use Light-Duty Vehicles, Light-Duty
Trucks, and Complete Otto-Cycle Heavy-Duty Vehicles

0
2. Amend Sec.  86.1803-01 by adding a new definition in alphabetical
order, to read as follows:

Sec.  86.1803-01  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Secondary air injection means a system whereby air (not ingested by
the engine) is introduced into the exhaust system in front of a
catalyst.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  86.1804-01 by adding new acronyms in alphabetical order,
to read as follows:

Sec.  86.1804-01  Acronyms and abbreviations.

* * * * *
A/F--Air/Fuel
* * * * *
BAT--Bench-Aging Time
* * * * *

SBC--Standard Bench Cycle
* * * * *
SRC--Standard Road Cycle
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  86.1817-05 by revising paragraph (i)(3)(i) to read as
follows:

Sec.  86.1817-05  Complete heavy-duty vehicle averaging, trading, and
banking program.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) These reports shall be submitted within 90 days of the end of
the model year to: Director, Certification and Compliance Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 6405J, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 20460.
* * * * *

0
5. Add a new Sec.  86.1823-08 subpart S to read as follows:

Sec.  86.1823-08  Durability demonstration procedures for exhaust
emissions.

    This section applies to all 2008 and later model year vehicles
which meet the applicability provisions of Sec.  86.1801. Optionally, a
manufacturer may elect to use this section for earlier model year
vehicles which meet the applicability provisions of Sec.  86.1801.
Eligible small volume manufacturers or small volume test groups may
optionally meet the requirements of Sec. Sec.  86.1838-01 and 86.1826-
01 in lieu of the requirements of this section. A separate durability
demonstration is required for each durability group.
    (a) Durability program objective. The durability program must
predict an expected in-use emission deterioration rate and emission
level that effectively represents a significant majority of the
distribution of emission levels and deterioration in actual use over
the full and intermediate useful life of candidate in-use vehicles of
each vehicle design which uses the durability program.
    (b) Required durability demonstration. Manufacturers must conduct a
durability demonstration for each durability group using a procedure
specified in either paragraph (c), (d), or (e) of this section.
    (c) Standard whole-vehicle durability procedure. This procedure
consists of conducting mileage accumulation and periodic testing on the
durability data vehicle, selected under the provisions of Sec.  86.1822
described as follows:
    (1) Mileage accumulation must be conducted using the standard road
cycle (SRC). The SRC is described in Appendix V of this part.
    (i) Mileage accumulation on the SRC may be conducted on a track or
on a chassis mileage accumulation dynamometer. Alternatively, the
entire engine and emission control system may be aged on an engine
dynamometer using methods that will replicate the aging that occurs on
the road for that vehicle following the SRC.
    (ii) The fuel used for mileage accumulation must comply with the
mileage accumulation fuel provisions of Sec.  86.113 for the applicable
fuel type (e.g., gasoline or diesel fuel).
    (iii) The DDV must be ballasted to a minimum of the loaded vehicle
weight for light-duty vehicles and light light-duty trucks and a
minimum of the ALVW for all other vehicles.
    (iv) The mileage accumulation dynamometer must be setup as follows:
    (A) The simulated test weight will be the equivalent test weight
specified in Sec.  86.129 using a weight basis of the loaded vehicle
weight for light-duty vehicles and ALVW for all other vehicles.
    (B) The road force simulation will be determined according to the
provisions of Sec.  86.129.
    (C) The manufacturer will control the vehicle, engine, and/or
dynamometer as appropriate to follow the SRC using good engineering
judgement.
    (2) Mileage accumulation must be conducted for at least 75% of the
applicable full useful life mileage period specified in Sec.  86.1805.
If the mileage accumulation is less than 100% of the full useful life
mileage, then the DF calculated according to the procedures of
paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this section must be based upon a line
projected to the full-useful life mileage using the upper 80 percent
statistical confidence limit calculated from the emission data.
    (3) If a manufacturer elects to calculate a DF pursuant to
paragraph (f)(1) of this section, then it must conduct at least one FTP
emission test at each of five different mileage points selected using
good engineering judgement. Additional testing may be conducted by the
manufacturer using good engineering judgement. The required testing
must include testing at 5,000 miles and at the highest mileage point
run during mileage accumulation (e.g. the full useful life mileage).
Different testing plans may be used providing that the manufacturer
determines, using good engineering judgement, that the alternative plan
would result in an equivalent or superior level of confidence in the
accuracy of the DF calculation compared to the testing plan specified
in this paragraph.
    (d) Standard bench-aging durability procedure. This procedure is
not applicable to diesel fueled vehicles or vehicles which do not use a
catalyst as the principle after-treatment emission control device. This
procedure requires installation of the catalyst-plus-oxygen-sensor
system on a catalyst aging bench. Aging on the bench is conducted by
following the standard bench cycle (SBC) for the period of time
calculated from the bench aging time (BAT) equation. The BAT equation
requires, as input, catalyst time-at-temperature data measured on the
SRC.
    (1) Standard bench cycle (SBC). Standard catalyst bench aging is
conducted following the SBC
    (i) The SBC must be run for the period of time calculated from the
BAT equation.
    (ii) The SBC is described in Appendix VII to Part 86.
    (2) Catalyst time-at-temperature data
    (i) Catalyst temperature must be measured during at least two full
cycles of the SRC.
    (ii) Catalyst temperature must be measured at the highest
temperature location in the hottest catalyst on the DDV. Alternatively,
the temperature may be measured at another location providing that it
is adjusted to represent the temperature measured at the hottest
location using good engineering judgement.
    (iii) Catalyst temperature must be measured at a minimum rate of
one hertz (one measurement per second).
    (iv) The measured catalyst temperature results must be tabulated
into a histogram with temperature bins of no larger than 25[deg] C.
    (3) Bench-aging time. Bench aging time is calculated using the
bench aging time (BAT) equation as follows:

te for a temperature bin = th
e((R/Tr)-(R/Tv))
Total te = Sum of te over all the temperature
bins
Bench-Aging Time = A (Total te )

Where:

A = 1.1 This value adjusts the catalyst aging time to account for
deterioration from sources other than thermal aging of the catalyst.
R = Catalyst thermal reactivity coefficient. For the SBC, R=17500 for
Tier 2 vehicles and R=18500 for all other vehicles.
th = The time (in hours) measured within the prescribed
temperature bin of the vehicle's catalyst temperature histogram
adjusted to a full useful life basis e.g., if the histogram represented
400 miles, and full useful life was 100,000 miles; all histogram time
entries would be multiplied by 250 (100000/400).
Total te = The equivalent time (in hours) to age the
catalyst at the temperature of Tr on the catalyst aging
bench using the catalyst aging cycle to produce the

same amount of deterioration experienced by the catalyst due to thermal
deactivation over the vehicle's full useful life.
te for a bin = The equivalent time (in hours) to age the
catalyst at the temperature of Tr on the catalyst aging
bench using the catalyst aging cycle to produce the same amount of
deterioration experienced by the catalyst due to thermal deactivation
at the temperature bin of Tv over the vehicle's full useful
life.
Tr = The effective reference temperature (in [deg]K) of the
catalyst on the catalyst bench run on the bench aging cycle. The
effective temperature is the constant temperature that would result in
the same amount of aging as the various temperatures experienced during
the bench aging cycle.
Tv = The mid-point temperature (in [deg]K) of the
temperature bin of the vehicle on-road catalyst temperature histogram.

    (4) Effective reference temperature on the SBC. The effective
reference temperature of the standard bench cycle (SBC) is determined
for the actual catalyst system design and actual aging bench which will
be used using the following procedures:
    (i) Measure time-at-temperature data in the catalyst system on the
catalyst aging bench following the SBC.
    (A) Catalyst temperature must be measured at the highest
temperature location of the hottest catalyst in the system.
Alternatively, the temperature may be measured at another location
providing that it is adjusted to represent the temperature measured at
the hottest location using good engineering judgement.
    (B) Catalyst temperature must be measured at a minimum rate of one
hertz (one measurement per second) during at least 20 minutes of bench
aging.
    (C) The measured catalyst temperature results must be tabulated
into a histogram with temperature bins of no larger than 10[deg] C.
    (ii) The BAT equation must be used to calculate the effective
reference temperature by iterative changes to the reference temperature
(Tr) until the calculated aging time equals the actual time
represented in the catalyst temperature histogram. The resulting
temperature is the effective reference temperature on the SBC for that
catalyst system and aging bench.
    (5) Catalyst Aging Bench. The manufacturer must design, using good
engineering judgement, a catalyst aging bench that follows the SBC and
delivers the appropriate exhaust flow, exhaust constituents, and
exhaust temperature to the face of the catalyst.
    (i) A manufacturer may use the criteria and equipment discussed in
Appendix VIII to part 86 to develop its catalyst aging bench without
prior Agency approval. The manufacturer may use another design that
results in equivalent or superior results with advance Agency approval.
    (ii) All bench aging equipment and procedures must record
appropriate information (such as measured A/F ratios and time-at-
temperature in the catalyst) to assure that sufficient aging has
actually occurred.
    (6) Required Testing. If a manufacturer is electing to calculate a
DF (as discussed in paragraph (f)(1) of this section), then it must
conduct at least two FTP emissions tests on the DDV before bench aging
of emission control hardware and at least two FTP emission tests on the
DDV after the bench-aged emission hardware is re-installed. Additional
testing may be conducted by the manufacturer using good engineering
judgement.
    (e) Additional durability procedures--(1) Whole vehicle durability
procedures. A manufacturer may use either a customized SRC or an
alternative road cycle for the required durability demonstration, with
prior EPA approval.
    (i) Customized SRC. A customized SRC is the SRC run for a different
number of miles and/or using a different mileage accumulation fuel with
higher levels of certain compounds that may lead to catalyst poisoning,
such as phosphorus, sulfur and lead, than specified in paragraph
(c)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (ii) Alternative Road Cycle. An alternative cycle is a whole
vehicle mileage accumulation cycle that uses a different speed-versus-
time trace than the SRC, conducted for either the full useful life
mileage or for less than full useful life mileage. An alternative road
cycle may also include the use of fuel with higher levels of certain
compounds that may lead to catalyst poisoning, such as phosphorus,
sulfur and lead, than specified in paragraph (c)(1)(ii) of this
section.
    (iii) Approval Criteria. The manufacturer must obtain approval from
EPA prior to using a customized/alternative road cycle. EPA may approve
a customized/alternative cycle when the manufacturer demonstrates that
the cycle is expected to achieve the durability program objective of
paragraph (a) of this section for the breadth of vehicles using the
customized/alternative cycle. To obtain approval the manufacturer must
submit all the following information and perform all the following
analyses:
    (A) The manufacturer must supply in-use FTP emission data on past
model year vehicles which are applicable to the vehicle designs it
intends to cover with the customized/alternative cycle.
    (1) The amount of in-use emission data required to demonstrate the
effectiveness of a customized/alternative cycle in meeting the
durability objective is based on whether the customized/alternative
cycle is more or less severe than the SRC. In most cases, EPA will
accept a minimum of 20 candidate in-use vehicles tested as-received on
the FTP cycle. If the customized/alternative cycle is significantly
more severe than the SRC, EPA may accept less data. Conversely, if the
customized/alternative cycle is significantly less severe than the SRC,
EPA may require more data, up to a maximum of 30 vehicles.
    (2) This data set must consist of randomly procured vehicles from
actual customer use. The vehicles selected for procurement must cover
the breadth of the vehicles that the manufacturer intends to certify
using the customized/alternative cycle. Vehicles should be procured and
FTP tested in as-received condition under the guidelines of the high
mileage IUVP program (ref: 40 CFR 86.1845-04).
    (3) Manufacturers may use previously generated in-use data from the
CAP 2000 IUVP or the RDP ``reality check'' in-use program as well as
other sources of in-use emissions data for approval under this section.
    (4) Manufacturers must remove unrepresentative data from the data
set using good engineering judgement. The manufacturer must provide EPA
with the data removed from the analysis and a justification for the
removal of that data.
    (5) Manufacturers may supply additional in-use data.
    (B) The manufacturer must submit an analysis which includes a
comparison of the relative stringency of the customized/alternative
cycle to the SRC and a calculated equivalency factor for the cycle.
    (1) The equivalency factor may be determined by an evaluation of
the SRC and the customized/alternative cycle using catalyst time-at-
temperature data from both cycles and the BAT equation to calculate the
required bench aging time of each cycle. The equivalency factor is the
ratio of the aging time on the SRC divided by the aging time on the
alternative cycle.
    (2) If emissions data is available from the SRC, as well as time-
at-temperature data, then that emissions information

may be included in the evaluation of the relative stringency of the two
cycles and the development of the equivalency factor.
    (3) A separate equivalency factor may be determined for each test
group, or test groups may be combined together (using good engineering
judgement) to calculate a single equivalency factor.
    (C) The manufacturer must submit an analysis which evaluates
whether the durability objective will be achieved for the vehicle
designs which will be certified using the customized/alternative cycle.
The analysis must address of the following elements:
    (1) How the durability objective has been achieved using the data
submitted in paragraph (e)(1)(iii)(A) of this section.
    (2) How the durability objective will be achieved for the vehicle
designs which will be covered by the customized/alternative cycle. This
analysis should consider the emissions deterioration impact of the
design differences between the vehicles included in the data set
required in (e)(1)(iii)(A) of this section and the vehicle designs that
the manufacturer intends to certify using the customized/alternative
cycle.
    (2) Bench-aging durability procedures. A manufacturer may use a
customized or alternative bench aging durability procedure for a
required durability demonstration, if approved as described in
paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (vii) of this section. A customized/
alternative bench aging procedure must use vehicle performance data
(such as catalyst temperature) measured on an approved road cycle as
part of the algorithm to calculate bench aging time. The manufacturer
must obtain approval from the Agency prior to using a customized bench
durability procedure.
    (i) The lower control temperature on the SBC may be modified
without prior EPA approval provided that the high control temperature
is set 90 [deg]C above the lower control temperature and an approved
BAT equation is used to calculate bench aging time.
    (ii) The R-factor used in EPA's BAT equation may be determined
experimentally using EPA's standard procedures (specified in Appendix
IX of this part) without prior EPA approval. Other experimental
techniques to calculate the R-factor require advance EPA approval. To
obtain approval, the manufacturer must demonstrate that the calculated
bench aging time results in the same (or larger) amount of emission
deterioration as the associated road cycle.
    (iii) The A-factor used in EPA's BAT equation may be modified,
using good engineering judgement without prior EPA approval, to ensure
that the modified durability process will achieve the durability
objective of paragraph (a) of this section.
    (iv) Bench aging may be conducted using fuel with additional
compounds that may lead to catalyst poisoning, such as phosphorus,
sulfur or lead, without prior EPA approval. A manufacturer using fuel
with these additional compounds may either calculate a new R-factor or
A-factor to assure that the durability objective of paragraph (a) of
this section is properly achieved regardless of the use of worst-case
fuel, in which case the approval criteria for those changes would
apply.
    (v) An approved customized/alternative road cycle may be used to
develop catalyst temperature histograms for use in the BAT equation
without additional EPA approval beyond the original approval necessary
to use that cycle for mileage accumulation.
    (vi) A different bench cycle than the SBC may be used during bench
aging with prior EPA approval. To obtain approval the manufacturer must
demonstrate that bench aging for the appropriate time on the new bench
cycle provides the same or larger amount of emission deterioration as
the associated road cycle.
    (vii) A different method to calculate bench aging time may be used
with prior EPA approval. To obtain approval the manufacturer must
demonstrate that bench aging for the time calculated by the alternative
method results in the same or larger amount of emission deterioration
as the associated road cycle.
    (f) Use of deterioration program to determine compliance with the
standard. A manufacturer may select from two methods for using the
results of the deterioration program to determine compliance with the
applicable emission standards. Either a deterioration factor (DF) is
calculated and applied to the emission data vehicle (EDV) emission
results or aged components are installed on the EDV prior to emission
testing.
    (1) Deterioration factors.
    (i) Deterioration factors are calculated using all FTP emission
test data generated during the durability testing program except as
noted:
    (A) Multiple tests at a given mileage point are averaged together
unless the same number of tests are conducted at each mileage point.
    (B) Before and after maintenance test results are averaged
together.
    (C) Zero-mile test results are excluded from the calculation.
    (D) Total hydrocarbon (THC) test points beyond the 50,000-mile
(useful life) test point are excluded from the intermediate useful life
deterioration factor calculation.
    (E) A procedure may be employed to identify and remove from the DF
calculation those test results determined to be statistical outliers
providing that the outlier procedure is consistently applied to all
vehicles and data points and is approved in advance by the
Administrator.
    (ii) The deterioration factor must be based on a linear regression,
or another regression technique approved in advance by the
Administrator. The deterioration must be a multiplicative or additive
factor. Separate factors will be calculated for each regulated emission
constituent and for the full and intermediate useful life periods as
applicable. Separate DF's are calculated for each durability group
except as provided in Sec.  86.1839.
    (A) A multiplicative DF will be calculated by taking the ratio of
the full or intermediate useful life mileage level, as appropriate
(rounded to four decimal places), divided by the stabilized mileage
(reference Sec.  86.1831-01(c), e.g., 4000-mile) level (rounded to four
decimal places) from the regression analysis. The result must be
rounded to three-decimal places of accuracy. The rounding required in
this paragraph must be conducted in accordance with Sec.  86.1837.
Calculated DF values of less than one must be changed to one for the
purposes of this paragraph.
    (B) An additive DF will be calculated to be the difference between
the full or intermediate useful life mileage level (as appropriate)
minus the stabilized mileage (reference Sec.  86.1831-01(c), e.g. 4000-
mile) level from the regression analysis. The full useful life
regressed emission value, the stabilized mileage regressed emission
value, and the DF result must be rounded to the same precision and
using the same procedures as the raw emission results according to the
provisions of Sec.  86.1837-01. Calculated DF values of less than zero
must be changed to zero for the purposes of this paragraph.
    (iii) The DF calculated by these procedures will be used for
determining full and intermediate useful life compliance with FTP
exhaust emission standards, SFTP exhaust emission standards, and cold
CO emission standards. At the manufacturer's option and using
procedures approved by the Administrator, a separate DF may be
calculated exclusively using cold CO test data to determine compliance
with cold CO emission standards. Also at the manufacturer's option and
using procedures approved by the Administrator, a separate DF may be

calculated exclusively using US06 and/or air conditioning (SC03) test
data to determine compliance with the SFTP emission standards.
    (2) Installation of aged components on emission data vehicles. For
full and intermediate useful life compliance determination, the
manufacturer may elect to install aged components on an EDV prior to
emission testing rather than applying a deterioration factor. Different
sets of components may be aged for full and intermediate useful life
periods. Components must be aged using an approved durability procedure
that complies with paragraph (b) of this section. The list of
components to be aged and subsequently installed on the EDV must
selected using good engineering judgement.
    (g) Emission component durability. [Reserved] For guidance see 40
CFR 86.1823-01(e).
    (h) Application of the durability procedure to future durability
groups. The manufacturer may apply a durability procedure approved
under paragraphs (c), (d) or (e) of this section to a durability group,
including durability groups in future model years, if the durability
process will achieve the objective of paragraph (a) of this section for
that durability group. The manufacturer must use good engineering
judgment in determining the applicability of an approved durability
procedure to a durability group.
    (1) Modifications to a durability procedure.
    (i) Standard durability procedures. The manufacturer may modify a
standard durability procedure (allowed in paragraphs (c) or (d) of this
section) by increasing or decreasing the number of miles run on the SRC
to represent full or intermediate useful life emissions deterioration
or by changing the A-Factor in the BAT equation for a bench aging,
using good engineering judgment, to ensure that the modified procedure
will achieve the objective of paragraph (a) of this section for that
durability group.
    (ii) Customized/Alternative durability procedures. The manufacturer
may modify an alternative/customized durability procedure approved
under the provisions of paragraph (e) of this section, using good
engineering judgment, for the purposes of ensuring that the modified
procedure will achieve the objective of paragraph (a) of this section
for that durability group.
    (2) The manufacturer must notify the Administrator of its
determination to use an approved (or modified) durability procedure on
particular test groups and durability groups prior to, or concurrently
with, its submission of the Application for Certification for the
affected test groups (notification at an annual preview meeting
scheduled before the manufacturer begins certification activities for
the model year is preferred).
    (3) Prior to certification, the Administrator may reject the
manufacturer's determination in paragraph (h) of this section to apply
an approved or modified durability procedure for a durability group or
test group if:
    (i) It is not made using good engineering judgment,
    (ii) It fails to properly consider data collected under the
provisions of Sec. Sec.  86.1845-04, 86.1846-01, and 86.1847-01 or
other information, or
    (iii) The Administrator determines that the durability procedure
has not been shown to achieve the objective of paragraph (a) of this
section for particular test groups which the manufacturer plans to
cover with the durability procedure.
    (i) Evaluation of the certification durability procedures based on
in-use emissions data.
    (1) Manufacturers must use the information gathered from the IUVP,
as well as other sources of in-use emissions data, to periodically
review whether the durability procedure it employs achieves the
objective specified in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (2) Required analysis of a manufacturer's approved durability
procedures.
    (i) In addition to any periodic reviews under paragraph (i)(1) of
this section, a manufacturer must conduct a review of whether the
durability procedure it employs achieves the durability objective
specified in paragraph (a) of this section when the criteria for
additional testing specified in Sec.  86.1846 (b) are activated.
    (ii) These criteria are evaluated independently for all applicable
FTP emission constituents.
    (iii) This analysis must be performed for each test group certified
by the manufacturer.
    (iv) These procedures apply to the EPA standard durability
procedures discussed in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section as well
as durability procedures approved under paragraph (e) of this section,
including modifications under paragraph (h) of this section.
    (v) The analysis must be submitted to EPA no later than 60 days
after the submission of the IUVP data report specified in Sec.
86.1847(f).
    (3) EPA may require a manufacturer to perform an analysis as
described in paragraph (i)(2) of this section if EPA is concerned that
the manufacturer's durability procedure may not achieve the durability
objective of paragraph (a) of this section.
    (j) If, based on the analysis required in paragraph (i) of this
section and/or any other information, EPA determines that the
durability procedure does not achieve the durability objective of
paragraph (a) of this section, EPA may withdraw approval to use the
durability procedure or condition approval on modifications to the
durability procedure. Such withdrawal or conditional approval will
apply to future applications for certification and to the portion of
the manufacturer's product line (or the entire product line) that the
Administrator determines to be affected. Prior to such a withdrawal the
Administrator will give the manufacturer a preliminary notice at least
60 days prior to the final decision. During this period, the
manufacturer may submit technical discussion, statistical analyses,
additional data, or other information which is relevant to the
decision. The Administrator will consider all information submitted by
the deadline before reaching a final decision.
    (k) If EPA withdraws approval, under the provisions of paragraph
(j) of this section, for a durability procedure approved under the
provisions of paragraphs (c) and/or (d) of this section, the following
procedures apply:
    (1) The manufacturer must select one of the following options for
future applications for certification for the applicable portion of the
manufacturers product-line affect by the Agency's decision:
    (i) Increase future DFs calculated using the applicable durability
process by the average percent-difference between certification levels
and IUVP data; or
    (ii) Increase the miles driven on the SRC or the aging time
calculated by the BAT equation by the average percent-difference
between certification levels and IUVP data, or
    (iii) The manufacturer may obtain approval for a new customized
durability process, as allowed in paragraph (e) of this section, that
has been demonstrated to meet the durability objective.
    (2) If EPA's decision to withdraw approval under the provisions of
paragraph (j) of this section is based on fewer than 20 tests, the
Administrator may require a smaller adjustment than specified in
paragraph (k)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section.
    (l) Any manufacturer may request a hearing on the Administrator's

withdrawal of approval in paragraphs (j) or (k) of this section. The
request must be in writing and must include a statement specifying the
manufacturer's objections to the Administrator's determinations, and
data in support of such objection. If, after review of the request and
supporting data, the Administrator finds that the request raises a
substantial factual issue, she/he must provide the manufacturer a
hearing in accordance with Sec.  86.1853-01 with respect to such issue.

0
6. Add Sec.  86.1824-08 to subpart S to read as follows:

Sec.  86.1824-08  Durability demonstration procedures for evaporative
emissions.

    This section applies to gasoline-, methanol-, liquefied petroleum
gas-, and natural gas-fueled 2008 and later model year vehicles which
meet the applicability provisions of Sec.  86.1801. Optionally, a
manufacturer may elect to use this section for earlier model year
gasoline-, methanol-, liquefied petroleum gas-, and natural gas-fueled
vehicles which meet the applicability provisions of Sec.  86.1801.
Eligible small volume manufacturers or small volume test groups may
optionally meet the requirements of Sec. Sec.  86.1838-01 and 86.1826-
01 in lieu of the requirements of this section. A separate durability
demonstration is required for each evaporative/refueling family.
    (a) Durability program objective. The durability program must
predict an expected in-use emission deterioration rate and emission
level that effectively represents a significant majority of the
distribution of emission levels and deterioration in actual use over
the full useful life of candidate in-use vehicles of each vehicle
design which uses the durability program.
    (b) Required durability demonstration. Manufacturers must conduct a
durability demonstration which satisfies the provisions of either
paragraph (c), (d), or (e) of this section.
    (c) Whole vehicle evaporative durability demonstration.
    (1) Mileage accumulation must be conducted using the SRC or any
road cycle approved under the provisions of Sec.  86.1823(e)(1).
    (2) Mileage accumulation must be conducted for either:
    (i) The applicable full useful life mileage period specified in
Sec.  86.1805, or
    (ii) At least 75 percent of the full useful life mileage. In which
case, the manufacturer must calculate a df calculated according to the
procedures of paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this section, except that the DF
must be based upon a line projected to the full-useful life mileage
using the upper 80 percent statistical confidence limit calculated from
the emission data.
    (3) The manufacturer must conduct at least one evaporative emission
test at each of the five different mileage points selected using good
engineering judgement. The required testing must include testing at
5,000 miles and at the highest mileage point run during mileage
accumulation (e.g. the full useful life mileage). Additional testing
may be conducted by the manufacturer using good engineering judgement.
The manufacturer may select to run either the 2-day and/or 3-day
evaporative test at each test point using good engineering judgement.
    (d) Bench aging evaporative durability procedures. Manufacturers
may use bench procedures designed, using good engineering judgement, to
evaluate the emission deterioration of evaporative control systems.
Manufacturers may base the bench procedure on an evaluation the
following potential causes of evaporative emission deterioration:
    (1) Cycling of canister loading due to diurnal and refueling
events,
    (2) Use of various commercially available fuels, including the Tier
2 requirement to include alcohol fuel;
    (3) Vibration of components;
    (4) Deterioration of hoses, etc. due to environmental conditions;
and
    (5) Deterioration of fuel cap due to wear.
    (e) Combined whole-vehicle and bench-aging programs. Manufacturers
may combine the results of whole vehicle aging and bench aging
procedures using good engineering judgement.
    (f) Fuel requirements.
    (1) For gasoline fueled vehicles certified to meet the evaporative
emission standards set forth in Sec.  86.1811-04(e)(1), any mileage
accumulation method for evaporative emissions must employ gasoline fuel
for the entire mileage accumulation period which contains ethanol in,
at least, the highest concentration permissible in gasoline under
federal law and that is commercially available in any state in the
United States. Unless otherwise approved by the Administrator, the
manufacturer must determine the appropriate ethanol concentration by
selecting the highest legal concentration commercially available during
the calendar year before the one in which the manufacturer begins its
mileage accumulation. The manufacturer must also provide information
acceptable to the Administrator to indicate that the mileage
accumulation method is of sufficient design, duration and severity to
stabilize the permeability of all non-metallic fuel and evaporative
system components to the mileage accumulation fuel constituents.
    (2) For flexible-fueled, dual-fueled, multi-fueled, ethanol-fueled
and methanol-fueled vehicles certified to meet the evaporative emission
standards set forth in Sec.  86.1811-04(e)(1), any mileage accumulation
method must employ fuel for the entire mileage accumulation period
which the vehicle is designed to use and which the Administrator
determines will have the greatest impact upon the permeability of
evaporative and fuel system components. The manufacturer must also
provide information acceptable to the Administrator to indicate that
the mileage accumulation method is of sufficient design, duration and
severity to stabilize the permeability of all non-metallic fuel and
evaporative system components to mileage accumulation fuel
constituents.
    (3) A manufacturer may use other methods, based upon good
engineering judgment, to meet the requirements of paragraphs (f)(1) and
(2) of this section, as applicable. These methods must be approved in
advance by the Administrator and meet the objectives of paragraphs
(f)(1) and (2) of this section, as applicable: to provide assurance
that the permeability of all non-metallic fuel and evaporative system
components will not lead to evaporative emission standard exceedance
under sustained exposure to commercially available alcohol-containing
fuels for the useful life of the vehicle.
    (g) Calculation of a deterioration factor. The manufacturer must
calculate a deterioration factor which is applied to the evaporative
emission results of the emission data vehicles. The deterioration
factor must be based on a linear regression, or an other regression
technique approved in advance by the Administrator. The DF will be
calculated to be the difference between the full life mileage
evaporative level minus the stabilized mileage (e.g., 4000-mile)
evaporative level from the regression analysis. The full useful life
regressed emission value, the stabilized mileage regressed emission
value, and the DF result must be rounded to the same precision and
using the same procedures as the raw emission results according to the
provisions of Sec.  86.1837-01. Calculated DF values of less than zero
must be changed to zero for the purposes of this paragraph.
    (h) Emission component durability. [Reserved] For guidance see 40
CFR 86.1824-01(d).
    (i) If EPA determines based on IUVP data or other information that
the

durability procedure does not achieve the durability objective of
paragraph (a) of this section, EPA may withdraw approval to use the
durability procedure or condition approval on modifications to the
durability procedure. Such withdrawal or conditional approval will
apply to future applications for certification and to the portion of
the manufacturer's product line (or the entire product line) that the
Administrator determines to be affected. Prior to such a withdrawal the
Administrator will give the manufacturer a preliminary notice at least
60 days prior to the final decision. During this period, the
manufacturer may submit technical discussion, statistical analyses,
additional data, or other information which is relevant to the
decision. The Administrator will consider all information submitted by
the deadline before reaching a final decision.
    (j) Any manufacturer may request a hearing on the Administrator's
withdrawal of approval in paragraph (i) of this section. The request
must be in writing and must include a statement specifying the
manufacturer's objections to the Administrator's determinations, and
data in support of such objection. If, after review of the request and
supporting data, the Administrator finds that the request raises a
substantial factual issue, she/he must provide the manufacturer a
hearing in accordance with Sec.  86.1853-01 with respect to such issue.

0
7. Add a new Sec.  86.1825-08 to Subpart S to read as follows:

Sec.  86.1825-08  Durability demonstration procedures for refueling
emissions.

    This section applies to 2008 and later model year light-duty
vehicles, light-duty trucks, and heavy-duty vehicles which are
certified under light-duty rules as allowed under the provisions of
Sec.  86.1801-01(c)(1) which are subject to refueling loss emission
compliance. Optionally, a manufacturer may elect to use this section
for earlier model year light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and
heavy-duty vehicles which are certified under light-duty rules as
allowed under the provisions of Sec.  86.1801-01(c)(1) which are
subject to refueling loss emission compliance. Refer to the provisions
of Sec. Sec.  86.1811, 86.1812, 86.1813, 86.1814, and 86.1815 to
determine applicability of the refueling standards to different classes
of vehicles for various model years. Diesel fuel vehicles may qualify
for an exemption to the requirements of this section under the
provisions of Sec.  86.1810.
    (a) Durability program objective. The durability program must
predict an expected in-use emission deterioration rate and emission
level that effectively represents a significant majority of the
distribution of emission levels and deterioration in actual use over
the full useful life of candidate in-use vehicles of each vehicle
design which uses the durability program.
    (b) Required durability demonstration. Manufacturers must conduct a
durability demonstration which satisfies the provisions of either
paragraph (c), (d), or (e) of this section.
    (c) Whole vehicle refueling durability demonstration. The following
procedures must be used when conducting a whole vehicle durability
demonstration:
    (1) Mileage accumulation must be conducted using the SRC or a road
cycle approved under the provisions of Sec.  86.1823(e)(1).
    (2) Mileage accumulation must be conducted for either:
    (i) The applicable full useful life mileage period specified in
Sec.  86.1805, or
    (ii) At least 75 percent of the full useful life mileage. In which
case, the manufacturer must calculate a df calculated according to the
procedures of paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this section, except that the DF
must be based upon a line projected to the full-useful life mileage
using the upper 80 percent statistical confidence limit calculated from
the emission data.
    (3) The manufacturer must conduct at least one refueling emission
test at each of the five different mileage points selected using good
engineering judgement. The required testing must include testing at
5,000 miles and at the highest mileage point run during mileage
accumulation (e.g. the full useful life mileage). Additional testing
may be conducted by the manufacturer using good engineering judgement.
    (d) Bench aging refueling durability procedures. Manufacturers may
use bench procedures designed, using good engineering judgement, to
evaluate the emission deterioration of evaporative/refueling control
systems. Manufacturers may base the bench procedure on an evaluation
the following potential causes of evaporative/refueling emission
deterioration:
    (1) Cycling of canister loading due to diurnal and refueling
events;
    (2) Use of various commercially available fuels, including the Tier
2 requirement to include alcohol fuel;
    (3) Vibration of components;
    (4) Deterioration of hoses, etc. due to environmental conditions;
and
    (5) Deterioration of fuel cap due to wear.
    (e) Combined whole-vehicle and bench-aging programs. Manufacturers
may combine the results of whole vehicle aging and bench aging
procedures using good engineering judgement.
    (f) [Reserved]
    (g) Calculation of a deterioration factor. The manufacturer must
calculate a deterioration factor which is applied to the evaporative
emission results of the emission data vehicles. The deterioration
factor must be based on a linear regression, or an other regression
technique approved in advance by the Administrator. The DF will be
calculated to be the difference between the full life mileage
evaporative level minus the stabilized mileage (e.g., 4000-mile)
evaporative level from the regression analysis. The full useful life
regressed emission value, the stabilized mileage regressed emission
value, and the DF result must be rounded to the same precision and
using the same procedures as the raw emission results according to the
provisions of Sec.  86.1837-01. Calculated DF values of less than zero
must be changed to zero for the purposes of this paragraph.
    (h) Emission component durability. [Reserved] For guidance see 40
CFR 86.1845-01 (e).
    (i) If EPA determines based on IUVP data or other information that
the durability procedure does not achieve the durability objective of
paragraph (a) of this section, EPA may withdraw approval to use the
durability procedure or condition approval on modifications to the
durability procedure. Such withdrawal or conditional approval will
apply to future applications for certification and to the portion of
the manufacturer's product line (or the entire product line) that the
Administrator determines to be affected. Prior to such a withdrawal the
Administrator will give the manufacturer a preliminary notice at least
60 days prior to the final decision. During this period, the
manufacturer may submit technical discussion, statistical analyses,
additional data, or other information which is relevant to the
decision. The Administrator will consider all information submitted by
the deadline before reaching a final decision.
    (j) Any manufacturer may request a hearing on the Administrator's
withdrawal of approval in paragraph (i) of this section. The request
must be in writing and must include a statement specifying the
manufacturer's objections to the Administrator's determinations, and
data in support of such objection.

If, after review of the request and supporting data, the Administrator
finds that the request raises a substantial factual issue, she/he must
provide the manufacturer a hearing in accordance with Sec.  86.1853-01
with respect to such issue.

0
8. Amend Sec.  86.1826-01 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b)(3)(iv) to
read as follows:

Sec.  86.1826-01  Assigned deterioration factors for small volume
manufacturers and small volume test groups.

    (a) Applicability. This program is an option available to small
volume manufacturers certified under the small volume manufacturer
provisions of Sec.  86.1838-01(b)(1) and small volume test groups
certified under the small volume test group provisions of Sec.
86.1838-01(b)(2). Manufacturers may elect to use these procedures in
lieu of the requirements of Sec. Sec.  86.1823, 86.1824, and 86.1825 of
this subpart.
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iv) The manufacturer must develop either deterioration factors or
aged components to use on EDV testing by generating durability data in
accordance with Sec. Sec.  86.1823, 86.1824, and/or 86.1825 on a
minimum of 25 percent of the manufacturer's projected sales (based on
durability groups) that is equipped with unproven emission control
systems.
* * * * *

0
9. Amend Sec.  86.1829-01 by revising paragraphs (a)(3) and (d)(1) to
read as follows:

Sec.  86.1829-01  Durability and emission testing requirements;
waivers.

    (a) * * *
    (3) The DDV shall be tested and accumulate service mileage
according to the provisions of Sec. Sec.  86.1831-01, 86.1823, 86.1824
and 86.1825. Small volume manufacturers and small volume test groups
may optionally meet the requirements of Sec.  86.1838-01.
* * * * *
    (d)(1) Beginning in the 2004 model year, the exhaust emissions must
be measured from all LDV/T exhaust emission data vehicles tested in
accordance with the federal Highway Fuel Economy Test (HWFET; 40 CFR
part 600, subpart B). The oxides of nitrogen emissions measured during
such tests must represent the full useful life emissions in accordance
with Sec.  86.1823-08(f) and subsequent model year provisions. Those
results are then rounded and compared with the applicable emission
standard in Sec.  86.1811-04. All data obtained from the testing
required under this paragraph (d) must be reported in accordance with
the procedures for reporting other exhaust emission data required under
this subpart.
* * * * *

0
10. Amend Sec.  86.1830-01 by revising paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2),
(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3) and (c)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  86.1830-01  Acceptance of vehicles for emission testing.

* * * * *
    (b) Special provisions for durability data vehicles. (1) For DDV's,
the mileage at all test points shall be within 250 miles of the
scheduled mileage point as required under Sec.  86.1823-08(c)(3).
Manufacturers may exceed the 250 mile upper limit if there are
logistical reasons for the deviation and the manufacturer determines
that the deviation will not affect the representativeness of the
durability demonstration.
    (2) For DDV's aged using the standard or a customized/alternative
whole-vehicle cycle, all emission-related hardware and software must be
installed and operational during all mileage accumulation after the
5000-mile test point.
* * * * *
    (c) Special provisions for emission data vehicles. (1) All EDV's
shall have at least the minimum number of miles accumulated to achieve
stabilized emission results according to the provisions of Sec.
86.1831-01(c).
    (2) Within a durability group, the manufacturer may alter any
emission data vehicle (or other vehicles such as current or previous
model year emission data vehicles, running change vehicles, fuel
economy data vehicles, and development vehicles) in lieu of building a
new test vehicle providing that the modification will not impact the
representativeness of the vehicle's test results. Manufacturers shall
use good engineering judgment in making such determinations.
Development vehicles which were used to develop the calibration
selected for emission data testing may not be used as the EDV for that
configuration. Vehicles from outside the durability group may be
altered with advance approval of the Administrator.
    (3) Components used to reconfigure EDV's under the provisions of
paragraph (c)(2) of this section must be appropriately aged if
necessary to achieve representative emission results. Manufacturers
must determine the need for component aging and the type and amount of
aging required using good engineering judgment.
    (4) Bench-aged hardware may be installed on an EDV for emission
testing as a method of determining certification levels (projected
emission levels at full or intermediate useful life) using bench aging
procedures under the provisions of Sec.  86.1823.

0
11. Amend Sec.  86.1831-01 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (b)(1) to
read as follows:

Sec.  86.1831-01  Mileage accumulation requirements for test vehicles.

    (a) Durability Data Vehicles. (1) The manufacturer must accumulate
mileage on DDV's using the procedures in Sec.  86.1823.
    (b) * * *
    (1) The standard method of mileage accumulation for emission data
vehicles and running change vehicles is mileage accumulation using
either the Standard Road Cycle specified in Appendix V to this part or
the Durability Driving Schedule specified in Appendix IV to this part.
* * * * *

0
12. Amend Sec.  86.1838-01 by revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as
follows:

Sec.  86.1838-01  Small volume manufacturers certification procedures.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) Durability demonstration. Use the provisions of Sec.  86.1826-
01 rather than the requirements of Sec. Sec.  86.1823, 86.1824, and/or
86.1825.
* * * * *

0
13. Amend Sec.  86.1839-01 by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  86.1839-01  Carryover of certification data.

* * * * *
    (b) In lieu of using newly aged hardware on an EDV as allowed under
the provisions of Sec.  86.1823-08(f)(2), a manufacturer may use
similar hardware aged for an EDV previously submitted, provided that
the manufacturer determines that the previously aged hardware
represents a worst case or equivalent rate of deterioration for all
applicable emission constituents for durability demonstration.
0
14. Amend Sec.  86.1841-01 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory
text and (a)(2) and removing and reserving paragraph (a)(3) to read as
follows:

Sec.  86.1841-01  Compliance with emission standards for the purpose of
certification.

    (a) * * *
    (1) If the durability demonstration procedure used by the
manufacturer under the provisions of Sec. Sec.  86.1823, 86.1824, or
86.1825 requires a DF to be calculated, the DF shall be applied to the
official test results determined in Sec.  86.1835-01(c) for each
regulated

emission constituent and for full and intermediate useful life, as
appropriate, using the following procedures:
* * * * *
    (2) If the durability demonstration procedure used by the
manufacturer under the provisions of Sec. Sec.  86.1823, 86.1824, or
86.1825, as applicable, requires testing of the EDV with aged emission
components, the official results of that testing determined under the
provisions of Sec.  86.1835-01(c) shall be rounded to the same level of
precision as the standard for each regulated constituent at full and
intermediate useful life, as appropriate. This rounded emission value
is the certification level for that emission constituent at that useful
life mileage.
    (3) [Reserved]
* * * * *

0
15. Amend Sec.  86.1844-01 by revising paragraph (d)(4) to read as
follows:

Sec.  86.1844-01  Information requirements: Application for
certification and submittal of information upon request.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) Durability information.
    (i) A description of the durability method used to establish useful
life durability, including exhaust and evaporative/refueling emission
deterioration factors as required in Sec. Sec.  86.1823, 86.1824 and
86.1825 when applicable.
    (ii) The equivalency factor required to be calculated in Sec.
1823-06(e)(iii)(B), when applicable.
* * * * *

0
16. Add Appendices V, VII, VIII, and IX to part 86 to read as follows:

Appendix V to Part 86--The Standard Road Cycle (SRC)

    1. The standard road cycle (SRC) is a mileage accumulation cycle
that may be used for any vehicle which is covered by the
applicability provisions of Sec.  86.1801. The vehicle may be run on
a track or on a mileage accumulation dynamometer.
    2. The cycle consists of 7 laps of a 3.7 mile course. The length
of the lap may be changed to accommodate the length of the service-
accumulation track.

                         Description of the SRC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Typical
           Lap                        Description             accel rate
                                                               (MPH/s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................  (start engine) Idle 10 sec......            0
1........................  Mod accel to 30 MPH.............            4
1........................  Cruise at 30 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
1........................  Mod. decel to 20 MPH............           -5
1........................  Mod accel to 30 MPH.............            4
1........................  Cruise at 30 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
1........................  Mod. decel to stop..............           -5
1........................  Idle 5 sec......................            0
1........................  Mod accel to 35 MPH.............            4
1........................  Cruise at 35 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
1........................  Mod. decel to 25 MPH............           -5
1........................  Mod accel to 35 MPH.............            4
1........................  Cruise at 35 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
1........................  Mod. decel to stop..............           -5
--------------------------
2........................  Idle 10 sec.....................            0
2........................  Mod accel to 40 MPH.............            3
2........................  Cruise at 40 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
2........................  Mod. decel to 30 MPH............           -5
2........................  Mod accel to 40 MPH.............            3
2........................  Cruise at 40 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
2........................  Mod. decel to stop..............           -5
2........................  Idle 5 sec......................            0
2........................  Mod accel to 45 MPH.............            3
2........................  Cruise at 45 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
2........................  Mod. decel to 35 MPH............           -5
2........................  Mod accel to 45 MPH.............            3
2........................  Cruise at 45 MPH for \1/4>\ lap.            0
2........................  Mod. decel to stop..............           -5
--------------------------
3........................  Idle 10 sec.....................            0
3........................  Hard accel to 55 MPH............            4
3........................  Cruise at 55 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
3........................  Mod. decel to 45 MPH............           -5
3........................  Mod accel to 55 MPH.............            2
3........................  Cruise at 55 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
3........................  Mod. decel to 45 MPH............           -5
3........................  Mod accel to 60 MPH.............            2
3........................  Cruise at 60 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
3........................  Mod. decel to 50 MPH............           -5
3........................  Mod. accel to 60 MPH............            2
3........................  Cruise at 60 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
3........................  Mod. decel to stop..............           -4
--------------------------
4........................  Idle 10 sec.....................            0
4........................  Hard accel to 80 MPH............            3
4........................  Coastdown to 70 MPH.............           -1
4........................  Cruise at 70 MPH for \1/2\ Lap..            0
4........................  Mod. decel to 50 MPH............           -3

4........................  Mod accel to 65 MPH.............            2
4........................  Cruise at 65 MPH for \1/2\ lap..            0
4........................  Mod. decel to 50 MPH............           -3
--------------------------
5........................  Mod accel to 75 MPH.............            1
5........................  Cruise at 75 MPH for \1/2\ lap..            0
5........................  Mod. decel to 50 MPH............           -3
5........................  Lt. accel to 70 MPH.............            1
5........................  Cruise at 70 MPH for \1/2\ lap..            0
5........................  Mod. decel 50 MPH...............           -3
--------------------------
6........................  Mod accel to 70 MPH.............            2
6........................  Coastdown to 60 MPH.............           -1
6........................  Cruise at 60 MPH for \1/2\ lap..            0
6........................  Mod. decel to 50 MPH............           -4
6........................  Mod. accel to 65 MPH............            1
6........................  Cruise at 65 MPH for \1/2\ lap..            0
6........................  Mod. decel to stop..............           -4
--------------------------
7........................  Idle 45 sec.....................            0
7........................  Hard accel to 55 MPH............            4
7........................  Cruise at 55 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
7........................  Mod. decel to 40 MPH............           -5
7........................  Mod. accel to 55 MPH............            2
7........................  Cruise at 55 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
7........................  Mod. decel to 40 MPH............           -5
7........................  Mod. accel to 50 MPH............            2
7........................  Cruise at 50 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
7........................  Mod. decel to 40 MPH............           -5
7........................  Mod. accel to 50 MPH............            2
7........................  Cruise at 50 MPH for \1/4\ lap..            0
7........................  Mod. decel to stop..............           -5
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The standard road cycle is represented graphically in the following
figure:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17JA06.066

* * * * *

Appendix VII to Part 86--Standard Bench Cycle (SBC)

    1. The standard bench aging durability procedures [Ref. Sec.
86.1823-08(d)] consist of aging a catalyst-oxygen-sensor system on
an aging bench which follows the standard bench cycle (SBC)
described in this appendix.
    2. The SBC requires use of an aging bench with an engine as the
source of feed gas for the catalyst.
    3. The SBC is a 60-second cycle which is repeated as necessary
on the aging bench to conduct aging for the required period of time.
The SBC is defined based on the catalyst temperature, engine air/
fuel (A/F) ratio, and the amount of secondary air injection which is
added in front of the first catalyst.

Catalyst Temperature Control

    1. Catalyst temperature shall be measured in the catalyst bed at
the location where the highest temperature occurs in the hottest
catalyst. Alternatively, the feed gas temperature may be measured
and converted to catalyst bed temperature using a linear transform
calculated from correlation data collected on the catalyst design
and aging bench to be used in the aging process.
    2. Control the catalyst temperature at stoichiometric operation
(01 to 40 seconds on the cycle) to a minimum of 800 [deg]C (< plus-
minus> 10 [deg]C) by selecting the appropriate Engine speed, load,
and spark timing for the engine. Control the maximum catalyst
temperature that occurs during the cycle to 890 [deg]C (
10 [deg]C) by selecting the appropriate A/F ratio of the engine
during the ``rich'' phase described in the table below.
    3. If a low control temperature other than 800 [deg]C is
utilized, the high control temperature shall be 90 [deg]C higher
than the low control temperature.

                                           Standard Bench Cycle (SBC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Secondary air
           Time  (seconds)                               Engine air/fuel ratio                       injection
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
01-40................................  14.7 (stoichiometric, with load, spark timing, and engine            None
                                        speed controlled to achieve a minimum catalyst
                                        temperature of 800 [deg]C).
41-45................................  ``Rich'' (A/F ratio selected to achieve a maximum                    None
                                        catalyst temperature over the entire cycle of 890
                                        [deg]C, or 90[deg] higher than low control temperature).
46-55................................  ``Rich'' (A/F ratio selected to achieve a maximum              3% (< plus-
                                        catalyst temperature over the entire cycle of 890           minus> 0.1%)
                                        [deg]C, or 90[deg] higher than low control temperature).
56--60...............................  14.7 (stoichiometric, same load, spark timing, and engine      3% (< plus-
                                        speed as used in the 01-40 sec period of the cycle).        minus> 0.1%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17JA06.067

Appendix VIII to Part 86--Aging Bench Equipment and Procedures

    This appendix provides specifications for standard aging bench
equipment and aging procedures which may be used to conduct bench
aging durability under the provisions of Sec.  86.1823-08.

1. Aging Bench Configuration

    The aging bench must provide the appropriate exhaust flow rate,
temperature, air-fuel ratio, exhaust constituents and secondary air
injection at the inlet face of the catalyst.
    a. The EPA standard aging bench consists of an engine, engine
controller, and engine dynamometer. Other configurations may be
acceptable (e.g. whole vehicle on a dynamometer, or a burner that
provides the correct exhaust conditions), as long as the catalyst
inlet conditions and control features specified in this appendix are
met.
    b. A single aging bench may have the exhaust flow split into
several streams providing that each exhaust stream meets the
requirements of this appendix. If the bench has more than one
exhaust stream, multiple catalyst systems may be aged
simultaneously.

2. Fuel and Oil

    The fuel used by the engine shall comply with the mileage
accumulation fuel provisions of Sec.  86.113 for the applicable fuel
type (e.g., gasoline or diesel fuel). The oil used in the engine
shall be representative of commercial oils and selected using good
engineering judgement.

3. Exhaust System Installation

    a. The entire catalyst(s)-plus-oxygen-sensor(s) system, together
with all exhaust piping which connects these components, [the
``catalyst system''] will be installed on the bench. For engines
with multiple exhaust streams (such as some V6 and V8 engines), each
bank of the exhaust system will be installed separately on the
bench.
    b. For exhaust systems that contain multiple in-line catalysts,
the entire catalyst system including all catalysts, all oxygen
sensors and the associated exhaust piping will be installed as a
unit for aging. Alternatively, each individual catalyst may be
separately aged for the appropriate period of time.

4. Temperature Measurement

    Catalyst temperature shall be measured using a thermocouple
placed in the catalyst bed at the location where the highest
temperature occurs in the hottest catalyst (typically this occurs
approximately one-inch behind the front face of the first catalyst
at its longitudinal axis). Alternatively, the feed gas temperature
just before the catalyst inlet face may be measured and converted to
catalyst bed temperature using a linear transform calculated from
correlation data collected on the catalyst design and aging bench to
be used in the aging process. The catalyst temperature must be
stored digitally at the speed of 1 hertz (one measurement per
second).

5. Air/Fuel Measurement

    Provisions must be made for the measurement of the air/fuel (A/
F) ratio (such as a wide-range oxygen sensor) as close as possible
to the catalyst inlet and outlet flanges. The information from these
sensors must be stored digitally at the speed of 1 hertz (one
measurement per second).

6. Exhaust Flow Balance

    Provisions must be made to assure that the proper amount of
exhaust (measured in grams/second at stoichiometry, with a tolerance
of 5 grams/second) flows through each catalyst system
that is being aged on the bench. The proper flow rate is determined
based upon the exhaust flow that would occur in the original
vehicle's engine at the steady state engine speed and load selected
for the bench aging in paragraph (7).

7. Setup

    a. The engine speed, load, and spark timing are selected to
achieve a catalyst bed temperature of 800 [deg]C ( 10
[deg]C) at steady-state stoichiometric operation.
    b. The air injection system is set to provide the necessary air
flow to produce 3.0% oxygen ( 0.1%) in the steady-state
stoichiometric exhaust stream just in front of the first catalyst. A
typical reading at the upstream A/F measurement point (required in
paragraph 5) is lambda 1.16 (which is approximately 3% oxygen).
    c. With the air injection on, set the ``Rich'' A/F ratio to
produce a catalyst bed temperature of 890 [deg]C ( 10
[deg]C). A typical A/F value for this step is lambda 0.94
(approximately 2% CO).

8. Aging Cycle

    The standard bench aging procedures use the standard bench cycle
(SBC) which is described in Appendix VII to Part 86. The SBC is
repeated until the amount of aging calculated from the bench aging
time (BAT) equation [ref. Sec.  86.1823-08 (d)(3)] is achieved.

9. Quality Assurance

    a. The temperatures and A/F ratio information that is required
to be measured in paragraphs (4) and (5) shall be reviewed
periodically (at least every 50 hours) during aging. Necessary
adjustments shall be made to assure that the SBC is being
appropriately followed throughout the aging process.
    b. After the aging has been completed, the catalyst time-at-
temperature collected during the aging process shall be tabulated
into a histogram with temperature bins of no larger than 10 [deg]C.
The BAT equation and the calculated effective reference temperature
for the aging cycle [ref. Sec.  86.1823-08(d)] will be used to
determine if the appropriate amount of thermal aging of the catalyst
has in fact occurred. Bench aging will be extended if the thermal
effect of the calculated aging time is not at least 95% of the
target thermal aging.

10. Startup and Shutdown

    Care should be taken to assure that the maximum catalyst
temperature for rapid deterioration (e.g., 1050 [deg]C) does not
occur during startup or shutdown. Special low temperature startup
and shutdown procedures may be used to alleviate this concern.

Appendix IX to Part 86--Experimentally Determining the R-Factor for
Bench Aging Durability Procedures

    The R-Factor is the catalyst thermal reactivity coefficient used
in the bench aging time (BAT) equation [Ref. Sec.  86.1826-
08(d)(3)]. Manufacturers may determine the value of R experimentally
using the following procedures.
    1. Using the applicable bench cycle and aging bench hardware,
age several catalysts (minimum of 3 of the same catalyst design) at
different control temperatures between the normal operating
temperature and the damage limit temperature. Measure emissions (or
catalyst inefficiency (1-catalyst efficiency)) for each constituent.
Assure that the final testing yields data between one- and two-times
the standard.
    2. Estimate the value of R and calculate the effective reference
temperature (Tr) for the bench aging cycle for each
control temperature according to the procedure described in Sec.
86.1826-08(d)(4).
    3. Plot emissions (or catalyst inefficiency) versus aging time
for each catalyst. Calculate the least-squared best-fit line through
the data. For the data set to be useful for this purpose the data
should have an approximately common intercept between 0 and 4000
miles. See the following graph for an example.
    4. Calculate the slope of the best-fit line for each aging
temperature.
    5. Plot the natural log (ln) of the slope of each best-fit line
(determined in step 4) along the vertical axis, versus the inverse
of aging temperature (1/(aging temperature, deg K)) along the
horizontal axis, Calculate the least-squared best-fit lines through
the data. The slope of the line is the R-factor. See the following
graph for an example.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17JA06.068

    6. Compare the R-factor to the initial value that was used in
Step 2. If the calculated R-factor differs from the initial value by
more than 5%, choose a new R-factor that is between the initial and
calculated values, then repeat Steps 2-6 to derive a new R-factor.
Repeat this process until the calculated R-factor is within 5% of
the initially assumed R-factor.
    7. Compare the R-factor determined separately for each
constituent. Use the lowest R-factor (worst case) for the BAT
equation.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17JA06.069

[FR Doc. 06-74 Filed 1-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 24, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 100)]
[Notices]
[Page 29951]
[DOCID:fr24my06-82]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM93-11-000]

Revisions to Oil Pipeline Regulations Pursuant to the Energy
Policy Act of 1992; Notice of Annual Change in the Producer Price Index
for Finished Goods

May 18, 2006.
    The Commission's regulations include a methodology for oil
pipelines to change their rates through use of an index system that
establishes ceiling levels for such rates. The Commission bases the
index system, found at 18 CFR 342.3, on the annual change in the
Producer Price Index for Finished Goods (PPI-FG), plus one point three
percent (PPI+1.3). The Commission determined in an ``Order Establishing
Index For Oil Price Change Ceiling Levels'' issued March 21, 2006, that
PPI+1.3 is the appropriate oil pricing index factor for pipelines to
use.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 114 FERC ] 61,293 at P 2 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The regulations provide that the Commission will publish annually,
an index figure reflecting the final change in the PPI-FG, after the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) publishes the final PPI-FG in May of
each calendar year. The annual average PPI-FG index figures were 148.5
for 2004 and 155.7 for 2005.\2\ Thus, the percent change (expressed as
a decimal) in the annual average PPI-FG from 2004 to 2005, plus 1.3
percent, is positive .061485.\3\ Oil pipelines must multiply their July
1, 2005, through June 30, 2006, index ceiling levels by positive
1.061485 \4\ to compute their index ceiling levels for July 1, 2006,
through June 30, 2007, in accordance with 18 CFR 342.3(d). For guidance
in calculating the ceiling levels for each 12 month period beginning
January 1, 1995,\5\ see Explorer Pipeline Company, 71 FERC ] 61,416 at
n.6 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ BLS publishes the final figure in mid-May of each year. This
figure is publicly available from the Division of Industrial Prices
and Price Indexes of the BLS, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and in print in
August in Table 1 of the annual data supplement to the BLS
publication Producer Price Indexes via the Internet at [http://www.bls.gov/ppi
]. To obtain the BLS data, click on ``Get Detailed

PPI Statistics,'' and then under the heading ``Most Requested
Statistics'' click on ``Commodity Data.'' At the next screen, under
the heading ``Producer Price Index--Commodity,'' select the first
box, ``Finished goods--WPUSOP3000'', then scroll all the way to the
bottom of this screen and click on Retrieve data.
    \3\ [155.7-148.5] / 148.5 = 0.048485 + .013 = 0.061485.
    \4\ 1 + 0.061485 = 1.061485.
    \5\ For a listing of all prior multipliers issued by the
Commission, see the Commission's Web site, http://www.ferc.gov. The

table of multipliers can be found under the headings ``Oil'' and
``Index''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to publishing the full text of this Notice in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print this Notice via the Internet through
FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's Public Reference

Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at
888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. The full text of
this Notice is available on FERC's Home Page at the eLibrary link. To
access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the
last three digits of this document in the docket number field and
follow other directions on the search page.
    User assistance is available for eLibrary and other aspects of
FERC's Web site during normal business hours. For assistance, please
contact the Commission's Online Support at 1-866-208-3676 (toll free)
or<PHONE_NUMBER> (e-mail at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov), or the Public
Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-Mail the Public
Reference Room at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-7963 Filed 5-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P