EPA Allows California to Require On-Board Diagnostics in 2010
By Eric Miller, Staff Reporter
This story appears in the Sept. 15 print edition of Transport Topics. Click here to subscribe today.
In a sweeping decision with possible national implications, the Environmental Protection Agency has granted California a waiver that will allow state environmental regulators to implement stringent new heavy-duty vehicle and engine onboard diagnostics requirements for 2010 engines and beyond.
Robert Meyers, EPA’s principal deputy assistant administrator for air and radiation, announced Sept. 8 he had decided OBD requirements approved by the California Air Resources Board in 2005 would not “be less protective of public health and welfare than applicable federal standards.”
Meyers acknowledged that his decision on the California requirements would create ripples far beyond the state’s boundaries.
“My decision will affect not only persons in California but also the manufacturers outside the state who must comply with California’s requirements in order to produce heavy-duty vehicles and engines for sale in California,” Meyers said. “For this reason, I hereby determine and find that this is a final action of national applicability.”
Onboard diagnostics systems are comprised primarily of complex software designed into a vehicle’s onboard computer to detect emission control system malfunctions as they occur.
The CARB regulations require that, among other things, OBD systems monitor for engine misfires and emissions related in various systems including fuel, catalyst, turbo-charger, exhaust gas recirculation, particulate matter filter, cooling and variable timing and control.
In early 2007, EPA said it would propose its own OBD requirement for heavy diesels, but has not completed its final rule.
EPA’s ruling on California’s on-board diagnostics follows the agency’s denial last year of the state’s request that EPA grant a waiver for state’s passenger-vehicle greenhouse gas standards. EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson rejected that request, partly because he said California did not convince him that it met the “compelling and extraordinary conditions” standard that merited a waiver from the federal Clean Air Act.
He also said he feared approving the California waiver would result in a “patchwork” of differing state greenhouse gas regulations.
CARB’s request for the OBD waiver, made in September 2006, argued that California needed its own rigorous emission standards because it had some of the nation’s worst air pollution and a fast-growing vehicle population.
EPA said in its announcement that it had received public comment from American Trucking Associations and others that EPA should defer making a decision to “maximize the opportunities for full alignment and harmonization between the EPA and CARB OBD programs.”
Meyers said in his decision that he could find no evidence to suggest that the CARB OBD regulations would be inconsistent with federal standards.
However, Glen Kedzie, ATA vice president and environmental affairs counsel, said the California waiver decision “raises the level of uncertainty.”
“What this means for us, it’s hard to say,” Kedzie said. “I don’t know if this is going to prompt the federal government to finally put out a regulation, and, if so, is that regulation going to mirror this California regulation?”
A phone message seeking comment from Jed Mandel, president of the Engine Manufacturers Association, was not returned to Transport Topics by press time.
However, in comments on the waiver request Mandel filed with EPA last year, the EMA said it did not oppose the waiver request but said it wanted EPA to wait until it finalized its own rule.
“A state-by-state opt-in to California OBD standards could have disastrous consequences for the heavy-duty engine and vehicle industry, other businesses and potentially even consumers, as it would, among other things, re-quire manufacturers to label, distribute and track engine products meeting California requirements in some states and federal requirements in others,” the EMA stated. “Potential disruptions in the availability of engines — vital to the commercial marketplace — could result.”
