1:
34
PM
5/
31/
2005
MEMORANDUM
OF
AGREEMENT
Program
to
Develop
Emission
Measurement
Accuracy
Margins
for
Heavy­
Duty
In­
Use
Testing
EPA
Staff
Working
Document
V7
1.
Parties:
The
Engine
Manufacturers
Association
(
EMA)
representing
its
member
companies
that
manufacture
heavy­
duty
on­
highway
("
HDOH")
diesel­
fueled
engines,
the
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
and
the
California
Air
Resources
Board
(
CARB)
(
collectively
"
the
Signatories"
or
"
the
parties")
recognize
the
challenge
of
the
upcoming
emission
standards
for
heavy­
duty
diesel
engines
and
the
importance
of
meeting
those
standards
in­
use.
EPA
has
proposed
and
will
soon
finalize
heavy­
duty
in­
use
testing
(
HDIUT)
regulations
aimed
at
assessing
in­
use
compliance
with
the
emission
standards.
Following
a
pilot
testing
program,
full
program
testing
would
begin
in
2007
for
gaseous
emissions
and
2008
for
particulate
matter
(
PM)
emissions.
This
program
would
require
the
use
of
portable
emission
measurement
systems
(
PEMS)
on
heavy­
duty
diesel
vehicles
in
actual
operation.
This
memorandum
of
agreement
describes
the
joint
understandings
and
agreements
of
the
Signatories
with
regard
to
developing
data­
driven
emission
measurement
accuracy
margins
for
gaseous
and
PM
emissions
to
be
applied
to
the
results
of
PEMS
in­
use
in
field
testing
under
the
forthcoming
HDIUT
regulations.

2.
Background:
In
a
Settlement
Agreement
dated
June
3,
2003,
EPA
and
EMA
agreed
to
an
"
Outline
of
a
Regulatory
Proposal
for
a
Manufacturer
Run
In­
Use
Heavy­
Duty
Vehicle
NTE
Testing
Program."
The
outline
states
that
emission
measurement
accuracy
margins
for
the
HDIUT
program
will
be
jointly
determined
by
EPA,
CARB,
and
the
engine
manufacturers.
The
purpose
of
these
additive
margins
is
to
account
for
the
emissions
measurement
variability
associated
with
PEMS
units
in
the
field.
In
meetings
on
this
subject,
manufacturers
have
stated
their
belief
that
more
data
is
needed
to
establish
the
HDIUT
accuracy
margins
for
the
fully
enforceable
program
(
FEP)
for
gaseous
emissions
(
scheduled
to
commence
in
2007)
and
for
PM.(
scheduled
to
commence
in
2008)
EPA
and
CARB
agree
that
more
data
would
be
helpful
in
determining
these
accuracy
margins.

3.
Purpose:
This
agreement
describes
how
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
for
gaseous
and
PM
emissions
will
be
developed,
the
roles
and
responsibilities
of
the
parties
to
this
agreement,
how
the
final
accuracy
margins
will
be
incorporated
into
the
governing
HDIUT
regulations,
and
the
consequences
of
failing
to
complete
the
program
to
develop
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
in
time
to
start
either
portion
(
gaseous
emissions
or
PM
emissions)
of
the
FEPs.

4.
Program
for
Gaseous
Emission
Margins:

a.
Scope:
Working
together
with
CARB
and
the
engine
manufacturers,
EPA
has
prepared
a
document
(
attached)
which
will
serve
as
the
test
plan
for
developing
data
driven
accuracy
margins
for
gaseous
emissions.
The
test
plan
describes
the
basic
scope
and
objectives
of
this
research,
development,
and
demonstration
(
RDD)
program
and
defines
specific
analyses,
laboratory
experiments,
and
field
work
which
need
to
be
accomplished
to
develop
the
accuracy
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
2
margins.
For
gaseous
emissions,
individual
margins
will
be
established
for
NOx,
NMHC,
and
CO.
The
test
plan
contains
the
following
basic
elements:

 
Third­
party
laboratory
experiments
to
assess
emissions,
exhaust,
flow
and
torque
measurement
variability
of
PEMS
units
incremental
to
that
experienced
in
the
laboratory.
Results
will
be
used
to
"
calibrate"
a
computer
model
that
will
calculate
the
measurement
allowances.
 
Third
party
laboratory
experiments
to
assess
the
effects
of
environmental
parameters
on
the
measurement
accuracy
capability
of
the
PEMS
units
and
their
ability
to
operate
correctly
and
consistently
in
use
over
a
normal
sampling
time.
Results
will
be
used
to
"
calibrate"
a
computer
model
that
will
calculate
the
measurement
allowances.
 
Third
party
on­
vehicle/
trailer
comparison
of
portable
emission
measurement
versus
field
laboratory
emission
measurement.
Results
will
be
used
to
validate
the
computer
model
used
to
calculate
the
measurement
allowances.
 
Manufacturer
voluntary
submissions
of
data
that
demonstrate
non­
deficiency
AECD
effects
on
the
ability
to
estimate
NTE
torque/
bsfc
values
from
ECM
parameters,
using
prescribed
mapping
procedures.
EPA
and
CARB,
in
consultation
with
HDOH
engine
manufacturers,
will
utilize
this
information,
if
reasonably
common
among
manufacturers,
to
determine
and
include
a
margin
component
in
the
error
model
that
accounts
for
the
variability
in
the
torque/
bsfc
values
used
in
the
NTE
brake­
specific
emission
calculations.
For
example,
EPA/
CARB
would
consider
information
for
an
additional
allowance
if
variability
due
to
non­
deficiency
AECDs
are
consistent
across
manufacturers.
If
variability
is
inconsistent
and
infrequent
across
the
submissions
or
if
there
is
a
consistent
bias,
EPA
and
CARB
would
expect
manufacturers
to
account
for
these
errors
by
creating
more
sophisticated
algorithms
that
decrease
the
infrequent
large
deviations
or
account
for
the
consistent
bias
that
exists
across
manufacturers.

b.
Costs:
The
portion
of
the
RDD
program
to
develop
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
for
gaseous
emissions
is
not
intended
to
cost
more
than
$
1.5
million.
EPA's
participation
in
this
agreement
is
subject
to
the
availability
of
appropriated
funds.
In
addition
to
the
resources
EPA
commits
to
this
effort,
CARB
and
the
engine
manufacturing
industry
intend
to
donate
additional
resources
to
the
Agency
under
Section
104(
b)(
4)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act.
The
industry
intends
that
it
will
contribute
a
50%
cost
share
up
to
$
750,000,
subject
to
EPA/
CARB
funding
the
remainder
of
the
RDD
program
Those
contributions
may
be
in
the
form
of
money
used
to
fund
contract
work
efforts
and/
or
vehicles,
engines,
and
PEMS
test
equipment.
Parties
that
contribute
the
use
of
items
such
as
vehicles,
engines,
and
PEMS
test
equipment
will
have
those
program
contributions
valued
as
part
of
their
overall
contribution
based
on
current
fair
market
value.
The
parties
further
agree
that
this
project
should
be
funded
through
a
single
contract
vehicle
or
work
assignment
as
appropriate
to
support
the
RDD
project
that
will
be
financed
with
EPA
funds
and
donations
from
industry
and
CARB.

c.
Execution
of
the
Gaseous
Emission
Testing
Program:
It
is
intended
that
the
RDD
program
will
follow
the
test
plan
and
the
schedule
discussed
in
paragraph
4d,
below.
All
testing
and
subsequent
data
analyses
will
be
managed
by
EPA
in
close
coordination
with
the
HDOH
engine
manufacturers
of
EMA,
and
CARB.
Program
technical
direction
(
including
any
necessary
modifications
to
the
test
plan)
will
be
provided
by
a
Steering
Committee
drawn
from
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
3
representatives
of
the
parties.
The
Steering
Committee
will
also
track
progress
of
program
completion
both
in
terms
of
technical
output
and
schedule.
EPA
will
keep
records
of
Steering
Committee
meetings
and
documents
related
to
this
project
and
make
them
part
of
the
public
record
for
the
direct
final
rule
discussed
below.

The
experiments
described
in
the
attached
test
plan
have
been
submitted
to
a
statistician
to
ensure
that
the
information
generated
is
sufficient
and
appropriate
for
developing
the
gaseous
emission
accuracy
margins
and
to
establish
an
algorithm
for
calculating
the
margins
using
the
data
derived
from
the
program.
This
overall
approach
will
provide
assurance
that
the
experimental
designs
are
acceptable
to
all
participants
and
is
intended
to
prevent
multiple
and
competing
interpretations
of
the
data.
It
will
also
help
ensure
that
the
program
will
be
completed
on
schedule
and
within
budget.

Participation
by
HDOH
manufacturers
in
the
RDD
test
programs
will
result
in
some
burden
to
those
companies,
but
will
produce
useful
information.
Therefore,
for
each
engine
manufacturer
that
participates
in
the
RDD
test
programs,
EPA
expects
that
the
final
rule
to
be
promulgated
in
June
2005
(
discussed
below)
will
limit
that
manufacturer's
testing
burden
under
the
original
pilot
program
(
2005­
2006
for
gaseous
emissions)
to
five
vehicles
per
designated
engine
family,
subject
to
the
allowable
annual
cap
on
the
number
of
engine
families
that
can
be
designated
for
in­
use
testing
in
a
single
calendar
year.
EMA
will
provide
to
EPA
a
list
of
those
companies
who
contributed
to
the
funding
of
the
RDD
effort,
coincident
with
their
initial
donation
payment
to
the
gaseous
emission
RDD
program.
.
d.
Schedule:
In
order
to
provide
adequate
time
to
promulgate
the
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
for
gaseous
emissions,
the
gaseous
emission
portion
of
the
RDD
program
will
need
to
be
completed
and
final
accuracy
margins
calculated
by
November
1,
2006.
The
parties
recognize
that
to
meet
this
milestone
all
laboratory
and
field
work
need
to
be
completed
prior
to
September
30,
2006.
Toward
that
end,
the
following
not­
later­
than
dates
are
agreed
upon
by
the
parties
as
working
targets:

Schedule
for
Gaseous
Measurement
Allowance
Program
Description
Date1
1
Funding
and
execution
of
lab
test
plan
contract
15
July
2005
2
Delivery
of
PEMS
units
to
be
provided
by
PEMS
suppliers,
EPA,
or
CARB
15
August
20052
3
Delivery
to
lab
of
all
agreed
upon
engines,
PEMS
and
other
equipment
to
be
provided
by
the
engine
manufacturers/
EMA
15
August
20052
4
Commencement
of
engine
dyno
lab
testing
1
October
20052
5
Completion
of
lab
testing
programs
(~
5
months
duration)
1
March
2006
6
Delivery
of
lab
testing
interim
report
30
March
2006
8
Funding
and
commencement
of
environmental
testing
15
April
2006
9
Contractor
report
on
all
environmental
testing
1
July
2006
10
Funding
and
execution
of
field
testing
contract
1
July
2006
8
Delivery
to
field
of
agreed
upon
vehicle,
PEMS
and
other
equipment
15
July
20062
9
Commencement
of
field
testing
30
July
2006
10
Completion
of
field
testing
(~
2
months
duration)
30
September
2006
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
4
11
Delivery
of
field
testing
interim
report
15
October
2006
12
Delivery
of
contractor
final
report
with
accuracy
margin
inputs
1
November
2006
1All
dates
specified
at
time
of
close­
of
business
(
COB)
2Or
when
contractor
requires
in­
kind
equipment,
whichever
is
later
5.
Program
for
PM
Emission
Margins:

a.
Scope:
EPA,
CARB,
and
the
engine
manufacturers
have
agreed
to
work
together
to
prepare
a
test
plan
for
developing
data
driven
accuracy
margins
for
PM
emissions.
As
is
the
case
for
gaseous
emissions,
the
test
plan
for
the
PM
portion
of
the
HDIUT
program
will
address
the
basic
scope
and
objectives
of
this
RDD
program,
and
define
specific
analyses,
laboratory
experiments,
and
field
work
which
need
to
be
accomplished
to
develop
the
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
for
PM
emissions.
The
test
plan
is
expected
to
contain
the
following
basic
provisions:

 
Third
party
laboratory
experiments
to
assess
emissions
measurement
variability
of
PM
PEMS
units
incremental
to
that
experienced
in
the
laboratory.
Results
will
be
used
to
"
calibrate"
a
computer
model
that
will
calculate
the
measurement
allowances.
 
Third
party
laboratory
experiments
to
assess
the
effects
of
environmental
parameters
on
the
measurement
accuracy
capability
of
the
PM
PEMS
units
and
their
ability
to
operate
correctly
and
consistently
in
use
over
a
normal
sampling
time.
Results
will
be
used
to
"
calibrate"
a
computer
model
that
will
calculate
the
measurement
allowances.
 
Third
party
on­
vehicle/
trailer
comparison
of
portable
PM
emission
measurement
versus
field
laboratory
PM
emission
measurement.
Results
will
be
used
to
validate
the
computer
model
used
to
calculate
the
measurement
allowances.

b.
Costs:
The
portion
of
the
RDD
program
to
develop
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
for
PM
is
not
intended
to
cost
more
than
$
1.5
million.
EPA's
participation
in
this
agreement
is
subject
to
the
availability
of
appropriated
funds.
In
addition
to
the
resources
EPA
commits
to
this
effort,
CARB
and
the
HDOH
engine
manufacturing
industry
intend
to
donate
additional
resources
to
the
Agency
under
Section
104(
b)(
4)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act.
The
industry
intends
that
it
will
contribute
a
cost
share
up
to
$
750,000
subject
to
EPA/
CARB
funding
of
the
remainder
of
the
RDD
program.
Those
contributions
may
be
in
the
form
of
money
used
to
fund
contract
work
efforts
and/
or
vehicles,
engines,
and
PEMS
test
equipment.
Parties
that
contribute
the
use
of
such
items
such
as
vehicles,
engines,
and
PEMS
test
equipment
will
have
those
program
contributions
valued
as
part
of
their
overall
donation
based
on
the
current
fair
market
value.
The
parties
further
agree
that
this
project
should
be
funded
through
a
single
contract
vehicle
or
work
assignment
as
appropriate
to
support
the
RDD
project
that
will
be
financed
with
EPA
funds
and
donations
from
industry
and
CARB.

c.
Execution
of
the
PM
Emission
Testing
Program:
It
is
intended
that
the
RDD
program
will
follow
the
test
plan
and
schedule
discussed
in
paragraph
5d,
below.
All
testing
and
subsequent
data
analysis
will
be
managed
by
EPA
in
close
coordination
with
the
HDOH
engine
manufacturer
members
of
EMA,
and
CARB.
Program
technical
direction
will
be
provided
by
a
Steering
Committee
drawn
from
representatives
of
the
parties.
The
Steering
Committee
will
also
track
progress
of
program
completion
both
in
terms
of
technical
output
and
schedule.
EPA
will
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
5
keep
records
of
Steering
Committee
meetings
and
documents
related
to
this
project
and
make
them
part
of
the
public
record
for
the
direct
final
rule
discussed
below.

The
experimental
designs
to
be
set
forth
in
the
test
plan
will
be
submitted
to
a
statistician
to
ensure
that
the
information
generated
is
sufficient
and
appropriate
for
developing
the
PM
accuracy
margin
and
to
establish
an
algorithm
for
calculating
the
margin
using
the
data
derived
from
the
program.
This
overall
approach
will
provide
assurance
that
the
experimental
designs
are
acceptable
to
all
participants
and
is
intended
to
prevent
multiple
and
competing
interpretations
of
the
data.
It
will
also
help
ensure
that
the
program
will
be
completed
on
schedule
and
within
budget.

Participation
by
manufacturers
in
the
RDD
programs
will
result
in
some
burden
to
those
companies,
but
will
produce
useful
information.
Therefore,
for
each
manufacturer
that
participates
in
these
RDD
programs,
EPA
expects
that
the
final
rule
to
be
promulgated
in
June
2005
(
discussed
below)
will
limit
that
manufacturer's
testing
burden
under
the
original
pilot
program
(
2006­
2007
for
PM
emissions)
to
five
vehicles
per
designated
engine
family
subject
to
the
allowable
annual
cap
on
the
number
of
engine
families
that
can
be
designated
for
in­
use
testing
in
a
single
calendar
year.
EMA
will
provide
to
EPA
a
list
of
those
companies
who
contributed
to
the
funding
of
the
RDD
effort,
coincident
with
their
initial
donation
payment
to
the
PM
RDD
program.

d.
Schedule:
In
order
to
provide
adequate
time
to
promulgate
the
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
for
PM
emissions,
the
RDD
program
will
need
to
be
completed
and
final
accuracy
margins
calculated
by
November
1.
2007.
The
parties
recognize
that
to
meet
this
milestone
all
laboratory
and
field
work
will
need
to
be
completed
prior
to
September
30,
2007.
Toward
that
end,
the
following
not­
later­
than
dates
are
agreed
upon
by
the
parties
as
working
targets:

Schedule
for
PM
Measurement
Allowance
Program
Description
Date1
1
Working
group
agreement
on
draft
test
plan
29
July
2005
2
Final
agreement
on
PM
test
plan
30
September
2005
3
Funding
and
execution
of
lab
PM
test
plan
contract
14
July
2006
2
Delivery
of
PEMS
units
to
be
provided
by
PEMS
suppliers,
EPA,
or
CARB
14
August
20062
3
Delivery
to
lab
of
all
agreed
upon
engines,
PEMS
and
other
equipment
to
be
provided
by
the
engine
manufacturers/
EMA
14
August
20062
4
Commencement
of
engine
dyno
lab
PM
testing
31
August
20062
5
Completion
of
lab
PM
testing
programs
(~
5
months
duration)
1
February
2007
6
Delivery
of
lab
PM
testing
interim
report
30
March
2006
8
Funding
and
commencement
of
PM
environmental
testing
30
March
2007
9
Contractor
report
on
all
PM
environmental
testing
1
July
2007
10
Funding
and
execution
of
PM
field
testing
contract
1
July
2007
8
Delivery
to
field
of
agreed
upon
vehicle,
PEMS
and
other
equipment
15
July
20072
9
Commencement
of
PM
field
testing
30
July
2007
10
Completion
of
PM
field
testing
(~
2
months
duration)
30
September
2007
11
Delivery
of
PM
field
testing
interim
report
15
October
2007
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
6
12
Delivery
of
contractor
final
report
with
PM
accuracy
margin
inputs
1
November
2007
1All
dates
specified
at
time
of
close­
of
business
(
COB)
2Or
when
contractor
requires
in­
kind
equipment,
whichever
is
later
It
is
the
parties'
intent
that
if
fundamental,
irresolvable
technical
problems
are
identified
relative
to
PM
portable
emission
measurement
systems,
the
PM
portion
of
the
RDD
program,
will
go
into
abeyance
until
such
time
as
suitable
emission
measurement
devices
are
identified
and
available
or
the
problems
otherwise
resolved.
Accordingly,
the
parties'
inability
to
comply
with
any
of
the
dates
set
forth
in
the
schedule
above
due
to
fundamental,
irresolvable
technical
problems
may
result
in
holding
in
abeyance
the
RDD
program
for
establishing
data­
driven
PM
accuracy
margins
until
those
technical
problems
are
resolved.
Similarly,
the
PM
portion
of
the
two
year
pilot
program
and
FEP
would
be
delayed
until
the
PM
accuracy
margin
program
discussed
herein
is
completed.
EPA
would
make
the
final
determination
since
any
revisions
to
the
regulatory
program
would
require
a
regulatory
action.

If
the
PM
portion
of
the
FEP
is
delayed,
2007
and
subsequent
model
year
engines
may
be
selected
and
subject
to
enforcement
testing
(
for
gaseous
as
well
as
PM
emissions)
once
the
datadriven
accuracy
margins
are
established
and
the
PM
portion
of
the
FEP
begins.
Such
engines
would
be
counted
toward
the
annual
cap
on
the
number
of
engine
families
that
may
be
designated
for
in­
use
testing
in
any
single
calendar
year.

6.
Resolution
of
the
Laboratory
Gaseous
Emission
Measurement
Error
Issue:
Concern
has
been
expressed
about
what
exactly
the
HDIUT
accuracy
margin
should
cover.
EPA
and
CARB
maintain
that
the
accuracy
margin
is
intended
to
address
the
incremental
measurement
variability
of
assessing
emissions
from
an
in­
use
vehicle
using
an
onboard
PEMS
unit
versus
laboratory
measurements
using
Part
1065
compliant
laboratory
emissions
measurement
systems
of
NTE
events
as
short
as
30
seconds.
However,
EMA
is
concerned
that
laboratories
using
Part
1065
compliant
laboratory
emissions
measurement
systems
have
not
been
optimized
to
measure
gaseous
emissions
over
30
second
intervals
and
that
during
this
testing
the
laboratory
error
over
NTE
events
might
be
significantly
larger
than
the
error
that
is
known
to
exist
when
measuring
steady­
state
(
SET)
emissions.
EMA
is
concerned
that
a
large
laboratory
NTE
error
could
lead
to
a
very
small
or
nonexistent
PEMS
measurement
allowance
as
discussed
above.

To
address
this
issue,
the
parties
agree
to
the
following
terms.
Steady­
state
lab
error
determined
in
Section
3.2
of
the
attached
test
plan
will
be
subtracted
from
transient
PEMS
error
determined
in
Section
3.3.
Therefore,
the
error
model
will
not
subtract
any
lab
accuracy
or
precision
that
was
determined
from
the
lab
measuring
transient
30
second
NTE
events.
Further,
if
the
test
plan
results
show
that
the
lab
95th
percentile
NTE
error
determined
in
Section
3.3
(
transient)
is
greater
than
the
lab
99th
percentile
error
in
Section
3.2
(
steady­
state),
then
EPA,
CARB,
and
EMA
would
agree
to
the
following:

a.
EMA
will
work
with
EPA
and
CARB
to
optimize
laboratory
NTE
measurement
specifications
and
procedures.
This
work
will
primarily
be
in
the
form
of
participating
in
and
supporting
joint
laboratory
NTE
test
procedure
development
efforts
and
meetings.
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
7
b.
EPA
would
intend
to
issue
a
guidance
document
and/
or
propose
changes
to
Part
1065
to
reflect
any
optimized
specifications
and
procedures
for
laboratory
NTE
testing
as
a
result
of
those
efforts
and
meetings
no
later
than
the
end
of
calendar
year
2008.

7.
Preamble
and
Regulatory
Provisions:
The
HDIUT
program
and
associated
regulatory
language
will
be
contained
in
a
Final
Rule
to
be
promulgated
in
June
2005.
EPA
intends:
1)
that
the
basic
programmatic
objectives
and
approach
of
this
agreement
will
be
reflected
in
the
HDIUT
final
rule,
2)
that
the
key
provisions
of
this
agreement
will
be
referenced
and
to
the
degree
possible
contained
in
the
preamble
of
the
final
rule,
and
3)
certain
key
provisions
will
also
be
reflected
in
the
final
rule's
regulatory
language,
including
provisions
such
as
the
interim
accuracy
margins1,
changes
in
the
pilot
program
provisions,
the
key
milestone
dates
for
the
gaseous
emissions
and
PM
portions
of
the
RDD
program,
and
also
the
consequences
of
failing
to
meet
those
dates
and
complete
the
accuracy
margin
test
programs
as
specified
below.

EPA
intends
to
propose
the
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
in
direct
final
rules
as
soon
as
reasonably
practical
after
the
final
values
and
documentation
are
available,
with
the
target
dates
of
15
January
2007
and
15
January
2008
for
the
rules
pertaining
to
gaseous
emission
and
PM
emission
margins,
respectively.
Although
EPA
intends
to
implement
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
by
direct
final
rule,
the
Agency
cannot
guarantee
that
the
results
of
RDD
test
programs
will
end
up
being
implemented
in
a
final
rule
if
significant
adverse
comments
are
received.
The
Signatories
agree
to
support
the
final
accuracy
margins,
assuming
that
the
agreed
upon
program
to
develop
the
accuracy
margins
is
followed
and
the
results
of
the
RDD
test
programs
are
incorporated
in
the
direct
final
rules
or
any
subsequent
final
rules
based
on
the
related
NPRMs
accompanying
the
direct
final
rules.
All
parties
agree
to
use
the
data­
driven
accuracy
margin
values
for
their
planning
and
implementation
efforts
for
the
FEPs
as
soon
as
the
data
becomes
available.

The
parties
agree
that
publishing
the
direct
final
rule
with
the
data­
driven
accuracy
margins,
or
if
necessary
publishing
a
final
rule
based
on
the
test
results
(
due
to
public
comment
on
the
direct
final
rule
document),
will
fulfill
EPA's
obligation
under
the
settlement
agreement.

Even
if
there
is
adverse
comment
on
the
direct
final
rule,
the
schedules
laid
out
in
the
tables
above
are
intended
to
include
ample
time
for
rulemaking
action
and
lead
time
for
manufacturers
before
engine
family
selection
begins.
Thus,
assuming
that
a
follow­
on
final
rule
resulting
from
comments
on
a
direct
final
rule
still
results
in
implementation
of
accuracy
margins
substantially
similar
to
those
originally
developed
in
the
RDD
program,
EPA
and
CARB
would
expect
to
select
engine
families
without
any
additional
time
allowance.
If
the
follow­
on
final
rulemaking
is
substantially
delayed
or
there
are
significant
changes
in
the
accuracy
margin,
EPA
would
address
the
engine
designation
and
FEP
implementation
schedule
in
the
follow­
on
final
rule.
EPA
would
intend
to
provide
at
least
three
months
between
promulgation
of
the
final
rule
and
engine
family
designation
(
for
both
gaseous
and
PM
emission
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
and
related
provisions),
even
if
this
results
in
engine
family
designation
after
the
normal
June
30
date.
Such
1
The
HDIUT
final
rule
will
establish
the
following
interim
additive
accuracy
margins
for
use
in
connection
with
the
pilot
programs:
NMHC=
0.17
g/
bhp­
hr;
NOx=
0.50
g/
bhp­
hr;
CO=
0.60
g/
bhp­
hr;
and
PM=
0.10
g/
bhp­
hr.
All
testing
using
these
interim
margins
will
be
conducted
as
a
pilot
program
but
not
in
the
FEP
which
relies
on
the
data
driven
accuracy
margins.
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
8
delays
would
be
accommodated
in
the
total
time
allotted
to
complete
the
first
year
of
the
program.
Subsequent
model
year's
designation
would
not
be
affected.

8.
Consequences
If
Commitments
Are
Not
Met:
The
parties
agree
that
successful
completion
of
this
RDD
project
on
schedule
is
essential
to
implementation
of
the
FEPs.
Critical
to
that
success
is
for
the
Signatories
to
meet
their
various
commitments
in
a
timely
manner.
All
of
the
Signatories
believe
that,
subject
to
the
caveats
set
forth
in
paragraph
5d
above,
the
projects
described
in
the
attached
test
plan
can
be
completed
on
time
and
within
budget
and
are
signing
this
agreement
in
the
cooperative
and
constructive
spirit
that
has
been
exhibited
in
development
of
the
gaseous
emissions
test
plan.
However,
to
address
potential
problems
the
following
are
agreed
upon
by
all
parties.

If
the
data­
driven
accuracy
margin
values
and
documentation
are
not
obtained
from
the
contractor
by
November
1,
2006
for
gaseous
emissions
and
November
1,
2007
.
for
PM
because
a
manufacturer(
s)
does
not
meet
its
commitments
under
this
agreement,
but
the
delay
is
less
than
a
total
of
3
months,
the
implementation
date
of
the
FEP
would
be
delayed
by
the
same
number
of
whole
months
(
rounded
up)
that
it
takes
to
complete
and
finalize
the
final
contractor
report.
2
If
the
final
values
and
documentation
are
delayed
beyond
3
months,
the
FEP
would
go
into
abeyance
for
the
pending
calendar
year
(
i.
e.,
2007
for
gaseous
emissions
or
2008
for
PM).
If
this
occurs,
the
number
of
engine
families
that
would
otherwise
have
been
designated
for
testing
in
that
year
if
the
FEP
was
not
delayed,
would
be
accumulated
and
may
be
designated
for
testing
when
the
FEP
is
initiated.
Those
accumulated
tests
would
not
count
toward
the
allowable
annual
cap
on
the
number
of
engine
families
that
may
be
designated
for
in­
use
testing
in
that
year.
However,
the
normal
18­
month
period
for
testing
and
reporting
would
be
expanded
to
24
months
for
such
"
carryover"
engine
families.
If
necessary,
this
cycle
would
be
repeated
until
the
final
accuracy
margins
are
identified
and
documented
in
a
final
report
with
the
agreement
of
all
parties.
3
A
delay
in
the
PM
portion
of
the
HDIUT
program
would
not
necessarily
trigger
a
delay
in
gaseous
emission
testing
for
that
calendar
year.
If
engine
families
are
selected
for
gaseous
emissions
testing,
EPA
would
retain
the
option
to
select
additional
engine
families
for
gaseous
and
PM
testing
in
subsequent
years,
subject
to
the
allowable
annual
cap
on
the
number
of
engine
families
that
may
be
designated
for
in­
use
testing
in
a
single
calendar
year.

For
the
gaseous
emission
portion
of
the
RDD
program,
a
manufacturer's
failure
to
meet
its
commitments
may
be
demonstrated
by
missing
one
or
more
of
the
critical
milestones
as
follows:

Deliverables
Required
from
Manufacturers
for
Gaseous
Measurement
Allowance
Program
Description
Date1
1
Contract
funding:
quarterly
payments
each
representing
25%
of
the
total
obligation
15
Oct
2005,
15
Jan
2006,
15
April
2006,
15
July
2006
2
The
anticipated
June
30
date
for
designating
engine
families,
which
initiates
the
18­
month
testing/
reporting
period,
would
be
delayed.
3
If
the
cycle
is
repeated,
the
six
month
additional
period
for
testing
will
be
continued
for
all
carryover
engine
families.
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
9
2
Delivery
to
lab
of
all
agreed
upon
engines,
PEMS
and
other
equipment
to
be
supplied
by
EMA
15
August
20052
3
Delivery
to
field
of
agreed
upon
vehicle,
PEMS
and
other
equipment
to
be
supplied
by
EMA
30
June
20062
1All
dates
specified
at
time
of
close­
of
business
(
COB)
2Or
when
contractor
requires
in­
kind
equipment,
whichever
is
later
Furthermore,
manufacturers
are
invited
to
voluntarily
submit
to
EPA/
CARB
laboratory
information
on
how
non­
deficiency
AECDs
affect
the
error
of
ECM­
derived
NTE
torque/
bsfc.
EPA/
CARB
will
not
consider
such
information
if
it
is
submitted
later
than
one
month
prior
to
the
start
of
model
validation.
This
deadline
is
required
in
case
the
voluntary
submissions
lead
to
a
change
in
the
error
model,
which
is
scheduled
to
be
on­
road
validated.
Once
the
error
model
is
validated,
no
changes
to
the
model
will
be
made.

For
PM
emission
testing
a
manufacturer's
failure
to
meet
its
commitments
may
be
demonstrated
by
missing
one
or
more
of
the
critical
milestones
as
follows:

Deliverables
Required
from
Manufacturers
for
PM
Measurement
Allowance
Program
Description
Date1
1
Contract
funding:
quarterly
payments
each
representing
25%
of
the
total
obligation
15
Oct
2006,
15
Jan
2007,
15
April
2007,
15
July
2007
2
Delivery
to
lab
of
all
agreed
upon
engines,
PEMS
and
other
equipment
to
be
supplied
by
EMA
1
August
20062
3
Delivery
to
field
of
agreed
upon
vehicle,
PEMS
and
other
equipment
to
be
supplied
by
EMA
30
June
20072
1All
dates
specified
at
time
of
close­
of
business
(
COB)
2Or
when
contractor
requires
in­
kind
equipment,
whichever
is
later
A
failure
by
any
individual
manufacturer
that
leads
to
not
fulfilling
one
or
more
of
the
critical
milestones
described
above
(
for
gaseous
or
PM
testing)
could
trigger
this
provision
for
all
manufacturers.

If
a
failure
to
obtain
the
final
accuracy
margin
values
and
documentation
from
the
contractor
by
November
1,
2006
for
gaseous
emissions
(
November
1,
2007
for
PM)
results
from
the
actions
or
inactions
of
CARB
or
EPA
or
a
party
other
than
the
manufacturers,
and
the
delay
is
less
than
a
total
of
3
months,
the
FEP
would
be
delayed
by
the
same
number
of
whole
months
(
rounded
up)
that
takes
to
complete
and
finalize
the
final
contractor
report.
4
If
the
final
values
and
documentation
are
delayed
beyond
3
months,
the
Phase
1
pilot
program
would
be
implemented
for
that
year
using
the
interim
accuracy
margins
contained
in
the
HDIUT
regulations.
If
necessary,
and
agreed
upon
by
all
Signatories
this
cycle
will
be
repeated
until
the
final
accuracy
margins
are
derived
and
documented
in
a
final
report.

4
The
anticipated
June
30
date
for
designating
engine
families,
which
initiates
the
18­
month
testing/
reporting
period,
would
be
delayed.
1:
34
PM5/
31/
2005
10
Regardless
of
the
reason,
if
either
the
gaseous
or
PM
emission
portion
of
the
FEP
is
delayed,
model
year
2007
and
subsequent
model
year
engines
may
be
selected
and
subjected
to
testing
once
the
data­
driven
accuracy
margins
are
established
and
the
FEP
begins.
Such
engines
would
be
counted
toward
the
total
number
of
engine
families
that
may
be
designated
for
in­
use
testing
in
any
single
calendar
year
as
described
earlier.

9.
Commitments
of
CARB:
CARB
intends
to
propose
for
adoption
a
manufacturer
run
HDIUT
program
that
is
fully
consistent
with
the
provisions
of
this
agreement.

10.
Data
Ownership
and
Use:
The
parties
agree
to
work
together
to
ensure
that
any
contract
with
third
parties
to
implement
the
RDD
program
contain
mutually
acceptable
provisions
related
to
ownership,
use,
patent
rights,
confidentiality
and
dissemination
of
the
data
derived
under
the
contract.

11.
Modifications:
The
terms
of
this
agreement
may
be
modified
at
any
time
and
from
time
to
time
by
mutual
written
agreement
among
the
parties.
All
parties
agree
to
meet
to
discuss
and
negotiate
any
revisions
which
in
judgment
of
any
party
are
needed
to
address
significant
changes
in
circumstances
or
to
assure
that
this
agreement
continues
to
accomplish
the
objectives
of
the
parties.
No
amendment
to
this
agreement
will
take
effect
unless
in
writing
and
signed
by
authorized
representatives
of
the
parties.

12.
General:
This
agreement
does
not
imply
a
requirement
to
commit
funds
or
other
resources
from
any
party
to
any
other
party.
The
activities
undertaken
in
connection
with
this
agreement
are
not
intended
to
provide
services
to
the
Federal
government
and
the
parties
agree
not
to
seek
compensation
from
the
other
parties
for
this
work.
The
Federal
Government
is
prohibited
from
endorsing
products
nor
does
it
recommend
for
or
against
the
purchase
of
specific
products.
This
agreement
does
not
negate
any
existing
legal
right
or
requirements,
nor
does
it
create
any
new
legal
rights,
benefits,
obligations
or
requirements,
substantive
or
procedural,
under
state
or
federal
law
or
equity.

Margo
Tsirgotis
Oge,
Director
_______________________
EPA,
Office
of
Transportation
and
Air
Quality
date
Catherine
Witherspoon,
Executive
Officer
__________________________
California
Air
Resources
Board
date
Jed
Mandel,
President
___________________________
Engine
Manufacturers
Association
date
