Repair Sequence for Failed I/M Vehicles

Final Report

Project: Establishment of a Repair Sequence for Failed I/M Vehicles

Contract Number C003485
Performed for:

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Consultant Contractor:

TESTCOM Inc.
25 Walker Way
Albany, New York 12205

Subcontractors to TESTCOM Inc.
dKC Klausmeier Consulting
Radian International LLP
Aspire Inc.

DECEMBER 1999

We thank the many technicians, advisors, business operators, Hudson Valley Community College personnel and others who contributed to the Project, and recognize the following persons who played key roles during the Project.

[names in alphabetical order]

From the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Dick Gibbs, Ph.D.
Bob Johnson
Gil LaDuke
John Marschilok
Doug Surpitski

From the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles

Jim Fisher
Phil Risley

From TESTCOM Inc.

Frank Caridi
Grahame Champagne
Mike Piotrowski
John Rogers, Ph.D.

From dKc Klausmeier Consulting

Rob Klausmeier

From Radian International

Sandeep Kishan

From ASPIRE Inc.

Ron Minicucci

For more information regarding this Project, please contact:

Gil LaDuke or John Marschilok at NYSDEC (518)402-8401
Frank Caridi or Mike Piotrowski at TESTCOM (518) 452-0300

To get a printable version of this document you can either:

1.) Download the Microsoft Word® document. Click on the file name below, save it to your hard drive and then double click on the file and it will open.

finalrep.exe (819 k)

2.) View the pdf file. Click on the file name below.

cmaq_final_rpt.pdf (1169 k)

1.Introduction 1-1

1.1.

New York's Enhanced I/M Strategy 1-1

The Federal Clean Air Act 1-1

Enhanced I/M Requirement in New York 1-1

New York State Approach 1-1

NYTEST Implementation 1-1

New Challenges for Repair Technicians 1-2

1.2.

Project Goal 1-2

2.Repair Industry Background 2-1

2.1.

Overview 2-1

2.2.

Repair Industry Assessment 2-1

Colorado Program 2-1

Repair Effectiveness Experiences of Other I/M States 2-3

Conclusions From These Studies 2-4

2.3.

Orientation of This Project 2-4

2.4.

New York State Industry Resources 2-4

3.Project Work Plan 3-1

3.1.

Project Overview 3-1

Organization of Project 3-1

Expected Results 3-2

Project Phases 3-3

3.2.

Phase I - Albany 3-4

Goal and Methodology of Phase I 3-4

Albany Test center Equipment 3-4

Diagnostic Equipment 3-5

Acceptance Test Procedures (ATPs) 3-5

Calibration Procedures and Checks 3-6

Emissions Tests and Records 3-6

Emissions Test Procedures 3-6

Quality Assurance Protocols 3-6

Albany center Staffing 3-7

Procurement of Vehicles 3-8

Incentives 3-8

Screening Techniques 3-8

Cutpoints 3-9

3.3.

Development of Diagnostic/Repair Sequences 3-10

Summary of Each Procedure 3-10

Implementation of Procedures 3-10

Database Development 3-10

Utilization of Database 3-13

Upstate Phase I Challenges and Experiences 3-14

Pros and Cons of Hotline Usage 3-15

3.4.

Phase II - SUNY Farmingdale 3-17

Goal and Methodology of Phase II 3-17

SUNY Test center Equipment 3-17

Diagnostic Equipment 3-18

Acceptance Test Procedures (ATPs) 3-18

Calibration Procedures and Checks 3-19

Emissions Test and Records 3-19

Emission Test Procedures 3-19

Quality Assurance Protocols 3-19

Staffing at SUNY 3-20

Procurement of Vehicles 3-20

Incentives 3-21

Database System Enhancement 3-22

Utilization of Database 3-23

Usefulness of Transient (Drive Trace) Data 3-23

Technician Feedback on Procedure 3-24

4.Analysis of Test Data 4-1

4.1.

Introduction 4-1

4.2.

Analysis of Data from the Upstate Program 4-1

Description of the Vehicles 4-1

Summary of Emission Reductions Observed 4-2

Percent of Vehicles Complying with Standards After Repair 4-5

Reductions by Diagnostic Procedure 4-6

Effectiveness of Different Types of Repairs in Reducing Emissions 4-7

Effectiveness of the Repair Procedure on Individual Components 4-8

Emission Reductions for Combinations of Repairs 4-9

Conclusions from the Upstate Program 4-10

4.3.

Derivation of the Procedure for Downstate 4-10

4.4.

Analysis of Data from the Downstate Program 4-12

Description of the Vehicles 4-12

Summary of Emission Reductions Observed 4-13

Emissions Reductions by Model Year and Odometer 4-15

Trends by Repair Facility 4-15

Analysis of Emissions Trace 4-15

Effectiveness of Individual Repair Steps 4-17

Problems Remaining in Vehicles that Continued to Fail Standards 4-20

Conclusions of the Downstate Program 4-22

4.5.

Evolution of the Diagnostic and Repair Procedure 4-23

5.Conclusions and Recommendations 5-1

5.1.

Conclusions 5-1

Phase I 5-1

Phase II Conclusions 5-1

Status of the Repair Industry 5-2

Repairs in Cost-Effective Manner 5-2

Implications of Using NYTEST 5-3

Emission Reductions 5-3

Repair Cost Limit Waivers 5-3

5.2.

Dissemination of the Recommended Sequence 5-3

Nature of the Tool 5-3

Understanding the End User 5-4

Options Considered 5-4

Program to Run on NYTEST Systems 5-5

Stand-Alone Program for a PC 5-5

Delivering Diagnostics Through the Web Site 5-5

Training Curriculum 5-6

5.3.

Recommendations 5-6

Additional "Sequence" Testing and Refinements 5-6

Repair Cost Waiver Limit QA System 5-6

Appendices

The appendices are in pdf format.

A: Repair Procedures Manual (145k, pdf)
B: Diagnostic Repair Procedure "A" (19k, pdf)
C: Diagnostic Repair Procedure "B" (15k, pdf)
D: Hybrid Repair Procedure (Phase II) (32k, pdf)
E: "Repairs to Vehicles Failing Enhanced I/M Tests"(dKC Report 4-9-98)(79k, pdf)
F: Specific Combinations of Repairs in the Phase I Program(113k, pdf)
G: TESTCOM Project Team (42k, pdf)
H: Phase II Statistical Summary of Repair Actions and Results (138k, pdf)
I: Repair Shop Interviews by NYSDEC (13k, pdf)
J: Final Diagnostic/Repair Procedure (418k, pdf)
K: Estimated Emission Reductions from Phase II Vehicle Repair(8k, pdf)

Figures

3.3-1 Example Database Field 3-11

3.3-2 Data Entry Forms 3-12

3.4-1 Relational Database 3-22

4-1 NOx Emissions Reductions vs. When Emissions Occurred 4-17

Tables

4.2-1 Test Vehicle Model Year Distribution 4-2

4.2-2 Test Vehicle Odometer Distribution 4-2

4.2-3 Overall Emission Reductions 4-3

4.2-4 Summary of Upstate (Phase I) Results4-4

4.2-5 Percent of Vehicles Complying with Standards After Repair4-5

4.2-6 Percent of Vehicles That Complied with Emission Standards After Repair Breakdown by Model Year and Odometer 4-6

4.2-7 Emission Reductions by Diagnostic Procedure 4-6

4.2-8 Repair Category Groupings 4-7

4.2-9 Number and Percent of Repairs Classified as Effective By Repair Component 4-8

4.2-10 Characterization of Required Repairs - Single Component vs. Multiple Components 4-9

4.4-1 Test Vehicle Model Year Distribution 4-12

4.4-2 Test Vehicle Odometer Distribution 4-13

4.4-3 Summary of Downstate (Phase II) Results 4-14

4.4-4 Results by Repair Facility 4-16

4.4-5 Percent of Vehicles with High Emissions in Specific Modes 4-16

4.4-6 Results of Specific Types of Repairs 4-19

4.4-7 Effectiveness of Repairs Prior to Catalyst Change 4-20

4.4-8 Fail Rate by Pollutant - After Repairs 4-20

4.4-9 Vehicles Approaching Repair Limit That Fail NOx 4-21

4.4-10 Vehicles Approaching Repair Limit That Fail HC 4-22

Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION

The "Project", The Establishment of a Repair Sequence for Failed Inspection/Maintenance Vehicles, was conceived and managed by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Air Resources, Bureau of Enhanced Inspection/Maintenance (the "Department").

To finance the Project, the Department secured $792,732.30 in Federal funds from the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) for the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ). Of the total contract cost, the Department was required to provide a 20% match, or approximately $158,500. The contract employed a cost plus fixed fee compensation structure.

The Department selected TESTCOM Inc., of Albany, NY, as the Project contractor. TESTCOM supplemented its own resources with specialists from de la Torre Klausmeier Consulting (dKC), Radian International and Aspire Inc. Department personnel worked closely with the TESTCOM Project Team participating in test, diagnostic and repair activities. The New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (NYSDMV) also provided valuable assistance and recommendations during the course of the Project.

REPAIR INDUSTRY CHALLENGES

During 1998 and 1999, the State of New York substantially upgraded the emissions inspection/maintenance (I/M) program in the New York Metropolitan Area (NYMA) involving approximately 5.5 million vehicles. Most notably, the State has mandated, as the required test, transient, loaded mode testing, including measurement of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). The more comprehensive transient test replaces idle mode testing and is referred to as NYTEST (New York Transient Emissions Short Test).

CONSUMER & AIR QUALITY IMPLICATIONS

For the first time in the NYMA I/M program, vehicles failing to meet State standards for NOx must be repaired. The relationship between Hydrocarbon (HC) and Carbon Monoxide (CO) failures and the impact on repairs is known by many repair technicians in the NYMA. These types of repairs have been routinely performed under the earlier I/M program. However, the introduction of NOx failures increases the number of possible diagnostic and repair scenarios. Tuning a vehicle to comply with only one pollutant may increase another.

Accordingly, this Project has focused on the challenges facing the diagnostic/repair industry and the need for more information, structure and discipline in the diagnostic/repair process. Increased repair technician knowledge and skills will clearly benefit consumers and ultimately improve air quality.

PROJECT PURPOSE

The purpose of the Project was to better understand and favorably influence the dynamics associated with competently repairing vehicles that fail to meet exhaust emissions standards.

In the context of this Project, the "diagnostic/repair sequence" is the disciplined process by which a mid-level (or higher skilled) technician performs diagnostic checks and related (necessary) repairs. The sequence specifies the order of checks based in part on:

the type (gas) of emissions failure(s), and
the probability of a related component and/or system malfunction or deterioration being the source of the problem.

The results of each check in the sequence lead to logical conclusions that, in turn, lead to effective repair.

Accordingly, the Project was designed to achieve the following:

Gain a competent understanding of the status and capability of the repair industry in the NYMA to diagnose and repair emission-failed vehicles,
Develop well-conceived options for diagnostic and repair sequences,
Field test the refined sequences in a real world I/M environment where results could be measured, and practicing repair technicians could offer suggestions for further refinement, and
Disseminate the results to the repair industry via user-friendly media.

PROJECT STRUCTURE

The Project consisted of a variety of interrelated tasks. Early in the Project, the TESTCOM Project Team reviewed emissions inspection failure data from the previous New York inspection program as well as repair effectiveness data from other states

TESTCOM identified several candidate diagnostic/repair strategies and, in cooperation with the Department and NYSDMV, further refined those strategies, resulting in the design of two diagnostic/repair sequences which were then subjected to extensive testing and evaluation.

The testing elements of the Project were performed in two phases. Phase I was conducted at TESTCOM's Albany, NY facility. Its purpose was to thoroughly evaluate the two diagnostic/repair sequences. More than 1,200 vehicles were recruited and screened, yielding 183 high emitting vehicles for inclusion in the Project. (To qualify for participation, vehicles had to fail final IM240 cutpoints.) Vehicles were subjected to the step-by-step diagnostic and repair sequences. The experiences and data from Phase I were used to create a single, more refined diagnostic/ repair sequence for evaluation in Phase II.

Phase II activities took place on Long Island, New York, and were based at the State University of New York (SUNY) in Farmingdale. TESTCOM equipped and staffed the SUNY facility. The consolidated diagnostic/ repair sequence developed at the end of Phase I was distributed for "real world" testing and evaluation by six commercial repair facilities in the Farmingdale area. These facilities conducted repairs on 73 vehicles using the sequence. Baseline testing (before repairs) and verification testing (after repairs) was conducted at the SUNY facility. This process allowed for evaluation of the effectiveness of the diagnostic/repair sequence.

SCHEDULE

The Project began in March of 1997. Phase II testing was completed in December of 1998. The following displays key elements of the Project.

Review of Existing New York I/M Data March 1997 - June 1997
Review of I/M Data from Other States March 1997 - July 1997
Development of Strategies and Methods Aug. 1997 - Dec. 1998
Preparation of Albany Facility for Testing March 1997 - April 1997
Vehicle Solicitation and Testing (Albany) Sept. 1997 - March 1998
Vehicle Diagnostics and Repair (Albany) Sept. 1997 - March 1998
Selection/Chartering of Phase II Stations Feb. 1998 - April 1998
Phase II Setup and Testing March 1998 - Dec. 1998

OVERALL RESULTS

The Project was successful in achieving objectives. Most notably, and as a result of hands-on technician experiences with the diagnoses and repairs, an effective diagnostic/repair sequence has been defined.

The recommended sequence has resulted from extensive testing, analysis and continuing refinement. During the second half of 1999, the Department and TESTCOM will disseminate the recommended diagnostic/repair sequence to repair technicians facing the challenge of diagnosing and repairing emissions failed vehicles.

In addition to development of the sequence, a tutorial video describing the NYTEST (transient test) process and its value in diagnosis and repair was produced and distributed to more than 3,500 shops. Together with other important subjects, the video addressed interpretation of the emissions drive trace information when performing diagnostics.

More about Repair Sequence for Failed I/M Vehicles:

Repair Sequence for Failed I/M Vehicles - Introduction - During 1998 and 1999, the State of New York substantially upgraded the emissions inspection/maintenance (I/M) program in the New York Metropolitan Area (NYMA) involving approximately 5.5 million vehicles
Repair Sequence for Failed I/M Vehicles- Repair Industry Background - During 1998 and 1999, the State of New York substantially upgraded the emissions inspection/maintenance (I/M) program in the New York Metropolitan Area (NYMA) involving approximately 5.5 million vehicles.
Repair Sequence - Project Work Plan - During 1998 and 1999, the State of New York substantially upgraded the emissions inspection/maintenance (I/M) program in the New York Metropolitan Area (NYMA) involving approximately 5.5 million vehicles.
Repair Sequence - Analysis of Test Data - During 1998 and 1999, the State of New York substantially upgraded the emissions inspection/maintenance (I/M) program in the New York Metropolitan Area (NYMA) involving approximately 5.5 million vehicles.
Repair Sequence - Conclusions and Recommendations - During 1998 and 1999, the State of New York substantially upgraded the emissions inspection/maintenance (I/M) program in the New York Metropolitan Area (NYMA) involving approximately 5.5 million vehicles.