Frequently Asked Questions
We can help
Haven't found what you are looking for? Contact Helpline for assistance.
Lawn, Garden & Landscape Equipment
The retest must be performed on the same engine and/or equipment that generated the original test results. No additional preconditioning is required if the fuel system has continuously contained fuel subsequent to the original test.
Good engineering practices are used to calculate surface areas for irregular shaped tanks.
In years that you are required to meet fuel hose permeation standards only, the evaporative family code can be omitted from the label. However, the label must still contain an unconditional statement of compliance for evaporative emissions.
The effective date applies to the model year of the generator.
Yes, 13 CCR Section 2753 (d) applies.
Yes. However, the first two characters of the evaporative family code must be as specified by CP-902.
As defined in Cal. Code Regs., title 13, section 2752(a)(9), “Evaporative Family” means a class of off-road engines or equipment that are grouped together based on similar fuel system characteristics as they relate to evaporative emissions. For equipment less than or equal to 80 cc, the engine family and evaporative family are considered equivalent. For integrated equipment greater than 80 cc the engine family and the evaporative family may be considered equivalent at the manufacturer’s discretion
Footnote 4 was inadvertently removed from proposed 15-day modifications, published May 14, 2004, when the regulations were finally approved by the Office of Administrative Law. The footnote read as follows: “4 Applies to small production volume tanks exempted pursuant to section 2766.”
Yes. For the model years when only a low permeation hose is required, the manufacturer can omit the evaporative code from the label. However, the label must still contain an unconditional statement of compliance.
Manufacturers meeting the small production volume exemption in Section 2766 must certify equipment annually pursuant to Section 2753 (d). However, equipment is not required to be configured with low permeation fuel hoses and carbon canisters or conform to fuel cap performance standards until model year 2010.
No. Compression-ignited engines are not regulated in the small offroad engine regulations.
Yes, running loss emissions that are combusted are considered controlled.
Yes. Any changes to a certified evaporative emission control system will require the certification holder to submit a running change request.
No. The regulations do not specify the technology that must be used.
For equipment manufactured prior to or during a specific model year, the engine or equipment must comply with the respective exhaust and evaporative standards in effect for that model year in which it was produced. In the example described above, as long as the 2007 model year engine was compliant with the 2007 model year exhaust standards, and the 2008 model year equipment is compliant with 2008 model year evaporative requirements, a 2008 model year evaporative certification could be issued for the equipment.
The EMEL and EFELD are only applicable when a manufacturer is participating in the averaging and banking provisions of section 2754.1. When a manufacturer chooses to certify engines using the regulatory provisions for averaging and banking, the level being certified is the EFELD and not the EMEL. However, the EMEL for each model is the model’s effective emission standard.
Yes. Manufacturers can use an integrated exhaust and evaporative label with the last two characters of the exhaust family code representing the evaporative family.
Although this is not a requirement, a fuel cap manufacturer may voluntarily choose to request an CARB approval number (not a component EO) for their fuel cap design if they are selling the same fuel cap to a number of equipment manufacturers. Then, the fuel cap manufacturer can provide the equipment manufacturer with the CARB approval number to list in their certification application instead of providing the design diagram. For fuel cap manufacturers that would like to request an CARB approval number for their fuel cap design, please provide a letter along with the supporting information specified in Question 1-5.a above to the following address: Ms. Annette Hebert, Chief Emissions Compliance, Automotive Regulations and Science Division 9480 Telstar Ave., Suite 4 El Monte, CA 91731
The intent of 13 CCR 2756(a) is to ensure that the fuel cap remains attached to the tank, equipment, or engine for the full useful life of the small offroad engine or equipment under normal use. To meet the requirement of 13 CCR 2756(b), a description and an evaluation of how the user feedback and vapor seal are established should be included in the certification application. Fuel caps used on systems that pass a diurnal performance test are considered compliant with the vapor seal requirement. In the certification application, the manufacturer must describe how their fuel cap meets the performance standards in 13 CCR 2756(a) and 2756(b) by providing a design diagram. Please provide the fuel cap description on page 42 for performance-based, page 44 for design-based, and page 46 for small production volume tank manufacturers. If necessary, CARB may request manufacturers to submit fuel cap and tether samples for evaluation. As an alternative, if an equipment manufacturer is using the same fuel cap design in a number of certification applications, they may choose to submit the fuel cap design to DMS once and get an CARB approval number (not a component EO) for that specific design. Then, as long as there are no changes, manufacturers can just list the CARB approval number on future applications instead of providing the design diagram.
There are no specific requirements to control emissions from the carburetor. However, controlling the emissions from the carburetor will provide a greater margin of compliance.
These can be a significant source of permeation emissions if uncontrolled. Vapor hoses are not required to meet the 15 g/m2 /day permeation standard. However, CARB recommends using vapor hoses that do meet the standard to minimize emissions.
No. However, the end user is prohibited from tampering with certified control systems pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 43008.6.
An abrasive which is sold by its producer or vendor during the certified period is certified for use until it is gone. Advisory 164 on this issue is available online.
It can be returned if a Statement of Reuse form, included in the application, is submitted. If the tested abrasive sample cannot be reused as an abrasive, we can arrange appropriate disposal. Costs for the return/disposal of a tested abrasive sample will be included in the invoice for testing.
The certification test consists of two separate tests. The before-blasting sieve test and the after-blasting hydrometer test.
The producer or vendor of an abrasive which fails the before-blasting sieve test has three options on how to proceed:
- They may choose to abandon further testing. In this case, they will only be charged for the sieve test and the return/disposal of the tested abrasive sample.
- They may choose to resubmit the abrasive sample for retesting. In this case, they will be charged for the original sieve test, all testing done on the resubmitted abrasive sample and the return/disposal of the both tested abrasive samples.
- They may choose to demonstrate that the abrasive meets twenty percent opacity when blasted in accordance with the Visible Emissions Evaluation (VEE) test method. They are responsible for arranging for the test to be conducted at a site in California. CARB will provide a representative to do the opacity reading. In this case they will be charged for the sieving and blasting test of the abrasive sample, and the return/disposal of the tested abrasive sample, as well as for the costs to do the opacity reading. Any additional costs to perform the VEE test are separate for CARB invoicing. It should also be noted that normal certification testing uses the entire abrasive sample provided to CARB. Additional abrasive must be shipped to the VEE test site.
If the abrasive fails the after-blasting hydrometer test, it cannot be certified.
The cost varies since the total cost for testing in a given period is divided by the number of abrasives submitted for certification during that period. Therefore, the cost may be lower if more abrasives are submitted or higher if less are submitted. In general, the cost is expected to be between $1,800 and $2,400 per abrasive sample plus disposal/return costs.
Part of the testing process is done outdoors and is dependent on the weather. Also, if we have more abrasive samples on-hand it will take longer to get through them. Generally, you can expect that testing will take several months. We always strive to complete the testing as quickly as possible.
A roofed and walled structure built for continuing or enduring use without fundamental or marked change which is used, in whole or in part, for abrasive blasting operations. A tent is not a permanent building.
No. Abrasives do not need to certified if:
- They are used inside a permanent building, or
- They are made from steel or iron shot/grit, exclusively, or
- They are used with compressed air as the propelling force, using water to minimize the plume, or
- They are used with high pressure liquid as the propelling force, or
- The spent abrasive, surface material, and dust are immediately collected by a vacuum device.
For more detail, the California Code of Regulations, title 17, sections 92000 - 92530 is available online.
CARB is unable to provide any information about specific year models of vehicles prior to their being certified for sale in California. Once a vehicle is certified, an Executive Order is issued which authorizes the manufacturer to offer the applicable test group and models for sale in California. The Executive Order is published and also lists the specific details of which certification options were selected, and the test results submitted to CARB as part of the certification process. There is no set time for the certification process as manufacturers typically submit vehicle information and test results as they become available, but once complete, most applications are processed within a few weeks.
Vehicle manufacturers are free to discuss the status of certification applications at any time, however most will not provide exact details of the timing of their submittals, or provide other information prior to certification that they feel may change, or that may compromise their marketing efforts. Its also important to note that manufacturers are not permitted to "sell", or offer for sale any uncertified vehicle. They are however allowed to establish "interest" or "wait" lists for uncertified vehicles as long as any required deposit is unconditional and fully refundable on demand.
Have you ever wondered what a baghouse is or what NMOG stands for?