Test Procedures for Testing Highway and Nonroad Engines and Omnibus Technical Amendments
Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking.
This proposed regulation aims to revise and harmonize test procedures from the various EPA programs for controlling engine emissions. It will not address emission standards, nor is it intended to change the emission reductions expected from these EPA programs. Rather, it proposes to amend the regulations, which contain laboratory specifications for equipment and test fuels, instructions for preparing engines and running tests, calculations for determining final emission levels from measured values, and instructions for running emission tests using portable measurement devices outside the laboratory. These regulations currently apply to land-based nonroad diesel engines, land-based nonroad spark-ignition engines over 19 kilowatts, and recreational vehicles. These proposed revisions will update the regulations to deal more effectively with the more stringent standards recently promulgated by EPA and will also clarify and better define certain elements of the required test procedures. In particular, the proposed amendments will better specify the procedures applicable to field testing under the regulations.
This action also proposes to apply the regulations to highway heavy-duty diesel engine regulations. This action is appropriate because EPA has historically drafted a full set of testing specifications for each vehicle or engine category subject to emission standards as each program was developed over the past three decades. This patchwork approach has led to some variation in test parameters across programs, which we hope to address by adopting a common set of test requirements. The primary goal of this effort is to create unified testing requirements for all engines, which when implemented will streamline laboratory efforts for EPA and industry.
This action will also include other technical changes intended to clarify and better define requirements for several different EPA engine programs. These changes are relatively minor and are technical in scope.
2 actions from July 2004 to July 2005
- Final Action
Table of Contents Back to Top
- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
- A. Regulated Entities
- B. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
- C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?
- 1. Electronically
- i. EPA Dockets
- ii. E-Mail
- iii. Disk or CD ROM
- 2. By Mail
- 3. By Hand Delivery or Courier
- D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?
- Table of Contents
- I. Modified Test Procedures for Highway and Nonroad Engines
- A. Incorporation of Nonroad Test Procedures for Heavy Duty Highway Engines
- B. Revisions to Part 1065
- 1. Subpart A General Provisions
- 2. Subpart B Equipment Specifications
- 3. Subpart C Measurement Instruments
- 4. Subpart D Calibration and Performance Checks
- 5. Subpart E Engine Selection, Preparation, and Maintenance
- 6. Subpart F Test Protocols
- 7. Subpart G Calculations and Required Information
- 8. Subpart H Fuels, Fluids, and Analytical Gases
- 9. Subpart I Oxygenated Fuels
- 10. Subpart J Field Testing
- 11. Subpart K Definitions, References, and Symbols
- II. Technical Amendments
- A. Definitions and Penalties
- B. Nonroad General Compliance Provisions (40 CFR Part 1068)
- C. Land-based Nonroad Diesel Engines (40 CFR Parts 89 and 1039)
- D. Marine Diesel Engines (40 CFR Part 94)
- E. Small Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines (40 CFR Part 90)
- F. Marine Spark-Ignition Engines (40 CFR Part 91)
- G. Large Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines (40 CFR Part 1048)
- H. Recreational Vehicles (40 CFR Part 1051)
- I. Locomotives (40 CFR Part 92)
- J. Highway Engines and Vehicles (40 CFR Part 86)
- 1. Light-duty Vehicles
- 2. Highway Motorcycles
- 3. Heavy-Duty Highway Engines
- 4. Importation of Nonconforming Highway Engines and Vehicles
- 5. Revisions and Corrections to Dynamometer Driving Schedules
- III. Public Participation
- IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
- A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
- B. Paperwork Reduction Act
- C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
- D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
- E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
- F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
- G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks
- H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
- I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
- V. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
- List of Subjects
- PART 85—CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOBILE SOURCES
- Appendix II to Subpart V of Part 85—Arbitration Rules
- Part A—Pre-Hearing
- Section 1: Initiation of Arbitration
- PART 86—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY VEHICLES AND ENGINES
- PART 86—[AMENDED]
- Appendix I to Part 86—Urban Dynamometer Schedules
- PART 89—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE NONROAD COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES
- Appendix A to Subpart F of Part 89—Sampling Plans for Selective Enforcement Auditing of Nonroad Engines
- PART 90—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NONROAD SPARK-IGNITION ENGINES AT OR BELOW 19 KILOWATTS
- PART 91—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM MARINE SPARK-IGNITION ENGINES
- PART 92—CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM LOCOMOTIVES AND LOCOMOTIVE ENGINES
- Appendix IV to Part 92—Guidelines for Determining Equivalency Between Emission Measurement Systems
- PART 94—CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MARINE COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES
- PART 1039—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW AND IN-USE NONROAD COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES
- PART 1048—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NEW, LARGE NONROAD SPARK-IGNITION ENGINES
- Subpart A—Overview and Applicability
- PART 1051—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM RECREATIONAL ENGINES AND VEHICLES
- Subpart A—Overview and Applicability
- Subpart D—Testing Production-line Vehicles and Engines
- PART 1065—ENGINE-TESTING PROCEDURES
- Subpart A—Applicability and General Provisions
- Subpart B—Equipment Specifications
- Subpart C—Measurement Instruments
- MEASUREMENT OF ENGINE PARAMETERS AND AMBIENT CONDITIONS
- FLOW-RELATED MEASUREMENTS
- CO AND CO 2 MEASUREMENTS
- HYDROCARBON MEASUREMENTS
- NO X MEASUREMENTS
- O 2 MEASUREMENTS
- PM MEASUREMENTS
- Subpart D—Calibrations and Performance Checks
- MEASUREMENT OF ENGINE PARAMETERS AND AMBIENT CONDITIONS
- FLOW-RELATED MEASUREMENTS
- CO AND CO 2 MEASUREMENTS
- HYDROCARBON MEASUREMENTS
- NO X MEASUREMENTS
- PM MEASUREMENTS
- Subpart E—Engine Selection, Preparation, and Maintenance
- Subpart F—Running an Emission Test in the Laboratory
- Subpart G—Calculations and Data Requirements
- Subpart H—Engine Fluids, Test Fuels, and Analytical Gases
- Subpart I—Testing with Oxygenated Fuels
- Subpart J—Field Testing
- Subpart K—Definitions and Other Reference Information
- Subpart A—Applicability and General Provisions
- Subpart B—Equipment Specifications
- Subpart C—Measurement Instruments
- Measurement of Engine Parameters and Ambient Conditions
- Flow-Related Measurements
- CO and CO 2 Measurements
- Hydrocarbon Measurements
- NO X Measurements
- O2 MEASUREMENTS
- PM MEASUREMENTS
- Subpart D—Calibrations and Performance Checks
- Measurement of Engine Parameters and Ambient Conditions
- Flow-Related Measurements
- CO AND CO 2 MEASUREMENTS
- HYDROCARBON MEASUREMENTS
- NO X MEASUREMENTS
- PM Measurements
- Subpart E—Engine Selection, Preparation, and Maintenance
- Subpart F—Running an Emission Test in the Laboratory
- Subpart G—Calculations and Data Requirements
- Subpart H—Engine Fluids, Test Fuels, and Analytical Gases
- Subpart I—Testing With Oxygenated Fuels
- Subpart J—Field Testing
- Subpart K—Definitions and Other Reference Information
- PART 1068—GENERAL COMPLIANCE PROVISIONS FOR NONROAD PROGRAMS
Tables Back to Top
- Alternate Distillation Range for Ultra Low-sulfur Diesel Fuel
- Table 1 of § 86.513-2004.—Gasoline Test Fuel Specifications
- Table R99-5.—Intermediate Useful Life (50,000 Mile) In-Use Standards (g/mi) for Light-Duty Vehicles
- Table R99-6.—Full Useful Life (100,000 Mile) In-Use Standards (g/mi) for Light-duty Vehicles
- Table R99-14.2.—SFTP Exhaust Emission Standards (g/mi) for LEVs and ULEVs
- Table S04-2.—Tier 2 and Interim Non-Tier 2 IntermediateUseful Life (50,000 Mile) Exhaust Mass Emission Standards (Grams per Mile)
- EPA Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule
- Speed Versus Time Sequence
- EPA SC03 Driving Schedule
- Table 1.—Sampling Plan Code Letter
- Table B124-1.—Test Sequence for Locomotives and Locomotive Engines
- Table 1 of § 1048.101.—Examples of Possible Tier 2 Duty-cycle Emission Standards
- Table 2 of § 1048.101.—Tier 1 Emission Standards (g/kW-hr)
- Table 3 of § 1048.101.—Examples of Possible Tier 2 Field-testing Emission Standards
- Table 1 of § 1048.140—Long-term Standards for Blue Sky Series Engines (g/kW-hr)
- Table 1 of § 1048.505
- Table 2 of § 1048.505
- Table 3 of § 1048.505
- Table 4 of § 1048.505
- Table 5 of § 1048.505
- Table 6 of § 1048.505
- Table 1 of § 1048.810.—NIST Materials
- Table 2 of § 1048.810.—SAE Materials
- Table 1 of § 1051.107.—Exhaust Emission Standards for ATVs (g/km)
- Table 1 of § 1051.810—ASTM Materials
- Table 2 of § 1051.810—SAE Materials
- Table 3 of § 1051.810—NIST Materials
- Table 1 of § 1065.190—Dewpoint Tolerance as a Function of % PM Change and % Sulfuric Acid PM
- Table 1 of § 1065.195—Dewpoint Tolerance as a Function of % PM Change and % Sulfuric Acid PM
- Table 1 of § 1065.202.—Data Recording and Control Minimum Frequencies
- Table 1 of § 1065.205.—Recommended Performance Specifications for Measurement Instruments
- Table 1 of § 1065.303—Summary of Required Calibration and Performance Checks
- Table 1 of § 1065.514.—Summary of Point Omission Criteria From Duty-Cycle Regression Statistics
- Table 2 of § 1065.514.—Default Statistical Criteria for Validating Duty Cycles
- Table 1 of § 1065.602-Critical t Values Versus Number of Degrees of Freedom, v
- Table 1 of § 1065.640.—C fCFV versus β and γ
- Table 2. of § 1065.640.—Permissible Ranges of Dilution Air Dewpoint Versus Calibration Dewpoint Where a Constant M mix May Be Assumed
- Table 1 of § 1065.655.—Default Values of Atomic Hydrogen to Carbon Ratio, α, Atomic Oxygen to Carbon Ratio, β, and Carbon Mass Fraction of Fuel, w C, for Various Fuels
- Table 1 of § 1065.703.—Test Fuel Specifications for Distillate Diesel Fuel
- Table 1 of § 1065.710.—Test Fuel Specifications for Gasoline
- Table 1 of § 1065.715.—Test Fuel Specifications for Natural Gas
- Table 1 of § 1065.720—Test Fuel Specifications for Liquefied Petroleum Gas
- Table 1 of § 1065.750—General Specifications for Purified Gases
- Table 1 of § 1065.905—Summary of Field-Testing Requirements That Are Specified Outside of This Subpart J1
- Table 1 of § 1065.915.—Recommended Minimum Measurement Instrument Performance for Field Testing
- Table 1 of § 1065.1010.—ASTM Materials
- Table 2 of § 1065.1010.—ISO Materials
- Table 3 of § 1065.1010.—NIST Materials
- Table 4 of § 1065.1010.—SAE Materials
DATES: Back to Top
Comments: Send written comments on this proposed rule by October 29, 2004. See Section IV of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information about written comments.
Hearings: We will hold an informal public workshop in Ann Arbor on October 1, 2004. If anyone requests a public hearing , we will hold it on September 27, 2004. To request a public hearing, send a request to the contact in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by September 20, 2004. See Section III for more information about public workshops and hearings.
ADDRESSES: Back to Top
You may submit comments, identified by docket number OAR-2004-0017, by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Note that this is not available until after this proposal is published in the Federal Register.
E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. Specify docket number OAR-2004-0017 in the body of the message.
Fax: (202) 260-4400.
Mail or Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket, Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460.
Hand Delivery or Courier: EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC., Attention Docket ID No. A-2001-28. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
Instructions: Include the agency name and docket number in all submissions for this rulemaking. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.epa.gov/edocket, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Participation” heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to the Web site at the URL identified above or to the Air Docket at the address identified above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Back to Top
Alan Stout, U.S. EPA, Voice-mail (734) 214-4636; E-mail: email@example.com
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Back to Top
A. Regulated Entities Back to Top
This proposed action would affect companies that manufacture or sell engines. Regulated categories and entities include:
|Category||NAICS Codes a||Examples of potentially regulated entities|
|b North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).|
|Industry||333618||Manufacturers of new engines.|
This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. To determine whether particular activities may be regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the proposed regulations. You may direct questions regarding the applicability of this action to the person listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information? Back to Top
1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0017. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Documents in the official public docket are listed in the index list in EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EDOCKET. Documents may be available either electronically or in hard copy. Electronic documents may be viewed through EDOCKET. Hard copy documents may be viewed at the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Docket in The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744.
This proposal relies in part on information related to our November 2002 final rule, which can be found in Public Docket A-2000-01. This docket is incorporated by reference into the docket for this action, OAR-2004-0017.
2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the Federal Register listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/ Or you can go to the federal-wide eRulemaking site at http://www.regulations.gov.
An electronic version of the public docket is available through EDOCKET. You may use EDOCKET at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the appropriate docket identification number.
Certain types of information will not be placed in the EDOCKET. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EDOCKET, the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. Publicly available docket materials that are not available electronically may be viewed at the docket facility identified in Unit I.B. EPA intends to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket.
For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief description written by the docket staff.
C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? Back to Top
We are opening a formal comment period by publishing this document. We will accept comments for the period indicated under DATES above. If you have an interest in the program described in this document, we encourage you to comment on any aspect of this rulemaking.
Your comments will be most useful if you include appropriate and detailed supporting rationale, data, and analysis. If you disagree with parts of the proposal, we encourage you to suggest and analyze alternate approaches to meeting the air quality goals described in this proposal. You should send all comments, except those containing proprietary information, to our Air Docket (see ADDRESSES) before the end of the comment period.
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket identification number in the body of your comment. Submit your comments within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information that is otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in Section IX.D. Do not use EPA Dockets or e-mail to submit CBI or information protected by statute.
If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed below, we recommend that you include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows us to contact you if we cannot read your comment or if we need further information on the substance of your comment. Our policy is that we will not edit your comment; any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If we cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, we may not be able to consider your comment.
i. EPA Dockets
To submit comments on EPA's electronic public docket, go directly to EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket and follow the online instructions for submitting comments. To access EPA's electronic public docket from the EPA Internet Home Page, select “Information Sources,” “Dockets,” and “EPA Dockets.” Once in the system, select “Quick Search,” and then key in Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0017. The system is an “anonymous access” system, which means we will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
Comments may be sent by electronic mail to firstname.lastname@example.org. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system is not an “anonymous access” system. If you send a comment via electronic mail directly to the Docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, the e-mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail addresses that are automatically captured are included and made available as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket.
iii. Disk or CD ROM
You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM that you send to the mailing address identified in Section IX.A.2 below. Avoid the use of special software, characters, and any form of encryption.
2. By Mail
Send your comments to: Air Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460.
3. By Hand Delivery or Courier
Deliver your comments to: EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC., Attention Docket ID No. A-2001-28. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency? Back to Top
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e-mail. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Assessment and Standards Division, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, Attention Docket No. OAR-2004-0017. You may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI (if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is CBI). Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Table of Contents Back to Top
I. Modified Test Procedures for Highway and Nonroad Engines
A. Incorporation of Nonroad Test Procedures for Heavy Duty Highway Engines
B. Revisions to Part 1065
II. Technical Amendments
A. Definitions and Penalties
B. Nonroad general compliance provisions (40 CFR part 1068)
C. Land-based nonroad diesel engines (40 CFR parts 89 and 1039)
D. Marine diesel engines (40 CFR part 94)
E. Small nonroad spark-ignition engines (40 CFR part 90)
F. Marine spark-ignition engines (40 CFR part 91)
G. Large nonroad spark-ignition engines (40 CFR part 1048)
H. Recreational vehicles (40 CFR part 1051)
I. Locomotives (40 CFR part 92)
J. Highway engines and vehicles (40 CFR part 86)
III. Public Participation
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
V. Statutory Provisions and Legal Authority
I. Modified Test Procedures for Highway and Nonroad Engines Back to Top
A. Incorporation of Nonroad Test Procedures for Heavy Duty Highway Engines
As part of our initiative to update the content, organization and writing style of our regulations, we are proposing revisions to our test procedures.  We have grouped all of our engine dynamometer and field testing test procedures into one part entitled, “Part 1065: Test Procedures.” For each engine or vehicle sector for which we have recently promulgated standards (such as land-based nonroad diesel engines or recreational vehicles), we identified an individual part as the standard-setting part for that sector. These standard-setting parts then refer to one common set of test procedures in part 1065. We intend in this rule to continue this process of having all our engine programs refer to a common set of procedures by applying part 1065 to all heavy-duty highway engines.
In the past, each engine or vehicle sector had its own set of testing procedures. There are many similarities in test procedures across the various sectors. However, as we introduced new regulations for individual sectors, the more recent regulations featured test procedure updates and improvements that the other sectors did not have. As this process continued, we recognized that a single set of test procedures would allow for improvements to occur simultaneously across engine and vehicle sectors. A single set of test procedures is easier to understand than trying to understand many different sets of procedures, and it is easier to move toward international test procedure harmonization if we only have one set of test procedures. We note that procedures that are particular for different types of engines or vehicles, for example, test schedules designed to reflect the conditions expected in use for particular types of vehicles or engines, will remain separate and would be reflected in the standard-setting parts of the regulations.
In addition to reorganizing and rewriting the test procedures for improved clarity, we are proposing to make a variety of changes to improve the content of the testing specifications, including the following:
- Writing specifications and calculations in international units
- Adding procedures by which manufacturers can demonstrate that alternate test procedures are equivalent to specified procedures.
- Including specifications for new measurement technology that has been shown to be equivalent or more accurate than existing technology; procedures that improve test repeatability, calculations that simplify emissions determination; new procedures for field testing engines, and a more comprehensive set of definitions, references, and symbols.
- Defining calibration and accuracy specifications that are scaled to the applicable standard, which allows us to adopt a single specification that applies to a wide range of engine sizes and applications.
Some emission-control programs already rely on the test procedures in part 1065. These programs regulate land-based nonroad diesel engines, recreational vehicles, and nonroad spark-ignition engines over 19 kW.
In this document, we are proposing to adopt the lab-testing and field-testing specifications in part 1065 for all heavy-duty highway engines, as described in Section II.J. These procedures would replace those currently published in subpart N in 40 CFR part 86. We are proposing a gradual transition from the part 86 procedures. We will allow the use of part 1065 procedures beginning in the 2006 model year. By the 2008 model year, part 1065 procedures will be required for any new testing. For all testing completed for 2007 and earlier model years, manufacturers may continue to rely on carryover test data based on part 86 procedures to certify engine families in later years. In addition, other subparts in part 86, as well as regulations for many different nonroad engines refer to the test procedures in part 86. We are including updated references for all these other programs to refer instead to the appropriate cite in part 1065.
Part 1065 is also advantageous for in-use testing because it specifies the same procedures for all common parts of field testing and laboratory testing. It also contains new provisions that help ensure that engines are tested in a laboratory in a way that is consistent with how they operate in use. These new provisions will ensure that engine dynamometer lab testing and field testing are conducted in a consistent way.
In the future, we may propose to apply the test procedures specified in part 1065 to other types of engines, so we encourage companies involved in producing or testing other engines to stay informed of developments related to these test procedures. We also request comment on whether we should make part 1065 applicable for light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, motorcycles, and aircraft in the future. Although light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and motorcycles are tested on chassis dynamometers, rather than engine dynamometers, there are several aspects of testing that are common. For example, emission sampling systems, dilution systems, gas analyzers, PM measurement equipment, some test sequences, fuels, analytical gas standards, and specifications related to oxygenated fuels are all similar. However, there are differences, such as chassis dynamometer specifications, vehicle intake air, exhaust system, and coolant specifications, some test sequences such as evaporative and refueling tests, vehicle preparation, and some emission calculations (e.g., g/mi vs g/kW-hr) that would have to be addressed in any future decision to apply part 1065 to these engines.
Although testing aircraft engines requires some special provisions, there are several aspects of testing that are common, such as emission sampling systems, dilution systems, gas analyzers, PM measurement equipment, some test sequences, fuels, analytical gas standards, and specifications related to oxygenated fuels.
B. Revisions to Part 1065
Part 1065 was originally adopted on November 8, 2002 (67 FR 68242), and was initially applicable to standards regulating large nonroad spark-ignition engines and recreational vehicles under 40 CFR parts 1048 and 1051. The recent rulemaking adopting emission standards for nonroad diesel engines has also made part 1065 optional for Tier 2 and Tier 3 standards and required for Tier 4 standards. The test procedures currently in part 1065 are sufficient to conduct testing, but we are proposing to reorganize and add content to improve these procedures. In particular, we propose to reorganize part 1065 by subparts as shown below:
Subpart A: General provisions; global information on applicability, alternate procedures units of measure, etc.
Subpart B: equipment specifications; required hardware for testing
Subpart C: measurement instruments
Subpart D: calibration and performance checks; for measurement systems
Subpart E: engine selection, preparation, and maintenance
Subpart F: test protocols; step-by-step sequences for testing and test validation.
Subpart G: calculations and required information
Subpart H: fuels, fluids, and analytical gases
Subpart I: oxygenated fuels; special test procedures
Subpart J: field testing
Subpart K: definitions, references, and symbols
We propose to scale specifications for test equipment and measurement instruments by parameters such as engine power, engine speed and the emission standards to which an engine must comply. That way a single set of specifications will cover the full range of engine sizes and our full range of emission standards and our regulations will therefore specify equipment and instruments that are appropriate for a given engine size and emission standard. Manufacturers will be able to use these specifications to determine what range of engines and emission standards may be tested using a given laboratory or field testing system.
The new content that we are proposing for part 1065 is mostly a combination of content from our most recent updates to other test procedures and from test procedures specified by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). In some cases, however, new content is proposed that never existed in previous regulations. This new content addresses very recent issues such as measuring very low concentrations of emissions, using new measurement technology, and performing field testing. A full description of the changes is in the Technical Support Document that accompanies this proposal (this document is available in the docket for this rulemaking).
The new content we are proposing also reflects a shift in our philosophy for specifying measurement performance. In the past we specified numerous calibration accuracies for individual measurement instruments, and we specified some performance checks for individual components, such as NO 2 to NO converters. We have shifted our focus away from individual instruments and toward the overall performance of complete measurement systems. We did this for several reasons. First, some of what we specified in the past precluded the implementation of new measurement technologies. These new technologies, sometimes called “smart analyzers”, combine signals from multiple instruments to compensate for interferences that were previously tolerable at higher emissions levels. These analyzers are useful for detecting low concentrations of emissions. They are also useful for detecting emissions from raw exhaust, which can contain high concentrations of interferences, such as water vapor. This is particularly important for field testing, which will most likely rely upon raw exhaust measurements. Second, this new “systems approach” challenges complete measurement systems with a series of periodic performance checks, which we feel will provide a more robust assurance that a measurement system as a whole is operating properly. Third, the systems approach provides a direct pathway to demonstrate that a field test system performs similarly to a laboratory system. This is explained in more detail in item 10., below. Finally, we feel that our systems approach will lead to a more efficient way of assuring measurement performance in the laboratory and in the field. We believe that this efficiency will stem from less frequent individual instrument calibrations, and higher confidence that a complete measurement system is operating properly.
We organized the new content relating to measurement performance into subparts C, D, F, and J. We specified measurement instruments in subpart C and periodic performance checks in subpart D. These two subparts apply to both laboratory and field testing. We organized content specific to laboratory testing in subpart F, and specific to field testing in subpart J.
In subpart C we specified the types of acceptable instruments, but we only recommend individual instrument performance. We provided these recommendations as guidance for procuring new instruments. We feel that the periodic performance checks that we required in subpart D will sufficiently evaluate the individual instruments as part of an overall measurement system. In subpart F we specified measurement performance validations that must be conducted as part of every laboratory test. In subpart J we specified similar measurement performance validations for field testing that must be conducted as part of every field test. We feel that the periodic performance checks in subpart D and the validations in subparts F and J that are required for every test ensure that complete measurement systems are operating properly.
In subpart J we also specified an additional overall performance check for a field test system. This check is a comprehensive comparison of a field test system versus a laboratory, and it may take several days of laboratory time to set up, run, and evaluate. We propose that this performance check must be performed at least once for a given make, model, and configuration of a field test system. We request comment on whether or not we should additionally require that this check be performed on every individual field test system at least once. We request comment on whether or not we should require the end-user of a field test system to perform this overall check. We believe that the performance checks in subpart D and the test validations in subpart J will ensure that an individual field test system is operating properly, however, we request comment on whether or not this comprehensive overall check must also be required to completely ensure proper operation of an individual field test system.
Below is a brief description of the content of each subpart, highlighting some of the new content.
1. Subpart A General Provisions
In Subpart A we identify the applicability of part 1065 and describe how procedures other than those in part 1065 may be used to comply with a standard-setting part. We specify that testing must be conducted in a way that represents in-use engine operation, such that in the rare case where provisions in part 1065 result in unrepresentative testing, other procedures would be used. In subpart A we indicate the conventions we use regarding units and certain measurements and we discuss recordkeeping. We also provide an overview of how emissions and other information are used to determine final emission results. The regulations in § 1065.15 include a figure illustrating the different ways we allow brake-specific emissions to be calculated.
In Subpart A we describe how continuous and batch sampling may be used to determine total emissions. We also describe the two ways of determining total work. Note that the figure indicates our default procedures and those procedures that would require additional approval before we would allow them for use.
2. Subpart B Equipment Specifications
Subpart B first describes engine and dynamometer related systems. Many of these specifications are scaled to an engine's size, speed, torque, exhaust flow rate, etc. We specify the use of in-use engine subsystems such as air intake systems wherever possible in order to best represent in-use operation when an engine is tested in a laboratory.
Subpart B next describes sampling dilution systems. These include specifications for the allowable components, materials, pressures, and temperatures. We describe how to sample crankcase emissions. We also propose to allow limited use of partial-flow dilution for PM sampling. We request comment on whether or not our specifications for partial-flow dilution and our specifications for proportional-sampling validation (i.e., § 1065.140(d) and § 1065.545) are sufficient for us to allow partial-flow dilution for all PM sampling without requiring alternate system approval.
Subpart B also specifies environmental conditions for PM filter stabilization and weighing. Although these provisions mostly come from our recent update to part 86, subpart N, we also describe some new aspects in detail.
The regulations in § 1065.101 include a diagram illustrating all the available equipment for measuring emissions.
3. Subpart C Measurement Instruments
Subpart C specifies the requirements for the measurement instruments used for testing. In subpart C we recommend accuracy, repeatability, noise, and response time specifications for individual measurement instruments, but note that we require that overall measurement systems meet the calibration and performance checks in Subpart D.
In some cases we allow new instrument types to be used where we previously did not allow them. For example, we propose to allow the use of a nonmethane cutter for NMHC measurement, we propose to allow the use of non-dispersive ultra-violet analyzers for NO X measurement, we propose to allow the use of zirconia sensors for NO X and O 2 measurement, we propose to allow various raw exhaust flow meters for laboratory and field testing measurement, and we propose to allow ultrasonic flow meters for CVS systems.
4. Subpart D Calibration and Performance Checks
Subpart D describes what we mean when we specify accuracy, repeatability and other performance parameters. We propose calibration and performance checks that scale with engine size and the emission standards to which an engine is certified. We propose to replace some of what we have called “calibrations” in the past with a series of performance checks, such as a linearity check, that essentially checks the calibration of an instrument without specifying how the instrument must be initially calibrated. Because new instruments have built-in routines that linearize signals and compensate for various interferences, our typical calibration specifications sometimes conflicted with an instrument manufacturer's instructions. In addition we propose new performance checks in subpart D to ensure that the new instruments we specified in Subpart C are used correctly.
5. Subpart E Engine Selection, Preparation, and Maintenance
Subpart E describes how to select, prepare, and maintain a test engine. We updated these provisions to include both gasoline and diesel engines. This subpart is relatively short, and we did not make many changes to its original content.
6. Subpart F Test Protocols
Subpart F describes the step-by-step protocols for engine mapping, test cycle generation, test cycle validation, pre-test preconditioning, engine starting, emission sampling, and post-test validations. We propose an improved way to map and generate cycles for constant-speed engines. The constant-speed mapping procedure we propose better represents in-use engine operation. We propose a more streamlined set of test cycle and proportional validation criteria. We propose to allow modest corrections for noise and drift of emission analyzer signals within a certain range. We also propose a recommended procedure for weighing PM samples.
7. Subpart G Calculations and Required Information
Subpart G describes all of the calculations that are required in part 1065. We propose definitions of statistical quantities such as mean, standard deviation, slope, intercept, t-test, F-test, etc. By defining these quantities mathematically we intend to resolve any potential mis-communication when we discuss these quantities in other subparts. We propose all of the calculations for calibrations and emission calculations in international units to comply with 15 CFR 1170, which removes the voluntary aspect of the conversion to international units for Federal agencies. Furthermore, Executive Order 12770 (56 FR 35801, July 29, 1991) reinforces this policy by providing Presidential authority and direction for the use of the metric system of measurement by Federal agencies and departments. For our standards that are not completely in international units (i.e. grams/horsepower-hour, grams/mile), we specify in part 1065 the correct use of internationally recognized conversion factors.
We also propose to calculate emissions based on molar quantities for flow rates, instead of volume or mass. This change eliminates the frequent confusion caused by the use of different reference points for standard pressure and standard temperature. Instead of declaring standard densities at standard pressure and standard temperature to convert volumetric concentration measurements to mass-based units, we declare molar masses for individual elements and compounds. Since these values are independent of all other parameters, they are known to be constant.
8. Subpart H Fuels, Fluids, and Analytical Gases
Subpart H specifies test fuels, lubricating oils and coolants, and analytical gases for testing. Because standard-setting parts for diesel engines now refer to part 1065, we are proposing diesel fuel specifications in part 1065. These fuel specifications are consistent with those previously adopted, with one exception. We propose to eliminate the Cetane Index specification for all diesel fuels because the existing specification for Cetane Number sufficiently determines the cetane levels of diesel test fuels. We propose to eliminate any detailed specification for service accumulation fuel. Instead, we propose that service accumulation fuel may be a commercially available in-use fuel. This change helps ensure that testing is representative of in-use engine operation. We propose to scale analytical gas specifications with the standards, which an engine must meet.
In addition, we request comment on whether or not we should consider revising our specifications for ultra low-sulfur diesel test fuel to reflect the expected lower distillation range relative to fuels with higher sulfur levels. We request comment on whether or not widening the distillation ranges by lowering the lower limit by 5 °C would better reflect in-use diesel fuels with sulfur concentrations below 15 ppm. The following table shows alternative distillation temperatures for ultralow-sulfur diesel test fuel, with the lower end of the distillation ranges lowered by 5 °C.
|Initial Boiling Point||(166 to 204) °C.|
|10% point, °C||(199 to 238) °C.|
|50% point, °C||(238 to 282) °C.|
|90% point, °C||(288 to 332) °C.|
|End point, °C||(316 to 366) °C.|
9. Subpart I Oxygenated Fuels
Subpart I describes special procedures for measuring certain hydrocarbons whenever oxygenated fuels are used. We updated the calculations for these procedures in Subpart G. This subpart is relatively short, and we did not make many changes to its original content. We request comment on whether or not we should provide additional guidance for testing with oxygenated fuels. For example, the regulations currently include a general reference to 40 CFR part 86 for sampling procedures related to oxygenated fuels. We request comment on the degree to which any specific provisions in part 86 should be included in Subpart I.
10. Subpart J Field Testing
Although Subpart J Field Testing existed prior to this proposal, we are proposing many changes to this subpart. We are proposing that in general, field testing equipment and measurement instruments meet the same specifications and performance checks that laboratory instruments must meet, according to subparts B, C, and D. However, for field testing instruments, we propose to allow certain deviations from the laboratory specifications. In addition to meeting many of the laboratory system requirements, we propose that a field test system meet an overall performance check versus a laboratory. This check involves repeating a duty cycle several times. The duty cycle itself must have several individual field test intervals (e.g., NTE events) against which the field test system is compared to the laboratory system. This is a comprehensive check of the field test system. We also propose a procedure for preparing and conducting a field test, and we propose additional drift and noise allowances for emission analyzers. Given the evolving state of portable emissions measurement technology, the proposed field testing procedures provide for a number of known measurement techniques. We request comment on the relative efficacy of these approaches and/or the need to consider additional methods. We plan to expand on this topic in an upcoming memo to the docket.
11. Subpart K Definitions, References, and Symbols
In Subpart K we propose some new and revised definitions of vocabulary that we frequently use in part 1065. For example we have revised our definitions of “brake power”, “constant-speed engine”, and “aftertreatment” to provide more clarity, and we have added new definitions for things such as “300 series stainless steel”, “barometric pressure”, and “operator demand”. We propose definitions such as “duty cycle” and “test interval” to distinguish the difference between a single interval over which brake-specific emissions are calculated and the complete cycle over which emissions are evaluated in a laboratory. We also propose a thorough and consistent set of symbols, abbreviations, and acronyms. We propose to update our references to include references of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
II. Technical Amendments Back to Top
A. Definitions and Penalties
We are proposing to revise several definitions that apply over more than one part of our regulations. These changes are designed to harmonize our regulations.
We are proposing to change the definition of Marine engine and Marine vessel to harmonize our approach to amphibious vehicles and clarify other issues. We have treated amphibious vehicles differently whether they had a diesel engine or a spark-ignition engine. We are proposing to harmonize our treatment of amphibious vehicles by consistently treating these as land-based products. We are also adding a provision defining amphibious vehicles are those that are designed primarily for operation on land to clarify that we don't consider hovercraft to be amphibious vehicles. See the Technical Support Document for additional information related to these definitions. In particular, note that we describe our interpretation of what it means for an engine to be “installed in a marine vessel.” Manufacturers have raised several questions related to this issue, especially as it relates to portable engines installed on barges.
We are also considering changes to the definition for Spark-ignition and Compression-ignition. We define Compression-ignition as relating to reciprocating internal-combustion engines that are not spark-ignition engines. We limit these definitions to reciprocating engines to avoid including gas turbines under the definition of Compression-ignition. We currently do not have emission standards for gas turbines. A question has come up regarding how we should treat rotary engines, such as the Wankel engine. We request comment regarding whether the definition of Compression ignition should refer to “reciprocating and rotary engines” to clarify that rotary engines not meeting the definition for Spark-ignition engines would fall under our provisions for compression ignition engines.
We currently define Spark-ignition as follows:
Spark-ignition means relating to a gasoline-fueled engine or any other type of engine with a spark plug (or other sparking device) and with operating characteristics significantly similar to the theoretical Otto combustion cycle. Spark-ignition engines usually use a throttle to regulate intake air flow to control power during normal operation.
This definition has left some confusion regarding natural gas engines that have a throttle, but perhaps do not clearly have operating characteristics that are significantly similar to the theoretical Otto combustion cycle. As an alternative, we are considering the following definition to remove this ambiguity:
Spark-ignition means relating to a gasoline-fueled engine or any other type of engine with a spark plug (or other sparking device). Engines that use diesel fuel are not spark-ignition engines.
Such a simple approach would be very clear, but could have the effect of defining some natural gas engines that have operating characteristics that are significantly similar to the theoretical diesel combustion cycle as spark-ignition engines. This may be appropriate, but it would represent a change from our existing policy for these engines. We are also considering another definition, as follows:
Spark-ignition means relating to a gasoline-fueled engine or any other type of engine with a spark plug (or other sparking device) and with operating characteristics similar to the theoretical Otto combustion cycle. Spark-ignition engines usually burn a premixed charge of air and fuel. Engines that use diesel fuel are not spark-ignition engines.
This definition aims for consistency with the existing policy, but focuses on premixed combustion instead of the throttle to indicate whether natural gas engines are more appropriately regulated as compression-ignition or spark-ignition engines.
We welcome comment on all of these possible definitions of spark-ignition, as well as other possible approaches to this definition.
The Clean Air Act specifies maximum penalty amounts corresponding to each prohibited Act. These maximum penalty amounts are periodically adjusted for inflation, based on the provisions of the Debt Collection Improvement Act. These maximum penalties have been updated under 40 CFR part 19. The new maximum penalties are $32,500 for introducing noncompliant engines into commerce for manufacturers guilty of tampering, and $2,750 for non-manufacturers guilty of tampering. In addition, the maximum penalty we can recover using administrative procedures is $270,000. We are proposing to extend these revised penalties into each of our emission-control programs.
B. Nonroad General Compliance Provisions (40 CFR Part 1068)
In addition to the changing test procedures described above, we are proposing or considering changes that would affect multiple engine categories.
We are proposing several amendments to the provisions of 40 CFR part 1068, which currently apply to land-based nonroad diesel engines, recreational vehicles, and nonroad spark-ignition engines over 19 kW. We encourage manufacturers of other engines to take note of these changes, since we intend eventually to apply the provisions of part 1068 to all engines subject to EPA emission standards. Note that we are not requesting comment on the whole range of provisions in part 1068, but rather on those items that are included in this proposal. These changes include the following:
- Section 1068.10: Clarify confidentiality provisions to address how we treat information that we collect from on-site visits or testing, as opposed to information that manufacturers send to us.
- Section 1068.30: Add or correct definitions to coordinate with the standard-setting parts and clarify various terms.
- Section 1068.105: Expand paragraph (a) to better explain requirements for equipment manufacturers to use current model-year engines. This relates especially to the existing provision that allows equipment manufacturers to use up their normal inventories of engines from previous model years in cases where a new emission standard takes effect. We propose to change § 1068.101(a)(1) to reflect these changes.
- Section 1068.110: Clarify that the manufacturers' warranty obligation includes all expenses related to diagnosing and repairing or replacing emission-related parts. This is not intended to include incidental expenses (such as replacement units during warranty service), consequential damage (such as damage caused by engine malfunction), or opportunity costs (such as foregone revenue from engine downtime).
- Section 1068.115: Add text to paragraph (a) to provide a complete list of reasons for manufacturers to deny warranty claims. This clarifies that the list of reasons given in paragraph (b) is descriptive, and is not intended to be comprehensive.
- Section 1068.245: Clarify that manufacturers applying for hardship must use the provisions of § 1068.250 (if applicable) before applying for hardship under § 1068.245. This is necessary to remove the ambiguity resulting from the current approach, which specifies that both §§ 1064.245 and 1068.250 are provisions of last resort.
- Section 1068.260: Clarify that including the cost of separately shipped components means that the cost of shipping must also be addressed.
- Section 1068.265: Add provisions that clarify what manufacturers must do when they are required to meet emission standards for engines that are not certified. A typical example would be an exemption that applies to new engines that replace an old engine that was certified to emission standards. We already require these engines to have the same degree of emission control as the replaced engine. We do not want manufacturers to certify these engines, but we are proposing to add requirements to clarify how manufacturers can show that the new engines meet an older set of emission standards. This involves either using an engine that is the same as one that was certified in an earlier model year, or performing tests to show that the engines meet the specified emission levels. In any case, manufacturers would not need to go through the process or pay the fees associated with certification. We recently adopted these same provisions for nonroad diesel engines and are proposing to extend them to the other engine categories covered by part 1068.
- Section 1068.315: Reduce the ownership requirement for the identical configuration exemption from one year to six months; also, change the qualifying criterion from “the same as” to “identical to.”
- Section 1068.410: Add provisions allowing manufacturers to test engines up to three times total if an engine family reaches a fail decision under selective enforcement auditing, consistent with the provisions that apply under most of our programs.
- Section 1068.510: Clarify that manufacturers must describe the qualifications of repair personnel, rather than simply stating that they are qualified.
C. Land-based Nonroad Diesel Engines (40 CFR Parts 89 and 1039)
We recently adopted a new tier of emission standards for nonroad diesel engines, codifying these standards in 40 CFR part 1039. This rulemaking led us to make several regulatory changes to the existing tiers of standards for these engines in 40 CFR part 89. In cases where we discovered the need for changes after publishing the proposed rule, but we did not make those changes to part 89 in the final rule out of concern that the public had not had an opportunity for comment. Similarly, we are proposing some adjustments to part 1039, based on information that surfaced late in that rulemaking. We are proposing the following changes in part 89 and part 1039:
- Section 89.102: Clarify that equipment manufacturers using allowances under this section may use lower-emitting engines than we currently require.
- Section 89.110 and § 89.1009: Allow manufacturers to identify a different company's name and trademark on the emission control information label, with additional provisions to ensure that operators take certain steps to ensure that operators have the full benefit of the emission-related warranty.
- Section 89.130: Refer to the nearly identical provisions for rebuilding engines in § 1068.120.
- Section 89.410: Allow manufacturers to use ramped-modal testing, as specified for engines that must meet the Tier 4 standards.
- Appendix A to subpart F: Correct the ranges of values to address an unintentional gap for sales volumes between 300 and 500.
- Section 89.603: Clarify that standards applicable to Independent Commercial Importers (ICIs) are those of the year in which the imported engine was originally produced, for up to five engines per year. See the Technical Support Document and the discussion below related to highway engines and vehicles for additional information.
- Sections 89.913 and 89.914: Allow engine and equipment manufacturers to use the engine-dressing provisions in §§ 1039.605 and 1039.610.
- Section 89.1003: Clarify that engine manufacturers may ensure that the replaced engine is destroyed instead of taking possession of it; add a new label requirement for replacement engines that are allowed to meet a less stringent set of standards that are in effect when the replacement engine is built (to address the case where the engine being replaced was subject to emission standards less stringent than the current standards).
- Section 89.1003: Clarify that violating the requirements to rebuild an engine to its original configuration is considered tampering with respect to the applicable penalties.
- Section 89.1 and § 1039.5: Allow manufacturers to include marine auxiliary engines in an engine family certified under part 89 or 1039, subject to certain limitations.
- Section 1039.1: Clarify that residence-time limits do not apply to engines used in stationary applications if they have been certified to nonroad emission standards.
- Section 1039.104, 1039.625, and 1039.655: Change cross-reference from § 1039.260 to § 1068.265.
- Section 1039.125: Clarify that a manufacturer's obligation to pay for scheduled maintenance under certain situations is limited to the useful life of the engine.
- Section 1039.225: Include a modified FEL as the basis for a change to the application for certification, consistent with current practice.
- Section 1039.240: Adding section references that were inadvertently omitted.
- Section 1039.510: Remove provisions that are covered by part 1065.
- Section 1039.605 and § 1039.610: Clarify the ABT responsibilities relative to engines or vehicles that are certified under the motor-vehicle program and used in nonroad applications.
- Section 1039.705: Add a constraint for averaging, banking, and trading to prevent manufacturers from including credits earned in California if there would ever be a situation where they are required to meet separate standards in California (or another state).
- Section 1039.740: Correct the provisions allowing the use of emission credits to from previous tiers of emission standards to include an item that was inadvertently omitted from the Tier 4 final rule, as described in the preamble to that final rule.
- Section 1039.801: Update various definitions to reflect the change to move the full text of these definitions to part 1068.
In the Tier 4 final rule, we adopted a revised provision allowing manufacturers to request a useful life shorter than that specified for engines generally. Our recent experience with a similar provision for marine diesel engines has shown that it can be difficult to implement. The main difficulty relates to the extent and quality of the information manufacturers must supply to establish an alternate useful-life period. As a result, we are interested in changing this provision. A similar provision has been in place in part 89 since the beginning of emission standards, but we are not aware of anyone requesting a shorter useful life for any particular application. In the similar consideration of this provision for nonroad spark-ignition engines, the only manufacturers that we would expect to consider a shorter useful life would be for engines used in concrete saws, concrete pumps or similar severe-duty applications. To establish a shorter useful life for a set of engines, manufacturers would need to establish a separate engine family and pay the associated fees for certification. It is not clear that any manufacturer of nonroad diesel engines would make the extra effort or face the extra expense of segregating a family for a shorter useful life. We therefore request comment on removing this provision. We also request comment on the approach under consideration for spark-ignition engines, namely to remove the current approach of requesting a shorter useful life and replacing it with a useful life of 1500 hours for engines used in concrete saws, concrete pumps, and similar severe-duty engines. The useful life in years would be the same for all engines.
During the Tier 4 rulemaking, equipment manufacturers raised a concern regarding diesel engines certified to meet Tier 4 standards based on the use of catalyst technology relying on ultra low-sulfur fuel, where those engines are exported to countries with a higher sulfur content in diesel fuel. Many pieces of equipment may be designed and manufactured for the U.S. domestic market and eventually sold to an end-user that may use the equipment outside of the United States. The resulting damage to the emission-control system after extended exposure to the higher sulfur fuel could permanently reduce the effectiveness of emission controls. One possible solution would be to require that engines exported from the United States have the engine label and the aftertreatment removed before shipping the engine. This in effect invalidates the engine's certification, which would make it illegal to continue to use the engine in the United States, or to later import the engine back into the United States. Two potential drawbacks include reconciling the total balance of emission credits under the averaging, banking, and trading program and reconciling the use of the engine in an existing flexibility program. Alternatively, we could require tracking engines and documenting end-use status once it has been placed in equipment. We seek comment on the use of such a provision to prevent re-importation of engines that are exposed to fuel sulfur levels that would be considered tampering if it occurred in the United States.
D. Marine Diesel Engines (40 CFR Part 94)
We are proposing several changes to our diesel marine engine program, in 40 CFR part 94. These changes are intended to clarify several aspects of the program. These changes, which are described in more detail in the Technical Support Document, are as follows:
- Section 94.2: Modify the definitions of “marine engine” and “marine vessel” and add a new definition of “amphibious vehicle” to clarify what kinds of amphibious vehicles are not considered marine vessels; modify the definition of “United States” to remove the reference to the Trust Territories of the Pacific Islands.
- Section 94.904: Allow the sale of an exempted or excluded engine if it is certified or identical to a certified engine.
- Section 94.907: Allow vessel manufacturers to take advantage of the engine dresser provisions; clarify the reporting requirement to specify that the total number of dressed engines produced by all companies dressing that base engine for use in a marine vessel is less than 50 percent of total annual sales for the base engine; add language clarifying the requirements related to generating and using emission credits with these engines.
- Section 94.912: Exempt marine auxiliary engines from the part 94 requirements as long as they are included in an engine family certified under part 1039 or 89, subject to certain limitations.
- Section 94.1001: Revise applicability to clarify that the provisions in Subpart K apply to manufacturers, owners, and operators of marine vessels that contain engines with per-cylinder displacement of at least 2.5 liters.
- Section 94.1103: Clarify that the engine manufacturer may ensure that the replaced engine is destroyed instead of taking possession of it; add a new label requirement for replacement engines that are allowed to meet a less stringent set of standards than are in effect when the replacement engine is built (to address the case where the engine being replaced was subject to less stringent emission standards).
The Technical Support Document also clarifies the conditions under which an auxiliary engine used on a marine vessel will be considered a marine auxiliary engine and be subject to 40 CFR 94.
E. Small Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines (40 CFR Part 90)
We are proposing to add a new section 90.913 to better define the responsibilities for manufacturers choosing to certify their engines below 19 kW to the emission standards for Large SI engines in 40 CFR part 1048. We are also revising section 90.1 to cross-reference provisions in parts 86, 1048, and 1051 that allow highway motorcycle engines and nonroad engines above 19 kW to meet the requirements in part 90 under certain conditions.
We have adopted a new approach to define maximum engine power in 40 CFR part 1039 for nonroad diesel engines for purposes of defining the applicability of standards. This definition includes a detailed procedure for determining this value. The current approach for Small SI engines is to rely on a definition of “gross power” that describes generally how to characterize an engine's maximum power. We request comment on adopting the new definition of maximum engine power in 40 CFR part 90. This would have the advantage of harmonizing our treatment of this basic tool to characterize engines and would allow for consistent treatment across programs. See the Technical Support Document for more information.
In addition, we are updating current references to test procedures in 40 CFR part 86 by pointing instead to 40 CFR part 1065. Manufacturers are also encouraged to review the proposed provisions in 40 CFR part 1065, since we intend eventually to apply those same procedures to Small SI engines. In particular, we have noted that the equations in § 90.426(b) and (d) for calculating mass flow rate and dilution factor differ from the comparable equations in part 1065, subpart G. We request comment on applying the equations from part 1065, subpart G, to Small SI engines for calculating these values.
F. Marine Spark-Ignition Engines (40 CFR Part 91)
We are proposing only minimal changes for marine SI engines in 40 CFR part 91. These changes are primarily to update current references to test procedures in 40 CFR part 86 by pointing instead to 40 CFR part 1065. We are also updating various definitions, as described in Section II.A. Manufacturers are also encouraged to review the proposed provisions in 40 CFR part 1065, since we intend eventually to apply those same procedures to marine SI engines.
G. Large Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines (40 CFR Part 1048)
We adopted emission standards for nonroad spark-ignition engines over 19 kW in November 2002 (67 FR 68242). The regulations in 40 CFR part 1048 were our first attempt to draft emission-control regulations in plain-language format. In the recent final rule for nonroad diesel engines, we went through a similar process, including extensive interaction with a different set of manufacturers. This process led us to adopt regulatory provisions in 40 CFR part 1039 that differ somewhat from those in part 1048. Since the process of meeting standards, applying for certificates, and complying with other emission-related requirements has a lot of commonality across programs, we have a strong interest in adopting consistent provisions and uniform terminology where possible. As a result, we are proposing extensive changes in part 1048 to align with the regulations in part 1039. Many of these changes reflect minor wording differences. The more significant changes to part 1048 include the following:
- Section 1048.105: Exclude marine fuel tanks from the standards for evaporative emissions. This is appropriate, because the fuel-hose requirements are incompatible with Coast Guard requirements and because we are developing a separate emission-control program that would apply to all fuel tanks associated with marine spark-ignition engines.
- Section 1048.135: Add a requirement for manufacturers to supply duplicate labels. This corresponds with the recently adopted provisions of 40 CFR 1068.105(c) that ensure that equipment manufacturers will take steps to prevent the misuse of duplicate labels.
- Section 1048.135: Allow manufacturers to identify a different company's name and trademark on the emission control information label, with additional provisions to ensure that manufacturers take certain steps to ensure that operators have the full benefit of the emission-related warranty.
- Section 1048.145: Add detailed provisions to the family-banking provisions to better define the qualifying criteria and the process for using this provision. For example, we establish a date by which manufacturers must begin production of early-compliant engines to avoid giving credits for marginal early production, we clarify that the late-complying engines must continue to meet the Tier 1 standards, and we add a requirement that manufacturers report the number of engines they produce under this provision to allow us to verify compliance.
- Section 1048.310: Clarify that the maximum testing rate of 1 percent for production-line testing applies only after testing the minimum number of engines specified.
- Section 1048.501: Allow an optional procedure for measuring diurnal emissions from plastic fuel tanks. This addresses the fact that we intended to control diurnal emissions from fuel tanks, not permeation emissions. This will have minimal environmental impact, since plastic fuel tanks are rarely used with industrial spark-ignition engines. While we may consider adding permeation controls in the future, we are proposing to adopt procedures that would not require upgrades to plastic fuel tanks at this time.
- Section 1048.505: Allow manufacturers to use ramped-modal testing for simplified measurement of steady-state emission results. See the Technical Support Document for additional discussion or ramped-modal testing.
For discussion of additional changes, see the Technical Support Document.
In the November 2002 final rule, we adopted a provision allowing manufacturers to request a useful life shorter than that specified for engines generally. Our recent experience with a similar provision for marine diesel engines has shown that it can be difficult to implement. The main difficulty relates to the extent and quality of the information manufacturers must supply to establish an alternate useful-life period. As a result, we are interested in changing this provision. As far as we are aware, the only manufacturers that might reasonably consider a shorter useful life would be for engines used in severe-duty applications. To establish a shorter useful life for a set of engines, manufacturers would need to establish a separate engine family and pay the associated fees for certification. During the rulemaking, manufacturers of these engines suggested that their engines rarely operate longer than 1500 hours. We therefore request comment on removing the current approach of requesting a shorter useful life and replacing it with a useful life of 1500 hours for severe-duty engines. The useful life in years would be the same for all engines.
Starting in the 2007 model year, manufacturers must show that they meet emission standards over a transient duty cycle. The specified transient duty cycles were based on real-world operation from in-use engines. While these duty cycles were extensively tested with a variety of engines over the course of the rulemaking, we have learned that certain high-speed engines may not be able to sufficiently match the speed-load trace in the duty cycle to meet cycle-validation criteria. The cycle was developed with engines that were designed with governed speeds around 3000 rpm. For example, for engines with governed speeds of 3600 rpm or higher, the denormalized duty cycle may have exaggerated acceleration rates that exceed an engine's capability.  In this situation, manufacturers would be able to use a modified duty cycle under the provisions for special test procedures in 40 CFR 1065.10. We request comment on the need for using the provision for special test procedures to address this situation. We also request comment on whether it would be appropriate to make cycle-related adjustments in the regulation. This could take the form of relaxed values for cycle validation criteria, limits to cap acceleration rates, using different maximum-speed and maximum-torque values for denormalizing, or other approaches.
H. Recreational Vehicles (40 CFR Part 1051)
We are proposing to make several adjustments and clarifications to the regulations for recreational vehicles in part 1051, including the following:
- Clarify the characteristics for evaporative emission families to include items we inadvertently omitted from the November 2002 final rule, and make it clearer how evaporative and exhaust emission families relate to each other.
- Clarify the evaporative test procedures regarding steps to seal the fuel tank.
- Define “Fuel lines” to remove uncertainty related to which products are subject to permeation standards.
- Specify a maximum 8-hour time period between refueling and starting the permeation test run and clarify that extending permeation testing from two weeks to four weeks depends on establishing a linear change in emissions based on daily measurements.
- Clarify that youth-model ATVs and off-highway motorcycles count toward meeting the phase-in requirements.
- Remove the ATV FEL cap for carbon monoxide, which was inadvertently left in the final regulations.
- Specify that the warranty period may be based on hours of engine operation in addition to odometer readings.
- Allow rounding of Normalized Emission Rates to one decimal place, rather than to the nearest whole number, and adding additional equations for smaller engines.
- Change the minimum useful life for youth-model ATVs and off-highway motorcycles to 5,000 kilometers and 500 hours.
- Allow all ATVs certifying to J1088 to use the raw gas sampling provisions of Part 91 for engine testing through the 2008 model year, which was intended in the November 2002 final rule.
- Allows manufacturers to test engines based on an engine's maximum power if that better represents in-use operation, rather than using the specified procedure to establish maximum test speed.
- Adopt a speed threshold to exclude low-speed all-terrain vehicles from part 1051. For example, low-speed amphibious vehicles not meeting the definition of offroad utility vehicles would be covered by part 90 instead of part 1051.
These provisions are all discussed in more detail in the Technical Support Document. In addition, we request comment regarding whether it is appropriate to adopt a ramped-modal test method as an alternative for the steady-state tests applicable to recreational vehicles under § 1051.505 and § 1051.615. This is also discussed in more detail in the Technical Support Document.
We adopted emission standards for recreational vehicles in November 2002 (67 FR 68242). The regulations in 40 CFR part 1051 were our first attempt to draft emission-control regulations in plain-language format. In the recent final rule for nonroad diesel engines, we went through a similar process, including extensive interaction with a different set of manufacturers. This process led us to adopt regulatory provisions in 40 CFR part 1039 that differ from those in part 1051. Since the process of meeting standards, applying for certificates, and complying with other emission-related requirements has a lot of commonality across programs, we have a strong interest in adopting consistent provisions and uniform terminology as much as possible. As a result, we are proposing extensive changes in part 1051 to align with the regulations in part 1039. Many of these changes reflect minor wording differences. The more significant changes to part 1051 include the following:
- Section 1051.135: Allow manufacturers to identify a different company's name and trademark on the emission control information label, with additional provisions to ensure that operators take certain steps to ensure that operators have the full benefit of the emission-related warranty.
- Section 1051.135: Add a requirement for manufacturers to supply duplicate labels. This corresponds with the recently adopted provisions of 40 CFR 1068.105(c) that ensure that equipment manufacturers will take steps to prevent the misuse of duplicate labels.
- Section 1051.135: Add a requirement to include the hang-tag label with normalized emission rates in the application for certification.
- Section 1051.225: For situations where the Family Emission Limit changes during a model year, the manufacturer calculates the credit balance for the family based on the FEL that applies for the corresponding production volume. This allows manufacturers to generate more credits (or use fewer credits), but this is consistent with the fact that manufacturers are liable for the emission-control performance of each engine relative to the FEL that applied at the point of production.
- Section 1051.501: Add “or add” in paragraph (b)(2) to clarify that the addition of fuel would not be allowed after the first weight measurement is taken in the permeation test run.
- Section 1051.705: Add a constraint for averaging, banking, and trading to prevent manufacturers from including credits earned in California if there would ever be a situation where they are required to meet separate standards in California (or another state).
- Section 1051.505 and 1051.615: We request comment on adding an option to allow manufacturers to conduct steady-state testing using ramped-modal cycles, as described in the Technical Support Document.
We request comment on all these changes to part 1051.
I. Locomotives (40 CFR Part 92)
We are proposing a variety of changes for our locomotive regulations in 40 CFR part 92 to make correct various technical references and typographical errors. See the Technical Support Document and the proposed regulations for additional information.
In addition, we are requesting comment on a few additional items. The Engine Manufacturers Association recommended several revisions to the locomotive regulations.  We are proposing many of these changes, and are requesting comment on those that we are not proposing. We are especially interested in comments related to EMA's request to revise the accuracy specifications found in §§ 92.104(b)(1)(i), 92.105(d), 92.106(b)(1)(ii), 92.107(a)(1), and 92.126(b)(3). These comments generally express a concern that the adopted specifications require too much precision or accuracy. We request further comment on the achievable level of precision and accuracy for these specifications, and on the degree to which we should change the specified values.
The standards for locomotive engines currently do not apply to engines used in locomotives if they have a maximum power below 750 kW. These engines are generally designed and manufactured for other applications, so they are excluded from locomotive standards and procedures. We have received a request that we allow engines below 750 kW that are used in locomotives to optionally certify to locomotive standards instead of the otherwise applicable requirements of 40 CFR part 89.  This commenter suggested the following addition to the regulations in 40 CFR part 92:
The manufacturer or remanufacturer of a vehicle propelled by an engine rated less than 750 kW, but that otherwise meets all the requirements of this definition may elect to have it treated under this part rather than under part 89 by giving written notice of such election to the Administrator. All of the provisions of this part shall apply to vehicles for which such an election is made.
We continue to believe that engines below 750 kW should be regulated as nonroad diesel engines under part 89. However, we request comment on this suggestion to allow manufacturers to optionally meet the standards in part 92 instead. We also request comment regarding the applicability of the line-haul emission standards to these low-power locomotive engines. Finally, we request comment on alternate calculations to address the equivalent tractive horsepower of hybrid locomotives.
J. Highway Engines and Vehicles (40 CFR Part 86)
1. Light-duty Vehicles
a. Calculation Method for Nonmethane Hydrocarbons. Text changes are proposed to properly align EPA and CARB calculation methods for measuring nonmethane hydrocarbons from gasoline, diesel, methanol, ethanol, and liquefied petroleum gas fueled light-duty vehicles. Harmonization of EPA and CARB testing and calculation practices, including proper accounting for the methane response of the total hydrocarbon FID, was anticipated when Tier 2 regulations were developed. Modifying the language in 86.121-90(d) and 86.144-94(c)(8)(vi) to explicitly require the use of a measured methane response factor, as opposed to the current CFR text which specifies an assumed methane response factor of 1.0, will align the calculation methods. Calculating nonmethane hydrocarbon using a measured methane response factor is the technically correct calculation and measurement method.
b. Correction to Tier 2 Regulations. On December 6, 2002, we made some minor technical amendments to EPA's Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur regulations (67 FR 72821, December 6, 2002). However, those actions mistakenly reversed a prior correction to Table S04-2 in § 86.1811-04(c)(6) that was made on February 28, 2000 (65 FR 10598, February 28, 2000). We are now reestablishing the correct version of that table. Specifically, in § 86.1811-04(c)(6), in Table S04-2, the “Notes” entry corresponding with “Bin No. 9” should read “a b e f g h”.
c. Correction to Supplemental Federal Test Procedure Regulations. We propose to make the following corrections to regulatory references, spelling, and the like with these technical amendments:
- An incorrect regulatory reference is corrected in section 86.158-00;
- Revision to section 86.161-00 inserts the correct humidity tolerance of plus-or-minus 5 grains of water/pound of dry air; and
- Revision to the equation in section 86.164-00 adds plus (“+”) signs that were omitted in the regulations.
d. Correction to National Low Emission Vehicle Regulations. In several places in the National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) emissions standards there are typographical errors affecting emission standards and testing provisions which require correction:
- Incorrect in-use formaldehyde standards for light-duty vehicles in tables R99-5 and R99-6 (§ 86.1708-99).
- Incorrect model year applicability of in-use standards for light-duty trucks (§ 86.1709-99(c)(1)).
- Missing standards for light-duty trucks from 0-3750 loaded vehicle weight in Table R99-14.2 (§ 86.1709-99).
- Correction of fleet average NMOG standards for calculating credits for 1997 and 1998 model years in the Northeast Trading Region (§ 86.1710-99(c)(8)).
- Correcting a reference to 86.1705-99(e)(4) that should have been to 86.1707-99(d)(4) (§ 86.1711-99).
2. Highway Motorcycles
a. Highway Motorcycle Labeling Requirements. On January 15, 2004, we finalized new emission standards for highway motorcycles (69 FR 2398, January 15, 2004). These new standards are implemented in two stages: a “Tier 1” that is effective in the 2006 through 2009 model years, and a “Tier 2” that takes effect starting with the 2010 model year. These standards are generally harmonized with California emission standards that take effect two years earlier. Under the new standards, Class III motorcycles must comply with a new HC+NO X emission standard on a corporate average basis. This new flexibility allows manufacturers to market motorcycles that produce more pollution than the designated average standard as long as they are balanced out by sales of less-polluting models such that the manufacturers' sales-weighted corporate average remains below the standard. Averaging is also optionally allowed for Class I and II motorcycles.
Since publishing the final rule, however, we realized that the labeling language for highway motorcycles is not helpful in the context of the new averaging standard. The current federal labeling language (see 40 CFR 86.413-78) only requires that a motorcycle label indicate compliance with EPA standards for a given model year. This is all that is needed when there is no uncertainty regarding what the applicable emission standards are. In the context of the type of averaging program we finalized, however, the manufacturers essentially choose their own emission standard (up to a cap) for each engine family. The manufacturer-selected emission standard is known as a “Family Emission Limit,” or FEL. For example, a manufacturer with two engine families might market one meeting a standard of 2.2 grams/mile HC+NO X and another one meeting a standard of 0.5 grams/mile HC+NO X. If these are equally-selling engine families, then the manufacturer will meet the required Tier 1 average of 1.4 grams/mile HC+NO X.
In the case described above, a label with only the model year will not provide adequate information regarding the applicable emission standard. Historically both EPA and ARB have required labels that identify the specific applicable FEL for vehicles certified under averaging programs. Therefore, we are amending the labeling requirements with two goals in mind. First, the label must provide sufficient information regarding the applicable emission standard and model year, as well as specific tune-up information. Second, the label requirements should be aligned with ARB to the greatest degree possible to prevent a situation where the manufacturer has to apply two labels to a motorcycle to meet two different sets of requirements. The new labeling language in 40 CFR 86.413-2006 accomplishes both of these goals.
b. Highway Motorcycle Fuel Specifications. In our final rule setting new emission standards for highway motorcycles (69 FR 2398, January 15, 2004) we updated the fuel specifications for motorcycle emission testing to be consistent with the fuel specifications finalized on February 10, 2000, as part of our “Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements” (65 FR 6697, February 10, 2000). This was necessary to ensure that motorcycles are tested using fuels consistent with those available in the marketplace. We received no negative comments on making this change. It is necessary at this time to correct some errors that were made in updating the motorcycle test fuel specification. The specific corrections are:
- Changing the volume percent of aromatics from “35 minimum” to “35 maximum”;
- Changing the phosphorous g/liter specification from 0.005 g/liter to 0.0013 g/liter (the alternative specification is 0.005 g/U.S. gallon);
- Changing the sulfur weight percent from 0.08 maximum to 0.008 maximum; and
- Changing the volatility test procedure from “ASTM D 3231” to “ASTM D 323.”
c. Highway Motorcycles with engines below 50 cc. We are proposing modified language in § 86.447 and § 86.448 to clarify various aspects of the provision allowing manufacturers to use products certified to nonroad emission standards instead of the standards for highway motorcycles under part 86. These changes include the following:
—Clarify the requirement related to the number of engines that may be certified under nonroad programs.
—Define the requirements related to generating and using emission credits with these engines.
—Add language to better define the legal responsibilities for companies involved in producing motorcycles under this provision.
3. Heavy-Duty Highway Engines
As discussed above, we are proposing to adopt the lab-testing and field-testing specifications in part 1065 for heavy-duty highway engines, including both diesel and Otto-cycle engines. These procedures replace those currently published in 40 CFR part 86 subpart N. We are proposing a gradual transition from the part 86 procedures over a period of two model years in order to fully migrate to part 1065, no later than model year 2008. Manufacturers would not need to conduct new testing if they are able to use carryover data, but any new testing for 2008 and later model years would be done using the part 1065 procedures. Migrating heavy-duty highway engines to the part 1065 procedures allows us to include all the testing-related improvements in the HD2007 rule, including those we have adopted through guidance.  In addition, part 1065 incorporates revisions based on updated procedures for sampling low concentrations of PM.
We are also proposing to require manufacturers to use ramped-modal testing to show that they meet steady-state emission standards using the Supplemental Emissions Test (SET), which will be required for model year 2007 and later engines. The conventional approach for steady-state testing is to measure emissions separately for each mode. Ramped-modal testing involves a single, continuous emission measurement as the engine operates over the test modes in a defined sequence, including short transition segments between modes. Ramped-modal testing offers several advantages, primarily that of increased accuracy for measuring very low levels of PM emissions. See the Technical Support Document for additional information on the advantages of ramped-modal testing.
We are also clarifying that certain data requirements related to Supplemental Emission Testing are required only when engines are subject to Maximum Allowable Emission Limits.
Part 1065 bases the denormalized duty cycle on “maximum test speed,” which differs somewhat from the traditional approach from part 86 of relying on rated speed. We request comment on whether or not we need to adjust how maximum test speed is applied to heavy-duty highway diesel engines to better represent in-use operation. Specifically, we request comment on whether or not we should specify that maximum test speed should be equal to the 112% speed from the duty cycle for this particular sequence. This would shift the prescribed speeds that are in excess of 100% speed to be no greater than 99.92% of maximum test speed. This adjustment would prevent excessive speeds, while ensuring our intent to specify maximum test speed to test an engine over its complete operating range.
We are proposing a minor adjustment to the phase-in process for the HD2007 standards to allow manufacturers to make their compliance demonstration either on the basis of model years or calendar years. This increases the flexibility for manufacturers to define their model year without affecting their ability to show that they meet their phase-in obligations. Because the phase-in period is three years under either approach, we believe this adjustment would not harm the environmental objectives of the program.
In the recently finalized Nonroad Diesel Tier 4 final rule, we included new regulatory provisions allowing engine manufacturers to ship engines and aftertreatment separately to equipment manufacturers, provided several criteria were met (69 FR 39308, June 29, 2004). These criteria were based on two main principles. First, the engine manufacturer is responsible to ensure that equipment manufacturers are fully aware of their responsibilities for proper installation of the engine and catalyst system. Second, the engine manufacturer has the primary responsibility for ensuring the engine and catalyst are properly installed. While the engine manufacturer has the primary responsibility, we may also find the equipment manufacturer liable under certain circumstances. We request comment on applying similar provisions to allow separate shipment of engines and aftertreatment for heavy-duty highway engine manufactures, including both gasoline and diesel engines. In addition, we request information that would indicate to what extent the heavy-duty highway engine/catalysts/vehicle manufacturer business relationships are similar to those for nonroad diesel engines, and whether the same provisions should apply to the companies producing highway engines and vehicles as we have adopted for the nonroad diesel engines and equipment.
We are taking this opportunity to clarify an aspect of the information reporting requirements described in a recently proposed rule making for manufacturer in-use testing of heavy-duty vehicles. The Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) for the manufacturer-run in-use testing program (FR Cite) was issued June 3, 2004. Section K in the preamble provides a non-exhaustive example of the types of engine parameters commonly stored in the engine's on-board computer and requires manufacturers to report those parameters which are readily available. We want to be clear that not only should those parameters be reported to EPA, but that they also must be reported to and stored by any portable emissions measurement system used to meet the testing requirements described in the NPRM. Because the proposed regulatory language in 40 CFR part 1065, subpart J contained in today's notice does not contain all of the parameters we intended to be required in the manufacturer in-use testing program, we expect that section 86.1920(a)(4)(xii) in the final in-use testing regulations will contain language that will better reflect this intent and make explicit the types of parameters that may be subject to the reporting requirements. Specifically, the current language in 86.1920(a)(4)(xii) states:
Recorded one-hertz test data for all the parameters specified in 40 CFR part 1065, subpart J, including any other relevant parameters electronically sensed, measured, calculated, or otherwise stored by the engine's onboard computer. This also includes any parameters used to modulate the emission-control system.
The final language would state:
Recorded one-hertz test data for all the parameters specified in 40 CFR part 1065, subpart J, and any other relevant parameters electronically sensed, measured, calculated, or otherwise stored by the engine's onboard computer, including but not limited to engine speed, engine torque, engine coolant temperature, intake manifold temperature, manifold absolute pressure, barometric pressure (altitude), ambient temperature, brake specific fuel consumption, exhaust temperature upstream of aftertreatment, and elapsed time, any parameter needed to demonstrate the engine is within the NTE or an approved carve-out or deficiency region. The one-hertz test data must also include any parameters used to modulate the emission-control system.
We request comment on this revision.
Similarly, Subpart K of the preamble requests comment on the whether engine manufacturers should be required to design the on-board engine computer to explicitly identify when an engine is operating in an approved NTE carve-out or deficiency. We want to make clear that the request for comment also more broadly covers whether the engine's on-board computer should identify when the engine is operating within the NTE. Under the proposal, manufacturers are required, at a minimum, to provide information from the engine's on-board computer or some other readily available source that will enable EPA to make these NTE determinations.
4. Importation of Nonconforming Highway Engines and Vehicles
The Agency is proposing revisions to 40 CFR part 85, subpart P regarding the applicable emission standards for imported nonconforming highway vehicles and engines, including light-duty vehicles (passenger cars), light-duty trucks, heavy-duty vehicles, heavy-duty engines, and motorcycles. This proposal clarifies that these nonconforming vehicles and engines are required to meet the emission standards in effect when the vehicle or engine was originally produced, not the emission standards in effect when the vehicle or engine is modified. This approach is consistent with the requirements for light-duty Independent Commercial Importers (ICIs) which have been in effect since 1996 (61 FR 5842, February 14, 1996).
Most of the issues related to this proposal were previously addressed in the 1996 rule. An excerpt from that 1996 rule provides a brief summary of the basis for this proposal. Section I.A of the 1996 final rule reads in part:
As proposed, EPA is eliminating the requirement that nonconforming light-duty vehicles and Light-duty trucks imported pursuant to 40 CFR 85.1501 or 85.1509 meet the part 86 emission standards in effect at the time of modification. These vehicles, with a few exceptions, will instead be required to meet emission standards (with applicable deterioration factors applied) that were in effect at the time of original vehicle production, using currently applicable testing procedures.
The specific standards applicable to these vehicles are contained in a new § 85.1515 * * *.
As discussed in the proposal (Supplementary Document pp. 27-28, Docket No. A-89-20), when EPA promulgated the prior requirement to meet standards applicable at the time of modification, the Agency had no data or evidence suggesting that older vehicles could not be modified to meet current year emission standards. Since that rulemaking, EPA has obtained evidence suggesting that many older vehicles cannot be modified to meet current year standards without extraordinary cost, which makes the conversion financially unfeasible for many owners of such vehicles. Today's rule would give owners of older vehicles a way to import their vehicles. In addition, it would have been significantly more difficult and costly for importers to modify vehicles to comply with the current model year standards beginning in January, 1996, when the standards applicable to small volume manufacturers became substantially more stringent. EPA agrees with the statements submitted by ICIs after the close of the comment period that the expense of such modifications would have a serious deleterious effect on their businesses and would not justify the costs.
Although the intent of the 1996 rule was clear, we are proposing to make regulation changes to make the regulation language consistent with the intent of the 1996 rule. The 1996 final rule added 40 CFR 85.1515, which provided a list of the emission standards applicable to imported light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks based on the original production (OP) year of the vehicle. Tables 1 and 2 in 40 CFR 85.1515 correctly indicate that the emission standards applicable for pre-1994 imported light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks are based on the original production year of the vehicle. Tables 1 and 2 also correctly indicate (in a footnote) that 1994 and later imported light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks are required to meet the applicable emission standards as “Specified in 40 CFR part 86 for the OP year of the vehicle, per 85.1515(c).” However § 85.1515(c)(1) incorrectly indicates that “Nonconforming motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines of 1994 OP model year and later conditionally imported pursuant to § 85.1505 or § 85.1509 shall meet all of the emission standards specified in 40 CFR part 86 for the model year in which the motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine is modified.” (emphasis added)
This ambiguity in the regulations was unfortunately not corrected after the 1996 rule changes became effective. Nor was it corrected when Interim non-Tier 2 and Tier 2 requirements were adopted for import vehicles (65 FR 6698, February 10, 2000). Although the 2000 rulemaking did not intend to change the highway engine or vehicle importation process, the regulations continued to indicate that nonconforming motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines must meet the emission standards in the model year in which the motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine is modified; see 40 CFR 85.1515(c)(2)(ii) through (d). We have now received several petitions from light duty ICIs to correct the regulations to permit vehicles imported by ICIs to meet OP year standards.
In summary, for the reasons discussed in the provisions of 61 FR 5842, February 14, 1996, we are proposing changes to correct the regulations for nonconforming highway vehicles so they are consistent with the intent of the 1996 final rule. This proposal will require imported highway vehicles to meet the emission standards in effect the year the vehicle was originally produced, not the emission standards in effect in the year the vehicle or engine is modified. We are, however, concerned that ICI provisions which apply OP year standards could be used as a way to circumvent our Tier 2 light duty standards and our new more stringent motorcycle standards. Thus we are proposing to cap each ICI's annual production of vehicles meeting OP year standards when OP year standards are less stringent than the standards that apply during the year of modification. We are proposing a cap of a total of 50 light duty vehicles and trucks and 50 motorcycles. This does not impact the number of vehicles an ICI may produce that are certified to the standards that apply during the year of modification.
While we have never had an ICI for highway HDEs, we are also proposing, consistent with the above, to make clear that the applicable standards for HDEs imported by an ICI would be those of the year of original production. For HDEs, we are proposing an annual cap of five on an ICI's production of engines certified to OP year standards that are less stringent than those that apply during the year of modification. This will address the possibility that ICIs could provide an avenue by which truck purchasers could avoid the additional costs of new trucks with engines meeting aftertreatment-based engine standards. We are proposing a similar amendment for nonroad diesel engines, as described elsewhere in this document.
We believe it is appropriate to have different caps on the quantity of vehicles and engines that can be certified to OP year standards, where OP year standards are less stringent than those that apply during the year of modification. The sales of light-duty vehicles and trucks are many times greater than those of heavy-duty highway engines and nonroad diesel engines combined. Further, we believe that the caps for light-duty vehicles, light-duty trucks, and motorcycles should be larger than those for nonroad and highway engines to accommodate an industry that has grown up around the light-duty ICI program. The light-duty and motorcycle ICIs can provide additional consumer choice and also provide an avenue by which (for a price) someone who has lived outside of the United States, including returning U.S. military personnel, can bring a used personal vehicle they acquired overseas into conformity with U.S. emission requirements. No such ICI industry exists for highway or nonroad engines. Where OP year standards are applied to highway and nonroad engines, we are proposing a lower cap. We believe it will be appropriate to limit the activities of engine ICIs, when previous model year engines are involved, to those specialized trucks or pieces of equipment for which demand is so low that normal certification didn't occur or might not occur. While we want to provide an opportunity for the importation of highly specialized vehicles or equipment that might otherwise be unavailable in the United States, we do not want to develop an industry that simply provides older equipment that would most likely be built with engines meeting significantly less stringent standards.
5. Revisions and Corrections to Dynamometer Driving Schedules
a. SC03 and US06 driving cycles. This rule proposes to correct errors in the SC03 driving cycle and to reconcile several discrepancies between the CFR language and the second-by-second US06 and SC03 drive cycle traces in the appendices to part 86.
The SC03 cycle in Appendix I, paragraph (h) is proposed to be lengthened to 600 seconds by the addition of six seconds of zero miles per hour after 594 seconds. This change and additional language changes would eliminate confusion in how to execute the requirements in sections 86.160-00(c)(12) and 86.159-00(f)(2)(ix). Sections 86.159-00(f)(2)(ix) and 86.160-00(c)(12) both state that the engine is turned off 2 seconds after the end of the deceleration (which occurs at 594 seconds and driving stops at 596 seconds).
With respect to the SC03 drive trace, section 86.160-00(c)(10) reads “Twenty seconds after the engine starts, begin the initial vehicle acceleration of the driving schedule.” However, this is incorrect. The printed driving schedule in Appendix I, paragraph (h), correctly shows eighteen seconds of idle. The regulatory language is proposed to be modified to reflect eighteen seconds of idle, rather than twenty.
Section 86.160-00(c)(12) currently reads “Turn the engine off 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration,” but the Appendix I, paragraph (h), drive schedule has no idle seconds at the end of the SC03 cycle. Idle speed values are proposed to be added to the end of the SC03 drive schedule to make it consistent with the regulatory language. The impact of these changes would clarify that the first non-zero speed value to be at trace time t=19 seconds. This section is proposed to be amended to clarify that driving stops at trace time t=596 seconds.
The US06 drive schedule has a similar discrepancy. Section 86.159-00(f)(2)(ix) reads “Turn the engine off 2 seconds after the end of the last deceleration.” However, the drive schedule in Appendix I (g) has six idle seconds at the end of the US06 cycle. We proposed to amend this section to clarify that driving stops at trace time t=596 seconds.
b. Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule. We are also proposing to take action to correct two minor errors in the Appendix I, paragraph (a), Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule (UDDS) that have existed since the 1970's. Originally published in the Federal Register on November 10, 1970 (35 FR 17311), the UDDS is the driving cycle that is the basis of the Federal Test Procedure. Since it was published, however, two speed values in the UDDS were erroneously modified. Specifically, the speed value at t=961 seconds was changed from 5.3 mph to 5.0 mph in 1972, and the speed value at t=1345 seconds was changed from 18.3 mph to 18.8 sometime between 1973 and 1977. The speed value of 5.0 mph at t=961 creates an acceleration of 3.6 mph/sec to 8.6 mph at t=962, which is inconsistent with the acknowledged 3.3 mph/sec maximum acceleration rate due to dynamometer limitations. The speed value of 18.8 mph at t=1345 is inconsistent with what should be a gradually decreasing acceleration rate from t=1343 to t=1347 seconds. This rule proposes to revert these values back to the speed values as they were published in 1970. It is important to note that the regulated industry and EPA have been using the correct speed values since 1970, despite the error in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
In addition, a dynamometer manufacturer commented to EPA that the CFR has several errors in the Appendix I, paragraph (b), version of the UDDS that is expressed in kilometers per hour. EPA has verified that these errors are not rounding errors when converting from miles per hour, but are more likely the result of errors in typing. The table below indicates the correct mile per hour and kilometer per hour values, as well as the incorrect value. This rule proposes to make these corrections.
|Time (seconds)||Incorrect KPH||Correct KPH||Correct MPH|
III. Public Participation Back to Top
We request comment on all aspects of this proposal. The comment period for this rule will end on October 29, 2004.
We will hold an informal public workshop on October 1, 2004 at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, which is located at 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105. The workshop will start at 9 a.m. with an opportunity for any individuals to raise questions or comments related to the proposed technical amendments. Following this, the rest of the day will be devoted to discussions of the proposed changes to the test procedures in 40 CFR part 1065.
If you would like a public hearing in addition to the planned workshop, contact us by September 20, 2004 as described above in DATES. If a public hearing is requested, we will hold it on September 27, 2004 starting at 9 a.m. EDT. Contact us for updated information about the possibility of a public hearing.
If you would like to present testimony at a public hearing, we ask that you notify the contact person listed above at least ten days beforehand. You should estimate the time you will need for your presentation and identify any needed audio/visual equipment. We suggest that you bring copies of your statement or other material for the EPA panel and the audience. It would also be helpful if you send us a copy of your statement or other materials before the hearing.
We will arrange for a written transcript of the hearing and keep the official record of the hearing open for 30 days to allow you to submit supplementary information. You may make arrangements for copies of the transcript directly with the court reporter.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Back to Top
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is “significant” and therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the requirements of this Executive Order. The Executive Order defines a “significant regulatory action” as any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:
- 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;
- Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
- Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
- Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
Because the rule merely revises the measurement methods and makes a variety of technical amendments to existing programs, it is not a significant regulatory action and is not subject to the requirements of Executive Order 12866. Any new costs associated with this rule will be minimal. In addition, some of the changes will substantially reduce the burden associated with testing, as described in the Regulatory Support Document.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not include any new collection requirements, as it merely revises the measurement methods and makes a variety of technical amendments to existing programs.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this final rule on small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA) by category of business using North America Industrial Classification System (NAICS) and codified 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 proposed rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The small entities directly regulated by this proposed rule are small businesses that produce nonroad engines. We have determined that no small entities will experience more than incidental costs as a result of this rule. This rule merely revises the measurement methods and makes a variety of technical amendments to existing programs. This proposed rule, therefore, does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. For example, most of the proposed changes clarify existing requirements, which will reduce the time needed to comply, and added flexibility, which may allow for a simpler effort to comply.
We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.
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 actions 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 final rules with “federal mandates” that may result in expenditures to state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Before promulgating 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 a