Implementation Of Retrofit Program For Diesel Equipment During The
Construction Phase The I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Improvement
Program In Southern Connecticut

Paper \# 999

## Guido Schattanek

Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc., One Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10119

# Donna Weaver

Connecticut Department of Transportation, 2800 Berlin Turnpike,
Newington, CT 06131

**ABSTRACT**

The Connecticut Department of Transportation implemented a diesel
vehicle emission control program during the construction phase of the
I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Improvement Program (I-95 NHHC) in
Southern Connecticut. The project includes the reconstruction of
Interstate I-95 from Exit 46 in New Haven to Exit 54 in Branford, and
the replacement of the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge. Construction of the
7.2-mile corridor started in 2002 and is expected to take more than
twelve years to complete.

The diesel vehicle emissions control program requires that diesel
powered construction equipment with engines over 60 horsepower, which
remains in the site over 30 consecutive days: either retrofit the engine
with emission control devises, and/or use clean fuels.

This paper focuses on the results of the program after over 70 pieces of
diesel powered construction equipment have been retrofitted during the
first three years of construction. It includes a summary of the
development of the emission control specifications; it describes the
information process to contractors, inspection, verification, and the
tracking procedures put in place to ensure the continuation of the
program as it moved from development to implementation phase. It also
covers practical issues such as what contractors do with the emission
control devices once the equipment leaves the project.

**INTRODUCTION**

The need for reducing emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines is clear.
The diesel engine has been a workhorse of the 20^th^ century. It is
reliable, fuel-efficient, durable, easy to repair, and inexpensive to
operate. But diesel engines produce significant levels of particulates
(PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), mostly when overloaded during
acceleration from a stop.

Current estimates indicate that emissions from such engines in the
Northeast States account for roughly 33% of the NOx and 80% of the PM
emitted by all mobile sources. In addition, since diesel engines that
power construction equipment are more polluting than equivalent diesel
engines for normal highway use (due to the lack of any emission controls
until 1996), the reduction of these emissions has not only the potential
to improve ambient air quality for the region, but more importantly, it
has significant air quality benefits to those who live or work in or
adjacent to construction areas.

A major step in reducing diesel emissions was taken in May 2004 with the
approval of the new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Clean
Non-road Diesel Rule. This new Tier 4 emission standards for non-road
engines will apply to diesel engines used in most kinds of construction,
agricultural, and industrial equipment. The new rule includes a
nationally mandated reduction of sulfur content in non-road diesel fuel
from approximately 3,000 parts per million (ppm) average today to 500
ppm by 2007, and 15 ppm by 2010, and the implementation of emission
control technology on non-road diesel engines by 2008. However, it will
take almost two decades to have the diesel engines that power
construction equipment replaced with the new mandated cleaner engines.

The diesel engine retrofit program discussed in this paper started as a
way to reduce emissions before cleaner fuels and cleaner engines become
part of the standard manufacturing process. Currently, there is an
expanding list of emission reduction technologies, which has been
approved by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air
Resources Board (CARB) for diesel engines and clean fuels. The most
commonly known technologies can be grouped into three main categories:

-   Fuel modifications: including synthetic diesel, water-in-diesel
    emulsions, biodiesel, ultra low sulfur diesel, and fuel additives.

-   Engine Design/fuel modifications: including exhaust gas
    recirculation (EGR), dimethyl ether, and natural gas.

-   After Treatment /add-on pollution control devices: including
    oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters (DPF), lean
    catalysts, and selective catalytic reduction (SCR).

The I-95 NHHC diesel emission control program focused on add-on
pollution control devises with the option of cleaner diesel fuels.
Today, there are several areas within the US where these types of
programs are being evaluated and/or are starting to be implemented. The
experience of this large transportation project can serve as a road map
toward implementation of these programs in other areas. Connecticut
Department of Transportation (DOT) has been contacted by EPA as well as
other state agencies which indicated that they are looking into
implementing their own Diesel Emission Control Programs.

**I-95 NHHC OVERVIEW**

The I-95 NHHC administered by the Connecticut DOT consists of the
construction of a new State Street Commuter Railroad Station, the
widening of I-95 from Exit 46 in New Haven to Exit 54 in Branford, the
replacement of the existing Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge (Q Bridge) with
a new 10 lane bridge, and the reconstruction of the I-95/I-91/Route 34
Interchange. The existing Q Bridge built in 1958 to carry in both
directions, 40,000 vehicles per day, was operating in 1993 at a level of
over 120,000 per day. An estimate of 140,000 to 150,000 vehicles per day
in 2015 has been forecasted.

The project is located in the municipalities of New Haven, East Haven
and Branford, which are a serious non-attainment area for ozone (O~3~),
and non-attainment for PM~10~ and PM~2.5~ for the New Haven area only

The construction of this 7.2-mile corridor, which was started in 2002
and will take more than twelve years to complete, will include more than
200 pieces of diesel powered construction equipment.

Construction is divided in five phases under four major contracts. Four
contracts have been awarded with the first one completed in June 2004.
The first contract (called Contract D) started June 2002. Contract C1
(working in the East Haven area) is scheduled to finish November 2005.
Two other contracts have just been award and will start in the future.

**DIESEL EMISSION CONTROL PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT**

The DOT started to look at the possibility of a retrofit program linked
to the I-95 NHHC one year before the advertising of the first
construction contract. In October 2000, DOT formed an air quality
working group, which investigated the benefits and costs of implementing
a diesel emission control program. The group included personnel from
various offices within DOT, and experts from Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB),
New England States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM),
Connecticut Department Environmental Protection (DEP), Department of
Motor Vehicles (DMV), and Connecticut Construction Industries
Association (CCIA).

It was decided early on that the Diesel Emission control Program called
"Connecticut Clean Air Construction Initiative" would combine the
non-road diesel powered equipment with the inspection of highway diesel
vehicles. The highway diesel vehicles are already regulated by the DMV
under a heavy-duty diesel emissions regulation. In the state of
Connecticut the DMV conducts opacity tests on heavy-duty diesel
vehicles.

**Selected Technologies**

Four different scenarios (technologies) that could be implemented to
reduce air emissions during construction were identified. Two included
diesel engine retrofit technologies, such as oxidation catalysts, and/or
four way catalysts; while two others included the use of cleaner fuels,
Biodiesel B-20 Blend^TM^ and/or PuriNOx™. Any of these four technologies
could be applied partially and in combination with the others. All had
logistical and cost advantages and disadvantages that were evaluated
prior to implementation.

An evaluation of emission benefits and costs for each technology was
performed during 2001. The methodology used to estimate the emission
reductions from the diesel retrofit and/or clean fuels program followed
the same procedure used for State Implementation Plan credit
calculations recommended by NESCAUM, i.e.:

-   Estimation of baseline emission factors for CO, HC, NOx and PM~10~
    by equipment type in grams per brake horsepower hour.

-   Estimation of baseline emissions (tons/year) based on equipment
    type, usage, and hours of operation.

-   Estimation of emission reductions for each type of equipment
    retrofitted and/or type of fuel for applicable pollutants.

Today the estimation of emission reductions can be easily calculated by
using the EPA electronic calculator included in the EPA Verified
Retrofit Technology List. At the time emission rates of CO, HC, and PM
from diesel powered construction equipment were estimated using the EPA
NONROAD Emission Model.

A paper presented by the same authors at the 2002 AWMA annual meeting
(Paper No. 42536) described the technology selection process up to the
development of the emission control specifications (pre-construction
phase).

Considering that this was a voluntary pilot program for DOT, it was
decided to use the most widely accepted technology and fiscally
responsible emission reduction options.

As such, the following technologies were selected:

-   Oxidation catalysts due to its wide acceptance and proven
    experience,

-   Clean fuels listed with the EPA or CARB which could achieve specific
    NOx and PM emissions reductions.

It was decided that the program would include the option of either
retrofitting with oxidation catalysts or use a clean fuel such as the
emulsified diesel fuel PuriNOx^TM^. This would provide the contractors
more flexibility in situations where equipment would not remain on site
for long periods of time.

Four way catalysts (FWC) were considered to be too experimental and too
costly for a pilot program. The use of Biodiesel was rejected because of
the possible NOx increases.

A blind survey of construction equipment conducted by CCIA among their
members, indicated that the Connecticut non-road equipment fleet is
primarily an average of 1980's vintage. The makeup of the construction
fleet can range from brand new to 55 years old. Construction companies
nursed their equipment from job to jobs and/or large companies sell
their old equipment to smaller firms extending the equipment life cycle.

The existence of so many pre-1994 (Tier 1) pieces of equipment limited
the option of using diesel particulate filters (DPF). The success of
DPFs have been mostly on highway trucks and buses, with more limited
cases on construction equipment. In addition, most of the manufacturers
of DPF listed in the EPA retrofit technology list are designed for post
1994 diesel engines, and also require the use of ultra low sulfur
diesel.

DPFs require exhaust temperature profiles above 210 degrees Centigrade
for at least 40% of time, and the NO~x~ /PM ratio greater than 20%,
preferably greater than 30%. Pre 1994 non-road construction equipment
engines typically have extremely low NOx/PM ratios. Essentially they are
spewing a lot more PM. In addition, they were designed for a higher
level sulfur fuel, which presents additional hurdles for the proper
functioning of DPFs.

**Emission Reductions Potential and Costs**

***Oxidation Catalysts***

At the time the evaluation for the I-95 NHHC Program started, the
Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) Project in Boston, Massachusetts had
already installed approximately 70 oxidation catalysts on a variety of
construction equipment with positive results. Based on the EPA
technology retrofit list, oxidation catalysts are expected to achieve a
minimum of 20% reductions for PM, 40% reductions for CO, and 50%
reductions for HC in all heavy-duty diesel engines. The average cost per
piece of equipment in the CA/T project was \$ 2,500, which translated
into a cost of \$8/HP and was used for this assessment.

***Clean Fuels***

PuriNOx^TM^ is an emulsified diesel fuel which can be used on any diesel
engine manufactured and distributed by Lubrizol Corp. in Ohio. It was
considered as a good alternative to reduce NOx and PM~10~ since the EPA
retrofit technology list certifies that use of this fuel can reduce PM
from 16 to 58% and NOx from 9 to 20%.

The cost of PuriNOx^TM^ at the time was approximately 16-cents per
gallon above the cost of N^o^2 diesel fuel according to the
Massachusetts distributor. Since PuriNOx ^TM^ contains close to 20% of
water, the relative cost differential depends on the wholesale cost of
diesel fuel (i.e. the higher the diesel fuel cost the lower the
differential). It also carries a fuel consumption penalty since water
has no caloric power, making the real cost to the contractor higher than
the fuel cost differential.

**Equipment Size Applicability And Length Of Time On Site**

An evaluation of the emission benefits, as a function of HP-hours of
operation and fuel consumption for each contract, indicated that if all
equipment with engine size over 60 HP were retrofitted, more than 98% of
the emission benefits of retrofitting all equipment would be achieved.
As a result, 60 HP became the smallest engine size that would be
retrofitted. In terms of duration of the equipment on the construction
site, the main issues were if specialized equipment would need exemption
because they would be only needed for some special operation, and how to
deal with rental equipment without limiting the contractor's options.
The minimum time limit required for exemption started at 100 days and
was latter shortened to 30 days, in order to limit the possibility that
contractors will rotate equipment to avoid complying with the program.

**Payment Options**

Current DOT standard specifications related to environmental compliance
is in the form of either "incidental" or "pay" items.

-   Pay items are those that the contractor bids a unitary price for,
    can be measured on site, and once verified by an inspector, are paid
    for according to the contract's unitary price. This payment method
    is common for such items as the application of calcium chloride,
    water for dust control, and/or fences for wind or erosion control.
    The contractor has to perform these tasks in order to get paid.

-   Incidental items are those where that the cost is included in a
    contractor's overall bid price, and not specifically identified. One
    of the critical issues associated with incidental items is
    enforcement (i.e., what monies are retained for non-compliance). DOT
    has a 24-hour provision normally used for environmental aspects,
    where once the contractor is notified that they are not performing a
    contractual task, the Department can have the task performed by a
    third party, with the cost billed to the contractor.

It was decided that the retrofit program would be included in project
contracts as an incidental item, with some special enforcement
provisions.

**Diesel Vehicle Emissions Controls Specification**

Current DOT standard specifications related to airborne emissions
include 1.10.04 Air quality Control, 9.42 Calcium chloride for dust
control, and 9.43 Water for dust control. The retrofit/clean fuel
program has been issued in what is called a Notice to Contractors (NTC).
In the bid package the NTC is a legally binding specification in the
Special Provision portion, and is linked to all future I-95 NHHC
contracts.

The final form of the specification can be summarized as follow:

-   All diesel powered construction equipment with engine horsepower
    (HP) ratings of 60 HP and above, that are on the project or are
    assigned to the contract for a period in excess of 30 days shall be
    retrofitted with Emission Control Devices and/or use Clean Fuels in
    order to reduce diesel emissions. In addition, all motor vehicles
    and/or construction equipment shall comply with all pertinent State
    and Federal regulations relative to exhaust emission controls and
    safety.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The reduction of emissions of CO, HC, NOx, and PM~10~ will be
    accomplished by installing retrofit emission control devices or by
    using less polluting clean fuels.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The retrofit equipment shall consist of oxidation catalysts, or
    similar retrofit equipment control technology that is included in
    the EPA Verified Retrofit Technology List, and certified to provide
    a minimum of emission reductions of 20% PM~10~, 40% CO, and 50% HC.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The Clean Fuels shall consist of PuriNOx^TM^, or other low NOx and
    PM emission diesel fuel that can be used without engine
    modification, and it is certified to reduce the emission of NOx, and
    PM by more than 10% and 30% respectively when compared to N^o^2
    diesel fuel as distributed and sold in the State.

-   Construction shall not proceed until the contractor submits a
    certified list of the diesel powered construction equipment that
    will be retrofitted with emission control devices or that will use
    Clean Fuels. The list shall include (1) the equipment number, type,
    make, and contractor/sub-contractor name; (2) the emission control
    device make, model and EPA certification number; and/or (3) the type
    and source of fuel to be used.

-   The contractor shall submit monthly summary reports, updating the
    same information stated above, and include certified copies of the
    clean fuel delivery slips for the report time period, noting which
    vehicles received the fuel. The addition or deletion of diesel
    equipment shall be included on the monthly report.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The contractor shall establish truck-staging zones that are waiting
    to load or unload material at the contract area. Such zones shall be
    located where the diesel emissions from the trucks will have minimum
    impact on abutters and the general public.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Idling of delivery and/or dump trucks, or other diesel powered
    equipment shall not be permitted during periods of non-active use,
    and it should be limited to three minutes in accordance with
    Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies 22a-174-18, subsection
    (a)(5).

-   A Diesel Emissions Mitigation plan will be required for areas were
    extensive work will be performed in close proximity (i.e. less than
    50 feet) to sensitive receptors.

> If a diesel equipped vehicle is found to be in non-compliance with
> this specification, the contractor will be issued a Notice of
> Non-Compliance and given a 24-hour period in which to bring the
> vehicle into compliance or remove it from the project.

**Heavy-Duty Diesel Highway Vehicles Emissions Opacity Test Regulation**

The DMV performs the inspections in conjunction with any safety or
weight requirement at any official weighing area or other location
designated by them.

The DMV Program specifies that only diesel-powered commercial motor
vehicles consisting of the following characteristics should be tested:

-   Vehicles over 26,000 lbs. GVWR

-   Vehicles designed to transport sixteen or more passengers

-   Vehicles transporting hazardous material and those required to be
    placarded

Roadside tests have been in operation for 4 years. The failure rate is
averaged at approximately 16-18 percent. Vehicles that fail are subject
to a potential \$300 fine, and must submit proof of repairs. Second
encounters with previously failed vehicles show a drastic reduction in
smoke opacity. For the year 2003, a total of 1447 vehicles were tested
out of which 246 exceeded the states opacity standards.

The I-95 NHHC program arranged with the DMW for a pre-construction
opacity test for all contractors and sub-contractors. DMV goes to either
the maintenance garage or a convenient job site to run through the
opacity / safety testing.

The benefit of the DMV being invited by the contractor is that a waiver
of fines and an opportunity to correct any safety violation within a
reasonable time. If the contractor is caught on the road, a fine is
levied and potential loss by automatic towing. The system reduces the
chance of the contractor having delays and increase safe and emission
compliant equipment on these Contracts. A visual inspection tag is
applied to all equipment that passes the DMV inspection.

**Contractor Information Process -- Public Notice of Retrofitting**

Once the requirements for the diesel vehicle control specification were
determined, the air quality working group started the preparations for a
contractor information and dissemination program. This program focused
on how to explain the benefits and requirements of the Connecticut I-95
Diesel Emission Control Program to contractors and prospective bidders.
One of the main purposes was to acquaint contractors with specification
requirements and with vendors of emission control devices and clean fuel
distributors. CCIA distributed invitations and several presentations
were made at the DOT training facility.

These presentations included speakers from DEP, EPA, NESCAUM,
Caterpillar, DOT, DMV, and the CA/T retrofit program. Emission control
vendors and clean fuel distributors were also invited to set up booths
with their products. The presentations lasted a full morning which
included an overview of federal and state regulations, the experience
obtained through the CA/T retrofit program, engine-manufacturers points
of view, the specification requirements, and a demonstration of the smog
opacity test performed by the DMV on heavy-duty vehicles.

**DIESEL EMISSION CONTROL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION**

By the fall of 2004 the program had installed approximately 72 oxidation
catalysts on a variety of construction equipment with positive results.
This represents 60 percentage of all the equipment used during the
current contracts. From the beginning of the first contract the DOT had
devised a tracking system where each contractor and sub-contractor had
to provide a list of the non-road diesel powered equipment with detail
information for each piece of equipment that will be allowed to operate
within the construction area.

The following information was required for each piece of non-road diesel
powered equipment:

-   Contractors/ Sub-Contractors name

-   Date of Equipment arrival on Site

-   Equipment number (ID)

-   Equipment Type (Description)

-   Make, Model & Task

-   e.g. Caterpillar M318 Excavator

-   Rental/Lease company and name (on same line as lessee)

-   The Make of the Emission Control Devise

-   Model/number

-   EPA verification number

When the equipment is on site for 30 days:

-   Date of installation of retrofit device

-   Or option to use clean fuels

It was also required to prepare a monthly report including:

-   What has been retrofitted and the date

-   Make, model number, manufactures make

-   What Equipment has left the site and the date of departure

-   Copies of certified clean fuel delivery

-   What piece of equipment received clean fuel

**Emission Controls Selected - Benefits and Costs**

The diesel oxidation catalysts manufactured by Lubrizol Engine Control
Systems (ECS) and Clean diesel Technologies (CDT) have been the vendors
of choice by the Contractors and Sub-Contractors. Both oxidation
catalysts are certified by EPA to achieve a minimum of 20% reductions
for PM, 40% reductions for CO, and 50% reductions for HC.

The prices have range from \$800 to \$2000. The only problem was the
availability because the demand increase during the start of the second
contract associated with the I-95 Program.

In conjunction with CDT catalysts, a Sub-contractor is using the CDT
Fuel Borne Catalyst Plus in their aged on-road fleet and non-road
construction equipment. This product combination is certified by EPA to
achieve up to 50% reductions for PM, CO, and HC. The sub-contractor
appears to be very satisfied with the results based on their fuel
economy and the added emission reduction with the catalysts.

While a number of papers have been published on the long-term durability
of oxidation catalysts used in highway diesel applications, relatively
few data are available on the durability of catalysts used in non-road
construction machines. As of now, some of the oxidation catalysts have
been operating for two years on this program without any complaints from
the contractors. No tests have been performed yet, but we hope that in
the future some of the emission control equipment could be tested to
verify their initial performance.

None of the contractors and subcontractors opted for *PuriNOx*^TM^ as a
clean fuel alternative. All of the contractors have gone with oxidation
catalyst. The worries voiced by the contractors regarding the use of
*PuriNOx*^TM^ were that the fuel needed agitation, and freezing concerns
over winter temperature while in the construction vehicles. No test of
*PuriNOx*^TM^ have been performed on any the I-95 NHHC contracts.

An important aspect of these contracts is that all contractors and
sub-contractors had been using on-road diesel fuel for all of their
non-road and on-road equipment. The on-road diesel fuel has an average
sulfur content of 400 ppm today in New England versus a 3,000 ppm sulfur
content average for the non-road diesel fuel. By using on-road (400 ppm
sulfur) diesel fuel for construction equipment (which is not required by
law today) the PM reductions due to the lower sulfur content are in the
order of 30% when compared to the non-road high sulfur fuel.

The sub-contractors were at a disadvantage because very few primary
contractors help the sub with the cost of retrofit equipment. DOT is
looking into programs willing to dispersing funds for these disadvantage
sub-contractors in permanently putting retrofit equipment on their old
non-road equipment.

One of the issues that we have been investigating is what contractors do
with the emission control devices once the construction equipment leaves
the work area. Various strategies were implemented with varies
contractors. The first primary contractor (Out of State) purchased 22
retrofit equipment and moved them on and off the 28 pieces of
constriction equipment while on the job site. Now that the job is
finished all the retrofits are removed and are in storage. The
attachment of the retrofit equipment was engineered for easy detachment
and therefore not as permanent as the second contractor.

The second primary contractor (Major Connecticut firm) has committed to
keep the retrofits on even after the equipment is not on the site.
(There is 17 retrofitted construction equipment work off site at this
time on jobs throughout the State of Connecticut.) The connection
engineered by this company of the retrofit equipment is more secure in
nature and therefore more permanent.

The different between the two primary contractors might be that the
two-year difference has made the retrofit program more accepted. Also
that the CCIA commitment to educate and be a working partner with the
contractors has had a important effect. (Between you and me, going
through varies meeting with these two companies -- it is their
management philosophies.)

######## Highway Vehicles Opacity Test Results

As of this date, there have been six inspections by the DMV to insure
that the On-Road vehicles met Connecticut standards. Approximately 15
vehicles are tested at a time. Approximately five have fail since the
Opacity/safety checks were started and were corrected within a week. New
inspections are scheduled for Contract C1 when new equipment comes on
the job site and/or any new Sub-contractor starts working. At the end of
the year (2004) two new contracts will be starting in which DMV will
start their inspection program under those contracts.

**CONCLUSION**

The I-95 NHHC retrofit program had the advantage of using the experience
of the CA/T project in Boston, which had retrofitted over 100 pieces of
equipment by the time this program started implementation. It had the
advantage of the CA/T experience of starting almost one year before the
bit documents had to be ready for the advertising of the first contract.

The most positive aspect of initiating the retrofit program was the
creation of an air quality-working group that met on a regular basis
(every six weeks). The group was able to convince all of the affected
parties to buy into the retrofit program. It was very important to
obtain a clear understanding of the program benefits, costs, who was
going to pay, and how the concept would be translated into a required
specification as part of the bid documents early on in the program.

It was critical to include the requirement for emission control
equipment in the contract's bid package. By doing so, the cost of the
retrofit equipment was included as part of the overall contract cost,
thus avoiding the use of economic incentives to bring contractors into
the program.

The major concerns ~~were~~ expressed by contractors who participated in
the I-95 NHIP retrofit program were to get assurances from the
manufactures of emission control equipment that the emission control
device will not affect equipment performance. Once those issues were
resolved, it was also very important to have a good tracking system to
make sure that the contractors and sub-contractors would not avoid the
retrofit requirements by rotating equipment or using other clever
maneuvers.

The I-95 NHHC diesel retrofit program proved that retrofitting
construction equipment with oxidation catalysts is very feasible, and
that it has significant benefits in terms of emission reductions, odor
control, and visible smoke. When considering that the costs of the
oxidation catalysts are on the order of one percent of the total cost of
the construction equipment to be retrofitted, and the emission
reductions are in the order of 20 to 50 %, this program is a very
effective way to reduce diesel emissions and odor. By having this
requirement in the final remaining contracts, it is estimated that an
additional 130 pieces of off-road construction equipment will be
retrofitted with oxidation catalysts. This should bring the total number
of retrofits to approximate 200 by the time the I-95 HHHC ends.

**ACKNOWLEDGEMENT**

Mr. Frank Kaminski from DOT, Ms. Tracy Babbidge, and Mr. Paul Bodner
from DEP, Alyssa Glide from NESCAUM, Lt. David Maestrini from DMV, and
Ms. Faith Gavin-Kuhn from CCIA for their efforts in the process and
implementation of the Connecticut I-95 NHIP - Diesel Emission Control
Program.

**REFERENCES**

U.S. EPA. *Air and Radiation. Heavy-duty Diesel Emission Reduction
Project Retrofit/Rebuild Component*. Prepared by Northeast States for
Coordinated Air Use Management. EPA420-R99-014. June 1999.

U.S. EPA. Office of Mobile Sources, Assessment and Modeling Division.
*Exhaust Emission Factors for Non-road Engine Modeling --
Compression-Ignition*. Report No. NR-009A. June 1998

Schattanek , Guido, Kasprak, A, Weaver , D, Cooper, C. "*Implementation
of Retrofit/Clean Fuel Programs for Diesel Equipment During the
Construction Phase of Two Large Transportation Projects*" Presented
paper at the AWMA 95^th^ Annual Meeting. Baltimore, Maryland. June 2002.
Paper No. 42536

Connecticut. Department of Motor Vehicles. *Connecticut's Heavy Duty
Diesel Emissions Program.* <http://www.dmvct.org/> *March* 2001.

Schattanek, G. *Technical Memorandum - I-95 Q Bridge Project --
Projected Air Pollution Benefits and Costs of Diesel Engine Retrofit
and/or Clean Fuels Program for the Construction Phase.* December 4,
2000.

Schattanek, G. *Technical Memorandum - I-95 Q Bridge Project -- Summary
of Projected Air Pollution Benefits and Costs of Diesel Engine Retrofit
and/or Clean Fuels Program for the Construction Phase.* December 7,
2000.

U.S. EPA. *Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program.*
[www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/index](http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/index).

Connecticut. Department of Transportation. I-95 New Haven Corridor
Improvement Program. [www.i95newhaven.com](http://www.i95newhaven.com/)