ta

otection Agency 

William Jefferson Clinton Building 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Mail Code: 2201A 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

Dear Ms. Giles: 

I would like to meet with you to discuss the possibility of the Office of Enforcement and 

Compliance Assurance (OECA) providing "no action assurance" relief to the manufacturers and 

users of certain stationary source diesel engines. EPA already has made a policy determination 

to provide flexibility in its regulations for nonroad diesel engines and equipment used in 

emergency operations. That flexibility allows nonroad equipment to continue to operate to 

ameliorate the emergency and save lives without having to be concerned that the functioning (or 

nonfunctioning) of emission controls could lead to a mission disabling inducement. Specifically, 

EPA has adopted a final rule which allows operators of nonroad diesel engines and equipment 

the means to obtain short-term relief from the inducements associated with the use of selective 

catalytic reduction (SCR) emission control technology while operating in emergency situations, 

such as those where operation of the nonroad equipment is needed to protect human life. The 

extensive background explaining the need for such relief is available in the docket associated 

with EPA's direct final rule and notice of proposed rule published on June 8, 2012 and in EPA's 

Final Rule published on August 8, 2014. See 77 Fed. Reg. 34130-34148; 77 Fed. Reg. 34149-

34178; 79 Fed. Reg. 46356-46375 and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-1032. 

EPA's actions granting relief have so far been focused on nonroad mobile diesel engines. 

However, EMA and its members have been working with EPA to assure that the manufacturers 

and users of diesel engines used in stationary source applications have the same type of relief 

EPA has provided for mobile source engines. Those stationary diesel engines typically share the 

same technologies and often are identical to their nonroad mobile counterparts. Indeed, EPA has 

allowed mobile and stationary engines to be dual certified since the inception of stationary 

engine regulations. That provides significant cost savings to manufacturers, dealers, and users 

and substantially reduces administrative burdens to them and to the Agency. 

If manufacturers implement the inducement override EPA has now authorized for 

nonroad mobile engines, dual certification will not be available as an option and costs and 

complexities will skyrocket. Of even greater importance, nonroad equipment operating today 

during an emergency are able to take advantage of the relief EPA has provided, and avoid 

shutting down if the equipment runs out of diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) or if the engine senses, 

correctly or not, that it should go into inducement mode. An operator using that same engine in a 

A Non Governmental Organization in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations 
We further understand that the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) 

has prepared a draft of such a rule, that the policy decision to proceed with such a rule has been 

made by the Office of Air and Reduction (OAR), and that a proposed rule could be published as 

soon as late winter or early spring this year. However, it is uncertain when a final rule will be 

published and, thus, when the necessary relief actually will be available to be used. 

Inasmuch as EPA already has made a policy decision to allow the use of temporary a 

override for both mobile and stationary engines and equipment used in emergencies, and because 

the time lag between the finalization of the mobile rule and the finalization of the stationary rule 

creates significant potential problems and expenses, EMA and its affected members are asking 

OECA to exercise its authority to provide "no action assurance." A "no action assurance" letter 

from OECA would allow manufacturers and operators of diesel stationary engines and 

equipment to immediately begin using the temporary inducement override already adopted by 

EPA for diesel mobile source engines and equipment. 

"No action assurance" would avoid the following situations: 

• Because manufacturers cannot dual certify a nonroad engine with our inducement 

override and its counterpart stationary application, manufacturers will be required 

to split engine families; dealers and customers will be required to double their 

inventory; and EPA will face significant demands on its already overburdened 

certification staff. 

• Since the costs and burdens of splitting engine families is significant, and because 

manufacturers were hoping for prompt action by EPA in providing stationary 

emergency operation relief, many manufacturers have yet to implement the 

inducement override provided in the nonroad emergency operation final rule. As 

more and more products with SCR technology enter the marketplace (with the 

required shutdown inducement and without the override), the risk of a shutdown 

in an emergency grows more and more likely. 

• Some customers already have purchased dual certified stationary engines with 

Tier 4 (SCR) technology and are using those engines in generators installed in 

major medical centers. Without the ability to override the inducement that EPA 

regulatorilly requires for those applications, there is significant current risk of 

harm to human life. 

• Many customers would like to purchase the cleanest Tier 4 products today, but are 

unwilling to make those purchases because of the fear of shutdown in the case of 

an emergency. In some situations (those subject to the special emergency 

operation rules) customers can purchase Tier 2 or Tier 3 engines instead. In other 
inducement caused significant adverse publicity for EPA and manufacturers. EPA should not 

put itself in the position of explaining how a backhoe could continue to operate in an emergency, 

but that a pump or a generator was required to shut down, and could not perform its life saving 

miSSIOn. 

EMA and its members are available to meet with you to further explain the serious risks 

to human life that exist today because stationary engines with clean SCR technologies cannot 

temporarily override, in an emergency, regulatory imposed inducement. We also are prepared to 

further explain the costs and burdens, and adverse impacts on air quality, that will occur pending 

the finalization ofthe soon to be expected OAQPS stationary engine rule. 

Please let me know when you are available to meet. If you need additional information, 

please do not hesitate to contact me. 

cc: Janet McCabe 

Christopher Grundler 

Phillip Brooks 

Bryon Bunker 

Very truly yours, 

, _/JedR del ~ 

President