34130 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 85, 86, and 1039 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–1032; FRL–9673–1] 

RIN 2060–AR54 

Heavy-Duty Highway Program: 

Revisions for Emergency Vehicles 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action on revisions to its heavy-duty 

diesel regulations that will enable 

emergency vehicles, such as dedicated 

ambulances and fire trucks, to perform 

mission-critical life-saving work 

without risking that abnormal 

conditions of the emission control 

system could lead to decreased engine 

power, speed or torque. The revisions 

will allow manufacturers to request and 

EPA to approve modifications to 

emission control systems on emergency 

vehicles so they do not interfere with 

the vehicles’ missions. This action is not 

expected to result in any significant 

changes in regulatory burdens or costs. 

DATES: This rule is effective on August 

7, 2012 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comment. If we 

receive relevant adverse comment on 

distinct elements of this rule by July 27, 

2012, we will publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register 

indicating which provisions we are 

withdrawing. The provisions that are 

not withdrawn will become effective on 

August 7, 2012, notwithstanding 

adverse comment on any other 

provision. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2011–1032, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744 

• Mail: Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Docket, Mail-code 6102T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center 

(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC, Attention Docket No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2010–0162. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– 

1032. For additional instructions on 

submitting written comments, see the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section on 

‘‘Public Participation’’ in the parallel 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in 

today’s Federal Register. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW., Washington, DC. The 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, and the telephone 

number for the Air Docket is (202) 566– 

1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lauren Steele, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Transportation and 

Air Quality, Assessment and Standards 

Division, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann 

Arbor, Michigan 48105; telephone 

number: 734–214–4788; fax number: 

734–214–4816; email address: 

steele.lauren (@epa.gov). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Why is EPA using a direct final rule? 

EPA is publishing this rule without a 

prior proposed rule because we view 

this as a noncontroversial action and 

anticipate no adverse comment. This is 

also to expedite the regulatory process 

to allow engine and vehicle 

modifications to occur as soon as 

possible. However, in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of today’s Federal 

Register, we are publishing a separate 

document that will serve as the 

proposed rule to adopt these revisions 

for emergency vehicles if adverse 

comments are received on this direct 

final rule. We will not institute a second 

comment period on this action. Any 

parties interested in commenting must 

do so at this time. For further 

information about commenting on this 

rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this 

document. 

If EPA receives adverse comment on 

a distinct provision of this rulemaking, 

we will publish a timely withdrawal in 

the Federal Register indicating which 

provisions we are withdrawing. The 

provisions that are not withdrawn will 

become effective on the date set out 

above, notwithstanding adverse 

comment on any other provision. We 

would address all public comments in 

a subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. 

EPA is publishing this direct final 

rule to expedite the deployment of 

solutions that will best ensure the 

readiness of the nation’s emergency 

vehicles. We request that commenters 

identify in your comments any portions 

of the action with which you agree and 

support as written, in addition to any 

comments regarding suggestions for 

improvement or provisions with which 

you disagree. In the case of a comment 

that is otherwise unclear whether it is 

adverse, EPA would interpret relevant 

comments calling for more flexibility or 

less restrictions for emergency vehicles 

as supportive of the direct final action. 

In this way, the EPA will be able to 

adopt those elements of this action that 

are fully supported and most needed 

today, while considering and addressing 

any adverse comments received on the 

proposed rule, in the course of 

developing the final rule. 

Does this action apply to me? 

This action may affect you if you 

produce or import new heavy-duty or 

nonroad diesel engines that are 

intended for use in vehicles that serve 

the emergency response industry, 

including all types of dedicated and 

purpose-built fire trucks and 

ambulances. The following table gives 

some examples of entities that may be 

affected by this action. Because these 

are only examples, you should carefully 

examine the existing and revised 

regulations in 40 CFR parts 85, 86 and 

1039. If you have questions regarding 

how or whether these rules apply to 

you, you may call the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section above. 

Category NAICS code a Examples of potentially affected entities 

Industry ..................................................... 336111 Motor Vehicle Manufacturers, Engine and Truck Manufacturers. 

336112 

333618 

336120 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34131 

Category NAICS code a Examples of potentially affected entities 

Industry ..................................................... 541514 Commercial Importers of Vehicles and Vehicle Components. 

811112 

811198 

Industry ..................................................... 811310 Engine Repair, Remanufacture, and Maintenance. 

Note: 

a North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). 

Table of Contents 

I. Overview 

II. Statutory Authority and Regulatory 

Background 

A. Statutory Authority 

B. Background: 2007 and 2010 NOX and 

PM Standards 

(1) On-Highway Standards 

(2) Nonroad Standards 

III. Emergency Vehicle Provisions 

A. Background on Regulation of Emergency 

Vehicles 

B. Why is EPA taking this action? 

(1) How does a DPF work? 

(2) Why are emergency vehicles having 

problems with DPF regeneration? 

(3) What are the concerns for emergency 

vehicles using SCR? 

C. What would occur if EPA took no 

action? 

(1) The Industry Would Continue To Get 

Smarter 

(2) The Fleet Would Continue To Migrate 

to the 2010 Standards 

(3) Some Trucks Would Continue To 

Experience Problems 

D. Regulatory Action 

(1) Liberalized Regeneration Requests 

(2) Engine Recalibration 

(3) Backpressure Relief 

E. What engines and vehicles are affected? 

(1) Newly Certified Engines 

(2) Certified Engines and Vehicles In-Use 

(3) Labeling Requirements 

(4) Other Regulatory Provisions 

F. Economic Impacts 

(1) Costs to Manufacturers 

(2) Operational Costs 

(3) Societal Costs 

G. Environmental Impacts 

H. Health Effects 

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 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. Overview 

EPA is adopting amendments to its 

heavy-duty diesel engine programs that 

will specifically allow engine 

manufacturers to request to deploy 

specific emission controls or settings for 

new and in-use engines that are sold for 

use only in emergency vehicles. EPA is 

adopting these revisions to enable fire 

trucks and ambulances with heavy-duty 

diesel engines to perform missioncritical life- and property-saving work 

without risk of losing power, speed or 

torque due to abnormal conditions of 

the emission control systems. 

EPA’s current diesel engine 

requirements have spurred application 

of emission controls systems such as 

diesel particulate filters (commonly 

called soot filters or DPF’s) and other 

after-treatment systems on most new 

diesel vehicles, including emergency 

vehicles. Some control system designs 

and implementation strategies are more 

effective in other segments of the fleet 

than in emergency vehicles, especially 

given some emergency vehicles’ extreme 

duty cycles. By this action, EPA intends 

to help our nation’s emergency vehicles 

perform their missions; to better ensure 

public safety and welfare and the 

protection of lives and property. 

II. Statutory Authority and Regulatory 

Background 

A. Statutory Authority 

Section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or the Act) directs EPA to 

establish standards regulating the 

emission of any air pollutant from any 

class or classes of new motor vehicles or 

new motor vehicle engines that, in the 

Administrator’s judgment, causes or 

contributes to air pollution which may 

reasonably be anticipated to endanger 

public health or welfare. Such standards 

apply for the useful life of the vehicles 

or engines. Section 202(a)(3) requires 

that EPA set standards applicable to 

emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon 

monoxide, NOX and particulate matter 

(PM) from heavy-duty trucks that reflect 

the greatest degree of emission 

reduction achievable through the 

application of technology which we 

determine will be available for the 

model year to which the standards 

apply. We are to give appropriate 

consideration to cost, energy, and safety 

factors associated with the application 

of such technology. We may revise such 

technology-based standards, taking costs 

into account, on the basis of information 

concerning the effects of air pollution 

from heavy-duty vehicles or engines and 

other sources of mobile source related 

pollutants on the public health and 

welfare. 

Section 202(a)(4)(A) of the Act 

requires the Administrator to consider 

risks to public health, welfare or safety 

in determining whether an emission 

control device, system or element of 

design shall be used in a new motor 

vehicle or new motor vehicle engine. 

Under section 202(a)(4)(B), the 

Administrator shall consider available 

methods for reducing risk to public 

health, welfare or safety associated with 

use of such device, system or element of 

design, as well as the availability of 

other devices, systems or elements of 

design which may be used to conform 

to requirements prescribed by (this 

subchapter) without causing or 

contributing to such unreasonable risk. 

Section 206(a) of the Act requires EPA 

to test, or require to be tested in such 

manner as it deems appropriate, motor 

vehicles or motor vehicle engines 

submitted by a manufacturer to 

determine whether such vehicle or 

engine conforms to the regulations 

promulgated under section 202. Section 

206(d) provides that EPA shall by 

regulation establish methods and 

procedures for making tests under 

section 206. 

Section 213 of the Act gives EPA the 

authority to establish emissions 

standards for nonroad engines and 

vehicles (42 U.S.C. 7547). Sections 

213(a)(3) and (a)(4) authorize the 

Administrator to set standards and 

require EPA to give appropriate 

consideration to cost, lead time, noise, 

energy, and safety factors associated 

with the application of technology. 

Section 213(a)(4) authorizes the 

Administrator to establish standards to 

control emissions of pollutants (other 

than those covered by section 213(a)(3)) 

which ‘‘may reasonably be anticipated 

to endanger public health and welfare.’’ 

Section 213(d) requires the standards 

under section 213 to be subject to 

sections 206–209 of the Act and to be 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34132 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1Control of Air Pollution from New Motor 

Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle 

Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control 

Requirements (66 FR 5001). 

2Control of Emissions of Air Pollution from 

Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel (69 FR 38958). 

3 In this rule, emergency vehicle is defined as a 

fire truck or an ambulance for on-highway 

applications, and for nonroad applications, we are 

defining emergency equipment as specialized 

vehicles to perform aircraft rescue and firefighting 

functions at airports, or wildland fire apparatus. See 

Section III.C and revisions at 40 CFR 86.1803–01 

and 40 CFR 1039.801. 

4Heavy-Duty Highway Final Rule, December 21, 

2000, Response to Comments, Section 3.2.1, 

‘‘Technical Feasibility of Engine/Vehicle 

Standards//Diesel Engine Exhaust Standards,’’ page 

3–58 to 

3–60, available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/highway

-diesel/regs/2007-heavy-duty-highway.htm. 

5Letter dated February 1, 2001 to C. Whitman, 

EPA Administrator from G. Miller, President, 

National Association of State Fire Marshalls. 

6See, for example, letter dated October 22, 2009, 

from Roger Lackore of the Fire Apparatus 

Manufacturers’ Association and Randy Hanson of 

the Ambulance Manufacturers Division, to Keisha 

Jennings of EPA. 

7See, for example, letter dated October 4, 2011 

from Congressman Filner to EPA Administrator 

Jackson, and letter dated October 14, 2011, from 

Director Cimini of the Southeast Association of Fire 

Chiefs to EPA Administrator Jackson. 

enforced in the same manner as 

standards prescribed under section 202 

of the Act. 

B. Background: 2007 and 2010 NOX and 

PM Standards 

(1) On-Highway Standards 

On January 18, 2001, EPA published 

a rule promulgating more stringent 

standards for NOX and PM for heavyduty highway engines (‘‘the heavy-duty 

highway rule’’).1 The 0.20 gram per 

brake-horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr) NOX

standard in the heavy-duty highway 

rule first applied in MY 2007. However, 

because of phase-in flexibility 

provisions adopted in that rule and use 

of emission credits generated by 

manufacturers for early compliance, 

manufacturers were able to continue to 

produce engines with NOX emissions 

greater than 0.20 g/bhp-hr. The phase-in 

provisions ended after MY 2009 so that 

the 0.20 g/bhp-hr NOX standard was 

fully phased-in for model year 2010. 

Because of these changes that occurred 

in MY 2010, the 0.20 g/bhp-hr NOX

emission standard is often referred to as 

the 2010 NOX emission standard, even 

though it applied to engines as early as 

MY 2007. 

The heavy-duty highway rule adopted 

in 2001 also included a PM emissions 

standard for new heavy-duty diesel 

engines of 0.01 g/bhp-hr, effective for 

engines beginning with MY 2007. Due 

to the flexible nature of the phase-in 

schedule described above, 

manufacturers have had the opportunity 

to produce engines that met the PM 

standard while emitting higher levels of 

NOX. During the phase-in years, 

manufacturers of diesel engines 

generally produced engines that were 

tuned so the combustion process 

inherently emitted lower engine-out 

NOX while relying on PM aftertreatment to meet the PM standard. The 

principles of combustion chemistry 

dictate that conditions yielding lower 

engine-out NOX emissions generally 

result in higher engine-out PM 

emissions. This is what we call the 

NOX-PM trade-off. For many new lowNOX diesel engines today, engine-out 

PM emissions could be at or above the 

levels seen with the MY 2004 standards 

(0.1 g/bhp-hr). To meet today’s stringent 

PM standards, manufacturers rely on 

diesel particulate filter after-treatment to 

clean the exhaust. 

(2) Nonroad Standards 

EPA adopted similar technologyforcing standards for nonroad diesel 

engines on June 29, 2004.2 These are 

known as the Tier 4 standards. This 

program includes requirements that will 

generally involve the use of NOX aftertreatment for engines above 75 hp and 

PM after-treatment (likely soot filters) 

for engines above 25 hp. These 

standards phase in during the 2011 to 

2015 time frame. 

III. Emergency Vehicle Provisions 

A. Background on Regulation of 

Emergency Vehicles 

Typically, the engines powering our 

nation’s emergency vehicles belong to 

the same certified engine families as 

engines that are installed in similarly 

sized vehicles sold for other public and 

private uses.3 Historically, engine and 

vehicle manufacturers have sought EPA 

certification for broad engine families 

and vehicle test groups that are defined 

by similar emissions and performance 

characteristics. Engine families typically 

only consider the type of vehicle in 

which the engine is intended to be 

installed to the extent that it fits into a 

broad vehicle weight class and, to a 

lesser extent, the vehicle’s intended 

duty cycle (i.e. urban or highway). 

Because of the above-described 

manufacturing practices and the narrow 

CAA authority for any exemptions, EPA 

has historically regulated engines for 

emergency vehicles, including 

ambulances as well as police vehicles 

and fire-fighting apparatus, in the same 

manner as other engines. 

In the public comments received on 

the proposed heavy-duty highway rule, 

EPA received some comments about 

DPF technologies and regeneration 

cycles on heavy-duty trucks, including 

one comment that expressed concerns 

that the systems may not be failsafe.4

However, none of the comments 

specifically raised technical feasibility 

with respect to emergency vehicles, and 

EPA’s response was based on the best 

information available at the time. After 

publishing the final rule requiring 

heavy-duty highway engines to meet 

performance standards that compelled 

technologies such as DPF’s, EPA 

received a letter from the National 

Association of State Fire Marshals, 

requesting some provision for public 

safety in implementing this new rule, 

considering that fire departments across 

the nation have trouble covering basic 

costs and may not have funds for more 

expensive trucks.5 This letter did not 

raise any technical feasibility issues, 

and EPA did not see a need to take 

action. 

More recently EPA has received 

letters from fire apparatus 

manufacturers and ambulance 

companies requesting relief from power 

or speed inducements related to low 

levels of DEF for SCR systems on 

emergency vehicles.6 Power and speed 

reduction inducements were new on 

vehicles equipped with SCR. These 

were not specifically mandated by EPA 

but designed by manufacturers to occur 

if DEF levels became low, to induce 

operators of the vehicles to perform the 

required emission-related maintenance 

in use. More discussion on this, 

including why the emergency response 

community requested relief and what 

action EPA took, is found below in 

Section III.B(3). 

Recently, beginning in October 2011, 

EPA received a series of comment letters 

from fire chiefs and other interested 

stakeholders, requesting regulatory 

action to relieve emergency vehicles 

from the burden of complying with the 

2007 PM standards.7 EPA promptly 

opened a dialogue with the fire chiefs 

and engine manufacturers to understand 

the issues. Power and speed reductions 

were occurring on some vehicles with 

soot filters but without SCR systems, in 

part related to engine protection 

measures designed by manufacturers. 

Essentially, these soot filters are 

supposed to be self-cleaning by 

periodically burning off accumulated 

soot during normal vehicle use. The 

cleaning process is called regeneration, 

and when this doesn’t work as designed, 

the filter gradually gets more clogged, 

which can lead to engine problems. EPA 

has determined that while other 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34133 

8Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for the ‘‘2007 

Heavy-Duty Highway Rule,’’ EPA420–R–00–026, 

December 2000. Chapter III, Emissions Standards 

Feasibility, is available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

highway-diesel/regs/ria-iii.pdf. 

9Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for ‘‘Control of 

Emissions from Nonroad Diesel Engines,’’ EPA420– 

R–04–007, May 2004. Chapter 4, Technologies and 

Test Procedures for Low-Emission Engines, is 

available http://www.epa.gov/nonroad-diesel/

2004fr/420r04007e.pdf. 

10See Final RIA Chapter III, Note 8, above. 

pathways are available for resolving 

some issues related to soot filters on 

emergency vehicles, there remains a 

public safety issue related to design of 

engines and emission control systems 

on emergency vehicles that should be 

addressed through this rulemaking. 

More discussion of this, including why 

relief was requested and what other 

actions can be taken in addition to EPA 

regulation, is found below in Sections 

III.B and III.C. 

There have been some examples of 

EPA providing limited exemptions for 

other types of emergency-use engines 

and vessels. Further descriptions of 

current and proposed limited 

exemptions are provided in the Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking published 

elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. 

These limited exemption provisions are 

only applicable to newly certified 

engines. They are not applicable to any 

existing in-use engines that are already 

deployed in emergency equipment. 

B. Why is EPA taking this action? 

EPA is amending its regulations to 

facilitate engine manufacturers’ design 

and implementation of reliable and 

robust emission control systems with 

regeneration strategies and other 

features that do not interfere with the 

mission of emergency vehicles. Through 

the comments and letters we have 

received, as well as our own outreach 

and data-gathering efforts, we have 

learned that some emission control 

systems on fire trucks and ambulances 

today, in particular, certain applications 

using diesel particulate filters, are 

requiring an unexpected amount of 

operator interventions, and there are 

currently a nontrivial number of 

emergency vehicles that are 

electronically programmed to cut power 

or speed—even while responding to an 

emergency—when certain operational 

parameters are exceeded in relation to 

the emission control system. As we 

understand it, the experiences of 

operators are mixed, with some not 

reporting any problems and some 

reporting problems that raise public 

safety and welfare concerns. 

EPA’s standards are performancebased, and reflect the greatest degree of 

emission reduction achievable, 

according to CAA sections 202(a)(3) and 

213(a)(3). Our on-highway and nonroad 

PM standards do not specify the type of 

diesel particulate filter for 

manufacturers to use, nor do they even 

mandate the use of such a filter. Our 

analysis of the feasibility of the 2007 onhighway PM standard is presented in 

Chapter III of the final Regulatory 

Impact Analysis (RIA) for that rule.8 Our 

analysis of the feasibility of the Tier 4 

nonroad compression ignition engine 

standards that will be phasing in 

through 2015 is presented in Chapter 4 

of that rule’s final RIA.9 For most 

nonroad engines, these standards are 

similar in stringency to the 2007 onhighway heavy-duty engine and vehicle 

standards. As described below in 

Section III.H, these two rules are 

providing billions of dollars of annual 

health benefits by virtually eliminating 

harmful PM emissions from the 

regulated engines. Even so, EPA is 

required by sections 202(a)(4)(B) and 

213(c) of the Act to, among other things, 

consider methods for reducing risk to 

public safety and welfare associated 

with the use of emission control devices 

or systems. 

Based on the information available to 

us, we have concluded that there is an 

indirect risk to public safety and welfare 

associated with some examples of 

emission control systems when they are 

deployed on emergency vehicles that 

experience extreme duty cycles. This 

indirect risk is related to the readiness 

of emergency vehicles and the risk that 

they may not be able to respond during 

emergencies with the full power, torque, 

or speed that the engine is designed to 

provide. While this risk is not inherent 

to the requirement to reduce emissions 

or to the use of diesel particulate filters 

on emergency vehicles, EPA believes it 

is appropriate to ensure that emergency 

vehicles can perform their emergency 

missions without the chance of such 

consequences. 

EPA’s current rules already provide 

the opportunity for manufacturers to 

address many issues through 

applications for certification of new 

engines and new vehicles. There is also 

currently a mechanism for 

manufacturers to deploy field 

modifications to the in-use fleet, 

including those that are substantially 

similar to approved upgrades for new 

vehicles, as well as those that apply 

only to vehicles that are no longer in 

production. As manufacturers become 

aware of the need for upgrades or 

enhancements, this process occurs 

within the new and in-use fleet with 

various degrees of application. While 

that process is occurring today, EPA 

views this issue as serious enough that 

we would be remiss if we did not act to 

ensure that our regulations clearly offer 

the needed flexibilities for emergency 

vehicles. 

(1) How does a DPF work? 

To explain more fully the issues that 

we are addressing with this action, and 

hence why we are taking this action, we 

are providing here some background 

information on diesel particulate filters 

and the process of DPF regeneration. 

DPF’s are exhaust after-treatment 

devices that significantly reduce 

emissions from diesel-fueled vehicles 

and equipment. DPF’s physically trap 

PM and remove it from the exhaust 

stream. Figure III–1 depicts a schematic 

of a wall-flow monolith style filter, with 

the black arrows indicating exhaust gas 

laden with particles, and the gray 

arrows indicating filtered exhaust gas. 

This style of filter is the most common 

in today’s heavy-duty diesel engines, 

and has very high rates of filtration, in 

excess of 95 percent.10


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34134 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

11EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 86.004–25(b)(4) for 

heavy-duty diesel engine maintenance specify a 

minimum interval for DPF ash cleanout from 

100,000 to 150,000 mi. Many manufacturers design 

DPF systems with longer maintenance intervals. 

12See http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/tru/ 

documents/ashguide.pdf. 

13See memo dated May 4, 2012, ‘‘Diesel 

Particulate Filter Regeneration,’’ Docket ID EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2011–1032. 

To be successful, these devices 

generally must be able to accomplish 

two things: Collect PM and clean away 

accumulated PM. There are two main 

types of PM that can accumulate: 

combustible and non-combustible, and 

two very different types of cleaning 

methods: regeneration and ash cleaning. 

Regeneration occurs relatively 

frequently, and is designed to complete 

the combustion (oxidation) of the 

trapped combustible PM components, 

releasing them to the exhaust as gasphase compounds (mostly H2O and 

CO2). In contrast to the PM that can be 

oxidized and carried out the tailpipe as 

gases, the non-combustible PM such as 

metallic ash cannot be destroyed 

through regeneration and will always 

remain inside a DPF. To clean ash from 

a DPF, the filter unit is removed from 

the vehicle and professionally cleaned 

with a special machine. Fortunately, 

there is very little ash formation from 

modern diesels so ash cleaning and ash 

disposal occurs very infrequently, 

generally with at least 150,000 mile 

service intervals, and the mass of 

accumulated ash is generally small (a 

few teaspoons).11 12 This distinction is 

made here because the ash cleaning 

process is not a source of concern that 

has given rise to this EPA action. The 

infrequent cleaning of noncombustible 

materials from DPF’s is not part of the 

scope of this action. 

Regeneration, however, is a type of 

routine DPF cleaning that must occur 

regularly, and for which EPA does not 

specify a minimum interval in its 

regulations, in contrast to the ash 

cleaning process. At its very essence, 

regeneration involves burning off the 

accumulated soot. Since this burning 

can involve extra heat and/or oxygen or 

oxygen-containing compounds, this 

must be done carefully and safely to 

avoid uncontrolled burns. The 

discussion below in Section III.B.(1)(b) 

describes the three types of routine DPF 

regeneration: Passive regeneration, 

automatic active regeneration, and 

manual (parked) active regeneration. 

Additional discussion is provided in the 

accompanying Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking published elsewhere in 

today’s Federal Register and in a 

memorandum to the docket.13 Below, 

we discuss the reason why regeneration 

is needed at all. 

(a) Failure of a DPF 

When the style of filter installed on a 

diesel vehicle is the wall-flow type that 

is predominant in the market today, it 

physically traps so much of the PM that 

the particles accumulate on the inside of 

the filter and if not burned off, this PM 

can over time block the passages 

through the filtering media, making it 

more restrictive to exhaust flow. This is 

commonly referred to as ‘‘trap 

plugging.’’ Some other styles of filter, 

such as flow-through DPF’s, are less 

prone to plugging, but do not generally 

reduce the PM emission rate sufficiently 

to meet today’s stringent PM standard. 

Any time something gets in the way of 

free flowing air through an engine, it 

creates what we call ‘‘exhaust 

backpressure.’’ Even a clean, new DPF 

generates a small amount of exhaust 

backpressure due to the porous walls 

through which all of the exhaust flows. 

Engines can tolerate a certain range of 

exhaust backpressure. When an increase 

in this backpressure, or resistance, is 

detected, engines can compensate to a 

point. An increase in exhaust 

backpressure from a DPF trapping more 

and more PM represents increased work 

demanded from the engine to force the 

exhaust gas through the increasingly 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2ER08JN12.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34135 

restrictive DPF. However, unless the 

DPF is frequently cleansed of the 

trapped PM, this increased work 

demand can lead to reductions in 

engine performance and increases in 

fuel consumption. This loss in 

performance may be noticed by the 

vehicle operator in terms of poor 

acceleration and generally poor 

drivability of the vehicle. 

If a DPF is not regenerated and it 

becomes plugged, there is a risk of two 

types of failure. The degree of this risk 

and which consequence may be 

experienced will depend on the engine 

and emission control system design. 

One consequence is that the lack of air 

flowing through an engine will cause an 

engine to shut down because it can no 

longer compensate for the extra work 

being demanded of it. The other is a risk 

of catastrophic DPF failure when 

excessive amounts of trapped PM begin 

to oxidize at high temperatures (i.e., 

DPF regeneration temperatures above 

1,000 °C) leading to a ‘‘runaway’’ 

combustion of the PM within the DPF. 

This can cause temperatures in the filter 

media to increase beyond its physical 

tolerance, possibly creating high 

thermal stresses where the DPF 

materials could crack or melt. This is an 

unsafe condition, presenting physical 

danger to occupants as well as to objects 

and persons near the vehicle. Further, 

catastrophic failure can allow 

significant amounts of the diesel PM to 

pass through the DPF without being 

captured. That is, the DPF is destroyed 

and PM emission control is lost. For all 

these reasons, most manufacturers 

generally design their emission control 

systems to prevent uncontrolled 

shutdown or runaway DPF regeneration 

by programming the engine’s electronic 

control module (ECM) to limit 

maximum engine speed, torque and/or 

power when excessive backpressures 

are detected. This mode of engine 

operation at reduced performance may 

allow a vehicle to ‘‘limp home’’ to 

receive service. In extreme cases the 

ECM may command the engine to shut 

down to prevent a catastrophic failure. 

(b) Types of Regeneration 

There are three types of routine DPF 

regeneration. Passive regeneration refers 

to methods that rely strictly on the 

temperatures and constituents normally 

available in the vehicle’s exhaust to 

oxidize PM from a DPF in a given 

vehicle application. Passive 

regeneration is an automatic process 

that occurs without the intervention of 

an engine’s on-board diagnostic and 

control systems, and often without any 

operator notice or knowledge. Passive 

regeneration is often a continuous 

process, because of which, it is 

sometimes referred to as continuous 

regeneration. In a vehicle whose normal 

operation does not generate 

temperatures needed for passive DPF 

regeneration, the system needs a little 

help to clean itself. This process is 

called active regeneration, and 

supplemental heat inputs to the exhaust 

are provided to initiate soot oxidation. 

There are two types of active 

regeneration: Those that may occur 

automatically either while the vehicle is 

in motion, while idling, or while 

powering an auxiliary device such as a 

pump or ladder (power take-off (PTO) 

mode)), and those that must be driverinitiated and occur only while the 

vehicle is stationary and out-of-service. 

Vehicles with automatic active 

regeneration systems require operators 

to be alert to dashboard lamps and 

indicators. Written instructions are 

provided to operators to explain what 

each lamp means (such as high 

temperatures or need for regeneration) 

and what action is called for (such as 

driving at highway speeds or initiating 

a manual active regeneration). Because 

EPA emissions standards are 

performance based; and therefore, do 

not dictate any required emission 

control system technologies or 

configurations, each manufacturer has 

the discretion to program the timing and 

sequence of lamps as needed to inform 

drivers of the condition of the emission 

control system. As noted above, it is not 

uncommon in today’s heavy-duty fleet 

for an engine’s ECM to limit its 

maximum speed, torque or power when 

a plugging DPF is detected. These 

engine and emission control system 

protection measures can alert drivers to 

the need to change driving conditions to 

facilitate automatic active regeneration 

or to make plans to allow for a manual 

active regeneration. 

A manual active regeneration allows 

the engine’s ECM to increase engine 

speed and exhaust temperature to a 

greater extent than what is typically 

allowed during an automatic active 

regeneration. Because the ECM takes 

full control of an engine during a 

manual active regeneration, the vehicle 

must remain parked and not used for 

other purposes, such as pumping water 

in PTO mode. Some manual active 

regenerations may require towing the 

vehicle to a special service center, and 

may occur while the DPF is on the 

vehicle, or offline with the DPF 

removed from the vehicle. In such cases, 

if a spare DPF is not available, the 

vehicle could be out of service 

overnight. If a driver disregards such 

warnings, the risk of uncontrolled 

engine shutdown or a catastrophic DPF 

failure may increase. EPA encourages 

the design of robust systems calling for 

minimal driver interventions, while 

providing drivers with clear and early 

indicators before any interventions are 

needed. EPA also encourages accurate 

and thorough operator training to ensure 

that the correct remedial action is taken 

at the earliest available time. 

Actively regenerating DPF systems 

typically require sufficient air flow, 

temperature and soot accumulation 

before an automatic active regeneration 

will be requested by the engine’s ECM. 

As mentioned above, this may occur 

either while the vehicle is in motion or 

parked, if pre-set engine operating 

conditions are met (such as speed and 

temperature). When the engine’s ECM 

signals the initiation of an automatic 

active regeneration and the extra heat is 

generated, an ideal DPF system 

accomplishes this as a transparent 

process, with no effects perceivable by 

the driver. 

A variety of manufacturer approaches 

can be taken to produce the 

supplemental heat needed for active 

regeneration. Diesel engines of MY 2007 

or newer often incorporate one or more 

of the following approaches: 

• On-board electrical heaters 

upstream of the filter. 

• Air-intake throttling in one or more 

of the engine cylinders. When 

necessary, this device would limit the 

amount of air entering the engine, 

raising the exhaust temperature and 

facilitating regeneration. 

• Exhaust brake activation. When 

necessary, this device would limit the 

amount of exhaust exiting the engine, 

raising the exhaust temperature and 

facilitating regeneration. 

• Engine speed increases. This 

approach is sometimes used in 

combination with the other approaches 

to deliver more heat to the filter to 

facilitate regeneration. 

• Post top-dead-center (TDC) fuel 

injection. Injecting small amounts of 

fuel in the cylinders of a diesel engine 

after pistons have reached TDC 

introduces a small amount of unburned 

fuel in the engine’s exhaust gases. This 

unburned fuel can then be oxidized over 

an oxidation catalyst upstream of the 

filter or oxidized over a catalyzed 

particulate filter to combust 

accumulated particulate matter. 

• Post injection of diesel fuel in the 

exhaust upstream of an oxidation 

catalyst and/or catalyzed particulate 

filter. This method serves to generate 

heat used to combust accumulated 

particulates by oxidizing fuel across a 

catalyst present on the filter or on an 

oxidation catalyst upstream of the filter. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34136 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

14MECA Diesel Particulate Filter Maintenance: 

Current Practices and Experience (June 2005) http:// 

www.meca.org/galleries/default-file/ 

Filter_Maintenance_White_Paper_605_final.pdf. 

• On-board fuel burners upstream of 

the filter.14

These are presented here merely as 

examples, and are by no means a 

complete list of the strategies available 

to manufacturers when designing 

engines that use automatic active DPF 

regeneration, though not all may be 

applicable to all engines. A common 

approach that gets a lot of consumer 

attention is the use of fuel burners or 

fuel injection strategies. This approach 

is often called ‘‘dosing.’’ Vehicle owners 

may notice an increase in fuel 

consumption when driving a vehicle 

that relies heavily on fuel dosing for its 

automatic active regenerations. In this 

case, when an engine’s ECM gives the 

signal, the doser injects a metered 

amount of diesel fuel into the exhaust 

flow (or cylinders), which reacts with 

the DPF catalyst to raise the temperature 

to a point that enables regeneration. 

EPA does not have information about 

which manufacturers employ this 

technique or the number or types of 

vehicles with engines that use fuel 

dosing as part of the active regeneration 

strategy. Estimates of the additional fuel 

use by a vehicle whose DPF 

regeneration system employs fuel 

dosing are described in the Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking published 

elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. 

This is also mentioned here because one 

of the possible outcomes of this EPA 

action is that some manufacturers may 

alter their strategies for automatic active 

regenerations on emergency vehicles, 

which may have a modest effect on 

supplemental fuel use due to dosing. 

(2) Why are emergency vehicles having 

problems with DPF regeneration? 

At the time of promulgation of the 

heavy-duty highway rule, EPA and the 

engine manufacturers expected the 

2007-compliant engine emission control 

systems would be integrated with 

advanced engine controls to ensure DPF 

regeneration under all vehicle operating 

conditions and environments. While 

this is widely true today, the experience 

of the rule implementation thus far 

indicates there are still some exceptions. 

Although EPA is aware of a relatively 

small number of emergency vehicles 

that are experiencing problems with 

DPF regeneration, of those that are 

having problems, most of the problems 

can be related to the vehicle’s duty 

cycle, the ambient conditions, and/or 

the engine’s combustion characteristics. 

A vehicle’s duty cycle means how it is 

driven, including its speeds, loads, and 

distances, as well as time out of service 

and time spent idling. A vehicle’s duty 

cycle can vary by the demographic of 

the service area, including whether the 

vehicle responds to emergencies in a 

rural or urban community, and whether 

it drives over flat or hilly terrain. 

Because DPF regeneration requires heat 

and oxygen (basic ingredients for 

combustion), the success of DPF 

regeneration strategies can also be 

influenced by ambient conditions such 

as extreme cold winter temperatures 

and whether the vehicle operates near 

sea level or at a high elevation. The 

engine combustion and exhaust 

characteristics can influence the success 

of a DPF regeneration strategy since 

parameters such as engine-out NOX and 

PM emission levels can influence how 

easily the soot can be oxidized, and how 

much soot needs to be oxidized and 

how often. 

Both the engine’s duty cycle and the 

overall control strategy of the engine’s 

emission control system play a large 

role in the success of integrating a DPF 

with an engine to control PM emissions. 

In this section we provide additional 

discussion of how engine combustion 

characteristics and vehicle duty cycle 

can lead to DPF regeneration problems 

on emergency vehicles. In Section III.D, 

below, we discuss our regulatory action 

to address these issues. While our 

approach specifically targets engine 

combustion characteristics and emission 

control system design, we encourage 

emergency vehicle owners to inquire 

with their dealers and manufacturers 

regarding suitable vehicle and engine 

options that are appropriate for their 

duty cycle as well as their demographic 

and geographic location. 

(a) Engine Combustion Characteristics 

Engine combustion characteristics can 

be designed to enable continuous 

passive regeneration or to rely heavily 

on automatic active regeneration. As 

mentioned above, regeneration is a 

combustion process, burning off the 

accumulated PM or soot. The PM is 

created because the initial combustion 

process in the engine was imperfect. To 

completely convert all fuel to CO2 and 

water, the combustion process needs 

more heat and oxygen. Both of these 

things create NOX because nitrogen (N2) 

is naturally present in the air and 

readily oxidizes at high temperatures. 

Thus there is a NOX-PM trade-off of 

most diesel combustion processes 

(homogeneous charge compression 

ignition being an exception) where 

lower combustion temperatures help 

control NOX but create more PM, and 

higher temperatures that destroy PM (or 

prevent it from being created) can 

generate more NOX. 

In an engine with a DPF system, 

combustion settings, or calibrations that 

enable continuous passive regeneration, 

tend to be those with higher engine-out 

NOX and lower engine-out PM, partly 

because of the higher temperatures that 

create the NOX, partly because of the 

NOX itself that can act as an oxidizer (to 

burn off soot), and partly because of the 

lighter soot loading rate. In contrast, 

engine calibrations that may lead to a 

heavy reliance on automatic active 

regeneration tend to be those with lower 

engine-out NOX and higher engine-out 

PM, partly because of the lower 

temperatures, partly because of a lack of 

helpful NOX, and partly because of a 

heavier soot loading rate. Note that 

‘‘engine-out’’ means emissions upstream 

of any after-treatment cleaning devices 

such as DPF or SCR. An example of a 

DPF system that may rely almost 

exclusively on active regeneration to 

maintain a clean PM filter, from an 

engine calibration perspective, would be 

an engine using advanced exhaust gas 

recirculation, because it would have 

very low engine-out NOX and relatively 

high engine-out PM. An example of a 

DPF system that may rarely experience 

automatic active regeneration (and 

frequently passively regenerate), from 

an engine calibration perspective, 

would be an engine using SCR to 

control NOX, because it could have 

comparatively high engine-out NOX and 

relatively low engine-out PM. The SCR 

after-treatment would then reduce the 

high engine-out NOX to provide very 

low tailpipe NOX. 

Thus it is important to note that this 

NOX-PM trade-off is a critical design 

parameter when developing an engine 

that will be successfully integrated with 

a DPF-equipped emission control 

system. To date, all of the concerns 

expressed to EPA regarding emergency 

vehicles with DPF regeneration issues 

have been for vehicles that do not 

employ SCR technology, and thus may 

have higher engine-out PM. The 

differences in engine combustion 

characteristics of the MY 2007 vehicles 

compared to those of the majority of 

MY 2010+ vehicles support the concept 

that the emergency vehicle fleet may 

experience fewer DPF regeneration 

troubles as it migrates to engines that 

use after-treatment to meet EPA’s 2010 

NOX standards. Such a trend may 

indicate that some engine manufacturers 

may see a greater need to address in-use 

emergency vehicles than new vehicles. 

(b) Duty Cycles 

As noted above, the duty cycle of a 

vehicle is one of the factors that 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34137 

influences how often the DPF 

regenerates passively or actively. It is 

important to note that all DPF systems 

with active regeneration components 

also have the capability to passively 

oxidize soot accumulated on the filter, 

though some of the above-described 

factors may inhibit successful passive 

regeneration. Operation at highway 

speeds and high engine loads (high load 

means demanding more work from the 

engine, such as accelerating, driving 

uphill or carrying heavy cargo) typically 

leads to successful passive regeneration 

of a DPF. An example from a duty-cycle 

perspective of a vehicle that frequently 

experiences automatic passive 

regeneration would be a long-haul 

tractor-trailer. There is also often a 

threshold of speed or load that is 

required for automatic active 

regeneration strategies as well, though 

not as great as for passive regeneration— 

often at least 5 miles/hour or parked 

with a PTO engaged. In some vehicles, 

passive regeneration occurs so rarely 

that a DPF system relies almost 

exclusively on active regenerations to 

maintain a clean PM filter. An example 

of this from a duty-cycle perspective 

would be a vehicle that operates at idle, 

low speed and low load over most of its 

duty cycle. Many emergency vehicles 

fall into this category. 

A detailed discussion of the duty 

cycles of emergency vehicles is 

provided in the Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking published elsewhere in 

Today’s Federal Register. The data 

provided in that discussion indicate that 

engines on emergency vehicles across 

the country are commonly operated over 

duty cycles that offer very limited 

opportunities to regenerate DPF’s. It is 

also important to note that emergency 

vehicles do not typically get deployed 

on planned duty schedules with 

predictable blocks of garage time for 

servicing or maintenance. While some 

other types of vocational vehicles may 

have duty cycles with many 

characteristics similar to those shown 

above, emergency vehicles are unique in 

their need to be ready to deploy at any 

moment for the purpose of protecting 

public safety and welfare by saving 

human lives that may be in immediate 

danger. 

When trucks with an engine-driven 

PTO are working in a stationary PTO 

mode, some engines achieve the 

conditions to enable an automatic active 

regeneration during this time. While 

this is normally designed to be a 

transparent process, in practice some 

effects of this type of regeneration have 

been noticed by operators. EPA has 

received information from fire chiefs 

indicating that there have been 

instances where engine ECM’s took 

control from the operator during water 

pumping operations. When an 

automatic active regeneration is 

initiated during a water pumping 

operation, for example, an ECM may be 

programmed to alter throttle position or 

engine speed to achieve the conditions 

needed to complete an automatic active 

regeneration. Depending on the design 

of the water pumping system’s pressure 

regulation, this may in turn affect the 

water pressure in the fire hoses. EPA 

has not heard of this occurring on a 

widespread basis, and has reason to 

believe that affected engine and truck 

manufacturers have identified and 

corrected this issue on some vehicles. 

EPA’s current regulations already allow 

manufacturers to develop and request 

EPA approval for certification of engines 

with emission control strategies where 

the process of undergoing automatic 

active regeneration would not interfere 

with safely pumping fire suppressant. 

While not addressed directly in this 

action, there are technologies that could 

be implemented to decrease the amount 

of time emergency vehicles spend with 

their main engines operating at light 

loads and at idle. These technologies 

include electronically programmed 

automatic engine start/stop systems and 

hybrids. Automatic start/stop systems 

automatically stop and start an engine 

depending upon whether or not it is 

needed to supply power to the vehicle. 

This technology is already being 

implemented on other heavy-duty 

vehicles to decrease unnecessary engine 

idling. Hybrid drivetrains also decrease 

engine idling with an integrated 

alternate power source such as a battery. 

We are currently seeing an increase in 

the use of hybrid technologies in heavyduty diesel vocational vehicles. Garbage 

trucks, utility company trucks, and 

other work trucks are using hybrid 

technology to power on-board hydraulic 

systems and cab heating and cooling 

systems. In conventional vehicles these 

systems are powered by a main engine 

typically operating at light load or at 

idle. Because automatic start/stop and 

hybrid technologies improve fuel 

economy and decrease greenhouse gas 

emissions, we believe that they will be 

used in more and more vehicles in the 

future. We believe there is potential for 

these technologies to be integrated into 

future designs of emergency vehicles to 

decrease their operation at light loads 

and at idle. Such technologies would 

not only improve fuel economy and 

decrease greenhouse gas emissions from 

emergency vehicles, they would also 

help to prevent their diesel particulate 

filters from becoming plugged due to 

excessive operation at light loads and at 

idle. While we are not taking any 

specific action at this time related to 

decreasing the amount of time 

emergency vehicles operate at light load 

or at idle, in the accompanying NPRM, 

we request comment on the potential for 

application of alternate power sources 

and idle reduction technologies on 

emergency vehicles. 

(3) What are the concerns for emergency 

vehicles using SCR? 

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) is 

an exhaust after-treatment system used 

to control NOX emissions from heavyduty engines by converting NOX into 

nitrogen (N2) and water (H2O). The 

technology depends on the use of a 

catalytic converter and a chemical 

reducing agent, which generally is in an 

aqueous urea solution, and is often 

referred to as diesel exhaust fluid (DEF). 

Some trade names for this chemical 

reductant include AdBlue, BlueDef, 

NOXBlue, and TerraCair. 

Most engine manufacturers chose to 

comply with the 2010 NOX emission 

standard by adding SCR to their engine 

models. In general, the approach with 

an SCR system has been a sound and 

cost effective pathway to comply with 

EPA’s 2010 emissions standards, and it 

is the primary path being used today. 

DEF is injected into the exhaust 

upstream of the SCR catalyst where it 

forms ammonia and carbon dioxide. The 

ammonia then reacts with NO and NO2, 

so that one molecule of urea can reduce 

two molecules of NO or one molecule of 

NO2. A robust SCR system can achieve 

about 90 percent reduction in cycleweighted NOX emissions. Improvements 

have been made over the last several 

years to improve the NOX conversion 

rate and reduce the impact of lower 

exhaust temperatures on the conversion 

efficiency. 

Because an SCR system is only 

effective when DEF is injected into the 

exhaust, we consider refilling a 

vehicle’s DEF tank to be a critical 

emission-related engine maintenance 

requirement. We are proposing to take 

action to establish this in our 

regulations, as described in Section V of 

the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

published elsewhere in today’s Federal 

Register. Therefore, manufacturers have 

implemented a number of strategies to 

induce a vehicle operator to refill a 

vehicle’s DEF tank when needed. These 

operator inducements generally include 

first illuminating one or more dashboard 

lights to warn the operator that the DEF 

tank needs to be refilled soon. However, 

if such initial inducements are 

persistently ignored by the vehicle 

operator, eventually additional 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34138 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

15FAMA 2010, Emergency Vehicle SCR and DEF 

Inducement Guidelines; 2010 Engine Emissions 

Control Requirements. 

16American Trucking Associations, Technology & 

Maintenance Council, S3 Engine Study Group. 

Survey conducted Fall 2011, public slides dated 

February 2012 available at http://www.truckline.

com/Federation/Councils/TMC/Documents/2012%

20Annual%20Meeting%20and%20Exhibition%

20Documents/TMC12A_TECH2.pdf. 

17See ATA/TMC, Note 16. 

18See Volvo 2010 product brochure, ‘‘Volvo’s 

SCR No Regen Engine,’’ available at http://www.

volvotrucks.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/VTNA_

Tree/ILF/Products/2010/09-VTM075_NoRegen_SS_

041609.pdf. 

inducements are typically activated that 

decrease the maximum speed or power 

of the vehicle. These additional 

inducements are intended to create 

conditions making operational 

conditions of the vehicle increasingly 

unacceptable if the initial dashboard 

lamp illumination inducements are 

persistently ignored. Similar 

inducements may occur in cases where 

DEF quality does not meet system 

specifications, or if the SCR system is 

not functioning correctly for another 

reason. 

While decreasing vehicle performance 

can be an effective inducement strategy, 

we believe it may not be appropriate in 

all situations for emergency vehicles 

because of their special need to be ready 

at any moment for the purpose of 

protecting public safety and welfare by 

saving human lives that may be in 

immediate danger. We recognized this 

during the initial implementation of our 

2010 NOX standards, and we worked 

with the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers’ 

Association (FAMA), the Ambulance 

Manufacturers Division of the National 

Truck Equipment Manufacturers 

Association, and the International 

Association of Fire Chiefs to support the 

publication of a May 18, 2010 memo 

that instructed emergency vehicle 

manufacturers and engine 

manufacturers to implement less severe 

inducement strategies for emergency 

vehicles.15 In this rule we are taking 

additional steps so that emergency 

vehicle manufacturers and engine 

manufacturers have the option to further 

reduce the severity or eliminate 

altogether any performance related 

inducements that are or could be 

implemented on emergency vehicles 

and their engines during emergency 

situations. We believe that this 

additional flexibility will help to 

prevent any abnormal condition of a 

vehicle’s emission control system from 

adversely affecting the speed, torque, or 

power of an emergency vehicle during 

emergency situations. 

C. What would occur if EPA took no 

action? 

(1) The Industry Would Continue To Get 

Smarter 

Improving the components of diesel 

particulate filters is the current subject 

of research and development activities 

within the automotive and air pollution 

control industries. Aspects that are 

being improved include filter ash 

storage capacity, filter pressure drop, 

substrate durability, catalyst activity, as 

well as other physical and chemical 

properties that can optimize the device 

for heavy-duty vehicle applications. 

Engine manufacturers have taken a 

systems approach, optimizing the 

engine with its after-treatment system to 

realize the best overall performance 

possible. Manufacturers can manage the 

functioning of the emission control 

system by adjusting parameters such as 

the thermal profile of the after-treatment 

system, the exhaust gas chemical 

composition, the rate of consumption of 

DEF, the rate of particle deposition, and 

the conditions under which DPF 

regenerations (soot cleaning) may occur. 

In a broad and general sense, the 

trend is that DPF’s are slowly becoming 

even more robust without EPA 

intervention. Future DPF’s will need 

fewer total regenerations during the 

useful life of the engine and control 

system, more passive and fewer active 

regenerations will occur, and manual 

regenerations will become rarer. 

In addition, vehicle operators and 

fleet managers will continue to become 

more experienced with this new 

generation of sophisticated 

electronically-controlled vehicles. 

Manufacturers across the country are 

providing training on actions fleet 

managers can take to decrease problems 

with DPF regenerations. These actions 

include: 

• Use low-ash engine oils. 

• Avoid extended idling. 

• Maintain insulation on the exhaust 

pipe. 

• Maintain the crankcase filter. 

• Periodically operate a vehicle at 

higher speeds and loads. 

The Technology & Maintenance 

Council (TMC) of the American 

Trucking Associations conducted a 

survey in late 2011 to compare user 

experiences between EPA 2010, EPA 

2007, and EPA 2004 vintage trucks.16

According to TMC, 72 percent of the 

survey respondents indicated that driver 

understanding of the 2007-vintage aftertreatment system was worse than driver 

understanding of the 2004-vintage aftertreatment system, and 33 percent of 

respondents indicated that driver 

understanding of the 2010-vintage aftertreatment system was worse than driver 

understanding of the 2007-vintage aftertreatment system. The responses 

regarding driver understanding of fault 

codes and dash lamps indicated that 

drivers have 69 percent poorer 

understanding of 2007 vs. 2004 fault 

codes and dash lamps, and 50 percent 

poorer understanding of 2010 vs. 2007 

fault codes and dash lamps. We expect 

that this education component will 

gradually improve over time without 

EPA intervention. 

(2) The Fleet Would Continue to Migrate 

to the 2010 Standards 

Vehicles with 2010-compliant heavyduty diesel engines tend to place 

different demands on their DPF systems 

than pre-2010 vehicles. With the 

addition of NOX after-treatment such as 

SCR, engines may be tuned to emit 

lower engine-out PM (recall the NOXPM trade-off described above). When an 

SCR system is integrated, it provides the 

opportunity to run an engine at lower 

soot levels and elevated levels of NO2, 

which is a chemical species that 

efficiently oxidizes the soot in the 

absence of elevated temperatures. It is 

EPA’s expectation that vehicles of MY 

2010 and beyond, particularly those 

using SCR, will generally experience 

fewer troubles with DPF’s than the 

earlier model year vehicles, due to the 

nature of the on-board technology as 

well as the many years of experience 

gained by manufacturers since 2007. 

The 2011 TMC survey included an 

assessment of relative satisfaction levels 

between EPA 2010, EPA 2007, and EPA 

2004 vintage trucks. The survey results 

indicate that after-treatment durability 

is better with EPA 2010 trucks 

compared to EPA 2007 trucks, with less 

time out of service.17 As an illustration, 

according to a Volvo product brochure, 

the company’s EPA 2010-compliant 

trucks eliminate the need for active DPF 

regeneration, reducing driver 

involvement with the emission control 

system, using a design that allows for 

the DPF system to reliably oxidize 

accumulated soot using continuous 

passive regeneration.18

(3) Some Trucks Would Continue to 

Experience Problems 

Even though such trends would 

indicate that instances of emergency 

vehicles experiencing difficulty 

managing regeneration of DPF’s would 

decrease, in the absence of this EPA 

action, some vehicles would be likely to 

continue to experience some problems. 

EPA has learned that some engine 

manufacturers have disabled these 

engine protection measures on some 

emergency vehicles. In these cases the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34139 

19See 40 CFR 86.082–2 . 

20See 40 CFR 86.094–21 and 094–22. 

21U.S. General Services Administration, Federal 

Specification for the Star-of-Life Ambulance, 

August 1, 2007, http://www.deltaveh.com/f.pdf. 

22See National Fire Protection Association Web 

page. Accessed April 2012 at http://www.nfpa.org/ 

catalog/product.asp?title=Code-1901-2009-

Automotive-Fire-Apparatus&category%

5Fname=&pid=190109&target%5Fpid=190109&

src%5Fpid=&link%5Ftype=search&icid=. 

manufacturer has reasoned that an 

operator should be allowed to remain in 

control of an emergency vehicle even 

facing risk of catastrophic failure, with 

the consequences of that failure being 

less severe than the consequences of the 

vehicle prematurely losing power, 

torque and/or speed while performing 

emergency services. 

Without a clear action from EPA to 

provide the regulatory flexibility needed 

for swift deployment of robust remedies 

throughout the emergency vehicle fleet, 

implementation of best practices could 

be inconsistent, insufficient, or even 

impossible due to regulatory 

constraints. Some vehicles would 

continue to experience frequent 

plugging of DPF’s, frequent forced filter 

regenerations, and reduced engine 

power, speed or torque that diminish 

the ability of first responders to save 

lives and property. There would also 

remain a heightened risk that an 

emergency vehicle could be taken out of 

service when it is most needed. 

D. Regulatory Action 

As described above in Section III.C, 

many DPF-equipped vehicles include 

engine controls and driver alerts that 

lead to decreases in maximum speed, 

torque, or power when DPF 

backpressure exceeds normal levels, as 

protective measures for either the 

engine or the DPF, or as inducements 

for the operator to immediately conduct 

DPF regeneration. Similarly, vehicles 

equipped with selective catalytic 

reduction (SCR) systems for NOX

reduction currently have engine 

controls and driver alerts that lead to 

eventual loss of speed, torque, or power 

when the SCR controls detect abnormal 

conditions (such as a malfunction, low 

DEF levels, etc.), as inducements to take 

immediate corrective action to allow the 

SCR to function normally. In most 

vehicles, these alerts and inducements 

may be easily avoided with normal 

driving and routine maintenance, and if 

activated, these inducements would not 

have any significant effect on public 

safety and welfare. In emergency 

vehicles, however, should any of these 

limits on maximum speed, torque, or 

power occur while a vehicle is 

responding to an emergency, it could be 

a matter of life or death. To address 

these issues that could otherwise limit 

the maximum speed, torque or power of 

an emergency vehicle’s engine when it 

is needed most, EPA is proposing to 

amend 40 CFR part 86 to revise the 

definition of defeat device; add new 

definitions of emergency vehicle, 

ambulance and fire truck; and add new 

labeling requirements for new onhighway engines with approved 

Auxiliary Emission Control Devices for 

emergency vehicles. EPA is also 

amending its regulations at 40 CFR part 

1039 to revise the definition of defeat 

device, add a new definition of 

emergency equipment, and add a new 

labeling requirement for nonroad 

engines with approved Auxiliary 

Emission Control Devices for emergency 

equipment. 

In our current regulations, engine 

manufacturers may request as part of an 

application for new engine or vehicle 

certification, and EPA may approve, 

Auxiliary Emission Control Devices, if 

they are not determined to be ‘‘defeat 

devices.’’ Auxiliary Emission Control 

Devices, or AECD’s, are any design 

element of an engine’s emission control 

system that senses temperature, vehicle 

speed, engine RPM, transmission gear, 

manifold vacuum, or any other 

parameter for the purpose of activating, 

modulating, delaying, or deactivating 

the operation of any part of the emission 

control system.19 Some AECD’s can 

temporarily decrease the effectiveness of 

an emission control system. This type of 

AECD is only permitted in very limited 

situations, for example, when such 

excursions are deemed to be necessary 

in order to protect the vehicle, engine, 

and or emission control system during 

limited modes of operation. 

A defeat device is a type of AECD that 

reduces the effectiveness of vehicle 

emission controls in situations when 

such reduction in effectiveness is not 

approved or permitted by EPA. Defeat 

devices are not permitted by the Clean 

Air Act or EPA. 

Approvals of AECD’s are made by 

EPA on a case-by-case basis. In 

applications for engine certification, 

manufacturers must include a detailed 

description of each AECD to be installed 

in or on any vehicle (or engine) covered 

by the application, as well as a detailed 

justification of each AECD that results 

in a reduction in effectiveness of the 

emission control system. According to 

40 CFR 86.094–21(b)(1)(i)(B), EPA may 

disapprove a request for an AECD based 

on consideration of currently available 

technology. Use of an unauthorized or 

disapproved AECD can be considered a 

violation of section 203 of the Act.20

In this action, EPA is proposing to 

revise the definition of defeat device at 

40 CFR 86.004–2, 86.1803–01, and 40 

CFR 1039.115 to exclude AECD’s that 

apply only for engines on emergency 

vehicles, where the need for an AECD 

is justified in terms of preventing the 

vehicle or equipment from losing speed, 

torque, or power due to abnormal 

conditions of the emission control 

system, or in terms of preventing such 

abnormal conditions from occurring 

during operation related to emergency 

response. 

In this action, EPA is proposing to 

define an emergency vehicle as a vehicle 

that is an ambulance or a fire truck. EPA 

is proposing to adopt a definition of 

ambulance consistent with the current 

U.S. General Services Administration 

Star of Life specification.21 EPA is 

proposing to define fire truck as a 

vehicle designed to be used under 

emergency conditions to transport 

personnel and equipment and to 

support the suppression of fires and 

mitigation of other hazardous situations, 

consistent with the scope of standards 

for automotive fire apparatus issued by 

the National Fire Protection 

Association.22 We are defining 

emergency equipment as specialized 

vehicles to perform aircraft rescue and 

firefighting functions at airports, or 

wildland fire apparatus. With these 

definitions, it is EPA’s intent to include 

vehicles that are purpose-built and 

exclusively dedicated to firefighting, 

emergency/rescue medical transport, 

and/or performing other rescue or 

emergency personnel or equipment 

transport functions related to saving 

lives and reducing injuries coincident 

with fires and other hazardous 

situations. EPA requests comment on 

whether we should refine or expand our 

definition of emergency vehicle within 

the scope of this action to include those 

equipped with heavy-duty diesel 

engines that serve other civilian rescue, 

law enforcement or emergency response 

functions. We are especially interested 

in information regarding instances of 

such vehicles experiencing or risking 

loss of power, speed or torque due to 

abnormal conditions of the emission 

control system, and how that may 

inhibit mission-critical life- and 

property-saving work. 

EPA is also adopting an associated 

engine labeling requirement so that 

engines with approved emergency 

vehicle AECD’s will be clearly 

identified and distinguished from other 

similar engines. 

As mentioned above in Section III.B, 

some engine manufacturers currently 

specify that when an engine is sold for 

installation in an emergency vehicle, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34140 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

23Frequency in percent refers to the fraction of 

engine test cycles during which an automatic active 

regeneration occurs. 

some of the default power, torque or 

speed inducements be de-activated or 

set to alternate, less severe settings. In 

such applications, when the DPF system 

requests regeneration, the warning lights 

remain illuminated while the vehicle 

remains in complete control of the 

driver. In these cases the manufacturer 

has likely reasoned that the 

consequences of catastrophic failure 

would be less severe than the 

consequences of the vehicle 

prematurely losing power, torque and/or 

speed while performing emergency 

services. EPA has granted related 

AECD’s in the past. 

However, without the optional 

flexibilities provided by EPA in this 

action, manufacturers could be 

prevented from implementing truly 

failsafe solutions for all affected 

vehicles. For example, while current 

custom solutions may allow an 

emergency vehicle to continue pumping 

water or transporting a person to safety, 

its DPF would continue to accumulate 

particles and the risk of catastrophic 

failure would increase. 

In this action, EPA is adopting 

amendments so that manufacturers can 

apply for (and EPA can approve) 

AECD’s that may be justified in terms of 

preventing the occurrence of abnormal 

conditions of the emission control 

systems for emergency vehicles or in 

terms of preventing the engines from 

losing speed, torque, or power due to 

such abnormal conditions. In this 

context, EPA would consider abnormal 

conditions to be parameters outside 

normal ranges for proper operation, 

such as excessive exhaust backpressure 

from high soot loading on a DPF or 

insufficient DEF for use with an SCR 

system. 

EPA is encouraging manufacturers to 

apply for AECD’s that are tailored for 

engines on emergency vehicles, 

considering the duty cycle information 

presented in the accompanying NPRM, 

along with any other information 

needed to design failsafe emission 

control systems for new emergency 

vehicles. EPA is also encouraging 

manufacturers to design field 

modifications to address these issues on 

in-use emergency vehicles, including 

those whose engines are no longer in 

production. Further discussion of field 

modifications is provided below in 

Section III.E(2). 

To achieve these goals, EPA 

understands that increased flexibility 

will be needed because EPA’s strict NOX

and PM standards present many design 

constraints. Below we describe some 

solutions that EPA believes it could 

approve as part of an emergency vehicle 

AECD or field modification, as adopted. 

EPA is encouraging engine 

manufacturers to apply for emergency 

vehicle AECD’s and/or field 

modifications for in-use emergency 

vehicles for which service disruptions 

related to abnormal conditions of 

emission control systems may occur or 

have occurred. EPA suggests that such 

AECD’s or field modifications could 

include, but are not limited to, one or 

more of the following strategies: 

(1) Liberalized Regeneration Requests 

It is current practice that most modern 

diesel engine ECM’s are set to initiate an 

automatic active regeneration only 

above a designated DPF soot load, and 

those vehicles equipped with manual 

regeneration switches are set to not 

allow the option of initiating manual 

active regeneration until an even greater 

soot load is detected. The reason why 

manufacturers do this is related to 

certification of engine families and 

vehicle test groups. If manufacturers can 

limit the frequency of regenerations by 

design, then they can be assured that 

average emissions will remain below the 

certified average emission level. Excess 

regenerations could lead to higher 

average emissions, since some exhaust 

emissions increase during regeneration. 

Particularly for engines not equipped 

with SCR systems, NOX emissions can 

increase by an order of magnitude 

during regeneration, and these 

temporary increases in emission are 

accounted for in EPA’s certification 

process. See the accompanying NPRM 

for more information about the 

emissions impacts of DPF regenerations. 

In addition, excess regenerations could 

shorten the useful life of the DPF system 

since high temperatures place stress on 

filter substrates. 

EPA believes that emergency vehicle 

AECD’s that enable more frequent 

automatic active and manual active DPF 

regenerations, associated with a wider 

range of soot loads could improve the 

reliability of DPF systems without 

significantly compromising emissions 

reductions or durability. As explained 

below Section III.E(4), EPA does not 

expect this provision to affect other 

aspects of certification. For emergency 

vehicles with approved AECD’s that 

involve changes in the frequency of 

regeneration, the resulting increase in 

NOX emissions will not be counted 

against certification levels for applicable 

engine families or vehicle test groups. 

Furthermore, emissions certification 

testing may be conducted with any 

approved AECD’s for emergency vehicle 

or equipment deactivated. According to 

EPA’s current engine certification data, 

engines from MYs 2008 and 2011 have 

an average maximum automatic active 

regeneration frequency near 20 percent, 

with the typical frequency between 

three and seven percent. Those with 

frequencies near zero rely almost 

exclusively on passive regeneration.23

(2) Engine Recalibration 

As mentioned above, in-cylinder 

combustion chemistry dictates a NOXPM trade-off where engines calibrated to 

reduce in-cylinder NOX tend to have 

higher PM levels. These factors lead to 

higher rates of particle accumulation 

and lower rates of particle oxidation on 

filters. EPA believes that AECD’s that 

incorporate engine calibration 

modifications could enable operation in 

a ‘‘low soot mode’’ with a reduced rate 

of particle deposition that would lead to 

more frequent and effective passive 

regenerations. Such calibration 

modifications could also extend the 

operating time between all types of 

regenerations, improve active 

regeneration effectiveness, and boost 

reliability of the DPF systems. On 

engines with downstream (i.e., SCR) 

NOX controls, SCR control could be 

modulated such that engine 

recalibration would not significantly 

affect NOX emissions. On engines 

without downstream NOX controls, EPA 

believes that some degree of increased 

NOX emissions during the conditions 

justified by the AECD would be 

approvable for emergency vehicles. As 

explained below in Section III.E(4), EPA 

does not expect this provision to affect 

other aspects of certification. When 

manufacturers calculate the average 

NOX emissions during a test cycle, they 

incorporate data regarding both the 

frequency of regeneration and the 

increase in NOX emissions during 

regeneration. For emergency vehicles 

with approved AECD’s that involve 

recalibration to alter regeneration 

frequency or average NOX emissions, 

the resulting increase in NOX emissions 

will not be counted against certification 

levels for applicable engine families or 

vehicle test groups. Furthermore, 

emissions certification testing may be 

conducted with any approved AECD’s 

for emergency vehicle or equipment 

deactivated. A discussion of the 

estimated emissions impacts of 

recalibration is provided in the Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking published 

elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. 

(3) Backpressure Relief 

It is EPA’s objective that all of our 

clean diesel emissions standards be 

implemented with reliable technologies 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34141 

that require a minimum amount of 

driver intervention and do not 

compromise the utility of vehicles. EPA 

understands that manufacturers are 

motivated to seek design solutions that 

are cost effective and easily deployable. 

However, by focusing solely on 

preventive measures such as those 

described above, manufacturers may not 

achieve a completely failsafe DPF 

strategy on all emergency vehicles. EPA 

anticipates that some vehicles may 

benefit from an additional failsafe 

measure that relieves engine exhaust 

backpressure as a last resort to prevent 

loss of engine speed, torque or power. 

There are products on the market today 

that could be configured to temporarily 

relieve excessive engine exhaust 

backpressure when detected, then 

return the system to normal at the 

instant that backpressure returns to a 

safe level. Such a device may be 

justified as a failsafe measure, and may 

be included as part of an overall strategy 

that also includes preventive measures, 

if justified and properly limited, where 

excess PM emissions would be expected 

to be emitted only during a small 

fraction of vehicle operation. That is, 

the vast majority of DPF operating 

cycles would be expected to have 

continuous PM emission control, while 

any temporary backpressure relief that 

reduced PM control or allowed bypass 

of controls would be expected relatively 

infrequently. 

E. What engines and vehicles are 

affected? 

Today’s action applies to new and inuse fire trucks and ambulances, new 

and in-use airport fire apparatus and 

wildland fire apparatus, and heavy-duty 

diesel engines on these emergency 

vehicles and equipment. 

(1) Newly Certified Engines 

Of those new diesel engines covered 

by EPA’s current heavy-duty diesel 

standards, only those installed in 

vehicles or equipment meeting the 

definition of emergency vehicle or 

emergency equipment will be eligible to 

obtain an approved AECD of the type 

discussed above in Section III.D. Where 

a vehicle is chassis-certified and either 

sold as an incomplete vehicle to a truck 

body manufacturer or built and sold as 

a complete vehicle, only those sold and 

built as emergency vehicles will be 

eligible to obtain an approved AECD of 

the type discussed above. 

(2) Certified Engines and Vehicles InUse 

To address in-use engines and 

vehicles, EPA plans to allow engine and 

vehicle manufacturers to submit 

requests for EPA approval of Emergency 

Vehicle Field Modifications (EVFMs) for 

on-highway emergency vehicles and 

Emergency Equipment Field 

Modifications (EEFMs) for nonroad 

emergency equipment. EVFMs and 

EEFMs will be modifications to existing 

hardware and software to be installed 

on in-use vehicles or equipment to 

prevent loss of speed, torque, or power 

due to abnormal conditions of emission 

control systems, or to prevent such 

abnormal conditions from occurring, 

during vehicle or equipment operation 

related to emergency response. EPA will 

use an approval process similar to the 

process that is currently utilized to 

submit modifications to current 

applications for certification, also 

known as ‘‘running changes.’’ The 

information submitted by a 

manufacturer to EPA as part of this 

request and approval process will be 

similar to the information submitted for 

emergency vehicle or equipment 

AECD’s. 

It is important to emphasize that this 

action will allow only those approved 

modifications to be deployed by 

manufacturers and their authorized 

dealers. Modifications made by end 

users are not generally approvable; 

rather the tampering prohibitions would 

generally apply to such modifications. 

EPA has identified three types of field 

modifications that will be permitted for 

emergency vehicles and emergency 

equipment under the final regulations, 

based on the extent to which the 

modification is being incorporated into 

new production vehicles and 

equipment. The three types are: 

b Type A: Any field modification 

that is a change to a certified vehicle 

(i.e., a vehicle, engine or equipment 

covered by a certificate of conformity) 

that is identical in all respects to a 

running change that is approved for 

incorporation in new vehicles by the 

manufacturer. Where the running 

change was approved by EPA for 

implementation only in conjunction 

with certain other running changes, the 

field modification may be considered to 

be a Type A field modification only if 

implemented under the same 

constraints. 

b Type B: Any field modification 

that is not identical in all respects to, 

but provides for essentially the same 

purpose as, a running change that is 

being incorporated in new vehicles by 

the manufacturer or that would have 

been incorporated if the vehicle were 

still in production. A Type B field 

modification is used when it is not 

practical to incorporate the exact 

running change in vehicles that have 

left the assembly line, or when the 

vehicles are no longer in production. 

b Type C: Any field modification 

that is made selectively only to vehicles 

which have left the assembly line and 

which would not have been 

incorporated on the assembly line. For 

example, this would apply when 

making a field modification to a vehicle 

that is no longer in production where 

there are no similar vehicles in 

production. 

The amount of justification needed for 

the field modification differs depending 

on which type of modification is being 

requested. 

(3) Labeling Requirements 

Because the engines and vehicles 

eligible for the AECD’s described in this 

proposal belong to broadly certified 

engine families and test groups, when 

they are sold for installation in an 

emergency vehicle and equipped with 

one or more approved emergency 

vehicle AECD’s, they must be labeled as 

such, to distinguish them from other 

certified engines. EPA is proposing 

adding a labeling requirement to 40 CFR 

part 86 subpart A, such that engines 

with one or more approved AECD’s for 

emergency vehicle applications must be 

labeled with the statement: ‘‘THIS 

ENGINE IS FOR INSTALLATION IN 

EMERGENCY VEHICLES ONLY.’’ EPA 

is also proposing adding a labeling 

requirement to 40 CFR part 86 subpart 

S, such that vehicles with one or more 

approved AECD’s for emergency 

vehicles, include the following 

statement on the emission control 

information label: ‘‘THIS VEHICLE HAS 

A LIMITED EXEMPTION AS AN 

EMERGENCY VEHICLE.’’ EPA is also 

adding a labeling requirement to 40 CFR 

part 1039, such that nonroad engines 

with one or more approved AECD’s for 

emergency equipment include a label 

with the following statement: ‘‘THIS 

ENGINE IS FOR INSTALLATION IN 

EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT ONLY.’’ 

EPA requests comment on whether 

these labeling requirements are 

satisfactory to ensure that engines and 

vehicles operating with approved 

emergency AECD’s are permanently 

distinguished from similar certified 

engines. EPA also requests comment on 

whether a similar label should be 

required for an in-use emergency 

vehicle or equipment where a field 

modification is deployed that prevents 

the engine from losing speed, torque, or 

power due to any occurrences of 

abnormal conditions of the emission 

control system, or prevents such 

abnormal conditions from occurring. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34142 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

24Although this action will not affect certification 

of engine families or test groups, EPA’s regulations 

do offer options to manufacturers who wish to 

ensure that emission-related maintenance will 

occur in use, including visible signals that are not 

reset until maintenance occurs. 40 CFR 86.004– 

25(b)(6)(ii). 

(4) Other Regulatory Provisions 

Today’s rule will not alter the 

tampering prohibition in 40 CFR 

1068.101(b)(1). This provision describes 

a general prohibition against anyone 

from removing or rendering inoperative 

an engine’s emission controls before or 

after entering into service, where an 

exception is provided in 

1068.101(b)(1)(ii) for engine 

modifications needed to respond to a 

temporary emergency, provided that the 

engine is restored to proper functioning 

as soon as possible after the emergency 

has passed. EPA encourages 

manufacturers to design their 

emergency vehicle AECD’s to be 

engaged only to the extent necessary to 

prevent the engine from losing speed, 

torque, or power due to abnormal 

conditions of the emission control 

system, or to prevent such abnormal 

conditions from occurring during 

operation related to emergency 

response. EPA recognizes that there may 

be cases where an AECD may need to 

be engaged at times other than while 

actively responding to an emergency, in 

order to assure that loss of speed, torque 

or power does not occur during 

operation related to emergency 

response. EPA also recognizes that some 

AECD’s may involve electronic 

approaches where the engine’s 

functions would be modulated based on 

exhaust backpressure or other 

parameters that are not correlated with 

any emergency situation. EPA may 

even, in extreme cases, such as at high 

altitude or with certain older MY 

engines allow engagement of AECD’s at 

all times, if they are justified as 

necessary to prevent engine from losing 

speed, torque, or power during 

operation related to emergency 

response. 

We are also encouraging 

manufacturers to design their emission 

control systems to discourage 

tampering. According to EPA’s 

tampering prohibition, a vehicle 

operator who abuses or alters an 

approved AECD may be guilty of 

tampering. For example, if an AECD 

includes enabling an operator to initiate 

more frequent manual active 

regenerations, engine manufacturers 

may choose to prevent the abuse of this 

function by means such as a daily or 

weekly cap on the number of manual 

active regenerations, or a minimum soot 

loading for the function to engage. As 

another example, if an emergency 

vehicle alerts a driver to an abnormal 

condition of its emission control system 

by illuminating dash lamps, alarms or 

other warnings that do not limit vehicle 

performance, it is the operator’s 

responsibility to take prompt action to 

remedy the problem.24 If an operator 

disregards such warnings beyond the 

time needed to respond to the 

emergency, this may be considered 

tampering. It is important to note that if 

an emergency vehicle is not equipped to 

ever allow an operator to initiate a 

manual active regeneration, this may in 

practice encourage tampering by the end 

user. 

Manufacturers of highway and 

nonroad engines will be required to 

describe any emergency vehicle AECD 

in an application for certification. In 

this action, we are not proposing any 

revisions to the information needed to 

review and approve AECD’s. It is 

common practice for manufacturers, in 

describing AECD’s, to identify engine 

parameters such as those that would 

operate differently to preserve adequate 

engine performance during an 

emergency, including information about 

how the engine would respond under 

different in-use operating conditions 

under the various sets of conditions that 

would otherwise cause the engine to 

operate at less than full performance 

levels. Other than the requirement for a 

manufacturer to describe the emergency 

vehicle AECD in its application for 

certification, we do not expect this 

provision to be relevant for other 

aspects of certification. For example, 

emissions certification testing may be 

conducted with any approved AECD’s 

for emergency vehicle or equipment 

deactivated. Additionally, 

manufacturers do not need to consider 

emergency vehicle AECD’s when 

developing infrequent regeneration 

adjustment factors (IRAFs) or when 

developing deterioration factors (DFs). 

Thus, manufacturers can include 

emergency and non-emergency engines 

and vehicles in the same engine families 

and test groups. Manufacturers may also 

apply for emergency vehicle AECD’s for 

new, existing, and/or formerly approved 

emissions certificates. 

F. Economic Impacts 

EPA expects the economic effects of 

this rule to be small, and to potentially 

have benefits that are a natural result of 

easing constraints. 

(1) Costs to Manufacturers 

Due to the optional and voluntary 

nature of this action, there are no direct 

regulatory compliance costs to engine 

manufacturers. To the extent 

manufacturers elect to develop and 

deploy upgrades to engines for 

emergency vehicles, they may 

voluntarily incur some degree of costs 

associated with the following: 

• Design and testing to determine 

effectiveness of potential AECDs 

• Education & outreach to 

intermediate vehicle manufacturers and 

end users 

• Deployment of AECDs onto new 

and in-use emergency vehicles 

• Labeling costs 

EPA expects any fixed costs will be 

small, and any variable costs will apply 

only to the engines sold for installation 

in emergency vehicles or emergency 

equipment, which comprise less than 

one percent of the heavy-duty on-road 

fleet, and an even smaller fraction of the 

nonroad fleet. As per standard practice, 

manufacturers would be free to set a fair 

market price for any approved AECD 

they offer, to offset the costs incurred in 

its development. 

(2) Operational Costs 

Depending on the type of AECD or 

field modification that a manufacturer 

voluntarily elects to deploy, some 

operational costs could increase and 

some could decrease. 

When an emergency vehicle is 

experiencing frequent plugging of its 

DPF, this increases maintenance costs 

for owners and warranty costs for 

manufacturers. These costs are expected 

to decrease with this action. 

Furthermore, EPA believes that the 

potential for reduced warranty costs 

may help to offset the cost to produce 

and deploy any optional AECD’s. 

Similarly, EPA believes the potential for 

reduced maintenance and operational 

costs may offset the cost to owners for 

obtaining requested AECD’s. 

Where DPF systems employ fuel 

dosing to enable active automatic 

regenerations, it is uncertain whether 

liberalizing the parameters for initiating 

regenerations would affect fuel 

consumption, and whether fuel 

consumption would increase with an 

increased number of regenerations 

during a given operating period. To the 

extent regenerations are enabled with 

other means besides fuel, or demand for 

regenerations is reduced through 

recalibration, then any potential 

increase in fuel use from dosing would 

be mitigated. Further discussion of 

operational costs including costs of fuel 

dosing is provided in the Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking published 

elsewhere in Today’s Federal Register. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34143 

25 ICCT, May 2009, ‘‘Heavy-Duty Vehicle Market 

Analysis: Vehicle Characteristics & Fuel Use, 

Manufacturer Market Shares.’’ 

(3) Societal Costs 

Because this rule eases constraints on 

the development of robust DPF systems, 

the economic impacts can only improve 

with this action. It is presumed that the 

benefits to society of enabling first 

responders to act quickly when needed 

outweigh the costs to society of the 

temporary increase in emissions from 

this small segment of vehicles. 

G. Environmental Impacts 

We expect any environmental impacts 

from this action will be small. By 

promulgating these amendments, it is 

expected that the emissions from this 

segment of the heavy-duty fleet will not 

change significantly. 

EPA estimates that on-road emergency 

vehicles comprise less than one percent 

of the national heavy-duty fleet. 

According to the International Council 

on Clean Transportation (ICCT), less 

than one percent of all new heavy-duty 

truck registrations in 2003 to 2007 were 

for emergency vehicles (includes class 8 

fire trucks plus other class 3–8 

emergency vehicles).25 On average, the 

ICCT’s data suggest that approximately 

5,700 new emergency vehicles are sold 

in the U.S. each year; about 0.8 percent 

of the 3.4 million new heavy-duty 

trucks registered between 2003 and 

2007. The available information 

indicates that the emergency vehicles 

included in the scope of this rulemaking 

have lower annual vehicle miles 

traveled than average non-emergency 

vehicles. Therefore, we conclude that 

they contribute less than 1% of the 

annual air emissions from the heavyduty diesel truck fleet. 

Due to the optional and voluntary 

nature of this action, it is difficult to 

estimate its overall emissions impact 

accurately. The amendments offer many 

options to manufacturers, and the 

emissions impacts will depend on 

which options and strategies are 

employed, and for how many vehicles. 

Further discussions of potential NOX

and PM emissions impacts and fuel 

consumption from dosing are provided 

in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

published elsewhere in Today’s Federal 

Register. 

H. Health Effects 

EPA’s clean diesel standards are 

already providing substantial benefits to 

public health and welfare and the 

environment through significant 

reductions in emissions of NOX, PM, 

nonmethane hydrocarbons (NMHC), 

carbon monoxide, sulfur oxides (SOX), 

and air toxics. We project that by 2030, 

the on-highway program alone will 

reduce annual emissions of NOX, 

NMHC, and PM by 2.6 million, 115,000 

and 109,000 tons, respectively. These 

emission reductions will prevent 8,300 

premature deaths, over 9,500 

hospitalizations, and 1.5 million work 

days lost. All told, the monetized 

benefits of the on-highway rule plus the 

nonroad diesel Tier 4 rule total over 

$150 billion. A sizeable part of the 

benefits in the early years of these 

programs has come from large 

reductions in the amount of direct and 

secondary PM emitted by the existing 

fleet of heavy-duty engines and 

vehicles, by requiring the use of the 

higher quality diesel fuel in these 

vehicles. While this final action may 

slightly increase some emissions, as 

explained in the previous section, we do 

not expect that these small increases 

will significantly diminish the health 

benefits of our stringent clean diesel 

standards. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden. The 

regulatory relief for emergency vehicles 

is voluntary and optional, and the 

revisions for engine and vehicle 

maintenance merely codify existing 

guidelines. However, the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

previously approved the information 

collection requirements contained in the 

existing regulations under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has 

assigned OMB Control Numbers 2060– 

0104 and 2060–0287. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

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 rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

primarily engaged in shipbuilding and 

repairing as defined by NAICS code 

336611 with 1,000 or fewer employees 

(based on Small Business 

Administration size standards); (2) a 

small business that is primarily engaged 

in freight or passenger transportation on 

the Great Lakes as defined by NAICS 

codes 483113 and 483114 with 500 or 

fewer employees (based on Small 

Business Administration size 

standards); (3) a small business 

primarily engaged in commercial and 

industrial machinery and equipment 

repair and maintenance as defined by 

NAICS code 811310 with annual 

receipts less than $7 million (based on 

Small Business Administration size 

standards); (4) 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 (5) 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 rule on small entities, 

I certify that this final rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

In determining whether a rule has a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, the 

impact of concern is any significant 

adverse economic impact on small 

entities, since the primary purpose of 

the regulatory flexibility analyses is to 

identify and address regulatory 

alternatives ‘‘which minimize any 

significant economic impact of the rule 

on small entities.’’ 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 

Thus, an agency may certify that a rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities if the rule relieves regulatory 

burden, or otherwise has a positive 

economic effect on all of the small 

entities subject to the rule. 

This rule provides regulatory relief 

related to emergency vehicles. As such, 

we anticipate no costs and therefore no 

regulatory burden associated with this 

rule. We have concluded that this rule 

will not increase regulatory burden for 

affected small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34144 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any State, local or tribal governments or 

the private sector. This direct final rule 

offers manufacturers the flexibility to 

choose whether to use optional AECD’s 

based on their strategies for complying 

with the applicable emissions 

standards. Therefore, this action is not 

subject to the requirements of sections 

202 or 205 of the UMRA. 

This action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This direct final 

rule applies to manufacturers of heavyduty diesel engines and not to state or 

local governments. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this 

action. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This direct final rule will be 

implemented at the Federal level and 

may result in indirect costs on affected 

engine manufacturers depending on the 

extent to which they take advantage of 

the flexibilities offered. Tribal 

governments will be affected only to the 

extent they purchase and use vehicles 

with regulated engines. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: 

(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

EPA has reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

the agency must evaluate the 

environmental health or safety effects of 

the planned rule on children, and 

explain why the planned regulation is 

preferable to other potentially effective 

and reasonably feasible alternatives 

considered by the agency. 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that are based on health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Order has 

the potential to influence the regulation. 

This direct final rule is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it does 

not establish an environmental standard 

intended to mitigate health or safety 

risks, and because it is not economically 

significant under Executive Order 

12866. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. 

This action does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, EPA did not 

consider the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this direct 

final rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations. 

This action is not expected to have any 

adverse environmental impacts. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 

5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A Major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule 

will be effective on August 7, 2012. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 85 

Confidential business information, 

Imports, Labeling, Motor vehicle 

pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Research, Warranties. 

40 CFR Part 86 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Motor vehicle pollution, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

40 CFR Part 1039 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Confidential 

business information, Imports, Labeling, 

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Warranties. 

Dated: May 23, 2012. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency amends title 40, chapter I of the 

Code of Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 85—CONTROL OF AIR 

POLLUTION FROM MOBILE SOURCES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 85 

continues to read as follows: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34145 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart R—[Amended] 

■ 2. Add § 85.1716 to subpart R to read 

as follows: 

§ 85.1716 Approval of an emergency 

vehicle field modification (EVFM). 

This section describes how you may 

implement design changes for an 

emergency vehicle that has already been 

placed into service to ensure that the 

vehicle will perform properly in 

emergency situations. This applies for 

any light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, 

or heavy-duty vehicle meeting the 

definition of emergency vehicle in 

40 CFR 86.004–2 or 86.1803. In this 

section, ‘‘you’’ refers to the certifying 

manufacturer and ‘‘we’’ refers to the 

EPA Administrator and any authorized 

representatives. 

(a) You must notify us in writing of 

your intent to install or distribute an 

emergency vehicle field modification 

(EVFM). In some cases you may install 

or distribute an EVFM only with our 

advance approval, as specified in this 

section. 

(b) Include in your notification a full 

description of the EVFM and any 

documentation to support your 

determination that the EVFM is 

necessary to prevent the vehicle from 

losing speed, torque, or power due to 

abnormal conditions of its emission 

control system, or to prevent such 

abnormal conditions from occurring 

during operation related to emergency 

response. Examples of such abnormal 

conditions may include excessive 

exhaust backpressure from an 

overloaded particulate trap, or running 

out of diesel exhaust fluid for engines 

that rely on urea-based selective 

catalytic reduction. Your determination 

must be based on an engineering 

evaluation or testing or both. 

(c) You may need our advance 

approval for your EVFM, as follows: 

(1) Where the proposed EVFM is 

identical to an AECD we approved 

under this part for an engine family 

currently in production, no approval of 

the proposed EVFM is necessary. 

(2) Where the proposed EVFM is for 

an engine family currently in 

production but the applicable 

demonstration is based on an AECD we 

approved under this part for an engine 

family no longer in production, you 

must describe to us how your proposed 

EVFM differs from the approved AECD. 

Unless we say otherwise, your proposed 

EVFM is deemed approved 30 days after 

you notify us. 

(3) If we have not approved an EVFM 

comparable to the one you are 

proposing, you must get our approval 

before installing or distributing it. In 

this case, we may request additional 

information to support your 

determination under paragraph (b) of 

this section, as follows: 

(i) If we request additional 

information and you do not provide it 

within 30 days after we ask, we may 

deem that you have retracted your 

request for our approval; however, we 

may extend this deadline for submitting 

the additional information. 

(ii) We will deny your request if we 

determine that the EVFM is not 

necessary to prevent the vehicle from 

losing speed, torque, or power due 

abnormal conditions of the emission 

control system, or to prevent such 

abnormal conditions from occurring, 

during operation related to emergency 

response. 

(iii) Unless we say otherwise, your 

proposed EVFM is deemed approved 30 

days after we acknowledge that you 

have provided us with all the additional 

information we have specified. 

(4) If your proposed EVFM is deemed 

to be approved under paragraph (c)(2) or 

(3) of this section and we find later that 

your EVFM in fact does not meet the 

requirements of this section, we may 

require you to no longer install or 

distribute it. 

PART 86—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM NEW AND IN-USE HIGHWAY 

VEHICLES AND ENGINES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 86 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart A—[Amended] 

■ 4. Section 86.004–2 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. By adding a definition for 

‘‘Ambulance’’ in alphabetical order. 

■ b. By revising the definition for 

‘‘Defeat device’’. 

■ c. By adding definitions for ‘‘Diesel 

exhaust fluid’’, ‘‘Emergency vehicle’’, 

and ‘‘Fire truck’’ in alphabetical order. 

The additions and revision read as 

follows: 

§ 86.004–2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Ambulance has the meaning given in 

§ 86.1803. 

Defeat device means an auxiliary 

emission control device (AECD) that 

reduces the effectiveness of the 

emission control system under 

conditions which may reasonably be 

expected to be encountered in normal 

vehicle operation and use, unless: 

(1) Such conditions are substantially 

included in the applicable Federal 

emission test procedure for heavy-duty 

vehicles and heavy-duty engines 

described in subpart N of this part; 

(2) The need for the AECD is justified 

in terms of protecting the vehicle 

against damage or accident; 

(3) The AECD does not go beyond the 

requirements of engine starting; or 

(4) The AECD applies only for engines 

that will be installed in emergency 

vehicles, and the need is justified in 

terms of preventing the engine from 

losing speed, torque, or power due 

abnormal conditions of the emission 

control system, or in terms of preventing 

such abnormal conditions from 

occurring, during operation related to 

emergency response. Examples of such 

abnormal conditions may include 

excessive exhaust backpressure from an 

overloaded particulate trap, and running 

out of diesel exhaust fluid for engines 

that rely on urea-based selective 

catalytic reduction. 

Diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) has the 

meaning given in § 86.1803. 

Emergency vehicle means a vehicle 

that is an ambulance or a fire truck. 

Fire truck has the meaning given in 

§ 86.1803. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 86.004–28 is amended by 

revising paragraph (i) introductory text 

to read as follows: 

§ 86.004–28 Compliance with emission 

standards. 

* * * * * 

(i) Emission results from heavy-duty 

engines equipped with exhaust 

aftertreatment may need to be adjusted 

to account for regeneration events. This 

provision only applies for engines 

equipped with emission controls that 

are regenerated on an infrequent basis. 

For the purpose of this paragraph (i), the 

term ‘‘regeneration’’ means an event 

during which emission levels change 

while the aftertreatment performance is 

being restored by design. Examples of 

regenerations are increasing exhaust gas 

temperature to remove sulfur from an 

adsorber or increasing exhaust gas 

temperature to oxidize PM in a trap. For 

the purpose of this paragraph (i), the 

term ‘‘infrequent’’ means having an 

expected frequency of less than once per 

transient test cycle. Calculation and use 

of adjustment factors are described in 

paragraphs (i)(1) through (5) of this 

section. If your engine family includes 

engines with one or more AECDs for 

emergency vehicle applications 

approved under paragraph (4) of the 

definition of defeat device, do not 

consider additional regenerations 

resulting from those AECDs when 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34146 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

calculating emission factors or 

frequencies under this paragraph (i). 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Section 86.095–35 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(O) to read 

as follows: 

§ 86.095–35 Labeling. 

(a) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(iii) * * * 

(O) For engines with one or more 

approved AECDs for emergency vehicle 

applications under paragraph (4) of the 

definition of ‘‘defeat device’’ in 

§ 86.004–2, the statement: ‘‘THIS 

ENGINE IS FOR INSTALLATION IN 

EMERGENCY VEHICLES ONLY.’’ 

* * * * * 

Subpart B—[Amended] 

■ 7. Section 86.131–00 is amended by 

adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 86.131–00 Vehicle preparation. 

(g) You may disable any AECDs that 

have been approved solely for 

emergency vehicle applications under 

paragraph (4) of the definition of defeat 

device. The emission standards do not 

apply when any of these AECDs are 

active. 

Subpart N—[Amended] 

■ 8. Section 86.1305–2010 is amended 

by adding paragraph (i) to read as 

follows: 

§ 86.1305–2010 Introduction; structure of 

subpart. 

* * * * * 

(i) You may disable any AECDs that 

have been approved solely for 

emergency vehicle applications under 

paragraph (4) of the definition of ‘‘defeat 

device’’ in § 86.004–2. The emission 

standards do not apply when any of 

these AECDs are active. 

■ 9. Section 86.1370–2007 is amended 

by adding paragraph (h) to read as 

follows: 

§ 86.1370–2007 Not-To-Exceed test 

procedures. 

* * * * * 

(h) Emergency vehicle AECDs. If your 

engine family includes engines with one 

or more approved AECDs for emergency 

vehicle applications under paragraph (4) 

of the definition of ‘‘defeat device’’ in 

§ 86.1803, the NTE emission limits do 

not apply when any of these AECDs are 

active. 

Subpart S—[Amended] 

■ 10. Section 86.1803–01 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. By adding a definition for 

‘‘Ambulance’’ in alphabetical order. 

■ b. By revising the definition for 

‘‘Defeat device’’. 

■ c. By adding definitions for ‘‘Diesel 

exhaust fluid’’, ‘‘Emergency vehicle’’, 

and ‘‘Fire truck’’ in alphabetical order. 

§ 86.1803–01 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Ambulance means a vehicle used for 

emergency medical care that provides 

all of the following: 

(1) A driver’s compartment. 

(2) A patient compartment to 

accommodate an emergency medical 

services provider and one patient 

located on the primary cot so positioned 

that the primary patient can be given 

intensive life-support during transit. 

(3) Equipment and supplies for 

emergency care at the scene as well as 

during transport. 

(4) Safety, comfort, and avoidance of 

aggravation of the patient’s injury or 

illness. 

(5) Two-way radio communication. 

(6) Audible and visual traffic warning 

devices. 

* * * * * 

Defeat device means an auxiliary 

emission control device (AECD) that 

reduces the effectiveness of the 

emission control system under 

conditions which may reasonably be 

expected to be encountered in normal 

vehicle operation and use, unless: 

(1) Such conditions are substantially 

included in the Federal emission test 

procedure; 

(2) The need for the AECD is justified 

in terms of protecting the vehicle 

against damage or accident; 

(3) The AECD does not go beyond the 

requirements of engine starting; or 

(4) The AECD applies only for 

emergency vehicles and the need is 

justified in terms of preventing the 

vehicle from losing speed, torque, or 

power due to abnormal conditions of 

the emission control system, or in terms 

of preventing such abnormal conditions 

from occurring, during operation related 

to emergency response. Examples of 

such abnormal conditions may include 

excessive exhaust backpressure from an 

overloaded particulate trap, and running 

out of diesel exhaust fluid for engines 

that rely on urea-based selective 

catalytic reduction. 

* * * * * 

Diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) means a 

liquid compound used in conjunction 

with selective catalytic reduction to 

reduce NOX emissions. Diesel exhaust 

fluid is generally understood to conform 

to the specifications of ISO 22241. 

* * * * * 

Emergency vehicle means a vehicle 

that is an ambulance or a fire truck. 

* * * * * 

Fire truck means a vehicle designed to 

be used under emergency conditions to 

transport personnel and equipment and 

to support the suppression of fires and 

mitigation of other hazardous situations. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Section 86.1807–01 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (h) and (i) to read as 

follows: 

§ 86.1807–01 Vehicle labeling. 

* * * * * 

(h) Vehicles powered by model year 

2007 through 2013 diesel-fueled engines 

must include permanent readily visible 

labels on the dashboard (or instrument 

panel) and near all fuel inlets that state 

‘‘Use Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel 

Only’’ or ‘‘Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel 

Only’’. 

(i) For vehicles with one or more 

approved AECDs for emergency vehicles 

under paragraph (4) of the definition of 

‘‘defeat device’’ in § 86.1803, include 

the following statement on the emission 

control information label: ‘‘THIS 

VEHICLE HAS A LIMITED EXEMPTION 

AS AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE.’’ 

§ 86.1807–07 [Removed] 

■ 12. Subpart S is amended by removing 

§ 86.1807–07. 

■ 13. Section 86.1840–01 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 86.1840–01 Special test procedures. 

* * * * * 

(c) Manufacturers of vehicles 

equipped with periodically regenerating 

aftertreatment devices must propose a 

procedure for testing and certifying such 

vehicles, including SFTP testing, for the 

review and approval of the 

Administrator. The manufacturer must 

submit its proposal before it begins any 

service accumulation or emission 

testing. The manufacturer must provide 

with its submittal sufficient 

documentation and data for the 

Administrator to fully evaluate the 

operation of the aftertreatment devices 

and the proposed certification and 

testing procedure. 

* * * * * 

PART 1039—CONTROL OF EMISSIONS 

FROM NEW AND IN-USE NONROAD 

COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES 

■ 14. The authority citation for part 

1039 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 34147 

Subpart B—[Amended] 

■ 15. Section 1039.115 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (g)(4) and (5) to read 

as follows: 

§ 1039.115 What other requirements 

apply? 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(4) The auxiliary emission control 

device applies only for engines that will 

be installed in emergency equipment 

and the need is justified in terms of 

preventing the equipment from losing 

speed or power due to abnormal 

conditions of the emission control 

system, or in terms of preventing such 

abnormal conditions from occurring, 

during operation related to emergency 

response. Examples of such abnormal 

conditions may include excessive 

exhaust backpressure from an 

overloaded particulate trap, and running 

out of diesel exhaust fluid for engines 

that rely on urea-based selective 

catalytic reduction. The emission 

standards do not apply when any 

AECDs approved under this paragraph 

(g)(4) are active. 

(5) The auxiliary emission control 

device operates only in emergency 

situations as defined in § 1039.665 and 

meets all of the requirements of that 

section, and you meet all of the 

requirements of that section. 

■ 16. Section 1039.135 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(15) to read as 

follows: 

§ 1039.135 How must I label and identify 

the engines I produce? 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(15) For engines with one or more 

approved auxiliary emission control 

devices for emergency equipment 

applications under § 1039.115(g)(4), the 

statement: ‘‘THIS ENGINE IS FOR 

INSTALLATION IN EMERGENCY 

EQUIPMENT ONLY.’’ 

* * * * * 

Subpart F—[Amended] 

■ 17.Section 1039.501 is amended by 

adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 1039.501 How do I run a valid emission 

test? 

* * * * * 

(g) You may disable any AECDs that 

have been approved solely for 

emergency equipment applications 

under § 1039.115(g)(4). 

■ 18.Section 1039.525 is amended by 

revising the introductory text to read as 

follows: 

§ 1039.525 How do I adjust emission levels 

to account for infrequently regenerating 

aftertreatment devices? 

This section describes how to adjust 

emission results from engines using 

aftertreatment technology with 

infrequent regeneration events. For this 

section, ‘‘regeneration’’ means an 

intended event during which emission 

levels change while the system restores 

aftertreatment performance. For 

example, exhaust gas temperatures may 

increase temporarily to remove sulfur 

from adsorbers or to oxidize 

accumulated particulate matter in a 

trap. For this section, ‘‘infrequent’’ 

refers to regeneration events that are 

expected to occur on average less than 

once over the applicable transient duty 

cycle or ramped-modal cycle, or on 

average less than once per typical mode 

in a discrete-mode test. If your engine 

family includes engines with one or 

more AECDs for emergency equipment 

applications approved under 

§ 1039.115(g)(4), do not consider 

additional regenerations resulting from 

those AECDs when calculating emission 

factors or frequencies under this section. 

* * * * * 

Subpart G—[Amended] 

■ 19. Add § 1039.670 to subpart G to 

read as follows: 

§ 1039.670 Approval of an emergency 

equipment field modification (EEFM). 

This section describes how you may 

implement design changes for 

emergency equipment that has already 

been placed into service to ensure that 

the equipment will perform properly in 

emergency situations. 

(a) You must notify us in writing of 

your intent to install or distribute an 

emergency equipment field 

modification (EEFM). In some cases you 

may install or distribute an EEFM only 

with our advance approval, as specified 

in this section. 

(b) Include in your notification a full 

description of the EEFM and any 

documentation to support your 

determination that the EEFM is 

necessary to prevent the equipment 

from losing speed, torque, or power due 

to abnormal conditions of its emission 

control system, or to prevent such 

abnormal conditions from occurring 

during operation related to emergency 

response. Examples of such abnormal 

conditions may include excessive 

exhaust backpressure from an 

overloaded particulate trap, or running 

out of diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) for 

engines that rely on urea-based selective 

catalytic reduction. Your determination 

must be based on an engineering 

evaluation or testing or both. 

(c) You may need our advance 

approval for your EEFM, as follows: 

(1) Where the proposed EEFM is 

identical to an AECD we approved 

under this part for an engine family 

currently in production, no approval of 

the proposed EEFM is necessary. 

(2) Where the proposed EEFM is for 

an engine family currently in 

production but the applicable 

demonstration is based on an AECD we 

approved under this part for an engine 

family no longer in production, you 

must describe to us how your proposed 

EEFM differs from the approved AECD. 

Unless we say otherwise, your proposed 

EEFM is deemed approved 30 days after 

you notify us. 

(3) If we have not approved an EEFM 

comparable to the one you are 

proposing, you must get our approval 

before installing or distributing it. In 

this case, we may request additional 

information to support your 

determination under paragraph (b) of 

this section, as follows: 

(i) If we request additional 

information and you do not provide it 

within 30 days after we ask, we may 

deem that you have retracted your 

request for our approval; however, we 

may extend this deadline for submitting 

the additional information. 

(ii) We will deny your request if we 

determine that the EEFM is not 

necessary to prevent the equipment 

from losing speed, torque, or power due 

abnormal conditions of the emission 

control system, or to prevent such 

abnormal conditions from occurring, 

during operation related to emergency 

response. 

(iii) Unless we say otherwise, your 

proposed EEFM is deemed approved 30 

days after we acknowledge that you 

have provided us with all the additional 

information we have specified. 

(4) If your proposed EEFM is deemed 

to be approved under paragraph (c)(2) or 

(3) of this section and we find later that 

your EEFM in fact does not meet the 

requirements of this section, we may 

require you to no longer install or 

distribute it. 

Subpart I—[Amended] 

■ 20. Section 1039.801 is amended by 

adding definitions for ‘‘Diesel exhaust 

fluid’’ and ‘‘Emergency equipment’’ in 

alphabetical order to read as follows: 

§ 1039.801 What definitions apply to this 

part? 

* * * * * 

Diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) means a 

liquid compound used in conjunction 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2
34148 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

with selective catalytic reduction to 

reduce NOX emissions. Diesel exhaust 

fluid is generally understood to conform 

to the specifications of ISO 22241. 

* * * * * 

Emergency equipment means either of 

the following types of equipment: 

(1) Specialized vehicles used to 

perform aircraft rescue and fire-fighting 

functions at airports, with particular 

emphasis on saving lives and reducing 

injuries coincident with aircraft fires 

following impact or aircraft ground 

fires. 

(2) Wildland fire apparatus, which 

includes any apparatus equipped with a 

slip-on fire-fighting module, designed 

primarily to support wildland fire 

suppression operations. 

* * * * * 

■ 21. Section 1039.805 is amended by 

adding abbreviations for ‘‘DEF’’, 

‘‘EEFM’’, ‘‘ISO’’, and ‘‘SCR’’ in 

alphabetical order to read as follows: 

§ 1039.805 What symbols, acronyms, and 

abbreviations does this part use? 

* * * * * 

DEF Diesel exhaust fluid. 

EEFM Emergency equipment field 

modification. 

* * * * * 

ISO International Organization for 

Standardization (see www.iso.org). 

* * * * * 

SCR Selective catalytic reduction. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–13088 Filed 6–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES2